 |
|
Reply
| |
Hans, please could you tell us somthing more about the alleged benefits of chocolate?
I ask for that because Doctor Giraldo names chocolate as a thing to avoid, as we can see in this link
http://www.robertogiraldo.com/eng/papers/TreatingAndPreventingAIDS.html
"As a consequence, it is necessary to consume as much natural and whole foods as possible, avoiding tobacco, alcohol, coffee, tea, chocolate, cocoa, sodas, processed foods, canned food, foods containing chemical preservatives and refined products like sugar, white flour and sweeteners such as aspartame. It is also essential to decrease the consumption of animal proteins and fats, including dairy products, as well as sugars and candies."
By the way, I suppose you don't agree with other assertions, like "It is also essential to decrease the consumption of animal proteins and fats, including dairy products",
because you eat dairy products.
I am very interested in chocolate because I think it provokes me acne on my back when I "overdose", but I like it so much, it is a "vice" (and precisely that leads me to suspect perhaps It is not good).
I am interested in dairy products too because I eat cheese and drink milk regularly.
Could you tell us something more, some evidence perhaps?
As always, thank you so much. |
|
 First
Previous
2 of 2
Next
Last
|
|
Reply
| |
I don't think there are any studies of the effects of various diets on the "progression to AIDS." I don't know what his reasoning is. It sounds like he is taking very old nutritional dogma for granted. Coffee, tea, chocolate, etc. are "natural," and many of the fatty acids found in animals are exactly the same as those found in plants. I don't think it's worth addressing this person's claim because it's so out of date, and also, since "AIDS" is not the same "disease" from one person to another necessarily there is no way to subject this to the scientific method. One can get some lab rats and feed them different diets and see what happens, but with people it's much more difficult, because you can't control their behavior like you can with lab animals.
Here's an example of why this kind of advice is too general to be taken seriously, even if it were correct. Recently, there were studies that found that tea is "beneficial," but only if you don't put milk in it. Most Americans do put milk in their tea and coffee, so this is likely the problem (it makes sense down to the molecular level). Same thing with "sugar" - I've found it's fine, but beyond a certain amount and you start to gain weight. Also, you need to eat enough high-quality protein with the sugar, which a lot of people don't do. Similarly with chocolate, small amounts of dark chocolate are good, but large amounts of milk chocolate I advise against.
Any time you do something very different, like change your diet, you might experience effects that appear to be deleterious, even if it is beneficial for your long-term health. Moreover, something like sugar may exacerbate problems with a fungal overgrowth situation, but that's probably because there are other problems. In my case, once I supplemented with enough stomach acid, things began to fall into place - that was the root problem. However, because I was deficient for so long, I needed to supplement with vitamins and minerals, and what I learned is that you need to take the right form, because the wrong form can make your condition worse. I doubt this person has even the slightest idea of how complex it can be. He seems to offer little more than very basic ideas derived from the textbook dogma.
I suggest you read my site, look at the evidence, and then compare that to this person's presentation. |
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
