Chiropractic Healthiness

Question:

Does anyone have information regarding nutritional preparation prior to surgery?  I recall reading somewhere, sometime that certain steps can be taken nutritionally to ensure that the patient heals faster.  A good friend is having a hysterectomy next week and I would like to pass on info if available.  Surgery is necessary because she has a 16mm cyst on ovary.  Thanks P Phillips

Response:

<<Does anyone have information regarding nutritional preparation prior to surgery?  I recall reading somewhere, sometime that certain steps can be taken nutritionally to ensure that the patient heals faster.  A good friend is having a hysterectomy next week and I would like to pass on info if available.  Surgery is necessary because she has a 16mm cyst on ovary.  Thanks>> At the very least, she needs to be taking the B-complex and vitamin C. If she takes a lot of vitamin C, the urine tests may read the excess C in the urine as sugar. They’re similar chemically. But whoever is doing the lab work  can compensate. I would recommend keeping up the vitamins afterwards. BTW, I recently read an article, I think in the Journal of Hospital Infection, that C-section patients had a 41-46 percent risk of contracting an infection in the hospital. Different surgery, but somewhat similar incision. Jack Challem Editor The Nutrition Reporter (TM) newsletter

Response:

Does anyone have information regarding nutritional preparation prior to surgery?  I recall reading somewhere, sometime that certain steps can be taken nutritionally to ensure that the patient heals faster.  A good friend is having a hysterectomy next week and I would like to pass on info if available.  Surgery is necessary because she has a 16mm cyst on ovary.  Thanks P Phillips Vitamin C and zinc are great for helping the body to heal itself.  Both are also good for prevention of disease.  Make sure that you get natural instead of synthetic products.  The best brand I’ve found is Shaklee.

Response:

some have recommended the homeopathic "arnica"

Response:

> <<Does anyone have information regarding nutritional preparation prior to > surgery?  I recall reading somewhere, sometime that certain steps can be > taken nutritionally to ensure that the patient heals faster.  A good > friend is having a hysterectomy next week and I would like to pass on > info if available.  Surgery is necessary because she has a 16mm > cyst on ovary.  Thanks>> > At the very least, she needs to be taking the B-complex and vitamin C. If she > takes a lot of vitamin C, the urine tests may read the excess C in the urine > as sugar. They’re similar chemically. But whoever is doing the lab work  can > compensate. I would recommend keeping up the vitamins afterwards.

Not a particularly good idea to do any of this without discussing it with your doctor and the surgeon first. sdb —

Response:

>Vitamin C and zinc are great for helping the body to heal itself.  Both are >also good for prevention of disease.  Make sure that you get natural instead >of synthetic products.  The best brand I’ve found is Shaklee.

What I’ve read about Shaklee products implies that they are very deficient in vitamin B-12.  This could lead to anemia.  If you value your health, make sure your nutritional supplements contain adequate supplies of B-12.

Response:

>There has been significant research on the benefits of Chlorella, >because of one of its components named Chlorella Growth Factor. >CGF is not a single element but a complex combination of amino acids, >nucleic acids, peptides and carbohydrates that have yet to be all >isloated and identified. It is described as a growth factor because of >its ability to stimulate tissue growth and repair. Independent >research around the world has demonstrated that CGF, and an acidic >polysaccharide found in chlorella’s cell-wall, will both stimulate >production of interferon by the body,  strengthening our natural >immune response. Interferon is the substance that stimulates >macrophage. leucocyte and lymphocyte activity and controls the >mobility of these white blood cells that form our front line defence >against viral, bacterial, chemical and foreign protein invasions.

