Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #76   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 12:58 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,072
Default Return On Investment

Billy wrote:
....
Seems like the problem is the distribution of wealth.


seems like the problem is
people eating poorly.


songbird
  #77   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 01:40 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,072
Default Return On Investment

Billy wrote:
songbird wrote:

....re plants...
not directly as they don't "mentate" (there
is rumor most people don't either ), but
if they kill off all of their seed dispersers
then they will eventually be outdone by
the other plants that are "nicer".


Try to get it into that dormant organ that resides between your ears,
that "organic agriculture" doesn't increase flavonids, it simply
doesn't suppress them as insecticides do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavono...gical_activity

....
Potential for biological activity
Flavonoids (specifically flavanoids such as the catechins) are "the
most common group of polyphenolic compounds in the human diet and are
found ubiquitously in plants".[4] Flavonols, the original
bioflavonoids such as quercetin, are also found ubiquitously, but in
lesser quantities. Both sets of compounds have evidence of
health-modulating effects in animals which eat them.
The widespread distribution of flavonoids, their variety and their
relatively low toxicity compared to other active plant compounds (for


"relatively low toxicity" (i.e. they are not completely
harmless).

just shot yourself in the foot there...


instance alkaloids) mean that many animals, including humans, ingest
significant quantities in their diet. Resulting from experimental
evidence that they may modify allergens, viruses, and carcinogens,
flavonoids have potential to be biological "response modifiers", such
as anti-allergic, anti-inflammatory,[5] anti-microbial[6] and
anti-cancer activities shown from in vitro studies.[7]
[edit]


neutral to supportive to your point,
but as mentioned elsewheres we're
already getting plenty.


Antioxidant activity in vitro
Flavonoids (both flavonols and flavanols) are most commonly known for
their antioxidant activity in vitro.
Consumers and food manufacturers have become interested in flavonoids
for their possible medicinal properties, especially their putative
role in prevention of cancers and cardiovascular diseases. Although
physiological evidence is not yet established, the beneficial effects
of fruits, vegetables, and tea or even red wine have sometimes been
attributed to flavonoid compounds rather than to known micronutrients,
such as vitamins and dietary minerals.[8]
Alternatively, research conducted at the Linus Pauling Institute and
evaluated by the European Food Safety Authority indicates that,
following dietary intake, flavonoids themselves are of little or no
direct antioxidant value.[9][10] As body conditions are unlike
controlled test tube conditions, flavonoids and other polyphenols are
poorly absorbed (less than 5%), with most of what is absorbed being
quickly metabolized and excreted.


this sounds like a body having to do
work to get rid of a substance that there
is too much of. i.e. having less of it in
plant products is probably putting less
stress on the liver (which is in fact
one of the things i mentioned originally --
this is a point in my favor if the science
holds up).


The increase in antioxidant capacity
of blood seen after the consumption of flavonoid-rich foods is not
caused directly by flavonoids themselves, but most likely is due to
increased uric acid levels that result from metabolism of
flavonoids.[11] According to Frei, "we can now follow the activity of
flavonoids in the body, and one thing that is clear is that the body
sees them as foreign compounds and is trying to get rid of them."


*ding ding!*


[edit]
Other potential health benefits


"potential"


[edit]
Cancer
Physiological processing of unwanted flavonoid compounds induces
so-called Phase II enzymes that also help to eliminate mutagens and
carcinogens, and therefore may be of value in cancer prevention.


"may"


Flavonoids could also induce mechanisms that may kill cancer cells and


"could"


inhibit tumor invasion.[11] UCLA cancer researchers have found that
study participants who ate foods containing certain flavonoids, such
as catechins found in strawberries and green and black teas;
kaempferol from brussel sprouts and apples; and quercetin from beans,
onions and apples, may have reduced risk of obtaining lung cancer.[12]


"may" but that could be due to other factors (like
fiber) or other compounds. a true study of
flavonols in isolation would be needed to pin this
down.

the point to consider further is that there might
be the case that everything we currently eat is
bad for us in one form or another. some vegetables
just might be the least noxious. like i said before
evolution is not optimal, there might be other
pathways which can be demonstrated to be
better. we don't know yet.


Research also indicated that only small amounts of flavonoids may be
needed for possible benefits.


"small amounts" which are available in
what is grown now. this is not a point in
your favor.


Taking large dietary supplements likely
provides no extra benefit and may pose risks. However, certainty of
neither a benefit nor a risk has been proven yet in large-scale human
intervention trials.[11]


"neither a benefit nor a risk has been proven yet"

another point in my favor.


[edit]
Diarrhea
A study done at Children's Hospital & Research Center Oakland, in
collaboration with scientists at Heinrich Heine University in Germany,
has shown that epicatechin, quercetin and luteolin can inhibit the
development of fluids that result in diarrhea by targeting the
intestinal cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator Cl*
transport inhibiting cAMP-stimulated Cl* secretion in the
intestine.[13] [edit]
Capillary stabilizing agents
Bioflavonoids like rutin, monoxerutin, diosmin, troxerutin and
hidrosmin have potential vasoprotective proprieties still under
experimental evaluation.[citation needed]
[edit]


"are still under experimental evaluation"

most of these pretty much prove my initial
statements accurate enough for general
conversational purposes. good job!


songbird

  #78   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 02:12 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,085
Default Return On Investment

In article ,
"songbird" wrote:

Billy wrote:
...
Seems like the problem is the distribution of wealth.


seems like the problem is
people eating poorly.


songbird


http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/43968/2/298.pdf

A taste

VI. CONCLUSIONS
Based on a household health production framework, this paper exploits
the combination of socio-economic, health and nutrition information from
the UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey to analyze the endogenous
relationship among wealth, nutrition, weight and the final health
outcomes.

Using structural equation modelling, we reach three main conclusions:

(1) higher wealth is associated with lower weight and
better health as expected, but because of a better diet rather than
extra exercise or lower calorie consumption;
(2) while reduced exercise and unhealthy diets have a direct negative
effect on health, this does not rule out an additional adverse health
outcome associated with larger weight;
(3) the waist- hip ratio is a better predictor of health outcomes than
body-mass index. The study has also limitations and model specification
can be further improved by including prices and other behavioural
determinants. However, there is a lack of such a comprehensive
data-set.VI.

--
Bill S. Jersey USA zone 5 shade garden
What use one more wake up call?
http://comment.rsablogs.org.uk/videos/
http://tinyurl.com/277bz9m
  #79   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 03:02 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Apr 2010
Posts: 106
Default Return On Investment

In article ,
"songbird" wrote:

Billy wrote:
...
Seems like the problem is the distribution of wealth.


seems like the problem is
people eating poorly.


songbird


Songbird and Billy are correct. The poor do eat poorly.

However, Corn, Wheat, Soybeans and Rice are subsidized foods.
These subsidized foods make processed foods very cheap. Fresh fruits and
vegetables are not subsidized are cost much more per calorie than: Corn
Chips, Sandwiches and Cereals. Also many poor communities do not have a
super markets near them (I am talking poor in the United States). Super
Markets want a nice profit margin when they build stores. Poor
communities also do not have good public transportation to get to those
nice markets. The poor communities tend to have small party stores which
sells only canned or packaged goods which the poor can mostly afford.

Distribution of wealth can help the poor eat better.

Also over population of the planet also contributes to poverty and not
as eating as well due to limited resources of the planet.

--
Enjoy Life... Dan

Garden in Zone 5 South East Michigan.
  #80   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 05:10 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2008
Posts: 544
Default Return On Investment

In article ,
says...

"are still under experimental evaluation"

most of these pretty much prove my initial
statements accurate enough for general
conversational purposes. good job!


I find your attitude tiresome.

It's probably best that I add you to a killfile for awhile.


  #81   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 05:11 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,072
Default Return On Investment

phorbin wrote:
songbird says...


"are still under experimental evaluation"

most of these pretty much prove my initial
statements accurate enough for general
conversational purposes. good job!


I find your attitude tiresome.

It's probably best that I add you to a killfile for awhile.


good day, i hope you
find whatever you are
looking for in a decent
conversation.

i'll drop it now.

peace all,


songbird
  #82   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:33 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,438
Default Return On Investment

In article ,
"songbird" wrote:

Billy wrote:
...
Seems like the problem is the distribution of wealth.


seems like the problem is
people eating poorly.


songbird


³When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why
the poor have no food, they call you a communist.²
-Archbishop Helder Camara
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/2...al_crime_scene
  #83   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:41 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,438
Default Return On Investment

In article ,
"songbird" wrote:

phorbin wrote:
songbird says...


"are still under experimental evaluation"

most of these pretty much prove my initial
statements accurate enough for general
conversational purposes. good job!


I find your attitude tiresome.

It's probably best that I add you to a killfile for awhile.


good day, i hope you
find whatever you are
looking for in a decent
conversation.

i'll drop it now.

peace all,


songbird


Come on, shake it, boid, shake it.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/2...al_crime_scene
  #84   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 09:29 AM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,036
Default Return On Investment

Billy wrote:
In article ,
Bill who putters wrote:

In article ,
phorbin wrote:
I don't have time to supply cites but the truth is out there.

Try sugar salt fat acts brain drug study


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM


Truly, an excellent presentation.


The content was good. The delivery was rather self indulgent, it could have
been, should have been, reduced from 1 1/2 hours to 1. There was too much
courting the audience and too much previewing what was to come. In a
lecture format questioning of the audience is generally helpful in engaging
them however you couldn't hear the audience response so for the viewer it
was a waste of time. Of course the small screen format made it impossible
to read most of the slides but that is not the lecturers fault. I know, I
am hard to please. But the message was good, I learned quite a few things.

David

  #85   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:36 PM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,072
Default feeling the love in the grapes

Billy wrote:
....
Come on, shake it, boid, shake it.


i love you too Billy.

the grapes look ok,
i might get some kind of
crop out of them yet this
year. the birds are being
birds so i'm losing some
to pecks and poop damage.

some are being stung and
i remove them when seen.
only a few have shown
signs of rot and i've trimmed
them off too just in case
that can spread further.
for the rest there are plenty
showing no sign of rot and
good clean loose bunches
that should plump up well.

getting them through the rest
of the summer will be a
challenge and it's so early yet.
amazing that a large number
are already the size of a nickel
(and getting into the safe from
black rot zone now).

have a nice day,

now i have to go weed and
SAVE THE LEAF LITTER!


songbird


  #86   Report Post  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:42 PM posted to rec.gardens.edible
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,438
Default Return On Investment

In article ,
"songbird" wrote:

Billy wrote:
...
-------

So that is what we were talking about, this crazy organic gardening
thing. You know, the way in which all food was grown before 1945.


false. some food was grown
organically pre 1945, but much
of the rest of it was grown in a
kind of slow motion slash and
burn agriculture. the slash and burn
was not tropical forests, but the
result is still the same, the topsoil
is used up in many places and
there is no cheap fix.


1) Is this some kind of fuzzy idea, or just another brain fart?
Are you confusing organic with sustainable? Are there any man made
chemicals used in your slash and burn agriculture? If, not, it was
organic.

have you made any claims about
pre-history and sustainabilty?

When did the conversation become sustainability? Again, commercial
factory agriculture isn't sustainable, because at some point we will run
out of fossil fuels (non-sustainable), if we don't die from the heat and
H2S first.
other
than your general waving of the word
organic at it, but i suspect that much
of what you think about pre-history
isn't accurate either.

Again, judgement without facts. It comes second nature to you.
With small populations, hunter-gathering was sustainable.
http://www.environnement.ens.fr/pers.../mistake_jared
_diamond.pdf
As to other cultures of pre-history, which one used man-made
fertilizers, or pesticides, hmmm?

i'll admit i don't
know either.

I think you'll find general agreement to that statement.


So now you propose that eating the way we did before 1945, and reaping
the benefit of flavonoids as we did before 1945 is some kind of
"organic religion".


it is if science eventually shows that
the pathways that flavonoids take in
the body are not universally beneficial
then my point is valid. i mentioned the
liver in specific because it is vital to
any debate about nutritional health
and various effects from different
sources.

also, there is such a thing as too
much of a substance not being a
good thing. folic acid, vitamin A,
copper, selenium, iron, and many
others, required in small amounts,
but beyond that amount possibly
toxic. what makes you think that
flavonoids escape that type of problem?
do they flush out of the body without
any cellular intervention -- does the
liver not have to regulate them or
their byproducts? i'll admit i don't
know, i'm not sure the science is in
on them completely. or at least i
would be very surprised if any
reputable scientist says they are a
100% solved item. there's much we
still do not know.

You know, if you could make a statement instead of wandering off into
sophistry, this would be a discussion, instead of theater of the absurd.
Since falvonoids exist in all plants (not counting fungi) that we eat,
where is the incidence of excess consumption, hmmmm?

While Wikipedia may not be perfect, it is sufficient for a citation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavonoid

Flavonoid

Biological roles
They also protect plants from attacks by microbes, fungi[3] and insects.
(When plants are grown with pesticides, flavonoids are less necessary,
and fewer are produced. Parentheses mine)

Potential for biological activity
Flavonoids (specifically flavanoids such as the catechins) are "the most
common group of polyphenolic compounds in the human diet and are found
ubiquitously in plants".[4] Flavonols, the original bioflavonoids such
as quercetin, are also found ubiquitously, but in lesser quantities.
Both sets of compounds have evidence of health-modulating effects in
animals which eat them.
The widespread distribution of flavonoids, their variety and their
relatively low toxicity compared to other active plant compounds (for
instance alkaloids) mean that many animals, including humans, ingest
significant quantities in their diet. Resulting from experimental
evidence that they may modify allergens, viruses, and carcinogens,
flavonoids have potential to be biological "response modifiers", such as
anti-allergic, anti-inflammatory,[5] anti-microbial[6] and anti-cancer
activities shown from in vitro studies.[7]

Antioxidant activity in vitro
Flavonoids (both flavonols and flavanols) are most commonly known for
their antioxidant activity in vitro.
(I'll let you look up free radicle. Parentheses mine)




----

Then on Mon, 28 Jun 2010 23:53:45, I try to show carbon sequestration
in the soil, in part by describing the flora and fauna found in good
garden soil,


your effort failed, most people
agree with me that healthy garden
soil does not sequester carbon, for
the most part it cycles it.


In the sense that there is more carbon in garden soil than in
impoverished, commercial, factory-farming soil, where there is next to
none? Even you should be able to understand that.

if you want to argue that changing
poor soils to better sequesters carbon
then i'll give you that,

How gallant of you.
but that is still a
small and limited amount compared
to what is actually needed. and then,
eventually the poor soil improves to
the point where it mostly cycles carbon
again, but it is not the same degree
of carbon sink as compared to a forest.
but even the mature forest will be a
relatively carbon neutral cycle.


As compared to a prairie?


note: there were some interesting
hints in the literature i scanned about
some sequestration by certain bacteria
in soil that already had charcoal/char/etc
in it, but i'm not sure this is a phenomena
that will be repeatable world wide. it
might require tropical jungle conditions
with a certain level of moisture or some
other factors not very transferrable. i.e.
the science is still out on this. a small
glimmer there from what i've seen so far.
i'm always looking for more such hints
of hope.

I'm glad you read the material I posted, I was thinking it was a
complete waste of electrons.

I repeat. You are either very dense or a troll.


most often i'm amused, but whatever makes
you happy.


Trust me. You wouldn't be.


songbird


I fear I've strained your brain by going to what "MAY" be the next step
in our understanding of nutrition, "flavoniods", so let me back up and
just direct that ADHA little mind of yours to the citations below,
comparing organic and contemporary commercial (factory farmed) produce.

http://www.rawfoodexplained.com/the-...e-against-comm
ercially-grown-foods.html



http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/cm/symposium/organics/delate/

http://www.rawfoodlife.com/Articles_...commercial_foo
d/organic_vs_commercial_food.htm

http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/107555301750164244

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title2/susagri/susagri018.htm

http://www.ota.com/organic/benefits/nutrition.html

http://www.organixentral.co.uk/rutgers.html

Let me add, that this exchange isn't for you, but for others who may
read it. The conversation shows your lack of authoritative support by
the lack of citations, and the sophistry of your arguments, e.g.
referring to earthworms as an invasive species in a discussion about
gardening.

Happy trolling.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Arn3lF5XSUg
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/6/2...al_crime_scene
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AMC: Super Couple of the past return and speculation about their return *spoilers!* [email protected] Ponds 0 25-12-2007 10:32 PM
Perennials reward your landscape investment Earl@Greenwood Gardening 0 09-03-2006 09:07 PM
Will pine investment be a bad risk now? (Was: New problems with GM corn?) Brian Sandle sci.agriculture 14 08-09-2003 02:42 PM
Will pine investment be a bad risk now? Brian Sandle sci.agriculture 2 06-09-2003 04:32 PM
alternative investment Geoff Kegerreis alt.forestry 0 24-05-2003 04:44 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017