The Acid-Alkaline Myth: Part 1

149306852

Many of you have probably heard of the ‘alkaline diet’. There are a few different versions of the acid-alkaline theory circulating the internet, but the basic claim is that the foods we eat leave behind an ‘ash’ after they are metabolized, and this ash can be acid or alkaline (alkaline meaning more basic on the pH scale).

According to the theory, it is in our best interest to make sure we eat more alkaline foods than acid foods, so that we end up with an overall alkaline load on our body. This will supposedly protect us from the diseases of modern civilization, whereas eating a diet with a net acid load will make us vulnerable to everything from cancer to osteoporosis. To make sure we stay alkaline, they recommend keeping track of urine or saliva pH using handy pH test strips.

In this two-part series, I will address the main claims made by proponents of the alkaline diet, and will hopefully clear up some confusion about what it all means for your health.

Will eating an alkaline diet make you and your bones healthier?

Foods can influence our urine pH

Before I start dismantling this theory, I want to acknowledge a couple things they get right. First, foods do leave behind acid or alkaline ash. The type of ‘ash’ is determined by the relative content of acid-forming components such as phosphate and sulfur, and alkalis such as calcium, magnesium, and potassium. (1, 2) In general, animal products and grains are acid forming, while fruits and vegetables are alkali forming. Pure fats, sugars, and starches are neutral, because they don’t contain protein, sulfur, or minerals.

It’s also true that the foods we eat change the pH of our urine. (3, 4) If you have a green smoothie for breakfast, for example, your pee a few hours later will likely be more alkaline than that of someone who had bacon and eggs. As a side note, it’s also very easy to measure your urine pH, and I think this is one of the big draws of the alkaline diet. Everyone can probably agree that it’s satisfying to see concrete improvements in health markers depending on your diet, and pH testing gives people that instant gratification they desire. However, as you’ll see below, urine pH is not a good indicator of the overall pH of the body, nor is it a good indicator of general health.

Foods don’t influence our blood pH

Proponents of the alkaline diet have put forth a few different theories about how an acidic diet harms our health. The more ridiculous claim is that we can change the pH of our blood by changing the foods we eat, and that acidic blood causes disease while alkaline blood prevents it. This is not true. The body tightly regulates the pH of our blood and extracellular fluid, and we cannot influence our blood pH by changing our diet. (5, 6) High doses of sodium bicarbonate can temporarily increase blood pH, but not without causing uncomfortable GI symptoms. (7, 8) And there are certainly circumstances in which the blood is more acidic than it should be, and this does have serious health consequences. However, this state of acidosis is caused by pathological conditions such as chronic renal insufficiency, not by whether you choose to eat a salad or a burger. In other words, regardless of what you eat or what your urine pH is, you can be pretty confident that your blood pH is hovering around a comfortable 7.4.

A more nuanced claim has been proposed specifically regarding bone health, and this hypothesis is addressed somewhat extensively in the scientific literature. It supposes that in order to keep blood pH constant, the body pulls minerals from our bones to neutralize any excess acid that is produced from our diet. Thus, net acid-forming diets (such as the typical Western diet) can cause bone demineralization and osteoporosis. This hypothesis, often referred to as the ‘acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis,’ is what I will discuss for the rest of this article. I’ll address some of the other health claims in part two.

The kidneys – not bone – regulate blood pH

While more reasonable than the first claim, the acid-ash hypothesis seems to completely disregard the vital role the kidneys play in regulating body pH. The kidneys are well equipped to deal with ‘acid ash.’ When we digest things like protein, the acids produced are quickly buffered by bicarbonate ions in the blood. (7) This reaction produces carbon dioxide, which is exhaled through the lungs, and salts, which are excreted by the kidneys. During the process of excretion, the kidneys produce ‘new’ bicarbonate ions, which are returned to the blood to replace the bicarbonate that was initially used to buffer the acid. This creates a sustainable cycle in which the body is able to maintain the pH of the blood, with no involvement from the bones whatsoever.

Thus, our understanding of acid-base physiology does not support the theory that net acid-forming diets cause loss of bone minerals and osteoporosis. But just for argument’s sake, let’s say that our renal system cannot handle the acid load of the modern diet. If bones were used to buffer this excess acid, we would expect to see evidence of this taking place in clinical trials. Alas, that is not the case.

Clinical trials do not support the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis

At first glance, some of the studies may look convincing, because higher acid diets often increase the excretion of calcium in the urine. Some researchers assumed that this extra calcium was coming from bone. (8) However, when calcium balance (intake minus excretion) was measured, researchers found that acid-forming diets do not have a negative effect on calcium metabolism. (9) Some studies found that supplementing with potassium salts (intended to neutralize excess acid) had beneficial effects on markers for bone health, which would tend to support the acid-ash hypothesis. However, these results were only observed in the first few weeks of supplementation, and long-term trials did not find any benefit to bone health from these alkalizing salts. (10)

Finally, even though the hypothesis holds that higher intakes of protein and phosphate are acidifying and therefore detrimental to bone health, multiple studies have shown that increasing protein or phosphate intake has positive effects on calcium metabolism and on markers for bone health. (11, 12) Summarizing the clinical evidence, two different meta-analyses and a review paper all concluded that randomized controlled trials do not support the hypothesis that acidifying diets cause loss of bone mineral and osteoporosis. (13, 14, 15)

So, it appears that neither physiology nor clinical trials support the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis. But again, just for argument’s sake, let’s suppose that these trials are imperfect (which they are, of course; no science is perfect!), and thus we can’t depend on their conclusions. If the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis were true, we would expect to see an association between net acid-producing diets and osteoporosis in observational studies. Yet again, this is not the case.

Observational studies do not support the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis

Observational studies have not found a correlation between dietary acid load and bone mineral density (BMD) or fracture risk, nor have they found a correlation between urine pH and BMD or fracture risk. (16, 17, 18) Additionally, higher protein intakes are correlated with better bone health in multiple studies, even though high-protein diets are generally net acid forming. (19) In fact, animal protein in particular (the most acid-forming food of all) has been associated with better bone health. (20, 21) Imagine that! One study included in a recent meta-analysis did find an association between higher protein intake and greater risk for fracture (22), but compared to the numerous more recent studies showing the opposite, this evidence isn’t very strong. Overall, the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis is not supported by physiology, clinical trials, or observational data.

Hopefully I’ve given you a decent understanding of how our bodies handle pH balance, and have reassured you that you don’t need to worry about the acidity of your urine with regards to bone health. Click HERE for part two where I tackle some of the other claims of the alkaline diet!

Like what you’ve read? Sign up for FREE updates delivered to your inbox.

  • I hate spam too. Your email is safe with me.

Comments Join the Conversation

  1. Don says

    I am doing research into acid-alkaline balance in the human body and came across your myth articles. Thank you for all of your reference material. Since I am a purist when it comes to research, I am a little disappointed that you seem to freely accept one study that supports your belief (high protein diet improves nitrogen balance) and just as freely disregard a study that does not support your belief (one observational study concluding that alkaline diets improve lean muscle mass). I also am a little leery of someone who refers to research and use phrases like “multiple studies have shown”. I was taught that studies are designed to “find evidence to support” or “find no evidence to support”. Stating that “studies have shown” is not what I am used to nor did I find that statement within the referenced article.

    With these examples from your articles in play, I am grateful for the reference material but do not trust your analysis of the material.

    Thank You,

    • James says

      Don: “I am a little disappointed that you seem to freely accept one study that supports your belief (high protein diet improves nitrogen balance) and just as freely disregard a study that does not support your belief (one observational study concluding that alkaline diets improve lean muscle mass). ”

      How is that contradictory? Plants contain protein as well, and in some cases have higher protein contents than meats.

      Also keep in mind that there is more to maintaining muscle mass that simply the amino acids present. For example, you can eat high protein from animal or plant sources all day long and still not improve muscle mass without exercising the muscles. Testosterone levels are another big factor.

  2. Laurie says

    Why aren’t we talking about what the kidneys really do and that is to filter. They filter cellular waste. If we have clear urine why do we think this is good? (well if you are drinking tons of water during the day you may) but in the am if you pee in a jar and see no sediment you are not filtering your cellular wastes. In turn then we are not getting that waste out correctly. So as anything that needs to get out and it doesn’t it stays inside. Maybe as we sweat it will come out a bit but if the kidneys are not filtering you will have acidosis. See in 2 minutes how you can check your filtration.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0OznrAVGCY&list=PLAmZ0Av0CC5S9pLz2eutPvISRQBJnwWJO
    ANd Dr.CHris can you please discuss this further. Why aren’t doctors doing this easy check on patients?
    If you have kidney issues in the family you need to know. Also if your bp is over 115/75 the top number is adrenals and bottom number is kidney function/filtration. If you have high bp even a little you probably need to fix the adrenals and kidneys and without meds, boom . it can normalize. I know it because it happened to me. After slightly high bp reading I learned my kidneys don’t filter very well. Take time and check, fix kidneys and bp goes down. Awesome stuff this healing body we have.

    • Dennis Tucker says

      Thank you Laurie, VERY practical, helpful and interesting information. As to your question. I think you already know the answer.

    • James says

      The kidneys have more functions than simply filtering. Calcium balance and producing a hormone for red blood cell production for example.

      Acidosis has more than one cause as does high blood pressure. This are not strictly kidney or adrenal related.

  3. Angony says

    The most intelligent comment so far was by Christine
    OCTOBER 16, 2013 AT 11:44 AM

    Whatever you read regarding health , diet etc basically it all comes back to a very simple rule . For good health eat natural foods , stay away from anything that has been processed . Nothing more complicated than that .

    Also AVOID ALL Big Phama drugs, vaccines, chemotherapy, radiation. cosmetics, toxic chemicals and stress. Get plenty of exercise, sun and sleep and drink lots of fluoride free water…..The one factor everyone here has failed to mention – COMMON SENSE!

    • Dennis says

      I missed Christine’s comment so thank you for mentioning it again. I back it up 100%. I know it is a good general guideline so I’ll throw in a few details.

      1] “Natural foods” does NOT include dead animals. So if you eat them, I suggest you work towards eliminating that from your diet. Take your time and do it gradually if needed, but DO IT.

      2] “Natural foods” COULD include a daily drink of super foods which could, depending on what you need, included healing herbs. [feel free to ask me for suggestions]

      3] Work at eliminating your negative thought processes or emotions. If you do that you WILL get healthy. [there may be a correlating improvement of the diet as this happens]

      • Antonio says

        Dead animals, like dead plants, are completely natural and, if they are not adulterated with additives or from things the animal was fed, a very healthy and necessary part of the human diet. I was a vegetarian for something like 30 years before self preservation and an article by Barbara Kingsolver overcame my ethical misgivings.

        • Dennis Tucker says

          [Sorry about the delayed response]

          Very involved subject but here are the basics

          If you are asking about the natural human diet, then it would be foods that are not altered by heat or processing. This would be fruit and some vegetables, [spouts], which is the most natural foods for humans and very easily digestible.

          Two of the healthiest foods are sunflower seeds and almonds. They are natural but really should be soaked, allowing them to be easily digestible.

          Slightly less natural are vegetables that require mild heating by steam.

          As far as eating dead animals, it is not even CLOSE for a natural food for humans. Just because many humans eat it and often contains much nutrition, does not mean that it is natural for the human diet.

          If one cannot use common sense to understand this then there is overwhelming, scientific evidence showing this fact.

          • James says

            That is not a fact, it is hypothesis.

            Secondly, humans are designed as OMNIVORES, not herbivores or carnivores.

            In addition, we cannot get true B12 from plants. We get this from meats. Strict vegetarians who do not supplement with B12 will develop a B12 deficiency anemia in an average of 2-6 years since the liver stores an average 2-6 year supply of B12.

            By the way, vegetables are just as natural as nuts, seeds and meats.

            • Dennis Tucker says

              You are incorrect and again, hurting people with your ignorance.

              Humans are absolutely NOT meant to be meat eaters.

              As I said, it does not mean that we cannot gain from eating it and even be relatively healthy, eating it in moderation. That does not mean that we are designed to eat it or it is our optimal food any more than Twinkies are.

              Once again, you are not able to THINK. You need to use logic, common sense and get the bigger picture.
              As we evolve, meaning the as the “dweller” within the physical body evolves, then the need to eat meat will become less and less and eventually, there will be no need or desire for it.

              • James says

                Dennis,

                I have read the various propaganda sites and seen the various propaganda videos claiming we are designed as vegetarians Ironically it those people who fail to use common sense or think for themselves.

                For example, common sense tells us that since we are designed as omnivores neither a strict meat diet nor a strict plant diet is optimal. A mixture of the two is optimal.

                And again using some common sense a person would have to ask themselves where would we get sufficient B12 if not from meats since real B12 is not found in plants? These days we can get real B12 from supplements but we were not designed as recent as supplements have been available. Therefore, we had to obtain our B12 from meat prior to supplementation. As I mentioned before strict vegetarians will develop a B12 deficiency over time if they do not supplement with B12 since you CANNOT obtain true B12 from plants. Therefore, common sense also tells us that humans have always depended on meat since this was once the ONLY source of B12.

                Common sense tells us that our closest animal relatives, the bonobos, have virtually identical digestive systems as humans and bonobos like humans are omnivores.

                Bonobos, which are our closest animal relatives also have short canine teeth just like humans. Canine teeth are ONLY required by animals that also consume meat such as bonobos and humans. Herbivore mammals such as horses and cows lack canine teeth altogether and instead have flat grinding teeth instead strictly for plant matter..

                Common sense tells us that we have the same body length to intestine length as most omnivores and carnivores. Not the ratio of herbivores as the propaganda sites falsely claim.

                Bottom line is that I have argued the myth that we are supposedly herbivores for years with people who are simply regurgitating the bogus propaganda they have seen. And I have NEVER lost a debate with these people. Therefore, if you want to claim I am wrong you better come up with some really solid evidence to prove your claim because a major pet peeve of mine are people who want to simply claim others are wrong with ABSOLUTELY NO evidence to back their claims. That just shows a complete ignorance of the subject and shows the person is trying hard to make themselves appear more intelligent than they really are. That is like someone making up a ludicrous claim such as Twinkies (since you brought them up) are the perfect food for the body since they provide the body with the protein, fat and sugars the body needs to survive. See, anyone can make any absurd claim. It takes actual intelligence and understanding of the topic to actually back up the claims with real and solid evidence as I just did proving humans are omnivores

                James.

              • tee says

                Uh…youre simply making claims, not backing them up.

                Also, you did not define what natural means, but simply gave a few limited examples of what are commonly called natural foods.

                And what is this, dweller stuff? Define that as well…

              • Joel says

                Perhaps if you tried actually backing your arguments up instead of simply stating others are wrong, you’d get somewhere Dennis.

                Explain why we have these
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxillary_canine

                Anyone applying your argument of ‘common sense’ (which in itself is not an argument) would be able to see not too many (if any) herbivores have canines. Feel your mouth, you’ve got 4 yourself. They’re the ones that stick up above the rest so you can tear meat.

          • Maiysa says

            Natural Food-If there is anyone who would love to be vegan, that would be me!! I love nuts and beans, but I have a condition Mast Cell Activation that causes me to react to many foods, smells, pollen, virus’s, etc. Nuts seem to be the worst and I go into anaphylactic easily from them although I am not allergic. Also if I have beans more than a few times I week, no matter how they are soaked or how organic they are, I start to react terribly; the same goes for too much dairy. Peas are a very high histamine food, which also triggers my reactions to other foods, so pea protein is not even a choice. But since I have cut out 95% of grains, (I cheat a little with a gluten snack occasionally), but since cutting grains, nuts along with coconut, and trimming back my bean consumption, my anaphylactic reactions have been cut down considerably. I have never been a fan of meat, but since acquiring this condition, a few means are my only choice for protein. I still eat more greens than meat, but so grateful I can at least consume meat to get my proper protein. I get frustrated when people get a bit judgmental of those who eat meat. I hope some can remember that not everyone has choices, I know many others just like me.

    • Jenny Graves says

      You say avoid chemotherapy to stay healthy. Well, as a survivor (6 years now) of acute myeloid leukaemia and having gone through 6 rounds of chemo and a bone marrow transplant, I have to say that I’m grateful for chemo! I simply wouldn’t be alive without it. Yes, it’s a bastard of a treatment and it took me a while to get over it (with the help of lots of herbs and supplements) but I am still here. And I wouldn’t have been otherwise.

    • kitty says

      Mediterranean diet I was brought up eatong. Also read Edgar Cayce regarding the acid/alkaline diet. everything in moderation.

  4. David says

    I love your stuff, but can you please stop inhibiting science literacy by using the word “theory” to describe things that are not theories? I know you’re using it in the vernacular, but still. It’s not helping the cause of real science.
    Here’s a nice definition from James Krupa, “a theory is a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence generating testable and falsifiable predictions.”

  5. says

    Hello James,
    I was having a lot of UTI’s last year, I am 67 years old, I read about d-mannose, the last UTI I had was 3 months after the last UTI, I immediately started taking the d-mannose 5 times per day and started to get relief in about 6 hrs. I did that for about 5 days, that was 10 months ago, I now take d-mannose with a week cup of week coffee in the morning, which I can’t seem to give up, if my urine has an unusual smell to it I may take another d mannose during the day. The D-mannose has been a life saver since no one wants to take antibiotics every 3 months. ..but I also suffer from incontinence, I use to take a lot of vit c, but I noticed it seem to make my incontinence worse, ..I do take DHEA in very small amounts, 6 mlg, by accident one day i took 12 mlg but noticed my incontinence had improved. the new DHEA is the one that is supposedly non hormonal. 7 keto DHEA, but I would be taking it for a long time, (not sure if it is safe to take the 12 mlg) do you have any knowledge about this nutrient? Thank you…Pat

    • James says

      Hi Patricia,

      D-mannose is great for UTIs. It does not kill the bacteria causing the infection but rather prevents the adherence if bacteria to the urinary tract walls. Just like real cranberry juice or blueberry juice does.

      I also like the herbs uva ursi or manzanita leaves, which actually kill the bacteria. These plants contain aglycones, consisting of an antiseptic hydroquinone bound to a glucose molecule. Uva ursi contains 2 while manzanita leaves contain 16. These aglycones remain intact until they reach the kidneys then the aglycone is split releasing the antiseptic hydroquinones in to the urinary tract. This kills the bacteria in the urinary tract without affecting other parts of the body like conventional antibiotics do and thus these herbs do not cause secondary infections like pharmaceutical antibiotics.

      Taking the herbs with some calcium citrate will enhance the effects by further alkalizing the urine since the hydroquinones work best in an alkaline environment.

      Synthetic vitamin C does give some people urinary tract problems. Possibly from the oxalic acid it can form. I knew one lady that always got urinary tract infections when she took even small amounts of synthetic vitamin C.

      I have not really looked much in to 7 keto DHEA since I don’t like fooling with isolated hormonal substances. I know that this is not supposed to directly convert in to testosterone, which could then be converted in to estrogen by aromatase. But it does convert in to DHEA-S, which can explain the androgenic effects of 7 keto DHEA.

      James

    • Scott N. says

      I can only comment that I am seeing a holistic dietician that supports intermittent short (24-48 hr.) fasts. I have fasted several times for 24 hrs and experienced a feeling of well being afterwards.

    • James says

      Hi B,

      There are various levels of fasting from complete no food to minimal amounts of something to help the body and prevent blood sugar from dropping.

      Personally I do not believe in strict fasts at all. The way I see it is that this is simply putting more stress on the body. For example, if a person goes on a diet where they don’t eat what happens? The metabolism simply slows down to try and conserve energy. Then the body turns around and creates more fat with the food it gets later in anticipation of future starvation periods.

      If someone is going to fast I recommend a limited fast such as still taking in some juice or nutritional herbs to reduce stress on the body, prevent blood sugar drops and to prevent the body from going in to a starvation mode.

      James

      • buddhi says

        i beg to differ. fasting is almost always good. and you can fast for much longer than most people realize. just drink water. most people say they feel Great! on a fast.
        senses become attenuated, thinking and skin clear up,
        energy increases, toxins decamp, and sleep is deeper.

        fasting is the oldest curative we have; all animals fast when not feeling well.

        natural, temporary stress is a good thing. we rev ourselves up at the molecular level and become more efficient. the body quickly adjusts and blood markers improve as biochemistry reboots.

        it’s not just all about what you eat. we eat too often and too much, which backs up the system causing congestion, an under appreciated cause of disease.

        this congestion results in (i speculate) chronic stress, which is not good.

  6. James says

    Hi Laura,

    The whole cancer cannot live in an alkaline environment is BOGUS!!!!! Cancer forms in an alkaline environment all the time. What people are confusing is the fact that in the later stages of cancer the immediate area around the tumor becomes acidic. Therefore, some people have mistook this to mean that cancer thrives in an acidic environment.

    Alkalinity drives cancer cell growth and malignant transformation:

    Role of the Intracellular pH in the Metabolic Switch Between Oxidative Phosphorylaiton and Aerobic Glycolysis-Relavance to Cancer. Cancer 2011;2(3):WMC001716

    Na+/H+ exchanger-dependent intracellular alkalinization is an early event in malignant transformation and plays an essential role in the development of subsequent transformation-associated phenotypes. FASEBJ 2000
    Nov;14(14):2185-97

    Tumorigenic 3T3 cells maintain an alkaline intracellular pH under physiological conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990 October; 87(19): 7414–7418

    31P NMR analysis of intracellular pH of Swiss Mouse 3T3 cells: effects of extracellular Na+ and K+ and mitogenic stimulation. J Membr Biol 1986;94(1):55-64

    Extracellular Na+ and initiation of DNA synthesis: role of intracellular pH and K+. J Cell Biol 1984 Mar;98(3):1082-9

    Keep in mind that the blood is kept in an alkaline state except in very rare circumstances. Yet cancer cells form in this alkaline state. Even tissues that are normally acidic, such as the stomach and colon have a higher risk of cancer when they become too alkaline.

    When the cancer cells start to grow they produce hydrogen ions (protons) just as healthy cells do as part of their energy production, which involves both glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation also as with healthy cells. The highly alkaline internal pH of cancer cells though increases the use of glycolysis over oxidative phosphorylation in cancer cells.

    The protons do generate acidity so they are removed or buffered by the body. The body can only do so much though to keep up. In the early stages of the cancer the body can keep up with the export of the acidic protons from both healthy cells and malignant cells maintaining the normally alkaline tissues in an alkaline state. As the tumor continues to grow though there comes a tipping point where the higher metabolic rate of the tumor produces more protons than the body can remove or buffer and the LOCALIZED area around the tumor becomes acidic as the tumor cells rapidly export the protons out to maintain the internal alkalinity they need to survive and thrive. If the proton pumps of cancer cells are blocked the cancer cells become acidic killing them:

    Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase in Cancer Cells: Structure and Function. Atlas of
    Genetics and Cytogenetics in Oncology and Haematology Sept. 2011

    Vacuolar H+-ATPase in human breast cancer cells with distinct metastatic
    potential: distribution and functional activity. Am J Physiol Cell
    Physiol 286: C1443–C1452, 2004

    Targeting vacuolar H+-ATPases as a new strategy against cancer. Cancer
    Res 2007 Nov 15;67(22):10627-30

    Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase signaling pathway in cancer. Curr Protein Pept Sci
    2012 Mar;13(2):152-63

    Another very common myth is that cancer cells secrete lactic acid. Cancer cells secrete non-acidic lactate, not lactic acid. These ARE NOT the same thing even though the two terms get used interchangeably all the time, even by researchers who should know better:

    Tumor metabolism of lactate: the influence and therapeutic potential for MCT and CD147 regulation. Future Oncol 2010 Jan;6(1):127-48

    Enzymes involved in L-lactate metabolism in humans. Mitochondrion 2013 Sep 9. pii: S1567-7249(13)00244-4

    Tumor metabolism: cancer cells give and take lactate. J Clin Invest 2008 Dec;118(12):3835-7

    Mitochondrial fission induces glycolytic reprogramming in cancer-associated myofibroblasts, driving stromal lactate production, and early tumor growth. Oncotarget 2012 Aug;3(8):798-810

    Therefore, the localized acidity around malignant tumors IS NOT from the secretion of lactic acid, but rather the rapid export of protons by the cancer cells to maintain their internal alkalinity.

    There have been studies where attempts to alkalize cancer cells to kill them has been tried.

    Attempts to alkalize with cesium chloride showed that the cesium chloride DID NOT kill cancer cells. To the contrary cesium chloride was found to not only cause cancer being a mutagen, but also to promote the growth of existing cancers. Cesium chloride was also found to increase the risk of death from heart issues and could cause liver damage. The whole concept of using cesium chloride stems from very faulty studies by one doctor who used more than one therapy on cancer patients then attributed the survival of the few that did survive to cesium chloride while ignoring the other therapies. And the myth that parts of the world where cesium levels are high in the soil and water have lower cancer rates. I checked the cancer rates in those areas they claim were low and found the cancer rates were normal to extraordinarily high compared to other parts of the world.

    Alkalizing with lithium chloride showed no effect on cancer cells.

    Alkalizing by the ingestion of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) showed no killing of cancer cells, but did inhibit metastases by reducing the localized acidity needed for the body’s proteolytic enzymes to allow cancer metastases.

    The problem with this though is that the study only looked at the short term effects of baking soda ingestion. To generate an alkaline effect at all the stomach acid and other buffers need to be overwhelmed. One role of stomach acid is to prevent infection by ingested pathogens, which include those that cause cancer. Another role is the absorption of nutrients, which include those required for a process known as methylation. Methylation is involved in about 4,000 reactions in the body. Among these are immune function, hormone balance and DNA repair. Therefore, neutralizing the stomach acid by ingesting baking soda actually increases not only the development of cancer but also cancer growth by decreasing methylation in the body.

    Many people will refer to the quack Simoncini who claims cancer is a fungus and who also claims Aspergillus and Candida are the same thing. That is all another story though. Simoncini has had some luck though injecting concentrated baking soda solutions directly in to tumors. People are assuming this is helping because of alkalizing, although alkalizing has NOTHING to do with it. In fact, the reaction of the baking soda with the acidity around the tumor will just form another acid called carbonic acid. The reason this can work is because the concentrated solution is causing such as strong osmotic shift on the cells that it will kill cancer cells as well as healthy cells. This is the same principle as destroying varicose veins, which are still normal cells, by injecting a concentrated saline solution in to them.

    As for diet helping, the answer is yes. But not from alkalizing since diet DOES NOT alkalize the body. Healthy foods are rich in immune stimulating nutrients such as ascorbic acid and pantothenic acid, as well as antioxidants and antivirals (the vast majority of cancers are viral in origin) such as tannic acid, chlorogenic acid, etc. Inflammation is also a key factor in cancer and healthy foods can contain anti-inflammatories such as omega 3 fatty acids and salicylic acid. Notice what all these compounds have in common? Fibers in these foods help with detox and are fermented by the flora that account for most of our immune system in to beneficial acids such as lactic acid, acetic acid and other fatty acids.

    Speaking of acids I would love to see any of these people promoting the cancer loves acid and low oxygen levels explain how that works since alkalinity DECREASES oxygen levels. Acidity is needed to release oxygen from hemoglobin and to maintain circulation. People die from severe alkalosis due to the above reasons and due to the fact that severe alkalosis induces severe spasm contractions of the lungs preventing the person from breathing. So how do they explain their paradox that cancer cells thrive in low oxygen that would be induced by alkalinity but also supposedly thrive in acidity, which increases cancer cell oxygen levels?

    Speaking of which the cancer loves low oxygen levels is also a major myth. Cancer cells are highly reliant on oxygen for survival and growth. Cancer cells die in the absence of oxygen stimulating a process known as angiogenesis to increase oxygen levels to surviving cancer cells spurring their growth:

    Reliance of cancer cells on oxygen:

    Oxygen Consumption Can Regulate the Growth of Tumors, a New Perspective on the Warburg Effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033

    Choosing between glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation: a tumor’s dilemma? Biochim Biophys Acta 2011 Jun;1807(6):552-61

    Comparison of Metabolic Pathways between Cancer Cells and Stromal Cells in Colorectal Carcinomas: a Metabolic Survival Role for Tumor-Associated Stroma. Cancer Res January 15, 2006 66;632

    Akt Stimulates Aerobic Glycolysis in Cancer Cells. Cancer Res June 1, 2004 64; 3892

    That cancer growth is inhibited by low oxygen levels an die in the absence of oxygen:

    Oxygen consumption can regulate the growth of tumors, a new perspective on the Warburg effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033

    Anoxia is necessary for tumor cell toxicity caused by a low-oxygen environment. Cancer Res 2005 Apr 15;65(8):3171-8

    Relationship between oxygen and glucose consumption by transplanted tumors in vivo. Cancer Res 1967 Jun;27(6):1041-52

    Death of cancer cells by lack of oxygen and angiogenesis stimulation to increase the growth rate of tumors by increasing oxygen levels to the tumor:

    Computational models of VEGF-associated angiogenic processes in cancer. Math Med Biol 2012 Mar;29(1):85-94

    Blood Flow, Oxygen Consumption, and Tissue Oxygenation of Human Breast Cancer Xenografts in Nude Rats. Cancer Res 47, 3496-3503, July 1,1987

    A Mathematical Model for the Diffusion of Tumour Angiogenesis Factor into the Surrounding Host. Tissue Math Med Biol (1991) 8 (3): 191-220

    The History of Tumour Angiogenesis as a Therapeutic Target. University of Toronto Medical Journal Vol 87, No 1 (2009)

    In fact, cancer cells have a higher affinity for oxygen than healthy cells due to their reliance on oxygen:

    Utilization of Oxygen by Transplanted Tumors in Vivo. Cancer Res 1967;27:1020-1030

    Growth-related changes of oxygen consumption rates of tumor cells grown in vitro and in vivo. J Cell Physiol 1989 Jan;138(1):183-91

    I cover the use of herbs and touch on diet in this write up:

    http://www.medcapsules.com/info/Cancer.htm

    But with any cancer especially metastasized and aggressive cancers my first choice will always be ozone therapy:

    http://medcapsules.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=89

    http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=6804&pid=9900&mode=threaded

    You can also run a search on the word “ozone” on the MedCapsules site fr more research on ozone.

    James

  7. Allan says

    Hi James, obviously you have a very firm grasp of textbook, human physiology, respiration being the primary mechanism of body ph control, etc. After an open minded perusal of the general thrust of your take on this, I am left with the feeling that there is something you are missing in the big picture of the ultimate effect of diet on overall body ph. If what you say is true, that the ph of the food we eat, ultimately has little to no effect on, let’s say our blood ph, then it should be true in the most extreme of cases. So you are saying then…. that if one went on a “fast” consuming only large quantities of water with sodium bicarbonate in it… that at the end of say 3 weeks time of consuming only SBC solution, that that alone would have ZERO effect on anything except possibly stomach/intestinal ph? Would not affect our blood ph AT ALL? Or, the opposite, consuming only water and strong acetic acid solution for the same period of time, would not have some blood ph lowering effect at all? ZERO? Honestly I find that hard to imagine though I’m open to being wrong. If you accede that it ultimately would, if taken to an extreme have an effect, then it’s not hard to imagine then, that it would also have a more subtle, though not well understood, effect under normal conditions? Because saying that though “alkaline food is good for us”, it has NOTHING what so ever to do with it’s ph level, it just strikes me as highly possibly being… “iffy”. After all, just a few years ago MD’s and accepted physiology claimed that eggs caused heart disease, and now “we” pretty much know it’s much more complicated than that. I’m not “settled” either way on this, just looking for feedback. Btw, I never was taken in by the 4K water machines :) Thanks.

    • James says

      Hi Allan,

      In general you are right that if you go on a fast and take nothing but water and baking soda or water and vinegar this is not going to change your blood pH one bit. Again the body can only live in a very narrow pH range, which is why the body has so many redundant systems to keep the pH within that narrow range. And tiny fluctuation is met with an increase in respiration to reduce acidity or decrease in respiration to increase acidity. If the lungs cannot keep up the kidneys can take up a lot of the slack. If they cannot keep up then the body still has various other means to keep the pH in balance.

      Now, there have been cases where people have developed acidosis or the even more dangerous alkalosis by ingesting too much acid, such as lots of kombucha, or by ingesting too much baking soda or calcium carbonate. But these are extremely rare cases because this requires overwhelming the body’s pH buffering system, which is very difficult to do.

      Also keep in mind that neither baking soda nor vinegar are really foods. And I have been talking about foods not alkalizing the body. As I pointed out several times already ALL foods get metabolized in to acids. Many of those acids are also what make up your body, allow your cells to produce energy, that help with detoxification, that maintain your circulation and blood pressure, that allow oxygenation of tissues,…………. People need to stop fearing the acids we derive from food and that are formed by the body. Most are not evil, they are essential!!!

  8. Ted Hutchinson says

    http://www.nature.com/hr/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/hr201523a.html
    “Association between the markers of metabolic acid load and higher all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a general population with preserved renal function”
    Although metabolic acid load has been associated with many well-known risk factors for mortality, its clinical implications are not yet clear.
    To evaluate the association between biomarkers of metabolic acid load, such as serum bicarbonate, serum anion gap and urine pH and mortality, we analyzed the health records of 31 590 adults who underwent a health screening between January 2001 and December 2010 and had an estimated glomerular filtration rate greater than or equal to60 ml min−1 per 1.73 m2.
    Urine pH was measured by a dipstick test performed on fast morning urine sample and categorized as acidic (urine pH less than or equal to5.5), neutral and alkaline (urine pH greater than or equal to8.0).
    Using the Cox proportional hazard model, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of all-cause mortality of the lowest quartile of serum bicarbonate was 1.460 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.068–1.995) compared with the highest quartile, after a median follow-up of 93 months.
    The aHRs of cardiovascular and cancer mortality of the lowest quartile of serum bicarbonate were 2.647 (95% CI 1.148–6.103) and 1.604 (95% CI 1.024–2.513), respectively, compared with the highest quartile.
    Acidic and neutral urine pH were significantly associated with a higher all-cause mortality (aHR 2.550, 95% CI 1.316–4.935; aHR 2.376 95% CI 1.254–4.501, respectively), compared with an alkaline urine pH.
    In conclusion,higher metabolic acid load was associated with an increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a healthy population.
    The association between metabolic acid load and mortality and the causality of the relationship need to be confirmed.

    Unfortunately I haven’t as yet been able to read the full text but I think most people after reading the abstract, they may want to reconsider the importance of increasing intake of frut and vegetables and reducing meat intake?
    Urine pH is an indicator of dietary acid-base load, fruit and vegetables and meat intakes: results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Norfolk population study.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18042305

    • James says

      Ted Hutchison,

      Do you understand the fact that we have been discussing blood pH and the urinary pH discussed in this article DOES NOT reflect blood pH as has been pointed out so many times.

      Furthermore, your comment about increasing the intake of fruit and vegetables and reducing meat is irrelevant since as also pointed out diet DOES NOT alkalize the blood. ALL foods get metabolized in to acids.

      James

  9. says

    This is a very well researched and detailed article against the validity of the ash alkaline diet. I have read other articles, both in support of and against it, but very few of them are this well thought out, refuting the effectiveness of the diet, point by point. However, I will add this. In all the articles that say that the alkaline diet plan does not really work, they all concede that there are some claims in the theory that are actually valid and are based in science. So the inability of any argument I have read to completely refute the legitimacy of the alkaline diet, tends to make me believe that parts of the alkaline
    diet are actually real.

    • James says

      The only benefits of the so-called “alkaline diet” are the higher nutritional value, which includes numerous beneficial acids and the higher fiber intake, which are fermented in to more beneficial acids.

  10. prema says

    I am sorry but there is too much information out there that absolutely supports alkalizing…..including other holistic doctors….i was so thrilled to read Kris’s article on magnesium stearate in supplements but this article throws all his information into question for me. Seems everyone has an angle and when presented singly it makes the most sense….oh well Kris you have dropped a few notches in my book….

  11. Ashley says

    I understand what you are trying to say, and I do agree that the alkaline diet is not well founded, or necessary based on current scientific knowledge. However, as a biochemist, I must ask that you revise you paragraph titled “Kindneys – not none – regulate blood pH.” It suggests that metabolic processes in the kidneys have nothing to do with bone health, which is simply untrue. I would hate to see the focus of the article stray away from “debunking” the Alkaline diet, however this paragraph could cause some confusion, and as a result negate some of the article’s credibility. Here are some websites that can better explain the role of the kidneys in calcium metabolism.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18591745
    http://courses.washington.edu/conj/bess/calcium/calcium.html
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9763881

  12. Ted Hutchinson says

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4104095/

    Effects of natural mineral-rich water consumption on the expression of sirtuin 1 and angiogenic factors in the erectile tissue of rats with fructose-induced metabolic syndrome

    https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/hmbci.ahead-of-print/hmbci-2014-0032/hmbci-2014-0032.xml
    Natural mineral-rich water ingestion improves hepatic and fat glucocorticoid-signaling and increases sirtuin 1 in an animal model of metabolic syndrome

    Isn’t what we are seeing here what actually happens when the acidifying effects of fructose are adequately buffered with alkalizing mineral waters?

    • James says

      Ted Hutchison: “Isn’t what we are seeing here what actually happens when the acidifying effects of fructose are adequately buffered with alkalizing mineral waters?”

      No.

      First of all you ignoring the fact that mineral rich waters can be acidic or alkaline.

      Secondly, minerals in water can produce all sorts of beneficial effects on the body even though they are not doing anything to alter blood pH. For example, magnesium common in mineral waters can help regulate blood sugar among numerous other things since magnesium is required for about 300 processes in the body. These are not related to alkalizing the blood.

      You are also overlooking various other facts. For example, why are fruits considered alkalizing when they contain fructose, which you say is acidifying?

      The fact is that ALL foods get metabolized in to acids regardless of what the food is.

      So what keeps us from becoming overly acidic? Not diet, that is for sure. And minerals in water really play little if any role.

      As pointed out our pH is maintained primarily by respiration followed by hydrogen ion retention or elimination by the kidneys. These account for virtually all pH regulation of the blood.

      A person can sit and drink highly mineralized water all day long and this still would not alter their blood pH since the blood buffers the blood constantly to prevent acidosis and the significantly more dangerous alkalosis.

      By the same reasoning consuming fructose DOES NOT induce acidosis either. Therefore, highly mineralized water is not buffering any acidosis from fructose since acidosis from fructose is not occurring in the first place.

  13. Jes says

    So if an acid state has no impact on the absorption of calcium that means that when we drink milk the body is NOT leaching calcium from our bones in an attempt to re alkaline the body!?????
    So dairy is safe to drink….?

      • James says

        Yes. The high protein content of milk blocks calcium absorption from milk, which is why dairy is actually a bad source for calcium. The high phosphorus content of mil leads to calcium loss from bone making things even worse.

        Calcium in milk will also block iron absorption.

        • Jadgpanther says

          James… it is a bit off the topic but would you please share your opinion on the pine pollen and testosterone hormone metabolism?
          Kind regards,
          Jadgpanther

          • James says

            Hi Jadgpanther,

            Pollen in general is a good source of sterols, which can help with testosterone production. It does not need to be pine pollen.

            There are numerous other sterol sources as well, some much higher than pollen such as jiaogulan, which id the highest source I have ever found.

            If you want to maintain testosterone levels it is also a very good idea to combine an aromatase inhibitor such as nettle root. This blocks the conversion of testosterone in to estrogen.

            James

        • sherie says

          Dear James:
          Do you have any helpful advice you can offer for a 75 year old man with rheumatoid arthritis?

  14. Bea Bacher-Wetmore says

    I have wondered if the “alkaline” diet folks understand the digestive process, whereby food is broken down into small molecules, first in an acidic environment, then in an alkaline one. The body is not a “black box.”

    • Ted Hutchinson says

      I think we are all able to read and understand what actually happens when we take young people and some elderly folk and change their diet from a high protein to a high vegetable diet and then swap the diets.
      Try reading the full text of this paper.
      Effect of diet composition on acid–base balance in adolescents, young adults and elderly at rest and during exercise
      http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejcn2014245a.html
      and then consider this article
      Small change in blood acidity could prove detrimental to kidney disease patients
      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150106081518.htm
      Then bear in mind what % of the population have asthma, COPD, Pulmonary dysfunction or low vitamin d status all of which mean lung function is not optimal.

      • James says

        Just because someone has asthma, COPD (which includes asthma), pulmonary dysfunction (which includes COPD) or low vitamin D this DOES NOT mean they will also have acidosis. Nor does this mean they have kidney dysfunction in the first place, which is what your link is saying acidity can be a problem with.

  15. Confucoius Sayso says

    Self regulating blood ph may be a normal function of a healthy person, but what about when the body is plagued by illness? From my understanding most bacteria prefer a acidic environment and the body has to spend energy regulating blood ph which takes away from it’s capability to heal from illness and vice versa. This is especially true in cancer patients because the cancer produces large amounts of lactic acid which can put extra strain on your liver, kidneys, and body systems. Prescription medicines for these sorts of illnesses will also put extra strain on the liver. Ultimately this will have an acidifying effect on all systems in the body. Reference: http://www.mercola.com/article/sugar/sugar_cancer.htm

    • James says

      In my opinion Mercola is far from a credible source of health information.

      First of all even if the body is plagued with illness this DOES NOT make the blood acidic. And most pathogens thrive in alkalinity, not acidity. Stomach acid for example kills many pathogens as do acids from our flora. On the other hand bacteria tend to alkalize tissues and fluids to survive. For example, Helicobacter pylori secretes highly alkaline ammonia to protect itself. The bacteria that cause urinary tract infections secrete urease to split urea to form highly alkaline ammonia to protect themselves from the acidity.

      As for cancer, the cancer cells secrete lactic acid myth was dispelled decades ago.

      Cancer cells secrete lactate, not lactic acid:

      Tumor metabolism of lactate: the influence and therapeutic potential for MCT and CD147 regulation. Future Oncol 2010 Jan;6(1):127-48

      Enzymes involved in L-lactate metabolism in humans. Mitochondrion 2013 Sep 9. pii: S1567-7249(13)00244-4

      Tumor metabolism: cancer cells give and take lactate. J Clin Invest 2008 Dec;118(12):3835-7

      Mitochondrial fission induces glycolytic reprogramming in cancer-associated myofibroblasts, driving stromal lactate production, and early tumor growth. Oncotarget 2012 Aug;3(8):798-810

      Cancer DOES NOT make the body acidic, only the immediate microenvironment around the tumor becomes acidic. This is due to to the cancer cells rapidly exporting the acidic hydrogen ions in to the extracellular (outside the cell) to maintain the alkaline internal pH that allows the cancer cell to survive and to drive glycolysis in the cancer cells.

      • Ted Hutchinson says

        Introduction to the molecular basis of cancer metabolism and the Warburg effect
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25672512
        Here are a couple of paragraphs from the above paper that may interest readers here.
        There is also evidence suggesting that due to the Warburg effect and the production of lactate cancer cells possess a selective advantage over normal cells in their microenvironment.
        It has also been shown that lactate is a key driver of angiogenesis and is critical for the development
        and growth of cancer cells.

        Further in the paper they explain,
        “When tumors increase in size, blood vessels supplying
        nutrients and oxygen relative to the size of the tumor is
        often not enough to sustain the development of the tumor.
        As a result of the Warburg effect, reduced oxygen supplied to the tumor acts as a compromise, ultimately leading to hypoxia.
        When molecules of ATP lactate are yielded as a result of aerobic glycolysis in cancer cells, lactate is secreted into the tumor microenvironment.
        The consequence of the release of lactate leads to the development in growth and proliferation of cancer cells, also increasing the likelihood of metastasis

        • James says

          Cancer cells will use some of that lactate as a fule source as lactate is one of various fuel sources for cancer cells. The others being glucose, fructose, ketones and some amino acids.

          And yes, hypoxia will develop as the tumor grows, but only in parts of the tumor. This is due to the erratic vasculature within the tumor, which leaves parts of the tumor highly oxygenated and other parts hypoxic. It is these hypoxic regions that chemo and radiation therapies tend to fail due to the lack of oxygen radical formation to kill the cancer cells.

          One area I really disagree with is the claim that lactate promotes metastases. Metastases is driven by proteolytic enzymes such as hyaluronidase. But these enzymes are activated by acidity, which comes from the excess hydrogen ions secreted by the cancer cells. Lactate itself IS NOT acidic and thus would not activate the enzymes needed to drive metastases.

          • Jadgpanther says

            Dear James,
            “Cancer as a metabolic disease” book brings forth the wide academic proof that the cancer causes the mitochondrial damage and irreversibly cancer cell mitochondria consume sugars even if the oxygen is widely available. For that reason, they have supercharged blood veins in order to consume so much sugar to create so little energy. Not my claim. But frankly, I bought that idea. I do respect your approach and experience and let me listen to you why you subscribe to such opinion and whether it is based on personal experience or something else. I ll cling on to that until you persuade me to something else.
            Kind regards,
            Jadgpanther

            • James says

              Cancer does involve changes to the genes of the cells. But these changes, most often from viral insertion, are the cause of the cancer, NOT the result of the cancer.

              And yes, cancer cells will feed on glucose and fructose even in the presence of high oxygen levels (the reverse Warburg effect), but you overlooked my point. My point was that sugars are only ONE potential fuel source for cancer cells. Cancer cells also utilize some amino acids, lactate and ketones for fuel sources. So even if blood sugar levels are reduced the cancer cells still feed and grow.

              Not sure what you mean by “supercharged blood veins”. In actuality the vascular structure of malignant tumors is very poor and erratic. This is why there are areas of malignant tumors are well oxygenated and other areas are hypoxic. Same reason most chemotherapy drugs and radiation therapy tend to have such low success rates. Most rely on a free radical principle to kill the cancer cells. The oxygen saturated areas therefore are more prone to oxidative destruction of the cancer cells. But the hypoxic regions tend to be chemo and radiation resistant due to the hypoxia inhibiting the production of oxygen radicals to kill the cancer cells.

              That same erratic vasculature is going to inhibit glucose delivery just like oxygen delivery is inhibited.

              Here is the research showing cancer cells using glucose, amino acids, lactate and ketones for fuel:

              Ketones and lactate “fuel” tumor growth and metastasis: Evidence that epithelial cancer cells use oxidative mitochondrial metabolism. Cell Cycle 2010 Sep 1;9(17):3506-14

              Glucose-Independent Glutamine Metabolism via TCA Cycling for Proliferation and Survival in B Cells. Cell Metabolism, 2012; 15 (1): 110

              Glycine consumption and mitochondrial serine hydroxymethyltransferase in cancer cells: the heme connection. Med Hypotheses 2013 May;80(5):633-6

              Energy transfer in “parasitic” cancer metabolism: mitochondria are the powerhouse and Achilles’ heel of tumor cells. Cell Cycle 2011 Dec 15;10(24):4208-16

              The autophagic tumor stroma model of cancer: Role of oxidative stress and ketone production in fueling tumor cell metabolism. Cell Cycle 2010 Sep 1;9(17):3485-505

              Autophagy and senescence in cancer-associated fibroblasts metabolically supports tumor growth and metastasis via glycolysis and ketone production. Cell Cycle 2012 Jun 15;11(12):2285-302

              Ketone bodies and two-compartment tumor metabolism: stromal ketone production fuels mitochondrial biogenesis in epithelial cancer cells. Cell Cycle 2012 Nov 1;11(21):3956-63

              Pyruvate kinase expression (PKM1 and PKM2) in cancer-associated fibroblasts drives stromal nutrient production and tumor growth. Cancer Biol Ther 2011 Dec 15;12(12):1101-13

              Warburg meets autophagy: cancer-associated fibroblasts accelerate tumor growth and metastasis via oxidative stress, mitophagy, and aerobic glycolysis. Antioxid Redox Signal 2012 Jun 1;16(11):1264-84

                • James says

                  Nice OPINION piece. Where is the research to back his view. All I see him referencing are other opinion articles. Again, where is the REAL research countering the studies that show ketones are a fuel source for cancer?

                  In addition, you are still overlooking the fact that cancer cells can also use other fuel sources other than sugars and ketones. This includes amino acids that can be supplied by a ketogenic diet. So you keep focusing on looking at one tree while ignoring the rest of the forest.

                • James says

                  Ted Hutchinson: “http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197426/”

                  Once again you post something that you expect someone to go through and try to guess what point you are trying to make instead of stating what you are getting at in the link and quoting what you think is true. So all I can do is guess that this is the quote from the study you posted that you wanted me to see:

                  “Despite the evidence outlined above showing how CHO restriction counteracts tumor glycolysis, accounts for the altered metabolism of the tumor-bearing patient and may even improve the tolerability of radiation treatment, some authors still question the scientific rationale for the KD and deny any possible benefits171.”

                • Ted Hutchinson says

                  I think this is a very important debate and those with a cancer diagnosis will have to take extremely seriously.
                  It’s important they consider all sides of the debate and not think James’ view are the only opinions that matter.
                  I see absolutely no point in debating issues with those whose minds are closed to reason or evidence.
                  Of course such is the nature of consensus medical opinion it will be many years before the use of ketogenic diets to assist cancer therapy become commonplace.
                  If we look at the history of ketogenic diets for epilepsy we can trace it back to 500years BC but despite a period in the 1920s it’s been ignored until perhaps the last 20 years but still we see it’s mainly used a last resort after drug therapies have been tried and failed.
                  When lots of money is involved in medical treatments it’s not patient safety or common sense that come first.
                  It may help to understand the issue from the perspective of someone fighting brain cancer.
                  http://greymadder.net/2014/04/28/fight-cancer-with-a-ketogenic-diet-book-review/

                • James says

                  Ted Hutchison: “It’s important they consider all sides of the debate and not think James’ view are the only opinions that matter.”

                  Stop trying to make this about me. I AM NOT the topic. I am merely providing evidence that REAL science has already shown. I am not in to opinion pieces as “evidence”.

                  Ted Hutchison: “I see absolutely no point in debating issues with those whose minds are closed to reason or evidence.”

                  If there was REAL evidence presented in the first place then maybe I would reconsider. Posting opinion articles IS NOT “evidence”. I posted actual research showing cancer cells use ketones as one of various fuel sources. That is an example of REAL evidence.

                  Ted Hutchison: “it will be many years before the use of ketogenic diets to assist cancer”

                  If ever. Again, so far the only REAL evidence that has been presented shows ketones fuel cancer. Why put so much effort in to trying to make an argument for something where real evidence is lacking when we already have things that have been proven to work on cancer such as ozone therapy?

                  Ted Huthison: “If we look at the history of ketogenic diets for epilepsy we can trace it back to 500years BC”

                  A of things we use today can be dated back to ancient times. Are you aware that electrotherapy and even thermography principles were being used back in Greek and Roman days? The reason they are in use today is because there was an actual rational for their use backed by REAL science and not some hypothesis that goes against what real science has already shown.

              • James says

                “May Be Vital to Tumor Suppression”

                “May be”? Do you understand this this means hypothetical, not proven?

                Even if you red through the article they are still pointing out this is all hypothetical.

                In addition, it sounds like they did a Petri dish study, which IS NOT the same as in a living body since a Petri dish DOES NOT have a metabolism. See, in an actual human body if glucose is restricted guess what happens? The body can generate its own glucose from a variety of things including glycogen, amino acids from proteins, fats and lactate. The process is known as gluconeogenesis. This is why one cancer therapy, known as hydrazine sulfate (HS), is used in some countries to treat cancer. HS helps to prevent the conversion of lactate in to glucose thus helping to reduce fuel to the cancer cells.

                But again, cancer cells can use various fuel sources including ketones. Therefore, a Petri dish study DOES NOT reflect what actually happens in the human body.

                When they put the cancer cells in a Petri dish and withhold glucose there are no secondary fuel sources to feed the cells as occurs within the human body. And there is no response to low blood sugar from the adrenals and thus no glucose generation by the liver as in the actual human body.

                Petri dish studies ARE NOT proof of anything. They are great manipulation tools though to try and prove a point or to get more grant money because most people don’t understand that these types of studies mean very little.

                As an example of where I said “try and prove a point” there was a study reported all over the media a while back claiming vitamin C caused infertility. How did they come to this bogus conclusion? They put vitamin C directly on semen in a Petri dish killing the semen. Of course semen is alkaline to survive the acidic pH of the woman’s reproductive organs, but still it can only take so much acidity. If this bogus study were true then none of us would exist since we also need vitamin C to exist and survive.

      • James says

        Blood can become acidic, but this is an EXTREMELY rare occurrence.

        As for tissues, some tissues need to be acidic to keep them healthy. For example the skin and colon.

        Normally alkaline tissues again rarely become acidic. An example would be an accumulation of uric acid. The body routinely produces uric acid, which is done to not only protect us from highly alkaline and highly poisonous ammonia but is also one of the body’s primary antioxidants. Excess uric acid can be produced and/or accumulate in certain instances such as antifreeze poisoning, dehydration, some medications, hypothyroidism, etc.

        • Amy says

          James :”The body does not become acidic from a lack of minerals. Again the body’s primary means of pH regulation are respiration followed by kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions”

          To relate this to the overly touted RO water systems with remineralization filters…Many claim that they have superior systems because in RO systems without remineralization filters, you are left with acidic water, which is “bad for you”.
          James, do you have any thoughts bout this topic?

          • James says

            Hi Amy,

            Purified waters (distilled, reverse osmosis) do go rapidly acidic as they absorb gases from the air. When water absorbs carbon dioxide this forms carbonic acid. As the water absorbs nitrogen and sulfur oxides from the air various nitrogenous and sulfurous acids are formed.

            Are these harmful? Not really. The acidity is pretty minor and the only potential danger would be to the tooth enamel.

            As with other acids in foods, drinks and stomach acid these acids will simply be neutralized in the chyme as the chyme leaves the stomach. This is a normal part of the digestive process. As chyme leaves the stomach the pancreas releases bicarbonate to neutralize acids in the chyme so the acids will not harm the intestines.

            James

            • Amy says

              Thanks for your thoughts on this topic, James. The way you explained it makes sense. It should not be surprising that some companies utilize fear tactics to try and reel us in. A quick example, I stumbled upon
              an RO system that markets itself as superior to all others and gives two major reasons:
              ” Reverse osmosis (RO) systems do an outstanding job eliminating a wide range of toxins, Unfortunately, they are not discriminating and strip the good with the bad. We’re then left with super clean water, but water that is acidic, dead and biologically damaging.
              The —-(company x) uses RO for its filtration basis, but then adds our healthy Mineral Mix to the water. By using a specially designed cartridge with slow release minerals and ceramics (no worries about kidney stones or overdosing) we are able to create water with high pH levels, ionized antioxidant benefits and the same light, super hydrating properties found using electric water ionizers.”

              When I first read this, I felt stuck. RO systems seem to be the only way to be rid of the more harmful aspects of municipal water- chlorine, chloramine, and fluoride (etc.). Yet most RO systems produce water that is “acidic, dead and biologically damaging.” With the exception of company x, who will provide perfectly balanced pH etc…

              Still another article argued against RO altogether and recommended high quality spring water.
              Sounds like I should take all of this with a big grain of salt.
              It is confusing to say the least. Do you have any further thoughts on this?

              • James says

                Hi Amy,

                Personally I prefer a good spring water with the minerals still intact over any other water. This is not always available though so my second choice would be a reverse osmosis system. All you need to do is to add a little trace element slat such as Real Salt (Himalayan salt) to the water. To my water bottles I just add a pinch. This reduces the solvency of the water as well as reduces the dangerous osmotic shift that can occur with purified waters. And that tiny amount does not make the water taste salty. my other favorite is to add a spoon full of food grade diatomaceous earth to a gallon of water and let it settle out. Then I drink the water part way down then refill the jug and let the DE settle out again repeating this process over and over. The DE is left in the bottom all the time and each time you add new water traces of silica in the DE is dissolved, which is extremely beneficial to the body.

                And neither of these will dangerously neutralize the stomach acid like ionized alkaline waters or waters highly alkalized with carbonates or oxides.

                Both the trace element salt or DE are cheap, safe and effective means to reduce health problems that can occur from drinking purified waters.

                James

                • Amy says

                  James, thank you once again for your time and knowledgeable feedback. I also read your responses to Ian. One of the main takeaways from reading your comments is the fact that water ionizers alkalize water through the formation of unhealthy mineral hydroxides…
                  Example: Magnesium carbonate is converted in to magnesium hydroxide.
                  So, water that is naturally alkaline through minerals etc…is the way to go. Or with an RO system, I just need to “take it with a grain of salt”, real Himalayan, that is.

                  I do have another question for you. Before receiving your recent feedback, I continued my research of RO systems and found an interesting one by AquaLiv. It promises all the bells and whistles sans electric water ionizers. They seem to be on the same page with you regarding the dangers of water ionizers.
                  (AquaLiv)“All common alkaline water ionizers provide hydrogen derived benefits. However, they also provide artificial pH side effects. It is not possible for any common alkaline water ionizer to separate the two. If an alkaline water ionizer uses electricity, it’s the type you want to avoid.”
                  Instead, they utilize “ActivMag”, which looks to be magnesium bound to oxygen (see below)…
                  “The AquaLiv Water System uses ActivMag™ Technology to ensure the water you drink has a proper, naturally alkaline pH through the addition of trace amounts of magnesium. The magnesium used in ActivMag™ is pre-oxidized (bound to oxygen) in order to create a self-regulating pH system. Because the magnesium is oxidized, it is not readily available to dissolve in water. It first needs to react with the naturally occurring H+ ions in the water. The more H+ in the source water, the more acidic that water is. When the H+ ions interact with the magnesium, it frees the magnesium from the oxygen and allows it to dissolve, increasing the water’s alkalinity.
                  “In addition to slightly increasing the pH, a small amount of the magnesium reacts with water to produce molecular hydrogen, H2. The world’s first and best antioxidant. ActivMag™ Technology is the next best thing to water flowing down mineral deposits in a mountain stream.”

                  Do you think the above method would produce water akin to the dangerous ionized alkaline waters or waters highly alkalized with carbonates or oxides?

                  AquaLiv makes many enticing promises:
                  • Leaves in the beneficial minerals that reverse osmosis systems strip away
                  • Creates Energized Structured Water
                  • Creates a healthful, stable alkaline pH 1(8-9.5)
                  • No electricity needed to run the system
                  • System is eco-friendly—no water is wasted unlike reverse osmosis water filters 2
                  • Increases circulation and blood oxygen levels 3
                  • Stabilizes blood sugar 4
                  • Safe for people and pets of all ages
                  • Increases Dissolved Hydrogen level in water
                  • Improves Oxidation Reduction Potential
                  • Provides Magnesium to the body (NO MENTION OF CALCIUM?)

                  I was excited to see a potential RO system that seemed to meet real health standards- but I’m skeptical due to all that I’ve been learning. Thanks again for your part in that learning! Out of curiosity, do you have a science background?
                  For now, I’ll look for some good New England spring water and await your congenial responses.

          • says

            Amy, the whole debate about alkaline water and RO is very much a marketer’s dream becasue most people have never had the need to really learn about something that most people simply take for granted. james is correct about RO. I t does acidify the water. It’s known as ‘hungry water’.

            Water ionizers do not actually alkalize water. they simply concentrate the alkaline minerals in the existing supply. The pH of these units comes about through electrolysis.

            The active ingredient in water from a water ionizer be it natural or electric is molecular hydrogen, and the therapeutic effects of H2 have nothing at all to do with alkalinity.

            The problem electric ionizers have – it’s really a design problem – is that to get high H2 infusion in output water, the user has to increase the electricity in the electrolysis chamber to a point where the pH can go over pH 10, making it rather nasty to consume. There are now new technologies that give more H2 with less pH – even neutral pH.

            • James says

              Ian Blair Hamilton: “Amy, the whole debate about alkaline water and RO is very much a marketer’s dream becasue most people have never had the need to really learn about something that most people simply take for granted. james is correct about RO. I t does acidify the water. It’s known as ‘hungry water’.”

              Purified waters are not known as “hungry water” because they become acid. It is because the more pure water is the more solvent it becomes and it will try to saturate with whatever it can.

              Ian Blair Hamilton: “Water ionizers do not actually alkalize water. ”

              Actually they do through the formation of mineral (metal) hydroxides.

              Ian Blair Hamilton: “they simply concentrate the alkaline minerals in the existing supply. ”

              Again not true. The minerals that are naturally occurring in the water, which are usually carbonates, are artificially altered in to synthetic mineral (metal) hydroxides, which are what create the high pH in these waters.

              For example, calcium carbonate that is common in many tap waters is concerted in to calcium hydroxide, used to make cement. Magnesium carbonate is converted in to magnesium hydroxide, which is used as a laxative in part because it chemically burns the intestinal wall. If you have potassium in your water like our water contains naturally you will form potassium hydroxide commonly sold as Drano. Or if you have sodium in your water you will form sodium hydroxide commonly sold as Red Devil Lye. Note all these compounds are caustic to the tissues and dangerously neutralize the stomach acid when ingested. Neutralization of stomach acid can lead to food allergies and nutrient deficiencies from improper digestion of foods. A lack of stomach acid also decreases methylation increasing the risk of cancer, heart disease, immune suppression, depression, hormone imbalances, arthritis, decreased cellular energy production, etc.

              In addition these hydroxides dissociate forming a dangerous free radical.

              In short people are just asking for health issues by drinking ionized alkaline water, especially in the long term. But as you said “most people have never had the need to really learn about something that most people simply take for granted.”

              Ian Blair Hamilton: “The pH of these units comes about through electrolysis.”

              Yes, that is true. The alkalinity comes from the electrolysis forming caustic mineral (metal) hydroxides, not from concentrating alkaline minerals.

              During the electrolysis process water is split leaving the positively charged hydrogen and the negatively charged hydroxyl group. Since opposite charges attract they have to be kept separated so they don’t simply form back in to water. So the negatively charged hydroxyl group looks for a positive charge to balance and gets that from the positively charged metals of the minerals in the water. Calcium (Ca+) for example reacts with the negatively charged OH to form CaOH2. See, the calcium in the water was not concentrated, it is was simply transformed in to a dangerous and synthetic hydroxide to make the water alkaline.

              Ian Blair Hamilton: “The active ingredient in water from a water ionizer be it natural or electric is molecular hydrogen, and the therapeutic effects of H2 have nothing at all to do with alkalinity.”

              That is not what all the water ionizer sales hype is claiming. They have been claiming for decades that it has to do with the alkalinity, which really is rubbish. The fact is that the alkalinity of the ionized alkaline waters is actually quite harmful to the body as I pointed out above.

  16. mhikl says

    Truly Chris,
    You are one of the best Alternative Medicine practitioners in the field of all health studies. That you also support Brian Peskin’s studies into Omega oils lends credence to your endeavours.

    All the standard medical profession has to offer are chemicals that address the symptoms yet do nothing to heal the problem itself.

    There are a lot of great natural health providers on the net but many of them get caught up in the confines of their beliefs and studies, and though they offer some excellent support, they fail to continue to reach beyond their own set of interests and background of studies as you and a few other natural healers do.

    I also like Dr Mercola who never fears to step beyond his past understandings. For example, he has proposed, since 2008, that the noon day sun (10 AM to 3 PM) is the best time for healthy sun exposure (UVB) to ensure healthy Vitamin D and skin. The other hours of the day have the dangerous, intense sun rays, UVA, that damages skin and seems to be the cause of skin cancers.

    I was a believer of the alkaline/acid use of baking soda to change my alkalinity. I do find that it does calm my eczema when the itch occurs, but now I know to be careful, and not over do the amount I take at one time, though with the information on Omega oils, my need to clear the itch is much lessoned.

    The protocols of Professor Peskin and you regarding the negative nature of fish oils and the better use of plant based Omega oils have very much helped my skin. I have now a salve mixture of MSM, vitamin C and oils that is finally taming the itch and healing my eczema for the first time in the seven or so years I have had this plague. (This past holiday season the skin from my elbows and knees down fell off and I was in the worst health and pain of my life. Nothing helped, except alkalising with backing soda water, until I found yours and Prof Peskin’s information.)

    My skin was certainly better this summer when I was getting the noon time sun suggested by Dr Mercola and now I am trying to get the immediate 12 O’clock sun in the warmer days of winter in my norther country. Along with proper Omega oils, now, I think I can beat the blight that makes my life, at times, unbearable.
    Namaste and care,
    mhikl

    • Mitch says

      MHIKL … could you kindly provide your salve “recipe” in detail…which oils,quantities, etc Thanx !

  17. Andrea says

    My research has led me to believe that the foundation of good health requires good mineral nutrition. And that without it the body becomes acidic due to the gradual depletion of it’s mineral reserves and all types of health stress can occur. And that the goal is to move pH back into the ideal range. I also thought it had been clinically established the urine’s pH is an accurate reflection of the whole body’s acid/alkaline status. I thought urine pH was directly correlated to both tissue oxygen levels an soft tissue levels of minerals (calcium, magnesium, trace elements). That these minerals are the basic currency of exchange for literally every cell in the body. Thoughts?

    • James says

      The body does not become acidic from a lack of minerals. Again the body’s primary means of pH regulation are respiration followed by kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions. Since these do not require any kind of reserve we do not deplete these pH regulation methods.

      As for urinary pH, no urinary pH does not reflect the pH of the blood or other tissues whatsoever. Urinary pH is affected by hydration levels, certain supplements and medications, exercise, things in diet or by degradation of food products and by bacteria in the urine. Urinary tract infections lead to highly alkaline urine as the bacteria use the enzyme urease to split urea in to highly alkaline ammonia. The alkalinity helps the bacteria, as with most pathogens, to survive.

      Therefore, urinary pH does not tell us anything about tissue oxygenation or mineral levels either.

      The pH of the blood does affect tissue oxygen levels though. Excess alkalinity leads to decreased tissue oxygen levels by both constricting blood vessels leading to decreased circulation and by inhibiting oxygen release from hemoglobin. Excess acidity has the opposite effect.

  18. Clement says

    Hi James,

    At the start of each day, my wife whisks up a cup of matcha, eat probiotics, vitamin c and spirulina to cleanse and energize her body. I am concerned if these can be consumed together in one go and if matcha is indeed effective as there aren’t much scientific research to begin with. Do you know of any research which supports claims of its benefits?

    Does having alkaline foods (in general) have the counter effect of causing the stomach to work harder and secrete excess acid?

    • James says

      Hi Clement,

      I am not big on green tea, including matcha, for several reasons. Green tea is very high in fluoride, which can lead to thyroid suppression. The tea plant is also high in tannins, which can block nutrient absorption and could adversely affect the probiotic bacteria. If she is going to drink the matcha then it needs to be done away from supplements and probiotics.

      Green tea does have benefits, such as the antioxidant effect. Unfortunately those same antioxidants can interfere with nutrient, supplement and medicine absorption.

      And the high fluoride content is also an issue. I prefer other teas such as jiaogulan, nettle leaf, rooibos, etc.

      Vitamin C should also be taken away from probiotics as the vitamin C could also harm the probiotics.

    • Nannette says

      Hi Vickie,

      I support my kidneys’ filtering/cleansing function by taking occasionally doTERRA’s Zendocrine Detox Complex (herbal blend of dandelion roots, clove buds, burdock root, etc). I know also of essential oil blend of clove, rosemary, grapefruit and geranium that can do the same job as above. Also, Juniper Berry essential oil is a kidney oil. It can be applied topically or internally to support the kidneys. Let me know if you’re interested. Shot me an email at [email protected]. Nannette

        • Nannette says

          Hi Bagsimon,

          You can find published health benefits of essential oils and herbs at Pub-Med.gov, plenty of them. It is good to be cautious but don’t close your eyes completely about these products because you miss a lot through sheer lack of credible information and understanding.

          In such a situation, the challenge is to find an honest supplier. Thankfully, in a wold geared to sole profit, there are still a few out there who could be trusted.

          Sincerely,

          Nannette

        • Christine Garcia says

          I disagree with you. Aromatic oils for health are real and I am a living testimony. I will not give the name of the company but I have been taking a few drops of Thieves every night since March of 2013 and have not gotten sick once. I also put a drop of cloves essential oil in my tea and Roma hot drinks. One time I was in someone’s kitchen in the winter so all the windows and doors were closed. She started smoking and after an hour I had to leave. My throat felt irritated. I put less than a nano-drop of this Thieves on my fingertip and stuck it down my throat. In an instant everything cleared up and never returned. Also, I had a slight histamine reaction to some unknown thing and I took an empty gelatin capsule and added four drops each of Lavender, Lemon, and Peppermint. Then swallowed it. This acts as a natural anti-histamine. No more symptoms. OK, so much for the remarks about condemning essential oils. They are great and lots of companies make real good ones.

          • Dennis says

            Christine, that is some good information you gave, along with your experiences.

            It is SO important for us to know that science and the medical establishment will ALWAYS lag behind the truth about health and healing……and the truth of how to heal ourselves of anything is available to all.

        • Allan says

          Oh bee ess, she may be spamming but to say essential oils for health are a hoax is just ignorant. Just one example, essential oil of Oregano kills parasites. That alone makes you full of it. I suppose all botanical herbs are “for health” are a hoax too, EH? Note (?) many pharmaceuticals are synthesized compounds based on phyto-chemicals. Sweeping generalizations much?

    • mhikl says

      Vickie, what I find very helpful is fresh celery juice. I take one whole bunch and pulverise it in my blender and then pass it to my juicer. I keep it in the fridge and drink it regularly.

      When I first started using this I drank a complete celery bunch every day for quite a few days—don’t remember exactly how long, but it was at least a week in length. Now I probably down two bunches a week and I use another one or more in my cooking as well.

      The improvements I found was an ease and strength in urine flow. There were other indicators but it is so long ago since I began this protocol that I do not remember. When I go off it, it takes months for problems to re-occur, but I have learned my lesson and it is a mainstay to my health.

      Here are 2 sites I just found in a Google search that you might find interesting:
      http://juicing-for-health.com/basic-nutrition/healing-vegetables/health-benefits-of-celery.html
      http://www.kidney-cares.org/ckd-nutrition-recipe/1246.html
      Namaste and care,
      mhikl

    • James says

      Supporting the kidneys is not that hard. One of the best herbs for the kidneys is nettle leaf. I also like schisandra berry.

  19. Arnold says

    Maybe there in USA alkaline is myth, here in Germany, if u get ill, your doctor first test your body acidness, then if its high, you must first make your body alkaline, then come back for medicaments. Usually 90% dont come back to doctor, because illness is gone when body is alkaline.

    • James says

      So why would acidosis be so common in Germany and EXTREMELY rare in the rest of the world?

      And why is it that so much disease only occurs in an acidic body in Germany yet in the rest of the world mos disease occurs in the normally alkaline blood bodies?

      • Bangsimon says

        Because in Germany many people think “Naturopaths” are doctors and many doctors use naturopathic nonsense to to get the patient to make lifestyle changes, which the patients would not believe in if the doctor told them the truth… that it is their own fault for eating wrong, drinking to much and exercising too little. If you tell the patient their malaise is his own fault he will go to someone else. If you tell them its toxins and acid, they are more likely to follow the advice about diet and exercise.

        • Nancy says

          Yes, Bangsimon, it is so much better when doctors, who are ignorant as to the cause of an ailment, prescribe pharmaceuticals to mask symptoms rather than use any of that “naturopathic nonsense” to deal with the root cause.

        • James says

          Here is this country naturopaths actually have a lot more medical training than MDs. In fact, i know quite a few MDs that went and got the additional training to become naturopaths because allopathic medicine has a ton of flaws in their thinking and approach to what they call “healing”.

          Regardless, what someone is told is not going to change their pH. So the question remains why is acidosis supposedly so common in Germany and so rare in the rest of the world?

      • James says

        PaleoHuntress has is correct.

        You are not going to alkalize by taking supplements or through diet. The body’s main means of pH regulation is through respiration followed by hydrogen ion retention or elimination by the kidneys. This accounts for virtually all pH regulation in the body and why you will likely never meet anyone who has acidosis.

        When people try to force their pH one way or the other all they do is put more stress on the body as the body now has to work harder to deal with the imbalance the people are actually creating.

  20. says

    I have osteoporosis and I have been reading and researching alternative methods of treating it, rather than using the pharmaceutical drugs like Fosamax etc. I’ve been studying this issue for about a year. So much of what I have learned convinced me that an alkaline diet was the key. So, imagine how interesting I found this article which debunks the theory. One of my particular issues is that when I’ve had the 24hr urine test done, I am losing more calcium in my urine than normal. I was guessing this was due to an acidic body/diet. Even though I’ve increased my vegetables and eat a relatively healthy diet; no processed foods, I am still excreting more calcium in my urine than the normal range. One Dr. suggested that I start taking even more calcium but that didn’t seem necessarily wise to me. I take supplements and I eat tons of kale, broccoli, etc Any ideas anyone?

    • James says

      First of all eating a lot of kale is not a good idea since it is high in oxalic acid, which binds calcium preventing its absorption.

      As for why you are losing so much calcium the main reasons for this are hyperparathyroidism and pseudohyperparathyroidism.

      Did the doctor check your parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels?

    • KC says

      Hi Jessie.

      I agree with James.

      I had a high blood calcium and high urinary calcium. A high PTH level confirmed hyperparathyroidism caused by a benign parathyroid tumor.

      All was resolved with a simple surgery to remove the one affected parathyroid gland ( most people have 4)

      I had my surgery done by Dr Norman @ http://parathyroid.com because no one in my area was doing the type of procedure that he was doing with minimal scarring.

      • James says

        These benign parathyroid tumors that cause hyperparathyroidism have been linked to low vitamin D levels. I would try supplementing with Vitamin D3 and NO supplemental calcium before I would undergo surgery.

        Supplementing with magnesium malate or citrate can also help counter side effects of high calcium.

  21. George says

    Hi James, Thanks for your willingness to share what you have found out about the acid-alkaline effect upon Osteoporosis. It has reached me in Australia. This subject is far more than just an intellectual discussion to me. I have been diagnosed with osteoporosis, and I have decided not to take the prescribed drugs, because of their serious side effects. Therefore, I need to understand my problem so that I can do some things to help myself. Up to reading your articles I thought that I could do something by following the acid- alkaline diet. However, you have shot that down. Now I do not have a reason for my problem such as an over acid diet that caused my body to rob minerals from my bones to keep my blood at the right ph level. Also, I do not have a plan of attacking my problem apart from taking several supplements to help me. I need a new reason why my body is naturally breaking down bone but not rebuilding it to the point that I on a road to diminishing bone density. Maybe I was deficient in K2, D3, magnesium, calcium, & other minor elements, and if I take them I will do all I need to do. Apart from not meeting the body’s Vitamin and mineral needs does science have another reason why peoples bones naturally break down but do not fully build up each cycle? This is what I need to know, and I am asking you have you seen any scientific info on this subject!

    • Ted Hutchinson says

      The effect of supplementation with alkaline potassium salts on bone metabolism: a meta-analysis.
      CONCLUSIONS:

      This meta-analysis confirms that supplementation with alkaline potassium salts leads to significant reduction in renal calcium excretion and acid excretion, compatible with the concept of increased buffering of hydrogen ions by raised circulating bicarbonate. The observed reduction in bone resorption indicates a potential benefit to bone health.

    • says

      Hi, George, I too found I was suffering from severe Osteo at age 66. I’m now 69 and after my 3rd Dexascan I can say that things have improved, thanks to the diligent research of my partner, Cassie Bond (alkalinepaleodiet.com).
      I was a vegetarian for many years and then adhered to the Alkaline diet but Cassie discovered that the absence of K2 in my diet meant the adequate calcium I was receiving was not able to deposit on my bones. My Dexascan results taken annually are improving. I’m 70 this year. I am now on what we like to call the new Alkaline Diet.

    • James says

      Hi George,

      Calcium, magnesium, vitamin D and vitamin K will not reverse osteoporosis for a simple reason. A common misconception about osteoporosis is that this is a loss of bone minerals. A loss of bone minerals though is actually osteopenia or osteomalacia, not osteoporosis. Osteoporosis is the result of a a lack of bone collagen, which decreases mineral binding sites in bone. Without sufficient mineral binding sites bone density decreases.

      Bone collagen formation is dependent on the amino acids lysine, hydroxylysine, proline, hydroxyproline and glycine as well as vitamin C, silica and traces of copper and zinc as catalysts.

      The most common deficiencies that lead to a loss of collagen are silica and vitamin C.

      Most of our silica comes from insoluble plant fibers. Brans and seaweeds are especially good sources. Herbally I prefer bamboo, which is the richest herbal source of silica and nettle leaf. I avoid horsetail grass (shavegrass) due to its vasoconstrictive properties, which can be dangerous for some individuals such as diabetics, those with Raynaud’s, heart disease, etc.

      Silica is acid dependent for proper absorption since acid helps convert silica in to its absorbable form orthosilicic acid (OA). Stomach acid levels decline with age though, and stomach acid blockers, such as proton pump inhibitors, or stomach acid neutralizers such as antacids, baking soda, ionized alkaline water, calcium carbonate (oyster shell, coral, dolomite) and magnesium oxide/hydroxide (found in many supplements and Milk of magnesia) further decrease the conversion of silica in to OA. Many “aging” conditions are actually the result of OA deficiencies leading to a loss of collagen and the similar protein elastin.

      Silica is poorly absorbed due to the poor conversion of silica in to OA, which declines even more if acid levels decline. Due to poor absorption most silica supplements do not do a lot of good since most of the silica in the supplement is not absorbed and people are generally not very good at taking supplements more than once a day. I prefer to get silica from diatomaceous earth (DE) in water. Any silica from the DE that dissolves in to the water forms OA. And since people drink water throughout the day drinking the DE water guarantees more silica being absorbed since a little is absorbed with each drink of water. I discuss how to do this here:

      http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2800

      As for vitamin C I prefer naturally occurring vitamin C sources since they tend to be more stable and effective. An exception is camu camu, which is rather unstable. Great food sources include papaya, kiwis, mangoes, berries and peppers. Recommended herbal sources include acerola cherry, amla, rose hips and nettle leaf.

      James

  22. cd says

    I’ve read that drinking Kombucha is not advised while on a Candida cleanse due to the high acidity and fermented sugars which supposedly feed the yeast in the gut. Is this probably true? Just started experimenting with maple syrup/baking soda blend to attract the yeast and kill them. Wondering if adding baking soda to kombucha will help attract and kill Candida? Also thinking that adding baking soda to Kombucha might disrupt the acidity and unfortunately kill the good bacteria though…. I’ve been working very hard for months on getting rid of the overgrowth, from diatomous earth, bentonite clay, antifungal herbs, lemon water, aloe vera, paleo low car diet, but it hasn’t gotten better. Should Kombucha be consumed and will baking soda help get rid of Candida?

    • James says

      Hi CD,

      Acids DO NOT feed Candida, they control Candida.

      In short, Candida is a dimorphic microbe meaning it can exist in two forms. In the normal acidic environment the Candida growth gene is turned off and the Candida remains in its BENIGN yeast form. When our acid producing flora, which keep the Candida under control, are reduced the terrain becomes alkaline turning on the Candida growth gene and morphing the Candida in to its PATHOGENIC fungal from. This later state caused by the excess alkalinity is known as candidiasis. When the Candida morphs in to its fungal form from the alkalinity the Candida forms finger-like projections known as hyphae that allow the Candida to dig in to tissues causing tissue damage and inflammation.

      This is why antibiotics lead to fungal Candida infections because they kill the beneficial acid forming flora alkalizing normally acidic tissues. This alkalinity then leads to candidiasis. Probiotics and prebiotics are used to treat candidiasis because they restore the natural acidity to these tissues thereby once again halting the Candida growth and converting the Candida back in to its benign yeast form. See:

      http://curezone.info/forums/fm.asp?i=1452732#i

      http://curezone.info/forums/fm.asp?i=1452739#i

      http://curezone.info/forums/fm.asp?i=1452747#i

      http://medproductreview.wordpress.com/2013/02/23/using-probiotics-to-treat-candida-yeast-infections/

      Using baking soda is not going to help at all. Whether you mix it in the tea or ingest it the baking soda the baking soda is simply going to be neutralized by acids and therefore will no longer be baking soda.

      Also keep in mind that many things are claimed to work based on Petri dish studies. But what happens in a Petri dish is not always the same as what happens in the body. There is no evidence that ingesting baking soda will control Candida.

      James

  23. De Aun says

    I was encouraged to post and seek comment when I saw the dates on this article. I generally only seem to come across things posted ages ago. I have been struggling for some time now to grasp the true effects of acid/alkaline diets. Looking to add more probiotics to my diet, I started making my own kombucha about a year ago, but I struggled with the idea of drinking something acidic in order to lower my ph. I have a ph meter for canning so I started testing my urine ph. The numbers were disturbingly low (ie highly acidic). I understand that my blood ph will be kept within a tight range, but my urine had very large swings in acidity. Which lead me to ponder whether my kidneys were possibly being overburdened trying to pull my ph into range. I wonder, James, if you would comment on this.

    Actually I’m hoping for your insights on two specific issues: 1) How is it possible that consuming things high in acid (ie lemon, apple cider vinegar, or kombucha) can work to alkalize us, and 2) Why shouldn’t a highly acidic urine be seen as an indication that our bodies are being asked to work extra hard to compensate?

    • Rhys Kempen says

      I changed my urine ph from 5.5 to 8 in two weeks by drinking a glass of water with a level teaspoon of baking soda, the juice of half a lemon (squeezed by hand) and a tablespoon of apple cider vinegar…

      this was to assist the healing of a UTI. I am not sure how long the lowering of the h took but the tests were two weeks apart.

      I did not change my diet other than that and I eat a lot of sugar.

      • Paleo Huntress says

        Rhys,

        What reaction did you see occur when you added the lemon and vinegar to the baking soda? It foamed and bubbled, right?

        Well, the drink you consumed was practically neutral– the acids and alkalines neutralized each other in the cup long before they could change anything in your body. <–(Were that not a myth.) You consumed a drink with some sodium and a little vitamin C and acetic acid, but even the vitamin C was reduced by the baking soda. After mixing the two together, if there were any such thing as acid or alkaline forming foods, both properties were neutralized, rendering them both useless.

        Urine pH has no correlation whatsoever to blood and tissue pH.

        • 2SHADES says

          Thank you, for being one of the few who actually possesses common sense & a REAL education regarding this subject matter.

          So much anecdotal information floating around out there that people claim is “evidence”, I’ve been fighting this fight for YEARS and it just keeps getting worse and worse as time goes on.

      • James says

        Rhys,

        Bacterial urinary tract infections are detected by a urine analysis because the bacteria alkalize the urine for their survival. They do this by secreting the enzyme urease to increase urinary ammonia alkalizing the urine.

        Adding lemon juice and/or vinegar to baking soda simply neutralizes the baking soda. The lemon juice will form primarily sodium citrate and sodium malate. The vinegar reacts with the baking soda forming sodium acetate, the flavoring for salt and vinegar potato chips.

        James

    • James says

      Hi De Aun,

      Urinary pH does fluctuate normally. It is affected by hydration levels, certain supplements and medications, exercise, things in diet or by degradation of food products and by bacteria in the urine.

      As for the acid foods question, they don’t. This myth stems from the fact that the so-called “alkaline response” is a normal part of the digestive process. But somewhere along the lines the supporters of the “alkaline diet” myth twisted this fact to make it sound like only acids stimulate this response and that this somehow alkalized the blood. Neither claim though is true.

      All foods are made acidic or more acidic in the stomach as part of the normal digestive process. When the chyme (partially digested food, stomach acid and enzymes) is released from the stomach in to the intestines the pancreas releases sodium bicarbonate to neutralize the acid. This is the “alkaline response”. Therefore, the neutralization of acidity is only in the intestine, not the blood. And it does not matter if you eat greens, or steak or candy bars, or………. you will still get the same exact alkaline response.

      As for your last question, a highly acidic urine is only an issue if it is higher than a normal acidity, which is below 4.6. This can be from something like diabetic ketoacidosis or starvation.

      James

  24. TG Canonfly says

    What a relief! Now I can go back to drinking soda pop with reckless abandon and forget organic green smoothies. Thanks for clarifying how nutrition has nothing to do with acidic levels in your blood. Now to find a Dr. Pepper to add to my whiskey.

    • James says

      What a completely ignorant comment that was!!!!

      I guess some people still have not caught on to the fact that even though you cannot alkalize the blood through diet the so-called “alkaline diet” is still healthy due to the higher nutritional levels including the high level of beneficial acids!!!

      • TG Canonfly says

        Someone’s sarcasm detector clearly needs fine tuning. Did you consider that the comment might have been made as a retort to the tone of the article? Why spend so much energy making the inane point how blood alkalinity is maintained at a constant level regardless of what you ingest? If an alkaline diet is beneficial (and I strongly believe that it is), why build a case suitable for a trial lawyer to prove an esoteric point that leads a casual reader to think alkalinity is not important in nutrition? Was that just to show off biochemistry acumen? If one believes organic green smoothies are better for overall health functioning than soda pops and alcohol, why not spend time writing an article that directly supports that premise?

        • James says

          Why make such a stupid statement in the first place? Did your comment serve some actual purpose other than to sound stupid?

          For some reason though the supporters of the mythical “alkaline diet” keep using the same stupid statement. It is like they have some make the same dumb response playbook and they are going to play it out exactly.

          As for diet, what is good for one person is not going to be exactly good for another person. And many of the so-called “healthy foods” are not always as healthy as people think. For example, how many people are aware of the fact that flax seed is nearly 4 times higher in thyroid suppressing phytoestrogens than raw soy? And even higher compared to fermented or cooked soy? Point is that it would take way more than a little article to cover the topic of what is considered a healthy diet. Maybe a book or two might cover a good majority of the topic.

          • TG Canonfly says

            Stupid, huh? Nice intelligent retort. Very thoughtful. You know, being constipated can make one especially grouchy. You might consider increasing the roughage in your diet, say for example with more green smoothies. From a blender, not a juicer. Think of that pulp as scrubbing bubbles for the colon. Not sure what to suggest about the judgmental attitude. Perhaps more meditation for you, grasshopper.

    • Dennis says

      TG…..I got your humor and I was trying to think of something to say to add to your sarcasm.

      I was also going to warn you that there may be small number of people that won’t get it. I’m too late. Now you know.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Your next serious point is right on, plus you don’t have to only ‘believe’ the so-called, alkaline diet is beneficial, ….it IS beneficial. Without question.

      Fortunately, I believe most people that read this blog, see it for what it really is and won’t be negatively influenced.

      • TG Canonfly says

        Thanks, Dennis. I appreciate that. Speaking of Organic Green Smoothies, I have to give props to rawfamily.com for great recipes (no, I don’t work for rawfamily.com or are affiliated in any way; just a fan). I also found Sergei’s 30 day green smoothie challenge where his youtube videos show a different recipe each day. http://bit.ly/1sFllAf

        Good stuff!

        Greg

        P.S. Adding coconut water instead of plain water makes them especially delicious!

  25. says

    James,
    good article!

    I’m sad to see how many people are brain dead blindly trusting US government (or any government) and “official” studies.

    It is probably a big surprise for many alkaline folks to know that there are other countries on the planet and other studies in many different languages.

    US is the only country where they promote and sell alkaline-only water machines.
    In Japan, Russia or EU you get dual action machines (acidic/alkaline).

    They even call them “Live” (acidic) and “Dead” (alkaline) water machines.

    Don’t be lazy! Learn other languages like Russian, German or Mandarin, for example.
    You will find out why do you need both types of water and foods, plus so much more…

  26. Ben says

    Hi!
    I would simply like to let tell you left out some very important information in your article. Even though there are pH buffers in our blood, they do not correct our blood’s pH INSTANTANEOUSLY, so if you’re eating food that causes excess positive hydrogen ions in your blood all day every day, your blood is indeed going to be too acidic for a good part of the day, every day. Also, it would be an abusive use of your bloods buffers, which is energy demanding and could lead your body to fail at making enough of it or making it properly. It could also indeed cause your body to look for material to make buffers in places you don’t want it to, if it’s abused. Just like you shouldn’t eat too much sugar just because your body can produce insulin, because you’ll abuse it, and it can lead you to diabetes.
    It is not a myth that it is a good thing to eat properly in order to keep your blood’s pH balanced without having to abuse the mechanisms that your body uses to keep homeostasis constant.
    That is something you should have mentioned it your article, if you really wanted to make sure people would not be misguided.
    Thank you! (and sorry for my bad english)
    Have a nice day!

    Ben

    • James says

      Ben: “Even though there are pH buffers in our blood, they do not correct our blood’s pH INSTANTANEOUSLY, so if you’re eating food that causes excess positive hydrogen ions in your blood all day every day, your blood is indeed going to be too acidic for a good part of the day, every day. ”

      This is not true. The body’s main means of pH regulation is respiration. If the blood starts to become acidic at all the respiration increases to decrease the acidity instantly. If the blood becomes too alkaline the respiration slows down or even stops temporarily to allow an immediate increase in acidity to bring the pH back to normal.

      Ben: “Also, it would be an abusive use of your bloods buffers, which is energy demanding and could lead your body to fail at making enough of it or making it properly.”

