Axel asks:
> -- Do you know anything about the possible chemical/molecular cause of what
>you are saying? What could be about animal fats that our bodies crave and
>that could not be satisfied with plant fats?

Nothing but what I've read, and I'm not sure I understand most of that ;)

Generally, the vegans will say that there is no difference that matters,
that one can get all the fatty acids needed from plant foods and the human
body can metabolize the rest. Vegans, in general, have dismissed the
superiority of animal fats (and protiens) and argued that "technical
alternatives" like linseed oil, avos (and/or sprouts) are as good if not
better than RAF.

Ronald Schmid, who seems IMO to be a real pioneer in RAF, even more so than
instinctos have been, has an interesting chapter in Native Nutrition
regarding fat metabolism. He agrues basically that proper fat metabolism
from vegetable, nut and seed oils is frought with possible problems related
to stress, other nutritional deficiencies, alcohol, etc. He feels that
vegans are better off without such sources of fat:

"Some strict vegetarians eat many fresh raw greens and sprouts. Such people
may be very healthy, especially if they minimize intake of vegetable, nut,
and seed oils (though most eventually show symptoms of deficiencies). Th
subtle aspects of fatty-acid metabolism discussed above help explain their
relative good health--their bodies make EPA from alpha-linoleic acid.
[comment: supporting Tom's take that sproutarians do better than
fruitarians and other all-raw vegan diets]

"Minmizing sources of excessive linoleic and arachidonic acids, while
emphasizing sources of EPA, DHA, and alpha-linolenic acid, favors the
metabolic pathways producing EPA. Sources of linoleic and arachidonic acids
include most vegetable, nut, and seed oils, and fatty meats and dairy
products from grain-fed animals. Sources of EPA, DHAm and alpha-linolenic
acid include fish and shellfish, meat and dairy products from grass-fed
animals, and green vegetables, including lettuce and other salad greens.
The small amounts of linoleic acids the body requires are supplied by such
a diet." (p.78)

According to Peter, Schmid eats a 50/50 diet of seafood and veggies, mostly
raw. I wouldn't at all be surprised if instincto needs to be tweeked in
this direction in the future. Most instinctos rely too much on sweet fruit
and plant fats (avos, nuts, etc.) esp if high-quality RAF is not easily
available.

Indeed, in attempting to leave the avos out of my present diet in
preference to RAF, I find it simply a will-power struggle--indicating more
of an "addiction" to avos than any real need for them. When I eshew avos
for a few days I feel stronger, even more alert, etc (this may have as much
to do with lots of fatty fish--and their _bones_ as well!--as it does no
avos). But in spite of the improvement w/o avos I am finding them hard to
give up. Having been a smoker I know what an addiction feels like, and I'm
not thrilled about having to give up avos cold turkey. :( Of course, I
realize that w/o RAF to meet my "true needs"(?) it would be even harder.
But RAF taste changes are very clear and when reached one is satisfied that
no more will taste good: hardly the case for avos, which, at least for this
boy, I can always come back an hour after a meal and eat another avo! Not
useful.

Interestingly, I have lived years on and years off of avos (few were
available in Thailand). If they aren't around, it's not a big problem, I
find plenty of other stuff to eat, but when they are four for a dollar at
the local farmer's market, they are hard to resist! And they still taste
good for the most part. This is, in a nutshell (or avo skin! :)) the
biggest problem with instincto: one goes along following pleasure as the
supreme guide amongst raw foods, and because of the difference in the
modern food supply (vs prehistoric supply) one must modify their diet away
from instant pleasure (ie not as much fruit as they have a "taste" for,
searching out RAF instead of relying on avos too much, etc). When relying
on avos, I weigh around 180lbs. When without, I am about 170lbs. No big
deal, but 180 is "too heavy" and avos do seem to go straight to my fat
cells, which would indicate a problem in fatty acid metabolism (if not
emotional/addiction problems as well, considering my 240lbs history!).

The original attraction for many folks to instincto is the "guilt-free"
pleasure principle proposed. It comes as no intellectual surprise that such
pleasure-seeking (even when limited to raw foods) is not, by itself, going
to result in the _highest_possible_ level of health. Granted even the most
pleasure seeking motivated instincto is probably healthier than most in
this world, but if they would be doing even better by intelligent
modifications of their instincto practice, then they will each have to find
their own comfort level.

All of which is why I have not held instincto out as the be all and end all
of diets. As Peter reminds me, instincto is young and in a somewhat
narcisistic stage... Maybe sometime soon, instincto newcomers can avoid
such long-term mistakes by focusing less on the idealism of the instincto
diet and more on common sense. :/

Cheers,
Kirt