How to Stop Being Tricked by Bad Nutritional Science
How to Stop Being Tricked by Bad Nutritional
Science

** Do you ever get confused by all the
conflicting raw food diet information out there?

** Have you been scared off eating a 100% raw
diet because of what you have read on a raw food
forum or even a raw food book?

** Do you want to know if the science they are
using is valid?

** Has your belief in Ayurvedic Medicine or the
popular body type diets made you believe that
eating raw might not be the best thing for you?

*~*~*~*
Maybe you have those questions or similar ones.
The misinformation out there is rampant. I
believe some of the information is purposely
deceptive and designed to make you fail at doing
a raw diet.

Remember, who profits the most if you don't do a
raw diet? The giant prepared food industry and
the medical and pharmaceutical industry. There
are megabucks in there. I wouldn't be surprised
if some of the negative information you read is
somehow sponsored by one or both of these
industries.

The problem is that even well meaning raw food
proponents can often scare you from doing a raw
diet. I used to be confused by all the
conflicting raw food information out there.

They can't confuse me anymore. I know too much.
I've done my homework and have heard all the
arguments, many times over. It takes a lot of
knowledge, experience and good judgment to be
able to discern truth when it comes to a complex
subject like nutrition. It is very easy to be
scared off by some scientific sounding
information, unless you have a thorough
understanding of raw food nutrition.

In today's email, I'll give you some perspective
and show you how to look at scientific findings.
** With Healthy Skepticism and Common Sense **

** You'll learn some of the techniques they use
to trick you.

** You'll learn how to judge for yourself
whether or not the information is accurate.

*~*~*~*
One of my subscribers forwarded this email to
me. A well-known raw food leader wrote this.
However, I know that this leader does not
recommend that we go 100% raw. In his email
below, he explains the scientific reasons of why
he believes that some cooking is beneficial.

As you might guess, I strongly disagree about
this from a scientific, philosophical and
experiential point of view. He simply used
science to back up his belief systems. But the
problem comes when you don't have the complete
picture. You can totally distort issues when you
don't comprehend the whole. This is how science
can fool you.

Science can distort reality or truth. It's like
Dr. Atkins claiming his diet heavy in bacon,
butter and animal protein is healthy. Studies can
be manipulated, findings can be distorted and
that is why you get all of these scientific
sounding books contradicting themselves about a
certain diet's effectiveness.

There are always studies small enough in scope
that can pretty much lend credence to any
argument. This is because if you focus on only
one aspect of something scientifically you can
get very distorted results. That is why you need
to use common sense and your own experiences
along with a broad understanding of science to be
able to get to the truth of a matter.

The other point is that I know this author feels
that it's easier for most people to stay 80% raw
than 100%. It's a much easier recommendation and
so he may be trying to fit the science to justify
his recommendations of less than 100% raw.

Here are his arguments for eating some cooked
foods and below my reply. I also include some
commentary right after some of his points.

*~*~*~*~*
Here are some of the scientific findings that
support the health benefits of eating quickly
cooked foods compared to relying solely on a raw
foods diet:

(Note RH: Quickly cooking foods still does
severe cellular damage to food. It still destroys
the enzymes and it still creates toxins. The less
you cook it and at lower temperatures the less
damage that is done to the food. But if you
quickly cooked your hand, you'd be in massive
pain. The damage is significant even with quick
cooking. Don't let anyone fool you otherwise.
Cooking kills and destroys the integrity of the
food.)

More Carotenoids: Carotenoids are usually
hooked together with proteins or locked into
their own crystal- like structure when found in
their natural state. Heating helps break down
these structures and free carotenoids for
digestion and absorption into our cells. The
release of carotenoids through cooking can be
measured. In carrots, for example, about 40% more
carotenoids are released and made available
through cooking.

More Lycopene: This phytonutrient, which is
concentrated in tomatoes, is made more readily
available to the body after tomatoes are cooked.

More Sulfur-containing Phytonutrients: Lightly
cooking onions and garlic can help convert some
of the less beneficial sulfur-containing
phytonutrients into more beneficial ones and can
increase the variety of sulfur-containing
phytonutrients that are available to our cells.

(RH: The people with the highest antioxidant and
phytonutrients levels are long-term 100% raw
foodists. There are tests now that can determine
your antioxidant levels and the people with the
best results by far are 100% raw foodists.
Cooking would not improve those results in my
opinion.)

