U
Usual Suspect
Guest
chelsea who counts on her fingers wrote:
>>>><...>
>>>>
>>>>>>>Alfalfa seed, sprouted, raw - - - - - 30.00
>>>>>>
>>>>>>3 kg of alfalfa sprouts per day? I don't think so.
>>>>>
>>>>>No. A varied veg*n diet will do, as long as the foods are high quality.
>>>>
>>>>How? Most of the foods you listed are very low-calorie, so people would have to gorge themselves
>>>>in order to get sufficient zinc.
>>>
>>><..>
>>>
>>>>Not a strawman. Show us how easy it is to get enough zinc on a veg-n diet without resorting to
>>>>supplements. Put together a menu, complete with food weights, containing 22.5mg of veg-n zinc
>>>>for us.
>>
>>You whiffed. Wanna try again or give up now? And I'm not snipping just
>
No, the charge was for you to put together a menu with food weights to reach 22.5mg of zinc. You
didn't. If you even TRIED to do it, you'd realize you'd have to drop your complaints about binge
eaters -- that's exactly what your diet, at least unsupplemented, requires to avoid zinc (and iron,
btw) deficiency.
Now, now, Chelsea. No need to lash out just because you cannot support your claims.
>>>Zinc
>>>
>>>Zinc is important for optimal cell growth, rapid wound healing and proper functioning of the
>>>immune system. Animal products, especially meat, provide 70% of the zinc in the typical American
>>>diet. Vegetarian intake of zinc is lower than nonvegetarians and the absorption of zinc from
>>>plant is lower than from animal products. The RDA for zinc is 15 mg for men and 12 mg for women.
>>>There is some controversy over this figure. In the United States only a small percentage of
>>>individuals consume the recommended amount of zinc, and yet deficiencies are rarely seen. The
>>>World Health Organization recommends from one third to three quarters of the USA RDA. Well
>>>planned vegetarian diets can provide as much as 20mg of zinc. Good sources include: whole grain
>>>cereals, mushrooms, peas, sea vegetables, beans, tofu, tempeh, textured vegetable protein, nuts,
>>>wheat germ, milk, and cheeses. http://www.nutrition.cornell.edu/foodguide/guidelin.html
>>
>>Most of the above contain phytates which bind zinc and prevent absorption.
>
> Which is why vegetarians need consume 50% more than the RDA.
At least that much more. What do the serum studies show, though?
>>Milk and cheese contain very little zinc. One eight-ounce serving of milk contains only 5% USRDA
>>of zinc; I guess you'd get enough from drinking a gallon a day. I showed you how many pounds of
>>mushrooms it would take to get the RDA for zinc.
>
> 'Well planned vegetarian diets can provide as much as 20mg of zinc.'
Which is zinc-deficient for males.
> It follows that well planned vegetarian diets. comprised of high quality produce, can provide as
> much as 32mg of zinc.
Ipse dixit.
-------------
Organic More Nutritious? Even the Organic Industry Doesn't Think So!
by Alex Avery
Is organic food more nutritious? The simple answer is no. While some studies have been trumpeted as
having finally shown the nutritional superiority of organic foods, other studies of similar crops
show either no difference or superiority of conventional produce. Many factors affect nutrient and
mineral content of food, especially produce (genetics, sunlight, moisture, pests, harvest date/time
of day, time lag from harvest to consumption, etc.). Any differences which may result from the use
of organic or conventional farming practices cannot be detected.
But don’t take our word for it. Look at what others have had to say about this question:
-- Even the organic foods industry has been forced to admit that their products offer no significant
nutritional advantages. Katherine DiMatteo, spokesperson for the U.S. Organic Trade Association, was
asked on ABC’s 20/20 (February 4, 2000) whether organic foods were more nutritious than their
conventional counterparts. She twice responded that “organic foods are as nutritious as any other
product.” Not more nutritious, merely “as nutritious.”
--The Tufts University Health & Nutrition letter
(http://www.phys.com/b_nutrition/02solutions/10tufts/tuftsqa/organic.htm) answered the question
of whether organic is more nutritious this way: “No one knows. The question is a difficult one
to study because of all the factors besides farming methods that could affect nutritional
quality, including soil type and climate. The evidence from the small body of reliable studies
available thus far does not show any significant differences between the nutrient content of
organically grown and conventionally grown food.”
--UC Davis nutritionist Dr. Gail Feenstra says, “As much as I'd like to say yes, unfortunately
the evidence doesn't show that it is. The studies are equivocal; there are no definitive
studies that show that organic is much better than conventionally-produced produce."
--Consumer Reports, a magazine that strongly favors organic foods (and has recommended it
several times in the past), wrote this after its own evaluation of organic foods Dec. 15, 1997.
(available at www.consumerreports.com/Special/News/Reports/9712n001.html): “Yet organic produce
tastes no different than ‘conventionally’ grown produce, and any nutritional differences there
might be between them are likely so subtle as to evade detection.”
