Pat:

> I have had very rare stops for fruit--once, I believe the banana was simply
> not ripe enough--another, pineapple finally stung my tongue.This seems
> unsound, I could eat these "sweets" all day long, but that is nutritionally
> unsound.In my educated opinion, frutarians are time bombs, and that saddens
> me.Children love sweets, too. But even eating fruit until satiation will not
> forestall hunger but three hours max for me (and that's a stretch!)so,I run
> out of one and have to start another, not knowing how much to stock, and the
> nearest so-so store is 30 min, the good ones are 45 min. Tough decisions, I
> have been frugal all my life, and tho this is not a problem now, I am a
> conservationist, after all, and have a pathology for waste.What problems do
> you see with this, and what solutions have you found?
>

Thinking about the reasons for changing one's diet, I found only
three: 1] for health 2] for pleasure 3] to be different. I won't
discuss the third, but for the first one, the main advantages of raw
food are 1] no loss of nutrients 2] no creation of toxic compounds due
to cooking. A 100% raw diet is probably not necessary, the examples of
populations with exceptional longevity shows that frugality & and high
percentage of raw already gives good results. And the small fraction
of cooked food is not necessarily a problem, since:
 -it is possible that humans have pertially adapted to cooked food
(cf. Ward Nicholson's article in Chet Day's "Health and Beyond"
homepage);
 -the loss of nutrients is compensated by the raw part of the diet;
 -cooking destroys some natural toxins and harmful micro-organisms;
 -cooking improves starch digestibility, and tenderizes food.

An instincto-style diet can be, IMO, the most efficient of raw diets,
but is also the most difficult one. Following the instinct to regulate
the quantities is indeed an attractive idea, but before one becomes
self-disciplined enough not to overeat fruits and one is able to eat a
wide variety of vegetables with relish, many years of uncertainty and
mistakes can pass, during which the pleasure level has ups and downs.

Dealing with hunger/overeating fruits is not easy either. GC Burger
recommends a fruit and/or honey meal at lunch (12:30 p.m.) and a
"protein" and vegetables dinner (without fruits) at dinner (18:30
p.m.). FWIW, I think that having at least one meal without fruit
limits the sugar intake, and that many foods, which are longer to
digest (starchy vegs, nuts, avos, RAF...), help preventing hunger.


>
> And oh Jean-Louis, (It was you?) please tell me sweet potato won't do me in,
> I adore it, it really has often carried me thru the day, now you have
> frightened me!

I don't remember having said anything about sweet potato. Considering
(ordinary) potato, experience shows that it is rarely a staple for
instinctos. In fact, the lack of tubers is perhaps one of the problems
of instincto-nutrition. Of course, a grilled potato contains at least
350 types of Maillard molecules, but a mildly cooked one is probably
less harmful; moreover, it is more palatable and more digestible than
a raw one.

The next question is: why did I choose not to eat potatoes, instead of
eating boiled ones now and then? Possible answers: because, when
eating any type of cooked food, I am under the impression of
"polluting" my sense of taste, and I am afraid to engage in the gear
of less pleasure-more cooking...

> Bon appétit,

Merci!
--
Jean-Louis Tu
[log in to unmask]