Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [MT] Dimitar & our private conversation, now for the group.

Expand Messages
  • ireneandersson77
    And so many poisonings are caused by inaccurate generalizations about what is safe and not.. A better approach is to eat only what you can ID with 100%
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 1, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      And so many poisonings are caused by inaccurate generalizations about what is safe and not..
      A better approach is to eat only what you can ID with 100% certainty and know is a good edible.

      Irene A


      --- In MushroomTalk@yahoogroups.com, Ron Pastorino <ronpast@...> wrote:
      >
      > I would start by questioning your first premise..."Most wood-growing LBM's are
      > edible."
      (..................)

      > Ron





      > ________________________________
      > From: Sam Schaperow <sam.schaperow@...>
      > To: MushroomTalk@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Sat, December 31, 2011 7:04:14 PM
      > Subject: [MT] Dimitar & our private conversation, now for the group.
      >
      >
      > W/permission, I have included this now for the group (and Dimitar, too?) to
      > comment on. To anyone interested, I'm seeking some solid critical thinking on
      > the subject.
      >
      >
      > The below is what I said in reply to the idea that we must know all LBMs very
      > well prior to any consumption consideration:
      >
      > "Hi Dimitar:
      >
      > I find often any cautions come out of important reasons, but occasionally out of
      > inaccurate generalizations. I wonder if this LBM safety [topic of having to
      > know them very well] could be the latter, at least w/in the scenario I've
      > depicted. Check out this logic & let's see where it may be flawed, then if that
      > flaw can be compensated for by changing the strategy:
      >
      > 1. Most wood-growing LBMs (WGLBMs) are edible.
      > 2. Poisonous WGLBMs do not have hollow stipes.
      > 3. WG Psathyrellas & Tubarias are non-toxic (assuming all their species are
      > non-toxic and particularly non-very-toxic) & can/do have hollow stipes.
      > 4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't
      > dangerous.
      > 5. It is not dangerous to eat all hollow-stiped WGLBMs.
      >
      > To add a part about deadly gallerinas: Deadly gallerinas do not have hollow
      > stipes, therefore WGLBMs w/hollow stipes are not deadly gallerinas.
      >
      >
      > I appreciate the critical thinking qualities to this conversation and look fwd.
      > to further discussion."
      >
      > If I critique the above myself, I'd say that if such a thing exists as a deadly
      > gallerina with a hollow stipe, that would be a dangerous situation. However, if
      > a person includes the idea of checking over multiple of teh specimens, then
      > unless there exists an cluster of hollow stiped deadly gallerinas.... Hum, but
      > I doubt it is very useful to get into the most remote of possibilities. So,
      > I'll instead hope for discussion around more likely issues w/the above logic.
      >
      >
      > --
      > Sam Schaperow, MSMFT, LMFT
      > Clinical Director
      > http://schaperowpsychologycenter.com | Reply to group | Reply via web post |
      > Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
      >
      > Recent Activity: * New Members 2
      > Visit Your Group
      > MARKETPLACE
      > Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the
      > Yahoo! Toolbar now.
      >
      >
      > Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
      > .
      >
    • Dimitar Bojantchev
      Sam, I ll second the previously expressed opinions, as I suggested in our private exchange -- it seems that you are trying to draw some new kind of a key for
      Message 2 of 7 , Jan 1, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Sam, I’ll second the previously expressed opinions, as I suggested in our private exchange -- it seems that you are trying to draw some new kind of a key for the LBMs that in my opinion will need a lot of work, if viable at all.
         
        There is only one safe approach to LBMs -- you must know all genera at an advanced level to ever consider them for food.
         
        >1. Most wood-growing LBMs (WGLBMs) are edible.
        Assuming that you limit this to the Northern hemisphere only, we still do not know. That's a huge stretch to make such a statement.
         
        >2. Poisonous WGLBMs do not have hollow stipes.
        First of all, I am not at all sure that you can so easily define what a hollow vs. stuffed stipe really is as this character may be variable during the life time of the fruitbody and not always easy to interpret. I also believe that there are many Galerinas of unknown toxicity that might have hollow stipe. They may be mostly moss dwelling species, but still.
         
        >3. WG Psathyrellas & Tubarias are non-toxic (assuming all their
        species are non-toxic and particularly non-very-toxic) & can/do have hollow stipes.
        We cannot make this generalization -- no exhaustive data is available.
         
        >4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't dangerous.
        Untrue. There are many lignicolous species.
         
        >5. It is not dangerous to eat all hollow-stiped WGLBMs.

        To make such a statement requires deep knowledge and experimentation with the stipe properties of LBMs that few of us have, I encourage you to become an expert on LBMs and study the subject further.
         
                D.
         
         

        Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2011 7:04 PM
        Subject: [MT] Dimitar & our private conversation, now for the group.

         

        W/permission, I have included this now for the group (and Dimitar, too?) to comment on.  To anyone interested, I'm seeking some solid critical thinking on the subject. 

        The below is what I said in reply to the idea that we must know all LBMs very well prior to any consumption consideration:

        "Hi Dimitar:

        I find often any cautions come out of important reasons, but occasionally out of inaccurate generalizations.  I wonder if this LBM safety [topic of having to know them very well] could be the latter, at least w/in the scenario I've depicted.  Check out this logic & let's see where it may be flawed, then if that flaw can be compensated for by changing the strategy:

           1. Most wood-growing LBMs (WGLBMs) are edible.
           2. Poisonous WGLBMs do not have hollow stipes.
           3. WG Psathyrellas & Tubarias are non-toxic (assuming all their species are non-toxic and particularly non-very-toxic) & can/do have hollow stipes.
           4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't dangerous.
           5. It is not dangerous to eat all hollow-stiped WGLBMs.

        To add a part about deadly gallerinas: Deadly gallerinas do not have hollow stipes, therefore WGLBMs w/hollow stipes are not deadly gallerinas. 

        I appreciate the critical thinking qualities to this conversation and look fwd. to further discussion."

        If I critique the above myself, I'd say that if such a thing exists as a deadly gallerina with a hollow stipe, that would be a dangerous situation.  However, if a person includes the idea of checking over multiple of teh specimens, then unless there exists an cluster of hollow stiped deadly gallerinas....  Hum, but I doubt it is very useful to get into the most remote of possibilities.  So, I'll instead hope for discussion around more likely issues w/the above logic. 

        --
        Sam Schaperow, MSMFT, LMFT
        Clinical Director
        http://PsychologyCT.com


      • Boletebill
        Re: # 5. It is not dangerous to eat all hollow stiped WGLBM. Conocybe(Pholotina) filaris. This is a poisonous wood-chips LBM that like many Conocybes can
        Message 3 of 7 , Jan 1, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Re: # 5. "It is not dangerous to eat all hollow stiped WGLBM."
          Conocybe(Pholotina) filaris. This is a poisonous wood-chips LBM that like many Conocybes can develop a hollow stipe in age. Since most people avoid LBM's there may be many other poisonous wood chip LBM's with a hollow stipe.
          The attempt to create a rubric for safe consumption of LBM's using syllogisms and obligate deductions as if mushrooms obey the rules of logic is not only foolhardy but dangerous as well.

          Bill Yule

          --- In MushroomTalk@yahoogroups.com, Sam Schaperow <sam.schaperow@...> wrote:
          >
          > W/permission, I have included this now for the group (and Dimitar, too?) to
          > comment on. To anyone interested, I'm seeking some solid critical thinking
          > on the subject.
          >
          > The below is what I said in reply to the idea that we must know all LBMs
          > very well prior to any consumption consideration:
          >
          > "Hi Dimitar:
          >
          > I find often any cautions come out of important reasons, but occasionally
          > out of inaccurate generalizations. I wonder if this LBM safety [topic of
          > having to know them very well] could be the latter, at least w/in the
          > scenario I've depicted. Check out this logic & let's see where it may be
          > flawed, then if that flaw can be compensated for by changing the strategy:
          >
          > 1. Most wood-growing LBMs (WGLBMs) are edible.
          > 2. Poisonous WGLBMs do not have hollow stipes.
          > 3. WG Psathyrellas & Tubarias are non-toxic (assuming all their species
          > are non-toxic and particularly non-very-toxic) & can/do have hollow stipes.
          > 4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't
          > dangerous.
          > 5. It is not dangerous to eat all hollow-stiped WGLBMs.
          >
          > To add a part about deadly gallerinas: Deadly gallerinas do not have hollow
          > stipes, therefore WGLBMs w/hollow stipes are not deadly gallerinas.
          >
          > I appreciate the critical thinking qualities to this conversation and look
          > fwd. to further discussion."
          >
          > If I critique the above myself, I'd say that if such a thing exists as a
          > deadly gallerina with a hollow stipe, that would be a dangerous situation.
          > However, if a person includes the idea of checking over multiple of teh
          > specimens, then unless there exists an cluster of hollow stiped deadly
          > gallerinas.... Hum, but I doubt it is very useful to get into the most
          > remote of possibilities. So, I'll instead hope for discussion around more
          > likely issues w/the above logic.
          >
          > --
          > Sam Schaperow, MSMFT, LMFT
          > *Clinical Director*
          > http://PsychologyCT.com
          > <http://schaperowpsychologycenter.com>
          >
        • sam_schaperow
          Dimitar, A. Oh right, lignicolous . TY. I ll retain that word in my memory this time. So, I should say LLBMs instead of WGLBMs. B. You make good points. I
          Message 4 of 7 , Jan 2, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Dimitar,
            A. Oh right, "lignicolous". TY. I'll retain that word in my memory this time. So, I should say LLBMs instead of WGLBMs.
            B. You make good points. I also want to say that this discussion is quite educational abt. these mushrooms.
            C. My "4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't dangerous." was not written correctly. It should have read (though I'll change WG to L for lignicolous, and will use "HS" for "hollow stiped": "4. If a mushroom is HS & LLBM, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't dangerous."
            But, I see from Bill Y.'s reply, C. filaris can grow on wood that can develop a hollow stipe in age, which would bring up a known exception to my attempt at a rubric here.

            Bill, yes, even with known exceptions, there can be unknown exceptions. So I appreciate your help here as well. BTW, have you found C. filaris in CT? I haven't found one yet, but I can believe they appear here from time to time.

            Regarding rubrics for safe consumption of any group of mushrooms, it seems to me that there are casual collectors who do so for years on things like morels vs. false morels, puffballs vs. others, non-toxic polypores, etc. But, not for LLBMs. From the discussion, I'd think LLBMs are just too variable and contain too many unknowns to do this, @ least w/our present knowledge.

            Ironically, the more I attempt to create rubrics, the more I learn about mushrooms (since I put these theories to discussion and research, not into blind practice) and the less I'd benefit from a rubric.

