Because its good for you

Ok. Let’s look. The physiological issue is muscle cramps.Ok ? A vitamin is defined (in 1911) as a…”lost physiological activity”… So that is why we always begin a biological discussion, with naming WHAT physiological activity is lost. We will basically find a one-to-one correspondence or correlation to some vitamin which was lost. The physiological activity is restored, …when the vitamin is restored.

The vitamin named, in this brief, commercial, link, ….is “water”. They say it is a rehydration problem. We can look at that. But is the primary physiological discussion and definition, of cramps, a water discussion ? This is the question. One is not just “prioritizing” the variables, but one is also ….”listening to”… the literature. Has the writer of this statement never seen a superseding interest, relative to muscle activity, in the biological literature, that is of greater value than water, to function of muscles or loss of that function, described as cramping ?

This is not a criticism. It is a way of understanding the act of reading. These kinds of refutations are supposed to build a much bigger thing: “how one can go wrong” is a guide post in ANY discipline. Such ideas are called “heuristics” ….principles, or navigational techniques, orienting ideas, …levers, ….crowbars. A few facts can prove a lot of things, …if… the concept of “generalization” is embraced. Did I not attack “generalizing” just above ? Yes but “generalization” is a far more beautiful thing, than “generalities”. The former is a huge theoretical property of conversation in physics (Nature) or the natural sciences, including mathematics. Perhaps, the instinct for this comes first in mathematics: for instance, to Einstein, a vector can be “generalized” into a similar construct and tool called a “tensor”. A tensor has fewer restrictions on it than a vector, in essence. In mathematics, we have proofs based on showing that a formula might be demonstrated for the number one, two, or three, but there are an infinity of whole numbers, …so we prove the formula for the number “one” and then prove, that if it is true for SOME whole number …..”n”… then it may prove to be true for “n + 1” (the next whole number.) If it is true for “one” and it is true for “n + 1” when it is true for …”n”…, then we can “inductively” say it is true for ALL whole numbers , 1,2,3,….n, n+1,…. to infinity.

Generalization is a little more ….”general” than that, but the “proof by induction” or the “recursive formula” which we just showed as a general method of proof in number theory, begins the discussion of how one can proceed from the particular to the general, ….OR…. how we can take visible, experimental evidence, …and PROCEED ….often through a Gedanken experiment (a thought-experiment) to a more general idea.

Mathematics does it all the time. When we do it even ONCE in physics, (what we call “the real world”) we all immediately sit up and take notice and call the physicist who did this ONE thing for mankind, a “genius”. This was what Galileo did one day when he imagined a ball rolling down a slope, ..across a flat…and back up another slope. He kept rolling the ball from the same height, …across the same flat,….but he started lowering…. the up-slope, each time, …little by little… each time that he rolled the ball again. What he first noticed is, that a ball dropped down a slope, from the same height, will roll over the flat, and up the new slope, but it will go FURTHER “along the slope” ….if…. the slope is not as steep. If he kept on lowering, and lowering, …little by little, …the up-slope angle, ….he found that the ball would go further and further. He then thought about his results. We know that water dropped from one vessel will rise to its own level in a second vessel (the same level, or in other words, they end at the same level in two vessels.) The ball also, tends to go “almost” BACK to its “starting height”. When the last slope in his 3 plane experiment is very nearly flat, the ball seems to roll much further than if the third plane is a higher angle back up. So his thought experiment said: the ball loses some of its distance going back UP hill, because of friction during its whole trip. The further and further DISTANCE one can see the ball roll, when the up-slope is a lower and lower angle, means that the ball “WOULD” have gone all the way to the original height that it started from, ….if… there were no friction. Therefore he concluded that “the ball seeks its own height”. Amazing. He IMAGINED a ball rolling …”without friction”… with ZERO friction. Everyone thought, “Impressive conclusion”. But then he realized, that if the up-slope were lowered and lowered, until it was the SAME plane as the “flat” in the middle of the experimental set-up, then the ball would roll forever ! It would still “seek its original height ! Since it was not going UP anymore, …it would continue FOREVER. Thus he had reasoned that the “friction” not only prevented a real ball from getting “back” to its original height ( though it “almost”… gets there) …. but he “further” reasoned, that the ball ALWAYS went further and further if the slope was lower and more gradual on the way “back up.” It could ALWAYS go …farther… in distance. Thus it was capable of going forever, …if…. there was no opposing force to STOP it. Friction was the opposing force which stopped it. Thus he had discovered inertia. The tendency of something moving ..,to keep moving… That is called the law of inertia.

But, ….he had to generalize. Twice. Once to “notice” the ball “seeks its own height” and a second time to “say”: …”the ball goes on forever”…. The ball does NOT go on forever. But, in utterly “empty” space, the ball COULD go on forever. That is why …Galileo is Galileo. He did more, he did “other things” but if he had not “generalized” we would not really have (except in mathematics) the developing notion of “generalization.” Generalization can be more subtle. It is not always a number-theoretic extension into infinity. It is not, in other words, simply the question of infinite series, which converge or diverge, or are summable or not summable.

Once Pasteur had seen and conceived of …infectious disease agents, (bacteria), …under microscopes, and under reflective consideration, we had about a fifty-year period, which ultimately resulted in a generalization of the germ-theory of infectious disease. If the presence of something, invisibly small, living in your body could cause a disease…. perhaps…. the ABSENCE of something invisibly small, living in your body, could cause disease. So “generalization” in the natural sciences takes subtly different forms. But they tend to be this somewhat “new” heuristic tool, of looking for something that “resembles” …not necessarily some “thing” else, …but resembles an “idea” that is already circulating in some province of thought and theoretical conversation. But some “feature”, some “characteristic” is …removed from the original “idea” …perhaps because the new idea applies to a completely different science: but one is still aware, that the generalization of the concept CAME FROM another idea.

Now in physiology, after 1911, we have this correlation between “lost physiological activity” and the vitamins (they are the same thing: a definition of “the vitamin.”) And, we have the progressive translation of all physiology, into, ..the vitamin concept. Thus each degenerative disease (non-infectious disease) has been found to be caused, by the loss of some vitamin, ….when the disease is investigated. So we end up with a check list: as we present, in history, each so-called “degenerative disease” …we assign to it, a vitamin which reverses the disease. Sometimes more than one vitamin at a time. This “check-list” approach, eventually leads to people “waiting for” the explanation of each degenerative disease that has not been solved yet, and sometimes, to a general contempt for theoretical properties like, ….( the politicization of) the vitamin concept. People following their noses, may refuse to generalize; the generalization here is that there are only two kinds of disease possible: on the one hand we have the “presence” …of something invisibly small, living inside you, …that you DON’T want; on the other hand, …we have the “absence” …of something invisibly small, living within you, that you DO want. Presence, …absence, …want, and don’t want, ….altogether, a 2 x 2 matrix ( “a two by two matrix.”) The failure to generalize, leads to wandering and wondering about “what is the ultimate cause of ‘this’ disease”, rather than recognizing what everyone since Galileo …recognizes.

Now, I had originally intended to simply mention a very hard-working med-student I went to school with, a few years older than me, who was already in medical school, when I was trying to understand the history of all 4 fundamental sciences. He taught me various physiological findings, and eventually graduated first in his class, at one of the most prestigious medical-science faculties in the world. He had been an athlete in high school, and in college, we even played on the same rugby team, but while becoming a long-distance runner in high school, he had …more than once… literally crawled home from practice, actually on his hands and knees, for more than a couple of miles, ..because of muscle cramps. Severe muscle cramps.

In the med-sci faculty, he was taught that muscle cramps were essentially, a potassium deficiency. This water-soluble electrolyte, is the object of the well-rehearsed sodium and potassium pumps, which determine the concentration of these two ionic metals, in a preferred ratio favoring more potassium inside a cell, and more sodium on the outside of a cell ( in the inter-cellular fluid). The ratio is determined by active pumping (mostly) of potassium in and sodium out of cell membranes. Not only nerve signals are produced by the relative electrical charge represented by this relative inside-out concentration of sodium and potassium along a nerve cell’s length, sequentially, but even non-nerve cells, must obtain these two ions in order to maintain electrical differences between inside and outside, but also other functional differences between sufficient concentrations of potassium or sodium, and deficient…concentrations of each of these two elements.

So, being told that potassium deficiency leads to muscle cramping seemed like a pretty direct result, and a pretty transparent understanding of the cramps. But later in the 1970’s we acquired a much more detailed insight into the precise role of metals in human physiology, through the introduction of a technique from physics, not chemistry, not biology, …into biology and physiology. That technique was nuclear-magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy, which… allows a person to be placed in a large electro-magnetic chamber, which slowly scans their body, and reads the EXACT NUMBER and LOCATION, …of every atom of a certain metal, in that person’s body. Each NMR spectroscope reads solely ONE metal, one element, …at a time. They are not tunable; to read another metal, requires a whole new NMR spectroscope. Their history, between 1978 and 1980 is a longer story. Before the year 1978 we already knew that calcium was necessary for muscle function, and so was a second metal, magnesium. What happened between 1978 and 1980 was the reinitiation of the discussion of metals in human physiology, and generally, an improvement in understanding most of them.

The discussion of all the metals, suddenly leap-frogged our knowledge of all the other vitamins, ….basically in a two-year period. The discussion and publishing still had to continue afterwards, but in Richard Passwater, Ph.d., in 1981, Trace Elements, Hair Analysis and Nutrition, we find that the physiology of muscle contraction, and muscle relaxation, are expressed as the activity of two metals: calcium and magnesium to contract a muscle, and magnesium to relax a muscle. Now the anatomical translation of photomicrographs into physiological discussion of muscle ACTIVITY, was begun by one of the Huxleys, I believe, perhaps in the 1920’s. These were tissue descriptions, at the visual level (microscopey) of large, parallel structures, in muscle, …sliding over one another and then back: contraction and relaxation, of muscle “fibers”. The level of inference BENEATH visibility, is called biochemistry. This began in 1911, and is called the vitamin concept. The metals, had just begun to be listed, 1, 2, 3 , …in the 1920’s. This did not happen all at once. Other non-metallic vitamins took precedence, in biochemistry and in the vitamin concept, that means.

Calcium never functioned successfully as a pure crystal substance (i.e., as a supplement.) It was the ONLY vitamin that presented this difficulty. ALL other discovered vitamins were successfully supplemented in isolation, as single, pure, crystalline substances. That is the last step ….of PROVING THE IDENTITY of a vitamin: you PROVE …that a single substance RESTORES a physiological activity that had been lost.

Nonetheless, the FIRST step (of five) in identifying and proving the identity of, …a vitamin, …is finding a FOOD… that restores the “lost physiological activity.” In other words, the very FIRST THING we do, in each and every search and proof for a vitamin’s existence, is to show that “some” (particuar) food, HAS that vitamin: …that food, RESTORES that vitamin and thus its activity.

The food, that provides calcium, is usually going to be identified as broccoli, kale, or collard (with a few more that have much smaller, but real, amounts.) Yet calcium did not lead to an easy “proof of” it’s physiological nature. The basic reason for this, is that calcium is very “complicated” in its transport and in its chemistry. The BIGGER ….”complication”, for calcium understanding, is that calcium participates in over 95 % of ALL biochemical reactions in the whole human body. So, first of all, calcium deficiency is GENERALLY devastating. It basically defines depression, but is not properly discussed in that connection, …yet.

Beneath the tissue-level of Julian Huxley’s description of “muscle-movement”, we later find, …first calcium and magnesium systems, ….and then, later, we find a nearly invisible set of microtubules, sort of like the Gazan tunnels, which move calcium ions from a “forbidden zone” to a place it is required. The microtubules protect,…like an electrical wire, …the discharge of electrical potential…. until, it is precisely located and timed, between nerve signals, and relaxation functions, and reverse motions, …and MORE CALCIUM BEING SUPPLIED right thereafter. This (muscle cramps) is the primary “symptom” ….for ATHLETES, .. (of calcium deficiency.) For “human beings” as the “whole group” ….we have periodontal disease, which means calcium resorption from the jaw bone causing pain and infection in the nerve that dangles in a relatively empty bone matrix, due to the “frank calcium deficiency”. That means that you do not eat enough calcium, regularly, and in the salad WITH OIL. Kale, collard or broccoli with oil: a truly green salad. Twice a day. NOT doing this, …every day,… requires the jaw-bone to GIVE UP its calcium and this causes periodontal disease ( as just described.) Only the truly green salads, (plus vitamin C and b-6) will REVERSE. ….periodontal disease and that means, to restore the jaw bone’s calcium, kill the infectious bacteria that slide in to the calcium holes, and repair the dangling, mashed, and infected nerve that normally rests in a nice, hard, bone matrix.[Later, we add co-enzyme Q-10 to the periodontal disease requirements, for full reversal .]

How we can trace down the “short-term” routing of calcium to the muscles, versus the blood requirement, versus the bone loss of calcium, …that is a longer discussion, involving parathyroid hormone (which “provides” calcium from bone, when you do not provide enough calcium from your food …in salads ) and, …your food, i.e., ….when was the last salad ? (with kale, collard, or broccoli ).

