Dr. Emoto's book is very interesting.  We got one from a friend in Hong Kong in
2000 before they were available here in the US.



We started our rather extensive study of the relationships 'twixt water & living
cells at the time we were introduced to Nikken's PiMag Living Water systems. 
The whole idea of energy fields of water (& of us) was a mind-blower for us. 
We'd been taught that water was just a couple molecules of hydrogen stuck to a
molecule of oxygen & that water was water.  All this stuff re water having a
memory, etc. was quite a stretch for us, but it's been documented by world-wide
research.



As a result of our studies, we've been drinking only PiMag Living Water from
www.Wellness-Forever.com since 2000 (& "Optimized" since 2002), 'tho Bob, being
an all-raw (& fellow SunGazer since 2005) fellow since 1990, gets nearly all his
water from uncooked fruits/veggies (& drank NO fluids from '90-'96).



We consider Aajonus to be a good friend & his book helped Bob to incorporate
uncooked dead animals into his food since '93 . however, carbonated crap is NOT
food for living things & predisposes, along with cooked animal stuff, to the
tendency toward osteoporosis, since its end-products suck minerals from the
bones & teeth (Bob's a Lake Tahoe dentist).  We share your lack of interest in
adding more plastic bottles to the land fill & wouldn't drink bottled anyhow,
since it's mostly just tap water laced with whatever it can imbibe from its
plastic prison.



The results of our studies have left us with the conclusion that the only
healthful water left on this polluted planet is stuff made at the point of use &
our conclusion as to the best way to do that is to "un-process" the water with
the PiMag Unit, returning the tap water to close to the pristine state in which
it fell to earth centuries ago, before pollution, thru pollution-free skies,
onto pollution-free earth, flowing down pollution-free creeks & streams into
pollution-free lakes.  So, that's what we drink, water whose molecular clusters
are mostly hexagonal, apparently the structure that living cells actively
transport thru their cell membranes, fully hydrating every cell in our bodies
(if you get a chance to check Dr. Batmanghelidj "Your Body's Many Cries for
Water" you'll learn that most low back problems, headaches, etc. are caused or
exacerbated by chronic dehydration, since most folks consider soda pop, coffee,
etc. sources of water).  The Living Water also has optimal levels of trace
minerals & replenished with the missing magnetic, pi & far-infrared energies.



And yes, due to our extensive study, we're impressed enough with Nikken's
integrity, research and vision of world peace thru world health, based on a
blanked life founded on the Five Pillars of Health (healthy mind, body,
finances, family & society) that we've been consultants for them since we were
introduced to their magnetic/far-infrared sleep systems in -97.







--lou & dr. bob wynman


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Posted by: "dellahart" dellahart@...   dellahart
Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:24 am (PST)


I have read one of the books about Dr. Emoto and the theory that you mention.
Apparently, there was a difference in the water when words were taped to the
outside of the water bottle. Apparently words like "Love" "Joy" "Happiness"
etc., created beautiful ice crystals, whereas words like "Hate" "Ugly" "War"
created awful, distorted, nasty looking ice crystals.

Silly as it sounds, I have been taking a sharpie and writing nice words on my
water bottles ever since I read this. I don't know if it works or not, but it
sure couldn't hurt.

della

--- In rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com, "ccbmamma" <caroleebol@...> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone, I wanted to get your thoughts on "living" water. I've been
reading a bit about Dr. Emoto and his studies on water and emotions and the
structure of water crystals. There are some people who sell water systems that
can make the crystals "structured" (purportedly) thus (purportedly again)
healthy for our bodies. I know Aajonus suggests drinking carbonated mineral
water such as Perrier and getting most of our water from raw foods, but Perrier
is pricey for our family of four (and all those bottles don't sit well with me
even though we recycle) and my toddler sometimes just wants water instead of raw
milk or squeezed juices and doesn't like the bubbles. I can't however find any
recommendations from past posts here and am having a hard time online getting
reliable info from people who don't have something to sell!
>
> Thank you very much for your time in answering this post,
> Carolee

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE:  We respect your wishes to avoid unwanted clutter in your Inbox.  Please
reply with "Delete" in Subject or Message blanks if you'd prefer we don't send
email information to you!  & if you prefer only certain KINDS of info -- eg,
energy technologies for health (Nikken), Natural Hygiene, Instinctive Nutrition,
animals, religion, golf, SunGazing, war, Home-Schooling, Economics, Philosophy,
RV's, aviation, dentistry, kiteboarding, teaching, computers, Ayn Rand,
Volitional Science (Galambos), politically-incorrect pro-freedom propaganda,
Forex trading, chemtrails, Planet X ... as well as cutesy humor & "offensive"
humor.  We have separate groups for each of those categories.

Please lettuce no in which areas you might be interested, so that we don't
clutter your Inbox with unwanted junk.

'ealth & 'appiness to ya!

--bob & lou
www.wynman.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have read one of the books about Dr. Emoto and the theory that you mention.
Apparently, there was a difference in the water when words were taped to the
outside of the water bottle.  Apparently words like "Love" "Joy" "Happiness"
etc., created beautiful ice crystals, whereas words like "Hate" "Ugly" "War"
created awful, distorted, nasty looking ice crystals.

Silly as it sounds, I have been taking a sharpie and writing nice words on my
water bottles ever since I read this.  I don't know if it works or not, but it
sure couldn't hurt.

della

--- In rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com, "ccbmamma" <caroleebol@...> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone, I wanted to get your thoughts on "living" water. I've been
reading a bit about Dr. Emoto and his studies on water and emotions and the
structure of water crystals. There are some people who sell water systems that
can make the crystals "structured" (purportedly) thus (purportedly again)
healthy for our bodies. I know Aajonus suggests drinking carbonated mineral
water such as Perrier and getting most of our water from raw foods, but Perrier
is pricey for our family of four (and all those bottles don't sit well with me
even though we recycle) and my toddler sometimes just wants water instead of raw
milk or squeezed juices and doesn't like the bubbles. I can't however find any
recommendations from past posts here and am having a hard time online getting
reliable info from people who don't have something to sell!
>
> Thank you very much for your time in answering this post,
> Carolee
>

--- In rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@...> wrote:
>
> On 10/27/2009, rawtruth (garyva@...) wrote:
> > In developed countries, one environmental exposure that does come to
> > mind is the ubiquitous fortification of the food supply with Vitamin
D,
> > which is thought by Trevor Marshall to have played an important role
in
> > the increase of autoimmune disease in those countries.
>
> All of the Vitamin D that is used in the commercial food industry to
> 'fortify' other foods is D2, not D3. D2 is the bad kind, and the form
> that any of the studies promoting the fear of overdosing use to show
> toxicity.
>
> > Marshall's work, as well as the success of his protocol in
overcoming
> > chronic disease,
>
> Much room for debate on whether or not there are any long term
'success'
> cases. That, combined with the reports of a cult-like mentality ('You
> aren't doing it right', disappearing posts and banned user accounts)
> when it comes to anyone reporting problems - especially 'getting
worse'
> - on the official 'Study site', makes the entire protocol immediately
> suspect.
>
> http://stuff.mit.edu/people/london/universe.htm
>
>
http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/marshall-protocol-and-other-fa\
iry-tales.html
>

Hello Charles,

Guess you haven't looked at any cartons of milk lately? I just had a
peek in my fridge, and the milk there (which my wife uses, not me)
clearly states Vitamin D3 as an ingredient. Ditto for the can of
evaporated milk that I found in the pantry.

Re Mark London's "critique" of Marshall, you might be interested in this
researcher's background if you're going to promote him as some kind of
health "expert:"
http://web.mit.edu/bin/cgicso?query=alias%3DM-london
<http://web.mit.edu/bin/cgicso?query=alias%3DM-london>

Yes, he works at MIT but in the capacity of a computer systems analyst.
His long, rambling, unnecessarily complex and rather incoherent essay
reveals his unfamiliarity with intracellular pleomorphic bacterial forms
as well as a complete absence of understanding of molecular modeling,
both of which are foundational to the Marshall pathogenesis.
Introduction to the Marshall pathogenesis
<http://mpkb.org/doku.php/home:patients:pathogenesis_overview>

As to your second citation referencing John Cannell, I already responded
to you on that score about a year ago, so if you've forgotton, you can
look it up in the archives. Suffice to say, Cannell and his "Vitamin D
Council" are essentially a front for Vitamin D supplement manufacturers
who stand to gain financially from the public perception of Vitamin D as
a "miracle nutrient."

Livin' on the raw grass fat of the land,
Gary



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On 10/27/2009, rawtruth (garyva@...) wrote:
> In developed countries, one environmental exposure that does come to
> mind is the ubiquitous fortification of the food supply with Vitamin D,
> which is thought by Trevor Marshall to have played an important role in
> the increase of autoimmune disease in those countries.

All of the Vitamin D that is used in the commercial food industry to
'fortify' other foods is D2, not D3. D2 is the bad kind, and the form
that any of the studies promoting the fear of overdosing use to show
toxicity.

> Marshall's work, as well as the success of his protocol in overcoming
> chronic disease,

Much room for debate on whether or not there are any long term 'success'
cases. That, combined with the reports of a cult-like mentality ('You
aren't doing it right', disappearing posts and banned user accounts)
when it comes to anyone reporting problems - especially 'getting worse'
- on the official 'Study site', makes the entire protocol immediately
suspect.

http://stuff.mit.edu/people/london/universe.htm

http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/marshall-protocol-and-other-fairy-tale\
s.html

Here's an interesting article on parasites and their function within the body:-

http://goingferal.wordpress.com/2009/11/15/parasites-those-who-inhabit-us/

http://tinyurl.com/y9do8wl

"Parasites: Those who Inhabit us
November 15, 2009 in Uncategorized

Parasites have been coming up a lot in my life recently. Almost every day I am
touching them, looking at them, talking to friends about them. Trying to
understand what their role is, in me. Much of it has to do with the salmon we
have been preserving; salmon are host to many parasites, but the one I have been
paying particularly close attention to is a parasitic nematode this world calls
Anasakis. They look like long, stringy white worms, I have seen them in the
flesh of almost every salmon I've ever butchered, usually still alive, wriggling
around. Humans are not hosts for them, they require a marine mammal's digestive
system to continue their life cycle. If a human eats the raw, fresh (drying
kills them, there are no eggs present in the flesh, just obvious, living worms)
meat of a host fish, they might not ever notice anything, or they might get
nauseious and even puke up a clump of these little fellas. In any case, our
bodies are not their chosen bodies. Salmon, of course, do carry other parasites
that can inhabit our bodies. Like, say, tapeworms.

Yesterday I was slicing up the meat of a deer for drying, and found a few
tapeworm cysts in it's flesh. One way tapeworms reproduce is by migrating out of
a hosts digestive system and into the muscle tissue, where they form cysts, a
kind of egg almost, the intention being that when a carnivore eats the hosts
flesh, the cysts are ingested and come alive in this new, carnivorous host,
where they live in the guts and shed eggs via feces. I once butchered a large
buck whose back muscles were completely infested with small, stringy white worms
– possibly juvenile tapeworms on their journey to encyst.

How does one react? These are all parasites infesting creatures I ate, and
continue to eat, raw. Is it disgusting? Stupid? I do sometimes freeze meat (14
days of freezing kills all parasites, says the USDA), or marinate it in salt
water or a weak vinegar marinade when it feels just too graphically obvious
there are parasites in it that will inhabit me, but this is mostly for
phsychological reasons. The times I don't freeze meat insure I am exposed to
these parasites, and, to a certain degree, some of them likely inhabit me.

As they have inhabited humans, always.

Why are we disgusted at parasites? Is it their creepy crawlyness, hiding out in
`our' bodies (not theirs), stealing our energy? Do we just not like the idea of
sharing our bodies? Or are there actual legitimate health problems that cause an
instinctive reaction towards them?

One thing I can't help but notice, and seems to be of huge relevance, is that
many, possibly most, probably all, of the wild animals I have butchered have
been inhabited by some kind of parasite. This leads me to believe that wild
animals pretty much just live with parasites, that is the way. The remarkable
thing is, all of these wild animals have been incredibly strong, beautiful,
sensual, well adapted, vibrant creatures, capable of living in balance. Salmon,
with anasakis larvae and tapeworm inhabiting their flesh, have a ridiculously
strong life force – their whole lives essentially result in creating more
fertility where they were born, bringing more beauty and aliveness to this
earth. Deer are graceful, quiet, aware, strong, well adapted – with horrific
tapeworms apparently robbing their bodies of energy.

Ten years ago, some white hunters in northern B.C. found the body of a native
man in a melting glacier while they were hunting mountain goats. Scientists
eventually analyzed everything they could about this person, who had died there
between 300-160 years ago – his stomach contents, his hair, skin. He was
traveling over a mountain range from the coast into the interior, barefoot,
wearing nothing but a ground squirrel skin parka and spruce root hat, carrying
some seal meat, crab, dried salmon, usnea, and a few tools. Drinking glacier
water, eating blueberries. Got caught in a storm. He had tapeworms, fish
tapeworms from eating salmon raw, dried or undercooked. What he didn't have were
any of the often severe nutrient deficiencies associated with tapeworm
infestations in modern humans. He was hiking across an incredibly rugged
mountain range, barefoot, after all.

Is it possible that in a healthy host, some parasites do not actually cause
harm? Is it possible that some could even benefit their host, helping it live in
a beautiful, sustainable way? It would, after all, be in their best interests to
have a host that lives a long, healthy life, wouldn't it? And what if we, the
hosts, need them, in complex, subtle ways, in order to live in balance?

A friend actually got tested for parasites recently, after eating raw meat quite
consistently for a couple years. Her doctor told her all she had was a very
common parasite, she forgot the name, which even western medicine considers
beneficial and essential to a healthy GI tract. There have been many studies
showing that certain parasites cause shifts in their host's immune system, make
them less prone to certain allergies, more resistant to certain viruses and
infections. It makes sense – it is the same force that drives salmon to enrich
their `host': the rivers, forests and oceans they inhabit and depend on for
their continuation.

I still have to admit, though, that having a 100 foot long tapeworm living in my
guts isn't appealing.

Presumably fish tapeworms were a near universal `affliction' for the indigenous
people living all along the northwest coast, wherever salmon was a major (or
minor) food, yet when researchers look, they find that the people living here
before civilization, as a whole, had little or no tooth decay, their skeletal
structure in general was ideal, most all of the chronic diseases and cancers of
modern society were absent (refer to `Price, nutrition & physical
degeneration'). They did not suffer from deficiencies, despite the parasites
inhabiting them. On top of that, they lived in balance with their land bases, as
part of them.

Now, when a modern industrial human gets fish tapeworms, they usually don't
notice them, but if they do, it's often because of severe nutrient deficiencies
( B12 deficiency, anemia etc.). I suspect that periodic cleansing, taking strong
anti-parasitic plants internally, and a diet free from processed foods, grains
and high amounts of sugars, allowed the indigenous people here to have fish
tapeworms inhabiting their bodies in a way that was not pathological, that was
balanced and symbiotic. If a modern diet has an unbalancing effect on our
bodies, it must follow that whatever parasites are inhabiting us would be
knocked out of balance also. So one way of `dealing' with parasites, and this is
the one I advocate, is eating traditional foods – excluding grains and large
amounts of sugars (that includes fruit sugars, honey, maple syrup etc.), foods
that knock our bodies out of balance, and are the foundation of this culture
that knocks everything alive out of balance.

Still, there are parasites that the indigenous people of this land would get
very sick from. Like, say, trichinosis – a parasite that inhabits the flesh
(skeletal muscle tissue, specifically) of omnivores (bear, raccoon, seal, cat
etc..), sometimes fatal to humans when ingested, hence warnings to always cook
the meat of such creatures very well, while the meat of herbivores is commonly
eaten rare or raw totally safely.

Many cultures had/have strict taboos against eating bear, likely related in part
to trichinosis. Others had taboos against eating bear flesh (where the parasites
are), but would still hunt bears for their fat, which would be rendered (cooked)
for storage anyways. Yet Bears, raccoons, cougars, wolves and sea lions,
incredible, powerful, amazing creatures, live amazing lives while inhabited by
trichinosis. Like us, they are omnivores, but something allows them to live
amazing lives with trichinosis while we, even if healthy, get sick or die….

Slicing up salmon to dry a couple weeks ago, pulling stringy anasakis worms out
of their flesh, still alive, a friend and I discussed what we should do about
all of these parasites in our food? Why not cook it all? Cause cooking meat (red
meat in particular) causes it to become carcinogenic, way less digestible – and
not as storeable. Eating cooked meat you are guaranteed to be ingesting
something that is in some way bad for you, whereas eating it raw, you are
guaranteed that you are eating something good for you, that humans have eaten
forever, that *may* give you parasites, which might not affect you in a bad way,
depending on the creature you are eating and your health in general. Freezing is
a good option if you really want to reduce you chances of infestation, that is
if it's below freezing outside, or you live with electricity. I don't, and,
eventually, humans won't, so it isn't a long term solution. I jokingly said to
my friend: `we could just microwave it all, I bet that would kill the
parasites!' And it's true, it would – in fact until all of this earth, and our
bodies, have been irradiated, parasites will continue inhabiting us – they are
everywhere – and we will continue seeing only a tiny glimpse of what they are,
as part of who we are."




Geoff

There's a newish forum for french-language-speaking rawpalaeodieters on this
site:-

http://paleocru.webatu.com/forum/

Geoff

I'm so glad that the US government was blocked from banning raw oysters. If it
had gone through, the very next step would have been legal moves to force
irradiated raw meat on us. Well, so far we've had 2 significant victories:- this
one and the failed attempt, a while back,  by the 5 biggest French producers of
cheese to allow high-quality-labelled cheeses to be sold in pasteurised form.



Geoff








To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
From: tironanyc@...
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:54:47 -0800
Subject: Re: [rawpaleodiet] Very disturbing story! Update!





It was a business decision,based not on freedom of choice and the right to live
your life,but a victory(for now) nevertheless.
http://blog.al.com/live/2009/11/raw_oyster_ban_fda_backs_off_p.html(Updated) FDA
backs off raw oyster restrictions after coastal criticismBy The Associated
PressNovember 13, 2009, 1:36PMWASHINGTON -- Facing fierce resistance, the Obama
administration today backed off a plan to ban sales of raw oysters from the Gulf
of Mexico during warm weather.

In a statement, the Food and Drug Administration told lawmakers it will put the
proposal on hold while it studies ways to make consumption of raw oysters more
safe, according to several lawmakers.

The oyster industry -- as well as Democrats and Republicans across the Gulf --
blasted the plan as unnecessary government meddling. They said it could have
killed a $500 million industry and thousands of jobs.

"By reversing course, the FDA has acknowledged that its original plan was
unreasonable and that we need a commonsense approach to protecting the small
number of at-risk consumers," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who said FDA
Commissioner Peggy Hamburg informed her of the decision by telephone.

The move was also welcomed by Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Tuscaloosa, and Rep. Jo
Bonner, R-Mobile. "Clearly, the FDA listened to lawmakers and the Gulf Coast
oyster community in their evaluation of whether or not to proceed with the
implementation of a drastic new requirement that would have had a devastating
impact on the local oyster industry," Bonner said in a statement this afternoon.

Shelby hopes that further study "will produce a result that better balances
illness reduction goals with the economic importance of the oyster community to
the Gulf Coast," a spokesman said in an e-mail.

But a leading food safety advocate saw political pressure at work to the
detriment of public health.

   "Every year that the current policy stays in place, it sentences more
consumers to die from these products," said Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of
food safety at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Science in the Public
Interest, which has been lobbying the FDA for years to take a more aggressive
stance on Vibrio.

She noted, however, that the FDA's statement made no mention of rolling back the
schedule for implementing the added treatment requirements if the agency again
decides that is the right course. FDA spokeswoman Meghan Scott could not
immediately say this afternoon when a decision will come.

    About 15 people die each year in the United States from raw oysters infected
with Vibrio vulnificus, which typically is found in warm coastal waters between
April and October. Most of the deaths occur in people with weak immune systems
caused by health problems like liver or kidney disease, cancer, diabetes, or
AIDS.

The oyster industry has been working with regulators for years to improve its
safety performance by increasing refrigeration and trying to raise awareness of
the hazards to people with weak immune systems.

But the FDA says the results haven't changed much.

The FDA proposal -- which had been slated to go into effect in 2011 -- would
have prohibited sales of raw oysters from the Gulf for much of the year unless
the shellfish were treated to destroy bacteria.

The Gulf region supplies about two-thirds of U.S. oysters, and some people in
the industry argue that anti-bacterial procedures such as pasteurization and
irradiation are too costly. They also say the processes ruin the fresh taste and
texture of raw oysters, considered a delicacy by many.

(Press-Register Washington Bureau Reporter Sean Reilly contributed to this
report.
By The Associated PressNovember 13, 2009, 1:36PMWASHINGTON -- Facing fierce
resistance, the Obama administration today backed off a plan to ban sales of raw
oysters from the Gulf of Mexico during warm weather.

In a statement, the Food and Drug Administration told lawmakers it will put the
proposal on hold while it studies ways to make consumption of raw oysters more
safe, according to several lawmakers.

The oyster industry -- as well as Democrats and Republicans across the Gulf --
blasted the plan as unnecessary government meddling. They said it could have
killed a $500 million industry and thousands of jobs.

"By reversing course, the FDA has acknowledged that its original plan was
unreasonable and that we need a commonsense approach to protecting the small
number of at-risk consumers," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who said FDA
Commissioner Peggy Hamburg informed her of the decision by telephone.

The move was also welcomed by Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Tuscaloosa, and Rep. Jo
Bonner, R-Mobile. "Clearly, the FDA listened to lawmakers and the Gulf Coast
oyster community in their evaluation of whether or not to proceed with the
implementation of a drastic new requirement that would have had a devastating
impact on the local oyster industry," Bonner said in a statement this afternoon.

Shelby hopes that further study "will produce a result that better balances
illness reduction goals with the economic importance of the oyster community to
the Gulf Coast," a spokesman said in an e-mail.

But a leading food safety advocate saw political pressure at work to the
detriment of public health.

   "Every year that the current policy stays in place, it sentences more
consumers to die from these products," said Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of
food safety at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Science in the Public
Interest, which has been lobbying the FDA for years to take a more aggressive
stance on Vibrio.

She noted, however, that the FDA's statement made no mention of rolling back the
schedule for implementing the added treatment requirements if the agency again
decides that is the right course. FDA spokeswoman Meghan Scott could not
immediately say this afternoon when a decision will come.

    About 15 people die each year in the United States from raw oysters infected
with Vibrio vulnificus, which typically is found in warm coastal waters between
April and October. Most of the deaths occur in people with weak immune systems
caused by health problems like liver or kidney disease, cancer, diabetes, or
AIDS.

The oyster industry has been working with regulators for years to improve its
safety performance by increasing refrigeration and trying to raise awareness of
the hazards to people with weak immune systems.

But the FDA says the results haven't changed much.

The FDA proposal -- which had been slated to go into effect in 2011 -- would
have prohibited sales of raw oysters from the Gulf for much of the year unless
the shellfish were treated to destroy bacteria.

The Gulf region supplies about two-thirds of U.S. oysters, and some people in
the industry argue that anti-bacterial procedures such as pasteurization and
irradiation are too costly. They also say the processes ruin the fresh taste and
texture of raw oysters, considered a delicacy by many.

(Press-Register Washington Bureau Reporter Sean Reilly contributed to this
report.

--- On Mon, 11/9/09, geoffp0115 <geoffpurcell@...> wrote:

From: geoffp0115 <geoffpurcell@...>
Subject: [rawpaleodiet] Very disturbing story
To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 9:31 AM



Here's an article, below, about the FDA trying to destroy the
raw-oyster-industry out of sheer stupidity, all in the name of the ghastly
health and safety.If you're in Florida, please, please send lobbying letters to
your local politicians and try to stop this nonsense. There is a mention of some
politicians looking to block this bill in some way.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





_________________________________________________________________
View your other email accounts from your Hotmail inbox. Add them now.
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394592/direct/01/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hi/ i'm in this diet about couple of months now. i love this.



       New Email names for you!
Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
Hurry before someone else does!
http://mail.promotions.yahoo.com/newdomains/aa/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It was a business decision,based not on freedom of choice and the right to live
your life,but a victory(for now)
nevertheless. http://blog.al.com/live/2009/11/raw_oyster_ban_fda_backs_off_p.htm\
l(Updated) FDA backs off raw oyster restrictions after coastal criticismBy The
Associated PressNovember 13, 2009, 1:36PMWASHINGTON -- Facing fierce resistance,
the Obama administration today backed off a plan to ban sales of raw oysters
from the Gulf of Mexico during warm weather.

In a statement, the Food and Drug Administration told lawmakers it will put the
proposal on hold while it studies ways to make consumption of raw oysters more
safe, according to several lawmakers.

The oyster industry -- as well as Democrats and Republicans across the Gulf --
blasted the plan as unnecessary government meddling. They said it could have
killed a $500 million industry and thousands of jobs.

"By reversing course, the FDA has acknowledged that its original plan was
unreasonable and that we need a commonsense approach to protecting the small
number of at-risk consumers," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who said FDA
Commissioner Peggy Hamburg informed her of the decision by telephone.

The move was also welcomed by Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Tuscaloosa, and Rep. Jo
Bonner, R-Mobile. "Clearly, the FDA listened to lawmakers and the Gulf Coast
oyster community in their evaluation of whether or not to proceed with the
implementation of a drastic new requirement that would have had a devastating
impact on the local oyster industry," Bonner said in a statement this afternoon.

Shelby hopes that further study "will produce a result that better balances
illness reduction goals with the economic importance of the oyster community to
the Gulf Coast," a spokesman said in an e-mail.

But a leading food safety advocate saw political pressure at work to the
detriment of public health.

  "Every year that the current policy stays in place, it sentences more
consumers to die from these products," said Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of
food safety at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Science in the Public
Interest, which has been lobbying the FDA for years to take a more aggressive
stance on Vibrio. 

She noted, however, that the FDA's statement made no mention of rolling back the
schedule for implementing the added treatment requirements if the agency again
decides that is the right course. FDA spokeswoman Meghan Scott could not
immediately say this afternoon when a decision will come.

   About 15 people die each year in the United States from raw oysters infected
with Vibrio vulnificus, which typically is found in warm coastal waters between
April and October. Most of the deaths occur in people with weak immune systems
caused by health problems like liver or kidney disease, cancer, diabetes, or
AIDS.

The oyster industry has been working with regulators for years to improve its
safety performance by increasing refrigeration and trying to raise awareness of
the hazards to people with weak immune systems.

But the FDA says the results haven't changed much.

The FDA proposal -- which had been slated to go into effect in 2011 -- would
have prohibited sales of raw oysters from the Gulf for much of the year unless
the shellfish were treated to destroy bacteria.

The Gulf region supplies about two-thirds of U.S. oysters, and some people in
the industry argue that anti-bacterial procedures such as pasteurization and
irradiation are too costly. They also say the processes ruin the fresh taste and
texture of raw oysters, considered a delicacy by many.

(Press-Register Washington Bureau Reporter Sean Reilly contributed to this
report.
By The Associated PressNovember 13, 2009, 1:36PMWASHINGTON -- Facing fierce
resistance, the Obama administration today backed off a plan to ban sales of raw
oysters from the Gulf of Mexico during warm weather.

In a statement, the Food and Drug Administration told lawmakers it will put the
proposal on hold while it studies ways to make consumption of raw oysters more
safe, according to several lawmakers.

The oyster industry -- as well as Democrats and Republicans across the Gulf --
blasted the plan as unnecessary government meddling. They said it could have
killed a $500 million industry and thousands of jobs.

"By reversing course, the FDA has acknowledged that its original plan was
unreasonable and that we need a commonsense approach to protecting the small
number of at-risk consumers," said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who said FDA
Commissioner Peggy Hamburg informed her of the decision by telephone.

The move was also welcomed by Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Tuscaloosa, and Rep. Jo
Bonner, R-Mobile. "Clearly, the FDA listened to lawmakers and the Gulf Coast
oyster community in their evaluation of whether or not to proceed with the
implementation of a drastic new requirement that would have had a devastating
impact on the local oyster industry," Bonner said in a statement this afternoon.

Shelby hopes that further study "will produce a result that better balances
illness reduction goals with the economic importance of the oyster community to
the Gulf Coast," a spokesman said in an e-mail.

But a leading food safety advocate saw political pressure at work to the
detriment of public health.

  "Every year that the current policy stays in place, it sentences more
consumers to die from these products," said Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of
food safety at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Science in the Public
Interest, which has been lobbying the FDA for years to take a more aggressive
stance on Vibrio. 

She noted, however, that the FDA's statement made no mention of rolling back the
schedule for implementing the added treatment requirements if the agency again
decides that is the right course. FDA spokeswoman Meghan Scott could not
immediately say this afternoon when a decision will come.

   About 15 people die each year in the United States from raw oysters infected
with Vibrio vulnificus, which typically is found in warm coastal waters between
April and October. Most of the deaths occur in people with weak immune systems
caused by health problems like liver or kidney disease, cancer, diabetes, or
AIDS.

The oyster industry has been working with regulators for years to improve its
safety performance by increasing refrigeration and trying to raise awareness of
the hazards to people with weak immune systems.

But the FDA says the results haven't changed much.

The FDA proposal -- which had been slated to go into effect in 2011 -- would
have prohibited sales of raw oysters from the Gulf for much of the year unless
the shellfish were treated to destroy bacteria.

The Gulf region supplies about two-thirds of U.S. oysters, and some people in
the industry argue that anti-bacterial procedures such as pasteurization and
irradiation are too costly. They also say the processes ruin the fresh taste and
texture of raw oysters, considered a delicacy by many.

(Press-Register Washington Bureau Reporter Sean Reilly contributed to this
report.

--- On Mon, 11/9/09, geoffp0115 <geoffpurcell@...> wrote:

From: geoffp0115 <geoffpurcell@...>
Subject: [rawpaleodiet] Very disturbing story
To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 9:31 AM
















 











Here's an article, below, about the FDA trying to destroy the
raw-oyster-industry out of sheer stupidity, all in the name of the ghastly
health and safety.If you're in Florida, please, please send lobbying letters to
your local politicians and try to stop this nonsense. There is a mention of some
politicians looking to block this bill in some way.





















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Here's an article, below, about the FDA trying to destroy the
raw-oyster-industry out of sheer stupidity, all in the name of the ghastly
health and safety.If you're in Florida, please, please send lobbying letters to
your local politicians and try to stop this nonsense. There is a mention of some
politicians looking to block this bill in some way.

Anyway, it's a real warning-sign. Given the previous attempts to ban raw dairy
in some US states, I had real concern that they would start targetting other raw
animal foods.


"Florida oyster advocates fuming over FDA treatment
An upcoming government requirement that raw oysters be treated to eliminate a
potentially deadly bacteria has the industry protesting.
By Roger Bull Story updated at 1:04 AM on Sunday, Nov. 8, 2009

. The federal government has decided that starting in 2011, raw oysters coming
out of the Gulf of Mexico in warm-weather months must be treated before they can
be sold to consumers.

The FDA wants all raw oysters harvested from the Gulf of Mexico during
warm-weather months to be treated to kill bacteria.

Only oysters in the shell would be affected.

Half of all oysters sold are eaten raw.

Two-thirds of all oysters harvested in the U.S. come from the gulf.

About 40 percent of those are harvested during warm-weather months.

Franklin County produces 90 percent of Florida oysters and 5-10 percent of the
nation's.

Only two dealers in the state now treat raw oysters, and one of them said his
freezing method increases the price by 21/2 to 3 times.

Before hunting, there was gathering.

Like an orange hanging on the tree, a raw oyster is one of the most basic of
foods. Reach down and pull it out of the water, open it and eat it. OK, maybe
add a little lemon or hot sauce.

But it may soon not be that simple. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has
decided that starting in 2011, raw oysters coming out of the Gulf of Mexico
during warm-weather months must be treated before they can be sold to consumers.

They call it post-harvest-processing (PHP for short) and there are several
methods - freezing, pressure, radiation - to kill vibrio vulnificus, a bacteria
that occurs naturally in warm coastal waters and is more prevalent in the
summer. But it can be fatal to people with liver disease, diabetes or other
problems.

The bacteria causes about 30 people a year to get sick from eating raw gulf
oysters and half of those die. And it's the reason that warnings about eating
raw seafood are printed on menus everywhere.

The FDA's plan would apply only to oysters still in the shell because while
shucked oysters sold in pints and gallons are still raw, it's assumed they'll be
cooked before eaten. The FDA hasn't been specific about what it considers
warm-weather months, but discussions so far have indicated it would start in
April or May and end in October.

That would loosely correspond to the old, unofficial tenet to eat oysters only
in months with an "R." And though oyster sales are better in cool months, 40
percent of oysters harvested in the gulf are during warm months.

The FDA would not talk to the Times-Union despite repeated requests, but the
move has already drawn a storm of protest. Charles Bronson, Florida commissioner
of agriculture, wrote a letter to the FDA on Wednesday objecting. On Thursday,
Sens. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., Mary Landrieu, D-La., and David Vitter, R-La.,
announced a bill to stop the FDA's plan.

But nowhere is the outrage greater than in Franklin County, the small Panhandle
county where 90 percent of the state's oysters are brought up by hand and tong
from the bottom of Apalachicola Bay. More than 20 percent of the county's 11,200
population work either in harvesting, shucking or shipping oysters.

"We're all upset about it," said Beverly Hewitt, owner of the Apalachicola
Seafood Grill, a gathering spot at the center of the historic small town. "We
had a emergency county commission meeting. This is going to kill Apalachicola."

Tommy Ward, who runs Buddy Ward and Sons Seafood, the company his father started
in Apalachicola in 1957, said it would cost him about $1 million to set up a PHP
plant.

"We have to shut down in the summer," he said. "It'd wipe out the whole county."

Besides not being able to afford $1 million, Ward said that treated oysters
simply don't sell very well.

"They're on the market now," he said. "But the customers don't accept them."

Ahead of the curve

Grady Leavins, who's been in the oyster business in Apalachicola for 38 years,
is one of the few seafood dealers in the state who already treats oysters. His
PHP plant freezes them at minus 130 degrees with liquid nitrogen and sells them
on the half shell.

Sales are good, he said, and increasing. But they're still only 5 to 7 percent
of his total oyster sales, which are running about 400,000 pounds a week right
now and will go up to 600,000 in another month.

Leavins sees himself as ahead of the curve.

"I knew that it was the thing that was going to be done," he said. "Are we
making money? Yes. Have we gotten our investment back? I don't know, but anytime
you do something like this, it's a long-term thing."

The treated oysters cost 2? to 3 times more than untreated and are sold to
oyster bars and restaurants.

"They're for the people who want a traditional oyster," he said, "but have a
compromised immune system."

And that's one of the things that bothers those in the oyster business the most:
People should know when they should avoid the oysters.

"The biggest thing is cirrhosis of the liver from alcoholism," Leavins said.
"I'm a high-risk person; I'm a diabetic. So I don't eat them in the summer."

Caught by surprise

Kevin Begos, executive director of the Franklin County Oyster & Seafood Task
Force, said that he and the rest of the industry had been working with the FDA
for two years on improved refrigeration controls. Two days before they were to
leave for a shellfish conference, they started hearing rumors about the more
severe restrictions.

"It was a tremendous surprise," he said. "They flew in one of their top
officials and said, 'We're going to do this.'

"They hadn't talked to anyone, they hadn't any economic impact studies. One of
the things that upsets us is that we think we've done a good job protecting our
resources here. Now the FDA is saying, 'We don't care what you've done.' "

"I think it's a darn shame," said Leavins, who's a member of the Gulf Oyster
Industry Council. "We were doing everything that we agreed to do, that they
asked us to do."

On the half shell

Late Thursday afternoon, as the sky was darkening and a cool wind came in from
the ocean, Victoria Franklin and her daughter Jacquelyn Ingram sat at Bukkets in
Jacksonville Beach, each with a dozen raw oysters sitting it front of them.

Franklin grew up in Pensacola, lives in Atlanta and has been eating raw oysters
all her life. A little bit of salt, horseradish, hot sauce and a cracker.

She said she's not much interested in anything frozen or radiated.

"They just need to be fresh," she said.

Leavins said his quick-freezing, liquid-nitrogen method has no effect on the
taste and little effect on the texture.

"I've had a panel of people who are supposed to be experts," he said. "I've put
the same oyster, treated and untreated, side by side and they couldn't tell the
difference."

Bonnie Belchoir, owner of Bukkets, said that she bought some frozen once - she
didn't know where they came from - but didn't like them.

"They had no taste," she said, "and we couldn't sell them."

Marci Juskowsi owns Oyster Co-op in Orange Park with her husband, Danny. They'll
sell about 1,800 bushels a week to seafood stores and restaurants in the area
this time of year. That's about 27,000 dozen oysters.

She's tried a couple of treated oysters, too. And she's not impressed.

"Pasteurized oysters have a nasty taste," she said. "Frozen oysters aren't bad;
they just have a different texture."

And back in Apalachicola, Hewitt is still mad.

"Even in July," she said, "I went through 150 pounds of oysters on the half
shell every day. And not one person got sick."

roger.bull@...,"

http://jacksonville.com/business/2009-11-08/story/florida_oyster_advocates_fumin\
g_over_fda_treatment_0

Geoff

Well, I used to eat lots of fat(usually marrow) with each meal, but eventually
didn't feel the need to do that all the time. The way I see it, Cordain is
half-right/half-wrong re this. Palaeo hunters hunted a wide variety of wild game
and, while some must have been lean during winter months/during famine etc.,
there must have also been quite a bit of fat available from older animals etc.,
just not as much as what Sally Fallon and co claim.

Geoff




To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
From: zgraff@...
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 14:32:45 +0000
Subject: [rawpaleodiet] Re: Cordain Newsletter Update





his recommendations are too low in fat though, aren't they? I don't eat lean
meats unless I eat them with lots of fat.



_________________________________________________________________
Download Messenger onto your mobile for free
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/174426567/direct/01/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

his recommendations are too low in fat though, aren't they? I don't eat lean
meats unless I eat them with lots of fat.

--- In rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com, "geoffp0115" <geoffpurcell@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Here's some of the more relevant parts from Cordain's recent newsletter:-
>
> "
>
>
> Whole grains contain a substance called phytate which binds zinc and iron,
making these minerals unavailable for absorption5. It is entirely possible that
consuming this diet could leave one with an inadequate intake of iron and/or
zinc.
>
>
> Finally, gluten containing grains (wheat, rye, barely and oats) would be
unsuitable for patients with celiac disease – now estimated to be 1 in 250
people6, or more than 1 million U.S. citizens.
> Don't buy into the diary industry's well financed and politically connected
campaign to convince you that you need to drink milk.
>
> No mammal in the world requires milk past weaning, including humans. Can you
imagine the difficulty one of our ancestors would have had in trying to milk a
wild animal? A diet which avoids grains and dairy, and includes high levels of
fruits and vegetables will result in calcium balance, and will steer you clear
of the problems below:
>
> The recommended inclusion of 3 cups a day of fat-free or low-fat milk could
exacerbate the potential high glycemic load of this diet by producing
undesirable elevations in blood insulin concentrations. Milk, fermented milk
products and yogurt paradoxically have low glycemic indices, but maintain
insulin indices similar to white bread7 and raise blood insulin concentrations
even when added to low glycemic index mixed meals8.
>
>
> There are links between milk consumption and prostate cancer9, multiple
sclerosis10, rheumatoid arthritis11, Crohn's disease12 and type 1 diabetes13, so
it may be not be judicious to increase your milk consumption.
>
>
> There are an estimated 72 million lactose intolerant Americans14 for whom
increased milk consumption is likely to be problematic.
> Increase your intake of omega 3 fatty acids.
>
> In the past decade, perhaps the single most important dietary recommendation
to improve our health and prevent chronic disease is to increase our dietary
intake of omega 3 fatty acids which are found primarily in fatty fish. Thousands
of scientific papers spanning a variety of diseases unequivocally demonstrate
the health benefit of these fatty acids. Incredulously, the authors of the 2005
Dietary Guidelines see no need for Americans to increase our intake of omega 3
fatty acids, and offer these statements, "more research is needed" and "limited
evidence suggest an association between consumption of fatty acids in fish and
reduced risks of mortality from cardiovascular disease for the general
population." These statements fly in the face of the American Heart
Association's dietary recommendations to increase fish consumption for the
general population15 and are also contrary to AHA recommendations16 for patients
with CVD whose conclusions were "Randomized trials have convincingly documented
that omega-3 fatty acids can significantly reduce the occurrence of CVD events
in patients with coronary artery disease."
>
> Eat more protein and less high glycemic load carbohydrates than are
recommended by the Dietary Guidelines.
>
> The new guidelines tell us to keep our fat intake between 20 to 35 % of
calories, and table 2 in the new Guidelines shows that the USDA recommendation
for protein comes in at 18 % of energy. Consequently, the carbohydrate content
of new Guidelines would generally fall between 47 and 62 % of energy. These
macronutrient recommendations are inconsistent with world wide hunter-gatherer
values in which protein was always elevated at the expense of carbohydrate17.
>
> Increasingly, dietary interventions have demonstrated that high protein,
carbohydrate reduced diets are effective in improving blood lipid profiles18,
contributing to increased weight loss in the overweight19, improving bone
mineral health20, reducing blood pressure21 and improving insulin sensitivity22.
>
> Conclusion
>
> Judgments made by committees rarely reflect cumulative group wisdom and
knowledge, but more frequently come about by the political acumen of certain
individuals within the group. It is likely that the current Dietary Guidelines
were developed in a similar manner. That is not to say that any deliberate ill
intentions towards the health of the American public were planned, rather the
opposite. The intentions of the Dietary Guidelines Committee were, without a
doubt, to improve health and prevent the risk of chronic disease. Despite these
benevolent intentions, the recommendations still remain ill-informed and lack
understanding of how human dietary requirements were ultimately established –
not by committee and not even by humans, but rather by evolution acting through
natural selection. Until this most fundamental of all biological principles is
considered in establishing human nutritional needs, current guidelines and
recommendations will remain flawed. By basing your meals and snacks on lean
meats, fish, fresh fruits and vegetables, you can eat a diet that is
significantly healthier than that recommended by the latest government
Guidelines.
>
>
>
>           Did You Know
>
> . . . . . that a low salt diet can alleviate insomnia (sleeplessness)? Only a
single study in the scientific literature has examined this effect.
Unfortunately, this timely information is virtually unknown to most physicians,
nutritionists or even sleep experts because it is buried in the old scientific
literature, prior to the date (1950) that MEDLINE
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi) begins it's listings of
scientific papers. Fortunately, you can download this classic paper which
appeared in the September 22, 1945 issue of the Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA) by clicking on this link:
http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles/SaltInsomnia.pdf
>
>
> . . . . . that lemon juice produces a net alkaline PRAL (potential renal acid
load) in the body? Despite being acidic to the taste, its consumption will
contribute to a net metabolic alkalosis (what you want) and help to prevent bone
demineralization (osteoporosis). http://www.thepaleodiet.com/acidbase.htm.
>
>
> . . . . . that vinegar produces a net acid PRAL and is virtually devoid of any
micronutrients? Hence vinegar can be viewed as a nutritionally empty food that
carries with it the baggage of promoting a net metabolic acidosis which in turn
contributes to age associated bone loss. Do yourself a favor and use lemon juice
on your salads and in your salad dressing!
>
>
> . . . . . that whole grains are poor sources of minerals because they are
bound to phytic acid and thus poorly absorbed? On paper whole grains appear to
be moderately good sources of zinc, iron, copper and magnesium but poor sources
of calcium. These minerals are all so-called "divalent ions", and it has been
known for years that the divalent ions zinc, iron and calcium in whole grains
are poorly absorbed because they are bound to phytate (phytic acid) contained in
grains. Recently, it has been shown that magnesium is also a victim of phytate
binding and is poorly absorbed23. The practical value of this information is
that diets such as the one recommended by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans
2005 which is heavily reliant upon grains and whole grains do not consider this
in body (in vivo) effect. Whole grain based diets frequently are deficient in
iron and, zinc5 despite meeting recommended values on paper. The Paleo Diet is
rich in lean meats and seafood (excellent sources of highly absorbable iron and
zinc) and fresh fruits and veggies (great sources of well absorbed magnesium)24.
>
>
> . . . . . that 2% fat milk (2.0 % fat by weight) actually contains 35% fat by
calories and that whole milk (3.3% fat by weight) contains 49% fat by energy?
>
>
> References:
>
> 1. Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2005. U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
http://www.healthierus.gov/dietaryguidelines/
>
> 2. Position paper on trans fatty acids. ASCN/AIN Task Force on Trans Fatty
Acids. American Society for Clinical Nutrition and American Institute of
Nutrition. Am J Clin Nutr. 1996 May;63(5):663-70.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=8615347
>
> 3. Nelson GJ. Dietary fat, trans fatty acids, and risk of coronary heart
disease. Nutr Rev. 1998 Aug;56(8):250-2.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=9735680
>
> 4. Letter Report on Dietary Reference Intakes for Trans Fatty Acids. Food and
Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, 2002.
http://www.iom.edu/file.asp?id=13083
>
> 5. Cordain L. Cereal grains: humanity's double edged sword. World Rev Nutr
Diet 1999; 84:19-73. http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles.htm
>
> 6. Not T, Horvath K, Hill ID, Partanen J, Hammed A, Magazzu G, Fasano A.
Celiac disease risk in the USA: high prevalence of antiendomysium antibodies in
healthy blood donors. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1998 May;33(5):494-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=9648988
>
> 7. Ostman EM, Liljeberg Elmstahl HG, Bjorck IM. Inconsistency between glycemic
and insulinemic responses to regular and fermented milk products. Am J Clin
Nutr. 2001 Jul;74(1):96-100.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11451723
>
> 8. Liljeberg Elmstahl H, Bjorck IM. Milk as a supplement to mixed meals may
elevate postprandial insulinaemia. Eur J Clin Nutr 2001;55:994-999.
>
> 9. Giovannucci E. Nutritional factors in human cancers. Adv Exp Med Biol
1999;472:29-42.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=10736613
>
> 10. Guggenmos J, Schubart AS, Ogg S, Andersson M, Olsson T, Mather IH,
Linington C. Antibody cross-reactivity between myelin oligodendrocyte
glycoprotein and the milk protein butyrophilin in multiple sclerosis. J Immunol.
2004 Jan 1;172(1):661-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=14688379
>
> 11. Cordain L, Toohey L, Smith MJ, Hickey MS. Modulation of immune function by
dietary lectins in rheumatoid arthritis. Brit J Nutr 2000, 83:207-217.
http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles.htm
>
> 12. van den Bogaerde J, Kamm MA, Knight SC. Immune sensitization to food,
yeast and bacteria in Crohn's disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2001
Oct;15(10):1647-53.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11564006
>
> 13. Paronen J, Knip M, Savilahti E, Virtanen SM, Ilonen J, Akerblom HK,
Vaarala O. Effect of cow's milk exposure and maternal type 1 diabetes on
cellular and humoral immunization to dietary insulin in infants at genetic risk
for type 1 diabetes. Finnish Trial to Reduce IDDM in the Genetically at Risk
Study Group. Diabetes. 2000 Oct;49(10):1657-65.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11016449
>
> 14. Goldberg JP, Folta SC, Must A. Milk: can a "good" food be so bad?
Pediatrics. 2002 Oct;110 (4):826-32.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=12359802
>
> 15. Krauss RM, Eckel RH, Howard B et al. AHA Dietary Guidelines: revision
2000: A statement for healthcare professionals from the Nutrition Committee of
the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2000 Oct 31;102(18):2284-99.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11056107
>
> 16.Kris-Etherton PM, Harris WS, Appel LJ; American Heart Association.
Nutrition Committee. Fish consumption, fish oil, omega-3 fatty acids, and
cardiovascular disease. Circulation. 2002 Nov 19;106 (21):2747-57.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=12438303 "
>
>
> Geoff
>

Here's some of the more relevant parts from Cordain's recent newsletter:-

"


Whole grains contain a substance called phytate which binds zinc and iron,
making these minerals unavailable for absorption5. It is entirely possible that
consuming this diet could leave one with an inadequate intake of iron and/or
zinc.


Finally, gluten containing grains (wheat, rye, barely and oats) would be
unsuitable for patients with celiac disease – now estimated to be 1 in 250
people6, or more than 1 million U.S. citizens.
Don't buy into the diary industry's well financed and politically connected
campaign to convince you that you need to drink milk.