      Again, the body’s main means of pH regulation is simply breathing. The second in line is the elimination or retention of hydrogen ions (protons) through the kidneys. These account for virtually all pH regulation in the body and neither of these require the production of buffers by the body that can be depleted.

          • Andy says

            Hello James,

            Hope you have a great new year. I have little understanding of pH regulation in the body and how it may or may not help the human body.

            But then I thought the idea should not be to get into technicalities, but to look at which of these food groups (alkaline vs acidic) has healthier foods. There is some classification on this page – http://greenopedia.com/alkaline-acid-food-chart I am sure google god would lead readers to others.

            Needless to say, alkaline food camp has lesser items which are processed or meat products. I think that says everything! One should not miss out on the larger picture.

            • James says

              Andy,

              I have pointed out various times that the benefits of the so-called “alkaline diet” are from the higher nutritional value. The diet DOES NOT alkalize the blood or tissues as so many people falsely believe.

              James

          • rudy ferrara says

            hi
            I liked your comments james. about PH I’m interested in health and nutrition from a personal standpoint as I’ve had adrenal fatigue and sugar addiction issues. I’m even putting together a short article for my blog to sharre with others

            I’ve heard both sides of the ph issue but my question concerns something I heard about terminally ill cancer patients. The cancer wards for the terminally ill supposedly smell like ammonia. Can this be because the bodys going thru it’s last stages of shutting down ie the organs are failing and giving out the smell. Has nothing to do I assume with the ph of the body and I’ve heard esp paleo people that It’s an last ditch attempt of the body to get rid of the cancer by changing its ph. What are your thoughts on this subject. Thanks

            rudy ferrara

            • James says

              Hi Rudy,

              I have spent a lot of time working in cancer wards and never experienced the ammonia smell some people claim.

              If there is an ammonia smell from a patient I would suspect liver failure since ammonia levels can reach toxic levels in cases of liver failure.

              James

      • Matthew says

        Yeah, even though you were just debunked Ben, this person still believes in what she believes in so she totally agrees with you.

        I read this article with no previous knowledge of either camp. Now I know so much more about it because I bothered to look at both sides. I’ll have to go with the evidence which is that Ben is wrong.

        • Ben says

          How have I been debunked?
          It did forget to mention respiration, but I also didn’t say it wasn’t true.
          My point is still valid. Your body’s means to keep the balance is like an air bag; you’re glad it’s there but you’d prefer not to have to use it. Hyperventilating or choking to correct your blood’s ph because you use respiration as an excuse to have an unbalanced diet is unwise.
          Like I said, why not also eat a lot of refined sugar until you become diabetic and realise you can abuse your body, also eat a lot of unhealthy fats until you realise your weight is a problem and you can also abuse your body that way. My point was simply that there is some important information missing in this post, it should’ve been added, unless the objective wasn’t t inform people so they can make better choices.

          • James says

            You don’t have to hyperventilate or choke to maintain your proper pH. The body maintains that on its own primarily through normal respiration. If you hyperventilate you throw off your pH, causing the blood vessels to constrict from the alkalinity and you pass out from a lack of blood flow to the brain. When you pass out respiration slows or even stops temporarily to restore the proper pH by building CO2 levels back up. If you are choking and cannot breathe this will lead to an excess build up of CO2 and hydrogen ions. If the ability to breathe is restored respiration will be increased temporarily to blow off that excess CO2 and hydrogen ions until the proper pH is restored then the respiration slows back down to normal.

            • Ben says

              First with TG and now with me, you really are bad with people, and with explaining what you think you know. That was sarcasm James, I know the blood’s pH doesn’t cause sudden hypoventilation or hyperventilation.
              That’s the point, when people eat junk they usually don’t compensate by working out or entering in deep medidation. after eating, you won’t start breathing faster to regulate your pH because even though you need to balance it, you don’t need the extra oxygen/hyperventilation. If you’re at rest The kidneys do most of the work most of the time (and that needs proper hydration too).
              Acidosis is real, Renal tubular acidosis is real, you CAN abuse your system defense, slowly or rapidly.
              You didn’t address that, you just give some partial information (misinformation) to try to debunk the supposed myth of ingestion-pH balance. Anyway good luck James! I’m done with this thread.

              • James says

                Ben,

                You obviously do not understand how things really work in the body so let me try to give you a very basic explanation in regards to the topic.

                You mention when people eat “junk”. But the fact is that ALL foods, even greens are metabolized in to acids in the long run. So junk foods don’t make you any more acidic than any other food including greens. This is part of the reason that the whole “alkaline diet myth” is just that, a myth.

                Secondly, if the blood does start becoming too acidic then your respiration will increase automatically. See, we don’t need to think about breathing, our breathing is regulated all by itself without our having to think about it.

                And just because respiration increases this does not mean the person is hyperventilating. A person can have an increase of 16 to 20 respiration per minute and this is still an increase even though it is not hyperventilation. Generally, fluctuations in our blood pH are very slight and so only require slight variations in the respiratory rate to make adjustments

                As far as your claim about acidosis being real, nobody ever claimed it was not. All I said is that true acidosis is EXTREMELY rare due to all the redundant systems the body has to maintain its normal pH. Respiration being the primary means.

                It is not that hard to understand. All you have to do is a little actual research to verify all this. Here are a few articles I wrote a while back explaining this:

                https://medreview.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/top-5-worst-internet-health-information-sites-curezone-org-part-3-alkalineacid-support-forum-part-1/

                https://medreview.wordpress.com/2013/03/08/top-5-worst-internet-health-information-sites-curezone-org-part-2-alkalineacid-support-forum-part-2/

                • Ben says

                  It’s pointless telling me that you think I don’t understand how things really work in the body, I think the same of you.
                  Not to mention we’re not talking about how things work in the body, but only about one very specific thing.
                  You’re wrong, not all food is acid-forming, not even ultimately in the long run. Breathing is not always enough, not for those who abuse acid-forming junk. The buffer systems can be overworked. This can cause health problems such as kidney stones. I really don’t find a lot of literature that support your claims, especially the “there is no alkaline-forming food”. Now, your immense immaturity and “no lifeness”, expressed through your constant replying to every comment here in a very immature way with insults, and by not admitting that you don’t know everything, that you might be wrong, that you don’t address a lot of things in regards to this topic, makes it impossible to take anything you say seriously, including when you say you’re a health professionnal. If you are one, you’re the kind I would never consult, and would never recommend. You’re like a child. You could say I’m immature too, even though I only reply to your replies directed to me, not to every single comment here, and I don’t use insults, but most of all, I don’t have to be credible here cause and I don’t pretend to be a health professionnal and some sot of authority in the subject, so nobody as the rely on me or on what I say. Also, I am indeed still an undergrad teen. But what’s your excuse? Even I can point out all that is wrong or incomplete in what you said here. Honestly, I think you’re quite lame.
                  I said I was done with this thread, I thought you would understand it was pointless to keep replying to me, but I see I have to make it clear for you: Please don’t reply anymore, its pointless.
                  Again, sorry for my bad English, good luck and, I suggest you rethink your attitude and life in general.
                  Don’t believe anyone that tells you you cannot get smarter and better as a person!
                  Good bye!

                • James says

                  Ben: “You’re wrong, not all food is acid-forming, not even ultimately in the long run. ”

                  I’m not wrong at all. Tell you what, name even one specific food that does not get metabolized in to acids and I will show you why you are wrong.

                  Ben: “Breathing is not always enough, not for those who abuse acid-forming junk.”

                  Again, ALL foods get metabolized in to acids. And many of the so-called “alkaline foods” already have an acidic pH to begin with.

                  Ben: “The buffer systems can be overworked. This can cause health problems such as kidney stones. ”

                  It is almost impossible to overwork the buffer systems. That is why acidosis is so extremely rare.

                  Also, if you use a little common sense here. You will generate more acid from heavy exercise that you do from the acids formed from eating a salad or steak. Does this mean exercise is dangerous for the health? Does exercise cause kidney stones?

                  Also keep in mind that alkalinity can cause kidney stones as well.

                  Ben: “You’re like a child. You could say I’m immature too”

                  I did not have to since you already pointed out that fact yourself and as is evidenced by your long drawn out childish tirade.

                  But neither of us are the topic. So let’s get back on topic by your answering my questions above and I will explain the facts.

    • alexander says

      Hi Ben,

      I just wanted to drop in and say I support you in believing choosing an alkaline diet can alter your health drastically. Recently a 60 yr old male coworker of mine was going through stage 3 colon cancer and was being treated at Roswell Park Institute. After going through extensive chemo with no improvement he was given 6 months to live. He decided to take his health into his own hands, and after some research decided to 1 ) adopt an alkaline diet 2 ) exercise rigorously to send oxygen to cells and 3 ) cut out all sugar from his diet. After some time, his health improved but following a clinical evaluation, his results were withheld. It became a battle he wasn’t expecting just to receive his results but eventually, one of the head doctors at Roswell reluctantly gave him his cancer free diagnosis. He beat his cancer and nobody wanted him to know it. Since then he has begun studying law so that other people don’t have to fight as hard as he did to prove that cancer is treatable by natural means.

      The moral of the story is don’t let these kinds of articles fool you. There is a major giant out there that only makes money when people are sick and destitute. It is an industry, not a practice.

      A

      • James says

        Once again, nobody claimed the so-called “alkaline diet” is not good. We only pointed out that the diet DOES NOT alkalize the body. The benefits of this diet actually come from the higher level of nutrition, which includes various beneficial ACIDS!!!!!

        • Rid says

          Big difference in natural healthy sugars and GMO sugars….seem to like to argue about anything… I will never bet my life on your nonsence….you must believe in chemo…radiation and Big Pharma too…Dead Doctors never lie…..good luck…

      • bill macy says

        Alexander,
        It is great that your friend “beat” cancer. It is likely that eliminating sugars from his diet and regular exercise were what “cured” him, not some fad “alkaline” diet.
        The ketogenic diet has had amazing results similar, with focus on high quality fats and elimination of all sugars.

        • James says

          Eliminating sugar does not cure cancer for several reasons.

          One is that virtually anything you eat, including meats contain sugar. Secondly, if you body needs sugar it simply produces it. And finally, cancer cells can use other fuel sources other than sugars. This includes some amino acids, lactate and ketones.

          • Ted Hutchinson says

            It may help other readers here (and maybe even James) to watch Thomas Seyfried: Cancer: A Metabolic Disease With Metabolic Solutions available on You Tube
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEE-oU8_NSU
            THE IHMC have other videos providing more information relevant for those fighting cancer
            Dominic D’Agostino: Metabolic Therapies: Therapeutic Implications and Practical Application
            Colin Champ: Augmenting Cancer Therapy with Diet

            You can also learn more by reading
            “Starvation of Cancer via Induced Ketogenesis and Severe Hypoglycemia” Adam Kapelner and Matthew Vorsanger
            available online free here
            http://arxiv.org/pdf/1407.7622.pdf

            • James says

              Ted,

              I am not going to sit through a nearly hour long video and try to guess what point you are trying to make. If you want to debate something specific about cancer then be specific in your claims and stop posting vague references that supposedly support your vague claims.

              I did skip through a little of the video though and found the guy really does not have a clue about cancer when he first claimed Warburg was right when Warburg’s hypotheses were disproven decades ago. Note I said hypotheses. Warburg NEVER made those claims as fact. He merely hypothesized (an educated guess) about cancer cells having a respiratory defect and producing all their energy from glycolysis. Again, these hypotheses were disproven decades ago. Today we know that cancer cells derive at least 50% of their energy production from oxidative phosphorylation. In fact, just like healthy cells cancer cells utilize both glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation for energy production.

              And even more when he started claiming cancer cells “ferment lactic acid”. First of all lactic acid is not fermented it is a byproduct of fermentation. But not in cancer cells, which DO NOT secrete lactic acid. They secrete lactate, which IS NOT the same thing. In fact, look at the chart he shows at 23:49. Do you see the words “lactic acid” anywhere? Of course not. But we do clearly see the word “lactate”, which is what is being released. Yet even with this chart he still continues to erroneously stating “lactic acid”, then goes on further erroneously claiming that the non-existent lactic acid is making the microenvironment around the tumor acidic. Again, this acidic microenvironment is due to a build up or protons, not non-existent lactic acid nor non-acidic lactate. This guy needs to stop getting his information from the 1930s and get current in his research!

              We don’t build up lactic acid either during exercise either as he implies. Again, we build up lactate. The “burn” is from a build up of hydrogen ions (protons), not lactic acid. Another hypothesis that was disproven decades ago.

              One thing he did get right is that viruses can cause cancer. But NOT from interfering with the respiration cycle of cells. Cancer viruses have been shown to lead to cancer through altering or genes to turn off apoptosis, increasing growth hormone output and by turning off tumor suppressor genes.

              He is also overlooking the fact that ROS also kill cancer cells. This is the basis for most chemo drugs and for radiation therapy, which kill cancer cells in the well oxygenated regions of tumors through ROS generation. These therapies are ineffective in the hypoxic regions of tumors due to the inability to generate ROS.

              And what in the hell is he talking about our immune cells fusing to cancer cells leading to metastases?!!!!!! First of all our immune cells have a very difficult time even detecting cancer cells, which is why they can grow from a single cancer cell in to a tumor in the first place. One of the main reasons for this is the formation of HCG coatings that shield the tumor from the immune system. Anyway, back to the point. Metastases is the result of proteolytic enzymes that are activated by the acidity from the hydrogen ions (protons) released by the cancer cells during their energy production.

              He also falsely claims that the cancer cells cannot utilize the ketones. I already posted the titles of more current research disproving his hypothesis. Cancer cells can and do in fact utilize ketones as a fuel source.

              I am not going to sit here and address every mistake this guy is making because he is relying on antiquated research. So again, if you want to debate this subject then use your own words to state your opinion instead of posting links to other people’s claims where I have to guess as to what the point is you are trying to make.

              James

  27. John says

    James,
    You are sounding very defensive!
    I was recently diagnosed with a return of Prostate Cancer. This was found after 4 years of a rise in mt PSA from Post Prostatectomy of 0 to 1.18. Established medicine, of which you subscribe,wanted to perform 42 Radiation treatments over a period of 7 weeks. I chose the PH Diet and after 3 weeks my PSA dropped from 1.18 to 1.04. I have remained on the diet and I am due for my next blood test in a week.
    When is your profession going to stop killing people with old methods that don’t work just so you can take the money from the drug companies.

    • James says

      John: “You are sounding very defensive!”

      Gee, why would I become defensive sounding when there are so many fools on here trying to make this personal against me instead of sticking to the topic of the blog article? And when they keep falsely accusing me of being associated with allopathic medicine when I have been working in HOLISTIC medicine for the last 24 years?!!!!

      John: “I was recently diagnosed with a return of Prostate Cancer. This was found after 4 years of a rise in mt PSA from Post Prostatectomy of 0 to 1.18. Established medicine, of which you subscribe,wanted to perform 42 Radiation treatments over a period of 7 weeks. I chose the PH Diet and after 3 weeks my PSA dropped from 1.18 to 1.04. I have remained on the diet and I am due for my next blood test in a week.”

      And once again, I DO NOT subscribe to “established medicine” so stick to the topic instead of trying to make this personal.

      By the way PSA counts are garbage. They can rise for a variety of reasons including BPH, infection and even caffeine!!!

    • Chaz Wyman says

      Have you ever heard of the phrase; “post hoc ergo propter hoc”?

      Look it up, and stop trying to pretend to yourself that you can generalise from one case to another.

      You apparent positive seeming change my have nothing to do with your diet.

  28. Helen says

    Hi James. I’ve been reading nutritional info since I was 16. I’m 58 now. I agree with you. Thanks for the info!
    Anyways, could you advise me as how to make a facial toner using citric acid.

    Thank you,
    Helen

    • James says

      Hi Helen,

      I have not mixed this in quite a while but if I recall right I was using a quarter teaspoon of the citric acid in a gallon of water. You don’t want it strong as fruit acids can be irritating to the skin if too concentrated and the skin only needs to be slightly acidic to keep healthy.

      James

  29. David Mcquain says

    The lower the ph the more acidic stuff is the higher the ph it is it becomes a base people dont seem to realize 7 is a ok ph its neutral a strong base is dangerous look at bleach get some on you and do nothing about it your skin could start peeling off

  30. says

    James,

    I read some of your comments and am especially interested in the one where you talk of hydroxides. I make magnesium water from magnesium hydroxide and carbonated water and use it regularly. I’m wondering now if this is safe after seeing your comments. I do dilute the magnesium bicarbonate with distilled water before drinking but am wondering if it might be working against me. I’ve been trying to correct a magnesium deficiency with the magnesium bicarbonate water. Now I’m thinking it may be creating other issues. Please give me you take on this. Thanks in advance.

    • James says

      Reacting the magnesium hydroxide with carbonic acid will form a magnesium carbonate and carbonates are a lot safer than the mineral hydroxides. Although both neutralize stomach acid, which is not a good thing, the carbonates are not caustic like the mineral hydroxides and do not chemically burn the tissues like the mineral hydroxides formed in ionized alkaline water or formed from mixing certain metal oxides in water.

      Overall though the best thing to do would be to mix the magnesium hydroxide with malic or citric acids to form magnesium malate or citrate. Both are found in lemon juice.

      Hydroxides and carbonates are very poorly absorbed to begin with. The acidified salts such as the malates and citrates are much better absorbed.

      • Luke says

        Also, another thing. Would you prefer to drink a mixture of 10grams magnesium hydroxide with 100gwater or 10g of potassium carbonate with water?…

        • James says

          I would not ingest either one. Both can be caustic.

          In fact, I have known for a long time that some forms of potassium salts could be corrosive to the stomach lining. In the earlier days of the medical establishment using potassium salts in treatment they found that some forms could actually burn a hole through the stomach. That is why the main sources of potassium seen on the market for ingestion are potassium chloride or potassium gluconate.

          • Luke says

            Ok, so tak a sodium carbonate (not bicarbonate) instead, compare it with magnesium hydroxide. Which mixture would you dring (assuming you HAVE to drink one)?…

    • Luke says

      Add some lemon juice to the magnesium carbonate and drink the solution . It won’t make your blood more alkaline :) but will be absorbed more easily; though some studies ( http://www.jle.com/fr/revues/mrh/e-docs/study_of_magnesium_bioavailability_from_ten_organic_and_inorganic_mg_salts_in_mg_depleted_rats_using_a_stable_isotope_approach_267774/article.phtml?tab=texte )show that carbonates are absorbed quite good as well.

      Also, one thing in mind: the more magnesium in food, the lesser percentage of it is absorbed – so ensure you have a little magnesium in all foods you eat.

      There are also some

  31. Kieron says

    I haven’t read all the comments, but i have read a lot. I am not a scientist but I have a laymans understanding of some things. James, you could be wrong. Science is and always will be flawed. True scientists talk in ‘odds’ and not ‘facts’. Just because your science doesn’t indicate something, it doesn’t mean it can not be. Placebo is most likely a very real ‘thing’. Faith in a lifestyle has strongly indicated positive results in many studies and this is probably as true of the blinkereed scientist as it is of the health fad fanatic. The truth is that we don’t really ‘know’ anything and everything falls in to infinite decreasing/increasing half lifes of posibility. I don’t trust the medical profession, the cancer charity industry, the meat and dairy (and food) industry or any establishment with financial/political interests in what I think, say and eat. What I am more likely trust is my own personal observations and the very impartial trials of this diet in the un-regulated real world. Wheather or not we can explain it with food-science or not at this point in time, if it’s improving people’s diet, lifestyle and quality of life then I think we should let it be and work out the science afterwards. MAny thanks xxx

    • James says

      Hi Keiron,

      “Could be wrong” is far from “am wrong”.

      Science is evolving all the time but we have to go with what science has “proven” at this point. Just because you think science is flawed does this mean that we should just claim gravity may not really exist? Maybe we should just regard all the claims made about healthy nutrition since science has proven this but according to you science is flawed. At what point do we stop throwing out all that science has taught us just because it MAY be flawed?

      I will agree that SOME science is flawed. For instance there are all sorts of manipulated medical studies out there. How do we know they are manipulated? Because science gives us the evidence to weed through what is real and what is obviously quack science.

      For example, there was a study that claimed vitamin C increased the risk of heart disease. Was this claim true or were the study results misinterpreted? How would we be able to tell the difference without science? Answer, we could not. So how did I know these study results were misinterpreted. Simple, science told me. According to the findings of the study the claim of increased risk of heart disease because it thickened the arterial wall. What science told me is that this was not a bad thing and it was not increasing the risk of heart disease. Vitamin C is needed for the formation of the structural proteins collagen and elastin in the blood vessels. This makes the arterial walls thicker so they can handle the higher pressure the arteries are exposed to and prevents aneurysm. The thicker walls DO NOT mean decreased circulation since the elastin allows the arteries to expand and contract to maintain proper circulation and blood pressure. Therefore, science told me that even though the walls were thickening just like they are supposed to for health of the artery this would not decrease circulation since the muscle of the blood vessel would simply relax to compensate.

      We should not fear science, we should embrace it and learn from it.

      As for the so-called alkaline diet as has been pointed out diet does not alkalize the blood. But this does not mean the so-called alkaline diet is bad. People benefit not from a pH adjustment but rather better nutrition, which includes a variety of beneficial acids.

      James

      • Morgan says

        Two things I noticed: your first statement said eating alkaline foods to leave an acid ash. Not necessarily. Limes have a low pH but leave an alkaline ash. Also, thickening of the arteries is detrimental to cardio health in that the function of elastin depletes as we age and therefore it becomes more difficult for our bodies to compensate…leaving us with hardened thick arteries. I really enjoyed your chemical explainations on magic and citric acids!

        • Morgan says

          Tomatoes and avocados also leave an alkaline ash. I would like to learn more about the different combinations of foods and how that changes the chemical process our bodies have to use in order to compensate for the types of foods we eat as individuals. I am sure it also very much depends on the activity level and lifestyle of the individual. I think it is nearly impossible to come up with a perfect set of guidelines for everyone to follow.

          • James says

            Morgan: “Tomatoes and avocados also leave an alkaline ash.”

            Again, the metabolism of foods DOES NOT leave an ash residue as is obtained by the thermal burning of foods used to create the ash that is being analyzed.

            Morgan: “I would like to learn more about the different combinations of foods and how that changes the chemical process our bodies have to use in order to compensate for the types of foods we eat as individuals.”

            Compensate for what? As pointed out there is NO such thing as an alkalizing food. ALL foods get metabolized in to acids. And pH is regulated almost exclusively through respiration followed by hydrogen ion retention or elimination by the kidneys. Not diet.

            • Luke says

              Morgan meant by ‘ash’, I guess, the metabolism products of lemons. Still, I won’t believe it until I see WHAT ‘ash’ is it.
              However – methyl alcohol is chemically neutral, but drink it and you can be sure of severe acidosis… so there MAY be some point in ‘alkaline ash’ theory. Not believing it though, unless I see WHAT metabolite of lemon is ‘alkalizing’ blood.

        • James says

          Morgan: “Two things I noticed: your first statement said eating alkaline foods to leave an acid ash”.

          I never said that. What I said is that the alkaline myth is based on the measurement of alkaline ash only. And that this is extremely misleading since it totally ignores the naturally occurring acids within these foods and the acids that ALL foods metabolize in to.

          Morgan: “Not necessarily. Limes have a low pH but leave an alkaline ash. ”

          Limes have a low pH because of the various acids in them, which again is not considered when foods are considered alkalizing. But these foods do not burn in the body in the same sense as they are burned to obtain the ash residue. So no, they do not leave an ash when digested.

          There is a lot of potassium in limes, but this DOES NOT alter the blood pH. First of all keep in mind that the potassium is going to react with stomach acid forming potassium chloride salt. The potassium is alkaline, but the chloride is acidifying. And has been pointed out so many times virtually all pH regulation is maintained by respiration followed by ion retention or elimination by the kidneys. Not by salts.

          People do often talk about the so-called “alkaline response” from ingesting citrus juices. Again, this has absolutely nothing to do with the potassium in the citrus juice. In addition, this same exact alkaline response occurs with EVERY food you consume including steak, candy bars, lettuce, cake, etc. The alkaline response is nothing more than the release of pancreatic bicarbonate to neutralize the acid in chyme leaving the stomach as part of the normal digestive process. So again, this occurs with ALL foods.

          Morgan: “Also, thickening of the arteries is detrimental to cardio health in that the function of elastin depletes as we age and therefore it becomes more difficult for our bodies to compensate…leaving us with hardened thick arteries.”

          Not really.

          First of all the arteries need to be thicker for a very simple reason. They are subjected to much higher pressures than the veins. Without the thicker walls they are more prone to problems such as aneurysm and rupture.

          The loss of elastin comes primarily from the decline in stomach acid people tend to develop with age. This leads to less production and absorption of orthosilicic acid that is essential to the formation of collagen and elastin.

          “Hardening of the arteries” results from inflammation leading to the deposition of cholesterol that calcifies. One of the major factors that can lead to atherosclerosis is elevated homocysteine levels. And the most common causes of high homocysteine are low or absent stomach acid and hypothyroidism.

          Bottom line is that the arteries need to remain thick throughout our lives. And hardening of the arteries is really a separate issue from the natural and essential thickening of the arteries.

      • Amber says

        Long before science came along there were medicine men who cured many body ailments. They probably jacked a few up along the way in a trial and error manner, but still, healing properties were observed and used to cure disease… science has its value, but science around health is highly manipulated. Healthy people do not produce profits for the medical industry. Thus, things that truly improve health tend not to be studied or done so in a manner which can skew the perception of the truth. Your article fits, so I see why you were assumed to be allopathic. Great feedback for you.

        I for one, have witnessed 100′ s of anecdotal stories of massive health improvement through pH. My own health is top notch in every single test that can be run. I eat about 80% alkaline forming foods and drink alkaline water.

        The bogus thing I notice about your article is that you keep making it about blood pH. The point of an alkaline diet is to make the interstitial fluids of the body more alkaline. The blood pH is highly regulated, as you suggest. It’s not going to change much. Further, you don’t talk about the quality of blood on an alkaline diet.

        Many microorganisms form in the blood of a body that is too acidic and often the negative charge around the red blood cells is lost, causing them to clump up and distort in shape, making one feel more lethargic due to the lack of quality of the blood… alkaline forming foods create the opposite. Red blood cells are round and bounce off of each other with fewer microorganisms present.

        Debunking a pH diet based on blood pH alone is kinda like what a magician does when he directs your attention to only part of what he is doing to make something explainable look like magic. You aren’t even covering how an alkaline diet affects the body… just using one little piece of the puzzle which will never change much because the body self regulates it, and omitting what an alkaline diet actually does to improve health. It’s kinda shady. I feel bad for the people you are misleading. You make some true statements, but what you use as a means to debunk the value of managing body pH is misleading. Stop the magic tricks and give people sound information.

        Just goes to show you, anyone can write online and it doesn’t mean it’s true… this article has many truths in it, but a VERY faulty conclusion based on half truths. Dangerously misleading.

        • Ed Watson says

          Excellent Amber. You’re the only person to allude to Zeta Potential of the blood – that is the state of the ionic charges – induced by mineral adsorption onto the three formed elements of the blood (white/red blood cells and platelets). Zeta potential determines the degree that red blood cells may either be optimally suspended and discrete or tend more toward coagulation. The blood is in CONSTANT flux. This is NOT classic blood chemistry – chemistry in terms of biochemical cascade reaction – but electrostatic. Old science actually. But overlooked in significance. Congrats on the some of the highest thinking I’ve seen in these comments over the months.

        • James says

          Amber: “science has its value, but science around health is highly manipulated.”

          Some is, but not all. And there is bogus information on both sides of the fence. For example, all the bogus information about being able to alkalize by diet, “liver flushes”, cesium chloride or “oleander soup” for cancer. All have been proven to be bogus.

          Amber: “I for one, have witnessed 100′ s of anecdotal stories of massive health improvement through pH.”

          Fantastic example of skewing science to fit a personal view.

          Amber: “My own health is top notch in every single test that can be run.”

          Wait, those tests are based on that manipulated science you talk about. So how do you know you are really healthy since you cannot base this on those manipulated tests? Or is science only acceptable when you feel it fits your view?

          Funny thing is that I am seen so many alkaline diet supporters claim that they are 100% healthy. But the more you question them all of a sudden they start taking about all their health problems.

          Amber: “I eat about 80% alkaline forming foods and drink alkaline water.”

          There is NO such thing as an alkaline forming food. As has been pointed out so many times ALL foods are metabolized in to acids. And many of the so-called “alkaline foods” are acidic already from their naturally occurring acids.

          As for alkaline water this does not alkalize the blood any more than the so-called “alkaline foods” that do not alkalize the blood either.

          Amber: “The bogus thing I notice about your article is that you keep making it about blood pH. The point of an alkaline diet is to make the interstitial fluids of the body more alkaline. ”

          How is it bogus when it is the blood and even more alkaline lymph that maintains the alkalinity of the interstitial fluid? This is a great example of why people need to stop relying on propaganda sites to get their health information and need to start getting their health information from real scientific sites.

          Amber: “The blood pH is highly regulated, as you suggest. It’s not going to change much. Further, you don’t talk about the quality of blood on an alkaline diet.”

          Yes, the blood pH, and thus the pH of interstitial fluid is highly regulated.

          And the blog article was about the alkaline myth, not the nutritional aspects of the so-called “alkaline diet”, which includes a number of beneficial acids we need to survive and function properly.

          Amber: “Many microorganisms form in the blood of a body that is too acidic and often the negative charge around the red blood cells is lost, causing them to clump up and distort in shape, making one feel more lethargic due to the lack of quality of the blood… alkaline forming foods create the opposite. ”

          More bogus claims found on various alkalizing propaganda sites.

          First of all most pathogens thrive in an ALKALINE environment. This is one of the reasons pathogen induced diseases still occur despite the fact that the blood is maintained in an alkaline state as even Amber admits.

          Pathogens elsewhere in the body also need alkalinity to survive and thrive. The ulcer and cancer causing pathogen Helicobacter pylori for example secretes highly alkaline ammonia to protect itself from the stomach’s acidity. The bacteria that lead to urinary tract infections use the enzyme urease to split urea forming the highly alkaline ammonia that creates the alkaline pH it needs to survive. The dimorphic microbe Candida albicans remains in its benign yeast form in an acidic environment. Acidity also turns off the Candida growth gene. In an alkaline environment the Candida growth gene is turned on and the Candida morphs in to its pathogenic fungal form. In this fungal form the Candida forms hyphae that allow the Candida to dig in and damage tissues. These are just a few examples of the numerous pathogens that rely on alkalinity to survive.

          As for the red blood cell clumping claim again this bogus claim is based on a real misunderstanding of human physiology. What this refers to is a process known as rouleaux. The claim being made here is the same as I saw on a video pushing goji (lycii) berries, so here is a copy of my response:

          “The clumping of the blood cells shown in the slide is known as rouleaux and has NOTHING to do with the blood being acidic or alkaline. Rouleaux most commonly occurs from dehydration, excessive sodium and some medications.

          Another company selling enzymes claims that the rouleaux is not from acidity but rather a lack of enzymes, which is also untrue. But of course they were selling the enzymes they claim you need just like this company is selling the goji berries at outrageous prices. You can buy these berries at China Town under the name lycii berry for a fraction of the cost.

          Also pay close attention to the slide where they claim the black spots are bacteria and cholesterol. Notice how they do not move when the red blood cells shift. This is because they are not in the blood, they are artifact on the slides. Again they are lying to their audience to sell their product.

          Then they claim the light colored centers of the red blood cells indicate anemia. More BS. They are lighter because if you ever look at the structure of red blood cells they are concave in the center making the cells thinner in the center and thus the light passes through the center easier.

          Note where they claim there are uric acid crystals in the blood but again they are not moving, which leads me to believe these are again artifact on the slide. Even if uric acid is present, which is in everyone, uric acid is one of the body’s primary antioxidants. Its present DOES NOT mean the blood is acidic. The uric acid is formed in everyone as a protective mechanism against the highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia. The ammonia is converted in to uric acid to protect the body from ammonia poisoning.

          Fungi in the blood is also EXTREMELY rare.

          Basically the video is loaded with lies and misrepresentations because its sole purpose is to push sales.”

          As we can see people twist real science all the time to make up whatever “facts” they feel fits their needs. This DOES NOT make those claims they are making up true.

          Amber: “Red blood cells are round and bounce off of each other with fewer microorganisms present.”

          Again, not true.

          Amber: “Debunking a pH diet based on blood pH alone is kinda like what a magician does when he directs your attention to only part of what he is doing to make something explainable look like magic.”

          Not at all. The topic was the myth of the alkaline diet, and so that is what was being discussed. If the topic was about the beneficial acids and other nutrients supplied by the so-called “alkaline diet” even though none of them alkalize the blood then those nutrients would have been discussed. Your analogy is like saying if someone is discussing rockets that they are diverting attention if they don’t discuss all the planets in the universe.

          Amber: “You aren’t even covering how an alkaline diet affects the body”

          Again, because that WAS NOT the topic!!!

          Amber: “and omitting what an alkaline diet actually does to improve health. It’s kinda shady. I feel bad for the people you are misleading. ”

          Some people really amaze me, and not for good reasons.

          Read the title of the articles so you can figure out what the topic of the article is.

          And how about your various misleading statements I addressed above?

          Amber:You make some true statements, but what you use as a means to debunk the value of managing body pH is misleading. Stop the magic tricks and give people sound information.”

          The information was sound. Just because it debunks what you read on various bogus propaganda sites this does not make Kessler’s information non-credible. The fact that anyone would think differently that what science has already proven only shown how gullible some people can be.

          Amber: “Just goes to show you, anyone can write online and it doesn’t mean it’s true…”

          Yes, what you posted is proof of that since the information you presented is bogus.

          Amber: “this article has many truths in it, but a VERY faulty conclusion based on half truths. Dangerously misleading.”

          If you are going to claim the article is full of dangerous half truths then why don’t you present REAL evidence to the contrary instead of just regurgitating the same bogus information you read somewhere on propaganda sites?

  32. says

    IMHO the Alkaline Diet is a bit of a problem when you get right down to trying it out.

    All foods have different acid and alkaline mineral content, but the charts most websites offer don’t take into account that many so-called alkaline foods also have large amounts of acid-forming minerals or substances. A banana is a perfect example. Although high in potassium, it’s also loaded with fructose, a highly acidifying form of fruit sugar.

    We’ve been helping people over come this difficulty for years now. First step was to find a good source of alkaline food lists. The only one we found was Dr Susan E Brown’s Acid Alkaline Food Guide, because she has based her easy-to-use lists on the work of Dr Russell Jaffe, who spent countless hours measuring the acid/alkaline balance of foods, but also ‘calibrating’ his findings based not just on pH but also on the biological effect of the particular acid or alkali.

    We designed our Alkaline Food Chart based on their work.

    So if you look at my lunch yesterday, that I absolutely enjoyed, by the way, it may not look particularly alkaline balancing.

    Let’s take a look at yesterday’s lunch!

    1. Cos lettuce picked straight from our garden: Medium alkalizer
    2. Wild caught Salmon: Medium acidic
    3. Kalamata Olives: Medium acid-forming. If I’d chosen green olives, they would have been medium alkaline forming.
    4. Tiny Tom tomatoes from the garden: Low acid forming.
    5. Cucumber from the Farmers’ Market: Low alkaline forming ability
    6. Fresh Snow peas: Low alkaline forming ability
    7. Cassie’s home made Mayo: Low acid forming.
    8. Dill Pickles: Medium alkaline forming
    (see it here: http://www.alkaway.com.au/blog/alkaline-lunch/)

    Now… looking at this, the simple way would be to say that I consumed a total of 4 alkaline forming foods, and three acid forming foods. But.. what about how MUCH I ate? And what about whether I am deficient in the minerals that are being replenished. We Aussies, for instance, are almost all deficient in Magnesium. So what looks simple isn’t simple at all. But there’s something else on my plate. Did you notice? Fresh Lime, straight from our own tree! Highly alkaline forming! So my quarter lime could have easily tipped the balance to alkalizing. We use either lime or lemon with almost every main meal. I have even trained my palate to use the squeezed lime as a mouth refresher after my meal. Wow! It’s amazing!

    Summarizing, my alkaline forming ‘secret strategies’ make it easier for me to avoid this balancing act. Here they are; the result of 15 years of deep and meaningful alkalizing. I just use lime and lemon any time I can, as often as I can, and I also consume leafy greens as often as I can.

    With Cassie’s support, and because I found I had severe osteoporosis, I’ve also eliminated the BIG acidifiers, sugar grains and bread, which also happen to be seriously addictive. Once my addiction eased up i found I was also eating far less, including meat. As an addict I would eat anything in front of me. Anytime. Anywhere. A walking vacuum cleaner. Now meat doesn’t ever become the big acidifier it can when you consume too much. Dr Susan Brown points out in her Guide that excess meat converts directly to acid and is stored in our fat!

    Raw? Vegetarian?
    I have watched some alkaline diet advocated who have somehow ‘arranged’ the alkaline science to suit their own diet preferences – usually raw or vegetarian. however a diet high in fresh fructose-laden fruit, especially juices, is an acid time bomb. Ask me – I was a vegetarian for 14 years and I directly attribute my osteoporosis to the diet. They are slowly coming around, leading em to wonder if they ever really examined thew science in detail.

    A Non-Radical Approach

    |So an alkaline diet doesn’t have to be radical. You can also supplement your food with alkaline electrolytes, or alkaline green powder which easily takes you up to the recommended 6 serves of green vegetables a day without the bulk. Cassie eventually gave our diet a name; The Alkaline Paleo diet, and although she doesn’t post much on her blog today, the info there is still excellent and still helping a lot of people.

    Water Support

    Of course, I support it with alkaline ionized water from our mighty UltraStream, but although it’s a great alkaline water producer, its great benefit is its ability to supply me with a constant supply of molecular hydrogen, which in turn (may) assist me with issues such as free radicals, inflammation and allergies. (and perhaps a huge amount more, according to the 400+ studies!) I sincerely believe that any diet without good hydration is like having a good car with bad oil. Dumb and dumber.

    • James says

      The first problem with your comment is that as has been pointed out so many times there is no such thing as an alkaline forming food. ALL foods, including those incorrectly considered “alkaline forming” are metabolized in to acids in the body. So it does not matter if you are eating eating cucumbers or candy bars they will all be metabolized in to acids.

      This is one of the reasons that diet does not alkalize the blood. Blood pH is maintained primarily by respiration followed by kidney excretion or retention of hydrogen ions. These account for virtually all the pH regulation in the body. Diet has virtually no effect.

      As for the comment on the ionized water there are some problems with the statement.

      First of all the alkaline water is a free radical source, not antioxidant. Alkaline ionized water is formed by the electrolysis of water with minerals in it. On the alkaline side the hydroxyl (OH) radical binds with the minerals in the water forming caustic mineral (metal) hydroxides such as calcium hydroxide, magnesium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide, etc. Hydroxides are not safe to ingest or even get on the tissues because they dangerously neutralize stomach acid and hydroxides chemically burn the tissues. Magnesium hydroxide for example is used as a laxative because it chemically burns the intestinal wall. This leads to an influx of water in to the intestines and increased peristalsis. Bags of calcium hydroxide used to make cement among other things have clear warnings not to allow contact with the tissues since again it can burn the tissues. Potassium hydroxide (Drano) and sodium hydroxide (Red Devil Lye) also have these same warnings due to severe chemical burns they can cause to the tissues. So I find it hard to phantom that anyone would recommend ingesting these dangerous chemicals and do so while falsely claiming ionized alkaline water is health promoting. How can chemicals that repeatedly burn the tissues increasing the risk of diseases like cancer be considered healthy by any means?

      As these mineral hydroxides disassociate they re-create the hydroxyl radical, which is a free radical.

      This free radical is damaging to the cells and IS NOT antioxidant. Anti-oxidant means “anti-oxygen”. The hydroxyl radical DOES NOT mop up singlet oxygen radicals. In other words it does not form HO2.

      It is the acidic water, not the alkaline water, that provides molecular hydrogen that mops up the oxygen radicals. In other works: H (molecular hydrogen) + H (molecular hydrogen) + O (singlet oxygen radical) forms H2O (water).

      Therefore, the ionized alkaline water is a dangerous and disease forming free radical source while the acid water is antioxidant.

      • says

        There are no hydroxyl radicals produced in the alkaline side. It is hydroxide (OH-) ions that are produced.

        At a low pH 8-10 the hydroxide ions do not bind to the those minerals, except for a small amount that makes up some of the white flakes in the water (although that is primarily carbonates)…mineral hydroxides are only toxic when at a molar concentration above 0.01 M or so, not 0.0001 pH 12 vs10, respectively.

        • James says

          Ian Hamilton: “There are no hydroxyl radicals produced in the alkaline side. It is hydroxide (OH-) ions that are produced.”

          Incorrect. Hydroxyl radicals are formed from the disassociation of the mineral hydroxides that are formed when the water is split by electrolysis to make the alkaline water.

          Ian Hamilton: “At a low pH 8-10 the hydroxide ions do not bind to the those minerals, except for a small amount that makes up some of the white flakes in the water (although that is primarily carbonates)”

          First of all a pH of 8 to 10 IS NOT “low”. Those are high pH levels.

          Secondly, the hydroxide group does in fact bind to the minerals. I hate to say it but this is very basic chemistry. Ever hear the term “opposites attract”? The negatively charged hydroxyl group needs to be balanced. So it binds to the positively charged metals from the minerals such as sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium forming the corresponding mineral (metal) hydroxides.

          And these DO NOT form white flakes as is being claimed. These hydroxides are water soluble. To form white flakes they would either have to insoluble or the water supersaturated with the mineral (metal) hydroxides to allow them to precipitate out.

          And how could they be carbonates? Where are the carbonates coming from? They would had to have been in the water to begin with such as calcium and magnesium carbonates. So this brings up the very obvious question, if these carbonates were insoluble why were they not in the water to begin with before the electrolysis?

          Ian Hamilton: “mineral hydroxides are only toxic when at a molar concentration above 0.01 M or so, not 0.0001 pH 12 vs10, respectively.”

          First of all source on your claim?

          Secondly, studies showing the mineral hydroxide content of various ionized alkaline waters for an average.

          And finally, what SPECIFICALLY are you deeming to be toxicity? In other words SPECIFICALLY what side effects from the toxicity?

          • says

            Just a few points:

            ….. If you Google “electrolysis of water” you will see that it is OH- hydroxides that are produced are not toxic hydroxyl (OH) radicals

            ….pH 8 -10 is relatively low compared pH 12-14.

            ….Some people’s home water has a pH near 10

            ….if mineral hydroxides are soluble then they don’t bind to each other, if they do then they are called insoluble. Again google that.

            …. wikipedia. …the carbonates are coming from the tap water, their is always some dissolved CO2, which forms CO3^2- and HCO3-, their solubility is a function of pH and as the pH increases they bind to calcium to form insoluble calcium carbonate, which is the white flakes. …

            James, I’ve followed your posts over the last months. You have a good mind and good knowledge in your specialities. I won’t be posting on this again.

            • James says

              Ian hamilton: “Just a few points:

              ….. If you Google “electrolysis of water” you will see that it is OH- hydroxides that are produced are not toxic hydroxyl (OH) radicals”

              Read what I said again because that is not what I said. As we can see I CLEARY stated:

              “Hydroxyl radicals are formed from the disassociation of the mineral hydroxides that are formed when the water is split by electrolysis to make the alkaline water.”

              So I DID NOT say that the hydroxyl radicals were formed from the electrolysis. What I pointed out was that the negatively charged hydroxyl group formed during electrolysis is attracted to the positively charged metals from the minerals in the water forming mineral (metal) hydroxides. These dangerous, caustic hydroxides are what make this disease promoting water alkaline. It is the disassociation of these mineral hydroxides that form the dangerous hydroxyl radical making the alkaline water a free radical source.

              And again, for this water to be antioxidant the water would have to react with oxygen radicals neutralizing them. But the dangerous free radical, the hydroxyl radical DOES NOT do this since we cannot form O2H (O+OH). The antioxidant properties of electrolyzed water would come from the ACID water, which contains reactive hydrogen that reacts with reactive hydrogen to form water. Thus H+H+O forms H2O otherwise known as water.

              Ian Hamilton: “….pH 8 -10 is relatively low compared pH 12-14. ”

              I almost fell out of my chair laughing when I red this. What a way to stretch things to cover up a major error. By your same reasoning we could say that a pH of 1 or 2 is “relatively low” compared to a pH of 12 to 14. But my statement stands, a pH of 8 to 10 ins widely accepted as being a HIGH pH value, not a low one.

              Ian Hamilton: “….Some people’s home water has a pH near 10″

              And?!!!! So what? Naturally alkaline waters are alkaline due to naturally occurring carbonates, not dangerous caustic and free radical providing mineral (metal) hydroxides.

              Ian Hamilton: “….if mineral hydroxides are soluble then they don’t bind to each other, if they do then they are called insoluble. Again google that.”

              Again, you missed my point. The mineral (metal) hydroxides in ionized alkaline water are SOLUBLE!!! Look up the solubility of sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium hydroxides. All can be dissolved in water in small amounts.

              Yes, you can get precipitate if enough hydroxide is ADDED to supersaturate the water or if you use a cobalt, iron or aluminum hydroxides, which are insoluble. Of course I never mentioned those last three hydroxides.

              Ian Hamilton: “…. wikipedia. …the carbonates are coming from the tap water, their is always some dissolved CO2, which forms CO3^2- and HCO3-, their solubility is a function of pH and as the pH increases they bind to calcium to form insoluble calcium carbonate, which is the white flakes. ”

              But in your original statement you said “At a low pH 8-10 the hydroxide ions do not bind to the those minerals, except for a small amount that makes up some of the white flakes in the water”.

              And I reponded:

              “And these DO NOT form white flakes as is being claimed. These hydroxides are water soluble. To form white flakes they would either have to insoluble or the water supersaturated with the mineral (metal) hydroxides to allow them to precipitate out.”

              So the primary question is how can these white flakes be the mineral hydroxides when they are soluble in the water in those amounts? The question still stands.

              Then I went on to say:

              “And how could they be carbonates? Where are the carbonates coming from? They would had to have been in the water to begin with such as calcium and magnesium carbonates. So this brings up the very obvious question, if these carbonates were insoluble why were they not in the water to begin with before the electrolysis?”

              You kind of answered that question with a reasonable answer I was hoping you would answer since this provides the evidence to what could be yet another danger to ionized alkaline water.

              Now, as you pointed out the solubility of this calcium salt decreases with increasing pH, which is true. Therefore, using the reasoning by the ionized alkaline water supporters, if their claims were true that drinking this water actually alkalizes the blood then this would also mean that the higher alkalinity would decrease the solubility of calcium salts in the body leading to calcifications. For example, calcified arterial plaque, bone spurs, calcified gallstones, etc. So thanks for answering that question so that everyone will know that the claims by the alkaline water supporters claiming the water is alkalizing is either bogus or the water can lead to disease causing calcifications in the body.

              Ian Hamilton: “I won’t be posting on this again.”

              Oh, but we are making so much progress discrediting ionized alkaline water. Don’t give up yet. There are still more questions on of your claims I am still waiting for answers on. You have not backed up these claims you made yet:

              Ian Hamilton: “mineral hydroxides are only toxic when at a molar concentration above 0.01 M or so, not 0.0001 pH 12 vs10, respectively.”

              First of all source on your claim?

              Secondly, studies showing the mineral hydroxide content of various ionized alkaline waters for an average.

              And finally, what SPECIFICALLY are you deeming to be toxicity? In other words SPECIFICALLY what side effects from the toxicity?

              Don’t leave us hanging Ian, we need evidence and answers to your claims!!!

              • Chris says

                Oh lord, I’m so confused now. James, I don’t know if you’re still commenting on this thread or not, but I need to ask this.

                My family has been drinking purified/distilled water (mostly because we don’t want to drink our city water, and also because it just tastes better). Over the past few weeks, I had gotten increasingly worried, because I kept reading about how distilled water is “acidic” and will leach minerals from your bones via osmosis, etc. People have recommended adding pink Himalayan salt to the water to remineralize it.

                In your opinion, is it necessary, or even crucial, to do this? I have begun to do it, but remain worried about the years we’ve been drinking distilled water (without even realizing there were any arguments against it!). And if there is no such thing as “alkalinizing” by way of diet…what would remain possible costs or benefits to adding pink Himalayan salt to distilled water? Does it make a difference at all? Or would you recommend it?

                This article you wrote has been very informative, and I appreciate what I’ve learned in reading it. I hope your still commenting on this thread, because this topic has, literally, kept me up at night! Lol.

                • finndian says

                  I’ve heard the same about distilled water. Nature abhors a vacuum… the water stripped of minerals and dissolved solids tries to reconstitute as it passes through you by collecting your trace minerals. In effect, stripping you of minerals right back.

                  There is some truth to that as any refrigerator repair man can tell you. Through the door water dispensers dispense charcoal filtered water on many new refrigerators. The hose, from the filter to the dispenser that fills your glass, must be plastic. The supply line to the actual filter is often still copper. Why is this? Because the stripped water slowly eats away at the inside of pipe until pin holes appear. I’m not going to call it acidic… I’m going to just say its what water does. A river of water flowing over rocks collects minerals.

                  Distilled water would logically leach and collect as it passes through you. I would certainly would not be drinking distilled water long term or at least I’d be adding trace minerals to each glass of it I consume.

                  By the way, James did not write the article… Chris Kresser did (or at least his people). James is still here lurking. Just try saying his name 3 times in a mirror and poof there he is. :)

                • Jadgpanther says

                  I guess James would go crazy if he would see your comment. Now let us go back to Chemistry 101. If you drink pure water, it will consume everything on its path till it reaches equilibrium since its osmotic pressure is different. Now it is not related with acidity. If you get this, if you drink acid or alkali water but with different osmotic pressure, same applies. So what you drink in pure water is a neutral sponge. It will suck its minerals out of you. If you drop a piece of pure water on your eye (DONT DO IT!!! It is an example of its effect.) your eye would be blurred immediately and you will need to get it removed like a cataract if you are lucky.
                  Last, if your parents are not using a pure water machine, then what they use should be filtering the water with active carbons. That is not the same thing. It is purified water, not pure water and they should have salt (in its general meaning) additive section.

                • James says

                  Hi Chris,

                  They are partially right. Purified waters will absorb carbon dioxide, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides from the air making the water acidic. But this has NOTHING to do with taking minerals from the body.

                  Water is the universal solvent so it will dissolve substances in an attempt to reach some type of saturation. A simple way to understand this is if you take a glass of water and start stirring in sugar it will dissolve the sugar until it reaches a saturation or in some cases a supersaturation.

                  It is this solvency that also allows vitamins and minerals to be dissolved and carried both in to and out of the body.

                  Now, the more pure the water is the more solvent it becomes, and ultrapure waters are so solvent that they are actually highly corrosive. Of course we are not going to drink ultrapure water anyway and reverse osmosis and distilled waters are far from ultrapure waters.

                  Regardless, as I said the more pure a water is the more solvent it becomes. In addition, water does not have a brain to say I will take the bad stuff and leave the good stuff. It will dissolve both and again can carry both out of the body as easily as it can carry these in to the body.

                  I actually did some videos on the subject a while back:

                  http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=6357

                  Therefore, drinking purified waters will rob the body of nutrients, but NOT from acidity.

                  And this is not the only danger issue with purified waters.

                  The other factor goes to the osmosis factor. Water will go from a level of higher purity to a level of lower purity to try and reach equilibrium. If you want to research examples study the difference between hypotonic, isotonic and hypertonic IV solutions.

                  When people drink a purified water the water RAPIDLY enters the bloodstream since the concentration of of purer water is greater in the stomach than the blood. But this sudden influx of water in to the blood can raise blood pressure and dangerously hyper-dilute the electrolytes. Therefore, the body has to work extra hard to rapidly remove this sudden influx of water to prevent problems. This is why when people drink a purified water they need to urinate so much sooner than with a mineralized water. This can also lead to a rebound dehydration if the body over reacts in trying to eliminate that sudden influx of water.

                  There are expensive, trendy water on the market claiming to hydrate cells faster using bogus claims like the water molecules are smaller. Great sales hype. Again, these are nothing more than purified waters so the water enters the bloodstream faster, but again can lead to rebound dehydration.

                  If drinking a lot of purified water, such as on a hot day there is also a greater risk of death from water intoxication ( selling of the brain due to hyper-dilution of the electrolytes) for the same reason.

                  So to answer your question about adding Real Salt (Himalayan Salt) to the water, yes this is one way to help re-saturate purified waters to reduce the dangers mentioned above. You do not need to make the water taste salty. I add a pinch to a bottle or glass of water.

                  I also like to use food grade diatomaceous earth to my water as an alternative to get the benefits of the silica. See:

                  http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2800

                  http://www.medcapsules.com/info/Silica.htm

                  http://www.medcapsules.com/info/Silica_Diatomaceous%20Earth%20vs%20Horsetail%20Grass.htm

      • Luke says

        Magnesium hydroxide isn’t caustic; its solubility is so low, that the pH of saturated solution is around 10 (that is similar to typical soap). it can ‘irritate’ intensinal wall but not burn.
        Also, magnesium sulphate or chloride have a laxative effect as well…

  33. Karen says

    Interesting reading…any suggestions for an AB+ kidney transplant recipient, non diabetic, seeking to provide kidney longevity through diet & not giving kidneys more stress through acidic diet? I am strongly considering an alkaline diet vegan life change.

    • James says

      As for diet more foods high in silica such as oat bran or rice bran and foods high in natural vitamin C such as papaya, kiwis, mangoes, berries, etc.

      The herb nettle leaf is also highly supportive of the kidneys and is not an issue with the anti-rejection drugs,

  34. Andrew says

    Dear James

    Brilliantly explained
    Keep it up but I’m afraid there is no educating or convincing some people

    really nicely explained

    • James says

      Thanks Andrew.

      I agree, some people will never figure it out. But there are those who will listen and will research the claims. Then hopefully they will start spreading the correct information and the correct information will start to snowball drowning out the bogus “alkaline diet” misinformation.

  35. gh says

    Forget about blood ph. People should be looking at saliva and urine ph and how they relate to health. People with systemic chronic illnesses have more acidic saliva and urine. Pathogens produce the acid present in the saliva and urine of people who are significantly acidic long term – directly and indirectly. Taking bicarb does over time have a similar effect on the pathogens involved as antimicrobials do – they do not thrive in an alkaline environment and their numbers decrease. Yes, the typical alkaline diet will provide better nutrition than the average diet.
    Though I would like to see some studies of blood ph in seriously chronically ill people vs healthy people to see how well the body’s buffering systems keep up. Not much point in arguing about blood ph without knowing that.

    • James says

      Salivary and urinary pH are not a reflection of blood pH.

      Salivary pH actually tells us very little. Salivary pH is affected by the amount of bacteria in the mouth so things such as brushing your teeth will make the saliva more alkaline. So will drinking water, thinking of certain foods, etc. Dry mouth increases acidity as alkaline saliva normally washes away acid forming bacteria in the mouth.

      Urinary pH is affected by hydration levels, certain supplements and medications and by bacteria in the urine. Urinary tract infections lead to highly alkaline urine as the bacteria use the enzyme urease to split urea in to highly alkaline ammonia. The alkalinity helps the bacteria, as with most pathogens, to survive.

      Ingesting baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) does not really alkalize the blood in most cases and even if it does it is very temporary. Ingesting baking soda can actually cause acidosis since as it reacts with the stomach acid it forms carbonic acid and sodium chloride. Carbonic acid can cause acidosis as well as excess sodium chloride, which can cause hyperchloremic acidosis.

      Another common myth is that most pathogens cannot survive in an alkaline environment. Actually most pathogens cannot survive in an acidic environment and thrive in an alkaline environment. Look at H. pylori bacteria, which secrete highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia to neutralize stomach acid and protect themselves. In addition, roles of both stomach acid and the acids produced by the beneficial bacteria that inhabit our bodies is to destroy pathogens. Same reason people exposed to food poisoning pathogens are more prone to the pathogens when they have low stomach acid and acid producing flora.

      The acid producing flora also keeps Candida under control. These acids turn off the Candida growth gene and keep the Candida in its benign yeast form. When the flora numbers are decreased the environment becomes alkaline turning on the Candida growth gene and morphing the Candida in to its pathogenic fungal form (candidiasis). It is in this fungal form that the Candida forms finger-like projections known as hyphae that allow the Candida to dig in to tissues causing damage and inflammation.

        • James says

          Hi Kayla,

          I want to start by pointing out that everyone has Candida. It is a normal part of the body. But not everyone has candidiasis, which is the overgrowth of fungal Candida. And again, the overgrowth is due to an alkaline environment, which turns on the Candida growth gene and morphs the Candida in to its pathogenic fungal form.

          Therefore, you cannot really kill off the Candida. This is the most common mistake people make. For example, using enzymes to try and digest the Candida, which will not work and can make things worse. See:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMPoie_16ns

          What people with candidiasis need to do is to restore the naturally acidic environment in the areas of the body where Candida naturally exists.

          To do this the first thing I recommend is eating more cultured foods such as kefirs, cultured vegetables, miso, tempeh, etc. These provide a good source of probiotics to jump start the growth of the beneficial bacteria to restore the acidity.

          A side note here. I generally do not recommend yogurts unless homemade since most are not live culture even if they claim they are on the package.

          The second thing I recommend are prebiotics, which are the fibers that feed the flora. My favorites are rice or oat bran since they are also great sources of B vitamins and silica and do not cause severe bloating like psyllium does. Other good sources include vegetable gums (guar, glucomannan, xanthan, etc.), fructooligosaccharides (FOS) and inulin. More high fiber vegetables in the diet is also good. The bacteria feed on these fibers breaking them down and fermenting the resultant sugars forming the acids that control the Candida.

          You cannot cut out sugars from the diet since basically all foods contain sugars. Even meats contain sugars. But try to stay away from high glycemic foods.

  36. Trish says

    Please advise on the following info: “Osteoporosis Around the World: Throughout the world, the incidence of osteoporosis correlates directly with animal protein intake. The greater the intake of protein, the more common and more severe will be the osteoporosis. In fact, world health statistics show that osteoporosis is most common in exactly those countries where dairy products are consumed in the largest quantities – the United States, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Nathan Pritikin studied the medical research on osteoporosis, and found no basis at all for the Dairy Council viewpoint:
    African Bantu women take in only 350 mg. of calcium per day. They bear nine children during their lifetime and breast feed them for two years. They never have calcium deficiency, seldom break a bone, rarely lose a tooth… How can they do that on 350 mg. of calcium a day when the (National Dairy Council) recommendation is 1200 mg.? It’s very simple. They’re on a low-protein diet that doesn’t kick the calcium out of the body’.
    At the other end of the scale from the Bantus are the native Eskimos. If osteoporosis were a calcium deficiency disease it would be unheard of among these people. They have the highest dietary calcium intake of any people in the world – more than 2000 mg. a day from fish bones. Their diet is also the very highest in the world in protein – 250 to 400 grams a day. The native Eskimo people have one of the very highest rates of osteoporosis in the world.
    In March, 1983, the Journal of Clinical Nutrition reported the results of the largest study of this kind ever undertaken. Researchers in Michigan State and other major universities found that, by the age of 65 in the United States:
    •Male vegetarians had an average measurable bone loss of 3%
    • Male meat-eaters had an average measurable bone loss of 7%
    • Female vegetarians had an average measurable bone loss of 18%
    • Female meat-eaters had an average measurable bone loss of 35%
    This is from the website Food Maters.

  37. Martha says

    Hey Chris,

    I love your blogs and I find them really informative and I loved the studies. I’m an almost RD, and so I’m familiar with ketoacidosis, which I know is what happens in type 1 diabetics who neglect to use their insulin. In the case of the diabetic, their blood sugar spikes, cells starve, hydroxy butyrate (ketones) are formed, but again, ketones aren’t taken into the blood, and they are acidify the blood…causing acidosis. I can’t remember how they acidify, I keep visualizing my notes from medical nutrition and keep thinking they are broken down, released H+, but I can’t remember the little details. In this case, why do the kidneys not balance Ph? Is it just an overload they can’t handle? Also, if you’ve seen the documentary forks over knives you know all about anti meat because of the carboxylic acid of the protein: again, why does eating more meat (intaking more carboxylic acid) not effect serum Ph in the same way? I’m always learning new things in nutrition, and I’ve decided I’ll be reading articles and studies until (or after) I retire -thanks

  38. edna says

    I have donated a kidney to my son 7 years ago. A couple of years post transplant I have developed a few health issues like high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol , weight gain etc.
    The kidney specialist suggested to start with medications. I decided to reverse my health issues by following a vegan lifestyle, and I make sure the urine is never than 8.
    All the issues have been reversed.
    I run a wholistic clinic, and I witnesses many reversals with clients following the Alkaliney lifestyle. E.g. cancer, diabitis, auto immune diseases, shrinking of fibroids etc etc etc.
    I also read Dr. Colin Campbell book “The China Study” and it confirmed my beliefts. I do believe that by not touching any animal protein, I am allowing my one and only kidney to have an easier time filtering all the toxins, and the results are my best witness.
    Thank you.

    • Paleo Huntress says

      Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or my-side bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true. As a result, people gather evidence and recall information from memory selectively, and interpret it in a biased way.

      They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and/or recall have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a stronger weighting for data encountered early in an arbitrary series) and illusory correlation (in which people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

      https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Confirmation_bias.html

  39. James says

    Teresa: “Yet again James , you have missed the point. You try and speak so knowledgeably and yet you know so little.”

    I actually know a whole lot more than you think including how the body REALLY works.

    Teresa: “This is a common side effect the first time you start an alkaline diet. ”

    There is NO such thing as an alkaline diet as has been explained in depth numerous times.

    Teresa: “My body and particularly my head was just emptying itself of all the toxins I had accumulated over the years. ”

    The fact that you actually believe that shows how little you really know about the body.

    Teresa: “All my life I used to get colds and particularly sinus attacks every single winter but since taking alkaline water I have been completely sinus free after that first detox.”

    Have you ever heard of placebo effect? See:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6r9U-tbKAM

    You cannot predict when a cold will happen. The fact that you tell yourself you only get colds during the winter, but not during the rest of the year when they can still happen leads to believe that they are most likely psychosomatic rather than viral.

    • Laura Schoenfeld says

      NOTE: We will not be approving any more of these comments that contain personal attacks and insults.

      James, Paleo Huntress, Teresa, Guest, and whoever else is involved in this debate: please move your conversation elsewhere. Chris’s website is not a forum for people to verbally attack each other over the internet.

      If anyone involved in this discussion continues to post in this manner, I’ll have no choice but to ban you from the site, so please keep this in mind when writing comments in the future.

  40. James says

    Teresa: “Eighteen months ago, I bought a quality ioniser that is attached to my main water tap – I can get four levels of water in varying degrees of alkalinity or just plain filtered water.
    When I first started using it, I seemed to have what appeared to be like a heavy head cold, very phlegmy and sinusy. That lasted for over a month, but then that cleared up and so do my acid reflux, and happily I haven’t had a head cold either for well over a year now which is very unusual for me.”

    It took over a month for what you think was a heavy head cold to clear up? Usually they take a lot less time to clear up on their own. Sounds like the water slowed down the normal healing process quite a bit.

    • Teresa says

      Yet again James , you have missed the point. You try and speak so knowledgeably and yet you know so little.
      This is a common side effect the first time you start an alkaline diet. My body and particularly my head was just emptying itself of all the toxins I had accumulated over the years. All my life I used to get colds and particularly sinus attacks every single winter but since taking alkaline water I have been completely sinus free after that first detox.
      But of course this isn’t what you want to hear is it? You just go on blindly believing that everything you say is correct and the naysayers must all be talking rubbish.
      Why don’t you try it for a while and see how you feel? You never know you might actually find it works.

  41. Teresa says

    While James et al battle away on this subject, all I know is that I suffered from acid reflux for fifteen years until I started drinking alkaline water. Result? No more acid reflux. You figure it out.

    • Michele says

      Okay. Now we are getting somewhere! Can you tell me what exactly is alkaline water. Be specific. Thanks.

      • Teresa says

        Eighteen months ago, I bought a quality ioniser that is attached to my main water tap – I can get four levels of water in varying degrees of alkalinity or just plain filtered water.
        When I first started using it, I seemed to have what appeared to be like a heavy head cold, very phlegmy and sinusy. That lasted for over a month, but then that cleared up and so do my acid reflux, and happily I haven’t had a head cold either for well over a year now which is very unusual for me.
        You can only speak as you find, and I know I wouldn’t be without my alkaline water now.

    • James says

      Teresa: “While James et al battle away on this subject, all I know is that I suffered from acid reflux for fifteen years until I started drinking alkaline water. Result? No more acid reflux. You figure it out.”

      Not hard to figure out. The caustic mineral hydroxides in the ionized alkaline water will neutralize stomach acid just like Tums, which is not caustic like ionized alkaline waters. This covers up the symptoms of acid reflux, but DOES NOT correct the underlying problem. In fact, it make the underlying condition worse since low stomach acid leads to acid reflux from decreased digestion and increased fermentation.

      In the long run the use of ionized alkaline waters will really screw up digestion really bad as the neutralization of stomach acid inhibits proper nutrient absorption. This includes the vitamins B6, B12 and folate that are all acid dependent for absorption. Decreased absorption of these nutrients interferes with the production of the methyl donor SAMe. Among the numerous functions of methylation there are DNA repair to prevent cancer, reduction of heart disease, hormone formation, breakdown of excess hormones, neurotransmitter formation, allergy reduction, proper immune function, cartilage formation, etc. in fact, there are about 4,000 methylation reactions in the body.

      Another important function of methylation is the formation of stomach acid. Therefore, when people ignorantly neutralize or block stomach acidity such as by drinking the caustic ionized alkaline water they actually put themselves at risk for numerous diseases and disorders. To make matters worse methylation is also required for stomach acid formation. Therefore, when a person neutralizes their stomach acid they are actually inhibiting the formation of more stomach acid, which further decreases stomach acid………. All the time they continue putting their health at greater risk do to the decreased methylation and from the chemical burning from the caustic mineral hydroxides in the water and tissue damage from the hydroxyl radicals these mineral hydroxides disassociate in to.

      Stomach acid is also required for the proper absorption of zinc as well, which is a required catalyst for the production of stomach acid.

      People may feel better initially due to becoming hydrated, by covering up symptoms such as with acid reflux or simply placebo effect. I have also seen where people have added supplements to their regime that could account for alleviating their symptoms but gave credit to the ionized alkaline water that could not have anything to do with alleviating their symptoms.

      People just want so hard to believe that ionized alkaline water is a cure all or is going to improve their health. Especially if they were duped in to buying one of those quack, overpriced and over-hyped water ionizers.

      If they would do their homework first though they would realize some important facts such as:

      -You CANNOT alter the blood pH with ionized alkaline water unless you first dangerously overwhelm the stomach acid and the body’s pH buffering systems.

      Even if they manage to do this the induced alkalosis will lead to more problems as minor alkalosis constricts blood vessels leading to decreased circulation and increased blood pressure. Alkalosis also inhibits oxygen release from hemoglobin leading to decreased tissue oxygenation leading to all sorts of health risks.

      -Ionized alkaline water contains caustic mineral hydroxides that make the water alkaline. These hydroxides can include potassium hydroxide sold as Drano, sodium hydroxide sold as Red Devil Lye, calcium hydroxide sold as lime used to make cement and magnesium hydroxide sold as Milk of Magnesia used as a laxative because it chemically burns the intestinal wall leading to a water influx in to the intestines and increased peristalsis. People really want to drink this crap?!!!!

      • Teresa says

        James, you are wrongly assuming that I put nothing in my stomach apart from alkaline water, which is absolutely not true.
        I supplement two large glasses of ordinary water a day for alkaline water. the rest of the time I drink filtered water, Green or Jasmine tea, almond milk, red wine and such like.
        I would rather treat acid reflux that way than the proton-pump inhibitors that Doctors give out like Smarties.
        I was diagnosed osteo-porotic five years ago, and was told to take bio-phosphates, which once I researched I refused to take any more.
        What with the above medications, and now we are all meant to be on Statins for the rest of our lives, the medical profession is probably doing a better job of killing us all off than a couple of glasses of alkaline water a day.

        • James says

          Teresa: “James, you are wrongly assuming that I put nothing in my stomach apart from alkaline water, which is absolutely not true.”

          I did not assume anything. Why would I think for example that you would not put food in your stomach?

          What else you put in your stomach is irrelevant though to my points about the dangers of ionized alkaline water such as the caustic nature, the radicals formed, the inhibition of nutrient absorption from the other things you do put in your stomach, etc.

          Teresa: “I would rather treat acid reflux that way than the proton-pump inhibitors that Doctors give out like Smarties.”

          Proton pump inhibitors DO NOT treat acid reflux, they mask the symptoms just like ionized alkaline water. And both PPIs and ionized alkaline water make the underlying condition worse in the process.

          If you want to learn about acid reflux and how to actually treat it then read this:

          http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=2632

          Teresa: “I was diagnosed osteo-porotic five years ago, and was told to take bio-phosphates, which once I researched I refused to take any more.”

          You are referring to bisphosphonates, which also do not treat osteoporosis and are well known for increasing the risk of fractures among other side effects.

          Osteoporosis is the result of collagen loss in the bone decreasing mineral deposition sites. The main reasons for loss of bone collagen are lack of ascorbic acid and/or orthosilicic acid.

          Bisphosphonate drugs, such as Boniva and Evista, basically kill cells that break down bone inhibiting the bone remodeling process needed for healthy bone. This leads to “rotten” bone that the drugs then “plaster” minerals to. In the long run the bone loses strength and flexibility leading to an increased risk of fractures.

          Alkaline ionized water can make matters worse b inhibiting mineral proper mineral absorption as well as inhibiting proper protein digestion needed for collagen formation.

          Statins are a joke. See:

          http://medreview.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/why-statins-and-low-cholesterol-cause-heart-attacks-and-strokes/

          If you really want to get cholesterol down see:

          http://www.medcapsules.com/info/Heart_Disease.htm

  42. Michele says

    I really wish you guys would stop with the obsessive-compulsive arguments-personality conflicts going on here in this thread. I am getting 15-30 emails a day of you guys which is useless to me.

    • James says

      Sorry, but people get accurate health information for health and safety overrides your slight inconvenience.

      You can do as I do and leave the e-mail in place. This will accumulate most if not all the responses in one e-mail then when done you can delete it.

  43. bean says

    To james,

    again, what u used isnt real science. A lot are unproven and far fetched. everyone please read from the very beginning, while i only started to get aggressive after more than 10 comments, james have been aggressive ever since the start.

    the thing that made me furious is that he said what i said is wrong and bogus and use assumptions and speculations, while he himself admitted that he cant prove me wrong, and he himself uses lots of speculations which is solely based on his own understandings. Worst is that lots of his speculations cant be found on the internet, while mine can.

    • James says

      Bean: “again, what u used isnt real science. A lot are unproven and far fetched. everyone please read from the very beginning, while i only started to get aggressive after more than 10 comments, james have been aggressive ever since the start.”

      Providing facts is not being aggressive. And again, this blog article is not about me. Trying to discredit me with your lies is aggressive. So I am asking you again, stay on topic about the acid-alkaline myth and stop trying to make this personal.

      Bean: “the thing that made me furious is that he said what i said is wrong and bogus and use assumptions and speculations, while he himself admitted that he cant prove me wrong”

      I did not say I could not prove you wrong. In fact, I have proven you wrong a number of times. But again, you are being aggressive by trying to make this personal.

      Bean: “and he himself uses lots of speculations which is solely based on his own understandings. Worst is that lots of his speculations cant be found on the internet, while mine can.”

      Thanks for saving me the time of proving how you keep lying. If the claims I am making cannot be verified on the internet then how was I so easily able to find medical studies in a matter of minutes backing what I said? You yourself claimed you could not find anything, anywhere on the internet backing the fact that osteoporosis is caused from a collagen loss. So given your lack of research skills I am not surprised at all that you cannot find any real research backing either of our claims. Just because you are incapable of finding readily available research though, this does not mean it does not exist.

      As for your “evidence”, propaganda sites claiming what you want to hear IS NOT evidence. For example, show us the medical research proving that long term ingestion of foods claimed to be acid forming induce acidosis as you keep implying. Let’s see if there really is any evidence to back your claims as you just claimed here.

  44. bean says

    To james,

    this is about the statistic part.

    james: “Statistics only prove what the person wants to prove. This is why statistics are such a popular alternative to real research since real research is much harder to manipulate or misinterpret.

    For example, if people really look deep in to the issue the longest lived people in the world have better health not due to diet, but rather the least stress. Stress will kill a person much faster than bad diet anyday.”

    so i guess what u are saying is that stress kills part has a more concrete study and evidence, rather than healthy diet leads to a healthy life then. This is your BS “real science”. no real prove.

    and i need u to clarify on another thing. you are saying that statistics done by a lot of people in the world are manipulated and changed to their advantage ?
    and i will need u to give eg. of which statistics done are like that please.

    the 1st 1 i take it as you say that selectively chose 6 good results out of 100 results yea ?

    please clarify that u, james sloane, said all these stuffs.

  45. bean says

    To james,

    DUDE, the only thing that i have been wrong is when i didnt explain that stomach acids does other functions, as i think its not really relevant to the main topic. THE REST OF THE STUFFS WE BEEN DISCUSSING, U YOURSELF ADMITTED THAT U CANT PROVE IT TO BE WRONG OR RIGHT EITHER.

    mots of the stuffs u posted are NOT real science. It is based on your understandings and its NOT PROVEN SCIENCE.

    As for the osteoporosis stuffs, scroll above for my reply, what u gave me about the collagen stuffs is NEVER been 100% proven, and the study done on ncbi is totally wrong if realize those condition set by the researcher him/herself will cause loss in minerals itself. U are and old man but u argues like a child.

    james : “There is yet more I could have found, but again it is not my job to do your homework for you. As we can all see though I base my statements on known scientific fact while Bean relies on speculation and poor or absent research skills.”

    BS. you said u treat people the way they treat you. TOTAL BS. scroll up and see from the 1st comment i made till now. Did i ever sound so offensive like u ?

    Everyone who is seeing this post now, please search for the reason why osteoporosis happen. While i gave the simplest explanation, which is accepted worldwide ( loss of mineral density), james gave an explanation which is loss of collagen (which i found out that it is result of loss of mineral density that leads to it)

    search and tell this james to his face who is using speculations and who is using “real science” .

    • James says

      Bean: “DUDE, the only thing that i have been wrong is when i didnt explain that stomach acids does other functions, as i think its not really relevant to the main topic. THE REST OF THE STUFFS WE BEEN DISCUSSING, U YOURSELF ADMITTED THAT U CANT PROVE IT TO BE WRONG OR RIGHT EITHER.”

      First of all my names is not “DUDE”. So don’t refer to me that way.

      Secondly, yes the stomach acid issue is relevant since people attempting to alkalize often dangerously neutralize their stomach acid putting themselves at risk for various health problems.

      And as I said before what I have said is backed by REAL science, not assumptions like you rely on. This is why you have to discredit anything I have said with any real research. That is not the same as claiming something cannot be proven.

      Bean: “As for the osteoporosis stuffs, scroll above for my reply, what u gave me about the collagen stuffs is NEVER been 100% proven, and the study done on ncbi is totally wrong if realize those condition set by the researcher him/herself will cause loss in minerals itself.”

      LOL!!!! You could not even find any studies anywhere on the internet with all the time you have available to argue. I find several studies backing this within a couple of minutes. If you are not smart enough to even find these studies then you clearly are not smart enough to understand them.

      I also noticed how you tried to manipulate what was said in the first study and keep completely ignoring the second study, which also proves my point.

      Bean: “BS. you said u treat people the way they treat you. TOTAL BS. scroll up and see from the 1st comment i made till now. Did i ever sound so offensive like u ?”

      Here is one: “i guess u really just want to win in every argument” from July 31. In your post you claimed I argue like a child since you cannot counter anything I said with real evidence. Instead you have argued from the start using assumptions but no REAL evidence to back your claims.

      But again, this blog IS NOT about me. When people try to keep going off topic making it about the messenger instead of the message they do this because they have no REAL evidence to present. So they try attacking the messenger instead to divert attention away from their ignorance of the subject. I have seen you try to make this about me a number of times and have yet to provide even one piece of solid evidence to back your claims proving my point.

      Bean: “Everyone who is seeing this post now, please search for the reason why osteoporosis happen. While i gave the simplest explanation, which is accepted worldwide ( loss of mineral density), james gave an explanation which is loss of collagen (which i found out that it is result of loss of mineral density that leads to it)”

      Mineral loss IS NOT the cause, it is a result. Again learn some anatomy and physiology!!! And the studies I provided back this fact. Just because you tried to distort what the one study said and keep ignoring the second study this does not change that fact. Again, mineral loss from bone result in ostoepenia and osteomalacia, not osteoporosis. The lack of collagen matrix reduces mineral binding sites thus decreasing bone density. Since the minerals cannot bind they get eliminated if not useable elsewhere to prevent other health issues such as the side effects of hypercalcemia.

    • bean says

      Of course i coudnt find any, because its so few and maybe non-existent.

      i did not manipulate your 2nd study. Your 2nd stdy TOTALLY did not support what u claimed to be real science. It says it is loss of mineral density and MAY BE associated with loss of collagen. i really dont know how u can totally ignore the 1st part of the stdy saying its loss of minerals and keep on clinging on to the “may be” part. I feel its really stupid to continue saying osteoporosis is loss of collagen just because u found a website stating that “it may be associated with loss of collagen”

      i wrote that because u did it. u does argue like a child. and if u see the time correctly, it was all posted on the same day by me ( same as the day i said u didnt treat ppl the same way others treat u ), because i read what u wrote which is way way more offensive than mine, way before i posted these. Check the time and date beside and compare with your own comments please.

      AGAIN…. u failed to prove it. and again, u use the word “real science”. i am really fed up with u james. i am done with arguing on this topic with u. Everyone can judge this case ( whether osteoporosis is loss of minerals or loss of collagen ) . Not that i really cared about it anymore.

      • James says

        Bean: “Of course i coudnt find any, because its so few and maybe non-existent”

        That only proves your poor research skills. I found two studies in less than two minutes proving my point. Just because you keep twisting what the first study said and keep ignoring the second study altogether, this DOES NOT make them wrong. Only you.

        If I spent hours searching like you probably did then I would have found a lot more. But the fact that I was able to find those tow studies with hardly any effort proves my point about your poor research skills.

        From the first study you keep deliberately keep ignoring ” A primary loss of collagen in osteoporotic bones is an essential prediction of the hypothesis; in fact this loss is well established but, inexplicably, it has been assumed to be secondary to the bone loss”. No wonder you keep ignoring this study since it backs what I have said all along and says the exact opposite of what you keep trying to falsely claim. And from the second study which you keep trying to twist what was said “The high remodeling rate is associated
        with decreased bone mineralization”. Wow, not a loss of minerals from bone as you keep falsely claiming, but a lack of bone mineralization as I have said all along. And again, the lack of bone mineralization is the result of a lack of bone collagen decreasing mineral binding sites. So you can keep trying to twist what the studies have proven all you want. All that will prove is how desperate you are and to what lengths you will go to in order to make it appear you have a clue what you are talking about.

        Of course I am still waiting for a rational response from the person who thought water was food, glucose was an acid and that amino acids and alkaline ammonia are the same thing among other ludicrous thoughts.

        By the way, still waiting for you answer how it is that athletes maintain bone density despite the high protein diets you claim are acid forming.

        Actually you have ignored all my questions for you as well as requests to provide REAL evidence to your claims. Not surprising since you keep making stuff up rather than rely on real science.

        Bean: “i did not manipulate your 2nd study. Your 2nd stdy TOTALLY did not support what u claimed to be real science. It says it is loss of mineral density and MAY BE associated with loss of collagen.”

        Thanks again for proving my point of how you are lying by twisting what was really said in the abstract. I ran a search for what you are claiming was quoted from both abstracts to make sure I did not miss what you claim. Guess what? What you claim was said DOES NOT show up because that is not what was said. Instead the abstract CLEARLY states: “there is increasing evidence that a high remodeling with a negative bone balance induces bone loss and modification of the microarchitecture, such as decreased trabecular thickness and loss of connectivity, decreased cortical thickness, and increased cortical porosity. The high remodeling rate is associated with decreased bone mineralization “. So they mention “microarchitecture”, which refers to the collagen matrix, which is what gives bone much of its strength and allows bone to deal with forces. Then the abstract states “The high remodeling rate is associated with decreased bone mineralization “. Again, “decreased bone mineralization” backs what I have said all along and is the opposite of what you keep falsely claiming of mineral loss. Further in the abstract they state “An overhydroxylation of lysine residues and an overglycosylation of hydroxylysine have been reported [145–147], resulting in the formation of fibrils of small diameter [148] that may affect the collagen fiber’s ability to mineralize normally”. Wow, affecting the ability of the collagen fibers to mineralize normally just as I have been saying all along and just the opposite of your false claims you keep making by twisting what was really said.

        Bean: “i really dont know how u can totally ignore the 1st part of the stdy saying its loss of minerals and keep on clinging on to the “may be” part.”

        Because that IS NOT what the abstract says. You keep twisting what was said to mislead people to fit your needs. Again, here is the EXACT quote “The high remodeling rate is associated with decreased bone mineralization that may reduce bone stiffness and may be associated with a modification of the content of collagen crosslinks.”

        As we can see it DOES NOT state the result is a loss of minerals as you keep twisting things to make it appear as if that what was said. In fact, they CLEARLY state “decreased bone mineralization” as I have said all along, and NOTHING about mineral loss as you keep falsely claiming.

        This brings up another question I posed to you earlier that you also ignored. Since you keep harping on the word “may”, does decreased bone mineralization reduce bone stiffness or not? Stop ignoring the question just because answering it will blow the misleading word games you keep playing.

        Bean: “I feel its really stupid to continue saying osteoporosis is loss of collagen just because u found a website stating that “it may be associated with loss of collagen”

        Again, that is not what the abstracts said. Learn to read!!! Both studies back what I have been saying all along. And again, these are only the two studies I found in less that two minutes after you claimed to not having been able to find anything, anywhere on the internet. If I spent as much time as you did finding nothing I could find a lot more research backing this fact because unlike you I know how to do real research.

  46. bean says

    To james,

    stop claiming u have been giving real science
    lots of “facts” u given are not proven stuffs
    in fact, its what most of us never even heard before of. Its like u are better than those researchers doing researches.

    while i enjoy peoples’ feedback, infact i am searching for people like those to to correct what i may have understood wrongly, your feedbacks are really offensive and aggressive. AND YOU DO NOT TREAT PEOPLE THE WAY THEY TREAT YOU.

    scroll up and look at every comments between u and me, since the very start please.

    • James says

      Bean: “stop claiming u have been giving real science
      lots of “facts” u given are not proven stuffs
      in fact, its what most of us never even heard before of. Its like u are better than those researchers doing researches.”

      What researchers are backing your claims? And where is their research backing these claims since you have failed to produce any?

      • bean says

        i didnt claimed that it was from “real science” like u do.

        everything we have discussed until now, u have yet to prove me wrong. so stop saying its wrong.

        • James says

          Bean: “i didnt claimed that it was from “real science” like u do.”

          I did not say “real science” in the post you are responding to. I asked for “research”, which you failed to provide. So again you show your poor reading skills, which also explains why you kept misquoting the abstracts I provided proving osteoporosis was due to collagen loss, not mineral loss as you keep falsely claiming.

          Bean: “everything we have discussed until now, u have yet to prove me wrong. so stop saying its wrong.”

          LOL!!! I have proven you wrong numerous times. But you keep twisting what was said to make it appear that you were not wrong in the first place even though the solid evidence says otherwise.

  47. bean says

    of course i know alkalosis is also a disease. But due do the modern diet which is really “acidic” there’s virtually no way for our body to take in too much alkalies. Even if we do eat only veges which is really hard for aprrox 90% of the population of the world, we are only restoring our body to a more balance state which is the results of taking in net forming acidic food for decades. Do you think something which takes so long to have effect can be overturn by just taking in alkalies in a short time ?
    and while lots of different food are really really acidic, its not the same with alkaline forming food. Their alkalinity is not as strong as the acidity of the those food.

    James : “Again, if people would simply learn how the body really works then they would stop perpetuating these myths.”

    again if you would start opening your mind accept some of the facts, you might change your mind. NOT EVERYTHING U SAID IS PROVEN RIGHT EITHER.

    • James says

      Bean: “of course i know alkalosis is also a disease.”

      Clearly you did not, just like you did not know water is not a food. Funny though how every time I call you on your comments that prove you were unaware of these things that you all of a sudden claim that of course you knew that. If you did then why do you keep making such ridiculous statements to begin with?

      Bean: “But due do the modern diet which is really “acidic” there’s virtually no way for our body to take in too much alkalies.”

      Again, DIETS ARE NOT ACIDIC!!!!! Learn some real science and real anatomy and physiology!!!

      Bean: “Even if we do eat only veges which is really hard for aprrox 90% of the population of the world, we are only restoring our body to a more balance state which is the results of taking in net forming acidic food for decades.”

      Again, all MYTH!!!! In fact, how many naturally occurring acids are found in vegetables? A lot!!!! And again ALL foods, including vegetables are metabolized in to acids in the long run. There is NO such thing as an alkalizing food. As has been explained to you so many times the diet has virtually no effect on alkalizing the blood. How many times do you have to be told to learn some real chemistry and anatomy and physiology instead of just making crap up?

      Bean: “Do you think something which takes so long to have effect can be overturn by just taking in alkalies in a short time ?”

      If acidosis was cumulative like you imply and diets could really be acid forming as you also falsely claim then we would be dead in a short time from acidosis. Add learn some common sense along with real chemistry and anatomy and physiology.

      Bean: “and while lots of different food are really really acidic, its not the same with alkaline forming food.”

      You insist of repeating the same disproven garbage. I guess you will never realize the truth.

      Bean: “again if you would start opening your mind accept some of the facts, you might change your mind. NOT EVERYTHING U SAID IS PROVEN RIGHT EITHER”

      Then show me some facts rather than your assumptions. And if they are facts then back them with some real science instead of guessing.

      Also keep in mind that the things I have said are backed by real science. So far you have failed to provide any real evidence to prove anything I have claimed wrong. You just keep posting your assumptions of truth as evidence.

      • bean says

        To james,

        DUDE, i never once mention alkalosis until u mention that it is a disease too. Why should i claim i know that it is a disease too when i didnt even touch a topic about it.

        and DUDE again, i am not like u. I dont like to explain stuffs which most of the population already know. Everyone knows water is a drink and not food. And thus, i feel its stupid to explain it to u, given u are an educated man possibly much more than me, and it would insult u if i had to explain every single small detail like water is not food to u. If u want me to explain that way to u, i can gladly try to make it as simple as possible to reduce the stress of other readers reading completely useless stuffs they already known.

        • James says

          Bean: “i never once mention alkalosis until u mention that it is a disease too. Why should i claim i know that it is a disease too when i didnt even touch a topic about it.”

          You keep harping on acidosis being so dangerous. Clearly you are not aware that alkalosis is even more dangerous. And this is all on topic since we are discussing the acid-alkaline myth.

          Bean: “I dont like to explain stuffs which most of the population already know. ”

          Reality, you cannot explain what you know nothing about. It is that simple. Just like how you implied water was food, that sugar was an acid, that amino acids and alkaline ammonia are the same thing, etc. Maybe the general public is well aware of the differences but you clearly are not.

      • bean says

        To james,

        NOT ALL CHEMICAL COMPOSITION IN VEGES ARE METABOLIZED INTO ACIDS. get your “REAL SCIENCE” right 1st before you claim it to be a real science. BS. Again i have to stress here again, we are talking about NET forming. YOU are the one which is not acceptive to new ideas.

        OMG, how childish can u be ? that u feel the need to win argument of every sentence ? or u are just plain idiot. I CLEARLY meant these wont happen in a short time. and btw, FYI, acidosis is very dangerous and if not treated early enough, the acids would have done irreversible damages and cause problems with organ function, respiratory failure, and kidney failure. Severe acidosis can also cause shock or even death.

        common sense ? i think u are lacking a lot of it.

        yes, a lot of stuffs i said are my guesses or i would like to use the word hypothesis as u suggested to me. But bear in mind that its from real facts that these guesses are formed, and when one day it is proven, it will be a discovery.

        • James says

          Bean: “NOT ALL CHEMICAL COMPOSITION IN VEGES ARE METABOLIZED INTO ACIDS. get your “REAL SCIENCE” right 1st before you claim it to be a real science. ”

          More proof of how Bean twists what was REALLY said to fit his needs. NEVER did I claim that all the chemicals in vegetables were metabolized in to acids. What I have CLEARLY said over and over is the fact that ALL foods are eventually metabolized in to acids. This fact is not refutable. Proteins are broken down in to amino acids and eventually metabolized in to uric acid. Oils are metabolized in to fatty acids. The shorter chain sugars including those formed from starches are metabolized in to carbonic acid. The insoluble fibers (long chain sugar molecules) are fermented by the flora in to a variety of beneficial acids including lactic and acetic acids.

          Bean: “FYI, acidosis is very dangerous and if not treated early enough, the acids would have done irreversible damages and cause problems with organ function, respiratory failure, and kidney failure. Severe acidosis can also cause shock or even death.”

          Wow, you repeated the symptoms of acidosis I already posted for you!!! Nothing like riding on the coattails of someone that already knows what they are talking about to make yourself appear smart.

          But then you slid right back down in to Dunceville by ignoring the well known fact that acidosis is EXTREMELY rare. This despite the high consumption of foods that you falsely think are acid forming. Again, ALL foods are eventually metabolized in to acids. But the body uses respiration and kidney function as primary means to maintain the proper, necessary levels of acid in the blood while eliminating the rest. This is why acidosis is so rare regardless of what the propaganda sites you get your health information from claim.

          Bean: “yes, a lot of stuffs i said are my guesses or i would like to use the word hypothesis as u suggested to me. But bear in mind that its from real facts that these guesses are formed, and when one day it is proven, it will be a discovery.”

          Only IF it is ever proven. So far all the science has proven the alkalizing claims are completely bogus.

  48. Alan says

    Thanks everyone your comments have been incredibly helpful. I am more confused about this topic than I was when I first read the article. Mind numbing.

  49. bean says

    To james

    u deny alkaline theory so much but u supported ozone therapy which doesnt have evidence and scientific studies strong enough to back it up. The ozone therapy can cost their whole life-savings while the alkaline theory to help in cancer cost the same price as a meal. Ozone therapy also comes with many hazards and serious side effects which can kill the user.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/10394090/Ozone-therapy-endangered-patients-life-court-hears.html

    i really dont understand why u deny alkaline diet theory so much
    and u yourself admitted that u cant prove it to be wrong either

    • James says

      Bean: “u deny alkaline theory so much”

      It is not a theory, it is a hypothesis. A theory has evidence backing it.

      Bean: “but u supported ozone therapy which doesnt have evidence and scientific studies strong enough to back it up”

      Says who? Have you even bothered looking at the research and the chemistry backing ozone? Clearly not!!!

      Bean: “The ozone therapy can cost their whole life-savings while the alkaline theory to help in cancer cost the same price as a meal.”

      Yep, you CLEARLY have no idea what you are talking about again. Ozone machines are a fraction of the cost of the quack water ionizers so many people are trying to push for one. You also overlook that when the so-called “alkaline diet” does not work for a health problem then the cost becomes significantly higher.

      Bean: “Ozone therapy also comes with many hazards and serious side effects which can kill the user.”

      Wow, you found a propaganda article and never bothered to check your facts again. Study conducted in Germany followed nearly 6 million doses of ozone given. There were less that 40 adverse events reported most minor such as irritation at the injection site.

      Look, I can play your same game:

      http://www.ehow.com/about_5542158_alkaline-diet-complications.html

      The fact is that all therapies can pose dangers and possibly cause dearth is USED IMPROPERLY!!!! This does not make the therapies inherently dangerous, just the people who promote crap without understanding what they are promoting such as yourself.

      Bean: “i really dont understand why u deny alkaline diet theory so much”

      Again, it IS NOT a theory, it is a HYPOTHESIS!!! Learn the difference!!!

      Bean: “and u yourself admitted that u cant prove it to be wrong either”

      I have provided plenty of evidence discrediting the so-called alkaline diet. So stop making stuff up in a poor attempt to support your position.

      What I said is that the so-called “alkaline diet” DOES NOT alkalize the blood as has been proven by science, but it does provide health benefits by providing a high level of nutrition.

      • bean says

        fine, ok. it is a hypothesis.

        but i am not going to argue further with u anymore on this topic.

        i urge everyone to search about ozone therapy, particularly the myths part and costs, and scientific reports backing it up if u can find it.

        i am far too lazy to continue with this stubborn person. Be your own judge and i am sure u can find what i said is true.

        he is just like everyone else explaining using his own assumptions, giving out opinions which doesnt have evidence proving it but just that he is much much more stubborn than anyone else.

        • James says

          Bean: “i urge everyone to search about ozone therapy, particularly the myths part and costs, and scientific reports backing it up if u can find it.”

          We have all seen Bean’s lack of research skills when he could not find “anything anywhere in the net” concerning the fact that osteoporosis is a loss of collagen matrix. Yet I found two studies in less than two minutes with hardly any effort. If I tried a little harder I could have found even more since there is more research backing this readily available. It just takes being smarter than a first grader to find the research.

          But to show Bean how easy it is once again, here:

          http://medcapsules.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=354

          This is only some of the research readily available. I have other research that is not on the internet and thus was not listed. Pay attention to that fact Bean. Not all research can be found on the internet. Sometimes you have to resort to other sources such as medical libraries and databases.

          I also recommend that anyone real serious about the research on ozone also get the book The Use of Ozone in Medicine, which was written by doctors for doctors.

  50. bean says

    I know WATER IS NOT FOOD. but u are smart enough to know that i am implementing the concept that both goes in our mouth and absorbed by our body. And if water does changes to our body, why not food ?

    and FYI, i have been trying alkaline water for past few weeks and the effects are amazing. I have chronic acne for past 10 years and i have tried basically everything from antibiotics to laser therapy. The only thing i havent tried is plastic surgery. I myself never trust this alkaline BS but since my family brought one of the water ionizer which produces alkaline water, i have no choice but to drink this water (unless i boil tap water everyday). In just 2-3 weeks, i can see that no more big acne comes out till now. I also frequently get sick from flu and cough but i have been sick free ever since. My little brother has asthma attacks once in a while but he hasnt had any ever since he started drinking this water. I TELL U TO TRY IT BECAUSE U WILL NOT TRUST ME.

    The reason i tell u to try not alkaline water but acidic water is that i know u will just SPOUT ANOTHER THEORY why your body gets healthier and its not because of this alkaline water. If u try to explain why i get lesser acne , flu and cough, and my brother’s asthma, u just justified my reason to let u try the acid water.

    • James says

      Bean: “I know WATER IS NOT FOOD”

      Apparently not.

      Bean: “i am implementing the concept that both goes in our mouth and absorbed by our body. And if water does changes to our body, why not food ?”

      Of course water and food implement changes in the body. There is just no evidence that either alkalize the body as people keep trying to claim.

      Water can react with silica forming orthosilicic acid, which is essential to the body. And water helps to maintain the vascular system. Food can supply energy sources for the body and provides amino acids that help form neurotransmitters and hormones among other functions of food. But again, where is the proof that either alkalize the blood?

      Bean: “and FYI, i have been trying alkaline water for past few weeks and the effects are amazing. I have chronic acne for past 10 years and i have tried basically everything from antibiotics to laser therapy. The only thing i havent tried is plastic surgery. I myself never trust this alkaline BS but since my family brought one of the water ionizer which produces alkaline water, i have no choice but to drink this water (unless i boil tap water everyday). In just 2-3 weeks, i can see that no more big acne comes out till now. I also frequently get sick from flu and cough but i have been sick free ever since. My little brother has asthma attacks once in a while but he hasnt had any ever since he started drinking this water. I TELL U TO TRY IT BECAUSE U WILL NOT TRUST ME.”

      I have tried it and I did not like it. I also know a lot of other people who tried it and reported becoming ill from drinking the water, which makes a lot of sense if you understand the chemistry.

      If the water really helped your acne or your brother’s asthma as you claimed then there must be a scientific rationale for these effects. So exactly how did the water affect the androgen hormone levels that lead to acne formation or the adrenal dysfunction that leads to asthma. Please be specific in your explanations.

      I see people trying to make a case for the quack ionized alkaline water all the time giving credit to the water when they did other things that are what really helped. For example, a woman on another site tried to claim the ionized alkaline water got her off her thyroid medication although there is nothing in the water that supports thyroid function. She totally ignored the fact that her doctor claimed she was magnesium deficient and therefore was given magnesium shots and started on a magnesium citrate supplement. Guess what REAL science has proven to support thyroid function? That’s right, MAGNESIUM!!! So it was the magnesium shots and supplements that likely helped her get off her thyroid medication since the water has nothing in it to significantly help.

      Again, people do this all the time. They want so hard to believe in a product that they throw common sense out the window and give credit to a product that has nothing to do with it while ignoring the other changes that were really helping.

      Another good example of this is cesium chloride often touted as a cancer cure. This despite the fact that cesium chloride has been shown to induce cancer and promote the growth of already existing cancers. Yet the believers love to quote one study that showed a small number of remissions among test subjects given cesium chloride. Sounds promising until you read the rest of the study they ignored where the people were given various other things in conjunction including things known to boost immunity and fight cancer. So there is no proof that cesium chloride cured any cases of cancer. Although various other studies do show that it causes and promotes cancer.

      As another example, another quack cancer and AIDS “cure” is “oleander soup”. Every humans study on oleander has found it to ineffective for cancer and according to the latest research appears to shorten the lives of cancer patients. But the promoters of oleander ignore this fact and also twist the findings to make it sound effective when it is not. And as usual they cite one source that makes it sound effective. This is not even a study, but rather someone’s thesis. What the promoters of quack oleander ignore is that in these thesis the person is also discussing the use of Sutherlandia, which unlike oleander has been proven to cure cancer. Yet they ignore this fact and give credit to the oleander, which has been proven to be ineffective while ignoring the Sutherlandia given to the same patients despite its being proven to be effective. Same with the AIDS patients who were given antiviral and immune stimulating foods and supplements. So it is common for people to ignore common sense and real research to focus on what they desire to believe even when no scientific reasoning exists.

      Bean: “The reason i tell u to try not alkaline water but acidic water is that i know u will just SPOUT ANOTHER THEORY why your body gets healthier and its not because of this alkaline water. If u try to explain why i get lesser acne , flu and cough, and my brother’s asthma, u just justified my reason to let u try the acid water.”

      Did you know that the acidic water is actually antioxidant? As where the alkaline water contains caustic mineral (metal) hydroxides that chemically burn tissues and dangerously neutralize stomach acid. As these caustic mineral (metal) hydroxides disassociate they form the very dangerous hydroxyl radical. Again, basic science. Unfortunately people are often too laze to do real research. So they just read some bogus propaganda sales site and accept whatever they claim as the gospel. Kangen is no exception. See:

      http://medreview.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/top-5-worst-internet-health-information-sites-curezone-org-part-3-alkalineacid-support-forum-part-1/

      • bean says

        To james,

        thats exactly the reason why i tell u to drink the water. because u said theres no proof to water alkalizes the blood. If i drink it and show it to u, u wont believe it and just come out with another 100+ reasons why it happen and not because of the water.

        i can try to research why it helped me, but u will just again come up with countless reasons again. Its futile and i dont want to waste my time anymore with such a stubborn person.

        all the more reason i tell u to try acidic water instead of alkaline. because if alkaline water does help u, u will just spout another reason unrelated to water which make the change in your body

        if u think this acidic water is anti-oxidants, wow, its really good. it can clear up free radicals for u. u should really try it.

        as for how the machine creates alkaline water is not by adding those metals. its mainly by electrolysis of water to make the water separates into H+ and OH- and by manipulating the concentration of H+ and OH-, walahhhh, u got your alkaline water or acidic water.

        FYI, enagic’s kangen water machine has operate in japan for past 40 years and the only known problem found is that its contraindicated in people who cant produce enough stomach acids. and yes, it has obtained much more quality and safety recognition all around the world than some of the methods u recommended to other people. If u think that the water is dangerous, go ahead and sue them, stop spreading rumors and unproven stuffs on the net like so many other people.

        as for how u said it dangerously neutralize stomach acids, it just shows that u are the 1 that did not do any research. Although stomach acids exists at normal time, it is mainly produced when there is food intake. That is why people who dont eat at the same time everyday more prone to gastric. This is proven real science.

        • James says

          Bean: “thats exactly the reason why i tell u to drink the water. because u said theres no proof to water alkalizes the blood. ”

          EXACTLY, NO proof just as I have been saying all along. So stop trying to promote this myth as fact.

          Bean: “i can try to research why it helped me, but u will just again come up with countless reasons again.”

          Again, REAL facts cannot be disputed. Therefore, all you have to do is to provide some REAL research backing your claim. Even a scientific explanation of exactly how the water is working for these different conditions. All I keep hearing from you is excuses as to why you can’t provide the evidence. Come on Bean be honest and just admit the reason is that there is no real reason the water can help other than maybe placebo effect.

          Bean: “if u think this acidic water is anti-oxidants”

          Yes, this is BASIC science. You should try using some basic science for once. You will be surprised at what facts you may actually learn. Just like how basic science has proven how ionized alkaline water disassociates forming the powerful and dangerous hydroxyl radical.

          Bean: “as for how the machine creates alkaline water is not by adding those metals. ”

          Never said it did. I have made it CLEAR that they start with mineralized water. The minerals in the water allow for the formation of caustic mineral (metal) hydroxides, which when dissociate form the dangerous hydroxyl radical. Look it up. Ah, that’s right, I forgot you don’t know how to do even basic research. Just like how you could find nothing anywhere on the internet discussing the fact that osteoporosis is the result of collagen, not mineral loss. Yet I found two studies in less than two minutes. And there is still more I could have found if I spent a little more time. All you have to do is to know how to research to find the facts.

          Bean: “its mainly by electrolysis of water to make the water separates into H+ and OH- and by manipulating the concentration of H+ and OH-, walahhhh, u got your alkaline water or acidic water”.

          Very good, all stuff I have explained to people in the past. What you left out are the facts that the negatively charged OH binds with the positively charged metals in the minerals forming the caustic mineral (metal) hydroxides known for neutralizing stomach acid and chemically burning tissues. As these disassociate they form the dangerous hydroxyl radical.

          Bean: “FYI, enagic’s kangen water machine has operate in japan for past 40 years”

          So what? Chemotherapy has been around longer than that. This does not mean it is safe or effective!!!

          Bean: “and the only known problem found is that its contraindicated in people who cant produce enough stomach acids”

          There are a lot more dangers than that. But again, you have to understand basic chemistry and how the body really works to understand why it also increases the risk of cancer, heart disease, allergies, immune suppression, hormone imbalances, neurotransmitter imbalances, decreased collagen synthesis, nutritional deficiencies, etc. Obviously you don’t understand basic chemistry and how the body really works. This is why you keep getting your health information from propaganda filled sales sites.

          Bean: “If u think that the water is dangerous, go ahead and sue them, stop spreading rumors and unproven stuffs on the net like so many other people.”

          You obviously know as little about law as you do health. In order to sue you have to show cause as in proof of your own injury. Since I have never tried the water long term to cause these problems I don’t have cause. Again, you should learn something about what you are posting about before posting such foolish assumptions

          By the same token, if you had even the slightest clue of what you were talking about then you would know that these are not unproven statements but rather well known science and human physiology.

          Bean: “as for how u said it dangerously neutralize stomach acids, it just shows that u are the 1 that did not do any research. Although stomach acids exists at normal time, it is mainly produced when there is food intake.”

          Note your own wording of “mainly”. Thus you are apparently also aware that stomach acid can also be produced even when food is not present. Even drinking water produces stomach acid. And basic proven real science has proven that the stomach acid will neutralize the alkaline water making it no longer alkaline unless the alkaline water dangerously overwhelms the stomach’s acidity.

          • Elizabeth says

            I found reading this interesting until it got to be a full out spat and it was about only refuting another’s claim rather than informing the general public and that person. I don’t credit or discredit the alkaline water community. Honestly I have met many who swear by their water machines and they are radiantly healthy individuals. But it might just be put down to the fact that they are doing themselves the gigantic favor of drinking more water which we should all do. I was looking for information and in the end had to settle for an argument. Will have to go elsewhere to understand the validity of alkaline vs acid.

            • James says

              Hi Elizabeth,

              Addressing your comment about some people using these machines and looking radiantly healthy this does not mean anything. First of all we have to keep in mind that many people who are severely ill can still look radiantly healthy. This is why so many people do not realize they are sick with cancer or other diseases until they go in for routine tests or some trauma or health issue pops up and they end up in the hospital where tests are run.

              In addition people who invest in to these machines thinking they are doing something healthy are likely doing other things for their health such as a better diet, herbs, supplements, exercise, etc. To give credit to a caustic water without any evidence to back this is ridiculous, but people do it all the time Just like the lady who swore up and down that the ionized alkaline water cured her hypothyroidism. Of course the water will not do squat for hypothyroidism. With further questioning low and behold the truth came out. She said she had started feeling better after receiving magnesium injections from her chiropractor. So she continued to supplement with magnesium citrate. Guess what helps support thyroid function? Magnesium!!!

              This is why real scientific evidence is needed instead of assumptions that something is working just because people want to believe that after they plunked down $5,000 on one of these quack devices that it had better do something for their money’s worth! So most people are not going to believe that a $12 bottle of magnesium cured them when they were conned in buying a $5,000 machine to correct what people claim will cure the same health issues.

              On the seller’s side they need to justify their expensive machines. So they use whatever twisted scientific facts or outright bogus science claims counting on people not researching the claims.

              For example, they claim the alkaline water is antioxidant. Have they ever explained this claim scientifically? I have never seen a real explanation. But we know in chemistry that antioxidant means “anti-oxygen”. So an antioxidant would have to neutralize oxygen radicals such as singlet oxygen. But the hydroxyl radicals formed by the disassociation of the mineral (metal) hydroxides in the ionized alkaline water DOES NOT neutralize singlet oxygen. On the other hand the hydrogen ions in the acid water does as pointed out in my earlier post. If the alkaline water peddlers had any proof whatsoever to the contrary then they would have posted the proof. Instead they simply come back with unsupported claims and misinterpretations of the studies they tout.

              This is why I always tell people RESEARCH the claims they read on the internet from credible sources. I even tell people to research my claims because I have already researched the facts from credible medical sources and am confident in my statements. And unlike so many of the people who tend to post on medical topics on blogs and videos I have a very long medical background and do know how to read and understand medical studies.

              Anyway, good luck with your health research.

              James

  51. bean says

    Bean: “It dont have to be severe for our body to start looking for other sources of alkali forming substances, because our body already dont have the means to keep the pH in normal range.”

    James: “Again, the body DOES NOT have to seek out alkali forming substances since virtually all pH regulation is through respiration followed by ion secretion or retention by the kidneys. NO alkaline reserves required and no having to seek out alkaline forming substances in these methods that account for virtually all pH regulation in the body.”

    Bean: ” It might just be normal for a while while our body compensates it and it slowly decreases till below pH 7.35 which doctors may finally start to diagnose it as metabolic acidosis. the reason why people is saying only under EXTREME conditions, that minerals are pulled out is that people can noticed it much easier under such conditions. It doesnt prove that under normal conditions it doesnt happen.”

    James: “Proof goers both ways. There is no proof that this does happen either.”

    while i have no proof of these happening in our body aside from countless pages on internet claimed it to be, but its more logical that it does happen if u look at how a chemical reaction happen, particularly the brownian motion part where the substrates meet.

    our body doesnt have an on-off switch. Its all regulatory mechanisms, which in this case is the buffer systems. The molecules of the buffer systems are free moving in the blood. That means that as long as these molecules of, doesnt matter bicarbonate buffer regulated through resp. and kidneys or the protein buffer systems or any other buffer system meet with acids, IT WILL INTERACT WITH IT. There is no switch to stop the phosphate buffer from interacting with acids, theres no stopping when the molecules of protein buffer meets the acids, IT WILL INTERACT WITH IT. The reason bicarbonate is the main buffer because it existed in a much bigger concentration. IT DOESNT MEANT OTHER BUFFERS ARE NOT WORKING AT THE SAME TIME. And the molecules to create these buffers are replenished at the same time.

    Think logically, when molecules to create these are used more than it is replenished, what will happen ? In my opinion it is happening but only that people are not noticing it until it became EXTREME

    • James says

      Bean: “James: “Proof goers both ways. There is no proof that this does happen either.”

      while i have no proof of these happening in our body aside from countless pages on internet claimed it to be, but its more logical that it does happen if u look at how a chemical reaction happen, particularly the brownian motion part where the substrates meet.”

      Just because some propaganda site on the internet makes a claim this DOES NOT make it true.

      And if you understood even basic chemistry then you would know why your claims have been wrong.

      Bean: “our body doesnt have an on-off switch. Its all regulatory mechanisms”

      Which do have on an of “switches”. These are known as receptors.

      Bean: “which in this case is the buffer systems. The molecules of the buffer systems are free moving in the blood. That means that as long as these molecules of, doesnt matter bicarbonate buffer regulated through resp. and kidneys or the protein buffer systems or any other buffer system meet with acids, IT WILL INTERACT WITH IT. ”

      So what? Part of the reactions of acids in the body with other things is to produce other substances essential to the body and to protect the body from highly alkaline ammonia. These are essential things, not bad things. And again it does not use of alkaline reserves as has been claimed.

      Bean: “There is no switch to stop the phosphate buffer from interacting with acids, theres no stopping when the molecules of protein buffer meets the acids, IT WILL INTERACT WITH IT. The reason bicarbonate is the main buffer because it existed in a much bigger concentration. IT DOESNT MEANT OTHER BUFFERS ARE NOT WORKING AT THE SAME TIME. And the molecules to create these buffers are replenished at the same time. ”

      And again your point? As pointed out respiration and kidney function account for nearly all the pH buffering in the body. Yes, there are other extremely minor pH buffers also at work, which has been explained previously. But again, they are minor buffering systems.

      I did notice you contradicted yourself in the last part of your statement. Previously you claimed the alkaline reserves get used up. But now you state “the molecules to create these buffers are replenished at the same time”. If they are being replenished then how are they being depleted? That is an extremely clear contradiction.

      Bean: “Think logically, when molecules to create these are used more than it is replenished, what will happen ? In my opinion it is happening but only that people are not noticing it until it became EXTREME”

      Yes, think logically for once Bean. Again the primary means of pH regulation that account for virtually all of the body’s pH regulation are respiration and kidney function. NEITHER of these need or have “alkaline reserves”. So where is the proof that any alkaline reserves are being taxed in the body in the majority of individuals? In order to prove that it is happening in the first place you need to provide the evidence, which you have not done. You only keep providing your assumptions.

      • bean says

        To james,

        when u separates my sentences and look at it individually, u managed to implement a new meaning in my sentences. well done james. well done indeed.

        what i meant is that the processes wont stop immediately, completely. and u do understand how receptors work. Through feedback mechanisms. When it is a lot, -ve feedback mechs will signal our body for a reaction in the opposite direction and when its too few, the receptor picks up the signal and causes the other reaction. It is always regulated. Not completely stopped !!!

        i will try to explain it in a simpler way. My bad that u cant understand what i am trying to tell. i thought u are smarter than that.

        since u keep on saying bicarbonate buffer is the main buffer and so on and so on, i will try to use this as an eg.
        lets give a hypothetical value to this buffer, say 70 molecules. If the acids in our body is more than 70 ? say 100, where do other 30 will go ? and keep in mind that acids doesnt choose which buffer system to neutralize them.

        this is the part i need to stress again and again and again. If your body uses more of the alkalies than it is replenished through diet everyday, there will be a day when these run out. and even before it run out, it would have already caused some damages.

        If u still didnt see the big picture, i give another eg. for u.
        Lets say u kept 100grand in a bank. each day u withdraw 10g and only put back in 9g. Do you think your money can last forever ?

        The sentences below are discussing about the same thing. and u manage to separate them and said i contradicted myself. ANOTHER JOB WELL DONE by james
        Bean: “There is no switch to stop the phosphate buffer from interacting with acids, theres no stopping when the molecules of protein buffer meets the acids, IT WILL INTERACT WITH IT. The reason bicarbonate is the main buffer because it existed in a much bigger concentration. IT DOESNT MEANT OTHER BUFFERS ARE NOT WORKING AT THE SAME TIME. And the molecules to create these buffers are replenished at the same time. ”
        Bean: “Think logically, when molecules to create these are used more than it is replenished, what will happen ? In my opinion it is happening but only that people are not noticing it until it became EXTREME”

        my bad if u really cant understand, next time i will make sure i write it more clearly JUST FOR U, james.

        while resp. and kidney are the two main organs for bicarbonate buffer system, overwork of any organ in our body always leads to fatigue and eventually failure of the organ itself. in my opinion, this only further justify the need to reduce acid intake. i have no proof that alkaline reserve are being taxed, but its same as u have no proof that it isnt. Thats why i try to explain it to you over and over again. My way of explaining is much more logical than yours. Can u prove to me that if an acid meets a base, a reaction wont take place ? So logically speaking, if there is too much acids, the chances of these reactions will happen will increase accordingly too. And thus, the birth of the “HYPOTHESIS” to reduce acids for a healthier life.

        while i am providing assumptions, so does u. U assume that the bicarbonates regulated by resp. and kidneys are infinite and no matter how much acids u take in, they will be the ones that completely neutralizes it all.

        • James says

          Bean: “when u separates my sentences and look at it individually, u managed to implement a new meaning in my sentences.”

          Not doing that at all. I am reading them exactly as they are written. You just keep twisting things to make it sound like you said something else when you get making stuff up. Just like you kept claiming the studies I presented on collagen loss and osteoporosis said things that are not found ANYWHERE in the studies. Lying like that does not support your position, it just proves how unethical you really are.

          Bean: “Through feedback mechanisms. When it is a lot, -ve feedback mechs will signal our body for a reaction in the opposite direction and when its too few, the receptor picks up the signal and causes the other reaction. It is always regulated. Not completely stopped !!!”

          Thanks for contradicting yourself again. Before you claimed that the body can use up its alkaline reserves, which would stop the process if the claim were true to begin with. Now you are claiming processes are never completely stop. So again, you change your wording to fit your needs. Typical of people who don’t have a clue of what they are talking about.

          Bean: “i will try to explain it in a simpler way. My bad that u cant understand what i am trying to tell. i thought u are smarter than that.

          since u keep on saying bicarbonate buffer is the main buffer and so on and so on, i will try to use this as an eg.
          lets give a hypothetical value to this buffer, say 70 molecules. If the acids in our body is more than 70 ? say 100, where do other 30 will go ? and keep in mind that acids doesnt choose which buffer system to neutralize them.”

          Are you seriously that dumb?!! You keep referring to the bicarbonate system, which tells me that you at least know this is tied to respiration. But the body has several bicarbonate systems, which is why I refer specifically to respiration as being the main means of pH regulation

          I already know you will not listen to me so I found a detailed explanation for you about how respiration works. And since I already know you have a reading comprehension problem I found you a video instead with pictures.:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHWXbqRz5y4

          As we can see carbonic acid and bicarbonate go back and forth and no alkaline reserves are used up as you falsely claim in the process. The kidneys take up much of the remaining task of pH regulation. And again, no reserves are used up as you again falsely claim.

          Bean: “The reason bicarbonate is the main buffer because it existed in a much bigger concentration.”

          Maybe it is bigger because it is so important as a pH regulator being that this is the main means of pH regulation.

          Bean: “IT DOESNT MEANT OTHER BUFFERS ARE NOT WORKING AT THE SAME TIME.”

          ROTFLMAO!!! I never claimed they were not. In fact, I have made it EXTREMELY clear that the body has multiple pH regulators. So once again Bean is caught red handed twisting what was really said to fit his needs instead of being honest about what was really said.

          Just because it is pointed out numerous times the body’s primary means of pH regulation are respiration and kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions, this does not mean they are the only active buffers. NOBODY ever claimed this as Bean is trying to falsely imply. But the other buffering systems are minor systems, not primary. So why does Bean keep trying to twist what was really said rather than just being honest?

          Bean: “And the molecules to create these buffers are replenished at the same time.”

          And again, so there is no depletion of buffers as Bean earlier claimed in a contradictory statement.

          Bean: “while resp. and kidney are the two main organs for bicarbonate buffer system, overwork of any organ in our body always leads to fatigue and eventually failure of the organ itself.”

          Which MAY be true if they were actually being overworked. But you still have to prove that acidosis is as common as you imply, which you have not and cannot do!

          Bean: “i have no proof that alkaline reserve are being taxed”

          Exactly, but you keep making this sound like a fact with your assumptions.

          Bean: “but its same as u have no proof that it isnt”

          Actually, since respiration and kidney ion retention or elimination account for nearly all the pH regulation in the body and neither have so-called “alkaline reserves”. So that is pretty strong evidence against your assumption.

          Bean: “My way of explaining is much more logical than yours.”

          Assumptions presented as “evidence” is hardly logical. More like completely ridiculous.

          Bean: “Can u prove to me that if an acid meets a base, a reaction wont take place ? ”

          Science has already proven that a reaction does take place between an alkaline substance and an acid substance. I even gave you multiple examples of this including how ionized alkaline water neutralizes stomach acid. Why are you pretending to be such an idiot? Or are you even pretending?

          Bean: “So logically speaking, if there is too much acids, the chances of these reactions will happen will increase accordingly too. And thus, the birth of the “HYPOTHESIS” to reduce acids for a healthier life.”

          You still have to prove the acidosis you keep claiming in the first place, which you have NEVER done, nor can you do since the acidic food causing acidosis claims are myths.

          Bean: “while i am providing assumptions, so does u. U assume that the bicarbonates regulated by resp. and kidneys are infinite and no matter how much acids u take in, they will be the ones that completely neutralizes it all.”

          See my last statement again. You are basing your assumptions on a myth.

  52. bean says

    To james,

    Quoted from james
    “And then look at amino acids, which are actually broken down in to highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia. ”

    this is a process called deamination. It happens when there is an excess of proteins. Again it supports the alkaline diet theory where too much acids is not good for our body.

    • James says

      Bean: “Quoted from james
      “And then look at amino acids, which are actually broken down in to highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia. ”

      this is a process called deamination. It happens when there is an excess of proteins. Again it supports the alkaline diet theory where too much acids is not good for our body.”

      ROTFLMAO!!!!! You are wrong on several points Bean.

      First, this is not just from an excess of protein. The body is always breaking down old cells to replace with new ones. This also provides a source of ammonia.

      Secondly, ammonia IS NOT an acid. So how does this in YOUR own words “supports the alkaline diet theory where too much acids is not good for our body”? Do you realize how toxic ammonia is to the body?

      • bean says

        To james,

        DUDEEEEEEEEE,
        I am refering to AMINO ACIDS, not ammonia. Do u think i am so blind that i cant see u wrote “highly alkaline”

        so our body already produces HIGHLY TOXIC ammonia, and u think its not a good approach to reduce excess amino acids which can further increase these highly toxic ammonia ?

        OMGGGGG
        PLease stop these futile attempts at trying to win at every argument.

        BTW, “Deamination is the process by which amino acids are broken down if there is an excess of protein intake.” from wikipedia. Thats all i wanted to say, i never asked what are other sources of ammonia.

        while u said i lie, manipulate, bla bla bla…
        and in this case, u said i am wrong on several points, which i just proved to u that i am not,
        u, on the other hand just showed another classic eg. of how u direct the discussion to other stuffs as what u have been doing ever since the start, and i have been pointing it out to you.

        • James says

          Bean: “I am refering to AMINO ACIDS, not ammonia. Do u think i am so blind that i cant see u wrote “highly alkaline””

          Well, you do clearly have a comprehension problem.

          To start with the toxicity IS NOT from the amino acids but the highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia produced from their breakdown. This is why the toxic ammonia is converted in to beneficial uric acid, which among other things is one of the body’s primary antioxidants. In the process one acid is traded to form another while eliminating the toxic alkaline ammonia in the process.

          Bean: “and u think its not a good approach to reduce excess amino acids which can further increase these highly toxic ammonia ?”

          Again a comprehension problem. To start with even if you cut out protein intake the body is still going to produce ammonia. But the body has a means to deal with the toxic ammonia and create a beneficial compound in the process. If you knew anything about how the body really works then you would have known all this.

          Bean: “OMGGGGG
          PLease stop these futile attempts at trying to win at every argument.”

          I am not trying, I am. You have been proven wrong so many times already yet you keep up with YOUR futile attempts to win every argument. The reason your attempts are so futile is that you keep relying on assumptions as evidence while I keep relying on scientific evidence. Scientific evidence always trumps assumptions.

          The rest of your post is not worth responding to. It is just more rhetoric trying to go off topic and make things personal since you cannot argue the actual topic due to lack of any evidence to back your assumptions.

  53. bean says

    To james,

    As i said again… the way they measure (by food ash) whether the food is more acidic or alkaline may be wrong, but that doesnt prove that food can be net forming acids or bases.

    alkaline diet MAIN point is that food that net forming bases will be better for health.

    and yes, the alkaline food will be metabolized to be acids and be used by our body, but it is much much much muchhhhh lesser than those net acid forming food. remember the word net forming ?

    To answer your question on the milk calcium thing, while searching for how protein interferes with calcium absorption, almost every page on google gave the following explanation :

    high amounts of animal protein depletes calcium from the body into the kidneys leaving calcium deficient bones and increased kidney stones. The high acid in protein foods withdraws calcium from bones to balance the pH in the blood. Acid forming foods also creates excess uric acid, which builds up in muscles and organs causing pain and congestion

    while i know this doesnt answer your question, i just want to show u that a lot of studies have been made on how different food can cause different diseases for a very very long time. It just that until recently people find the common thing in these food is that it is net acid forming.

    ps: lots of stuffs u explained cant be found in the internet. i am sorry i am just not as educated as u. God knows where your knowledge of them came from.

    and u dont have to add a comment to every sentence i made. some comments u made just further explains my statements and it made the comments really really long and difficult for for other readers.

    if u want to see eg. :

    me-
    “what i was trying to meant is that stomach acids provides an acidic environment and the food are stilled absorbed as its simplest form. ”

    you-
    “Yes, but as I said the acidity serves multiple purposes. As far as digestion and absorption its role is in the breakdown of proteins and acidification of minerals to make them more absorbable and to enhance absorption of some vitamins.

    As for the absorption of other things, yes they are absorbed in their broken down forms. Not all of these require stomach acid though.”

    my main point is that “it is absorbed in its simplest form”, but u went and explain so many other stuffs just to agree with me in the end. U dont have to do that.

    me-
    “As far as i know minerals are absorbed in the ionized form. (eg. ca2+, mg2+) it will form salts but when it passes through membranes, it will dissociates and still transported as ions. ”

    You-
    “Yes, but some salts are easier to disassociate, which again is why the reaction of minerals with stomach acid enhance their absorption.”

    These are just a few of the eg., i am sure u dont need me to copy paste everything here right ?
    u add a comment to almost every sentence i made. please stop it if your answer is not going to contradict my answer. Try to keep it to the main point of the arguement

    • James says

      Bean: “As i said again… the way they measure (by food ash) whether the food is more acidic or alkaline may be wrong, but that doesnt prove that food can be net forming acids or bases. ”

      And it does not prove they do either. What we do know though is that if you sit down and eat a cheeseburger or spinach these WILL NOT alter your blood pH because again the body maintains its pH balance regardless of what you eat.

      And since you admit you cannot prove your assumptions stop trying to pass them off as facts!!!

      Bean: “alkaline diet MAIN point is that food that net forming bases will be better for health.”

      Again, in order to prove this ASSUMPTION you still have to prove that there is a higher “net forming base”, which you have NO evidence for. Then you would have to still prove that this is leading to health benefits. Alkaline does not necessarily mean healthy. In fact, most of the most toxic compounds found in plants are alkaline alkaloids. If you feel your claims are true then lets see some REAL scientific evidence rather than worthless assumptions!!!

      Bean: “and yes, the alkaline food will be metabolized to be acids and be used by our body, but it is much much much muchhhhh lesser than those net acid forming food. remember the word net forming ?”

      Once again, is this assumption or something backed with REAL scientific evidence?

      For example, you keep claiming that “acid forming” foods lead to bone loss. Yet you keep ignoring my question as to how athletes maintain such a high bone density despite the assumed “acidic diet”. So again, what is your explanation?

      Bean: “To answer your question on the milk calcium thing, while searching for how protein interferes with calcium absorption, almost every page on google gave the following explanation :

      high amounts of animal protein depletes calcium from the body into the kidneys leaving calcium deficient bones and increased kidney stones. The high acid in protein foods withdraws calcium from bones to balance the pH in the blood. Acid forming foods also creates excess uric acid, which builds up in muscles and organs causing pain and congestion”

      ROTFLMAO!!!! You are reading propaganda sites again. That is not even close to being true!!! Look up the REAL science. The real answer has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with blood pH!!!

      Bean: “while i know this doesnt answer your question, i just want to show u that a lot of studies have been made on how different food can cause different diseases for a very very long time.”

      You clearly were not reading actual, real scientific studies since the information was completely bogus. REAL science can explain the real reason though. You just need to do some research from some credible sites instead of propaganda sites.

      Bean: “It just that until recently people find the common thing in these food is that it is net acid forming.”

      You mean they are guessing this since there is no REAL scientific evidence backing these assumptions.

      Bean: “ps: lots of stuffs u explained cant be found in the internet. i am sorry i am just not as educated as u. God knows where your knowledge of them came from.”

      Not everything on the internet is correct. There is a lot of health fraud. For example, the whole acid-alkaline diet myth. Or the bogus claims that acidity causes cancer or osteoporosis. Etc. This is also why you have so many “health” sites making contradictory claims from other “health” sites. There is a whole lot of guessing going on and virtually no fact checking by people.

      As for where my knowledge came from it is from being in medicine for nearly 34 years and spending a hell of a lot of time doing research from actual medical studies instead of propaganda and sales sites.

  54. says

    Dear Mr. Bean,

    I believe what you claimed as a contradiction what James or other James said and what he stated from his comment does not necessarily conflict in my opinion. Since everyone wants to carpet bomb him, let me be the one to be on his side for once at least.

    As I understand it, he says it may affect but this effect takes a very long time and in extreme situations may be observed. So in generalizations we do not speak of exceptions, do we?Simple is that.

    He can correct me as he wants.
    Regards, Korkut

    • bean says

      dear korkut,

      what he says about the effects will take a long time and under extreme conditions is about metabolic acidosis which leads to osteoporosis not about food will affect pH. He never once admitted that food does affects pH but once in a while accidentally contradicts himself in his arguement.

      • says

        Dear Bean and James,

        I love to follow you guys both and I am not taking sides. Just keep going.

        In the meantime, I believe anything and everything can be depleted in human body by cuisine and food selection or by other environmental effects.
        James would remember, B12 is critical for nerve protection and it is widely medicated for diabetes type II. Similarly, insulin is produced from cromium and lack of mineral cromium intake will wear the body in the long run for such patients. So shall we deduce lack of some alkali might just lead to acidosis in the long run? At least on a probability thought level?

        Last for your acne, you can try Ag+ as well. It is a bacteria killer in its best form. Dont use tap water but distilled water and good quality silver. Easy to form by 32 V DV voltage in pure water preferably pre-microwaved but away from UV. Good for hard to reach locations of the body by antibiotics such as throat, inner ear, face, etc. Brown and blue glass it should be kept in.

        I am not necessarily a “homeosympathetic” for the record.

        Regards,
        Korkut

        • bean says

          dear korkut

          thx for the info. i will try it out. My acne has almost cleared out. It only comes back when i had lots of beer or eat junk food

          something about you can help make peace in dire situations. i admire that.

      • James says

        Bean: “what he says about the effects will take a long time and under extreme conditions is about metabolic acidosis which leads to osteoporosis not about food will affect pH. He never once admitted that food does affects pH but once in a while accidentally contradicts himself in his arguement.”

        Bean, As explained to you already osteoporosis IS NOT the result of acidosis. In fact, a lack of ascorbic acid and/or orthosilicic acid are the primary causes of osteoporosis. Again, learn how the body really works instead of guessing.

        In fact, acidosis does not cause any significant bone loss. It takes extreme acidosis to cause any bone loss since bone is the last resort for pH buffering. And if the person’s acidosis is that bad then they have more important things to worry about. Especially considering how little bone loss will occur from the extreme acidosis.

        I have not contradicted myself either. You just keep twisting things to try and make a point since you cannot rely on real evidence to back your claims.

        • bean says

          To james,

          to clarify to you, you yourself said that acids might only start to leech minerals from bones under EXTREME conditions. does this RING A BELL to u ?

          i can find and copy paste for u exactly the comment which u said it but i am lazy. But i will do it for u if u want.

          oh wait, u just said it again right below on the 3rd paragraph that extreme acidosis causes osteoporosis. Normally, i would like to delete all the words above but since i have already spend energy on it, i decided to not delete the sentences above and just leave it for displaying purposes.

          i didnt twist anything. well, maybe i might have twisted a little here and there, i am not sure. Show me where i twisted your statements and i will apologize to u.

          again, please please refrain the word “real science”, acids does have effect on the bones, only that it is more prominent when it is severe. and u CANT prove that osteoporosis may be the effect of acids leeching minerals over the years is wrong.

          PS: the comment above was made because korkut thinks that u said food will affect pH if its very long and under extreme conditions, so i reply saying that what u meant by the very long and under extreme conditions is about metabolic acidosis. I am not trying to bombard u or anything in that comment. I was solely trying to explain to korkut what u meant by the very long and under extreme conditions thing.

          • James says

            Bean: “to clarify to you, you yourself said that acids might only start to leech minerals from bones under EXTREME conditions. does this RING A BELL to u ?”

            Yes, I have always stated that bone buffering is a LAST RESORT method of buffering. Therefore, it requires very extreme acidosis and is more rare than the already EXTREMELY rare acidosis.

            Bean: “i can find and copy paste for u exactly the comment which u said it but i am lazy. But i will do it for u if u want.”

            Nah, that is alright. I would hate to see you strain that last active brain cell.

            Bean: “oh wait, u just said it again right below on the 3rd paragraph that extreme acidosis causes osteoporosis.”

            Where? In the paragraph above your post here is my quote about osteoporosis:

            “Bean, As explained to you already osteoporosis IS NOT the result of acidosis. In fact, a lack of ascorbic acid and/or orthosilicic acid are the primary causes of osteoporosis. Again, learn how the body really works instead of guessing.

            In fact, acidosis does not cause any significant bone loss. It takes extreme acidosis to cause any bone loss since bone is the last resort for pH buffering. And if the person’s acidosis is that bad then they have more important things to worry about. Especially considering how little bone loss will occur from the extreme acidosis.”

            Wow, NOWHERE in my statement do I claim acidosis is the cause of osteoporosis as you falsely claim. I do state that a lack of one or two ACIDS can lead to osteoporosis.

            And I also CLEARLY state that “little bone loss will occur from the extreme acidosis.”

            And on March 18th I also CLEARLY state: “In addition, osteoporosis IS NOT a loss of bone minerals and so has NOTHING to do with acidosis.”

            What part of “NOTHING to do with acidosis” did you not understand?

            On July 27th I state: “Evidence? A lack of ascorbic acid, amino acids, and especially orthosilicic acid will lead to osteoporosis, but that is as close to having to do with pH as it gets.”

            Again NOTHING stating acidosis causing osteoporosis.

            In fact I ran a search for the word ‘osteoporosis” and looked at all the posts where that word was. NOT even a single post from myself states anywhere “extreme acidosis causes osteoporosis” as you claim. So why are you lying about what was really said yet again? Are you really so desperate to win an argument that you would go to these lengths? Have you ever thought about maybe trying to back up your claims with real scientific evidence instead of just making up lies about what was really said?

            Bean: “Show me where i twisted your statements and i will apologize to u”

            I just gave you a great example. But I am not going to go back and look up all the past examples again since I already addressed them before and frankly it is not worth wasting more of my time over. As people read through the posts they will see for themselves.

            Bean: “again, please please refrain the word “real science”, acids does have effect on the bones, only that it is more prominent when it is severe. ”

            What is ironic here is that REAL science has proven that acids have an effect on bone. Problem is that it is not acids in the blood. Bone cells secrete acid to break down old bone to be replaced with new healthy bone. A process known as remodeling. Again, this has NOTHING to do with acidosis, which is EXTREMELY rare. The excessive acidosis required to have any effect on bone is even more rare. So you have a better chance of winning the lottery than you do ever meeting anyone who has had severe enough acidosis to cause buffering from bones. Again, do some real research and stop relying on propaganda sites for your health assumptions.

            Bean: “and u CANT prove that osteoporosis may be the effect of acids leeching minerals over the years is wrong.”

            Actually it is not only easy to disprove your assumption, it has already been done. As has been proven osteoporosis is a loss of collagen matrix leading to decreased bone mineralization. It is not a loss of minerals from bone, which are osteopenia and osteomalacia. And the primary causes of collagen loss are a lack f ascorbic ACID and/or orthosilicic ACID!!! Even severe acidosis DOES NOT cause collagen loss. Should not be that hard for a person to comprehend.

        • bean says

          since u said u never contraindicated yourself, i went and find these out for u.

          James : “Yes and no. The main effect ALL foods provide as far as pH goes is the fact that all foods are metabolized in to acids in the long run, many of which are essential to our health, energy production and existence.”

          Bean: “quoted from your statement,
          “The main effect ALL foods provide as far as pH goes is the fact that all foods are metabolized in to acids in the long run, many of which are essential to our health, energy production and existence.”
          Bean: “doesnt this meant that certain food will increase acids in the body ? ”

          James : “Yes, acids we can exist or function without. And yes, there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. But this is why the body has so many redundant systems to maintain its required acidity level.”

          Both statement given by you meant food will turn into acids which justifies food does affect pH

          • bean says

            this is another eg.

            james: “One form that is very poorly absorbed (the alkaline form) and one that is highly absorbed (the acidic form). This higher levels of the acidic form will reach the blood and thus more of the excess gets excreted when the body cannot utilize it”

            this is on a topic about calcium retention and incidentally showed that food affects blood pH, this is the reply by james

            • James says

              Bean: ”

              this is another eg.

              james: “One form that is very poorly absorbed (the alkaline form) and one that is highly absorbed (the acidic form). This higher levels of the acidic form will reach the blood and thus more of the excess gets excreted when the body cannot utilize it”

              this is on a topic about calcium retention and incidentally showed that food affects blood pH, this is the reply by james”

              So what is the problem? I was explaining one of the major errors the researchers of the study you posted made. Thus the study DID NOT back your claim of acidosis causing bone loss.

          • James says

            Bean: “Bean: “quoted from your statement,
            “The main effect ALL foods provide as far as pH goes is the fact that all foods are metabolized in to acids in the long run, many of which are essential to our health, energy production and existence.”
            Bean: “doesnt this meant that certain food will increase acids in the body ? ””

            No. You are overlooking a simple concept called “balance”. Any tiny increase in acidity will be met with an increased elimination of acid, usually by increased respiration to maintain that balance.

            Let me give you an analogy that may make this concept easier for you to understand. Let’s say you go out in a boat each day to the middle of a lake with a water inlet and a water outlet. If you dumped a bag of salt in to the lake each day for even for a thousand years if possible would the lake ever become salty? Of course not. The lake is going to maintain its fresh state by constantly having fresh water coming in flushing the salt out of the lake through the outlet of the lake. So the same thing is going on in the body. Even though all foods are being metabolized in to acids, not all those acids are entering the blood. And the ones that do end up in the blood are partially utilized and the rest eliminated almost entirely through respiration followed by kidney elimination of hydrogen ions. On the opposite end if the blood starts to become to alkaline then respiration decreases and kidneys start to retain hydrogen ions thus bringing the acidity back up. Thus the pH is constantly regulated so that neither acidosis nor alkalosis occur except in EXTREMELY rare instances such as some poisonings or diabetic ketoacidosis. Simply eating foods will not induce acidosis since again the body excretes or retains what it needs to maintain the narrow pH range it requires to survive.

            Bean: “James : “Yes, acids we can exist or function without. And yes, there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. But this is why the body has so many redundant systems to maintain its required acidity level.”

            Both statement given by you meant food will turn into acids which justifies food does affect pH”

            You are stretching things again to fit your needs. I have said in the past that yes foods will metabolize in to acids essential to the body. This includes carbonic acid necessary for various things in the body and that does alter blood pH to help the body to maintain the pH it requires for survival. But as I also said diet will not have any significant direct effect on blood pH. Blood pH is maintained primarily through respiration followed by kidney excretion or retention of hydrogen ions. None of this has anything to do with diet supposedly alkalizing the blood and does not involve using up alkaline reserves as you claimed previously. Any role diet will play in alkalizing any part of the body will be indirect and minor. For example, diet can provide the amino acids that eventually lead to the formation of albumin, which in turn has a minor effect in buffering acids. The “alkaline ash” IS NOT having any direct or major effect on pH regulation of the blood.

            And you keep overlooking the simple fact that if any excess acids end up in the blood it is promptly reduced. This is why everyone is not dropping dead immediately from eating since ALL foods are metabolized in to acids.

  55. bean says

    To james,

    As to your question on “But explain to everyone here how it is that athletes with high protein consumption, which is considered acidic, still maintain a high bone density if your hypothesis is true?”

    if u claimed that u study so much articles on human body, u, yourself already know the answers.

    its our body’s compensatory mechanism that takes place. when we uses particular part of our body more, our body will grow accordingly. eg. if we use our biceps more, it will grow stronger (hypertrophy), and vice versa, if u dont use it, it will undergo atrophy.

    while high protein consumption is recommended for athletes, to repair tissue damage and for muscle growth etc, the diet is optimal for them, but its a totally different story for people who doesnt exercise, i am sure i dont have to explain this right ?

    Too much protein actually supports the acid-alkaline theory if u think about it carefully.

    • James says

      Bean: “As to your question on “But explain to everyone here how it is that athletes with high protein consumption, which is considered acidic, still maintain a high bone density if your hypothesis is true?”

      if u claimed that u study so much articles on human body, u, yourself already know the answers.”

      Yes, I have known the answer for a very long time. And it has NOTHING to do with pH. So why are you dancing around answering my question for you? Because you don’t understand how the body really works as I have pointed out so many times?

      Bean: “while high protein consumption is recommended for athletes, to repair tissue damage and for muscle growth etc, the diet is optimal for them, but its a totally different story for people who doesnt exercise, i am sure i dont have to explain this right ? ”

      Trust me, knowing how little you understand the human body I definitely don’t want you trying to explain anything. I prefer facts to fairytales.

      For example, a high protein intake does not benefit athletes anymore that the average person. The average person can only utilize roughly 3 ounces of protein daily. Even top athletes only roughly 3.5 ounces of protein daily. Anything in excess is just waste to the body that the body then has to deal with spending energy to eliminate.

      Bean: “Too much protein actually supports the acid-alkaline theory if u think about it carefully.”

      Actually anyone really thinking factually about this would realize that this does not support the acid-alkaline HYPOTHESIS (Its not a theory, learn the difference!!!).

      Let’s see how smart you really are Bean. What is the highly toxic ALKALINE byproduct of the breakdown of protein’s amino acids? What are the two mechanisms by which protein directly and indirectly regulate pH? be very careful on how you answer this if you don’t want to make yourself look a lot more foolish.

      • bean says

        To james,

        there isnt a value to “high protein intake”
        i was just using back the words used by u. u used high protein intake so i used back the same. But it was understandable by anyone(maybe aside from u) that high protein intake means a diet that has increase percentage of protein compared to normal diet. But “high” has never has a value besides from what we humans valued it. To us, the “high” here, we understand it by higher than normal but its in optimal range. A “high value” which has been calculated by professionals and shared to the world. I didnt know how “high” is your value of protein intake. If the “high” is what u claimed it to be, everyone in the internet and books, or whatever papers will have to write a “higher protein intake which is not too high to be in excess” Imagine, the headline of a magazine, ” a higher protein intake which is not too high to be in excess helps athletes” its understandable that theres a limit to how high it can be, and need not written it down.

        what given in your statement meant athletes utilize more protein than a normal sedentary person.

        which is what i have been trying to explain to u, that the calculated “high protein intake” is optimal for the athletes (not in excess) to be utilize in different functions, eg muscle repair/growth and wont results in excess, unlike for normal people which will results in excess.

        and by why i said it actually supports the acid/alkaline diet “hypothesis”, is because

        quoted by you
        “Anything in excess is just waste to the body that the body then has to deal with spending energy to eliminate.”

        thats why, the “hypothesis” to reduce these net acid forming food is formed.

        PS : i am not smart. I never claimed i am. I never tried to look that way either. If u are trying to make me look foolish, good job, keep up the good work.

        • James says

          Bean: “there isnt a value to “high protein intake”
          i was just using back the words used by u. u used high protein intake so i used back the same. But it was understandable by anyone(maybe aside from u) that high protein intake means a diet that has increase percentage of protein compared to normal diet…………………..”

          Your rambling did not answer my question. Again, if protein intake causes acidosis as you claim and acidosis causes bone loss as you claim then how come athletes who tend to eat way more protein daily than the body can use do not end up with bone loss? Instead they have INCREASED bone density despite what you claim would be a highly acidic, bone depleting diet.

  56. bean says

    To james,

    if food doesnt affects pH, explain the treatment of metabolic acidosis, particularly in the oral form, sodium bicarbonate/potassium citrate etc.

    although those salts doesnt necessarily meant food, but u get where i am going at. Please dont reply that sodium bicarbonate etc are not food, i get it. Please short and simple, straight to the point, please dont explain other stuffs.

    • James says

      Bean: “if food doesnt affects pH, explain the treatment of metabolic acidosis, particularly in the oral form, sodium bicarbonate/potassium citrate etc.

      although those salts doesnt necessarily meant food, but u get where i am going at. Please dont reply that sodium bicarbonate etc are not food, i get it. Please short and simple, straight to the point, please dont explain other stuffs.”

      Do you even understand metabolic acidosis? If you think you do then you answer first what this has to do with diet to begin with.

      For example, if someone develops metabolic acidosis from drinking antifreeze then this is not diet induced. And as you pointed out the bicarbonates and citrates are not food. So what does this have to do with the topic?

      Furthermore, are you aware that the bicarbonates can induce acidosis?

      So I can see you are trying desperately to stretch things to make a point over things you really do not understand as usual. Just like in your last post where you tried to falsely claim that the study you posted proved foods do affect pH. The study made NO such claim or even implied it. You just keep twisting information to fit your needs.

      If you would spent as much time learning how the body really works as you do trying to argue over things you clearly do not understand then you would save both of us a lot of time.

      • bean says

        Dear my lovely james,

        i am at the verge of becoming crazy explaining to u not the hypothesis and stuffs, but in the questions itself.

        these are salts that go in through our alimentary canal right ? these are absorbed through the same mechanisms as other food right ? (through digestive system) these can increase blood pH right ?

        if u still cant understand my question, think of it as this way. If a food contains these elements or form these elements when absorbed into the blood, doesnt it increase the pH of the blood ?

        i dont know bicarbonates induce acidosis, but i do know that induces alkalosis. Normally i would like you to prove that it does induce acidosis but its irrelevant to the main topic so u can skip it.

        what do u meant by stretching things to make a point ? this is by far my most logical hypothesis to food does affects pH.

        i have to clarify here. i did not claim the stdy prove food affects pH. In fact, i even wrote that I KNOW that the stdy is NOT about food and pH but its about calcium retention. All i wanted is just to flash some accidental findings to your face. and again, i did not twist it.(evidence below)

        “While searching for how minerals are pulled out from bones, i accidentally came across this from ncbi.”
        “However this is a study about calcium retention not whether food affects acidity.”

        if u think i twisted it by copy paste some parts and not the other parts, press ctl+f and copy paste the sentence above to find the full comment.

        this is by far the lowest form i can go… i cant believe i have to go so low as to copy paste and find out where the comment i posted just to justify myself. i dont know why i keep on engaging in these useless argument with a person who is not open to new ideas. and worse, would go so low to defame other people.

        TQ james for bringing out the ugly side in me.

        • James says

          Bean: “these are salts that go in through our alimentary canal right ? ”

          Yes.

          Bean: “these are absorbed through the same mechanisms as other food right ? ”

          Not really. But I am not going to go in to a long explanation of the absorption of different food compounds since there are so many different food components absorbed by different means.

          Bean: “these can increase blood pH right ?”

          Not really. Have you ever heard of hyperchloremic acidosis? It can be caused by the consumption of chloride salts, the most commonly consumed. And some other salts, such as magnesium sulfate can also create acid. So can the salt, sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) that most people consider alkalizing.

          But let’s say that salt was alkalizing as you are implying. In that case beef, which is full of sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium salts should be considered an alkaline food. Yet people who have fallen for the alkaline diet myth say beef is acid. Again a great example of people relying on assumptions instead of REAL science.

          Bean: “i dont know bicarbonates induce acidosis, but i do know that induces alkalosis”

          The risk of acidosis is dependent on several factors including the dosage and the method of administration. Administration by injection or IV can lead to acidosis from carbonic acid formation. Ingestion of baking soda is more apt to cause hyperchloremic acidosis from the sodium chloride formed by reaction with stomach acid.

          Bean: “i have to clarify here. i did not claim the stdy prove food affects pH. In fact, i even wrote that I KNOW that the stdy is NOT about food and pH but its about calcium retention. All i wanted is just to flash some accidental findings to your face. and again, i did not twist it.”

          Just because the title of a study sounds like it will back your assumption this does not mean it will. You need to actually read and understand the studies you are going to post as evidence. Again, the study you posted did not back your assumption and was heavily flawed to begin with.

          As far as wanting to “flash some accidental findings to your face”, this is not debate. This is game playing and simply wastes my time and makes you look foolish.

          Bean: “TQ james for bringing out the ugly side in me.”

          Nobody can bring out someone else’s ugly side. Only the person can do that themselves. That is like the addict claiming someone else forced them to shove the cocaine up their nose when they chose to do it themself. Don’t blame others for your bad behavior since as an adult you are responsible for your own behavior.

  57. bean says

    To James,

    u are really stubborn. i have to admit it u are the most stubborn person i ever met.
    and some of your answers doesnt really answers my questions

    while u yourself indirectly said food will increase acid contents in the body, and while i showed what u yourself wrote and asked for clarification, u gave an answer which is totally unrelated. all i want is just for u to clarify it. Not for u to explain acid-alkaline balance all over again

    Quoted from what u wrote again
    “One form that is very poorly absorbed (the alkaline form) and one that is highly absorbed (the acidic form). This higher levels of the acidic form will reach the blood and thus more of the excess gets excreted when the body cannot utilize it. ”

    this is your statement when i posted the ncbi’s report on some calcium retention stuffs which showed food affects pH. And again, what u wrote (above) again shows food does affect pH.
    Now that i realize it, your replies are always like this, u are trying to direct us to another point while giving contradicting statements yourself

    • bean says

      To everyone else who stumble upon the comment above, and have no time to read our full comment since the start, the statement in (” “) is actually the 2nd totally different statement given by james which again supports that food does affect pH.

    • James says

      Bean: “u are really stubborn. i have to admit it u are the most stubborn person i ever met.”

      Apparently you have never looked in the mirror. Yet here you are still arguing over things that you don’t understand as we will see.

      Bean: “and some of your answers doesnt really answers my questions”

      It is not my job to answer all your questions. But have you considered that the problem can also be that you don’t understand the answers? Again you give an example in the post I am responding to.

      Bean: “while u yourself indirectly said food will increase acid contents in the body, and while i showed what u yourself wrote and asked for clarification, u gave an answer which is totally unrelated. all i want is just for u to clarify it. Not for u to explain acid-alkaline balance all over again”

      One example of your not understanding an answer. Yes, ALL foods eventually metabolize in to acids. The things you don’t seem to understand are:

      -Not all those acids reach the blood, and when talking about pH balance we are talking about blood pH.

      -That the body needs various acids to exist, function and remain healthy. One of those primary acids is carbonic acid, which is produced by the metabolism of foods.The body uses what it needs and readily eliminates the rest thus maintaining a pH imbalance. If carbonic acids go dangerously low then the body starts retaining more CO2 to build up carbonic acid thus maintaining balance. Thus pH is maintained by maintaining carbonic acid levels. Minerals from the diet are not making this regulation as claimed and there is no direct role of diet in pH regulation as I said, or more specifically no significant alkalizing effect.

      Bean: “Quoted from what u wrote again
      “One form that is very poorly absorbed (the alkaline form) and one that is highly absorbed (the acidic form). This higher levels of the acidic form will reach the blood and thus more of the excess gets excreted when the body cannot utilize it. ”

      this is your statement when i posted the ncbi’s report on some calcium retention stuffs which showed food affects pH. And again, what u wrote (above) again shows food does affect pH.”

      Again, another great example of your lack of comprehension. The study you posted was full of errors as I pointed out. And it DID NOT show that anything altered the blood pH.

      I will try to explain this super simple concept to you once more and hopefully you will get it this time.

      The one form of calcium they used was well known for being poorly absorbed. Thus very little of this calcium would have made it in to the blood.

      The second form of calcium was pre-acidified and thus it did not inhibit absorption like the first calcium by neutralizing stomach acid. This this second form of calcium was absorbed significantly better. But the body can only utilize so much calcium at one time and there is a very dangerous condition known as hypercalcemia (excessive calcium) that can cause all sorts of side effects such as high blood pressure, constipation, confusion, muscle spasms, etc. So the body worked a little harder to excrete the excess calcium that was absorbed by the more absorbable form of calcium compared to the poorly absorbed form of calcium to prevent hypercalcemia.

      NONE of this had anything to do with the pH of the blood as you are falsely contending. Again, the problem is with your lack of comprehension and lack of understanding of how the body works.

      Bean: “Now that i realize it, your replies are always like this, u are trying to direct us to another point while giving contradicting statements yourself”

      Again, my replies are not contradicting. The problem is with your lack of comprehension of the answers that explain how things really work in the body.

  58. says

    To ADMIN: There are some comments on email notification but not on the listings aftermath. Is there a recall mechanism or people ask their comments to be removed afterwards? Just trying to understand how it works this way…

  59. says

    From my personal life, during the visit to my parents I eat fresh fruits, fresh fish from the sea (organic natural one) and get enough sunlight, and in around 2 weeks my metabolism gets well and I get fit and feel healthy. And when I am back to our urban lifestyle with its cuisine I feel older around 5 years immediately. I never seek what is alkali or what is acidic but recently I realized I dislike cola or any other synthetic drinks when I am on healthy cycle. Just a note…

  60. says

    Giving up hope on James or other James and Bean and Robin, I have refered to an MD on the subject who is an expert on body physiology and what he says:
    “Blood pH can go as low as 6.7 which was observed on diabetes II patients on metformin medication. So theoretically, any cronic exposure of EM forcing its way with voltage change and in turn a pH change (as Dr. Tennant claims) may decrease the blood pH. The balancing function of lungs and kidneys will not work perfect for a cronic exposure for long durations. Eventually, pH drop will be observed. ”
    Similarly EM exposure during night time suppresses the melatonin secretion. The only problem for me left is to find people working in high EM power density areas for a long time versus a control group which does not.
    As a bottomline, one may deduce from that expert’s opinion, your diet will surely effect your overall blood pH one day eventually if you are on a low pH diet for an extended period.
    Anyway, I still welcome any opinion for my thesis. I need POV. That is what one cannot artificially generate by himself more than a few ones still biased with one and the only.

    • James says

      Korkut: “Giving up hope on James or other James and Bean and Robin”

      Hi Korkut, I did not give any response because I have never seen any scientific evidence backing any of this. A lot of what is being claimed is all hypothetical, not theoretical. So there is a lot of assuming going on without any real solid evidence. Look at your own statement later in your post:

      “So theoretically, any cronic exposure of EM forcing its way with voltage change and in turn a pH change (as Dr. Tennant claims) may decrease the blood pH. ”

      Note the words “claims” and “may”. Again these are not words of proven fact. Claims without evidence is still a hypothesis, not a theory. And “may” is assumptive, not proven factual.

      Here is another part of your post:

      “The balancing function of lungs and kidneys will not work perfect for a cronic exposure for long durations. Eventually, pH drop will be observed. ”

      If this is the case then why is acidosis such an EXTREMELY rare condition?

      That statement is also putting the cart before the horse. To really start providing any type of evidence to that claim the researcher has to first prove that long term acidosis occurs to begin with before claiming the hypothesis that this decreases lung and kidney function. Then he would have to prove that this chronic acidosis really decreased lung and kidney function, then finally that this leads to a drop in pH to make it a theory. But how would he prove their is a drop in pH from decreased lung and kidney function when he is already claiming that the pH was low to begin with? And if you go very low, which really is a small drop, the person would be dead. Again, there is a lot of assumptions being made but I have not seen any solid evidence backing any of Dr. Tennant’s claims.

      Korkut:”Similarly EM exposure during night time suppresses the melatonin secretion.”

      Again, is there is any solid evidence in medical research verifying this claim?

      Korkut: “As a bottomline, one may deduce from that expert’s opinion, your diet will surely effect your overall blood pH one day eventually if you are on a low pH diet for an extended period.”

      Making deductions from hypotheses gets us nowhere. Evidence needs to be produced to even elevate the hypotheses to the level of a theory.

      For example, a person can form a hypothesis that a big meteor will strike the Earth next week. People can deduce from this unproven hypothesis that they need to be prepared for this supposed meteor. When it does not happen though the person making the hypothesis is made out to sound like a quack because most people have no idea what a hypothesis is and the people who took the hypothesis as a fact end up looking foolish. This is why we should not focus on hypotheses as sources of “evidence” because hypotheses lack real evidence to begin with.

      Real evidence has proven that diet has virtually no influence on blood pH. The only way anything ingested could potentially alkalize the blood directly is if the ingested substance was strong enough and was taken in sufficiently high enough levels to dangerously overwhelm the body’s pH buffering systems.

      • says

        Thanks for responding James.

        About the melatonin effects here is one example:
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23051584?dopt=Abstract
        More you can find on http://www.emf-portal.de

        About the blood pH issue I dont want to chase shadows so trying to find effects of EM (electromagnetic) thru blood pH (since we cannot directly measure cellular level pH (for we could not even measure cellular voltage)) is terribly hard and finding diabetes type II patients (like using genetically modified rats for research) on metformine medication would be like next to impossible in statistically large numbers.
        “Healing is voltage” issue from Dr. Tennant could be right and even in that case it has no tangible use for me. If it is wrong than the whole issue will be down the drain.

        That is the reason I wanted to get different point of views.

        As you can see, I am not an expert on any of these and I just need some guidance not to enter a deadlock thesis at least from the very beginning.
        {A good opening is the key to winning in Chess.}

        That is the sole reason I wrote. So if you say, seeking acidosis in order to prove some effects of EM would be lunatic, I take your advise. I am yet sane.

        And if you have another proposal such an endocrine marker which is sensitive to EM or indirect effects of EM such as heat, you are very welcome.

        • James says

          Korkut: “About the melatonin effects here is one example:
          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23051584?dopt=Abstract

          Interesting hypothesis, bu the study was not conclusive to anything. In fact they say that the results are inconclusive, so much more research needs to be done to prove one way or the other. This is from the link:

          “The results show that this comparison does not seem to be consistent despite the fact that it offers an advantage of drawing attention to the importance of the exposure limits to weak EMFs. In addition to those inconsistent results, the following were also observedfrom this work: (i) the ICNIRP recommendations are meant for the well-known acute effects, because effects of the exposure duration cannot be considered and (ii) the significance of not replicating the existing experimental studies is another limitation in the power-frequency EMFs.”

          Korkut: “About the blood pH issue I dont want to chase shadows so trying to find effects of EM (electromagnetic) thru blood pH (since we cannot directly measure cellular level pH”

          Cellular pH can be measured and has been measured using microprobes. This is how they found out that the pH of cancer cells was more alkaline than that of healthy cells.

          Korkut: ““Healing is voltage” issue from Dr. Tennant could be right and even in that case it has no tangible use for me. I”

          I always saw it as voltage is healing. The body is electric and electricity is known to heal. For instance, it has been known for a long time that minute electrical currents can speed the healing of fractures. In fact, bone generates its own electricity to mineralize the collagen matrix. The ancient Greeks employed the electricity from electric rays and eels to heal. As little as one volt of electricity has been shown to destroy viruses. And even I used electricity to help grow back the end of my thumb after I cut it off in a table saw accident. So electricity can be healing.

          Korkut: “That is the sole reason I wrote. So if you say, seeking acidosis in order to prove some effects of EM would be lunatic, I take your advise. I am yet sane.”

          I never said anything about being lunatical. Again the evidence is lacking either way as to the effects of EMF on the body so I have no real opinion either way.

    • bean says

      dear korkut,
      sry for not replying, i didnt know the question was directed to me as well.

      i am not a doctor or any profession related to it so i dont know. Most of the comments i made with james are based on internet researches. Thats how i found out his lots of his claims are not backed by scientific studies either. and most of the times he is just trying to win an argument.

  61. Michele says

    Chris you said above: “In other words, regardless of what you eat or what your urine pH is, you can be pretty confident that your blood pH is hovering around a comfortable 7.4″

    So what does the urinalysis pH mean? Is there such a test as a blood pH test? I’ve got health records showing my fasting urinalysis pH was 5 in 1992, 5 in 2000, 7 in 2003, and 5 in 2014. I’ve always been a meat eater and don’t eat enough vegetables, but healthy at 64. It’s nice to know I don’t have to worry about my urine pH.

    • James says

      Hi Michele,

      I can answer that for you. Urinary pH does not reflect blood pH whatsoever. Urinary pH varies quite a bit more than blood pH naturally and can be influenced quite a bit by a variety of things. For example, dehydration can lower pH. Urinary tract infections can make urine very alkaline as bacteria use the enzyme urease to split urea to form highly alkaline ammonia to help the bacteria survive. In fact, most pathogens thrive in an alkaline environment contrary to all the alkalizing propaganda.

      Urinalysis is not a singular tests but can comprise a number of different tests such as testing for blood, glucose, ketones, pH, nitrate, sodium, calcium, white blood cells, etc. These tests can help with the diagnosis of numerous diseases and conditions.

      Some people also try to determine their blood pH through salivary pH testing. Again, this in no way reflects blood pH and there are various factors that can affect salivary pH such as dry mouth or not brushing the teeth.

      There is a blood test for blood pH, and blood is the ONLY thing that can be tested to determine blood pH. But blood pH RARELY goes out of range since either excess alkalinity or excess acidity can both cause health issues and possibly death. Therefore, the body has numerous redundant systems to maintain its pH within normal range. This is also why your body maintains its pH regardless of what you eat.

      • Michele says

        Thank you James. I imagine all the 5’s in my urinalysis pH tests were due to “dehydration”. I must have a “survival” gene because I am rarely thirsty and “don’t drink enough water”. I don’t drink at meals and just drink when thirsty and I’m rarely thirsty. I’ve got other markers on blood tests that list dehydration as a possible cause.

      • says

        Hi James,

        Would you please illuminate me on this subject? We are trying to find out the effects of electromagnetic exposure on living organisms by utilizing the cell voltage cell pH relation. It is almost impossible to get the cell pH so falling back to blood pH or saliva pH does not save the day either. There is surely an effect of EM so what kind of a marker you could propose to track it?
        Dr. Tennant was the one to claim this cell voltage health and cell pH issue altogether.
        Kind regards,
        Korkut

  62. vishva Mitra says

    so please how u explain that countries with the most dairy and meat consumption have much higher rate of osteoporosis ??
    thank you,

    • James says

      Diets high in meats and dairy tend to be low in two key nutrients needed to maintain the collagen matrix. Ascorbic acid and orthosilicic acid. As bone collagen is lost there is less surface area for mineralization resulting in osteoporosis.

      High intake of dairy and red meats can also lead to other bone disorders such as osteopenia and osteomalacia due to the high protein content and high phosphorus content. High protein blocks calcium absorption, but not phosphorus absorption. The increase in phosphorus absorption in to the blood leads to pseudohyperparathyroidism. As a result excess parathyroid hormone is released resulting in a loss of calcium from bones.

  63. says

    Chris,

    This is your first series of posts that I’m going to have to preliminarily disagree with. Thirty years ago, I got a B.S. in Nutrition Science from one of the top nutrition schools in the country — UC Davis. Current nutrition thinking even back then, was based on “research”. And we knew so very little compared to what we know now. Yet, we know so little today compared to what we’re learning and will learn in years to come. In my experience, I would hardly rule something out (like an alkaline diet to help certain health issues) based on what limited research has actually been done. Just because studies have not yet been done to prove something one way or another is not enough. If I based my health, or all the people whom I help with their health, on current research — then I wouldn’t get very far. Sometimes we have to try the unresearched until we find what works.
    And regards the field of curing CANCER, if you’ve ever had it, and looked for natural or alternative cures to cancer, then you’ll know how limited research really is! Anyone with cancer who wants to truly help themselves will use any tool available. That especially includes dietary practices that have worked for other survivors. That includes an alkaline diet — albeit with enough protein because the scientist in me knows that we need protein for just about everything in the body. One additional point is that different types of cancer (tumor vs blood) require different diet strategies, in the opinion of many including myself.
    That being said, it’s good to keep up on current research, just not to eliminate possible assistance needlessly.

    • James says

      Adele: ” I would hardly rule something out (like an alkaline diet to help certain health issues) based on what limited research has actually been done. ”

      It is more dangerous to assume something rather than to rely on evidence of what has been learned through research. And there is a lot more research available that you are implying. Look at PubMed and you will find so much research it can keep you reading for years.

      As an example of the dangers of assumption though let’s look at the false belief by some that injecting baking soda can cure cancer.

      Research has already shown us that cancer cells are more alkaline than healthy cells and they need that high alkalinity to survive and thrive. Attempting to alkalize them is not going to work as various research with other alkalizers such as cesium chloride and lithium chloride have shown. In fact, cesium chloride, which a lot of people have been duped in to using as a cancer treatment ha s not only been shown to cause cancer but also promote the growth of existing cancers in research. This could be due to in part the fact that research has shown that healthy cells when made excessively alkaline will morph in to cancer cells. Anyway, back to baking soda ingestion. People have incorrectly come to the conclusion that ingesting baking soda will kill cancer cells based on the work of Simoncini and a misinterpreted study often touted. Simoncini was injecting the highly concentrated baking soda solution right in to the tumor, which can kill cancer cells as well as healthy cells through the powerful osmotic shift this will cause. Same principle as injecting concentrated saline in to varicose veins to destroy them. This has nothing to do with alkalizing the cancer. The study often touted discusses how baking soda can help prevent metastases, which people often assume means curing the cancer. No, these ARE NOT the same thing. The enzyme hyaluronidase, which allows cancer cells to spread by breaking down hyaluronic acid is acid dependent for activation. The baking soda alkalizes the EXTERNAL matrix where the hyaluronidase is found thus inhibiting it. This DOES NOT kill the cancer cells as some people have misinterpreted the study to say.

      There is still the dangers to drinking the baking soda as well. When ingested the baking soda will come in to contact with the stomach acid neutralizing both the stomach acid and the baking soda forming sodium chloride and carbonic acid. Neutralization of the stomach acid leads to decreased methylation promoting cancer, allows ingested pathogens including cancer causing microbes to survive easier and leads to decreased nutritional uptake and immune suppression that can further promote cancer. In addition, all the salt formation can lead to hyperchloremic acidosis.

      Injection of baking soda in to the body must also be done carefully since the injection can also lead to ACIDosis from the carbonic acid formed as the baking soda reacts with acids in the body. This is why doctors have to be so careful when injecting sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) in hospital settings for the treatment of acidosis since the sodium bicarbonate can also induce acidosis.

      Again, people need to know how the body works and the chemistry of what they are doing to themselves with treatments to be safe. Assuming things, especially based on other people’s assumptions posted on the internet is just asking for trouble.

      As far as the so-called “alkaline diet” even this is a very misleading term since most of the so-called “alkaline foods” are loaded with naturally occurring acids. And ALL foods stimulate the same alkaline response and ALL foods are eventually metabolized in to acids within the body. So there is NO such thing as an “alkaline diet”. On the other hand, nobody is discounting the foods promote in the mythical “alkaline diet”. The foods being promoted are more nutritious that most other foods. Although we still have to keep in mind that if people are neutralizing their stomach acid with garbage like ionized alkaline waters or baking soda in attempt to alkalize the already alkaline blood they are not gong to be absorbing many of those nutrients. Again, people need to understand how their bodies work and the chemistry of what they are doing rather than relying on assumptions just because they did not look at the vast amount of research readily available.

      Adele: “And regards the field of curing CANCER, if you’ve ever had it, and looked for natural or alternative cures to cancer, then you’ll know how limited research really is!”

      Again not limited at all if people actually look. I am in the process of writing a book on holistic cancer therapies right now. Even though I have been researching cancer for over 30 years I am still finding vast amounts of research on cancer I have never seen before. For example, just last night I found research showing high dose estrogen once being used as an effective treatment for some hormonally sensitive cancers including some breast cancers. It was later replaced though with more dangerous estrogen blockers like Tamoxifen.

      Adele: “Anyone with cancer who wants to truly help themselves will use any tool available.”

      Some of those tools can conflict with each other. Again, people need to understand how the body works and the chemistry behind what therapies they are doing to help keep themselves out of danger.

      Adele: “That especially includes dietary practices that have worked for other survivors. That includes an alkaline diet — albeit with enough protein because the scientist in me knows that we need protein for just about everything in the body. ”

      It is not that hard to get sufficient protein, even from plants. In fact, some plant sources are higher in protein that meats. But there are also different qualities of protein. Not all sources are complete proteins for one. And protein sources can contain various compounds that can be detrimental such as hormones, arachidonic acid, high phosphorus or enzyme inhibitors. Or they can contain beneficial anticancer compounds such as phytic acid, acidic polyphenols, phytoestrogens, etc.

      Also keep in mind that the body only requires roughly 3 ounces of protein daily. Excess is just going to increase the stress on the body as the body has to deal with the waste products such as the highly alkaline and extremely toxic ammonia formed from amino acid breakdown. Even though a food such as meat, grain or vegetable is not 100% protein with the standard 3 meals a day it really is not hard at all to meet the body’s daily protein requirements.

      But getting hack to the mythical “alkaline diet” once again, the benefits of this type diet IS NOT from alkalizing since the diet does not really alkalize. That is why the so-called “alkaline diet” is a myth. Instead, benefits come from the higher nutritional level including the various beneficial, anticancer compounds they can provide such as chlorogenic acid, acidic polyphenols, phytoestrogens (found in all plants), fibers that get fermented in to beneficial acids, etc. And again, when people fall for the alkalize for health myth they often do stupid things like consume baking soda or drink ionized alkaline waters that neutralize stomach acid leading to impaired nutrient absorption, immune dysfunction and increased risk of cancer. So I will say it again. People need to learn how the body actually works and the chemistry behind what they are doing rather than rely on their assumptions or the assumptions made by other people on the internet. Again, there is massive amounts of REAL research readily available for anyone who wishes to look for it. It is incredible as to how much we have really learned about the human body even in just the last 50 years. But not looking for the research DOES NOT mean it doesn’t exist.

  64. Daisy says

    It is very interesting as there is evidence to support both theories. However neither side can conclusively prove their claims. What I did find interesting is the use of bi-carb soda in treating some cancers, namely colon or skin cancers. Dr Toullio Simoncinni’s work in this area is gaining a lot of interest and many others are also using this method. The one thing that does appear to be undisputed is that diets high in vegetables and fruits, result in statistically lower incidences of cancer, heart disease, arthritis and diabetes. I have seen many published studies claiming this to be true. Even the American Cancer Council and American Heart Foundation mention this on their websites. With a number of studies also accessible through the National Institute of Health. Without constantly taking blood samples from people to determine whether the acid / alkaline theory does in fact play a significant role in the development of disease, we can probably only continue to speculate. Whether we are for or against the theory, it may simply be the removal of processed, refined foods, and the addition of nutrient, antioxidant, phytochemical and fibre rich plant foods, that are in fact resulting in less incidence of disease.

    • James says

      Daisy: ”

      Daisy: “It is very interesting as there is evidence to support both theories. However neither side can conclusively prove their claims.

      I have yet to see any REAL evidence to back the alkalize for health hypothesis, or the hypothesis that you can even alkalize the body through diet. As pointed out previously ALL foods are made acidic in the stomach then the chyme alkalized in the intestines as the “alkaline response”. Then ALL foods are eventually metabolized in to acids.

      It has also been pointed out numerous times that even the so-called “alkaline foods” are generally loaded with naturally occurring acids.

      Bottom line is that there really is no such thing as an “alkaline food”.

      Daisy: “What I did find interesting is the use of bi-carb soda in treating some cancers, namely colon or skin cancers. Dr Toullio Simoncinni’s work in this area is gaining a lot of interest and many others are also using this method.”

      There are several important facts that people keep overlooking when referencing Simoncini. First of all the neutralization of one acid with baking soda produces an acid called carbonic acid. This is why when baking soda is given intravenously in a hospital setting it must be used with extreme caution to prevent rebound acidosis. And if ingested the baking soda is neutralized by the stomach acid producing not only carbonic acid, but also a lot of sodium chloride, which can cause hyperchloremic acidosis.

      It has already been shown in various studies that cancer cells have a higher than normal pH that healthy cells. Cancer cells need this higher that normal alkalinity to survive and thrive. When their proton pumps are blocked the cancer cells become acidic killing them.

      Studies have also repeatedly shown that alkalizers such as lithium chloride and cesium chloride DO NOT kill cancer cells. In fact, it has been shown that highly alkaline cesium chloride often touted as a cancer treatment not only causes cancer, but also promotes the growth of existing cancer cells.

      What Simoncini was doing was injecting the sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) directly in to the tumors. This can kill cancer cells, but this has NOTHING to do with alkalizing since as pointed out the neutralization of any acid will simply form more acid. The process can kill cancer cells through a strong osmotic shift, which can kill cancer cells as easily as healthy cells. Therefore, in my opinion it is not much different than chemotherapy in the fact that the therapy DOES NOT selectively kill cancer cells. If you want to understand this process better research sclerotherapy for varicose veins in which a concentrated sodium chloride solution is injected in to the varicose veins to destroy the tissue. Again, this has NOTHING to with alkalizing.

      And keep in mind that some of Simoncini’s patients died from his therapy. One reason this may have occurred is because the therapy, just like chemotherapy and radiation therapies, can destroy healthy cells just as easily as cancer cells. Or it is possible that Simoncini’s therapy killed these people from the rebound acidosis induced by the sodium bicarbonate injections.

      I do believe Simoncini is on to something here, and there is a scientific basis to how his therapy could kill cells. Unfortunately this also includes healthy cells. And Simoncini would have been taken more seriously if he had not been touting ridiculous, bogus claims such as cancer is Candida. Then he confuses Aspergillus for Candida even though they ARE NOT the same thing and are not even related.

      In fact, studies have proven that alkalinity promotes Candida overgrowth and pathogenicity. Alkalinity does this by turning on the Candida growth gene and by morphing the Candida from its benign yeast form in to its pathogenic fungal form.

      Also keep in mind that EVERYONE has Candida, it is a normal inhabitant of the body. Not everyone has candidiasis though, which is the overgrowth of fungal Candida. In its fungal form the Candida forms finger-like projections known as hyphae that allow the Candida to dig in to the tissues causing tissue damage and inflammation, but not cancer. And again, the Candida morphs in to this pathogenic fungal form in an alkaline environment. If Simoncini was correct and cancer and Candida were the same thing then everyone would have cancer, which IS NOT the case. I have heard the claim that everyone does have cancer by several people including some doctors. But this is a complete myth. I am not going in to an explanation of this here. It is a long explanation and I already covered this in depth in the book on holistic cancer therapies I am working on. In short though if everyone was developing cancer cells daily as claimed then none of us would be here.

      Daisy: “The one thing that does appear to be undisputed is that diets high in vegetables and fruits, result in statistically lower incidences of cancer, heart disease, arthritis and diabetes. I have seen many published studies claiming this to be true.”

      Agreed, but this has NOTHING to do with alkalizing. Especially considering the fact that ALL foods including fruits vegetables, meats, candy bars, etc. will metabolize in to acids in the long run. There is NO such thing as a truly alkaline food. And again, most of the foods incorrectly called “alkaline foods” are full of naturally occurring acids. And again, ALL foods produce the same “alkaline response”, which is simply pancreatic bicarbonate neutralizing the acids in chyme as it exists the stomach to protect the intestines. This has NO effect on blood pH as is often falsely claimed.

      Daisy: “Without constantly taking blood samples from people to determine whether the acid / alkaline theory does in fact play a significant role in the development of disease, we can probably only continue to speculate.”

      Or we can add a little common sense and think about the well known fact that the body can only live in a very narrow pH range. If acidosis or the extremely more dangerous alkalosis occurs we can die. This is why the body has so many redundant systems to maintain its pH and why both of these conditions are so extremely rare. If foods really produced excess acidity or alkalinity as is so often claimed by the alkalize for health supporters then people would be dying right and left from acidosis and alkalosis just from eating. But the fact is that diet does not really alkalize the blood and actually has virtually no direct influence on blood pH. The main effect on blood pH from food is indirect, and involves the production of beneficial acids by the metabolism of ALL foods, including fruits and vegetables. Virtually all pH regulation though is controlled by respiration, followed by kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions, not diet.

      Bottom line here is that common sense tells us that pH has very little to do with most disease since pH imbalances are EXTREMELY rare as where diseases are very common.

      Daisy: “Whether we are for or against the theory, it may simply be the removal of processed, refined foods, and the addition of nutrient, antioxidant, phytochemical and fibre rich plant foods, that are in fact resulting in less incidence of disease.”

      And there is the answer to why the so-called “alkaline diet is more healthy. It has NOTHING to do with alkalizing but rather the higher levels of nutrients, phytochemicals, which include a number of beneficial acids, and fibers that promote health in large part by the beneficial acids they are fermented in to.

      • says

        Dear All Guests,

        This is an open request whoever can guide.
        I am PhD student working on electromagnetics trying find a mechanism on the effects of EM onto body and one way it seems is the electrical effects on the body. Dr Tennant from US claims a voltage health relation and he also connects it further into pH with a voltage versus pH relation. To note this is not the blood pH but the cell pH. It is definitely very hard to sample cell voltages but could be easier to find cell pH. Don’t know.
        Now any comments, advise, guidance will be welcome. I am an EE so I may stumble on deep medical terms.
        QEEG loreta system I heard for brain related such sampling. Looking for its details. Bring on more please.
        Regards,
        Korkut

  65. Flowrut says

    I figured all references were coming from “Abstract”. Those studies are not showing the details. The value of them is nothing.

    • James says

      Abstracts are just a summary of the study and the results. This does not invalidate the study and the entire studies can be found if someone wants more details such as how the study was designed and conducted.

  66. Arc says

    This article is BS. I’ve seen the alkaline diet work from a friend within months. And I see all the obese sickly people pulling into McDonald’s for their daily fix of addictive food product. There’s a reason why the US has sick care (we neglectfully call it ‘healthcare’)….its because they make money off of sick people. You people trying to debunk this…well, you make me sick but you’re not going to make a dime off me in the hospital.

    • James says

      Nobody is claiming the so-called “alkaline diet” is not healthy. What has been pointed out over and over but the alkaline supporters cannot seem to grasp is the fact that the so-called “alkaline diet” DOES NOT alkalize the body. In fact the so-called “alkaline foods” are often loaded with naturally occurring acids. And like all foods the “alkaline foods” are eventually metabolized in to acids. The health benefits of the so-called “alkaline diet” is the result of the higher nutritional value including acidic vitamins. It has NOTHING to do with altering the blood’s pH to obtain health benefits.

  67. Alexander Montgomery says

    So I just wanted to put this out there. FOR ALL TYPE 1 DIABETICS. The artifical insulin they give us has an acid base. After being this product for less then a year my blood ph registered as 4.7.
    BEWARE! They don’t list this as a problem and can make it a lot harder on our kidneys then they already are. I also was starting to see my insulin not be as effective as it was. So I started eating a tablespoon of baking soda a day and my ph is around 6.0 now and going up after about month. HAVE YOURSELF CHECKED!!!

    • Rocco says

      If you your blood pH was 4.7, you would have already died. The pH stays in a very narrow range. And through breathe and kidneys can adjust anytime.

  68. Maggie Percy says

    I don’t recall blood pH being the factor cited when I read or was told an alkaline ash diet was better than acid. So I am a bit confused on that point, since I don’t recall blood ever being discussed.

    However, I have heard and it seems possible that an overall acid-producing diet paves the way for imbalance that lets cancer and other things get a hold and grow, because they are more suited to that environment than they are to a more ‘natural’, less acid-producing diet.

    I know there is a lot more to this than meets the eye. I deal in energy work, and it’s obvious that no one diet is proof against disease. It’s what you think that matters. Yet, I do subscribe to the belief that a more ‘natural’ diet is less acid-forming and healthier and sometimes seems to rectify health issues.

    What part of the change in diet is causing the healing in your opinion? I would have felt the shift in pH was helping, but you must have another opinion? You aren’t saying we should all eat grain or anything else we like, because it doesn’t matter what we eat as long as our kidneys are working, are you???

    • James says

      Your article does back up all I have been saying all along.

      For example, the article states:

      “The relationship between carbon dioxide and bicarbonate is additionally underlined by the fact that the infusion of sodium bicarbonate increases carbon dioxide production and arterial pCO2, as it was first documented in 1956 [23, 24].”

      Increased CO2 increases carbonic acid levels, which backs what I have been saying all along about how sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) therapy actually increases acidosis.

      In fact, they bring up another potential source of acidosis from the use of baking soda where they write:

      “The anions most frequently encountered in conditions leading to metabolic acidosis are chloride (hyperchloremic acidosis)”

      And:

      “8.1.1. Hyperchloremic (Nonanion Gap) Acidosis

      An increase in the plasma concentration of chloride out of proportion of sodium causes hyperchloremic acidosis. The relative increase in plasma chloride may be due to either exogenous administration of chloride in excess of sodium or a decrease in the plasma sodium concentration with no change in the chloride level.”

      Hyperchloremiic acidosis can be induced by too much sodium chloride (“table salt”). When people ingest baking soda the baking soda reacts with stomach acid dangerously neutralizing the stomach acid while generating large amounts of sodium chloride as the sodium from the baking soda combines with chlorine from the stomach acid. The excess of the Cl- displaces the bicarbonate ion leading to acidosis.

      In addition, the ingestion of baking soda can also induce diarrhea, which in turn can also lead to a loss of bicarbonate ion leading to metabolic acidosis.

      The article you linked also goes in to what Mr. Kessler and I have been explaining over and over about how respiration and hydrogen ion retention or excretion the primary means of pH regulation for the body. As we pointed out diet has very little influence on maintaining the alkalinity of blood.

  69. Faisal says

    The article starts off stating: “The more ridiculous claim is that we can change the pH of our blood by changing the foods we eat”. So the author believes that drinking 3 liters of coke a day would not influence your bloods pH level? If you inject acid into anything, it is obvious it gets more acidic. Even a school kid could tell you that. Obviously the body CAN adjust the pH level by grabbing calcium from the bones and teeth, otherwise we would be dead, but it is easier for the body to adjust the pH to a normal level if we don’t fill it with acid. Maybe those who claimed to have done those clinical trials work for Coca Cola or McDonalds. Usually there is some hidden vested interest behind such articles, that are expensively sponsored on Facebook and Google, like this one. Either way this article is total rubbish.

    • James says

      Faisal: “So the author believes that drinking 3 liters of coke a day would not influence your bloods pH level? If you inject acid into anything, it is obvious it gets more acidic. Even a school kid could tell you that. ”

      Even a school kid knows that ingesting something and injecting something ARE NOT the same thing. If you ingest 3 liters of Coke it is not going to kill you right away like injecting 3 liter of coke in to your body.

      When we ingest anything though whether alkaline or slightly acidic it is going to be made acidic in the stomach. Then the acids in the chyme will be neutralized by pancreatic bicarbonate as the chyme leaves the stomach.

      Even when the blood starts to become acidic for some reason again it is respiration that is the main means of pH regulation. Next is hydrogen ion retention or excretion by the kidneys. Followed by various other means of pH regulation before minerals will be removed from bones and teeth. The body only uses minerals from bone as a very last resort. And considering that this takes extremely severe acidosis, which is extremely rare the bones are almost never used as a source of pH balance. This is just one of those myths that keep getting circulated in the alkalize for health circles that they can never back with any evidence because it is not true to begin with.

  70. James says

    Daniel: “So what he’s saying is don’t bother trying to eat healthy, just do what you want because in his opinion, this stuff doesn’t work. ”

    That is not even close to what was said. The article WAS NOT about what is healthy or unhealthy to eat. It was just about the simple fact that you CANNOT change your blood pH through diet.

    If you want to discuss foods that are healthy vs unhealthy then find a blog article on that topic. But don’t assume someone is saying something they were not saying just because they are discussing a completely different topic than you assume they are discussing.

  71. Daniel says

    So what he’s saying is don’t bother trying to eat healthy, just do what you want because in his opinion, this stuff doesn’t work.

    Sounds like someone who doesn’t want to practice self control and remember that we, as a whole have been patterned to be unhealthy and it’s not some hokey, hippie idea.

    Go ahead give up on being smart about your diet gain weight, get huge with all the problems that come with it, maybe you’ll at least die content… and very young.

    Worst article to put out there, to discourage people from eating better foods.

    • M.M. says

      Yep, if the body regulates virtually everything, including counting of calories and weight, why are we bothering about eating the paleo way?

      PS.: Thanks, Jefferson, for giving me this link, but I happen to bump into this site some days ago and enjoying it.

  72. says

    Simply wish to say your article is as astounding.
    The clearness in your post is just spectacular and i can assume you are an expert on this subject.
    Fine with your permission allow me to grab your feed to keep updated with forthcoming post.
    Thanks a million and please continue the enjoyable work.

  73. Hannah says

    THANK YOU so so much for posting this article. These diet trends are ridiculous! Its really disturbing to think that people will believe anything they hear!

    • Francesco says

      He has lost many points……..at root life is bioelectrical let consider Ph balance and redox balance as bioelectrical balance , life need a relatively more quote of negative charge, electrons are the more little antioxidant and alcalizer. the blood has to’ be in strict ranges and especiale p h. Each eritrocite can carry from 1 million to’ 14 million of electrons, tris is a real alcaline reserve of blood , we need electrons for energy i.e. Mitocondrial oxidative phosphorilation, and for sustaining flow… Of nutrients one way catabolites and toxins the other way. Our blood is a colloid as Our lymph mucus , flam, we are 80 percent water, the more of that in colloidal state so let study water and colloid! In evryday practice we confront with that. let see at ESR erithrosedimentation rate. The ESR dépend mostly from two Things fibrinogen and other cationics protein mostly infiammatory and ROS , the other side there is zeta potential the electronegatives charge of blood. more plus charge and ESR is higher , blood sticky sludge and slow ( blood stasis and congestion ) more negatives charge , the ESR is low and blood fluid. tris happens be cause in colloidal state negative elettrical charge surround particles, cells allowing repulsion dispersion and flow one Things that affect mostly zeta potential is pH……

  74. knapsta says

    These comments are all very well, but annoyingly ego-based, point-scoring, pride laden ‘digs’ at others’ views. There is so much dietary information out there, it is easy to make a claim, then counter it, then counter that, ad infinitum. For me, a slim and healthy 65 year old, football playing, non-smoking., non-drinking vegan, it is a no brainer not to eat meat. Firstly, a clear conscience to a large degree (nothing dies for my diet); secondly, it’s liberating to break the habits of a lifetime (brought up with meat and dairy); thirdly, I don’t have to buy in to yet more hypocrisy (let’s go watch a cute animal cartoon about a cute talking piggy with the kids, then feed them pork sausages for tea…..etc etc etc. Man evolved from a primeval swamp, progressed through stages to what we now call ‘modern man’. At some point we will surely develop a deeper level of consciousness and learn about better, kinder ways to exist. As a vegan, I feel I am, in a small way, at the forefront of this next stage of human development.

    • James says

      Here is a post I did on the comments in response to someone posting the same old myths about acidity causing cancer by decreasing oxygen. I also address some claims of the article itself:

      “These myths were disproven decades ago.

      The biggest problem with your claim is the part stating that acidosis leads to cancer by decreasing oxygen levels to the cells. First of all it is alkalosis that leads to decreased oxygen, not acidosis. Acidity is required to release oxygen from hemoglobin to tissues. Alkalosis inhibits this leading to tissue hypoxia. Alkalosis also decreases circulation by constricting blood vessels and in severe cases leads to death due to suffocation from contraction spasms of the lungs.

      The whole “primitive form of respiration” claims come from a hypothesis by Otto Warburg who thought cancer cells had a respiratory defect that led to their generating most of their energy through anaerobic glycolysis. Warburg’s hypotheses were disproven decades ago.

      Modern research has proven that not only are cancer cells highly dependent on oxygen for survival and growth, but they generate at least 50% of their energy through oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos), which requires sufficient oxygen. Even though cancer cells rely less on OxPhos, cancer cells have been shown to have a much higher affinity for available oxygen than healthy cells.

      In fact, it is the death of early cancer cells that stimulate the formation of angiogenic growth factors such as vascular endothelial growth factor, which increases the oxygen supply to malignant tumors increasing their growth and survival.

      Modern research has also proven that the internal pH of cancer cells are more alkaline than healthy cells. Cancer cells maintain this alkalinity to allow them to survive and thrive. They maintain their alkalinity by exporting the acidic hydrogen protons formed from energy production in to the external matrix. When the proton pumps are blocked the cancer cells become acidic killing them.

      Modern research has also shown that when healthy cells are made excessively alkaline these healthy cells morph in to cancer cells.

      If you do your homework you will also find that many of the best natural cures for cancer are acids. Betulinic acid, chlorogenic acid, acidic polyphenols, etc.

      Acidosis is actually extremely rare, as is the extremely more dangerous alkalosis.

      The article is rather misleading as well as respiration is the body’s primary means of pH balance. Dumping or retention of protons by the kidneys is secondary. Buffering by proteins or calcium phosphate are not primary means of pH regulation. In fact, using calcium phosphate from bones is a last resort. Most calcium loss from bones is due to hyperparathyroidism and pseudohyperparathyroidism, which have nothing to do with acidosis.”

  75. cheryl says

    James,
    knowing about the PH of cancer cells and surrounding area, are there treatment programs for ca based on this?

    • James says

      Hi Cheryl,

      Sodium bicarbonate has been used to reduce uric acid acid levels formed during the destruction of cells. I prefer to use nettle leaf for the same purpose since it is much safer and provides a lot of nutrition and immune support. Oral or IV injection of sodium bicarbonate though do not kill cancer cells.

      Studies have been performed looking in to blocking the proton pumps of cancer cells. Studies have shown that when this is done the cancer cells go from a highly alkaline internal pH to an acidic internal pH, which kills the cancer cells.

      I still feel ozone therapy is the most effective cancer therapy ever devised. Ozone does not kill cancer cells by adjusting pH, but rather through the formation of peroxides. Ozone also has other cancer fighting benefits such as killing cancer pathogens, destroying many carcinogens and immune stimulation.

      James

  76. says

    I think there is a danger some people think Acid-Alkaline balance refers only to blood pH and we can safely ignore factors leading to acidosis elsewhere.

    I felt it was important to draw attention to the way Intestinal alkaline phosphatase regulates protective surface microclimate pH.
    We also have to bear in mind “Acidic priming enhances metastatic potential of cancer cells”.

    • James says

      Edward Hutchinson: “I think there is a danger some people think Acid-Alkaline balance refers only to blood pH and we can safely ignore factors leading to acidosis elsewhere.

      I felt it was important to draw attention to the way Intestinal alkaline phosphatase regulates protective surface microclimate pH.”

      Alkaline phosphatase is responsible for dephosphorylation. It DOES NOT alkalize anything. The “alkaline” part of “alkaline phosphatase” refers to the fact that it functions in an alkaline environment.

      Edward Hutchinson: “We also have to bear in mind “Acidic priming enhances metastatic potential of cancer cells”

      Also incorrect. This myth has been disproven over and over. Studies have shown that cancer cells not only have a higher internal alkalinity than healthy cells, but also that excess alkalinity of a healthy cell will morph it in to a cancer cell. I already posted medical journal references to these facts earlier.

  77. says

    Intestinal alkaline phosphatase: novel functions and protective effects.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24506153
    Important protective roles of intestinal alkaline phosphatase (IAP)–including regulation of intestinal surface pH, absorption of lipids, detoxification of free nucleotides and bacterial lipopolysaccharide, attenuation of intestinal inflammation, and possible modulation of the gut microbiota–have been reviewed recently.
    IAP is modulated by numerous nutritional factors.
    The present review highlights new findings on the properties of IAP and extends the list of its protective functions.
    Critical assessment of data suggests that some IAP properties are a direct result of dephosphorylation of proinflammatory moieties, while others (e.g., gut barrier protection and microbiota shaping) may be secondary to IAP-mediated downregulation of inflammation.
    IAP and tissue-nonspecific alkaline phosphatase isoforms characterize the small intestine and the colon, respectively.
    Gastrointestinal administration of exogenous IAP ameliorates gut inflammation and favors gut tissue regeneration, whereas enteral and systemic IAP administration attenuates systemic inflammation only.
    Finally, the IAP gene family has a strong evolutionary link to food-driven changes in gastrointestinal tract anatomy and microbiota composition.
    Therefore, stimulation of IAP activity by dietary intervention is a goal for preserving gut homeostasis and health by minimizing low-grade inflammation.

    • James says

      And again your point? You keep posting studies without stating what your reasoning for posting the study is making the studies irrelevant.

      What does this have to do with the myth that you can alkalize the blood through diet?

  78. Olga says

    Also, James, what is the best source of the protein? As a mother who just had a child and nursing I am having a had time with nutrition intake. Meat is out for me for 20 years plus, dairy as well, allergic to eggs and peanuts. Fish is on the menu, but all that information about mercury make me want to limit it. What do I have left? Beans, nuts, peas, hemp and brown rice protein. Is it enough to get all I need? My blood tests showed I am far from anemic.

    • Paleo Huntress says

      Olga,

      In Chris’ podcast RHR: The Truth About Toxic Mercury in Fish, he interviews Dr. Nicholas Ralston, an expert in mercury in fish and the protective effects of selenium. In that post, you’ll find this-

      “[M]ost people do not eat enough cold-water, fatty fish, and this is especially true of pregnant women. Concern about mercury toxicity is one of the main reasons for this. But as you’ll learn in this episode, such concerns are unfounded and not supported by the science.”

      Check it out!

    • James says

      “Also, James, what is the best source of the protein? As a mother who just had a child and nursing I am having a had time with nutrition intake. Meat is out for me for 20 years plus, dairy as well, allergic to eggs and peanuts. Fish is on the menu, but all that information about mercury make me want to limit it. What do I have left? Beans, nuts, peas, hemp and brown rice protein. Is it enough to get all I need? My blood tests showed I am far from anemic.”

      It really is not that hard to meet your daily protein needs. The body can only utilize roughly 90 grams of protein a day. Even major athletes can only utilize slightly higher amounts. Anything in excess is simply waste the body has to exert a lot of energy to make non-toxic and eliminate.

      Therefore, you can easily meet your protein needs with nuts, seeds, grains, etc. In fact, the highest protein sources are from non-meat sources. Beef for example is only about 22% protein as where fish is about 24% protein. Pollen is 30% protein, chlorella is 60% protein and spirulina is 95% protein. The only animal source of protein that comes close to spirulina are bugs, ants and bees being the highest in protein. And like pollen they contain the full range of amino acids.

      • Paleo Huntress says

        James, this is where you and I will disagree– unless you have a very different resource for your numbers.

        Olga, I’ve no doubt that protein needs can be met without meat, but there are very few (likely no) plant sources with more protein than meat.

        According to the USDA database, spirulina is 48% protein and doesn’t have an especially good PDCAAS score. (Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score). FWIW, ALL plant sources are deficient in sulfur-containing amino acids, so though some are “complete” in the sense that they contain all of the “essentials”,

        Chlorella is 57% protein (USDA database), close to 60%. But there is some concern that regular consumption of it may lead to autoimmune issues as the LPS it contains is great for kicking up your immune response during flu season, but having your immune response on high alert chronically is likely not beneficial. Chronic exposure to LPS leads to chronic inflammation even in small amounts, which is not a desirable state of affairs. Specifically, systemic LPS-activated macrophages in the brain have been implicated in progressive degeneration of brain neurons and may be responsible for Parkinson’s disease. (not proof, but certainly worth a read)

        According to the USDA database:

        Haddock is 92% protein
        Tuna is 91% protein
        Beef brisket is 70% protein
        Beef sirloin is 65% protein
        Salmon contains 60% protein

        And just in case you’ve heard this fairytale about broccoli having more protein than a steak, it contains 26% protein.

        Finally, this 2010 review found current protein significantly underestimated–> Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2010 Jan;13(1):52-7 This is pretty close to James’ recommendation but addresses many of the WF/PB community’s claims that protein recommendations are currently too high.

        And the current recommendation during pregnancy is 25 grams per day, ABOVE then the norm.

        • Paleo Huntress says

          (I managed to delete part of the comment while posting…)

          This should read,

          “FWIW, ALL plant sources are deficient in sulfur-containing amino acids, so though some are “complete” in the sense that they contain all of the “essentials”——-”

          ——-but they aren’t contained in the ideal proportions, and the way I understand it, you’d need to eat more overall to net more of the sulfurs.

        • James says

          Hi PaleoHuntress,

          I will start with the claims that plants are deficient in sulfur amino acids.

          Sesame, soy and Brazil nuts are all examples of plants higher in the sulfur amino acid methionine than beef.

          We also have to keep in mind that methionine is generated from the methylation of homocysteine.

          Plants are lower in cysteine, but cysteine is also synthesized in the body and is not needed in high levels. In fact, high levels are toxic.

          Also keep in mind these two facts.

          1. When measuring amounts of amino acids the amounts are based on small amounts of food, usually 100 grams. Since most people consume much more than a 100 grams of food per day they are getting well over the amount of the amino acid content listed for that food.

          2. People’s diet should not and do not consist of one food source. Doing so would not be safe. Only eating beef every day is not healthy just as eating only broccoli every day would not be healthy. We need a varied diet to get varied sources of nutrition and to prevent deficiencies.

          Deficiencies do not only result from a lack of nutrients within a food but can also result from a food blocking nutrient absorption or utilization. For example, did you know that high protein blocks calcium absorption? This is one of the reasons dairy leads to bone loss. But plants provide high levels of silica and organic acids that help with calcium absorption.

          As another example, it is a common myth that the reason people get sleepy after a Thanksgiving dinner is from the tryptophan in the turkey. Problem with this hypothesis is that high protein blocks the conversion of tryptophan in to calming serotonin. The real reason people get sleepy is because all the food needs to be digested and blood gets shunted away from the brain to the stomach making the person tired.

          Not sure which USDA database you go tthose figures from but they don’t get even close to matching up with the figures from this USDA database, which shows protein values far under what you are quoting. For example haddock showing 16.32 grams of protein per 100 grams of meat:

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4496?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=haddock

          That is not even close to 92% protein. That’s less than 17& protein.

          And what does the USDA list the protein content for Tuna? Not 91%, but rather less than 25% for three different types of tuna:

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4580?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=tuna

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4584?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=tuna

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4587?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=tuna

          Beef brisket is listed by the USDA as having less than 22% protein, not 70% protein.

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/3979?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=beef+brisket

          Beef sirloin less than 30% protein, not 65% protein.

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/3934

          And salmon is listed by the USDA as less than 22% protein on three different species of salmon. This is way lower than 60%.

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4541?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=salmon

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4548?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=salmon

          http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/4544?fg=&man=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=25&offset=&sort=&qlookup=salmon

          Spirulina is listed by the FDA as just over 57% protein, which is much higher than the meat sources you listed, but I question the USDA testing here for several reasons. First of all the other lists I have seen for protein content were much higher. In addition, the USDA lists the spirulina as a seaweed. Spirulina is not a seaweed. In fact, it is not even an algae, it is a cyanobacteria. Being the USDA does not know the difference causes me to question what they really tested.

          As for the claims about chlorella and autoimmunity this is VERY misleading. Part of the problem is that most medical “professionals” really don’t understand autoimmunity. They are under the assumption that autoimmune disorders involve an overactive immune system when in fact it is just the opposite. There is immune suppression through adrenal gland dysfunction leading to the over production of low affinity (nonspecific) antibodies. This is why things that suppress the immune system such as stress, stimulants and steroids actually aggravate autoimmune conditions. If the immune system was overactive these things would improve the condition, not make it worse.

          Chlorella does contain polysaccharides that can increase white blood cell activity. On the other hand so do many other foods. Many other foods also contain vitamin C, which also increases white blood cell activity. So the chlorella-autoimmune claims are scare tactics.

          As for the review, that is all it is. A review. Not a study supporting anything with real evidence and not reviewed by other sources.

          Regardless, most people get well over the recommended daily allowance for protein already.

          James

          • Paleo Huntress says

            James,

            We are talking about the percentage of the macros to each other, right? (protein, carbohydrate, fat) You can’t count water content, most certainly not if you intend to compare a raw piece of meat to freeze-dried seaweed. I mean, throw in another 1/4 of water while cooking your grains and they lose a percentage of protein?

            I would appreciate some intellectual honesty.

            • James says

              Intellectual honesty? I listed the protein amounts based on how they are consumed. Again spirulina IS NOT a seaweed, nor i chlorella. And both are consumed dry. Unless you are eating jerky the meats are not dry. But if you bother to check your “USDA database” that is not a database for the USDA at all you will find that the difference in protein content between the raw meats and cooked, which has less of a water content is minimal.

              Even if ALL the water content was removed from the meat sources you mentioned they still would not come close to the protein percentages you quoted, nor do they match or exceed the protein content of chlorella or spirulina. In fact, using your non-USDA “database” we see that even beef jerky, which is dry is still only 45% protein, which is still well below the protein contents you claim for beef:

              http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/snacks/5332/2

              So if you want talk “intellectual honesty” I can think of a couple of places for you to start.

          • Paleo Huntress says

            You know exactly what database I’m using because I linked to it. =) Please note, the database actually GIVES the percentage of protein in each food cited, it doesn’t require calculation.

            100 grams of cooked edamame (soybeans) contains 141 mg of methionine.

            100 grams of cooked ground beef contains 656 grams of methionine. That’s 4 and half times more than the soybeans.

            The following is a table showing the methionine content of different foods. (http://morelife.org/food/methioninecomparison.html)

            Meat and eggs have more than even isolated soy protein… and though sesame seeds and brazil nuts are indeed high, you’ll have to consume about 600 calories for same equivalent and if the more than 600 calories in the brazil nuts doesn’t get you, the toxic levels of selenium you’d have to consume likely will. By energy content (protein/fat/carbohydrate), plant foods are deficient in sulfur containing aminos.

            The review is just a review… my acknowledgement of this was clearly stated with, “not proof, but certainly worth a read”.

            • James says

              PaleoHuntress: “You know exactly what database I’m using because I linked to it. =) Please note, the database actually GIVES the percentage of protein in each food cited, it doesn’t require calculation.

              100 grams of cooked edamame (soybeans) contains 141 mg of methionine.

              100 grams of cooked ground beef contains 656 grams of methionine. That’s 4 and half times more than the soybeans.”

              What happened to ‘intellectual honesty”?

              I did not realize the blue lettering on your food source names were links initially. When I realized this I clicked on them and found out that they WERE NOT to a USDA database as you claimed.

              According to the actual USDA the protein content of the foods you listed come nowhere close to the protein contents you claimed that USDA stated. They were actually almost right on to the values I gave originally.

              So again, where did you come up with these values such as your claim of haddock being 92% protein when the actual USDA puts the protein content as less than 17%? Were you being honest about the percentages or even that the percentages came from the USDA database?

              And why are you all of a sudden jumping from percentage of protein to methionine content? Methionine is not protein.

              And the milligrams of methionine is various foods is not really that relevant for the reasons I gave earlier.

              By the way selenium may be toxic in high doses, but it is also essential to the body to keep it healthy. Just like water is essential to the body but can kill you in high doses. So please, show some intellectual honesty here.

            • James says

              PaleoHuntress,

              I forgot to ask where you got those protein percentage values again. You stated:

              “You know exactly what database I’m using because I linked to it. =) Please note, the database actually GIVES the percentage of protein in each food cited, it doesn’t require calculation.”

              So I went back and read through your first link again for haddock from this non-USDA database you claimed was a USDA database. NOWHERE does it give the percentage of protein as you claim. And NOWHERE does it claim haddock has anywhere near the 92% protein content you claimed the site said it had. Not even the RDA percentage of protein for haddock is 92%. So once again I am asking where did you come up with these percentage of protein figures since the links you provided as “evidence” DO NOT come even close to supporting your claims. So where or how did you come up with the inflated protein percentages for the meat sources you listed?

        • James says

          PaleoHuntrress,

          I was just looking at your references for protein content and don’t see where you are coming up with your values.

          First of all your links ARE NOT to the USDA whatsoever. And they don’t show anywhere near the protein content you are claiming for these meats. For example, your link for the protein content of haddock is:

          http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/finfish-and-shellfish-products/4060/2

          So what did this link show for protein content of haddock? 36 grams of protein per 150 grams of fish, which is nowhere close to 92% protein that you claim. If you want to make it easy change the grams of fish to 100 grams on the link and they show 24 grams of protein per 100 grams, which is only 24% protein, which again is not even close to the 92% you claimed.

          • Paleo Huntress says

            James,

            The link is to the calculator, and this calculator uses data from the USDA database… at the bottom of each food entry you find this statement-

            “Source: Nutrient data for this listing was provided by USDA SR-21.”

            When you click the link, please look at the upper right hand corner where you’ll find a breakdown of macros represented both by a triangular pictogram and text.

            Once the water is removed (and why would we even look at water?), haddock is 1% carbohydrate, 7% fat and 92% protein.

            • James says

              Just because they reference the USDA this does not make them a USDA database.

              And the water is factored in because the meat is being consumed with the water intact. That is intellectual honesty. It isn’t if someone is going to take away the water. That is like saying if I extract everything but the iron in beef that the beef is 100% iron.

              So haddock is not anywhere near 92% protein as you keep claiming and is only 24% as I stated earlier.

              From the triangle you refer to in your link it does say 92% protein under “caloric ratio”. But this IS NOT the actual protein content of the food. What they are saying is that 92% of the calories are being derived from the protein in the haddock. 1% of the calories is coming from the carbohydrate content and 7% of the calories from haddock are being derived from the fat. That is why the triangle is about the “caloric ratio” NOT the composition of the meat.

              Again, haddock is only 24% protein and 1% fat unless you factor in the cholesterol, which makes the fat content 26%. according to your link. IN fact, using your link and some common sense, if the haddock composition is 26% fats, then how can it be 92% protein? Not even taking in to account the water content you are already up to 118%. Must be some mutant fish caught from near Fukishima ;-).

          • Paleo Huntress says

            If we look at the same data, of the 150 grams in the filet, 111 are water. That leaves 39 grams of solids, 36 grams of which are protein. 36 is just over 92% of 39.

            Therefore, the haddock is 92% protein according to the USDA’s data.

            • James says

              Wrong for the reasons I stated above.

              But again, using YOUR own reference go scroll down to where it says “Nutritional Information”. I suggest switching to 100g of haddock to make it easier to follow. How many grams does it say 100 grams of haddock contains? 24.2 grams, our roughly 24% protein, not 92% protein. Now, what does it say about water content? 74.3 grams, which is roughly 74% water.. I messed up on the last post. I did not catch that the cholesterol was milligrams, not grams. So the total fat content is just over 1%. So we have 24% protein, 74% water, 1% fat and the rest consisting of things like minerals and carbohydrates to make up the 100% composition.

              And again, to intellectually honest as you claim to require then the composition should be listed in a manner it is consumed, not by isolating one compound out the meat to inflate the percentage.

              • Paleo Huntress says

                James,

                I’m sorry for the late reply– I’ve been busy with a sick family member for a couple of weeks.

                While it’s true that the calculator I reference is not the database itself, the data matches EXACTLY in both formats. The calculator saves us the time of doing out the math, but if you compare ANY entry at all, you’ll find that the data is identical. And this is because the SOURCE of the data is the same. I guess you can continue to suggest that the calculator isn’t a viable source, but all evidence says it is, and if you’re not happy with it, you can certainly reference the USDA directly and do your own math, but after you’ve wasted your time doing so, you’ll come to the same numbers the calculator comes to.

                Anyway…

                Chlorella and spirulina are freeze-dried foods, and before consumption they are rehydrated in water or a beverage of some sort, no, most people do NOT consume it dry. (The average serving is 2-5 teaspoons or 1-15 grams) The average serving of a piece of fish (or other meat) is 4 oz which is 113 grams, but hey, if you can show me someone spoon-eating 113 grams of dried chlorella or spirulina in a sitting, I’ll take it all back. (Ever eat powdered hot cocoa mix by the spoonful as a child? ~cough~) To be intellectually honest, the composition should be listed in a manner it is consumed… right?

                You could still argue that people consume them in encapsulated form though, so to be fair, let’s compare that to the dried versions of the animal foods. People certainly consume dried fish and meat, and these versions would be a more intellectually honest form to compare to dried plant food sources.

                100 grams of chlorella contains 58 grams of protein. (58% protein) <– This is the equivalent of as much as a 100 SERVINGS!
                100 grams of dried cod contains 63 grams of protein. (63% protein) <– This is 2.5 servings
                100 grams of dried beef (not jerky which has added sugar) contains 64 grams of protein. (64% protein) <– This is 2.5 servings

                The foods below aren't whole foods, but like chlorella and spirulina, they're added to liquids quite often for their protein content–

                100 grams of dried egg whites contains 82 grams of protein (82% protein)
                100 grams of dried whey contains 78 grams of protein (78% protein)

                My intention was not to "inflate" the percentage, it was to reference the amount of ENERGY in a food that comes from protein. Water is water. It doesn't provide calories, it doesn't satiate, it doesn't suppress hunger. Using your logic, if you mix 2 ounces of chlorella into 2 ounces of water, your chlorella loses 50% of its protein. If you mix it into FOUR ounces, it's down 75%– and what started as 58% protein is down to a mere 14.5%… How is that honest? And then there's the water you drink with your meal and any water your other foods might contain too. As I pointed out earlier, you cook a cup of rice in two cups of water, or you cook it in three, the rice contains the same energy and nutrition, the only difference is how much water it absorbs. Looking at the energy ratio over volume IS intellectual honesty- but even if we compare it 'dried apples to dried apples', the animal food contains more protein.

                • James says

                  Paleo Huntress: “I guess you can continue to suggest that the calculator isn’t a viable source,”

                  That is not what I said. What I was pointing out was that according to your own reference the percentage of protein you are claiming is way overinflated as I have shown.

                  Paleo Huntress: “Chlorella and spirulina are freeze-dried foods, and before consumption they are rehydrated in water or a beverage of some sort, no, most people do NOT consume it dry. ”

                  First of all you are being misleading again. Chlorella and spirulina are generally taken as a tablet or powder, which are DRY forms. Even if added to something like a smoothie the protein content DOES NOT change. If there is 30 grams of protein in the amount of dry powder added to the smoothie there is still 30 grams worth of protein being added to the smoothie. The water does not dissolve the protein reducing its content.

                  Regardless, you are overlooking another simple concept. The body only needs roughly 90g of protein a day. And this is not hard to achieve especially considering that most people eat at least 3 meals a day and also snack. Each one of those meals provide protein as can snacks.

                  Therefore, regardless of the protein content of chlorella, spirulina or meats people are not saying I am going to have one meal a day with ___ grams of _____ to get ____ grams of protein. People have been eating for thousands of years without counting their protein intake and guess what? Humans have managed to survive all this time!!!

                  Therefore, making comments such as ” if you can show me someone spoon-eating 113 grams of dried chlorella or spirulina in a sitting, I’ll take it all back” is really asinine since people are not making a single meal out of one thing to meet their protein needs.

                  Anyway, I am done arguing over this. You just don’t get it and keep twisting things to fit your needs wasting my time.

                  Paleo Huntress: “

  79. Olga says

    Another question for James, what do I suppose to do with 3000 alkalizing machine now besides cleaning? Can I use it just a greatly overpriced purifier and drink neutral water from it? Would it be a good source of water?

    • James says

      “Another question for James, what do I suppose to do with 3000 alkalizing machine now besides cleaning?”

      They make great boat anchors :-)

      “Can I use it just a greatly overpriced purifier and drink neutral water from it? Would it be a good source of water?”

      I doubt if these really purify the water. If the machine purified the water then the minerals would be removed. But you need to have minerals in the water to form the mineral hydroxides that form the alkaline water.

      The acid water though is great for watering roses, tropical plants and other plants that prefer acidity. The acid water would also be good for aquariums with fish that need slightly acidic water.

      Or add some of the acid water or other acid source, such as lemon juice, to the alkaline water to neutralize the dangerous mineral hydroxides while creating beneficial mineral salts.

      Personally I prefer spring water. If I cannot get spring water I use reverse osmosis water with minerals added back to the water before drinking it.

  80. Olga says

    Also, You say that one cannot get vitamin B12 from plant sources. If I take B12 supplement, which is vegan, does it mean that it is useless? I have not been eating meat for last 20 years and eggs (even though I love them), cause ache in my ears (I guess allergic reaction), where do I get B12?

    • James says

      “Also, You say that one cannot get vitamin B12 from plant sources. If I take B12 supplement, which is vegan, does it mean that it is useless? I have not been eating meat for last 20 years and eggs (even though I love them), cause ache in my ears (I guess allergic reaction), where do I get B12?”

      Commercial B12 used to be derived from the sewers since B12 is synthesized from our intestinal flora.

      B12 is now synthesized by microbial fermentation of brown rice.

      Meat or eggs are the best sources of B12. Otherwise you can use a sublingual B12 supplement as methylcobalamin (active B12) as opposed to cyanocobalamin (inactive B12).

      Since B12 stores in the liver it does not need to be taken in massive doses or on a regualr basis.

      • Olga says

        Well, I am taking balanced B Complex by Mega Food. It does not say if it is active or not. How do I know? Thank you so much for your great answers.

        • James says

          It is impossible to say. They are using a yeast as a source of the B vitamins, but this could mean they are either fermenting something with the yeast, which is the most likely, to obtain the B vitamins or they are extracting the B vitamins, which is unlikely due to cost of extraction.

  81. Olga says

    Hello James, I have a few questions for you. First of all, you mention silica helps osteoporosis, but you cannot just take it in as a supplement. What could be done to improve osteoporosis? What diet changes would help and what supplements if any? Also what kind of diet do you think is most beneficial? I saw in your posts you are against dairy, but what about meet? What do you think about China Study? I am rather confused with all the abundance of information about nutrition. Also is gluten bad for everybody or just for those sensitive to it? Thanks

    • James says

      Hi Olga,

      “First of all, you mention silica helps osteoporosis, but you cannot just take it in as a supplement. What could be done to improve osteoporosis?”

      Silica is the most important because of its role in collagen formation. Remember that osteoporosis IS NOT a loss of bone minerals but rather a loss of collagen matrix.

      Silica is poorly absorbed so I do not rely much on normal supplements unless acid sources are added to aid in absorption. The easiest way to get silica is with food grade diatomaceous earth. I add a spoon full to a gallon of water and let it settle out. Then I drink the water part way down, fill the container again and let it settle out again repeating this process over and over. Each time new water is added a tiny amount of the silica is dissolved in the water forming orthosilicic acid, which is the form of silica the body absorbs and utilizes. The presence of acid aids in this conversion, which is why silica levels decline with age since stomach acid declines with age.

      That spoon full of diatomaceous earth will last several years if done properly, but I generally dump it out every 6 months and put new diatomaceous earth in. An ounce of diatomaceous earth is about $0.40 an ounce and will probably last about 10 years.

      The easiest indicator that you are absorbing and utilizing the silica is that the fingernails become hard and inflexible after a few weeks.

      Other good silica sources are bamboo, nettle leaf, butcher’s broom, couch grass and seaweeds. I do not like horsetail grass (shavegrass) due to its vasoconstrictive properties. See:

      http://www.medcapsules.com/info/Silica_Diatomaceous%20Earth%20vs%20Horsetail%20Grass.htm

      Good sources of the other less important nutrients include alfalfa and nettle leaf for the minerals and gelatin for the amino acids.

      Exercise is very important since the mineralization of bone is dependent on the pressure exerted on the silica molecules during exercise.

      “What diet changes would help and what supplements if any? Also what kind of diet do you think is most beneficial? I saw in your posts you are against dairy, but what about meet?”

      Red meat intake should be limited since they are high in phosphorus due to inducing pseudohyperparathyroidism. Same with colas.

      Avoid caffeine and limit intake of refined sugars.

      The diet should consist primarily of vegetables. Fruits are fine and meats are OK in moderation.

      Vitamin C sources are the second most important.

      “What do you think about China Study?”

      Here are some posts I did addressing Campbell and the “China Study”:

      http://curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1873862#i

      http://curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1874196#i

      http://curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1874509#i

      http://curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1874285#i

      “Also is gluten bad for everybody or just for those sensitive to it?”

      Just to those who have true Celiac disease or a gluten intolerance. And even those with a gluten intolerance can generally still consume some forms of gluten without ill effects.

  82. Garry Walton says

    Hi Chris
    I would appreciate you making a distinction between ignoring the snake oil salesmen of Alkalinity who talk about rebalancing the body pH and the targeted oral use of pH 8+ alkaline water to denature Airway Pepsin in LPR sufferers like myself. I’m sure you know of Jamie Koufman in NYC who has researched this and professors Bardhan & Dettmar who are experts on the dangers of Pepsin in the airways as a catalyst for cell damage. Pepsin as you know remains dormant but stable in epithelial cells up to pH 8 when it is denatured.
    This use is both effective and low cost.
    I have read with interest your views on low acid as a cause of GERD and recommend your ideas on my Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/refluxhelp
    which tries to advise sufferers who get blank looks from their doctors.
    Regards Garry (justpassingthrough)

  83. michael says

    People posting on health related threads like this should be encouraged to post links to the own photos: “listening” to our bodies is surely important, and so is seeing the manifestation of health.

    To the original author: I got 30 comments in, and couldn’t find anyone supporting your theories that spoke of the astounding, and growing sums of money spent on antacids/acid reflux in the modern world. This could be seen as tangential to a discussion of blood ph (in your argument), but it is directly relevant to initial aspect of ingesting acidic/alkaline foods, or food that produce these conditions in the digestive system.

    • James says

      The fact that antacids and acid blockers are some of the largest selling pharmaceuticals is a pretty well known fact. Maybe you should try doing some real research rather than relying on 30 alkaline supporters that don’t know squat to begin with.

  84. Cinzia says

    Hi All,

    I’m late to this party, but I am a great believer in the pH diet. I followed it a while back when I had some GI issues and it really worked for me. However, I was dubious about some of the science, if a little interested in the fact that it relied on ‘fringe’ theories (I work in a Uni and am aware that not being accepted does not mean not being right in peer reviewed papers etc.). However, my main issue with the debate is ‘does it really matter?’ When I followed the diet it seemed to basically say eat more leafy green veg, fruit and good things than meat, grains, alcohol, dairy and bad things. Not don’t eat certain things or only eat certain things, but balance. Since following the diet I got into good habits – an extra portion of veg on my plate, a salad if I had spag bol the day before, leave the skins on potatoes when mashing… and guess what? Doing this stuff made me feel better… Whether you ascribe to it being because of a pH issue, a hydration issue, a paleo diet, anti-parasitic, or whether these are just useful ways to explain a more complex issue to the lay person, it can’t do anyone any harm, surely, to eat more veg? My ‘pH balanced’ diet looks suspiciously similar to a pre-war diet with a few curries chucked in for good measure. The exact nature of why it is better is always going to be a complex mix of issues, theories, disciplinary differences and misunderstandings. But the fact that I eat better is surely the best outcome?

    • Paleo Huntress says

      Yours is a very thoughtful comment, Cinzia, but I think it DOES matter. Perhaps not to the person who bought a book and followed the diet and got some relief from eating whole foods instead of junk food for the first time– but our current understanding of nutrition and health is rife with misinformation brought on by correlative data rather than causative data.

      This thread is a great example of the damage that false “common knowledge” does later when trying to explain the true mechanisms of diet and physiology, and how much resistance and push-back there is from people who were previously misinformed by well-intentioned souls. Maybe for the average person, the “why” won’t matter, but what about the person with some sort of deficiency, dysbiosis or intolerance who is avoiding a food (or group of foods) that could be exceptionally helpful to them out of fear that it is “acidifying”?

      If you give people honest information, they can be trusted to make the right choices. We don’t need to trick them.

    • James says

      Hi Cinzia,

      Paleo Huntress brings up a good point. Take for example, what if a person is anemic and is eating what is deemed as an “alkaline food” such as kale loaded with oxalic acid that binds with iron preventing its absorption? Or avoids red meat and eggs that are considered “acidic” leading to a B12 deficiency since you can’t get true B12 from a plant based diet.

      Then there are other issues. For one when people are falsely convinced they are acidic people may resort to dangerous practices such as drinking ionized alkaline water or consuming baking soda in an attempt to alkalize even though their blood is already alkaline. This will not only stress the body more as it has to deal with this temporary alkalosis, but also presents numerous other health problems by neutralizing the stomach acid. These health issues can include increased risk of cancer and heart disease in the long run. And what if the person has high blood pressure from sodium retention and they are told to alkalize by ingesting backing soda (sodium bicarbonate), which reacts with stomach acid forming a lot of sodium chloride salt? These are just the tip of the iceberg of potential problems people are not being made aware of by ingesting alkalizers that they are being talked in to doing with all the alkalizing propaganda.

      Even outside all the potential health dangers there is still another issue. I have been working very hard for decades to expose fraudulent information in holistic health because I want to see holistic health legitimized. This is very hard to do when people keep making up and presenting totally bogus information, which makes holistic medicine look like quackery. For example, the claims that cancer is a survival mechanism or the claims that those big squishy blobs people pass after doing a “liver flush” are gallstones when they are in fact saponified oil and sterol-cholesterol complexes. In fact, even if these flushes dis work gallstones come from the gallbladder, which is not the liver. So why are they calling these “liver flushes”? This is the kind of quackery that keeps giving holistic medicine a bad name and keeps holding us back. It is not just the government and ‘big pharma”. We have more than enough people in holistic medicine repeating the same proven bogus information over and over to keep holistic medicine to be openly accepted without the help of government and “big pharma”.

      We could cure 100,000 people of cancer with holistic medicine and there would not likely be a peep in the media about it. But one person dies trying a bogus cancer therapy like oleander, cesium chloride or drinking baking soda and those are the stories that we are going to see making the news. So yes, holistic medicine is being targeted, but people pushing these bogus ideas and therapies are fueling the fire rather than putting it out by exposing these frauds.

      Is eating a healthier diet with more fruits and vegetables and less junk food a good idea? Of course, but don’t promote it as “alkalizing” when it has no real effect on blood pH. And don’t promote the diet as being helpful due to alkalizing when the diet is not making us feel better or healthier from alkalizing. Promote facts, not conjecture.

  85. Tina says

    This is what I know to be true. For most of my life, I would tarnish any metal I came in contact with. I don’t know what my PH was, but it was not the same as everyone else. During that time, I was never sick, my teeth never formed tartar, I had no body odor, had very low body fat (10-12%), and always had energy and good health.
    I no longer tarnish metal, and I now I feel sluggish, produce tartar, have normal body odor, and higher body fat (still average for woman). Something is different.
    My diet has actual improved…less sugar and carbs…but I think the negative changes have to do with PH. Now I am not saying eating differently would reverse things…I just know there is something to PH.

  86. says

    Whoops… now I’m getting confused: breathing faster than optimal ( more than 8 breaths per minute) raises blood pH of course!

    [Thereby reducing tissue oxygenation: Bohr effect/O2 haemoglobin dissociation curve; stimulating sympathetic nervous system, redistributing blood from core to periphery; tightening running & bracing muscles.]

  87. Sara says

    This article and discussion has been so helpful in getting my head straight about this topic. Thank you Chris and James. I understand the myths and realities so much better now.

  88. James says

    John: “The connection between alkalinity and cancer (or any disease): Alkalinity increases the availability of oxygen to the cells, while acidity decreases oxygen to the cells, making them prone to disease. ”

    Again, not true!!! First of all alkalinity DECREASES tissue oxygen levels for several reasons. Alkalinity constricts blood vessels, which decreases circulation. Alkalinity also prevents the release of oxygen from hemoglobin leading to tissue hypoxia. If the alkalosis is sufficiently bad the person will die from suffocation as the alkalosis will cause spasm contractions of the lungs preventing proper respiration.

    Many people still believe the myth that a lack of oxygen leads to cancer because of the numerous times Otto Warburg has been misquoted. Contrary to claims Otto Warburg:

    -Did not win the Nobel Prize for discovering cancer was caused from a lack of oxygen. Warburg won the Nobel Prize for his discovery of an enzyme he called “iron oxidase”
    -Never claimed cancer was caused from a lack of oxygen. Warburg believed cancer cells had a respiratory defect, and that they would continue to ferment glucose regardless of how much oxygen was present (the “Warburg effect”). Warburg’s hypotheses on the cancer cells having a respiratory defect and how they produced energy were later disproven.
    -Never claimed that any disease resulted from a lack of oxygen.
    -Never claimed that cancer was caused by acidity.

    Yet all of these are common statements made by the alkalizing supporters who keep making these false claims about what Warburg actually said.

    Modern research has revealed a lot about cancer including the fact that cancer cells not only need oxygen for survival, but they are highly reliant on oxygen and higher oxygen levels actually promote cancer growth.

