The following are some of Bruno' thoughts on trichinosis that he wrote
and sent me a month ago. I have just received his permission to post
them on the list.

Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]

Bruno:
A number of contributions have been sent out to the list in the last 48
hours, but most of them are not about Zephyr, but about various other
subjects. Several posts were also sent to Deborah when the problems
with Zephyr initially started, until he was diagnosed with trichinosis.

I've been corresponding several times with Deborah since the beginning
of this episode, especially urgeing Zephyr and her to take medical
action if necessary and luckily she has done so. I encouraged her to
make a medical diagnosis as fast as possible, go to hospital if
necessary, and especially to research for parasitic problems, which
turned out to be correct. However, I never mentioned trichinosis and
worried more about malaria or other parasitic diseases, this being the
first case of trichinosis I hear of in the instinctive eating
community.

Zephyr's contribution when he comes back in the arena will be essential
and most interesting. He's the one that's coming back from it and it
will be quite interesting to receive his impressions.
Some of my posts recently sent more or less concern this subject. My
feeling is that : (1) there are probably strong emotional aspects
involved in this story between Deborah and Zephyr (similarly to
Nicole's death, food is not the only level of explanation). I would
appreciate discussing this more privately with them. (2) parasites are
not as well controlled with instinctive nutrition as bacterias and
viruses. This isn't new and has already been expressed previously
several times. (3) even with an instinctive diet, medical action should
be undertaken if necessary. This also isn't new. (4) It's the first
case I see concerning trichinosis. Previously I had known a few similar
cases with malaria (reported in a previous post), and two cases of
toxoplasmosis but both concerning severely ill aids patients (not fatal
because treated early enough). (5) at food-level, the role of toxins
from childhood and/or inadequate practise of diet (too much RAF or
over-eating could be questioned). The idea of useful microbes is of
course challenged by Zephyr's story. I'd like to receive his input on
that. My feeling so far is that explanation n° (1) plays a major role
and (5) may be important too, but remains unclear so far because strict
abstinence from RAF is also much worse than some RAF and there is also
strong evidence in favor of at least some (occasional rather than
regular ?) RAF. The question of insects as main source of RAF is
another direction to be explored further but there aren't enough cases
til now practising raw instinctive entomophagy with or without meat to
know if a case like Zephyr's would have also happened if... (2)
proposes a theoritical immunological understanding. The idea that some
diseases are absolutely fatal in nature and that a parasite could win
the fight over a healthy and happy well-fed and well-balanced
individual even in optimal circumstances, at least once in a while
statistically, is another possibility, but I still have some difficulty
to choose between (5) and this. Or maybe, as often, several approaches
are true at the same time and multiply their effects ? But that can
also be seen as a way to end the discussion without finding the real
cause. Solutions to apparently complex and unclear questions are
generally very simple.

For sure, for those who hadn't understood yet, medical science
shouldn't always be rejected, especially in such extreme circumstances
when the "diet only" option has evidently and righteously failed. As
far as I've seen, raw foodism does however very much improve global
immunity and it sometimes even cures advanced diseases. Knowing the
exact limits of what can be expected as results, defining the best
possible guidelines for practice to avoid problems as much as possible,
and not hesitate to use the drugs or other approaches when necessary is
all the question.