[www.naturalnews.com]
Man says raw food diet has made him 'almost superhuman'

Peace and Love..........John

while I am not at his level, I've experienced myself a huge improvement. I swimm for 1.5 hours non stop medium intensity and afterwards I feel like new. I also follow a high carb and look much younger than before.

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [www.naturalnews.com]
> uitarian_health_benefits.html
> Man says raw food diet has made him 'almost
> superhuman'
>
> Peace and Love..........John


Don't want to be a "Debbie Downer" here lol but exercising that much and eating such high calories every day isn't really an effective strategy for longevity. He says "I eat a lot of calories, like most animals in nature do"... most of these animals in nature weigh a lot more than you do and don't binge on FRUIT all day. It's easy in the short-term to feel like a fruitarian diet is working for you because you'll have a lot of energy (well, if you're eating non-stop like they do) and since fruits are mostly water you'll be detoxing a lot, but again non-stop eating isn't good for the digestive system and in the long-term, especially with excessive exercise, this guy could run into a host of health problems, including severe mineral deficiency.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 01:46PM by jtprindl.

Taking part in heavy exercise would be the only viable way to burn off all the excess sugar there taking in. Else the excess carbs would just turn to fat/weight gain like many 80/10/10ers complain of. Carbohydrate intake should always be kept in relation to activity levels and metabolic health.

His wife Victoria also hasn't been able to make the diet work from what ive read. So whilst it might make him feel superhuman its certainly not a way of eating which is applicable to everyone.

We will only see in time if he can manage to make such a diet work in the long term, which so far very few, if anyone has successfully managed to do.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 02:11PM by powerlifter.

"which so far very few, if anyone has successfully managed to do."

More disinformation.

Not only have many people made it work in the long-term but they also THRIVE and are the healthiest they've ever been in their life. Not to mention there are countless stories of people who have cured chronic disease and ailments from going 100% raw.

You keep repeating the same thing but never give any logical explanations behind your statements. So I just have two questions for you (try and answer this time instead of continuously and intentionally dodging):

1.) Why would one person be able to completely thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?

2.) Why would being 100% raw not work out in the long-run, other than lack of education on what to consume to ensure you're getting everything you need?

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1.) Why would one person be able to completely
> thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?
>
> 2.) Why would being 100% raw not work out in the
> long-run, other than lack of education on what to
> consume to ensure you're getting everything you
> need?

How about you tell me ? seen as how your the expert around here.

You've just finished posting saying mike arnstein could run into health problems and end up with serious mineral deficiencies on such a diet. Ive posted something pretty similar after you, yet my post is considered disinformation, whilst yours isn't lol.

So like i say, how about you share your wisdom why you think they fail ? Ive given my views a number of times on here why i think 80/10/10 doesn't work long term, if your willing to listen without acting like a jerk then i will go to the bother of posting again, if your going to start screaming shills and other immature crap then i can't be bothered to give you the time of day.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 02:35PM by powerlifter.

"How about you tell me ? seen as how your the expert around here."

That doesn't even make sense considering I disagree 100% with your statements. This was too predictable, you simply cannot logically explain your disinformation. I said this certain individual, due to eating so much sugar and exercising excessively could run into problems, not because he's on a 100% raw food diet. See the difference?


1.) Why would one person be able to completely thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?


2.) Why would being 100% raw not work out in the long-run, other than lack of education on what to consume to ensure you're getting everything you need?

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "How about you tell me ? seen as how your the
> expert around here."
>
> That doesn't even make sense considering I
> disagree 100% with your statements. This was too
> predictable, you simply cannot logically explain
> your disinformation. I said this certain
> individual, due to eating so much sugar and
> exercising excessively could run into problems,
> not because he's on a 100% raw food diet. See the
> difference?
>
>
> 1.) Why would one person be able to completely
> thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?
>
>
> 2.) Why would being 100% raw not work out in the
> long-run, other than lack of education on what to
> consume to ensure you're getting everything you
> need?

If you could actually be bothered to read i never mentioned raw or vegan being a factor here at all.

I said the majority of these people following his type of diet don't tend to be able to make it work successfully long term as we see with 80/10/10 and high sugar raw diets, and the low success rates that come with such diet.

