Conventional attitudes regard nutrition as being almost exclusively involved with foods and feeding, but this is only one facet of the nutritional scene (albeit an important one). At the outset it is prudent to define what nutrition is and, in view of the many misconceptions, what nutrition is not.
Nutrition Is the Sum of All Processes That Promote Growth and Function
Nutrition does not mean food only. Nutrition is the sum of all the processes that supply, develop and sustain an organism’s faculties and functions at the optimal level of existence. In short, nutrition is the total of all that supplies life’s needs. It embraces all requirements for perfect health and supplying these requirements constitutes nutrition.
Nutrition Is Modified By the Entire Spectrum of Life Conditions and Activities
The sum of nutritional processes adds up to our health quotient; that is, our state of health equals the total of the nutritional processes that created it.
Anything that modifies nutrition or the processes of supply and usage also modifies health. Everything we get involved in or do in all spheres of life affects in some way our nutritive disposition, either for the better, for the worse or equivalently.
With respect to foods and feeding, we have specific adaptations for acquiring and processing particular foods to meet our nutritive needs. Anything that changes in the whole process affects our nutrition and, consequently, our health.
Because of its importance, we re-emphasize: Nutrition is largely dependent upon our health and, likewise, our health is dependent on nutrition.
Nutrition Involves the Processes of Growth, Development, Supply and Invigoration
Dr. Herbert M. Shelton has defined nutrition as follows:
Perfect nutrition is dependent on perfect organs, perfect functions and normal health. Each is dependent upon and grows out of the other. All processes and functions are interdependent and interact harmoniously for mutual well-being. They cannot be taken apart and categorized. Every aspect of life is but a part of a unified whole.
This idea of interdependence and interaction leads to the principle that the appropriate way to recover and develop strength and vigor is through the activities and processes that give rise to growth. We recover arid develop strength and vigor in the same way that we keep well, in the same way that a babe grows into vigor and adulthood.
The powers and forces that brought us into being, that sustain us in existence, that cause us to grow through all the phases of life to manhood and womanhood, are sufficient to restore us if health becomes impaired.
Food Is An Element Of Nutrition
As stated earlier, food constitutes only a part of the needs of life. It constitutes some of the raw materials which become part of the overall nutritive processes. When the body receives food, it breaks it down mechanically and chemically into components which can be absorbed and synthesized by the organism into special substances to meet the special needs of the organism.
Food Is an Inert Substance—Merely Raw Materials
Many people believe that foods have different actions in the body. However, this is erroneous. Foods do not act in the body but are, instead, acted upon by the body. To be appropriated the food must lose all its character. It is mechanically crushed, comminuted and mixed with digestive fluids, then chemically reduced to basic components for absorption, synthesis and use.
Let us again review nutrition as Dr. Shelton has expressed it in yet another definition:
Nutrition is a vital process carried on only by a living organism. It is a process of growth, development and invigoration. To eat good food and enough of it, to drink pure water and breathe pure air, in and of themselves, are very desirable, but something more is needed in order to acquire health, strength and vigor. Nutrition is dependent on function. We can have better nutritive function only when we have a capacity for better nutrition.
Food is of value only in its physiological connections with air, water, sunshine, rest and sleep, exercise or activity, cleanliness and wholesome mental and moral influences—in short, all the natural or normal circumstances which we know to be necessary for the preservation of health.
What Dr. Shelton is saying is but a reiteration of what has been emphasized here, that the better your health the better will be your nutrition and the better your nutrition the better will be your health. Every factor and condition of life must be supplied optimally to assure best health.
Again, to highlight its importance, we repeat that food does not use the body or do anything to the body. The body does unto the food and uses it. In creating foods, plant life designed them to be utilized by animals in exchange for a service to the plant. This is symbiosis. Human service to plants is the incidental broadcast of their seeds. Was ever a reward so great for such a small service?
As a nutritionist you must ever keep this in mind: Foods do nothing in the body. They have no powers of cleansing, healing or anything else. Foods have no will or purposes of their own. To be consumed and used is their inherent design.
Food Use Is Subject to the Body’s Ability to Process, Appropriate, Assimilate, Metabolize and Eliminate
A body that is impaired is unable to properly process and use food. To the extent that the impairment causes withdrawal of functional energies from digestive processes, the body is unable to be fed. When the body’s nutritive functions are in any way impaired, and this will usually be evidenced by depressed or lost appetite, make this a standing rule: do not partake of food. Guide clients away from food. Missing a meal or a few meals is most constructive.
If the body is in any abnormal condition, food should not be taken or given. In fever, pain, emotional upset, fatigue, worry, sleeplessness and many other conditions, the body is unable to muster the needed energies for the processes of digestion, appropriation, and assimilation. In such conditions the body does not create the condition of hunger or give rise to appetency.
Food Is But One of Many Needs in Nutrition
Our capacity to receive, process and assimilate food is necessary to the nutritive process. In the absence of functional energies in these areas, feeding results in lowered body energies and the waste of foodstuffs. It is passed on to the bowels and the body is worse off for it.
To appropriately receive, digest and assimilate foods, other physiological needs must also be present. Oxygen, water, digestive fluids, nerve energy and a multitude of other factors and influences must favorably coalesce to effect these processes. Should any impairment in the nutritive faculties exist, the interference may prove insurmountable and result in indigestion.
This leads to this inescapable conclusion which you must ever bear in mind: proper nutrition is dependent upon and is affected by the entire spectrum of the organism’s activities and conditions.
Physiological Criteria Foods Must Meet
Every creature in nature has become adapted to securing and nourishing itself on particular foods. All natural equipment and faculties dispose to this specialization. Humans are not exceptions to this rule. Because we have developed tools using our capabilities and can supply ourselves with an abundance of anything on earth as food does not in any way alter our physiological adaptations and specializations.
Every creature has basic nutritive requirements. Our biology books detail these rather impartially and correctly for animals. But the books and teachings that concern human nutrition do not deal impartially with the subject. Our educational establishment is the captive of our mammoth industrial complex.
This means they prostitute their teachings to cater to the needs of those whose grants support them. Thus, human nutrition as taught in our society is dictated, not by physiological faculties and needs, but by the wishes of those food industries that stand to gain from the miseducation that panders to their products.
Food Adaptations of Various Species
The food specializations of various species are categorized by general designation. Some of these categories are as follows:
- Herbivores (grass and vegetable eaters such as cattle, sheep, goats, deer, horses, rabbits, etc.)
- Graminivores (animals that subsist on grains—birds primarily)
- Insectivores (bats, birds and creatures that subsist on insects)
- Frugivores (fruit-eating animals—primates and anthropoids, humans, orangutans, apes, monkeys, etc.)
- Carnivores (animals that live on the flesh, bone, offal, etc. of other animals—cats, dogs, lions, tigers, wolves, buzzards, hawks, eagles, jackals, etc.)
- Omnivores (animals such as swine (pigs, hogs) that live off a mixed diet of fruits, vegetables, grains, flesh, offal, etc.)
As you’re aware, the bee lives on the nectar of blossoms and flowers and the pollen with which it becomes incidentally contaminated. All the bee’s equipment befit it to seek out flowers, land upon or hover over them, withdraw nectar the flower has secreted especially for the bee, and to return to its hive where it shares its harvest with other bees, the surplus being stored as honey.
The bee is excellently equipped to meet its needs amply in this manner. Humans cannot meet their needs this way. Neither can cattle, horses or pigs. They’re equipped in their own special ways to meet the needs of their adaptations.
As a sidelight on the symbiotic relationship of life, we might note that the flower created the nectar for the bee in exchange for a service. The flower or blossom is a step in the plant’s creation of seeds. Before a seed can be formed, fertilization must take place and to insure this fertilization the bee is enticed by nectar.
Incidental to the taking of nectar the bee contaminates itself with pollen. At the next flower the bee contaminates the flower’s pistil with this pollen. This incidental fertilization is the service the plant induced the bee to perform with the nectar secretion. Who said plants weren’t smart?
Range of Food Processing Capabilities
Humans are endowed with certain natural capacities and limitations in the acquisition, processing and utilization of foods. Human development (which endowed us with our faculties and capabilities) specialized and restricted our equipment and capabilities for food gathering and processing to certain foods just as in the case of other animals. The faculties of most creatures are developed so as to make disposition of surpluses or to survive scarcities. Surpluses are either stored as reserves or are excreted. Redundancies beyond needs and ability to readily excrete founder humans and other animals that are so unwise as to overeat.
In ascertaining the criteria that a food must have to satisfy human needs, we must be cognizant of the capacities and capabilities of the organism as well as the properties of the food.