-- Canada’s Manitoba Agriculture and Food agency
(www.gov.mb.ca/agriculture/homeec/cbd03s01.htm) had this to say: “Nutritional value of plants
depends on genetics, availability of water, amount of sunlight, maturity when picked, how long
it took to come to market and whether it was properly handled and refrigerated. Numerous
laboratory tests have not found any substantial nutritional differences in organically and
conventionally grown produce.”
--The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
(http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/research/researchfund/fs2docs/fs7061.htm): “Various
comparisons have been made on the nutrient content of plants and on other components of
nutritional quality. Although differences can be found they are not consistent among the
different experiments that have been conducted. Varying the soil nutrients or other growing
conditions could conceivably produce similar results. There is no conclusive evidence that
crops grown organically are either inferior or superior nutritionally. There are major
differences between experiments and among crops within the same experiment.”
Dr. Clarence Swanton, professor in the Department of Plant Agriculture at the University of Guelph,
Ontario, Canada says, “There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that I am aware of that
[organic food] is nutritionally better for you.”
http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articles/1999/oct_18_97.htm
----------
See also: http://www.price-pottenger.org/Articles/OrganicNutrition.html
http://www.ivillage.co.uk/food/cook/health/articles/0,10103,164370_526834,00.html
http://www.nature.com/nsu/000831/000831-4.html
>>>* 'Studies have shown that the mineral content of foods such as fruit and vegetables has
>>>decreased over the years. A study by David Thomas makes alarming reading. Using government data
>>>on the chemical composition of various foods between 1940-1991, Thomas shows, for example, that
>>>for seven vegetables analysed between 1978-1991 the average reduction in zinc was 59% and for
>>>copper it was a staggering 72%.
>>>
>>>A reduction in the mineral content of food may apply equally across the board to organic and
>>>non-organic food because neither organic or conventional farmers replace the all-important trace
>>>minerals such as zinc in the soil.
>>>http://www.familiesonline.co.uk/topics/health/health_organic_food_farming.htm
>>
>>****.
>
> Ipse dixit, liar.
See above. Not ipse dixit.
>>>'Over a two-year period, Bob Smith, the study's author and president of Doctor's Data, a trace
>>>minerals laboratory in West Chicago, Ill., compared organic and conventional apples, pears,
>>>potatoes, corn and wheat. Among his findings: The organic produce contained, on average, 63 per
>>>cent more calcium, 59 per cent more iron and 60 per cent more zinc; overall, the organic foods
>>>contained more of 20 out of 22 trace elements studied.
>>>http://www.eap.mcgill.ca/MagRack/SF/Summer%2094%20A.htm ) *
>>
>>Evasion.
>
> We know.
Go on then, skank, put together a diet with weights showing how much food must be consumed for a
veg-n to get a full RDA of zinc.
>>>><...>
>>>>
>>>>>>>Alfalfa seed, sprouted, raw - - - - - 30.00
>>>>>>
>>>>>>3 kg of alfalfa sprouts per day? I don't think so.
>>>>>
>>>>>No. A varied veg*n diet will do, as long as the foods are high quality.
>>>>
>>>>How? Most of the foods you listed are very low-calorie, so people would have to gorge themselves
>>>>in order to get sufficient zinc.
>>>
>>><..>
>>>
>>>>Not a strawman. Show us how easy it is to get enough zinc on a veg-n diet without resorting to
>>>>supplements. Put together a menu, complete with food weights, containing 22.5mg of veg-n zinc
>>>>for us.
>>
>>You whiffed. Wanna try again or give up now? And I'm not snipping just
>
No, the charge was for you to put together a menu with food weights to reach 22.5mg of zinc. You
didn't. If you even TRIED to do it, you'd realize you'd have to drop your complaints about binge
eaters -- that's exactly what your diet, at least unsupplemented, requires to avoid zinc (and iron,
btw) deficiency.
Now, now, Chelsea. No need to lash out just because you cannot support your claims.
>>>Zinc
>>>
>>>Zinc is important for optimal cell growth, rapid wound healing and proper functioning of the
>>>immune system. Animal products, especially meat, provide 70% of the zinc in the typical American
>>>diet. Vegetarian intake of zinc is lower than nonvegetarians and the absorption of zinc from
>>>plant is lower than from animal products. The RDA for zinc is 15 mg for men and 12 mg for women.
>>>There is some controversy over this figure. In the United States only a small percentage of
>>>individuals consume the recommended amount of zinc, and yet deficiencies are rarely seen. The
>>>World Health Organization recommends from one third to three quarters of the USA RDA. Well
>>>planned vegetarian diets can provide as much as 20mg of zinc. Good sources include: whole grain
>>>cereals, mushrooms, peas, sea vegetables, beans, tofu, tempeh, textured vegetable protein, nuts,
>>>wheat germ, milk, and cheeses. http://www.nutrition.cornell.edu/foodguide/guidelin.html
>>
>>Most of the above contain phytates which bind zinc and prevent absorption.
>
> Which is why vegetarians need consume 50% more than the RDA.
At least that much more. What do the serum studies show, though?
>>Milk and cheese contain very little zinc. One eight-ounce serving of milk contains only 5% USRDA
>>of zinc; I guess you'd get enough from drinking a gallon a day. I showed you how many pounds of
>>mushrooms it would take to get the RDA for zinc.
