Autism and Roundup-MIT scientist

[PGP]

An article dealing with the issue of autism and the use of Monsanto Roundup. I find it particularly interesting as it mentions the effect on gut bacteria and amino acid synthesis. Worth a look.

 

http://www.anh-usa.org/half-of-all-children-will-be-autistic-by-2025-warns-senior-research-scientist-at-mit/print/

[st434u]

And then you wonder why the world is so sick...

[J. D. Stembal]

This mind-blowing video presentation is buried in the above link.

 

[Sal9000]

I saw that some time ago. Nice video, too bad it's wrong. Glyphosate has been used since the mid 70s. If her theory were true, autism would have spread since then and not since the mid 90s. She makes a simple mistake by confusing correlation with causation. You can do the same graphs comparing vaccines and autism with: The popularity of Chinese food, the numbers of cell phones, internet use and so on. 

[J. D. Stembal]

I saw that some time ago. Nice video, too bad it's wrong. Glyphosate has been used since the mid 70s. If her theory were true, autism would have spread since then and not since the mid 90s. She makes a simple mistake by confusing correlation with causation. You can do the same graphs comparing vaccines and autism with: The popularity of Chinese food, the numbers of cell phones, internet use and so on. 

 

Wouldn't there be a lag time between an introduction of a new toxin into the food supply and the general onset of the symptoms of disease? It took 24 years for Minimata disease to show up in the Japanese population exposed to mercury. That's nearly a generation of eating contaminated seafood before mercury levels bio-accumulated to a level significant enough to cause health problems in people. Incidentally, the symptoms of mercury poisoning showed up in children and animals first.

 

I also doubt that glyphosate was used in 90% of crops in the 1970s.

 

Whether the data indicates correlation or causation, it should be clear by now that avoiding industrial ag products like corn, soy, wheat, and sugar is preferred behavior if you wish to stay healthy. Humans were not meant to consume any of these foods before the GMO strains were developed, so it's a bit of a moot point to offer incredulity at the findings.

[Sal9000]

Wouldn't there be a lag time between an introduction of a new toxin into the food supply and the general onset of the symptoms of disease?

 

I guess this depends on the sort of toxin and how it enters the food chain. Mercury takes some time to make it's way to fish and seafood until humans are affected by it. Glyphosate should enter the foodchain at the human level already. 

 

I also doubt that glyphosate was used in 90% of crops in the 1970s.

 

Yes, but you should see an increase in Autism earlier than was indicated in the video. 

 

Humans were not meant to consume any of these foods before the GMO strains were developed,

 

What are we supposed to eat and how do we know?

[J. D. Stembal]

I thought you said you already watched the video I linked.

 

I eat mostly meat, nuts and low-glycemic fruits and vegetables. In this way, I avoid glyphosate, all GMO crops, and elevated blood sugar levels which contributes to the incidence of all of the diseases of civilization: cancer, diabetes, obesity, heart disease, Alzheimer's disease and stroke. I know this is the way I was meant to eat because by most empirical measurements I am healthy.

 

For instance, my fasting blood glucose is 55 mg/dL. Most people consider that number abnormally low, but I do not have a diabetic condition.

[Sal9000]

I did some time ago. However, there are multiple positions on what you should eat, depending on the fad of the moment. Right now, Paleo seems to be trending, before it was Atkins and so on. I have yet to find a consistent fact based theory.

[J. D. Stembal]

I did some time ago. However, there are multiple positions on what you should eat, depending on the fad of the moment. Right now, Paleo seems to be trending, before it was Atkins and so on. I have yet to find a consistent fact based theory.

 

From the McGovern committee wiki:

 

In January 1977, after having held hearings on the national diet, the McGovern committee issued a new set of nutritional guidelines for Americans that sought to combat leading killer conditions such as heart disease, certain cancers, stroke, high blood pressure, obesity, diabetes, and arteriosclerosis.^[2][10][11] Titled Dietary Goals for the United States, but also known as the "McGovern Report",^[10] they suggested that Americans eat less fat, less cholesterol, less refined and processed sugars, and more complex carbohydrates* and fiber.

