To: Ilaine who wrote (26919 ) 12/27/2007 6:37:22 PM From: Maurice Winn Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 217820 Supermarkets are interesting places. When whole aisles are not related to food [other than in the sense that they are intended to be sold to be swallowed] it is not surprising that there is biological chaos on a large scale. Especially when lifestyle involves hunter-gathering in SUVs on freeways, cyberspace in cubicles, riding golf carts to hunt golf balls, and wandering around malls. That life isn't exactly arduous and then the hunter gatherer returns to a 5th floor apartment to watch TV and eat their "food" in excess amounts. They might also play sport by going to a stadium to shout at "their" team while eating more "food" they have hunter-gathered at the stadium. Milk is not a food for huge numbers of humans and they lack the digestive enzyme lactase for example. Large amounts of wheat, barley, corn etc are fairly recent components of diet. But those who have spent millennia eating bread and such mashed up grains are fairly well adapted to it. I'm pleased to see that Staffan Lindeburg recognizes that plants do NOT love us [or any other animals] and deliberately produce the most vicious toxins they can to avoid being eaten. Some plants produce fruit with the intention of being eaten so that the consumer carries the seeds and puts them in a new location with lots of lovely poop to help the plant grow. Bees, fruit bearers and animal/birds work well together like that for mutual benefit. Other than that, plants are out to kill us or at least keep us, insects, and other animals away. I don't think I have seen anyone else [other than me] pointing out that plants/animals, birds and insects are in permanent fights to the death via chemical warfare. Plants have had hundreds of millions of years developing a huge chemical arsenal. Many people seem to think that plants are our friends. When humans are under attack from third parties such as parasites and perhaps cancer cells, plants which are borderline foods [eaten only in dire need as foods due to their toxicity] are especially good to kill off the invaders, according to an untested theory I developed when trying to figure out how to save an offspring from lymphoma. That's how chemotherapy and radiation work too = they also kill good cells, but the cancer cells are even more susceptible so they get killed first [mostly]. Hopefully all of them. So it's not that chemotherapy is a new idea from plants. But there seem to be relatively few suitable chemicals which have been found. The place to look for anti-cancer chemicals is where monkeys and other primates live and the things to eat are the plants they eat when they are short of food. That's where phytochemicals which will be biologically active in people would be found most readily. I wonder if a more regular diet of borderline plants would provide protection against cancer. Or perhaps even more normal plants would be good enough [cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, lettuce and the many other established vegetables and cancer is less incident with high consumptions of them]. My diet is quite different from my first 25 years [during ignorance and bad nutrition]. My health is a lot better too. It's now excellent. Mqurice