Fruitarianism ♥

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Sapphirez

I don't get why you keep repeating things I have fairly discredited or showed to be illogical. like that protein is necessary for the body when it is ONLY amino acids that are.

You get amino acids by eating protein.

which is Did the castle brick analogy really not make sense The castle is the protein, the building blocks or bricks of it are the amino acids. If you need a few bricks you don't want to take the whole castle because then you have to take it entirely apart just to get the few bricks you need, and that is just a lot of unnecessary work that will hurt you for no good reason, which is what high protein foods do to an even greater extent than taking down a castle would if you make them a mainstay of your diet. It is that simple. The body Does Not want proteins.

Think of it this way. A protein is like a pallet of bricks. The bricks are amino acids. You give that pallet of bricks to the builders who take the palate (pun intended) apart and use the bricks to build your house.

just like it does not want complex starches.. it wants simple sugars, and it wants amino acids, and amino acids are available in all sorts of other food so why would you eat a castle that the body has to break down into amino acids when you can just get the amino acids in an already available state in fresh raw foods that don't even need to be cooked?

We get amino acids form protein in food.


For vegans, protein food sources also contain starch.


The healthiest, longest living populations on earth have starch staple diets.

This is science and sense, if you don't accept it then it is proof that you are just interested in repeating the same mainstream story you decided to believe from whatever sources you were exposed to however long ago.

I'm all over the science, but people should double check what I say with leading vegan doctors and dietitians who have a proven track record.

but it would do you some good to gain new insight and information, especially since you seem to have crowned yourself the nutrition guru when you are in fact the one going around giving people incomplete and sometimes inaccurate or incorrect information.

I tell people to steer clear of diet gurus, fake online doctors, and anyone who sells supplements, and encourage people to seek information from qualified professionals. There are many vegan advocates who are well qualified and have stellar track records such as these.



I generally say all the same things as these esteemed individuals in the vegan context. I don't agree with any of them on 100% of everything, but what they have to say about nutrition is excellent.

I am here for the truth. just because you believed it one day and still want to, doesn't mean it is factual or beneficial to you or anyone that you keep believing it.

The people I linked above are reliable enough to be called 'truth'.

it's just so pointless and such a waste because you could be a great influence if you were open to investing yourself into learning the actual truths of the human body and its union with food. I feel sad that I spent so much of my time thinking that you were approaching this with an open mind and everything, but you haven't been.

Of course I am open minded and repeatedly point out that there are so many ways to get good to optimum nutrition. I'm not the one saying don't eat this, only eat that, and making nutritional options impossibly restrictive.

Seriously most of what you say, here and your advice to vegans or vegetarians elsewhere on the forum, is just repeated misinformation that most people would find by googling mainstream accepted belief systems about nutrition. it isn't the reality of the facts.

I give out good nutritional information which people should double check against reliable qualified sources such as the 20 I have linked above.

You have some more to learn about the acid/alkaline action of the body and foods, but I'm afraid to correct you or elaborate on the things I've tried to tell you because it hurts to be ignored and information (that you could verify if you cared to or wanted to) repeatedly being disregarded, and disagreed with despite the truth being available if you search for it or use your own mind to see the sense of it. but it seems you are invested in thinking the way you currently do. you should be more sensitive to intruding on others' posts and threads if they are trying to learn and grow more with new information though if you're not there for the same reason. it's unfair

Just because somebody goes to school for years doesn't mean they actually get the privilege of learning the truth. or that they'll be able to garner what the best use of the knowledge is if they do learn truth.. especially when it comes to health. although the way the body works is good to learn and many of the facts about it cannot be faked like some other "health" teachings are. but then again they don't have that much information available and mainstream medicine and science is only starting to place more emphasis on the lymphatic system, which is perhaps the most important system to understand in those fields.. There is a lot of intricate stuff to learn, yet it also comes down to simplistic terms, which you don't need to go to years of schooling to learn and understand. And that is the two sides of chemistry. acid and alkaline. acid tears down and that is what most disease results from. and beans or most legumes are generally acidic actually. and cooked food in general is acidic. and you can eat all the raw foods you want, but if you keep pouring acid into the system with other foods, well you won't be able to put the fire out with them.. acidic and dead foods stagnate the lymphatic system and fluid. so that and the organs break down and you can eat more raw foods, but if you continuously keep eating acidic foods they're not gonna work. and vegetables don't have the detoxifying lymph stimulating power that fruits do.