Fewer Alkaloids: The alkaloid content of
nightshades is problematic for some individuals.
Cooking can lower the alkaloid content by as much
as 40 to 50%.

(RH: The body can handle toxins. Most of the
toxins we deal with are ones created in our own
bodies by the breakdown of dead cells. There are
small levels of toxins even in raw foods. But
cooking creates many more toxins than what is in
the food naturally. So cooking to remove one
toxin doesn't make an ounce of sense to me.)

Fewer Goitrogens: Although research studies are
limited in this area, cooking does seem to reduce
goitrogens. These compounds can cause enlargement
of the thyroid glands in people who are
susceptible to goiters.

Fewer Oxalates: Cooking can help reduce the
oxalates found in vegetables by 5 to 15%.
Although this reduction is a small one, it may
still be beneficial for individuals needing to
restrict their oxalate intake. Boiling is the
best cooking method when there is concern about
the oxalate content of vegetables because direct
contact between the vegetable and the water helps
to leach oxalates out of the vegetable and into
the water.

Less Salmonella and E. coli bacteria: These
bacteria are sometimes found on raw sprouts
because they are grown under warm and humid
conditions. This is true whether they are grown
commercially or in the home. The heat from
cooking can help destroy the bacteria in sprouts
as well as any other types of bacteria that can
be found on some vegetables.

(Note RH: Without bacteria, we couldn't survive.
Vitamin B12 is created by bacteria and not by
animals. While killing so called bad bacteria we
have to be careful not to kill good bacteria as
well.

Personally, I don't recommend making sprouts a
major component of your diet anyway. They tend to
be quite high in toxins. This is nature's way of
insuring that these sprouts survive to become
full-grown plants. If you were out in the jungle,
you could never even find enough sprouts to make
a meal out of them. The sprout eaters are
definitely doing something that wouldn't happen
in nature. I haven't heard of chimpanzees making
sprouts a major component of their diet.)

Cooking can also aid in the digestion of
vegetables by breaking down cell walls, a job
your body would have to do if they were not
cooked and you didn't chew thoroughly. Our
digestive system has lost the ability over the
last thousand years to easily digest raw
vegetables.

(Note RH: We probably never had the ability to
digest certain course vegetables like broccoli
and kale at any point in our history as humans.
We also don't have four stomachs to be able to
derive the nutrients from grasses like cows,
sheep, goats, deer, giraffes and other ruminants
can. Bonobos our closest primate relatives eat
only the soft green tips of leaves.

** Do they do it because they lost the ability
to digest the whole leaf?

It's more likely they could never digest
vegetables that were too heavy in cellulose.

Plus bonobos haven't been eating cooked and
unnatural foods in the first place. So the so-
called evolution argument doesn't apply to them.

In my opinion, the theory of evolution doesn't
cut mustard anyway. It sounds good until you
really think it out and realize that it's
virtually impossible. How for instance could we
say that the human eye evolved? It is so complex,
it couldn't happen by chance.

How about a tail for a cat? Did it get all the
bones, muscles and tendons all at once? If not,
how could a partially developed or accidental
start of a tail, help in its survival? There are
many prominent scientists today that logically
dispute the theory of evolution that so many
people take for granted. You can find plenty of
information about this by searching Google for
it. I used to be a blind follower in the Theory
of Evolution, but the more I studied it the less
sense it actually made. There is too much
perfection and mathematical precision in numerous
areas in life to believe all of the universes
happened by chance. There was definitely an
intelligence behind it in my opinion.)

I've included more commentary below.

*~*~*~*~*

RH:
First of all, if we need to cook a food to eat
it, that means it isn't a food designed for human
consumption. Everyone always tells us how good
and nutritious broccoli is for us. Even though it
is high in nutrients, it's also very hard to
digest in its raw state. We can't break down the
cellulose to extract most of the nutrients.

Therefore, some people would theorize that we
should cook it to release the nutrients. Other
people, like me would assume that we shouldn't be
eating raw broccoli in the first place. At least
we shouldn't eat it and expect to get a high
source of nutrients. Many people eating
cruciferous vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower
and kale get gas after eating these foods raw.
That should be telling them something.

All animals get all the nutrients they need by
eating a 100% raw diet. They don't eat a food
because it is high in nutrients, they eat the
foods that they are attracted to and that taste
best to them. Just because something is raw
doesn't mean we should eat it, or that it is good
for us. Therefore, there is no nutritional need
to eat a food that we wouldn't eat in the raw
state. What do you think we ate before the
harnessing of fire? All raw foods.

