Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 62
Like Tree33Likes

Thread: Microwaved milk is bad for you

  1. #1
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029

    Microwaved milk is bad for you

    Gene Cafe Coffee Roaster $850 - Free Beans Free Freight
    The gauge is, at best, merely an indicator, accurate mainly with itself. i.e. when you find the perfect shot, the gauge might be almost anywhere on the scale - and the next good shot will be around the same. Mine does best with pressure a little above the top of the colour segments.

    Sounds like you're getting in the range. You could try 1 step finer and tamp a lot lighter than the 15kg or so and see how that goes. I have had blissful coffees pour in 45secs and even 1 or 2 that took maybe 60secs with no sign of blonding and tasted great. Again the time of 60ml in 25secs is just an indicator - depends on the bean, the grind, the machine and your tamping.

    Something to remember - most grinders adjust best when either empty of beans or when running. It confused the hell out of me for a while as I would make an adjustment and either see no change or even have it go the wrong way. One good thing about an EM0480 grinder is the switch at the side - you can flick it up and the grinder runs while you use both hands to adjust. It's a bit awkward with the EM0450/440 to try to press the button and still adjust things. (not sure which grinder you have)

    I usually just empty it, clean any stuck beans from the grind surfaces and make the adjustment - experience usually means I get it right within one or at most two adjustments, but it's a bit of a piss off to empty, adjust, fill, grind, empty, adjust etc. Makes for fast learning.

    I've also found the SB baskets seem to work better with the tamped coffee at least 4mm down. With both the 6910 version and the 7000 version, that sits the ground weight at about 15g - 16g. (my scales only do gram accuracy)

    Post copied from another thread in its entirety but only the following paragraph relates to this new thread topic.

    A word of warning - one of the worst things to microwave is milk. MW works by breaking apart molecules to release heat and some milk byproducts are toxic. Also, the reason why there's a 'best' temp for frothing milk is to avoid getting the milk to where it begins to break down. The steamer on the 7000 is pretty good, so it isn't really much of a chore to use.
    Last edited by Javaphile; 19th June 2014 at 10:01 AM. Reason: Off topic discussion moved

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    395
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    A word of warning - one of the worst things to microwave is milk. MW works by breaking apart molecules to release heat and some milk byproducts are toxic.
    This is absolutely rubbish.
    Dragunov21 and KizZ84 like this.

  3. #3
    TC
    TC is offline
    .
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    14,665
    Free amino acid concentrations in milk: effects ... [Amino Acids. 1998] - PubMed - NCBI which states:

    "Microwave effects on free amino acid concentrations in milk versus a water bath heating were investigated in view of their importance for infant growth. Concentrations of few amino acids, such as aspartate, serine or lysine, are unchanged whatever the way and the temperature of heating. In contrast, tryptophan concentrations decreased similarly whatever the way of heating (110 +/- 3 mumol/l before heating vs 84 +/- 4 mumol/l after 30 degrees C microwave heating, p < 0.05). On the contrary, concentrations of glutamate and glycine increased more after water bath heating at 90 degrees C (325 +/- 4 and 101 +/- 1 mumol/1, respectively) than after microwave heating (312 +/- 4 and 95 +/- 1 mumol/l, respectively, p < 0.05) suggesting milk proteolysis. Moreover, the accumulation of ammonia observed at 90 degrees C with the water bath together with increase Glu levels might reflect a degradation of glutamine. An ornithine enrichment, more evident with microwave heating, was shown and could be of interest as it is a polyamine precursor. Also, considering few variations of free amino acid concentrations and the time saved, microwave heating appears to be an appropriate method to heat milk."

  4. #4
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    Science is meant to be sceptical, and that actually includes, of science. Modern versions of science are political and funding controlled by producing expected results. It's easy to find many examples of this all around us.

    Any claim of 'absolute' anything is not supported by the tenets of science (except possibly 'absolute zero' ) and the saturation levels of surety we see about all kinds of subject shows how the media has driven science to the level of being the new 'opiate of the masses.'Personally I prefer not to drink the Kool-aid even if it IS offered by a white coat.

    The history of microwave use has quite a few martyrs along the path and there has been little real testing of effects. Anyone interested in learning more than the panaceas offered by 'Authority' can trace the history of MW since it was first used. Along the way are rather startling road signs such as how the US decided on what is a safe level, why US safe levels are more than 10x that of USSR/Russia (a country not renowned for putting safety first, why the US embassy in Moscow was such a health risk during the 60's and much more.

    MW DOES break apart molecules as they vibrate so rapidly bonds get broken, and proteins and aminos are not good things to break apart then ingest. Milk these days causes many issues with health, including an alarming rise in lactose intolerance - one has to question why the milk we get now is so much worse for us than what they were getting in the 50's and 60's - seems strange that making it 'better' for us would cause so many more people to become sick... doncha think.

