Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
03-31-2012, 01:22 PM,
#16
RE: Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
Pork and chicken, due to being very high in PUFAs should be avoided. Instead eat lots of organic grass-fed raw-to-medium beef/veal/lamb/ox (not just steak but liver, brains, kidneys etc). If you need to cook it a bit grill.barbeque then always marinate it in organic vinegar and use spices such as turmeric, rosemary, chili and ginger (+others). This has been shown to drastically reduce, up to 90%, the formation of heterocyclic amines (HCAs) produced in grilled and roasted meats. I always marinade this way, even when I eat raw beef.


Reply
03-31-2012, 05:59 PM, (This post was last modified: 03-31-2012, 05:59 PM by thokling.)
#17
RE: Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
Whereabouts do you get your nutritional info from, nwo2012? The stuff I rely on says chicken's distributed somewhat (using that term loosely) evenly across the big three fats, and pork is very low in polyunsaturated fats.

I'm not even close to starting on my PUFA research. This is turning out to be a fun project.
Truth appears in many forms. Find those that resonate with you.

- "If we do not believe in freedom of speech for those we despise, we do not believe in it at all." - Noam Chomsky
- "Humans are not a rational animal, but a rationalizing one." - Leon Festinger

http://avaaz.org - The World In Action
Reply
04-01-2012, 12:40 AM,
#18
RE: Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
Chicken is evenly distributed but still too high n PUFAs. Yes pork is lower in PUFAs but still too high for regular consumption. Although it is said if you fry bacon in coconut oil some of the PUFAs will be displaced. Beef/lmab are much lower in PUFAs so the best meats to eat if you want to avoid these. You need to dig deep in PUFA research to find the data but it is there.

A well referenced article here:

http://weeksmd.com/2008/06/polyunsaturated-oils-pufa-and-cancer/

[quote]Polyunsaturated fats suppress the immune system

Polyunsaturated fats (PUFs) are greatly immunosuppressive, and anything that suppresses the immune system is likely to cause cancer. The first person to suggest that polyunsaturated fats cause cancer was Dr R A Newsholme of Oxford University, England. (6) What Newsholme wrote was that when our bodies get sufficient nutrition, our diet includes immunosuppressive PUFs which make us prone to infection by bacteria and viruses. When we are starved, however, our body stores of PUFs are depleted. This allows our bodies’ immune systems to recover which, in turn, allows us to fight existing infection and prevent other infections. He was making the point that the immunosuppressive effects of PUFs in sunflower seeds are useful in treating autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis, (7) and that the same fatty acids could be used to suppress the immune system to prevent rejection of kidney transplants.

It was during the early days of kidney transplantation that doctors first encountered the problem of tissue rejection as their patients’ bodies destroyed the alien transplanted kidneys. If transplantation were to be a success, they had to find a way to suppress the immune system. Newsholme had said that there was no better way to immunosuppress a renal patient than with sunflower seed oil. So kidney transplant doctors fed their patients linoleic acid. (8) (Linoleic acid is the major polyunsaturated fatty acid in vegetable oils.) But the transplant doctors were then astonished to see how quickly their patients developed cancers: some cancers were up to twenty times as frequent as was expected.

This was in line with heart trials using diets that were high in PUFs which, reported an excess of cancer deaths from as early as 1971. (9)

By the early 1980s, we were being exhorted by doctors and nutritionists to eat more PUFs because they were ‘good for us’ despite the fact that Oncology Times carried a paper in January 1980 from the University of California at Davis that mice fet PUFs were more prone to develop melanoma. In May 1980, the same publication carried a similar report from Oregon State University which said that PUFs fed to cancer-prone mice increased the numbers of cancers formed.

In 1989 there was a report of a ten-year trial at a Veterans’ Administration Hospital in Los Angeles. In this trial half the patients were fed a diet which had double the amount of PUFs as compared to saturated fats. In the half of the patients on the high PUF diet there was a fifteen percent increase in cancer deaths compared to the saturated fat group. (10) The authors of the report said that the PUFs had been the cause of the increase in cancer deaths. The British Medical Journal carried an editorial in its 6 October 1973 issue which asked if PUFs were carcinogenic. It came to the conclusion that they were.

Wayne Martin likes to tell a story which suggests just how cancer-causing are PUFs. In 1930 in the USA, eighty percent of men smoked cigarettes and the tar content of cigarettes was much higher than it is today. The death rate at that time from lung cancer was very low. In 1955 doctors decided that PUFs were good in terms of heart disease protection. After this lung cancer deaths increased so dramatically. By 1980 although the number of American men who smoked had dropped to only thirty percent, three times as much PUF was being eaten — and there were sixty times as many lung cancer deaths. (11)

In 1990, Martin called Newsholme’s Oxford University office but by then Newsholme had retired. Martin spoke to his successor to find that they were still treating autoimmune diseases with PUFs. By then they were using fish oil. The doctor said the reason for the fish oil was that the degree of immunosuppression increased with the degree of unsaturation and fish oil was much more unsaturated than sunflower oil. Martin asked the doctor why they were not talking about PUFs causing cancer. The doctor replied that if he did that he would be run out of Oxford.

Carcinogens — background radiation, ultraviolet radiation from the sun, particles in the air we breathe and the food we eat — continually attack us all. Normally, the immune system deals with any small focus of cancer cells so formed and that is the end of it. But linoleic acid suppresses the immune system. With a high intake of margarine, therefore, a tumour may grow too rapidly for the weakened immune system to cope thus increasing our risk of a cancer.
Polyunsaturated fats cause cancer

Since 1974, the increase of polyunsaturated fats has been blamed for the alarming increase in malignant melanoma (skin cancer) in Australia. (12) We are all told that the sun causes it. Are Australians going out in the sun any more now than they were fifty years ago? They are certainly eating more polyunsaturated oils: in Australia in 1995 I saw that even the cream on milk was removed and replaced with vegetable oil. Victims of the disease have been found to have polyunsaturated oils in their skin cells. Polyunsaturated oils are oxidised readily by ultra-violet radiation from the sun and form harmful ‘free radicals’. These are known to damage the cell’s DNA and this can lead to the deregulation we call cancer. Saturated fats are stable. They do not oxidise and form free radicals.

Malignant melanoma is also said to be increasing in this country. Does the sun cause this? In Britain the number of sufferers is so small as to be relatively insignificant. Even so, it is not likely that the sun is to blame since all the significant increase is in the over-seventy-five-year-olds. People in this age group tend to get very little sun.

That the sun is not to blame is confirmed by other findings:

Melanoma occurs ten times as often in Orkney and Shetland than it does on Mediterranean islands.
It also occurs more frequently on areas that are not exposed to the sun.
In Scotland, for example, there are five times as many melanomas on the feet as on the hands;
and in Japan, forty per cent of pedal melanomas are on the soles of the feet . (13)

Polyunsaturated fats promote cancer

Many laboratories have shown that diets high in polyunsaturated fatty acids promote tumours. Cancer promotion is not the same as cancer causing. The subject is complex; suffice to say here that promoters are substances that help to speed up reproduction of existing cancer cells.

It has been known since the early 1970s that it is linoleic acid that is the major culprit. As Professor Raymond Kearney of Sydney University put it in 1987: ‘Many laboratories have shown that a greater proportion of polyunsaturated fats are superior to diets rich in saturated fats in promoting the yield of experimental mammary tumours. In such studies, omega-6 linoleic acid appeared to be the crucial fatty acid . . .’ and ‘Vegetable oils (eg Corn oil and sunflower oil) which are rich in linoleic acid are potent promoters of tumour growth.’ (14)
Polyunsaturated fats and breast cancer

