That's true, Bryan. I have heard Doug state many times that for athletes he advises that they plan their transition in the off season of their sport because of the possible detox and reduced performance that they are likely to experience. And he has been saying this for years. I don't believe that he ever said one could do so "symptom free."

debbietook, that's interesting that there are raw foodists saying that about the Kenyan runners. I have been involved with the "raw movement" for about 13 years now and have never heard anyone claim this. I guess there's always some new bit of "urban legend" type information floating around out there.

When I first learned about the concept of eating a low fat fruit based raw diet, I rejected it strongly and was highly resistant and experienced/came up with all sorts of reasons and symptoms for why it wouldn't work for me. Similarly to Bryan, it took me several years to get to the point that I was able to eat such a diet in a balanced manner. I can't help but see the same patterns in other people who attempt it.

there is nothing wrong with believing you have the optimum diet. to me this is not the same as saying you have the only workable diet. I don't see where I attacked anyones preference for whole foods. I criticized alot of the common arguments which are used to 'factor out' other workable systems. to me these arguments are totally bogus. I never once criticized anyone elses diet or said it couldn't possibly work for them.

There is nothing I said that suggested richard followed or contradicted 811. I don't speak for other people. I wasn't even using him to back up my beliefs I just said it brings to the surface peoples how entrenched people's beliefs ares. IMO it is a fallacy of logic that humans and animals are biological machines with specific inputs. and even if there is a animal and human specific diet it is naive to believe that our modern internal environment is immediately hospitable to such a diet.

I don't think my examples were pointless
once again its fine to prefer something which isn't the same thing as 'ideal' or 'better' (not saying YOU personally made these statements) which implies in every possible circumstance. I've eaten just fruit for a long time. but certainly not tomatoes, it would destroy your pancreas and kidneys. the idea that if it would provide the calories you need and therefore better then juice is absurd. plenty of people are doing excellent on 92 day juice diets. if you want to compare that to a 100% whole food diet and choose a whole food diet fine but don't say its because 'fiber is an essential nutrient'. but lets look at the results and not the 'science'.


the things you listed Zone, Atkins. its the same kind of thing using traditional science of calories and macronutrients to figure out what is the best 'nutrition'. so its not supprizing that people can pitch their tent around those ideas either. I don't agree with the hippo folks but if one wants to take the 'science' route I think they have a more accurate view of whats really going on internally, but really they are just observing fom the same traditional model.


I agree that diet can only facilitate what you are speaking of. but I never said people wern't 'nice' or had poor intentions. I implied that a kind of fragility and unbalance ...which isn't necessarily 'diet' related but is health related and not due to lack of emotional work. This is purely my observation.

not that I care to nitpick the Kenyan issue but 100% positive he made the comment on the kenyans a few years back on rawveganradio

I never said "fiber was an essential nutrient," I said that I prefer my foods with fiber. I don't know what you mean when you say that a diet of tomatoes would destroy the pancreas and kidneys, certain times of the year (summer) I eat a diet consisting heavily of tomatoes (several pounds a day) and have never experienced such trouble, please elaborate if you feel inclined although it's getting off topic of the original thread.

Like you, I don't wish to nitpick, but you did say that almost every time you've heard Dr Graham speak he brought up the Kenyan runners. Maybe hearing it one time on raw vegan radio is almost every time you've heard him speak (if you've only heard him twice or something). Having been familiar with his work for almost a decade now I find it difficult to believe, as he has never been disinclined to admit that a low fat raw vegan diet for an athlete is in some ways a cutting edge practice in modern times without precedent and that there are no sample population groups doing so that we can study.
I am guessing that he may have said they eat a low fat diet which is a different matter, but I realize that it's futile to get into a back-and-forth over it, if you think you heard him say it, so be it.

He certainly isn't saying it now and in 9 or 10 years of familiarity and a fair amount of time spent with him I have never once heard him mention it in any context whatsoever so you can understand my skepticism.

Yes, absolutely there are people experiencing wonderful results on juice diets, it's just not my preference and my belief is that they would experience superior results on a whole-food diet properly planned. I don't claim to have data or evidence for this at the moment (just anecdotal personal experience), so I can understand why you wouldn't accept it as the gospel truth, but I see no reason why it would be perceived as an unreasonable belief for someone to hold. It's not outside the bounds of logic/commonsense, etc. To extrapolate that holding such a view implies intolerance or religiosity is going too far.

So again it appears to me that sometimes people are simply threatened or uncomfortable with someone holding different beliefs. I have experienced time and again that someone projected an emotion of judgement onto me (i.e, accusing me of being judgemental) simply because I let it be known that I didn't agree with them about a particular issue. In fact they were being judgmental towards me because I didn't accept that their opinion had validity or truth. There is no personal judgement implied if I dispute an opinion or don't hold it to be true but often people feel that there is.

As I said earlier, there are judgements made by people in all walks of life and I have yet to perceive a greater amount of judgement coming from any one circle or philosophy of diet. I think many times people think that "natural hygienists" are more judgemental simply because they tend to be sure of their beliefs and not neccesarily wandering and changing their minds. Sometimes consistency and unwavering steadfastness of belief are perceived as judgemental particularly when the beliefs dispute what one holds to be true.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2008 08:26PM by doghouse reilly.

Of note is the fact that Natural hygiene is a philosophy primarily based on consistent ways of analysis and determination (this should be clear regardless of whether or not one believes NH to be a valid system). Whereas certain other "schools" of raw food/health thought are not necessarily as straightforward and may be more "intuitive" and hence somewhat inconsistent or counter-intuitive at times.
So I believe that there will be more opportunities for the consistency of natural hygienists to "grate" or "rub" people in ways that make them uncomfortable, irritated, or threatened. There have been so many times that I have seen people erupt with anger over a natural hygienist who is simply stating calmly and rationally that they believe a certain thing to be true. It's the lack of acceptance of opposing views, on the basis of certain ways of analysis, that irritated people and cause them to project judgement onto the NH system. Undisputably, NH is a system that recognizes boundaries and restrictions that are far stricter than those of other raw systems. The existence of these boundaries and strictures frightens people and causes them to feel threatened, sometimes. Whereas other approaches don't have these boundaries and are more "anything goes."

Caveat being, of course, that there are no doubt numerous NH practitioners who are full of judgement and intolerance. I have certainly seen these people as well, as I have also seen the judgement and intolerance of Hippocrates practitioners, superfood salesmen, etc. But I have seen just as often what I described above.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2008 08:38PM by doghouse reilly.

there is a complete difference between consuming solid food and consuming juice which passes through the stomach and thus allows for more rest. If one was to just eat carrots, I guess you could consider that 'cleansing' because it would be absent of 'other things' but it wouldn't allow for the digestive rest of the juice fast, nor would it supply the minerals/neutralize toxins directly in the blood in higher percentages. I won't make any more claims as I agree its already geting off topic, other then to say that tomatoes without the consumption of other foods would be way too acid.

some of my talking points might not be directed at things you have said but are common statements made by many including doug. so I apologize if you feel I've put words in your mouth, especially since you seem to have such a too each his own vibe.

the rawveganradio was the only one I can confirm...i'm pretty sure i've actually heard him say it and I think it was also recorded in the recent raw summit video, I wasn't aware I needed more then one example

---
[www.vegsource.com]

-----------------------------

agreed



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2008 08:58PM by anaken.

anaken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
that tomatoes without the
> consumption of other foods would be way too acid.
>
and
>>I don't think my examples were pointless
once again its fine to prefer something which isn't the same thing as 'ideal' or 'better' (not saying YOU personally made these statements) which implies in every possible circumstance. I've eaten just fruit for a long time. but certainly not tomatoes, it would destroy your pancreas and kidneys. the idea that if it would provide the calories you need and therefore better then juice is absurd. plenty of people are doing excellent on 92 day juice diets. if you want to compare that to a 100% whole food diet and choose a whole food diet fine but don't say its because 'fiber is an essential nutrient'. but lets look at the results and not the 'science'.


anaken,

doghouse seems to have noted this already, but i'm confused in that you seem to still be comparing eating only tomatoes with drinking a mixed juice diet. so why would that be a valid comparison? nobody claimed that it would be better, and your argument that the original statement means " in every possible circumstance" is certainly not the intention of anyone that would be making that statement from what i can tell, and i have no idea what would cause you to draw that conclusion or propose that requirement.

