Print Topic - Archive

BTD Forums  /  Eat Right 4 Your Type  /  Corn: Bigger Questions
Posted by: san j, Sunday, June 22, 2014, 10:06pm
Quoted from dadamo's TYPEBase entry for "Corn"
Throughout Europe, "corn" has always been the generic name for any of the cereal grains; Europeans call corn maize , a derivative of the early American Indian word mahiz. In fact, before settlers came to the New World Europeans had never seen this food - called Indian corn by colonists. What a wonderfully versatile and useful gift the Indians gave the world. Everything on the corn plant can be used: the husks for TAMALES, the silk for medicinal tea, the kernels for food and the stalks for fodder. Corn is not only a popular food, but the foundation of many by-products including BOURBON, CORN FLOUR, CORNMEAL, CORN OIL, CORNSTARCH, CORN SYRUP, CORN WHISKEY and laundry starch. The multicolored Indian corn - used today mainly for decoration - has red, blue, brown and purple kernels. Horticulturists developed the two most popular varieties today - white (Country Gentleman) and yellow (Golden Bantam) corn.


1. The Bloodtype Question:

(The happy quote struck me as odd, considering there is only one BT subtype for which corn isn't an Avoid: It's a Neutral for A Secretors.)

What is it about corn itself -not GM corn- that is a problem for all BTs except A Secretors?

Lola has come up with a Peter D'Adamo quote about chicken and galactose on another thread that was quite specific for Bs.
Is there a similarly explanatory quote available re: Corn --- why this crop, that sustained the almost exclusively Type O American indigenous population for centuries (?millennia?) should have sickened them in large numbers but didn't? And turned out to be non-"toxic" only for those European colonists who were A Secretors?  ??)

2. The Genotype Question:

Just as the GTD marks Chicken as an outright Avoid for NO Bs (it's a Black Dot for Nomads and Gatherers, a Neutral for Explorers), Corn is an Avoid for all genotypes except Hunters and Explorers, for whom it is a "Black Dot" (funny that only a tiny minority of this population is A Secretor).

Should the refinements of GTD and SWAMI be considered to invalidate D'Adamo's TypeBase classifications, therefore?

This calls for an explanation of what it is about Corn (and chicken, why not?) that makes it so "damaging" to so many.
Posted by: Possum, Sunday, June 22, 2014, 10:16pm; Reply: 1
Good questions san j and thanks for raising them ;)
Incidentally I actually have particularly dreadful problems with corn fed chicken!! ::)
Posted by: ABJoe, Sunday, June 22, 2014, 11:57pm; Reply: 2
Eat Right 4 Your Type
Type O
- Page 54 shows corn interferes with insulin efficiency and slows metabolic rate...  
- Pg. 67 - Corn lectins affect production of insulin, often leading to diabetes and obesity.  All type Os should avoid corn - especially if you have a weight problem or family history of diabetes.

Type B:
- Page 147 shows corn inhibits insulin efficiency and hampers metabolic rate...
- Page 156 Corn and buckwheat are major factors in Type B weight gain.  More than any other food, they contribute to a sluggish metabolism, insulin irregularity, fluid retention, and fatigue.

Type AB:
- Page 188 shows corn inhibits insulin efficiency.
- Pages 196, 197, 198, and 200 all say avoid corn (or corn and buckwheat) but provides no additional information about why, although on 200 it says "Like Type B", so you can refer to Type B text on pg. 156...


Live Right 4 Your Type
Type A:
- Page 206 - In particular, non-secretors should watch their consumption of wheat and corn, whose lectins can exert an insulinlike effect, lowering active tissue mass and increasing total body fat.


I also remember discussion about American Indian burial mound research indicating that bones contained less calcium after corn (maize) was introduced than before, although I don't remember where it was.

Genotype/SWAMI question:
I do NOT think anything in the Genotype Diet invalidates the information in Typebase.  Just because an item has a black dot rating does not mean an individual can eat it uninhibited.  It is still a toxin that requires each individual to monitor their reaction and to be more strict about avoiding the item in case their body is affected more than someone else's.
These diets put more obligation on the follower to be honest with themselves about what is really working for them and what isn't...

