The Travis Corner

[Fractality]

What are your thoughts on kiwis as a whole food source of vitamin c? A kiwi has about the same amount of vitamin c as an orange. Their quality/ripeness is more consistent, and especially when I snag them at (33 cents a kiwi), they seem to be more cost-effective. . I don't consume the skin, am I missing out on anything by doing that? I have settled into eating 2-4 kiwis a day and feel good doing so.

 

[Travis]

Thank you. If one eats it as a staple (2-3kg per day) then wouldn't the copper/zinc and calcium/phosphate ratios be severely off balance with a need for the rest of the diet to make up for it? Potatoes, boiled, cooked without skin, flesh, without salt Nutrition Facts & Calories
The okinawan ate a lot of sweet potatoes and it appears to be much higher in calcium and lower in copper Sweet potato, cooked, boiled, without skin [Sweetpotato] Nutrition Facts & Calories.

I'm not sure they measure the minerals and vitamins content of cooked food, I thought vitamin c and some of the b-vitamins wouldn't make it past extended heat exposure.

I didn't check the ratios personally because nutritiondata.self always tanks my browser, as I always have too many .pdfs open at once with not enough 'physical memory' on my computer. But I still maintain that to hit the RDA for calcium a personally essentially has to choose between eating leaves or eating dairy since little else contains it in sufficient concentrations. A person could make the case the US RDA for calcium is a bit high on account of cultural bias and food politics, but perhaps not; I'd assume that most other primates eat enough leaves and fruit to exceed the RDA despite them not eating cheese, so the current RDA level actually appears naturally achieved among other animals similar in size and shape.

The copper∶zinc ratio is interesting, as this influences serum cholesterol levels. Although I'm fairly certain that cholesterol has very little to do with cardiovascular disease but this is still worth knowing. This is very consistent observation, and you could bet money that zinc would raise cholesterol. This is probably a direct transcription event, as many transcription factors in the cell's nucleus need zinc to function (zinc finger). I'd bet a person could even find-out exactly which one(s) is responsible for doing this, or research into the transcription factors having zinc fingers to see if they are disproportionately involved in steroid metabolism. The Cu²⁺ and Zn²⁺ ions appear to directly compete and displace each other even within the same cell, as the metallothioneins—a thiol metal-binding protein—bind them both.

The potato is usually cooked under the most nondestructive methods possible (high water, low O₂), meaning that more vitamins would be expected to survive unchanged. These cooking techniques also don't lead to resistant starch, which is formed from high heat 'toasting' bread and from steam-rolling oats. This resistant starch is turned into a plus! by the food industry as they throw it into the category of 'soluble fiber,' but I do have my doubts that this is actually beneficial in the long run (although it does of course lower the glycemic index). Experiments indicate that a bit of this enzyme-resistant starch is actually absorbed, where I think it could be a liability as being a hyaluronate and/or chondroitin mimetic in the extracellular space. The word 'amyloid' is actually derived from the latin word for starch—these inclusion bodies were found to stained by Lugol's over a century ago, normally indicating starch—and the misfolded β-amyloid protein that is very often found in dementia is an extracellular glycoprotein having four polysaccharide-binding domains. Is the protein itself misfolded or are the polysaccharides which surround and stabilize it of the wrong shape, length, or type? But there isn't much direct evidence for my suspicion here that resistant starch could contribute to dementia, with support only to be found with effort. But it should be noted that fatty acids aren't particularly associated with dementia (despite being the most-studied association) and nor is protein. The foot category which best predicts dementia is 'carbohydrate,' yet this excludes fruit sugar. What remains then is toasted starch, and diabetics have long been observed to have a higher prevalence of dementia (and toasted starch associated with diabetes II). The potato has the least amount of resistant starch, meaning that it mostly is converted into the safer and more mobile glucose which cannot interfere with the geometry of proteins in the extracellular matrix. There are many genetic diseases (i.e. Hunter's) caused by misshapen extracellular polysaccharides. The intracellular components get the most attention within textbooks, but the space found outside of the cells is also very important.

 

[Travis]

Any comments on the activity of racemic lipoic acid vs R-lipoic acid?