Like i said his wife hasn't had too much success making the diet work for whatever reasons, so its not a way of eating which works or is applicable to everyone.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 02:40PM by powerlifter.

powerlifter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jtprindl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "How about you tell me ? seen as how your the
> > expert around here."
> >
> > That doesn't even make sense considering I
> > disagree 100% with your statements. This was
> too
> > predictable, you simply cannot logically
> explain
> > your disinformation. I said this certain
> > individual, due to eating so much sugar and
> > exercising excessively could run into problems,
> > not because he's on a 100% raw food diet. See
> the
> > difference?
> >
> >
> > 1.) Why would one person be able to completely
> > thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?
> >
> >
> > 2.) Why would being 100% raw not work out in
> the
> > long-run, other than lack of education on what
> to
> > consume to ensure you're getting everything you
> > need?
>
> If you could actually be bothered to read i never
> mentioned raw or vegan being a factor here at
> all.
>
> I said the majority of these people following his
> type of diet don't tend to be able to make it work
> successfully long term as we seen i.e 80/10/10 and
> high sugar raw diets, and the low success rates
> that come with such diet.
>
> Like i said his wife hasn't had too much success
> making the diet work for whatever reasons, so its
> not a way of eating which works or is applicable
> to everyone.


So then you agree that an 100% raw food diet can and does work for many people and therefore can work for everyone? If not...

1.) Why would one person be able to completely thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?


2.) Why would being 100% raw not work out in the long-run, other than lack of education on what to consume to ensure you're getting everything you need?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 02:39PM by jtprindl.

<<<Taking part in heavy exercise would be the only viable way to burn off all the excess sugar there taking in. Else the excess carbs would just turn to fat/weight gain like many 80/10/10ers complain of. Carbohydrate intake should always be kept in relation to activity levels and metabolic health.>>>

Excess Carbs do turn into Fat, but do NOT turn into Excess Weight unless you eat more Calories than you burn. As far as Carbohydrate Intake being kept in relation to activity levels, I’ve considered that possibility a long time ago and there are 2 main problems with that idea: 1) the percentage of Fat goes up so high that a lot of people won’t be getting very many Micro-Nutrients and 2) some people may lose Lean Body Mass if their calculations are off by as little as 10%, which won’t happen in one day, but if repeated day after day, it’s only a matter of time before they deplete their Carbohydrate Fuel Tank and Gluconeogenesis kicks in.

Hey jtprindl,

I’ve been at this for over 23 years and I am still very active exercising 2 to 4 hours a day, but I only eat 2 times a day and a usually do a 30 Day Green Juice Fast/Feast once a year. My diet is fairly close to the 801010, but my Fat % is more like 20% and I am NOT afraid of Supplements where the need arises. Currently, the only thing I consume other than Fruits, Vegetables, Nuts and Seeds would be some Kelp or Dulse on my Salads and B12 twice a week. In the past, I have done Spiriluna, Fermented Foods and Superfoods and for a short period of time I also did some Sprouting, but not anymore and it’s been a long time since I’ve done any of those. I guess only time will tell, but so far, it’s working for me!

Peace and Love..........John

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> <<>>
>
> Excess Carbs do turn into Fat, but do NOT turn
> into Excess Weight unless you eat more Calories
> than you burn. As far as Carbohydrate Intake
> being kept in relation to activity levels, I’ve
> considered that possibility a long time ago and
> there are 2 main problems with that idea: 1) the
> percentage of Fat goes up so high that a lot of
> people won’t be getting very many
> Micro-Nutrients and 2) some people may lose Lean
> Body Mass if their calculations are off by as
> little as 10%, which won’t happen in one day,
> but if repeated day after day, it’s only a
> matter of time before they deplete their
> Carbohydrate Fuel Tank and Gluconeogenesis kicks
> in.

The meaning of excess - an amount of something that is more than necessary, permitted, or desirable.

Excess calories coming from any macro-nutrient whether it be carbs, protein or fat can cause weight gain. Excess being more than you are burning or require for maintenance.

Which is why i said that the only viable alternative for these people is to burn off all the excess sugar by exercising heavily.

This doesn't mean im against carbohydrates, most individuals do not do well on a low carb diet. But too much carbs is also problematic for many and certainly 80% of your diet coming from sugar is completely unnecessary in my opinion.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 03:18PM by powerlifter.

<<<Excess calories coming from any macro-nutrient whether it be carbs, protein or fat can cause weight gain. Excess being more than you are burning or require for maintenance.>>>

When I was playing competitive tennis, I was consistently eating 1000 Calories less than I burned and yet, I was eating over 175% Carbohydrates than I needed, so all of my EXCESS Carbohydrates (less 30% for the Thermogenic Effect) were stored as Fat and yet, I did NOT gain any EXCESS Weight because I was NOT eating EXCESS Calories.

