OK, lets take a look at some of Alan's proclamations:

>Some domesticated (and even some wild) animals can be induced to
>drink milk..as the smell is right. This does not detract from
>the fact that it is always bad for them (ask any vet or read
>any good book on pets) and often fatal.

[not a Pottinger's Cat fan I take it?]

snip

>Humans get their calories from carbohydrate foods in the first
>instance (i.e. foods containing simple sugars). Meat (i.e. the
>saturated fat in meat) is neither healthy for the human system
>and nor is it a good source of energy.

snip

>You obviously have no experience here whatsoever..or were fasting with
>other juices instead of simple water.

snip

>Our intestinal flora are not as fast at reorganizing and settling
>down again as we would like. Some in some people are in better
>shape than in others.

snip

>Nobody on this earth (except a person in the final stages of
>starvation from any cause) will not benefit by fasting for two weeks
>at the most on water only.

snip

>There is no person on this earth who will benefit more on a cooked
>rather than a raw diet. This even includes meat free of parasites
>and antibiotics etc...

Regardless of the tedious content, Alan makes statements as facts when they
are only his (apparently) ignorant opinion. Perhaps Alan can show that such
statements are facts (uh-huh ;)), but he seems to be getting more and more
cavalier in his indiscrimination between fact and opinion, between theory
and reality.

So, Alan, hows does one politely ask you to support your factual claims or
be quiet?

Cheers,
Kirt




Secola  /\  Nieft
[log in to unmask]