----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Orlando" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 11:34 AM
Subject: RAF


> >Instinctive raw nutrition experiments have shown that raw meat of animal
> >with no acess to processed food
> >and cereals fields not only may taste very good, but is also perfectly
> >digested and causes no troubles at all, unlike animal milk and wheat.

> 1. raw meat does not taste like much of anything at all.
> (perhaps the mouth sensation, or feeling of fullness is pleasurable)

Yes, when it is fresh, it doesn't have much taste, but when maturated for
some weeks or some months in  dry cool air (hung on a hook in a fridge with
or without skin, or just left in the wind, maybe hung on the rear view
mirror of your moving vehicle !), it becomes a real delight with a strong
taste - as long as you need it, of course. It may take some months to a year
or even more of instinctive raw nutrition till someone can realy apreciate
it. The important point is not to eat anything if there's no attraction and
to stop as soon it gets less tasty. Also, do not eat it along with something
else, say a mouthfull of meat, a mouthfull of sweet patatoe, one of meat,
one of... and so on. This way, one will overtake its stomach digestive
power.
>
> 2. this assumption of meat being "perfectly digested", I find not to be
> true,
> and certainly not supported by any literature that I'm aware of.
>
I also had some problems of digestion at the beggining of the experiment. I
ate fresh beef from Argentina which didn't realy attracted me. It would have
been better not to eat it, but I just thought I must eat some. I was wrong.
Now I like the raw gamy meat very much and I eat a lot of  without any
digestive problems. What I get here in Switzerland is sometimes chamois,
venisson or wild boar, but mostly I buy fresh lamb from New-Zealand and
horse from Australia at the supermarkets. I'm not quite sure the last one is
not fed with proccessed food or cereals, but we never experienced any
problems with it.

No, not much litterature about it is published yet.You may find some stating
that primitive hunters-gatherers are able to digest huge amonts of
"roten"raw meat without any troubles. I've lend the book to a friend, so I'm
unable to give you the ref. right now.
>
> 3. "Causes no troubles at all", is a generalization, which is not true
> in my case.  My occasional forays into raf (fish), have shown me that
> it is not "perfectly digested", and in addition may cause muscular tension
> for various reasons.

Yes, there are such cases at the beggining. It may take some time untill we
don'get reactions anymore.
I digested a full small tuna without even feeling I was digesting. But I was
quite hungry, having been stuck on an Island without much food for some
days: I don't practice fishing myself.

> That said, I think the continuing arguments here about raf are pointless.

Why do you argue, than ?
>
> If you want it, eat it.

Thank you.

> But let's not kid ourselves about "digestibility".  I "digested" just
about
> everything when I was a mixed, cooked
> food eater.

So... ? Could you let us know why you abandonned this fine nutritious system
?
Kind regards,
>
François