Care to cite the research papers where this stuff was published? Preferably, papers published in a serious scientific journal like _Nature_, as opposed to a newsletter for Japanese chiropractors. It seems strange that an algae would manufacture a chemical for stimulating human cell growth.  And even if it did, wouldn’t that make it likely to be a carcinogen (i.e. causes cancer)?  If this chemical is so new that no one even knows what’s in it, isn’t it a bit early to be recommending it for human consumption?  We could find out years from now that it’s harmful!  What if it takes 20 years for the cancers to appear?  Better to stick with stuff that has a long track record of safe use in humans. >Incidentally Chlorella contains more B12 than beef liver – one of the >richest meat sources of this vitally important vitamin. One of

On what basis do you make this statement.  I heard on sci.med.nutrition that algae contain a considerable number of corrinoids (general term for the class of molecules that includes B-12) which test positive on standard tests used to measure B-12, but which do not have nutritional activity as a replacement for B-12.  And even if the algae did have B-12 in it, it would be destroyed in the processing used to prepare it for the consumer.  That’s why regular B-12 (i.e. cobalamin) is not used in vitamin supplements.  The molecule is far too unstable to survive normal handling and storage procedure. Instead, a semi-synthetic form of B-12, cyanocobalamin, is used. This molecule is tough enough to survive canning in the production of baby formula, and yet it retains nutritional B-12 activity. >Nature’s highest levels of natural beta-carotene, Plus Vitamin C and E >are found in chlorella. These are the three vitamins that have been >widely acclaimed as antioxidant free radicl quenchers.

Yes, but in what quantity?  And at what price?  Those three vitamins are widely available in concentrated form at low prices. >I supply Nature’s Balance Pure Premium Grade Chlorella via Mail order >if you cannot find it in your health food store.

Ah, so that’s why you’re making so many preposterous and unsupported claims for _Chlorella_.  How will we find you 20 years from now when the cancers start popping up?  And, what will you say?  I’m sorry? Anyone using _Chlorella_ should consider the implications of its vile taste.  The human sensory organs have evolved over millions of years to help distinguish between helpful and harmful materials.  Stuff you shouldn’t eat like shit, corpses, rotten fruits and vegetables all smell and taste bad.  Good stuff like fresh fruit and vegetables, roasted meat, baking bread all smell and taste good.  If _Chlorella_ is good, why does it taste so very bad? Furthermore, _Chlorella_ contains a powerful growth _inhibitor_, chlorellin.  See the journal _Science_, vol 99 pages 351-352, the article by Pratt, et al.  I wonder what the effect of _that_ would be on "healing".

Response:

: Ah, so that’s why you’re making so many preposterous and unsupported : claims for _Chlorella_.  How will we find you 20 years from now when : the cancers start popping up?  And, what will you say?  I’m sorry? Chlorella didn’t start being consumed today, Mark, so this argument is wrong. It has been in use for at least fifty years. Spirulina has been in use for centuries. —

Response:

>>Vitamin C and zinc are great for helping the body to heal itself.  Both are >also good for prevention of disease.  Make sure that you get natural instead >of synthetic products.  The best brand I’ve found is Shaklee. >What I’ve read about Shaklee products implies that they are very deficient >in vitamin B-12.  This could lead to anemia.  If you value your health, >make sure your nutritional supplements contain adequate supplies of B-12.

