Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-14-2009, 06:17 PM
 
11,555 posts, read 53,171,880 times
Reputation: 16349

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
Interestingly, and anecdotally, my sister and I (now 59 and 71) both reached puberty early (I started maturing at age 9). Our daughters matured much later in age (early to mid teens). We didn't eat any of the things that early maturation is attributed to these days; they grew up on it.

Again, it's VERY individual what effect such things will have on any given human body. It would be lovely if it were as mechanized a response as some seem to think, but, really, folks, it isn't.
Certainly, your own anecdotal experience would be of value, but limited compared to the thousands of children and the years of follow-up studies of illnesses related to the studies being done by researchers such as my dental hygienist. Her husband is an ND, and they've both been in practice for 30+ years.

According to them, the percentage of children having early maturity was very small decades ago, with some clear patterns of genetics involved. Now, it's common, and they have been able to link the increase very closely with the saturation of the food marketplace with soy and soy products.
As part of the ND's practice, he's been able to minimize or eliminate a lot of symptoms by removing soy from women's diets.

I'll agree that it's hard to make a blanket statement that all factors and risks are as simple as they may seem ... but, at the same time, we've seen a lot of childhood problems (developmental, behavorial) that appear to be linked to the common aspects of the USA diet over the last few decades. For example, we're seeing a lot more ADHD or similar problems which appeared to become more prevalent with the introduction of artificial sweeteners (another big hidden food additive in many products) into the american food marketplace.

It's interesting when you put these physical problems into the perspective of the writings of someone like Jean Carper's Nutrional Pharmacy or Balch's Prescripton for Nutrional Healing. These folks are solving a lot of illnesses through well validated alternative methods rather than prescription drugs.

It's also of interest to see the genetics involved with a lot of illnesses. For example, a very close friend of mine (MD, psychiatry) at Columbia pioneered the genetic studies of families with a history of a certain mental illness. He was fortunate to find a French family with an almost total family history of problems going back 5+ generations, and obtained genetic material from many of them. They've since isolated the gene(s) responsible for the predisposition to the mental illness which carried through to hundreds of people. Perhaps they'll also be able to find the genes and the influence of powerful hormones, such as in soy, that there is for early development as well as links to certain cancers in time. From what I'm told, that's a new area of interest and grant applications that they're working on now that they've just about finished the mental illness study they were working on.

Last edited by sunsprit; 06-14-2009 at 06:46 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-15-2009, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Nebraska
4,176 posts, read 10,686,242 times
Reputation: 9646
I think both sunsprit and Texas Horse Lady are arguing two sides of the same coin.

Genetics plays an important part in hereditary dispositions, from the propensity to get cancer, to the maturation rate. But outside influences, like the ingestion of soy, play a definitive part in that genetic response. So basically what it boils down to is the old chicken-and-egg, nature-or-nurture, heredity-or-environment debate. This debate can't be resolved, because no matter how, say, Irish you are, your genetic makeup as compared to your ancestors and currently-living relations in Ireland is still slightly different. So your reactions to your environment - as well as your reactions to the environment in Ireland, should you go there - are going to be different. Similar, but different. How similar or how different depends on who gramma and mom married, what THEIR genetic dispositions were, etc... as well as whether they were coal miners or ate soy; how much and what kind of alterations were introduced into their environment. Your family can have a history of resistance to cancer - but put them in an environment that is highly reactive to their genes to cause cancerous growth, and suddenly you may find that resistance reduced or negligible.

Blanket statements are the only things that researchers can come up with, because let's face it, their pool of experimentation is limited as is their funding. (Not to mention that research results are now all too often determined by who's paying for the research, but that's another thread.) Genetic response and environmental impacts are oftentimes too closely intertwined to separate for proper research. This is why very little research can be taken at face value, because most variables are too, well, variable! One has to determine in which 'pocket' of variables and impacts one will research, then solve for "x" within that limited realm.

When blanket determinations are made, with the natural and inevitable impacts of genetics and environment only considered within limits, then we have endlessly refutable 'research', and tend to dismiss it all as "junk science". What may be true in one subset may not be true in other subsets, and to assume that one subset is representative of the whole set is to either be very ignorant and gullible, or to be purposefully manipulative of results to reach a desired end. ("There are lies, damned lies, and then statistics.")
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-15-2009, 09:07 AM
 
9,803 posts, read 16,187,823 times
Reputation: 8266
-"(There are lies, damned lies. and then statistics" ) "

An old saying I read was similar------" statistics are like bikinis, What they reveal is interesting, what they conceal is vital "
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-15-2009, 09:16 AM
 
Location: S.E. US
13,163 posts, read 1,691,582 times
Reputation: 5132
Quote:
Originally Posted by marmac View Post
-"(There are lies, damned lies. and then statistics" ) "

An old saying I read was similar------" statistics are like bikinis, What they reveal is interesting, what they conceal is vital "
remember that next time the government comes out with them, or you read the results of a poll.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-15-2009, 02:28 PM
 
Location: On the Ohio River in Western, KY
3,387 posts, read 6,626,728 times
Reputation: 3362
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound View Post
I now have my own recipe for mayo which I'm anxious to try. All natural and clean and free of all that stuff.
Mayo is super easy to make IMO.

I have one of those "Magic Bullet" blender things, and just add an egg, a bit of S&P, and the oil of your choice (start slow with the oil and add more till it matches what you want out of it.), then just whip till it's fluffy and done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-15-2009, 02:32 PM
 
Location: On the Ohio River in Western, KY
3,387 posts, read 6,626,728 times
Reputation: 3362
Quote:
Originally Posted by marmac View Post
-"(There are lies, damned lies. and then statistics" ) "

An old saying I read was similar------" statistics are like bikinis, What they reveal is interesting, what they conceal is vital "
Tried to rep you for this, but I have to "spread it around 1st".

It's a BRILLIANT quote, BTW!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2009, 08:45 AM
 
Location: Castle Hills
1,172 posts, read 2,632,853 times
Reputation: 656
My wife and I have been drinking rice dream for about 7 years now and love it. We won't even touch regular milk anymore. Rice dream taste like a 1% milk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2009, 08:51 AM
 
Location: I think my user name clarifies that.
8,292 posts, read 26,671,830 times
Reputation: 3925
Quote:
Originally Posted by ufcrules1 View Post
My wife and I have been drinking rice dream for about 7 years now and love it. We won't even touch regular milk anymore. Rice dream taste like a 1% milk.
What are the benefits? And is there some reason you're not drinking cow's milk?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2009, 06:01 PM
 
Location: here and then there...!
947 posts, read 3,408,763 times
Reputation: 597
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
Stonyfields Farms is doing their part, returning the cows' diet to one that more accurately reflects what they evolved to eat. As do those who raise grassfed beef,for much the same reason.
Yup! I agree. A few companies are more in tune with pre- factory farm ways of raising/keeping cows for dairy. "doing their part", with smaller farms and caring a bit more about the land/environment, health of animals and our planet, at least this is my hope!

It has been worth it to me to spend the extra $$$ on products from these types of companies because they do seem more responsible and aware of the concerns of the environment and concerns that consumers have, things that are important to consumers such as quality product and environmentally conscious company.
...wish there were more like this!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2009, 06:23 PM
 
9,803 posts, read 16,187,823 times
Reputation: 8266
------"wish there were more like this "--

If the price for that product was higher, there would be more like that.

Awhile back, I watched an Oprah show and didn't realize how dense she is about agriculture. She had on a panel promoting more "simple" ways of farming.

One guy was a hog farmer who has his sows on grass /legume pasture and they farrow ( give birth) in individual huts in the pasture. ( He was a full time hog farmer)

He stated he enjoys raising hogs that way and has a contract with a packer who pays a good premium as they are slaughtered seperately and their meat sold to certain accounts. The farmer said without that premium$$$$$$ he could not do it cuz he loses efficency.

Another consumer panelist said that type of pork was expensive to the average consumer, however.

Oprah then stated--------" If more and more farmers did it this way, there would be more supply and the prices would drop for the consumer"

What ???????????

Evidently Oprah forgot that the hog farmer said the only way it is profitable is with that premium $$$ being paid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top