Vitamin D requirements

March 6, 2007

I totally disagree with eating fish. Plants do not have pain receptors

and nervous systems. That is a really poor comparison. The world is

about " murder " as much as we make of it, Joe. Honestly, then people

should be dining out down at the morgue under that pretense. Joe,

please go to www.youtube.com and watch the movie EARTHLINGS. It is

available in 3 parts for free and is socially critical. We should

really be opposing wool and leather, too, which sounds ridiculous

until we look into the industries and how they are made. Absolutely

cruel.

March 6, 2007

Well now I'm just embarrassed in front of everyone haha! Just

kidding

Yeah you're absolutely right about everything...this girl is a

firecracker everyone so watch out! hehe

Remember I'm a scientist and we are the hardest people to teach

anything new! We're also the hardest people to point out the obvious to.

I'll watch that video tonight!

Cheers

rawfood , " Erica " <schoolofrawk wrote:

>

> I totally disagree with eating fish. Plants do not have pain receptors

> and nervous systems. That is a really poor comparison. The world is

> about " murder " as much as we make of it, Joe. Honestly, then people

> should be dining out down at the morgue under that pretense. Joe,

> please go to www.youtube.com and watch the movie EARTHLINGS. It is

> available in 3 parts for free and is socially critical. We should

> really be opposing wool and leather, too, which sounds ridiculous

> until we look into the industries and how they are made. Absolutely

> cruel.

>

March 7, 2007

Totally true.

That does NOT mean that some rawfoodists don't require respectable

ones, though.

2 different issues.

March 8, 2007

Hey Joe, here is an excerpt from the group description:

" This group is here to support people wanting to learn how to eat a Healthy

Raw Food Diet. Just because something is raw doesn't necessarily mean it is the

best thing for us. This group supports a Vegan Raw Food Diet. Please don't come

here trying to promote other diets. "

Please explain why you think you are excluded from this charter?

BTW, there is nothing humane about killing an animal for food.

tev

Joe Postma <joepostma wrote:

As for vitamin D and B12, a true Natural Hygienist gets those from

animal products! You heard right! There is absolutely nothing wrong

with an organic steak or whatever from an animal that was raised

humanely, as long as you understand that most of your diet should come

from raw food. We also use small amounts of butter.

____________________

The experience of dynamic religious living transforms the mediocre individual

into a personality of idealistic power. Religion ministers to the progress of

all through fostering the progress of each individual, and the progress of each

is augmented through the achievement of all. [The Urantia Book:

1094:1][http://www.urantia.org/]

_____________________

TRUELOVE @

http://www.vegconnect.com/

_____________________

Bored stiff? Loosen up...

Download and play hundreds of games for free on Games.

March 9, 2007

> Hey Joe, here is an excerpt from the group description:

>

> " This group is here to support people wanting to learn how to eat

a Healthy Raw Food Diet. Just because something is raw doesn't

necessarily mean it is the best thing for us. This group supports a

Vegan Raw Food Diet. Please don't come here trying to promote other

diets. "

>

> Please explain why you think you are excluded from this charter?

>

> BTW, there is nothing humane about killing an animal for food.

>

> tev

Well, ask the same of other people promoting supplements; that also

goes against the charter does it not? Supplementation does not fit

into Natural Hygiene anywhere, as far as I know...but if you want to

start talking about exceptions, then we all can, as I did.

If you paid attention to the important parts of any of my posts, I was

stressing the importance of raw food (fruit and veggies) throughout.

Are you a moderator tev?

There are lots of ways to define humane, we pick the one that suits us

best. Do not think for an instant that you are not guilty of that. I

freely admit I am, without qualification. Are you honest enough to do

the same, without qualification?

Let us put aside our bleeding hearts and decadent 1st world ideas of

morality for a moment.

I proudly admit I am a well read, brilliant scientist (astrophysics),

so what I am about to talk about comes from some the most well

respected evolutionary scientists and research in the world. I study

this as a hobby among my other endeavors, and have studied natural

history on my own for a longer time than I have been in astrophysics

(12 years). I know I am as foibled as anyone else, so please spare

telling me. But I know the extent of my personal library.

Please just relax, this is a kind and well meaning, loving science lesson.

Our species has been been on earth in its currently recognized form

for somewhere around 100,000 years. We know from archeology that

humans have hunted animals for food throughout that period.

Chimpanzees and humans speciated from our latest common ancestor (LCA)

somewhere around 1-2 million years ago, and there is about 2%

difference in our DNA. It is estimated that DNA " evolves " at the rate

of 0.01% per 10,000 years or so. A small amount of DNA change can

cause huge differences in a species behavior and appearance. We know

for a fact that chimps eat meat occasionally, and so did we as we

became homo sapiens sapiens. This tells us that the human/chimp LCA

was an occasional meat eater too, so this goes back 2 million years.

Before the human/chimp speciation was the human/chimp/orangutan and

gorilla (a little further back) speciation, 5 millions years ago or

so. However, the orangutan/gorilla side of the speciation is, as far

as I know, exclusively vegan. This means, then, that the

human/chimp/orangutan/gorilla LCA was either exclusively vegan or an

occasional meat eater, like us. All this is perfect territory for

debating, at least partially, how the speciation occurred. One side

found a niche being exclusively vegan, while the other ate meat

occasionally. There are obviously lots of other factors, but this was

a small part or a small result of it, in any case. How much meat it

ate and if the human/chimp/orangutan/gorilla LCA ate meat at all is a

good question which we can also consider. If you consider the fact

that the amount of meat a human or chimp needs to eat in order to

maintain ZERO deficiency and 100% health is SO SMALL, and that

gorillas and orangutans are quite healthy without eating any meat at

all, then it is likely the h/c/o/g LCA was vegan, or at least ate meat

extremely! rarely. Thats about 5 millions years ago. In the more

recent homo sapiens line, it appears that we have subsided on a diet

heavier in meat for the last hundred thousand or so years, given the

proliferance of hunting utensils found in archaeological sites, and

our known preponderance for it in written history extending back 5000

years or so. In 100,000 years, our DNA would have adapted

approximately 0.1% towards that lifestyle, which is not insignificant.

So those are some basic, relatively well known facts. Dispute them

among yourselves if you wish, but I can suggest some great books if

you truly have an open mind and want to learn something new. Please

ask, I would would be happy to discuss in another forum or through email.

So the most common sense question is: Do humans (we) develop any

deficiencies, NOT eating meat.

First let me say: DON'T GET ME WRONG HERE! I AM A RAW FOODIST (no

meat) 99.9% of the time! I LOVE IT! I deserve to post here as much

as anyone, but we must not be blindly afraid of the word " meat " .

However, I've been challenged, so I'm being honest and giving a

science lesson.

Getting back to the question: I would think, honestly, that most

nutritionists, even raw food ones, would say humans do develop certain

deficiencies when not eating meat for a prolonged period. The only

" common sense " conclusion which can be made from this is that humans

have adapted, have evolved, to eat small amounts of meat. Settle

down. I want to emphasize, " SMALL AMOUNTS " . The mass market/factory

farm cruelty stuff we do to animals is utterly sick, twisted, and

inexcusable. There is no need for it whatsoever.

The deficiency seems to be in only one or two vitamins - D and B12 are

the only ones I can think of. So I think our adaptation to eating

meat is only a small one. I mean TINY!

If we want to become truly exclusively vegan as a species, it is going

to take several hundred thousand or millions years to adapt our

physiological systems to operate that way without deficiency

100%...other metabolic pathways will need to develop or disappear in

order to take care of the deficiency. If you are open to using

technology to assist health, then supplements are they way to go, but

if everyone did that then eventually our entire species would need

supplements from birth...in the womb even...and that's not a future I

like. The only supplement you should need is natural food. It is

ultimately more natural to simply eat meat as little as you can in

order to keep from having a b12 or D deficiency...it is in our

evolutionary and biological makeup to do so (in only a SMALL way).

I stated in another post that the body has a b12 reserve for 2-5

years, so this is likely as often as you need to eat meat...BUT, good

quality, organically and lovingly grown, meat. I am sorry animals

have to die too, but it happens EVERYWHERE in nature, and we are PART

of that nature, unless you prefer the supplement-dependent future

scenario...then you can take us out of nature. But I like nature, I

think it is beautiful, truly, even the death and cycle of life stuff.

It is immeasurable in its beauty. Its amazing beauty is what drew

me to become one who studies some of the most fundamental properties

of the universe itself. But like I said, that factory farm stuff is

NOT natural, and it is sick. There is a difference between

factory-farming, and the concept of eating meat in general. Read that

last sentence over again.

So, I said Natural Hygienists will eat meat occasionally. Common

sense is much of, though not exclusively, the basis Natural Hygiene.

I consider myself somewhat of a Natural Philosopher, and though

factory farming makes me sick, I must be open to the idea that our

side of the human/chimp-orangutan/gorilla speciation has ate meat in

SMALL quantities for millions of years. This isn't something to be

angry about towards me or anyone else, it is a simple, gentle fact of

life, one to enjoy and consider calmly and happily in its discovery

and acceptance.

I DO believe a future without ANY meat consumption is a good one, and

I wish so much that the wholesale slaughter, murder even, of countless

animals would stop. But it is foolish to jump on the murder bandwagon

and decry anyone who doesn't follow. If you were out for a walk in

nature and were eaten by a mountain lion or bear (which happens to

people a few times a year here in Alberta), would you call that lion

or bear a murderer? Interesting concept. If a poverty stricken

family in some God-forsaken country killed a deer to feed themselves,

could they really be called murderers? Factory farming and wanton

cruelty IS sick and IS murder, but not all meat consumption is murder.

For humans, a SMALL, TINY amount of meat consumption, from properly

raised animals, should not be considered murder without reproach. And

when properly understood, it can be a small, TINY part of Natural Hygiene.

I started posting on this group answering people's questions about

fasting and food combinations etc etc, but I feel I have been attacked

many times in response. I post in a very positive, raw food centered

manner. I find other people posts back to me violent and vindictive.

I simply give my opinion, while others seem to attack my opinion

without giving any real good ones of their own.

People seem to attack my posts, as if mine were subjective and without

sense. It is astounding that they either 1: Don't have an opinion of

their own, or 2: Don't realize their own opinions are so obviously

just as equally as subjective as my own.

So please, instead of attacking each others subjective opinions, just

state your own opinion, and leave others out of it if you can't be

positive, happy, and loving in your address to other people's posts.

If you've read any of my posts, I am obviously a raw foodist, so I do

not understand why you chose (tev) to take the time to single me out

for some sort of punishment. It seems rather angry. In fact, that is

the impression that I have gotten in a couple of responses towards me

several times.

I have little desire to visit this place anymore...that's only after a

week or so.

Blessings and All the Best

Joe

March 9, 2007

Great post/lesson! Thanks Joe!

rawfood , " Joe Postma " <joepostma wrote:

> Well, ask the same of other people promoting supplements; that also

> goes against the charter does it not? Supplementation does not fit

> into Natural Hygiene anywhere, as far as I know...but if you want to

> start talking about exceptions, then we all can, as I did.

>

> If you paid attention to the important parts of any of my posts, I was

> stressing the importance of raw food (fruit and veggies) throughout.

>

> Are you a moderator tev?

>

> There are lots of ways to define humane, we pick the one that suits us

> best. Do not think for an instant that you are not guilty of that. I

> freely admit I am, without qualification. Are you honest enough to do

> the same, without qualification?

>

> Let us put aside our bleeding hearts and decadent 1st world ideas of

> morality for a moment.

> I proudly admit I am a well read, brilliant scientist (astrophysics),

> so what I am about to talk about comes from some the most well

> respected evolutionary scientists and research in the world. I study

> this as a hobby among my other endeavors, and have studied natural

> history on my own for a longer time than I have been in astrophysics

> (12 years). I know I am as foibled as anyone else, so please spare

> telling me. But I know the extent of my personal library.

>

> Please just relax, this is a kind and well meaning, loving science

lesson.

> Our species has been been on earth in its currently recognized form

> for somewhere around 100,000 years. We know from archeology that

> humans have hunted animals for food throughout that period.

> Chimpanzees and humans speciated from our latest common ancestor (LCA)

> somewhere around 1-2 million years ago, and there is about 2%

> difference in our DNA. It is estimated that DNA " evolves " at the rate

> of 0.01% per 10,000 years or so. A small amount of DNA change can

> cause huge differences in a species behavior and appearance. We know

> for a fact that chimps eat meat occasionally, and so did we as we

> became homo sapiens sapiens. This tells us that the human/chimp LCA

> was an occasional meat eater too, so this goes back 2 million years.

> Before the human/chimp speciation was the human/chimp/orangutan and

> gorilla (a little further back) speciation, 5 millions years ago or

> so. However, the orangutan/gorilla side of the speciation is, as far

> as I know, exclusively vegan. This means, then, that the

> human/chimp/orangutan/gorilla LCA was either exclusively vegan or an

> occasional meat eater, like us. All this is perfect territory for

> debating, at least partially, how the speciation occurred. One side

> found a niche being exclusively vegan, while the other ate meat

> occasionally. There are obviously lots of other factors, but this was

> a small part or a small result of it, in any case. How much meat it

> ate and if the human/chimp/orangutan/gorilla LCA ate meat at all is a

> good question which we can also consider. If you consider the fact

> that the amount of meat a human or chimp needs to eat in order to

> maintain ZERO deficiency and 100% health is SO SMALL, and that

> gorillas and orangutans are quite healthy without eating any meat at

> all, then it is likely the h/c/o/g LCA was vegan, or at least ate meat

> extremely! rarely. Thats about 5 millions years ago. In the more

> recent homo sapiens line, it appears that we have subsided on a diet

> heavier in meat for the last hundred thousand or so years, given the

> proliferance of hunting utensils found in archaeological sites, and

> our known preponderance for it in written history extending back 5000

> years or so. In 100,000 years, our DNA would have adapted

> approximately 0.1% towards that lifestyle, which is not insignificant.

> So those are some basic, relatively well known facts. Dispute them

> among yourselves if you wish, but I can suggest some great books if

> you truly have an open mind and want to learn something new. Please

> ask, I would would be happy to discuss in another forum or through

email.

> So the most common sense question is: Do humans (we) develop any

> deficiencies, NOT eating meat.

> First let me say: DON'T GET ME WRONG HERE! I AM A RAW FOODIST (no

> meat) 99.9% of the time! I LOVE IT! I deserve to post here as much

> as anyone, but we must not be blindly afraid of the word " meat " .

> However, I've been challenged, so I'm being honest and giving a

> science lesson.

> Getting back to the question: I would think, honestly, that most

> nutritionists, even raw food ones, would say humans do develop certain

> deficiencies when not eating meat for a prolonged period. The only

> " common sense " conclusion which can be made from this is that humans

> have adapted, have evolved, to eat small amounts of meat. Settle

> down. I want to emphasize, " SMALL AMOUNTS " . The mass market/factory

> farm cruelty stuff we do to animals is utterly sick, twisted, and

> inexcusable. There is no need for it whatsoever.

> The deficiency seems to be in only one or two vitamins - D and B12 are

> the only ones I can think of. So I think our adaptation to eating

> meat is only a small one. I mean TINY!

>

> If we want to become truly exclusively vegan as a species, it is going

> to take several hundred thousand or millions years to adapt our

> physiological systems to operate that way without deficiency

> 100%...other metabolic pathways will need to develop or disappear in

> order to take care of the deficiency. If you are open to using

> technology to assist health, then supplements are they way to go, but

> if everyone did that then eventually our entire species would need

> supplements from birth...in the womb even...and that's not a future I

> like. The only supplement you should need is natural food. It is

> ultimately more natural to simply eat meat as little as you can in

> order to keep from having a b12 or D deficiency...it is in our

> evolutionary and biological makeup to do so (in only a SMALL way).

> I stated in another post that the body has a b12 reserve for 2-5

> years, so this is likely as often as you need to eat meat...BUT, good

> quality, organically and lovingly grown, meat. I am sorry animals

> have to die too, but it happens EVERYWHERE in nature, and we are PART

> of that nature, unless you prefer the supplement-dependent future

> scenario...then you can take us out of nature. But I like nature, I

> think it is beautiful, truly, even the death and cycle of life stuff.

> It is immeasurable in its beauty. Its amazing beauty is what drew

> me to become one who studies some of the most fundamental properties

> of the universe itself. But like I said, that factory farm stuff is

> NOT natural, and it is sick. There is a difference between

> factory-farming, and the concept of eating meat in general. Read that

> last sentence over again.

> So, I said Natural Hygienists will eat meat occasionally. Common

> sense is much of, though not exclusively, the basis Natural Hygiene.

> I consider myself somewhat of a Natural Philosopher, and though

> factory farming makes me sick, I must be open to the idea that our

> side of the human/chimp-orangutan/gorilla speciation has ate meat in

> SMALL quantities for millions of years. This isn't something to be

> angry about towards me or anyone else, it is a simple, gentle fact of

> life, one to enjoy and consider calmly and happily in its discovery

> and acceptance.

> I DO believe a future without ANY meat consumption is a good one, and

> I wish so much that the wholesale slaughter, murder even, of countless

> animals would stop. But it is foolish to jump on the murder bandwagon

> and decry anyone who doesn't follow. If you were out for a walk in

> nature and were eaten by a mountain lion or bear (which happens to

> people a few times a year here in Alberta), would you call that lion

> or bear a murderer? Interesting concept. If a poverty stricken

> family in some God-forsaken country killed a deer to feed themselves,

> could they really be called murderers? Factory farming and wanton

> cruelty IS sick and IS murder, but not all meat consumption is murder.

> For humans, a SMALL, TINY amount of meat consumption, from properly

> raised animals, should not be considered murder without reproach. And

> when properly understood, it can be a small, TINY part of Natural

Hygiene.

>

> I started posting on this group answering people's questions about

> fasting and food combinations etc etc, but I feel I have been attacked

> many times in response. I post in a very positive, raw food centered

> manner. I find other people posts back to me violent and vindictive.

> I simply give my opinion, while others seem to attack my opinion

> without giving any real good ones of their own.

> People seem to attack my posts, as if mine were subjective and without

> sense. It is astounding that they either 1: Don't have an opinion of

> their own, or 2: Don't realize their own opinions are so obviously

> just as equally as subjective as my own.

> So please, instead of attacking each others subjective opinions, just

> state your own opinion, and leave others out of it if you can't be

> positive, happy, and loving in your address to other people's posts.

>

> If you've read any of my posts, I am obviously a raw foodist, so I do

> not understand why you chose (tev) to take the time to single me out

> for some sort of punishment. It seems rather angry. In fact, that is

> the impression that I have gotten in a couple of responses towards me

> several times.

> I have little desire to visit this place anymore...that's only after a

> week or so.

>

> Blessings and All the Best

>

> Joe

>

March 9, 2007

Joe,

I, for one, enjoy reading ALL your posts. I too am astounded at how much

negativity is returned in posts here - the delete key works really well for me

:-). That being said, I applaud you for your posts and always look forward to

reading yours. I am sure there are others like me out here. Keep up the good

work.

Ini