Guest guest Posted September 11, 2003 Report Share Posted September 11, 2003 I first heard about the raw diet several years ago, but after doing some research, I kept running into the BeyondVeg site and it convinced me not to try it. I come from a very scientific-minded family and many of the arguments made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, unproven, or idealistic rather than realistic. That said, I've been seeing more and more people join this movement, and it makes me have second thoughts about how quickly I dismissed it. There are a few questions that I have yet to find a satisfying answer to. I will post them here, and if anyone could help answer them (with concrete evidence or examples, rather than guesses or hypotheses) I would be very appreciative. Also, I am assuming this diet is usually vegan as well, so that assumption will be present in my questions. 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? -Most produce, especially fruit, is nothing like it was thousands (much less millions) of years ago; the fruit has been cultivated to have unnatural amounts of sugar. I've read several experiences where people on high fruit diets experience mineral deficiencies, teeth problems, and " sugar highs, " which certainly would not be characteristic of our true diets. Moreover, we have been documented as eating meat for over 2 million years. As far as I know, there are no raw vegan societies either in the present or in history, and there is no record of humans having been frugivorous or vegan any time in our evolutionary history. 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? Since many deficiencies don't show up for many years, the pool of short-term raw fooders (5-10 years) is unreliable to base any conclusions abou the diet. The long-term proponents that I know of (T.C. Fry, Shelton) died at relatively young ages of suspicious causes. If this diet results in perfect health and longevity, wouldn't it seem that there would be many 120, 130, or 140 year old raw fooders with impeccable strength and stamina for their age? This diet is not " new, " so certainly there would be time for someone practicing the diet to have lived a long, undiseased life. I have not heard of such cases. 3. Why the high failure rate? In observing some of the raw food (especially raw vegan) support boards, I've seen many people whose health has declined and they eventually abandoned the diet. Initially, it appears that people do great, but eventually they run into problems (the most common I've seen are chronic diarrhea, low energy, fatigue, and hormonal imbalances in women). I heard some scary things about the health of those on the Hallelujah Diet. Why is this and how can it be avoided? 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? From what I've read, some advocate a high-fruit vegan diet, like Doug Graham; others declare that animal food is necessary for health (Chet Day, Stanley Bass); others only advocate a high percentage of raw. Beyond that, the findings of people like Weston A. Price/Sally Fallon suggest that the longest-lived, healthiest societies are not all raw or vegan, but include liberal amounts of animal fat and fermented products. Those are my main questions. Right now, what concerns me is how to adequately form this diet (especially if it is vegan) without relying on super- sweet hybrid fruits, without developing a deficiency like zinc or iron, and without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and decay. I just haven't seen enough positive, long-term results to make up my mind. Thanks for your time & thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2003 Report Share Posted September 15, 2003 Personally, I am not a 100% raw fooder because of similar concerns. I host raw food dinners, and eat better-tasting, more healthful food there than at almost any other meal. As for point 1, an anthropologist (not a raw foodist) at vegetarian summerfest said that the diet has _always_ been changing throughout the millenia. There never has been a constant. I'm not giving you quite the answer that you're looking for, but try this recipe on my raw food website http://www.rawfoodwiki.org/index.php/Tomato%20Soup Or this: http://www.rawfoodwiki.org/index.php/Cream%20of%20Celery%20Soup You too might be moved by tastebuds and aromas to consider eating this way often, regardless of whether you're persuaded by science to eat this way exclusively.) (Use only fresh, ripe, organic ingredients, for " valid results. " ) Regarding your questions, I'll be very interested in the answers you get. Glad you raised the zinc question. Definitely food for thought. I'm thinking that the answer to that is sprouted legumes, and squash seeds, such as pumpkin. As for iron, men tend to have _too much_ iron. Here's a good iron resource http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/iron.htm Hope this helps. Best Regards Margie (And please do try my soup recipies! Cut in half if you don't have a large blender. I can't imagine you'll think that cooking these soups will make them better, but your feedback is welcome in any case.) On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, preciousspark33 wrote: > I first heard about the raw diet several years ago, but after doing some > research, I kept running into the BeyondVeg site and it convinced me not to try > it. I come from a very scientific-minded family and many of the arguments > made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, unproven, or idealistic rather than > realistic. That said, I've been seeing more and more people join this > movement, and it makes me have second thoughts about how quickly I > dismissed it. > > There are a few questions that I have yet to find a satisfying answer to. I will > post them here, and if anyone could help answer them (with concrete > evidence or examples, rather than guesses or hypotheses) I would be very > appreciative. Also, I am assuming this diet is usually vegan as well, so that > assumption will be present in my questions. > > 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? > -Most produce, especially fruit, is nothing like it was thousands (much less > millions) of years ago; the fruit has been cultivated to have unnatural amounts > of sugar. I've read several experiences where people on high fruit diets > experience mineral deficiencies, teeth problems, and " sugar highs, " which > certainly would not be characteristic of our true diets. Moreover, we have > been documented as eating meat for over 2 million years. As far as I know, > there are no raw vegan societies either in the present or in history, and there > is no record of humans having been frugivorous or vegan any time in our > evolutionary history. > > 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? > Since many deficiencies don't show up for many years, the pool of short-term > raw fooders (5-10 years) is unreliable to base any conclusions abou the diet. > The long-term proponents that I know of (T.C. Fry, Shelton) died at relatively > young ages of suspicious causes. If this diet results in perfect health and > longevity, wouldn't it seem that there would be many 120, 130, or 140 year old > raw fooders with impeccable strength and stamina for their age? This diet is > not " new, " so certainly there would be time for someone practicing the diet to > have lived a long, undiseased life. I have not heard of such cases. > > 3. Why the high failure rate? > In observing some of the raw food (especially raw vegan) support boards, I've > seen many people whose health has declined and they eventually > abandoned the diet. Initially, it appears that people do great, but eventually > they run into problems (the most common I've seen are chronic diarrhea, low > energy, fatigue, and hormonal imbalances in women). I heard some scary > things about the health of those on the Hallelujah Diet. Why is this and how > can it be avoided? > > 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? > >From what I've read, some advocate a high-fruit vegan diet, like Doug > Graham; others declare that animal food is necessary for health (Chet Day, > Stanley Bass); others only advocate a high percentage of raw. Beyond that, > the findings of people like Weston A. Price/Sally Fallon suggest that the > longest-lived, healthiest societies are not all raw or vegan, but include liberal > amounts of animal fat and fermented products. > > Those are my main questions. Right now, what concerns me is how to > adequately form this diet (especially if it is vegan) without relying on > super- sweet hybrid fruits, without developing a deficiency like zinc or > iron, and without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and > decay. I just haven't seen enough positive, long-term results to make > up my mind. > > Thanks for your time & thoughts. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2003 Report Share Posted September 15, 2003 Hi! I don't know much about much, but I'll tell you what I do know!!! =) > many of the arguments made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, unproven, or idealistic rather than realistic. That, sadly, is true! I've read many ridiculous and contradictory statements in the raw books and some are just contrary to proven science. I'm not sure about enzymes and one author says that, when we eat cooked food, our lungs fill 2/3 with mucous! Yeah, right, like you could really survive that!! Having said that, looking beyond the hype and silliness, I see something that's basically sound. > 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? It only needs to if you have enough faith to believe in evolution. I am keenly interested in science, esp biology and chemistry and my hubby is a professional engineer - ie loads of maths and physics and neither of us can accept the evolutionary theory. It would be an unscientific mistake to base acceptance of one idea by how well it fits in with an unproven and faulty theory. The more I learn about biology, esp ecology, the more I realise there HAD to be an intelligent mind behind it all. To accept that it all came about by chance is a leap of faith that I just can't make!=) > 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? There are some but not many. That's mostly to do with the answer to the next question....!!! > 3. Why the high failure rate? For the same reason there's a high failure rate with giving up all manner of addictive things - it's just plain hard going and there's a lot of pressure in society to conform. Have you read " The Raw Secrets " by Fred Patenaude? It's quite a new publication but it goes into a lot of reasons wny people experience eternal detox and low energy etc. Worth looking at, I enjoyed it a lot.=) > 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? Because no-one knows the truth and we are all a little different with differing genetic tendancies, differing lifestyles and differing tastes. Some things hit the spot with some, others with others. Same with all diet-styles really. One thing that is true though is that, although we have the ability to digest meat etc, that does not make it an ideal food. I was reading something in a biology book the other day that talked about a certain herbivore, (I forget which but can check), who will eat her young when threatened showing she *can* physically digest meat, but that is not optimal for her!!! From my reading I understand the long-living societies are largley vegetarian including, not liberal, but very occasional animal products. The hortest lived societies are those based almost entirely on animal foods. > without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and decay. I had an interesting chat with my dentist a while back. He said that fruit juice can erode the teeth if it's still on the surface when they are cleaning, so the acid plus the friction will lead to long- term erosion. He said the way around this was simply to swill out the mouth before brusing. He also stressed that this was NOT decay, but just normal, albeit accelerated, wear. Hope there's something at least interesting in there!! hugs, Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2003 Report Share Posted September 15, 2003 You have searching questions. Unfortunately I'm not the one to give answers since I'm just beginning. My question is this: What frightening things have you heard about the Hallelujah Diet? I've read their information but have heard nothing negative anywhere. Thanks. Diane preciousspark33 <preciousspark33 wrote: I first heard about the raw diet several years ago, but after doing some research, I kept running into the BeyondVeg site and it convinced me not to try it. I come from a very scientific-minded family and many of the arguments made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, unproven, or idealistic rather than realistic. That said, I've been seeing more and more people join this movement, and it makes me have second thoughts about how quickly I dismissed it. There are a few questions that I have yet to find a satisfying answer to. I will post them here, and if anyone could help answer them (with concrete evidence or examples, rather than guesses or hypotheses) I would be very appreciative. Also, I am assuming this diet is usually vegan as well, so that assumption will be present in my questions. 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? -Most produce, especially fruit, is nothing like it was thousands (much less millions) of years ago; the fruit has been cultivated to have unnatural amounts of sugar. I've read several experiences where people on high fruit diets experience mineral deficiencies, teeth problems, and " sugar highs, " which certainly would not be characteristic of our true diets. Moreover, we have been documented as eating meat for over 2 million years. As far as I know, there are no raw vegan societies either in the present or in history, and there is no record of humans having been frugivorous or vegan any time in our evolutionary history. 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? Since many deficiencies don't show up for many years, the pool of short-term raw fooders (5-10 years) is unreliable to base any conclusions abou the diet. The long-term proponents that I know of (T.C. Fry, Shelton) died at relatively young ages of suspicious causes. If this diet results in perfect health and longevity, wouldn't it seem that there would be many 120, 130, or 140 year old raw fooders with impeccable strength and stamina for their age? This diet is not " new, " so certainly there would be time for someone practicing the diet to have lived a long, undiseased life. I have not heard of such cases. 3. Why the high failure rate? In observing some of the raw food (especially raw vegan) support boards, I've seen many people whose health has declined and they eventually abandoned the diet. Initially, it appears that people do great, but eventually they run into problems (the most common I've seen are chronic diarrhea, low energy, fatigue, and hormonal imbalances in women). I heard some scary things about the health of those on the Hallelujah Diet. Why is this and how can it be avoided? 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? From what I've read, some advocate a high-fruit vegan diet, like Doug Graham; others declare that animal food is necessary for health (Chet Day, Stanley Bass); others only advocate a high percentage of raw. Beyond that, the findings of people like Weston A. Price/Sally Fallon suggest that the longest-lived, healthiest societies are not all raw or vegan, but include liberal amounts of animal fat and fermented products. Those are my main questions. Right now, what concerns me is how to adequately form this diet (especially if it is vegan) without relying on super- sweet hybrid fruits, without developing a deficiency like zinc or iron, and without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and decay. I just haven't seen enough positive, long-term results to make up my mind. Thanks for your time & thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2003 Report Share Posted September 15, 2003 rawfood , Diane Law <joy2knit> wrote: > What frightening things have you heard about the Hallelujah Diet? I've read their information but have heard nothing negative anywhere. There's a chap called Chet Day whose entire purpose in life seems to be baggin vegetarians and 'proving' why we should eat meat. He esp likes to slam the HA diet, which I confess to knowing little or nothing about! You can find his stuff on: www.beyondveg.com/org Don't know the exact url as I've only looked once. I'm already convinced that veganism is the beginning of a healthy diet and don't buy his arguments. You must make up your own mind though. Love, Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2003 