Francois,

> F :  Since instinctive nutrition is nothing more than our original
>> nutrition  (not only our direct ancestors fed on it for millions of
>> years, but also all life forms have relied upon it since the beggining
>> of life) it can hardly be compared to an addiction.

There is reasonable debate about whether humans' "original nutrition" is
entirely raw.

Nevertheless, I am speaking of the instincto who feels "special", who is not
a "common folk", who can spend great amounts of time/money/energy obtaining
"pure" foods, who loves to idealise nature and gurus, who looks down on
humanity because it is not as enlightened and disciplined as s/he is, who
figures that they have found the "original nutrition".

And whenever I speak of such things with instinctos they say that those
things must've been my problems because they are not like that. This must be
how an ex-crackhead feels when speaking to a user, no?

> It is rather the quite
>> recent neolithic cooked nutrition based on cereal grains and dairy
> products
>> which is an addiction

Perhaps.

> Many guys fall back
>> after thinking and boasting enthousiasticaly they've found the ultimate
> truth and nutrition.

And a special few don't fall back thinking they have found the ultimate in
truth and nutrition, eh? ;)
 
> The whole subject isn't well documented since it is
>> difficult to know exactly when and where mankind began to use the fire for
>> cooking foodstuffs. I just mean that instincto writings aren't n
> dogmaticaly
>> saying what you pretend they are saying. There'a a dense fog on this aeria
>> and we are aware of this.

I am limited to the english writings on instincto. Perhaps Burger's books
are full of concern for this dense fog you speak of, but I seriously doubt
it.

The instincto line is that cooked foods are not "original", meaning that
they are bad. The more clever line (yours, when pressed) is that cretain
cooked foods may be OK but there's no way to tell for sure so avoid cooked
foods. In any case, it sounds like dogma to me.

> F : There must have been a broad range of datations depending on location
>> and climate and it is probable that some remote hunters-gatherers remained
>> untouched by the cooking addiction until some few thousand years ago.

Yes. So what does that mean? That these hypothetical hunter-gatherers were
still eating the "original nutrition"? ;)

>> [Burger] totally agrees with you on
> this
>>>> point as well as on the former one, so it'd be fair to give it to him.
> K : I don't remember taking it away, except that the above reasoning is
>> often used as the unfalsifiable excuse for any less-than-ideal results for
>> instinctive eaters.
> F : Maybe. But is there any ideal standart for results ?

Sure. Burger has quite a list of indicators of health. Very overboard, very
idealised, and no one seems to obtain all these results.

> K : Is there a list of cooked foods that Burger considers non-toxic?
> F :  Jean-Louis Tu has one on this site (see my original post).

Yeah, but how about Burger? ;) Or am I misunderstanding...

By The Way (BTW), I am assuming you are confusing "this site" (meaning the
beyongveg web site) with this mailing list. They are separate things.

> F :  He suspects that cooked food (or at least some
>> cooked food) is, along with milk and cereals, the cause of many health
>> problems and since we ignore exactly which foodstuffs, if not all
>> processed ones, are responsible of these problems, it is safer to avoid
>> them all and eat as much as possible only raw original food.
> K :  Sounds like an ideal situation, unless, of course, some cooked foods
>> are actually beneficial to health.
> F : It remains to be proved that havoc among finely tuned biochemical
> process could be beneficial.

What remains to be proved is that only raw foods don't create havoc among
finely tuned biochemical processes. ;) Seriously, how fine tuned do you
really think human digestive chemistry (and its associated genetics) is
after so much time cooking and quite a few generations of agriculture. I
would call this a bottleneck of evolution. If a particular human was 100%
evolved to only raw paleo foods, they would not have been as likely to
procreate when born into a tribe that had started cooking, or farming. My
guess is that we are not perfectly adapted to an all raw diet anymore, but
of course, we are likely not adapted to a cooked diet. And some folks do as
good as intinctos do on a cooked non-paleo diet. Current human digestive
evolution is probably closer to a mutt/mongrol than a pure-bred instincto
falstaff. ;)

> F :  He told us almost exactly what you say about a contingent minimum
> adaptation to
>> some processed food, probably for some folks at least.
> K : When did he tell you this?
> F : At least twice in 1987 and latter at Montramé on his public course.

So this is from a seminar? Is it found in his books?

> K : Yeah, I would agree--in the beginning. In my expereince it gets as
>> boring as most any regime in the longterm.
> F : It may get boring if one doesn't have an broad choice for practical
>> reaseons or for intellectually or culturaly exluding some categories of
>> food.

No. It probably gets boring because one has fewer nutrient detriments after
a time instincto, so everything/anything raw tastes OK but nothing comes
close to the ecstacy of the first months/years of instincto.

FWIW, I didn't exclude any category of foods and lived in the tropics for
much of the time I was instincto.

Interestingly, it appears that instinctos living in the tropics in
less-than-modern conditions may have more health problems than you barely
pre-neolithic temperate zone mountaineer Swiss instinctos living with
(probably) more modern conveniences. I know you could (will) argue that the
Hawaiian instinctos are not "doing it right" but there may be more than
irony in the observation above.