So it is possible, as I already pointed out to you, to consume EXCESS Carbohydrates and NOT gain any EXCESS Weight unless you eat more Calories than you burn. In other words, if you are going to speak of EXCESS, you have to be more specific because, once again, you can consume EXCESS Carbohydrates and NOT be consuming EXCESS Calories.

<<<Which is why i said that the only viable alternative for these people is to burn off all the excess sugar by exercising heavily.>>>

Once again, you have to be more specific because it’s possible to consume EXCESS Carbohydrates and NOT be consuming EXCESS Calories.

Again what your saying im not disagreeing with, to gain weight you tend to need to consume more calories than you are expending, which is why i referred to excess i.e more than is required.

That being said have you ran 2000-2500 calories of a typical 80/10/10 diet into any nutrient calculator ? It comes short on an number of vital nutrients, protein, fats, certain micronutrients such as zinc, B vitamins etc either aren't met or are low. 2500 calories from 80/10/10 your looking at about 15-35g of protein if you are very lucky, which is too low to be healthy for the majority, especially active individuals and males.

Then you have all these calories coming un-needlessly from sugar/carbs instead of just balancing your protein and fat intake.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 04:40PM by powerlifter.

Yes DR does overeat.
However, you presume that the nutrient targets in cron and others are correct.
They are not. They are inflated.
and so as i said, when you focus on nutrients, you will fail to eat properly.
but I suppose I am foolishly talking to a brick wall. silly me.

"That being said have you ran 2000-2500 calories of a typical 80/10/10 diet into any nutrient calculator ? It comes short on an number of vital nutrients, protein, fats, certain micronutrients such as zinc, B vitamins etc either aren't met or are low. 2500 calories from 80/10/10 your looking at about 15-35g of protein if you are very lucky, which is too low to be healthy for the majority, especially active individuals and males."

As predicted, completely ignored the questions on several occasions because you simply cannot back up your outrageous and ignorant claims. But let's talk about this next quote...

Sprouts and algae are extremely high in protein, vitamins, minerals, and very low in calories. As far as zinc and B-vitamins goes... look no further than wheatgrass (http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/custom/900675/2). I mean, there are definitely other sources of these nutrients, but wheatgrass alone provides them in massive amounts with very little calories. Furthermore, protein intake does not need to be high for gaining or maintaining muscle, nor does it need to be high for optimal health.

Nobody said protein needed to be high or excessive, but you still need to get enough to be healthy.

As someone who has been bodybuilding since they were 14, trained with amateur and professional athletes, studied sport science/nutrition as a fitness instructor, the recommendation of 1g-1.5g of protein per kg of bodyweight is not only heavily supported by reliable sports science but i feel an accurate recommendation personally for those looking to build muscle.

For those not looking to build muscle then, 0.8g of protein per kg of bodyweight is the recommendation for a normal individual however and is again supported by most scientific bodies.

I ignored your questions because your acting like abit of a jerk for no reason, if you came down off your high horse id be more than willing to go back and answer them.

If you had bothered to read 80/10/10 you will realize that sprouts and algaes aren't part of the diet.

As to wheatgrass which i love, i don't think the nutrition datas recommendations are correct here at all, especially since ive seen many nutrient analysis for wheatgrass which disagree. They are saying that 4g of wheatgrass contains 62mg of zinc lol, no chance.

So 4g worth of wheatgrass only contains 1% of the RDA of calcium but somehow contains 400% of the zinc RDA. I smell.....



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 05:41PM by powerlifter.

powerlifter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nobody said protein needed to be high or
> excessive, but you still need to get enough to be
> healthy.
>
> As someone who has been bodybuilding since they
> were 14, trained with amateur and professional
> athletes, studied sport science/nutrition as a
> fitness instructor, the recommendation of 1g-1.5g
> of protein per kg of bodyweight is not only
> heavily supported by reliable sports science but i
> feel an accurate recommendation personally for
> those looking to build muscle.
>
> For those not looking to build muscle then, 0.8g
> of protein per kg of bodyweight is the
> recommendation for a normal individual however and
> is again supported by most scientific bodies.
>
> I ignored your questions because your acting like
> abit of a jerk for no reason, if you came down off
> your high horse id be more than willing to go back
> and answer them.
>
> If you had bothered to read 80/10/10 you will
> realize that sprouts and algaes aren't part of the
> diet.
>
> As to wheatgrass which i love, i don't think the
> nutrition datas recommendations are correct here
> at all, especially since ive seen many nutrient
> analysis for wheatgrass. They are saying that 4g
> of wheatgrass contains 62mg of zinc lol, no
> chance.


