HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kja@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (krista.j.anderson)
Subject: Re: milk press conference
Summary: pointer to sci.med article on allergens in breastmilk
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:09:16 GMT

In article <1992Oct27.015102.29202@athena.cs.uga.edu>, hulsey@athena.cs.uga.edu (Martin Hulsey) writes:
> All of the proteins in mother's milk are made exclusively by mom.  If 
> milk or any other food causes colic, it is *not* through transmission of 
> a protein that mom ate.

While I agree with most of Martin's arguments, I think there is
some evidence against the above assertion.  In some allergy books
there are references to food allergens a mother ate that do get
into her breastmilk.  I have posted more information in sci.med
with a title of "Allergens in Breastmilk" because it's a followup
to something I wrote previously about "Cow's Milk Allergy".

Nevertheless, the issue may still be open to dispute; I was only
using one source and sometimes researchers are biased.  Also, it
could be that only certain women pass on allergens through
breastmilk; for example, maybe only atopic women with leakier
guts are subject to the problem.  Also note that the majority of
people including infants are not hypersensitive to anything.

I just got a whole bunch of books on calcium and metabolism from
the library, so I'll post what I find out.
-- 
Krista Anderson
krista@ihlpf.att.com  or  ihlpf!krista@att.att.com  or  att!ihlpf!krista
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: jil@uts.uucp (Jamie Lubin)
Subject: Re: request for info on egg consumption
Organization: Bellcore, Piscataway, NJ
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 15:37:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.210340.9691@cbfsb.cb.att.com> kja@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (krista.j.anderson) writes:
>In article <1992Nov7.000419.20930@netcom.com>, feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel) writes:
 
>That lecithin lowers cholesterol is another myth propagated by the
>late Adelle Davis, but modern studies have not shown evidence that
>this is true.
 
Commented on Adelle Davis in previous posting.

>However, the book below says that commercial preparations of
>lecithin are usually only about 3% lecithin.  In Harold McGee's
>newest book on kitchen science (i forget title), he discusses his
>numerous experiments in using less and less egg yolk to emulsify
>sauces.  Slightly frozen egg yolk will emulsify more oil (i seem to
>recall) and he found that far fewer yolks were needed to make
>mayonnaise than are usually used. 
>
>Reference
>1. Herbert, Victor, et all, eds., _The Mount Sinai School of
>Medicine Complete Book of Nutrition_, NY: St. Martin's Press, 1990.

I have an article in front of me entitled "Vitamin & Mineral Supplementation"
by Dr. Louis A. Johnson, Ph.D. which begins "over the past several years Drs.
Frederick Stare and Victor Herbert have campaigned vigorously against the use
of vitamin and mineral supplements."

The National Nutritional Foods Association has also constantly attacked the
above doctors for their stance over the years.  I'd ALMOST sooner read a
40-year old Adelle Davis book than one by Victor Herbert.
From: tsf@CS.CMU.EDU (Timothy Freeman)
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: Are there any dietary magic bullets to lower cholestrol?
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:46:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.BxGJxt.1MF.1
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Originator: tsf@U.ERGO.CS.CMU.EDU

In article <1992Nov6.180457.23321@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> sherwood@space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford) writes:

   Subject says it all.

Lots of niacin can get the job done, although too much niacin can
destroy your liver.  Others have recently discussed niacin for
cholesterol reduction in this newsgroup; the discussion mentioned one
fellow who changed brands of niacin without his doctor's supervision
and destroyed his liver.  Caveat emptor; I'm not going to pay anyone's
liver transplant bills.

Copper deficiency can cause excess cholesterol as well.  Taking a 2
mg/day supplement if you have high cholesterol seems like a good bet.
If your high cholesterol wasn't caused by a copper deficiency, I don't
have any reason to believe that extra copper would help, so you should
not rely upon this to solve the problem.

Or, according to these guys, you could regularly drink beer instead of
taking your copper.  I prefer the copper myself; I want to keep my
liver and brain for a while yet.

