[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Jimmy Kimmel’s career over after ‘disgusting’ lies about Charlie Kirk shooter [Plus America's Homosexual-In-Chief checks-In, Clot-Shots, Iryna Zarutska and More!]

1200 Electric School Busses pulled from service due to fires.

Is the Deep State Covering Up Charlie Kirk’s Murder? The FBI’s Bizarre Inconsistencies Exposed

Local Governments Can Be Ignorant Pissers!!

Cash Jordan: Gangs PLUNDER LA Mall... as California’s “NO JAILS” Strategy IMPLODES

Margin Debt Tops Historic $1 Trillion, Your House Will Be Taken Blindly Warns Dohmen

Tucker Carlson LIVE: America After Charlie Kirk

Charlie Kirk allegedly recently refused $150 million from Israel to take more pro Israel stances

"NATO just declared War on Russia!"Co; Douglas Macgregor

If You're Trying To Lose Weight But Gaining Belly Fat, Watch Insulin

Arabica Coffee Prices Soar As Analyst Warns of "Weather Disasters" Risk Denting Global Production

Candace Owens: : I Know What Happened at the Hamptons (Ackman confronted Charlie Kirk)

Illegal Alien Drunk Driver Mows Down, Kills 16-Year-Old Girl Who Rejected His Lewd Advances

STOP Drinking These 5 Coffees – They’re Quietly DESTROYING Your Gut & Hormones

This Works Better Than Ozempic for Belly Fat

Cinnamon reduces fat

How long do health influencers live? Episode 1 of 3.

'Armed Queers' Marxist Revolutionaries Under Investigation For Possible Foreknowledge Of Kirk's Assassination Plot

Who Killed Charlie Kirk? the Case Against Israel

Sen. Grassley announces a whistleblower has exposed the FBI program “Arctic Frost” for targeting 92 Republican groups

Keto, Ivermectin, & Fenbendazole: New Cancer Treatment Protocol Gains Momentum

Bill Ackman 'Hammered' Charlie Kirk in August 'Intervention' for Platforming Israel Critics

"I've Never Experienced Crime Of This Magnitude Before": 20-Year Veteran Austrian Police Spox

The UK is F*CKED, and the people have had enough

No place for hate apeech

America and Israel both told Qatar to allow Hamas to stay in their country

Video | Robert Kennedy brings down the house.

Owner releases video of Trump banner ripping, shooting in WNC

Cash Jordan: Looters ‘Forcibly Evict’ Millionaires… as California’s “NO ARRESTS” Policy BACKFIRES

Dallas Motel Horror: Immigrant Machete Killer Caught


Health
See other Health Articles

Title: Who'll live longer: meat eaters or vegetarians?
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.sciencealert.com/who-ll- ... est-meat-eaters-or-vegetarians
Published: Dec 30, 2016
Author: JAMES BROWN, THE CONVERSATION
Post Date: 2016-12-30 06:22:14 by Tatarewicz
Keywords: None
Views: 104
Comments: 1

ScienceAlert...

Our ability to live a long life is influenced by a combination of our genes and our environment. In studies that involve identical twins, scientists have estimated that no more than 30 percent of this influence comes from our genes, meaning that the largest group of factors that control how long a person lives is their environment.

Of the many possible environmental factors, few have been as thoroughly studied or debated as our diet. Calorie restriction, for example, is one area that is being investigated.

So far, studies seem to show that restricting calories can increase lifespan, at least in small creatures. But what works for mice doesn’t necessarily work for humans.

What we eat – as opposed to how much we eat – is also a hot topic to study and meat consumption is often put under the microscope.

A study that tracked almost 100,000 Americans for five years found that non-meat eaters were less likely to die – of any cause – during the study period than meat eaters.

This effect was especially noticeable in males.

Some meta-analyses, which combine and re-analyse data from several studies, have also shown that a diet low in meat is associated with greater longevity and that the longer a person sticks to a meat-free diet, the greater the benefit.

Not all studies agree, however. Some show very little or even no difference at all in longevity between meat eaters and non-meat eaters.

What is clear is evidence that meat-free diets can reduce the risk of developing health problems such as type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure and even cancer.

There is some evidence to suggest that vegan diets possibly offer added protection above a standard vegetarian diet. These findings are far easier to interpret as they report the actual event of being diagnosed with a health problem rather than death from any cause.

So can we confidently say that avoiding meat will increase your lifespan? The simple answer is: not yet.

The first thing that is clear is that, compared with most other creatures, humans live for a very long time. This makes it very difficult to run studies that measure the effect of anything on longevity (you’d have difficulty finding a scientist willing to wait 90 years for a study to complete).

Instead scientists either look back at existing health records or recruit volunteers for studies that use shorter time periods, measuring death rates and looking to see which group, on average, was mostly likely to die first.

From this data, claims are made about the effect certain activities have on longevity, including avoiding meat.

There are problems with this approach. First, finding a link between two things – such as eating meat and an early death – doesn’t necessarily mean one thing caused the other.

In other words: correlation does not equal causation. It may appear that vegetarianism and longevity are related but a different variable may explain the link.

It could be that vegetarians exercise more, smoke less and drink less alcohol than their meat eating counterparts, for example.

Nutrition studies also rely on volunteers accurately and truthfully recording their food intake. But this can’t be taken for granted. Studies have shown that people tend to underreport calorie intake and overreport healthy food consumption.

Without actually controlling the diet of groups of people and measuring how long they live, it is difficult to have absolute confidence in findings.

So should I avoid meat for a long and healthy life? The key to healthy ageing probably does lie in controlling our environment, including what we eat.

From the available evidence it is possible that eating a meat-free diet can contribute to this, and that avoiding meat in your diet could certainly increase your chances of avoiding disease as you age.

But there’s certainly also evidence to suggest that this really might work in tandem with avoiding some clearer risks to longevity including smoking.

James Brown, Lecturer in Biology and Biomedical Science, Aston University

This article was originally published by The Conversation.


Poster Comment:

Longevity may well depend on which foods have fewer noxious contaminants.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.

#1. To: Tatarewicz (#0)

claims are made about the effect certain activities have on longevity, including avoiding meat.

There are problems with this approach. First, finding a link between two things – such as eating meat and an early death – doesn’t necessarily mean one thing caused the other.

that theory may have been disproved by The China Study

T. Colin Campbell Center for Nutrition Studies in partner with eCornell.

Doctor Inspired by The China Study for His Cancer Patients

"My expertise, if one could call it that, derives from the clinical experience I have had in treating cancer patients and discovering for myself the extraordinary relationship that exists between animal protein and cancer. My aim therefore is to present examples of what can happen when we ignore the necessity for a whole food, plant-based (WFPB) diet and the benefits that are there for the taking, when patients adopt an animal protein free diet.

Ten years ago I would have scarcely entertained the possibility that a diet of any description could have an important role to play in the cure for cancer. At that time I had been practicing medicine as a family doctor, a general practitioner in Dublin, Ireland for more than forty years. Like most of my medical colleagues I would have been hugely skeptical of all the various dietary cures that were on offer, all based on little more that anecdotal evidence.

Then one day all that changed. A close friend of mine had died from cancer. At his funeral I happened to meet up with the only true icon of Irish science that I had ever known. We had come to be acquainted in our university days and even then he was considered to be one of the brightest students on the campus. In fact, he had gone on to become a professor of genetics.

At the funeral I brought up the subject of our friend’s death. I asked him whether there were any worthwhile cancer cures coming through in the field of genetics. His response was rather surprising. A wry smile came to his face and he took a business card from his pocket. On the back he wrote the name of a book and the name of the author, T. Colin Campbell. Then he said, “If you want to know more about cancer read The China Study.” Disconcertingly, we didn’t speak on the subject after that.

