Why Is There So Much Soluble Fibre In Human Breast Milk?

[narouz]

It sounds weird too, but...simply having focus on something seems to keep it fresh...back in the day id cook large amounts of food in a pot and once it was done id turn heat off and cover it, one thing I noticed was that...because I would only eat fresh food...nothing that had gotten cold or old

Reminds me a little of traditional Chinese medicine, The Five Elements, the ancient Chinese ideas
about cooking and health.
As I recall from when I looked into those things,
when they cooked something,
they ate it then and not later.
It was an energy thing, in their view.
A vibration thing.
When the food was, as you say "cold or old,"
their word for it was "wrecked."
The energy of the food was wrecked, crashed.

 

[tara]

... one of the things I love about when Ray is talking, he always puts in the words 'useful' energy, because...not having something useful to use your energy towards kinks up even a great diet

Me too.

Possibly there was one inspiring person, like pboy, who lifted mittir's group up, supplied most of the energy, and "made it happen". I've seen it happen, and have walked into similar situations before. It's quite astounding in this day and age when one can walk into such a community. It takes one strong one, and then their energy is contagious and also multiplied by those who actively follow the lead. I believe each of us can be such a leader if we follow some of the guidelines that you just laid down, pboy.

Yes.

 

[EnoreeG]

[

It has been known for a while that catecholamines (adrenaline and noradrenaline for example) have quorum sensing capabilities, but not that long ago they discovered pro-inflammatory cytokines to be involved as well!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24107297

Your ncbi link said: "We propose a novel mechanism by which pathogens use the twitching motility mode of the Tfp machinery for sensing and importing host elicitors, aligning with the inflamed environment and switching to the virulent state."

I don't know if this is quorum sensing. It sounds very familiar, though they say it is novel. There are a lot of ways pathogens have of destroying us. Mimicry, taking over genetic controls, inserting themselves into cells and stealing the energy, etc. They are very tricky once they get inside us. I don't mean in our gut. That is still outside us. All the more reason to keep the gut endothelium intact, well coated with mucus, continually absorbing minerals and other nutrients while repelling toxins and pathogenic onslaughts, and able to do repairs in short order. This is immunity, and this is predominantly the chore the commensals have decided to do for us, all for the price of sufficient food, which is the fermentable fiber we can't digest anyway. We are hardly attacked by pathogens in any way (if we don't have open wounds) compared how we could be under a continual state of attack in the intestines if we didn't have commensal bacterial forces working in our favor.

Relatively speaking, the commensals make life relatively easy for us "hosts". Otherwise, it would be a jungle in there. Just my "easy" point of view again.

 

[narouz]

There are a lot of ways pathogens have of destroying us. Mimicry, taking over genetic controls, inserting themselves into cells and stealing the energy, etc. They are very tricky once they get inside us. I don't mean in our gut. That is still outside us. All the more reason to keep the gut endothelium intact, well coated with mucus, continually absorbing minerals and other nutrients while repelling toxins and pathogenic onslaughts, and able to do repairs in short order. This is immunity, and this is predominantly the chore the commensals have decided to do for us, all for the price of sufficient food, which is the fermentable fiber we can't digest anyway. We are hardly attacked by pathogens in any way (if we don't have open wounds) compared how we could be under a continual state of attack in the intestines if we didn't have commensal bacterial forces working in our favor.

Relatively speaking, the commensals make life relatively easy for us "hosts". Otherwise, it would be a jungle in there. Just my "easy" point of view again.

Are both of these statements true?

Peat believes in keeping the small intestine pretty sterile.
Enoree believes in keeping the small intestine pretty sterile.

 

[EnoreeG]

Dr. Garrett Smith just said this on his FB :
"It is the minerals that ultimately determine the biome you have and/or can sustain:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19187213
"This study shows that the structure of bacterial communities in soil is influenced by the mineral substrates in their microhabitat and that minerals in soil play a greater role in bacterial ecology than simply providing an inert matrix for bacterial growth. This study suggests that mineral heterogeneity in soil contributes to the spatial variation in bacterial communities."
Wondering why probiotics continue to "not work" for you? You likely have a mineral problem. Do you have leaky gut or an "absorption" problem? You have a magnesium problem that is not going to be fixed by shoving more pills down your gullet. Use topical magnesium approaches aggressively instead. And no, magnesium is absolutely NOT the answer to every gut biome problem...but it is the best place to start."

Garrett Smith is on top of things. His citation was all about soil science, but there's no reason to believe the same principle doesn't apply to gut microbes. After all, the same microbes are found in both places. In fact many people take internally, as a probiotic, formulas which were specifically designed as soil innoculants (EM-1 for example). They survive and even flourish on these probiotic snacks.

So as there are minerals in certain meals, and these are not absorbed in the small intestine (Stuart says they don't absorb until in the colon) then they are going to affect the microbiome, it's health, and it's reproduction. It makes sense to me.

Bacteria, as well as higher life forms, need quite a few minerals, fats, and amino-acids in order to build a body. And when they die, they leave those basic building blocks behind, to be consumed by the next generation of microbes. The amino-acids are built from minerals. We could actually think of the dead bodies of some of our microbiome as part of the "humus" or "fertilizer" that must be used by succeeding generations of microbes in order to live. Once microbes are formed, yes, they can eat fiber for their energy. But to originally build each body, they really need the bodies of the previous generation, to get minerals and proteins, because after all, the human host has already absorbed all the sugars, fats and proteins of the meals, way back in the small intestine. So interesting how this work, no? An intricate, but workable design.

 

[EnoreeG]

There are a lot of ways pathogens have of destroying us. Mimicry, taking over genetic controls, inserting themselves into cells and stealing the energy, etc. They are very tricky once they get inside us. I don't mean in our gut. That is still outside us. All the more reason to keep the gut endothelium intact, well coated with mucus, continually absorbing minerals and other nutrients while repelling toxins and pathogenic onslaughts, and able to do repairs in short order. This is immunity, and this is predominantly the chore the commensals have decided to do for us, all for the price of sufficient food, which is the fermentable fiber we can't digest anyway. We are hardly attacked by pathogens in any way (if we don't have open wounds) compared how we could be under a continual state of attack in the intestines if we didn't have commensal bacterial forces working in our favor.

Relatively speaking, the commensals make life relatively easy for us "hosts". Otherwise, it would be a jungle in there. Just my "easy" point of view again.

Are both of these statements true?

Peat believes in keeping the small intestine pretty sterile.
Enoree believes in keeping the small intestine pretty sterile.

"Are both of these statements true?"

They are until you put any single (or multiple) specie of pathogen in charge in your gut. It's so simple to just put almost any species of friendly bacteria in charge though, why take the chance on a pathogen? But people do it every day when they take their doctor's orders and take a broad spectrum antibiotic.

Isn't it interesting that unless someone has submitted a stool sample for assay, they have absolutely no idea what their dominant bacterial species is down there? Absolutely no idea. Let alone that there are probably a good 30-50 genuses, each with several species, of commensal bacteria in the gut, all of which vastly outnumber any pathogen present. People usually cannot even name one of the good guys who inhabit their gut in the billions! Yet most of us readily recognize the names of several pathogens.

If there's anything vague about my answer to this, narouz, I'm guessing it might be because someone hasn't read my other posts here or doesn't get the fact that I totally subscribe to the notion that an ample quantity of one species of bacteria can totally control any other species of bacteria. This is my assumption until someone can show that minimal numbers of a bacteria has any kind of power over a hugely outnumbering other species.

 

[narouz]

"Are both of these statements true?"

They are until you put any single (or multiple) specie of pathogen in charge in your gut. It's so simple to just put almost any species of friendly bacteria in charge though, why take the chance on a pathogen? But people do it every day when they take their doctor's orders and take a broad spectrum antibiotic.

Isn't it interesting that unless someone has submitted a stool sample for assay, they have absolutely no idea what their dominant bacterial species is down there? Absolutely no idea. Let alone that there are probably a good 30-50 genuses, each with several species, of commensal bacteria in the gut, all of which vastly outnumber any pathogen present. People usually cannot even name one of the good guys who inhabit their gut in the billions! Yet most of us readily recognize the names of several pathogens.

If there's anything vague about my answer to this, narouz, I'm guessing it might be because someone hasn't read my other posts here or doesn't get the fact that I totally subscribe to the notion that an ample quantity of one species of bacteria can totally control any other species of bacteria. This is my assumption until someone can show that minimal numbers of a bacteria has any kind of power over a hugely outnumbering other species.