Food Adaptations of Humans
Humans are classified as frugivores because they have the equipment to harvest and efficiently process only a class of foods called fruits. Humans are not alone in this class. For millions of years humans subsisted solely, exclusively and only on fruits. That is the way it was expressed by Dr. Alan Walker of Johns Hopkins University, an anthropologist who conducted extensive research into the dietary background of humans.
Even though humans have eaten foods outside their dietary adaptations off and on for perhaps hundreds of thousands of years and have eaten some cooked foods for tens of thousands of years, there has been no physiological change that would justify straying from our natural dietary.
Our adaptations are strictly as fruit-eaters as you will see in subsequent lessons.
The Dietary Requirements That Determine Our Ideal Foods
Natural foods for humans must satisfy the following criteria and nutrient needs:
Foods Must Be Non-Toxic
First and foremost the food must be toxin-free. None of the compounds and substances in the food should present a digestive problem. The body must have enzymes adapted to handle every substance within the food. Toxic substances are those which the body cannot use as food. Substances that the body cannot use but which it cannot prevent absorption of (as in alcohol, cholesterol, drugs, etc.) are toxic.
Foods Must Be Edible in the Raw State
The food must be edible in its living or raw state as nature delivers it up for us as food. If we cannot eat our fill of a food in its raw state with relish and make a meal of it that meets all or most of our nutrient needs, then it is not a natural food for humans and should be shunned in favor of foods that do.
Foods Must Have Sensory Appeal
Foods of our adaptation have great sensory appeal. They are a delight to the eye, their aromas tantalize the sense of smell and their substance is an unqualified gustatory delight.
Foods Must Be Digested Easily When Eaten Alone or Properly Combined
Foods of human adaptation undergo practically no digestion in the stomach and humans can absorb the chyme and chyle of their natural foods with very little chemical elaboration in the stomach and small intestine.
Foods Must Be Digested Efficiently
While ease of digestion necessarily also implies efficiency of digestion, this entry relates to another aspect of efficiency. That which is eaten represents a certain amount of energy potential. To derive this energy from food, the body must expend energy to obtain it. The ratio of energy obtained relative to energy expenditure determines the ratio of efficiency.
For instance, we spend a mere 30 calories of energy in the process of appropriation, chewing, absorbing, transporting and assimilating 400 calories of watermelon. On the other hand, we may spend 280 calories in the digesting meat to obtain 400 calories. The efficiency with which we handle foods with monosaccharides versus the inefficiency with which we handle protein foods indicates most emphatically the types of food to which we are naturally adapted.
In processing food for use, we expend two kinds of energy. We expend metabolic energy, which is the chemical and mechanical energies expended, and we expend nerve energy. For instance, we use very little nerve energy in digesting watermelon. But, in processing foods to which we are not biologically adapted, an enormous expenditure of nerve energy is occasioned.
Meats may cause nervous exhaustion due to the body’s frenzied activities in dealing with proteins, uric acids and other toxic substances in them. Though we may feel exhilarated while expending nervous energy just as we feel “a pick-me-up” when taking coffee (which really drains nerve energy), the stimulation occasioned by eating unsuitable foods such as meat is an indication of the inefficiency with which the body handles it.
Foods Must Have Protein Adequacy
Our natural foods must supply us with our protein requirements of about 25 grams daily. The less protein eaten down to the point of adequacy, the better. Protein is taken into the body for replenishing amino acid components needed for a multitude of applications. There are three things you should keep in mind relative to protein digestion:
- the body can recycle up to two-thirds of its proteinacious wastes to meet its needs;
- protein digestion requires an expenditure of energy equivalent to about 70% of its total caloric content; and
- neutralization and elimination of the toxins of protein degeneration (putrefaction) uses up vast amounts of nerve energy which, though stimulating at the time, exhausts and debilitates the body.
We must not feel compelled to eat protein foods as such in order to achieve protein adequacy. Almost every food natural to humans has about 4% protein dry weight, an ample amount to supply our needs. Further, most of our natural foods contain the amino acids we need.
Foods Must Be Adequate in Vitamin Content
Some 30 vitamins have been determined to be needed in various quantities in the human diet. The vitamins must be in the diet in an organic context with other nutrients to be useful.
Foods Must Be Adequate in Mineral Salts
Our only source of the minerals of life is from food. Only in food are they in the organic context which we can use. Under no circumstances can the body make use of inorganic minerals as might be ingested with water, supplements or powdered rock (as with dolomite).
Natural Foods Must Supply Our Needs for Essential Fatty Acids
Those food factors which the body requires but cannot itself synthesize are said to be essential. The essential fatty acids are linoleic, linolenic and arachidonic. Essential fatty acids are unsaturated fats. They occur in practically every fruit, nut, seed and vegetable in ample quantities to supply human needs.
Natural Foods Must Supply Our Needs for Caloric Values
The energy we expend must be derived from our food intake. The foods which most efficiently and easily supply our caloric needs are those with high monosaccharide content. Sweet fruits are at the top of the list in meeting these requisites.
Natural Foods Are Water-Sufficient to Meet Our Needs in Most Cases
Foods to which we are biologically adapted normally meet all our water needs. This is obvious, for we have no water-drinking faculties other than suction which is necessary for swallowing food. Fruitarian species normally do not drink water.
Natural Foods Are Alkaline in Metabolic Reaction
We require foods that are alkaline- or base-forming when metabolized. Almost every food of our adaptation is base-forming, even if it has an acid pH in its natural state. Should we eat any acid-forming foods, such as nuts, they should be offset at the same meal with alkaline-forming foods such as green leaves or other vegetable fare.
These are the criteria or requirements for foods that are natural to the human dietary. Only fruits, and especially sugar-containing fruits, meet all these needs ideally. Nothing else meets all these requirements. As further lessons will demonstrate, the requisites of life can be amply met on a totally fruitarian regime.
Nonfood Nutritional Factors
The first part of this lesson has emphasized the great breadth of the nutritional scope and perspective. This introduction is but a preview of some nutritional factors. In-depth treatment is given to most aspects of nutrition in subsequent lessons.
Among the nonfood nutritional factors are the following:
- Sunlight and natural light
- Fresh air and the oxygen it supplies
- Pure water
- Exercise, play and recreation
- Rest and relaxation
- Emotional poise
- Other requisites of life
- General body conditions
Inasmuch as you’ve already had a glimpse of nineteen essential factors and influences for great health in a previous lesson, and they included the above, the details will not be repeated here. You may refer back to lessons three and four if necessary. The above listing is to emphasize the great dependence of proper nutrition upon other needs of the body (besides food) being appropriately met. Nutrition does not occur in a vacuum. It is not an independent process. It involves the organism in every aspect of its being.
Discussion Of Conventional Nutritional Teachings
As perhaps you know or may have long suspected, and as was stated earlier in this lesson, conventional nutritional teachings are distorted to accommodate the “food” industries that dominate America. In fact, these distortions and fabrications predominate, not only in America, but also in most of the Western world.
If we follow conventional nutrition, we are bound to end up with malnutrition and toxemia and the pathologies they lead to. As Life Science serves no commercial masters, it has no interests to be served in teaching you false concepts. Further, we do have the benefit of knowing the truth. With respect to conventional nutritionists, it might be said that “It is better to be ignorant than to know so much that isn’t so.”
Do RDAs Represent Our Actual Needs?
The recommended dietary allowances of the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council reflect the many fallacies to which a wrong philosophy of nutrition leads.
First, the RDAs are educated estimates and are sometimes revised upwards or downwards in view of “new findings.”
Second, the board has been very liberal in its allowances. In almost every case, the allowance or suggested daily intake is two to ten times the amount needed by healthy persons. Likewise, they are far in excess of the needs of unhealthy persons, for unhealthy persons usually have impaired nutritive faculties, do not function as efficiently as do healthy individuals and should have a physiological rest in the form of a fast.
Third, the allowances are based on conventional diets which are comprised largely of cooked foods. Not only are cooked foods so deranged that a substantial portion of their nutrients are not usable, but they so vitiate the nutritive faculties as to impair them and lower their efficiency.
Healthy individuals eating a raw diet of proper foods have highly efficient nutritive faculties and thrive on a fraction of the intake on which the RDAs are based for conventional eaters.
The Concepts of the Basic Four Food Groups
The pathology and suffering resulting from the abominable nutritional concept of the four basic food groups is a national disaster! This concept and its promotion stems from a national policy of catering to industrial behemoths rather than to the welfare of consumers. While today’s “food” industries are outgrowths of incorrect eating going back into the past, the justification for them is relatively recent in origin. The concept has been to acclaim as science the eating of “foods” that cover, not human needs, but the gamut of foods produced by powerful food interests.
The basic four food groups are as follows:
- The milk group, which includes milk and all milk products.
- The meat group, which includes meat, eggs, fish, legumes and nuts.
- The bread-cereal group, which includes grains and grain products.
- The fruit-vegetable group, which includes all fruit and vegetable fare excepting nuts and legumes which are in the meat group because of their protein content.
Eating specified amounts from each of these groups daily is proclaimed “balanced nutrition.” In truth it is a “balanced market” for the commercial “food” interests that share the food market. The selection of foods in the typical American diet has nothing to do with meeting human needs. The typical American diet is gravely pathogenic and is mostly responsible for our deplorably diseased population.
In subsequent lessons you’ll learn why milk and all milk products are unfit for human consumption and the physiological grounds for this unfitness. You’ll also learn why all meats, eggs, fish (and legumes except sprouted) should be rejected as items of diet. Additionally, the relative unsuitability of grains and grain products (compared with fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds) in the diet will be highlighted. Bread, cereals and other starchy foods, if included in the diet, are a far less than ideal part of the diet.
To comment on group four, we point out that some vegetables can be added to the human diet with benefit, though their rich content of nutrients is really unneeded if we partake liberally of fresh raw fruits (and abstain from eating unwholesome foods).
Tubers such as potatoes constitute a large portion of the vegetable intake in America. Inasmuch as most tubers are cooked to make them palatable, and cooking significantly lowers the nutritive value of the food, they, like cereal grains, are less than ideal as foods. In addition, many other vegetables, such as onions, garlic, radishes, spinach and others contain toxic substances (such as mustard oil in onions and garlic and oxalic acid in spinach) that make them unsuitable as foods.
So, while certain vegetables (such as lettuce, celery, broccoli, cabbage and others) may supply “nutrient insurance,” many, if not most, vegetables have liabilities that make them less than ideal, even undesirable, as foods. Besides, we can obtain most, if not all, the nutrients we need from fresh ripe fruits, especially if we also include the non-sweet fruits often called vegetables (such as tomatoes, bell peppers, cucumbers, etc.) plus a few nuts and seeds in our diet of fresh fruits.
It bears reiterating that the items of diet to which we are not biologically adapted are, to some degree, pathogenic. Subsequent lessons will probe the ill effects of wrong diet in greater depth.
Eating Practices of Americans
Most of us are keenly aware of American eating practices. A typical breakfast may include every member of the four basic food groups. The typical American breakfast usually includes from the meat group ham, bacon or sausages and eggs, from the grain or cereal group bread (toasted or untoasted) and/or some pastry or perhaps a donut, and a bowl of cereal.
From the fruit and vegetable group may be an “appetizer” in the form of grapefruit, an orange, orange juice or cantaloupe. Also from this group may be some fried potatoes and possibly banana or other fruit on top of the cereal. From the milk group there is usually milk for cereal, cream for the coffee, butter for the toast and perhaps a glass of milk on the side. Sugar, salt, pepper and other sweeteners and condiments may be added.
An American lunch usually includes a meat dish with servings of vegetables, tubers or grains on the side. It usually includes bread and may include milk, ice cream, butter and other dairy products. An American dinner is not substantially different than an American lunch except there’s usually more of it.
The typical American diet is heavy on members of the four food groups promoted in America as nutritious fare. There has not been in all history more pathogenic fare than this!
Discussion Of Human Eating Habits The World Over
Diets vary widely over the face of the globe. We have the Lapps and the Eskimos who live pretty much as carnivores on one end of the spectrum, and we have groups of peoples in the equatorial regions who live as almost total fruitarians at the other end of the spectrum.
The Origins of Paradises and Edens
Up until relatively recent times in human history, humans have been primarily fruitarians. To this day in Java and other Malaysian islands there are enclosures known as para desas where people live among fruit-bearing trees. (The word paradise derives therefrom.)
All over Europe and much of the Far East there were walled enclosures of heavy stone where people resided and tended orchards. These were called paradises or edens. The walls kept out animals, helped capture and retain the sun’s heat and protected against winds and frosts.
Many words with roots of ava, and aval (such as Valhalla and avalon) evolved from terms born of a fruit culture. Valhalla originally meant apple hole or a place where apples were stored. Avalon merely meant the land of apples. The cultivation of fruits had attained scientific status long before formal histories were kept. We know of them through folklore legends and the remains of the incredible stone walls of these edens.
The Origins of Today’s Eating Practices
If humans are natural fruitarians, how have they come to stray from the diet of their physiological adaptation? .
In nature, such animals as gorillas, cattle and horses will die of starvation rather than eat flesh; but chimpanzees and some other fruit-eating animals will rend and eat another animal on occasion.
Humans, in addition to being possessed of a strong survival instinct, possess extraordinary intelligence to employ in support of that instinct. About three to four million years ago humans begin wandering out of their homelands in tropical regions. In time they peopled most of the earth accessible to them. Over the whole globe, according to geological records, climate was hospitable and favored their frugivorous habits. The remains of tropical plants have been found in Alaska and other northerly latitudes.
Due to some cataclysmic event or events that resulted in cold and freezing temperatures and ice ages, humans in northerly climes retreated south. Those that remained had to survive on the fare available to them or perish. For a part, this meant meat and animal products. Humans had to learn providence against the seasons and to survive on the foods available in harsh seasons or disappear from the scene.
This led to meat-eating and to the use of non-fruit foods. These dietary perversions, born of necessity, became fixed in many peoples and gradually spread to people who had no necessity to resort to non-fruitarian diets. Despite this, many pockets of people throughout the world never deserted their natural fruit diet and remain fruitarians unto this day.
Even such a harsh seasonal climate as found at the 8,000 foot level in the Himalayas in Northeast Pakistan has a fruitarian culture, that of the Hunzas. While the Hunzas do partake of some pulses and grains, theirs is primarily an ecoculture of orchards, and their dietary consists mostly of apples, apricots and other fruits that thrive in their climate and growing season.
The use of meat and animal products, grains, roots and other non-fruitarian fare has arisen in relatively recent times in human history and undoubtedly originated in the adversity humans faced in certain climates, especially northerly ones. The cultivation of grasses for grain is only a few thousand years old, perhaps less than ten thousand.
A Look at Some Diets over the World
If you were a Mongolian you’d probably be a nomadic appendage to an animal flock. You’d have some vegetables but, for the most part, you’d fare on meats, cheeses, milks and milk products.
If you were among groups of people in tropical Brazil and other tropical cultures, you might live almost entirely on a banana diet, on breadfruit or on some other fruit. The same might be true if you lived on many Pacific islands or Indian Ocean cultures.
If you lived in Southern China you might adopt a diet heavy in fruits, rice and vegetables, whereas in Northern China you might adopt a diet heavy in fruits, soybeans and vegetables.
Eskimos and Lapplanders live almost exclusively on animal fare. With the exception of some areas
where fish is consumed extensively, most Asian cultures are vegetarian and fruitarian. Most Asian countries have what is called a rice economy, though some Asian cultures utilize other grains and legumes as staples.
Europeans, immediate ancestors for most Americans, are heavily into grain culture and make it a substantial part of their diet, though they also partake heavily of fruits and vegetables. Meat and animal products form but a small part of the diets of most Europeans. English-speaking people the world over are the heaviest meat-eaters with the exception of Argentinians and Finlanders.
When we look at the world’s healthiest people we observe the Hunzas, Vilcabambians, Abkhasians and other primarily fruitarian cultures. These peoples are healthy for more reasons than just fruit-eating, however. They also live mostly in the outdoors in rather unstressful circumstances.
Wherever you look at cultures and their dietary practices of long standing, you find that people have adopted as foods that which they can most easily cultivate and harvest in their regions. They fare well or poorly in accord with the beneficence or lack of it in their dietary.
Do Different Dietary Habits Change Human Physiology?
Faculties usually require hundreds of thousands of years to develop. Who knows how many millions of years were required to develop human hands to the present stage? In some of our primate relatives the hands have yet to reach the facile stage which humans have attained.
In physiology changes are equally slow in coming about. Humans may eventually adapt to cooked foods and meats just as jackals and buzzards adapted to the roles of scavengers of dead rotting meats. But we might first become extinct! Many creatures have not survived drastic dietary changes.
The weakness and diseased condition of most present-day humans is ample warning that our dietary is incorrect and death-dealing with portents of disaster for that part of humanity that indulges in it. The evolvement of adaptations to new foods may not occur at all or so slowly as to be of no good consequence.
In view of the ecological and health benefits of fruit culture and its ease of cultivation, it behooves humans to stay with the diet that developed them into the magnificent creatures that they were, that some are and all can be. By consuming fruits we’ll thrive and, at the same time, place a demand on the marketplace that will spur the development of orchards and even more fruit!