To be exposed to the work of T. Colin Campbell, PhD is a big day in anybody’s life, but when a medical doctor reads The China Study he can react only in a very limited way. Most doctors will immediately realize that the contents of the book are not exactly orthodox teaching and many of them will discard the book after the first few pages. Famously, this was the reaction of a doctor friend of mine that I gave the book to as a present. He threw it away. But I am glad to say he picked it up again some years later. My own reaction was to read the book over and over again until I became absolutely convinced that there was a great deal of truth in what Colin Campbell was saying.

What is most striking about The China Study is the amount of solid evidence it presents. The book contains detailed accounts of Professor Campbell’s experiments on laboratory rats where he showed how it was entirely possible to switch the growth of cancer on and off by simply varying the amount of animal protein that there was in the diet. This represented an enormous discovery and the fact that the results could be replicated made the conclusions scientifically irrefutable.

The message that I got from the book certainly pricked my conscience. From the very first reading I came away with the conviction that it should be possible to apply the findings to my own cancer patients. It seemed reasonable to presume that what had happened in rats might very well also happen in humans, and without any danger to patients. I talked about the possibilities with colleagues but not unexpectedly everybody felt that it would be best to leave the matter in the hands of cancer specialists. It was when I received absolutely no encouragement from this quarter that I decided to conduct a simple trial of my own.

From that moment on I spoke about the diet to every cancer patient that walked through my office door. Some of them had been sick for many years and their cancers were very advanced, whilst others were just newly diagnosed. In total, almost seventy patients took part in my trial. I suggested to all of them that they should get a copy of The China Study and that they would have to stay on an animal protein free diet indefinitely. What happened far exceeded anything that I could have hoped for. Almost all of the patients began to feel considerably better within just a few weeks. It was as if their cancers had actually stopped growing. Astonishingly, my simple experiment appeared to be working. In my book Stop Feeding Your Cancer I describe some of the more dramatic cases that I have seen over the past ten years. One could say that all of them behaved in the manner Colin Campbell might have predicted. Those patients that committed faithfully to the diet remained in good health whilst those that were not compliant responded very much like the rats in his experiments. When there was animal protein in the diet their cancers flared up, only to come back under control again as soon as a WFPB diet was resumed...."

http://nutritionstudies.org/doctor-inspired-by-the-china-study-for-his-cancer-patients/

from http://cancertutor.com, the relation to animal protein in the diet to cancer (and other diseases):

"...Dr. Campbell says, “From our extensive research, one idea seemed to be clear: lower protein intake dramatically decreased tumor initiation.” He explains that the human body needs a diet of about 10% protein to be healthy (a range of about 8-12% depending on body weight). As soon as protein intake exceeds the needed amount, enzyme production increases exponentially; so as far as protein intake goes, the more is not the merrier!

[see also One Answer to Cancer by Dr. William Kelley, D.D.S., M.S., who cured his pancreatic cancer with diet and the use of PANCREATIC ENZYMES which are important in breaking down protein and dissolving cancer. He once said if people would not eat protein after 2 (?) p.m. there would be a lot less cancer. Kelley went on to live another 30 or 40 years, helping 30,000 other people cure their cancers, The Establishment harrassing him all the way. Scroll down to see what happened to actor Steve McQueen, a patient of Kelley's, who said "cancer is a racket and I'm going to blow the lid off it.". whale.to/a/kelley.html ]

Up to this point in all his experiments the protein Dr. Campbell’s group had been using was casein, which makes up 87% of cow’s milk protein. The next set of questions that he needed to answer were whether is matter which type of protein was been consumed. Next they replicated all the 5%-20% tests, but this time they used different types of protein on each sets of rats, both animal proteins from fish and livestock, and plant proteins like gluten and soy. What resulted was nothing short of spectacular! The rats now being fed animal proteins had the exact same reactions as the casein rats, diets in the 10-20% ranges all developed liver cancer or the beginning stages of increased foci development. On the contrary, none of the rats in the 10-20% plant based protein diet groups developed increased foci production or tumors, even when given increased aflatoxin doses!

