How to Stop Being Tricked by Bad Nutritional Science

[Guest guest]

Hi Roger,

 

I enjoyed reading what you wrote. Like you, I believe in a 100% raw lifestyle.

One question: What's your opinion about why people can begin to gain weight

when eating 100% raw, after the initial weight loss when they begin?

 

I've gained about 15 excess pounds in the last few months, and despite giving

up most nuts, all dates and bananas and similar sweet fruits, and upping my

exercise from a half hour to one hour of aerobics a day plus several times a

week of resistance exercises, I'm not losing even one pound. I can't figure it

out.

 

Judy

 

In a message dated 3/15/2005 5:27:11 PM Eastern Standard Time,

roger2 writes:

How to Stop Being Tricked by Bad Nutritional

Science

 

** Do you ever get confused by all the

conflicting raw food diet information out there?

 

** Have you been scared off eating a 100% raw

diet because of what you have read on a raw food

forum or even a raw food book?

 

** Do you want to know if the science they are

using is valid?

 

** Has your belief in Ayurvedic Medicine or the

popular Body Type Diets made you believe that

eating raw might not be the best thing for you?

 

*~*~*~*

Maybe you have those questions or similar ones.

The misinformation out there is rampant. I

believe some of the information is purposely

deceptive and designed to make you fail at doing

a raw diet.

 

Remember, who profits the most if you don't do a

raw diet? The giant prepared food industry and

the medical and pharmaceutical industry. There

are megabucks in there. I wouldn't be surprised

if some of the negative information you read is

somehow sponsored by one or both of these

industries.

 

The problem is that even well meaning raw food

proponents can often scare you from doing a raw

diet. I used to be confused by all the

conflicting raw food information out there.

 

They can't confuse me anymore. I know too much.

I've done my homework and have heard all the

arguments, many times over. It takes a lot of

knowledge, experience and good judgment to be

able to discern truth when it comes to a complex

subject like nutrition. It is very easy to be

scared off by some scientific sounding

information, unless you have a thorough

understanding of raw food nutrition.

 

In today's email, I'll give you some perspective

and show you how to look at scientific findings.

** With Healthy Skepticism and Common Sense **

 

** You'll learn some of the techniques they use

to trick you.

 

** You'll learn how to judge for yourself

whether or not the information is accurate.

 

*~*~*~*

One of my rs forwarded this email to

me. A well-known raw food leader wrote this.

However, I know that this leader does not

recommend that we go 100% raw. In his email

below, he explains the scientific reasons of why

he believes that some cooking is beneficial.

 

As you might guess, I strongly disagree about

this from a scientific, philosophical and

experiential point of view. He simply used

science to back up his belief systems. But the

problem comes when you don't have the complete

picture. You can totally distort issues when you

don't comprehend the whole. This is how science

can fool you.

 

Science can distort reality or truth. It's like

Dr. Atkins claiming his diet heavy in bacon,

butter and animal protein is healthy. Studies can

be manipulated, findings can be distorted and

that is why you get all of these scientific

sounding books contradicting themselves about a

certain diet's effectiveness.

 

There are always studies small enough in scope

that can pretty much lend credence to any

argument. This is because if you focus on only

one aspect of something scientifically you can

get very distorted results. That is why you need

to use common sense and your own experiences

along with a broad understanding of science to be

able to get to the truth of a matter.

 

The other point is that I know this author feels

that it's easier for most people to stay 80% raw

than 100%. It's a much easier recommendation and

so he may be trying to fit the science to justify

his recommendations of less than 100% raw.

 

Here are his arguments for eating some cooked

foods and below my reply. I also include some

commentary right after some of his points.

 

*~*~*~*~*

Here are some of the scientific findings that

support the health benefits of eating quickly

cooked foods compared to relying solely on a raw

foods diet:

 

(Note RH: Quickly cooking foods still does

severe cellular damage to food. It still destroys

the enzymes and it still creates toxins. The less

you cook it and at lower temperatures the less

damage that is done to the food. But if you

quickly cooked your hand, you'd be in massive

pain. The damage is significant even with quick

cooking. Don't let anyone fool you otherwise.

Cooking kills and destroys the integrity of the

food.)

