so, i heard that our digestive juices break down enzymes ( all enzymes are a class of proteins) into their constituents ( amino acids)

hence, whether one cooks them or eats them raw, the nutritional profile will be the same

first, i don't agree with this completely, it is obvious that the nutritional profile of a food will be drastically altered when heated ( especially fats)

however i DO wish to find more research from the raw camp of doctors and scientists that address the theory that the enzymes that we consume from foods will absolutely not be capable of going through our digestive juices and come out intact

there is no question that consuming raw vegetables imbues a higher and heightened sense of energy

hence, something is going on... if it is not enzymes then is it simply the greater availability of nutrients?

also, question TWO

there are those who contend that certain vegetables will yield greater nutrients when steamed ( esp. Dr. Joel Fuhrman) though he does admit that there are many that are better raw

however, i contend that those veggies that are stated to yield a greater bioavailability when cooked could do even better by simply being blended

why not? doesn't blending break down the cell walls with far greater efficacy whilst also maintaining the nutrients?

however, opinion is not the same as fact

what are everyone else's idea concerning this?

so, i'll repeat my two salient questions

1) Is there any theory that counters ( goes against) the idea that digestive juices will simply destroy the enzymes derived from consuming raw foods by breaking them down into their constituent amino acids thus rendering them ineffective for their main use ( catabolic and anabolic catalytic effects).

2) Does blending raw foods render them far more bioavailable than heating
certain raw foods that some contend has greater nutrition ( when lightly heated)?

The vegetables in question that some believe have greater bioavailability are tomatoes ( lycopene) carrots ( carotenes) etc. They are not all vegetables but just some.

The greater sense of heightened energy and well being from consuming blended vegetables ( rather than cooked vegetables) is undeniable. However, I am also interested in learning about the science behind why I feel so good when chemical findings indicate that digestive juices have already destroyed mostly all the enzymes from food hence rendering them inactive except for their use as amino acids.

Also, if it is true that certain vegetables have greater bioavailability of certain nutrients when cooked, then why do I feel better when I blend those exact vegetables rather than cooking them? Is it because certain "other" nutrients are more readily available... like Vitamin C?

Anyhow, feelings aside, I really am interested in the science behind these things. What does Brian Clemment, or Gabriel Cousens have to say about this other than the finding in the raw camp that leukocytes ( white blood cells) rush to the site of tissues etc. when cooked foods are consumed hence "indicating" that cooked foods are "bad" and raw is far more better.

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> however i DO wish to find more research from the
> raw camp of doctors and scientists that address
> the theory that the enzymes that we consume from
> foods will absolutely not be capable of going
> through our digestive juices and come out intact


That is simply NOT the case at all. That was based on numerous presumptions by scientists and has since been proven wrong. It was assumed that food enzymes would be inactivated in the body, and even if they did survive they wouldn't be able to penetrate various membrane barriers of the body...all of these assumptions have been proven wrong. You might want to read this science study a few times and take notes, this was the study which changed the old outdated thinking:

Conservation of Digestive Enzymes

STEPHEN ROTHMAN, CHARLES LIEBOW, AND LOIS ISENMAN
[course.zju.edu.cn]

I wouldn't worry about Joel Furhman, he doesn't adress many issues and only gives a partial commentary of the situation, so his opinion dosn't really matter very much.



I won't be able to adress the rest of the post because l will be flat out busy for 1 - 4 weeks.

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> there are those who contend that certain
> vegetables will yield greater nutrients when
> steamed ( esp. Dr. Joel Fuhrman) though he does
> admit that there are many that are better raw
>


Saying a cooked vegetable will yield higher levels of nutrients is fantasy thinking. Why? because cooking can't create nutrients, they can only make certain nutrients more bioavailable such as beta carotene in carrots.

Other silly talk often made is that cooking tomatoes increases phyto chemicals in the food. So are these folks saying that cooking creates a whole new set of nutrients? Rubbish! What is does is break open the cells where the phyto chemicals pour out and appear to be more according to Dr Clement. This makes sense...certainly more than nutrients appearing in thin air like many nutrition scientists try to claim.

