"Tot ceea ce e necesar pentru ca raul sa triumfe, este ca omul bun sa nu faca nimic."
Edmund Burke




          Cati dintre oameni au acasa animale de companie caini sau pisici? Multi. De compasiunea si dragostea fata de animalele de companie au profitat marile concerne, creand mancare artificiala dar si profituri uriase. Cati dintre acei oameni care afirma sus si tare ca iubesc animalele, in special cainii si pisicile, au aceeasi dragoste si compasiune fata de porcul din cotet pe care il taie si mananca in special de sarbatori? Dragostea fata de animale, cum ar fi porcii, gainile, oile, vacile, pestii, este uitata si convertita in necesitate. 
          Constiinta oamenilor a scazut atat de mult incat porcul nu mai e porc, gaina nu mai e gaina, oaia nu mai e oaie, ci e HRANA. Dar niste animale ucise, hacuite si apoi "cosmetizate" pentru a fi vandute pot fi numite HRANA? Nu cred. 
          Isador Duncan spunea: "Atat timp cat servim noi insine drept morminte vii pentru animalele asasinate, cum putem spera in domnia pacii pe pamant?".
          Este foarte adevarat ca putini dintre noi am omorat animale, dar prin faptul ca noi cumparam mereu si mereu, nu facem altceva decat sa intretinem aceasta mega industrie a carnii.
          Ne facem complici la decapitarea a milioane de animale pentru a ne satisface nu numai foamea ci si poftele. Este foarte comod sa platesti pe altcineva sa ucida in locul tau. De cele mai multe ori nici nu ne gandim la asta. Probabil ca daca am fi nevoiti sa ucidem noi pentru a ne procura hrana, multi nu ar fi in stare si ar incepe sa isi puna intrebari despre viata, despre modul de a gandi, despre alimentatie si multe altele. 




"Exista totusi o stransa legatura intre ospatul de care tocmai te-ai bucurat si abatorul ascuns grijuliu la mile distanta." 
Ralph Waldo Emerson








          "Expozitia de cadavre" din abatoare, supermarket-uri si alte magazine de profil nu face altceva decat sa arate cat de mult a decazut umanitatea in zilele noastre, culmea, in era informatiei cand e foarte usor sa te documentezi despre nocivitatea consumului de carne.
          Oamenii de azi nu mai sunt interesati de un mod nou de viata, nu au timp pentru altceva, dar o mare parte isi doreste o schimbare radicala in ceilalti. Cu totii vrem o viata mai buna, o lume mai buna, dar nu facem nimic pentru a schimba ceva. 




          In acest sens Mahatma Gandhi spune: "Tu trebuie sa reprezinti schimbarea pe care doresti sa o vezi in lume". 
          Asadar sa incepem cu noi transformarea, iar cei din jur vor vedea un exemplu viu. 

Din punct de vedere al sanatatii








"Atata timp cat oamenii masacreaza animale, se vor omori si unii pe altii. Cu siguranta cel ce sadeste samanta omorului nu poate culege bucurie si dragoste."
Pitagora




          Corpul uman si sanatatea sunt strans legate de ceea ce mancam. De cate ori nu a recomandat medicul in caz de boala sa nu se mai manance carne? Nu cred ca sunt medici care sa recomande celor foarte bolnavi sa manance carne pentru a se vindeca de boala.
"Nici cel mai fioros animal nu si-a facut deocamdata cojoc sau manusi din piele de om."
Vasile Ghica
          Unul dintre motivele pentru care carnea dauneaza organismului este acela ca intestinele omului sunt de sase ori mai lungi decat lungimea corpului, asta inseamna ca produsele din carne stau mai mult in organism. Animalele care consuma carne au intestinele de trei ori mai lungi, ceea ce face ca eliminarea carnii sa se faca mai repede. La om s-au descoperit resturi de carne in colon si de zece ani de zile. 
          Se stie ca mare parte din imunitatea corpului sta in colon. Astfel,un colon mereu curat aduce un aport energetic in organism, pe cand un colon in care tranzitul se face foarte greu, nu va aduce decat probleme. Carnea se descompune rapid daca nu este prelucrata, imediat dupa ce a fost omorat animalul. De aceea, pentru a impiedica acest proces, carnea este prelucrata cu nitrati si alte substante cancerigene. Pe langa aceste substante se mai adauga altele din hranirea animalelor carora li se dau fel de fel de concentrate pentru a le mari masa de carne. 
          In marile ferme de productie, animalele nu au conditiile prielnice pentru a se dezvolta natural si sunt indopate cu hormoni pentru a produce intr-un mod rapid si nenatural o masa mai mare de carne.
"Doar hrana vie si proaspata ii poate permite omului sa ramana sanatos, sa fie fericit si sa simta adevarul."
Pitagora




