HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rbradbur@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Bradbury)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Gene response to minute levels of substances [was Re: Homeopathy]
Summary: Could our body have very sensitive detection/amplification mechanisms?
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:03:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct8.190337.26374
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <TSF.92Oct5143747@U.ERGO.CS.CMU.EDU> tsf@CS.CMU.EDU (Timothy Freeman) writes:
>
>Homeopathy holds that two similar vials, each containing the same
>amount of pure water, can have different effects on your body when you
>drink them if one of them was prepared by diluting some poison until
>none of the poison was left.  Since you think you live in a world
>where this happens, you must have pondered how.  What's your best
>guess?
>

I'll probably get flamed for this but I would like to offer a possible
explanation for the "grain of truth" in homeopathy.

Assuming that our body has fairly sensitive detection systems for the
detection of "harmful" substances one could hypothesize that we are
able to detect minute amounts of a substance and amplify our response
to it (similar to the way our immune system can launch a large responce
to small amounts of antigen).  This makes sense from an evolutionary
viewpoint as detection of a small amount of substance and generating
an "excessive" response might protect you from larger potentially fatal
exposure levels in the future.  There are a number of genes which have
very specific responses to specific substances in the environment:
metallothionein(metals), superoxide disumtase (oxygen radicals),
glutatione transferases(aromatic hydrocarbons), etc.  These genes
are all regulated by promoters which are very sensitive to detecting
changes in levels of potentially toxic substances.  One might assume
that these promoters could act on other genes (hormones?) which could
in turn act in a positive feedback loop to greatly amplify the response
to a toxic substance.  (This is not hypothetical as many genes involved
in dealing with toxic substances have promoters which are activated by
glucocorticoids (our stress response hormones).)

Now, if we will assume that the underlying premise in homeopathy is that
a small amount of a substance can generate a large response in the body
then the above is an explanation for how homeopathy might work.  I suspect
that homeopaths carrying a good thing too far (if a little is good, 1/10 
of a little is better and so on) or else the rhetoric by the anti-homeopaths
trying to demonstrate that an effect is found where there can be no possible
cause may have obscured a potential treatment.  If the proper scientific
tests were done I think that one would find that there are some substances
in very small amounts which modify the expression of genes in our body
in a non-linear dose-response manner.  To go to the extreme as homeopaths
may have done of applying this to many substances or over-diluting those
substances may produce results which cannot withstand scientific scrutiny.

Robert Bradbury		uunet!sftwks!bradbury or rbradbur@u.washington.edu
From: das@voodoo.boeing.com (Deb Schwartz)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: Impact of Caffeine on Health
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:49:13 GMT
Organization: Yet Another Graphics Project, Bellevue, WA

In article <1992Oct13.191910.8081@nynexst.com> laura@nynexst.com writes:
>What is the impact of caffeine on health?  In particular, what (if any) is caffeine's 
>impact on breast disease?  If possible, cite the source of information.
>
My doctor, a breast specialist, told me last year that no studies to
that time had shown any link between caffeine and breast cancer.  Also,
last week in the Seattle Times there was an article about a recent study which
concluded that there is no link between coffee (either with caffeine or
decaffeinated) and breast cancer.  I didn't save the article, but I suspect
that the American Cancer Society might know about it, if you want more info.
------
Debbie Schwartz // das@voodoo.boeing.com  // or uunet!bcstec!voodoo!das 
    "organic is close to godliness, but like godliness, can have
     drawbacks like the busload of nuns that were wiped out by a
     run-away truck full of organic produce." - Suzanne McCaffrey
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition,talk.politics.animals
From: bhjelle@carina.unm.edu ()
Subject: Re: Vegetarian diets
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 17:42:07 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: usa

In article <5lxz9mp@rpi.edu> schwae@aix.rpi.edu (Eric A. Schwartz) writes:
>>
>>  What does the healthiness/unhealthiness of eating meat have to do
>>       with the morality of eating meat anyway?
>>
>The idea is that by convincing people that meat is unhealthy, they will
>do the moral thing and stop eating it, whether or not they agree with
>the morality presented to them.  Besides, if you are a vegetarian,
>either you actually believe it is healthier, or you are willing to 
>risk yourself for your convictions.  In either case, it isn't a bad
>motive. 