The acidic body narrative is based on the 'ash' (waste product from cellular metabolism). What I said about different PH of ash is accurate enough, and there are not people who dispute that. What you are saying is hoopla, but I still encourage and 'alkaline diet' in practice because it means eating lots of fruit and veg.


If you look at the people who made the 'acidic body' rhetoric popular, such as "DR" Robert Young, you also find they have questionable credentials. Everyone with proper credentials dispels acidic diet nonsense. When people double check what I say, they will find out that I learned what I say from properly qualified people. If you are irrationally adverse to all acid forming food, you make it exceedingly difficult and practically impossible to acquire adequate protein from plant foods and supplementation - so again, your ideas are simply not workable IRL.

not if you know what you're doing and just try to restrict the foods that create too many unnecessary toxins and taxation on the body. Consuming foods that do what I just said does not make for a sustainable long healthy life, it is what contributes to disease and disorder. I'm sorry if this is impossible for you to understand given your investment in believing certain information because of your job or career. but you can help more people by learning the truth of what the foods you're recommending for them actually do to the body.


Perhaps to continue this discussion, since we are getting nowhere the way it's going, we could examine foods one by one to see what impact they really have on the body. I love to know and study about the benefit of foods too, believe me, I've done this and would like to do it more even if I am aware that there are other reasons to abstain from eating said food.. I mean I started cataloging foods with different colored pretty glitter pens in a notebook writing down their nutrition content so I could compare them and try to put together a single meal or even smoothie to try and get the daily requirement of nutrients with vegan ingredients. and the foods I wrote down included foods I've probably told you are not worth eating.. I mean I didn't know what I understand now about the starch content or cooking etc. of these foods, but still since eating raw isn't the most practical or easy to do and I am just curious by nature, I'd like to learn more about a variety of foods. but fi we do this, if you want to, you have to agree to be open about what other things we can find out about the foods or processing of them, whether beneficial or detrimental to the diet and human consuming them. If you're in agreeance, any other guidelines or details you want to suggest are welcome, and would you want to start with some letter A foods?

Basically, there is no 'all good', and there is always 'good and bad', so what we aim for is balanced healthy nutrition form whole 'unprocessed' food. Restrictions can be healthy in terms of restricting soft drinks, alcohol and the gamut of processed junk, and restricting meat from the diet is often health motivated. Too many restrictions is bad though, and I think the borderline is where you need supplements to ameliorate dietary restriction. For example restricting animal products entirely necessitates b12 supplementation, and makes some other nutrients difficult to obtain, but that's OK, it's what I'd consider 'borderline' but still very healthy, but then you say no starchy food, no protein dense food, no cooking, and so on, and hold that this is in the best interests of a healthy life when in fact it would be of tremendous detriment.

[Sapphirez]

so is that your way of saying you're not interested in trying to understand food better with me?

[Sapphirez]

Originally Posted by Gem

You get amino acids by eating protein.



Think of it this way. A protein is like a pallet of bricks. The bricks are amino acids. You give that pallet of bricks to the builders who take the palate (pun intended) apart and use the bricks to build your house.


We get amino acids form protein in food.

Amino acids are present in fresh produce, "protein" doesn't need to enter the equation, it just complicates and unnecessarily acidifies the situation

why would you give someone a pallet when they only need a brick?

I'm all over the science, but people should double check what I say with leading vegan doctors and dietitians who have a proven track record.

I doubt any of your examples are on part with how many people and the intensity of cases Robert Morse has healed, whether you want to put Dr. in front of his name or not, or even it bothers you that he doesn't have mainstream degrees from schools that teach people erroneous information that is potentially dangerous. You spent all of ten minutes was it? listening to him and you did so with a closed mind and heart to what he was saying. I think that anybody who is willing and wishing to learn who hears his messages and information will have no choice but to agree, because he just makes sense and shares useful information. He understands the body and the scientific reality of chemistry and how the body works along with food, and I don't know of any others who are sharing the same important information, especially not for free

I tell people to steer clear of diet gurus, fake online doctors, and anyone who sells supplements, and encourage people to seek information from qualified professionals. There are many vegan advocates who are well qualified and have stellar track records such as these.

having a mainstream degree or education, even if it is more nature-based than what' is popular or common these days, does not automatically make somebody legitimate, and even if they are it doesn't mean that they understand the body that well or actually have the best advice. if they tell vegans to supplement with silly vitamins and stuff they probably don't know what they're talking about. if they emphasize protein when protein in actuality has nothing to do with ideal human nutrition or nourishment, one should be weary listening to them. Again though this is a thread about Fruitarianism so which doctors on your list that you're posting in my thread are advocates of that or know anything about it? Why do you insist on trying to highjack my thread about a specific topic to spout off the same misinformation that you're not interested in seeing through and learning the truth about? It's just getting kind of weird now and very selfish and inconsiderate on your part because I have played along with you but you were never here to learn anything were you?

