>Gary Orlando:
>1. Is there any way you can support your assertions of people not doing
>well in the long run and what you believe might be the reason?  What
>particular nutrients would you say are missing?  Do you maintain that
>animal products are required by some or all people?

Tom:
There are written diet bios (of folks who had troubles on "ideal"
raw diets) on the Beyond Veg site. I encourage you (and other
interested
folks) to read them.

Read part 3 of the "Paleolithic Diet vs. Vegetarianism" series on the
Beyond Veg website for info on successes/failures gleaned from the
M2M.

I have been actively involved in SF-LiFE, a large raw-foods group,
since 1995 or so. Step outside the pro-raw "party-line" circles on
Internet,
and speak to folks who have tried the diet, long-term. The failure
rate of
raw vegan diets is very high.  More to the point, the few who claim
success
are often are *not strict* (a critical point) or if they claim to be
strict,
often are of dubious credibility.

In SF-LiFE I have met many who can't follow the program strictly,
long-term. These people are not "failures" or "cooked-food addicts."
They
are sincere people who have tried, with intermittent successes and
failures, to follow the diet.  (This is personal observation.)

I discourage folks from sending me private e-mail, but it happens.
On occasion I get letters from folks who found that raw didn't work
for them, even though they were following the "expert" advice of some
of
the better known raw gurus. In some cases these folks are in very
bad shape (weight at anorectic levels), but the raw gurus, ignoring
their
frail, precarious condition, tell them to keep starving themselves.

Read the archives of: this list, the bulletin board of
living-foods.com, and
even the rawtimes/raw-steps list archives. Problems of all kinds are
common,
and "lapsed" raw fooders who want to return to the fold are common
as well. The evidence is there - you just have to sift thru a lot
of material to find it.

The above is (of course) anecdotal evidence - but that is all that is
available. The few claims of success are also anecdotal as well.
There is basically no published research (from peer-reviewed
scientific
or professional journals) on failure to thrive in raw vegan diets.
It is interesting however, that one study of living-fooders had to
exclude some participants when available evidence suggested that some
who claimed to follow the diet, actually did not. See the study of
Agren et al. [1995] which is cited and briefly discussed in:

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-7i.shtml

I would remind you that you also should be skeptical of those who
claim
success. It is easy to claim strict adherence to a 100% raw vegan
regime,
but difficult in practice, at least in the long-term. The article
"Assessing Claims and Credibility" on Beyond Veg provides some
criteria
for questioning the claims of the alleged "successes."

I would also point out that my criticism of raw is aimed specifically
at *strict* 100% raw vegan regimes. Diets less than 100% raw (even
90 or 95% raw) appear (based on anecdotal evidence) to work much
better than 100% raw. I personally have done reasonably well on
90% raw. This does NOT mean that EVERYONE can do well on 90% raw.
Rather, each person must find what works for themselves, both
long and short term.

What nutrients might be missing? Due to the lack of research on
raw-fooders,
this is only speculative. A few select possibilities include vitamin
B-12 (long-term only), vitamin D, iron, zinc, calcium. There are
a diversity of raw diets; some are better than others. I'm
NOT suggesting that all these are deficient in all raw diets!

The most common deficiency is: energy (calories) which is seen in
the prevalence of emaciation among 100% raw vegans.

Another issue is the level of sugar in raw vegan diets. Someone who
eats 2000 calories of sweet fruit per day, is eating about 1 pound of
sugar per day. This raises issues of insulin resitance and related
health problems.

There are many long-term conventional vegans who are doing well on
the diet. This suggests that some folks appear to not need animal
products.
Others do not fare so well on vegan regimes, and may need some animal
products.

>Gary Orlando:
>2. What fallacies exist in Diet for a new america?

Tom:
As discussed on sci-veg:
* the claim that it takes 2500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound
of beef (the beef industry reports 400-500 gallons)
* the claim that Westerners switching to vegan diets will reduce or
eliminate hunger in developing countries. There is already a food
surplus in the world, and hunger exists because political and
economic conditions restrict the distribution of the food
excess. Westerners switching to vegan diets, does nothing about these
political and economic restraints.

Don't recall offhand if it was on sci-veg, but the rainforest claims
in Robbins' book are pretty dubious as well. Very little "rainforest
beef" is imported to the US or other Western countries, as the
prevalence
of hoof and mouth disease in tropical countries means that raw meat
cannot be imported from those countries.

The sci-veg archives are offline at present.  I do have a very few
old posts in my online files, from sci-veg, on the topic of Robbins.
(I didn't write any of the posts in question.) I will share these
with you via private e-mail, but only if you promise that you will not
post the material on any bulletin board, email list, forum, or other
public venue. The reason for this is simple: to do so would be to
violate
copyrights.

Here is a related article, with background info, from the archives of
this list. (It too cannot be cross-posted; please share the URL
instead):

http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9902&L=raw-food&P=R20517

>Gary Orlando:
>3. Would you be willing to divulge what book you are referring to with
>respect to plagiarism and how it would be considered plagiarism?  Are
>we not allowed to share information, or was the source not properly
>identified?

Tom:
This is old news to many on this list, as the plagiarisms were
uncovered
here. See the following posts from the archives of this list:

* Plagiarism of the book "Raw Eating" (original author: Arshavir
Ter Hovannessian):

http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9802&L=raw-food&F=&S=&P=4310
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9802&L=raw-food&F=&S=&P=29324

* Plagiarism of material from the book "Darwin on Trial" (original
author: Phillip Johnson); the evidence is in 5 parts:

http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9710&L=raw-food&P=R3713
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9710&L=raw-food&P=R4439
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9710&L=raw-food&P=R4893
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9710&L=raw-food&P=R5337
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/CGI/wa.exe?A2=ind9710&L=raw-food&P=R4013

>Gary Orlando:
>4. While I respect your personal decisions regarding your personal diet, I
>wonder if
>you might discuss what nutrients are available in dairy (goats milk) that
>are not available in other plant life?

Tom:
The following nutrients are in dairy but of limited bio-availability
in fresh fruits and veggies:  vitamin B-12, vitamin D, zinc, iron.
[Zinc and iron are in some grains and seeds, along with antinutrients
that limit their bioavailability.] For info on all the preceding,
except for vitamin D, see section 7 of the "Comparative Anatomy"
paper on the Beyond Veg website. It's a long section, and begins at:

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-7a.shtml

>Gary Orlando:
>Also discuss where ingesting dairy falls on the spectrum
>of natural behavior,
>I understand that natural is difficult to define.  Identify any other
>species that ingest the milk of another species, if you could.

Tom:
I cut you off in private correspondence on this topic, because you
appeared to demand that I debunk a position that I never advocated.
When you did that, I assumed you were a heckler and cut you off
immediately.

Nowhere on the Beyond Veg site do I state or imply that drinking
milk by adults is "natural."  I personally use some dairy because
it works for me, it helped me. I don't recommend dairy to all.

By the way, among the very few people I suggest dairy to are the folks
who
e-mail me in desperation: they are severely emaciated and trying
to gain back weight lost on (100%) raw vegan regimes (dairy, if they
tolerate it OK, may help one to regain lost weight).

Note to all readers:
I don't have the time for long debates or question lists. I have
answered the above as some of the questions are common. Please
check the Beyond Veg site before asking questions, and make your
questions short and fully relevant. Thanks for your cooperation!

Tom Billings