Guest guest Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 Good morning, The raw food diet is discussed (bashed) on this science website that I read regularly. I've responded to this author on other subjects and his tone is quite a bit more civil when he gives direct responses. This article doesn't show much positive or objective consideration of the topic. I'd like to respond but I'm a little busy right now with a job change. Anyone else interested in providing this guy with better data? http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/060704_bad_raw_food.html Thanks. btw My new job will have me telecommuting fulltime from my home for a Seattle company. It's likely that I'll be out to visit in the near future. Nick Hein Morgantown, WV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 Hi Nick, Thanks for the post. I read the article, and the fellow certainly does do an admirable job mixing himself up, while torturing the issue and the more well-informed readers. His article is a testament to the degree of confusion surrounding natural health in the civilized- human world. It is nice to see that the site allows one to respond to the author in an email. Is that how you responded to him before, and would now, if you had time? For the sake of organizing my thoughts on paper, I'll give it a shot at presenting him with some organized, sensical information on raw food, keeping in mind his civility. It is frustrating to read such a large, disorganized, and misleading collection of facts and considerations being used to make conclusions about the raw food diet. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2006 Report Share Posted July 5, 2006 The author touches on some valid points but misses others. I wonder if he's John Dvorak in disguise? " Most commercial chicken and a good deal of beef and pork, sadly, are loaded with bacteria and parasites. " This is accurate but not precise. In fact pretty much all commercial meat of any kind is loaded with bacteria due to sloppy processing, and the non-commercial stuff is probably just as bad. Read " Slaughterhouse " for tales of parasites. I knew a guy who worked fishing boats in Alaskan waters for fifteen years who told me stories about the ecto- and endo-parasites that riddle fish, too. *cough* *cough* Pfiesteria *cough*. Sure, cooking tends to eliminate bacteria, but how many carnies really cook their meat? Years ago at a company picnic, a salescritter jackass took control of the grill and refused to cook my alloted steak past the raw+bleeding point. Lots of people like their meat effectively raw, and even those who don't are far from perfect - witness the Jack-in-the-Box events of 1993. A macrobiotic diet includes fish, right? As such it may be healthy in comparison to a mammal-based diet, but only relatively. He does touch on the enzyme thing. I find the word bandied about constantly in raw circles, but I've yet to find any science listing them and describing the metabolic differences between raw and cooked plant enzymes. I'm not saying that there isn't a difference - just that I haven't read a clear discourse on the topic. As for the sprouts/green onions thing, I haven't read extensively but do wonder if the contamination issue is really any worse than with other foods. > Good morning, > The raw food diet is discussed (bashed) on this science website that I > read regularly. I've responded to this author on other subjects and > his tone is quite a bit more civil when he gives direct responses. > This article doesn't show much positive or objective consideration of > the topic. I'd like to respond but I'm a little busy right now with a > job change. Anyone else interested in providing this guy with better > data? > > http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/060704_bad_raw_food.html > > Thanks. > btw My new job will have me telecommuting fulltime from my home for a > Seattle company. It's likely that I'll be out to visit in the near > future. > > Nick Hein > Morgantown, WV Visit the Seattle Raw Foods Community: http://rawseattle.org > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 Hi Robert. When you do, would you please share your letter with us? Helen Robert Rust wrote: > ... > > For the sake of organizing my thoughts on paper, I'll give it a shot > at presenting him with some organized, sensical information on raw > food, keeping in mind his civility. It is frustrating to read such a > large, disorganized, and misleading collection of facts and > considerations being used to make conclusions about the raw food > diet. > > Robert > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 I'll have to check the actual amounts, but I believe raw pumpkin seeds are an excellent, reliable source of zinc, and I suspect there are others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 Robert, You can either send your message to him directly or post it in the forum. I believe I posted directly to his email (linked under his name on the byline) last time. If you do so I think it might be a good idea to cc the Dan Stone (ceo) of Imaginova - the parent brand. Imaginova is aware that the American market is underserved by real science reporting, but that providers aren't doin enough to satisfy consumers who want verifiable facts. Thanks, Nick morgantown, wv - Robert Rust RawSeattle Wednesday, July 05, 2006 5:35 PM [RawSeattle] Re: Raw Food bashing on Live Science Hi Nick, Thanks for the post. I read the article, and the fellow certainly does do an admirable job mixing himself up, while torturing the issue and the more well-informed readers. His article is a testament to the degree of confusion surrounding natural health in the civilized- human world. It is nice to see that the site allows one to respond to the author in an email. Is that how you responded to him before, and would now, if you had time? For the sake of organizing my thoughts on paper, I'll give it a shot at presenting him with some organized, sensical information on raw food, keeping in mind his civility. It is frustrating to read such a large, disorganized, and misleading collection of facts and considerations being used to make conclusions about the raw food diet. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2006 Report Share Posted July 6, 2006 I've long been curious about metals and metalloids in foods. Some (eg. calcium and of course silicon) are fairly ubiquitous in soil, but others like copper, zinc, and selenium would seem to be much less common - it'd be interesting to read a study of soil constituents across regions. > I'll have to check the actual amounts, but I believe raw pumpkin seeds > are an excellent, reliable source of zinc, and I suspect there are > others. 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.