Quality of food vs type of food

[Nameless One]

As time goes on I'm finding that I'm really more of an omnivore, I like to have everything. When I go long enough without having a certain thing, be it raw fruit, raw veggies, certain fats, nuts, milk, bread, grains, and more rarely meat, I start to get pissed. I also start to feel really bad if I eat something of low quality. I originally was going to respond to the "lactose intolerance" thread, but decided perhaps it would be more appropriate to write this as a separate thread.

Some people really do better on certain types of foods and not on others. This could be genetics, it could also be how they grew up, and also I've read that depending on how one's intestinal flora are, certain foods might not agree with them. I've also found that being sedentary vs exercising, exercising makes me agree with food more, while being sedentary requires much more strictness or I'll feel like crap.

Standard milk had horrendous effects on me
Interesting. As a child up until mid teens I had plenty of standard hormone laden toxic laden milk from messed up cows factory farmed and I would have plenty of it with standard sugary refined grain refined sugar junk cereals. I was always chubby but then I became thin over years when I no longer ate that stuff, even while eating all sorts of junk food. Before changing this diet (not even intentionally), I had all sorts of sicknesses, high fevers, and had many doctor/hospital visits. I never went to a doctor again for over 10 years, nor have I had any sort of drug or medication, period.

I found the best milk I've ever tasted from a store
There's a brand of milk at the Whole Foods which is non-homogenized, grass fed, VAT pasteurized, whole (no reduced fat), and most of all organic certified, no added hormones. I've tried other organic milks, they taste like swill. They're ultra pasteurized and homogenized, and leave a sour taste in my mouth after only one sip. Unfortunately this stuff isn't raw, but it uses the lowest temperature pasteurization that is legal. VAT pasteurization means maintaining a temperature of 145 degrees F for 30 minutes. Have you ever had non-homogenized whole milk? If not, you might be missing out. This stuff tastes amazing, and it takes a glass or two to begin leaving a slight sour taste in my mouth.

The brand name is: Farmer's Creamery, or Farmer's All Natural Creamery. I will not touch any other organic brand around here. They're all junk. Don't even think about mentioning standard milks! I've had a couple glasses of this stuff and been super charged for 8 hours until eating again. Just a warning: I don't like leaving it in the fridge for too long because it seems to go bad in just a few days. I wish it came in quarts or half gallons, because I don't chug this stuff and I'd rather not waste a relatively expensive quality milk. I like having it occasionally.

Milk and cereal
I did notice, however, that my body does not like cereal and milk, even if I'm using this good brand. Even "organic" cereal, or cereal with zero sugar, liked puffed whole grains. In fact, I don't seem to do well when eating any kind of ready to eat packaged cereal, despite handling relatively high quality breads well. In fact, I've tried soy milk with cereal and the result is just as bad as milk and cereal, perhaps worse in some respects. If I'm exercising I think I can handle certain organic cereals if I just eat them by themselves, or with nuts.

Puffed grains
I don't think I'll ever touch any sort of puffed grains again. The puffing process utterly destroys grains in a way that normal cooking/baking does not. This must be why I've always shied away from rice cakes. There's just something not right about them. You'll also notice many of the standard brands of cereal are puffed. I don't think many people are aware of just how dangerous puffed grains might be. The puffing process does things to the proteins that standard cooking does not. Now combined puffed grains and standard bad milk and you've got a recipe for disaster. As a child I suffered all sorts of maladies. My #1 meal every day, which I had many heaping bowls of, was junk cereal + junk milk, which I just could not stop eating until I felt almost sick full.

Conclusion
What some may call lactose intolerance might just be junk milk intolerance. It might be a genuine inability to properly digest milk, but I've noticed that both milk and meat as well as bread and cooked food have gotten a horrible rap, mostly due to things that are associated with them, such as the horrendous practices, added chemicals, refining of sugar, grains, processing of fats, and crops with low mineral/micro-nutrient content thanks to bad farming practices and being bred for bulk (profit only), not biological hardiness. I find that I'm quite omnivorous, I like all sorts of stuff. It's when stuff is refined, poisoned, over processed, or if I'm sedentary and over eat, that's when I start to feel like crap on it.

How much have you attributed to type of food (meat, milk, bread, grains, honey, fruit, veggies, oils, roots, cooked vs raw), that really should be attributed to quality of food? Did you know that a piece of meat that takes 4-7 hours to digest in the stomach cooked, takes only half hour raw? How come I've gone days where I had nothing but honey and felt great? How could I subsist on 800-1000 calories of quality milk and quality bread, 2 meals a day, and feel great? By the same token, I can ask the standard meat eater, how come I feel so amazing on fruits and veggies only for a couple days? How come I've felt awesome after having a couple tablespoons of coconut oil, and nothing else for hours? How come I've felt so amazing from just... not eating for 24 hours (assuming I didn't need a fast)?

Someone who's prejudiced against certain types of food, cannot handle what I'm saying here.

[HealthySoul]

Hmm... interesting points you bring up. I think the problem with lactose intolerance is partly due to the terrible quality of milk products we drink. But let's not forget the fact that it's not natural for an animal to drink the mammary glands' secretion past the infant stage, let alone the titty juice from ANOTHER SPECIES.

But yes, "non-homogenized, grass fed, VAT pasteurized, whole (no reduced fat), and most of all organic certified, no added hormones milk" is relatively better for you. But how easy is it to get this quality of milk in everything that you eat? Do you only drink this milk and refuse the other products that use cheap milk?

Have you tried rice milk? If you don't expect it to taste like the high fat, high sugar, cow's milk it tastes really good. So good, in fact, that rice milk is the first thing that we run out of after going to the market, no matter how much we seem to buy.

Cow milk is a very concentrated source of food. It contains a lot of protein to grow a baby calf to 600 pounds fast. Whole cow's milk contains 28% protein while human breast milk only contains 8% (Source). If we only need 8% of our diet from milk when we are babies and growing really fast, then why would drinking milk that is 28% protein be good for us? The percentage of protein will increase by the amount of fat you take out.

As stated in the China Study and numerous others, the problems with protein is that we get too much of it.

"We never talk about protein anymore, because it's absolutely not an issue, even among children," says Marion Nestle, Ph.D., chair of the Department of Nutrition, Food and Hotel Management at New York University. "If anything, we talk about the dangers of high-protein diets. Getting enough is simply a matter of getting enough calories."

High protein comes from eating animal-based foods. Our body is not meant to consume meat or diary. Our digestive system is just not set up for it. We have the physiology and anatomy of an herbivore. We have very little in common with true omnivores like bears, raccoons, and dogs. For example, omnivores have an almost unlimited ability to handle saturated fats and cholesterol. When humans eat too much meat we get atherelclorsis.

Also, erectile dysfunction is more often seen in men with elevated cholesterol levels[1] and high levels of LDL “bad” cholesterol[2]– both conditions related to habitual meat-eating. The more meat makes you eat the less your penis works. Therefore, eating meat makes you less of a man.

The same things happen in studies done on rabbits and other herbivores.

Cow's milk is associated with bone loss, not strong bones.

Originally Posted by Dr. John Mcdougal, MD

"Osteoporosis is caused by several factors; however, the most important one is diet – especially the amount of animal protein and acid in the foods we eat.[3-5] The high acid foods are meat, poultry, fish, seafood, and hard cheeses – parmesan cheese is the most acidic of all foods commonly consumed.[6] Once consumed, this food-derived acid must be neutralized in the body. Fruits and vegetables can do this neutralizing (these foods are alkaline in nature). However, because the diet of the average Westerner is so deficient in fruits and vegetables and so high in acid foods, the primary neutralizer of dietary acid becomes their bones – the bones dissolve to release alkaline materials."

You don't need tons of calcium for strong bones. Milk and other animal-based foods actually takes calcium out of the bones to counter the high acidity of the food to balance the PH. The large amounts of calcium in the milk do not help build strong bones.[7]

It is clear the huge differences in quality of product whether the "food" came from pure, natural, organic conditions or it has so much additives in it that it still looks good 12 years later (McDonalds Burger).

But just because a food makes you feel better than a burger from McDonalds, does not mean that it's good for you.

What effect meat has on us when we consume large quantities of it raw, is not well documented. It is obviously much healthier for us then cooking it, but, again, our bodies aren't designed to digest animal-based foods. They contain too much of what we don't need, and not enough of what we do need. The problem with the western diet is that we consume too much protein:

"We never talk about protein anymore, because it's absolutely not an issue, even among children," says Marion Nestle, Ph.D., chair of the Department of Nutrition, Food and Hotel Management at New York University. "If anything, we talk about the dangers of high-protein diets. Getting enough is simply a matter of getting enough calories."

Yes, raw honey is an amazing food, I'm not surprised you felt great just eating that. Coconut oil is also praised as being extremely healthy for you as long as it's cold-pressed virgin oil.

If you feel good off of only milk and bread for a few days, I suggest going a month without consuming any animal foods and see you feel off of eating only milk and bread for two days. I guarantee you won't feel so great.



[1] Bodie J. Laboratory evaluations of erectile dysfunction: an evidence based approach. J Urol. 2003 Jun;169(6):2262-4.

[2] Walczak MK Prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in erectile dysfunction.
J Gend Specif Med. 2002 Nov-Dec;5(6):19-24.

[3] Maurer M. Neutralization of Western diet inhibits bone resorption independently of K intake and reduces cortisol secretion in humans. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2003 Jan;284(1):F32-40.

[4] Remer T. Influence of diet on acid-base balance. Semin Dial. 2000 Jul-Aug;13(4):221-6.

[5] Frassetto L. Diet, evolution and aging--the pathophysiologic effects of the post-agricultural inversion of the potassium-to-sodium and base-to-chloride ratios in the human diet. Eur J Nutr. 2001 Oct;40(5):200-13.

[6] Remer T. Potential renal acid load of foods and its influence on urine pH. J Am Diet Assoc. 1995 Jul;95(7):791-7.

[7] Kanis JA. The use of calcium in the management of osteoporosis. Bone. 1999 Apr;24(4):279-90.

[Nameless One]

You're prejudiced.

[HealthySoul]

It seems like you aren't open to new information. Maybe if you would look at the evidence before making your judgement, you would come to a different conclusion. How much of my post did you even read?

Who cares about the animals? I went vegan because any study that isn't funded by the meat or diary industry suggests it's much healthier FOR ME.

Look at our bodies, we have nothing in common with omnivores. We don't have sharp teeth or claws, the more meat we eat the sicker we get, and most people can't stand the taste of raw meat. It only tastes good after we cook it with a bunch of sauces, spices, salt, and/or fat.


1. Human (herbivore)
2. Cow (herbivore)
3. Cat (carnivore)
4. Dog (omnivore)
5. Horse (herbivore)

Do you like the idea of eating cats, or dogs, or horses? What makes these animals so different from cows, pigs, and chickens?

Would you drink human breast milk? Don't you think human breast milk is more suited for humans than cow's milk?

[Nameless One]

I've read it all, and nothing you are saying is new to me. I've read these things too. I've also read a lot of other things. For instance, have you read Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston Price? I could easily throw that at you as a source, and then say: "What now, ♥♥♥♥♥?"

But see, that's the thing. The more I've read about and experimented with diet, the more convinced I am that I haven't really met anyone who can really tell me what's what. At best I can find people who can share their story with me, and some useful things they've learned along the way. Experience and observation are key. And the more experience and observation I accrue, the more weaknesses I see in any rigid way of life, system of concepts, or belief system, no matter how good it seemed at first.

For me life is a continual process of forming beliefs and concepts, and then eventually, or quickly, having them destroyed and reshaped by further experience and/or observation. This used to make me suicidally depressed. But now it's a matter of course for me.

Almost every point you make could be argued endlessly, with citations up the yin-yang which refute each other. I could easily point at a couple things you said and show you how ridiculous they are, but why? I'm merely positing that:

A) Discerning whether a food is good for one self is often done sloppily by looking at food type prior to food quality. Often it is not food type, but food quality, that determines whether it is a beneficial food or harmful.