AND...even if these nutrients did defy science logic and did magically appear out of nothing, are these cooked phytochemicals and nutrients usable or efficiently used by the body? Apparently they are not.

No comparison to eating 100% raw over cooked if it is done well. Cooked is a sacrifice and draws on the bodies energies in every way. But the opposite can happen if a raw diet is poorly done, it can drain and starve the body also.

"AND...even if these nutrients did defy science logic and did magically appear out of nothing, are these cooked phytochemicals and nutrients usable or efficiently used by the body? Apparently they are not."

I think cooking can increase the bioavailability of certain nutrients and phytochemicals, but it changes the molecular structure. So, you may be absorbing more lycopene for example from a cooked tomato, but it's not really lycopene (deranged and wouldn't have the benefits associated with raw lycopene). Less is more in this situation.

"1) Is there any theory that counters ( goes against) the idea that digestive juices will simply destroy the enzymes derived from consuming raw foods by breaking them down into their constituent amino acids thus rendering them ineffective for their main use ( catabolic and anabolic catalytic effects)."

The main use of the live plant's enzymes, (for us eaters of them), is to digest the plants so that we don't need to expend as much energy creating our own digestive enzymes to do that job. This frees us to expend more energy creating our own metabolic enzymes, which are different from food based and digestive enzymes, and are the ones which do the majority of the work in our bodies.

Such great questions/responses! Because yes, for many who are raw, there is a definite difference; so there has to be a biochemical reason.

I want to read Sproutarian's study, but meanwhile, here's a couple of thoughts.

In Becoming Raw (Davis, RD and Melina, RD), the authors say this:

"Based on the knowledge that the pH of a full stomach can rise to 4.5 - 5.8 for up to an hour after we have eaten, that food stays in the upper portion of the stomach for an average of forty minutes, and that the main function of this part of the stomach is as a reservoir, we can expect that the enzymes naturally present in raw food would survive and be active during this time. In addition, food preparation techniques (such as chopping, blending, and pureeing) and chewing release or activate some of the enzymes present within the plant cell walls...What is the significance of this predigestive action to the entire digestive process?"

In other words, what is going on with those little plant enzymes while they're in the stomach reservoir? There's not much absorbed up there in the stomach, but what else might be going on? Why does our food hang out in the upper part of our stomach for 40 minutes?

The enteric nervous system is our "second brain" and extends along the entire GI tract. What messages are sent from the reservoir? What chemical reactions are taking place already, before anything is even digested? And etc., etc.

And/or here's another line of thought: B vitamins are easily destroyed by heat - not all of them, but a lot. When B vitamins are eaten, they become crucial co-enzymes for the biochemical functions of our enzymes. If heat destroys the B vitamins and we have a stomach full of food with no co-enzyme action to help our own enzymes do what they're supposed to do, how are we going to turn that food into something entirely useable? And if it's less useable, it seems like our bodies might not feel so great about having to deal with it.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/06/2014 11:17AM by suncloud.

"When B vitamins are eaten, they become crucial co-enzymes for the biochemical functions of our enzymes. If heat destroys the B vitamins and we have a stomach full of food with no co-enzyme action to help our own enzymes do what they're supposed to do, how are we going to turn that food into something entirely useable?"


Just a reminder here, for clarity, for those who have not taken biology classes and may be confused about what gets done where. Before vitamins can be used as co-enzymes, etc., they first are digested and then are transported via the bloodstream to tissues and cells where they are metabolized by the cell's mitochondria. This processing does not happen in the digestive system or in the red blood cells which aren't equipt with mitochondria.

sproutman

will read the article

thanks

suncloud

that's an interesting theory concerning alkalinity increasing after consumption of food... hmmm... i wonder why... especially if the pH is going up PRIOR to the food mixing with the digestive juices.. that is definitely a conundrum

suez

there is no doubt that enzymes extant in food aid in the digestion of that food itself. however , as you know, only partial digestion occurs via mastication... then the digestive juices take over and it goes on from there so the question of the survivability of the enzymes is still an apt question to explore


concerning the bioavailability of nutrients

it is true that heating above a certain temperature denatures the molecular structure of proteins ( of which enzymes are one class)

hence that is something to scrutinize when talking about " bioavailability of nutrients increase during heating"

so, back to my second question... what are others' thoughts on blending being the most efficacious way of releasing these nutrients that others contend are better yielded via heating ( in certain vegetables)

any thoughts that this method is more efficacious on rupturing cell walls to yield a greater nutritional content or juicing even?

thanks again for all thoughts
interesting

[nutribulletblog.com]

More research needs to be done on the true effect of blending on nutrients and enzymes, but it appears that blending does have many drawbacks, which would include the destruction of nutrients and enzymes (extent of the damage would depend on how powerful the blender is and how long you blend) and indigestion. When you blend, you essentially bypass the natural process of mastication by drinking roughage, not allowing food to mix with saliva as you would if you were to eat it, causing indigestion. Of course this is likely less of an issue for those who swish around the smoothie in their mouth before swallowing, allowing for the secretion of saliva.

One of the negatives of blending mentioned in that link is "If someone is sensitive to fiber, it could make a person bloated and a little gassy", but I don't think it would be due to the fiber, I think it'd be due to drinking roughage.

Overall, I would think blending for a short period of time and swishing it in your mouth before drinking wouldn't be a problem. I'd still definitely go with juicing... you can easily consume way more nutrition and it's pre-digested.

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> suez
>
> there is no doubt that enzymes extant in food aid
> in the digestion of that food itself. however ,
> as you know, only partial digestion occurs via
> mastication... then the digestive juices take over
> and it goes on from there so the question of the
> survivability of the enzymes is still an apt
> question to explore
>
>
> concerning the bioavailability of nutrients
>
> it is true that heating above a certain
> temperature denatures the molecular structure of
> proteins ( of which enzymes are one class)
>
> hence that is something to scrutinize when
> talking about " bioavailability of nutrients
> increase during heating"

la_veronique, I wasn't trying to say that your question about the survivability of the plant enzymes in the digestive system was not apt. I just thought some people might confuse the different types of enzymes and their functions and that's why I said what I did.

Ingested plant enzymes can survive in a wide enough pH range to survive the acidity of the stomach and the alkalinity of the intestines. The plant enzymes can also survive the range of our internal temperatures. Also, as an off your topic aside, there is a lot of chemical digestion going on in the mouth in addition to mastication. For example, the enzymes that break down coconut oil are secreted in the mouth so it is important to "chew" even coconut oil.

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hence, something is going on... if it is not
> enzymes then is it simply the greater
> availability of nutrients?

The enzymes and the pulverizing together trump cooking, IMO and experience.


> why not? doesn't blending break down the cell
> walls with far greater efficacy whilst also
> maintaining the nutrients?

I don't see why not. Look at chlorella which has both had it's cell walls broken and been dehydrated, (at who really knows what temperature), yet even with the extra possessing it still works for us very well.

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
...the finding in the raw camp that
> leukocytes ( white blood cells) rush to the site
> of tissues etc. when cooked foods are consumed
> hence "indicating" that cooked foods are "bad" and
> raw is far more better.

The problem of leukocytosis has been disputed, and very well, by Jameth Sheridan in an interview John Kohler did with him on YouTube. He says that problem has been shown as not being applicable to cooked vegetables.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/08/2014 11:39PM by SueZ.

There is more to food enzymes that just being something in food that is used to digest it. Food enzymes do have the ability to modify body functioning in animals and man/woman to improve their physical health.