          In urma studiilor s-a aratat ca vegetarienii, in raport cu cei care consuma carne, au nivelul de colesterol in sange mai scazut, rata de deces mai mica in cazul bolilor de inima, de asemenea incidenta cancerului la prostata si colon mult mai mica. 
          Nici un mamifer nu consuma laptele altei specii, iar odata intarcat, nu mai bea lapte. Laptele oricarui animal este sanatos numai pentru puii lui. Hormonii din laptele de vaca sunt vehicule ce transmit hipofizei vitelului informatii specifice acestei specii. Informatia de crestere si dezvoltare se adreseaza vitelului, care la 6 luni atinge 300 kg. La copilul alimentat cu lapte de vaca, care la aceeasi varsta atinge doar 7-8 kg, se perturba mecanismele sistemului hormonal si apar dereglari de natura fiziologica: irascibilitate, dureri de abdomen si de cap, diaree, gaze. 
          Se pare ca dupa alcoolism si fumat, consumul de carne este cea mai raspandita cauza de mortalitate din S.U.A. si Europa.

Alimentatia vegetariana in Crestinism








"Putem spera la mantuirea sufletului cand pentru Sfanta zi de Craciun alergam dupa porc sa-i infingem un cutit in gat ca apoi sa ne delectam cu soric si maruntaie?"
Marius Vornicescu








          Crestinismul face parte din categoria marilor religii ale planetei care a incurajat postul si alimentatia vegetariana. Alimentatia calugarilor si a pustnicilor demonteaza toate "studiile" si "teoriile" de nutritie ale marilor "specialisti". 
          In ultimii ani s-au gasit multe dovezi, care aratau ca acesti asa-zisi specialisti sunt platiti de marile companii pentru a da publicitatii "studii" in nutritie. Bineinteles ca urmand aceste sfaturi nu putem sa fim decat clienti fideli ai farmaciilor pentru a ne cumpara vitamine si minerale atat de necesare corpului uman. La posturile de televiziune sunt promovate in mod obsesiv sute de reclame pentru pastile si fel de fel de produse pentru slabit. Dar nimeni nu promoveaza si nu face reclama unui mod de viata si de alimentatie sanatos.
          Parintii pustiei si sfintii in crestinism au fost vegetarieni si de multe ori se hraneau dupa modelul Muntelui Athos, cu putina paine si apa, si atunci la cateva zile, iar unii, mai cu ravna, chiar la patruzeci de zile. Unii dintre voi vor spune: "Da, dar ei au aer curat la munte si se roaga". Perfect raspuns. Deci se poate si cu rugaciune. 
          Nu spune nimeni si nici nu se impune sa traim toti asa. Important e ca se poate. Iar daca asa multi oameni au putut sa traiasca 90-100 de ani doar cu fructe, legume si apa inseamna ca toate studiile privind nutritia cad. Un alt aspect este ca acei pustnici, desi nu aveau farmacia in desert, de unde sa cumpere vitamine si minerale, au trait bine, iar cel mai important e ca erau fericiti. Hrana lor era rugaciunea. Iisus Hristos era in fiecare Sfanta Impartasanie si asta era destul. Dar poate rugaciunea suplini vitaminele si mineralele care sunt recomandate in mod obsesiv in reclame? Raspunsul este DA. Crestinismul a aratat-o din plin in cei 2000 de ani, prin sfintii sai. 




"Nu se mananca porcul pentru ca, desi are copita despicata, nu isi rumega mancarea; acesta este necurat pentru voi. Carnea acestora sa n-o mancati si de starvurile lor sa nu va atingeti."
Biblia, Deuteronomul 14:8

Aditivii alimentari








"Animalele impart cu noi privilegiul de a avea un suflet."
Pitagora








          Aditivii sintetici din semipreparatele din carne raman in organism chiar si zece ani, pentru ca tubul digestiv nu le poate digera. Consumul anual de mezeluri in Romania este de aproximativ zece kilograme pe cap de locuitor, ceea ce inseamna ca, in fiecare zi, un roman mananca cam 28-30 de grame de produse din carne. 
          Anul trecut, media tarilor europene mergea catre aproape 100 de grame consumate zilnic. Totusi, diferenta este data de calitatea semipreparatelor romanesti din carne, care este printre cele mai slabe din Europa, asta si pentru ca romanii nu se arata preocupati de ce pun in farfurie. 




Slanina multa si injectii cu apa








"Veverita pe care o ucizi in gluma moare cu seriozitate."
David Thoreau








          In unitatile de productie mari si in abatoarele tehnologizate, sacrificarile de animale sunt rare. Dupa transare, 80% din carne se foloseste pentru specialitati, iar restul intra in productia salamurilor, a carnatilor, parizerului si a crenvurstilor. 
          Cantitatile sunt ajustate cu multa slanina tare, dar si cu soia sau alte grasimi hidrogenate. Malaxarea se face intr-un recipient mare de metal, in care se pun la tocat carnea, apoi slanina si soriciul. Din saci de rafie se adauga faina de soia, si, potrivit fiecarui retetar, se adauga aditivi sintetici si coloranti. Omogenizarea se face in cateva minute, iar pasta prinde gust si aspect de carne. Ambalarea se face in membrane de plastic, care, uneori, ajung sa coste mai mult decat compozitia produsului. 
          De cealalta parte, produsele "premium", ca pastrama, muschiul sau cotletul, sunt injectate cu saramura si fosfati, compusii care retin cea mai multa apa. 
          Injectarea se face cu o masina speciala cu ac, iar vidarea mascheaza ca produsul e umplut cu apa. Saramura, care trage foarte mult din greutatea produsului, are ca efecte secundare hipertensiunea arteriala si diabetul.          E-urile sunt importate si, in cele mai multe cazuri, condimentele precum ceapa sau usturoiul sunt prafuri obtiunite prin deshidratare.

E-uri








          E-uri nelipsite din produsele conservate din carne: 
          E 250 - nitrit de sodiu - conservant sintetic, fixator de culoare, agent antibotulinic, care se adauga in carnati, carne, mezeluri, sunca, carne sarata, carne conservata. Efecte nocive: efect cancerigen; formeaza nitrozamine; afecteaza rinichii, sistemul cardiovascular, sistemul respirator, nervos, gastrointestinal, provoaca alergii, astm, greata, migrene, hipotensiune, tulburari respiratorii. 
          E 452 - polifosfat de sodiu, de potasiu, de calciu sau de amoniu - se adauga in hrana pentru copii, in cerealele pentru micul dejun, in preparatele din carne si peste. Efecte nocive: modifica echilibrul calciu - fosfor din organism, scad densitatea osoasa, produc osteoporoza, alergii, irita ochii si pielea. 
          E 621 - glutamat monosodic (GMS) - intensificator de gust, cu efect tetragen, ce poate produce amorteala, dureri de cap, iritabilitate, modificari de comportament, disconfort abdominal, transpiratie abundenta, ritm cardiac crescut.
"Compasiunea fata de animale e intim legata cu bunatatea caracterului si se poate afirma cu siguranta ca cel crud fata de animale nu poate fi numit om bun."
Arthur Schopenhauer




          E 951 - ASPARTAM ( ASP ). Aspartamul poate declansa sau stimula urmatoarele afectiuni: 
          - Sindrom cronic de oboseala 
          - Sindromul lui Meniere 
          - Boala lui Alzheimer, boala lui Parkinson 
          - Epilepsie 
          - Scleroza multipla 
          - Hipotiroidie datorata mercurului din plombele dentare 
          - Lupus eritematos desiminat 
          - Diabet si complicatii ale diabetului 
          - Depresii si alte tulburari psihologice 
          Indulcitor artificial. Este un inlocuitor artificial care substituie zaharul in multe produse si are o putere de indulcire de 180 de ori mai mare decat acesta si nu contine calorii. Provoaca reactii alergice, migrene, greata, voma, spasme musculare, oboseala, palpitatii cardiace, pierderea memoriei, inflamatii. Produce dureri de cap, apoplexie, tulburari de comportament. Se foloseste mult in bauturile racoritoare. 




"Iubiti animalele: Dumnezeu le-a inzestrat cu o minte simpla si cu o bucurie de nezdruncinat. 
Nu le tulburati aceasta bucurie, nu le hartuiti, nu le privati de fericire, nu actionati impotriva vointei lui Dumnezeu. 
Omule, nu te mandri ca esti superior animalelor; ele sunt fara pacat, si tu, cu maretia ta, pangaresti pamantul, 
lasand semne ale nebuniei tale in urma-ti; si, din pacate, acesta este adevarul despre aproape noi toti !"
Dostoievski








Glutamatul de sodiu - E 621 
          Fabricat din melasa (care este obtinuta din zahar) prin fermentatie, glutamatul monosodic este sarea de sodiu a acidului glutamic. Mai poate fi intalnit sub denumirile: glutamat de sodiu, monosodium glutamate, natrium glutaminat, E 621 (conform regulamentelor europene). 
          Glutamatul se foloseste cel mai mult in alimentele fabricate artificial si in semipreparate gen supe concentrate, sosuri, condimente, mezeluri, inghetata, budinci, etc. Rolul lui este de a da impresia creierului ca acel aliment este foarte gustos (o pacaleala). Dar asta nu este totul... 
          Glutamatul este interzis in Australia, insa este tolerat in Statele Unite. Majoritatea persoanelor sunt sensibile la glutamat invocand simptome ca greata, dureri de cap, ameteli, palpitatii, slabiciune si oboseala 
          Glutamatul monosodic (E 621) este un drog si un neurotransmitator. El este intalnit in mod natural in corpul uman si este responsabil, alaturi de alti neurotransmitatori (ca acidul aspartic), de functionarea corecta a sistemului nervos. De aceea, pentru o functionare corecta a creierului si a organelor interne, este absolut necesar sa existe un nivel echilibrat al concentratiei acestora in corp. 




"Oamenii hraniti cu carne si care au baut bauturi tari, au tot sangele otravit si arid si aceasta ii face sa innebuneasca intr-o suta de feluri diferite."
Voltaire








          Toate organele interne din corpul nostru contin receptori ai glutamatului, adica reactioneaza specific la prezenta glutamatului. Suprastimularea acestor receptori (in creier sau in alte organe) duce la numeroase dezechilibre interne si la probleme de sanatate care copiaza simptomele altor boli (fibromialgie sau aritmie cardiaca, de exemplu), dar continua sa fie gresit diagnosticate de medici (uneori chiar mai multi ani) care prescriu adesea medicamente scumpe si cu o multime de efecte secundare periculoase. 
          Folosirea sa pe scara larga in industria alimentara a aprins mari discutii in randul medicilor pentru ca glutamatul suprastimuleaza activitatea celulei nervoase (neuronul). Glutamatul nu este nici necesar si nici lipsit de pericole. Glutamatul pacaleste creierul si te face sa crezi ca mancarea are un gust excelent, iar producatorii folosesc astfel, ingrediente de proasta calitate in componenta produsului care, desi este mediocru (calitativ), va avea astfel un gust "de varf". Pe seama sanatatii consumatorului se obtin profituri uriase folosindu-se ingrediente de proasta calitate cu o valoare nutritiva aproape nula. 
          Intoleranta la glutamat nu este o reactie alergica ci raspunsul disperat al organismului uman la suprastimularea cauzata de acest drog. Chiar daca exista unele categorii de persoane care nu sufera de reactii explozive consumand glutamat, expunerea pe termen lung la acest drog distruge neuronii. 
          Dr. Russell Blaylock explica in cartea sa "Excitotoxinele, gustul care ucide" de ce glutamatul si aspartamul sunt periculoase. Excitotoxinele sunt substante chimice care supra-stimuleaza celulele nervoase, "arzandu-le". Simptomul cel mai des intalnit in acest caz este pierderea temporara a memoriei. Substantele cele mai periculoase sunt aspartamul care contine acidul aspartic si fenilalanina, glutamatul monosodic care are 30 de denumiri alternative si se foloseste in cantitati uriase in majoritatea produselor alimentare prelucrate. "Cu cat are un gust mai bun, cu atat contine mai mult glutamat" spunea cineva. 




"Priveste un miel cat e de bland. Joaca-te cu el, tine-l in brate si alinta-l. 
Priveste-l in ochi. Te priveste asa pentru ca are incredere in tine. 
Bucura-ti copiii cu jucausenia iedului si blandetea mielului. Apoi injunghie-i, transeaza-i, gateste-i si mananca-i pentru ca este Invierea Domnului. 
Doar asta inseamna Pastele, nu?"

Cîteva surse interesante: http://www.retete-vegetariene.ro/ http://www.retete-vegetariene.com/ http://retetevegetariene.info/ (cei ce dispun de informatii interesante rog sa imi scrie)

Nu oblig pe nimeni nimic. E doar informatie.

Most diabetologists have believed that diabetic complications are caused by the toxic effects of high blood sugar. The means by which high blood sugar induces damage in cells, arteries, and tissues are indeed profound, and the consequences, as the carbohydrate hypothesis implies, extend far beyond diabetes itself. This line of research is pursued by only a few laboratories. As a result, its ultimate implications and validity remain to be ascertained. But it should be considered as yet another potential mechanism by which the consumption of refined carbohydrates could cause or exacerbate the entire spectrum of the chronic diseases of civilization.

In particular, raising blood sugar will increase the production of what are known technically as reactive oxygen species and advanced glycation endproducts, both of which are potentially toxic. The former are generated primarily by the burning of glucose (blood sugar) for fuel in the cells, in a process that attaches electrons to oxygen atoms, transforming the oxygen from a relatively inert molecule into one that is avid to react chemically with other molecules. This is not an ideal situation biologically. One form of reactive oxygen species is those known commonly as free radicals, and all of them together are known as oxidants, because what they do is oxidize other molecules (the same chemical reaction that causes iron to rust, and equally deleterious). The object of oxidation slowly deteriorates. Biologists refer to this deterioration as oxidative stress. Antioxidants neutralize reactive oxygen species, which is why antioxidants have become a popular buzzword in nutrition discussions.
The potential of advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) for damage is equally worrisome. Their formation can take years, but the process (glycation) begins simply, with the attachment of a sugar—glucose, for instance—to a protein without the benefit of an enzyme to orchestrate the reaction. That absence is critical. The role of enzymes in living organisms is to control chemical reactions to ensure that they “conform to a tightly regulated metabolic program,” as the Harvard biochemist Frank Bunn explains. When enzymes affix sugars to proteins, they do so at particular sites on the proteins, for very particular reasons. Without an enzyme overseeing the process, the sugar sticks to the protein haphazardly and sets the stage for yet more unintended and unregulated chemical reactions.
The term glycation refers only to this initial step, a sugar molecule attaching to a protein, and this part of the process is reversible—if blood-sugar levels are low enough, the sugar and protein will disengage, and no damage will be done. If blood sugar is elevated, however, then the process of forming an advanced glycation end-product will move forward. The protein and its accompanying glycated sugars will undergo a series of reactions and rearrangements until the process culminates in the convoluted form of an advanced glycation end-product. These AGEs will then bind easily to other AGEs and to still more proteins through a process known as cross-linking—the sugars hooked to one protein will bridge to another protein and lock them together. Now proteins that should ideally have nothing to do with each other will be inexorably joined.
In the mid-1970s, Rockefeller University biochemist Anthony Cerami and Frank Bunn independently recognized that AGEs and glycation play a major role in diabetes.*56 Both Cerami and Bunn were initially motivated by the observation that diabetics have high levels of an unusual form of hemoglobin—the oxygen-carrying protein of red blood cells—known as hemoglobin A1c, a glycated hemoglobin. The higher the blood sugar, the more hemoglobin molecules undergo glycation, and so the more hemoglobin A1c can be found in the circulation. Cerami’s laboratory then developed an assay to measure hemoglobin A1c, speculating correctly that it might be an accurate reflection of the diabetic state. Diabetics have two to three times as much hemoglobin A1c in their blood as nondiabetics, a ratio that apparently holds true for nearly all glycated proteins in the body. (The best determination of whether diabetics are successfully controlling their blood sugar comes from measuring hemoglobin A1c, because it reflects the average blood sugar over a month or more.)