B) Personal experience and observation trump beliefs and concepts, every time. Beliefs and concepts are mental tools which are useful and get the job done when they conform to experience and observation. To the extent that they conflict with experience and observation, or to the extent that experience and observation are subjugated to beliefs and concepts and silenced, is the extent to which these mental tools become less and less useful.

[HealthySoul]

How does the book Nutrition and Physical Degeneration refute anything that I've said? I have not read the book, but my understanding of it is that processed foods are bad for you.

Our bodies are adapted to eat raw, plant foods. The farther away from our natural diet we strive, the more sick we become.

Yes, food type in important, but I feel better from eating commercially grown fruits or vegetables than the most organic, natural steaks.

You're right, no one can tell you which diet is best for you. But I can tell you what kind of diet is best for humans based on their physical makeup, just like I can say cats should eat meat, and bunnies should eat vegetables. The human body is insanely similar to herbivores.

What makes you think you should drink milk? Because you've drank it for a few days and felt alright?

[Nameless One]

I've made my points, and I'm more interested in making these points than in arguing details. See, I've had plenty of time in my life to argue details, which I've done just about endlessly. I like to K.I.S.S. (keep it simple stupid) without K.I.S.S. (keeping it simple stupidly) oversimplifying. That means if I can make a more broad point that is more all encompassing, which can easily apply to a multitude of individual actions and decisions much better than can a few academic details, I will do that, and not sink energy into the details which can easily become very confusing and just a quagmire for more arguing or conflicting points and confusion. Anybody with enough energy, smarts, power, can make an extremely strong, seemingly irrefutable case for eating certain types of foods only, but at the end of the day, how much does a case matter when someone is living their life and finding things out through their own experience? The only case I'm making is experience/observation > beliefs/concepts, and more precisely, since I'm mostly focused on physical vitality particularly with regards to eating, eating high quality food > low quality food and as such, low quality food of a certain type = energy depleting to someone, does not always mean high quality food of that same type = energy depleting to someone. I am merely making a case against food type prejudice.

[HealthySoul]

I totally agree with "experience/observation > beliefs/concepts," but how do you decide to make choices? What you experiment with will be based on your beliefs/concepts. If I read Steve's article about veganism, then I read about a doctor's story about how he grew up on a farm, drinking lot's of milk and eating meat with every meal, and through his studies, found that veganism is better in terms of health and disease.

After reading this book, my beliefs/concepts changed. Now that I had different beliefs, my experience changed because I tried different things, like not eating animal foods.

I had numerous benefits like feeling the food being easily absorbed from the mouth out the anus, spending way less on toilet paper, clearer thinking, and more energy and endurance.

After experiencing the benefits of not eating animal foods, my beliefs changed to I operate better on plants than on animal foods.

Then I began to see what other concepts I had missed out on about a healthy diet. I learn about raw food and all the damage we do in cooking it. Which makes sense because cooking food kills it. Would it not kill your skin if you touched the pan for more than a few seconds?

So I begin eating more raw foods and experiencing and observing the benefits of that, too. All because I search for other people beliefs/concepts who have experience observing hundreds and thousands of people on different diets.

You still didn't answer me about how Dr. Weston Price's book discredits my argument in any way.

I also don't see what your point is about "food type prejudices." I was only prejudiced before I started learning about what everyone had to say and what made sense to me.

[Nameless One]

Yes convincing arguments from other people have been useful to myself as well. You may be someone who does better on raw vegan in the long term. I cannot argue that point. I believe we are all special unique snowflakes. On the other hand, I believe we all are the same in some ways. From what I've seen, different people do better on different foods, some people will thrive on the same foods as certain other people. Regardless, food type is irrelevant if food quality is not addressed. That is my only point.

