Back to Current forum index
| Back to Main forum index Back to Current forum index |
| Author | Topic: Blood chemistry test |
| Jean 02-18-2003 01:14 PM | I would like to know the effect of Wai's diet on the blood chemistry. Does anyone under this diet for a few years know his fasting blood sugar level, his cholesterol profile and his triglycerides? My fear is about the huge amount of fructose in this diet. It should have a big influence on the metabolism. Several studies indicate that fructose may responsible for: Insulin resistance Impaired glucose tolerance High insulin levels High triglycerides Hypertension |
| Wai 02-19-2003 03:11 PM | yes, i know someone, i will ask him to post his resultsquote:the fructose perfectly balances with the glucose in this diet. If you think the amount of glucose + fructose is too high, you simply need to increase you fat intake until sufficient... |
| aacesta 02-19-2003 03:50 PM | I've got the details you want, perhaps more than you've asked for: http://geocities.com/aacesta/medical.html Now let me explain the changes from the first to the second exams. First I was on a reasonable vegetarian diet I made up myself for one year. I decided there was something wrong with the first diet, and changed into Wai's diet (eating the fish, and egg yolks, fruits, nuts, etc). After 4 months I repeated the exams, and also sat a fitness test. My cholesterol was perfect after 4 months eating 4 egg yolks a day, and my body fat was of 10.9% if you know what that means for men. I should probably test again, and send my details now (after more than 1 year on Wai's diet). But I see no reason for that as I am perfectly healthy, and don't even get cold/flu like most people do. I can say I eat on Wai's diet for at least 6 days a week. And on the single day I don't eat on the diet, I am very careful with what sort of crap I get from friends or restaurants. If there is someone willing to do some more research on this excellent diet (involving this sort of tests) I am game for it my friend!!! If you want you can also try to follow my Yoga/fitness class with me ;-) |
| Wai 02-19-2003 04:12 PM | Thank you Andre, that was FAST!!! ![[Smile]](../smile.gif) |
| Jean 02-20-2003 03:56 AM | Unfortunately, these are dead links! I have achieved excellent health and blood chemistry (Total cholesterol=1.75, HDL=0.91 fasting glucose = 0.89) with a diet incorporating some of Wai's recomendations. I humbly think that if you're not suffering from acne, there are simpler and healthier diets to follow. Wai, you should take a blood test to see what's going on in your body! |
| Wai 02-20-2003 09:58 AM | Jean, Even on an unhealthy diet you can (temporarily)achieve 'excellent health and blood chemistry' quote:okay, well show us then what exactly would be healthier... i'm sure many are curious now... |
| Jean 02-21-2003 03:13 PM | Based on finger-stick testing I made my own diet. Your diet even when eating a lot of fat was giving unstable results. Glycemia would drop bellow 0.8 if food wasn't taken every 2 hours. By introducing some steam cooked food, I managed to keep my glycemia very stable. Consequently, I have added whole rice and vegetables. I'm also taking a few supplements such as vitamin B12, vitamin D, calcium, omega-3 rich oils. I also noticed that I needed more protein than advised here. I think that the insulin response too your diet is quite high. It seems that insulin response can deffer from the glycemic index according to recent studies. I believe that everybody reacts differently so when I said healthier, I meant helthier for me at least. Besides, it much more convenient since I have only 4 comparable meals a day. I also feel much better. Please have your blood chemistry test done! |
| aacesta 02-21-2003 03:30 PM | Sorry. The links are fixed. You can see medical records now. |
| Jean 02-22-2003 07:46 AM | Yout fasting glycemia is quite low. Your total cholesterol is extremely low too. However, your Total cholesterol/ HDL ratio is far for being optimal. Very similar lipid profile to vegetarian people's. |
| Jean 02-22-2003 08:15 AM | Low iron and low B12 too. More interestingly, your ferritin is normal. It has probably to do with your low B12. Your triglycerides are alarmingly low. 0.4 mmom/l. It can be life threatening in the long run! You have a high monocyte count (outside the range.) It might be due to an infection (bacteria usually.) You have also at risk of neutropenia. Check you neutrophil, it's quite low (outside the range.) Long term neutrophil low count is a major factor of infection. You're my friend according to your analysis a typical vegetarian. You should know that the life expectancy of vegetarian is lower than the general population's (National UK survey.) I'm not saying you should change your diet, I'm simply warning you according to your blood test results. |
| aacesta 02-22-2003 05:13 PM | Yes you are right. The first exams are of a typical vegetarian. You are absolutely right, I was on a vegetarian diet. The second exams are after 4 months on Wai's diet (much better results, but perhaps still with some influence from the previous diet). You can see how iron, etc have increased. The fitness test is after 4 months on Wai's diet. I should give you a full exam after one year on Wai's diet. Just let me know if you really want it, and I'll do it for you. |
| Jean 02-23-2003 12:04 PM | Results are a little better, sure, but the lipid profile remains the same. Your blood count is still abnormal. Will your blood next test show general improvements, we will see? I wonder why your blood pressure is high like that (85 is too high at your age)? Mineral imbalance maybe? You will see yourself if everything is ok after 1 year on wai's diet. Take care. |
| Wai 02-23-2003 02:50 PM | quote:that is the whole point Jean, you NEED to eat more often with this diet... This seems perfectly natural; gathering our foods, we didn't gather it to make a big meal; we ate while we gathered... quote:how exactly does COOKING your food stabilize your blood sugar level? quote:based on what? Actually, a diabetes-1 patient needed 40% less supplementary insulin than on his 'normal SAD diet'... I'm glad you're feeling better. RRM and me do so as well |
| Jean 02-25-2003 09:32 AM | Maybe he would need even less insulin on another diet? |
| Jean 02-25-2003 09:47 AM | Don't you think that a diet that allows us to eat only 4 times a day and succeeds in keeping the glycemia very stable is much more convenient for most people? Besides, considering gently cooked vegetables, meat, fish and whole rice unhealthy and toxic is purely non-scientific. No evidence or experience can support it. Your approach is not scientific even though you're citing a lot of studies. You have obtained very interesting results on a condition that is acne but that's all. Your "theory" about the dammaged proteins by heat is simplistic. If acne sufferer report skin improvement when avoiding some food, it doesn't mean that the excluded food is dangerous to everybody! There are definitely healthier diets and ways of life but I doubt your diet would be the solution for everybody. I think it is very extreme and thus dangerous. . THIS THREAD CONTAINS MORE THAN ONE PAGE >>> |
| Wai 02-27-2003 11:14 AM | quote:if convenience is your priority, you shouldn't do my diet indeed. quote:in your opinion, cooking does not originate any toxins? quote:simplistic but truthfully? or simply untrue? quote:if cooking originates toxins, cooked foods are potentially dangerous to everybody, right or not? quote:WHAT diet exactly is healthier? quote:so, everything that is extreme is dangerous? Thus, extremely healthy is also dangerous? |
| Jean 02-27-2003 03:54 PM | Come on wai, you're using syllogism as scientific proof! I define a healthy diet for people with no particular health problem as follows: 1) quite convenient so that it can be followed easily for a long time without having to cheat all the time 2) does not make the glycemia fluctuate a lot and does not stimulate the insulin a lot, therefore not exposing people to cravings 3) bringing all the nutrients and protective chemicals 4) exposing us to reasonables levels of toxins Gentle low temperature cooking is not the major source of toxins. Toxins are within the food and are produced by our own body. For instance, we produce maillard reaction products within our body (http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-1b.shtml). By eating large amount of brazil nuts, you're loading your body with toxins (too much selenium and too much radium.) Large amounts of pineapple is toxic because of hydroxyptamine presence and so on. Storage is an important source of damage. The body is capable to deal with all these "toxins" provided they remain at reasonable levels. Keeping that level low is probably enough. I asked if anyone could provide blood chemistry results after some time on that diet. The only one who did that showed results that were extremely bad. He had been on a supposedly healthy diet (vegeterian) and was showing signs of serious health problems. He turned to your diet and it didn't seems change the figures a lot. Bring consistent blood chemistry figures and then we can really talk. There's no possible science without proper testing. I think that you've brought very good ideas but they need to be evaluated scientifically. |
| RRM 02-28-2003 07:30 AM | quote:So, because our body produces beta-carbolines, heat originated beta-carbolines are okay? Our body produces oxidants, so exposing our body to external oxidants is okay? quote:So, if you only smoke a few cigarettes a day, this cannot cause lung cancer? Our body is not designed to be able to cope with toxins that are formed during the cooking process, simple because we are not designed to eat cooked foods. quote:Wai doesn't consider that to be a healthy diet at all. You cannot blame Wai's diet for the effects of a vegan diet. quote:Absolutely. I'm sure people will get themselves tested. I will do my best to do so soon. (I've been on the 100% strict diet for about 7 years) Also, I understand that you don't want to be so strict with your diet, but I don't understand why you cannot bear the idea that the 100% strict diet may be healthier than your version of the diet. |
| Jean 02-28-2003 04:41 PM | Are we doing science here or playing on words? A few cigarette is simply too much of a toxin! Probably half a cigarette would be handled pretty well by the body leaving intact the life expectancy. Again, the body can cope with reasonable amount of toxins, and I'm not talking about poisons here, ok (like the cigarettes you're talking about). When you allow yourself with a munch food, you get reasonable amount of toxins for example. Raw meat contains reasonable amount of toxins. Cooking add toxins and destroy some sometimes. I'm very strict on the contrary. My diet is simply different. Also I don't need munch-junk food. I did some finger blood testing to compare mine to Wai's for example. And believe me, I'm not getting much more toxin than you with my extra steamed cooked food. I also think that my supplements can allow me to "beat nature". I'm sorry, I'm not a caveman. We invented the fire long ago and we have increased our life expectancy ever since. We will see who was right in say 50 years. It might be you, it might be me, we really don't know. You know why? Nutrition is not a science! Nutrition is an empirical discipline. There's no way to modelize the human body, it's way too complex. Take care Robot |
| RRM 03-01-2003 12:23 AM | quote:Well : quote: quote:You may want to believe so, but these supplements may do harm to your body. quote:Who's being unscientific now? We also inhale more toxic gasses now, but does that make us live longer? Don't you think the increased life expectancy is due to the fact that we always have sufficient food at our disposal, our health care system and don't having to sleep in caves anymore? quote:But we can very well determine that the less toxins we ingest, the better, I think, don't you? Where are your blood chemistry test results, Jean? RRM |
| engesongwok 03-01-2003 06:17 PM | Jean, You said, "I'm sorry, I'm not a caveman. We invented fire long ago and we have increased our life expectancy ever since." I have heard other people say this on other webpages. I asked for evidence, and a sitation, I have yet to hear one. Why do people say that raw food is unscientific, and then they say such things without anything to back it up? Can you find the source of this idea? Is it possible that there are other factors other than food, which could extend life? I used to take supplements, but I stopped taking them after reading Wai's suggestions. I am not sure that anyone can do better than nature. People have been trying, and all I see is the environment degrading and life getting more stressful. As for average lifespans increasing, I think this is do to infant mortality decreasing. If more people live past childhood, it might appear that people are living longer and better... I must admit that I like indoor heating and plumbing, but I HATE the trade off with pesticides, man made environmental pollutions. If only we could have the best of both worlds. I believe that technology can and should work with the environment and our own nature and not against it. |
| Isis 03-02-2003 09:38 PM | Wow! What an interesting thread! If only everyone was like this... http://www.newtreatments.org/showbloed.php3?persoonid=1 But it's quite fun to discuss science, isn't it? ![[Wink]](../wink.gif) |
| riko 05-11-2003 02:42 PM | quote:Science is too slow. It needs a long time to finally declare something as a fact. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t live top healthy right now. I have some grand grand parents who have lived more that 100 years without any mendicant near them. You can’t detect the true sign from the science, the sign for the healthiest diet. I don’t have nothing in my pockets to fight with your statements for blood chemistry results, but try to infiltrated this information in your “waiting room” in your mind – don’t throw it away. There are many people in my country and everywhere that heals with bioenergy, cosmic energy, universal energy or any given name for God’s energy. They are saying that one should not eat anything that is cooked - the energy is circulating better trough the body this way. Cooked foods makes Cooked body. The energy flows better in body that is “live” not “dead”-cooked. There is some “not proven” info that there are people in Tibet that lives 700-800 years, they are constantly in meditation – but they are eating only raw food. God will not show you the right way trough scientists. It will give you trough those who are closely under him, who are helping to other people. Wai’s, whenever is believing in God or not, she is helping to other people, she is not asking anything for return – recognized as an essential element for highly spiritual development people (souls). One can easily see her as a trusted person. What do you have to offer? It is perfectly all right for you to disagree with her, but it is not very good to take gold from someone and give it back as silver. Try to find some evidence that will prove Wai’s diet as a very healthy. I’ve seen that you have very good in finding proves, use your searching resources for proving and upgrade Wai’s Diet, take her hand for a change. |