Jump to content

The Rationale of Food Combining


Recommended Posts

The Rationale of Food Combining

From The Natural Hygiene Life Science Course

by Dennis Nelson

From Living Nutrition Magazine vol. 16

http://www.livingnutrition.com

©Living Nutrition Publications. All rights reserved.

 

The principles of food combining were first explained in the earlier part of the 20th century by Dr. John Tilden, M.D., author of Toxemia Explained, and Dr. William Howard Hay, M.D. Their work was followed by that of Dr. Herbert Shelton and is continuing with the doctors and teachers of the Natural Hygiene movement.

 

 

This is not to imply that those people "laid down the law" about how we should eat, but rather that they observed how the human body works optimally in carrying out the processes of digestion. They found that nature's way demands simplicity, and any alterations of this plan will be met with less than ideal consequences.

 

 

It has been observed that animals in nature eat very simply and combine their food minimally. Carnivorous animals eat their meal alone, without any carbohydrate or acid foods. Birds and squirrels have also been observed to eat one type of food at a time. Certainly no animal in nature would at any one time eat the variety of foods that many humans are accustomed to eating at a conventional meal.

 

 

The basis for food combining is a logical application of the chemistry and physiology of digestion, with special consideration given to the limitations of our digestive juices and enzymes. The practical application of this knowledge has given us the rules of food combining, which we may use to ensure a greater degree of digestive efficiency.

 

 

In relating this concept lo nutrition, we should realize that the nourishment our body receives is dependent on what we can digest and assimilate. That which is not digested only wastes the body's energy in passing it through the alimentary canal. What is worse, the undigested food becomes soil for bacteria to feed upon, resulting in putrefaction and fermentation which irritates and poisons our tissues. This is a primary contributing factor in the causation of disease.

 

 

This is not to say that applying the principles of food combining will always lead to good digestion, as there are other factors which reduce our digestive capabilities, e.g., overeating and eating under stressful conditions. Some of these include: fatigue; preceding or following strenuous exercise; during a fever or when there is severe inflammation; and while experiencing strong emotions. All of these conditions hinder digestion and predispose to bacterial decomposition of food. In addition, the use of condiments, (especially salt), vinegar, alcohol, coffee or tea during a meal retards digestion considerably. All of these circumstances must be considered if one desires good digestion, and, consequently, a well-nourished body.

 

 

That people suffer greatly from indigestion is evidenced by the fact that billions of dollars are spent yearly on over-the-counter medicines in the U.S. alone, to suppress the pains and discomforts due to conventional eating and living habits. Diseases of the stomach, intestines, colon, and rectum are on the increase; conventional treatment with drugs and surgery does not remove their underlying causes. We need to adopt a saner plan of living that includes sound nutritional principles, if we are ever to remedy this situation. Simple meals of compatible combinations are a necessity for good digestion.

 

 

Dr. Shelton says in his book Food Combining Made Easy: "As all physiologists are agreed that the character of the digestive juice secreted corresponds with the character of the food to be digested and that each food calls for its own specific modification of the digestive juice, it follows as the night the day, that complex mixtures of food greatly impair the efficiency of digestion. Simple meals will prove to be more easily digested, hence more healthful."

 

 

The wonderful thing about the food combining concept is that anyone, no matter what their dietary preference, may benefit from the application of these rules to their particular diet. Whether you subsist on a vegetarian diet or one that includes animal foods need not be a concern in food combining principles. The digestive system works fundamentally the same for all humans, both chemically and physiologically. The idea that each one of us has individual needs and capacities is true to a certain extent, but this does not nullify the physiological limitations of the human organism.

 

 

To quote Dr. Shelton again: "There are great numbers of people who will object lo these simple rules on the ground that their own experiences have revealed that it is safe for them to violate each and every one of these rules. The rules, they will say, may be applicable to some people, but not to them. The individual, rejecting the existence of a general law as the basis of physiology and digestion in diet, in health and disease, and holding that what is most valuable to one person may not be helpful to another – that 'one man's meat is another man's poison' – and that what is best for each individual may be determined only by observation of each person's idiosyncrasies will, perhaps, find it impossible to accept the truth of any plan of living that does not meet with the approval of his/her habits and prejudices.

 

 

"If we accept the obvious fact that a general law underlies physiology and biology and that all are subject to this law, it becomes easy to understand that hard and fast rules may be established that will fit all human beings. Physiology is not as chaotic and unlawful as some people seem to think.

 

 

"I frequently get another objection lo any effort to regulate the diet and eating practices according to any law of life. It runs this way: 'Diet is not all of life. Other things are also important.' Nobody stresses this fact as emphatically as does the Hygienist; but the objection is not raised by those who wish to emphasize the importance of the factors of life. It is made by those who desire to find a reason to disregard all the sane rules of eating and living. "

 

 

Digestion of Foods

 

 

Digestion is the term that applies to the processes by which the complex materials of food are broken down into simpler substances in preparation for their subsequent entrance into the bloodstream. For example, proteins are broken down into amino acids; carbohydrates, composed of starches and sugars, are converted into simple sugars; and fats are broken down into fatty acids. These are the simple substances which the body can use to build new tissue. Let us now discuss this process and how it works.

 

 

The human digestive tract may be divided into three cavities: the mouth, the stomach, and the small intestine. Each of these cavities contains its own distinct digestive secretions with which to carry on its own specific work of digestion. In each of these three stages, the work carried on at one stage prepares the food for the digestive work done at the next.

 

 

For purposes of this article, we need only concern ourselves with first two stages of the digestive process, that of salivary and gastric digestion. However, it must be understood that the efficiency of their work will determine the efficiency of digestion that is subsequently conducted in the intestine.

 

 

When food enters the mouth, the mechanical process of mastication along with the chemical process of insalivation initiate the digestive process. The taste buds are excited and these tiny nerve endings send signals to the brain to determine the type of food ingested. Immediately, specific juices are secreted, and an environment is created for the efficient digestion of that particular food. If this contains starch, then a specific enzyme called “salivary amylase” (ptyalin) will also be secreted in the saliva. However, this enzyme acts only upon starches and will not be secreted if the food does not contain starch.

 

 

After leaving the mouth, the food passes down the esophagus and into the stomach, where the digestive process continues. Here we find gastric juice containing primarily hydrochloric acid and digestive enzymes. The pH of this gastric juice is variable, ranging from highly acidic to a mild acid or nearly neutral medium, depending on the type of food eaten. This variable range is secured by the degree of concentration of the hydrochloric acid.

 

 

Also present in the gastric juice are three primary enzymes: pepsin, which acts upon proteins; gastric lipase which acts upon fats; and rennin, which acts upon milk proteins. This third enzyme is present in sufficient quantities only in the gastric juice of infants. When the child has a full set of teeth, the secretion of rennin begins to diminish. This phenomenon indicates the time for weaning and feeding solid food. There is no physiological need for milk from this time forth.

 

 

The important fact lo understand here is that each enzyme can act only upon one class of food. For instance, the enzyme salivary amylase which acts upon starches, cannot act upon protein or fat. In fact, enzymatic action is so specific that each one of the different forms of complex sugars, such as maltose or lactose, requires its own specific enzyme for digestion.

 

 

An additional consideration is the fluid medium in which the digestive process takes place during the gastric phase. In the case of starches, salivary amylase requires an alkaline medium in which to continue its work and will be destroyed by a highly acid environment. This is also true of fats, whereby the enzyme gastric lipase and its action upon fats is inhibited by a highly acid medium in the stomach. However, in the case of proteins we have the opposite situation; they require a highly acid environment for the enzymatic activity of pepsin to take place. This is created by a sufficient outpouring of hydrochloric acid into the gastric juice.

 

 

Now as previously stated, there are three stages of the digestive process. Each one of these stages requires the action of different enzymes, and the efficiency of their work is determined by the digestive efficiency of the preceding stage. It is a sequential operation. For example, if pepsin, the enzyme secreted in the stomach during protein digestion, has not converted the proteins into peptones, it follows that erepsin, the enzyme secreted in the intestine, will not be able to carry on the final stage of protein digestion, that of converting the peptones into amino acids. The work of each enzyme is designed specifically for the stage of its secretion.

 

 

So, if there is to be efficient digestion of a food, the limitations of each stage of the digestive process must be respected. This requires that a food be eaten by itself or in combination with other foods that will not interfere with the distinct activity of different enzymes. When two foods are eaten that require opposite conditions for their digestion, the secretions will clash with each other and digestion of both foods will be limited or even suspended.

 

 

Another observation concerning the efficient digestion of various foods pertains to the emptying time of the stomach into the intestine. Fruits, when eaten alone as a meal, will remain in the stomach from ten minutes to an hour. However, when concentrated starches are eaten, their digestive time in the stomach takes from two to three hours. In the case of concentrated proteins, the digestive time required in the stomach is about four hours. In fact, some foods may require five or six hours to complete gastric digestion, as in the case of Iegumes or grains.

 

 

The point I wish lo make here is this: If foods are eaten together which require different time periods for gastric digestion, then we create a situation in which a food requiring the shorter time is held up in the stomach awaiting the more lengthy digestive time required by the other food. When this occurs, as when fruit or other sugars are eaten with protein, for example, the sugars ferment and nutrition is impaired.

