February 28, Gene Kelly <[log in to unmask]> posted an excellent post on NFL
& fruitarianism to the "raw" list.  For those of you who did not catch it,
I am cross-posting it here with permission.

Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]

************************************************************************
Nature's First Law (NFL),
      I have been active on this listgroup for about 2 months. So, being a
relative newbie to the world of Internet listgroups and to this raw food
listgroup I have not been aware of much of the history of some of the
conversation that has transpired here and did not completely understand all
that I read. In an effort to correct this knowledge deficiency, correct my
ignorance, I went searching through the archives of this list, run by J.R.,
and also the raw food list moderated by Peter Brandt.
      I was rather shocked and dismayed and then angry to learn that the
plagiarism reported here on this list, by a forward of an e-mail by Peter
Brandt called "More Plagiarism from NFL", was not the first instance of
plagiarism linked to NFL. This is where the word "More" came from in the
 title of Peter Brandt's post.
    I found out that the first instance of plagiarism linked to NFL was in a
paper written by David Wolfe and NFL entitled "Science or science?" on
9/28/97.  This paper was written by David Wolfe and copyrighted by NFL to
support a challenge David Wolfe had issued to Ward Nicholson to a debate on
evolution on the raw food list group moderated by Peter Brandt.
    Ward Nicholson conclusively proved, in a 5 part e-mail response on Peter
Brandt's raw food listgroup to NFL dated 10/12/97, that the vast majority of
David Wolfe's and NFL's paper "Science or science?"  was plagiarized from
 the book "Darwin on Trial" by Phillip E. Johnson 1993  2nd Edition InterVarsity
Press: Downer's Grove, Illinois. Paperback, 220 pp. including index. Ward
Nicholson exhaustively analyzed each paragraph of the "Science or science?"
paper and in side by side comparisons and comments linked the overwhelming
majority to be passages to have been cut and pasted together from Phillip E.
Johnson's book. Some words were changed to their synonyms and the order of
sentences rearranged, but it was very clear that David Wolfe and NFL were
 not writing material in their own words here. Even in some later listgroup posts
between David Wolfe and Ward Nicholson, David Wolfe continued to plagiarize
Phillip E. Johnson's books in his arguements as if he were writing his own
original thoughts and comments.  So, I now know that the David Wolfe and NFL
 have plagiarized in the  paper "Science and science?" and they plagiarized in their
 book "Nature's First   Law:
The Raw Food Diet" as it was shown last month on this listgroup. That  book
was heavily plagiarized from "Raw Eating" by Arshavir Ter Hovessianan, an
Iranian author who wrote this book about 40 years ago.
     Last week I first wrote a post to this listgroup condemning plagiarism
 in general. After struggling with this issue for a couple more days I wrote a
post coming out in support of NFL and told them to "Keep Up the Good Fight".
 I did not feel completely comfortable writing this post because some things
still bothered me about NFL. The foremost thing in my mind was I did not
 know the origin of the word "More" in the title of Peter Brandt's post called
 "More Plagiarism from NFL". So, I went searching and what I found is what I
explained above. Other things that were on my mind were some of the
insensitive and intimidating tactics of NFL.
     I now after further consideration this week withdraw my support for NFL
until they have they performed the following acts that in my eyes will show
that they are ready to change their research methods and also refrain from
their intimidation and more surly tactics that I have observed.
    This is the constructive criticism that I have for David Wolfe, R.C.
 Dini and Stephen Arlin who are the founders of Nature's First Law. In order to be
at the forefront of the raw food' movement and announcing to the world
 the benefits of eating raw food I would like to see ethical and responsible
behavior coming from NFL. I have not read or heard of any apologies or signs
of remorse or reform emanating from NFL concerning the acts of plagiarism in
the book "Nature's First Law: The Raw Food Diet", in NFL''s paper "Science
 of science?", and in the listgroup posts written by David Wolfe to Ward
Nicholson.  Here is what I suggest to NFL to show remorse and to reform
 their reputation:

1.  First pull all copies of the 1st and 2nd editions of "Nature's First Law:
The Raw Food Diet" and destroy them for they are plagiarized and the origin
 of the work is hidden and undue credit is given to the authors names that are
 on the cover.
2.  Issue a 3rd edition of the book that is rewritten to show a more
 balanced approach to raw food eating and to other people on the planet, i.e. cooked
foodists. The title would look like this:

                        Nature's First Law: The Raw-Food Diet

                        Originally written as "Raw Eating" by Arshavir Ter Hovessianan

                        Modernized by Arlin - Dini - Wolfe

3.  On the inside of the book issue an apology for the plagiarism that
occurred in the first two editions, include a summary of Arshavir Ter
Hovessianan' life and meaning to raw foodists around the world, state
 your relationship to him and state the debt you owe to him for originally writing
this book.

4.  On your web site write an apology on the first page that says that you
 are sorry for misleading the public into thinking that the book "Nature's First
Law: The Raw Food Diet" and the paper "Science and science?" was your
 original work.  State that these two works  plagiarized and that you promise not to
ever let this type of thing happen again. You should also apologize to
 Phillip E. Johnson on this first page of your web site. I hope you have already
written to Phillip E. Johnson in private and apologized.
5.  You owe a public apology to Ward Nicholson that should be posted to this
listgroup and also to Peter Brandt's raw food listgroup for producing a
plagiarized paper in order to debate him on a public forum and for
 responding to him after the paper "Science or science?" was posted in continued
plagiarized posts when debating the original plagiarized paper.
6.  Stop threatening to sue Peter Brandt for copyright infringement when he
quotes from "your" book to show where it is plagiarized. If you copyright
something it should clearly be original and not a plagiarized version of
another book. In two instances at least NFL has put a copyright on material
that appears to be plagiarized. This should not be the basis for threatening
people who are trying to get the truth out in the open.

       If the raw food diet is so good, then let it stand on its own accord
and don't prop it up with plagiarized works. I seem to have been somewhat
 of a "true believer" of NFL for the past two years and I was very supportive of
them to other people and have ordered many books, video tapes and audio
 tapes from them and also given materials from NFL to other people trying to
encourage them to eat more raw food.. After experiencing problems on the raw
food pure fruitarian diet that NFL espouses I am searching for a more
 balanced approach in the diet and in the messages I hear coming from NFL. From what I
have read NFL is very sensitive to criticism and will not react well to this
post. T.C. Fry also preached the pure fruitarian route for 25 years and he
 was not able to live it himself, he ended up having a plethora of health
 problems and led in retrospect a very unbalanced life in many aspects of his life.
 From the loud and aggressive tactics that I have seen NFL use in their posts and
 in their condemnation of all people who eat cooked food and even condemning
cooked foodists thought's just because they eat cooked food, I have
 begun to suspect that maybe they have lost their sense of balance and respect for the
dignity of the human race. This is no longer a group that I can be proud of
being linked to and I will not anymore recommend their book to anybody until
it is rewritten, toned down, cleared of any connection to pure fruitarianism
and re-balanced to reflect tolerance of other peoples views and life
 styles.    One of the original proponents of pure fruitarianism was Morris Krok of
South Africa. Around 1960, some 38 years ago, he wrote a number of works on
pure fruitarianism and promoted it. Here is what Morris Krok has said
recently; it was posted to Peter Brandt's raw food listgroup on 10/22/97 by
Tom Billings of SFLife. It is from a letter by Morris Krok to a man in
 Canada  who located Morris Krok from an incorrect 30 year old address that amazingly
made it to him anyway:

     "My view, almost thirty eight years later, is that one can be very
healthy without trying to live only on fruit. For short periods it is
wonderful, providing one drinks a lot of water in between, and starts the
programme by clearing the colon first. To try and live only on fruit in the
cold of a Canadian winter is absurd. Too much of a good thing is bad and
 this applies to food as well, including fruit. Instead of aiming to live only on
fruit, one should be very happy if we can live on raw foods which includes
nuts and sprouted grains."    "Let us analyze fruit. Fruit is basically sweet water,
 it has very little fat or more concentrated food material, it digests very quickly and is also
utilized by the body very rapidly, especially in cold climates or high
altitudes. Therefore, if we attempt to live only (on ) fruit we become too
 food conscious, and if we add high sugar foods such as dates and raisins to
complement it, the body has to handle a lot of sugary substances which can
cause an imbalance. Many who have tried to live on fruit found that they had
trouble with their teeth and were very cold in the winter months. It is
 wrong to blame city pollution or that the fruit is not organically grown, for any
problem that eating only fruit may cause. Some said that they lost all
interest in sex, and that their wounds did not heal easily until they added
greens and sprouts to their diet. When one does not drink water in between
 all fruit eating, fruit can become too sickly to the taste and not so
pleasurable."

     The "Just Eat Fruit" line that I hear from NFL needs to be tempered
considerably from my experience as well. I have had teeth and bone problems
 on the all fruit diet and also experienced a lack of energy, preoccupation with
food, general nervousness and suspicion of others on this diet. I have added
greens, other vegetables, some raw fish, and powdered barley and wheat grass
drinks to my diet. I believe the pure fruitarian diet is too restrictive to
 be a healthy one and I don't believe NFL has either the experience, done the
research, or have the scientific studies to back up prescribing it to
 people.  In fact, I think it can be very dangerous in the long term. It is a
 seductive message they preach because, at first, your health improves as you are
cleansed. But after the initial cleansing the energy and stamina wanes on
 just fruit and it is the quickest road to teeth and bone problems that I know of.

>From all the study I have done on it, pure fruitarianism consistenly comes
 up lacking in multiple aspects of nutrition. This agrees with the longer term
effects I have experienced. I live a very stressful live here in Japan and
 all fruit just doesn't add up to physical and mental health for me.

Sincerely,
Gene Kelly