MSN Home  |  My MSN  |  Hotmail
Sign in to Windows Live ID Web Search:   
go to MSNGroups 
Free Forum Hosting
 
Important Announcement Important Announcement
The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
The Scientific Debate Forum.Contains "mature" content, but not necessarily adult.[email protected] 
  
What's New
  
  Disclaimer: Read this page first.  
  Links  
  Messages  
  General  
  Nutrition  
  "Mission Statement."  
  Why the "germ theory" is not science.  
  The Underlying Cause of "Disease."  
  The Scientific Method.  
  How dangerous are bacteria and viruses?  
  The Contributions of Hans Selye and others.  
  How direct effects are often ignored, and indirect markers used  
  Understanding "disease" at the molecular level.  
  Understanding disease at the molecular level, part II.  
  What the "common cold" can teach us about illness.  
  The AA connection to today's common "diseases."  
  How easy the key experiments would be to do.  
  The best practical diet and the explanation for it.  
  Fish oil quotes you might want to read  
  Where the "immune system" fits into this view of "disease."  
  How many 'scientific studies' violate the scientific method  
  Why you have to be careful with antioxidants.  
  Why Cancers today are more aggressive than those of the past.  
  The Latest Evidence.  
  Some studies worthy of note.  
  HSWC "in action."  
  How language can impede science.  
  How language impedes science, part II.  
  More on why "germs" don't cause "disease."  
  How a latent virus actually causes "disease."  
  A new report that "says it all."  
  The science "show" must go on?  
  Odds and ends  
  Some thoughts on a book by Robert Gallo.  
  Saturated fatty acids are the solution, not the problem.  
  It's stress, not "germs" that causes disease.  
  Epidemiology: Facts versus "factoids."  
  It's stress, not germs, part II.  
  The latest on "inflammation."  
  Why many nutritional claims make no sense  
  The use of hypotheticals in science.  
  What "viral infections" really do to the body.  
  What determines longevity?  
  An example of an anti-"saturated fat" study that is flawed.  
  A Rough Guide to a Gentle Diet.  
  A unified "AIDS" hypothsis without "HIV."  
  A unified "AIDS" hypothsis without "HIV." Part II.  
  Okay, so when is this diet going to kill me?  
  Scientific Debate Forum Pictures  
  The EFA Claim Was Refuted Long Ago  
    
  
  
  Tools  
 
Nutrition : Why legumes inhibit normal physiology?
Choose another message board
 
     
Reply
 Message 1 of 2 in Discussion 
From: MSN Nicknamenuno2048  (Original Message)Sent: 2/2/2007 11:33 AM
I'm new to this group, and have found it an excellent resource for healthy nutrition.

In the essay "the best practical diet" it is mentioned that legumes inhibit normal physiology, and therefore they are not included in the diet.

Since legumes are a significant part of my diet (and I like beans a lot :) ) I would like to know more about how they inhibit normal physiology.

Can someone explain, or lead me to the relevant references.


First  Previous  2 of 2  Next  Last 
Reply
 Message 2 of 2 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameHansSelyeWasCorrectSent: 2/3/2007 6:51 AM

The right beans, prepared correctly, and "in moderation," are probably a lot healthier than most of the things the "typical Amerian" is eating these days.  However, my argument is that if you can eat a tasty and satisfying diet that is also healthy, why bother with things that are not?  I also used to eat a lot of beans.  They did upset my stomach and they were not very satisfying.  Of course, taste is subjective, at least to some degree.  In any case, you can do some internet searches and see for yourself.  Here are a couple of things I found on quick searches:

Titre du document / Document title Nutritional significance of lectins and enzyme inhibitors from legumes Auteur(s) / Author(s) LAJOLO Franco M. (1) ; GENOVESE Maria Inés (1) ; Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s) (1) Departamento de Alimentos e Nutrição Expérimental, Universidade de São Paulo, Avenida Prof. Lineu Prestes 580, CEP 05508-900, São Paulo, BRESIL American Chemical Society, ETATS-UNIS Résumé / Abstract Legumes have natural components, such as lectins, amylase, and trypsin inhibitors, that may adversely affect their nutritional properties. Much information has already been obtained on their antinutritional significance and how to inactivate them by proper processing. Chronic ingestion of residual levels is unlikely to pose risks to human health. On the other hand, the ability of these molecules to inhibit some enzymes such as trypsin, chymotrypsin, disaccharidases, and α-amylases, to selectively bind to glycoconjugates, and to enter the circulatory system may be a useful tool in nutrition and pharmacology. Trypsin inhibitors have also been studied as cancer risk reducing factors. These components seem to act as plant defense substances. However, increased contents may represent an impairment of the nutritional quality of legumes because these glycoproteins and the sulfur-rich protease inhibitors have been shown to be poorly digested and to participate in chemical reactions during processing reducing protein digestibility, a still unsolved question.

SOURCE:  http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=14353437

And:

"Lectin may contribute to the atherogenicity of peanut oil."

Lipids. 1998 Aug;33(8):821-3.

Read the abstract of this study at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9727614&dopt=Abstract language=JavaScript1.2> </SCRIPT> language=JavaScript1.2> </SCRIPT>