Dear All, There has been significant research on the benefits of Chlorella, because of one of its components named Chlorella Growth Factor. CGF is not a single element but a complex combination of amino acids, nucleic acids, peptides and carbohydrates that have yet to be all isloated and identified. It is described as a growth factor because of its ability to stimulate tissue growth and repair. Independent research around the world has demonstrated that CGF, and an acidic polysaccharide found in chlorella’s cell-wall, will both stimulate production of interferon by the body,  strengthening our natural immune response. Interferon is the substance that stimulates macrophage. leucocyte and lymphocyte activity and controls the mobility of these white blood cells that form our front line defence against viral, bacterial, chemical and foreign protein invasions. Incidentally Chlorella contains more B12 than beef liver – one of the richest meat sources of this vitally important vitamin. One of Nature’s highest levels of natural beta-carotene, Plus Vitamin C and E are found in chlorella. These are the three vitamins that have been widely acclaimed as antioxidant free radicl quenchers. I supply Nature’s Balance Pure Premium Grade Chlorella via Mail order if you cannot find it in your health food store. Regards Mike Sandford.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->There has been significant research on the benefits of Chlorella, >because of one of its components named Chlorella Growth Factor. >CGF is not a single element but a complex combination of amino acids, >nucleic acids, peptides and carbohydrates that have yet to be all >isloated and identified. It is described as a growth factor because of >its ability to stimulate tissue growth and repair. Independent >research around the world has demonstrated that CGF, and an acidic >polysaccharide found in chlorella’s cell-wall, will both stimulate >production of interferon by the body,  strengthening our natural >immune response. Interferon is the substance that stimulates >macrophage. leucocyte and lymphocyte activity and controls the >mobility of these white blood cells that form our front line defence >against viral, bacterial, chemical and foreign protein invasions. >Care to cite the research papers where this stuff was published? >Preferably, papers published in a serious scientific journal like >_Nature_, as opposed to a newsletter for Japanese chiropractors. >It seems strange that an algae would manufacture a chemical for >stimulating human cell growth.  And even if it did, wouldn’t that >make it likely to be a carcinogen (i.e. causes cancer)?  If this >chemical is so new that no one even knows what’s in it, isn’t it a >bit early to be recommending it for human consumption?  We could >find out years from now that it’s harmful!  What if it takes 20 >years for the cancers to appear?  Better to stick with stuff that >has a long track record of safe use in humans. >Incidentally Chlorella contains more B12 than beef liver – one of the >richest meat sources of this vitally important vitamin. One of >On what basis do you make this statement.  I heard on sci.med.nutrition >that algae contain a considerable number of corrinoids (general term >for the class of molecules that includes B-12) which test positive >on standard tests used to measure B-12, but which do not have >nutritional activity as a replacement for B-12.  And even if the >algae did have B-12 in it, it would be destroyed in the processing >used to prepare it for the consumer.  That’s why regular B-12 >(i.e. cobalamin) is not used in vitamin supplements.  The molecule >is far too unstable to survive normal handling and storage procedure. >Instead, a semi-synthetic form of B-12, cyanocobalamin, is used. >This molecule is tough enough to survive canning in the production >of baby formula, and yet it retains nutritional B-12 activity. >Nature’s highest levels of natural beta-carotene, Plus Vitamin C and E >are found in chlorella. These are the three vitamins that have been >widely acclaimed as antioxidant free radicl quenchers. >Yes, but in what quantity?  And at what price?  Those three vitamins >are widely available in concentrated form at low prices. >I supply Nature’s Balance Pure Premium Grade Chlorella via Mail order >if you cannot find it in your health food store. >Ah, so that’s why you’re making so many preposterous and unsupported >claims for _Chlorella_.  How will we find you 20 years from now when >the cancers start popping up?  And, what will you say?  I’m sorry? >Anyone using _Chlorella_ should consider the implications of its vile >taste.  The human sensory organs have evolved over millions of years >to help distinguish between helpful and harmful materials.  Stuff you >shouldn’t eat like shit, corpses, rotten fruits and vegetables all >smell and taste bad.  Good stuff like fresh fruit and vegetables, >roasted meat, baking bread all smell and taste good.  If _Chlorella_ >is good, why does it taste so very bad? >Furthermore, _Chlorella_ contains a powerful growth _inhibitor_, >chlorellin.  See the journal _Science_, vol 99 pages 351-352, >the article by Pratt, et al.  I wonder what the effect of _that_ >would be on "healing".

