Teeth as evidence

[Guest guest]

I've been seeing a lot of conversation about how, in antiquity, humans who ate a

plant-based diet had a lot more tooth decay than those on a meat-based diet.

Since going raw I've had to have several cavities filled and there have been

lots of not-so-positive changes in my teeth. I've been doing this for over six

months. I know, there are lots of remedies to prevent tooth decay, but that's

not what this post is about.

 

What, exactly, do these highly prevalent tooth problems say about the raw food

diet? Is it REALLY the best diet for humans if it causes oral health problems?

Without a dentist, I'd be well on my way to losing my teeth, that is for

certain.

 

Thoughts?

[Guest guest]

All you say about your diet is that you went raw. What exactly are you

eating, and how often? What do you do to clean your teeth? What are the

not-so-positive changes in your teeth?

 

 

 

Mark

 

_____

 

On Behalf Of emilyc615

Sunday, June 28, 2009 2:56 PM

 

Teeth as evidence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've been seeing a lot of conversation about how, in antiquity, humans who

ate a plant-based diet had a lot more tooth decay than those on a meat-based

diet. Since going raw I've had to have several cavities filled and there

have been lots of not-so-positive changes in my teeth. I've been doing this

for over six months. I know, there are lots of remedies to prevent tooth

decay, but that's not what this post is about.

 

What, exactly, do these highly prevalent tooth problems say about the raw

food diet? Is it REALLY the best diet for humans if it causes oral health

problems? Without a dentist, I'd be well on my way to losing my teeth, that

is for certain.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I suspect our ancestors were chewing on a lot more greens, as well as

less sweet fruits. Modern fruits have been hybridized and are quite

sweet. Also, most store-bought fruits have been picked prematurely,

which can leave them acidic (not to be confused with acid ash vs.

alkaline ash), which can contribute to eroding the teeth. I suspect

that our teeth get much of their mineralization directly from the

greens we chew (which may still be true with green juice). If oils or

dressings with with oils are used, they can coat both the teeth and

greens and prevent that mineralization. I've notices over the years

that my teeth felt much stronger when I was eating a lot of

" dry " (naked) greens (no dressings). I also noticed they felt

healthier/stronger when I was rinsing regularly with wheatgrass shots

(which can also alkalize the mouth).

 

Just a few thoughts!

 

Jeff

 

On Jun 28, 2009, at 2:56 PM, emilyc615 wrote:

 

> What, exactly, do these highly prevalent tooth problems say about

> the raw food diet? Is it REALLY the best diet for humans if it

> causes oral health problems? Without a dentist, I'd be well on my

> way to losing my teeth, that is for certain.

>

> Thoughts?

[Guest guest]

Emily:

 

Good point about often people have the same or more dental health problems when

going raw.

 

1.? Dehydrated foods are one of the toughest (like raisins, crackers, pie

crusts, any dried fruit) foods to get out from in between the teeth.

????? Just last night I went to a raw catered event with two dehydrated dishes

and everyone went from eating to a discussion group?!? As usual I was the only

one of 15 people to go to my car so I could brush and floss my teeth.? Sometimes

I have flossed in the same room with them but it hasn't changed anyone else's

behavior.? I still have more then half of my teeth at 61.? My parents lost all

or most of their teeth in their 50's, my grandparents lost all their teeth in

their 20's or 30's..

 

2. While I feel not eating meat is important to me for many reasons.? I know one

person whose Grandparents were raw and lived into their late 90's without

disability or disease until the very end of her life. Her husband basically

didn't want to live any longer after she died and he died soon after.? They ate

smoked meats/fish that he fished or hunted for.? Apparently their are low temp

ways to smoke and preserve meat that can keep them raw.

 

3.? I find it important to floss and brush after every snack or meal.?? Many

people think the health benefits from raw will also include their teeth but that

is not the case for most people.

 

Bill

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Jeff,

Imo, dental issues have little to do with lack of minerals in the diet. For

one thing, we have no basis for assuming ancient humans would prefer green

leaves over sweet-tasting and sweet-smelling fruit. It seems obvious to me

that any human whose head has not been filled with modern nutritional

pseudo-science and who has only his senses with which to select foods is

going to be choosing the sweetest, most colorful, fragrant, fuel-rich food

available. Greens do not qualify, by any stretch.

 

In modern raw fooders, eating greens may seem to help dental issues but it's

not because of 'mineralization.' Raw fooders who favor fruit tend to eat

frequently or even constantly in order to keep themselves satisfied,

especially early in transition. This makes it impossible to keep the teeth

clean. Sugar particles prevalent in fruit accumulate between the teeth

attract bacteria, whose acidic waste products erode enamel. If you add to

that situation the decision to include dental hygiene among the personal

care rituals that raw fooders typically feel the need to do less of (like

hair washing, bathing, etc.), you have a situation ripe for tooth decay.

That it happens more frequently to fruit eaters than greens-and-fats eaters

doesn't mean fruit causes it. It's the constant eating that is the problem.

People who favor greens and fats over fruit tend to eat less frequently.

Because those foods are more difficult to digest, it's possible to go many

hours without eating, much like we're used to doing when we eat cooked food.

That's why these foods are very helpful to new raw fooders.

 

I think it's normal and natural to go many hours without eating. However,

ancient humans did this on fruit, not on greens and fats. When we modern

humans try to do this, especially when we are first transitioning, we feel

" unsatisfied " . But that's not normal or natural, it's addiction. Those

feelings that we equate with lack of " satisfaction " (really lack of

numbness) are the body readjusting and cleansing itself, which it is freed

up to do when easily digest foods (fruits) make up the bulk of the diet. It

takes a long time to heal from a lifetime of eating cooked food and it's

that physical healing which allows people to eat fruit and not feel these

uncomfortable feelings, which are commonly mistaken for " hunger " , and which

lead to constant eating.

 

That doesn't mean that a person transitioning to raw food via high fruit is

destined to have dental issues. Rinsing after eating, frequent gentle

brushing and flossing can prevent most problems, even in northern dwelling

raw fooders who have nothing to eat all winter except supermarket fruit.

Incidentally, that ancient humans obviously managed without rinsing or

brushing their teeth has more to do with the quantity and frequency of meals

(in addition, perhaps, to the teeth being stronger genetically in the first

place) than any theory related to the nutrient density of ancient foods vs.

modern foods. In my wildly unpopular opinion , humans living naturally

would not have felt the need to even eat everyday, never mind multiple times

per day, so food particles would not be constantly present in the mouth.

 

The fact that your teeth feel better when you're not eating oils or salad

dressings has many possible explanations. It can't be that the oils are

preventing the absorption of minerals into the teeth because teeth have no

mechanism by which to directly absorb nutrients from the foods we eat. All

food has to be processed by the digestive tract before it can be converted

to flesh, blood and bone.

 

I have had a personal experience with a dental issue that may be helpful to

share. I have a tooth that has given me pain periodically and the diagnosis

is that it's under a 20 year old crown that needs to be replaced because the

cement underneath it has eroded. I know I'll have to have it fixed

eventually but right now the cost is the biggest inhibiting factor. In the

meantime, it has been helpful for me to use tooth pain as an indication that

I need to make changes to my diet. It has led me to make some astounding

progress, including eating less overall, eating less frequently, no fats, no

complicated meals, etc., and fasting when symptomatic. When my diet is good

and I'm getting plenty of rest, there is no pain. When I eat too much or

get too little rest, the tooth becomes inflamed. Considering all the

evidence, I can't help concluding that toxins and wastes are settling in

this weak area whenever my body's capacity for eliminating wastes is

overburdened.

 

Best wishes,

Nora

 

 

 

-

 

 

 

>I suspect our ancestors were chewing on a lot more greens, as well as

> less sweet fruits. Modern fruits have been hybridized and are quite

> sweet.

[Guest guest]

Hi Nora,

 

Interesting thoughts. I'm not sure I've ever heard that ancient humans

would prefer green leaves (or greens and fats) over ripe fruit and

haven't heard anyone making that assumption. I suppose it is possible,

but my belief is that they would have preferred ripe fruits. Having

said that, I still suspect they would have been chewing on a lot more

greens and less sweet fruit than many raw foodists and, especially,

those on a Standard American Diet. I'm suspect, not because of

preference, but because in the wild, fresh ripe fruits are no where

near as prevalent (IMO) as in a modern supermarket. In the market I

can buy many cases of ripe organic fruits. In the wild (before

farming, etc.) our ancestors needed to hunt (for fruit trees and

bushes, as well as other edible plants) and gather their food. There

were other primates, as well as other animals and insects seeking the

same foods, so our ancestors had competition for the fruit. When they

could not find fresh fruit, wouldn't they then eat greens (tender

greens)? I'm sure there were times/seasons and areas where ripe fruits

were plentiful. Similarly, there were likely times that the ripe

fruits were not plentiful, so greens, even if not a preference, could

be a meal. I suspect there were also times of no (or extremely little)

food available and people would fast by default. Modern humans who can

afford it, typically eat every day, many times a day and miss any

benefits of fasting. Those natural times of fasting (along with other

things you had mentioned) likely kept our tissues (including teeth)

much healthier. Ever since I was little I have thought that our

ancestors likely didn't brush their teeth, so why do our teeth

supposedly fall apart if we don't? Thank you for your insights!

 

Jeff

 

 

On Jun 29, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Nora Lenz wrote:

 

> Jeff,

> Imo, dental issues have little to do with lack of minerals in the

> diet. For

> one thing, we have no basis for assuming ancient humans would prefer

> green leaves over sweet-tasting and sweet-smelling fruit. It seems

> obvious to me

> that any human whose head has not been filled with modern nutritional

> pseudo-science and who has only his senses with which to select

> foods is

> going to be choosing the sweetest, most colorful, fragrant, fuel-

> rich food

> available. Greens do not qualify, by any stretch.

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Jeff,

 

 

 

Your reasoning seems sound. I have read that mountain gorillas eat a lot

more greens than lowland gorillas, simply because there is not as much fruit

available to them in the mountains. As for people, I don't know what the

optimum amount of greens versus greens to eat is, so I am experimenting,

trying to listen to my body. But it makes sense to me to eat at least some

greens every day. Some say we need the minerals. I have also noticed that

when I eat nothing but fruit, I feel kind of spacey. Also, chewing on celery

after eating fruit may help to clean your teeth naturally. But it's still a

good idea to brush anyway, IMO.

 

 

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Nora,

 

Interesting thoughts. I'm not sure I've ever heard that ancient humans

would prefer green leaves (or greens and fats) over ripe fruit and

haven't heard anyone making that assumption. I suppose it is possible,

but my belief is that they would have preferred ripe fruits. Having

said that, I still suspect they would have been chewing on a lot more

greens and less sweet fruit than many raw foodists and, especially,

those on a Standard American Diet. I'm suspect, not because of

preference, but because in the wild, fresh ripe fruits are no where

near as prevalent (IMO) as in a modern supermarket. In the market I

can buy many cases of ripe organic fruits. In the wild (before

farming, etc.) our ancestors needed to hunt (for fruit trees and

bushes, as well as other edible plants) and gather their food. There

were other primates, as well as other animals and insects seeking the

same foods, so our ancestors had competition for the fruit. When they

could not find fresh fruit, wouldn't they then eat greens (tender

greens)? I'm sure there were times/seasons and areas where ripe fruits

were plentiful. Similarly, there were likely times that the ripe

fruits were not plentiful, so greens, even if not a preference, could

be a meal. I suspect there were also times of no (or extremely little)

food available and people would fast by default. Modern humans who can

afford it, typically eat every day, many times a day and miss any

benefits of fasting. Those natural times of fasting (along with other

things you had mentioned) likely kept our tissues (including teeth)

much healthier. Ever since I was little I have thought that our

ancestors likely didn't brush their teeth, so why do our teeth

supposedly fall apart if we don't? Thank you for your insights!

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

On Jun 29, 2009, at 10:37 PM, Mark H wrote:

 

> But it's still a

> good idea to brush anyway, IMO.

 

Agreed! Flossing and rinsing too! I even use a Waterpik!

 

Jeff

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

" I'm not sure I've ever heard that ancient humans

would prefer green leaves (or greens and fats) over ripe fruit and

haven't heard anyone making that assumption. "

 

 

 

Mark,

 

What would have motivated our ancestors to eat greens if not preference?

That's all they had to go on. That is, unless you're talking about food

scarcity, and then we have to bring all kinds of other secondary foods

(flesh, roots, etc.) into the discussion. But we're not discussing those

foods, we're trying to determine what is ideal. For that we don't look to

what humans ate when their only other choice was starvation. We have to

look at what humans ate out of sheer appeal, like all other animals on earth

still do. THOSE are the foods our bodies adapted a need for.

 

 

 

In our modern world, sugar is commonly used to disguise inappropriate foods.

In this practice, we have collectively admitted that SWEETNESS is the

primary indicator of a food's suitability. Our ancestors would have known

with every cell in their bodies that sugar is what fuels them. They would

look for sugar in every food, the way that horses look for grass and

squirrels look for nuts. If sugar-rich food (fruit) was available, they

would favor it over sugarless foods like greens. If fruit was not available

at any given time, of course other foods may have been eaten. But since

greens provide no real food value (sugar), the question of what these foods

offer over doing without food entirely needs to be considered. Remember,

ancient humans did not have the benefit (for want of a better word) of

modern intellectual concepts like nutrient density.

 

 

 

Considering that we see all of our primate relatives eating greens, it would

be speculative to claim that humans never ate greens just because they lack

fuel value. At the same time, it's important to realize that we can't take

all our cues from observations of other primates. Bonobos and Chimps eat

and behave differently from each other, and they are probably closer to each

other genetically than either of them is to us. Obviously then, it would be

a mistake to not expect some differences between us and them. Where would

the differences be? How are we to know which of them are due to

civilizational influences and which are due to natural (genetic) factors?

 

 

 

Lacking wild humans to observe and learn from, we can only hope to get

general guidelines from watching our wild relatives. For the remainder, we

have to rely on the only thing we still have that served our ancestors for

millions of years - our senses. Our senses don't lie to us, in spite of all

the talk about how they have become " perverted " from wrong eating practices.

The common assumption that there are substantial differences between ancient

and modern foods usually provides the basis for claiming that sensory input

is irrelevant and unreliable, but there just isn't enough real evidence to

support that contention.

 

 

 

When we look at the way humans eat greens today, even raw fooders, we see

that hardly anybody eats them without disguising their taste. Most

Americans would be aghast at the idea of eating a green salad without

dressing, or at least lemon juice. Lemon juice isn't something we generally

enjoy but its strong flavor masks the even more unpleasant taste of greens.

Even if a salad is eaten without dressing, almost everyone uses fruits like

tomatoes and avocados to make the greens more palatable. Green smoothies

are all about fooling our bodies into thinking they're getting fruit.

 

 

 

You mentioned that when you eat only fruit, you get spacey. I'm sure you

realize that spaciness is not caused by fruit-eating. It is a sign that

your body is using the respite provided by your consumption of easily

digested foods to heal itself from your previous mistakes. You probably

feel some of these same symptoms when you fast as well. Eating foods like

greens and green salads slows this process down, so you feel better.

Although it's a symptomatic approach, it's an entirely acceptable

transitional strategy, imo. Healing will eventually occur, albeit slower

than if you were to eat just fruit or fast. When the healing is complete,

there will be no symptoms when you eat only fruit. Alternatively, spaciness

is a symptom that could be caused by overeating, so eating greens in place

of fruit would have the effect of decreasing your overall consumption.

 

 

 

Every time we have this discussion I have to make the disclaimer that I am

not lobbying against the consumption of greens, so here goes: Greens are a

fine transitional food, even buried under nuts and goopy dressings. People

need to do what they need to do to get from A to B. I'm only making the

case that greens are not healing, that they don't prevent tooth decay, and

that they are not special in any way that aligns with what we know about our

species' long-developed, sense-based ability to choose one food over

another.

 

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Nora

 

 

 

 

 

----

 

 

 

 

 

I suppose it is possible,

but my belief is that they would have preferred ripe fruits. Having

said that, I still suspect they would have been chewing on a lot more

greens and less sweet fruit than many raw foodists and, especially,

those on a Standard American Diet. I'm suspect, not because of

preference, but because in the wild, fresh ripe fruits are no where

near as prevalent (IMO) as in a modern supermarket. In the market I

can buy many cases of ripe organic fruits. In the wild (before

farming, etc.) our ancestors needed to hunt (for fruit trees and

bushes, as well as other edible plants) and gather their food. There

were other primates, as well as other animals and insects seeking the

same foods, so our ancestors had competition for the fruit. When they

could not find fresh fruit, wouldn't they then eat greens (tender

greens)? I'm sure there were times/seasons and areas where ripe fruits

were plentiful. Similarly, there were likely times that the ripe

fruits were not plentiful, so greens, even if not a preference, could

be a meal. I suspect there were also times of no (or extremely little)

food available and people would fast by default.

[Guest guest]

Nora,

 

I realize your email was addressed to Mark, but you included comments

from one of my posts.

 

> What would have motivated our ancestors to eat greens if not

> preference?

 

Hunger! While they were searching for fruit, they could have easily

consumed tasty greens on their travels. Greens are far more plentiful

than fruit in nature (unlike supermarkets).

 

> That's all they had to go on. That is, unless you're talking about

> food

> scarcity, and then we have to bring all kinds of other secondary foods

> (flesh, roots, etc.) into the discussion.

 

 

No, we don't have to discuss " all kinds of other secondary foods " . If

a " secondary food " (in terms of non-sweet, as you suggest), such as

greens, were consumed regularly, that is quite different from a food

that was rarely eaten (further down the list of " secondary food " ). As

we do not have documentation, such as a diet diary, we do not know the

exact eating habits of our early ancestors.

 

 

> But we're not discussing those

> foods, we're trying to determine what is ideal. For that we don't

> look to

> what humans ate when their only other choice was starvation. We have

> to

> look at what humans ate out of sheer appeal, like all other animals

> on earth

> still do. THOSE are the foods our bodies adapted a need for.

 

 

The original discussion was about teeth and moved to ideal diet. If

our ancestors ate fruit and greens regularly, then the bodies would

have adapted to that diet (whether that be 50/45 or 70/25, etc. -

with a small % for nuts, seeds, etc.). I do not believe that we should

now say that the greens should be eliminated. Just because we have a

taste for sweet fruit, I believe that does not necessitate we now eat

only fruit. I believe it is possible that greens were so plentiful,

that the body did not need a craving for those foods. They were common

(and still are) and our ancestors could consume them while looking for

the important fruits they needed for fuel. I believe we should keep

open minds regarding a time that has no written records. I believe

that just because our strongest drive in terms of taste is for sweets,

that does no mean that the sweet fruits are all we should eat.

 

> For that we don't look to

> what humans ate when their only other choice was starvation.

 

 

I do not believe that early humans, when fruit was not available and

hunger was present, would pass by edible greens and wait till they

faced starvation (weeks or even months(?)) before eating those greens.

I find greens (by themselves) to be very palatable. If I was looking

for fruit and wasn't finding any, but was passing some wild edible

greens, I would certainly eat the greens. I would not wait weeks to

make that choice. I wouldn't hesitate, I would eat at the first sign

of hunger.

 

Do you recognize that it is possible for the body to NOT give us a

craving for important nutrients?

 

> look at what humans ate out of sheer appeal, like all other animals

> on earth

> still do. THOSE are the foods our bodies adapted a need for

 

 

I do find greens appealing. I may find fruits much more appealing, but

have enjoyed many greens by themselves (no dressing, oil, fruit,

etc.). Again, if I did not have fruit available, I would not hesitate

to eat greens, even if that was only hours before finding fruit. I

would not continue hunger and ignore the edible greens waiting to find

fruit.

 

Jeff