Enzyme rebutal!!

June 4, 2001

The following was not written by me but by a

freind of Jeff Novicks, the nutritionist who posts here

occasionally. Jeff sent me the comments of his freind, I have

pasted them in word for

word. Blake --------- The

radioactive tagging study is very dubious. Later

studies made similar claims, then were debunked: the

protein was the tag, and it was being broken down and the

tagged protein, not the enzyme was cirulating. That is,

the food enzymes were digested and put into the

body's protein cycle - they were not recirculated as

intact enzymes, as Howell suggests happens. This

is mentioned

in: <a

href=http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2d.shtml

target=new>http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2d.shtml</a><br\

> relevant here: discussion of possible enterpancreatic

circulation. The studies of Rohr et al [1981] and Scheele and

Rohr [1984] the ones that disprove enteropancreatic

circulation, i.e., Howell's recycling of

enzymes. the studies on chickens: human digestive systems are

so different from chickens, that generalizing from

chickens to humans is difficult/dubious.

June 4, 2001

This well researched

article: <a

href=http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2d.shtml

target=new>http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2d.shtml</a><br\

><a href=http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2b.shtml#enzymes

target=new>http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2b.shtml#enzyme\

s</a> Is a must read for anyone interested in enzymes. I

just reread it, the first time I read it was over a

year ago. Blake Remember raw foods

do not hinge on dietary enzymes. Dr. Edward Howell

has been a supporter on the enzyme thoery for so long

he is likely closed off to counter arguments. Him

turing away from enzyme theory is like Dr Mcdougall

turning to the atkins diet and Dr Atkins going vegan.

Those events would never happen. If people are truly

trying to find the truth, all biases/ideologies aside,

they will apply the exact same amount of skepticism to

both sides of an argument and consider all the

different viewpoints.

June 4, 2001

Blake, you have got to be kidding me. I give you

the results of years of intensive research, and you

give me the OPINIONS and ASSUMPTIONS of morons? Where

is the opposing research? I suspect there is none.

Do you know, for instance, that the intire salt

scare proprosed by the medical comunity (that salt

aggrivates hypertension) is based on a paper written by a

student, and that no research was done? That more recent

research shows that salt my actually lower blood pressure?

The mere fact that these articals extensevly mention

Dr. Howell's theories shows a strong bias (results of

research is not a theory. Just as Einstien's " theory " of

relativity is now simply called " Relativity " ). This also

shows your bias, in that you are willing to believe

this crap. Doug

June 4, 2001

The rebuttal to Dr. Howell's enzyme research you

quoted mentioned " ...the radioactive tagging study is

very dubious. Later studies made similar claims,

then were debunked... " This is a classic case

in how easy it is to get confused about who is

right. It threw me for a second until I realized that

Dr. Howell's conclusions were supported by actual

studies that were properly referenced. The above claim

refers to supposed studies, but where's the references?

And even if there were references, if you have

several studies that are credible, and someone later

comes along and does a flawed study, the fact someone

screwed up trying to duplicate an earlier study does not

prove anything (other than the latter guy screwed

up). I'm trying to be open minded and logical in reviewing

conflicting viewpoints. But I guess it bothers me when

someone attempts to debunk years of work supported by

studies by making unsupported claims. And I'm

still sticking by my assertion that there is no logical

rebuttal to mankind - the only species cooking food - made

a serious mistake in playing with matches. I

heard a good story on National Public Radio recently.

An American Indian (native American) tribe lived in

the Southwest hundreds of years without any incidence

of Diabetes. But the US Army dammed up their river

choking off their ability to hunt and farm. Our

benevolent government filled the gap by providing processed

food products. And now the tribe is being studied (for

past 50 years now) by the US National Health Institute

because they have the Highest incidence of diabetes of

any group known. And guess what the NHI's theory and

focus of study is on? A genetic predisposition to

diabetes! And they wonder why the Indians are getting

resentful at being treated like guinea pigs. I wish

there was an effective forum for stamping out

stupidity. Unfortunately our political and corporate

dominated establishment are not cooperative! Thanks

for the good citations Doug, and your

thought-provoking quotations at rebuttal Blake. But I still see too

many gaps in the use of logic on the rebuttal side.

I'll read the other links to rebuttals you quoted and

let you know if I have opinions later. US

Doctors have significantly shorter life spans than of

other professionals. Anecdotal (but true) yes, but I'll

model after others outside the " health "

establishment. Mallon

June 4, 2001

Blake, Re the internet links to the Howell

rebuttals: I agree these are decent, logical rebuttals to

some of Dr. Howell's arguments. Namely that eating

enzyme-dead food forces the pancreas to " rob " the body of

it's " enzyme reserve " . As best I can tell, no

one has proven the body has a fixed potential for

producing enzymes. Even though some animal studies have

indicated that animals on cooked diets have larger

pancreas' than animals on raw diets - thereby concluding

the pancreas works harder to make up for food-enzyme

deficiency - that in itself does not prove there is a

limited ability to produce enzymes. But it does raise a

valid question of whether the body could be a little

more efficient if less effort sere expended on

producing enzymes for digestion and instead diverted for

other metabolic processes. Also agree the

statement quoted by some raw-foodists, purporting to be

logic: " ...enzymes are life force, therefore if you eat

enzyme-dead food you die faster... " is not a valid logical

argument. Having said that I do believe there is an energy or life

force inherent in enzymes, I just don't see that it's

been quantified (except in limited examples showing

aid in digestion) as to the extent of effect the

" life force " or energy has once it's been consumed.

Most of what I've read has been theoretical and would

be difficult to quantify or " prove " . I take

issue with the fact they assert that the vast majority

of food enzymes are destroyed by stomach acid. Doug

has cited studies that suggest otherwise. I also take

issue that they discount many of Howell's cited studies

for no other reason than because of the date of the

studies (some are about 50 - 70 years old). They

presuppose (bad doggie) that anything that old is

unreliable. I can tell you I see many, many, flawed studies

(or perhaps more correctly " flawed conclusions " )

being published every day. So I see no reason to

discount scientific work solely on the basis of age, as

long as it is properly documented. On the

mystical side, I do note there are cultures that believe

vital essences such as body enzymes should be conserved

for optimal health. I have my own opinions about

that, but I havn't seen proof either way. I

think we mostly all agree food enzymes are good, but

are not necessarily the biggest or most important

reason that raw food is desirable. It is also

frustrating sorting through the conflicting opinions on the

subject...both sides have some flaws in the logic used to base

their points. But I don't think we should write off

enzymes as insignificant, mainly due to the studies that

have shown ability to aid in digestion and produce

other desirable, related benefits. Anyone vote

for moving onto another topic? We've about beaten

this one to death (my keystroke potential is being

depleted! I could put those hands to better use doing

something else ;-) Mallon

June 5, 2001

Doug,,, Have you read the articles I

posted????? & gt; & gt; & gt;I give you the results of years of intensive

research, and you give me the OPINIONS and ASSUMPTIONS of

morons? If you are talking about Tom Billings of

beyondveg.com, then Tom is no fool. He has been researching raw

foods for over 30 years. & gt; & gt; & gt;Where is

the opposing research? If you had bothered to

read the articles I linked to, they reference over 200

studies in their body. There is a link to a complete

reference list at the bottom. & gt; & gt; & gt;I suspect

there is none. There is a

lot. & gt; & gt; & gt;Do you know, for instance, that the intire salt

scare proprosed by the medical comunity (that salt

aggrivates hypertension) is based on a paper written by a

student, and that no research was done? That more recent

research shows that salt my actually lower blood

pressure? I have seen much research to support the

salt-hypertension theory on, i'm not sure where your coming from.

Salt is also linked to numerous other illnesses such

as stomach cancer and

osteoporosis. & gt; & gt; & gt;The mere fact that these articals extensevly

mention

Dr. Howell's theories shows a strong bias The

article was written as a response to claims about enzymes

with Howell being a key figure of course they mention

him and his work a lot. & gt; & gt; & gt;Just as

Einstien's " theory " of relativity is now simply called

" Relativity " ). Not everything eistein claimed turned out to be true

you know?? & gt; & gt; & gt;This also shows your

bias, in that you are willing to believe this

crap. Ok what are you basing this on?? The fact I disagree

with you?? You do seem insecure about this beleif

otherwise you would not act so aggressive! Blake

June 6, 2001

Your right Blake. Cooked food is just as good as raw. I give up. Doug

Sign In

Enzyme rebutal!!

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads