Kirt, I found your response very inspiring and informative. Do not feel
obliged to answer any of my comments or questions - especially since
many of them are not directed at you specifically. As it might be a
long while, before I am ready to experiment with instinctive eating
myself - I would like to test the limits of regular raw food veganism
first - I will continue to play the devils advocate, and see what I can
learn. Hopefully, you will bite a little more. :-)
>>Do you feel any improvement in your health, when you are eating
>>instinctively rather than just eating 'regular' raw foods?
> But, in answer to your question, yes, very definately a noticable
>improvement in the way I feel when not mixing. I also think that
>besides muddying the metabolism to a degree, mixing prevents deeper
>detoxing. Thus while eating instincto I feel better, I am also more
>likely to detox (pretty minor after all these years but clearly
>detox).
Feeling purer & better and detoxing a little deeper I do not think will
cut it for many raw fooders, who might be considering eating
instinctively. There are many ways to balance a raw foods diet, maybe
you could have obtained the same results, without going instincto. -
How does the deeper detox manifest?
>>Q: How soon after beginning to eat instinctively, did you start
>>eating meat? Q: Are you, in your pinion, any healthier from eating
>>it? Q: Did you begin to crave it, or did you start eating it, because
>>you thought it might be good for you?
>Three weeks or so. I started with NO INTENTION of eating raw meat or
>seafood, but experienced such a calm after a few weeks raw vegan that
>I simply became curious as to the taste of animal foods.
I am curious to what made you curious. How long had you been without
meat at the time? Could you have been unconsciously trying to fulfil
the instincto expectation that virtually nobody can expect to succeed
with the instinctive program for any lenth of time without beginning to
incoperate some meat into their diet? Or do you believe that the
curiosity arose out of being more in touch with your instinctive needs
through your new eating habits? There is a big jump from being a calm,
raw vegan to wanting to experiment with raw meat. If I was calm with a
stable, consistent blood sugar level - I wish - I doubt that I would
start thinking of meat - even if I ate only unmixed foods.
>We went to a sushi bar and ordered sashimi, most of which was
>denatured, but my first taste of tuna, though very mildy flavored when
>fresh, was something. I felt metabolic dominoes falling down
>throughout my organism, VERY pleasantly so.
>Oysters, many fillets of ocean fish, (esp. atlantic mackeral!!!), and
>walleye roe all provided VERY pleasurable meals over time. I know its
>almost impossible to beleive that it isn't totally repulsive to eat
>these things (and beleive me I was a tad nervous upon the venture) but
>when lamb or mackeral simply melts away in a fatty/sweet glory only
>hinted at by, say fried bacon in the cooked arena, you immedeately
>lose any inhibition. You could care less about all the fears you had
>only a moment before the mouthful. Only when the taste change comes
>are you reminded of how you thought it would taste. The taste changes
>are so clear and the pleasure so high (if you need the food) that you
>know at once as an organism-as-whole that there is nothing wrong with
>the food. You are in nature's hands, even with bone marrow and organ
>meat.
>I'm not sure one can crave raw meat/seafood until one's body has
>experienced it. I saw, and see, not reason for a philosophical
>distinction betwn animal and plant foods. Indeed, I'm not sure I have
>any philosophical concerns about anything anymore. Philosophy is like
>white noise static.
The argument has been made that meat is an addictive and very
stimulating substance that is a good survival food but not needed or
even condusive for optimum health. Your descriptions above could
support the first part of this argument very well.
>
>>Q: Do you ever proces
>Ethically: none. Ecologically: heaps. Note that I am not about to eat
>commercial meat. You and me both don't eat factory farmed animals. her
>King salmon in June is among the finest foods on the planet. Salmon
>does give me qualms, yes. And so does using electricity to clean my
>clothes.
Cleaning your clothes is not something you can do without, unless you
are living in tropical nudist colony. Though cleaning clothes is
definitely not without its problems, it pales in comparison with eating
meat, which is more of a real choice, and which is having a devastating
effect on the enviroment. To justify getting any of my calories from
animals, I would need more than the potential pleasure of the
experience to motivate me - like overcoming ailments that a regular raw
foods diet could not help heal, greatly increased stamina or strength,
increased longevity etc. Unfortunately, you like most instinctive
eaters were not on a regular raw foods vegan diet fot very long before
switching, and even though you alternate back and forth with the salad
eating, it makes it difficult for an observer to judge, whether or not
you are just getting away with eating all that meat, because it is raw
and that you would be better off without it. Also, one might argue
especially knowing some of the cultish aspects of how instincto
philosophy has been practised, especially in France, that instincto is
more about trying to recapture the innocence of a lost past that maybe
never existed, under the guidance of a charasmactic father figure, than
getting to the truth of the issue of the optimum human diet . I
sometimes wonder whether the instinctive eating philosophy is just a
fantasy - a system that gives a feeling of belonging and finding ones
roots by giving an easy answer to a lot difficult and confusing
questions + a good excuse to indulge for people with lives devoid of
much pleasure. Yet, instinctive eating is very thought provoking and
impossible to get around, so I think we will be tossing around these
issues for quite a while yet. But, I cannot see how the planet can
sustain itself, if everybody went instincto even with 20% of calories
coming from animals, though I might be wrong on this one.
You say that under ideal conditions with no problems of
supplying high quality foods, 40% of your diet would be from animals.
That means that you most be compromising your health somewhat by only
eating 20%. If not, why not 10% or even less, which I understand is the
level most instinctive eaters stabilize at% How do you account for
needing so much more? Are you really following your instincts, or are
your desires and tastes being dictated by some inner neurotic need? The
fact that quite a few instinctive eaters still seem to have problems
with overeating even after years on the diet indicates that instincts
are not the only factor involved, when it comes to eating our food. It
seems that instinct can easily be compromised. Maybe, if you were doing
all catching & killing yourself, eating meat would be less romantic and
you would eat less. Or do our instincts get to rule over everything
else, as soon as we get in touch with them, as you seem to suggest? And
if they do and that carries over into other aspects of life, will it
promote the jungle law, the survival of the fittest, more greed or work
towards the unity of mankind? These concerns might seem prudish, but
have we not evolved from being purely instinctive creatures, and if we
try to turn back the clock, are we not ignoring our own evolutionary
development? Does the fact that we are the only creature on the planet
with a higher consciousness not have any impact on how we conduct
ourselves, and is the price of the instincto pleasures not inevitably
guilt, bad karma and denial? - What I do like about instinctive eating
is that it forces us to take a good look at ourselves and not leave one
stone unturned.
>>Q: If you do not eat
insects, is it because you do not crave them, or >>do you believe that
it is your psychological conditioning that is >>preventing you from
eating them?
>I assume you asked the question because you assumed I would be in a
>quandry about the inconsistancy of eating meat but not insects.
Not quite. If instintive eaters would get most of their animal foods
from insects, they would be promoting a very ecologically sound
lifestyle. Breeding insects does not tax the ecosystem, and as we have
evolved from being insectvores, as you point out, it would probably be
our best bet for satisfying our potential needs for animal food. Many
see the concept of instinctive pleasure as a very egocentrical demand
for instant gratification and as being very antisocial in many aspects.
However, if instinctive eaters were really to walk their talk, they
would get their 'meat' from insects and help preserve and sustain the
planet in the process. - I am glad I am not an instinctive eater. :-)
>Now this is nonsense, but if you substitute fruit for insects and
>animal foods for fruit, you get the natural hygiene argumaent for
>vegetarianism.
I do not understand your point. It might be me, but could you make it a
little clearer?
>Well, Peter, I answered you staight and only hope that you weren't
>simply goading me with your questions, but that you were sincerely
>cruious.
No, I have no hidden agenda.
>Cheers,
>Kirt
Best regards, Peter
[log in to unmask]
|
