jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "shall we assume that you don't have your own
> original thoughts?
> just parroting some other person?"
>
> You, an imbecile, can assume that if you'd like
>
>
> "such statements like the above are meaningless
> without numbers."
>
> Where are your numbers? This is coming from a
> Naturopathic doctor with decades of experience.
>
> "i am not concerned about his experience as i have
> my own experience."
>
> So you're a hypocrite. You try to force your
> experiences on everyone else but aren't open to
> the experiences of others. GOT IT. Not that your
> diet is succeeding, especially cognitively.
>
> "I disagree. especially with the nonsense below."
>
> You disagree with lots of things - not because
> they are wrong but because you lack education,
> logic, and critical thinking skills.

Glad you're back, jtprindl. Great post!

"i am not the one making the statement. he is."

Provide numbers proving the success of Natural Hygiene diets. Provide numbers proving the success of strict fruit and vegetable diets. Provide numbers proving that fasting alone can heal the body of all disease. All statements you have made.

"not forcing anything."

Yeah you do, every time someone mentions how they suffered health issues on a diet similar to the one you promote, you throw out every excuse in the book and blame the individual rather than being aware of and acknowledging that maybe that diet isn't as healthy as you think it is. These aren't isolated incidents, either, MANY people fail on fruit and veggie N.H. style diets, and it's not always their fault. If your diet is so nourishing, post these so-called tests you've had in the past that revealed zero deficiencies.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "i am not the one making the statement. he is."
>
> Provide numbers proving the success of Natural
> Hygiene diets.

if someone makes a quantitative statement like this:

"A large percentage of Natural Hygienists, become deficient in important nutrients such as B-12, calcium, and protein. "

then I ask for the numbers, as the person making the statement has said "a large percentage"

show me the percentage based on actual data! where is it?

just like when someone says "most people" fail to thrive on a raw vegan diet.

I say, show me your numbers, since if you do not, it is too easy to be biased in your sample.



Provide numbers proving the success
> of strict fruit and vegetable diets.

what do you mean by strict?
what foods are not allowed?

once in a while i will have seaweed, b12 or nuts.

a while back, even though you are unable to admit it, i showed you that a sample
in cron of fruits and veg meeting human needs, since almost all of the nutrients were 100% or above. a couple were not 100%, and i showed evidence that 100% rda is not necessary for those. if you think you need to run your life based on your belief that the rda's are all too low, or that if you don't meet the rda, you are malnourished, that is your belief. there's absolutely zero evidence that is so.

i do not need to provide numbers proving the success of "strict" fruit and veg diets since I am not making a quantitative statement like "all people" or "most people" - i am merely using myself and observations of others and nutrient analyses and saying that the nutrients are sufficient to succeed and that apparently people do succeed.


Provide
> numbers proving that fasting alone can heal the
> body of all disease. All statements you have
> made.
>

never said that. but you do tend to invent what people say and attempt to insert what you think people believe into other people's brains.


> "not forcing anything."
>
> Yeah you do, every time someone mentions how they
> suffered health issues on a diet similar to the
> one you promote, you throw out every excuse in the
> book and blame the individual rather than being
> aware of and acknowledging that maybe that diet
> isn't as healthy as you think it is.

it's based upon something very simple. we are , except for very minor differences, essentially the same with respect to food needs. if some people do fine as raw vegan and then one person says - I don't do well on high fruit - it makes me prediabetic, then i must think that the body has a problem, or there was a problem with the application of the diet. saying that people are different leaves us with the question of what is different which must be the state of the body, or the functions and capacities of that body, which are dynamic.


These aren't
> isolated incidents, either, MANY people fail on
> fruit and veggie N.H. style diets, and it's not
> always their fault.

if you say so. my belief in this matter should not threaten you or anyone else.


If your diet is so nourishing,
> post these so-called tests you've had in the past
> that revealed zero deficiencies.

i will take any test that you wish - you pay.

is there some reason why you are making this a diet war?
some reason you have such trouble allowing others to entertain their own thoughts?

"I say, show me your numbers, since if you do not, it is too easy to be biased in your sample."

Yet you never show any numbers regarding your dietary beliefs because you're biased.

