Again, prism, that was a terrible mistake. I've appreciated all of your input on this thread immensely, and especially your very sincere concern for Rawfrancois!

Hi smile,

I'm talking about the unhulled sesame seeds, the brown ones.

I think you mistook me for other poster. That's ok
Love,
Prism



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2007 11:30PM by Prism.

suncloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> But I still don't see you offering any evidence
> that a person can fulfill all their needs without
> them, and that includes the info you've offered
> from the charts.
>
> If you don't agree with the charts, that's fine
> too.
>
> But I just don't think you can use them as
> evidence to support your point of view, and that's
> probably more to the point that I was trying to
> make.
>

After some research, I got it.

Here's what I found.

The usda rdi's, which used to be called rda's
are completely bogus. I know that sounds absurd, but bear with me.

1. They periodically request info from "interested parties" in setting the values. Guess what? I found letters from supplement companies making recommendations. can you say conflict of interest?

2. The usda does not set the values based on good science. Often they simply use the MEDIAN POPULATION INTAKE ! Completely bogus.

3. I found that WHO defines RNI's. These values are set after they engage in serious study worthy of real scientists. Extremely detailed and accurate, and based on real needs, not estimates.

And what do the numbers show? They show it's easy to get our nutrient needs.

I checked zinc and selenium

Here's Zinc:

for females

USDA RDI = 8 mg
WHO RNI as low as 3 mg (they show high, low and medium bioavail)

for males

USDA RDI = 11 mg
WHO RNI as low as 4 mg

So it's just like I guessed, it turns out that WHO is 30% of USDA.

If you read the WHO documents, you will see how impressive it is.

Someone else said it already, "I don't eat based on charts" good thinking.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/21/2007 11:51PM by fresh.

I agree with fresh,

its ADMITTED that all the info, regardless of infulence, falsification etc.. is based on what everyone is already eating !

my take, is that people should do their best to intake as many nutrients as they think they need...to intake enough fat as to regulate their detox and not push their boundries too prematurely. to eat foods they enjoy and to not fear foods they enjoy. to not worry about their weight, since gaining weight(waste) is neigh impossible if your body is truly in a cleansing state (muscle of course is another thing).

Also a bit more 'extreme' perhaps, but there is NO reason to lose nutrients if the body is not expelling waste, at that state, it is not naive/ludricous to believe that the body has all it needs...its all the toxic junk/thoughts that block this from being a reality.

the simplest way to 'prove' this is regular folks can't even eat simple for 1 day without feeling ill...people that have mastered their bodies can go seasons on single fruits..it has nothing to do with have a stored bounty of nutrients from eating healthy...and EVERYTHING to do with cleansing.

how much raw/plant based selenium did you get for the first 20 years of your life? how much cooked gunk did you eat that is proven to cause nutrient depletion including the 'health foods' of brown rice. legumes, etc.,.


_____________________



it could be your thoughts...

[www.writerwriterwriter.com]
[www.lulu.com]


short and sweet....and DEEP

_____________________________________________________ ...and FREE

Yes, Prism, I'm so sorry. BEAUCOUP THANKS for being so understanding and sweet about it!

That IS very interesting fresh!

Good Job!

Can you give us a link?

Nah, I'm gonna make you work for it. :-)

just go to the WHO website and start digging.

didn't take long.

I can't see how the RDAs are valid. I took plenty of supplements for years and felt terrible anyway.

The RDAs might be perfectly correct or they might be way off - either way, I don't see how they can be applied to a healthy raw vegan person.


The reason quantities of nutrients are needed is to process some other nutrient, which is in turn required to deal with the load of crap (fat, chloresterol, chemicals, etc) a person eats and around and around the mulberry bush.

Think of it algebraically and it makes more sense.

When healthy raw vegans are the subjects of nutrient requirement testing, I'll believe what I'm told. Till then, it's just about the wrong amounts for diets that come from the slaughterhouses and factories of artificial flavour-enhancers, etc.

The SAD diet is more work for the body so of course it needs more material. The more dishes there are to do, the more tea towels and biologically-friendly detergent you need to do them.

Dear fresh,

HM.....Men! And after I tried so hard to oblige all YOUR requests for references!

But, oh well! We women do ALL the work!

The document you refer to probably comes from the WHO, Vitamin and Mineral Requirements in Human Nutrition.

You quoted only the MINIMUM requirement for adult females and adult males.

The actual chart includes figures for people who have low, medium, and high bioavailability.

To determine bioavailability as a factor of diet, WHO explains in this document that phytates from unrefined grains lower the availability, while diets high in meat protein raises availability.

According to the document, "MODERATE availability appplies to VEGAN diets NOT primarily on unrefined cereal grains, or high extraction-rate flours. (emphasis mine)

The requirement range for a female teenager (including Rawfrancois) corresponding to HIGH availability/MODERATE availability/LOW availability is 4.3mg/7.2/14.4mg.
For a male teenager: 5.1mg/8.6mg/17.1mg.

For an adult female: 3.0mg/4.9mg/9.8mg
For an adult male: 4.2mg/7.0mg/14.0mg

For pregnant women, the range is from 3.4mg to 20mg, depending on the trimester and the bioavailability, with a range of 6.0mg - 20mg being the recommendation during the third trimester.

For lactating women, the range is 4.3 to 19.0, depending on the # of months a woman has been lactating and the bioavailability.

The official RDA/RDI is 15mg for all adults, according to several sources including nutritiondata.com and lenntech.com.

Lenntech.com/recommended-daily-intake states, "Values from the World Health Organization (WHO) may be somewhat lower than those of the FDA"....

So, bottom line, if a person figures they're in the high bioavailability range (rather than medium assigned to vegans with low grain consumption according to the WHO documents), then most won't need even 50% of the RDA.

IF these documents are accurate, I think it's probably reasonable to assume that a raw food vegan WOULD be in the high bioavailability range as long as they're 100% raw vegan. If a person is mostly raw vegan, but eating some grains, then their bioavailability for zinc would be lower and they'll need more zinc. If a person is vegan and eating quite a bit of grains, according to WHO, they would land in the low bioavailability range, and need the highest recommended level for zinc.

That's all according to WHO. It's up to people reading this to believe it or not.

Thanks fresh for finding it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2007 06:36AM by suncloud.