Report Share Posted September 15, 2003 Elisabeth, why are you even snooping around a raw foods if you believe all of this? There is no doubt that the only sure-fire diet for longer life and optimal health is a low calorie diet. I've tried a bunch of " diets " over the years and Raw Foods seems to work for me, but there are some lingering concerns that I have - in that- I have lost A LOT of weight and kept it off. I feel great, but I am 5'11 and now down to about 140 and my body now looks more like a supermodel's than an athletic man's. I'm way too skinny and I can't gain it back. I'm actually thinking about abandoning my raw foods diet for a more moderate, higher fat and higher calorie diet. I'm searching for solutions to get me back to my fighting weight but remaining RAW. Brian Powell allGoode Organics 215-242-1133 - office 215-313-6927 - cell brian Elisabeth Braun [elisabeth.braun] Monday, September 15, 2003 5:33 PM rawfood [Raw Food] Re: Curious but Skeptical Hi! I don't know much about much, but I'll tell you what I do know!!! =) > many of the arguments made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, unproven, or idealistic rather than realistic. That, sadly, is true! I've read many ridiculous and contradictory statements in the raw books and some are just contrary to proven science. I'm not sure about enzymes and one author says that, when we eat cooked food, our lungs fill 2/3 with mucous! Yeah, right, like you could really survive that!! Having said that, looking beyond the hype and silliness, I see something that's basically sound. > 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? It only needs to if you have enough faith to believe in evolution. I am keenly interested in science, esp biology and chemistry and my hubby is a professional engineer - ie loads of maths and physics and neither of us can accept the evolutionary theory. It would be an unscientific mistake to base acceptance of one idea by how well it fits in with an unproven and faulty theory. The more I learn about biology, esp ecology, the more I realise there HAD to be an intelligent mind behind it all. To accept that it all came about by chance is a leap of faith that I just can't make!=) > 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? There are some but not many. That's mostly to do with the answer to the next question....!!! > 3. Why the high failure rate? For the same reason there's a high failure rate with giving up all manner of addictive things - it's just plain hard going and there's a lot of pressure in society to conform. Have you read " The Raw Secrets " by Fred Patenaude? It's quite a new publication but it goes into a lot of reasons wny people experience eternal detox and low energy etc. Worth looking at, I enjoyed it a lot.=) > 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? Because no-one knows the truth and we are all a little different with differing genetic tendancies, differing lifestyles and differing tastes. Some things hit the spot with some, others with others. Same with all diet-styles really. One thing that is true though is that, although we have the ability to digest meat etc, that does not make it an ideal food. I was reading something in a biology book the other day that talked about a certain herbivore, (I forget which but can check), who will eat her young when threatened showing she *can* physically digest meat, but that is not optimal for her!!! From my reading I understand the long-living societies are largley vegetarian including, not liberal, but very occasional animal products. The hortest lived societies are those based almost entirely on animal foods. > without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and decay. I had an interesting chat with my dentist a while back. He said that fruit juice can erode the teeth if it's still on the surface when they are cleaning, so the acid plus the friction will lead to long- term erosion. He said the way around this was simply to swill out the mouth before brusing. He also stressed that this was NOT decay, but just normal, albeit accelerated, wear. Hope there's something at least interesting in there!! hugs, Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 15, 2003 Report Share Posted September 15, 2003 Question: Are we just so used to seeing so many people *nicely padded* with fat that we are no longer aware of what is truly *normal* weight. It occurs to me that if you are unable to regain the lost weight that perhaps you are at the optimum weight for your height and bone structure. Diane Brian Powell <brianmpowell wrote: Elisabeth, why are you even snooping around a raw foods if you believe all of this? There is no doubt that the only sure-fire diet for longer life and optimal health is a low calorie diet. I've tried a bunch of " diets " over the years and Raw Foods seems to work for me, but there are some lingering concerns that I have - in that- I have lost A LOT of weight and kept it off. I feel great, but I am 5'11 and now down to about 140 and my body now looks more like a supermodel's than an athletic man's. I'm way too skinny and I can't gain it back. I'm actually thinking about abandoning my raw foods diet for a more moderate, higher fat and higher calorie diet. I'm searching for solutions to get me back to my fighting weight but remaining RAW. Brian Powell allGoode Organics 215-242-1133 - office 215-313-6927 - cell brian Elisabeth Braun [elisabeth.braun] Monday, September 15, 2003 5:33 PM rawfood [Raw Food] Re: Curious but Skeptical Hi! I don't know much about much, but I'll tell you what I do