    So for those wanting to drink the kool-aid and not do real science by being sceptical of claims and checking for themselves, feel free to keep microwaving your food. Those who prefer to perhaps avoid some of the ever-increasing 'syndromes', 'disorders' and deficiencies might like to do some reading for themselves.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,376
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post

    MW DOES break apart molecules as they vibrate so rapidly bonds get broken, and proteins and aminos are not good things to break apart then ingest. Milk these days causes many issues with health, including an alarming rise in lactose intolerance - one has to question why the milk we get now is so much worse for us than what they were getting in the 50's and 60's - seems strange that making it 'better' for us would cause so many more people to become sick... doncha think.
    There is a difference between saying microwaves can break apart molecules, and saying that it's how they work (which is not the case).

    Heating milk on a gas stove can (and does) break apart molecules too.

    Science is about investigation, and generating models of reality, to improve our ability to "understand" the complex behaviour of everything.

    My day job is, in essence, using models to design or troubleshoot process facilities, and one of my favourite sayings is "all models are wrong, but some are useful" - the trick is understanding the limitations of the model you are applying.

    Henpicking "facts" and considering only half of the problem at hand generally does not lead to a useful model
    Dr._V and Dragunov21 like this.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    @MrJack - I may have worded my post better, but the content is still valid. There is a significant difference between heating milk molecules on a stove or with steam and subjecting it to 2.45 billion vibrations per second - these vibrations cause significant direct damage to molecules and also deformation of nearby molecules due to friction and impact.

    To quote a 1989 report in Lancet:
    "Microwaving baby formulas converted certain trans-amino acids into their synthetic cis-isomers. Synthetic isomers, whether cis-amino acids or trans-fatty acids, are not biologically active. Further, one of the amino acids, L-proline, was converted to its d-isomer, which is known to be neurotoxic (poisonous to the nervous system) and nephrotoxic (poisonous to the kidneys). It's bad enough that many babies are not nursed, but now they are given fake milk (baby formula) made even more toxic via microwaving."


    Also, a comparative study of conventional and MW foods found:
    One short-term study found significant and disturbing changes in the blood of individuals consuming microwaved milk and vegetables. Eight volunteers ate various combinations of the same foods cooked different ways. All foods that were processed through the microwave ovens caused changes in the blood of the volunteers. Hemoglobin levels decreased and over all white cell levels and cholesterol levels increased. Lymphocytes decreased.Luminescent (light-emitting) bacteria were employed to detect energetic changes in the blood. Significant increases were found in the luminescence of these bacteria when exposed to blood serum obtained after the consumption of microwaved food."


    Also, from Switzerland,
    In 1991, he [Hertel] and a Lausanne university professor published a research paper indicating that food cooked in microwave ovens could pose a greater risk to health than food cooked by conventional means. An article also appeared in issue 19 of the Journal Franz Weber in which it was stated that the consumption of food cooked in microwave ovens had cancerous effects on the blood. The research paper itself followed the article.
    And there is much more out there available to read as well as better detail on the ones I show here. It's not that difficult to find and you can get lots of clues by carefully reading the mainstream reports - often the reporters copy across words that indicate exactly where the original scientists were trying to cover themselves against later reactions.

    These are not 'alternative world' studies but rigorous science done by established professionals. Strangely you have to search for them, when one would think the implications would bring banner headlines. There are vested interests in only doing research that supports the paradigm (and money-making) of the corporations - when contrary results arise, pressure is used to prevent publication, to dilute the message and even to attack the experimenters.

    So I stand by what I wrote, even if 'how they work' might not be semantically correct. Microwaving milk is NOT a good thing to do if you value your health.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    274
    Drinking 8-10 cups of water that's been captured from the ground where animals and birds live, stored, pumped re-cycled, treated, run though asbestos, copper, steel pipes, and boiled in brass/ copper/ stainless steel, then forced through a smashed up, roasted bean to extract somewhere between 100-200mg of a nasty stimulant probably isn't that good for us either..
    Caffeineholic likes this.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Robbks View Post
    Drinking 8-10 cups of water that's been captured from the ground where animals and birds live, stored, pumped re-cycled, treated, run though asbestos, copper, steel pipes, and boiled in brass/ copper/ stainless steel, then forced through a smashed up, roasted bean to extract somewhere between 100-200mg of a nasty stimulant probably isn't that good for us either..
    That kind of took the shine off of my freshly brewed Costa Rican Hermosa SHB Premium double ristretto, but made me chuckle nonetheless. There's nothing quite like a brutally stark bit of reality to get us off of our pedestals and soap boxes.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Robbks View Post
    Drinking 8-10 cups of water that's been captured from the ground where animals and birds live, stored, pumped re-cycled, treated, run though asbestos, copper, steel pipes, and boiled in brass/ copper/ stainless steel, then forced through a smashed up, roasted bean to extract somewhere between 100-200mg of a nasty stimulant probably isn't that good for us either..
    While I might dispute the nasty stimulant bit, (there's a growing body of evidence coffee is actually good for us ) the water part of it is why I have a reverse osmosis system for all consumable water.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    274
    Yeah, I don't need filtering.
    Fresh Tasmanian Rainwater staright from the sky... Filtered through Gumleaves and a dead possum in the guttering...

