On 12/18/2023 at 9:14 PM, CanadaSam said:

I am amazed at the prevalence of meat in the Thai diet, it seems that everywhere, everyone eats loads of pork, chicken, and very little veggies, IMO.

 

All that meat, especially if it is fatty cuts, will do them the world of good. There is a lot of research showing that meat consumption is healthy, even if the mainstream media and some activist groups try to tell us that is not. Granted, "conventional wisdom" was that fat should be avoided - and I agree that trans fat absolutely should be avoided - but fatty cuts of meat are, I believe, food from the Gods. Do your own research on this.

 

I try to eat fatty cuts of red meat often and enjoy ribeye 3 or 4 times / week. Fortunately, I am in a part of the world where all beef is grass-fed and prime cuts of meat are relatively inexpensive. I have increased my meat / animal-protein markedly in recent times and I really do feel better for it.

 

 

21 hours ago, Luuk Chaai said:

Negative .....    Fibre is not needed for a proper Human Diet

                         Statins are not your friend   

                          The entire carb / grain / veggie  sugar (don't forget the poison seed oils )  are part of the Kellog's / Morman bought and paid for lie

 

                          Human's thrive on carnivorous diets  "Saturated fat's " are your real friend .. eat beef !

                          Start out with BBBB  (0" carbs ) Beef Butter Bacon Eggs for 60 days ..  then go get your bloodwork rechecked

                          Amazing.  how getting back to nature heals the body 

                           

 

Bullseye! Agree 100%!

 

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, do the opposite of what mainstream media says. Embrace red meat. Don't shy away from fats and do add salt to taste.

12 hours ago, billd766 said:

If I were to take anybody's advice on this forum it would be Sheryl's and nobody else's.

 

She KNOWS what she is talking about whereas most of the posters only know about themselves and their problems.

 

If you were to line up and interview 10, 20 or more posters they may have similar problems, but their cures would be different. What works for one person, may not work for another or even anybody else, no matter what they believe or say.

Based on that why do you bother giving advice? surely it's best if you say nothing?

16 hours ago, Sheryl said:

I meant that use by people who do NOT have coronary artery disease is of less clear benefit. You DO have CAD and there is no question but that you should continue the prescribed statins. 

 

The source is a peer-reviewed journal. However the authors repeatedly stress that this is a hypothesis of what may  be the case.  It is a controversial article.

 

 

I would add to the above that, although it is listed as a peer-reviewed journal, the qualifications and affiliations of the authors are less than clear to me.

 

They seem to belong to the "Nagoya City University and Institute for Consumer Science and Human Life"  which despite its name seems based at Kinjo Gakuin University, a small private women's college.  I can find no information on  this Institute other than other articles written by the same people in online journals (all of them of similar bent).  Website for Nagoya University does not mention this Institute under any of its faculties that I can see.

 

From the article, the authors have expertise in pharmacology but not epidemiology and many of their hypotheses simply do not fit what we see happening in the real world, epidemiologically. There ave been innumerable long term prospective studies related to coronary artery disease and if in fact stain use increased its prevalence or severity this would have been apparent by now. The journal this appears in is one of pharmacology not epidemiology or cardiology.

 

Which is not to say statins are totally benign or should be used indiscriminately.  But the propositions in this article are far fetched to say the least.  Between an in vitro lab finding and actual impact on living organisms there are many steps and factors.

 

The Co-Enzyme Q10 depletion mentioned is well known. Use of  Q10 supplementation for patients on statins has been proposed and is  routine in Japan, but several random controlled studies have failed to show any effect from it. These however focused on muscle pain and muscle related changes, not coronary effects. Nonetheless no harm in taking a Q10 supplement and personally, I  put a family member with CAD who requires statins on it.

 

 

18 hours ago, newnative said:

     I'm in the same boat and I'm curious as to whether you have had a CAC (Coronary Artery Calcium) test and, if so, what your score was.  Like you, I have been taking a statin for high cholesterol for at least 20 years, which has kept my cholesterol within normal ranges.   At my last physical, the doctor gave me a CAC test, which I don't believe I have ever had before, even though I have high cholesterol.

