RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
David Karas <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 11 Jan 2002 19:52:36 -0800
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Reply-To:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
This is a raw food diet support list. How can one eat in a healthful way.
Some people here follow a raw vegan diet and many others include RAF (Raw
Animal Food) in their diet. This is not a place to criticize people for
their dietary choices. It is a place to assist each other in enhancing
their diets. To suggest that people cannot eat RAF and be healthy simply
does not pass the test of experience.. According to Archeological records
our species appears to be omnivorous from the beginning. What an earlier
species did is probably not important whether evolution theory is correct
or not.

There seems to be some interest in this subject so go ahead with the
thread. Let us see where it goes.

David Karas
listowner raw-food

At 1/9/02 08:43 PM -0500, you wrote:
>Hello David,
>
>I don't understand your comment. You are saying that evolution is off-topic
>for this board, but the whole idea of eating raw meat is based on
>evolutionary theory (if it is correct or not is another issue). Especially
>when people use the evolutionary theory to show that we are adapted to
>eating meat, it is extremely relevant. Actually, I don't think I can think
>of a more relevant subject. So if I believe that somebody uses the theory
>of evolution in the wrong way and shows us invalid adaptation, I believe
>that it is extremely relevant to show the errors in the argumentation. This
>brings me to the second point you bring up, saying that I am attacking
>someone. This is absolutely not the case; I am only trying to correct
>information that is presented in a way that is not in accordance with
>scientific theories. If anything, people should be grateful that I am doing
>that. There is plenty of valid scientific articles out there that explain
>the current view on how evolution works and that should be extremely
>relevant to people who post on this board.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2