In the next set of experiments he branched out from liver cancer and into other types of cancer and disease to see if these results would hold. First they worked with hepatitis-B because chronic HBV patients have a 20-40% increased risk of developing liver cancer. Again, when the casein diets exceeded about 14% the viral infection began to turn cancerous. In 1982 The University of Illinois Medical Center in Chicago research the connection between mammary (breast) cancer and casein and also had the same results; increased casein intake promoted mammary cancer growth in infected subjects along the same percentages. At this point he had all the information he needed to move beyond rat testing. It was clear, excessive animal protein consumption promoted cancer in rats.

Now he needed to take these results to the next level: human testing. But how could he possibly organize a study large enough to completely verify his finding? In 1980 the answer to his need walked through the door of his lab in the form of a Chinese scientist named Dr. Junshi Chen. In the early 1970’s the first premier of the People’s Republic of China, Zhou EnLai, was dying of cancer. He helped initiate The China Health and Nutrition Survey, the largest survey ever completed to date (and it is still ongoing). With 650,000 workers and the best medical researchers available, they collected data from 880 million Chinese citizens. Not only are the sheer quantity of people questioned important, but an additional important factor to understand is that 87% of people living in China at that time were (and generally still are) genetically similar, from the Han heritage. Not only would the findings of this alliance result in knowledge regarding the connection between diet, lifestyle, and cancer, but it would also subsequently disprove the idea that cancer is largely the result of ones genetics.

Dr. Chen brought the China Atlas. This was the primary result from the initial massive survey of 96% of the entire Chinese population. The Atlas made one thing crystal clear, cancer in China was geographically localized. In many rural areas, cancer was almost non-existent! While urban areas and small pockets of rural areas were experiencing dramatic increases in cancer and disease. The next natural step was to gather more data. With the help of the authors of the Cancer Atlas Survey, Dr. Campbell, Dr. Chen, and a team of world class researchers went to China. The team selected sixty-five rural to semi-rural counties to gather data from 6,500 people, testing 367 variables. They administered blood tests, urine samples, and measured everything the families ate over three day periods. From the Cancer Atlas they had access to disease mortality rates on more than four dozen kinds of diseases, including cancer, heart disease, and other infectious diseases. In the end they discovered “more than 8,000 statistically significant associations between lifestyle, diet, and disease variables.”

Let’s compare an average diet in China to its counterpart diet in America. The average American eats 15-16% of our total calories from protein and 80% of that is typically from an animal protein source. The average Chinese person in the study typically ate only 10% of their total calories from protein and only 10% of their total protein, on average, came from an animal source. Strangely enough, the total calories in the low protein (33g/day) diets were higher than the high protein (91g/day) diets! In China they ate about 650 more calories per day, but because the protein was primarily plant based and not animal based the fat percentages were only 14.5% in China versus 36% in the U.S. diet. The last two major differences between the two diets were total iron and fiber intake. In China they ate 33 g/day fiber and 34 g/day iron, while in the U.S. they only ate 12 g/day fiber and 18 g/day iron...."

www.cancertutor.com/china-study/

[cancertutor goes on to talk about cholesterol and taking vitamin D supplements. been meaning to talk with them about that, especially the vitamin D supplements, particularly in high doses, whatever that is, which I have come to believe may be risky since, if not balanced by things such as vitamin K2 ( www.newswithviews.com/Howenstine/james59.htm ) and boron ( educate-yourself.org/cn/boraxconspiracy03jul12.shtml ), could put too much calcium in the arteries (in the form of placque), and decrease the metabolism of oxygen. decrease oxygen to the cells by 30%, and you will get cancer. they are the experts on cancer and not i, but i fear they may not be as aware of this as they should be. so that's my caveat on that part of the cancertutor article.]

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt  posted on  2017-01-08   5:20:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 1.

        There are no replies to Comment # 1.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 1.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]