 

More Carotenoids: Carotenoids are usually

hooked together with proteins or locked into

their own crystal- like structure when found in

their natural state. Heating helps break down

these structures and free carotenoids for

digestion and absorption into our cells. The

release of carotenoids through cooking can be

measured. In carrots, for example, about 40% more

carotenoids are released and made available

through cooking.

 

More Lycopene: This phytonutrient, which is

concentrated in tomatoes, is made more readily

available to the body after tomatoes are cooked.

 

More Sulfur-containing Phytonutrients: Lightly

cooking onions and garlic can help convert some

of the less beneficial sulfur-containing

phytonutrients into more beneficial ones and can

increase the variety of sulfur-containing

phytonutrients that are available to our cells.

 

(RH: The people with the highest antioxidant and

phytonutrients levels are long-term 100% raw

foodists. There are tests now that can determine

your antioxidant levels and the people with the

best results by far are 100% raw foodists.

Cooking would not improve those results in my

opinion.)

 

Fewer Alkaloids: The alkaloid content of

nightshades is problematic for some individuals.

Cooking can lower the alkaloid content by as much

as 40 to 50%.

 

(RH: The body can handle toxins. Most of the

toxins we deal with are ones created in our own

bodies by the breakdown of dead cells. There are

small levels of toxins even in raw foods. But

cooking creates many more toxins than what is in

the food naturally. So cooking to remove one

toxin doesn't make an ounce of sense to me.)

 

Fewer Goitrogens: Although research studies are

limited in this area, cooking does seem to reduce

goitrogens. These compounds can cause enlargement

of the thyroid glands in people who are

susceptible to goiters.

 

Fewer Oxalates: Cooking can help reduce the

oxalates found in vegetables by 5 to 15%.

Although this reduction is a small one, it may

still be beneficial for individuals needing to

restrict their oxalate intake. Boiling is the

best cooking method when there is concern about

the oxalate content of vegetables because direct

contact between the vegetable and the water helps

to leach oxalates out of the vegetable and into

the water.

 

Less Salmonella and E. coli bacteria: These

bacteria are sometimes found on raw sprouts

because they are grown under warm and humid

conditions. This is true whether they are grown

commercially or in the home. The heat from

cooking can help destroy the bacteria in sprouts

as well as any other types of bacteria that can

be found on some vegetables.

 

(Note RH: Without bacteria, we couldn't survive.

Vitamin B12 is created by bacteria and not by

animals. While killing so called bad bacteria we

have to be careful not to kill good bacteria as

well.

 

Personally, I don't recommend making sprouts a

major component of your diet anyway. They tend to

be quite high in toxins. This is nature's way of

insuring that these sprouts survive to become

full-grown plants. If you were out in the jungle,

you could never even find enough sprouts to make

a meal out of them. The sprout eaters are

definitely doing something that wouldn't happen

in nature. I haven't heard of chimpanzees making

sprouts a major component of their diet.)

 

Cooking can also aid in the digestion of

vegetables by breaking down cell walls, a job

your body would have to do if they were not

cooked and you didn't chew thoroughly. Our

digestive system has lost the ability over the

last thousand years to easily digest raw

vegetables.

 

(Note RH: We probably never had the ability to

digest certain course vegetables like broccoli

and kale at any point in our history as humans.

We also don't have four stomachs to be able to

derive the nutrients from grasses like cows,

sheep, goats, deer, giraffes and other ruminants

can. Bonobos our closest primate relatives eat

only the soft green tips of leaves.

 

** Do they do it because they lost the ability

to digest the whole leaf?

 

It's more likely they could never digest

vegetables that were too heavy in cellulose.

 

Plus bonobos haven't been eating cooked and

unnatural foods in the first place. So the so-

called evolution argument doesn't apply to them.

 

In my opinion, the theory of evolution doesn't

cut mustard anyway. It sounds good until you

really think it out and realize that it's

virtually impossible. How for instance could we

say that the human eye evolved? It is so complex,

it couldn't happen by chance.

 

How about a tail for a cat? Did it get all the

bones, muscles and tendons all at once? If not,

how could a partially developed or accidental

start of a tail, help in its survival? There are

many prominent scientists today that logically

dispute the theory of evolution that so many

people take for granted. You can find plenty of

information about this by searching Google for

it. I used to be a blind follower in the Theory

of Evolution, but the more I studied it the less

sense it actually made. There is too much

perfection and mathematical precision in numerous

areas in life to believe all of the universes

happened by chance. There was definitely an

intelligence behind it in my opinion.)

 

I've included more commentary below.

 

*~*~*~*~*

 

RH:

First of all, if we need to cook a food to eat

it, that means it isn't a food designed for human

consumption. Everyone always tells us how good

and nutritious broccoli is for us. Even though it

is high in nutrients, it's also very hard to

digest in its raw state. We can't break down the

cellulose to extract most of the nutrients.

 

Therefore, some people would theorize that we

should cook it to release the nutrients. Other

people, like me would assume that we shouldn't be

eating raw broccoli in the first place. At least

we shouldn't eat it and expect to get a high

source of nutrients. Many people eating

cruciferous vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower

and kale get gas after eating these foods raw.

That should be telling them something.

 

All animals get all the nutrients they need by

eating a 100% raw diet. They don't eat a food

because it is high in nutrients, they eat the

foods that they are attracted to and that taste

best to them. Just because something is raw

doesn't mean we should eat it, or that it is good

for us. Therefore, there is no nutritional need

to eat a food that we wouldn't eat in the raw

state. What do you think we ate before the

harnessing of fire? All raw foods.

 

The only exception would be if we didn't have

access to enough raw foods to meet all of our

nutrient needs. Then you might have to cook some

foods just to survive. But don't think you would

thrive by doing that.

 

Secondly, he didn't mention all the different

kinds of toxins created in the cooking process.

Even if you can get some more of some kinds of

nutrients, that doesn't help when at the same

time you create a dramatically increased toxic

load. Therefore, you trade more of " some kind " of

nutrients for increased toxins. Why doesn't he

mention that in his argument? You see how we are

getting an incomplete picture and partial

science, to justify an argument.

 

The cooking process also decreases the levels of

many other nutrients. So you may get more

lycopene but less vitamin A or C for instance.

Proteins become coagulated and unusable because

the body can't break them down. Fats become

carcinogenic and turn into transfats, which raise

your cholesterol levels. From 20 to 80% of the

vitamin content of raw foods is destroyed in the

cooking process. Plant minerals change from the

organic and useable form to the inorganic and

unusable form by cooking them.

 

The food goes from being alive to being dead.

There is a strong vibrational difference in the

food. Dr. Gabriel Cousens mentions the Subtle

Organizing Energy Fields (SOEF) of raw foods.

There is evidence showing these organizing energy

fields are destroyed in the cooking process.

Kirlian Photography shows dramatically diminished

energy fields around cooked foods versus the same

food in it's raw state. There are many things

that cooking damages and of which science may not

be able to detect.

 

It's the difference between drinking fresh

squeezed orange juice versus, pasteurized juice

in a carton. You can taste and feel the

difference. It is like night and day. I remember

the first time I had fresh squeezed orange juice

as a kid; it had such a powerful vibration to it.

I felt it tingle in my mouth and it tasted so

much better than the cooked orange juice I drank

from a carton.

 

Then finally, there is the question of how much

of a nutrient is the right level. Maybe the level

of lycopene in raw tomatoes is the ideal quantity

for humans. Too much of certain nutrients can

create a toxic overload, as the human body has a

limit as to how many nutrients it can absorb at

any one time.

 

So you see what one thinks is important depends

on perspective and philosophy. Some scientist and

doctors will often try to use some facts and

ignore other very important facts. Science can

give a distorted view of reality.

 

Too much belief is put into science, there

should be some healthy skepticism with anything

you read. (Including what I am writing you here

today.) The fact is that we are the only beings

on the planet that cook our foods.

 

I also know from personal experience that even

cooking small percentages of my diet gives me

less than ideal results. You could give me all

the science you wanted, but I know from my own

experience that 100% raw is the way to go.

 

I've heard the same from many other people who

for years ate a high percentage raw diet only to

find dramatic and sustained improvements in their

health by staying 100% raw. I never met anyone

who switched to a 100% raw diet who didn't feel

the results were better than while still eating a

cooked food diet.

 

Even the times I failed at maintaining 100% raw,

I still knew it was giving me better results than

eating cooked food. But I wasn't doing the diet

correctly to maintain it long term. This is why

it could save you lots of wasted energy, time and

money to get expert guidance on doing an Optimal

Raw Food Diet.

 

My Raw Food Diet Success Society at

http://www.HowToGoRaw.com will give you the

expert support and resources you need to succeed

at going 100% raw and love it.

 

To Your Radiant Health, Happiness and Fitness,

Roger Haeske

 

 

P.S. I've added a new and very valuable bonus

for people who join the http://www.HowToGoRaw.com

website. All members now have access to a monthly

20-minute telephone coaching session.

 

This used to be available only for yearly

rs, but now it's available for all paid

members. I haven't updated the website yet with

this new information, but it applies as of this

email for all quarterly and yearly members.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

How to Stop Being Tricked by Bad Nutritional

Science

 

** Do you ever get confused by all the

conflicting raw food diet information out there?

 

** Have you been scared off eating a 100% raw

diet because of what you have read on a raw food

forum or even a raw food book?

 

** Do you want to know if the science they are

using is valid?

 

** Has your belief in Ayurvedic Medicine or the

popular Body Type Diets made you believe that

eating raw might not be the best thing for you?

 

*~*~*~*

Maybe you have those questions or similar ones.

The misinformation out there is rampant. I

believe some of the information is purposely

deceptive and designed to make you fail at doing

a raw diet.

 

Remember, who profits the most if you don't do a

raw diet? The giant prepared food industry and

the medical and pharmaceutical industry. There

are megabucks in there. I wouldn't be surprised

if some of the negative information you read is

somehow sponsored by one or both of these

industries.

 

The problem is that even well meaning raw food

proponents can often scare you from doing a raw

diet. I used to be confused by all the

conflicting raw food information out there.

 

They can't confuse me anymore. I know too much.

I've done my homework and have heard all the

arguments, many times over. It takes a lot of

knowledge, experience and good judgment to be

able to discern truth when it comes to a complex

subject like nutrition. It is very easy to be

scared off by some scientific sounding

information, unless you have a thorough

understanding of raw food nutrition.

 

In today's email, I'll give you some perspective

and show you how to look at scientific findings.

** With Healthy Skepticism and Common Sense **

 

** You'll learn some of the techniques they use

to trick you.

 

** You'll learn how to judge for yourself

whether or not the information is accurate.

 

*~*~*~*

One of my rs forwarded this email to

me. A well-known raw food leader wrote this.

However, I know that this leader does not

recommend that we go 100% raw. In his email

below, he explains the scientific reasons of why

he believes that some cooking is beneficial.

 

As you might guess, I strongly disagree about

this from a scientific, philosophical and

experiential point of view. He simply used

science to back up his belief systems. But the

problem comes when you don't have the complete

picture. You can totally distort issues when you

don't comprehend the whole. This is how science

can fool you.

 

Science can distort reality or truth. It's like

Dr. Atkins claiming his diet heavy in bacon,

butter and animal protein is healthy. Studies can

be manipulated, findings can be distorted and

that is why you get all of these scientific

sounding books contradicting themselves about a

certain diet's effectiveness.

 

There are always studies small enough in scope

that can pretty much lend credence to any

argument. This is because if you focus on only

one aspect of something scientifically you can

get very distorted results. That is why you need

to use common sense and your own experiences

along with a broad understanding of science to be

able to get to the truth of a matter.

 

The other point is that I know this author feels

that it's easier for most people to stay 80% raw

than 100%. It's a much easier recommendation and

so he may be trying to fit the science to justify

his recommendations of less than 100% raw.

 

Here are his arguments for eating some cooked

foods and below my reply. I also include some

commentary right after some of his points.

 

*~*~*~*~*

Here are some of the scientific findings that

support the health benefits of eating quickly

cooked foods compared to relying solely on a raw

foods diet:

 

(Note RH: Quickly cooking foods still does

severe cellular damage to food. It still destroys

the enzymes and it still creates toxins. The less

you cook it and at lower temperatures the less

damage that is done to the food. But if you

quickly cooked your hand, you'd be in massive

pain. The damage is significant even with quick

cooking. Don't let anyone fool you otherwise.

