Sender: |
|
X-To: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 20 Nov 1998 12:43:25 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Wes Peterson wrote:
> I've decided to un-subscribe.
Darn, darn, darn! You let the extremists run you off after all.
Well, I'm going to stick around a while and save all the posts that attacked
you. Maybe the more harsh phrases will sound different when they are
recycled---back toward their original authors.
You have no idea how exasperated I am! The conversation seemed almost ready
to turn and go in an honest scientific direction: toward QUALITY.
Those on this list that have raised livestock know that a huge percentage of
the eat-this/eat-that/cook-it/don't-cook-it dietary arguing here is so much
b.s. For instance, those people know that good hay makes for thriving
animals and poor-quality hay makes for sickly, non-producers. There's no
reason to think a raw-foodist can thrive on a diet of low quality raw food.
Those that failed raw, and are insisting that's it's near-impossible for you
to succeed, need to know about that.
Please consider coming back. I'll keep the toxic-exfruitarians (or whatever
they're called) in check. I'll also give you a piece of my world's best
deer jerky. :)
Good luck,
Rex Harrill
|
|
|