I know I have talked about this before, but this is just one of the most shocking revelations I have come across in a long time. As a cancer survivor, I am horrified that none of this was told to me EVER! If you have time, (it's pretty long), please try to take the time to watch the following video: [video.google.ca]. If you don't have time, here's my short recap of the information:

Information from Lecture of T. Colin Campbell and China Health Study

- Background was trying to feed malnourished kids in the Phillipines - looking for better high animal protein sources, but problems occurred - LIVER CANCERS!

- It was initially thought that high fat was correlated to cancers, but as shown below, it was totally disproven and found that it was in fact animal PROTEIN levels.

- Study was done on animal tumors in India. When fed 20% animal protein, 30 out of 30 animals developed tumors (normal protein consumption in America). When protein was reduced to 5%, 0 out of 12 tumors noted. ZERO!!! Created questions about protein intake and cancer rates.

- Another study of Casein (milk) protein on rats - at 5%, tumors were almost non-existent (marker # was 248), at 12%, marker # was 2358, quite high, but at 20%, marker # was 3321 (extremely high). At 100 weeks, the 5% rats were sleek, healthy and young looking (expected to be dead by that time), but all the other rats were dead.

- Casein - the main protein in milk is a carcinogen, the most significant carcinogen consumed by man, far more deadly than many banned chemicals. (much DEADLIER than DDT!!) Reflective of all animal proteins - plant proteins do not do this.

- Animal proteins increase blood cholesterol (NOT saturated fats) - known since 1909.

- Compromises Vitamin D status, increases IGF-1 and increases calcium bone loss

- Originally believed that animal fats were correlated to incidence of cancer, but it was proven that it was NOT the fats, but rather the PROTEIN. Therefore, not much value in a low fat protein based diet, since decreasing fat usually means increasing protein (eg - skim milk, lean meats, etc.)

- VERY DISTURBING - In 2002, the Food and Nutrition Board from the National Academy of Sciences in USA (which also sets the policy for school food, hospital foods, determines RDA's etc) announced that the standard for good health should be between 10-30% protein, and no more than 25% of calories from added refined sugars. (studies partly funded by M&M Mars and Coca Cola). The average American consumes between 11-22% protein - and the above study showed a 100% incidence of cancer at 20%, so I would not like to know what will happen at the 30% level.

- Besides CANCER, other diseases for which animal proteins have been proven to be implicated [video.google.ca] are:

ARTHEROSCLEROSIS
HIGH CHOLESTEROL
OSTEOPOROSIS (1992 Yale study)
CATARACTS
KIDNEY STONES
MS - SEVERITY AND PROGRESSION
LUPUS
MACULAR DEGENERATION
COGNITIVE DYSFUNCTION
ALZHEIMERS
OBESITY
TYPE 1 DIABETES
TYPE 2 DIABETES

Sapphire

i watched this the other day and it's great. really revealing, i'm passing the info on to my mum. she has been my healthy inspiration all my life but her hubby (married to him now less than 10years) has her eating all kinds of gunk. this should help propel her back on track.

I found this very informative/interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Campbell found a problem with casein but it hasn't been shown with whey, in fact whey is protective in some studies.

With most with protein/cancer studies (any type) there is an upside down U-shaped curve--either too much or too little will starve a tumor and the "just right" amount in the middle will help it grow faster.

NO they are not very healthy. They die much too fast. That would account for their low cancer rates, which tend to be exponential with age after 50 or so.

Coco - My heart goes out to you watching your mom make bad eating choices. I remember going through that with my mother-in-law. She had such high blood pressure / high cholesterol, and was told to make so many changes, and she just would not do many of the things she was told to do. It drove me crazy, but it was just not my place to tell her how to live her life. Sadly, it all caught up with her, and her heart just gave out at the age of 71, far too young in my opinion. My oldest child was only 5 at the time, and sadly, none of my kids remember much about this wonderful lady, who I miss so much.

Arugula - Thank you so much for your information - you always set me straight on so many confusing things. When I watched this video, I looked at my family, and the amount of meat and dairy they consume and freaked out completely! It made me wonder if I am poisoning my own kids simply by allowing them to take a yogurt to school or put milk on their cereal. I can't seem to shake that fear.

