Hello Peter and all:

>I just finihsed a re-read of Schmid's book over the holidays.  It goes into great
>detail about the vital part that raw animal foods played in the nutrition of several cultures.
>I am curious to which cultures he specifically is speaking of.  If it is
>easier for you, just give me the page numbers and I will look it up myself.

Summaries of cultures in Schmid's "Native Nutrition":
Swiss of the Loetschental Valley - p. 9
Gaels - p. 11
Eskimos - p. 12
North American Indians - p. 14
Polynesians - p. 17
Africans - p. 19
Aborigines of Australia - p. 23
Peruvians - p. 26


>Although both
>authors, especially Schmid, speak highly of raw animal foods, if my memory
>serves me right, none of them have claimed that in all the cultures that
>Price visited, were raw animal foods essential to achieving & maintaining
>good health.  If am wrong please direct me to the appropriate passages from
>their books.

Chapter 2 of Schimd's book speaks of specific raw food benefits; the book as
a whole provides continued examples of how raw and/or lightly cooked foods
were applied in the differing cultures.

>Except for raw organ meats you do not seem to be missing out on much.  My
>question, though, was regarding the sources of the foods you eat.

I admit, Peter, source of food is one of my major concerns.  Much of my
fruits/vegetables are not organic.  Most of my raw animal products are
non-commercial, but some of the animals are fed grain.  In an optimal
situation, I would try to obtain my foods from natural sources and animals
that are non-commercial, free-grazing.  I try to improve my sources as
better ones are available.  In the meantime, I deem it wise to choose
non-organic raw over non-organic cooked.  I'm sure many of us have the same
problems in finding good organic food sources.

>If you know of any research that confirms the beneficial microbe theory, I
>hope you will share it with us.

I would be a fool to pretend some kind of expertise in the field of
microbiology.  However, through personal experience, I tend to think more
like the scientists such as Koch, Bechamp, and others who agree that the
"germ theory" is not an absolute.  I would be glad to share any information
that I find from time to time that provides a different way of looking at
this idea.

>Your book section only gives a short description of the books that you
>recommend and does not explain what makes leading scientists critical of
>the germ theory or who these researchers are.

Yes, I know.  Unfortunately, these represent some of the volumes that I am
more familiar with.  As I am introduced to more, or as more people provide
their own findings, I'll be glad to post them.  As far as pushing the
non-"germ theory" goes, I opt not to say much about that on the website,
given my lack of scientific credentials in that arena.

>Even if they do bury these eggs for a 100 years before eating them, which I
>have my doubts about

(I think the 100-year old eggs are simply given that name, I don't think
they are stored more than a year)


>I still do not see how the fact that people can eat fermented foods with
>high bacterial counts is an argument in favor of the existence of
>pleomorphism.  Please explain.

I agree that my points do nothing to "disprove" the germ theory or
absolutely prove pleomorphism.  All I really am trying to present is that
things are most likely not as black-and-white as allopathic medicine would
have us believe.  If the "germ theory" is absolutely true, then how is it
that two people exposed to the same virus do not both get ill?  Or, why do
consistently high percentages of cases of Hepatitis, Measles, Polio, and
many other diseases come from vaccinated persons?

Maybe the absolute truth is somewhere inbetween the "bacteria are our
friends" theory and the germ theory.  I'm certainly not the authority in
this matter.

>Fair enough, the only problem is finding the "wise diet" - unlike you, I am
>still searching. :-(  Also, it should not be ignored that infectious
>diseases are quite  common even among the most healthy of native societies.

Good luck in your searching, Peter.  There is still _oodles_ for me to learn
about my own health.  Also, which sources speak of high disease rates among
native societies?

>> For example, Aajonus Vonderplanitz received attention recently for
>achieving complete > reversals in over 95% of 250 cancer patients.
>
>These are his claims.  But it should be noted that he 1) does not obtain
>medical records from his patients to confirm that they have cancer in the
>first place 2) he does not do any follow-up on his patients, so unless they
>call him back he has no way of knowing how they are doing  3) he keeps no
>files on his patients.

You obviously know more about his record-keeping than I do.  I was merely
referred to him through a couple of his patients, who were very helpful in
teaching me more about raw foods.  I spent most of my time researching his
sources, and not his claims.  So I really don't know too much more about the
statistics of his disease-curing.

>His web site is very poor mostly consisting of quotes from his book which I
>already have. I find your web site to be much better.

True, but truth be known, his publishers deal with that site, and most
likely are not willing to publish all of his material publicly.  However, I
have heard that he is planning on publishing a more extensive detail of the
methodology of his treatments.  I will certainly be looking for that.

-Best regards,

Ben