hehe, it's a Quebecois (French Canadian) accent. English Canadian accents are different :P
Exactly - If they just exercised a little, started drinking water and maybe doubled their caloric intake, they would easily be two fit & badass frugivores! :D
Oh well... At least their **** doesn't stink :)
If there's no scientific evidence of long term fruitarian people (and there's not as far as I know), then you CANNOT say that a fruitarian diet is dangerous, simply because THERE IS NO EVIDENCE about that, either.
I have yet to see a long term 100 % fruitarian who gets 3000+ calories, sleeps 10-12 hours and drinks 4+ liters of water everyday.
If anyone goes 811 but fails to meet these basic needs NO amount of greens will save them in the long run.
This is my theory here:
This opinion seems to say that eating starch based foods is ok because humans secrete some enzymes that can digest starches. The human body may be capable of secreting anywhere from 2500-80000 different enzymes, but that does not necessarily mean it is healthy to secrete and utilize these enzymes all of the time.
We always have to look at the bigger picture.
The starches in potatoes, beans, and grains need the hormone insulin to be broken down, usually in the liver, and then assimilated into the cells of the body. This causes an extra workload for the body, takes enzymes from other needed areas, and may prevent the liver from working as a detox organ as it becomes an organ of digestion once starches are eaten. (Not to mention the problems with eating high fat and high cholesterol based foods and what they do to the liver and gall bladder.)
The digestion, breakdown, and assimilation of fructose does not involve the use of insulin initially.
If anything goes wrong, any imbalance, or out of balance fat intake, then this potentially leads to problems with weight gain, insulin is also the fat storage hormone, and increased risk of diabetes.
The starch based foods tend to have little or no vitamin C as well. Primates and humans cannot manufacture their own vitamin C, and must rely on the diet for it. Many people on SAD diets may have subclinical scurvy which may manifest itself in degenerative conditions, skin infections, and deterioration of the teeth and gums.
Many of our members have found that they have teeth pain and gum issues if they eat less than one pound of tender leafy greens a day. More than a pound does not seems necessary.
My thoughts on greens is that they may not only contain a higher mineral content than fruit, the chlorophyl they contain may be beneficial and a necessity to human health.
Some primate eat about 40% both in volume and calories of their diet from greens as well.
As human beings,
We can survive on SAD and cooked foods for a minimum period of time. We can live on starches. We thrive on fruit and leafy greens.
bmoojeni, in my opinion, posts like yours above, even if correct, are very harmful, because when new members read messages of this kind, they are strongly discouraged to go for a raw vegan diet.
How did you come to this conclusion? How is Bmoojeni's comment harmful and discouraging? As far as I can see, he does not claim anywhere, that a fruitbased diet is not possible.
I don't think what he said is anymore discouraging than posting an article from an author who frequently tries to debunk 100 % fruitarianism or even 100 % rawfoodism on a raw vegan/semi-fruitarian website.
I've posted Patenaude's article so it could be debunked in this forum!
Listen - my point is that if you see bmoojeni's comment as discouraging or harmful, you might as well see this whole post as discouraging as well. I don't think there's anything wrong with his comment or your post. Just think you might have misunderstood what he wrote.
I'm sorry if my previous came of as critisism of your post. I'm only happy that you want to debunk mr. patenaude :)
bmoojeni, ok, don't worry! I didn't want to be argumentative! Sorry if I have appeared aggressive! :)
The science and evidence does show that people can live on starches, true, but sometimes, if not balanced with raw fruits n veggies, there can still be long term degenerative consequences.
I agree with you that a vegan low fat complex car/starch/grain based is a healthier and more ethical alternative to doing a SAD, animal, high protien, or high fat diet.
However, my mission is this, to show people how they can do better and or improve their results, and or live an optimum long life.
I do not want to see people settle for less.
Some people may get caught up in the celebrity and aw worship of characters like Pritikin and Mcdougall, and or have white coat syndrome of blindly following orders just because an MD stated them.
BTW, before there was Mcdougall, there was Pritkin who followed and promoted a complex starch and grain based diet, and Pritikin ended up suffering a decades long battle with leukemia and committed suicide possibly from the pain of his illness.
