http://www.flaxcouncil.ca/english/in...ng1&mp=growing

> Crop Rotation
>

> Following Canola or Mustard
>
> Research in Saskatchewan has shown that flax sometimes does poorly after canola or mustard. This is due to toxic compounds in mature canola and mustard plants and their seedling residues. However, research in Manitoba has shown that flax yields on canola stubble were generally not affected, although small reductions occurred in some years. The problem is most evident where straw and trash from the previous canola crop have not been adequately spread on the soil surface. Canola straw should, therefore, be spread uniformly, and spring volunteer seedlings should be controlled at an early stage in order to minimize possible toxic effects. Seeding into untilled canola stubble can also minimize the problem.

"Matt" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.flaxcouncil.ca/english/in...ng1&mp=growing
>
>> Crop Rotation
>>
>
>> Following Canola or Mustard
>>
>> Research in Saskatchewan has shown that flax sometimes does poorly after
>> canola or mustard. This is due to toxic compounds in mature canola and
>> mustard plants and their seedling residues. However, research in Manitoba
>> has shown that flax yields on canola stubble were generally not affected,
>> although small reductions occurred in some years. The problem is most
>> evident where straw and trash from the previous canola crop have not been
>> adequately spread on the soil surface. Canola straw should, therefore, be
>> spread uniformly, and spring volunteer seedlings should be controlled at
>> an early stage in order to minimize possible toxic effects. Seeding into
>> untilled canola stubble can also minimize the problem.
>

What exactly is your point here? You think canola oil is unsafe to eat?

Matt wrote:
> http://www.flaxcouncil.ca/english/in...ng1&mp=growing

I take it you don't put mustard on your hotdogs.

Gabby

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> "Matt" > wrote in message
> ...
>> http://www.flaxcouncil.ca/english/in...ng1&mp=growing
>>
>>> Crop Rotation
>>>
>>> Following Canola or Mustard
>>>
>>> Research in Saskatchewan has shown that flax sometimes does poorly after
>>> canola or mustard. This is due to toxic compounds in mature canola and
>>> mustard plants and their seedling residues. However, research in Manitoba
>>> has shown that flax yields on canola stubble were generally not affected,
>>> although small reductions occurred in some years. The problem is most
>>> evident where straw and trash from the previous canola crop have not been
>>> adequately spread on the soil surface. Canola straw should, therefore, be
>>> spread uniformly, and spring volunteer seedlings should be controlled at
>>> an early stage in order to minimize possible toxic effects. Seeding into
>>> untilled canola stubble can also minimize the problem.
>
> What exactly is your point here? You think canola oil is unsafe to eat?

I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is. I did find the
following:

http://www.google.com/search?num=100...id&btnG=Search

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1464246

> Evaluation of Western Australian canola meal for growing pigs
> MULLAN B. P. (1) ; PLUSKE J. R. (2) ; ALLEN J. (1) ; HARRIS D. J. (3) ;
> Increasing amounts of canola meal in the diet were associated with heavier (P < 0.001) thyroid weights, suggesting a negative influence of the products of glucosinolate hydrolysis on thyroid function. Single-press canola meal is a suitable alternative to other protein sources; however, at levels > 150 g/kg for growing-finishing pigs, higher intakes of glucosinolates were associated with a tendency for decreased pig performance and thyroid hypertrophy despite the canola varieties used being low glucosinolate'.

Gabby wrote:
> Matt wrote:
>> http://www.flaxcouncil.ca/english/in...ng1&mp=growing
>
> I take it you don't put mustard on your hotdogs.
>
> Gabby
>

Hmmm ... well that's an idea---thanks.

http://www.ithyroid.com/goitrogens.htm

> GOITROGENS
>
> Goitrogens are foods which suppress thyroid function. In normals, goitrogens can induce hypothyroidism and goiter. In hypos, goitrogens can further depress thyroidal function and stimulate the growth of the thyroid (goiter).
>
> In hyperthyroids, goitrogens may help suppress thyroidal function until normal thyroidal functioning can be restored. However, this may not be a good strategy. Goitrogens work by interfering with the thyroidal uptake of iodine. While many hypers try to limit thyroid output by iodine restriction, this strategy can backfire. Iodine restriction will cause the thyroid to increase in size (goiter) in an effort to filter more blood to get more iodine. When iodine is then re-introduced to the diet or accidentally ingested, the now larger thyroid gland has the capacity for greater thyroid hormone production.
>
> I do not believe that iodine restriction is a good long-term method for controlling thyroid hormone production. Therefore the consumption of goitrogens is not a good strategy. It is better to increase copper metabolism by supplementation of copper and the assisting nutrients. Once copper is replenished and copper metabolism is working properly, the body will tolerate iodine without increasing thyroid hormone production.
>
> Many goitrogens are generally members of the brassica family. These include:
>
> Broccoli
> Cauliflower
> Brussel Sprouts
> Cabbage
> Mustard
> Kale
> Turnips
> Rape seed (Canola Oil)
>
> Other goitrogens include:
>
> Soy
> Pine nuts
> Millet
> Peanuts

Matt wrote:
>
> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.

Is it the erucic acid that concerns you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erucic_acid

Matt wrote:
>
> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.

You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp

"Mark Thorson" > wrote in message
...
> Matt wrote:
>>
>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>
> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>
> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp


The first sentence of the letter should've been a warning:
"Recently I bought a cooking oil that's new to our supermarkets..."

What friggin' planet was that person from? Canola's been around for
what...at least 15 years? More?

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> "Mark Thorson" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Matt wrote:
>>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp
>
>
> The first sentence of the letter should've been a warning:
> "Recently I bought a cooking oil that's new to our supermarkets..."
>
> What friggin' planet was that person from? Canola's been around for
> what...at least 15 years? More?

Everything on the web was authored within the last 90 days. :-)

Mark Thorson wrote:
> Matt wrote:
>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>
> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>
> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp

nope

> DANGERS OVERSTATED
>
> Reports on the dangers of rapeseed oil are rampant on the internet, mostly stemming from an article, "Blindness, Mad Cow Disease and Canola Oil," by John Thomas, which appeared in Perceptions magazine, March/April 1996. Some of the claims are ludicrous. Although rape is a member of the brassica or mustard family, it is not the source of mustard gas used in chemical warfare.

http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/conola.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...22%5BAuthor%5D

"Matt" > wrote in message
news
> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> "Mark Thorson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Matt wrote:
>>>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>>> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>>>
>>> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp
>>
>>
>> The first sentence of the letter should've been a warning:
>> "Recently I bought a cooking oil that's new to our supermarkets..."
>>
>> What friggin' planet was that person from? Canola's been around for
>> what...at least 15 years? More?
>
> Everything on the web was authored within the last 90 days. :-)


Not only that, but before that 90 day period, there was no history, no
books, no nothing. How did we get through a day?

Mark Thorson wrote:
> Matt wrote:
>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>
> Is it the erucic acid that concerns you?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erucic_acid

Not particularly. There may be more than one thing wrong with it. The
biggest question seems to be the antithyroid effects of glucosinolates.

I wrote:

> http://www.google.com/search?num=100...id&btnG=Search
>
> http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1464246
>
>> > Evaluation of Western Australian canola meal for growing pigs
>> > MULLAN B. P. (1) ; PLUSKE J. R. (2) ; ALLEN J. (1) ; HARRIS D. J. (3) ;
>> > Increasing amounts of canola meal in the diet were associated with heavier (P < 0.001) thyroid weights, suggesting a negative influence of the products of glucosinolate hydrolysis on thyroid function. Single-press canola meal is a suitable alternative to other protein sources; however, at levels > 150 g/kg for growing-finishing pigs, higher intakes of glucosinolates were associated with a tendency for decreased pig performance and thyroid hypertrophy despite the canola varieties used being low glucosinolate'.