"a while back, even though you are unable to admit it, i showed you that a sample
in cron of fruits and veg meeting human needs, since almost all of the nutrients were 100% or above. a couple were not 100%, and i showed evidence that 100% rda is not necessary for those. if you think you need to run your life based on your belief that the rda's are all too low, or that if you don't meet the rda, you are malnourished, that is your belief. there's absolutely zero evidence that is so.

i do not need to provide numbers proving the success of "strict" fruit and veg diets since I am not making a quantitative statement like "all people" or "most people" - i am merely using myself and observations of others and nutrient analyses and saying that the nutrients are sufficient to succeed and that apparently people do succeed."

You can continue living in delusion and repeating lie after lie to yourself in your subconscious but that's just going keep you spinning around in a never-ending pool of ignorance and embarrassment. You have never shown any evidence that RDA is not necessary for selenium, zinc, EPA/DHA, iodine, or sodium. In fact, I posted multiple studies showing how your selenium intake was vastly subpar. To go along with the fact that fruit and vegetable diets are low in all of these critical nutrients to begin with, they also don't even take into consideration nutrient loss from toxicity and other bodily stressors, such as being zapped by the computer you're typing on. What's your definition of "succeed"? Not having symptoms of disease? Having energy? Lots of professional athletes have far more endurance and energy than you'll ever have and many eat unhealthy diets - so yeah that's not evidence of anything. Like I said, if you want to claim your diet is fully nourishing and that you've had tests that reveal no deficiencies, POST THEM. Chances are you've never had any tests gauging your nutrient levels and you completely lied because it was convenient at the time.

"it's based upon something very simple. we are , except for very minor differences, essentially the same with respect to food needs"

Wrong - different environments (toxicity and climate), different levels of physical activity, different stressors, different pre-birth conditions, etc., can lead to very major differences in food needs.

"i will take any test that you wish - you pay."

You've already claimed you had tests that revealed no deficiencies. Post em.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I say, show me your numbers, since if you do not,
> it is too easy to be biased in your sample."
>
> Yet you never show any numbers regarding your
> dietary beliefs because you're biased.
>
> "a while back, even though you are unable to admit
> it, i showed you that a sample
> in cron of fruits and veg meeting human needs,
> since almost all of the nutrients were 100% or
> above. a couple were not 100%, and i showed
> evidence that 100% rda is not necessary for those.
> if you think you need to run your life based on
> your belief that the rda's are all too low, or
> that if you don't meet the rda, you are
> malnourished, that is your belief. there's
> absolutely zero evidence that is so.
>
> i do not need to provide numbers proving the
> success of "strict" fruit and veg diets since I am
> not making a quantitative statement like "all
> people" or "most people" - i am merely using
> myself and observations of others and nutrient
> analyses and saying that the nutrients are
> sufficient to succeed and that apparently people
> do succeed."
>
> You can continue living in delusion and repeating
> lie after lie to yourself in your subconscious but
> that's just going keep you spinning around in a
> never-ending pool of ignorance and embarrassment.
> You have never shown any evidence that RDA is not
> necessary for selenium, zinc, EPA/DHA, iodine, or
> sodium.

yes i have. with respect to fatty acids, zinc, selenium. you are simply not open to the information and come up with excuses.


In fact, I posted multiple studies showing
> how your selenium intake was vastly subpar.

you know exactly ZERO about my selenium intake.


To go
> along with the fact that fruit and vegetable diets
> are low in all of these critical nutrients to
> begin with

to the guy with the hammer, everything is a nail.

to the nutritionist, everything is deficient in nutrients.


, they also don't even take into
> consideration nutrient loss from toxicity and
> other bodily stressors, such as being zapped by
> the computer you're typing on. What's your
> definition of "succeed"? Not having symptoms of
> disease? Having energy?

for starters.



Lots of professional
> athletes have far more endurance and energy than
> you'll ever have and many eat unhealthy diets - so
> yeah that's not evidence of anything.

and the evidence of YOUR health is what exactly?


Like I said,
> if you want to claim your diet is fully nourishing
> and that you've had tests that reveal no
> deficiencies, POST THEM.

put your money where your big mouth is.
i cannot find the results, and even if i could, you would come up with excuses why the test was not good enough.

pick your test and i will take it.

POST your money to my account.

or better yet, post your own test results.
eh?

Chances are you've never
> had any tests gauging your nutrient levels and you
> completely lied because it was convenient at the
> time.
>
> "it's based upon something very simple. we are ,
> except for very minor differences, essentially the
> same with respect to food needs"
>
> Wrong - different environments (toxicity and
> climate), different levels of physical activity,
> different stressors, different pre-birth
> conditions, etc., can lead to very major
> differences in food needs.

not to the point to explain these dietary failures.

>
> "i will take any test that you wish - you pay."
>
> You've already claimed you had tests that revealed
> no deficiencies. Post em.

see above.

"yes i have. with respect to fatty acids, zinc, selenium. you are simply not open to the information and come up with excuses."

No, you tried to find sources with the lowest possible requirements to justify your malnourished diet to yourself.

"you know exactly ZERO about my selenium intake."

I know it's low if you only eat fruits and vegetables, which is what you were previously arguing for.

"and the evidence of YOUR health is what exactly?"

Lots of things.

"not to the point to explain these dietary failures."

Prove it.

"i cannot find the results,"

That's what I thought.

"and even if i could, you would come up with excuses why the test was not good enough"

Already got yourself a nice built-in excuse. Fantastic!

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "yes i have. with respect to fatty acids, zinc,
> selenium. you are simply not open to the
> information and come up with excuses."
>
> No, you tried to find sources with the lowest
> possible requirements to justify your malnourished
> diet to yourself.
>
> "you know exactly ZERO about my selenium intake."
>
> I know it's low if you only eat fruits and
> vegetables, which is what you were previously
> arguing for.
>

i will repeat. you know exactly ZERO about my selenium intake.


> "and the evidence of YOUR health is what
> exactly?"
>
> Lots of things.
>


HAHAHAHA

good one.

the blowhard challenges me then doesn't have an answer for his own question.

> "not to the point to explain these dietary
> failures."
>
> Prove it.


i can't . it's just an opinion.
just like you have opinions on matters that can not be independently proven.
>
> "i cannot find the results,"
>
> That's what I thought.
>
> "and even if i could, you would come up with
> excuses why the test was not good enough"
>
> Already got yourself a nice built-in excuse.
> Fantastic!

don't have enough money to send to satisfy your demand upon me?

[www.rawfoodsupport.com] RAW HEMP PROTEIN GRASS POWDER

Not only did your proposed diet completely fail to meet a variety of critical nutrients but you LIED about the actual numbers. So fresh, do you eat roughly 30 stalks of celery daily or drink a good portion of coconut water to get your sodium? Do you sit there and eat 2 plain heads of lettuce every day? Where do you get iodine in this modern day world where iodine is depleted in the soil? Again, deficient in selenium, zinc, iodine, sodium & EPA and/or DHA.

"i will repeat. you know exactly ZERO about my selenium intake."

And I will repeat, I know it's low if you only eat fruits and vegetables. You like to hide behind meaningless comments such as "you don't know what I know" or "you don't know what I eat"... it's called COMMON SENSE based off your own comments.

"the blowhard challenges me then doesn't have an answer for his own question."

The answer was lots of things, because I know regardless of what I say, you're going to lie and say that you meet everything on that list to "prove" you're diet is succeeding.

"don't have enough money to send to satisfy your demand upon me?"

Why would I pay for something to confirm what I already know? I asked you to show the tests you ALREADY PAID FOR and predictably you backed down because you "couldn't find them". Then you had a built-in excuse for your deficiencies.

whether the sources were the lowest or highest was not the question.

my statement was that i found references showing that the requirements are lower than the rda

I can't help it if you don't like that

you are free to believe what you want and eat what you want.

but there is nothing wrong with the scientific sources that i cited.


zinc

woman 120lbs

FAO 2mg-6mg depending upon bioavailability

NIH and rda - 8mg

"my statement was that i found references showing that the requirements are lower than the rda"

Your entire approach towards nutrient requirements is a huge contradiction and again doesn't take into consideration things that DEPLETE nutrient stores in the body which is especially important on a diet that provides low amounts of certain nutrients. You'll take references from one site and believe them for a certain nutrient and then say the very same source is untrustworthy when it comes to a different nutrient.

Do you eat roughly 30 stalks of celery daily or drink a good portion of coconut water to get your sodium? Do you sit there and eat 2 plain heads of lettuce every day? Where do you get iodine in this modern day world where iodine is depleted in the soil?

>Not only did your proposed diet completely fail to meet a variety of critical nutrients but you LIED about the actual numbers. So fresh, do you eat roughly 30 stalks of celery daily or drink a good portion of coconut water to get your sodium? Do you sit there and eat 2 plain heads of lettuce every day? Where do you get iodine in this modern day world where iodine is depleted in the soil? Again, deficient in selenium, zinc, iodine, sodium & EPA and/or DHA.

if you say so.