They'd of course chelate identically in vitro, but they could have differences in vivo due to the differential pharmacokinetics consequent of opposite stereochemistry. I do know that only RRR-α-tocopherol is distributed withing the body, with the other seven stereoisomers never reaching most peripheral cells. Apparently, there is a tocopherol-binding protein that only accepts the RRR stereoisomer. But you might think that even if there were no specific 'lipoic acid-binding proteins' to be found in the body the two isomers would nonetheless distribute differently based on stereospecific, nonspecific interactions. I'd tend to lean towards the R-form which is exclusively found in nature, out of safety, as our body has evolved handling this one.

 

[Travis]

@Travis
Any thoughts on phytates?

Phytates will be found in foods that most everyone here avoids anyhow. Things like wheat, oats, and almonds are high in phytates yet there's better reasons to avoid them. The inositol phosphates are effective calcium chelators and even found on our cell membrane, as inositol triphosphate phospholipids. During a prolactin signalling event, the enzyme phospholipase C cleaves IP₃ from the cell membrane leading to in intracellular calcium spike. (This is good for lactating females, but not cool for males. Prolactin receptors are found in the abdominal region and breasts so excess prolactin can contribute to a 'female' body fat pattern.) Inositol hexaphosphate (IP₆) chelates calcium even better than endogenous IP₃ but is essentially harmless, and only detrimental to the extent that it interferes with calcium absorption (and also perhaps by contributing too many phosphates).

 

[Travis]

What are your thoughts on kiwis as a whole food source of vitamin c? A kiwi has about the same amount of vitamin c as an orange. Their quality/ripeness is more consistent, and especially when I snag them at (33 cents a kiwi), they seem to be more cost-effective. . I don't consume the skin, am I missing out on anything by doing that? I have settled into eating 2-4 kiwis a day and feel good doing so.

I think it's good idea. I have eaten them whole, in two bites, and have to admit that the 'fuzz' gets a bit annoying after a while. I can eat about one fuzzy peel per day and then start cutting them in two and using a spoon to scoop-out the interior. I really like kiwis when they are fully ripe (soft with an emerald green interior) and like many other relatively uncommon fruits (i.e. persimmon, rambutan, dragonfruit).

 

[X3CyO]

Phytates will be found in foods that most everyone here avoids anyhow. Things like wheat, oats, and almonds are high in phytates yet there's better reasons to avoid them. The inositol phosphates are effective calcium chelators and even found on our cell membrane, as inositol triphosphate phospholipids. During a prolactin signalling event, the enzyme phospholipase C cleaves IP₃ from the cell membrane leading to in intracellular calcium spike. (This is good for lactating females, but not cool for males. Prolactin receptors are found in the abdominal region and breasts so excess prolactin can contribute to a 'female' body fat pattern.) Inositol hexaphosphate (IP₆) chelates calcium even better than endogenous IP₃ but is essentially harmless, and only detrimental to the extent that it interferes with calcium absorption (and also perhaps by contributing too many phosphates).

Thanks for the reply.
Just an offside comment of interest.
I know malt has pufa in it, but damn have you seen the ratio of fats? Didnt expect so much saturated fat and mufa.

Tastes so good. Wonder if soaking it in papain would be good enough to break down the gluten before creating alcohol or something from it.

 

[Fractality]

I think it's good idea. I have eaten them whole, in two bites, and have to admit that the 'fuzz' gets a bit annoying after a while. I can eat about one fuzzy peel per day and then start cutting them in two and using a spoon to scoop-out the interior. I really like kiwis when they are fully ripe (soft with an emerald green interior) and like many other relatively uncommon fruits (i.e. persimmon, rambutan, dragonfruit).

Cool, do you think there are any advantages to eating the fuzzy peel?

 

[sladerunner69]

I think it's good idea. I have eaten them whole, in two bites, and have to admit that the 'fuzz' gets a bit annoying after a while. I can eat about one fuzzy peel per day and then start cutting them in two and using a spoon to scoop-out the interior. I really like kiwis when they are fully ripe (soft with an emerald green interior) and like many other relatively uncommon fruits (i.e. persimmon, rambutan, dragonfruit).

Are you concerned with the numerous seeds contained within a kiwi? They have a not insignificant amount of PUFA, but I am not sure if they would even be digested or pass through the gut in tact, as nature intends.

 

[Fractality]

Are you concerned with the numerous seeds contained within a kiwi? They have a not insignificant amount of PUFA, but I am not sure if they would even be digested or pass through the gut in tact, as nature intends.

I will ultimately defer to Travis on this but I believe that a little PUFA from whole nutritious foods is acceptable and well, unavoidable. If no other PUFA (especially from refined sources like oils) is consumed, I think getting a gram a day from kiwis is fine.

 

[X3CyO]

Cool, do you think there are any advantages to eating the fuzzy peel?

Even if there are, its not worth it in comparison to more palitable sources like citrus peels; marmalade.

 

[Wagner83]

The seeds pass through in my case.

 

[sladerunner69]

The seeds pass through in my case.

Pics or it didn't happen

 

[Ulysses]

@Travis , I have been persuaded by R.P. and some other researchers that the estrogen content of dairy is too low to pose a threat to my health. Nonetheless, I am considering opting for skim dairy in order to keep my estrogen intake at an absolute minimum.

However, it occurs to me that if estrogen is fat soluble, then the other hormones in milk might be too. If, as Ray says, those other hormones like progesterone are not only balancing the effect of the estrogens, but actually having a net beneficial effect on human health, then perhaps it is better to consume the whole fat dairy in spite of the increased estrogen content.

Here's one study I found on progesterone concentrations in skim vs. whole milk:

Comparison of 2 enzyme immunoassays and a radioimmunoassay for measurement of progesterone concentrations in bovine plasma, skim milk, and whole milk. - PubMed - NCBI

When only the high-P4 samples analyzed by RIA were compared, the mean P4 concentration was higher (P < 0.001) in whole milk than in skim milk, at 9.8 (1.0) and 4.1 (0.7) ng/mL, respectively​

So, for commercial milk, this means that one can expect a substantial difference in progesterone concentration, because, as I understand it, virtually all working dairy cows are kept in a state of perpetual pregnancy or pre-pregnancy, to maximize production. Thus, nearly all of them would fall into the "[expected] high-P4" group.

The decrease in progesterone tracks the decrease in 17β-Estradiol that I've seen recorded by other studies: both of these are fat-soluble hormones, and they both decline by about 60% when whole milk is converted to skim.

What about other hormones, or fat-soluble vitamins like D and A? For example, I'm having a difficult time finding studies on thyroid hormone concentrations in skim vs. whole milk, but thyroid is one of the reasons R.P. recommends drinking milk. I'm sure there are other health-beneficial fat-soluble substances in milk other than the four I can name off the top of my head. Have you looked at any research on this?

The other thing is, you have persuaded me that goat dairy is better, but there's no convenient source of skim goat dairy near my apartment, so in practice the question becomes: if skim dairy is generally better, but goat is also better than cow, is it better from the estrogen intake perspective to drink skim cow milk, or whole goat milk?

The reason I'm being A.R. about this is, I recently got some blood work showing high estradiol (the number was 70, upper end of the reference range was 30; can't remember the units of measurement and unfortunately, don't have a copy of the bloodwork with me ATM). So, I'm trying to keep my dietary intake to an absolute minimum, but don't want to quit dairy because otherwise I'll have a really hard time getting adequate calcium.

Also - I'm wondering which databases you hit first when you're interested in researching a specific topic. Pubmed?

 

[Travis]

Thanks for the reply.
Just an offside comment of interest.
I know malt has pufa in it, but damn have you seen the ratio of fats? Didnt expect so much saturated fat and mufa.

Tastes so good. Wonder if soaking it in papain would be good enough to break down the gluten before creating alcohol or something from it.

There's actually been a study on bromelain showing it can hydrolyze gluten to the point of it being completely nonimmunogenic. Papain has actually been more thoroughly studied, as it seemed to have been more of a standard 'research chemical' a few decades ago, but with conflicting results. Initial reports showed that it completely hydrolyzed gluten, but a later investigator had showed that it didn't do anything besides an insignificant deamination of glutamine to glutamate. Later articles had proposed the explanation that only 'crude papain,' as was used initially, was able to do this and purified papain is largely inactive. Crude papain contains many other enzymes than simply papain, yet is still called 'papain,' and is a material which represents the unresolved dried latex exudate from scored green papayas. The papain for sale in grocery store is likely purified and crystallized papain, and I wouldn't expect it to work based on the studies I had read. However, I would expect bromelain to work. I still have about 12 pineapples right now and may start experimenting with the stem bromelain, perhaps add it to the blended kale juice to see if I can't get the pulp to break-down. I am starting to wonder where the extra sugar—apparent extra sugar—comes from as the pineapple ripens? I was imagining that the stem bromelain diffuses-out and hydrolyzes a polysaccharide of the pineapple matrix, both softening it an increasing it's sugar content.

But bromelain is cheap, as it's made from the would-be discarded pineapple stems that would otherwise represent a useless byproduct. We've all had that juice in a can on piña colada night, but little did we consider that someone had likely paid money for the stem bromelain fraction of the very same fruit—to be used in some capacity or another (i.e. wound debridement, digestive aid, brewing, sink unclogging, laundry spot treatment). I'm fairly certain that they're almost giving it away at this point, and perhaps we should all buy some. It's so safe that it's LD₅₀ is so high that it hasn't been determined, despite the fact that much of it escapes digestion and is actually absorbed into the bloodstream; here, it acts as a fibrinolytic agent which keeps platelets from sticking together. And because it's been proven to do that, a person might also expect that it could increase oxygen delivery capacity, slightly, both by freeing platelets and clearing capillaries of excessive proteins.

 

[Obi-wan]

Is Supplemental Bromelain ok?

 

[Travis]

@Travis , I have been persuaded by R.P. and some other researchers that the estrogen content of dairy is too low to pose a threat to my health. Nonetheless, I am considering opting for skim dairy in order to keep my estrogen intake at an absolute minimum.

However, it occurs to me that if estrogen is fat soluble, then the other hormones in milk might be too. If, as Ray says, those other hormones like progesterone are not only balancing the effect of the estrogens, but actually having a net beneficial effect on human health, then perhaps it is better to consume the whole fat dairy in spite of the increased estrogen content.

Here's one study I found on progesterone concentrations in skim vs. whole milk:

Comparison of 2 enzyme immunoassays and a radioimmunoassay for measurement of progesterone concentrations in bovine plasma, skim milk, and whole milk. - PubMed - NCBI

When only the high-P4 samples analyzed by RIA were compared, the mean P4 concentration was higher (P < 0.001) in whole milk than in skim milk, at 9.8 (1.0) and 4.1 (0.7) ng/mL, respectively​

So, for commercial milk, this means that one can expect a substantial difference in progesterone concentration, because, as I understand it, virtually all working dairy cows are kept in a state of perpetual pregnancy or pre-pregnancy, to maximize production. Thus, nearly all of them would fall into the "[expected] high-P4" group.

The decrease in progesterone tracks the decrease in 17β-Estradiol that I've seen recorded by other studies: both of these are fat-soluble hormones, and they both decline by about 60% when whole milk is converted to skim.

What about other hormones, or fat-soluble vitamins like D and A? For example, I'm having a difficult time finding studies on thyroid hormone concentrations in skim vs. whole milk, but thyroid is one of the reasons R.P. recommends drinking milk. I'm sure there are other health-beneficial fat-soluble substances in milk other than the four I can name off the top of my head. Have you looked at any research on this?

The other thing is, you have persuaded me that goat dairy is better, but there's no convenient source of skim goat dairy near my apartment, so in practice the question becomes: if skim dairy is generally better, but goat is also better than cow, is it better from the estrogen intake perspective to drink skim cow milk, or whole goat milk?

The reason I'm being A.R. about this is, I recently got some blood work showing high estradiol (the number was 70, upper end of the reference range was 30; can't remember the units of measurement and unfortunately, don't have a copy of the bloodwork with me ATM). So, I'm trying to keep my dietary intake to an absolute minimum, but don't want to quit dairy because otherwise I'll have a really hard time getting adequate calcium.

Also - I'm wondering which databases you hit first when you're interested in researching a specific topic. Pubmed?

I wouldn't be so sure about skim milk being lower in estrogen. Of course this is everyone's first impression as estradiol itself is lipid-soluble, but it does actually bind significantly to the protein fraction (albumin I think). Let me see what I can find (using sci-hub.tw and GoogleScholar):

Farlow, D. "Quantitative measurement of endogenous estrogen metabolites, risk-factors for development of breast cancer, in commercial milk products by LC–MS/MS." Journal of Chromatography B (2009)​

Chromatography is going to be accurate; check-out their admirable calibration curves:

They had bought milk from a grocery store in Maryland, had extracted the steroids using methanol, had analyzed that, and then had hydrolyzed the sulfated and glucoronidated metabolites and had then measured those. Below is a graph showing both free and conjugated metabolites of estrogens:

The skim actually milk has more total estrogens as expressed per unit volume. Although the fatty fraction could have more than its fair share, it is less dense than the protein and water fractions. Moreover, the fatty fraction likely has more lipid-soluble steroids crowding-out the space available for estrogens: cholesterol, pregnenolone, progesterone, and the androgens are all slightly more lipid-soluble than estradiol because they have less polar groups. The estrogens are also quite unique chemically in that they have a planar ring which would be expected to give them extra protein affinity due to hypothetical π–π stacking with the aromatic amino acids phenylalanine, tyrosine, tryptophan, and histidine. And of course, the sulfate group makes a steroid much more water-soluble and is likely the very reason why mammalian enzymes use them for this purpose; the sulfate groups ostensibly prime the steroids for excretion in the urine. Some of these estradiols were also glucuronidated although they hadn't discriminated between the two conjugated species in the above study. I'd think the glucoronic acid conjugates would likely be even more water-soluble than the sulfates on account of their −1 formal charge on the carboxyl group in addition to the three partial charges contributed by their hydroxyl groups—and the two by their ether groups.

So I would vote going full-fat. If I were to buy cheese right now, I'd go full-fat (although Emmentaler is a good cheese made exclusively from part-skim, and a legal requirement to labeled as such). This would both raise the calories ingested by the fuel-efficient as sometimes beneficial (i.e. stearic aid) saturated fatty acids and lower the total amount protein ingested—which could be seen as a plus to body builders but protein is harder to metabolize for energy than are saturated fatty acids. Skim milk would also have more casein both per calorie and per unit volume, meaning that it would also have more β-casomorphin per calorie or lilter.

There's also the possibility that skim milk could have either an enriched estrogen∶androgen ratio and/'or and increased estrogen∶progesterone ratio—or both—than full-fat milk should the milkfat happen to have more than its fair share of those (you might expect this based on solubility, and also because progesterone is not conjugated as frequently). Perhaps it would be helpful to see the comparative fractionation of all steroids to get a better idea?

Courant, Frédérique. "Determination of naturally occurring oestrogens and androgens in retail samples of milk and eggs." Food additives and contaminants (2007)​

As a side-note, there is great variability of egg steroid content from one hen to another.

'Purified Helix pomatia preparation was used for steroid deconjugation (Sigma, St Louis, MO, USA).' ―Courant​

Suspicion confirmed: It looks as if the process of skimming not only increases the total estrogen concentration but also decreases the total androgen concentration:

Adding the total androgens together—(34 +32 +296)—yields a value of 362 nanograms per liter in the skimmed milk and also—(65 +78 +934)—a value of 1077·ng/L for the whole milk. Referencing Figure 4 above (the estrogen determination) yields value of 458 and 323·pg/mL, in skimmed and whole milk respectively. Although the authors had used different units, it's easy to show that they are equivalent (multiplying by 10³/10³ is the same as multiplying by one):

pg/mL × (10³/10³) = ng/L​

So the process of skimming would obviously lead to a gross inflation of the estrogen∶androgen ratio—now in numbers:

Whole: 323/1077 = .300
Skim: 458/362 = 1.27​

A quadrupling of the estrogen∶androgen ratio is observed upon skimming. And conversely, the cream would be expected to get the reciprocal—or a fourfold higher androgen ratio.

 

[Travis]

Is Supplemental Bromelain ok?

Oh yeah. You can take grams of the stuff with no issue. I think I ingest high milligram amounts everytime I eat a pineapple.

 

[raypeatclips]

I wouldn't be so sure about skim milk being lower in estrogen. Of course this is everyone's first impression as estradiol itself is lipid-soluble, but it does actually bind significantly to the protein fraction (albumin I think). Let me see what I can find (using sci-hub.tw and GoogleScholar):

Farlow, D. "Quantitative measurement of endogenous estrogen metabolites, risk-factors for development of breast cancer, in commercial milk products by LC–MS/MS." Journal of Chromatography B (2009)​

Chromatography is going to be accurate; check-out their admirable calibration curves:

View attachment 8633

They had bought milk from a grocery store in Maryland, had extracted the steroids using methanol, had analyzed that, and then had hydrolyzed the sulfated and glucoronidated metabolites and had then measured those. Below is a graph showing both free and conjugated metabolites of estrogens:

View attachment 8634

The skim actually milk has more total estrogens as expressed per unit volume. Although the fatty fraction could have more than its fair share, it is less dense than the protein and water fractions. Moreover, the fatty fraction likely has more lipid-soluble steroids crowding-out the space available for estrogens: cholesterol, pregnenolone, progesterone, and the androgens are all slightly more lipid-soluble than estradiol because they have less polar groups. The estrogens are also quite unique chemically in that they have a planar ring which would be expected to give them extra protein affinity due to hypothetical π–π stacking with the aromatic amino acids phenylalanine, tyrosine, tryptophan, and histidine. And of course, the sulfate group makes a steroid much more water-soluble and is likely the very reason why mammalian enzymes use them for this purpose; the sulfate groups ostensibly prime the steroids for excretion in the urine. Some of these estradiols were also glucuronidated although they hadn't discriminated between the two conjugated species in the above study. I'd think the glucoronic acid conjugates would likely be even more water-soluble than the sulfates on account of their −1 formal charge on the carboxyl group in addition to the three partial charges contributed by their hydroxyl groups—and the two by their ether groups.

So I would vote going full-fat. If I were to buy cheese right now, I'd go full-fat (although Emmentaler is a good cheese made exclusively from part-skim, and a legal requirement to labeled as such). This would both raise the calories ingested by the fuel-efficient as sometimes beneficial (i.e. stearic aid) saturated fatty acids and lower the total amount protein ingested—which could be seen as a plus to body builders but protein is harder to metabolize for energy than are saturated fatty acids. Skim milk would also have more casein both per calorie and per unit volume, meaning that it would also have more β-casomorphin per calorie or lilter.

There's also the possibility that skim milk could have either an enriched estrogen∶androgen ratio and/'or and increased estrogen∶progesterone ratio—or both—than full-fat milk should the milkfat happen to have more than its fair share of those (you might expect this based on solubility, and also because progesterone is not conjugated as frequently). Perhaps it would be helpful to see the comparative fractionation of all steroids to get a better idea?

Courant, Frédérique. "Determination of naturally occurring oestrogens and androgens in retail samples of milk and eggs." Food additives and contaminants (2007)​

As a side-note, there is great variability of egg steroid content from one hen to another.

'Purified Helix pomatia preparation was used for steroid deconjugation (Sigma, St Louis, MO, USA).' ―Courant​

Suspicion confirmed: It looks as if the process of skimming not only increases the total estrogen concentration but also decreases the total androgen concentration:

View attachment 8636

Adding the total androgens together—(34 +32 +296)—yields a value of 362 nanograms per liter in the skimmed milk and also—(65 +78 +934)—a value of 1077·ng/L for the whole milk. Referencing Figure 4 above (the estrogen determination) yields value of 458 and 323·pg/mL, in skimmed and whole milk respectively. Although the authors had used different units, it's easy to show that they are equivalent (multiplying by 10³/10³ is the same as multiplying by one):

pg/mL × (10³/10³) = ng/L​

So the process of skimming would obviously lead to a gross inflation of the estrogen∶androgen ratio—now in numbers:

Whole: 323/1077 = .300
Skim: 458/362 = 1.27​

A quadrupling of the estrogen∶androgen ratio is observed upon skimming. And conversely, the cream would be expected to get the reciprocal—or a fourfold higher androgen ratio.

So whole goat milk would be your "milk of choice"? Would the androgens vary much between cow/goat milk do you know?

 

[Wagner83]

I didn't check the ratios personally because nutritiondata.self always tanks my browser, as I always have too many .pdfs open at once with not enough 'physical memory' on my computer. But I still maintain that to hit the RDA for calcium a personally essentially has to choose between eating leaves or eating dairy since little else contains it in sufficient concentrations. A person could make the case the US RDA for calcium is a bit high on account of cultural bias and food politics, but perhaps not; I'd assume that most other primates eat enough leaves and fruit to exceed the RDA despite them not eating cheese, so the current RDA level actually appears naturally achieved among other animals similar in size and shape.

The copper∶zinc ratio is interesting, as this influences serum cholesterol levels. Although I'm fairly certain that cholesterol has very little to do with cardiovascular disease but this is still worth knowing. This is very consistent observation, and you could bet money that zinc would raise cholesterol. This is probably a direct transcription event, as many transcription factors in the cell's nucleus need zinc to function (zinc finger). I'd bet a person could even find-out exactly which one(s) is responsible for doing this, or research into the transcription factors having zinc fingers to see if they are disproportionately involved in steroid metabolism. The Cu²⁺ and Zn²⁺ ions appear to directly compete and displace each other even within the same cell, as the metallothioneins—a thiol metal-binding protein—bind them both.24
The potato is usually cooked under the most nondestructive methods possible (high water, low O₂), meaning that more vitamins would be expected to survive unchanged. These cooking techniques also don't lead to resistant starch, which is formed from high heat 'toasting' bread and from steam-rolling oats. This resistant starch is turned into a plus! by the food industry as they throw it into the category of 'soluble fiber,' but I do have my doubts that this is actually beneficial in the long run (although it does of course lower the glycemic index). Experiments indicate that a bit of this enzyme-resistant starch is actually absorbed, where I think it could be a liability as being a hyaluronate and/or chondroitin mimetic in the extracellular space. The word 'amyloid' is actually derived from the latin word for starch—these inclusion bodies were found to stained by Lugol's over a century ago, normally indicating starch—and the misfolded β-amyloid protein that is very often found in dementia is an extracellular glycoprotein having four polysaccharide-binding domains. Is the protein itself misfolded or are the polysaccharides which surround and stabilize it of the wrong shape, length, or type? But there isn't much direct evidence for my suspicion here that resistant starch could contribute to dementia, with support only to be found with effort. But it should be noted that fatty acids aren't particularly associated with dementia (despite being the most-studied association) and nor is protein. The foot category which best predicts dementia is 'carbohydrate,' yet this excludes fruit sugar. What remains then is toasted starch, and diabetics have long been observed to have a higher prevalence of dementia (and toasted starch associated with diabetes II). The potato has the least amount of resistant starch, meaning that it mostly is converted into the safer and more mobile glucose which cannot interfere with the geometry of proteins in the extracellular matrix. There are many genetic diseases (i.e. Hunter's) caused by misshapen extracellular polysaccharides. The intracellular components get the most attention within textbooks, but the space found outside of the cells is also very important.

Thanks for the thorough answer.

The amount of calcium in sweet potatoes is 9% of the RDA per 330 gr, or 88.6mg. So eating 2kg of them would yield no less than 60% of the RDA in calcium, the phosphate is very close, at 10% of the RDA per 330gr. Interestingly methionine, tryptophan and cystine are the lowest of all amino acids. The copper is at 15% of the RDA or 0.3mg.
As for potatoes the amount of calcium per 300 gr is just 2%, or 24mg, while the phosphate is higher than sweet potatoes at 12% (120mg). The copper is higher as well, 25% or 0.5mg (so it should be easy to hit above the RDA for copper).

My personal experience with resistant starch is very negative, I feel like crap and digestion is impaired. I noticed this after suffering from cooked, cooled and recooked potatoes and white rice (I understood the issue only later on). I wonder if it isn't digested quick enough (fat, fibers tc..) if potatoes can turn into resistant starch inside the digestive tract.

Regarding the post on milk, I have noticed clear androgenic effects from goat milk (2.5%) and even some cow milk (also higher in fat), however dairy and milk in particular are quite mucogenic in my case. Do you have any idea why and how to counter this? Perhaps bromelain could help with that?

 

[YourUniverse]

however dairy and milk in particular are quite mucogenic in my case

My case as well, would love to know whats behind it