Hi Irene,

>  As I look at the carrots which insist on
> sprouting in my refrigerator, I can hardly call them "dead."

Would you call a rose in a vase of water "dead?" It's unopened buds will
open in a few days. Does this mean the rose is alive?

Liza had said:
>  I just don't like seeing it described as something that it is
> >not - a panacea for all ills - and I don't like seeing attributed to >it
> >all kinds of magical healing powers and energy fields and magnetic
> >cosmic what-nots and abilities that it doesn't have. It's just food.

Irene replied:
> In that case, then pizza, fries, roast beef, etc., are just food.

:)  Well, it depends on how you are defining food! I define food as
something which has digestible, absorbable protein, carbohydrate, fat,
as well as micronutrients such as vitamins, minerals and all the other
infinitesimally small compounds we're now discovering which are referred
to as phytonutrients.

I would, in fact, call pizza, french fries, and roast beef all foods.
I'd like to know -- what would you call them? Now, I might not recommend
them across the board, as the ONLY foods that can benefit every person
of every constitution and every genetic makeup, but I'd still call them
foods.

> ... there is a definite effect from using overcooked,
> processed foods than fresh raw ones.

My point is not to trumpet the great benefits of a junk-food diet. I'm
trying to make the point that there is no one diet that is right for
every person - and that most definately includes an all-raw diet right
along with every other highly-touted "best" diet.

I had said:
>  I
> >think we're making entirely too much of food, when we start >worshipping
> >it and elevating it to such a high place of importance in our lives.
>

You replied:
> I don't think "worshipping" is quite the right word.  I, too, agree >that
> food needs to be in the proper perspective, but let's face it.  It's
> third in line after *air* and *water.*

Air and water don't need to be put up on a pedestal, either. These
things you mention are necessary requirements for health - but that's
all they are. Life is not about paying inordinate amounts of attention
to what you eat. In my opinion, life is about having fun, LOTS of fun,
loving people, being creative, doing meaningful work when you can,
playing and listening to loads of music, laughing as much as possible,
helping other people, stuff like that. Eating food is just the fuel to
allow us to do these other things, which are what life is really about.

> It's never JUST food.  Not just here at this group, either.

Not sure what you mean by that statement. Can you elaborate?

> Check out
> the focus on food in various cultures.

The focus is not on the food - the focus is on the celebration - the
PEOPLE - not the food. The great traditional feasts are just a means of
celebrating wonderful things in the lives of the people.

> I don't think this
> means that we are anthromorphizing our food ... we're giving it the
> importance that it deserves.

Ah! THAT'S the word! Thank you!

I gotta say, though, that some people do in fact do that thing to their
food. You can tell by the way they talk about (and to) their food. It's
scary.

> Now I don't believe that at 100% raw food diet all the time is
> necessarily healthy (sorry Wes.  I was 21 once and 26 years later, see
> things a lot differently), I believe that the discovery of a way of
> eating to build health and keep us alive can't be lightly scoffed at.

Hear, hear!! I agree 100%. Very well said.

Love, Liza

[log in to unmask] (Liza May)