Ideally, I would love it if everyone around me would embrace at least the vegan point of view, but since that is just not realistic, I am trying to find a balance and set a good example. My kids eat what their friends eat, and to not do so might impact their social status, or so they believe. My husband believes what he believes, and he is totally supportive of my beliefs so long as it doesn't threaten his in any way. I don't see our differences as a negative, but rather, I try to show my kids that even though dad eats a lot of foods I don't eat, he also consumes a lot of vegetables and at least some fruit, so it's always possible to work on adding something healthy.

So, can you tell me, how do I figure out just exactly what is a safe level of animal food consumption for those in my family who think they need it?

Sapphire

{So, can you tell me, how do I figure out just exactly what is a safe level of animal food consumption for those in my family who think they need it?}

I would look at what populations known for their longevity are eating.

-Okinwan elders, about 15% animal products (fish mostly)
-Sicilian Italians, maybe 10% animal or animal product
-Adventist vegetarians- maybe 15% egg and dairy.
-Chinese centenarians in Yimeng mountains, 5% meat, no dairy

So I'd stick with seafood, insects, gastropods, egg, and dairy and I'd keep to at 10% or under. Nothing fried or overcooked. No red meat, or if they must eat it, limit to less than 30 g per day.

I wonder if its the same for raw meat? I eat sashimi once a week. Does anyone have any info on that?

I wonder if they used organic raw goat milk or cheese for this study? The protein and casein in goats milk is different than cows milk casein.

I can see how a high protein diet, from diseased, depressed, miserable animals, pumped with hormones, chemicals and living life in hell on earth can cause cancer. I'm sure the study was a result of this kind of protein.

I wonder what the study would have resulted, had they used organic, unprocessed eggs and raw dairy, from happy, healthy, free range animals.

Of the three areas in the world noted for the longevity, Caucasus Mountains in Russia, land of the Hunza in northern India, the village of Vilcabamba in Ecuador, Kashmir, whose staple is raw goat milk and fermented dairy, have the highest longevity and centenarians of anyone else in the world. Their intestinal systems are pure and super clean, when autopsies were performed.

The longest living man in the West was Old Par, an English peasant who labored in the fields until his death at 152 years. His diet consisted almost entirely of raw goat milk products-milk, cheese and whey.


Processing is the problem.

After taking microbiology I would not recommend any uncooked animals or even animal products as foods.

You can get salmonella from eggs. The tube that the egg comes out of is the same tube that the excrement comes out of and the shell is permeable as the egg is being laid.

You can get worms and nematodes from uncooked flesh.

Insects, maybe? Doesn't appeal to me, I'd rather get my B12 from a pill.

I'm allergic to raw eggs, and raw fish is not appealing to me, but maybe lightly searing it, would render it safe, but I doubt the fish would be happy about it. The good bacteria in clean raw milk, kills the bad bacteria, if there was any in the first place, as seen under microscopes. I'm not advocating any of the above, but the subject was about protein, cancer and longevity, so I've just contributed the information that I've known since I was 18. If someone is a vegan, then they don't have to be concerned about it.

brian clement says that even very well done fish under a microscope reveals a plethora of live parasites.

Campbell's idea that everyone has cancer because modern life gives us cancer, and it's what we eat that determines whether that innate cancer is fed or not, is interesting. In other words, it's a given we have cancer. But the cancer will stay dormant if we "eat right." If we "don't eat right" then it will grow. It will grow if we feed it with animal protein, sugar, and all the processed crap we all know about, ad nauseum. Campbell seems to have plenty of evidence to back this claim, and the claim seems compelling.

Yet I have this gnawing feeling when I read his book ("The China Study" that he, too, may be a victim of the same propaganda machine he so convincingly rails against. I mean, nothing is certain in this world. We may get cancer, we may not. Who knows. Yet he sounds so certainly convinced, and his work seems to leave no stone unturned as to the causes. This, somehow, maybe even unfairly, makes me suspect and it raises a quiet red flag.

Rawrr,
There was an athabascan woman in alaska that reached the age of 127. I was just so amazed to hear about that. That was in the 1980's, so she was actually born when the civil war was going on, and just before the alaska purchase. I saw a photo of her and she was very stooped over and hair completely white. She hauled her own water,even up to a few days before her death. She was considered 'grandma' to the village, and its probably true that she was related to most people there. Someone very easily could have hauled water for her, but they knew that she neede something to do on her own for herself, and perhaps for someone else.

The traditional athabascan diet is not vegetarian, but includes wild game, and wild foods, which are still gathered. I have no idea what modern foods she may have consumed in addition to traditional staples. I also do not know if her longevity is unusual or not for athabascans in the area. I had a friend whose grandmother was 97, I met her, and she was very frail, but alert. She still beaded things. She made a large bead net to cover a piano, I was very impressed. She also covered the alter, and most surfaces for the local orthodox church she attended. I think that having a sense of purpose contributes to longevity.

Arugula,
What statistic do you have for Inuit people dying too fast? When I was born I had three great grandparents alive. We know that two lived over 100, for sure, but the exact birth year wasn't well documented. We think it was around 108 for one and the other around 112. This could be a different time period, when they lived perhaps there wasn't as much pollution. It could be something unusual statistically. However, I don't think its that unusual for Inuit people to live long, if they (like anyone) live as healthy as they know possible. There is quite a bit of ignorance though in some eskimo villages in reguard to food and other health habits.

Consumption of coffee, sugar, refined flour, shortening is very detrimental to their health. Most aren't aware that even small amounts can be very harmful. Perhaps even more harmful when combined with traditional foods. Not to mention alcohol and tobacco.

My gradmother lived to be 90, but she had several strokes. I am convinced that was largely due to shortening consumption. They have a habit of mixing that with berries along with sugar. I am not sure how that started, but thats very unhealthy. I think she would still be alive in good health if she knew to avoid that.

(This next portion is open to anyone willing to read)

It is my conviction that when people do their best to live a good life, and live according to what they know is right, they will be blessed. Even if its not the ultimate ideal that is available in the world. I commented on this in the "saving the life of a fly" thread. The doctrines of karma, compassion exist up there in the arctic circle, along with prayer and meditation.

I know it seems like a contradiction to have ahimsa in a culture that is so dependent upon animals. I am not sure, but I think there must be some way that animals can and do freely give of themselves to humans when necessary. Its not known and generally practiced in the western world. What is familiar in the west is the horrible enslavement of animals, and brutal killing. I am still thinking of ways that this could be minimized or even eliminated in the arctic. There is so much traditional knowledge that is lost, its difficult for me to imagine. I have some ideas, but without actually experiencing it myself, I do not know of its reality.

I have heard of Hindus collecting milk from cows that freely give excess milk. When the animals are loved, they produce milk which wets the grass below them. All they have to do is place a pan underneath. In this situation that could be considered 'fruit' as far as it being a product which is freely given. I am sure that the general properties of this milk would be different from the usual overbred machine milked cows milk we are familiar with in the united states.

I am speculating that lizards could give their tail to people for consumption. An example could be a gecko which regenerates its tail. Usually it detaches when a predator trys to catch it, the lizard gets away, the the predator gets a little meal. I have not heard of one of these lizards tails just dropping off, but I would consume it if a lizard came up to me and gave me its tail. It seems far fetched, but maybe that could happen some day to someone.

I know this is a vegan webpage. So I'm not wanting to go against the general theme, so please do not take this comment as advocating anything against the general ideals held here. I think that a vegan lifestyle is ideal if you have its knowledge and are open to it, and if its practical for where you live.

Sapphire,

what you have written is absolutely right! Above that, animal protein is acid promoting which may damage our body cells as well as internal organs.

Well written, thanks for sharing your info.

Regards, Mel

Alkaline Food / Green Food Chart With pH Scale

Iburg KM, Bronnum-Hansen H, Bjerregaard P. Health expectancy in Greenland. Scand J Public Health 2001;29(1):5-12. Choinere R. Mortality among the Baffin Inuit in the mid-80s. Arctive Med Res 1992;51 (2):87-93.

Don't believe anything you read from the Weston-Price foundation.

jodi, don't forget, one must eat all the internal organs as well as the bones for proper nutrient balance. opps, can't chew that with MY teeth, or digest it either!
raw eggs might be a better bet if you don't mind salmonella and, ugh *shudder*, raw egg.
or how's about some bugs? mmm, crunchy.

gak.

hehe thats right coco ! i forgot about the bones an guts ! lol

likewise ...

i can strap a kite to my back .. jump off a cliff ...and land safely (hopefully lol) but it doesnt mean i was meant to fly ... see what i mean?

Guys, now stop it! I've just had breakfast and I liked it. I want it to stay there.

Lots of interesting ideas. I do believe a fresh vegan mostly raw diet is the safest bet. Yet, for cancer I thi nk thee problem is more complicated than simply diet. Diet is probably one factor of the equation. Pollution is another robably and not one to neglect. You mention all these populations with amazing longevity - yet it strikes me that none of them is located in modern Western areas. So, we might think of more than diet when we try to achieve our best health: level of activity (very low generally in the US and other like countries). air we breath (don't get me started on this one) and diet (procent of prov=cessed foods especially - and not only termically, but with all the additives the modern food is full of).Probably another factor to take into account is the insane level of stress modern societies lay on people. The rhythm of life in preindustrial societies and in the postindustrial ones is expremely different.Of course a whole life lived mostly outdoors in fresh air working until very old, eating just fresh, additive-free food (even animal products obtained fresh from animals not fed with hormoned and antibiotics) would be far superior to the lived we live in the smoggy, poisonous cities we call modern. Given we can't change that, a diet free of everything porcessed (animal food is processed here!) is the best.

So we cannot look at the populations you have mentioned and conclude that that is the ideal diet for every human being on this planet.

cricri

love,
peace
cricri

sapphire

you voiced concern about your family members

have u shown them the video yet?

Just to clarify....

I don't know if I am really out to prove anything by this thread, but I am surrounded by people who I love who are not vegan or raw or who often don't give any thought to what they eat. And I try to support their choices the best I can, while setting a good example of my choices.

Yes, I have been through the phase where I was the biggest know-it-all, holier than thou, in your face vegetarian. I'm surprised my family put up with me back then, and I had just barely become vegetarian. I was still eating plenty of dairy and even the occasional seafood. But after a few years of being little miss smarty pants, I wound up being the first person in the family (in my generation) to develop a seious illness - CANCER! Boy, that really put me in my place. It was especially devastating because I had always felt that I was the one and only person I knew who really took my health seriously, who really made the effort! So now, I don't tell anyone what they should eat, I offer to share, and keep healthy stuff available, but I don't say too much unless someone makes it very clear to me that they really want to know what I think. And I don't criticize, how can I?

However, after seeing this film, I really need to re-question whether it is okay for me to continue to give my family so much dairy in the foods I prepare for them. Supportive or not, as a mother, there is also the obligation (and desire) to give my kids the foundation of great health. Also, I believe there are a few others on this forum in the same boat as me, at least so far as dealing with people in their immediate life, and I thought they might want to be aware of this as well. It's important to find a good balance.

As for myself personally, it would sure be great to be able to point at this one thing and say WOW, there's the answer, now I know why I got sick!!! But that's probably not right either, I am sure there were a combination of things, although this very well may have been one.

Sapphire

Arugula,

Doing a simple search, I found the following:

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]


Mortality among the Baffin Inuit in the mid-80s.

Choinière R.

Department of Community Health Montreal General Hospital, Canada.

This article proposes to describe mortality among the Inuit of the Baffin region during the 1983-1987 period and to compare it with that of Canadians as a whole. Mortality among the Baffin Inuit is clearly higher than that of the Canadian population as a whole. Life expectancy at birth is 66.6 years, approximately 10 years lower than that for the general Canadian population (76.3 years). Injuries and poisoning, neoplasms, and diseases of the respiratory system are the leading causes of death observed among the Baffin Inuit. For each of these causes, the rates obtained for the Inuit are significantly higher than those for the total population of Canada.


Argula, It sounds like most of the causes of death are not necessarily dietary related. There is a possibility that neoplasms could be dietary related., but without reading the whole article, I wouldn't know. Poisoning could also be dietary related, again reading the complete article would be a help. People can be poisoned by a variety of means. Injury, not necessarily. Diseases of the respiratory system is likely to be more related to smoking or tuberculosis.
[ajrccm.atsjournals.org]


[www.informaworld.com]

"Abstract
Background: Mortality and disease patterns in Greenland have greatly changed since the 1950s. Infectious diseases have decreased markedly; chronic diseases, suicides and violent deaths have increased. Methods: Life tables for the period 1991-95 were used and health status was derived from the 1993/94 Greenland Health Interview Survey. Health expectancy for the Inuit population of Greenland was calculated by an index suggested by Sullivan.Results: Greenland Inuit women live longer than men, but the expected lifetime in self-rated good health was shorter for women than for men. Chronic disease rates are high in Greenland, and consequently many healthy life years are lost, especially because of musculoskeletal diseases. Health expectancy decreases with age, but for this Inuit population the proportion of healthy life years increases after the age of 60, especially among men.Conclusion: The many healthy life years lost in Greenland according to self-rated poor health and chronic diseases should be a cause for concern in public health planning in Greenland. Special attention should also be paid to future investigations of regional patterns of health in Greenland, since there is great population heterogeneity according to geography and urbanization. "

Argula,
" Infectious diseases have decreased markedly; chronic diseases, suicides and violent deaths have increased." These are not directly dietary related. On commenting on chronic diseases, "Chronic disease rates are high in Greenland, and consequently many healthy life years are lost, especially because of musculoskeletal diseases." Particularly dietary causes are not attributed, then again I am reading the abstract. How many musculoskeletal diseases are attributed to dietary causes?