@article	( KLEVAY90,
key	=	"Klevay90" ,
author	=	"Leslie M. Klevay and Robert J. Moore" ,
title	=	"Beer mitigates some effects of copper deficiency
in rats" ,
journal	=	"American Journal of Clinical Nutrition" ,
volume	=	"51" ,
year	=	"1990" ,
pages	=	"869--72" ,
keywords=	"beer, copper, tsf" ,
)

According to these guys, too much vitamin C can make the copper
situation worse:

@article	( MILNE81,
key	=	"Milne81" ,
author	=	"David B. Milne and Stanley T. Omaye and William H.
Amos Jr." ,
title	=	"Effect of ascorbic acid on copper and cholesterol
in adult cynomolgus monkeys fed a diet marginal in copper" ,
journal	=	"American Journal of Clinical Nutrition" ,
month	=	"November" ,
year	=	"1981" ,
pages	=	"2389--2393" ,
keywords=	"vitamin C, copper, tsf" ,
)

That's all I know.  Good luck.
--
Tim Freeman <tsf@cs.cmu.edu>    CompuServe ID 71045,2267 checked occasionally.
When they took the fourth amendment, I was silent because I don't deal drugs.
When they took the sixth amendment, I kept quiet because I know I'm innocent.
When they took the second amendment, I said nothing because I don't own a gun.
Now they've come for the first amendment, and I can't say anything at all.
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Subject: Re: Are there any dietary magic bullets to lower cholestrol?
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:05:34 GMT

In article <BxGr1o.E7s@fc.sde.hp.com> fritz@fc.sde.hp.com (Gary Fritz) writes:
>According to research I have read, the safest and most efficacious form
>of niacin for treating hyperlipidemia is inositol hexaniacinate, or IHN.
>Doses of several grams per day have been monitored with no side effects.

I really know nothing about this other than what you've posted here already,
but one should make the point that this is not a "form of niacin", it's a
different drug, and one which is not currently FDA approved.  It'd be nice
if it proved to be as or more effective than niacin or have fewer (or no)
side effects, but I think it's too early to conclude this.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
From: fritz@fc.sde.hp.com (Gary Fritz)
Subject: Re: Sulfites
Organization: HP SESD, Fort Collins, CO
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 20:11:07 GMT

Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) wrote:
: What I am looking for is a list of beers that do not contain sulfites.
: I would appreciate as long a list as I can find, which hopefully
: contains darker beers as well.

I would suspect that most imported German beers would not have sulfites,
but that's not a sure bet.  If the beer was brewed for consumption in
Germany, it could not contain additives like that, but many German
beers are "adulterated" when shipped to the US.

And, of course, you can always brew your own...

Gary
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: kja@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (krista.j.anderson)
Subject: Re: The Calcium in Milk is BAD???
Summary: sulfates from protein
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:27:06 GMT

In article <1992Oct30.162654.17933@emr1.emr.ca>, woodgold@emr1.emr.ca (Cathy Woodgold) writes:
> In article <1992Oct29.183625.16627@cbfsb.cb.att.com> kja@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (krista.j.anderson) writes:
> >[Milk leaches calcium out of bones?]
> >The problem occurs only if you are getting excessive protein, that
> >is, more than your bodies needs to replace its own cells.  The
> >reason for it is that excess protein is metabolized by cells for
> >energy and some proteins contain sulfur so that their metabolism
> >leaves sulfuric acid as a by-product.  The sulfuric acid can leach
> >calcium out of bones.
> >
> I read that the way it works is that if you eat too much protein,
> it is broken down, producing uric acid, which must be excreted in
> the urine.  The larger amounts of urine being produced cause minerals
> such as calcium to be lost.  As usual, I forget where I read that.
> Also, I don't know whether it's the same effect as just drinking
> lots of water.  I drink lots of water;  my body chemistry demands it;
> perhaps it's related to my migraine headaches.  I don't know whether
> I'm losing a lot of minerals that way.  I'm pregnant and I'm getting
> leg cramps, a sign of calcium deficiency, in spite of drinking lots
> of milk and taking calcium supplements.

Well, aren't there other causes of leg cramps?  I had a lot of
"crazy leg" when I was pregnant though I'm sure I was getting
enough calcium.  But I was carrying a lot of extra weight at an
awkward angle and some parts of my body were squished.  :-) 

On the protein, while "browsing" at the bookstore, I read in _The
New Pritikin Program_ that some proteins have *sulfates* as
by-products.  (Sorry if it was wrong when I said sulfuric acid.)
Calcium as well as magnesium is needed to neutralize the sulfates
and if there aren't enough of those minerals in the blood to do the
job, then calcium and magnesium are taken from the bones.

It also said, as you did, that excess proteins in general do result
in more uric acid which does raise the requirements for water.  So,
I'm glad you pointed that out.
-- 
Krista Anderson
krista@ihlpf.att.com  or  ihlpf!krista@att.att.com  or  att!ihlpf!krista
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: mpmena@skcla.monsanto.com
Subject: Re: niacin and the NIH
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 09:11:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.222033.5369@pixel.kodak.com>, young@serum.kodak.com (Rich Young) writes:
> 
> 	Excuse me for butting in, but I think there's a semantic problem
> 	here.  "First choice" may well not mean "worst", but it doesn't
> 	necessarily mean "best," as in "most efficacious," either.  From
> 	the paragraph presented, it looks like the recommendation is being
> 	made on the basis of several other factors AS WELL AS efficacy;
> 	that is, it gives acceptable performance at a reasonable price with
> 	well understood and relatively benign side-effects.  Other drugs
> 	may work better, but may have more serious side-effects or signifi-
> 	cantly greater cost, for example.
> 
> 	The point is, you must define precisely what is meant by "best"
> 	before any agreement is possible.  If you do this, I suspect that
> 	you'll find that you and Steve essentially agree, at least with the
> 	NIH statement's intent.  Whether you'll ever agree on the wisdom
> 	of self-treatment with a drug capable of causing serious damage in
> 	theraputic doses is another question altogether.
> 
> 
> -Rich Young (These are not Kodak's opinions.)

Rich, you're absolutely right... Sometimes, however, I have this bad habit of
urging on certain personality types...I know I shouldn't, but it's such fun!


Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: agoodrid@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu (Stephen Klautky)
Subject: Re: Are there any dietary magic bullets to lower cholestrol?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 01:52:00 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.152005.15194@zooid.guild.org>
rwaigh@zooid.UUCP (Rosemary Waigh) writes...

>In article <1992Nov6.180457.23321@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> 
>sherwood@space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford) writes:

>>Subject says it all.

>You could try a low-fat vegan diet (though I'm not sure if this
>qualifies as a magic bullet).


I presume you are concerned about high cholesterol because of the
associated risks with health.  My understanding of this area is
that high cholesterol levels (>200) is only one risk factor.  You
should look at the HDL/LDL ratios too.  Remember, risk factors
are determined by looking at large amounts of data which have a
considerable number of variables that cannot all be controlled.  I
guess what I'm trying to say is that if you have a cholesterol
level over 200 don't panic.  Low-fat diets are a reasonable start.
Couple that with regular exercise and you'll be better off.  Boy,
now wasn't that boring advice.

Steve (cholesterol=130) Klautky     AGOODRID@VAXA.WEEG.UIOWA.EDU
:-)  even with eating donuts, pate, cheese, bacon, eggs, etc. :-)

Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: sherwood@space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford)
Subject: Re: Eating spoiled food reduces lifetime?
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:02:15 GMT

Nancy Lebovitz writes
> 
> I've dealt with this by keeping oil in the refrigerator after I open  
it--
> this certainly keeps it from _tasting_ rancid. Does anyone know if  
that's
> sufficient evidence that it isn't oxidizing, or at least not  
oxidizing
> enough to matter? 

Taste is pretty sensitive, so your actions would seem reasonable.

If you are really concerned get an accordian squeeze bottle from your  
local photo supply store.  (Used to keep developing solutions)  These
allows you to squeeze all the air out first.  

Alternately, transfer to small bottles and freeze the ones that aren't  
in use.
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: kudzu@netcom.com (Michael Sierchio)
Subject: Re: Anti-oxidants v. oxygen therapy
Organization: True Love, and Home-Grown Tomatoes
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 21:06:33 GMT

In article <61410006@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com> 
	 kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse) writes:

>As Andy Rooney says on "60 Minutes".....
>
>	My understanding of oxygen therapy is that ozone or hydrogen peroxide
>	liberate an oxygen molecule which kills germs by oxidation. 

It also destroys cells membranes of your own cells.

-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Michael Sierchio                          1563 Solano Avenue, Suite 123 |
|  kudzu@netcom.com                                Berkeley, CA 94707-2116 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: mpmena@skcla.monsanto.com
Subject: Re: niacin and the NIH
Organization: Searle, Skokie, IL
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 10:13:27 GMT

>>
>>"NIACIN IS "A FIRST CHOICE DRUG" FOR PREVENTION OF CORONARY HEART DISEASE, NIH
>>PANEL SAYS;..."
> 
> So, where's the word "BEST"?   Simple, it wasn't mentioned.
> 
What does FIRST CHOICE mean to YOU????
  "Any moron" would understant that the term first choice doesn't mean "worst"

>>"Niacin is a "first choice drug" for prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD)
>>"because of its low cost and efficacy in altering multiple lipid fractions,"
>>according to the concluding statement of a Feb 26-28 National Institutes of
>>Health Consensus Development Conference on Triglyceride, High Density
>>Lipoprotein and Coronary Heart Disease."
> 
> You're a fool if you're treating yourself with niacin without it being
> prescribed by a physician and having periodic checkups.  It is not a
> drug suitable for self-administration.

Although any compound, be it a nutrient of pharmacologic agent, can have some
side effects, a recognized panel of national experts feel strongly about the
relative value of niacin, compared to other hypolipemic and bile-sequestiering
agents.  Mr. Dyer seems to glibly ignore their combined experience and
recommendations in this area.

One other question... How much nutrition is taught at medical schools these
days?  A recent study (no, I don't have it at my fingertips; if you can't find
it on Medline like any other "moron" tough luck) decried to lack of adequate
training by physicians not only in the area of basic and clinical/critical care
nutrition and metabolism, but also in disease prevention.  My regular
interaction with the faculty of these institutions in the US and other
countries hasn't revealed any changes in these areas.
 
> Any moron can get access to Medline, as we see here.  The knowledge to put
> that raw information to use doesn't come along with it.
> 
In this area, Steve is absolutely right.  Anyone can get access to Medline...So
why have the vast majority of physicians consistently failed to access
peer-reviewed information relevant to nutrition for so many years... Is it that
all too many physicians don't have the intelligence to gain the knowledge to
put the raw information to use...(maybe they just don't understand
metabolism...) or that they're too busy making money pumping patients through
the disease-oriented system they created to be concerned about the health and
well-being of their patients?  (My apologies to the few physicians who DO care,
and make the effort to know what they're talking about!)

Wake up, Steve, and smell the vitamins!
   
> -- 
> Steve Dyer
> dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: rmorales@dit.upm.es (Rodolfo M. Gonzalez)
Subject: Food Allergies
Organization: UUES, Asociacion de Usuarios de UNIX, Spain
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 09:52:42 GMT


	As the Celiac I am, I'm not happy. My evolution is not good
	enought. I suspect I suffer of associates allergies.
	Actually, I've got a list of suspicious alergenic foods but
	I'm interested in knowing a complete food family list.
		Where could I get one?
		Have you 1 to send me?
	After having that list, it's my intention to separate the
	'polemic' food discovering it throught a rotation diet.
		How could I do such a rotation?
		Is there any 'good' book which tells how?