"Matt" > wrote in message
...
> Mark Thorson wrote:
>> Matt wrote:
>>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>>
>> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp
>
> nope
>
>> DANGERS OVERSTATED
>>
>> Reports on the dangers of rapeseed oil are rampant on the internet,
>> mostly stemming from an article, "Blindness, Mad Cow Disease and Canola
>> Oil," by John Thomas, which appeared in Perceptions magazine, March/April
>> 1996. Some of the claims are ludicrous. Although rape is a member of the
>> brassica or mustard family, it is not the source of mustard gas used in
>> chemical warfare.
>
> http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/conola.html
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...22%5BAuthor%5D


Don't provide links like the .gov search results and expect most people to
spend the time reading all those things. Provide excerpts which support what
you're saying, along with links for those of us who want to read more.
Otherwise, your credibility is immediately suspect. You *may* have a
secretary, but that person is not in this newsgroup.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> "Matt" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>> Matt wrote:
>>>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>>> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>>>
>>> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp
>> nope
>>
>>> DANGERS OVERSTATED
>>>
>>> Reports on the dangers of rapeseed oil are rampant on the internet,
>>> mostly stemming from an article, "Blindness, Mad Cow Disease and Canola
>>> Oil," by John Thomas, which appeared in Perceptions magazine, March/April
>>> 1996. Some of the claims are ludicrous. Although rape is a member of the
>>> brassica or mustard family, it is not the source of mustard gas used in
>>> chemical warfare.
>> http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/conola.html
>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...22%5BAuthor%5D
>
>
> Don't provide links like the .gov search results and expect most people to
> spend the time reading all those things.

The significance of the pubmed link was that Mary G. Enig (co-author of
the Con-ola article) is a degreed research scientist. The pubmed link
is a list of some of her published articles.

Matt wrote:
>
> Hmmm ... well that's an idea---thanks.
>
> http://www.ithyroid.com/goitrogens.htm

I think you're ok unless you are a pig who is eating massive quantities
of babassu and mandioca. Even then, take your iodine and all will be
well.

-L.

"Matt" > wrote in message
...
> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>> "Matt" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>>> Matt wrote:
>>>>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>>>> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp
>>> nope
>>>
>>>> DANGERS OVERSTATED
>>>>
>>>> Reports on the dangers of rapeseed oil are rampant on the internet,
>>>> mostly stemming from an article, "Blindness, Mad Cow Disease and Canola
>>>> Oil," by John Thomas, which appeared in Perceptions magazine,
>>>> March/April
>>>> 1996. Some of the claims are ludicrous. Although rape is a member of
>>>> the
>>>> brassica or mustard family, it is not the source of mustard gas used in
>>>> chemical warfare.
>>> http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/conola.html
>>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...22%5BAuthor%5D
>>
>>
>> Don't provide links like the .gov search results and expect most people
>> to
>> spend the time reading all those things.
>
> The significance of the pubmed link was that Mary G. Enig (co-author of
> the Con-ola article) is a degreed research scientist. The pubmed link
> is a list of some of her published articles.

I'm not questioning the credibility of any of the articles. I'm saying that
expecting us to read them all is like writing a college paper with footnotes
saying "Some book - I forgot which", or "This book, and guess which page".

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
> "Matt" > wrote in message
> ...
>> JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>> "Matt" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>>>> Matt wrote:
>>>>>> I don't know---maybe you could explain whether it is.
>>>>> You didn't get these ideas from reading this, did you?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp
>>>> nope
>>>>
>>>>> DANGERS OVERSTATED
>>>>>
>>>>> Reports on the dangers of rapeseed oil are rampant on the internet,
>>>>> mostly stemming from an article, "Blindness, Mad Cow Disease and Canola
>>>>> Oil," by John Thomas, which appeared in Perceptions magazine,
>>>>> March/April
>>>>> 1996. Some of the claims are ludicrous. Although rape is a member of
>>>>> the
>>>>> brassica or mustard family, it is not the source of mustard gas used in
>>>>> chemical warfare.
>>>> http://www.westonaprice.org/knowyourfats/conola.html
>>>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...22%5BAuthor%5D
>>>
>>> Don't provide links like the .gov search results and expect most people
>>> to
>>> spend the time reading all those things.
>> The significance of the pubmed link was that Mary G. Enig (co-author of
>> the Con-ola article) is a degreed research scientist. The pubmed link
>> is a list of some of her published articles.
>
> I'm not questioning the credibility of any of the articles. I'm saying that
> expecting us to read them all is like writing a college paper with footnotes
> saying "Some book - I forgot which", or "This book, and guess which page".

Wow. The point of my last post to you was that people weren't supposed
to read all those papers. Most of them have little to do with canola.
They were just supposed to see that she has published a lot of
peer-reviewed research and so is less likely to be a crackpot. Get it?

Please join my team in the fight against cancer.
http://www.grid.org/services/teams/t...3-AEB0DD18A6CE
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Matt wrote:
>>
>> Hmmm ... well that's an idea---thanks.
>>
>> http://www.ithyroid.com/goitrogens.htm
>
> I think you're ok unless you are a pig who is eating massive quantities
> of babassu and mandioca. Even then, take your iodine and all will be
> well.
>
> -L.

This 'canola thing' is a prennial weed; popping up at regular intervals.
I have no doubt that its origins can be traced to the corn oil
industry/lobby in the USA.
The Snopes article de-bunks it thoroughly but lazy people come across the
mis-information and predictably push the 'big red button' without further
thought.

Ken.

Matt wrote:

: They were just supposed to see that she has published a
: lot of peer-reviewed research and so is less likely to be a crackpot.

Only one published study in recent ten years and nine published studies in
total is not very impressive.

--
Juhana

Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
- Thomas Dewar

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:55:16 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
> wrote:

>Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
>- Thomas Dewar

But not so open that your brains fall out.
- Richard Dawkins in a letter to Prince Charles.

en wrote:
: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:55:16 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
: > wrote:
:
:: Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
:: - Thomas Dewar
:
: But not so open that your brains fall out.
: - Richard Dawkins in a letter to Prince Charles.

In my opinion Dawkins never opened his parachute. ;-)

--
Juhana

Of two evils, choose the more interesting.
- Thomas Dewar

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 08:58:37 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
> wrote:

wrote:
>: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:55:16 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
>: > wrote:
>:
>:: Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
>:: - Thomas Dewar
>:
>: But not so open that your brains fall out.
>: - Richard Dawkins in a letter to Prince Charles.
>
>In my opinion Dawkins never opened his parachute. ;-)

So that's why arguably the most prestigious university in the world
gave him arguably the most influential science chair on their campus?
Go figure! The trouble most folk have with Dawkins is that he DID
open his parachute wide and then argued cogently his case based on
evidence. Go figure! :=) jack

en wrote:
: On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 08:58:37 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
: > wrote:
:
:: en wrote:
::: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:55:16 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
::: > wrote:
:::
:::: Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
:::: - Thomas Dewar
:::
::: But not so open that your brains fall out.
::: - Richard Dawkins in a letter to Prince Charles.
::
:: In my opinion Dawkins never opened his parachute. ;-)
:
: So that's why arguably the most prestigious university in the world
: gave him arguably the most influential science chair on their campus?
: Go figure! The trouble most folk have with Dawkins is that he DID
: open his parachute wide and then argued cogently his case based on
: evidence. Go figure! :=) jack