            --- In MushroomTalk@yahoogroups.com, "Boletebill" <boletebill@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > Re: # 5. "It is not dangerous to eat all hollow stiped WGLBM."
            > Conocybe(Pholotina) filaris. This is a poisonous wood-chips LBM that like many Conocybes can develop a hollow stipe in age. Since most people avoid LBM's there may be many other poisonous wood chip LBM's with a hollow stipe.
            > The attempt to create a rubric for safe consumption of LBM's using syllogisms and obligate deductions as if mushrooms obey the rules of logic is not only foolhardy but dangerous as well.
            >
            > Bill Yule
            >
            > --- In MushroomTalk@yahoogroups.com, Sam Schaperow <sam.schaperow@> wrote:
            > >
            > > W/permission, I have included this now for the group (and Dimitar, too?) to
            > > comment on. To anyone interested, I'm seeking some solid critical thinking
            > > on the subject.
            > >
            > > The below is what I said in reply to the idea that we must know all LBMs
            > > very well prior to any consumption consideration:
            > >
            > > "Hi Dimitar:
            > >
            > > I find often any cautions come out of important reasons, but occasionally
            > > out of inaccurate generalizations. I wonder if this LBM safety [topic of
            > > having to know them very well] could be the latter, at least w/in the
            > > scenario I've depicted. Check out this logic & let's see where it may be
            > > flawed, then if that flaw can be compensated for by changing the strategy:
            > >
            > > 1. Most wood-growing LBMs (WGLBMs) are edible.
            > > 2. Poisonous WGLBMs do not have hollow stipes.
            > > 3. WG Psathyrellas & Tubarias are non-toxic (assuming all their species
            > > are non-toxic and particularly non-very-toxic) & can/do have hollow stipes.
            > > 4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't
            > > dangerous.
            > > 5. It is not dangerous to eat all hollow-stiped WGLBMs.
            > >
            > > To add a part about deadly gallerinas: Deadly gallerinas do not have hollow
            > > stipes, therefore WGLBMs w/hollow stipes are not deadly gallerinas.
            > >
            > > I appreciate the critical thinking qualities to this conversation and look
            > > fwd. to further discussion."
            > >
            > > If I critique the above myself, I'd say that if such a thing exists as a
            > > deadly gallerina with a hollow stipe, that would be a dangerous situation.
            > > However, if a person includes the idea of checking over multiple of teh
            > > specimens, then unless there exists an cluster of hollow stiped deadly
            > > gallerinas.... Hum, but I doubt it is very useful to get into the most
            > > remote of possibilities. So, I'll instead hope for discussion around more
            > > likely issues w/the above logic.
            > >
            > > --
            > > Sam Schaperow, MSMFT, LMFT
            > > *Clinical Director*
            > > http://PsychologyCT.com
            > > <http://schaperowpsychologycenter.com>
            > >
            >
          • Dimitar Bojantchev
            ... Exactly! And as Irene said this is a good recipe for sorrow when the threshold of ignorance reaches critical levels, particularly for people who do not
            Message 5 of 7 , Jan 2, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              >Regarding rubrics for safe consumption of any group of mushrooms, it
              seems to me that there are casual collectors who do so for years on things like morels vs. false morels, puffballs vs. others, non-toxic polypores, etc.
               
              Exactly! And as Irene said this is a good recipe for sorrow when the threshold of ignorance reaches critical levels, particularly for people who do not even have basic generic concepts in their mind -- "eating an Amanita instead of Lactarius", for example -- that sort of thing. 
               
              In my opinion these kind of "rules of thumb" are immensely popular and extremely diverse -- we should start collecting them. I have heard some crazy generalizations.
               
              Some "self-appointed" experts tend to get a free pass with such nonsense for along time, until they pull the wrong ticket in the woods and get nailed, which is generally rarely, but always often enough to make the statistics.. and the headlines...
               
              >Ironically, the more I attempt to create rubrics, the more I learn
              about mushrooms
               
              This is undoubtedly true. An essential part of the analytical process is to strive to create generalizations and try to analyze the exceptions, which may defeat them. As long as one is willing to discard the hastily thrown hypotheses.
               
              In general the vast group of organisms that we reduced to "LBM"s are very unsuitable for generalizations -- they are far too numerous and diverse to play such simplistic games. So many keys have been attempted in the last century even by pure morphologists that if a good one really existed it would likely been found by now...
               
                      D.

               
              Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 9:21 AM
              Subject: [MT] Re: Dimitar & our private conversation, now for the group.

               

              Dimitar,
              A. Oh right, "lignicolous". TY. I'll retain that word in my memory this time. So, I should say LLBMs instead of WGLBMs.
              B. You make good points. I also want to say that this discussion is quite educational abt. these mushrooms.
              C. My "4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't dangerous." was not written correctly. It should have read (though I'll change WG to L for lignicolous, and will use "HS" for "hollow stiped": "4. If a mushroom is HS & LLBM, it is Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't dangerous."
              But, I see from Bill Y.'s reply, C. filaris can grow on wood that can develop a hollow stipe in age, which would bring up a known exception to my attempt at a rubric here.

              Bill, yes, even with known exceptions, there can be unknown exceptions. So I appreciate your help here as well. BTW, have you found C. filaris in CT? I haven't found one yet, but I can believe they appear here from time to time.

              Regarding rubrics for safe consumption of any group of mushrooms, it seems to me that there are casual collectors who do so for years on things like morels vs. false morels, puffballs vs. others, non-toxic polypores, etc. But, not for LLBMs. From the discussion, I'd think LLBMs are just too variable and contain too many unknowns to do this, @ least w/our present knowledge.

              Ironically, the more I attempt to create rubrics, the more I learn about mushrooms (since I put these theories to discussion and research, not into blind practice) and the less I'd benefit from a rubric.

              --- In MushroomTalk@yahoogroups.com, "Boletebill" <boletebill@...> wrote:

              >
              >
              > Re: # 5. "It
              is not dangerous to eat all hollow stiped WGLBM."
              > Conocybe(Pholotina)
              filaris. This is a poisonous wood-chips LBM that like many Conocybes can develop a hollow stipe in age. Since most people avoid LBM's there may be many other poisonous wood chip LBM's with a hollow stipe.
              > The attempt to create a
              rubric for safe consumption of LBM's using syllogisms and obligate deductions as if mushrooms obey the rules of logic is not only foolhardy but dangerous as well.
              >
              > Bill Yule
              >
              > --- In
              href="mailto:MushroomTalk%40yahoogroups.com">MushroomTalk@yahoogroups.com, Sam Schaperow <sam.schaperow@> wrote:
              > >
              > >
              W/permission, I have included this now for the group (and Dimitar, too?) to
              > > comment on. To anyone interested, I'm seeking some solid
              critical thinking
              > > on the subject.
              > >
              > > The
              below is what I said in reply to the idea that we must know all LBMs
              > > very well prior to any consumption consideration:
              > >
              > > "Hi Dimitar:
              > >
              > > I find often any cautions come out
              of important reasons, but occasionally
              > > out of inaccurate
              generalizations. I wonder if this LBM safety [topic of
              > > having to
              know them very well] could be the latter, at least w/in the
              > >
              scenario I've depicted. Check out this logic & let's see where it may be
              > > flawed, then if that flaw can be compensated for by changing the
              strategy:
              > >
              > > 1. Most wood-growing LBMs (WGLBMs) are
              edible.
              > > 2. Poisonous WGLBMs do not have hollow stipes.
              > >
              3. WG Psathyrellas & Tubarias are non-toxic (assuming all their species
              > > are non-toxic and particularly non-very-toxic) & can/do
              have hollow stipes.
              > > 4. If a mushroom is WG & LB, it is
              Psathyrella/Tubaria, which isn't
              > > dangerous.
              > > 5. It is
              not dangerous to eat all hollow-stiped WGLBMs.
              > >
              > > To add
              a part about deadly gallerinas: Deadly gallerinas do not have hollow
              > > stipes, therefore WGLBMs w/hollow stipes are not deadly gallerinas.
              > >
              > > I appreciate the critical thinking qualities to this
              conversation and look
              > > fwd. to further discussion."
              > >
              > > If I critique the above myself, I'd say that if such a thing
              exists as a
              > > deadly gallerina with a hollow stipe, that would be a
              dangerous situation.
              > > However, if a person includes the idea of
              checking over multiple of teh
              > > specimens, then unless there exists
              an cluster of hollow stiped deadly
              > > gallerinas.... Hum, but I doubt
              it is very useful to get into the most
              > > remote of possibilities. So,
              I'll instead hope for discussion around more
              > > likely issues w/the
              above logic.
              > >
              > > --
              > > Sam Schaperow, MSMFT,
              LMFT
              > > *Clinical Director*
              > >
              href="http://PsychologyCT.com">http://PsychologyCT.com
              > > <
              href="http://schaperowpsychologycenter.com">http://schaperowpsychologycenter.com>
              > >
              >

            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.