Kirt:
>After more than 8 years 100% raw, I found that steamed veggies and seared
>meat digest very well and cause no untoward symptoms. Even "toxic" raw
>dairy was not a problem. On the other hand, I find like JL, that too much
>raw fruit seems to be more "toxic" to my system.

That you felt no down effects and even felt better by reducing your
consumption of fruits and substituting them with steamed vegetables and
seared meats comes as no surprise to me. Only a handful of people seem to
be able to get away with a high long term intake of fruits and there is
little doubt in my mind that gently heated foods (slowly at low
temperatures) have few of the side effects of foods cooked at high
temperatures. What I do find surprising is that you are only able to
increase your intake of these foods significantly by eating them heated -
not raw.  It could be that the reason you are getting earlier stops with
raw meats and vegetables than when eating them heated is that man through
genetic adaption has developed a lower threshold to the natural toxins in
these foods. Also, an explanation for the earlier stops that you are
experiencing with raw muscle meats could be that you need to increase your
intake of the raw organ meats (ROF's) instead, and that the only natural
way for you to keep up your intake of vegetables is to forage wild greens.
So far I have only known one RAF eater who has an adequate intake of ROF
and only one or two who eats wild greens on a regular basis and none who
eats both.  These foods are not easy to come by especially not organically
but I doubt that heated muscle meats can substitute ROF's completely if an
optimal state of health is the goal - naturally, setting aside the side
effects such a quest might have on mental health and thereby on physical as
well. Maybe eating raw muscle meats will be easier for you if try a low
carb diet that will put you in and out of ketosis. I look forward to
hearing more from your adventurous on-going dietary experiments.

>It may be that there is a pyschosomatic component to the hardcore
>instinctos' claim of 100% or nothing. Karl, you clearly BELIEVE that the
>slightest of denatured food must cause you all sorts of ills, and perhaps
>it does, but you may be fulfilling your own "placebo expectations" in the
>process.

This is probably the most common pitfall for people on radical diets.  The
on-going hope of and quest for perfect health can be a very effective
distraction from personal problems such as low self-esteem, a lack of sense
of personal identity and connection to the world.

>How much of your own personal identity is wrapped up with instincto? How
>much of your world would fall apart if particular denatured foods proved to
>be useful (not toxic) to your organism?

The problem with this line of questioning is that if a major part of
somebody's identity is wrapped around a radical diet such as instincto,
odds are that it will be too painful for such a person to admit to his/her
orthorexia in the first place. The moment the person can talk about his/her
obsession with diet and health, he/she is probably no longer a victim of
this condition, so the trick is, if one wants to indulge in ones obsession
with diet undisturbed from well-meaning family and friends, never to be
openly defensive or seem to be in denial about ones eating habits. ;-)

Best, Peter
[log in to unmask]