On Aug 31, 12:54 pm, Lyle Bogart <lylebog...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, not necessarily so. The Amish have been studied extensively (or as > extensively as can be done given difficulties involving technology) for the > very reason of the high prevalence of high fat, high protein diets, obesity > rates vastly below that of non-Amish America, vastly lower cancer rates > (except perhaps breast cancer) than non-Amish America.
okay. so a select group of people with a genetic make-up that makes them more resistant lung cancer can smoke and have lower rates of lung cancer compared to the general population. ergo, smoking does "not necessarily" lead to increased risk of lung cancer for people who don't share those genes? same logic, right? If so, I'm not sure I find the Amish counterpoint persuasive. FWIW, I recall reading somewhere that heart disease is still the leading cause of death in Amish communities, despite some genetic resistance to it. which isn't shocking. anyway, i don't mean to overstate anything about any foods . .. i simply called some foods "markers." these diet markers turn up over in over in cases of disease and obesity. that's an irrefutable fact. are they the sole cause? no, of course not. and I never stated (or overstated) that they were. genetics play a role. environment plays a role. lifestyle plays a role. those are all part of the health equation. I'm officially out of this one, but will gladly debate offlist! It's an important discussion. and I know it's intensely personal for some (myself included). Patrick -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
