Sulforaphane

A place to discuss health and fitness, healthy diets. A fit body makes for a fit mind.
Post Reply
Ionbuddy
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2021 5:20 am

Sulforaphane

Post by Ionbuddy »

There have been multiple studies on the benefits of sulforaphane. Check out these videos, they all have around 5 to 8 papers cited for each video. I don't count them, but trust me he goes through a lot of research.




The best source of precursors sulforaphane are in broccoli sprouts, which are very easy to grow.

The bestway to get sulforaphane, and not it's useless cousin sulforaphane-nitrile, are these steps. First, make sure to heat broccoli sprouts to 70 degrees centigrade for 10 minutes or to heat broccoli crowns to 60 degrees centigrade for 10 minutes.

There was also another study which matched these results. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-46382-7

Second cool them down immediately.
Third, put them into a blender until thoroughly cut.
Fourth, wait for around 40 minutes.


Finally, you can cook them at boiling temperature. Alternatively, you could eat them raw if you're absolutely sure you've made sure no pathogenic bacteria grew alongside the broccoli sprouts.
I still have defilements.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Sulforaphane

Post by DooDoot »

i steam broccoli for 3 minutes only because a jewish professor said so. is this OK?
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
coconut
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:10 am

Re: Sulforaphane

Post by coconut »

nutritionfacts.org is not a reputable source, and the creator dr. greger is a controversial figure. He also is the last person I would consider healthy.

His book "how not to die" is very unscientific and dishonest.

Broccoli is a poor mans food farmers use to profit off, it's all from the same plant.

Image
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Sulforaphane

Post by salayatananirodha »

coconut wrote: Fri Jan 29, 2021 9:36 am nutritionfacts.org is not a reputable source, and the creator dr. greger is a controversial figure. He also is the last person I would consider healthy.

His book "how not to die" is very unscientific and dishonest.
why / how?
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
coconut
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:10 am

Re: Sulforaphane

Post by coconut »

salayatananirodha wrote: Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:11 pm
coconut wrote: Fri Jan 29, 2021 9:36 am nutritionfacts.org is not a reputable source, and the creator dr. greger is a controversial figure. He also is the last person I would consider healthy.

His book "how not to die" is very unscientific and dishonest.
why / how?
He cherry picks studies and ignores key variables. Here is a quote someone wrote, but he isn't the only one who has said this about him, I've heard respected professionals say the same thing about him.
However, Greger’s notorious for “overselling” the benefits of such a diet by cherry-picking pieces of research to back up his statements. I mean, he seriously published a book titled “How Not To Die”.

A good example is found within that same book: he discusses, at length, that animal protein causes kidney stones:
subjects who didn't eat meat at all had a significantly lower risk of being hospitalized for kidney stones, and for those who did eat meat, the more they ate, the higher their associated risks
But what he doesn’t tell you is that the study he’s citing actually says that vegetarians have a significantly higher risk of kidney stones than those who eat a low amount of meat, and almost the same amount of risk as pescatarians (fish-eaters). That seems truly deceptive.

In another area of his book, he claims that there’s no evidence that omega-3 fatty acids (commonly found in fish) are good for heart health, saying the study he was citing:
found no protective benefit for overall mortality, heart disease mortality, sudden cardiac death, heart attack, or stroke
He was citing a single review of scientific literature; before he wrote his book, that review had been repeatedly criticized; you can see examples here
, here
, and here

.

Later, Greger also goes on long screeds claiming that asthma is caused by meat-based diets, ignoring the fact that the very study
he’s citing shows that people who eat a lot of seafood had a lower incidence of asthma than vegetarians, something that has repeatedly
beenvalidated

.

In light of these items (I could go on and on…this book has been critically torn apart online in many different forums that provide continual citations), we have to conclude one of two things are true:

- Greger is a conman, making money off gullible people who’ll buy his books and products without critically assessing his claims, or
- Greger is an exceedingly sloppy and lazy researcher who is, frankly, a danger, due to his bad advice.

You decide.
https://www.quora.com/Is-Dr-Michael-Greger-a-conman
Ionbuddy
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2021 5:20 am

Re: Sulforaphane

Post by Ionbuddy »

I'd like to point out that none of these arguments have anything to do with whether sulforaphane has any benefits.
I'd also like to point out that in the sources cited as to why Dr. Greger is some kind of bad person:
But what he doesn’t tell you is that the study he’s citing actually says that vegetarians have a significantly higher risk of kidney stones than those who eat a low amount of meat, and almost the same amount of risk as pescatarians (fish-eaters).
1. For some reason they lumped vegetarians and pescatarians together. They also didn't seem to mention people who only ate plants, they said vegetarians. That's an ambiguous term. What if the vegetarians were downing butter like no tomorrow? That isn't mentioned in the abstract. The full text is hidden behind a paywall. What if there's some confounding factor that wasn't taken into account?
He was citing a single review of scientific literature; before he wrote his book, that review had been repeatedly criticized; you can see examples here, here, and here.
2. None of those are studies, they're all comments. Dr. Greger has cited studies that omega 3 fats are not associated with lower cardiovascular events. A text citation of his book How Not to Die would be nice. Also, the full texts of the comments are all hidden behind paywalls.
people who eat a lot of seafood had a lower incidence of asthma than vegetarians, something that has repeatedly been validated.
3. The first study is pretty weak. It's not a meta anyalsis, nor is it even a controlled study. It's a questionnaire. You can't make any good conclusions from this. The last two studies are not about fish, they are about fish oil. You can get omega 3 dha and epa from microalgae just fine.
I still have defilements.
waryoffolly
Posts: 346
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:30 pm

Re: Sulforaphane

Post by waryoffolly »

coconut wrote: Fri Jan 29, 2021 9:36 am Broccoli is a poor mans food farmers use to profit off, it's all from the same plant.
Cruciferous vegatables (such as members of the brassica family like broccoli/cauliflower/brussel sprouts) are extremely healthy. So whether or not they are “poor man’s food” misses the point imo. Eating large portions of these vegetables per week is associated with decrease in all-cause mortality. Relative risk is decreased 15% for all cause mortality when comparing the top 25 % of cruciferous vegetable eaters to the bottom 25% according to the first study below:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 1418301638

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=e ... zTYDwI3XcJ

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=e ... 3UcWcQxKEJ

Eat more cruciferous vegatables! Sulfurophane is likely just one of many beneficial compounds they are high in!
Post Reply