According to The New Earth (www.thenewearth.com), "A Fruitarian eats lots of fruit, with some nuts and grains or the products thereof".

That pretty much goes along with the botanical definition of fruit, which is (according to my World Book Encyclopedia) "the part of a flowering plant that contains the plant's seeds. Fruits include acorns, cucumber, tomatoes, and wheat grains."

The horticultural definition of fruit is "an edible seed-bearing structure that (1)consists of fleshy tissue and (2) is produced by a perennial. A perennial is a plant that lives for more than two years without being replanted". That would exclude nuts of course because they don't have "fleshy tissue", but it also excludes tomatoes, cucumbers and melons because they aren't produced by a perennial.

It seems many all-fruit fruitarians follow the horticultural definition by not eating nuts or grains, but they also follow the botanical definition when they eat melons and cucumbers.

So, are there any New Earth fruitarians out there who follow the botanical definition of fruit and include nuts and sprouted grains in their diet, but not greens?

I've tried being fruitarian without nuts or grains, and I've tried it with nuts but without grains. I might like to try it WITH nuts AND sprouted grains, so I'm just wondering if others have had that experience and how did it go?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2007 02:13AM by suncloud.

I would assume most people eat fruit based on what is softest on the body and allows for little to no digestional drain.

the opposite could be said about grain.

I don't think anyone leaves out nuts or seeds because they don't fit a definition of fruit. they just take way more energy to digest, perhaps more then they give.

if you are eating grains..I would assume eating them with greens would help with the digestion. but perhaps this is just a myth.

I found nuts and grains to be too much work to be able to eat them fresh....edible...and appetizing....and I personally am a little more low-maintenance! Ha! ha!.......but if they work for you....I say go for it!

-David Z. Mason

WWW.RawFoodFarm.com

Anaken, thanks for your suggestion, but greens are usually difficult for me to digest. That's why I'm looking around for new raw modes.

Thanks David. I'm kind of in the unique (and happy) position to have lots of fresh nuts, and nuts are really easy for me to digest.

I don't usually eat the sprouted grains more than once a week. I just tried kamut for the first time today, So far, so good.

By the way, I posted a "thank you" to you on m's thread for answering my question there, but it didn't stick. So thank you again.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2007 06:18AM by suncloud.

The claim that the botanical definition of fruits includes seeds like grains and nuts is totally erroneous. I have a BS degree in Range Ecology and have worked as a botanist for the BLM and the Forest Service in Idaho, Oregon, and California.

The botanical definition: A fruit consists of the ripened ovary and other plant parts that contain the seed(s).

The seeds are contained in a fruit. It is the container that makes it a fruit. The seeds by themselves are not fruits, they are just seeds. In the conventional definition of fruits it is the sweet container we eat. The only difference under the botanical definition is that the container may be inedible. It may be a dry husk.

I think the Stone Fruit genus (Prunus spp) illustrates this well. Apricots, plums, cherries, peaches, nectarines, and almonds are all in the Prunus genus, the Stone Fruits. The almond fruit is just like the others as it develops, a thick fleshy green covering a hard shelled seed. In the sweet fruits the fleshy green develops into our familiar favorites. In the almond the fleshy green withers into a dry inedible husk. The almond fruit, under the botanical definition, consists of this dry husk containing the hard shelled seed. Without the husk the almond is just a seed, not a fruit, just as a peach without the sweet surrounding flesh is just a seed.

Insisting on calling seeds and nuts fruits on the claim that it is the botanical definition is wrong. It brings ridicule on the live food movement, maligns botanists, and corrupts the English language.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2007 05:57PM by brome.

suncloud i went to that link you posted and couldnt find anything about fruitarianism there.... it looked like a generic sales link...is part of it missing?

...Jodi, the banana eating buddhist

Jgunn, Thanks for pointing that out! I wrote the wrong address. You might try [www.thenewearth.org]. You should get an article called, "How to become a fruitarian". Their definition of fruitarian is the first sentence of the 3rd paragraph.

Sorry Brome, I surely didn't mean to malign or ridicule anybody! The botanical definition I gave in my above post, really is the definition given in my World Book encyclopedia (Volume 7, p. 470, 1984). If it's wrong, it's probably their innocent mistake, as I don't think they have any hidden food preference agenda or anything.

Brome, it seems to me that the "container" you're describing is botanically called the "pericarp" of the fruit. The pericarp (or ovary wall of the fruit) is one part of the fruit consisting of three layers: the exocarp, the mesocarp, and the endocarp. Could you possibly give us a referenced quote that supports your point that the seed of a fruit is never botanically considered to be part of the fruit? I couln't find anything that specifically said that.

World Book goes on in more detail under the subtitle "How botanists classify fruits" from page 472 to page 474:

"Botanists classify fruits into two main groups: (1) simple fruits and (2) compound fruits...

"Simple Fruits are by far the largest group of fruits. They are divided into two types, depending on whether their pericarp is fleshy or dry... (the two groups are "fleshy simple fruits" and "dry simple fruits"...

"Dry Simple Fruits include... the grains of the corn, rice, and wheat plants; and nuts. Botanists regard nuts as single-seed fruits with a hard pericarp called a shell. The seed is the edible part. Acorns, chestnuts, and hazelnuts are true nuts. But many so-called nuts are classed otherwise by botanists."

Notice that the grains of corn, rice, and wheat plants are considered fruits. Also notice the statement, "the seed is the edible part". Part of what: part of the nut, which is here included as a "Dry Simple Fruit".

I didn't mean to stir up controversy. I usually don't mind controversy though as long as its kept on a civil level.

I was just wondering about maybe getting in touch with people who eat according to The New Earth definition of fruitarian. I'm looking for something a little different from the usual raw vegan diet, since I'm extremely sensitive to greens. Whether or not I misunderstood the botanical definition of fruit, I'm still attracted to the concept of fruit as outlined by The New Earth (although I find some of their writings - that aren't about food - a little more difficult to swallow, so to speak).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2007 08:31PM by suncloud.

thnkss hun .. i tried everywhich way for that site to bring up fruit anything and it wouldnt work lol

...Jodi, the banana eating buddhist

Under the botanical definition seeds are a part of a fruit for sure but they are not the fruit itself. The fruit includes all of the ripened ovary that contains the seed(s) and any other plant parts integral to the seed's dissemination. In a walnut it includes the husk that contains the shell with the seed within. In grain the hull and the awn are an integral part that contain the seed. In the acorn it includes the cap. Sure often the seed is the edible part. Then just say the seed since you're tossing everything else. The convention for edible fruits is that it's the edible fleshy container that you're talking about. If you're talking about the seeds, why not just say seeds instead of going on an obscure, disingenuous tangent.

Why should anyone even want to bring in the botanical definition, anyway, when one is talking about nutrition and not the complicated system of plant classification and physiological relationships in botany?

The botanical definition I gave can be found in the glossary of any flora.

Consider the apricot and plum. Some have edible seeds within. If I offered you a fruit salad and served up a bowl of apricot and plum pits that would be a bit confusing. Melons have edible seeds. Should blended and strained cantaloupe seeds be considered a fruit smoothie?

Hi Jgunn,

Wow that's weird. I just clicked on it from my post above, and my computer went right to it! Did you try clicking on it that way instead of typing it in?

Oh well!

Brome,

I'm sorry. I don't really understand why you think anything I said was disingenuous. I'm really kind of perplexed, and definitely unhappy that I seem to have said something offensive to you. I like to speak my mind, but I definitely don't like to hurt anyone's feelings! I merely quoted the encyclopedia. And the botanical definition you give above seems to me to bear out everything I said.

I never meant any more than exactly what I said. Maybe something I wrote could be interpreted as meaning something other than what I actually meant. Sometimes that happens over the internet of course. I certainly didn't mean to imply that blending up a bunch of seeds could be called a fruit smoothie. I never even referred to seeds at all, except in the quote that came straight from the encyclopedia in their botanical definition of fruit.

Help! I'm innocent!

Let's be friends, OK? Much nicer. I've enjoyed all your posts for a long time.

And good for you for pursuing right livelihood!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2007 03:18AM by suncloud.

the 2nd link works fine thanks hehe i was talking about the first one lol

the site is interesting i didnt get a chance to go through it all ..

one thing that perplexes me is i cant seem to find who exactly is in charge of it ?

who is the person behind all these ideals

the other thing i noticed was on one page about fruitarianism ..it starts out aoubt not harming animals and down near the bottom it goes on about using fruit peels with honey ... that seems a bit hypocritcal

...Jodi, the banana eating buddhist

heh, woah.

good points Brome, but..woah

suncloud..if what you originally posted is correct..then a mellon-seed/corn/acorn concoction would be fruit smoothy.


I don't quite understand...what is your sensativity to greens? do you have digestive issues? shouldn't this be addressed prior to picking 'the optimal diet'? Can you eat only fruits without any physical/mental detox symptoms? do grains slow/stop this? I can only speculate..but I don't think folks would remove greens from their diet due to distress unless it was an evolving process.NOT a pre-existing condition.

to me..sprouting is about doing alot of work to make something not edible..somewhat edible..it IS pretty amazing that some folks can live off the stuff and create there own food out of nothing. but that same argument can be placed on unleavened bread or whatever (ie. living..or keeping the body out of detox?)

Greens would be wayyy closer to fruits in terms of what would constitute our natural diets (although not necc a part of..who knows?)...grains wouldn't have even been in the equation.

just my opinions

Hi Jgunn,

Yeah, I tried to find a contact link, but I couldn't.

I didn't see the thing you mentioned about using fruit peels with honey (is it somewhere on the first page?), but when I just now clicked the link at the bottom left of the first page, I got some more information about their "fruitarian" diet, and I realized it's not really anything I'd care to follow after all.

For one thing, I'm already all raw all the time , and they're including things like bread and muffins and baked beans with tomato sauce, because they consider those things to be fruit.

Sigh, that's definitely not for me. Oh well, I'll just have to come up with my own thing. I do like the general concept of having a raw diet based on the conventionally named fruits, plus nuts and sprouted grains (kamut specifically so far), because those foods are the easiest for me to digest. I thought I'd maybe found some kindred souls out there when it comes to the specific diet that I like best.

Oh well, no biggie. Thanks for helping me discover what they're about.

hehe np yea thats where i saw some weird things on that 2nd page from the first page link .. honey, baked beans , tomato sauce, wheatgerm, homeroasted coffee, cooked pasta, tofu ..an on an on

i dont understand it started off on a frutarian note and seemed to end on a vegetarian note .. unless they meant these are acceptable along the path TOO fruitarinism ..

hmm i dont know it was a bit confusing ..

sounds like yer already on the right path thats right for you

...Jodi, the banana eating buddhist

Anaken,

I hear ya, and thanks for the concern. Unfortunately, this has been going on with me for about 16 or 17 years now. It probably stems from a time when I had a serious amoeba that nearly killed me. I was already vegan and about 97% raw at the time (one cooked meal about every 3 weeks), but when the amoeba became serious, I had to cut out greens entirely because they would cause immediate violent vomitting. Then I had to cut out seeds and limit myself to fruit and 4 macadamia nuts OR fruit and 1/2 avocado a day. After that I could only eat fruit. Finally the doctor figured out what was wrong with me and I took the flagyl (nightmare) and was cured.

I've read that amoebas can leave a person with food sensitivities long after the amoebas are gone, and I think that's what happened to me. I usually do eat greens, but only once or twice a week, and then I have to give it a few days of rest before I can eat them again. That's the only way I can avoid exhaustion, itchy skin, swollen eyes, depression, etc. I've tried just about every food experiment I can come up with to alter the situation and stay comfortable, but nothing has worked. Despite that, I'm all raw vegan, all the time, plus I lead a very happy, active, physical life, even though I'm 56. But I'm always searching for a better way.

Amazingly (I guess), nuts and sprouted grains digest very well for me. Put yourself in my position. If you were all raw vegan (and liked it that way), and you couldn't eat much greens, but you knew you could easily eat raw nuts and sprouted grains (particularly kamut), would you eat the nuts and grains? Or would you not eat the nuts and grains because someone told you they're not as good as greens, and instead eat the greens even though they made you sick?

It is what it is. I'm not complaining, just searching. After the experience with the amoebas, I'm very glad I can eat anything at all. I feel extremely lucky. Besides that, my husband and I planted about maybe 70 or 80 macadamia nut trees that we rescued from the dump, and they'll be putting out choke nuts this year, and I love them!

Before I came to this forum, I thought every raw vegan valued nuts over greens. It turns out I'm probably wrong on that, but for me, it still is what it is.

Thanks again for your concern!



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2007 05:56AM by suncloud.

Suncloud, I meant only to address the definition of fruit in a general way, and not you in particular, as many (me in particular) have been confused by the wildly varying definitions on this site. I should have started a separate thread. Sorry, I didn't mean to criticize you at all. I meant to criticize those that made up the erroneous definition in the first place.

The "you" in my above post was meant in the general sense and not in the sense as you in particular.

I wish you well in your quest to find the diet for yourself. I found that dried greens may be more palatable and easy to take if one is having problems with them fresh. Perhaps even cooked greens may be an interim solution.

Dear Brome,

Thank you so much for your very sweet post. You have really made my day so much brighter!

And thank you for your suggestions. I think maybe the wild greens might be somewhat easier on me. I've just started experimenting with that, and actually, I've just started experimenting with the sprouted kamut also. So far, so good on the kamut. As far as dried greens, I like the sundried seaweeds, but haven't really isolated them yet to see what their effect alone is. Interesting suggestion!

Thanks again Brome!

>
> Amazingly (I guess), nuts and sprouted grains
> digest very well for me. Put yourself in my
> position. If you were all raw vegan (and liked it
> that way), and you couldn't eat much greens, but
> you knew you could easily eat raw nuts and
> sprouted grains (particularly kamut), would you
> eat the nuts and grains? Or would you not eat the
> nuts and grains because someone told you they're
> not as good as greens, and instead eat the greens
> even though they made you sick?
>

Right

best to do what feels good/right as opposed to what is good/right (if there is such a thing)

my research/experience is that dense and complex things slow detox/healing. and that food sensitivities could probably be 'cured' by facilitating detox over a period of time. Yet there are other types of sensitivities of course towards foods that are unhealthful. Grains are pretty complex and dense. Gluten presents a problem for most, but usually only manifests as a problem in folks that are healthy enough to notice.

I don't know anything about amoebas so I won't comment further.

I wish you luck also, itseemed odd that you were looking for some kind of rationalization/program to validate what you are doing. which I think is what people responded to. if your unique approach allows for accelerating health, power to you.

I say do what makes you happy...

Thank you Fruitarian One! I very much appreciate your support!

I hope you don't mind my asking, but have you ever heard of anyone eating raw this way? And also, how do greens make you feel?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/28/2007 07:09AM by suncloud.

Yeah I've heard of all kinds of Fruitarians, but theirs only one true way and that is "Mother Natures way" we can come up with all the "ways" we want but mother nature knows best.

So just follow your personal instinct and do what makes you feel best at any given time until you reach the end of your transitioning path, then you can experience the real Fruitarian way.

Greens made me feel like I was back on cooked food, it never agreed with me at all.

F1

But in "Mother Nature" there is no creature that lives on fruit alone.
"Mother Natures way" is fruit and greens and more

Why go through life debating everything and comparing yourself to other things...just live and let live and be happy, do what suits your lifestyle/environment and roll with with the punches, nobody really cares whay I do and nobody really cares what you do...just live and be happy!

If you feel that no other animal lives on fruit alone and that every body needs greens then all the power to you, I wish you all the best and much love to you!

F1

Wow, Fruitarianone, I feel that way with greens too! Except for me the greens are maybe a degree or two less bad than cooked food, and the greens take less time to wash out of my system than cooked food. Still though, greens are rough on me!

Thanks so much. It's a such a relief to know that I'm not completely alone!

For now, I may continue to eat some wild greens and seaweed and see how that is.

Djatchi, even though I don't always agree with what you say - especially regarding bananas - , sometimes I totally agree with you, and I always enjoy reading your posts because you're not afraid to speak your mind!

There was no comparing at all, I thought we are talking about "Mother Nature".

I agree with FO! LOL. YOU choose the way to eat that YOU'VE researched / determined is right for you.....and is successful and joyful to you....and you've got my 100% support!

-David Z. Mason

WWW.RawFoodFarm.com

There is no question that we have the right to CHOOSE the way that worked for us but we cannot make it a prescription for others when there is no evidence of it working in nature and in the long run.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/28/2007 11:41PM by djatchi.

Personaly I think too many people spend too much time debating the validity of the lifestyle instead of just living it and enjoying it.

It's simple...eat what you like and have fun!

F1