>And I will repeat, I know it's low if you only eat fruits and vegetables. You like to hide behind meaningless comments such as "you don't know what I know" or "you don't know what I eat"... it's called COMMON SENSE based off your own comments.

no you don't. there's a little thing called nutrient content. and you have no idea what i am eating, what nutrients are in what i am eating, etc., what i am absorbing. because you think that looking at a chart means something.

in fact, you know less than zero.


>The answer was lots of things, because I know regardless of what I say, you're going to lie and say that you meet everything on that list to "prove" you're diet is succeeding.

i don't need to prove anything to you. you are the one challenging me to prove something for some bizarre reason.


>Why would I pay for something to confirm what I already know?

i guess that's as good an excuse as any .


>I asked you to show the tests you ALREADY PAID FOR and predictably you backed down because you "couldn't find them". Then you had a built-in excuse for your deficiencies.

the reason i said i can't find it is because i can't find it.
weird, i know. you're so used to lying that you think everyone else does too.
you mean the deficiencies you can determine from my mental state and my food intake that you have no clue about, and all of this through your computer?

like i said, you are an amazing person with powers far beyond mere mortals.

you still want to play, jtprindl? have you wasted enough time yet?

"no you don't. there's a little thing called nutrient content. and you have no idea what i am eating, what nutrients are in what i am eating, etc., what i am absorbing. because you think that looking at a chart means something."

And I will repeat, I know it's low if you only eat fruits and vegetables. Doesn't matter if you absorb 100% of a deficient amount of selenium.

"i don't need to prove anything to you. you are the one challenging me to prove something for some bizarre reason."

No, you don't, but that also doesn't mean I'm not correct about your malnourished diet and faulty definition of "diet success".

"the reason i said i can't find it is because i can't find it."

Keep telling yourself that.

"you mean the deficiencies you can determine from my mental state and my food intake that you have no clue about, and all of this through your computer?"

Just because I'm smarter than you and you cannot comprehend how I have a clue about your deficiencies doesn't mean it's not true, sorry to say. Again it's COMMON SENSE based off your ignoramus comments.

"you still want to play, jtprindl? have you wasted enough time yet?"

Says the guy who sits on rawfoodsupport all day everyday making it seem like he wastes his life doing nothing except getting government welfare.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "my statement was that i found references showing
> that the requirements are lower than the rda"
>
> Your entire approach towards nutrient requirements
> is a huge contradiction and again doesn't take
> into consideration things that DEPLETE nutrient
> stores in the body which is especially important
> on a diet that provides low amounts of certain
> nutrients. You'll take references from one site
> and believe them for a certain nutrient and then
> say the very same source is untrustworthy when it
> comes to a different nutrient.
>

thanks for your opinion.

> Do you eat roughly 30 stalks of celery daily or
> drink a good portion of coconut water to get your
> sodium? Do you sit there and eat 2 plain heads of
> lettuce every day? Where do you get iodine in this
> modern day world where iodine is depleted in the
> soil?


wait a minute. you claim to know that i am deficient.
now you are asking me what i eat? i don't understand.

ignoring that particular contradiction.....

- why are you being so confrontational? isn't that a quality that you rant and rave about in other people?

- if you're so interested in my diet why don't you just ask? why engage in such childish accusations?

-i eat celery coconut water lettuce and occasionally seaweed. does that answer your question?

- you engage in the same kind of ignorant statements that temp used to. he was constantly including unproven assumptions in his "questions". like when you say "do you eat 30 stalks of celery per day", the implication is that one needs to do so. yet you have not shown that to be true. same with coconut water. same with your statements about iodine, the content of the foods that I or anyone else eat you have NO CLUE. but, thanks for you concern. i am not suffering from hyponatremia - and never have. weird.

The National Heart Lung and Blood Association reports that 500 mg is a safe daily minimum intake of sodium. This amount will be enough to maintain the bodily functions that require sodium. In an average temperate climate, a normal adult may be able to thrive with as little as 115 mg of sodium each day. Because most foods contain at least a small amount of natural sodium, it is difficult to drop below the minimum recommendation even on an extremely low-sodium diet.

"wait a minute. you claim to know that i am deficient.
now you are asking me what i eat? i don't understand."

Not a contradiction, I'm sorry you cannot differentiate between the two. Your proposed diet was already deficient in zinc, selenium, iodine, and sodium and that's with eating two heads of lettuce.

"i am not suffering from hyponatremia - and never have. weird."

You can say that all you want but unless you consistently consume fairly large quantities of celery or coconut water (since you don't use sea salt *GASP* I know, salt), where are you getting it from?

"i eat celery coconut water lettuce and occasionally seaweed. does that answer your question?"

So your only source of iodine is occasional seaweed?

"the implication is that one needs to do so. yet you have not shown that to be true. same with coconut water. same with your statements about iodine, the content of the foods that I or anyone else eat you have NO CLUE. but, thanks for you concern."

If you do any exercise at all, you lose sodium. On top of an already deficient amount, how are you getting enough?

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "wait a minute. you claim to know that i am
> deficient.
> now you are asking me what i eat? i don't
> understand."
>
> Not a contradiction, I'm sorry you cannot
> differentiate between the two. Your proposed diet
> was already deficient in zinc, selenium, iodine,
> and sodium and that's with eating two heads of
> lettuce.
>



> "i am not suffering from hyponatremia - and never
> have. weird."
>
> You can say that all you want but unless you
> consistently consume fairly large quantities of
> celery or coconut water (since you don't use sea
> salt *GASP* I know, salt), where are you getting
> it from?
>
> "i eat celery coconut water lettuce and
> occasionally seaweed. does that answer your
> question?"
>

your problem is that you have inflated ideas of what is necessary.

since you are unable to question those ideas, you will be forever asking "where do you get".

so i can't help you there.

i have posted something on sodium. you have been ranting about sodium without even the barest hint of what you think is a minimum sodium requirement.
i find this intellectually bankrupt. when you can provide some data to support your assumptions, only then can a discussion ensue.

> So your only source of iodine is occasional
> seaweed?
>

another assumption that presumes that ONLY seaweed contains iodine.

you are the Master Assumer.


> "the implication is that one needs to do so. yet
> you have not shown that to be true. same with
> coconut water. same with your statements about
> iodine, the content of the foods that I or anyone
> else eat you have NO CLUE. but, thanks for you
> concern."
>
> If you do any exercise at all, you lose sodium. On
> top of an already deficient amount, how are you
> getting enough?


you have not established that it is "already deficient", but as i have said to you, you are a hammer looking for nails.

jtprindl Wrote:


> If you do any exercise at all, you lose sodium. On
> top of an already deficient amount, how are you
> getting enough?


We send our operatives to pump it out of you when you're asleep.

"your problem is that you have inflated ideas of what is necessary."

Not according to multiple selenium studies I posted and organizations selenium recommendations.

Zinc - [ods.od.nih.gov] (11 mg/day)
[www.iom.edu] (9.4 mg/day)

"another assumption that presumes that ONLY seaweed contains iodine."

What are YOUR other sources of iodine? Stop making up false assumptions in your delusional mind as a poor attempt to divert the conversation away from you answering questions.


"The National Heart Lung and Blood Association reports that 500 mg is a safe daily minimum intake of sodium. This amount will be enough to maintain the bodily functions that require sodium. In an average temperate climate, a normal adult may be able to thrive with as little as 115 mg of sodium each day. Because most foods contain at least a small amount of natural sodium, it is difficult to drop below the minimum recommendation even on an extremely low-sodium diet."

What are these statements based upon? Or is just based off this random article that doesn't provide any references? (http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/much-sodium-adults-need-daily-5362.html)

Cosmo defend failure to research Belle cancer claims and says she can keep Fun Fearless Female award

..."In responding to criticism the magazine failed to look into her cancer claims properly, McCahon said the award was given to women in times of “triumph and adversity” — and said the under-fire Gibson was now experiencing adversity."....


[www.dailytelegraph.com.au]

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "your problem is that you have inflated ideas of
> what is necessary."
>
> Not according to multiple selenium studies I
> posted and organizations selenium
> recommendations.
>

i am aware of the selenium recommendations.
what i have posted is minimum numbers not as a target, but to see what is possible, and to see how the typical recommendations are inflated. the selenium low reference was 17ug, under which there was a medical issue, but only in conjunction with an associated health problem. so this is an indication of the potential of how low is possible. i do not know what i personally get on average, and neither do you. therefore your statement that i am deficient is rejected.

> Zinc -
> [ods.od.nih.gov]
> (11 mg/day)
> [www.iom.edu]
> Nutrition/DRIs/5_Summary%20Table%20Tables%201-4.pd
> f (9.4 mg/day)
>

i have already posted my reference, and that was 2mg per day.

you still don't know what my zinc intake is, and your rants about me being deficient are based on nothing. therefore your contention is rejected.

