No scientific evidence of any benefit. No scientific evidence that the supplemental enzymes do anything. Jon Barron is trying to sell you snake oil. You are still failing to learn the science behind digestion and depending upon false experts to provide your arguments.
No scientific evidence of any benefit. No scientific evidence that the supplemental enzymes do anything.
I'd be interested to know what is incorrect about his description of what happens in the stomach. It seems to go along with what I learned in school. We chew food and it mixes with enzymes in our mouth, to aid digestion. Is this old wives tales they are teaching us in school? What's the story; does stomach acid do it all?
I hear what you are saying, but it is contrary to everything I read, even on LEF.org.
I've read articles in mainstream magazines/newspapers that question the long-term effectiveness of antacid pills. That much is well known. The digestive enzyme part, however, I have no idea about. On a personal level, I tried some disgestive enzymes, just to see, and they didn't seem to produce any difference. However, I will admit that I have a perfectly fine and operable digestive system to begin with.
I'd be interested to know what is incorrect about his discription of what happens in the stomach. It seems to go along with what I learned in school. We chew food and it mixes with enzymes in our mouth, to aid digestion. Is this old wives tales they are teaching us in school? What's the story; does stomach acid do it all?
I hear what you are saying, but it is contray to everything I read, even on LEF.org.
The point of the matter is that there is no BENEFIT to taking suplemental digestive enzymes. The point of the matter is that there is no REASON to do so.
The point of the matter is that perfectly logical arguments built on faulty assumptions are still faulty.
The point of the matter is that there is no evidence that you need extra digestive enzymes. All arguments assume that you do.
The point of the matter is that there is no BENEFIT to taking suplemental digestive enzymes.
The point of the matter is that there is no REASON to do so. . .
So as I understand what you say, we do not need additional digestive enzymes. This does fit with what I've read, that a normal and healthy body can compensate for missing digestive enzymes in cooked food.
Yet this does not seem to be the way nature intended. There is little or no predigestion and it over works the pancreas. When the body is no longer able compensate, we have digestive problems.
The benefit of enzymes, which I take for a cooked meal, is to take the load off our body. When I eat raw food, I skip the additional enzymes.
Now for someone whose digestive system is worn out, it seems that digestive enzymes are essential. The alternative is to treat the symptoms and live with poorly digested food and all the health problems this causes.
So it's a choice. If I'm wrong I'll have spent a little extra money needlessly. If I'm right and do nothing, someday my health will suffer.
So as I understand what you say, we do not need additional digestive enzymes. This does fit with what I've read, that a normal and healthy body can compensate for missing digestive enzymes in cooked food.
Yet this does not seem to be the way nature intended. There is little or no predigestion and it over works the pancreas. When the body is no longer able compensate, we have digestive problems.
The benefit of enzymes, which I take for a cooked meal, is to take the load off our body. When I eat raw food, I skip the additional enzymes.
Now for someone whose digestive system is worn out, it seems that digestive enzymes are essential. The alternative is to treat the symptoms and live with poorly digested food and all the health problems this causes.
So it's a choice. If I'm wrong I'll have spent a little extra money needlessly. If I'm right and do nothing, someday my health will suffer.
The digestive system doesn't wear out. Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system. Nature doesn't intend anything. Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.
Unless the enzymes you are consuming with your food are human enzymes, you have a strong chance of developing allergies against them as their dosages are undoubtedly not understood or well calculated. So not only will you waste money, but you have the possibility of causing disease...
The digestive system doesn't wear out. Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system. Nature doesn't intend anything. Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.
The man has a point. We've been eating cooked foods for arguably longer than we've been drinking cow milk. I have trouble with dairy, but most other white people don't. The adaptation that enables dairy digestion took place over only a short period of time, realistically speaking. It seems pretty sensible to consider that we've adapted to consumption of cooked food.
Besides, the cellulose in vegetables prevents mineral uptake unless it's softened. . . by cooking.
The adaptation that enables dairy digestion took place over only a short period of time, realistically speaking.
For thousands of years man has been consuming dairy products raw. It is only recently that it has been pasteurized, thereby killing all digestive enzymes. There are two issues here:
First, our bodies adapting to milk other than human milk. I have no argument; this does take place.
Second, our bodies "cope" with foods that lack digestive enzymes by first excreting much more stomach acid, and then more pancreatic enzyme, all to help digest food that lacks enzymes. (Read the quote I posted from Jon Barron.)
Quote:
Besides, the cellulose in vegetables prevents mineral uptake unless it's softened. . . by cooking.
Some, not all, vegetables require cooking, but if enough raw food is also consumed, there are enzymes present to help digest it. If the whole meal is cooked, I take an enzyme capsule just before eating.
