Do you believe crohn's is purely genetic?

Gianni · Oct 12, 2012

Do you think Crohn's is only caused because of genetics?

Do you think if you carried the gene you could have done anything to avoid manifesting the disease? Or do you think it is left up to chance?

Gianni

partyboy690 · Oct 12, 2012

I think a lot of people carry the gene but don't smoke and don't do a lot of things I think that would trigger it. Obviously my dad carries the gene because he passed it onto me but my uncle got the disease and not my dad so I don't think its purely genetic.

Wooddy · Oct 12, 2012

The genetic component of inflammatory bowel disease is more complicated than just having one gene for Crohns, I would argue that it is a combination of genetic factors that predispose someone to have IBD.

There is definitely a genetic link, even if it seems like a relatively weak one. This suggests that there is not single cause or single gene responsible. Which makes sense because the simple fact that some people respond better to certain therapies than others, suggests that IBD is a common symptom that we all share resulting from various pathologies. In other words, Crohn's, UC and other linked inflammatory diseases are probably the result of epistatic reactions between tightly linked genes.

acheallova · Oct 12, 2012

There is a theory that crohns is infectious; as well as, geneticaly linked. But, what isn't? We all carry cancer genes called oncogenes, its just a matter of environmental factors and immune modulators that allow us to " turn them on" , progressing to full blown cancer. Thus, i believe that this lovely C disease acts somewhat the same way. We all carry the gene, it's just a matter o whether or not our bodies can combat it and keep it supressed completely or if a trauma happens and that gene is allowed to break free.Just a theory

.

superhotfemale · Oct 15, 2012

Personally, I am hoping it was a game of chance with my genetic lottery

For my story - my mother thinks she was diagnosed with mild Colitis when she was 21 (she has nothing to back this up and there is no other family history of IBD) she then had four kids - three girls and one boy. One of my sisters is only 22 months older than me and we were brought up exactly the same until I turned 18. That meant: we shared a bedroom, went to the same schools, wore the same clothes (hated that one as I got her hand me downs) and we ate the same food.

I was diagnosed with Crohn’s Disease six years ago and as I say I hope it was just because of genetic lottery, I would really hate to have to kick my own butt

if the choice’s I made after I turned 18 gave me Crohn’s now!

Kev · Oct 16, 2012

I read an article that 'reported' that people with a genetic link... family history.. have a 10 times risk of developing it than those who don't. I e-mailed the author of the article to try to find out where she got those figures, but she never responded, and there weren't any footnotes, credits, sources, etc., attached to the article. I can't at this stage remember what periodical it was from... (this was several years back... someone posted a link to the article.. I believe it was a West Coast US periodical/magazine.) Anyway, so please take that number with a grain of salt. I've heard 1st hand from many doctors that there is a genetic risk factor; but never an exact number or percentage. Having said all that, it appears that genetics plays a part, but isn't the sole factor. If it was all genetics, only people with a family history of the disease would get the disease; and obviously, that isn't so. I don't know (my memory sucks.. I blame it on Crohns, not my age) if anyone has ever conducted a poll on here about family history/no history of Crohns, but if not, it might be interesting to see the results. I'm betting there would be plenty of members here who never heard of Crohns disease until they were hit with it.

EthanPSU · Oct 16, 2012

I am the only person in my whole family that has it. No sisters, brothers, cousins, moms, dads, aunts, uncles, noone but me has it in our family.

Wooddy · Oct 16, 2012

The genetic link for Crohn's disease is weak but it exists. The interesting thing about the genetic connection is that it's not only connected with other cases of Crohn's or inflammatory bowel disease in families but is genetically linked on a more rudimentary level to other autoimmune disorders in general. This is the reason the genetic connection is so weak. Your may have inherited some predisposing genes for an autoimmune disorder from one parent that wouldnt show up unless pleiotropic and/or epistasic interactions with other genes inherited from the other parent resulted in expression of the Crohn's. Sometimes it takes a number of genes from both parents for this to happen. Sometimes, all it takes is the right gene from one parent that gets passed down for generations and when it happens to meet the pair up with the right combination of genes the chain reaction of genomic interactions commence and the resulting disorder whether it's Crohns, Lupus or [insert autoimmune disorder here of choice here] shows up.

I just had my hand operated on, and it's killing me, so I have to stop. This explanation is by no means complete but generally what I wanted to say. Feel free to chime in and correct any discrepancy.

Here are links that reference not only the genomic connections but environmental factors.

http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1002254

http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1002254

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2807%2960750-8/fulltext

Beach bum · Oct 16, 2012

My Aunty on my Dad's side has server Crohn's and my Grandmother ( her mother) has always had stomach issues , although I have never been given a clear answer as to what is up with her.
Meanwhile my Mum has also had IBS type symptoms for years too.
So I don't think I had much chance of dodging the bullet.

My brother says he doesn't have trouble , although I notice he takes quite a while in the loo (takes a paper with him).

My two sisters have a different Dad from me and they seem ok.

Guest9283 · Oct 16, 2012

Gianni said:
Do you think Crohn's is only caused because of genetics?

Do you think if you carried the gene you could have done anything to avoid manifesting the disease? Or do you think it is left up to chance?

Gianni

Lol, I know what you are trying to get at. Being vegan and juicing right? However I have a question for you. How so then can my friends family have 2 people diagnosed with crohns when it's a strictly vegan family and has been so for some generations (he is Indian)? He was diagnosed while being vegan, growing up on home made meals...

Although likelihood he did have a genetic predisposition since his grandfather had it. They do say it tends to skip a generation each(most) time.

Personally, I think there might be more than one condition or let's say strain of crohns, labeled under "crohns". That's why some react well and some dont to certain foods/drugs/juicing/EN/LDN ect. I definitely think it has a genetic and autoimmune component in each case. There probably is more factors than just those two we just don't know of yet

Gianni · Oct 16, 2012

Lol

K

I know what you are trying to get at. Being vegan and juicing right?

I don't believe I mentioned that. This is simply a thread to see how others view the disease. Many of us believe it has to do with genetics but not many people are very specific on what exactly that means.

How so then can my friends family have 2 people diagnosed with crohns when it's a strictly vegan family and has been so for some generations (he is Indian)? He was diagnosed while being vegan, growing up on home made meals...

I don't like to play the he said she said game. Just because someone is vegan it doesn't mean they automatically are healthy. I could eat nothing but potato chips, french fries, and soda and call myself a vegan. I also was brought up on home cooked meals, that holds no weight in the discussion as i cannot analyze exactly what was eaten, home cooked meals isn't a food.

You claim that his family was vegan for previous generations. The system of agriculture with GMO's, pesticides, and deficient plants has completely changed the health and DNA structure of the plants that your friend's previous ancestors were used to. (I am assuming that he ate commercial produce). Not to even mention the added "vegan" foods I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

I am not by any means ruling out genetics because obviously there is a link there. This thread was simply to see how others viewed it.

If you want to discuss diet, please do so in one of my diet threads.

Thank you for your opinion on the genetic link.

Gianni

Mountaingem · Oct 17, 2012

I believe it's a combination of environmental issues and genetic components. My husband tests positive for the genetic markers and does not have Crohn's-while my tests did not show definitive markers yet I've had Crohn's for 21 years.

Like Ethan I am the only one in my family with Crohn's. I think if you smoke, drink, or maybe experience a traumatic event, your body's defenses can be lowered enough to bring it on.

nikimazur · Oct 17, 2012

I believe that it is part genetics. Even if not hereditary, it more then likely is a result of a genetic mutation. Since crohns is a problem at the cellular level, and it is known scientifically to be at the cellular level, genes/chromosomes must be involved. Whether it is an in heredited cellular mutation or a mutation that happens later on in life, due to immune response/stress/environment changes... The cellular replication and DNA is involved.

I'm in the group of people who believes that there is a heredity factor. My grandmother has had severe Crohns since the age of 17. My siblings and I all have bowel issues, and other autoimmune disorders. Crohns and UC are tricky to diagnose even with today's amazing(well sometimes) medicine, which means that even if your grandparents or cousins or other siblings do not have the disease, other family members may have had it without ever knowing. People are quick to jump to conclusions that the rate of Crohns is skyrocketing. That is in itself a false assumption. The rate of people being correctly diagnosed is skyrocketing. Crohns itself was not considered a disease until the 1930s, and even with that was and is extremely hard to diagnose with out costly diagnostic tools.

Wooddy · Oct 17, 2012

Gianni said:
I don't like to play the he said she said game. Just because someone is vegan it doesn't mean they automatically are healthy. I could eat nothing but potato chips, french fries, and soda and call myself a vegan. I also was brought up on home cooked meals, that holds no weight in the discussion as i cannot analyze exactly what was eaten, home cooked meals isn't a food.

You claim that his family was vegan for previous generations. The system of agriculture with GMO's, pesticides, and deficient plants has completely changed the health and DNA structure of the plants that your friend's previous ancestors were used to. (I am assuming that he ate commercial produce). Not to even mention the added "vegan" foods I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

Gianni

Gianni,

There are professional athletes that have IBD, even gold medalists that deal with the consequences of flares. These people are arguably some of the healthiest people on the planet. Eating a proper diet is critical to their success but invariably because of their disease, they must still deal with flares no matter what they eat.

Before there was GMO food there was inflammatory bowel disease. Even your buddy Hippocrates recognized it around 600bc. :ytongue: And also it's hard to associate that any random genetic mutation would directly result from consuming GMO foods. Mutations would have to happen at a ridiculously high frequency in order for enough of them to account for the increase in IBD we see today. We would also notice other randomly crazy manifestations if genetic mutation happened such an increased rate, for example someone might notice an eyeball growing out of their butt or something like that. Considering how ubiquitous GMO foods are today and how rare IBD is there has to be more to there in order to connect a causal relationship. I am not saying that there isn’t a connection. However, if you want to implicate GMO foods as a key factor responsible for causing IBD, whether it’s via genetic mutation or not, you will have to conduct some research and reference credible sources that support your point with relevant data.

But this is a discussion about genetics, and even though there is a dietary element involved in IBD, if you are genetically predisposed to have it consider yourself fortunate when you are not having a flare. However, accepting the fact that a disease genetic doesn’t mean that you are completely powerless over it. On the contrary, it has been over 10 years since I had a serious flare. Even after so much time has passed since enduring that impressive agony, the memory of it remains vivid enough that 10 years later I still do everything I can to keep this disorder in check, which means taking medication. If I didn’t take medications and just used diet to control this disease I would have been powerless. The quality of my life would have been destroyed and I would have died by now. By the way, that’s what happened back in the day when Hippocrates was around, many people died young because needless to say, medicine was not nearly as advanced then as it is today. Hippocrates used food as his medicine because he had no other means at his disposal comparable to what is available today. Make sure you keep that in mind when you are drinking your food.

By the way, my new juicer just came I am going to go give my hand a break from typing and make myself a smoothy... mmmm

Wooddy · Oct 17, 2012

The one thing about a genetic predisposition that I can say for certain is that there is a curious association with people who have Crohn's, UC, Lupus or other autoimmune disorder that have inherited an autosomal dominant gene responsible for causing deficiency in heme production called porphyria. This deficiency in heme synthesis causes its own set of problems and it is a rare disorder.

Because [in most cases] porphyria is caused by an autosomal dominant gene, there is a 50/50 chance that a parent will pass it on to a child. However, not everyone who has this deficient gene will actually realize it, since the symptoms associated with this type heme deficiency are often elusive and non-specific. Only 10-15% of people who have the gene ever encounter situations frequently enough to experience the symptoms associated with acute porphyria. The other 85-90% don’t even know they have it even though they might have an acute attack once or twice in their life.

Another thing interesting is that just like IBD, historically, the geographical prevalence of acute porphyria is higher in Northern and Western regions of Europe and it has gradually increased in the same areas of southern Europe with the prevalence of IBD.

At fist glance, some people could argue that the similar prevalence of porphyria to IBD is merely a coincidence. Others may argue that it’s probably a deficiency in vitamin D that links the prevalence to the same northern regions of the globe and nothing more. Maybe it is, however, since both IBD and porphyria have been observed in southern regions of Europe as well as South Africa the vitamin D argument needs more support if it’s going to hold up.

It’s also very interesting when we look at the disease process behind IBD. A big part of drug therapy currently focuses in regaining control of the intestinal immune system. The loss of control of apoptosis is one of the factors responsible for causing inflammatory bowel disease. Targeting cytokines responsible (TNF-alpha) for mediating apoptosis with specific drugs has demonstrated very good results for some people with IBD. What is interesting here, is that heme is a messenger ligand that is fundamental for orchestrating the communication/crosstalk that ultimately regulates cellular function and apoptosis as well as conducting other critical metabolic functions in the intestines. It would make sense in a situation where there is a depleted heme pool and/or heme production cannot be up-regulated fast enough in response to certain stimuli, that control of apoptosis would be lost as it is in IBD. That loss of control translates into the specific disease associated with the corresponding (otherwise innocuous) heme dependent genes or combination of genes [insert your genes here]. Without getting into too much more detail, this argument suggests that there is enough evidence here explain the weak genetic link associated with IBD implicating porphyria as the smoking gun behind the cause of at least some cases of IBD, and also demonstrates why everyone with porphyria doesn't have IBD.

It is a little more complicated than what I have explained, there is a bit more to it. I would be happy to clarify add specifics and share what I have learned from my research so far. If anyone is interested.

Some of the information that I have gathered from reading some of the other threads since I first found this forum suggests that it’s likely that some of you probably have the porphyria gene and might not be aware of it. I have read threads where several people with IBD (whether they had Crohn’s or UC it didn’t matter) have described specific symptoms consistent with porphyria that are not necessarily characteristic of IBD. It would be interesting to find out how many of us actually have porphyria in addition to IBD. The knowledge might be useful in not only to help tailor therapy but it’s imperative to know if you have porphyria to avoid situations that might put you at risk for nasty consequences.

I hope that enough people are interested and reply with any additional comments or questions.

Gianni · Oct 17, 2012

If I didn’t take medications and just used diet to control this disease I would have been powerless. The quality of my life would have been destroyed and I would have died by now.

Well, being diagnosed with severe crohn's two years ago, I'll let you know If I'm alive and well in 20.

Even your buddy Hippocrates recognized it around 600bc.

Source please?

And also it's hard to associate that any random genetic mutation would directly result from consuming GMO foods.

I wasn't trying to make a direct relationship. It is no secret that these are bad for health, and anything that threatens our health should be taken seriously whether or not it has been connected with IBD because our bodies are one unit and if these gmo's were to cause other problems that is one more burden are body has to bear which ultimately will lead to a weakened body and possibly more agressive disease.

My point about GMO's was that the food structure is completely different than our ancestors. Our bodies cannot find the benefits from the food so we become deficient. Malnutrition can cause a TON of problems and I absolutely believe that can be a driving force in auto immune manifestation.

Hippocrates used food as his medicine because he had no other means at his disposal comparable to what is available today.

Absolutely not. He had a strong belief that the body had an innate ability to heal itself. He was able to demonstrate this through nutrition. He was first to demonstrate that diseases were caused naturally and would be fixed NATURALLY. People died in the time of Hippocrates because they believed diseases were caused by the Gods. They thought the only two ways of dealing with diseases was to succumb to the God's will or make sacrifices... not too sure how that would've helped them. Hippocrates wasn't an instant star when he made his theory, people still believed that diseases were from the Gods... not to mention there was no TV he could just go on and try to explain his theory.

Hippocrates also believed the body needs to heal as a whole and it is not compartmentalized. Drugs target specific parts of the body, not the body as a whole so no if he had access to let's say Remicade I would bet just about anything he wouldn't give it a seconds thought.

His whole theory was based on boosting health so absolutely not would he use the same drugs that are used today seeing these drugs almost always suppress health.

Plus there is evidence some Greeks used mercury as a medicine, Hippocrates and his followers didn't.

By the way, my new juicer just came I am going to go give my hand a break from typing and make myself a smoothy... mmmm

A blender or a juicer? I hope your hand feels better, Don't stick it in the Juicer

Gianni

Wooddy · Oct 17, 2012

Gianni said:
A blender or a juicer? I hope your hand feels better, Don't stick it in the Juicer

Gianni

Just got the Ninja QB1004. Drinking a mixed fruit smoothy right now. Love this Ninja! Cant beat it for the price. And don't worry there is no way to put my hands inside while its running.

My wife hid the juicer from me because I made such a mess with it last time I used it, but I know where she put it :wink:

Seeing that you were diagnosed 2 years ago with severe Crohn's 2 years ago, I hope you are fortunate enough not to ever have symptoms again and if I am still alive in 20 years you can tell me about it. I'll reply to your other points later when I get back from running errands. In the mean time if you want that Hippocrates reference just Google it I am sure something relevant will pop up, otherwise you will have to wait for me to get back.

Later...

CLynn · Oct 17, 2012

Gianni, I have 20 plus years now, and I'm still here!

I am the only one in my family with Crohn's, we could not find it in any earlier generation. Both of my older brothers (we share the same mother) have some colon issue, but nothing as serious as Crohn's.
Personally, I believe it's more than one thing, and the more I read, the more I think it could also be the diets we eat, the poisons in the ground, etc. The human diet for most of the world has changed drastically since humans were first eating on this earth. In remote places where the diet hasn't changed much, they do not have the diseases or other health problems that plague most of the civilized world, even down to not having dental issues.

Gianni · Oct 17, 2012

he human diet for most of the world has changed drastically since humans were first eating on this earth. In remote places where the diet hasn't changed much, they do not have the diseases or other health problems that plague most of the civilized world, even down to not having dental issues.

Exactly, but unfortunately our medical community doesn't take these cases seriously and doesn't research into them. It makes perfect sense that the answer lies within the people whom don't manifest auto immune disease.

Thank you for the post

CLynn · Oct 17, 2012

You are more than welcome!

Cross-stitch gal · Oct 17, 2012

Well...IBD does run in my family. But, I do have a coworker that is undiagnosed and seems to show signs of Crohn's from something she took as a teenager. As far as we know, her family doesn't carry IBD...

Wooddy · Oct 17, 2012

Gianni said:
Hippocrates also believed the body needs to heal as a whole and it is not compartmentalized. Drugs target specific parts of the body, not the body as a whole so no if he had access to let's say Remicade I would bet just about anything he wouldn't give it a seconds thought.

His whole theory was based on boosting health so absolutely not would he use the same drugs that are used today seeing these drugs almost always suppress health.

Plus there is evidence some Greeks used mercury as a medicine, Hippocrates and his followers didn't.

Gianni

Gianni,

No one can argue that the human body doesn't have an incredible capacity to maintain homeostasis, the level of redundancy built into the body is absolutely amazing. The human body has a lot of systems built in to repair itself from injury to keep it going. However, the capacity that the human body has to heal itself has certain limits otherwise we would live forever.

If too many systems are out of whack then the body is going to have a harder time healing itself. This is at least one reason that I agree with you that we must have adequate nutrition to fuel our body so it's functioning optimally. However, as nutrient levels become saturated in the body we start seeing diminishing returns from consuming additional nutrients and eventually negative effects. Also, there is only so much that adequate nutrition can contribute to fight infection or deal with any other insult it may encounter either from environmental and/or genetic factors.

No doubt Hippocrates was a brilliant physician but -- if he had Remicade available and refused to use it as you suggested then certainly some of his patients would suffer unnecessarily and die prematurely. Whether he used Mercury or not matters why? Yes Mercury is toxic, but a physicians job is to decide whether or not the benefits out weigh the risks. A good physician will presumably make decisions that will save your life but not necessarily his ego. It's a pretty bold statement to say that every doctor that uses Remicade or any other life saving medication should probably put their prescription pad down in exchange for your juice menu. So I am not sure how you came to the conclusion that Hippocrates not use Remicade in that hypothetical situation

Also, even though I agree with you about some of the unknowns of GMO foods, before you go on to explain the danger GMO foods it might help your argument to explain exactly how the structure is different and why that difference prevents the human body from absorbing nutrients. Not all GMO is created equal and just because someth is GMO doesn't make it automatically bad. Try telling that to the Mayans who were responsible for domesticating and genetically modifying maize to form of corn that we eat today. It has been traded and grown since 2500 BC and is the definition of GMO food (that reference you can find easily on your own in case you don't already know).

Your argument about GMO will have more credibility if you are able to point to specific facts on what types of problems have been known to occur from ingesting GMO foods instead of just saying our body can't find benefits from it. The body has no idea that food is GMO or not, there is no warning that your body sees which says here comes GMO food ha ha you're not gonna get any benefits, it just breaks it down the GMO like it would anything else you ingest and eventually you deal with the consequences, what ever they are.

There should be plenty of studies available that can provide relevant information if you care to research. I am not a huge fan of GMO food myself and have read my fair share of studies. Monsanto is a major source of nasty stuff and also has lots of enemies that are always publishing juicy facts about their products You might want to start with finding reputable articles about their products and who uses them. Most people would be surprised to learn just how involved Monsanto is in their lives.

As for Hippocrates here are some of the references you were looking for and I was mistaken he lived around 400BC not 600BC.

http://m.medindia.net/patientinfo/ulcerative-colitis.htm

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ibd.3780010103/pdf

By the way, my smoothy was delicious and the juicer is coming out tomorrow, going to try to extract juice from pomegranates from my dads tree. I have had a hard time extracting juice from them, any advice?

I am sure the wife will not be happy with me, they always make a big mess.

farmerswifey · Oct 17, 2012

Mountaingem said:
Like Ethan I am the only one in my family with Crohn's. I think if you smoke, drink, or maybe experience a traumatic event, your body's defenses can be lowered enough to bring it on.

This is what was told to me also, my son is 9 and I mother him, feed him etc the exact same way as my other children. He has Crohn's. Perhaps he had an infection in his body that lowered something and let it happen. I'd really love to know x

Gianni · Oct 18, 2012

However, as nutrient levels become saturated in the body we start seeing diminishing returns from consuming additional nutrients and eventually negative effects.

Our bodies utilize the nutrients, they just don't sit there and stay forever. The nutrients needs to be constantly replenished.

Also, there is only so much that adequate nutrition can contribute to fight infection or deal with any other insult it may encounter either from environmental and/or genetic factors.

Our immune system is the ultimate fighter. It can absolutely deal with its own infections. By the time i got my 3rd pneumonia while taking humira I decided to treat it with food instead of antibiotics. I was able to overcome it in about the same time that antibiotics would have taken but even then my immune system was weak before i started to "saturate nutrients". Pneumonia can be a dangerous infection and as far as infections so I think the body has the ability to take care of them.

Our primal selves strengthened our genomes, so why can't we protect our genomes or even rebuild our genomes? It's only common sense. Researchers know that antioxidants can protect from DNA damage. Why can't other nutrients do the same?

or oils?

There are a bunch of other sources linking nutrition to the strengthening of DNA and chromosomes if you care to look into it. I'm not basing these opinions off of delusion, I'm basing them off of forgotten, "unimportant" science.

Whether he used Mercury or not matters why? Yes Mercury is toxic, but a physicians job is to decide whether or not the benefits out weigh the risks.

Mercury wasn't thought to be toxic back then it was used as an anti septic and a very successful one. The fact that he would use food and exercise over conventional treatments even at the time suggests he would stick to his guns. In my opinion, Hippocrates would be ashamed to be called the father of western medicine today if he saw the manner in which medications were being used and how even with western medicine this western nation is the sickest in the world, while those countries/populi whom have stuck to nutrition are clearly more healthy than us.

It's a pretty bold statement to say that every doctor that uses Remicade or any other life saving medication should probably put their prescription pad down in exchange for your juice menu.

I don't recall saying that, But i digress. I'm not saying Juicing is the end all, I don't even believe I have mentioned juicing in this thread yet. I'm talking about nutrition and when you repeat that sentence with put down their prescription pads in chronic conditions and prescribe nutrients, it doesn't sound so bad. Of course I recognize that these medications have their values in acute, life saving situations. Nutrition isn't a rescue drug but I believe it should be taken more seriously as a long term treatment. But people don't want to hear that, which is what i have such a hard time understanding. Its safe, its easy, it makes sense, you take matters into your own hands. But "if it was that easy my doctor would have told me".

Doctors receive little to no training in nutrition today. So they don't know as well. You can be wrong, and you can be sincerely wrong.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/he...chen.html?_r=0

http://www.naturalnews.com/036702_do...atalities.html

Last year, a bill was introduced in California to mandate that physicians get continuing medical education in nutrition (see Nutrition Education Mandate Introduced for Doctors). Unbelievably, physician trade groups such as the California Medical Association came out in opposition to the bill, which would only require doctors to get a measly 7 hours of nutrition training anytime before 2017 (see Medical Associations Oppose Bill to Mandate Nutrition Training). Read more: http://www.care2.com/greenliving/how...#ixzz28sHp37yh

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/83/4/941S.full

There are plenty of other sources about doctors and nutrition. It's a pretty well known fact amongst the medical community and it's critics. Truth is, in undergrad they learn about the body, medical school they learn about medicine. Medicine, medicine and more medicine.

So I am not sure how you came to the conclusion that Hippocrates not use Remicade in that hypothetical situation

The same way you came to the conclusion he would.

"Hippocrates used food as his medicine because he had no other means at his disposal comparable to what is available today." (From your earlier post)

Also, even though I agree with you about some of the unknowns of GMO foods, before you go on to explain the danger GMO foods it might help your argument to explain exactly how the structure is different and why that difference prevents the human body from absorbing nutrients

Only unknowns because monsanto has patents on these GMO's and refuse to do long term health studies, and any independent researchers who do, do under the risk of litigation.

Plants are made of plant cells in the nucleus lies DNA. This DNA is how the body recognizes which plant has entered the body and what to do with it. Our pancreas and digestive tract doesn't have eyes or a nose so it reads the DNA to determine which enzymes are needed to digest the food if aid is necessary.

Monsanto and other GMO companies literally remove sequences of the DNA and insert their own. Therefore the DNA is unpredictable and the body treats it as a foreign invader and will actually elevate white blood cell activity. These genes that are inserted can actively release a toxic insecticide, these insecticides are now being found in high amounts in the blood of pregnant women.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21338670

ot all GMO is created equal and just because someth is GMO doesn't make it automatically bad. Try telling that to the Mayans who were responsible for domesticating and genetically modifying maize to form of corn that we eat today. It has been traded and grown since 2500 BC and is the definition of GMO food

I wouldn't call that Genetically engineering ha. They simply just soaked the corn and cooked and hulled it, not really using a virus to implant a gene inside the crop a gene that will create pesticides. Even so it isn't the point of the conversation as I'm sure everyone thinks of todays Gmo's rather than maize... even if you would consider it a GMO, which I would not.

The body has no idea that food is GMO or not, there is no warning that your body sees which says here comes GMO food ha ha you're not gonna get any benefits

I didn't say the body has an alarm system...? I'm unsure what you mean here.

As for health problems, you can do a google search and get some sources but here are some anyways.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/health-risks

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/12/monsantos-gmo-corn-linked_n_420365.html

Also watch this video on GMO's, I found it very interesting.

By the way, my smoothy was delicious and the juicer is coming out tomorrow, going to try to extract juice from pomegranates from my dads tree. I have had a hard time extracting juice from them, any advice?

I am sure the wife will not be happy with me, they always make a big mess.

Ahh pomegranates, I ruined a few articles of clothing before I found this awesome video on the best way to deal with a pomegranate.

Or you can try the ever popular water method

Gianni

Mountaingem · Oct 18, 2012

farmerswifey said:
This is what was told to me also, my son is 9 and I mother him, feed him etc the exact same way as my other children. He has Crohn's. Perhaps he had an infection in his body that lowered something and let it happen. I'd really love to know x

I believe the virus that causes the stomach flu, particularly the norovirus is believed to trigger Crohn's in children and adults that are predisposed to it.

My doctor has said some bacteria that causes food poisoning (listeria) and c.difficile also have the same effect. His advice-try not to get food poisoned. Yeah, I'm sure EVERYONE already tries not to get food poisoned, thanks Doc lol!

Wooddy · Oct 18, 2012

Gianni,

I see that I invoked quite a response. Glad, I got you thinking, and as always, you do bring up some interesting points. You make it very easy to tell that your heart is in the right place.

Gianni said:
Our bodies utilize the nutrients, they just don't sit there and stay forever. The nutrients needs to be constantly replenished.
Gianni

First, let me remind you that this is the second time you have incorrectly made this point. It is wrong on several accounts but for the sake of time I will (at least try) to elucidate why by citing two examples. However, I fear that I still might be wasting my time
1. The fat-soluble vitamins A, E, D, and K can hang around for a long time. Excessive levels of these vitamins have been known to cause toxicity. If you want to deny the potential for toxicity, that’s your prerogative. Go ahead an replenish them, by all means go crazy feel free to ignore any previous knowledge gained from people that have made the same mistake.
2. The non water-soluble vitamins can cause havoc as well even if they don’t stick around for long. Did you ever wonder what your body does to the excessive vitamins (fat-soluble or not) that you take in? In case you didn’t know, it’s constantly trying to get rid of them. Is this why you make your argument that you need to replenish? I guess you don’t think that uses precious resources. Ok since you understand that better than everyone else, then there is no argument, you are right, go ahead and take loads of vitamins. You are young now -- your body can handle it a lot. Give yourself 10 years kid you will be singing a different tune. There is nothing that I can write here that will convince you of that. You will have to impart that wisdom on yourself with time.

As for your other points, I realize that you already put a lot of thought into them but you have not shown one inkling that you are willing to admit there is a possibility that you could be mistaken. Clearly, since you are only 20 years old, there hasn’t been enough time in your life for you to acquire enough knowledge and experience to make you an expert on everything that you are talking about. In fact, you are not able to deviate at all from the notion that you have all the answers. Basically, you aren’t able to give anyone any credence if they disagree with you. That ego will get you in trouble my friend, the same way it got the doctors that you chastise so much in trouble. Be careful. However, even though I disagree with many (not all) of your arguments, I admire the passion you have and that is one quality that you never want to lose because I can see that it will take you far.

I am sorry that Humira didn’t work out for you. It is a nasty drug for a nasty disorder. I understand why you are so resentful to the medical community for not having all the answers. No one does, not even you. Unfortunately, it’s hard to accept but we would be fooling ourselves if we thought otherwise. That’s not to say that we should stop the quest to learn more but we have to accept reality along the way.

As for the pomegranates, yeah I know how to cut into them, been doing it since I was six. I wanted to know if you used a blender or your juicer to extract their goodness. Aside from making a mess, I wanted to see if you had technique that was more efficient than picking out each individual kernel from the pith. I hate the bitterness the pith leaves and I have yet to find a juicer that can leave the pith behind unless I pick most of it out first.

It's getting late, gotta go to bed. ttyl8r

Gianni · Oct 18, 2012

First, let me remind you that this is the second time you have incorrectly made this point. It is wrong on several accounts but for the sake of time I will (at least try) to elucidate why by citing two examples. However, I fear that I still might be wasting my time

We've had this conversation before so I'm not going to delve into it again but I will say you changed the structure of the conversation on me. I was saying that the nutrients don't sit in you forever, even fat soluble vitamins are utilized and you will need to replenish them. I realize that Fat soluble vitamins can be dangerous at extreme levels, my food log carefully dictates what vitamins are going into my body and I am careful with the fat soluble ones, with that being said I don't think the RDA of these vitamins is nearly enough.

We have talked about water soluble ones, and you can go back to the other thread to view my opinions.

k since you understand that better than everyone else, then there is no argument, you are right, go ahead and take loads of vitamins. You are young now -- your body can handle it a lot. Give yourself 10 years kid you will be singing a different tune. There is nothing that I can write here that will convince you of that. You will have to impart that wisdom on yourself with time.

The only vitamin I am supplementing is Vitamin B12, a water soluble. I get all of my other vitamins through consumption so i highly doubt I ,this "kid", will be singing a different tune from eating fruits and vegetables.

If you think vitamins are more detrimental than long term medication then you sir will be singing a different tune in 10 years.

As for your other points, I realize that you already put a lot of thought into them but you have not shown one inkling that you are willing to admit there is a possibility that you could be mistaken.

You are just assuming this. Have you conceded that you have been mistaken? We have our own opinions, and not one is greater than the other. You make your decisions/ideas and I'll make mine, whether or not we yield we are mistaken doesn't matter. I am constantly researching and constantly changing my ideas/opinions/views on different matters and you bet I have to realize my mistakes and change with my views. I used to believe food held no power, and 2 years ago I probably would have called myself crazy.

Clearly, since you are only 20 years old, there hasn’t been enough time in your life for you to acquire enough knowledge and experience to make you an expert on everything that you are talking about. In fact, you are not able to deviate at all from the notion that you have all the answers. Basically, you aren’t able to give anyone any credence if they disagree with you.

21. I never said I was an expert neither do I think I am... I am simply on these forums to learn and to share what I've learned. In no way do I think I have all the answers, that is why i continue to research and is why i continue to read this forum and continue to learn.

In fact, you are not able to deviate at all from the notion that you have all the answers.

I found this sentence a little funny, the use of "in fact" and then stating you think I think I have all the answers is almost paradoxical. In the future use ... "In fact" when something is a fact unless you believe you know me well enough to claim it as a fact, which you don't. I take that as a personal attack.

Basically, you aren’t able to give anyone any credence if they disagree with you.

A lot of people even in this post have posted things in which i disagree with, but i simply thank the post and that's that. I respond to you because I feel like its a tradition now

You're clearly a smart guy and I respect your opinions and I truly enjoy the discussions we have but just cause I disagree with you doesn't mean I lack the ability to recognize other people's opinions and give credit where credit is due, after all most of my threads are asking for other's opinions.

That’s not to say that we should stop the quest to learn more but we have to accept reality along the way.

Accept the reality that the disease is incurable? accept the reality that the best way to deal with this disease are dangerous and scary longterm drugs? the reality that 75% of Crohn's victims will need intestinal surgery? the reality that all those things above is the only answer?

I am not in denial, I went through that stage long ago, but that doesn't mean the "acceptance" stage means to not believe there is a better answer out there.

Aside from making a mess, I wanted to see if you had technique that was more efficient than picking out each individual kernel from the pith.

Well those methods show great alternatives to picking each individual kernel out... did you watch the vids?

And yeah don't juice the pith, its gross, although the pith is a great cold remedy

Having said all this I do appreciate the lively debates and I respect your opinions although I'd rather talk about Crohn's and anything related rather than any personal traits you may think I have.

Gianni

Jennifer · Oct 18, 2012

Gianni said:
Nutrition isn't a rescue drug but I believe it should be taken more seriously as a long term treatment. But people don't want to hear that, which is what i have such a hard time understanding. Its safe, its easy, it makes sense, you take matters into your own hands. But "if it was that easy my doctor would have told me".

You want to know why? This is why. Its the assumption that we haven't tried diets or that we all must eat fried mayonnaise balls for breakfast, lunch and dinner (I know you didn't say that, I'm saying that's how your posts come off to me). You constantly bring up a "Western/American diet" and suggest eating healthy to everyone on here. All you have to do is share your thoughts on diet, how its helped/helping you and provide research on how its helped other people with Crohn's. Yet your posts come off as attacking us for eating poorly (no one that I've seen has shared with you what they eat everyday) and they come off as treating us as if we're stupid. We don't blindly follow doctors. We're all on here asking questions and doing our own research. I don't know how many threads I've seen on here (its countless/never ending) where a person says that their doctor suggested something yet they come on here to see if that helped others or if there's an alternative.

Now at the very beginning you say that nutrition isn't a rescue drug yet you constantly bash medication (suppressing the immune system in general), doctors (your posts have mentioned they only want money and know nothing about food, well see a nutritionist and a GI, don't put nutritionists out of work) and posters (calling us sheep) on here for using medication instead of changing their diet (again an assumption on your part that we all eat poorly).

Should you wait until you get to the point of bleeding or needing surgery to try going on medication? No. In my opinion that's extremely risky. Does that mean we shouldn't eat healthy? Of course not. Many studies have shown that healthy diets help people live longer, give more energy, help your immune system etc. Just because we have IBD doesn't mean we can't benefit from a healthy diet in a similar way. Obviously not the same because we still deal with inflammation, scar tissue etc making digestion difficult along with diarrhea, the pain of any type of food or even beverages passing making eating in general a chore/battle, trigger foods bringing on more symptoms etc. Those are just a few of the issues that come with IBD. So in the end, you're right, nutrition isn't a rescue drug but its possible it could help in the future. Medication though allows us to have that future. If you've read through the forum you'll find many threads where people share their story about how they would have died and we can't jump to conclusions about how they must have ate poorly their entire life and that they're too stupid to question an uneducated money grubbing doctor.

Gianni · Oct 19, 2012

You constantly bring up a "Western/American diet" and suggest eating healthy to everyone on here. All you have to do is share your thoughts on diet, how its helped/helping you

I do constantly share my diet and how it has helped me, look over my posts if you don't believe me. My first few posts on this forum was exactly this but people doubted it. I have shared my thoughts on why juicing is so beneficial and I hope to continue sharing my experiences.

(your posts have mentioned they only want money and know nothing about food, well see a nutritionist and a GI, don't put nutritionists out of work)

I have never mentioned that doctors are money hungry, I've mentioned Pharmaceuticals are a big business and it isn't in their best interest to "cure" us because they are making plenty of money as is. Doctors , I believe, are honestly trying to help the individual. Even though my previous G.I. prescribed hard drugs on me, I understand that is what he learned and he is happy that I am doing better on a diet.

I have said doctors know little about nutrition, because it is true. They are not required to learn much about nutrition during their schooling and I've backed that up with sources.

You want to know why? This is why. Its the assumption that we haven't tried diets or that we all must eat fried mayonnaise balls for breakfast, lunch and dinner

If your someone who believes your diet is fine then don't read my posts. If you go to diet Fitness, and supplements section on this forum (at the way bottom) you will see one of the most popular threads is "Top 3 favorite fast food places"

I absolutely believe some people on this thread eat healthy. In fact there are others like me who believe that nutrition is the best medicine, I've been messaging these individuals throughout my time here on the forum.

I'm not saying everyone eats trash, I'm saying healthy food is more powerful than previously believed. Many people have their diets simply to avoid symptoms (elimination diets) but all I'm preaching is that taking it a next step further and including foods that help the body is in people's best interest.

Medication though allows us to have that future. If you've read through the forum you'll find many threads where people share their story about how they would have died and we can't jump to conclusions about how they must have ate poorly their entire life and that they're too stupid to question an uneducated money grubbing doctor.

I completely agree that medication allows people the future in serious situations and in no way have i ever recommended that someone in a dire situation pick up a juicer or start researching into nutrition, In fact i tell them my experience in dealing with a dire situation and to listen to their doctors because in the case of emergency situations no one does a better job than the medical community.

I was one of those people that didn't think twice about my doctors advice and trusted him fully (but again I don't think doctors are out to swindle everyone from their money) (I have a good relationship with my doctor). I am just suggesting people take matters into their own hands as well and do everything possible to increase your health.

(I know you didn't say that, I'm saying that's how your posts come off to me).

As long as we're making observations, your posts come off to me as someone who lacks the imagination to entertain the idea of a different pool of knowledge not popularly accessed. In my previous threads you refused to reply to my sources of nutrition not being traditionally taught in medical school, nor did you respond when I brought up my opinions on suppressing inflammation and extraintestinal manifestations. You are headstrong, as am I, but I don't think someone holds the power to critique someone if they had not at least entertained the ideas presented.

I realize you don't agree with just about anything I have to say, and are constantly one of my biggest critics and I appreciate that, but if you feel that strongly against me and my beliefs than you don't have to read or take to heart what I have to say. Those interested will read.

Sorry if I had offended you in any prior posts.

Gianni

Guest9283 · Oct 19, 2012

Gianni said:
K

I don't believe I mentioned that. This is simply a thread to see how others view the disease. Many of us believe it has to do with genetics but not many people are very specific on what exactly that means.

Obviously that is exactly what you wanted to tell us... about your diet & genetics, just like you have without me in the last 6 posts. Which is ok, absolutely - its your side of how you view this whole disease. I was actually trying to help you, believe it or not. I assumed this thread was in responce to a forum member asking you (in another thread) to make a genetic vs diet thread. Your answer was "noted" shortly followed by this thread. So please dont play coy and make me look bad. I WAS trying to help get it started with a valid question that ive always had. But... i will stay away - Ive got no opinion on genetics. No one thinks its "just genetics". There are most likely more components then we believe there are. Way more.

Gianni · Oct 19, 2012

Mr. Ziggy said:
Obviously that is exactly what you wanted to tell us... about your diet, just like you have without me in the last 6 posts. Which is ok, absolutely - its your side of how you view this whole disease. I was actually trying to help you, believe it or not. I assumed this thread was in responce to a forum member asking you (in another thread) to make a genetic vs diet thread. Your answer was "noted" shortly followed by this thread. So please dont play coy and make me look bad. I WAS trying to help get it started with a valid question that ive always had. But... i will stay away - Ive got no opinion on genetics. No one thinks its "just genetics". There are most likely more components then we believe there are. Way more.

Yeah this thread got away from me... sorry bout that... I guess this thread is open to just about any topic now.

Gianni

Guest9283 · Oct 19, 2012

Gianni said:
Yeah this thread got away from me... sorry bout that... I guess this thread is open to just about any topic now.

Gianni

Just for the record I did think you brought up some good points.

Jennifer · Oct 19, 2012

Gianni said:
As long as we're making observations, your posts come off to me as someone who lacks the imagination to entertain the idea of a different pool of knowledge not popularly accessed. In my previous threads you refused to reply to my sources of nutrition not being traditionally taught in medical school, nor did you respond when I brought up my opinions on suppressing inflammation and extraintestinal manifestations. You are headstrong, as am I, but I don't think someone holds the power to critique someone if they had not at least entertained the ideas presented.

I was diagnosed when I was a child and pretty much grew up with the disease. I don't know everything and am open to new ideas but I'm not a novice either. Over the years of joining this forum my posts seem to now lack emotion or creativity and depth due to the repetition of responding to the same questions and ideas over and over. Diet and nutrition are nothing new. Eating healthy is one of the first things we learned in school where I'm from all the way down to preschool. So in my mind anything having to do with diet being healthy and good for you is common knowledge to the point of being common sense. I'm certainly not lacking in imagination and I'm always learning something new on this forum. Quite honestly I've learned something new everyday since I joined the forum be it a new diet, possible side effects to simply learning about the members here etc.

We have a tagging system now on the forum which is a wonderful tool where you can mention someone's name and they'll see your post (I often get tagged when people are feeling just plain "crabby"

). Being a monitor on the forum I'm not always able to head back to threads I've already responded in, especially when I feel there's no further debate on the matter. The Administrator, forum monitors and moderators are quite busy simply trying to keep up with all the new threads that come in. If I don't respond to you where you feel a response is needed (or if you simply want me to read a post) then tag my name in your post and I'll head back there. I've tried my best on the forum but am not able to come back into every thread I've posted in.

Gianni · Oct 19, 2012

Eating healthy is one of the first things we learned in school where I'm from all the way down to preschool. So in my mind anything having to do with diet being healthy and good for you is common knowledge to the point of being common sense.

Yes I also did learn about nutrition in school at a young age but I wouldn't exactly call those 5 food groups healthy seeing as processed sugar was actually one of them.

According to the governments nutritional standards taught in elementary schools today,

A bowl of Lucky Charms with Low-fat Milk and a glass of orange juice from concentrate for breakfast; Cheese-flavored crackers (Cheez-It) for a morning snack; A cheeseburger on a whole-grain bun with French fries and a can of Coke for lunch; Chocolate pudding and grapes for an afternoon snack; and chicken nuggets with a biscuit, green beans from a can for dinner with low-fat ice cream for dessert.(excerpt from "Forks Over Knives")

Is a completely healthy day's worth of food (according to the USDA).

I don't believe what I am suggesting is "common sense" as I am proposing that food is much more powerful than generally thought. Obviously this nation has a skewed opinion on what is healthy when you take a look at the average diet.

You claim that the importance of diet is common sense to you, yet you voted diet to be "somewhat important" on my other thread because you felt like diet only helped because liquid diets don't aggravate symptoms... so I'm a bit confused now.

We have a tagging system now on the forum which is a wonderful tool where you can mention someone's name and they'll see your post (I often get tagged when people are feeling just plain "crabby" ). Being a monitor on the forum I'm not always able to head back to threads I've already responded in, especially when I feel there's no further debate on the matter. The Administrator, forum monitors and moderators are quite busy simply trying to keep up with all the new threads that come in. If I don't respond to you where you feel a response is needed (or if you simply want me to read a post) then tag my name in your post and I'll head back there. I've tried my best on the forum but am not able to come back into every thread I've posted in.

I brought it up because we were actively engaged in the conversation or debate but when I brought up a credible source as evidence the conversation died, and it came off as you didn't want to entertain the idea and rather shrug off something that didn't agree with your preconceived notions.

I understand you are busy as you are almost always the first person to greet new members as well as ease the concerns of troubled members, and I know everyone appreciates that.

Gianni

Jennifer · Oct 19, 2012

Gianni said:
Yes I also did learn about nutrition in school at a young age but I wouldn't exactly call those 5 food groups healthy seeing as processed sugar was actually one of them.

We were showed the food pyramid (and since then its changed, I posted a thread about it a while back, maybe I can still find the link, can't find the thread, should be in the Members Only section pages back but here's a link to My Plate: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110602145249.htm). The old food pyramid was total crap and we all knew it. Candy shouldn't be up there.

That's not even really food. The new one they have now is a lot better than the old one but still has too much grains in my opinion. There's just no way grains are as important as vegetables but I addressed this in my old thread.

Gianni said:
According to the governments nutritional standards taught in elementary schools today,

A bowl of Lucky Charms with Low-fat Milk and a glass of orange juice from concentrate for breakfast; Cheese-flavored crackers (Cheez-It) for a morning snack; A cheeseburger on a whole-grain bun with French fries and a can of Coke for lunch; Chocolate pudding and grapes for an afternoon snack; and chicken nuggets with a biscuit, green beans from a can for dinner with low-fat ice cream for dessert.(excerpt from "Forks Over Knives")

Is a completely healthy day's worth of food (according to the USDA).

Ya I could care less what they make up to try and sell more crappy products. My school, teachers, parents and doctors all knew better. Obviously none of the stuff listed above is healthy (we were taught the food pyramid but went in depth on the meaning of each section and what was actually a healthy diet). When I say "healthy" I mean food in its rawest form where it contains the most nutrients. Any packaged product was listed near the top at my school (the stuff at the top was the stuff to avoid).

Gianni said:
I don't believe what I am suggesting is "common sense" as I am proposing that food is much more powerful than generally thought. Obviously this nation has a skewed opinion on what is healthy when you take a look at the average diet.

I keep hearing this but I'm confused. What is the "average diet?" You bring up the USA a lot, yet the people on the forum are from everywhere around the world. Not to mention the USA is made up from people from all around the world and we serve food from all cultures and even consume imported products. Why constantly bring up the (what I assume you're referring to) the American stereotype diet of hamburgers and fried cheese when not only are many people on here not from the USA but most can't even eat that stuff because they have IBD. I don't understand why you assume we all eat poorly.

Gianni said:
You claim that the importance of diet is common sense to you, yet you voted diet to be "somewhat important" on my other thread because you felt like diet only helped because liquid diets don't aggravate symptoms... so I'm a bit confused now.

I said diets are important during a flare. When I think "diet" in reference to Crohn's I think of foods that wont bring on more symptoms, to avoid your trigger foods and obvious trigger foods (fried food, fatty food, spicy foods, fiber, nuts, seeds, etc). When we're talking diet in reference to Crohn's we're talking about making a flare worse or causing a flare in general. I'm still of the opinion that food does not cause flares (again this is not only based on what my doctors say but my own personal experience). That doesn't mean I promote eating unhealthy food or that my doctors said unhealthy foods are ok. Just like smoking is bad in general for everyone with or without IBD (not talking about Colitis, that's a different topic and its the nicotine that helps not the act of smoking) so is fried food. That's common sense at this point.

When you mentioned "diet" I didn't think you meant choosing a salad over a fried mayonnaise ball. I know I'd get diarrhea from either one but I'd prefer the salad.

Gianni said:
I brought it up because we were actively engaged in the conversation or debate but when I brought up a credible source as evidence the conversation died, and it came off as you didn't want to entertain the idea and rather shrug off something that didn't agree with your preconceived notions.

As I said I'm very busy with the forum but as I've also mentioned I'm one of my grandpa's caregivers so sometimes I'm not physically or mentally capable of posting on the forum and threads that die don't get my attention right away unless there's less than 3 posts (gotta make sure everyone gets the help they need).

Gianni said:
I understand you are busy as you are almost always the first person to greet new members as well as ease the concerns of troubled members, and I know everyone appreciates that.

Thank you

Wooddy · Oct 19, 2012

Gianni said:
Well those methods show great alternatives to picking each individual kernel out... did you watch the vids?
And yeah don't juice the pith, its gross, although the pith is a great cold remedy
Gianni

Yeah man I watched the videos, I have no problem opening them up, been doing it since I was six. The problem is, it's a pain in the ass and takes forever. I was looking for an easier way to attack this fruit in the juicer. Anyway, you slice it really must be worth it because I have been opening them up and eating them for the past 35 years.

I was a lot like you are when I was 21, I wish I was that young again. I enjoy our debates as well, and never take anything personal. I have noticed that it's hard to make any headway on some points. It seems like I am always putting you on the defensive and that is not my goal. All I can say for now is to just keep that fire burning inside you.

I don't suppose you read my theory on what I have discovered about the genetics behind my particular case of IBD? Or why other cases respond the way they do to certain therapies? Apparently, (at least in some cases) the mono-clonal antibody (MAB) treatments aren't effective because the defect causing the specific form of IBD is farther upstream metabolically. As a result, after treatment with MABs the body responds by making antibodies against various MABs in an attempt to render them ineffective, which is a normal response the body would be expected to make to address that type insult, because the MABs were not mediated to be there by the body in the first place. This is why some people need to take other immune suppressors like mtx or Imuran along with the MAB to negate that response. But as you know, the consequences of suppressing the immune system are nothing to sneeze at.

Personally, I discovered that a rare genetic defect hinders my body from producing a fundamental ligand crucial for maintain metabolic homeostasis quick enough when needed. I think this defeciency may be at least partly responsible for causing my case of IBD. This particular deficiency has been associated with all forms of IBD and is also responsible for causing a number of other associated problems that I have been experiencing like, fatigue, joint pain etc...

If you're curious to find out more do a search on google on the role of nitric oxide (inflammatory mediator), heme oxygenase, in the colon as well as the presence of colonic cytochrome enzymes in Crohn's. If you can bear to sift through all the research you will find that certain people express different levels of these cytochrome enzymes in different parts of the intestine and specific patterns seem to be a recurring theme in certain IBD patients. The ligand that "activates" the apo-cytochrome enzymes is called heme, so it's interesting that people with a deficiency in heme synthesis also have IBD. In addition, there have been studies that directly link exhaled nitric oxide levels and active IBD demonstrating that this is indeed a systemic disease (duh?) Isn't that what our old pal Hippocrates was teaching? Currently, soluble guanylyl cyclase is the only known nitric acid receptor in the body and it also relies on heme to function. It's makes sense that a relationship between nitric oxide levels and IBD has already been established (see link below). At least for some people, it seems like this a common spot in metabolism (loss of adequate heme regulation) that some forms of IBD share and/or where they start to differentiate into the various diseases.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12194639

None of this theory is written in stone, I am putting all of this out there hoping that someone might be able to shed some more light on these ideas one way or the other.

Samboi · Oct 19, 2012

Purely genetic?
Nobody else in my immediate or extended family has Crohns Disease.
There are over 100 family members in my immediate and extended family that I am genetically related to.
Not a single one with CD.
I had no intestinal issues prior to being diagnosed 20 years ago.
I had a very regular trauma free life.
(Had plenty of traumas since!!)

Buggered if I know what caused me to get Crohns.
But I'm pretty sure it wasn't genetics or trauma.

StarGirrrrl · Oct 19, 2012

It's always a puzzle when one person is sick and no-one else in the family has it- I'm undiagnosed at 25 but all I can find in the family is a few cases of cancer, a great-aunt with UC, my grandad's great-neice with CD, and Mum's cousin who has psoriasis (I mention the latter because my Rheumy always asks about that condition/anyone closer who has it).

But having done a family tree (male line from my Granddad up ) recently, back to the early 1700's, (my great x 7 grandparents) I realize there are alot more people related to me (and potentially passed faulty genes down) than whose health I can look at today!

Kip1 · Oct 19, 2012

My mum & I have Crohns. Cant be just co incidence.

Gianni · Oct 19, 2012

If you're curious to find out more do a search on google on the role of nitric oxide (inflammatory mediator), heme oxygenase, in the colon as well as the presence of colonic cytochrome enzymes in Crohn's. If you can bear to sift through all the research you will find that certain people express different levels of these cytochrome enzymes in different parts of the intestine and specific patterns seem to be a recurring theme in certain IBD patients. The ligand that "activates" the apo-cytochrome enzymes is called heme, so it's interesting that people with a deficiency in heme synthesis also have IBD. In addition, there have been studies that directly link exhaled nitric oxide levels and active IBD demonstrating that this is indeed a systemic disease (duh?) Isn't that what our old pal Hippocrates was teaching? Currently, soluble guanylyl cyclase is the only known nitric acid receptor in the body and it also relies on heme to function. It's makes sense that a relationship between nitric oxide levels and IBD has already been established (see link below). At least for some people, it seems like this a common spot in metabolism (loss of adequate heme regulation) that some forms of IBD share and/or where they start to differentiate into the various diseases.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12194639

None of this theory is written in stone, I am putting all of this out there hoping that someone might be able to shed some more light on these ideas one way or the other.

Interesting stuff, I did look over the source. I have had asthma since infancy although I haven't experiences any asthma related problems for nearly a decade now.

I wonder if the body is able to monitor Nitric Oxide levels on it's own and its just part of this particular immune response that it isn't a part of. Or maybe environmental toxins can inhibit the production of NO. Or maybe a gene...or it is solely because of heme.

I know i was deficient in hemoglobin which might explain UC and Crohn's low level of heme. Apparently heme when exposed to free radicals may be responsible for an acute inflammatory response.

I found it interesting, while reading, that heme will break down through heme oxygenase eventually into bilirubin. I remember taking a high school physical a year before my diagnosis and my doctor told me I had an elevated level of bilirubin in my urine. It also appears that this occurs under oxidative stress and when free radicals are presents, so definitely something I am going to look more into.

Thanks for the info.

Gianni

Wooddy · Oct 19, 2012

The role of bilirubin is quite interesting in all of this but I will have to talk about that later.

As for the NO levels being monitored by your body, the answer is yes. When your body needs NO there is actually an entire family of enzymes responsible for catalyzing the production of NO. NO is very important for many functions in your body in fact, VIAGRA works by enhancing signaling through the NO pathway. So you can see at least one way its function is very important.

All of these metabolic systems in the body are interconnected and influence each other. If one system goes out of balance, other systems try to compensate to return the body back to a state of equilibrium (homeostasis). However, trying to follow the tangle of signals that connect every system and axis of control is quite a formidable task.

The fascinating part of all of this (at least to me) is the way all of this is regulated. If your body needs more of a particular enzyme, it makes more directly from expressing and translating your DNA. The level of control and cross talk involved is the fascinating part. It’s a little too complex for me to get into the detailed required but I will try to simplify.

In order for DNA to be transcribed, the right proteins have to be activated by the appropriate ligands and then bind together with other appropriate transcription factors – then the proteins complex together with either themselves (homodimerize) or other proteins (heterodimerize) before they can attach to the promoter region of the DNA. However, this can only happen if other signaling proteins have already triggered the correct section of DNA to unwrap itself from the histone that it is wound around. Even then, if all those conditions are met transcription can’t happen unless other proteins allow the dimerized complex to enter the nucleus of the cell so that it can bind to the promoter region of the DNA. Then after mRNA is transcribed, it’s translated into the proper enzyme by stringing together tRNA sequences in the specific order that the mRNA dictates and finally makes the enzyme you needed in the first place. Each one of these ligands, transcription factors, nuclear receptors, co-factors have multiple functions in your body and mediate control over overlapping systems, that sometimes oppose each other. I left out a lot, but there are factors and co-factors involved some inhibit transcription some that enhance it, regardless of all that, DNA transcription and translation is going on constantly in your body 24/7. Whether it is to make more of the enzyme that pigments your eyes or to produce epithelial cells in your intestine or to make more TNF-alpha or what ever is needed to return the body back to homeostasis. Maybe I make another thread to talk about the role of heme in all this, because it’s a crucial signaling ligand that is fundamental for all of this signaling that has evolved around it to work properly.

I'll put more up later if anyone is interested, time for dinner now.

Gianni · Oct 19, 2012

I keep hearing this but I'm confused. What is the "average diet?" You bring up the USA a lot, yet the people on the forum are from everywhere around the world. Not to mention the USA is made up from people from all around the world and we serve food from all cultures and even consume imported products. Why constantly bring up the (what I assume you're referring to) the American stereotype diet of hamburgers and fried cheese when not only are many people on here not from the USA but most can't even eat that stuff because they have IBD. I don't understand why you assume we all eat poorly.

Here is a site referring to the average american diet. I simply brought it up here because we were talking about the education system in which children learn nutrition in this country. This diet is still within the parameters of healthy according to the government. I realize people on this forum generally eat healthier but I usually am simply making a statement about the eating habits of people in general. As for the other countries on this forum, places like australia and the UK now have very similar systems of food. High number of fast food, high rates of obesity etc etc. But even so people think they are eating healthy but are incorporating many processed, toxic, or deficient foods.

It seems like you, like most others, aim to just eliminate bad food. Many people think by just eliminating fried food they are eating healthy. People learn that vegetables are good for you but are rarely told why. I am suggesting that vegetables and other healthy foods help the body in a way not many people are aware of. That fruits and vegetables can substantially aid or even cure many chronic diseases. So I don't feel like I'm preaching common sense.

Gianni

Jennifer · Oct 19, 2012

Gianni said:
That fruits and vegetables can substantially aid or even cure many chronic diseases.

This is what you're trying to get at and trying to prove. Stay focused on that rather than bring up/put down/bash anything else. I don't care how other things are wrong I want to know how this is right. I want scientific studies and personal experience on how fruits and vegetables can cure chronic diseases. Are you cured yet? How long do you think it would take to cure yourself or will it take multiple generations to remove the possibility of getting Crohn's from our genes through a specific diet? Do you follow the diet you think is ideal 100%? If not, why?

Jennifer · Oct 21, 2012

Hey Gianni, haven't heard from you. Just giving you a tag.

Gianni · Oct 21, 2012

I'll answer those questions in different threads that I will make soon. For now, in this thread, I want to stick to this thread's topic.

Gianni

wildbill_52280 · Oct 22, 2012

truth is, i dont understand genetics enough to fully answer the question or know what its significance would be. but i believe what your concern is whether any part of the disease, predetermined? or otherwise almost your/our destiny?

i would have to say resoundingly no, why? because of the most basic of epidemiologic data we have on crohns that points to environmental factors to be a greater influence on disease occurance. not only geographical data, but chronological data dating from 1900-present. if it were simply genetic, the disease rates wouldnt fluctuate so greatly in these stated dimensions of time and space.

that raises serious doubts as to whether it was genetically determined or not.

one interesting fact that just came to my mind is low rates in china almost the lowest documented anywhere for instance compared to the highest rates, in a country i cant recall at the moment, it is 70X lower in china thats unbelievable, i have looked over the data and apparently they have been reluctant to use western medicine until only recently , the patterns in ibd incidence directly match up with the data on the increase in frequency of using western medicine, my own interpretations of the meaning of this data, support yet again, antibiotics to play some role in the development of many cases. but antibiotics may not be required to develop crohns, they have only become a another road to developing it.

Gianni · Oct 22, 2012

I too believe antibiotics have a role here.

Gianni

DustyKat · Oct 22, 2012

Antibiotics as a primary or secondary source and consumed by the sufferer and/or in previous generations?

Dusty.

Gianni · Oct 22, 2012

all the above ^

Antibiotics destroy the natural immune system. The beneficial gut bacteria makes up about 80% of our immune system and the antibiotics destroy it all and allows Candida and resistant harmful bacteria to thrive. Beneficial flora also helps detox the body from heavy metals and other toxins. Beneficial flora also helps assimilate nutrients and Candida will inhibit this process so deficiencies start to pile up and other problems start.

Because Crohn's is a result of a hyper-active immune system, it is definitely something to think about.

Antibiotics are in the meats we eat, and the milk we drink. Farmers are actually now injecting cows with e coli viruses to speed up the cows metabolism so that they produce more milk. Unfortunately this produces more bacteria and pus in the milk so the farmers just throw even more antibiotics into the milk.

The food systems seems to have a problem of fixing a problem with another problem. Farmers started feeding their cattle corn because it's cheaper but corn isn't digested well by cows and started to create e coli. E coli was then found in the meat. But instead of going back to grass, the meat factories decided they'd rather bleach the meat with ammonia and throw a bunch of antibiotics in it rather than pay the few extra dollars to keep healthy cows.

Of course though primary consumption of the antibiotics would be the worst.

Personally I believe the genetic link has to do with the weakening of the genomes. My parents didn't eat well and were on plenty of antibiotics. What i find interesting is that I am the youngest child of 4 and I have a severe case of crohn's. My brother also has crohns and he is the second youngest child but his is mild to moderate. I believe that my parents genome became weaker, to the point that when they had their first two children, their genomes were still relatively healthy. But when they had my brother the genome was weaker than before at the point of conception, and when they had me (in their 30's) the genome was even weaker because the years of abuse on the body adds up (more antibiotics,hormones,Gmo's, Pesticides, etc etc as time went on).

I grew up with a pediatrician who was very trigger happy with antibiotics. Have a sinus infection? "Here are some broad spectrum antibiotics" etc etc. I believe that through the weakening of my parents' genomes and the continuing weakening of my genome through antibiotics, diet.. etc etc, I had an increased chance of developing an autoimmune disorder.

Gianni

ellie · Oct 22, 2012

Hmm, isn't it hard to know!!
A significant part of me can't BELIEVE I have CD!
NO family Hx of IBD that I know of. An aunt on the maternal side had bad rheumatoid arthritis, aunt on the paternal side had a foot drop (mono neuritis ) following a GI infection. Sister has Meniere's Disease.
My Crohn's is relatively mild (where's some wood to touch!!?) In fact I couldn't really believe it at age 56, having been always plump and tending towards being constipated :/ (always ordered salad greens "dutifully"!)
Only useful bits to add are multiple courses of antibiotics for sinus infections 2000-2005, weight loss high protein shakes (coincided with major flare), and taking Xenical in another weight losing attempt (have since wondered about it's effect on bile salts!)
So to sum up?? A scattering of sort-of immune related contributors..
I do think these opportunities for "ideas melting pots" are an excellent opportunity to broaden the aetiological scope!.. some where in this mix will lie the answer

HD

Kip1 · Oct 22, 2012

My Irish relatives from way back up to 140 years ago as far as we can trace had bowel problems, some of which brought about there death. Its the Irish side (mums side) that still has Crohns & Colitis lurking around in many of us. There were no antibiotics given then so what caused the possible IBD.
I think that we get caught up too much in blaming certain drugs or maybe lifestyle for many of todays illnesses when in fact they were around before the drugs etc.

bangarang · Oct 22, 2012

I do believe genetics plays a role but its not everything except in the case for babies then its fully genetic. Eating a poor nutrient dense diet and some genetics is the one two punch that gets most people in my opinion.

acheallova · Oct 22, 2012

Well then, I'm a mystery then. No bowel problems in either side of family as far back as i can find AND never believed in pharmaceuticals ( or took any) until i got sick and have been put on a regimen. That is confusing now, isn't it?

Wooddy · Oct 22, 2012

Gianni said:
all the above ^
Personally I believe the genetic link has to do with the weakening of the genomes. My parents didn't eat well and were on plenty of antibiotics. What i find interesting is that I am the youngest child of 4 and I have a severe case of crohn's. My brother also has crohns and he is the second youngest child but his is mild to moderate. I believe that my parents genome became weaker, to the point that when they had their first two children, their genomes were still relatively healthy. But when they had my brother the genome was weaker than before at the point of conception, and when they had me (in their 30's) the genome was even weaker because the years of abuse on the body adds up (more antibiotics,hormones,Gmo's, Pesticides, etc etc as time went on).
Gianni

Gianni,

I like your thinking, but a genome doesn’t exactly become weaker. Let me explain.

There is no doubt that certain somatic changes in DNA occur due to the influence of external factors like pesticides, GMO’s, hormones, drugs, radiation, etc… or anything else otherwise known as a carcinogen and/or mutagen. The problem is that these types of mutations aren’t passed on from parents to children, unless of course you were cloned from somatically obtained DNA. So, unless there is something that you are not telling us about yourself, :wink: it’s unlikely that you would inherit any acquired genetic mutation that would cause you to have Crohn’s, from the exact situation you mentioned -- particularly if your parents didn’t acquire Crohn's from these mutagens. But I do not think that you are too far off the mark.

There is one other possibility, correct me if I am wrong, but I think this is what you may possibly be suggesting: If the mutations occur specifically in your parents’ germ-cells (eggs and sperm) you parents wouldn’t likely be directly affected by the mutations but their offspring would. In other words, it is conceivable that any of these aforementioned factors may have contributed to a germ-cell mutation in either your mother or father (or possibly both) which would not necessarily affect either of them but would result in a mutation in their offspring. Almost like a teratogenic affect that would be heritable from then on.

The mutations have to start somewhere, I suppose this is one possible mechanism.

Mountaingem · Oct 22, 2012

Kip1 said:
My Irish relatives from way back up to 140 years ago as far as we can trace had bowel problems, some of which brought about there death. Its the Irish side (mums side) that still has Crohns & Colitis lurking around in many of us. There were no antibiotics given then so what caused the possible IBD.
I think that we get caught up too much in blaming certain drugs or maybe lifestyle for many of todays illnesses when in fact they were around before the drugs etc.

One of my maternal great grandmothers was Irish, the other German Jew and my father is Norwegien/Estonian-no one had Crohn's but they did have fistulas and the cause was never determined...so who knows, really?

Both my parents abused drugs so I tend to think this is the actual cause for me, anyway.

Gianni · Oct 22, 2012

There is one other possibility, correct me if I am wrong, but I think this is what you may possibly be suggesting: If the mutations occur specifically in your parents’ germ-cells (eggs and sperm) you parents wouldn’t likely be directly affected by the mutations but their offspring would. In other words, it is conceivable that any of these aforementioned factors may have contributed to a germ-cell mutation in either your mother or father (or possibly both) which would not necessarily affect either of them but would result in a mutation in their offspring. Almost like a teratogenic affect that would be heritable from then on.

Yes I am saying this. These mutations will and do happen continuously within the germ-cells. It is how evolution works, the parents are becoming accustomed more and more to the climate and the necessary changes will occur within these germ cells to better adapt the offspring. Possibly with a bombardment of antibiotics necessary immune system response changes occur within the germ cells (i.e. immune system needs to become more active because the parents are continuously weakening theirs.) or simply the genome or dna within the germ cells are being weakened as well. The health of sperm has been shown to be effected by diet and other environmental factors so I assume that is also weakening the traits that the offspring will get.

Gianni

Wooddy · Oct 23, 2012

Gianni said:
Yes I am saying this. These mutations will and do happen continuously within the germ-cells. It is how evolution works, the parents are becoming accustomed more and more to the climate and the necessary changes will occur within these germ cells to better adapt the offspring. Possibly with a bombardment of antibiotics necessary immune system response changes occur within the germ cells (i.e. immune system needs to become more active because the parents are continuously weakening theirs.) or simply the genome or dna within the germ cells are being weakened as well. The health of sperm has been shown to be effected by diet and other environmental factors so I assume that is also weakening the traits that the offspring will get.

Gianni

Gianni,

This is what I was getting at earlier when it looked like you were driven to do some research on companies like Monsanto. No matter what kind of patent protection they have for their products the data is available for everyone to see. You don’t have to worry there is a ton of information, you’ll be surprised at what you find, that is if you are still interested in researching it. Here is one link with an interesting story, it also has a bunch of related links that you might find interesting as well.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/monsanto-s-bt-cotton-kills-the-soil-as-well-as-farmers/12432

Monsanto is a target for Grenpeace, which is why I suggested it. Greenpeace has a long history of protesting Monsanto and they have done lot of the leg work to find lots of juicy information if you care to look on their website as well. I am sure you know that Monsanto is not the only company but is a big one that contributes many of the questionable products that you and a lot of us are also concerned with. For example, Roundup, Celebrex and Nutrasweet are/were just a few of their products sold directly to the consumer. However, it's interesting to see which commercial companies are Monstanto's biggest customers and how many of those companies actually use Monsanto's products to make their own products and redistributed commercially to be bought by other companies who incorporated them into stuff someone might come in contact with or ate every day. No matter where you are in the world, it would be hard to avoid Monsanto.

Someone who was health conscious could avoid putting Nutrasweet (aspartame) in their herbal tea. However, they might unwittingly sweeten it with brand of all natural honey that is labeled "organic" thinking that it is safe to consume until they visit the honey producer and noticed that honeybees visit a nearby farm crop just sprayed with Monsanto pesticide. It's crazy how hard it is to avoid their products, they are ubiquitous and their stock price shows how well they are doing screwing people and getting away with it.

Even though germ-cell mutation is a viable mechanism for introducing heritable mutations into the human genome, it's also important to approach this with as much objectivity as possible. For example, if we blindly blame Monsanto or other companies for contributing to diseases or genetic mutations that cause diseases A,B and C it wont make a difference unless the data is organized data presented sensibly to convince enough people, or at least the right people to make necessary changes. Good luck.

Anyway, one of the biggest challenges might be in differentiating between familial occurrences of an inherited disease, from newly occurring mutations. Especially with diseases like IBD that have such a week familial link, it’s hard to pin point how what triggered them since there are so many genes that can be responsible. We can look at all the people that have responded to just to this thread alone, some have no other family members with any autoimmune problems and others have multiple family members with IBD.

For what it's worth, evolution has provided humans with a pretty good mechanism to weed out even germ-cell errors. This is evident from the progeny of the Japanese parents who survived Nagasaki and Hiroshima and the relatively low genetic problems they have. The problem is that a lot of time needs to pass before data can be collected that means anything. It’s too soon yet to measure the total effects of germ-cell mutations from the Chernobyl disaster but there might be a better reference in the future because apparently the Hungarians have maintained a registry for inherited diseases for years which helps to identify a benchmark http://jmg.bmj.com/content/25/1/2.full.pdf

Anyway, I am glad you started this thread, it was very informative, but I am a bit confused about something. I am not sure that I understand exactly what you mean when you use the word “weak” or “weakening the traits” when you are referring to genes or a genome. A weak genome generally refers to a smaller pool of genes, as in a small population of a castaways stuck on an isolated island somewhere -- and when one of them dies, the gene pool weakens further. However, if larger boat filled with people that have a myriad of genetic disorders shipwrecks on that same island causing the population to quadruple the gene pool would be strengthened because it would be larger, even if they only eat GMO food and wash it down with pesticides. I am not sure if you are using the word “weak” to describe mutated genes or if you are suggesting else. Can you clarify a little?

Gianni · Oct 23, 2012

Monsanto is a target for Grenpeace, which is why I suggested it. Greenpeace has a long history of protesting Monsanto and they have done lot of the leg work to find lots of juicy information if you care to look on their website as well. I am sure you know that Monsanto is not the only company but is a big one that contributes many of the questionable products that you and a lot of us are also concerned with. For example, Roundup, Celebrex and Nutrasweet are/were just a few of their products sold directly to the consumer. However, it's interesting to see which commercial companies are Monstanto's biggest customers and how many of those companies actually use Monsanto's products to make their own products and redistributed commercially to be bought by other companies who incorporated them into stuff someone might come in contact with or ate every day. No matter where you are in the world, it would be hard to avoid Monsanto.

Someone who was health conscious could avoid putting Nutrasweet (aspartame) in their herbal tea. However, they might unwittingly sweeten it with brand of all natural honey that is labeled "organic" thinking that it is safe to consume until they visit the honey producer and noticed that honeybees visit a nearby farm crop just sprayed with Monsanto pesticide. It's crazy how hard it is to avoid their products, they are ubiquitous and their stock price shows how well they are doing screwing people and getting away with it.

Well fortunately California has a ballot initiative this election that will label GMO products and if it passes it will be the first of a chain reaction that will hit Monsanto and other Gmo companies very hard. Other states will follow suite if California starts to label GMO products and shareholders will lose faith in the company.

Anyway, I am glad you started this thread, it was very informative, but I am a bit confused about something. I am not sure that I understand exactly what you mean when you use the word “weak” or “weakening the traits” when you are referring to genes or a genome. A weak genome generally refers to a smaller pool of genes, as in a small population of a castaways stuck on an isolated island somewhere -- and when one of them dies, the gene pool weakens further. However, if larger boat filled with people that have a myriad of genetic disorders shipwrecks on that same island causing the population to quadruple the gene pool would be strengthened because it would be larger, even if they only eat GMO food and wash it down with pesticides. I am not sure if you are using the word “weak” to describe mutated genes or if you are suggesting else. Can you clarify a little?

Now you are confusing me lol. From what I understand, a genome refers to an organisms complete set of genes and DNA. Basically a genome refers to the entirety of an organisms hereditary information. Or it basically is what makes up the species... if that makes sense.

I think I may understand what you are referring to. A genome, I supposed, could be thought more specifically towards a population. For example if i say the Vilcabamba people of Ecuador have a stronger genome than the people of New York. I am not referring to the size of the population but rather the health of the organisms' "make up".

So basically when i refer to someone weakening their genome, I am referring to them weakening their genes and basically what makes them a human.

Did that answer your question?

Wooddy · Oct 23, 2012

Gianni said:
Now you are confusing me lol. From what I understand, a genome refers to an organisms complete set of genes and DNA. Basically a genome refers to the entirety of an organisms hereditary information. Or it basically is what makes up the species... if that makes sense.

I think I may understand what you are referring to. A genome, I supposed, could be thought more specifically towards a population. For example if i say the Vilcabamba people of Ecuador have a stronger genome than the people of New York. I am not referring to the size of the population but rather the health of the organisms' "make up".

So basically when i refer to someone weakening their genome, I am referring to them weakening their genes and basically what makes them a human.

Did that answer your question?

By definition a strong genome means a large pool of genes. The variety of genetic "make up" that you are referring to is determined by specific Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNPs). So in the example you just cited, the inference that was made about a smaller gene pool of people being stronger was actually incorrect. It's misleading to describe individual genes as becoming "weaker" or "stronger" Individual gene's don't weaken or strengthen, they mutate. It's the susceptibility to mutation that you are referring to, not the strength of genome.

I believe the point you're trying to convey is the Vilcabamba people have the ability to resist genetic changes or mutation compared to New Yorkers, which is probably correct. But lets try to compare apples to apples. Vilcamabas live in a stress free environment, the climate is consistent all year and they are surrounded by foods that have some of the strongest anti-oxidant properties in the world. This can offer any genome a lot of protection and is the same reason that Greenpeace likes to go after companies like Monsanto. The Vilcabamas are still human just like you and me. I am willing to guess that if they changed places with New Yorkers they would be susceptible to the same genetic fate as their bodies adapt.

Here is link that you might find handy if you haven't already seen it. Actually, this guys website is chock-full of knowledge

http://www.khanacademy.org/science/...genetics/v/genetics-101-part-2--what-are-snps

Gianni · Oct 23, 2012

By definition a strong genome means a large pool of genes.

What definition? In biology a genome refers to the organisms complete genetic make up.. hints the words genes and chromosome combined to make genome. Even the dictionary has this definition.

I believe the point you're trying to convey is the Vilcabamba people have the ability to resist genetic changes or mutation compared to New Yorkers, which is probably correct. But lets try to compare apples to apples. Vilcamabas live in a stress free environment, the climate is consistent all year and they are surrounded by foods that have some of the strongest anti-oxidant properties in the world. This can offer any genome a lot of protection and is the same reason that Greenpeace likes to go after companies like Monsanto. The Vilcabamas are still human just like you and me. I am willing to guess that if they changed places with New Yorkers they would be susceptible to the same genetic fate as their bodies adapt.

I wasn't making a statement here lol, I was giving you an example of what I thought you meant. Obviously i realize it is because of the environment. Read the context of my last post and you will understand what I was saying. I picked New york out of thin air. I could have just as easily have said Mickey mouse has a stronger genome than Donald Duck... Don't read into this and say it isn't fair comparing the genomes of a mouse and a duck...

Gianni

Wooddy · Oct 24, 2012

Gianni said:
Don't read into this and say it isn't fair comparing the genomes of a mouse and a duck...

Gianni

This isn't a contest, so being fair doesn't apply. There is nothing fair or unfair about it. It is about understanding the context on the same level so that we can move on.

Gianni said:
What definition? In biology a genome refers to the organisms complete genetic make up.. hints the words genes and chromosome combined to make genome. Even the dictionary has this definition.
Gianni

I am not trying to split hairs here. I just want to learn as much as possible by removing as much ambiguity as possible. The larger and more diverse the gene pool is in a particular genome the stronger it’s considered to be. Do you agree that is correct? Because, the response you gave indicates that you do not agree with that concept. When you say, "What definition?” it implies that you are not certain of nature of the context that is being addressed. Which is fine, but instead of making an irrelevant reference to the dictionary it would be easier to cite an example. For instance, if you gave an example of a specific genetic characteristic that makes an identical gene "stronger" in one subset of people over another it might help explain exactly what you are trying to say.

To clarify, when I say larger and more diverse I don’t mean larger or different karyotype, it's not really that obscure, otherwise I would be talking about the difference between ducks and mice instead of humans.

Some (not all) of the things that you suggest or theorize in this thread make a lot of sense and you describe them with an interesting non-conventional angle of approach that is gratifyingly unique. It takes a lot to put your ideas out there to dangle for others to scrutinize. Not very many people feel comfortable doing that but I it is an excellent way to learn. I am not trying to put you on the defensive. It might sound that way, but it's hard to display affect when you type, even with the availability of emoticons :eek2: :ybatty:

The concepts and terminology discussed in this thread have a deep-rooted technical background and the colloquial use of phrases like "strong genome" introduce layer of ambiguity that makes it harder to sort out what you are trying to explain. Thinking conventionally, I am wondering if you are suggesting that "fortified" and "unfortified" would more accurately describe what you mean when you refer to a genome as being "stronger" or "weaker"? If that is not the case, please elaborate, because I am missing something.

Ihurt · Oct 24, 2012

Very interesting theories indeed. I have not been dx yet, I am going through some tests( tomorrow MRE of small intestines). Though I have been sick since 2003 with all sorts of other chronic illnesses.

Is Crohn's genetic, well I think it can be in some people, but I wont say that it is exclusively genetic. I do believe that crohn's disease and other immune issues may be triggered by diet in some people as well as by medications. If you think about it, Crohn's disease is not seen in the third world countries really. The reason I think is because the foods are not processed ( pesticides etc..) like they are here. Also a lot of these places do not have access to all kinds of fast food places and such. Their food is usually eaten in it's natural state( raw). They also do not have access to medications like we do here. When they get infections, they just deal with it or use some type of natural remedy to try and get well. ( which sucks of course as sometimes meds are needed and they do save lives sometimes). Also over here the FDA regulates everything( which is good, but they do let a lot of stuff pass through that probably should not have been in my opinion). For instance, here they add all sorts of hormones and stuff to milk which God knows what it is doing to our kids. They feed our animals here antibitoics like it is part of their regular meals( this is not good). Well then we ingest the meats and get all the bad stuff with it. This does not happen in third world countries.

I mean I sure they get sick with a lot of other stuff in these countries due to sanitation issues with their food, but that is a different story.

Here is another interesting fact I learned. AWhile back I read a story about how celiacs has started to pop up in a lot more people. I remember reading that many people are getting celiacs now because the wheat farmers have cross-germinated their wheat with a hardy type weed that is not digestible to the human gut. They seen a huge spike in people coming down with celiacs after this happened. And of course the reason the wheat farmers do this is likely so the wheat can grow in abundance and hence they make more money. I also read that Ireland is the one place where they still harvest wheat in it's natural form( it is not cross-germinated with anything else).

So yeah, I would like to say that I truely believe that a lot of these orphan diseases that are popping up like crazy have a lot to do with foods, and environmental issues( pollution etc..), and medications and chemicals that the human body was never meant to comsume.

I know in my particular case, I was a very healthy person for the most part, and I got a flu shot and two weeks later my health took a downfall. So in my case I do think chemicals played a huge part in me getting sick.

Gianni · Oct 24, 2012

I was a very healthy person for the most part, and I got a flu shot and two weeks later my health took a downfall. So in my case I do think chemicals played a huge part in me getting sick.

I also got a flu shot about 6 months before i got sick, not sure I can deduce it was the cause though or a causing factor.

Also over here the FDA regulates everything( which is good, but they do let a lot of stuff pass through that probably should not have been in my opinion).

The FDA is about as corrupt as they come, they are awful at their jobs. I really think we would be better without them.

Gianni · Oct 24, 2012

I am wondering if you are suggesting that "fortified" and "unfortified" would more accurately describe what you mean when you refer to a genome as being "stronger" or "weaker"?

I suppose you can call it that.

Jer · Oct 24, 2012

Well, since my sister, my brother and myself all have Crohn's, I'm sure genetics play a big role, but IMHO there must be a trigger to get the ball rolling.

Ihurt · Oct 24, 2012

You have a point Gianni. I mean I do know that I am constantly hearing about drugs that were approved by the FDA and deemed safe, then a year later you find out a bunch of people are dying from taking the drug. It is pretty scary.

The FDA is about as corrupt as they come, they are awful at their jobs. I really think we would be better without them.[/QUOTE]

wildbill_52280 · Oct 24, 2012

gianni, i was wondering if your crohns occurs higher up your small intestine, in addition to the ileum? or to your knowledge is only the ileum affected, or is it the typical ileo-colonic?

Gianni · Oct 24, 2012

Just the ileum as far as I know. I've had three colonoscopies two of which showed Ileal Crohn's and one which showed no evidence of disease.

Gianni

Gianni · Oct 24, 2012

You have a point Gianni. I mean I do know that I am constantly hearing about drugs that were approved by the FDA and deemed safe, then a year later you find out a bunch of people are dying from taking the drug. It is pretty scary.

Yup because money talks. If you are old enough I'm sure you remember the drug vioxx and the FDA's refusal to take it off the market even after being linked to nearly 60,000 deaths. Eventually they did.

There have been many investigative journalists who have dug deep into the corruption of the FDA. A google search on FDA and corrupt yields thousands of results.

Wooddy · Oct 25, 2012

Gianni said:
Yup because money talks. If you are old enough I'm sure you remember the drug vioxx and the FDA's refusal to take it off the market even after being linked to nearly 60,000 deaths. Eventually they did.

There have been many investigative journalists who have dug deep into the corruption of the FDA. A google search on FDA and corrupt yields thousands of results.

The FDA certainly isn't perfect. Vioxx was withdrawn 8 years ago, and since then there have been a numerous other drugs removed from the market -- however, Avandia still remains available in the US but has been withdrawn in Europe.

What I don't like, is the commercials that you see on TV for prescription drugs. Before 1997, it used to be illegal for drug companies to advertise on TV. It was the FDA who changed the rules quietly, without congressional approval to allow this marketing. Before that rule change, the doctor decided what drug you needed, if any at all, after an examination in his/her office. What happens now is, people walk in to the doctor's office and demand Drug X but don't worry if that doctor doesn't prescribe it, their practice will suffer because the patient will go to a doctor who will. This puts a tremendous amount of pressure on the doctors to give out prescriptions unnecessarily. Apparently, it has also seemed to have backfired on Merck with Vioxx, but propelled Pfizer's stock to increase over 300% after Viagra was approved in 1998 and the fact that they were able to tell you about it on TV didn't hurt sales!

I am not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch of the imagination, but I understand the FDA is manipulated by the drug companies. That's something that doesn't require an advanced degree to sort out and I think most of us agree on this point.

The reason that I am responding to this particular post is because I am hoping to find an answer to a question that my wife and I have had for a very long time. :sign0085: We really want to know, from anyone reading this thread, why does the commercial for Cialis feature two separate "his" and "her" bathtubs? How does that work? :hug: :kiss: :confused2: :ybatty:

Ihurt · Oct 25, 2012

Hey Woody,

I dont know, but when I see the commercials they scare the crap out of me. I mean they always end the commercial with telling you " serious reactions have happened when using the drug, such as tuberculosis, lymphoma, and in some cases, death. Please talk to your doctor if you experience any of these reaction". Ahh, really???? I especially like how they expect you to talk to your doctor if death was one of your experiences!:ywow:

I myself find it that some doctors are the ones that kind of push the drugs, not really the other way around. At least not in my case. All the side effects scare me off really fast.

I still cannot figure out the two bathtubs in the cialis commercial though

. You would think they would be in one tub together, hehehhe

DustyKat · Oct 25, 2012

We really want to know, from anyone reading this thread, why does the commercial for Cialis feature two separate "his" and "her" bathtubs? How does that work?

Now bearing in mind that I have never seen the ad and had to google what the med was, I will hazard a guess...

An advertising guy trying to think like a woman and therefore thinking this is perfect foreplay and as a result the bloke in the ad is going to score. :ylol:

Wooddy · Oct 25, 2012

Ihurt said:
I myself find it that some doctors are the ones that kind of push the drugs, not really the other way around. At least not in my case. All the side effects scare me off really fast.

I still cannot figure out the two bathtubs in the cialis commercial though . You would think they would be in one tub together, hehehhe

Ihurt,

Funny you should mention that because companies like IMS Heath buy prescription data from pharmacies all around the country/world and sell it back to the drug companies. Although when the data is sold to IMS from the pharmacy the patient specific data is not included, however, the doctor's name is and the prescribed drug is. So every drug rep knows exactly which doctors are prescribing their drugs and how frequently the prescriptions are getting filled. So if you want to know why antibiotics are so heavily prescribed or why Nexium and Nasonex are flying off pharmacy shelves, it's because the drug reps are visiting your doctor and pressuring him/her to write prescriptions. A drug rep can walk into Dr. Kilpatient's office and tell him exactly what he was prescribing, how many new prescriptions he wrote for that drug in a certain time frame and how many times those prescriptions were refilled. He can also see if that doctor was writing prescriptions for a competing drug instead and then pressure him to change to the one that he is selling even though it might be more expensive or offer no advantage over the other. They keep a very nice tally don't they? Keep mind that the drug reps salary is based on commission -- it can be very lucrative career to legally push drugs.

Besides all the pressure that the public gets from the TV commercials, if that doesn't work to increase sales because the advertisement didn't make sense, you don't have to worry because the doctor is going to push it anyway. That is why there are two tubs, after taking so much Cialis the couple is worn out after too much sex and needs a break so they go in their individual tubs to relax after rolling around on the beach!

Ihurt · Oct 25, 2012

Ha ha , that is hilarious!

But yeah, you are right. I do always see those reps in the doctors office giving away free samples of drugs to the doctor. There have been times when I have seen like three different drug reps in my doctors office within the hour pushing different drugs.

I remember a few years back I use to see this one doctor and I am not kidding you, I went to see him for back pain and he gave me a script for nexium!! I was like " umm, I dont have heartburn, my back hurts"! Do you think the doctors get a kcikback everytime they prescribe a drug?? I just think it is nuts.. I know when my son was little ( he has asthma), well when I would bring him to the doctor, they would always want to give him antibitoics, even when he just had a cold. I would Not give them to him unless he really started having an issue, like fever or something like that. But yes, you are right, doctors do push certain meds a bit too much and unnessasarily a lot of the time..

Wooddy said:
Ihurt,
. That is why there are two tubs, after taking so much Cialis the couple is worn out after too much sex and needs a break so they go in their individual tubs to relax after rolling around on the beach!

Gianni · Oct 25, 2012

We really want to know, from anyone reading this thread, why does the commercial for Cialis feature two separate "his" and "her" bathtubs? How does that work?

I personally haven't seen the ad but I would guess it's part of the FCC's regulations. Just how beer commercials can never show a person drinking beer, I bet that an E.D. drug can never show such intimacy during the commercial. Maybe they can roll around in sand but sharing a bathtub might be crossing the inappropriate line for commercial television especially if it is during family viewing hours (I.e. before 10pm).

Gianni

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

Ihurt said:
Ha ha , that is hilarious!

But yeah, you are right. I do always see those reps in the doctors office giving away free samples of drugs to the doctor. There have been times when I have seen like three different drug reps in my doctors office within the hour pushing different drugs.

I remember a few years back I use to see this one doctor and I am not kidding you, I went to see him for back pain and he gave me a script for nexium!! I was like " umm, I dont have heartburn, my back hurts"! Do you think the doctors get a kcikback everytime they prescribe a drug?? I just think it is nuts.. I know when my son was little ( he has asthma), well when I would bring him to the doctor, they would always want to give him antibitoics, even when he just had a cold. I would Not give them to him unless he really started having an issue, like fever or something like that. But yes, you are right, doctors do push certain meds a bit too much and unnessasarily a lot of the time..

Ihurt,

Not too long ago the drug companies would entice doctors to prescribe their drugs by rewarding them in one way or another but would barely try to make it look legit.

I cut and pasted the requirements for physicians to maintain their license in the next paragraph so you can see the relevance.

Continuing Medical Education (CME) credit hours are required for all licensed medical doctors. Licensed health professionals must earn continuing education units (CEU), but medical doctor specific units, are called CME. The number and type of CME credit hours are defined by the states. Coursework must be approved by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) as defined by the American Medical Association (AMA). Coursework is divided into two categories. These categories are Category 1 (formal classes with post-test evaluation) and Category 2 (self directed learning).

For example, in Pennsylvania the State Board of Medicine requires medical doctors to complete a total of 100 CME credit hours every two years. A minimum of 20 CMEs must be chosen from Category 1 credit hour options. Twelve (12) CME credit hours must cover Risk Management, or Patient safety. Coursework may fall into Category 1 or Category 2 guidelines. The balance of required CMEs may be covered in Category 2 activities. So you can see that Category 1 CME are not only time consuming, but a pain in the ass to get because you had to study and pass a test. Who wants to do that?

In the past, a drug company might help a doctor fulfill this requirement by sponsoring an event for CME that would give the doctor 20 or more hours of Category 1 credit while on a 1 or 2 week cruise on a private yacht/cruise-liner owned or rented by the drug company. In order to receive credit, the doctor might have to attend a 2 hour lecture at the end of each day, while eating a gourmet dinner served with the most expensive wine and you can bet the doctor giving the lecture had a glass in his hand while he was giving the lecture as well. On the other hand, they might have had the option of attending a lecture during breakfast as they prepared for a day of fishing for Marlin. One thing that is certain, the CME lectures focused on the drugs that the sponsoring drug company was promoting at the time and the doctors got credit to maintain licenses to practice from them.

The kickbacks are still there for sure -- however, they have been toned down a bit in recent years for a number of reasons, partly to save face before increasing public pressure would be force to act FDA to intervene. [The FDA regulates the drug companies but you can see that in the end, it’s the drug companies who pull the strings]

Now, the drug companies aren’t allowed to sponsor and CME events, they all even stopped giving out free goodies. They used to give out all kinds of good free stuff like pens, clocks, Phillies tickets, you name it they had their name on it… But don’t worry they still have a good grip on the doctors and the other people prescribing their medications. If your doctor gives out lots of samples, you can bet that the drug rep is rewarding him/her for writing prescriptions for drugs made by that drug company. Kind of like a crack dealer that gives you a free sample every once in a while so you use his stuff and not someone else’s. Even the grocery store pharmacies give you free antibiotics to lure you in to their store and it’s all legal. 85%-90% of the time, upper respiratory infections are caused by a virus and antibiotics are not indicated. However, if the doctor has a coupon from the drug company for a very expensive antibiotic to give to you that will eliminate your co-pay you will take it to the pharmacy, not pay a cent, the pharmacy will make money, the drug company will make money, and you will get a drug that you don’t need. The worst part about that is that it might cause you harm, but don’t worry it was free to you after all so it doesn’t matter.

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

Gianni said:
I personally haven't seen the ad but I would guess it's part of the FCC's regulations. Just how beer commercials can never show a person drinking beer, I bet that an E.D. drug can never show such intimacy during the commercial. Maybe they can roll around in sand but sharing a bathtub might be crossing the inappropriate line for commercial television especially if it is during family viewing hours (I.e. before 10pm).

Gianni

Gianni, are you suggesting that they should start making X-rated commercials? :biggrin:

Don't forget that 10pm on the West Coast is much different on the East Coast, the networks might encounter some problems, maybe they should get Howard Stern to promote these drugs instead of a bathtub. :ytongue:

Gianni · Oct 26, 2012

Don't forget that 10pm on the West Coast is much different on the East Coast, the networks might encounter some problems, maybe they should get Howard Stern to promote these drugs instead of a bathtub.

Of course but you won't see all the same commercials I see if we are both watching monday night football. Often commercials differ based on region/timezone.

Additional programming will occur at 10pm on west coast and east coast... For example if you were watching uhhh (don't watch much tv)... two and a half men each thursday, it will show after 10pm on east coast, and again on the west coast.

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

Gianni said:
Of course but you won't see all the same commercials I see if we are both watching monday night football. Often commercials differ based on region/timezone.

Additional programming will occur at 10pm on west coast and east coast... For example if you were watching uhhh (don't watch much tv)... two and a half men each thursday, it will show after 10pm on east coast, and again on the west coast.

When I watch TV, I usually watch the History Channel and since according to my wife, I am about as big as two and a half men, my wife forbids be to watch the Cialis commercials so I don't know what's going on that late except what ever she wants... :ytongue:

Gianni · Oct 26, 2012

I feel like the history channel has been saturated with a bunch of alien encounter shows recently D:

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

Gianni said:
I feel like the history channel has been saturated with a bunch of alien encounter shows recently D:

Need to make a series on the History of IBD!!!!

Gianni · Oct 26, 2012

Wooddy said:
Need to make a series on the History of IBD!!!!

let's make one!

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

Who's gonna offer up the first video chronicling their first colonoscopy?

Gianni · Oct 26, 2012

a more important question is would they censor the whole procedure?

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

hmm, not if it was John Madden during half time on Monday Night Football!

Gianni · Oct 26, 2012

lol:lol2:

Gianni · Oct 26, 2012

Of course the browns would need to be playing

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

Seriously, there needs to be a medical history channel

Wooddy · Oct 26, 2012

Gianni said:
Of course the browns would need to be playing

OMG! that was wrong on so many levels! :rof:

:nonono::dance:

wildbill_52280 · Oct 26, 2012

Gianni said:
Just the ileum as far as I know. I've had three colonoscopies two of which showed Ileal Crohn's and one which showed no evidence of disease.

Gianni

im asking this to try to perhaps explain why you are doing so well consuming juices, assuming you actually drink some of the recipes you have shared on other posts which at least include apples, carrots and sweet potatoes.

i believe someone with a greater small intestinal involvement may not do so well on a juice blend made with these, because most of the digestive process happens in the small intestine, these sugars would cause more diarhea, and the mucus would impair digestion. for instance i have more small intestinal involvement, something like apples that contains perhaps only 2-5 grams of sucrose would lead to diarhea in 1-3 days.

im glad you are doing so well on your regimin, but take note, do not overgeneralize and assume just because we all have a general label of crohns or UC, that what you do will apply to the next person simply because of the general crohns label, there are more specificitys and ranges of the crohns/ibd condition.

im sure what im saying has likely occured to you already, but it didnt seem like you communicated it that well, or i failed to read it somewhere in your posts. but i dont want to discourage you from giving advice that could help someone.

Gianni · Oct 26, 2012

i believe someone with a greater small intestinal involvement may not do so well on a juice blend made with these, because most of the digestive process happens in the small intestine, these sugars would cause more diarhea, and the mucus would impair digestion. for instance i have more small intestinal involvement, something like apples that contains perhaps only 2-5 grams of sucrose would lead to diarhea in 1-3 days.

im glad you are doing so well on your regimin, but take note, do not overgeneralize and assume just because we all have a general label of crohns or UC, that what you do will apply to the next person simply because of the general crohns label, there are more specificitys and ranges of the crohns/ibd condition.

im sure what im saying has not occured to you before, but it didnt seem like you communicated it that well, or i failed to read it somewhere in your posts. but i dont want to discourage you from giving advice that could help someone.

When I was flaring, I already was having D quite often, so when juicing I didn't really notice a difference. When I did my first juice fast however, I never even needed to go to the bathroom, I think because it was made very absorbable, but then again I rarely included fruit into my juices when I first started.

Yes I do realize some people would not benefit from fruit in their juices and is why I recommend primarily vegetable juices.

I suppose I look at it as the body will utilize all these vegetables and some fruits to help build the immune system and the immune system in return will not have to use so much inflammation (which will then help with the digestion). You can read all about that in my juicing as a treatment option thread.

Small intestine crohn's can effect the assimilation of nutrients more so than any other type, but i believe that doesn't mean nutrition through fruits vegetables should be avoided, because in my mind nutrition is the answer. If you don't feel the same way, then don't include the fruits.

But yes I should be more specific about different types of Crohn's/UC when it coms to juicing. I don't mean to come off as someone who draws assumptions.

Thanks,

Gianni

wildbill_52280 · Oct 27, 2012

Gianni said:
When I did my first juice fast however, I never even needed to go to the bathroom, I think because it was made very absorbable, but then again I rarely included fruit into my juices when I first started.

the fact you didnt have a bowel movement is interesting.
from what i have read, stool is 50-90% bacteria, it is a result of bacterial fermentation. in an ideal situation, your stool may consist of 90% bacteria, as then most of the actual food would have been broken down and absorbed with little to no maldigestion/malabsorption in the small intestine, and the only thing remaining is the fiber components that are for the bacteria to ferment in the colon, and a certain amount of waste products released from the bile. ideally, stool formation is a general marker of health. this almost suggests the bacteria may not prefer this type of fiber in whatever vegetables you have included, but i wouldnt make and firm conclusions based on such little information, but its interesting.

Gianni · Oct 27, 2012

juicing removes the fiber, and i clear out my system as much as possible before a fast.

Jennifer · Oct 27, 2012

Gianni said:
juicing removes the fiber, and i clear out my system as much as possible before a fast.

What do you do to "clear out" your system? What's the purpose in doing so?

Gianni · Oct 27, 2012

A week of a really high fiber diet through vegetables. Drinking plenty of water, not any other type of drink. Both those things will clear you right up. And if i'm feeling really inspired, a coffee enema will definitely do the trick, although not as much fun.

By clearing out your system you are allowing more nutrients to be assimilated. All that bacteria and other build up just sits there so clearing out your system makes the intestines healthier by being cleaner, removing toxins that are just sitting there, and getting your whole tract ready for a high dose of nutrition

!

Jennifer · Oct 27, 2012

A lot of that bacteria is good bacteria that we need. So you intentionally destroy your natural gut flora by inducing diarrhea in hopes that you'll digest better? Do you have any research that shows people absorb nutrients better after horrible bouts of diarrhea?

Edit: Do you recommend other people do the same before a juice fast? What if they already suffer from chronic diarrhea?

Gianni · Oct 27, 2012

It won't create diarrhea... Fiber just pushes things along and actually creates more formed stool. A coffee enema simply will remove the feces just sitting there. Good bacteria is constantly being removed through each bowel movement anyways. The enema will cause a lil stress on the colon so the intestines will get working and moving... that's all. The coffee will just help detox your liver, which will make room for more fat soluble vitamins

I believe it is the strongest known liver detox method

I've actually only done the enema once before a juice fast. It is interesting how much energy I felt right after (probably because of the coffee part) but that was my easiest juice fast because I think my body didn't have to push as many toxins out.

For the community juice fast right now, all I'm recommending is a high fiber diet a few days before+a good amount of water (if they are comfortable with high fiber) and by high fiber I mean vegetables only. Also leafy vegetables will give plenty of fiber and won't be as hard on the digestive system for those worried.

Gianni

Jennifer · Oct 27, 2012

When I eat raw leafy vegetables they come out as raw leafy vegetables. You could make a salad out of it all over again.

It does bring on diarrhea not only in me but for many people on the forum. Fiber is a natural diuretic so yes it will cause diarrhea in MANY.

Gianni · Oct 27, 2012

I'm guessing you meant a laxative rather than a diuretic.

Soluble fiber will actually act as a sponge and add bulk to your bowel movements. The only reason why I think it would cause diarrhea is if there is active inflammation or if you just have too much fiber.

The truth is fiber regulates bowel movements and that's a well known fact.

I guess if someone has diarrhea when introduced with fiber, they would fall under the category of fiber bothering them and may not want to introduce fiber before a juice fast.

Wooddy · Oct 28, 2012

Gianni said:
A coffee enema simply will remove the feces just sitting there. Good bacteria is constantly being removed through each bowel movement anyways. The enema will cause a lil stress on the colon so the intestines will get working and moving... that's all. The coffee will just help detox your liver, which will make room for more fat soluble vitamins I believe it is the strongest known liver detox method

I've actually only done the enema once before a juice fast. It is interesting how much energy I felt right after (probably because of the coffee part) but that was my easiest juice fast because I think my body didn't have to push as many toxins out.
Gianni

Gianni,

Interesting that you mention coffee enemas. I am assuming that you use organic coffee. I am curious if you have any references that outline the benefits of coffee enemas on the type of bean used and as related to the degree that the beans are roasted?

Curiously, when I was first diagnosed with UC, I seemed to achieve some relief from drinking coffee, but not all the time. There were so many other factors involved, that it was hard to pinpoint coffee's role. It seemed that the darker the roast the more beneficial the effects. Check out that link below.

http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlepdf/2011/FO/C1FO10055F

I have never tried a coffee enema, but I have happily been in remission for 10 years now. If for some reason I flare again, I will consider the most effective method of administration to achieve relief. I am wondering if you are aware of any study that directly compares the benefits of rectally administered coffee vs orally consumed coffee with respect to IBD -- and/or identifies circumstances that demonstrate what method of administration would provide optimal benefit.

Do you believe crohn's is purely genetic?

Moderator

Senior Member

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Adminstrator

Moderator

Moderator

Adminstrator

Moderator

Adminstrator

Moderator

Moderator

Adminstrator

Adminstrator

Moderator

Moderator

Super Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Super Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Adminstrator

Moderator

Adminstrator

Moderator

Adminstrator

Moderator