Moderators: JeffN, carolve, Heather McDougall
Johnnyzen wrote:What is a good ratio of raw and cooked food per day? Is an all raw diet optimal? What is your opinion of Macrobiotics? Thanks. John
Coleslaw wrote:Actually, it is the Oxalic Acid that is a problem when greens are cooked.
According to Norman Walker D. Sc. from his book, "Fresh vegetable and fruit juices", he states, "As to the oxalic acid itself, when converted into an inorganic acid by cooking or processing the food, it often results in causing inorganic oxalic acid crystals to form in the kidneys.....The most abundant supply of organic oxalic acid is found in fresh raw spinach, Swiss chard, beet greens, turnip and mustard greens, kale and collards, and the broad-leafed French sorrel".
Raw foodists thus believe we should eat our greens raw. The Raw family started up the green smoothies. http://www.rawfamily.com .
From the Rave Diet book by, Mike Anderson. He says that (pg.24) Anthony Sattilaro, MD, who at the age of 46 contracted prostate cancer that had spread throughout his body, found out about the Macrobiotic diet and through desperation went on this diet, which basically was an Asian peasant's diet. He remained cancer free for 10 years. But, he started eating chicken and fish again and his cancer returned. "Despite ten years of being declared free of cancer following his change in diet, his medical mind was still not totally convinced the diet had made the difference. As a result, he continued eating chicken and fish, was forced to resume taking his narcotic painkillers and soon the cancer killed him".
JeffN wrote:
While many may make the claim, I know of no actual documented verifiable cases or reports of anyone being "cured" of cancer on a macrobiotic (or any other) diet. If anyone knows of an actual documented case, I would love to see the info on it.
In Health
Jeff
Suebee wrote: I keep forgetting that if I answer on this particular post I have to give documentation via the scientific journals, which in this case I cant. It has more to do with experiential evidence which isn't considered scientific here.
Suebee wrote: When I belonged to the Natural Hygiene Society I attend one of their conferences and I didn't see healthy people--the women has big bloated stomachs like those kwashiokor children and I wondered if it was all the fruit they ate. One older woman spokeswoman has severe osteoporosis and was all hunched over. As I said, my observations which here don't count for much.
Suebee wrote:The words "no real published evidence" says it all. No, there wouldn't be--it would mean that a study had been done with group A on the diet, group B not on the diet, followed for a number of years by recognized doctors, etc. Usually people who heal themselves of cancer are ALONE and highly motivated. They are not randomly chosen, they do the hard work of finding out what will work for them, etc. .
Suebee wrote:Also, there would be plenty of bias against doing such a study as if such a diet worked, it would put plenty of people out of business, but really, the problem is one of motivation and consistent effort.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests