Roger Haeske's Latest Newsletter

[Guest guest]

I was a little surprised to read Roger Haeske's

latest email newsletter. Since some of the members on this list

to it, I am going to address one of his comments.

 

Roger (who was a very vocal member of this list in the early days)

was talking about a book by an MD -- as far as I read (I *had* to stop)

he had not mentioned the name of the book nor of its author. Just as well.

Roger wrote:

" Here's another quote from the book, " The basic way that we increase

the ratio of protein intake is with a variety of seed or nut pâtés. "

 

This shows a complete lack of understanding by this author regarding

this topic. Nuts and seeds don't have anywhere close to 50% protein

content. Nuts and seeds are much higher in fat content than protein.

No person could even come close to getting 50% of their calories from

protein even if they only ate raw nut and seed pâtés. "

 

If we only look at the last sentence in this passage, Roger is having

trouble with his math (I will admit that my math is not all that

fantastic, but there is a critical error here)

 

First, I have not seen any nutritionist/author recommending 50% of

calories from protein. Even Atkins recommended only 30% of calories

from protein. The basic low-carb regime mandates 40% carbohydrates,

30% protein, and 30% (good) fats.

 

One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one wish to

do so.

 

The low carbohydrate/high protein diet is primarily aimed at the

portion of the population who eat a " regular (SAD) diet, with cooked

grains and other starches (breads, rice, potatoes, etc.) and refined

sugars. People on this kind of diet are often " sensitive " or

" allergic " to a number of the foods which they eat to excess (or which

cause cravings). This type of diet is very good in that it gets

people to give up starches and sugars which may be causing them health

issues (if we study SAD candidiasis diets, most eliminate refined

sugars as well as grain-based starches, and high glycemic vegetables.

The promise of unlimited protein (most people will not go overboard,

simply because protein will fill them up quickly and they will not

become hungry again quickly).

 

A raw diet does tend to be relatively low in carbohydrates, unless one

is eating only high carbohydrate fruit and vegetables. 2 cups of raw

spinach, for example, have only 4 grams of carbohydrates.

A totally raw food diet is not going to include the wild high glycemic

counts that the SAD diet, including rice (typically 50 grams or more

of carbohydrate), bagels (45-50 grams, or more, of carbohydrate), or

refined white sugar by the spoonful (14 grams of carbohydrate per

teaspoonful, as I recall).

 

Since the average " medically-prescribed " diet, even for diabetics,

recommend somewhere around 10-20 grams of protein per day, with

approximately 60-70 percent carbohydrates (without differentiating

between nutrition-bearing carbohydrates and refined sugars), and only

10-20 percent fats (these diets do not tend to differentiate between

good fats and " bad " fats), there is really no comparison.

 

Haeske's concerns are not dissimilar in their focus to those of the

traditional medical (allopathic) establishment. The allopathic

medical establishment is intent on maintaining the status quo. (One of

the leading New York diabetes specialists has even written a book for

diabetics which indicates that ice cream is allowable daily-- one of

his patients, who was a client of mine, shared the book with me)

 

Numerous raw food friendly articles (and, perhaps, even books) have

suggested that raw food/vegan diets may need protein supplements.

 

We would do well to examine the scientific evidence regarding the

necessity of protein (and how much is necessary) in the human diet.

It is known that protein is necessary for cell regeneration, as well

as the formulation of certain enzymes necessary for proper physical

and mental function (in certain studies, it has been found that a lack

of protein affects production in the brain of serotonin, the " feel

good " enzyme which affects such things as depression and weight

regulation. Witness the advertisements for Prozac and other such

medications, which suggest that the " lack " of a certain " chemical " in

the brain is at fault for depression.) Have there been studies on

extremely low protein diet raw foodists and/or vegans, as far as

incidence of depression.

 

It is known that low protein diets are wont to occasion pernicious

anemia (several articles on veganhealth.org address this issue)

 

We would like to believe that what we are doing is right for us. Most

of us who have adopted an 80 percent to 100 percent raw diet have

experienced positive effects. Nevertheless, we must filter the

information we receive from raw food alarmists just as assiduously as

we filter the information we receive from the medical establishment.

 

Margaret

[Guest guest]

Thank you, Margaret! Very well said!

 

 

Blessings,

 

Jennifer

 

 

_____

 

rawfood

[rawfood ] On Behalf Of Margaret Gamez

Saturday, May 06, 2006 8:09 PM

rawfood

[Raw Food] Roger Haeske's Latest Newsletter

 

 

" ...we must filter the information we receive from raw food

alarmists just as assiduously as we filter the information

we receive from the medical establishment. "

 

Margaret

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Roger isn't just a member of this list. He's a moderator.

 

Tommie

http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com

 

rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1 wrote:

>

> I was a little surprised to read Roger Haeske's

> latest email newsletter. Since some of the members on this list

> to it, I am going to address one of his comments.

>

> Roger (who was a very vocal member of this list in the early days)

> was talking about a book by an MD -- as far as I read (I *had* to

stop)

> he had not mentioned the name of the book nor of its author. Just as

well.

> Roger wrote:

> " Here's another quote from the book, " The basic way that we increase

> the ratio of protein intake is with a variety of seed or nut pâtés. "

>

> This shows a complete lack of understanding by this author regarding

> this topic. Nuts and seeds don't have anywhere close to 50% protein

> content. Nuts and seeds are much higher in fat content than protein.

> No person could even come close to getting 50% of their calories

from

> protein even if they only ate raw nut and seed pâtés. "

>

> If we only look at the last sentence in this passage, Roger is

having

> trouble with his math (I will admit that my math is not all that

> fantastic, but there is a critical error here)

>

> First, I have not seen any nutritionist/author recommending 50% of

> calories from protein. Even Atkins recommended only 30% of calories

> from protein. The basic low-carb regime mandates 40% carbohydrates,

> 30% protein, and 30% (good) fats.

>

> One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one wish

to

> do so.

>

> The low carbohydrate/high protein diet is primarily aimed at the

> portion of the population who eat a " regular (SAD) diet, with cooked

> grains and other starches (breads, rice, potatoes, etc.) and refined

> sugars. People on this kind of diet are often " sensitive " or

> " allergic " to a number of the foods which they eat to excess (or

which

> cause cravings). This type of diet is very good in that it gets

> people to give up starches and sugars which may be causing them

health

> issues (if we study SAD candidiasis diets, most eliminate refined

> sugars as well as grain-based starches, and high glycemic

vegetables.

> The promise of unlimited protein (most people will not go overboard,

> simply because protein will fill them up quickly and they will not

> become hungry again quickly).

>

> A raw diet does tend to be relatively low in carbohydrates, unless

one

> is eating only high carbohydrate fruit and vegetables. 2 cups of

raw

> spinach, for example, have only 4 grams of carbohydrates.

> A totally raw food diet is not going to include the wild high

glycemic

> counts that the SAD diet, including rice (typically 50 grams or

more

> of carbohydrate), bagels (45-50 grams, or more, of carbohydrate), or

> refined white sugar by the spoonful (14 grams of carbohydrate per

> teaspoonful, as I recall).

>

> Since the average " medically-prescribed " diet, even for diabetics,

> recommend somewhere around 10-20 grams of protein per day, with

> approximately 60-70 percent carbohydrates (without differentiating

> between nutrition-bearing carbohydrates and refined sugars), and

only

> 10-20 percent fats (these diets do not tend to differentiate between

> good fats and " bad " fats), there is really no comparison.