  11. #11
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    While I might dispute the nasty stimulant bit, (there's a growing body of evidence coffee is actually good for us ) the water part of it is why I have a reverse osmosis system for all consumable water.
    I'm pretty sure the human body was never designed to ingest/consume pure, unadulterated water, after all, it sure as hell doesn't occur anywhere in the natural world. You may as well wear an alu-foil hat (to protect your head from solar flares and radio waves) while drinking your reverse osmosis water for all the good it will do. There is such a thing as being overly protective.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,376
    So I take it you don't drink beer or cook on the BBQ either JM?


    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    @MrJack - I may have worded my post better, but the content is still valid. There is a significant difference between heating milk molecules on a stove or with steam and subjecting it to 2.45 billion vibrations per second - these vibrations cause significant direct damage to molecules and also deformation of nearby molecules due to friction and impact.
    Our models of reality are obviously some ways apart...

    You suggest that microwave heating is the result of exothermic chemical reaction (or rather, implied it by suggesting it is the result of breaking chemical bonds)
    vs.
    Heating induced by exciting chemical bonds without breaking them (which, as I recall, is the primary mode of heating in a domestic microwave).

    I believe it is a fundamental difference, not a semantic one.

    Anyway, I'm not arguing that the studies and finding you have quoted are invalid (as I haven't read it), but what you've stated as fact, isn't, and the language you are using reads (to those who have some knowledge of the subject matter, that is) less like a scientific explanation, and more like marketing sensationalism.

    Deformation of molecules through friction and impact? And?

    Any increase in temperature will increase the rate of collisions between molecules (which is part of the reason reaction rates increase at higher temperatures). Friction doesn't really even have meaning at that scale.

    Molecules (particularly complex organic molecules like in milk) are not a fixed material object. They vibrate, and stretch, and waggle, and twist, and move, and bump into each other, and change shape (I.e. deform) and even change chemical structure, constantly.

    So, it's not some terrible thing that a microwave subjects them to, it's quite normal and will be happening in your milk jug too!

    I'll take my kool-aid neat, and in a in a test tube. Thanks

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    46
    Mr Jack. This is a coffee forum. Not a place for you to sprout your knowledge in a condescending manor.
    I to have a science degree and work in the food industry. If someone wants to believe that there is some issues with microwaved food then all good.
    By the way after reading what JM has posted I can't see anywhere he tried to say the heating is caused by an exothermic chemical reaction. So how about you put away your dictionary and start posting something that is worthwhile.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,376
    Quote Originally Posted by Fard View Post
    Mr Jack. This is a coffee forum. Not a place for you to sprout your knowledge in a condescending manor.
    I to have a science degree and work in the food industry. If someone wants to believe that there is some issues with microwaved food then all good.
    By the way after reading what JM has posted I can't see anywhere he tried to say the heating is caused by an exothermic chemical reaction. So how about you put away your dictionary and start posting something that is worthwhile.
    Actually, what JM said was:
    MW works by breaking apart molecules to release heat and some milk byproducts are toxic.
    Breaking apart molecules to release heat is almost the definition of an exothermic chemical reaction.

    I was not intending to be condescending, but was responding to what I found a questionable explanation, based on my own understanding (no dictionary was harmed in this discussion).

    In my experience simply saying "that's incorrect", without backing it up, tends to result in more "open your eyes, don't drink the kool-aide" type responses, which doesn't really benefit anyone (and is extremely frustrating).

  15. #15
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Robbks View Post
    Yeah, I don't need filtering.
    Fresh Tasmanian Rainwater staright from the sky... Filtered through Gumleaves and a dead possum in the guttering...
    Do you prefer brushtail or ringtail? I guess the ringtail might add greater depth to lighter roasts.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinitasse View Post
    I'm pretty sure the human body was never designed to ingest/consume pure, unadulterated water, after all
    Agreed, water exists in two equally enjoyable, but vastly different solutions, coffee and beer!

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry O'Speedwagon View Post
    Do you prefer brushtail or ringtail? I guess the ringtail might add greater depth to lighter roasts.
    Definitely ringtail, it's probably more the "rare delicacy" factor, like truffle oil..

  17. #17
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinitasse View Post
    I'm pretty sure the human body was never designed to ingest/consume pure, unadulterated water, after all, it sure as hell doesn't occur anywhere in the natural world.
    Actually, if you think it through, the human body was 'designed' (a word I'd dispute but hey, believers are everywhere ) to ONLY consume pure water and it used to be everywhere before we began messing it up. You can still find it in a few country areas where mountains block the pollution we pump into the air and the land is free of chemicals and pollutants we use to do really poor imitations of natural processes.

    It sure as hell wasn't 'designed' to drink the stuff that comes out of the taps in most places, and those with rain water sources that aren't close to towns and cities should consider themselves VERY lucky, although many of them would still be consuming the detritus of civilisation.

    Cleaning crap out of what you consume is nowhere near 'overly protective' but rather, basic commonsense. Kool-aiders might like to believe the pacifying drool in the meida but truth is, our environment has never been as bad for us as it is now, and I am talking personal environment here, not espousing greenie propaganda.

    @MrJack -
    In my experience simply saying "that's incorrect", without backing it up, tends to result in more "open your eyes, don't drink the kool-aide" type responses, which doesn't really benefit anyone (and is extremely frustrating).
    Well you cleaned up what he actually said, but you're right, which is why it got the response I gave. As shown, turns out the 'absolute rubbish' was the comment about it being absolute rubbish. (as demonstrated by the results of a 5 minute search to confirm what I was saying)

    As Above, if you like to drink the kool-aid, feel free to do so. Personally I prefer to reduce the poisons I put in my body as much as possible. Breaking apart proteins and aminos into random chunks of active materials seems to me to be a silly thing to blithely dismiss as harmless when the evidence says it isn't.

    So... back to Grind/Dose/Tamp issues.

  18. #18
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Man oh man! You sure didn't do yourself, or your credibility, much good with that one. I will follow up tomorrow after a decent sleep.

  19. #19
    TC
    TC is offline
    .
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    14,665
    So will we do sex, politics or religion now?

  20. #20
    Senior Member Barry O'Speedwagon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PRL
    Posts
    2,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Talk_Coffee View Post
    So will we do sex, politics or religion now?
    A working girl, Joe Hockey and a Vicar walked into a roaster.........
    SniffCoffee likes this.

  21. #21
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    ... and Joe Hockey taxed the working girl to help subsidize the vicar's private all girls school (the one Tony Abbott's daughters used to attend)

    Too much?

  22. #22
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    Actually, if you think it through, the human body was 'designed' (a word I'd dispute but hey, believers are everywhere ) to ONLY consume pure water and it used to be everywhere before we began messing it up. You can still find it in a few country areas where mountains block the pollution we pump into the air and the land is free of chemicals and pollutants we use to do really poor imitations of natural processes.
    Ummm.... no, and nooooooooooooooo!

    No... the human body is NOT meant to "...ONLY consume pure water." When a dehydrated person is brought into hospital, what is he or she given? Pure water or a saline water solution? When our eyes are dry, what does the medical community think we should use as eye drops? Pure water or a saline water solution? In both cases the answer is: a saline water solution.

    If we were to take this another level I might challenge you to a 7 day water only fast, where you take only pure water and I rely on a saline/mineral/heavy metal water solution. After 7 days I would be a little thinner but very much alive. You would have suffered along the way as your muscles and your brain functions both slowly shut down and by day 7 you would most likely be dead.

    Yes... there are nasties in the water that we drink and if we took a handful of pure magnesium or zinc or salt, we too would probably die as well. But our bodies are capable of ingesting a whole bunch of crap, taking out the nutrients required for a fully functioning life, and then discarding 99.99999% of the nasties that we do not need. Our liver and kidneys, our bladder and bowels, our sweat and oil glands are all pretty good at what they do and exist because we are supposed to take in nutrient rich (i.e. not pure) water and foods. It has always been thus so get used to it and wake up and smell the coffee already... so to speak.

    You state that pure water can still be found in some country areas where conveniently placed and very benevolent mountains magically block any pollution from tainting those pristine waters. On which planet does this occur cuz it certainly does not happen here on planet earth. Not now... not ever! I happen to be Canadian and Canada boasts the world's largest supply of "fresh" water... and we have a lot of mountains too but there is not a single river, stream or lake I would drink untreated water from unless I was dying of thirst. Ask Bear Grylls... while a sip or two in a pinch might do, you would still be at grave risk of picking up something such as giardia, if not worse. "Fresh" water is always tainted by something. The water flows over various minerals and organic matter. There is always run-off of some kind flowing in there... including the waste matter of numerous animals... all the way from micro-organisms to fish to mammals. And, what's more, this very un-pure water pre-dates mankind by a few million, if not billion, years. Those nasty volcanoes spewing ash, those nasty dinosaur defecations, those naturally occurring evils such as uranium, arsenic and lead were crapping all over our water table way before we got here!
    Last edited by Vinitasse; 18th June 2014 at 02:52 PM.

