1 The brain is an organ that does not have an energy storage means. It depends on constant blood supply.

2 The storage of energy of the brain is in the liver and called glycogen (glucose). It is delivered by blood.

3 But the liver stores of glycogen is primarily through 50/50 ratio of fructose and glucose

4 Ripen fruit has 50/50 glucose/fructose ratio

5 liver glycogen capacity is 80 grams = 3.5 apples and it is spent in 7-8 hours only on brain. It itself needs constant refilling and acts as a battery.


CONCLUSION: only fruit could provide energy for human brain development consistently and abundantly. Diet without fruit in every meal is the cause of many current diseases (not only brain) like adrenal fatigue, anxiety, etc. But fruit excess could be bad too. It need of other supply of energy too (for the rest of the body). The right amount of fruit per meal is the ideal human diet for health, happiness and longevity.

None of those points leads to the conclusion that fruit evolved the human brain.

[biofoundations.org]

Higher EPA and DHA (omega-3 fats) corresponds with larger total brain and hippocampal volumes

www.phytopanacea.com

The Masai and Inuit people traditionally don't eat plant or fruit. Yet they have developed brains.

These people the Inuit and Masai are the most healhier than any other group of people the planets biggest killers heart disease and cancer very rare. Cardiovascular disease also very rare and prostate cancer almost unheard of in the north. No sugar at all in the north. Might be its what you don't eat being more important.

[/sub]These people the Inuit and Masai are the most healhier than any other group of people the planets biggest killers heart disease and cancer very rare. Cardiovascular disease also very rare and prostate cancer almost unheard of in the north. No sugar at all in the north. Might be its what you don't eat being more important.

<<<These people the Inuit and Masai are the most healhier than any other group of people the planets biggest killers heart disease and cancer very rare.>>>

[www.diseaseproof.com]
Do Primitive Peoples Really Live Longer?
Posted on August 2, 2006 by Joel Fuhrman

No. For example, Inuit Greenlanders, who historically have had limited access to fruits and vegetables, have the worst longevity statistics in North America. Research from the past and present shows that they die on the average about 10 years younger and have a higher rate of cancer than the overall Canadian population.1

Similar statistics are available for the high meat-consuming Masai in Kenya. They eat a diet high in wild hunted meats and have the worst life expectancy in the modern world. Life expectancy is 45 years for women and 42 years for men. African researchers report that, historically, Masai rarely lived beyond age 60. Adult mortality figures on the Kenyan Masai show that they have a 50% chance of dying before the age of 59.2.

...

[www.diseaseproof.com]


[nutritionfacts.org]
Volume 28 · January 22nd 2016 · Michael Greger, M.D.
Omega-3’s and the Eskimo Fish Tale
The concept that heart disease was rare among the Eskimos appears to be a myth.

Omega-3’s and the Eskimo Fish Tale
3:35 Minute Video
[www.youtube.com]

The revelation that fish oil appears useless in preventing heart disease, as I reviewed before, in either heart patients or for those trying to prevent heart disease in the first place, leads one to wonder how this whole fish tale began.

Well, the common mythology is that in response to anecdotal reports of a low prevalence of coronary heart disease among the Eskimos, Danish researchers Bang and Dyerberg went there and confirmed a very low incidence of heart attack. The absence of coronary artery disease would be strange in a meat-based diet, hardly any fruits and vegetables—violating all principles of heart-healthy nutrition. This paradox was attributed to all the seal and whale blubber, which is extremely rich in omega 3 fish fat, and the rest is history. The problem is, it isn’t true.

The fact is they never examined the cardiovascular status of the Eskimos; they just accepted at face value this notion that coronary atherosclerosis is almost unknown among the Eskimo, a concept that has been disproven over and over starting in the 30’s. In fact, going back over a thousand years, we have frozen Eskimo mummies with atherosclerosis. Another from 500 years ago, a woman in her early 40’s - atherosclerosis in her aorta and coronary arteries. And these aren’t just isolated cases. The totality of evidence from actual clinical investigations, autopsies, and imaging techniques is that they have the same plague of coronary artery disease that non Eskimo populations have, and actually have twice the fatal stroke rate and don’t live particularly long.

