Post by robwhite on Jul 30, 2009 7:30:35 GMT -5
As far is i am aware, there was only one psychologist whos work plays a large importance in metabolic typing, and that was of George Watson, who discovered that different foods triggered different mental states in different patients, and this correlated strongly with changes in pH and markers of the rates of oxidation of different foods in different persons. for example, fast oxidisers tend to have a blood pH a bit lower than 7.46, which is slightly too acidic for optimal physical and mental health, whilst slow oxidisers had a slight alkaline state above 7.46. He found that Group I foods (grains, low fat, low purine meats and veg, fruit) actually tend to acidify blood pH but Group II foods (high purine meats and veg, and fattier foods) actually alkalised. So the acidic fast oxidisers could balance their pH and therefore mental state with the alkalising Group II foods, whilst the alkaline slow oxidisers could balance their pH and therefore mental state with the acidifying Group II foods.
In terms of understanding the ANS component of MT, the most valuable work was performed by Francis Pottinger, Snr, and William Kelley. Sadly, neither of these fellows were involved in psychology, and their work was focussed on physical health and disease management. They found that many people are often dominant in one branch of their ANS other the other, and have typical, specific symptoms that distinguish the dominance, and that certain foods are good for bringing up the activity of the lagging ANS branch. Group I foods seem to be effective at activating the para ANS, and group II foods seem to stimulate the symp ANS more. William Kelley in his later years also found that parasympathetic dominant people also tend to be slightly more alkaline in their blood pH, whilst sympathetics tend to be more acidic, which correlates with their symptoms.
From George Watsons work, it can be clearly seen that the effect of Group I and Group II foods have profound effects on both physical AND mental states, so wherever each food group is having a physical effect, you can bet that it will be also altering brain chemistry. Therefore, it is likely that both fast oxidisers and parasympathetics benefit both physically and mentally from Group II foods, whilst slow oxidisers sympathetics benefit from Group I foods. The problem with reconciling this though was that Group I foods and Group II foods had totally different pH effects in the Oxidative theories (from Watson), and the ANS theories (from Pottinger Snr and Kelley)! I.e. to recap, Group II from the Watsons perspective were alkalising, but from Pottinger and Kelleys perspective were acidifying, and vice versa for Group I foods.
In the early 90’s, William Wolcott came up with the idea of the Dominance Factor theory (probably in trying to understand why Kelley's and Watson's works indicated totally different pH effects) where he suggested that although a person may have both oxidative and ANS imbalances, one is going to be more dominant that the other in each person, and that will determine whether or not a Group of foods will alkalise or acidify. He, along with Gabriel Cousins and Harold Kristal, did some clinical studies where individuals with different oxidation rates (determine through Glucose Challenge and serum pH), and ANS imbalance (determined through questionnaires and physical characteristics) were determined. The subjects were given fruit and veg powders from Group I foods, and protein powders (representing Group II), and then serum pH changes were measured. In individuals that were oxidative dominant, and those that were ANS dominant, the same foods had opposite different pH effects! This confirmed that in each person, either the oxidative or ANS imbalance was dominant, which determined the pH effects of each food Group, and therefore the physical and metnal effects. I’m not exactly sure how Wolcott determines dominance, but my guess it’s a case of ‘scoring’ the extent and severity of each imbalance through physiological tests and questionnaires, and then seeing which imbalance scores the highest.
In terms of understanding the ANS component of MT, the most valuable work was performed by Francis Pottinger, Snr, and William Kelley. Sadly, neither of these fellows were involved in psychology, and their work was focussed on physical health and disease management. They found that many people are often dominant in one branch of their ANS other the other, and have typical, specific symptoms that distinguish the dominance, and that certain foods are good for bringing up the activity of the lagging ANS branch. Group I foods seem to be effective at activating the para ANS, and group II foods seem to stimulate the symp ANS more. William Kelley in his later years also found that parasympathetic dominant people also tend to be slightly more alkaline in their blood pH, whilst sympathetics tend to be more acidic, which correlates with their symptoms.
From George Watsons work, it can be clearly seen that the effect of Group I and Group II foods have profound effects on both physical AND mental states, so wherever each food group is having a physical effect, you can bet that it will be also altering brain chemistry. Therefore, it is likely that both fast oxidisers and parasympathetics benefit both physically and mentally from Group II foods, whilst slow oxidisers sympathetics benefit from Group I foods. The problem with reconciling this though was that Group I foods and Group II foods had totally different pH effects in the Oxidative theories (from Watson), and the ANS theories (from Pottinger Snr and Kelley)! I.e. to recap, Group II from the Watsons perspective were alkalising, but from Pottinger and Kelleys perspective were acidifying, and vice versa for Group I foods.
In the early 90’s, William Wolcott came up with the idea of the Dominance Factor theory (probably in trying to understand why Kelley's and Watson's works indicated totally different pH effects) where he suggested that although a person may have both oxidative and ANS imbalances, one is going to be more dominant that the other in each person, and that will determine whether or not a Group of foods will alkalise or acidify. He, along with Gabriel Cousins and Harold Kristal, did some clinical studies where individuals with different oxidation rates (determine through Glucose Challenge and serum pH), and ANS imbalance (determined through questionnaires and physical characteristics) were determined. The subjects were given fruit and veg powders from Group I foods, and protein powders (representing Group II), and then serum pH changes were measured. In individuals that were oxidative dominant, and those that were ANS dominant, the same foods had opposite different pH effects! This confirmed that in each person, either the oxidative or ANS imbalance was dominant, which determined the pH effects of each food Group, and therefore the physical and metnal effects. I’m not exactly sure how Wolcott determines dominance, but my guess it’s a case of ‘scoring’ the extent and severity of each imbalance through physiological tests and questionnaires, and then seeing which imbalance scores the highest.