I hope Aajonus really takes the time to articulate not only his own years of experience with fruitarian and high fruit RVAF/instinctive eating but also the SPECIFICS as to why such things are so damaging for modern people and why his specific approach intentionally goes above and beyond or sideways to a supposed natural eating plan that is entirely too simplistic such as in
natural hygiene to restore health.
The books only suggest a mere chunk of symptoms (over emotionality) of fruit eating and doesn't have a concise blurb that people can separate from whatever other 'oddball' theories as to how destructive these diets can become or how foolish the detractors are to regularly dismiss of a wide variety of tools that can be essential for healing. These rebuttals or scoffing are usually based entirely on concepts of 'natural' rather than what things are actually working and therefore have little bearing for contemporary people.
As for disagreeing with Graham, and other high fruit dieters, even amongst the majority of non-Aajonus followers of the (raw and cooked) paleo and primal world as well as the raw vegan world itself is largely in unison.
Often times you hear the pathetic attempts to slander or group these people as snake oil salesmen preventing people from the easily accessible health benefits of store bought fruit eating...and yet I would argue that in each one of these often diametrically opposing ideas of health (certainly ones I disagree with) you will find far healthier people than those on a high fruit diets who are often secretly or overtly in awful health.
Unfortunately in the cooked world which is the the highest percentage of anti-high fruit in paleo/primal many of the arguments are focused on "too much sugar" or fructose in modern fruits that is out of line with supposed low sugar fruits coming in nature. While this is a legitimate point IMO it doesn't get to the heart of the matter. Often times in these cooked paleo diets (and even the heavily anti-cooked Primal Diet) cooked starch is seen as an OPTIMAL replacement..which is never articulated well enough to suit the rawies..particularly because this is also 'sugar' in a slightly different form. The results usually speak for themselves but the understanding becomes confusing particularly by 'raw' logic.
For those who insist on sugar as a mainstay of the human diet its hard to convince that fruit in nature was low sugar..less sweet and appealing..difficult to obtain with larger populations of natural consumers for how else would one get enough sugar? But even these arguments are unconvincing and almost irrelevant in the actual examination of what the fruits we have available are doing to the modern people that consume them..not the theoretical cave person that could have potentially eaten larger amounts of fruits perhaps in a more healthful way in a natural environment...free of the poor modern internal environment of accumulated wastes/metals/fungus/bacteria/and other unbalanced micro-organisms.
Many have the experience coupled by a scientific understanding of why excessive fruit is harmful but the way they frame it often comes out in arguments that are ridiculous to already converted and naive. Some other raw foodists who are either have not yet experienced such..or have such an already skewed sense of assessment as to what is healthy that are often due the adhering to the same theories which suggest everyone else is wrong and therefore whatever state they are in due to their ideal diet is right and free from external criticisms..particularly of cooked food dieters and their 'standards' of weight/what is attractive etc..
Anyway claims such as that excess of 150 grams of fruit will make you fat or some other nonsense will not carry over to rawies. Most people (barring some people with some heavily messed up systems) who have ever been on a high fruit diets of course will drop lbs like crazy as with zero carbs diets even of 100% cooked and greasy foods. Weight loss is hardly signal that a diet is good. The important issue is whether the people are even capable of building HEALTH: newer levels of healthy fat and muscle or even bone/organ etc...NOT DUE TO DEFICIENCY OF INTAKE (as even standard industrial eaters can and will heal these situations) but due to other corresponding problems associated with that WOE.
Other than Aajnous, often you only get the real information on the dangers of
particularly raw fruit sugar (even as opposed to modern sugars and starches) in the raw vegan camps who have had decades of experience with the symptoms associated with such.
In my opinion, this is the perfect 'control' group of the same level of exclusion of animal foods of which to examine this issue. Often people find the ability to fix those issues to some degree ON [equally deficient of animal foods] raw vegan diets.
---
It would be a nice dream..that whatever peoples opinions are about Aajonus or others that the RAF or RVAF community can be the first to call a spade a spade when sizing up which aspects of which programs are actually healing disease and which things are essentially even making relatively well people more sick.
Now unfortunately alot of peoples only access to other people doing raw diets is through the internet..but if anyone has ever lived in New York or LA or Miami or places with large raw and vegan populations..you'd be privy to alot more face to face and also old war stories about just how dangerous this stuff is. There have been people on this forum who have commented on such even within the RVAF communities.
Doug Graham - physical criticisms
http://youtu.be/VsmcYRSvwGMhttp://www.30bananasaday.com/forum/topics/dr-grahams-jaw?xg_source=activityid=2684079%3ATopic%3A911996&page=1#commentsYou can see the kind of excuse-ism in rationalizing things that surely are the cause of the diets themselves. For all intents and purposes many of these high fruit dieters - that basically only some really desperate people look up to and never truly functional healthy people- had 0 significant health problems (like cancer not acne) and were always to some degree fit and athletic and furthermore still really don't stack up at all to probably 10s of thousands or more in their same corresponding age groups in fitness or health.
Ann Osborne(fruitarian) and Scott Wheeler (Primal)
http://youtu.be/w-PcGP0BLqMSome of many sure signs of high fruit consumption on any program are seen in emotional state/irritability, soul-less/black eyes(also a physical trait that gets discussed here on this site) and one of two types of skin problems (alligator like skin in older folks, smoother cloudier almost ODO-like [star trek DS9] in younger folks in addition to poor hair/nails etc.. is a sure sign of the fungus and candida they claim they don't have - more on this below). Also in most cases emaciated to low body-weight and inability to put on lean mass regardless of extreme food intakes where others on healthy diets can succeed on much lower caloric levels. These are in addition to the same problems all high carb diets are prone to...its just that people on Orinish type cooked diets tend to hold up better long term as they arn't digging as deep into old wastes and other problems with fruit sugars.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9ccZkGonpg(on transparent skin/fungus)
same age ~ as Graham..mostly low sugar vegan..very little paleo food..'toxic' supplements superfoods. accused like all 'low sugar' dieters of being on steroids and HGH..but even if so, use of these things alone produce relatively dissimilar results amongst even heavy duty athletes..never-mind common slobs with the worst diet approaches.
----
Meanwhile there are the people that propagate the entirely impossible to follow 'low carb' veg diet ala Ann Wigmore/HHI/Cousens diet and healing oriented approach like Brian Clement and Densie Mari that seem in good health or even other low sugar emphasis like DW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-50X4AFqro&feature=relatedThis information I completely disagree with of course..but I can respect that despite the difficultly of following such a program (from experience) that its the far safer health decision than following a diet high in modern fruits -vegan or not. To me THESE diets are the ones we can legitimately point to as deficient of important animal based nutrients but not more destructive internal problems caused by fruits.
Otherwise how can one explain the least paleo of raw 'natural' diet of sprouts, algae, supplements, nuts, and so forth that are so deemed unimportant-->toxic (that are also even high starch carb in some cases and include cooked grains) maintain some sense of visual health and composure of a healthy human being.
Its my experience in meeting some of these longer term low-sugar raw vegans and vegetarians that there were indeed the few that seemed normal or even healthy composure with main flaws being presumably neurological ( ok i'll just say neurotic) and being too thin. Other than being something of an ego-jerk (and like I said proposing a diet that is far too challenging) Clement seems to be an even greater exception in doing pretty well without animal foods for 4 decades while restricting fruit for that period. But all around other than a few more minor faults (in comparison to hopelessly sick fruit dieters) their incredibly more-so 'paleo deficient' diet seemed to be working far better even then the people who came from largely healthy and athletic backgrounds that seem perpetualy on egg-shells in aggressively defending their faulty results against obvious successful examples through their poor "well it should be this way" logic.
So it will be interesting to see what this debate reveals to the truly open minded and likely not the people who will hopelessly continue to see what they wish to see. As for me, with all this collective obvious evidence it strikes me as incredibly distorted how
anyone can surmise that the type of diet one chooses to heal has to do merely with abstaining from grain and modern based foods and cooked foods when the results when looking at raw paleo dieters, raw primal dieters, raw and cooked vegans to cooked zero carb and cooked primal/paleo dieters really effectively show precisely the opposite that certain aspects of what is 'natural' are far more important than others to be attuned to, some being less relevant and others far more destructive.
http://youtu.be/VUh0rMdoJYo12 years all raw primal from gall-bladder disease.
http://youtu.be/ie8yn2J08Qcfor good measure
