Here is an interesting 20 year old Thread followed by a 19 year old Thread illustrating that DENIAL is as alive today as it's ever been.

JR Insert from "LIVING AND RAW FOOD DISCUSSION - 1" file...
8-19-00
The original query posted by scharms and then repeated by tao [fresh] reads as follows:

Calling Jeff N and Tom B

I was hoping one of you, or both, could answer the questions I posed in the original post of this thread. I am not looking to argue, but I just cannot come up with any logical explanation as to why some cooked food would be better for our health. If you could respond, without quoting studies and using anecdotes, but rather using logical reasoning, it would be most appreciated.

Please understand, I am not a "100% raw dogmatist", but am just looking for answers.

Thanks a lot.
-scharms-

[www.living-foods.com]
To all who promote less than 100%

I would love to read a logical explanation of why something cooked would be better for you than raw. Is there something in the cooking process that makes food better for your health?

Also, since all free-living animals (unaffected by humans) eat 100% raw (please do not make silly references to fires caused by lightning, which then in turn "cooks" the food - this is a rare occurence), does this not mean that we should do the same? Doesn't this seem the more natural, logical way to eat?

I am having a very hard time trying to justify, logically, the inclusion of cooked food in my diet, except to satisfy my own cravings and addictions - of course, this stems from emotions, not logic.

Will someone please elighten me as to why cooked food, in limited quantities, is better than raw, and do so using logical arguments? I am not looking for any references to any studies, just plain, simple, logical reasoning.

Thank you
-scharms-
[www.living-foods.com]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There's more to this Thread, including Jeff’s response and Tom’s response, as well as my replies to them, so stay tuned because I'm really curious to see if anyone here can come up with better answers than Jeff and Tom.

In fact, I'm more curious to see if anyone here can come with answers that are more twisted and deceptive than Jeff and Tom, which means our resident SHILL aka "kenny t" will probably AVOID this Thread because there is no adequate answer to this question and if "little nn" answers it, everyone will see the T--U--R--D's deceptive and twisted sense of logic in action, just like Jeff and Tom.

For now, let's jump ahead with the same question, one year later!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

for blake
tao (12.42.25.---)
Date: 09-21-01 08:04

>In the long term people who eat some cooked fare better than those who stay fanatically all raw,

I'm reposting this and expanding here.

Aren't there studies that show that a small amount of alcohol increases health? Does this mean that alcohol is good?
Is this unbiased?

Have you ever been all raw for an extended period?
What is your opinion of that period of time?

I see you referred to several sources. This is anecdotal, hearsay, etc. What I'm saying is, do you have any evidence or documentation that compares the two types of regimens keeping all factors as equal as possible, and shows that people who eat some cooked fare better?

Can we not just as easily show that cooked food diet fails? Are you saying that there is some magical percent raw that is best? What is that percent and why?

Why do these people that you refer to fare better (with some cooked)?

1. Nature has made an error in not producing foods in a cooked state

2. Poor quality food while all raw

3. "Unbalanced" raw diet

4. Poor status of the body

5. B12

6. Addictive withdrawal

7. Social needs

8. Inability to eat enough raw.

9. Humans have adapted to, and require cooked food.

What I'm getting at, is I can not understand the rampant cynicism that is being propagated, which implies that all raw is "fanatical". Certainly there are many factors that go into health - why the need to continuously imply that all raw is faulty?
[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
----------------------------------------
hear, hear
scharms (---.clearwater.honeywell.com)
Date: 09-21-01 11:12

Tao,

My sentiments exactly.

I believe I have asked the same question that you have asked, only phrased a little differently. I did not get any responses that answered the question adequately (the question about why someone would fare better with some cooked food). No one could come up with a good answer, including Jeff N. We will see if someone can answer this one...

-scharms-
[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
----------------------------------------
Re: healthier or not?
tao (12.42.25.---)
Date: 09-21-01 12:08

Hello Jerry,

>As anecdoatal evidence there seems to be no end of people seeking support on boards such as this who have problems making the transition to 100% raw and staying that way.

the fact that there are problems really doesn't mean anything significant, Jerry. It's quite expected.

> From personal experience I found no noticeable health benefit from going to 100% raw.

that is interesting. I would be interested to know your dietary composition, and inclusion of any salt, grains, etc.

>living on imported tropical fruit is good enough reason for me not be 100% raw.

yes, there are practical difficulties, no doubt.

> At the moment I am thinking about trying a 100% cooked diet to see if I can notice any negative health changes, just for curiosity sake.

please let us know your results. I've stated mine here before.

> What sort of medical testing have you undergone Tao to show that you are in fact healthier, or is your evidence just anecdotal as well?

I have not made a statement like blake has, so there is no reason for me to support any position. If you find that I have, I will do my best to support it, or withdraw it.

The alleviation of ALL symptoms of disease is enough evidence for me - of course it is anecdotal. I'm talking about the sweeping generalizations blake has made from limited information, and perhaps drawing incorrect conclusions from the anecdotal evidence of failure.
[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
End of JR Insert from "LIVING AND RAW FOOD DISCUSSION - 1" file.

The answer to your question is the RESULTS:

VEGAN CENTENARIANS – WHERE ARE THEY?

CONCLUSION:

The beauty and simplicity of Veganism and Fruitarianism sounds appealing, but ....
Of 60,000 centenarians in the United States, there are no vegans or fruitarians
Many well-known vegans have died early after battling severe illnesses for years
Short-term, raw vegan diets offer enormous benefits in overcoming serious health problems.
Long-term, physical and psychological deterioration will almost certainly occur.


Vegan Centenarians – Where Are They?
by Brian White

In recent years, I’ve noticed a growing trend among young people to follow the teachings of vegan ‘gurus’ like David Wolfe, Douglas Graham, Paul Nison and Gabriel Cousens. Many of these followers are obsessed in their dietary beliefs and have unrealistic expectations of ‘living to 100 in a perfect state of health.’ They overlook the fact that most vegan leaders have died prematurely after battling severe illnesses for years. They also fail to produce a single authenticated vegan centenarian to validate their beliefs.

While the beauty and simplicity of Veganism and Fruitarianism sounds appealing, there’s just one tiny flaw ….. the vast majority of people who attempt these diets will fail. Eventually, chronic health problems caused by nutritional deficiencies will force them to add animal foods into their diets. Sadly, many misguided health- seekers will ignore this warning and suffer the consequences. How do I know this? Because 30 years of research and experience tells me so.
Think about this for a moment; if the utopian claims made about these dietary regimes are genuine, where are all the vegan/fruitarian centenarians??

There are an estimated 60,000 centenarians in the United States, 9,000 in the United Kingdom, and 3,000 here in Australia. Most are meat eaters and a few are vegetarian, but I’ve never heard of any who are vegan or fruitarian.
In fact, in one of the world’s longest-running studies of authenticated centenarians ever undertaken, it was found that none of the participants were vegan, fruitarian or even vegetarian! The Okinawa Centenarian Study has been ongoing since 1976 and examined the lives of over 600 centenarians who were living their traditional lifestyle. Their diets included fish, pork, poultry, dairy products and eggs.

While I acknowledge they only represent a small percentage of the population, vegan and fruitarian groups have existed for a long time, so they’ve had ample opportunity to establish their longevity bonafides …..

David Wolfe claims, “My mom is from Persia, and in that country they have vegan communities dating back thousands of years. They also have raw-vegan communities with similar traditions.”

Then why isn’t every television station in the world reporting on this super-race? After “thousands of years” of dietary and genetic purity, you’d expect to hear of hundreds of fully verified, healthy centenarians living today. Where are they?

The Arnold Ehret Health Club has operated in the U.S. since the 1920’s, so there should be plenty of 100 –120 year old fruitarians running around. Yet, when I contacted the club, they admitted they were not aware of any Ehret devotee who has reached 100. It seems that fruitarian centenarians are rarer than Bigfoot!

H. Jay Dinshah was the founder and president of the American Vegan Society. Although a vegetarian from birth, then a vegan for 43 years, he died from a heart attack at just 66 years of age.

Herbert M. Shelton was the most influential Natural Hygienist of the 20th century. For six decades he preached the superiority of a raw vegan diet of fruits, vegetables and nuts. Did he enjoy a long and vigorous life? No! He was in a declining state of health in his sixties, and was bedridden for the final 13 years of his life due to Parkinson’s disease. He died at just 89.

His protégé, T.C. Fry, taught the infallibility of a raw vegan diet for 26 years, yet he died at the ridiculously young age of 70!! However, even more disturbing is the fact that he suffered from numerous health problems long before his death. According to Dr Bernarr Zovluck, a close friend for 30 years, Fry died from coronary embolism. He also had multiple atherosclerotic thrombi of his lower legs, edema, a lesion on his left lung, anemia, high acid blood pH, breathing problems, constipation, osteoporosis, teeth and gum problems, etc.
Yes indeed, his vegan/fruitarian diet certainly worked miracles for his health!

George R. Clements (AKA Hilton Hotema, AKA Kenyon Klamonti) claimed he became a vegan at 9 years of age after reading a book about health at school. He also claimed he lived as a breatharian-fruitarian for almost 80 years and would “live to be 150 years of age.” He only managed to reach 92.

Hereward Carrington, author of The Natural Food of Man, believed that a strict diet of raw fruits and nuts could “sustain man in a perfect state of health”. He died at 78 years of age.

Dr O.L.M. Abramowski was a German born doctor who immigrated to Australia in 1884. While working at the Mildura District Hospital, he successfully treated patients with fresh fruit and juices. He wrote several books including Fruitarian Diet and Physical Rejuvenation and thought his diet of raw fruit, nuts and grains would enable him to reach 100 –120 years. He died at 58.

Ross Horne, Australia’s most famous raw food author, believed his fruitarian diet was superior to all others. I met Ross in 1983 and corresponded with him periodically over the years. Despite rigidly adhering to his tropical fruit diet for 22 years, he died last year of Prostate Cancer. He was only 79. Ironically, his final book was titled Cancerproof Your Body.

Summary:
As an 18 year old searching for the secrets of perfect health and long life, I had a voracious appetite for knowledge and devoured every book I could find; from Vilhjalmur Stefansson to Adelle Davis to Arnold Ehret; from carnivorous to omnivorous to frugivorous. Over the past three decades I’ve read hundreds of books and scientific studies relating to diet, nutritional supplements and natural therapies. In addition to experimenting on myself, I’ve also observed the practical, long-term effects various diets have on people. Along the way I’ve encountered charlatans, liars and delusional individuals who make ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims about therapies, diets and products.

After 30 years of research, I have no doubts that the foundation of a healthy diet should be fresh, raw, organically grown vegetables and fruits (and their juices), plus sprouts, nuts and seeds. Short-term, raw vegan diets offer enormous benefits in overcoming serious health problems. However, long-term physical and psychological deterioration will almost certainly occur unless animal foods such as eggs, fish or dairy products are consumed. Those who refuse to do this should supplement with B12 (methylcobalamin), folic acid and flax or hemp seeds.

FOLLOW-UP:

Well-known hygienist Jo Willard, who had a health radio program for many years, died from brain hemorrhage, after being a vegan/fruitarian for over two decades. She went for a 30 day fast at Dr. Scott's place, came down with Alzheimer's symptoms after the fast, and died shortly after. One of her favorite foods was a banana wrapped in lettuce.
2007 - Harvey Milstein died from colon cancer (in his sixties), very quickly, shortly after being checked into a hospital. He was the leader of the NH movement in Houston for 20 years, a fruitarian/vegan, after NH helped him get rid of migraines, kidney stones, & more, in 1984. He was a follower of TC Fry. See his story here.
2008 - a young Houston vegan (around 30) also died from cancer - very quickly, within 2 weeks of diagnosis.
May, 2008 - A leading member in ANHS, Max Huberman passed away at age 86 following a fall at home, after getting Parkinsons (the same disease Dr. Shelton got before his death). ANHS first advocated a raw vegan diet, which later changed to today's cooked/raw vegan diet with supplements. His son Mark was the lawyer of ANHS for many years, and now is the lawyer of NHA. Max overcame polio in 1950, a health crisis that led him and his wife to embark on a lifestyle of vegetarianism and natural living, a program that ultimately led them to open a health food store in 1958 originally called Natural Health Foods, one of the first in the nation to sell organically grown fruits and vegetables. He was a 55-year member of the National Health Association (ANHS/NHA) and served on its Board of Directors.
Youkta, 30 year raw vegan wife of Victor Kulvinskas, M.S., who died a few years ago in Costa Rica of colon cancer associated with other, e.g. emotional, problems.
The late Helen Jean Story of California, who created one of the first raw foods newsletter via snail mail before the Internet. She worked hard in her later life publishing this newsletter and arranging gatherings and trips. She died after having a stroke a few years ago.
Long term vegan Elder Victor Kulvinskas, M.S., who is now reported to be the father of the modern raw food movement, had two car accidents in the state of Arkansas prior to moving to Costa Rica. The last accident running a stop sign. Victor K. has also had cataract eye surgery a few years ago, and was hospitalized for a hernia operation in 2006 in Little Rock AR.
Mrs. Davison, 88 years old, developed heart disease as a raw vegan, and was forced to close the health resort, she had kept for 30 years, in 2005. She lived in Arkansas with her husband, on a Tilley farm where they raised 5 children. She was a 40 year raw eater, and resort director. After a car accident she damaged ribs & collar bone, and died a year later.
A South African, 30 year raw fruit eater, Morris Krok, author, died of cancer. His leg was amputated.


And add to that Jameth Sheridan, Johnny Lovewisdom, Matt Monarch who is deteriorating rapidly etc etc....

nunativs

name the diet that gives the best longevity results.

Read "Primitive Man and His Food". None of the raw foodists, fruitarians are getting results like that. Maybe WE're too degenerated?

It seems to be a mixed Omnivore diet, though the tribes near the Equator that had access to fresh fruit fared better, and lived far longer than the heavy meat eating tribes that were LIVING in the Northern zones. Was it climate, was it meat, who knows?

Both cooked and raw, lots of WILD foods not cultivated. Humans used fire to process those foods to make them edible, like Acorns. Is fire a blessing or a curse?

Yet in my mind, with hundreds of years of attempts, we wouldn't be seeing the poor results posted above. This movement started way back in Germany in the 1800's. When I read "Children of the Sun", I quickly noticed the lifespan of these Hygienists being very low...

thank you. now....


Read "Primitive Man and His Food". None of the raw foodists, fruitarians are getting results like that.


> I don't want to read it right now.
what was the average age of death?


Maybe WE're too degenerated?

> yes
or - there are more toxic factors now
or - their reports are incorrect
or - diet is a small part of longevity

It seems to be a mixed Omnivore diet, though the tribes near the Equator that had access to fresh fruit fared better, and lived far longer than the heavy meat eating tribes that were LIVING in the Northern zones. Was it climate, was it meat, who knows?

>I can give stats on a mixed omnivore diet that does not do well which would invalidate your conclusions

>well you seem to know that's why i was asking
and if you're going to keep bringing up a small list of SUPPOSED raw eaters who didn't fare well, i figured you would have an answer

Both cooked and raw, lots of WILD foods not cultivated. Humans used fire to process those foods to make them edible, like Acorns. Is fire a blessing or a curse?


Yet in my mind, with hundreds of years of attempts, we wouldn't be seeing the poor results posted above. This movement started way back in Germany in the 1800's. When I read "Children of the Sun", I quickly noticed the lifespan of these Hygienists being very low...

>study statistics. if you did, you wouldn't be drawing your conclusions.

> so in your mind. the factors are cooked and raw, omnivore.
again I can show many who don't live long on omnivore cooked and raw.

and you stated above the fruit eaters did the best from what i can gather.

I do not know the actual longevity stats of your various categories.

If you have that, then share it.

so what is the answer?

1. either there is a specific diet that lends to longevity. and I don't see a pattern except as I said, blue zones.
or
2. diet is a small part. which is also the point of the blue zones. the other factors are prominent in longevity.

the reason I am noting this is because you can keep posting your alleged raw eaters and their results but if diet is a small part of longevity, then YOUR CONCLUSIONS about the raw diet are NOT VALID. because it's too small of a part.
I am not going to convince you, but it's a fact that we can not draw conclusions from small samples even if you think in your mind, WELL SOMEONE should have lived a long time. but we would need to compare their longevity with others during their period of time living, and we also need to be realistic as to longevity. are you expecting 120 years old? the VERY longest lived people don't eat good diets, again, evidence that diet is a small factor.

that's all for now. i am just shooting from the hip here.

As PREDICTED, our resident SHILL does NOT have an answer and can only do what Lying Con Artists do best - CHANGE THE SUBJECT!

Once again, let's look at the questions that were initially asked by scharms:

"I would love to read a logical explanation of why something cooked would be better for you than raw. Is there something in the cooking process that makes food better for your health?"

"Will someone please elighten [sic] me as to why cooked food, in limited quantities, is better than raw, and do so using logical arguments?"

CON ARTIST - DIVERSION - CHANGE THE SUBJECT

Edit note: Tom and Jeff did the same thing 20 years ago after they gave a Bullshit answer and was called on it that our resident SHILL did above and that's - CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2020 08:28PM by John Rose.

OK, here are Jeff’s response and Tom’s response followed by the 1st of my 5 replies - stay tuned - more to follow...

JR Insert from "LIVING AND RAW FOOD DISCUSSION - 1" file...
Jeff’s response:

[www.living-foods.com]
I didnt answer it because I have already answered it and the question that was posed is self negating, there is no response to it cause it contradicts itself.

Realize there is no "rift" between science and nature, at least in the way I look at it.

Tom’s response:

[www.living-foods.com]
I ignored the question because, despite the use of the word "logical" in the post and followups, the question is a logical fallacy. The structure of the query in the post is to adopt an UNproven assertion, and then demand that I disprove it. This approach is logically invalid and a fallacy because it is an attempt to reverse the burden of proof. Those who make positive claims are required to show proof. As well, it is often impossible to prove a negative assertion.

Also, the query insists on simple (simplistic?) reasoning. Unfortunately, reality and nature are often highly complex, and don't care about our desire for simplicity.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

JR's 1st Response

8-19-00
[www.living-foods.com]
[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
We're Being Bamboozled!!!
JR (---.splitrock.net)
Date: 08-19-00 16:45

I sure hope everyone analyzes the answers above. Let's take a closer look at their answers.

But first let's look at the questions that were initially asked by scharms:

"I would love to read a logical explanation of why something cooked would be better for you than raw. Is there something in the cooking process that makes food better for your health?"

"Will someone please elighten me as to why cooked food, in limited quantities, is better than raw, and do so using logical arguments?"

Jeff’s response:

"I didnt answer it because I have already answered it and the question that was posed is self negating, there is no response to it cause it contradicts itself."

Tom's response:

"I ignored the question because, despite the use of the word "logical" in the post and followups, the question is a logical fallacy. The structure of the query in the post is to adopt an UNproven assertion, and then demand that I disprove it. This approach is logically invalid and a fallacy because it is an attempt to reverse the burden of proof. Those who make positive claims are required to show proof. As well, it is often impossible to prove a negative assertion."

Doesn't everyone see that these so-called answers are twisted and deceptive!

Tom said, "Those who make positive claims are required to show proof." Read the query!!! You guys are the ones who are making positive claims about cooked food, and all that we are asking is for you to prove your claims. Proof that you guys have no answers is all of the "Mumbo Jumbo" that you gave us in your above answers.

I'm sure that all of us here would love to hear some good answers from you guys, but I for one am tired of you guys trying to bamboozle everyone by insisting that all humans must eat differently than all of the other living creatures on this planet.

Please don't insult us by twisting these simple questions any more than you already have. These are simple questions which deserve simple answers or are you not up to it.

"Life is really simple, but men insist on making it complicated." - Confucius

"Genius is the ability to reduce the complicated to the simple." - C. W. Ceram

"Genius means little more than the faculty of perceiving in an unhabitual way." -William James

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction." -Albert Einstein

Peace and love to all of the raw fooders who have the courage and a touch of genius to move in the opposite direction and to live a simple life.......JR
End of JR Insert from "LIVING AND RAW FOOD DISCUSSION - 1" file.

Thank you fresh for an honest response and contribution to this subject.

I too think that diet is perhaps a small part of longevity as well.

At the same time, having studied this from all sides, there are more question in my mind than conclusions.

My main point is that Viktoras, Lovewisdom and others came out with books claiming WE would LIVE hundreds of years in total Youthfulness by following strict Raw Fruitarian diets, which I completely believed in my youth, but that has turned out to be nonsense...

JR's 2nd Response

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
More "Mumbo Jumbo"
JR (---.splitrock.net)
Date: 08-19-00 21:34

There you [jeff n] go again...twisting everything around...no one is attacking you...no one is judging you...no one is venting...just answer the questions. Once again, you insulted everyone with a brain by twisting everything around and by avoiding to answer these simple questions with simple answers.

The best defense is a good offense, so you divert the real issue by attacking me and act like I'm attacking you. I'm not attacking you...I just would like to see some answers. This is a raw food website, so why do you keep referring to tom's website, which is clearly anti-raw! This is only a simple question...it's not an attack, so stop twisting things around. If anyone is attacking anyone, it's you attacking me.

Btw, Dr. Doug asked for everyone to not play doctor. He said this, because someone else asked me for advice, which I never gave. Once again, you're twisting everything around. Besides, doctors aren't teachers, they're butchers and drug pushers. In the ten years that I have been a Wellness Consultant and with the thousands of students that I have helped overcome numerous health challenges, I have never nor will I ever pretend in any way to be something so low as a doctor! I am only a teacher...I do not diagnose...I do not prescribe...I do not push drugs...I do not cut...I do not burn...I do not poison!!!

I have not only read, but I have absorbed over 300 books...I have taken the best of the best from everyone that has been successful at healing the body with natural methods...I have done research in this area of health with both myself and thousands of others that is unparalleled, and I'll put my knowledge of health up against any one else, especially those who have been formerly miseducated!!!

So are we going to get any simple answers from you guys or just more "Mumbo Jumbo" and more deception by diverting attention away from the answers? Just take a look at your answer...it doesn't make any sense:

"I didnt answer it because I have already answered it and the question that was posed is self negating, there is no response to it cause it contradicts itself."

If the question is self negating and there is no response to it, then how could you have already answered it?

You keep claiming that you have answered these questions, but you have not!!! Once again, let's look at the questions that were initially asked by scharms:

"I would love to read a logical explanation of why something cooked would be better for you than raw. Is there something in the cooking process that makes food better for your health?"

"Will someone please elighten me as to why cooked food, in limited quantities, is better than raw, and do so using logical arguments?"

So once again, are we going to get any simple answers from you guys or just more "Mumbo Jumbo" and more deception by diverting attention away from the answers?
[www.living-foods.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2020 08:58PM by John Rose.

JR's 3rd Response

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
More "Mumbo Jumbo"
JR (---.splitrock.net)
Date: 08-20-00 00:07

JR Insert: not part of original post...
“But, how does one detect ones detractor's emotions via their written word? Of course, one does not; we infer other people's emotions, sometimes erroneously, ourselves.” John Coleman
End of JR Insert: not part of original post.

Once again, you've [tom] twisted everything around...no one is making an emotional or irrational outburst...and I still have not seen an answer to scharms questions, which are the issue at hand. Let's look at the questions that were initially asked by scharms:

"I would love to read a logical explanation of why something cooked would be better for you than raw. Is there something in the cooking process that makes food better for your health?"

"Will someone please elighten [sic] me as to why cooked food, in limited quantities, is better than raw, and do so using logical arguments?"

Read the queries!!! You guys are the ones who are making positive claims about cooked food, and all that we are asking is for you to prove your claims. This is not an emotional nor is it an irrational request. By diverting these questions and then posing a new assertion, and then to say that a rational and reasonable request is emotional and irrational is imo irrational and also deceptive.

So once again, are we going to get any simple answers from you guys or just more "Mumbo Jumbo" and more deception by diverting attention away from the answers?
[www.living-foods.com]

Quote
John Rose

Edit note: Tom and Jeff did the same thing 20 years ago after they gave a Bullshit answer and was called on it that our resident SHILL did above and that's - CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!!

As you can see, our resident Shill has done exactly what most people do when they don't have a leg to stand on - they CHANGE THE SUBJECT, as I explain in my video below, which was made specifically for our resident Shill.

Quote
John Rose
[www.youtube.com]
Disgusting Human Traits
10:45 Minute Video

Published on Jan 23, 2017
In this Video, John Rose takes a closer look at one of the Most Disgusting Human Traits from the most Common Disease and the most Dangerous Disease that’s ever afflicted Mankind ever since the Fall of Mankind.

Per Video Tape JR# M2U00189 - 10:45 made 1-23-17:

...

[youtu.be]
2:44 MM
Now the Problem with having the Wrong Mentality is you can see it everywhere you go and one of my observations I made a long time ago and I see it all over the place and I’m so aware of it every time I see it I literally get sick to my stomach because it’s just a sad reflection of our Species. We especially see it in the Worst of the Worst of us - the Sickest of the Sickest of us - they use it as part of their MO to Control us. It’s all about Divide and Conquer. It’s all about Mis-Direction. It’s all about Changing the Subject - Diverting the Attention - that’s what Con Artists do! And we especially see this in little children, but it happens all throughout our lifetimes in adults. I’m having a conversation on a Message Board with one person right now who’s doing this and what do they do?

They Change the Subject. You see, when you’re dealing with Evil or when you’re dealing with False Knowledge, there are only 2 things they can do. They can accept defeat and say, you’re right - I was wrong or they Change the Subject.

What’s the Best Defense?

It’s a Good Offense - use a Red Herring - a Straw Man - that’s why I delete all of that Crap.

And remember, the purpose of my YouTube Channel is we go to get Re-Connected. We got to test an idea whose time has come and that’s the main thing we have to do. We have to have to reach the Tipping Point. That’s why I don’t want to see a bunch of Bullshit on my Channel. I’m deleting some of you people for a reason. Don’t take it personal.

I’m on a Mission. If you don’t have my Vision, don’t get mad and don’t take it personal. I don’t want a bunch of Crap on my YouTube Channel. I want to see what I’m seeing now - a lot of Good Testimonials of people doing a Solid Food Vacation.

And remember, when people are unkind, they’re hurting. 4:28 MM

...

...you don’t Audit the Mafia, except after you close them down.

[youtu.be]
5:07 MM
Do you see how we’re being Tricked?

It’s all a Distraction. We’re always being Distracted. If you can’t Attack the Message itself, what do you do? You Attack the Messenger. When they defend themselves, what do you do? You twist it back around and you say, oh, you’re Attacking me!

You see it everywhere you go - it’s one of the most Common Traits we have and look around - you see everybody doing it, don’t you? Everywhere you go, especially on Message Boards where people have this anonymity and they’ll do things they’ll never do to your face.

Again nn
From the book did they report an average age of death

Quote
fresh
Again nn
From the book did they report an average age of death

100 average for most of the tribes except those in the far North.

1. Health: Civilized and Primitive
2. Story of the Red Man
3. People of the Northlands
4. Dietary Habits in Europe
5. In the Lands of Asia
6. Tribes of Africa
7. Among Aborigines in Australia
8. New Zealand Maori
9. Marquesas Islanders .
10. Pitcairn’s Island
11. Other Island Races
12. Value of Primitive Foods
Bibliography

Thank you JR for more belligerent SPAM....

JR's 4th and 5th Responses

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
One Issue At A Time Please
JR (---.splitrock.net)
Date: 08-20-00 00:24

Better yet Kirk, why don't you show us all where they answered the questions that were initially asked by scharms. You can't find their answers, because they are masters at diverting the real issues. Also, I would love for you to show me where I was not logical. I pride myself on my logic, and if it is faulty and you can show me, I'll be indebted to you.
Once we resolve this issue, I'd love to move on to the next issue and address Tom's points, however one issue at a time please. Haven't you noticed that they keep diverting the real issue by bringing up new issues and by attacking me and act like I'm attacking them.
[www.rawfoodsupport.com]


[www.rawfoodsupport.com]
The Analytical Method of Reasoning [to Kirk]
JR (---.splitrock.net)
Date: 08-20-00 12:20

I did not change the issue, I brought the issue back to the original issue. You did the same thing that they are doing...changing the original issue. Socrates, perhaps the smartest man who ever lived, used the analytical method of reasoning and always took one issue at a time to its resolution.

As I said in my previous post...Once we resolve this issue, I'd love to move on to the nest issue and address Tom's points, however one issue at a time please. Believe me, I will answer your questions after we resolve this issue. Don't you understand the concept of one issue at a time and right now the issue is the questions that scharms has asked. Everyone seems to be diverting this issue to another topic. Let's discuss all of the topics, but let's do it in a logical systematic order...one at a time!!!
[www.rawfoodsupport.com]

For one thing, a raw food diet for humans doesn't occur in the WILD where WE came from UNLESS you farm.

None of the raw food staples in the stores can be found in WILD NATURE. They are artificial, hybridized INVENTIONS of man.

Even Hotema clued in on that and stated they are products of the pampering hands of men. They need artificial watering, weeding, fencing etc.

Let's face it, if this "civilization" melted down right now, no one surviving would be a raw vegan. In fact most would not survive as vegans as that is a diet of "civilization"...

Is that a good or bad thing? I don't know...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2020 09:36PM by NuNativs.

Quote
John Rose

Quote
John Rose

Edit note: Tom and Jeff did the same thing 20 years ago after they gave a Bullshit answer and was called on it that our resident SHILL did above and that's - CHANGE THE SUBJECT!!!

As you can see, our resident Shill has done exactly what most people do when they don't have a leg to stand on - they CHANGE THE SUBJECT, as I explain in my video below, which was made specifically for our resident Shill.

Quote
John Rose
[www.youtube.com]
Disgusting Human Traits
10:45 Minute Video

Published on Jan 23, 2017
In this Video, John Rose takes a closer look at one of the Most Disgusting Human Traits from the most Common Disease and the most Dangerous Disease that’s ever afflicted Mankind ever since the Fall of Mankind.

Per Video Tape JR# M2U00189 - 10:45 made 1-23-17:

...

[youtu.be]
2:44 MM
Now the Problem with having the Wrong Mentality is you can see it everywhere you go and one of my observations I made a long time ago and I see it all over the place and I’m so aware of it every time I see it I literally get sick to my stomach because it’s just a sad reflection of our Species. We especially see it in the Worst of the Worst of us - the Sickest of the Sickest of us - they use it as part of their MO to Control us. It’s all about Divide and Conquer. It’s all about Mis-Direction. It’s all about Changing the Subject - Diverting the Attention - that’s what Con Artists do! And we especially see this in little children, but it happens all throughout our lifetimes in adults. I’m having a conversation on a Message Board with one person right now who’s doing this and what do they do?

They Change the Subject. You see, when you’re dealing with Evil or when you’re dealing with False Knowledge, there are only 2 things they can do. They can accept defeat and say, you’re right - I was wrong or they Change the Subject.

What’s the Best Defense?

It’s a Good Offense - use a Red Herring - a Straw Man - that’s why I delete all of that Crap.

And remember, the purpose of my YouTube Channel is we go to get Re-Connected. We got to test an idea whose time has come and that’s the main thing we have to do. We have to have to reach the Tipping Point. That’s why I don’t want to see a bunch of Bullshit on my Channel. I’m deleting some of you people for a reason. Don’t take it personal.

I’m on a Mission. If you don’t have my Vision, don’t get mad and don’t take it personal. I don’t want a bunch of Crap on my YouTube Channel. I want to see what I’m seeing now - a lot of Good Testimonials of people doing a Solid Food Vacation.

And remember, when people are unkind, they’re hurting. 4:28 MM

...

...you don’t Audit the Mafia, except after you close them down.

[youtu.be]
5:07 MM
Do you see how we’re being Tricked?

It’s all a Distraction. We’re always being Distracted. If you can’t Attack the Message itself, what do you do? You Attack the Messenger. When they defend themselves, what do you do? You twist it back around and you say, oh, you’re Attacking me!

You see it everywhere you go - it’s one of the most Common Traits we have and look around - you see everybody doing it, don’t you? Everywhere you go, especially on Message Boards where people have this anonymity and they’ll do things they’ll never do to your face.

Our resident Shill constantly accuses us of doing what he is doing.

kenny t = Disgusting Human Traits!

I am contributing to the subject, you just can't handle what it implies...

From the book, "Astray the Herd":

11 - VEGETARIANS
Now being a vegetarian is anyone’s basic right. But
citing moral, “holier than thou” reasons for this choice of diet is
to deny all the laws of nature and basic biological fact. No one is
exempt from these laws, and no one can exist on this planet
without causing the death of other life forms.

How can we humans be so arrogant as to classify life
forms in such a way that we put more value on one species than
another? Many vegetarians, unlike the English shopkeeper,
will eat fish and have no problem even with the catching and
killing of them, but would not dare eat a mammal like a rabbit or
a deer. Is the life of a deer more valuable in the grand scheme of
things that that of a fish? Is the fish worth more than an insect?
And what about mosquitoes? How many vegetarians are able
to crush an offending mosquito with no qualms of murderous
guilt?

And plants are living things as well. Do vegetarians
not kill plants on a regular basis, as well as disrupting their right
to produce offspring by eating seeds and fruit? To argue such
points with vegetarians is fruitless. Perhaps the popularity of
vegetarianism is a result of modern humans becoming
domesticated, like the cud-chewing ungulates whose herd
behavior they so closely mimic.

I left the dive shop to search for a fishing spear
elsewhere. I was determined to take advantage of all this free
food on the reef. It was a way that I could make my few green
frogskins last much longer. And, by taking my food directly
from nature, I could further separate myself from the herd, which
is dependant upon a massive infrastructure of food producing,
processing, preserving, packaging, and marketing networks. In
order to achieve the simplicity of living I sought and the
freedom to move about as I pleased, I needed to switch back to
a hunter-gatherer mode of existence.These islands had always, like
the North American mainland, provided abundant subsistence to
the pre-technological, pre-Colombian hunter-gatherers who lived
here before: the Native Americans.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/30/2020 09:45PM by NuNativs.

