chronic conditions Articles

Fiber alone is the wrong answer for intestinal health. With all the information out there, it is still not easy to find the truth. We know that the Eskimos had good health on a low to no fiber diet. There have never been so many intestinal problems than here in the high fiber touting U.S.A.

DIETARY FIBER

Most doctors, nutritionist, and food manufactures recommend a high fiber diet. Dietary fiber is considered not only good, but necessary. Fiber is in many whole foods. The American assumption is if this is true, than let us manufacture more.

This recommendation is based on the assumptions of Dr. Dennis Burkitt, a British surgeon working in Africa a half century ago. It was his theory that the barley bread eaten by his African patients was what made their digestion system work so well. The Englishmen living in Africa and England lived on a diet of refined food.

INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE

The real difference was in the diet. Inflammatory bowel disease wasn’t a fiber shortage, but a lack of good fats and whole foods.

The English ate large quantities of sugar. The Africans ate none.

The English ate large quantities of flour. The Africans ate none.

The English ate large quantities of breakfast cereals made from grain. The Africans ate none.

The English ate large quantities of potatoes. The Africans ate none.

The English ate salt cured meat when meat was eaten. The Africans ate no cured meats.

The English ate very little fresh meat or raw meat. The Africans ate a generous supply of both.

The English were most likely to be protein deficient. The Africans had a generous supply of protein from meat.

The English diet was deficient in omega-3 fatty acids. The Africans had omega-3 fatty acids in the fresh meat.

The English diet of processed food was deficient in vitamins and minerals. The Africans had an abundance supply.

The English diet caused tooth and gum problems.

The English drank large quantities of sugar sweetened soft drinks. The Africans drank none.

The English ate a significant amount of honey. The Africans ate none.

The English ate molasses and maple syrup. The Africans ate none.

The English ate a significant amount of canned fruit. The Africans ate very little fresh fruit and none canned.

LOW-CARB DIET

Dr. Burkitt’s assumption that the fiber made the African’s so healthy. The real reason for their good health was from the benefits of eating a relative low-carbohydrate diet, which consisted of fresh meats, animal fats and some vegetables. The barley bread was a relatively small part of their diet.

They were not vegetarians; their diet had a large quantity of meat. They raised domestic cattle, sheep, and goats, while hunting and eating wild animals. The diet was high in protein and fat.

ESKIMOS

The Eskimos had good intestinal health with a diet of primary animal protein and fat. The Arctic Eskimos ate an all meat diet with almost zero fiber. They had very healthy digestive systems, and were without cancer of any kind in the entire population. The digestive health of the Eskimos was much better than that of Dr. Burkitt’s African patients who ate the higher fiber barley bread diet. Eskimo is an American Indian word which translates to “eaters of raw meat.”

MASAI TRIBE

Dr. Weston A. Price visited the Masai tribe in 1935, and noted that they had excellent health. They herded cattle, and ate little to no fiber.

LOW-FAT DIET

Between the high carbohydrates, low-fat, high fiber diet that is recommended we still are not healthy. It must be the opposite low carbohydrates, high good fats, and hold the industrial type fiber. Manufacturers of high fiber cereal, and potent fiber over the counter laxative type products, don’t get it. Everything is in a whole food diet, which includes plenty of Omega 3 fatty acids, brings good intestinal health.

CONCLUSION

Fiber is known to make inflammatory bowel diseases worst. It actually encourages pathogenic bacteria and produces bowel diseases. Many times fiber expands and gets impacted in the intestines.

Fiber fermentation inside the intestines produces gases. The acidity from the fermentation causes intestinal inflammation. Avoiding dietary fiber isn’t easy. It is hidden behind names like cellulose, pectin, guar gum, cellulose gum, Carrageen, agar-agar, frutooligoaccharides, psyllium, and others.

These are factory-made ingredients. The sources for them are wood-pulp, cotton, husks, seeds, tubers, and other plants that may not be for human consumption unless they are processed. These add texture and volume to our faux foods. If you need these items for fiber, your diet consists of pre-packaged manufactured foods.

The human mouth is not meant to grind indigestible fibers. That is why fiber is milled or ground first so it will require little or no chewing. Manufactured fiber is not fit for human consumption.

Cholesterol is not an accurate predictor of heart attacks. That unhappy outcome is from a poor lifestyle, and related to the amount of processed food. Just because you have a presumably higher overall reading doesn’t mean you should go on a low-fat kick.

HEARTBREAKING

Your heart is a workhorse, when given the proper nutrition. While the doctors are on patrol to see if your cholesterol is too high, they ignore the true cause of heart disease, nutritional deficiencies. It is heartbreaking in the literal, as well as figural, the miscalculations made on the part of the medical community.

The cholesterol lowing drugs cause nutrient deficiencies. The common assumption is that high cholesterol will cause clogged arteries.

INFLAMMATION 

The studies to pay attention to are the ones that show atherosclerosis is the response to injury. The body uses cholesterol to respond to injury of the cells lining the inside of the arteries. Vascular injury can occur from mechanical stress, tobacco fumes, metabolic consequences of diabetes, deficiencies of vitamins A and D, consumption of trans fatty acids, and microorganisms.

Sounds to me like a lifestyle problem. Omega 6s in our diet causes inflammation. Since this is in most processed food we know the solution, and it isn’t in a pill.

DIET AND EXERCISE

When diet and exercise doesn’t help who do we call, the doctor of course. What is wrong with this picture is that there isn’t a single culture that eats their natural diet that doesn’t find diet and exercise enough.

From the early Eskimos who ate a diet of whale blubber and other good fats to the native America’s who hunted on the Great Plains cholesterol wasn’t problematic.

Now, when they followed the path of civilization they now have to call the doctor.

HOW LOW

Physicians are so engaged in driving cholesterol to new lows, they never look at is the primary goal of health, which is to have individuals function at the best level possible.

As a result of cholesterol lowing medicine the persons has a higher risk of harm. The irony is that the hypothesis that cholesterol is harmful at a certain number is not only unproven, but false.

MYTH

One reason for the high cholesterol myth was the observation; mortality rates for heart attacks dropped in areas with a low food supply in World War ll. This phenomenon was noticed by Dr. Ansel Keys in the 1950”s.

Dr. Keys’ findings were eagerly endorsed by “cholesterol is harmful” advocates, but he himself did not state that cholesterol was the direct cause of heart disease or atherosclerosis. He pointed out that just because cholesterol is present in arterial plaque does not mean that cholesterol is the cause of arterial plaque.

What is wrong with the conclusions, most of the people were following an American diet that had sugar, and refined flour. They were on an inflammatory diet, which produces inflammation. Calorie restrictive diets are known to be anti-inflammatory.

Again wrong assumptions based on the wrong hypothesis. That is the Achilles heel of modern medicine.

DANGEROUS SCIENCE

The fist drug approved for the lowering of cholesterol appeared in 1967 called Atromid-S and was withdrawn from the market in 2000. The drug didn’t prove to lower mortality. However, it was found to increase the incidence of gallstones, cancer, liver disease, and inflammation of the pancreas producing pancreatitis.

The side effects included nausea, diarrhea, loss of sexual performance, weakness, abdominal pain, muscle pain and other discomforts. The newer drugs available for this bring some of the same risks and side effects. This is dangerous science.

CONSIDERATIONS

The biggest consideration is that most cardiovascular disease is seen in people over 60. Fact, higher cholesterol in the elderly is protective. Seniors with higher cholesterol levels tend to live longer than their peers with low cholesterol.

The two reasons for this, first cholesterol is protective, and second those with lower levels are on the dangerous medications. 

First and foremost take the prudent path with a healthy and active lifestyle.

Researches have found a pancreatic cancer soda connection. There is a new study that found consuming two or more soft drinks (soda) a week, had about a two-fold higher risk of developing pancreatic cancer. All it took was two plus soft drinks in a week’s time. Will many people consuming two plus soft drinks a day, health care will have a run for their money.

Study

This study was published in the February issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

Senior author Dr. Mark Pereira, associate professor at the School of Public Health at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis and colleagues, followed over 60,000 Singapore-based men and women for over a decade. They found that the people who consumed two or more soft drinks developed pancreatic cancer at two times more that those who did not consume soft drinks.

“Singapore is a wealthy country with excellent health care. Favorite pastimes are eating and shopping, so the findings should apply to other western countries.” stated Dr. Pereira.

What is intriguing is that after adjusting for other lifestyle factors, it was found that people who drank two or more soft drinks a week (average of 5 per week) had a higher chance of developing this disease.

There was no risk associated with the consumption of fruit juice.

Reality Check

Anyone drinking 5 sodas a week is not practicing good health habits in other areas. Carbonation along with sugar is a deadly combination. Both independent of each other cause problems.

The carbonation in soft drinks deplete calcium and causes a nutritional deficiency in that mineral. Carbonation irritates the stomach. The cure for the irritation is to find an antacid, and that is the calcium in the body. It takes it from where it can get it, from places in the body that depend on it. That is one reason osteoporosis is on the rise.

Soft drinks contain phosophoric acid, and this causes other problems related to calcium loss

The sugar in soft drinks is dissolved in liquid, and it quickly makes its presence known. The pancreas goes into overdrive. Now the pancreas pumps out plenty of insulin.

Interesting Facts

Teenagers and children are the largest consumers of soda pop. Studies have shown that teenage boys can drink three plus cans per day and girls can drink at least two cans per day.

Soda comes in an aluminum can, and aluminum is able to bind with both calcium and phosphoric acid and is excreted through the urine.

Calcium can improve signaling within cells and cause cancer cells to differentiate and/or die. What that is saying it can cause them to revert to healthy cells.

Sugar or glucose is the food of cancer cells.

Analysis

All the real time studies by credible scientist and validated data will not change anything. The soft drink industry’s public relation campaigns and targeted ads will keep the soft drink bubble going.