I could just as easily say: "Humans are natural omnivores" because I've found I do extremely well on a variety of quality foods and exercise, and suffer when I go too long without a certain type. As I've said, no doctors, no medications. 10 years. Before this, I've been hospitalized many times, and I was a bed wetter. Now I do not have to worry, even if I get super high, or drunk, or drink a lot before going to sleep, and not leak a single drop of urine, even if my bladder is completely full. I used to fear I would be a bed wetter my whole life, but it hasn't happened in 10 years, seemingly on its own. I go to bed with half a gallon of liquid in my system and don't care. I've had sleep studies done with regards to my bed wetting, performed by a brilliant doctor, who could not figure it out. In the past few years I've had one fever, an extremely strong one which lasted 1 day, I was convulsing in shivers in an 85 degree room under 4 blankets and wearing 4 jackets and boots. Then I was back to work the next day, and though I felt perfectly fine, I did cough up massive amounts of phlegm for the next two weeks, often spitting it out on the back docks where I worked. I consumed nothing but a slice of apple, a clove of garlic, a bit of tea, and a bit of fruit juice that day I had a fever. That was about 4 years ago, when I was still eating a heavy junk food diet (but without evil milk/cereal, which is my personal kryptonite).

Even when I was eating junk, I ate it omnivorously, so i got away with it to some extent. As I said, no doctors, no hospitals, no medication. I did suffer for it though, in many ways which would take me down more slowly than quickly, but accelerating as time went on. Then not through my own choice, but through my suffering and life path, I found myself becoming more in tune with quality, more natural foods. It's never been a passion or interest of mine. The only reason I care is because my life is showing me that if I don't take care of this, I will be in a sad mess.

Now, based on my experience, I could easily begin to say that for all people, type of food is irrelevant, and variety and quality is what matters. It's always tempting to decide one knows what's best for others, when they find something that works for themselves. I could also say for all people, that what matters is temperance in eating, and not stuffing oneself for psychological satisfaction. I could also say that lots of exercise is king, and without it, one will be decrepit. But that applies to me. That's my struggle. Believe me, I've had some phases where I felt a certain type of diet was hands down the best, either certain foods, certain meal timing, eating often, not eating often, not ever fasting, fasting, etc, different forms of physical training. In the end, however, I haven't found salvation in anything but prioritizing life experience.

For me to decide that my own dietary discoveries automatically apply to all human beings, would be quite erroneous. Many more naturally inclined doctors, some of whom got a lot of inspiration from Natural Hygiene, have found again and again, that different patients responded better to different diets, even if they suffered from the exact same problems.

Ultimately, I'm still on the path, and learning something new every day, getting rid of some delusion or illusion every day. I'm still working on it. Right now I'm fasting. I don't know how long I will be fasting, but I know that afterward will be a hotbed for dietary experimentation. I also know, that I will be breaking my fast on fruit, and a bit of vegetable. The more I go on, the less I can say I really know. Fortunately there's a wise teacher called experience which tells me whether I'm full of ♥♥♥♥ or not.

Now, let's get to questions. The Tarahumara indians of Mexico consider it aggressive and impolite to ask questions with the expectation of an answer. When you ask someone a question, you are basically telling them to tell you something. Now hey, that's all gravy. I'm not saying I subscribe to their system of courtesy, although it mirrors my own feelings a lot. Whether or not I answer your questions is for me to decide, and if you choose to discern what I know and don't know, or how valid my point is, based on whether or not I will cooperate and do as you say, then that is your mess, not mine. Also, questions are all loaded questions. By directly answering a question, one must to some extent conform to the question itself. By conforming to your question, I'd merely be derailing the points I'm making, by going into needless details.

[HealthySoul]

Ah, I was merely curious as to what was in Dr. Price's book that I did not know about. If you were trying to explain something to me and I ask you a question about it, I find it rather rude if you choose to ignore it. But to each his own...

You're right, we all have different types of bodies, and each body type requires different proportions of nutrients. Everyone has a dominant physiologic type. Some people are oxidative system dominant, some are autonomic system (ANS) dominant. Some people are fast oxidizers, some people are slow oxidizers. Some people are catabolic, some people are anabolic. And we all have different blood types. The many different diets for bodies of different types are "the details" as you say.

Based on all these differences, each human needs a different combination of carbohydrates, fats, and proteins. But the best sources for these nutrients comes from raw vegan food, because we are natural herbivores. Cooking food is not good for any animals because it kills the food.

If you want to learn more about the different body types, I suggest reading Conscious Eating by Gabriel Cousins. He is a big fan of personal experimentation to find your unique optimal diet.

[Nameless One]

I guess you find it rude for someone to do what they want, not what you want. To each his own. I'm a believer in freedom and whenever someone does not do what I want them to do, I've been getting better at just letting it go. This has been a long, painful process, which continues to this day. One could even say the fact that I'm writing this thread here, shows that I have a long ways to go. I'd say this is true. My only excuse is that I'm water fasting and keeping myself busy, since I am quite incapacitated. And what better way to keep busy than to discuss dietary? This is probably the most intense thing I am capable of doing right now without severely slowing down the cleansing process. But enough of my rationalizations.

Eating a Whole Food Diet is THE Healthy Way to Lose Weight

This is a page from your own web site which not only uses photographs that are from Weston Price's Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, but even quotes the man.

And yet you have not read this work.

I'm laughing at you. We're all laughing at you. (sorry, had to make a movie reference, State Property 2 is hilarious)

You can find both this publication and the movie for free, pirated on the internet, if you are short on funds or wish to try before you buy.

[HealthySoul]

You caught me. Yes, I got those pictures from the online version of the book. Yes, I've read Conscious Eating which summarizes Dr. Price's book, but I have not read the book itself. Is that a crime? No. Is it dishonest? Perhaps.

You assuming that I find it rude when people do what they want, is a gross generalization based on my statement that was there to give you a different perspective on the whole questions and expectations thing. This is very trivial, and matters little to me.

All arguments aside, good luck with the water fast! I'm currently testing recipes for my website so I do not feel now is the best time to fast. But in the distant feature I will give it a shot!

Now if you will excuse me, I'm off to read Nutrition and Physical Degeneration

[Nameless One]

Oh well, my mistake. Don't let little old me get in your way. Gross generalizations and all.

p.s. for those of you who aren't too important for this thread: You may find the dietary contents of these healthy people shown in Weston Price publication to be rather... interesting. Especially if you've been getting into the whole "animal foods bad" paradigm.

[moonrambler]

Originally Posted by Nameless One

Milk and cereal
I did notice, however, that my body does not like cereal and milk, even if I'm using this good brand. Even "organic" cereal, or cereal with zero sugar, liked puffed whole grains. In fact, I don't seem to do well when eating any kind of ready to eat packaged cereal, despite handling relatively high quality breads well. In fact, I've tried soy milk with cereal and the result is just as bad as milk and cereal, perhaps worse in some respects. If I'm exercising I think I can handle certain organic cereals if I just eat them by themselves, or with nuts.

Puffed grains
I don't think I'll ever touch any sort of puffed grains again. The puffing process utterly destroys grains in a way that normal cooking/baking does not. This must be why I've always shied away from rice cakes. There's just something not right about them. You'll also notice many of the standard brands of cereal are puffed. I don't think many people are aware of just how dangerous puffed grains might be. The puffing process does things to the proteins that standard cooking does not. Now combined puffed grains and standard bad milk and you've got a recipe for disaster. As a child I suffered all sorts of maladies. My #1 meal every day, which I had many heaping bowls of, was junk cereal + junk milk, which I just could not stop eating until I felt almost sick full.

Conclusion
What some may call lactose intolerance might just be junk milk intolerance.

The comments about puffed cereal reminded me of Paul Stitt's book where he talks about the experiment where rats eating puffed cereal died before rats in any other aspect of the study.

Have you read any of Sally Fallon's writings? It sounds like she takes a similar stance on junk milk.

Food processing-Chemical warfare-Toxic agents-carcinogens-Toxins-aspertame-Sugars-Milk

[Nameless One]

Originally Posted by moonrambler

The comments about puffed cereal reminded me of Paul Stitt's book where he talks about the experiment where rats eating puffed cereal died before rats in any other aspect of the study.

Have you read any of Sally Fallon's writings? It sounds like she takes a similar stance on junk milk.

Food processing-Chemical warfare-Toxic agents-carcinogens-Toxins-aspertame-Sugars-Milk

Yea I read Paul Stitt's book Beating The Food Giants, while I feel like it's kind of a giant advertisement for his food products, it's still a great book. Thanks for the link. Wow. Even I didn't suspect things were this bad... this link just piles it all on, in all its horrendous glory. No wonder we're all so ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ up.