This might be of interest to you. :-)

http://tinyurl.com/yjhcle


--
Juhana

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 16:00:18 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
> wrote:

wrote:
>: On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 08:58:37 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
>: > wrote:
>:
>:: en wrote:
>::: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:55:16 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
>::: > wrote:
>:::
>:::: Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
>:::: - Thomas Dewar
>:::
>::: But not so open that your brains fall out.
>::: - Richard Dawkins in a letter to Prince Charles.
>::
>:: In my opinion Dawkins never opened his parachute. ;-)
>:
>: So that's why arguably the most prestigious university in the world
>: gave him arguably the most influential science chair on their campus?
>: Go figure! The trouble most folk have with Dawkins is that he DID
>: open his parachute wide and then argued cogently his case based on
>: evidence. Go figure! :=) jack
>
>This might be of interest to you. :-)
>
>http://tinyurl.com/yjhcle


More dismay actually, Juhana, that humans can be so superstitous and
gullible. jack

> wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 16:00:18 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
> wrote:
>>http://tinyurl.com/yjhcle
>
>More dismay actually, Juhana, that humans can be so superstitous and
>gullible. jack

If it takes 660 pages to bamboozle them into believing
in God, they're not that gullible.

--Blair

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:20:30 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

> > wrote:
>>On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 16:00:18 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
> wrote:
>>>http://tinyurl.com/yjhcle
>>
>>More dismay actually, Juhana, that humans can be so superstitous and
>>gullible. jack
>
>If it takes 660 pages to bamboozle them into believing
>in God, they're not that gullible.

The 660 pages being the Bible?
Well, if they actually read it.
Seems that America is the most religiously fundamentalist country in
the world, and when questioned, the most ignorant about the details of
their holy book. So I would say that Dawkin's theories about children
believing what parents or elders tell them without question for their
own physical safety and so they believe anything they are told is
pretty right. I'm so glad my parents shoved nothing down my throat,
except a healthy questioning of everything. What is it the Jesuits say
about "give me the child until he is seven and I will give you the
man"? At least they were honest. jack

> wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:20:30 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>
>> > wrote:
>>>On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 16:00:18 +0200, "Juhana Harju"
> wrote:
>>>>http://tinyurl.com/yjhcle
>>>
>>>More dismay actually, Juhana, that humans can be so superstitous and
>>>gullible. jack
>>
>>If it takes 660 pages to bamboozle them into believing
>>in God, they're not that gullible.
>
>The 660 pages being the Bible?

No, the 660 pages being the book they flog at the bottom of
the rant at that URL. _Does God Believe in Atheists_, by
John "Fallacy of Presuming the Conclusion" Blanchard.

>Well, if they actually read it.

The bible is a ****ing mess. Nobody who has "actually read
it" as an entire work could come away believing any of it,
because it's internally inconsistent to a crippling degree.

And the KJ version is not an entire work in the first
place. The Apocrypha, which were also "the word of God",
were edited out of it by men. The stories of Jesus being
a serial killer in his youth are particularly interesting.

>Seems that America is the most religiously fundamentalist country in

Second to many muslim countries, unfortunately. We may
have state-sponsored religion, but we haven't succumbed
to anything like Sharia quite yet.

>the world, and when questioned, the most ignorant about the details of
>their holy book. So I would say that Dawkin's theories about children
>believing what parents or elders tell them without question for their
>own physical safety and so they believe anything they are told is
>pretty right. I'm so glad my parents shoved nothing down my throat,
>except a healthy questioning of everything. What is it the Jesuits say
>about "give me the child until he is seven and I will give you the
>man"? At least they were honest. jack

That's a bit young to be making men of boys.

--Blair

In article >,
en says...

---snip---

> What is it the Jesuits say
> about "give me the child until he is seven and I will give you the
> man"? At least they were honest. jack
>
>
Sounds like some sort of weird hostage exchange deal to me... :-)

The Jesuits, at least here in the U.S., also have had a reputation for
turning out some of the best-educated converts from Catholicism to
atheism or agnosticism, so perhaps it all balances out. Or maybe that's
what they're talking about in your quote above.

Bob

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 14:20:09 GMT, Blair P. Houghton > wrote:

>That's a bit young to be making men of boys.

Whoooosh!

jack