So what the writer of the juice recipe provided, was “water”,…. but also …”broccoli.” The discussion of muscle hydration and all the benefits of water has been in the literature for a long time, but ignored. It is significant in itself, and it is significant to the presence or absence of potassium, as the medical students were originally taught would spell the presence or absence of cramps. But let us ask, what causes “potassium deficiency” ? The answer is processed-food. Only processed-food is “low” in potassium. ALL natural food has potassium. ALL natural food has water. So while “rehydration” confers endurance and strength to muscles, we know that rehydration including potassium in the water of any juice, of any food, can ONLY reverse a water and a potassium deficiency syndrome.

We ADDITIONALLY know, that calcium deficiency ALWAYS existed, even before …processed food existed. We also know dehydration always existed. Ultimately, only the study of individual vitamins, and individual foods …..(“combined” …in this complicated case called the “salad” …for calcium transportation, including salad DRESSING as the first representative of calcium transport chains….) …. will reveal the “symptoms” and the “restoration of lost activities”, associated with each “body-part” or , vitamin. The vitamins ARE the “body-parts. The BIG ….”generalization”… of the 20 th century, unacknowledged to date, …is that body-parts (anatomy) ….have….activity !! ….Body-parts (anatomy) ….ARE…. physiology. Anatomy and physiology ….ONLY in the light of the vitamin concept…. ARE the same thing !

And because…. muscle “movement” is “opposing groups” ( one group relaxes while the other group contracts, ….and vice versa….) then EITHER magnesium OR calcium deficiency can cause a cramp. Generally, however, since magnesium is easier to absorb and to transport, and to find, in food…. then we clearly identify cramping as PRIMARILY and FUNDAMENTALLY a calcium deficiency syndrome ….REVERSED BY… 2 truly green salads each day, …and simultaneously NOT over-eating protein.

The juice had broccoli, …but no oil: it is not a salad.

The juice had water. But ALL food has water.

The juice had potassium . But ALL (natural) food has potassium.

Cramps will only be FULLY eliminated with 2 salads, each day, with (only) …kale, collard , or broccoli,…..(no other dark broad, green leaves) and the SALADS MUST HAVE OIL ….(“dressing”.) Flax-seed oil, and if you like, ….avocado as well. Flax-seed oil in a brown, GLASS, bottle [ Flora, brand ].

Calcium will not ENTER the body without iodine. So, Kelp, at 3″ x 5″ per day, is required.

Calcium has many complications. Many things interfere, AND many things are required. Thus calcium is HANDS DOWN the single MOST difficult vitamin to eat, absorb, transport, assimilate, function, and maintain.

Thus the juice listed was misleading and CREATES complications, by not recognizing the many complicating factors even THOUGH it “mentioned” broccoli. Broccoli will NOT …repeat NOT …”give you”, the calcium ….that it has. Period.

Lastly, if …..rehydration…. is ACTUALLY the issue for an individual, at any time, ….the technical requirement for re-introducing water ….simultaneously requires salt, protein, water, and vitamin A. Fortunately, by about 1976 it was understood that …chicken soup…. is thus the “best” rehydration formula known. Water itself, in someone not severely dehydrated will work for hydration: but not for muscle MOVEMENT.

Frankly, it is amazing that we figured out the vitamins’ identities. Amazing too, is how utterly “transparent” the physiological proofs ….are.

Our last reference can go to Bob Dylan: “It’s amazing we can even FEED ourselves.” (a line form his song “Idiot Wind”, [from the album “Blood On the Tracks”] ironically, a song about journalism and the press as vacuous and dissipative. All food biology is subject to this ….systematic… distortion.

LikeLiked by 1 person

5 comments

ydpartita says:

January 28, 2015 at 22:07

These somewhat generic and definitely commercialized blogs for various food combinations, nearly universally fail to touch on real physiology, and therefore, talk their way into basic mistakes. This one is classic, in its own way, however. I will be back in a little while and will explain …as a short example… how much mis-leading biology someone can generate in 3 or 4 simple sentences. But the implications are significant: they lead to false theorization, footed on false or factitiiusous statements, false generalizations, or overlapping of ideas.

LikeLike

- ydpartita says:
  
  January 28, 2015 at 22:10
  
  The software refused to spell factitious correctly (and is trying to do it again as I type it over here). Please edit it if someone has access to the editing function.
  
