The following started as a response to madinah on the "Does Doug Graham look old" threat and just felt tired writing it. I don't know if you have ever gotten tired writing a response here kind of thinking to yourself, "been there, done that". To be sure it's noone fault but my own. Each individual picks their battles and can learn to leave threads that have more heat than light alone. Maybe I can make that a skill for self-improvement. Who knows. I will leave the response below as I originally wrote it and felt it. The rest is self-explanatory. Be well.

madinah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Clement works out, I have seen video of his wife
> talking about their workout. The reason why Doug
> and Clement are good comparison is that each
> thinks the other's diet is the wrong approach.
> Clement think we should limit fruit consumption
> while Doug is not for sprouts, greens, and sea
> vegies. They are about the same age, actually Doug
> is younger. They are both white so no skin color
> issue. Both workout. I think the difference is in
> the diet, one is fruit sugar, the other one is
> greens. The difference is very clear, fruit sugar
> make you age.
> [www.youtube.com]
> =related

Madinah,

While I tend to agree more with Clement's diet than Graham's and also agree that overeating a high sugar fruit based diet is not optimal, I also think in the interest of candor that Tamara's point is spot on. If you are looking at the skin of the two gentleman and ascribing aging to fruit sugar instead of the fact that Doug Graham probably has much more sun exposure, then I think we part company.

If Graham's skin looks older than Clement (and both men look great for their age), then Graham's athleticism and his sun exposure are the likely culprits.

I wonder though if this general line of thought, having one individual or two or three for that matter speak to the efficacy of a diet is appropriate. If the EPIC trials on vegetarians and health conscious meat eaters taught us anything, they showed that most of the benefits in reduced mortality was related to factors that got subsumed into the vegetarians lifestyle. Vegetarians are more likely to exercise, less likely to smoke, etc. When compared to a cohort of health conscious meat-eaters, the health benefits appear to be less dramatic [www.veganhealth.org].

To be sure, you can say that's a strawman because it's mostly "vegetarian" rather than raw food vegan. And I take your point. But my purpose wasn't to preclude the possibility that a raw vegan diet can't be better, but rather to point out the fallacy of looking at two individuals, albeit prominent vegan authors of the same age, and trying to make a generalizations about the respective effects of aging from each diet.

I think the analogy about Graham and Clement is largely a symbolic one without much substance. And as such, it's something of a distraction from the larger point of personal discovery. Many raw vegans I have seen have that "glow" or energy eating somewhat different diets but with a general focus on eating raw fresh fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds. Who am I talking about in their sixties? Cherrie Soria ,Annette Larkins (66) among others.

I do think there is something special about raw vegans, or I wouldn't have come here. But this constant infighting about who's diet is better wastes so much energy I think it's time for me to move on. I love this forum and thank Prana for administering it and John for creating it. But this rehashing of the same old b-12 or Clement vs. Graham pics is probably aging me. So, with a thanks to everyone I have met on the Board. Thank you.

A particular thank you Alice, Robin, Tamara, Cherie, Kwan, Prana (Brian), JK, Loeve, Banana Who, WY, Jodi and esp. John Kohler for his tremendous leadership and example. I have learned so much and am humbled.

I will also take this time to personally apologize for a few errant momments where I may have taken an arrogent tone or been too direct. To those recipients of my replies, I am sorry and would perform differently today had I the opportunity.

My warmest wishes and highest hopes for your personal success and long life. For those friendships I have made on the forum, if you would like to stay in contact either shoot me a PM with an email address or send me a Facebook request. Thank you all.

Paul



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2010 04:01PM by pborst.

Ohmigosh, I hardly know what to say, Paul. I will so miss your thoughtful and thorough additions to discussions. Thank you for them all. Perhaps you can pop in now and then. I hope so. Whatever you choose to do, I wish you well.


My favorite raw vegan

pborst Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> Maybe I can make that a skill for self-improvement.
>
>

I think the above sentence is the best approach.

I am sure anyone that has been on these forums long enough has been where you are... writing the same things, expressing the same opinions, suddenly wondering why we do it. I know I have been there. Taking a break from it all certainly helps. Practicing self-control and discipline is another strategy.

Every 'lifestyle' needs mentors and leaders. And sure, you will find yourself repeating the same things over and over as new people join the forum and ask the same question that has been asked a thousand times. Or debating the same basic principles again and again in an effort to reveal the facts. So you have to just practice self-preservation and learn how much of your energy you can dedicate to others before you feel depleted. And take a break before you reach your limit.

