Acne Archives

HUGE kudos!

[ Acne Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!
 
        

HUGE kudos!

Posted by
Cara on August 16, 1999 at 04:02:27:

Dearest Dr. Stoll:

I have just spent the last hour browsing through your MOST incredible website for the first time (I'm a good little student and didn't post any questions until I looked for answers already posted)! I'm so glad I found it!

I have had acne for years. I'm a 26-year-old actress, and it has cost me TV and film jobs. I've been on everything from Klaron and Cleocin T gel to Retin-A and Minocycline. I went through one course of Accutane therapy at age 19. I was lucky to come through it without so much as chapped lips, but my "doorbell" was not functioning, nevertheless.

Anyway, as I'm sure you suspect, my acne did come back, and with a vengeance. But this time I'm ready! I've researched enough to know that a complete lifestyle overhaul is needed. I'm finally willing to commit to that, for more reasons than just to treat my acne, too. But I'm a rookie, so here's my question (took me long enough, didn't it?):

I'm looking into a macrobiotic diet. In my travels through your site, I have not seen any specific references to it. Am I on the right track? I'm assuming it's similar to the whole foods diet, but are there any major differences? Here's what I know about macro: brown rice is central to the entrees; no meat, eggs, dairy or alcohol; no artificial sugar or salt; severely limited amounts of caffeine (grain coffee, bancha tea and water are pretty much the only beverages); fats are obtained only through nuts, oils and seeds; some vegetables and a few fruits are acceptable. I'm about to do a major pantry makeover, but I wanted your advice first.

And, finally... thanks! Thank you for not being that doctor who tosses antibiotics at his embarassed, insecure, hopeful patients and says, "You'll live with it and someday you'll be better..." License or no, you've empowered me! Yeah! What can I say?! You're awesome! Keep it up! (A little dramatic... can you tell I'm an actress? :-)) I'm looking forward to educating myself with your site.

You go!
Cara



Re: HUGE kudos! Acne and Diet

Posted by
Paul on August 16, 1999 at 12:02:52:

In Reply to: HUGE kudos! posted by Cara on August 16, 1999 at 04:02:27:

Cara,

I picked the whole foods diet. Macrobiotic diets can get complicated and they can be high in salt, which is not good for someone with acne. I prefer the simplicity of the whole foods diet. Just eat "whole foods"!

But in any case, I think the most important thing about taking on one of these diets is that you cut out the things that your body cannot handle. After starting the whole foods diet, I started to learn about the things that body does not like. For instance, I thought I could get away with eating some sugar-free gelatin. Instead, I got these big purple welts on my forehead. Unless you are on one of these diets; it can be very difficult to tell what your body reacts to.

I think that is this is the most important thing about going on any kind of diet: you want it to be a tool for learning about your body and for healing your body. Everybody is different, and - no doubt - your body will react differently to different foods. Macrobiotic or whole food diets are good places to start; but whichever diet you choose, you will need to make whatever adjustments that are suitable for you.

I will give you more examples from my personal experience. Dairy products cause me to break out. My body has trouble handling oils and fats in general. I have to be very careful about what I ingest: I can eat sunflower seeds, but not flax seeds. I break out and get nauseous from nutrasweet.

The important thing is that the diet was a good place for me to start, to learn about my body's needs and the things that it cannot handle.

Good luck!
Paul
ekstasis@goplay.com



you might try ER4YT

Posted by Pete R on August 16, 1999 at 13:24:34:

In Reply to: HUGE kudos! posted by Cara on August 16, 1999 at 04:02:27:

Thats great news that you have discovered this site and will follow Dr. Stoll's wellness program. Most of us are devoted followers and can't say enough good about him.

A macrobiotic diet may not do well for everyone. If you are a blood-type "O", you may do better with some lean (organic) meats. If you haven't tried it, I'd recommend you read Peter D'Adamo's book, "Eat Right 4Your Blood Type". Dr. Stoll has suggested that ER4YT only helps 75% of the people. You may be in that 75%. Its a must read.

Regards.
Pete Reinhard



Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people??

Posted by
RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 14:51:50:

In Reply to: you might try ER4YT posted by Pete R on August 16, 1999 at 13:24:34:

About your saying that Walt said that "ER4YT only helps 75% of the people":

I guess I missed where Walt said that. Seems to me that the % would be MUCH lower than that.

Something (a diet) that really helped 75% of the people would be head and shoulders above anything I've heard promoted and practiced.

Perhaps it's 75% correct in the middle of China, where little/no mixing of bloodlines occurs with other people. In a mixing pot place like the US, I'd guess it would be "helpful" for only a very small % of the people. More like a random draw.

And I've seen nothing inherently universally helpful/applicable about ER4YT. No, I'm not a ER4YT "believer", but I guess what I'm saying is that a quick look at the various food lists for the various blood types did not necessarily make "sense" to me. On the other hand, Robert's H/G and AG diets make some logical sense to me.

Walt, can you set the record straight?

Thanks,
RocketHealer Jim++



Have you actually read the book? ER4YT?

Posted by
Pete R on August 16, 1999 at 16:16:35:

In Reply to: Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people?? posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 14:51:50:

Please, RHJ, read the book before deciding if the food lists make "sense" to you. Dr. D'Adamo is quite a smart person. And we like Naturopaths on this site, don't we? He didn't just make the stuff up. Please read it. Its really quite interesting.

I am aware that Rob McF has some disagreements with ER4YT but so do many other people, for many different reasons.

