"I have done that. listed the foods. listed the calories."

No you haven't, who are you trying to fool? Not once have you listed exact foods and their exact amounts on a strict fruit and vegetable diet to show sufficient levels of zinc and selenium. You have now resorted to ad hominem arguments and useless blabbering because you know you simply cannot do it. Time to put up or shut up. Close-mindedness and dogma, both of which you have become a major victim to, is never going to increase your knowledge.

Better luck next time.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I have done that. listed the foods. listed the
> calories."
>
> No you haven't, who are you trying to fool? Not
> once have you listed exact foods and their exact
> amounts on a strict fruit and vegetable diet to
> show sufficient levels of zinc and selenium.


It seems you are right. He hasn't done it and probably is incapable of doing it.

8 bananas
5 stalks celery
2 heads lettuce
1 bunch spinach
5 mangoes
3 tomatoes
2 grapefruits


2500 calories
11mg zinc
29.4ug selenium

27 ug per day requirement for selenium
11 mg per day requirement for zinc

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 8 bananas
> 5 stalks celery
> 2 heads lettuce
> 1 bunch spinach
> 5 mangoes
> 3 tomatoes
> 2 grapefruits
>
>
> 2500 calories
> 11mg zinc
> 29.4ug selenium
>
> 27 ug per day requirement for selenium
> 11 mg per day requirement for zinc


1.) On CRON-O-Meter, the sample diet website you've been referring to, that is 54% RDA for selenium and 83% RDA for zinc.

2.) Nice attempt at botching the numbers, I entered exactly what you typed and only got 9.1 mg zinc.

[ods.od.nih.gov] (RDA = 11 mg)
[ods.od.nih.gov] (RDA = 55 micrograms)

EVERYONE knows that 1 or 2 Brazil Nuts is all we need for Selenium and here is an old post by Jeff Novick about Zinc...

[www.vegsource.com]
Concerns for Zinc are based on current recommendations. Realize that the traditional concerns over a vegan diet are usually only for a few nutrients, which are Protein, Calcium, Iron and Zinc. Now, think about it, do you notice anything in common about these foods? One thing should stick out, Animal products are traditionally thought to be good sources of these nutrients. We know the beef industry has influenced the protein requirements and a vegan diet is more then sufficient. And now we know that excess protein, especially from animals can be harmful in many ways. We also know that the dairy industry has influenced the calcium recommendations and that a vegan diet and proper lifestyle can easily meet the calcium requirements. And now we know that taking in dairy products can be harmful in many ways.

And now we also know that a vegan diet can easily meet iron needs, and after all those years of being told you need to eat meat to get enough iron, as plants don’t contain a good "type" of iron, we now know that getting in too much iron in the form of iron that is in meat, can be highly toxic and leads to a condition called hemochromatosis. Well, the last one is zinc, and like the others, the recommended levels have been greatly influenced by these industries.

These "inflated" levels of protein, calcium, iron, zinc make animal based diets look good and vegan diets look bad, but now the truth is coming out and we are learning all about the hazards of the consumption of these animal products.
Jeff N
[www.vegsource.com]

"EVERYONE knows that 1 or 2 Brazil Nuts is all we need for Selenium and here is an old post by Jeff Novick about Zinc..."

Right, but we're talking about a strict fruit and vegetable diet. Fresh says he doesn't eat nuts. Your comments about zinc are interesting but nothing more than conjecture.

<<<Your comments about zinc are interesting but nothing more than conjecture.>>>

It’s a lot more than conjecture as it makes a whole lot of sense!!!

As far as Zinc, here is a small snippet from my file…

Zinc it is about 7-9.
Zinc...pumpkin seeds.
Brian Clement...Mung Bean Sprouts...premature greying and balding hair...2nd - pumpkin seeds.
Zinc and Vitamin E (abundant in olives and olive oil)
Napa Cabbage. Only 2 cups of it gives you 8mg of zinc.
100 Grams of Olives have .22 mg of Zinc

"It’s a lot more than conjecture as it makes a whole lot of sense!!!"

In theory it makes sense, but it's still conjecture nonetheless. He hasn't demonstrated or offered any alternative that shows humans require less than the RDA. It's also not even a guarantee that zinc requirements were exaggerated to promote animal products in the first place.

<<<He hasn't demonstrated or offered any alternative that shows humans require less than the RDA.>>>

The RDAs are a JOKE...

