Introductory Thoughts...

[TruthHunter]

Hello everyone:

I am very interested in this topic, though I have different prejudices than most people here. I was raised as a vegetarian and have many friends who are vegan.  My philosophical world view is different than most RAF eaters. 
My interest in RAF/RVAF comes mostly from what I have learned about vitamin B12.  My own mother was a cooked Vegan  for many years. She did fine on this diet until her early 80's.  Too late I realized that her mental deterioration was the result of B12 deficiency. I mixed some B12 with DMSO and applied it to the back of her hand. She immediately responded, but the damage was done.  The research I found indicated the 80% of Vegans are deficient in B12.
I have another friend who is mostly vegan. She drinks soy milk, eats almost no eggs or meat and very little cheese.  Her B12 levels are near the maximum.  I guess she is part of the 20 %!
What gives?
Interestingly enough, 40% of cooked food meat eaters are  also deficient.

I first tried Raw foods in my early 20's then gave it up because of the social aspects. Over the years since, I have eaten mostly the SAD diet, though I tended toward vegetarianism and ate more raw foods than most.  Raw meat though??! I was raised with almost a phobia about than! Not even a rare steak! 
When I was on 100% raw, I remember losing all excess body fat and having my already excellent eyesight improve. I had some periods of euphoria, but  mostly returned to normal baseline energy. I concluded that psychological factors were more important than
physical health.  I decided that I would go back on raw foods if I ever developed a incurable chronic condition!

Last year I decided that the condition had been met.  The incurable chronic condition was aging.  I dropped 4 inches from my waist and from 182 to 159, much of it during the 1st month. More of it was muscle than I would like. For the most part I look better and feel better than last year. Many of the problems I have had are due to the occasional cooked food I eat.
I didn't want to become a crank or an obsessive so I decided that I would NOT eat 100%, and would not beat myself up over occasional cooked food. I don't have many issues with cravings and eat cooked food mostly in social situations.  I find that I don't enjoy most cooked  foods anymore.  It has no taste.
I eat mostly vegan, but include some raw eggs.  I find that I get gas if I eat more than about 3 eggs at a time or combine them with other things.
My brother told me about Aajonus, and I was a bit scandalized. I believe  one of the worst traits is choosing ideology over truth and living according to permanent hidden prejudices.  I had to find out more about such things.
I couldn't ignore the Beyondveg.com site either.

I think its obvious that AV is exceptional, but to what extent and why?
 
I decided to join  this forum to so I could ask questions and comment on some of the issues.  I am not sure I will ever add raw meat to my diet.  I am highly allergic to red meat anyway, but I consider the whole discussion very interesting and philosophically pivotal for me.
Lets consider some facts:

1. Humans aren't adapted to be carnivores.We have neither the short digestive system of a lion or wolf, nor the complex system of a ruminant. Our livers don't tolerate the high levels of Carotene that a largely herbaceous diet provides. How much variation  is there? It stands to reason that some people inherit short digestive tracts. If heights vary from 4' to 7', why not digestive tracts from 15' to 30?  Many people don't do well on high meat diets. Likely we were originally  best adapted to the semi-fruitarian diets similar to the Orangutan or the chimpanzee.
 
2. Most of human populations have lived outside of the tropical zones for long time. Survival has favored adaptation to cooking and for many populations milk was the only raw food. An example of this adaptation is lactase enzyme stlil present in many adults.  Through most of history milk products were not heated. As mammals, milk is at least as similar to our intended food as meat of other animals.  If we only drink human milk, should we eat only humans to get the same meat?    Drinking milk is a smaller digression from natural than cooking.
Survival has caused humans to adapt to rather different diets than even a few thousand years ago. The ability to reproduced isn't the same as optimum health. Grains and weapons are important survival tools for the Lemming like hordes.

3. Cooking of meat has to do with taste as much as anything. Most meats are quite bland. Primitive humans are often no better than moderns at selecting food based on taste rather than well being... Like Steffensen's Eskimoes "Ah, cook the fish heads for the little ankle biters!"

4. Among wild carnivores, parasites and disease are an important limiting factor for lifespan.
Of course, predators are most likely to eat the old, weak, or diseased. Particularly for the aged, contagion can be an important factor

 5. Outside of the arctic regions very few peoples have eaten raw meat. If the health benefits were uniformly apparent, it would seem that more people would have advocated it in the past. I suspect that the negative reactions reported by some even on this site, are fairly common.  Of course many of the sanitation methods we have in the modern world weren't available for most of human history.  Still, the issue of disease and meat is significant IMO.