Dr. Stoll DID say 75%. Could it be 64% or 77%? I'm sure it was just intended to be an approximate statement. I understood what he meant. AND, of course, statistics can be misleading. Just because most people get better on the blood type diet, does that make the blood type theory valid? Some people say that just eating any good foods and following a specific diet will produce good results. Still, after reading the book (there I go again...) the interaction of food and blood seems to be a facinating connection. I don't care if I can't eat tomatoes again. I still do, however, but much more infrequently, because of the blood type knowledge.
(ER4YT also says not to drink beer but that staple is not as easily replaced.)
Personally, I follow ER4YT in "moderation",eating "whole" foods whenever possible, do some SR, and exercise quite a bit.

Regards. PR



Re: You are right - I've not read the book, just the food lists.

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 16:26:35:

In Reply to: Have you actually read the book? ER4YT? posted by Pete R on August 16, 1999 at 16:16:35:

You are right that my comments were made without benefit of having read the book. I probably ought not express such an uninformed Opinion without reading the book.

I don't plan to read the book based on what I've learned here from Robert. Based on that "Don't confuse me with the Facts, I've got my mind made up!" I stand by what I said (as an opinion) and I look forward to anything Dr. Stoll and Robert can say about this.



Re: You are right - I've not read the book, just the food lists.

Posted by
Robert McFerran on August 16, 1999 at 18:39:14:

In Reply to: Re: You are right - I've not read the book, just the food lists. posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 16:26:35:

Hi Jim and Pete,

Finding your best diet is all about ADAPTATION.

What Dr. D'Adamo and I are both trying to do is find a 'system' to help an individual APPROXIMATE what foods they are best ADAPTED.

The 'systems' are different -- like comparing apples and oranges (or perhaps ribeyes and pineapples)!

I believe my system has a higher degree of effectiveness and accuracy (especially for those trying to RECOVER from chronic illness). At the same time it is more complex and requires the individual to guide themselves (through mind/body reactions) to find their BEST diet.

I'm sure there is plenty of stuff in the archives on where our two 'systems' agree and where they part company.

Bob





Am I the only one who feels---->

Posted by
Valerie Pescanescu on August 16, 1999 at 19:10:11:

In Reply to: Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people?? posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 14:51:50:

Like you just proved Dr D'Adamo's point? No wonder he is reluctant to recommend this BB to his readers, with reactions like yours! I'm speechless!

Would you, or Walt, or anyone else recommend anyone to a website which did nothing but snipe at you? I doubt it.

Val, A+

(2 years doing ER and very happy about)



Re: HUGE kudos! Acne and Diet

Posted by
Cara on August 16, 1999 at 19:15:26:

In Reply to: Re: HUGE kudos! Acne and Diet posted by Paul on August 16, 1999 at 12:02:52:

Paul:

MANY thanks for your input. You're right; I've only been macro for a few days and am having a hard time finding the special food and the time to cook it.

I've ordered Dr. Stoll's book and am looking into the whole foods diet as I write. I feel a bit lost; I'm not at all sure yet what to stay away from (that's why I was drawn to macro; there were VERY strict guidelines). My theatre friends are very much "beer & burgers" people; it's nice to have support and sounding boards on this site!

Thanks again,
Cara



Re: YOU just lost a whole lot of RocketHealer "Points" (NMI)

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 21:17:26:

In Reply to: Am I the only one who feels----> posted by Valerie Pescanescu on August 16, 1999 at 19:10:11:

NMI



Re: YOU can take your Rocket and shove it... (NMI)

Posted by
Val P. on August 16, 1999 at 22:25:58:

In Reply to: Re: YOU just lost a whole lot of RocketHealer posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 21:17:26:


!



Re: HUGE kudos! Acne and Diet

Posted by
Paul on August 16, 1999 at 23:17:49:

In Reply to: Re: HUGE kudos! Acne and Diet posted by Cara on August 16, 1999 at 19:15:26:

Cara,

You might consider getting _The Healing Power of Whole Foods_ by Beth Loiselle. Dr. Stoll recommends it and I think he did the forward or preface.

You can also try just going on the whole foods diet on intuition and commonsense. I started the whole foods diet waiting for the above book to arrive. Basically, you avoid anything that is processed. Eat vegetables and fruits. Get protein from unprocessed meats - or if you are a vegetarian, eat nuts, beans, seeds for protein and fatty acids.

The book is helpful for refining your dietary habits, but quite a bit of it you can figure out as you go along. Other than staying away from processed foods and getting enough protein and fatty acids, it isn't too complicated. Most of the work will initially come from trying to stay on the diet. Even that will go away after time. The few times I have fallen off the wagon, so to speak, eating that junk just grossed me out. You lose your taste for junk like that. Pretty soon, you won't even crave that stuff.

And after that, figuring out what demands your body is making - what foods you need to avoid, what things you might be allergic or sensitive to - takes center stage.

I have to say the biggest challenge for me now is figuring out how to stay on the diet when I go out with friends. You sometimes you have to break the rules and suffer a little.

Eating healthy doesn't have to be complicated. Lot of it is just commonsense. Stay away from refined sugar, refined grains, artificial anything. Make sure you are getting enough nutrients, proteins, essential oils.

Well, good luck.