I wonder why no one can answer this simple question posed by scharms:

"I would love to read a logical explanation of why something cooked would be better for you than raw. Is there something in the cooking process that makes food better for your health?"

"Will someone please elighten [sic] me as to why cooked food, in limited quantities, is better than raw, and do so using logical arguments?"

Why does everyone who believes in this hype always give deceptive answers and/or Changes the Subject?

Could it be because they are under the Hunger Spell ala Plato's Magical Enchantment or simply because there are NO Benefits to ALTERING our Food with Fire, except to EAT things we are NOT Biologically Adapted to Eat, which might come in handy in extreme conditions.

many reports of old age are fraudulent

so I don't know how to verify the 100 average claim.

Quote
fresh
many reports of old age are fraudulent

so I don't know how to verify the 100 average claim.

I have saved lots of isolated examples of people in modern times and yes the diets vary widely.

I noticed in Hotemas books, that while he promoted raw diet and fruitarianism, all the examples of those living to advanced ages didn't follow those diets...

Quote
John Rose


Why does everyone who believes in this hype always give deceptive answers and/or Changes the Subject?

"Those who think they know it ALL, have no way of finding out they DON'T!"
Leo Buscaglia

Quote
John Rose
I wonder why no one can answer this simple question posed by scharms:

"I would love to read a logical explanation of why something cooked would be better for you than raw. Is there something in the cooking process that makes food better for your health?"

"Will someone please elighten [sic] me as to why cooked food, in limited quantities, is better than raw, and do so using logical arguments?"

Why does everyone who believes in this hype always give deceptive answers and/or Changes the Subject?

Could it be because they are under the Hunger Spell ala Plato's Magical Enchantment or simply because there are NO Benefits to ALTERING our Food with Fire, except to EAT things we are NOT Biologically Adapted to Eat, which might come in handy in extreme conditions.

There is NO GOOD ANSWER!!!

There are NO Benefits to ALTERING our Food with Fire, except in extreme conditions.

The answer to your question is the RESULTS:

your article that you referenced is kind of nonsense
here's why


first of all

[blameitonlove.wordpress.com].

secondly

"The term vegan, and a shared definition of it, was established in 1944, so there was nobody self identified as vegan more than 70 years ago.

1% of the US population was vegan as of 2009, and more recent surveys show this has risen to 2.5%. There are now more vegan products in stores and restaurants, but it was considered an impractical lifestyle by early vegetarian societies. It's still fairy impractical in some areas. So it would be unusual to find someone born in the 1910s who managed to find 100% non-animal food sources when there was no concept of veganism, where social gatherings and restaurants could accommodate plant based meals."



….. the vast majority of people who attempt these diets will fail. Eventually, chronic health problems caused by nutritional deficiencies will force them to add animal foods into their diets.


this statement is nonsense supported by nothing.





H. Jay Dinshah was the founder and president of the American Vegan Society. Although a vegetarian from birth, then a vegan for 43 years, he died from a heart attack at just 66 years of age.

so WHAT? WHAT DID he eat?
how did he live?

SAME FOR ALL THE OTHER EXAMPLES
YOU can't just say, oh this person claimed to eat X diet
that is ABSOLUTE RUBBISH.

Herbert M. Shelton was the most influential Natural Hygienist of the 20th century. For six decades he preached the superiority of a raw vegan diet of fruits, vegetables and nuts. Did he enjoy a long and vigorous life? No! He was in a declining state of health in his sixties, and was bedridden for the final 13 years of his life due to Parkinson’s disease. He died at just 89.

just 89?
give me a break
and
so WHAT? WHAT DID he eat?
how did he live?


His protégé, T.C. Fry, taught the infallibility of a raw vegan diet for 26 years, yet he died at the ridiculously young age of 70!! However, even more disturbing is the fact that he suffered from numerous health problems long before his death. According to Dr Bernarr Zovluck, a close friend for 30 years, Fry died from coronary embolism. He also had multiple atherosclerotic thrombi of his lower legs, edema, a lesion on his left lung, anemia, high acid blood pH, breathing problems, constipation, osteoporosis, teeth and gum problems, etc.
Yes indeed, his vegan/fruitarian diet certainly worked miracles for his health!

ANOTHER STUPID CLAIM.
since it was reported that didn't follow his own diet.

George R. Clements (AKA Hilton Hotema, AKA Kenyon Klamonti) claimed he became a vegan at 9 years of age after reading a book about health at school. He also claimed he lived as a breatharian-fruitarian for almost 80 years and would “live to be 150 years of age.” He only managed to reach 92.

only 92?
the article writer has RIDICULOUS assumptions of longevity

Hereward Carrington, author of The Natural Food of Man, believed that a strict diet of raw fruits and nuts could “sustain man in a perfect state of health”. He died at 78 years of age.

what did he eat?
how did he live?


. However, long-term physical and psychological deterioration will almost certainly occur unless animal foods such as eggs, fish or dairy products are consumed. Those who refuse to do this should supplement with B12 (methylcobalamin), folic acid and flax or hemp seeds.

NONSENSE supported by nothing.

Nieuroff. visited Brazil in 1647 and pointed out: "The Brazilians come soon to maturity and arrive to a great age, and that without distemper's; they also seldom become grey.

Father Bechamel saw them later in the century, commenting that "They are tolerably endued with good sense, which they have the opportunity to cultivate and refine by a long train of experiences, with which the many years they LIVE furnish them:
FOR THEY COUNT A MAN DIES YOUNG, IF HE DOES NOT LIVE ABOVE 100 YEARS!

again, why do some long lived people smoke and/or drink?

how did they live so long?

if they lived long and it's not because they smoked and drank
, then how can you say those who don't live long is because of their diet?

---------------------------------

‘The trouble with the world is not that people know too little; it’s that they know so many things that just aren’t so.’

There is no famous quote better than the Mark Twain one above that exemplifies the level of misinformation and half-truths that permeate the common understanding of human ageing and longevity.

My own father held the beliefs that ageing is caused by gravity — mother nature’s way of returning us to the ground from which we came — that colds are caused by walking outdoors with bare feet; that we shouldn’t exercise so as not to use up our limited allotment of heartbeats; and that applying a rag soaked in WD40 to one’s knees alleviates the pain caused by arthritis. He lived proudly and happily to the ripe old age of 96, so I never had the heart to do much more than smirk and nod.

The media is constantly seeking out the sage advice of living centenarians by asking them what the secret is to their exceptional longevity. The irony in this question is the fact that many exceptionally long-lived people have atrocious lifestyles.

By far my favourite quote about ageing and longevity comes from Warren Buffett, the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway. In an interview with Fortune magazine he made the following statement:

‘I checked the actuarial tables, and the lowest death rate is among six-year-olds. So I decided to eat like a six-year-old. The octogenarian adds, ‘It’s the safest course I can take.’

Buffett’s daily routine is to drink five cans of whole sugar Coca-Cola along with eating ice cream and potato sticks (perhaps it’s no coincidence that he owns large blocks of stock in the companies that produce these foods). This profound perversion of life table statistics confounded by personal financial interest demonstrates just how misinformed the public is about the phenomenon of biological ageing and risk factors for diseases that all of us experience.

So what, then, is the real secret to longevity? The glib answer often given by gerontologists is to choose long-lived parents, which is equivalent to saying that inherited genes drive the process, and that if your blood relatives lived a long life, chances are you will as well.

But this is not a satisfying or even accurate answer for a variety of reasons, the most important of which is that it ignores the critical importance of lifestyle. If there is one thing that epidemiology and public health have taught us, it’s that how we choose to live our lives and the environment into which we are born can profoundly influence our health and longevity — but it’s not quite that simple either. So, here’s the answer in a nutshell.

How long most sexually reproducing species live, including humans, is calibrated to something that has absolutely nothing at all to do with how we live our lives. Here’s the chain of reasoning. The level of hostility in the environment that existed when each species arose had a direct and profound influence on when reproduction begins. A hostile environment where predation is common leads to early reproduction and the accompanying biology and physiology that supports rapid physical development. An example would be a mouse — a meal for many other living things. As a result mice develop and reproduce quickly: they go through puberty at 30 days and live for about three years in protected environments.

A relaxed environment with few predators allows other species to develop and reproduce later, with an accompanying life history strategy, biology, and physiology that support later development. An example would be a Greenland shark — an animal that has few predators. Thus it does not go through puberty until 176 years of age and can live for 400 years.

Human reproduction and longevity are somewhere between a mouse and a Greenland shark. The point here is that duration of life is calibrated to reproduction; reproduction is calibrated to the level of hostility in the environment; human physiology and body design evolved to accommodate these unique life history traits; and therefore the secret to species-specific longevity rests within a set of fixed genetic programmes for early life developmental events over which we have no control. Thus, while natural selection could not have given rise to ageing or death programmes, ageing happens anyway as an indirect byproduct of biological clocks that regulate developmental events early in life.

So, where does lifestyle come into play? I’ve been making the case for decades now that the only control humanity has over our personal duration of life is to shorten it, which is to say that the adoption of unhealthy lifestyles can hasten the process of ageing. It’s easy to die early. Just pick up any one of a dozen harmful behavioural risk factors that your mother told you to avoid (smoking, drugs, eating too much food or doing just about anything in excess).

What’s difficult is figuring out how to leverage your genetic heritage to maximise the genetic potential for longevity you were born with. The good news here, of course, is that because there is no genetic programme for ageing, behavioural interventions can help us live longer and healthier lives.

Keep in mind that the presence of genetic diversity means that some people can smoke and live long (the longest-lived person in the world, Jeanne Calment, lived for 122 years and smoked for 100 of them); while others can live a healthy lifestyle and die early (Jim Fixx). The fact is, no one has a chance to live an exceptionally long life unless they won the genetic lottery at birth, which is to say that one begins by choosing long-lived parents, and then listens to their advice by avoiding the harmful behavioural risk factors that shorten life.

The longer we live, the more important genetics becomes in determining duration of life. Once you’ve made it to about age 80, time has already informed you that you’re part of the longer-lived subgroup of the human family.

The take-home message on the secret to longevity is therefore surprisingly simple. Adopt a healthy lifestyle early to maximise your longevity potential; time will reveal to you whether you belong to a long-lived subgroup of the population; and, by the time you reach the age when you know the answer to this question, you’ll already be old enough to know that most of what you thought you knew about human ageing is probably wrong.

[life.spectator.co.uk]

Then there is absolutely no reason to be a completely raw food vegan eater as hammered incessantly by JR.

Thus, his touting that a raw food diet is the panacea solution to all of humanities ills is completely baseless.

Eat whatever you want, but above all enjoy this brief interlude called LIFE!

First and foremost LOVE EACH OTHER, as WE are ALL, just drops of WATER, that will soon evaporate back into the Wholey SUN/LIGHT...

Then there is absolutely no reason to be a completely raw food vegan eater as hammered incessantly by JR.

No he is correct. There are many reasons

Have you ever been all raw vegan if so how long

Thus, his touting that a raw food diet is the panacea solution to all of humanities ills is completely baseless.

No. I agree with him


Eat whatever you want, but above all enjoy this brief interlude called LIFE!

Of course

First and foremost LOVE EACH OTHER, as WE are ALL, just drops of WATER, that will soon evaporate back into the Wholey SUN/LIGht

Of course