AgTalk Home
AgTalk Home
Search Forums | Classifieds (148) | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Has "modern" medicine?
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forums List -> AgTalk CafeMessage format
 
cottonhauler
Posted 10/29/2015 19:54 (#4865548)
Subject: Has "modern" medicine?


Zabcikville, TX
Made us (as a society) afraid of death? With all of the diseases that a person can come up with, most have been around for generations. There are a few "new" ones, I admit. It just seems to me that most folks are damned and determined to live forever. No matter the cost or quality of life involved. Also, how does modern medicine affect the overpopulation of our planet? There's not enough food to go around, is that just because there are simply too many people alive?? I'm not faulting or laying blame on anyone. Please do not take it that way. Just some thoughts running through my mind.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
redoak
Posted 10/29/2015 20:36 (#4865687 - in reply to #4865548)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


sw ontario
Death isn't my concern its more modern health keeping me alive without any quality in life in a nursing home.....side note ,cottonhauler,you been feeling OK since your health scare?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
cottonhauler
Posted 10/29/2015 20:46 (#4865726 - in reply to #4865687)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


Zabcikville, TX
Yes, feeling about like normal. Normal aches and pains, knees, elbow, and ankles. Otherwise, no problems. Never happened again, may never happen again. Thank you for asking!

Edit: redoak, shoot me an email if ya would.

Edited by cottonhauler 10/29/2015 20:48
Top of the page Bottom of the page
redoak
Posted 10/29/2015 21:02 (#4865780 - in reply to #4865726)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


sw ontario
cottonhauler you have mail
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Chris
Posted 10/29/2015 20:46 (#4865723 - in reply to #4865548)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



East central Iowa

Noting that obesity has become a world wide problem I'm not certain that we're running out of food.  Or when food is as cheap as it is compared to lipstick, printer ink, or women's shoes I think we've a ways to go before we have to worry. 

Then too, remember everybody living will be gone in a few short years. (relative to geological time)

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Von WC Ohio
Posted 10/30/2015 07:19 (#4866328 - in reply to #4865723)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



Obesity has exploded due to the lies about food we are being fed along with the carb saturated food.

Karl Denninger's article below.






Committee? You Mean Scammittee, Right?
 

C'mon folks, it's not difficult at all.

The committee is recommending lower consumption of meat, especially red and processed varieties. And its first sustainability component finds plant-based diets to be better for the environment than those that rely on animal protein.

About half of all U.S. adults have one or more preventable chronic diseases relating to poor diets and physical inactivity such as hypertension, diabetes and some cancers, according to the government. More than two-thirds of adults and almost one-third of youth are overweight or obese.

Again, there are only three sources of energy from food: Carbohydrate, protein and fat.

Not four, not five, not six, three.

All foods contain some mixture of one or more of those sources.

Among carbohydrates there is a wide variation in the speed of absorption of the energy contained into your gut.  Sugars, white potatoes and breads all absorb extremely rapidly to the point that they are almost-indistinguishable from table sugar in that regard.  Juicing, pureeing and other similar processing greatly speeds the rate of absorption as well.

Protein is, for the most part, animal based.  There are exceptions; green peas and various legumes (beans), quinoa (which is actually a seed if you want to get technical), nuts and similar are in that camp.  One to be careful with is anything soy-based, as soy is a known estrogen mimic in the body.  Whether this is actually bad is unknown, but if you are in the camp that any endocrine disruption is to be avoided then soy is on your "use sparingly at best" list.  Beware if you're vegan or vegetarian; there are a number of amino acids your body requires and cannot synthesize; getting all of them is difficult, but not impossible, on a vegan or vegetarian diet.

Fats come in two broad forms -- saturated and unsaturated.  Saturated fat is a solid at room temperature and is typically (but not entirely) found from animal sources.  Fats do not, broadly-speaking, provoke an insulin response.

Unsaturated fats come in two forms, mono-unsaturated and poly-unsaturated.  There is one major exception to the rule that these are typically found in plant-based sources, and that is Omega-3 fatty acid, which is a poly-unsaturated fat and is found largely in fish.

What is important to realize is that virtually all plant-based oils are not naturally-occurring substances available for you to eat.  That is, while you can eat corn by doing nothing more than cooking it you cannot eat corn oil without processing the corn to extract the oil.

Further, there are no hydrogenated (partially or fully) oils in nature; all of them are man-made, chemically-stabilized so they do not degrade in storage at room temperature (this is called being "shelf-stable.")

Now here are the challenges associated with the "What should I eat?" question.

  • Fast carbohydrates all, by definition, produce an insulin spike in your body.  This is utterly necessary to prevent your blood sugar from rising out of control.  However, that process of necessity causes all excess available glucose (that the insulin is being released in response to) being converted to fat and stored in the body.  It has to go somewhere and your liver and muscles, which are the only storage available for glycogen, have very limited capacity (about 1,800 calories TOTAL.)  When they are full conversion to fat is the only option.  Note that the total glycogen storage available in the body is roughly equivalent to one half pound of fat -- in other words, almost-nothing on a comparative basis.  A man who is "fit" typically has 15% or so of their body weight as fat and only about 5% of that is "essential"; for a 170lb man this means he has thirty-five times the amount of energy available to him at any time through fats as through fully-stoked glycogen reserves.  (Women tend to run ~7% higher in body fat and have a higher essential percentage (by about the same amount) as well.)

  • Your body will preferentially burn glucose to fats.  It does so because glucose is cheaper (metabolically) to burn; this is the essence of fat storage in the body as otherwise you could not survive without eating for more than a day or so!  When there is an insufficient amount of glucose available the body can both convert fats to glucose (which the brain specifically requires) and your muscles can burn lipids directly (fats.)  This state is known as ketosis and, contrary to the scaremongers, is not the same as the (very dangerous and life-threatening) diabetic condition called ketoacidosis.  In fact this is the way your body works on purpose.

  • When blood glucose falls off the body reduces its insulin response.  However, that response lags the glucose drop, and that produces hunger.  This is an unavoidable "feature" of eating a fast-released carbohydrate meal; a relatively short time later you will want to eat more.  Anyone with kids knows damn well that sugary snacks produce both a "sugar high" and then a cranky, nasty crash -- that one can satiate with more sugar!  The same thing happens in all of us.
  • There was a hypothesis, called the "lipid hypothesis", that saturated fats caused heart disease and obesity.  This hypothesis was factually disproved decades ago and in fact the original data would not have survived any sort of rational review.  But -- this hypothesis and broad dissemination of this myth has driven much of "food public policy" for decades.  The shocker (to you) should be that following the recommendations to remove saturated fats from the diet heart disease, Type II diabetes and obesity all exploded in prevalence rather than subsiding!

The conundrum was this -- in order to remove saturated fats from the diet you had to replace those calories with one of the other two available options -- protein or carbohydrate.  Very high protein levels are known to be ill-advised for any but very serious body-builders, as the body does not efficiently store that excess protein and thus it winds up putting a heavy load on the kidneys.

What replaced the saturated fats was carbohydrates and hydrogenated oils.

Look at the so-called "Food Pyramid", which you were told to eat.

The very base of it, with two to five times the amount recommended of foods above it, are nearly all very fast carbohydrates.

That is, they all provoke a spike in your body's insulin level and you will get hungry again when it wears off.  The same applies to anything in the fruit and vegetable group that is not eaten whole.  

An orange and orange juice may appear the same but one 8 oz glass contains the juice of roughly 4 oranges -- and all the sugar in them, ready for immediate release into your body.  You might well eat one medium orange at a sitting but would you really eat four?

This set of recommendations was and is an outright disaster for one simple reason -- you cannot possibly "count" calories accurately enough to maintain your body mass.  One pound of mass is about 3,500 calories.  There are 365 days in a year; in order to avoid winding up 50lbs overweight over your life you'd have to be able to count calories accurately enough to be within 10 a day.  To put some perspective on that this accuracy level is approximately one small bite out of a banana!  If you're off two bites (because you get hungry after eating a fast-carb-laden mealyou will be 100lbs overweight before you die.

It's impossible to count calories that accurately by hand but your body is capable of regulating itself that tightly, just as it does with blood sugar, blood pressure and dozens of other utterly essential biological processes, provided you don't poison the biological systems that animal bodies developed over hundreds of thousands of years of evolution to regulate caloric intake, and during none of that time (in the evolutionary sense) were those systems challenged by included sugar, pressed juices, extracted vegetable oils and hydrogenated crap in the diet.

How, in short, do you go back to what your body knows how to handle?

Well, since we now know the lipid hypothesis is crap eat few carbohydrates and no fast carbohydrates at all.  That is, the entire bottom of that "food pyramid" should be thrown out and, if you insist on eating anything on that list, do so only as a treat, meaning on a one serving a week or so basis.  At the same time eliminate processed (hydrogenated) oils and avoid, to the extent possible, vegetable oils.  In other words cook with the saved fat from your bacon and put butter on your veggies!

Since you must make up the calories somewhere, guess where they should come from?  Animal fats, primarily, not "lean" animal meat but rather full-fat cuts, which also gives you a moderate protein intake.  The balance should be green vegetables ex-potatoes (which are almost as bad as table sugar in terms of glucose release rates!) and some fruits.

I attempt to keep my carbohydrate intake to 50g/day, with a target of zero for "fast" (sugar) carbohydrates.  I don't achieve the zero all the time, but I am almost-always under 20g/day of sugars of various sorts (including beer, if I have some.)

Guess what?  Doing that caused me to lose 60lbs and more importantly keep it off without counting calories at all.

You want to know what else?  If I play games with this, and start eating the crap again, the weight starts to go back on.  The reason is simple -- I again get hungry, and when you're hungry you have to consciously avoid eating, which is hard.

You can either torture yourself, choose to eat in a way that you don't have to, or you will get fat with a greatly increased risk of all the bad health problems that come with being fat.

Yes, exercise is also important but let's cut the crap, shall we?  If you actually measure caloric expenditure from exercise (I did; I wore a Garmin watch with a heart-rate strap for all of my running and biking while the weight was coming off) you will find that only about one pound in three comes off due to exercise.  I proved this because I have every single work-out from that time period logged and I worked out a lot.

The rest of the weight comes off because your body regulates its caloric demand down the pie hole; that is, you're not hungry as often and when you are you eat less.

The best part of doing this, by the way, is that when you get to where you should be you won't have to change anything or "stop dieting."  Your body knows how to regulate itself and it will slowly stop losing mass when you approach a proper weight and stabilize there without you doing anything differently on a conscious level.

You can argue with the facts if you'd like but the fact of the matter is that these "government stooges" have been killing you for the last five decades and food producers like it this way.  How many boxes of Corn Flakes and packages of brownies would they sell otherwise?

Zero!

If you like Diabetes, blindness, chopped off toes and fingers from gangrene, heart attacks, strokes and being so damn fat and out of shape you can't run a half-mile or make it up a couple of flights of stairs without feeling like you're going to die, keep doing what you've been doing.

If not, then change it.

I did, and it changed my life.

A few years ago I could not run one mile.  Yesterday, aged 51, I did this.

(broken image link) Image showed a readout of time and distance ran 

You choose.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
cynic
Posted 10/30/2015 09:51 (#4866634 - in reply to #4866328)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



Thanks for that very informative article!
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Von WC Ohio
Posted 10/30/2015 10:48 (#4866714 - in reply to #4866634)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



Your welcome !

It also really works !

I started down this path 3rd week of February giving up the carbs and cutting all the junk out of my diet.

Have lost 65 pounds in that time frame. Latest weigh in have went from 235 to 170.

http://talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=587951&posts=1#M4856688

Documented some of this in the weekly weigh in threads in the Kitchen Table Forum.

http://talk.newagtalk.com/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=582573&posts=1#M4810766

Top of the page Bottom of the page
farm160
Posted 10/29/2015 21:29 (#4865859 - in reply to #4865548)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


NE Nebraska
I don't know that they want to live forever, they just want to stay healthy long enough to fulfill their bucket lists, and their bucket lists have gotten bigger. People are so much more aware of all of the things and experiences the world has to offer - places to travel and foods to eat, new things to try. They have the desire and oftentimes the means to get out there and live life to the fullest, and they're counting on modern medicine to keep them well enough so they can do as much as possible before death comes calling.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Ben D, N CA
Posted 10/29/2015 21:56 (#4865943 - in reply to #4865548)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot
Some people have become so spoiled by modern medicine, that they think that their children's health is a great place to make a political statement.

You never saw people who'd been around Polio, meningitis, Measles, not vaccinating their kids. But, after having been removed from such horrors for a generation or two, apparently those diseases weren't so bad, and we'd like to reintroduce them to public schools...
Top of the page Bottom of the page
north1
Posted 10/29/2015 22:21 (#4865987 - in reply to #4865548)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


North Dakota
My take,

1. When you have no religious beliefs, you will do anything to live longer because you are afraid to die.

2. Medical industry loves keeping people alive as long as possible. They make ALOT of money doing so.

3. How many trillions of dollars have been spent on cancer research just in the last 50 years? Sometimes I wonder if treating a disease has become much more important than curing it, purely for monetary reasons.

4. Media hype. Can't watch TV without having this pill for this, this pill for that. Often the side effects stated at the end if you can hear them that fast are worse than what they portend to treat. TAKE THIS LITTLE RED PILL TO TREAT ERECTILE DISFUNCTION, may cause kidney, heart, liver failure, high blood pressure, some forms of cancer etc and so on. It is constantly being drummed into our heads we have to do all we can to live forever.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
johnypop
Posted 10/29/2015 22:55 (#4866043 - in reply to #4865987)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


ND

north1 - 10/29/2015 10:21 My take, 1. When you have no religious beliefs, you will do anything to live longer because you are afraid to die. 2. Medical industry loves keeping people alive as long as possible. They make ALOT of money doing so. 3. How many trillions of dollars have been spent on cancer research just in the last 50 years? Sometimes I wonder if treating a disease has become much more important than curing it, purely for monetary reasons. 4. Media hype. Can't watch TV without having this pill for this, this pill for that. Often the side effects stated at the end if you can hear them that fast are worse than what they portend to treat. TAKE THIS LITTLE RED PILL TO TREAT ERECTILE DISFUNCTION, may cause kidney, heart, liver failure, high blood pressure, some forms of cancer etc and so on. It is constantly being drummed into our heads we have to do all we can to live forever.

Warren you nailed it, they can't make money on a dead person so they give you a drug and keep you coming back to treat the side effects. They won't find a cure for cancer, too much money in treating it, all these big fancy cancer centers, have to pay for them somehow. 

Top of the page Bottom of the page
PPo
Posted 10/30/2015 10:29 (#4866693 - in reply to #4866043)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



The argument around that is pretty simple. If there was an easy or even reasonable cure for it, one or two people would stand to get fat rich and they'd do it. If you've dealt with many specialist docs and businesspeople, you know that they'd be perfectly happy to shut down another industry if it would put money in their pocket. The specialists make a TON of money, but they make a tiny fraction of what they could make if they could start a company with an actual cure for cancer. It would get to market very quickly if it existed.

There's no easy cancer cure simply for the reason there's no easy one. the changes in treatment have not made significant increases in life span in recent years, but certainly some of the chemo, etc, is easier for people to tolerate than it used to be.