Since 1980, AGEs have been linked directly to both diabetic complications and aging itself (hence the acronym). AGEs accumulate in the lens, cornea, and retina of the eye, where they appear to cause the browning and opacity of the lens characteristic of senile cataracts. AGEs accumulate in the membranes of the kidney, in nerve endings, and in the lining of arteries, all tissues typically damaged in diabetic complications. Because AGE accumulation appears to be a naturally occurring process, although it is exacerbated and accelerated by high blood sugar, we have evolved sophisticated defense mechanisms to recognize, capture, and dispose of AGEs. But AGEs still manage to accumulate in tissues with the passing years, and especially so in diabetics, in whom AGE accumulation correlates with the severity of complications.
One protein that seems particularly susceptible to glycation and cross-linking is collagen, which is a fundamental component of bones, cartilage, tendons, and skin. The collagen version of an AGE accumulates in the skin with age and, again, does so excessively in diabetics. This is why the skin of young diabetics will appear prematurely old, and why, as the Case Western University pathologist Robert Kohn first suggested, diabetes can be thought of as a form of accelerated aging, a notion that is slowly gaining acceptance. It’s the accumulation and cross-linking of this collagen version of AGEs that causes the loss of elasticity in the skin with age, as well as in joints, arteries, and the heart and lungs.
The process can be compared to the toughening of leather. Both the meat and hide of an old animal are tougher and stiffer than those of a young animal, because of the AGE-related cross-linking that occurs inevitably with age. As Cerami explains, the aorta, the main artery running out of the heart, is an example of this stiffening effect of accumulated and cross-linked AGEs. “If you remove the aorta from someone who died young,” says Cerami, “you can blow it up like a balloon. It just expands. Let the air out, it goes back down. If you do that to the aorta from an old person, it’s like trying to inflate a pipe. It can’t be expanded. If you keep adding more pressure, it will just burst. That is part of the problem with diabetes, and aging in general. You end up with stiff tissue: stiffness of hearts, lungs, lenses, joints…. That’s all caused by sugars reacting with proteins.”
AGEs and the glycation process also appear to play at least one critical role directly in heart disease, by causing the oxidation of LDL particles and so causing the LDL and its accompanying cholesterol to become trapped in the artery wall, which is an early step in the atherosclerotic process. Oxidized LDL also appears to be resistant to removal from the circulation by the normal mechanisms, which would also serve to increase the LDL levels in the blood. As it turns out, LDL is particularly susceptible to oxidation by reactive oxygen species and to glycation. In this case, both the protein portion and the lipid portion (the cholesterol and the fats) of the lipoprotein are susceptible. These oxidized LDL particles appear to be “markedly elevated” in both diabetics and in nondiabetics with atherosclerosis, and are particularly likely to be found in the atherosclerotic lesions themselves.
That glycation and AGEs are critical factors in diabetic complications and in heart disease has recently been demonstrated by experiments with compounds known as anti-AGE compounds or AGE breakers. These will reverse arterial stiffness, at least in laboratory animals, and, as one recent report put it, ameliorate “the adverse cardiovascular and [kidney-related] changes associated with aging, diabetes and hypertension.” Whether these or similar compounds will work in humans remains to be seen. When biochemists discuss oxidative stress, glycation, and the formation of advanced glycation end-products, they often compare what’s happening to a fire simmering away in our circulation. The longer the fire burns and the hotter the flame, the more damage is done. Blood sugar is the fuel. “Current evidence points to glucose not only as the body’s main short-term energy source,” as the American Diabetes Association recently put it, “but also as the long-term fuel of diabetes complications.” But there is no reason to believe that glucose-induced damage is limited only to diabetics, or to those with metabolic syndrome, in whom blood sugar is also chronically elevated. Glycation and oxidation accompany every fundamental process of cellular metabolism. They proceed continuously in all of us.
Anything that raises blood sugar—in particular, the consumption of refined and easily digestible carbohydrates—will increase the generation of oxidants and free radicals; it will increase the rate of oxidative stress and glycation, and the formation and accumulation of advanced glycation end-products. This means that anything that raises blood sugar, by the logic of the carbohydrate hypothesis, will lead to more atherosclerosis and heart disease, more vascular disorders, and an accelerated pace of physical degeneration, even in those of us who never become diabetic.

Proof?

stânga - aproape nimic colagen în piele. La fel prin alte fotografii se vede cum încheieturile sunt înflate. Înăuntru ea toată e putredă.
dreapta - piele netedă, elastică, încheieturi sănătoase. Același lucru precis se poate de zis și despre sistemul circulator.
Genetics has nothing to do with it

With the subject of heart disease, however, controversy arrived. Cohen testified that there was no “direct relationship” linking heart disease to dietary fats, and that he had been able to induce the same blood-vessel complications seen in heart disease merely by feeding sugar to his laboratory rats. Peter Cleave testified to his belief that the problem extended to all refined carbohydrates. “I don’t hold the cholesterol view for a moment,” Cleave said, noting that mankind had been eating saturated fats for hundreds of thousands of years. “For a modern disease to be related to an old-fashioned food is one of the most ludicrous things I have ever heard in my life,” said Cleave. “If anybody tells me that eating fat was the cause of coronary disease, I should look at them in amazement. But, when it comes to the dreadful sweet things that are served up…that is a very different proposition.”

Trowell’s experiences in East Africa had left him with the characteristic awareness of the diseases-of-civilization phenomenon. When he arrived in Kenya in 1929, he said, he had noticed that the Kenyans were all as thin as “ancient Egyptians,” yet when he dined with the native tribes, they always left food at the end of the meal and fed it to their domestic animals, which suggested that their relative emaciation was not caused by food shortages or insufficient calories. During World War II, according to Trowell, a team of British nutritionists was dispatched to East Africa to figure out how to induce the Africans in the British Army to put on weight, since they would not or could not do it. “Hundreds of x-rays,” Trowell recalled, “were taken of African intestines in an effort to solve the mystery that lay in the fact that everyone knew how to fatten a chicken for the pot, but no one knew how to make Africans…put on flesh and fat for battle. It remained a mystery.” Nonetheless, by the 1950s, fat Africans were a common sight, and in 1956 Trowell himself reported the first clinical diagnosis of coronary heart disease in a native East African—a Banting-esque high-court judge (five foot two and 208 pounds) who had lived in England and had been eating a Western diet for twenty years. In 1970, Trowell returned to East Africa and described what he saw as “an amazing spectacle: the towns were full of obese Africans and there was a large diabetic clinic in every city. The twin diseases had been born about the same time and are now growing together.”

From 1968 to 1982, a team of New Zealand anthropologists, physicians, and epidemiologists led by Ian Prior took the opportunity to study the health and diet of the emigrants as they resettled, as well as those who remained behind on the islands as their diets were progressively Westernized. This Tokelau Island Migration Study (TIMS) was a remarkably complete survey of the health and diet of all men, women, and children of Tokelauan ancestry. It was also quite likely the most comprehensive migration study ever carried out in the history of nutrition-and-chronic-disease research.
On Tokelau, the primary changes during the course of the study came in the mid-1970s, with the establishment of a cash economy and trading posts on the atolls. The year-round availability of imported foods led to a decrease in coconut consumption to roughly half of all calories. This was offset by a sevenfold increase in sugar consumption*38 and a nearly sixfold increase in flour consumed—from twelve pounds per person annually to seventy pounds. The islanders also began eating canned meats and frozen foods, which they stored in freezers donated by the United Nations; by 1980, six pounds of mutton per capita, three pounds of chicken backs, and five pounds of tinned corned beef had been consumed. (In comparison, 270 pounds of fish were caught per islander in 1981.) By then, the trading ships were also delivering annually some eighteen pounds per person of crackers, biscuits, and Twisties, a cheese-flavored corn snack. Smoking increased dramatically, as did alcohol consumption. Through the 1960s, the only noteworthy health problems on the islands had been skin diseases, asthma, and infectious diseases such as chicken pox, measles, and leprosy. (Modern medical services and a trained physician had been available in Tokelau since 1917.) In the decades that followed, diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, gout, and cancer appeared. This coincided with a decrease in cholesterol levels, consistent with the decrease in saturated-fat consumption. Average weights increased by twenty to thirty pounds in men and women. A similar, albeit smaller, trend was seen in Tokelauan children. The only conspicuous departure from these trends was in 1979, when the chartered passenger-and-cargo ship Cenpac Rounder ran aground and the islanders went five months without a food or fuel delivery. “There was no sugar, flour, tobacco and starch foods,” reported the New Zealand Herald, “and the atoll hospitals reported a shortage of business during the enforced isolation. It was reported that the Tokelauans had been very healthy during that time and had returned to the pre-European diet of coconut and fish. Many people lost weight and felt very much better including some
of the diabetics.”
As for the migrants to New Zealand, the move brought “immediate and extensive changes” in diet: bread and potatoes replaced breadfruit, meat replaced fish, and coconuts virtually vanished from the diet. Fat and saturated-fat consumption dropped, to be replaced once again by carbohydrates, “the difference being due to the big increase in sucrose consumption.” This coincided with an almost immediate increase in weight and blood pressure, and a decrease in cholesterol levels—all more pronounced than the increases witnessed on Tokelau. Hypertension was twice as common among the migrants as among the Tokelauans who remained on the islands. The migrants also had an “exceptionally high incidence” of “diabetes, gout, and osteoarthritis, as well. A number of factors combined to make this higher disease incidence among the migrants difficult to explain. For one thing, the Tokelauans who emigrated smoked fewer cigarettes than those who remained on the atolls, so tobacco was unlikely to explain this pattern of disease. The migrants tended to be younger, too, which should have led to the appearance of less chronic disease on the mainland. And though the weights of the Tokelauan
migrants were “substantially higher” than those of the atoll-dwellers and, “in fact, obesity became a problem for some,” the migrant lifestyle was definitively the more rigorous of the two. The men worked in the forest service and casting shops of the railway; the women worked in electrical-assembly plants or clothing factories, or they cleaned offices during the evening hours, and they walked “some distance to and from the shops with their purchases.” Finally, the original Tokelauan diet had been remarkably high in fat and saturated fat, but the migrants consumed considerably less of both. If Keys’s hypothesis was correct, the migrants should have manifested less evidence of heart disease, not more."