Paul
ekstasis@goplay.com



Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-)

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 17, 1999 at 09:20:06:

In Reply to: Re: You are right - I've not read the book, just the food lists. posted by Robert McFerran on August 16, 1999 at 18:39:14:

Thanks. Yes, I understand it is definitely about adaptation, not hard and fast "rules". Not sure I see how your system is harder to adapt, but that's OK. It still seems like a much better (more logical) starting point to me. As always, Your mileage may vary.

I have not searched the archives for the similarities and differences. I don't think that is overly important. I was looking more for an overview type comment on % effectiveness and perhaps why.

I guess you don't care to hazzard a % comparison. That is tough to do "scientifically". I understand that, so I understand you not stepping in with your % estimate, much less an estimate for the apparent "competition". But Competition.... not what we're really after, but Truth!

I'm still looking forward to see what Walt can say in just a few words about this. As I said earlier, I don't personally "buy" the 75% figure. But I'm expressing this as my opinion/understanding as a part of a request for more "authoritative" answers from the experts here. Not as my word being the final one on the subject, but as a question.

Too bad some people (not you!) have to jump down a person's throat if another person's understanding/opinion (expressed as such) does not match their own.



Apparently you ARE...

Posted by
trish on August 17, 1999 at 10:11:02:

In Reply to: Am I the only one who feels----> posted by Valerie Pescanescu on August 16, 1999 at 19:10:11:

and you're not so speechless, either, Valerie.

What exactly did Jim do but voice a dissenting opinion? An uneducated one, that he admits to...THAT's the problem here - you guys just don't want to hear anything that might not totally agree with Eat Right, lock, stock and barrel - you are closing your eyes and ears to anything else.

Grow up, Valerie, nobody's sniping at Peter.

trish



Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people??

Posted by
trish on August 17, 1999 at 10:12:11:

In Reply to: Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people?? posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 14:51:50:

Jim,

I read this thread last night, but was simply too tired to comment at that point.

As a long time D'Adamo follower (I used to hang around the OLD board with the likes of CyberMage and believe it or not, Thomas Seay) and someone who used a modified O diet to help rid myself of candida, I would say that approximately 75 percent is a pretty decent guess.

I strongly suggest that you read the book, which WILL make sense to you if you "buy" into Robert's ideas - there are a LOT of comparisons to be made - and do the blood type diet. It IS much easier to follow (it's all spelled out for you) than Bob's stuff, it's not so strict with the refined carb thing as the whole foods diet is, and it might be the perfect starting point for you. I KNEW you didn't read the book before you confessed it, because you would not have said what you said. I have fits about my mother who says that she's tried the diet, but she also never read the book and always complains about the "strange" foods that are or are not on a given list. J !

Once you have that under your belt, you would perhaps be able to make the next logical step and refine the diet more to a metabolic bent. Of course that's assuming you are in the 75% for whom ER works. I am one who fits both categories nicely, a type O hunter gatherer. However, I know Aaron from way back and a personal acquaintance who were in the 25% minority = I work with a woman who's been trying the A diet, but has been feeling progressively worse - she is feeling hypoglycemic. She is also taking my advice and trying more protein for awhile to see if she feels better. (Thanks, Bob!)

Both approaches have valid research and valid ideas, Jim. I am only sorry that there can't be more open discussion about it between the "powers that be."

just some food for thought!

trish



Re: HUGE kudos! (WAY TO GO!) Archive under acne.

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 17, 1999 at 10:19:01:

In Reply to: HUGE kudos! posted by Cara on August 16, 1999 at 04:02:27:

Thanks, Cara.

It is people like you who keep me doing this. Those who are willing to put out the effort you are describing are the ones who get the very best results.

NOW, although Macrobiotics is a good substitute for a Whole Foods Diet, please do not focus all or your efforts on the diet. If you wre going to do just one thing, SR would be the thing. Combining diet with SR magnifies the benefits of both as does adding a mild exercice program.

In the meantime, adding the essential oils on the FAQ page will get you earlier benefits.

I am surprised that we do not have an archive for Macrobiotics. The informattion may be listed under diet or cancer, etc. Were I trying this, I would get a Certified Macrobiotics Instructor to fix my meals and teach me for a week or so. It would be well worth the investment. Call the Kushi Institute at (413)623-5741 for information and a listing of the Certified Instructors in your area.

You are going to LOVE what happens. Please share your experiences with the BB. They will help many others see that they do not have to live this way.

Walt



Peter, you're always the voice of reason!

Posted by
trish on August 17, 1999 at 10:21:50:

In Reply to: Have you actually read the book? ER4YT? posted by Pete R on August 16, 1999 at 16:16:35:

Thank you for that!

trish



Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people?? (CLARIFICATION) Archive?

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 17, 1999 at 10:57:41:

In Reply to: Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people?? posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 14:51:50:

Dear RoicketHealer Jim.

I HOPE I did not say that. I have no idea what % gets permanent benefits. I DO know that about 75% of people will get a positive result from ANYTHING they do that they believe in. It is just that the results will not be long lasting. I find it hard to consider that anyone would go to the bother of trying the ER4YT who did not believe in it.

Perhaps I said something like THAT and it was just misunderstood. I would be VERY interested in any research that showed the % of ER4YT who were still getting benefits a year later. I am sure that there IS a % but have no idea what it is.

Walt



Re: Have you actually read the book? ER4YT?

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 17, 1999 at 11:02:52:

In Reply to: Have you actually read the book? ER4YT? posted by Pete R on August 16, 1999 at 16:16:35:

Thanks, Pete.

I hope you will take the time to read my response to RHJ about the 75%. I would like to see the note in which I said that so I can see how it could have been misunderstood.
Can you tell me?

I do not believe that ANYONE (including Peter D.) knows what % of people who do the ER4YT are still doing it a year later. Correct me if I am wrong.

Still have an open mind.

Walt



Re: ER4YT Walt CLARIFICATION at last!

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 17, 1999 at 11:09:59:

In Reply to: Re: ER4YT (only) helps 75% of the people?? (CLARIFICATION) Archive? posted by Walt Stoll on August 17, 1999 at 10:57:41:

Thanks for that clarification. Thanks! Thanks! Thanks!

I simply could not buy that any single "Diet" would work and be "right" for 75% of the people of the world, based on what I've learned here the past 6 months about individual variability.

All that said, I think your "75% of people will get a positive result from ANYTHING they do that they believe in" might even be a little high :-) Based on what you've said here about the placebo effect, I'd put it closer to 50-60%. But that's just MY guess.

As Robert pointed out, it's not so much the diet starting point, but the process of listening to our body and adapting what we eat to suit it that is important in the long term. I've done lots of diets that worked in the short term, but I was unable to stay with them in the long term, and all the lost weight was rapidly found again, plus a lot more!

Thanks again!



Thanks lc trish. (nmi)

Posted by Pete R on August 17, 1999 at 14:57:56:

In Reply to: Peter, you're always the voice of reason! posted by trish on August 17, 1999 at 10:21:50:

nmi



I DID buy and read BOTH books

Posted by
Rosemarie on August 17, 1999 at 16:11:33:

In Reply to: Re: You are right - I've not read the book, just the food lists. posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 16, 1999 at 16:26:35:

Hi Everybody!

I just had to jump in here with my 2 cents.

One day I heard another doctor on a radio program briefly refer to the ER4YT diet as the only diet that cured his lifelong affliction (sorry I can’t recall what it was). I was very curious. I’m always ready to expand my knowledge, but at the time I also had a bad rash for over 8 months, around both eyes, that wouldn’t go away no matter what I tried. (Remember Dr. Stoll? You diagnosed it right away and I got rid of it within 2 weeks!)

Anyway, I bought the ER4YT and later the cookbook which incidentally has some very tasty recipes in it.

I was of course overjoyed to discover that I was already eating most of the foods recommended for my blood type “A”! I made a few adjustments and followed the diet rather closely for a couple of months.

I went to the ER4YT BB almost daily. I also asked Dr. D’Adamo what other suggestions he might have about my rash – back then he was still accepting/answering individual questions off the BB. I got no response. Later on I noticed a reference and link to Dr. Stoll’s BB and started coming here. As mentioned I got the answer to my medical problems AND as a bonus am meeting some of the finest people around!

As I was visiting the ER4YT BB, I was struck by the great anxiety this diet created among most participants. Many people became so obsessed that they even worried what food ingredients were allowed outside their bodies! Since the food lists were always incomplete and sometimes changing, one could never be sure. That created ANXIETY AND FEAR. And as we all know anxiety and fear create STRESS. I didn’t need THAT!

Now, Peter you seem to be one of the few who are taking this diet with an easy going attitude. You still eat tomatoes and some of the foods you shouldn’t. And I guess that’s how I finally looked at it. Drinking lemon juice first thing in the morning gave me an upset stomach - something I never get. So I stopped that. I also still eat tomatoes and many of the fruits I “shouldn’t” eat.

The old saying is “don’t fix it if it ain’t broke” and I’ve been doing very well with my way of eating (generally whole foods), having lived well into my 50’s without any of the usual health problems so common today.

I think you all agree...this has been a fascinating discussion.

All the best
Rosemarie





Re: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt! - Not needed during Dieting - already a 4-letter word!

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 17, 1999 at 16:24:46:

In Reply to: I DID buy and read BOTH books posted by Rosemarie on August 17, 1999 at 16:11:33:

Thanks for sharing your experience and your observations.

I can see where about the last thing a person needs in a "diet" (already a four-letter word!) is added Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (to use someone else's phrase)

I did not quite get the part about "people worried what food ingredients were allowed outside their bodies!" Did that meant that if they should not eat tomatoes, that they should not Handle them? Or don't even be in the same room with a rutabaga if it is forbidden!? Was it the smell, the touch, the forbidden color/texture, perhaps bad "vibrations"??? Sorry if I'm missing the point.

I did not know that Dr. D no longer addressed individual questions in his board. That's sad. What would this place be without Dr. S?????????? Everyone else (to steal the Deja.com slogan) Shares what they know, learns what they don't, but it would not be anything without one strong knowledgeable Dr. present day and night! :-)

Glad that you are not only here, but also are obviously one of the finest people around! :-) OK everyone, pat yourself on the back!



Walt - have YOU read ER4YT?

Posted by
Pete R on August 17, 1999 at 16:26:25:

In Reply to: Re: Have you actually read the book? ER4YT? posted by Walt Stoll on August 17, 1999 at 11:02:52:

Hello Walt. As you know I have been a faithful follower of both you and Dr. D'Adamo. However, I believe that your recommendation of SR is a big "key" to all wellness.

And you did say "75%" in regards to ER4YT, but, as you clarified above, you may have been referring to the placebo effect. I don't care. I will never be able to find it anyway.

But have YOU read ER4YT? I thought it was a great book, but then again, I'm not a doctor.

If you answered YES above: Do YOU put any value in the blood type diet? i.e. do you feel that a person with one blood type interacts with a food differently than a person with another blood type?? OR, do you think this is just a placebo effect? Please comment briefly.

RHJ: You commented that your knowledge leads you to believe that one diet can't be good for everyone; please note that ER4YT is actually 4 different diets. I'll second trish's recommendation that you just try the diet.

I have an open mind too.

Regards. Pete Reinhard



I agree with your diet observation

Posted by Pete R on August 17, 1999 at 16:38:22:

In Reply to: I DID buy and read BOTH books posted by Rosemarie on August 17, 1999 at 16:11:33:

Hello Rosemarie.
I have to ditto your comment regarding the obsessive nature of the ER4YT board. At least with some of them. I recall an "O" asking, "Oh.. what shampoo can I use. Most shampoos have coconut in them and that is bad for us Os".

I replied "Shampoo right 4 your type", plus some logic; she didn't think it was very funny, or correct. What ever. I was just so shocked to see that she (IMHO) wasted valuable seconds of her life worrying about such a thing. (Sure there are bad chemicals that you don't want on your skin, but that has nothing to do with er4yt)

But there are a lot of "normal" people over there too. Like us (???) :-)

Take care. PR



Jim check Pete R's response

Posted by Rosemarie on August 17, 1999 at 22:18:27:

In Reply to: Re: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt! - Not needed during Dieting - already a 4-letter word! posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 17, 1999 at 16:24:46:

Sorry to confuse you. I didn't express it right. What I meant was they worry whether any "forbidden" food ingredients are in their shampoos, body lotions, creams, soaps, etc. It's just pathetic!

All the best.
Rosemarie





Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-)

Posted by
Robert McFerran on August 17, 1999 at 23:00:42:

In Reply to: Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-) posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 17, 1999 at 09:20:06:

Hi Jim,

If Pete and you are searching around for a percentage of success figure you are going to have to ask more specific questions -- and you still might not get a satisfactory answer

I have dealt EXCLUSIVELY with folks that are sick. Healthy people aren't thrilled to run the elimination diet, test foods, discipline their eating to a specific metabolic diet and completely eliminate some lectin containing foods from their diets (oh, by the way, these are all WHOLE foods). With all that I've found that EVERYONE shows improvement -- but how much do I need to claim success? (Remember that diet is only one leg of the stool)

When the likes of Dr. Sears (of THE ZONE fame) tags a percentage on the success of his dietary plan you have to look at WHO is having the success. In the case of THE ZONE he was working with college swimmmers and saw an increase in their performance. College students have notoriously bad diets (pizza and sodas -- the epitome of junk food and the staple of the modern college diet) so ANYTHING would have likely helped their lot -- at least to the point where Dr. Sears could add them to his list of successes.

When you try to calculate the rate of success with ER4YT you run into the same sort of problems.

I would like someone that follows the type 'O' diet that is a caucasian of northern european decent tell me where their ancestors got the pineapple?

Bob



Re: Thanks - good points - %s really don't matter

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 18, 1999 at 07:00:00:

In Reply to: Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-) posted by Robert McFerran on August 17, 1999 at 23:00:42:

Thanks Robert for the insightful reply.

About Sick folks, many of them won't do the Elimination diet. They'd DIE first! :-)

About the Zone. I tried it for over a year and felt like it really made much more sense for me that what I was doing before. But then I fell off the wagon. And never really got back on. Now I'm less sure which people it really works for, and how long. Not knocking it, but realize that not it or any diet is absolutely positively RIGHT for everyone right out of the box/book.

And yes, I do realize that ER4YT is 4 different diets, in response to another question. Have not and do not plan to read the book any time soon. Other priorities higher and I like the basis of your diets/approach better than what I understand to be the basis of Dr. D's diets.

So I figure this discusssion has probably run its course.



Then there are a lot of pathethic people on this board

Posted by
Val on August 18, 1999 at 09:21:39:

In Reply to: Jim check Pete R's response posted by Rosemarie on August 17, 1999 at 22:18:27:

Who might in other words be termed "ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE. To ask a question in your eyes makes the pathetic?



Blind belief is good for nothing.

Posted by
Karel on August 18, 1999 at 10:02:30:

In Reply to: Apparently you ARE... posted by trish on August 17, 1999 at 10:11:02:

Hi Trish,
thanks for your note - I would undersign it. Just a constant comparison of various dissenting or partially dissenting ideas can bring anything forward. Blind belief is good for nothing.
Be well,
Karel



Yo, Val

Posted by Pete R on August 18, 1999 at 10:13:15:

In Reply to: Then there are a lot of pathethic people on this board posted by Val on August 18, 1999 at 09:21:39:

Hello.
First of all Val, we are not attacking all the people over there. I was an original member myself. BOTH boards have their share of off-the-wall people.

But Rosemarie's observation has merit. Yes, I thought it was pathethic that someone would ruin their parents Thanksgiving dinner with their obsessive diet concerns. "Oh God, what will I eat there? All those Avoids!! Please Help!" (I'm not making this up)

What I'm saying is that, even though I believe in Dr. D'Adamo's work (or do so to some degree) that carrying it to its extreme is both stressful and boring, both to you and to those around you. Dr. D'Adamo states 90% compliance would be great. So, a few days off in a year will not kill you.

RE your comment on Environmental Sensitivity: Yes, this is a concern to some people (most likely with LGS and could be helped via SR??) but what does Dr. D'Adamo's work have to do with that? He has studied how "foods" react with "blood". Those foods are ingested; not transfused, absorbed, etc. It might take him another 10 years to study how foods applied to the scalp interact with different blood types, lectins, etc. Some people over there falsely extend his blood type/diet work to everything, and that is unscientific. I'm sure Dr. D would agree.

PR



Evil tomatoes, good figs? Oh no, not always (long).

Posted by
Karel on August 18, 1999 at 10:40:29:

In Reply to: Walt - have YOU read ER4YT? posted by Pete R on August 17, 1999 at 16:26:25:

Hi,
I have read the ER4YT book with enthusiasm a year ago, I still remember almost all foods grouped into the "highly beneficial", "neutral" and "avoid" categories of all four blood groups. I have read lots about it - positive and negative. I tried the diet for 4 months, I had the feeling it works for the first few weeks. But later I felt worse.
I reintroduced the evil tomatoes, peppers and even potatoes after those 4 months (blood type A) and - surprisingly - I felt much much better.
It seems I am an agriculturist as to the metabolic diet, which should be near what Peter D'Adamo recommends for A's. But there is some difference. Actually, when you are an agriculturist and stop eating tomatoes, peppers, cabbage etc. because of its lectins, you may eat less veggies in the end - that is what happened to me. I feel great on veggies. I feel far better on those alleged "lectin-dangerous" foods than on "highly beneficial" dried figs or raisins.
There may be such a complexity of problems, that if you fit everybody into one diet, or everybody into four blood type diets, it is still too little diets to work for 75 percent.
If someone is an A and has candida, dried figs won't be "highly beneficial". I may write countless of conditions where other factors will be much more important than the lectin issue. Even if the lectins may be a problem, a thousand of other problems may wait in line to be solved first because they may be more important.
Once, a critic of ER4YT pointed out, that Peter D'Adamo's lectin theory is based on experiments of different lectins and different blood than that running inside us. First, the blood samples are outside the body and second, the lectins are outside a raw living plant. How can Peter D'Adamo be sure the blood, immune system, whatever, will behave the same way in the test tube as it behaves in our veins? How can he be sure that there are no coping mechanisms in our bodies that deal with the lectins... Etc. etc. There are so many things that can be said and that stayed unanswered in the book and on his own BB. Even with the present knowledge of ER4YT theory, the book could have been written much better.
This does not mean there is no connection between blood types and health. I am open to anything, but for now, at the present state of knowledge about the theory, I would personally put not much emphasis in that it is the diet to save the world. But why not try it for those who believe..
Be all well, those who believe, and those who do not, those who feel there is just a little bit truth, and everybody else.
Karel




Re: ER4YT Walt CLARIFICATION at last! Archive in philosophy. Nugget about placebo.

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 18, 1999 at 15:09:54:

In Reply to: Re: ER4YT Walt CLARIFICATION at last! posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 17, 1999 at 11:09:59:

Dear RHJ,

WELL! I can finally tell you something you have not already learned (grin).

The actual statistics are:

When done by double-blind, the positive effect of placebo is 30-35% and this level has been remarkably steady as long as double-blinds have been done.

HOWEVER when the patient knows what they are getting and the doc who gives it to them believes it will help AND the patient believes in the doc, the % is 70-75% positive placebo effect. Surely the ER4YT fits in this catagory! You can get the research and statistice by contacting the Brain-Mind Bulletin. I am surprised to see that it is not listed in my bibliography for the my book. It is edited by Marilyn Ferguson (the author of the classic: "The Aqurian Conspiracy"). By the way, this is a wonderful way to understand how this all fits together (inside and outside our skins). Every library would have copies of both.

Talk at me.

Walt



Re: Walt - have YOU read ER4YT? Archive in diet.

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 18, 1999 at 17:25:29:

In Reply to: Walt - have YOU read ER4YT? posted by Pete R on August 17, 1999 at 16:26:25:

Dear Peter.

As a matter of fact I have.

Peter D. sent me a complimentary, autographed copy when it first came out. How could I not read it from cover to
cover?

Anyhow, that was when I said to Peter that I thought he had a piece of the truth. That is the best I can say about ANY of the dietary approaches (including whole foods)! The reason I keep recommending whole foods is that, in my experience, it does the most consistant positive effect in the most people in the lpong run. That is not to say that some people will not get better benefits from Robert McFerran's approach or Peter D's or Atkins, or ------.

This is why I keep saying that the person needs to listen to their own personal laboratory to figure out which diet works for THEM. I am sure Robert McFerran would say the same.

Four diets are better than one. HOWEVER, those 4 diets are based on one concept and that is not enough to cover the incredibly genetically diverse group that is humanity.

Peter D'Adamo's piece of the puzzle IS valid but it is just one more piece of the puzzle. Let us hope it is not lost in the shuffle when the actual % who are still getting benefits in a year comes out.

Walt



Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-) Archive under diet!

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 18, 1999 at 18:09:04:

In Reply to: Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-) posted by Robert McFerran on August 17, 1999 at 23:00:42:

Right on, Robert, right on!

Walt



Karel brought out a VERY important point - in case you missed it

Posted by
Rosemarie on August 18, 1999 at 18:50:28:

In Reply to: Evil tomatoes, good figs? Oh no, not always (long). posted by Karel on August 18, 1999 at 10:40:29:

Thanks Karel for mentioning this.

This is so important and not stressed often enough. What she said applies to a LOT of theories and conclusions gained by "Petrie dish testing" and which we often take at face value. While she uses ER4YT as her example because that's the subject matter here, there are many others.

She said: "Once, a critic of ER4YT pointed out, that Peter D'Adamo's lectin theory is based on experiments of different lectins and different blood than that running inside us. First, the blood samples are outside the body and second, the lectins are outside a raw living plant. How can Peter D'Adamo be sure the blood, immune system, whatever, will behave the same way in the test tube as it behaves in our veins? How can he be sure that there are no coping mechanisms in our bodies that deal with the lectins... Etc. etc."

Our body has many ways of coping with different substances and situations. Many of those I'm sure are still not known by the medical community.

Rosemarie



Re: Thanks - good points - %s really don't matter

Posted by
Robert McFerran on August 18, 1999 at 19:02:33:

In Reply to: Re: Thanks - good points - %s really don't matter posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 18, 1999 at 07:00:00:

Jim and others,

Wait a minute!!

I still want someone to tell me where the blood type 'O's' that were indigenous to Northern Europe got the pineapples??

Bob



Here in the US, "Karel" would be considered a woman's name...

Posted by
trish on August 18, 1999 at 19:48:43:

In Reply to: Karel brought out a VERY important point - in case you missed it posted by Rosemarie on August 18, 1999 at 18:50:28:

But, I know from email correspondence that our dear friend (quiet unless he has something very useful to say) Karel is a man! Thought you'd want to know (and that Karel would want us to know!) :-)

trish



They were carried from the southern hemisphere by swallows...

Posted by
trish on August 18, 1999 at 19:50:55:

In Reply to: Re: Thanks - good points - %s really don't matter posted by Robert McFerran on August 18, 1999 at 19:02:33:

not sure if they were european swallows or south american swallows...
trish



Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-)

Posted by
geddy on August 18, 1999 at 23:16:14:

In Reply to: Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-) posted by Robert McFerran on August 17, 1999 at 23:00:42:

Bob,i heard from an aunt of mine who visited Hawaii when she toured the DOLE pineapple factory that the pineapple originated in Portugal.It is definitely not Northern Europe but it could of got there somehow,food for thought.

GEDDY



Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-)

Posted by
Robert McFerran on August 18, 1999 at 23:42:56:

In Reply to: Re: So you won't risk guessing a %? :-) posted by geddy on August 18, 1999 at 23:16:14:

Hi Geddy,

You are quite correct about the origins of pineapple. It could be grown in the very temperate climate of Spain. I would be impossible to grow in ANY of the northern european countries.

My point here is that there is no way that anyone of northern european decent could be well adapted to pineapple. Their ancestors simply did not have access to it until very recent times (the last 200 years).

This is one reason why I find the that blood type diets are not truly tied to the concept of ADAPTATION. Instead Naturopathic physicians would say that the good from the enzymes in the pineapple outweigh the fact that blood type O's of northern european decent must be poorly adapted to pineapple.

We are all to well aware of the deleterious effects of eating red meat on a regular basis for those folks who are MALADAPTED to it. These folks happen to be EXTREME Agriculturists who derive their metabolic identity from ancestors who simply did not eat large quantities of red meat.

The converse is also true. EXTREME Hunter-gatherers that have acquired their metabolic identity from ancestors living in cold or arid climates are as equally maladapted to fruits (especially tropical fruits) as their Agriculturist counterparts are to red meat. The only diffence is that the chronic diseases caused by eating a diet mismatched to inherited metabolism vary. The Agriculturist will be at high risk for diabetes and coronary disease while the H-G will be at high risk for hypoglycemia.

Bob



Thanks Trish for telling me - So sorry Karel..it's not always easy to tell. (NMI)

Posted by Rosemarie on August 18, 1999 at 23:44:49:

In Reply to: Here in the US, "Karel" would be considered a woman's name... posted by trish on August 18, 1999 at 19:48:43:

NMI



Re: Thanks Trish for telling me - So sorry Karel..it's not always easy to tell. (NMI)

Posted by
Karel on August 19, 1999 at 05:40:32:

In Reply to: Thanks Trish for telling me - So sorry Karel..it's not always easy to tell. (NMI) posted by Rosemarie on August 18, 1999 at 23:44:49:

Hi Trish and Rosemarie,
I am glad you liked my post. Yes, it may be not always easy to find out if a foreign name sounds like a man's or a woman's name. Karel is a Czech version of Charles in English or Karl in German, Carlos in Spanish etc. But I do not mind - it may happen to me with some foreign names, too (like Chinese etc.) - but thanks, Trish, for your post.
I would love to be less "quiet" but time not always permits me to go to my most favourite site on the net. I am glad I met you all this way!
Karel



Finally a definitive answer!

Posted by Pete R on August 19, 1999 at 09:15:13:

In Reply to: They were carried from the southern hemisphere by swallows... posted by trish on August 18, 1999 at 19:50:55:

That reminds me of a Monty Python bit.
Good one, lct.
We can close this chapter. Dr. Stoll believes there is at least a little bit of truth in er4yt.
PR



Re: But isn't the skin the largest organ?

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 19, 1999 at 09:28:48:

In Reply to: Yo, Val posted by Pete R on August 18, 1999 at 10:13:15:

But isn't the skin the body's largest organ?

Wouldn't putting something on the skin offer at least the possibility of that something getting into the bloodstream? Yes, I know the skin is designed to keep things OUT and the intestinal linings are designed to let certain things IN.

Anyway, it seems to me (an opinion, not a fact!) that there could be *some* (perhaps small) relationship between things put onto the skin to things eaten, and the results thereof.



YES! I was wondering who'd pick up on that...it was The Holy Grail :-D !nmi

Posted by
trish on August 19, 1999 at 10:36:54:

In Reply to: Finally a definitive answer! posted by Pete R on August 19, 1999 at 09:15:13:


nmi



Re: But isn't the skin the largest organ? (Archive under philosophy.)

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 19, 1999 at 11:40:03:

In Reply to: Re: But isn't the skin the largest organ? posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 19, 1999 at 09:28:48:

Hi, RocketHealer, Jim.

When I was in medical school, the wisdom presented to us was that the skin was a nearly perfect barrier to anything placed on it. THEN along came DMSO. The fact that it acted as though the skin wasn't even there shocked so many professionals, suffering from the Tolstoy Syndrome, that even research on DMSO was prohibited.

One only has to look at the rush (today) by pharmaceutical companies presently trying to produce nearly everything to be administered by a "patch" to know how wrong MY medical school instrustors were.

About 50% of the "well known" facts I was taught 40 years ago are now known to be wrong or seriously disputed.

Walt



I still stand by my statement

Posted by Pete R on August 19, 1999 at 13:41:03:

In Reply to: Re: But isn't the skin the largest organ? (Archive under philosophy.) posted by Walt Stoll on August 19, 1999 at 11:40:03:

…that scientific results which form the book "Eat" right 4 your type do NOT extend to "Shampoo" right 4 your type. That is what I said. The amount of absorption into the blood would not be measurable. I would actually think that "Breathe" right 4 your type makes more sense in terms of blood absorption, but the book was not based on that delivery mechanism either.

I did NOT assert that the skin is an impenetrable barrier.

I feel annoyed now and need to SR.

Good day.

PR



Re: Shall we Fight over this?

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 19, 1999 at 15:37:27:

In Reply to: I still stand by my statement posted by Pete R on August 19, 1999 at 13:41:03:

I just ran into the following quote in a daily thought for the day N/L I get:

"We shall fight on the beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We shall never surrender!"

-- Sir Winston Churchill

I simply Loved your Shampoo Right 4 Your Type! :-)

I don't think we ought to fight over this matter. My point was that the large surface area of the human body and known things like DMSO, patches etc. (that I did not elaborate on) gave at least some credence to claims that things could penetrate the skin and enter the bloodstream - that therefore it made some sense to pay some attention to what we put on our skin. Walt said it much better than me and pointed out the specifics of DMSO, patches, etc. I understand that skydivers don't have to breathe while skydiving because the high velocity air passes right thru their skin, oxygenating them without need for breathing - and that they don't skydive thru clouds because of the water which would pass thru the skin.

Anyway, I don't think there is/was anything intended for you to get all bent out of shape over, but that's your choice. We are each 100% responsible for all of our experiences.

Namaste'
RocketHealer Jim++



Re: OK that explains the 75% number quoted earlier! It was Real

Posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 20, 1999 at 14:43:11:

In Reply to: Re: ER4YT Walt CLARIFICATION at last! Archive in philosophy. Nugget about placebo. posted by Walt Stoll on August 18, 1999 at 15:09:54:

Thanks Walt.

Those are IMPRESSIVE statistics.

Now about Miracle Cures... Why is the % so low? I was reading about mind-body cancer cures and that the % of "unexplained" remissions using combinations of Kill-em with chemicals and radiation, surgery, etc. along with mind-stuff like meditations, visualization, affirmations, etc. is less than 0.1% In those cases the patient believed, the Dr. believed, etc. etc. Why is not their % much higher than effectively Zero?

Perhaps it is that the chemo, radiation, surgery, etc. are so harmful on the patient that despite their mind's help, the body just cannot pull off the necessary healing. Perhaps if they declined the "conventional" torture and took care of their bodies and their minds, the desired healing would occur, at least much more frequently. Do you have a general understanding/position on this?

I've always said that if I got some cancer, I'd NOT do the conventional chemo/radition/surgery unless I was PROMISED a really high success rate. Of course, what a person will really do in a specific circumstance cannot be known with high certainty ahead of time.



Re: OK that explains the 75% number quoted earlier! It was Real (Archive in philosophy.)

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 20, 1999 at 18:03:39:

In Reply to: Re: OK that explains the 75% number quoted earlier! It was Real posted by RocketHealer Jim++ on August 20, 1999 at 14:43:11:

Hi, RHJ.

The problem with the placebo effect I am talking about is that it is temporary (can last up to a few months).

However, the 0.1% of spontaneous remissions you are describing are REAL cures (forever stuff). To THAT I say: we are just babes in the woods when it comes to understanding the potential for healing already present in the human bodymind. HOWEVER: "The appearance of one sparrow proves the existance of birds!" If even one person has this ability so do we all. It is only a matter of learning how to access it!

Walt



Re: I still stand by my statement (Who doesn't?)

Posted by Walt Stoll on August 21, 1999 at 12:47:45:

In Reply to: I still stand by my statement posted by Pete R on August 19, 1999 at 13:41:03:

Pete,

I hope nothing I said produced your need for SR.

I said the medical wisdom of 40 years ago considered the skin to be an impenetrable barrier. That had nothing to do with anything you said but to once again point out that the God-like allopath is frequently wrong.

Basically, I agree with everything you said.

It is interesting, though, that there is more environmental chemical exposure from the daily shower than there is from drinking water from that same community water supply.

Walt



[ Acne Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!