Of course I am open minded and repeatedly point out that there are so many ways to get good to optimum nutrition. I'm not the one saying don't eat this, only eat that, and making nutritional options impossibly restrictive.

The point is that even the cleanest seeming diets which are not raw end up killing people at a relatively young age, if you consider that the human lifespan needn't be less than 100 on average, and I think humans are capable of living much longer and more healthfully. So the point is that a lot of things that people *think* they are supposed to or can eat, or actually things that are hurting them and killing them quicker because they destroy the body. You are completely closed off to learning and understanding the truth about certain foods that you want to believe are great to eat. You don't want to understand how the human body works and what foods it appreciates and which are detrimental to it overall. That is the point, so no you're not being open-minded to any new information and concepts

The acidic body narrative is based on the 'ash' (waste product from cellular metabolism). What I said about different PH of ash is accurate enough, and there are not people who dispute that. What you are saying is hoopla, but I still encourage and 'alkaline diet' in practice because it means eating lots of fruit and veg.

acid ash destroys and alkaline ash harmonizes, essentially. it's strange that you don't want to shed consciousness on the deeper truth about raw produce being alkalizing and instead just say that they're good just cuz they are produce, and that is just more mainstream thinking and failure to understand food at a deeper level, which is also a main point and goal of my thread here. the only hoopla going on is the hoola hooplin you keep doing with your own misguided misinformation at the expense of being open to accepting or understanding anything new

If you look at the people who made the 'acidic body' rhetoric popular, such as "DR" Robert Young, you also find they have questionable credentials. Everyone with proper credentials dispels acidic diet nonsense. When people double check what I say, they will find out that I learned what I say from properly qualified people. If you are irrationally adverse to all acid forming food, you make it exceedingly difficult and practically impossible to acquire adequate protein from plant foods and supplementation - so again, your ideas are simply not workable IRL.

Oh My Goodness gracious great balls of exasperation.. what part of your logic makes you actually think that eating acid is good or that the body wants us to add extra acid to it? And humans don't need very much protein. All foods have amino acids, right? The body ONLY wants amino acids, it doesn't even know what protein Is except something that is difficultly holding its amino acids that it has to break down to get them out. it is very sad that you theorize that someone should eat acidifying foods just to meet your imaginary protein threshold holy bajeezus

Basically, there is no 'all good', and there is always 'good and bad', so what we aim for is balanced healthy nutrition form whole 'unprocessed' food. Restrictions can be healthy in terms of restricting soft drinks, alcohol and the gamut of processed junk, and restricting meat from the diet is often health motivated. Too many restrictions is bad though, and I think the borderline is where you need supplements to ameliorate dietary restriction. For example restricting animal products entirely necessitates b12 supplementation, and makes some other nutrients difficult to obtain, but that's OK, it's what I'd consider 'borderline' but still very healthy, but then you say no starchy food, no protein dense food, no cooking, and so on, and hold that this is in the best interests of a healthy life when in fact it would be of tremendous detriment.

How would you know how good and bad foods are if when asked to investigate and explore the reality of the situation you simply chose to ignore my request? I'm guessing you've not done this on your own already so it appears you are just closed off to learning in more depth about foods, which is what your problem is because you keep telling people information that will end up hurting them. There is a lack of logic and sensibility to what you keep insisting and what you keep repeating is just what anyone can find from mainstream sources who also don't know what they're talking about and aren't willing to find the actual truth. myths about protein and b12 and food needing to be cooked are getting really tired and hurting people. No animal elsewhere in the kingdom eats cooked food and when they do they get sick because it doesn't make any sense and distorts nature and the integrity of the divine food as the Earth provided it. and remember, some of the biggest and strongest animals don't eat "protein" so how did they get that way?

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Sapphirez

Amino acids are present in fresh produce, "protein" doesn't need to enter the equation, it just complicates and unnecessarily acidifies the situation

why would you give someone a pallet when they only need a brick?

