Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 I agree, Janie, and I appreciate your sharing this, a request from your heart. Erica, honestly, I observe throughout much of your writing here a great rage within you. I mean no judgment nor disrespect in saying this ... throughout the majority of my life, I, too, was filled with unresolved feelings -- pain, sadness, etc. -- that left me in a state of rage. And SO many of my interactions with people were characterized by that rage. Almost continually, my words and body language were an almost endlessly tragic expression of my own unmet needs. I wonder whether you might be willing to explore inwardly, whether here and/or elsewhere, so that you can learn to distinguish between the content you wish to share and the rage in which it is often wrapped. Best, Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of bentsmom Tuesday, July 10, 2007 9:07 AM rawfood [Raw Food] Re: Reality Check (formerly: bored with raw) " I have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . Erica, I'm living the natural hygienist lifestyle...just for your information, I do NOT look like crap!!!! I do NOT have brittle dry hair. Actually, my hair dresser of 20 years has told me, my hair is the healthiest she has ever seen it. I have reversed a B-12 deficiency since changing to this lifestyle. I really do not understand why you continually lash out and insult others in this way. I would appreciate being treated in the respectful way others in this group treat you. Please & Thank you!! Janie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Then what do you suppose is the problem with those that are hygienist and/or 80-10-10 and do " look (and probably feel like crap) " ? That do have vitamin defeciencies? do you think they are making it up? Still going thru detox? Belinda > > " I have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound > almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, > with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing > wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . > > Erica, > I'm living the natural hygienist lifestyle...just for your > information, I do NOT look like crap!!!! I do NOT have brittle dry > hair. Actually, my hair dresser of 20 years has told me, my hair is > the healthiest she has ever seen it. I have reversed a B-12 deficiency > since changing to this lifestyle. > > I really do not understand why you continually lash out and insult > others in this way. I would appreciate being treated in the respectful > way others in this group treat you. > > Please & Thank you!! > Janie > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Janie wrote: " I have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . Erica, I'm living the natural hygienist lifestyle... just for your information, I do NOT look like crap!!!! I do NOT have brittle dry hair. Actually, my hair dresser of 20 years has told me, my hair is the healthiest she has ever seen it. I have reversed a B-12 deficiency since changing to this lifestyle. I really do not understand why you continually lash out and insult others in this way. I would appreciate being treated in the respectful way others in this group treat you. Please & Thank you!! Janie Janie, I NEVER SAID you looked like crap. Not once. I said SOME natural hygienists do. Maybe I don't understand why you wanted to see an insult that was clearly not there, just to have reason to jump on someone. I do not " continually lash out and insult others in this way " . I don't understand why some people in a raw foods group that supposedly embraces many different raw influences (as indicates on the front page) continually puts down any other path to raw but one single extreme one that does not work for everyone. Did you even read my post or do you just not like me because I challenge what you like to believe? Please & Thank you! Erica Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Mail Beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Elchanan wrote: I agree, Janie, and I appreciate your sharing this, a request from your heart. Erica, honestly, I observe throughout much of your writing here a great rage within you. I mean no judgment nor disrespect in saying this ... throughout the majority of my life, I, too, was filled with unresolved feelings -- pain, sadness, etc. -- that left me in a state of rage. And SO many of my interactions with people were characterized by that rage. Almost continually, my words and body language were an almost endlessly tragic expression of my own unmet needs. I wonder whether you might be willing to explore inwardly, whether here and/or elsewhere, so that you can learn to distinguish between the content you wish to share and the rage in which it is often wrapped. Best, Elchanan Elchanan, I am sorry for your experiences. Please don't project your experiences on me - is that too much to ask here? I can assure you my main concern is that people are given a balanced view of the raw diet and not just one single perspective, as you often uphold. I honestly sense (and have had this conversation with others in this group, in private emails) a great deal of ego and condescenscion in your posts. I would urge you to let go of that a bit in effort to offer others the best information possible and promoting your opinions as fact. After all, it is their health. I treat people fairly and have many