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 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.d
Will eating an alkaline diet make you and your bones healthier? #alkalinediet #bonehealth
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.
Like what you’re reading? Get my free newsletter, recipes, eBooks, product recommendations, and more!
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!
Better supplementation. Fewer supplements.
Close the nutrient gap to feel and perform your best.
A daily stack of supplements designed to meet your most critical needs.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Okay. Now we are getting somewhere! Can you tell me what exactly is alkaline water. Be specific. Thanks.
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.
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?!!!!
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Bean: “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.”
The adverse effects of stress are well known in science and medicine. Again, just because you do not know how to find studies this does not mean they do not exist. Of course it does not help that you do not know how to read studies even if you did find them.
Not studies, but look what I was able to find in less than one minute:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/meditation-modern-life/201111/elevated-stress-levels-increase-chance-death
http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2011/oct/high-moderate-levels-stress-lead-higher-mortality-rate
http://psychcentral.com/news/2011/10/21/stress-can-hasten-mortality/30592.html
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2011/impact.aspx
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2181921/Even-low-levels-stress-puts-risk-dying-heart-attack-stroke.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7991620/Stress-increases-risk-of-death-five-fold.html
Amazing what people can easily find when they are actually researching a subject instead of just guessing at things.
And if you want studies look at what I found in less than another minute:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10877687
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15877986
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23457412
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15842971
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10711923
To james,
Bean: “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.”
James: “The adverse effects of stress are well known in science and medicine. Again, just because you do not know how to find studies this does not mean they do not exist. Of course it does not help that you do not know how to read studies even if you did find them.”
so u are saying a healthy diet is not well known in science and medicine ? are u making a joke of yourself ?
good job on finding those pages on internet.
here i give u About 23,300,000 results (0.38 seconds) from google.
https://www.google.com/search?q=healthy%20diet&gws_rd=ssl#q=healthy+diet+healthy+lifestyle
and these are scientific studies
About 627,000 results (0.24 seconds)
https://www.google.com/search?q=healthy%20diet%20ncbi&gws_rd=ssl
PLEASE STOP THESE USELESS ARGUMENTS JAMES
PS: u havent clarify which statistical studies was manipulated and that u yourself, james sloane, said it.
Bean: “so u are saying a healthy diet is not well known in science and medicine ? are u making a joke of yourself ?”
Joke is on you since that is not what I said. In fact, I have made it clear numerous times that the so-called “alkaline diet” does not alkalize the blood but does benefit the body due to the high nutrition level. Of course you keep twisting things to fit your needs just like how statistics are twisted to fit needs.
Again, statistics only prove what the person wants to prove. That is why statistics conflict with each other so often. It is kind of akin to the alkaline myth which is based on only looking at the alkaline ash of the plant while totally ignoring the acid content of these plants and the fact that are all metabolized in to acids in the long run. So as with statistics by only looking at what the “researcher” wishes to look at they can “prove” what they wish even if it is not true.
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” .
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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/
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.
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.
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.
Hi, Elizabeth, I am in a group on what is really the hidden truth about socalled alkaline water. It isn’t selling anything and is devoted to studying the science behind the water. If you’d like to be involved email me, but if not, just have a look at http://www.moleularhydrogeninstitute.com
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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…