To unsubscribe from this newsletter simply CLICK HERE and your eMail program will send the request with YOUR eMail address. You will then be sent, to that same address, a request for confirmation of the unsubscribe action. If you are NOT subscribed, you may subscribe at the bottom of the letter by clicking on SUBSCRIBE. The subscription list is maintained professionally by SparkList, not by Karl Loren.
The Wednesday Letter
| Home | Subscribe | Previous Issues |
November 1, 2000
|
Karl Loren On Diet Relative To Diabetes And Life |
Our Government recommends EXACTLY the wrong diet, and we eat it!
It is painfully obvious to me that the medical profession urges you to use EXACTLY the wrong diet for diabetes, and for that matter, heart disease. Unbelievably they tell you that it is OK to eat sugar and that your diet should be high in carbohydrates, low in protein. The exact opposite of these recommendations is the truth.
In all my 15+ years of exposing government lies, this is now the biggest and worst of them all!
These Government-recommended diets CAUSE diabetes and heart disease!
How can I, a mere author from California (of all places) disagree with eminent authorities? Well, it is easy. When you read the research, even the research paid for by the drug companies, (more than 2,000 pages of research studies in this section alone) you cannot avoid the conclusion that a diabetic should NOT be eating sugar and MUST have supplemental chromium in his diet. This article is connected to more than 3,000 pages I have compiled to bring you the truth about diet!
 |
The American Diabetes Association does NOT recommend chromium but DOES recommend sugar! Here is what they say about sugar: |
CARBOHYDRATE AND SWEETENERS -- The percentage of calories from carbohydrate will also vary, and is individualized based on the patient's eating habits and glucose and lipid goals. For most of this century, the most widely held belief about the dietary treatment of diabetes has been that "simple" sugars should be avoided and replaced with complex carbohydrates. This belief appears to be based on the assumption that sugars are more rapidly digested and absorbed than are starches and thereby aggravate hyperglycemia to a greater degree. There is, however, very little scientific evidence that supports this assumption. Fruits and milk have been shown to have a lower glycemic response than most starches, and sucrose produces a glycemic response similar to that of bread, rice, and potatoes. Although various starches do have different glycemic responses, from a clinical perspective first priority should be given to the total amount of carbohydrate consumed rather than the source of the carbohydrate. [Source]
I can't consider this anything different from mass murder! The portion in larger type, and underlined, above, is where the American Diabetes Association is linking to the government-sponsored high-carbohydrate diet. What the ADA is saying is that you should be on a high carbohydrate diet, and that within THAT diet it doesn't make any difference what type of carbohydrates you get -- sugar or vegetables. That is criminal!
There is even fascinating evidence that autism is caused by or aggravated by milk and grain. Click here for the heartwarming story of how one mother cured her son's autism despite doctors telling her that it could not be done.
The American Heart Association has proposed a diet that causes heart disease. When I published that, some years ago, the AHA lawyers actually sent me a lengthy letter demanding that I remove certain information from my web pages, and threatened to sue me if I did not!
I have their letter published on my web site, along with my response. I haven't heard a peep out of them since I published my reply on the web. Obviously I have not removed any of my material.
What should your diet be? My first answer is that you should NOT trust the government's recommendations, nor those of the American Heart Association nor those of the American Diabetes Association. For that matter, your doctor, in the grip of authority, is not a source of good diet information either!
The first evil substance you should recognize is sugar.
If you cannot agree with this about sugar, even after reading this page, then there is not much chance you will accept my further advice on diet. Diet is mostly a matter of mental discipline, not magic pills!
This diet article certainly includes concepts first developed by many others, but the final diet recommendation is different from that developed by any other person -- it is my own very personal research and finding.
 |
One of those differences is that I have developed a gradient and sequential approach to getting on my diet. That is, I don't expect you to start with my entire diet at one jump! I think you should get off sugar first -- and just that change may take you some time. I'm ahead of you -- to help! But, my diet is a sequential thing -- get off sugar first, and when you have succeeded with that step, take the next step. Constant progress, not speed of progress, is your key to good health. |
And the progress has to be on a gradient you can handle in your life. Successfully reducing your sugar intake is more important than trying to stop completely and failing. So, if you can move through and adapt this diet in one day, more power to you. But if it takes a year to get off sugar, do it on your own pace. Just be sure you are making constant progress, not fooling yourself about your progress!
Just get on this steps leading up to health and make constant progress.
 |
Basic Instinct!
|
Wolves Howl! It is a basic instinct that has probably not changed for millions of years! Man has basic instincts -- we don't even question their existence! (Click here to go to the page where you'll hear the sound of a howl of the timber wolf!
I believe that man has several instincts that seem very basic. Of these, the most basic is the instinct to survive -- to continue living. This is the driving motivation in all living things - man, animal and plant.
But, very close to that instinct is another -- that is the instinct to desire and experience sensations. The two sensations that probably come first to mind are sex and food. The human body seems to desire the sensations of sex and food. They also seem "natural," since without sex, there would be no children, and no future. Without food there would be starvations and death.
So, these desires for the sensations related to the basics of life seem very rational. But, it is also obvious that a person can be very insane on the subject of sex -- seeking sexual sensation far, far beyond that needed to create children. There are vast quantities of energy devoted to sexual activities that have nothing to do with creating children -- these would all be classified as pursuing this instinctive desire for sensation for the sake of the sensation itself -- not for the sake of survival.
The desire for food sensation has obviously gone far beyond the needs of the body -- to a degree of obesity in our society that is now contrary to survival.
The drive to survive is sane and logical for any living thing. The next instinct may have seemed to have survival value, but it certainly doesn't in today's world! Desire For Sensation is, I think you'll find, exactly contrary to survival, and thus an aberration today.
Its original survival value of the desire for sensation probably related to "good things taste good" and "bad things taste bad." If that were always true, then the desire for sensation would be wholly useful. And, it may even BE true of natural tastes -- that is, food items that have never been cooked or processed beyond their original natural form.
|
I had an interesting experience while writing this. I live high in the hills of Burbank, with a beautiful view of the San Fernando Valley. My wife, Jean Ross, and I live in an area where we have coyotes walking past our front door and our back yard every night -- and deer walking down the street and coming into our yard. I had heard complaints from my wife, and from neighbors, that the deer ate the roses. Well, I never saw that and we have so many rose bushes that it seemed to me that we always had fresh roses in the house. |
|
We also have a large bird feeder in the back. It holds 25 pounds of bird seed, and often will be emptied in just a few days. The bird feeder is on a pole stuck in the ground just 18" from the backyard fence.
One day, as my daughter looked out the back picture window, onto the back yard, she saw a deer eating our roses! He had a five point horn (each side) so that's a pretty big deer. He was IN BETWEEN the bird feeder and the fence -- stuck in that 18" space, gently poking his nose through the bars of the fence and nibbling the rose blossoms and buds.
We stood not 12 feet from him, glass door closed, dogs all growling and eager to go out and defend the territory, but he just kept eating.
 |
I believe my wife now when she says that virtually ALL our roses are eaten by the visiting deer. The point of this? Well, I think that the desire for sensation in the deer leads him to eat exactly the right foods for him, at the time he needs them. |
To eat JUST the rose blossom, or bud, must mean that there is something in that flower that is needed in the deer's diet -- something he doesn't get from grass or other food sources. After all he has to come close to a house, where dogs bark, and poke his nose THROUGH a fence to reach a rose bush, and then even put himself into a tight spot -- just to eat a rose flower.
I don't know what is in the rose that the deer needs and I don't think the deer "thinks" about it the way I might, but I do know that deer like roses.
So, as I've suggested, man's instinctive desire to satisfy his cravings based on sensation seems to work not very well for man, but the similar desire for sensation must be leading the deer to eat what he eats.
Well Done! Deer!
Among the various sensations we experience are those of hunger, thirst and pain. Certainly the sensation of pain would seem to be designed to warn us away from something -- seems pretty sane to me.
 |
The sensation of hunger, I've learned, can become false. I've written extensively on the fact that a body not getting enough water will experience a "sensation" that you usually perceive as "hunger" when, in fact, it is "thirst." You react to this sensation of "hunger" by eating when, in fact, the true need is for water -- which is not well served by food. So, the sensation of "hunger" continues (being really "thirst") and you eat more food -- not what the body needs. |
People often wrongly believe that coffee, soda or tea will handle the body's need for water -- they do not. You experience "thirst" and drink a soda. Somewhere there the proper sensation (thirst) is being handled with the wrong response (coffee) --- so that, again, is an example of the instinct for survival being overthrown by the desire for the sensation of the coffee or soda. These are, of course, both addictive drugs!