Cooking kills and destroys the integrity of the

food.)

 

More Carotenoids: Carotenoids are usually

hooked together with proteins or locked into

their own crystal- like structure when found in

their natural state. Heating helps break down

these structures and free carotenoids for

digestion and absorption into our cells. The

release of carotenoids through cooking can be

measured. In carrots, for example, about 40% more

carotenoids are released and made available

through cooking.

 

More Lycopene: This phytonutrient, which is

concentrated in tomatoes, is made more readily

available to the body after tomatoes are cooked.

 

More Sulfur-containing Phytonutrients: Lightly

cooking onions and garlic can help convert some

of the less beneficial sulfur-containing

phytonutrients into more beneficial ones and can

increase the variety of sulfur-containing

phytonutrients that are available to our cells.

 

(RH: The people with the highest antioxidant and

phytonutrients levels are long-term 100% raw

foodists. There are tests now that can determine

your antioxidant levels and the people with the

best results by far are 100% raw foodists.

Cooking would not improve those results in my

opinion.)

 

Fewer Alkaloids: The alkaloid content of

nightshades is problematic for some individuals.

Cooking can lower the alkaloid content by as much

as 40 to 50%.

 

(RH: The body can handle toxins. Most of the

toxins we deal with are ones created in our own

bodies by the breakdown of dead cells. There are

small levels of toxins even in raw foods. But

cooking creates many more toxins than what is in

the food naturally. So cooking to remove one

toxin doesn't make an ounce of sense to me.)

 

Fewer Goitrogens: Although research studies are

limited in this area, cooking does seem to reduce

goitrogens. These compounds can cause enlargement

of the thyroid glands in people who are

susceptible to goiters.

 

Fewer Oxalates: Cooking can help reduce the

oxalates found in vegetables by 5 to 15%.

Although this reduction is a small one, it may

still be beneficial for individuals needing to

restrict their oxalate intake. Boiling is the

best cooking method when there is concern about

the oxalate content of vegetables because direct

contact between the vegetable and the water helps

to leach oxalates out of the vegetable and into

the water.

 

Less Salmonella and E. coli bacteria: These

bacteria are sometimes found on raw sprouts

because they are grown under warm and humid

conditions. This is true whether they are grown

commercially or in the home. The heat from

cooking can help destroy the bacteria in sprouts

as well as any other types of bacteria that can

be found on some vegetables.

 

(Note RH: Without bacteria, we couldn't survive.

Vitamin B12 is created by bacteria and not by

animals. While killing so called bad bacteria we

have to be careful not to kill good bacteria as

well.

 

Personally, I don't recommend making sprouts a

major component of your diet anyway. They tend to

be quite high in toxins. This is nature's way of

insuring that these sprouts survive to become

full-grown plants. If you were out in the jungle,

you could never even find enough sprouts to make

a meal out of them. The sprout eaters are

definitely doing something that wouldn't happen

in nature. I haven't heard of chimpanzees making

sprouts a major component of their diet.)

 

Cooking can also aid in the digestion of

vegetables by breaking down cell walls, a job

your body would have to do if they were not

cooked and you didn't chew thoroughly. Our

digestive system has lost the ability over the

last thousand years to easily digest raw

vegetables.

 

(Note RH: We probably never had the ability to

digest certain course vegetables like broccoli

and kale at any point in our history as humans.

We also don't have four stomachs to be able to

derive the nutrients from grasses like cows,

sheep, goats, deer, giraffes and other ruminants

can. Bonobos our closest primate relatives eat

only the soft green tips of leaves.

 

** Do they do it because they lost the ability

to digest the whole leaf?

 

It's more likely they could never digest

vegetables that were too heavy in cellulose.

 

Plus bonobos haven't been eating cooked and

unnatural foods in the first place. So the so-

called evolution argument doesn't apply to them.

 

In my opinion, the theory of evolution doesn't

cut mustard anyway. It sounds good until you

really think it out and realize that it's

virtually impossible. How for instance could we

say that the human eye evolved? It is so complex,

it couldn't happen by chance.

