Why Aren't You Telling Us What Works Over The Long Run

[Wagner83]

I tend to agree with you about the water, but i think there is a lot more then just the mineral issue, i started drinking mostly distilled water couple years ago and very happy i did, although i really enjoy and feel good with the occasional Italian bubbly waters.

And i am glad you are bringing up this water subject, i have felt its has been not given enough attention on the forum and is of upmost importance to our health, everyone is always talking about the food and supplements they take but never about the most important substance we put in our bodies, the water.

I have been finding adding Molecular Hydrogen to my distilled water has been very beneficial.

Molecular Hydrogen Institute

What have you noticed from the added hydrogen? You always come up with new ideas thanks for sharing them.

@Travis it would be interesting to know your thoughts on the topic of inorganic minerals and erect water.

 

[Amazoniac]

I'll throw in here that our emperor mentioned this:

Osteoporosis, harmful calcification, and nerve/muscle malfunctions

"The earliest deposition of crystals on implanted material is calcium carbonate. (J. Vuola, et al, 1996.) In newly formed bone, the phosphate content is low, and increases with maturity. While mature bone has an apatite-like ratio of calcium and phosphate, newly calcified bone is very deficient in phosphate (according to Dallemagne, the initial calcium to phosphorus ratio is 1.29, and it increases to 2.20.) (G. Bourne, 1972; Dallemagne.)

The carbonate content of bone is often ignored, but in newly formed bone, it is probably the pioneer. Normally, "nucleation" of crystals is thought of as a physical event in a supersaturated solution, but the chemical interaction between carbon dioxide and amino groups (amino acids, protein, or ammonia, for example) removes the carbon dioxide from solution, and the carbamino acid formed becomes a bound anion with which calcium can form a salt. With normal physiological buffering, the divalent calcium (Ca2+) should form a link between the monovalent carbamino acid and another anion. Linking with carbonate (CO32-), one valence would be free to continue the salt-chain. This sort of chemistry is compatible with the known conditions of bone formation."​

As far as I know it's a safe supplement, it's just that most people don't need it, there and fore it's associated with negative effects. And minerals in foods have to be digested to become assimilable anyway.

Our Tarot Reader On The Antagonistic Effects Of Magnesium On Calcium

 

[Daniel11]

What have you noticed from the added hydrogen? You always come up with new ideas thanks for sharing them.

@Travis it would be interesting to know your thoughts on the topic of inorganic minerals and erect water.

Hey, thanks for saying i am always coming up with new ideas, i kind of thought i was boring everyone because I'm always posting about photobiomodulation and how beneficial it is to get orange/red light through ones eyes by bringing light photons (620 nm - 670nm wavelengths) through the optic nerve to stimulate hypothalamus, pituitary and cerebral functioning.

I have made enormous improvements in my health with photobiomodulation and nutrition, adding Molecular Hydrogen to my water has been really wonderful and taken my health to a new level, the first thing i experienced was an almost immediate relaxation of my senses and emotions, improved focus and concentration. The next thing i noticed was improved, energy, digestion and bowl functioning.

I really feel orange/red light therapy and drinking molecular hydrogen go very well together.

I mentioned before that i noticed one of the spectral emission lines of hydrogen was 656 nm (visible red light) right in the sweet spot for photobiomodulation, i don't know if there is any correlation to hydrogens beneficial actions but i thought it was very interesting.

“Drinking H2‐water reduced hepatic oxidative stress, and significantly alleviated fatty liver.”

“The mitochondria are a major source of reactive oxygen species during energy production metabolism and H2 directly protects mitochondria that are exposed to reactive oxygen species.”

“Indeed, H2 stimulated energy metabolism as measured by oxygen consumption. The present results suggest the potential benefit of H2 in improving obesity, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome.”

https://aasldpubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/hep.25782

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2011.6

This is the little device i have, good quality works very well.

https://hydrogen4health.com/product/spe-h2-hydrogen-rich-water-bottle/

 

[Richard Jehl]

I tend to agree with you about the water, but i think there is a lot more then just the mineral issue, i started drinking mostly distilled water couple years ago and very happy i did, although i really enjoy and feel good with the occasional Italian bubbly waters.

I also drank distilled water during one year, to help me recover from the calcium poisoning I mentionned earlier, and It helped me a lot. I stopped because of the time necessary to make water, the electrical consumption, and also because I felt the water was missing something and was not energised correctly. Today I use a simple vortexing piece I am satisfied with, in order to vitalize water, and always drink water with total mineralisation < 40 mg/l. I feel osmosis devices are preferable to distillation, but water still needs to be re-vitalized if obtained through osmosis.

And i am glad you are bringing up this water subject, i have felt its has been not given enough attention on the forum and is of upmost importance to our health, everyone is always talking about the food and supplements they take but never about the most important substance we put in our bodies, the water.

You are damned right. Considering the number of molecules in our bodies, we are 99% water. Asking ourselves and deciding what kind of water we want to drink is the very first task we should deal with, and the most important. At cellular level we are made of :
1) water (pure !!!...)
2) ions (sea water-like composition)
3) amino acids
4) lipids
5) nucleotides
6) proteins
7) RNA
8) polysaccharides
9) DNA
10) other...

I have been finding adding Molecular Hydrogen to my distilled water has been very beneficial.

I have been interested in hydrogen supplements too.