No mammal in the world requires milk past weaning, including humans. Can you
imagine the difficulty one of our ancestors would have had in trying to milk a
wild animal? A diet which avoids grains and dairy, and includes high levels of
fruits and vegetables will result in calcium balance, and will steer you clear
of the problems below:

The recommended inclusion of 3 cups a day of fat-free or low-fat milk could
exacerbate the potential high glycemic load of this diet by producing
undesirable elevations in blood insulin concentrations. Milk, fermented milk
products and yogurt paradoxically have low glycemic indices, but maintain
insulin indices similar to white bread7 and raise blood insulin concentrations
even when added to low glycemic index mixed meals8.


There are links between milk consumption and prostate cancer9, multiple
sclerosis10, rheumatoid arthritis11, Crohn's disease12 and type 1 diabetes13, so
it may be not be judicious to increase your milk consumption.


There are an estimated 72 million lactose intolerant Americans14 for whom
increased milk consumption is likely to be problematic.
Increase your intake of omega 3 fatty acids.

In the past decade, perhaps the single most important dietary recommendation to
improve our health and prevent chronic disease is to increase our dietary intake
of omega 3 fatty acids which are found primarily in fatty fish. Thousands of
scientific papers spanning a variety of diseases unequivocally demonstrate the
health benefit of these fatty acids. Incredulously, the authors of the 2005
Dietary Guidelines see no need for Americans to increase our intake of omega 3
fatty acids, and offer these statements, "more research is needed" and "limited
evidence suggest an association between consumption of fatty acids in fish and
reduced risks of mortality from cardiovascular disease for the general
population." These statements fly in the face of the American Heart
Association's dietary recommendations to increase fish consumption for the
general population15 and are also contrary to AHA recommendations16 for patients
with CVD whose conclusions were "Randomized trials have convincingly documented
that omega-3 fatty acids can significantly reduce the occurrence of CVD events
in patients with coronary artery disease."

Eat more protein and less high glycemic load carbohydrates than are recommended
by the Dietary Guidelines.

The new guidelines tell us to keep our fat intake between 20 to 35 % of
calories, and table 2 in the new Guidelines shows that the USDA recommendation
for protein comes in at 18 % of energy. Consequently, the carbohydrate content
of new Guidelines would generally fall between 47 and 62 % of energy. These
macronutrient recommendations are inconsistent with world wide hunter-gatherer
values in which protein was always elevated at the expense of carbohydrate17.

Increasingly, dietary interventions have demonstrated that high protein,
carbohydrate reduced diets are effective in improving blood lipid profiles18,
contributing to increased weight loss in the overweight19, improving bone
mineral health20, reducing blood pressure21 and improving insulin sensitivity22.

Conclusion

Judgments made by committees rarely reflect cumulative group wisdom and
knowledge, but more frequently come about by the political acumen of certain
individuals within the group. It is likely that the current Dietary Guidelines
were developed in a similar manner. That is not to say that any deliberate ill
intentions towards the health of the American public were planned, rather the
opposite. The intentions of the Dietary Guidelines Committee were, without a
doubt, to improve health and prevent the risk of chronic disease. Despite these
benevolent intentions, the recommendations still remain ill-informed and lack
understanding of how human dietary requirements were ultimately established –
not by committee and not even by humans, but rather by evolution acting through
natural selection. Until this most fundamental of all biological principles is
considered in establishing human nutritional needs, current guidelines and
recommendations will remain flawed. By basing your meals and snacks on lean
meats, fish, fresh fruits and vegetables, you can eat a diet that is
significantly healthier than that recommended by the latest government
Guidelines.



           Did You Know

. . . . . that a low salt diet can alleviate insomnia (sleeplessness)? Only a
single study in the scientific literature has examined this effect.
Unfortunately, this timely information is virtually unknown to most physicians,
nutritionists or even sleep experts because it is buried in the old scientific
literature, prior to the date (1950) that MEDLINE
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi) begins it's listings of
scientific papers. Fortunately, you can download this classic paper which
appeared in the September 22, 1945 issue of the Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA) by clicking on this link:
http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles/SaltInsomnia.pdf


. . . . . that lemon juice produces a net alkaline PRAL (potential renal acid
load) in the body? Despite being acidic to the taste, its consumption will
contribute to a net metabolic alkalosis (what you want) and help to prevent bone
demineralization (osteoporosis). http://www.thepaleodiet.com/acidbase.htm.


. . . . . that vinegar produces a net acid PRAL and is virtually devoid of any
micronutrients? Hence vinegar can be viewed as a nutritionally empty food that
carries with it the baggage of promoting a net metabolic acidosis which in turn
contributes to age associated bone loss. Do yourself a favor and use lemon juice
on your salads and in your salad dressing!


. . . . . that whole grains are poor sources of minerals because they are bound
to phytic acid and thus poorly absorbed? On paper whole grains appear to be
moderately good sources of zinc, iron, copper and magnesium but poor sources of
calcium. These minerals are all so-called "divalent ions", and it has been known
for years that the divalent ions zinc, iron and calcium in whole grains are
poorly absorbed because they are bound to phytate (phytic acid) contained in
grains. Recently, it has been shown that magnesium is also a victim of phytate
binding and is poorly absorbed23. The practical value of this information is
that diets such as the one recommended by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans
2005 which is heavily reliant upon grains and whole grains do not consider this
in body (in vivo) effect. Whole grain based diets frequently are deficient in
iron and, zinc5 despite meeting recommended values on paper. The Paleo Diet is
rich in lean meats and seafood (excellent sources of highly absorbable iron and
zinc) and fresh fruits and veggies (great sources of well absorbed magnesium)24.


. . . . . that 2% fat milk (2.0 % fat by weight) actually contains 35% fat by
calories and that whole milk (3.3% fat by weight) contains 49% fat by energy?


References:

1. Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2005. U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
http://www.healthierus.gov/dietaryguidelines/

2. Position paper on trans fatty acids. ASCN/AIN Task Force on Trans Fatty
Acids. American Society for Clinical Nutrition and American Institute of
Nutrition. Am J Clin Nutr. 1996 May;63(5):663-70.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=8615347

3. Nelson GJ. Dietary fat, trans fatty acids, and risk of coronary heart
disease. Nutr Rev. 1998 Aug;56(8):250-2.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=9735680

4. Letter Report on Dietary Reference Intakes for Trans Fatty Acids. Food and
Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, 2002.
http://www.iom.edu/file.asp?id=13083

5. Cordain L. Cereal grains: humanity's double edged sword. World Rev Nutr Diet
1999; 84:19-73. http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles.htm

6. Not T, Horvath K, Hill ID, Partanen J, Hammed A, Magazzu G, Fasano A. Celiac
disease risk in the USA: high prevalence of antiendomysium antibodies in healthy
blood donors. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1998 May;33(5):494-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=9648988

7. Ostman EM, Liljeberg Elmstahl HG, Bjorck IM. Inconsistency between glycemic
and insulinemic responses to regular and fermented milk products. Am J Clin
Nutr. 2001 Jul;74(1):96-100.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11451723

8. Liljeberg Elmstahl H, Bjorck IM. Milk as a supplement to mixed meals may
elevate postprandial insulinaemia. Eur J Clin Nutr 2001;55:994-999.

9. Giovannucci E. Nutritional factors in human cancers. Adv Exp Med Biol
1999;472:29-42.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=10736613

10. Guggenmos J, Schubart AS, Ogg S, Andersson M, Olsson T, Mather IH, Linington
C. Antibody cross-reactivity between myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein and the
milk protein butyrophilin in multiple sclerosis. J Immunol. 2004 Jan
1;172(1):661-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=14688379

11. Cordain L, Toohey L, Smith MJ, Hickey MS. Modulation of immune function by
dietary lectins in rheumatoid arthritis. Brit J Nutr 2000, 83:207-217.
http://www.thepaleodiet.com/articles.htm

12. van den Bogaerde J, Kamm MA, Knight SC. Immune sensitization to food, yeast
and bacteria in Crohn's disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2001
Oct;15(10):1647-53.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11564006

13. Paronen J, Knip M, Savilahti E, Virtanen SM, Ilonen J, Akerblom HK, Vaarala
O. Effect of cow's milk exposure and maternal type 1 diabetes on cellular and
humoral immunization to dietary insulin in infants at genetic risk for type 1
diabetes. Finnish Trial to Reduce IDDM in the Genetically at Risk Study Group.
Diabetes. 2000 Oct;49(10):1657-65.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11016449

14. Goldberg JP, Folta SC, Must A. Milk: can a "good" food be so bad?
Pediatrics. 2002 Oct;110 (4):826-32.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=12359802

15. Krauss RM, Eckel RH, Howard B et al. AHA Dietary Guidelines: revision 2000:
A statement for healthcare professionals from the Nutrition Committee of the
American Heart Association. Circulation. 2000 Oct 31;102(18):2284-99.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=11056107

16.Kris-Etherton PM, Harris WS, Appel LJ; American Heart Association. Nutrition
Committee. Fish consumption, fish oil, omega-3 fatty acids, and cardiovascular
disease. Circulation. 2002 Nov 19;106 (21):2747-57.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra\
ct&list_uids=12438303 "


Geoff

Hi, Laurel,

I had a couple of busy days and couldn't reply in a timely manner. Anyway, yes,
do what you can, because every little change will help. Starting with "rare", as
in lightly cooked eggs and barely seared meats, is a big help. Eat raw what you
can, and cook the other stuff as lightly as possible, and less each time. There
isn't any worry about parasites in pork these days, at least in North America. I
eat a lot of raw pork, and have never had any problems. It's hard to find
pastured pork, so I eat the common supermarket stuff. I use a lot of fish oil to
make up for the crummy fat profiles.

Salmonella is literally everywhere, and you probably already have a good
resistance to it. I haven't worried about it in chicken, and, again, no problems
in a few years of eating it. Raw eggs are healthy enough, but difficult to eat -
just hard to handle. I make a lot of mayonnaise with olive oil, I stir them into
salad or minced meat. Egg nogs are pretty much out - no sugar or honey here, and
no dairy. I will admit to caving with scrambled eggs now and then - comfort food
from my childhood.

All the resources one could want are on this list, I believe. I especially value
the info about AGEs and other negative products of heating foods. Not only is
raw better, cooked is worse:)

Have fun in your explorations,

ginny

All stunts performed without a net!




> To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
> From: tobeonwater@...
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:50:34 -0700
> Subject: Re: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water
>
> Hi Ginny,
>
> I am sitting on the fence of cooked paleo ( which I have been following for 2
years at the 80% rule, meaning 80% compliant ), and thankfully at this time, I
am not suffering from any disorder or ailment - but want to live long and well !
I run 1/2 marathon's and am about to do my first full marathon.
>
> I am very curious about raw paleo, and have questions about success stories,
and what research there is that proves we can handle the bacteria or whatever we
don't kill through cooking, in our systems.
>
> Would I be ok, if I just introduce raw eggs, and raw steak right away?
Salmonella - is it a myth that it comes from raw eggs?  What about raw chicken
and trichinosis from raw pork?
>
> I know I must make you roll your eyes with my naive questions - but you seem
to have been where I am, going from paleo, to raw..to eating cooked sometimes...
> What reliable resources could you point me to for well founded research and
information so that I can decide if this would be a road I could follow?
>
> Thank you so much.
> Laurel -
> Ottawa Canada
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: G WILKEN <gwilken@...>
> To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, October 25, 2009 10:12:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water
>
>
>
> First of all, to stay on the advertised topic:
>
> I use water processed in a Nikken Optimizer. This takes prefiltered water and
spins it through powdered coral to pick up trace minerals; the spinning is done
with a magnetic paddle. The theory is that this duplicates your basic mountain
stream source by mineralizing, polarizing, and oxygenating it. I know this: it
tastes terrific, and one tends to drink a lot of it, and to find other waters,
bottled or otherwise, bland and flat-tasting. I know that when you put it on
your skin it soaks in much faster than does tap water. Their similar shower
filter has what resembles a softening effect; it seems wetter, somehow, and the
soap goes further and you rinse cleaner. I also have observed that potted plants
thrive remarkably when fed this water, growing to a size and at a rate markedly
different than their entire previous lives. I make no claims for it, and was
extremely skeptical prior to using it.
>
> Now, on juice: I stayed away from juices for quite a few years while doing
Paleo, both cooked, previously, and now 95% raw. I have all the usual reactions
to cooked foods, but social constraints sometimes lead to not a heck of a lot of
choice. I never lost a desire to eat veggies, and even if I went without in
perfect comfort for a few days, I could chow down to huge amounts of salad and
eat with no sensible "stop". Recently I experimented with juicing again, and I
have had a few good results with the pain lessening in my chronically sore
muscles, food cravings diminished, and generally more appetite control and less
hunger despite no increase in volume of food. I know the pros and cons, and
didn't expect to feel such a vigorous change, which came about despite my former
routine's including a fair amount of raw fruit and veg. Presently I have no
desire to eat other veg, no wild cravings for fruit, and am satisfied with my
two small meat meals and a glass
>  of juice each day, with the occasional apple or citrus fruit. My juice is of
organic greens such as kale, chard, parsley, beet greens, a bit of raw garlic,
celery and carrots. I find it overwhelmingly delicious, wonderfully alive and
"real", as if it "fits in" to my system and needs. Given the nice benefits, I
think I'll stay with it a while, watching for anything negative. I'm drinking
about 12oz almost daily. It could be there's something in here I need.
>
> There; my big confession:) The good part is that I am eating darn near
everything raw now, and am very happy with it, not bored, not "missing out". And
I think perhaps my remaining few headaches are directly related to the "cooked
stuff events".
>
> ginny
>
> All stunts performed without a net!
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>       __________________________________________________________________
> The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier.  Optimized for Yahoo! 
Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

No, the Nikken Optimizer does not filter. It's up to you to use whatever system
you want. I use a really good commercial mechanical filter; I don't like RO
either. Nikken sells filters, too, but they're no better, IMO, than what I
bought at a tiny fraction of the price.

I don't worry about bugs, just about drugs:) After the article that Geoff linked
about bacteria in the blood, especially, I think we are all bugs anyway, and we
just need to take good care of the nice ones and keep them in balance.

ginny

All stunts performed without a net!




> To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
> From: caroleebol@...
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:40:26 +0000
> Subject: [rawpaleodiet] Re: Living (Structured) Water - veggie juices - spring
water
>
> I was wondering about the RO systems. Ginny, is the Nikken RO?


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I was wondering about the RO systems. Ginny, is the Nikken RO? I'm a little
unsure about the whole issue of pulling minerals in RO systemsa and from what I
understand it's hard to add the same amount and ratios which would normally
occur in nature. Also they use 3 gallons per one gallon of filtered water which
seems wasteful, but maybe there isn't a perfect system either unless one finds a
spring. Ginny, your system does sound nearly perfect, and Mandy I love the idea
of blessing the water before giving it my children (or anyone, and blessing food
as well). I think Dr. Emoto would concur!

On the topic of veggies and anti-nutrients, thank you so much Geoff for this
valuable info. I was wondering the same as I had recently read Walker's book on
juicing where he mentions not to be concerned about such effects if it's in
organic form such as raw. But from what you are saying, "everything in
moderation"... which makes sense.

Regarding spring water, there is a site that Daniel Vitalis recommends (he is in
a number of videos talking about "living" spring water - can be googled)
www.findaspring.com but only lists some springs. There is a spring I found in
Western NJ but I had the water tested and it was very high in bacterial count
(1400 coloforms per something...) and the guy at the lab said it should be
considered "undrinkable". These are probably the same folks who think
pasteurized milk is better than raw as everything is dead in it, mind you. But
is it safe to assume that if it's from a spring or a well, that it's always
healthy water? I imagine there are some springs and wells which contain
incredibly healthy water and others which are not? Perhaps long ago, all water
was healthy but now there is seepage of pesticides and such, and I'm not sure
how purity can be measured without spending loads on every test available. When
I have more time, I'll research the topic of spring water and will post what I
find! Right now, I have two little ones which keep me pretty busy so I am so
very grateful to everyone here for helping me through this, saving hours of
research time :) I do imagine there's a yahoo group out there... ;)

Carolee

Geoff,

That's an interesting therapy. However, your notion about the importance
of the environment is actually refuted by this statement in the article:

"For example, heart disease and arteriosclerosis both have similar
epidemiological profiles as autoimmune diseases and both involve
inflammation, and their recent increase in incidence cannot be solely
attributed to environmental factors according to a recent paper
proposing the eradication of helminths as an explanation of this
discrepancy."

For my part, as a child I played in the dirt quite extensively and grew
up working on a farm where I frequently forked cow manure out of the
barn, etc., so I don't think I missed potential exposure that would have
hindered my immune system development.

In developed countries, one environmental exposure that does come to
mind is the ubiquitous fortification of the food supply with Vitamin D,
which is thought by Trevor Marshall to have played an important role in
the increase of autoimmune disease in those countries.

While infecting oneself with whipworms and hookworms may have a
stimulatory effect on the immune system in the short term, Marshall
would say it is unlikely to be of long term benefit without eradicating
the underlying intracellular infection of metagenomic pleomorphic
bacterial forms which have successfully "learned" to evade immune
system.

Marshall's work, as well as the success of his protocol in overcoming
chronic disease, has demonstrated that these organisms have subverted
innate immune system response by disabling the Vitamin D nuclear
receptor (as well as Vitamin D metabolism) which affects the functioning
of at least 913 genes, including many that are responsible for
generating a number of anti-microbial proteins and peptides, such as
cathelicidin.

Autoimmune Disease explained in 10 minutes
http://www.youtube.com/user/DrTrevorMarshall
<http://www.youtube.com/user/DrTrevorMarshall>


Livin' on the raw grass fat of the land,
Gary



--- In rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com, "geoffp0115" <geoffpurcell@...>
wrote:
>
> There's actually been more evidence that infections may actually
protect against heart-disease,  not worsen it.Here's an paragraph or two
from the relevant hygiene hypothesis article on wikipedia:-
>
... (snip)
> "
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygiene_hypothesis
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygiene_hypothesis>
>
> That's the thing, more and more the notion that the problem lies with
the environment and not the pathogen is coming to the fore.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
> --- In rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com, "rawtruth" garyva@ wrote:
> >
> > Bacteria in heart disease and strokes
> > <http://www.rense.com/general88/bbac.htm
<http://www.rense.com/general88/bbac.htm>  >  by Alan Cantwell, MD
> >
> > Excerpt:
> >
> > Recent research, based on molecular  biology,  indicates     that
90% of
> > the cells of the human body  are microbial cells! Despite this
> > amazing new discovery, most physicians  do not believe bacteria are
> > involved     in any way with the major diseases (heart disease,
stroke
> > and cancer) that     kill most of us...
> >
> > Perhaps the biggest reason why
> > pleomorphic,  cell wall     deficient acid-fast bacteria are ignored
in
> > human disease  is that these     microbes  are so ubiquitous.
Everyone
> > carries them, both in sickness  and     in health. Physicians  are
also
> > reluctant to accept that the same type     bacteria present in a
healthy
> > individual  could cause a variety of chronic     diseases  in sick
> > people.           However, almost  all  healthy  people  eventually
die
> > of diseases, such as cancer, heart or kidney  disease, or suffer a
> > stroke.     Livingston was  fond of saying "the microbe" was both
the
> > giver     and the taker of life. I think it is fair to say that  we
> > still know very      little about  the bacteria we carry in our
bodies,
> > and the trouble they     can cause as we age.
> >
> > Livin' on the raw grass fat of the land,
> > Gary



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Carolee
I have read a bit about Dr Emoto too. I like his idea of water crystals being
affected by thoughts. I also wouldn't recommend carbonated water as my
understanding is that fizzy drinks may deplete calcium and contribute to
osteoporosis.

  I am extremely fortunate to have an untreated private water supply. (I would
much rather take my chances with e coli etc, than the chlorines and water
softeners in the mains water here!)I am a semi professional singer and I find
that if I drink the mains water it drys my throat and avdversly affects my vocal
chords. Before I moved here I had a reverse osmosis filter which I would
recommend. If you cant get that, a jug filter removes chlorine (but not
chloramines, which a lot of water supplies have now) and rather than buy a
machine to energise your water why not just put your hands on the glass and
focus on putting love, or thanks, or whatever emotion you want, into the water
before you drink it or give it to your children. Perhaps your toddler would
enjoy choosing what emotions he wants to put in his water? You can also try
putting energy/emotions into any food you are preparing/eating.
Mandy

Not "best", just "preferred."  I started on the diet by making smoothies
of milk, cream, fruit and eggs, etc.  I soon abbreviated that to just
popping open the egg into a glass and downing it a la "Rocky."  One
other way I use eggs is to occasionally mix into a Steak Tartar.

-=mark=-

Lillydipper wrote:
> When mixing eggs (raw) into the diet, is there any "best way", like an egg nog
or the like?
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: theta <thetasig@...>
> To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, October 26, 2009 12:17:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water
>
>
> Laurel,
>
> A couple of quick, basic ideas. First, get naturally fed foods (no
> growth hormones, soy meal, vaccines, etc.) - grass-fed meat, free-range
> fowl, deep-sea fish, organic veggies if you eat those too. They will be
> healthiest to eat, then. Second, bacteria is ubiquitous in and on our
> bodies and is part of our being, including helping digest foods we eat
> and being first line of defense against interloping bacteria. Introduce
> new bacteria (these raw foods) slowly to give the body a chance to
> switch over to new strains, etc. I mixed cooked and raw together,
> slowing adding more raw over about 5 months when I started. Each person
> has their own pacing. There's more to say, but this is a good starting
> point.
>
> -=mark=-
>
> Lillydipper wrote:
>> Hi Ginny,
>>
>> I am sitting on the fence of cooked paleo ( which I have been following for 2
years at the 80% rule, meaning 80% compliant ), and thankfully at this time, I
am not suffering from any disorder or ailment - but want to live long and well !
I run 1/2 marathon's and am about to do my first full marathon.
>>
>> I am very curious about raw paleo, and have questions about success stories,
and what research there is that proves we can handle the bacteria or whatever we
don't kill through cooking, in our systems.
>>
>> Would I be ok, if I just introduce raw eggs, and raw steak right away?
Salmonella - is it a myth that it comes from raw eggs? What about raw chicken
and trichinosis from raw pork?
>>
>> I know I must make you roll your eyes with my naive questions - but you seem
to have been where I am, going from paleo, to raw..to eating cooked sometimes...
>> What reliable resources could you point me to for well founded research and
information so that I can decide if this would be a road I could follow?
>>
>> Thank you so much.
>> Laurel -
>> Ottawa Canada
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________ _________ _________ __
>> From: G WILKEN <gwilken@...>
>> To: rawpaleodiet@ yahoogroups. com
>> Sent: Sun, October 25, 2009 10:12:58 PM
>> Subject: RE: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water
>>
>>
>>
>> First of all, to stay on the advertised topic:
>>
>> I use water processed in a Nikken Optimizer. This takes prefiltered water and
spins it through powdered coral to pick up trace minerals; the spinning is done
with a magnetic paddle. The theory is that this duplicates your basic mountain
stream source by mineralizing, polarizing, and oxygenating it. I know this: it
tastes terrific, and one tends to drink a lot of it, and to find other waters,
bottled or otherwise, bland and flat-tasting. I know that when you put it on
your skin it soaks in much faster than does tap water. Their similar shower
filter has what resembles a softening effect; it seems wetter, somehow, and the
soap goes further and you rinse cleaner. I also have observed that potted plants
thrive remarkably when fed this water, growing to a size and at a rate markedly
different than their entire previous lives. I make no claims for it, and was
extremely skeptical prior to using it.
>>
>> Now, on juice: I stayed away from juices for quite a few years while doing
Paleo, both cooked, previously, and now 95% raw. I have all the usual reactions
to cooked foods, but social constraints sometimes lead to not a heck of a lot of
choice. I never lost a desire to eat veggies, and even if I went without in
perfect comfort for a few days, I could chow down to huge amounts of salad and
eat with no sensible "stop". Recently I experimented with juicing again, and I
have had a few good results with the pain lessening in my chronically sore
muscles, food cravings diminished, and generally more appetite control and less
hunger despite no increase in volume of food. I know the pros and cons, and
didn't expect to feel such a vigorous change, which came about despite my former
routine's including a fair amount of raw fruit and veg. Presently I have no
desire to eat other veg, no wild cravings for fruit, and am satisfied with my
two small meat meals and a
>  glass
>> of juice each day, with the occasional apple or citrus fruit. My juice is of
organic greens such as kale, chard, parsley, beet greens, a bit of raw garlic,
celery and carrots. I find it overwhelmingly delicious, wonderfully alive and
"real", as if it "fits in" to my system and needs. Given the nice benefits, I
think I'll stay with it a while, watching for anything negative. I'm drinking
about 12oz almost daily. It could be there's something in here I need.
>>
>> There; my big confession:) The good part is that I am eating darn near
everything raw now, and am very happy with it, not bored, not "missing out". And
I think perhaps my remaining few headaches are directly related to the "cooked
stuff events".
>>
>> ginny
>>
>> All stunts performed without a net!
>>
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
>> The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo!
Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads. yahoo.com/ ca/internetexplo rer/
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------ --------- --------- ------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>       __________________________________________________________________
> Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!
>
> http://www.flickr.com/gift/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

When mixing eggs (raw) into the diet, is there any "best way", like an egg nog
or the like?




________________________________
From: theta <thetasig@...>
To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, October 26, 2009 12:17:36 PM
Subject: Re: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water

 
Laurel,

A couple of quick, basic ideas. First, get naturally fed foods (no
growth hormones, soy meal, vaccines, etc.) - grass-fed meat, free-range
fowl, deep-sea fish, organic veggies if you eat those too. They will be
healthiest to eat, then. Second, bacteria is ubiquitous in and on our
bodies and is part of our being, including helping digest foods we eat
and being first line of defense against interloping bacteria. Introduce
new bacteria (these raw foods) slowly to give the body a chance to
switch over to new strains, etc. I mixed cooked and raw together,
slowing adding more raw over about 5 months when I started. Each person
has their own pacing. There's more to say, but this is a good starting
point.

-=mark=-

Lillydipper wrote:
> Hi Ginny,
>
> I am sitting on the fence of cooked paleo ( which I have been following for 2
years at the 80% rule, meaning 80% compliant ), and thankfully at this time, I
am not suffering from any disorder or ailment - but want to live long and well !
I run 1/2 marathon's and am about to do my first full marathon.
>
> I am very curious about raw paleo, and have questions about success stories,
and what research there is that proves we can handle the bacteria or whatever we
don't kill through cooking, in our systems.
>
> Would I be ok, if I just introduce raw eggs, and raw steak right away?
Salmonella - is it a myth that it comes from raw eggs? What about raw chicken
and trichinosis from raw pork?
>
> I know I must make you roll your eyes with my naive questions - but you seem
to have been where I am, going from paleo, to raw..to eating cooked sometimes...
> What reliable resources could you point me to for well founded research and
information so that I can decide if this would be a road I could follow?
>
> Thank you so much.
> Laurel -
> Ottawa Canada
>
>
>
>
> ____________ _________ _________ __
> From: G WILKEN <gwilken@...>
> To: rawpaleodiet@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Sun, October 25, 2009 10:12:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water
>
>
>
> First of all, to stay on the advertised topic:
>
> I use water processed in a Nikken Optimizer. This takes prefiltered water and
spins it through powdered coral to pick up trace minerals; the spinning is done
with a magnetic paddle. The theory is that this duplicates your basic mountain
stream source by mineralizing, polarizing, and oxygenating it. I know this: it
tastes terrific, and one tends to drink a lot of it, and to find other waters,
bottled or otherwise, bland and flat-tasting. I know that when you put it on
your skin it soaks in much faster than does tap water. Their similar shower
filter has what resembles a softening effect; it seems wetter, somehow, and the
soap goes further and you rinse cleaner. I also have observed that potted plants
thrive remarkably when fed this water, growing to a size and at a rate markedly
different than their entire previous lives. I make no claims for it, and was
extremely skeptical prior to using it.
>
> Now, on juice: I stayed away from juices for quite a few years while doing
Paleo, both cooked, previously, and now 95% raw. I have all the usual reactions
to cooked foods, but social constraints sometimes lead to not a heck of a lot of
choice. I never lost a desire to eat veggies, and even if I went without in
perfect comfort for a few days, I could chow down to huge amounts of salad and
eat with no sensible "stop". Recently I experimented with juicing again, and I
have had a few good results with the pain lessening in my chronically sore
muscles, food cravings diminished, and generally more appetite control and less
hunger despite no increase in volume of food. I know the pros and cons, and
didn't expect to feel such a vigorous change, which came about despite my former
routine's including a fair amount of raw fruit and veg. Presently I have no
desire to eat other veg, no wild cravings for fruit, and am satisfied with my
two small meat meals and a
  glass
> of juice each day, with the occasional apple or citrus fruit. My juice is of
organic greens such as kale, chard, parsley, beet greens, a bit of raw garlic,
celery and carrots. I find it overwhelmingly delicious, wonderfully alive and
"real", as if it "fits in" to my system and needs. Given the nice benefits, I
think I'll stay with it a while, watching for anything negative. I'm drinking
about 12oz almost daily. It could be there's something in here I need.
>
> There; my big confession:) The good part is that I am eating darn near
everything raw now, and am very happy with it, not bored, not "missing out". And
I think perhaps my remaining few headaches are directly related to the "cooked
stuff events".
>
> ginny
>
> All stunts performed without a net!
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
> The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier. Optimized for Yahoo! Get
it Now for Free! at http://downloads. yahoo.com/ ca/internetexplo rer/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>




       __________________________________________________________________
Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

http://www.flickr.com/gift/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Laurel,

A couple of quick, basic ideas.  First, get naturally fed foods (no
growth hormones, soy meal, vaccines, etc.) - grass-fed meat, free-range
fowl, deep-sea fish, organic veggies if you eat those too.  They will be
healthiest to eat, then. Second, bacteria is ubiquitous in and on our
bodies and is part of our being, including helping digest foods we eat
and being first line of defense against interloping bacteria.  Introduce
new bacteria (these raw foods) slowly to give the body a chance to
switch over to new strains, etc.  I mixed cooked and raw together,
slowing adding more raw over about 5 months when I started. Each person
has their own pacing. There's more to say, but this is a good starting
point.

-=mark=-

Lillydipper wrote:
> Hi Ginny,
>
> I am sitting on the fence of cooked paleo ( which I have been following for 2
years at the 80% rule, meaning 80% compliant ), and thankfully at this time, I
am not suffering from any disorder or ailment - but want to live long and well !
I run 1/2 marathon's and am about to do my first full marathon.
>
> I am very curious about raw paleo, and have questions about success stories,
and what research there is that proves we can handle the bacteria or whatever we
don't kill through cooking, in our systems.
>
> Would I be ok, if I just introduce raw eggs, and raw steak right away?
Salmonella - is it a myth that it comes from raw eggs?  What about raw chicken
and trichinosis from raw pork?
>
> I know I must make you roll your eyes with my naive questions - but you seem
to have been where I am, going from paleo, to raw..to eating cooked sometimes...
> What reliable resources could you point me to for well founded research and
information so that I can decide if this would be a road I could follow?
>
> Thank you so much.
> Laurel -
> Ottawa Canada
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: G WILKEN <gwilken@...>
> To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sun, October 25, 2009 10:12:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water
>
>
>
> First of all, to stay on the advertised topic:
>
> I use water processed in a Nikken Optimizer. This takes prefiltered water and
spins it through powdered coral to pick up trace minerals; the spinning is done
with a magnetic paddle. The theory is that this duplicates your basic mountain
stream source by mineralizing, polarizing, and oxygenating it. I know this: it
tastes terrific, and one tends to drink a lot of it, and to find other waters,
bottled or otherwise, bland and flat-tasting. I know that when you put it on
your skin it soaks in much faster than does tap water. Their similar shower
filter has what resembles a softening effect; it seems wetter, somehow, and the
soap goes further and you rinse cleaner. I also have observed that potted plants
thrive remarkably when fed this water, growing to a size and at a rate markedly
different than their entire previous lives. I make no claims for it, and was
extremely skeptical prior to using it.
>
> Now, on juice: I stayed away from juices for quite a few years while doing
Paleo, both cooked, previously, and now 95% raw. I have all the usual reactions
to cooked foods, but social constraints sometimes lead to not a heck of a lot of
choice. I never lost a desire to eat veggies, and even if I went without in
perfect comfort for a few days, I could chow down to huge amounts of salad and
eat with no sensible "stop". Recently I experimented with juicing again, and I
have had a few good results with the pain lessening in my chronically sore
muscles, food cravings diminished, and generally more appetite control and less
hunger despite no increase in volume of food. I know the pros and cons, and
didn't expect to feel such a vigorous change, which came about despite my former
routine's including a fair amount of raw fruit and veg. Presently I have no
desire to eat other veg, no wild cravings for fruit, and am satisfied with my
two small meat meals and a glass
>  of juice each day, with the occasional apple or citrus fruit. My juice is of
organic greens such as kale, chard, parsley, beet greens, a bit of raw garlic,
celery and carrots. I find it overwhelmingly delicious, wonderfully alive and
"real", as if it "fits in" to my system and needs. Given the nice benefits, I
think I'll stay with it a while, watching for anything negative. I'm drinking
about 12oz almost daily. It could be there's something in here I need.
>
> There; my big confession:) The good part is that I am eating darn near
everything raw now, and am very happy with it, not bored, not "missing out". And
I think perhaps my remaining few headaches are directly related to the "cooked
stuff events".
>
> ginny
>
> All stunts performed without a net!
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>       __________________________________________________________________
> The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier.  Optimized for Yahoo! 
Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Hi Ginny,

I am sitting on the fence of cooked paleo ( which I have been following for 2
years at the 80% rule, meaning 80% compliant ), and thankfully at this time, I
am not suffering from any disorder or ailment - but want to live long and well !
I run 1/2 marathon's and am about to do my first full marathon.

I am very curious about raw paleo, and have questions about success stories, and
what research there is that proves we can handle the bacteria or whatever we
don't kill through cooking, in our systems.

Would I be ok, if I just introduce raw eggs, and raw steak right away?
Salmonella - is it a myth that it comes from raw eggs?  What about raw chicken
and trichinosis from raw pork?

I know I must make you roll your eyes with my naive questions - but you seem to
have been where I am, going from paleo, to raw..to eating cooked sometimes...
What reliable resources could you point me to for well founded research and
information so that I can decide if this would be a road I could follow?
 
Thank you so much.
Laurel - 
Ottawa Canada 




________________________________
From: G WILKEN <gwilken@...>
To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, October 25, 2009 10:12:58 PM
Subject: RE: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water

 

First of all, to stay on the advertised topic:

I use water processed in a Nikken Optimizer. This takes prefiltered water and
spins it through powdered coral to pick up trace minerals; the spinning is done
with a magnetic paddle. The theory is that this duplicates your basic mountain
stream source by mineralizing, polarizing, and oxygenating it. I know this: it
tastes terrific, and one tends to drink a lot of it, and to find other waters,
bottled or otherwise, bland and flat-tasting. I know that when you put it on
your skin it soaks in much faster than does tap water. Their similar shower
filter has what resembles a softening effect; it seems wetter, somehow, and the
soap goes further and you rinse cleaner. I also have observed that potted plants
thrive remarkably when fed this water, growing to a size and at a rate markedly
different than their entire previous lives. I make no claims for it, and was
extremely skeptical prior to using it.

Now, on juice: I stayed away from juices for quite a few years while doing
Paleo, both cooked, previously, and now 95% raw. I have all the usual reactions
to cooked foods, but social constraints sometimes lead to not a heck of a lot of
choice. I never lost a desire to eat veggies, and even if I went without in
perfect comfort for a few days, I could chow down to huge amounts of salad and
eat with no sensible "stop". Recently I experimented with juicing again, and I
have had a few good results with the pain lessening in my chronically sore
muscles, food cravings diminished, and generally more appetite control and less
hunger despite no increase in volume of food. I know the pros and cons, and
didn't expect to feel such a vigorous change, which came about despite my former
routine's including a fair amount of raw fruit and veg. Presently I have no
desire to eat other veg, no wild cravings for fruit, and am satisfied with my
two small meat meals and a glass
  of juice each day, with the occasional apple or citrus fruit. My juice is of
organic greens such as kale, chard, parsley, beet greens, a bit of raw garlic,
celery and carrots. I find it overwhelmingly delicious, wonderfully alive and
"real", as if it "fits in" to my system and needs. Given the nice benefits, I
think I'll stay with it a while, watching for anything negative. I'm drinking
about 12oz almost daily. It could be there's something in here I need.

There; my big confession:) The good part is that I am eating darn near
everything raw now, and am very happy with it, not bored, not "missing out". And
I think perhaps my remaining few headaches are directly related to the "cooked
stuff events".

ginny

All stunts performed without a net!



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





       __________________________________________________________________
The new Internet Explorer® 8 - Faster, safer, easier.  Optimized for Yahoo!  Get
it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

First of all, to stay on the advertised topic:

I use water processed in a Nikken Optimizer. This takes prefiltered water and
spins it through powdered coral to pick up trace minerals; the spinning is done
with a magnetic paddle. The theory is that this duplicates your basic mountain
stream source by mineralizing, polarizing, and oxygenating it. I know this: it
tastes terrific, and one tends to drink a lot of it, and to find other waters,
bottled or otherwise, bland and flat-tasting. I know that when you put it on
your skin it soaks in much faster than does tap water. Their similar shower
filter has what resembles a softening effect; it seems wetter, somehow, and the
soap goes further and you rinse cleaner. I also have observed that potted plants
thrive remarkably when fed this water, growing to a size and at a rate markedly
different than their entire previous lives. I make no claims for it, and was
extremely skeptical prior to using it.

Now, on juice: I stayed away from juices for quite a few years while doing
Paleo, both cooked, previously, and now 95% raw. I have all the usual reactions
to cooked foods, but social constraints sometimes lead to not a heck of a lot of
choice. I never lost a desire to eat veggies, and even if I went without in
perfect comfort for a few days, I could chow down to huge amounts of salad and
eat with no sensible "stop". Recently I experimented with juicing again, and I
have had a few good results with the pain lessening in my chronically sore
muscles, food cravings diminished, and generally more appetite control and less
hunger despite no increase in volume of food. I know the pros and cons, and
didn't expect to feel such a vigorous change, which came about despite my former
routine's including a fair amount of raw fruit and veg. Presently I have no
desire to eat other veg, no wild cravings for fruit, and am satisfied with my
two small meat meals and a glass of juice each day, with the occasional apple or
citrus fruit. My juice is of organic greens such as kale, chard, parsley, beet
greens, a bit of raw garlic, celery and carrots. I find it overwhelmingly
delicious, wonderfully alive and "real", as if it "fits in" to my system and
needs. Given the nice benefits, I think I'll stay with it a while, watching for
anything negative. I'm drinking about 12oz almost daily. It could be there's
something in here I need.

There; my big confession:) The good part is that I am eating darn near
everything raw now, and am very happy with it, not bored, not "missing out". And
I think perhaps my remaining few headaches are directly related to the "cooked
stuff events".

ginny



All stunts performed without a net!







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There are numerous lists on the web, such as this one, :-



http://www.waiworld.com/waidiet/vgb-vegetables.html



which go into detail on the many antinutrients found within plants.



As for people complaining about veggie-juice symptoms, they seem to be rather
varied(you'd have to check the message-archives of the various forums).
Nutritional deficiencies would be bound to be different from person to person,
given different types of antinutrients imbibed. In my own case, my experiment
with raw veggie-juice was rather short-lived(it just gave me diarrhea within
15-30 minutes and wasn't digested, really).



(I seem to recall people claiming that symptoms were more profound when several
glasses a day of veggie-juice were consumed. So, maybe, your 1.5 glasses a day
isn't too excessive.Who knows?



Re cayenne-pepper:- I used that during my own CF phase at the very start of
going rawpalaeo(due to initial, unfounded fears re parasites) and didn't notice
any problems.

Geoff








To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
From: clairewest@...
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:49:20 -0800
Subject: Re: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water





Geoff,

Well, I'm not sure what to make of this. I was aware of phylates in grains as a
problem, but didn't know about them in veggies. I did know of oxalic acid --
esp. in spinach, but Norman Walker said only the cooked version of this acid
would cause stones, and otherwise the acid, esp. in spinach, was helpful in
encouraging peristalsis (which is what it does in prunes as well.)

There are so many things I do for my health -- besides diet -- that it is always
very hard to sort out what exactly is causing what benefit or counter-benefit.
In all, my health has improved remarkably in the last six years -- esp. given my
age -- but again, there's no way to know if it might have improved faster or
more completely with one of my "protocols" elminated. (I just learned recently
from this list that cayenne pepper was counter productive for someone with
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.)

So, let me ask you this -- what kinds of issues did the "imbibing" folks
experience after long term use? And, where exactly would I go to learn more
about this view of vegetable juices?

Claire

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









_________________________________________________________________
New Windows 7: Find the right PC for you. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/buy/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Claire,

Some findings by doing a search on "antinutrients in celery", for example:

"Psoralens: natural toxins in food products such as celery, parsley and
parsnips. These compounds sensitize the skin to the harmful effects of
ultraviolet radiation in sunlight, and as such are said to be
photocarcinogenic. They are not destroyed by normal cooking procedures
(boiling or microwave); thus humans are exposed to appreciable levels of
psoralens through the consumption of celery, parsnips and other
psoralen-containing foodstuffs. Psoralens are used to treat pigment
disorders of the skin and other skin diseases such as psoriasis and
nonmelanoma skin cancers."

I didn't find any details on antinutrients in zucchini, cucumber or
limes (the other primary items used in Aajonus' vegetable juice).  Maybe
a more careful search would turn up something.

As for my own experience, I have never had any sun sensitivity from the
about 16oz or more daily drink of the green juice (and I live in
Southern California where the sun is relentless).  I haven't experienced
any negative effects in some 13-14 years of drinking the green juice and
eating in a paleo fashion.  But I have noticed positive effects, mental
clarity, alertness, energy and endurance.  I also find that I want/need
the green juice less and less as time goes by.  Maybe it's more of a
remedial?

-=mark=-



Claire West wrote:
> Geoff,
>
> Well, I'm not sure what to make of this.  I was aware of phylates in grains as
a problem, but didn't know about them in veggies.  I did know of oxalic acid --
esp. in spinach, but Norman Walker said only the cooked version of this acid
would cause stones, and otherwise the acid, esp. in spinach, was helpful in
encouraging peristalsis (which is what it does in prunes as well.)
>
> There are so many things I do for my health -- besides diet -- that it is
always very hard to sort out what exactly is causing what benefit or
counter-benefit.  In all, my health has improved remarkably in the last six
years -- esp. given my age -- but again, there's no way to know if it might have
improved faster or more completely with one of my "protocols" elminated.  (I
just learned recently from this list that cayenne pepper was counter productive
for someone with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.)
>
> So, let me ask you this -- what kinds of issues did the "imbibing" folks
experience after long term use?  And, where exactly would I go to learn more
about this view of vegetable juices?
>
> Claire
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Yes, indeed! I was lucky enough to grow up with a cuisine influenced by mainly
eastern European tradition, which in many cases emulated French as a mark of
superior taste. We were also fairly poor, which helped, no doubt. We commonly
had lamb's tongues, brains, kidneys, and hearts. Calf liver was preferred over
that of beef or lamb, and beef heart was in the occasional stew. We had
sweetbreads, as an extreme luxury - this is the thymus ones, and not the cheap
imitation of pancreas. We had tripe, mostly "Spanish" style, and steak and
kidney pie. And I do remember those lovely pork chops with a kidney slice in
each - had not thought of those in decades.

Later, I found virtually all pork organs in Oriental markets, and used to make
menudo. Now, although I am eager to eat any I can find, I am fairly limited to
local beef organs and the occasional tub of pork brains. I used to buy raw
ground tripe for my dog, and tasted that but found it not particularly
appetizing. I am sure my early exposure made my transition to raw organs much
easier - they were already "meat" to me.

ginny

All stunts performed without a net!




  Subject: [rawpaleodiet] Interesting article about offal
>
> I've always regretted the fact that organ-meats(what British people
erroneously call "Offal") are made so difficult to obtain for the British
public.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Geoff,

Well, I'm not sure what to make of this.  I was aware of phylates in grains as a
problem, but didn't know about them in veggies.  I did know of oxalic acid --
esp. in spinach, but Norman Walker said only the cooked version of this acid
would cause stones, and otherwise the acid, esp. in spinach, was helpful in
encouraging peristalsis (which is what it does in prunes as well.)

There are so many things I do for my health -- besides diet -- that it is always
very hard to sort out what exactly is causing what benefit or counter-benefit. 
In all, my health has improved remarkably in the last six years -- esp. given my
age -- but again, there's no way to know if it might have improved faster or
more completely with one of my "protocols" elminated.  (I just learned recently
from this list that cayenne pepper was counter productive for someone with
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.)

So, let me ask you this -- what kinds of issues did the "imbibing" folks
experience after long term use?  And, where exactly would I go to learn more
about this view of vegetable juices?

Claire


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

All raw(and even cooked) vegetables contain some minimal level of
antinutrients(called "phytonutrients" by some, if in small amounts), such as
oxalates etc.. They are not an issue when one eats raw vegetables in solid form
as raw vegetables are generally unpalatable and few want to eat them in large
amounts, therefore. However, juicing the raw veg allows one to consume far more
of those antinutrients daily than would normally be the case, and it has also
been claimed by rawists that not only does the shredding the of the cell-walls
via juicing release far more of the nutrients than usual, it also releases far
more of the antinutrients as well. At any rate, many rawists have reported
issues with raw veggie-juice in the past, especially if they drank several
glasses a day for long periods. Indeed, in RVAF/Primal circles, issues with raw
veggie-juice come 2nd only to issues with raw dairy, judging from reports.


Geoff





To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
From: clairewest@...
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:58:43 -0800
Subject: Re: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water





Geoff,

<the trouble is that raw veggie-juice, drunk in such large quantities, can be
very problematic as the levels of antinutrients start rising>

Antinutrients? This is new to me. Could you please explain.

Claire, who's been drinking about 1-1/2 quarts of juice a day for the last six
years.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









_________________________________________________________________
Chat to your friends for free on selected mobiles
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/174426567/direct/01/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Geoff,

<the trouble is that raw veggie-juice, drunk in such large quantities, can be
very problematic as the levels of antinutrients start rising>

Antinutrients?  This is new to me.  Could you please explain.

Claire, who's been drinking about 1-1/2 quarts of juice a day for the last six
years.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re Aajonus always recommending to get one's water mostly from raw foods:-
I find this most foolish a notion. The only reason Aajonus can get away with
this notion up to a point  is that he also routinely expects people to have
c.25% of their diet taken up by raw veggie-juice which of course has a high
water-content - the trouble is that raw veggie-juice, drunk in such large
quantities, can be very problematic as the levels of antinutrients start rising.
And those, like me, who don't do well on raw veggie-juice would have to consume
vast amounts of raw fruit to get enough water, IMO(raw meat, while having some
water-content, is not good enough for slaking thirst).

So, better to just stick to mineral-water(or , at worst, specially filtered
tapwater etc.)

Geoff







To: rawpaleodiet@yahoogroups.com
From: thetasig@...
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:52:43 -0700
Subject: Re: [rawpaleodiet] Living (Structured) Water





















                   Sorry, no experience with "living" water, per se.  Only my
opinion that

Nature makes exactly what we need in that regard (which is not all that

easy for most of us to obtain these days).  So I do believe in fresh,

clean springs as a good source.



I think that Aajonus revised his views on drinking [so much] mineral

water.  If I recall correctly he, instead, emphasizes eating raw fat to

support [proper] metabolism and mostly water from foods with little from

bottles.  Still, I enjoy some Gerolsteiner carbonated mineral water from

time to time and I also occasionally make some "alkaline" water using a

hospital-style electrolysis unit.  That water tastes a bit like stream

water and has the advantage of helping to cancel out so-called free

radicals (my opinion, after having tested it for some 10 years or so).



Regards,



-=mark=-



ccbmamma wrote:

> Hi everyone, I wanted to get your thoughts on "living" water. I've been
reading a bit about Dr. Emoto and his studies on water and emotions and the
structure of water crystals. There are some people who sell water systems that
can make the crystals "structured" (purportedly) thus (purportedly again)
healthy for our bodies. I know Aajonus suggests drinking carbonated mineral
water such as Perrier and getting most of our water from raw foods, but Perrier
is pricey for our family of four (and all those bottles don't sit well with me
even though we recycle) and my toddler sometimes just wants water instead of raw
milk or squeezed juices and doesn't like the bubbles. I can't however find any
recommendations from past posts here and am having a hard time online getting
reliable info from people who don't have something to sell!

>

> Thank you very much for your time in answering this post,

> Carolee

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

> Yahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>




















_________________________________________________________________
New Windows 7: Simplify what you do everyday. Find the right PC for you.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/buy/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]