PDA

View Full Version : Activated Barley instead of high calorie food?



Ecaz
03-11-2013, 13:10
I know everyone is looking for high calorie per oz foods, such as Olive Oil and Peanut Butter, hence all the junk food on the trail, but has anyone considered this:

http://www.sunwarrior.com/store/activated-barley-900-gm-container.html

Activated barley is supposed to offer 400% more energy than any other food calorie known to man, and since it's around 100 calories/oz, I thought it might balance out as a very healthy alternative to massive amounts of high calorie junk food.

Any suggestions?

Thanks!

Feral Bill
03-11-2013, 13:31
THE ABOVE STATEMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN EVALUATED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION. THIS INGREDIENT IS NOT INTENDED TO DIAGNOSE, TREAT, CURE, OR PREVENT ANY DISEASE.

You may also be interested in the following product(s)


100 Calories/ounce is the same as for any other carbohydrate or for protein. The rest is marketing nonsense.

max patch
03-11-2013, 13:31
1. Olive oil and peanut butter are not junk food.

2. Since a "calorie" is by definition a measurement of "energy" the 400% claim is bogus. Barley is a good food to eat, the "activated" sounds like marketing BS.

Ecaz
03-11-2013, 13:47
100 Calories/ounce is the same as for any other carbohydrate or for protein. The rest is marketing nonsense.


Despite what the USDA may tell you, not all calories are created equal.

They counter your argument in their argument ;-)

I don't have an opinion either way, but if we're missing something I think it's worth discussing further...

Are calories all created equal?

Feral Bill
03-11-2013, 13:55
Despite what the USDA may tell you, not all calories are created equal.

They counter your argument in their argument ;-)

I don't have an opinion either way, but if we're missing something I think it's worth discussing further...

Are calories all created equal? Yes, as a matter of physics, they are. When someone promises you magic, their trick is making your money disappear. This stuff looks like overpriced Grape Nuts.

Ecaz
03-11-2013, 13:55
So, I understand that a calorie is a measurement of energy, so I agree that by definition, a calorie is a calorie, so I will refine my argument if I can find further evidence that this food will provide more energy than other foods commonly eaten on the trail. Thanks for the feedback!

Rocket Jones
03-11-2013, 13:58
A calorie is a measurement.

Saying calories aren't equal is like saying one inch can be different than another inch.

BobTheBuilder
03-11-2013, 14:00
I shared a shelter on a section hike last spring with a guy from New York who was eating something like this - vegan, raw grain of some sort that he boiled and then promptly threw up after eating. I kept my mac and cheese down just fine, so I assert that my calories were superior, in that they weren't decorating a pile of dead leaves.

Hops53
03-11-2013, 14:40
Why use barley for this when it could be used for making beer?
This is grain, which any fool can eat, but for which the Lord intended a more divine means of consumption. Let us give praise to our maker and glory to his bounty by learning about... BEER. - Friar Tuck

JAK
03-11-2013, 14:52
I agree. If this activated barley really works, it should be used for beer, or better yet, Scotch.
How about some 320 Proof Scotch ? Now that would be something.

ShadeeLane
03-11-2013, 15:25
Hops53, that was my first thought. "Activated" barley sounds like brewing malt! Never thought of having a little snack before I throw it in the kettle.

Ecaz, if this is the case than this wonder food is basically another form of sugar/starch (maltose). Yeast will probably find it tastier than you. I love how the word "malt" is nowhere to be found on the page.

ShadeeLane
03-11-2013, 15:31
2 lbs for $50!!! You can get 10 lbs of 10L Caramel malt here (http://www.midwestsupplies.com/caramel-10l-briess.html) for $15.

Dogwood
03-11-2013, 16:15
Ecaz had his mind in the right place. I think I know where he was going. Instead of slamming Ecaz with under handed statements about using this activated or sprouted long chain slow burning complex carbohydrate containing barley food(like maltodextrin which seems to be finding its way into a great many energy/post athletic performance recovery foods/drinks these days or whole unprocessed grains composed of slow burning non insulin spiking complex carbs) you all might want to know some researchers are now questioning the commonly held opinion that a calorie is a calorie! Some independent research is saying something differently especially when it comes to body fat reducing diets derived from mainly one significant calorie source like a low complex carb, high complex carb, high fat, low fat, low animal fat, high protein, etc diet. For all those quick to be naysayers you might want to do some research on this topic before coming to harsh judgements.

