Content-Type: |
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 19 Dec 1998 15:21:44 -0500 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Jacques Laurin wrote:
> Ok, if I understand you correctly, to be intolerant implies an
> almost immediate pathological reaction and to be tolerant implies
> no immediate pathological reaction. Does being tolerant
> necessarily implie that you are adapted?Instruct me, what is
> triggering the reaction of indigestion? (beside the foodstuff
> input)
A pathological reaction may or may not be immediate. There are
different kinds of pathological reactions. I would say that
tolerance implies no pathological reaction, immediate or delayed.
Indigestion is caused by the inability to digest something. It
might well be a protein, or it could be a sugar such as lactose,
or a kind of fat, such as the new synthetic fat Olestra. Other
pathological reactions may be delayed, such as illnesses caused
by hydrogenated fats.
Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]
|
|
|