"The earliest deposition of crystals on implanted material is calcium carbonate. (J. Vuola, et al, 1996.) In newly formed bone, the phosphate content is low, and increases with maturity. While mature bone has an apatite-like ratio of calcium and phosphate, newly calcified bone is very deficient in phosphate (according to Dallemagne, the initial calcium to phosphorus ratio is 1.29, and it increases to 2.20.) (G. Bourne, 1972; Dallemagne.)
The carbonate content of bone is often ignored, but in newly formed bone, it is probably the pioneer. Normally, "nucleation" of crystals is thought of as a physical event in a supersaturated solution, but the chemical interaction between carbon dioxide and amino groups (amino acids, protein, or ammonia, for example) removes the carbon dioxide from solution, and the carbamino acid formed becomes a bound anion with which calcium can form a salt. With normal physiological buffering, the divalent calcium (Ca2+) should form a link between the monovalent carbamino acid and another anion. Linking with carbonate (CO32-), one valence would be free to continue the salt-chain. This sort of chemistry is compatible with the known conditions of bone formation."

A "newly formed bone" can be seen as an old one aging (transforming). Nothing new forms itself on nothing, but only on preexisting material, which is transformed. The transformation from a colloidal substance to a cristallized one like carbonates and phosphates IS aging, and what here is called "newly formed bone". Both proportions of phosphates and carbonates raise during life, considering a tissue globally (colloidal/non cristallized substance + cristallized substance). Mature = also...more aged ;-)
Aging implicates fundamentally :
1) depletion/loss of water
2) cristallization
3) loss of suppleness (and of the ability to adapt, which requires suppleness)

I really feel orange/red light therapy and drinking molecular hydrogen go very well together.

I suppose those red light therapies you are all talking about, use infrared emission am I right ? In my past experiments I had found infrared to be quite positive and beneficial when applied locally.

 

[Wagner83]

Thanks to all.

 

[Amazoniac]

A "newly formed bone" can be seen as an old one aging (transforming). Nothing new forms itself on nothing, but only on preexisting material, which is transformed. The transformation from a colloidal substance to a cristallized one like carbonates and phosphates IS aging, and what here is called "newly formed bone". Both proportions of phosphates and carbonates raise during life, considering a tissue globally (colloidal/non cristallized substance + cristallized substance). Mature = also...more aged ;-)
Aging implicates fundamentally :
1) depletion/loss of water
2) cristallization
3) loss of suppleness (and of the ability to adapt, which requires suppleness)

The thing is: how could calcium carbonate be detrimental if it predominates during the formation of bone? Especially because the food has to be digested first to make the minerals available.

https://academic.oup.com/jn/article/129/1/9/4723248

"It is obvious that calcium must be ionized and in solution to be absorbed. Even if a calcium salt is precipitated because of alkaline conditions—as prevail in the ileum (Table 1)—some calcium ions are in solution. As these are absorbed, other calcium ions will go into solution, and the total absorbed is a complicated function of local solubility, the rate of tryansepithelial movement (i.e. absorption) and the sojourn time in the particular intestinal segment (Duflos et al. 1995). Moreover, calcium found in vegetables or other nonfluid foods cannot go into solution until at least some part of the vegetable (or food) has been digested. Therefore foods with high fiber content are likely to be poorer sources of calcium than foods that contain less or no fiber but an equivalent amount of calcium (cereals vs. milk, Weaver et al. 1991). These theoretically valid considerations notwithstanding, studies with vegetables grown with labeled calcium have indicated unexpectedly high absorption levels for some, probably because effective digestibility is hard to assess (kale vs. spinach, Heaney and Weaver 1990, Heaney et al. 1988).

In recent years, a number of studies have reported on attempts to improve bioavailability of calcium by the addition of compounds such as citric acid (Lacour et al. 1997), casein phosphopeptides (Hansen et al. 1997), or by the addition of highly soluble salts such as calcium gluconate (Pansu et al. 1993) or calcium gluconate-glycerophosphate (Schanler and Abrams 1995). Other studies have dealt with the question of whether certain diet components, e.g., rice cereal added to infant formula (Lifschitz and Abrams 1998) or increasing dietary fiber in weaning cereals (Davidson et al. 1996), have adversely affected calcium bioavailability and/or absorption. In a review such as this, individual reports cannot be analyzed in detail. Nevertheless it is apparent that when calcium intake is adequate, differences in bioavailability, as from increased solubilization, play no or only a minor role in the amount of calcium that is absorbed or deposited in the skeleton (Deroisy et al. 1997, Tsugawa et al. 1995). When, however, the dietary calcium content is low and in the form of poorly soluble or poorly digestible sources (e.g., spinach, Peterson et al. 1995), the decrease in calcium absorption compared to a source like milk becomes nutritionally significant. The high absorbability of calcium in milk has been related to the presence of lactose (Fournier 1954), phosphopeptides (Mykkänen and Wasserman 1980) and amino acids (Wasserman et al. 1956), the latter perhaps derived from hydrolysis of casein in the intestinal lumen. It is of interest that some milk substitutes, though otherwise nutritionally equivalent (Cioccia et al. 1995) are, compared to milk, a poorer source for calcium and phosphorus (Barrera et al. 1995). On the other hand, milk and dairy products have all the same effective bioavailability (Nickel et al. 1996)."

 

[Travis]

What have you noticed from the added hydrogen? You always come up with new ideas thanks for sharing them.

@Travis it would be interesting to know your thoughts on the topic of inorganic minerals and erect water.

I think inorganic minerals, considering each ion independently, are identical to those complexed with organic acids in food. There are enough short chain dicarboxylic acids in fruit in 'chelate' extra calcium ions, and the lactic acid in kimchi and sauerkraut can do likewise. Adding a buffer to kimchi also increases the amylase activity of Lactobacilli by holding the pH constant, allowing it to degrade starch particles within one day instead of four:

​

[These cassava starch particles would have been a persorption hazard until Lactobacilli plantarum came along. This strain of Lactobacilli is also a γ-aminobutric acid-producing strain, and the second most prevalent strain usually found in kimchi. I had become interested in the starch-degrading properties of Lactobacilli plantarum after finding a cornmeal-containing spice blend that happens to go really well in kimchi.]​

Starch particles change upon heating as they lose water and further crystallize but I would consider simple ions like Ca²⁺ or Na⁺ the same whether heated, not heated, found as inorganic crystals, or found in a plant/fruit (the difference being only the co-complexing moiety—either a dicarboxylic acid in the case of fruit or a phosphate/carbonate/chloride/etc in the case of mineral). I suppose there could be some slight quantum mechanical differences in the valence electrons that change over time, but I don't think there's any theoretical reason to assume that there would be nor evidence for such—but there could be.. . ..somewhere.

 

[Travis]

I'll throw in here that our emperor mentioned this:

And I will throw it back out:

'The earliest deposition of crystals on implanted material is calcium carbonate. (J. Vuola, et al, 1996.) In newly formed bone, the phosphate content is low, and increases with maturity. While mature bone has an apatite-like ratio of calcium and phosphate, newly calcified bone is very deficient in phosphate (according to Dallemagne, the initial calcium to phosphorus ratio is 1.29, and it increases to 2.20.) (G. Bourne, 1972; Dallemagne.)' ―The Emporer​

The first time I had read this it had made no sense to me. After reading it ten more times, it still doesn't make sense to me. Judging by the Dallemagne article, I think he had meant to say this:

'The earliest deposition of crystals on implanted material is calcium carbonate. (J. Vuola, et al, 1996.) In newly formed bone, the phosphate content is low, and increases with maturity. While mature bone has an apatite-like ratio of calcium and phosphate, newly calcified bone is very deficient enriched in phosphate (according to Dallemagne, the initial calcium to phosphorus ratio is 1.29, and it increases to 2.20.) (G. Bourne, 1972; Dallemagne.)' ―The Emporer​

'The chemical study of bone callus, of the embryonic bone and tooth, and of bone periostic origin, reveals that young osseous tissue is far richer in phosphorous as compared with calcium than the adult bone.' ―Marcel Dallemagne​

This is better, and actually now makes sense; but this is still incorrect. The stated 'initial calcium to phosphate ratio [of] 1.29' was never actually assumed by Dallemagne to represent the initial calcium to phosphate ratio in bone. This value—as explained in Dallemagne's second paragraph—corresponds to the claim by Kramer and Shear who'd published this figure, and is a claim Dallemagne actually argues against. Dallemagne personally had measured ratios as low as .35 for newly-formed bone and had mentioned that Roche had observed values even lower. Dallemagne concludes the article with this statement:

'It is but a coincidence that the Ca/P ratio touches the value 1.29 and in no way explains the presence of brushite in bone in course of formation.' ―Dallemagne​

I think he had probably meant to say this:

'The earliest deposition of crystals on implanted material is calcium carbonate. (J. Vuola, et al, 1996.) In newly formed bone, the phosphate content is low, and increases with maturity. While mature bone has an apatite-like ratio of calcium and phosphate, newly calcified bone is very deficient enriched in phosphate (according to Dallemagne, the initial calcium to phosphorus ratio is 1.29 ≤ .35, and it increases to 2.20.) (G. Bourne, 1972; Dallemagne.)' ―Ray Peat, PhD
​

I'm not sure if your emperor has any clothes; perhaps you should start calling him by his first & last name?

[1] Dallemagne, Marcel J. "The theory of primary calcification in bone." Nature (1948)​

 

[danishispsychic]

Sunlight, coffee with sugar and dairy, lemon everything, epsom salt baths, mercola vitamin d spray, serrapeptase enzyme, and....more coffee.

 

[Daniel11]

I think inorganic minerals, considering each ion independently, are identical to those complexed with organic acids in food. There are enough short chain dicarboxylic acids in fruit in 'chelate' extra calcium ions, and the lactic acid in kimchi and sauerkraut can do likewise. Adding a buffer to kimchi also increases the amylase activity of Lactobacilli by holding the pH constant, allowing it to degrade starch particles within one day instead of four:

View attachment 9164 ​

[These cassava starch particles would have been a persorption hazard until Lactobacilli plantarum came along. This strain of Lactobacilli is also a γ-aminobutric acid-producing strain, and the second most prevalent strain usually found in kimchi. I had become interested in the starch-degrading properties of Lactobacilli plantarum after finding a cornmeal-containing spice blend that happens to go really well in kimchi.]​

Starch particles change upon heating as they lose water and further crystallize but I would consider simple ions like Ca²⁺ or Na⁺ the same whether heated, not heated, found as inorganic crystals, or found in a plant/fruit (the difference being only the co-complexing moiety—either a dicarboxylic acid in the case of fruit or a phosphate/carbonate/chloride/etc in the case of mineral). I suppose there could be some slight quantum mechanical differences in the valence electrons that change over time, but I don't think there's any theoretical reason to assume that there would be nor evidence for such—but there could be.. . ..somewhere.

To me much of this points to what is the status of our gut microbiota, I'm interested to hear more your thoughts on using cultured foods like kimchi to improve digestion and microbial diversity, also what buffering agents have you found increases the amylase activity of Lactobacilli in cultured foods?

The one thing that has come of all the current research on the human microbiome is that the lack of gut microbial diversity is the common observation among those with poor health and digestion, i’m guessing the abundance of children born via C-section, chemicals in our public water/food and overuse of antibiotics are all major causes of this lack of microbial diversity for humans in developed countries.

In any of the communities on this planet i have visited where the people have very robust health they all include specific cultured foods in their diet.

 

[Daniel11]

I also drank distilled water during one year, to help me recover from the calcium poisoning I mentionned earlier, and It helped me a lot. I stopped because of the time necessary to make water, the electrical consumption, and also because I felt the water was missing something and was not energised correctly. Today I use a simple vortexing piece I am satisfied with, in order to vitalize water, and always drink water with total mineralisation < 40 mg/l. I feel osmosis devices are preferable to distillation, but water still needs to be re-vitalized if obtained through osmosis.


You are damned right. Considering the number of molecules in our bodies, we are 99% water. Asking ourselves and deciding what kind of water we want to drink is the very first task we should deal with, and the most important. At cellular level we are made of :
1) water (pure !!!...)
2) ions (sea water-like composition)
3) amino acids
4) lipids
5) nucleotides
6) proteins
7) RNA
8) polysaccharides
9) DNA
10) other...


I have been interested in hydrogen supplements too.


A "newly formed bone" can be seen as an old one aging (transforming). Nothing new forms itself on nothing, but only on preexisting material, which is transformed. The transformation from a colloidal substance to a cristallized one like carbonates and phosphates IS aging, and what here is called "newly formed bone". Both proportions of phosphates and carbonates raise during life, considering a tissue globally (colloidal/non cristallized substance + cristallized substance). Mature = also...more aged ;-)
Aging implicates fundamentally :
1) depletion/loss of water
2) cristallization
3) loss of suppleness (and of the ability to adapt, which requires suppleness)


I suppose those red light therapies you are all talking about, use infrared emission am I right ? In my past experiments I had found infrared to be quite positive and beneficial when applied locally.

I think infrared wavelengths can be beneficial for warming the body and increasing metabolism but for photobiomodulation where we are holding a focused LED light on or within a few inches of the skin or especially the eyes because of infrareds affinity for water molecules it could be to over heating to delicate tissue, I'm sure for short term therapy use its fine and in a clinical setting has proven beneficial, but i feel for long term home use the orange/red wavelengths in the 620 nm to 680 nm range is safer and more effective.

Also i have used infrared for different periods of time through the eyes and although it was stimulating i found it made me feel not so inspired emotionally, were the orange and red wavelengths through the eyes have very positive uplifting emotional and physical effects.

Someone just sent me some good info about how beneficial photobiomodulation in the eyes is for age-related macular degeneration (AMD)

 

[Arrade]

I would say Whole Milk and Lifting Weights.
Eating well rounded meals (protein plus carbs and veg)

 

[SOMO]

Hey, thanks for saying i am always coming up with new ideas, i kind of thought i was boring everyone because I'm always posting about photobiomodulation and how beneficial it is to get orange/red light through ones eyes by bringing light photons (620 nm - 670nm wavelengths) through the optic nerve to stimulate hypothalamus, pituitary and cerebral functioning.

I have made enormous improvements in my health with photobiomodulation and nutrition, adding Molecular Hydrogen to my water has been really wonderful and taken my health to a new level, the first thing i experienced was an almost immediate relaxation of my senses and emotions, improved focus and concentration. The next thing i noticed was improved, energy, digestion and bowl functioning.

I really feel orange/red light therapy and drinking molecular hydrogen go very well together.

I mentioned before that i noticed one of the spectral emission lines of hydrogen was 656 nm (visible red light) right in the sweet spot for photobiomodulation, i don't know if there is any correlation to hydrogens beneficial actions but i thought it was very interesting.

@Daniel11

RP says Pituitary is meant to be inactive and works as a backup in case of failure of the human to regulate other glands. The other stuff sounds beneficial though.

Regarding Red Light Therapy (bulb, not laser) for scar improvement, does the standard 620-660nm bulb penetrate deep enough (when applied directly to skin) to resurface a 20+ year old deep scar? And can issues arise from the close contact between red light bulbs and skin (i.e. premature aging or TEWL?)

Sunlight, coffee with sugar and dairy, lemon everything, epsom salt baths, mercola vitamin d spray, serrapeptase enzyme, and....more coffee.

@danishispsychic
I took high doses of Serrapeptase and Nattokinase to get rid of some internal fibrous tissue in my genitals. Didn't do anything unfortunately. What's your experience with serrapeptase?

 

[Richard Jehl]

The thing is: how could calcium carbonate be detrimental if it predominates during the formation of bone? Especially because the food has to be digested first to make the minerals available.

Nutritional Aspects of Calcium Absorption | The Journal of Nutrition | Oxford Academic

"It is obvious that calcium must be ionized and in solution to be absorbed. Even if a calcium salt is precipitated because of alkaline conditions—as prevail in the ileum (Table 1)—some calcium ions are in solution. As these are absorbed, other calcium ions will go into solution, and the total absorbed is a complicated function of local solubility, the rate of tryansepithelial movement (i.e. absorption) and the sojourn time in the particular intestinal segment (Duflos et al. 1995). Moreover, calcium found in vegetables or other nonfluid foods cannot go into solution until at least some part of the vegetable (or food) has been digested. Therefore foods with high fiber content are likely to be poorer sources of calcium than foods that contain less or no fiber but an equivalent amount of calcium (cereals vs. milk, Weaver et al. 1991). These theoretically valid considerations notwithstanding, studies with vegetables grown with labeled calcium have indicated unexpectedly high absorption levels for some, probably because effective digestibility is hard to assess (kale vs. spinach, Heaney and Weaver 1990, Heaney et al. 1988).

In recent years, a number of studies have reported on attempts to improve bioavailability of calcium by the addition of compounds such as citric acid (Lacour et al. 1997), casein phosphopeptides (Hansen et al. 1997), or by the addition of highly soluble salts such as calcium gluconate (Pansu et al. 1993) or calcium gluconate-glycerophosphate (Schanler and Abrams 1995). Other studies have dealt with the question of whether certain diet components, e.g., rice cereal added to infant formula (Lifschitz and Abrams 1998) or increasing dietary fiber in weaning cereals (Davidson et al. 1996), have adversely affected calcium bioavailability and/or absorption. In a review such as this, individual reports cannot be analyzed in detail. Nevertheless it is apparent that when calcium intake is adequate, differences in bioavailability, as from increased solubilization, play no or only a minor role in the amount of calcium that is absorbed or deposited in the skeleton (Deroisy et al. 1997, Tsugawa et al. 1995). When, however, the dietary calcium content is low and in the form of poorly soluble or poorly digestible sources (e.g., spinach, Peterson et al. 1995), the decrease in calcium absorption compared to a source like milk becomes nutritionally significant. The high absorbability of calcium in milk has been related to the presence of lactose (Fournier 1954), phosphopeptides (Mykkänen and Wasserman 1980) and amino acids (Wasserman et al. 1956), the latter perhaps derived from hydrolysis of casein in the intestinal lumen. It is of interest that some milk substitutes, though otherwise nutritionally equivalent (Cioccia et al. 1995) are, compared to milk, a poorer source for calcium and phosphorus (Barrera et al. 1995). On the other hand, milk and dairy products have all the same effective bioavailability (Nickel et al. 1996)."

The link you provided is really interesting and I spent hours reading. It may seem as a lot of studies contradicts my assertions but that is not the case, all depends on what you consider and your point of view. Let me try to explain, and give some links that support my words.

I give at the end of this message a link to a lecture by Dr Tom Levy about calcium which I encourage everyone to look at. Understanding why there is no such thing as calcium deficiency, that we don't need to reach the insane "recommended daily value intake", and that we need above all to ELIMINATE the cristallized calcium we have on our bodies (and that is not easy), is crucial for each health condition.

What I am fundamentally interested in, is the proportion of non-cristallized substance to cristallized substance. For bones as for any other tissue, cristallization increases during lifetime and that IS a component of aging we all have to cope with, it is not possible to stop it, only slow it down and maintaining cristallization at a level life is still enjoyable.

Therefore slowing down aging process, or maintaining it at a low and enjoyable level, make us NOT TO DESIRE cristallization and depots on the bones as well as for any other tissue. All studies make the mistake to consider calcium bone-deposit as desirable while it is NOT, in cristallized form. They don't consider that bone tissue can keep with benefits, its supple colloidal state longer, and that cristallisation/depots IS NOT what is desirable.

Child age faster than adults : the cristallization process is very high for them as the rate of calcium deposition is high. As the studies show, for the adults the cristallisation/depots slows a great deal. This is seen as a bad thing and potential cause of problems while it should be considered A GOOD ONE. If adults continued to have deposition of calcium with a high rate LIFE EXPECTANCY would not be a lot more than 30 or 40 years.

Calcium cristallization starts at the very beginning, during prenatal state, and life is like a game : in a way an embryo has already all the calcium it needs, but it WILL attract more, because of the feeding and contact with external world. Then the game it to loose the colloidal/aqueous substance as little as possible and CRISTALLIZE A THE LOWEST RATE as possible. Cristallization is unavoidable but should be kept MINIMAL. Thats is the life game, considering physical cristallization/aging.

Studies consider cristallization as desirable while it is the keeping of the colloidal (non cristallized state) THAT IS DESIRABLE. There is no need for increasing cristallization, or to have the rate of cristallization of young people back (they age faster). What we should try to keep from our young years, is the high poportion of colloidal substance.

When osteoporosis or similar problems occur, we hear that bones have a density problem and that there is a "lack" of calcium etc. But loss of density and lack of calcium are only relative, and what you say depends on the way you measure/what you consider. Because we are obsessed with caclium and the fear of a deficiency, these problems are not considered the right way. Osteoporosis should be seen globally as regard to calcium as a problem of inharmonious repartition, and not as a lack of cristallization. When you give too much work to a system or someone to be done, some tasks will not be fullfilled correctly. Osteoporosis comes from an EXCESS of calcium (which ended cristallized), and the cristallized parts of the bones are still TOO MUCH cristallized, they lack colloideous substance. Density of these parts are too high and not too low, because it is not the whole bone that should be considered, but the cristallized substance only, which lacks NON CRISTALLIZED aqueous substances to make the global bone more harmonious.

To heal osteoporosis, we should not give calcium at all, because health and curing involves many different substances and nutrients. We should care giving all minerals, vitamins etc.

A lot of studies claim calcium supplement is good against fractures etc. As Dr Levy points out in the lecure, these studies also used vitamin D supplementation, and the beneficial effects came from vitamin D and not calcium because, when calcium alone is used FRACTURES RATES ARE HIGHER. We can also see that when high dose of calcium is used as supplement, health worsen.

Calcium supplementation is one of the worst thing you can add to your diet, and I agree with Dr Levy as it should be considered toxic and absolutely non-desirable. It was not hazardous for me to make my 1) point as : avoid all inorganic/cristallized forms of calcium. For me it is absolutely essential for a healthy way of living to avoid it. We don't lack calcium, wa have far too much of it through our daily food to cope with in reality. My claim is the result of observation and thinking coming from 20 years of experience with patients. A lot of researchers are coming to similar conclusions nowadays, and we know that apoptosis, death comes from calcium and that this death process is similar to cristallization.

We should think in a more global way and also use common sense. Every part of the body is cristallizing. Teeth break or fall because of proportion of cristallized substance increasing, skin creases for the same reason, arteries stiffen and small vessels become completely cristallized and are lost, bone tissue loses its colloidal substance and keeps cristallizing, stomach, glands, eyes, brain cristallize, this cristallization coming mainly from calcium salts (mainly phosphates and carbonates) AND STILL...guess what...we hear we lack calcium !!! And that calcium should be used for bones or whatever. What a mistake and lack of global consideration !

According to my experience and what I see with collegues, bones problems like osteoporosis are not corrected with calcium, they become worse if calcium supplements are given. It is also very important to stop dairy products for people with osteoporosis. More clever would be to say that we lack magesium, rather than calcium. I always had the desired health results using silicium by the way on every difficult bone-related issue. I like to use supplements as little as possible with my patients, but in a few cases I do use some. As far as silicium is concerned, the best results are given with orthosilicic acid (Biosil). But first of all : stopping all dairy (exception may be butter) and avoiding water rich in minerals is essential.

I strongly believe destination of an ion, and its use by the body, is dependent on the molecules it comes from. To me, the body does not use calcium coming from a citrate for example, or from a protein-bind form, the same way it will use calcium coming from an inorganic form like phosphate or carbonate. Ions keep a memory of the different forms they were a part of. But as far as I know we don't have proof of that with studies published, if only in quantic experiments. My claim of calcium coming from dairy products or water not being "used" by the body, would appear incorrect since studies do show that this calcium is well assimilated, and that it "deposits" itself as well as any calcium coming from other sources. But this "depositing" is precisely what we want to avoid. I am convinced that calcium coming from carbonates and phosphates (and rich water) is preferentially used by the body for the cristallization, as it comes from cristallized forms. And thus veggie calcium is preferable.

The calcium which interests me more is the one not correlated with cristallization/"deposit" of calcium. The body uses calcium in other functions than the ones involved in cristallizing. Maybe the fact that calcium in vegetables is generally less "assimilated" compared to diary should be seen as a GOOD THING, because it acts then as a regulatory filter. This filter is missing with diary and with rich waters, and the fact that veggie-source of calcium is preferable, has to do probably with our relation to plant life. We cannot live on a purely mineral nor on a purely animal diet, there would be deficiencies. But it is possible to live on a purely plant diet. Human being has a relation with plants he does not have with minerals or animals.

Calcium excretion in the urine is often considered as problematic as soon as it raises, but we should first consider calcium excretion as crucial, as calcium accumulation (cristallization) is the cause of physical death and plays an essential role in EVERY PATHOLOGY.

In summary : to maintain health we want to keep colloidal substance (non cristallized) proportions as high as possible, and the appearance of cristallized substances (unavoidable) as low as possible, while receiving a correct amount of necessary nutrients via our food.

Very interesting lecture about death, calcium and studies :
Death by Calcium - Proof of the Toxic Effects of Dairy and Calcium Supplements
This lecture shows many studies and the reference number of them. So if you like studies...

Calcium excess gives among many other things insomnia. I found interesting the fact that Ray promotes dairy but admitted to have suffered a great deal from insomnia...Again this remark is not irrespectful to him because as I said I value his opinions a lot and find many of his thoughts very inspiring, while not agreeing on absolutely everything he says or promotes.

And a good summary by Markus Rothkranz :
...

Regards

 

[Amazoniac]

The link you provided is really interesting and I spent hours reading. It may seem as a lot of studies contradicts my assertions but that is not the case, all depends on what you consider and your point of view. Let me try to explain, and give some links that support my words.

I give at the end of this message a link to a lecture by Dr Tom Levy about calcium which I encourage everyone to look at. Understanding why there is no such thing as calcium deficiency, that we don't need to reach the insane "recommended daily value intake", and that we need above all to ELIMINATE the cristallized calcium we have on our bodies (and that is not easy), is crucial for each health condition.

What I am fundamentally interested in, is the proportion of non-cristallized substance to cristallized substance. For bones as for any other tissue, cristallization increases during lifetime and that IS a component of aging we all have to cope with, it is not possible to stop it, only slow it down and maintaining cristallization at a level life is still enjoyable.

Therefore slowing down aging process, or maintaining it at a low and enjoyable level, make us NOT TO DESIRE cristallization and depots on the bones as well as for any other tissue. All studies make the mistake to consider calcium bone-deposit as desirable while it is NOT, in cristallized form. They don't consider that bone tissue can keep with benefits, its supple colloidal state longer, and that cristallisation/depots IS NOT what is desirable.

Child age faster than adults : the cristallization process is very high for them as the rate of calcium deposition is high. As the studies show, for the adults the cristallisation/depots slows a great deal. This is seen as a bad thing and potential cause of problems while it should be considered A GOOD ONE. If adults continued to have deposition of calcium with a high rate LIFE EXPECTANCY would not be a lot more than 30 or 40 years.

Calcium cristallization starts at the very beginning, during prenatal state, and life is like a game : in a way an embryo has already all the calcium it needs, but it WILL attract more, because of the feeding and contact with external world. Then the game it to loose the colloidal/aqueous substance as little as possible and CRISTALLIZE A THE LOWEST RATE as possible. Cristallization is unavoidable but should be kept MINIMAL. Thats is the life game, considering physical cristallization/aging.

Studies consider cristallization as desirable while it is the keeping of the colloidal (non cristallized state) THAT IS DESIRABLE. There is no need for increasing cristallization, or to have the rate of cristallization of young people back (they age faster). What we should try to keep from our young years, is the high poportion of colloidal substance.

When osteoporosis or similar problems occur, we hear that bones have a density problem and that there is a "lack" of calcium etc. But loss of density and lack of calcium are only relative, and what you say depends on the way you measure/what you consider. Because we are obsessed with caclium and the fear of a deficiency, these problems are not considered the right way. Osteoporosis should be seen globally as regard to calcium as a problem of inharmonious repartition, and not as a lack of cristallization. When you give too much work to a system or someone to be done, some tasks will not be fullfilled correctly. Osteoporosis comes from an EXCESS of calcium (which ended cristallized), and the cristallized parts of the bones are still TOO MUCH cristallized, they lack colloideous substance. Density of these parts are too high and not too low, because it is not the whole bone that should be considered, but the cristallized substance only, which lacks NON CRISTALLIZED aqueous substances to make the global bone more harmonious.

To heal osteoporosis, we should not give calcium at all, because health and curing involves many different substances and nutrients. We should care giving all minerals, vitamins etc.

A lot of studies claim calcium supplement is good against fractures etc. As Dr Levy points out in the lecure, these studies also used vitamin D supplementation, and the beneficial effects came from vitamin D and not calcium because, when calcium alone is used FRACTURES RATES ARE HIGHER. We can also see that when high dose of calcium is used as supplement, health worsen.

Calcium supplementation is one of the worst thing you can add to your diet, and I agree with Dr Levy as it should be considered toxic and absolutely non-desirable. It was not hazardous for me to make my 1) point as : avoid all inorganic/cristallized forms of calcium. For me it is absolutely essential for a healthy way of living to avoid it. We don't lack calcium, wa have far too much of it through our daily food to cope with in reality. My claim is the result of observation and thinking coming from 20 years of experience with patients. A lot of researchers are coming to similar conclusions nowadays, and we know that apoptosis, death comes from calcium and that this death process is similar to cristallization.

We should think in a more global way and also use common sense. Every part of the body is cristallizing. Teeth break or fall because of proportion of cristallized substance increasing, skin creases for the same reason, arteries stiffen and small vessels become completely cristallized and are lost, bone tissue loses its colloidal substance and keeps cristallizing, stomach, glands, eyes, brain cristallize, this cristallization coming mainly from calcium salts (mainly phosphates and carbonates) AND STILL...guess what...we hear we lack calcium !!! And that calcium should be used for bones or whatever. What a mistake and lack of global consideration !

According to my experience and what I see with collegues, bones problems like osteoporosis are not corrected with calcium, they become worse if calcium supplements are given. It is also very important to stop dairy products for people with osteoporosis. More clever would be to say that we lack magesium, rather than calcium. I always had the desired health results using silicium by the way on every difficult bone-related issue. I like to use supplements as little as possible with my patients, but in a few cases I do use some. As far as silicium is concerned, the best results are given with orthosilicic acid (Biosil). But first of all : stopping all dairy (exception may be butter) and avoiding water rich in minerals is essential.

I strongly believe destination of an ion, and its use by the body, is dependent on the molecules it comes from. To me, the body does not use calcium coming from a citrate for example, or from a protein-bind form, the same way it will use calcium coming from an inorganic form like phosphate or carbonate. Ions keep a memory of the different forms they were a part of. But as far as I know we don't have proof of that with studies published, if only in quantic experiments. My claim of calcium coming from dairy products or water not being "used" by the body, would appear incorrect since studies do show that this calcium is well assimilated, and that it "deposits" itself as well as any calcium coming from other sources. But this "depositing" is precisely what we want to avoid. I am convinced that calcium coming from carbonates and phosphates (and rich water) is preferentially used by the body for the cristallization, as it comes from cristallized forms. And thus veggie calcium is preferable.

The calcium which interests me more is the one not correlated with cristallization/"deposit" of calcium. The body uses calcium in other functions than the ones involved in cristallizing. Maybe the fact that calcium in vegetables is generally less "assimilated" compared to diary should be seen as a GOOD THING, because it acts then as a regulatory filter. This filter is missing with diary and with rich waters, and the fact that veggie-source of calcium is preferable, has to do probably with our relation to plant life. We cannot live on a purely mineral nor on a purely animal diet, there would be deficiencies. But it is possible to live on a purely plant diet. Human being has a relation with plants he does not have with minerals or animals.

Calcium excretion in the urine is often considered as problematic as soon as it raises, but we should first consider calcium excretion as crucial, as calcium accumulation (cristallization) is the cause of physical death and plays an essential role in EVERY PATHOLOGY.

In summary : to maintain health we want to keep colloidal substance (non cristallized) proportions as high as possible, and the appearance of cristallized substances (unavoidable) as low as possible, while receiving a correct amount of necessary nutrients via our food.

Very interesting lecture about death, calcium and studies :
Death by Calcium - Proof of the Toxic Effects of Dairy and Calcium Supplements
This lecture shows many studies and the reference number of them. So if you like studies...

Calcium excess gives among many other things insomnia. I found interesting the fact that Ray promotes dairy but admitted to have suffered a great deal from insomnia...Again this remark is not irrespectful to him because as I said I value his opinions a lot and find many of his thoughts very inspiring, while not agreeing on absolutely everything he says or promotes.

And a good summary by Markus Rothkranz :
...

Regards

Thank you for taking the time for the redacts all this.

I'm not sure if I'm understanding what you mean by crystallization, but it appears to me that it's about calcification of soft of the tissues, right? Making bones more brittle not only because they're more porous, but because the composition becomes more impure and their collagenous structure has hardened.

I think our guru recommends calcium carbonate for people that are struggling getting enough through diet. I agree that most people don't need more any more, especially from supplements, but that doesn't mean that it isn't safe. There's nothing harmful about it as far as I know.

 

[Richard Jehl]

I'm not sure if I'm understanding what you mean by crystallization, but it appears to me that it's about calcification of soft of the tissues, right? Making bones more brittle not only because they're more porous, but because the composition becomes more impure and their collagenous structure has hardened.

By cristallization I mean stiffening, formation of non-colloidal structure from a previous colloidal state.

Every tissue, no exception, could be seen as soft in its primal, original state. Even bones. Differienciating bones from "soft" tissue is artificial and misguides us.
Look at bones of a foetus or a young child : they are more soft than solid. A child may have only 1/4 of its bone tissue cristallized (hydroxyapatite), the 3/4 remaining being in colloidal/aqueous state (gelatin-like or collagen-like). In older people the proportion is reversed : 3/4 is cristallized. Chemically speaking those crystals are mainly calcium combined with carbonate or phosphate like in hydroxyapatite. There are also salts, sulfates etc, and magnesium salts as well, but BY FAR all cristallizations are mainly due to calcium stiffening products formation.

All this is scientifically known for more than a century, and lead some researchers long ago to say that calcium is responsible for the body death. Nowadays this is making more and more sense as we study the role of calcium in apoptosis and all cellular death occuring in the body. In a way, slowing aging and maintaining a good health state is minimizing cellular deaths or maintaining them in an acceptable and rather low range. That equals minimizing all cristallization processes in the body, including the ones occuring in the bones. A bone loses its strenght and harmony by becoming more generally cristallized, and in parallel its colloidal and non cristallized substance decreases in proportion. That is also true...for every tissue !

There is no need for increasing "calcification"/cristallization in bones. Bone issues should be seen in a different way.

 

[Amazoniac]

By cristallization I mean stiffening, formation of non-colloidal structure from a previous colloidal state.

Every tissue, no exception, could be seen as soft in its primal, original state. Even bones. Differienciating bones from "soft" tissue is artificial and misguides us.
Look at bones of a foetus or a young child : they are more soft than solid. A child may have only 1/4 of its bone tissue cristallized (hydroxyapatite), the 3/4 remaining being in colloidal/aqueous state (gelatin-like or collagen-like). In older people the proportion is reversed : 3/4 is cristallized. Chemically speaking those crystals are mainly calcium combined with carbonate or phosphate like in hydroxyapatite. There are also salts, sulfates etc, and magnesium salts as well, but BY FAR all cristallizations are mainly due to calcium stiffening products formation.

All this is scientifically known for more than a century, and lead some researchers long ago to say that calcium is responsible for the body death. Nowadays this is making more and more sense as we study the role of calcium in apoptosis and all cellular death occuring in the body. In a way, slowing aging and maintaining a good health state is minimizing cellular deaths or maintaining them in an acceptable and rather low range. That equals minimizing all cristallization processes in the body, including the ones occuring in the bones. A bone loses its strenght and harmony by becoming more generally cristallized, and in parallel its colloidal and non cristallized substance decreases in proportion. That is also true...for every tissue !

Having tough properly calcified bones is a desirable thing, which is why it's worrying if babyzords are born with bones that are too soft or are underdeveloping. I can't imagine them opening watermelons with their heads, something that Travisord does regularly without problems.
As our pastor mentioned somewhere, calcium can indeed amplify the damage, but the solution is not to become deficient. The recommendation of calcium carbonate is to supplement to get enough of it, and as long as the rest of the diet is fine and the person is in need, I'm not aware of any problem that it might pose. And the risk of isolated supplementation is similar to various other minerals, it's not because there's something in and herently bad about calcium carbonate.

 

[Daniel11]

@Daniel11

RP says Pituitary is meant to be inactive and works as a backup in case of failure of the human to regulate other glands. The other stuff sounds beneficial though.

Regarding Red Light Therapy (bulb, not laser) for scar improvement, does the standard 620-660nm bulb penetrate deep enough (when applied directly to skin) to resurface a 20+ year old deep scar? And can issues arise from the close contact between red light bulbs and skin (i.e. premature aging or TEWL?)

There is no such thing as an inactive gland, the red light will enhance mitochondrial respiration so normal functioning is improved, what that means will be different for everyone.

When you say standard bulb are you talking about this LED light i have been recommending,

Orange and Red Light Therapy - LGS1

Im not sure how it will help your scar, i have been using the light directly on my skin and with in few inches of my face for over a year and everything is improving, my skin looks good and my face is not puffy anymore and looks more attractive.

 

[Daniel11]

On the topic of molecular hydrogen and the importance of microbial abundance and diversity for human health.

“Microbial molecular hydrogen (H2) cycling is central to metabolic homeostasis and microbial composition in the human gastrointestinal tract.”

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19490976.2016.1182288

“This article reviewed the progress of hydrogen medicine from its initiation toward clinical applications. H2 is easily applicable because it has no adverse effects and great efficacy on nearly all pathogenic states involved in oxidative stress and inflammation. Indeed, the clinical effects of H2 were positive in patients with more than 10 various diseases.”

Molecular hydrogen as a preventive and therapeutic medical gas: initiation, development and potential of hydrogen medicine - ScienceDirect

 

[Travis]

To me much of this points to what is the status of our gut microbiota, I'm interested to hear more your thoughts on using cultured foods like kimchi to improve digestion and microbial diversity, also what buffering agents have you found increases the amylase activity of Lactobacilli in cultured foods?

The one thing that has come of all the current research on the human microbiome is that the lack of gut microbial diversity is the common observation among those with poor health and digestion, i’m guessing the abundance of children born via C-section, chemicals in our public water/food and overuse of antibiotics are all major causes of this lack of microbial diversity for humans in developed countries.

In any of the communities on this planet i have visited where the people have very robust health they all include specific cultured foods in their diet.

Well, the study I had read used a pure culture of Lactobacilli and I have decided modifying the pH of nascent kimchi is not a very good idea. I think you want to lower the pH as quickly as possible so only the Lactobacilli species survive and proliferate—not the alternate forms you don't want. Only later I think it would be safe to add a starch-based kimchi coating and to raise the pH.

If you look into the process, you will see that the cabbage is coated is pureed pear mixed with spices. This adds flavor which sticks to the cabbage, but also glucose & fructose to fuel Lactobacilli growth. Kimchi-making is an interesting process, and something I enjoy doing. Eating plain leaves is okay, but making a salad with a few additions—such as kimchi—is also fun. I since I stopped eating avocados, there are few things left which go well on these ω−6-null salads (others include grated coconut and tomatoes).