Again with outrageous claims that never have any evidence attached to them. Where is your scientific evidence that we need .8 grams of protein per kg of bodyweight? Please answer this question along with the other two questions I've asked you multiple times.

Where are your other nutrient analysis' of wheatgrass that contradict the nutritional data I posted and why would sprouts and algae not be allowed on the 80/10/10 diet? Because they weren't mentioned in one book written by one man?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 05:41PM by jtprindl.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Again with outrageous claims that never have any
> evidence attached to them. Where is your
> scientific evidence that we need .8 grams of
> protein per kg of bodyweight? Please answer this
> question along with the other two questions I've
> asked you multiple times.
>
> Where are your other nutrient analysis' of
> wheatgrass that contradict the nutritional data I
> posted and why would sprouts and algae not be
> allowed on the 80/10/10 diet? Because they weren't
> mentioned in one book written by one man?

Its not just my opinion, its pretty much every scientific dietary bodies recommendation that 0.8g of protein per kg of bodyweight is the considered RDA for healthy indivduals.

Take a minute to search for the RDI's/RDA's wherever you live, if you can't find then i will link studies for you.

Doug Graham is against many foods. He only cares for fruit, some greens typically and small amount of nuts/seeds. No superfoods, algaes etc are recommended to be included on 80/10/10.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 05:51PM by powerlifter.

Where is your scientific evidence that we need .8 grams of protein per kg of bodyweight? Where are your other nutrient analysis' of wheatgrass that contradict the nutritional data I posted?

***Please answer these questions along with the other two questions I've asked you multiple times.***

Also, maybe if you only follow Douglas Graham's recommendations, but you can thrive on a low-fat raw vegan diet... which would include sprouts, algae, grasses, and sea vegetables.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 05:53PM by jtprindl.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Where is your scientific evidence that we need .8
> grams of protein per kg of bodyweight? Where are
> your other nutrient analysis' of wheatgrass that
> contradict the nutritional data I posted?
>
> ***Please answer these questions along with the
> other two questions I've asked you multiple
> times.***
>
> Also, maybe if you only follow Douglas Graham's
> recommendations, but you can thrive on a low-fat
> raw vegan diet... which would include sprouts,
> algae, grasses, and sea vegetables.

I see you took the time to research yourself, if you think im sitting new years eve digging out science for you then you are sorely mistaken. If you want to dispute what im saying then go look for yourself.

Go look at any nutritional body for your country, they all tend to recommend 0.8g per kg for protein based on a wealth of science.

I ignored your other two questions because they have nothing to do with this thread, if you want to argue that 100% raw works for everybody, start another thread with them two questions and i will answer.

This thread is about 80/10/10.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 05:57PM by powerlifter.

powerlifter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jtprindl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Where is your scientific evidence that we need
> .8
> > grams of protein per kg of bodyweight? Where
> are
> > your other nutrient analysis' of wheatgrass
> that
> > contradict the nutritional data I posted?
> >
> > ***Please answer these questions along with the
> > other two questions I've asked you multiple
> > times.***
> >
> > Also, maybe if you only follow Douglas Graham's
> > recommendations, but you can thrive on a
> low-fat
> > raw vegan diet... which would include sprouts,
> > algae, grasses, and sea vegetables.
>
> I see you took the time to research yourself, if
> you think im sitting new years eve digging out
> science for you then you are sorely mistaken. If
> you want to dispute what im saying then go look
> for yourself.
>
> Go look at any nutritional body for your country,
> they all tend to recommend 0.8g per kg for protein
> based on a wealth of science.
>
> I ignored your other two questions because they
> have nothing to do with this thread, if you want
> to argue that 100% raw works for everybody, start
> another thread with them two questions and i will
> answer.


You've been sitting on this thread all day and literally no more than a few minutes ago just said "Take a minute to search for the RDI's/RDA's wherever you live, if you can't find then i will link studies for you".

I can't find anything that agrees with your claim that we need .8g per kg for protein, so where is this scientific evidence that you speak of?


Where are your other nutrient analysis' of wheatgrass that contradict the nutritional data I posted?

Why would one person be able to completely thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?

Why would being 100% raw not work out in the long-run, other than lack of education on what to consume to ensure you're getting everything you need?

Now questions about a raw food diet have nothing to do with the thread titled "Raw food has made me superhuman"...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 06:03PM by jtprindl.

You can't find anything ? Probably because you didn't bother to search. I will go to the bother for you.

"The recent Dietary Reference Intake recommendations for mean and population-safe intakes of 0.66 and 0.8 g/kg/day"

"This EAR plus a safety factor is the current RDA (0.8 g/kg/d) defined as "the minimum daily needs for protein to maintain short-term nitrogen balance in healthy people with moderate physical activity"

Every country tends to have the universal recommendation of 0.8g of protein per kg of bodyweight. As far as i know its the current RDA pretty much worldwide.

I can't link most of these sites into the post because they are non-vegan and have non-vegan recommendations on where to get the protein. Search pubmed for protein recommendations and you will find constant reference to the current RDI's/RDA's for protein and strength training, athletes protein requirements or those with kidney disease needing lower levels of protein etc.

Most of the studies are done using better methods such as nitrogen balance to determine healthy protein recommendations.

" This erroneous way of looking at reality, considering ONLY quantity while always ignoring quality, has led exactly to the global ecological disasters that currently threaten the continued existence of all Life on this planet. There are QUANTITATIVE and QUALITATIVE aspects to all situations, concepts, and practices; both must be fully considered, otherwise, misunderstanding and disaster are inevitable."

"Another way orthodox nutritional pseudoscience uses to determine protein "needs" is called the Nitrogen Balance method. Since nitrogen is part of the amino group [-NH2] in the amino acids from which all proteins are made, and since nitrogen is much easier to quantify in the lab than complex proteins, the theory is that one should consume enough protein (measured as nitrogen) so that the amount eaten equals the amount excreted. (This is similar to the nonsensical Gatorade philosophy: eat your excretions.) Therefore, when in "nitrogen balance", there are no net gains or net losses of nitrogen and one's tissues are claimed to be maintained ideally. To determine one's protein status, they place people on a reduced-protein, or protein-free, diet and then measure the nitrogen excreted over a few days and then assume that since this represents the amount of protein lost, it also represents the amount one should have eaten over the same time period in order to maintain a steady weight. Simple and obvious; right? Wrong! Unfortunately, orthodox nutritionists do not know that enormous amounts of protein-based mucus and toxins are stored in the average high-protein meat/egg/dairy cooked-food eaters' body, or that putting them on what is essentially a fast will trigger a self-cleansing process that will cause large amounts of nitrogen-rich mucus and toxins to be eliminated from the body. As a result of these inadvertently-accelerated excretions, the protein needs of the human being are grossly overestimated. "

powerlifter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can't find anything ? Probably because you
> didn't bother to search. I will go to the bother
> for you.
>
> "The recent Dietary Reference Intake
> recommendations for mean and population-safe
> intakes of 0.66 and 0.8 g/kg/day"
>
> "This EAR plus a safety factor is the current RDA
> (0.8 g/kg/d) defined as "the minimum daily needs
> for protein to maintain short-term nitrogen
> balance in healthy people with moderate physical
> activity"
>
> Every country tends to have the universal
> recommendation of 0.8g of protein per kg of
> bodyweight. As far as i know its the current RDA
> pretty much worldwide.
>
> I can't link most of these sites into the post
> because they are non-vegan and have non-vegan
> recommendations on where to get the protein.
> Search pubmed for protein recommendations and you
> will find constant reference to the current
> RDI's/RDA's for protein and strength training,
> athletes protein requirements or those with kidney
> disease needing lower levels of protein etc.
>
> Most of the studies are done using better methods
> such as nitrogen balance to determine healthy
> protein recommendations.


I can't find anything that agrees with your claim that we need .8g per kg for protein, so where is this scientific evidence that you speak of? There's absolutely nothing that would prevent you from being able to link anything, other than you just making stuff up and pretending like it's accurate information. I did find this, though: [vimeo.com]


Where are your other nutrient analysis' of wheatgrass that contradict the nutritional data I posted?

Why would one person be able to completely thrive on a raw food diet but another cannot?

Why would being 100% raw not work out in the long-run, other than lack of education on what to consume to ensure you're getting everything you need?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 06:56PM by jtprindl.

lol this is how i know you're a troll.

i just posted you quotes for these studies, which even pasting them into google brings up the source studies for you. Bring up pubmed and type protein recommendations, it takes 15 seconds jtprindl and it will list a number of studies referencing the USDAs proteins recommendation if you are in the US for example. Or Canada's, UK's or the EU's protein recommendations which are again all 0.8g per kg of bodyweight the last time i checked for healthy individuals.