private requests for recipes or other books that of course are systematically ignored on this monolopolized forum. A word of wisdom would be that if you are not insecure with your chosen select path, you will allow other topics to be discussed and respected as well as they will be no threat to you and your opinion. Thanks for the opportunity to address this, Erica Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Mail Beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 p.s. To reiterate, you definitely can hear " upset " in my writings at times, but to use the term " rage " is just another way to condescend to someone, a roundabout way to dismantle their statements. Feeling upset can be justified. Ponder that. Instead of focusing on that as another way of silencing any dissenting views to your opinion, perhaps consider WHY someone who is otherwise not upset MIGHT be upset about some of the behavior and biases in this forum, Elchanan (and Janie). It might be more productive and constructive, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Belinda, First, to whom to you refer? Without knowing what you are talking about, well ... we cannot know what you are talking about. Second, we must always consider where each person began. What lies behind us contributes to who we are now. Best, Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of Belinda Tuesday, July 10, 2007 11:42 AM rawfood [Raw Food] Re: Reality Check (formerly: bored with raw) Then what do you suppose is the problem with those that are hygienist and/or 80-10-10 and do " look (and probably feel like crap) " ? That do have vitamin defeciencies? do you think they are making it up? Still going thru detox? Belinda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 I have to agree with Janet on most of this. Good post. Especially the part about one person knowing it all or having all the answers. Alot of religious followers have met their doom believing their leader had all the answers. I also believe that if anyone wants to go raw in anyway, they are many steps toward health than the SAD that they are moving away from. If they want their food pretty and interesting, so what. It is still a far superior diet than SAD. Just because it is not endorsed by Douglas Grahm doesn't make it a bad way of eating and living. For me, I would rather eat more simply. Because I need to not focus on food so much. The only reason I have been interested in the 80-10-10 diet is because, I like all the fruit. It isn't because I think it is more healthy, because as of yet, I don't believe that it is. At least not long term. I do believe it to be a great way to get away from SAD. I am especially concerned about this diet if it makes women stop haveing their menstrual cycles. I just do not believe that is normal or healthy. I know of no evidence that healthy women have ever not bled during their monthly cycles. Just because animals do not cycle as humans, doesn't make it unhealthy for humans. We are not now or have ever been animals. We cannot look at the animal world and how they live or thrive and apply the same to humans. As far as humans and what is natural for them to eat, I think that would have depended on where they lived. The Eskimos would have consumed very little vegetation for the growing season would have been so short. I would say their main diet would have been meat and probably high in fat to keep them warm. As opposed to those in tropical areas, that would probably have consumed a lot of fruit and likely fish. The American Indians probably consumed a greater variety of things because they moved around a lot. I know there are still people that still live very primitive. And they may not suffer from our western world diseases, but we don't suffer from theirs either. They have their own health problems that they have to deal with. I also find it odd that if someone posts that they eat something that is not suppose to digest well or be healthy to eat, and the body does just fine with it, then the remark is that the body has just adapted itself to the " bad " diet and you don't know you are really having problems. Yet if one posts of what is considered a healthy diet, and feels good on it, no problems, then it is assumed the body is healthy. However if the body on the so called, healthy diet, is not respoding well or comfortably, then it is called detox. But if the body responds the same on the so called, unhealthy diet, then it is due to the unhealthy diet. There is a lot posted on the 80-10-10 diet, but I have not found anyone that has been eating this way, totally for a long period of time. I know Douglas Grahm says that he has eaten this way for years, but the general public has not known about it long enough to try it to see if they are going to suffer health problems because of it. For me, I will wait and see about this wonder diet. I want to see people from both genders of all ages and all walks of life from all climates, eat and live this way for several years. I want to see many, many more testimonies. I have seen some great sounding ones on this diet(usually by those that have done it for a short time) and I have read some very bad ones on this diet too. Some down right scarey. I advise all interested in this diet to look up info of all those that have tried this. And not just the ones that say they are doing great on it. For now and for me, I will continue to eat mostly raw, but it will be a greater variety of foods for me. Though it will include lots of fruit when I can get good, ripe fruit. It will be organic when I can get it and I can afford it. Belinda > Janet, > I'll be sure to try to remember to sign my posts. I don't always because it says " School Of RAWk posted: " before my typing... > > I never said that getting people off animals is all there is to know about food. Far from that. I agree. But I do think it should be the #1 outreach effort priority, not getting others to go all raw, necessarily, unless they want to or are sick. > > I have read and own a LOT on natural hygiene, including a lot of Herbert Shelton's stuff. Fit For Life covered a lot, plus there are many other resources. I love a lot of the concepts and think it's great people abide by a lot of them. > > Other things about natural hygiene are pretty ridiculous. I don't believe any one " guru " is 100% right, period. Because they are not. I have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . NH isn't frustrating to me in the least, the blanket approach, insisting that ALL raw vegans should be 8/1/1 is not so much frustrating but of concern to me (and others), especially in a supposed raw foods and not natural hygiene group. I'd actually encourage you to read up outside of natural hygiene to see it's critiques and why others may actually thrive less on it, and more on more balanced raw vegan diets. Pretty much all raw vegan diets are natural, so I don't disagree that " nature knows best " . Nature knowing best and Doug Graham knowing best are 2 different things, though, Janet. ;-) > > You want me to clarify the following statements: > > High raw and for some > > > all raw (but not necessarily 100% unless personally > > > desired) is optimal within a vegan diet. Within > > > that, eating simpler is of course ideal > > Well, that is exactly what I meant, but I'll say it again. Within the vegan diet, the more raw you are the better, with " ideal " hovering between 80 and 100%, depending on the person. Inside of that, the simpler meals are the more ideal they are for digestion, etc. That is true, sure. > > What part of the following statement about more creative foods like raw pasta with marinara, etc or raw brownies, isn't clear? I could clarify, but I'd probably be just repeating myself as I'm not sure how much simpler I can write the following: > > but to hint that his food is not healthy or ideal > > > is crazy. It is all raw vegan organic food, just > > > presented more creatively > > Thanks, > Erica > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. > Visit the Auto Green Center. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Goodness, she didn't say you looked like crap. She didn't even say that all natuaral hygeinest look like crap. She just said she had seen some that did. Just like we have all said that we have seen raw foodist that look very unhealthy. Very skinny, pale, weak looking. Doesn't mean that they all do. Belinda > > " I have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound > almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, > with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing > wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . > > Erica, > I'm living the natural hygienist lifestyle...just for your > information, I do NOT look like crap!!!! I do NOT have brittle dry > hair. Actually, my hair dresser of 20 years has told me, my hair is > the healthiest she has ever seen it. I have reversed a B-12 deficiency > since changing to this lifestyle. > > I really do not understand why you continually lash out and insult > others in this way. I would appreciate being treated in the respectful > way others in this group treat you. > > Please & Thank you!! > Janie > > rawfood , School Of Rawk <schoolofrawk@> wrote: > > > > Janet, > > I'll be sure to try to remember to sign my posts. I don't always > because it says " School Of RAWk posted: " before my typing... > > > > I never said that getting people off animals is all there is to > know about food. Far from that. I agree. But I do think it should be > the #1 outreach effort priority, not getting others to go all raw, > necessarily, unless they want to or are sick. > > > > I have read and own a LOT on natural hygiene, including a lot of > Herbert Shelton's stuff. Fit For Life covered a lot, plus there are > many other resources. I love a lot of the concepts and think it's > great people abide by a lot of them. > > > > Other things about natural hygiene are pretty ridiculous. I don't > believe any one " guru " is 100% right, period. Because they are not. I > have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound > almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, > with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing > wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . NH isn't frustrating > to me in the least, the blanket approach, insisting that ALL raw > vegans should be 8/1/1 is not so much frustrating but of concern to me > (and others), especially in a supposed raw foods and not natural > hygiene group. I'd actually encourage you to read up outside of > natural hygiene to see it's critiques and why others may actually > thrive less on it, and more on more balanced raw vegan diets. Pretty > much all raw vegan diets are natural, so I don't disagree that " nature > knows best " . Nature knowing best and Doug Graham knowing best are 2 > different things, though, Janet. ;-) > > > > You want me to clarify the following statements: > > > > High raw and for some > > > > all raw (but not necessarily 100% unless personally > > > > desired) is optimal within a vegan diet. Within > > > > that, eating simpler is of course ideal > > > > Well, that is exactly what I meant, but I'll say it again. Within > the vegan diet, the more raw you are the better, with " ideal " hovering > between 80 and 100%, depending on the person. Inside of that, the > simpler meals are the more ideal they are for digestion, etc. That is > true, sure. > > > > What part of the following statement about more creative foods > like raw pasta with marinara, etc or raw brownies, isn't clear? I > could clarify, but I'd probably be just repeating myself as I'm not > sure how much simpler I can write the following: > > > > but to hint that his food is not healthy or ideal > > > > is crazy. It is all raw vegan organic food, just > > > > presented more creatively > > > > Thanks, > > Erica > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. > > Visit the Auto Green Center. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 You trimmed off the posts that was on my post about this. It was in reference to Janies's posts that was in reference to Erica's post. Belinda > Belinda, > > First, to whom to you refer? Without knowing what you are talking about, > well ... we cannot know what you are talking about. > > Second, we must always consider where each person began. What lies behind us > contributes to who we are now. > > Best, > Elchanan > _____ > > rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of > Belinda > Tuesday, July 10, 2007 11:42 AM > rawfood > [Raw Food] Re: Reality Check (formerly: bored with raw) > > > Then what do you suppose is the problem with those that are hygienist > and/or 80-10-10 and do " look (and probably feel like crap) " ? That do > have vitamin defeciencies? > do you think they are making it up? Still going thru detox? > > Belinda > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 rawfood , " Belinda " <MistyBlueTN wrote: > > Goodness, she didn't say you looked like crap. She didn't even say > that all natuaral hygeinest look like crap. She just said she had > seen some that did. > > Just like we have all said that we have seen raw foodist that look > very unhealthy. Very skinny, pale, weak looking. Doesn't mean that > they all do. > > Belinda > >Thank you Belinda! Exactly. Erica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Oh my, this should have said that " I have to agree with Erica " I picked up the wrong name. Belinda > I have to agree with Janet on most of this. Good post. > > Especially the part about one person knowing it all or having all the > answers. Alot of religious followers have met their doom believing > their leader had all the answers. > > I also believe that if anyone wants to go raw in anyway, they are > many steps toward health than the SAD that they are moving away from. > > If they want their food pretty and interesting, so what. It is still > a far superior diet than SAD. Just because it is not endorsed by > Douglas Grahm doesn't make it a bad way of eating and living. > For me, I would rather eat more simply. Because I need to not focus > on food so much. > > The only reason I have been interested in the 80-10-10 diet is > because, I like all the fruit. It isn't because I think it is more > healthy, because as of yet, I don't believe that it is. At least not > long term. I do believe it to be a great way to get away from SAD. > > I am especially concerned about this diet if it makes women stop > haveing their menstrual cycles. > I just do not believe that is normal or healthy. I know of no > evidence that healthy women have ever not bled during their monthly > cycles. Just because animals do not cycle as humans, doesn't make it > unhealthy for humans. > We are not now or have ever been animals. We cannot look at the > animal world and how they live or thrive and apply the same to humans. > > As far as humans and what is natural for them to eat, I think that > would have depended on where they lived. The Eskimos would have > consumed very little vegetation for the growing season would have > been so short. I would say their main diet would have been meat and > probably high in fat to keep them warm. As opposed to those in > tropical areas, that would probably have consumed a lot of fruit and > likely fish. > The American Indians probably consumed a greater variety of things > because they moved around a lot. > > I know there are still people that still live very primitive. And > they may not suffer from our western world diseases, but we don't > suffer from theirs either. They have their own health problems that > they have to deal with. > > I also find it odd that if someone posts that they eat something that > is not suppose to digest well or be healthy to eat, and the body does > just fine with it, then the remark is that the body has just adapted > itself to the " bad " diet and you don't know you are really having > problems. > Yet if one posts of what is considered a healthy diet, and feels good > on it, no problems, then it is assumed the body is healthy. > > However if the body on the so called, healthy diet, is not respoding > well or comfortably, then it is called detox. > > But if the body responds the same on the so called, unhealthy diet, > then it is due to the unhealthy diet. > > There is a lot posted on the 80-10-10 diet, but I have not found > anyone that has been eating this way, totally for a long period of > time. I know Douglas Grahm says that he has eaten this way for > years, but the general public has not known about it long enough to > try it to see if they are going to suffer health problems because of > it. > > For me, I will wait and see about this wonder diet. I want to see > people from both genders of all ages and all walks of life from all > climates, eat and live this way for several years. > > I want to see many, many more testimonies. I have seen some great > sounding ones on this diet(usually by those that have done it for a > short time) and I have read some very bad ones on this diet too. > Some down right scarey. I advise all interested in this diet to look > up info of all those that have tried this. And not just the ones > that say they are doing great on it. > > For now and for me, I will continue to eat mostly raw, but it will be > a greater variety of foods for me. Though it will include lots of > fruit when I can get good, ripe fruit. It will be organic when I can > get it and I can afford it. > > > Belinda > > > > > Janet, > > I'll be sure to try to remember to sign my posts. I don't always > because it says " School Of RAWk posted: " before my typing... > > > > I never said that getting people off animals is all there is to > know about food. Far from that. I agree. But I do think it should be > the #1 outreach effort priority, not getting others to go all raw, > necessarily, unless they want to or are sick. > > > > I have read and own a LOT on natural hygiene, including a lot of > Herbert Shelton's stuff. Fit For Life covered a lot, plus there are > many other resources. I love a lot of the concepts and think it's > great people abide by a lot of them. > > > > Other things about natural hygiene are pretty ridiculous. I don't > believe any one " guru " is 100% right, period. Because they are not. I > have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound > almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, > with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing > wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . NH isn't frustrating > to me in the least, the blanket approach, insisting that ALL raw > vegans should be 8/1/1 is not so much frustrating but of concern to > me (and others), especially in a supposed raw foods and not natural > hygiene group. I'd actually encourage you to read up outside of > natural hygiene to see it's critiques and why others may actually > thrive less on it, and more on more balanced raw vegan diets. Pretty > much all raw vegan diets are natural, so I don't disagree > that " nature knows best " . Nature knowing best and Doug Graham knowing > best are 2 different things, though, Janet. ;-) > > > > You want me to clarify the following statements: > > > > High raw and for some > > > > all raw (but not necessarily 100% unless personally > > > > desired) is optimal within a vegan diet. Within > > > > that, eating simpler is of course ideal > > > > Well, that is exactly what I meant, but I'll say it again. Within > the vegan diet, the more raw you are the better, with " ideal " > hovering between 80 and 100%, depending on the person. Inside of > that, the simpler meals are the more ideal they are for digestion, > etc. That is true, sure. > > > > What part of the following statement about more creative foods > like raw pasta with marinara, etc or raw brownies, isn't clear? I > could clarify, but I'd probably be just repeating myself as I'm not > sure how much simpler I can write the following: > > > > but to hint that his food is not healthy or ideal > > > > is crazy. It is all raw vegan organic food, just > > > > presented more creatively > > > > Thanks, > > Erica > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative > vehicles. > > Visit the Auto Green Center. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 It is important to keep in mind that people following a natural hygiene lifestyle who " look like crap " are likely in a certain phase of their path of health. Symptoms are messages from within the body and today's society does not embrace symptoms, they cover them up with various treatments. The difference between one who practices natural hygiene who looks UNhealthy, and one who practices SAD and looks healthy, is that the NHist's body has the vitality to rid itself of foreign matter. They will exhibit symptoms. SAD eaters's bodies are too busy trying to digest matter continuously and therefore little time to divert attention to " cleaning house " . They are walking time-bombs, which is why there are athletes who have dropped dead from heart attacks. (A heart attack is a symptom of dis-ease.) Also, many symptoms come to rise during a fast. The body is in a state of relative rest and can now begin to rapidly cleanse, build, and repair the body. If all people practiced natural hygiene and lived in a natural environment that supports health (not northern Alaska or Kansas where bananas don't grow), those symptoms would rarely materialize, just as it is rare to see truly wild animals getting sick. So, all people beginning a raw food lifestyle will exhibit symptoms, both positive and negative. Just as SAD eaters accumulate problems over time, it takes time to undo those issues, and the body has its own agenda, separate from our consciousness. Janet rawfood , " Belinda " <MistyBlueTN wrote: Goodness, she didn't say you looked like crap. She didn't even say that all natuaral hygeinest look like crap. She just said she had seen some that did. Just like we have all said that we have seen raw foodist that look very unhealthy. Very skinny, pale, weak looking. Doesn't mean that they all do. Belinda " I have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . Erica, I'm living the natural hygienist lifestyle...just for your information, I do NOT look like crap!!!! I do NOT have brittle dry hair. Actually, my hair dresser of 20 years has told me, my hair is the healthiest she has ever seen it. I have reversed a B-12 deficiency since changing to this lifestyle. I really do not understand why you continually lash out and insult others in this way. I would appreciate being treated in the respectful way others in this group treat you. Please & Thank you!! Janie rawfood , School Of Rawk <schoolofrawk@> wrote: Janet, I'll be sure to try to remember to sign my posts. I don't always because it says " School Of RAWk posted: " before my typing... I never said that getting people off animals is all there is to know about food. Far from that. I agree. But I do think it should be the #1 outreach effort priority, not getting others to go all raw, necessarily, unless they want to or are sick. I have read and own a LOT on natural hygiene, including a lot of Herbert Shelton's stuff. Fit For Life covered a lot, plus there are many other resources. I love a lot of the concepts and think it's great people abide by a lot of them. Other things about natural hygiene are pretty ridiculous. I don't believe any one " guru " is 100% right, period. Because they are not. I have also seen lots of hygienists that look like crap, but sound almost cultish when they speak. They actually think they are healthy, with their dry brittle hair and B12 deficiencies, adamantly refusing wheatgrass or juice because it's " not natural " . NH isn't frustrating to me in the least, the blanket approach, insisting that ALL raw vegans should be 8/1/1 is not so much frustrating but of concern to me (and others), especially in a supposed raw foods and not natural hygiene group. I'd actually encourage you to read up outside of natural hygiene to see it's critiques and why others may actually thrive less on it, and more on more balanced raw vegan diets. Pretty much all raw vegan diets are natural, so I don't disagree that " nature knows best " . Nature knowing best and Doug Graham knowing best are 2 different things, though, Janet. ;-) You want me to clarify the following statements: High raw and for some all raw (but not necessarily 100% unless personally desired) is optimal within a vegan diet. Within that, eating simpler is of course ideal Well, that is exactly what I meant, but I'll say it again. Within the vegan diet, the more raw you are the better, with " ideal " hovering between 80 and 100%, depending on the person. Inside of that, the simpler meals are the more ideal they are for digestion, etc. That is true, sure. What part of the following statement about more creative foods like raw pasta with marinara, etc or raw brownies, isn't clear? I could clarify, but I'd probably be just repeating myself as I'm not sure how much simpler I can write the following: but to hint that his food is not healthy or ideal is crazy. It is all raw vegan organic food, just presented more creatively Thanks, Erica Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the Auto Green Center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 And how can you be so sure that these NH'ers are going thru detox? Just because they are NH'ers? If you are so in tune with your body, then you must know that the body has pain discomfort for a very good reason. It is to let us know something is wrong. We have pain when we break a leg, so we will not continue using it and doing further damage. Now I know the body detoxes and has it's discomforts doing it. Ask any alcaholic or drug addict. Or even someone that suddenly quits consuming caffeine and experiances the infamous " caffeine head ache " . All of which will go away once the body adjust to no longer having these chemicals in it. So while some body discomforts may very well be some kind of detox, you cannot always assume that it is. Your body also has pain and discomfort because you are doing something to it or not doing something to it, that it needs. It could very well be for some of these NH'ers, that the crappy way they look is due to some serious problems in the way they are treating their body. That their body is trying it's best to let them know that what ever they are doing to it, isn't good. In many ways, I see the NH'ers that obviously are not healthy, no different than the overweight junk food junkies denying that they have health problems and that it is due to their diet and lifstyle. Some from both extremes deny the fact that their diet and lifestyle is the reason for their compromised health. Compromised health, that neither will even admit that they have. Or if they do admit, that they have health problems, place blame on anything but the diet and lifestyle. NH'ers blame their problems on detox, junk food junkies blame their problems on genetics(born with bad health and/or weight problems, because their parents had bad health) Belinda > It is important to keep in mind that people following a natural > hygiene lifestyle who " look like crap " are likely in a certain phase > of their path of health. Symptoms are messages from within the body > and today's society does not embrace symptoms, they cover them up with > various treatments. The difference between one who practices natural > hygiene who looks UNhealthy, and one who practices SAD and looks > healthy, is that the NHist's body has the vitality to rid itself of > foreign matter. They will exhibit symptoms. SAD eaters's bodies are > too busy trying to digest matter continuously and therefore little > time to divert attention to " cleaning house " . They are walking > time-bombs, which is why there are athletes who have dropped dead from > heart attacks. (A heart attack is a symptom of dis-ease.) > > Also, many symptoms come to rise during a fast. The body is in a > state of relative rest and can now begin to rapidly cleanse, build, > and repair the body. If all people practiced natural hygiene and > lived in a natural environment that supports health (not northern > Alaska or Kansas where bananas don't grow), those symptoms would > rarely materialize, just as it is rare to see truly wild animals > getting sick. > > So, all people beginning a raw food lifestyle will exhibit symptoms, > both positive and negative. Just as SAD eaters accumulate problems > over time, it takes time to undo those issues, and the body has its > own agenda, separate from our consciousness. > > Janet > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Something else I forgot to add. People taking chemo treatments look alot like some of the NH'ers going through detox. But I don't think anyone on this board would think that chemo and what it does to the body is a healthy path to a healthy body. Belinda > And how can you be so sure that these NH'ers are going thru detox? > Just because they are NH'ers? > > If you are so in tune with your body, then you must know that the > body has pain discomfort for a very good reason. It is to let us > know something is wrong. > > We have pain when we break a leg, so we will not continue using it > and doing further damage. > > Now I know the body detoxes and has it's discomforts doing it. Ask > any alcaholic or drug addict. > Or even someone that suddenly quits consuming caffeine and > experiances the infamous " caffeine head ache " . All of which will go > away once the body adjust to no longer having these chemicals in it. > > So while some body discomforts may very well be some kind of detox, > you cannot always assume that it is. > > Your body also has pain and discomfort because you are doing > something to it or not doing something to it, that it needs. > > It could very well be for some of these NH'ers, that the crappy way > they look is due to some serious problems in the way they are > treating their body. That their body is trying it's best to let them > know that what ever they are doing to it, isn't good. > > In many ways, I see the NH'ers that obviously are not healthy, no > different than the overweight junk food junkies denying that they > have health problems and that it is due to their diet and lifstyle. > > Some from both extremes deny the fact that their diet and lifestyle > is the reason for their compromised health. Compromised health, that > neither will even admit that they have. Or if they do admit, that > they have health problems, place blame on anything but the diet and > lifestyle. NH'ers blame their problems on detox, junk food junkies > blame their problems on genetics(born with bad health and/or weight > problems, because their parents had bad health) > > > Belinda > > > > It is important to keep in mind that people following a natural > > hygiene lifestyle who " look like crap " are likely in a certain phase > > of their path of health. Symptoms are messages from within the body > > and today's society does not embrace symptoms, they cover them up > with > > various treatments. The difference between one who practices > natural > > hygiene who looks UNhealthy, and one who practices SAD and looks > > healthy, is that the NHist's body has the vitality to rid itself of > > foreign matter. They will exhibit symptoms. SAD eaters's bodies > are > > too busy trying to digest matter continuously and therefore little > > time to divert attention to " cleaning house " . They are walking > > time-bombs, which is why there are athletes who have dropped dead > from > > heart attacks. (A heart attack is a symptom of dis-ease.) > > > > Also, many symptoms come to rise during a fast. The body is in a > > state of relative rest and can now begin to rapidly cleanse, build, > > and repair the body. If all people practiced natural hygiene and > > lived in a natural environment that supports health (not northern > > Alaska or Kansas where bananas don't grow), those symptoms would > > rarely materialize, just as it is rare to see truly wild animals > > getting sick. > > > > So, all people beginning a raw food lifestyle will exhibit symptoms, > > both positive and negative. Just as SAD eaters accumulate problems > > over time, it takes time to undo those issues, and the body has its > > own agenda, separate from our consciousness. > > > > Janet > > > 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.