I was just noticing that there may be a confluence here with Peat.
You both believe, generally, in keeping the small intestine fairly sterile.

So we may be talking more about tactical differences.
I am skeptical of Peat's tactics and open to yours.
Well, more than open.
I've been practicing them now for many months.

Well, another way of looking at it is,
you might be said to have a strategic difference with Peat.
You put a lot of energy into positively cultivating helpful intestinal flora,
while Peat puts a lot of energy into whacking down all bacteria.

 

[Such_Saturation]

I was just noticing

 

[narouz]

I was just noticing

I do it every now and then!

 

[Stuart]

When Dr. Peat and others talk of trying to keep the S.I sterile it's important to remember that the normal healthy state of your digestive tract before the colon (where it's ALL bacteria) all the way up to your mouth is home to considerable numbers of bacteria. It would be well nigh impossible to achieve a sterile S.I. even with very strong antibiotics, and certainly isn't even remotely possible with raw grated carrot.
But the most important question is why you would even want to? Bacteria in your mouth, stomach, S.I. (and of course your colon) have a job to do. Leave them alone, or you just make it so much more difficult for your body to work as a cohesive whole.
What you do wan't to ensure, is that the bacteria you have in your digestive tract (upper as well as colon) are the right mix of pathogenic and beneficial. If they're not, your body will reward you with ill health in one form or another.
I think it was either Narouz or Enorgee who commented that it's very difficult to foster the right spectrum of bacteria in your colon if you don''t feed them enough fermentable fiber. I'm not sure wether the bacteria who normally populate the upper digestive tract benefit directly from dietary fermentable fiber in the same way your colon microbiota does. But the maintaining the right colonic bacterial mix in your colon is inextricably linked to maintaining the right mix of species and strains in your upper gut in any case.

Many commenters argue that just because breast milk has so much fermentable fiber in it, it doesn't mean that adults benefit from the same food. Breast milk contains three major ingredients (and a lot of minor ones of course). 'Fat sugar protein and fermentable fiber. I don't think anyone here would suggest that we don't continue to benefit from protein sugar and saturated fat (I think breast milk has small amounts of pufa's too, interestingly - anyone know?) till our dying day. Don't you think it's a little odd to single out the fermentable fiber as something that becomes harmful when we are weaned?

Tara pointed out that some people do benefit from restricting fermentable fiber intake. That's true. But I think that those people are all suffering from some type of gut dysbiosis, and resricting the preferred food of your microbiota may well just cover up the problem. But the gut dysbiosis remains. In fact I think that the clearest indication that you have fixed your gut dysbiosis is by being able to feed your microbiome with their preferred food again. But I'm not for a moment suggesting that resurrecting your microbiome is very (as Amazoniac described it) 'nuanced'. Spending the rest of your life restricting the one food that your gut microbiota thrive on just seems like throwing in the towel.

@pboy
I loved your thoughts about experiences affecting your gut bacteria. Feeling 'sick with worry' is a universal human affliction (my dog can look pretty green about the gills sometimes too). And I think it's a two way street. If your microbiota isn't powering, you'll be more likely to make ill considered descisions. For instance just reacting destructively to some emotional situation . Negativity doesn't just emanate from a dysbiotic gut, but it won't make it any easier to keep your amygdala from jumping in ahead of your forebrain. How many hapless people languish in prisons because gut dysbiosis has helped to precipitate some ill considered act? Prisons are expensive places too. Maybe it would save the government of the day megabucks to just supplement schoolkids lunches with soluble fiber enriched gummies?

 

[Amazoniac]

The great thing about most of pboy's posts is that in a good way he's very intuitive. The only issue with that is that it requires refinement just like an ancient culture's wisdom would. Both of them describe the process without getting technical, and that depends a lot on the person's interpretation. In Eastern medicine they talk a lot about flow, qi, yin-yang, heat-dampness, etc. Those are not clear statements and due to that, many people will only resonate after experiencing something similar. I guess this is why people only acknowledge their value after a long time.

All in all, it surprises me that with many cool things to do in heaven, like hitting on Aphrodite, pboy spends his time on a human forum.

 

[EnoreeG]

All in all, it surprises me that with many cool things to do in heaven, like hitting on Aphrodite, pboy spends his time on a human forum.

Or in a human form. Maybe it's grace. Maybe it's meant to be NOT understood, thus raising our curiosity, then investigation, then awareness. We might expect to learn some, even a lot, from a Master. But should we despair if we don't surpass them, who are also moving forward in wisdom?

 

[EnoreeG]

@EnoreeG

RBTI still allows one to play with wheat and dairy, two categories that turn out to be disaster for many people.

Have you studied RBTI? I have only a superficial idea of it. My understanding was that Reams was not into eating lots of wheat (I think his family of several ate a loaf of bread a week, and he discouraged lots of pasta and cheese), and that a key point of RBTI is that the ideal diet is individual, and that the test analyses could be used to figure out which foods would be more or less supportive. So theoretically, a good RBTI paractitioner may be able to tell on the basis of a sequence of tests if someone would be best to avoid wheat, or milk? In general, I think RBTI tends to encourage regular fruit and vegetable consumption, not a low fibre diet?

So just because I talk here generally of the value of fiber, and Ray talks generally of restricting it, and the conclusion is therefore that I want "more" than Ray does in my diet, shouldn't be construed as my wanting the positive extreme you label "lots of" fiber. I would rather be characterized here as someone who is against people taking Rays ideas about limits, and then OVER applying the limits and trying for NO fiber to get NO microbes.

We still differ, though, because my point is that some people actually do seem to do better when they get as close to zero fibre as they can - the stories are here to read. I don't believe they have zero microbes, though. Unless we starve ourselves, there will be something in there that can eat whatever's going through. I don't think everybody needs to minimise fibre, just some people.

One of the factors we have not discussed on this thread yet, I think, is that accordinging to Peat, it is worth trying to avoid substances that irritate our intestines, and to which they respond with inflamation. He seems to suggest that for some of us (and our sensitivities are not all the same), this means avoiding various fermentable carbs, eg pectin. I think the theory goes that when something irritates the gut, and it gets inflamed, this will result in a constricted lumen, slowed transit, increased absorption of endotoxin.

Many of us alternative-health advocates are always tempted to "overdo" things. We tend to try to eat the foods highest in vitamins, highest in saturated fat, highest in whatever is good, lowest in whatever is bad. That is absolutely overkill and I have to caution myself daily to chill out and just eat variety and in moderation.

I think what is overkill, and what is reasonable effort/restriction etc really varies from person to person to person too. For someone prone to anaphylactic shock, quite a bit of effort to avoid triggering allergens is quite justified; for celiacs strict gluten avoidance is worth it. Many of us are here because we have serious health conditions we are trying to survive, slow down, and recover from. What might be overkill for you who are healthy may be necessary for some of us with debilitating conditions.

From the article you linked to:

The injection of living or killed Gram-negative cells or purified LPS into experimental animals causes a wide spectrum of nonspecific pathophysiological reactions, such as fever, changes in white blood cell counts, disseminated intravascular coagulation, hypotension, shock and death. Injection of fairly small doses of endotoxin results in death in most mammals. The sequence of events follows a regular pattern: (1) latent period; (2) physiological distress (diarrhea, prostration, shock); (3) death. How soon death occurs varies on the dose of the endotoxin, route of administration, and species of animal. Animals vary in their susceptibility to endotoxin.

Far from showing that endotoxin is nothing to worry about, this seems to confirm that it can be a problem when it gets into the system.
As i understand it, our gut is supposed to provide a barrier to the lipopolysaccharides, but when it is weakened, it can let some through. Slow transit can also mean more of the gram-negs die before they get expelled, allowing the endotoxin to accumulate and likely increase the quantity that leaks into the system.
So when all is well, it's a manageable burden - nothing to worry about, but when the system is weakened, it can be a significant burden, worth mitigating by reducing quantity inthe gut.

Peat also talks about the value of carrying away the bile and its associated estrogens and other toxins with fibre (or sometimes activated charcoal).

Thanks, tara for all these thoughts. Lots to look at.

Reams and his RBTI -- My main exposure is via my interest in soil mineralization and enhancement. My main problem with Reams, briefly, is he is out of date now. The tools for measurement were limited in his day. He used what he had, did his own "studies" and came to his own conclusions. You can go explore his realm and the ideas of his current supporters far more efficiently than I can post links and refer to passages.

He was big on "nutrient density" but used the most limited tool we can imagine now days, now that we have actual tissue assays to determine mineral contents of foods. He used a refractometer which was originally used only by vintners to determine sugar content of grapes. His theory was, "the more sugar, the more of other minerals as well". He wasn't looking at phytonutrients or vitamins, only minerals. His theory was flawed in several ways. First, plants at least can have very different mineral / sugar ratios, just within the exact identical plant. So sugar is no indication of nutrient density. If you measure a plant in the middle of the night, you may get a lower reading because most all the sugars developed from photosynthesis have been sent down to the roots. The minerals are mostly still in the plant's leaves though. The leaf at midnight is actually more nutrient dense than at mid-day. But the refractometer will be showing a way lower reading, which he would have taken as lower nutrition. Same goes for dehydration. It affects his readings. The exact same leaf, 3 hours after harvest will show it is more nutrient dense because there is less water. Actually, it has the same, or slightly less nutrients in it than when first picked. These are just simple criticisms of one measurement tool he used to base a lot of work on. But there are lots of other things to say. You must explore this yourself. Seek how he valued proteins and fats. Find why he thought the liver was the most valuable part of us, and compare that with other people's ideas.

On amounts of fiber -- I don't think we can, or need to agree. If you actually think that some people need to minimize fiber (your words, but their concept then of what "minimize" means) I would ask that you use care and suggest they read up on fiber before you make a blanket recommendation (as I mistakenly did in recommending fiber in general, without qualification or quantification). I've learned from you on that. I've learned care in presentation matters a lot, and that one needs to be careful that the audience has duplicated the presenter's ideas also, and not inferred something else.

On irritation, inflammation -- You mentioned that Peat seemed to recommend "avoiding various fermentable carbs, eg pectin." Do you have a reference for this statement, or any other that shows pectin causing irritation/inflammation? All I can find are references that show that pectin reduces inflammation. For instance:

http://www.arborcounty.com/pectin.asp

http://www.cybercolloids.net/inform...les/pectin-basics-nutritional-aspects-pectins

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21554121

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20945935

On overkill -- Perhaps if I gave the example of overkill being someone who heard me speak of the value of fiber and then made dietary changes such that they took in 4-5 times the recommended amount of fiber, "just to be safe", it would better make the point I was aiming for when speaking of many of our tendencies to overkill on a nutrient. That's all I meant. Not something like "Even though drastic circumstances (like stage 4 cancer) call for drastic measures", I, EnoreeG, must still push for "moderation in all things".

I really want the first example, not the second, to be how my statement on overkill is interpreted. I'm so bothered when I hear people continually focusing on blueberries to the exclusion of all other fruits, just because of the antioxidants. I think they've missed the forest focusing on the blueberry bush. The same phenomenon seems to show up though every time a health guru posts an article on any micronutrient. And it also shows up when someone talks of toxins such as phytates -- people try to avoid all phytates from then on, even though the main threat is to certain minerals, and only in the meal in which the phytates are included. People may be violating some of pboy's wonderful principles when they focus too closely on the devil's details and never again stop to smell the roses or eat a few rose hips for fear of the phytates.

On endotoxins, you cited a study where endotoxins were injected, and then talked about the possibility of them being absorbed. You admit that it is when the gut is "weakened" that endotoxins might be admitted to the body. So the issue is still, what causes "weakening"? You speak of "slow transit" time as a critical factor in allowing endotoxins to enter the body. Have you read about what effects transit time? You speak as though you are sure, somehow, that fiber must slow transit time. You might want to research this, or provide a link to a study on it. You might be talking heavily in favor of reasonable quantities of fiber at this point.

 

[Amazoniac]

All in all, it surprises me that with many cool things to do in heaven, like hitting on Aphrodite, pboy spends his time on a human forum.

Or in a human form. Maybe it's grace. Maybe it's meant to be NOT understood, thus raising our curiosity, then investigation, then awareness. We might expect to learn some, even a lot, from a Master. But should we despair if we don't surpass them, who are also moving forward in wisdom?

All I know is that Every little thing that he does is magic.
Sometimes I lay on the ground and serenade to the clouds hoping that he can hear me, singing:
Every breath you take, every move you make..

..and then I realize that Sting sounds like a creep in those songs. Imagine what's like for a girl to hear that!

 

[Jennifer]

All in all, it surprises me that with many cool things to do in heaven, like hitting on Aphrodite, pboy spends his time on a human forum.

Or in a human form. Maybe it's grace. Maybe it's meant to be NOT understood, thus raising our curiosity, then investigation, then awareness. We might expect to learn some, even a lot, from a Master. But should we despair if we don't surpass them, who are also moving forward in wisdom?

All I know is that Every little thing that he does is magic.
Sometimes I lay on the ground and serenade to the clouds hoping that he can hear me, singing:
Every breath you take, every move you make..

..and then I realize that Sting sounds like a creep in those songs. Imagine what's like for a girl to hear that!

Haha! I can see how Every Breath You Take comes off as a creepy stalker song, but what's creepy about this...

Though I've tried before to tell her
Of the feelings I have for her in my heart
Every time that I come near her
I just lose my nerve
As I've done from the start

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

Do I have to tell the story
Of a thousand rainy days since we first met
It's a big enough umbrella
But it's always me that ends up getting wet

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

I resolve to call her up a thousand times a day
And ask her if she'll marry me in some old fashioned way
But my silent fears have gripped me
Long before I reach the phone
Long before my tongue has tripped me
Must I always be alone

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

 

[Amazoniac]

All in all, it surprises me that with many cool things to do in heaven, like hitting on Aphrodite, pboy spends his time on a human forum.

Or in a human form. Maybe it's grace. Maybe it's meant to be NOT understood, thus raising our curiosity, then investigation, then awareness. We might expect to learn some, even a lot, from a Master. But should we despair if we don't surpass them, who are also moving forward in wisdom?

All I know is that Every little thing that he does is magic.
Sometimes I lay on the ground and serenade to the clouds hoping that he can hear me, singing:
Every breath you take, every move you make..

..and then I realize that Sting sounds like a creep in those songs. Imagine what's like for a girl to hear that!

Haha! I can see how Every Breath You Take comes off as a creepy stalker song, but what's creepy about this...

Though I've tried before to tell her
Of the feelings I have for her in my heart
Every time that I come near her
I just lose my nerve
As I've done from the start

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

Do I have to tell the story
Of a thousand rainy days since we first met
It's a big enough umbrella
But it's always me that ends up getting wet

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

I resolve to call her up a thousand times a day
And ask her if she'll marry me in some old fashioned way
But my silent fears have gripped me
Long before I reach the phone
Long before my tongue has tripped me
Must I always be alone

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

A bit needy?

 

[Amazoniac]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnZEge78_78

 

[Jennifer]

All I know is that Every little thing that he does is magic.
Sometimes I lay on the ground and serenade to the clouds hoping that he can hear me, singing:
Every breath you take, every move you make..

..and then I realize that Sting sounds like a creep in those songs. Imagine what's like for a girl to hear that!

Haha! I can see how Every Breath You Take comes off as a creepy stalker song, but what's creepy about this...

Though I've tried before to tell her
Of the feelings I have for her in my heart
Every time that I come near her
I just lose my nerve
As I've done from the start

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

Do I have to tell the story
Of a thousand rainy days since we first met
It's a big enough umbrella
But it's always me that ends up getting wet

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

I resolve to call her up a thousand times a day
And ask her if she'll marry me in some old fashioned way
But my silent fears have gripped me
Long before I reach the phone
Long before my tongue has tripped me
Must I always be alone

Every little thing she does is magic
Everything she does just turns me on
Even though my life before was tragic
Now I know my love for her goes on

A bit needy?

Needy? I see someone who is in love.

 

[narouz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnZEge78_78

That was cool. :)

 

[Stuart]

@Amazoniac
Amazing stuff. One of the things that first alerted me to the beneficial effects of fermentable fiber consumption (except of course if your gut microbiota are dysbiotic) was when I learned that the T regs the video talks about correlate almost directly to the amount of fermentable fiber in the diet.
It was interesting also that the video was sponsored by a big Pharma star, Janssen. I'm sure they'd just love to persuade people they need a pill when you can achieve the same effect with food.
But breathtaking graphics nevertheless.
I'd like to see any studies of the infammatory effect of pectin too. It does seem strange that a ubiquitous component of fruit would be inflammatory.
Pboy is a bit of a muse to you isn't he?