>From:	Chet Day <[log in to unmask]>
>As you may recall, Dr. Stanley Bass frequently cites Price's
> book as confirmation of his and Dr. Christopher Gian-Cursio's own
> studies, both with patients and with his mice experiments--these
> studies  conclude that humans must consume some form of animal protein
> for optimal health.

Did Price state that animal protein was necessary, or did he say
seafood was essential?  I seem to recall the latter, & didn't he
describe some Andean people who go to lengths to obtain seaweed to
supplement their diet?  It's been a long time since I read him.  I
think the seafood argument made sense when people ate a diet which
had all been grown in one region which could have had various soil
deficiencies.  But not that our food is shipped from all over &
hopefully grown on higly-mineralized soil, I don't think the seafood
argument holds water.  The Hunzas certainly do great without seafood
but eating produce from their highly-mineralized soil.  Anyway, just
because Price observed that animal and/or seafood diets produced
health (& let's not forget that much of his definition of health
centered around teeth & skeletal features) does not preclude an
entirely vegetarian diet from also doing so (indeed, I think it
does).  And as someone who has spent quite a bit of time on other
lists arguing that mice are extremely poor test beds from which to
attempt to draw conclusions about the proper human diet, I'll just
point out that they have an entirely different diet and metabolism
from ours.  If you place mice fed cooked diets (that is all that the
research has been done on at the present, but obviously this needs
to be done with raw-fed mice too) on a fast, many will drop dead in
2-3 days.  They are completely different than we are.

I think the Taoists have a lot to offer here, in that some people
may be more adapted to a diet containing meat, while others do best
without it.  It is something you have to determine for yourself.

I've noticed that often people on this list will rave about the
tropical fruits in this or that locale, but never hear vegetables
talked about glowingly.  And if I'm not mistaken it is generally the
sweet fruits which are raved about, although sometimes the sub-acid
are praised.  The point I'm getting at is that human appetites seem
to motivate toward the sweet fruits.  The appetite for meat is
something I just can't relate to as I have never had any desire for
it.  My raw lacto-vegetarian cat on the other hand clearly has an
internal appetite for meat, & even her favorite fruits & vegetables
(especially cucumbers for some reason) will just not push her
buttons anywhere near like actual meat will when she gets it maybe a
couple of times a year if she is lucky.  But I don't think it does
her any good, and am convinced it shortens her lifespan.  The point
being that I suspect that even carnivores do best as vegetarians.

I personally am now drinking raw milk & occasionally eat raw cheese.
But I do not think these are necessary for optimal health (which I
define as not only keeping you free from disease, but also extending
your lifespan to the maximum extent) nor that they are necessarily
the best things for me to eat.  But I'm human.

 >Interestingly, according to one of my subscribers,
>the China Study also notes no cancer in people who eat less
> than something like 5% flesh, but that cancers start once you
> consume more than about 7%.

Cancer incidence is directly related to protein intake, lifespan is
inversely related.  Animal protein is clearly worse in this regard
than is vegetable.

I am puzzled by what I see as an unwarranted effort to amend the NH
unwritten constitution as it has developed in recent decades to one
which says raw vegetarian is O.K., but we have to mix in a little
cooked or a little animal.  I just don't get it, & never have.
Again, maybe the Taoists are right & some people are descended from
ancestors who evolved to eat some meat, but all I know is that I can
definitely feel the difference when even eating only a little cooked
or high-protein food (raw milk & nuts included), & what I feel is
that my body reacts negatively to these foods.  I suspect that those
trying to make the case for cooked and/or animal are doing so out of
weakness, not actual dietary needs.  I would not want this to be
taken the wrong way & have a big shouting match break out, and
again, I sometimes (as I am doing now) eat dairy products.  I'm weak
in this regard & I admit it.  But there is no way anybody is going
to convince me that I need animal products, & I suspect that there
may not be any humans who need them & that all of us would do best
without any cooked or animal foods.  But I also think that a great
deal of the plant food most of us eat comes from soils which are
lacking in minerals, & that this is a large part of the equation.
If you have ever eaten foods grown on soil heavily fertilized with
stone dusts & seaweed, you know the difference.

--Doug Schwartz
[log in to unmask]