 

How about a tail for a cat? Did it get all the

bones, muscles and tendons all at once? If not,

how could a partially developed or accidental

start of a tail, help in its survival? There are

many prominent scientists today that logically

dispute the theory of evolution that so many

people take for granted. You can find plenty of

information about this by searching Google for

it. I used to be a blind follower in the Theory

of Evolution, but the more I studied it the less

sense it actually made. There is too much

perfection and mathematical precision in numerous

areas in life to believe all of the universes

happened by chance. There was definitely an

intelligence behind it in my opinion.)

 

I've included more commentary below.

 

*~*~*~*~*

 

RH:

First of all, if we need to cook a food to eat

it, that means it isn't a food designed for human

consumption. Everyone always tells us how good

and nutritious broccoli is for us. Even though it

is high in nutrients, it's also very hard to

digest in its raw state. We can't break down the

cellulose to extract most of the nutrients.

 

Therefore, some people would theorize that we

should cook it to release the nutrients. Other

people, like me would assume that we shouldn't be

eating raw broccoli in the first place. At least

we shouldn't eat it and expect to get a high

source of nutrients. Many people eating

cruciferous vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower

and kale get gas after eating these foods raw.

That should be telling them something.

 

All animals get all the nutrients they need by

eating a 100% raw diet. They don't eat a food

because it is high in nutrients, they eat the

foods that they are attracted to and that taste

best to them. Just because something is raw

doesn't mean we should eat it, or that it is good

for us. Therefore, there is no nutritional need

to eat a food that we wouldn't eat in the raw

state. What do you think we ate before the

harnessing of fire? All raw foods.

 

The only exception would be if we didn't have

access to enough raw foods to meet all of our

nutrient needs. Then you might have to cook some

foods just to survive. But don't think you would

thrive by doing that.

 

Secondly, he didn't mention all the different

kinds of toxins created in the cooking process.

Even if you can get some more of some kinds of

nutrients, that doesn't help when at the same

time you create a dramatically increased toxic

load. Therefore, you trade more of " some kind " of

nutrients for increased toxins. Why doesn't he

mention that in his argument? You see how we are

getting an incomplete picture and partial

science, to justify an argument.

 

The cooking process also decreases the levels of

many other nutrients. So you may get more

lycopene but less vitamin A or C for instance.

Proteins become coagulated and unusable because

the body can't break them down. Fats become

carcinogenic and turn into transfats, which raise

your cholesterol levels. From 20 to 80% of the

vitamin content of raw foods is destroyed in the

cooking process. Plant minerals change from the

organic and useable form to the inorganic and

unusable form by cooking them.

 

The food goes from being alive to being dead.

There is a strong vibrational difference in the

food. Dr. Gabriel Cousens mentions the Subtle

Organizing Energy Fields (SOEF) of raw foods.

There is evidence showing these organizing energy

fields are destroyed in the cooking process.

Kirlian Photography shows dramatically diminished

energy fields around cooked foods versus the same

food in it's raw state. There are many things

that cooking damages and of which science may not

be able to detect.

 

It's the difference between drinking fresh

squeezed orange juice versus, pasteurized juice

in a carton. You can taste and feel the

difference. It is like night and day. I remember

the first time I had fresh squeezed orange juice

as a kid; it had such a powerful vibration to it.

I felt it tingle in my mouth and it tasted so

much better than the cooked orange juice I drank

from a carton.

 

Then finally, there is the question of how much

of a nutrient is the right level. Maybe the level

of lycopene in raw tomatoes is the ideal quantity

for humans. Too much of certain nutrients can

create a toxic overload, as the human body has a

limit as to how many nutrients it can absorb at

any one time.

 

So you see what one thinks is important depends

on perspective and philosophy. Some scientist and

doctors will often try to use some facts and

ignore other very important facts. Science can

give a distorted view of reality.

 

Too much belief is put into science, there

should be some healthy skepticism with anything

you read. (Including what I am writing you here

today.) The fact is that we are the only beings

on the planet that cook our foods.

 

I also know from personal experience that even

cooking small percentages of my diet gives me

less than ideal results. You could give me all

the science you wanted, but I know from my own

experience that 100% raw is the way to go.

 

I've heard the same from many other people who

for years ate a high percentage raw diet only to

find dramatic and sustained improvements in their

health by staying 100% raw. I never met anyone

who switched to a 100% raw diet who didn't feel

the results were better than while still eating a

cooked food diet.

 

Even the times I failed at maintaining 100% raw,

I still knew it was giving me better results than

eating cooked food. But I wasn't doing the diet

correctly to maintain it long term. This is why

it could save you lots of wasted energy, time and

money to get expert guidance on doing an Optimal

Raw Food Diet.

 

My Raw Food Diet Success Society at

http://www.HowToGoRaw.com will give you the

expert support and resources you need to succeed

at going 100% raw and love it.

 

To Your Radiant Health, Happiness and Fitness,

Roger Haeske

 

 

P.S. I've added a new and very valuable bonus

for people who join the http://www.HowToGoRaw.com

website. All members now have access to a monthly

20-minute telephone coaching session.

 

This used to be available only for yearly

rs, but now it's available for all paid

members. I haven't updated the website yet with

this new information, but it applies as of this

email for all quarterly and yearly members.

[Guest guest]

Hi Roger,

 

I enjoyed reading what you wrote. Like you, I believe in a 100% raw

lifestyle.

One question: What's your opinion about why people can begin to gain

weight

when eating 100% raw, after the initial weight loss when they begin?

 

I've gained about 15 excess pounds in the last few months, and despite

giving

up most nuts, all dates and bananas and similar sweet fruits, and upping

my

exercise from a half hour to one hour of aerobics a day plus several

times a

week of resistance exercises, I'm not losing even one pound. I can't

figure it

out.

 

Judy

 

[Roger H.] Hi Judy,

 

[Roger H.] Great to hear from you. I'd need to know more details.

 

[Roger H.] I'd suggest you start by filling out a free account at

www.fitday.com. That way you can tell approximately how many calories

you are consuming.

 

[Roger H.] Then you can make your link public and send me that link so I

can see what you have been eating and how many calories you are

consuming and what the percentage of protein, carbohydrates and fats are

in your diet. You can even input your exercise. It's really a great

tool. You can make your link unpublicized whenever you want. The only

people who could see it anyway, are the people you give the link to.

Email it to my personal email address if you want some input from me.

 

[Roger H.] Make sure to be careful with the oils as well. Oil is the

most fattening food on the planet. You also may have developed some kind

of Thyroid problem. I've seen people with hypothyroidism that have had a

hard time losing weight, even on a raw diet. They lose but they have a

hard time losing all of the weight. Stay away from vinegar of any kind

as this has quite a negative influence on the thyroid gland.

 

[Roger H.] I'm sure if you did a water fast you would lose weight. I

asked Loren Lockman if he had any fasting patients that didn't lose

weight. He said they all lost weight but he did have a couple that were

resistant for a day or two, but eventually they lost as well. The point

is that if you consume less calories than you need, you will lose

weight.

 

A fast may also help you if you do have a thyroid problem. Fasting and

an Optimal Raw Food Diet are the best ways to heal that I know of. Check

with your health practitioner to help determine if you have any health

problems.

 

For whatever reason, what you were used to doing, no longer seems to

work for you. Make sure to stay away from salt as well, as that can add

quite a bit of additional water weight. You might simply have to eat

less than you are used to doing. You're metabolism might have slowed

down. It might require intense muscle building activity.

 

[Roger H.] A pound of muscle burns 75 calories per day and a pound of

fat only 2. So try to build muscle. My Lightning Speed Exercise program

is great for putting on muscle, burning calories and getting in

fantastic shape with just a couple of exercises. To find out more.

http://www.lightning.superbeing.com.

 

[Roger H.] Increase your greens, decrease fat's from all overt sources

and increase your muscle building activities. This should help. Even

fruit can make some people overweight if they eat too much of it.

 

I hope this helps Judy. How's Florida these days?

 

To Your Radiant Health, Happiness and Fitness, Roger Haeske

 

P.S. Are you having trouble staying 100% raw? Are you afraid of eating

fruit? Are you sick of the time consuming effort of having to juice,

sprout, dehydrate and ferment your foods? Discover the simple secrets to

raw food success from the Raw Motivator and Radiant Health Coach, Roger

Haeske. http://www.HowToGoRaw.com for more info.