So, it is clear to me that sensations can be false signals, or perceived wrongly.
In this same way the desire for sensation for sweet, for instance, can lead one astray -- trying to satisfy this desire with sugar which is harmful, when some other nutrient might much better serve the body.
It could be that the first "drug" on our planet was cooked food -- it appeared to taste better, but it was harmful to survival. Animals will eat cooked food, but I think only when they have no other choice.
Man's desire for sensation seems to be implanted , not natural. Even Aristotle wrote about it. Aristotle didn't have the depth of wisdom of The Buddha on this subject. The Lord Buddha rightly counseled that man would not be spiritually free as long as he was tied to the desire for body sensations.
If you study carefully I think you'll find that a great deal of man's behavior is motivated by his desire for sensation.
This "sensation" doesn't have some fancy, strange definition.
I am talking about, primarily, the desire for sexual sensation and the desire for taste sensation. You might have a sensation of "success" but I am talking about the obvious physical sensations that can be experience by our bodies.
 |
I think you'll find that most of the pattern of social behavior you observe can be understood to be man's unending quest for sensation -- sexual and taste. That may be controversial enough to get you off the diet track I'm on -- but let's stay on the diet track and accept for a moment that ancient man, as well as modern man, has an inherent desire for sensation. Sweet things taste "good." Bitter things don't. There are some who would say that "bad" tastes are simply nature's warnings of toxicity? But that is too glib, and not universally true. |
The desire for sex sensation is probably more harmful and more pervasive, and obviously more hidden than the desire for taste sensation. An article in the Wall Street Journal gives us a peek. Americans spend millions of dollars ever year on internet pornography -- "web sex" is the ultimate in "safe" since you experience it in the privacy of your home, and no matter what foolish psychologist might defend one-handed sex, there can be nothing healthy or natural about this type of "sex." Yet people seek it desperately!
The porn viewers were told they were being charged to view sex videos over a phone line to Madagascar at a rate of $3.99 a minute, the complaint says. But the FTC concluded that the phone calls actually terminated in the United Kingdom and should have cost only eight cents a minute. Verity, the agency alleged, intended to pocket the difference.
The operation described by the FTC appears to have been huge. In a single week in September, about 67,000 U.S. households received bills from Verity, according to the FTC. The average overcharge was $222, with some overcharges topping $4,000, the agency said.
For now I'll limit my writing to man's desire for taste sensation, even though the desire for sex sensation is probably much stronger and has more impact on behavior.
When you have a built-in desire for sensation, along with a desire for simple survival, you can get conflicts.
You KNOW (don't you) that cocaine is not healthy, but those who desire this sensation let the desire for sensation overpower their desire for survival.
The whole drug scene on this planet can be understood, now, as the drug addict's desire for sensation at the expense of survival.
|
|
|
Probably the single most destructive addictive drug on this planet is refined sugar. Are you addicted to sugar? Click here to take the test for sugar addiction. On the average each American consumes 150 pounds of refined sugar per year -- some eat much less, and teenagers generally eat about double that average!
Probably the single most terrible drug on the planet just now is white sugar!
You may think that hard drugs, street drugs, are the only true problem: In fact, they are a great problem:
More than 6 million Americans are estimated to require treatment for drug abuse problems. New approaches to treatment are urgently needed. [Source]
These addicts are publicly identified and cause serious disruption in their families and neighborhoods. But, there are probably 200 million sugar addicts. They don't SEEM to be a source of trouble, but then our "health bill" is measured in the trillions. If 200 million Americans quit eating any sugar I think the savings in life and health care would dwarf the costs of treating the problems caused by hard drugs. We have spread the sugar problem out so much that it can't be seen clearly. It is there.
Incidentally, if you are reading this because you are in search of a new and better diet for yourself, don't take street drugs. I will be writing on the natural foods that can help you kick drugs, but you can't become healthy with this diet while continuing to do drugs.
So, if you are a druggie -- get off drugs. Then take a look at sugar, your next big drug addiction.
 |
What Do You Suppose They Eat?These Are Not Likely Readers Of This Page! |
Cigarettes, coffee and tea are in there somewhere -- and millions are addicted to these. Those who suffer these addictions experience withdrawal symptoms when they try to stop -- so they prefer the sensation of the drug to the sensation of withdrawal symptoms.
It would be hard to get on the diet I recommend while you are still addicted to coffee, cigarettes, tea, street drugs or sugar.
So, the "market" for my diet ideas is dreadfully small!
There is no question that sugar is addictive -- one of the important components of the definition of an "addictive drug" is that you desire it with great ferocity! That plain white sugar is harmful is not controversial except to the millions of people for whom the addiction overcomes reason. Man tends to justify and continue his errors rather than change!
Thousands of scientific studies show that eating plain white sugar is, for one, not necessary since you can get all the sugar you need in more complex (and less harmful) forms, but overwhelmingly the science shows that sugar causes disease.
Sir Frederick Banting, the co-discoverer of insulin, noticed in 1929 in Panama that, among sugar plantation owners who ate large amounts of their refined stuff, diabetes was common. Among native cane-cutters, who only got to chew the raw cane, he saw no diabetes. [Click here for the source of the quote and an excellent article on the dangers of eating sugar.]
So, man has a built-in desire for sensation and one of the most desirable taste sensations is "sweet."
I won't try yet to get archeologically accurate, but man has been on this planet for millions of years. During most of that time he was wandering and eating what he could find. I've found that there are actually many people who have no notion of how it has been determined that man has existed on this planet for millions of years. Here is a good article on that question. This article, incidentally, demolishes the concept of a vegetarian having a good diet -- it cannot be done! At least, it was never man's natural diet!
 |
Man never stumbled across white sugar in his millions of years! |
He never found sugar in any form much more than honey (which, incidentally, is one of the finest sources that exists for many enzymes and vitamins -- but only UNHEATED honey). Honey is on my diet, but no refined sugar.
Do you want to improve your diet -- in alignment with the most basic and historical needs of the physical body?
Well, start by knocking out ALL simple sugar.
Why don't you?
Because you have this inherent desire for sensation. The desire for sensation OFTEN wins over the desire for survival. You could not erase the desire for survival because that is the most basic of all instincts. But, I think the desire for sensation can be handled -- perhaps not 100%, but you can make progress.
I would help you in that progress.
 |
Religious orders recognized the truth of this, and tried to solve it in ways that "worked" in a mechanical sense, at least. Priests were forbidden to marry -- forbidden to have sex sensations. Many religious groups have tried to get away from their desire for taste sensation with simple living -- look at the Quakers and Amish for their simple lives. |
There are actually foods, and life-styles, which decrease sexual desires, and thus reduce the desire for sexual sensation. But, desire for taste sensation is not so easy to eliminate.
What we do, instead, is eat foods that are bad for us, but since they are then acting like addictive drugs, we get "withdrawal symptoms" when we try to kick the habit. In order to avoid the withdrawal symptoms we keep eating the bad stuff -- the same applies to street drugs.
 |
The druggie can "know" that it's bad for him, but he also knows that he'll go through living hell if he quits. The better alternative, he thinks, is to keep taking the stuff. |
So, sugar can be viewed as one of the most basic of all health problems on the planet -- not just plain white sugar, but the overwhelming foolishness of "official" diets that put your ideal intake at 60% carbohydrates, and a much-too-low percentage of proteins
|
Now, take a look at how hard commercial companies try to addict children to sugar. Click here to review the top cereals in the world -- for maximum content of pure sugar. Then, on that page, or here, click (or click the image) to see the home page for Kellogg's Cereals. That page is a drug pusher's dream -- entrap the kids into playing games that make them want sugar -- feed them "healthy" cereal that is 53% pure sugar, and there goes civilization. I don't think they are ignorant of the evil they represent! |
|
If you would like the history of how sugar got started in the Western world, read here.
If you think the artificial sweeteners are better?? click here -- they are not!
You've heard it many times: "Sugar contains no nutrition of any kind -- it adds calories, but no food value." Our society is grossly overweight, yet we eat more sugar than most other countries in the world, and far, far more than we did a few hundred years ago.
Sugar is the number one health hazard in our society. It's no surprise that the Government subsidizes production of sugar -- spending billions to support an industry that is both harmful to consumers and no longer economical to have within the United States. Sugar growers are a powerful force for evil in our society.
I've already mentioned cigarettes, but consider that the government not only subsidizes production of sugar, and promotes its use, but also subsidizes the production of tobacco. Obviously the evils of tobacco are now public, while the evils of sugar are not.
 |
Warning Labels For Cigarettes! |
The above are official warning labels in Canada! I don't know if they convince people to stop smoking, but they certainly portray the truth about one health effect from smoking! Interestingly, there were many other, equally gross, graphics on the web, now all of them have been withdrawn and cannot be found. The Wall Street Journal wrote about them, but you can no longer find these pictures except on THIS page??? Is the tobacco lobby that strong??
Do you know any smoker who would willingly carry and show off a pack of cigarettes with that image?
The nature of this evil is to visit the eventual wrath of society onto the tobacco farmer, for the sins of his fathers! We have generations of otherwise honest men and women, grown corrupt by the money from selling tobacco, and now not able to see the truth of the evil they bring to the planet. The same is true about sugar growers. To paraphrase Jesus:
The government subsidizes tobacco production while at the same time collecting fines and money from the cigarette producers -- who pays? You know! You do. How would YOU feel if you were a tobacco farmer? or a worker in the cigarette factory? You are robbing from your neighbors while you murder them! Sugar plantations are no better, nor the companies producing and selling sugar.
And Kellogg's Cereals!
Incidentally, the solution is NOT to try to regulate these evil industries, but to raise the awareness of individuals so that they no longer seek such sensations. The desire for sensation would be fine, as a survival instinct, if we could predict the consequences of the substance causing the sensation. Food that is good FOR you should taste good! It doesn't always, but if you had sufficient awareness you would know about the future consequences of some food-based sensation.
No diet of any kind should include any processed sugar, nor any foods to which sugar (including fructose, corn syrup, artificial sweeteners, etc.) have been added.
This one change, alone, can improve your health very dramatically, yet this change, alone is one of the hardest to make. Sugar is more addictive than cigarettes, caffeine or cocaine -- and more deadly.
Yet the government suggests that you can eat the stuff, even if you are a diabetic.
If you can't accept this simple truth, there is no need to read further about the true natural diet of man. I didn't say that you feel strong enough to kick the habit -- that takes a lot of determination. But, even many people who can't kick the sugar habit understand, intellectually, that sugar is bad for them. They just acknowledge that they can't break the addiction. Likewise, they could not go onto the diet I recommend here.
Click here to go to a summary page of all the research material about sugar, on this web site.
 |
Coca Cola!An Addictive Drug! |
A close cousin to pure, processed sugar, certainly is your common, every-day soda!
You know, of course, that sodas contain a great deal of sugar. But there are other harmful ingredients too.
Early on Coca Cola actually contained cocaine == that's where it got the name. Now the addictive ingredients are sugar, caffeine and sugar substitutes! The filthy origin of Coca Cola is one of those well-known secrets. The sins of its past don't guarantee that the sin continues, but there is so much fresh evidence of the evil of Coca Cola that any person who drinks it is obviously unaware of its history, or its harm!
Click here to read a simple and damning description of the health harm done by sodas.
Consumption of soft drinks has risen 900% in 55 years. Here are figures showing consumption per kid!
| Table
1.
Consumption of non-diet soft drinks by 12- to 19-year-olds (ounces per day) and percent of caloric intakes (all figures include non-drinkers). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Calculated from U.S. Dept. Agr. Nationwide Food Consumption Survey, 1977-78; Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individual, 1987-88, 1994-96. |
Children start drinking soda pop at a remarkably young age, and consumption increases through young adulthood. One fifth of one- and two-year-old children consume soft drinks.6 Those toddlers drink an average of seven ounces -- nearly one cup -- per day. Toddlers' consumption changed little between the late 1970s and mid 1990s. [Source]
The above table includes ALL kids in that age group. But, there is a wide disparity among children -- with some drinking zero, and others drinking large quantities. And, if the truth be told, the ones drinking the most are the poor and the minorities -- making them all the more likely to remain at the bottom of the economic pile.
| Table 2. Consumption of regular and diet soft drinks by 12- to 19-year-olds (excludes non-drinkers). | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
U.S. Dept.
Agr. Nationwide Food Consumption Survey, 1977-78; Continuing Survey |
For the average 13- to 18-year-old boy or girl drinker, soft drinks provide about 9% of calories. Boys and girls in the 75th percentile of consumption obtained 12% of their calories from soft drinks, and those in the 90th percentile about 18% of their calories. [Source]
There certainly should be some sort of warning signal here to any responsible parent, and to any teenager who can see further than a few years into the future!
 |
Junk Foods |
|
Sugar added to foods and sodas are just the beginning of the deadly diet of today's youth -- when you add junk foods you have about ended any chance for health in later years.
Not too long ago Zoos would encourage visitors to feed the animals -- until a group of school kids visited one zoo and gave a bunch of spider monkeys snacks from their brown-bag lunches -- brought from home and "loving moms." All the monkeys got deathly sick. Now, all over the country zoos are absolutely strict -- no feeding of the animals by visitors. Why could the kids eat this stuff and the monkeys not?
Once a batch of my 15+ grandchildren visited and I had the pleasure of taking them to the store for picnic supplies. I was amazed at what they thought was food. I got so saddened, and inspired, that I recorded a lecture, then wrote an article, the first in my series called The Four Roads To Ruin. If you have read this far, in this long article, my interim reward is that you can write and get a free cassette tape of that lecture -- I think it is great.
Many people feel that the "nutritional drinks" like Ensure, etc., are good for seniors. They are just slightly better than pure sugar. Once a person is on the Ensure diet, he is on the way down the tubes. Unfortunately, many of these greedy companies are now marketing these instant drinks to young people -- pushing them further into poor health and away from natural foods. Click here for a story about Ensure and Carnation Instant Breakfast -- all fine sources of processed food -- and sugar. They are, of course, nothing more than junk foods.
 |
I don't really expect many youth to read this page, but there are still millions of beer and potato chip adults watching Sunday TV, and cookie and milk moms watching afternoon soap -- dulling their senses enough with TV to be totally ignorant of the dangers of their constant snacks. |
Let me throw it in here. I've mentioned that the solution to your desire for sensation is to be able to see, and predict, the consequences of today's diet. One of the most dulling actions for your awareness is television. TV is a passive inflow of mostly useless information -- from the viewpoint of survival. And, much of the advertising on TV promotes exactly the wrong diet for you. When you couple the dulling effect of TV with the promotion of junk food, you get what we have -- a society on its way down the tubes in terms of health. Click here for a cute, but practical, set of advices on how to reduce the TV addiction rate in your home.
I've found, now that I have started on "man's natural diet" that I have less compulsion to watch TV.
Another side issue that is important is so-called health insurance. As long as people don't have to pay for their diet mistakes, because insurance will give them a drug to ease the pain, then there is little motivation to change. Much of society is rigged to reduce your awareness or concern for future consequences. Read an article I've written on this.
But, you don't have to agree with all this. Just start your road to health by knocking out sugar, then sodas, then junk foods. With just those changes you will feel better, I guarantee. Want to go further, then read further!
Throw potato chips out of your life!
 |
Pastas, Cereals, Bread & Grains |
I am writing, now, about refined foods in the grain family. the picture above certainly looks "healthy" but every bit of that "food" has been heated and processed. There is nothing "natural" about it.
"Whole grains" are just as dead as "refined flour." The whole grains just have more of the dead remains of the valuable nutrients that are removed early in the refining process. So, yes, whole grains have a better effect on your health than refined grains, but the real comparison should be with sprouted grains and live foods.
I happen to believe that live, sprouted beans and sprouted grains are very healthy, but once you take the grain and process it == then cook it into bread, pasta and other refined carbohydrates, you no longer have food -- you have glue!
The smell of baking bread has to be one of the most addicting, and appetizing aromas around -- I am not immune to it. Coming back to this point -- I do not suggest that I have somehow erased my desire for sensation. Rather I would say that I have increased my ability to predict consequences. Even at my advanced age (69 at this writing) I can foresee a long and healthy life ahead of me, but ONLY if I apply sense and logic to overcome my desire for sensation.
ALL of these foods, grains, pasta, bread, cereal, are converted by the body into sugar. There may be small amounts of protein in some of them (5% to 15% protein in various forms of flour, for instance). But, as soon as that grain has been "processed" there is no life remaining. It is not much different from eating cooked meat -- the protein has been heated and damaged.
|
|
I've now written about sugar, soda and grains -- the first two, obviously, have nothing alive in them. There is still a sentimental attractiveness to "whole grain cereal" even if not to white bread.
But, no matter how "whole" the grain is, more than 80% of the grain turns into sugar in the body, and if the protein in this processed product is useless to the body, then the whole subject belongs in the Halls of Boondoggle!
This is only a part of the total article on diet by Karl Loren -- the part that is being sent out as the November issue of The Wednesday Letter. Karl's opinion is that the Wednesday Letters were becoming too long -- too much memory -- too long for downloading. So, the above portion of the total article seemed like a logical part to end off for one gulp. If you want to read the entire article (which is still in progress as of November 1, 2000) click here.
 |
To give you a further hint, here is what I am saying to many people who write to me and ask advice about serious health problems: |
In past years I spent much of my time researching individual ingredients to add to my vitamin formulas, or designing new formulas.
I've gotten away from that in the last year or so -- in favor of broader subjects, and research relating to the "whole person."
This is the type of advice similar to when people would read my many pages about the importance of drinking water, and ask me, "What type of a filter should I use?"
I would always answer by saying, "The amount of water you drink if far more important than what type of water! You can drink LOTS of tap water and have more benefit than from drinking tiny amounts of fancy filtered water."
So it is now. People often ask me, "What about XX ingredient?" or, "How about YY disease?"
I am moving toward a universal answer to these questions.
I've written pieces of this over many years, but it is coming together.
First, and foremost, there is a spiritual and mental component to health that is senior to any physical factor.
 |
I don't know how many times I realize talking to someone, that they don't need a new pill, they need to get out of a noisy home! or, break off a terrible relationship. |
The inner turmoil caused by outer turmoil is tremendous, and not well appreciated. I can trace virtually EVERY illness to a particular type of relationship with someone close!
Next, just about everyone needs to get rid of toxins in their bodies -- so taking a pill is not very helpful compared with flushing out those toxins -- with a good cleansing program. Water is part of that, but our own oral chelation product is a great detoxifier. But, there are others, and people ought not to be putting more toxins INTO their bodies while trying to remove them with an expensive detox program.
But, people want a magic bullet, and ask for a pill.
So, as I've said, I'm starting to resist this, and turn toward more general advice.
|
This is at some risk, of course, to my business profits, but I can do nothing else in good conscious. So, my current research and writing are on the subject of diet. I, myself, have changed my diet very drastically -- and I'm 69! I have decided that I won't tell people straight up about the diet -- that they will have to "earn" the information. |
|
Well, it is all published among my 13,000 pages, on 7 web sites, but people are also fond of saying, just give me the bottom line!
Incidentally, I have hit a "highest ever" for visitors to my web sites. The main web site is www.oralchelation.com, and here are the statistics for visitors:
Each unit (
) represents 1 500
requests for pages, or part thereof.
month: pages: -------- ----- May 2000: 29:Aug 2000: 60041:
Oct 2000: 63394:
Since I have been writing most recently about diet, published on www.karlloren.com, here are the stats for that web site:
Each unit () represents 400
requests for pages, or part thereof.
month: pages: -------- ----- May 2000: 7:
Since my diet material has been published there has been a large increase in the number of visitors to this web site.
I have five other web sites -- and each of them is getting an increase in visitors. The immune system builder, Transfer Factor, at www.supercolostrum.com is becoming increasingly popular too:
) represents 400 requests for
pages, or part thereof.
month: pages: -------- ----- May 2000: 8:Sep 2000: 13073:
One of my other webs is where I'm writing new material about heart disease, at http://www.heart-disease-bypass-surgery.com That, too, is getting more and more activity:
Each unit () represents 150
requests for pages, or part thereof.
month: pages: -------- ----- May 2000: 14:Aug 2000: 5588:
My Book, Life Flow One, The Solution For Heart Disease, has its own web site, at: http://www.oralchelation.net and the visitors there are increasing, too:
Each unit () represents 300
requests for pages, or part thereof.
month: pages: -------- ----- May 2000: 12:
Another web site hasn't had much activity, but I've started to put more material there -- check it out, at http://www.insteadof.com where the stats look like this:
Each unit () represents 60
requests for pages, or part thereof.
month: pages: -------- ----- Jun 2000: 2711:Sep 2000: 2587:
There is an old web site about arthritis that I have neglected, but it still has good information on it. It continues to attract more visitors looking for help on this problem. Look at http://www.arthritisinformation.net
Each unit () represents 400
requests for pages, or part thereof.
month: pages: -------- ----- May 2000: 15:
There is no sense offering a magic formula (even if free) when the guy is drunk every night and eating doughnuts for his protein! Write to me -- convince me that you are serious about improving your health and will engage in a dialogue about your diet -- I'll respond -- I promise!
So, there ARE things that could be added to my vitamin formulas, but there are other changes you can make that are free to you, but do cost an investment in learning and self discipline.
Are you interested?
So, tell me about your diet?
Tell me about your family and home life.
I promise to respond.
