The Raw Vegan Paradox ?!?!?

[Raw tennis]

Hi I'm new here. Raw vegan(also new in this department:) looking around for some information.

And I came across this article:

http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/cal-par/calorie-paradox1c.shtml#main%20table.

 

Also I was going through youtube vids and came across "The Raw Family" talking about chimps. Are they aware that monkeys eat insects and small quantities of meat therefor they're NOT vegans?

 

 

Can you, please comment on the above article?

 

Thank you.

[beforewisdom]

Chimpanzees are not monkeys. They also aren't vegans or even vegetarians. They eat vegan 99% of the time. Same for Gorillas & orangutangs who also eat dirt and feces.

 

Chimpanzees are humanity's closest living genetic relatives. They are more like us than any other animal. However, this doesn't mean that what will work for chimpanzee/human will work for a human/chimpanzee. Similar does not mean the same and chimpanzees are a DISTINCT species.

 

I *think* Chimpanzees can make their own vitamin C. If not, some of the other apes can and guess what? Human beings can not. My point is that it is fallacious to look at the dietary habits of apes to try justify fad diets for human beings.

 

FWIW, I always felt beyondveg.com was anti-vegetarian. However, Jack Norris who is the cofounder of the animal rights group Vegan Outreach and who became a Registered Dietitian specifically to help promote veganism thinks that it is good to read beyondveg.com.

 

He doesn't agree with everything beyondveg.com says, but Jack Norris feels that many vegans have fictional beliefs in regards to nutrition and feels that sites like beyondveg.com that challenges people with studies ( however bogus and OLD ) are a good thing.

 

Jack Norris actually wrote an interesting opinion about raw foodism and beyondveg.com here:

 

http://www.veganhealth.org/articles/cooking

 

Again, Jack Norris is an animal rights activist who confounded Vegan Outreach and Jack Norris is Registered Dietitian. He is one of us and he is on our side.

[Katabatic]

This is something I have been thinking about. I have been to BeyondVeg and don't exactly agree with everything he says, but I guess it's not bad to read for another perspective. BeyondVeg basically says you can't get enough calories on raw foodism, and yet I do see raw athletes here and elsewhere. And, yet, according to his experience, raw foodists have to go to the toilet way too frequently. What's the deal? Do raw foodists have to go to the toilet too frequently? Hopefully the raw people here could answer this.

 

Wrangham and Conklin-Brittain cite much research to indicate that, in their words, "Cooking is therefore widely accepted back to at least 250,000 years ago." Some evidence points to 1.6 million years. They also argue that it takes only 5,000 years or less for the human body to adapt to different methods of eating. The implication is that humans have been cooking long enough to have adapted to a diet of cooked foods, and that in a normal state of nature there may be no turning back. This could explain why so many people who try raw foodism fail to thrive.

This quote from the site you linked is something I have thought about as well. We may have actually had our digestive system change to live on cooked foods.

[Im Your Man]

interresting link, thanx Raw Tennis. Thing is, when you eat raw foods, you need less calories than with cooked foods and espescially when it's meat, fish and other things hard to digest.

When you eat a fruit, it provides energy quick (less than 30 minutes) with virtually no lost of energy to digest it. But when you're on a diet rich in cooked foods, meat and high in proteins, the body may use up to 1/3 from the calories of those foods just to digest them . It takes lots of energy, besides, all the blood that flows to the digestive muscles leave less blood for brain and other muscles, causing fatigue and feeling sleepy.

 

Anyway, eating only greens it's true that you would need to eat all day long, but it's not true for nuts, seeds, and hi-calorie fruits like avocados, bananas, dates and dried fruits like figs, sprouted grains.

 

Even if raw-foodists de need to eat larger amounts of foods, it's a good not a bad! it allows to eat more without gaining weight, who doesn't like to eat?

[dontxhide]

Is there some scientific explanation why a raw vegan cant get enough calories?

 

It doesnt make any sense to me. You eat, you get calories. I was raw for about a year and was getting about 4000 kcal a day, very easily.

[beforewisdom]

BeyondVeg basically says you can't get enough calories on raw foodism, and yet I do see raw athletes here and elsewhere.

 

There are raw sources of concentrated calories. Juices, nuts, seeds & avocados. Interestingly all those sources fall on one extreme or another. Either concentrated sources of simple sugars ( juices, dried fruits) or concentrated sources of fat.

 

Many people can't handle getting their calories that way and the preferred fuel source of the human body is complex carbohydrates. Tough to get raw.

[DV]

BeforeWisdom,

 

Thank you for another well-researched, thoughtful post.

[Raw tennis]

Chimpanzees are not monkeys. They also aren't vegans or even vegetarians. They eat vegan 99% of the time. Same for Gorillas & orangutangs who also eat dirt and feces.

 

Chimpanzees are humanity's closest living genetic relatives. They are more like us than any other animal. However, this doesn't mean that what will work for chimpanzee/human will work for a human/chimpanzee. Similar does not mean the same and chimpanzees are a DISTINCT species.

 

I *think* Chimpanzees can make their own vitamin C. If not, some of the other apes can and guess what? Human beings can not. My point is that it is fallacious to look at the dietary habits of apes to try justify fad diets for human beings.

 

FWIW, I always felt beyondveg.com was anti-vegetarian. However, Jack Norris who is the cofounder of the animal rights group Vegan Outreach and who became a Registered Dietitian specifically to help promote veganism thinks that it is good to read beyondveg.com.

 

He doesn't agree with everything beyondveg.com says, but Jack Norris feels that many vegans have fictional beliefs in regards to nutrition and feels that sites like beyondveg.com that challenges people with studies ( however bogus and OLD ) are a good thing.

 

Jack Norris actually wrote an interesting opinion about raw foodism and beyondveg.com here:

 

http://www.veganhealth.org/articles/cooking

 

Again, Jack Norris is an animal rights activist who confounded Vegan Outreach and Jack Norris is Registered Dietitian. He is one of us and he is on our side.

 

It's always a good thing to keep the mind constantly working/searching out new data. I feel that beyond.com is propaganda and should not be taken too seriously.

One's experience should speak for itself.

 

Enough said.

 

Thanks for the article very interesting indeed. About the enzymes being destroyed in the stomach is making me think more about the raw food being more digestible than cooked food. Only time will show ( in my case).I'm going to keep going being raw.

 

Thanks again.

[Im Your Man]

not sure the numbersof the link are even good...

It says to have 2 000 calories only from avocados, we would need to eat 2,5 lbs of avocados.

I made the calcul:

On Nutritiondata.com, it says 100gr of avocados is 160 kcals.

2 000 divided by 160 equals 12,5

12,5 times 100 equals 1 250gr equals 1,25 lb

 

so 1,25lbs, not 2,5

[dontxhide]

My diet is usually based on how I feel.

 

I feel healthy, wonderful, and allergy free when eating all raw, but when I do get cooked food cravings I dont stop myself from eating, as long as its healthy, and as unprocessed as possible.

 

Like in the article, the second part, one vegan diet isnt right for all vegans.

[beforewisdom]

interresting link, thanx Raw Tennis. Thing is, when you eat raw foods, you need less calories than with cooked foods and espescially when it's meat, fish and other things hard to digest.

 

Not true. Your calorie needs are the same regardless of the food you eat. Some foods are more satiating than others. Raw vegetables can have a lot of bulk ( fiber & water ) which make people feel fuller on fewer calories.

[Im Your Man]

you're right.

What I meant is : when you eat 100 kcals of beef, you actually get only 67kcals that are gonna be use, the other 33kcals cannot be used for running, breathing, etc, because the digestive system used it.

 

But if you eat 100kcals of fruits, perhaps you can use 90 instead of 67.

[Wobbly Lifter]

not sure the numbersof the link are even good...

It says to have 2 000 calories only from avocados, we would need to eat 2,5 lbs of avocados.

I made the calcul:

On Nutritiondata.com, it says 100gr of avocados is 160 kcals.

2 000 divided by 160 equals 12,5

12,5 times 100 equals 1 250gr equals 1,25 lb

 

so 1,25lbs, not 2,5

 

Actually 1250 grams is 2.7 lbs as 1 pound equals 454 grams.

[Im Your Man]

you're right WobbyLifter... after I posted this I wasn't sure how many grams make 1 pound.

 

You know what the real raw paradox is ? When you eat 2000 kcals of raw foods, you actually get 2 000 kcals or a bit less because of digestion. But to get 2000 calories of cooked food you need to eat 2650 calories. That explains why people eat so much, and more than raw foodists. But what's amazing is how cooked and raw has different effects on the body.