  LikeLiked by 1 person
  
ydpartita says:

January 29, 2015 at 05:21

Ok. Let’s look. The physiological issue is muscle cramps.Ok ? A vitamin is defined (in 1911) as a…”lost physiological activity”… So that is why we always begin a biological discussion, with naming WHAT physiological activity is lost. We will basically find a one-to-one correspondence or correlation to some vitamin which was lost. The physiological activity is restored, …when the vitamin is restored.

The vitamin named, in this brief, commercial, link, ….is “water”. They say it is a rehydration problem. We can look at that. But is the primary physiological discussion and definition, of cramps, a water discussion ? This is the question. One is not just “prioritizing” the variables, but one is also ….”listening to”… the literature. Has the writer of this statement never seen a superseding interest, relative to muscle activity, in the biological literature, that is of greater value than water, to function of muscles or loss of that function, described as cramping ?

This is not a criticism. It is a way of understanding the act of reading. These kinds of refutations are supposed to build a much bigger thing: “how one can go wrong” is a guide post in ANY discipline. Such ideas are called “heuristics” ….principles, or navigational techniques, orienting ideas, …levers, ….crowbars. A few facts can prove a lot of things, …if… the concept of “generalization” is embraced. Did I not attack “generalizing” just above ? Yes but “generalization” is a far more beautiful thing, than “generalities”. The former is a huge theoretical property of conversation in physics (Nature) or the natural sciences, including mathematics. Perhaps, the instinct for this comes first in mathematics: for instance, to Einstein, a vector can be “generalized” into a similar construct and tool called a “tensor”. A tensor has fewer restrictions on it than a vector, in essence. In mathematics, we have proofs based on showing that a formula might be demonstrated for the number one, two, or three, but there are an infinity of whole numbers, …so we prove the formula for the number “one” and then prove, that if it is true for SOME whole number …..”n”… then it may prove to be true for “n + 1” (the next whole number.) If it is true for “one” and it is true for “n + 1” when it is true for …”n”…, then we can “inductively” say it is true for ALL whole numbers , 1,2,3,….n, n+1,…. to infinity.

Generalization is a little more ….”general” than that, but the “proof by induction” or the “recursive formula” which we just showed as a general method of proof in number theory, begins the discussion of how one can proceed from the particular to the general, ….OR…. how we can take visible, experimental evidence, …and PROCEED ….often through a Gedanken experiment (a thought-experiment) to a more general idea.

Mathematics does it all the time. When we do it even ONCE in physics, (what we call “the real world”) we all immediately sit up and take notice and call the physicist who did this ONE thing for mankind, a “genius”. This was what Galileo did one day when he imagined a ball rolling down a slope, ..across a flat…and back up another slope. He kept rolling the ball from the same height, …across the same flat,….but he started lowering…. the up-slope, each time, …little by little… each time that he rolled the ball again. What he first noticed is, that a ball dropped down a slope, from the same height, will roll over the flat, and up the new slope, but it will go FURTHER “along the slope” ….if…. the slope is not as steep. If he kept on lowering, and lowering, …little by little, …the up-slope angle, ….he found that the ball would go further and further. He then thought about his results. We know that water dropped from one vessel will rise to its own level in a second vessel (the same level, or in other words, they end at the same level in two vessels.) The ball also, tends to go “almost” BACK to its “starting height”. When the last slope in his 3 plane experiment is very nearly flat, the ball seems to roll much further than if the third plane is a higher angle back up. So his thought experiment said: the ball loses some of its distance going back UP hill, because of friction during its whole trip. The further and further DISTANCE one can see the ball roll, when the up-slope is a lower and lower angle, means that the ball “WOULD” have gone all the way to the original height that it started from, ….if… there were no friction. Therefore he concluded that “the ball seeks its own height”. Amazing. He IMAGINED a ball rolling …”without friction”… with ZERO friction. Everyone thought, “Impressive conclusion”. But then he realized, that if the up-slope were lowered and lowered, until it was the SAME plane as the “flat” in the middle of the experimental set-up, then the ball would roll forever ! It would still “seek its original height ! Since it was not going UP anymore, …it would continue FOREVER. Thus he had reasoned that the “friction” not only prevented a real ball from getting “back” to its original height ( though it “almost”… gets there) …. but he “further” reasoned, that the ball ALWAYS went further and further if the slope was lower and more gradual on the way “back up.” It could ALWAYS go …farther… in distance. Thus it was capable of going forever, …if…. there was no opposing force to STOP it. Friction was the opposing force which stopped it. Thus he had discovered inertia. The tendency of something moving ..,to keep moving… That is called the law of inertia.

