The Health Mess...age

john8verse32 · 03-23-09 10:38 pm

EGW was right after all!!!! (at least this) meat kills!!!!! quote: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - People who eat the most red meat and the most processed meat have the highest overall risk of death from all causes, including heart disease and cancer, U.S. researchers reported on Monday. The National Cancer Institute study is one of the largest to look at the highly controversial and emotive issue of whether eating meat is indeed bad for health. Rashmi Sinha and colleagues looked at the records of more than 500,000 people aged 50 to 71 who filled out questionnaires on their diet and other health habits. Even when other factors were accounted for -- eating fresh fruits and vegetables, smoking, exercise, obesity -- the heaviest meat-eaters were more likely to die over the next 10 years than the people who ate the least amount of meat. "Red and processed meat intakes were associated with modest increases in total mortality, cancer mortality, and cardiovascular disease mortality," Sinha and colleagues wrote in the Archives of Internal Medicine. They divided the volunteers into five groups, called quintiles. Between 1995 and 2005, 47,976 men and 23,276 women died. The quintile who ate the most red meat had a higher risk for overall death, death from heart disease and cancer than the men and women who ate the least red meat. The researchers said thousands of deaths could be prevented if people simply ate less meat. "For overall mortality, 11 percent of deaths in men and 16 percent of deaths in women could be prevented if people decreased their red meat consumption to the level of intake in the first quintile," Sinha's team wrote. HELPING THE ENVIRONMENT Many studies have shown that people who eat less meat are healthier in many ways, and Sinha's team noted that meat contains several cancer-causing chemicals, as well as the unhealthiest forms of fat. The U.S. government now recommends a "plant-based diet" that stresses fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Barry Popkin, an expert in nutrition and economics at the University of North Carolina, said the study was unusually thorough and careful. Eating less meat has other benefits, he said, and governments should start promoting this. For instance, farming animals for meat causes greenhouse gas emissions that warm the atmosphere and uses fresh water in excess, he said. "I was pretty surprised when I checked back and went through the data on emissions from animal food and livestock," Popkin said in a telephone interview. "I didn't expect it to be more than cars." Cancer experts said the study fit in with what is known from other research. "This large study provides further evidence to support the recommendations by groups such as the World Cancer Research Fund in demonstrating an association between a high consumption of red and processed meats and a increase risk of death from cancer," said Ian Olver, Chief Executive Officer of Cancer Council Australia. The meat industry denounced the study as flawed. But American Meat Institute executive president, James Hodges, said: "Meat products are part of a healthy, balanced diet and studies show they actually provide a sense of satisfaction and fullness that can help with weight control. Proper body weight contributes to good health overall."

john8verse32 · 03-24-09 4:49 pm

more bad news for carnivores: Eating the equivalent of a quarter-pound hamburger a day raised a man's risk of dying of cancer by 22 percent and of heart disease by 27 percent. Women saw the risk leap 20 percent for cancer and 50 percent for heart disease. from <a href="http://news.aol.com/health/article/red-meat-death-risk/393932" target=_top>http://news.aol.com/health/article/red-meat-death-risk/393932</a> the details: The findings appear in Monday's Archives of Internal Medicine. Over 10 years, eating the equivalent of a quarter-pound hamburger daily gave men in the study a 22 percent higher risk of dying of cancer and a 27 percent higher risk of dying of heart disease. That's compared to those who ate the least red meat, just 5 ounces per week. Skip over this content Women who ate large amounts of red meat had a 20 percent higher risk of dying of cancer and a 50 percent higher risk of dying of heart disease than women who ate less. For processed meats, the increased risks for large quantities were slightly lower overall than for red meat. The researchers compared deaths in the people with the highest intakes to deaths in people with the lowest to calculate the increased risk. People whose diets contained more white meat like chicken and fish had lower risks of death. The researchers surveyed more than 545,000 people, ages 50 to 71 years old, on their eating habits, then followed them for 10 years. There were more than 70,000 deaths during that time. Study subjects were recruited from AARP members, a group that's healthier than other similarly aged Americans. That means the findings may not apply to all groups, Sinha said. The study relied on people's memory of what they ate, which can be faulty. In the analysis, the researchers took into account other risk factors such as smoking, family history of cancer and high body mass index. Dangers Of Red Meat WCBS-TV’s Dr. Holly Phillips spoke to Maggie Rodriguez about the grave dangers of eating red meat daily. In an accompanying editorial, Barry Popkin, director of the Interdisciplinary Obesity Center at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, wrote that reducing meat intake would have benefits beyond improved health. Livestock increase greenhouse gas emissions, contributing to global warming, he wrote, and nations should reevaluate farm subsidies that distort prices and encourage meat-based diets. "We've promoted a diet that has added excessively to global warming," Popkin said in an interview. Successfully shifting away from red meat can be as easy as increasing fruits and vegetables in the diet, said Elisabetta Politi of the Duke Diet and Fitness Center in Durham, N.C. "I'm not saying everybody should turn into vegetarians," Politi said. "Meat should be a supporting actor on the plate, not the main character." The National Pork Board and National Cattlemen's Beef Association questioned the findings. Dietitian Ceci Snyder said in a statement for the pork board that the study "attempts to indict all red meat consumption by looking at extremes in meat consumption, as opposed to what most Americans eat." Lean meat as part of a balanced diet can prevent chronic disease, along with exercise and avoiding smoking, said Shalene McNeill, dietitian for the beef group so, sometimes the SPAM depends on your bias!!!!<img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/89/866.jpg" alt="">