Personally I wouldn't pay this retail price for sprouted barley but I get where the marketing and research may have merit. I would simply buy fresh sprouted DRIED beans(they are sometimes available in bulk from heath food stores like Whole Foods) or freshly sprout beans/seeds etc while on trail to enhance my trail nutrition, which I already sometimes do.

Slo-go'en
03-11-2013, 20:26
A calorie is a calorie in the lab, but how effectively it is used by the body could be a whole nother issue. Whether or not this "activated" barley is any better than plain old barley might be difficult to prove. But since it costs so much, it must be better, eh?

leaftye
03-11-2013, 20:50
It sounds like a lot of marketing BS. If it look like a duck and swims like a duck, it's probably a duck.

So let's look at the big claim, that it has 400% more energy per calorie, blah blah.

On its face, that shows they don't understand physics, refuse to accept it or except their customers to be too ignorant to understand it. The latter is most responsive to shady snake oil marketing.

As others in this thread have said, maybe they meant their product is processed more effectively by the body. More effectively than what? Why is it processed more effectively? What studies back this up? Snake oil scam artists won't answer these questions.

Wise Old Owl
03-11-2013, 20:52
+1 on Oh crap Leaftye...it's just barley .. lighten up... Serious.

Odd Man Out
03-11-2013, 21:34
Ecaz had his mind in the right place...but I get where the marketing and research may have merit. ...

I agree that Ecaz is well intentioned. But I am afraid that I have to conclude that your claim that this product has "400% more energy than any other food calorie known to man" suggest that you are an innocent victim of the charlatans who make millions of dollars by conning people looking for "health food". The fact that there is a lot of legitimate research done on nutrition and diet does not change the fact that the marketing of this product has no scientific merit whatsoever. Here is a tidbit from their marketing:

...this superfood produces some astounding numbers on the Bovis Scale. If you are not familiar with the Bovis Scale, it was developed by a French physicist and quantifies or measures how positively or negatively charged a substance is. For living organisms, the key reference point on the scale is found at 6,500 Bovis Energy Units. From 0 to 6,500, the charge is in the negative range, or life-detracting, while above the 6,500 point the energy gradually becomes more positive, or life-enhancing. The desired minimal energy level for humans is found between 8,000 to 10,000 Bovis Energy Units, or slightly positive. The Earth itself creates energy in the 7,000 to 18,000 range. This energy is also referred to as "Biophotons", which are light particles invisible to our eyes. This positive radiation is necessary to the maintenance of life on Earth. A simple way of describing Bovis Energy Units would be to call them "Bio-Photon-Activating" Energy Units...

This is pseudoscience at its silliest. Even when they refer to legitimate nutritional research...

...In addition, barley has high concentrations of tocotrienols, antioxidant compounds that work to suppress the activity of the first rate-limiting enzyme (HMG-CoA Reductase) in the liver, thus reducing cholesterol synthesis...

...their wording suggests they either don't know what they are talking about, or just have bad copy editors. They also fail to include any citations. http://www.jbc.org/content/268/15/11230.full.pdf+html

This is just malted barley. It is very good for you and quite tasty. It is the foundation of western civilization. It is much cheaper if you buy it bulk at the beer making store (although eating all those husks may give you fiber overload). Fermenting it gives you more vitamins (from the yeast). That makes it more potable but less portable. Or you could just buy a box of Grape Nuts. It will not give you more energy per gram than fats and oils.

Slo-go'en
03-11-2013, 21:51
Bovis Scale - What? I'm afraid to even google that term and see what comes up! Biophotons - okay now you really lost me...

Alligator
03-11-2013, 21:54
I shared a shelter on a section hike last spring with a guy from New York who was eating something like this - vegan, raw grain of some sort that he boiled and then promptly threw up after eating. I kept my mac and cheese down just fine, so I assert that my calories were superior, in that they weren't decorating a pile of dead leaves.Yep boiled grape nuts will do that to you.

Dogwood
03-12-2013, 00:06
LOL. I find it more than a little ironic that posters will find ways to dismiss something such as the possible benefits of foods high on the Bovis Scale when they don't even make an attempt at understanding the science and principles behind these ratings. Talk about not being open to new ways of thinking regarding nutrition and efficient usable energy in consumables that some might say are revolutionary. Talk about being about close minded.

LOL. Of course, there's marketing going on with this product. Of course, the health food industry has its share of misguided and outrageously false claims. After all, a profit motive exists in the health food industry as well as the modern mass produced Industrial Agriculture and fast food sectors. I CERTAINLY DO NOT agree or support ALL of the marketing claims of this product but there's also some independent research that has been conducted backing up some of the marketing claims of this product and regarding specific nutritional science related to some of the info in the advertising.

