Calcium availability is dependent on various factors including whether or not the source is also high in oxalates. Carrots, which contain more calcium that human breast milk, do not contain high levels of oxalates. So it is a good source of calcium, especially when juiced.
Interesting sidenote on oxalates. I don't think the carrot calcium comparison to human breast milk indicates much though, as human breast milk is not known to be a source especially high in calcium. Carrots have 3.26% daily value of calcium per cup (122 grams) according to World's Healthiest Foods website nutritional profile. So if I juiced about 30 cups I'd reach daily value (I do juice close to this much on a carrot fast, ie nearly 10 pounds which is ~4,500 grams).
As an aside, the high calcium content of cow's milk versus the much lower calcium content of human breast milk is another reason that formula is not a good substitute. Beside, of course, all the epidemiological evidence of differential outcomes (breastfeeding increasing IQ, improving digestive capabilities).
First thing to keep in mind is that it is not the amount of calcium present but the absorbability of the calcium. Acidified calciums for example are better absorbed than calcium carbonate. And cow's milk is crap as far as a calcium source. The problem is that the protein in cow's milk blocks the calcium absorption. This is why they add vitamin D to the milk to try and counter this problem. Breast milk on the other hand is not a singular milk, but rather 4 types of milk that alter in composition to meet the infant's growth needs.
As far as breastfeeding and IQ that has to do with the essential fatty acid composition, not the calcium content.
As for the digestion, that has to do with the flora in the milk and derived from the mother's nipple skin during nursing, not calcium.
As I mentioned above there are often other sources of fats people over look. You just mentioned fasting. Guess what is increased in the process of fasting, or even the consumption of bitter foods like some greens? The body breaks down fat stores, much of which is excreted through the intestines. For example, when people start using bitters they will generally find that their stools float. This is from the flushing of fats that were being stored in the body.
I do not store much body fat at all, honestly I am very thin due to a poor digestion and my tense emotions and mental approach.
There are fats stored in the body that you may not realize. For that matter even the brain is mostly fat and water. Your nervous system is protected by fats, every cell in your body has fatty membranes, etc. Then there are the fatty acids generated by the flora.
Well, if we check the research on fecal soaps a lot of the research in is cattle grazing on grass. I have also seen some research on poultry that were not feeding on milk either.
Ok somewhat reasonable, but animal studies are not conclusive for anything that happens in humans.
And again, I have plenty of evidence of fecal soaps in humans in the past. Just because the LF supporters choose to ignore this evidence since it violates their belief system does not mean it does not exist.
It seems conceivable to think that the hyperdosing with magnesium could possibly effect the duct to have different properties (and I doubt the reference number was measured under those conditions).
That is like saying that if I heat up a rubber band a few degrees it will significantly increase its elasticity. If a rubber band can only stretch 4 inches maximum, warming it up a few degrees is not going to make it go another inch, or even a 1/16th of an inch. A rubber band can only expand so far regardless just like the bile ducts can only expand so far. This is why people have lodged stones in their bile ducts during flushes despite taking magnesium.
Analogies and metaphors can only take us so far. Ultimately every distinct thing needs to be determined experientially / empirically.
Yet you accept the "liver flushing" claims pretty much without any real evidence. Nearly every claim made by the LF supporters have been disproven by science and common sense. For example the claims of passing cups of "stones" even though the gallbladder is not large enough to even hold that many real stones. That is my problem with so many of the LF supporters. They accept claims blindly even when they are disproven and physically impossible.
Stones are extremely slow to form and grow to any significant size. This is why the people who claim to pass cups of stones then do the same thing a few days later are simply providing more evidence that those big blobs are nothing more than soap stones. And as I pointed out before the sterols in olive oil will also bind cholesterol creating congealed matter. Impurities get caught in it during the formation creating the colors. And the dye experiment where people mix dye in the olive oil then ingest it further proves this fact since the dye never reaches the liver or gallbladder. So the fact that the dye ends up in the middle of these "stones" conclusively proves that they were formed in the intestines, not the liver nor the gallbladder.
This is the strongest evidence of intestinal formation. I also noticed a black waxy stone upon flushing with toasted pumpkin seed oil (black), whereas I had not noticed a black one with my olive oil flushes.
Yes, and same goes with when people have added red dye to the olive oil and the dye ends up in the middle of these soap stones. Since the dye never reaches the gallbladder or liver this means these so-called "stones" are being formed in the intestines.
One thing I find very ironic though is that anyone who disagrees with "liver flushing" is branded "pro-pharma". But the "liver flush supporters are using a pro-pharma mentality of using the old shotgun approach to address a problem. The non-pharma approach to healing is small doses and slow and steady. The pro-pharma approach is to force the issue with high doses, just like the “liver flush” supporters are doing.
And this extends beyond the shotgun approach reasoning. It also applies to the same thing people in the alternative healing fields complain about allopathic medicine and big pharma of treating the symptom and not the cause. Liver flushing does not treat the cause of Gallstones either.
I agree that there are underlying issues at play that should be addressed.
It is not just the underlying issues. It is also the safety if real stones are present and the fact that people are being duped in to believing that those big squishy green blobs are gallstones or liver stones when nothing can be further from the truth. So people are risking ending up in the emergency room and possibly surgery by performing these "flushes" if real gallstones are present.
Not sure what you want to know. Yes they exist, and yes they are a problem especially in some parts of the world. But Hulda Clarkreally over hyped the issue to the point of giving alternative medicine a real big black eye with her ridiculous claims.
I meant, do you believe the rolled up "tomato skins" in the toilet post flush are flukes or something else?
I don't even know what post you are referring to. But yes, some people do mistake undigested cellulose for parasites. I have seen this several times.
I can say I released quantities of these skins (as well as other odd, parasitic looking forms) in my first few flushes, and now see none. I was also consuming parasite killing herbs at the time. I did not start consuming tomatoes again until the last couple weeks, in which I have not flushed.