Arugula,

I forgot to highlight this part, "Health expectancy decreases with age, but for this Inuit population the proportion of healthy life years increases after the age of 60, especially among men".

How is that possible? If it was all dietary related, wouldn't their health continute to decrease? Assuming that they had access to the same foods, and the same habits? Its quite possible that their eating habits could change, but without further commentary, I just don't know.

Sapphire,
Thank you for being so honest. That sounds pretty difficult. Its one thing to offer advice to those outside of your family, quite another when you do the shopping for family members. Thats difficult.

There is one thing which I wonder about in all of this. Is it dairy in every form? Or is it pasturized dairy? What about purification of components of dairy? It seems to me that in these studies, its usually some preparation of particular substances which isn't always consumed in the way that people consume them. Isn't there also something in the way that things are presented that makes a difference?

I have heard people in indian medicine say that food made in anger is poison, even the freshest, most organic, raw vegan food. In contrast I have heard it said in an introduction to hinduism, that its better to eat ham, and offer it to god, and to thank god, and think of god often, then to be vegetarian and never thank god or think of god at all.

In studies, one could subconsciously suggest that another person gets ill? If you go out looking for pathology, you will find it, or perhaps create it? As the bumper sticker states, "research causes cancer in animals".

I just watched a story on 60 mintues this evening about protein-energy malnutrition. In some countries people are distributing a special mixture. Apparently its having some great results. Its not raw, and not vegan as it does have milk powder. But also has added vitamins and minerals.

I am curious if there is a vegan answer to this? I am sure there must be some project like this to assist people. Actually the children are so young, they really need milk, but there isn't enough human milk. Is there a suitable vegan substititue?
[www.projectpeanutbutter.org]

Mislu:

If I understand it correctly, some of the original tests were done using dairy proteins, but the result ended up implicating all kinds of animal protein. So, I think that means that it wouldn't matter if the dairy was organic, but rather whether it contained protein, which it all does. It would also implicate meat, but for me personally, I don't buy much meat. My husband and son like to BBQ occasionally, but my daughters prefer to skip it, so I'm more concerned about the dairy around here.

Arugula pointed out that some of this had come into question, but even so, it worries me. However, I found this video particular compelling because a few years ago, I read a book by a woman named Jane Plant about her experience with breast cancer and the impact of dairy - here's a good summary: here

The thing about having a housefull of teenagers is that you really experience how they want to try out every thing they see on TV, how they want to eat all the stuff their friends eat, how all the "easy" food you buy at the store that just needs to be heated up is loaded with dairy, sometimes meat, and always lots of chemicals I can't pronounce! It can be quite overwhelming, because some of this garbage actually tastes good, and they are more influenced by their taste buds than their knowledge that this isn't good.

Sapphire

Mislu-
Your posts are great! I really enjoy your knowledge (both researched & empirical apparently), diplomacy on the issue, & philosophical wisdom. Thanks for sharing!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2007 04:48PM by wrenbrrd.

Mislu,

I think people in these countries are protein malnutritioned because they must rely on grains and starches - not fresh fruits & vegetables - for the majority of their food. It's sad, but the world is set up agriculturally and economically to rely on grains for the majority of its calories. Without the grains, most of the world would starve. It needs to change. The fruit tree initiative is good. And people need to be taught to grow their own vegetables in third world countries and given the land and the means to do so.

If you want to know why "a dollar could buy 1,200 calories of cookies or potato chips but only 250 calories of carrots. Looking for something to wash down those chips, he discovered that his dollar bought 875 calories of soda but only 170 calories of orange juice." , I started a thread about it over here [www.rawfoodsupport.com]

I recommended scrapping the Farm Bill as the best solution. If we can bring that about, fresh produce and organic has a much better chance of flourishing in my opinion.

On the topic of animal proteins, I was very intrigued about Campbell's book as well, and agree with him. I found the results on heart disease to be the most startling though actually. I still haven't been able to read about the protein controversy and some criticisms of his work yet, apparently there is a debate online about it, but will try soon.

Cheers,
J