Stefan;

This is a good list and much to think about comes up.  Tom had suggested I try
to review the archives first before spouting too much more and I had taken his
advice as appropriate.  However, pending time to do that, I'll give direct
answers to what appear to be direct question from you.  Perhaps it would be
best to send you e-mail, but maybe a post won't create a problem just this
once.

Stefan Joest wrote:

> What about the ability of a harvested fruit to ripen afterwards? Do you
> consider this to be useless?

I consider it to be different.  A point I had hoped to make was that
artificially removing a fruit before natural ripening *may* and probably does
interfere with MN's grand design.  Certainly, MN is prevented from putting in
that last burst of flavor (spelled m i n e r a l s) that, in an evolutionary
competitive world, would allow the more perfect tree to produce a more perfect
tasting fruit to attract more numerous seed-spreaders.

I spoke to banana and, if memory serves well, I spoke to orange where the acid
reduction is carefully monitored by the agronomists so they know when citrus
is *ripe*.  A problem here is that *their* idea of ripe means a single fruit,
or glass of juice, won't blister the average mouth.  I haven't fooled with the
other fruits you've used as examples, but I am involved in an on-farm
experiment with tomatoes.  I have a gut feeling that 99% of the tomatoes
people eat and refer to as "acid" are simply unripened.  An answer should
start shaping after a few more seasons.  The answer is elusive so far.

BTW, Bruce Tainio at http://www.tainio.com/ has developed a chart that is most
enlightening about the pH of the *leaves* of a growing plant and the plant's
susceptibility to insect attack or disease manifestation.  This chart, which
he has quietly circulated, but not published, struck me like a bolt from the
blue: it answered many, many grower questions.  Bruce carries heavy duty
credentials with the scientific community and I suspect that any
pseudo-scientists guilty of endlessly regurgitating the official line of the
toxic technology giants are going to have a lot of explaining to do should the
public understand this chart.

> Would you always prefer "ripened on the tree" over "harvested and
> ripened afterwards" ?

Heck, yeah.

> Are there exceptions to the rule, i.e. fruits
> that never reach a good state on the tree but are eatable after picking
> and ripening? Olives come to my mind and perhaps some sorts of avoca-
> dos aswell as bananas.

Stefan, there are exceptions to everything, including this rule.

> About biophotones:
> I still think that a food contains more than you can measure with your
> refractometer. I think we can agree to disagree here.

Absolutely no disagreement here: my point is that higher Brix, which is a sum
total, points toward higher quality.  Millions of refractometers in the hands
of millions of consumers could turn agriculture around.  Millions of
biophotone meters in the hands of consumers would probably do the same.

> About compost heaps you wrote:
> >Mine tend to be about 5 feet high when made, but they "cook" down to 3
> feet.

> That looks a bit too high to my instinctive soul. ;-)
> Since you speak of "cooking down" - have you ever measured the temperature
> inside of your compost heaps?

Mine go to about 140 degrees F if made correctly.  Obviously your correct and
mine are not the same.  Do you have thoughts dealing with 104+ temperatures
when it is 110 degrees out there where I am using a wheel hoe on a typical
summer day?

There is a parlor game where one person whispers a story or parable into
another's ear.  That person then whispers the story to a 3rd...it goes to a
4th...etc.  It has been my experience that the story is unrecognizable by the
8th or 10th person.  Could the "don't heat the enzymes over 104 degrees"
concept be suffering from some transliteration problems?  Bacteria seem
comfortable creating enzymes.  If they get some overheated compost, that's
overheated as judged by some scientist, they go to work and do whatever is
needed.  Once they do their job, the plant feeds.  Or at least that is the way
I see it.

> If you are exceeding 104F in your compost heaps you are leaving the
> natural paths of fermentation and create a wild mixture of substances
> that is totally artificial and would never be produced in the wild.
> Simply because MN does not do high heap compost. She prefers flat ones.
> What do you think?

I think you have a good point.  So far, she has taken care of it and I tend to
trust her ability to offset my boo-boos.  Farming itself is quite artificial.
My composting is only a speeded up digestion.  Stage two of composting is when
the material hits the soil.  The micro-organisms go to work and don't stop
until everything is digested to the right stage (utterly marvelous, I say).
But I do want to give you a minor exception to consider: cow patties, dropped
on straw, start a furious microbial decomposition that is 100% *natural*---and
quite heated.  Help clean a stable and observe the steam.  Farmers didn't
start controlled composting because some scientist dreamed a process up.  They
simply copied what they saw in everyday farming.  Any chance of agreement
here?

> >"Very good" and "spoil faster" are contradictory in my mind.

> My terms were confusing here, sorry. "Very good" meant: suited for
> instinctive eating, despite the fact that the foods "spoil faster" than
> others also suited for instinctive eating. Orkos sells only foods that
> are suited for the instincto practice.

Stefan, I trust no one 100%.  *Everything* in agriculture has lied to me at
some point EXCEPT the refractometer.  Fertilizer salesmen lie; extension
agents lie; university research lies; books lie; everything, at some point or
another, has lied.  OTOH, if the refractometer shows 12 Brix, I know I won't
have sucking insects.  If one fruit has a higher reading than another of the
same variety, it always tastes better.  If I get readings lower than certain
levels, I can damn well count on disease moving in.  I don't know "Orkos," so
they haven't lied to me---yet.  However, I suspect they can be fooled.  I
suspect even their best supplier can occasionally get lazy and send in a load
of sub-standard produce.  Do they just throw it out?

> I'm not sure if citrus shouldn't spoil after some weeks. Are you saying
> that every citrus that spoils after 10 days is too bad to be put into
> your/mine body?

I didn't dream up the "orange bush" story.  It happened.  Yes, I'm saying that
unexpected rot or decay is always a sign of poor quality.  This is a painful
lesson for many.

> >Understanding the role of bacteria, mold, and viruses comes easy once
> >you see the true relationship between plants and insects.

> The story doesn't end at plants. It goes on to animals and includes us
> humans too. Graphically said, if a human being is consisting of garbage
> it is eaten by viruses and bacteria or at least it has problems with
> them.  The conclusion is, that all microbes are there for a good purpose. This
> is also known as the "beneficial microbe theory". Do you know it and
> its implications for human health?

Certainly, the "Germ Theory of Disease" fails to float as high in the water as
its supporters wish.  Better nutrition insulates us from much that the potion
sellers direly warn of.  Ultimately there is no real difference between people
and plants.

> Yes, and what's the reason for this behavior? In my oppinion the reason
> is the bad nutrition most people put into their bodies. If you cook
> everything until it is dead and then spice it up, it doesn't matter if
> it had a good taste and lots of minerals etc. before cooking. Just add
> more spices and the lousy watery tomato will be palatable although you
> would never like it in its raw state.

Remember Stefan, I'm treading in uncharted waters here.  Tom has warned
against "toxic fruitarians" lurking around and I still haven't had time to
review the archives.  Perhaps I'll be seized and held for ransom.  However, my
angle, if one is needed, is that a more abundant supply of higher quality food
(spelled  b e t t e r - t a s t i n g) will result in all, not just
Instinctos, eating more uncooked food.  I'm on the warpath against the
tasteless junk that floods supermarket shelves.  I think denatured food makes
breeding our successors almost impossible.

> the senses of an educated
> instincto are much better than a refractometer.
> See - your nose can detect a handful of molecules in one cubic meter
> of air. Can your refractometer reach the same sensitivity?

A few thoughts: first, I'll defer commenting on the skills of your "educated
instincto" until I've met and tested a few.  Second, were you aware that a
honeybee won't go to a blossom where the nectar is less than 7 Brix?  I've
read that their eyes see in a spectrum that lets them judge, from afar, if
there is adequate energy to make a stop worthwhile.  In my opinion, this goes
a long way toward explaining poor pollination in chemically fertilized
fields.  Third, my experience has been that the aroma from high Brix fruits is
always of note.  Please understand that, at least to me, the Brix value of any
plant helps me understand how far down the road that plant went with its
particular characteristics.  Here's a for instance: I grew some rather high
Brix basil one year.  For fun I would take a little in my pocket if I had to
go out to a function.  While there I would innocently reach in my pocket and
crush a little between my fingers.  Soon, everyone in the room would be
looking around, sniffing, and saying, "What's that?"  I would just smile when
someone would respond, "That's basil---where could it be coming from?"

Regards,
Rex Harrill