Friday, November 25, 2016

Is the Shikimate Pathway proof that there is a Higher Power?

Makes one wonder what this is really about now doesn't it? It might seem obvious that the title was meant to conjure up beliefs in what's known as Intelligent Design. I was once referred to a scholarly article about how life could not have originated on Earth on its own as the possible combinations of molecules needing to come together in a specific way to create the proteins needed for life had been calculated to be so enormous that they could not possibly have occurred. Mathematically speaking. The religious zealots had used science to prove that Intelligent Design was the only possible explanation for life.

I haven't figured that one out yet. There are a lot of people out there with way more time on their hands to think about stupid shit than what I want to indulge in.

Realistically, this is the problem of an infinite number of monkeys typing away randomly at an infinite number of keyboards and given an infinite amount of time, one of them will produce Shakespeare. The problem with all that is when the first monkey writes the first sonnet, then you no longer have an infinite number, it has then become finite. And the predicted result has occurred. Just because you calculate the odds against a random set of complex proteins forming as being too great to ever happen only means that when it did, the experiment was over. 

Life formed. The monkey wrote 'To be or not to be.'

And here on Earth, one random broken down old man, a former chef, a scholar, a former researcher into the world of mycology; writes about how one company, has elevated itself from just a corporation that made money to that pinnacle of achievement, Deification. 

Monsanto Corporation, soon to be Bayer/Monsanto, has declared itself to be without fault. Without blame. Bearing no responsibility for any wrongdoing that lowly mortal men might ever consider as having been attributed to the machinations of modern corporate existence. That throughout their existence, the products they manufactured, the methods they used, and the irresponsible way in which they disposed of industrial waste, were just a part of doing business, and as such, we, the public, must bear the brunt of cleanup costs, suffer the ecological damage and rejoice in the benefits that Monsanto believes that they have brought to our lowly, mortal existences. That things from their past (DDT, PCBs, Dioxin, etc.) have nothing to do with their drive to create the most comprehensive seed monopoly possible along with the complete control over all agricultural chemical production. 

Whether or not those chemicals harm the environment or not. Monsanto is going to control them. And the outcries of mere mortals be damned.

I assume that everyone out in the real world knows about the Hague Tribunal against Monsanto that took place last month in the Netherlands. I'm probably wrong, in my short life I have discovered that most people don't want to know anything about things they believe they have no control over. Like ecological disasters. It doesn't affect them, so watch the Kardashians on TV and the world is just fine. American food manufacturing is riff with horrific toxic chemicals that are causing long term diseases and degradation of our environment. Oh well, watch Dancing with the Stars and football and all is good. 

Unfortunately, it is not all good. There have been several studies done that have begun to show us just how pervasive and omnipresent the pesticide Glyphosate is in our environment, in our food supply, and in our bodies. And this is where the problems begin. Glyphosate interferes with the Shikimate Pathway in plants, (that's why they die when sprayed with the stuff) and also in bacteria. When we consume foods containing Glyphosate, it interferes with the life processes of the bacteria that live in our intestinal tracts. Both good and bad ones. Research show us this is happening, the conclusions are a lot harder to prove, but we know, WE KNOW, it is happening.

Monsanto response: So!

Something to think about.   

Shikimate Pathway
Odds against life  
GMO Answers as to why Glyphosate won't hurt you 
a bit better review of Samsel & Seneff 
Why gluten intolerance is growing

Sunday, November 6, 2016

It isn't groundbreaking to any thinking cognizant American. BUT, for the FDA it's GYNORMOUS

Couple days ago I wrote about how Almonds have now made it to the FDA 'Healthy" list. Not a bad thing. Probably from some corporate pressure, not saying which big Blue colored Diamond rated corporation that ten years ago got the FDA to change their rules for selling RAW almonds and thus put very nearly every other almond processor out of business. But that's the FDA's function, to do the bidding of BIG AGRIBUSINESSES and BIG DRUG COMPANIES. 

Well, that's what their function appears to be. Creating rules and procedures that protect the population from unsafe drugs, bad food manufacturing processes, and to be guardians of the health of all America might be their stated purpose, the reality is far far different. And I write about their failures all the time here on this blog. But for now, I want to congratulate the FDA for, well, for taking a step forward. The latest Dietary Guidelines came out a couple months ago. And they are a RADICAL change from the previous ones. In the past, the guidelines were drafted to ensure that the powerful food manufacturing corporations were happy. Concessions to each industry, making sure that processed foods were included. And in fact were placed with greater emphasis than real whole foods. 

This new Guide, is a departure from those concessions. It doesn't go quite far enough, however it's a start. You can take a look here (FDA Food Guidelines)  It's a hundred and forty-four pages of concepts that actually are a bit innovative for an agency that has never once done something like this. And by that I mean that this one time, the FDA has stated nutrition and health are closely related. Page 21.  They also tell us that we should 'limit calories from added sugars'. Page 33. Now, they also tell us to limit intake of transfats. The FDA earlier this year came out and declared that in two more years, transfats will no longer be allowed as an ingredient in any foods. Well, that's not true. Most manufacturers can petition to continue using the stuff and it probably won't make much difference, they will fill the shelves of stores much as they do now. But the FDA did finally admit they are not healthy. The Guide also tells us that we should consume low fat dairy products and/or soy. That was the seventies belief, and so much research is out now regarding how soy products are not in anyway healthy. But then soy is the third largest agricultural commodity in the US, so there's that concession.

The Guide also explains that you should eat grains, and at least fifty percent should be whole grains.

Then there are a couple of declarations that are just, well, weird. Page 35. "Nutritional needs should be met primarily with food"  This is a jab at the supplement industry. The FDA wants to control, sorry, REGULATE the supplement industry in a very bad way. And realistically, that isn't a bad idea, there has been some independent lab testing done of herbal stuff that was quite revealing. Hint hint, Large Arkansas Chain and some corner drug store brands that had little to none of the advertised herbs within the packages. Buyer Beware. And you get what you pay for. So, well, the advice is just odd. 

Page 44. Coconut oil and palm oils are not considered oils because they contain high levels of saturated fat. However the FDA says Canola, Soy other oils should be a part of your diet. Up to 27 grams. Daily. Really, CANOLA is toxic. But, it is the fifth largest agricultural commodity in America. Big bucks there. And then there is that saturated fat thing, these new guidelines tell us that we should be eating 26 ounces of meats, every week. TWENTY-SIX OUNCES!!!  And meats, all contain saturated fat. The really big thing that I don't understand is that same page 44 at the bottom is the statement that "Fats provide essential fatty acids and Vitamin E"  This one just makes me think that these provisions were added to keep the processed oil manufacturers happy. Because there isn't a single one of the oils they recommend, except olive oil, that contains much of the needed fatty acid, DHA. They all have ultra high levels of Omega-6 and low levels of the necessary Omega-3s. Read a bit about those here (the Omegas) Now I would like someone to please tell me how humans evolved needing processed plant oils in their diet in order to live. They are bad for humans, they should all be avoided at all costs, and especially, canola. Well, soy, corn, cottonseed, peanut, and well, all of them. The Guide describes how the Omegas comprise the polyunsaturated oil group. And that they are essential. We need to eat polyunsaturated fats to live. It's as if these people that wrote this Guide have not ever looked at the definitions of Omega fats, let alone the research defining how the body deals with the fats that are consumed. Yes, it's true we need Omega-6 fats, but you can get by with tiny amounts in your diet. And they will be a part of most of the vegetable material that you eat. And Omega-3 fats are the ones responsible for good health. Too many of the 6's and they outstrip the healthy aspects of the 3's. Processed oils contain HIGH amounts of Omega-6 and low amounts of Omega-3. The opposite of what you need for optimum health.

And just because back in the fifties one researcher, Dr. Ansel Keyes did a very poor job of assessing the effect of saturated fat on health, the world has taken those old worn out and outdated concepts as gospel. And the new research is showing that saturated fats are in fact healthy. Well, way way better than processed oils. But not a lot of money to be made telling the truth to anyone. 

Well, page 55. The Guide then tells about the Lacto-Ovo Vegetarian lifestyle. Man, why do the Feds push soy products. We know they are anti-nutritive, meaning they block the absorption of vitamins and minerals. They are extremely high in Lectins, which are toxic, and they have compounds that mimic human hormones. Not a good choice for anyone. EVER. And blah blah blah, I get the idea that none of these authors of the Guide have ever met a vegetarian. What would they do with someone that's a Vegan, that's beyond my guess. It must be the concept that Americans think for themselves and only eat real food and forgo the non-nutritive, convenience, chemical laden plasticized food that is manufactured for the sole purpose of keeping the agribusiness engine finely tuned to makiing money. Lots of it. 

Anyway, I gave up trying to read anymore than the first 70 pages of the new Guide. There is some pretty interesting stuff there. And the push toward Americans eating "Healthier" foods and living "Healthier Lifestyles" is a first for the FDA. Generally they tell us all to eat sugar, Crisco, Coke and Gatorade with every white flour white rice meal. So, for that, I applaud the FDA. 

They have just got a long long long way to go before they are even close to defining what is healthy, and what isn't.