Home   |   About Us   |   GROW: The Book   |   Blog   |   Join Us   |   Shop   |   Forum Rules

Is it myth, partial fact, or truth? Let's use critical thinking — The Grow Network Community
Everything you want is on the other side of fear.

-Jack Canfield

Is it myth, partial fact, or truth? Let's use critical thinking

LaurieLovesLearningLaurieLovesLearning ModeratorManitoba, Canada 🍁 zone 3, PrairiesPosts: 2,078 admin

Critical thinking: "begins with what exactly is being said and by what authority." I found this quote recently online.

Let me state upfront that I am certainly not a fan nor supporter of destructive GMO nor spraying practices. Far from it. I hate both. But I do like to dig into things to find myth vs. truth. There are a lot of lies on the chemical side, but also some misguided ideas on the other, which we need to be very careful of and aware of if we want to show that we are well informed. It is the same as when a person deals with the milk issue. There is much more to discover about conventional/raw milk that most people can easily learn if you can just observe the practices (on both sides) for yourself from beginning to end and ask questions. Find out information for yourself, as directly as possible and don't just believe 'say so' or internet myths & spectacular popularly believed propaganda.

A bit on wheat, GMO wheat, sprays, weight loss, etc...

I as far as GMO wheat...it has been developed, but not released on a large scale. If it had been, we would certainly see many of our local farmers using it, and I can say with certainty that they are not. They love the sprays here and have no issue with GMOs. One of the worst chemical applicators here grows wheat every second year. Spray means money to him (so deceived as it does exactly the opposite). If it had been released, he'd certainly proudly be using it. We would know. We are smack dab in the middle of spray country.

There was the 'I found GMO wheat in my crop' incident in the US years ago. I am not sure how that was determined without a farmer dessicating at harvest, which kills everything except GMO & is an extremely widespread practice. Foreign countries, North America's largest trading partners insisted on that. If N.A. grew GMO wheat, they would lose their business immediately. This halted the release.

Pretty much all crops are desiccated (even if they are fully ripe & ready to go!). If the wheat was GMO, it would not die from this application. Dessicating is the last thing to happen before grain is put in the grain driers, stored & sold.

The modern wheat today is actually smaller than older less hybridized varieties. With spray comes less viability in the germ, so says a local seed grower (he grows the best of the new varieties to sell to companies who sell to regular farmers) who sprays very minimally because of this. He knows because that determines his incoming price (top quality seed grower seed vs. substandard seed, which is actually still considered better than what regular farmers harvest). This is where some issues start...it loses quality as it goes down the line.

With hybridization, the goal was creating an easier to thrash thinner seed coat. Old varieties are very hard to thrash. I have no idea how this affects the inner structure, however (it may/may not), but it is like show dog/poultry breeding...much is often lost to attain the look. I have seen no solid proof that gluten, the protein that surrounds the brand & germ (and provides structure to bread), has been increased in the hybridization process...however, EXTRA gluten is often added to commercial bread products and this is not natural. I think that gluten is the popular scapegoat for the problems and is not the true problem in the majority, but only in cases of celiac disease. I believe something else is in play here. I have a celiac friend who is very active in the celiac support community. She believes the cause of the majority of the wheat related issues is also the spray/dessicating. She has experienced the Mediterranean wheat and has high praise...but they don't dessicate. Also, there is no fiddling with the seed coat thickness, so that will also play a factor. Their flour will be fresh & not irradiated to increase shelf life. Yet another factor. They have not removed, finely ground at high temps, & then "added back" a portion of the whole grains goodness. Another factor. I suspect that they may let their dough sour/ferment as well, but I don't have direct knowledge of this.

What I believe, as she does, causes a lot of the disruptive issues in the case of wheat, is the dessicating spray (this is usually Roundup or glyphosate from another company).

As far as losing weight, if you consider that most baked sweets use wheat, I would say that the larger culprit silently lurking in that part of the gluten controversy is the type & amount of sugar. But that is not all. Irradiation is a factor, starting to lose nutrition immediately upon grinding & becoming empty both from the milling & age of the flour is also a factor. Eat empty foods=gain weight. Empty foods also=digestive issues.

I have found that my greatest times of bloating come from sugar late at night, lentils (beans, split peas, other lentils...they are dessicated) and corn chips. The corn will be GMO, but is not dessicated. I haven't seen that practice here in the feed corn. BUT if I chew the chips very well, I experience no bloating.

As far as corn, except for popcorn, the large majority is GMO. The feed corn (for cows), certainly is. I know a man who ate some directly out of his field and developed holes in his stomach (it healed after care, thankfully). This is a result of GMO. The corn was developed to eat away at the digestive system of the corn borer. He said that he will never feed it to his cows again.

So, my conclusion after uncovering all of this information is that the problem makers are (and in no particular order): dessicating, refinement...destroying & removing nutrition & enzymes (through high heat caused by very high speed milling), not thoroughly chewing food, emptiness of the milled & old flour, sugar, sometimes the GMO (but not always). A body is not designed to digest these foods treated this way and reacts accordingly.

We all know that creating sourdough makes a difference to digestion through bacterial enzymes...but what does that action REALLY do? Does anyone here know?

My advice to anyone about anything they read & hear...Don't just swallow all information, but weigh it carefully and research. Be willing to change if your information is incomplete.

@blevinandwomba, I thought you might be interested in this, but didn't want to disrupt your thread.

Comments

  • Leslie CarlLeslie Carl Posts: 263 ✭✭✭✭

    Words from a sourdough expert explaining the effect that the fermentation process has on the food:

    The longer rising/soaking time necessary to raise sourdough breads allows for the breakdown of the proteins (gluten in wheat) into amino acids, making it easier to digest. This gluten breakdown is why some people who have a gluten sensitivity can tolerate sourdough wheat breads.

    The lactic acid produced during the fermentation process creates a lovely tang in the bread and predigests the grain for you. The acetic acid helps the bread to keep longer by inhibiting the growth of molds.

    Because sourdough breads go through a fermentation process, many of the simple sugars present in the grain are eaten up in the process. This process makes the bread easier on blood sugar levels. The fermentation process also makes the bread higher in nutrients, especially B vitamins.

    Finally, the bacteria present in the sourdough help to activate phytase, an enzyme that breaks down phytic acid, an anti-nutrient found in all grains and seeds. This allows your body to better hold onto minerals, as phytic acid can bind with them and take them out of your body.

    _______________________________________________________

    As I was studying about sourdough, it was also explained that when eating sourdough bread, your body responds to it as if it were a vegetable, not a bread/grain.

  • ines871ines871 zn8APosts: 1,410 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Hi @Laurie re "Eat empty foods=gain weight. Empty foods also=digestive issues.

    As far as corn, except for popcorn, the large majority is GMO. The feed corn (for cows), certainly is. I know a man who ate some directly out of his field and developed holes in his stomach (it healed after care, thankfully). This is a result of GMO. The corn was developed to eat away at the digestive system of the corn borer. He said that he will never feed it to his cows again."

    The vast majority of the global population now suffers from 'leaky gut, & brain'. That was also done intentionally by big pharma, to further increase their profit, & by extension the ama's profits, & that of the insurance companies.

  • blevinandwombablevinandwomba Central PaPosts: 454 ✭✭✭✭

    @Laurie thanks, that was very interesting; learned a few new things. I hear a lot of people confusing GMO's with hybridization. I like the dog breeding comparison; I think that makes things clearer.

  • gennywugennywu Posts: 97 ✭✭✭

    I agree that it is important to do your own research and to think critically about these issues. We can't just hop on one bandwagon and believe everything we hear. However, as someone who is not a scientist, I find it difficult to evaluate two opposite arguments. Often both sides are presented by well-educated people and both arguments sound plausible to me. When in doubt, I always go with the most natural option - the food and environment closest to what we were made to enjoy.

  • ines871ines871 zn8APosts: 1,410 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @gennywu Good for you !

    Bringing this discussion to a Practical/Applicable level, might it be useful to review what a "scientist" is. A scientist is someone making a hypothesis/Belief & testing it, to gain & share understanding & knowledge.

    A scientist can be further defined by:

    • what understanding is sought, for instance the elements in the universe: Geologists, Chemists, etc; or closer to our common interest here: Biologically-active form of each mineral & vitamin needed for health.
    • how you go about this, for instance by use of experimentation, repeated & continuing for life...
    • where a science-finding is applied, for instance in the food industry (Food Scientist) in our self, children, other family members, etc

    However all scientists are united by their relentless curiosity and systematic approach to satisfy it.

    In fact the younger the child, the more pure the research,

    as he or she has not yet become led astray... by adult beliefs, evidently increasingly sick beliefs that have caused the biggest health catastrophe of all time, & getting worse... Proof: More children get cancer than ever before in our history. The incidence of childhood brain cancer & childhood leukemia has increased 33% since 1973 (Ries et al. 1993). Cancer kills more children under the age of 14 than any other disease. - Also huge cancer increases during the past 40 years, which are also shown in lab tests to be prone to tumors from carcinogenic chemicals: are the kidney (up 116%), liver (up 88%), brain (up 74%), and thyroid (up 102%), as well as non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (up 172%) and multiple myelomas (up 183%) (Miller et al. 1993). Farmers, otherwise healthier than the average population, have elevated rates of several types of cancer that are associated with chemical exposure (see farmer reference, Appendix 2).

    Please remember Each of us, every human was born a scientist... it is also good remembering What, How, & Where you do your research remains your choice... Let us continue our research in our gardening experiments. But when growing your own food is temporarily not possible, IF you buy produce, take this with you to the store:


  • gennywugennywu Posts: 97 ✭✭✭

    Well said and thank you for the shopping guide! I like your definition of a scientist - it is exactly what a scientist should do. It is the scientific jargon, I think, that intimidates people like me and keeps us from thinking more deeply about the things we read.

  • ines871ines871 zn8APosts: 1,410 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Never be intimidated by scientific "jargon". - I spent 40 years working in medicine (all specialties but abortion & cancer & hospice). Sure, I could have nearly all members here totally lost with a plan-of-Care, or even just 1 clinical Progress note particularly in any ICU setting; but what would be the point??

    @gennywu -Simply find & discover any of endless millions of Natural substances & processes, & ask continual questions... All moral LIFE-promoting questions & personal research... are worth your whil;, & encouraging, & giving, & sustaining should be enjoyable...

  • jjoceanjjocean Posts: 31 ✭✭✭

    Semantics - I can't help myself. A myth is generally some truth couched in a story. It is not synonymous with false. I agree, without critical thinking we can believe falsehoods. Scientists in many cases (almost all of them eh?) require money to do their research and to keep their position. One of the most important factors in critical thinking is the motivation of someone's research. This goes for both sides of an issue. Sometimes the one stretching the truth may have something to sell. e.g. "There's no hope unless you buy this miracle stuff."

    It is true that we as a people are sicker, fatter, less happy than previous generations. The cause is complicated but I am convinced that eating weed killer and pesticides is not good for us. I'm also convinced there is no magic bullet that makes it ok to eat that stuff.

Sign In or Register to comment.