elaine · 03-24-09 10:24 pm

Life Extension Research (on Oprah today) showed the very positive aspects of decreased caloric intake to extend one's life. Diets that are very high in fruits, vegetables and nuts, are ideal and can prolong life beyond the normal expectations. Also, new scientific developments growing complete body organs by an animal organ, deprived of its cells, leaving only the structure, can be treated with one's own body cells to grow a replacement organ. This, when perfected, will eliminate the need for other human organ donations and give the donee an organ that is created from his own cells, so there will be no rejection.

john8verse32 · 04-28-09 12:16 pm

Soy...natures gift to Worthington and Loma Linda Foods...potentially helps in taming menopause, BUT...the same hormone generating capacity that benefits women, may diminish the male libido.... so much for those Vega-links!!!! <a href="http://w3.newsmax.com/newsletters/brownstein/soy.cfm?PROMO_CODE=7CB4-1" target=_top>http://w3.newsmax.com/newsletters/brownstein/soy.c fm?PROMO_CODE=7CB4-1</a>

neal · 04-28-09 12:28 pm

I was talking with a relative last evening about the health mess-(age). Thought of something that I wanted to post here: I have told u about the SDA & Catholic hospitals joining together. Well, last week I was driving, listening to KBCO from Boulder. An ad came on. Avista Adventist Hospital (just outside Boulder) is cosponsoring a prize give-away for Mother's Day. Ok, cool I thought. The Grand Prize? A trip for 2 to Sonoma County, California for a WINE TASTING TOUR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Its retarded that they even put 'Adventist' in their hospital names anymore. Pathetic. Just a big non-taxable-profit business with an unfair advantage over the 4 profits. Until next time CHEERIO

john8verse32 · 04-28-09 1:49 pm

but if the WINE TASTING TOUR!!!! includes a breathtaking hike up to PUC for some pine scented alpine air, and some judicious group foot washing on the 13th Sabbath, all their sins might be forgiven!!!

bob_2 · 04-28-09 6:11 pm

Non-profits have excess revenues over expenses called "reserves". Resulting in higher salaries because no investors other than maybe non-profit bond holders to answer to. For profits, pay taxes that benefit the local and federal community and attempt to make a legitimate profit for their investors. Both sanctioned by the US Government, eh John and Neal.

neal · 04-29-09 12:15 pm

Non-profits have excess revenues over expenses called "reserves". False. The 'profit' is called their 'margin'. Retained 'margin' is called reserves (retained earnings to a taxable profit company).

john8verse32 · 04-30-09 11:19 am

Ellen...wrong again??!!!!!! or did she just substitute "vineagre" .... (aged wine, in French...comes from fermented apples in New England) ScienceDaily (Apr. 30, 2009) — Drinking up to half a glass of wine a day may boost life expectancy by five years—at least in men, suggests research published ahead of print in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. Drinking wine was strongly associated with a lower risk of dying from coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, and death from all causes. These results held true, irrespective of socioeconomic status, dietary and other lifestyle habits, factors long thought to influence the association between wine drinking and better health. more links here <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090429205609.htm" target=_top>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090429205609.htm</a>: Hey!!! Lets drink to this!!! <img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/89/1162.gif" alt=""> check these links out, guys!!! Red Wine Protects The Prostate, Research Suggests (May 26, 2007) — Researchers have found that men who drink an average of four to seven glasses of red wine per week are only 52% as likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer as those who do not drink red wine. In ... > read more Red Wine May Lower Lung Cancer Risk (Oct. 7, 2008) — Moderate consumption of red wine may decrease the risk of lung cancer in men. The most substantial risk reduction was among smokers who drank one to two glasses of red wine per day. The researchers ... > read more

bob_2 · 04-30-09 4:48 pm

Do you have someone arguing with you about wine as being sinful John??? Not here, only when done to excess, temperance in all matters.

john8verse32 · 05-01-09 12:13 pm

ya!! EGW...and everybody who believed her messages to literally be inspired by (if not directly received from) God.... In 1894, Ellen White wrote to a non-Adventist active in the temperance cause in Australia who had asked about the Adventist position on being “total abstainers”: “I am happy to assure you that as a denomination we are in the fullest sense total abstainers from the use of spirituous liquors, wine, beer, [fermented] cider, and also tobacco and all other narcotics. . . . All are vegetarians, many abstaining from the use of flesh food, while others use it in only the most moderate degree.”54 <a href="http://www.whiteestate.org/books/mol/chapt27.html" target=_top>http://www.whiteestate.org/books/mol/chapt27.html</a>

bob_2 · 05-01-09 11:03 pm

Temperance is not abstaince, is it. Is EGW relevant to you. Doubt it with other arguments and positions you take.

john8verse32 · 05-01-09 11:15 pm

read it again, and accept her words as she wrote them instead of interpolating what you want to hear: “I am happy to assure you that as a denomination we are in the fullest sense total abstainers...EGW not temperance, but total abstention.... and yes... EGW is relevant to me today, because she and her claims controlled the first half of my life.... directly thru her books or indirectly thru all the people around me who followed her dictums and expected me to do the same..... man o man would it be nice to get some of those years back.......

bob_2 · 05-02-09 12:51 am

Look John, do you accept everything every SDA denominational theologian says because he says it, or EGW in like manner. If it isn't logical or doesn't make sense, why is it relevant to you???

bob_2 · 05-02-09 9:29 am

Besides, sort of uncompassionate, un-Carnegie like, eh, picking on a defenseless, dead woman. Stick to defending our live "prophetess" Elaine, eh???<img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/rofl.gif" border=0> (Message edited by Bob_2 on May 02, 2009)

neal · 05-02-09 10:51 am

If it isn't logical or doesn't make sense, why is it relevant to you??? Duh! Add barbaric, ignorant, false on the evidence, racist, homophobic, sexist, cruel, and impossible to your "isn't logical or doesn't make sense}" and you would START to get the reasons to explain my conclusion ABOUT THE BIBLE- its irrelevant, backwards, and is for the infants of our civilization.

bob_2 · 05-02-09 1:30 pm

In honor of John's capitalizaton problem: ttthtfal

john8verse32 · 05-02-09 1:40 pm

do you accept everything every SDA denominational theologian says because he says it, or EGW in like manner. as an impressionable child, I did accept what people told me. I feared being thrown into the den of lions, or the eternal lake-o-fire... of having mountains fall on me in the last daze... all threats which were used to force me to believe..or else.... If it isn't logical or doesn't make sense, why is it relevant to you??? after having studied science, history, archeology, a bit of philosophy, I now know that much (if not most) of what I was once told as truth no longer is. what remains are three issues: 1) what and how we can "replace" the old good news with something which will still make us good people, as well as provide meaning (and maybe hope) to those who need it.... and 2) liberate people from the terrors of ancient beliefs as punishment for not genuflecting to a certain tribe's god in a certain way, and allow people to grow and succeed as humans in a humanist world... where people respect each other as humans, and not as heretics to be shunned, beheaded, or burned at the stake. and 3) the quest for knowledge.... it would be nice, before He lovingly kills us in his torturing lake-o-fire if God would show us what it was He meant in the first place!!! <img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/messages/89/1179.jpg" alt="">

renie · 05-02-09 5:41 pm

I wish the church would let Ellen die. Every sabbath school lesson has tons of quotes by Ellen. Every Review has an article written by her. Do they ever use any modern authors' quotes? No. I AM glad we don't have a modern day prophet, though. That's a chilling thought. renie

bob_2 · 05-02-09 7:05 pm

John, sorry buddy, you look to be at square one. You know where the answers are but, dang, you're sure fighting it!!!<img src="http://www.atomorrow.net/discus/clipart/uhoh.gif" border=0>

elaine · 05-02-09 8:14 pm

Renie, there must be a deathly fear in Silver Springs that the young of the church are going to "forget" their prophet, so they constantly and consistently remind us. Please, let her R.I.P.

bob_2 · 05-03-09 12:23 am

I certainly consider her irrelevant and have stated so. Solo Scriptura.

elaine · 05-03-09 7:50 pm

She's exhumed every Sabbath somewhere.

bob_2 · 05-03-09 10:25 pm

And you care??? If you did, you would quit attending the Fresno SDA Church, wouldn't you???

don · 05-04-09 2:23 am

I wish the church would let Ellen die. I think it is far more important to address the ideas promoted than to fuss about how much attention a dead woman gets. .

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#1 03-23-09 10:38 pm

The Health Mess...age

#2 03-24-09 4:49 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#3 03-24-09 10:24 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#4 04-28-09 12:16 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#5 04-28-09 12:28 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#6 04-28-09 1:49 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#7 04-28-09 6:11 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#8 04-29-09 12:15 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#9 04-30-09 11:19 am

Re: The Health Mess...age

#10 04-30-09 4:48 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#11 05-01-09 12:13 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#12 05-01-09 11:03 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#13 05-01-09 11:15 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#14 05-02-09 12:51 am

Re: The Health Mess...age

#15 05-02-09 9:29 am

Re: The Health Mess...age

#16 05-02-09 10:51 am

Re: The Health Mess...age

#17 05-02-09 1:30 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#18 05-02-09 1:40 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#19 05-02-09 5:41 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#20 05-02-09 7:05 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#21 05-02-09 8:14 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#22 05-03-09 12:23 am

Re: The Health Mess...age

#23 05-03-09 7:50 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#24 05-03-09 10:25 pm

Re: The Health Mess...age

#25 05-04-09 2:23 am

Re: The Health Mess...age

Board footer