Guest guest Posted April 23, 2001 Report Share Posted April 23, 2001 Mallon, <br><br>You say you eat at leat 50% raw, I have found that people almost always over estimate their raw %.<br><br>I'll give some examples. Say an active person consumes 2500 calories a day.<br><br>If this person consumes raw foods such as:<br>-2 pounds of fruit<br>-2 pounds of veggies<br>-the rest is cooked<br><br>2 ponds of veggies + 2 pounds of fruit = ~900calories or less = ~ 36% raw!!!!!!!<br><br>People will often say they are 65% raw when they are more like 30%.<br><br><br>I am not convinced 100% raw is optimum for everyone in the long term. and before you say but all animals in nature eat all raw let me explain.<br><br>The majority of people who attempt to stay all raw in the long term devolop problems. possibly to do with<br>-living our whole lives on cooked junk<br>-hybridised fruit<br>-not eating fresh and well grown fruit<br>-Not blancing the diet properly, it's not as easy as you may think.<br>-Not exercising enough, burning off the sugar from fruit.<br><br>B12, this can be a problem fro anyone, vegans should definitely put their desires for purity and 'faith in nature' aside and get a reliable supplement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2001 Report Share Posted April 25, 2001 Blake,<br><br>From what source do you base your statement that the majority of people who attempt to stay 100% raw develop problems? I'd be curious to read what they have to say, after I first was able to determine whether there was any inherent bias in the group that produced the study/report.<br><br>Your comment about exercising enough to burn off the sugar from the fruits seems to imply that you're suggesting people on raw food diets that include lots of fruit need more exercise than a " normal " diet. I don't buy it. When I've gone mostly raw at times, I eat like a pig (to try and stay " full " ) and my weight still tends to drop. The one comment I've read from most raw fooders, particularly men, is they get concerned early on about weight loss, until they stabalize or otherwise form new conclusions of what a " normal " weight should be. Stated another way, I think the body's intelligence (or call it what you wish) knows the difference between naturally occurring sugars and refined white sugar. Conventional wisdom probably disagrees, but then conventional wisdom doesn't do a good job explaining why people on SAD which normally includes a high amount of processed sugar tend to be overweight. I've read statistics that say the average American consumes a total of about 175 pounds of sugar per year - the number has risen dramatically in the last 20 or so years. I think any concerns about naturally occurring fruit sugars are insignificant by comparison.<br><br>You're correct about how easy it is to overestimate the percentage of raw foods one consumes. However this is not an issue to me, because when I say my goal is 50% raw at present, that is not a calculated figure, but rather a workable goal that means I'm getting a pretty good amount of fresh foods into my system.<br><br>to be cont'd... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2001 Report Share Posted April 25, 2001 continued...<br><br><br>Some of the concerns you raise about issues or possible problems with an all raw diet are valid discussion points in my opinion, but let's disect them one by one.<br><br>Living our whole lives on cooked junk: Are you implying because we've eaten crap for many years, that it's dangerous or a bad idea to start eating right?<br><br>Hybridized or poorly grown fruit: I don't like the idea of pseudo scientists and corporate whores monkeying around with our produce, especially when they genetically engineer it. What's the solution - throw up our hands and surrender ourselves to the mercy of the processed food industry to sell us products they say are balanced? Or seek out and support organic growers and do our best to eat right despite the activities of agribusiness. (I say the latter).<br><br>As a society, most people relinquished responsibility for their health to the health care industry during the last 50 years, with the promise that diseases resulting from bad lifestyle choices could be all cured by the latest antibiotics, vaccines, and surgical and high-tech treatments around. The " health care " and pharmaceutical industry took advantage of it to sell more overpriced drugs that cause more problems than they fix. The whole AIDS scam has sucked over $50 billion of American taxpayer dollars and they have nothing to show for their efforts. Unless you count the dead bodies that started out healthy people with positive HIV tests whose well-meaning doctors literally poisoned them to death with AZT and other DNA chain terminators and poisons... but I'm getting off track here.<br><br>The bottom line to me is that in the developed world most diseases are diseases of excess, rather than diseases of deficiencies. The food industry, like many businesses use scare tactics to make you think diet is more complicated than it need be. " Use underarm deodorant or you'll smell bad...use mouthwash or else you'll have butt-breath...consume 1500 mg of calcium or you'll develop osteoporosis (btw, the only way to get that much calcium from " food " is drink several glasses of milk daily - guess what industry prompted the US govt to recommend 1500mg/day?)<br><br>I don't eat from a position of fear. I eat using a small amount of logic and mostly intuition. I'm not going to let commercial interests scare me into buying their products. Their motivations are real simple: profit. I'm interested in my health. In the macro view, it is totally illogical to believe we need to take extraordinary steps involving processed food products and measuring fat/protein/carb intake, etc....nice information to study as a hobby or profession, but not necessary knowledge to survive IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2001 Report Share Posted April 27, 2001 & gt; & gt; & gt;From what source do you base your statement that the majority of people who attempt to stay 100% raw develop problems?<br><br>1. From the countless raw gurus who where previously 100% raw and know are not and recomend ~85% raw.<br>Including<br>-Viktoras Kulvinskas<br>-Dr Gabriel Cousins<br>-Brian Clement, (Hippocrates)<br>-Dr Malkamus, (Hacres)<br><br>many others I can't think of know!!<br><br>These gurus where also not 100% raw.<br>-TC Fry<br>-Arnold Ehret<br>-Dr Shelton<br><br>2. The opinion of health professionals who have seen the effects of the raw diet in the long term of hundreds/thousands of people. I have contacted some of these people personally.<br><br>3. The shear lack of healthy raw fooders who have been around a long time. Raw foods has been around, in a modern sense, for many decades.<br><br>4. My personal internet contact with various people who have been all raw for a long time with problems.<br><br>--------<br><br>I'm not saying all raw can not be acheived but most people who atempt it don't acheive it.<br><br><br> & gt; & gt; & gt;Your comment about exercising enough to burn off the sugar from the fruits seems to imply that you're suggesting people on raw food diets that include lots of fruit need more exercise than a " normal " diet. I don't buy it.<br><br>I was just hypothesising one the the possible causes of some of the problems that occur. I obviously don't know all the answers.<br><br> & gt; & gt; & gt;The one comment I've read from most raw fooders, particularly men, is they get concerned early on about weight loss, until they stabalize or otherwise form new conclusions of what a " normal " weight should be.<br><br>I agree, nearly everyone is overweight in terms of body composition and most people who say they are an ideal weight actually are carrying around much extra body fat and have poor muscle tone. When these people lose fat from raw they will appear very thin if they do not gain muscle as they will have poor muscle tone and little body fat.<br>There is no such thing as ideal weight but ideal BMI and body composition. This was discussed on the vegsource.com raw board recently.<br><br>I have always been thin I weight ~128 pounds at 5'11, I actually really like being thin believe it or not while I might be considered underwieght by some I have no desire to gain weight exept maybe a little healthy muscle.<br><br> & gt; & gt; & gt;Stated another way, I think the body's intelligence (or call it what you wish) knows the difference between naturally occurring sugars and refined white sugar. Conventional wisdom probably disagrees, but then conventional wisdom doesn't do a good job explaining why people on SAD which normally includes a high amount of processed sugar tend to be overweight.<br><br>Conventional wisdom agrees with you that there is a large difference between refined sugar and sugar from whole fruits differences include:<br>-the types of sugar, fructose is a larger molecule and less quickly absorbed<br>-fruits are nutritious sugar is nutrient devoid and calorie rich<br>-Fruit has fiber in it which slows down the absorbtion process.<br><br>But I still have some concerns about not yet known possible problems with a mostly fruit raw diet.<br><br> & gt; & gt; & gt;I've read statistics that say the average American consumes a total of about 175 pounds of sugar per year - the number has risen dramatically in the last 20 or so years.<br><br>No doubt processed sugar is one of the biggest villans to our health, more significant than meat IMO. I think veg gurus should put as much focus on avoiding sugar, refined grains, etc as they do to avoiding meat.<br><br>Blake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2001 Report Share Posted April 27, 2001 & gt; & gt; & gt;Living our whole lives on cooked junk: Are you implying because we've eaten crap for many years, that it's dangerous or a bad idea to start eating right?<br><br>I am obviously not implying this, what I was raising is the possibility that some people could have a hard time adapting to a diet so different.<br>-Suagar, salt, oils. meat, dairy, eggs, refined grains etc<br><br>vs<br><br>-Fruits, veggies with some nuts or seeds<br><br>Growing up with junk your organs grow to be used to process this stuff. I'm just raising an idea.<br><br> & gt; & gt; & gt;Hybridized or poorly grown fruit: I don't like the idea of pseudo scientists and corporate whores monkeying around with our produce, especially when they genetically engineer it. What's the solution - throw up our hands and surrender ourselves to the mercy of the processed food industry to sell us products they say are balanced? Or seek out and support organic growers and do our best to eat right despite the activities of agribusiness. (I say the latter).<br><br>I wish it was as simple as you say but basically all fruit is hybridised.<br><br>The price is an issue for some of us as well, We can't afford to buy organic produce as it is over twice as expensive. At frist glance fruits and veggies are cheap but when you realise how much of them you need to eat to meet calorie needs then you realise how much cheaper grains are.<br><br> & gt; & gt; & gt;The whole AIDS scam...<br><br>AIDS scam, I have read a bit about this viewpoint, so what eaxctly are you saying, you don't believe AIDS exists.<br><br> & gt; & gt; & gt;and measuring fat/protein/carb intake, etc....nice information to study as a hobby or profession, but not necessary knowledge to survive IMHO.<br><br><br>I have to disagree! Protein is not so improtant, protein deficiencies generally don't exist in people who eat a diet with enough calories and variation, ie not 95% fruit. <br><br>Fat is important though. The fat in animal products is not healthy. While meat has been a part of our diets for millions of years, the fat content and types where very very different. Eggs and dairy where not a major part of our evolutionary diet and obviously there where no oils, margarines etc. Fat is important for many reasons including heart disease.<br><br>Would you mind telling me how much fat is in you diet, as in what and how much fatty foods you have in your diet.<br><br>I personally eat ~8% calories from fat, very little. Not nuts, avocado, oils, animal products etc. Just low fat plant foods with some whole falx seeds for EFA's. IMO raw fooders generally still eat too much fat. I think people tend to do best with 10-15% fat range.<br><br>Blake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 30, 2001 Report Share Posted April 30, 2001 Happy birthday Blake!<br><br>Re fat, I don't know exactly what my intake is and I don't have a goal for it. I eat organic butter occasionally and avocadoes and nuts with some regularity, so I'm quite certain I'm not deficient and I dont think excessive either, at least not by comparison with avg American where the govt recommends something like 40 - 60 gms/day. I've read your body needs 20 or 25gms - I'm not sure what's best but I probably average somewhere in-between.<br><br>I don't want to delve into AIDS too far (we could text hours on this one), but it is not a " disease " , it is a " syndrome " which tends to be a catch-all for conditions that medical establishment cannot pin to a specific cause, or which has ill defined characteristics.<br><br>The term AIDS was coined around early 80's where doctors were seeing people with opportunistic diseases and with battered immune systems. What was odd was how young they were to have such diseases and how it was odd to get those diseases in a modern society with hygenic standards etc. HIV was isolated from some people who were diagonosed as having AIDS, but it was rushed to press without subject to adequate peer-review and other protocols that normally precede announcements of this sort.<br><br>There are several " tests " or rules which have served medical science to identify causes of diseases and which conventionally must all be anwerable before a " cause " is pinned on a factor. HIV failed to be a proven cause on more than one of these, but it's been touted as the sole cause regardless. AIDS is not an infectuous epidemic, as the press would have you believe, for a number of reasons including it does not spread expotentially like other epidemics. And it is hard to " transmit " (if you believe it is transmittable) and it remains highly correlated to certain segments of society rather than spread into the public like any other disease.<br><br>Long story shortened, most of the people with AIDS have other lifestyle habits that would compromise their immune systems. It's not an epidemic and doesn't behave like one. HIV has never been proven to be the " AIDS virus " . Having the HIV retrovirus detectable in your system does not guarantee you'll get AIDS (they've had to admit one may be HIV positive forever with no ill effect) and lack of HIV present does not guarantee you will not get acquired immune deficiency. But what is certain is if you're treated with drugs intended to limit HIV, you will get AIDS symptoms due to their extreme toxicity.<br><br>AIDS seems to be growing, at least due to press accounts, but they've had to continually increase the number of " AIDS diseases " to make it seem as it is getting much worse. If I develop tuberculosis and go to the doctor for an AIDS test, by definition I have " AIDS " if test positive, and I have " tuberculosis " if test negative.<br><br>If you want to look into this issue further, please visit Dr. Peter Duesberg's web site and purchase one of his books. He very well answers any questions you may have. If you can cite the reference where HIV was proven to " cause AIDS " , please site it for me. Duesberg and a number of others insist it doesn't exist, which among other things is what interested me in this subject in the first place.<br><br>I have challenged gay friends and a gay pharmacist to tell me of one AIDS case they know of where the person became seriously ill prior to beginning AIDS drug therapy. All I've found so far were people who first tested HIV positive, then began drugs, then got full-blown AIDS symptoms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.