Great post BmacG.
I agree with what you’re saying about cancer and the pharmaceutical companies.If I had a cure in my hands that cured any kind of disease or cancer that you could ever fathom and took it to the FDA,they’d probably take it and throw it away because they’d be out of business.
I believe most cancer/diseases are caused by:
Environmental toxins( like you said.Just look at the air)
Unhealthy diet(along with poor nutrition)
Not enough fruits and vegetables(like our mothers told us)
Toxins in our processed foods
And drugs themselves
I don’t believe protein casues cancer.Although it may NOT help you if you have cancer,I don’t belive protein causes it.The saying “you are what you eat” is true.
“Let your food be your medicine and your medicine be your food.”
All physicians took the hippocratic oath; and yet they still go out and push deadly drugs.
You have geat insite on things BmacG.
It’s great to talk to an intelligent human being.
I have to say, it didn’t suprise me at all at the various ignorant responses I got to this post, but that was expected. There were a few insightful posts though, and to those posters I say thanks.
Cy, the study did vary the amounts of casein in the rat and mice diet, one group receiving about 5-6%, the other receiving about 20-22%. The issue tested was not whether aflatoxin initiates and promotes cancerous tumor growth, that is known (to be conservative, in mice and rats at least, whether in humans we don’t know one could argue, but the argument is put forth that protein metabolism and requirements in rats is very similar to humans). The resulting incidence of liver tumor growth was much (significantly) higher in the higher casein group than the lower casein group. The equivalent high gluten group (20-22% gluten fed diet) was also low, roughly equivalent to the 5-6% casein.
To those that claim, yes, this is an obvious effect due to the higher BV of casein, fair enough. But think of the number of carcinogenic compounds your body is exposed to on a daily basis in our modern society (some may take issue with this as well, but I think you’d be proven grossly wrong by toxicological research). Campbell talks about how we all carry the “seeds” (initiation stage) of cancer in our bodies, yet whether they develop into cancer or not in large degree can be controlled by amount and type of protein intake. In other words, whether it goes into promotion is controlled largely by diet. It’s an interesting postulate, advanced by a prominent nutritional researcher using sound methods.
It’s funny also how some people think the pharmaceutical companies will save us all from cancer with amazing cures. Think again, they no doubt help in the effort, but as some of the writers on here have repeatedly stated, albeit in regards to muscle-building, “it’s your diet stupid”. Diet and exposure to environmental toxins, Campbell claims, to a lesser degree genetics, are the culprits. The genetics argument is interesting, as it allows for a kind of “Oh well!” fatalistic attitude towards ones current and future health, like it’s out of their hands if they develop cancer or not. As we all know, diet is a hard, 24-hour/day ordeal, yet those who eat clean reap the benefits through lower disease rates and improved health and vigor.
Ok, well this grows long. I may have left out some points I wished to make. Spare me the ignorant posts (although I doubt that’s likely). I look forward to the constructive posts. [/quote]