Hi Jean-Louis,
> > Deficiencies in what? Dental problems from what?
>
> Fruits are usually poor in minerals compared to other
> foods. Fruit from Orkos is perhaps more rich in minerals, thereby
> delays deficiency problems.
>
Which deficiencies are you thinking of? I ask this because I keep
reading that the less minerals a food contains, the better they
seem to be taken up. I will quote on this aspect when I come
across it again.
> I think several people on this list have experienced dental problems
> on a high-fruit diet.
>
It has not been reported to my knowledge here in Germany. There
could be problems with fillings of course.
> > > -Many fruitarians are emaciated because fruitarianism is
> > > calorie-restricted (unless you eat large amounts of avocados and
> > > dates).
> >
> > All the fruitarians I know are not emaciated, they carry their
> > natural weight (just as I do at 74 kg plus or minus 0.5 kg).
>
> Perhaps, but how do you know whether they are pigging out on
> high-calorie foods (dates, avocados, nuts) or not? Unless you watch
> them every minute, every day, you can't be certain about what they
> actually put in their mouth.
>
Whereas this is obviously true, I see no reason for lying to
myself (what do I have to gain?) for eating my non 100% fruitarian
diet, and I see no reason why Helmut Wandmaker et al should lie
to themselves either. In the U.S.A. and the other English-speaking
countries one can become a millionaire selling books, for example,
but not in Germany (if you are lucky you may manage to gain a
small profit after paying the publisher).
> In my case, my weight is 65 kg (I am 178 cm tall), which is already
> quite thin, despite eating a respectable amount of calories and animal
> foods (I weigh about the same as when I was on SAD).
You weigh less than I do..and at 174 I am not even as tall as you
are. So much for me not getting enough of something ;-).
> I find that,
> whenever I eat predominantly vegan, and little calorie-dense foods, my
> weight drops to 60 kg in a few weeks, and could even become lower, but
> then I eat concentrated foods again in order to gain weight.
>
What happens when you eat a diet based roughly on the
daily intakes of the chimps?
Pygmy chimpanzee Chimpanzee Gorilla Orang utan AVERAGE
______________________________________________________________
Fruits, berries 80.0% 58.0% 20.0% 50.0% 52.0%
Sprouts, leaves, 18.5% 21.0% 70.0% 30.0% 35.0%
wild plants
Roots, seeds not known 9.0% 4.0% 5.0% 4.0%
Galls, bark not known 5.0% 0.95% 5.0% 3.0%
Blossoms not known 4.0% 5.0% 10.0% 5.0%
Small animals 1.0% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6%
Insects 0.5% 1.4% 0.5% 0.0% 0.4% I
> agree with you that obesity is not only a matter of calories; in
> fact, the calorie issue is very secondary for obese people. But it
> would be foolish to assume that everyone can sustain a normal weight
> when fed at near-starvation levels (I don't have statistics, but I am
> pretty sure that most calorie-restricters have a weight below normal).
>
It is mere coincidence that the foods which cause obesity (i.e.
refined sugar and products containing it, refined flour and
products containing it, saturated fats and the trans fats etc.)
are calorific. I have yet to read a serious paper, however,
which prooves beyond all shadow of doubt that more calories means
more fat. Most people expend nearly all the energy that they take in
on attempting to expell the rubbish that they take in. The body
merely stores the rest of the rubbish (toxins, non-food chemicals
etc.) in fat for safekeeping (i.e. to protect the body) until
such time as it has enough energy to expell it. The detox round
about the second day of fasting prooves this beyond all doubt.
It is not the high calory diet which causes obesity but the
high rubbish diet, i.e. regardless of how many calories it
represents.
Best regards,
Alan
|
