The intense acid in lemon juice denatures the proteins in the meat. It's not exactly raw. I love it myself though!

See, here's the deal, MacGeek.

The problem isn't the acute problems that come up, like, for instance, you get extra mucus or a stiff neck (or whatever symptom) immediately, within a day after eating some junk.  You can see those immediately, so they can't surprise you, except the first time they happen.

Those situations aren't the problem.

The problem might be decreased stamina, sex drive, energy, muscle tone, strength, mood, etc., that take longer to show up.  That depends on which symptoms show up in your individual case, and which of those impairs you to some degree. Let's say you're an athlete, and need the extra aerobic stamina that eating all raw gives you.   It's important to at least try all raw for several months.  That way you know what you can expect from it.  These types of symptoms take longer to go away and come back, so it takes some time eating a certain way to improve or worsen them.

The problem almost certainly is the heart disease, cancer, strokes, diabetes, etc., that take decades to happen, and which may very well take your life earlier than you want to die. 

Often those things can be predicted with family history, your personal habits (like diet, smoking, drug use, exercise, etc.), exposure to toxins, and blood work. 

Not always, though.   

Do you feel lucky?  How lucky?  Those are the real questions.

Yes, of course. I'm not worried about the immediate symptoms at all. I laugh at people who think that just because they don't get negative symptoms immediately, that that means the food did no harm.

I would like to live to as close to my life-span potential as possible, disease free. My concerns are cancer, heart disease, auto-immune diseases, etc. I've never drank alcohol in my life, and never will, and same goes for smoking and drugs.

I guess I'm just trying to understand exactly how it is that something I eat today can have an actual impact on my health for the rest of my life, because otherwise there'd be no justification to deprive myself of all the delicious things people have created. If one person gains weight when they eat pie, and I don't gain weight when I eat pie, what else is going on in my body? What else, aside from weight gain, which can be clearly seen, happens inside the body when something like pie is consumed? And how quickly is the body able to regenerate itself from any negative effects from the pie?

Thank you for the responses.

What I don't understand is, how exactly does something cause harm in the long term?

If I eat an apple pie from Whole Foods, and then eat 100% raw paleo for the next three months, where in my body is the harm done by that pie? Can it be seen or measured in any way?

And, I'm sure we can all agree that if that apple pie was the ONLY unhealthy thing I ever ate in my life, that it would have no effect whatsoever on my health, correct?

And if this is the case, there must be a threshold, an amount of unhealthy food beneath which it can't have any effect on you because it's too insignificant. What is this amount? Surely it's more than one apple pie in an entire lifetime.

But more importantly, how exactly does it engage in long-term harm of the body? All evidence of it is gone not long after you consume it. And the body is constantly regenerating itself. And furthermore, if the pie is the ONLY unhealthy thing you ever eat, it Doesn't cause long-term harm. So, long-term harm can only come from "too much" unhealthy food eaten regularly. It's an accumulative thing. It's not like one apple pie causes x disease 50 years after you consume it.

I used to think that since i ate healthy all week, then the weekend was party time... all i was really doing was trashing my good weeks work with a bunch of bullshit in one day (because you felt so crap, you didnt to it two days in a row haha)

You can eat shit till 50 and then clean yourself out... it just means that you wasted your years up to 50 not being as healthy as you could have been.. squandering your prime to masturbate your mouth with those 3% donuts.... haha.

But hey, i remember getting so depressed from cutting out 'snacks' and 'yummy food' that i really questioned if life was worth living without them.... thats one hell of a drug....

Well, I'm not even talking about delicious foods that make you feel like crap. I'm talking about the standard "healthy" diet, that 999 out of 1000 people in America would consider to be super healthy, but that does include some desserts, bread, rice, beans, cooked meat, etc. I'm not talking about eating super unhealthy food. I'm just wondering if that "healthy organic" diet that most raw paleo's no longer consider healthy, is Actually unhealthy, and how we know that.

I think about this a lot, because I eat 100% raw organic, but I look around and see all the people in their 40s, 50s, 60s, etc, who are doing just fine without worrying about food at all.

