Conscious Eating Part 15

Similar to herbs, vegetables and fruits have specific healing properties that are beneficial for specific organs. The principle of food relating to certain disease conditions is a well-established clinical finding in Western naturopathic systems, as well as in both the Chinese and Ayurvedic systems. In the Western natural healing tradition, Dr. Walker's book Raw Vegetable Juices elaborates how specific juices are good for certain health conditions and organ systems.

Since each juice has its own particular properties and is rejuvenative for different parts of the body, I try to vary my juice intake, especially during fasts. Some of the main juices that I use are carrot, beet, kale, wheatgra.s.s, alfalfa, sunflower and buckwheat sprouts, celery, parsley, spinach, apple, watermelon, orange, and zucchini. It should be briefly mentioned that for certain people with autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and lupus, the consumption of copious amounts of alfalfa sprouts in juice or in their whole form has been a.s.sociated with the worsening of these conditions. This information came from only one informal study, and further research must be conducted to confirm this finding and to ascertain what in alfalfa sprouts may be responsible for making certain autoimmune diseases worse.

Food Irradiation and Genetic Engineering of Food.

Two emerging government/private industry trends are becoming threats to the ability of the general public to obtain whole food. These practices are food irradiation and the genetic engineering of food. The once publicly defeated issue of food irradiation has re-emerged after Hudson Foods' recall of 25 million pounds of beef due to E. coli contamination. For reasons that are typical of American corporate thinking, the press came out with some pro-food-irradiation articles. The thinking basically goes like this: Since the food supply is contaminated, food irradiation is a quick and easy way to fix the problem. They have failed to address the deeper issues. How did the food supply became so contaminated? What are the ramifications of building hundreds of nuclear irradiation plants? What are the damaging effects of nuclear irradiation on the food and the people who end up eating it?

The food supply has become contaminated because of inhumane, hygien-ically filthy, and fecally contaminated animal processing facilities. The focus on slaughtering rates in many facilities of up to three hundred cows per hour almost guarantees filth and contamination by pathogen-containing fecal matter, especially in beef and chicken. Cheap industrial food has the least chance of being safe or humane (in my world, killing animals for food could never be humane), but ma.s.s-produced animals for slaughter remains vastly different from the respect and prayer a Native American would go through before killing a buffalo. Food irradiation does not solve the problem, it only gives the illusion of helping. It actually makes the situation worse because it makes possible the conditions for lowering the hygiene standards even further. Food inspectors are already down in numbers from 20,000 to 7,000. They sometimes have to inspect nine birds per minute and three hundred cattle per hour.

Who are we kidding? Food irradiation is not 100% effective. It is already known that food irradiation does not eliminate all the E. coli. Studies show that 1-10% of the E. coli are left to multiply during storage. Researchers have discovered radiation-resistant E. coli and salmonella. In other words, food irradiation has already become a source of mutant bacteria and perhaps viruses that are radiation-resistant. It is the old antibiotic-resistant story with a new twist. Also, the radiation does not destroy the pathogenic toxins in the meat which are produced by the pathogenic bacteria. Many of these toxins can cause illness by themselves.

Food Irradiation Plants Are Unsafe.

Radioactive accidents have already happened at the few food-irradiation plants that exist in this country and worldwide. Since 1974, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has recorded 54 accidents at 132 irradiation facilities around the world. In New Jersey, which has the highest concentration of irradiation plants, almost every plant has a record of environmental contamination, worker over-exposure, or regulatory failures.

Accidents can be extremely dangerous to surrounding communities and to workers at the plant. In 1991, a worker in Maryland suffered critical injuries when exposed to ionizing irradiation from an electron beam accelerator. In 1988, Radiation Sterilizers, Inc., in Decatur, Georgia, had a leak of cesium-137 capsules into the water, which endangered the workers and contaminated the facility. It is unclear how much got into the community, but clean-up costs were greater than $30 million. In 1986, Radiation Technology in New Jersey had its license revoked for thirty-two worker safety violations and for throwing radioactive garbage out with the trash. In 1974, Isomedix in New Jersey flushed radioactive water down toilets and contaminated pipes leading to sewers. To irradiate all the flesh food alone, hundreds of facilities would be needed. The only radioactive isotope available for this level of usage is cesium-137, which is not only deadly today but remains dangerous for approximately six hundred years.