I would like people to have all of the facts and see all points of view, and then make the choice for themselves if and when they are ready.
Some people simply do not choose a raw fruitarian diet because they do not know about it.
Some people may shy away from it because of the social stigma.
Myself personally, had been put off by a fruitarian because of the hippy and bong smoking stigma being fruitarian comes with in our culture. But after multiple illnesses and surgeries, I intuitively woke up from my last surgery a few years ago, and my mind was telling to go research a fruitarian diet. I was like I cannot believe i am doing this, and I must be high on the percocet:D))) Well, may be I was:D
But the more I researched it, the more it made sense. (I do have a background in healthcare managment, though not nutrition at the time.)
The more I practiced it, the better I felt as well.
It is my wish to pay it forward and assist others in finding a path not just in SAD survival, or mediocre living, but in optimal health and thrivation. In fact, I like to call this the thrivation diet plan:D
BTW, regarding the tubers, for the most part to make them palatable and tasty, and or to render their toxins less toxic, we have to cook them. Cooking in return, may render their other vitamin and mineral content less useful for us. Cooking may destroy their vitamin C content.
While, yes, we can eat them for short term living, why not just go for the glory and eat raw fruits with their vitamin C content in tact?
The body prefers to digest and assimilate those simple carbs such as fructose first, then starches and complex carbs, then other things like protein and fat.
That should send a big message to us, give the body what it prefers and likes. While yes, the fructose that we assimilate is metabolized in the liver, the breakdown of fructose bypasses the production of insulin by the pancreas and the process of insulin usage in the liver. The breakdown of fructose also bypasses amylase which again may tax the pancreas and or draw from the blood supply of amylase enzymes.
Now, the next benefit of fructose is that it can be broken down into other needed chemicals and or hormones by the body. The body can only manufacture glucose (and or form glycogen) from complex starches and grains.
Another benefit of raw fruit and a fructose is that the body will take what it needs in digestion, and the rest passes into the intestines where it is utilized by the gut flora, bacteria, and fungi. It is said that about 80% of our dry feces material may be from bacteria and other gut flora. From these healthy bacteria, our bodies can access vitamin b12 and vitamin K.
Amylase may serve some function in breaking down the starches of not quite ripe fruits. But it is also important in breakdown dead leukocytes in the blood. If too many complex cooked starches are eaten over a long period of time such as weeks, months, or even years, then problems start such as skin ulcerations and infections as well as other degenerative diseases.
I agree with you that people did eat complex cooked starches and grains for the last 10k years, but people have paid a price for that in degenerative diseases.
Eating a low fat starch based diet may decrease ones risk of heart disease, but long term, may increase risks of other degenerative conditions.
The benefits of a raw fruit diet is that we do not need to process and cook fruits. Therefore, their vitamins and minerals and enzymes stay somewhat intact. The body can then utilize the enzymes in digestion verses drawing from its own supplies, taxing and stressing the pancreas, and decreasing blood supplies needed for other health maintainance functions.
While raw grains and starches may have some enzymes and vitamins and minerals, they also have enzyme inhibitors. In order to make complex starches and grains edible in a form we can get enough calories, and to break down the enzyme inhibitors, we have to cook them. But that is counter intuitive, because then the other vitamins, minerals, and enzymes get rendered useless as well.
On this page, scroll down, and find Dr. Howell's books on enzymes which teach about their role in our bodies, and compares and contrasts via scientific studies the effects cooked and raw foods have on our bodies:
Most grains and complex starch sources have no, or very little vitamin C which is a must have for primates and humans as they cannot manufacture their own. Cooking of these complex starches may render what little VitC they have useless. We need vitamins C to ward off subclinical symptoms of scurvy.
I am recommending and attaching more references for your further research:
Regarding what our hominid ancestors may have eaten, and the health benefits of a fruitarian diet:
While I agree with you that we can live on a complex starchy carb grain based diet, I do not agree that our long term prognosis is good, especially if this diet is not balanced out with raw fruit and leafy greens.
For more scientific information read this free ebook:
Improving on Pritkin (aka a starch and grain based diet) You can do better by Ross Horne
and I am attaching chapter 10 from that book:
Grains are for the Birds