Weston A. Price Foundation: shills and quacks

- Activator-X - was a bit like... here we are selling you the worlds only... last one folks here it is... it's on a special today only two for one... we can offer you some credit or get it now and pay in 2060... garbage! The WPF goons feel its ok to call it vitamin K2 because it sits in with their wonderful world of flesh eating. My point is its marketing at its best... the big build up to.......... - Activator-X - What next - Suckervator K2 - Gave me a break!

Listen Sebastapol if we were meant to eat pork chops, beef, eggs, butter (from cows goats I don't care where) we would have been able to take it right down bugs and all. Further we were not designed to eat cooked food (white blood cell spike proves this argument - period) and we sure as hell can’t eat flesh RAW! Our teeth are not designed to rip and tear like other flesh eating animals but grind because we are not animals for we have souls and can think of what we put into our temporal bodies! Our intestinal lining has protrusions and ridges and this has been proven that meat cooked and raw gets stuck and can rot in some cases for 20+ years (again scientists have proven this)!!! Our anatomy is not designed for it its way too long to process and much to tough on our body - bacterial load is huge from living flesh and rotting flesh - period. Truth is we know now that pathogens are a big deal - case and point - if you don't know anything about parasites before you think about responding do some homework.

Casein is 20 times less addictive than opium! Calves need it for a reason! You don’t think you are addicted to milk, butter, ice cream... You are because it is additive and was not designed for our consumption!

Weston Price told us all that we needed if you listen carefully to his original work! We know now that what we lacked was "nutrient dense" foods not animal flesh!!! Of course Animals are going to be nutrient dense like humans... by eating animals you are not only IN-HUMAN you are boarding a cannibal thinking. For eating any flesh is just simply wrong our bodies have been blessed and we have been gifted with a SOUL to think about that which we put into our temples! Unlike a cow, goat or another animal we have the power to THINK!!! This was our gift. Religion or no belief system its irrelevant but being awake and thinking allows you to look at rights and wrongs... listen to your soul from within and you have the answer. The easy option is to follow an ill educated business women with little integrity or look at nature... with just 1% DNA difference between us and the big guys you have your answer here also.

Why do most folks have reactions to casein (milk protein) - case closed because you don't have an answer and won’t find one just your assumption! As babies we stop consuming mother’s milk 12 - 24 months! If we were supposed to have milk we would be sucking on mothers breast over 2 years - you dig me! If we were supposed to consume ANIMAL milk we would do it right from the animal udders and all not from a PLASTIC container - are we thinking yet... What do you think butter is!!! and a goat is seriously wrong - that's just sick... if you consume milk you are sick or will be for there is a large build up of mucus thought to be several pounds blocking or constricting most organ or causing an inflammation type response. Let’s not talk about all the hormones, puss cells and pathogens like the famous parasites.

Most folks are like walking zombies following other zombies that can’t think for themselves and want to attack anyone who challenges "THEIR" doctrine their normality because "THEY" cant compute their little world is so fragile and sick with twisted and confused thinking laid down by “MY MOTHER TOUGHT ME THIS GARBAGE” – Case and point you know that it’s ok to eat flesh (you think) because your mother brought you on up on beef steak, lamb chops and chicken soup with a little fillet of fish! But you failed your soul if you don’t get the plan now and if it doesn’t feel wrong you are a lost soul!

People like Sally Fallen make a nice little living from selling books on eating flesh - slight conflict of interests don't you think... perhaps you don’t see anything wrong with this way of living and sleeping but it’s the basic premise for a corrupt mind... now if you said to me... Hey have you heard of Sally Fallen... you founded this organisation that don’t sell any books and that don't pull in lots of cash and don’t over sell their doctrine and they are trying to promote good nutrition and a healthy lifestyle and haven’t turned what they are doing into business profiting from it – get the point! I may just listen but we both know that the very foundations of the WAPF are weak because it is a business profiting or not Sally profits from her book sales... on top of this there was already a foundation which Sally worked for which is documented above and makes it clear why there is a HUGE trust issue.

There are way too many people on the planet selling you something they have a vested interest in - therefore they are not impartial or independent for he who comes with nothing has nothing to gain or lose and those who bring everything have everything to lose - use your heads folks it doesn't cost a bean to think and question bad marketing and promoters of something they can lose if they don't sell it to you!

Don’t listen to me... question your soul and what feels right and what feels wrong to you.

two thoughts and a long screed: a) tofu is NOT fermented but it is not "poison" as a result - for those who digest soy well, and i am among the, it;s a wonderful, versatile food that makes up into all kinds of tasty dishes.

I rather stumbled in on this conversation, after hearing Lierre Keith on KPFA's "Your wn health and Fitness" hosted by Layna Berman. I've been healthily vegetarian, leaning more and mroe toward the vegan diet, for close to 40 years now (!) and would like to weigh in a bit on the soy issue, and on Ms Keith's treatment of vegetarian philosophy and personality.

I'd actually like to hear Ms Keith debate Frances Moore Lappe, who popularized the "Diet for a Small Planet" concepts in the 1970s tat led to an ecological apologetics for vegetarianism. some of Ms Keith's assertions about grain production and industrial agriculture are worthy of consideration, but in my opinion they do not argue ipso facto against the environmental sustainability of a plant-based diet; they merely suggest that we need to look at the total environmental impact of various types of agriculture pro0duct and practice.

now back to tofu. correct on both counts that it's not fermented, just coagulated into curds and whey with minerals (magnesium chloride from sea water, most traditionally, or calcium salts such as calcium sulfate) and that it's eaten as a regualr part of the diet in many parts of the Japanese archipelago including, especially, Okinawa.

for whatever reasons, mostly having to do with digestibility I imagine, most of the Asian countries that use soy as a major source of protein and just good eating do fraction the beans in some way 9with the eveption of green soybeans, known as edamame). the Chinese and Japanese grind the beans for soymilk (though the remaining soy pulp is also used in cooking - known as okara, pronounced like the green African-origin vegetable "okra".) Indonesians, who live in a much warmer climate than most of China or Japan, ferment the beans into tempeh cakes - those who have tried this process at home know that they must maintain an atmosphere of abut 90 F (35 centigrade)for the culture to "take." that's an average ambient humid air temperatre in much of Indonesia.)
the fermented products and sea vegetables that are often eaten as condiments along with tofu and rice in these cultures may indeed increase their digestibility, provide sources of trace minerals, etc. most of the Japanese fermented products are the products of halophilic (salt-loving_)bacteria, and there ma be a downside to their heavy use; some epidemiologists have suggested that there is a relatively high rate of stomach cancer among the Japanese because of the high use of salt-fermented foods. everything in moderation, I suppose. on the ther hand, these foods are sources of favorable lactic-acid bacteria that are hard to obtain otherwise in a non-dairy diet.

I love tofu and it has always agreed with me well. I'm not ethnically East Asian though I often joke that some parts of my family were so far Eastern European as to really BE Asian; my maternal grandfather definitely looked Asiatic, and I have a rather Asian digestion as well as perspective) I grew up in port cities where Chinese food containing tofu was a fairly regualr part of my diet, and Japanese food including tofu an occasional and welcome treat,long before the hippies discovered it (before there WERE hippies, actually - I'm over 50 now.)

my own working hypothesis-approaching-theory about diet is that indiciduals are all somewhat unique in what foods are optimum and in what proportions to each other, and that there are three factors of relatively equal weight in findingone;s own best eating plan.

one's own genetic makeup is a good third of the puzzle; people from northern climates where neither fresh fruits and vegetables nor high-starch and often moderately high protein sources of energy were available may be better adapted to a diet higher in fairy and/or meats than people who live in a more temperate or even tropical zone.

the next important factor is one;s present climate. eating oranges in morocco bu aples in Poland makes good sense, and there is something to be said, with some modifications, for the bioregionalism that the recent "locavore" approach promotes 9thougha ine of 100 miles or 150 miles seems somewhat arbitrary to me for deciding whether a food is :locally produced." there's good environmental sense as well as good health sense to eating with the locally produced.

finally there is the influence of our childhood diet and the climate (and social) conditions around us as well as your family's food traditions. soemone who was raised in Los Angeles, as I was, and ate fresh local citrus almost daily, along with traditional mexican/SOuthwest style food (beans, corn tortillas, shredded fresh cabbage, tomatoes and other subtropical fruits and vegetables) may have a different pattern than someone of similar ethnic background who grew up in New England. I had a friend who excalimed that the Polarity cleansing diet, which uses a lot of orange and lemon juice along with olive or almond oil and garlic, seemed really harsh to him when i suggested it as a 14 day program, many years ago. I thought about it, thought about his upbringing in Massachusetts and Vermont, and said that there is a folk tradition there if using apple cider vinegar 9which doesn't agree with me at all; vinegar is a migraine trigger in my diet!)

getting back to soy: I'm very willing to say that a food that is heath-giving and delicious to one person is not necessarily going to be health giving and delicious to another. for whatever combinations of genetics,childhood exposure, and personal circumstance, I really thrive on a diet that includes goodly amounts of tofu and other soy foods as protein sources. I'm quite happlily vegetarian but find that if I eat whole legumes every day along with the rest of my high-fiber diet, I need to eliminate more often than is convenient (too much information, perhaps...but four such trips to the toilet between 6 AM and 1 or 2 PM can be a distraction, especially for a scholteacher, even more esepcailly if my first "gotta get up and GO" was at 4 AM) so I vary the Mexican-style whole beans and the split pea soup with tofu ranging from fairly traditional stir-fry with a grain to a good toamto-pasta sauce with firm tofu sauteed with onions, garlic, and herbs and used as a sort of "ground meat substitute" to give it texture as well as good protein content. (recipe available on request; it's popular even with omnivores and I served it with good results to 250 or so people at a PTA back-to-scho0ol dinner last year.)

my own guess, based on my studies on epidemiology and public health nutrition as well as common sense, is that eating a diet with a variety of vegetables, grains, and protein sources is a significant improvement over the standard processed-food diet eaten by too many people in the US and, sadly, worldwide today. I honestly believe that people who eat a varied, organic foods-based "mostly plants" diet as Michael Pollan advises, with moderate amounts of organic meats and dairy will be fairly healthy as a population, as will vegans who eat a wide variety of healthy foods including many vegetables, fruits, grains, beans and, yes, tofu and other soy foods. my prediction is that after 20 eyars, as GROUPS, they will both lok pretty good in terms of health outcomes relative to the general population.

I do respect that some people kind they just can;t make it on a vegan, or even a lacto-vegetarian, diet. as I say, we each have a unique dietary "fingerprint" and those reading this are blessed to live in a world where there is an abundance of healthy food available to us.

Lierre Kieth raises some important and interesting issues about the sustainability of various criops, but I balk at her suggestion that "vegans are prone to rage" as she recently suggested n Layna Berman's program on KPFA - to which Ms Berman, who *had* seemed more restrained in her critiques of vegetarian diets recently, averred that veganism was a "type of eating disorder" in whichpeople went into denial about the problems that their dietary beliefs were causing!!!

I'll eat my evening organic natural-nigari tofu burger or Japanese-style grilled tofu with vegetables, or my morning eggless pancakes made with organic soymilk in the bater, without regrets or worries. I even eat the occasional TVP "no-meatball" (my kid, who is a healthy.high-achieving high schooler, likes them in spaghetti sauce for a change.) I like my vegetarian ethos, but I won't lecture or begrudge my omnivorous friends their home-raised eggs or even lamb chops. t;s not how I choose to eat or raise food, but I'm really and truly all right with "live and let live": without calling each other silly names for following different diet practices.

And they eat TONS of pork!

"There is no need for animal products in the human diet."

How long have you been vegan Tom?