Jeff did not go into the absurdity of using the RDAs, but Joel Fuhrman does:

Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live”
• “The RDAs are levels set by our government for various nutrients considered to be desirable for good health. But are they correct? Are these levels appropriate, and will even higher levels of certain nutrients benefit us? Difficult questions to answer, but first we must consider how the RDAs were derived.” -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 140
• “The RDAs were first developed when the government began questioning the nutritional value of military rations distributed to our soldiers during World War II. Later, our government’s Food and Nutrition Board looked at what foods they expected most people to eat. By analyzing the average diet, they came up with a suggested minimum and then added an upward adjustment to theoretically ensure optimal health.” -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 140
• “The RDAs are biased in favor of the conventional level of intake. They are not based on how people should eat to maintain optimal health; rather, they have been formulated to represent how we do eat. They characterize the conventional diet: high in animal products; lots of dairy products and fat; and low in fiber, antioxidants, and other nutrients, such as vitamin C, that are rich in plant foods. The RDAs reflect a diet that caused all the problems in the first place." -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 140
• "The RDAs reflect a diet that caused all the problems in the first place." -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 140
• "The government must hold the RDA ridiculously low because it would be inconsistent with the other absurd dietary suggestions and make it impossible to achieve levels without supplementation." -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 141
• "...thousands of phytonutrients lack RDAs." -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 141
• “Even the dietary menus for 1,200 calorie and 1,600 calorie diets published in the National Institutes of Health’s recent guide for physicians do not meet the RDAs, because the traditional American food choices are too low in nutrients. The NIH diets are too low in important nutrients such as chromium, vitamin K, folate, and magnesium, whereas the Eat to Live diet plans and suggested menus more than meet all RDAs within the NIH’s caloric limits.” -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 190

So as you can see, the RDAs are too low and too high to reflect a diet that NO ONE wants to emulate.

""The RDAs reflect a diet that caused all the problems in the first place." -Joel Fuhrman"

This is a false statement - RDA's haven't caused the problems associated with standard diets, poor quality foods (animal products and processed foods) have.

"The government must hold the RDA ridiculously low because it would be inconsistent with the other absurd dietary suggestions and make it impossible to achieve levels without supplementation.""

Yes, RDA's for many nutrients are too low, though I have yet to see anything suggesting that they are too high for others (except for protein)

"So as you can see, the RDAs are too low and too high to reflect a diet that NO ONE wants to emulate."

Can you elaborate?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2015 01:21AM by jtprindl.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> fresh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > 8 bananas
> > 5 stalks celery
> > 2 heads lettuce
> > 1 bunch spinach
> > 5 mangoes
> > 3 tomatoes
> > 2 grapefruits
> >
> >
> > 2500 calories
> > 11mg zinc
> > 29.4ug selenium
> >
> > 27 ug per day requirement for selenium
> > 11 mg per day requirement for zinc
>
>
> 1.) On CRON-O-Meter, the sample diet website
> you've been referring to, that is 54% RDA for
> selenium and 83% RDA for zinc.
>
> 2.) Nice attempt at botching the numbers, I
> entered exactly what you typed and only got 9.1 mg
> zinc.
>
> [ods.od.nih.gov]
> sional/ (RDA = 11 mg)
> [ods.od.nih.gov]
> ofessional/ (RDA = 55 micrograms)


it's not possible to enter exactly what i entered.
there are different sizes for fruits.

the numbers match the requirements. no nuts/seeds/algae.

finito.

so let's recap.

lysine hard to get? false
efa's hard to get? false
zinc? nope
selenium? nope



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2015 01:28AM by fresh.

"it's not possible to enter exactly what i entered.
there are different sizes for fruits."

I entered in the largest for each of them, so there would be nothing different except even smaller amounts of zinc and selenium.

"efa's hard to get? false
zinc? nope
selenium? nope"

Maybe if you keep telling yourself this, eventually it will turn to reality. Today is not that day.

>This is a false statement - RDA's haven't caused the problems associated with standard diets, poor quality foods (animal products and processed foods) have.


this statement above calling JR's statement a false statement,
is itself a false statement,

since it is the rda's that directly compel people to think that they need to eat foods that they should not be eating.

"since it is the rda's that directly compel people to think that they need to eat foods that they should not be eating."

RDA's are based on nutrients not what types of foods you "should" be eating. There is no meat or milk RDA.

I guess you did something wrong in the cronometer. oh well. you can work on it a bit and get the numbers you need to get. i wonder why you couldn't do that until I did it? strange. very strange.

>not what types of foods you "should" be eating. There is no meat or milk RDA.

of course they are not, you tool. but if people see that the rda is X, even though it's higher than it should be , and only a diet in animal products can supply that X amount, then they will be compelled through ignorance to consume those things.

