Raw freeze dried pet food?

[fireflysea]

Of course I know fresh is always optimal, but for someone who has very poor digestion, is prone to sickness, has a lot of inflammation, and also doesn't have a stable place to live and thus to store/prepare food, what do you all think of raw freeze dried pet food? I found one that is made with grass fed, cage free, and wild meats/seafood and organic fruits and veg (like 95% of the ingredients comes from tje meats/organs). I feel like it's a good way to get a variety of amino acids and nutrients ( uses muscle meat, heart, bone, kidney, liver, gizzard, etc depending on which flavor). It does also contain pumpkin seeds and added vitamins and minerals which is unfortunate but not the worst. I'm having a lot of health problems leading to massive daily bingeing (on raw foods only but still not good), so much inflammation, digestive dysfunction, extreme bloating/distention, IBS, weight and body fat gain from bingeing, and inability to like interact socially, etc etc etc. I figure this would be easy to bring about since I don't have a stable home, would simplify my food intake, and ensure a variety of amino acids/nutrients from the diff meats and organs.

Thoughts? Anyone else eat pet food? The ingredients are supposedly human grade and the freeze dried patties taste DELICIOUS

Ps sorry for any typos, writing this from my phone

[cherimoya_kid]

If anything, it's probably worse than lightly cooked food. That's just a guess.

[fireflysea]

If anything, it's probably worse than lightly cooked food. That's just a guess.

Really? Can you elaborate on this? They have a frozen variety as well but I'd need a place to store it

[Iguana]

GCB & al meticulous experiments in the 60s showed that mice fed with lightly cooked food fared worse than the ones on conventional thoroughly cooked diet. I’ve already mentioned that several times but no one seems to have taken notice.   

[Brad462]

GCB & al meticulous experiments in the 60s showed that mice fed with lightly cooked food fared worse than the ones on conventional thoroughly cooked diet. I’ve already mentioned that several times but no one seems to have taken notice.   

Ok, that is really vague and doesn't make much sense.  Can you explain why that might be please?

[TylerDurden]

Ok, that is really vague and doesn't make much sense.  Can you explain why that might be please?

It makes sense as cooking causes the creation of numerous different types of toxins plus it reduces nutrients considerably, so the less cooking the better.

[Iguana]

Yes, Brad. The hypothesis is roughly that a molecule completely wrecked (by heat) will by recognized as antigenic by the immune system and discarded while a only slightly damaged one may enter the metabolism where it may cause various disorders further down the line, for example when an enzyme remains blocked on the damaged side.

Tyler, did you read the previous posts properly?

[TylerDurden]

Tyler, did you read the previous posts properly?

Sorry, I should have been more careful re assuming. While I think you may well have a point re lightly cooked food, I do not think that toxins from heavily cooked foods are so easily gotten rid of. Sure, if the person does a lot of fasting as well, maybe, but otherwise.....

[Iguana]

I guess the problem is that even with a rather thorough cooking, there are nonetheless many molecules only slightly damaged. Most are not damaged at all and that's why we can survive on a cooked diet.

A completely carbonized food is certainly non toxic, because pure carbon is not toxic. That plainly shows there's no linear relation between cooking temperature / duration and toxicity.

The above hypothesis is only there to try to explain the results of experiments.

Cheers
François

[JeuneKoq]

I think Iguana's point wasn't about how effectively the body gets rid of cooked food toxins, but rather how the body can recognize and differentiate a toxically altered molecule from a safe one, depending on the degree of transformation this molecule has been subject to. Am I right?

Say your body is an office building, safe/useful molecules are employees, slightly-modified molecules are hit men disguised as employees, and highly-modified molecules are fully equipped mercenaries with grenades in their pockets, and bullet belts around their shoulder, Rambo style.
Which ones are more likely to be permitted entrance inside the office by the security guards at the front door? 

[eveheart]

Really? Can you elaborate on this? They have a frozen variety as well but I'd need a place to store it

Freeze-drying has a major effect on microorganisms and enzymes in food. You can find scientific research papers that explain this, if you like to read that sort of information. Rehydrating the food does not bring life back to these important substances.

I feel like it's a good way to get a variety of amino acids and nutrients ( uses muscle meat, heart, bone, kidney, liver, gizzard, etc depending on which flavor).

