>>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]