Doug: >>A lot of the calorically-restricted make the same comments, > andrather than feeling deprived by their regimen, they feel much >>better. Kirt: >This is good news. I have a cat who I raised on an essentially raw lacto-vegetarian & calorically restricted diet, and I don't think there is any question that this is not a regimen which leaves her "deprived." On the contrary, she thrives on it, in contrast to the obese, diseased pets one sees all too often. Is it humane to overfeed a pet & shorten its life & degenerate its health? I think anybody calorically restricting should keep a CR'ed pet so they can get a good feel for true hunger vs. "eating by the clock." [Hint: when a cat suddenly runs up your pant leg & starts whining at you from around your waist this is a sign that it's true hunger.] >Never heard of the calorically-restricted before. -snip- Tell me, >is the group asover-represented with the "evangelical" as one sees > amoung the natural hygienists? Probably not, it is quite a bit easier to tell people to eat raw than to starve/fast. [Obviously both are almost impossible.] >t sounds frm your post that natural hygiene is > pretty foreign to most of them. Yeah, to most, but not all. I've have given them some introduction, but for many (last I looked that list had about 125 subscribers) they are as oblivious to the raw world as many of the rawsters are to their world. >Since it seems you have a foot solidly in both worlds, >have you any insights into how they, as my high school > english teacher so often said, "compare and contrast" to the NHers. Some of them have already gotten into raw, most have not, eating conventionally only restricting their calories. In their postings of personal anecdotes, it is clear that many experience withdrawal symptoms rather than true hunger when they try to go too long without food. Many are constipated (some with hemorrhoids), & the reason is that they eat very rigid diets (some of entirely processed foods) because they are so concerned with getting exact calorie counts. In my own case, I had always longed for an extremely-long lifespan, and in high school began to read some stuff about practical ways to increase it. I read everything I could, both modern scientific works & historical accounts. My goal was not health (which I had), it was life extension. It was clear that only two camps were on to something significant & were actually willing to make the lifestyle changes needed to live longer: the NHers & the CRers. I eventually got into both. One thing most CRers don't grasp is the need to also restrict protein, and on this score the NHers are generally already clued in. We have posted relevant journal citations to that list which clearly support this in recent months. There are all sorts of various approaches (popping supplements, eating organically-raised grains, etc.) which a lot of people think will significantly increase their lifespan, but which I really think have to be considered a drop in the bucket compared to raw and/or CR. There is a lot of self-delusion out there, but certainly those on this list already know this. Another thing: the M.D.s (& pre-meds) on that list think they know everything there is to know about human nutrition. They don't know anything, & probably the least-knowledgable on this list knows much more about the massive subject of practical human nutrition. Many are hung up on peer-reviewed journal articles, & think that anything which does not appear in one of these over the past 25 years is off their screens. Anecdotal stuff has no validity for these types. (Don't get me wrong, probably most on the CR list are open-minded, it's just that a few vocal clowns take offense at NH type of knowledge.) One thing which many on this list might find of use is this: rodent studies make it very clear that (from a lifespan & cancer incidence standpoint) the best course is to go as long as possible between meals. I function best when I skip both breakfast & lunch. >Or better yet, how about posting the sub info for the list. send to: [log in to unmask] in the body write: subscribe crsociety [log in to unmask] [replace my e-mail address with your own] If this info is incorrect, let me know & I'll try to find the right answer. Here's the plan: get a whole bunch of rawsters to subscribe and tell those on that list who already know everything there is to know about diet what I have told them: that they will probably extend their lives at least as much by eating raw as by restricting their calories, and they will do so a lot easier. If they do both, CR is many times easier when eating raw than when eating cooked. Tell them this time after time, & when they DEMAND you cite relevant journal articles you might want to point out to them as I have that massive quantities of humans (not rodents) have actually gone the raw route and enjoyed phenomenal health. Keep this up day after day, and then when we've got them right where we want them, start in with the fruit jokes. Start with the grape jokes: 1) How do you crush a grape? Tell it you don't love it anymore. 2) How does an elephant make a grape whine? It steps on it. 3) Did you hear the one about the purple kid? His mother was graped. You get the idea. Keep it up & go right through all the fruit jokes, & when they are about to crack start in with the VEGETABLE JOKES! Guaranteed, they will lose it :^) --Doug Schwartz [log in to unmask]