It has long been an intruguing fact to me that most raw-food eaters are thin, a few
underweight and a few slightly overweight but virtually no one seriously
overweight. One of the myths of raw food is that, as cooked food is toxic, it
exceeds the capacity of elimination of the body and thus, the body stores the
toxins in fat tissues, waiting for better days. Proof: everyone knows that
toxins accumulate in fat, and it is a commonly observed fact that many people
who have switched to raw food lose weight and have detox reactions. While that
argument makes sense, it seems a bit weak to me because

 *We don't know if it's true that toxins created by cooking (like AGEs,...)
accumulate in the body to the point that it becomes difficult for the body to
manage them.
 *Some weight loss programs work well, despite being mostly cooked (like the
Zone, low-carb diets...).

So why are raw-fooders thin? Here I propose a few explanations. As usual, it is
of course largely speculative.

One of the best ways to gain weight is to eat a lot of concentrated forms of fat
and of carbohydrate at the same meal. Let's examine the "SAD":
 *Most of the carbohydrates in the SAD come from refined flour and refined
sugar. Both have a high glycemic index (which leads to insulin resistance), are
very concentrated, easily digested, and contain no fiber (thus, the intestinal
transit is slower, giving more time for digestion and assimilation).
 *Fat is omnipresent: in all animal products, salad dressings, sauces, cakes,
cookies, chocolate...
 *Some foods are concentrate and very easy to eat: cookies, soft drinks...
 *It is possible to eat cooked food very quickly almost without chewing. When we
eat, and food (or in fact, the "chyme") reaches the duodenum, the enzyme CCK
signals that we are satisfied, and our appetite decreases. But it takes on
average 15 minutes, and by that time, a lot of calories can be absorbed.

Now, for raw-food:
 *raw, sprouted grains contain a lot of fiber and are difficult to eat in
quantity. In addition, they have a low glycemic index.
 *raw starch is difficult to digest
 *fruits have a short transit time, so it is difficult to assimilate a high
quantity of carbohydrates from fruit. In addition, most fruits have a
significantly lower glycemic index than white bread (the exceptions being dried
fruits, dates, bananas and a few others). Juicy fruits are not concentrated
enough to give many calories, so only dried fruits, dates, bananas could help
gain weight. But due to their short transit time, they usually come out at the
only end partially undigested.
 *most raw-fooders eat much more fiber than SADers, thus decrasing transit time.
 *raw foods often contain more water than cooked food, so they fill the stomach
quickly.
 *It's not easy to eat huge quantities of non-fruit raw food, because it becomes
less attractive, and it takes more time to chew.
 *most raw-fooders are vegetarians, and thus don't eat a lot of fat (and eat a
lot of fiber).
 *a few have a very restrictive diet, and are emaciated due to deficiencies.
 *many RAF eaters also practice food combination, thus don't eat a lot of carbs
and fat at the same meal.
 *the only way to eat a lot of raw fat and carbs is to have a diet consisting
mostly of fatty animal food and honey. But the case of Aajonus eating honey by
the gallon is unique (BTW, I don't understand why a diabetic should use honey,
which has a high glycemic index): raw honey has a clear instinctive stop. In
addition, RAF and honey at the same meal is a bad combination for most people.
And finally, even Aajonus still has a low- to mid-carb diet.

Of course, there are some genetic factors too. Personally, whatever my diet
(cooked or raw), when I don't eat excessively, my weight is always around 64 kg
for 1.78m (141 lbs for 5'10). However, I noticed that I was able to put on 4 kg
(8 lbs) by eating high amounts of bread and butter (in a distant past), or dates
and avocados and nuts (8 months ago).

Additional ideas and comments are of course greatly appreciated.

Best wishes,

Jean-Louis
[log in to unmask]