I m not “selling” u anything. The only way any1 can benefit off what happened, 2 spouse would b if u r a malpractice atty, or the drug manufacturer providng th replacement chemical messengers he is now required 2 take, since his own body no longer produces same..its SAD that people have had th need 2 start non profit groups, write books over what is preventabl, & forces people 2 rely on artificial means, 2 stay ALIVE…its not funny.
The statistics, about chickens I referred 2 in prior post came from an affiliate group of the AVVS,th antivivisection society…no idea,where original literature is, which came in mail.
CENTRAL 2 the ethical considerations of continuing 2 eat animals is sentience.
WIKI defines this word as follows:
“” Sentience
Not to be confused with sapience. “Sentient” redirects here. For other uses, see Sentient (disambiguation).
Sentience is the ability to feel, perceive or be conscious, or to have subjective experiences. Eighteenth century philosophers used the concept to distinguish the ability to think (“reason”) from the ability to feel (“sentience”). In modern western philosophy, sentience is the ability to have sensations or experiences (described by some thinkers as “qualia”). For Eastern philosophy, sentience is a metaphysical quality of all things that requires respect and care.
The concept is central to the philosophy of animal rights, because sentience is necessary for the ability to suffer, which entails certain rights.
In science fiction, non-human characters described as “sentient” typically have similar abilities, qualities and rights as human beings""
+safe bet 2 say the drug manufacturers in this case, would as soon have no need 2 “profit” off said sufferings, @ least, I HOPE such… I know of @ least 1 malpractice atty whom has no interest in profiting as u emphasize, off of this rampant health issue, because he nearly lost a beloved family member. ..2 complications, of celiac. Attempts 2 prevent or allevi8 human suffering r NOBLE EFFORTS deserving of praise, not mockery.
Sorry, but no. It’s still gibberish.
I am sadly reminded of my aunt Cia after her stroke - still very intelligent but unable to express herself in a way that others could understand.
While I’m not convinced she’s posting pure gibberish, I’m not willing to wade through her awful presentation to find out. As it is, the claims I can make out are clearly false on their face. I don’t hold out much hope for the rest.
Okay, checking translator…
Nope. Still incoherent.
I thought it might be okay because as a newsletter it didnt have any copyright claims at the end - but I didnt think about what your policies might be :o
Would a link from the “waybackmachine” be acceptable? http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
as the newsletter is no longer online
OMG! :eek: Now it’s channeling Yoda grammar!…
It’s quotes they get touchy about, not links. As long as the link is “safe for work” that is; if not, then follow the “two click rule”; it should take at least two clicks to reach a potentially offending image. Using spoiler boxes for that is allowed:
Like this, if the link was potentially offensive.
Leet, Yoda is!
happens, it does.
But, STRICTLY yoda.
i draw the line @ any Ramtha if he ever were 2 grace me with presence…
: /
B honest, you probably were not all that interested, in what she had to say, before…if I may add strokes are not the least amusing & in fact, a friend we are fond of just had one. Im sorry about Cia…i ought to point out stroke risk runs in families & is, one of the associated conditions, stroke is listed…in that book I shared on earlier post…& its warranted to attempt to avoid another one… good sweet aunt Cia..
If I knew an adress, I would send a copy of those publications to Cecil in the mail…then, when proof is commanded & citations, whatnot, requested, you can access his newly expanded knowledge base instead of heaping all this grief upon an already buried up 2 eyeballs in grief me…how do you suppose I give so much of it, so well? I have an endless supply.
It is not an associated disorder listed, in the book but, other things like depression may be. Cut me some slack please (guaranteed 2 build more tension, less slack)…
The author has reported that an early onset parkinsons patient contacted, them as he had improved dramatically on a gluten free diet & this is NOT a known associated condition listed in the studies…the patient reportedly felt it couldnt hurt 2 try going gluten free, his caregivers, did & his condition responded…in a major way. His prognosis had been poor. If u ask me to cite him, the name is listed with his recovery on the site for the book & the author, publisher are willing to talk about how the protocols helped & are willing to answer any serious enquiries regarding their work.
Its one of those things, cant hurt might help…
& the person mentioned was NOT celiac.
But, he benefited, anyway. The odds he would even have tried this are stacked against but, he did.
