Hi Tom,

Just a couple of comments on your very interesting post.

Tom wrote:
> R: Humans are natural omnivores, per: 1) comparative anatomy analysis,
> 2) evidence of ape diets, 3) the fossil record, 4) every hunter-gatherer
> society ever known on this planet.

Mark:
Even if the above is true, and I am not qualified to comment on whether it
is or not, this does not address the question of what is the most healthful
diet for humans, as opposed to "natural," whatever that means.  To me, that
is the key question, although the other is interesting from a historical
standpoint.  So those who use evidence from anatomy, apes, fossils or
history to promote or refute veganism are missing the point, in my opinion.

Tom wrote:
> Note that, despite the above, there are sufficient, powerful, spiritual
and ethical reasons to be a > vegetarian.

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 wrote:
> R: Actual experience with 100% raw vegan diets shows that they may assist
> healing and health in the short run, but can be problematic in the long
> run.  Long-term 100% raw vegans are very rare, as very few people manage
>to stay on the diet long-term. There's a lesson here, if you are open to
>receive  it. Note that vegan diets that are less than 100% raw, say 75-90% raw,
>are more common and may be less problematic than 100% raw. (Hmm...the "best
> diet" is one that very few succeed on long-term; these "symptoms" suggest
> an excess of idealism!)

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?  And of course, there are
different varieties of 100% raw vegan diets.  If someone ate 80% fruit,
found that his health actually got worse, so he quit the diet, that doesn't
mean he wouldn't have found improved health had he tried another 100% raw
vegan diet, one with more greens, sprouts, etc.  What I'm saying is, the
fact that few people "succeed" on the generic 100% raw vegan diet doesn't
necessarily mean that some type of 100% raw vegan diet isn't right for
them.

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?  I have
heard lots of secondhand reports, but I would like to hear some stories
directly from the people themselves.

Mark