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:
Carol & David <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 25 Mar 1999 08:41:19 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (59 lines)
Peter:
> >>:) (Warning: Since no credible science supports fruitarianism and
> >>considering its very poor track record, just claiming that a few of
> >>your friends have been doing well on such a diet will not cut it.

Carol:
I think it likely -- though I don't know it for sure -- that no
credible science supports fruitarianism because no credible science
has ever investigated it.

And as for Alan claiming that he knows people who do well on it...
How different is that from your statement of fruitarianism's "poor
track record" if neither of you have scientific studies to back you
up?

Alan:
> >It was my profession for 14 years in the British Foreign Office to
> >study scientific reports (or should I say..what is published and what
> >is not published and why). To put it in a nutshell, if you follow the
> >events in www.notmilk.com, for example, you get a pretty good idea
> >of how food research is handled in modern western countries "for
> >the good of the citizens" (or should I say the major industrial
> >companies).

Peter:
> Poor argumentation - bad science does not justify unfounded claims or
> hype.

Carol:
I don't think that is what he was saying.  I took Alan's little story
to be just an explanation of why he doesn't put much stock in scientific
reports.  He's seen too much slop, as have I.  Seems to me that as much
as we differ, Alan and I would agree that putting a couple of scientific
references at the end of one's statements shouldn't be assumed to give
that statement any more weight.  One would have to go back to the orig-
inal article and read it to find out.  How many of us do that whenever
we see a scientific reference??

Alan:
> > Dr. Norman Walker was just lucky to die at the age of 116 and must be
> >"abnormal" in some way, etc.

Peter:
> Norman lived to be 109 and enjoyed eating both cheese and fish.

Carol:
Can anyone provide a death certificate for this guy?!  Sheesh!  I've
heard so many different ages at death for him that it's laughable.
106, 108, 109, 114, 116, 120...  Anybody know what city he died in?

Peter:
> A good nutrition library will provide you with many reports of
> how cooking enhances the uptake of nutrients.

Carol:
A gentle reminder: One must always read beyond the abstract to see if
the study makes good sense.  Never trust the conclusions of those who
wrote the study.  Think for yourself.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2