What is the BEST food to eat???
 

Avoiding EL MORTE....


Take notes.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30gEiweaAVQ

Well a can of sardines every other day for lunch and a bowl of blueberries and milk every morning cant hurt i guess. great deal on blueberries most people dont know is they sell frozen bags of them about 4 pounds for 12 $ here pretty cheap and probably better than the fresh ones . since they are frozen right away after picking.

https://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2012...ey=blueberries

I take a blueberry/pomegranate extract...can get 1 lb frozen blueberries for `$3.

Might do some research on the effect of combining milk and phyto-foods and/or extracts? I think something in the milk tends to bind up the good stuff in plant foods....not sure.

I used to like sardines...after getting used to them...then for some reason I didn't. Just eating canned salmon now.

EAGERLY awaiting the new FrankenSalmon though! :thumbup:

Very good video :thumbup: thanks for the post! Entertaining and informative. blew my whole shopping list out the window though. I thought I was doing so good limiting my red meat and sticking to fish and chicken. My 2 best foods I eat are Kale and Chia seeds. Chia seeds are like my cocaine! When work is really busy I can go nonstop with a few hits of the Chia :D Kale is like my Franks red hot... I put that $&*@ in everything!

I mostly eat energy bars. In fact I can run 26 miles on 3 bars.

That works out to 8.6 miles per energy bar. Maybe the FDA can mandate bars that will get 10 miles per bar, because in the 21st century it is all about energy bar economy ; )

Ironic that in the USA we import Asian cars, and export the western Diet. I think the USA is getting the better deal in that trade.

I gave up completely on poultry except for a few eggs. Check the videos for why. Trying to limit meat protein and keep it varied.

Now growing some kale.

The first few minutes speaks volumes....I subscribed to these videos...need to be informed on a daily basis to make any lasting changes....

Check out.....????

Doping With Beet Juice | NutritionFacts.org

I like meat, but also enjoy some poultry and fish. As I lived in Amazon for 5 years, and 12 years in the Brazilian shore, I'm very used to fish. Also, by the way, fish is the most efficient in an organic matter-to-protein conversion ratio comparing to cattle and poultry.

I like meat too...but it's not healthy? STRANGE but not unexpected...the two meats that are supposed to be healthy are not...poultry and fish.....

Assuming women and men are not separate species.....:D

What Women Should Eat to Live Longer | NutritionFacts.org


Info on meat...

Harvard's Meat and Mortality Studies | NutritionFacts.org

I believe that meat is not so much the problem, more the way we get our meat. I would be willing to bet that meat that is not commercially produced would not suffer from the same bacterial infections. If meat was fresh or preserved immediately it would be a different story. I cant bring myself to believe that meat is altogether bad ;) There must be a flaw in our processing procedures.

Non CAFO raised meat is better by far....but I'd guess that too much meat is still unhealthy.

Chicken Dioxins, Viruses, or Antibiotics? | NutritionFacts.org


WHY to avoid poultry?

EPIC Findings on Lymphoma | NutritionFacts.org

I've stopped eating chicken and turkey. Even farm raised chickens likely get fed GMO corn?


Veggies vs omnivores....

Vegetarians Versus Healthy Omnivores | NutritionFacts.org

Ever since I can remember, as a young kid, there have been dire health warnings about this & that. The one about smoking is true, for sure, but all the rest - I dunno.

My parents are health nuts and have followed all these healthy eating plans since I can remember. My dad's 89 and looks and acts like any other 89 year-old. Yet, somehow, even with all these horrible poisonous foods "big business" is shoving down our throats (no pun intended), while government "looks the other way", life expectancey continues to rise, year afer year, decade after decade.

I was going to suggest a lot of this stuff might be "unicorn corral" material, but I guess it's more the opposite - - - "little boy who cried wolf" corral, or something....

All that "don't eat this/don't eat that" deal would drive me crazy if I cared about it. I won't get rid of meat (including white meats from poultry and fish) just because a tree-hugger told me to do so.

In this world..."you makes yer choices and you takes yer chances"? :cool:

I've eaten rather poorly at times in my life....mostly rice and canned soups or similar....other times mostly hamburgers.

Since I have gone about working to improve my diet I noticed that though people won't really admit it....most people are SERIOUSLY hung up on the foods they eat...REAL close to politics and religion in prejudicial value?

To find this out...you should suggest that they change.....:D

I don't expect myself to eat perfectly...I just expect to try and move in the right direction....

I notice that when I eat mostly salads and soups with lots of vegs...I feel better....just keep me away from pumpkin pies, corn chips, and ice cream though....and my mother's banana bread.:D

This thread was just something I'm interested in...DO AS YOU WILL.

