Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: Projectile Vomit on June 22, 2017, 10:29:02 am
-
The notion that agriculture as a means of food procurement is the result of ancient people's addiction to opioid peptides found in cereal grains and milk has come up in the forum before. I've done a fair amount of research into this theory and its intricacies, and explored the idea in the most recent episode of my podcast A Worldview Apart. Folks who are interested are welcome to give it a listen, either on my website (http://ericgarza.info/addictive-origins-of-agriculture/) or on iTunes (https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/a-worldview-apart/id1237823663). Comments and feedback are welcome!
-
Very interesting topic, After the Cultivation of opiate contain plants it was only a matter of time before the invention of fentanyl. Ive been postulating for some time now how the evolution of the human brain along with its subsequent creation of "high technology" may have been driven by its hunger for pleasure. This also ties in to the eastern views of attachment, samsara, and of how living can bee seen in and of itself as a form of addictive behavior.
During the cerebral supernova in which there was an exponential increase in brain size, the corresponding pleasure centers of the brain also expanded greatly, and the development of the "will to power" co-arose with the "will to pleasure"
This drove our ancestors to intentionally seek out novel and unique experiences and encounters with euphoric and mutigenic biological substances within the environment, in a such a way that other animals were never before able... during these encounters initiated by our curious apish ancestors tolerance was built and antigenic adaption took place which reinforced behaviors.
The phenomenon of Agriculturally created addiction arrived at the tail end of these early processes, which has since spiraled out of control into all sorts of perversions from electronic addiction to synthetic opiate epidemic.
I am deeply interested in the actual utility of the knowledge of these things in helping those who share this awareness to chart out a "sane" path forward, and I believe a greater understanding in the origins and purposes of the endogenous pleasure centers is needed in this endeavor.
Before the mythological fall from grace, that followed banishment from the garden after eating the forbidden fruit, what was it that evolved the modern human being out of a primordial field of potentiality?
This is where my worldview takes a deeper look behind the factors that lead up to the agrarian addiction. I postulate that the raw materials sought out and consumed by hominids during the cerebral explosion, that fueled the maximization of intelligence, also fueled a maximization of the endogenous pleasure seeking parts of the brain. These phenomenon culminated in the development of a greater curiosity and worked in tandem during our ascension.
Before the rise of the agrarian addict....Hunter gatherer man was hooked on the thrill of the hunt, the blood from a fresh kill, eating the brains and glands, sexual conquest, cultivation of sensual relationships, these were the primal triggers of the endogenous pleasure centers before the cultivation of opiate containing foodstuff. High meat may of been the drug of choice in this age. The bacterial micro flora in the guts of primal humans were capable of producing a far more balanced and superior overall sense of well being than that of the eaters of fermented grains. I further postulate the likelihood that a number of other substances in the environment were sought out as sacraments to accentuate the primal pleasure experience. These foods during the paleo era were more supplemental than staples. During this time Herbs with opiates.... cannabis.. plants with adaptogenic and euphoric properties were experimented with. Small amounts of grains were collected and eaten, and perhaps it was these practices which could be considered the gateway period that lead up to the agrarian epidemic which eventually took over humanity.
Once agrarian life became established there really was no chance of escaping the trap, and a vicious circle enveloped from which the modern whirled is still captive. Its worth mentioning the fermentation of grains into alcohol occurred simultaneously with the use of yeast bread, and overnight in these populations the micro biome was altered and the neurological wiring began its attempts to develop a symbiosis with the yeast and other grain loving microbes...this eventually lead to dependency and addiction... which is merely the dual face of adaptation.
Though this grain brained arrangement I believe leaves humanity somewhat cheated, in that although diets high in these unnaturally occurring foods provide a high level of endorphin which the brain craves, it is potentially lacking in many essential nutrients which would build a more environmentally balanced optimal "mind body". Also the anti nutrient effects of these foods, in many ways mitigates whatever positive endorphin feelings attained by their consumption... Its evident that there is a vicious cycle at work in which those addicted to the foods of civilization are compelled to cultivate means greater means of stimulating the pleasure centers, while at the same time the bodies physical capacity to create and utilize its own endogenously created endorphin is diminished
-
I had forgotten how addictive wheat actually was. It's been a few years since I've had it but even as recently as a few days ago I smelled someone making toast and started craving it. As I recall it was much harder than giving up coffee.
I remember giving up wheat maybe 40 years ago and it didn't seem as hard back then. I'm guessing it was because I just switched to other grains and the last time I went totally grain free. So basically all cereal grains are addictive in the same way? I also wonder if it could have been harder because the wheat wasn't as addictive back in the '70's, though it was the mid 70's so the more addictive modified strains were already out.
-
Though this grain brained arrangement I believe leaves humanity somewhat cheated, in that although diets high in these unnaturally occurring foods provide a high level of endorphin which the brain craves, it is potentially lacking in many essential nutrients which would build a more environmentally balanced optimal "mind body"...
I think 'potentially' is an understatement. I think people drive towards foods heavy on the opioid peptides and light on minerals and nutritionally-valuable phytochemistry is the story of agriculture. When this process first started 10,000 years ago the nutritional imbalance was relatively small, as cereal grains were still fairly robust and soils rich in nutrients for all plants to take up and incorporate into their tissues. Weston A. Price's work documents the physical degeneration that went with adopting particularly nutrient poor industrial foods, but archeologists around the world have been documenting physical degeneration even in people 10,000 years ago as they started eating cereal grains.
I remember giving up wheat maybe 40 years ago and it didn't seem as hard back then...
Read books like Wheat Belly and Grain Brain and one thing you'll learn is that wheat has changed a lot in the last 50 years. If my memory serves me, modern varieties of wheat have at least 20x more gluten per unit volume than they did back in 1950. Since the opioid compounds identified in wheat are part of the gluten, more gluten in modern varieties of wheat means more opioid peptides. Bread made from modern varieties of wheat is far more addictive and stimulates our opioid receptors far more than bread made in the 1950s or before.
-
In my opinion it has nothing to do with addiction but rather a much simpler explanation - hunger. Grain can be stored in industrial quantities for ages and allows people to survive tough times such as wars, diseased livestock, etc. Over time it became a staple for poor as means of survival and eventually got indoctrinated into culture.
American Indians had plenty of wild animals to choose from and did not have much need for grains. In other parts of the world people were not so lucky and had to resort to grain.
-
I think 'potentially' is an understatement.
I deliberately added "potentially", in part as a snide jab against the over cautious language often used by the scientific minded, but also as an acknowledgement that we do not know all the subtle cause and effect relationships which even though may be presented as overtly problematic on one level, on another level it could be critical for some latent and understated evolutionary advantage.
Some say necessity is the mother of invention, but would there be a necessity to motivate a nurturing and inventive mind, without a kind of underlining desperation that acts as the bastard father driving the creative mind with unfulfilled desire. Meaning that a contented and well balanced mind, which may "possibly" of been possessed by apex paleo hunter gatherers, wouldn't toil away their lives, obsessively dividing elaborate methods to obtain external opiate compounds that they would be able to produce ample amounts endogenously on the natch, with basic stone age technology.
In this theory....It is the totally addicted and depraved mind, megalomaniaclly dedicated to finding and maintaining a more perfect high, from which some of the most radical and life changing technological "progress" has been birthed.
Read books like Wheat Belly and Grain Brain and one thing you'll learn is that wheat has changed a lot in the last 50 years. If my memory serves me, modern varieties of wheat have at least 20x more gluten per unit volume than they did back in 1950. Since the opioid compounds identified in wheat are part of the gluten, more gluten in modern varieties of wheat means more opioid peptides. Bread made from modern varieties of wheat is far more addictive and stimulates our opioid receptors far more than bread made in the 1950s or before.
http://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2012/01/the-gliadin-effect/ (http://www.wheatbellyblog.com/2012/01/the-gliadin-effect/)
The protien gliandin passes thought the gut membrane and enters directly into the bloodstream
-
There is no addictive component to wheat when wheat is sprouted. Soaking 24 hours, after that 2-3 days to let it grow small white roots and this is best time to eat it taste wise and otherwise.
What creates this "addiction" about wheat is when it is consumed unsprouted, as are almost all commercial products and "eco" products made -- from unsprouted wheat. Regardless whether is mass-produced thus deficient of many minerals-vitamins and full of toxins, or grown on rich and clean soil. Wheat has to be sprouted before consumption (or other natural processes, like fermentations).
Having eaten sprouted wheat for months every day, then for 2-3 months of not eating any wheat, and then again eating it. There is no addictive component when sprouted. In fact sprouted wheat has positive effects on functioning of body, it like gives sharpness/strength/surety/balance/stability, not much but some and its quality is distinctive to wheat, if sensitive enough then can feel it and its deeper qualities.
Wheat itself, if grown on rich and unpolluted soils and is sprouted before consumption, is highly nutritious. Far more nutritious than raw animal fat.
What gives food its nutritional value, any food, is not proteins-fats-carbs-sugars-starches because these are very easy to get enough of, but are vitamins and minerals and other such micro nutrients because official daily requirements are on average about 5 times too low (varies from vitamin-mineral to vitamin-mineral, some have their official requirements many tens of times too low). How much vitamins-mirnals has fat? And wheat grains? Difference is immense and sharply in favor of wheat. If to choose what to eat by nutritional richness alone, between raw fat and sprouted wheat, then sprouted wheat should be preferred due to its significantly higher nutritional value.
Not that raw fat isn't needed, it is needed, but if to maximize body's functioning in all regards then have to choose and eat that which is of highest nutritional value without overeating (fats-proteins-carbs) and also without causing deficiencies in any regard (due having to see to it that deficiencies do not occur, fat must also be eaten, brain and solar plexus, nervous system overall, does need it).
Mentality/bias of grains being cause of many modern failures, is essentially completely false.
Grain causes harm only when it is unsprouted (or when unfermented, as that can also neutralize its debilitating effects). Ancient peoples fermented and sprouted grains, also soaked them in ash water to get natural toxins out of it. Old and ancient peoples knew of negative effects of wheat and processed them accordingly -- they knew about food many tens if not even hundreds of times better than any of us here and now. Of course there are stupid peoples in all eras, but are also smart ones, so best not to look at stupid ones and identify everyone in that era as stupid. Smart ones don't pollute and live in harmony with nature, which means they don't leave much signs of themselves ever having existed to newer generations of peoples, while stupid ones are very loud and expansive and so leave many signs and ruins behind because they failed. Failures can go a long way before they truly die out, can leave a lot of crap for newer peoples to work out and prove themselves successful.
-
Wheat itself, if grown on rich and unpolluted soils and is sprouted before consumption, is highly nutritious. Far more nutritious than raw animal fat.
Reading your post, it looks like you and I will have to agree to disagree on a lot of things.
-
In my opinion it has nothing to do with addiction but rather a much simpler explanation - hunger...
I accept that hunger did play a role, but I don't think hunger alone could have spawned agriculture. If it were just hunger, people would have eaten grain when needed, then reverted to more nourishing foods when times got better. That's not what happened. People turned to cereal grains, and never looked back.
Just look at European colonization of the Americas and South Africa. People with a long history of food-derived opioid dependency arrived in continents with abundant game and nutritionally dense, non-cereal plants and what did they do? They ate a little of the new foods, but for the most part brought their nutritionally poor yet opioid rich cereal grains with them and ate those. And of course they ate the few cereal grains that indigenous people had domesticated, primarily maize (aka corn).
-
I've made sprouted wheat bread many times. I can't vouch for it being non addictive. It's more nutritious than regular bread but wouldn't consider it to be in the same league as raw animal fat. I have a half a sack of rye that is several years old to make sprouted rye if I ever feel the need to start eating bread again. It's very easy to make but sprouted rye is much tougher than wheat and is very hard on my juicer to grind.
-
http://www.raw-food-health.net/Sprouting-Grains.html (http://www.raw-food-health.net/Sprouting-Grains.html)
-
Reading your post, it looks like you and I will have to agree to disagree on a lot of things.
No, simply I know and am aware better than you. There are things I know and am aware that you are not. Things I've done that you have not. There isn't anything "to agree to disagree on". Wrong is wrong. There are no two correct answers.
Have you yourself ever eaten sprouted wheat for months, then not for months, then again? So to get real personal experience, thus also real knowledge and awareness as to truth about wheat, and then comparing this to research you've done and whatever claims are made about wheat? Or is everything you "know" merely something someone else has said before, and you essentially merely copy-pasting same opinions without actually ever yourself having verified truth of any of what you are saying, and those who before you have said, about wheat?
Conclusions based only on research, but no actual personal experience in comparison to that research, are worth nothing at best. Research alone does not, can not, suffice to get real truth.
It is easy to say that you've done a lot of research about something, by so doing asserting some tone of authority, and so credulity follows much more easily for readers of less awareness and knowledge. But conclusions based of falsities and fallacies, are simply wrong; research done when materials themselves omit many relevant facts, because creators of those materials themselves knew and were aware of too little and were biased -- conclusions based on such materials alone are wrong. They cannot be right. Comparing materials with materials, but not materials with something unbiased/neutral like actually trying it yourself, leads nowhere good.
Personally, I know that many things are said about many things. But how do I myself verify for myself with true certainty as to what is truth? Mere copy-pasting of opinions of others without myself ever having tested anything regarding whatever it is, is playing dumb. I don't like playing dumb, so I don't do it. If I don't have true personal experience then how am I truly supposed to know whether the said is true or not? How is anyone supposed to know for certain if they lack true personal experience regarding the said?
Truth regarding wheat is easy to test for oneself. Only takes 6-9 months.
Wheat is not bad, wheat is good, very good. I advise to eat it, sprouted of course. Also buckwheat (soaking for 8 hours suffices, has to be raw of course, not heat-treated) and barley (just soaked is enough; cleanses entire body quite well, easily noticed about skin as makes skin smoother-softer-nicer).
-
I've made sprouted wheat bread many times.
Bread means cooked with high temperatures. High temperature means starches-sugars are ruined, along other constituents and balances that are ruined. Starches and sugars that due to too high temperature have energetic value lowered significantly, making body require many times more oxygen and minerals-vitamins to metabolize them. Affects nervous system quite badly (thus info processing functions, thinking, logic, feelings, emotions, all of it) as energetic influence lowers electrical-energetic functioning of nervous system and whole body. A big bad mess, simply because too high temperature ruins food severely, not just nutrients but also energetically.
Even starches in cooked potatoes have same effect as white sugar. Due to heat treatment that ruins.
This ruined starch and ruined sugar. These cause addictive like condition in body. They are also easy meal for yeast/candida while body has trouble using such ruined nutrients.
Another that causes addiction-like condition is when unsprouted, they have antinutrients that associate minerals, thus mineral deficiencies in body, thus body asking for more food. When sprouted there is no such issue.
-
I accept that hunger did play a role, but I don't think hunger alone could have spawned agriculture. If it were just hunger, people would have eaten grain when needed, then reverted to more nourishing foods when times got better. That's not what happened. People turned to cereal grains, and never looked back.
Just look at European colonization of the Americas and South Africa. People with a long history of food-derived opioid dependency arrived in continents with abundant game and nutritionally dense, non-cereal plants and what did they do? They ate a little of the new foods, but for the most part brought their nutritionally poor yet opioid rich cereal grains with them and ate those. And of course they ate the few cereal grains that indigenous people had domesticated, primarily maize (aka corn).
I agree, and believe though hunger may have driven people to eat grains in times of want, it wasn't the primary factor in the development of the widespread grain addiction that spawned the agricultural revolution. From my point of view there isnt a linear progression of cause and effect that easily explains the rise of the grain headed hominids. There is an element of quantum co-arising, that poses a "chicken or the egg" dichotomy which cannot be addressed with "either or"linear thinking.
As Gabor Mates work has shown, addiction is a holistic phenomenon, and the presence of addictive substance in the environment are often not nearly important as the patterns of behavior established by the society at large. Sociological factors must of played a huge role, at the time of the divergence between "hunter gatherer' and agrarian. The fact is that though in some areas humans had diminished the big game staples of hunting cultures, there continued to be nomadic people who continued to follow the herds to new frontiers...and in many cases succeeded in becoming herders of large open range livestock, which provided them everything they needed....... while in other cases the early agrarians began to set up long term structures and institutional establishments. Even in time of famine and want the agrarians stayed put and would no longer venture out in search of food, and when the locust and pest ate up their grain crops many starved, rather than resort to gathering the insects, and digging for grubs. The same spirit which made them raise the temples to the gods, and become attached to a central location, is the same spirit of addiction which lent itself to the rise of a grain brain culture.
This did not happen overnight....the establishment of religious temples, and stone permanent structures of early civilization occurred during transitional phases, usually near water ways where even when there was no hunting, fish was plentiful as primary staple, and enabled many early agricultural communities to prosper and populations to explode. Over the course of generations deeply ingrained behavior pasterns developed, the people became totally domesticated and acculturated, indoctrinated with ideology, they forgot entirely the ways of their nomadic ancestors. Divisions of labor and hierarchy emerged and created an underclass who no longer had the freedom, time, or know how to forage and fish for supplemental food. This underclass became entirely addicted to the daily bread rations, and became reliant on the nectar of the tards( known as wine and beer) for their diversions....without even realizing it humanity became simultaneously addicted to Grain, as well as to civilization itself.
These are general observations which span the gamut of the many conflicting sides humanity and not a moral judgment...... perhaps Aldous Huxley was right in, how prescribing an opiate to the masses is in some way necessary in order to make people of civilization enjoy a life of servitude. Growing and using various forms of dope has brought more humans together than was possible in hunter gatherer groups, where without narcotics there seems to be a natural limit to the number of people the tribal alpha hierarchy can tolerate.
I was at a job sight once and there as a black man, a bi racial, a Cuban, a Guatemalan, a Mexican, and myself smoking a joint, and the black man says with a huge smile as he takes a hit "this is the one thing that can bring everyone together" and everybody there laughs . Be it sharing tea, smoking tobacco, coffee, or even "Breaking bread" there seems to be something about these euphoric substances which can break down primal barriers and unite large numbers of people...and even if nations of people are only united out of some hopeless codependency, which is overall detrimental to the health of the individual, perhaps some how by creating unity and cooperation, the communal living dope growing agrarian humanity isnt without some merit??
-
I personally tried raw sprouts (100% sprout plus alkaline mineral water diet for something like 4-5 months)near the end of my raw vegan phase, and , for a raw vegan, they do provide some esential missing nutrients, as I found BUT they were largely useless compared to raw meats that I ate, as the latter cleared up my health problems unlike the sprouts. I would concede that sprouts consumption might prolong a raw vegan`s health for a bit longer, but not be a solution for health. This sort of view/personal account seems to be rather common on RVAF diet forums, judging from past endless posts.
-
No, simply I know and am aware better than you. There are things I know and am aware that you are not. Things I've done that you have not. There isn't anything "to agree to disagree on". Wrong is wrong. There are no two correct answers.
(...)
Wheat is not bad, wheat is good, very good. I advise to eat it, sprouted of course.
... two and half years after a sudden nummi's plague disappearance, it has surfaced again... :(
-
I personally tried raw sprouts (100% sprout plus alkaline mineral water diet for something like 4-5 months)near the end of my raw vegan phase, and , for a raw vegan, they do provide some esential missing nutrients, as I found BUT they were largely useless compared to raw meats that I ate, as the latter cleared up my health problems unlike the sprouts. I would concede that sprouts consumption might prolong a raw vegan`s health for a bit longer, but not be a solution for health. This sort of view/personal account seems to be rather common on RVAF diet forums, judging from past endless posts.
My experience is similar. I felt really good at first on a raw vegan diet but terrible after a few weeks. I stuck to it for 6 months and continued to get worse. Then I went back to a SAD diet and took loads of supplements. This made things even worse. My stomach got big and my hair started turning gray. But for some reason when I started on raw organ meats my hair regained it's natural color, my stomach went down and my health improved immensely. I totally didn't expect that and had resigned myself to being old and wouldn't have believed it except that I experienced it for myself!
-
I'm a big fan of organ meats too. I don't think they make up half of my diet, by calories, but certainly more than 1/4. I've come upon very good sources of chicken and duck eggs, and for the price they're very inexpensive sources of rich calories. The yolks are bright orange. But even as I say that, I laid out some raw lamb heart and goat tongue for breakfast tomorrow.
-
Organ meats don't make up half my diet either. They make up half of the meat I eat by volume. I eat a lot of fruits and vegetables too and lately egg yolks. I was really impressed with the ground beef heart jerky I made just before my dehydrator bit the dust. When I get a new one I think I can boost that up even higher and also boost the health content by only drying it half way!
-
I personally tried raw sprouts (100% sprout plus alkaline mineral water diet for something like 4-5 months)near the end of my raw vegan phase, and , for a raw vegan, they do provide some esential missing nutrients, as I found BUT they were largely useless compared to raw meats that I ate, as the latter cleared up my health problems unlike the sprouts. I would concede that sprouts consumption might prolong a raw vegan`s health for a bit longer, but not be a solution for health. This sort of view/personal account seems to be rather common on RVAF diet forums, judging from past endless posts.
Alkaline diet is bad as stomach and intestines require acidic environment. Eating sprouts during alkaline diet practicing and near end (or during) of vegan phase does not and can not give sufficiently correct experiential awareness/knowledge so to make correct conclusions about them, because not eating animal meats disables a lot about nervous system functioning and especially when having not eaten them some longer period, senses are messed up and also logic processes are severely messed up.
Largely useless compared to raw meats that you ate? Raw meats that you began eating after vegan period? And so raw meats that your body craved immensely and was likewise immensely satisfied by receiving into itself so to break apart and use, so finally over too long period debilitating deficiencies began going away. This really is not something that can be used to make impartial, thus correct, conclusions about sprouted grains.
To make correct and true conclusions that are actually based on reality, not some assumptions nor mere beliefs that themselves are also based on further assumptions and beliefs, is to personally eat sprouted grains while other aspects of diet are also sufficiently correct.
None of you have ever actually verified truth about grains by consuming them correctly. All you here base your claims on are flawed opinions and assumptions, and personal experiences that are based on false practices.
You can't get correct conclusions if method you used to arrive at those conclusions is dishonest and false and lacking.
... two and half years after a sudden nummi's plague disappearance, it has surfaced again...
Only "it" here is you, as you do not have a mind. All you do is follow some dogma, like some machine following commands and rules. Dogma that happens to be significantly better than vegan nonsense, but dogma the same. You are a fanatic, thus no rationality about you when it comes to pointing out simple logical facts that many things about your dogma are simply false when compared to actual reality and of course your assumptions and beliefs that you have about yourself.
You have shown before that you completely mistranslate and misinterpret me and my saying, trying to force and attach your delusions to what I say, and trying to claim that your delusions are what I meant. Try to keep yourself from doing that again. Try to be straightforward and honest, especially to yourself, advisably (but decades of you being stuck in your severely dogmatic and fanatic ways... have done their job...).
Keep away your insults, and there can not occur any issues. Because you won't be creating any.
-
Agriculture is necessary so to be able to rise higher than instinctive-animalistic stage development. So to move on, to advance.
Instincts are based on body's adaptations and what body has thus far received into itself and learned about. What body already knows, but not what body does yet not know.
Instinctual eating is for animals and beasts, not humans nor anyone who is capable of creating civilizations.
Body's inner functionings can be raised significantly higher than that which instinctual eating enables and allows. For that have to use mind, to think things through, how and why things work, and so how to make everything more than was before.
Trying to keep ourselves to instincts alone is lowering ourselves to animalistic ways. We are are not animals. We are not supposed to behave and act and eat like animals. We are supposed to behave, act, live like us, as is appropriate to us and to our stage of development.
Animals cannot do better than instincts. Instincts are their "mind", it is who they are. The fact that all of us here can talk about instincts is absolute proof that instinctual way is not appropriate to us. Our way is supposed contain in it instinctual sense also, but is supposed to be dominated by higher info-processing functions than instincts. In our case we have more than instincts, we shouldn't be nor keep ourselves stuck to instincts when we can do better. We should be concentrating nutritional value into food items we eat thus into our own bodies, so to be ourselves ever stronger and clearer and more powerful and likewise to make this world ever better.
Agriculture is necessity after animal/beast stage of development. Animals/beasts don't do it because they can't, because they lack inner info-processing tools for it, thus also lack need for it.
That agriculture has been done wrongly, especially in these modern times, and that food items grown have been treated and eaten wrongly, does not mean agriculture is bad or wrong. It just means practices regarding it have been wrong, not that the entire thing itself is wrong.
-
Whatever the case, I notice that many long-term RPDers, myself included, do tend, over time, to adopt many of the Instincto ideas that Iguana advocates. Not all of them necessarily, but a significant proportion. Basically, the more we turn away from Nature, the worse off we are re health and many other issues.
Incidentally, we ARE animals.So far, scientists have been desperately trying and failing to determine what makes humans different from animals. Suggestions, such as that laughter or tool-use or complex social societies etc. etc. are supposedly unique to humans, have been proven wrong again and again and again.
Personally, I think it`s great to hear different viewpoints as that challenges dietary orthodoxy etc. But it would help to avoid the (CK-inspired?) notions of self-perfection. Perfection does not exist in Nature/Reality, either.
-
Personally I don't care for any dogma/rules/scripture/orthodoxy. Instead I care for functioning of nature and world in relation to my own body, as my existence depends on these. I want real truth. I need to know how world and nature truly work, so I could know how I myself truly work. There is only one way to find out what real truth is -- have to actually try things out myself, instead of believing and parroting same things over and over, again and again, year after year, decade after decade, getting not even nowhere and in truth never improving self. Doesn't even measure up to ridiculous what some are doing. I was away from these forums, as Iquana said 2.5 years -- I haven't been wasting all that time, significant selfimprovements instead and a lot, many tens and hundreds of times more to do which will take years and more. What many of you here do, is jabber about same things over and over, there isn't anything new, there is no onward movement. You're not getting anywhere with yourselves, you are stuck -- dogmatic cultistic following does this.
Personally have chickens, next year some meat rabbits and some quails, have bees and need to get more hives. Growing plants (for example simple plant as pumpkin has very powerful effects for internal info-processing functions, which I have observed from experience; can any of you find anything about this from googling "science" articles or anything? no), and next year will begin growing mushroom (reishi, shiitake, lion's mane, some others, as apparently it is very easy to grow them and they have high health values). As a newer thing will begin growing plants that have leaves-flowers-stems-roots of higher health values, that are commonly regarded as medicinal plants. Will try and see how my body will function when making them part of my daily food (smaller amounts as regular food as they are potent).
And most of you here do what? You just jabber about same thing which is eating meat this much or that much, this way or that way, then or then instead; and "wheat is bad", yourself never having even tried eating wheat for months in its correct edible state, so to see what is actual truth about it.
I too regarded wheat as "bad", merely because such ridiculous dogma was only source I was aware I could get information at first, but then eventually I tried for myself to see whether such claims about wheat are of truth or lies.
Whatever the case, I notice that many long-term RPDers, myself included, do tend, over time, to adopt many of the Instincto ideas that Iguana advocates. Not all of them necessarily, but a significant proportion.
Iguana is someone who attaches some simple truths to severely wrong directions. Wrong directions that keep one from moving on with their self. Exactly same thing why cults "sell" so well and hoard followers instead of guiding people to become truly selfsufficient, selfaware, selfconscious, and selfimproving; it is easier to follow than to actually do things truly self. As a very good example cults like veganism which has some truth aspects to it, but extremely severe and debilitating wrongs. Or this "Flat Earthism" cult that is most strongly propagated in vegan circles because their logic processes are ruined or gone entirely, also has some very simple truths attached to severe wrongs (in reality isn't mainstream ball nor is flat; there are reason why can seem either of them; main reason being that light is not straight, does not travel, is instant, is energy field similar to magnetic field, there is reaction time between matter and light and this is this so-called "lightspeed"). Or common Christianity and all those other ones, which again have very simple truths attached to severe wrongs that make people stuck.
They all have simple truths that fool those unaware and naive. They impress them, cause wonder in them, state of wonder that makes them stick very strongly to whatever cult they got stuck to. Many different ways to cause this "wonder" in people. For example cannabis is another thing that causes wonder to such naive and unknowing young souls and minds, and then they begin using it far too often and too much, thus literally burning away their consciousness processes thus leaving them solely functioning on memory they had thus far obtained (consciousness which is aspect about info-processing functions that enables one to admit to oneself what one is actually doing and why), thus in a state of utter stuckness.
Iguana does same thing. Simple truths to sell big bad wrongs that get people stuck. He is just another common fanatical cultist priest directing people to get stuck.
Only creatures whose activities and behavior are supposed to be dominated by instincts are those lower than humans. Among humans is supposed to be perhaps 50% instinctual, since humanity is a point of "choosing/proving" (but each of two choices within them also contain different directions, plus combinations-variations...).
The way we can process information, read, make conclusions, think, etc -- none of this is instinctual.
If some creature were to remain purely instinctual, it could and would never reach a state where it can read, write, build things, etc. Why go back?
Basically, the more we turn away from Nature, the worse off we are re health and many other issues.
Incidentally, we ARE animals.So far, scientists have been desperately trying and failing to determine what makes humans different from animals. Suggestions, such as that laughter or tool-use or complex social societies etc. etc. are supposedly unique to humans, have been proven wrong again and again and again.
Personally, I think it`s great to hear different viewpoints as that challenges dietary orthodoxy etc. But it would help to avoid the (CK-inspired?) notions of self-perfection. Perfection does not exist in Nature/Reality, either.
Never supposed to turn away from nature, but instead are supposed to work ever better with nature, while at same time developing ways that are independent from nature in ways that don't harm nature. Because we all depend on nature. If by our activities we harm nature then we also harm ourselves. But there are ways to become more than what nature alone can enable for us; nature's prime function or goal, is to have its subjects reach a state where they can get true hold over themselves, to begin guiding themselves little by little ever more, which would be best done without harming nature. And there are ways to even improve functioning of nature. Nature is essentially some basic circling/cycling intelligent processes, which has no self aspect to it; intelligence yes, self aspect no; something neutral, that can be used for whatever purposes by anyone who has reached such stage of developemnt, but those who use it shouldn't destroy it as they themselves depend on it. There is this ancient picture depicting a serpent with its own tail in its mouth... if those old/ancient peoples were so dumb and their knowledge so "primitive" then how could they possibly have known this, and knowing this how could they possibly let themselves ruin themselves and that which they themselves depend on? If you knew, would you ruin yourself thus also doom further generations? Conceptions about old and ancient peoples, that are propagated in "science" circles, via media, are biased and wrong; belief gets nowhere but stuck.
Agriculture is not supposed to be about simply taking a plot of land and growing some plants there and then hope for good results. Doesn't work, is not supposed to, quite like that. Is supposed to be about seeing how and why nature works and how nature can be guided and directed toward producing results that we need for our own improvement and betterment. And preferably that nature also benefits.
Regarding us being animals. We are not animals. We do have in us qualities that are same that animals have, but those are under newer qualities. Newest qualities, those that require perfecting, those determine who any creature is. Animals do not have capability for mind as we do, these inner infoenergy processing functions and possibilities. Same thing if you take a seed and put into soil and let it grow to a tree... which is it then? Still a seed? Or a tree? What determines its being, that which it has been thus internally on some level sort of still is, or rather that which it actually is in present moment? Same way about children growing in mothers stomach, and infants, and grown ups...
Animal is like a child, human is like teenager. Then man stage. And then other stages.
If we say we are animals, then we also must say we are bacteria. Obviously not true.
Animals and humans are stages of development, of advancement. Who how far is. Animals are specific general stage. Humans are specific general stage. Man (not male, not masculinity), as in older times people called themselves and was gender neutral term, denotes mindhood; those who have achieved mind, which is stage of development after human. These are things not any of you know, because to find these things out, can't simply follow some "science" articles and notions nor dogma, actually have to truly think things through for oneself (in other words no place for dogmatic fanatical behavior; no place for belief, humans believe, not Men).
Difference between animals and humans, and man, and all other stages, are primarily about info processing functions and not so much about looks. These inner processes and capabilities determine who any of us are. This is according to nature and functioning of this world, we ourselves have not created these infoprocessing functions but are born around them, and after human stage can slowly begin getting own hold over them thus also personally directing how they develop further and turn out to be one day.
Being human and then getting self stuck to animalistic ways, is degeneration/devolution. Is path back to animalhood, should anyone after generations somehow survive such degeneration. It's like a grownup degenerating back to infancy. Why would anyone want to go back to previous stage of development instead of onward and forward?
Animals have "embryo" capabilities and abilities that humans do. They have to have them because nature determines their path of development, which is for them toward human stage, human stage that is supposed to be toward mind stage, etc. They could not "evolutionarily" move on if they did not have in them something that would enable them to develop newer senses. They need something with which they can gradually, slowly step onto newer/higher plane of being -- which is determined by nature and those who have before them achieved mindhood and higher stages, and thus have shaped world and nature, thus also effected in which directions newer generations of organisms and animals will develop with their organs/senses. Very many aspects to it all that need to be considered before any truly true conclusions can be made. What I know are some very general, but true, things; not copy-pasting from nor combining some dogmatic scripture lying in memory.
Selfperfection is necessary, and this requires concentration of nutritional value, thus by necessity agriculture. Those who do not recognize it as necessary and something that must be done and fail to do so during their life, or do it wrong, have failed life and nature.
Perfection does not exist in nature, but nature has perfection as its active direction. If everything stopped changing, conditions remained same, then eventually nature would achieve its own perfect form according to those conditions; but since everything is in constant change then this perfect form cannot be achieved. This direction toward perfection is why organisms adapt to newer conditions if changes haven't been so severe as to kill them out.
-
Self-perfection of this sort just leads to dietary orthodoxy or dietary orthorexia in the end. Nature is not perfect nor does it ever seek perfection. Perfection is a mere manmade concept, which is wholly unnatural in and of itself.Same goes for other idiotic manmade concepts such as equality, which only can exist in death, or coerced human altruism.
Anyway, we all do indeed experiment all the time with palaeo concepts, myself included. As regards sprouts, given my lack of success with sprouts, I find it rather difficult to believe that sprouted wheat could be any different, a sort of superfood.It's arbitrary, like stating that raw 100% grassfed beef is way better for one's health than raw 100% grassfed lamb.
You may not approve of Iguana, fair enough, but bear in mind he has been rather longer at this RPD lifestyle than you, as regards raising chickens, experimentation etc.
Re animals:- bacteria are actually very highly complex organisms, too. So are many animals. Indeed some of their behaviours are far more complex than humans can achieve without technology., such as electroreception. Also, human intelligence also requires access to and use of the primitive animalistic(ie mammalian/reptilian) parts of the brain, to some extent.For example, most of the world's really brilliant geniuses were loners like Tesla, Newton, Archimedes etc.etc., who clearly had unusually well-developed/enhanced frontal lobes but poorly-developed animalistic parts of their brains, thus leading to them becoming incapable of the usual human relationships, and therefore none of them had children.
-
Self-perfection of this sort just leads to dietary orthodoxy or dietary orthorexia in the end. Nature is not perfect nor does it ever seek perfection. Perfection is a mere manmade concept, which is wholly unnatural in and of itself...
A great point. I would add that there are parallels between the way people's idea of perfection is socially constructed and how dogma is socially constructed.
Nummi, for all of your claims about how you don't care for dogma/rules/scripture/orthodoxy, you are entangled in an awful lot of it. What's worse, you seem to be utterly oblivious of this fact.
-
I have eaten sprouted wheat for months on end in my twenties. I put it through a juicer auger type. I ate it raw. To it I added my own dressings etc. Otherwise I found it quite unappealing. I wonder how you eat it, how you hopefully enjoy it, how much you eat, and do you still eat it? It's in the details, and they seem to be missing from your lectures.
-
Nature is neither perfect or imperfect, these arguments about what is the most natural are judgmental concepts outside of ultimate reality. Nature is that which happens of itself, and could mean anything and everything.
There is no inherent exclusivity in nature, herbivores evolved in tandem with carnivores, plants with animals, fungus with bacteria...one form of life isn't more valid than others, one way of life can be just as viable as another...the proof of success is built into the genetic code of the linage of surviving generations.
On the human level we are given the scope of consciousness by which to compare or contrast different modes of living and to make subjective personal judgement of what is optimal, based on the rocky ground of reason and science.
We all have our own individual values which shape our view of what is optimal...I personally like to use a broad scope that combines personal anecdotal experience with documented evidence of successful examples of healthy and viable ways of living. There are numerous examples of large groups of people living healthy lives, on a variety of vastly different dietary approaches....
From this wider scope when discussing specific benefits of specific foods such as the alleged benefits of sprouted wheat, anecdotal evidence isn't enough proof of anything...Where are the trans-generation groups of humans who have been known to thrive on diets high in sprouted grains of any kind?? Sure there are people who claim that sprouted grains are healthy, but how do we quantify those claims??? Are there any examples sprouted grain champions who would best the top cage fighters, mountain climbers, apex breeders, intellectually powerful, or the longest living, people in the world?
Perhaps there are some individuals who can indeed thrive on diets high in sprouted grain, though generally speaking I just dont see the evidence that sprouted grains provide any advantage over diets based on animal foods which could be combined with various ratios of non grain based plants that were used as human staples before the age of cultivation.
On a personal note I cant stand the taste of sprouted wheat or any other grain enough to even consider a long term experiment...I have from time to time added some sprouts to my salads, but have always been somewhat repulsed by the flavor, and had a strong aversion to anything more than a trace amount.
-
I agree, and believe though hunger may have driven people to eat grains in times of want, it wasn't the primary factor in the development of the widespread grain addiction that spawned the agricultural revolution. From my point of view there isnt a linear progression of cause and effect that easily explains the rise of the grain headed hominids. There is an element of quantum co-arising, that poses a "chicken or the egg" dichotomy which cannot be addressed with "either or"linear thinking.
As Gabor Mates work has shown, addiction is a holistic phenomenon, and the presence of addictive substance in the environment are often not nearly important as the patterns of behavior established by the society at large. Sociological factors must of played a huge role, at the time of the divergence between "hunter gatherer' and agrarian. The fact is that though in some areas humans had diminished the big game staples of hunting cultures, there continued to be nomadic people who continued to follow the herds to new frontiers...and in many cases succeeded in becoming herders of large open range livestock, which provided them everything they needed....... while in other cases the early agrarians began to set up long term structures and institutional establishments. Even in time of famine and want the agrarians stayed put and would no longer venture out in search of food, and when the locust and pest ate up their grain crops many starved, rather than resort to gathering the insects, and digging for grubs. The same spirit which made them raise the temples to the gods, and become attached to a central location, is the same spirit of addiction which lent itself to the rise of a grain brain culture.
This did not happen overnight....the establishment of religious temples, and stone permanent structures of early civilization occurred during transitional phases, usually near water ways where even when there was no hunting, fish was plentiful as primary staple, and enabled many early agricultural communities to prosper and populations to explode. Over the course of generations deeply ingrained behavior pasterns developed, the people became totally domesticated and acculturated, indoctrinated with ideology, they forgot entirely the ways of their nomadic ancestors. Divisions of labor and hierarchy emerged and created an underclass who no longer had the freedom, time, or know how to forage and fish for supplemental food. This underclass became entirely addicted to the daily bread rations, and became reliant on the nectar of the tards( known as wine and beer) for their diversions....without even realizing it humanity became simultaneously addicted to Grain, as well as to civilization itself.
These are general observations which span the gamut of the many conflicting sides humanity and not a moral judgment...... perhaps Aldous Huxley was right in, how prescribing an opiate to the masses is in some way necessary in order to make people of civilization enjoy a life of servitude. Growing and using various forms of dope has brought more humans together than was possible in hunter gatherer groups, where without narcotics there seems to be a natural limit to the number of people the tribal alpha hierarchy can tolerate.
I was at a job sight once and there as a black man, a bi racial, a Cuban, a Guatemalan, a Mexican, and myself smoking a joint, and the black man says with a huge smile as he takes a hit "this is the one thing that can bring everyone together" and everybody there laughs . Be it sharing tea, smoking tobacco, coffee, or even "Breaking bread" there seems to be something about these euphoric substances which can break down primal barriers and unite large numbers of people...and even if nations of people are only united out of some hopeless codependency, which is overall detrimental to the health of the individual, perhaps some how by creating unity and cooperation, the communal living dope growing agrarian humanity isnt without some merit??
The stimulants are preventing neurodegeneration somewhat because the majority of humans aren't producing their own.... ******* ....in abundance. What's missing?
-
I first came to this forum 4 years ago? I've read posts older than that. I see what is talked about now... what has been talked about inbetween. You are all stuck. You are simply regurgitating same old, only difference is that you are wording same thing somewhat more nicely or strongly. Seeming appearance seems to change, but essence is still same; essence has not improved at all.
One thing I've noticed, not just here but overall everywhere, is that truly extremely few can actually describe and explain their own info-processing steps, how they came to their assumptions and conclusions. Reasons and causes why. Honesty especially to self. Most people simply blurt out short replies that say and give at best nothing but are rather insults and other such low garbage that brings less than nowhere.
Rather astonishing how short and narrow field of view of almost everyone is. Field of view regarding written texts and especially thoughts and meanings within those texts, but also field of view when it comes to making logical connections and conclusions. And when such short and narrow perspective meets one that requires significantly wider and deeper so to even hope to comprehend what is said and why... And because of this shortness/narrowness, short blurts of nothingness and insults and demeanings follow instead of actually at least trying to explain and reason, to be rational and logical.
Self-perfection of this sort just leads to dietary orthodoxy or dietary orthorexia in the end. Nature is not perfect nor does it ever seek perfection. Perfection is a mere manmade concept, which is wholly unnatural in and of itself.
Not selfperfection, but selfimprovement. There's distinct difference. Selfperfection alone yes leads to orthodoxy/stuckness, but not selfimprovement as there is always some way to make better. But even for selfperfection there is place within selfimprovement; some aspects of living that require perfecting to whatever degree before can move onto next.
About nature and its "perfection" I already said some.
Perfection is not solely humanmade concept, there is actual such aspect/functioning/processing to working of world/nature. There is that which humans have made up (which is nonsense), and that which is real (cannot be described by words we use); of that natural/real perfection can somewhat describe direction toward it, and up to reader whether reader can comprehend or not. World/nature also has like layers of perfection, and all that which lies between layers/points of different perfections, regions of becoming and unbecoming so to say.
But why are you even talking about perfection and assuming everyone regards it same way you do? How about you define what you regard perfection as? So that anyone could immediately see what it means to you, thus what exactly you are talking about (or is another issue that you can't understand what others are talking about because you don't know things as well? simple solution to this is selfimprovement, this very thing you apparently are very much against).
Perfection does exist, it can be achieved, but each aspect of life and living, and functioning of world, has its own levels of perfections. This world, as it at present is, has conditions and factors. Nature, life of nature lies within those factors. Conditions/factors which have their own perfect forms; nature which has its own perfect forms; entities/creatures/organisms that have their own perfect forms -- interchanges and workings between all these that also have their perfect forms and ways. Different perfections clashing, different becomings to perfection clashing. So obviously world is a mess, and manifestation of true perfection seems to be nonexistent and truly impossible.
Anyway, we all do indeed experiment all the time with palaeo concepts, myself included. As regards sprouts, given my lack of success with sprouts, I find it rather difficult to believe that sprouted wheat could be any different, a sort of superfood. It's arbitrary, like stating that raw 100% grassfed beef is way better for one's health than raw 100% grassfed lamb.
"Anyway, we all do indeed experiment all the time with palaeo concepts, myself included." -- this means that you are dogma follower. Because you specified phrase "paleo concepts". It means severely limited views and disregarding anything that goes against paleo dogma. I personally am not talking from perspective of some "paleo" dogmatic limitation/garbage, I'm talking about functioning of body and what it needs so that it could function as good as can achieve and ever better if possible -- this is what dieting and health is about when regarding food, not any "paleo" or any other dogmatic cultistic prohibiting garbage. Only body and its needs and how to fulfill those needs, and how to become ever stronger (ever stronger as in improving, similar to what you might regard as "evolution"; self-improvement comes when "evolution" has achieved its goal in enabling organism self aspect, thus self-improvement; point from which onward movement can not occur if you keep yourself subject to only instinctive ways).
Sprouts and superfoods? They are not. They are simply nutritious food, and that's all.
That sprouted wheat "could be any different". This means that you have never even tried on yourself to confirm whether it is or not, that all you do regarding it is simply believe something you've read somewhere and believe what some priest (like Iguana) is telling you.
When you tried sprouts, how was your overall diet, balanced and stable or rather not? And how would you ever know what is balanced and stable if you're merely a follower of something that tells you to regard things some, whatever, way? And how was your nervous system functioning at that time when you tried them, was it lower/weaker/numbed, any issues that could compromise your sensings, or could you actually honestly feel effects of food after consuming them? Because if nervous system functioning is too weak/numbed, can't feel much anything. And considering that you've practiced veganism in your past, how much nervous system damage, thus sensing and also logic-process damage, did you cause to yourself?
And, even when leaving previous aside, it isn't arbitrary. Buckwheat, barley, wheat, and all other grains and seeds have different effects specific to their species/varieties. Just like fish, beef, kangaroo, sheep, chicken, pig, etc are different. Even more so that consistencies of all grains and seeds are differ, more so different when they are sprouting and already synthesizing vitamins and doing all those other sprouting things. Yet more so different as to soils they grew on. More so that some sprouts are not that good, and some sprouts can be eaten safely only during very limited sprouting period.
So really, your claims about seeds/grains/legumes overall, regardless condition they are in, is based on what? Belief and dogma, not reason/logic/mind. Same apparently goes to all of you.
You may not approve of Iguana, fair enough, but bear in mind he has been rather longer at this RPD lifestyle than you, as regards raising chickens, experimentation etc.
Exactly same as some vegans/meat-avoiders attempt to assume some position of authority and that "they are absolutely right" merely because they've practiced those ridiculous ways for decades. You think with Iguana this is any different? How long he has practiced is of no significance other than it shows how long he has been stuck; just like those vegans/meat-avoiders are totally stuck; for decades.
Could as well say that wars and raping and killing, etc -- that these are all something all of us should actively practice, merely because they've been done for thousands of years and more.
Whether someone is right or wrong is not determined by how long someone has practiced that whatever, but whether what he practices and does is right or wrong, and how right and how wrong; and more importantly how big and bad wrongs are attached to rights of those practices, and likewise what rights are attached to wrongs.
Easy to claim things, and apparently very easy to get stuck to claims without actually ever verifying truth regarding them.
Re animals:- bacteria are actually very highly complex organisms, too. So are many animals. Indeed some of their behaviours are far more complex than humans can achieve without technology., such as electroreception. Also, human intelligence also requires access to and use of the primitive animalistic(ie mammalian/reptilian) parts of the brain, to some extent.For example, most of the world's really brilliant geniuses were loners like Tesla, Newton, Archimedes etc.etc., who clearly had unusually well-developed/enhanced frontal lobes but poorly-developed animalistic parts of their brains, thus leading to them becoming incapable of the usual human relationships, and therefore none of them had children.
There isn't anything that cannot be learned. All that those "loners" did is not anything special. All abilities and skills they had can be learned, trained, achieved, and it is very easy to do. But it takes quite some while because nervous system, metabolism, overall body functioning has to be improved -- self-improvement -- for example to train/learn reading speed up to 100 words a second took me 8 months (also depends on difficulty of texts, but I read books regarded as most difficult, so...). This increase in reading speed, not looking words but looking at thoughts behind words, significantly improves thinking capability and speed of thoughts, depth and width and other dimensions. Overall info-processing functions of body are improved.
One day I took a magnet into my hand and it felt weird, realized by moving my other hand around it that I could feel magnetic fields, couldn't do this ever before. My senses are more sensitive/sharper (or is word improved more appropriate?). Also flashes of true 3D vision; picture any (most likely) of you see via your eyes is not 3D, but is same as 2D picture on paper; true "3D" vision is such that you can literally feel shapes-textures-surfaces with eye-sight; to have such vision actively part of self, not 2-3 very short flashes, for that need rather significantly more powerful functioning of nervous system and whole body than I currently have. Many more things not any of you have ever even remotely mentioned of having achieved or being on path toward achieving; all you, any of you, do here is merely rewording same old you've already achieved; totally stuck.
As body improves, deeper issues reveal that need to be corrected so to heal more fully. What nearly all of you are doing is assuming a "normal" position of health and body functioning and instead of making yourself ever better you are keeping yourselves stuck at that specific chosen "normalcy" condition.
I know how to achieve all this and much more, will take very long time, years upon years of work, and will be rewarding beyond my current imagination. And will come to know exactly how to achieve all this and more, which means can likewise easily give advice to self-willing listeners as what to do and what not to do so to be on path of self-realization and self-improvement. Instead of keeping self stuck to some dogma.
Most of you here have no life's purpose, you don't even know what life and living is, and many of you here are imitating being on purposeful/lifeful road. Belief/fanaticism/dogmatism nullifies purpose and living, thus also nullifies self aspect within yourselves, thus self-improvement cannot occur, thus completely stuck, for decades and for entire life-time like in case of some already mentioned.
If cannot see self then cannot see others. Before can see others first need to learn to see self. I can see myself very well, which means I can see you all very well. Blindness regarding self at same means blindness regarding others; blindness regarding others means misinterpretations and mistranslations of others, because you don't see others as they are because you don't see yourself as you are. Simple logic, world is weird.
-
From this wider scope when discussing specific benefits of specific foods such as the alleged benefits of sprouted wheat, anecdotal evidence isn't enough proof of anything...Where are the trans-generation groups of humans who have been known to thrive on diets high in sprouted grains of any kind??
Who, except you now, has here ever said anything about diets high in sprouted grains of any kind?
Sure there are people who claim that sprouted grains are healthy, but how do we quantify those claims???
Sure there are people who claim that eating raw meat is healthy, but how do we quantify those claims???
Are you really so blind regarding yourself? Simply looking for justifications and excuses why to demonize something you have never even tried on yourself to see what truth regarding it is. And just because something has on it label "scientific proof", is in actual reality mere opinions and personal views and personal experiences of someone else, based on measurement systems that are themselves again based on someone elses opinions. Such a thing as "scientific proof" does not exist.
To get it right, anything right, have to see relativistic functioning (not "science" relativism garbage). One thing or aspect of something, in relation to or relativized by others connected to it or influencing it, thus determining its condition and being, thus real truth.
Either you have something personal you can show/describe/explain, and especially verify for yourself, thus can inform others how verification process works so that others could perhaps do same, or you don't. Personal bodily and environmental conditions, how and when and why, discriminating differences and comparing them, trying on ourselves. But not some fanatical cultistic dogmatic regurgitations merely for sake of glorifying some ridiculous dogma.
Are there any examples sprouted grain champions who would best the top cage fighters, mountain climbers, apex breeders, intellectually powerful, or the longest living, people in the world?
This too attached directly to your overconsumption of sprouted grain nonsense... Delusional much, or severe prejudice, bias, preconception? Same exact type of excuses vegans use for glorifying their far worse garbage. And you assume yourselves to be better than them, yet behave essentially same.
Are you really so delusional that you assume that eating basically only one food item one can become some great and powerful entity? I would very much like to see you be "oh great and powerful" by eating almost only/mainly bulls balls, or whatever. Severe health issues would quickly follow... starving yourself of so much essential, and overconsuming many other nutrients.
Perhaps there are some individuals who can indeed thrive on diets high in sprouted grain,
And the only one who began talking about eating sprouted grains in such excessive amounts, is you and none else.
though generally speaking I just dont see the evidence that sprouted grains provide any advantage over diets based on animal foods which could be combined with various ratios of non grain based plants that were used as human staples before the age of cultivation.
Civilizations here on Earth have existed for millions of years and longer. Civilizations that have been far far more advanced than this current humanity.
For example statues from hundreds/thousands of years ago, making of which requires by "modern" standards at least very highly advanced 3D printer that can print marble to perfection. Printers that officially do not even exist yet (not that printers were used, as there are other ways too; but sculpting out such sculptures with chisels and hammers is impossible). You want specific "links" to such "sculptures" and examples? Then go do some honest research, and honest thinking that must follow such honest research.
Age of cultivation... there have been many.
And this "paleo times" that gets constantly repeated here over and over, personally none of you ever having seen that such time actually existed, and base your own "opinions" regarding it solely on opinions of someone else, some "scientists" and other dogmatists... This paleo time that you so childishly favor, never existed. Proof? Only ones who can prove it to you are you yourselves, but this does require honest research and honest thinking.
You have truly absolutely no conception nor idea what was staple dieting in those "paleo times" that never existed to begin with. There were people at those times, many different peoples, they did eat stuff, they also cultivated things. But running around wild with simple tools and such? Sure, just as people doing essentially same exist right now at this time too, mostly in jungle areas.
On a personal note I cant stand the taste of sprouted wheat or any other grain enough to even consider a long term experiment...I have from time to time added some sprouts to my salads, but have always been somewhat repulsed by the flavor, and had a strong aversion to anything more than a trace amount.
That might be you specifically. Or it might also be dogma in your brain dictating what and how to regard. Or you're simply missing the fact that being on very specific way of dieting, and then trying something that really does not fit that kind of dieting, simply cannot work just as easily as trying a few times.
And obviously, as should be well known to all here, tastes change as diets change. Digestion changes as diets change. So if you keep yourself stuck to one specific way of eating that discludes other specific food items, and have formed such way of eating over years, stuck to it, then perhaps it would be best if you simply stay quiet regarding that which you do not eat and never will, because you are keeping specific digestion that does not suit to sprouted grains and many others and as such sprouted grains would not taste as good nor digest as good either.
It is rather dumb to base "grains are all and only bad" merely because you dogmatically haven't eaten them, don't and won't, and your personal digestion does not suit them.
Nummi, for all of your claims about how you don't care for dogma/rules/scripture/orthodoxy, you are entangled in an awful lot of it. What's worse, you seem to be utterly oblivious of this fact.
Those stuck cannot see themselves as they truly are. Oblivious are you not I.
You haven't even personally tested whether claims about wheat, you keep yourself stuck to, are true or not... Instead you have preconceptions and you look (research) for any justifications how to "justify" those, and attempt to make up newer seemingly sane excuses to justify and glorify your cultistic dogma.
I had those exact same claims before me about wheat, from exact same dogma that you still are stuck to, but I tested their validity. And you call me "entangled" and "oblivious" while you don't even bother testing for yourself, on yourself, truly honestly, claims you hold as absolutely true, whether claims you fanatically adhere to actually hold up to reality.
Claims about agriculture being "bad". Ridiculous, as after animal/beast/savage stage development, agriculture becomes necessity, as societies emerge and become civilizations. And agriculture also is supposed to improve, and eventually become obsolete as something yet greater is supposed to take its place -- all of which has to be done right, not wrong; that these things can be done wrong does not mean all of them are wrong and bad.
Agriculture is bad only for those who are incapable of doing it themselves and sustaining and improving themselves with its aid, and/or by attempting to do it they would instead mess things up so bad that they would be better without. This does not mean it is bad overall, it just means there are those so dumb or low advanced they simply can't with it.
Just because some can't use toilet paper without having their finger go to shit, does not mean ass is some big bad thing that should be done away with.
You call me entangled, trying to convey to it sense of stuckness? Why use this word "entangled"? Entangled sure, as everything is in relation to all else, thus entangled as dependent on all else and actively anyones identity being created/caused by all else. But not stuck. How much "entangled" is, depends on how much of world one can perceive and feel and use, and how straightforward and honest to oneself one is.
I have eaten sprouted wheat for months on end in my twenties. I put it through a juicer auger type. I ate it raw. To it I added my own dressings etc. Otherwise I found it quite unappealing. I wonder how you eat it, how you hopefully enjoy it, how much you eat, and do you still eat it? It's in the details, and they seem to be missing from your lectures.
I eat them raw, sometimes together with other seeds, sometimes I add spices and stuff (not due to taste but due to spices-etc having metabolically and health wise great effects). Taste wise best timing to eat is 2-3 days after they begin growing small roots (weather also effects their germination and growth and taste), before that taste isn't that great and after that begins tasting grassy.
I eat a handful to two at a time. Not every time, not every month. I've eaten 6 months straight, every day some, then 2-3 months none, then 3-4 months again. They are constantly available as I have chickens and I sprout for them, and eat same myself. Closeby me there's a family whose children cannot eat any eggs, nor many things at all, due to allergies and stuff that are due to parents not having been smart enough in time for children, they can't eat eggs except those from my chickens (regardless whether those eggs are massproduced garbage or from homegrown chickens; they are all fed with unsprouted grains), because I sprout all wheat I give my chickens. Eggs from chickens who have eaten unsprouted wheat, taste is awful; but when chickens on sprouted wheat, then there is no bad taste and instead is very good.
Your behavior, most of yours here, is exactly same as that of vegans trying to defend their cultistic garbage. Your responses are also exactly same in essence and effect -- short garbage that is meant to attack instead of ask questions and provide explanations and descriptions of causes that determine what is what and why. As tyler said "paleo concepts" -- only that which is within "paleo" dogma borders, only that which paleo dogma allows. A cult just like veganism, both are bad, one worse than other.
All you do is say short things, but not ever describing your own processes as to how you came to those "conclusions". Because you don't have any, you simply believe and follow. If you don't describe how you came to them, then how are readers supposed to verify whether your conclusions are correct or false? Vegans do same thing as you do, nothing at best but mostly attacks and excuses when in light of information that shows them to be wrong.
-
The "civilisations appearing on Earth millions of years ago"concept/theme has been so throughly debunked like with the
flat earth theory that it is absurd to bring it up. As regards fanous people like Tesla, it is not realistic to assume that anyone, least of all yourself, could emulate his key abilities within 1 lifetime. Yes, I know of that "10,000 hours "claim but Tesla, for example, was able to literally see his inventions in his mind's eye, so that he could work out whether they would function or not. Marcos had a photographic memory, again a trait unlikely for someone else to attain short of a billion-to-1 chance happening such as a rare head-injury(see Orando Serrell) etc. etc.
re "If we say we are animals, then we also must say we are bacteria. Obviously not true." Actually, there are now valid scientific theories which claim that bacteria are a key, essential part of all macro-organisms:-
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170321-why-your-diet-may-be-bad-for-your-gut-bacteria (http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170321-why-your-diet-may-be-bad-for-your-gut-bacteria)
Anyway, others' personal experiences, do seem to run counter to your claims. I have tried raw sprouts even when eating RVAF diets as well, other than my 100% raw sprouts diet prior to going RVAF, and they did not work then either.
Ultimately, behind all the guff, your point is that agriculture can be a good thing(the best thing?) if properly managed by humans. Fair enough. After all, some of us cannot get hold of genuine raw wild foods on a regular 100% basis, so improving agricultural methods if one has access to a small farm of some sort can be a good idea.
-
Ultimately, behind all the guff, your point is that agriculture can be a good thing(the best thing?) if properly managed by humans. Fair enough. After all, some of us cannot get hold of genuine raw wild foods on a regular 100% basis, so improving agricultural methods if one has access to a small farm of some sort can be a good idea.
Notions of "good" or "bad" are always relative: something good in certain circumstances or/and for something or somebody may be bad in other circumstances or/and for something or somebody else. ;)
BTW, congrats for having read all the above drivel!
-
Translation:
I been coming to this forum for a long time and everything you guys ever posted is composed of the same 26 letters of the alphabet over and over... Nothing new! Unlike me. You guys don't know anything about diet because everything you eat turns to shit... You guys don't know anything... Blah-blah-blah. Bulls balls! Wah-wah-wah!
-
Translation: I been coming to this forum for a long time and everything you guys ever posted is composed of the same 26 letters of the alphabet over and over... Nothing new! Unlike me...
LOL, well played!