There was a big recent bulge in life expectancy due to statin drugs and cardiovascular health drugs and treatments.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
FarmTex
Posted 10/30/2015 15:43 (#4867039 - in reply to #4865987)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


North East Texas
+ 1000, north1. Hit the nail on the head !
Top of the page Bottom of the page
flyinfarmer
Posted 10/30/2015 07:01 (#4866295 - in reply to #4865548)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



NE Iowa
My wife and I have this discussion/argument every now and then - usually about the time I put salt on my popcorn or have a 2nd brownie out of the pan. She will make some comment about me not eating very healthy, and I respond by asking, 'What's your goal - to live forever? Sorry to disappoint you, but that isn't going to happen'. I get the part about not treating my body so bad that I become non-functional and a burden to my family, but I really see no point in eating stuff I don't like, not eating stuff I do like, just to get my weight down to some number that some health nut has determined is ideal for my age and height. I get a complete physical every year, and the doc keeps saying he believes I am going to make it another year. Blood tests are good. Colonoscopy was good. I do take blood pressure meds (ok - maybe I should back off on the salt) - pretty sure I could get off of those if I would do some type of cardio exercise.....
Top of the page Bottom of the page
TxPope
Posted 10/30/2015 08:00 (#4866433 - in reply to #4866295)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


Abilene, Texas
.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
blacklander
Posted 10/30/2015 10:21 (#4866676 - in reply to #4866295)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


Central Texas
My wife and I just had the same conversation. What good is it to live forever if all you are going to do is worry about every bite of food you put in your body. I don't think God is going to allow mankind to be immortal, no matter what some scientists want to think.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
PPo
Posted 10/30/2015 10:25 (#4866683 - in reply to #4865548)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



There's no shortage of food, and there isn't likely ever to be one. Think about it, we can waste half our or caloric food output by mixing it to make fuel, and nobody is growing much of anything on all of their yard area.

Modern medicine makes people live longer, and in some cases improves the quality of life. It sure keeps us from dying of very preventable things that killed people in generations past. We certainly also do things that make us live less long (get overweight and get diabetes, eat more meat than we necessarily need or protein, as well as processed oils and foods, smoke, expose ourselves to chemicals, etc..).

I wonder whether or not people think that the improvement in medicine is going to make them have a convenient life, sometimes I think it does. Until someone gets truly sick with something and finds out otherwise.

One thing is for sure, people are more interested in having perfect 100% guaranteed safety now than they were 30 years ago. Just the way people deal with their kids that I see, they're over their backs all the time.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
HeyhayJCM
Posted 10/30/2015 10:50 (#4866716 - in reply to #4866683)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


central ohio..between Springville and Millbrook.
PPo - 10/30/2015 10:25

There's no shortage of food"

You must live in America

Josh Moorefield
Top of the page Bottom of the page
PPo
Posted 10/30/2015 11:10 (#4866732 - in reply to #4866716)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



There's no shortage of food that has anything to do with inability to grow enough food around the globe.

The fact that anyone would go without is a money, distribution and politics problem.

The fact that there is a money and distribution problem has mostly to do with politics and corruption.

Energy is a much bigger problem if population doubles. It be even if population doesn't double.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
PeteMN
Posted 10/30/2015 12:08 (#4866810 - in reply to #4866732)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?


E.Central MN
Energy and water. But think about it, its much easier to double someone's lifespan if they've been dying under the age of 5 than it is if they have been dying at 60. Modern medicine is reducing early mortality in a lot of countries where living to the ripe old age of 35 was considered good. Unfortunately it hasn't done anything and probably can't do anything to remove the ethnic and religious conflicts that also happen in those same countries. All it has done is increase the number of people in the pressure cooker so to speak. Modern medicine doesn't prevent death, it just postpones it.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
PPo
Posted 10/30/2015 13:43 (#4866911 - in reply to #4866810)
Subject: RE: Has "modern" medicine?



Agree with that, progress has been slow for a long time now and probably will be.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete cookies)