 

[Zack]

But to get 2000 calories of cooked food you need to eat 2650 calories. d

 

Can you show some evidence for this scientific calculation?

[Wobbly Lifter]

you're right WobbyLifter... after I posted this I wasn't sure how many grams make 1 pound.

 

You know what the real raw paradox is ? When you eat 2000 kcals of raw foods, you actually get 2 000 kcals or a bit less because of digestion. But to get 2000 calories of cooked food you need to eat 2650 calories. That explains why people eat so much, and more than raw foodists. But what's amazing is how cooked and raw has different effects on the body.

 

 

The video you post contradicts what you just said. You get more calories from eating cooked potatoes then raw. Some of us are active enough that we don't worry about getting fat. We need the extra

[Im Your Man]

But to get 2000 calories of cooked food you need to eat 2650 calories. d

 

Can you show some evidence for this scientific calculation?

 

Have read it in a book called Living Foods for Optimum Health, Brian Clements, 1996, Prima Publishing. I don't remember what page. It said that the body uses about 1/3 of the calories of cooked foods you eat just to digest it, while it's far less for living foods. Maybe the author doesn't even show evidence of this because there's maybe no studies made on this. But it is obvious that digesting 400 kcals of pizza and cheeseburger will put the digestive system on harder work than digesting 2 avocados which is 400 kcals also.

 

Wobby Lifter, at first view the video may seem to contradict what I said about calories, but this is not about calories anymore but about the nature of the food itself, it's molecular structure is modified when it's cooked; the food becomes less of a food and becomes more of a innert object (because it's not living anymore, it,s dead) so the body don't even see it as food, the nutrients are not all absorbed by the body to use as energy, not rejected by the body. The body is not able to use this dead "food" for anything useful so it just goes straight to storage of fat.

[michaelhobson]

Maybe the author doesn't even show evidence of this because there's maybe no studies made on this.

 

Kind of sums the whole thing up, doesn't it?

[Katabatic]

http://www.weedsandseedshealth.com/?q=node/57

Net Gain: Increased energy through conservation not consumption

 

By Brendan Brazier

 

The nutritional value of food as stated by the “label claimâ€

[Wobbly Lifter]

http://www.weedsandseedshealth.com/?q=node/57

Net Gain: Increased energy through conservation not consumption

 

By Brendan Brazier

 

The nutritional value of food as stated by the “label claimâ€

[ChaserHUN]

I went raw and dropped a kg now I'm 180cm tall and 55kg, but I don't feel that I got weaker, I have lot more energy, I hope with lots of exercise I will pack on muscles, because sometimes I freak out that I'm tooooo skinny

[Wobbly Lifter]

I went raw and dropped a kg now I'm 180cm tall and 55kg, but I don't feel that I got weaker, I have lot more energy, I hope with lots of exercise I will pack on muscles, because sometimes I freak out that I'm tooooo skinny

 

I'm your height and 15kg heavier and feel skinny! Eat man! Quick. Eat anything and everything!

[ChaserHUN]

I went raw and dropped a kg now I'm 180cm tall and 55kg, but I don't feel that I got weaker, I have lot more energy, I hope with lots of exercise I will pack on muscles, because sometimes I freak out that I'm tooooo skinny

 

I'm your height and 15kg heavier and feel skinny! Eat man! Quick. Eat anything and everything!

woaaaaa, now I feel ultraskinny, I'm eating all day, I don't get wich I don't mind, muscle is coming, but thats a long journey to get really muscular, but I'm not really a bodybuilder, my goal is not to be extra huge

[Im Your Man]

Maybe the author doesn't even show evidence of this because there's maybe no studies made on this.

 

Kind of sums the whole thing up, doesn't it?

 

Thing is : how do you wanna do a study on this ?

It is impossible to recreate perfectly a stomach in laboratory and see what happen. Even if they can do it, it's just gonna be the results made in laboratory and it would differs from the results in human body.

 

But this sums the whole thing up:

if we look at the cells of a living person, they're not like those of a dead person, don't you agree?; so a dead food is not like a living food.

Also, we all know that proteins take longer to digest, that means more calories are needed to break down a steak than a watermelon.

[Zack]

that means more calories are needed to break down a steak than a watermelon.

 

Undoubtedly.