Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

10 top inflammatory and anti-inflammatory foods

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 10 top inflammatory and anti-inflammatory foods

    http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/clea...ory-foods.html

    Most of it looks pretty right on, but can anyone debunk what they say about red meat?

    "6. Red and Processed Meat: Red meat contains a molecule that humans don't naturally produce called Neu5GC. Once you ingest this compound, your body develops antibodies which may trigger constant inflammatory responses. Reduce red meat consumption and replace with poultry, fish and learn cuts of red meat, once a week at most."
    Starting Weight : 338lbs 6/11/2010
    Current Weight: 266lbs
    High-school Weight: 235lbs
    Goal: ????

  • #2
    Russ,

    I'm REALLY glad you asked that question. Neu5GC gives me a GREAT clue. My instructor in a seminar we attended said the same thing about red meat, but went even further to say, "If it has 4 legs, then don't eat it." Eat only meats from fish & 2 legged creatures. They did not explain WHY to avoid such meats except to say it contributes to toxic liver, which was the seminar subject. Their lack of good reasons has been nagging me for 6 months now. WHY? I wish now that I had asked that question in class. But destiny came to the rescue with your question.

    I found THIS link that sheds light on the question.
    http://juvenon.com/jhj/vol8no3w.htm

    The thing about Google Search is that we must do exactly the RIGHT search to get our answers. If we don't know anything about the subjects, we can't do the proper search. So what if I search Toxic Liver Neu5GC?

    AHA !
    "endothelial damage that occurs mainly in the gastrointestinal tract and in the
    kidneys, and sometimes also in the brain and the liver."
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2752721/

    Neu5Gc is a type of glycan, or sugar molecule, that humans don't naturally produce, but that can be incorporated into human tissues as a result of eating red meat. The body then develops anti-Neu5Gc antibodies – an immune response that could potentially lead to chronic inflammation. Tumor tissues contain much more Neu5Gc than is usually found in normal human tissues," said Varki. "We therefore surmised that Neu5Gc must somehow benefit tumors."It has been recognized by scientists for some time that chronic inflammation can actually stimulate cancer, Varki explained. So the researchers wondered if this was why tumors containing the non-human molecule grew even in the presence of Neu5Gc antibodies. ScienceDaily (Nov. 14, 2008)
    http://cancershield.net/id23.html

    So the real answer is FAR WORSE than just toxic liver or inflammation, it is CANCERS CAUSED BY RED MEAT! DAMN!

    What do you think?

    Best of health to all,
    Grizz

    Comment


    • #3
      These lists always screw with me. For example, the Alcohol as an inflammatory. I keep reading how moderate alcohol is good for you and that people live longer if they drink. So, if it is an inflammatory, maybe it's mild enough that it doesn't really bother you if you reduce or eliminate the other inflammatory foods.

      Comment


      • #4
        (Living in hope someone will come along and debunk... especially the things Grizz found...)

        Comment


        • #5
          I used to get a bit exercised when I read this sort of stuff, but I just don't bother any more. I simply think to myself "we evolved over millions of years eating red meat - would we have evolved to respond with inflammation to red meat?"

          And for me, the answer is no. It's not scientific, but it feels like common sense to me.
          My primal journal
          You might find these handy: Free gluten free restaurant cards in 50+ languages
          In Praise of the Primal Lifestyle

          Comment


          • #6
            What most people don't understand is that just because you find something that has a seemingly negative physiological effect doesn't mean that it has any biological consequences or is of any significance. For example, all vegetables contain fructose, fructose feeds cancer cells... erm, are we going to shy away from carrots now? Just read the entire articles.

            " Experiments with mice, exhibiting tumors bearing the Neu5Gc sugar, corroborated the effectiveness of anti-inflammatory drugs. Tumor growth increased after the mice were injected with the antibody to Neu5Gc. However, if the animals were treated with an anti-inflammatory agent then injected with the antibody, the stimulatory effect was largely eliminated."

            In other words, DON'T BE INFLAMED. Serialsinner and I eat a lot of red meat, but we both have CRP levels that are almost undetectable. It would seem that the key to avoding cancer is...once again. DON'T BE INFLAMED. Or be nutrient deficient. And don't eat sugar.
            Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

            Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by john_e_turner_ii View Post
              These lists always screw with me. For example, the Alcohol as an inflammatory. I keep reading how moderate alcohol is good for you and that people live longer if they drink.
              The evidence of alcohol being good is questionaires. However complete abstinence from alcohol is often because the person has previously been an alcoholic, or have an illness so they can't tolerate it.

              Comment


              • #8
                They have refined grains on the list, but not whole grains. Something is seriously wrong with their logic.

                On to the Neu5Gc argument. I'm not a doctor or medical professional so much of the terminology is beyond me, but I do undestand the definition of "may". Read the paper, it's all theoretical with an obvious bent against red meat (Section title: Poetic Justice for Red Meat Eaters?). It also requires a "perfect storm" of this chemical and E-coli. I'd love to see Peter at Hyperlipid attack this paper.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I love how we tear what we don't like to shreds, but ignore the same (lack of) level of evidence when something supports our views. Or criticize others for ignoring evidence that doesn't suit them, and then ... do that ourselves. I rather expect there's something wrong with the idea that beef is bad for us in this way, but I'd like to base it on more than, "Yeah, so?!" There's gotta be better reasons.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by avocado View Post
                    I love how we tear what we don't like to shreds, but ignore the same (lack of) level of evidence when something supports our views.
                    +1
                    On the other hand, every food contains harmful substances, so at this point I'm just doing whatever works for me.
                    Height: 5'4" (1.62 m)
                    Starting weight (09/2009): 200 lb (90.6 kg)
                    No longer overweight (08/2010): 145 lb (65.6 kg)
                    Current weight (01/2012): 127 lb (57.5 kg)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I love how we tear what we don't like to shreds, but ignore the same (lack of) level of evidence when something supports our views.
                      Ain't it great being biased, saves so much on thinking

                      You're quite right of course Avocado, there's just no way I'm avoiding red meat, hence the offhand response. Stabby seems to have picked up on something specific above, and of course for bigger brains than mine, there may well be other gaping holes in the argument.
                      My primal journal
                      You might find these handy: Free gluten free restaurant cards in 50+ languages
                      In Praise of the Primal Lifestyle

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Mirrorball View Post
                        +1
                        On the other hand, every food contains harmful substances, so at this point I'm just doing whatever works for me.
                        +1

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          analysing a single compound in meat doesn't really make much sense. as was already mentioned - fructose is a poison, yet it's in many veggies and fruits. combined with the fiber that's also in those foods, and fructose gets metabolised well. Removing the fiber (by, say, juicing?) actually makes those same foods mildly toxic. in nature fructose is always found with fiber.

                          soooo. it's all great and good that they found something in isolation in meat that probably causes harm. and it doesn't mean shit. i'll stick to eating what we're biologically adapted to eat, and have evolved eating, thanks.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The whole phenomenon without said perfect storm appears to be COX-mediated. And so it follows that if one is eating the cow, one should be eating its brain
                            Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

                            Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              http://coolinginflammation.blogspot....nd-sialic.html
                              explaines something about the Neu5Gc sialic acid
                              challenge yourself
                              i blog here http://theprimalwoman.blogspot.com/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X