I hear and read a lot about the benefits of fermented food for gut/overall health. Unfortunately, it seems that everytime I try to introduce them (kimchi, blue cheese etc) a day later I slip into a depressive like state. Usually only last a day but it's noticeable. Could this be correct/common? Or am I making this up?
i have always thought that the major benefit of a fermented product was to make otherwise indigestible substances like plant fibers/cellulose digestible by the human. Because we are lacking the suitable enzymes for the breakdown of cellulose, the bacterial byproducts of decaying plant matter essentially "digest themselves" rendering the fibers able to be taken into the gut without irritation. Raw cabbage for example is very hard on the gut, and historically has been associated with gas for this reason (it is fermenting in the gut)
This led me to think that if it essentially needs to be rotting and self rectifing through pleiomorphic change (becoming bacterial) it is probably not a health food (as the healthiest foods from a Living Systems perspective are those with the most life force (very fresh fruits and/or soft vegetables, very fresh animal products as close to living as possible) - Fritz Popp's work on biophoton emissions showed it took 72 hours after a body dies for biophoton emissions to stop for example...
moreover,
- Fermented foods are rich in lactic acid.
- Excess lactic acid can be stressful for the cells.
- Lactic acid and carbon dioxide have opposing effects. (Lactic acid = bad, CO2 = good)
I have always held the opinion that the "microbiome" in the gut, whilst a decent indicator of what may be going on, is often misunderstood. people talk about "good" and "bad" bacteria, as if they are the cause of illness, but bacteria are simply cleanup squads of microzymic nature that are farmed according to the organisms needs.
Rather than seeing the bacteria as the driving force, ive always seen them as representative of what is occurring, more like a "so called good bacteria live in healthy people". "so called bad bacteria have to be present in those who are not as healthy"
... Fritz Popp's work on biophoton emissions showed it took 72 hours after a body dies for biophoton emissions to stop for example..
It would be fascinating to repeat Popp's work on fermented plant matter.
I have always held the opinion that the "microbiome" in the gut, whilst a decent indicator of what may be going on, is often misunderstood. people talk about "good" and "bad" bacteria, as if they are the cause of illness, but bacteria are simply cleanup squads of microzymic nature that are farmed according to the organisms needs.
Rather than seeing the bacteria as the driving force, ive always seen them as representative of what is occurring, more like a "so called good bacteria live in healthy people". "so called bad bacteria have to be present in those who are not as healthy"
Ah, this is similar to what I have discussed in the past with a friend/colleague (who happens to be a vet). The specific situation was my cat's abscess from a brawl. Her expedient approach was to lance the very large abscess but then we debated about the nature of the goo that emerged, with our conclusion then being that the microbes were probably there to clean out the wound, not because they were introduced into the wound from the other critter. [The slow approach to resolving the abscess, btw, would have been sufficient dosing of calc sulph 6X as cell salts or hepar calc sulph as a 30C remedy but the hunter cat didn't like hanging around, being chill, to wait for the healing to occur. Expedient was more suited to his temperament.]
@jen absolutely, in my experience 100% of the "unpleasant symptoms" animals or humans encounter are resolution focused happenings that seek to recitify decay or injured cells, purge the debris to the outside away from the central important organs etc. When doctors and vets take "swab samples" of the debris being pushed out, they see "bacteria" which are of course nothing other than cellular compost. the action of antibacterial agents only hijacks the complete resolution of the issue and serves to push some of the muck back inside incompletely processed, which i believe leads to a more chronic presentation, or in best case scenario, a further acute event must be raised to deal with it later.
So in this line of thinking then, what is the purpose of the cell types in the immune system? Specialized cleanup scavenging cells?
@jen yes, this is my understanding, macrophages are an acute phase reactant specifically to gobble up waste, transform it into a material that can be escorted out of the body (pus, phlegm etc) and keep an inventory of the most unique feature of the damage, usually some kind of toxin. The mistake in thought generally being that its a "virus" when the virus-like-particle is simply "cell compost" or remnants of injured cells
please see Jamie Cunliffe's work over at morphostasis.org.uk for more, he has covered this perfectly in my view
@josh-lsh I remember you mentioning him quite a long while ago but it's also been some time since I thought about how his work fits into the bigger picture.