The observation that monounsaturated fats both lower LDL cholesterol and raise HDL also came with an ironic twist: the principal fat in red meat, eggs, and bacon is not saturated fat, but the very same monounsaturated fat as in olive oil. The implications are almost impossible to believe after three decades of public-health recommendations suggesting that any red meat consumed should at least be lean, with any excess fat removed.

In the late 1980s, Krauss began a series of clinical trials to explore the association between diet and the dangerous small, dense LDL. The results of his seven trials have been consistent: the lower the fat in the diet and the higher the carbohydrates, the smaller and denser the LDL and the more likely the atherogenic pattern B appears; that is, the more carbohydrates and the less fat, the greater the risk of heart disease.

On a diet that Krauss calls the “average American diet,” with 35 percent of the calories from fat, one in three men will have the atherogenic pattern B profile. On a diet of 46 percent fat, this proportion drops: only one man in every five manifests the atherogenic profile. On a diet of only 10 percent fat, of the kind advocated by diet doctors Nathan Pritikin and Dean Ornish, two out of every three men will have small, dense LDL and, as a result, a predicted threefold higher risk of heart disease. The same pattern holds true in women and in children, but the percentages with small, dense LDL are lower. Krauss and his colleagues even tested the effect of types of fat on these lipoproteins, and reported that, the more saturated fat in the diet, the larger and fluffier the LDL—a beneficial effect.

One key fact to remember in this discussion is that LDL and LDL cholesterol are not one and the same. The LDL carries cholesterol, but the amount of cholesterol in each LDL particle will vary. Increasing the LDL cholesterol is not the same as increasing the number of LDL particles. There are two ways to increase the amount of cholesterol in LDL. One is to increase the amount of cholesterol secreted to begin with; the other is to decrease the rate of disposal of cholesterol once it’s been created (which is apparently what happens when we eat saturated fat). Either method will eventually result in elevated LDL cholesterol. Joseph Goldstein and Michael Brown worked out the details of the clearance-and-disposal mechanism in the 1970s, and this work won them the Nobel Prize.

This model also explains, as Pete Ahrens suggested in 1961, why high-carbohydrate diets appear innocuous in populations that are chronically undernourished. This was inevitably the case with those Southeast Asian populations extolled by Keys and others for their low total-cholesterol levels and apparent absence of heart disease. Such populations lived on carbohydrate-rich diets out of economic necessity rather than choice. Their diets were predominantly unrefined carbohydrates because that’s what they cultivated and it was all they could afford. As Ahrens had noted, the great proportion of individuals in such populations barely eked out enough calories to survive. This was true not only of Japan in the years after World War II, but of Greece and other areas of the Mediterranean as well. If these populations indeed had low cholesterol and suffered little from heart disease, a relative lack of calories and a near-complete absence of refined carbohydrates would have been responsible, not the low intake of saturated fat. In developed nations—the United States, for example—where calories are plentiful, it would be the carbohydrates pushing our metabolisms toward the production of atherogenic lipoproteins. Here, too, the saturated fat in the diet is of little significance.