PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jay Banks <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:34:01 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (74 lines)
Bruce Kleisner  wrote:
> Only fermentation allows
> us to easily digest starches and complex sugars.

I have been experimenting with fermented foods lately with good results. I
flipped through my copy of the Paleo Diet and Neanderthin this morning and,
in the indexes, found no references to fermented foods other than the Paleo
Diet's recommendation to avoid miso. I also don't recall reading anything
about fermented foods in the books, either. Where do fermented foods fall in
as far as being paleo?

Interestingly, Dr. Edward Howell wrote quite a bit about fermented foods and
the role of enzymes in making them, in his book Enzyme Nutrition.

Bruce Kleisner  wrote:
>The fact that nobody
> has duplicated any of their research proves it was in error.

More of Dr. Howell's research that has been proven true:

Dr. Edward Howell wrote decades ago:
There is abundant laboratory proof of profoundly disturbed enzyme chemistry
in cancer...

But from what you have learned by studying this book [Enzyme Nutrition --
Jay], you know they are merely pointing at stimulating factors of cancer
[smoking, chemicals, toxins, etc. -- Jay], and not the one basic cause [the
root cause being an enzyme issue -- Jay]. If the body chemistry is not
afflicted by the basic cause, the hundreds of stimulating causes will be
ineffective in causing cancer.


Note: Dr. Howell spent a great deal of time talking about the role of
enzymes in cancer.

Up-to-date, 2003 research providing the missing clue as to why some people
get lung cancer and some people do not. Strangely, it turns out to be an
enzyme issue:

Why only some smokers get cancer

Researchers find enzyme that protects against lung disease

http://www.msnbc.com/news/960953.asp


Sept. 3 — Israeli researchers said they have identified a naturally produced
compound that may explain why only some smokers get lung cancer.

SMOKERS WITH low levels of the enzyme were five to 10 times more likely to
develop lung cancer than smokers with the highest levels, the team at Israel
’s Weizmann Institute found.
       The enzyme is called OGG1 or 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase 1. The
enzyme fixes damage done to DNA by smoking and other environmental stresses
and is one of a large group of repair compounds in the body.
       Writing in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Zvi Livneh
and colleagues said 40 percent of the 68 lung cancer patients they tested
had low levels of OGG1 activity, in contrast to 4 percent of a healthy group
of 68 people.

Nonsmokers with the lowest levels of OGG1 also had a higher risk of lung
cancer, although their overall risk of cancer was much lower than that of
the smokers.
       Lung cancer is by far the biggest cancer killer in the world, killing
a million people every year worldwide and nearly 160,000 a year in the
United States.

Up to 90 percent of all lung cancer patients are smokers, but only 10
percent of heavy smokers develop lung cancer. Smoking is also a major cause
of heart disease and stroke.
       The researchers said the findings needed to be confirmed in larger
studies but they may lead to the development of a blood test that smokers
could take to determine their personal risk.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2