PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Date:
Thu, 21 Jan 2010 08:10:16 -0600
Reply-To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<op.u6vyyzzfwc4mme@tengu>
Subject:
Re: glycation
From:
Robert Kesterson <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines) 
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:44:18 -0600, Ken O'Neill <[log in to unmask]>  
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 6:25 AM, Geoffrey Purcell
> <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>>
>> I obviously wasn't suggesting that. I merely pointed out that current
>> scientific research shows that processed supplements are nowhere near as
>> effective as the same nutrients in more unprocessed foods, with the  
>> former being often linked to side-effects.
>
> First I've heard of that with respect to synthesized or refined
> nutraceuticals. Accordingly, please substantiate the point with  
> references from peer reviewed journals.
> Stay Strong,
> k

I recommend reading "In Defense of Food", which deals with exactly this  
topic.

--
   Robert Kesterson
   [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2