In regards to eating meat

[Monica]

With respect to raw food in general, I have to side with the Chinese view... from an energetic standpoint the body should have a fire in the belly. Too much cold food weakens the energetic system.

That's true, but the element of fire can be obtained in other ways besides cooking. Those on a high-raw vegan diet often gravitate towards yoga, chi-kung, and other ways of generating heat in the body. Many also gravitate towards tropical or sub-tropical climates, simply because there is an abundance of fresh, raw fruits and veggies.

The Essene Gospel also addressed this, by advocating letting the 'angel of sunlight' warm the food with life-force.

Earlier you mentioned grains causing health problems for some people. Those who can't tolerate cooked wheat can usually tolerate sprouted, low-temp-baked wheat just fine.

It's interesting that Jesus was advocating sprouted wheat 2000+ years ago, and it's now been shown that the nutrient content of grains is multiplied manyfold when the grain is sprouted.

Now I understand that "raw" can supposedly mean up to 120 degrees or so... but c'mon isn't that just confusing? I don't think the average person thinks of that as "raw". Why not say "lightly cooked"?

In the context of the 'raw' or 'living' diet the demarcation is whether there is still enzymatic activity. Enzymes are destroyed at temps higher than around 120. (There's some dispute about the exact temp, but somewhere around there.)

Yes, I think this is what they are referring to. I also see how this can be turned on its head to reinforce a closed belief system.

Very true.

The convincing. Now- I do have some concern that there are individuals out there who may be genetically programmed to consume meat- but who skip right to vegetarianism. If so- could there be a negative effect because the body was not brought through the proper stages? I wouldn't be surprised.

I suppose so. There are probably many factors at play here, such as the reason the person decided to go veg, how toxic they are, whether they replace the meat with a healthy diet, etc.

On the other hand, there are known negative effects of continuing to eat hamburgers and other junk food...

But there is the flip side of that, too. Actually one of my very first patients was a little boy with horrible eczema whose mother was raising as vegan. She was so convinced of the "rightness" of veganism that she was really unwilling to hear that it may not be the best choice for him. Of course, the little boy's condition never improved and eventually I stopped hearing from her. So I suppose that experience affects my bias.

I can see how that experience affected your view.

I'm not so sure that there can be any certainty that lack of meat was the cause or even a contributing factor, though. My guess is that lack of essential fatty acids is a more likely culprit.

When I was having unusual health problems years ago, and after consulting with MDs, NDs, homeopaths, acupuncturists, etc. all to no avail, I finally let a macrobiotic nutritional counselor convince me to eat meat again. (This shows the level of desperation I had reached!) He told me I lacked 'chi' or 'digestive fire' and needed meat.

It was extremely difficult for me. After having been a vegetarian for about 15 years, I dutifully cooked organic chicken and salmon, smothered it in hot salsa, and got it down.

I ate it every day for about a year.

Guess what - it didn't help my health problems at all! I mean not even a little.

So I finally decided to be true to my vegetarian self and quit eating the meat, since it didn't help anyway.

Later, I did find the solution to the problems, and it had nothing to do with meat.

But as for vegetarians being themselves- no I never try to convince them to eat meat or anything like that. But if not eating meat means consumption of mass amounts of GMO wheat, corn, and soy, then from a health standpoint I believe they would probably be better off eating meat.

That's a tossup, since the meat has all the hormones, concentrated pesticides, etc.

(I know it is not an either/or thing... but how does one convey this to another who is stuck in either/or thinking?)

I dunno.

That's not what I meant. I meant a disservice of the self to the self from a person going cold-turkey (from anything really) when their body is not sufficiently prepared. Now if you were out there proclaiming vegetarianism as a one-size-fits-all solution or out of a spiritual mandate, then yes I think that would be a disservice.

Even if I did do that (which I don't), people can still make their own choices. No one is forced to 'go cold turkey' unless they allow themselves to be.

Sure... and when you use the word transition then I really take no issue to that. Any other discussion from me beyond that is just more on a pragmatic level.

For me, it's a philosophical thing, at least in this discussion.

For example, I think an overall message about shifting to more of a sea-based diet addresses a much broader, more holistic view, of the issue. And if those researchers are right about the algae taking away meat cravings... then this will eventually and naturally lead toward less consumption of sea animals as well.

I agree that that might be an excellent transition.

But when you speak of the "population" I wonder if you just mean Americans? Because the majority of the world is still in a state where they need to eat whatever they can in order to survive. For wide swaths of certain landlocked areas, I think the promotion of insect consumption would be a very wise move, for example. So this is why I won't get behind the idea that eating "animals" is the problem.

Other than philosophical ideals of what may happen eventually, yes, I'm primarily referring to the US and other industrialized nations that have large factory farming meat industries.