Is bone broth all that it is hyped up to be? Lets talk about TF myths... - Page 3 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 65 Old 05-02-2012, 07:12 AM
 
LoveRealFood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New York
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I read some of the responses. Very interesting discussion.

 

For cavities, I always recommend oil-pulling. This practice works wonders! I have seen it over and over again. Not only with teeth but also skin and headaches. 

 

I have also seen bone broth do some real work on people with IBS. 

 

Great comments all around. I agree that sometimes we just have to chill. Enjoy life. Observe your body and respect its messages and you'll probably do great.


"Become Independently Healthy" www.bodywisefoodsmart.com
LoveRealFood is offline  
#62 of 65 Old 04-16-2013, 04:25 PM
 
thatnameistaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

This is an old thread but I'll add my 2 cents anyway.  On the topic of bone broth - my grandmother fed her family "skinny soup" (basically bone broth) every single day for supper.  The interesting part is that she cooked it for only a few hours.  I know of other traditional cultures where bone broth is consumed daily, but it too is cooked for only a few hours.  I'm thinking specifically of the Vietnamese breakfast dish Pho, which is a beef bone broth served with wafers of meat, noodles and sprouts.  It is consumed daily in that part of the world.  The recipe calls for bone broth to be cooked for 3-4 hours only.  Many asian cultures consume noodle soups made from bone broth daily, such as the Thais, Chinese and Indonesians.  But the nutritional profile of a broth cooked 3-4 hours will be very different from one which has been cooked for 24 hours or longer.

 

Personally, I am sensitive to amines (I follow a loose version of the Failsafe diet).  Broth can be high in amines, so I need to be careful with it.  In order to make sure it is not too high in amines, I need to make sure it is cooked for only 3 or so hours, and then cooled quickly in ice water.  I'm just wondering if their is a connection between the traditions I am familiar with and their short broth cooking time, and health.

 

Lastly, the Koreans eat fermented food daily in the form of Kim Chi.  This is part of their traditional diet.  Yet in Korea, it is known that daily Kim Chi consumption leads to stomach cancer, because of the nitrates present in fermented food.  It is a known problem with the Korean diet.

 

Just because a food is traditional does not necessarily mean it can never cause a problem.  Traditional foods are certainly healthier than the SAD.  But I think we need to approach our diets with our heads on our shoulders and not throw ourselves headlong into something we can't ever fully understand.  Our best guide is our body. If we feel better, it's good.  If we don't, it's not.

thatnameistaken is offline  
#63 of 65 Old 05-06-2013, 11:27 AM
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 499
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)

I prefer seaweed and raw green foods over bone broth for minerals. Even powdered eggshell. The less production, the better the quality IMO.

 

However, I have and do use bone broth. I don't consider it "essential" however. 

pumabearclan is offline  
#64 of 65 Old 05-15-2013, 11:27 PM
 
LoveOurBabies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: In an Australian kitchen
Posts: 613
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm inclined to agree about the shorter cooking time for bone broths. When my mom made soup or cooked dishes with beef bone in them, it was only for 3-4 hours at most. How in the world would one continue to cook bone broth for three days straight in real outdoor conditions anyway? It just doesn't seem like a plausible practise.

 

Also, I agree with the person who said that we should eat foods more "whole". That is, every time you roast a chicken, put aside the fat and bones to use the next day for meal preperation. Use those bones to make a clear chicken broth and alongside, cook some vegetables in the chicken fat. There you go, whole chicken nutrients consumed together within 24 hours.

 

The low calorie debate is intriguiging to me. This is purely observational, but every person I know that is well into their 70's and 80's eats low calorie naturally. I think it's healthy to eat until you feel just satisfied, not until you can't move off your chair (even if everything you did have on that plate was a superfood).

 

This is a really good and long overdue thread - I hope the discussion continues! orngbiggrin.gif


 

Me:  run.gif  DH:  hammer.gif 

 

Our babies:  reading.gif  blahblah.gif energy.gif moon.gif and a  stork-suprise.gif  coming in July

 

 

 

LoveOurBabies is offline  
#65 of 65 Old 05-24-2013, 12:29 PM
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 499
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveOurBabies View Post
The low calorie debate is intriguiging to me. This is purely observational, but every person I know that is well into their 70's and 80's eats low calorie naturally.

 

 

My husband and I practice paleoesque-CRON, which in some ways is merely adapting to the portion sizes of 75 years ago. We are low-carb and high-fat (which is not the way CRON is broadly presented; it is presented as a carb-based low-fat diet).

 

CRON is basically to cut out superfluous calories (mostly from starches such as potatoes, pasta, and bread; and sugar) and shoot for a basic diet 300-500 calories per day lower than "recommended." For me, I am recommended to have around 2000 calories per day; I eat around 1700 per day.

 

My husband eats about 500 calories per day less than his recommendation. I think that women can't cut it that low until they are much older (70+ years).

 

 

Instead of lots of vegetables as recommended by CRON, I eat an equivalent of meat and fat: hence "paleoesque."

 

I don't think that food was "traditionally" as abundant as it is now, and so much more work (calorie expenditure) went into acquiring it.

 

I think that it's perfectly normal and acceptable to actually feel hunger a few times a week. Not gnawing pains, but to feel hungry.

 

My dog has been fed paleoesque-CRON for all her life and she is nearly 20 and still walks and runs over a mile a day. She is slim and healthy. She has no grey hairs and good vision and hearing. This is the aim of calorie-restriction: to spare wear and tear on the organs and increase satiation when food is consumed for health and longevity.

 

Growing persons (up to age 25-28) and preganant/nursing women should not practice CRON. For adults, I do agree that it's natural and healthy. Good for the environment, the budget, and the body.

pumabearclan is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off