Once again i could link these sites but there not inherently vegan and neither are the recommendations, so i don't want that coming back to bite me from pedantic indivduals like yourself insisting im some shill for the meat industry.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 07:02PM by powerlifter.

As far as wheatgrass goes, to start with raw powdered wheatgrass(which yes i know has lower nutrition than fresh but not that much difference) there is no zinc content i have ever seen in any food recorded that high from wheatgrass.

If true this would mean that wheatgrass is the richest source of zinc in the world, which is lies. Infact alot of nutritional analysis on wheatgrass has shown its not as nutrient dense as many suspect.

Not only that but they are saying that you only need a mere 4g worth of wheatgrass to achieve that. Which if true would mean your likely to get zinc poisoning from the amount people juice, which again we know is nonsence. There is no way an ounce of wheatgrass contains 3000% of zinc, ill put anything on that being incorrect.

There are alot of lies about the nutrient contents of superfoods including the likes of goji berries, which again good foods, they don't contain 500 times the vitamin C that an orange does like there often claimed to. I will research and paste up some nutritional analyses later on for wheatgrass.

Please don't claim bias here either because im a massive fan of both wheatgrass and goji berries. I also like reliable trusted information however.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 07:19PM by powerlifter.

Table 1. Nutrient comparison of 1 oz (28.35 g) of wheatgrass juice, broccoli and spinach.
Nutrient Wheatgrass Juice Broccoli Spinach
Protein 860 mg 800 mg 810 mg
Beta-carotene 120 IU 177 IU 2658 IU
Vitamin E 880 mcg 220 mcg 580 mcg
Vitamin C 1 mg 25.3 mg 8 mg
Vitamin B12 0.30 mcg 0 mcg 0 mcg
Phosphorus 21 mg 19 mg 14 mg
Magnesium 8 mg 6 mg 22 mg
Calcium 7.2 mg 13 mg 28 mg
Iron 0.66 mg 0.21 mg 0.77 mg
Potassium 42 mg 90 mg 158 mg
Data on broccoli and spinach from USDA database.[7] Data on Wheatgrass juice from indoor grown wheatgrass.[3

Thats an ounce of wheatgrass compared to the 4g that nutrition data claims. Not exactly as rich in nutrients as people think, considering broccoli and spinach are more nutrient dense overall. Id also believe the USDA database over a random nutrition data website.

powerlifter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Table 1. Nutrient comparison of 1 oz (28.35 g) of
> wheatgrass juice, broccoli and spinach.
> Nutrient Wheatgrass Juice Broccoli Spinach
> Protein 860 mg 800 mg 810 mg
> Beta-carotene 120 IU 177 IU 2658 IU
> Vitamin E 880 mcg 220 mcg 580 mcg
> Vitamin C 1 mg 25.3 mg 8 mg
> Vitamin B12 0.30 mcg 0 mcg 0 mcg
> Phosphorus 21 mg 19 mg 14 mg
> Magnesium 8 mg 6 mg 22 mg
> Calcium 7.2 mg 13 mg 28 mg
> Iron 0.66 mg 0.21 mg 0.77 mg
> Potassium 42 mg 90 mg 158 mg
> Data on broccoli and spinach from USDA
> database.[7] Data on Wheatgrass juice from indoor
> grown wheatgrass.[3
>
> Thats an ounce of wheatgrass compared to the 4g
> that nutrition data claims. Not exactly as rich in
> nutrients as people think, considering broccoli
> and spinach are more nutrient dense overall. Id
> also believe the USDA database over a random
> nutrition data website.


Post the direct link to this website containing wheatgrass nutritional information.

Actually i have to correct myself there, the USDA information is in regards to broccoli and spinach only sorry, not the wheatgrass it seems.

Doesn't change my point of view however because the nutrition data site wheatgrass data you linked is just self edited, anyone can change it and it has no scientific backing either to prove its analysis.

I have viewed the nutrient analysis's for fresh and raw powdered wheatgrass for a number of years for supplement manufacturers and whilst they are nutrient dense and great superfoods, they don't contain 3000% worth of zinc via 28g worth of plant material. No chance and whilst batches of wheatgrass vary in nutritional composition they don't to this extent, most of them contain fairly low zinc levels from what i have observed.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/31/2013 07:49PM by powerlifter.