  23. #23
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    Kool-aiders might like to believe the pacifying drool in the meida but truth is, our environment has never been as bad for us as it is now, and I am talking personal environment here, not espousing greenie propaganda.
    While I will agree that there is FAR MORE global pollution present today than ever before, I do not necessarily agree with your belief that "...our environment has never been as bad for us as it is now..." If you could jump into a time machine and take yourself back to London, or Paris, or any other major city, to any point in time between the beginning of the dark ages and the end of the industrial revolution I think you would find the soot ridden skies, the streets flowing with raw sewage and drinking water laced with cholera and various other pathogens and scads of heavy metals to be far, far worse than anything we have to put up with today.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is... lighten up! Your constant worrying and paranoia about the things you ingest is probably causing you more stress, and ultimately doing more damage to your overall health and potential life span than any amount of tap water ever could.

  24. #24
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Besides... coffee made with "tainted" mineralized water simply tastes better

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    184
    I personally don't care if you fear microwaves or not, but just to set it straight a couple of the articles mentioned before were covered by Dr. Carl here

    I actually tried to get the first one in from the lancet (non peer revued letter so doesn't count for anything anyway). Unfortunately the 2nd page of the pdf didn't open up... conspiracy? hmmm

    Anyway all I could get was that they compared heating in a microwave for 10 minutes vs a 80 degree water bath for the same time, which sounds a bit flawed to me.

  26. #26
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by burr View Post
    I personally don't care if you fear microwaves or not, but just to set it straight a couple of the articles mentioned before were covered by Dr. Carl here

    I actually tried to get the first one in from the lancet (non peer revued letter so doesn't count for anything anyway). Unfortunately the 2nd page of the pdf didn't open up... conspiracy? hmmm

    Anyway all I could get was that they compared heating in a microwave for 10 minutes vs a 80 degree water bath for the same time, which sounds a bit flawed to me.
    If you heated milk in a microwave for 10 minutes, wouldn't it burst into flames?

  27. #27
    Senior Member Yelta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Moonta SA.
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinitasse View Post
    If you heated milk in a microwave for 10 minutes, wouldn't it burst into flames?
    Evening Vinitasse,

    Just tried it, the microwave burst into flames seriously though why would you do it?

    Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought the topic title was
    Problem with EM7000 - Grind, tamp or other? seems to have drifted a little.


  28. #28
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Yelta View Post
    Evening Vinitasse,

    Just tried it, the microwave burst into flames seriously though why would you do it?

    Correct me if I'm wrong, I thought the topic title was
    Problem with EM7000 - Grind, tamp or other? seems to have drifted a little.
    "Other" is a pretty open topic of discussion

  29. #29
    Senior Member Yelta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Moonta SA.
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinitasse View Post
    "Other" is a pretty open topic of discussion
    Did I mention our Burmese cat caught a mouse last night.
    chokkidog likes this.

  30. #30
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinitasse View Post
    Ummm.... no, and nooooooooooooooo!

    No... the human body is NOT meant to "...ONLY consume pure water." When a dehydrated person is brought into hospital, what is he or she given? Pure water or a saline water solution? When our eyes are dry, what does the medical community think we should use as eye drops? Pure water or a saline water solution? In both cases the answer is: a saline water solution.

    If we were to take this another level I might challenge you to a 7 day water only fast, where you take only pure water and I rely on a saline/mineral/heavy metal water solution. After 7 days I would be a little thinner but very much alive. You would have suffered along the way as your muscles and your brain functions both slowly shut down and by day 7 you would most likely be dead.
    Yeah... but no. You're talking about weird situations. And I have done a 7 day fast with only water so your conjecture about how one might end after such is about as wrong as you can get. And you might want to stay away from heavy metals as a diet supplement - it tends to not end well. even by orthodox medical standards.

    Sometimes people get carried away in trying to disprove someone and they make stupid statements. You might well try to live on saline water - in very short time you will not be feeling well - that's why people lost at sea are advised strongly against drinking sea water.

    Fact is, your body IS adapted to drinking water... just water... without additives or even your preferred heavy metals. While minerals and supplements might be required to alleviate some kind of abnormal situation brought on by modern life, your body has many thousands of years living elsewise. To think the modern state is somehow normal simply displays another kool-aid drinker. I'm betting you believe McDonalds is good food as well?

    As for your ridiculous other rants going on, you might have missed the last 60 years or so of medical evidence that many of the contaminants in our daily lives are NOT dealt with by the body and accumulate in the system.

    Also you seem to be ranting on about pure water as if at some point I have insisted RO water is the only source, whereas the point I was making had to do with making pure the contaminated supply most of the planet has to deal with.

    And yes, the basics of how the climate works will provide that mountains can block pollution - that comes from things like rain shadow, and snow. That's why when people want to measure things like pollution they first get a baseline out in the mountains. I grew up in a town that drank untreated water. Couple of coarse filters and a settling dam was it. You have had too much kool-aid if you rely on Bear Grylls to provide your science.

    Or Canada is far worse than your PR lets on...

  31. #31
    Senior Member Dragunov21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,281
    So you don't subscribe to the findings contained in the WHO's study on the effects of drinking demineralised water?

    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    Fact is, your body IS adapted to drinking water... just water... without additives or even your preferred heavy metals. While minerals and supplements might be required to alleviate some kind of abnormal situation brought on by modern life, your body has many thousands of years living elsewise. To think the modern state is somehow normal simply displays another kool-aid drinker. I'm betting you believe McDonalds is good food as well?
    Call me crazy, but I was under the impression that over the enormous period of time we've spent evolving and adapting, our primary source of water would have been from lakes, streams and springs, which you'd assume would not contain demineralised water.
    chokkidog and Vinitasse like this.

  32. #32
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    Yeah... but no. You're talking about weird situations. And I have done a 7 day fast with only water so your conjecture about how one might end after such is about as wrong as you can get. And you might want to stay away from heavy metals as a diet supplement - it tends to not end well. even by orthodox medical standards.

    Sometimes people get carried away in trying to disprove someone and they make stupid statements. You might well try to live on saline water - in very short time you will not be feeling well - that's why people lost at sea are advised strongly against drinking sea water.

    Fact is, your body IS adapted to drinking water... just water... without additives or even your preferred heavy metals. While minerals and supplements might be required to alleviate some kind of abnormal situation brought on by modern life, your body has many thousands of years living elsewise. To think the modern state is somehow normal simply displays another kool-aid drinker. I'm betting you believe McDonalds is good food as well?

    As for your ridiculous other rants going on, you might have missed the last 60 years or so of medical evidence that many of the contaminants in our daily lives are NOT dealt with by the body and accumulate in the system.

    Also you seem to be ranting on about pure water as if at some point I have insisted RO water is the only source, whereas the point I was making had to do with making pure the contaminated supply most of the planet has to deal with.

    And yes, the basics of how the climate works will provide that mountains can block pollution - that comes from things like rain shadow, and snow. That's why when people want to measure things like pollution they first get a baseline out in the mountains. I grew up in a town that drank untreated water. Couple of coarse filters and a settling dam was it. You have had too much kool-aid if you rely on Bear Grylls to provide your science.

    Or Canada is far worse than your PR lets on...
    Magnesium is a heavy metal and my brain seems to like having a wee bit up there

    And just so you know, a saline solution is typically 9g/l of NaCl while seawater hovers around 35g/l... a wee bit different don't you think?

    And now your magic mountains apparently also have even more magical pollution trapping snow that never melts as well? Because, of course, if it did melt... all those trapped pollutants would then be released into that "pure" water table on the other side of the mountain.

    In any event... you live happily on your planet and I'll stay here on planet earth

    Best of luck with your alternate reality
    chokkidog likes this.

  33. #33
    Super Moderator Javaphile's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth!
    Posts
    15,787
    If someone claims to base their decisions on Science and/or tries to use Science to backup a claim/justify a stance it behooves them to use their terminology correctly least they look the Koo-laid drinker/uneducated lout.

    Pure water/ice is a collection of H2O molecules and nothing else. Any other usage of the phrase 'pure water/ice' is meaningless unless a specific definition is given. Nowhere on the surface or sub-surface of this planet does pure water/ice exist except that which has been made by Man. Every body of water and field of ice on this planet has molecules other then H2O in it and always has. None of these bodies are or ever have been comprised of pure water/ice. Neither Homo Sapiens nor their ancestors evolved drinking pure water. These are scientific facts. Period. Full stop.


    Java "Potable != Pure" phile
    chokkidog and Vinitasse like this.
    Toys! I must have new toys!!!

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,376

    What they said.

    Too many posts to like in this thread.


    The trouble with constructing a model on the basis of an invalid assumption is that, no matter how well conceived and thorough the model is, it will never be useful.

  35. #35
    Senior Member Yelta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Moonta SA.
    Posts
    6,949
    Been sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn, very entertaining thread.

    Seems to me most of what's been written re the dangers of microwaving milk relate to uneven heating of milk/babies bottles in microwaves, along with the risk of severe burns, other than this the jury is still out on other claims.

    Unless of course you are a supporter of this quack The Hidden Hazards Of Microwave Cooking he obviously has enough people sucked in to make a very comfortable living from his brand of fear mongering, remembering of course he is based in the US, which obviously gives him a head start.

    Guess the important thing to keep in mind is that somewhere between opposing radical views lies the truth.
    Vinitasse likes this.

  36. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Sydney North Shore
    Posts
    1,326
    The problem is that anyone can put anything on the internet and make it look fair dinkum.

    It is important to look at the origin before believing what you see on the net as there is a lot of questionable junk there.

    Barry
    Fard and Vinitasse like this.

  37. #37
    Mal Dimal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Warwick, QLD
    Posts
    16,993
    I gave up on the contemplation of senseless consumption of unmitigated tripe many years ago, and here we have yet more platefuls of the unsavoury offal being presented....

    Pul-eeze....
    flynnaus, chokkidog and Vinitasse like this.

  38. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    395
    A few things to the quacks on this thread:
    1. Microwaves work by vibrating _water_ molecules, not anything else (although it is not clear what else has a resonant frequency in the same range).
    2. Magnesium is not a heavy metal. It's lighter than calcium!
    3. Humans aren't 'adapted for drinking pure water'. We'd be extinct long ago if this were the case. Humans are adapted to drink whatever they can, whenever they can, and to reject the absorption of undesirables. This mechanism, of course, is imperfect.
    4. You can do a 7 day water only fast just fine. The body's stores of solutes are perfectly adequate for such a situation.

  39. #39
    Sleep is overrated Thundergod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    10,496
    I've done 7 days on only water.
    No big deal.

  40. #40
    Senior Member SniffCoffee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    705
    If it any way will assist discussion I am more than prepared to go 7 days consuming nothing but lattes.

    Alternatively I am prepared to go 7 days consuming gin and tonic with your choice of tap, filtered or RO ice cubes.

    Just give me a couple of days notice so I can clear a week in my calendar.
    Dimal, TC, Vinitasse and 1 others like this.

  41. #41
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Hildy View Post
    A few things to the quacks on this thread:
    2. Magnesium is not a heavy metal. It's lighter than calcium!
    Speaking of quacks, you might want to check your facts a bit more closely before throwing insults around.

    Just so you know... the jury is still out on whether or not magnesium is or is not a heavy metal. There are schools of thought supporting both sides of the argument and I merely went with the definition I was taught.

    source: Chemical International

    Heavy Metals
    "At some point in the history of the term, it has been realized that density or specific gravity is not of great significance in relation to the reactivity of a metal. Accordingly, definitions have been formulated in terms of atomic weight or mass, which brings us a step closer to the periodic table–traditionally the most sound and scientifically informative chemical classification of the elements. However, the mass criterion is still unclear. Bennet [13] and Lewis [14] opt for atomic weights greater than that of sodium, i.e., greater than 23, thus starting with magnesium, while Rand et al. [15] prefer metals of atomic weights greater than 40, thus starting with scandium. "
    Last edited by Vinitasse; 20th June 2014 at 06:25 PM.

  42. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    395
    admitting the electrolytes into the definition of 'heavy metal' gives a funny view of 'heavy metal poisoning'.

  43. #43
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Javaphile View Post
    If someone claims to base their decisions on Science and/or tries to use Science to backup a claim/justify a stance it behooves them to use their terminology correctly least they look the Koo-laid drinker/uneducated lout.

    Pure water/ice is a collection of H2O molecules and nothing else. Any other usage of the phrase 'pure water/ice' is meaningless unless a specific definition is given. Nowhere on the surface or sub-surface of this planet does pure water/ice exist except that which has been made by Man. Every body of water and field of ice on this planet has molecules other then H2O in it and always has. None of these bodies are or ever have been comprised of pure water/ice. Neither Homo Sapiens nor their ancestors evolved drinking pure water. These are scientific facts. Period. Full stop.
    Java "Potable != Pure" phile
    Yeah... but no.. See, what you are forgetting... or maybe ignoring... is the basic fact that we have built-in ways to deal with the normal 'contaminants' that we find in 'natural' water. The problems come when we have to try to deal with what is now considered to be good water. So many contaminants, so few ways to handle it.

    Anyone can look up the facts, but our current system makes sure most people are not even aware there are other 'facts' than what they are being fed. Your body IS 'designed' to use 'pure' water and also to deal with the things nature adds. It is NOT 'designed' to deal with the crap we put in there. FACT. If we are going for design as a parameter, maybe someone could supply a scenario involving polluted water supplies to which the human system IS adapted? We might then export that to the 3rd world states in Africa who suffer so badly from NOT having 'pure' water. (and I am pretty damn sure they would dispute the definition given above as to what 'pure' might mean - I am fairly sure they would define it as water that doesn't kill them.

    But hey, live your life as you wish. I'm sure Godwin would appreciate the dedication to which a modern society adheres to Hitler's use of water supplies.

  44. #44
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    The definitive chart of Heavy Metals is here I think...

    Pop Chart Lab --> Design + Data = Delight --> Periodic Table of Heavy Metals
    Hildy and Vinitasse like this.

  45. #45
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinitasse View Post
    Speaking of quacks, you might want to check your facts a bit more closely before throwing insults around.

    Just so you know... the jury is still out on whether or not magnesium is or is not a heavy metal. There are schools of thought supporting both sides of the argument and I merely went with the definition I was taught.

    source: Chemical International

    Heavy Metals
    "At some point in the history of the term, it has been realized that density or specific gravity is not of great significance in relation to the reactivity of a metal. Accordingly, definitions have been formulated in terms of atomic weight or mass, which brings us a step closer to the periodic table–traditionally the most sound and scientifically informative chemical classification of the elements. However, the mass criterion is still unclear. Bennet [13] and Lewis [14] opt for atomic weights greater than that of sodium, i.e., greater than 23, thus starting with magnesium, while Rand et al. [15] prefer metals of atomic weights greater than 40, thus starting with scandium. "
    Yes, but if you want to use reactivity rather than molecular weight, you should remember Gold IS a heavy metal and is very non-reactive.

    @Hildy - yeah - I used to think that too, but 2.45GHz - it's a bit hard to accept the only molecules vibrating are water ones... doncha think?

    And as to deformation of molecules, proteins are probably the worst things to deform. The shape of proteins (and as far as I am aware, aminos) matters. Mad Cow is a result of a deformation of a common molecule. Proteins that get their shape changed cause some very serious diseases. (or syndromes or whatever you might call them)

    Look up how microwave ovens work, not just the 'this is safe' stuff but how they actually work.The vibration is just a part of it, but even there, you have to question just how atoms vibrating can generate heat. Seriously. Which gets to what is friction in ANY sense. See... atoms never touch, so how can rubbing them together generate heat?

    And now... how does vibrating a molecule (water or otherwise) generate heat?

    Now... think about all that and ask yourself if you REALLY want to microwave milk...

  46. #46
    Senior Member Journeyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by MrJack View Post

    The trouble with constructing a model on the basis of an invalid assumption is that, no matter how well conceived and thorough the model is, it will never be useful.
    The trouble with constructing a model at all is they very rarely correspond to reality at all, but rather tend to confirm the opinions of the modeller.

    You might wish to point out the invalid assumption instead of sniping from the sidelines - get involved, it's much more fun that way.

  47. #47
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    ... and I am pretty damn sure they would dispute the definition given above as to what 'pure' might mean - I am fairly sure they would define it as water that doesn't kill them.
    Well... in that case my tap water must fit your definition of "pure" water because it sure as hell hasn't killed me yet

  48. #48
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    Yes, but if you want to use reactivity rather than molecular weight, you should remember Gold IS a heavy metal and is very non-reactive.

    @Hildy - yeah - I used to think that too, but 2.45GHz - it's a bit hard to accept the only molecules vibrating are water ones... doncha think?

    And as to deformation of molecules, proteins are probably the worst things to deform. The shape of proteins (and as far as I am aware, aminos) matters. Mad Cow is a result of a deformation of a common molecule. Proteins that get their shape changed cause some very serious diseases. (or syndromes or whatever you might call them)

    Look up how microwave ovens work, not just the 'this is safe' stuff but how they actually work.The vibration is just a part of it, but even there, you have to question just how atoms vibrating can generate heat. Seriously. Which gets to what is friction in ANY sense. See... atoms never touch, so how can rubbing them together generate heat?

    And now... how does vibrating a molecule (water or otherwise) generate heat?

    Now... think about all that and ask yourself if you REALLY want to microwave milk...
    Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhh!
    MrJack likes this.

  49. #49
    Senior Member Yelta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Moonta SA.
    Posts
    6,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post
    Now... think about all that and ask yourself if you REALLY want to microwave milk...
    Right at this moment? no, but if I needed to would not hesitate.

    Sometimes wonder about Journeyman, does he really believe all of this way out stuff he posts or is he simply playing devils advocate?

  50. #50
    Senior Member Vinitasse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Mornington Peninsula VIC
    Posts
    1,251
    Quote Originally Posted by Yelta View Post
    Right at this moment? no, but if I needed to would not hesitate.

    Sometimes wonder about Journeyman, does he really believe all of this way out stuff he posts or is he simply playing devils advocate?
    "Devil's advocate"? Homer Simpson's advocate might be a bit more accurate. Time for a bit more edumacation perhaps.



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •