Ben:
<< In fact he has explained to me that he sees cases where cancers from
artificial sources (chemical poisoining, for example) grow at such astounding
rates that nothing seems to affect their progress. >>

What is the difference between cancers from artificial sources and cancers of
unknown cause? And how in the world would anyone tell the difference?

My understanding of cancer is that it represents a profound failure of the
entire immune system in a different way than any other disease known, and that
there are many conjectures about possible `causes', but certainly no certainty
about any one single culprit being responsible.  Cancer is cancer - to me it
seems a little simplistic, Ben, to try to separate `artificial' cancers from
`natural' ones.

<< The bottom line is that everyone is responsible for their own health. >>

People are also gullible, find it close to impossible to think rationally
about food, are horribly confused by the vast numbers of contradictory diet
theories out there, and they are desperate, absolutely desperate, to find
simplistic answers to the question of what to eat.

I think the issue is that when you assume a position of leadership in the
nutrition community, you are taking on a responsibility that is much huger
than you may be aware of. People are listening to you, they are looking to you
for guidance, they're following your lead and your (even if unspoken) personal
biases and assumptions.  You may underestimate your influence, but the truth
is that you actually play an important role in people's lives, because of your
impact on the decisions they make regarding their health.

So, in light of this, your spoken or unspoken advocacy of a diet regime which
could possibly be harmful to people, is cause for some concern.

<<  If someone is not experiencing a good balance while following Aajonus'
reccommendations, then by all means, I would hope they would continue to
search for their balance........  It seems that whatever the nutritional
changes may be, healing through nutrition is a very gradual process.>>

Of course the two ideas you've expressed above, in the same paragraph, further
add to the confusion. I'm sure you know that what usually happens is that the
person thinks that they somehow are at fault for not complying rigidly enough
to the rules of the diet - that its not the diet's fault it's theirs. And
then, like you say above about nutrition working gradually, they assume they
probably have just not given the diet long enough to work its cures. So again
you're faced with the fact that you may be unwittingly leading people down a
dangerous path, particularly if they have serious health problems that need
attention and they are relying on the diet to get well.

<< Look, I'm through playing mommy on that list. >>

Mommy?? I thought you were the originator, owner and moderator of that list!
Am I wrong? You lost me - I don't understand what you mean by playing Mommy.

<<  If it gives you a thrill, feel free to post Moss' review there yourself.
>>

Speaking for myself, it wouldn't give ME a thrill, but I think now that this
had been suggested, that it might be helpful for some people to see a
contradictory view, and I think its the right thing to do.  I'm subscribed to
your list - do I have your permission to post the review?

Hey Ben  -  HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!!  Twenty-one WOW!!!! I hope
you
have a totally awesome birthday!!!

Love Liza

[log in to unmask] (Liza May)