The only exception would be if we didn't have
access to enough raw foods to meet all of our
nutrient needs. Then you might have to cook some
foods just to survive. But don't think you would
thrive by doing that.

Secondly, he didn't mention all the different
kinds of toxins created in the cooking process.
Even if you can get some more of some kinds of
nutrients, that doesn't help when at the same
time you create a dramatically increased toxic
load. Therefore, you trade more of "some kind" of
nutrients for increased toxins. Why doesn't he
mention that in his argument? You see how we are
getting an incomplete picture and partial
science, to justify an argument.

The cooking process also decreases the levels of
many other nutrients. So you may get more
lycopene but less vitamin A or C for instance.
Proteins become coagulated and unusable because
the body can't break them down. Fats become
carcinogenic and turn into transfats, which raise
your cholesterol levels. From 20 to 80% of the
vitamin content of raw foods is destroyed in the
cooking process. Plant minerals change from the
organic and useable form to the inorganic and
unusable form by cooking them.

The food goes from being alive to being dead.
There is a strong vibrational difference in the
food. Dr. Gabriel Cousens mentions the Subtle
Organizing Energy Fields (SOEF) of raw foods.
There is evidence showing these organizing energy
fields are destroyed in the cooking process.
Kirlian Photography shows dramatically diminished
energy fields around cooked foods versus the same
food in it's raw state. There are many things
that cooking damages and of which science may not
be able to detect.

It's the difference between drinking fresh
squeezed orange juice versus, pasteurized juice
in a carton. You can taste and feel the
difference. It is like night and day. I remember
the first time I had fresh squeezed orange juice
as a kid; it had such a powerful vibration to it.
I felt it tingle in my mouth and it tasted so
much better than the cooked orange juice I drank
from a carton.

Then finally, there is the question of how much
of a nutrient is the right level. Maybe the level
of lycopene in raw tomatoes is the ideal quantity
for humans. Too much of certain nutrients can
create a toxic overload, as the human body has a
limit as to how many nutrients it can absorb at
any one time.

So you see what one thinks is important depends
on perspective and philosophy. Some scientist and
doctors will often try to use some facts and
ignore other very important facts. Science can
give a distorted view of reality.

Too much belief is put into science, there
should be some healthy skepticism with anything
you read. (Including what I am writing you here
today.) The fact is that we are the only beings
on the planet that cook our foods.

I also know from personal experience that even
cooking small percentages of my diet gives me
less than ideal results. You could give me all
the science you wanted, but I know from my own
experience that 100% raw is the way to go.

I've heard the same from many other people who
for years ate a high percentage raw diet only to
find dramatic and sustained improvements in their
health by staying 100% raw. I never met anyone
who switched to a 100% raw diet who didn't feel
the results were better than while still eating a
cooked food diet.

Even the times I failed at maintaining 100% raw,
I still knew it was giving me better results than
eating cooked food. But I wasn't doing the diet
correctly to maintain it long term. This is why
it could save you lots of wasted energy, time and
money to get expert guidance on doing an Optimal
Raw Food Diet.

My Raw Food Diet Success Society at
http://www.HowToGoRaw.com will give you the
expert support and resources you need to succeed
at going 100% raw and love it.

To Your Radiant Health, Happiness and Fitness,
Roger Haeske


P.S. I've added a new and very valuable bonus
for people who join the http://www.HowToGoRaw.com
website. All members now have access to a monthly
20-minute telephone coaching session.

This used to be available only for yearly
subscribers, but now it's available for all paid
members. I haven't updated the website yet with
this new information, but it applies as of this
email for all quarterly and yearly members.

http://www.power.superbeing.com
http://www.ThinkAndGoRaw.com
http://www.HowToGoRaw.com
http://www.lightning.superbeing.com

Living Nutrition Raw Food Lifestyle Magazine and Books
http://tinyurl.com/55wgp

http://www.SuperbeingDiet.com
http://www.Superbeing.com

This article is protected by copyright.

© 2005, Roger Haeske, All rights reserved

This autoresponder email was sent by AutoResponse Plus. Use the link below to discover the most advanced email broadcast and autoresponder system available. Pay only one low price, forget the monthly fees.

http://tinyurl.com/66gad
- posted by Roger Haeske @ 4:19 PM