The only trouble with the mixing of morality and health issues
is is that it has inspired too many vegetarians
to "bend the truth" a little in making their case that meat is
unhealthy. Much better that the two issues be addressed on their
own merits.

Brian
From: beynonrj@uxb.liv.ac.uk (Dr. R.J. Beynon)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: Stress & Vitamins (was Re: Inco
Date: 14 Oct 92 08:48:16 GMT
Organization: The University of Liverpool
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Richard Foulk (richard@pegasus.com) wrote:
: > [...]         Also, my favourite vitamin is B6
: > so anything on that would be of special interest!
: >
: 
: What's so wonderful about B6 that elevates it to `favorite' status?
: 
: -- 
: Richard Foulk		richard@pegasus.com

Ah, that's a long one. I work on B6 metabolism, mainly because most of the 
B6 in the human body is bound up in a single protein in skeletal muscle. This
has interesting consequences for B6 metabolism. So my interest is purely
professional, as they say :-)

BTW, I take a regular, 100% RDA multivitamin/mineral tablet every day. I
*do not* quaff hundreds of milligrams of B6 each day - that would be
cranky ;-)

Rob
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: avery@netcom.com (Avery Ray Colter)
Subject: Re: Freedom of "unhealthy choices"? [was Re: Cooking/Heating Protein...]
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 18:32:35 GMT

Far as I'm concerned, the vegans can avoid meats and I can have them.
To be fair, though, there are lunatic extremists in the vegetarian
factions as well. I remember one fine day on the Berkeley campus when
this patently sallow individual was trying to tell me how I would be
ruining my life if I did not give up consumption of all flesh forthwith.
Among other things, he told me that meat consumption made one too horny.
My reaction: "And you're trying to DISCOURAGE me from eating meat???"
I didn't even let on to him about which women make me horny, it likely
would have blown his protein-deficient mind.

I would estimate that at least 40% of my total calories come from meat
and dairy, and in certain ranges of time that number could be above 50%.
I haven't been in the habit of pulling the skin off my poultry, and I
tend to choose dark meat when I have the choice. While I see no reason
to use salted butter, that just means I use unsalted kinds. And whole milk
is still the type I normally use. The result on my somatics and my health?
20% UNDERweight according to those nonsensical charts, with no intention
of forcing my body to be heavier than it wishes; no major hospital visits
since birth (for correction of equinoveric feet); no high BP readings ever,
albeit my pulse runs relatively high.

I've actually had someone at the Berkeley Psychic Institute, during one
of their open houses, tell me that I should eat more meat. I haven't been
back there since - their powers are obviously not too strong with my case.
Likely the person who said this was being far too distracted by my body
type and the prevailing weight-based stereotypes of the day. 
 
-- 
Avery Ray Colter ("Elfcat") - 	avery@netcom.netcom.com (IP 192.100.81.100)
(510) 656-1902 
"Heaviness is the root of lightness; calmness is the controller of haste"
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: yozzo@watson.ibm.com (Ralph Yozzo)
Subject: Re: The More Things Change...
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 01:50:23 GMT
Distribution: na
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <1992Oct13.183850.21303@netcom.com> avery@netcom.com (Avery Ray Colter) writes:
>jil@donuts0.uucp (Jamie Lubin) writes:
>
>>In spite of all the evidence of its harmful nature, there are still many people
>>who smoke or eat or drink excessively.  Such people don't respond to threats or
>>arguments or even so-called reasoning.  Don't be discouraged if some ignore
>>your information or argue with it or ridicule it--they are operating from the
>>level of their state of knowledge, which for them is correct or proper.  When
>>they are ready to move into a new area they will ask for assistance and you can
>>present your views at that time.  Remember the old saying: "A woman convinced
>>against her will, is of the same opinion still."  It applies to men as well.

I agree.  Lifelong habits are hard to change.

A story that goes along with that is about an elder person that I know.
He has had diabetes for over 20 years.  He had a heart attack five
years ago and another one recently.  This one required a triple bypass
heart operation and two months in the hospital.  Three weeks of which
was spent in a restless fighting state in which the nurses and my family
had our hands full stopping him from pulling all the tubes out of his
throat and legs and arms.

Well, he finally recovered and as he lay in the bed with one of the
hoarsest voices I have ever heard, the nurse asked him about his
diabetes and his diet.

He said something that I'll never forget and I think is somewhat 
typical.

With a very low, hoarse voice he said, "Yea, the doctor gave
me a diet, but I never followed it."


T
-- 
--
 Ralph Yozzo (yozzo@watson.ibm.com)  
 From the beautiful and historic Mid-Hudson Valley area of NY state
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: watanabe@milton.cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe)
Subject: Re: Milk v/s Soymilk
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 02:30:03 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.155217.20948@emr1.emr.ca> woodgold@emr1.emr.ca (Cathy Woodgold) writes:

>Studies have shown that breastfed babies grow up into more intelligent people.

This could be accounted for by the following phenomena:

	1. Intelligent mothers tend to have intelligent children.
	2. Intelligent mothers tend to read and follow the advice
		in articles about raising children, including those
		recommending breastfeeding.
	
Thus, there may be a correlation between breastfeeding and
intelligence of breastfed babies (when they grow up), but 
this correlation could be as meaningless as the "large feet is
correlated with intelligence in children" phenomenum
(accounted for by the fact that older children have larger
feet than younger ones).

-Larry Watanabe

Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk)
Subject: Re: Stress & Vitamins (was Re: Inco
Organization: Pegasus,  Honolulu
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 05:26:14 GMT

> [...]         Also, my favourite vitamin is B6
> so anything on that would be of special interest!
>

What's so wonderful about B6 that elevates it to `favorite' status?

-- 
Richard Foulk		richard@pegasus.com
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition,talk.politics.animals
From: rbradbur@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Bradbury)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Freedom of "unhealthy choices"? [was Re: Cooking/Heating Protein...]
Summary: Should we freedom of "unhealthy choices" be permitted?
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:31:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct8.173138.15646
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Oct2.141107.27887@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> jil@uts.uucp (Jamie Lubin) writes:
> 
>Again, I'm not recommending that anyone else in the world supplement their
>diet with protein, vitamins, minerals or any other food supplements.  From
>what I've read & heard, I want to do so & will continue to do so until
>either the FDA stops me or I die, which hopefully won't be from an overdose
>of protein ;-)  I supplement my breakfast & lunch with protein because I don't
>feel that I get much protein at those meals.  At dinnertime, I don't
>supplement & usually get some pretty good protein from food.  I feel good
>knowing that my body will have what it needs & if it has a little more than
>it needs, that doesn't bother me either.  I am not going to cease my
>supplemention no matter how scientifically sound your arguments appear to be.
>I do hope, however, that your flames don't kill me :-)  As I said, there is a
>freedom of choice, to some extent, in this country.
>

Yes, but the question is to what degree you have the "right" to exercise
a "freedom" with long term negative health consequences which your employer
(i.e. your fellow employees) or government (i.e. me as a taxpayer) will end
up paying for?

The general purpose of this group as I see it is to distribute up-to-date
information based on scientific and medical sources (sci.med) with a
nutritional focus to promote better health and prevent disease.  Ultimately
this orientation is necessary to reduce our health care costs (which are
rapidly approaching $1 Trillion/yr in the US).

The evidence for excessive protein intake causing premature kidney failure
is fairly strong.  If tests of nitrogen excretion were to reveal that your
protein intake was excessive would you object to being charged a "premium"
for your health care coverage due to the increased health risk you are
choosing to take?  This is not a retorical question, national health care
in any form which does not include a payment scale based on health risks
is a system of wealth transfer from individuals who are conscious of and
take care of their health to individuals who either care less or choose
to ignore scientific evidence.  Any economist would tell you that a
system where your benifits are not associated with their actual costs
is a recipe for an inefficient system with higher costs.

Robert Bradbury		uunet!sftwks!bradbury or rbradbur@u.washington.edu
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition,talk.politics.animals
From: swood@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Scott Wood - EVENSONG)
Subject: Re: AMA Blasts Animal Rights Group on Milk Panic
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:12:24 GMT

bhjelle@carina.unm.edu () writes:

`Sigh. If I need to explain it, you're probably not going to understand.

Wow, if only I could use that type of an arguement on AR-heads!

swood
-- 
Michigan Archery deer season opens October 1st!!!!!
 I will be sure to be out there, enjoying the sunrise and watching the
  critters roam about.  Whether or not I get a deer, the sunrise will
   still be there, and so will I.
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: richard@pegasus.com (Richard Foulk)
Subject: Re: Protein intake and kidney disease
Organization: Pegasus,  Honolulu
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 05:37:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.173554.9327@u.washington.edu> rbradbur@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Bradbury) writes:
>>
> [...]
>Steve, you will find that my comments are rarely based on currently accepted
>medical treatments.  They are based on a careful review of the literature
>and some hard thought about what goes on in our bodies as we age.

Wow.

`Currently accepted medical treatments' used to be based on `careful review
of the literature' and other vehicles of scientific knowledge.

Did that change while I looked away for a minute?

-- 
Richard Foulk		richard@pegasus.com
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: a726226@shiva.mc.ti.com (Savithri)
Subject: test, please ignore
Originator: a726226@shiva.mc.ti.com
Reply-To: kali@shiva.mc.ti.com
Organization: _
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:47:50 GMT


testing, please ignore
-- 
.............................................
KALI, THE AVENGER
.............................................
From: npm@dale.cts.com (Nancy Milligan)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: request for info on how to gain body fat
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:26:42 GMT
Organization: Titan Linkabit
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Make certain your doctor takes a blood sample and analyzes it for thyroid
abnormalities.  Your thyroid regulates your metabolism.  If your thyroid
is hyperactive (hyperthryoid) you'll lose weight and not be able to regain
it.  You'll want to make certain that your doctor checks the levels of
TSH.  Some doctors still aren't very good at detecting thyroid disorders.
I've spoken to a number of people that suffered for years before they
got an accurate diagnosis.  It can be a hideous disease to live with.

Symptoms of hyperthryoidism are:

Nervousness, irritability, shortness of breath, eye problems, rapid pulse,
irregular heart-beat, diarrhea, swelling at the base of the neck, excessive
hair growth, weight loss, muscle weakness, trembling, and others which I 
don't recall.

I had most of those and was diagnosed with Graves disease, right about
the same time Barbara Bush got it.  Except for some odd reason, I never
really lost much weight.

I know there are other diseases that can make you overly skinny, but
Graves disease always pops into my head.  You really should get a
doctor that takes your problem seriously and insist on a full medical
check-up including cancer screening and blood testing.
--
Nancy P. Milligan 				npm@dale.cts.com
Titan Linkabit					cts!dale!npm
3033 Science Park Road
San Diego, CA 92121
From: acs_belscamp@rivers.acc.uwrf.edu
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: food and asthma question.
Date: 16 Oct 92 06:00:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: rivers.1992Oct16.120018.96
Organization: University of Wisconsin - River Falls


I was wondering if anyone knows of any foods one could eat or not eat to 
help with asthma. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.  You can either
reply to the list, or to me personally.  


Jill
From: yozzo@watson.ibm.com (Ralph Yozzo)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: How to cook beans
Date: 15 Oct 92 15:55:40 GMT
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

In article <1992Oct14.211901.1694@emr1.emr.ca> woodgold@emr1.emr.ca (Cathy Woodgold) writes:
>Put the beans in new water and boil them.  A foam may form
>on top of the water.  Scoop the foam off and discard it.
>Continue boiling the beans and scooping off the foam as long as
>the foam keeps forming.  Reduce to simmer and continue cooking
>until soft enough to eat.
>
>Cathy Woodgold   woodgold@emr1.emr.ca  Ottawa, Canada
>
Does anyone know what that foam is that forms at the
top of some cooked beans?  I suspect that it is fat, but 
I do not know this for a fact.