Lactose intolerance has NOTHING to do with the pasteurization of milk -- Europeans are more likely to be lactose tolerant because they consumed over many generations milk (indicating that lactose is still present in large quantities in non-pasteurized milk and that there is no effective decrease in the concentration of lactose due to cow lactase) versus other populations.
snoopy, you aren't even providing your own rational for things, you are quite literally talking out of someone else's ass. How do you do that?
Would you prefer the word 'malfunction' or 'run down?' Why does TV push so many purple pills? Digestive problems are big business. No, it doesn't happen over night, but years of excess demand on it takes its toll.
Quote:
Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system.
We aren't discussing disease, but poor health due to improper functioning of the digestive track.
Quote:
Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.
But often not living long enough to reap the consequences. Besides, many foods consumed were raw, like the raw milk that I mentioned in my previous post.
Quote:
Unless the enzymes you are consuming with your food are human enzymes, you have a strong chance of developing allergies against them as their dosages are undoubtedly not understood or well calculated.
I guess I'm simply trusting my supplier on that one.
Lactose intolerance has NOTHING to do with the pasteurization of milk . . .
And I never said it did. If you read that post of mine again, you will see I split the issue into two parts. First I said:
"First, our bodies adapting to milk other than human milk. I have no argument; this does take place."
Lactose intolerance means someone's body has not adapted to cows milk. It has nothing to do with the digestive coping that takes place when someone drinks pasteurized milk, lacking enzymes.
Thanks for your explanation however. Yet I would appreciate it if you omitted your rude personal remarks. I'm doing the best I can, even though I fall far short of your expectations.
As far as I'm concerned, I have no problem if you want to continue eating raw foods. I'll stick with cooked most of the time, and I'll let you know when my digestive tract stops functioning perfectly. (And yes, I crap three times a day). Despite my lactose intolerance, I seem to be part of a line that has adapted to eating cooked food.
And I never said it did. If you read that post of mine again, you will see I split the issue into two parts. First I said:
"First, our bodies adapting to milk other than human milk. I have no argument; this does take place."
Lactose intolerance means someone's body has not adapted to cows milk. It has nothing to do with the digestive coping that takes place when someone drinks pasteurized milk, lacking enzymes.
Thanks for your explanation however. Yet I would appreciate it if you omitted your rude personal remarks. I'm doing the best I can, even though I fall far short of your expectations.
I'll stick with cooked most of the time, and I'll let you know when my digestive tract stops functioning perfectly.
That's cool. I really don't know anyone who eats all raw food, and I'm not trying to convert anyone. We must do what suits us best. I just like discussions, and believe nutrition is important.
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, I have no problem if you want to continue eating raw foods.
Thanks. I don't eat that much raw food, but do take enzymes to make up for it at a cooked meal. My wife wouldn't put up with many raw foods, and keeping peace at home is a high priority of mine. When I'm by myself, I consume more raw food.
Comments
No scientific evidence of any benefit. No scientific evidence that the supplemental enzymes do anything.
I'd be interested to know what is incorrect about his description of what happens in the stomach. It seems to go along with what I learned in school. We chew food and it mixes with enzymes in our mouth, to aid digestion. Is this old wives tales they are teaching us in school? What's the story; does stomach acid do it all?
I hear what you are saying, but it is contrary to everything I read, even on LEF.org.
I've read articles in mainstream magazines/newspapers that question the long-term effectiveness of antacid pills. That much is well known. The digestive enzyme part, however, I have no idea about. On a personal level, I tried some disgestive enzymes, just to see, and they didn't seem to produce any difference. However, I will admit that I have a perfectly fine and operable digestive system to begin with.
I'd be interested to know what is incorrect about his discription of what happens in the stomach. It seems to go along with what I learned in school. We chew food and it mixes with enzymes in our mouth, to aid digestion. Is this old wives tales they are teaching us in school? What's the story; does stomach acid do it all?
I hear what you are saying, but it is contray to everything I read, even on LEF.org.
The point of the matter is that there is no BENEFIT to taking suplemental digestive enzymes. The point of the matter is that there is no REASON to do so.
The point of the matter is that perfectly logical arguments built on faulty assumptions are still faulty.
The point of the matter is that there is no evidence that you need extra digestive enzymes. All arguments assume that you do.
The point of the matter is that there is no BENEFIT to taking suplemental digestive enzymes.
The point of the matter is that there is no REASON to do so. . .
So as I understand what you say, we do not need additional digestive enzymes. This does fit with what I've read, that a normal and healthy body can compensate for missing digestive enzymes in cooked food.
Yet this does not seem to be the way nature intended. There is little or no predigestion and it over works the pancreas. When the body is no longer able compensate, we have digestive problems.
The benefit of enzymes, which I take for a cooked meal, is to take the load off our body. When I eat raw food, I skip the additional enzymes.
Now for someone whose digestive system is worn out, it seems that digestive enzymes are essential. The alternative is to treat the symptoms and live with poorly digested food and all the health problems this causes.
So it's a choice. If I'm wrong I'll have spent a little extra money needlessly. If I'm right and do nothing, someday my health will suffer.
Why not just drink vinegar like everyone else.
I do that too, unpasteurized and unfiltered Apple Cider vinegar.
So as I understand what you say, we do not need additional digestive enzymes. This does fit with what I've read, that a normal and healthy body can compensate for missing digestive enzymes in cooked food.
Yet this does not seem to be the way nature intended. There is little or no predigestion and it over works the pancreas. When the body is no longer able compensate, we have digestive problems.
The benefit of enzymes, which I take for a cooked meal, is to take the load off our body. When I eat raw food, I skip the additional enzymes.
Now for someone whose digestive system is worn out, it seems that digestive enzymes are essential. The alternative is to treat the symptoms and live with poorly digested food and all the health problems this causes.
So it's a choice. If I'm wrong I'll have spent a little extra money needlessly. If I'm right and do nothing, someday my health will suffer.
The digestive system doesn't wear out. Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system. Nature doesn't intend anything. Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.
Unless the enzymes you are consuming with your food are human enzymes, you have a strong chance of developing allergies against them as their dosages are undoubtedly not understood or well calculated. So not only will you waste money, but you have the possibility of causing disease...
The digestive system doesn't wear out. Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system. Nature doesn't intend anything. Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.
The man has a point. We've been eating cooked foods for arguably longer than we've been drinking cow milk. I have trouble with dairy, but most other white people don't. The adaptation that enables dairy digestion took place over only a short period of time, realistically speaking. It seems pretty sensible to consider that we've adapted to consumption of cooked food.
Besides, the cellulose in vegetables prevents mineral uptake unless it's softened. . . by cooking.
The adaptation that enables dairy digestion took place over only a short period of time, realistically speaking.
For thousands of years man has been consuming dairy products raw. It is only recently that it has been pasteurized, thereby killing all digestive enzymes. There are two issues here:
First, our bodies adapting to milk other than human milk. I have no argument; this does take place.
Second, our bodies "cope" with foods that lack digestive enzymes by first excreting much more stomach acid, and then more pancreatic enzyme, all to help digest food that lacks enzymes. (Read the quote I posted from Jon Barron.)
Besides, the cellulose in vegetables prevents mineral uptake unless it's softened. . . by cooking.
Some, not all, vegetables require cooking, but if enough raw food is also consumed, there are enzymes present to help digest it. If the whole meal is cooked, I take an enzyme capsule just before eating.
snoopy, you aren't even providing your own rational for things, you are quite literally talking out of someone else's ass. How do you do that?
The digestive system doesn't wear out.
Would you prefer the word 'malfunction' or 'run down?' Why does TV push so many purple pills? Digestive problems are big business. No, it doesn't happen over night, but years of excess demand on it takes its toll.
Disease states aren't caused by wearing out of the digestive system.
We aren't discussing disease, but poor health due to improper functioning of the digestive track.
Human's have been eating cooked foods for, well, ever.
But often not living long enough to reap the consequences. Besides, many foods consumed were raw, like the raw milk that I mentioned in my previous post.
Unless the enzymes you are consuming with your food are human enzymes, you have a strong chance of developing allergies against them as their dosages are undoubtedly not understood or well calculated.
I guess I'm simply trusting my supplier on that one.
Lactose intolerance has NOTHING to do with the pasteurization of milk . . .
And I never said it did. If you read that post of mine again, you will see I split the issue into two parts. First I said:
"First, our bodies adapting to milk other than human milk. I have no argument; this does take place."
Lactose intolerance means someone's body has not adapted to cows milk. It has nothing to do with the digestive coping that takes place when someone drinks pasteurized milk, lacking enzymes.
Thanks for your explanation however. Yet I would appreciate it if you omitted your rude personal remarks. I'm doing the best I can, even though I fall far short of your expectations.
And I never said it did. If you read that post of mine again, you will see I split the issue into two parts. First I said:
"First, our bodies adapting to milk other than human milk. I have no argument; this does take place."
Lactose intolerance means someone's body has not adapted to cows milk. It has nothing to do with the digestive coping that takes place when someone drinks pasteurized milk, lacking enzymes.
Thanks for your explanation however. Yet I would appreciate it if you omitted your rude personal remarks. I'm doing the best I can, even though I fall far short of your expectations.
sorry snoopy...
I want us all to be better.
I'll stick with cooked most of the time, and I'll let you know when my digestive tract stops functioning perfectly.
That's cool.
As far as I'm concerned, I have no problem if you want to continue eating raw foods.
Thanks.
sorry snoopy...
I want us all to be better.
That's okay. Don't let up when I make mistakes.