But, ….he had to generalize. Twice. Once to “notice” the ball “seeks its own height” and a second time to “say”: …”the ball goes on forever”…. The ball does NOT go on forever. But, in utterly “empty” space, the ball COULD go on forever. That is why …Galileo is Galileo. He did more, he did “other things” but if he had not “generalized” we would not really have (except in mathematics) the developing notion of “generalization.” Generalization can be more subtle. It is not always a number-theoretic extension into infinity. It is not, in other words, simply the question of infinite series, which converge or diverge, or are summable or not summable.

Once Pasteur had seen and conceived of …infectious disease agents, (bacteria), …under microscopes, and under reflective consideration, we had about a fifty-year period, which ultimately resulted in a generalization of the germ-theory of infectious disease. If the presence of something, invisibly small, living in your body could cause a disease…. perhaps…. the ABSENCE of something invisibly small, living in your body, could cause disease. So “generalization” in the natural sciences takes subtly different forms. But they tend to be this somewhat “new” heuristic tool, of looking for something that “resembles” …not necessarily some “thing” else, …but resembles an “idea” that is already circulating in some province of thought and theoretical conversation. But some “feature”, some “characteristic” is …removed from the original “idea” …perhaps because the new idea applies to a completely different science: but one is still aware, that the generalization of the concept CAME FROM another idea.

Now in physiology, after 1911, we have this correlation between “lost physiological activity” and the vitamins (they are the same thing: a definition of “the vitamin.”) And, we have the progressive translation of all physiology, into, ..the vitamin concept. Thus each degenerative disease (non-infectious disease) has been found to be caused, by the loss of some vitamin, ….when the disease is investigated. So we end up with a check list: as we present, in history, each so-called “degenerative disease” …we assign to it, a vitamin which reverses the disease. Sometimes more than one vitamin at a time. This “check-list” approach, eventually leads to people “waiting for” the explanation of each degenerative disease that has not been solved yet, and sometimes, to a general contempt for theoretical properties like, ….( the politicization of) the vitamin concept. People following their noses, may refuse to generalize; the generalization here is that there are only two kinds of disease possible: on the one hand we have the “presence” …of something invisibly small, living inside you, …that you DON’T want; on the other hand, …we have the “absence” …of something invisibly small, living within you, that you DO want. Presence, …absence, …want, and don’t want, ….altogether, a 2 x 2 matrix ( “a two by two matrix.”) The failure to generalize, leads to wandering and wondering about “what is the ultimate cause of ‘this’ disease”, rather than recognizing what everyone since Galileo …recognizes.

Now, I had originally intended to simply mention a very hard-working med-student I went to school with, a few years older than me, who was already in medical school, when I was trying to understand the history of all 4 fundamental sciences. He taught me various physiological findings, and eventually graduated first in his class, at one of the most prestigious medical-science faculties in the world. He had been an athlete in high school, and in college, we even played on the same rugby team, but while becoming a long-distance runner in high school, he had …more than once… literally crawled home from practice, actually on his hands and knees, for more than a couple of miles, ..because of muscle cramps. Severe muscle cramps.

In the med-sci faculty, he was taught that muscle cramps were essentially, a potassium deficiency. This water-soluble electrolyte, is the object of the well-rehearsed sodium and potassium pumps, which determine the concentration of these two ionic metals, in a preferred ratio favoring more potassium inside a cell, and more sodium on the outside of a cell ( in the inter-cellular fluid). The ratio is determined by active pumping (mostly) of potassium in and sodium out of cell membranes. Not only nerve signals are produced by the relative electrical charge represented by this relative inside-out concentration of sodium and potassium along a nerve cell’s length, sequentially, but even non-nerve cells, must obtain these two ions in order to maintain electrical differences between inside and outside, but also other functional differences between sufficient concentrations of potassium or sodium, and deficient…concentrations of each of these two elements.

So, being told that potassium deficiency leads to muscle cramping seemed like a pretty direct result, and a pretty transparent understanding of the cramps. But later in the 1970’s we acquired a much more detailed insight into the precise role of metals in human physiology, through the introduction of a technique from physics, not chemistry, not biology, …into biology and physiology. That technique was nuclear-magnetic resonance imaging spectroscopy, which… allows a person to be placed in a large electro-magnetic chamber, which slowly scans their body, and reads the EXACT NUMBER and LOCATION, …of every atom of a certain metal, in that person’s body. Each NMR spectroscope reads solely ONE metal, one element, …at a time. They are not tunable; to read another metal, requires a whole new NMR spectroscope. Their history, between 1978 and 1980 is a longer story. Before the year 1978 we already knew that calcium was necessary for muscle function, and so was a second metal, magnesium. What happened between 1978 and 1980 was the reinitiation of the discussion of metals in human physiology, and generally, an improvement in understanding most of them.

