Q. I was shocked to read the following in my daily newspaper today: (San Gabriel Valley Daily Tribune, June 3, 1976)

Dr. Thomas H. Jukes doesn't feel your pulse, listen to your heartbeat, or dispense pills or medicine but he is a real tonic to meet."

He is, in fact, a biochemist and a distinguished one. He is professor-in-residence of medical physics and lecturer in nutritional sciences at the University of California at Berkeley.

His fields of research, in which he has received credit for pioneering work, have included various vitamins and other organic substances, antibiotics in nutrition, the amino acid code, protein chemistry, and molecular evolution.

So it's cheering to hear such an expert rebut all those scare stories about the trashy food we're all eating these days.

'Nonsense,' he says. 'American food, as produced by scientific agricultural methods including the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and approved food additives, is the safest, most nutritious, and most diverse in the history of the world.'

Jukes criticizes what he calls the 'nutritional counter-culture' - health buffs and food faddists whose attacks on fertilizers, pesticides, cyclamates, white bread, sugar, beef, bacon, and a host of other products have 'caused many to mistrust our food supply.'

He says there's no reason for anybody to be uptight about sugar.

Neither does he see anything wrong with many people's preference for white bread, 'especially when it is enriched with thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, and iron'.

He regards the organic food movement as a retreat from reason.

Jukes said that food crops grown with chemical fertilizers are as rich in proteins, vitamins, and minerals as when they are grown with so-called 'organics'.

What kind of a joker of a biochemist nutritionist is he? And, who is paying for his research sugar companies, or "Wonder Bread"? I would like to hear your comments on this misinformed man. Just think of all the people who read this and believe it! Mrs. J.P., La Puenta, CA.

Q. I have a lot of trouble with acne. I eat only nutritious foods, but when I eat dried or fresh fruit, oranges, honey, or anything that is naturally sweet, my face breaks out. I would hate to give up these foods because I know they are so nutritious. Could you please give me some advice. S.W., Port Hardy, B.C., Canada.

Q. My daughter gets her monthly regularly, but the cramps sometimes are so severe that last week she actually passed out. Do you know of anything that will cure or reduce the cramps? She has taken some of the commercial products, but they don't help much and I would rather have her take something natural. Mr. R.K., Coopersbury, PA.

A. Not knowing the age of your daughter, it is difficult to advise - is she 13, 23, or 53? At each of these ages, the cause of severe cramps would be totally different. At 13, it could be puberty-related hormonal imbalances; at 23, it may be associated with the Pill or other birth-control devices; at 53, it may be associated with menopause. It is amazing and amusing how many people write for advice on personal health problems, using several pages describing their symptoms, but failing to mention their age. You see, it would be helpful for me to know the age of the person. If someone is falling apart at 18, I would advise drastic and immediate corrective measures; on the other hand, if someone is 92, I may suggest that she count her blessings and thank the good Lord that she is still hanging on.

Q. Somewhere I read that wheat germ starts getting rancid after it is exposed to the air for more than 3 days. Is this true?

In the May, 1976 Nutrition Forum, you wrote a short section on rancid oils, which has whetted my appetite for more information on rancidity.

What about wheat flour and other whole-grain flours? How long will they keep? And, bran? I understand that nuts will keep for months if allowed to remain in the shell. How long will they keep after they are shelled?

Several years ago I became desperately sick with what my nature doctor said was stoppage of the bowels. Among other instructions he gave me, one was to take olive oil. We had some olive oil in the cupboard, which had been sitting there for several months. Since I had never heard of rancid oils or that rancid oils can be poisonous, I started taking this olive oil as prescribed by the doctor. (Why didn't he prescribe 'fresh' olive oil!) It was a small bottle, thank heaven, and it tasted terrible, but I kept taking it until it was gone, and I kept getting gradually sicker. The doctor was puzzled and could not figure out what was the matter. After the rancid oil was all gone, I bought some that was fresh. It tasted so good, and I started to improve at once. When I read your mention of rancid oils, I remembered this past experience. Just how poisonous is rancid food? Could it cause death? Mrs. H.A.N., Medford, Oregon.

A. Rancid foods can be very toxic - the more rancid, the more dangerous. Toxic chemicals produced during rancidity, such as peroxides, aldehydes, free radicals, malonaldehydes, etc. can cause serious health disturbances and even lead to the development of cancer.

Now, to your direct questions:

1. Yes, wheat germ begins to turn rancid as soon as it is made, and is already harmful when about 7-10 days old.
2. Whole wheat flour also turns rancid within a few weeks. It should always be ground fresh, just before baking.
3. Bran is perfectly safe. Its content of fat is so small that it stores several months without turning rancid, but it is still best kept in the refrigerator.
4. Nuts are safer in shells. Some nuts turn rancid faster than others. Almonds are extremely durable, even without shells (can be kept for many months even years), while walnuts turn rancid very rapidly. Crushed or ground nuts or seeds (seed mill) turn rancid fast within a few weeks. You must grind your own seeds, grains, or nuts, just before eating them.

Promiscuous Age

Q. Dear Editor:

My mother receives your magazine every month, so therefore, I, too have the chance to read it. I believe it is a very informative magazine and I enjoy reading it very much. As I understand, Let's LIVE is supposed to be about the natural things in life. I hope I am correct in assuming this.

In your June issue, you published an article on birth control, titled "Birth Control: A Biological Perspective", by Paavo Airola, Ph.D. In many ways, it was a great article. In most respects he is very right. However, I do disagree with him on one statement. He states that this is a "promiscuous age". To a certain extent that may be true. But, as a reader, I feel I have the right to question that statement.

I have been told by an authority of the law that the age of consent in North Carolina is 12 years of age. If two consenting adults perform the act of sexual intercourse, is it really promiscuity? I am very sorry to say the article containing that statement contradicts the whole purpose of your magazine.

In hopes of an honest reply, I ask you: What is more natural than sexual intercourse? Does it really make any difference if you are married to one another or not? E.S., Conover, N.C.

A. First, thank you for considering my article "great in many ways". I've stated in the article that this is a promiscuous age, without expressing moral judgement on this fact. You seem to agree that this is indeed a promiscuous age, but do not feel there is anything wrong in being promiscuous. There is a severe lack of logic in several of your conclusions and statements.

1. Only because the age of consent in North Carolina is 12 years, it does not mean that: a) 12-year-olds are considered adults; or b) that they can freely indulge in sexual intercourse upon reaching that age.
2. In using the term "sexual promiscuity", I did not refer to all sexual intercourse between consenting adults, but to the lack of discrimination in sexual liaisons - indiscriminate hopping into bed with partner after partner, without consideration of physical, and psychological consequences of such behavior.
3. I agree with you that sexual intercourse is natural. But this does not mean that we can "do it" indiscriminately, without exercising self control, discipline, and consideration of those we live and associate with, as well as having a thorough understanding and preparedness, and willingness to accept the possible long-term effects of such acts. Defecation is natural, too, yet we exercise great discrimination and control as to when and where we perform this perfectly natural act.
4. Your naive question, shared by so many today, "does it really make any difference if you are married to one another or not?", proves better than anything else that this is indeed an "age of promiscuity". It does make a difference. Human sexual intercourse is an expression of love. That's where we human beings, created in the Divine image, differ from animals. Sex is a beautiful and divinely sanctioned act, but only between two responsible adults bound not only by temporary infatuation or physical attraction, but by love, total commitment, and fidelity in a monogamous, permanent relationship.
5. Finally, the statement that "this is a promiscuous age" does not contradict the "whole purpose of our magazine". Our purpose is to promulgate better health in this world - physical, mental, spiritual, and moral health - where sound, healthy sexual habits and high moral standards are essential factors of building and maintaining total health. Only such total health can lead to optimal happiness, true joy of living, and total fulfillment.