>
> 'Well planned vegetarian diets can provide as much as 20mg of zinc.'
Which is zinc-deficient for males.
> It follows that well planned vegetarian diets. comprised of high quality produce, can provide as
> much as 32mg of zinc.
Ipse dixit.
-------------
Organic More Nutritious? Even the Organic Industry Doesn't Think So!
by Alex Avery
Is organic food more nutritious? The simple answer is no. While some studies have been trumpeted as
having finally shown the nutritional superiority of organic foods, other studies of similar crops
show either no difference or superiority of conventional produce. Many factors affect nutrient and
mineral content of food, especially produce (genetics, sunlight, moisture, pests, harvest date/time
of day, time lag from harvest to consumption, etc.). Any differences which may result from the use
of organic or conventional farming practices cannot be detected.
But don’t take our word for it. Look at what others have had to say about this question:
-- Even the organic foods industry has been forced to admit that their products offer no significant
nutritional advantages. Katherine DiMatteo, spokesperson for the U.S. Organic Trade Association, was
asked on ABC’s 20/20 (February 4, 2000) whether organic foods were more nutritious than their
conventional counterparts. She twice responded that “organic foods are as nutritious as any other
product.” Not more nutritious, merely “as nutritious.”
--The Tufts University Health & Nutrition letter
(http://www.phys.com/b_nutrition/02solutions/10tufts/tuftsqa/organic.htm) answered the question
of whether organic is more nutritious this way: “No one knows. The question is a difficult one
to study because of all the factors besides farming methods that could affect nutritional
quality, including soil type and climate. The evidence from the small body of reliable studies
available thus far does not show any significant differences between the nutrient content of
organically grown and conventionally grown food.”
--UC Davis nutritionist Dr. Gail Feenstra says, “As much as I'd like to say yes, unfortunately
the evidence doesn't show that it is. The studies are equivocal; there are no definitive
studies that show that organic is much better than conventionally-produced produce."
--Consumer Reports, a magazine that strongly favors organic foods (and has recommended it
several times in the past), wrote this after its own evaluation of organic foods Dec. 15, 1997.
(available at www.consumerreports.com/Special/News/Reports/9712n001.html): “Yet organic produce
tastes no different than ‘conventionally’ grown produce, and any nutritional differences there
might be between them are likely so subtle as to evade detection.”
-- Canada’s Manitoba Agriculture and Food agency
(www.gov.mb.ca/agriculture/homeec/cbd03s01.htm) had this to say: “Nutritional value of plants
depends on genetics, availability of water, amount of sunlight, maturity when picked, how long
it took to come to market and whether it was properly handled and refrigerated. Numerous
laboratory tests have not found any substantial nutritional differences in organically and
conventionally grown produce.”
--The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
(http://www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/research/researchfund/fs2docs/fs7061.htm): “Various
comparisons have been made on the nutrient content of plants and on other components of
nutritional quality. Although differences can be found they are not consistent among the
different experiments that have been conducted. Varying the soil nutrients or other growing
conditions could conceivably produce similar results. There is no conclusive evidence that
crops grown organically are either inferior or superior nutritionally. There are major
differences between experiments and among crops within the same experiment.”
Dr. Clarence Swanton, professor in the Department of Plant Agriculture at the University of Guelph,
Ontario, Canada says, “There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that I am aware of that
[organic food] is nutritionally better for you.”
http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articles/1999/oct_18_97.htm
----------
See also: http://www.price-pottenger.org/Articles/OrganicNutrition.html
http://www.ivillage.co.uk/food/cook/health/articles/0,10103,164370_526834,00.html
http://www.nature.com/nsu/000831/000831-4.html
>>>* 'Studies have shown that the mineral content of foods such as fruit and vegetables has
>>>decreased over the years. A study by David Thomas makes alarming reading. Using government data
>>>on the chemical composition of various foods between 1940-1991, Thomas shows, for example, that
>>>for seven vegetables analysed between 1978-1991 the average reduction in zinc was 59% and for
>>>copper it was a staggering 72%.
>>>
>>>A reduction in the mineral content of food may apply equally across the board to organic and
>>>non-organic food because neither organic or conventional farmers replace the all-important trace
>>>minerals such as zinc in the soil.
>>>http://www.familiesonline.co.uk/topics/health/health_organic_food_farming.htm
>>
>>****.
>
> Ipse dixit, liar.
See above. Not ipse dixit.
>>>'Over a two-year period, Bob Smith, the study's author and president of Doctor's Data, a trace
>>>minerals laboratory in West Chicago, Ill., compared organic and conventional apples, pears,
>>>potatoes, corn and wheat. Among his findings: The organic produce contained, on average, 63 per
>>>cent more calcium, 59 per cent more iron and 60 per cent more zinc; overall, the organic foods
>>>contained more of 20 out of 22 trace elements studied.
>>>http://www.eap.mcgill.ca/MagRack/SF/Summer%2094%20A.htm ) *
>>
>>Evasion.
>
> We know.
Go on then, skank, put together a diet with weights showing how much food must be consumed for a
veg-n to get a full RDA of zinc.
