Fasting and Eating for Health by Joel Fuhrman; Neal D. Barnard
Authors: Joel Fuhrman; Neal D. Barnard
Ads: Link
reduction in fat is compared to a reduction in protein intake, the protein effect on blood cholesterol is more significant than the effect of saturated fat. Animal protein is a hypercholesterolemic agent . . . Many Americans are switching from beef to skinless chicken and other animal-based foods simply to reduce their intake of fat. However the existing evidence suggests that this makes little or no sense.‖18
It is clear that one should consume protein in quantities sufficient to meet the needs of the body, but with no extra. Excess protein affects the body in a variety of negative ways, shortening potential life span. Animal protein consumption has been linked with increased cancer rates and tumor formation as well as the acceleration of at.herosclerosis.19 Excess proteins also increase our requirements for other nutrients by reducing the uptake of folate, pantothenic acid, and pyridoxine, and by washing away essential minerals through the kidney as the kidney attempts to eliminate the extra nitrogenous waste.20 Because our physiological nature is such that we are primates, equipped with the virtually identical digestive apparatus (comparatively small liver and kidney) as the great apes, our structure is not well equipped to handle high quantities of concentrated fats and proteins. Monkeys also do poorly on high-protein diets and improve physically and emotionally when a high-carbohydrate diet is resumed.21 Relatively high levels of uric acid, ammonia, and other toxins such as phenols, skatole, and indole are formed by proteolytic bacteria, which line our digestive tract when we consume a high-protein diet.22,23 These toxic by-products elaborated by bacteria in our gut can significantly add to the toxic load the body must deal with on a daily basis and 33
can contribute to multiple disease processes.
The idea that the major diseases in prosperous countries are related to dietary excesses is becoming a majority view among those studying the question. Dr. Mark Hegsted, Professor of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, stated before a Senate Committee, ―The risks associated with eating this diet (rich in meat, other sources of fat, sugar, and refined carbohydrates) are demonstrably large. The question to be asked is not why should we change our diet, but why not? Ischemic heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and hypertension are the diseases that kill us. They are epidemic in our population. We cannot afford to temporize. We have an obligation to inform the public of the correct food choices. To do less is to avoid our responsibility.‖24
We continue to pretend that the cause of disease is a mystery or is genetic —
beyond our control. Fortunately, this is not so. On the other hand, many, including physicians and informed laymen, are eager for excuses not to face the annoying facts so they can continue to eat in ways that are convenient and agreeable but hazardous to their health.
We Can Stop the Cancer Epidemic Only If We Change Our Diets If we look at breast cancer as a model to illustrate why cancer incidence has skyrocketed in this century, we can observe that in spite of modern medicine there has been a slow, steady climb in the death rate from breast cancer.
Efforts to detect cancer earlier with mammograms and breast exams have not impeded the climb in statistics showing that an increasing number of women are still dying from this cancer. The failure to prevent cancer has exacted an increasing toll: as of 1993 the disease attacks one in eight women in America.
The evidence linking diet to breast cancer has been known for years. As is the case with most other diseases, however, the public is the last to know. In Japan, for example, breast cancer was rare, but Japanese women who migrated to this country soon had the same rate of cancer as American women—at least 400 percent higher than in Japan. We discovered that the decreased rate of cancer was due not to genetics but primarily to the amount of
It is clear that one should consume protein in quantities sufficient to meet the needs of the body, but with no extra. Excess protein affects the body in a variety of negative ways, shortening potential life span. Animal protein consumption has been linked with increased cancer rates and tumor formation as well as the acceleration of at.herosclerosis.19 Excess proteins also increase our requirements for other nutrients by reducing the uptake of folate, pantothenic acid, and pyridoxine, and by washing away essential minerals through the kidney as the kidney attempts to eliminate the extra nitrogenous waste.20 Because our physiological nature is such that we are primates, equipped with the virtually identical digestive apparatus (comparatively small liver and kidney) as the great apes, our structure is not well equipped to handle high quantities of concentrated fats and proteins. Monkeys also do poorly on high-protein diets and improve physically and emotionally when a high-carbohydrate diet is resumed.21 Relatively high levels of uric acid, ammonia, and other toxins such as phenols, skatole, and indole are formed by proteolytic bacteria, which line our digestive tract when we consume a high-protein diet.22,23 These toxic by-products elaborated by bacteria in our gut can significantly add to the toxic load the body must deal with on a daily basis and 33
can contribute to multiple disease processes.
The idea that the major diseases in prosperous countries are related to dietary excesses is becoming a majority view among those studying the question. Dr. Mark Hegsted, Professor of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, stated before a Senate Committee, ―The risks associated with eating this diet (rich in meat, other sources of fat, sugar, and refined carbohydrates) are demonstrably large. The question to be asked is not why should we change our diet, but why not? Ischemic heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and hypertension are the diseases that kill us. They are epidemic in our population. We cannot afford to temporize. We have an obligation to inform the public of the correct food choices. To do less is to avoid our responsibility.‖24
We continue to pretend that the cause of disease is a mystery or is genetic —
beyond our control. Fortunately, this is not so. On the other hand, many, including physicians and informed laymen, are eager for excuses not to face the annoying facts so they can continue to eat in ways that are convenient and agreeable but hazardous to their health.
We Can Stop the Cancer Epidemic Only If We Change Our Diets If we look at breast cancer as a model to illustrate why cancer incidence has skyrocketed in this century, we can observe that in spite of modern medicine there has been a slow, steady climb in the death rate from breast cancer.
Efforts to detect cancer earlier with mammograms and breast exams have not impeded the climb in statistics showing that an increasing number of women are still dying from this cancer. The failure to prevent cancer has exacted an increasing toll: as of 1993 the disease attacks one in eight women in America.
The evidence linking diet to breast cancer has been known for years. As is the case with most other diseases, however, the public is the last to know. In Japan, for example, breast cancer was rare, but Japanese women who migrated to this country soon had the same rate of cancer as American women—at least 400 percent higher than in Japan. We discovered that the decreased rate of cancer was due not to genetics but primarily to the amount of
Similar Books