    Cancer cells die in the absence of oxygen. This is seen in the initial growth of cancerous tumors that rely on oxygen diffusion to get oxygen. Once the tumor reaches 2-3mm in size though oxygen can no longer diffuse in to the tumor and the center of the tumor dies from a lack of oxygen. This stimulates the release of angiogenesis growth factors (AGFs) that stimulate blood vessel formation increasing oxygen levels to the tumor.

    Modern research has also shown that cancer cells derive at least 50% of their energy through oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos), which requires oxygen, and that cancer cells have a higher affinity for oxygen than healthy cells.

    John: “We need the proteins, fats, B vitamins, and omega oils in animal foods just as much as we need the minerals, antioxidants, and polyphenols in plant foods. ”

    Proteins are made up of amino acids. Fats are made up of fatty acids. Some B vitamins are acids. Omega oils are fatty acids. Many antioxidants, such as vitamin C are acids. Polyphenols, such as tannic acid, are also acids.

    • Crystal says

      James,

      You are consistent and I understand why your tone is so straight forward. Too many people chime w/o reading enough of what you have so graciously took the time to share. I am a nursing student and still trying to begin to put much of this together. I wanted to thank you, I really have enjoyed this reading. I am so glad to of stumbled across it and will continue to follow you.

  89. says

    Thank-you for this write-up and information. Based on your analysis, could you please elaborate on the affects of Alkalinity and Cancer? Why does the natural health world promote the approach to thrive the body with Alkalinity and to reduce acidity to help with healing cancer naturally?

    • James says

      Hi Julia,

      This has all been addressed earlier in the comments, but here it is again so you don’t have to search:

      “Cancer cells themselves have an internal pH more alkaline than healthy cells. Studies have shown that not only does excessive alkalinity of cell cause healthy cells to revert to a cancerous state, but also that cancer cells need that high internal alkalinity to survive and thrive.

      The acidity you refer to is the external matrix around cancer cells. The external matrix becomes acidic because the cancer cells export acidic protons in to the external matrix to protect themselves from the acidity. When the proton pumps of cancer cells are blocked the cancer cells die from the build up of acid within the cancer cells.”

      Alkalizing will not cure cancer. That has been proven with research showing alkalizing lithium salts had no effect on cancer and alkalizing cesium chloride was not only cancer causing, but can also increase the growth rate of existing cancers.

      Many people will try to tout the work of Dr. Simoncini who killed cancerous tumors by directly injecting the tumors with baking soda (sodium bicarbonate). People who do not understand the basics of chemistry ran with this claiming the alkalizing effect of the baking soda cured the cancer ignoring several facts. For one the neutralization of acids with baking soda forms carbonic acid and therefore there really is not an alkalizing effect. Secondly, the most likely explanation for this is the baking soda was simply creating such as strong osmotic effect on the tumor that this is what killed the tumor. This same principle is used to destroy varicose veins, which is not even malignant tissue. The varicose veins can be injected with a strong saline (salt) solution creating a strong osmotic effect destroying the varicose veins.

      If alkalizing the cancer cells actually worked then the amount of alkalinity required would be lethal to healthy cells around the tumor long before it would be lethal to the cancer cells since the cancer cells require a higher alkalinity to survive and the higher proton production would buffer the alkalinity more effectively than in healthy cells.

      Unfortunately, people have taken the research of Simoncini and incorrectly assumed that ingesting baking soda would have the same effect. Most of the baking soda though is going to be neutralized by the stomach acid to begin with. In order to overcome this problem the person would have to ingest so much baking soda that it completely overwhelms the stomach acid which is very dangerous, and even more dangerous to cancer patients. This could exacerbate cachexia since a lack of stomach acid interferes with nutrient absorption. In addition, the lack of stomach acid actually increases the risk of cancer by decreasing methylation.

      The only potential benefit of ingesting baking soda with cancer is reducing metastases since hyaluronidase is acid activated, and reduction of pain by reducing uric acid. But the dangers of ingesting the baking soda far outweighs any potential benefits. And there are other, much safer ways, of reducing the risk of metastases and lowering uric acid.

      James

    • John says

      The connection between alkalinity and cancer (or any disease): Alkalinity increases the availability of oxygen to the cells, while acidity decreases oxygen to the cells, making them prone to disease. The Paleo diet is on the acidic side, but it also includes plenty of alkaline plant foods to balance the scales. We need the proteins, fats, B vitamins, and omega oils in animal foods just as much as we need the minerals, antioxidants, and polyphenols in plant foods. However, we must use supplements as well due to the poor soil conditions of today’s farmlands. See Dr. Otto Warburg.

  90. Molly says

    It’s interesting to me that you are advocating the Paleo diet and not taking a neutral stance.

    People need to do their own research.

    As a trained health care professional, my comment is that your information is not only misleading, but inaccurate.

    When people encourage you to “alkalize your blood,” most of them mean that you should eat plenty of foods that have an alkaline-forming effect on your system. The reason for making this suggestion is that the vast majority of highly processed foods – like white flour products and white sugar – have an acid-forming effect on your system, and if you spend years eating a poor diet that is mainly acid-forming, you will overwork some of the buffering systems mentioned above to a point where you could create undesirable changes in your health.

    For example, your phosphate buffer system uses different phosphate ions in your body to neutralize strong acids and bases. About 85% of the phosphate ions that are used in your phosphate buffer system comes from calcium phosphate salts, which are structural components of your bones and teeth. If your body fluids are regularly exposed to large quantities of acid-forming foods and liquids, your body will draw upon its calcium phosphate reserves to supply your phosphate buffer system to neutralize the acid-forming effects of your diet. Over time, this may lead to structural weakness in your bones and teeth.

    Drawing on your calcium phosphate reserves at a high rate can also increase the amount of calcium that is eliminated via your genito-urinary system, which is why a predominantly acid-forming diet can increase your risk of developing calcium-rich kidney stones.

    This is just one example of how your buffering systems can be overtaxed to a point where you experience negative health consequences. Since your buffering systems have to work all the time anyway to neutralize the acids that are formed from everyday metabolic activities, it’s in your best interest to follow a diet that doesn’t create unnecessary work for your buffering systems.

    Generally speaking, most vegetables and fruits have an alkaline-forming effect on your body fluids.

    Most grains, animal foods, and highly processed foods have an acid-forming effect on your body fluids.

    Your health is best served by a good mix of nutrient-dense, alkaline and acid-forming foods; ideally, you want to eat more alkaline-forming foods than acid-forming foods to have the net acid and alkaline-forming effects of your diet match the slightly alkaline pH of your blood.

    The following lists indicate which common foods have an alkaline-forming effect on your body fluids, and which ones result in acid ash formation when they are digested and assimilated into your system.

    Foods that have a Moderate to Strong Alkaline-Forming Effect

    Watermelon
    Lemons
    Cantaloupe
    Celery
    Limes
    Mango
    Honeydew
    Papaya
    Parsley
    Seaweed
    Sweet, seedless grapes
    Watercress
    Asparagus
    Kiwi
    Pears
    Pineapple
    Raisins
    Vegetable juices
    Apples
    Apricots
    Alfalfa sprouts
    Avocados
    Bananas
    Garlic
    Ginger
    Peaches
    Nectarines
    Grapefruit
    Oranges
    Most herbs
    Peas
    Lettuce
    Broccoli
    Cauliflower

    Foods that have a Moderate to Strong Acid-Forming Effect

    Alcohol
    Soft drinks (pop)
    Tobacco
    Coffee
    White sugar
    Refined Salt
    Artificial sweeteners
    Antibiotics (and most drugs)
    White flour products (including pasta)
    Seafood
    White vinegar
    Barley
    Most boxed cereals
    Cheese
    Most beans
    Flesh meats
    Most types of bread

    Please note that these lists of acid and alkaline-forming foods are not comprehensive, nor are they meant to be.

    If you’re eating mainly grains, flour products, animal foods, and washing these foods down with coffee, soda, and milk, you will almost certainly improve your health by replacing some of your food and beverage choices with fresh vegetables and fruits.

    Thanks for your article. It was interesting.

    • says

      Oh dear,

      Molly, I think you’ve invited a sh^tstorm of technical data by James that will (in his mind) prove you wrong.

      I think you’ve expressed an important element in wellbeing — do your own research, and trust your intuition.

      E.g. for many decades we’ve been warned again, again and again about the dangers of saturated fats. Recent research by Cambridge University reveals no evidence linking consumption of saturated fats, with heart disease. (there are some surgeons — e.g Dr. Dwight Lundell — who argues vegetable oils and similar unsaturated fats actually cause heart disease).

      Whoops.

      So much for all that technical detail about how low-fat is best for you. These days you can barely buy a full-fat yogurt in supermarkets.

      Prudent advice: take note of, and do as those who’ve succeeded against all odds, as exampled by Dr Turner.

      • Paleo Huntress says

        Steaphen,

        I intend to link this page in a comment in every online conversation that I encounter that promotes you, your website or your book, including Amazon.

        Before anyone makes a decision to spend money on a doctrine, they should see how that doctrine’s guru behaves. People should see the lack of self-control, self-awareness and follow-through of that guru, as well as his ego and refusal to leave a forum in peace even after he’s agreed to.

        I do hope your words here reflect your doctrine as you state it and are something you will be proud to have people read.

        ~Huntress

        • James says

          Poor Steaphen is simply attacking the messenger as usual since he is clueless to the topic and thus is unable to attack the message.

          One point he does bring up is:

          “E.g. for many decades we’ve been warned again, again and again about the dangers of saturated fats. Recent research by Cambridge University reveals no evidence linking consumption of saturated fats, with heart disease. (there are some surgeons — e.g Dr. Dwight Lundell — who argues vegetable oils and similar unsaturated fats actually cause heart disease).”

          Yes, there is a debate here because many scientists have this assumption of presence of must mean cause of. Saturated fats do not cause heart disease. Heart disease is the result of arterial inflammation, which has various causes. For example, elevated homocysteine, insulin damage, smoking, high blood pressure, xanthine oxidase from dairy, etc. Presence of saturated fats in cases of arterial plaque formation does not mean cause.

          The only reason I bring this up is the same exact faulty reasoning has been applied to promote the so-called “alkaline diet”. People are assuming the presence of alkaline minerals in certain foods must make the blood alkaline. And they are assuming that despite ALL foods eventually metabolizing in to acids that only some foods will make the body acidic. Then they assume that these acids will lead to disease. And they assume that the so-called “alkaline foods” will neutralize these acids keeping the body healthy even though diet has little effect on raising pH. And they assume that bones are a primary buffering system for blood acidity, which again is not true. So they have all these assumptions all based on the presence of alkaline ash content of foods, which have virtually no influence on blood pH.

          Also like how Steaphen’s Dr. Turner who assumes that just because people can think about diseases that their thoughts are the primary means of both disease formation and cure. Although he has yet to produce even one of the over 3500 published medical articles on this process he claims exist for review. Either they don’t exist or he does not believe in them enough to post them as actual evidence to his claims.

          • says

            Hi James

            re your ” Although he has yet to produce even one of the over 3500 published medical articles on this process he claims exist for review. ”

            I think there’s been a misunderstanding that needs clarification.

            I originally copied and pasted a comment by Dr Lissa Rankin regarding Dr Kelly Turner’s research (claiming the 3,500+ case studies).

            I’m not privy to those links, so it would be irresponsible to post any links that weren’t directly cited by either Dr’s Turner or Rankin.

            In any case, a cursory search on the net revealed (for me) plenty of links. I posted some online here http://beliefdoctor.com/news/radical-remissions-from-cancer-9-key-factors#resistance

            But again, I’ve not yet seen any links to her case studies, so as a matter of professional courtesy and clarity, I most certainly won’t be posting any links here, nor allude to any that might have been used in her research, unless specifically cited by her.

            That said, in reading her book, I have, shall we say, a wonderfully exuberant confidence in her findings — that diet, pills and potions … and expensive medical treatments is not a singular primary factor in 3,500+ cases of radical remissions.

            :)

            btw, a small criticism of her findings — I think she should have include supplements with diet, leaving only 8 key factors — but who knows, maybe the figure 9 is better for marketing or some such.

            • James says

              Steaphen,

              You posted a quote as “evidence” to back your claim. In that quote it clearly states:

              “3500 case studies published in the medical literature about people who experienced spontaneous remissions from seemingly “incurable diseases.””

              IF these case studies really exist and IF they were really published in medical journals this would make them PUBLIC RECORD. Therefore, the claim you are “not privy to those links” is a bogus excuse. And the more you ignore me on proving any of these studies exist and back your claims the more it appears all you have been claiming is fraudulent.

              • says

                “the claim you are “not privy to those links” is a bogus excuse.”

                ?

                First of all I’m unfamiliar with the technical term “bogus”. Secondly, I’ve not yet cited those links, so won’t claim to know them. Earlier I provided links to some 100+ cases, that are easily verified in the public domain. Not sure what your issue is. They’re readily available.

                Thirdly, could I please caution you … if I was the publisher of Dr Turner’s book, I might take exception to your posts here, and since Murdoch has more money than you, I and half of America, I’d be a bit more restrained in going overboard on that bogus claim. You’d be easy pickings, from what I understand of libel laws and related matters.

          • says

            Dr Kelly Turner wrote:

            “I am overjoyed to announce that my book Radical Remission: Surviving Cancer Against All Odds made the New York Times Bestseller List for the April 6th edition!

            . . .

            Many of you have asked how you can continue to help spread the word. The best ways would be simply to keep letting people know about the book, and writing an Amazon review if you feel so inclined.

            Many thanks again, and I’m excited to see where it goes from here!

            Sincerely,
            Kelly

            Amazon: http://amzn.com/0062268759
            Facebook: Dr. Kelly Turner
            Twitter/Instagram: @drkellyturner
            Web: http://www.drkellyturner.com

            Dear Dr Turner, I’m happy to help spread the word about your good work! :)

            • James says

              And why are you posting that here when it has NOTHING to do with the topic?

              I would not buy her book in the first place simply because those over 3500 published studies don’t appear to exist in the first place.

              And it really irks me that you just simply WILL NOT stop posting off topic here. If you want to discuss Turner’s hypotheses take it to some on topic blog. Despite being asked how many times to do this you have taken every opportunity you can to plug her here even though her claims have NOTHING to do with the topic here. I am beginning to wonder if you are her publisher or what other connection you have to her since you are insistent in forcing her work down our throats. Again, I and other people here did not come to this blog to listen to her off topic pseudoscience!!! Take it elsewhere Steaphen!

              • says

                “NOTHING” to do with people’s health and wellbeing, one of the reasons they look to an alkalizing diet in the first place?

                You’re welcome to your opinion :)

                • James says

                  Steaphen, I cannot believe you still do not comprehend such simple concepts such as what it “on topic”. I could stretch claims like you keep doing and claim war is on topic since this also affects people’s health. But the topic is not the mind-body connection, it is not turner and it is not me despite your constant trying to make these the topic. The topic is the alkaline myth. Even a 3rd grader could figure out such as simple concept.

                  By the way, you were right the first time, you had not cited the studies.

                  And you clearly understand law less than you do medicine or the difference between cited and sighted.

                  It’s obvious that you are going to remain oblivious to the facts presented so I am doen dealing with you. I would get further arguing with the wall that I get arguing with you. Clearly you will never get it.

            • says

              Hi James

              It seems you’re still unaware … as Dr Herbert Benson says quite definitively : Mind can change one’s biochemistry.

              So all your details, facts and opinions about biochemistry are riding on a flawed premise.

              That’s why I’ve posted material on Dr Turner’s book, to give a heads-up that all your comments are, while somewhat in the ballpark, are undermined by the players changing ballparks. So, in a sense all your comments are off-topic.

              Another pertinent point is that the low-fat issue was championed by people like you for decades, citing lots of technical data, just like you.

              Now you have some surgeons (one who’s done “over 5,000 open-heart surgeries”) saying all those years, “we” were wrong. All that technical information, wrong.

              Whoops.

              My advice, as before, read Dr Turner’s book, and Norman Cousins book “Anatomy of an Illness” and conclude what Cousins did … “Drugs are not always necessary. Belief in recovery always is”

              I’d rather follow those who have proven results, than the advice of technicians whose data is often contradicted, and subsequently shown to be disadvantageous to health.

        • finndian says

          If that isn’t the pot calling the kettle black. Every forum you frequent you are seen as nothing more than a trouble maker. You go to forums to ‘correct’ people instead of trying to help. You disrupt… you do not help. You are a troll and apparently proud of it.

          • Paleo Huntress says

            No Wormtongue, it isn’t. I’ve never claimed to be trying to “help people”, that is Steaphen’s schtick. I come for the discussion and the debate. I have nothing to gain by people believing my goal is to “help them”, and nothing to lose when my actions don’t back a book that I didn’t write or a website that I don’t host. >.<

            You still don't know what a troll is, and you obviously don't know how to the use the 'pot calling the kettle black' analogy properly– but having my own personal internet stalker is kinda fun.

            Put your forked tongue back behind your teeth.

      • says

        @Finndian (in response to your post March 28, 2014 at 7:35 pm)

        I think a couple of points might provide some perspective:

        When Paleo Huntress expresses vitriol and name-calling, while using a fake name (alias) on this website, she’s telegraphing some aspects of character that is evident to many.

        Specifically, when meeting with and communicating with people in public (e.g. at work) she will (in kind, with her posts here being behind a mask) use a “mask” and hide her true feelings. My guess is her work requires her to be nice, happy and sweet when serving clients, all the while being unable (due to work commitments, or just shy) to speak her mind — e.g. as a waitress or sales person.

        I’ve seen research which confirms the increased incidence of ill-health for those who must always be ‘up’ –smiling, pleasant — while feeling frustrated, angry and stressed over their inability to express what they genuinely feel. Knowing that about her enables one to empathize and understand the vitriol in forums like this one. That’s not meant to be condescending, just what is.

        The second point is that even if she were to sufficiently slander anyone, it is a fairly straight forward matter to commence legal proceedings, and subpoena Chris Kresser, and/or his ISP (and additional ISPs as needed), get her real name, then she’s in court, pronto. But that path (even using legal help at mate’s rates) is expensive, and time-consuming. Besides, those reading this blog will appreciate her character and the context and cause of her vitriol, name-calling etc, and ignore.

        At the end of the day, so to speak, we’re all in this together, so it behooves each of us to make the world a little better for one and all.

        • Paleo Huntress says

          vit·ri·ol
          ˈvitrēəl,-ˌôl
          noun
          1. cruel and bitter criticism.

          Do you really feel you’ve been cruelly and bitterly criticized, Steaphen?

          You’ve been asked repeatedly to stay on the topic of pH and you’ve said you were leaving this forum several times, and yet, you refuse to honor the forum request and you cannot even honor your own word and follow through. When that is brought to your attention, you attempt to excuse your behavior with sexist jokes and pretend to be unable to distinguish between topics of general health and this one about pH myths. Given that, do you truly feel that my criticism of you is cruel and/or bitter? Truly?

          Regarding slander, I don’t need to slander you, you do a great job of making YOURSELF look bad. I’m not trying to sell anyone a book on how thinking positively will heal them, it is YOU doing that. There are no laws preventing anyone from directing people on the internet to public examples of your character. YOU wrote the words, not me. YOU provide examples of behavior that conflicts with your doctrine, not me.

          Funny thing though, I did a google search to see where most people were talking about you, and as it turns out, the only person talking about you on the internet is YOU. lol It seems I didn’t give people enough credit for recognizing and avoiding charlatans.

          • finndian says

            Who are you and your alter ego James to come and try to police the forum? Where you get off telling someone to stay on topic? Neither of you are moderators and you are an obnoxious troll. As everyone tells you in every forum you disrupt… go away! You add nothing to the discussion.

            • Paleo Huntress says

              -Holds up the mirror for Finny-

              For Paleo folks, there was an article published at Paleo Leap just over a month ago.

              Acid/Alkaline Balance and Paleo: Myth or Truth?

              “The major health benefit of a low-acid load diet probably has more to do with cutting out processed foods and eating plenty of nutrient-dense vegetables than anything else. Fruits and vegetables do contain some nutrients that increase absorption of calcium (like magnesium, for example), so these foods probably are good for bone health, and every other kind of health as well. But it’s not because they’re re-balancing the body’s acid levels, it’s because they’re supplying essential aids to calcium absorption from green vegetables and other plant sources of calcium.”

    • James says

      Molly: “When people encourage you to “alkalize your blood,” most of them mean that you should eat plenty of foods that have an alkaline-forming effect on your system. The reason for making this suggestion is that the vast majority of highly processed foods – like white flour products and white sugar – have an acid-forming effect on your system”

      As has been pointed out numerous times foods DO NOT really have an alkalizing or acidifying effect on the body. ALL foods are made acidic in the stomach, alkalized in the intestine and then eventually metabolized in to acids., most of which are essential to the body.

      Molly: “if you spend years eating a poor diet that is mainly acid-forming, you will overwork some of the buffering systems mentioned above to a point where you could create undesirable changes in your health.”

      The body’s primary means of pH regulation is respiration. We have to breathe throughout life and so we never overwork our respiratory buffering system. Dumping of hydrogen ions through the kidneys is the body’s secondary means of pH regulation. And again, the kidneys are designed to do this job throughout our life. We do not use up any kidney buffers. And the body has yet more buffering systems it uses long before bones would be used for buffering. This is why acidosis is EXTREMELY rare to begin with and buffering by bones is even more rare than the already extremely rare acidosis.

      In fact, if you are in medicine then you should be aware of what is the main reason for bone demineralization (osteomalacia, osteopenia) really is. It is excess phosphorus, the same phosphorus that is in the calcium phosphate you mention. High phosphorus levels create a calcium-phosphorus ratio imbalance triggering pseudohyperparathyroidism (PHPT). PHPT leads to a release of parathyroid hormone (PTH), which leads to a release of calcium from bones. This has NOTHING to do with acidosis. The other primary cause of mineral loss from bone are benign pituitary tumors that are believed to result from a lack of active vitamin D3. The benign tumors stimulate PTH release again resulting in bone mineral loss despite the extremely rare acidosis not being present.

      People need to stop repeating this acidosis being a common cause of bone mineral loss myth.

      Same with the acidosis causing disease myth. Are you aware of the dangers alkalizing presents? For example, most pathogens thrive in an alkaline environment. Candida for example morphs in to its pathogenic fungal form and its growth gene is turned on in an alkaline environment. Our flora acids control Candida by keeping it in a benign yeast form and turning off the Candida growth gene. And studies have shown that over-alkalinity of healthy cells morphs these cells in to cancer cells, which require a highly alkaline internal pH to survive and thrive.

      Molly: “For example, your phosphate buffer system uses different phosphate ions in your body to neutralize strong acids and bases. About 85% of the phosphate ions that are used in your phosphate buffer system comes from calcium phosphate salts, which are structural components of your bones and teeth. If your body fluids are regularly exposed to large quantities of acid-forming foods and liquids, your body will draw upon its calcium phosphate reserves to supply your phosphate buffer system to neutralize the acid-forming effects of your diet. Over time, this may lead to structural weakness in your bones and teeth.”

      You are correct that the phosphate buffering system relies on two ions. When the blood builds up too many hydrogen ions the blood starts to become acidic. In response hydrogen phosphate, NOT calcium phosphate, takes up a hydrogen ion to form the other ion dihydrogen phosphate. When the blood loses too many hydrogen ions the blood becomes dangerously alkaline so the dihydrogen phosphate now releases the hydrogen ions it picked up back in to the blood to bring the pH back down.

      By the way, phosphate is considered insignificant as a blood pH buffer due to the extremely low concentrations in the blood. Therefore, the whole phosphate buffer debate is really irrelevant anyway.

      Molly: “If your body fluids are regularly exposed to large quantities of acid-forming foods and liquids, your body will draw upon its calcium phosphate reserves to supply your phosphate buffer system to neutralize the acid-forming effects of your diet. Over time, this may lead to structural weakness in your bones and teeth.”

      Not true as explained above.

      Molly: “This is just one example of how your buffering systems can be overtaxed to a point where you experience negative health consequences.”

      Again, phosphate buffering IS NOT a significant source of pH buffering for the blood due to the very low concentrations of phosphate buffers. Respiration and hydrogen dumping or retention are the primary means of pH balance in the blood.

      Molly: “Generally speaking, most vegetables and fruits have an alkaline-forming effect on your body fluids.

      Most grains, animal foods, and highly processed foods have an acid-forming effect on your body fluids.”

      Again, these myths have been addressed a number of times. There is NO such thing as a truly acid forming or truly alkaline forming food. ALL foods are made acidic in the stomach, alkaline in the intestines (the “alkaline response”) then eventually metabolized in to acids most of which are essential to the body.

      In addition, fruits and vegetables in particular are loaded with various dietary acids as I pointed out in an earlier post:

      “Steaphen, you missed the malic acid, tartaric acid, oxalic acid, amino amino acids and fatty acids in lemon.

      Fruits and vegetables, including many considered alkaline can also contain various acids including chlorogenic acid, tartaric acid, tannic acid, quinic acid, aketoglutaric acid,
      oxalacetic acid, pyruvic acid, fumaric acid, lactic acid, succinic acid, acetic acid, caffeic acid, p-coumaric acid, formic acid, isocitric acid, lactoisocitric acid, shikimic acid, malonic acid, t-aconitic acid, quinic acid, glyceric acid, citramalic acid, glycolic acid, lipoic acid, succinic acid, glucuronic acid, galacturonic acid, benzoic acid, phosphoric acid, hydrochloric acid, sulphuric acid, fumaric acid,
      pyrrolidinonecarboxylic acid, neochlorogenic acid, sinapic acid, salicylic acid, gentistic acid, acidic vitamins such as folic acid and pantothenic acid, etc.

      There is a partial list of the acids found in fruits and vegetables.

      As for the second part of my statement about ALL foods metabolizing in to acids this is basic human chemistry as well. For example, all the sugars and some other compounds are metabolized leading to the formation of carbonic acid. Fats and oils in plants and meats are metabolized in to fatty acids. Proteins in to amino acids. Amino acids can metabolize in to uric acid. Fibers in plants are fermented by the flora in to acetic, lactic and other fatty acids as well as acidic B vitamins. I could go a lot deeper in to all the various other acids needed by the body and generated by the body through the metabolizing and metabolic products of foods. ”

      Molly: “ideally, you want to eat more alkaline-forming foods than acid-forming foods”

      Again, there is no such thing as an alkaline forming food. ALL foods, including the so-called “alkaline foods” will metabolize in to acids. And most of these foods again contain acids to begin with.

      If you really want to see how ludicrous the acid-alkaline food hypothesis is consider this. Lemons are loaded with citric acid, malic acid, malic acid, tartaric acid, oxalic acid, amino amino acids and fatty acids. Lemons also contain a race of nitric acid, but not acetic acid as Steaphen incorrectly claimed earlier. Yet lemons are considered alkaline. Now compare this to beef, which is considered acidic despite having a lower acid content and being loaded with alkaline minerals such as sodium, potassium, calcium and magnesium.

      Then vinegar is considered acid forming even though it is a weaker acid than the citric acid in lemons.

      The alkaline supporters will incorrectly claim that the lemon juice becomes alkaline in the body. It is not really becoming alkaline, the acid is being neutralized by the body’s buffering system. The same exact thing happens to ALL ingested foods including steak, candy bars, pie, etc. The digestion process requires stomach acid. Therefore, all food is made acidic in the stomach as part of the digestive process. Food is partially digested by enzymes in the stomach to form chyme. As the acidic chyme is released in to the intestines the acid has to neutralized to protect the intestines. Therefore, the pancreas releases sodium bicarbonate to neutralize the acids in the chyme. This process is commonly referred to as the “alkaline response”, which again occurs with ALL foods. Digestion is then completed in the intestines by alkaline enzymes.

      Molly: “The following lists indicate which common foods have an alkaline-forming effect on your body fluids, and which ones result in acid ash formation when they are digested and assimilated into your system.”

      If you read different lists you will find that they tend to contradict each other. The reason is that these lists are bogus. As pointed out numerous times there is no such thing as a truly acid forming or truly alkaline forming food. ALL foods stimulate the same alkaline response. Most foods also contain amino acids that are metabolized first in to amino acids. Amino acids are eventually broken down in to highly alkaline and highly toxic ammonia. To protect the body the body reacts the highly alkaline ammonia with carbonic acid, neutralizing the carbonic acid and forming uric acid in the process. Uric acid is one of the body’s primary antioxidants. Excess uric acid is normally hydrolyzed and excreted in urine and feces. Fats and oils in foods are first broken down in to fatty acids and eventually metabolized to form carbonic acid. Sugars in foods, including those found in fruits, vegetables and meats are all metabolized eventually in to carbonic acid. Fructose from fruits also elevates uric acid levels. The fibers in the so-called “alkaline foods” will be fermented by the intestinal flora to form lactic acid, acetic acid and other fatty acids. Lactose from milk will also ferment in to lactic acid. Bottom line is that ALL foods, including the so-called “alkaline foods”, will eventually metabolize in to acids in the long run. Even so, since they can also form alkaline intermediates such as the highly toxic ammonia, these foods are not considered truly acid, nor truly alkaline forming.

      The main influence diet has on blood pH is simply the formation of carbonic acid, which has several essential functions to the body. But the body readily eliminates any excess the body cannot utilize without taxing any buffering systems for the body.

      The whole alkalizing food myth is based on isolating the alkaline ash from foods while totally ignoring the naturally occurring acids present in foods and the acids they metabolize in to. If they reversed this and only isolated all the naturally occurring acids in the so-called “alkaline foods” and ignored the alkaline ash present then all these so-called “alkaline foods” would suddenly be considered “acid forming foods”.

      This does not even take any scientific reasoning, just some simple common sense to understand the whole alkaline diet thing is a myth.

  91. Michele Duncan says

    Why do Eskimos have such high rates of hip fractures osteoporosis? Eskimos eat lots of animal protein and calcium?

    • Paleo Huntress says

      I’m not sure they eat “lots” of calcium… though even if they did, calcium intake isn’t the determining factor in osteoporosis. But they do suffer from very high rates of chronic Vitamin D deficiency due to a lack of UV exposure. As such, they also have one of the highest suicide rates in the world, as well as one of the highest rates of alcoholism and depression.

    • James says

      Osteoporosis is not the result of low calcium. Osteoporosis is the result of a loss of collagen matrix. The two primary deficiencies that lead to a loss of collagen matrix, and thus osteoporosis, are silica (orthosilicic acid) and vitamin C (ascorbic acid). The best natural sources for these are plants, not whale or seal that make up a large part of their diets.

      Bone density can also be decreased by excess vitamin A, which they probably get way more than they need in their diets.

  92. James says

    Steaphen: “Hi James

    James: “while totally ignoring things such as the naturally occurring acid content of the foods or the acids they metabolize in to.”

    ?

    I think most who (for example) eat alkaline-foods (e.g. lemons) are aware of the acid (acetic and ascorbic) in the fruit.”

    Steaphen, you missed the malic acid, tartaric acid, oxalic acid, amino amino acids and fatty acids in lemon.

    Fruits and vegetables, including many considered alkaline can also contain various acids including chlorogenic acid, tartaric acid, tannic acid, quinic acid, aketoglutaric acid,
    oxalacetic acid, pyruvic acid, fumaric acid, lactic acid, succinic acid, acetic acid, caffeic acid, p-coumaric acid, formic acid, isocitric acid, lactoisocitric acid, shikimic acid, malonic acid, t-aconitic acid, quinic acid, glyceric acid, citramalic acid, glycolic acid, lipoic acid, succinic acid, glucuronic acid, galacturonic acid, benzoic acid, phosphoric acid, hydrochloric acid, sulphuric acid, fumaric acid,
    pyrrolidinonecarboxylic acid, neochlorogenic acid, sinapic acid, salicylic acid, gentistic acid, acidic vitamins such as folic acid and pantothenic acid, etc.

    There is a partial list of the acids found in fruits and vegetables.

    As for the second part of my statement about ALL foods metabolizing in to acids this is basic human chemistry as well. For example, all the sugars and some other compounds are metabolized leading to the formation of carbonic acid. Fats and oils in plants and meats are metabolized in to fatty acids. Proteins in to amino acids. Amino acids can metabolize in to uric acid. Fibers in plants are fermented by the flora in to acetic, lactic and other fatty acids as well as acidic B vitamins. I could go a lot deeper in to all the various other acids needed by the body and generated by the body through the metabolizing and metabolic products of foods. But my point has already been more than made.

    As for the rest of your comments I will ignore them since once again you are trying hard to post off topic, including making this about me since you cannot argue the topic of the blog as usual.

  93. James says

    Hi Rhonda,

    I would actually like to address this.

    First of all the body has numerous buffering systems since it needs to maintain its tight pH. Respiration is the body’s primary means of pH regulation though. If the blood starts to become too acidic respiration increases to reduce carbonic acid levels. If the blood starts to become too alkaline then respiration slows down to build up carbonic acid. The kidneys are the body’s second in line for pH regulation.

    The other thing we have to keep in mind is that there is no such thing as a truly acid or truly alkaline food. Here is a post I just did on another site in regards to the acid-alkaline food myth:

    “There is no basis for this, which again is why so many acid and alkaline food lists contradict each other.

    This myth is based on measuring ONLY the ash content of the food while totally ignoring things such as the naturally occurring acid content of the foods or the acids they metabolize in to.

    If they only measured the acid content of the so-called “alkaline foods” then many of those so-called “alkaline foods” would then have to be re-listed as acid foods. This is another reason this “alkaline food” lists are bogus.

    Also consider this fact. Beef is listed as acidic even though beef is loaded with alkaline calcium, magnesium sodium and potassium. More than most of the plants considered alkalizing.”

    James

    • says

      Hi James

      James: “while totally ignoring things such as the naturally occurring acid content of the foods or the acids they metabolize in to.”

      ?

      I think most who (for example) eat alkaline-foods (e.g. lemons) are aware of the acid (acetic and ascorbic) in the fruit.

      Earlier you wrote “If people were reading this blog article it was because they were interested in what was being said about the alkaline myth”.

      I don’t presume to speak for others, but I believe many people reading this blog would have the primary focus on health, and topics such as acid-alkaline are part of that focus.

      I suggest to those reading this who are ill or interested in long-term health, to ask some questions.

      We know (from the above comments by James) that he does not believe we can be well, naturally (e.g. he states that mind is only a factor in psychosomatic illness, not “serious ones” caused by pathogens. Research by Dr Turner, Dr Herbert Benson (Harvard) and others says otherwise).

      I think James’ focus is to undermine people’s confidence in the alkaline-diet. That then would soften them to being receptive to the need for expensive pharmaceutical medications.

      I recommend to those who are unwell, to ask: “What do those who recover from serious illness do (especially those who have terminal illness for which conventional treatments have proved ineffective?)”

      Keep a journal, note what improves, what worsens your condition.

      Be very suspicious of those who profit from you remaining on medications.

      Trust your intuition (one of the 9 key factors utilized by cancer survivors).

      One of the habits of highly successful people (Stephen Covey) is to start with the end in mind. Start with the end in mind of being free of medications. That possibility is available to all.

      At first you would be wise to merely start weaning yourself off medications, not drastically cutting those medications. Note that those who are most vehemently opposed to your goal (of medication-free wellness) will likely be those who have the most to (financially) lose. Watch for their name-calling, abuse, derision and anger as an indicator of either their financial income being at stake if you regain wellness naturally, or their belief that you must remain a victim to your disease.

      Stay focused. Research what has worked for others (e.g. alkaline-diet, meditation, letting go anger etc, as per Dr Turner’s list).

      Finally, ask “what do I want? Do I want to remain on expensive medications?” No? then research, meditate, research, radically change your diet, trust your intuition, go your own way, take control of your health, let go anger, improve your social support network — in other words, do what thousands of others have done to regain wellness against all odds.

      If I am wrong in my advice, no problem — ignore it, go your own way, find what works. Enjoy.

  94. Rhonda says

    Hi Chris,
    Your views about the bones not being responsible for balancing our PH but instead it’s our kidneys that balance out acid were very interesting and made a lot of sense.
    But in that case, couldn’t it then put the kidneys at risk by putting too much strain on the kidneys if we consume a diet too high in acid foods?
    Thank you,
    Rhonda

  95. Dennis says

    James,
    I think you should stop complaining about people being off topic. Every time, [15 – 20?], you asked Steaphen for published studies, you went off topic, therefore inviting more off topic comments.

    All you had to do is ignore Steaphen’s and my comments from the beginning, but you could not do that. So you invite him over and over to come back with his off topic published studies.

    Can you see this picture?

    I read through many of the published cases and they are impressive, but don’t need those to know what the mind can do to systematically heal the body [along with diet etc], or hurt the body. I’ve got 43 years experience with this.

    Of course, I strongly suspect, that nearly everyone reading this blog knows full well how rigidly, locked in you are to your limited understanding of the body.

    So since it appeared that Steaphen was not going to post the links, I went ahead and did in hopes to finally shut you up concerning the published cases you keep asking for.

    Then again, why should you read them when you WILL reject in any way possible anything that challenges your limited understanding.

    Now, having said all of those facts.

    James and Paleo. I agree that it was inappropriate for Steaphen and I to comment off topic as much as we did.

    I’m sure both of you will admit though, there will be some natural deviation from the topic as I believe there was before we commented, but we did take it too far.

    As soon as I saw the mind mentioned in relation to the body, I jumped on it with the intention of helping people but not sensitive to the scope on the blog.

    It is very true, if there was a “thread” in a forum with the subject of, say, “influence of the mind on healing”, and somebody comes along and asks about the PH of the gut after eating whatever, then the forum modulator would probably instruct that person to start a new thread of that subject.

    So, ignoring the off topic comments maybe the best way to handle it. At least I’d stay away.

    • James says

      Dennis: “James,
      I think you should stop complaining about people being off topic. Every time, [15 – 20?], you asked Steaphen for published studies, you went off topic, therefore inviting more off topic comments.

      All you had to do is ignore Steaphen’s and my comments from the beginning, but you could not do that. So you invite him over and over to come back with his off topic published studies.

      Can you see this picture?”

      Clearly you don’t. You and Steaphen were asked a number of times to stop posting of topic. But instead the tow of you were acting like atheists barging in to a church and trying to force your convictions on everyone. People don’t go to church to hear atheists ramble on about their convictions. And people were not reading this blog article because they wanted to hear your and Steaphen’s off topic rantings about YOUR beliefs. If people were reading this blog article it was because they were interested in what was being said about the alkaline myth, not hypotheses on the mind-body connection and spontaneous remissions. Now you want to make me the bad guy instead of taking responsibility for your own actions. Typical troll.

  96. James says

    Dennis: “I wish you would have answered my other questions, also.”

    If you get back ON TOPIC then I would happy to answer your questions on topic with the blog article. You and Steaphen though don’t seem to have enough brains between the two of you to figure out that your posts ARE NOT on topic, even when several people have told you this over and over. If you noticed I have been ignoring most of your and Steaphen’s posts because as the saying goes “don’t feed the trolls”. By responding to your off topic posts it just encourages you and Steaphen to post even more off topic. It’s like a sick game the two of you wish to keep playing.

    Dennis: “OK, so, personally, I don’t think Steaphen should have or needed to look up any published medical articles for you.”

    It is up to the original claimant to back their claims with the evidence. If these studies really exist AND if they really back Steaphen’s claims then he should have posted the evidence. The fact that he refused to post the evidence but rather spend so much time arguing against everyone but you just makes it appear all that more that the studies either do not exist or are flawed.

    I see you claim they exist but I have seen all sorts of people post titles to articles they claim back their points. When you read the studies though they either have nothing to do with the topic or they are heavily flawed or misinterpreted.

    This is why I repeatedly asked for these studies to be presented for review. Did you read and review all those 3500+ references or did you just see some references posted and assumed they must back Young’s belief? Being that you said you looked at the site and saw the references but said nothing about actually reading them it appears to to be the later.

    So since you and Steaphen don’t want to back your claims with real evidence and it is off topic why don’t the two of you go somewhere else where your beliefs are the topic since this is not the topic here.

  97. Dennis says

    James
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Dennis: “Do you TRULY believe that Dr Turner simply made up all of her references to spontaneous remission?”

    James: I have no idea. That is why I keep waiting for Steaphen to supply at least 20 of those over 3500 published medical articles he claims exists for review. The fact that he has yet to supply even at least one is pretty suspicious.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I wish you would have answered my other questions, also.

    OK, so, personally, I don’t think Steaphen should have or needed to look up any published medical articles for you. For one reason, because I don’t believe you have any flexibility to adjust your thinking on that matter anyway. I could be wrong.

    I just checked out his site and the links to published articles that you’ve been begging for, are there.

    I don’t know why he didn’t simply put the link here, but it could be, like I believe, he didn’t want to simply bow to your demand. I don’t know. I’m just guessing.

    http://beliefdoctor.com/news/9-key-factors-affecting-radical-remission-from-cancer#remissions

    • says

      Sorry Dennis, I think you, James and his affiliate have misunderstood me – I really don’t care if James accepts the research that Dr Turner has presented.

      As far as I’m concerned, from a holodynamic-systems perspective, all healing is in a sense “spontaneous remission”. Btw Dr Turner does not use the term “spontaneous” as it implies healing occurs without our deliberate intent. Not so, she says, as her research makes abundantly clear..

      The research is, for me, irrelevant. But not everyone has spent decades developing a world-view that provides a fuller view with which to the appreciate the cultural and scientific dogmas at work.

      My posting here is to give those who are experiencing severe illness, a fuller understanding of the dynamics of recovery. The naysayers are irrelevant, or at least they need to be considered irrelevant when seeking recovery from illness. It’s crucial to recovery for people to take control of their lives, their beliefs, diet, and their relationships that are undermining their beliefs, and expectations of recovery.

      I think Stuart Chase was close to the mark when he said that “For those who believe, no proof is necessary, for those who don’t believe, no proof is possible”. I understand the deeper rhythms and processes of life and do not require proof, having now moved beyond the need to look for supporting evidence of that understanding. That said, I’m still delighted when my understanding throws up some surprises, as I make mention here http://beliefinstitute.com/blog/steaphen-pirie/quantum-physics-sex

      Mind you I do get quite vocal about the superstitions and egregious behavior of mechanical-universe thinkers. I share Prof. Richard Conn Henry’s lament that to not speak up about those old-world mechanical beliefs, is a dereliction of social duty. As he says “As a person of iron integrity, I cannot participate in the dereliction of social duty that is going on among scientists today. I must speak up, and, by gum, I am!” (http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/quantum.enigma.html)

      In my work I go into detail about the irrational superstitions that are endemic in modern medicine and science. It really is a travesty of modern science to steadfastly maintain old, irrational superstitions that are causing immense harm in our world. http://beliefdoctor.com/the-travesty-of-modern-science.html

      • says

        Astute readers will be alert to the underlying reason why James seeks to discredit the research — because biochemical processes won’t explain “spontaneous remissions”.

        Just as a biochemical analysis won’t explain how we move our bodies to even so much as lift a finger.

        If anyone wants the unquestionably robust argument as to why that is the case, and will continue to remain the case, read the content of the following link. http://beliefdoctor.com/the-modern-superstitions-of-science-and-religion.html

        • James says

          I already gave several explanations behind spontaneous remissions. So why are you lying again Steaphen? Just looking for another excuse to push your bogus site?

          Steaphen: “Just as a biochemical analysis won’t explain how we move our bodies to even so much as lift a finger.”

          You clearly know nothing about how the body really works if you don’t think science know how muscles work.

          • says

            “You clearly know nothing about how the body really works if you don’t think science know how muscles work.”

            Perhaps true, I know very little — so I ask questions.

            For example: A runner begins running.

            He moves off the start line, and moves forward 1/1,000,000th of the Planck length (note: infinite-series, used to mathematically “solve” Zeno’s Paradoxes requires movement through all increments, including infinitely shorter than the Planck Length).

            Precisely, exactly what biochemical/electrical processes are responsible for that movement?

            If you would be so kind to enlighten the physics community, they’ll reward you with a Nobel or two.

        • says

          James

          When you lift a finger, initially moving it a small distance, say 1/1,000,000th of the Planck length, exactly what biochemical process does that?

          Please be aware, casual observers of your reply will notice the tell-tale signs of your “cognitive dissonance” in the form of denial, or imprecise generalizations that do not answer the question, or comments about being “off-topic”.

          Earlier I suggested you’d receive a Nobel or two if you answer that question. Besides physics you would be a certainty for a Nobel in Chemistry and Medicine, as a precise answer would undermine much of modern scientific and medical dogma.

          • says

            James

            To appease those who believe my comments (and those of Dennis) are off-topic, why don’t you provide a link to a forum at which we can drill down into the biochemistry, say of muscle movement, thinking, memory, feelings, imagination, creativity, hope, desire, love.