The Living and Raw Foods Community Support

Our Organic Farm In Loxahatchee,Florida (no replies)

moringaplace — Wed, 22 May 2013 03:44:05 -0400

[www.facebook.com]

vitamin tincture or liquid vitamin DIY (no replies)

amazi — Wed, 22 May 2013 02:14:50 -0400

I'm considering making my own vitamin tincture. I'm looking to include Vitamin B12, B6 & zinc in the appropriate amounts I need within vegetable glycerin and water. (Food sources aren't good enough so I need to go this route)

I'd like to avoid the fillers, magnesium stearate that most pills include. It also helps to put everything in one container instead of taking so many pills. I've found a vitamin place that sell some of these vitamins and others in powders and I have the option of either making my own capsules, making a liquid vitamin or maybe some type of lozenge. Hmm lozenge that just came to me - I have to look into that one.

Anyway I was hoping I could find someone here to guide me in this process to avoid mistakes.

thanks

humic acid & fulvic acid (no replies)

amazi — Wed, 22 May 2013 00:49:37 -0400

I have been pretty excited since hearing about the benefits of both of these acids. But I'm reluctant to try any brands since they all seem to claim they are the best and that other brands are contaminated.

Is there any credible humic/fulvic acid brand you guys trust?

I'm bowlegged... am I doomed? (1 reply)

fruitylou — Wed, 22 May 2013 04:35:19 -0400

Should I try to correct it?

Am I more susceptible to injuries?

30 min video: Dr Douglas Graham 13 years ago (no replies)

Panchito — Tue, 21 May 2013 17:34:58 -0400

[www.youtube.com]

Rawfoodist cake with strawberry (no replies)

Matvienknat — Tue, 21 May 2013 14:12:08 -0400

Hello! THANK YOU FOR THOSE AWESOME RECIPES!
Want to share with you the recipe of a strawberry cake (for rawfoodists) - each and every ingredients was taken on the local market (except for the carob - I ordered it here - [veganmarket.wordpress.com])
Base:
- Prunes (100g)
- Cranberry (100g)
- Raisins (100g)
- Raw almonds (100g)
- sesame
For all the basics blender grind
Send it in the freezer.
For the "cheese" layer:
- cashew
- Slice of lemon, about 1 cm
- 1/4 cup water
- 1 tablespoon of coconut
- 1 tablespoon of liquid honey (not sugared!)
- 1/2 cup strawberries
For the cheese layer blend into a smooth paste everything except strawberries, using a blender. We post 2/3 based on weight. To the remaining "cream" add strawberries and whisk again until smooth. Spread on a white layer.
Decorate as you want!
Well, actually all! Send it in the freezer to freeze!

Oxidation over time rules of thumb (no replies)

Delta223 — Tue, 21 May 2013 10:11:08 -0400

Hi, are there any rules of thumb for how many nutrients are oxidized over time? I like to sip on my smoothies over a period of 1-2 hours so this would be useful to know.

FDA To Decide Whether Antibacterial Soap Is Safe (1 reply)

Panchito — Tue, 21 May 2013 07:05:50 -0400

[singularityhub.com]

"Antibacterial soap has been around for 40 years. But research now shows that the active ingredient in the soap, triclosan, alters hormonal balance in animals, is possibly harmful to the immune system, and possibly contributes to the rise of antibiotic resistant germs.

I’ll give you a moment to dump all your triclosan-containing antibacterial liquid soaps and body washes that you’ve been using for years into the trash.

Triclosan, which kills both bacteria and fungus, is found in about 75 percent of antibacterial products. In addition to soaps, it’s found in deodorants and toothpaste and mouthwashes where it helps prevent gingivitis, and it’s infused in various household products such as garbage bags, kitchen utensils, furniture, clothing, toys, and some cosmetics."

Viruses in the gut protect from infection (no replies)

Panchito — Tue, 21 May 2013 04:49:13 -0400

[www.nature.com]

“Mucus is everywhere,” says microbiologist Jeremy Barr. Almost every animal uses it to make a barrier that protects tissues that are exposed to the environment, such as the gut or lungs. Now, Barr and a team of researchers have discovered that mucus is also the key to an ancient partnership between animals and viruses.

Barr and his colleagues, who are based at San Diego State University in California, show that animal mucus — whether from humans, fish or corals — is loaded with bacteria-killing viruses called phages. These protect their hosts from infection by destroying incoming bacteria. In return, the phages are exposed to a steady torrent of microbes in which to reproduce. “It’s a unique form of symbiosis, between animals and viruses,” says Rotem Sorek, a microbial geneticist at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel, who was not involved in the research.

“It’s groundbreaking,” adds Frederic Bushman, a microbiologist from the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. “The idea that phage can be viewed as part of the innate immune system is original and exciting.” The results are published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences1.

Ron Paul's Revolution Continues (2 replies)

KidRaw — Tue, 21 May 2013 19:16:50 -0400

EXCLUSIVE: Ron Paul's revolution continues (interview)

[communities.washingtontimes.com]

"Since leaving the House of Representatives, former 12-term representative and presidential candidate Ron Paul has not slowed down. He has released a new educational curriculum for homeschoolers, opened a new Institute that focuses exclusively on foreign policy, and continues to speak across the country at college campuses to students eager to hear his philosophy of liberty."

Prayers to OKlahoma tonight (1 reply)

banana who — Mon, 20 May 2013 23:07:46 -0400

I heard about the elementary school...Hope for the safe recovery of those trapped and healing for families of those children and adults who didn't make it :(

RIP Ray Manzarek (2 replies)

banana who — Tue, 21 May 2013 16:56:39 -0400

My favorite group of all time. I didn't know he had cancer but he was such a bright spirit.

Just starting out - advice and support is welcome! (no replies)

fig — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:00:28 -0400

I'm trying to change my diet to raw vegan, but I'm having some trouble since I don't know anyone who eats this way. I'm going to start a blog thread and maybe people will give me some advice or encouragement or get encouraged from reading my posts. I don't know.

I'm trying to eat this way for my health generally, but also for migraines specifically. If anyone has experience with eating raw vegan to help with migraines, please let me know! I'd love to hear more about it. I've been struggling with terrible migraines since October 2011. I've tried removing many things from my diet, I've tried eating particular ways, I've tried many kinds of pills with varying horrible side effects. I've gotten started eating raw vegan a couple different times over the past several weeks. I'll get going for about 5 days and then crash because of a stressful or busy day or some kind of social or family event.

I've realized that making this big of a change is going to require a lot work and planning and commitment. When I look up raw vegan online, there seems to be a whole world of things I don't understand, and that confuses me and intimidates me. Things about flushes and cleanses and fasts, juicing, dehydrating, blending, raw recipes, etc. When I do eat raw vegan for several days (pretty much just fruits, vegetables, and nuts) in a row I start to feel so much better, so I know this is the way to go for me. I have to really give it a try.

So I'm going to try and sort out this new way of eating and see what works. I'm going to try to update on here how it is working for my migraines and any ideas I find that work for me. I might post too much or not much at all, I'm not sure. But I feel like some handholding would be nice :) I'm doing this alone while continuing to prepare cooked and non-vegan food every day for my husband and children and my mother who lives with me. I'm trying to at least have something raw for them at each meal. If you suffer from migraines, please reply! I don't know anyone else with migraines either.

CORPORATE MONSTERS ARE NOT HUMAN (after all) (no replies)

riverhousebill — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:35:21 -0400

A Pennsylvania judge in the heart of the Keystone states fracking belt has issued a forceful and precedent setting decision holding that There is nocorporate right to privacy under that states constition, giving the citizens and journalist a powerful tool to understand the health and environmental impactd of natural gas drillind in their communities.

Whether a right of privacy for businesses exist within the prenumbra rights of Pennsylvanias constitution is a matter of first impression.

Lemmings myth (no replies)

riverhousebill — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:08:57 -0400

© anomalies-unlimited.com Im amazed at how many people belive in Disneyland and this myth. And to Slander such a fine animal. Stupid humans!
Yet Another Warm Fuzzy Disney Tale or How Disney Has Brainwashed You
But, you're saying....it's Disney. So what if there's a little T & A in the movies? So what if they kill off all the mothers in their films? No one pays attention to this stuff! Want to know just how much Disney's influence affects Life As We Know It? Well, I'll tell you anyway.

Everyone knows lemmings commit suicide by throwing themselves off of cliffs, right? We have the expression "lead astray like lemmings to the sea".."followed like lemmings", "like lemmings off a cliff"..used to describe stupid acts by several people. Thing is, Lemmings don't behave that way - Walt Disney made the whole thing up. All of it. You'd be surprized how many people believe this as fact; go ask a few. Maybe you do, too, till right now.

It all started when the nature documentary 'White Wilderness' was filmed in 1958 in the arctic wilds of Alberta, Canada. It was a massive undertaking that took 3 years. No one has yet to figure out why - and Disney never explained - why they got it in their heads to film a "real lemming migration" complete with rare, never-before-seen footage of the critters drowning themselves in the sea. This was never-before-seen because lemmings don't do this. Population explosions sometimes happen and lemmings do migrate and maybe a few will accidentally fall off a cliff or tumble down some rocks and fall in a stream or something and drown. Sucks to be them, then, but it's not a habit they all get into as some wise form of population control. You could just as easily say ants migrate and commit suicide by throwing themselves off curbs and drowning themselves in puddles. Apparently The Disney Documentary Braintrust neglected, in researching their Wildlife documentary, to find any actual desire to document the wildlife accurately. Not to fear! The head photographer and crew decided to take the liberty of bullshitting. They paid Inuit kids 25 cents for every lemming they brought in and they got a few dozen.

They put the critters on a huge, snow-covered "Lazy Susan" turntable and spun it, then filmed from various angles as the critters ran, fell and slid into each other. This pretty much made it look like a "migration" sequence showing a bunch of spinning, running, sliding lemmings with snow flying all over. Voila! Lemming migration! Afterwards, instead of just letting the things go with a few $ and some Mickey Mouse ears, then they were all taken to where there was a cliff overlooking a river and herded over the edge, down into the water, where they drowned. For real. For no reason except to be filmed. Cut and Wrap! Disney got his footage and the myth of the Lemming Hurling Off Cliffs To Commit Suicide was born.

This is how much people trusted Uncle Walt and the stuff that came out of Disney Studios back then. Disney Documentary was as good as God's Honest Wholesome Truth. People to this day will still believe this story is Nature Wilderness fact when in fact it's made up Disney bull and proof of how much trust people put into the clean, honest "image" of Disney.

I ate in an American restaurant last night... (8 replies)

coco — Tue, 21 May 2013 10:36:11 -0400

It's been a while. Visiting family over here, it got late, we got hungry. I could have waited but the kids and everyone else, well...
The SALT! OMG! I feel like a dried out sea sponge this morning. Seriously, this is how the rest of the world eats? Hello hypertension, sheesh. I have no idea what the food even tasted like under all that sodium. Can't have been very good...

Biting inspect repellant (4 replies)

rawne — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:37:37 -0400

Anyone know of a tried & true ALL NATURAL repellant?

Green Smoothie fast/feast (1 reply)

BreakingSilence — Wed, 22 May 2013 00:24:41 -0400

I think I am deciding tomorrow to start a green smoothie fast/feast. If anyone cares to join me let me know! Feel free to contact me at srockntc@optonline.net

Natural remedy for strong pain? (8 replies)

rab — Wed, 22 May 2013 03:41:15 -0400

Does anyone know a strong herbal or any natural solution for strong pain?

Recruiting Extraordinary People for a Sustainable Urban Eco-Community (no replies)

BlueAngelRowing — Sun, 19 May 2013 13:52:04 -0400

I am female, in my early 50's, a very peaceful health/fitness/green-minded professional from the East Coast. I used to run a health retreat in my big, beautiful old home with guests from all over and live-in staff. I then went from being an alternative heath practitioner/life coach/retreat owner to being an inventor. As the house is no longer filled with staff and guests, it is far too big for one person.

I am offering a beautiful harmonious home for people of like mind to live and work together to demonstrate how living a green and eventually sustainable lifestyle can be accomplished in an old house within city limits not designed to have a low carbon footprint.

Also, I am offering the house and grounds with it's unique amenities and qualities as an eco/organic/alternative health/fitness/spiritual business incubator for the participants I am manifesting to take part. I wish to use this house to monetize it once more in partnership with like-minded go-getters.

It is a beautiful, elegant old house in a popular eclectic gentrified old neighborhood in lush and temperate Birmingham, Alabama. The house has 5 bedrooms, 5 baths, has two fireplaces, hardwood floors, 2 claw foot tubs, 4 showers, a huge well-equipped kitchen, two refrigerators, a free-weight gym, a great workshop in the basement and much more. The neighborhood is quiet and beautiful and the backyard is adjacent to a park.

Participants living here would video and write about their projects, ideas and simple tips for conserving, as well as tying in the new paradigm/spiritual components of manifesting, positive thinking and that we are all one and need to work together that I have been writing about for so many years on my website ... a voice crying in the wilderness.

I need people with impetus and ideas who are willing to take part in doing the projects both with good old fashioned hard work, digging in the dirt, online/social media/website/writing/videoing/editing/fundraising, ad infinitum ... as well as a proportionate financial contribution. There is unlimited scope for creativity for POSITIVE enthusiastic creative people.

With the right people to run it, the health/fitness retreat could be re-established. If you come with some experience in one or more holistic modalities, I am willing to teach/train. Investigate my background you will discover this is a unique educational opportunity.

I am certified in Living Foods Lifestyle and for many years hosted a weekly Organic Raw Food Supper Club that had a loyal following! I would love to resurrect it at least on a monthly basis. We are in the process of doing a large organic garden expansion which includes a plan to build a 30 foot high pyramid greenhouse this summer.

I want the right people for this endeavor. The "right" people will see this ad and it will grab them. The "right" people will read it carefully and understand this is not a just a cool place to rent to live, but a life/career opportunity. You will further investigate (read the websites) and fully perceive the value and I won't have to defend a thing ... such as how I have priced the rooms. They are different sizes so it seems fair to charge more or less accordingly for single occupancy. I am providing 90% materially ... and a vastness of intangible value as my contribution to the foundation. From there, together, we will create a vision that is exponentially great than the sum of our individual parts. It will then be a springboard to a potential beyond what we can foresee now!

Two bedrooms are furnished ($700 and $800), one partially ($700) and one unfurnished ($500). Each room has it's own bathroom. What is included? Utilities and wi-fi, access to the unique amenities of a health/fitness retreat, life coaching, intern/apprenticeship in a wide scope of areas of your interest from prototyping inventions in the workshop, living foods lifestyle (sprouting, dehydrating, fermenting etc.), cleansing/detoxification, a unique approach to fitness and diet, personal energy (spiritual) management, global issues ... ad infinitum. PLUS, you will have an open venue to express your unique contribution and unlimited creative potential. In short, every goal you have on all levels can be reached and exceeded here. But you have to have the intention and the courage to succeed. My retreat guests paid $500 a day to go through the program to learn to empower themselves . . . so to live here and have access to all of the above for $25 a day is a pretty good deal.

To learn more, go to www.globalrowingclub.com. The "Take the Tour" link is a virtual tour of the house. You can also see more on my public FB page.

Email and tell me about you and what you feel you have to bring to such a community as this. Please include your FaceBook page, LinkedIn or website . . . to help me know you are a real person, not a creepy CL spammer. If I get a sense that it could be a fit for both of us and you are serious about pursuing a place in this adventure, we can set up a time to talk.

No smokers.

Peace. :)

Jenifer

Growing, expanding and hiring a sales team (no replies)

swimmer — Sun, 19 May 2013 10:39:35 -0400

I'm hiring several sales people (commission only) to join my growing business. Located in San Diego, but you can work from home anywhere in the world. My other two sales people are home based. Earn generous commissions and bonus opportunities.

Work full, or part time selling 3d animations and illustrations in the medical and legal fields. Work as many or as few hours as you like. From RNA and cellular activity to anatomical animations to accident scene re-creations, we visualize it all it all. Our services are used by medical device manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, medical groups, litigation attorneys, etc. This is a technical, scientific sales position, so some medical or legal knowledge is very helpful.

Join the ground floor of a fast growing scientific 3d animation company.

I’m also hiring freelance animators and 3d artists on a part time, as needed basis. SideFX Houdini experience highly preferred. ZBrush or Mudbox modelers are also needed.

Respond to my craigslist ad if you’re interested.

[sandiego.craigslist.org]

Thnaks!

A completely frivolous nonsensical item. That I want, lol. (2 replies)

coco — Mon, 20 May 2013 13:59:23 -0400

This is adorable. I mean, really, the cutest thing ever. I am not much of one for keeping care of houseplants though I do like greenery inside the house but this, this little travelling ball of green beauty, this I like.

[www.uncommongoods.com]

The Inquisition of Climate Science (12 replies)

riverhousebill — Wed, 22 May 2013 04:39:36 -0400

James Lawrence Powell, The Inquisition of Climate Science (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011), 232 pages, $27.95, hardcover.

James Powell was inspired to write this important new book because of a remarkable paradox: among climate scientists, there is a near-unanimous consensus that global warming is occurring now, is largely human-made, and will cause very severe environmental problems if humanity continues business as usual. However, among the lay public the picture is much more mixed: only about half of the U.S. public agrees with the climate scientists. Why the enormous discrepancy?

Powell argues that “in the denial of global warming, we are witnessing the most vicious, and so far most successful, attack on science in history.” Although Powell himself is not a climate science researcher, he has an appropriate background to understand the field: he holds a doctorate in geochemistry from MIT and became a geology professor, teaching at Oberlin College for over twenty years. He has been a college president at three institutions, and served for a dozen years on the National Science Board. Powell’s book is a sharp attack on the global-warming denial “industry,” a network comprised of corporate funding, think tanks, popularizers, and propagandists, who all work with a compliant mass media.

Corporate Funders

Powell details the support of ExxonMobil for denialism, but omits the combative Koch brothers, owners of Koch Energy, the world’s largest privately held energy company. ExxonMobil is the biggest funder of global-warming denialism, spending nearly $16 million on more than forty organizations over the period 1998–2005. Powell also mentions in passing funding by ideological conservative foundations, motivated by opposition to government regulation of the economy.

Think Tanks

Chapter nine describes “Toxic Tanks”—think tanks that promote global-warming denial. These toxic tanks have swell-sounding names (e.g., “Frontiers of Freedom”) that do not hint they are climate-change deniers. Powell describes in detail four (out of a much larger number) of these fossil-fuel-company-funded think tanks.

1. The now-defunct Global Climate Coalition (GCC) included Exxon-Mobil, Amoco, Chevron, American Petroleum Institute, Shell, Texaco, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Chrysler, General Motors, Ford, and the American Forest and Paper Association. The GCC, established in 1989, operated from the offices of the National Association of Manufacturing. The GCC hired a PR firm which produced a video to combat the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. However, some of its member companies left the GCC; they thought it too risky to be publicly identified with global-warming denial, and feared the fate of Big Tobacco; it had ended up losing lawsuits for health-care costs of smokers, ultimately settling for damages of $251 billion. Beset by the defections, the GCC disbanded in 2001.

During its lifetime, the GCC established a research arm, the Science and Technology Assessment Committee, which was staffed by industry scientists. A committee led by Mobil Oil chemical engineer L. C. Bernstein produced a confidential 1995 report which was circulated to the members of GCC: oil and coal companies, electric utilities, attorneys, National Mining Association, etc. In a stunning admission, the Bernstein Report concluded that “the scientific basis for the greenhouse effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied.” The report knocked down one of the most popular contrarian arguments: that global warming could be attributed to changes in the Sun’s brightness. In opposition to the contrarian view, the Bernstein Report stated that changes in the brightness of the Sun were too small by at least a factor of five to cause the temperature change observed in the last 120 years. It pointed out that the deniers had no alternative theory of their own, saying “The contrarian theories raise interesting questions about our total understanding of climate processes, but they do not offer convincing arguments against the conventional model of greenhouse gas emission-induced climate change.”

Thus, while the oil companies and their hired hands were proclaiming in public that global warming was not caused by burning fossil fuels, their own scientists were saying exactly the opposite in private. If you have never heard of the Bernstein Report, you have lots of company. It did not surface until 2007, a dozen years after it was written, during a discovery process in a California court proceeding.

2. Another ExxonMobil-funded think tank discussed by Powell is the Chicago-based Heartland Institute, which originated as a Libertarian propaganda outfit supported by Big Tobacco. The manager for industry affairs for Philip Morris, Roy E. Marden, served for years on the Heartland board of directors. The Heartland Institute raised $676,500 from ExxonMobil between 1996 and 2006; after 2006 Heartland stopped identifying their contributors. The institute published a slim booklet, The Skeptic’s Handbook, whose publication costs were paid by “an anonymous donor,” and whose author, “Joanna Nova,” is a pseudonym. Vast numbers of the handbook were distributed for free—and in total over 150,000 copies have been distributed in fifteen languages. The recipients include 850 journalists, 26,000 schools, and 19,000 leaders and politicians. The largest single recipients are black churches (over 25,000 copies) and trustees at colleges and universities (over 20,000 copies). In addition, over 60,000 free copies have been downloaded from their website.

In February 2012, too late for inclusion in Powell’s book, confidential documents from the Heartland Institute were leaked to bloggers. Damaging revelations included the identification of some corporate funders of Heartland: Microsoft, tobacco giant Altria, the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline, and the General Motors Foundation. The documents describe payments by Heartland to some contrarian scientists: for example, Craig Idso, head of an organization of climate change deniers in Arizona, was receiving over $139,000 annually. The documents also describe Heartland’s plans for a “Global Warming Curriculum for K-12 Classrooms,” and the planned “curriculum that shows that the topic of climate change is controversial and uncertain—two key points that are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science.”

3. The George C. Marshall Institute, in Washington, D.C., was originally established in 1984 to flack for Reagan’s Star Wars program (officially SDI, the “Strategic Defense Initiative”), a scheme for shooting down incoming enemy missiles. A scholarly study by the American Physical Society found that Star Wars would not work, but nobody who mattered minded at all. If you think the goal was to defend the United States from attack, Star Wars showed itself to be useless against the 9/11 attacks. But if you think that one of the real goals of SDI was to spend money, then the program was a big success: by September 2001, Star Wars had homed in on the taxpayer for over $40 billion.

The Marshall Institute adopted other issues in addition to Star Wars, including second-hand smoke and global warming. The Marshall Institute proclaims that the health hazards of second-hand smoke are unproven. Regarding global warming, the scientists associated with the Marshall Institute have claimed at different times that (a) the twentieth century is not unusually warm, (b) global warming stopped in 2005, and (c) in any event increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide will stimulate plant growth, thus fertilizing the earth. Therefore, increased carbon dioxide will be good for the planet.

Some of the scientists at the Marshall Institute have scientific credentials, but in fields that are remote from global-warming research. For example, Sally Baliunas and Willy Soon are both associated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. If you think that global warming is caused by increased brightness of the Sun, then Baliunas and Soon, both astrophysicists, have the relevant scientific background. If you do not think that the Sun is causing global warming, then Baliunas and Soon do not have expertise in the relevant discipline.

The claim that the Sun is causing global warming was refuted decades ago. If it were true, then both the surface of the earth and the stratosphere would warm. But if increased atmospheric greenhouse gases caused global warming, then the surface of the earth would warm, while the stratosphere would cool. In fact, stratospheric cooling has been observed, and it includes both natural contributions (volcanoes) and human-made contributions.1

Since 1979, direct observation of the Sun’s output by satellite has established a high-quality data base. The output exhibits periodic small (less than 0.1 percent peak-to-trough) oscillations, caused by the eleven-year sunspot cycle. After averaging over the sunspot cycle, there has been no increase from one cycle to the next in the intensity of the Sun. The latest solar data can been seen at the website of James Hansen and Makiko Sato.2

Baliunas and Soon published a paper in 2003 in the journal Climate Research. It claimed that there was nothing special about global temperatures in the twentieth century. Three editors for the journal resigned in protest against publishing the flawed paper.

The founder of the Marshall Institute, the late Frederick Seitz, was a distinguished physicist whose 1940 textbook, The Modern Theory of Solids, was a standard in solid-state physics, albeit a field very remote from climate-change science. Seitz served as President of the National Academy of Sciences and then President of Rockefeller University. Shortly before retiring from Rockefeller University, he began working as a consultant to R.J. Reynolds tobacco company, helping Reynolds to spend $45 million for research that was intended to discredit or downplay the health hazards of smoking. Seitz and Reynolds were especially interested in second-hand smoke. Seitz’s scientific credentials were impressive in their own field, but utterly nonexistent in the fields of the hazards of smoking or climate change.