A study of 61,471 women aged forty to seventy-six, conducted in Sweden, looked into the relation of different fats and breast cancer. The results were published in January 1998. This study found an inverse association with monounsaturated fat and a positive association with polyunsaturated fat. In other words, monounsaturated fats protected against breast cancer and polyunsaturated fats increased the risk. Saturated fats were neutral. (15)

Flora margarine, the brand leader, is thirty-nine percent linoleic acid; Vitalite and other ‘own brand’ polyunsaturated margarines are similar. Of cooking oils, sunflower oil is fifty percent and safflower oil seventy-two percent linoleic acid. Butter, on the other hand, has only a mere two percent and lard is just nine percent linoleic acid. Linoleic acid is one of the essential fatty acids. We must eat some to live, but we do not need much. The amount in animal fats is quite sufficient.

Because of the heart disease risk from trans-fats in margarines, in 1994 the manufacturers of Flora changed its formula to cut out the trans fats and other manufacturers have since followed. But that still leaves the linoleic acid.
The anti-cancer fat

Linoleic acid is one of the essential fatty acids that our bodies need but cannot synthesise. We must eat some to survive. Fortunately there is one form of linoleic acid that is beneficial. Conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) differs from the normal form of linoleic acid only in the position of two of the bonds that join its atoms. But this small difference has been shown to give it powerful anti-cancer properties. Scientists at the Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, New York (16) and the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, New Jersey Medical School, (17) showed that even at concentrations of less than one percent, CLA in the diet is protective against several cancers including breast cancer, colorectal cancer and malignant melanoma.

Conjugated linoleic acid has one other difference from the usual form — it is not found in vegetables but in the fat of ruminant animals. The best sources are dairy products and the fat on red meat, principally beef. (18)

It has been suggested that the consumption of red meat increases the risk of colon cancer, yet in Britain there is no evidence to support this. (19) It is interesting that all the evidence implicating red meat in cancer comes from the USA — where they cut the fat off.[.quote]

Note the small amount of PUFAs in grass-fed red meat is mainly CLA, the only useful one.
Reply
04-01-2012, 11:47 AM,
#19
RE: Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
Adding that site to my bookmarks, definitely.

I'm using Canada Nutrient File (CNF) for my research, which lists the following examples I chose (the percentage is the amount out of any serving of that particular nutrient):

Canada Nutrient File:

1) Pork, loin, centre cut (centre chop), bone-in, lean and fat, pan-fried /

SFA: 6.01%, MUFA: 7.06%, PUFA: 1.91%

2) Beef, ground, regular, pan-fried, degree of doneness: medium /

SFA: 8.85%, MUFA: 9.88%, PUFA: 0.84%

Although the PUFA levels in pork are about 2.5 times that of beef (not counting all the varieties and cooking methods, granted), they're considerably low comparing to vegetable oils:

3) Vegetable oil, canola /

SFA: 7.365%, MUFA: 63.276%, PUFA: 28.142%

4) Vegetable oil, corn /

SFA: 12.948%, MUFA: 27.576%, PUFA: 54.677%

5) Vegetable oil, coconut /

SFA: 86.5%, MUFA: 5.8%, PUFA: 1.8%

Coconut oil and pork have the same general amounts of PUFA - LA and GLA, in small amounts, appear to be necessary for good health, but still fall under the "consume moderately" rule:

Pork PUFA: 18:2 (Linoleic acid)=1.69%, 18:3 (Gamma-linolenic acid)=0.11%
Coconut oil PUFA: 18:2 (Linoleic acid)=1.80%

Hence, my inquiry as to the resource(s) you're using for nabbing nutrient levels in foods. It would be cool to have as much info as possible.

This is also, I know, generalisation, as there are different types of SFAs, MUFAs and PUFAs that do different things - some types of any category are good, and some are bad, and some of this depends upon the amounts consumed.
Truth appears in many forms. Find those that resonate with you.

- "If we do not believe in freedom of speech for those we despise, we do not believe in it at all." - Noam Chomsky
- "Humans are not a rational animal, but a rationalizing one." - Leon Festinger

http://avaaz.org - The World In Action
Reply
04-01-2012, 04:50 PM,
#20
RE: Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
Thanks for the link thokling. You are right, it would be good to have more links seeing as how they run any scientist who won't deliver research conclusions asked for by the higher ups out of the organization.
An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it.
Mohandas Gandhi


Each of us is put here in this time and this place to personally decide the future of humankind.
Did you think you were put here for something less?
Chief Arvol Looking Horse
Reply
04-02-2012, 10:36 AM,
#21
RE: Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
I see what you mean now thokling, just any of the sites such as the one you are using or http://caloriecount.about.com.
The other thing I don't like about pork is the level of parasites often present in pigs. But frozen or 'treated' pork would be ok in that respect. The other thing worth noting about meats is not to eat just the muscle meats. As well as organs, stuff like gelatin (from the bones) is good as the amino acids are in a better balance - less likely to induce stress hormones. Dr Ray Peat has extensively researched this and suggests some gelatin with all meats. I make my own jelly beans for this purpose, from gelatin and depulped freshly squeezed orange/lemon juice. Nice treat for the kids too.
Reply
03-03-2013, 05:06 AM,
#22
RE: Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is it That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
.. building on the fake meat theme.

Quote:59% of Tuna Mislabeled, Fake Tuna Linked to 'Anal Oil Leakage'
By Anthony Gucciardi, NaturalSociety
25 February 13

Do you enjoy the taste of tuna? If you answered yes to that question, there's a very large chance that you actually enjoy the taste of many bizarre and exotic imposter 'fake tuna' fish types that have been peddled and mislabeled by the seafood industry and restaurants alike - even a 'snake mackerel' fish linked to side effects like anal oil leakage.

The new genetic testing campaign kickstarted and funded by the nonprofit organization known as Oceana, a group whose mission statement involves protecting the world's oceans, reveals that 59% of tuna is not only mislabeled but is almost entirely compromised of a fish once banned by the FDA. Sushi restaurants were the worst offenders by far, but the tests spanned throughout restaurants and grocery stores alike. Altogether, the findings oust over half of tuna fish as fraudulent.

As you can see for yourself in the report by Oceana, the numerical breakdown of tuna fraud (especially 'white tuna') paints a picture of just how far companies will go to deliver rubbish products and deceive the consumer:

Between restaurants and grocery stories in the US alike, 59% overall of the tuna tested was definitely not tuna as found by genetic testing.

Sushi restaurants had the worst record, with every single restaurant's 'tuna' tested in major cities like DC, Chicago, Austin, and New York City coming back as fraudulent.

A whopping 84% of 'white tuna' was actually escolar, the snake mackerel fish that causes oily anal leakage and was banned by the FDA until 1992. It is still banned in Japan, Italy, and requires warning labels regarding the leaky discharge in Canada, Sweden, and Denmark.

Oceana also offers a graphical breakdown:

   

Rampant Food Mystery Ingredients | From Fake Tuna to Horsemeat

The blatant lack of knowledge regarding the actual ingredients in so-called 'tuna' products is reminiscent of recent food ingredient disasters such as the Burger King horsemeat incident, in which Burger King was forced to admit that consumers had been eating either horse or donkey meat in their juicy Whoppers for who knows how long. An admission that not only grossed a lot of people out and emotionally touched a lot of horse lovers, but brought up a great consideration: we really don't even know what we're putting into our mouths.

We've even seen rampant food fraud in the seafood industry before, with food geneticists revealing a large percentage of the entire market is actually filled with mislabeled fish. Oftentimes, it becomes an even greater concern when entering into the realm of health. Many 'wild-caught' fish varieties are scams and are actually heavily processed, with the FDA inspecting only around 2% of seafood imports.

