RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Robert Ratliff <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:03:41 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
He did not say nutrition science is meaningless, he said most
nutrition
science was not based on truth.

Best Regards, Robert Ratliff
SE Tenn.
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
Loren:
>Around 1000 calories per day.  Sometimes more, and
>sometimes less, but always far less than someone my size is supposed to
>require.  But most nutrition "science" is based on typical animal and
>cooked food bodies, and is meaningless.

Tom:
You started this post by saying you are a nutritionist, now you tell
us that nutritional science is meaningless?  :-)  Note: I do
agree that as raw diets are so different from SAD diets, one must
be cautious in extrapolating the results of research.

Tom Billings

ATOM RSS1 RSS2