>


-- 
--
 Ralph Yozzo (yozzo@watson.ibm.com)  
 From the beautiful and historic Mid-Hudson Valley area of NY state
From: sudesh@utkal.njit.edu (T. J. Sudesh)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: MULTI-VITAMINS
Date: 12 Oct 92 13:10:42 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <10OCT92.05245458.0109@VM1.MCGILL.CA>, CCMG@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CCMG) writes:
|> 
|>   Hi there,
|> 
|>      Im presently taking MULT-VITAMIN/MINERAL supplement,
|>      the brand is QUEST.It is a ONE A DAY vitamin.I noticed
|>      that my urine is a much darker yellow while I take these
|>      vitamins.Is this normal? harmful?.Also is it dangerous
|>      to take MULT-VITAMINS over a long period?
|> 
|>                                    Giovanni


    Hi,
	It is possible that the B-complex in these Multi-Vits can cause your
urine to be a little yellow.But it would not make it orange red.I really dont
know that much, but this is my experience.You might want to stop it for a week
and chech out.But of course it depends on the dosage of B-complex you are
taking.....
							warm regards,
								sudesh
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition,talk.politics.animals
From: bhjelle@carina.unm.edu ()
Subject: Re: AMA Blasts Animal Rights Group on Milk Panic
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 16:15:41 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Oct8.214014.21923@zooid.guild.org> rwaigh@zooid.UUCP (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>>
>>Try this. No-one claims that humans *need* cow's milk to survive.
>>No-one, not even dairy farmers.
>>
>>Since no-one is arguing the other side, ergo, your argument is
>>a straw man.
>>
>That's funny, Canada's Food Guide says everyone needs to drink cow milk
>every day (amounts depending on age and pregnancy).  I had thought the
>situation was similar in the U.S.
>
>I used to force myself to drink milk every day, even though to me it tastes
>incredibly vile (I *never* aquired a taste for it), because I had read
>various claims stating that without cow's milk I would get osteoporosis.
>
The original comment was about whether humans had *evolved* to
*require* cow's milk. This rhetorical claim was a straw man,
regardless of whether some "nutrition experts"  *recommend*
cow's milk. There is a huge difference.

Brian
From: rbradbur@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Bradbury)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Protein intake and kidney disease
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:35:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct9.173554.9327
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Oct8.224119.3767@spdcc.com> dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.173138.15646@u.washington.edu>
  rbradbur@hardy.u.washington.edu (Robert Bradbury) writes:
>>The evidence for excessive protein intake causing premature kidney failure
>>is fairly strong.
>
>Snort.  Protein restriction is one component in the treatment of
>chronic renal failure.  I've never seen any evidence that someone
>with healthy kidneys needs to be worried about "premature kidney failure".
>

Steve, you will find that my comments are rarely based on currently accepted
medical treatments.  They are based on a careful review of the literature
and some hard thought about what goes on in our bodies as we age.
I would suggest you go down to the library and read some of the recent
studies comparing calorie & protein restricted diets and ad-lib fed diets
in rodents.  Kidney failure is a major cause of death among elderly rodent
populations, this "disease" disappears as a significant cause of death
when the rodents are protein/calorie restricted.  Kidney failure is also
a significant factor in disease and death among human elderly.  You can
make lots of arguments that rodent studies should not be extended to human
conditions but that would throw out most of our current knowledge about cancer.
I am willing to accept information from rodent studies can be applied to
humans except in situations where the physiology/biochemistry is known
to be different.

The basic argument runs as follows, kidney cells are non-replicative and die
at some rate over your lifetime so that as an elderly individual you may
only have 30% of the cells left that you started with.  The rate at which
these cells die is determined by a number of factors (plaque buildup
causing a blood shortage, having to filter toxic metals/carcinogenic
substances and damage (presumably from free radicals) associated with
the high oxygen/energy consumption of the kidneys.  Excretion of nitrogen
associated with excessive protein intake increases these energy requirements
and is expected to accelerate the rate of cell death.

The only reason that animals survive as long as they do is that kidneys have
a large reserve capacity.  If you place excess stress on your kidneys so that
they decline at a more rapid rate you will be looking at renal failure as
an elderly person.  There is one caveat to all of this and that may be the
genetic component.  A study of kidney function of individuals in the Baltimore
longitudinal aging study indicated that some individuals (20-30%) showed no
decline in function with age.  Perhaps some people have genes which preserve
kidney function over their lifetimes.
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition