RE: cipes are GOOD! Bored with raw

[Guest guest]

Perhaps the ultimatum statement regarding focus

isn't correct. Didn't Gandhi state something about

god revealing itself through food? If that is a revelatory

statement, then we should focus on our food.

 

Then again, I am a food fascist!

 

tev

 

Laurie Swanson <laurie wrote:

Well, Neal, when people post looking for help with staying on raw or

dealing with emotional eating...

 

Laurie

 

rawfood , neal wrote:

>

> On Tuesday 10 July 2007 23:14, Jen V wrote:

> > But what Elchanan and others, I believe, are saying, is

> > that you are compromising something by eating them. So long as your

focus

> > is on food and not on true health, then you are still sort of a

prisoner to

> > food,

>

 

 

____________________

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/]

_____________________

 

http://www.vegconnect.com/

 

_____________________

 

 

 

Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Travel.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Erica,

 

I see my name in what you wrote, however, I have to ask.......... " Are you

talking to me?? " LOL

 

If you are, I have to say, I can not speak to ...... " why people (not just me)

would feel the need to post the definition of fascism as well as fanaticism in

this group's forum. "

 

Perhaps I am missing the context of this sentence you wrote. I may have missed

the post(s) that this refers to.

 

Care to elaborate?

 

Thanks,

 

Jeannie

 

 

your time is the most cherished gift of all, tomorrow is promised to no one.

 

 

 

 

School Of Rawk <schoolofrawk

rawfood

Thursday, July 12, 2007 11:49:54 AM

Re: cipes are GOOD! [Raw Food] Bored with raw

 

 

I would simply ask you, Jeannie, actually, why people (not just me) would feel

the need to post the definition of fascism as well as fanaticism in this group's

forum. That's all.

 

 

 

 

Don't be flakey. Get Mail for Mobile and

always stay connected to friends.

 

 

[Guest guest]

em wrote:

> >Now, if I do eat som guacamole from a restaurant, and it

> > has garlic and/or onions, I REALLY notice. My heart seems

> > to beat a little faster and my mouth feels a bit burned.

 

Not to fly in the face of what anybody else has said(Heaven

forbid!!!), but....

if you are having this kind of reaction, you might consider

the possibility that you are allergic to something, or (even more fun)

that you have candidiasis!

 

If you are allergic to some food (or ingredient in that food), you

may have a quick reaction (if you are lucky). You may even find the

taste of the food unpleasant (this is how my milk *protein* allergy

was finally identified -- I cannot even bear the smell of milk or

fresh milk products, such as cottage cheese, American cheese, and

farmer's cheese) If a food is distasteful to you, do not question

it... simply avoid it! If you get a weird reaction from eating a

food, stop eating it!!!

 

Now, if you do not have a weird or unpleasant reaction to food, go

ahead and eat it.

 

Traditional herbal medicine suggests that, for example, eating garlic

is good for you. Along comes X Guru, who claims that garlic is bad

for you. What do you do? If garlic is the way to go for your cure,

have some, in a raw/natural hygiene meal, and see what happens. If you

get weird results (intestinal gas would be the most likely), don't eat

garlic anymore.

On the other hand, if you get a tingle on your tongue from eating

garlic, hot peppers, or onions, consider that you are finally noticing

the wonderful taste sensations of said food, and [then] watch to see

if you have some weird reaction or not. the probability is that you

will not. Tingling on your tongue is not a bad thing unless you do

not like it, or unless it signals the start of *other* unpleasant

symptoms.

 

Garlic *will* give you a tingle, particularly if you eat enough it at

a time. So will hot peppers, onion, and a lot of other things.

 

Red bell peppers will notify your taste buds of a sweet taste... does

this mean that you should avoid them?

 

The best way to know what food is bad for you (personally) is to eat

some (if you want to), and pay attention to what happens. If the

reaction is unpleasant, do not eat that food again. If the reaction

is not necessarily unpleasant, eat the food as you will.

I'll give an unrelated example we all know: I do not like the feeling

in my mouth if I make a very proper " z " sound (I never have liked that

feeling, since I was a child) I say " s " instead, because that " z "

feeling is disgusting in my mouth.

A food example might be: I eat marinated kale with garlic. If I am

not uncomfortable (uncomfortable means, here, gassy), I can eat some more.

 

Caron wrote:

> I noticed this when I had a roast

<snip>

 

 

Has it at all occurred to you that your reaction might have been from

the meat?

 

One of the problems I see in the raw food community is that people

have issues (as all humans will) and when they eat something, they

look at the wrong part of the picture and then blame the rest of the

picture.

 

If you are supposedly raw, and you eat a roast, and then you have a

reaction, would it not be smarter to look at your raction to eating

the read meat than to hasten to the idea that the problem was that you

wree pregnant and there were more pregmant people to help out.

[Guest guest]

-

prettysmartideas

>Has it at all occurred to you that your reaction might have been from

the meat?

 

It occured to me that, as the reaction occured immediately after my first

bite, which happened to be a small piece of roast sweet red potato with

gravy on it, that perhaps it might have been from that.

 

>If you are supposedly raw, and you eat a roast, and then you have a

reaction, would it not be smarter to look at your raction to eating

the read meat than to hasten to the idea that the problem was that you

wree pregnant and there were more pregmant people to help out.

 

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by this?

 

Caron

[Guest guest]

This is in response to your question about people expressing their thoughts,

Jeannie. My counter-question, because I feel I've expressed the answer, as have

others, is why would people have to post these definitions, saying this is their

summary of this group? Why would ANYone get that impression at all if you are

right? The problem is not posting, it's the monopoly of a supposedly open group

that only promotes one very extreme form of raw foodism that only works for some

and causes deficiencies in the other. The OTHER problem of concern is that no

feasible drawbacks are listed for that extreme form unless others bring it up.

It is promoted as though that one radical model works for all and all legit

reports of health problems it has led to in others are not tolerated or

discussed and are rejected or excused. THAT is actually the biggest, most

alarming concern. It's as if promoting this one diet is more important than

promoting health for all, and it is a huge turn-off and

not a positive reflection on those who are so insistent it's working even when

people deteriorate on it. Care to comment on WHY that is? We're all waiting on

it. Erica

 

 

 

 

Luggage? GPS? Comic books?

Check out fitting gifts for grads at Search.

 

 

[Guest guest]

I tend to concur with Erica. Not only did I not sense

any rage in her posts, I see that she exhibits thoughtfulness

and concern. I think it unfair to ad hominemly discredit

her posts with the label " rage. "

 

I am sure all of us can nod in agreement that Elchanan's

contribution to the forum is appreciated. His great breadth

of knowledge, insights, experience, and, his willingness

to share all that freely is a credit to his character. Still, I do find

that there is a tendency to state in absolute terms. Such statements

rub me wrong. I can't help it, I am part eraser.

 

Regarding the recipe issue, it is simply too dismissive to

wave away a long time human behavior. Ralph Waldo stated

that " all sorts of things go together to make up the wind and

weather " and I believe our finite minds haven't enwrapped all

that it is enwrappable.

 

As an artist, I am constantly amazed at the sublties I continously

discover when I revisit a work; subtleties that I " missed " before. I

suggest there is more than meets the eye and that we should be

more cautious about our dismissiveness.

 

tev

 

Erica <schoolofrawk wrote:

" just because he posts on things a lot and tries to show another point

of view doesn't make him a fanatic. "

 

Fanatic:

(n.) 1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as

in religion or politics (or natural hygiene)

 

Another point of view? The whole problem that many are having is that

no other points than his are seemingly allowed. Are you following that

at all? Not upset, but here to clarify... Erica

 

 

 

____________________

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/]

_____________________

 

http://www.vegconnect.com/

 

_____________________

 

 

 

Get the toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Great post, Tev, and THANK YOU! :-)

I agree that we get along more than we all don't get along, but I do show

alarm at some of these absolutes, as do many others. :-)

 

 

 

 

 

Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.

Try the Mail Beta.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Elchanan, I dispute this design theory. Please

cite your data from the " Designer " . Thanks. Oh,

and please do not suggest " Nature " is the designer.

It is simply not true.

 

tev

 

Elchanan <Elchanan wrote:

Hi Bryan,

 

I agree with all that you say here ... except that what David says about

smoothies is sorely misguided. To bypass our own design, in this case to

bypass the act of chewing, is not productive in the long run. Liquefied

diets are for people who cannot chew ... infants, those who have no teeth,

and for those whose digestive systems are virtually in shreds.

 

 

Best,

Elchanan

 

 

____________________

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/]

_____________________

 

http://www.vegconnect.com/

 

_____________________

 

 

 

Building a website is a piece of cake.

Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Liquefied

> diets are for people who cannot chew ... infants, those who have no

teeth,

> and for those whose digestive systems are virtually in shreds.

>

Liquified diets are for those who are looking to strengthen their

digestion, period, and to enhance their assimiliation/absorption.

[Guest guest]

Nope. You cannot strengthen any function by underutilizing that function.

There were NO liquefied diets until very recent time, from an historical

perspective ... it's all just marketing arising from new products and

technologies, not a bit more.

 

Best,

Elchanan

_____

 

rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of

Erica

Friday, July 13, 2007 4:16 PM

rawfood

Re: cipes are GOOD! [Raw Food] Bored with raw

 

 

Liquefied

> diets are for people who cannot chew ... infants, those who have no

teeth,

> and for those whose digestive systems are virtually in shreds.

>

Liquified diets are for those who are looking to strengthen their

digestion, period, and to enhance their assimiliation/absorption.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Tev,

 

I would like to make a suggestion, not just directed at you but others, just

as y ou disagree with Elchanan as would like him to cite his data when you or

anyone else disagree can you add the data to back up your thoughts and beliefs

just to have a full picture on both sides?

 

 

 

tev treowlufu <goraw808 wrote:

Elchanan, I dispute this design theory. Please

cite your data from the " Designer " . Thanks. Oh,

and please do not suggest " Nature " is the designer.

It is simply not true.

 

tev

 

Elchanan <Elchanan wrote:

Hi Bryan,

 

I agree with all that you say here ... except that what David says about

smoothies is sorely misguided. To bypass our own design, in this case to

bypass the act of chewing, is not productive in the long run. Liquefied

diets are for people who cannot chew ... infants, those who have no teeth,

and for those whose digestive systems are virtually in shreds.

 

Best,

Elchanan

 

________

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/]

________

 

http://www.vegconnect.com/

 

________

 

 

Building a website is a piece of cake.

Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Bryan,

 

Smoothies are great and I have them regularly. However, it's important

to give the pearly whites something to do. Teeth need to be worked

daily. It does a mouth good.

 

Janet

 

rawfood , Bryan Au <rawbryan wrote:

>

> Elchanan,

>

> I hear you and agree but there are breatharians and some people

who only do urine and swear that is the most optimal and the best in

health too, then there are sun gazers, but not everyone does those

things or even wants to...everyone is at their level and everyone has

their little pleasures and joys...for you it is different for someone

else and everyone also has different health goals, and reasons...I

agree with you and hear you but recipes are fun and most people are

into it even if technically it may not be the most super optimal way.

David Wolf recently says that doing Smoothies instead of eating meals

is good too because it is fast, easy to digest but again most people

would probably not replace all their meals with smoothies even with

all the benefits although great advice...

>

> Bryan

>

> Elchanan <Elchanan wrote:

> Well, then, I must be not be real, and I must be well

acquainted with

> nobody!

>

> Bryan, learning the distinction between stimulation and health still

lies

> before you ... you need only open to new possibilities.

>

> Best,

> Elchanan

>

> _____

>

> rawfood [rawfood ] On

Behalf Of

> Bryan Au

> Tuesday, July 10, 2007 9:33 AM

> rawfood

> Re:cipes are GOOD! [Raw Food] Bored with raw

>

> Ok I hear what everyone is saying but lets be REAL! No one is going

to sit

> around and eat like one thing, then another and maybe one more and

that is

> it,

>

>