	I need this info as soon as posible since my doctor told me
	that there's no other way for the celiac to know his response
	to normal food.
	I've decided to get moving on my own interest.
	Please e-mail me.


				Thanks in advance,
					Rodolfo M. Gonzalez


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rodolfo Morales Gonzalez
Dept. of Telematic Engineering ( DIT)
E.T.I.I.Telecomm.
Polytechnic Univ. of Madrid
Madrid, Spain.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Phone: +34-1-394-1005		| e-mail: rmorales@sanson.dit.upm.es
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: ssfels@cs.toronto.edu (Sidney Fels)
Subject: Food Irradiation: comments?
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 6 Nov 92 22:21:38 GMT


I am interested in people's opinion on food irradiation.   Here in Canada,
the Canadian dietician's association is quite pro-irradiation making it
difficult to get much information on the con side.  The only research
that I've seen linked to them with results against irradiation was 
prevented (by them) from publication and it was only by chance that 
I was able to get the comprehensive analysis.
Is there a general consensus out there about the positive and negative 
benefits of food irradiation?  What other references do people know about?  

I have included below the info I got on how to get a copy of the 
report on irradiation if anyone is interested:  (this was fairly
hard to get a hold of so pass it along to anyone you may know
that may be interested).

Thanks in advance for your comments:

Sid Fels

---------------------------------------------------------------

     NEW FOOD IRRADIATION RESOURCE

You can learn more about food irradiation by purchasing a 230 page
research manuscript written by registered dietitian, Karen Graham. 
Learn about food irradiation and its uses, safety concerns, environ-
mental risks, the politics of food irradiation, and alternative 
processes.  ``Food Irradiation -- A Canadian Folly' is a timely,
valuable resource for all professionals and consumers wishing a
more in-depth look at food irradiation.

Cost: Please send cheque or money order to K. Graham for \$19.95 Cdn
      (GST and PST exempt).  When ordering from the United States send
      U.S. \$18.95, and for international orders send U.S. \$22.95.
      All prices include shipping and handling.  Allow 6--8 weeks for
      delivery.

Available from:  89 Wilkinson Cresent
                 Portage la Prairie, MB
                 R1N 1A7
                 CANADA

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: sherwood@space.ualberta.ca (Sherwood Botsford)
Subject: B6 as anti atherosclerotic?
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 01:02:19 GMT


Things are getting dull.  So I'll start the pot boiling again...

Just finished an interesting book that made the following points:
1.	The connection between dietary cholesterol and serum  
cholesterol is not great.  Very few people can change their cho. levels  
by as much as 25%, and most only by about 10%.

2.	The connection between reducing cho. serum levels and reduced  
risk of heart disease is small.

The authors maintained that most athersclerotic lesions get started due  
to the presense of an amino acid homocysteine.  Once the lesions start,  
they are infused with cholesterol to form plaques.

In culture this amino acid causes epithelial cells to pile up, instead  
of growing as a single layer.  

Homocysteine is not used in the body but is a byproduct of the  
metabolism of methionine, a common amino acid in both veg and animal  
protein, but more abundent in animal protein.

Normally this amino acid is processed to either tryptophan or back to  
methionine.  

B6 is a co-enzyme for this catalyst.

Atherschlerosis can be induced in lab animals with a B6 deficiency or  
by IV administration of homocysteine.

Groups that are low in serum levels of B6 have more heart disease.  The  
converse is also true.

B6 is normally available as three forms naturally.  Two of them are  
heat sensitive, and suffer substantial breakdown in cooking.  While the  
RDA for B6 is 2+ mg/day, it is quite difficult to get this much in a  
reasonable and interesting diet.

The authors admit there are some unanswered questions, but in view that  
toxicity of B6 is small  (LD50 dose estimated at 200 grams) and that  
it's fairly cheap ($30/kg in 1981 when the book was written) they  
recommended that people supplement their B6 use to the tune of about 10  
mg/day.

Comments?