Guest guest Posted January 5, 2007 Report Share Posted January 5, 2007 Hi Melanie, I'm SO glad you asked this question!!! The focus on enzymes as life force or the like is a surefire way for RF teachers and their loyal students to lose credibility in the presence of people who actually know some science -- biology, physiology, biochemistry in particular. I do deeply wish that every RF teacher would simply let go of the entire topic and just move on. Enzymes form a class of proteins, nothing more, nothing less. They perform 2 specific functions throughout all of Nature: they either put things together, or they take things apart. When they take things apart and they also happen to be located in the digestive system, we call them " digestive enzymes " . When the very same enzymes are located on white blood cells and perform the very same function, we call them by other names. I mean, not the individual enzymes, but we no longer call them " digestive " . Now they become part of our mythological " immune system " . The human body is known to use more than 3000 (last time I checked) different enzymes throughout its metabolic infrastructure. Of these, approximately two dozen are classified as " digestive enzymes " . There are simply not enough enzymes in any food of which I am aware to support digestion inside a human body in the time required for healthful digestion. That is, the vast majority of the digestive enzymes are ALWAYS provided by the body. Years ago (1030, 1937), a research scientist named Paul Kouchakoff published two papers on his observations, noting that when people ate cooked foods, the body tended to initiate a response he called " digestive leukocytosis " . In other words, white blood cells flooded the blood stream, presumably to deal with the cooked " food " as foreign matter. BUT ... Kouchakoff also found that by feeding a person a small quantity of a given food raw, then following with the same food cooked (or sometimes combined), the tendency toward digestive leukocytosis pretty much disappeared. To my knowledge, Kouchakoff's experiments have never been replicated, much less expanded upon. Some in the RF world have jumped upon his findings as a justification for eating RF. They are not. At the very most, we might observe that, perhaps, when the body receives the raw form of a food, the body picks up on what is needed to digest that food and then manages to digest the cooked form of the same food. But even this conclusion is speculative. Further, that notion that we have a fixed lifetime supply of enzymes, or of digestive enzymes, or whatever, is well-written nonsense -- it's simply false. The potential lifespan for our species is presently unknown. Most longevity experts agree that we have the potential to live at least 140-160 years, but that is more of an arm-wave then constructive science. Years ago, another scientist (whose name eludes my memory for the moment) at the Rockefeller Institute in New York took some human cells and put them into a culture dish. He (his team) provided nourishment and waste removal and observed. I cannot remember exactly, but I believe that, after watching the cells thrive without aging for more than thirty years, the team threw out the experiment, not knowing how to use their findings. The point of all this is that, if our individual cells can thrive in such a way, then our entire organism can, as well. Enzymes are simply not a primary reason for eating raw food, or anything else, for that matter. It is true that, when eating cooked food, adding a pile of digestive enzymes aids digestion, but people simply assume this occurs because the added enzymes enhance the digestive process directly. This may be so, to an extent, but it is equally likely that the body recognizes the enzymes, treats them as a model, and goes from there. Sorry to burst a big bubble! Best to all, Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of melanieburtis Friday, January 05, 2007 8:22 AM rawfood [Raw Food] Re: UV Pasturization rawfood , " dt king " <whipmaker wrote: rawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan@> wrote: Enzymes cannot be killed, as they are not living organisms to begin with. Elchanan Fair enough; I can rephrase. Does the molecular disruption from UV exposure that inactivates E. Coli also break down the enzimes in apple cider that may or may not be beneficial to human health in a similar manner or extent that heat pasturization also breaks down food enzimes? Just wonderin'. David King Well then, if enzymes can't be killed, I'm confused because I thought a large part of the reason for going raw was because cooked food kills the enzymes of which your body only produces a set amount during your life. This is what I thought the term living foods came from, i.e., that they contained LIVE enzymes. Elchanan, or anyone else, please explain. Thanks, Melanie <http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=5520395/grpspId=1705015482/msgId =26916/stime=1168011060/nc1=3848445/nc2=4025306/nc3=3> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 6, 2007 Report Share Posted January 6, 2007 rawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan wrote: > > Hi Melanie, > I'm SO glad you asked this question!!! > Hi Elchanan, I'm SO glad you answered my question ;>)) Thanks so much! I appreciate your scientific knowledge of the subject matter at hand. In other posts you make that I read, I also appreciate your integration of the concept of whole- health, rather than just focusing upon the food one eats. Creating lasting health is so much more. Melanie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 rawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan wrote: > > Years ago (1030, 1937), a research scientist named Paul Kouchakoff published > two papers on his observations, noting that when people ate cooked foods, > the body tended to initiate a response he called " digestive leukocytosis " . > In other words, white blood cells flooded the blood stream, presumably to > deal with the cooked " food " as foreign matter. Guy must have had something going for him, to be publishing over the span of a millenium. :-) My initial introduction to the notion of enzymes was from the popular Carol Alt book, Eating in the Raw. Her point of view -- attributed to Nicholas J. Gonzales, m.d. -- was that the body might be reusing enzymes in raw food, rather than having to fabricate them from scratch with the basic elements of cooked food. The idea was that building enzymes took much more energy than getting them off the shelf. I take a cosmological attitude. If an eating model based on fairies and spirits makes me healthy and fit, I'll get on that train. My primary criteria for any plan of action is that it needs to work. Don't do what doesn't work. That's why I gave up on portion control diets years ago. Eating raw works for me. Say it's from preserving enzymes, life force, glycemic foobars; just as long as I can sort out the good food from the bad food. David King Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2007 Report Share Posted January 7, 2007 I agree, David, and at the same time, we all benefit from having support in the scientific/technical community. The typical RF enzyme discussion diminishes, rather than enhances, that support. So to the extent that any of us is willing to lift up our eyes and look beyond ourselves, then this may seem important to some. Just a point of view, not " true " or " false " . Best, Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of dt king Saturday, January 06, 2007 9:38 PM rawfood Re: Enzymes and Raw Food (WAS: [Raw Food] UV Pasturization) <<< snip >>> I take a cosmological attitude. If an eating model based on fairies and spirits makes me healthy and fit, I'll get on that train. My primary criteria for any plan of action is that it needs to work. Don't do what doesn't work. That's why I gave up on portion control diets years ago. Eating raw works for me. Say it's from preserving enzymes, life force, glycemic foobars; just as long as I can sort out the good food from the bad food. David King <http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=5520395/grpspId=1705015482/msgId =26945/stime=1168144961/nc1=4299907/nc2=4025323/nc3=3> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.