Query -- Where's the iron

some chemical in tea. Lack of B12 and BCAA

"ray" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Recent blood and urine labs showed everything pretty good
accept for low hemoglobin, hematocrit and RBC count. The
doctor recommended eating more meat.

I'm not a vegetarian but I eat meat seldom. The diet is
extremely nutritious, about half whole intact grains with
protein supplements of legumes, nuts and seeds, and some
animal products. Fruits and vegetables are eaten at most
meals. Attention is paid to freshness.

The Nutrition Almanac shows there should be no problem
with iron intake. Legumes are about as high as meat though
it's mentioned that form of iron is harder for the body to
absorb. Pumpkin seeds are iron-high.

Since intake is sufficient, the problem would be
absorption, inability to utilize for some reason or loss.

If there's no improvement, further tests would be done,
probably to check for blood loss in the stool.

What iron antagonists are there? Do some classes of
medications burn it up or make the supply less available
for use? Are there environmental factors that could affect
it? Fumes from certain types of jobs? The Nutrition
Almanac said "alkalines" could push the level down. It's
expected that includes some medications.

Best, rjn

ray said:

The Nutrition Almanac shows there should be no problem
with iron intake. Legumes are about as high as meat though
it's mentioned that form of iron is harder for the body to
absorb. Pumpkin seeds are iron-high.

The Nutrition Almanac said "alkalines" could push the
level down. It's expected that includes some medications.

I haven't seen that book myself, but this review from
amazon.com doesn't make it sound promising:

32 of 34 people found the following review helpful: Is there
science hiding in here?, November 3, 2001 Reviewer:
zheniagorkovia from San Francisco, CA United States

I bought this book based upon the Amazon reader
recommendations I found here. Now I feel obligated to set
the record straight.

While parts of this book are thorough, with lots of hard
numbers [though it's difficult to figure out what they mean
in a practical sense, and the charts are not lined to assist
in their reading], it is also riddled with new age
foolishness as directly presented as fact as RDA
recommendations -- including homeopathy, aroma therapy, etc.
The book's organization leaves me with questioning its
entire content. It is also not nearly as complete as I might
have hoped in listing nutritional content, leaving out more
unusual fruits and vegetables, and glossing over different
cuts of meat as largely the same.

It also gives far out of date [at least 20 years?]
recommendations for treatment of various diseases and
maladies. The treatments I'm aware of, again raise questions
about the others.

I will continue my search for thorough -- and scientific,
a.k.a. proven, not just testimonial and/or based upon one
flawed study -- nutrition elsewhere.

Quoted message said:

Subject: Query -- Where's the iron
From: [email hidden] (ray)
Date: 4/7/04 7:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Recent blood and urine labs showed everything pretty good
accept for low hemoglobin, hematocrit and RBC count. The
doctor recommended eating more meat.

You need a different doctor.

The iron in meat acts radically different in the body that
does iron from a plant. The iron in meat is more toxic to
the human than it is beneficial.

Basically, you doctor is basing his numbers and
conclusions upon the data collected from supposedly
healthy, yet sick people. THE DOCTOR HAS NO NUMBERS BASED
UPON TRULY HEALTHY PEOPLE.

If you are not ill, feel overly tired, etc, you are probably
healthier than any patient your current doctor has.

It is not unusual for truly healthy people to be told they
have AIDS by their doctor simply because their WBC count is
not up to the level of the typical sick human.

DrC PhD

I appreciate all three responses.

My experience, observation and reading show much of (but
definitely not all) what is called "new age" promotes health
better than the recommendations of the medical establishment
so use of the term doesn't ward me away from the book. It
seems likely the nutrient tables came from generally
respected sources though I can't find where it is taken
from. The review you refer to doesn't call it untrustworthy.

Best, rjn

Mark Thorson <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

ray said:

The Nutrition Almanac shows there should be no problem
with iron intake. Legumes are about as high as meat
though it's mentioned that form of iron is harder for
the body to absorb. Pumpkin seeds are iron-high.

The Nutrition Almanac said "alkalines" could push the
level down. It's expected that includes some
medications.

I haven't seen that book myself, but this review from
amazon.com doesn't make it sound promising:

32 of 34 people found the following review helpful: Is
there science hiding in here?, November 3, 2001 Reviewer:
zheniagorkovia from San Francisco, CA United States

I bought this book based upon the Amazon reader
recommendations I found here. Now I feel obligated to set
the record straight.

While parts of this book are thorough, with lots of hard
numbers [though it's difficult to figure out what they
mean in a practical sense, and the charts are not lined to
assist in their reading], it is also riddled with new age
foolishness as directly presented as fact as RDA
recommendations -- including homeopathy, aroma therapy,
etc. The book's organization leaves me with questioning
its entire content. It is also not nearly as complete as I
might have hoped in listing nutritional content, leaving
out more unusual fruits and vegetables, and glossing over
different cuts of meat as largely the same.

It also gives far out of date [at least 20 years?]
recommendations for treatment of various diseases and
maladies. The treatments I'm aware of, again raise
questions about the others.

I will continue my search for thorough -- and scientific,
a.k.a. proven, not just testimonial and/or based upon one
flawed study -- nutrition elsewhere.