to clarify...

>WHY would someone get sick from eating something that is really nutritious just because they mixed it with other things that are also nutritious to make it taste better?

>People need to sense all of the food they eat to garner benefit from it?

no.

for example, some greens are too strong and contain elements disturb digestion, and many people have blended them with other foods to try to mask the flavor and gotten very nauseous ,etc.

same thing with eating something that you add a dressing to.

you can either be eating something of low quality and wasting your time and energy, or ingesting something that is disturbing to the digestion and functions of the body.

"for example, some greens are too strong and contain elements disturb digestion, and many people have blended them with other foods to try to mask the flavor and gotten very nauseous ,etc."

Could be from drinking roughage or improper food combinations. Or compromised digestion from previous poor habits.

"same thing with eating something that you add a dressing to.

you can either be eating something of low quality and wasting your time and energy, or ingesting something that is disturbing to the digestion and functions of the body."

Not enjoying the taste of something doesn't mean it's going to disturb digestion or that it's low-quality. Something like sprouts doesn't pick and choose which individuals to provide nutrition to based on whether that person enjoyed the way they tasted.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Not enjoying the taste of something doesn't mean
> it's going to disturb digestion

I never said that.

> or that it's low-quality.

yes actually it is. not really using your word enjoying because that can be damaged by poor diet but taste correlates with quality which is what I am talking about.

[www.crossroads.ws]

[www.highbrixgardens.com]

[davesgarden.com]


Something like sprouts doesn't pick
> and choose which individuals to provide nutrition
> to based on whether that person enjoyed the way
> they tasted.

never said that.

that's two strawmen in one post!

CommonSenseRaw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I would like to get into eating flowers.
> Where do you get yours especially in the winter?
> Flowers in store are said not to be ok to eat.

I live in a tropical climate, so fresh flowers are available year-round. My favorites are the great big pink petticoat hibiscus (several fluffy petal layers), ginger flowers (available in wild abundance during late summer/early fall), arugula flowers, and nasturtiums. Arugula, nasturtiums, and marigolds can probably be planted pretty soon where the winters are cold.

[ajcn.nutrition.org]

Abnormal bitterness tends to be equated with dietary danger, and rightly so. Rancid fats, hydrolyzed proteins, plant-derived alkaloids, and other toxins generally have an unpleasant bitter taste

"Abnormal bitterness tends to be equated with dietary danger, and rightly so. Rancid fats, hydrolyzed proteins, plant-derived alkaloids, and other toxins generally have an unpleasant bitter taste"

There's a difference between rancid foods and fresh foods that one does not enjoy the taste of.

"never said that."

Then what's the issue with using dressing on a sprout salad IF one didn't enjoy the plain taste of sprouts? It's well-known that sprouts are nutritional powerhouses, not enjoying the taste wouldn't mean they're low-quality.

"but taste correlates with quality which is what I am talking about."

No, it doesn't, unless you're talking about something rotten compared to something fresh.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2014 02:44AM by jtprindl.

Read the links then speak after that, not before

you whine about no evidence then I provide it and you ignore it. Brilliant.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jtprindl Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > Not enjoying the taste of something doesn't
> mean
> > it's going to disturb digestion
>
> I never said that.
>
> > or that it's low-quality.
>
> yes actually it is. not really using your word
> enjoying because that can be damaged by poor diet
> but taste correlates with quality which is what I
> am talking about.
>
> [www.crossroads.ws]
>
> [www.highbrixgardens.com]
>
> [davesgarden.com]


I used to test everything raw that I ate with my Zeiss refractometer. From lots of time paying close attention while doing this I became much better at recognizing higher quality fruits and veggies when I went shopping. Unfortunately, though, there was never anything of really high quality for sale in my area ever.

Learning and knowing this was one of the main points that attracted me to the Conductivity Diet. The way of compensating for our ruined dead soils by adding Himalayan salt, shilajit, fulvic acid, and lots of seaweed is smart, IMO, for anyone who doesn't want to have to devote a huge portion of their life to becoming a good farmer for themselves- like me.

I used to see a woman loading large amounts of seaweed into her trailer for her garden.
wish id seen her garden.

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I used to see a woman loading large amounts of
> seaweed into her trailer for her garden.
> wish id seen her garden.


Lucky her - so long as she wasn't on the Pacific coast, the Gulf of Mexico. or anywhere near a nuclear powerer plant, that is.

[www.theseaweedman.com]

fresh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Read the links then speak after that, not before
>
> you whine about no evidence then I provide it and
> you ignore it. Brilliant.


"Taste is built upon the upon the carbohydrate and mineral levels in the produce."

1.) What data is this based off of?
2.) Even so, there is much more to nutrition than carbs and minerals.
3.) This is irrelevant because if some people, for example, do not like the taste of sprouts, or certain varieties of fruit, that doesn't mean sprouts or those fruits are low-quality.

Of course nutrient-dense food is going to have more flavor than less-nutrient dense food, but that's for when you compare two types of the same food. Like organic strawberries grown in pristine, rich soil compared to GMO strawberries. So yeah, if you bite into a strawberry and it's almost tasteless, it's not going to be as nutritious as one that is very sweet.

>>>>"Abnormal bitterness tends to be equated with dietary danger, and rightly so. Rancid fats, hydrolyzed proteins, plant-derived alkaloids, and other toxins generally have an unpleasant bitter taste"

>>>>There's a difference between rancid foods and fresh foods that one does not enjoy the taste of.

your willingness to avoid things only hurts you, not me.
see how you avoided "plant derived alkaloids" above?
much more info in that link as well.



>>>>>3.) This is irrelevant because if some people, for example, do not like the taste of sprouts, or certain varieties of fruit, that doesn't mean sprouts or those fruits are low-quality.

I never said that.

we started from (1) use taste to determine proper foods
then
we moved to (2) quality
and you are conflating the two now.



>Of course nutrient-dense food is going to have more flavor than less-nutrient dense food, but that's for when you compare two types of the same food. Like organic strawberries grown in pristine, rich soil compared to GMO strawberries. So yeah, if you bite into a strawberry and it's almost tasteless, it's not going to be as nutritious as one that is very sweet.

right, as far as taste and brix.

using our taste to determine proper (not "quality" food is another issue which we still appear to disagree on. that's fine.

"I never said that."

Ok so then what's the issue with using dressing on sprouts if one were to not enjoy the taste of sprouts?

"your willingness to avoid things only hurts you, not me.
see how you avoided "plant derived alkaloids" above?
much more info in that link as well."

There's a difference between disliking food rich in toxins and disliking nutritious food. The whole "senses" argument doesn't hold up when dealing with foods that are well-known to be healthy, unless said food isn't ripe or going bad.

"using our taste to determine proper (not "quality"winking smiley food is another issue which we still appear to disagree on."

That would mean different people need to have different foods that are "proper" for them, because taste buds differ, which isn't true, unless one is suffering from some type of deficiency or disease.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2014 06:38PM by jtprindl.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I never said that."
>
> Ok so then what's the issue with using dressing on
> sprouts if one were to not enjoy the taste of
> sprouts?
>

your position presumes something to be healthy.
I have no such presumption.

maybe my body has no desire/need for sprouts today
but it will tomorrow.

>
> There's a difference between disliking food rich
> in toxins and disliking nutritious food. The whole
> "senses" argument doesn't hold up when dealing
> with foods that are well-known to be healthy,
> unless said food isn't ripe or going bad.

your position is static.
mine is dynamic.
you presume "nutritious" .
I do not.

bottom line is both ways I think we can be healthy.
your way you eat things that you might not like and disguise the taste.
I don't. anymore.

> That would mean different people need to have
> different foods that are "proper" for them,
> because taste buds differ, which isn't true,
> unless one is suffering from some type of
> deficiency or disease.

and you would rigidly prescribe foods to eat based on your
determination of "healthy", ignoring the body,
not taking into account differences in bodily state and needs
as they change over time.

“Gustatory alliesthesia provides many obvious advantages over intellectual approaches. In fact, the nutritional instinct is as capable of solving math problems as the intellect is of solving dietary problems. Putting each tool in its perspective place, corresponding to its natural function, is the right way to go. Trying to set up our diet with our intellect is a little like using a screwdriver as a hammer; even if it somehow works, it wasn’t made for that.” Roman Devivo and Antje Spors, “Genefit Nutrition” p. 47

"your position presumes something to be healthy.
I have no such presumption."

What? That has nothing to do with what I said... what, for both healthy and unhealthy individuals, would be the issue if one were to use a dressing on a sprout salad because they didn't enjoy the taste of sprouts?

"maybe my body has no desire/need for sprouts today"

Based off what, being satisfied by eating fruit? You may not desire them but that doesn't mean you wouldn't benefit from eating them (this can be with any healthy food, not just sprouts). You may want just enough to get by without being sick, others want the ultimate nutrition.

"you presume "nutritious" .
I do not."

Not a presumption with sprouts, it's fact.

"bottom line is both ways I think we can be healthy.
your way you eat things that you might not like and disguise the taste."

I personally don't disguise the taste of anything I eat, but if someone wants to mask the taste of a food that is really nutritious because they don't necessarily love the taste, then there's no problem with that.

"and you would rigidly prescribe foods to eat based on your
determination of "healthy", ignoring the body,"

Things like sprouts, sprout/grass/vegetable juices, algae's, and fresh fruit are going to be healthy for the vast majority of the population regardless of their state of health. Back to the original point, two different HEALTHY individuals can have different tastes regarding the SAME food, which is where your "senses" argument falls apart. It makes sense when comparing two types of the same food (going back to the organic vs. GMO strawberry) but not it comes to someone flat-out not enjoying the taste of a certain food based on their personal preference.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2014 07:53PM by jtprindl.

"Trying to set up our diet with our intellect is a little like using a screwdriver as a hammer; even if it somehow works, it wasn’t made for that."

I'm not for one OR the other, using both natural instincts and intellect would be the best way to go in my opinion. You shouldn't be ruled by the taste buds though, that would lead many people to being fruitarian. Their taste buds love it but as evidenced by the countless failures, it's not a successful diet in the long-term.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2014 08:09PM by jtprindl.

jtprindl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "your position presumes something to be healthy.
> I have no such presumption."
>
> What? That has nothing to do with what I said...

it has everything to do with what you said.

> what, for both healthy and unhealthy individuals,
> would be the issue if one were to use a dressing
> on a sprout salad because they didn't enjoy the
> taste of sprouts?
>

I have already explained that.


>
> Based off what, being satisfied by eating fruit?
> You may not desire them but that doesn't mean you
> wouldn't benefit from eating them (this can be
> with any healthy food, not just sprouts). You may
> want just enough to get by without being sick,
> others want the ultimate nutrition.
>

more presumptions.
you know nothing about what constitutes "ultimate" nutrition.


> "you presume "nutritious" .
> I do not."
>
> Not a presumption with sprouts, it's fact.
>

baloney


> I personally don't disguise the taste of anything
> I eat, but if someone wants to mask the taste of a
> food that is really nutritious because they don't
> necessarily love the taste, then there's no
> problem with that.

if you say so.


> Things like sprouts, sprout/grass/vegetable
> juices, algae's, and fresh fruit are going to be
> healthy for the vast majority of the population
> regardless of their state of health. Back to the
> original point, two different HEALTHY individuals
> can have different tastes regarding the SAME food,
> which is where your "senses" argument falls apart.

no it doesn't.
I am not saying that two different people determine the value of a food.
I am saying if you don't desire it in some way, don't eat it.
You're saying eat it because you say so and because clement says so and because pubmed says so.

you refuse to acknowledge any negative aspect of sprouts.
every food has pros and cons.
this elevation of sprouts is absurd and the need to juice them is an issue as well, as is the constant talk by your guru TSM of all the alterations and defenses that one must engage in on the sprout/seed/ferment based diet.


this thread is about FRUIT by the way.

"I have already explained that."

You haven't, though. If you're referring to the blended greens example, that's not an explanation or answer to the question.

"you know nothing about what constitutes "ultimate" nutrition."

I know that things like sprouts, algae's, sea vegetables, and super foods offer many things that cannot be found in the foods that many raw foodists eat. That doesn't mean those things don't have their benefits, though.

"baloney"

Lol, ok.

"I am saying if you don't desire it in some way, don't eat it.
You're saying eat it because you say so and because clement says so and because pubmed says so."

Again, why, even if someone doesn't desire a food that is extremely nutritious, should they not eat it? Especially when they do have the option of masking the taste in a healthy way. This could result in overeating certain foods just because they enjoy the taste.

"you refuse to acknowledge any negative aspect of sprouts.
every food has pros and cons."

Which is why you rotate sprouts and make sure you don't overeat certain varieties. This is another one of those situations where the benefits largely outweigh any cons.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2014 08:32PM by jtprindl.

I know this response was for JR, but..


>>>I'm not for one OR the other, using both natural instincts and intellect would be the best way to go in my opinion.


I have already stated that and agree.


> You shouldn't be ruled by the taste buds though, that would lead many people to being fruitarian.

has nothing to do with being "ruled" by tastebuds.
so some people would be fruitarian , that's their deal, has nothing to do with what I am talking about.

why?

because as above, I use senses and intellect and......

wait for it....

I like greens!

what part of that don't you get?

I could just as well say that you and TSM are off in a ditch because you're doing the opposite, ignoring your tastebuds and thinking that if something tastes good then it must not be "good for you" or "medicinal" enough for you, or "ultimate".


does this thread end when I say I agree with you and I'm wrong about everything?

John Rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> “Gustatory alliesthesia provides many obvious
> advantages over intellectual approaches. In fact,
> the nutritional instinct is as capable of solving
> math problems as the intellect is of solving
> dietary problems. Putting each tool in its
> perspective place, corresponding to its natural
> function, is the right way to go. Trying to set
> up our diet with our intellect is a little like
> using a screwdriver as a hammer; even if it
> somehow works, it wasn’t made for that.”
> Roman Devivo and Antje Spors, “Genefit
> Nutrition” p. 47

Wonder what happened to them

"I could just as well say that you and TSM are off in a ditch because you're doing the opposite, ignoring your tastebuds and thinking that if something tastes good then it must not be "good for you" or "medicinal" enough for you, or "ultimate""

I don't think that if something tastes good then it's bad for you, I'm saying it doesn't need to taste good in order to be good for you. I don't ignore my tastebuds, I enjoy the taste of sprouts, minus fenugreek.

Some good posts jtprindl.


Ms Minger writes some very interesting things, and l appreciate the study she does. None-the-less, how accurate are her writings. Are those wild jungle fruits examples of the earliest fruits? We can't be really sure.