> "another assumption that presumes that ONLY
> seaweed contains iodine."
>
> What are YOUR other sources of iodine? Stop making
> up false assumptions in your delusional mind as a
> poor attempt to divert the conversation away from
> you answering questions.
>

as i already said, many foods contain iodine, yet it is strongly dependent upon the growing conditions. i do not have any thyroid problems. do you?

perhaps you have heard of bananas? strawberries?
-----------

Bananas

Eating a banana is a quick and healthy way to get an energy boost, thanks in part to the high potassium content. But many people don’t realize that bananas also contain iodine, making them a healthy and nutrient-rich food to supplement a high iodine diet. A medium-sized banana contains 3 micrograms of essential iodine.

Serving Size (1 medium banana), 3 micrograms of iodine (2% DV), 12 calories.

Strawberries

Strawberries are a tasty and nutrient rich fruit that provides your body with many vitamins and minerals. Strawberries are deliciously sweet, but they’re a surprising source of iodine. A one-cup serving contains 13 micrograms of iodine, or just under 10% of what the average person needs to consume in a day.

Serving Size (1 cup), 13 micrograms of iodine (9% DV), 46 calories.

what's next? are you going to do some calculations on the above and tell me that it's impossible to eat enough?

remember now, that was not your contention above. your contention was "where do you get your iodine?" as if you have no idea what foods contain iodine, which is strange coming from a nutritionist, who is supposed to know about nutrients.


>
> "The National Heart Lung and Blood Association
> reports that 500 mg is a safe daily minimum intake
> of sodium. This amount will be enough to maintain
> the bodily functions that require sodium. In an
> average temperate climate, a normal adult may be
> able to thrive with as little as 115 mg of sodium
> each day. Because most foods contain at least a
> small amount of natural sodium, it is difficult to
> drop below the minimum recommendation even on an
> extremely low-sodium diet."
>
> What are these statements based upon? Or is just
> based off this random article that doesn't provide
> any references?
> (http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/much-sodium-adult
> s-need-daily-5362.html)


[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

[www.jeffnovick.com]

now how about for once in your life, acknowledge that i have countered your false assumptions, and then perhaps you can attempt to discover my other alleged deficiencies through your interrogation.

"what i have posted is minimum numbers not as a target, but to see what is possible, and to see how the typical recommendations are inflated"

You have never shown that selenium, zinc, iodine, or EPA/DHA recommendations are inflated. You picked the source which has the lowest daily requirement to validate the low nutrient intake of certain nutrients in your diet or one similar to that of which you promote (such as your previous sample diet). There are many studies and/or recommendations that state much higher intakes are needed for significant health benefits (such as selenium intake and glutathione production). According to your link, we MAY (your pubmed link was an estimate) be able to sustain with 500 mg daily.

"therefore your contention is rejected."

Completely predictable from your end - doesn't have a basis in reality, though.

"if you have no idea what foods contain iodine,"

Another one of your delusional made up in your head assumptions.


[articles.mercola.com]

"According to Dr. Flechas, researchers have determined that the
average dietary intake of iodine for Japanese women is 13.8 milligrams
(mg) per day. He recommends 12.5 mg/day, especially for his pregnant
patients to optimize their child’s intelligence. He shares a couple of
success stories in his lecture, where iodine supplementation at higher
doses resulted in children with remarkably advanced intelligence.

But pregnant women aren't the only ones who need to be concerned
with the iodine content of their diet. According to Dr. Flechas, your
thyroid alone needs about 6 mg of iodine per day; the breasts of a
110-pound woman will need about 5 mg/day (larger women or women with
larger breasts need more); and other body tissues, such as your
adrenals, thymus, ovaries, hypothalamus, and pituitary gland, need about
2 mg/day.

The US RDA May Be Insufficient for Many

It is important to realize that the current US daily recommended
allowance (RDA) for iodine are not in milligram doses but in micrograms:

150 micrograms (mcg) per day for adult men and women
220 mcg for pregnant women
290 mcg for lactating/breastfeeding women

However, this RDA was set with the intention to prevent goiter only.
Dr. Flechas makes a compelling argument for it being completely
insufficient for overall physical health and prevention of diseases such
as thyroid disease, fibromyalgia, and cancer. Iodine actually induces
apoptosis, meaning it causes cancer cells to self destruct. Dr. Flechas
is adamant that absence of iodine in a cell is what causes cancer, and
statistics tend to support this view. In his lecture, he shows the
results of a number of NHANES surveys.

For example, between 1971 and 2000, the average iodine levels
declined by 50 percent in the US. During that same time, cancers
specifically associated with iodine deficiency—such as cancer of the
breast, prostate, endometrium, and ovaries—increased. He also points
out that the RDA completely ignores the presence of increasing amounts
of goitrogens in the environment."

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "what i have posted is minimum numbers not as a
> target, but to see what is possible, and to see
> how the typical recommendations are inflated"
>
> You have never shown that selenium, zinc, iodine,
> or EPA/DHA recommendations are inflated. You
> picked the source which has the lowest daily
> requirement to validate the low nutrient intake of
> certain nutrients in your diet or one similar to
> that of which you promote (such as your previous
> sample diet). There are many studies and/or
> recommendations that state much higher intakes are
> needed for significant health benefits (such as
> selenium intake and glutathione production).
> According to your link, we MAY (your pubmed link
> was an estimate) be able to sustain with 500 mg
> daily.
>

115mg if you're talking about sodium.
both links.

and you STILL have not said ANYTHING about what you THINK sodium intake should be.

and then try this...

"fresh, i see that you have provided some fascinating information regarding sodium. i will endeavor to research this further and thank you for your efforts. i stand corrected on my wild guesswork and claims regarding your sodium intake" sincerely , jtprindl.

> "therefore your contention is rejected."
>
> Completely predictable from your end - doesn't
> have a basis in reality, though.
>
> "if you have no idea what foods contain iodine,"
>
> Another one of your delusional made up in your
> head assumptions.
>

so you HAVE heard of bananas and strawberries then ?

>
> [articles.mercola.com]
> /2013/05/04/iodine-deficiency-affect-childs-brain-
> function.aspx
>
> "According to Dr. Flechas, researchers have
> determined that the
> average dietary intake of iodine for Japanese
> women is 13.8 milligrams
> (mg) per day. He recommends 12.5 mg/day,
> especially for his pregnant
> patients to optimize their child’s intelligence.
> He shares a couple of
> success stories in his lecture, where iodine
> supplementation at higher
> doses resulted in children with remarkably
> advanced intelligence.
>
> But pregnant women aren't the only ones who need
> to be concerned
> with the iodine content of their diet. According
> to Dr. Flechas, your
> thyroid alone needs about 6 mg of iodine per day;
> the breasts of a
> 110-pound woman will need about 5 mg/day (larger
> women or women with
> larger breasts need more); and other body tissues,
> such as your
> adrenals, thymus, ovaries, hypothalamus, and
> pituitary gland, need about
> 2 mg/day.

in other words, you did not receive sufficient iodine as a child?


so in conclusion, you have an opinion regarding nutrients and i accept that you have that opinion that you think is supported by some literature.

now go tell anne osborne how deficient she is.

you also claimed that i was deficient in xyz....
you have failed to support your claim.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/2015 02:21AM by fresh.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "what i have posted is minimum numbers not as a
> target, but to see what is possible, and to see
> how the typical recommendations are inflated"
>
> You have never shown that selenium, zinc, iodine,
> or EPA/DHA recommendations are inflated. You
> picked the source which has the lowest daily
> requirement to validate the low nutrient intake of
> certain nutrients in your diet or one similar to
> that of which you promote (such as your previous
> sample diet). There are many studies and/or
> recommendations that state much higher intakes are
> needed for significant health benefits (such as
> selenium intake and glutathione production).
> According to your link, we MAY (your pubmed link
> was an estimate) be able to sustain with 500 mg
> daily.
>
> "therefore your contention is rejected."
>
> Completely predictable from your end - doesn't
> have a basis in reality, though.
>
> "if you have no idea what foods contain iodine,"
>
> Another one of your delusional made up in your
> head assumptions.
>
>
> [articles.mercola.com]
> /2013/05/04/iodine-deficiency-affect-childs-brain-
> function.aspx
>
> "According to Dr. Flechas, researchers have
> determined that the
> average dietary intake of iodine for Japanese
> women is 13.8 milligrams
> (mg) per day. He recommends 12.5 mg/day,
> especially for his pregnant
> patients to optimize their child’s intelligence.
> He shares a couple of
> success stories in his lecture, where iodine
> supplementation at higher
> doses resulted in children with remarkably
> advanced intelligence.
>
> But pregnant women aren't the only ones who need
> to be concerned
> with the iodine content of their diet. According
> to Dr. Flechas, your
> thyroid alone needs about 6 mg of iodine per day;
> the breasts of a
> 110-pound woman will need about 5 mg/day (larger
> women or women with
> larger breasts need more); and other body tissues,
> such as your
> adrenals, thymus, ovaries, hypothalamus, and
> pituitary gland, need about
> 2 mg/day.
>
> The US RDA May Be Insufficient for Many
>
> It is important to realize that the current US
> daily recommended
> allowance (RDA) for iodine are not in milligram
> doses but in micrograms:
>
> 150 micrograms (mcg) per day for adult men and
> women
> 220 mcg for pregnant women
> 290 mcg for lactating/breastfeeding women
>
> However, this RDA was set with the intention to
> prevent goiter only.
> Dr. Flechas makes a compelling argument for it
> being completely
> insufficient for overall physical health and
> prevention of diseases such
> as thyroid disease, fibromyalgia, and cancer.
> Iodine actually induces
> apoptosis, meaning it causes cancer cells to self
> destruct. Dr. Flechas
> is adamant that absence of iodine in a cell is
> what causes cancer, and
> statistics tend to support this view. In his
> lecture, he shows the
> results of a number of NHANES surveys.
>
> For example, between 1971 and 2000, the average
> iodine levels
> declined by 50 percent in the US. During that same
> time, cancers
> specifically associated with iodine
> deficiency—such as cancer of the
> breast, prostate, endometrium, and
> ovaries—increased. He also points
> out that the RDA completely ignores the presence
> of increasing amounts
> of goitrogens in the environment."

Interesting.

My grandmother told me that when she was growing up in what is known as a "goiter belt" everyone had one. Like many people in the US my ancestors were from areas where fish and seaweeds were plentiful and a lot of it was eaten. When they migrated to the US and moved inland there wasn't the abundance of fish and seaweeds anymore. Before iodine was added to salt Dr.'s would travel from town to town and distribute iodine to the sufferers.

The rise in cancer/lowered iodine intake seems also to correlate with the 1971-2000 time when salt (where most of the iodine intake was coming from) was demonized.

Maybe, in the future, before the medical community demonizes something people are getting most of a supplement from they should transfer the supplementation to some food they don't intend to demonize.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/2015 02:37AM by SueZ.

beware of the iodine dose re: apoptosis

[www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

Low-to-moderate concentrations of I(2) (10-20 microM) cause G1 and G2/M phase arrest in MCF-12F and caspase-dependent apoptosis in MCF-7 cells.

In normal cells, only high doses of I(2) (40 microM) induced apoptosis

every time prindl can't show what he's trying to show, he pulls out the cancer card.

to stop cancer, take this!

give me a list of what we need to take to stop cancer..

turmeric
iodine in high amounts
chaga
reishi
coffee implants
cayenne
shilajit

help me out here.
i can't remember them all.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/2015 04:42AM by fresh.

No, you're a doo doo head!!!

(Meanwhile ALL 7,000,000,000+ humans are miraculously breathing and exchanging the same Air, but hey let's argue about food...)

NuNativs on YouTube...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/2015 05:05AM by NuNativs.

<<<(Meanwhile ALL 7,000,000,000+ humans are miraculously breathing and exchanging the same Air, but hey let's argue about food...)>>>

Hey NuNativs,

Have you seen the movie Mindwalk?

[www.youtube.com]
MINDWALK.wmv
1:48:42 Minute Video


JR Notes:

1:02:35 MM
[www.youtube.com]
Jack: Yea, but there are boundaries, aren’t there? I mean, between you and me, for instance, we are 2 separate bodies, aren’t we? That’s not an illusion, is it? Are you saying that there is actually a Physical Connection between you and me and between you and the wall behind you and the air and this bench?

Sonia: Yes, at the Sub-Atomic Level, there is a continual exchange of Matter and Energy between my hand and this wood, between the wood and the air and even between you and me. I mean a real exchange of Photons and Electrons, ultimately, whether we like it or not, we’re all part of one inseparable web of relationships. 1:03:06 MM

I'll check that out John, thanks!

There are two billard balls of the same color on a table arguing.

One ball says they are the same because both balls are on the same table and the floor physically connects them.

The second ball argues that they are different balls because they think indepently, move independently, and make decissions on their own.

An observer third balls outside the table says that the two balls come from the same factory and look the same. The third ball says that the other two balls may be going through an identity crisis, common between balls of the same color.

But be careful, the third ball is connected through a lamp table made in China and the ball was made in Mexico, which adds more variables to the equation.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/25/2015 07:57PM by Panchito.