'Light steaming does minimal damage but makes uptake of some nutrients easier. I think this is Fuhrman's stance as well: that the emphasis should be on vegetables with a mix of raw and cooked rather than completely raw.'


Yes, it would be Fuhrman's stance, because he is not a raw foodist.

He simply doesn't want to give up eating his cooked food (as is the case with 99% of the world, and quite understandable), and is therefore telling others to do as he does, whilst taking full advantage of the raw food market (he was even speaking at last year's Kevin Gianni 'Raw' Summit!).

The millions of other species we share the world with don't need to steam their food 'to make uptake of nutrients easier'.

They all live in accordance with nature. We, who have free will, can choose to eat the pure, or we can damage it. Steaming damages food. For those who want to eat cooked food, sure - steaming is better than deep-frying. But it is not better than raw.

Eat your food with all the nutrients nature designed it to give, intact, undamaged, in the proportions that were intended to enable all the chemicals in that food to work with each other in our bodies. That's the way for 'easy uptake of nutrients'.

[Eat your food with all the nutrients nature designed it to give, intact, undamaged, in the proportions that were intended to enable all the chemicals in that food to work with each other in our bodies. That's the way for 'easy uptake of nutrients'.]

Well if you are going to argue the "nature intended" track, that would be to rely predominantly on cooked starches, because that is how our GI tracts evolved and yes they have changed a lot since we learned how to use fire.

The best choices for that would be sweet potato or winter squash.

We do not have the GI tracts of the chimpanzee or the gorilla who can tolerate extremely high amounts of fiber. Some raw foodists work around this problem by blending, juicing, and eating lots of overt fats or some combination of these.

Since there are many well-documented instances of deficiencies and other problems associated with raw food diets, this may not be the ideal solution for all. I think it is possible to do very well with only raw food provided that supplements are used for B12. But certaintly easier when modest lightly steamed portions of vegs are included.

There are also very many well-documented examples of raw vegans thriving without B12 supplements. See giveittomeraw.com for a thread I started on this.

It's probably not worth arguing it further. I believe the 100% raw food diet is healthier than a part-raw diet, although a part-raw diet is light years ahead in terms of health than a diet with little raw in it. People who choose to eat some cooked food are divided. Some simply choose to eat some cooked, knowing that 100% is best. Others choose to eat some cooked, and believe that 100% isn't always best, and some choose to eat some cooked, and believe that 100% is never best.

We'll have to agree to differ, I think.

I supplement B12 as I think it is one of those slow developing deficiencies that a person dosn't notice happening until they find themselves tired and lacking energy. However I don't include any cooked food in my diet. The natural fresh raw foods taste so wonderful to me that I see no need to add anything to them or to compromise the nutrients in the food by doing any processing including cooking. I feel best on a 100% all fresh, whole, raw food diet.

I am trying to really pay attention to my body and how it responds to certain foods. I LOVE sweet fruit but I am consuming too much and when I do this I notice my body reacts negatively too them in many ways. (i.e. had 3bannas,1kiwi,piece of pinapple,piece of coconut,and probally one more sweet fruit.
I am going to reduce the amount which will help.
Has anyone ever experieced this and what foods DO you eat and stay raw.

I think all the sugar in the fruit jacks up blood sugar level.

Thanks

how is your body responding to the fruit? are you MONO eating it??

does make a big difference

that is NOT a lot of fruit..

Do you eat greens?green juice/smoothies?

In a sense, to me, as far as my opinions/beliefs/whatever go...

If you are starting a diet, and plan to go 100% with it, plan to go 100% with your goals, commit fully, and thrive, taking supplements seems self-defeating. It's like coming into the picture immediately thinking, "I can start this perfect diet that makes me happy, glowing from the inside and out, making me feel BETTER than I have ever felt in my life before... but I can only be okay if I take these pills."

Attitude and nutrition are BOTH parts of health that cannot be ignored. I'm not telling anyone to stop taking supplements if they do, and I'm certainly not discounting anyone who has benefitted from taking them--but there are also people who SHINE and THRIVE without them. Why are we discounting them? There is SO much more to be learned and understood! The body changes so much on a raw diet, and continues to evolve within it. We know so little, and the same nutritional laws for the SAD diet don't necessarily hold true for a raw diet all of the time.

I just don't understand the self-doubt. Different people have different needs, I understand, but as far as supplements go, a lot of deficiency fears/concerns seem rooted in doubt!

Just my thoughts, I'm not judging/bashing/condemning... only consider them if you like. =)

>taking supplements seems self-defeating.

It is not self-defeating when you know that the foods you are eating do not contain it in sufficient quantities.

Taking vitamin C, however, on a raw food diet, would definitely be questionable.