Nutition from food is not enough

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

The reason that I, Jan, Carole, Tim Bolen and a host of others keep
referring
to a conspiracy for the drug companies, and therefore against good health,
is
the very fact that physicians and the shills deny most any value for herbs
and
supplements. Fundamental intelligence would reject this negative logic and
begin
to reject the proponents of such doctrine. Herbs and supplements offer good
health, drugs offer continued illness with symptomatic relief and all drugs
offer
unwanted side effects.

To say that our food supply is fine would insult most 11 year old children.
We have
been growing food on the same unrested land for decades. How would you
account
for the "fact" that we started using chemical fertilizers on farm land
around 1945?
If we grow and grow and grow, where do all the nutrients come from? If we
use
chemcal fertilizer, how many chemicals do they contain? Where did the
chemical
compounds come from?

David Wright thinks there has been no soil deletion.

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

The reason that I, Jan, Carole, Tim Bolen and a host of others keep
referring
to a conspiracy for the drug companies, and therefore against good health,
is
the very fact that physicians and the shills deny most any value for herbs
and
supplements. Fundamental intelligence would reject this negative logic and
begin
to reject the proponents of such doctrine. Herbs and supplements offer

good

Quoted message said:

health, drugs offer continued illness with symptomatic relief and all

drugs

Quoted message said:

offer
unwanted side effects.

To say that our food supply is fine would insult most 11 year old

children.

Quoted message said:

We have
been growing food on the same unrested land for decades. How would you
account
for the "fact" that we started using chemical fertilizers on farm land
around 1945?
If we grow and grow and grow, where do all the nutrients come from? If we
use
chemcal fertilizer, how many chemicals do they contain? Where did the
chemical
compounds come from?

David Wright thinks there has been no soil deletion.

Nutrient depletion in food would appear that the mineral content of many

grains may be steadily decreasing. This situation has resulted largely from
changing soil characteristics and fertilizer treatments. Horticultural and
botanical studies confirm these problems with mineral depletion of soil.
Drs. Stoff and Pellegrino emphasize the problems that we face with mineral
depletion of vegetables. They state “vegetables in your local supermarket
are not only twice as big and twice as expensive as those grown before the
“green revolution” (the widespread use of synthetic fertilizers), but you’ll
probably have to eat twice as many to get the same nutritional value”.
Further, agriculture practices that are used to increase crop yields have
been blamed as a indirect cause of nutrient deficiency in the population.
Factors that can cause nutrient depletion include the strain of plant,
climatic conditions, maturity of the plant etc. As a result of many people
missing important elements in their diet one will highly benefit coral
calcium to replace vital minerals and elements that are lost from our food
chain.

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

I think the markedly increased availability and freshness of vegetables and
fruits would make up for the deficiencies shown here, assuming they are
real.

One thing which makes me wonder about the validity of the comparisons is
that meats are also shown to have markedly lower contents of many minerals.
Such as ---
Loss of 30% of their Sodium

Loss of 16% of their Potassium

Loss of 28% of their Phosphorous

Loss of 10% of their Magnesium

Loss of 41% of their Calcium

Loss of 54% of their Iron

Loss of 24% of their Copper

This does not make sense. Some of these deficiciencies, if real, would be
incompatible with life.

Peter Moran

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

I think the markedly increased availability and freshness of vegetables

and

Quoted message said:

fruits would make up for the deficiencies shown here, assuming they are
real.

One thing which makes me wonder about the validity of the comparisons is
that meats are also shown to have markedly lower contents of many

minerals.

Quoted message said:

Such as ---
Loss of 30% of their Sodium

Loss of 16% of their Potassium

Loss of 28% of their Phosphorous

Loss of 10% of their Magnesium

Loss of 41% of their Calcium

Loss of 54% of their Iron

Loss of 24% of their Copper

This does not make sense. Some of these deficiciencies, if real, would

be

Quoted message said:

incompatible with life.

Peter Moran

Once the soil becomes deficient feed for livestock becomes deficient and so
do
we. We have been moving slowly to a state of malnutrition and can see it in
the
rise in illness.

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

http://www.directfood.net/ionic/supplement.asp

The need to supplement

There is an established and growing body of scientific evidence to say that
the reduction of the mineral content in our diet, due to the severe natural
depletion of these vital nutrients in fresh food as well as our modern
convenience diets, which are low in fresh foods and high in processed and
refined foods, lies at the core of many modern degenerative diseases.

Compared to the previous generation, we are exposed to much increased levels
of stress and environmental pollution; both known to be real everyday
threats to our good health. Today the need for correct and complete
nutrition is more vital than ever.

Whilst it would be wonderful to imagine a world where uncontaminated fresh
food was available to everyone at every meal, modern lifestyles and
commercial interests will make this impossible.

The only viable alternative is to supplement. Since it is effectively
impossible to underestimate the importance of minerals and trace elements
for the health of human body, we have no alternative but to ensure these are
present through correct supplementation.

Our society is beginning to react and demand better nutrition; the “writing
is on the wall”. BSE and other food scares have created greater knowledge
and concern over what we are fed and how this relates directly to our
health. The food industry has reacted by offering a small range of
supplemented foods. As yet this is small scale and often led by legislation.
There is a growing public awareness and demand for convenience foods that
not only look, taste and smell good but also have an intrinsic health
benefit – a real functional food. This is the opportunity: adding magnesium
and trace minerals to a formulation to increase your product’s USPs and your
margins.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

Quoted message said:

David Wright thinks there has been no soil depletion.

I was referring to the United States over the last 50 years or so.

Quoted message said:

http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/nutrientmining/docs/AssessmentofSoilNutrientDepletion.pdf

This is an excerpt from a U.N. conference on worldwide soil nutrient
depletion.

Primarily concentrating on sub-Saharan Africa! Are you selling
ginseng there? Are any of us reading it there? No. How dishonest
of you, Spammin' Dave, not that I'm at all surprised.

Of course overfarming in Ethiopia has been a disaster; but that has
nothing to do with whether the tomatoes I buy are less nutritious
than ones grown 20 years ago.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

Quoted message said:

David Wright thinks there has been no soil depletion.

I was referring to the United States over the last 50 years or so.

http://www.fao.org/ag/agl/agll/nutrientmining/docs/AssessmentofSoilNutrient

Depletion.pdf

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is an excerpt from a U.N. conference on worldwide soil nutrient
depletion.

Primarily concentrating on sub-Saharan Africa! Are you selling
ginseng there? Are any of us reading it there? No. How dishonest
of you, Spammin' Dave, not that I'm at all surprised.

Of course overfarming in Ethiopia has been a disaster; but that has
nothing to do with whether the tomatoes I buy are less nutritious
than ones grown 20 years ago.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
As Bugs
Bunny would say, "What a marroon".

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

Quoted message said:

The reason that I, Jan, Carole, Tim Bolen and a host of others keep
referring to a conspiracy for the drug companies, and therefore
against good health, is the very fact that physicians and the shills
deny most any value for herbs and supplements.

You're starting out with a lie. Bad way to start.

Quoted message said:

Fundamental intelligence would reject this negative logic and begin
to reject the proponents of such doctrine. Herbs and supplements
offer good health, drugs offer continued illness with symptomatic
relief and all drugs offer unwanted side effects.

All herbs also have side effects. It's inevitable.

Quoted message said:

To say that our food supply is fine would insult most 11 year old
children.

I don't see why. They aren't farmers.

Quoted message said:

We have been growing food on the same unrested land for decades. How
would you account for the "fact" that we started using chemical
fertilizers on farm land around 1945?

Good question, since most of that farmland had been in use for
centuries. Maybe it was because they wanted to recharge the soil and
replace lost nutrients.

Quoted message said:

If we grow and grow and grow, where do all the nutrients come from?
If we use chemcal fertilizer, how many chemicals do they contain?
Where did the chemical compounds come from?

Golly, they probably came from nature, where all compounds come from.
There's nothing magic about the nutrients in fertilizers, after all.

Quoted message said:

David Wright thinks there has been no soil deletion.

"Soil deletion?" That's a keeper.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

Quoted message said:

The reason that I, Jan, Carole, Tim Bolen and a host of others keep
referring to a conspiracy for the drug companies, and therefore
against good health, is the very fact that physicians and the shills
deny most any value for herbs and supplements.

You're starting out with a lie. Bad way to start.

Quoted message said:

Fundamental intelligence would reject this negative logic and begin
to reject the proponents of such doctrine. Herbs and supplements
offer good health, drugs offer continued illness with symptomatic
relief and all drugs offer unwanted side effects.

All herbs also have side effects. It's inevitable.

Quoted message said:

To say that our food supply is fine would insult most 11 year old
children.

I don't see why. They aren't farmers.

Quoted message said:

We have been growing food on the same unrested land for decades. How
would you account for the "fact" that we started using chemical
fertilizers on farm land around 1945?

Good question, since most of that farmland had been in use for
centuries. Maybe it was because they wanted to recharge the soil and
replace lost nutrients.

Quoted message said:

If we grow and grow and grow, where do all the nutrients come from?
If we use chemcal fertilizer, how many chemicals do they contain?
Where did the chemical compounds come from?

Golly, they probably came from nature, where all compounds come from.
There's nothing magic about the nutrients in fertilizers, after all.

Quoted message said:

David Wright thinks there has been no soil deletion.

"Soil deletion?" That's a keeper.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

Nutrient depletion in food would appear that the mineral content of many
grains may be steadily decreasing. This situation has resulted largely from
changing soil characteristics and fertilizer treatments. Horticultural and
botanical studies confirm these problems with mineral depletion of soil.
Drs. Stoff and Pellegrino emphasize the problems that we face with mineral
depletion of vegetables. They state “vegetables in your local supermarket
are not only twice as big and twice as expensive as those grown before the
“green revolution” (the widespread use of synthetic fertilizers), but you’ll
probably have to eat twice as many to get the same nutritional value”.
Further, agriculture practices that are used to increase crop yields have
been blamed as a indirect cause of nutrient deficiency in the population.
Factors that can cause nutrient depletion include the strain of plant,
climatic conditions, maturity of the plant etc. As a result of many people
missing important elements in their diet one will highly benefit coral
calcium to replace vital minerals and elements that are lost from our food
chain.

"Coral calcium." Need I say more? (By the way, Spammin' Dave ripped
off this paragraph from www.coralcalciummagazine.com, in case you were
wondering. As usual, he didn't say where he got it, but google found
it for me no problem. I haven't been able to learn much about
Drs. Stoff and Pellegrino except that they wrote a book about CFS that
claims it's a hidden epidemic.)

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

I think the markedly increased availability and freshness of vegetables

and

Quoted message said:

fruits would make up for the deficiencies shown here, assuming they are
real.

One thing which makes me wonder about the validity of the comparisons is
that meats are also shown to have markedly lower contents of many

minerals.

Quoted message said:

Such as ---
Loss of 30% of their Sodium

Loss of 16% of their Potassium

Loss of 28% of their Phosphorous

Loss of 10% of their Magnesium

Loss of 41% of their Calcium

Loss of 54% of their Iron

Loss of 24% of their Copper

This does not make sense. Some of these deficiciencies, if real, would

be

Quoted message said:

incompatible with life.

Peter Moran

Once the soil becomes deficient feed for livestock becomes deficient
and so do we. We have been moving slowly to a state of malnutrition
and can see it in the rise in illness.

"Incompatible with life" means the animals would have died before they
could be used for food, Spammin' Dave. Meanwhile, if there's such a
rise in illness, why is longevity constantly increasing? A rise in
illness would cut longevity.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

Quoted message said:

The reason that I, Jan, Carole, Tim Bolen and a host of others keep
referring to a conspiracy for the drug companies, and therefore
against good health, is the very fact that physicians and the shills
deny most any value for herbs and supplements.

You're starting out with a lie. Bad way to start.

Quoted message said:

Fundamental intelligence would reject this negative logic and begin
to reject the proponents of such doctrine. Herbs and supplements
offer good health, drugs offer continued illness with symptomatic
relief and all drugs offer unwanted side effects.

All herbs also have side effects. It's inevitable.

Quoted message said:

To say that our food supply is fine would insult most 11 year old
children.

I don't see why. They aren't farmers.

Quoted message said:

We have been growing food on the same unrested land for decades. How
would you account for the "fact" that we started using chemical
fertilizers on farm land around 1945?

Good question, since most of that farmland had been in use for
centuries. Maybe it was because they wanted to recharge the soil and
replace lost nutrients.

Quoted message said:

If we grow and grow and grow, where do all the nutrients come from?
If we use chemcal fertilizer, how many chemicals do they contain?
Where did the chemical compounds come from?

Golly, they probably came from nature, where all compounds come from.
There's nothing magic about the nutrients in fertilizers, after all.

Quoted message said:

David Wright thinks there has been no soil deletion.

"Soil deletion?" That's a keeper.

It is no coincidence that your answers are simple. It is no coincidence that
you have no answers and that you are reduced to finding typos.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

Quoted message said:

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

As usual, Dave lapses into dimwitted laughter when cornered.

Quoted message said:

As Bugs Bunny would say, "What a marroon".

That's "maroon", you nitwit.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

"Dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> people
> who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).
>
> http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf
>
>
I think the markedly increased availability and freshness of vegetables

and

Quoted message said:

fruits would make up for the deficiencies shown here, assuming they are
real.

One thing which makes me wonder about the validity of the comparisons

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that meats are also shown to have markedly lower contents of many

minerals.

Quoted message said:

Such as ---
Loss of 30% of their Sodium

Loss of 16% of their Potassium

Loss of 28% of their Phosphorous

Loss of 10% of their Magnesium

Loss of 41% of their Calcium

Loss of 54% of their Iron

Loss of 24% of their Copper

This does not make sense. Some of these deficiciencies, if real,

would

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be

Quoted message said:

incompatible with life.

Peter Moran

Once the soil becomes deficient feed for livestock becomes deficient
and so do we. We have been moving slowly to a state of malnutrition
and can see it in the rise in illness.

"Incompatible with life" means the animals would have died before they
could be used for food, Spammin' Dave. Meanwhile, if there's such a
rise in illness, why is longevity constantly increasing? A rise in
illness would cut longevity.

Its not.

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

"Dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> people
> who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).
>
> http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf
>
>
I think the markedly increased availability and freshness of vegetables

and

Quoted message said:

fruits would make up for the deficiencies shown here, assuming they are
real.

One thing which makes me wonder about the validity of the comparisons

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that meats are also shown to have markedly lower contents of many

minerals.

Quoted message said:

Such as ---
Loss of 30% of their Sodium

Loss of 16% of their Potassium

Loss of 28% of their Phosphorous

Loss of 10% of their Magnesium

Loss of 41% of their Calcium

Loss of 54% of their Iron

Loss of 24% of their Copper

This does not make sense. Some of these deficiciencies, if real,

would

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be

Quoted message said:

incompatible with life.

Peter Moran

Once the soil becomes deficient feed for livestock becomes deficient
and so do we. We have been moving slowly to a state of malnutrition
and can see it in the rise in illness.

"Incompatible with life" means the animals would have died before they
could be used for food, Spammin' Dave. Meanwhile, if there's such a
rise in illness, why is longevity constantly increasing? A rise in
illness would cut longevity.

I have read your contributuions to this chatroom and find that if we didn't
allow you use any taunts, barbs or insults, you have nothing to say. You
appear to be a "Maroon".

In article <[email hidden]>,

(David Wright) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
people
who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).

http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

Quoted message said:

The reason that I, Jan, Carole, Tim Bolen and a host of others keep
referring to a conspiracy for the drug companies, and therefore
against good health, is the very fact that physicians and the shills
deny most any value for herbs and supplements.

You're starting out with a lie. Bad way to start.

Indeed, but it is a common lie told by alties in various guises. What
Glowlife Dave really objects to is that "conventional medicine" does not
believe that his ginseng is the miracle drug (or supplement or "immune
strengthener" or "toxin cleanser," or whatever else Dave likes to call
it) that Glowlife Dave thinks it is. Ginseng may have some value in some
medical conditions, but there is no evidence that it radically improves
COPD or congestive heart failure, as Dave claims it does.

If you do a Medline search on the word "ginseng," you will find (as of
today) 1,834 references to the peer-reviewed medical literature over the
last 38 years or so. That's quite a few. And that's just ginseng, not
other herbs. Such an interest rather belies Glowlife Dave's claim that
conventional medicine denies any value of ginseng.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Fundamental intelligence would reject this negative logic and begin
to reject the proponents of such doctrine. Herbs and supplements
offer good health, drugs offer continued illness with symptomatic
relief and all drugs offer unwanted side effects.

All herbs also have side effects. It's inevitable.

Indeed. We have pointed out some of these side effects, but Glowlife
Dave still insists on referring to his ginseng as a "food" not a drug
and insists that it cannot interact with drugs or cause side effects.

[Snip]

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

(David Wright) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

"Dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow the
> people
> who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).
>
> http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf
>
>
I think the markedly increased availability and freshness of vegetables

and

Quoted message said:

fruits would make up for the deficiencies shown here, assuming they are
real.

One thing which makes me wonder about the validity of the comparisons is
that meats are also shown to have markedly lower contents of many

minerals.

Quoted message said:

Such as ---
Loss of 30% of their Sodium

Loss of 16% of their Potassium

Loss of 28% of their Phosphorous

Loss of 10% of their Magnesium

Loss of 41% of their Calcium

Loss of 54% of their Iron

Loss of 24% of their Copper

This does not make sense. Some of these deficiciencies, if real, would

be

Quoted message said:

incompatible with life.

Peter Moran

Once the soil becomes deficient feed for livestock becomes deficient
and so do we. We have been moving slowly to a state of malnutrition
and can see it in the rise in illness.

"Incompatible with life" means the animals would have died before they
could be used for food, Spammin' Dave. Meanwhile, if there's such a
rise in illness, why is longevity constantly increasing? A rise in
illness would cut longevity.

Perhaps he means a rise in the chronic illnesses that are a direct
result of our vastly increased life expectancy. A century ago, so few
people lived to very old ages that few people got the age-related
diseases that are so common today and instead tended to die of trauma
or drop dead of infectious diseases at much younger age. Of course this
rise in chronic age-related diseases can be viewed as a direct result of
the success of modern medicine in extending life expectancy. ;-)

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
Dave <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Once the soil becomes deficient feed for livestock becomes deficient
and so do we. We have been moving slowly to a state of malnutrition
and can see it in the rise in illness.

"Incompatible with life" means the animals would have died before they
could be used for food, Spammin' Dave. Meanwhile, if there's such a
rise in illness, why is longevity constantly increasing? A rise in
illness would cut longevity.

Its not.

What's not?

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(David Wright) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Dave said:

"Dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> While every "altie" already understands this, I felt I would allow

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> people
> who have yet to know. This is self explanatory (I believe).
>
> http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/research/mineral_deplet.pdf

Quoted message said:

The reason that I, Jan, Carole, Tim Bolen and a host of others keep
referring to a conspiracy for the drug companies, and therefore
against good health, is the very fact that physicians and the shills
deny most any value for herbs and supplements.

You're starting out with a lie. Bad way to start.

Indeed, but it is a common lie told by alties in various guises. What
Glowlife Dave really objects to is that "conventional medicine" does not
believe that his ginseng is the miracle drug (or supplement or "immune
strengthener" or "toxin cleanser," or whatever else Dave likes to call
it) that Glowlife Dave thinks it is. Ginseng may have some value in some
medical conditions, but there is no evidence that it radically improves
COPD or congestive heart failure, as Dave claims it does.

If you do a Medline search on the word "ginseng," you will find (as of
today) 1,834 references to the peer-reviewed medical literature over the
last 38 years or so. That's quite a few. And that's just ginseng, not
other herbs. Such an interest rather belies Glowlife Dave's claim that
conventional medicine denies any value of ginseng.

Then why do you? A wild duck I suppose. LOL

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Fundamental intelligence would reject this negative logic and begin
to reject the proponents of such doctrine. Herbs and supplements
offer good health, drugs offer continued illness with symptomatic
relief and all drugs offer unwanted side effects.

All herbs also have side effects. It's inevitable.

Absolutely not true.

Quoted message said:

Indeed. We have pointed out some of these side effects, but Glowlife
Dave still insists on referring to his ginseng as a "food" not a drug
and insists that it cannot interact with drugs or cause side effects.

[Snip]

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"