I tend to approach info from a skeptic's stand point. I for one am not so gullible or uninitiated in regard to marketing and advertising claims when it comes to nutrition. Health and nutrition are STRONG interests of mine. My one brother has a PHd in Nutrition and my other brother was a professional athlete just missing the cut for the U.S. Olympic team a few yrs ago. Both of them have worked closely with some of the leading American and International nutritional authorities while in training. My brother who's the Nutritionist has a young daughter who is ranked # 3 in her age category in the U.S. as a competitive triathlete. Proper nutrition is one of the keys in my brother's and my niece's athletic success! AND, some of their athletic success has meant having to rethink and reeducate some commonly held nutritional ideas.

Perhaps, most of what I'm saying is falling on deaf ears or this isn't the place to share these ideas but none the less I'm still going to go forward. This product doesn't specifically go into great detail concerning these thoughts that I'm about to examine but they can dovetail nicely with the product. I too had a hard time accepting the fact that different foods, as well as objects, have different vibrational energies or vibrational frequencies and these energies affect us in different ways - some more positively, some more negatively. In the case of food, living or typically the least processed least refined most close to natural or organic foods have higher energies or vibrational frequencies associated with them than highly processed highly refined unnatural foods. For example, a freshly picked organic fruit or vegetable has more energy or higher vibrational frequency than say a like sized/wt slice of basically dead chocolate layer cake or Twinkie which has an indefinite shelf life. Interestingly enough, many things, and not only food, we as humans are more drawn to quite possibly because they have higher energies or vibrational frequencies. We have just been conditioned to move away from opting for these higher energy foods or objects because some have other agendas not in line with our natural instincts that draw us to these higher energies or simply don't understand this or CHOOSE TO NOT EVEN TRY TO UNDERSTAND THIS! Since I'm a Landscape Architect and Horticulturalist I often wondered why humans were so drawn to rose flowers. To my surprise I found that roses have some of the highest vibrational frequencies or energies of all flowers! HMM? Different parts of the human body have different energies too. More vital areas tend to have higher energies. I was also astonished that most diseases of the human body start occurring at particular energy or vibrational frequency levels! Even some western trained MDs already know, understand, and apply therapies along these lines. Am I getting the juices flowing thinking about possible consequences if we all started thinking about things like this, committing to research along these lines, applying what we've learned(or perhaps forgotten!), and return to our natural tendencies? I had originally dismissed notions like this as pseudo science or New Agey to garner serious scientific merit. I've had to re-examine some of my long held nutritional beliefs in light of some of this research. And, some of this research has been around for quite awhile. it's just not commonly discussed or only marginally investigated here in the U.S.

A lot was stated in the marketing of this product and really only a small part of it was concerning the Bovis Scale but I will post from Wikapedia a snippet of what it says about this:

"The unit of the Bovis scale is the ňngstr÷m (1 ┼ = 0,1 nm or 10−10m). The measurement consists of the operator placing a detecting device on or near the Bovis scale diagram and noting the Bovis number. A number of 6,500 (fresh, raw, vegetable foods) is considered "sufficient" (to keep the energetic balance), lower figures negatively affect human life and body functioning, higher numbers (as detected in fresh, ripe fruit and freshly pressed juices, seeds and sprouts, which score 8,000-10,000 on the Bovis scale) have positive effects aiding physiological functions. Numbers above 10,000 are in the "ethereal range", considered Places of power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Places_of_power)."

Slo-go'en
03-12-2013, 01:00
"The unit of the Bovis scale is the ňngstr÷m (1 ┼ = 0,1 nm or 10−10m). The measurement consists of the operator placing a detecting device on or near the Bovis scale diagram and noting the Bovis number. A number of 6,500 (fresh, raw, vegetable foods) is considered "sufficient" (to keep the energetic balance), lower figures negatively affect human life and body functioning, higher numbers (as detected in fresh, ripe fruit and freshly pressed juices, seeds and sprouts, which score 8,000-10,000 on the Bovis scale) have positive effects aiding physiological functions. Numbers above 10,000 are in the "ethereal range", considered Places of power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Places_of_power)."

This has new age BS written all over it. Measuring the life force of food and minerals- yea right. There is no doubt that freash, whole foods are better for you then the highly processed stuff most of us eat these days but to try and qualify it in the above manor is simply absurd.

