Guest guest Posted August 6, 2006 Report Share Posted August 6, 2006 I've been warned not to over do it on fruit consumption. Well, how do I know when it's enough, or too much??? My kids would eat fruit all day. How do I know when to stop them?? What would be the guidelines on this?? Thanks so much! Micele in So CA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2006 Report Share Posted August 6, 2006 Hi Micele, Warned by whom and what reasons did they give you?? It is very unfortunate that part of the raw movement has turned against and become afraid of the very food that we are meant to eat: fruit! They are very, very mistaken. Don't be afraid to eat fruit. Eat as much as you want and encourage your children to eat as much as they want. Nothing could be better for them or for you. All the best, Audrey www.rawhealing.com > " hesavedmebygrace " <hesavedmebygrace >rawfood >rawfood >[Raw Food] How much fruit is too much??? >Sun, 06 Aug 2006 19:55:59 -0000 > >I've been warned not to over do it on fruit consumption. Well, how do >I know when it's enough, or too much??? My kids would eat fruit all >day. How do I know when to stop them?? What would be the guidelines on >this?? Thanks so much! > >Micele in So CA > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2006 Report Share Posted August 6, 2006 If you read any of the articles on www.rawschool.com you will find there is no such thing as " too much fruit " . I have lived on nothing but watermelon for weeks at a time. I have eaten only mangos all day long. Yesterday all I ate was blackberries I picked off the bush and a number of bananas. Is that too much? I think not, it's what I wanted to feel energized and wonderful in the sunshine and for a nice long swim in the salt water of Hood Canal, Washington. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2006 Report Share Posted August 7, 2006 " SV " <shavig wrote: > If you read any of the articles on www.rawschool.com you will find there is no such thing as " too much fruit " . > That is still such a hard one to get over. Most people I know agree that you certainly can have too much fruit. But of course, this is always from people that just believe it, without doing any research! Too funny! Micele in CA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2006 Report Share Posted August 7, 2006 It was explained on a cd by Dr. Doug Graham, raw 25+ years, he said look at your hand. It's designed to hold fruit, it's not designed to dig up vegetables or track down and kill an animal. Plus we stand upright to reach up and pluck the fruit. Makes sense to me. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2006 Report Share Posted August 7, 2006 I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. Why couldn't we dig with our hands, what are the limitations? We have opposable thumbs that allow us to do a myriad of things including digging up a potato or, in modern times, hold a shovel. Not only do we stand upright to pluck fruit but we also have knees, hips, pelvis and a flexible low back to squat down and pickup strawberries and dig up corn from the earth. I'm mostly raw like everyone here but this blind believing in everything Graham, et al. say and write really confuses the hell out of me. Have we all lost our minds and lost the ability to think for ourselves? The thing that cracks me is that you never hear/read about a raw foodie that has been 100% raw for a long time and not have any problems. Note that I said 100%. I'm also not advocating eating meat, or cooking or anything whatsoever, it's just that raw foodists adhere to a dogma and listen to what these quacks say without listening to the absolute, most authoritative figure, bar none, on what is the perfect diet for us...our own body!! Some people can do fine a properly balanced raw diet whereas others (e.g. an elite endurance athlete) may suffer horribly. Now before anyone gets upset and starts to name drop famous athletes that are raw and doing fine, remember I'm talking about the majority of people. Sometimes we become enamored with the ideal of eating raw that we totally disregard what is really important, our health. (Shari, I'm not picking on you it's just that this email provided the right opportunity for a long needed diatribe) SV <shavig wrote: It was explained on a cd by Dr. Doug Graham, raw 25+ years, he said look at your hand. It's designed to hold fruit, it's not designed to dig up vegetables or track down and kill an animal. Plus we stand upright to reach up and pluck the fruit. Makes sense to me. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Sorry you feel that way Todd and sorry you are in such a quandry that you need a diatribe to feel better. Have you looked at www.rawschool.com at all? I keep going back to that because I believe in Natural Hygiene and I believe I can live happy, joyous, and free with only fruit and greens. Don't forget an avocado is a fruit, tomato, there are things out there we have been raised to think of as vegetables, when in fact they are fruit. I feel best when I eat fruit and greens only. And I will continue to defend it. If that bothers you and you think it's a load of crap, then I will take my leave. This isn't my list so I could really care less what sort of misinformation you would like to spread in your snit. Shari and this message was meant for you, Todd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 I don't see why people have to be so aggressive to each other about this. We're all different people, from different ancestors who've lead different lives and have different needs. That's something to be celebrated. I agree with that it's dangerous to accept anyone's recommendations blindly, and much better to do what feels best for you. And if fruit and greens only suits Shari best, that's wonderful! And it doesn't necessarily follow that solely eating fruit and greens will be good for everyone else. Something that is frequently overlooked when people say we are designed to be vegans, is the number of insects we would natually injest if we just ate fruit and vegetables in the wild. This small addition to the diet provides B12 and other 'animal' nutrients. Some people will miss these more than others (depending on their body chemistry), but few of us will want to eat raw bugs to fill the void! So some of us will need to try other things to replace them - small amounts of animal products (i.e. raw dairy or fish), or supplements (esp. B12), or superfoods, etc. It's wonderful if the diet that you choose ethically also suits you perfectly physiologically. If it doesn't though and you suffer constant cravings or ill-health, that doesn't mean there's something wrong with you. It's much better to find perfect health than try to force yourself to fit into someone else's perfect diet or the diet you believe you should eat. Anyway, we're all united by our quest to find our ideal diet despite the problems we face in modern society in doing so, let's not allow minor differences in opinion to divide us. Just my 2c! --- SV <shavig wrote: > Sorry you feel that way Todd and sorry you are in > such a quandry that you need a diatribe to feel > better. > > Have you looked at www.rawschool.com at all? I keep > going back to that because I believe in Natural > Hygiene and I believe I can live happy, joyous, and > free with only fruit and greens. Don't forget an > avocado is a fruit, tomato, there are things out > there we have been raised to think of as vegetables, > when in fact they are fruit. > > I feel best when I eat fruit and greens only. And I > will continue to defend it. If that bothers you and > you think it's a load of crap, then I will take my > leave. This isn't my list so I could really care > less what sort of misinformation you would like to > spread in your snit. > > Shari > and this message was meant for you, Todd > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > _________ Try the all-new Mail. " The New Version is radically easier to use " – The Wall Street Journal http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 I am not a disciple of Doug Graham or any other raw guru. I do, however, believe that the statement which Shari quoted is essentially correct. If you look at animals which eat root vegetables, you will find that they have claws for digging which we do not. They are also able to smell them through the dirt which we cannot. It doesn't mean that we can't dig these up and eat them. It is just a strong indicator that they are not a natural source of food for us. -Mike --- Todd German <tgerman1029 wrote: > I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he > possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold > fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load of > crap I've ever heard. Why couldn't we dig with our hands, what are > the limitations? We have opposable thumbs that allow us to do a > myriad of things including digging up a potato or, in modern times, > hold a shovel. Not only do we stand upright to pluck fruit but we > also have knees, hips, pelvis and a flexible low back to squat down > and pickup strawberries and dig up corn from the earth. > > I'm mostly raw like everyone here but this blind believing in > everything Graham, et al. say and write really confuses the hell out > of me. Have we all lost our minds and lost the ability to think for > ourselves? The thing that cracks me is that you never hear/read > about a raw foodie that has been 100% raw for a long time and not > have any problems. Note that I said 100%. I'm also not advocating > eating meat, or cooking or anything whatsoever, it's just that raw > foodists adhere to a dogma and listen to what these quacks say > without listening to the absolute, most authoritative figure, bar > none, on what is the perfect diet for us...our own body!! Some > people can do fine a properly balanced raw diet whereas others (e.g. > an elite endurance athlete) may suffer horribly. Now before anyone > gets upset and starts to name drop famous athletes that are raw and > doing fine, remember I'm talking about the majority of people. > Sometimes we become enamored with the ideal of eating raw > that we totally disregard what is really important, our health. > > > (Shari, I'm not picking on you it's just that this email provided the > right opportunity for a long needed diatribe) > > SV <shavig wrote: It > was explained on a cd by Dr. Doug Graham, raw 25+ years, he said look > at your hand. It's designed to hold fruit, it's not designed to dig > up vegetables or track down and kill an animal. Plus we stand > upright to reach up and pluck the fruit. > > Makes sense to me. > > Shari > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Here's more misinformation about b12. And I ask again, has anyone dared go to www.rawschool.com and read up on b12? If we are searching for answers why is there such closed mindedness on this list? I am on every raw list I can find and this one takes the cake for not wanting to seek new answers to old questions. Or old answers to new questions. So do you want to be raw or sort of raw some of the time? Victoria Boutenko says the difference between 99% and 100% is a 1000% better. And I can attest to this. I was 80 - 90% for many years and after going 100% there is a very noticable difference. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Thanks Mike. And to add to that, we are not made to chase and take down prey after which we rip the flesh from the bones and eat raw. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Mike, Sorry to disagree with you but you are forgetting one thing...we're not animals but humans with millions of years of evolution that has allowed us to adapt to eating an omnivorous diet, that includes digging up root vegetables and tubers. If claws and astute sense of smell are a determinant then explain a koala who sits in a tree all day eating leaves, or a tiger with some pretty impressive claws and a wicked sense of smell eats nothing but meat. What I am saying is that I do not think we can compare ourselves to animals, they are not of our species, Homo Sapien, had Neaderthal Man survived then we would have something to compare against. We are unique in the world. The closest could be chimpanzees and they eat meat! Shari, What kind of misinformation am I spreading? If I sound like I'm being aggressive I apologize, it's not my intention at all. Mike Elliot <mmelliot wrote: I am not a disciple of Doug Graham or any other raw guru. I do, however, believe that the statement which Shari quoted is essentially correct. If you look at animals which eat root vegetables, you will find that they have claws for digging which we do not. They are also able to smell them through the dirt which we cannot. It doesn't mean that we can't dig these up and eat them. It is just a strong indicator that they are not a natural source of food for us. -Mike --- Todd German <tgerman1029 wrote: > I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he > possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold > fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load of > crap I've ever heard. Why couldn't we dig with our hands, what are > the limitations? We have opposable thumbs that allow us to do a > myriad of things including digging up a potato or, in modern times, > hold a shovel. Not only do we stand upright to pluck fruit but we > also have knees, hips, pelvis and a flexible low back to squat down > and pickup strawberries and dig up corn from the earth. > > I'm mostly raw like everyone here but this blind believing in > everything Graham, et al. say and write really confuses the hell out > of me. Have we all lost our minds and lost the ability to think for > ourselves? The thing that cracks me is that you never hear/read > about a raw foodie that has been 100% raw for a long time and not > have any problems. Note that I said 100%. I'm also not advocating > eating meat, or cooking or anything whatsoever, it's just that raw > foodists adhere to a dogma and listen to what these quacks say > without listening to the absolute, most authoritative figure, bar > none, on what is the perfect diet for us...our own body!! Some > people can do fine a properly balanced raw diet whereas others (e.g. > an elite endurance athlete) may suffer horribly. Now before anyone > gets upset and starts to name drop famous athletes that are raw and > doing fine, remember I'm talking about the majority of people. > Sometimes we become enamored with the ideal of eating raw > that we totally disregard what is really important, our health. > > > (Shari, I'm not picking on you it's just that this email provided the > right opportunity for a long needed diatribe) > > SV <shavig wrote: It > was explained on a cd by Dr. Doug Graham, raw 25+ years, he said look > at your hand. It's designed to hold fruit, it's not designed to dig > up vegetables or track down and kill an animal. Plus we stand > upright to reach up and pluck the fruit. > > Makes sense to me. > > Shari > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Shari, Yes, I have been to rawschool.com many, many times and I am well versed on B12, plus I visit many raw sites as well. I have been 70%, 80%, 90% and 100% raw at various times, and currently I am around 90%, I know what works for me. I am most defiantely NOT closed minded about anything as I do a ton of research from VARIOUS (not just one or two) sources and experiment with what works for MY body. I never tell anyone what to eat and not to eat unless they ask me for suggestions. What works for me does not necessarily work someone else. The thing that I suggest is to do your homework and don't adhere to a dogma because someone says that this is the only way. Have you ever wondered how there are people who are in superb health and are not raw? According to some authors out there this could not be possible. It's because they stick to whole foods (and not even necessarily organic), stay away from junk food, GET PLENTY OF EXERCISE and try to limit stress in their lives. Is it not possible to be the epitome of health and fitness without being 100% raw? And back to the original post about being built to pick fruit and not dig vegetables, using your own mind, do you honestly believe this to be true? SV <shavig wrote: Here's more misinformation about b12. And I ask again, has anyone dared go to www.rawschool.com and read up on b12? If we are searching for answers why is there such closed mindedness on this list? I am on every raw list I can find and this one takes the cake for not wanting to seek new answers to old questions. Or old answers to new questions. So do you want to be raw or sort of raw some of the time? Victoria Boutenko says the difference between 99% and 100% is a 1000% better. And I can attest to this. I was 80 - 90% for many years and after going 100% there is a very noticable difference. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 While we are not primarily flesh eaters, if you look at our nearest cousins, you will see that most primates get 5 to 10% of their calories from animal products (mainly in the form of insects and scavenged flesh). However, knowing that I do not needs these things in my diet, I have made the conscious choice of not consuming them. As with most thing in life, there is always a choice... -Mike --- SV <shavig wrote: > Thanks Mike. And to add to that, we are not made to chase and take > down prey after which we rip the flesh from the bones and eat raw. > > Shari > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Shari, While we are all on the same journey, we are all on different parts of the path. Judging others for their personal choices, is seldom useful. Also, it is my belief, that for every " expert " with " proof " that someone can come up with, another " expert " with " proof " of the opposite can be found. For myself, I take a look at what is out there, see what makes the most sense to me at that moment and move on. I may not always make the optimal choice and that is ok with me. -Mike --- SV <shavig wrote: > Here's more misinformation about b12. And I ask again, has anyone > dared go to www.rawschool.com and read up on b12? > > If we are searching for answers why is there such closed mindedness > on this list? I am on every raw list I can find and this one takes > the cake for not wanting to seek new answers to old questions. Or > old answers to new questions. > > So do you want to be raw or sort of raw some of the time? Victoria > Boutenko says the difference between 99% and 100% is a 1000% better. > And I can attest to this. I was 80 - 90% for many years and after > going 100% there is a very noticable difference. > > Shari > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Hi I would hope you could be nicer to your fellow human beings. We are here to learn. What Shari brings up is logical, and what you bring up is *also* logical. But, it leaves a pit in my stomach to see how you deliver this information to the masses. And that pit is not a fruit pit, but a pit of disappointment. Please, be nice. Janet rawfood , Todd German <tgerman1029 wrote: > > I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. Why couldn't we dig with our hands, what are the limitations? We have opposable thumbs that allow us to do a myriad of things including digging up a potato or, in modern times, hold a shovel. Not only do we stand upright to pluck fruit but we also have knees, hips, pelvis and a flexible low back to squat down and pickup strawberries and dig up corn from the earth. > > I'm mostly raw like everyone here but this blind believing in everything Graham, et al. say and write really confuses the hell out of me. Have we all lost our minds and lost the ability to think for ourselves? The thing that cracks me is that you never hear/read about a raw foodie that has been 100% raw for a long time and not have any problems. Note that I said 100%. I'm also not advocating eating meat, or cooking or anything whatsoever, it's just that raw foodists adhere to a dogma and listen to what these quacks say without listening to the absolute, most authoritative figure, bar none, on what is the perfect diet for us...our own body!! Some people can do fine a properly balanced raw diet whereas others (e.g. an elite endurance athlete) may suffer horribly. Now before anyone gets upset and starts to name drop famous athletes that are raw and doing fine, remember I'm talking about the majority of people. Sometimes we become enamored with the ideal of eating raw > that we totally disregard what is really important, our health. > > > (Shari, I'm not picking on you it's just that this email provided the right opportunity for a long needed diatribe) > > SV <shavig wrote: It was explained on a cd by Dr. Doug Graham, raw 25+ years, he said look at your hand. It's designed to hold fruit, it's not designed to dig up vegetables or track down and kill an animal. Plus we stand upright to reach up and pluck the fruit. > > Makes sense to me. > > Shari > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Janet, I apologize if I came across harsh, I truly didn't mean to at all, sometimes the written word betrays your emotions. Sorry if I offended anyone with my tone. Janet FitzGerald <planetwax wrote: Hi I would hope you could be nicer to your fellow human beings. We are here to learn. What Shari brings up is logical, and what you bring up is *also* logical. But, it leaves a pit in my stomach to see how you deliver this information to the masses. And that pit is not a fruit pit, but a pit of disappointment. Please, be nice. Janet rawfood , Todd German <tgerman1029 wrote: > > I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. Why couldn't we dig with our hands, what are the limitations? We have opposable thumbs that allow us to do a myriad of things including digging up a potato or, in modern times, hold a shovel. Not only do we stand upright to pluck fruit but we also have knees, hips, pelvis and a flexible low back to squat down and pickup strawberries and dig up corn from the earth. > > I'm mostly raw like everyone here but this blind believing in everything Graham, et al. say and write really confuses the hell out of me. Have we all lost our minds and lost the ability to think for ourselves? The thing that cracks me is that you never hear/read about a raw foodie that has been 100% raw for a long time and not have any problems. Note that I said 100%. I'm also not advocating eating meat, or cooking or anything whatsoever, it's just that raw foodists adhere to a dogma and listen to what these quacks say without listening to the absolute, most authoritative figure, bar none, on what is the perfect diet for us...our own body!! Some people can do fine a properly balanced raw diet whereas others (e.g. an elite endurance athlete) may suffer horribly. Now before anyone gets upset and starts to name drop famous athletes that are raw and doing fine, remember I'm talking about the majority of people. Sometimes we become enamored with the ideal of eating raw > that we totally disregard what is really important, our health. > > > (Shari, I'm not picking on you it's just that this email provided the right opportunity for a long needed diatribe) > > SV <shavig wrote: It was explained on a cd by Dr. Doug Graham, raw 25+ years, he said look at your hand. It's designed to hold fruit, it's not designed to dig up vegetables or track down and kill an animal. Plus we stand upright to reach up and pluck the fruit. > > Makes sense to me. > > Shari > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 I completely agree with this. I'm sorry if I offended anyone, particularly Shari. I have no intention of forcing my opinions on B12 or anything else on others. I have researched a great deal, including at the rawschool website, and I was just putting forward my opinion based on this, not trying to spread misinformation. There's so much to learn in this 'new' way of eating, and I find the collective wisdom of the group very helpful. We may not agree on everything, but it's good to be stimulated by different views! --- Mike Elliot <mmelliot wrote: > Shari, > > While we are all on the same journey, we are all on > different parts of > the path. Judging others for their personal choices, > is seldom useful. > Also, it is my belief, that for every " expert " with > " proof " that > someone can come up with, another " expert " with > " proof " of the opposite > can be found. > > For myself, I take a look at what is out there, see > what makes the most > sense to me at that moment and move on. I may not > always make the > optimal choice and that is ok with me. > > -Mike > > --- SV <shavig wrote: > > > Here's more misinformation about b12. And I ask > again, has anyone > > dared go to www.rawschool.com and read up on b12? > > > > If we are searching for answers why is there such > closed mindedness > > on this list? I am on every raw list I can find > and this one takes > > the cake for not wanting to seek new answers to > old questions. Or > > old answers to new questions. > > > > So do you want to be raw or sort of raw some of > the time? Victoria > > Boutenko says the difference between 99% and 100% > is a 1000% better. > > And I can attest to this. I was 80 - 90% for many > years and after > > going 100% there is a very noticable difference. > > > > Shari > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > > > > > _________ Inbox full of spam? Get leading spam protection and 1GB storage with All New Mail. http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 " being built to pick fruit and not dig vegetables, using your own mind, do you honestly believe this to be true? " Yes. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Ok. I respect your opinion. SV <shavig wrote: " being built to pick fruit and not dig vegetables, using your own mind, do you honestly believe this to be true? " Yes. Shari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 I never said humans couldn't eat that stuff. I was merely pointing out that is not that type of food we would naturally gravitate toward. As for the millions of years of evolution, it is my understanding that evolution is not the slow gradual change, but big jumps as a species suddenly experiences a big change in its environment and suddenly needs to adapt in order to survive. -Mike --- Todd German <tgerman1029 wrote: > Mike, > > Sorry to disagree with you but you are forgetting one thing...we're > not animals but humans with millions of years of evolution that has > allowed us to adapt to eating an omnivorous diet, that includes > digging up root vegetables and tubers. If claws and astute sense of > smell are a determinant then explain a koala who sits in a tree all > day eating leaves, or a tiger with some pretty impressive claws and a > wicked sense of smell eats nothing but meat. What I am saying is > that I do not think we can compare ourselves to animals, they are not > of our species, Homo Sapien, had Neaderthal Man survived then we > would have something to compare against. We are unique in the world. > The closest could be chimpanzees and they eat meat! > > Shari, > > What kind of misinformation am I spreading? > > If I sound like I'm being aggressive I apologize, it's not my > intention at all. > > > Mike Elliot <mmelliot wrote: > > > I am not a disciple of Doug Graham or any other raw guru. I do, > however, believe that the statement which Shari quoted is > essentially > correct. If you look at animals which eat root vegetables, you will > find that they have claws for digging which we do not. They are also > able to smell them through the dirt which we cannot. It doesn't mean > that we can't dig these up and eat them. It is just a strong > indicator > that they are not a natural source of food for us. > > -Mike > > --- Todd German <tgerman1029 wrote: > > > I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he > > possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold > > fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load > of > > crap I've ever heard. Why couldn't we dig with our hands, what > are > > the limitations? We have opposable thumbs that allow us to do a > > myriad of things including digging up a potato or, in modern > times, > > hold a shovel. Not only do we stand upright to pluck fruit but we > > also have knees, hips, pelvis and a flexible low back to squat > down > > and pickup strawberries and dig up corn from the earth. > > > > I'm mostly raw like everyone here but this blind believing in > > everything Graham, et al. say and write really confuses the hell > out > > of me. Have we all lost our minds and lost the ability to think > for > > ourselves? The thing that cracks me is that you never hear/read > > about a raw foodie that has been 100% raw for a long time and not > > have any problems. Note that I said 100%. I'm also not > advocating > > eating meat, or cooking or anything whatsoever, it's just that raw > > foodists adhere to a dogma and listen to what these quacks say > > without listening to the absolute, most authoritative figure, bar > > none, on what is the perfect diet for us...our own body!! Some > > people can do fine a properly balanced raw diet whereas others > (e.g. > > an elite endurance athlete) may suffer horribly. Now before > anyone > > gets upset and starts to name drop famous athletes that are raw > and > > doing fine, remember I'm talking about the majority of people. > > Sometimes we become enamored with the ideal of eating raw > > that we totally disregard what is really important, our health. > > > > > > > (Shari, I'm not picking on you it's just that this email provided > the > > right opportunity for a long needed diatribe) > > > > SV <shavig wrote: It > > was explained on a cd by Dr. Doug Graham, raw 25+ years, he said > look > > at your hand. It's designed to hold fruit, it's not designed to > dig > > up vegetables or track down and kill an animal. Plus we stand > > upright to reach up and pluck the fruit. > > > > Makes sense to me. > > > > Shari > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 I read you as a bit harsh, too... but, you're so right that the written word leaves out expression, intonation, etc., and so we are often left with simply the cold words in black-and-white and they are often quite harsh in comparison to the way we meant them to be. That said, I was thinking about this discussion and one thing that came to mind is that even *if *our ancestors ate the perfect raw diet -- i.e. they ate only perfect, organic veggies and fruits (whether they dug them up, as bush people in Africa still do, living as they have for thousands of years) or plucked them from trees; they lived in a tropical climate allowing for access to food all year; they ate only the bacteria that was beneficial to them (unlikely, but bear with me); they never ingested chemicals in the forms of artificial additives; they drank only the purest water (also unlikely, because animals used it to, but -again- bear with me - and, yes... obviously much more pure than today by any measure)... even with all of this, they still only lived to the ripe old age of 30-something. As a species, we have adapted and changed into a far different animal... for many and various reasons -- some good and some not so good, but certainly useful or none of us would be here today. While I think raw, whole, organic foods are the best we can possibly do in terms of food... in today's age of soil depletion, careful hygiene, and petroleum-based chemicals in our air, food and water, it's not a wonder we aren't all living to be 150, right? I certainly don't live in a perfect environment, as much as I wish I did. I think there are many things we must consider... nothing is ever as black and white as it seems on the surface. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Hey Suzy, I couldn't agree with you more, I imagine that we could live much longer if we lived in a Utopian bubble but, unfortunately, this isn't the case. I read a few articles stating that, with the exception of emergency rescue medicine and pharmaceuticals (let's not even get into the conversation of drugs, I'm sure we all agree on it), we are living to the same age, even a few years younger, than we did 125 years ago. Despite our best diets we're not doing much better and in a lot of cases worse. Suzy <sgsikora wrote: I read you as a bit harsh, too... but, you're so right that the written word leaves out expression, intonation, etc., and so we are often left with simply the cold words in black-and-white and they are often quite harsh in comparison to the way we meant them to be. That said, I was thinking about this discussion and one thing that came to mind is that even *if *our ancestors ate the perfect raw diet -- i.e. they ate only perfect, organic veggies and fruits (whether they dug them up, as bush people in Africa still do, living as they have for thousands of years) or plucked them from trees; they lived in a tropical climate allowing for access to food all year; they ate only the bacteria that was beneficial to them (unlikely, but bear with me); they never ingested chemicals in the forms of artificial additives; they drank only the purest water (also unlikely, because animals used it to, but -again- bear with me - and, yes... obviously much more pure than today by any measure)... even with all of this, they still only lived to the ripe old age of 30-something. As a species, we have adapted and changed into a far different animal... for many and various reasons -- some good and some not so good, but certainly useful or none of us would be here today. While I think raw, whole, organic foods are the best we can possibly do in terms of food... in today's age of soil depletion, careful hygiene, and petroleum-based chemicals in our air, food and water, it's not a wonder we aren't all living to be 150, right? I certainly don't live in a perfect environment, as much as I wish I did. I think there are many things we must consider... nothing is ever as black and white as it seems on the surface. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2006 Report Share Posted August 8, 2006 Please know that these words, " I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load of crap I've ever heard. " , will never be construed as polite, in my book. Apology accepted. However, I might feel differently had those same words been directed toward me. Let us remember why we are here and give the listowner no reasons to moderate messages. Janet rawfood , Todd German <tgerman1029 wrote: > > Janet, > > I apologize if I came across harsh, I truly didn't mean to at all, sometimes the written word betrays your emotions. Sorry if I offended anyone with my tone. > > > Janet FitzGerald <planetwax wrote: Hi > > I would hope you could be nicer to your fellow human beings. We are > here to learn. What Shari brings up is logical, and what you bring > up is *also* logical. But, it leaves a pit in my stomach to see how > you deliver this information to the masses. And that pit is not a > fruit pit, but a pit of disappointment. Please, be nice. > > Janet > > rawfood , Todd German <tgerman1029@> wrote: > > > > I'm sorry Shari but do you really believe that??? How can he > possibly say something like that, " ...the hand is designed to hold > fruit and not dig up vegetables " !!!!!!! That's the biggest load of > crap I've ever heard. Why couldn't we dig with our hands, what are > the limitations? We have opposable thumbs that allow us to do a > myriad of things including digging up a potato or, in modern times, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2006 Report Share Posted August 9, 2006 There are some old texts that say " man " has lived for hundreds of years. I believe that to be true. Of course it was thousands of years ago. Louise rawfood , Suzy <sgsikora wrote: > > I read you as a bit harsh, too... but, you're so right that the > written word leaves out expression, intonation, etc., and so we are often > left with simply the cold words in black-and-white and they are often quite > harsh in comparison to the way we meant them to be. > > That said, I was thinking about this discussion and one thing that came to > mind is that even *if *our ancestors ate the perfect raw diet -- i.e. they > ate only perfect, organic veggies and fruits (whether they dug them up, as > bush people in Africa still do, living as they have for thousands of years) > or plucked them from trees; they lived in a tropical climate allowing for > access to food all year; they ate only the bacteria that was beneficial to > them (unlikely, but bear with me); they never ingested chemicals in the > forms of artificial additives; they drank only the purest water (also > unlikely, because animals used it to, but -again- bear with me - and, yes... > obviously much more pure than today by any measure)... even with all of > this, they still only lived to the ripe old age of 30-something. > > As a species, we have adapted and changed into a far different animal... for > many and various reasons -- some good and some not so good, but certainly > useful or none of us would be here today. > > While I think raw, whole, organic foods are the best we can possibly do in > terms of food... in today's age of soil depletion, careful hygiene, and > petroleum-based chemicals in our air, food and water, it's not a wonder we > aren't all living to be 150, right? I certainly don't live in a perfect > environment, as much as I wish I did. > > I think there are many things we must consider... nothing is ever as black > and white as it seems on the surface. > > > 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.