6. Some people seem to do very well with a raw vegan diet, though its probably a minority. Sometimes members of the same family will show different responses.  I suspect that the same is true for RAF diets.
I am not surprised that its the Holy Grail for some, ( And some people seem to thrive on a life of crime!)  . I suspect that people with sympathetic dominance do better.

7. When I examine the sources for my own families' vegetarianism, I find that the vigor of the body was not the primary issue, but Spiritual factors. Things like controlling the passions were emphasized. Aajonus certainly is an animal   I was also taught that all animal products should be cooked to lower the risk of disease. I was taught that the original human diet did not include animal food and this  was the ideal we should strive to get back to. So you see, RAF is quite a philosophical challenge to me. But as QC Fields said, "Its time to take the bull by the tail and look the facts in the face!"
 Ones' presuppositions have a lot to do with one's conclusions

8. There is some research indicating that occult infections may be a major factor in cancer. I find it ironic that AV uses raw animal products to cure cancer. I would challenge anyone with health issues after following RAF diet for awhile to assume they have an infection and take colloidal silver, or chlorine dioxide(MMS) or use a zapper or... something to rule out infection as a cause.

I can't help but wonder if on average, more people would be sick eating raw meat than would be healthier.

Can you prove me wrong?

John 

[TylerDurden]

Anyone can argue that humans are carnivores or herbivores. Strictly speaking, though, the weight of the evidence is that humans are omnivores with strong carnivorous tendencies. Here's an alternative argument claiming a carnivorous diet as being natural for humans, just for sake of argument:-

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/carn_herb_comparison.html


Re climate/diet:- This is irrelevant. First of all, most sources agree that cooking was only invented c.250,000 to 300,000 years ago - fire for warmth may have been invented 200,000 years earlier but that's all. One thing I should mention is that RAFers routinely mention that they become much better at adapting to hot and cold temperatures due to better blood-circulation etc. So cooking wasn't likely essential except possibly in blizzard conditions. Another point is that we live in a world with central heating/air-conditioning/clothes etc., so we can't conceive of a time when our ancestors went without such extras(yet they did, with ease!).

Re dairy:- (Non-human) Dairy, raw or otherwise, was only introduced to humans c.9,000 years ago(and then only to a small portion of humanity in the Near-East). Very large populations, nowadays, such as in East Asia, have only consumed dairy within the last 3 generations. In short,  9,000 years (or less) is nowhere near enough to get used to milk from other animals - plus, milk from other animals is a specially-designed ideal food(milk from cows is designed, via growth-hormones,  to make calves grow to full adult cattle-size within 2 years - humans, however, don't have to grow to adult-size within 2 years!).

Re taste:- Our tastes are defined by what our mothers eat in the womb and our first few years of life. While one can overcome this  by eating raw for long enough, it does take time.

Re parasites:- This has been extensively discussed on the rawpaleodiet yahoo group. It's been pointed out that some parasites are actually beneficial(ie symbionts). There was a study by Joel Weinstock, for example, which showed that ingesting certain worms reduced the symptoms of IBS(Irritable Bowel Syndrome). Indeed, the absence of parasites and bacteria has led to a major increase in auto-immune disorders and allergies etc. - just look up the numerous online references to the "Hygiene Hypothesis" theory.

Re negative reactions:- Actually, negative reactions to raw animal food diets are pretty rare. When they do occur, it's overwhelmingly because of non-Palaeo foods or practices(such as eating too much(you actually need to eat less daily raw food than cooked as raw is absorbed better), raw dairy, veggie-juice, too much raw honey, not eating enough raw animal fat. I come across very, very few cases of genuine parasitical infestation(other than a tiny minority of hypochondriacs who see parasites in every raw food they eat!). The couple or so of cases I've heard of which are genuine, tend to include people who've visited the tropics, had a few days(2 weeks at most) of minor itching, followed by expulsion of the parasites via the other end. I would agree though that parasites for those on cooked-food diets would be more of a problem, due to the body being less able to cope.

As regards turning to raw animal foods(or away from them, rather):- it should be pointed out that all cooked-foods(as well as dairy and grains) contain opioid hormones which are highly addictive(processed foods are even worse as they contain casein and gluten as (addictive) preservatives) . So, there's no reason to assume that people turned to cooked-foods out of survival. Plus, it's well-known that humans suffered a catastrophic collapse in health in the Neolithic when they turned to Neolithic foods like raw dairy, fermented grains and cooked legumes, yet they chose to eat those foods, anyway. In short, humans are stupid and easily led.

Re spirituality etc.:- There's some truth in the placebo effect or spiritual strength or whatever. But, it doesn't explain the remarkable success of RAFers, in general.


Re colloidal silver etc.:-  Unsurprisingly, since raw animal food is viewed with utter horror by people in most developed nations, most RAFers tend to try every possible diet or health-recovery-method before they even contemplate turning to raw animal foods. Colloidal silver has been mentioned before by other RAFers, among many other methods. But, overall, most RAFers point out that those other methods either don't work or are much less effective than raw animal foods.


Plus, given the loathing of raw animal foods by the general population, one would never expect people to turn to Aajonus in growing numbers - yet they do.

[boxcarguy07]

As mammals, milk is at least as similar to our intended food as meat of other animals.  If we only drink human milk, should we eat only humans to get the same meat?  Shocked Shocked  Drinking milk is a smaller digression from natural than cooking.

You're thinking of it the wrong way.
An animal (carnivore or omnivore) will drink its mothers milk during infancy, then it gets weaned and eats the meat of other animals.
Its mother's milk was designed for it until it could eat other things.
Just because we drink our mothers' milk doesn't mean it is correct for us to eat human flesh. That's a rather big jump there.

[Satya]

I believe  one of the worst traits is choosing ideology over truth and living according to permanent hidden prejudices. 

...

6. Some people seem to do very well with a raw vegan diet, though its probably a minority. Sometimes members of the same family will show different responses.  I suspect that the same is true for RAF diets.
I am not surprised that its the Holy Grail for some, ( And some people seem to thrive on a life of crime!)  . I suspect that people with sympathetic dominance do better.

John,

Isn't veganism an ideology?  A raw vegan diet may be fine short term for some people, but long term it will cause deficiencies in vitamins B-6, B-12, D, A, and perhaps others.  EFAs and protein are difficult to come by on a raw vegan diet.  Even raw vegan author Shazzie has come forward stating that children are failing to thrive on the diet.  She advocates supplements, but isn't that artificial?  If the diet can't provide the proper nutrients, then it is not a proper diet for people.  It is nothing more than an ideology.  I say this as a former vegan, both raw and cooked.

http://www.shazzie.com/raw/articles/raw_vegan_children.shtml

[Raw Kyle]

I came from a raw vegan diet and I find this diet much better. More economical and health giving and time saving.

[wodgina]

John,

Isn't veganism an ideology?  A raw vegan diet may be fine short term for some people, but long term it will cause deficiencies in vitamins B-6, B-12, D, A, and perhaps others.  EFAs and protein are difficult to come by on a raw vegan diet.  Even raw vegan author Shazzie has come forward stating that children are failing to thrive on the diet.  She advocates supplements, but isn't that artificial?  If the diet can't provide the proper nutrients, then it is not a proper diet for people.  It is nothing more than an ideology.  I say this as a former vegan, both raw and cooked.

http://www.shazzie.com/raw/articles/raw_vegan_children.shtml

Wow interesting, when I first got interested in being healthy Shazzies site was one of the first sites I found. I have massive respect for her to come out and say what she has said, it sounds like she will start feeding her daughter some milk which might be a step in the right direction.
She has pretty much said children should not be vegan...this is from a 21 year famous vegan and one who I suspect gets most of her income from her vegan website/books etc

[akaikumo]

Great topic, and I'll be interested to see what pops up. Not a lot of time to read through all this right now, but I wanted to make a comment.

You mention we're more likely to be evolved for a mainly fruitarian diet--this might be true, but you MUST keep in mind that the fruit we buy on the market shelves today (at least in the US and Europe) has been selectively bred to be larger and sweeter than the wild version. You also should keep in mind that most of this fruit (and any plants, arguably) may be grown on nutrient deficient soil.

Wild fruit (and vegetables) grown in good soil could certainly be more of a diet staple then their modernized counterparts. It's a lot different.

I really think that health isn't limited to carnivore or omnivore or herbivore. It's what is environmentally feasible (if you live somewhere where /real/ fruit isn't readily available, for instance, you might want to avoid fruit) and whatever balance works for your genetics. Some people might do better with mostly meat--some with mostly vegetation.

Also, I think that if you're going to eat RAF then it better be from a good source. It should be grass-fed, pasture-raised, and completely organic. Of course, that's best for cooked AF too.

Just my 2 cents. I'm new at the raw paleo diet. Still learning

[TruthHunter]

Re climate/diet:- This is irrelevant.

Not really, it has a tremendous impact of the availability of foodstuffs. It forces either storage or switching to year round sources.  Grains can be stored. Milk tends to be seasonable in primitive conditions, but cheese and butter are readily stored.  I tasted some interesting aged butters in  Morocco. They were reminiscent  of aged cheeses

Re dairy:- (Non-human) Dairy, raw or otherwise, was only introduced to humans c.9,000 years ago(and then only to a small portion of humanity in the Near-East). Very large populations, nowadays, such as in East Asia, have only consumed dairy within the last 3 generations. In short,  9,000 years (or less) is nowhere near enough to get used to milk from other animals - plus, milk from other animals is a specially-designed ideal food(milk from cows is designed, via growth-hormones,  to make calves grow to full adult cattle-size within 2 years - humans, however, don't have to grow to adult-size within 2 years!).

You are making assumptions about the rate of evolution of traits. If maintaining milk digesting enzymes into adult life provides survival advantages, it wouldn't take anywhere near 360 generations  for the majority of a population to possess it in say the steppes of central asia.

 

Re parasites:- This has been extensively discussed on the rawpaleodiet yahoo group. It's been pointed out that some parasites are actually beneficial(ie symbionts). There was a study by Joel Weinstock, for example, which showed that ingesting certain worms reduced the symptoms of IBS(Irritable Bowel Syndrome). Indeed, the absence of parasites and bacteria has led to a major increase in auto-immune disorders and allergies etc. - just look up the numerous online references to the "Hygiene Hypothesis" theory.

I know. I've heard it before. I don't trust true believers no matter how appealing the idea. I've read plenty of negative reactions too.

Re negative reactions:- Actually, negative reactions to raw animal food diets are pretty rare.

perhaps, but I find that most people who don't do well on any particular program just go away.

 Re spirituality etc.:- There's some truth in the placebo effect or spiritual strength or whatever. But, it doesn't explain the remarkable success of RAFers, in general.

Its interesting to me how peoples' background affects their openness to any particular diet. People that are heavily influenced by Hinduism(even unconsciously) tend to vegetarianism for example.

Re colloidal silver etc.:-  Unsurprisingly, since raw animal food is viewed with utter horror by people in most developed nations, most RAFers tend to try every possible diet or health-recovery-method before they even contemplate turning to raw animal foods. Colloidal silver has been mentioned before by other RAFers, among many other methods. But, overall, most RAFers point out that those other methods either don't work or are much less effective than raw animal foods.


I read some of the journals and people reported problems that sounded like they could be the result of infections. If it is, either herbs, or something with an antibiotic effect could be diagnostic. Is it primarily an infective process or just cleansing? 




Isn't veganism an ideology?  A raw vegan diet may be fine short term for some people, but long term it will cause deficiencies in vitamins B-6, B-12, D, A, and perhaps others.  EFAs and protein are difficult to come by on a raw vegan diet.  Even raw vegan author Shazzie has come forward stating that children are failing to thrive on the diet.  She advocates supplements, but isn't that artificial?  If the diet can't provide the proper nutrients, then it is not a proper diet for people.  It is nothing more than an ideology.  I say this as a former vegan, both raw and cooked.


Yes veganism is an ideology, but so is RAF.  Shazzie redily admits that Veganism isn't natural.
 
I will lry to move discussion to other locations besides the introduction

John

[wodgina]

Shazzie's daughter has had problems with anemia

This is a quote from Shazzie

"The truth is, though I'd love to see it, I have never once seen a 100% raw 100% vegan 100% unsupplemented child past breastfeeding age who has no tooth decay and is the correct weight and height for their age. Not one. Ever."

[TylerDurden]

Re climate:- Considering that raw animal foods(and cooked-foods)  have been eaten all round the world, it's somewhat extreme to suggest that climate plays any important role re cooking. As regard as the issue of storage, you're forgetting that during the Palaeolithic, there were vast herds of wild game for almost all of that era, so there was no real need for storage. It was only in the  more settled Neolithic that storage became a big issue(eg:-  granaries etc.)


Re Beyondveg.com:- Their anti-raw critique is heavily  biased(anti- Raw Vegan/Fruitarian), so don't seem to acknowledge even that RAF diets even exist. I've recently completed a critique of Beyondveg.com's own raw vs cooked essay, pointing out the flaws, where they got it right etc. The critique should go on rawpaleo.com over the next few weeks.


Re assumptions about dairy:- I'm afraid you are the one making a false assumption. I can easily point to the very obvious fact that 75% of the world's population are lactose-intolerant, to some extent,  to show that Mankind is NOT adapted to dairy:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactose_intolerance
. Another point that anthropologists routinely make is that there has been no significant genetic changes in the last 10,000 years - something one would expect if new DNA/mutations had arisen so that humans could drink milk easily without problems.

Re True Believers/Parasites:- Using terms like "true believer" displays a remarkable lack of knowledge of the motivations of RAFers. First of all, most RAFers turn to raw animal foods not out of ideology, but simply because all other methods have failed utterly - I'm no exception. This should be  obvious as modern society is so disgusted at the notion of raw animal foods, that it's always seen as a last resort. As regards the parasites-issue, I am merely relating the facts - it's simply not a major(or even minor) issue of RAFers, as otherwise one would find many more posts reporting such issues. Most RAFers eat raw meats from organic animals which have been routinely dewormed, and many(like myself) have eaten plenty of meats/organ-meats from wild animals, for years,  without incurring any parasitical problems whatsoever, so the hype/hysteria re parasites is simply a non-issue. I should add, though, that there are a very small number of  hypochondriacs who subscribe to the Hulda Clarke school of thought(akin to delusional parasitosis) where they believe that parasites are all around them and must be destroyed - but the community, as a whole, doesn't take this sort of thing seriously.

As it is, given that the RAF-community is growing, despite mass public hysteria over the very idea of eating raw animal foods, that should indicate that the benefits of RAF are numerous.

Re Hinduism/Vegetarianism:- You're clutching at straws, here, I'm afraid. RAFers tend to come from all sorts of different backgrounds, and, as I pointed out, the majority turn to RAF purely for health reasons. I mean one can argue that many people turn to Veganism due to a concern re animal-rights or spirituality, but RAFers, in most cases(myself included), just try every other possible diet or health-remedy out there, until they arrive at RAF foods as a last resort - we simply wouldn't remain on this diet for years unless it worked. Generally speaking, if people clear up all their health-problems through some alternative diet or health-remedy prior to  finding out about RAF diets, then they don't go the whole hog and turn to RAF foods at all. This is what is so remarkable about this diet - that the RAF community keeps on growing despite the vast amounts of hysteria concerning bacteria/parasites etc. in raw meats - I mean if even a small fraction of the whole hysteria was based on reality, then one would expect this diet to decrease in numbers of advocates, rather than the opposite.

In a way, though, I suppose that can create a wrong impression as most RAFers, unlike with other diets,  come to this diet with all sorts of  major health-problems such as cancer/heart-disease sustained from decades of eating processed/cooked  foods, which can take years to clear up(for example, it took c.4 months(post-raw-dairy) for c.50% of my own health-problems to be solved on this diet, with the other 50% taking a further couple of  years to be resolved) - so, I don't think one could realistically expect 100% miracle-recoveries within weeks of turning to RAF foods, if the person in question has previously sustained Multiple Sclerosis or whatever. As regards the minor side-effects you claim, that's inevitable on any  healthy diet. For one thing, people build up so many toxins from years on unhealthy diets, that they are bound to need to undergo occasional detox to get rid of the relevant poisons. And, of course, some people do stupid things such as drinking foods they are allergic to(I spent the first 2nd to 8th month drinking raw dairy, before realising that I was allergic to it), or they are unable/unwilling to find high-quality raw animal foods for a time etc.. But, the point is that, other than such  mistakes, people tend to do very well on this sort of diet.

[Satya]

Yes veganism is an ideology, but so is RAF.  Shazzie redily admits that Veganism isn't natural.

What is the ideology behind eating RAF?  Perhaps it should be noted that many of us are RVAF, not completely carnivorous.  Regardless, we have been consuming animal foods well into our evolutionary past, mostly raw until the recent past.  (It is why we have big brains and use tools to procure meat and marrow, and archeological evidence of this is widespread.)  Even still, Weston Price found that all native cultures in the 1930s, untouched by civilization, ate some raw animal foods.  None of them were vegan. 

[Raw Kyle]

I don't think Weston Price visited every native culture but it would be fair to say that from the ones he did visit you can safely assume that there are no vegan native cultures.

[TylerDurden]

It's true that the Jainites(southern Hindus) were practically Vegan(and unhealthy), but I don't think Weston-Price visited them.