Have you read the criticism of raw foodism at the end of the article? I was wondering what you thought of it. I really want to get healthy, & I have a feeling that incorporating mostly raw food into my diet will help, but I want to be sure. Thanks!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/21/2007 11:32PM by wrenbrrd.

well heres how i see it i can take my chances trying something different that is proving to work for quite alot of people or i can choose to go back to eating the standard diet of which is DEFINITELY proven not to be working for most people

without sounding like a broken record... there is nothing weird or obscure or abnormal about eating raw fruit and vegetables .. every health system in the world advocates it

i'll take my chances with the raw food version of life

...Jodi, the banana eating buddhist




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/22/2007 06:02AM by Jgunn.

Oh, I agree... but I wonder if it's a case of "too much of anything is never good" thing. Anyway, I'm going to try it out for a period of time & see what happens. Thanks for your response!

wikipedia is not a very good or accurate source to get your raw vegan info from, anybody can write or re-write what ever they want about it.

I would recommend you get support here, live the raw lifestyle for yourself and find what works for you and maybe get a couple of books written by people with thoughts that resonate with you.

F1

The Fruitarian One Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wikipedia is not a very good or accurate source to
> get your raw vegan info from, anybody can write or
> re-write what ever they want about it.
>
> F1


Very good point and I imagine most that contribute to that page aren't experienced raw fooders anyhow.

That's true but, by the same token, then you experienced raw foodists could edit it as well. If there's misinformation in there, please do everyone a service by setting it right. Thanks!

Try eating more raw fruits and vegetables. If you feel better, great. If not, then you know it didn't work for you.

I'm not selling anything.

I eat a primarily raw fruit and vegetable diet because I feel better this way. This way is the best for me.

If you are truly curious about whether this is the right path for you, try it.

I don't care if it doesn't work for others. It works for me so I'm going to keep doing it. I would never change the way I eat based on what works for others. This is about how I feel.

Wikipedia or Encyclopedia Britanica couldn't convince me that I don't really feel better eating this way.


Lee

Wikipedia has lost its integrity. Within the last 6 months there was an investigation where a computer programmer developed software to track the edits to wikipedia back to the IP address of the editor. He found a staggering amount of edits were coming from huge corporate interests and conservative political groups. There has been an agressive effort on the part of corporate Amerika to rewrite their history and delete any research or views that run counter to what they are trying to sell. After reading this I have relegated Wikipedia to the same level as Fox News. If I can find the link to the article about Wikipedia I will post it, but you should be able to google it too.

wrenbrrd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's true but, by the same token, then you
> experienced raw foodists could edit it as well.
> If there's misinformation in there, please do
> everyone a service by setting it right. Thanks!

In an ideal world that sounds great and all but unfortunatly, not everyone is pro-raw food, many non-raw people feel that raw foodist that promote the raw lifestyle or share raw info even to other raw foodists are promoting information that's dangerous to the health of others and they think they are doing people a favour by re-writing/editing even trashing these articles, I've seen it countless times when experienced or aspiring raw foodists have written good information on there only to have some disgruntled naysayer trashing the raw vegan/Fruitarian lifestyle and re-writing/editing the whole thing....a friend of mine did it also, he told me he was doing it and was really proud of himself for contributing, even though I warned him of what happens, he wrote a lengthy and informative article on Fruitarianism only to have some naysayer re-edit and trash the whole thing within minutes, exactly the same thing happened to a few vegan buddies of mine that were writing articles on veganism.

F1

MauiGreg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wikipedia has lost its integrity. Within the last
> 6 months there was an investigation where a
> computer programmer developed software to track
> the edits to wikipedia back to the IP address of
> the editor. He found a staggering amount of edits
> were coming from huge corporate interests and
> conservative political groups. There has been an
> agressive effort on the part of corporate Amerika
> to rewrite their history and delete any research
> or views that run counter to what they are trying
> to sell. After reading this I have relegated
> Wikipedia to the same level as Fox News. If I can
> find the link to the article about Wikipedia I
> will post it, but you should be able to google it
> too.


I agree, it is on the level with fox news. Wikipedia is a war zone for information; it isn't democratic or open or "ubiased" in the least, and inevitably, as with everything else, those with right-wing attitudes, against life, against kindness and truth and health are the ones who will win out because they will choose very violent methods to control the information, and they will never relinquish that control willingly.

To dream earth & Maui Greg: That is so interesting! Thanks for sharing that info! Lots of food for thought (pun intended?)

Lee123: You're totally right, & that's why I AM giving this a try. I feel myself detoxing already, after only two days!

Thanks everyone!

wikipedia is amazing

. the very fact that there is a tool that allows one to redefine...what in the past could be standadardized as law is quite a step up.

. something being modified/watered down/digitally removed (in a temporary sense) is not the same as the ability for information to be immediately destroyed in a physical sense.

- the fact that the corporate folks..know how to hold on to power...or suppress knowledge about health...isn't too supprising...but they only have so many resources

...which will eventually squander in the face of the infinite.

and of many un-refutable EXAMPLES.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/24/2007 05:06AM by anaken.

Nice counter argument Anaken.
I feel that Wiki is a great source of reference, but that when using it one should take the same responcibility for the information that one would apply to anything else, i.e take what works for you !

People on this board understand the necessity for this when assimilating dietary information so why is it different for anything else ?

Has anyone noticed that wiki seems so great when it's for info you know little to nothing about and so awful when it's for info you know a lot about?

JMO.