Raw Vs Cooked Debate Bridgette Mars/ Susun Weed

[Tsurugi_Oni]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nRwn7VRvb8

I'm currently watching this atm, and so far seems to be shining light on a lot of topics discussed here. Thought you guys might want to watch.

[T-Bird]

thanks TO. can't watch here at work, but will check it out when at home...

[Rose J.]

Very interesting...thanks for posting the link!

[Tsurugi_Oni]

Just some observations....

Bridgette doesn't give nearly any evidence, lots of mystic thinking, and a lot of irrelevant stuff. She should of focused much more on the toxins created by cooking, I think it would have given her position much more credibility. She goes off into dumb environmentalist rhetoric which dropped her down a couple notches in my eyes.

Susun backs up her stuff with evidence, although I think she could of worded her "digestion/cooking" section much better. Very solid argument.

Susun makes a good point about what "cooking" is, and a point I think a lot of people miss. Many people only see heat as cooking, and don't understand its true purpose. Our digestion is a type of "internal fire" which denatures and breaks down things. A omnivorous gourmet understands this when you eat a good slice of prosciutto, the breaking down of bland proteins into tasty free amino acids. Same goes for soy sauce and fermentation.

I would love if some of you guys would watch this and talk a little bit about it. It would certainly help dispel some of the confusion I've seen on here recently with the newcomers.

[snoops]

Just finishing the last one now. I agree with you that Bridgette does not do a very good service to the raw food movement. She just didn't sound as researched and polished than Susun.

Interesting about what Susun says that we do not eat a truly raw diet because everything we do to foods - dehydrating, putting oils on, vinegars, fermenting, I'm thinking blending too, break down the cell walls and hence render it "cooked". Picking the ripe fruit off the tree - it has been cooked by the sun. But the fruit that is picked green, then shipped has not had that benefit and is not used by your body. Sort of what you were saying a couple weeks ago!

That all said, I think they are really both on the same side in that cooked or raw we should be eating whole foods close to the land. And I'm just listening to the guy now who is asking why does it have to be one or the other. My thoughts exactly.

[Green_Woman]

Watching/listening now. Susun does NOT look very healthy, but I'm curious about her thoughts. Interested to hear more. :)

[Tsurugi_Oni]

You know what made me laugh, when Susun went "What does Na mean?". I LOL'd, cuz like....... how do you present information and not even truly know what it means? That made me think that she wasn't truly as well-versed as she appeared to be. If she don't understand she's only reciting, and if she can't understand she can't interpret. Knowledge is useless without understanding, data is simply data unless you can interpret and apply. That dropped her down majorly in my view.

Good debate tho, although the format was weird. The bell should have been a 1 minute warning, that would let them wrap up their ideas much better. Also the time allotted should of been like 4 minutes max, with 2-1 minute rebuttals and a 2 minute conclusion. That way they could debate point by point and allow a better progression in line of thought. It seemed like a dummy structured that debate, but what do i know :confused:

[Green_Woman]

Still listening.

Susun's arguments are interesting (nothing I haven't heard before) but....

a) is she a smoker? her voice sounds VERY much like one who has smoked for many years.

b) she's unhealthy in appearance.

YES, these may seem like superficial points... except, they're really not, are they? Because as humans we're very in-tune with appearances, and if you're representing a "product" or "viewpoint", your outward presentation is crucial. I wouldn't want to eat her diet, but I would want to eat Brigitte's... does that make sense?

Last point... her statement that nothing in nature eats raw food is bogus. And her further explanation of why she believes this, proves her to be inaccurate in this area. She talks about how the goat "heats" the foods up to 110 deg (still raw ;)) and their internal bacteria helps break down the cell walls.

Now... on to Brigitte!

[Tsurugi_Oni]

Well no, her point is that nothing is truly digested "raw", in the fact that digestion often times mimics the effects of cooking, or vice-versa. For the sake of extracting nutrients its nearly** the same. And what she argues is that through mechanical means of nutrient extraction, it would take many x more food to get required nutrition. The argument is a little weird.

Brigette does look much better than Susun, but I don't really pay attention. There's too many factors that can play into it, such as age, duration of diet, prior diet, water quality, lifestyle, and a billion other things.

[Green_Woman]

Tsurugi: I have to disagree with you. Brigitte is actually using A LOT of evidence in her argument. I'm impressed! I was expecting a pile of fluff based on your assessment, but she's in fact she's backing up her side of this very well... and with FAR LESS tension and strident gestures than Susun, whose mannerisms are grating on me. ;)

[Green_Woman]

But then based on many of your past threads, I'm not surprised by your comments. ;)

Question for you, T_O: are you an all-raw vegan? Have you yet tried eating all-raw? Based on so many of your threads in the past and your comments on the Youtube videos that I'm reading, I really get the impression you're either anti-raw, or you simply haven't tried it yet. (Which could possible be connected. ;) )

[Green_Woman]

You know what made me laugh, when Susun went "What does Na mean?"

That did make me smile. "What does NA mean... ANYONE!?!?"

She was so abrasive, it's as if she was upset about not knowing what sodium was. ;)


Wow... I'm almost done watching. Susun is driving me up the wall. In clip 5 she actually starts yelling, and yet throughout the entire debate, Brigitte sits very calmly, smiles pleasantly, and shows NO tension whatsoever....

[Tsurugi_Oni]

What evidence did Brigette present? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see much of it. A lot of it was "I personally feel....... Life force energy........ Something Western science is missing". I mean there were a couple blips of scientific knowledge, but not much.

I did 100% raw vegan for about 4 months straight at one point, and do high raw as a foundation. I'm definately not anti-raw, I'm strongly pro-raw. But I don't ignore the weak points of raw, and so I make *IMO* a healthy compromise. I'd rather eat some sashimi for b12 than take a supplement. I'd rather not live in temperate region and have to be super-dependent on tropical fruit to survive (Buying from foreign workers who are too poor to afford the food they grow). So I compromise with some acorn squash and sweet potato. I don't believe that raw is "all ups and no downs", I understand the cost/benefit of things. As a baseline for health though, I do believe raw is one of the strongest and most pure routes to go.

I also don't believe many of the naive myths spouted by the movement. We're not built to eat meat. Only humans eat cooked food, so we obviously made a mistake. The enzyme theory. Our "natural" fruit diet. Linking us to fruitarian gorillas as a strong suggestion we should be like them. That all animals are "perfectly adapted to their environments".

[SevenKindsOfCookie]

Yeah, I saw that one a few months back, and found it rather pointless and mostly laughable.
Brigitte is surely not the right person for that kind of debate and Susun tries to argue that everything is cooked so the raw food diet can't work. Also, paying someone to google about enzymes for a few hours doesn't make them any more creditable in my book.

[Green_Woman]

In video 4, I believe, Brigitte uses many research examples to prove various health points. It was well done on her part. I honestly wasn't expecting it!

You might consider eating fermented foods rather than turning to eating fish flesh for your B-12. I developed a B-12 deficiency when eating SAD and thought for a long time that eating raw fish would actually help with that. It didn't, but a raw vegan B-12 supplement plus regular inclusion of fermented foods has helped me out considerably and noticeably. :)

The more educated I become as regards the fishing industries/meat product industries, the less and less of a desire I have to contribute to either. In fact, currently, that desire is much stronger than my desire to ever return to eating animals.

[Tsurugi_Oni]

Getting b12 from fermented foods is questionable, but I still do include these within my diet. The fishing/meat industry is an ethical point which a lot of vegans make that I don't necessarily 100% agree with. I do agree that "mass meat procurement" is unethical, but Im not ignorant enough to tie that to meat in general. The main problem is massive demand for products which corrupts the "holy".

Same applies towards veggies. If there isn't much demand for a certain plant, often times wild-foraged varieties can be attained to supply demand. But when pressure overrides sustainability, less savory methods are typically used to increase availability. Wild foraged -> Hollistic growing system -> agribusiness farming. So instead of eating NO meat to save the rainforests, only eat 1 serving a week. Reduced pressure will ultimately lead to an increase of quality of our food, and save the world. But thinking that "vegan" is the pure solution is ignorance on the believers part.

Many vegans *IMO* dive too deep into one side without recognizing the other. It's like when people blame Mosanto for creating GM crops, when it is a NECESSITY based on how we consciously live our social system. So they completely blame Mosanto, when they don't even think once that *maybe* they have just a *little* bit to do with the problem. If people were intimate with their food then they would understand the sustainability of it. But since there is a disassociation (between consumer and procurer), the environment often ends up getting exploited due to simple ignorance of the facts. THen big brother has to step in to find a solution, because he sees the issue from both sides. Then people complain about not having freedom cuz big brother imposes restrictions. And they NEVER see how their lifestyle automatically creates these conditions in the first place. That type of thinking unfortunately seems to plague this movement (and in general).