There is no solid evidence to show that eating irradiated food is safe, but there is some evidence to show that it has specific dangers. Food is irradiated with gamma rays. The gamma rays break up the molecular structure of the food and create free radicals. The free radicals react with the food to form new chemical substances called "radiolytic products." Some of these include formaldehyde, benzene, formic acid, and quinones, which are known to be harmful to human health. In one experiment, for example, benzene, a known carcinogen, was seven times higher in the irradiated beef than in the non-irradiated beef. Some of these radiolytic products are unique to the irradiation process and have not been adequately identified or tested fortoxicity Irradiating the food destroys somewhere between 20 and 80% of the vitamins including A, B2, B3, B6, B12, folic acid, C, E, and K. Amino acids and essential fatty acids are also destroyed. Enzymes, of course, are destroyed as are the bio-photons.

A significant number of studies have shown some dangers of eating irradiated food for animals and humans. Raltech Scientific Services, Inc., after a series of twelve studies on feeding irradiated chicken to different animal species, found the possibility of chromosome damage, immunotoxicity greater incidence of kidney disease, cardiac thrombus, and fibroplasia. According to Food & Water Journal, from which I received much of this information, USDA researcher Donald Thayer concluded, "A collective a.s.sessment of study results argues against a definitive conclusion that the gamma irradiated test material (irradiated chicken) was free of toxic properties." Rats who received irradiated food showed a statistically significant increase in testicular tumors and possible kidney and testicular damage. One study in India found that with four out of five children who were fed irradiated wheat, there was the development of polyploidy, an abnormality that is a good indication of potential cancer. When they stopped feeding the children the irradiated wheat, the polyploidy disappeared.

In attempting to determine what to do about food irradiation, the FDA reviewed 441 toxicity studies. The chairperson in charge of new food additives at the FDA, Dr. Marcia van Gemert, testified that all 441 of the studies were flawed. The FDA, however, determined that at least five studies were acceptable under 1980 toxicological standards. The Department of Pre-ventative Medicine and Community Health of the New Jersey Medical School found that two of these studies were methodologically flawed. In one of the five studies, animals eating a diet of irradiated food experienced weight loss and increased miscarriages, possibly due to radiation-induced vitamin E deficiency. The remaining two of the five studies used irradiated food at levels below the FDA-approved 100,000 rads and thus can't be used to scientifically justify food irradiation at the level the FDA approved. Nevertheless, with none of the five studies supporting the use of food irradiation, the FDA approved the use of food irradiation in our food supply. This includes vegetables and fruits as well as spices, and a variety of flesh foods.

Fortunately, according to a CBS poll in August 1997,73% of US citizens oppose food irradiation, and 77% said they would not eat irradiated food. The wisdom of the public has prevailed up to this moment, and irradiated food has to have a label with the "radura" emblem on it. However, there is new legislation proposed that would not require the radura anymore, and food manufacturers would be allowed to obscure the irradiation disclosure information in tiny print.

Genetically engineered food raises some similar issues in that it is not a well-understood technology and there have been few clear studies of the effects. One soybean that used a Brazil nut for genetic material caused a significant incidence of allergies. Currently there are no FDA regulations on genetically engineered food. Genetically engineered milk products, corn, potatoes, soybeans, squash, cotton, tomatoes, and canola on the market do not seem to require labels indicating that they are genetically engineered. There are genetically engineered foods in infant formula, pizza, chips, and many other aspects of the general American diet. There is no guarantee that our children or grandchildren will not get cancer from it or that it will not weaken the germ plasm. Do we know if these foods are safe for pregnant women?

The environmental implications may be even more impactful. Many scientists believe that this genetic engineering may threaten wildlife and create imbalances in the ecosystem which may have uncontrollable environmental effects. No one knows. This is why it is so important that we stick with organic foods. Not paying attention to the natural laws of the universe usually makes a mess. The ecology and the people of this planet may pay a big price for this experimentation. The only ones who will profit from this in the short run are the food corporations. A s.h.i.+ft in consciousness is needed to help all of us begin to act in harmony with nature in a respectful and healing way that is good for us and the planet.

If we follow the guideline to eat only whole foods, the irresponsible tampering with our food supply will have little effect on us personally. If these issues pain your heart and conscience, then there are many positive steps to take such as checking where you buy groceries to make sure the buyers are committed to not marketing irradiated or genetically engineered food. The most active organization on these issues is called Food & Water, Inc. They are located at 389 Vermont Route 215, Walden, Vermont, 05873, and can be reached by phone at 802-563-3300.

There is no short cut to health and happiness except by following the natural laws of life to the best of one's ability and present knowledge. Humanity and all sentient beings are sustained by the same radiating light of the universe within and without us. If we are to be in harmony with this light as it comes to us through the natural interplay of earth, water, air, and fire via the vegetable kingdom, then it is essential to choose to eat organic agricultural products that are grown in the fullness of this light. We should be very cautious when we attempt to tamper with nature.

When it comes to nature and live foods, "if it's not broken, don't try to fix it." This is especially true since so few of us, if any, are even close to fully understanding the subtle energetics, biophysics, and biochemistry of Mother Nature's offerings to us.

Preview of Chapter 14.

THE PRACTICE OF EATING FLESH FOOD is not only inhumane but directly detrimental to our physical health. This chapter dispels the high-protein myth created by the early protein-need research carried out by the livestock and dairy industries that has scared people into a high flesh-food diet. Current research indicates that not only do we get more than sufficient protein on a vegetarian diet, but a vegetarian diet is generally healthier, increases longevity, and increases physical endurance. It is even a prime preventer of osteoporosis to the extent that vegetarian women have less osteoporosis than meat-eating men. A vegetarian diet is a way of loving yourself. Are you ready to let go of your fear of not getting enough protein when shown the evidence that a low-protein diet is better for your health? Are you ready to start loving yourself by eating healthy food?

I. Problems of eating flesh food A. Cruelty to animals B. Danger to your health II. Difference between plant and animal nutrition III. Myth of the need for a high-protein diet A. High protein need based on fear not science B. Vegetarian diets have twice the required protein C. Overconsumption of protein contributes to diseases such as osteoporosis D. High protein may accelerate the aging process IV. Vegetarian diet increases endurance A. Endurance increased 2-3 times B. Many world-cla.s.s athletes are vegetarian rather than nonvegetarian V. Longer life span and better health with a vegetarian diet.

Vegetarianism, A Step Toward Health and Harmony.

THE LATE PAUL BRAGG, A GREAT ADVOCATE of healthy natural living and vegetarianism, used to go to the meat market before certain press conferences and get a freshly killed chicken. He was a master at dramatically and cleverly confronting people with the reality of eating dead flesh. He would bring the dead chicken to the conference, and as he held it up in front of the reporters he would describe the horrible living conditions of the chicken; or he would describe how it was filled with antibiotics, a.r.s.enic, and a variety of other dangerous substances, e.g., often being infected with salmonella, tuberculosis, or cancer. Then he would point out that if humans were naturally carnivorous, we would act like carnivorous animals and eat the chicken by biting into it raw. And if we were truly carnivorous, we would bite into the guts as carnivorous animals do to their prey. Then he would swing the chicken around his head, throw it into the crowd, and laugh as the people scattered. It is not surprising that no one would pick up this free chicken.

The word "flesh," in the context of the Bragg story, has a certain dramatic connotation, but in its general usage it best defines the meaning of vegetarianism. A vegetarian is one who does not eat any red meat, fowl, or fish. Often people define themselves as vegetarian if they do not eat "meat" because meat for them is defined as red meat, and not fish or fowl. People who eat fish or fowl are not cla.s.sically defined as vegetarian. The word "flesh" is not meant to shock the reader as much as to help us operate from a common definition of vegetarianism. Secondarily, it does serve to cut through the subtle denial system that is created when euphemistic terms are used, such as "meat" or "red meat" (for cows, oxen, goats, lambs, and other such animals), "broilers" (for fowl), and "sea vegetables" (for fish).

Many things are done to keep us from being aware that we have partic.i.p.ated in the killing of Mother Nature's animals to satisfy our appet.i.tes. Rather than letting the public be numbed out and anesthetized, Bragg boldly challenged his audiences with such demonstrations. He tried to awaken people from the lulling effects of background Muzak at the supermarket where they bought dead animals for food, or to awaken them from the quiet sophistication of a fancy restaurant, with Mother Nature's flowers artfully placed on a candlelit table where flesh foods are further disguised under delightful sauces.