Hi Tom,

There is abundant need for animal products in the human diet for our best health, for how our species has evolved thus far. I've been paying attention to dietary practices since 1984 when I was 15, I'm 43 now.
I've seen the evidence with myself and other people here in San Diego, CA.
The evidence is abundantly clear, and I've clearly proved it with myself, beyond question. Though I realize there will be differences of what works best for different people in terms of 'dietary balance'.
People can also go through phases, especially in the modern world with so many choices.

It's all a matter of what works, you're body gives you results based on what you consume in real time: minutes, days, a week, ....not months, not years, not decades, except as affirmations of what's already been confirmed by good awareness in the near times.
That's basically what being 'in-tune' is.
We are human, we are generalist omnivores, fundamentally speaking, for our best health.

There are plenty of studies supporting both sides though. There are lots of variables.
I've only shared just a little bit. I've got plenty of real experience with readily correlate-able results with food and my body. I wanted to figure it out. What causes disease, what causes problems. It's not animal products. What causes disease, many things contribute, some more than others, and it's all a matter of balance and quantity. Animal products, fundamentally speaking are good for us, generally speaking. :o) Plant foods are great for us too. They both are. The basic four food groups works best for me. Cooked and raw, as is customarily with the the respective foods in our culture(s).

Signed,
Generalist Fundamental Omnivore

Dumbass. Typical hippy confusing abuse with sensible animal farming practices. It's just like the femmo hags who consider a smack on the backside the same as a punch in the face. Wake up fucktard.

How can you argue on one hand that dairy should not be consumed because it only began with the Neolithic revolution - and on the other hand that whole grains (and modern varities of vegetables & fruits)should be the basis of our diet - again these foods have only been available since the Neolithic revolution.

My argument is not "dairy should not be consumed because it only began with the Neolithic revolution", my argument was that the "traditional diets include milk so you should drink a lot of milk" argument is bogus.

I don't give a damn what a "traditional diet" is: I care what a compassionate, sustainable, healthful diet is. But, if someone is going to argue that consuming X must be good because people have been consuming X for a long time, and in fact people have not been consuming X for a long time, then their reasoning falls apart.

As for grains, the fact is that we have been eating grains a whole lot longer than the Neolithic revolution. Human consumption of grains goes back at least 23,000, and perhaps as far as 100,000 years. (Interestingly, it's even been suggested that bipedalism in hominids is tied to our ancestors adapting to eat grass seeds, though of course that's ancient enough to not be relevant. But then, so is the paleolithic.) That fact doesn't tell us whether eating grains is or is not healthful; but it does break the back of the "I only eat caveman food!" argument against them.

Some Inuit virtually only ate Caribuo whilst others only virtually ever ate Fish. All were almost immune to the diseases of civilisation.

And, consistent with what I said, caribuo flesh and especially marrow is high in unsaturated fat. (You know, rather than saying "Please read Stefansson & Price", it's nice to give specific links.)

But freedom from the "diseases of civilization" is seen in hunter-gather populations that rely primarily on plant foods, as well as farming populations eating a low-fat diet.

Low rates of obesity and diabetes have nothing to do with meat versus plants, and everything to do with energy density and activity levels.

But please open your mind to the fact that we are part of nature and we should eat what we have evolved to eat.

This teleological argument is, to be blunt, a load of bullshit.

Not only are the beliefs promulgated by "paleo diet" advocates about what out ancestors ate often just plain wrong, but they're irrelevant. Evolution does not care about ethics, nor about your longevity after your offspring are able to fend for themselves. It is an explanation of what did happen, never a guide to what you should do. After all, we "naturally evolved" to murder and steal -- those who eliminated the competition and took their resources had a great advantage. We "naturally evolved" to die after we spawn, to make room for the next generation. We "naturally evolved" to exist in hierarchical packs, but I don't hear many people saying we should do away with democracy.

So, leave the caveman behind. Step on up and evolve your thinking: eat a healthy, sustainable, and compassionate plant-based diet.

Tom Swiss - proprietor, unreasonable.org