Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - JeuneKoq

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20
76
Increased height is also linked to higher intelligence:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_and_intelligence
Tall and intelligent modern people are not necessary healthier though, as they seem to suggest.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200901/why-are-taller-people-more-intelligent-shorter-people

"First, both height and intelligence may be indicators of underlying health.  According to this view, people who are genetically and developmentally healthier simultaneously grow taller and become more intelligent than those who are less healthy, producing the positive correlation between height and intelligence.

This is a plausible theory.  In our paper, however, Reyniers and I produce evidence against it.  In the analysis of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, we control for the respondent’s health, by using four indicators of health and producing a latent variable for health using principal component analysis in order to eliminate random measurement error.  The association between height and intelligence does not diminish at all when we control for health.   In fact, once we control for other demographic and social variables, health is not significantly correlated with intelligence at all; it actually has a nonsignificantly negative association with intelligence.  So, at least in our sample, health is unlikely to be the common cause for both height and intelligence."


Other sources online claim that it is overall-increased meat-consumption, not increased dairy-consumption, that is the cause of the increased height.
I don't know, were our hunter-gatherer ancestors not supposed to have eaten plenty of meat? I mean, they basically made a great part of the mega-fauna go instinct from hunting, if I'm correct. Perhaps it's a mix of both.

Effect of cow milk consumption on longitudinal height gain in children:

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/80/4/1088.2.full

"In summary, in our prospective study, we observed a height gain in the children who consumed a high amount of cow milk."

"Several previous studies showed an effect of milk on height gain in pubertal children. In 1984 Takahashi (4) reported an acceleration of growth in Japan from the 1950s and suggested the importance of milk consumption. And this increase in height was prominent during puberty. In a cross-sectional study, Jirapinyo et al (5) reported that milk intake and parents' height contributed to adolescent height in females. Bonjour et al (6) found that prepubertal girls who consumed a diet including calcium-enriched foods grew in height in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. In our longitudinal study, the mean height gain in the high-consumption group was higher than that in the low-consumption group, and the difference in height gain between the 2 groups was 2.5 cm/3 y. "


About hip fracture in Japan and other westernized Asian cities (Hong Kong, Singapore...):

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jos/2010/757102/

"A major study concluded that in a Japan population aged 35 years or older the crude incidence of hip fracture was 244.8 per 100,000 person years from 2004 to 2006, and the gender-specific incidence was 99.6 per 100,000 person years for men and 368 per 100,000 person years for women [12]. When data was analysed and compared with that from 30 years ago it was also concluded that there is an increasing incidence of hip fracture in Japanese populations. The highest incidence of hip fracture from Asia has been reported from Singapore. A study by Koh et al. revealed that hip fracture rates from 1991 to 1998 (per 100,000) were 152 in men and 402 in women, and this was 1.5 and 5 times higher than corresponding rates in 1960s [13]"

77
Hmm, the point I was making was that the average human height is still well below what it was in Palaeolithic times despite a so-called "richer" diet. Now, granted, certain ethnic populations which have adapted to being much smaller even in palaeo times  might not benefit from being taller(eg:-  African pygmies, some East Asian ethnic groups), but I would have thought that being taller would be therefore a good thing for those whose ancestors in palaeo times were much taller?
Maybe, I guess if you intent to live a life where strength and height (eg: elongated body for extra running speed) is necessary for survival, like in paleo times. It sure doesn't hurt to be tall and strong, even today. And most women find it attractive.

Suffering from osteoporosis or hip fracture might very well be due to dairy consumption but is not related to increased height, I would think? Could you, out of curiosity,  please provide a scientific link as regards increased mental development delay among East Asians? I assume by "Asians" you mean  specifically "East Asians" as the US weirdly does not seem to distinguish between South Asians and East Asians?
Lets just say that dairy consumption leads to both increased height and osteoporosis (especially, as Sabertooth points out, if you don't live and eat in a way that helps prevent it), but one doesn't necessarily affect the probability of developing the other.

As for increased mental development delay in Asians (in that case, Japanese people), I read it in GCB's "Manger Vrai", and I trust that he had access to valid info on the matter in order to make such claims, as he was able to back up some of his claims with scientific articles.

I'll still look out there if I find something about it.

The bone health issues of modern Scandinavians is irrelevant because of the complete adulteration of the environmental conditions. Historically the larger framed breeds of humans lived in a way that would prevent loss of bone density and other degenerative conditions. They would nurse their children for the first three years, giving them maternal antibodies which would make them adapted to the raw cow dairy they would consume later in life. The raw foods, fermented foods, and active lifestyle would allow for optimal D levels and other endo-hormones which are responsible for maintaining strong bones.
Don't forget that cow milk has only been made available since the Neolithic, so those "large Scandinavians" probably didn't look the same in paleo times.

78
Are you implying that being taller means being healthier/fitter? It's not necessarily true in our modern world, where people have been steadily increasing in size thanks to a "richer" diet, and especially thanks to cow dairy. Interesting thing that the Scandinavians, one of the tallest people on the planet, are also a population that suffers the most from osteoporosis.

Now Asians are getting taller too, and are beginning to see more cases of hip fracture (proportionally to their population), and more cases of mental development delay, since the introduction of cow milk in their diet through westernization.

There must be a difference between "healthy" taller children brought up on a RPdiet (and who knows, the first generation might be smaller than their parents who drank milk), and "unhealthy" taller children who got tall thanks to natural and synthetic growth hormones in cow milk, and will probably suffer from it in the long run.

79
General Discussion / Re: Frequency of food borne illness
« on: December 16, 2015, 12:31:10 am »
True parasites are things like lice and mosquitoes, and even then I'm not entirely sure.
Well, it is not the mosquito that is parasitic, but rather the malaria parasite that it caries. Malaria can efficiently be treated with plants from the Artemisia family, especially Artemisia Annua, or "Wormwood".

http://www.nature.com/scitable/blog/bio2.0/artemisia_annua_a_vital_partner

"Extracts of A. annua, long used as an ornamental and medicinal shrub in traditional Chinese culture, were found to kill the malaria parasite, Plasmodium falciparum. Artemisinin, known in China as qinghaosu (Fig. 2), was identified as the responsible compound (Enserink, 2005)."

80
General Discussion / Re: What rawpalaeo foods are you eating right now?
« on: December 11, 2015, 02:14:31 am »
I wouldn't even last 2 weeks on vegan diet!
Haha I don't know for myself, I eat plenty of meat so maybe a week or two without any wouldn't be so bad. When it's warmer perhaps.

The girl was already cooked vegan though, so I guess she just didn't get the results she expected when turning raw (and probably did it the fruitarian way or something) and so she backed off.



81
General Discussion / Re: Drinking sea water
« on: December 11, 2015, 01:37:36 am »
I thought your drank sea water for the mineral content? Then you can find almost the same on rock salts. They're basically dry buildup of sea water minerals.

82
General Discussion / Re: Drinking sea water
« on: December 10, 2015, 01:47:50 am »
Drinking sea waters sounds the same as just liking on a salt rock, like some animals do. Just in diluted form.

83
General Discussion / Re: RPDers urged not to drink from tapwater
« on: December 02, 2015, 12:41:03 am »
Chlorine is not that bad. We eat this diet so we don't have to worry about little things like that.

Yeah, but why endure such things when you can avoid them? Also, eating clean alone doesn't automatically make you uber-healthy. Or else we could just stop sleeping, work in a nuclear central without a protection suit, and take after-work shots of roundup for the lols. Our ancestors breathed the fresh air of the forest, exercised everyday, slept regular hours and enjoyed plenty of vit.D boosting sun rays... I doubt they would feel as fresh if they ended up living the same lifestyle as ours (Or at least us city-rats)...and potentially live as long. I guess their threat were not pollution and lack of exercise, but rather night jaguars and wolfs.

BTW, the average dose of chlorine used in public swimming pools is harmful enough to make people develop asthma. I used to enjoy swimming, even if I was already asthmatic, but the chlorine made me wheeze so much that I had to quit swimming lessons. Now I don't have asthma anymore, but I certainly don't feel fresh when I stay in a chlorinated pool for too long, which happens maybe once a year.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-182679/Chlorine-link-asthma-surge.html

84
Off Topic / Re: Sea-breeze ain't what it used to be
« on: December 01, 2015, 05:17:11 am »
Jeune, you don't understand the difference between fields and waves. You really need to shut the fuck up about it all.
More than you do, apparently. I'll shut up about it because I know how much it frustrates you to be wrong.

Otherwise, please explain.

85
I do not get any bad effects  from the above. Neither I suspect would my brother even though he eats a mostly crappy cooked diet. He is a marvel - he can shovel vast amounts of cooked foods into his body at every meal and yet always stays ultra-slim. He must have an unusual metabolism.
Not as unusual as you may think. I had a massive bing-eating episode that lasted 4 years and was at it worst last year, and I actually lost weight. My parents were convinced I was making myself puke after diner, because I ate so much and still stayed slim -skinny, even-, but I did not. I rarely ate before 12pm though, but I largely made up for it later in the day.

86
Off Topic / Re: Sea-breeze ain't what it used to be
« on: December 01, 2015, 12:30:51 am »
EMFs are FIELDS. That's what the F in EMF stands for. Microwaves are WAVES. Seriously, do none of you have enough scientific training to know the difference? The fuck are you people doing arguing about this stuff when you don't know what you're talking about?
Do you even read about the stuff you claim to know so well? And what do you think those "fields" are composed of?

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/

"What makes the various forms of electromagnetic fields so different?
One of the main characteristics which defines an electromagnetic field (EMF) is its frequency or its corresponding wavelength. Fields of different frequencies interact with the body in different ways. One can imagine electromagnetic waves as series of very regular waves that travel at an enormous speed, the speed of light. The frequency simply describes the number of oscillations or cycles per second, while the term wavelength describes the distance between one wave and the next. Hence wavelength and frequency are inseparably intertwined: the higher the frequency the shorter the wavelength."


On the sources of EMFs:

Natural sources of electromagnetic fields

Electromagnetic fields are present everywhere in our environment but are invisible to the human eye. Electric fields are produced by the local build-up of electric charges in the atmosphere associated with thunderstorms. The earth's magnetic field causes a compass needle to orient in a North-South direction and is used by birds and fish for navigation.

Human-made sources of electromagnetic fields

Besides natural sources the electromagnetic spectrum also includes fields generated by human-made sources: X-rays are employed to diagnose a broken limb after a sport accident. The electricity that comes out of every power socket has associated low frequency electromagnetic fields. And various kinds of higher frequency radiowaves are used to transmit information – whether via TV antennas, radio stations or mobile phone base stations.

87
Off Topic / Re: Sea-breeze ain't what it used to be
« on: November 30, 2015, 06:12:54 am »
*sigh* EMF is NOT microwaves. Fucking learn the difference.
Yes they are?:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave

Microwaves are a form of electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths ranging from one meter to one millimeter; with frequencies between 300 MHz (100 cm) and 300 GHz (0.1 cm).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_field#Health_and_safety

The potential effects of electromagnetic fields on human health vary widely depending on the frequency and intensity of the fields. For more information on the health effects due to specific parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, see the following articles:

    Static electric fields: see Electric shock
    Static magnetic fields: see MRI#Safety
    Extremely low frequency (ELF): see Power lines#Health concerns
    Radio frequency (RF): see Electromagnetic radiation and health
    Light: see Laser safety
    Ultraviolet (UV): see Sunburn
    Gamma rays: see Gamma ray
    Mobile telephony: see Mobile phone radiation and health

88
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 28, 2015, 03:27:22 am »
Ideological debates are fine between brilliant minds that have thought and studied more deeply than anyone else on the topic. You are Dario are both smart, but neither of you have studied this topic long enough to make this an instructive process for....well, me, at least, and several other members too.

Not to belittle either one of you. You both seem to have plenty of potential for this kind of debate. Just try to keep it civil and factual, OK?
I don't think you need to have such an extensive knowledge to bring something interesting to the discussion. Sometimes the only thing you know about the subject is worth mentioning, and can turn the whole discussion around. It happens.

I only studied social anthropology for 6 months at Uni, but I did learn some things that other people might not know, about some tribe's relationship to animals, for instance.

89
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 27, 2015, 07:50:12 pm »
Oh boy, here we go.
All right, we'll stop here if people feel this thread should be for discussing Sabertooth's video project only. Divergence is sometimes tolerated -to some extent- in some threads, but like me you probably have the feeling this will turn into a long ideological debate.

90
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 27, 2015, 01:11:11 am »
Conversely, there is also too much of children being treated as if they were animals, which encourages all sorts of behavioral problems both in childhood and adulthood, and likely contributes to mental illness as well.
There's this fad of people putting their children on a leash  ;D I saw one at a supermarket, I found it quite pathetic. I guess we do live in a dangerous world where your child can be kidnapped on the corner of the street, or run over, but it sounds to me like these parents just can't be bothered with properly educating their progeny. Why not just hold hands?

There's a big problem in western societies, where animals are increasingly being seen as little children. They're not. They are property and should be treated as such.
They are neither children, nor objects (if this is what you mean by "property"). Animals have a soul, they have a presence. People can treat them like robots, put them away in a box when their task is over, but they will feel sad and hurt like you and I.

(present-day) Western Societies may regard them as children, but there are indigenous tribes that regard plants and animals as fellowman, sometimes as teachers.

91
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 26, 2015, 03:38:06 am »
Maybe those sleeping when dying  were not in a  dream-state at the time?
Maybe. At least some part of their brain must somehow be aware that the body is shutting down.

92
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 26, 2015, 03:31:56 am »
Except that I, for example,  was born via a Caesarian, so presumably felt no actual pain.
I imagine that you did not laugh taking your very first breath.

93
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 26, 2015, 02:01:17 am »
A frightening thought, become a ghost or face a lingering death instead.What about dying suddenly in one's sleep, though?

I know someone who sensed exactly when 2 of her closest companions died. More to do with telepathy than the after-life, but I therefore do accept that  mainstream science does not hold all the answers.
To me it feels like a necessary challenge to face, like the pain of being born.

And who says people who die in their sleep are not aware of it in the form of a particular kind of dream, or something?

Wandering in a place you're not supposed to be anymore for god knows how long doesn't sound too pleasant either.

94
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 26, 2015, 01:28:08 am »
Saber, don't you have some more...engaging pictures of you for a profile pic? In all honesty, you just look a bit too crazy to be taken seriously. It's the bloody teeth thing, really.

And I'd avoid filming when the neighbor is mowing the lawn.

Otherwise, looks like you could be on your way to making a catchy video series on Raw Paleo butchering.

95
Personals / Re: Project Raw Paleo Footage
« on: November 26, 2015, 01:11:55 am »
You might believe in this stuff or not, but I saw a documentary on medium and the afterlife, and there was this case of a women being somehow harassed by the spirit of her dead husband, and called in a medium to figure it out. The medium saw that the husband was still wandering in the living's world and interacting with his widow wife because he wasn't even aware that he was dead. The husband had committed suicide in front of his wife by blowing his brains out with a rifle or something, and the blow was so sudden that the man didn't have time to realize he had died. He told the medium he just remembered a powerful heat wave crossing his head, and thought it was strange that his wife was ignoring him since then.

I think we are meant to see our death coming to accept it, and ascend to the next phase. Whether its dying of old age, dying of hunger, of a bite in the neck, of an arrow in the heart,... death was never sudden in the days before bombs and bullets. And perhaps rightly so.

96
Off Topic / Re: Sea-breeze ain't what it used to be
« on: November 25, 2015, 04:41:47 am »
The most ecofriendly energy source for transportation is oil from conventional fields (which are getting depleted). Biofuels cause much more environmental damages, an hydrogen network is an Utopia and would be very inefficient, electricity must be generated somehow, batteries are all but ecological and even wind turbines need fossil fuels to be made and maintained. 
Yeah, I was thinking about hydrogen, but as far as I know the engine is very expensive because of the platinum piece(s) in it. And as you said, biofuel sounds like an increase in chemical conventional fields, which would be the opposite of ecological.

97
Off Topic / Re: Sea-breeze ain't what it used to be
« on: November 25, 2015, 04:32:53 am »
Lol I like the conclusion of this article  ;D

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4072

"I'll close with an experience related by a listener who wrote in, that aptly illustrates this phenomenon:

    We had an interesting incident near Humboldt State University. A new cell tower went up and the local newspaper asked a number of people what they thought of it. Some said they noticed their cell phone reception was better. Some said they noticed the tower was affecting their health. To paraphrase the bottom line: "think about how much more pronounced these effects will be once the tower is actually operational."



I guess it is a psychosomatic phenomenon for lots of people. I personally never noticed any strong ill effects from being close to sources of EMFs over a long period of time. I just used to turn off the wifi at night as a measure of precaution. I do have this friend that is quite sensible to this kind of stuff, and advised me to move my bed at least 10cm from the electric socket. Don't remember if I ended up sleeping better or not.

98
Off Topic / Re: Sea-breeze ain't what it used to be
« on: November 25, 2015, 01:43:26 am »
Well, phone companies are now required to indicate the SAR (Specific absorption rate) of their products.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_absorption_rate

And there's the case of people who cannot tolerate most kind of EMFs, and must live in the middle of nowhere in houses covered with special anti-EMF fabric.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_hypersensitivity

99
Off Topic / Re: Sea-breeze ain't what it used to be
« on: November 25, 2015, 01:35:43 am »
Jack Kruse claims that electric cars give of huge amounts of emf and may not be as good for human health as being sold to us?

Funny, I felt this kind of vibe too. At one point I wanted to buy a scooter, and I was thinking about getting an electric one, but I had this impression that it would somehow harm me, like siting on a giant cellphone. So I got a gas car at 18 instead :P

I hope they'll find a more "organic", yet clean way to power our cars.

100
Well it makes more sense to differentiate razor clams from regular mussels. Like algae and seaweed. These are (regular) mussels:


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk