a smorgasbord of memes

[Guest guest]

I feel like I've been getting pummeled lately for my views.

Rather than playing whack-a-mole and hitting all the posts

individually, I want to present a few thoughts in this one.

Does this " risk " missing specific points? Absolutely!

 

But, I'm not interested in arguing with a non-receptive

crowd. As others have noted on this board before, it's

often rather adversarial, as if everyone wants to be the

group guru.

 

So, for those who actually give a damn and are not asking

questions merely as bait, here you go:

 

Chocolate/Coffee: I've always liked these as unprocessed

and in an as close to the grove state as is possible.

My first taste of coffee was as a young teen. It was

black, and I liked it. We were not, however, permitted

to have it any more regularly than sips from the adults.

I do believe they have health-promoting aspects, at least

on their own (i.e., without added dairy and fat). And no,

this is not because I like the taste! Geez.

 

Wine: Similarly, I believe wine, in moderation, can be

a healthy addition to the diet. Resveratrol is one

possible reason and is getting a lot of good press and

is being studied regularly. However, even the alcohol

itself has been shown to have benefit.

 

Enzymes/Auras: What I object to, and that initially

turned me off to raw foodism with regard to enzymes

is that we have a limited supply, etc.. This does

not make me " anti-enzyme. " It means I don't buy the

pseudo-science behind the theory. And pretty pictures

of electromagnetic auras definitely strike me as new-

agey. Reminds me of the water images where the guy

either thought negative or positive.

 

I previously posted this way back in message #28026:

 

==========

 

Dr. Joel Fuhrman, author of Eat To Live, a 50-50 raw/cooked diet:

 

http://snipurl.com/1972s (Amazon link)

 

has this to say about the enzyme theory:

 

( from http://www.drfuhrman.com/faq/question.aspx?sid=16 & qindex=4 )

 

" Another fallacy promoted in the raw food movement and on the web is

that the fragile heat-sensitive enzymes contained in the plants we

eat catalyze chemical reactions that occur in humans and aid in

digestion of the food. This is not true. Plant foods do not supply

enzymes that aid in their digestion when consumed by animals. Our

body supplies exactly the precise amount of enzymes needed for

digestion; we are not ill equipped to digest normal food. The plant

enzymes are broken down into simpler molecules by our own powerful

digestive juices and even those that are absorbed as peptide size

pieces (or with some biologic function) do not function to catalyze

human functions. So it is not true that eating raw food demands less

enzyme production by your body. A healthy body produces the precise

amount of enzymes needed to digest the ingested food appropriately

and the enzymes our body uses for other processes are unique to our

human needs and are not present in plants. We make what we need from

the proper materials. "

 

==========

 

I recently found this interesting article too:

http://www.foodprocessing.com/articles/2005/506.html

 

 

-Erin " 77% RAW "

http://www.zenpawn.com/vegblog

http://www.vegandonelight.com