RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Thomas E. Billings" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 9 Aug 1997 18:11:40 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (61 lines)
Robert Wynman <[log in to unmask]>:
 >(Oh, BTW, Tom - your post has enabled me to redefine my goal:  now I would
 >be satisfied with 99.9%Raw, "perfection is unattainable" or "to be imperfect
 >is perfectly satisfactory".  With the 0.1% I feel that I need to choose my

Tom:
You miss the point - those obsessed with 100% raw, after achieving it,
then switch their obsession, say, to the quality of the food: how it was
raised, processed, shipped, how old it is, etc. I do like your point re:
excellence, rather than perfection.  If one defines 100% raw as perfection,
then achieves it, it can unbalance the ego for some folks. Of course, one
can go 100% raw and not be obsessed or unbalanced by it.

(You are making a good point re: context and definition of the word, "perfect".)

Bob:
>Hey, kids, have we ever agreed on a definition for "zealot"?  I suspect a
>search of Tom's posts would reveal it second in frequency to perhaps "the".
>;-) is a zealot "someone with a strong belief system differing from mine".

Tom:
Peter did a post that nicely characterizes zealots - mid January 1997,
I believe. I'm sure it's in the archives.

Re: zealots. I see the smiley. I would just mention that the z-types are
a problem in the movement, over and above their hostility. I followed
the writings of zealots for many years, and my health was damaged because
of that. I discuss the issue because z-types are a threat to the health
of people. The raw movement needs honesty and sanity, not more z-types....

Bob:
>OK, so what's the difference between herbs & foods?  Could herbs be
>considered "micro-nutrients & foods as "macro-nutrients" & the proper use of
>herbs is same as other foods, smell/taste test em & eat em (un cooked,
>unprocessed, etc.) When/if they smell/taste delicious?  Anyone had experience
>in this area?  Any research?  (ho ho ho)

Tom:
I did a post here recently, where I paraphrased the definitions of food, toxin,
and medicine, from Robert Svoboda's book, "Prakruti: Your Ayurvedic
Constitution". Basically, food is a substance that you dominate (digest and
assimilate), toxins are substances that dominate you, and medicines are those
things (like herbs) that assist you in dominating other things.

So, adding turmeric to sprouts to help you digest them, is to add a "medicine"
to the "food" (sprouts). Taking goldenseal root for an ailment helps you
dominate the illness, and digest any toxins associated with it.

The line between food and herb is blurry, though, as many common foods can be
used for medicinal purposes.

Re: micro-nutrients. There is a large body of research on the medicinal effects
of herbs, as the allopathic types try to isolate "active ingredients" so they
can synthesize them and sell them for a high price. You could view the active
constituents as micro-nutrients, in a sense.

Regards,
Tom Billings
[log in to unmask]


ATOM RSS1 RSS2