Negative Nutrition: Harmful Foods And Practices
Foods have varying degrees of beneficence in the human diet. They also have varying degrees of pathogenicity in the diet. Our finest foods are the raw materials of our nutritive processes. Our worst foods are vitality-sapping junk the body must struggle to contend with.
Condiments Are Drugs
Condiments are substances used to enhance or modify flavors and tastes. That could include sugar, lemon juice, salt, pepper, vinegar, onions or anything else added to a dish to alter its flavor. In using the term today, we mean specifically pungent substances that are excitants, not whole foods that we’d eat liberally of for their own sake.
If we cut up bananas and then mix in some diced mango, the flavor enhancement is really stunning. Yet we would, not refer to the mango as a condiment. It is a food that we could make a meal of for its own sake. Likewise, tomatoes and nuts or avocado added to a vegetable salad really give the salad zest. Yet we do not usually call tomatoes, nuts or avocados condiments, for they are whole foods, any of which we can easily eat alone as a meal.
Thus condiments narrow down to those substances that are used exclusively and only to modify flavors. Vinegar, salt, pepper, basil, MSG, mint, sage, garlic and hundreds of other herbs and substances are used only as excitants to the taste buds.
There is one quality about all condiments that make them unfit for the human diet: they are all pathogenic. As excitants or stimulants they are inherently poisonous. The body has thousands of guardian angels. The fact that taste buds and other cells and senses of the mouth, esophagus and stomach are put into a frenzy by certain substances is a warning. Accelerated functions and senses make us more aware of flavors in the foods condiments are combined with, but the excitation is a guardian faculty broadcasting an alarm.
If you were trying to eat salt, pepper or vinegar in and of itself, you wouldn’t get very far. They have no food value at all and, in fact, are indigestible! And that’s the key to the body’s objection to them. Body senses can detect the difference between foods and nonfoods. Foods are welcome and those items which the body cannot utilize for lack of enzymes to digest them or because of an outright anti-vital character, the body becomes excited or stimulated as a response. Unfortunately, humans have become so perverted as to seek this excitement as an end in itself. Many, if not most, people are seeking kicks.
Anything which the body treats as an anti-vital substance; anything which it cannot digest and use easily and efficiently; anything that presents problems by making chemical unions with body fluids and cells that excite and stimulate, are to be shunned. They all fulfill the definition of drugs which is another name of poisons. Discontinuance of them by habitues begets “withdrawal” symptoms just as occurs in deprived drug addicts.
Nature seasons foods natural to our palates with all the taste-satisfying nutrients we require. Flavors galore abound in them. Artificial seasonings do not really enhance their taste. Only a perverted palate seeks the kicks and “thrills” that are unnatural to our dietary.
Cooking Is Pathogenic
Cooking creates diseases on several counts. The most salient are as follows:
- Cooking deranges and destroys nutrients. To the extent that this occurs, we are denied needed vitamins, minerals, proteins, essential fatty acids and other nutrient factors.
- The deranged nutrients become, via cooking, unusable substances that are toxic in the system. This is readily evidenced by the doubling and tripling of the leukocyte count in the blood in half an hour to an hour after eating a meal of cooked foods. Any poison or drug taken into the body occasions the same body response.
- The body must expend tremendously of its nerve and other energies to expel the offending substances of cooked foods and to clear itself of their contamination. Cooked food eaters have “hangovers” and “withdrawal” symptoms just as do drinkers of coffee, tobacco smokers or other drug addicts who forego their regular round of stimulation.
The body cannot build really healthy cells and tissues with poor quality materials. That which must be cooked to be palatable is not worthy of the human diet. Cooking makes it less so! Shun cooked foods and guide your clients to raw foods. Living foods of our adaptation are the road to magnificent health, and anything less than the ideal results in development, growth and functions that are less than ideal.
Thus cooked foods as articles of diet are pathogenic in that they poison us on one count and result in deficiencies on yet another count.
Processed, Refined and Preserved Foods
Anything used as food that is not in its original natural state has been tampered with.
Processing is altering or preparing foods or both.
Refining means “making finer” or reduction to a purer state. Thus white flour is refined wheat. Though some chemical processes are used in making it white, essentially the process of refining of wheat flour is mechanically accomplished by milling. Refining sugar is the extraction of sugar from sugar cane or beets and, through cooking and chemical processes, obtaining sucrose.
Preserving involves treating foods so they will be usable for a much greater length of time than is normal in nature.
The processing of foods involves anything that alters foods (including steps that do not alter them significantly or nutritionally). While the shelling and vacuum packing of nuts is processing, these processes do not detract from the value of the nuts.
On the other hand, cooking fruits and adding sugar, preservative chemicals such as salt, etc., and then sealing them in cans and jars are very destructive processes. Drying the same fruits alters the fruits so that they can be preserved but does not alter them so significantly that they’re, a liability in the human diet. Most processed foods in the marketplace are unsuitable in the human diet in the first place before any alteration, refining or preserving occurs.
Examples of this are processed meats, refined cereals, pasteurized and homogenized milk, etc.
Canned foods have a shelf life of years and years. But they are not acceptable in the human diet even if they were good foods prior to canning. They might be acceptable only against the reality of eating them or starving to death. If canned foods only are eaten, death is rather quick and certain. That happened to many who were involved in the great Alaska gold rush, to those who were involved in the digging of the Panama Canal and to others in similar projects. This contrasts with excellent health that results from a diet of proper foods eaten in the raw state.
Freezing is a method of preserving foods. Frozen foods are not as wholesome as fresh foods. Their primary drawback is that the freezing bursts many cells and occasions degeneration due to oxidation. Freezing does not affect some foods at all, notably foods with low water content or very oily in texture. Dates, dried fruits, nuts and seeds may be frozen and kept fresher.
Dried fruits, though not as wholesome as their fresh counterparts, are wholesome. Nuts and seeds are well-preserved by lack of moisture and air in their own shells. Vacuum packing and a nitrogen media do not harm many foods and preserve them with food values intact.
Some foods are coated with paraffin, oils, waxes and other preservatives. If these substances have not penetrated the protective skin or covering and can be readily removed, they are suitable for food if they meet other dietary criteria. Removal may be accomplished by a bath in a mild solution of hydrochloric acid, vinegar, chlorox or even very warm water in some cases. If the solution is warm it will be chemically more active and more readily unite with the oils, waxes or paraffins. Moreover, the warmer the solution the more likely waxes and paraffins are to liquify.
Processing, refining and preserving are done commercially to give foods longer shelf life, to change their structure so as to make them marketable, to make them more palatable, to enhance flavors or for a number of other reasons. However, refining renders foods deficient in one or more ways even if they were suitable items of diet to start with.
But the final insult is in “embalming” foods with preservatives to protect from spoilage, bacterial degeneration or oxidation. Preservatives are, one and all, poisonous. That is the character of a preservative. It must be an antibiotic, an antioxidant or have some quality to maintain appearances of wholesomeness. Needless to say, that which is poisonous to bacteria is likewise poisonous to human cells. That which is poisonous interferes with digestion as much as do deranged portions of cooked foods.
As a rule/steer away from all preserved foods and give preference to fresh ripe fruits with some vegetables, seeds and nuts.
Food processing is also done in the home, as well as commercially, for, as stated earlier, it comprises anything done to alter foods from their original form. Cooking, grinding, chopping cutting, peeling and blending are all at-home food-altering processes. Of these, however, cooking is by far the most destructive of foods’ nutritional value and is, therefore, the primary at-home process to avoid (or keep to a minimum).
Even the other at-home processing should be limited to some extent. For example, you may serve juices sometimes but whole fruits (and vegetables) most of the time. Or you may prepare cut-up salads sometimes but, serve whole fruits or vegetables most of the time. A larger portion of the nutrients are left intact in whole foods as a rule. One notable exception to this, however, is sesame seeds.
Because they are so tiny, they normally do not get thoroughly masticated, even by very conscientious eaters. Therefore, grinding them and using them immediately may be a beneficial at-home process. Food preparation will be studied in depth in a future lesson.
Foods Not Suited to the Human Dietary
Any food that does not meet all the criteria heretofore cited is not a food of our natural adaptation. Foods of our adaptation meet our needs in every respect. Only fruits meet all our various needs.
Humans would not survive very long on a total meat diet. Shorter yet would be our lives if we ate a meat diet that had been cooked—well-done. We can survive two to three times as long on our fat reserves as we can upon an exclusive diet of meat. The body lives very poorly on a protein diet, being only about 30% efficient in converting proteins into fuels (carbohydrates), our primary need. This compares with about 90% to 95% efficiency in converting the sugars of fruits into energy.
