Hi, Jean-Louis!

You wrote:
>such a rule as very "instinctive"... Why not limit to avos once a
>week? Fruits once a week? Stop eatinf fruits for 3 weeks to see if you

Maybe it has also organizatorial reasons. Ask the people at Montrame.

Jean-Louis:
>OK, but why not eat only wild fruits, then?
>My opinion is that if you are just careful with meat like with fruits,
..
>at the luminous stage" seems reasonable, but feeling *guilty* about
>eating meat is not a healthy (mentally speaking) attitude.

You mix it all up here. And then you are confused of the results. If you
had asked me for my meat consumption, my answer would also have been:
"yes, but I need it only every x months" and x seems to increase. But
this is simply a statement of facts. No guilt, at least not with me.
I agree with you that maybe the majority of the instinctos feel guilt
when it comes to eating meat. I assume this has to do with ethical con-
siderations, some of them deeply rooted in you if your parents told
you that meat is bad. It can be terrible difficult to overcome such=20
attitudes. Reading the archives I found, that Peter, our moderator, has
done this fight and still does. Ask him or read his old posts about RAF.

Also, as I mentioned in a post to Zephyr, overeating animal proteins
is much more dangerous, than overeating fruits. Especially, when the
genes of your prey are close to yours as is the case with all mammals.
A hard job for your immune system.

Jean-Louis:
>check). And eating a vegetable grown on a "cooked" compost is not the
>same as eating a cooked vegetable, since the concentration of
>"abnormal" molecules is much lower in the first case. Anyway, some

But if some abnormal substances are enriched in the plant? Then it would
be worse to consume such a plant than to cook a naturally grown one.
You know, that toxins are enriched in the nutrition chain!

Jean-Louis:
>You wouldn't say that eating a living plant that has grown on ash
>amounts to eating hyper-cooked food, would you?

Ash seems to get handled by plants. Fires occur in nature as you stated.
My theory:
A fire burns 95% of the area it covers to ash. 5% are in a state between
raw and ash, more or less cooked. The probability to get the 5% is low.
And nature has adapted to the ash of the 95% area.
Maybe a bit to simplistic. Anyway, ash seems to get handled by plants
while high-heap compost does definitely not.
I read somewhere that birds are craving for insects of the 5% area and
after a fire search systematically for them. Interesting. Are birds
genetically adapted to cooked/grilled insects?
Very interesting experiments are to be made here.


Jean-Louis:
>I disagree. Suppose you cut your finger and eat it, it would probably
>be digested; and autolysis occurs during fasting.

Autolysis is a mechanism for your body to get nutrients that are missing
from nutrition. This has nothing to do with auto-immune diseases.

Jean-Louis:
>tolerance means a low level of intoxination, and the less tolerant,
>the "Purer" you are, like an innocent child smoking his first
>cigarette. Very few seem to consider that strong reactions can also
>indicate a low immune system, for instance. If I had to choose between

A weak immune system can't react adequately to an intoxication while a
strong one will react drastically. This is my view of the thing.
Maybe that having a tolerance is sometimes more comfortable in life
but if it will serve you in the long run is what I doubt. I prefer getting
rid of my toxins even if this feels cruel sometimes.

Jean-Louis:
>What do you mean by "good" idea? An idea that agrees with your
>thoughts? (Sorry to comment about a question that was actually
>addressed to Kirt).

You are hick-hacking on my words. Good ideas are the ideas, that are
good for you and your environment. Perhaps we should change the list
and do a discussion about the concepts of good and evil. And the ethics
of consequent utilitarism (I prefer this one). And the meaning of words.
And we should discuss what space and time mean, because it seems, they
were introduced by the human mind and don't exist in reality. (Kant)
So far I am concerned enough with this list and my time (???) is
limited (huh? how can something non-existing be limited?) :-)

Jean-Louis:
>instincto theory. Of course, I could, but as you and Karl are so
>enthusiatic and have so much knowledge, it is useless to add a third
>unexperienced voice... Of course, I could say many positive things
>about the way my health has improved, etc... Maybe I'll do that some
>day, when the situation will "stabillize". Anyway, instincto works so

I strongly encourage you to do so now! Hey, there are enough problems
getting reported. So if you got positive experiences, come out with them!
I would appreciate this very much. Please, don't wait until the situation
seems to be stable. It might last longer than you think... :-)

Jean-Louis:
>years of research by experienced persons, but doing that way is a
>means to understand things better, more deeply. Maybe one day I will
>be 100% convinced, and maybe not. There are as many "good" theories

I hope you will never be 100% convinced. E.g. instincto-theory doesn't
say enough about herbs and insects - two big issues missing.
There is no 100% truth in the world unless you are enlightened.
(Even then... I doubt it ;-))

Raw instinctive wishes,

Stefan