Click here to find out more!
 

By David Klein

The mainstream media has come a long way in the past few years in providing accurate reports on long-suppressed health and nutrition information. Research studies in areas which were once considered too controversial are coming to light. The subject of vegetarianism, which was previously considered radical and out of bounds by newspaper editors and their medical advisors, is now being shown for its merits. A positive force in this trend has been the Physicians' Committee for Responsible Medicine, lead by Neal Barnard, M.D., a renowned heart specialist who has documented conclusive success with the reversal of heart disease via a change to a low-fat vegetarian diet.

While accurate health information is gradually finding its way into the newspapers, there is still a way to go until we see clear information from establishment researchers which properly serves the health movement.

A February, 1996 article in Newsday reported that "an expert panel" of the National Research Council's (NRC) Committee on Life Sciences released a report, "Carcinogens and Anticarcinogens in the Diet" (1996), concluding that compounds in cooked fatty foods, most notably meat, probably pose a greater cancer risk than man-made carcinogens in the diet. This is a most laudable piece of information which our cancer-ridden society desperately needs to become aware of. However, isn't it a bit astonishing that it has taken establishment scientists until the computer age to finally learn what Plato, Socrates, Jesus the Essene and, Leonardo da Vinci knew: that eating cooked animal meat is extremely unhealthful?

The article goes on to further state that the "expert panel" characterized the cancer-causing agents (called heterocyclic amines, which are generated when cooking meat at high temperatures) as "naturally occurring dietary chemicals."

Does this characterization make you stop and think, Why do these "experts" associate cancer causing agents in the human diet with the word "natural"? Does the concept of carcinogens occurring naturally in the human diet make any sense to you? If we produce carcinogens when we cook meat, is it sensible to call the cooked meat food? To link the cooking of meat with "naturally occurring dietary chemicals" presumes that cooking meat is an act of nature. It is not! No animal cooks its food, and for the first 99% of our evolution humans did not either.

These NRC "experts" may well be proficient at detecting dietary carcinogens, but we need to understand that they are not properly schooled and trained in the life sciences. Their approach is to look for the cause of and cure for medical diseases; they would stand to learn far more if they looked for the cause of health. With their lack of fundamental understanding about the nature of healthful eating and our physiology, these and other establishment researchers often draw skewed conclusions which are unfortunately presented to the unwitting public. The public would derive far greater benefit from studies of the diets, lifestyles and physiological condition of long-lived vivacious peoples.

The research laboratory is the wrong place to start to find the truths about nutrition and healthful eating. A field trip out of the laboratory and into the wilderness will reveal that there are no barbecues or ovens to cook meat with in nature. When cooked meat or any cooked fat is eaten, we ingest toxins and set ourselves up for cancer and suffering, and that is not the natural way to eat or live.