Dear Mark, It seems a shame that a person cannot join this group without all this bitching however I will try to keep my reply short and to the point. If someone has a question in future I will reply to them privately so that they can make their own minds up. It is shame that peoples attention will not be brought to this natural product that has been on this earth for 2.5 BILILON YEARS however such is life. Firstly I have in front of me an excellent book which contains 185 references to research carried out over many years. These bibliographies are from as early as 1929 up to present date. These range from the Huntington Research Centre to The Medical Tribune and from the Kanazawa Medical University to The Journal of American Pharmaceutical Association.  I think that this amount of research justifies my statement > there has been significant research on the benefits of Chlorella. However if you don’t believe me I will gladly give you the title of the book. Secondly the maunfacturer of this particular brand of Chlorella is the longest established and largest Chlorella producer in the world. Their Chlorella is the ONLY non domestic brand available in the Japanese health food stores because of the stringent independent testing carried out by the Japan Food Research Laboratory. Since 1964, their production technology has been continually refined and updated to maintain their reputation as the world’s foremost producer of pure, premium grade chlorella. As Chlorella is the #1 selling nutritional supplement in Japan, where approx. 7 million Japanese take it, I presume that it’s 31 year track record negates your arguement. I have also in front of me the assay performed by the Japan Dairy Technical Association giving the composition and analysis of Chlorella again I presume that they know what they are talking about regarding the B12 content in comparison with Beef Liver. I understand from the manufacturers that they do not use traditional milling methods in the production of their Chlorella, so your arguement regarding B12 being destroyed is irrelevant. Thirdly I merely pointed out chlorella’s Beta-carotene, vitamin A & C content was in addition to many other vitamins and minerals which are too numerous to list here. Yes I do supply via mail order not everybody has the luxury of having a health food store on their door steps, also not all stores stock pure premium grade chlorella, yes, there is a very big difference in the grades that are available. I don’t know what brand of Chlorella you have been taking or maybe there is something wrong with your taste buds but none of my customers have ever commented on the taste. Incidentally liver tastes like shit to me but it’s supposed to be good for me!!!!!!! It makes me gag!!!!! I am very sorry that your opinions differ so much from mine however I do feel that encouragement should be given to new users like myself and hope that I can continue to make my opinions known to people who have an interest in this outstanding natural product. Regards Mike

Response:

>>Here is a quote from Nutrition News  1987 Vol.X No2 Siri Khasala, >Riverside CA 92507  ISSN 8756-5919. >That’s almost correct.  Germany and Japan both had programs to research >the mass cultivation of algae for food and fuel during World War 2. >This technology got picked up by the Carnegie Institute, and in the >late 1940’s and early 1950’s they funded research at Stanford Research >Institute and Arthur D. Little to explore this technology.  _Algal_ >_Culture_ was a report on the early research and a summary of the >research being done worldwide.

I am glad that in your own words  you admiited ‘That’s almost correct’. I would like to get a copy of _Algal_Culture report if you could let me know how to get hold of it I would be most grateful. I am also going to attempt to get from the manufacturers a copy of their latest research findings. This may of course take some time but be assured i will get back to you on this one. >I don’t remember offering any quack medicine advice in fact all I have >Here’s a quote from one of your earlier postings, to refresh your memory: ># There has been significant research on the benefits of Chlorella,

Like it or not there has been and still is significant research continually going on. As most of it appears to be in Taiwan & Japan it is unfortunate for you that you do not believe any research outside of USA is relevant ># because of one of its components named Chlorella Growth Factor. ># CGF is not a single element but a complex combination of amino acids, ># nucleic acids, peptides and carbohydrates that have yet to be all ># isloated and identified.

What is quack medicine about this statement? There are many elements of all sorts of naturally occuring medicines that have yet to be all isolated and identified. It is described as a growth factor because of ># its ability to stimulate tissue growth and repair. Independent ># research around the world has demonstrated that CGF, and an acidic ># polysaccharide found in chlorella’s cell-wall, will both stimulate ># production of interferon by the body,  strengthening our natural ># immune response.

The first experiment to demonstrate the immune stimulating and detoxification power of Chlorella was performed in 1973 by Kojima and Associates ( A new Chlorella Polysaccharide and its accelerating effect on the phagocytic activity of the reticuloendothelial system. Recent Adv. RES 13.11 1973). Many more studies also demonstrate that Chlorella Stimulates the immune sysrem by way of macrophage stimulation. 1.Neveu,PJ. O.Morin,M.Miegeville, BP LeMevel and C.Vermeil. Modulation of antibody synthesis by an anti-tumour alga.Experientia 34/12, p1644-1645 1978 2Yamaguchi,N.,S.Shimizu,T. Murayama, T. Saito, RF. Wang, and YC.Tong: Immunomodulation by single cellular algae (Chlorella pyrenoidosa) and anti-tumour activities for tumour bearing mice. Third International Congress of Developemetail and comparative Immunology, Reims France July7-13 1985. 3.Kobayashi,S.: Journal of Japanese Reticuloendothelial Society 10,83 1971 4.Kobayashi, S. Agricultural Chemistry 46,373,1972 5.Kobayashi,S. Influence of Chlorella extract on reticuloendothelial phagocytosis of rats. Health and Industry Newslatter, March 25 1978 Agricultural Chemical Convention. Japan.  Interferon is the substance that stimulates ># macrophage. leucocyte and lymphocyte activity and controls the ># mobility of these white blood cells that form our front line defence ># against viral, bacterial, chemical and foreign protein invasions.