It becomes a matter of how many health complications, one has perhaps, how uncomfortable you are & being willing to try something highly reccomended, which cannot make matters worse. Or, interest in preventing issues from ever beginning.
You r going 2 b eating anyway, a given. Its just a matter of what we are accustomed, to versus a slightly altered version.
Yes, that is called someones testimonial…testimony regarding his experience. Whenever testimony is given outside of a court, man on the streets, there is always a high degree of suspicion, controversey, skepticism & so forth…I have noticed, anyway. It would be my turn to discount these things, but i cant. Because I know better…firsthand. One would think this is a new religion instead of an innovation in health & wellness…by the responses here. This is not the newest yogaerobics hybrid. This is not merely a trend. It IS the GREATEST thing, since sliced bread, however…its sliced GLUTEN FREE BREAD.
With only testimony, poor research and biased promotion to support it it is religion and the latest yogaerobics hybrid.
On of the sure indications of quackery is a laundry list of vague and random ailments a given treatment is reported to alleviate.
Testimonials are useless without supporting evidence. Anecdotes are unreliable without measurements.
If you need help setting up the parameters of a clinical study, I might be able to help. We need to define what the health problem is, and a way to measure whether it gets better on a given treatment as compared to a similar group not getting the treatment.
Lather, rince, repeat until we can statistically show that the treatment does help with defined clinical signs and doesn’t make anythign we didn’t expect get worse.
(In the interest of full disclosure, I worked for a major pharmaceutical company for ten years in their clinical trial division.)
I posted a page or two back (here - more info, but without a link) about an article from Loren Cordain, titled “A 10,000 Year Old Riddle of Bread and Milk Solved”. It’s a facinating interpretation of how we adjusted to the new diet of grain, explaining along the way, oddly enough, why North Europeans are white - and able to digest milk.
Here’s a rough summary:
It turns out grains inhibit our ability to absorb vitamin D. Lack of vitamin D causes rickets. Women with rickets tend to die in childbirth. Milk (raw milk only actually) bonds with the grain in our gut in a way that stops it inhibiting the absorbtion of vitamin D. So people without the ability to digest milk, died out very rapidly. People with lighter skin (aids absorption of vitamin D from sunlight through the skin) survived better. I presume this happened only in Europe because it was the only northern (low sunlight) area where grains were intensively eaten prior to modern times.
The link is to a (word) “doc” file with the article. Because some people might possibly be wary about going directly to a file, I’ll put it in a spoiler.web.archive.org/web/20060519070647/http://www.thepaleodiet.com/newsletter/newsletters/NewsletterVol2No1.doc
@Der Trihs, thanks for the tips!
Modern humans have inhabited northern Europe for 40,000 years. Is your cite suggesting northern Europeans were not white before the advent of grain farming in Europe 8,000 years ago?
Skott, for a fair price and can give a testimony about dihydrogen monoxide and a nice comment on your book. I could even say something about not getting sick since I changed my diet, or would you prefer something about it changing my outlook on life?
This is not “Comment on Cecil’s Column.”
So I’m moving it.
I suspect the first humans to enter Europe were probably relatively dark skinned by today’s standards, but probably started to lighten up even before the advent of agriculture. The tendency, even among hunter-gatherer groups, is to have lighter skin as you go towards the poles and darker as you go towards the equator, though of course there are exceptions (not everyone migrates at the same time, and those consuming a lot of ocean fish might not have as much issue with vitamin D supply).
Adopting a grain and milk heavy diet might have accelerated the “bleaching” process for some groups, but isn’t the sole cause or effect of lighter skin.
It should be noted that there are African tribes that retain the ability to digest milk into adulthood just like most Europeans do, but despite that, they have retained their dark skin. Is that due to less grain in the diet, or because of more intense sunlight where they are herding their cattle?
Many of these things are multi-factorial, there isn’t just one reasons for them.
I give up, can’ t tolerate gluten free’s posting style.
I do not believe typing causes you pain, you are typing way too much.
Your zeal borders on the religious, and very common assertions are not getting through to you.
Just a drive by post but there is scientific evidence that women have easier childbirth because fo the way their pelvis develops if they have a diet of mostly meat. Especially brontosaurus burgers.