Humans cannot live on condiments and seasonings, raw of cooked. Condiments are used for their poison content, not for their nutrient content. Nor are we physiologically equipped to live on milk or milk products, eggs, fish or other animal products. Also, we are not suited to handle a diet heavy in fats and proteins, even if they are consumed totally raw, something most unlikely in our society because it can abide unnatural foods only if denatured by cooking. We need fats and proteins only in small amounts. Larger amounts are a toxic burden, tax our digestive systems and use up too much vital energy.
Humans cannot live on herbs in the current frame of reference because they, like condiments, are toxic and do not possess food values for the most part. Vegetables or plant fare as leaves, stalks, stems, grasses, etc. cannot comprise the mainstay of the human dietary because we cannot obtain our caloric needs from these types of foods. Few vegetables appeal to the palate as such anyway. Some vegetables, notably lettuce, are prized because of their relative sweetness and texture.
Chlorophyll is normally bitter and we’re turned off by bitter substances. Our natural foods appeal to our senses, and none appeal to our senses as do fruits, a sure indication that fruits are our natural preference because of natural adaptation. In the cooked state, vegetables appeal more because of the conversion of their starches to dextrin, a form of sugar.
A diet consisting almost entirely of oily foods is not suited to our needs. We can utilize a small amount of oil with benefit. This need can be met incidental to primarily carbohydrate fare. Oily foods are handled very slowly. (Digestion usually takes four to six hours.)
While oils are highly concentrated sources of calories, the body cannot make use of them with the facility it utilizes monosaccharides. Those who eat heavily of nuts and oily fruits exhibit problems and are not as healthy and vigorous as those on primarily carbohydrate fare.
There are groups of people who practically exist on coconuts. But they are eaten at a stage when the oils have not been formed to any extent. The coconuts are still primarily carbohydrates.
Starches also comprise an incidental part of our diet. We cannot survive on an exclusive diet of raw starches. First, we have a very limited capacity to digest raw starches. In light of this capacity, we cannot meet our needs for fuels and other nutrients on a raw starch diet. Secondly, most starches are contained in microglobules of cellulose that neither chewing nor digestion will break down. Hence we are not naturally equipped to eat raw starches as are birds with craws or animals that have a plethora of starch-splitting enzymes.
Our ability to utilize grains, tubers and other starchy foods relies upon the agency of cooking. However, some of these foods, notably the turnip, rutabaga, sweet potato, carrot and others, can be utilized raw only because of their sugar content. The traditional potato is entirely unsuitable, being repulsive to normal tastes when raw. Raw grains are repulsive to normal tastes for the same reason—we reject starch foods naturally with our natural equipment that evaluates foods beneath a conscious level. We can force ourselves to eat these foods and even pervert ourselves to the point we value them just as we value condiments and drugs. But this is contrary to our nature, not in accord with it.
Humans cannot utilize milk in its raw or cooked state. Raw we do not have the enzymes (rennin which ceases to be secreted in humans at about age three, the proper weaning age) to break down casein with which milk proteins, calcium and other nutrients are bound. At about the same age we lose the ability to secrete lactase, an enzyme that reduces lactose, the milk sugar, to monosaccharides.
Therefore, most of our people are said to be “lactose intolerant.” We cannot utilize fermented milk products because lactic acid and putrefaction by-products are toxic to humans just as they are to the bacteria that excreted fermentation by-products as bacterial defecation. There are very few products of bacterial activity that we can use. (Vitamin B-12 is a notable exception.)
Humans cannot live well on exclusive vegetarian fare even if it includes fruits referred to as vegetables (such as tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers, eggplants, squashes, pumpkins, etc.). Foods that must be cooked are third- and fourth-rate foods and should form no part of the dietary. Only the stark reality of being deprived for inordinately long periods of proper foods should force us to eat foods that are less than ideal in the diet.
Dietary Follies of Health Seekers
Seeking out wholesome organic foods free of unnatural fertilization and pesticides is most laudable. But it is relatively meaningless and ineffective if a person then proceeds to take organic foods and cook them. Much of the advantage is wiped out. Organically grown foods are always superior to their nonorganic counterparts undergoing the same amount of processing, cooking, etc. But it is preferable healthwise to eat conventional produce uncooked than organic produce in a cooked state.
Many health seekers believe food supplements are necessary because we have deficient soils. We do have truly deficient soils, as they would not produce foods that require the minerals in which they’re deficient. We have many soils, even in their virgin state, that are deficient in something or other that makes them unsuitable for certain plants or trees. We have many soils that have lost the capability of growing corn, potatoes, wheat and other staples but which will still grow grasses and legumes.
These soils can be built up very quickly if certain minerals are judiciously added (using organic methods). The deficient soil/deficient food complex is fostered among health seekers by fractionated food purveyors who are peddling a synthetic manufactured supplement or so-called natural supplements, both of which are far inferior to whole foods.
Supplements can in no way make good any partial deficiency that may exist. The synthetic supplements are not usable in any circumstances, and the body treats them as drugs. It is the stimulus of drug effects that we mistake for health effects. We mistake the energy an exhausted horse shows under the whip as beneficient when, in fact, it is pathogenic.
Even if part of the supplements are obtained from organic sources (as a fraction of a given supplement, say 5 to 10% only) so they can be represented as natural, they are still worthless. They’re also worthless if extracted entirely from organic sources. The body uses nutrients in context with other nutrients as a team. The shameful reality is that these supplements are obtained, as a rule, from the same products grown on the same “deficient” soils about which they warn us.
Health seekers often buy waste products that are sold as health products. An example of this is the beer manufacturers’ waste product—brewers yeast. Another example is the waste product of sugar manufacturers—molasses, which is a totally unusable and harmful product. Some health seekers buy or have bought the wastes of other manufacturers, too, especially the wastes of cheese manufacturers and meat processors. Whey, liver, gelatin and other wastes are thought to be healthful when, in reality, they are worse than worthless.
Many health seekers also buy minerals from unusuable sources. Many drink sea water, eat sea salt, drink hard mineralized waters, eat molasses, dolomite and/or take mineral supplements. All these contain inorganic minerals which are not only not usable by the body but which harm it grievously. In seeking health, many people fall victim to pathogenic practices foisted upon them in the name of health.
Many health seekers are likely to (or do) fall victim to alternate schemes of drugging. They are often persuaded to take a multitude of herbs and toxic plants because they are supposed to cure or prevent disease. Molasses and other waste products are also touted as medications. However, the truth is that health is built only by healthful practices. Diseases do not have to be prevented for the body will not initiate and conduct diseases unless the need exists. If everyone discontinued those practices that pollute their bodies, there would be no occasion for disease. In any event, so-called medication can never help and will only cause further harm to the body.
Among the many pernicious plants and herbs touted as healthful because of their toxin content, not their food content, are onions, garlic, comfrey, aloe, cayenne peppers, mints and innumerable others. In seeking health, many concerned individuals end up further polluting their bodies, thus creating more disease.
Drinking Habits Are Damaging to Health
Humans are not naturally drinking animals, for we have no natural equipment for that practice. Drinking is done artificially with the aid of tools. Our natural diet is usually water sufficient.
In addition, drinking as practiced today is almost totally pathogenic. Drinking pure (distilled) water is not pathogenic, but substances which occasion its drinking are usually pathogenic. (Sometimes, of course, extraordinary heat and/or vigorous activity lay the bases for drinking pure water.)
Most drinking is of poisoned drinks. Sugared and flavored drinks are toxic, as are coffees, cocoas, sodas, beers, wines, whiskeys, teas of all kinds, etc. Even fruit and vegetable juices are far less than ideal because they represent fragmented rather than whole foods.
Most drinking amounts to drug habits rather than acts supplying needed water. It bears reiterating that almost all drinking is pathogenic.
A Survey Of Unconventional Dietic Schools And Their Fallacies
There are many schools of thought concerning the content of the human diet. We have viewed conventional eating which embraces the concept of the four basic food groups. Other schools are called macrobiotic, vegetarian, fruitarian, vegan and yet others. Let’s take a brief look at some of these one by one.
The Macrobiotic School
This school was founded by George Oshawa, a native of Japan. The emphasis is on a so-called perfect diet consisting mainly of cooked rice, along with some cooked vegetables. Such a heavy diet of cooked rice provides primarily fuel (carbohydrates), but carbohydrates from cooked foods also render the toxic by-products of heat degeneration. Very few fruits are included in this diet, and, while the macrobiotic diet is a great improvement over conventional diets on many counts, it is far from ideal.
Even a brief discussion of the macrobiotic diet would be incomplete without the mention of the concepts of yin and yang. These concepts represent many sets of qualities, such as acid & alkaline, sweet and salty, and hot and cold. Without going into the subject, suffice it to say that, in macrobiotics, determinations of wholesome foods are made based on this yin-yang concept.
Supplementation and Special Foods
This might well be called the megavitamin or megafeeding school. Even though the only way to render a deficient diet adequate is to eat a diet adequate in natural nutrient factors, this school goes beyond that.
They say that if it’s a good thing there is no such thing as too much. For example, the RDA for vitamin C may be 60 milligrams daily. People in this school, such as Dr. Linus Pauling, advocate up to 10,000 milligrams daily. If 4,000 international units of vitamin A are the RDA, the megavitamin people advocate 100,000 to 200,000 units daily.
However, the body cannot use more than it needs, and it must excrete that which is in excess of needs. But the massiveness of the dosages is just one aspect of the harm wreaked by the supplementation advocates. The synthetic products that dominate the market are treated as outright drugs by the body! Even if these supplements were extracted entirely from natural sources, they’d still be unusable. The body uses foods, not individual nutrients. It uses them synergistically as nature puts them up, not as extracted or laboratory synthesized and compounded in imitation of nature.
Herbs Used as Alternate Medications
Some health seekers eat poisonous plants daily in the belief that they need “medicines” for health. Entrepreneurs harvest weeds from the wilds and from cultivated fields by the hundreds of tons for people who believe in “natural medicines.”
Herbs are not consumed for their nutrients and none could be consumed as foods in themselves. Death could result from an “overdose” if too much of any of these were eaten as a food. People have died on rather small amounts of some herbs.
There are about 25 million people in this country who eat only fruits and vegetables or who consume either what is known as an ovo- or a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet. Vegetarians who eat no animal foods whatsoever are called vegans; lacto-vegetarians include dairy foods in their diet; ovo-vegetarians include eggs but not dairy products; and lacto-ovo vegetarians include both eggs and dairy foods in their diet.
Many, if not most, vegetarians are ethical vegetarians, but this is especially so with the vegans, as they
refuse to cause suffering to animals. Vegetarians may eat lots of cooked foods, or they may consume an all-raw or almost all-raw diet. Many, if not most, vegetarians use herbs, especially if they are vegetarians for, or partly for, health reasons. Some vegans are Natural Hygienists. The common bond of vegans is non-exploitation of animals.
Vegetarians generally are healthier than the population at large, for, while many of their practices are not healthful, per se, they are less harmful than those of conventional eaters. Some vegetarians will eat just about any kind of non-animal food, even alcoholic beverages (really drugs and not foods) and junk foods (also more like drugs than foods in the system).
These people are vegetarians, not for health reasons, but for moral reasons relating to the killing of animals. However, most people who are vegetarians are more health oriented than non-vegetarians.
The Bircher-Benner School
This school is essentially a vegetarian school that is heavy on grains with some fruits.
The Mucusless Diet
The founder of this school, Arnold Ehret, reasoned that anything which results in mucus formation is unhealthy. This reasoning is correct, for anything that causes the system to secrete mucus is an indication that toxic or unwelcome materials are in the organism. Ehret thought that the foods themselves formed mucus, however, when, in fact, the organism creates the mucus in response to unwelcome foods.
Through trial and error Ehret discovered that a diet of non-oily fruits and some vegetables built high-level health and function and did not result in mucus formation. Thus he called his diet the mucusless diet.
Ebba Waerland of Sweden spent most of his life studying the touchstones of health. He was greatly influenced by the Bircher-Benner school and advanced their dietary philosophy to include more fresh raw vegetables and fruits. However, though he still advocated the use of various grains, he recommended they be prepared in a more conservative manner.
In many of his teachings Waerland added to the science of nutrition and health and paralleled the teachings of the Natural Hygienists. As a worldwide traveler and a deep student, he undoubtedly was well acquainted with the philosophy and practice of Natural Hygiene and added to his own system those features he liked. Especially did he advocate fasting as a course to follow during illness (and in good health!) as a health measure.
There are relatively few raw food fruitarians, but there is much interest in fruitarianism and sentiment for it. Humans are naturally frugivores and there is a sound basis for fruitarianism. But, except for the most ardent of fruitarians, most are likely to eat some nuts and vegetables. Many fruitarians are Natural Hygienists, though many Natural Hygienists are not fruitarians.
The primary difference between the fruitarians and the fruit-eating Hygienists is that many fruitarians do not adhere to principles of compatible food combining. Raw food fruitarianism is a fast burgeoning element in our society though, as yet, their numbers are only in the thousands.
The Natural Hygienists
This dietary school embraces many divergent outlooks on dietary fare. All Hygienists advocate a mostly raw diet of fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds and sprouts, although some advocate the eating of cheese and raw egg yolks. Some Hygienists advocate “complex carbohydrates” as important items of fare.
They feel that conservatively cooked rice, squashes, potatoes, yams and other starches are good in the diet if eaten in conjunction with hearty vegetable salads. Likewise, they are often heavy eaters of nuts and avocados if consumed in conjunction with a hearty salad of green leafy vegetables and some fruit fare popularly considered vegetables.
Hygienists originated and fostered the concepts and practices of food combining. Also, they advocate regimes in which diet comprises only a part. As a Life Scientist you’ll also call yourself a Natural Hygienist, for these are identical philosophies. But the dietary score has yet to be settled in practice although many Hygienists are idealistic raw fruitarians.
It is our endeavor in this course to present data sufficient to settle this score for you. Even the least healthful Hygienic diet is such a great improvement over conventional diets that those who adopt it must improve their health. Almost no one is so far down the road of life that they cannot improve dramatically upon the adoption of the Hygienic regime, even if they adopt a less than ideal version of it.
As a health professional you must keep in mind that anything less than ideal begets less than ideal results. But, on the other hand, every improvement you inspire in your clients will result in corresponding improvement in well-being.
Foods as Medicines
Like the herbal school which looks upon herbs as medicines, this school tries to employ foods as therapeutic tools. There are those who swear by the use of raw egg yolks; there are those who swear by blended salads, often with egg yolk. Many look upon fruits as cleansing foods. A multitude of foods are taken with the idea that they will prevent or “cure” diseases.
We must repeat that foods are raw materials which the organism acts upon. They have no actions of their own, much less cleansing and healing abilities.
The Juice Therapy School
This school advocates a diet heavy in or consisting primarily of juices extracted from fruits and vegetables. It was founded nearly a century ago, and Benedict Lust was one of its luminaries. Today N. W. Walker is perhaps its most articulate exponent.
Juices are fractionated foods subject to oxidative deterioration. Oxidation occurs quickly. For example, orange juice can lose up to 60% of its vitamin C within an hour after juicing. Iron is oxidized very quickly in all foods. This may be observed visually if an apple is broken open and exposed to air. Oxidation creates toxic byproducts. An example of this is cooking, which is a much accelerated process of oxidation as well as heat degeneration.
Juices are not whole foods. Many valuable nutrients are lost in the pulp. Further, those who “drink” their foods are often guilty of consuming inordinate amounts of it to secure satiety. While we can safely partake of several pounds of watermelon and like amounts of some juices, there are other juices that a few pounds of constitutes far too much food. Carrot juice drinkers are notorious over-eaters.
Nature did not furnish humans with juicers outside of those implicit in chewing.
The Blended Salad Diet
There is a small school that believes that blended salads three times a day are beneficial in the human dietary. While blending involves the whole food, it still has the objection of oxidation and enzymic degeneration.
Blended foods are never as tasty as their whole counterparts, even if eaten immediately after blending because enzymes and oxygen degenerate foods and destroy their goodness so quickly.
As you can see, there are many different schools of thought on diet and nutrition. The macrobiotic school is based on the concept of yin and yang and is rooted in Oriental tradition; vegetarian diets are based either on the ethics of killing animals or on the unhealthfulness of meat (and, for some vegetarians, dairy foods and/or eggs) or both; the mucusless diet is determined by which foods do and don’t result in mucus formation by the body; and the herbalists and “foods as medicines” schools base their diets on the supposed curative properties of foods.
However, the only diet that is totally based on sound physiological principles, that is based on science and not on tradition, is the Natural Hygienic diet, which is the same as the Life Science diet. Some Hygienists are fruitarians, most are vegans and all are vegetarians. Oftentimes individuals adopt and popularize diets that reflect their own individual ideas and experiences with diet, and the best of these diets have some commonalities with the Hygienic diet.
The diet of the Natural Hygienists is the only one that is particularly concerned with food combining, and this aspect of the diet is not only unique, but it is based on physiological principles.
The Physiological Necessity Of Proper Food Combining
One of the cardinal principles around which Natural Hygiene/Life Science is built in dietary practices is that of food combining when more than one food is eaten at a meal. Humans are capable of digesting with great ease a single food of their adaptation. However, when more than one food is consumed at a meal, the foods thus combined must be compatible in their digestive chemistry.
