Guest guest Posted September 19, 2007 Report Share Posted September 19, 2007 Actually, Janet, the " vore " names are indeed intended as design-descriptive terms. There is a large body of work on distinctions of digestive design underlying the taxonomy. The problem is that the intent becomes clouded when scientists (and others) observe what IS eaten ... which is subject to many exogenous influences. For example, the diets of most species today are influenced by human behavior. But much of what is eaten is suboptimal. Also, digestive systems can accommodate far more foods than they can process optimally. For example, a cat will eat corn voraciously when sufficiently hungry. But this should never be taken to mean that cats are well-designed to eat corn. Rather, it should be understood to mean that cats wish to survive. Best, Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of Janet FitzGerald Wednesday, September 19, 2007 2:45 PM rawfood [Raw Food] Re: Vores (great website references for both sides) Living by the design of nature, and figuring out what that design is, is the question, I believe. I believe the natural hygienists have answered that question better than any I have read to date. Also, I believe the labels " omnivore, carnivore, herbivore " are used to describe what CAN be eaten, and not what the body was DESIGNED to eat most efficiently. For those interested in learning more about natural hygiene, writings by Dr. Herbert Shelton can be found at www.soilandhealth.org. Janet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.