Hmmm?

Or maybe it happens a lot less than if we used a blender.

No. Oxidation occurs if the food sits out for too long. If you blend or juice the food and consume it soon afterwards there won't be any oxidation.

If you blend or juice it and then let it sit for 60 minutes or longer, oxidation will begin to occur.

ahh, I want to know if theres an article on that.

"When the cell walls are burst by methods other than heat, such as by cutting, mashing, blending or juicing, the vitamins, minerals and other food components are destroyed both by the cells lysosomes and by oxidation.

For example, when you bite into an apple or pear many cell walls are broken and oxidation occurs. However, you will get more nutrients from an apple or pear eaten this way than from the same apple or pear that has been cut up into a fruit salad. This is because many more cell walls are broken, usually for a longer period, when fruits are cut up into a salad. (The same is true for vegetables, of course.)

What's true for cut-up foods is also true for mashed, blended or juiced foods. Blending and juicing break open the protective walls of almost ail the cells, in the food, causing a considerable amount of nutritional value to be lost. That is one reason we recommend that you either not blend or juice foods or else do it sparingly. (The other reason is ecological.)

You may want to mash avocados to make "Vegemole," a salad dressing or a dip; or you might want to make a cut-up salad. But in the case of both avocados and other foods you are better off blending, juicing, cutting up or mashing them only occasionally—for variety or for guests, reluctant family members, or people without teeth or with other special problems.
"

I'll probably blend sparingly now. Eating whole-foods is great anyway.

The article is on page 3 and is written by Victoria Boutenko:

==> [www.rawfamily.com]

Food needs to be liquid to travel through the blood stream. If you read the book "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" by Weston Price, you will see how our teeth have become weak.

Our teeth do not form properly, our jaw structure is too small and we all have our wisdom teeth removed, everyone needs braces because processed foods cause our teeth to grow in crooked.

As a culture, we have lost our ability to chew properly. To make up for this, we need blended foods and vegetable juices in order to assimilate all the nutrients.

Ann Wigmore lived entirely on blended foods near the end of her life. Dr. Flora worked with Ann and said that at age 80, Ann only needed to sleep about 2 hours a night because she had so much energy and vitality.

Mike

> I want to know if theres an article on that.

The article is on page 3 and is written by Victoria Boutenko:

Here is the full URL

www.rawfamily.com/news/Raw%20Family%20Newsletter%20Jan%202006.pdf

Mike

Regarding the degeneration of our teeth and jaw structure, and health in general compared to isolated tribal cultures, you should read "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" by Weston Price, available at your library.

You can also read it on-line at
[journeytoforever.org]

www.journeytoforever.org/farm_library/price/pricetoc.html

It is a facinating book. Check out the various' photographs in each chapter that compare the isolated cultures to the people exposed to civilized foods

Mike

well the body that i'm in is only 17 years old. so maybe I haven't had too much damage... or is it already late...

Hi goldsplinter,

It is not too late for certain things. You can create a brand new body in a year. It may be too late to save your wisdom teeth.

Have you read about Pottenger's Cats?

[www.price-pottenger.org]

www.price-pottenger.org/Articles/PottsCats.html

Pottenger's Cats - A Study in Nutrition

by Francis M. Pottenger, Jr., MD

Between the years of 1932 and 1942, Dr. Francis Marion Pottenger, Jr. conducted a feeding experiment to determine the effects of heat-processed food on cats.

His ten-year cat study was prompted by the high rate of mortality he was experiencing among his laboratory cats undergoing adrenalectomies for use in standardizing the hormone content of the adrenal extract he was making.

Because there were no existent chemical procedures for standardizing biological extracts, manufacturers of such extracts necessarily had to use animals to determine their potency. As cats die without their adrenal glands, the dose of extract required to support their lives calibrated the level of the extract's potency.

In his effort to maximize the preoperative health of his laboratory animals, Francis fed them a diet of market grade raw milk, cod liver oil and cooked meat scraps from the sanitarium. These scraps included the liver, tripe, sweetbreads, brains, heart and muscle.

This diet was considered to be rich in all the important nutritive substances by the experts of the day, and the surgical technique used for the adrenalectomies was the most exacting known. Therefore, Francis was perplexed as to why his cats were poor operative risks. In seeking an explanation, he began noticing that the cats showed signs of deficiency.

All showed a decrease in their reproductive capacity and many of the kittens born in the laboratory had skeletal deformities and organ malfunctions.

As his neighbors in Monrovia kept donating an increasing number of cats to his laboratory, the demand for cooked meat scraps exceeded supply and he placed an order at the local meat packing plant for raw meat scraps, again including the viscera, muscle and bone.

These raw meat scraps were fed to a segregated group of cats each day and within a few months this group appeared in better health than the animals being fed cooked meat scraps. Their kittens appeared more vigorous, and most interestingly, their operative mortality decreased markedly.

The contrast in the apparent health of the cats fed raw meat and those fed cooked meat was so startling, it prompted Francis to undertake a controlled experiment. What he had observed by chance, he wanted to repeat by design. He wanted to find answers to such questions as: Why did the cats eating raw meat survive their operations more readily than those eating cooked meat?

Why did the kittens of the raw meat fed cats appear more vigorous? Why did a diet based on cooked meat scraps apparently fail to provide the necessary nutritional elements for good health? He felt the findings of a controlled feeding experiment might illumine new facts about optimal human nutrition.

The Cat Study of Francis M. Pottenger, Jr., MD is unique. There is no similar experiment in the medical literature. The pathological and chemical findings were supervised by Francis in consultation with Alvin G. Foord, M.D., professor of pathology at the University of Southern California and pathologist at the Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena.

Accordingly, the studies met the most rigorous scientific standards of the day and their protocol was observed consistently.

Since The Cat Study is unique, its findings are frequently quoted and misquoted in order to justify the ideas of others. For example, one author of a popular selling book states that 200 cats died of arthritis; this indeed did not happen.

Another author states that the cats were fed sprouts and survived in full health for four continuous generations. Again, no such experiment took place, and yet this misinformation has been traced over a dozen or more different articles and books.

A frequent criticism of The Pottenger Cat Study is that it was not properly controlled. Here it is necessary to ask, "By what standards?"

Every one of the studies followed strictly defined protocol. All variables in the stock of the animals were reported and explained. Because some of the test procedures may seem crude forty years later, this in no way invalidates the facts that the procedures were meticulously controlled and that the results of the experiments were reported as observed.

Another criticism is that the cats were kept in an artificial environment unrelated to real living conditions. Such a criticism overlooks the experimental necessity of maintaining a controlled environment to provide valid findings.

It also overlooks the evidence that given specific living conditions, specific changes repeatedly occurred in the health of the cats under observation.

Another frequent criticism is that the experimental work done on cat nutrition has no appropriate application to human nutrition. Francis M. Pottenger, Jr., MD never stated that a one-to-one comparison could be made between his findings in cat nutrition and his findings in human nutrition.

He did say: "While no attempt will be made to correlate the changes in the animals studied with malformations found in humans, the similarity is so obvious that parallel pictures will suggest themselves."

All too often, self-appointed authorities will state categorically that they do not believe other's observations and so seek to close the door on any further inquiry into these observations. They declare, "Because I do not believe the facts as presented, they are not so." Far better for science if responsible individuals maintain an attitude of open inquiry and test the observations of others before forming rigid opinions. In the case of The Cat Study, human welfare might well be served of concerned researchers made every effort to discover if valid correlation's can be made between cat nutrition and human nutrition. It must be remembered that cats and humans both are mammalian biological systems.

It would be of great value to the field of nutrition to repeat The Cat Study within the parameters of present day technology and with the use of present day antibiotics. Most of the cats on deficient diets died from infections of the kidneys, lungs and bones.

If these infections were eliminated as a cause of death by antibiotics, it would allow the cats to reveal their ultimate degenerative fates. As an extension to this experiment, it would be of interest to study the effects of vitamin and mineral supplementation in the diet of cooked food fed animals.

It is our effort in this monograph to present the observations made by Francis M. Pottenger, Jr., MD on the effects of deficient and optimum nutrition in cats and human beings as recorded in his articles and clinical records written between the years of 1932 and 1956. Nothing has been added or subtracted from his findings, and for the most part, the words describing his work are his own.

Though some of the scientific interpretations have not withstood the test of time, the observations are valid. A careful and selective interpretation by an inquiring mind will readily differentiate the two.

Weel we're not cats, and i've probably read that before.

I'm gonna stick to not blending that much.

Read "Green For Life"

Another article about Pottenger:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Pottenger

Pottenger noticed a disproportionately high death rate among cats undergoing adrenalectomy. These laboratory cats were being used to test the potency of a hormone in an adrenal extract he was making. The adrenal glands of these cats were removed for the experiments. Unfortunately most of the cats died during the operation.

Dr. Pottenger was feeding these cats the most nutritive diet he could, according to the experts of his day. The diet consisted of raw milk, cod liver oil and cooked meat scraps of liver, tripe, sweetbread, brains, heart and muscle. When the number of donated cats exceeded the supply of food available, Dr. Pottenger began ordering raw meat scraps from the local meat packing plant, including organs, meat, and bone, and fed a separate group of cats from this supply. Within months this separate group appeared in better health than the cooked meat group. Their kittens were more energetic and, most interestingly, their post-operative death rate was much lower. At a certain point, he decided to begin a controlled scientific study.

The Pottenger cats study lasted for ten years, with three generations of cats being studied. Approximately 900 cats were involved. This study was specifically designed to show the difference between eating raw foods versus cooked and processed foods over a long period of time. The experiment in which one group of cats received only raw milk and raw meat, while other groups received part of the diet as pasteurized milk or cooked meat, can be summarized as follows:

* Adequate Diet A: 1/3 raw milk, cod liver oil and 2/3 raw meat.

* Defficient Diet B: 1/3 raw meat, cod liver oil and 2/3 pasteurized milk.

* Defficient Diet C: 1/3 raw meat, cod liver oil and 2/3 evaporated milk.

* Defficient Diet D: 1/3 raw meat, cod liver oil and 2/3 sweetened condensed milk.

* Defficient Diet E: raw metabolized vitamin D milk only.

Effects on cats

* The cats eating only raw food were disease free and healthy, generation after generation after generation.

* The cats eating the cooked and processed foods had all kinds of problems.

o By the end of the first generation the cats started to develop degenerative diseases and became quite lazy.

o By the end of the second generation the cats had developed degenerative diseases by mid-life and started losing their coordination.

o By the end of the third generation the cats had developed degenerative diseases very early in life and some were born blind and weak and had a much shorter life span. Many of the third generation cats couldn't even produce offspring. There was an abundance of parasites and vermin while skin diseases and allergies increased from an incidence of five percent in normal cats to over 90 percent in the third generation of deficient cats. Kittens of the third generation did not survive six months. Bones became soft and pliable and the cats suffered from adverse personality changes. Males became docile while females became more aggressive.

o The cats suffered from most of the degenerative diseases encountered in human medicine and died out totally by the fourth generation.

His conclusions were that:

* A diet consisting exclusively of raw milk and raw meat was the only adequate intake which insured the maintenance of optimal health for the cats. Cats on the all-raw diet showed good bone structure with wide palates and plenty of space for the teeth as well as excellent bone density, shiny fur, and lack of parasites and disease. They reproduced with ease and were gentle and easy to handle.

* Cooking the meat, or substituting heat processed milks for raw, resulted in heterogeneous reproduction and physical degeneration that escalated with each successive generation.

* The changes in facial structure and beginning of degenerative diseases that Dr. Pottenger observed in cats on deficient diets mirrored the human degeneration that Dr. Price found in tribes and villages that had abandoned traditional foods.

The big point about Pottenger's cat study is that the 3rd generation of cats living on cooked food were born sick and diseased. Many of them were so sick they could not reproduce.

Humans are now in the 3rd and 4th generation of eating highly processed foods and junk foods.

Quote:

"By the end of the third generation the cats had developed degenerative diseases very early in life and some were born blind and weak and had a much shorter life span. Many of the third generation cats couldn't even produce offspring."

...dude why the hell are you talking about if raw food is good or not(or it's good for cats)? i'm talking about @#$%& blending food, not if raw food is good or not.

Hey goldsplinter...it's very obvious that you're only 17 because you are way too disrespectful to be any older than that. The members of this board (and others that I have seen you make rude comments on) are trying to help you learn more about a subject that you are interested in and have questions about (being raw). Why do you insist on insulting their good intentions?

i'm not insulting anyone's intentions.

guess you're probably as dumb as Mike... learn how to @#$%& read.

the topic is about BLENDING and OXIDATION...not if RAW FOOD IS GOOD OR NOT. I KNOW IT'S GOOD.

Sheesh.

Close this thread someone, it has turned retarded.

goldsplinter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> well the body that i'm in is only 17 years old.
> so maybe I haven't had too much damage... or is it
> already late...

The potengers cats stuff is in answer to this point you raised.

--
Rob Hull - Funky Raw
My blog: [www.rawrob.com]

cats
oxidation
blending

somehow
they seem to go together
and correlate

exactly how?
i better read the article and find out how
might be fun to figure out the connexxxion

"Goldsplinter" wrote

> guess you're probably as dumb as Mike... learn how to @#$%& read.

What's wrong Goldsplinter, why are you so upset?

psychologist in the house?

YO!!
veronique's the name and picking at yer brain is my game!
but gimme a grand up front
and i jusssst might be interested in listening to you

you have FIVE minutes!!

Mike Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The big point about Pottenger's cat study is that
> the 3rd generation of cats living on cooked food
> were born sick and diseased.

I think the big point about Pottenger's experiment
was that these cats didn't get enough taurine.

We didn't know much about taurine back then.

Give them a cooked diet with adequate taurine and they
will thrive.