Considering the dismal health status of Eskimos, it is remarkable that instead of labeling their diet as dangerous to health, they just accepted and echoed the myth and tried to come up with a reason to explain the false premise.

Such dismal health that the Westernization of their diets actually lowered their rates of ischemic heart disease. You know your diet’s bad when the arrival of Twinkies improves your health.

So, why do so many researchers to this day unquestioningly parrot the myth? Publications still referring to Bang and Dyerberg’s nutritional studies as proof that Eskimos have low prevalence of heart disease represent either misinterpretation of the original findings or an example of what’s called confirmation bias, which is when people cherry pick or slant information to confirm their preconceived notions. They quote the great scientist Francis Bacon: “We prefer to believe what we prefer to be true.” And so, literally thousands of articles on the alleged benefits of omega-3 fatty acids, we got a billion dollar industry selling fish oil capsules, millions of Americans taking the stuff, all based on a hypothesis that was questionable from the beginning.

>“We prefer to believe what we prefer to be true.”

Thanks John for the clarification most of the times statements are made without any research. Common sense can save us.

Why would humans living in terrestrial habitats require fish oil to survive and have a long life.

It does not make sense.

Because of lack of aborigal identifiers on death registrations, standard data sources and methods cannot be usd to estimate basic health indicators for the Inuit in Canada

Reading more on Inuit I see john rose is correct on his statements on Inuit and masaihj

Modern diets are not evolutionary. To the contrary, they are toxic. Modern people that think that are eating the best, they are actually killing themselves. Modern does not mean the greatest in evolution. The placement of modernity in time does not imply it is the best. Modern food is based on fears of scarcity and mass scale industrial production. The Earth is an ape farm factory.

The second most expensive food group (hardest to get), after fruit, is magnesium rich foods. Dark green plants and seeds/nuts (with omega 3s) are the best. But in the modern world, magnesium is used by the body even more because of the stress (farm animal lifestyle) so the Mg depletion is something to watch for. Best way to balance mg is through the skin not the diet.

The third group is electrolytes foods based on potassium like vegetables. Because of the nomad lifestyle, humans had to sweat, and electrolytes became essential. Exercise and sweating are part of the human life cycle.

The modern categorization of food groups based on carbs, protein, and fat is not useful and forces everybody to think with those ideas, which are a modern invention. Those discoveries are mental inventions. They only exist on the brain



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2017 05:22PM by Panchito.

I like your post Panchito.
Robert Morse has been teaching this for a long time with several cases to back up his theories.
My other teacher is a whiz on brain health, though: Datis Kharazzian.

>Modern diets are not evolutionary. To the contrary, they are toxic. Modern people that think that are eating the best, they are actually killing themselves

False. Claims can look sensational but it does not make them true.

People are living longer, they are healthier than they were any past century.

Of course there are many things we can do to improve the current diet.

Talk a walk in any major food super market, there are many fresh fruits and vegetables on display to choose from besides other things.

The modern health issues are not lack of nutrients or minerals it is assimilation, health of the digestive system.

Quote

Food: Because these innovations in transportation were still in their infancy in 1815, however, most Americans ate what they grew or hunted locally. Corn and beans were common, along with pork. In the north, cows provided milk, butter, and beef, while in the south, where cattle were less common, venison and other game provided meat. Preserving food in 1815, before the era of refrigeration, required smoking, drying, or salting meat. Vegetables were kept in a root cellar or pickled.
For those who had to purchase their food, one record notes the following retail prices in 1818 in Washington, D.C.: beef cost 6 to 8 cents a pound, potatoes cost 56 cents a bushel, milk was 32 cents a gallon, tea 75 cents to $2.25 a pound. Shoes ran $2.50 a pair. Clothing expenses for a family of six cost $148 a year, though the record does not indicate the quality of the clothes.


--
Life Expectancy: The boom in native population in the early 19th century was even more remarkable considering the low life expectancies of the time. By one estimate, a white man who had reached his 20th birthday could expect to live just another 19 years. A white woman at 20 would live, on average, only a total of 38.8 years. If measuring from birth, which counted infant mortality, life expectancy would have been even lower. A white family in the early 19th century would typically have seven or eight children, but one would die by age one and another before age 21. And, of course, for slaves, childhood deaths were higher and life expectancy was even lower. About one in three African American children died, and only half lived to adulthood.

[blogs.ancestry.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/22/2017 07:52PM by RawPracticalist.

[www.sfgate.com]

Quote

Love of U.S. food shortening Okinawans' lives / Life expectancy among islands' young men takes a big dive

For the cause, Yonahara had only to look into a mirror: at 5-foot-3, he weighed 179 pounds. He was soon off the crime beat and covering health issues.

It was not always like this. Traditional Okinawan cooking, with lots of vegetables and little fat, produced long lives and many centenarians, said Dr. Makoto Suzuki, co-author of "The Okinawa Diet Plan."

Men 65 years and older, most of whom still follow that diet, remain No. 1 in longevity, but younger men are dragging down the overall figures. Younger women's diets also have become Americanized, though more slowly.

"The modern categorization of food groups based on carbs, protein, and fat is not useful and forces everybody to think with those ideas, which are a modern invention. Those discoveries are mental inventions. They only exist on the brain"

No way! Is Panchito coming over to the other side?

www.phytopanacea.com

5th Element wellness-True Survivors more preferd research
David O brien
After John Roses posting on inuites
I thought I was wrong about Inuites, and said John is right, then I came by this 5th Element wellness- true survivor site
Now after reading this Id say John is the one who is wrong on inuit, why diet below par.

True Survivors: What I Learned from the Inuits


For a long time I’ve been fascinated with the Inuits of The Far North. While I’m intrigued in how all cultures have survived over time, the native people of Greenland have captivated me the most.

How can anybody survive in such harsh environmental conditions? And how have they flourished on a nutrition outline almost devoid of fruits and vegetables? Is it really all about a well rounded and balanced diet? Or is it about what nutrients our bodies demand according to our situation and environment?

Greenland is the largest island in the world. And while being isolated is something we Australians can appreciate, what makes the Greenlandic region more interesting is that it’s essentially a landmass of ice, bordered in a thin coating of rocks and grass.

Not the ideal area for growing crops. The most fertile aspect of the area is the water and what comes out of it. Everything that gave them life came from the ocean, hence why they never worshipped a god from the sky!

Let’s start with their food. An Inuit diet consisted of items like seal, walrus, whale, halibut (deep sea fish) and then the land animals of caribou (reindeer), musk oxen and smaller mammals. That’s a lot of meat! This menu would have most people cringing, and I can almost hear the comments, ‘They would have been so deficient in vitamins and minerals’ and ‘They must have died from so many diseases’. Yet many of the illnesses that have plagued Europeans for centuries were almost unheard of in Inuit people of the past. Actually, the most common form of death among the traditional Greenlandic people was starvation. So dependent were they on hunting and catching enough food, that if they didn’t, many of the elders would sacrifice themselves for the good of the tribe. Not a pretty thought, but this really highlights the importance of obtaining enough nutrients and food.






Many of the illnesses that have plagued Europeans for centuries were almost unheard of in Inuit people of the past.
Click to tweet
So, while land animals were hunted and eaten, they were definitely not the prized catch for survival. It was inevitably the animals that contained large amounts of fat that were the mainstay of their nutrition outline. Seals made up most of their diet (up to 90% in some instances). Now what is seal high in? I had to look this one up as well.

Vitamin A is the first one, vital for bone health and eye health, but most importantly, Vitamin A is necessary to breakdown protein. Seal meat also contains high amounts of Vitamin D, which was essential with such minimal sunlight. Vitamin D is essential for almost all functions within the body, liver detoxification being just one.

Seal meat is also particularly rich in polyunsaturated fats called n-3 fatty acids or omega 3 fatty acids, which have massive benefits to reducing inflammation in the body, as well as cognitive health. Not only this, but the blubber consists of 70% monounsaturated fats.

The other marine animals on the menu all had similar nutritional benefits. These nutrients were vital for the Inuit’s survival in such an unforgiving environment. Not only would they acquire essential life-giving properties from these animals, but what I admired the most – not one bit of the animal would go to waste. They’d utilise the oil and blubber for fuel for fire and cooking, and the skin for clothing and insulation in their shelters. They didn’t waste a thing, and held a special appreciation of the life that’d been taken for the continuation of their survival. Westerners cannot claim such environmental resourcefulness!



The vital organs of the animals were prized nutrients. Organ meats like liver, kidneys and brains are high in Vitamin A, Iron, Choline (brain food), B-Vitamins like B12, CoQ10, Vitamin D and Vitamin K, not to mention natural dietary cholesterol.

The benefits of offal is another post in itself, though it’s fair to say that offal meats are the most nutritionally dense foods in existence and this was definitely not lost on the most successful hunters in past history.

A traditional Inuit diet is like the Atkins on steroids. Containing foods extremely high in amazing quality fats, it’s like the ultimate Ketogenic outline. It seems the Inuits understood what was important long before we in The West have. We’re still wandering around in the dark, bumping into the next fad diet that comes along. These people understood that their bodies required particular nutrients to survive, and their hunting techniques were built on obtaining them at any cost.

Interestingly, in the 60s and 70s, and maybe a lot earlier, there were hardly any instances of cardiovascular disease in the traditional hunting population of Inuits. Research also states that in some recorded instances, the average 70-year-old Inuit on a traditional diet of whale and seal has arteries as elastic as those of a 20-year-old Dane (the closest western population). Amazing! It’s alarming that most experts warn against high fat consumption, ultimately minimising our intake of Vitamin A and Vitamin D. The Inuits look like a great case study to me!






A traditional Inuit diet is like the Atkins on steroids.
Click to tweet
Irrespective of this, modern Inuit life is on the decline due to the adoption of a more typical western diet. With an extremely high consumption of soft drinks, cardiovascular issues akin to The West, and a dramatic reduction in teeth per gum, sugar is here to stay in Greenland! This seems to paint a pretty clear picture of two different eras.

I’m not saying we have to add whale and seal meat to our nutrition outline – far from it. But we do have to address whether we’re eating the nutrients we require according to our environment. This basic, though powerful, connection with the land made them great survivors in a region not even the Vikings could survive. And why I’ll be covering other aspects of the Inuit’s health and resilience in other posts, it may be time to dig a little deeper and take these cultures more seriously.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2017 02:24PM by riverhousebill.

The Inuit diet was not based on choice. The ate the only thing that could be eaten. And then, they claimed it was the best thing ever. Look at this fabule:

[en.wikipedia.org]

Quote

Driven by hunger, a fox tried to reach some grapes hanging high on the vine but was unable to, although he leaped with all his strength. As he went away, the fox remarked 'Oh, you aren't even ripe yet! I don't need any sour grapes.'

and its translation...

Quote

Driven by hunger, Inuit people tried to survive in inhospitable land but were initially unable to. As they went along, the Inuit people remarked 'Oh, we can eat seals! Seals are now the best food and downn south there are suckers.'

People lost in the sea justify cannibalism. They say:

"Human meat is the best thing ever"



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/24/2017 04:35PM by Panchito.

I thought this was a raw food forum and a vegan thread.

And then, they claimed it was the best thing ever.

People lost in the sea justify cannibalism. They say:

"Human meat is the best thing ever"

Panchito did the Inuit say their diet is the best thing ever?
Did the Inuit say Human meat is the best thing ever?
Did the Donnor Pass and Andie plane crash survivors also make such claims?
or was it just done as a matter of life and death?

Quote
RawPracticalist
I thought this was a raw food forum and a vegan thread.

Rawpracticlaist would like some cenorship I see.
why dont you ask Prana if he may protect your bubble and censor,
we are talking about minerals and food effects, but you want to keep it
limited on the discussions. a controled discussion yes.

Just for the record Rawcenosrship I have not eaten meat or fish in over 30 years and would rather die than eat meat or fish, but your cackle i thoght this was a raw veagen thread amounts to a plea for censorship, control of subject matter.
It was ok for you before to comment on this subject but now a cackle for censorship.
The information you thanked John Rose for on health stats comes from the only group who has the records of Uniut health (RCAP) The same group I posted health Of Canadas First Nations.
censorship sucks.
There is no clearing of the air with the smog of cenorship.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2017 12:36PM by riverhousebill.

There is no question that we do all make references to animals as food in our discussion on this raw food forum to illustrate a point and I myself have done that in the past.

But when long discussions and posts are devoted to the issue we loose the purpose of this particular forum.

I think the problem is that there are other forums which do not have that restrictions but these forums are not active as this one so people who want to share their views on animal protein force that position on all of us here.

The following is taken from your posts.
---
"Vitamin A is the first one, vital for bone health and eye health, but most importantly, Vitamin A is necessary to breakdown protein. Seal meat also contains high amounts of Vitamin D, which was essential with such minimal sunlight. Vitamin D is essential for almost all functions within the body, liver detoxification being just one.

Seal meat is also particularly rich in polyunsaturated fats called n-3 fatty acids or omega 3 fatty acids, which have massive benefits to reducing inflammation in the body, as well as cognitive health. Not only this, but the blubber consists of 70% monounsaturated fats.

The other marine animals on the menu all had similar nutritional benefits. These nutrients were vital for the Inuit’s survival in such an unforgiving environment. Not only would they acquire essential life-giving properties from these animals, but what I admired the most – not one bit of the animal would go to waste. They’d utilise the oil and blubber for fuel for fire and cooking, and the skin for clothing and insulation in their shelters. They didn’t waste a thing, and held a special appreciation of the life that’d been taken for the continuation of their survival. Westerners cannot claim such environmental resourcefulness!



The vital organs of the animals were prized nutrients. Organ meats like liver, kidneys and brains are high in Vitamin A, Iron, Choline (brain food), B-Vitamins like B12, CoQ10, Vitamin D and Vitamin K, not to mention natural dietary cholesterol. "
-------

We do not care what seal meat provides as nutrients.
I want to learn from others about fruits, sprouts, micro nutrients,nuts.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2017 01:31PM by RawPracticalist.

Fructose is essential for human life. Without fructose, there would have never been an improvement.

The liver evolved to it (forest) as surroundings and became the 'tank' of energy the brain. The energy is glucose. Glucose to the brain is like oxigen to the body.

When you eat ripened fruit (50/50), the fruit first has to pass through the liver. When 50/50 is present, the tank fills up. Then if you continue eating the sugars pass the liver into the blood. And insulin is release. The best food for diabetics is ripened fruit since there is no release of insulin. Once the tank is full glucose is release to the blood. Too much glucose is bad. Even if there is no insulin resistance, too much glucose inside the cells is bad. The right amount of glucose is always best. The most important skill is learning portion control when it comes to fruit. Fruit will prevent aging with antioxidants and NAD+ (used in the liver). The hipotalamous controls metabolism and eating fruit will make you skinny. There are special neurons that sense sugars there and vibrate accordingly. Yes. fruit can make you skinny and healthy. You are bypassing thousands of years of wrng diets and going back to the paradise.

Rawpractilist-I have not advocated eating meat seal meat canibalism.
Ive been aware for many years eating meat is a lot of Bull.
And the suffering that goes with the production is cruel.
But to put blinders on and only look at one Prefferd aspect, You will never learn.
A Physicist would never say we dont care. They look at total picture.
Also Im part of the we you are the spokes person for!

the exploration of the interactions of matter and energy - minerals, vitamins,
are all part of the picture to say we dont care sounds like you are the spokes person for site, we? A physicist would never say stick to just one point on the compass

You said- -But when long discussions and posts are devoted to the issue we loose the purpose of this particular forum.
I will try to condense subject next time for times sake.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2017 11:51PM by riverhousebill.

My point was that it is irrelevant to me and maybe most on this forum if

"Seal meat is also particularly rich in polyunsaturated fats called n-3 fatty acids or omega 3 fatty acids.."

because we do not eat them, we do not want them dead. They are huge mammals who enjoy living... and we have many options for getting fatty acids or omega 3.

You are free to post whatever you want but I would not spend time reading about seal meat. Maybe the info can be useful in stopping the practice.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2017 12:58AM by RawPracticalist.

Cute seal picture rawpractilist, but like I said before a physicist would be open to all factors and not put on the blinders to their prefferd diet subject
And thankyou for telling me Im free to post whatever.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2017 06:53AM by riverhousebill.

If you are not eating 100 percent organic produce and veggies you are also killing the cute seal!

quote rawpracticalist-They are huge mammals who enjoy living... and we have many options for getting fatty acids or omega 3.
So true for us , but the inuit does not have the options you have, so seal meat it is for them to get the minerals and vitamins they also would need to survive. Many cute animails are now toxic from modern agraculture also, life forms between many toes along this walk on earth.
maybe you could advise the inuit on another sorce so to spare a cute seal



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2017 07:14AM by riverhousebill.

<<<But to put blinders on and only look at one Prefferd aspect, You will never learn. A Physicist would never say we dont care. They look at total picture.>>>

<<<but like I said before a physicist would be open to all factors and not put on the blinders to their prefferd diet subject>>>

WHAT A JOKE!!!

You wouldn't know how to look at both sides of a story if your life depended on it!

There is nothing to admire from an ape that calls itself a physicist. What is a physicist? An ordinary ape.

But lets keep moving:

Startch: starch is glucose but it has a very different purpose than the combo fructoose/glucose. Starch goes to muscle and creates glycogen there and later it turns into fat. It never comes out of the muscle and does fuel the brain except for the very short time is transported in the blood as glucose. Starch is not food for the brain.

Plain sugar: Creates a huge insulin spike as opposed to fructose. It is like starch and prone to become fat. It is not food for the brain because of the huge spike that results hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia kills the brain.

Fat: Fats never become glucose and never feed the brain properly unless following a keto diet (acidic) Fats become rancid. They have a structural role in the brain. Other parts of the body can oxidize them.

Proteins: The liver can make glucose from protein but it is not best.

Cooked or Uncooked?
There should be a difference on how the body process it and use it



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2017 05:30PM by RawPracticalist.

Fruit is always raw. Greens are always raw. Seeds/nuts always raw.

There is a time frame imposed by industrial modern life. A person has to produce labor. During labor a person cannot eat. Certain cooked foods (whole grains) produce a delayed release of glucose that simulate the original fruit based diet (raw). The original fruit based diet had no time frames. When the tank went low in the liver, you could refill by more fruit. The simulated cooked diet has benefits (time framed) and drawbacks (not fresh, no antioxidants, etc). Their effect on the brain should be different as they are different fuels even when they are both based on glucose. Perhaps, the cooked glucose diet stopped brain development. You should always eat fruit first in any meal and snack. But always remember the liver limits. The right amount of fruit depends on your particular demand.

Thanks Panchito. Very interesting and informative as always.

>Perhaps, the cooked glucose diet stopped brain development.

Maybe the cooked diet INCREASED brain development.

They could not have eaten raw potatos !!

Quote

The secret to man's intelligence? POTATOES: Humans evolved large brains because our ancestors ate starchy carbohydrates

[www.dailymail.co.uk]