[Green_Woman]

So instead of eating NO meat to save the rainforests, only eat 1 serving a week.

But not on this forum. ;)

[Tsurugi_Oni]

True dat true dat green momma.

[EZ rider]

Interesting debate. The bottom line for me is how does the food make me feel after eating it ? After eating raw I feel good and feel like doing things. After eating cooked I feel tired and have less energy.
The raw foods give me energy and the cooked foods take away my energy.

[Green_Woman]

The raw foods give me energy and the cooked foods take away my energy.

Yup. Same here.

I tried doing 75% High Raw for awhile with the only other food being cooked yams, beans and rice. I was perpetually EXHAUSTED. It wasn't even just "somewhat tired", but I felt beat up!

After a week of that, I started getting migraines every morning too. I cut out the beans and it was a little better, but the rice/yams still affected me very poorly compared to all-Raw/Living foods!

[Tsurugi_Oni]

Interesting debate. The bottom line for me is how does the food make me feel after eating it ? After eating raw I feel good and feel like doing things. After eating cooked I feel tired and have less energy.
The raw foods give me energy and the cooked foods take away my energy.

Even within these parameters, there still a lot of variables. How fresh is the raw food? What kind of food? Fructose content, blah blah.

Cooked food........ what kind? Method of cookinG? etc.

:)

[EZ rider]

How fresh is the raw food? What kind of food? I eat fresh whole fruits and green juices as single food meals so I get a very clear cause --> effect interaction between the foods I eat and their effect.

[Tsurugi_Oni]

The scientific method at its finest. A raw foodist's best tool I think.

[Green_Woman]

Science comes from humans. We are all scientists, but we don't necessarily all document our results using the Scientific Method (which in itself, is relatively new).

I have worked with some of the top researchers/Science writers at my University (which boasts world-famous research Programs and Professors) and all of them agreed that simply based on my appearance, energy level, and healthy mind, my diet was definitely something worth looking into.

NONE of the researchers I was fortunate to spend time under had anything negative to say about my choice to eat (at the time, only primarily, not exclusively) raw vegan foods. ALL of them were impressed with the obvious overall health of my Body, which was and IS, in fact, a living Science Experiment.

Science is LIFE. Life is science.

[kaybee]

This made me laugh:
Bridgette is surely not the right person for that kind of debate and Susun tries to argue that everything is cooked so the raw food diet can't work. :p

there has been debate, even on Susun's website, about her definition of "cooked." problem is that she groups/treats any method of breaking down food as one and the same, when we raw-fooders know that they are not. we're not opposed to helping to "predigest" food through using oil, vinegars, fermenting, blending, etc, just opposed to cooking because we believe it destroys nutritional value. Its too bad she groups these things all together because it means that the debaters arent even working off of the same definitions. which is confusing and unproductive... its like they arent even working from the same definition of what RAW foods ARE, of what RAW is....so how can you have a debate about something that you dont even agreee on a definition for to start with.....

i must say that I have found the forums on Susun's website particularly helpful for herbal healing,etc and I am grateful to her to have provided the space for that and also alot of the information that she provides about herbs. I believe that she and some others who post on her site are knowledgeable about using herbs for health and healing and I think its a great resource. The site itself is of course not vegan and not raw, but a lot of insight can be gleaned from some of the discussions on there, particulary in regards to things like foraging and identifying plants, and using particular herbs to heal particular health problems etc.

Anyhow heres the link to the discussion of her definition of "cooking" and discussion "from the other side," lol on this video, if anyones interested.
http://www.healingwiseforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=24300

Tsurugi Oni-- I understand that youre not anti-raw, and i recognize and agree with your arguments about the need to eat local as much as possible, and i respect your concern for people in other countries whose healthy food we might be taking away if we are not eating local...but you do come across as anti-vegan, which is frustrating on this board. Its much more compassionate to eat a few servings of cooked grains a week if necessary than to insist upon eating meat...not to mention more ecologically friendly as it is eating lower on the food chain...if you eat the cow the cow has to eat the vegetation or grain first anyway... And yet in many of your posts you seem to nonetheless continue to be emanating a palpable anti-vegan sentiment :( Please stop criticizing those of us who are vegan for ethical reasons. We are trying to extend as much compassion as we can. I guess that you dont hold our views but it would really be appreciated if you could stop the anti-vegan sentiments on this board; it would be easier to relate to the good things you are saying in your posts if it didnt feel like you were frequently attacking vegans, which it does in more than one of your threads/discussions :(

thanks

kaybee

[Tsurugi_Oni]

The "cooked" food argument Susun brings to the table does jarr things up a bit. Kinda destroys the timed debate.

