>Jean-Claude:
>I observed many times that when i follow the instinctive appeals as close as
>possible,the body's detoxification is happening in the mildest forms
>possible,often viral manifestations are going almost unnoticed (like a cold
>with just a slight higher mucous secretion than normal).
So instinctos say, over and over and over again. And if there are symptoms,
they don't count, because then it is...detox. How do you know when a virus
is present anyway?
>The trick is precisely to be able to really eat by instinct.
Ah, yes. The ever-useful caveat about the true instinct (whatever that is).
If a rawist, even instincto, falls ill, they simply must be doing it wrong,
not really following their pleasure (or not really intellectually
repressing it because of modern supply and demand to make it right again).
The failure must be with the person, because the theory is _perfect_, no?
Just like nature is. ;)
>he process of detoxification can
>get out of hand ( it is exactly what is happening too when eating cooked ,
>making medical intervention necessary, so there is no reason to be more
>scared because one is eating raw).
"Detoxing" gets out of hand with instinctos as well. Wild animal succumb to
disease in spite of their instinct. Face it.
>Eating raw undenatured foods by itself doesn't guarantee that one is eating
>instinctively, and get protected from diseases.( tho there is lot of living
>proofs that diseases doesn't get as necessary than when eating cooked)
Like Nicole Burger's uterine cancer? Like Zephyr's bout with trichonosis?
Like chronic staph infections? Like toxoplasmosis during pregnancy?
>That is the strength that i got from eating instinctively : there is no
>theorists out there to prescribe what one should eat , your own nose is the
>guidance , once you accept the idea ( that is the basic theory) to stay away
>from "denatured foods".
Yet you ate "too much fruit" (like every other instincto in the world ;))
using your own nose as guidance. Then, reading this mailing list gave you
the instinct to increase your animal food consumption--though Burger says
you eat too much if it is more than 10%!!! But that's not theorizing, is
it? ;)
The "strength you get" is the source of the trouble in my experience. It is
little different than the powerfullness felt by most any cult convert.
>All what i am advertizing is the possibility of each one of us to be in
>charge of our own health
Dream on, my friend. You can play the odds all the way back to pre-fire
homonids and you will never be in complete charge of your own health. You
are advertising that a particular regime will give you that power, but it
won't. The idea that we might have such power over our health is comforting
for all sorts of reasons.
> , by using the body's given ability to maintain
>homeostasis and using the tools that have been designed to regulate the
>miraculous balance between the inner ecology and the outer ecology (senses
>of smell and taste). I am afraid there is nothing to sell in that one.
Yet you've been sold! ;) jean-claude, Nature is not perfect, it simply
works. Evolution is not perfect; it is a balance of trade-offs. And
advertisements for instincto are advertisements for instincto.
>About changing while pregnant , if it was myself i will without question do
>that change
Well, there's little chance of that, is there? ;)
>anytime but will have an higher incentive to stick to it than i
>had when i did the change ( i was relaxed in my willingness to follow my
>nose wanting still to be in control with my intellect) Only the feed back of
>my body have been able to oblige me to be more disciplined.
So you noticed this body feedback with your intellect or what? ;) What did
you tell yourself when your "nose was still subservient to your intellect"?
How do you know you are no deluding yourself similarily now?
Cheers,
Kirt
Secola /\ Nieft
[log in to unmask]
|