 

*This is the first appearance of the word "complex carbohydrates" implying that they are somehow healthier than simple carbohydrates. Whole wheat bread (69), for example, has a higher glycemic index than sucrose (65) despite any fiber it may contain.

• 2009 - 26.7% of American adults are obese with a BMI of 30 or more.
• In 1980, 15% of American adults are obese.
• 2008 - 1 in 3 American adults are diabetic or pre-diabetic, or 81 million people.
• In 1980, 5.5% of American adults are diabetic.
• In 1994, the American Diabetes Association recommended that Americans consume at least 60% of their caloric intake from carbohydrate.
• The incidence of diabetes doubles in America in a ten year period from 1997 to 2007 by the CDC's records.
• From 1980 to 2011, incidence of adult diabetes in America more than triples.

The American Diabetes Association encourages diabetics to consume 135-180 grams of carbohydrate per day. Low carbohydrate intake lowers blood glucose while high carbohydrate intake elevates blood glucose. You can test this with a blood glucose meter, as I have. The ADA actively promotes high levels of carbohydrate consumption in sick people that probably fell ill from following the McGovern committee's nutrition recommendations, released in 1977.

 

In a randomized study published in 2004 by Stern, Iqbal, Seshadri et al, participants who were restricted to 30g of carbohydrate per day for a year lost an average of 11.2 lbs and decreased their hemoglobin A1c numbers (a measurement of long-term carbohydrate exposure) by 13.5%.

 

Higher carbohydrate consumption correlates with a higher incidence of diabesity, which is the precursor for other metabolic diseases. For example, in a Japanese study of 1000 participants over age 60, diabetics were twice as likely to develop Alzheimer's disease over a 15 year span compared to the non-diabetic cohort. (Kiyohara, Nov. 2011)

 

Please see this reply in another thread where I provide various graphs on American and world diabetes and obesity rates, grain and sugar consumption, which incidentally, also contain glyphosate. (I'm still looking for soybean data if someone wants to help me out.)

 

https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/38646-upb-and-animal-rights/page-3#entry399221

 

The low carbohydrate ketogenic diet is clearly not a fad. It has been the diet of our ancestors for millennia. Agriculture was only first developed between 10-15 thousand years ago depending on the region of the world. Dwarf wheat, one of the first GMO crops, was first developed in Mexico in the 1950-60s. If you zoom out and look at the entire history of diet and nutrition, the last forty years of disease has been a nutritional anomaly promoted almost entirely by state propaganda.

 

"We're going to run out of food; spend taxpayer money to grow more of it, more cheaply!"

 

"We've got all this grain and the price is dropping; find a way to get it in more foods to increase consumption!"

 

Of course, we don't have the whole picture as yet, but the evidence so far for the carbohydrate-metabolic disease connection is extremely profound. I encourage you to provide your best counterargument, so I that can better substantiate and craft mine. This information is only a very small portion of the total that exists.

 

Citations:

 

David Perlmutter, M.D., Grain Brain, Little, Brown, and Co. September 2013, p. 85-87

William Davis, M.D., Wheat Belly, Rodale, Inc. August 2011 (from the paperback edition June 2014), p. 100, 102, 111

Various pictures pulled from the internet, many of which are USDA and CDC data.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_Select_Committee_on_Nutrition_and_Human_Needs

http://healthy-living.org/html/glycemic_index_table.html (Glycemic Index Table)

[GA_Freeman]

I propose we start with a definition of health. I will define health as the ability of the body to properly absorb nutrients and minerals that are needed to supply the body with raw materials to function and a minimal amount of inflammation present in that body.

The two primary causes of all of the modern diseases such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes and obesity are all in my opinion directly related to those two issues.

 

By all measures modern diseases are now chronic and out-of-control. There are higher rates of cancer, obesity, diabetes and heart disease than at any other time in modern history. By all standard measures, this indicates a blatant failure of what is considered the current, modern, medical opinion.

 

All evidence seems to point to the fact that the only thing that matters with the diet is the recognition and consciousness that food is the primary cause of most, if not all of the diseases listed above. It either supplies or does not supply the necessary nutrients and causes or can minimize inflammation.

 

Anything consumed and repeated over a long period of time that causes the defficiency of necessary or so-called “essential”(because it cannot be produced by the body and must be consumed) nutrient will result in significant loss of nutrition and ultimately disease. One well-known example is scurvy, a simple deficiency of vitamin C.

So I assert that an individual's diet simply must provide the essential nutrients the body needs to function and maintain health while causing the least amount of information. Vegetables for the most part can support this but there is a lot of evidence that vegetables alone cannot provide the necessary nutrients. That is a high density, high quality food that provides necessary cholesterol when properly cooked. Cholesterol is necessary for brain function and hormone production, myelin sheath production and in my opinion should be up primary focus of any food strategy.

 

Autism has been shown to be relieved by any diet that reduces inflammation.

 

Here are some references:

http://thebigfatsurprise.com/blog/

http://www.foodforthebrain.org/

http://www.foundmyfitness.com/

http://blog.cholesterol-and-health.com/

These are all well referenced with plenty of reading if you are interested.

[ragdoll]

Doesn't the article itself suggest that the only thing wrong with Round-up is that it kills your gut bacteria?  That combined with studies that I've read showing the efficacy of probiotic treatments on autistic patients seems to suggest that we should all just take some probiotics and try and eat right.  

[Sal9000]

Evidence for a metabolical catastrophe are all around the USA (diabetes, obesity, metabolid syndrome).

The reason I called Paleo et al a fad is very simple. Every five years or so, there is a new flavour of the month of what to cut out or how to prepare your food, regardless of scientific backing.

The problem with Paleo is manifold. We don't know what exactly our ancestors ate. Was their diet based on vegetables, fruits, berries, meat. What kind of vegetables? Which fruits? Lets assume for the sake of the argument that you know what your ancestors had, bc of incredible luck you could find your DNA in a prehistoric group and via an analysis of their teeth you know what  they had. Could you reproduce their diet? The answer is pretty clear. You could, since the original plants we use for our veggies and fruits are still around. However, there is a reason not even the most strongest Paleo supporter eats them. They taste horrible. Almost every plant we consume today is the effect of the agrarian revolution where plants have been adapted for human consumption. The same is true for meat as well (beef, sheep, pigs). Unless you are really hardcore you cannot emulate your ancestors diet.

Few people understand the Glycemic Index. Different food is dried and 50 gramm of it is compared to the Insuline release of Fructose. This is problematic on some levels. First of all, it's not objective like the caloric index that can be found using experiments. Different people react differently, so you have to take a sample with many participants. Secondly, it wields a lot of strange results. Because of the method (only dried food is used) a normal apple and dried apple have the same glycemic index, regardless of their other ingredients. Furthermore, the interpretation of the charts is not as straightforward as one may think. In fact, you have to measure the area of the curve that is the Insuline reaction to get the total load of Insuline released. This means eg, that food that have a sudden spike may have a lower glycemic load compared to other food that cause a slower reaction but their area is large compared to 'spiky' food. In addition to that, the Glycemic Index only looks at single items. What happens when you add three or four veggies in a meal? How do they influence the respective insuline reaction? There still needs to be a lot of research before the GI becomes usable.

[J. D. Stembal]

Evidence for a metabolical catastrophe are all around the USA (diabetes, obesity, metabolid syndrome).

 

The reason I called Paleo et al a fad is very simple. Every five years or so, there is a new flavour of the month of what to cut out or how to prepare your food, regardless of scientific backing.

 

The problem with Paleo is manifold. We don't know what exactly our ancestors ate. Was their diet based on vegetables, fruits, berries, meat. What kind of vegetables? Which fruits? Lets assume for the sake of the argument that you know what your ancestors had, bc of incredible luck you could find your DNA in a prehistoric group and via an analysis of their teeth you know what  they had. Could you reproduce their diet? The answer is pretty clear. You could, since the original plants we use for our veggies and fruits are still around. However, there is a reason not even the most strongest Paleo supporter eats them. They taste horrible. Almost every plant we consume today is the effect of the agrarian revolution where plants have been adapted for human consumption. The same is true for meat as well (beef, sheep, pigs). Unless you are really hardcore you cannot emulate your ancestors diet.

 

Few people understand the Glycemic Index. Different food is dried and 50 gramm of it is compared to the Insuline release of Fructose. This is problematic on some levels. First of all, it's not objective like the caloric index that can be found using experiments. Different people react differently, so you have to take a sample with many participants. Secondly, it wields a lot of strange results. Because of the method (only dried food is used) a normal apple and dried apple have the same glycemic index, regardless of their other ingredients. Furthermore, the interpretation of the charts is not as straightforward as one may think. In fact, you have to measure the area of the curve that is the Insuline reaction to get the total load of Insuline released. This means eg, that food that have a sudden spike may have a lower glycemic load compared to other food that cause a slower reaction but their area is large compared to 'spiky' food. In addition to that, the Glycemic Index only looks at single items. What happens when you add three or four veggies in a meal? How do they influence the respective insuline reaction? There still needs to be a lot of research before the GI becomes usable.

 

This is why I explained that anyone can take their own blood glucose readings. I do it. I know the glycemic index is based on a tabulated average.

 

For example, 55 mg/dL is my FBS, at last sampling. If I eat a frozen pizza, which is essentially entirely wheat and cheese, two hours later my reading is 84 mg/dL. This particular pizza was 1250 calories, mostly carbs. Normally, my body metabolizes fuel through nutritional ketosis, which I monitor with urine test strips, so my two hour glucose reading after eating carbohydrate is a lot lower than most. Diabetics or people with pre-diabetic conditions would have much higher readings because their skeletal muscles and liver are more insulin resistant than mine. In the case of type-2 diabetics, they will have to continue insulin shots to sustain this diet.

 

Of course, we don't know exactly what all the ancient cultures ate (or which were our specific ancestors), but it is safe to say that before the agricultural revolution, humans hunted wild game. The Plains Indians ate buffalo. Okinawans fished and ate wild pigs. Atkins, Paleo, Low Carb, etc. are different variations on the same nutritional concept, which is the practical emulation of the diet of a typical hunter-gatherer.

 

People will follow what achieves the best health results for them. That's the hallmark of following empirical data and science. Rest assured, however, that no one is becoming progressively unhealthy by any health metric while following a low-carb health regime. As a bonus, low carbers avoid glyphosate exposure.

 

Unless you are really hardcore... so what? I am hardcore about health. All Americans should be hardcore about it since we have to bail out the poisoned and suffering masses thanks to ACA.

[J. D. Stembal]

Doesn't the article itself suggest that the only thing wrong with Round-up is that it kills your gut bacteria?  That combined with studies that I've read showing the efficacy of probiotic treatments on autistic patients seems to suggest that we should all just take some probiotics and try and eat right.  

 

Killing off your gut bacteria eventually kills you off, so it should not be taken so lightly. Your statement is like saying, "I can jump out of this tree because if I break my leg, I might be able to crawl to the emergency room."

 

It is preferable to avoid the disease from the very beginning, not looking for a remedy once the symptoms manifest.

 

Another health analogy: it is preferable achieve nutrition before you become overweight because you may never lose the weight.

 

This was the real reason I returned to the thread. Dr. Seneff delivered a concise summary of the health problems caused by glyphosate.

 

 

By the end of the video, it's also clear to me that she's read Hahn Niman's Defending Beef (http://www.amazon.com/Defending-Beef-Case-Sustainable-Production/dp/1603585362/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1432258898&sr=8-1&keywords=nicolette+hahn+niman) or listened to one of the lectures given by Allan Savory about Holistic Land Management, and the case for more cattle ranching.