know!!! =) > many of the arguments made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, unproven, or idealistic rather than realistic. That, sadly, is true! I've read many ridiculous and contradictory statements in the raw books and some are just contrary to proven science. I'm not sure about enzymes and one author says that, when we eat cooked food, our lungs fill 2/3 with mucous! Yeah, right, like you could really survive that!! Having said that, looking beyond the hype and silliness, I see something that's basically sound. > 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? It only needs to if you have enough faith to believe in evolution. I am keenly interested in science, esp biology and chemistry and my hubby is a professional engineer - ie loads of maths and physics and neither of us can accept the evolutionary theory. It would be an unscientific mistake to base acceptance of one idea by how well it fits in with an unproven and faulty theory. The more I learn about biology, esp ecology, the more I realise there HAD to be an intelligent mind behind it all. To accept that it all came about by chance is a leap of faith that I just can't make!=) > 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? There are some but not many. That's mostly to do with the answer to the next question....!!! > 3. Why the high failure rate? For the same reason there's a high failure rate with giving up all manner of addictive things - it's just plain hard going and there's a lot of pressure in society to conform. Have you read " The Raw Secrets " by Fred Patenaude? It's quite a new publication but it goes into a lot of reasons wny people experience eternal detox and low energy etc. Worth looking at, I enjoyed it a lot.=) > 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? Because no-one knows the truth and we are all a little different with differing genetic tendancies, differing lifestyles and differing tastes. Some things hit the spot with some, others with others. Same with all diet-styles really. One thing that is true though is that, although we have the ability to digest meat etc, that does not make it an ideal food. I was reading something in a biology book the other day that talked about a certain herbivore, (I forget which but can check), who will eat her young when threatened showing she *can* physically digest meat, but that is not optimal for her!!! From my reading I understand the long-living societies are largley vegetarian including, not liberal, but very occasional animal products. The hortest lived societies are those based almost entirely on animal foods. > without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and decay. I had an interesting chat with my dentist a while back. He said that fruit juice can erode the teeth if it's still on the surface when they are cleaning, so the acid plus the friction will lead to long- term erosion. He said the way around this was simply to swill out the mouth before brusing. He also stressed that this was NOT decay, but just normal, albeit accelerated, wear. Hope there's something at least interesting in there!! hugs, Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 rawfood , Diane Law <joy2knit> wrote: > Question: > > Are we just so used to seeing so many people *nicely padded* with fat that we are no longer aware of what is truly *normal* weight. > > It occurs to me that if you are unable to regain the lost weight that perhaps you are at the optimum weight for your height and bone structure. > What happened to me was that I lost weight the first 2 years 100% raw vegan. Then I gained some back, but I couldn' gain ANY more muscle afer that no matter how hard I worked. I would work outside and it would take a week to just recover. Now that I eat 4-5 raw egg yolks per day I can gain muscle and recover quickly. Pete > Diane > > Brian Powell <brianmpowell@e...> wrote: > Elisabeth, why are you even snooping around a raw foods if > you believe all of this? There is no doubt that the only sure-fire diet > for longer life and optimal health is a low calorie diet. > > > > I've tried a bunch of " diets " over the years and Raw Foods seems to work > for me, but there are some lingering concerns that I have - in that- I > have lost A LOT of weight and kept it off. I feel great, but I am 5'11 > and now down to about 140 and my body now looks more like a supermodel's > than an athletic man's. I'm way too skinny and I can't gain it back. > > > > I'm actually thinking about abandoning my raw foods diet for a more > moderate, higher fat and higher calorie diet. I'm searching for > solutions to get me back to my fighting weight but remaining RAW. > > > > Brian Powell > > allGoode Organics > > 215-242-1133 - office > > 215-313-6927 - cell > > brian@a... > > > > > Elisabeth Braun [elisabeth.braun@n...] > Monday, September 15, 2003 5:33 PM > rawfood > [Raw Food] Re: Curious but Skeptical > > > > Hi! I don't know much about much, but I'll tell you what I do know!!! > =) > > many of the arguments made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, > unproven, or idealistic rather than realistic. > > That, sadly, is true! I've read many ridiculous and contradictory > statements in the raw books and some are just contrary to proven > science. I'm not sure about enzymes and one author says that, when > we eat cooked food, our lungs fill 2/3 with mucous! Yeah, right, > like you could really survive that!! Having said that, looking > beyond the hype and silliness, I see something that's basically sound. > > > 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? > > It only needs to if you have enough faith to believe in evolution. I > am keenly interested in science, esp biology and chemistry and my > hubby is a professional engineer - ie loads of maths and physics and > neither of us can accept the evolutionary theory. It would be an > unscientific mistake to base acceptance of one idea by how well it > fits in with an unproven and faulty theory. The more I learn about > biology, esp ecology, the more I realise there HAD to be an > intelligent mind behind it all. To accept that it all came about by > chance is a leap of faith that I just can't make!=) > > > 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? > > There are some but not many. That's mostly to do with the answer to > the next question....!!! > > > 3. Why the high failure rate? > > For the same reason there's a high failure rate with giving up all > manner of addictive things - it's just plain hard going and there's a > lot of pressure in society to conform. Have you read " The Raw > Secrets " by Fred Patenaude? It's quite a new publication but it goes > into a lot of reasons wny people experience eternal detox and low > energy etc. Worth looking at, I enjoyed it a lot.=) > > > 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? > > Because no-one knows the truth and we are all a little different with > differing genetic tendancies, differing lifestyles and differing > tastes. Some things hit the spot with some, others with others. > Same with all diet-styles really. One thing that is true though is > that, although we have the ability to digest meat etc, that does not > make it an ideal food. I was reading something in a biology book the > other day that talked about a certain herbivore, (I forget which but > can check), who will eat her young when threatened showing she *can* > physically digest meat, but that is not optimal for her!!! From my > reading I understand the long-living societies are largley vegetarian > including, not liberal, but very occasional animal products. The > hortest lived societies are those based almost entirely on animal > foods. > > > without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and decay. > > I had an interesting chat with my dentist a while back. He said that > fruit juice can erode the teeth if it's still on the surface when > they are cleaning, so the acid plus the friction will lead to long- > term erosion. He said the way around this was simply to swill out > the mouth before brusing. He also stressed that this was NOT decay, > but just normal, albeit accelerated, wear. > > Hope there's something at least interesting in there!! > > hugs, Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 rawfood , " Brian Powell " <brianmpowell@e...> wrote: > Elisabeth, why are you even snooping around a raw foods if > you believe all of this? There is no doubt that the only sure-fire diet > for longer life and optimal health is a low calorie diet. They just found out that is no longer true. They have done new studies where rats are fed on alternate days and not fed the days between for their entire lives. On the days they eat, they eat two days worth of food. Their calories are not restricted but they still lived MUCH longer than rats fed the same calories every day. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 I found Chet Day's stuff at: http://www.chetday.com/vegandietdangers.htm http://www.chetday.com/ It's all interesting.... On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Elisabeth Braun wrote: > rawfood , Diane Law <joy2knit> wrote: > > What frightening things have you heard about the Hallelujah Diet? > I've read their information but have heard nothing negative anywhere. > > There's a chap called Chet Day whose entire purpose in life seems to > be baggin vegetarians and 'proving' why we should eat meat. He esp > likes to slam the HA diet, which I confess to knowing little or > nothing about! You can find his stuff on: > www.beyondveg.com/org Don't know the exact url as I've only looked > once. I'm already convinced that veganism is the beginning of a > healthy diet and don't buy his arguments. You must make up your own > mind though. > > Love, Elisabeth=) > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 preciousspark33 What a great bone you have thrown to the forum. Your arguments are rooted in solid common sense and therefore I shall attempt to answer you in that vein. 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? For large items in evolution such as passing from a diet of fruit and vegetables to meat many millions of years are required. The lower orders on the evolutionary chain frequently have short digestive tracts and consume their own weight in a short space of time. There are also those such as certain snakes which can spend long periods between meals. Typically a carnivore has a digestive tract which is, relative to its body length, about a quarter or less that of a frugivore or herbivore. In the last five million years, primate and human digestive tracts have not changed that much. What has changed is what has been put down them. Humans are way out on a limb eating cooked food and notice how they can hardly even eat meat unless it is cooked. This is largely because their gut just cannot handle the toxins of raw meat. AS soon as you stop eating it you will notice how you feel more alert. I admit there is a short rush after eating meat but the fatigue afterwards leaves true carnivores sleeping for most of the day. I was recently reading some history surrounding Pythagoras. He was a raw foodist, belonged to a raw food group and lived to a great age. Hebrews had sects that did not eat meat. There are millions of Indians, whole sects and tribes of Asians from China to Iran who have been vegetarian. Few, I would agree, who are 100% raw. 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? 3. Why the high failure rate? I answer these two questions together. The signs are that man has long ago lost those instincts which might have guided his diet in the evolutionary pattern. There have been many of his cousins who have specialized and been made extinct when the food source was attacked by climate change. Thus man's survival has been linked to his ability to adapt, change, use his knowledge and trust his instinct a whole lot less. His environment has greatly changed and so to have his senses. Put in simple terms, getting back to raw requires more than five senses and a jungle environment. Strangely, as a medium term raw foodist by your scale, circumspection and reading the experiences of others have steered me clear of many of the pitfalls that strike others. The writers of recent years have made it many times more easy to succeed with a raw diet. I suggest, and you may think me fanciful, that the essential knowledge to be successful on a raw diet has not been as accessible as it is now and the numbers of successes should now rapidly expand along with a lower failure rate. 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? There are as many opinions on how to eat as there are recipes for cooking. Until human knowledge is complete this proliferation will only increase. Each great leaner has a different guru etc. Having said that the knowledge of others is necessary requisite to getting diet right, I suggest reading the following three books in the order I put them. I suspect that you may well have read them already by the sources you quote. 1. Given your scientific background, " Eat to Live " by Dr. Eric Fuhrman will give you a lot of scientific foundation for a raw diet. Dr. Fuhrman is not 100% raw. He never explains the destruction that takes place when vegetables are steamed. Nor does he explain how any plant is better for eating when cooked. However, he explains so much of the human physiology that this work is an excellent primer. 2. Frederic Paternaude's " Raw Secrets " is written by a serious raw food practitioner and is abounding with sound counsel. 3. David Wolfe's Sun Food Success System, starting at his chapter on The Secrets Revealed at page 158 I think, is the eye opener to making the transition to raw food. His philosophy which abounds is a matter of palette. Those eminent people aside, I offer my humble contribution by saying that clearing out your previous diet with a good fast before you start will help to get you off on the right foot. Peter preciousspark33 [preciousspark33] 11 September 2003 20:40 rawfood [Raw Food] Curious but Skeptical I first heard about the raw diet several years ago, but after doing some research, I kept running into the BeyondVeg site and it convinced me not to try it. I come from a very scientific-minded family and many of the arguments made in favor of raw foodism are faulty, unproven, or idealistic rather than realistic. That said, I've been seeing more and more people join this movement, and it makes me have second thoughts about how quickly I dismissed it. There are a few questions that I have yet to find a satisfying answer to. I will post them here, and if anyone could help answer them (with concrete evidence or examples, rather than guesses or hypotheses) I would be very appreciative. Also, I am assuming this diet is usually vegan as well, so that assumption will be present in my questions. 1. How does this diet make sense in terms of evolution? -Most produce, especially fruit, is nothing like it was thousands (much less millions) of years ago; the fruit has been cultivated to have unnatural amounts of sugar. I've read several experiences where people on high fruit diets experience mineral deficiencies, teeth problems, and " sugar highs, " which certainly would not be characteristic of our true diets. Moreover, we have been documented as eating meat for over 2 million years. As far as I know, there are no raw vegan societies either in the present or in history, and there is no record of humans having been frugivorous or vegan any time in our evolutionary history. 2. Where are all the long-term raw fooders? Since many deficiencies don't show up for many years, the pool of short-term raw fooders (5-10 years) is unreliable to base any conclusions abou the diet. The long-term proponents that I know of (T.C. Fry, Shelton) died at relatively young ages of suspicious causes. If this diet results in perfect health and longevity, wouldn't it seem that there would be many 120, 130, or 140 year old raw fooders with impeccable strength and stamina for their age? This diet is not " new, " so certainly there would be time for someone practicing the diet to have lived a long, undiseased life. I have not heard of such cases. 3. Why the high failure rate? In observing some of the raw food (especially raw vegan) support boards, I've seen many people whose health has declined and they eventually abandoned the diet. Initially, it appears that people do great, but eventually they run into problems (the most common I've seen are chronic diarrhea, low energy, fatigue, and hormonal imbalances in women). I heard some scary things about the health of those on the Hallelujah Diet. Why is this and how can it be avoided? 4. Why are there so many differing opinions? From what I've read, some advocate a high-fruit vegan diet, like Doug Graham; others declare that animal food is necessary for health (Chet Day, Stanley Bass); others only advocate a high percentage of raw. Beyond that, the findings of people like Weston A. Price/Sally Fallon suggest that the longest-lived, healthiest societies are not all raw or vegan, but include liberal amounts of animal fat and fermented products. Those are my main questions. Right now, what concerns me is how to adequately form this diet (especially if it is vegan) without relying on super- sweet hybrid fruits, without developing a deficiency like zinc or iron, and without suffering health problems like tooth erosion and decay. I just haven't seen enough positive, long-term results to make up my mind. Thanks for your time & thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 rawfood , " Brian Powell " <brianmpowell@e...> wrote: > Elisabeth, why are you even snooping around a raw foods if > you believe all of this? I never said anything that opposed the raw diet - sorry if you thought I did! What I did say is that some raw authors have been sa guilty of writing nonsense and even scare tactics as meat-pushing ones have! I've been personally interested in the raw diet for years! I'm vegan and high raw most of the time and wouldn't change that, except perhaps to increase the raw! Hope that clarifies! Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 rawfood , alreadyherenow <no_reply> wrote: > They just found out that is no longer true. They have done new > studies where rats are fed on alternate days and not fed the days > between for their entire lives. On the days they eat, they eat two > days worth of food. Their calories are not restricted but they still > lived MUCH longer than rats fed the same calories every day. But rats are not humans - their physiology is SO different. I guess it would take a study of global magnitude and several decades to produce any really reliable answers for humans, but I think keeping calories relatively low, (ie being balanced but not indulgent), is a good idea. What do others think?? Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 rawfood , " Brian Powell " <brianmpowell@e...> wrote: >> I'm actually thinking about abandoning my raw foods diet for a more > moderate, higher fat and higher calorie diet. I'm searching for > solutions to get me back to my fighting weight but remaining RAW. Brian, I wondered if Stephen Arlin's " Raw Power " had been any use to use to you? I guess you've probably got it but I thought I'd mention it in case you'd missed that one and it would help.=) BW Elisabeth=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 rawfood , " Elisabeth Braun " <elisabeth.braun@n...> wrote: > rawfood , alreadyherenow <no_reply> wrote: > > They just found out that is no longer true. They have done new > > studies where rats are fed on alternate days and not fed the days > > between for their entire lives. On the days they eat, they eat two > > days worth of food. Their calories are not restricted but they > still > > lived MUCH longer than rats fed the same calories every day. > > But rats are not humans - their physiology is SO different. Yes, but the FACT is that many studies that apply to rats ALSO apply to humans. I was replying to someones post saying that the only proven method for live extension is limiting calories. That person was ALSO refering to rat studies. Also it makes sense considering how we would eat in nature. Most animals don't get a steady supply of food. They eat a lot when they CAN and inbetween when food is unavailable, they obviously don't eat. Many don't have the luxury of eating whenever they want. <<I guess > it would take a study of global magnitude and several decades to > produce any really reliable answers for humans, but I think keeping > calories relatively low, (ie being balanced but not indulgent), is a > good idea. What do others think??>> Why? The only evidence for this is rat studies and you don't seem to think those are valid. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 16, 2003 Report Share Posted September 16, 2003 keeping > > calories relatively low, (ie being balanced but not indulgent), is > a > > good idea. What do others think??>> > > Why? The only evidence for this is rat studies and you don't seem to > think those are valid. I was thiking more on the lines of the human suffering from obesity and related diseases. E.=) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2003 Report Share Posted October 8, 2003 In a message dated 9/15/03 8:31:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, mroswell writes: > I found Chet Day's stuff at: > http://www.chetday.com/vegandietdangers.htm > http://www.chetday.com/ > > It's all interesting.... What's REALLY interesting is that he used to work for Hallelujah Acres, and in fact put out a book about it (while he was there). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 9, 2003 Report Share Posted October 9, 2003 Also interesting that Chet doesn't look all that healthy. My dad is a 65 year old long distance runner, who practices calorie restriction (although not 100% raw) and looks years younger then Chet. --- bearscats wrote: > In a message dated 9/15/03 8:31:08 PM Eastern > Daylight Time, > mroswell writes: > > > I found Chet Day's stuff at: > > http://www.chetday.com/vegandietdangers.htm > > http://www.chetday.com/ > > > > It's all interesting.... > > What's REALLY interesting is that he used to work > for Hallelujah Acres, and > in fact put out a book about it (while he was > there). > The New with improved product search 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.