not being the food police, just sharing info.

regarding paul's post
it said on the video you posted

"There are two superfood classes of vegetables most adept at blocking human cancer cell growth in a petri dish."

not sure that a petri dish duplicates the human body.

so spinach blocks cancer growth
what does it do to "normal" cells?
does it block their growth too?
is that good or bad?
how do you know?

does the body not have mechanisms regardless of spinach intake?

has anyone ever healed while fasting?

agreed a petri dish doesn't duplicate the human body.. but it was human cells was it not.

I'll be glad to get more data for allium family and cruciferous family veggies and cancer protection. The video is a wake up call for other epi data that we need more allium and cruciferous veggies raw and cooked in our diets. Our best insurance is our eating habits and the sooner we acknowledge that, the sooner we can age in confidence.

[www.amazon.com]

add mushrooms,legumes, beans, berries, nuts and seeds and the occasional pomegranate and you are golden! spinach doesn't touch normal cells.

"Volatiles R US"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2012 09:44PM by pborst.

>spinach doesn't touch normal cells.

and your reference is....?


for lycopene, for example,

"Recently, Obermüller-Jevic et al. (36) reported that lycopene inhibited the cell cycle progression of *****normal****** prostate epithelial cells."


regarding allium

" However, this does not mean that a substance in Allium extracts definitely can be used to cure or even help treat liver cancer. Several more experiments must be done. It is also possible that the active ingredient in the Allium extract will kill normal cells too;

**********however, this is a usual finding with substances that kill tumour cells. ***********

In treating cancer, the goal is to find the healthiest balance between killing the cancer cells and not killing the living organism. "


i don't think it really matters what i say, so, hey, enjoy, live long and prosper!

fresh,

I dread seeing Bob Beck, DSc, listed as a valid source(and there he is!), as his findings were never properly published, are over fifteen years old, were never duplicated, etc.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >spinach doesn't touch normal cells.
>
> and your reference is....?

as above Bevileau. I could ask him to explain. But I thought he was pretty clear. Would you like a direct site to the complete article? Be glad to provide it.


>
>
> for lycopene, for example,
>
> "Recently, Obermüller-Jevic et al. (36) reported
> that lycopene inhibited the cell cycle progression
> of *****normal****** prostate epithelial cells."

yet it's net effect on normal prostate function is protective. Any evidence lypcopene cause prostate issues?

>
>
> regarding allium
>
> " However, this does not mean that a substance in
> Allium extracts definitely can be used to cure or
> even help treat liver cancer. Several more
> experiments must be done. It is also possible that
> the active ingredient in the Allium extract will
> kill normal cells too;

Allium family vegetables across the range of different cancer cells killed them without harming normal cells. In Super Immunity Dr. Furhman presents data demonstrating epi data showing dramatic protective effects of onion and allium family foods against cancer while poo pooing it as a cold remedy. No agenda.


>
> **********however, this is a usual finding with
> substances that kill tumour cells. ***********
>
> In treating cancer, the goal is to find the
> healthiest balance between killing the cancer
> cells and not killing the living organism. "
>
>
> i don't think it really matters what i say, so,
> hey, enjoy, live long and prosper!

Best to you Fresh.. Volatily yours best.

Paul

Natural Hygiene is pretty selective ive found, whilst garlic is an evil drug toxin that toxifies disease into health. I find it funny that the anti-microbial properties of garlic and onion are vilified whilst the anti-microbial compounds found naturally in fruit are great for us or completely ignored. Judging if a food is good or bad purely on if you can eat mono meals with it doesn't resonate with me at all but each to their own.

Also garlic is not a stimulant, neither are the majority of foods and herbs that natural hygiene class as stimulants. A very basic mis-understanding of what stimulants actually are and the difference between a CNS/Adrenal stimulant such as caffeine and a digestive stimulant such as various spices. Even then they class every herb as a stimulant which isn't correct anyway you want to look at it.

Agree with your posts above Paul.

[www.vegankingdom.co.uk]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 08:29AM by powerlifer.

Here is an old post that addresses some of these issues...

Superfoods...Herbs...Juice Fasting...Stimulants...Detox... Some Pros & Cons Of Natural Hygiene...
Author: John Rose
Date: 11-03-02 09:15

Here is a post that I just wrote in reply to Bryan and I feel that it is appropriate to use it to start a new thread...

Bryan wrote, "the fact that he had these symptoms after giving up certain foods and supplements tells me that those foods and supplements are somewhat toxic."

Bryan...I agree that toxic foods will stop the cleansing process...I have studied NH as much if not more than anyone else on this BB and that includes you and Zsuzsa. However, how do you explain people who are eating the SAD and they add these so-called "toxic" supplements and they feel better? Are you trying to tell me that these so-called "toxic" supplements are more toxic than pizza and beer or chicken fried steak and brandy? Are you trying to tell me that all of these substances are stimulants like coffee and cocaine?

I am not necessarily advocating the use of supplements, but supplements have come a long way since the days that Shelton wrote about them. For example, "superfoods" are not the same thing as vitamins, which I agree with Shelton are fragmented foods. When people take these "superfoods," the body is NOT stimulated because these "superfoods" are "irritants" or "excitants"...these "superfoods" are NOT "non-vital" or "uncompensated" stimuli...these "superfoods" are "vigorants," "renewers." or "nutrients"...these "superfoods" are "vital" or "compensated" stimuli. The Law of Stimulation or the Law of Excitation does NOT apply to these "superfoods"!!! Indeed, there is something in these "superfoods" that is giving these people something that they need!!!

According to Herbert Shelton, "The term stimulation is used to cover at least THREE groups of phenomena, as follows:

1.) The increase activities of the body resulting from a renewal and replenishment of its cells by nutrition--food, water, air, light, warmth, rest, exercise, etc.

2) The immediate elevation of functional action when the body is subjected to the kindly influence of light, warmth, coolness, mental elation, worthy ambition, the will, etc.

3) The defense actions of the body when subjected to IRRITANTS (POISONS) or EXCITANTS--drugs, electricity, heat, cold, blows, stabs, shocks, etc.

We have here THREE distinct groups of occasions for increased activity with at least two, perhaps three distinct groups of effects, the increased action serving different purposes and springing from different motives." -Herbert Shelton, Volume I, p. 115

"I propose that instead of calling the THREE types of occasions for added activity STIMULANTS that we use different terms for each type, somewhat as follows:

1) Vigorants, reneweres or nutrients.
2) Inspirers or tonics. ...
3) Stimulants, excitants, irritants. ...

...In a few words, while the renewers and tonics take from the body, they give more than they take, they compensate for the losses; the excitants give nothing, and take much, they do not compensate for the losses they compel." -Herbert Shelton, Volume I, p. 116

"More than twenty-five years ago, when I wrote "Human Life; Its Philosophy and Laws," I suggested that the "renewers" and "tonics" be called "compensated stimulants" and the "excitants" be called "uncompensated stimulants." -Herbert Shelton, Volume I, p. 119

"The following attempt to formulate what I formerly denominated the "Law of Stimulation," but which, I now call the "Law of Excitation," will aid us somewhat in understanding the phenomena of irritation. The reader will observe that excitation follows the law of dual effect." -Herbert Shelton, Volume I, p. 122

"The "Law of Excitation":--Whenever any irritating substance or influence is brought to bear upon the living organism this occasions vital resistance and excitation manifest by increased and impaired action, which always necessarily diminishes the power of action and does so in precisely the degree to which it accelerates action; the increased action is caused by the extra expenditure of vital power called out, not supplied, by the compulsory process and therefore the available supply of power is diminished by this amount." -Herbert Shelton, Volume I, p. 123

Now that we all better understand the differences between food and stimulants, let's take a look at juice fasting. In the past Zsuzsa has inaccurately claimed that symptoms disappear because juice fasting is toxic and works along the same lines as a stimulant. In other words, people feel better on a juice fast according to Zz because of the toxins in the juices. This is not an accurate observation. People feel better on a juice fast because a juice fast will get rid of toxins, which she just admitted is the cause of diseases, and people feel better on a juice fast because juices are foods and as Shelton would say, "they give more than they take, they compensate for their losses!!!

Now let's look at superfoods...are these "foods" or are they "excitants"? Do "they give more than they take and compensate for their losses" or do they give nothing, and take much"? What about herbs...do they not give more than they take? What about water fasting...it takes and takes and takes, but it also gets rid of toxins just like herbs do. So to evaluate the use of superfoods or herbs or juice fasting or water fasting, we must look at what we get as well as what what we lose. To me this is the downfall to many people's way of thinking...they are not looking at the big picture.

Now, here is an example where Shelton does not look at the big picture..."Drugless and semi-drugless practitioners are agreed that drug stimulants are ruinous but will not admit that their own methods of stimulation are injurious unless "abused." Abuse! The thing itself is the abuse! The drugless methods used are all employed to secure the same results that drugs are used to secure. They are followed by the same depressing reaction and all of them without exception leave the patient weaker." -Herbert Shelton, Volume I, p. 123

It is this kind of absurd thinking that leads many NHer's down the wrong path...they read this dribble and since Shelton said, IT MUST BE TRUE!!! Is this man not entitled to make mistakes? Is this man not human? We must think about what we read. Just because every thing Shelton wrote up to this point was brilliant, does not mean that he is infallible! Just stop and think about what Shelton is talking about here.

Is he referring to enemas? Do enemas NOT do any good at the right time under the right circumstances? What is more important...being enervated from a bowel full of uneliminated fecal matter or being enervated from an enema?

Is he referring to herbs? Do herbs NOT give more than they take? What about milk thistle? Is milk thistle more enervating than dying?

Is he referring to juice fasting? Do juices NOT give more than they take...do they NOT compensate for their losses?!?!?! According to Shelton, "It was found by certain British and German investigators that the addition of fresh carrot juice or raw spinach juice to the diet of children suffering with severe scurvy results in recovery. The addition of fresh vegetable juices to the diet has given excellent results in many cases of malnutrition. The same is true of fruit juices. ...Changes in the urine prove positively that metabolism is improved by the liberal use of fruits and green vegetables or their juices. ...These juices are valuable not alone in malnutritional states in children, but also in chronic diseases in children and adults. Their excesses of bases supply needed basic salts to the body and enable it to sweep itself free of acids.” -Herbert Shelton Vol. II p. 406-407

Shelton claims that these "drugless methods" secure the same results as drugs...POPPY @#$%&!!! These "drugless methods" are not palliating symptoms...they are getting rid of toxins!!! They are not treating the symptoms...they are not dealing with the effects, they are getting rid of the toxins...they are dealing with the causes. Of course, some of these "drugless methods" can have the same effect as drugs if the lifestyle factors that are creating these toxins are not also corrected, and it is my guess that this is the reason why Shelton is so against these "drugless methods." In this case I agree with Shelton...most people use these "drugless methods" like they do drugs and do nothing to change their way of life. But some of these "drugless methods" can give more than they take!

I believe that all of the nutrients that we need can be obtained from raw natural plant foods provided (1) these foods are grown on fertile soil without pesticides and (2) our bodies are not compromised because they are full of toxins, which interfere with their absorption, and our bodies are not damaged so that our bodies cannot convert ALA into DHA and EPA for example. The fact that a whole generation has not been breast-feed makes me wonder if these people will ever be able to manufacture B12 in the same way as those who were breast-feed.

Just for the record, I have been raw for over 12 years...the first 5 years I averaged 90% raw and the last 7+ years I have been 100% raw, and I am doing just fine without taking supplements. I have, however, done my experimenting with various "superfoods" such as Spirulina and most of the green powders and never noticed any improvements with any of them. For many years I did not eat that many greens, but those were the years that I was using the green superfoods, so who knows if those "supplements" were the reason why I did not have any problems.

As I have mentioned many times in the past, I am a big fan of NH. In fact, I remember when I first read about NH, it was very easy to embrace because I had already found the same pieces of the puzzle that NH had found. I had already looked at all the factors that affect our health and that is what attracted me to NH right from the beginning.

I also get somewhat annoyed when I read some people's comments about NH and they are still so brainwashed that they still think AIDS is contagious...they still think that they have to go to the doctor when they get sick...they still are afraid of fasting whether it is water or juices...yes, these individuals have a lot to overcome in order to truly understand the truth...and yes, it is easy to feel insulted by those who question these simple Laws of Nature when these people haven't even read a small fraction of what you have studied and have not experienced what you have been able to prove by simply applying these Laws of Nature to yourself and even with thousands of other people. But we must NOT forget that we were once in the same boat as these people...we all have been lied to for so long that the truth now sounds like a lie...surely it cannot be this simple!!! Oh, but it is...the only difference is that times have changed and it is no longer as simple as saying eat your fruit and fast on water. We must accept the fact that our soils are depleted...we must accept the fact that most people are so toxic and deficient that they are not only unable to absorb what they eat, but they are also so deficient that they are not able to detox without unnecessary discomfort and yes, even possible harm.

I am very grateful to NH for confirming the path that I was on and for fine tuning this knowledge in ways that I could never have done on my own, but NH needs to do their homework and they need to move into the 21st century. Today's superfoods are not yesterday's vitamins and the "old blanket statements" that NH uses to explain [or] to write herbs and superfoods off do NOT hold up under scrutiny. Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance and only reflects poorly on NH and keeps people from opening up to its principles.

In an ideal world without all of the xenobiotics, without all of the pollution, without all of the other screw-ups of humanity, eating fruit and fasting on water would be all that we need. But we are no longer living in an ideal world. We have reached levels of toxicity and deficiency that mankind was never meant to be exposed to and in these less than ideal times, we must take a closer look into wild green superfoods and juice fasting as a means to get us back to paradise. As Tony once said, "This is to me is not altering the principle in any way, rather it is adapting the principle to fit the needs and abilities of the person involved."

Peace and Love..........John

I just now added another old post, but it was suspected of being spam and has to be reviewed.

I'm testing to see if the title of my post was what created the suspicion...

The Problems of Natural Hygiene...Does Natural Hygiene Help Or Hurt The Raw Food Movement?

Its a very strange way of looking at things in my opinion but each to their own.

Doesn't make much sense to me either. Some of the same compounds and phytonutrients that give herbs their healing properties are the exact same ones found in fruits and vegetables which often are attributed to such and such foods health benefits. So why is one dying, toxic, medicinal where as the antimicrobial properties of ellagic acid from raspberries is healing and non toxic.

Even when you try to say look this herb X has been proven to not be toxic in anyway, you are still met with the weird logic that these herbs "poison" the body into healing. Also it just isn't true in my cases that all herbs do is cover symptoms, because many herbs get to the root causes of whatever they are treating. Maybe that is achieved by modulating the immune system, balancing hormones, restoring the adrenal glands and endocrine system. Just some examples.

Other than the strange logic i do like the simplicity in some cases but often the simplicity is taken too far. Natural Hygiene principles basically suggest that diet is a cure all panacea and all you need to do is take in the "building blocks" and you'll be healthy. Whilst that may be well for many, it doesn't take into account nearly anyone who isn't. What about people coming from severe disease, sure healthy diet and other wholisitic principles should be the starting point for anyone looking to heal but what if it isn't enough, what about the various herbs, foods and supplements which have been proven time and time again to be beneficial for X condition.

The problem when we don't at least use science and basic human physiology, terms and such as a basis for learning we end up with 100s of people creating their own science.

Agree with your last few paragraphs about various herbs getting to the cause/root John. I loved Bruce Lee's way of thinking, the rigours and boundaries of tradition will probably be your downfall. Adaptation is needed, science is constantly changing all the time some for the better and some for the worse.

[www.vegankingdom.co.uk]



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 12:37PM by powerlifer.

i will just comment on this one section

>However, how do you explain people who are eating the SAD and they add these so-called "toxic" supplements and they feel better?

are you trying to say that feeling better is necessarily healing?


>Are you trying to tell me that these so-called "toxic" supplements are more toxic than pizza and beer or chicken fried steak and brandy? Are you trying to tell me that all of these substances are stimulants like coffee and cocaine?

i didn't see the original post but, sounds like a straw man argument to me, JR.

Natural Hygiene principles are the natural observed diet principles in nature. They are the ideals. They may not be achievable for most but we cannot constantly keep ourselves in a state of not feeling well or never getting better. Spices, herbs, garlic should be short term solutions to health problems, we should not make them a lifestyle.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 04:13PM by madinah.

Well its clearly not the diet principles observed in nature as herbs and various spices have been used for thousands of years.

Why should we not include them in our lifestyle when they have been proven to be beneficial, many herbs and the allium family of vegetables are studied as being some of the best foods we can consume for health and cancer prevention ?.

NH is an outdated philosophy often based on poor logic which has some good bits(i.e mono fruit meals, simplistic) but is also very lacking, not very rounded and considers diet to be a panacea/cure all for everyone, which again is very short sighted if only it was that easy for everyone who was ill.

[www.vegankingdom.co.uk]



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 04:27PM by powerlifer.

Can anyone tell me when was the case you had diner at home with your family, a diner of herbs, garlic, and spices and the kids were so excited and wanted more. Yuk

My son wants ice cream, candy, junk. Is the excitement of kids the benchmark of health?

Garlic sucks! In my experience. It burns me a new one, i like to refer to it as vile whenever I talk about it.

pborst Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My son wants ice cream, candy, junk. Is the
> excitement of kids the benchmark of health?


The bigger question is why your sons want the bad food?

madinah,

This:

Quote

Can anyone tell me when was the case you had diner at home with your family, a diner of herbs, garlic, and spices and the kids were so excited and wanted more.

isn't really an argument; South Asian children will happily munch on all kinds of medicinal tubers. This is why NH is fine as a philosophy but falters when scientific paradigms are applied to it. There is no such thing as a human in nature, and goodness knows some of the Indians of the Amazon--the closest one can get--do eat all kinds of things as food that have medicinal value also. But, then, they sometimes eat things that we'd find repulsive, so there goes that argument!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 06:13PM by Tamukha.

madinah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> pborst Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > My son wants ice cream, candy, junk. Is the
> > excitement of kids the benchmark of health?
>
>
> The bigger question is why your sons want the bad
> food?

Your original statement was when was the last time kids wanted spices and garlic. My point is that what kids want isn't very helpful in deciding what to eat. Or adults for that matter. Eat to live, don't live to eat.

For most of us who grew up with SAD parents, we have lost of our sense of taste, our natural tendency toward raw natural food, food good for us, but if our kids have started out on the right path, spices, peppers, pop corn would not appeal to them, they would want ripe mangoes, juicy grapes, papayas

But as raw foodists if we keep repeating the mistakes of our parents, feeding children spices and popcorn, they would never learn, and regain the natural sense of taste, and tendency toward raw food.

paul,

>My point is that what kids want isn't very helpful in deciding what to eat. Or adults for that matter.

what kids want in reference to what?

cooked food?
you are joking?

why are you on this rawfood board?
are you a raw foodist?
perhaps i'm confused.

of course when we speak of this we are referring to raw food and when we do that we find that kids, or adults are both quite helpful in deciding what to eat, which is, what tastes good, and what they can eat using their physiology, just like any other animal.

madinah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For most of us who grew up with SAD parents, we
> have lost of our sense of taste, our natural
> tendency toward raw natural food, food good for
> us, but if our kids have started out on the right
> path, spices, peppers, pop corn would not appeal
> to them, they would want ripe mangoes, juicy
> grapes, papayas
>
> But as raw foodists if we keep repeating the
> mistakes of our parents, feeding children spices
> and popcorn, they would never learn, and regain
> the natural sense of taste, and tendency toward
> raw food.


Is this your actual experience with a real child or have you observed this in an actual child?

My son was feed nothing but breastmilk for the first year, I ate a mostly raw food diet during that time. He was fed raw food exclusively for the first 2 years of his life, I hand ground fruits and veggies for him, I chewed things for him to try, zero salt or spices. His second year birthday party (to the absolute horror of my family) was a raw sprouted rye cake with smashed avocado icing.
He was offered a variety of natural raw foods, tried and liked many of them but when he became able to express his desire for things and when I let him try foods that he had not previous eaten guess what he wanted? I can tell you right now, it was not grapes and mangoes, lol. Straight for the pasta (plain, no salt or sauce even), crackers (unsalted), cookies (natural or not), etc. He had observed others eating those foods, certainly, but based on this 'logic' of the unadulterated taste buds of our innocent children he should have found salt, sweet, spiced foods repulsive.

LOL.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 09:06PM by coco.

Coco, you mean he didn't demand that sprouted rye cake again?! Color me shocked! LOL

banana who Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Coco, you mean he didn't demand that sprouted rye
> cake again?! Color me shocked! LOL

LOL, girl!

I know, right? Freaking kid...

maybe someone else is making the point differently, but my point is
not that children won't like cooked food

> he should have found salt, sweet, spiced foods repulsive.

has nothing to do with my premise.
my premise only applies to raw FOOD.
humans will eat appropriate raw foods based on taste.

depends on availability
chimps eat all fruit when it's available, and other less desirable foods when it's not.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 09:26PM by fresh.

Hm. Unless you are also Madinah, I don't believe that I quoted or responded to you.
Would my kids rather have grapes than spinach? Undoubtably.
Would they rather have apples than cucumber? I would say not, those are both equally desired.
Would they rather have watermelon than cake? No. They will choose cake, raw or cooked, anytime. We are biologically directed to crave certain tastes, sweet, salty and fatty top the heap.

I read a story that wild bears escaped into the city and where found excited eating burgers and fries and mikshakes. I guess cooked food is very spicy. You can smell it from miles.

>Hm. Unless you are also Madinah, I don't believe that I quoted or responded to you.
that's why i said this:
"maybe someone else is making the point differently, but my point is
not that children won't like cooked food"

>>>>Would they rather have watermelon than cake? No. They will choose cake, raw or cooked, anytime. We are biologically directed to crave certain tastes, sweet, salty and fatty top the heap.


this is a raw food board - the fact that they will choose cake proves what?

Good point fresh, we have to promote the benefits of raw food



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2012 09:54PM by madinah.

Not so fast. I don't think we "have" to do anything except be interested in the topic ourselves. I am interested in hearing about people's REAL experiences. I don't have children but I would think that if they were raised with a wholesome diet of breast milk followed by raw foods, that they would never want any SAD items. The fact that they might actually do so is not threatening to me at all. Actually it allows me to be gentle with myself as I try to live with LIVE and get away from SAD.