This statement stands, I have personal experience in its ability to heal a burns wound that even the skin specialist was as a loss to explain. >That sounds like a quack medical claim to me. >>Surely, out of 185 references, you must have many which meet this >>common standard for scientific rigor. >1. Pratt, R., and Mautner, H. Antibiotic activity of seaweed extracts >Journal of american Pharmaceutical Assoc. (Scientific edition) 40:575 >1951 >Funny you should use this one as #1.  Did you not notice that this Pratt >is the same guy I cited a couple of posts ago?  The guy who in _Science_ >vol 99 pages 351-352 described chlorellin, a cytotoxic substance >manufactured by _Chlorella_.  _Chlorella_, like many if not most free- >floating microalgae, synthesizes cytotoxins to deter the microscopic >animals that graze on it and to kill off competing organisms.  Cytotoxins >probably aren’t a good thing to eat, don’t you agree?

Can you please tell me what a cytotoxin is and what effect it has.? what amount is released in comparison to all the other toxins that are present in the air that we breathe, the food that we eat and the water that we drink. >2.Hixson, J.R. : Beta-carotene showing promise as Topical Agent. >Medical Tribune August 6, 1986 p.3 >Irrelevant to your claims about the immune system. >3.Kirk, R.E and D.F.Othmer. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Vol3 >p879. The Intersciece Encyclopaedia Inc. New York. 1949 (2nd edition) >Why do you cite such an early edition?  I think there’s a current edition >of this work.  What’s the article title?  If it isn’t in the current >edition, I’m sure it was taken out because later research disproved it.

Can you tell me where it was disproved >4.Smith,W.L. and Livingstone A. Wound Healing American Journal of >Surgery 67.p30-39.1945 >Again, isn’t this a little far back?  If this is the most recent >article on this aspect of _Chlorella_, I assume this was a dead-end line >of research.

No, in this country many hospitals and doctors are using chlorella >5.Young, R.W. and J.S.Bergei Use of Chlorophyllin in the Care of >Geriatric patients. Journal of American Geriatrics Society.XXVIII, >No.1 p.46-47, 1980. >Does this article actually mention _Chlorella_.  It doesn’t sound >like it. >6.Terziev,V.B.Planski and Y.Encheva. The effect of chlorella as a >prophylatic means against Bronchopneumonia. Veterinary Science XX(1) >p36-39, 1983 >I don’t think Stanford would have this journal, because they don’t >have a veterinary program.  Who is the publisher? >I could go on & on with this list but there are research papers from >all over the world.

I was merely attempting to explain how far back and how far reaching the research has been >I assume you’ve culled the six best references from your list of 185. >Is that it?  Were all 179 other references not even up to this level? >Your references are ancient, obsolete, representing dead-ends of research, >or papers that are not relevant of your quack medical claims.  Do you >have even ONE paper in a recent scientific journal supporting your claims >of immune system effects humans for the dried algae?  No, of course you >don’t!

No I didn’t chose the six best references, I don’t have the time to type them all out, as for current research papers as it is the japanese who appear to be researching the subject and you can’t get them at Stanford it’s not really worth my while quoting them is it? >It is a pity that you have to pick on only Vitamin C. As the quote >from Algal Culture states it would provide more than the minimum >requirement, this rather verifies and substantiates that Chlorella >does have substantial nutritional value!!!!! >According to that quote, you need a QUARTER OF A POUND PER DAY of the >dried algae to get the U.S. RDA of vitamins.  I get the same U.S. RDA >from a tablet that weighs over 100 times less than the algae.  You’d >have to eat a block of dried algae about the size of a hamburger to >get that much nutrition.

Again as I don’t have the time to type out the full analysis perhaps you could let me know what the RDA is for Vitamin B1,B2,B3,B6,B12 and Vitamin C and E. I wil then let you know what the per 100 gram anlaysis is. IF as I assume you are trying to prove, that Chlorella has no significant nutritional value then you will have destroyed my belief in my product. PLEASE GET BACK TO ME ON THIS ONE> >How is anybody who has an interest in this group ever going to find >out about the alternatives available in the market place if we can’t >mention a product. >How are you going to make some fast money if you aren’t free to use >the net to hoodwink as many fools as you can find?

I do not need to make any fast money. I am a distributor of an excellent product. No one forces my customers to re-order month in month out. No one forces them to give me their persoanl testimonys. They buy the product because in many cases traditional medicine has been unable to help them. With many people it is only a matter of achieving body balance. At no time has there been any mention of miracle cures, this produst is an ALTERNATIVE CHOICE which is why people come to this newsgroup to find precisely that. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>Post all you like.  However, don’t expect quack medical claims to go >>unchallenged. >I do not remember making any medical claims any where. God Forbid. >I quoted one of your earlier posts earlier.  Read it. >This was I thought an alternative health group which is as I >understand it an alternative to traditional  methods, naturally >opinions will differ and I will continue to reserve the right to >express it. >Opinions are things like "I like chocolate".  But when you say things >like "X has effect Y", that is not an opinion.  It is a statement >which is either true or false.  If I were to say "_Chlorella_ excretes >cytotoxins", I can back that up with papers in refereed scientific >journals, so it seems like it is true.  If you say "_Chlorella_ does >not excrete cytotoxins", I can present evidence that shows that >statement is not true.

I am genuinely interested in the arguement, please verify what effect cytotoxins have and the amount that is released. If you have a paper that says CHLORELLA excretes cytotoxins, do you also have a paper that says that the cytotoxin released by chlorella is … read more »

Response:

>Here is a quote from Nutrition News  1987 Vol.X No2 Siri Khasala, >Riverside CA 92507  ISSN 8756-5919. >Chlorella was originally studied for its potential as a worldwide >protein source. It is almost 60 percent protein and it produces this >protein 50 times more efficiently than other protein crops (about 40 >tons per acre annually compared with half a ton of soy acres per acre >at 39 percent protein) Since the beginning of this century research >and developement of Chlorella passed from Germany to the United States >to Japan. There the Japanese scientists developed Chlorella into one >of the finest health food supplements in the world.

That’s almost correct.  Germany and Japan both had programs to research the mass cultivation of algae for food and fuel during World War 2. This technology got picked up by the Carnegie Institute, and in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s they funded research at Stanford Research Institute and Arthur D. Little to explore this technology.  _Algal_ _Culture_ was a report on the early research and a summary of the research being done worldwide. >I don’t remember offering any quack medicine advice in fact all I have

Here’s a quote from one of your earlier postings, to refresh your memory: # There has been significant research on the benefits of Chlorella, # because of one of its components named Chlorella Growth Factor. # CGF is not a single element but a complex combination of amino acids, # nucleic acids, peptides and carbohydrates that have yet to be all # isloated and identified. It is described as a growth factor because of # its ability to stimulate tissue growth and repair. Independent # research around the world has demonstrated that CGF, and an acidic # polysaccharide found in chlorella’s cell-wall, will both stimulate # production of interferon by the body,  strengthening our natural # immune response. Interferon is the substance that stimulates # macrophage. leucocyte and lymphocyte activity and controls the # mobility of these white blood cells that form our front line defence # against viral, bacterial, chemical and foreign protein invasions. That sounds like a quack medical claim to me. >Surely, out of 185 references, you must have many which meet this >common standard for scientific rigor. >1. Pratt, R., and Mautner, H. Antibiotic activity of seaweed extracts >Journal of american Pharmaceutical Assoc. (Scientific edition) 40:575 >1951