We get the amino acids from eating protein in food.

I doubt any of your examples are on part with how many people and the intensity of cases Robert Morse has healed, whether you want to put Dr. in front of his name or not, or even it bothers you that he doesn't have mainstream degrees from schools that teach people erroneous information that is potentially dangerous.

The doctors I linked have stellar track records in successfully treating a wide range of ailments and maladies through incorporating a healthy diet.

You spent all of ten minutes was it? listening to him and you did so with a closed mind and heart to what he was saying.

Morse dishonestly presents himself as a doctor when he isn't, so I don't trust him.

I think that anybody who is willing and wishing to learn who hears his messages and information will have no choice but to agree, because he just makes sense and shares useful information. He understands the body and the scientific reality of chemistry and how the body works along with food, and I don't know of any others who are sharing the same important information, especially not for free



having a mainstream degree or education, even if it is more nature-based than what' is popular or common these days, does not automatically make somebody legitimate, and even if they are it doesn't mean that they understand the body that well or actually have the best advice.

You have be abreast of the information, and look across the body of literature. I usually only refer to metastudies that compile a large body of research, or I listen to qualified people who explain it layman terms. Most of my application is with sports nutrition and weight loss, not so much epidemiology.

if they tell vegans to supplement with silly vitamins and stuff they probably don't know what they're talking about.

We'd generally assist vegans with vegan food plans which include adequate quantities of nutrients according to their respective lifestyles. Once a comprehensive nutritional profile is established, their nutrition can be optimised with supplements. Since b12 is only available from animal products, vegans need to supplement b12 somehow. B12 supplementation would ideally be via b12 fortified food rather than tablets. Sometimes, often, it is necessary to supplement other nutrients, but it is better if people can get these from whole food.

This is same way of approaching anyone's diet, vegan or not, except animal product consumers don't typically need B12 supplementation if their overall nutritional profile is pretty much complete. If their overall nutrition is mediocre to poor, they may have problems with b12 absorption because nutriants work symbiotically. After their nutrient intake is improved, they might consider other supplementation depending of their respective deficiencies.

if they emphasize protein when protein in actuality has nothing to do with ideal human nutrition or nourishment,

Incorrect.

one should be weary listening to them.

Protein is the first consideration in anyone's diet plan, because it is the most important macronutrient to consider when establishing caloric intake. Once the caloric intake of protein is established, fat and carbs can be manipulated according to personal preferences to make up the remainder of their caloric requirements. We can then build a micronutirent profile on that foundation. After the individual has incorporated that into daily life, we might consider supplementing any shortfalls. In this way, they have sustainable, life long healthy eating most suited to their individual lifestyle.

Again though this is a thread about Fruitarianism so which doctors on your list that you're posting in my thread are advocates of that or know anything about it?

There are no doctors who advocate it.

Why do you insist on trying to highjack my thread about a specific topic to spout off the same misinformation that you're not interested in seeing through and learning the truth about?


It's just getting kind of weird now and very selfish and inconsiderate on your part because I have played along with you but you were never here to learn anything were you?


The point is that even the cleanest seeming diets which are not raw end up killing people at a relatively young age, if you consider that the human lifespan needn't be less than 100 on average, and I think humans are capable of living much longer and more healthfully.


So the point is that a lot of things that people *think* they are supposed to or can eat, or actually things that are hurting them and killing them quicker because they destroy the body. You are completely closed off to learning and understanding the truth about certain foods that you want to believe are great to eat. You don't want to understand how the human body works and what foods it appreciates and which are detrimental to it overall. That is the point, so no you're not being open-minded to any new information and concepts


acid ash destroys and alkaline ash harmonizes, essentially. it's strange that you don't want to shed consciousness on the deeper truth about raw produce being alkalizing and instead just say that they're good just cuz they are produce, and that is just more mainstream thinking and failure to understand food at a deeper level, which is also a main point and goal of my thread here. the only hoopla going on is the hoola hooplin you keep doing with your own misguided misinformation at the expense of being open to accepting or understanding anything new

On the contrary, I suggest eating lots of raw food, salads and such, and even if a person wanted to go all raw, well ok, difficult, but possible - but all raw and no protein and no complex carbs, and so on? That can't work.