If the digestion of a meal’s various items requires differing digestive tasks, digestion will suffer. Digestion may be retarded and vitiated whether or not we are aware of it, whether we suffer the discomforts of indigestion or fail to feel them. Indigestion may be suffered beneath the level of awareness for decades before its debilitating effects show up as diseases and symptoms. On the other hand, the sufferer may be keenly aware of distresses resulting from indigestion on practically a meal-to-meal basis.
The ill effects of wrong eating and improper food combining are commonly treated with a raft of drugs, primarily antacid drugs such as Turns, Rolaids, bicarbonate of soda, poisonous aluminium preparations, Milk of Magnesia and so on.
The Chemical Character of Digestion and the Rules It Decrees
Further along in this course a complete lesson is devoted to food combining. The physiology of digestion recognizes that different foods present dissimilar digestive tasks. For instance, protein foods require an acid medium for digestion. Pepsin, the protein digestive enzyme, requires an acid gastric secretion, more specifically hydrochloric acid. Starchy foods, on the other hand, require an alkaline medium to enable the enzymes of salivary amylase (ptyalin) to perform their digestive task.
Below a pH of 4.0, starch digestion is totally suspended. Pepsin will not break down proteins at a pH higher than 3.0. Thus starchy foods and protein foods are incompatible in digestive chemistry. From this physiological fact of life emerges this feeding rule: Do not eat a protein food and a starchy food at the same meal.
There are many foods that do not combine with others. It is the practice of many to eat oils and sugars together. Sugars undergo no digestion in the stomach and melons and sweet fruits may stay in the stomach as little as ten minutes or remain for as long as thirty to forty minutes.
They are expelled rather quickly and absorbed very quickly from the small intestine. Oils remain in the stomach for several hours for processing before being forwarded to the small intestine for further elaboration. If eaten with fruits they hold up the sugars and fermentation is very likely to occur, thus vitiating the meal.
Differing Digestive Times Dictate Selectivity in Food Combinations
Even different fruits have differing digestive tasks. The body readily digests acid fruits and it also readily digests sweet fruits. But acids must first be changed and become alkaline before absorption can occur. This involves some delay in the stomach. Any delay in the stomach of a sweet fruit may dispose to fermentation. Thus, again, combining foods improperly may vitiate digestion and contribute to physiological problems, immediately and down the road, if unhealthful physiological practices continue.
Sweet fruits have their own digestive characteristics. Watermelon is perhaps the fastest digested of sweet fruits. Other melons are passed through the stomach quickly, too. But bananas, grapes and apples may remain in the stomach for two or three times as long. Hence, if bananas, apples or grapes are eaten with melon, fermentation and upset stomach may result.
Character of Food Determines Suitability in Diet
Humans are adapted to a narrow spectrum of the world’s foods, just as are most other animals. Our anatomy and physiology are highly specialized to handle efficiently the fruit foods of the earth. We have developed limited capacities to digest oils, proteins and starches. But under no circumstances are we primarily protein-eaters, starch-eaters or oil-eaters.
Inasmuch as some 85% to 90% of our diet by dry weight is for the purpose of fueling our body, it behooves us to eat primarily foods that most efficiently furnish our fuel requirements. Inasmuch as foods of our natural adaptation furnish this ratio of fuel values relative to other necessary nutrient factors within their context, we can most healthfully devote ourselves to a raw fruitarian regime.
Many, including a great number of Hygienists, will object to the all-fruit diet and cite supposed dangers that fruits are inadequate in the needs of life, especially proteins, essential fatty acids, mineral salts and vitamins. Thus they advocate green leaves and other vegetables, seeds and nuts and even cheese. They condemn “the more is better school,” yet tend to side with them in practice.
Close scrutiny of our physiological character decrees that we eat sparingly of nonfruit foods. It is erroneous to assume that the fruit diet is deficient in the needs of life, as will be demonstrated in other lessons.
The body supposedly uses eleven calories per day per pound of weight for metabolic purposes only! Hunza men who have superb physiques and perform labor that would exhaust our best on a daily basis have a total intake of only about 1,900 calories per day, about 12 calories per pound of weight! There must be some terribly wrong calculations here or else the needs of healthy individuals for fuel values is far below our diseased average.
In Vilcabamba, caloric intake is lower yet, being only about eight to ten calories per pound of weight per day. The average caloric intake there is about 1,350 calories per day. The Peruvians of Vilcabamba work hard in their gardens and fields, as do the Hunzas.
The work these two groups of people do would require, according to our nutritionists, from 3,500 to 7,000 calories a day! Something is amiss! In dealing with your clients, you’ll keep these facts in mind. The less feeding, down to a point, the more efficient the body is.
This is even true if you’re feeding highly efficient fruits rather than very inefficient meats and other high protein/fat foods that dominate in our American diets. Keep in mind that our high-powered dairy, poultry, cereal and meat industries have a heavy bias in having our populace consume as much of their products as possible. Perhaps they have influenced the RDAs so that people are pushed to overeat on their products.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are our real protein needs and how can we possibly get these from fruits? Fruits aren't protein foods.
Tests conducted by Professor Chittenden of Yale and others indicate that an average man requires about 25 grams of protein daily. There are people in some South Pacific Islands and elsewhere that live primarily on starch foods, especially cassavas. Their diet is low in protein—only about 15 grams daily. Yet these people are reported to be in excellent health. The body has the capability to recycle most of its protein wastes. Cassava, the main starch food eaten by these South Pacific people, has only about 1/5th of 1% protein, about one sixth of that of bananas. Moreover, these people cook their cassava. They are said to eat six to ten pounds of this food daily.
Our real protein needs are about 25 grams daily. The average fruit contains 1% protein. We should eat 2,500 grams of fruits daily, about five and a half pounds with water content. For an average man, this is not a tremendous amount of food. The average American consumes about seven pounds of food daily and ingests 94 grams of protein. Moreover, this diet is so heavy in fat that about 44% of America's caloric intake is derived from that source.
True, fruits aren't protein foods. But neither are we protein eaters as are carnivores. But look at those who do eat protein foods such as meats, cheese, etc. They are a diseased lot. In fact, most Americans are sick and the fact that they daily take in about four times their protein requirements is a contributing factor.
Fruits, we repeat, furnish us amply with our protein needs in an easily used form. This is particularly true if you include avocados and/or nuts, both of which are technically fruits.
You've never had one good word to say about drugs. In fact, you've knocked them so much and carried the definition so far as to make almost everyone a drug addict of one kind or another. If they were so harmful, surely we'd all be long since dead.
Humans are a hardy lot. They represent an aggregation of some hundred trillion cells with thousands of guardian angels. The impulse to life is great. We have a tremendous capacity for eliminating poisons. Despite this, most of us are diseased. How many assaults of food poisoning from condiments and cooked foods can we withstand? Most Americans have 50,000 to 70,000 bouts of leucocytosis before they die from it in the form of some degenerative disease, usually cancer or cardiovascular problems. We cut our life potential in half. If drugs had any value in the organism they would be foods, not drugs. Drugs are one and all poisonous regardless of their source. Almost every American is hooked on drugs of some kind.
Is there a science of correct feeding? It seems that the term nutrition covers much more than correct feeding.
There are two technical words that have to do with feeding, whereas nutrition covers all processes of supply and elimination and everything that effects those processes. Orthotrophy means correct feeding. Ortho means correct and trophy means to feed. Aristophagy means best eating. In the sense that correct feeding is the best eating, both words mean the same.
Don't certain types of foods help you get well? Juices and fruits help you clean out. Garlic is well known to help high blood pressure cases. Aloes helps heal wounds and ulcers.
Can you imagine a fruit or a fruit juice with an inborn intelligence and will such that, when consumed, instead of being digested, it goes into the blood stream and promptly starts rounding up toxic materials and putting them out of the body? Let's emphasize again and again that foods do not act in the body, that all the action is from the organism. Chemical actions may occur from chemicals in ingesta, yes, but any actions other than body actions are toxic actions.
However, fruits and juices are so easily digested and used and introduce so little food debris into our bodies that they do leave the body with extra energy to perform its duties. When freed of the burdens eliminating toxins from polluting foods and digesting unsuitable foods, the body devotes itself to extraordinary cleansing with the extra energies available.
Garlic does not help high blood pressure. In the presence of allicin and mustard oil, two of the toxic substances in garlic, the organism dilates its blood vessels to more quickly circulate blood and expel these toxins. The heart beats faster and leucocytosis occurs, sure signs of the toxicity of allicin and mustard oil. These substances freely permeate all body cells and tissues. They are not digested and used but excreted through the kidneys, bowels, skin and lungs.
After expulsion the blood pressure will be just as high as before if the same regime that caused it remains in effect. The garlic has helped nothing. Rather, it has complicated an already diseased situation. The drug effects of garlic are mistaken for beneficial effects. The problem is not solved by garlic, and high blood pressure is not the problem. Rather, it is but a symptom of the problem. The problem remained even though the symptom was lessened or suppressed.
Aloes applied to ulcers and wounds do not heal them. The toxic material in aloes, aloin, is absorbed by the body when applied to the skin and to open sores (which the body uses as an ejection site for toxic wastes and ingesta). When the poisons begin coming in from the outside the body closes the wound promptly, shutting down eliminative operations at the site. While the poisonous aloes have been the occasion for the body closing the wound, they have not healed the wound but were a source of a poisonous alkaloid. The body does the healing.
I read recently that an 80-pound chimpanzee was so strong that two handlers could not subdue it: Are they so strong? What kind of super foods do they eat?
Chimpanzees in nature have the strength to do acrobatic feats and handle their weight with such ease and facility as to put humans to shame. A four hundred-pound gorilla has about thirty times the strength of a 180 pound man. This attests not so much to the strength of these animals as to the degeneration and weakness of humans. In nature we were equally strong. We can achieve this strength again if we adopt our natural diet and practices akin to those that we developed in our natural habitat.
A substantial part of the diets of chimpanzees and gorillas consists of fruits. This is fruit-power for you.
Will an all-fruit diet cause nervous breakdowns and nervous problems as I've so often heard?
You will find no evidence of this among fruitarian societies or among fruitarian animals. Diets that are sufficient in the raw materials we require are the basis of health. They cause neither health nor ill health. Nervous breakdowns can come from nutrient inadequacy and from stressful situations, especially those that constantly drain the organism of nervous energy. In this society, millions have nervous breakdowns. We have only a few thousand fruitarians and they are faring well rather than poorly.
What is wrong with eating starchy foods? Doesn't cooking change the starch to usable sugars?
We actually use very little of the starch components in starchy foods, as most of the starch is not penetrated by our digestive amylases and thus is not broken down. The starch that is available cannot be digested to a great extent by humans because they quickly exhaust their limited supply of salivary amylase or ptyalin. Thus we fail as starch eaters.
Cooked starches are dextrinized, and more of the fuel values are available to us, yet, on the other hand, much of the food components are degenerated by heat and are, therefore, toxic in the system.
We're not meat eaters, then why do we secrete hydrochloric acid and pepsin?
Proteins from whatever source (meat or nuts, for example) require the enzyme pepsin and an acid medium in which to be digested. We need only small amounts of protein and we digest it with an efficiency ratio of only about one to two. Animals that live on protein diets have hydrochloric acid solutions so strong that unchewed flesh is readily digested. A tiger's stomach secretes a hydrochloric acid solution some 1,100% more concentrated than that in humans. Again, proteins form but a small part of the diet of humans in nature, whereas tigers eat heavily of proteins in the meat, bone and offal of their prey.
How do you, as a fruitarian, manage to control your hunger? Fruit meals leave me mostly unsatisfied.
Further, I feel empty and ravenously hungry within an hour or two after eating fruits. I have to eat five or six times a day if I'm on fruits just to keep my hunger under control. If I eat some nuts or an avocado right after my fruits I feel satisfied, though.
I've eaten a diet of 80% to 90% fruit for many years now. I rarely eat my first meal of the day before noon and I rarely eat more than two fruit meals in a day. Further, I eat about three or four meals weekly with some avocado or perhaps nuts and a hearty salad. I find my desire for vegetables and nuts waning and my desire for fruits increasing with the years. I feel very comfortable after fruit meals whereas sometimes I feel a bit uncomfortable after vegetable meals. I sleep more and feel more sluggish when I've had a nut and vegetable meal. I don't feel as alive, alert and zippy on mornings after vegetable and nut or avocado meals.
On occasion I have eaten a salad and nut meal at noon. As a result I usually missed the evening meal because even the best foods repulsed me—I had no hunger. It's as if my body closed down digestive operations. That is how "satisfying" vegetables and nuts are to me.
The fact that most people mistake irritation and vital symptoms of recovery for hunger does not mean hunger exists. An emptiness in the stomach means that the food has been passed from it. That is not hunger. Hunger is felt in the mouth and throat just as thirst is. It is not unpleasant and it urges us to eat just as thirst urges us to drink.
What we commonly mistake for hunger that drives us to eat are pathological symptoms not unlike the "withdrawal" symptoms of tobacco, coffee, alcohol, condiments and other drug addictions that drive us to go back for another fix. When the body is without its fix for a while, it begins clean-up operations. These usually involve unpleasant symptoms that drive us to get another fix. Another fix engages the body in activities that depress vital functions, especially eliminative functions. Thus we are satisfied for a while, in fact, quite a while in the case of foods that are not of our adaptation.
The fact that fruits are so easily digested and used permits the body to quickly reassert its vitality and devote itself to the cleansing and eliminative processes. The symptoms are not pleasant as the body restores itself from the effects of a previously unsuitable diet. We thus try to smother those symptoms with another meal. Those symptoms do not constitute hunger. Eating suppresses them in the same way that a cup of coffee suppresses the hangover of previous coffee-drinking.
As a mostly fruitarian I rarely experience any demand for food before noon and I'm satisfied until the evening meal. Sometimes I miss the noon or evening meal and I'm not particularly uncomfortable from the lack of food. I think most of this so-called hunger is psychological and pathological in nature.
You have said that the Vilcabambians of Peru get along well at hard labor on 1,300 to 1,400 calories daily. It's well known that hard working men need 3,000 calories and more a day. How can that few calories support vigorous work which these people are supposed to do?
Let us think about this. The world's healthiest and longest lived people eat a primarily carbohydrate diet. They eat very little protein foods in the form of legumes and very little oily foods in the form of legumes and nuts—in fact they consume almost no oily foods. Contrast this with Americans, especially laboring men, who take in 40% or more of their calories as fats and oils and a substantial part of the remainder in protein foods, especially meats, eggs and cheeses. Obviously the human organism isn't very efficient in dealing with these foods, as the studies indicate.
Further, we must recognize that the average American is a walking pathological museum, requiring far more energy just to deal with the pathology than healthy people. Further, impaired organisms do not operate efficiently, whereas healthy people operate efficiently and make full use of their foods.
How can you build muscle on a total fruit diet?
The average man uses about 75 grams of protein daily. Of this he needs only about 25 grams from the diet. The remaining 50 grams is obtained by recycling wastes. Fruit amply furnishes the 25 grams needed from outside sources daily. The healthier an organism becomes, the better use it can make of its nutrient supply. It is a myth and a delusion that we need more protein than normal to build muscles. It's like saying that we need more bricks to build a house than the plans call for. Once the structure has been built, replacement and additional bricks are needed but little.
How can we get vitamin B-12 from fruits? Vegetarians are warned about the lack of vitamin B-12 in vegetables and certainly fruits have none of this vitamin.
There's no vitamin B-12 in grass either, yet cattle have plenty of vitamin B-12. Almost no food in nature has vitamin B-12 in it.
We get our vitamin B-12 needs the same as other creatures in nature. We were not cheated in this regard. We do not have to eat animal products as the meat and dairy industries urge us to do. The bacteria of our intestines create vitamin B-12 which we absorb just as with other animals.
Almost all cases of anemia and B-12 deficiency occur in meat-eaters, not in vegetarians, which, if it happens, is given publicity like you wouldn't believe.
Shouldn't we eat locally-grown fruits for best nutrition? Animals in nature must live on locally-grown fruits and, as you have said, they're very healthy.
Here in Texas that would be great advice and we can do it. Our forefathers did that to a great extent on self-sufficient farms. But, as fruitarians, this is not presently possible. We must get our fruits from subtropical sources during the winter season. Of course we can develop and preserve our fruits, especially by drying and secondarily by freezing.
But fruits do not necessarily make us less healthy if they have been grown in other areas. Tropical bananas properly grown furnish no less nutritive benefits if eaten 2,000 miles away from their growing area as if consumed in that area. Nutritive adequacy is the need. Local produce may and may not be nutritively adequate. A good mix of foods from various soils is more likely to give us adequacy.
Aren't whole wheat products good to eat? The first Hygienists advocated whole wheat bread and other products. Graham advocated it so strongly that whole wheat flour came to be known as Graham flour. Why has that changed with Life Science?
By the end of the nineteenth century Hygienists had already begun to reject wheat as an unwholesome food no matter how eaten. Dr. Densmore and others began advocating an all-fruit diet with some nuts. Humans can't eat wheat raw and, even if cooked, the gluten protein component is almost wholly indigestible.