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:
Reply To:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 8 Jul 2001 12:14:28 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
Liza said, in part...
> A universe of the world's most excellent researchers, dedicated
> organizations, alternative-health advocates, non-mainstream "anti-
> cancer-establishment" leaders, international consortiums of
> scientists, the most brilliant minds around the globe are
> looking at every conceivable way to stop cancer.

A universe?  If each human has no more significance than a bacterium, why
would the whole universe be trying to solve our little problem?  Perhaps, as
the Gaia folks say, we are the disease and whatever wipes us out is the
solution. ;)

> There is a myth - unfounded in science and laughed at by anyone with
> even the simplest understanding of biology - that your body is
> "programmed" only in the direction of health. This is incorrect. Lots of
> bodies are defective, full of mutations and genes causing all kinds of
> mischief.

I think that notion comes from a misapplication of a very sound principle:
the idea of survival of the fittest.  For most of our evolutionary history,
we have been programming ourselves in the direction of survival because the
fittest were the only ones who survived to have kids.  In more recent times,
however, this has no longer been the case.  Plenty of less-than-perfect
specimens have been medicated, operated on, and been able to grow up to have
plenty of even less perfect kids.  To say that anyone with even the simplest
understanding of biology laughs at the notion of people being programmed in
the direction of health is pretty extreme and shows a lack of wide angle
thinking.

> If we get lucky, chemicals will be created that can hone in on the
> cancer only, and leave the rest of the cells alone. Many, many new drugs
> are on the near horizon.

You sound like an ad for Merck. :D

> There is an area of cancer research that focuses on building up of the
> immune system rather than attacking the out-of-control growth of the
> cancer. No one wants to "burden" the body with more stresses on it.
> This is not some radical "new" idea espoused only by natural hygienists.

But you've got to admit that conventional medicine came to that notion
kicking and screaming.

Another thing that I would add is that not all disease states are caused by
poisoning.  There is also such a thing as lack of needed nutrition.  Is
scurvy a process by which the god within creates vitamin C for the body?  I
doubt it.

Carol

ATOM RSS1 RSS2