What you say is true, but I think there is more to eating animal meat than just amino acids and FDA-recognized nutrients.

I figure this would be easy to bring about since I don't have a stable home, would simplify my food intake, and ensure a variety of amino acids/nutrients from the diff meats and organs.

If your dietary health is really important and your present home does not support your goals, then move or figure out how to get around having no place to store and prepare food. I have eaten RPD  with just an ice chest while on the road. You don't have to eat all animal parts in one mouthful. Instead, you can have liver one day, kidney another day. Small fish and seafood are a good choice if you want the whole animal without having a storage problem.

[TylerDurden]

A completely carbonized food is certainly non toxic, because pure carbon is not toxic. That plainly shows there's no linear relation between cooking temperature / duration and toxicity.

The above hypothesis is only there to try to explain the results of experiments.

Cheers
François

Hmm, in my pre-raw days I used to eat  activated charcoal in order to get rid of a farting problem. They caused some disturbance to my digestion. I am not convinced that burnt carbon is 100% toxin-free therefore.  I would agree that in some ways, a slightly -altered chemical substance might cause further problems for the body  than a fully altered one(if taken up into the body) but cooking foods heavily increases the amounts of heat-created toxins, thus causing damage in different ways.

Interesting hypothesis of yours, though. If we take it as fact, then one would have to assume that hunter gatherer tribes were less healthy than modern peoples as they mostly only slightly cooked their foods. So much for Weston-Price's notions!

[van]

personally I'd have to see the study and note how it was conducted.  For instance were the foods and amounts identical, how many mice were studied,, were they kept in identical conditions...     And then there is the whole issue with the notion that the slightly cooked foods that were chosen may not have been as digestible as the thoroughly cooked foods, and hence not as nutritious. For I would assume the same outcome would happen for people if say the food chosen were grain or beans.  Hard to digest them unless cooked well.     It is very easy to hear about a study and slot it into our belief system when we like the outcome,,  harder is it to challenge it and look closely.     Thoroughly cooked food is hardly carbonized. 

[van]

wish I had also thought of this for the earlier post,,   I don't know if mice are effected by anti nutrients as are humans?  But long cooking times breakdown anti nutrients and hence could very possibly be another reason those mice eating thoroughly cooked food faired better,,  no anti nutrients.   

[Iguana]

JeuneKoq, yes, I think you got it right.

Tyler, this hypothesis is not mine but GCB’s. He also said in his seminar that a manager in charge of cattle feeding told him that calves fed milk pasteurized at 55°C fared the worst compared to ones fed milk pasteurized at higher temperatures and, if I remember correctly, could not survive.

I’m not sure that hunter-gatherer tribes care to cook their food at low temperature. Without pottery, they mainly grill it. Anyway there are other factors in play for their health state: first, they eat neither cereals’ grains nor dairy and next they have a lot of natural physical activities.

It is very easy to hear about a study and slot it into our belief system when we like the outcome,,  harder is it to challenge it and look closely.     Thoroughly cooked food is hardly carbonized. 

Van, I have no particular preference for this hypothesis, I don’t even care since I don’t cook my food at all! I just tell about it to show that the conventional thinking that food cooked at high temperature are necessary more toxic than food cooked at low temperature may well be wrong. I don’t pretend that thoroughly cooked food is carbonized, of course. Burned food is.

All what’s left of that study is here. I personally know rather well this Jean-Daniel who was a companion of GCB in the early years and was one of the main experimenters.
https://fr.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Ecologie-Alimentaire/conversations/topics/5934
I think I already mentioned it somewhere in this forum and even translated it.

Malheureusement Burger, lorsqu'il était au Mexique, n'a pas payé le
loyer du local où il avait laissé toutes ses affaires.
Les comptes rendus des expériences n'existent plus. Exepté dans
quelques mémoires de vieux crudivores ...

Tout ce que je sais pour ma part est dans le résumé suivant que j'ai
écrit l'été dernier.


" HISTOIRE DE SOURIS

J'ai choisi de vous rapporter quelques extraits de la conversation que
Jean-Daniel Delévaux nous a amicalement faite pendant le rassemblement
à Montbarrey en Août 2007.

Nous étions assis dans l'herbe à l'ombre d'un arbre et ce moment
privilégié a ressuscité, dans une douce magie, l'époque qui a vu la
naissance de l'instincto, il y a plus de quarante ans déjà. Quasiment
de la préhistoire donc, et racontée par un très sympathique rescapé,
s'alimentant toujours 100% cru, qui a traversé le temps pour témoigner
des premiers pas de l'instincto.

Jean-Daniel arrive à la ferme des Trois Noyers en 1965. Et déjà, dans
la cuisine des Burger, quelques souris attrapées dans les champs
servaient de cobayes pour des expériences alimentaires sur le pain et
les produits laitiers. Puis le nombre de souris augmente. Il y a des
mulots, des musaraignes, toutes sortes de races et de tout âge.
Finalement, pour une expérimentation plus rigoureuse, des souris
blanches sont achetées à l'Institut Suisse de Recherche sur le Cancer.
Ce sont des souris de même race, de même âge, et présentant toutes une
tare génétique les conduisant au cancer mammaire (souris C3H), ou au
carcinome (souris AJ).

L'expérimentation durera dix ans, avec en moyenne entre 100 et 200
souris réparties dans quelque 25 cages. Elle engloutira les salaires
de Jean-Daniel, professeur, de Guy-Claude et de sa femme Nicole.
Initialement menées entièrement par Guy-Claude, ces expérimentations
seront ensuite gérées au quotidien par une personne salariée. Trois
salariés se succéderont.

Les souris sont réparties dans divers groupes alimentaires :
- instincto
- diététique
- régime cuit
- produits laitiers
- pain

Les conclusions générales de cette expérience sont les suivantes :

a/ Le groupe le plus catastrophique est le groupe "diététique". Avec
des dénaturations supposées minimes, cette alimentation se veut
pourtant « hypotoxique » (= faiblement toxique). Elle comprend
notamment du blé bio cuit à des températures inférieures à 100°. Des
lots de souris sont alimentés avec du blé et autres aliments "bio"
chauffés à 50°, d'autres avec des aliments chauffés à 60°, d'autres à
70° et ainsi de suite. Certaines souris deviennent très maigres,
tandis que d'autres grossissent énormément. Les souris se mangent
entre elles ou meurent prématurément, d'elles-mêmes. Il n'y a pas
besoin de les tuer pour la dissection.

b/ Les cages cuites :
Curieusement les résultats sont moins mauvais qu'avec des
dénaturations « douces ». Les souris sont nourries avec des patates
cuites, de la viande cuite, du pain_ Elles se mangent aussi entre
elles. Mais ce qu'il faut retenir c'est qu'il y a globalement une
amélioration par rapport à l'alimentation diététique.

c/ Cages lait :
C'est catastrophique.
Les morts sont précédées de maladies fonctionnelles : diabètes,
rhumatismes ...
Les souris « lait » sont reconnaissables par leurs yeux qui changent
de forme, leur urine qui cristallise et leur lenteur : elles marchent
de plus en plus lentement, elles boitent. Elles ne se mangent pas
entre elles.

d/ Les cages « pain ».
Les souris ont un comportement qui confine à la folie.

e/ Les cages instincto.
Les souris sont nourries avec uniquement du cru, notamment avec les
déchets de la table crue de la ferme des Trois Noyers. Elles
obtiennent les meilleurs résultats, notamment au niveau de la
longévité, mais elles finissent tout de même par développer le cancer
correspondant à leur tare génétique.

D'autres remarques intéressantes sont à noter :
- une souris sauvage réagit à un bruit agressif en faisant un ou deux
tours sur elle-même à une vitesse ultra rapide. Plus l'intoxication de
la souris avec une alimentation dénaturée dure, plus la vitesse de ses
tours diminue ;
- pour les souris instincto, les urines s'évaporent en ne laissant
pratiquement aucun cristaux. Si elles font une « exception » : un
repas de pain, un seul repas suffit, leurs urines s'évaporant laissent
des cristaux très visibles. Ceci pendant sept jours. Ensuite le volume
de cristaux diminue largement mais reste anormal par la suite ;
- une souris grise sauvage des champs à qui on fait subir le régime
suivant meurt : un jour sans manger, un jour de lait, un jour
d'avocat. Elle meurt le lendemain après avoir mangé de l'avocat.