> But if one
>> open his mind to test new foodstuffs on every occasion, specialy when
>> travelling, one may discover very often new tastes and get much more
> eating
>> pleasure than what is the case with cooked and mixed food.

Trust me, I did. ;) Fours years in Thailand (and a couple thousand durian
probably) left me feeling like leaving the humid tropics, kinda like our
ancestors did. ;)

> F : No, I do not hang out with instinctos.

Cooked fooders don't count. Do you hang out with ex-instinctos??? There must
be several hundred or thousand or more in Europe, no? ;)

> But all togheter, I have much more pleasure
> to
> eat now than before.

How long have you been at it? What were you eating before? I know what you
mean about more pleasure, but I'm telling you my experience which includes
more pleasure with mixing and cooking than with instincto.

> F :> For most people, long-term
>>> instinctive nutrition is easy only as long as you do it without
>>> exceptions.

I did it without exceptions for years and found I rarely ate vegetables
(except celery and romaine I guess). So I included salads. Then I found I
couldn't eat animal foods daily and would end up back at too-much-fruit and
avos. I can eat cooked animal foods exclusively for a month or more and feel
great (don't even grow tumors ;)). I don't pretend to know what "original
nutrition" means for me, but it ain't necessarily all-raw in sequence by
smell.

> F : I would and I will, I just didn't take the time. The generaly accepted
>> range in the litterature for the mastering of the fire is  between 500 000
>> and 350 000 years ago .

If that is generally accepted by instinctos then the theory crumbles.
25,000 generations away from an all-raw dietary does not make instincto our
original food, especially since fully modern humans are much more recent
than that. But OK...

> 450 000 years ago appeared the first known human disease, "pyorrhée
>> alveolaire"(in French), followed by malaria, "meningiome", syphilis and
> then
>> "actinomycose" 35000 years ago. For those who read French, an abstract can
>> be found at www.geocities.com/HotSprings/7627/nosancetres.html. I
>> didn't find the original article on the web, but I'll get it for you soon.

I am not familiar with many of the words above. But I would expect that a
change in dietary would leave a mark in metabolism and that would include
diseases. If no wild animal ever got sick or diseased I would be startled by
such a finding, but its not like disease was invented by cooking. Subtract
humans from the planet--like they never evolved--and there is still sickness
and disease.  Further, it may be that cooking helped pre-humans avoid other
diseases associated with fecal and other contamination of decomposing animal
foods. Who knows? There is very little black and white in nature and none in
natural selection. Nature isn't PERFECT, it is only what works, tradeoffs
galore. In that case, humans are very natural. ;)

> F : In 1987, 1988, 1991, 1992, 1994, 1995 and 2001, each time for about a
>> week. As for Burger "sales pitch", it seems he isn't a succesfull
> salesman.

Perhaps because he lies? ;)  Seriously, I wonder if we crossed paths there
in the late 80's. You're not the (then) young guy with the golden staph are
you? And 2001? I thought it was shut down...? How about an update on
Montrame, if you would.

>> Would you, please, back your reference to disease states of  long-term
>> instinctos ?

They are mentioned in the beyondveg (BV) piece you responded to originally.
Most of it has been discussed in this forum as well, so you can check the
archives. If you mean more than that by "references" I'm afraid I fail. ;)

>> The ones I know here in Europe are in good healt

How many do you know? How many instincto purists would you guess there are
in Switzerland? France? In Europe?

> , except some cases who
> were
>> lost causes anyway had they gone on with cooked nutrition. Many cases of
>> very spectacular improvements have been recorded and published in
> "Instincto
>> Magazine" and former "Orkoscopie". Of course there are some failures,
>> but not so many as with conventionnal ways of healing, which had allready
>> failed in these cases anyway.

The Hawaiian instinctos with problems were in OK health before
instincto--they had some severe episodes after being instincto for years.
There's an instincto-from-birth who had no enamel on many of his (very
darkened) first teeth, but not in Hawaii. No one likes to talk about that.
:/

> Here in Switzerland are the
>> most long-term instinctos, among them the ones who have started and
>> developped the whole idea along with Burger: All of them are very well.

Glad to hear it. Are they all instincto purists? My limited understanding is
that many of the early Burger cronies have disagreements with particular
aspects of instincto. Enlighten me?

> The treatment
>> Burger gave to his wife concerns only their private live, unless you speak
>> of medical treatment.

Burger's questionable mental health is pretty problematic if instincto
theory is at all accurate. I know all the excuses you will bring up, but how
is it that he can remain so unbalanced as the longest living instincto?

> K : Interesting, but the list is much larger than malaria at this point.
> How
>> has Burger responded from jail?
> F : What do you mean ? He wasn't in jail at the time if it's what you mean.

He's in jail now as has been for a while if I understand it correctly. How
has he responded to news of longterm instinctos' problems with trich and
staph? Or perhaps no one much talks about these pesky non-examples?

>> Sorry about my poor understanding of English.
>> Again, please back up your comment about "the much larger list".

Cancer. Trichonosis. Staph infections. Something called "ratlung" disease
here in Hawaii. Taxiplasmosis (sp?).

> F : The instincto does not claim anything, as far as I know. Some persons
>> may claim something, but not the "instincto" itself.

The similarities in claims from the published instincto writers (albeit in
English) are what I am generalizing.

>> Trichinosis is very dangerous. To my ¨knowledge it may be contracted with
>> pork, wild boar (and perhaps other animals) having access to corn fields,
>> garbage or processed food. That's one of the reasons why we are carefull
>> with meat, and eat only the meat of animals with no access to those food.
>> In case of doubt, another precaution may be to have your meat checked for.

Is malaria dangerous because of the same problems? ;) And why would trich be
dangerous to an instinctive eater? Is it dangerous to wild animals?

> I
>> don't know how Americans instinctos are aware and carefull about it, but
> here in Europe
>> I've never heard of any case of trichinosis among us, though there might
> be
>> some cases unknown to me.

Probably many many people have trich in them. The puzzler is why a longterm
instincto in his early 30's would approach death from it and normal eaters
carry it to their deathbed in their 70's.

>> If agriculture was the result of large scale cooking practices, the
> dividing
>> lines may be almost superimposed.

Then you are saying that large scale cooking is only 10,000 years old, no?

> K : You are evading the issue. Longterm instinctos getting sick and/or dying
> at young ages has nothing whatsoever to do with immortality, and neither
> does my reporting of the same.
> F : Are there such cases ?

No, of course not. I am making it all up to be a prick. ;) Besides, you know
well of Nicole as well as the malaria folks.

> I know many persons saying they eat "instincto",
> but in fact they do not do it properly anyway. It may sound an good excuse,
> but till we get controled experiments, there ain't no way to know.

Then quit claiming otherwise. The anecdotal evidence is not at all
conclusive, so lets wait for longterm controlled experiments which will
never happen, eh? And, yes, it is a "good excuse". Not. ;)

> F : Everyone knows that some pesticides and other stuff such as
> asbestos fibres, air pollution or exposure to high levels of radioactivity
> may trigger a cancer 20, 30 or more years latter. Maybe wheat and dairy
> products too, whatever your diet is at the time.

This is the kind of excuse making that makes me cringe! Unfalsifiable, and
you just ignore the non-examples.

> F : If some toxins can be eliminated, it doesn't mean all will be and that
> damage done can necessarilly be totally repaired.

What a surprise then that all the Swiss instinctos are the picture of
health, eh? ;)

> F : Yes. I saw Jean-Marie Burger and Nathalie Burger two months ago. They
>> are bright, very healty and well built.

Glad to hear it. Though I'm not sure who Jean-Marie is...

> Also near from here there is
> couple
>> eating "instincto" since the 60s for him and the 70s for her. Their two
>> kids, instinctos from birth, are fine and very well grown up.

I wouldn't expect otherwise, and again, glad to hear it.

>> Nicole Burger migth have died of cancer much earlier if she had gone on
> with
>> cooked food. Who knows ? If her case is not a good point for the instincto
>> theory, nor it is a valid point to oppose that theory. Nothing is proved
> by
>> a single case, specialy when mortality by cancer takes such a huge toll on
>> cooked food eaters.

Nothing is gained by ignoring (or excusing away) the non-examples to
instincto superhealth. Nicole is one of several "cases".

> Untill now the target has only been his [Burger's] personnal behavior, whi
> ch
>> has nothing to do with his revolutionary theories.

But if he is the result of decades of super instincto nutrition how can he
still be as loony as ever? (I know, I know...) How revolutionary his
theories are remains to be seen, and since meta is his theory as well, I
guess elaborate justifications for his own unmet needs may creep into his
theories, no? ;) Perhaps they are not as separate as you think. Attaining
purity by fulfilling one's sensory pleasure without intellect sounds an
awful lot like what Burger (and most of us) did not get as infants and
later. And pretty attractive to the eat-your-fill types as well.

> F : Some knowledge [of meta]. I'll enlight you about that latter on, there's
allready
> sufficient material to talk about for today ! The sun shines here and I'd
> like to take a walk.

It's raining here and I have to do the laundry. ;) The mangosteens like it
though.

> K :  The "common folk" no doubt ?
> F :  Sorry about using these words, it seems in English they don't have
>> exactly the same meaning as in my mother thonge and what I meant.

The words may not matter. It is an inborn elitism in instincto (and the rest
of the natural food regimes) that always shines through sooner or later it
seems.

> F : > ...15 years of prison is quite cheap for I guy who suggest a
>> theory that might save the whole planet.
> K :> Boy, you got it bad and that ain't good. ;)
> F : Ha ! Ha ! Ha ! Don't you know I'm a joker ?

Give me a hint when it's funny, eh? ;)

Thanks for slumming this list. I suspect the French instincto list is more
interesting. What sort of stuff gets talked about there?

Cheers,
Kirt