Hey Ric! Loved your informative post about your "routine"--not tremendously
unlike my own (minus some minor "details"). Thanks for sharing it!

Ric:
>Obviously there exists a great diversity among our individual metabolic
>configurations, and this surely must have a lot to do with why some people
>seem to thrive for a long, long time, on a raw diet with certain foods that
>just don't seem to work for others.

Kirt:
Is there any room for the idea that all-raw maybe isn't ideal for some
(perhaps most) folks? The "Raw is Law" bit is a catchy phrase, but I worry
that any law has it's problems--kinda the nature of laws, so to speak.

>Meantime, however, things aren't at all gloomy, since it is more than
>obvious to those of us who've persevered at this all raw routine, that "Raw
>is Law;" whether one is vegan, vegetarian, or instincto; the main thing we
>need to do to support and obtain superior health, is to reject any cooking
>of one's food.  It sounds so radical to hear the three musketeers claim it,
>but there's certainly far more hard science to support their allegation
>that, "Cooked food is poison" than otherwise!

The message of the power of raw foods is not really radical--at least to
most of us on raw-foods. The NFL rhetoric, however, seems to some as simply
aggressive and...well, I don't want to get into it all again, but cooked
food isn't _poison_, is it? Do you really think that a less than 100% raw
diet is "not right", and that any cooking should be rejected verbatim? You
sound so reasonable, but there is a creeping edge of "rigidity" that comes
through sometimes.

>The many anthropological observations that have been made over the ages
>made me believe we just aren't equipped with the special equipment birth
>righted to carnivorous critters.

Any details about these observations, or do you mean the appendix chart in
NFL--that kinda thing?

>Don't know what else to add at this juncture, but hope that this message
>gives you one more person's experiences to put into your  portfolio of
>considerations.

The more the merrier...

>Again, Axel, I suspect that this sort of question is very personal,
>therefore I think you'll have to continue to experiment and study.  With so
>much more information available (and so readily via the internet) than I
>was blessed to have when I made the switch to all raw, it shouldn't take
>you too long to target more closely on the ideal dietary for your own
>physiological, psychological and ethical needs.  Keep in mind, too, that at
>various junctures in your evolution you may find it appropriate to change
>and vary your traditional or habitual raw routine...more or less shift your
>gears to meet the changing challenges in your journey, just as we need to
>shift gears when driving through the mountains.

Words of wisdom in there!

>So, Axel, it would seem there is probably not just one narrow healthy path
>to follow...as long as it's raw (and that's the LAW!), and that will surely
>be music to the ears of you instinctos.

It's music to _my_ ears. Have you taught the three musketeers to whistle it
yet? BTW, were any of the over 100 enthusiasts at the big bash admitting to
any RAF consumption?

Cheers,
Kirt