Funny you should use this one as #1.  Did you not notice that this Pratt is the same guy I cited a couple of posts ago?  The guy who in _Science_ vol 99 pages 351-352 described chlorellin, a cytotoxic substance manufactured by _Chlorella_.  _Chlorella_, like many if not most free- floating microalgae, synthesizes cytotoxins to deter the microscopic animals that graze on it and to kill off competing organisms.  Cytotoxins probably aren’t a good thing to eat, don’t you agree? >2.Hixson, J.R. : Beta-carotene showing promise as Topical Agent. >Medical Tribune August 6, 1986 p.3

Irrelevant to your claims about the immune system. >3.Kirk, R.E and D.F.Othmer. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. Vol3 >p879. The Intersciece Encyclopaedia Inc. New York. 1949 (2nd edition)

Why do you cite such an early edition?  I think there’s a current edition of this work.  What’s the article title?  If it isn’t in the current edition, I’m sure it was taken out because later research disproved it. >4.Smith,W.L. and Livingstone A. Wound Healing American Journal of >Surgery 67.p30-39.1945

Again, isn’t this a little far back?  If this is the most recent article on this aspect of _Chlorella_, I assume this was a dead-end line of research. >5.Young, R.W. and J.S.Bergei Use of Chlorophyllin in the Care of >Geriatric patients. Journal of American Geriatrics Society.XXVIII, >No.1 p.46-47, 1980.

Does this article actually mention _Chlorella_.  It doesn’t sound like it. >6.Terziev,V.B.Planski and Y.Encheva. The effect of chlorella as a >prophylatic means against Bronchopneumonia. Veterinary Science XX(1) >p36-39, 1983

I don’t think Stanford would have this journal, because they don’t have a veterinary program.  Who is the publisher? >I could go on & on with this list but there are research papers from >all over the world.

I assume you’ve culled the six best references from your list of 185. Is that it?  Were all 179 other references not even up to this level? Your references are ancient, obsolete, representing dead-ends of research, or papers that are not relevant of your quack medical claims.  Do you have even ONE paper in a recent scientific journal supporting your claims of immune system effects humans for the dried algae?  No, of course you don’t! >It is a pity that you have to pick on only Vitamin C. As the quote >from Algal Culture states it would provide more than the minimum >requirement, this rather verifies and substantiates that Chlorella >does have substantial nutritional value!!!!!

According to that quote, you need a QUARTER OF A POUND PER DAY of the dried algae to get the U.S. RDA of vitamins.  I get the same U.S. RDA from a tablet that weighs over 100 times less than the algae.  You’d have to eat a block of dried algae about the size of a hamburger to get that much nutrition. >How is anybody who has an interest in this group ever going to find >out about the alternatives available in the market place if we can’t >mention a product.

How are you going to make some fast money if you aren’t free to use the net to hoodwink as many fools as you can find? >Post all you like.  However, don’t expect quack medical claims to go >unchallenged. >I do not remember making any medical claims any where. God Forbid.

I quoted one of your earlier posts earlier.  Read it. >This was I thought an alternative health group which is as I >understand it an alternative to traditional  methods, naturally >opinions will differ and I will continue to reserve the right to >express it.

Opinions are things like "I like chocolate".  But when you say things like "X has effect Y", that is not an opinion.  It is a statement which is either true or false.  If I were to say "_Chlorella_ excretes cytotoxins", I can back that up with papers in refereed scientific journals, so it seems like it is true.  If you say "_Chlorella_ does not excrete cytotoxins", I can present evidence that shows that statement is not true. Two opposite opinions can be equally valid, e.g. "I like chocolate" and "I don’t like chocolate".  But two opposite statements cannot be equally valid;  one must be true and the other must be false (with one exception: self-referential statements).  You’re "opinions" are actually false statements.

Response:

>It seems a shame that a person cannot join this group without all this >bitching however I will try to keep my reply short and to the point.

