This is in response to a post by Mark Hovila <[log in to unmask]>,
that was posted to both raw-food and veg-raw. (Hence, this reply is
posted to both lists.)

Re: humans are natural omnivores

Mark Hovila <[log in to unmask]>:
>... this does not address the question of what is the most healthful
>diet for humans, as opposed to "natural," whatever that means...
>...So those who use evidence from anatomy, apes, fossils or
>history to promote or refute veganism are missing the point, in my opinion.

Tom:
I believe Jean-Louis and Kirt have already commented on this, on the raw-food
list (only). I agree with you that "healthful" is more important than the
perception of natural. I prefer to look at it as the issue of CAN vs
SHOULD. We know humans are omnivores and CAN eat meat. We don't need ape
diets, anatomical comparisons, or the fossil record for that. One needs
only open their eyes and see the routine omnivorous behavior around us.
The question of SHOULD is more interesting - there one can use ethics and
spiritual considerations.

Re: ethical, spiritual views to be a vegetarian

Mark Hovila <[log in to unmask]>:
>I would be most eager to hear your views on those reasons.  I know you can
>handle the flak.  Maybe you've already recently given your views on this,
>in which case you can just tell me to check the archives.

Tom:
This is the SHOULD part. I mentioned some of the reasons, briefly, at the
end of a long post made last week, "myths of raw foods". I posted it
early last week, in two parts on the raw-food list, and one part on veg-raw.
The post can be found in the archives:
            < http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/raw-food.html >
The list in that post is far from complete. (Note to new people: I urge
you to read the "myths" post if you have not done so already.)

Mark Hovila <[log in to unmask]>:
>But why do very few people manage to stay 100% long-term?  How many find it
>problematic and give up because of social pressures, the power of old
>habits, etc., and how many give up because they gave it a good shot and
>found that their health did not improve?

Tom:
Good questions, for which there are no definitive answers. Let me give
my views on some of the reasons why 100% raw diet works for so few:
1) the world likes cooked food and meat - there is a lot of social pressure,
and 100% raw is just plain inconvenient and impractical,
2) because of 1), powerful discipline (in other words, fanaticism) may be
required to stay 100% raw,
3) the diet is promoted with over-optimistic, unrealistic claims - creating
disappointment when the real diet does not meet the marketing hype,
4) it's simply not necessary: once can have excellent health on 75-90%
raw, an easier and more practical diet for most,
5) the diet simply does not work, or is too hard for many people
6) the diet worked for a while, but problems arrived (a visit from reality).

Kirt wrote an *excellent* post on this topic, on the raw-food list, within
the last month or so. It is definitely worth looking it up in the archives!
(It was in response to a question by Dariusz.)

Mark Hovila <[log in to unmask]>:
>And another question that needs to be asked is: What kind of health do
>those few who have "succeeded" on a 100% raw vegan diet enjoy?

Tom:
Many of them enjoy good physical health, but in my opinion, some of them
display serious mental problems - this is especially common among 100%
raw vegans (particularly fruitarians).

When I was a fruitarian, 100% raw (for 8+ years), my physical health was
fantastic for the first few years. Then reality came for a long, unpleasant
visit in the form of health problems: dental (tooth and gum) problems,
emaciation and fatigue, eating disorder behaviors (cravings, binges),
and other problems. Those who brag about their great health on 100% raw,
have no basis to brag unless they have been on the diet for a while (min.
of 5-6 years, without break), and are mentally healthy as well. Even then,
if they are fruitarians, there is reason to question the reliability of
their claims: former fruitarians routinely report lying about their
diets (and their many binges) while on the diet.

Regards,
Tom Billings
[log in to unmask]