I'll post some research another day because it is very important too see there is more than previously believed to the benefits of digestive enzymes.

sproutman

<<There is more to food enzymes that just being something in food that is used to digest it. Food enzymes do have the ability to modify body functioning in animals and man/woman to improve their physical health.>>

tis very true
enzymes are just catalysts responsible for a range of catabolic and anabolic processes

they put stuff together
they take them apart

they themselves are not "pacman" going around gobbling and breaking down food particles

suez



<<Ingested plant enzymes can survive in a wide enough pH range to survive the acidity of the stomach and the alkalinity of the intestines.

well, that is (seemingly) the great debate
a host of MD's saying that plant enzymes absolutely cannot survive the digestive enzymes

and i'm interested in reading something outside of that box that proves that it can survive

if u have any articles, i'd be interested

jtprindl

<<When you blend, you essentially bypass the natural process of mastication by drinking roughage, not allowing food to mix with saliva as you would if you were to eat it, causing indigestion. Of course this is likely less of an issue for those who swish around the smoothie in their mouth before swallowing, allowing for the secretion of saliva.>>

hmmmm... interesting thought
however, i would think that the "indigestion" might be more of an issue when one is drinking a smoothie made with fruit/veggies simply due to the food combining issues

however, when it is just plants that are being blended , why introduce more enzymes by mastication ( e.g. "swishing" ) when the food has already been digested by the blender itself? hence the blender is doing the work of the digestive system itself




>> The plant enzymes can also survive the range of our internal temperatures. Also, as an off your topic aside, there is a lot of chemical digestion going on in the mouth in addition to mastication. For example, the enzymes that break down coconut oil are secreted in the mouth so it is important to "chew" even coconut oil.

The Sproutarian Man Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is more to food enzymes that just being
> something in food that is used to digest it. Food
> enzymes do have the ability to modify body
> functioning in animals and man/woman to improve
> their physical health.


You're talking about systemic protease enzymes then like the microbals, papain, and bromeliad. They do break down fibrin in the bloodstream and reduce inflammation beyond the bloodstream, etc. - provided they are taken between meals.

Nobody really knows exactly how they work yet or whether they are capable of working alone intact or if they even make it through the digestive system intact.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The problem of leukocytosis has been
> disputed, and very well, by Jameth Sheridan in an
> interview John Kohler did with him on YouTube. He
> says that problem has been shown as not being
> applicable to cooked vegetables.

Here is the video...

[www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/09/2014 05:56AM by SueZ.

la_veronique Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- >
> however, when it is just plants that are being
> blended , why introduce more enzymes by
> mastication ( e.g. "swishing" ) when the food has
> already been digested by the blender itself? hence
> the blender is doing the work of the digestive
> system itself

Because the food has not been digested by the blender itself. Digestion is more than just a mechanical process.

<<<The problem of leukocytosis has been disputed, and very well, by Jameth Sheridan in an interview John Kohler did with him on YouTube. He says that problem has been shown as not being applicable to cooked vegetables.>>>

All Jameth said in this video is that "I've proven that."

14:51 MM
"It's not cooked food that causes leukocytosis - I've proven that - it's animal protein that does it."

I've always wondered why this experiment has not been duplicated and if Jameth has duplicated this experiment, where is it?

I need a whole lot more than some guy on YouTube saying, "I've proven that" while he's eating cooked legumes. Me thinketh he might be rationalizing.

[vibrancemagazine.com]
Cooked Food Effects Wes Peterson
Leukocytosis and Cooked Food

In 1930, research was conducted at the Institute of Clinical Chemistry in Lausanne, Switzerland, under the direction of Dr. Paul Kouchakoff. The effect of food (cooked/processed vs. raw/natural) on the immune system was tested and documented. Dr. Kouchakoff's discovery concerned the leukocytes, the white blood cells. Apparently, a well-known phenomenon occurred immediately after a person ate.

It was found that after a person eats cooked food, his/her blood responds immediately by increasing the number of white blood cells. This is a well-known phenomena called "digestive leukocytosis," which means that there is a rise in the number of leukocytes, or white blood cells, after eating. Since digestive leukocytosis was always observed after eating, it was considered to be a normal physiological response to eating. No one knew why the number of white cells would rise after eating, since this appeared to be a stress response, as if the body was reacting to something harmful, such as infection, trauma, or exposure to toxic chemicals.

A Remarkable Discovery

Back in 1930, Swiss researchers of the institute of Chemical Chemistry studied the influence of food on human blood and made a remarkable discovery. They found that eating unaltered, raw food or food heated at low temperatures did not cause a reaction in the blood. In addition, if a food had been heated beyond a certain temperature (unique to each food), or if the food was processed (refined, added chemicals, etc.), this ALWAYS caused a rise in the number of white cells in the blood. The researchers renamed this reaction "pathological leukocytosis", since the body was reacting to highly altered food. They tested many different kinds of foods and found that if the foods were not overheated or refined, they caused no reaction. The body saw them as "friendly foods". However, these same foods, if heated at too high a temperature, caused a negative reaction in the blood, a reaction that is found only when the body is invaded by a dangerous pathogen or trauma.

The Worst Offenders

The worst offenders of all, whether heated or not, were processed foods — that had been refined (such as white flour or white rice), or homogenized (a process in which the fat in milk is subjected to artificial suspension), or pasteurized (also seen in milk, flash-heated to high temperatures to kill bacteria), or preserved (chemicals added to food to retard spoilage or to enhance taste or texture) — in other words, foods that were changed from their original God-given state. Good examples of these harmful foods are: pasteurized milk, chocolate, margarine, sugar, candy, white flour, and regular salt. The researchers found that if these altered, chemical foods were chewed very thoroughly, the harm to the blood could be lessened. In addition, another amazing finding was that if some of the same food in its raw state was eaten with the cooked counterpart, the pathological reaction in the blood was minimized. However, avoid these unnatural, processed foods; replace them with delicious whole foods for optimal health.

Reference
Kouchakoff, Paul, M.D.; "The Influence of Cooking Food on the Blood Formula of Man"; First International Congress of Microbiology; Paris, 1930.
[vibrancemagazine.com]

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> <<>>
>
> All Jameth said in this video is that "I've proven
> that."
>
> 14:51 MM
> "It's not cooked food that causes leukocytosis -
> I've proven that - it's animal protein that does
> it."
>
> I've always wondered why this experiment has not
> been duplicated and if Jameth has duplicated this
> experiment, where is it?
>
> I need a whole lot more than some guy on YouTube
> saying, "I've proven that" while he's eating
> cooked legumes. Me thinketh he might be
> rationalizing.

You're right. I just watched the video again and I can see I remembered wrongly. I will try to relocate the other info I read on the subject to follow up on that comment. Sorry.

suez

<< Because the food has not been digested by the blender itself. Digestion is more than just a mechanical process.>>

i would say it is only mechanical during chewing
and the rest is obviously chemical
however the vast amount of the digestion occurs in the chewing stage

before assimilation/absorption can take place

but the enzyme reactions you are referring to are the catabolic processes of breaking foods down via protease lipase amylase etc.

this can be done in a blender

but hey.. i'd be interested to know which enzymes aid in the absorption/assimilation process

then u run up against the same question again of whether or not these enzymes will survive

anyhow. i LOVE blending my veggies!!

first, i don't have to spend a lot of time chewing on salads
second, its really quick
third, i feel i get the most dense of nutrients
fourth, i feel sated and energized really quickly

best of all, i dont need to waste my time making salad dressing
cuz when i blend my salad
the need for a "dressing" goes " bye bye"

avo and lemon blended goes well with all veggies

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> suez
>
> << Because the food has not been digested by the
> blender itself. Digestion is more than just a
> mechanical process.>>
>
> i would say it is only mechanical during chewing
> and the rest is obviously chemical
> however the vast amount of the digestion occurs
> in the chewing


Well the food particles have to be made very small if they are going to be made digestible, that's true, but the majority of digestion in humans takes place in the duodenum. Things like simple carbs are broken down in the mouth. Most proteins are broken down in the stomach. The rest of the carbs, lipids, etc. are mostly broken down in the duodenum though.



> anyhow. i LOVE blending my veggies!!
>
> first, i don't have to spend a lot of time
> chewing on salads
> second, its really quick
> third, i feel i get the most dense of nutrients
> fourth, i feel sated and energized really
> quickly

Exactly. There is no way I could be raw vegan without my VitaMix and my juicers.