And then of course in a lot of cases when you look closer, they're not actually doing fine. And they get some terrible disease before they're 70.

But still, questions swirl in my mind. If they do get a terrible disease by 70, was it what they ate in their 20s that caused it? Do things really build up in the body over that long a time period?

Some of the primary questions that I ponder regularly these days are:

1. Do I really have to eat as perfectly as I'm eating in order to evade chronic or degenerative illness and/or cancer?

2. Does what I eat now, in my early 20s, really have a definitive and inescapable effect on the rest of my life?

3. Is the effect of food on health simply based on what your ratio of healthy to unhealthy food is? In other words, if you eat 99% healthy, but eat donuts for that last 1%, will those donuts have an impact on your health? And if not, why not? What about 2%? 3%? If 97% of what you're eating is raw vegetables, fruits, meat, etc, can that 3% of donuts really have an impact? How does it work? Is there a tipping point? Or is it just an infinitely curved line? Does it follow a similar working to the laws of motion? (i.e. Something must receive a minimum amount of force applied to it before it will begin to move). In the food case, this would be: A person must eat a certain amount of unhealthy food before it can adversely affect that persons health.

4. Are desserts made of whole foods (like what you find at whole foods) healthier than what you'd find at safeway? (with the massive lists of chemicals and preservatives, etc)

5. If you eat whatever you want until you're 50, and then go to 100% raw organic, does your body just clean itself out in a few years and you're good to go? Or does what you did in the years previous to 50 have a damning effect on you forever?

6. Why does it feel as though we Really need nice warm foods (like soups) during cold weather? How does completely avoiding all cooked food make sense living in a cold climate?

7. Kind of a general summary of all of the above. I see other young people eating whatever they want, day after day, week after week, and their bodies are functioning perfectly. Is something bad really building up inside them? How? Can it be seen? How do we know this?

8. What other factors contribute to health aside from food? And can they condemn you to illness even in the face of a perfect diet?

Basically, how do we know how any of this works? And how do we know that something like, for example, homemade lasagna, is unhealthy? (just the first thing that came to mind). Let's assume it was all made from scratch at home, and had no added sweeteners, preservatives, chemicals, etc. Just cooked pasta, melted cheese, tomato sauce, cooked meat, etc. This looks, smells, tastes and feels really good. What is it doing that will cause disease? Does it really cause disease? How do we know?

I'm going to guess that dried mango is somehow terribly unhealthy for a person, based on the fact that it's so delicious and addictive. Am I right? Does anyone know?

Thanks.

Ask her for scientific evidence on the safety of cooked meat.

Ask her for scientific evidence on the risks of raw meat from clean, pasture fed sources.

All the other mammals are eating everything raw.

The burden of proof is on her.

Though, on a more sociable note, I do sympathize with your predicament. I have been in a few relationships myself and know what it's like to be with someone whose view is biased by the mainstream and majority vote. It's tough. But I would seriously recommend not just pandering to her demands from within the paradigm she's in, but also to try and change her paradigm by showing her that her paradigm is illogical, and just based in majority vote and mainstream ideology.

Thanks.

Yeah, for me, even seeing a Lion eating a whole Zebra, and seeing that lions don't have heart disease or artery clogging issues, is great evidence in favor of uncooked meat being perfectly fine to eat in all ways. I just want to be 100% certain.

Hello,

I guess I'm essentially a raw paleo dieter. I avoid whatever seems to be dubious in terms of health, and that leaves me with 100% organic, raw food, including meat, eggs, milk, fish, etc.

I eat raw organic grass fed beef, confident that by not being cooked at all, there is just no way that it could result in clogged arteries, cancer, or whatever else cooked meat can cause over years of consumption.

Is there some real validated science behind this idea though? I just want to verify completely, for my peace of mind. I mean, it seems as though when the fat in the meat gets heated, it essentially becomes burnt, and hardens when cooling down, and therefore clogs arteries and stuff, but I assume there's a more concrete, in depth, scientific explanation for why meat is a health hazard when cooked, and incredibly healthy when uncooked.

Thanks!