My point is this... you have reached burn out. Take a break. But... DO return when you are refreshed and practice self-preservation by giving away only enough of your energy to share your wisdom but not so much as to deplete your love of sharing. The raw lifestyle needs experience and knowledge.

I have often thought of the careers of teachers and professors. Teaching the same things year after year, answering the same questions with each new class of students. Finding students that care and students that don't. They must reach burn out, too.

And sometimes a good strategy is to simply leave someone's crazy point of view untouched. Sometimes just thinking to yourself... "Okay, I don't get it, don't agree with it, but okay... if it works for them then great for them. I know better!"

(Maybe elitist but at least you aren't spending your energy trying to convince a crazy person otherwise. *LOL*)

Noooooo!!!! Say it ain't so, Paul! I am not trying to strongarm you into staying if you don't want to, but just to give my perspective about the 80/10/10 flap: I was amused by the back-and-forth stuff because in my opinion, there are points to be made on both sides. I may not be privy to everything you went through with your dissenters, but you have too much to offer us to walk away. There is a certain raw-fooder who is "famous" (as much as you can be in this little niche) and I don't think he looks so hot for someone eating such a healthy diet. Who cares? Grey hair must have a genetic component in certain cases because this man is starting to grey and he's not yet 40. I don't know if your debate got nasty and if this is the real reason for leaving but I hope you will reconsider

Paul,

[sniffling a bit]You must do what you feel is best, but I am sorry to see you go. I have truly appreciated your intelligent and penetrating analysis of topics, and have benefited a great deal from your experience, scholarship, and frankness[haven't ever thought your approach arrogant, but hey]. Yours is a valuable voice here and I shall miss it. Good luck to you in your endeavors, whatever they may be, and in attaining the best of health in all its aspects. A gentle wave, hanky in hand, toward the promenade deck . . .

Dont leave mate, i enjoy reading the posts you have to offer, everyone including myself can get heated in debates, i guess thats what happens but most of us leave on a good note.

You have input alot to this forum and like i say along with others i enjoy reading what you have to offer. Saying that if you feel you need to go you have to do whats best for you.

If not drop in from time to time.

I'm sorry to see you go. I hope that this is just a temporary break and that you come back when you are in a different state of mind. Your contributions are valuable. In any case, I wish you well.

Yeah, maybe just take a temporary break? A forum needs a "voice of reason" such as yours...

"Each individual picks their battles and can learn to leave threads that have more heat than light alone. Maybe I can make that a skill for self-improvement...."

Hear hear...I am finally learning that skill, lol - especially in "real life"...

Cheers,
JK

Oh garsh, Paul. I will surely miss your down-to-earth approach, not to mention all the great info you bring to the forum.

If and when you decide to come on back, I know you will be welcomed! As far as many of us are concerned, you're part of the family around here, ya know.

In my opinion you can't separate sun exposure and high-fruit-sugar diet. The sun brings all that sugar to the surface of the body - the skin - and damages it. I would bet my last $ that people who eat a low sugar/chemical diet of any kind and get plenty of sun exposure do not have ugly, old-looking, or unhealthy skin. The sugar is a sort of catalyst. This idea is not original with me but has been presented by others more knowledgable. I first heard this decades ago and it made much sense to me.

One other thing - older women who look remarkably good, I'd suspect they've had some "enhancing".

PBorst,

To take TWO people on different diets, compare their looks and then draw conclusions about their diets based on a sample size of ONE from each diet is obviously ridiculous.

It's as daft as putting a photo' of me (I look good for my age) against someone who follows a Clement-style diet (who doesn't look good for their age) and say 'There, that proves it. The Clement-style diet is ageing'.

Please don't leave because someone has said something daft. It happens all the times on forums.

I TOTALLY agree with you about the contant competition/fighting about 'whose diet is best, and the constant implication that anyone who isn't following a particular sort of raw food diet is doomed.' I'm one of those who believe that people can be successfully raw on all sorts of raw food diet.

But in general I find less of this sort of bickering/blinkeredness (?) on this forum.

So please reconsider. Hope to see you soon.

pborst
This discussion has nothing to do with your personal view point but rather has much to do with the result of two diets that totally opposed to each other.

Here we have two giants of the raw food community promoting two totally opposed diet plans. These giants are the product of the diet they preach for over 20 years. We have to judge them by their appearance. This cannot be blurred by arguments about sun exposure.

Graham teaches a high fruit diet with little emphasis on greens and finds sea vegetables not for human consumption, while Clement discourages a high fruit diet and focus more on greens, sea vegies and sprouts. This is the debate and what is the outcome of their respective diet over a long period of time, simply it is what these people themselves are over 20 years of practicing what they teach.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2010 06:57AM by madinah.

In response to madinah, no offense intended, but Oh Balderdash! First of all, nobody is a giant. Giants are in fairy tales. We don't even know for sure if those guys follow their own diets.

I agree with debbietook, that "(drawing) conclusions about their diets based on a sample size of ONE from each diet is obviously ridiculous."

Imagine if "science" did that. We'd be even more ignorant than we already are.

There's actually a pretty good possibility that both Clement and Graham could be right about some things and wrong about other things - just like the rest of us mere mortals. What then? Who should look better, and why?

Then there are those pesky little gene things that sometimes tend to express themselves. Oh, genes shouldn't matter? Oh, genes should matter? Either way - genes as fact, or genes as controversy - genes could kind of complicate the "evidence".

And who's to know if the person whom we happen to think "looks" better will keel over from cancer or a brain aneurism in a year?

And there's that little bitty matter of personal taste in looks.

It's a wonder that this kind of pressure on how a person looks doesn't put people into an early grave. Or...maybe it does!

I personally think I look absolutely wonderful at 60. A goddess, that's me. Even more important though - and this is hard for many young people to really get - I feel good, I can move, I can do lots of stuff, I can run, I can stand on my head, I have goals, I can think, I can learn, and I can love. The older one becomes, the more precious and awesome these abilities can be.

If Graham and Clement feel the same way, that's what counts. That's all that counts. If someone believes they will "look" better if they follow one diet or another, then go ahead and prove it over the same number of decades! - to yourself, young whippersnapper! -snort



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2010 09:15AM by suncloud.

Thanks, Paul. I learned a lot from you.

I have greatly enjoyed your viewpoint, Paul, even when we butted heads. I think we both learned from each other and tried to figure out what the person was saying and that we could disagree without going on and on about it. And I definitely agree with you re: B12 and aging posts. It's actually being posted on another raw forum I go to, and every time I log in and see the new posts, I think "Oh, man, please NOT AGAIN." Same person replies with same thing each time. argh!

:p

Be well.

Pborst, I have always read and enjoyed and benefited from your contributions here. You are well-read and express yourself well without any mean-ness and on anonymous forums, that is an accomplishment indeed. Best to you always. - Horsea.

I did not know that people still do that on the internet - "leave" a forum.

The best thing that pborst did with this message is to convince me that he is genuine. I disagree with not so much his views, but with his ideology. At moments I even thought that he may have had a hidden agenda. But, emotional outburst like this shows that he is genuine (hardly anybody can act like this) and I hope that I have a chance to read his texts in the future, even if I don't agree with him.
While I truly think that Doug Graham is the most advanced thinker in the vegan world, I am not and will never be a "follower". I don't accept everything from Doug, nor from any other human being. Critical thinking always helps, and I enjoyed pborst's answers regarding B12 - I do agree that vegans have a slightly higher risk of B12 deficiency, but I think that it can be resolved by eating from the garden and working outdoors more. True natural life, with our own source of power, our own food is my goal, and my philosophy.
I am not that meticulous as pborst is, nor as tidy in my arguments, so I highly appreciate his scientific approach. He is always so decent and careful (not like me again) and that is a very valuable characteristic of a person involved in a public dialogue.
So, pborst, stop acting like a hurt teenager, and post a reply here saying that you will, when you have time and good will, still right a few words here, even though some of us may not deserve it.

When Graham picture was posted everybody was saying how fit he was for his age, how athletic he was at 60, now when comparing him with another rawfoodist every body is complaining that the comparison is not fair.

White against white skin, same age, same time on raw food, two different conflicting approaches to raw food, what else do we need to compare? What we are really comparing is the long term effect on the body of a particular raw food diet, where else to look but at the guru himself.

I thought this was a forum where we are to make our case for a point of view, I have always presented my arguments with respect against other view point, if that make somebody to leave the forum because they are upset because their view point did not prevail so be it, it makes the forum dynamic to amicably disagree.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/13/2010 07:26PM by madinah.