>

> Haeske's concerns are not dissimilar in their focus to those of the

> traditional medical (allopathic) establishment. The allopathic

> medical establishment is intent on maintaining the status quo. (One

of

> the leading New York diabetes specialists has even written a book

for

> diabetics which indicates that ice cream is allowable daily-- one of

> his patients, who was a client of mine, shared the book with me)

>

> Numerous raw food friendly articles (and, perhaps, even books) have

> suggested that raw food/vegan diets may need protein supplements.

>

> We would do well to examine the scientific evidence regarding the

> necessity of protein (and how much is necessary) in the human diet.

> It is known that protein is necessary for cell regeneration, as well

> as the formulation of certain enzymes necessary for proper physical

> and mental function (in certain studies, it has been found that a

lack

> of protein affects production in the brain of serotonin, the " feel

> good " enzyme which affects such things as depression and weight

> regulation. Witness the advertisements for Prozac and other such

> medications, which suggest that the " lack " of a certain " chemical "

in

> the brain is at fault for depression.) Have there been studies on

> extremely low protein diet raw foodists and/or vegans, as far as

> incidence of depression.

>

> It is known that low protein diets are wont to occasion pernicious

> anemia (several articles on veganhealth.org address this issue)

>

> We would like to believe that what we are doing is right for us.

Most

> of us who have adopted an 80 percent to 100 percent raw diet have

> experienced positive effects. Nevertheless, we must filter the

> information we receive from raw food alarmists just as assiduously

as

> we filter the information we receive from the medical establishment.

>

> Margaret

>

[Guest guest]

rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1 wrote:

 

> One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one wish to

> do so.

 

Hi Margaret,

 

Can you illustrate with what raw vegetarian foods would one get 30% of

their daily calories from protein on a raw diet? Maybe you could come

up with a quick sample menu of a daily food intake that would produce

these numbers.

 

Thanks, Mike

[Guest guest]

This isn't a sample menu, but here is a list of the top 10 (most common?)

vegan foods that are high in protein:

 

1. Hemp Seeds

2. Goji Berries

3. Sprouts

4. Spirulina/Blue Green Algae

5. Pure Synergy

6. Maca

7. Avocado

8. Figs

9. Greens and veggies

10. Sprouted Nuts and Seeds

 

I think protein is overrated though, personally, and only shoot for 10%.

Everyone is different though.

 

Cindy

 

 

 

Hi Margaret,

 

Can you illustrate with what raw vegetarian foods would one get 30% of

their daily calories from protein on a raw diet? Maybe you could come

up with a quick sample menu of a daily food intake that would produce

these numbers.

 

Thanks, Mike

 

--

 

 

Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.4/332 - Release 5/4/2006

[Guest guest]

Mike, I'm wondering why we are wasting our time trying to justify a

diet that is so unbalanced as to have 30% protein? Roger is right. We

don't need that much. If babies can thrive on the amounts in mothers'

milk, why would we need more than we naturally get on 80-10-10 raw

vegan? And, pernicious anemia is caused by a B-12 deficiency, not a

protein deficiency. " Intrinsic factor is a protein secreted by cells

of the stomach lining. Intrinsic factor attaches to vitamin B12 and

takes it to the intestines to be absorbed. An absence of intrinsic

factor is the most common cause of pernicious anemia, and it typically

causes the stomach lining to shrink (atrophy). " This is taken from an

article on http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/9339/20862.

html. It goes on to say that the liver stores B-12 for up to five

years so it's unusual for diet to cause a deficiency. It isn't the

ingested protein but the protein the stomach secretes. I haven't

checked Roger's math. I don't have time. I don't think that's

important. What _is_ important is that he is definitely on the right

track. I have to credit him and his guidance with the success I've had

eating 100% raw.

 

Tommie

http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com

 

rawfood , apollo1237 <no_reply wrote:

>

> rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1@> wrote:

>

> > One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one

wish to

> > do so.

>

> Hi Margaret,

>

> Can you illustrate with what raw vegetarian foods would one get 30%

of

> their daily calories from protein on a raw diet? Maybe you could

come

> up with a quick sample menu of a daily food intake that would

produce

> these numbers.