My SWAMI output puts all corn (and chicken) items in total avoid status as I have experienced that they must remain...
Posted by: gulfcoastguy, Monday, June 23, 2014, 12:12am; Reply: 3
Well I can tell you that if I eat it my joints hurt and I get fat.
Posted by: san j, Monday, June 23, 2014, 5:29pm; Reply: 4
I wasn't anticipating this when I posted the Question, but:
It would seem we in the late 20th- early 21st century West are demanding quite a bit more of our food than our species historically has.

Of course this is due to scientific knowledge. But one wonders whether those maize-mastering indigenous peoples of the Americas (who, as the TypeBase quote admits, used every part of the corn plant and did not shun its use for finding it causing any great sicknesses) were any less well-adjusted or kind or happy or enlightened or healthy than are moderns who "know more" about the cobs that show up at our supermarkets.

Corn was, it would seem, as well integrated into the fabric of their life and culture as was the camel to the Bedouin. But whereas one doesn't read any camel-invalidating literature, one does come across the "Corn Is Toxic For All Os" belief within the dadamo universe - having nothing to do with "Genetic Modification" -  a belief not currently substantiated by History and Anthropology.

Kin'a makes me, anyway, wonder.
As usual, posing the Meta-questions... ;)
(think)
Posted by: ABJoe, Monday, June 23, 2014, 5:54pm; Reply: 5
I think many more people are focused on "Why?" the human body develops disease and "How?" to heal or, better yet, prevent said diseases.  This is what Dr. D'Adamo is providing us - the ability to push back the onset of many of these diseases, based on specific characteristics that have been studies and quantified.
Posted by: deblynn3, Monday, June 23, 2014, 6:01pm; Reply: 6
My two cents, foods just aren't what they use to be even not counting GMOs etc. and people eat so much of it as well. D'Adamo says for most people 80% compliance is good. The native American's of today are amount those with raising number of diabetics, weight issues and all the problems that come with it. I also remember the info on bones and American natives. That has run true for my family on the AN side.

Posted by: san j, Monday, June 23, 2014, 6:26pm; Reply: 7
Quoted from deblynn3
The native American's of today are amount those with raising number of diabetics, weight issues and all the problems that come with it.

This is what happened to native Americans after their integrated culture was destroyed and they became subject to processed sugar and spirits. This is not because of the centrality of Corn in their (lost) culture.
Posted by: san j, Monday, June 23, 2014, 6:43pm; Reply: 8
Quoted from ABJoe
I think many more people are focused on "Why?" the human body develops disease and "How?" to heal or, better yet, prevent said diseases.  This is what Dr. D'Adamo is providing us - the ability to push back the onset of many of these diseases, based on specific characteristics that have been studies and quantified.

Re; That "Focus":
In becoming scientifically sophisticated, longer-lived, less personally subject to decimating plagues and constant wars, are (post)modern humans bored? Has our historic mental leisure, combined with Cultural Rootlessness, bred the notion of Immortality via Diet, or (more broadly) Science? And: Can this disengaged ethos be construed Health, or Hubris?

Just wondering how, if we could travel back to him in a Time Machine, a Native American sage of a couple of centuries ago would have addressed this. Would he gamble his very culture for four or five years' POSSIBLE increased personal longevity?

This is a meta-question for the cerebral. For most here, it is not of interest, I grant you. But if you ponder History in grand swaths, if you meditate upon epochal changes as do I, chime in!  :)
If not, Carry On.  :K)
Posted by: ruthiegirl, Monday, June 23, 2014, 8:50pm; Reply: 9
One of the arguments for a "Paleo" diet is that humans' health declined after the introduction of grains to their diets. They look at fossil evidence (how many missing teeth, the presence or absence of arthritis in major joints, etc.) I'm fairly certain that one of the source materials was the Native Americans before and after corn was introduced.

Nearly all Native American tribes have a "creation myth" regarding the introduction of corn; all agree they were hunter-gatherers up until a time of crisis; there was a famine and the People would have starved on their hunter/gatherer diets but then some supernatural force introduced them to corn. The exact details of this supernatural force or personna varies from one tribe to another.

Then fossil evidence shows an increase in diseases after the time corn was introduced to the Native American diets. I think that may have included a shortened lifespan. Certainly, it's better than having whole tribes starve to death. The corn they ate back then was possibly "less toxic" than the forms available now, but it still wasn't a good thing in terms of overall health. Had quinoa been available at that time in history, rather than corn, the Native Americans as a whole may have been significantly healthier. But that's not what happened. Perhaps quinoa would have been hybridized to the point of toxicity if that had been the case!

So, in a nutshell, the Native Americans introduced corn to their diets to avoid mass starvation, and then there WAS a slow decline in health as a result. The effects may have been subtle, but they were still there.

You could ask similar questions about coconuts in southern Asia and Island communities. It's there, people eat it to avoid starvation, and it became part of the culture. But that does not automatically mean that it's a particularly healthy food for anybody to be eating.
Posted by: Lloyd, Monday, June 23, 2014, 11:03pm; Reply: 10
I've missed most of this thread.

Two points:

The corn that American Indians used prior to the arrival of Columbus, et al, was not the highly hybridized corn (much less GMO) of today. Different nutritional profile and so on.

And, the corn evaluated for the diets is the hybridized corn commonly found today, not the corn that Indians were eating when the pilgrims arrived at Plymouth Rock.

Use that information how you will.
Posted by: san j, Monday, June 23, 2014, 11:23pm; Reply: 11
Quoted from Lloyd
I've missed most of this thread.

...The corn that American Indians used prior to the arrival of Columbus, et al, was not the highly hybridized corn... of today. Different nutritional profile and so on.

And, the corn evaluated for the diets is the hybridized corn commonly found today, not the corn that Indians were eating when the pilgrims arrived at Plymouth Rock.

Hmm. You're invalidating ruthiegirl's contribution, here, making the sickening of Indians via the "former" corn even less relevant.

Dadamo TypeBase extols corn as "a gift the Indians gave the world". If that gift didn't sicken type A secretor Europeans as compared with type O Europeans and Americans, then ruthiegirl's post matters a great deal to Bloodtype Science. Until I see evidence of that, I'll stick with Dr. D'Adamo's more lab-based modern evidence, which is what my OP requests, though you admit you "missed most of this thread".  :-/ ;)

But, again, I'm pondering the phenomenon of individuals' assigning primacy to their own numeric longevity, over and above other more communal values, such as culture...
Too Big a Question, especially if one "misses" the thread!  :D
Posted by: Lloyd, Monday, June 23, 2014, 11:31pm; Reply: 12
Quoted from san j
.

Dadamo TypeBase extols corn as "....."


Blurbs were taken from other sources. It is well known that some of the blurbs are not entirely appropriate for the food item.

I think the blurbs should be used for general informational value and not use them as a part of the diet or Peter's work.

One last point being that the process of writing books and assembling websites has left a trail of items that can be interpreted or misinterpreted many ways. Some things were written for general low level consumption rather than for scientific scrutiny. It's a bit of a mess.
Posted by: Possum, Monday, June 23, 2014, 11:47pm; Reply: 13
I remember being fascinated and reading a bit on this subject - Apparently: The decline in health of the Native Americans was due to Pellagra which is a vitamin deficiency disease...and is common...in Native American cultures that grow corn...
Pellagra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pellagra
Posted by: san j, Monday, June 23, 2014, 11:50pm; Reply: 14
Quoted from ruthiegirl
Then fossil evidence shows an increase in diseases after the time corn was introduced to the Native American diets. I think that may have included a shortened lifespan. Certainly, it's better than having whole tribes starve to death. The corn they ate back then was possibly "less toxic" than the forms available now, but it still wasn't a good thing in terms of overall health. Had quinoa been available at that time in history, rather than corn, the Native Americans as a whole may have been significantly healthier. But that's not what happened. Perhaps quinoa would have been hybridized to the point of toxicity if that had been the case!

So, in a nutshell, the Native Americans introduced corn to their diets to avoid mass starvation, and then there WAS a slow decline in health as a result. The effects may have been subtle, but they were still there.

Hi, ruthiegirl.
I've been surfing around a little, and I've found a reference to a decline in the health of Indians who ceased their hunter-gatherer ways and began to live in villages and cultivate numerous crops such as beans, squashes and grains. The cultivation of corn was not something that happened at some other, isolated time; that would have rendered Corn more "blameable", but it looks like it's not what happened.
I can see Type O hunters declining in health as they increasingly depended on a carbohydrate-heavy diet for their nutrition, and upon the village lifestyle rather than that of hunters, interfering with their need for that sort and rhythm of strenuous exercise.
The difference between concomitance and causality is crucial here, with respect to Corn.
So, addressing your (more than my own) question: To blame the demise in Indians' health upon corn is not something I'm prepared to do. My brief internet search turned up no supportive historic data, but I don't mind including it on this thread, should you find any.  :)
Posted by: Mrs T O+, Tuesday, June 24, 2014, 1:24am; Reply: 15
Remember that in the " old days" most food was eaten In season. Maybe if it was eaten when harvested & a little into the winter through flour, etc., it might not have been so harmful. Do we know how it was used?  It might have been used all year, but maybe it was intended to be eaten during a certain season, like harvest for lots of extra energy to work.
I know too much is not good for me. I avoid it, but last year it was served to me in a restaurant ( not listed in the description of the order) & I ate it after not having any (except a few stray kernels in mixed veggies) for a few years & felt no ill effects. I still avoid it & don't consider it a vegetable, but the grain it is. Too bad we Midwesterners consider it a vegetable, which frustrates me.
Posted by: san j, Tuesday, June 24, 2014, 2:04am; Reply: 16
Quoted from Possum
I remember being fascinated and reading a bit on this subject - Apparently: The decline in health of the Native Americans was due to Pellagra which is a vitamin deficiency disease...and is common...in Native American cultures that grow corn...
Pellagra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pellagra

Pellagra was prevented, for hundreds and hundreds of years, by native Americans by treating their corn with alkali. It was the Europeans, who didn't know about such treatment, who had to discover the cause of their disease as gross niacin deficiencies.

So, Possum, you're opposing what the bloodtype books are saying, in a way. It wasn't the Indians (almost exclusively O's) who suffered from Pellagra as a result of eating corn; it was the Europeans.
Posted by: Possum, Tuesday, June 24, 2014, 2:31am; Reply: 17
Maybe that just shows you can't fully trust the internet eh, unless it is misinformation/or misinterpretation of it? I see now from further reading that you are absolutely right...
Posted by: PCUK-Positive, Tuesday, June 24, 2014, 12:14pm; Reply: 18
San J, How does Corn affect you?
Posted by: Averno, Tuesday, June 24, 2014, 12:36pm; Reply: 19
I wonder if corn becoming a staple in their diet moved a lot of other healthier foods they'd been acclimated to into the margins. Maybe what they experienced was the negative effect of the sort of dietary "evolution/revolution" that we're seeing now in the general population since the introduction of so many exotic foods (lab foods amongst them).  

As someone once said, it's the habit that harms...
Posted by: Paul Hopfensperger, Wednesday, June 25, 2014, 8:58pm; Reply: 20
Many years ago, I gave my father sweetcorn and he thought I had gone crazy. He is from Bavaria in Southern Germany originally and they only ever fed it to cattle - never humans. As a kid, I always remember looking at it in my stools wondering why we ate it when it never seemed to be digested correctly. I steer well clear of corn as does my family, and thank Dr. D'Adamo for confirming to me that we as humans (except A secretors) should not be eating this!
Posted by: Possum, Wednesday, June 25, 2014, 9:10pm; Reply: 21
Hi Paul and yes - good question!!
Posted by: ruthiegirl, Thursday, June 26, 2014, 5:19pm; Reply: 22
The examples I quoted were from memory; I didn't do any fresh research to back up any claims. My main point was to question the assumption that "these foods have been eaten for generations so they must be fine." It's POSSIBLE that these foods (such as corn and coconuts) are, in fact, causing health problems in the communities that have eaten them for a long time.

It's also possible that these foods were perfectly healthy when they were eaten generations ago, but only became unhealthy with modern hybridization. The difference between "ancient corn" and "modern corn" could be like the difference between spelt and wheat.

Dr D did not research any ancient grains that are no longer available today. We have no way of knowing how "ancient American corn" reacted in type O individuals 1000 years ago. If it's like spelt, then it was perfectly healthy for O secretors but problematic for O nonnies.
Posted by: deblynn3, Thursday, June 26, 2014, 5:44pm; Reply: 23
Paul, a Germany family I stayed with one summer felt the same was, they had never heard of "sweet corn" That way in the late 60's not that long ago. I rode my bike to that army base and got them some every week?  ::) Even in these few years corn isn't what it use to be.
Posted by: Averno, Thursday, June 26, 2014, 7:52pm; Reply: 24

Some Czech friends were horrified the we served them "pig food" a few years ago. They tried it and loved it. Roasted, buttered and salted... Oh my...  :D .
Posted by: san j, Thursday, June 26, 2014, 8:05pm; Reply: 25
Quoted from Averno

Some Czech friends were horrified the we served them "pig food" a few years ago. They tried it and loved it. Roasted, buttered and salted... Oh my...  :D .

Don't forget the pepper!  ;)

European countries don't have the "cornfields as far as the eye can see" agricultural allotments that we do, here in America: Corn, corn, everywhere.
Nor is "corn on the cob"  embedded in their culture as it is in ours; sweet corn on its cob says "Summer" to Americans - it's very much a part of our culture and an expected ingredient at many a summer holiday gathering or bbq.

As for the "pig-food" prejudice:
The filet of dover sole I bought last night is in my refrigerator: I suspect it's the "food" of some of my "Avoid" sea-critters, but that won't stop me from enjoying it.
I also enjoy a good lambchop; the fact that a dog would also enjoy it doesn't make it any less attractive to, or beneficial for, me.  :)
Posted by: Averno, Thursday, June 26, 2014, 8:10pm; Reply: 26
San j  ;D(clap)
Posted by: ruthiegirl, Thursday, June 26, 2014, 9:19pm; Reply: 27
A good many of my meals could be divided up between "rabbit food" and "cat food" too. Food is food, and before the invention of the "pet food industry" pets simply ate family leftovers.
Posted by: wayland B+, Sunday, June 29, 2014, 2:28pm; Reply: 28
http://northamericanpharmacal.com/living/2013/11/ask-dr-dadamo-native-americans-and-corn/
Posted by: wayland B+, Sunday, June 29, 2014, 3:59pm; Reply: 29
http://www.dadamo.com/B2blogs/blogs/index.php/2007/11/28/blog-11-28-2007-ar-excluded-middle?blog=24
Posted by: misspudding, Friday, July 4, 2014, 1:48am; Reply: 30
Well, I was almost entirely compliant with BTD/GTD except for corn until recently. Within the last two months, I've dropped 17 pounds without trying.
Posted by: Seraffa, Saturday, July 5, 2014, 3:15am; Reply: 31
Quoted from ruthiegirl


It's also possible that these foods were perfectly healthy when they were eaten generations ago, but only became unhealthy with modern hybridization. The difference between "ancient corn" and "modern corn" could be like the difference between spelt and wheat.



I'm an Explorer A Nonnie and can't have corn, period. BTW corn is a fruit; consider that. A carby-fruit. A wierd thing kind of like the way San J questioned Bananas a few months ago. I agree with the possiblity that corn a thousand years ago was maybe not even the "Indian Corn" we see today. I don't eat any grains anymore, PERIOD, because I will forever be a Neolith in digestion. There is one water-grass seed I do eat, nowhere related to rice at all, and that is "wild rice". It is FULL of PROTEIN. It is a treat when made with lentils (also made with protein) and tossed with buckwheat (for iron.)

I guess you could say buckwheat, breadfruit and bananas are the only  carby-fruits I can safely eat. But not corn!

Re: adding alkalai to corn to prevent pelagra - consider what the ancient Peruvians had to do with their first crops of potatoes in order to somewhat detoxify and consume them - because they were even more harmful than they are today.(I think they mixed then with potash before consuming.Gritty?) Peruvians were and still are, O's. People will try ANYTHING to make a food more digestible if they find it is filling and keeps away hunger.(though their pancreas may disagree.)
Posted by: Lola, Tuesday, July 15, 2014, 3:12am; Reply: 32
yes paul,
I lived in late Czechoslovakia during the 60s

we would ride out visiting castles and would undoubtedly steal corn passing through the countryside.....all corn was for porcine feed ;D


http://northamericanpharmacal.com/living/2013/11/ask-dr-dadamo-native-americans-and-corn/
Print page generated: Tuesday, September 2, 2014, 12:38am