     My reading on the CAC test was 433, which is considered very high.  Zero to 100 is the normal range.  I've since had an MRI, which indicated my heart arteries have blockages but are not severe enough to need stents at this point.  I had not yet seen this posted article with new research on statins or I would have ran it by my heart doctor when I had the MRI. 

    I find myself questioning the effectiveness of statins since I ended up with blocked arteries anyway after taking statins for at least 20 years.  While the statin kept my cholesterol in the normal range, it apparently did little or nothing, in my case, to prevent the buildup of calcium in my arteries.  Or, perhaps the buildup could have been worse.  Color me confused at this point.

I have NOT had a CAC test. The original (I think it's called a lipid test) test showed a high number of 9+. A following test showed that Simvastatin reduced this to lower than 5. I have not had any further tests done and I don't like taking drugs, but it's very easy to take 1x40mg tablet each night and, if it "keeps my tubes clear" than I'm happy to keep doing it.

I don't think that Statins per se were around very much when my father died aged 69 in 1984. He was overweight, did not lead what one could describe as a healthy lifestyle and his job was as an overhead crane driver working for British (English) Steel --- just imagine what he was ingesting every day --- sulphur pentoxide and all that.

So far, I'm in reasonable health. I do drink, mainly Chang, and the occasional red wine, but I stopped smoking 23 years ago. I'm 72 years old.

Just one final point --- I was OK when I visited my GP over 30 years ago. It was during a general check-up when he asked me about family history. Had I not told him about my father (who incidentally had succumbed to heart attacks and a couple of strokes prior to his demise) he would never have recommended the lipid test, I wouldn't have been put on Simvastatin --- and who knows, I may not have been writing this?   

3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Based on that why do you bother giving advice? surely it's best if you say nothing?

But YOU give advice all the time.

 

The advice that I give is not compulsory. It can be taken or ignored as people wish.

 

I try not to recommend anything in particular, unlike you and if I find something that works for me then I offer the advice point out, that while it works for me, it may not work for everybody.

 

Nor do I ram my choices down anybody's throat as you seem to do.

 

Advice is simply an opinion, everybody can have one.

 

I prefer to listen and read up an articles written by professionals how know what they are talking about, rather than read and listen to some anonymous person on an English forum, on an obscure website in Thailand.

 

If you don't like my "advice", then don't read my posts.

3 hours ago, 5davidhen1 said:

I have NOT had a CAC test. The original (I think it's called a lipid test) test showed a high number of 9+. A following test showed that Simvastatin reduced this to lower than 5. I have not had any further tests done and I don't like taking drugs, but it's very easy to take 1x40mg tablet each night and, if it "keeps my tubes clear" than I'm happy to keep doing it.

I don't think that Statins per se were around very much when my father died aged 69 in 1984. He was overweight, did not lead what one could describe as a healthy lifestyle and his job was as an overhead crane driver working for British (English) Steel --- just imagine what he was ingesting every day --- sulphur pentoxide and all that.

So far, I'm in reasonable health. I do drink, mainly Chang, and the occasional red wine, but I stopped smoking 23 years ago. I'm 72 years old.

Just one final point --- I was OK when I visited my GP over 30 years ago. It was during a general check-up when he asked me about family history. Had I not told him about my father (who incidentally had succumbed to heart attacks and a couple of strokes prior to his demise) he would never have recommended the lipid test, I wouldn't have been put on Simvastatin --- and who knows, I may not have been writing this?   

Thanks for the information.  Appreciate it.

6 hours ago, Sheryl said:

I would add to the above that, although it is listed as a peer-reviewed journal, the qualifications and affiliations of the authors are less than clear to me.

 

<snip>

 

From the article, the authors have expertise in pharmacology but not epidemiology and many of their hypotheses simply do not fit what we see happening in the real world, epidemiologically. There have been innumerable long term prospective studies related to coronary artery disease and if in fact stain use increased its prevalence or severity this would have been apparent by now. The journal this appears in is one of pharmacology not epidemiology or cardiology.

 

Which is not to say statins are totally benign or should be used indiscriminately.  But the propositions in this article are far fetched to say the least.  Between an in vitro lab finding and actual impact on living organisms there are many steps and factors.

 

<snip>

 

Bearing in mind the fact that I'm NOT a medical  professional,  I do think this adds a little weight to my previous reply to you @Sheryl  in that (IMO) 

"I do think it behoves anyone with any medical condition to keep up to date on developments from reliable sources and then ask the pertinent questions."