The discussion of all the metals, suddenly leap-frogged our knowledge of all the other vitamins, ….basically in a two-year period. The discussion and publishing still had to continue afterwards, but in Richard Passwater, Ph.d., in 1981, Trace Elements, Hair Analysis and Nutrition, we find that the physiology of muscle contraction, and muscle relaxation, are expressed as the activity of two metals: calcium and magnesium to contract a muscle, and magnesium to relax a muscle. Now the anatomical translation of photomicrographs into physiological discussion of muscle ACTIVITY, was begun by one of the Huxleys, I believe, perhaps in the 1920’s. These were tissue descriptions, at the visual level (microscopey) of large, parallel structures, in muscle, …sliding over one another and then back: contraction and relaxation, of muscle “fibers”. The level of inference BENEATH visibility, is called biochemistry. This began in 1911, and is called the vitamin concept. The metals, had just begun to be listed, 1, 2, 3 , …in the 1920’s. This did not happen all at once. Other non-metallic vitamins took precedence, in biochemistry and in the vitamin concept, that means.

Calcium never functioned successfully as a pure crystal substance (i.e., as a supplement.) It was the ONLY vitamin that presented this difficulty. ALL other discovered vitamins were successfully supplemented in isolation, as single, pure, crystalline substances. That is the last step ….of PROVING THE IDENTITY of a vitamin: you PROVE …that a single substance RESTORES a physiological activity that had been lost.

Nonetheless, the FIRST step (of five) in identifying and proving the identity of, …a vitamin, …is finding a FOOD… that restores the “lost physiological activity.” In other words, the very FIRST THING we do, in each and every search and proof for a vitamin’s existence, is to show that “some” (particuar) food, HAS that vitamin: …that food, RESTORES that vitamin and thus its activity.

The food, that provides calcium, is usually going to be identified as broccoli, kale, or collard (with a few more that have much smaller, but real, amounts.) Yet calcium did not lead to an easy “proof of” it’s physiological nature. The basic reason for this, is that calcium is very “complicated” in its transport and in its chemistry. The BIGGER ….”complication”, for calcium understanding, is that calcium participates in over 95 % of ALL biochemical reactions in the whole human body. So, first of all, calcium deficiency is GENERALLY devastating. It basically defines depression, but is not properly discussed in that connection, …yet.

Beneath the tissue-level of Julian Huxley’s description of “muscle-movement”, we later find, …first calcium and magnesium systems, ….and then, later, we find a nearly invisible set of microtubules, sort of like the Gazan tunnels, which move calcium ions from a “forbidden zone” to a place it is required. The microtubules protect,…like an electrical wire, …the discharge of electrical potential…. until, it is precisely located and timed, between nerve signals, and relaxation functions, and reverse motions, …and MORE CALCIUM BEING SUPPLIED right thereafter. This (muscle cramps) is the primary “symptom” ….for ATHLETES, .. (of calcium deficiency.) For “human beings” as the “whole group” ….we have periodontal disease, which means calcium resorption from the jaw bone causing pain and infection in the nerve that dangles in a relatively empty bone matrix, due to the “frank calcium deficiency”. That means that you do not eat enough calcium, regularly, and in the salad WITH OIL. Kale, collard or broccoli with oil: a truly green salad. Twice a day. NOT doing this, …every day,… requires the jaw-bone to GIVE UP its calcium and this causes periodontal disease ( as just described.) Only the truly green salads, (plus vitamin C and b-6) will REVERSE. ….periodontal disease and that means, to restore the jaw bone’s calcium, kill the infectious bacteria that slide in to the calcium holes, and repair the dangling, mashed, and infected nerve that normally rests in a nice, hard, bone matrix.[Later, we add co-enzyme Q-10 to the periodontal disease requirements, for full reversal .]

How we can trace down the “short-term” routing of calcium to the muscles, versus the blood requirement, versus the bone loss of calcium, …that is a longer discussion, involving parathyroid hormone (which “provides” calcium from bone, when you do not provide enough calcium from your food …in salads ) and, …your food, i.e., ….when was the last salad ? (with kale, collard, or broccoli ).