I know I sound anti-vegan, but in truth I'm anti-fanatical. And not even anti-fanatical, but pro truth. 100% raw may be very good for health and doable, as long as you live in a 1st world country and 95% of the world isn't. Or they act like the world would be the exact same place if we switched from dry commodity crops to wet ones. People talk about eating low on the food chain and unethics of raising beef, when really its the meat industry thats causing the problem. Or having your only source of b12 coming from a laboratory in a far far away land (which is 1000% fine by me, but acknowledge this fact honestly). The thing I dislike is when people spout the good, but never acknowledge the "negative". So people talk about "ethics", and they only see one side of the argument. If honestly presenting both sides comes off as an attack, I'm sorry.

Like I always say. A raw vegan king may be the highest example of health, having 10 peasants bring him his fruit every day, and having the finest fruits from far-away lands all year.

I have absolutely no problem with this scenario. But if you are a king, don't deny that you are one. And if you're ethical and a king, then I'd have to say that you're lying about the first.

[Green_Woman]

I know I sound anti-vegan, but in truth I'm anti-fanatical

Occasionally, you seem pretty fanatical about being anti-fanatical. ;)

[Tsurugi_Oni]

I actually lol'd. True enough. That's the only reason I come to these boards, to break the ice.

[T-Bird]

Getting b12 from fermented foods is questionable, but I still do include these within my diet. The fishing/meat industry is an ethical point which a lot of vegans make that I don't necessarily 100% agree with. I do agree that "mass meat procurement" is unethical, but Im not ignorant enough to tie that to meat in general. The main problem is massive demand for products which corrupts the "holy".


Same applies towards veggies. If there isn't much demand for a certain plant, often times wild-foraged varieties can be attained to supply demand. But when pressure overrides sustainability, less savory methods are typically used to increase availability. Wild foraged -> Hollistic growing system -> agribusiness farming. So instead of eating NO meat to save the rainforests, only eat 1 serving a week. Reduced pressure will ultimately lead to an increase of quality of our food, and save the world. But thinking that "vegan" is the pure solution is ignorance on the believers part.

Funny how easily you call anyone not of your opinion "ignorant" - don't be too sure the shoe isn't on the other foot.

Somehow you're "purer" for sticking a piece of fish or a cooked yam in your mouth once a week? Honestly - that passes for sense and logic with you?

[Green_Woman]

I actually lol'd. True enough. That's the only reason I come to these boards, to break the ice.

Now you sound like my (fanatical-atheist-author) brother. ;) Your argument, of course, is supportable (NOT the fish-eating, but the questionable nature of the sustainability of raw veganism).

However, instead of battering people who don't necessarily share your views, why not do some solid research, put together a book, and market the book? Consider the effort that goes into such a project and the increased broadness of your audience, and hence effectiveness of your "anti-fanaticism"...

...and while you're at it, think about the effort that must've gone into Alissa's massive book - doesn't she therefore deserve respect for her views on HER SITE, for the effort she put into her book?

;)

Just some thoughts, friend.

[Tsurugi_Oni]

I'm far from atheist, lol. And its funny you bring that up, cuz i know so many who just jump onto christian forums and start bashing and hating. I don't do that. The reason I jumped on this board was to have access to some of the most concentrated knowledge on a healthy diet that exists. And every topic helps me to learn of weaknesses in my argument, strengths, and helps me evolve concepts. You guys hit it from every angle. Without Alissa I wouldnt' even be here, along with many others, so a 10000 thanks to her being a vehicle for growth for so many. Seriously.

I don't toss around the word "ignorance" completely willy nilly, only when its nearly factual. To say that eating meat, even .00001g is harming the planet is ignorant. So already the issue is more complicated than black and white, and to reduce it to that level is IGNORANT!!

Since when did I say that I was "purer" than anyone else?

I would rather stick a piece of local fish in my mouth once a week instead of having to have a long chain of command produce me a b12 supplement. As a general rule, it would allow people to be much more independent, is applicable to people in poor communities, no real technical knowledge/equipment needed, and still provides needed nutrition without harsh detrimental drawbacks. Given the nature of our economic systems, I cannot say the same for b12 supplements (although with more raw vegans, and reallocation of resources, it *could* be just as accessible). It takes 1 man to catch a fish, it takes a hell of a lot more to make a b12 pill.

So many ethical vegans want to talk about sustainability, organic, local, healthy, wholesome, etc. Given that we both agree upon those points, I *personally believe* that eating fish rarely is much more "environmentally friendly" than the b12 supplementation. Now I"m not saying b12 supplements are wrong, but given who many say they are (environmentally friendly, local, green, blah blah) they fail to see that a 100% raw vegan diet directly conflicts with who they say they are (local, environmentally friendly, etc.)

Same goes for eating local veggies. Eating foreign fruit means we need ships, fossil fuels, pesticides, herbicides, refrigeration, etc. Not taking care of at least a portion of own food also creates the same results, leading society to intensively cultivate crops to make up for the lack of effort on my part. This system allows high specialization/efficiency, which given the competitive nature of typical man, is obviously the natural direction in which our governments try to influence us to go towards. So I realize that by living an extremely "modern lifestyle" that I in turn cause the world to be the way it is. Given that many ethical vegans consider fossil fuels, pesticides, herbicides, etc. bad, I *personally believe* that one should try to find the easiest way to reduce these things from your life. Eating local is the easiest way, but there are other ways. Moving to a tropical climate, turning your lawn into a garden, investing in community gardens, etc. That's not to say that hyper-modern living is bad. Eating foreign fruit isnt' bad either, but do you know how your food is raised? No, this gap in knowledge/communication (the basis of 99% of our problems in life) is what allows other people to exploit us. And given the lack of communication that is prevalent, one of the easiest way to close that gap is by creating a system where communication happens frequently. Local. Now if a Raw Vegan Commune in the US wants to own a fruit plantation in Ecuador, than I say that is 10000x better than the system we use now. Because there is true communication, efficiency, knowledge, and understanding within that system (which buying from a supermarket doesn't provide, hence leading to more potential for trouble).

I'm definately no "purer" than anyone else, whatever that means. But I know who I am, positive and negative, and don't deny the negative like many raw vegans. I try not to "Judge" in a general sense. But given who you say you are, you have to live up to your own standards, and not be blind to all of your aspects. Many raw-vegans (and people in general) are like young America. Land of the free, except for the slaves. Look deep is all I ask.

[Green_Woman]

I would just recommend that you review your assumptions.

You're assuming that "most" raw vegans have no idea where their foods comes from or what goes into the production and distribution of their food.

I beg to differ. I have yet to have a conversation with a serious raw/living foodist who WASN'T aware of these factors... in fact, I have done research projects on this very topic, myself.

For instance, in 2008 before a class of 175 students + 4 faculty, I presented a slide on the energy costs going into producing a can of tomatoes versus a box of fresh tomatoes, among numerous other considerations. (By the pound, the fresh tomatoes won out significantly, in case you're wondering. This was of course only one facet of my study.)

Watch your assumptions, check your attitude at the door, and ENJOY your rawness... and let others enjoy theirs.

In the education arena, write a SCHOLARLY ARTICLE on this topic, with references to your sources, and make your argument in a LOGICAL fashion and you will win over HORDES of readers... but ranting in forums does very little for anyone.

Again, just my thoughts, friend. ;)

P.S. I wasn't calling you an atheist. I was comparing your style of argument with my brother, and your "anti-fanaticism" with his own declaration of the same. It amused me that you both used a similar term, and yet showed a similar trait of fanaticism about the anti-part... ;)

[Tsurugi_Oni]

I know raw vegans have general knowledge about where there food comes from, but I mean an even more intimate knowledge. Like how a business tries to know where every penny is spent in their company. Or how a farmer knows every little thing about his farm.

Like I said, I use these forums to learn, not to win converts. Learn what it means to be raw vegan, and see how other people factually relate to their diet.

Anyone else watch the video tho? I promise I won't bash :D

[Rose J.]

I finally finished watching it. Personally, I didn't think either side did a very good job defending their side. And Susen said an Elephant weighs 1000 pounds? That's not right, they weigh more like 6,000-10,000 pounds. (Actually, I didn't catch that mistake, someone on Youtube mentioned it.) But still...you'd think she'd get her facts straight, especially when she's using that to make a major point.

[Revvell]

lol Otherness.

Leave others to their otherness and take care of yourself. :)


I've watched....I've read...I've seen...I've done...

this is so stupid!! That I can't watch, read see or do any more...LOL

Go do your (what does Revvell call it) oneness....

Go do your ONENESS...LOL

[snoops]

Thanks to the mods for allowing this debate. I was a little worried that it would get banned because it is a link to something bashing raw food. (Well seemingly - see 3rd paragraph) I have been very interested to read what has transpired here. And how most people support the raw food side - well thats not surprising - but shows that we can handle debate!!;)

I only listened to most of it as I was uncooking all morning:D but when I did watch I did see Bridgette's health shining through where as Susun did not look very healthy. But as someone else said there are many factors there not just food. But it is one factor for sure.

Someone else mentioned Susun's definition of cooked - what I got from the debate is that she is probably mostly raw so perhaps wasn't the best defender for that side. Or it wasn't really raw vs. cooked in my mind. It was all raw vs. high raw. I missed the Na thing - LOL.

[T-Bird]

So many ethical vegans want to talk about sustainability, organic, local, healthy, wholesome, etc. Given that we both agree upon those points, I *personally believe* that eating fish rarely is much more "environmentally friendly" than the b12 supplementation. Now I"m not saying b12 supplements are wrong, but given who many say they are (environmentally friendly, local, green, blah blah) they fail to see that a 100% raw vegan diet directly conflicts with who they say they are (local, environmentally friendly, etc.)

People are vegans for a whole host of reasons, yet you paint them with a broad brush for your ridicule.

Having something suffer - even momentarily or fleetingly - to be eaten by myself is repugnant to me. period. Any environmental positive is merely incidental.

I boycott eggs and dairy, even those products "humanely" achieved in solidarity with the thousands of years of animal slavery to the noxious cause of human food. Having given birth and breast fed 2 children, to be forced to go through those pains and discomforts, and bred to do them as much as possible, is wrong in my view.

Part of my philosophy is that every being on this planet has equal rights, and to pluck a fish out of his joyful swimming to eat it, or shoot down a deer in his prime is an ethical line I choose not to cross.

I do have a problem with people who eat at Kentucky fried chicken or buy cheap meat and poultry, eggs and dairy at the store with little care as to how it got there - possibly by a long life of suffering. However, I have no problem with people who fish or hunt and eat from their exploits. I don't want to go out to tea with them, but I mostly view these activities as a part of the natural order, men and weapons subbing in for cougars and bears.

But even that momentary stress and pain of living your life in your natural way and suddenly being thrust out of it and experience the pain of death - I want no part of inflicting that - or giving monetary profit to those who do.

Don't pretend to know me. Don't create a "persona" of the vegan and imbue it conveniently with traits just so you can abuse it and feel superior.

and as far as your case and ideas regarding the environment go:

It is a fact that a vegan diet is environmentally superior to the SAD. And no - no one is perfect unless they are living in a cave, foraging for food and naked and barefoot save for those things they have fashioned from the wilderness. Since you seem to have ready access to a computer, electricity, and the internet - I assume you are not so high minded.

Anyone who is making an effort environmentally is head and shoulders and above the rank and file who don't give a damn. Who are you to judge who is "doing it better" and call others ignorant? Because they don't share your view? Each of us is faced with multiple ways in which we can make a difference, but I don't think very many at all are capable of embracing all of these simultaneously. Many of us I think are taking on more and more as we develop personally, while much of the populace is not. I always find if amusing when someone would prefer to lambaste those who care and make an effort, rather than those who don't care and don't bother.....what is up with that? I've always wondered, so why don't you fill me in since you are one of those?

Also - given the extreme overpopulation of the humans on this earth - if every single one of us had a fish each week - many species could not survive. so I posit to you - given the overtaking of the planet by billions of people - do we have the right to take the fish to extinction so each person can have 1 per week? Is having a fish really less of an impact than a b12 pill? Which is merely cultivated in a petri dish on some mold. and incidentally - many vegans DON'T supplement, and philosophically don't think there is a need. So your point is?

Who is this "vegan" you are targeting with your ire? One that is solely doing it for environmental reasons - as I have never met one of that persuasion. Oh - I know many who do many meatless days for the environment - but none that can actually take the huge step to veganism solely for the environment. And no, I don't ridicule those who go meatless 4 days a week for environmental purposes from my lofty ethical vegan pedestal. I congratulate and encourage them, because they are on a path of awareness. Where they end will be up to their own conscience and ability. I can really only care deeply about my own, offer encouragement and ideas to others, and let them do their thing.

My own personal thoughts on you is that you tried to be vegan, aren't strong enough to do it - and then retrospectively philosophized your way to being "superior" to that which you can't attain. Those are only my thoughts on the matter, of course. I'm not ignorant enough to proceed on and pretend they are the facts.

[EatRaw]

lol Otherness.

Leave others to their otherness and take care of yourself. :)

Otherness, Oneness...LOL

If I leave them to their otherness....thats their oneness....LOL

I deleted my msg. thought it not proper.

dave

[Tsurugi_Oni]

Righty-oh about the elephant thing. And about the sun "cooking" the food on the vine/tree in the last video? That was a little weird to say the least. I think she should distinguish the processes of cooking and making nutrients more bio-available.

T-Bird, you definately have a more involved belief, which is totally cool. Your life philosophy reminds me of Jainism. They wear masks so they dont even kill germs, drink "raw" water, and sweep the ground beneath them so they dont kill insects. I don't pretend to know you, and don't think im' trying to "abuse" you. Generalization is a necessity in posting in these "stop-and-go" forums. But honestly I'm glad you're tellin me about you, it's a beautiful thing.

First of all, the earth is over-populated by what standards? If we follow "no pesticides, 10% fossil fuel usage, no herbicides" then we are. But we DEFINATELY have more than enough resources to support our population, we just don't allocate them right. So when we say "over-populated" we always have to say "by what standards"? The "eat fish once a week" was just an arbitrary standard, i just meant eat any local meat source for enough b12 to meet your dietary needs. That may mean once every month or less. Those who don't think they need to supplement, thats okay, and my whole argument doesn't apply towards them. But realize all of my arguments are from a position (usual a common position from both sides), and was based off the position that most vegans think they need b12.

Sure I can say vegan is generally superior to SAD, and I strongly promote a near vegan diet. But I'm not saying that it's superior to other non-sad diets. An extreme example, eskimos. They aren't destroying the food chain, although they fit much more within the balance of nature than most Western vegan eaters. So the issue isn't about meat vs veggie, it's about participating within a balanced system, or creating a new purposeful balance. But what's your definition of "good for the environment"? I don't go by standards like "energy used..... gallons of water used", those mean nothing. I can use a gallon of energy to drive to McDonalds, or run a generator to save the president. Not saying you do, but. I don't think electricity, clothes, internet ,computers are bad or "environmentally unfriendly". All I care about is that any system we try to live in sustainably takes care of inputs, outputs, waste as best as we can, and is sustainable within the global system. 9/10 times this means "protecting the environment". You can have high-technology and be sustainable, but you cannot have short-sightedness to be sustainable in ANY scenario (even low tech). Environmentalism isn't about being low tech (although many corrupt it to be so), it's about consciously and carefully controlling inputs, outputs, and waste so shit doesn't randomly backfire on you 10 year down the road.

I try to judge people according to their own standards. I've met PLENTY of real life ethical vegans, and on these boards. And by THEIR standards of ethics, I see many of them fail completely by their own standards because they don't see the bigger picture. So many say "if raw went mainstream the world would be healed!", and I simply say it would be an unrecognizable alien existence if that happened.

You can have your personal thoughts about me, by why make comments like you know me when you say I shouldn't do the same to you? I never attacked you personally, only against the typical philosophy (which I NEVER tacked on you). Doesn't bother me either way, just sayin :(

[T-Bird]

You can have your personal thoughts about me, by why make comments like you know me when you say I shouldn't do the same to you? I never attacked you personally, only against the typical philosophy (which I NEVER tacked on you). Doesn't bother me either way, just sayin

I was demonstrating to you what you were doing to me and other ethical vegans.:p

If you say "ethic vegans are X" and I am an ethical vegan - you are saying that about me.

You have never qualified your statements to the point of "some ethical vegans" or "this crazy vegan chick I met last summer" so how am I not to take that as aimed at me? I've been an ethical vegan for about 15 years. so yeah - that's me. I'm one.

As I said - there are multitudinous theme and variation on the whys and hows of each person's decision to do it. So there are many different faces on it, which was my point.

[Tsurugi_Oni]

My bad, *many* ethical vegans that *I* have personally come across. Honestly, my bad.

[Green_Woman]

i just meant eat any local meat source for enough b12 to meet your dietary needs.


"It is possible to develop a B-12 deficiency if your diet and lifestyle are not optimized as much as possible, whether you are a vegan, a vegetarian, or a meat eater. B-12 deficiency is in no way vegan specific."

Read more HERE (http://rawfoodtalk.com/showthread.php?t=2910)

Greenie Note: I used to eat raw fish (salmon, especially) thinking it would help me overcome an increasing fatigue and other symptoms of a B-12 deficiency... instead, I got worse. It wasn't until I went 100% Raw/Living, began to eat fermented foods, sea veggies, drink Kombucha, and YES -- take a B-12 supplement -- that I healed the deficiency!

That was 3 months ago... now I take B-12 a few times a week, at the most (sometimes I "forget" for ten days or more, which means my body no longer NEEDS it all the time) and I have STABLE energy and no more symptoms of deficiency.

[Tsurugi_Oni]

I can totally agree with ya green momma. Bad diet can definately leech us of our vitality. I would LOVE to hear of more stories like yours, but from my extremely limited experience I have also heard of many people eating raw fish and eggs to heal b12 issues.

If you can clean your machine and get it to conserve that b12, then that's FAR preferred than having to re-dose a broken down vehicle. But there's so much to learn so it's hard to say either way, and atm the science isn't there to back it up. Green momma, super props to you. I honestly hope more people like you step up, speak out, and prove time and time again the meat b12 myth wrong. That's what this community needs I think.

[Green_Woman]

I have also heard of many people eating raw fish and eggs to heal b12 issues.

They're welcome to it. But this is a Raw VEGAN Forum. :) Let's discuss Raw VEGAN ways of getting that B-12, and let's leave the meat-eating to other places, other forums.

People on this forum DO step up repeatedly. Open your eyes -- we happy, healthy, WHOLE Rawbies are all around you.

Bliss,
Greenie

[Tsurugi_Oni]

Well about the b12 thing more specifically. As in, some believe you don't even need supplementation. I wanna hear from those guys. Or those who believe they get b12 from fermented foods. Those long term 30 year strict raw vegans, etc.

[NaturalMama]

All I can say (after watching the first 2 parts), is that although Susun appears to be basing everything on "research" and "science"; it's all just theory and has not been proven (ie her demonstration of the plant cell walls). Science is wrong about a great many things. To me, what is the truth in practice, this is reality. I look at Susun and I would NOT want to emulate her at all, I'm not impressed with her appearance, she's not healthy. Meanwhile Brigitte looks far more healthy, and I know the difference in how I feel when I eat cooked vs raw foods.

[tireofthis]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nRwn7VRvb8

I'm currently watching this atm, and so far seems to be shining light on a lot of topics discussed here. Thought you guys might want to watch.

Thanks for posting this. I have only listened to part one, but plan on listening to the rest after I help with my kid's homework. :)

[NaturalMama]

Okay I watched the whole thing. Susun seems to base everything on the idea that you have to break the cell wall or else you can't obtain any benefit from it. I guess she doesn't know much about cells and keeps talking about the digestive acids which she claims cooks everything. Our cells are known to break the walls of foreign matter and other cells (ie., bacteria, proteins, dead cells, viruses, nutrients, etc.). We don't need to break the cell walls before we eat it, our bodies do it without destroying/releasing the nutrients. Cooked foods change to free radicals...not what I want. I'd rather it release the raw nutrients. Susun looks very unhealthy, I'd rather look like Brigitte who looks healthy, glowing, peaceful and has naturally good posture. The proof is in the pudding. And Susun claims that the nutrients aren't lost! That's not true, studies show the complete opposite. And even if they weren't lost, without the enzymes we don't absorb it all and require more. Like Alissa says in her video about proteins; cooked people claim we need tons of protein. Cooked protein isn't completely utilized and much more is required, I think you absorb 10% of it. But if I eat a raw "protein" I'm absorbing ALL of it.

[tireofthis]

I've finished watching the entire thing and I am floored by Susun Weed's statement that you cannot get nutrition from raw food. :eek: If this is true, why do I feel so much better eating raw food? Why have I seen an improvement in my depression and arthritis?