 

Basically, what you don't know CAN hurt you but it's also very easy for we amateurs to get bogged down in unnecessary hypotheses from unestablished sources. 

On 12/19/2023 at 8:07 AM, tandor said:

Thais eat a wide range of fruits all year round, and if not incorporated in their main dish it is always offered as a dessert.

Mr. Google says this:   The incidence rate of colorectal cancer in Thailand is low when compared with other countries. It is the third in frequency in males after liver and bile duct and lung cancers, and the fifth after cancers of the cervix, breast, liver and bile duct and lung for females.

Dont forget their addiction to somtam....and not forgetting Yaam.

55 minutes ago, SunsetT said:

Dont forget their addiction to somtam....and not forgetting Yaam.

 

I don't know what Yaam is but somtam has lots of fiber and goodness including vit c. I don't eat it much because I try to avoid all that salt and it tastes bland without fish sauce.

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I don't know what Yaam is but somtam has lots of fiber and goodness including vit c. I don't eat it much because I try to avoid all that salt and it tastes bland without fish sauce.

Yaam is just another type of Thai salad.

On 12/19/2023 at 7:41 PM, Mark Nothing said:

I like straight answers, in simple language, that is simple to implement, and shows immediate positive benefits.  This opposite of this article's goal.

 

The Bible is my health inspiration.  In the Book of Genesis many of the characters lived to be over 900 years old.  So I studied what they did to try and replicate it.  This was a time when pharmaceutical companies speaking a foreign language, medicalese, did not exist.

 

First off was perfect diet, fruits, vegetables, seeds, nuts and pure rain water.  Food and water was free of synthetic inorganic minerals made in a laboratory like today.  My water distilling machine has a thick concrete like residue after distilling bottled water which appears similar to the arteriosclerosis hardening of the arteries cholsterol buildup.

 

The second important element was proper mental health free of worry allowing a fully functioning immune system.  The first characters in the Bible spoke and met directly with God.  This seemed to make them extremely healthy mentally allowing the immune system to operate at full power to eliminate any impurities clogging up the body.  So I implemented this practice to ask God to bless my food and keep my body healthy with a daily prayer.  

 

The ailments dissappeared, and full healthy life resulted. I equate medicalese language as a tiger ready to pounce on his prey.  So I run for cover when spotted and avoid it.

Going directly from the Bible, your allotted years were determined by God after the flood as "three score and ten", or 70 years. This is a pretty good estimate. On average people live longer than that only because of medical intervention, but through the ages; before modern medicine was invented/discovered, most people died much younger than this.

 

God intervened after the flood, (before which people lived nearly 1000 years), by resetting your body's time clock. It has nothing at all to do with what you eat, how often you pray, or anything else you can do. You can pray all day long but you're still going to die. Sure, you can maybe extend it some years and you might be lucky to have extra good genes. 

 

Interestingly, a study of centenarians discovered that on average, they were more likely to smoke and drink, and less likely to exercise or eat well.

 

It's more important how well you live rather than how long you live. We can call this your health span, which comes to an end in your marginal decade. Your lifespan can have several useless years near the end if you're not lucky enough to die suddenly, avoiding the endless suffering of a slow death.

6 hours ago, SunsetT said:

Dont forget their addiction to somtam....and not forgetting Yaam.

i went to a popular thai restaurant yesterday in Sattahip, no vegetables on the menu, just a choice of 8 dishes, rice or noodles and meat, egg

6 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

i went to a popular thai restaurant yesterday in Sattahip, no vegetables on the menu, just a choice of 8 dishes, rice or noodles and meat, egg

Yes there are many like this. Sounds like what we call a 'fast food' restaurant selling the most popular basic Thai dishes. Cheap and cheerful 'spit and sawdust' just tables and chairs but the food can be very good. But as you say short on veg. When we eat somewhere like that, if I ask her. my missus will ask them to put some extra veg in the fried rice for me. There is some veg. in some of these dishes: Kale with crispy pork (kana moo grop), pad see yuu; the dry flat noodle version of Rad naa also has a fair bit of kale. The noodle soup also has some veg. in it. I like Chinese Thai restaurants the best. They are the best restaurants for non-spicy veg.

1 hour ago, SunsetT said:

Yes there are many like this. Sounds like what we call a 'fast food' restaurant selling the most popular basic Thai dishes. Cheap and cheerful 'spit and sawdust' just tables and chairs but the food can be very good. But as you say short on veg. When we eat somewhere like that, if I ask her. my missus will ask them to put some extra veg in the fried rice for me. There is some veg. in some of these dishes: Kale with crispy pork (kana moo grop), pad see yuu; the dry flat noodle version of Rad naa also has a fair bit of kale. The noodle soup also has some veg. in it. I like Chinese Thai restaurants the best. They are the best restaurants for non-spicy veg.

i only have that type of food once a week, other days i go to a place that includes a good variety of veg, broccoli, cauliflower, green beans, carrots, mushrooms 

I don't normally eat out so lunch today was a good old British favourite.

 

2 fried bacon and fried egg sandwiches, with salted butter and HP sauce. No veggies.

 

I only eat it once every 2 or 3 weeks.

 

Lovely.

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

I don't normally eat out so lunch today was a good old British favourite.

 

2 fried bacon and fried egg sandwiches, with salted butter and HP sauce. No veggies.

 

I only eat it once every 2 or 3 weeks.

 

Lovely.

 

Live! You only die once!

 

I'd rather live till 65-70 but able to eat this, rather than eating rabbit food all my life and live to 80-90.

14 hours ago, azt219 said:

 

Live! You only die once!

 

I'd rather live till 65-70 but able to eat this, rather than eating rabbit food all my life and live to 80-90.

When you change your diet to something healthy you actually enjoy it believe it or not, i don't enjoy a fry up fat boy breakfast anymore

20 hours ago, azt219 said:

I'd rather live till 65-70 but able to eat this, rather than eating rabbit food all my life and live to 80-90.

 

Dinnertime!

 

 

Going on 75, great numbers, no meds needed.

 

17 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

Dinnertime!

 

 

Going on 75, great numbers, no meds needed.

 

Would be better with some carbs, mash would be great

4 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Would be better with some carbs, mash would be great

 

No. Besides, you knew what carbs are, you'd see that it does indeed include carbs.

12 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

No. Besides, you knew what carbs are, you'd see that it does indeed include carbs.

those vegetables are not enough 

11 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

those vegetables are not enough 

 

LOL.

 

Burp!

12 hours ago, BigStar said:

 

Dinnertime!

 

 

Going on 75, great numbers, no meds needed.

 

 

Good one, that looks like a great meal. Keep eating like that and you'll get close to 100!

On 12/19/2023 at 4:52 PM, mstevens said:

There is a lot of research showing that meat consumption is healthy, even if the mainstream media and some activist groups try to tell us that is not.

 

New study shows red meat helps to protect against cancer. Too lazy to link sources. 

 

16 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

those vegetables are not enough 

 

I dont bother with vegetables anymore.

Apart from sauerkraut because it's fermented. Koreans eat kimchi, which is similar. 

And olives. But olives are actually a fruit. 

 

18 hours ago, BigStar said:

 

Dinnertime!

 

 

Going on 75, great numbers, no meds needed.

 

Hi Bigstar. Where/when was that pic taken --- the (beef?) steak looks great, and how much was it?

Thanks.

4 hours ago, save the frogs said:

 

I dont bother with vegetables anymore.

Apart from sauerkraut because it's fermented. Koreans eat kimchi, which is similar. 

And olives. But olives are actually a fruit. 

 

why no vegetables? i love vegetables plus fibre and all that, constipated?

4 hours ago, 5davidhen1 said:

Hi Bigstar. Where/when was that pic taken --- the (beef?) steak looks great, and how much was it?

Thanks.

 

D@mn good, enjoyed every bite. Longhorn Steakhouse Pattaya. Walking by, I had noticed the promotion for B595 or thereabouts. The competition's brutal in that arcade, as Patrick's and Beefeater are right there, too.

 

Now I'm getting hungry!  

6 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

why no vegetables? i love vegetables plus fibre and all that, constipated?

 

I joined the anti vegetable brigade, although people like me are in the severe minority.

I wont waste much time debating, because I don't want to tell people what to eat. 

To avoid constipation, fruit.