Cette dernière remarque est très surprenante. Il semblerait que la
détoxination du lait, que permet les nutriments sains apportés par
l'avocat, soit si violente que la souris en meurt.

Tous les résultats de l'expérimentation sont consignés, ainsi que les
rapports de dissection.

En 1974, l'expérience s'arrête, pour de multiples raisons:
- c'est une charge financière lourde, notamment pour Jean-Daniel ;
- la salariée du moment, qui s'occupe de l'expérience, a eu un conflit
plutôt violent avec Guy-Claude ;
- suffisamment de résultats particulièrement probants ont été collectés ;
- l'élevage de mouches qui permet de fournir des compléments
alimentaires aux souris dégage une puanteur incompatible avec la
vocation des Trois Noyers, devenu centre de stages et de conférences
sur l'instincto.

En 1979, les forces soviétiques envahissent l'Afghanistan. Guy-Claude
alors plongé dans l'observation de manifestations extrasensorielles,
interprète une vision comme un signe annonciateur d'une invasion de la
Suisse par les Russes. Il décide un départ précipité au Mexique. La
ferme des Trois Noyers est vendue. Toutes les affaires sont
transportées et stockées dans un local loué. Malheureusement, pendant
son séjour au Mexique, Guy-Claude n'assure pas le paiement du loyer si
bien que le propriétaire décide de vider le local et de tout brûler.
La totalité des archives sur l'expérience des souris part en fumée. 10
ans d'observations minutieusement consignées sont perdues à jamais.
Seules les mémoires de Jean-Daniel, de Guy-Claude et des salariés
conservent trace de cette expérience fondatrice qui a été un soutien
fondamental pour l'élaboration scientifique de l'instinctothérapie.

On peut retenir de ces expériences des faits très marquants, et
notamment :
- les dénaturations thermiques et l'usage du lait sont très nocives ;
- cela peut provoquer des maladies comme les rhumatismes ou des
dérèglements du système nerveux que la médecine actuelle ne songe pas
à attribuer à l'alimentation ;
- les dénaturations « douces » sont encore plus toxiques !
Guy Claude proposait comme hypothèse explicative que des molécules
faiblement dénaturées ont une partie de leur structure reconnue comme
correcte par notre corps et sont donc utilisées dans les processus
biochimiques du métabolisme. Mais comme ces molécules ne sont pas tout
à fait conformes, elles induisent par la suite des blocages profonds
du métabolisme.

En ce qui me concerne, cette dernière remarque est un point
fondamental, qui vient relancer mes réflexions personnelles sur la
pratique du cru, et dont j'espère vous faire part dans un prochain
article.

Je noterai enfin que l'expérience de l'exception au pain avec les
souris nourries crues et instinctivement, vient corroborer mes propres
observations : faire une exception n'est absolument pas anodin. Le
corps met au moins une semaine pour s'en débarrasser. Il suffit donc
d'une exception par semaine pour que l'instincto n'ait pratiquement
aucune efficacité.

Merci encore à Jean-Daniel d'avoir fait un saut à Montbarrey malgré un
deuil, et de nous avoir fait partager la subtile émotion qui a
accompagné l'évocation d'une épopée maintenant presque lointaine, et
pourtant au combien instructive.

Eric Rivoire
avec la collaboration de François Dovat"

[fireflysea]

Wait, you guys, lol what about my original question? Haha I'm asking about raw freeze dried pet food made with wild and pasture raised animal products and a smal amount of organic fruit and veg

[eveheart]

Wait, you guys, lol what about my original question? Haha I'm asking about raw freeze dried pet food made with wild and pasture raised animal products and a smal amount of organic fruit and veg

Perhaps you have already looked up how freeze-drying works. What about freeze-drying seems "paleolithic" to you, Fireflysea? To me, it seems about a thousand times more "processed" than naturally-dried food.

Of course I know fresh is always optimal, but for someone who has very poor digestion, is prone to sickness, has a lot of inflammation... Thoughts? Anyone else eat pet food? The ingredients are supposedly human grade and the freeze dried patties taste DELICIOUS

You've answered your own question here. I'll interpret what I hear: I say that I want to heal poor digestion and inflammation, but I really want to eat stuff that tastes "awesome" by 21st-century standards, so would somebody please tell me that very highly-processed "paleo" ingredients are as good as real food?

I know that didn't sound all nice and sweet, but seriously, you have to get serious if you want results. You are young enough to turn things around. I was a grandmother when I learned about RPD, and I wish I knew better when I was young. "Real" food tastes delicious. If processed foods taste delicious to you, you have to re-educate your tastebuds.

[Brad462]

Wait, you guys, lol what about my original question? Haha I'm asking about raw freeze dried pet food made with wild and pasture raised animal products and a smal amount of organic fruit and veg

My advice is that you should jump off a bridge.  Just kidding.  keep us updated pal.

[fireflysea]

I'm asking your opinions, but that doesn't mean I ever just rely on other people's opinions to make my decisions or gauge my own health. Yhis was meant to be a discussion, was curious to see if other people have tried it and things like that. Not everyone has access to perfect optimal food all the time, whatever that means, and just because something is though to be in alignment with "paleo" doesn't mean that it's a healthy food for everyone. When I eat fresh ripe organic fruit, for example, I feel very bad these days. I'm intolerant to nuts snd seeds. Everyyyyything irritates my digestion these days. I've been raw for 8 years now, only in the past two years did I start even TRYING more processed "raw" and "paleo" foods. Otherwise I ate only whole fresh foods and my health was even worse than it is now, so idk I haven't found the sweet spot for how to eat best for me personally, so I'm experimenting. Please be respectful of that, as I am respectful of any questions you may have or decisions you make.  Thank you for any input!

[Cristaraw]

I'm asking your opinions, but that doesn't mean I ever just rely on other people's opinions to make my decisions or gauge my own health. Yhis was meant to be a discussion, was curious to see if other people have tried it and things like that. Not everyone has access to perfect optimal food all the time, whatever that means, and just because something is though to be in alignment with "paleo" doesn't mean that it's a healthy food for everyone. When I eat fresh ripe organic fruit, for example, I feel very bad these days. I'm intolerant to nuts snd seeds. Everyyyyything irritates my digestion these days. I've been raw for 8 years now, only in the past two years did I start even TRYING more processed "raw" and "paleo" foods. Otherwise I ate only whole fresh foods and my health was even worse than it is now, so idk I haven't found the sweet spot for how to eat best for me personally, so I'm experimenting. Please be respectful of that, as I am respectful of any questions you may have or decisions you make.  Thank you for any input!

It's fine for a few months but I would not make it the center of your diet because you will develop vitamin deficiencies, in fact I suspect that you're already deficient in one of the B-Vitamins and a lot of your issues are coming from high levels of homo-cysteine that are not being properly converted (when is the last time you saw a Doctor?).

Another goodie would be canned sardines which are packed with nutrition. Cheap, easy to carry and easy to store.

[fireflysea]

It's fine for a few months but I would not make it the center of your diet because you will develop vitamin deficiencies, in fact I suspect that you're already deficient in one of the B-Vitamins and a lot of your issues are coming from high levels of homo-cysteine that are not being properly converted (when is the last time you saw a Doctor?).

Another goodie would be canned sardines which are packed with nutrition. Cheap, easy to carry and easy to store.

Thank you crista! I would in reality probably just use it as a supplement to add to other meat or seafood etc, because it has a variety of organs in it and otherwise it's hard to get good quality organ meats here/in my life right now. But yeah I'm not drawn to eating them all the time )
I used to eat tons of sardines, in fact they were at least a once-per-day food for me for a good stretch of time! I lovvvvvvve them so much. But haven't found a source yet and cannot stand the taste of cans unfortunately. I do also eat everything raw, tho if it helped me I'd be open to the cans. During a two month cooked experiment a LNG while ago I developed a deep aversion to canned food, even wil/organic/bpa free contents and cans. It just makes my head feel strange and gives me such a strong metal aftertaste. I'm really sensitive to certain types of metal too, even just wearing it or being near it. Lol it's weird.  I have found smelt tho and made a delicious ceviche with it. What do you think of ocean smelt?