Or to re-phrase this statement more accurately:  It’s a shame that a nutritional charlatan can’t have his theories uncritically accepted when he uses the net for advertising that other people pay for. >If someone has a question in future I will reply to them privately so

that no one can refute your particular brand of quack medicine. >that they can make their own minds up. It is shame that peoples >attention will not be brought to this natural product that has been on >this earth for 2.5 BILILON YEARS however such is life. >Firstly I have in front of me an excellent book which contains 185 >references to research carried out over many years. These >bibliographies are from as early as 1929 up to present date. >These range from the Huntington Research Centre to The Medical Tribune >and from the Kanazawa Medical University to The Journal of American >Pharmaceutical Association.  I think that this amount of research >justifies my statement > there has been significant research on the >benefits of Chlorella. >However if you don’t believe me I will gladly give you the title of >the book.

Not necessary.  Just give me some references to refereed scientific journals published in the U.S. or U.K., such as _Nature_, _Science_, _New_England_Journal_of_Medicine_, _Lancet_, etc.  Not all journals in places like Russia or Japan adhere to the same standards as U.S. or U.K. journals, and I don’t know which ones do and which ones don’t, so please stick to the journals I would find in a genuine scientific research library.  I do most of my research at Stanford, and they have all of the important scientific journals and many obscure ones. Surely, out of 185 references, you must have many which meet this common standard for scientific rigor. >Secondly the maunfacturer of this particular brand of Chlorella is the >longest established and largest Chlorella producer in the world. Their >Chlorella is the ONLY non domestic brand available in the Japanese >health food stores because of the stringent independent testing >carried out by the Japan Food Research Laboratory. Since 1964, their >production technology has been continually refined and updated to >maintain their reputation as the world’s foremost producer of pure, >premium grade chlorella. As Chlorella is the #1 selling nutritional >supplement in Japan, where approx. 7 million Japanese take it, I >presume that it’s 31 year track record negates your arguement.

Many millions more Japanese smoke cigarettes.  That is no testament to their safety.  And, many products are only discovered to be dangerous after many years.  Dozens of food additives, like safrole, were used used for many decades before being discovered to be carcinogens. >I have also in front of me the assay performed by the Japan Dairy >Technical Association giving the composition and analysis of Chlorella >again I presume that they know what they are talking about regarding >the B12 content in comparison with Beef Liver. I understand from the >manufacturers that they do not use traditional milling methods in the >production of their Chlorella, so your arguement regarding B12 being >destroyed is irrelevant.

Unless the algae is being delivered live and raw to the customer, my statements about B-12 stand.  If ordinary B-12 (i.e. not cyanocobalamin) were not highly unstable and therefore unsuitable for use as a nutritional supplement, then ordinary B-12 would be used in vitamin pills. >Thirdly I merely pointed out chlorella’s Beta-carotene, vitamin A & C >content was in addition to many other vitamins and minerals which are >too numerous to list here.

Quoting from _Algal_Culture_ edited by John Burlew (Carnegie Institution, 1953), page 306: "Comparison of the vitamin content of Chlorella with the minimum daily requirements for vitamins shows that approximately a quarter of a pound of dried Chlorella would provide more than the minimum requirement of all except vitamin C.  Although this vitamin is present in large quantity in the freshly harvested algae, it is largely lost in drying." >Yes I do supply via mail order not everybody has the luxury of having >a health food store on their door steps, also not all stores stock >pure premium grade chlorella, yes, there is a very big difference in >the grades that are available.

I never questioned the quality of your pond scum.  You’re just trying to sell product now. >I don’t know what brand of Chlorella you have been taking or maybe >there is something wrong with your taste buds but none of my customers >have ever commented on the taste. Incidentally liver tastes like shit >to me but it’s supposed to be good for me!!!!!!! It makes me gag!!!!! >I am very sorry that your opinions differ so much from mine however I >do feel that encouragement should be given to new users like myself >and hope that I can continue to make my opinions known to people who >have an interest in this outstanding natural product.

Post all you like.  However, don’t expect quack medical claims to go unchallenged.

Response: