Can't tell you how many times I've heard raw foodists claim that meat eaters could also suffer from low B12, and have to admit I didn't really believe it, as I'd never known any meat eaters who had low B12. Well, call me the poster boy for the low B12 omnivirous croud. Why me, oh gods of the land of plenty, why me?

I'd struggled to be a raw foodist many moons ago, but it never quite took. An acupuncturist convinced me of her traditional Chinese ways and beliefs, stating that raw foods created an imbalance, and with my condition I should never eat any raw foods. How I ever gave up my green smoothies I'll never know - too easily swooned, I guess, by a woman with a fistfull of needles.

Before long, I even gave paleo a limited try, so except for another raw foods blast about a year or so ago (some of you might remember my short-term presence here), many lambs were sacrificed for my "benefit" over the last several years, and as a result I'm heading to my doctor, with tail tucked between legs, once a week for the next month for a B12 shot before going on a supplement.

I assume this is caused by some sort of gut dysbiosis, right? My gut is out of whack and is trying to absorb nutrients like a clogged drain trying to suck in backed-up water.

Anyway, I'm back on my beloved green smoothies. No needled fisted woman shall ever seduce me away again, not even winged maidens with their siren songs. I've been enjoying my smoothies for awhile and was considering trying vegan raw foods again, easing into it more slowly, before this new low B12 finding gave me pause. Even though it happened while eating meat, I know it is usually more of a vegan issue so I don't want to make it worse. I'd be interested in any words of wisdom on going raw again without further hindrance of B12 absorption. I thank thee in advance...

hiya Jimtoo i remember you welcome back to veganism

i imagine its quite hard for an already compromised digestion system to handle raw meats . unlike carnivores we dont have the really super high stomach acids to breakdown flesh and bones an fur ..etc.

the only thing i can think to offer at this moment is eat simply for awhile ..3 ingredients or less at a time so your digestion isnt overworked, but change it up often so you dont get bored eating / drinking the same ol' same ol' everyday

im sure others will chime in with some more ideas

...Jodi, the banana eating buddhist

Hi Jodi,

Never ate any raw meats - I'm not that much of a heathen...

Not sure if I will ever be a "raw foodist," but it seems as if, no matter how hard I try to stay away, I always come back. Maybe that should tell me something. The last time I tried I told myself I was going to go into it slowly, and within a week I was 100 percent raw. Within 2 weeks I was 811 and scolding my bananas for not ripening quickly enough. Maybe my head is finally in the right place. I'm enjoying my green smoothies, eating more salads, and for now that's good enough. I'll see how this evolves, though I worry about that B12 issue.

I just don't want to end up looking like this:

[abitofhumor.posterous.com]

Hi, jimtoo! I remember you and your literate posts well

Sorry this has happened to you. It does sound like your problem is digestive, and, as Jodi said, raw animal products are difficult to process for a compromised system. IMO, excepting allergens, plant foods are always easier to digest than animal foods, because, for one thing, they contain fewer toxins. I would recommend taking it really easy: don't load up too many ingredients in the green smoothies, do consume lots of fresh soft leafy greens besides[gut problems likely involve mineral absorption problems as well], and consume as much fresh ripe fruit as you can, one type at a time and peeled if there's the slightest doubt as to insoluble fiber tolerance. Drink lots of filtered water and rest your stomach once in a while. Get your B12 stores back up, and then look into taking a good quality supplement, preferably from whole food sources(I am currently taking the Vitamin Code raw iron/B12 because of a digestive issue early this year, and it's really helping). Good luck and speedy healing

I would agree as you have probably read somewhere that your gut Dysbosis is the culprit. With out doing tests, (and some of them are not accurate) You should stimulate your digestine, use a top tear probiotic, preferably Primal Defense, and maybe eliminate some foods from your diet that cause inflamation until better. Again, without tests I would do a parasite cleanse and stay away from to much fruit for a while inthe case of fungas. The most common causes of this is pathogens, food intolerances and just general overall health and diet. Even mental issues that lead us to a poor diet and stress should be considered. Take a sublingual B-12 don't do the shots those snake oil salesmen try and give you. Yes I am talking about your doctor. B-12 is cheap and you only need to take it every other day if the dose is large like 1000mcg. But that depends on who you are, blood tests will confirm that.

jimtoo

<<How I ever gave up my green smoothies I'll never know - too easily swooned, I guess, by a woman with a fistfull of needles.>>

whoahhh... she had u give up your green smoothies? wowzahss! that's some crazy magic spell she had on ya!


<<Anyway, I'm back on my beloved green smoothies. No needled fisted woman shall ever seduce me away again, not even winged maidens with their siren songs.>>

just put earplugs in your ears for the latter

and you'll be right on track !

Thanks all.

rzmann, I assumed the shots were necessary for better absorption, since the supplements would wind up in the same unabsorbable area. But that's an assumption on my part, and you know what they say about those. Could you elaborate and enlighten me more? I admit I have lost confidence in this doctor - actually in all doctors, holistic and otherwise, and know I need to take control of my own health. Thanks

la_v, well, she was gorgeous, so whatever she was doing was working fine for her. That's what's confusing about all this dietary stuff - some seem to be able to consume nothing but sweaty foods and still sparkle. BTW, I've tracked this site for years, posting little, but have been around enough to notice you have a lovely spiritual presence here. So no singing...I am too easily smitten

jimtoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> la_v, well, she was gorgeous, so whatever she was
> doing was working fine for her. That's what's
> confusing about all this dietary stuff - some seem
> to be able to consume nothing but sweaty foods and
> still sparkle.


It seems, up to a point! There is a thread on Michelle Pfeiffer somewhere around here, check it out

>Banana ice-cream rocks!<

I read some of that thread. Personally, she still looks beautiful to me.

I too think she is beautiful, it just I think she realises it won't last unless she changes her diet. We are what we eat (as well as what we do!)

>Banana ice-cream rocks!<

jimtoo,

Me too. She looked beautiful before. She looks beautiful now. But her cholesterol is 80 points lower now, believe it or not. So she may be with us longer now. I loved The Russia House, Dangerous Liasons, and One Fine Day. Witches of Eastwick, I could take or leave. Whoops, thread drift... which is fine. Jimtoo, welcome back. Staying on message. Omnivores suffer from B-12 deficiency, especially as they get older, due to malabsorption rather than malnutrition. It maybe in their diet, but their system isn't capable as absorbing it, for whatever reason, when they older.

The vegan risk which is similar in not getting enough B-12 is from malnutrition (and possibly malabsorption as well, depending on the individual). But, the important point in distinguishing B-12 risk for vegans and B-12 risk for ominivores is the difference between malabsorption and malnutrition. One is that there is plenty B-12 and you just aren't getting it in. The other is that you just aren't taking enough of it.

Actually Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes provides an interesting analogy regarding insulin. Diabetes in general is a disease resulting from the body's inability to handle blood sugar. But that said, Type 1 and Type 2 are a bit different, like B-12 deficiency for omnivores and vegans. Type 1 diabetes results from the pancreas's inability to produce insulin, the horomone needed to reduce glucose from our blood stream and get it into the cells where it can be used. The beta cells in the pancreas that produce the insulin are destroyed in childhood (hence juvenile diabetes) and some have speculated that cow's milk or proteins in it may be responsible. Type 1 diabetics are usually thin (think Mary Tyler Moore) and are dependent on insulin injections. But their disease is one of malnutrition in a sense, not enough insulin.

Type 2 diabetics or adult/onset diabetes isn't due to a lack of insulin but rather malabsorption of the insulin or insensitivity for our cells to recognize the message that the insulin is sending, the key to the muscle cell (or other cell) to let the sugar in. So, the sugar, having to stay somewhere, stays in the blood and blood sugar levels rise. The cause is, according to some, too much fat in the diet (Graham claims fruit sugar isn't the problem, it's sugar in the presence of too much fat that is the problem, and there are data to support his position), being too fat (no question, lower BMIs/obesity favor less Type 2 diabetes) and frankly just wearing the pancreas out eating too many rich foods.

My analogy isn't perfect. But in general, the vegan B-12 risk is more like a Type 1 diabetic, we aren't getting enough of it (and we're thin like them too, more often than not). The omnivore risk of B-12 is more like Type 2. They have plenty of it, but it's not getting in for whatever reason. And the problem gets worse with age.

Too often you hear in the vegan community, yeah, I gotta worry about B-12 but I'm no different than an omnivore. Plenty of omnivore's with B-12 deficiency too. Apart from the obvious "if your friend jumped off a cliff would you jump too" response, it doesn't address the obvious question. What is the nature of your risk and how should you best respond? B-12 deficiency for vegans is different than it is for omnivores. Type 1 diabetes is different than Type 2. The analogy isn't exact. Vegans can suffer from malabsorption as well. But the prevalence of B-12 deficiency among vegans is higher than omnivores. [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] You can look at the other data in Becoming Raw by Davis and Melina, but the results are the same. Vegans have a bigger problem than omnivores, though it exists in both groups and the risks at the individual level are the same.

If you go to Foodnsport or whatever Graham's site, I last looked at when Fresh provided it, it said no supplements needed. Maybe not. Testing periodically can tell you what you want to know. Chlorella looks promising as a nonsupplement source of B-12 [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov][www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] "The major cobalt species in nutritive supplements and chlorella samples was cyanocobalamin". Note that containing active B-12 isn't enough because often the b-12 analogues that prevent their absorption may be present also. Whether or not it will reduce MMA Methylmalonic Acid, is the gold standard of the tests. [www.veganhealth.org] For those that don't know Jack, he's a vegan RD who runs the veganhealth.org site and runs college awareness campaigns for vegan causes. Great guy. Dont' agree with everything he and Ginny say in "Vegan for Life". Remember that's a collaboration. Lots of stuff in there on processed vegan food. whoops more thread drift. just no mention of body parts or anything gratuitous.

Anyway, test, take a supplement, use chlorella and red star nutritional yeast, make your best move. Just make it an informed one. Best.

p.s. whether or not supplements are needed depends in part on how you define supplement and whether or not you test, and how often. Frequently we all test just to check in. with b-12, at least at the beginning if you wanted to use chlorella and/or redstar nutritional yeast, you'd want to see how your body metabolizes those just to be sure and then check in once in a while. How often is at least in part a medical question which I'm not qualified to answer. So check with your doctor.

Paul



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2012 03:01PM by pborst.

fwiw, I'm going to do an MMA test "just to be sure" in addition to supplementing with B-12. I think each person has to decide how risk prone or risk adverse they are.

I'm under no delusion that humans evolved in vegan conditions and eat only vegan foods during evolution. And even if we had, it wouldn't make it the best chess move for our living today. Natural selection is designed to ensure survival of a species, not the individual or an individual in that species. If having lots of kids keeps the species going but kills the mother earlier , not a good individual chess move. Nature is good, but science is better for what I want.

Paul

make sure you are eating wheatgrass and sprouts sprouts sprouts !!!
once you clean your colon and intestines out over time it should help with the digestive bacteria levels to help the b 12 creation and absorption.

helping colon health can be useful. But developing B-12 in our lowercolon won't be a substitute for intake since the latter is absobred higher in our gi attract,at least that's always the way I've heard it explained.

jimtoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks all.
>
> rzmann, I assumed the shots were necessary for
> better absorption, since the supplements would
> wind up in the same unabsorbable area. But that's
> an assumption on my part, and you know what they
> say about those. Could you elaborate and
> enlighten me more? I admit I have lost confidence
> in this doctor - actually in all doctors, holistic
> and otherwise, and know I need to take control of
> my own health. Thanks
>
> la_v, well, she was gorgeous, so whatever she was
> doing was working fine for her. That's what's
> confusing about all this dietary stuff - some seem
> to be able to consume nothing but sweaty foods and
> still sparkle. BTW, I've tracked this site for
> years, posting little, but have been around enough
> to notice you have a lovely spiritual presence
> here. So no singing...I am too easily smitten


Yes, simply put a Sublingual B-12 is absorbed through the cells in the mouth and that is where you keep it until dissolved. It absorbs quite easily and has been shown to be just as effective as a shot! And yes it is also very hard to find a good doctor even Holistic. Since all I have learned over the years it's hard to sit and listen to even a holistic doctor spew there crap and then charge you hundreds of dollars to do so.

Thanks for all the details; much appreciated. Seems like you have to become a biochemist to fully understand the B12 issue - that class was a struggle for me, and I've done all I can do to repress those memories. Now the chemistry between Michelle and me, especially during her performance in The Age of Innocence, no doubt would light up the world...

Was that the one with Daniel Day-Lewis and Wynona Ryder?


jimtoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks for all the details; much appreciated.
> Seems like you have to become a biochemist to
> fully understand the B12 issue - that class was a
> struggle for me, and I've done all I can do to
> repress those memories. Now the chemistry between
> Michelle and me, especially during her performance
> in The Age of Innocence, no doubt would light up
> the world...

i would prefer to eat sprouts and wheatgrass instead of toxifying my blood by eating animal products. eggs are toxic to us. people that eat eggs smell like sulfur and their feces smell like rotting animals.

pborst Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Was that the one with Daniel Day-Lewis and Wynona
> Ryder?
>
>
>
Yes, that was the one. I can still picture her in my mind from that film, which is what my mind is good for - can't remember chemistry - but how she looked sticks with me...

I'd say ignore the oysters & eggs that one of the prior posters said. You have to look at the food as a package, all of the pros and cons. Oysters are overharvested. And both chlorella and red star nutritional yeast provide good reliable B-12 alternatives that are still vegan. Testing and supplements are good adjuncts. Best.

Paul

pborst

<<fwiw, I'm going to do an MMA test "just to be sure" in addition to supplementing with B-12. I think each person has to decide how risk prone or risk adverse they are. >>

you're going to wrestle it to the ground, perform a neck lock, then an ankle lock, then punch the B-12 issue in the face?

errr.... okay, i don't know what MMA is other than mixed martial arts
and i'm tired of googling every thing

if i don't get an answer, i'll figure, i just don't need to know what the acronym stands for

jimtoo

you can hear the siren's wail but just make sure its on a CD and you're comfortably at home

put in the earplugs when you're out at sea

"CAUTION, BOULDER AHEAD"

la-veronique,

I've never completely understood your meaning. And today is no exception. MMA per my last email is methyl malonic acid (not mixed martial arts). In short, you can't just rely on the presence of active b-12 in vegan food, you need to be sure there is enough of it and not enough of the bad stuff to keep you in tip top shape. I'm over simplifying. Read Jack's primer. And watch MMA if you wish. I'm starting training in silat in two weeks and am really excited. Best.

Paul



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/12/2012 08:51PM by pborst.

Paul, I thought the same thing: can doing martial arts really give you a good idea of your B12 levels? LOL!

pborst


<<I've never completely understood your meaning. And today is no exception>>


that's not news to me


<<And watch MMA if you wish>>

never been much of a spectator, actually

<<I'm starting training in silat in two weeks and am really excited. Best>>

silat, huh?
hmmmm....
that is an interesting choice, actually

ExperimentsWithTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> -Algae, chlorella, spirulina are not reliable
> sources of B12. (They contain "analogue" forms of
> B-12 which recent research has shown the body
> cannot use, and which can block/crowd out uptake
> of the needed form.)

Actually, true B-12 predominates chlorella and analogues predominate spirulina. [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov][www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] Moreover, chlorella has been shown to reduce the risk of anemia, edemia, proteinuria and hypertension in pregnant women. The authors conclude in the 2010 study "Chlorella supplement may be useful as a resource of natural folate, vitamin B-12 and iron for pregnant women." Moreover, raw vegans taking chlorella in a 1995 Finnish study had higher levels of B-12 than those raw vegans who didn't. [jn.nutrition.org] The authors of the study caution that chlorella cannot be used, by itself, as a source of B-12 not because analogues, but because of the large iodine intake that could accompany the chlorella. However, because chlorella is a freshwater algae, it has no significant iodine content. [www.klinghardtacademy.com]

Also, nutritional yeast is inexpensive and reliable as a B-12 source also. 1-2 tablespoons provides a daily requirement of B-12 and is fairly inexpensive. Source Davis & Melina, Becoming Raw p. 173.


Also expensive, and some are
> sold by the inefficient, unpopular method of
> multi-level marketing.
> -Supplements are best source for strict vegans:
> reliable, cheap.
> -Supplements not required if you eat raw dairy or
> are an instincto.
> [www.beyondveg.com]
> bleshooting-1a.shtml
>

Not really. Nutritional yeast and chlorella aren't supplements, per se but food. You can certainly buy chlorella in supplement form. But it's no more a supplement in bulk than any seavegetable.

> So it really boils down to which is the lesser
> evil:
> -eating vegetarian (vs stricly vegan)?
> or
> -eating pharmaceuticals

Vegans have considerable choice in how they meet their B-12 requirement. They can test, they can supplement, they can eat chlorella and nutritional yeast without breaking the bank.

> And to whoever deleted my first post, the board
> policy says "The spirit of the Living & Raw Foods
> Community discussion forums is to support others
> that eat a diet composed primarily of raw plant
> foods(including honey) but no animal products
> (such as meat,dairy,etc) emphasis added ." Which is precisely what
> I was discussing/suggesting...a primarily vegan
> diet with a small amount of occasional nonvegan
> foods. And this isn't anymore a violation of the
> spirit/policy of this forum than pborst suggesting
> supplements because supplements aren't food, much
> less raw or plant food.

The primarily was added for honey which John Kohler added. Discussing animal products is clearly different 1) because not all of the foods I discussed were supplements, and 2) there is no proscription against supplement but there is against animal products.

Paul

ExperimentsWithTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pborst,
>
> All I can say is that there are many ways to eat a
> diet composed of primarily raw plant foods and
> just because you choose to include/exclude certain
> things from your primarily vegan diet it doesn't
> mean we all should or that those of us who don't
> should have their views censored or deleted.

I'm not censoring you. Perhaps you should take your complaint to Prana for your concern. I'm not a moderator here.

> In fact, honey is "derived wholly or partly from
> animals" and, historically, advocates of veganism
> such as Gandhi have recognized that gathering
> honey is cruel and exploitative to bees (and so
> have meat eaters like Seinfeld!). Gandhi even says
> right in his book ( "Diet and Diet Reform" ) that
> contrary to Hindu teachings he thinks eating eggs
> is "more vegetarian" than eating milk or honey
> (this was before the invention of the term
> "vegan", but Gandhi is clear in this passage that
> "more vegetarian" means "more vegan" and was
> elsewhere a clear advocate of aspiring to 100%
> natural plant based diets).

Gandhi was a great leader and example but he was not Donald Watson or a member of the British Vegan Society. And he was dead three years before BVS established it's definition. So your point is something of a nonsequitor.

> For this reason I, for one, avoid honey regardless
> of who falsely claims it's a "plant food" and I
> also strictly avoid unnatural, domesticated foods
> invented in biology labs such as chlorella and
> nutritional yeast. As you said earlier, you have
> to look at the whole package and, in my opinion,
> the overall harm to life on earth of getting
> sucked in to consumer culture and dependency on
> corporate/government labs (by "supplementing" with
> agricultural/chemical innovations like chlorella
> and nutritional yeast) is far greater than the
> harm of eating an occasional natural raw oyster or
> egg.

that's fine there are paleo boards just don't violate TOS here. Eggs and oysters are animal products and clearly violate the terms of service here.

>
> So I would appreciate a little tolerance and
> respect and I'm sure so would the OP who is
> suffering from B12 deficiency even when eating
> foods that are very rich in B12 as opposed to
> foods or supplements that may just be borderline
> adequate for normal/healthy individuals (as are
> the ones you've suggested).

It's not an issue of tolerance or respect. I did not remove your post and did not make a personal comment against you. It's an issue of boundries. Promoting animal products, honey excepted, is not permitted here. You need to follow the rules just like everyone else.

That being said, for
> the benefit of jimtoo (who has expressed that his
> primarily vegan diet is not strictly vegan) I will
> reiterate my deleted suggestion that he might want
> to consider the following foods which are commonly
> eaten raw even among non-raw dieters:
> -Oysters (these are extremely high in B12 with
> 10-100x more than the next highest foods)
> -Eggs (which have are considered "more
> vegetarian"/vegan by some vegan advocates)
> Also, jimtoo, you can look up the nutritional
> information of foods on
> [nutritiondata.self.com] (but remember to
> take it with a grain of salt as all nutrition
> tables are notoriously rough estimates)
>
> Cheers,
> ExperimentsWithTruth

I see.

I am not 100% vegan but in respect to the rules here I avoid discussion of such topics. There are plenty of other websites out there that tolerate the promotion of non-vegan food stuffs but this is not one. This is the only completely vegan site (with the unfortunate recent inclusion of honey) that I know of and as such it is the only haven for those who follow a strict vegan diet. This has been discussed here many times and the general agreement is that participants do respect and follow those guidelines, it is not censorship, it is playing nice with each other.
If you wish to discuss non-vegan foods with specific members there is a private message function for that.

ExperimentsWithTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pborst,
>
> I'm not interested in arguing and I'm not
> violating the terms of service. So I suggest if
> you or the moderators don't like what I have to
> say that you attempt to change my mind with
> civilized argument because otherwise I will
> continue to post here just like all the other
> posters that eat primarily vegan (in my case 98%+)
> raw diets whether you want to mislabel my diet and
> discussion as Paleo or not.

you definitely have violated Terms of Service, you've mentioned animal products after Prana removed your post. So no question about that. Whether you will continue to post here is not my decision. That's Prana's decision. If it were my decision, you wouldn't.


> I also could care less what Donald Watson or the
> British Vegetarian Society have to say because the
> fact is that honey is more exploitative and cruel
> to animals than eggs (which are not meat or dairy)
> and agricultural inventions like chlorella and
> yeast share many of the same problems (including
> indirect cruelty and harm to animals and plants
> alike) as other agricultural foods which are
> typically cooked like wheat, rice, etc.

that's fine, the inaccuracies aside, eating chlorella spares animal suffering and avoids the cholestrol and fat of your animal choices.

> Finally, there's also a case to be made that
> coral, oysters, clams, etc are no more meat than
> yeast because:
> 1. The term "meat" can refer to the edible part of
> any food (including fruit) as opposed to just
> animals.
> 2. The term "animal" can refer to just mammals or,
> in the context of zoology (as opposed to biology)
> does not include inanimate beings like oysters and
> even in the context of biology oysters are not
> always classified as animals due to the absence of
> adequate sensory organs.

oysters are animal. No question. So are eggs

> So in my opinion you (and perhaps whoever deleted
> my original post) are giving way too much weight
> to the definitions of certain experts and
> organizations as opposed to the concepts that
> determine the relevance and importance of those
> particular definitions (vs others).

Perhaps nothing. Thanks for the compliment. If it were up to me, you'd have been banned by now. TOS is TOS. You've agreed to it and violated it, twice. I wouldn't need a third time if I were a MOD. Prana runs the show. Lucky for you.

Paul



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2012 04:57PM by pborst.

ExperimentsWithTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I also strictly avoid unnatural, domesticated foods
> invented in biology labs such as chlorella and
> nutritional yeast. As you said earlier, you have
> to look at the whole package and, in my opinion,
> the overall harm to life on earth of getting
> sucked in to consumer culture and dependency on
> corporate/government labs (by "supplementing" with
> agricultural/chemical innovations like chlorella
> and nutritional yeast) is far greater than the
> harm of eating an occasional natural raw oyster or
> egg.


Not to call you stupid because that would be rude, but do you actually understand what you write? So chlorella and nutritional yeast are "unnatural", "domesticated" and "invented in biology labs". Hmmm let's see.

Both chlorella and yeast are biological organisms, one is fungi and another is algae, which have been collected and dried so that they are ready to eat. Hence if they are unnatural then so is your chicken whose eggs you propose to eat.

Both chlorella and yeast are domesticated, yes, in that they are kept, bread and grown by people for people's purposes. But so is your chicken, the last time I checked!

As to chlorella and nutritional yeast being "invented in biology labs"? Well, people research chlorella and yeast in the labs to further their knowledge of other biological organisms. Thats hardly qualifies as "inventing" though. People also grow chlorella and yeast in controlled environment, and select particular species of chlorella and strains of yeast for these purposes. But if this makes them "invented in biology labs", then again - so is your chicken which is equally selected, bread and grown under human control.


So you are trying to avoid "the overall harm to life on earth of getting sucked in to consumer culture and dependency on corporate/government labs" - well if this is so you should seriously consider stripping your clothes, leaving your home, and departing to live on the wild pastures, because I'm afraid only the latter way of life does not in any part owe it's existence to aforementioned labs.

Not everything "unnatural" is for that reason bad, that's the point.

>Banana ice-cream rocks!<



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2012 05:03PM by chat.

ExperimentsWithTruth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pborst,
>
> I'm not interested in fighting and I'm not
> violating the terms of service. So I suggest if
> you or the moderators don't like what I have to
> say that you attempt to change my mind with
> civilized argument because otherwise I will
> continue to post here just like all the other
> posters that eat primarily BVS "vegan" (in my case
> 98%+) raw diets whether you want to mislabel my
> diet and discussion as "paleo" or not.

I don't believe you. You've done nothing but fight since you came here. As far as what you post and how much, that's an issue for Prana, not me. And also without the revisionism, most people here even if they aren't strict vegan (e.g. Coco), don't promote animal products which separates you I'm afraid.
>
> I also could care less what Donald Watson or the
> British Vegetarian Society have to say because the
> fact is that honey is more exploitative and cruel
> to animals than eggs (which are not meat or dairy)
> and agricultural inventions like chlorella and
> yeast violate the spirit of eating raw due to
> their similarity to typically cooked agricultural
> foods like wheat, rice, etc.

I'm not going to debate the line. Some vegan choices are better than others to be sure. But to call something the "spirit" in order to rationalize pushing animal products on a vegan forum is folly. But then you knew that.

> Finally, there's also a case to be made that
> coral, oysters, clams, etc are no more meat than
> yeast because:
> 1. The term "meat" can refer to the edible part of
> any food (including fruit) as opposed to just
> animals.
> 2. The term "animal" can refer to just mammals or
> also, in the context of zoology (as opposed to
> biology) does not include inanimate beings like
> oysters and even in the context of biology oysters
> are not always classified as animals due to the
> absence of adequate sensory organs.

oysters and eggs are animal. If you want to try out your thought elsewhere or with other posters on this forum, fine. I don't buy it.
>
> So in my opinion you (and perhaps whoever deleted
> my original post) are giving way too much weight
> to the definitions of certain experts and
> organizations as opposed to the concepts that
> determine the relevance and importance of those
> particular definitions (vs others).

I acknowledge your right to an opinion and expect you to abide by the TOS you agreed to when you registered here. It will be up to Prana as to how that's enforced.

>
> Living and Raw Food Boards Policy:
> "Please post and reply to queries related only to
> the vegan/vegetarian living food lifestyle.
> .
> .
> .
> The spirit of the Living & Raw Foods Community
> discussion forums is to support others that eat a
> diet composed primarily of raw plant
> foods(including honey) but no animal products
> (such as meat,dairy,etc)."

Thank you for making my point, no animal products, oyster and eggs are. ergo, you are violation.

Paul