"I guess you did something wrong in the cronometer. oh well. you can work on it a bit and get the numbers you need to get. i wonder why you couldn't do that until I did it? strange. very strange."

Maybe I should hack into CRON-O-Meter and skew the numbers to make it look like your proposed sample diet was sufficient in zinc and selenium.


"of course they are not, you tool."
"only a diet in animal products can supply that X amount"

Here come the petty insults...

And no, you don't need animal products to reach the RDA's for anything.

>And no, you don't need animal products to reach the RDA's for anything.


that was just an example, could be grains/beans, eggs, whatever.
that's what people THINK - has nothing to do with truth. man you're dense.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >And no, you don't need animal products to reach
> the RDA's for anything.
>
>
> that was just an example, could be grains/beans,
> eggs, whatever.
> that's what people THINK - has nothing to do with
> truth. man you're dense.


Oh yeah it was only an example even though you literally just said "but if people see that the rda is X, even though it's higher than it should be ,and only a diet in animal products can supply that X amount, then they will be compelled through ignorance to consume those things". And I'm the dense one...

and only a diet in animal products, For example, can supply that X amount,

being dense is a good thing. all the best fruits have a higher density.

i LOVE how you get all prickly when I give back to you the rudeness that you give to me. classic.

i am your mirror. be nice, get nice.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2015 02:36AM by fresh.

>1.) On CRON-O-Meter, the sample diet website you've been referring to, that is 54% RDA for selenium and 83% RDA for zinc.

and your point is what exactly?

you do realize that the there is no ONE requirement for selenium, right?

the selenium intake matched this source, which says 20-27 ug per day.

[www.fao.org]


>2.) Nice attempt at botching the numbers, I entered exactly what you typed and only got 9.1 mg zinc.


Oh, my god ! I wonder if YOU could possibly modify your foods to acquire the zinc that you think is necessary? no, that would be crazy.

nope just give up. hmmmmm. I wonder if it is not in your interest to see how you COULD meet what YOU think the requirements are, and then see if that amount/kind of food is doable?

no, that would require some actual thought, wouldn't it?

you see, this is why i didn't want to submit my sample, because you are incompetent.


hilarious.

"you do realize that the there is no ONE requirement for selenium, right?"

The link you listed has a RNI (Recommended Nutrient Intake) of 34 micrograms/daily for men - which leaves your proposed sample diet deficient. This is the second time you've posted something which contradicted yourself. Clearly all you're attempting to do is find a source with the lowest Se recommendations possible to justify your unsubstantiated opinion. It's not working out too well.


[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] - "Current evidence suggests that a daily selenium consumption for man of approximately 30 micrograms is necessary to prevent the selenium-deficient syndrome, Keshan disease, while approximately 90 micrograms/day/adult should be the minimum daily requirement for optimum biological performance."

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] - "The minimum dietary selenium requirement for the prevention of Keshan disease (KD) was found to be around 17 micrograms/d. On the other hand, an intake of 40 micrograms/d is required to maintain the plasma glutathione peroxidase (GPx) activity at plateau. Hence 40 micrograms/d is considered as the adequate dietary selenium requirement."


"Oh, my god ! I wonder if YOU could possibly modify your foods to acquire the zinc that you think is necessary? no, that would be crazy."

Why would I modify anything? You told me those exact foods and their exact amounts would give sufficient zinc - which it didn't - and then you proceeded to lie about how much your sample diet provided. The real reason you didn't want to submit your sample was because you knew it was insufficient in regards to zinc and selenium.


Better luck next time.

>Why would I modify anything? You told me those exact foods and their exact amounts would give sufficient zinc - which it didn't - and then you proceeded to lie about how much your sample diet provided. The real reason you didn't want to submit your sample was because you knew it was insufficient in regards to zinc and selenium.

my dear boy. i did not say that i would match the rda with a sample diet.

i said sufficient zinc and selenium is available on FV diet.

sufficient depends on what a particular person considers to be sufficient.

there is no exact amount that is agreed upon.

i merely submitted a sample diet that satisfied references found, which are just a bit lower than the RDA. I said to use cron simply to put the data in - i never said it should or would meet the RDA. the zinc was right around the cron requirements and the selenium came from another source which i cherry picked.

those requirements that I did meet are FAR HIGHER than the requirements that i just posted in another thread, thereby making the diet even easier to supply the nutrients.

now go and get some zinc, you seem a bit low. as you know, irritability is one of the symptoms. irritability is also a symptom of high selenium, which makes sense as well. taper that off a bit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2015 07:35AM by fresh.