We know there exists a number of serious additives that lurk in our food supply like MSG and various neurotoxic food coloring ingredients, but the fact of the matter is it even comes down to the very food product itself. Many of you probably do not consumer tuna for a number of reasons, such as the likelihood that it was harvested from Fukushima-touched Pacific waters, or perhaps because it contains mercury or was taken from the oil-plagued Gulf of Mexico. Regardless of the reason, I am sure you see the validity in highlighting this information for consumers.

When we can't even be sure what we're eating, even down to the very base product itself, we have a very serious problem for consumers. A problem that I don't think producers seem to care about given that this fraud is so prevalent - and it is undoubtedly a culinary fraud that expands far beyond the seafood industry.

Additional sources:The Atlantic
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/312-16/16203-59-of-tuna-mislabeled-fake-tuna-linked-to-anal-oil-leakage

.. and Switching up to nutrition..

No meat doesn't necessarily mean a nutritious diet. I've seen people east no meat but ingest a bunch of other shyte into the bod. All that soy crap doesn't give you any energy and most of it is GMO anyways.

There is something to be said for a nutritious vegetarian diet. You get lots of veg, lots of fruit and say eggs. You don't eat all that fear hormone that is secreted upon the assembly line death of an animal. Never been sold on a vegan diet, and nuts can be pricey

Now as far as grass fed beef, free run chicken and wild slamon et al. I'm sure that's healthy good stuff but that stuff is priced way out off of my cost to calorie threshold.

Bear mind that it takes some serious energy to digest, absorb and kidney filter some stuff. I'm a big fan of day cook soups, blender creations and chewing food.

But hey everything in balance and moderation, avoid the processed and FAKE stuff and I think we're doing fine. Counter-productive to stress about your food but change what you feel needs be changing, for you not because you read it somewhere.
There are no others, there is only us.
http://FastTadpole.com/
Reply
03-03-2013, 07:46 AM,
#23
Does Eating Red Meat Kill You … Or Is The Problem That We’re Eating FAKE Meat?
Ahh, I read the tuna stories elsewhere! At first I was sad, I loved tuna and mayonaise, but the mayonaise is almost completely soy oil... Then I discovered tuna and mustard, not too bad... Now I find out the tuna was not real either. I wonder what is next to be faked?
Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. - Henry L. Mencken

I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie. I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave. And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant. - Henry L. Mencken
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Grab a coffee, 2 sugars, and check the news:you’ve just help kill off a species h3rm35 0 676 06-13-2012, 11:20 PM
Last Post: h3rm35
Exclamation BPA Spikes 1,200 Percent After Eating Canned Soup: Study Dunamis 1 891 11-24-2011, 08:14 PM
Last Post: FastTadpole
  5 Reasons High Fructose Corn Syrup Will Kill You p4r4 2 829 10-14-2011, 09:30 PM
Last Post: FastTadpole
  PRIMAL DIET – RAW MEAT – RAW MILK & WHEEEEEY ! strangelove 22 4,951 08-17-2011, 09:33 PM
Last Post: strangelove
Information Drug-Resistant Bacteria Found in Half of U.S. Meat FastTadpole 2 1,430 04-19-2011, 08:02 AM
Last Post: FastTadpole
Music America's Food Chain: The Crisis, the Attack, the Kill h3rm35 0 716 10-13-2010, 10:18 PM
Last Post: h3rm35
  'Go Green Or We'll Kill Your Kids' dicktater 3 1,601 10-03-2010, 10:15 PM
Last Post: dicktater
  What next…kill the poor? drummer 1 1,075 08-26-2010, 05:28 PM
Last Post: hilly7
  New superbug, ‘potentially a major global health problem,’ found in Canada 52595 0 700 08-11-2010, 08:27 PM
Last Post: 52595
  Corporate News Fails Us Again, "Gulf is Kill Zone," Humans and Wildlife Used as Guine mexika 1 854 08-05-2010, 07:20 PM
Last Post: icosaface

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)