Life expectancy may be rising thanks to the drug companies oops... I mean thanks FROM the drug companies. With the way a lot of people eat, All they are is walking paycheck to the drug makers for the last half of their lives. Longer life is not my goal in trying to eat healthful, just better quality of life for longer. Senior suicide is on the rise with life expectancy... people may be living longer but many are wishing they weren't.

couldn't agree more! Most people are much more willing to listen to religion and political rants then hearing that what they are eating is not good for them... it really takes feeling the difference in your own mind and body to realize. The only thing I have found will offend quicker is talking about circumcision :eek:

Related to the food issue is the idea in the US of raising the eligibility age for SS and Medicare. Some keep talking about people living longer and lots of bullpucky as to how 65 is the new 50 or whatever.

Seems they keep forgetting about the increasing obesity...diabetes...blood pressure...etc rates in the US. In my immediate experience...a lot of boomers will be lucky to make 70...let alone early 80s.

The downlow on SS and Medicare?

The Great Social Security Robbery

The leaders of both major parties, Congress, the White House, the editorial writers, journalists of all the principle newspapers and most academic economists claim that Social Security and Medicare need to be ‘reformed’ in order to reduce the “unsustainable” fiscal deficit and avoid the bankruptcy of these social programs. An important aspect of this elite propaganda campaign is the perverse manipulation of the nature of those two programs. They are dubbed “entitlement programs”, implying some sort of government handout or individual privilege. In fact social security is a form of social insurance paid for through payroll tax deductions throughout the working life of the contributors, which usually approximates a half-century.

The “entitlement” rhetoric claims that the lifetime contributions are insufficient and that several regressive ‘reforms’ are necessary to “save the systems” – at the expense of the beneficiaries. The so-called “Grand Compromise” proposed by President Obama and the “Fiscal Reforms” proposed by the Congressional Republicans are all aimed at robbing working class contributors of their pension savings through various specific regressive changes.

The “Grand Compromise” as Legalized Theft

For decades only a small fraction of Social Security contributions are used to pay recipients, the bulk is transferred into the general treasury to pay for current expenditures – mostly hundreds of billions of dollars in war spending, payments on bonds and T-notes; subsidies to agro-business, bailouts to Wall Street speculative investment banks and other elite economic interests. Over the decades the Treasury robbed several trillions in SS funds, exchanging them for IOUs (never reimbursed) in order to provide a kind of “social insurance” for the military-industrial-Wall Street-police state power elite. If the accumulated payments to SS had remained in a special account instead of being siphoned off to cover the deficits incurred by military spending and overseas wars, SS finance would be in sound condition at least till the end of the 21st century. The Social Security Administration (SSA) would be able to adjust payments upward to real rates of inflation (about double the rate of adjustment now jiggered by the Government). The SSA could begin full payments at age 62 for most and at a lower age for those citizens working in hazardous occupations.

Even if we take account of the past Treasury heist, the SS fund could be fully replenished if the cap was eliminated on incomes above $110,000 and if the SS tax was made progressive. As is well known, self-employed billionaires and millionaires pay an average of $11,450 a year to the SS fund. If the cap was lifted, those earning a billion would pay a minimum of $100 million a year at the current rate, the millionaires $100 thousand a year. If a moderately progressive rate was in place, payments would double, pretty much ending the threat to SS.

There is no “entitlement crises” today. There is a crisis in the regressive payments and tax systems which finance the social insurance programs. The problem is elite tax evasion not the ‘aging of the population’. The problem is the use of SS payments to fund the power elite-robbing Peter (SS) to pay Paul (imperial wars).

...

Like taking candy from a baby? :cool:

...

Wife and I went vegan a year ago, except for a bit of fish 1-2 times a week.

Plus, no more sugar, no coffee or decaf (ok, about once every other month on average), no sodas or other chemical-laced "foods".

Can't we have just ONE thread from SN961 WITHOUT political rhetoric? This thread was going pretty well before that.

I'm not vegan, though I eat a lot of veggies and have friends who are. Personally, the keyword is moderation and variety. We can't go veggie now, not with two growing kids in the house, and the poor availability of the variety of veggie protein needed to support growing kids locally, but I expect eventually we'll go pescatarian, again. I lived that way for several years.

I have been a vegetarian for over 25 years bordering on vegan most of the time but will eat the odd egg and a bit of cheese so I don't become a complete bore when in the company of others. It takes about 40 years to change, in 1960 if you would have suggested that someone butt out because you didn't want to get cancer from second hand smoke you would have been met with ridicule. If you were told not to smoke in front of your kids as it was harmful most smokers would have said everything is harmful as long as it is in moderation she;ll be right, I got my window down and I blow the smoke out.
I bet In less then 40 years, Milk and meat marketing board members if they are still alive will be drawn in front of judges to answer law suits for misleading the public and spreading propaganda even though they knew about the science that existed 40 years back, which is today. It is all out there if you look for it, never been easier to find. Everyone dances around this, as there is too much to loose, the truth is, ready or not, if you are eating or feeding your kids meat, fish, poultry and dairy you are doing yourself and them a disservice and by the way I just read somewhere that life expentancy actually declined the last few years in america for the first time in a while. I am not arguing but the science is done the hard part is changing, this will take several generations one day we will be smoke free too but not today,:)

Politics is where the rubber meets the road? I know you seem to like to talk about things in some kind of scientific vacuum.....:confused:

Especially with food...you have to actually make changes.....if you have the leeway to make changes.....

Ban GMOs?
 

GMOs: The ultimate solution


Monsanto claims that GMOs are safe. This was the same comment made by the tobacco companies back in the 40s and early 50s regarding cigarette smoking.

Now we know without a doubt that smoking and lung and throat cancer are kissing cousins. Because GMOs have been around for 15 years or so, with no long-term studies other than Monsanto's being done, we only have Monsanto's word that GMOs are safe.

Fortunately, there have been studies done by Michael Antoniou of Earth Open Source and Dr. Giles-Eric Seralini of the University of Caan in France that say otherwise.

What Antoniou and Seralini have found is that GMOs, which are inundated with pesticides like RoundUp Ready containing glyphosate and 2-4-D, the active ingredient in Agent Orange, create numerous health problems, including birth defects, cancer, neurological imbalances, embryonic deaths, DNA damage, and fetal death. It's not rocket science to understand that when you eat a steady diet of these horrible chemicals, you will suffer disastrous health ramifications despite the fact that the GMO crops are designed to resist the heavy poisoning of the pesticides and herbicides.

So, where does the corruption tie in? Obviously with the politicians.
...

So niky....put on your school sweater with the big M on it and tell us it ain't so.....?

I'm on the seefood diet. :thumbup:

You see food and eat it? I am on that one too, I have just redefined what I consider "food"

Science doesn't exist in a vacuum. But a factual discussion should exist separate of politics.

Like the way you post stories in a way that paints anything "GMO" bad, as if it were a universal truth.

When the truth is: Crops modified or bred to be resistant to pesticides expose us to more pesticides, which may or may not be bad in varying degrees depending on the food crop and level of exposure.

Going "organic" is a good idea, depending on what food you're switching on, and how much of the pesticide goes into the food, and how bad that pesticide is.

"Genetic Modification" isn't frankenscience. It's simply an extension of the same techniques we've been using for centuries to grow hardier, higher-yielding crops. Just faster. And it has the same pitfalls... namely the higher exposure to pesticides, the lower nutritional yield of over-bred crops, and the increasing overuse of land. But to present this as a new thing and the simple removal of "GMOs" from the food supply as the answer oversimplifies the problem and draws attention away from the real issue: We're eating too much low-nutrition mass-produced garbage.

.

When ya'll have a little time, watch this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=wnlTYFKBg18

Then, do a little research on your own...

>

Aren't fava beans and chickpeas available there? Those are a good source of vegetable protein, alongside soybeans. But I wouldn't really incentive you to go vegan or enforce your kids to do so.

About the "pescatarian" deal: maybe I could eventually do so, I see no problem doing that. Kidney beans are a good source of iron, so maybe the absence of red meat wouldn't bother me so much.

there is a lot BS out there about protein...one interesting stat, from what I have read and have come to understand that there apparently has never been a case of protein deficiency unless you happen to be starving. I am not sure who started that rumour but I suspect the milk or meat marketing boards had something to do with it.who knows??:confused:

It seems to be all matter of how efficient is the organic matter-to-protein conversion ratio.

As far as I know...the difference between hybridization and genetic modification is that hybrids are developed by cross-breeding the plants themselves....whereas.....genetic mods involve inserting foreign genes from other organisms at the cellular (genetic) level...sometimes these other organisms are bacterial (or other animal) in origin for use in plants. For the FrankenSalmon I guess it's animal to animal.

The people pushing the ...low-nutrition mass-produced garbage...are the same ones pushing GMOs...but are not the only ones.

You are afraid that GMOs might get a bad name....IMO they deserve a bad name because they have been pushed on people with no serious underlying research on safety. What INDEPENDENT research that has been done doesn't make them look so good.

The OBVIOUS political dealing to push GM foods isn't real comforting either.

If I choose to reduce my consumption of possible GM foods I now need to avoid most processed foods (good idea anyway)...and look at the numbers on the labels on produce.

As an example....I like to use tomato juice/sauce in my "cooking"....so what are my choices? Tomato juice in a large tin can...a no-no due to the acid food leaching out the BPA that coating the can to reduce leaching of cadmium...etc. I go to spagetti sauces.....all have sugar...most have cottonseed/canola/say/corn GMO over refined oils....most are over salted....though this is packaged in glass.

Politics IS a part of any factual discussion. ALL IS INTERCONNECTED. PERIOD. :thumbup:

Very good.

Niky needs to watch this....lots of science...even some politics...and some profits. Wear your big M sweater?

The dude in the WH also needs to see this.......what a fool.....it will be very interesting when a POTUS is found to be promoting and supporting something even worse than the tobacco mess. It won't go away Barack....deal with it..... Then you can be buddies with GWB...needless wars/food supply degraded....2 peas in a pod? :cool:

Meanwhile...I'm serious about avoiding this sh*t.

I use fresh tomatoes. Don't bother with the processed stuff.

Despite what the anti-GMO radicals want you to believe, there is a lot of research, independent and otherwise, done on GMOs.

A gene is a gene. What matters is what that gene does, and the chemical make-up of the resulting product.

Remember I spoke about poisoned cows in the other thread? poisoned by hybrid, non-GMO grass. A lot of food plants already contain a lot of poisonous chemicals. We have people dying from casava poisoning here om a fairly regular basis. Cross-breeding these plants may lead to enhancing this. Direct genetic modification allows you to take what you want from one breed and discard all the negatives.

Not all GM is done cross-species. In fact, that's harder than simply splicing genes from the same species.

So how about a bite of something to stay well?
Superfoods That Fight Colds | Yahoo! Health

If your only answer to counter-arguments is to scream "bias", then your arguments aren't very good to begin with.

I'm perfectly happy to have a civil debate with you, and I actually agree about the eating of meat and the value of certain organic crops, which is the only reason I've bothered actually responding to this thread.

But apparently you would rather sling mud every which way and see what sticks, hmm? Ever wonder why you're the only active person on this board with closed threads?

I don't see any closed threads.

And then...continual arguments aren't really healthy.

I'm really interested in making real changes in my diet...not arguments.

You seem to like discussing the science in a vacuum.....


These people are all about protecting scientific integrity...

Scientific Integrity: Let Science Do Its Job | Union of Concerned Scientists


They are not exactly fans of GM crops...

Genetic Engineering in Agriculture | Union of Concerned Scientists

Does UCS Have a Position On GE?

Yes. We see that the technology has potential benefits, but we are critics of its commercial application and regulation to date. GE has proved valuable in some areas (as in the contained use of engineered bacteria in pharmaceutical development), and some GE applications could turn out to play a useful role in food production.

However, its applications in agriculture so far have fallen short of expectations, and in some cases have caused serious problems. Rather than supporting a more sustainable agriculture and food system with broad societal benefits, the technology has been employed in ways that reinforce problematic industrial approaches to agriculture. Policy decisions about the use of GE have too often been driven by biotech industry PR campaigns, rather than by what science tells us about the most cost-effective ways to produce abundant food and preserve the health of our farmland.

These are a few things policy makers should do to best serve the public interest:

Expand research funding for public crop breeding programs, so that a broad range of non-GE as well as GE crop varieties will remain available.

Expand public research funding and incentives to further develop and adopt agroecologically based farming systems.

Take steps—such as changes in patent law—to facilitate independent scientific research on GE risks and benefits.

Take a more rigorous, conservative approach to GE product approvals, so that products do not come to market until their risks and benefits are well understood.

Support food labeling laws that require foods containing GE crops to be clearly identified as such, so that consumers can make informed decisions about buying GE products.

Don't see your closed threads? Let me help you:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ics-24396.html
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...any-24362.html

It would be okay if you started a thread and stuck with it. But recently, every thread becomes a soapbox for the exact same things you're thumping about in every other thread.

Hey, I appreciate advocacy, but there's awareness raising and then there's trolling.

-

I don't actually disagree with the UCS position. Obviously. As I've already described my objections against monoculture and industrial farming in that other thread you've used to post the exact same arguments as you're posting in this thread.

In other words, why not keep the politics there and keep this as a relatively helpful thread about proper eating and nutrition, hmm? Because if the threads become exactly the same, then there is probably no need to have both of them... right?

Here is the real issue?
 

Which has what to do with healthy food?

You have trouble connecting the dots? Or you have trouble with those that do?

Calling those who are concerned about GMOs...radicals...would in essence label you as conservative at the least? Right wing reactionary? :D I think you are hiding a political position behind an apparent concern for the science.

So....post something about healthy food? Start a thread of your own on some subject?

So..what does THIS have to do with healthy food and politics?
 

Bill McKibben: Obama Versus Physics

I'll let you figure it out......children alive today will thank you for the effort.....connect the dots?