"those requirements are FAR HIGHER than the requirements that i just posted in another thread, thereby making the diet even easier to supply the nutrients."

As I just posted in regards to selenium...

The link you listed has a RNI (Recommended Nutrient Intake) of 34 micrograms/daily for men - which leaves your proposed sample diet deficient. This is the second time you've posted something which contradicted yourself. Clearly all you're attempting to do is find a source with the lowest Se recommendations possible to justify your unsubstantiated opinion. It's not working out too well.

Then there's the scientific studies which throw everything you've said about selenium out the window.


"you were merely a foil to debate, to get the info out there while refuting your claims."

Unfortunately, you failed miserably and the exact opposite happened.

Best of luck to you with your far from optimal levels of long-chain omega-3's and selenium - absolutely vital nutrients, especially for cognition.

RNI

interpolating estimates of average requirements by allowing for differences in weight and basal metabolic rate of age groups to up to 65 years and adding a 25 percent increase (2 x assumed SD) to allow for individual variability in the estimates of RN


It's not necessary to hit the RNI.

Why do you keep cherry picking the highest sources?

very weird. could you be biased? are you a nutritionist?

>Then there's the scientific studies which throw everything you've said about selenium out the window.

ooh, please share them!

don't bother, i will look some up myself.


>Unfortunately, you failed miserably and the exact opposite happened.

you're a bit too predictable with your responses.

>Best of luck to you with your far from optimal levels of long-chain omega-3's and selenium - absolutely vital nutrients, especially for cognition.

cognition? let me check... yup , seems to be good.

"ooh, please share them!"

Already did, scroll up. Everything you've posted about selenium is now irrelevant.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 154% is the iron content of the diet posted
> above.
>
> not enough?


Likely not for a vegan diet imo, especially a raw vegan diet. Iron is poorly absorbed and copper also competes for absorption with iron, so if one is getting 300 - 400% rda for copper and they only reach 154% for iron,problems could arise. The other issue is with manganese,that also competes with iron for absorption, and we know that many raw vegan diets will be 400 - 500% rda for manganese. Striving to reach 150% rda for iron is certainly is not something one wants to be putting in the heads of raw vegans given the high failure rate.

Truely...if one is serious they would get a blood spectra test to see how well they are absorbing the iron.

And lets not forget anti nutrients. I thought about something very interesting the other day, could it be that people who were not breast fed have reduced ability to break down anti nutrients due to having poor intestinal bacteria?? Maybe some people need those ferments where-as breast fed people on good raw diets don't??

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SueZ Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > fresh Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> >
> > > it's only an issue for those who wish to eat
> > > nuts/beans and find a justification to do so.
> >
> > Are raw nuts and seeds taboo in your whacky
> > version of raw vegan?
>
> ah, zeus, are you unable to have a civil convo,
> ever?
>
> no, my dear, they are not taboo, just not ideal.

Not ideal, not ideal for who, and according to who??? These foods offer great health benefits. Some people like myself do great on nuts, seeds and legumes, but not so good on low nutrient fruit because it is never fresh and rarely ripe and not strenghening and energising like the legumes/nuts/seeds.


Fresh - are you assuming a one fits all approach like some of those N.H raw food leaders? If you are then you are limiting your dietary viewpoints, and that is like many raw food leaders who's limited ideas lead to so much failure to thrive on the raw diet because the poor followers have been taught such a limited approach to diet so they give up because they have not been taught about options.

Nuts are mucus forming, nuts are acid blah blah blah. Do we still want to be buying into all these food phobias anymore? That type of nonsense used to baffle brains when people knew no better, but those old times have moved on. We can't play those types of games anymore.

www.thesproutarian.com



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2015 09:50AM by The Sproutarian Man.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> no need to wait for your numbers,
> I just found a source for fatty acid requirements
> [www.dhaomega3.org]
> mega-3-Nutrition-Gap-Recommended-Intakes
>
>
> omega 3 requirements = 1.6 g per day
> dha + epa = 160mg
>
> I put a basic food day together, 2500 calories, no
> nuts or seeds or algae.
>
>
> 2.3 grams omega 3 - meets requirements
> 4% for dha= 92mg
> 6% for epa = 138
>
> total = 230 of epa and dha - meets requirements
>
>
> exceeds requirements actually
>
> so tell me what the problem is.


Unfortunately things are not as simple as that. Conversion to EPA and DHA can be much lower for all diet groups, and now various scientists have seriously disputed whether 1.6 g per day is enough, some are suggesting up to 6 g and even certain people take even higher amounts ( I will need to check those numbers again to make sure).

Conversion of EPA/DHA can be as low as 1 - 2%, and given that most diets are poorly done by all diet groups it is not surprising that people are said to have such poor conversion rates. And thinking 1.6 grams of long chain omega 3's is enough is now highly questionable and puts one in a potential risk category imo. And when you read the science on how EPA/DHA shortages effect people you would not dare risk having low EPA/DHA. I think I remember that people did better on higher amounts of the rda for EPA/DHA (can't be 100% sure at the moment).

Fresh, we want to make sure people are safe, so given the controversy over EPA/DHA rda's it would be advised to up our intake of omega 3 ALA and improve our conversion rates. Raw vegans have been known to have 10% EPA conversion and 6% DHA, but we need a good 3 - 6's ratio and to have a background of saturated fat when taking in the ALA along with good levels of iron, zinc, amino acids, B6, B9, copper and calcium. BUT...vegan diets are often unbalanced in this respect and contain little or no saturated fat so conversion will be limited for most and the chances of vegans maintaining a raw diet will be slimmer. We want people to be able to stay raw vegan for life, but when we start talking low nutrient unbalanced diets we are putting people into possible risk categories.

You see a lot of highly strung unbalanced vegans (hormones??), so we don't want to be too dismissive of the long chain fats and the saturated fats in limited amounts. Having some saturated fat in the diet can double conversion of ALA to long chain omega 3 fats in humans. For rats it has increased conversion of EPA by 600% and DHA (the real important one) by 200% or more.



fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> 1. cron is not accurate



We know it is not accurate because it can greatly overestimate the nutrient levels because it is not consistent with various other charts, and it makes me think whether it is a disinfo site designed to give people false confidence so they can be reliant on drugs when they get deficient. Cronometer is a joke and l would never use it. One vegan girl boasted about how she reached 300 - 400 - 500% rda on nutrients while eating a lousy diet, so l wrote to her warning to do some more checks, but as usual the vegans don't like what l have to say and remove comments when it conbtracts their message as gurus. I will try and find the link.

One vegan used

www.thesproutarian.com



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2015 10:31AM by The Sproutarian Man.

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> <<>>
>
> The RDAs are a JOKE...


Yes they are, but not for the reasons the highly controversial Joel Fuhrman states. Gabriel Coisens will tell you that people getting the rda's for nutrients are sometimes not getting enough, and his experiment showed that getting significantly above the rda for B12 made 30% of his clients feel noticably better. Another doctor stated that some people need up to 10 times the rda for B vitamins. We live in a toxic world and our DNA is compromised, so our needs can be higher than we think. Improperly functioning DNA can't always utilise certain nutrients well.

I really would like it if Joel lived in the real world and was not so stuck in the past, l rarely agree with anything he has to say. His argument quoted by John below may have applied in the old days and may even apply to various minerals these days, but l have doubts about vitamins and fatty acids and B12. I wish he would start researching again because it is obvious that he doesn't read the literature much because of his limited and outdated ideas on various things.

>
> Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live”
> • “The RDAs are levels set by our government
> for various nutrients considered to be desirable
> for good health. But are they correct? Are these
> levels appropriate, and will even higher levels of
> certain nutrients benefit us? Difficult questions
> to answer, but first we must consider how the RDAs
> were derived.” -Joel Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to
> Live” p. 140
> • “The RDAs were first developed when the
> government began questioning the nutritional value
> of military rations distributed to our soldiers
> during World War II. Later, our government’s
> Food and Nutrition Board looked at what foods they
> expected most people to eat. By analyzing the
> average diet, they came up with a suggested
> minimum and then added an upward adjustment to
> theoretically ensure optimal health.” -Joel
> Fuhrman, M.D., “Eat to Live” p. 140



Btw,

jtprindl = the better debater by a clear margin
fresh = not so good debater, but hopefully one day he can learn to be.


btw 2 = my statement about 6 grams of long chain omega 3's was wrong. It should have read 600 - 800 mg and over 1 gram for various people. The highest recommended amount is 3,000 mg.

The biggest nutrients for me to focus on are:...l am especially focussed on zinc and DHA. I seem to be a very poor absorber of zinc and had been deficient all my life, so it is a major focus. I find that if l don't eat high zinc foods l am negatively effected.

* zinc
* EPA/DHA
* B12

www.thesproutarian.com



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/31/2015 10:58AM by The Sproutarian Man.

fresh - thanks for the pics with captions. Very funny stuff.