> best of all, i dont need to waste my time making
> salad dressing
> cuz when i blend my salad
> the need for a "dressing" goes " bye bye"
>


My favorite thing to do is to get a great salad dressing and huge salad that go well together and then throw all of both of those recipes' ingredients, (except for the oils), into the VitaMix for thick luscious soups that I drizzle the oil content over and fold in as I eat. Even though I don't have to chew anything I spend a good hour enjoying it's luxuriousness.

suez

what's your favorite dressing that u mix with the salad

and yeah, it is fun to luxuriate in a blended raw soup

funnny thing, sometimes i think raw soups taste a lot better than salads

cuz al the flavors seem to come out

like in bold relief

like those statue thing u see carved on walls

what are they called?

they are like frescoes minus the color and they stick out .. .out of the walls

like they are 3 dimensional

so blended salads are like that

because salads can be kind of plain

( then again, if u are super hungry ANYTHING in that salad tastes good... especially if you do a few days fast... then even your shoe looks tempting )

but i was saying..

if u blend all of it together like u mention

its like all the flavors just rush out

and become magnified

and for some reason

i feel VERY good VERY quickly

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> suez
>
> what's your favorite dressing that u mix with the
> salad

1.5 C. water
15 grams of Dulse
1 T. xylitol
4 cloves garlic
1 t. Himalayan salt
1 t. turmeric
1 t. cayenne pepper
1 large red bell pepper
1 small avocado
.25 C. oil drizzled on top to swirl in as I eat.

I rotate my oils. My favorite for this dressing is pumpkin seed oil.

I rotate my seaweeds. On days when I am using the brown seaweeds I add an extra half cup of water.



> and yeah, it is fun to luxuriate in a blended raw
> soup
>
> funnny thing, sometimes i think raw soups taste a
> lot better than salads
>
> cuz al the flavors seem to come out
>
> like in bold relief
>
> like those statue thing u see carved on walls
>
> what are they called?
>
> they are like frescoes minus the color and they
> stick out .. .out of the walls
>
> like they are 3 dimensional
>
> so blended salads are like that
>
> because salads can be kind of plain
>
> ( then again, if u are super hungry ANYTHING in
> that salad tastes good... especially if you do a
> few days fast... then even your shoe looks
> tempting )
>
> but i was saying..
>
> if u blend all of it together like u mention
>
> its like all the flavors just rush out
>
> and become magnified
>
> and for some reason
>
> i feel VERY good VERY quickly


Agreed. It's nice to get home, throw together a gourmet soup, and be done with the prep and the kitchen clean up in five minutes.

I have experimented with eating mono meals but I found them dragging me into a bored zombiedom - like watching tv or something. Not my cup of tea.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John Rose Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > <<>>
> >
> > All Jameth said in this video is that "I've
> proven
> > that."
> >
> > 14:51 MM
> > "It's not cooked food that causes leukocytosis
> -
> > I've proven that - it's animal protein that
> does
> > it."
> >
> > I've always wondered why this experiment has
> not
> > been duplicated and if Jameth has duplicated
> this
> > experiment, where is it?
> >
> > I need a whole lot more than some guy on
> YouTube
> > saying, "I've proven that" while he's eating
> > cooked legumes. Me thinketh he might be
> > rationalizing.
>
> You're right. I just watched the video again and
> I can see I remembered wrongly. I will try to
> relocate the other info I read on the subject to
> follow up on that comment. Sorry.

I'm still looking, unsuccessfully so far, darn it.

Does anyone know why Dr. Kouchakoff didn't become raw or even vegetarian after his findings? I guess he couldn't have been all that concerned about them.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> la_veronique Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > suez
> >
> > what's your favorite dressing that u mix with
> the
> > salad
>
> 1.5 C. water
> 15 grams of Dulse
> 1 T. xylitol
> 4 cloves garlic
> 1 t. Himalayan salt
> 1 t. turmeric
> 1 t. cayenne pepper
> 1 large red bell pepper
> 1 small avocado
> .25 C. oil drizzled on top to swirl in as I eat.
>
> I rotate my oils. My favorite for this dressing is
> pumpkin seed oil.
>
> I rotate my seaweeds. On days when I am using the
> brown seaweeds I add an extra half cup of water.


I should mention that this soup is a reinvention take off on a Tavis invented salad dressing. He uses orange juice instead of water and xylitol and uses olive oil in the mixture. I added the red bell pepper and dulse and drizzle the pumpkin seed oil on top instead.

