----- Original Message -----
From: "Jean-Louis Tu" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: An instincto's comments



Hi Jean-Louis,
Thank you to take the time to answer me, specialy if as you said, you're
busy working in your apartment..

.JL : On the contrary, I find that my approach is very similar to Jean
> Seignalet's. In my opinion, 100% raw is OK, IF your diet is correctly
> balanced. This is especially difficult in the case of instincto. Ideally,
> our instinct should take care of telling us what foods should be eaten and
> in which amounts, but we all know that instinct doesn't work very well
with
> modern, cultivated fruits and with meats from domestic animals. One
solution
> is to improve food quality: harvest wild fruits and plants, fish/hunt
> yourself, eat plants from your garden, or buy high quality/wild (and
wildly
> axpensive) foods from Orkos or from other suppliers.

F : Yes, I agree. But the difference I see is that your advice is aimed to
some instinctos to revert to some cooked food whereas the one of Jean
Seignalet is to cooked food eaters to eat as much raw and near instinctive
nutrition as possible. The difference is the starting point.

JL :> The other solution (if you are unable or unwilling to spend too much
time
> and/or money on food supply) is to add a few lightly cooked foods. For
> instance, if you tend to eat too much fruit and not enough vegetables, add
a
> few steamed vegetables and/
> or a few potatoes, rice... (but no wheat, which
> is a non-paleo food). If you find that your protein intake is not balanced
> (like too many avocadoes and nuts and not enough animal protein), add
cooked
> (very rare) meat.

F : Many did just that, specialy after Jacques Fradin (when he was working
at Montrame) came with a  similar theory. The problem appeared (again, as
with former experiences) to be a progressive sliding towards more and more
cooking for most people. It's like
beeing on slippery slope. Instinctive-nutrition seems to be easy only as
long as you do it 100% - at least for most guys. I can easily imagine
myself eating once some cooked food with friends. The next time I'll meet
these friends, if I don't want to eat cooked with them, they'll probably
bother me till I do. All my friends know there ain't no way I will do it and
they leave me alone, I mean they eat whatever they want, and they let me eat
what I brought without making a fuss - except that they like to taste my
food! I told'em (and myself) I'm doing an experiment ant that I d'like to do
it properly, that I may eat again cooked food one day, but not now.

Another reason is the very same one that made cooking so universaly adopted:
possible overload in some substances, which will make the same  foodstuff
smell and taste bad raw or at least unattractive for some time. Cooked and
seasoned, it'll be good anyway. So you are getting bit by bit in a vicious
circle from which it is much harder to get out then the first time you
started instinctive-nutrition. The first time, you are very motivated, but
for whatever unknown reason, it ain't the same the next time and you allways
think:
baahh, tomorrow. I saw it around me, and the pionners told me also that
allmost all the long-term ones do it at 100%.The others seem unable to go on
for very long.

It is not fanatism, it's just the only easy way for most of us.

By doing it at 100% I DON'T mean buying 100% Orkos, 100% organic, having a
broad choice every day, smelling every time to choose. I just mean 100% raw
and unmixed and eating only what we like.

We know that modern fruit and beef may fool a bit our instinct, but the
problem isn't too big. Burger had to find a scapegoat for the death of
Nicole. He chose to point out at the beefsteack. I owe most of what I
wrote here to him, but I can't follow him in this explanation. The Burger
and other pioneers ate (somme still eat) a lot of pesticides for years,
before organic and
Orkos products were widely avalaible, not to speak of the cooked food the
ate earlier. She was also very lonely and sad, loved by no one, tired of
working too much. What about pesticdes, by the
way? Are they destroyed by cooking or not ? Do you know any studies about
that?
.
Instead of boiling some vegetables, why not try some sweet patatoes and/or
soak some organic and unheated rice? I even tried manioc, which is said to
be toxic raw. I found some variety edible, but pink sweet patatoes may be
very tasty.

Do you have any feed-back infos about instinctos adding some cooked
vegetables to their food?


 JL : All the above are of course just suggestions, which might work for
some but
> not for everyone. I don't want to tell you my conception of the perfect
diet
> because I have none. The conclusions above are based on the fact that many
> instinctos I know (or many of those who claim to be instincto), either
spend
> a lot of time and/or money on food supply, or are unable to practice
> "correctly". But if you feel that what you are doing is right and are
happy
> with that, keep going!

F : You are right. We don't bother too much and do not look only for organic
stuffs. Now I spend very little time for my supply of food since I'm well
organised.

JL : Of course, it is impossible to know the combined effect of billions of
> molecules on billions of different people... My observation is just that,
> although research has found many ill-effects of pesticides, aspartame,
> asbestos and so on, it hasn't found any evidence that Maillard molecules
> could generate any serious disease.

F : Yes, I understand your point. But these substances are higly toxic and
it took decades till we knew their dangers.Their producers could just point
out at the lack of prove of these dangers and go on producing and selling.
It was the same for drugs. Does cooking produces only Maillard molecules?
Anyway, the number of new chemicals species produced by cooking is so huge
and their study takes so much time that there's no way to know.

JL : Wild animals do have diseases (examples are given somewhere on the BV
site, but I don't remember where).

F : Is any study of wild animals available in which the human observer does
not interfere by taking care of prohibiting animals acess to his garbage,
refuse and food left over ?

JL :> If you found a skeleton
> somewhere, how can you be sure that the person did NOT die of an
infectious
> disease?

F : Our experiments shows that infectious disease are very begnin with raw
instinctive-nutrition. Cooked food would be the cause of death, not
bacterias.


F : > Do you seriously think I could truly say *never* if I
> >add boil
> ed and unsalted patatoes to my food choice ?

JL : Of course not. Did I say that?

F : No, sorry, I misunderstood you.

Kind regards,
Francois
>