I would like to thank you all for your time, this was really enlightning. There
are few minor points I would like to address in order to clarify my thoughts on
the subject.


 Andrew Millard wrote:


> I'm not convinced that alimentary change is that much of a challenge.  For
> one thing the 1% change is across the entire genome and we don't know the
> percentage difference in the minority of the genome which is coding and
> this is the important figure in terms of adaptive difference. Secondly the
> gorilla diverged from humans and chimpanzees at about the same time, but
> the three species have very different diets, body sizes (including extent
> of sexual dimorphism), mating patterns, etc, and all those differences
> presumably have a genetic basis within the 1% difference.

> ...we know so little about the genetic basis of differences in diets that we
> can hardly begin
> to guess what isn't possible.  Given the differences already present between
> species, it seems likely that given enough time most things are possible.
> But at present we can't predict a priori how much time is enough.

If we have the right to hope for a future adaptation to the new proteins of
wheat, corn or cow's milk, it seams to me that it is a different story when we
are talking about cooked food. Many new chemical species generated by the
action of cooking, isomers for instance, differ too much from the natural
molecules to expect our digestive enzymes to be active on them. Do we know what
happens to the isomers that go through the intestinal barrier? I guess that at
best, they are unusable but in many cases, they are probably dangerous.

> ...so what is there in animal milk that gets into the body?

In general, there is certainly no problem with human female milk but cow's milk
seems to be a different story. Although Boudet (1993), Andre (1983) did
excellent general reviews and Seignalet (1996) a detailed analysis on the
differences between human and cow's milk and the risks linked to it`s
consumption (all in french) , I would appreciate comments on these already
translated excerpts from : “What milk to feed a newborn baby?” by Professor J.
Lestradet, in Journal of Nutrition and Diet (Cahiers de nutrition et de
diététique), March 1982.

“Any kind of milk other than mother’s milk, used in an unaltered state, will
cause major disruptions. Differences between types of milk are fundamental. As
a matter of fact, there is twice as much lactose in human milk as in cow’s
milk, and it is known that lactose is vital for brain growth, which is twice as
quick in a baby as in a calf".
The writer notes that ... "Romulus and Remus couldn’t possibly have been
suckled by a she-wolf since there is nine times as much protein in its milk as
in human milk. Such a high intake of protein would quickly have proved lethal,
since the liver and kidneys, which excrete uric acid, would have been grossly
overworked. Such an overload is already at work with cow’s milk in which there
is three times as much protein as in human milk. It is to be noted that the
liver and kidneys of a bottle-fed child are 30% larger than the very same
organs in a breast-fed child.
Cow’s milk doesn’t address calcium absorption better than human milk, although
it contains three times as much calcium. Cow’s milk contains five times as much
phosphate as human milk, and this causes two-thirds of the calcium to be
retained in the gut_the result being that a bottle-fed child tends to have low
blood calcium.
Further, cow’s milk, whether formulated or not, contains iron and this enhances
the growth of pathogenic bacteria. Using partly skimmed spray-dried milk, one
is going the other way and setting up an iron deficiency in the newborn, which
is, additionally, worsened since cow’s milk protein irritates the digestive
tract and causes microscopic bleeding. As for salt, which cow’s milk is three
times as high in, it is known to cause water retention and high blood pressure.
There are grounds for thinking that starting a child out on too much salt could
well account for some cases of adult high blood pressure."

Many other worth mentionning points, like the absence of gynolactose and
gammalinolenique acid  and the presence of betalactoglobuline etc. in cow`s
milk, are absent from these excerpts but as a starting point, I guess this is
enough...


Luc De Bry wrote:

>Advanced Maillard reaction products or burnt products may indeed cause some
toxicity and
>mutagenic and carcinogenic reactions.  Well conducted Maillard reaction is a
prerequisite to
>detoxify natural and powerful anti-nutritional factors contained in all
seeds.  Without this
>mastering of the Fire Technology, there would be no point spending time and
energy at
>growing toxic grains and beans, such as wheat and barley, soybeans, cocoa
beans, etc.  The
>Maillard reaction is also naturally occuring in the human body.  It is
associated to ageing,
>cataracts, diabetes, etc.
>
>Furthermore, the Maillard reaction involves a number of oxido-reductions.  The
same
>reaction was apparently also present at the origins of Life.  A number of
cooking-derived and
>Maillard-generated anti-oxidants and other compounds have useful nutritional
and health
>properties.
>
>Without it, there would probably be neither life nor humans.  With too much of
it, life and
>humans age to their ends.  The Maillard reaction gave us life.  The Maillard
reaction maintains
>life.  The Maillard reaction takes our lives back.  The Bible says something
like (excuse my
>poor English): "you are dust and you will be dust again".

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't there more to cooking then Maillard
reactions?
As described by Cuq and Lorient (1992) (excuse my poor english translation)
Cooking has multiple consequences (in short):
- Modification of the spatial structure
- Modification of the lateral chains of the amino acids residues
- Interaction between many proteins
- Interaction between proteins and glucides reducer (Maillard reactions)
- Hydrolysis of the peptidic
- Isomer formation
- Interaction between proteins and lipoids (multiple and complex) leading to
the production of free radicals
- Interaction between proteins and polyphenols

Comments?

Jacques Laurin

References:

Boudet, M. "Le lait maternel : production et constitution." Bulletin AMKI,
1993a, no 5, 3-8.

Andre, G. "Dietetique de l'enfant.", 1 vol., Masson, Paris, 1983, 276 pages.

Seignalet, Dr. J. "L'alimentation ou la troisieme medecine.", Collection
Ecologie humaine, Francois-Xavier de Guibert, 1996, 452 p.

Cuq, J.L. et Lorient, D., "Influence de traitements technologiques sur la
valeur nutritionnelle des protéines alimentaires.", in "Aspects nutritionnels
des constituants des aliments. Influence des technologies.", 1 vol., Lavoisier
Tec et Doc, Paris, 1992, 41 pages.