gut alkalinity and "instinct"

[cherimoya_kid]

Just out of interest, what is your definition of a (very) balanced diet? Just a diet that contains all necessary minerals and vitamins? Or a diet that has a certain macronutrient ratio? Or a certain plant to animal food ratio? Most people who know what I eat (which I think is similar to a lot of people on this forum) believe that my diet is not balanced, because it does not resemble the "healthy balanced diet" that is recommended by government bodies and illustrated by the food pyramid. I think the mainstream definition of a balanced diet is a diet that contains a large variety of different foods, comprising foods from a variety of different food groups.

In that case, I meant a diet with a fairly balanced ratio of animal to plant foods. Of course, people in extreme cold climates probably shouldn't eat much in the way of plant foods, but...humans aren't fully adapted to cold climates, anyway. We have neither fur nor blubber.

[svrn]

it is totally incorrect that peoples blood doesnt deviate from the normal ph. Many people have had blood tests done showing that they are either too acidic or too alkaline. THis is simple fact, everyone does not have the same blood ph or the same ph anywhere in the body for that matter.

as far as balance, any unhealthy act can remain for the most part undetrimental as long as you keep it below a certain level. THis is true for every toxin.

as long as you keep your plant consumption down to a certain level it wont affect your meat cravings but once you reach a certain point it DOES start to have a detrimental effect.

THIS IS TRUE FOR EVERY SINGLE TOXIN IN THE WORLD.

[LePatron7]

as far as balance, any unhealthy act can remain for the most part undetrimental as long as you keep it below a certain level. THis is true for every toxin.

as long as you keep your plant consumption down to a certain level it wont affect your meat cravings but once you reach a certain point it DOES start to have a detrimental effect.

THIS IS TRUE FOR EVERY SINGLE TOXIN IN THE WORLD.

When did plant foods become toxins?

[svrn]

i didnt say it was a toxin only that it was detrimental. and that even complete toxins are totally ineffectual at a low enough dose. When brought to a low enough level anythign is negligible, my point is that one should be careful to make sure it stays at a negligible level if ones interest is personal health.

[TylerDurden]

I see svrn is as usual peddling nonsense re the acid alkali theory and blood ph:-

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.html

http://www.gll-getalife.com/2013/05/acid-alkaline-diet/

[goodsamaritan]

I see svrn is as usual peddling nonsense re the acid alkali theory and blood ph:-

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.html

Please do not link to quack watch.  That is the epitome of the pharmaceutical medical industry. 

[TylerDurden]

Please do not link to quack watch.  That is the epitome of the pharmaceutical medical industry.  Sucks so bad.

I do not see them or anything else as irredeemably evil. Even evil people have some good in them, or some useful data to provide.

[svrn]

lol! citing quackwatch???

talk about discrediting yourself.....

and can people stop linking to articles debunking the clearly bullshit alkaline diet?

cant you see im not promoting that diet? If anything im promoting THE EXACT OPPOSITE

[TylerDurden]

lol! citing quackwatch???

talk about discrediting yourself.....

and can people stop linking to articles debunking the clearly bullshit alkaline diet?

cant you see im not promoting that diet? If anything im promoting THE EXACT OPPOSITE

Irrelevant. The fact is that the notion of acid/alkali theory re blood  is comprehensively debunked so your b#llsh#t is a joke.

[goodsamaritan]

I think quackwatch.org is irredeemably evil.  It is a tool to discredit anything that is not part of the western pharmaceutical hospital industry... meant to malign anything that may challenge their industry.  Its sole purpose is to keep the poor people boxed into their industry paradigms.

From what I have read in this thread, svrn is not peddling the blood acid / alkali balance theory... he's peddling a different idea about GUT alkalinity... which he thinks keeps people from eating instinctively.  Which was wrongly posted in the instincto forum...

The questions at hand here are as follows.

Does eating vegetation cause a condition in the stomach where one craves more vegetation and does eating animals cause an environment in the stomach where one craves more meat?

If this is so does that mean that a persons cravings are dictated by their immediate gut environment as opposed to whatever nutritional needs that person has in their body at the time? or perhaps both of these things play a role in what the person craves at the time?

and just to be clear, this is all in the context of a person eating a 100% raw diet.

i am not trying to discuss anything else on this thread.

My observation with myself and my children and the people I've assisted personally.

"Does eating vegetation cause a condition in the stomach where one craves more vegetation and does eating animals cause an environment in the stomach where one craves more meat?"

NO. NO. NO.

"If this is so does that mean that a persons cravings are dictated by their immediate gut environment as opposed to whatever nutritional needs that person has in their body at the time?"

THIS IS NOT SO.

Given enough time... People get sick of just meat.  Or just fruit.  Or just vegetables.
Nobody is purely Carnivorous for life.
Nobody is purely Vegan for life.
Nobody is purely Fruitarian for life.
There is such a thing as vitamin VARIETY.
In our entire human life, we will have eaten quite a variety of stuff.
My time frame is an entire human life span.
Vitamin VARIETY rocks... people want it... people are curious... people will try new stuff...

As I have said before, it is easy to understand nutritional requirements via INSTINCT especially in the case of SICK people and PREGNANT women.  Their instincts kick in.  Whether they want to eat or not, whether they crave to eat something or whether something is repulsive.

This hypothesis is so screwed up.
It's been thoroughly debunked.
Can we close this thread now?

Topic closed for lack of merit.