I think the whole point here is that 80/10/10 is one view of a diet; one outlook of how some people can live - not necessarily how everyone CAN live or is able to thrive on

One must agree it is irrational to say that just because they thought the diet wouldn't work for them, and it turned out it did, does not mean it will simply work for everyone that does it "correctly". Anyone on a different diet could also accuse this of someone. Hell, maybe someone who switched to 811 was simply not following the correct "cooked food" diet, and that's why they blamed the cooked food - not themselves.

I believe the tomato example was portraying looking at the diet from a scientific perspective...

Just like you could say it's shown that red meat will literally sit in your intestines and rot for hours, possibly causing IBS; or how eating high acidic foods could lead to heartburn. But then someone could say - ok, but I eat nothing but red meat and never have had IBS or any problems like that; or they could eat nothing but acids with their food for a week and not experience any acid reflux. Though, science shows many things and has much support for this.

just a shot in the dark at what anaken may have been trying to explain. if not, well that's an observation i have created then

haha
yeah!


when i posted on the boards that dr. graham posted in; and now see some supporters of his chat elsewhere - he seems a lot less strict then the people who follow him. I mean the guy talks about how much he eats tomatoes -- but where the hell would a tomato be found in the tropical rainforest? this is just one example of course. But it seemed like he was telling people to "loosen up" --though it's stressed you have to follow it so right. So it's really really discombobulated to me. and no, this isn't the only reason i don't follow the diet.

"is whole better than not whole

that rules out powders, juiced foods, recipes "


"Surely a wholefood is always better than a non whole food."
I'm wrong to assume this means any whole food -I'm going to be lienent and assume one means a raw vegan and water-rich food - is better then any non whole food (even a mixed food/juice) in any circumstance?

perhaps I could have come up with a less hyperbolic argument but actually I do think DR said he would prefer the tomatoes so I guess its not that absurd. the only reason I'm still on it is because thats what people chose to address. I gave a couple of other examples no one addressed those.

so what you are trying to say then, is that a powder, juice, or dehydrated/mixed food is only inferior to its whole form? I disagree with this also, but I won't argue if its simply a preference. I didn't see where you said that if one considers the circumstance and health of the individual that its possible for a non whole food to be better then another totally separate whole food

it seems to me this isn't what is being said, seeing since people that are doing these things are not following 811, and if they are not following 811 they're wrong...so it pretty much reverts back to the original statement.

1:1

- is orange juice always not as good as eating oranges?
the same results are achieved on an orange juice 'fast' then an orange diet?
- a week of green juices is not more cleansing/restful/closer to a fast then a week of eating only vegetables?
- while running a race better to drink cellery juice (or wadge/spit) or to eat/digest celery?

iLIVE, Tomatoes are tropical, native to central America.

It's a simple plan, not stressful or difficult or complicated. Graham's fond of summing it up by stating that it consists of "raw fresh organic plant foods, one at a time, when hungry, until full."

Nothing complex about it. Obviously with a de-emphasis on fattier foods. Never any recommendation not to eat fruits found outside of the tropics, but tropical fruits are among the tastiest.

It's usually those not following the plan who are under the impression that it's somehow complicated.

anaken, when it comes right down to it, it usually turns out that none of us are in as much disagreement as it originally seems. Orange juice, personally I prefer it with the pulp stirred back in and feel better that way, so yes, I would think I would obtain better results that way..definitely I'd choose an orange diet over an orange juice diet, the fiber is imperative to regulate the introduction of the sugar into the bloodstream.

Thanks for your comments, like I said we really aren't in much disagreement.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2008 02:08AM by doghouse reilly.

Yes, I would absolutely feel better and would get better results eating moderate amounts of green vegetables and nothing else as a sort of "fast" instead of juicing them, as long as I were to observe other conditions usual to a "fast" like adequate water, etc. I also believe that it's true for everyone if they were to try it, but if anyone feels differently, no big deal, we all have our own experiences and I just believe in putting the knowledge out there for others to try and have their own experience.

I believe it would be closer to a fast because of the massive load of juiced unbuffered nutrition being introduced into the body absent of the normal fiber which automatically regulates how much we eat at any one time. I personally feel much less burdened after a meal of a head of lettuce than a juiced head of lettuce (I have experimented extensively with green juices and fasting in the past.)

As far as athletics, I rarely include celery even on long excursions as I find that blended fruit supplies ample electrolytes for extended exertion (when accustomed to low sodium intake very little sodium is excreted) but on occasion I have and have chosen to blend it while competing as I find this works better for me than juicing it. In retrospect I wouldn't bother though, I just stick with blended orange or banana diluted with water now.

So basically, yes, I have found in all of your examples that I have obtained better results utilizing the whole foods. I bear nobody any grudge nor do I judge them if they believe the opposite to be true for them.

When asked, though, I will make my opinion known and will not hesitate to encourage it, especially if one is seeking improvement in health and athleticism.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2008 02:25AM by doghouse reilly.

anaken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "is whole better than not whole
>
> that rules out powders, juiced foods, recipes "
>
>
> "Surely a wholefood is always better than a non
> whole food."
> I'm wrong to assume this means any whole food -I'm
> going to be lienent and assume one means a raw
> vegan and water-rich food - is better then any non
> whole food (even a mixed food/juice) in any
> circumstance?
>
> perhaps I could have come up with a less
> hyperbolic argument but actually I do think DR
> said he would prefer the tomatoes so I guess its
> not that absurd. the only reason I'm still on it
> is because thats what people chose to address. I
> gave a couple of other examples no one addressed
> those.
>
> so what you are trying to say then, is that a
> powder, juice, or dehydrated/mixed food is only
> inferior to its whole form?

generally speaking yes.
your comparison was not an equivalent.
my statements were simply conceptual.
i could also, as you, say, well, a tomato full of pesticides isn't better than tomato juice from a can without pesticides right?
or any number of silly comparisons that are beside the point.


I disagree with this
> also, but I won't argue if its simply a
> preference. I didn't see where you said that if
> one considers the circumstance and health of the
> individual that its possible for a non whole food
> to be better then another totally separate whole
> food
>
> it seems to me this isn't what is being said,
> seeing since people that are doing these things
> are not following 811, and if they are not
> following 811 they're wrong...

statements about the nature of a target diet
Do not imply "Wrongness"

any more than saying that performing a standing press is an excellent and nearly ideal exercise to build many muscles of the shoulder and arms implies that those who are doing lateral raises are Wrong.

>
> - is orange juice always not as good as eating
> oranges?
> the same results are achieved on an orange juice
> 'fast' then an orange diet?
> - a week of green juices is not more
> cleansing/restful/closer to a fast then a week of
> eating only vegetables?
> - while running a race better to drink cellery
> juice (or wadge/spit) or to eat/digest celery?

you've gotten hung up on the word always, perhaps and misunderstood intent, which was the person stated that "she didn't know what kind of a raw diet to be on " ?
that was the only purpose of my words echoing graham since it seemed she (wendy?) was not familiar.

perhaps the brevity of my words caused misunderstanding as it is often wont to do.

anyway thanks for your post

a better example might be that
doing more than 1 rep is "always" better than doing 1 rep
when trying to build and strengthen muscle.
doesn't imply doing 1 rep is Wrong.

or breathing clean air is always better than breathing dirty air.
"But breathing once per minute of clean air is not better than breathing dirty air 40 times a minute!"

might be your retort, as an example .

also regarding "thin skin", diet certainly helps with peacefulness but it's not everything, so seems like an unrealistic expectation to place on diet.

taking your tack here,

"i've found all the anaken's i know are pedantic "

;-)

am i generalizing or being unfair? ignoring evidence to the contrary?

I'm sure there are a large variety of tomato; you would not see like a beefstake tomato growing in the rainforest, etc. etc. Also, some avoid tomatoes and eggplant (as a random example, just know they're both related) because they are closely related to the nightshade plant. My point in saying this is that perhaps even not all fruits are great for everyone's consumption, though dr. graham is loose on the subject of what to eat - as long as it's fruit. This just shows perhaps not everyone's body acts the same, or was born the same and raised the same. Just as in monkeys their digestive systems have secured them for heavier leaf consumption, or heavier fruit consumption; perhaps human beings when they are born and fed something for so long have trouble adapting at all to a certain diet. ..adapting to it; which explains some symptoms, along with certain food sciences. So yes, maybe it is possible that everyone could par take in the diet - but it's not for sound sure, that's all I'm saying. Just because it makes sense to one, worked for them, does not make it so for everyone else. And I find in any diet it would be acceptable to say only eat when you are hungry, and listen to your body. So in a way - this does not only apply to the 811 diet, but could also apply to any diet - meaning any diet could not be the cause of your problem but the way you approach the diet. Cancels out the fact that 811 is somehow superior (as a known fact at least). It's kind of like having controls before you actually do the experiment. Too many things changed without a control will lead you off to believe many possible things.

I guess the tomato was the problem with my post, as i didn't get much of a reply to anything else; haha
damn..should have googled it

right...you better sit up strait and listen son.




although if you think i'm only address semantics.
I think you are being untrue to the reality of most discussion around these issues


>>statements about the nature of a target diet
Do not imply "Wrongness"

no? its all over this thread from experienced folks and non
I don't care to defend these issues further...just shining light on them

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]


Harmony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree that milk is a whole food. Juice is a
> fractioned food. Fiber is an essential nutrient
> for optimum health. It gently sweeps through the
> digestive tract. What other animals juice their
> foods, throwing out the fiber?
>
> If you enjoy juicing, though, in place of
> consuming less optimal things, and feel good doing
> it...by all means, go for it.

further down the line..

anaken Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I think its fine to uphold these opinions but
> enforceing these ideas with arguments like: "This
> is a substitute for healthful living", "A Whole
> foods approach is the optimal choice for
> achieving optimal health", "that people USE
> juicing or external cleansing to MAKE UP for
> continuing to practice unhealthful diets and
> practices" or that "juicing is not natural"
> (somehow insinuating that is some relavent point
> of argument in a non-natural paradigm of
> non-natural humans)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2008 07:32PM by anaken.

So, without debating the virtues of the author himself, I just want to say that I finished reading the 80/10/10 diet book and thought it was pretty good. I'm still open-minded and questioning lots about raw veganism in general, but having just finished my first week of following 811, my skin is noticeably clearer (something significant for someone like me with horrible acne), I have bounds more energy to keep up with my kids at school, and I've even lost a few pounds of water weight. Yay for that!

I did have a question, though. I just input all of my food for yesterday and today into nutridiary, and I keep finding that I am still averaging about 20% of my calories from fat. The largest contributors, ironically, were: tomatoes (12% from fat), kiwi (7% from fat), and the romaine lettuce (13% from fat). (Maybe it's not ironic to some, but I certainly didn't expect lettuce to have more fat than fruits!!!) I'm so confused! Anyway, I want to follow the diet, but cutting out salads seems a little extreme. I like fruit, but not THAT much. Can anyone advise as to whether I should worry or not? (Everything else I eat is between 1-4% from fat.) Thanks for your help. Enjoy the weekend!

I don't concern myself with calories, % of fat, grams, or scales because I like the freedom the raw food lifestyle gives me from that sort of thing. I do pay attention to how I'm feeling, how my clothes are fitting, and any body signals my body is providing me to help supply its needs. I find this approach to raw fun, easy, and it provides just what my body needs in order to be healthy and well.

ecjames1120 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I did have a question, though. I just input all
> of my food for yesterday and today into
> nutridiary, and I keep finding that I am still
> averaging about 20% of my calories from fat. The
> largest contributors, ironically, were: tomatoes
> (12% from fat), kiwi (7% from fat), and the
> romaine lettuce (13% from fat). (Maybe it's not
> ironic to some, but I certainly didn't expect
> lettuce to have more fat than fruits!!!) I'm so
> confused! Anyway, I want to follow the diet, but
> cutting out salads seems a little extreme. I like
> fruit, but not THAT much. Can anyone advise as to
> whether I should worry or not? (Everything else I
> eat is between 1-4% from fat.) Thanks for your
> help. Enjoy the weekend!

the math doesn't sound right there. i don't see how it could be 20%
if they're all below twenty.

80/10/10 works for me but I'm usually too lazy to follow it properly all of the time! I mostly eat what I want. When I feel sluggish though, I'll pay closer attention what I am eating and how much I am eating and the closer I get to 80/10/10, the better I feel.

I have Bryan to thank. Some suggestions he made got me to slowly change this and that and to use Fitday to check on what I was really taking in. (It's a bother for me to do that but early on it was a real eye opener. I haven't used it for a while, but I would recommend it to people just starting out.)

When I started out I had a lot of detoxing to do. I felt like crap but it wasn't because of 80/10/10. It was because of years of eating meat, dairy, bread, etc. (Even though many of those years were with supposedly whole foods meat, dairy, and bread.) It was because of years of exposure to chemicals.

Be careful to not blame the diet for how you feel when your feeling like crap is may be because of years of bad diet and exposure to toxins.

If this way of eating stops working for me, I'll change the way I eat. If it doesn't work for you, please change what you eat. We all have a unique past and physical profile... and unique future.

I don't care if a guy who wrote a book about this way of eating is a jerk or a saint. Why get hung up on personality critiques?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/14/2008 11:51PM by Lee_123.

ecjames1120, you must have entered your figures incorrectly or you aren't mentioning the fats that you ate that day. There's no way the lettuce, tomato, and kiwis would bring your total over 20 percent. The higher relative fat content in the lettuce is insignificant because lettuce isn't eaten in significant caloric quantity to effect the total ratios to any real extent.

Alright, now I feel incredibly dumb. I was trying to figure out how, at 1118 calories consumed (38 of them being from fat) that it would be 21%... then it hit me. I had already plugged into the nutridiary my expected intake goals (no more than 10% from fat, which would have put me around 112 calories, by that point in the day, from fat.) The 21% was not coming from my TOTAL calories, but from my EXPECTED intake of calories. In other words, I was far below 10% still-- I had eaten 21% of my 10%. Does that make sense?!? Anyway, sorry for the ditz moment. It was a long week.

But, looking on it, it seems like a good mistake to have made because I learned a lot more about how to look at the nutrition content of what I eat. I'm especially happy that I've actually been able to follow 80/10/10 for a week now-- I really didn't think I could go from such a high-fat diet to such a low-fat one-- but I seriously feel great. I know I"m about to start feeling the detox symptoms cause I'm getting more tired lately with more headaches, but like I mentioned earlier: my skin has cleared up drastically and I'm losing weight. Since I didn't get that when I initially went raw (I was eating a LOT of 'raw' nuts and seeds still) I can only say that there must be something to eating low-fat as well. I would encourage others to not "knock it before you try it", but I understand that for some it might be intimidating at first.

I guess now I need to tackle the fitness element. For some reason, I have always been extremely resistant to exercise. I love how I feel afterward, but it's the before and during that make me... grrrr! It's also hard since I work one full-time and one part-time job. Nevertheless, I think if I can find time to pour over the posts on this forum (which is good in its own way) I can *make* time to run for 30 minutes. Fitness and emotional health are the other important aspects of the 80/10/10 that get overlooked, and if we're gonna do it we might as well do it right!

that does not sound like enough calories for a man; i'm assuming you're male; that might explain the headaches and tiredness, not necessarily detox; if it were detox it would make more sense that your skin would not clear up but worsen first because the skin is where the body leaches toxins.
for example, when i was following the diet strictly, my forehead broke out like hell and it got a little better when i switched things up on my diet slightly. but it must have something to do with the vitamin to mineral balance and how the liver is effected.
it just seems to much like 811 is glorified as a miracle diet - and i feel people get mad when someone lies and says they follow it - which yes is wrong but, people people could also be over exaggerating the effects they're feeling or jumping to conclusion as to why they're feeling them.
pretty much all the people i see talk about 811 all look like they stalk dr. doug in someway or find some sort of thing to quote that i could hear him saying; it's like it's more of a religion then anything.

I have no intent to offend anyone, but that's just what i'm seeing lately, and I hope I'm not the only one who notices that.

iLive- you're right. I know I don't get enough calories because I almost NEVER get above 2000 (usually anywhere between 1400-1700) but I never feel hungry either so maybe that's what my intake is supposed to be. I'm not particularly active...

And I didn't mean to seem as if I was 'glorifying' the diet. I think the low-fat element of it makes sense intuitively and in practice, and I think the theme of this group is to go with whatever floats your boat. Following this plan right now is beneficial to me. I can still eat out with friends because I appreciate salads a lot more and I have more energy. I'm not following it perfectly (though I do plan on renewing my gym membership this weekend to get the fitness aspect in) so I'm getting close. I can easily see where a purely fruitarian diet would be just a beneficial to some, or even one higher in fat (if a person happens to be particularly active.) I was just mentioning my experience and thoughts on the matter because Wendysmiling had wanted to know whether or not the diet was 'bad' for you. I didn't experience any negative reactions from the diet. I really don't think most raw diets are bad in and of themselves, but how they are applied (too much rich food, raw or not, I think is not healthy... eating too much food period is not good... not enough exercise...etc.)

The best part is that I had been hesitant to try persimmons before reading the book... yesterday I had the best hachiya persimmon of my life! It was so soft I had to eat it with a fork. Experiencing some miracle of nature like that everyday makes me not care what the diet is and just focus on my newfound love for food with a body that is alive enough to appreciate it.

IMO the true measure of any diet is how it makes you feel. A measure of self guidance is necessary to establish the necessary basic health parameters and from there its all about listening to your inner coach.

You could not feel hungry because of the amount of food and you not being used to it also. It just seems strange to eat that little for an adult male, I think; many nutritionists usually recommend around 2500 for men. This does come with being active - but not athlete active - maybe around moderate level exercise 3 times a week.
I have read about a study where calorie restriction will lead to helping disease and cancer - but also is not reliable, obviously. You need calories to keep your metabolism going - to make sure every internal organ is functioning properly. If 2000 is a minimum for your average weight, and you're only getting around 1800, let's say, you don't even have enough to keep your average metabolism going. This is if you were simply sitting still, and we all walk everyday and carry out household functions of course.

I just think you should rethink the value of getting all your calories and find out exactly how many you should be consuming. The gym is good too, but I definitely wouldn't start if you're experiencing fatigue - that is most likely because you do not have enough calories.

It is great to eat fruits, i absolutely agree on that note! But it's also amazing to have energy and a good weight going on. I'm not suggesting you change your diet, I just don't want you to get too slim too fast because of the restriction on calories. So just try eating a little more to get right up into your calorie suggestion and I bet you will feel different?

just watchin your back here, The comment after the calories referred to many discussions i've seen here - not specifically yours. So you weren't a target or anything.

I wish you luck, and hope you can continue to enjoy your diet

heres a little something on calories:

[ezinearticles.com]

ayai yai! 2550 for a sedentary male..yikes. it's because men have more muscle mass; muscle burns calories when sitting still.

There is another 8/1/1 but its not what most people would ever think of

I have been 811 for 8 months and have had nothing but incredible success. Weight has fallen off, I am lighter now at 37 than I was when I was unhealthy and 13. I have lost 102 pounds from my highest point 4 years ago with 85 of it coming this year alone. My physical activity level and fitness level is dramatically increased and while I did have some detox symptoms, my body has regulated itself beautifully and I enjoy enhanced skin and hair conditions. No more dry and cracked skin.
Whether or not 811 is ideal for people, one thing I can tell you is that it is much better for you than SAD. Struggling with 811 is better than coping with SAD. Do the work, continue to improve your 811 regimen and you will find the right combination of what works for you. Yes, it is the species specific diet, but each of us is unique and it takes minor tweaks to make it work for you.

Its more can 8/1/1 work long term, short term ive heard nothing but good things but they dont include seaweeds if im right? So already your bound to become deficient on iodine long term.

Certainly that issue isn't addressed in the book. I wonder what Doug's opinion is - any one know?

811 is not a "religion", not at all. It is just common sense. I am trying to follow it, and I hope to stay on it for life. But, if other people don't like it, or have other ideas, I am always ready to listen. There are questions on B12 and iodine that I am finding my own answers for, but other than that, like someone said, "eat all fruit and veggies you can and don't do more than 10% fat - that is my version of 811. This can be done in a much more controlled manner, and probably should, but I am just doing the best I can at the moment.
The way I got to 811 is - reading. I read a lot, whenever I am interested in something, I research. So, my opinion is based on rational thinking, analysis. I am open to other opinions, but I only accept things after a thorough review. Doug Graham has written an unbelievable book, I don't think that even he realizes how big that book (811 diet) is. My only remark is that he is focused on people in developed countries, not mentioning the poor. But, he has done his part. There will be some other nutritionist who will continue in his path, I am sure.