Either way it's amazing but I prefer my version. For those who try it and find that the amount of cayenne is too much just add in a Romaine lettuce heart or two. I do this sometimes myself.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SueZ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > John Rose Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > <<>>
> > >
> > > All Jameth said in this video is that "I've
> > proven
> > > that."
> > >
> > > 14:51 MM
> > > "It's not cooked food that causes
> leukocytosis
> > -
> > > I've proven that - it's animal protein that
> > does
> > > it."
> > >
> > > I've always wondered why this experiment has
> > not
> > > been duplicated and if Jameth has duplicated
> > this
> > > experiment, where is it?
> > >
> > > I need a whole lot more than some guy on
> > YouTube
> > > saying, "I've proven that" while he's eating
> > > cooked legumes. Me thinketh he might be
> > > rationalizing.
> >
> > You're right. I just watched the video again
> and
> > I can see I remembered wrongly. I will try to
> > relocate the other info I read on the subject
> to
> > follow up on that comment. Sorry.
>
> I'm still looking, unsuccessfully so far, darn
> it.



OK, I found the right video where John Kohler interviews Jameth Sheridan in which I thought Jameth disputed well that leukocytosis isn't a problem with cooked vegetables. While it does seem to only rely on his own testing he did even try processed vegan junk food in his failed attempts to get a high count with cooked veggies. He also says an unnamed other group also did testing after him and couldn't get a leukocytosis response from cooked vegetables either.

Sure what he says and did is still way too sketchy but according to Jameth no one knows exactly what Dr. Kouchakoff did or what his research really was. It seems no one has any records to show, (at least that I've been able to find on the web), on the matter so the whole damn concept could probably stand a complete revamp since if it really is a problem it's worth some raw vegan big wig's time to settle once and for all, isn't it?

Anyway I guess what tipped Jameth's dispute into a good one, for me at least, is if the problem is that big of a deal why didn't Dr. Kouchkoff utilize his own findings to go vegetarian or raw, at least, himself?


At about 18:00 Leukocytosis is first brought up by Jameth.
At 19:40 he talks about his own testing.

[www.youtube.com]

Here's another study that was done on leukocytosis and enzymes:

[www.logan.edu]


Be well,
Kola



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/11/2014 05:19PM by kola.

suez

<<la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hence, something is going on... if it is not
> enzymes then is it simply the greater
> availability of nutrients?

The enzymes and the pulverizing together trump cooking, IMO and experience.


> why not? doesn't blending break down the cell
> walls with far greater efficacy whilst also
> maintaining the nutrients?

I don't see why not. Look at chlorella which has both had it's cell walls broken and been dehydrated, (at who really knows what temperature), yet even with the extra possessing it still works for us very well. >>


hi suez

do u know how the cell walls in the chlorella are broken?
like what method was employed?

i love chlorella

which company do u get yours from?

la_veronique Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> suez
>
> < hence, something is going on... if it is not
> > enzymes then is it simply the greater
> > availability of nutrients?
>
> The enzymes and the pulverizing together trump
> cooking, IMO and experience.
>
>
> > why not? doesn't blending break down the cell
> > walls with far greater efficacy whilst also
> > maintaining the nutrients?
>
> I don't see why not. Look at chlorella which has
> both had it's cell walls broken and been
> dehydrated, (at who really knows what
> temperature), yet even with the extra possessing
> it still works for us very well. >>
>
>
> hi suez
>
> do u know how the cell walls in the chlorella are
> broken?
> like what method was employed?
>
> i love chlorella
>
> which company do u get yours from?

Hi la_veronique. I have tried many many brands, Sun, Heath Ranger's, etc., etc., and picked the only one, to me, which had absolutely no trace of swamp water taste to it. It has no brand name. I get it from Pacific Botanicals

kola Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's another study that was done on leukocytosis
> and enzymes:
>
> [www.logan.edu]
> 2007-Aug-21.pdf
>
>
> Be well,
> Kola


Thanks, Kola, got a chuckle out of that one.