I am generally raw, but every couple / few weeks, I do eat cooked veg*n. The reasons are many, but it happens. Sometimes, I eat cooked for just one meal. Others, it's up to 2 or 3 days in a row. Then, I switch back to raw.

Question: Is switching back and forth between raw and cooked, in itself, somehow harmful? Here is another way to ask the question. Is it better to eat (a) 9 days raw, followed by 1 day cooked, followed by 9 days raw, etc., for 100 days total; or (b) 90 days raw followed by 10 days cooked? Both cases have the same amount of raw and cooked days, but in the first case there is more switching between raw and cooked.

Good questions. I wouldn't use the words harmful, but my opinion would be that spreading your cooked days out would be healthier if only for the cravings and adjustments. I was going five days raw then two days in a row with a cooked meal then back to five all raw. I know I would feel really bad If I went four or even five in a row cooked, but as it was I would bounce back in a couple days. The more cooked I ate or the more junk I ate the harder the recovery.

I agree with Pakd4fun.

There's probably a lot more harmful things you could do to your body, but on the other hand, you could probably do better.

Do you want to be all raw, but you're caving? Or do you want to eat cooked food 90 out of 100 days, and you're wondering how best to do that?

If you want to be all raw, but you're caving, you might consider that there may be something lacking in your raw food diet that's making it too difficult for you to stay raw. Perhaps your raw food diet is overly restrictive.

If you want to eat cooked 90 out of 100 days and are wondering how best to do that, then I'd say your first option of 9 days raw, followed by 1 day cooked and then back to raw is better than 90 days raw followed by 10 days cooked. The first option gives your body some time to recoup before it goes back to cooked food, while the second option loads you up with a lot of cooked food at the same time. The first option would also probably be easier (and healthier) to maintain, especially if your raw food diet is overly restrictive. In fact, if your raw food diet were not overly restrictive, why would you even want to eat 10 days straight of cooked food after going 90 days on raw?



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/21/2007 07:52PM by suncloud.

I am pretty happy being all raw. Yes, sometimes, I do get a craving, but it is rare and not a big deal. Sometimes I run out of food through poor planning. Sometimes I am just too lazy. Also, when I go out, I do eat cooked vegan. Yes, I know some people get around eating cooked when going out, but at this point, I do not do that.

After eating cooked, I do get the "recovery". It's not necessarily that I feel "bad" by cooked standards, but I certainly feel that I am not 100 percent. I feel like there is too much food inside me, like I am a bit heavy on the inside. (This has nothing to do with actual body weight, which for me is normal and pretty stable.) Not sure how to describe it better. <too much information> Plus, I am not as regular. Again, maybe not by cooked standards, but certainly by what I am used to on raw. </too much information>

So that's why I was wondering whether / how harmful the back and forth is.

In and of itself? Probably not particularly. On the other hand, YOU should decide what level of raw that YOU want to be...and try to be consistent with that. Not being consistent and clear with what YOU want......and achieving it......just isn't that fulfilling! LOL. (in my experience / opinion).

-David Z. Mason

WWW.RawFoodFarm.com