The Baliunas-Soon study was funded by the American Petroleum Institute. The Marshall Institute received $630,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005, in addition to funds received from the Sarah Mellon Scaife and John M. Olin Foundations. Like the Heartland Institute, the Marshall Institute no longer publishes its donor list. Baliunas was paid $52,000 by the Marshall Institute in 1997 for serving as a director. The CEO of the Marshall Institute, William O’Keefe, was formerly the COO of the American Petroleum Institute and chairman of the GCC, mentioned above.

One executive director of the Marshall Institute, Matthew Crawford, became so disillusioned that he resigned after only five months on the job. Crawford wrote that “the trappings of scholarship were used to put a scientific cover on positions arrived at otherwise. These positions served various interests, ideological or material. For example, part of my job consisted of making arguments about global warming that just happened to coincide with the positions taken by the oil companies that funded the think tank.”3

The current Chairman of the Board of Marshall is Princeton physicist Will Happer, who was also my doctoral advisor at Columbia University in the early 1970s. Happer has had a distinguished career in atomic and laser physics, with over 200 publications in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, but none of them about climate change. In spring 2010, he testified before a committee of the U.S. House of Representatives that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are beneficial because they fertilize plant growth. It is a fact that the source of carbon for plant growth is atmospheric carbon dioxide. In support of his position, Happer noted that greenhouses use greatly elevated carbon dioxide levels to increase plant growth.

However, a German scientist, Justus Liebig, discovered in the 1830s “Liebig’s Law of the Minimum”: plant growth is controlled not by the total resources available, but by the scarcest resource (limiting factor). For example, in a desert, the limiting factor is typically water, not atmospheric carbon dioxide. Experiments have been conducted to seek increased plant growth caused by increased atmospheric carbon dioxide levels in a realistic agricultural environment. These experiments have yielded meager results, as demonstrated in an article written by my University of Nevada, Las Vegas colleague Stan Smith and published in 2000 in Nature, perhaps the most prestigious academic journal in the natural sciences, or indeed anywhere.

Another study at Stanford University published in Science in 2002 reached the same conclusions. “Most studies have looked at the effects of CO2 on plants in pots or on very simple ecosystems and concluded that plants are going to grow faster in the future,” said Field, co-author of the Science study. “We got exactly the same results when we applied CO2 alone, but when we factored in realistic treatments—warming, changes in nitrogen deposition, changes in precipitation—growth was actually suppressed.”4

Like fellow physicist Frederick Seitz, Happer has a great deal of expertise, but none in the relevant scientific discipline (plant biology in this case).

4. The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) was founded in 1984 to oppose government regulation in an astonishing range of fields: air quality, dioxin, drug safety, fuel-efficiency standards, labeling of alcoholic beverages, rent control, and security law. If that were not enough, CEI also opposes government regulation of high technology, e-commerce, intellectual property, and telecommunications. Whatever the field, government regulation is always bad. CEI filed lawsuits in the late 1990s challenging the Big Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement.

The CEI’s “expert” on global warming is Myron Ebell, who claimed, in a 2007 interview in Vanity Fair, that the “hockey stick” paper by Michael Mann and co-authors was wrong: the oceans are not warming, warming is not causing animal habitats to shift, and global warming does not threaten polar bears. Ebell has attacked eminent climate scientist James Hansen because the latter was trained as a physicist, not as a climate scientist. It seems fair therefore to ask about Ebell’s training. He holds an undergraduate degree in philosophy, and later studied political theory at the London School of Economics and history at Cambridge University.

CEI has been actively opposed to doing anything about global warming; it funded a PR program, “Earth Summit Alternatives,” which generated articles and interviews opposing the results of the 1992 Rio Climate Summit. In 1997, CEI offered to provide experts to promote the claim that global warming is “a theory, not a fact.” The experts included Sallie Baliunas, Patrick J. Michaels, and S. Fred Singer (on Singer, see below). In 2006, CEI ran television advertisements in fourteen U.S. cities to counteract Al Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth. Not surprisingly, CEI has received funding from Amoco, Philip Morris, and ExxonMobil, with ExxonMobil giving $2 million between 1998 and 2005.

Popularizers and Propagandists

Powell discusses and dismisses several non-scientist deniers, including former weatherman Anthony Watts, British journalist Christopher Monckton, Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg, and fictional thriller writer Michael Crichton. Powell also sketches a small number of contrarian scientists; in addition to Frederick Seitz, Sallie Baliunas, and Willie Soon, Powell discusses S. Fred Singer, Freeman Dyson, Richard Lindzen, and Tim Ball.

Singer, a physicist, is a “utility infielder” of contrarian science, with claimed expertise on second-hand smoke, the ozone hole, and global warming. His swell-sounding Science and Environmental Policy Program (SEPP) has only one employee—Fred Singer himself.

Freeman Dyson is a mathematical physicist at the Princeton Institute for Advanced Study. His mathematical abilities are impressive, but he knows very little about climate or climate science. Dyson is member of the Jasons, a group of scientists, mostly physicists, who advise the Pentagon. In the 1970s the Jasons did some computer modeling of climate, although nobody in the group had any background in climate science. Powell remarks, “If Dyson’s last brush with climate models was in the 1970’s, no wonder he scoffs at the models and derides those who use them” (69). Dyson advocates developing a “supertree” that can gobble carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and bury it underground or convert it to useful liquid fuels. Selective breeding of plants goes back to Luther Burbank over a century ago, but there is no evidence that such a supertree is anything but a figment of Dyson’s imagination.

Richard Lindzen actually does have climate-related expertise. He earned his Ph.D. from Harvard, and holds an endowed chair in meteorology at MIT. His CV runs to 350 publications, and he is a member of the National Academy of Sciences. He helped to prepare the 1995 and 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports.

Lindzen is convinced that the climate system somehow has negative feedbacks that tend to cancel out the effect of any external change. He proposed a specific model that he thought would produce negative feedback, the “adaptive iris” model. Unfortunately for Lindzen, when field measurements were made, they disproved his model instead of confirming it. The vast majority of climate scientists believe the feedbacks are positive, over the time scales relevant to humanity, decades to hundreds of thousands of years, with negative feedbacks (caused by weathering of rocks) operating on a longer time scale of millions of years or longer.5 He claims that the mainstream climate scientists have not proven global warming. This naturally raises the issue of how much proof is required. Lindzen has such an extremely high standard of proof that he believes that the link between cigarette smoking and cancer is unproven.

Lindzen has accused mainstream science of selling out for money, while claiming that skeptics of global warming have lost their grants. Actually, Lindzen himself has been awarded over $3.5 million since 1975 from the National Science Foundation alone.

Timothy Ball, a less well-known denier, is a former professor at the University of Winnipeg. Over the last decade he has given over 600 public talks on science and the environment, at the breakneck pace of over one talk every six days. Between 2002 and 2007 he wrote thirty-nine opinion pieces and thirty-two letters to the editor in twenty-four Canadian newspapers, a rate of one a month. Despite this rapid pace, he found time to write for the denier website Tech Central Station, and to appear in both the denier documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle and in a Fox News special, Exposed: The Climate of Fear, hosted by Glenn Beck. Ball was associated with Friends of Science, a great-sounding name but in practice funded by oil and gas companies. Ball then left Friends of Science in order to establish the (even greater sounding) Natural Resources Stewardship Project. Two of its three directors were PR flacks for energy industry clients.

In 2006, Ball rashly initiated a battle that ended in defeat. In an opinion piece published in the Calgary Herald newspaper, he claimed both that he held Canada’s first Ph.D. in climatology, and that he was a professor of the subject at the University of Winnipeg for twenty-eight years. Ball also disparaged another Canadian professor, Dan Johnson, Professor of Environmental Science at the University of Lethbridge. Johnson wrote a letter to the Herald accusing Ball of inflating his (Ball’s) resume, and claiming that Ball “did not show any evidence of research regarding climate and atmosphere.” Ball sued everybody in sight.

In the ensuring legal battle, Ball confessed to inflating his resume, admitted that he had been a professor for only eight years (not twenty-eight), and acknowledged that his doctoral degree was in geography, not climatology. The Herald newspaper expressed confidence in Johnson’s letter, and wrote “The plaintiff (Ball) is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist.” In June 2007, the time came to show up in court; with his reputation in ruins, Ball dropped his lawsuit (72).

Four years later, Ball appeared to have learned nothing from his defeat in 2007. He wrote an article in 2011 for the Canada Free Press (CFP), a conservative website, in which he attacked Professor Andrew Weaver, a climate scientist at the University of Victoria, Canada.

Weaver sued. The CFP folded, issuing a groveling apology:

CFP also wishes to dissociate itself from any suggestion that Dr. Weaver “knows very little about climate science.” We entirely accept that he has a well-deserved international reputation as a climate scientist and that Dr. Ball’s attack on his credentials is unjustified…. CFP sincerely apologizes to Dr. Weaver and expresses regret for the embarrassment and distress caused by the unfounded allegations in the article by Dr. Ball.

The CFP removed Ball’s article from its website, and for good measure removed nearly all of the 200 other articles that the prolific Ball had written from the CFP website as well.6

Politicians and the Mainstream Media

The oil companies control rafts of state and federal politicians through the system of campaign contributions. This is hardly news, and Powell devotes little space to the hordes of Senators and Congressional Representatives with campaign contributions from the energy industry. The fundraising champion in the Senate is James Inhofe (R-OK), who has received more oil company money than any other Senator, raking in over $662,000 between 2000 and 2008. Over in the House, Congressman Joe Barton has taken over $1 million in oil and gas company money during his twenty-seven-year House career.

Ken Cuccinelli, Attorney General of Virginia, is a favorite of the Tea Party, which was shown to be a Republican front group by Paul Street and Anthony Dimaggio.7 Cuccinelli issued a Civil Investigating Demand (CID) in 2010, demanding that the University of Virginia produce a wide range of documents relating to Michael Mann, a former professor at Virginia (and now at Penn State). Claiming to be determining whether or not Mann defrauded the taxpayers of Virginia by researching global warming, Cuccinelli demanded every document relating to Mann over the previous eleven years. To its credit, the University of Virginia rejected Cuccinelli’s demands and fought him. Cuccinelli lost in court on August 20, 2010, but his CID was dismissed without prejudice, meaning that he could file again. At the time of the original CID, three university committees had exonerated Mann, and three more committees exonerated him later. Cuccinelli attempted to continue his fishing expedition in August 2010 when he filed a new CID, but in March 2012 it was also dismissed, this time with prejudice.

Powell compares global-warming deniers to various other groups, including: the persecution of Galileo by the Catholic Church (the book cover depicts the trial of Galileo); Lysenko and his associates, who did a tremendous amount of damage to biological science in the Soviet Union; Creationists, who do not believe in Darwinian evolution; and AIDS denialists, who deny that HIV causes AIDS. In fact, “there is more evidence that HIV causes AIDS than there is for any other single human disease caused by an infectious agent, past or present,” according to Robert Gallo, co-discoverer of the AIDS virus.

Powell also attributes some of the success of the deniers to a failure of the mass media. The mainstream media typically are limited to one of two “frames” of the issue:

The first is open support for climate change denial by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, etc. The second is “fake balance” from the more responsible mainstream media. The media loves controversy—at least if it can be kept within certain controlled limits. There must be two sides to every controversy. So climate change deniers, representing 3 percent of climate scientists (if that), are granted equal weight with the vast majority of climate scientists, representing 97 percent of climate scientists.8

In an Appendix, Powell lists thirty-three countries or regions whose scientific academies have accepted the basic findings of human-caused global warming, as well as sixty-seven professional societies. None of these scientific academies have denied the basic science of human-caused global warming. (Powell has excluded denier websites and front groups.)

The Tobacco Strategy: “Doubt Is Our Product”

One important source for Powell is Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway’s Merchants of Doubt: How A Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming.9 The global-warming deniers do not have to win the argument, they just have to get a draw. Their goal is to create the impression that there is a serious scientific controversy about whether or not modern anthropogenic global warming is really happening. The global-warming deniers are following today the same strategy adopted by the tobacco companies decades earlier—as one tobacco company executive proclaimed, “Doubt is our product.”

Climategate: Much Ado About Nothing

Powell devotes chapter fourteen to “Climategate,” which he justifiably subtitles “Much Ado About Nothing.” In November 2009, some still-unknown person burgled the emails of the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom. Thousands of emails were posted on the internet. The denialist network took a handful of emails out of context, and claimed that the emails showed global warming to be a big hoax. The burglary and ensuing propaganda uproar occurred just weeks before the December 2009 Copenhagen climate summit, and it is hard to believe that the timing was coincidental.

A series of investigations followed, in both the United States and the United Kingdom. Every single one exonerated the scientists on the issue of scientific integrity.

The denialists claimed that the emails proved that climate scientists were admitting one thing in private while proclaiming something else in public. Actually, the topics covered in the emails were also discussed in the published scientific literature. The denialists were not familiar with this because most of the denialists are not scientists and do not read scientific literature.

For example, an email from climate researcher Kevin Trenberth laments that “it’s a travesty that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment.” The background is that we know that the earth is accumulating energy, but the temperature of the surface of the earth experiences short-term increases and short-term decreases along with a long-term increase. What Trenberth regretted was the lack of ability to predict how the energy flows among the various parts of the earth climate system (land surface, ocean surface, atmosphere, and deep ocean). Trenberth’s email was announcing the publication of his article “An Imperative for Climate Change Planning: Tracking Earth’s Global Energy.”10 In it, these issues were discussed in detail. The Trenberth email did not differ in any essential way from the published article. The email, as a communication from one expert to another, used shorthand that made it possible for deniers to take it out of context and distort its meaning.

What the emails did show was that the climate scientists were frustrated by constant attacks by denialists.

Sources, Dedication, and Limitations

Powell’s book ends with nineteen pages of notes and a seven-page bibliography. He draws upon a number of sources, including Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway’s admirable Merchants of Doubt; the Skeptical Science website which features frequently raised skeptical arguments; the blog realclimate.org (run by climate scientists); and helpful information from Greenpeace.

Powell’s book is dedicated to James Hansen, Michael Mann, Benjamin Santer, and the late Stephen Schneider, “scientists of courage and integrity.” James Hansen is a NASA scientist and one of the leading climate change researchers in the world. (For a review of Hansen’s book Storms of My Grandchildren, see the September 2010 Monthly Review.11) Michael Mann, a physicist and climatologist currently at Penn State University, was the lead author on the famous “hockeystick” paper in 1998, which became a lightning rod for attacks by deniers. Benjamin Santer, a scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, was a lead author for a chapter in the 1995 IPCC report. Santer was a target for many personal attacks by the deniers for his role. And the late Stephen Schneider, biology professor at Stanford and consultant to many government agencies, was an early (1980s) activist on the global-warming issue.

While Powell’s book is invaluable, the climate science background consists of a skimpy three-page chapter, including only one graph. Also barely discussed are the impacts of global warming. And outside the purview of the book is what to do about global warming.

One significant omission in the book is that Powell attributes the attacks on global warming to fossil-fuel companies (mainly ExxonMobil), and their hired hands, following the strategy pioneered by Big Tobacco. He does not consider that efforts to transition to non-carbon-emitting forms of energy also provokes opposition, or at least lack of support, from the rest of business. Many non-carbon forms of energy are more expensive than fossil fuels. Business wants to minimize costs, including the cost of energy; renewable energy imposes additional costs on business. Also, the largest consequences of global warming will start to occur a few decades in the future, beyond the time horizon of big and small businesses. Business has to meet a payroll every month, and many businesses must keep the stockholders happy with quarterly statements of earnings. A problem, however severe, that is decades in the future is so far off that many businesses are unwilling to make sacrifices now to prevent the problems in the future.

Many non-energy businesses are perfectly happy to sit out the battle, letting ExxonMobil take the lead in organizing and funding global-warming denial efforts. For their part, many politicians are perfectly willing to do nothing, rather than impose additional costs on their campaign contributors. The “flack” by the deniers provides a wonderful excuse; since the science is (supposedly) uncertain, do not do anything.

While the Republicans come in for a lot of justifiable criticism, many Democrats are pretty bad also. Recall also that at the time of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the U.S. Senate passed a Byrd-Hagel resolution expressing the Senate’s opposition to the Kyoto treaty. It passed the U.S. Senate by a lopsided 95–0. Despite the title of Chris Mooney’s book, The Republican War on Science, the Democratic Party is part of the problem as well, as demonstrated by the bipartisan and utterly overwhelming anti-Kyoto vote. Clinton and Gore went to Kyoto and signed the Kyoto Protocol but did not bother to take the treaty to the U.S. Senate for ratification where it would have been dead on arrival. So Clinton and Gore got credit for good intentions, thus winning on symbolism, while the fossil-fuel companies won on substance.

In the global-warming denial industry, the upper-level funders and fundraisers must be aware that the think tanks are partisans of their financial contributors. The lower-level employees may or may not be aware. Certainly many of the consumers of the propaganda are unaware of the industry funding. Not surprisingly, in recent years, many think tanks have stopped listing their financial contributors. And a few liberal and leftist writers have been sufficiently misled by the denialist arguments that they have become deniers themselves. But I would be astounded if they too were on the ExxonMobil payroll.

This arrangement is reminiscent of another large-scale opinion-forming project, the Congress for Cultural Freedom, an organization that was secretly funded by the CIA during the Cold War. The goal was to promote intellectuals who supported U.S. power and capitalism generally, criticizing the Soviet Union specifically and communism generally. Participants were not required to defend each and every U.S. policy, and this enhanced the credibility of the authors. The CCF supported magazines and conferences, and at its peak had branches in some thirty-five countries. Those at the top of the CCF knew about the CIA funding, while some contributors to magazines did not.

CIA funding was kept secret for two reasons: first, to promote the notion that Soviet citizens and their supporters were slaves to the government, while Western intellectuals were free men and women. Public acknowledgment of support by the CIA would ruin this pretty picture. (In fact, the 1967 exposure of the CIA funding led to the CCF becoming moribund.) The second reason was that many CCF intellectuals were social democrats, and U.S. conservatives would have objected to funding them.12

The CCF/CIA analogy holds lessons for the climate change denial industry. Those at the top of the organizations certainly know of their funding by fossil-fuel companies, but many members of the general public are unaware of the funding of denialist think tanks. Casual readers of denialist blogs are unaware of the funding, and it would be an error to assume that everyone spouting the denialist arguments is on the ExxonMobil payroll.

Conclusion

Powell is not a radical or leftist in any way, but his book could be evaluated bearing in mind Marx’s dictum that the ideas of the ruling class become the ruling ideas of the whole society. The Inquisition of Climate Science explains in detail how the global-warming-denialist ideas that serve the interests of the oil companies (and fossil-fuels industry) become sincerely held beliefs for a significant fraction of society. Denialist ideas are rejected by the vast majority of climate scientists, and the oil companies themselves know better from their own scientists (as the Bernstein Report mentioned above shows). Nevertheless, they continue to promote and subsidize a denialist literature blocking the crystallization of mass demands for far-reaching social transformation, even though this is precisely what is required to avoid catastrophic global warming.

My bookshelf holds a number of books about global warming, but The Inquisition of Climate Science is unequalled, combining scientific accuracy with clarity of exposition. It is comprehensive in its scope despite its modest length of 232 pages. A typical chapter is ten pages long, with cute titles and subtitles (“Aren’t You Embarrassed, Mr. Will?”). The book is written in a lively manner that is accessible to the lay public; Powell is able clearly to explain phenomena that only a few decades ago were unclear even to specialists. Inquisition is the definitive popular refutation of many of the denialist arguments that are frequently heard in the media and on the web. Everyone who cares about global warming should have a copy.

"We DID build this business." (6 replies)

banana who — Sat, 18 May 2013 21:46:51 -0400

I just saw this sign outside a local independent health food store. I really like this place--it's got a little bit of everything and although the prices are steeper than Whole Food's typically, they carry the smaller brands that my former store used to sell.

Anyway, when I went up to pay I asked if he was referencing Obama's statement and he said he was. I said: "You DO realize that he was referring to large corporations who pay their workers lower wages, right?" And he said that small businesses were being hit and he just put up the sign. I said that I didn't even vote for Obama last time but that he's right about the workers doing a lot of the work and deserving more money.

Well, I get to the university and discover that I am not quite accurate in my statement. Apparently Elizabeth Warren was the first to promote this concept in 2011:

<>

I feel a bit bad about any possible conflict with the owner. I don't go in there too often but I am glad it's around. I just can't stand the mentality that says "I did this all by myself." I really don't believe in the self-made person. Usually there was some blessing from the Universe, some break that provided the person with the means to start or continue or grow the business. I am not saying that people who have successful businesses didn't work their butts off! But it's the idea that they did it alone that bugs me. What about the customers? Without them, a business is toast. So it is a group effort.

Teacher’s Aide Could Lose Job Over…Her Homemade Raw Lunches (2 replies)

KidRaw — Sat, 18 May 2013 17:09:20 -0400
This is in Hawaii where you'd think they'd be into Raw Organic Healthy Eating - but I guess they're into "The State" even more -

[www.theblaze.com]

"Carissa Lee O’Connell began eating raw, organic food to try and stifle allergies and colds from which she was suffering — and it worked. Lee O’Connell can continue to bring her lunches as long as they’re not eaten in front of the children."

Miso-less, salt-less raw vegan bouillon? (1 reply)

Diana (Cda) — Sat, 18 May 2013 16:41:36 -0400
Does anyone have a recipe for a truly raw vegan vegetable bouillon?

Thanx!

Is it hard for you to deal with nay-sayers? (1 reply)

vfowler77 — Sun, 19 May 2013 14:44:43 -0400
I do have other health-minded friends around, but none who eat raw or properly combine their food. I don't even talk about it much unless someone asks. I KNOW I shouldn't take other people's misguided information to heart, but it's still hard for me take! Someone asked me a question on Facebook this week about food-combining, I answered, and a friend of mine jumped in and said,

"I'm pretty sure digestion doesn't work this way."

It was such a short comment, but instantly my heart started racing. Pretty sure? That means she is only guessing and hasn't educated herself on the subject but is still telling me I'm wrong.

It got me so riled up! So I'm thinking I better learn how to let these comments roll off me or I'm going to be upset all the time.

How do some of you deal with this kind of thing? Suggestions for quick responses to people like this? Or even just how to self-process it?

Ugh.

(also, most of these people are over-weight. So that makes it even more annoying.)

waking up from a domesticated life (10 replies)

Panchito — Tue, 21 May 2013 14:32:35 -0400
Do you think raw food wakes you up?

Does it make you different (after maybe years)?

Do people see you different (body and mind)?

Do you see people different?

What did you become?

Natural Health Doctor seeking work (no replies)

MangoSpain — Sat, 18 May 2013 08:13:57 -0400
Hey you all,

I am a 'Doctor of Natural Health' and I am eager to use my knowledge and experience to help others. I am seeking a business opportunity in a health retreat somewhere in the world and preferably in the sunshine, where I can run 'Health Programs' for guests.

I am very energetic and motivated. So any retreats out there that are looking to expand and bring true raw health to its clients, drop me a line.

I hope this message finds you in beautiful health

You can contact me at: naturaldr@yahoo.com

Thank you

How much food should you eat? (5 replies)

Armin Zhl — Sun, 19 May 2013 18:56:03 -0400
Hello,

I am a 19 year old man and now for 5 weeks 100 % raw vegan. Inspired by Markus Rothkranz. Before I started to be raw vegan I was "cooked" vegan for one year with a very sporty lifestyle. After I changed to raw vegan I my energy levels go down. At some days I had more power than ever, but now I am feeling more and more "dead".

I`ve lost 10 kilos. At the beginning I thought this are the detoxification symptoms. But now I feel miserable.
I went to the doctor who checked my blood levels. All levels are OK but Homocysteine is dramatically high (3 times higher than normal), ATP is very low.
I can`t climb some stairs without a burning in my muscles! I am really depressed.

About my diet:

I am eating fruits and green smoothies and some seeds like hemp, chia, and flax seeds and some tablespoons of coconut oil. I don`t eat any dehydrated things and nuts at the time. I don`t calculate the calories.
Could be the reason the amount of food intake?

Could you write some example meal plans for a raw vegan food diet based on fruits and greens and vegetables? Thank you so much!

Perhaps some people have the same problems. Please share it.

Please forgive me - I tried to use the search function, but they are so much topics so it is really difficult to find the right.

Greetings!

Armin