John wrote:
><< Perhaps many nutritionists get trained in outdated techniques and the
> information is, shall I say, narrow? >>

Liza writes:
>I see urine as a waste product, which should not be used as food. I think the
>idea of drinking it is repugnant for a reason. Under what circumstances do you
>recommend urine drinking to improve health, John?

You see at as a waste product and many others don't.  There is a least one
MD that has written about it and others that support its use as a therapy.
Read the book The Water of Life, A Treatise On Urine Therapy by J.W.
Armstrong, and another called UR-Own Therapy, which sites many studies in
its use.  Many Gurus and Yogis have also used it and sung its virtues.
But...Liza, I don't have the energy to convert you to it.  I'll leave it to
the experts in Urine Therapy, if they're lurking about.  Or just seek out
the books on it.


John wrote:
><<  I have found that most people will never get to a 100% or even 80% raw
>diet, whether fruit or vegetable and fruit. >>

Liza:
>When you say "get to" that says to me that you think that they are heading in
>that direction. Is this the case, or am I misinterpreting your statement? If
>so, then why do you think that a raw diet is where they should be "getting
>to?"  And why do you think that they should be "getting to" a vegetable and
>fruit diet? I may be misreading what you've written here, but it is
>assumptions such as these, preconceived notiions about what people should and
>should not eat, that I have a problem with.

Liza, you're very facile at trying to "put words in my mouth".  When I said
get to I meant people in my particular Community, students practicing the
Way of the Heart.  Some among them tried to "get to" a fruitarian diet,
testing out the theory by some experts that a fruitarian diet was the most
sattvic and purfiying.  I have no other conclusions about it.  Sorry.  I
also have problems with preconceived notions.  I know how you feel.

>If you do in fact have such preconceived opinions about what types of diets
>are best for all people, then I think it is your professional responsibility
>as someone who is calling himself a nutritionist to let your clients know
>about your opinions before they become your clients. Otherwise, you are being
>dishonest about your agenda.

Please read the above and wait for my answer before forming further opinions
of me.  I would appreciate that.

><< Ittakes a long time to transition to a mostly raw diet, >>

>Again, this is a generalization, which, like any other generalization about
>diet, is only sometimes true, for some people, some of the time. Many people
>have no problem whatsoever changing to a 100% raw diet overnite.

Where are your studies that support such an assertion?  It stand to reason
that a meat eater would have definite problems if she or he were to
transition, abrputly, ovrnite (as you say), to a 100% rasw diet.  So how do
you qualify many?  Who is jumping to conclusions here?

>It cannot be overemphasized enough, that every individual is unique, and their
>dietary needs are entirely unique, and change over time. Any other approach to
>the subject of what to eat is foolishly simplistic, and inadequate.

Of course.

><< .....and not everyone can handle a fruit diet, depending on their
>environment, climate, work conditions, past dietary habits, and so on. >>

>Not everyone can handle ANY one diet. Fruit is not superior in any way to ANY
>other food.

Liza, I sense you are YELLING.  And based on preconceived notions about what
I have stated.  It is always good to verify our opinions of others before we
say too much.

> Then one day during a long run,  "LIFE
>F0RCE"  just popped into my head out of nowhere.  I hadn't even been thinking
>about it that day. The name just flew into my brain, and felt perfect,
>instantly. It was funny how it happened. Everyone I told the name to thought
>it was GREAT, and completely descriptive of what I do.

I know of two companies by that name in the U.S..  I guess if your company
is not that big you won't get into any trouble, otherwise, if you're
noticed, some of their lawyers may challenge you.

>It was only this year (so many years later!) that I discovered that there is a
>whole concept of enzymes as supposedly having some sort of a metaphysical
>"life force" which they impart to our bodies and to foods that we eat. I see
>the term "life force" all over the literature about raw foods. The fact that I
>had chosen this name for myself, and it felt so right immmediately, makes me
>wonder a little about wether there is something funky going on in the universe
>that is trying to make its way into my thick and stubborn skull.  But I tend
>to be a little "out there" to be honest, so I might be attributing more
>significance to an insignificant coincidence than is really called for.

Well, from my studies, what you call life force is also likely called
VITALITY, and prana.  Prana in fact has many grades.  We get our life force
or vitality from the Sun through the chakram situated just above the splene.
It processes the prana (like a stepdown transformer) and sends out streams
of vitality globules to the other 7 chakrams, each stream of a different
color (so for instance the heart gets green colored globules and hence its
characteristic color, for those who have eyes to see such things).  This is
also why the spleen is so important in terms of nerve force, another name
for vitality, as the prana also streams along the nerves (as over a copper
wire).  All the cells are then enlivened with this life force.  Enzymes in
and of themselves have a pranic sheath or etheric sheath and the body does
make use of that.  By the way, this is why people who work at night are more
depressed, less vital, and those living in countries where they get less sun
during the year are more depressed and uptight.  Also, the pine tree
processes prana from the Sun and gives off what it can't use in the form of
reddish/purple energy globules which we can readily absorb through the
splenic centre and restore our vitality.  This is why much healing takes
place in forests (and why Sanitariums are usually located near forests or
oceans) and why people are told (in the New Age movement mostly but also in
Theosophy) to stand under or near a pine tree to get revitalized or healed.

Sorry for being a bit off-topic.

>Anyway, that's the story of my name, and thus, my screen name. Soon I hope to
>ditch aol (what a total complete nuisance aol is - and a rip to boot) and
>switch to a better service, so I hope I can use the same screen name again,
>but we'll see.

Hey, at the end of your letter, you're much more pleasant and it was nice
talking with you!
love, js