Oh My Goodness gracious great balls of exasperation.. what part of your logic makes you actually think that eating acid is good or that the body wants us to add extra acid to it? And humans don't need very much protein. All foods have amino acids, right? The body ONLY wants amino acids, it doesn't even know what protein Is except something that is difficultly holding its amino acids that it has to break down to get them out. it is very sad that you theorize that someone should eat acidifying foods just to meet your imaginary protein threshold holy bajeezus.

Amino acids come from dietary protein. That's simply true and there's no way around it. If a person does not consume adequate protein they run into problems, starting with muscle atrophy, and then other tissue degeneration. Most food has protein in it, but many foods are very low in protein. For vegans, adequate protein sources are legumes/grains, maybe some nuts. Legumes, grains and nuts comes with starchy carbs, and nuts come with a high fat content. The 'acidic body' thing is hocum, as any dietitian vegan or otherwise will attest to. Please check that out.



Your ideas won't work in practice, so please refer to validly qualified dietitians, medics and biochemists for your information.

How would you know how good and bad foods are if when asked to investigate and explore

the reality of the situation you simply chose to ignore my request



I'm guessing you've not done this on your own already so it appears you are just closed off to learning in more depth about foods, which is what your problem is because you keep telling people information that will end up hurting them.

People should double check any information I provide against properly qualified information.

There is a lack of logic and sensibility to what you keep insisting and what you keep repeating is just what anyone can find from mainstream sources who also don't know what they're talking about and aren't willing to find the actual truth. myths about protein and b12 and food needing to be cooked are getting really tired and hurting people. No animal elsewhere in the kingdom eats cooked food and when they do they get sick because it doesn't make any sense and distorts nature and the integrity of the divine food as the Earth provided it. and remember, some of the biggest and strongest animals don't eat "protein" so how did they get that way?

[Gem]

I'm just putting this video in this thread because it talks about the negative aspects of fructose. The narrator, Dr Fung, is properly qualified doctor who incorporates nutrition into his treatment plans. I have watched a number of his lectures, and although I find some aspects of his narrative questionable, he is dropping the knowledge in a fair, reasonably balanced way.


I'm not posting the video to support a 'fructose is bad' attitude of anything like that, and the video is somewhat overly simplistic in that regard - even though the simplistic information is correct. I'm posting the video to point out that the science is a complex discourse and two people can be 'right' without entirely agreeing on the nuances. Much of what has been said about fructose on this thread is a glorification of that particular sugar molecule coupled with the denigration of the glucose molecule (which is ludicrous).



By posting this video I basically want to express that metabolism is complex beyond reckoning, that all 'good food' has a 'bad side' as well...



Enjoy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvlXa9jW3kE

[Sapphirez]

before I watch, is it about eating fructose in the form of raw organic fruit, or is it about eating adulterated sugar such as high fructose corn syrup or its lesser evil still mutated processed cousins?

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Sapphirez

before I watch, is it about eating fructose in the form of raw organic fruit, or is it about eating adulterated sugar such as high fructose corn syrup or its lesser evil still mutated processed cousins?

It's an overly simplistic description of the fructose molecule's metabolic pathway. I'm pretty sure that implicates fruit.

[Gem]

I stumbled across this talk which is a more detailed narrative on fruit, and I'm posting it because it doesn't demonise fruit or glorify fruit. It is a marvelous, funny presentation and fair enough nutritional info. Be aware that speakers at this conference represent a 'low carb' agenda and you can expect that to influence the weight of bias.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6LL92Zs5L0

[Gem]

An excellent video on fructose metabolism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHmAARLd4yE


An excellent video on glucose metabolism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDK-SoWV61w

[Sapphirez]

I don't think that those links are accurate interpretations of what effect fruit has on the body. I looked at them but they don't seem to know the actual reality so I wouldn't rely on them for real information. I'm afraid to look at too much of them, but do they talk about the process of diffusion, and if you do find them to be based in reality, what is the summary of each link you provided as you understand it?

Fructose as a refined substance and fruit are completely different in the effect they have on the body, and also even the blood sugar. Eating ample fruit can help regulate or lower blood sugar, whereas even vegetables and of course especially starchy foods have troublesome effects on its right? Not that blood sugar is the only marker or indicator of health, but it is definitely worth noting that consuming raw whole fresh fruit even with its crazy 'sugar content' does not harass blood sugar levels and instead can have a very positive impact on balancing them properly. I hope you're not actually comparing fruit fructose to other mutated sources though