Since late 2016 we have entered the age of disclosures! Fasten your mental safety belt and enjoy the ride! Heretic

Sunday, April 25, 2010

Cheese - reduced risk of incident and fatal cancer

New European  EPIC study ,  just published.

24 thousand participants, over 10 years, 28% reduction in cancer mortality, mostly associated with prostate and lung cancers. Only dairy (not vegetable) source of vitamin K had any effect.


24,340 participants aged 35–64 y and free of cancer at enrollment (1994–1998) were actively followed up for cancer incidence and mortality through 2008. Dietary vitamin K intake was estimated from food-frequency questionnaires completed at baseline by using HPLC-based food-composition data.

Results: During a median follow-up time of >10 y, 1755 incident cancer cases occurred, of which 458 were fatal. Dietary intake of menaquinones was nonsignificantly inversely associated with overall cancer incidence (HR for the highest compared with the lowest quartile: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.73, 1.01; P for trend = 0.08[*]), and the association was stronger for cancer mortality (HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.53, 0.98; P for trend = 0.03). Cancer risk reduction with increasing intake of menaquinones was more pronounced in men than in women, mainly driven by significant inverse associations with prostate (P for trend = 0.03) and lung (P for trend = 0.002) cancer. We found no association with phylloquinone intake[**].

Conclusion: These findings suggest that dietary intake of menaquinones[**], which is highly determined by the consumption of cheese, is associated with a reduced risk of incident and fatal cancer.

My comments:

*) Accepted threshold for "significance" is P<=0.05 that is probability of the result being by chance are less or equal than 5%. P=0.08 means that the total cancer incidence results were also close to being significant, with the probability of being false of 8%.

**) Phylloquinone is the form of vitamin K (K1) that is present in plants. Menaquinones are forms of K2 present in non-plant food sources such as meat, organ meat and dairy (MK-4) or some types of yeasts (MK-7, MK-9).

It is interesting to reflect at this stage at the infamous "The China Study" book by Dr. T.C. Cambpell from Cornell University. For many years Campbell has been claiming that cheese (specifically caseine) supposedly caused cancer in his experimental mice and it was also presumed to be certain, according to him, to cause cancer in humans. Countless of vegans must have used Campbell's book to justify avoiding all dairy products.

Now it turnes out that the China Study must have been a mistake.  Some people like Chris Masterjohn, have been pointing that out in the past, to no avail probably due to high academic credibility of the book author.  (*)

False knowledge seems to be more harmful than no knowledge.




Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 May;91(5):1348-58. Epub 2010 Mar 24.
"Dietary vitamin K intake in relation to cancer incidence and mortality: results from the Heidelberg cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Heidelberg)."
Nimptsch K, Rohrmann S, Kaaks R, Linseisen J.


*) Updated 12-July-2010 - see also this post .


Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Running causes heart attacks


12% of marathon runners were found in a German study to have suffered heart atacks versus only 4% among  the age-matched control subjects.

This is important!  You have to read more about it on Kurt's blog here   and there . (Thanks for bringing this subject!).

It turns out that marathon runners not only carried more frequent traces of  past myocardiac infarction events, than the average age-matched population, but also had 62% more atherosclerotic plaque as showed in this research.  The true extent of atherosclerosis among runners is likely to be even higher than that, because the control group in that study wasn't random.  It was selected from among patients undergoing the same scan for symptomatic or suspected heart abnormalities.

Has there ever been a study on marathon runners using a diet other than high carb?


Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Carbohydrates increase women's heart risk


New large Italian study published in Archives of Internal Medicine is described on the BBC Health web site.

A study of over 47,000 Italian adults found that women alone whose diets contained a lot of bread, pizza and rice doubled their heart disease risk.

After seven years, 463 participants had developed coronary heart disease.

The researchers found that the women whose diet had the highest glycaemic load had more than double the risk of heart disease compared with those women with the lowest glycaemic load. 

The authors concluded: "Thus, a high consumption of carbohydrates from high-glycaemic index foods, rather than the overall quantity of carbohydrates consumed, appears to influence the risk of developing coronary heart disease."
  This is somewhat contradictory since the GlycemicLoad concept being a product of Glycemic Index times daily intake in grams, does include all types of carbohydrates not just those of the highest glycemic index.   Also, the fact that the correlation showed up among women but not men is a bit suspicious.

Last but not least, there is no mention of "artery-clogging" fat!  I wonder why?


Saturday, April 10, 2010

Money matters

I am glad to present another interesting essay written by Dozent (Stan P.), this is a continuation on the subject of Baby Boomers culture (that we fondly refer to as "Monkeys"), this time discussed in the context of economy and money.  I hope you will enjoy it.


Stan (Heretic) wrote Re:

I found that being too "business"-obsessed in the sense of seeing monetary rewards in everything is also a sign of a "monkey".   The reverse is probably also true. Real people want to be paid real money but they (we) are not too obsessed with it. Playing games with monetary reward, that is withholding it when due and rewarding arbitrarily when it is not warranted, is _their_ signature.


I always knew it and I have acted upon it.

What is money (I mean real-money) ? It is equivalent of work or in other terms a rechargeable work-battery   :-)

I like to work. It is normal. Why should I be obsessed with WORK.  If you can not make money then you do work nobody wants.  But the problem is: you NEVER KNOW what will sell.

A few years ago I found your "marketing research.on your sensors a little funny, but "harmless" so I said nothing.  Simply estimating the potential size of the market is a good thing.  But that as far as I would go.

I know "if the product WORKS for me then it will most likely work for others".   I veered off topic. "Monkeys" are obsessed with money because they can not do any useful work. For them money is NOT an equivalent of work. No wonder they print it - they can not not see the equivalence. They either "hustle" money or receive it for being loyal to the boss.  They can not earn it on the open work market because they have no marketable skills.  They can not make things other people need.  They are obsessed wit it because it is their constant problem.

Mind you, this definition automatically defines who is a "human" [in our sense] and who is a "monkey" [figuratively, not literally, in a cultural sense, S.B.].    The critical words are "what people need".

It means that a singer like lady Gaga is a human being because she creates something "people need" and are willing to pay for.   It means she is working for her money. It is a kind of work you and me do not understand, but we can not be Astronauts either.

The definition of "useful work" is that is has a "monetary value" on the market. Loyalty and arse kissing does not have a monetary value on the market though it does have value to the Top Monkey and is rewarded accordingly. However, nothing has been created neither by loyal followers nor the boss.  The money, being an equivalent of work must be stolen by a form of "taxation" or simple extortion.

This defines instantly the role of the government.   What government creates ?   Services ?   What services ? No, the only "product" government "creates" is SECURITY.   Mind you, it is a marketable product and people are willing to pay for it.   Providing security is a full time job.
Now what is a value of a well equipped army.  That depends.  If you are facing Hitler or Genghis Khan, nothing else matters.   The problem is a professional army could not stop Hitler.  If fact, it was wiped out and proved completely useless.   In the end a few million of regular folks had to leave their stores, their factories, their fields, they had to learn to fight and they kicked ass.

So the security it is not worth 50% of MY EARNINGS.   If it is, it is time to make weapons and go to war.

There is a reason why the "monkeys" do not understand the connection between work and money.   For them, there isn't any. No matter how hard they "work" ie talk, go to meetings, make noise and other efforts nothing happens.

There is no product, no buyer, no sale and no money.

Now we can go back and create some definitions.  

[Goods and Services]

To state the obvious: people need things.  In order to survive people need goods and services like food, shelter, clothing, tools etc...     These goods have to be made. For the sake of efficiency and quality work specialization is required so most of the goods we need is made by other people.  By definition services are provided by other people.  Primeval societies "found" things they needed. There was a very high "intrinsic" component in goods.  We hunted land animals and fish, collected nuts, dug roots, used wood, bone, native gold, obsidian and flint.  With few exceptions like fish we have exhausted the available supply of  things we could find.  Now ALL the goods have to be made by human labor.

[Trade and Economy]

The second factor is an economy of scale. It was difficult to kill an animal to catch a fish or to make a bow. It was even more difficult to produce "high tech" product like a bronze axe or a gold ear-rings. It required a skill and a know how.  Once the smith made first good axe, it was easy to make 10 or 20 more.  Then one could trade them for some beautiful sea shells    :-)      You know I am serious there. Trade is as old as humankind.   What was the first trade?   Well, the Bible is probably right: a woman exchanging sex for food though a Snake had nothing to do with it!

[Money, Value, Currency and Fake Value ]

Trade started as barter. Money was invented later to facilitate the exchange.   Money is a concept. It is a measure of "value" humans attach to goods and services.   Value is the desire of humans to "own" or "consume" goods and services.   However, money has an weakness. It needs a medium to be implement in practice.  A medium like sea shells, iron bars or gold and silver.   The medium has to be convenient to carry, indestructible, difficult and expensive to produce,  impossible to fake, easily recognizable and uniform (that is why diamonds are not money).    It has to have value to humans but it can not have any utility value so it will not be destroyed.    It has to be rare and expensive but not too rare nor too expensive.

The only medium of exchange that survived the centuries is gold and silver.   Over time, gold and silver has become money though it does not have any use and little utilitarian value.

Gold and silver money has serious flaw - the supply is limited by the availability of metal.  However, this is alleviated by increasing the velocity of money and creating credit.   Velocity of money is a fancy name for reuse.   A buys from B, B buys from C etc...  the same money facilitated multiple transactions.

Credit is a legal note created by a creditor, and backed by his tangible assets.   It is an obligation to buy back the note after the prescribed time for the principal plus interest.  This obligation must be enforced by law.   Money is an equivalent of labor.   It works like a rechargeable battery.   It "stores" human labor in a convenient form for later consumption.   However, people rarely need a pure human labor like the "professional" services of a doctor or lawyer.   In most cases we need "goods" ie. things which have been made by labor. The labor itself is hidden from consumer  in the "value" of these goods.   The value of the "product" is a measure of a desire of people to consume it.   Thus, "money" is an equivalent of goods and labor and a store of value ie. desire to consume.  

Credit is equivalent of work to be done in the future by the debtor in exchange for money borrowed from the creditor.   To account for the risk to the creditor the borrower has to pay interest.

Currency is a credit note issued by the government as a legal means of exchange.   In theory, the government promises to buy it back at any time for money.  The government is a debtor, the saver is the creditor.  It is a cheap credit as the government does not pay interest [or very little of it].   Money can not be easily created.   It has to be saved and pooled to create capital.  

Money is an asset and will hold value for as long as people desire gold and other rare objects.

Currency is a piece of paper. It has value as long as the government says it does. This "value" can be wiped out with one stroke of a pen. Currency is someone's liability. It holds value only as long as the issuer is credit-worthy and can pay back its debt..

Gold Rubles and gold Krugerrands are money . The Reichsmarks were currency. It lost all real value on 9-May-1945.

In the mid 20 century something curious had happened - currency had become "money".   The liability has become an asset.  The piece of paper acquired value backed by the creditworthiness of entire nations.  It is not the first time it has been tried.  The kings of France tried this.  The kings of England tried this.  The results were rather sorry - the kings lost their heads.  The current massive experiment lasted 70 years for over 3 generations.  One could think it was successful, but the fraud was just so big it took a very long time for the results to first appear.  Now the cows are coming home.  The currency will go to zero again, but that is a subject for another essay.

This simple definition of  "money" and  "currency"  has a very far reaching consequences.  First, it provides a clear distinction between human producers and parasitic consumers.  Second, it provides a clear distinction between money and currency.  Third, it clearly defines the role of the "government".

There are many people who have no skills or no desire to produce anything. Yet they need the manufactured goods and services in order to survive.   I call them "Monkeys" because just like the monkeys they tend to congregate into troupes and many are actually destructive.  The critical statement is this: since Monkeys do not make anything they can not "earn" money.  They have to steal it or extort it.  They congregate in groups of alike individuals and use agression to hustle a living.
The Currency is NOT money. It is a piece of paper. It obfuscates the role and the very nature of money as a deferred labor.  It enables the incompetent, destructive "monkeys" to pretend they also create "value".

However, currency is designed and promoted as the equivalent of money thus the equivalent of labor but unlike labor,  it can be printed at will.   It makes "credit" cheap.   After all, all it takes is to print a piece of paper.   It makes savings an oxymoron.   The banks do not need savings to issue credit.   Sooner or later credit printing gets out of control and the whole fraud unwinds.  We are witnessing it now.

The only products government can manufacture and sell is law and security.   Personal security.  It is a legitimate role and a legitimate products.   In fact, it is priceless.  Laws permit economies to function.  It enables property ownership and civility.   Personal security is the first step to political freedom which has been proven to promote wealth creation.

This has become a book. The real point can be made starting here with the "Monkeys" taking over the government in the times of prosperity and the replacement of  money with currency.  The system starts rotting from the top and the disaster is unavoidable.

I have no desire to write this book.  I know you know the end.  We both know the resulting cycle is very long.  In fact, this may well be the explanation of the Kondratiev's super-wave.  There has to be a longer cycle - about 3-4 generations.  In short, the cycle starts with competent people and real money and it ends with "Monkeys" in charge and worthless paper currency.

See you tomorrow.
Stan P.

(Text in brackets [] and quotes added by Heretic)
Update 24-April-2010.
More comments posted on this subject, see under the previous article.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Veg prevent cancer bullxxxx exposed


European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition report by BBC

Professor Walter Willet of Harvard University said the research strongly confirmed the findings of other studies, showing "that any association of intake and fruits and vegetables with risk of cancer is weak at best".

and this:

The study of 500,000 Europeans joins a growing body of evidence undermining the high hopes that pushing "five-a-day" might slash Western cancer rates.

The international team of researchers estimates only around 2.5% of cancers could be averted by increasing intake.
Healthy vegetables?  Yeah right!

Friday, April 2, 2010

Human regression, anthropology


This is a continuation of the previous post on the subject of present day human regression, problem with "Baby Boomers" generation etc.

I have been thinking of expanding it into an essay but I am not quite sure how to attack it.   As far as I know it has never been postulated this way.  It has probably never been said that certain traits and attributes of the modern human culture such as social uniformity and an obedience towards authority in power and regulations, may in fact be the symptoms of regression into our distant evolutionary past. It is important to recognize it since it may harm our long term survival.

On the first sight that may sound like a pure anarchic heresy.  I need to explain.   During our relentless discussions and rants (me with Dozent), we realized that there is a behavioral pattern, namely people who tend to be the most willing followers of hierarchy of power, who like obeying all regulations spread by governments, corporations and churches, are the same who have unusually well developed group social skills, and at the same time tend to lack the skills that defined our humanity in the past. The same type of people also lack certain human skills that used to ensure our survival, that is:  innate creativity, ingenuity, ability to manipulate or adapt to changing environment, high mobility  and tendency to build strong bonds within the small teams of equals based on skill and usefullness rather than on some hierarchy of authority and power.      

I will describe some basic differences between the characteristic of nomadic humans the way I see it, in contrast to the opposite traits of the so-called "Baby Boomers". Please keep in mind that use the last term in a simplistic generalized way, to described a certain subculture.

"Nomadic" (Homo Sapiens)  "Boomers" (Simian Sapiens)
outwardly - individualists,
inwardly - co-operative
outwardly - collectivists, inwardly
- aggressive and competitive
disobedient followers
adaptive, flexiblestatic, rigid
racially blind intolerant of strangers
value creativityafraid of new
dislike static ordervalue stability
rely on individual workwork unconnected to wealth
authorities = problemsauthorities = source of wealth
strong team bondsstrong social group bonds
manipulate environmentmanipulate people
technical and science skillslack of technical abilities
logic and mathverbal reasoning and rhetorics
observe what worksobserve what others say
individual survival prioritygroup has priority
idealizes religionsuses religions
support commerce consider it unfair profiteering
nomadic mentalitysettled mentality
highly focused on 1 taskmultitasker
"What I produce belongs to me""What you produce belongs to us"

Update 24-April-2010
More comments by Dozent posted on this subject, see the comments section.
Update 8-Feb-2011
Added last row in the table.
Update 4-March-2012
Added introver/extrovert attribute.  Note - read this article about Susan Cain's book.
Updated table 16-Jan-2014