So what the writer of the juice recipe provided, was “water”,…. but also …”broccoli.” The discussion of muscle hydration and all the benefits of water has been in the literature for a long time, but ignored. It is significant in itself, and it is significant to the presence or absence of potassium, as the medical students were originally taught would spell the presence or absence of cramps. But let us ask, what causes “potassium deficiency” ? The answer is processed-food. Only processed-food is “low” in potassium. ALL natural food has potassium. ALL natural food has water. So while “rehydration” confers endurance and strength to muscles, we know that rehydration including potassium in the water of any juice, of any food, can ONLY reverse a water and a potassium deficiency syndrome.

We ADDITIONALLY know, that calcium deficiency ALWAYS existed, even before …processed food existed. We also know dehydration always existed. Ultimately, only the study of individual vitamins, and individual foods …..(“combined” …in this complicated case called the “salad” …for calcium transportation, including salad DRESSING as the first representative of calcium transport chains….) …. will reveal the “symptoms” and the “restoration of lost activities”, associated with each “body-part” or , vitamin. The vitamins ARE the “body-parts. The BIG ….”generalization”… of the 20 th century, unacknowledged to date, …is that body-parts (anatomy) ….have….activity !! ….Body-parts (anatomy) ….ARE…. physiology. Anatomy and physiology ….ONLY in the light of the vitamin concept…. ARE the same thing !

And because…. muscle “movement” is “opposing groups” ( one group relaxes while the other group contracts, ….and vice versa….) then EITHER magnesium OR calcium deficiency can cause a cramp. Generally, however, since magnesium is easier to absorb and to transport, and to find, in food…. then we clearly identify cramping as PRIMARILY and FUNDAMENTALLY a calcium deficiency syndrome ….REVERSED BY… 2 truly green salads each day, …and simultaneously NOT over-eating protein.

The juice had broccoli, …but no oil: it is not a salad.

The juice had water. But ALL food has water.

The juice had potassium . But ALL (natural) food has potassium.

Cramps will only be FULLY eliminated with 2 salads, each day, with (only) …kale, collard , or broccoli,…..(no other dark broad, green leaves) and the SALADS MUST HAVE OIL ….(“dressing”.) Flax-seed oil, and if you like, ….avocado as well. Flax-seed oil in a brown, GLASS, bottle [ Flora, brand ].

Calcium will not ENTER the body without iodine. So, Kelp, at 3″ x 5″ per day, is required.

Calcium has many complications. Many things interfere, AND many things are required. Thus calcium is HANDS DOWN the single MOST difficult vitamin to eat, absorb, transport, assimilate, function, and maintain.

Thus the juice listed was misleading and CREATES complications, by not recognizing the many complicating factors even THOUGH it “mentioned” broccoli. Broccoli will NOT …repeat NOT …”give you”, the calcium ….that it has. Period.

Lastly, if …..rehydration…. is ACTUALLY the issue for an individual, at any time, ….the technical requirement for re-introducing water ….simultaneously requires salt, protein, water, and vitamin A. Fortunately, by about 1976 it was understood that …chicken soup…. is thus the “best” rehydration formula known. Water itself, in someone not severely dehydrated will work for hydration: but not for muscle MOVEMENT.

Frankly, it is amazing that we figured out the vitamins’ identities. Amazing too, is how utterly “transparent” the physiological proofs ….are.

Our last reference can go to Bob Dylan: “It’s amazing we can even FEED ourselves.” (a line form his song “Idiot Wind”, [from the album “Blood On the Tracks”] ironically, a song about journalism and the press as vacuous and dissipative. All food biology is subject to this ….systematic… distortion.

LikeLiked by 1 person

Rasha Foda says:

January 29, 2015 at 06:00

Thank you, David. That was an incredible essay. Very informative. I will now more easily refer to this than I would have had it been a comment on Facebook. 🙂

LikeLike

ydpartita says:

January 29, 2015 at 21:38

I am sorry it was not shorter and more organized, frankly. There are as many points about disinformation as about information. It is a problem. Calcium has THREE times the structural problems: biochemistry, negative biochemistry, and ….disinformation ! It is impossible to ” condense” and really requires a compositional plan, ..,rather than a straight, linear, discussion,,…that simply …proceeds… to a conclusion. Thanks for reading it.

LikeLike

SHAREverything.com

because it makes sense

Because its good for you

5 comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Because its good for you

Share this:

Like this:

5 comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply