Rex Harrill <[log in to unmask]>:
>Perhaps you can get a copy of Jack Raise's "Mystical
>Diets" and review the first 20 or so pages.  A lot of the flack coming
>your way can be seen in a different light once you juxtapose it against
>Jack's sad story of moving from total belief to bitter, and hurtful,
>disbelief.  Perhaps your critics are only reflecting their personal
>failures.

Tom Billings:
The claim "the diet isn't a failure, you are", is simply an intellectually
dishonest, self-righteous claim used by dietary extremists (who are in
denial of reality), to defend their false dogma. Sorry to be blunt about
it, but that is the way things are. I'm not picking on you personally
here, Rex - merely replying to the last sentence you wrote.

Blaming the practicioner when the diet doesn't work, especially an
idealistic diet like raw/fruitarianism (which, in the long run, have dismal
records - success is very rare), is outrageous. Is dietary
dogma more important than people are? If one diet does not work
for someone, then they should switch to another diet - and not feel
guilty about it. People are important, idealistic dietary dogma is not.

P.S. I think Raso's book is interesting. Some nonsense (and innuendo) in
there, but also some refs. to the failure of the Gerson Therapy, and
interesting insight into natural hygiene.

Tom Billings