Harvard study: plant fats replacing animal fats linked to lowering heart disease

[TylerDurden]

That's absurd. Just because the scientific community chooses to do more studies or less studies on a particular subject doesn't inform at all about importance, or in the level of toxins toxicity.

Yes it does. Until more studies are done on other toxins such as found in air-pollution, we have to , for now, concede that the available data isn't strongly in favour of air-pollution. Otherwise, it's just guess-work.

[KD]

well, there is is difference is saying, one should not be neurotic about chemicals and vaccines, and just focus on eliminating toxins that they have control of, and saying that toxins created even at the basic level of cooking are vastly more more harmful to us than chemicals and vaccines. I only know what I've read about vaccines and remain skeptical of its extremes, but chemicals found from atom bombs and power plants to basic stuff like diesel gasoline can have nearly 100 carcinogenic compounds. These are things that affect even individuals who avoid pesticides and have cleaned their house of household pollutants. I agree most health seekers could do best not fussing over this stuff, and their best bet to eliminate any chemicals both intake and detox is to not cook food, but chemicals I believe are a major factor in disease.

[Raw Kyle]

Yes it does. Until more studies are done on other toxins such as found in air-pollution, we have to , for now, concede that the available data isn't strongly in favour of air-pollution. Otherwise, it's just guess-work.

The problem is that you make sweeping declarative statements all the time, as if you are the keeper of all of this information. Honestly if you just said "I think the toxins from cooked food are more important health problems than those from industry" or something like that I would feel a lot better. Instead it's more like "cooked food toxins cause more health problems than environmental ones" and very often reads more like "anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid." It's all your opinion based on limited personal research, but it doesn't read that way.

[TylerDurden]

The problem is that you make sweeping declarative statements all the time, as if you are the keeper of all of this information. Honestly if you just said "I think the toxins from cooked food are more important health problems than those from industry" or something like that I would feel a lot better. Instead it's more like "cooked food toxins cause more health problems than environmental ones" and very often reads more like "anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid." It's all your opinion based on limited personal research, but it doesn't read that way.

Well, up to you how you read it, based on your opinions/biases. However, I can only go by my own experiences and report likewise:- which is that I get numerous reports from the media on the negative health-effects of cooked-foods on a regular basis, but that reports on toxins from other sources such as air-pollution are far, far rarer by comparison. When one examines the issue of other kinds of claimed toxins (such as vaccines, electromagnetic sensitivity,mercury amalgams etc.) then  general scientific concensus is extremely dismissive of such concerns(though even they, admittedly, accept that a tiny minority might well suffer badly from the above.

At any rate, from my POV, all we have as definitive, are past and current anecdotal reports from fellow RVAFers and past and incoming studies from various scientific bodies.  We can't accurately predict what future scientific studies can bring, so it's unwise(IMO) to speculate, beyond what we've been given, so far.  I would be prepared to speculate further if I was a biochemist or some food-science-oriented specialist, but I'm not, so have to go with the available data I have coming in.

[William]

I can only go by my own experiences and report likewise

I don't think anyone objects to your personal experience, it's your interpretation and extrapolation of them that is a problem.
For instance your account of tallow-making indicates that you made cooked fat, not tallow, and got even sicker than I when I ate cooked fat.

I dare you to eat properly made tallow or ghee in proportion to lean meat; then you can report experience, which will be respected.

[TylerDurden]

Unfortunately for you, we already have plenty of accounts from other RPDers on this forum on the harm done to their health by pemmican and ghee. My input isn't required, therefore, as the evidence against pemmican and ghee is already there.

As for me, I've already stated that I'm going to try a pemmican experiment within a few months, primarily out of curiosity. Ghee may be easier for me to get though in the UK(it'll also be bound to have the worst effects on my health so I won't have to endure it for long).  In order to make the experiment valid, though, I would be forced to eat only or almost wholly pemmican and/or ghee, as eating any raw grassfed meats/high-meat etc. would inevitably reduce any symptoms as it does with cooked foods to some extent - not a pleasant thought having to be constantly tired, fat etc. for a couple of weeks, purely for an experiment to be correctly followed.

I should add that I don't for one moment expect you, William, to be convinced re the above experiment. You will inevitably pretend it was "the wrong kind " of pemmican/ghee(as applicable).