Consistency

Poor analogy. It's more like a recipe, or software for a machine controller.

DNA dictates physical characteristics, machine code doesn't. Machine code is like the instructions of biochemistry.

Machine code lacks the consciousness that all organisms have.. including bacteria and white blood cells...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=JnlULOjUhSQ

That's routine. The genetic engineers at Monsanto do it all the time

Do they really? How? I thought they modify existing DNA...

Genetic engineering, also called genetic modification, is the direct manipulation of an organism's genome using biotechnology.

Unfortunately that is not so - evidence on how evolution functions is not quite that easy to get.

Exactly my point that nobody should claim to have facts when they don't have anything. It was a rhetorical statement by the way.

Here is some truth about Neanderthals to wager in... http://www.thematrix.co.uk/texttopic.asp?ID=8

Humans are the one exploring science in the first place, how is it that they are inhibiting-it? The actions you described merely slow down the progress, they do not reverse the gaining of the knowledge we have already attained.

What if the knowledge that is gained is bias and ultimately wrong?

Efficiency at what?

Mating, eating, gathering non-poisonous foods, migrating for food, defending themselves from predators, etc...

What about Geniuses that are born?

Vegetarians aren't vegans. Learn to read what I post.

A vegan or vegetarian diet substantially alters the human colonic faecal microbiota

http://www.hablemosclaro.org/pdf/noticias/A_vegan_diet_alters_the_human_colonic_faecal_microbiota.pdf

Nuts are calorie dense food.

You are wrong about human evolution because meat lacks omega 6's.

Omnivores? Not in a million years. Our brains have been shrinking.

I'm done here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficiency

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_%28ethology%29

Where did the creativity to build the tools come from in the first place?

The rivers current is strong.. maybe they were gradually making their way up stream on the sides of the river towards the mating grounds or got stuck as they were gradually making their way up stream towards the mating grounds... we can all interpret the data differently.

The so called scientific evidence is just as bad as reading the bible.

DNA = Blueprint. So.. when you can create DNA from non-biological molecules is when you have actual evidence on evolution and how it actually functions.

You have nothing just like religions have nothing.

"You need to read the wikipedia page...

 

In kidney failure, urea and other waste products, which are normally excreted into the urine, are retained in the blood.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uremia"

 

I did. I read the word "and" in there.

You still haven't explained where the toxicity is... lets see some pictures of uremia toxicity caused by urea... urea frost or drird urea is just a benign side effect of kidney damage.

Incidentally, other materials are excreted in the sweat so, even if you ignore the toxicity of urea, the point still stands.

Sweat is, among other things, an excretory pathway.

Discoloured sweat is, for example a documented side effect of l dopa.

Its obviously an excretory pathway when the kidney's are damaged. Where else are the excess molecules going to go?

Now.. why would the body throw away amino acids, vitamins, minerals onto the skin? Have you ever had a sauna?

Exogenous intake of L-DOPA?

If you studied evolution (the word means change) you would know that our ancestors were omnivores.

If they hadn't been then they wouldn't have been able to pick up enough calories (and other nutrition) to spend time doing anything but eat.

The whole rise of humanity depended on eating meat.

It let us leave the grazing to other animals while we got on with the clever stuff.

If you actually read the journals, not paleo diet made-up nonsense, you would see that the diet of our predecessors was high in plants and that current day humans are fortunate to have this amount of meat available to them.

http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/EvolutionPaleolithic/Eaton%20Paleo%20Nutri%20Review%20EJCN.pdf

Calories doesn't equate to a bigger brain and neither do Omega 3's directly. Gorillas eat more calories and omega 3's daily than us and they don't have bigger brains. Carnivores also don't have bigger brains from eating all that meat...

We were mostly selfish gatherers through our evolution.. nuts, fruits, edible leaves and the occasional animal. I am not doubting we ate meat but meat was for survival purposes.. calories and absolutely not required for brain evolution.

And re. ALA being "definitely not toxic", here's a clip of the side effects of using it.

" Check with your doctor if any of these most COMMON side effects persist or become bothersome when using Aminolevulinic acid Solution:

Burning; crusting; flushing; itching; loss of skin color; redness; scabbing; scaling; skin blisters; skin wasting; stinging; swelling; tenderness."

 

So, it's not toxic- unless you get a solution of it on your skin.

I never said it wasn't. Aminolevulinic acid is not found in sweat. What are you talking about?

Aminolevulinic acid is the first intermediate molecule in the heme/porphyrin/chlorophyll pathway.. http://www.genome.jp/kegg-bin/show_pathway?org_name=ko&mapno=00860&mapscale=1.0&show_description=show

Strawman. It's obvious that those who focus on healthier diets are better off than those who don't, vegetarian or omnivore. My argument is that there are plenty of bad eaters on both sides of the vegetarian-or-not debate. Just being a vegetarian isn't a magic pill for health. I'd stack a steak-eater who also enjoys an array of fruits and vegetables up against a french-fry and canned soup vegetarian any day.

 

Anyway, since you're not proposing any "theories" in this thread and your version of autodidactism is practically rigor-free cherry-picking and fallacious assertions that ignore anything that doesn't fit with what you think you've learned, I'm going to stop wasting my "discussion" time here. Best of luck with the journals, please keep us posted with any successful publications. I'm pretty sure you won't be telling us about the rejections.

I was talking about vegans, not vegetarians. Vegetarians eat dairy and in my view... are omnivores in denial.

I understand your point but meat causes body odor and promotes the growth of putrefactive bacteria in the intestine.

I proposed it already. 3rd post on page 4.

I won't be proposing anything because the experts are brainwashed on the true purpose of sweat.

A lot of drugs were discovered rather than invented.

Hempseed is a natural whole food and you could extend that definition to the rest of the plant.

Opium, magic mushrooms, and coca leaves are natural too.

And, if you are not in favour of these plants being legal or illegal, what are you in favour of?

You're right.. first discovered however I meant invented as in.. purified into powder.

We produce our own endorphins when we exercise, make love, hug, etc...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorphins

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endocannabinoid_system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opioid

Endocannabinoids are produced from omega 6's after exercise as a reward. Nuts are the best source of omega 6's.

I am in favour of working together to grow our own healthy foods and exercise.

As I pointed out there's a wiki page dedicated to uraemia which is, in essence, the toxic effect of too much urea in the blood.

You need to read the wikipedia page...

In kidney failure, urea and other waste products, which are normally excreted into the urine, are retained in the blood.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uremia

What are these other waste products? Uric acid?

A lot of molecules that are in the blood are toxic at high levels.. glucose.. blaming urea because someone has kidney problems is dishonest to urea.

Urea frost is urea powder? So.. where is the toxicity?

It has been a long time since anyone said anything about Vitamin B12.

People don't produce it. Bacteria do.

I never said we do. I said we stimulate bacteria to produce it with a molecule found in sweat. This molecule is many times higher in sweat than is found in the blood and definitely not toxic; before you start poking at it.

Technically.. we co-produce it.

If any is produced on our skin by the resident bugs that's all well and good; but it would be difficult or impossible to quantify how much (if any) of that gets into the body. A major problem would be the very small quantities involved- You would probably need to radio-label the stuff. Good luck getting that past the ethics committee.

Commensal bacteria*** There is B12 transport proteins in sweat which have an affinity for B12.. would radio-labelling still work?

Evidence that your version of "autodidact" includes assertions based on self-selected sampling. VERY bad habit.

 

Nice try at conflating omnivores with "shitty diets". The fact is that poor immune systems exist in both vegetarians and omnivores. Being a plant-eater doesn't automatically give you a healthy diet.

The data....

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10500983

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/62/6/1221.short

http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007%2899%2900267-1/abstract

If you brushed your teeth you'd see that your dentition marks you as an omnivore.

If you studied neurogenesis you'd see that omega 6's primarily drive brain evolution.

Since, whatever you may say, there's urea in sweat there's not a lot of point in continuing with this.

Get back to us when you have accepted that reality is real.

 

Incidentally, the stuff that I singled out as being excreted in sweat is a plant product

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sotolon

Would you like to try again?

I have accepted the fact that urea is found in sweat but its false that urea is toxic.

As I stated before.. read this study carefully... http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/09546639609086881

The studies are done on meat-eaters. They don't apply to plant-eaters. Find me a study of 100% vegans regarding sotolon.

I have been a plant-eater for years.. I don't need deodorant, I don't need to wash my hair, I don't need to wash my penis, I don't need to shower. I don't have toxins protruding through my pores.

Lots of things, infection would be the obvious one which you have deliberately missed off your list because it doesn't suit your bias.

Plant-eaters that eat their leafy greens have the strongest immune systems. While everyone I came in contact with this winter had the flu... the flu virus didn't even budge my immune system. Shitty diet equates to near defenseless immune system.

On the other hand, I can't find any reliable link source which says eating red meat leads to kidney disease.

High oxalate levels from some foodstuffs like rhubarb and tofu also contribute to kidney damage but I guess you are ignoring them because they are from plants and so they also don't fit with your world-view.

"Processed" red meat with added ammonia, nitrites and other toxic molecules.

Plant-eaters have healthy gut flora... we have high levels of oxalate degrading bacteria because leafy greens contain molecules which stimulate the growth of these bacteria... which can also degrade cellulose!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxalobacter_formigenes

http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/v66/n1/full/ejcn2011141a.html

High uric acid levels are likely to give rise to kidney damage and gout. One of the best known risk factors for gout is drinking wine. But, since it's not animal derived I guess you won't pay it any attention.

I already pointed out that plants are noted sources of purines which are metabolised to uric acid and, again, you seem not to accept that aspect of reality.

There is a big difference between drinking wine and alcoholism. The later causes gout.

Plants are low in purines and low in protein. Ultimately... urea and uric acid levels will be low or non-existent.

Unless your diet has exactly the right ratios of all these amino acids some of them will be in excess and that excess will be converted to urea.

This is more likely when eating animal products.

Some of that urea (which is toxic, whether you like it or not) is excreted in the sweat.

Please learn how to read and stop wasting my time. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16422263

Its toxic at unnatural high levels.

And you seem not to have answered the other point- the fact is, that other stuff is excreted in sweat too.

You remain wrong.

In meat-eaters.

You remain misinformned.

Can human domestication be confused with being ethical?

We praise the virgin, demonize the slut when it come to women but men are ridiculed as immature or praised as studs... I think it says a lot about our culture...

Hypocrisy... Everything is judged out in the open but nobody cares behind closed doors.

Lets accept that we are driven by hormones and/or pheromones and that sex is the best feeling in the universe!

Italian's look like Neanderthal's and quality tech has come from Italian's... so why do we need to clone them?

"They too will excrete the stuff in their sweat especially if their kidneys fail."
LOL If is a big word.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8893161
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/treating-kidney-failure-through-diet/

I understood that any EXCESS protein gets converted to urea through the urea cycle but its irrelevant because plant-based diets don't negatively effect kidney function.

The cause of high urea(and uric acid) levels is generally kidney trouble.

And what causes kidney trouble in the first place... Obesity? Eating too much processed red meat? High uric acid levels?

The point is that the body dumps this toxic material onto the skin via the sweat.

Urea is beneficial to the skin... http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/09546639609086881

Read this for urea vs uric acid... http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090412125723AAXRC2n

Urea being toxic is an exaggeration.

Urea itself is not toxic. This was demonstrated by Johnson et al. by adding large amounts of urea to the dialysate of hemodialysis patients for several months and finding no ill effects.

http://www.nugowiki.org/index.php/Urea#Biological_Function

Urea was non-toxic to a 10 week-old pig in an acute dose as high as 16 g/kg body mass. Ten % m/m urea in pig food over a period of 5 days was also without apparent deleterious effect.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7047739

Nice cherry pick! LOL.

I mean't the second part I wrote wrong. Not the first.

I am not mistaken because it doesn't apply to me(a plant eater).

I mean't without kidney trouble as you wrote it. I wrote it wrong. It is not that I am mistaken, it doesn't apply to humans who eat a plant-based diet. I am not going to reward bad behavior and accept excuses for eating animal products.

Animal products don't contain purines and ammonia? And GI tract bacteria doesn't produce ammonia from the putrefaction of meat?

Animal products don't contain high amounts of purines which get converted to uric acid?

I wasn't talking about uric acid as the toxic substance. You came up with it.

Naturally.. a person with kidney trouble will not be excreting large amounts of urea out onto the skin. As you stated.

I am going to do some searching in the enzymes of the microorganisms on the skin. Maybe some of them have the enzymes to break down urea.

 

Fundamentally, if we made and absorbed significant amounts of b12 in our sebaceous glands then nobody would get b12 deficiency.

They do, so we don't.

The majority of us don't go to a sauna and most of us wear clothes which absorbs the sweat.

We could produce large amounts if we lived butt naked in the tropics. We are tropical mammals unless you can live in the winter without shelter and heat.

WT?!?

 

It's like you've been dying to use that quote somewhere but didn't bother to read the thread before deciding it was appropriate here.

LMAO!

The quote is a reply to this... "There are no truths involved, and that's why the methodology is ongoing and constant."

I haven't read the research I collected in over a year. I misunderstood.

Topical aminolevulinic acid is converted into a potent photosensitizer, protoporphyrin, in human hair follicles and sebaceous glands. http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v115/n2/full/5600771a.html

ALA synthase light/dark activity:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16662450

http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/70/1/219.long

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16922603

High urea/uric acid levels are caused by the intake of animal products. It has nothing to do with natural sweat per se.

If you read the wikipedia page.. you can see that there are molecules which stimulate melanogenesis. Maybe there is a molecule in sweat which does that because I tan very fast under the Sun when I sweat.

All the data I have collected says that B12 is produced by propionibacterium acnes and other propionibacterium species found in the sebaceous glands at 37C when eccrine sweat makes its way into the sebaceous gland and stimulates growth, B12 biosynthesis and maybe other vitamins however light inhibits the first enzymes of both pathways which produce Aminolevulinic acid and this is because Aminolevulinic acid is a molecule that reacts with light and causes cell damage. Basically... all organisms and plants which use the porphyrin/chlorophyll biosynthetic pathway are inhibit by light to produce Aminolevulinic acid. Other porphyrins might react with light.. this I am not 100% certain of.

A lot of people believe that eccrine sweat is salt and water with toxins but thats just made up nonsense. Why would the body dump toxins on the skin? Simply... It wouldn't. -- Eccrine sweat contains amino acids for microorganisms growth, minerals, vitamins, B12 transport proteins, the stimulatory molecule which stimulates microorganism growth on the skin, B12 production and maybe other vitamins production, and other nutrients.

All this information can be easily found by using google.

Eccrine sweat is also for tanning the skin with light. I don't know how the photochemistry works between sweat, skin and light; I just know from experience that I can only tan if I sweat under the Sun. I would like to know how this happens.