L-tryptophane sure does help one to sleep, it's great and I used to use it all the time until I stopped consuming milk (I realized I wasn't a baby cow). For those that have heard the old wives tale that one should drink some hot chocolate in order to help get to sleep, well, the reason is because when you warm up milk, it either creates or activates L-tryptophane. I can't remember which, and I'm not going to spend the time to look it up. Suffice it to say, that if you warm up milk, you will end up with L-tryptophane in it. Just to get this back on topic, if you add some CS to the warm milk, you'll most likely prevent bacteria from growing in it while you're doing your sipping. :)
Yours in health, James Allison --------------------------------------------- Sunstone Herbals - Your Source For Supplements Visit Us Soon - http://www.sunstoneherbals.com --------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Missett" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 11:02 AM Subject: Re: CS>Fw: Update on Federal Labeling Legislation > There was never anything wrong with the L-tryptophane -- it was a > contaminated batch which got out to the public. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Barbara Liles" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 1:38 AM > Subject: Re: CS>Fw: Update on Federal Labeling Legislation > > > > I am a poor sleeper and was pointed to L Tryptofan about 15 years ago and > it > > was a great sleep aid. Sure missed it when it exited the shelves and > > thought it was pulled as it was a threat to the prescription sleep aides. > > > > So, did it truly have untoward or dangerous implications. > > > > Isn't it still available for veterinary applications? Used to be marketed > > in alfalfa like pellets and sold in feed stores. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Ode Coyote <[email protected]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 10:36 AM > > Subject: Re: CS>Fw: Update on Federal Labeling Legislation > > > > > > > > > > Last night on the health channel thre was a program about hundreds of > > > people who nearly died after using L Tryptofan as a sleep aid. > > > A Japanese company had genetically modified the organism used to > produce > > > it in order to increase production but the modified organism produced an > > > unidentified toxin along with the increased production rates that killed > 4 > > > people and severly crippled hundreds. > > > The FDA yanked all tryptofan off the shelves and it is banned to this > > day. > > > Tryptofan is present in turkey [and us]..a natural harmless protein that > > > makes you sleepy. > > > > > > Genetically modified? You might never wake up. > > > > > > Ken > > > > > > > > > At 07:43 PM 10/9/02 -0500, you wrote: > > > > > > > >News Update From The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > >Dear News Update Subscribers, > > > > > > > >The Natural Products Expo East was held October 3-6 in Washington, DC. > > > >The sponsor, New Hope Natural Media, generously provided The Campaign > to > > > >Label Genetically Engineered Foods a complimentary exhibit space at the > > > >event. Thank you New Hope Natural Media! > > > > > > > >On Friday Morning, October 4, Jeremy Rifkin gave the keynote address > > > >titled "Natural Products in the Biotech Century." Jeremy Rifkin has > been > > > >warning about the potential problems with genetically engineered foods > > > >since the 1980's. (Unfortunately Jeremy Rifkin's session was not > > > >recorded.) > > > > > > > >Jeremy emphasized the threat that genetically engineered foods pose to > > > >the organic segment of the natural products industry. He stated "This > is > > > >a life and death issue for your industry." He explained that we > probably > > > >only have about five years left to stop the open field growing of > > > >genetically engineered crops. Otherwise, organic crops in the United > > > >States will become permanently contaminated with genetically engineered > > > >organisms. > > > > > > > >I had to leave Jeremy Rifkin's presentation before it was over because > > > >it ran overtime and I had a 10:00 AM meeting with Senator Barbara > > > >Boxer's Senior Policy Advisor, John Hess. As you may be aware, > > > >California Senator Barbara Boxer had been planning to sponsor the > > > >"Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act" into the U.S. Senate > > > >this year. This is very similar to the legislation that was introduced > > > >into the House of Representatives by Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich > in > > > >May. > > > > > > > >John Hess explained that at this late date, it did not make sense to > > > >introduce the Senate version of the labeling legislation into the 107th > > > >Congress. However, he assured me that Senator Boxer is very > enthusiastic > > > >about moving forward on the "Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know > > > >Act" early next year after the 108th Congress begins. John and I > > > >discussed other members of the Senate that are likely candidates to > > > >co-sponsor the labeling legislation. > > > > > > > >Remember that this is an important election year. All members of the > > > >House of Representatives and one third of the Senators are up for > > > >re-election. This is an excellent time to put pressure on members of > the > > > >U.S. Congress and their opponents to support labeling legislation. > > > > > > > >Form letters to mail to members of Congress can be found on our web > site > > > >at: > > > >http://www.thecampaign.org/congressletters.htm > > > > > > > >Form letters can also be found in the back of The Campaign's Take > Action > > > >Packets. Order extra copies of our Take Action Packets to share with > > > >your friends and associates at: > > > >http://www.thecampaign.org/tap.htm > > > > > > > >Senator Boxer's Senior Policy Advisor and I also discussed the effort > to > > > >pass Measure 27 in Oregon. We agreed that passing Measure 27 in Oregon > > > >is likely to have a very positive effect on getting the federal > > > >legislation passed into law by the U.S. Congress. > > > > > > > >The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods launched a new web > > > >site last week to combat the misinformation campaign being run by > > > >Monsanto and the coalition trying to defeat Measure 27 in Oregon. We > > > >modified the appearance of the web site in the past few days and > > > >continue to add content. Check out the new appearance at: > > > >http://www.voteyeson27.com > > > > > > > >Posted below is an excellent article that recently ran in PR Week > > > >magazine with the headline, "PR Expert Warns Gene Giants on No-Labeling > > > >Stance." It discusses the misinformation campaign being waged by the > > > >opposition in Oregon. > > > > > > > >Craig Winters > > > >Executive Director > > > >The Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods > > > > > > > >The Campaign > > > >PO Box 55699 > > > >Seattle, WA 98155 > > > >Tel: 425-771-4049 > > > >Fax: 603-825-5841 > > > >E-mail: mailto:[email protected] > > > >Web Site: http://www.thecampaign.org > > > > > > > >Mission Statement: "To create a national grassroots consumer campaign > > > >for the purpose of lobbying Congress and the President to pass > > > >legislation that will require the labeling of genetically engineered > > > >foods in the United States." > > > > > > > >*************************************************************** > > > > > > > >PR Expert Warns Gene Giants on No-Labeling Stance > > > > > > > >PR Week (US) > > > >October 7, 2002 > > > > > > > >THE GM FOOD INDUSTRY'S INSISTENCE ON KEEPING SECRETS FURTHER EXPOSES > ITS > > > >PR SHORTCOMINGS > > > > > > > >HIGHLIGHT: > > > >By PAUL HOLMES, currently president of The Holmes Group and editor of > > > >www.holmesreport.com > > > > > > > >Let's say your company makes a massive technical advance, one that both > > > >improves the quality of the product you sell and has the potential to > > > >solve one of the world's most intractable problems. You'd be ready to > > > >spend millions to promote it, right? Well, not if you're in the > > > >genetically modified (GM) food business. Then you spend dollars 4.5 > > > >million on a campaign to keep your new technology secret. Faced with a > > > >ballot initiative that calls on food companies to label products that > > > >contain genetically modified ingredients, the Coalition Against the > > > >Costly Labeling Law is trying to sell Oregonians on the idea that such > > > >labeling would cost millions in 'government bureaucracy and red tape.' > > > > > > > >The campaign's premise is a lie, of course. The industry isn't > concerned > > > >about red tape - or if it is, it's a secondary issue. What truly > worries > > > >the industry - the reason it has resisted labeling since GM foods were > > > >introduced a decade ago - is that consumers will select unmodified > foods > > > >if given a choice. So the campaign is about denying them that choice, > > > >but calling the group the Coalition Against Informed Consumers probably > > > >sounded like a bad idea. > > > > > > > >Faced with labeling demands, the GM food industry falls back on the > fact > > > >that the FDA considers labels unnecessary. After I discussed this > > > >subject in a recent column, a Monsanto rep pointed out (correctly) that > > > >the company does label its products, which it sells to farmers rather > > > >than consumers, but the FDA 'has determined that the biotech crops > > > >currently grown and subsequent ingredients don't need to be labeled > > > >because biotech food is no different than conventional food.' > > > > > > > >But, the FDA's position notwithstanding, there is clearly a segment of > > > >the public that wants to know how its food is made, and it is hard to > > > >see any moral basis on which companies would deny that right. > > > >Apparently, the increased corporate transparency we've heard about > > > >doesn't encompass this kind of information. Instead, the industry is > > > >essentially saying, 'Trust us, you don't need to know.' > > > > > > > >But at the same time, it is also saying, 'We don't trust you. We think > > > >you're so stupid that you won't be able to use the labeling information > > > >intelligently. You're not smart enough to understand the science or to > > > >process our arguments. Instead, you will be influenced by hysterical > > > >Luddites who want to ban our product, and you won't buy it.' > > > > > > > >But 21st-century PR isn't about controlling the flow of information or > > > >deciding what information the public has a right to. It's about putting > > > >information in context. If the GM food industry doesn't believe its PR > > > >people are smart enough to explain its products' benefits, it should > > > >either hire new PR people or get a new product. > > > > > > > >Fighting against an informed public only creates the impression that it > > > >has a sinister secret to hide. > > > > > > > >- Paul Holmes has spent the past 15 years writing about the PR business > > > >for publications including PRWeek, Inside PR, and Reputation > Management. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > >The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal > silver. > > > > > > > >Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org > > > > > > > >To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > > > > > > >Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > > > > > > >List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
