Ric:
>While someone may be almost "immune" to the hair raising effects some of
>have to hot chili peppers, this doesn't also necessarily mean that they are
>a "good" food for those with the "tolerance," does it?

Tom:
Agreed; they are far too strong for most of us. There are a (very) few people
with incredibly strong constitutions who seem to have a very high tolerance for
them, though. Still, your point is good - those with tolerance might be better
off with less fiery food.

Ric:
...comments on ketogenic diet, snipped...

Tom:
Thanks for the add'l info on ketogenic diet. My knowledge of it is limited,
but I wanted to mention it as it can have a dramatic effect on people's
health, yet it breaks all the 'rules' of raw-vegan dogma. Macrobiotics is
a mostly cooked food diet that can assist healing, yet it breaks the raw
'rules' also.

Ric:
>This list is more preaching to the choir than helping the general public,
>but the rawist authors of some recent works like Roe Gallo and our own
>three musketeers of NFL fame, are helping a great deal in the wake up
>call...that's my opinion, anyway.

>I'll be looking forward to this afternoon's nationally syndicated broadcast
>by the three raw enthusiasts at five pm.  Hope they get some challenging
>call-ins, which they'll probably handle quite well.  The fact that the
>radio talk show host, Peter Weissbach, has called them back within a month
>of their first airing on his show, is simply amazing.  He's a tough host,
>and rarely calls anyone back that fast...if ever.

Tom:
Having been the target, on occasion, of NFL's hostility/zealotry, I cannot
share your positive view of them. Their record on this list (available to
all in the archives), shows that NFL:
- frequently engaged in rude, arrogant, hostile behavior, against any raw-
fooders who disagreed with their narrow dogma. Their behavior ultimately
resulted in their expulsion from this list.
- posted some chapters of their book, which were thoroughly debunked by list
members (showing their book has a low factual content.)

In my opinion:
- the NFL book is the worst raw food book ever written
- the NFL book has such a low factual content that it should be sold only as
fiction
- their mindless, hostile behavior is unnecessary and inexcusable
- their approach to raw foods is negative and counter-productive. They spend
far more time preaching fear/hatred of cooked foods, than in providing positive
motivation to be a raw-fooder: their mindless slogan, "cooked food is poison"
neatly summarizes their negative approach. I personally got into fruitarianism
back in the 1970's, with a negative motivation - the fear of mucus - as promoted
by the (crackpot) Arnold Ehret. Ultimately I found fruitarianism to be a sham,
and a very negative experience. That is why I am such a severe critic of
fruitarianism today. By promoting fruitarianism via fear/hatred, NFL is, in
a sense, planting "seeds" that will bear very bitter "fruit" for them in the
future. Unfortunately, they don't understand or realize this.

Kirt:
>Yeah, NFL will soon be a household word, eh? I suspect we all hear what we
>want to, you know? Today, I heard Mr. Weissbach level quite similar charges
>to those presented here--they (NFL) are more interested in marketing than
>accuracy; that many of their "arguments" are rude, condescending, and
>pretenscious; that they absurdly consider cooked food as the cause of all
>of humanity's problems, etc etc etc etc. I remain uncertain whether NFL
>needs a wake-up call even more so than the rest of the world. And hearing
>them use your "30 years raw" (I assume it is you they are refering to--they
>never detail anything--are you a "salesman"?) as their support for their
>high-fruit diet borders on simple fraud--especially as you are aware of the
>frequent problems encountered on the diet they prostelytise, consumed great
>anounts of RAF for many years, consider that you used to be addicted to
>avos (NFL bragged about 8 or 9 avos/day), etc.

>IMHO, NFL has more or less "Oprah-ised" the "raw foods message"--thus
>assuring that it appears as a fad/gimmick instead of anything less than the
>lunatic fringe. Perhaps they will make a buck at it. But if they say one
>more time about how it is their _instinct_ which tells them to eat sweet
>fruit to the exclusion of "anything with eyes", I may be inspired to buy
>them a Red Rider BB Gun for April Fool's Day. ;)

Tom:
Thanks for the above information, and for your kind words re: my original
post!  I'm happy to hear that people outside the raw foods community can
recognize the foolishness of the NFL message and diet. Whenever I wonder
about the motivation of NFL, the title of an old Frank Zappa album comes
to mind, "We're Only in it for the Money". I wonder why?...

I agree that the NFL publicity push will ultimately set the raw foods movement
back for years to come. I can imagine serious, sensible raw fooders being asked
if they think "cooked food is poison" or being asked about the evils of
masturbation, a topic of interest to NFL.

Tom Billings
[log in to unmask]