In today's world, even more so than in Bragg's day, we have escalated the level of abuse that we subject animals to on a daily basis. Animals are routinely and systematically treated as "things;" as simply raw materials of the agribusiness; as stock in the market like gold and silver coins or computer microchips; or as "livestock" rather than living creatures that have a spark of G.o.d in them. The outstanding book Diet for A New America, by John Robbins, discusses these issues in detail. For example, we do not even call chickens by their names any more. They are called "broilers" if they are going to be eaten or "layers" if their industrial purpose is to lay eggs. The living conditions for chickens are so inhumane, according to Dr. Virginia Livingston-Wheeler, a top cancer researcher, that a great many chickens develop microscopic or identifiable cancer before they are one year old. She says in her book, The Conquest of Cancer: I consider the potential for cancer in chickens to be almost one hundred percent. That is, most of the chickens on the dining tables and barbecue grills of America today have the pathological form of the PC (Progenitor Cryptocides) microbe, which I contend is transmissible to human beings.

She reports that: Many of the chickens processed for human consumption already display tumors both visible and invisible to the human eye but because of hurried processing techniques have sped by inspectors on the production lines.

Dr. Rous, n.o.bel Prize winner and long-time researcher at the Rockefeller Inst.i.tute for Medical Research, states that 95% of the chickens for sale in New York City are cancerous. He also concurs with other researchers in stating that the chicken cancer is transmissible. I have to note that the trans-missibility of these chicken cancer viruses to humans has not been conclusively proven, but as consumer advocate Ralph Nader points out on this issue, there is no proof to show that the cancer is not transmitted.

Rarely do these chickens live a normal life span of 15-20 years. The health conditions of the chickens by the time they are used for food are so horrible that a leading poultry worker union official told me in a private communication that he would never eat chicken knowing what he has seen. Flesh eating, particularly as it is practiced today, rather than returning us to harmony with Mother Nature, increases our alienation from nature.

The Difference Between Plant and Animal Nutrition.

PLANT NUTRITION, WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY UNDERSTOOD as condensed sunlight in various rainbow forms, is distinctly different from animal nutrition. Without plant nutrition we could not even have a "Rainbow Diet."

Plants have two "mouths" through which they gather energy and nutrients to share with us. In their leaves, they store and give us the energy of the sun in a direct transfer of light energy that both stimulates our inner light and brings sunlight-activated electron energy to our whole system. A tree is a good model for us because the branches move in every upward direction to gather in the light. The plant or tree stands between the earth and the sun as it gathers in the sunlight. Without the tree, the earth would not be able to draw sustenance from the sun. The plant kingdom also connects us to the unrevealed cosmic forces that rain upon the plant and soil day and night.

The plant burrows with its other "mouth" in the form of a root into the soil of Mother Earth to bring us nutrition directly from the earth. The roots keep growing into the unknown depths of the earth to gather nutrients. Alfalfa, which is exceptionally rich in minerals, may send its roots deeper than sixty feet into the mysterious force field of the earth. The food we take in from the plant is permeated with a synthesis of earth, sunlight, rainwater, and cosmic forces from the stars and planets. This is entirely different than what we can get from animal nutrition. The stellar and other cosmic forces taken in by the plants stimulate our harmony with the universe and accelerate our spiritual development.

According to Rudolf Steiner, plants supply us with their store of the outer light of the sun, which stimulates our inner light during the process of a.s.similation. In the system of anthroposophical medicine, the light released by the plant world helps to stimulate, form, and maintain our nervous system. In an exquisite, divine way, the taking in of plant food makes a cyclic connection of our inner light with the outer light of the solar system and plant world. One benefit of eating vegetarian food is that the light of plants is directly released into our bodies in a way that stimulates the inner light and the nervous system. This benefit is lost when we eat a primarily animal diet. When we take in animals as food rather than plants, we have to work harder to overcome the energy of the animals' considerably developed and individualized nervous systems. Because of this, the anthroposophical system of medicine suggests that those with nervous system disorders will do better with vegetarian foods. Dr. Sw.a.n.k, an eminent multiple sclerosis physician, has observed that his patients do better by avoiding flesh foods, particularly from four-legged animals.

To digest vegetarian food requires more inner spiritual light and digestive power than does meat digestion. Just as we lose our muscle tone and endurance when we do not exercise much, by eating animal products we indirectly weaken our ability to take in plant food. This is one reason why a transition to vegetarianism often needs to be gradual. Some of us need to overcome generations of heavy meat-eating behavior in which we have lost some of our subtle digestive power, and so we may initially have difficulty a.s.similating the living plant forces of a vegetarian diet. One person told me it took him ten years to stabilize into a vegetarian diet and feel healthy. Most people are able to make the transition comfortably within one or two years.

Our relations.h.i.+p with plants also reveals a natural harmony with nature in that we have a reciprocal exchange of gases with the plant kingdom. The animal kingdom, of which we are a part, takes in oxygen from the plants and breathes out carbon dioxide as a waste product. Our plant friends metabolize the carbon dioxide, and with the help of sunlight, convert it to complex carbohydrates and give off oxygen. Plants also supply basic alka-linizing nutrients when we eat them-nutrients we need to balance an acid-generating metabolism. In return, when our acid bodies return to the soil, they nourish plants.

A vegetarian diet avoids the disharmony connected with the poor treatment and killing of animals. This is particularly important because of the inhumane way animals are treated today. In what amount to animal concentration camps created primarily to maximize profits, euphemistically called "livestock farming," we have turned animals into victims. When an animal is about to be killed, there is a release of adrenaline into the tissues. This fear-released adrenaline is then absorbed by the eater of the dead animal. Since animals are victims, when we eat animals, we also partake in their victim consciousness. When we eat animal flesh, we take on their fear and pain of death, which permeates every cell.

An additional perspective on the harmonious animal kingdomplant kingdom cycle is that the plant kingdom (according to the Old Testament) was given to us for food. The consuming of plant life for food is in harmony with nature in that the fruits and vegetables we eat are harvested in their seasonal cycles in synchrony with their own life and death cycles.

Each plant, as a form of condensed sunlight, releases specific energies into our systems which help balance our various subtle energy centers as well as our glands and organs. Bircher-Benner, a world-famous European physician who made prominent use of raw foods, wrote that the closer our food is to the natural sun energy, the higher it is on all levels of nutritional value for the human organism. In this context, plant food is at the top of the nutritional scale and animal food is at the bottom. Rudolf Steiner a.s.serted the belief that nothing clouds the nervous system when nourishment comes from the plant realm, and that on a vegetarian diet humanity can more easily delve into the cosmic interrelations.h.i.+ps which take people beyond the constricted limitation of the mundane personality.

The Myth of a High-Protein Need.

THE "NEED" FOR HIGH PROTEIN is CENTERED ON FEAR rather than fact. The initial research on which this myth is based was done in Germany around the turn of the century It was financed, for the most part, by the meat and dairy industries. They decided that 120 grams of protein per day was needed. Today, modern research from around the world shows that a more accurate protein need is between 20 and 35 grams for men or non-pregnant women. The Journal of Clinical Nutrition states that we need approximately 2.5% of our total calories to be protein. This is approximately 18 grams of protein per day. The World Health Organization suggests 4.5% of our calories, or about 32 grams per day. Mother's milk has about 5% of its calories as protein.

In 1981, Frances Lappe stated in her revised edition of Diet for a Small Planetthat as long as one is getting enough healthy calories in the diet, one will automatically get enough protein in a vegetarian diet. In her original edition of Diet for a Small Planet, she popularized the idea of combining protein foods as a way to maximize protein intake. In doing so, she indirectly perpetuated fears concerning not getting enough "complete" protein. In her new edition, she skillfully corrected the inadvertent scare she had created when, after further research, she found out that protein complementarity at each meal is unnecessary. In addition, as physiologists have known all along, humans are able to store protein, so that just as long as there is some semblance of a variety of foods in the diet, there is really no need to worry about protein food-combining in the first place.

According to the American Dietetic a.s.sociation, pure vegetarian diets in America usually contain twice the required protein for one's daily need. Harvard researchers have found that it is difficult to have a vegetarian diet that produces a protein deficiency unless there is an excess of vegetarian junk foods and sweets. The well-known British medical journal Lancet said that vegetarian protein is no longer considered second-cla.s.s. In fact, if the vegetarian protein is consumed in its live state, even less protein intake is needed because research shows that one-half of the a.s.similable protein is destroyed by cooking. The Max Planck Inst.i.tute has found that the complete vegetarian proteins, those with all eight essential amino acids, are superior to, or at least equal to, animal proteins. They showed that these complete proteins were available in various concentrations from almonds, sesame seeds, pumpkin seeds, sunflower seeds, soybeans, buckwheat, peanuts, potatoes, all leafy greens, and most fruits. Many fruits have been found to have the same percentage of complete protein as mother's milk. Paavo Airola stated: It is virtually impossible not to get enough protein, provided you have enough to eat of natural, unrefined foods.

High-Protein versus Low-Protein Intake.

PAAVO AIROLA POINTS OUT that the overconsumption of protein contributes to the development of many of our most common and serious diseases, such as arthritis, pyorrhea, schizophrenia, atherosclerosis, heart disease, cancer, and kidney damage. Airolas research shows that a "high-protein diet causes premature aging." Other researchers have linked high meat consumption with tissue, organ, and cell degeneration and the consequent premature aging that follows. A high-protein intake creates amyloid deposits (a by-product of protein metabolism), which are deposited in the connective tissues and cells and cause tissue and organ degeneration. Dr. Schwartz, a professor of pathology at Frankfurt University and one of the leading experts on amyloid, feels that amyloid build-up could be one of the most important contributors to the aging process.

The metabolic combustion of excessive protein is a.s.sociated with creating an overly acid system because of the acc.u.mulation of toxic protein metabolic wastes such as uric acid, purines, and ammonia by-products. This results in what I call autotoxemia. Along with the excess protein in the system is a putrefaction process of the partially digested protein that results in the stimulation of unhealthy bacterial growth in the colon. These bacteria give off toxins that are absorbed into the blood through the colon. Ammonia, which is a breakdown product of a high-flesh-food diet, is directly toxic to the system. It has been found to create free radical damage and cross-linking (a process a.s.sociated with skin wrinkles and aging), as well as depletes the body's energy. I have seen alcoholics with liver disease be admitted to the hospital after ingesting a steak because they went into ammonia toxic-ity. Their damaged liver was not able to detoxify the excess ammonia and they became so ill they needed to be hooked up to life-support machines.

An excess-protein diet has been shown by the US Army to cause a deficiency of B6 and B3. Protein has also been found to leach out calcium, iron, zinc, and magnesium from the system.

Over the past thirty years, a family of research physicians, the Wendts, has developed evidence to show that those who ingest too much protein actually develop a generalized protein storage disease. The Wendts showed, through the use of electron microscope photography, that excess protein results in clogging the bas.e.m.e.nt membranes. Bas.e.m.e.nt membranes are those through which nutrients and oxygen are filtered into the cells from the capillaries and through which the waste products of the cells are filtered out into the blood to be eliminated. The more excess protein there is in the diet, the more protein there is stored in the bas.e.m.e.nt membrane. Eventually the bas.e.m.e.nt membrane becomes so clogged that nutrients and oxygen are not able to pa.s.s into the cells and waste products are not able to be eliminated. Contrary to the clogged and thickened membrane of an excess-protein eater, a baby's bas.e.m.e.nt membrane has wide-open pores through which nutrients easily pa.s.s.

This clogged membrane results in cellular anoxia (decreased oxygen in the cell) and cell malnutrition. In the Wendts' observations, the protein builds up in such a way that it contributes to hypertension, atherosclerosis, cardiovascular disease, and adult-onset diabetes. The Wendts coined the term "capillogenic tissue degeneration," meaning degeneration at the capillary level of circulation. By recommending fasting and a low-protein diet, they were able to reverse this process of bas.e.m.e.nt membrane clogging, cellular stagnation, malnutrition, and anoxia. Excess protein in the system, which is almost always the case with a high-flesh-food diet, results in a protein storage disease that slowly chokes off the cellular system. This clogging of the bas.e.m.e.nt membrane is reversed and prevented by a low-protein, vegetarian diet. As our diets get progressively lighter, our bas.e.m.e.nt membranes become more porous, like a baby's, and our cellular a.s.similation improves.

Another Danger of the High-Protein Myth.

WE HAVE A DIETARY EPIDEMIC OF OSTEOPOROSIS (loss of calcium from the bones) in the US. Approximately one out of three women will sufficiently demineralize her bones to cause at least one fracture in her lifetime. These fractures are significant because more women die from osteoporosis-related fractures than from cancer of the breast, cervix, and uterus combined. The toll due to these fractures is about 200,000 deaths per year. One to two million fractures occur per year. The evidence is overwhelming that the most important single dietary change one can make to prevent osteoporosis is to decrease the amount of protein in the diet. The clinical evidence from several major studies shows that vegetarians have significantly less bone loss than those who have a flesh-centered diet. The Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 1983 reported in the largest study of its kind that by the age of 65: Female nonvegetarians had an average measurable bone loss of 35% as compared to only a 7% bone loss in female vegetarians. In other words, female vegetarians had five times less bone loss by the age of 65 than those on a flesh-centered diet.

Male vegetarians had a 3% bone loss as compared to males on a flesh-food diet with 18% bone loss.

These statistics showed that female vegetarians had 2.6 times less bone loss than nonvegetarian men and five times less bone loss than nonvegetarian women.

In 1984, the Medical Tribune reported that vegetarians had significantly stronger bones. A study in 1988 of 1600 women, reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, showed that by the age of 80, those who had been vegetarians for at least 20 years had 18% bone loss as compared to a 35% bone loss of women on a flesh-centered diet. Note the following information:

Reasons Vegetarians May Be Protected from Osteoporosis.

A vegetarian diet brings us into more general harmony with nature and closer to the way our physiologies are meant to function.

Vegetarians consume less protein. The result is that vegetarians tend to be slightly alkaline rather than acidic, as are many meat-eaters. One way the body compensates to buffer against acidity is to pull calcium out of the bones to make alkaline salts in the blood, which act as a buffer against the acidity. Research shows that a protein intake of greater than 75 mg per day results in a negative calcium balance in which calcium is lost from the bones.

Flesh foods are considerably higher in phosphorus as compared to plant foods. The high phosphorus draws the calcium out of the bones. This produces a loss in bone density.

A high-flesh-food diet causes more osteoporosis in that it is high in fat. This fat blocks the calcium uptake by actually forming biochemical soaps with the calcium, which are then excreted by the system. Poor digestion is also a possible cause of low calcium. Low stomach acid is a.s.sociated with poor calcium absorption.

The research also shows that high calcium supplementation does not seem to make a significant difference in the prevention or treatment of osteoporosis. For example, members of the Bantus, an African tribe, get about 350 mg of calcium per day, almost one-fourth of the National Dairy Council recommendation of 1200 mg. The Bantu women, however, do not suffer from osteoporosis and rarely suffer from bone fractures. Although there may be some genetic component helping the Bantus, it is significant that the genetic relatives of the Bantus in the US, who are eating the standard American diet, have bone loss percentages that are about the same as the Caucasian population. Eskimos who have a calcium intake of 2000 mg per day, but a high protein intake of 250-400 grams per day, have a high rate of osteoporosis. The Eskimo diet again points to the fact that a high-protein diet is a more powerful force in causing osteoporosis than a high-calcium diet is in preventing it. A two-year study of postmenopausal women reported in the British Medical Journal in 1984 showed that 2000 mg of calcium in the diet, as compared to a diet with 500 mg per day, showed no difference in the demineralization process. A study in the New England Journal of Medicine also demonstrated that calcium supplementation has no effect on the rate of osteoporosis as compared to women who took no supplementation. Not only does a high calcium intake not help prevent osteoporosis, but a world expert on vitamin D, Hector DeLuca, Ph.D., has pointed out that large amounts of calcium in the diet tend to turn off the body's production of vitamin D hormone and thus stop the bone rebuilding process. Excess calcium also seems to reduce copper and zinc absorption in the bone. These are minerals essential for proper bone formation.

Certain vitamins and minerals are important in the biochemistry of bone formation. One of the most important is vitamin D, which in its hormonal form facilitates calcium absorption into the system and the bone. By staying in the sun for at least 20 minutes we get enough vitamin D to meet all our calcium metabolism needs. Unfortunately, perhaps because of sedentary lifestyles of older house-bound people, the average vitamin D level in older subjects is 47% lower than in younger subjects.

Vitamin C, which is found in higher concentrations in a vegetarian diet than in a meat-centered diet, is another important vitamin for bone development and reformation. Folic acid and pyridoxine (B6) are also important.

One of the most important minerals is silicon. It stimulates the growth and formation of bone and teeth. Silicon increases much-needed collagen in the bone. Silicon is found in mother's milk, in the fiber fraction of brown rice, in leafy greens and bell peppers, and in the herb called horsetail. These are primarily vegetarian sources. I have found that horsetail is extremely high in silicon and very good for bone repair, regenerating fingernails, and improving hair strength and vitality in my patients. Only organic silicon helps to do this. The inorganic form doesn't seem to have this effect.

Magnesium, although comprising 0.1% of bone as compared to calcium being 20.2%, plays an important role in fixing calcium into the bone and also converting vitamin D to its active hormonal form. Magnesium is found in high concentrations in leafy greens, whole grains, legumes, seeds, almonds, black-eyed peas, curry, mustard powder, alfalfa sprouts, avocados, apples, bee pollen, beets, dates, dulse, figs, garlic, lentils, most green vegetables, grapefruit, kelp, eggs, and liver. Vegetarians get more than enough magnesium in their diet.

Manganese, copper, pota.s.sium, strontium, and zinc are other minerals that are important in bone and cartilage formation. Plants that contain magnesium also contain these minerals.

Boron, a little-known mineral, is needed in small amounts for proper bone metabolism. It could be one of the most important minerals in the prevention of osteoporosis. Boron has been found to be essential for the production of the active form of vitamin D. A study done in 1986 on post-menopausal women found that adding 3 mg per day of boron reduced the urinary loss of calcium by 44% and significantly increased the serum concentrations of natural estrogenic hormones. The boron increased the blood 178-estradiol levels (the most biologically active estrogen in humans) to concentrations equal to those found in women on estrogen replacement therapy. This increase in estrogen also helps prevent bone loss. This boron stimulation of natural estrogen levels is important because of the controversy around the use of estrogen supplementation.

As pointed out by the National Inst.i.tute of Health Consensus Development Conference on Osteoporosis in 1984, the risk of endometrial cancer increases with the use of estrogen therapy. The April 1991 issue of the Journal of the American Medical a.s.sociation contained an article showing there was a direct linear relations.h.i.+p between the duration of use of menopausal estrogens and the risk of breast cancer. This article reviewed the major studies on the subject and is considered by some as one of the most thorough epidemiological studies a.n.a.lyzing the relations.h.i.+p between menopausal estrogens and breast cancer. Combining results from all the studies, regardless of the quality of the study, the statistics showed that if estrogens were used for 15 years, a woman had a 30% excess risk of breast cancer. If used for 25 years, there was a 50% increased risk of breast cancer. If only the five studies with the highest scientific quality were used, an increase of 60% incidence of breast cancer was found in the 15-year estrogen use group and 100% percent increase in breast cancer incidence in the 25-year use group.

Another piece of this osteoporosis controversy is a recent 14-year study reported in the Journal of the American Medical a.s.sociation in 1984, which showed there was no significant difference of hip fractures between women who did or did not have estrogen replacement therapy. These researchers found no a.s.sociation between fracture risk and hormone replacement therapy.

Boron may make a significant difference in our thinking about osteoporosis for its effect on estrogen alone, as well as its role in improving the metabolism of calcium, phosphorus, and magnesium and decreasing the calcium, magnesium, and estrogen losses. The two best sources of boron are kelp and alfalfa. Kelp is also high in silicon. Spinach, snap peas, cabbage, lettuce, apples, leafy greens, and legumes are also good sources of boron. Since boron is found primarily in vegetarian foods, this may be an additional reason why vegetarians have less osteoporosis. If you are growing your own garden, you may want to put borax in the soil to increase the boron concentration in your fruits and vegetables. The studies show a large margin of safety with boron. Dogs and rats were safe on more than 35 times the 3-milligram dosage. There are areas in the world where people naturally take in 13 times the required amount of boron in their food without any apparent side effects.

One can see that the prevention of osteoporosis is greatly enhanced by a low-protein, vegetarian diet. Such a diet provides an adequate-to-high source of calcium, boron, and other essential minerals and vitamins needed for optimal bone function. The low protein of a well-balanced vegetarian diet does not leach calcium from the bones. One study found that vegetarian women even stop having bone loss after the age of seventy. In addition, leading an active, balanced life with emphasis on regular communion with the angels of exercise and moderate suns.h.i.+ne helps prevent osteoporosis. One study showed that women in their seventies who exercised moderately increased their bone ma.s.s by 1% per month as compared to the controls who did not exercise and continued to have bone loss. An optimal level of exercise for the maintenance of bone ma.s.s is essentially similar to the activity of a young adult. The best exercises are antigravity ones in order to create healthy bone stress and stimulation. Walking is one of the best antigravity exercises, but there should also be some exercise for the upper shoulder girdle and arms. Hatha yoga is an excellent activity for the upper body, as are mild to moderate traditional exercises like push-ups, et cetera. Betty Kamen, Ph.D., who has written an excellent booklet on osteoporosis, points out that we need to stand about three hours a day in order to prevent osteoporosis or do antigravity exercises continuously for at least 20 minutes five days per week. A life in balance brings a calcium balance.

Vegetarian Diet Increases Endurance.