Miner
03-12-2013, 01:11
While I have found that there is some truth that a calorie isn't just another calorie as body chemistry in how it treats that calorie is different. There is a reason why sugary and heavily processed foods tend to make you gain weight over getting your calories another way, at least if you aren't physically active when consuming them. When I thru-hiked the PCT, I only lost 10 lbs, in part because I paid some attention to my diet and tried to eat healthy, even on the trail. That is because I believe that you need other nutrition inorder for your body to get the most out of the calories you consume. But Olive Oil and Peanut butter were also a big part of my diet and were likely the reason I only lost 10 lbs since I suspect I actually gained some weight back towards the end when I upped my Peanut butter consumption by adding it to all my snicker bars.

I dont know much about activated Barley, but it could be that adding some to a diet could be beneficial to how your body uses the calories it consumes. But, I have issues with the idea that Barley is better then fat calories at keeping a thru-hiker from looking like a skeleton after a few months. It might make a nice supplement, but not a replacement for high calorie food.

bfayer
03-12-2013, 06:06
Science is a wonderful thing, but scientists need to do two things to stay scientists and not become door men or food service technicians. They either need to show enough promising research to get grants and get published, or they need to get a job with a business that will pay them to publish good things about their products.

The food and supplement industry ripe with the second type. A five minute Google search will bring up promising research on every type of snake oil sold on late night TV.

My point is, what a few "scientists" say about a new and revolutionary product or how one calorie is different from another is highly suspect, especially when it comes from a web page that is trying to sell something.

Keep in mind Kellogg's Corn Flakes was developed as the ultimate health food by a doctor who made millions off the idea.

rocketsocks
03-12-2013, 06:26
I'm still tryin to get my head around the whole quantum particle jump from one orbit back to another latent Bovis measurement type thing...been up all night thinking about it...all most had it around 3....then I lost it in the either....fun to think about though.

post script...Note, could be an important piece in the constantly changing "Unified Hiker Theory" i've been working on.

Tinker
03-12-2013, 08:17
Imo: "Science" falls into two categories 1) Observing and preserving measurable data, and
2) Redefining terms to make your preconcieved beliefs more palatable, therefore saleable, to the end that it brings glory and honor to your intellect. (#2 reminds me of theology :rolleyes:).

The reader is probably justified in his/her skepticism when the almighty dollar is concerned ;).

Btw: Boiled Grapenuts are one of my favorite hot cereals when I'm on the trail. Add a little honey or brown sugar, powdered milk - great stuff! (I have never thrown it up :D).

Dances with Mice
03-12-2013, 09:50
LOL. I find it more than a little ironic that posters will find ways to dismiss something such as the possible benefits of foods high on the Bovis Scale when they don't even make an attempt at understanding the science and principles behind these ratings. Talk about not being open to new ways of thinking regarding nutrition and efficient usable energy in consumables that some might say are revolutionary. Talk about being about close minded.

.....
"The unit of the Bovis scale is the ňngstr÷m (1 ┼ = 0,1 nm or 10−10m). The measurement consists of the operator placing a detecting device on or near the Bovis scale diagram and noting the Bovis number. A number of 6,500 (fresh, raw, vegetable foods) is considered "sufficient" (to keep the energetic balance), lower figures negatively affect human life and body functioning, higher numbers (as detected in fresh, ripe fruit and freshly pressed juices, seeds and sprouts, which score 8,000-10,000 on the Bovis scale) have positive effects aiding physiological functions. Numbers above 10,000 are in the "ethereal range", considered Places of power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Places_of_power)."
I'm certainly no athlete, nutritionist or horticulturalist but I have spent some amount of time in labs with instruments that measure vibrational frequencies on the electromagnetic scale, aka vibrational spectroscopy. X-rays, ultraviolet, visible, infrared - those are terms I understand and can discuss somewhat intelligently the design of detectors for acquiring measurements in each of those areas. So I am very interested in "understanding the science and principles behind these ratings".

Part of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovis_scalewikipedia article that you didn't quote: "The Bovis scale, named after French radiesthesist (http://www.whiteblaze.net/wiki/Radiesthesia) AndrÚ Bovis (1871ľ1947; also referred to as either Antoine or Alfred by some authors), is a concept used by dowsers (http://www.whiteblaze.net/wiki/Dowsing) and adherents of geomancy (http://www.whiteblaze.net/wiki/Geomancy) to quantify the strength of a postulated "cosmo-telluric energy" inherent in a location."

Dowsing? Oh come on now. Really? There must be some mistake...
But I guess not...
(http://www.whitemagicway.com/bovisbiometer.html)

The first one is to give the pendulum a back and forth swing, lengthwise along the baseline, moving progressively along the numbers, concentrating on the object to measure and asking "Is it 1000, is it 2000...?" When you approach the number that is the result, the pendulum will change direction and swing back and forth perpendicularly to the line. The number above which the movement is the strongest is your result.

The second technique is to swing the pendulum back and forth perpendicularly to the baseline, moving progressively along the numbers, concentrating on the object to measure and asking "Is it 1000, is it 2000...?" When you approach the number that is the result, the pendulum will start turning clockwise. The number above for which the clockwise movement is the strongest is your result. If you pass the result, the pendulum will show an anti- clockwise movement.

Please don't use the term 'science' in reference to this Bovis scale thing.

The correct term would be 'belief'.

Just sayin'

JAK
03-12-2013, 10:14
What are the units for the Bogus scale ?

Rasty
03-12-2013, 10:18
What are the units for the Bogus scale ?

It's a blend of metric and imperial with a smidgen of Klingon.

This is sprout-able barley and is about $23 per pound too expensive. You would be better off having a nice microbrew beer.

ShadeeLane
03-12-2013, 10:32
Dogwood, I get what you're saying about being open to nutritional information that may be a bit counter-intuitive, but my point in making fun of the product was the idea that they're taking one of man's oldest foods and trying to repackage it and charge a ridiculous price for it. Actually Ecaz did the smart thing by running an uninformed purchase they were considering by a group of people that may possibly have greater knowledge on the subject. Kind of like if you get on a car repair forum when your engine starts making a whiny sound and you only have a rudimentary understanding auto repair. Somebody on that forum will probably know if your mechanic is jobbing you.

Alligator
03-12-2013, 10:53
Imo: "Science" falls into two categories 1) Observing and preserving measurable data, and
2) Redefining terms to make your preconcieved beliefs more palatable, therefore saleable, to the end that it brings glory and honor to your intellect. (#2 reminds me of theology :rolleyes:).

The reader is probably justified in his/her skepticism when the almighty dollar is concerned ;).

Btw: Boiled Grapenuts are one of my favorite hot cereals when I'm on the trail. Add a little honey or brown sugar, powdered milk - great stuff! (I have never thrown it up :D).J/K Tinker. I like most cereals but just never liked Grapenuts, I guess I should have boiled it first:D.

Feral Bill
03-12-2013, 12:40
What are the units for the Bogus scale ? I believe you mean bovine scale. The unit is the patty.

bfayer
03-12-2013, 12:43
I believe you mean bovine scale. The unit is the patty.

You guys can be brutal.

Odd Man Out
03-12-2013, 13:04
I believe you mean bovine scale. The unit is the patty.

Actually, that would be 0.1 nanopatties or 1 p┼tty.

I think I'm done with any serious discussion of this. But I do wish I had a nickel for ever time I saw Doctor of Philosophy abbreviated incorrectly here on WB.

Tinker
03-12-2013, 19:07
You guys can be brutal.


For real! :D

Btw: if you were from the Boston area your name might be bfayah. :)

Tinker
03-12-2013, 19:10
My nutrition mantra (misuse of grammar for emphasis ;)) - Eat watcha want what don't make ya sick. :p

Drybones
03-12-2013, 19:14
Are calories all created equal?

I dont know if all calories are created equal but I can say that I would lose weight eating nothing but junk food and drinking beer. I would gain eating vegetables and breads.

Drybones
03-12-2013, 19:22
They either need to show enough promising research to get grants and get published, or they need to get a job .

As long as you can get grants why bother with a job?

Drybones
03-12-2013, 19:28
So, I understand that a calorie is a measurement of energy, so I agree that by definition, a calorie is a calorie, so I will refine my argument if I can find further evidence that this food will provide more energy than other foods commonly eaten on the trail. Thanks for the feedback!

I may be in left field but I believe the body processes the calories from different foods with varying efficiency, and not necessarilly the same for everyone. Diesel fuel has calories as does gasoline but a gas engine doesn't process diesel too well.

q-tip
03-13-2013, 12:07
$50 for 32 oz--i don't think so.....

Feral Bill
03-13-2013, 12:25
I may be in left field but I believe the body processes the calories from different foods with varying efficiency, and not necessarily the same for everyone. Diesel fuel has calories as does gasoline but a gas engine doesn't process diesel too well. Nice analogy, but I think comparing grades of gasoline is more apt. The difference would be in the energy used to convert the different foods to glucose. which should be a known number for those who care enough to seek it out.

weary
03-13-2013, 13:29
Here's what WebMd says about Barley:

Barley is a cereal grain high in soluble fiber. Barley comes in many forms, including:

Sprouted barley
Pearl barley
Barley oil extract
Barley flour
Why do people take barley?

People take barley to try to lower:

Cholesterol
Blood pressure
Blood sugar
People also take barley to try to promote weight loss or help prevent some types of cancer.

Barley is likely effective for reducing total cholesterol and LDL "bad" cholesterol levels. It may also lower triglycerides and increase HDL "good" cholesterol levels. How much barley lowers cholesterol may depend upon how many grams you eat. The effect may also be less when barley is highly processed.

Barley may also lower blood pressure in people who do not have high blood pressure but have high cholesterol.

Dietary fiber in diet, such as in barley, may help prevent stomach cancer or extend survival in those with the disease. However, it doesn't seem to protect against colorectal cancer.

Researchers have not yet proven barley's effectiveness for other purposes. However, barley may help control appetite by stabilizing blood sugar and by slowing the emptying of your stomach.

Optimal doses of barley as a food or supplement have not been established for any condition.

However, to try to lower cholesterol, people have used one of these daily doses:

3 grams of barley oil extract
30 grams of barley bran flour
0.4 to 6 grams of soluble barley fiber
3 to 12 grams of pearled barley, or barley flour, flakes, or powder

jeffmeh
03-13-2013, 15:01
1) All calories are not created equal when processed by the body. Take a look at http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Controversial-Science/dp/1400033462. Paleo and primal diets tend to be consistent with these premises.
2) How does the Bovis scale reconcile with resonating strings in 10 or 11-dimensional space, what happens to the swinging pendulum when it enters those hidden dimensions, and does that alter the meaning of clock-wise?
3) My latest 5 gallons of beer has likely fermented out, and I feel strangely compelled to take a sample.

JAK
03-13-2013, 15:44
I prefer a primaevel diet myself, with mead.

Mead wasn't available in North America though. No bees. I'll bet they were pretty pissed off after walking all that way across the ice bridge.

Dogwood
03-13-2013, 19:09
There is no doubt that freash, whole foods are better for you then the highly processed stuff most of us eat these days...

What's freash? Just messing with you.

OK, we got you to realize/admit this so far. Now, have you explored the possibilities of WHY this is generally so, without giving a knee jerk preconceived preconditioned current textbook answer? Could it be that not every calorie is assimilated or is used by the human body in the same way? MAYBE, the overly simplistic concept that a calorie is a calorie does not take into account some vitally import things and has prevented us from gaining a better understanding of nutrition? Do we really understand the complexities of food and how different foods affect the human body when we take the scientific concept/definition of what a calorie is out of context with ALL that a food is or the mechanisms by which it is converted into usable energy for the body? Perhaps, in some sense, the way we have been thinking about these things has been misleading or incomplete! Perhaps, even with all the advancements, modern nutritional science is missing some vitally important things when it assumes a food is just the sum of its presently understood ingredients. MAYBE, the sum of the ingredients listed on the package leads to more than the the sum of the now known ingredients on the package.

I know that's a lot of MAYBES but if we aren't willing to question our current understandings of how things work we will never evolve to a higher level scientifically and as a species. Isn't it true that our past scientific knowledge that was once held as so dear, in some cases, is no longer valid? Isn't science, in all its disciplines, evolving/changing just like most things?

"Unified Hiker Theory" - I like that.

My point is, what a few "scientists" say about a new and revolutionary product or how one calorie is different from another is highly suspect, especially when it comes from a web page that is trying to sell you something.

Good pt. Even though the internet didn't exist when Einstein started offering his ideas on Unified Field Theory and General and Special Relativity you might also want to know he was met with some violent opposition by the consensus of the entrenched scientific community(physicists, chemists, engineers, etc) of his time, at first, too. Then, his ideas were gradually more accepted by the scientific community as they started thinking about and questioning his ideas with an open mind being willing to question their own long held as true scientific knowledge. DO YOU NOT THINK this even happens in today's societies? DO YOU NOT THINK that some of what we hold as undeniably true today will, perhaps in the not too distant future, seem foolish?

It was only a short time ago when the western medical community thought of some disciplines or branches of medicine as quackery or too belief oriented as opposed to "real provable science." We are now finding, maybe not totally understanding it YET though, that some alternative, homeopathic, and integrative based therapies, as well as BELIEFS, have merit AND play VITALLY IMPORT ROLES. Some of this information and knowledge is being intentionally surpressed by those who have a different agenda, often associated with a profit or power motive. YES, this can also occur in the so called health food industry too! As other posters have stated this may be what's occurring, at least to some extent, in the marketing of this product, and of which I also mentioned by stating I'm skeptical about the veracity of ALL the marketing of this product. PLEASE, let's get this clear, I never wholly endorsed this product or all that's stated in the marketing of it! If you are going to bash my opinions with your own, which is fair game, at least do it by taking my various posts on this thread in context with one another and PLEASE know what I said and didn't say.

Wise Old Owl
03-13-2013, 19:26
LOL. I find it more than a little ironic that posters will find ways to dismiss something such as the possible benefits of foods high on the Bovis Scale when they don't even make an attempt at understanding the science and principles behind these ratings. Talk about not being open to new ways of thinking regarding nutrition and efficient usable energy in consumables that some might say are revolutionary. Talk about being about close minded.


I tend to approach info from a skeptic's stand point. I for one am not so gullible or uninitiated in regard to marketing

Perhaps, most of what I'm saying is falling on deaf ears or this isn't the place to share these ideas but none the less I'm still going to go forward. This product doesn't specifically go into great detail concerning these thoughts that I'm about to examine but they can dovetail nicely with the product. I too had a hard time accepting the fact that different foods, as well as objects, have different vibrational energies or vibrational frequencies and these energies affect us in different ways - some more positively, some more negatively. In the case of food, living or typically the least processed least refined most close to natural or organic foods have higher energies or vibrational frequencies associated with them than highly processed highly refined unnatural foods. For example, a freshly picked organic fruit or vegetable has more energy or higher vibrational frequency than say a like sized/wt slice of basically dead chocolate layer cake or Twinkie which has an indefinite shelf life. Interestingly enough, many things, and not only food, we as humans are more drawn to quite possibly because they have higher energies or vibrational frequencies. We have just been conditioned to move away from opting for these higher energy foods or objects because some have other agendas not in line with our natural instincts that draw us to these higher energies or simply don't understand this or CHOOSE TO NOT EVEN TRY TO UNDERSTAND THIS! Since I'm a Landscape Architect and Horticulturalist I often wondered why humans were so drawn to rose flowers. To my surprise I found that roses have some of the highest vibrational frequencies or energies of all flowers! HMM? Different parts of the human body have different energies too. More vital areas tend to have higher energies. I was also astonished that most diseases of the human body start occurring at particular energy or vibrational frequency levels! Even some western trained MDs already know, understand, and apply therapies along these lines. Am I getting the juices flowing thinking about possible consequences if we all started thinking about things like this, committing to research along these lines, applying what we've learned(or perhaps forgotten!), and return to our natural tendencies? I had originally dismissed notions like this as pseudo science or New Agey to garner serious scientific merit. I've had to re-examine some of my long held nutritional beliefs in light of some of this research. And, some of this research has been around for quite awhile. it's just not commonly discussed or only marginally investigated here in the U.S. You could not find a simpler way to answer this? Strange we are not arguing with you... But would you buy this product to even try it?


What are the units for the Bogus scale ?

It's a blend of metric and imperial with a smidgen of Klingon.

This is sprout-able barley and is about $23 per pound is insane.


You guys can be brutal. Yup


$50 for 32 oz--i don't think so.....Its insane...


1) All calories are not created equal when processed by the body. Take a look at http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Controversial-Science/dp/1400033462. Paleo and primal diets tend to be consistent with these premises.
2) How does the Bovis scale reconcile with resonating strings in 10 or 11-dimensional space, what happens to the swinging pendulum when it enters those hidden dimensions, and does that alter the meaning of clock-wise?
Honest! very simple - back your statements up with real data and scientific evidence... after watching a few Nova's on PBS ... surprise us. Accept the challenge from the group here.

Rocket Jones
03-13-2013, 19:36
Therein lies the problem. A calorie is a very specific measurement of the stored energy of a given food. If our bodies perfectly processed the energy in that food, then relating calories to the bodies use of the fuel would make perfect sense. Instead we use calories as an approximation of the unattainable maximum efficiency from consuming a food. Nutrition works the same way. Our bodies do not always make full use of every bit of nutrition in a given food.

Maybe nitpicky semantics, but if you can't agree on basic definitions, then marketing claims like these are so vague as to be useless. Even worse, the average consumer sees the word calorie and believes that it precisely describes what your body gets from the food. That's deliberately taking advantage of a common misunderstanding of the concept. Call it marketing, spin, misleading, whatever... it all amounts to the same thing.

T.S.Kobzol
03-13-2013, 19:48
Yes. A calorie=calorie and inch=inch but one inch of cbewing gum <> one inch of guano

Sent from my SGH-T889 using Tapatalk 2

Wise Old Owl
03-13-2013, 19:56
RJ and TSK you seriously nailed the Nova video article... thank you!

Snowleopard
03-13-2013, 22:21
Barley is a pretty healthy food and has a lot of soluble fiber, which helps to lower cholesterol. For a thru-hiker, oats are a lot more convenient (i.e., rolled oat = oatmeal). I guess you can get rolled barley which ought to cook up similarly to non-instant rolled oats. Barley is a couple dollars a pound, Bob's Redmill rolled barley cereal is about $3 a pound.

This activated barley stuff is $60 for 2 lb including shipping, which outrageous.

Odd Man Out
03-13-2013, 22:47
Barley is a pretty healthy food and has a lot of soluble fiber, which helps to lower cholesterol. For a thru-hiker, oats are a lot more convenient (i.e., rolled oat = oatmeal). I guess you can get rolled barley which ought to cook up similarly to non-instant rolled oats. Barley is a couple dollars a pound, Bob's Redmill rolled barley cereal is about $3 a pound.

This activated barley stuff is $60 for 2 lb including shipping, which outrageous.

Check out the home brewing stores. You can get rolled or malted barley for less than 1$/lb if you buy in bulk. 1 lb bags for maybe $1.50 or less.

Dogwood
03-13-2013, 23:21
You could not find a simpler way to answer(say?) this? Strange we are not arguing with you... But would you buy this product to even try it? - WOO

Fair enough questions WOO. First, I know I can be wordy in my opinions. It's the way I sometimes express myself. You express yourself differently. I'm still open to what you say though. I'm trying to address things more fully in my own way. Sorry if you got lost in what I said in my last post.

Second, maybe you don't notice how obvious it is but it sure seems to me like some debate is occurring.

Third, even in my shortest least wordy post on this thread, post # 13, you have obviously missed my answer to your last question when I said this: "Personally I wouldn't pay this retail price for sprouted barley(I think that price is outrageously unwarranted!) but I get where the marketing and research may have merit. I would simply buy fresh sprouted DRIED beans(they are sometimes available in bulk from heath food stores like Whole Foods) or freshly sprout beans/seeds etc while on trail to enhance my trail nutrition, which I already sometimes do."

...the average consumer sees the word calorie and believes that it precisely describes what your body gets from the food. That's deliberately taking advantage of a common misunderstanding of the concept. Call it marketing, spin, misleading, whatever... it all amounts to the same thing. - Rocket Jones

Ahh, thank you for mentioning this observation RJ.

The angstrom is simply a globally recognized scientific measurement of length. Kinda wonder how one poster got the symbol for it to be posted.

Odd Man Out
03-14-2013, 14:58
The angstrom is simply a globally recognized scientific measurement of length. Kinda wonder how one poster got the symbol for it to be posted.

Copy/Paste (ctrl-C/ctrl-V) from your post #20. ┼┼┼┼┼┼┼┼┼┼
If you copy and paste from the Wikipedia page, you can get the umlaut too. ÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷÷


BTW, the ┼ngstr÷m might be globally recognized, but it is not technically a correct unit of length to use in scientific discussions. The nanometer (10 ┼) and picometer (0.01 ┼) are the closest acceptable SI units. But even though not officially correct, this, and several other units, are still widely used due to convenience or tradition (you can't teach an old scientist new units). ┼ngstroms are most commonly used today to describe the length of inter-atomic bonds as most covalent bonds are in the range of 1 ┼ and hydrogen bonds are about 2 ┼. The calorie is also widely used, despite being unitas non grata. We should be using Joules (or kJ), so please go back through this thread and divide all Calorie numbers by 4.184 to get kilojoules (since a Calorie is really a kilocalorie - ug).

Units are important. The Mars Climate Orbiter had to be renamed the "Mars Climate Crashes Into The Planet", because the engineers who developed the rockets gave its impulse specification in pound-seconds, but when these data were entered into the navigation computers (programed to use the correct units of Newton-seconds), the spacecraft was flown right into the planet instead of going into orbit (328 million dollar oops).

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

Dogwood
03-14-2013, 15:22
I figured the most likely way to post those things was Copy/Paste. As I said on another recent thread I suspected you were employed in a scientific field which is why I asked if you were/are a NASA engineer with your use of the BUMMER acronym. I almost became a Civil Engineer deciding to change my major in my 4 th yr of engineering school. In some of my engineering classes while discussing quantum mechanics, materials engineering, electrical system design, and chemistry we often used both the the Angstrom and Nanometer units.

Odd Man Out
03-14-2013, 16:48
Chemistry Professor