>

> Thanks, Mike

>

[Guest guest]

In the China Study, Colin Campbell has an illustration that shows that

with vegetables such as spinach and some others you get about the same

amount of protein that you do in a comparable quantity, weightwise, of

meat and dairy. So, getting the protein would not be a problem on a raw

diet that includes sufficient vegetable, I don't know about ones that

are really heavy in fruit. . Sorry, I can't give the exact amounts and

references, I have loaned that book out. The whole idea of needing to

eat meat to get protein is a myth and with the data Campbell presents

it is clear that one can get their protein easily on a diet with

sufficient raw veggies.

 

Tammy

On May 8, 2006, at 1:29 AM, apollo1237 wrote:

 

> rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1 wrote:

>

> > One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one wish

> to

> > do so. 

>

> Hi Margaret,

>

> Can you illustrate with what raw vegetarian foods would one get 30% of

> their daily calories from protein on a raw diet? Maybe you could come

> up with a quick sample menu of a daily food intake that would produce

> these numbers.

>

> Thanks, Mike

>

>

>

 

[Guest guest]

I'm not so sure that a question about protein is a waste of

time...isn't the point of this group support and education?

 

Seems to me that it was a great opportunity to pass along the

information you did, and without comments/questions that don't agree

with the path that you're (or anybody else is) on, there isn't much

room to spark discussion.

 

Just my .02

 

Bridgitte

 

rawfood , jerushy1944 <no_reply wrote:

>

> Mike, I'm wondering why we are wasting our time trying to justify a

> diet that is so unbalanced as to have 30% protein? Roger is right.

[Guest guest]

I agree with Bridgitte!

 

Susan

 

 

[Guest guest]

I think protien IS a much needed compenant in any diet.

Whether it is 10% or 30% i don't know. But i do know that you need protien for

muscle, and muscle supports your bones, and if you think that isn't important, i

would have to disagree. As for these people who claim protien unecessary,

well... thats up to you to decide, BUT somebody was wanting information on how

to put more protien in their diet. I think we should be considerate enough to

answer that. ( i believe somebody did, and THANK YOU because I was curious as

well )

 

Lets support eachother for the raw in our diet. I don't want to be told i'm not

doing it right. Back before technology and all of that, nobody was told how to

eat, and when to eat it. It should come naturally to you. Your body will tell

you what you need, in my opinion. Its a matter of listening to YOUR body, and

not the " optimal raw diet " handbook.

 

Kelly

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I'm not sure if I (or someone else) was misunderstood or if someone actually

said protein wasn't important, but I *do* believe it is necessary. It's in

all foods, so you really can't NOT get it. I just think that most people

believe we need massive amounts of it, when we really don't need that much.

But we do need *some*.

 

I personally follow the 8/1/1rv, but I know it's not optimal for everyone at

every point in their life. I agree that we should 'listen to our bodies' and

eat what we need. That may vary from day to day.

 

Cindy

 

 

 

I think protien IS a much needed compenant in any diet.

--

 

 

Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.4/332 - Release 5/4/2006

[Guest guest]

What I was trying to say was that we go over and over issues without

any real resolution. I have my beliefs. You have yours. Since there is

such a disparity between the two, usually, nothing is gained by

arguing. Excess protein can cause the kidneys to overwork. The RDA

is 'way more than anyone really needs. Foods have to have protein to

hold them together and that protein translates to what we need for our

muscles. Working in a hospital, I see what excesses of all sorts can do

to people. Sorry if I offended anyone (again).

 

Tommie

http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com

 

rawfood , " Bridgitte " <syndactylcat wrote:

>

> I'm not so sure that a question about protein is a waste of

> time...isn't the point of this group support and education?

>

> Seems to me that it was a great opportunity to pass along the

> information you did, and without comments/questions that don't agree

> with the path that you're (or anybody else is) on, there isn't much

> room to spark discussion.

>

> Just my .02

>

> Bridgitte

>

> rawfood , jerushy1944 <no_reply@> wrote:

> >

> > Mike, I'm wondering why we are wasting our time trying to justify a

> > diet that is so unbalanced as to have 30% protein? Roger is right.

>

[Guest guest]

No offense taken, Tommie! I love the openness of the forum and that we can

address issues we disagree with each other on. Isn't that the point? )

 

Susan

 

 

[Guest guest]

I didn't mean that I disagree with 80/10/10 - in fact, i'm glad it

was reiterated. I just meant that when the subject of protein comes

up, I don't think there are any stupid questions (my paraphrasing,

not your words) since there are lots of people who aren't fully

informed. Additionally, there are tons of people who read what gets

posted to the group but don't actively participate, and new people

join everyday. So when it comes up, i think it's always worth

repeating.

 

Sorry if my post came off snotty - it wasn't intended that way

 

Bridgitte

 

 

rawfood , jerushy1944 <no_reply wrote:

>

> What I was trying to say was that we go over and over issues

without

> any real resolution. I have my beliefs. You have yours. Since there

is

> such a disparity between the two, usually, nothing is gained by

> arguing. Excess protein can cause the kidneys to overwork. The RDA

> is 'way more than anyone really needs. Foods have to have protein

to

> hold them together and that protein translates to what we need for

our

> muscles. Working in a hospital, I see what excesses of all sorts

can do

> to people. Sorry if I offended anyone (again).

>

> Tommie

> http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com

>

> rawfood , " Bridgitte " <syndactylcat@> wrote:

> >

> > I'm not so sure that a question about protein is a waste of

> > time...isn't the point of this group support and education?

> >

> > Seems to me that it was a great opportunity to pass along the

> > information you did, and without comments/questions that don't

agree

> > with the path that you're (or anybody else is) on, there isn't

much

> > room to spark discussion.

> >

> > Just my .02

> >

> > Bridgitte

> >

> > rawfood , jerushy1944 <no_reply@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Mike, I'm wondering why we are wasting our time trying to

justify a

> > > diet that is so unbalanced as to have 30% protein? Roger is

right.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I'd just like to say that i view all of this as conversation not as arguement.

And if anyone needs a hug, i'm here LOL

 

Kelly

 

 

[Guest guest]

So???

Am I supposed to shake in my boots?

Should I be afraid to express an opinion which counters his?

Oh gee! I am afraid.

Margaret

 

rawfood , jerushy1944 <no_reply wrote:

>

> Roger isn't just a member of this list. He's a moderator.

>

> Tommie

> http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com

>

> rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1@> wrote:

> >

> > I was a little surprised to read Roger Haeske's

> > latest email newsletter. Since some of the members on this list

> > to it, I am going to address one of his comments.

> >

> > Roger (who was a very vocal member of this list in the early days)

> > was talking about a book by an MD -- as far as I read (I *had* to

> stop)

> > he had not mentioned the name of the book nor of its author. Just as

> well.

> > Roger wrote:

> > " Here's another quote from the book, " The basic way that we increase

> > the ratio of protein intake is with a variety of seed or nut pâtés. "

> >

> > This shows a complete lack of understanding by this author regarding

> > this topic. Nuts and seeds don't have anywhere close to 50% protein

> > content. Nuts and seeds are much higher in fat content than protein.

> > No person could even come close to getting 50% of their calories

> from

> > protein even if they only ate raw nut and seed pâtés. "

> >

> > If we only look at the last sentence in this passage, Roger is

> having

> > trouble with his math (I will admit that my math is not all that

> > fantastic, but there is a critical error here)

> >

> > First, I have not seen any nutritionist/author recommending 50% of

> > calories from protein. Even Atkins recommended only 30% of calories

> > from protein. The basic low-carb regime mandates 40% carbohydrates,

> > 30% protein, and 30% (good) fats.

> >

> > One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one wish

> to

> > do so.

> >

> > The low carbohydrate/high protein diet is primarily aimed at the

> > portion of the population who eat a " regular (SAD) diet, with cooked

> > grains and other starches (breads, rice, potatoes, etc.) and refined

> > sugars. People on this kind of diet are often " sensitive " or

> > " allergic " to a number of the foods which they eat to excess (or

> which

> > cause cravings). This type of diet is very good in that it gets

> > people to give up starches and sugars which may be causing them

> health

> > issues (if we study SAD candidiasis diets, most eliminate refined

> > sugars as well as grain-based starches, and high glycemic

> vegetables.

> > The promise of unlimited protein (most people will not go overboard,

> > simply because protein will fill them up quickly and they will not

> > become hungry again quickly).

> >

> > A raw diet does tend to be relatively low in carbohydrates, unless

> one

> > is eating only high carbohydrate fruit and vegetables. 2 cups of

> raw

> > spinach, for example, have only 4 grams of carbohydrates.

> > A totally raw food diet is not going to include the wild high

> glycemic

> > counts that the SAD diet, including rice (typically 50 grams or

> more

> > of carbohydrate), bagels (45-50 grams, or more, of carbohydrate), or

> > refined white sugar by the spoonful (14 grams of carbohydrate per

> > teaspoonful, as I recall).

> >

> > Since the average " medically-prescribed " diet, even for diabetics,

> > recommend somewhere around 10-20 grams of protein per day, with

> > approximately 60-70 percent carbohydrates (without differentiating

> > between nutrition-bearing carbohydrates and refined sugars), and

> only

> > 10-20 percent fats (these diets do not tend to differentiate between

> > good fats and " bad " fats), there is really no comparison.

> >

> > Haeske's concerns are not dissimilar in their focus to those of the

> > traditional medical (allopathic) establishment. The allopathic

> > medical establishment is intent on maintaining the status quo. (One

> of

> > the leading New York diabetes specialists has even written a book

> for

> > diabetics which indicates that ice cream is allowable daily-- one of

> > his patients, who was a client of mine, shared the book with me)

> >

> > Numerous raw food friendly articles (and, perhaps, even books) have

> > suggested that raw food/vegan diets may need protein supplements.

> >

> > We would do well to examine the scientific evidence regarding the

> > necessity of protein (and how much is necessary) in the human diet.

> > It is known that protein is necessary for cell regeneration, as well

> > as the formulation of certain enzymes necessary for proper physical

> > and mental function (in certain studies, it has been found that a

> lack

> > of protein affects production in the brain of serotonin, the " feel

> > good " enzyme which affects such things as depression and weight

> > regulation. Witness the advertisements for Prozac and other such

> > medications, which suggest that the " lack " of a certain " chemical "

> in

> > the brain is at fault for depression.) Have there been studies on

> > extremely low protein diet raw foodists and/or vegans, as far as

> > incidence of depression.

> >

> > It is known that low protein diets are wont to occasion pernicious

> > anemia (several articles on veganhealth.org address this issue)

> >

> > We would like to believe that what we are doing is right for us.

> Most

> > of us who have adopted an 80 percent to 100 percent raw diet have

> > experienced positive effects. Nevertheless, we must filter the

> > information we receive from raw food alarmists just as assiduously

> as

> > we filter the information we receive from the medical establishment.

> >

> > Margaret

> >

>

[Guest guest]

if you look at the chemical makeup of whatever it is you are eating,

you will likely find that there is protein in it. There is protein in

most things. Nuts have it, for sure, as do beans, but if you look at

everything else, there is protein in it.

Now we come to the tricky part:

What I have just said is true.

It has been found that there are certain " combinations " or proteins

which work to make up " complete proteins " (the first time I heard of

this was in Francis Moore Lappe's book Diet for a Small Planet, in the

70s.

Raw foodists will come up with differnt takes on this concept... some

will have you figuring out how you are getting your " complete

protein " by combining foods effectively, while others will tell you

that eating " instinctively " will do the trick (only problem then is

that " ice cream " seems to be an instinct.

If you do not believe what I have said, then do your own research. If

you do, on the other hand, believe what I have said, then do your own

research.

Margaret

 

rawfood , apollo1237 <no_reply wrote:

>

> rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1@> wrote:

>

> > One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one wish to

> > do so.

>

> Hi Margaret,

>

> Can you illustrate with what raw vegetarian foods would one get 30% of

> their daily calories from protein on a raw diet? Maybe you could come

> up with a quick sample menu of a daily food intake that would produce

> these numbers.

>

> Thanks, Mike

>

[Guest guest]

The human body constructs proteins from amino acids. It manufactures

50,000 different proteins from different combinations of them, and

each cell on its own makes 4,000 unique proteins (from Dr. Bernard

Jensen's Body Chemistry and Nutrition). If protein was one thing, I

would buy the complete protein theory, but given that there are so

many of them, and a lot of the amino acids are produced by the body

and not found in food, it doesn't make much sense to me.

 

Also, Frances Moore Lappe has modified her theory - you can read about

it here (among other places, I'm sure):

http://fernshomestead.com/complete_protein.html

 

I think that in the great protein debate, it's equally as important to

know how the body works as it is to know the protein content of food.

And since fruits and vegetables are abundant in amino acids, I

generally don't worry about it

 

Bridgitte

 

rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1 wrote:

>

> if you look at the chemical makeup of whatever it is you are eating,

> you will likely find that there is protein in it. There is protein in

> most things. Nuts have it, for sure, as do beans, but if you look at

> everything else, there is protein in it.

> Now we come to the tricky part:

> What I have just said is true.

> It has been found that there are certain " combinations " or proteins

> which work to make up " complete proteins " (the first time I heard of

> this was in Francis Moore Lappe's book Diet for a Small Planet, in the

> 70s.

> Raw foodists will come up with differnt takes on this concept... some

> will have you figuring out how you are getting your " complete

> protein " by combining foods effectively, while others will tell you

> that eating " instinctively " will do the trick (only problem then is

> that " ice cream " seems to be an instinct.

> If you do not believe what I have said, then do your own research. If

> you do, on the other hand, believe what I have said, then do your own

> research.

> Margaret

>

> rawfood , apollo1237 <no_reply@> wrote:

> >

> > rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1@> wrote:

> >

> > > One can certainly manage 30% protein on a raw diet, should one

wish to

> > > do so.

> >

> > Hi Margaret,

> >

> > Can you illustrate with what raw vegetarian foods would one get

30% of

> > their daily calories from protein on a raw diet? Maybe you could come

> > up with a quick sample menu of a daily food intake that would produce

> > these numbers.

> >

> > Thanks, Mike

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Francis Moore Lappe said in her second book she was wrong about the food

combining. You just have to eat a wide variety of foods to meet your

protein needs.

 

And you are right, there is protein in everything. Everything needs protein

to make a nucleus.

 

Shari

[Guest guest]

Yep yep yep, Susan! I come here for the diversity. I go to Roger's

private forum for support.

 

Tommie

http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com

 

rawfood , susan <peacefulmeow wrote:

>

> No offense taken, Tommie! I love the openness of the forum and that

we can address issues we disagree with each other on. Isn't that the

point? )

>

> Susan

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yep.

 

Tommie

http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com

 

rawfood , " Margaret Gamez " <mgamez1 wrote:

>

> So???

> Am I supposed to shake in my boots?

> Should I be afraid to express an opinion which counters his?

> Oh gee! I am afraid.

> Margaret

>

> rawfood , jerushy1944 <no_reply@> wrote:

> >

> > Roger isn't just a member of this list. He's a moderator.

> >

> > Tommie

> > http://www.rawburchard.blogspot.com