Guest guest Posted July 7, 2006 Report Share Posted July 7, 2006 Hi again folks In response to Robert (and staying on topic rather than responding to anything personal) I feel that it will be of service to the open discussion of the raw food diet to address to the basic assertion of his argument that physiologically we originated as tropical dwellers I won't argue this point However I would like to point out that Robert's subsequent leap of logic is faulty: that therefore our optimal diet is composed of primarily tropical fruit. Why is it faulty logic? Because MOST OF US DO NOT LIVE IN THE TROPICS! And for another huge reason: the fruit available today is not the same as the highly mineralized, wild fruit available when the human species originated in the tropics, etc. It is well-documented in the most recent raw-food research and thrity years of anecdotal evidence that a diet high in sweet fruit does NOT work for most of us. And despite Robert's humorous argument that because that we are biologically the same, we are all biochemically the same. In fact, as I stated before, we are each biochemically different: each us has a different ph, a different toxic load, different internal organ function, different metabolic rates, etc. Additionally, humans are also of different constitutions, or body types (see Gabriel Cousen's book Conscious Eating for an explanation of the Ayurvedic tri-dosha system and how it relates to staying balanced and healthy on a raw food diet). And we live in varying climates, have varying levels of physical activity, etc. as well. Some us do quite a well on what Robert would label a high-fat diet. We actually dare to eat nuts! The latest raw-food research shows that diets high in sweet fruits, which most of the tropical fruits, are actually promote disease by encouraging the growth of molds, yeasts, fugus and other pleomophic organisms in our bloodstreams. (See Gabriel Cousens' Rainbow Green Live-Food Cuisine for documantation). Low-glycemic diets that eliminate sweet fruits or diets that add copious amounts of greens into the diet are actually the ones that cleanse and heal our bodies. (See Cousens and Boutenko) And check this out: undermineralized fruit actually strips our bodies of valuable nutritients! Some well-known educators promote and many of us experience that by eating nutrient-dense, highly mineralized " superfoods " we actually find our deepest level of health and balance. Of course we are naturally frugivorous, but many of us do not thrive eating mostly fruit. I bet if we did a survey of people on this listserve, we would find that a variety of raw food diets-- some with more fruit, some with none and loads of greeens, some with high fat, some who knows what--work for the variety of different individuals that we are. Two fianl points: My original post questioned the eco-logic of buying imported, tropical, non-organic, expensive--and let me now add: possibly irradiated-- tropical fruit when so much local organic fruit is in season. Robert dismisses my questioning as " frivolous " and " not worth discussing " . Well, I thought that this list was about discussing various facets of the raw-food diet. And this is exactly what bugs me about how Robert expresses his views: as if they are THE TRUTH, as opposed merely his view on subject that is very much open to discussion as we are all having different experiences and joined this list to share and learn. And to be very clear on my view, I think that a diet that necesarily depends primarily on imported tropical fruit is not only unlikely to be sustainable for human health, but also very unsustainable for the health of the planet. And to me this is very much not a frivolous topic, but one of deep significance, especially as the raw food community aspires to be a model of sustaianbility. I hope that I have finally made clear my wish to engage in a lively, sometimes humorous, discussion free from personal attacks, disingenous argumants, faulty logic, innuendo, and another un-healthful communication. Rather I'm sure that the vast majority of us would prefer one where none of us claims to have a monopoly on the truth, and where a diversity of opinions and experiences are shared and valued! To all of your health, no matter how much fat or fruit you eat! Bruce, a.k.a Chef Sprout Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail Beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2006 Report Share Posted July 7, 2006 Here Here Chef Sprout!!! Such a logical and well written email. I fully agree with you Chef. Not to impune Roberts beliefs and if he does well on a fruitarian diet.. as we Aussies say... Good on ya, Robert!!! It is much healthier than the sad diet. Anyway.. I do believe that for some profound reason the human species of today need greens. I also believe that eating the fruits and vegetables in season is best. One reasons is because they are fresher. I go to farms where I can pick my own fruit and vegetables. I know that that food is living food because I just picked it. Anyway.. hello group. I am new here. My name is Diane and I am a raw foodist wanna be. I am always trying but I live with a family that is on the SAD diet and they think I am so over the top. It is very hard for me to stay 100% raw. I have a family that likes to eat out at least 3 times a week and they will not go to any of the restaurants on my list of " healthy " places to eat, much less a " raw food " restaurant. When I go to these places hungry.. I just cannot just eat a raw salad that they provide. It is just plain awful. I have an emotional eating disorder too. I really struggle with it and I just don't have the strength to overcome it when we are out at a restaurant. I am trying.. Every day I get up with the thought, " I am going to eat 100% raw today. I usually shop for the foods to eat that way.. but I have, disgracefully, thrown out so many rotting veges because we ate out and the food wasn't used. Once I eat food that is cooked I find that going back on my raw diet is so so hard for me. My cooked food cravings are so hard to overcome. Once I stay raw for at least a week, I don't have the cooked food cravings, such as bread and potatoes and pasta. I also crave chocolate. I try to buy my cooked food from the health food store and I read lables to make sure they are as healthy as posible.. but I know they are inferior to organic raw foods. However, I have only been able to stay 100% raw for one month at the most. Somehow.. I am put in a position where I have to eat cooked food. Either I am out with the family traveling and raw organic food is just to hard to get on the road, or my husband wants to go out to eat and he says things like.. " yeah.. I can't go anywhere because your on your extreme diet. " So, I feel bad and say... " let's go out. " I tell myeself.. I am going to eat only raw foods. But my resolve breaks down bit by bit and the next thing I am looking at the menu and I have this thought. " I will just eat this Salmon Fetucini this once and then I will go back on my raw diet tomorrow.. It is a lie that I tell myself... and incredulously believe everytime. Because what actually happens is after the heavy meal I get this.. Ok Today I will eat what I crave and then I will go on my diet tomorrow. Then the next day comes and I wake up craving eggs on toast. I am hungry.. so I give in to it, because all of a sudden my raw food in not at all what I feel like and that day is shot and I tell myself.. " Ok.. I will go on my diet tomorrow. " You know where this is going. It will take several days to get a hold of myself and make myself go back on my diet.. but sometimes is takes weeks!!! Sometimes only days. I am hoping that by meeting some raw foodists and getting some support. I will be able to overcome my problem.. Good health to all ... Diane On 7/6/06, Chef Sprout <chef_sprout2001 wrote: > > Hi again folks > > In response to Robert (and staying on topic rather than responding to > anything personal) > > I feel that it will be of service to the open discussion of the raw food > diet to address to the basic assertion of his argument > > that physiologically we originated as tropical dwellers > > I won't argue this point > > However I would like to point out that Robert's subsequent leap of logic > is > faulty: > > that therefore our optimal diet is composed of primarily tropical fruit. > > Why is it faulty logic? > > Because MOST OF US DO NOT LIVE IN THE TROPICS! > > And for another huge reason: the fruit available today is not the same as > the > highly mineralized, wild fruit available when the human species originated > in > the tropics, etc. > > It is well-documented in the most recent raw-food research and thrity > years of anecdotal evidence that a diet high in sweet fruit does NOT work > for > most of us. > > And despite Robert's humorous argument that because that we are > biologically the same, we are all biochemically the same. In fact, as I > stated before, we are each biochemically different: each us has a different > ph, a different toxic load, > different internal organ function, different metabolic rates, etc. > > Additionally, humans are also of different constitutions, or body types > (see Gabriel Cousen's book Conscious Eating for an explanation of the > Ayurvedic tri-dosha system and how it relates to staying balanced and > healthy on a raw food diet). > > And we live in varying climates, have varying levels of physical activity, > etc. > as well. > > Some us do quite a well on what Robert would label a high-fat diet. > > We actually dare to eat nuts! > > The latest raw-food research shows that diets high in sweet fruits, which > most > of the tropical fruits, are actually promote disease by encouraging the > growth of > molds, yeasts, fugus and other pleomophic organisms in our bloodstreams. > (See > Gabriel Cousens' Rainbow Green Live-Food Cuisine for documantation). > > Low-glycemic diets that eliminate sweet fruits or diets that add copious > amounts > of greens into the diet are actually the ones that cleanse and heal our > bodies. > (See Cousens and Boutenko) And check this out: undermineralized fruit > actually > strips our bodies of valuable nutritients! Some well-known educators > promote and > many of us experience that by eating nutrient-dense, highly mineralized > " superfoods " we actually find our deepest level of health and balance. > > Of course we are naturally frugivorous, but many of us do not thrive > eating > mostly fruit. I bet if we did a survey of people on this listserve, we > would find that a variety of raw food diets-- some with more fruit, some > with none and loads of greeens, some with high fat, some who knows > what--work for the variety of different individuals that we are. > > Two fianl points: > > My original post questioned the eco-logic of buying imported, tropical, > non-organic, expensive--and let me now add: possibly irradiated-- tropical > fruit > when so much local organic fruit is in season. Robert dismisses my > questioning > as " frivolous " and " not worth discussing " . Well, I thought that this list > was > about discussing various facets of the raw-food diet. And this is exactly > what > bugs me about how Robert expresses his views: as if they are THE TRUTH, as > opposed merely his view on subject that is very much open to discussion as > we > are all having different experiences and joined this list to share and > learn. > > And to be very clear on my view, I think that a diet that necesarily > depends primarily on imported tropical fruit is not only unlikely to be > sustainable for human health, but also very unsustainable for the health of > the planet. And to me this is very much not a frivolous topic, but one of > deep significance, especially as the raw food community aspires to be a > model of sustaianbility. > > I hope that I have finally made clear my wish to engage in a lively, > sometimes humorous, discussion free from personal attacks, disingenous > argumants, faulty logic, innuendo, and another un-healthful communication. > Rather I'm sure that the vast majority of us would prefer one where none of > us claims to have a monopoly on the truth, and where a diversity of opinions > and experiences are shared and valued! > > To all of your health, no matter how much fat or fruit you eat! > > Bruce, a.k.a Chef Sprout > > > > > > > Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail Beta. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2006 Report Share Posted July 7, 2006 _____ RawSeattle [RawSeattle ] On Behalf Of Chef Sprout Thursday, July 06, 2006 10:29 PM rawseattle [RawSeattle] Response to Robert Hi again folks In response to Robert (and staying on topic rather than responding to anything personal) I feel that it will be of service to the open discussion of the raw food diet to address to the basic assertion of his argument that physiologically we originated as tropical dwellers I won't argue this point However I would like to point out that Robert's subsequent leap of logic is faulty: that therefore our optimal diet is composed of primarily tropical fruit. Why is it faulty logic? Because MOST OF US DO NOT LIVE IN THE TROPICS! And for another huge reason: the fruit available today is not the same as the highly mineralized, wild fruit available when the human species originated in the tropics, etc. It is well-documented in the most recent raw-food research and thrity years of anecdotal evidence that a diet high in sweet fruit does NOT work for most of us. And despite Robert's humorous argument that because that we are biologically the same, we are all biochemically the same. In fact, as I stated before, we are each biochemically different: each us has a different ph, a different toxic load, different internal organ function, different metabolic rates, etc. Additionally, humans are also of different constitutions, or body types (see Gabriel Cousen's book Conscious Eating for an explanation of the Ayurvedic tri-dosha system and how it relates to staying balanced and healthy on a raw food diet). And we live in varying climates, have varying levels of physical activity, etc. as well. Some us do quite a well on what Robert would label a high-fat diet. We actually dare to eat nuts! The latest raw-food research shows that diets high in sweet fruits, which most of the tropical fruits, are actually promote disease by encouraging the growth of molds, yeasts, fugus and other pleomophic organisms in our bloodstreams. (See Gabriel Cousens' Rainbow Green Live-Food Cuisine for documantation). Low-glycemic diets that eliminate sweet fruits or diets that add copious amounts of greens into the diet are actually the ones that cleanse and heal our bodies. (See Cousens and Boutenko) And check this out: undermineralized fruit actually strips our bodies of valuable nutritients! Some well-known educators promote and many of us experience that by eating nutrient-dense, highly mineralized " superfoods " we actually find our deepest level of health and balance. Of course we are naturally frugivorous, but many of us do not thrive eating mostly fruit. I bet if we did a survey of people on this listserve, we would find that a variety of raw food diets-- some with more fruit, some with none and loads of greeens, some with high fat, some who knows what--work for the variety of different individuals that we are. Two fianl points: My original post questioned the eco-logic of buying imported, tropical, non-organic, expensive--and let me now add: possibly irradiated-- tropical fruit when so much local organic fruit is in season. Robert dismisses my questioning as " frivolous " and " not worth discussing " . Well, I thought that this list was about discussing various facets of the raw-food diet. And this is exactly what bugs me about how Robert expresses his views: as if they are THE TRUTH, as opposed merely his view on subject that is very much open to discussion as we are all having different experiences and joined this list to share and learn. And to be very clear on my view, I think that a diet that necesarily depends primarily on imported tropical fruit is not only unlikely to be sustainable for human health, but also very unsustainable for the health of the planet. And to me this is very much not a frivolous topic, but one of deep significance, especially as the raw food community aspires to be a model of sustaianbility. I hope that I have finally made clear my wish to engage in a lively, sometimes humorous, discussion free from personal attacks, disingenous argumants, faulty logic, innuendo, and another un-healthful communication. Rather I'm sure that the vast majority of us would prefer one where none of us claims to have a monopoly on the truth, and where a diversity of opinions and experiences are shared and valued! To all of your health, no matter how much fat or fruit you eat! Bruce, a.k.a Chef Sprout Get on board. You're invited to try the new Mail Beta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2006 Report Share Posted July 7, 2006 Hi Bruce, Low-glycemic diets that eliminate sweet fruits or diets that add copious amounts of greens into the diet are actually the ones that cleanse and heal our bodies. (See Cousens and Boutenko) ********** Well, one can eat lots of fruits AND lots of greens. It's not one or the other. Greens are necessary because of their high mineral content. And check this out: undermineralized fruit actually strips our bodies of valuable nutritients! ********** This is a claim I have not heard before. Can you cite a source for this? If it is true, as you say, that today's fruit has fewer minerals than that of fruit in the past, that would seem to be an argument for eating more fruit, not less. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 8, 2006 Report Share Posted July 8, 2006 Mark Hovila wrote: > Hi Bruce, > > >And check this out: undermineralized fruit actually > >strips our bodies of valuable nutritients! > Why just undermineralized fruit strips our bodies of nutritions and not refined sugar or starch, etc.? I'd say undermineralized FOOD may strip our bodies of nutritionts. > > ********** This is a claim I have not heard before. Can you cite a source > for this? If it is true, as you say, that today's fruit has fewer minerals > than that of fruit in the past > > It is true, Mark, that today's foods have less minerals than they used to. I've read that in the news a little while ago. I've been checking brix level of some fruits and vegetables and found vegetables do not fare better. Actually most of what I've found were so depressing I don't check on veggies much these days. The reason is that our top soils are very much demineralized. Helen 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.