 

 

Thus, with these considerations in mind, we may realize that we have the possibility of creating two distinct experiences when taking food. In the case of carbohydrates, during digestion they are broken down into simple sugars called monosaccharides, which the body can make use of to provide us with nutrients. However, if carbohydrates undergo fermentation, they are broken down into carbon dioxide, acetic acid, lactic acid, alcohol, and water; all, with the exception of the last, are poisonous substances. In the case of proteins, during digestion they are broken down into amino acids; however, when putrefaction occurs, they are broken down into a variety of ptomaines, leucomaines, and other poisons.

 

 

This is true with all other food components: enzymatic digestion of foods prepares them for the nutritive needs of the body, whereas bacterial decomposition of foods makes them unfit for its needs, poisoning it with the products of fermentation and/or putrefaction. The responsibility for harmonious digestion rests with us. Failure to observe digestive requirements results in subsequent pathology of mild to acute indigestion.

 

======

 

Food Combining For Optimum Digestion

 

© by David Klein, Ph.D.

 

Why do we need to practice proper food combining? Because our digestive systems cannot digest haphazard combinations, as evidenced by indigestion, flatulence, acid reflux, diarrhea, vomiting, body odors, colds, flu, pimples, dandruff, chronic pain, fatigue, and countless other signs of autointoxication. If we have chronic gastrointestinal gas, queasiness, bloating and body odors, we are not healthy, even if we feel good and happy. Toxic matter and gases in the body do erode our health and will sooner or later lead to disease, with no exception! Those who can seemingly eat “anything” are, ultimately, not going to get away with it! In fact, hygienic physiologists agree that over ninety percent of all known common maladies and major diseases are caused by autointoxication, i.e., self-poisoning, mainly stemming from eating diets which are incompatible with our physiological constitution and capabilities.

 

 

A properly combined diet of 75 percent or more raw food will clear up most maladies. The correct diet for the human species, as revealed by studies of anatomy, physiology and biology is, predominantly, whole, ripe, organic raw fruits and succulent vegetables, with minimal amounts of nuts and seeds.

 

 

The validity of the food combining guidelines (or“rules”) has been confirmed by virtually everyone who has applied them for a while, and they are supported by physiological science. During the Civil War era, a medical doctor named Beaumont performed clinical tests on a man who, by virtue of an unusual injury, had a temporary hole extending to the exterior of his abdomen which afforded direct sampling of his stomach contents under various eating conditions. Those observations were used subsequently by physiologists Dr. John H. Tilden and Dr. Herbert M. Shelton in the formulation of food combining guidelines. In my own case, within 24 hours of adopting a vegan diet and applying food combining, my g.i. system, which had been a virtual erupting volcano when I suffered with ulcerative colitis, completely quieted down, leaving me feeling wonderfully disease-free and allowing me to heal at a rapid rate. Countless others have experienced similar relief of their g.i. ills.

 

 

Test the guidelines out and learn for yourself. Everyone who diligently follows them, avoiding overeating and incorporating other essential elements of healthful living, sooner or later derives the benefits of excellent digestion, no body odors, minimal or no gas, inoffensive feces, effortless defecation, clear urine, clearer skin, eyes and mind, more balanced composure, ideal weight level, greater physical stamina, faster healing, better sleep, and youthful vitality. Basically, mono meals yield the best results. “Simple 3” salads (e.g., lettuce, tomato and avocado) also work very well. In sum, the simpler the digestive task, the better the results.

 

Guidelines

 

* Eat melons alone.

 

* Eat all other sweet fruits on an empty stomach with or without green neutral vegetables (e.g., lettuce, kale, celery) and/or cucumbers.

 

* Do not eat acidic citrus fruits with other types of sweet fruits.

 

* A minimal amount of sweet acidic citrus fruit might digest well with avocado, nuts, seeds and young coconut (whole, or blended into dressings) – test it and learn.

 

* Tomato, Cape gooseberry and tomatillo combine well with nuts, seeds and avocado.

 

* Do not eat fatty high-protein foods (nuts, seeds and coconut) with sweet fruit or starchy foods (squash, tubers, carrots, peas and corn).

 

* A minimal amount of avocado might combine well with starchy foods.

 

* Nuts and seeds can be eaten together. Avoid eating nuts/seeds with avocado and coconut.

 

* Eating nuts, seeds, coconut and avocado with green neutral vegetables (e.g., lettuce, kale, celery) and/or cucumbers typically enhances digestion as additional proper digestive juices will aid in the digestion of the fat.

 

* Legumes are poorly digested because of their high protein and starch content. Sprouted legumes are somewhat more digestible. These are best eaten with green neutral vegetables (e.g., lettuce, kale, celery) and/or cucumbers.

 

* Sweet peas and young carrots fresh from the garden are nonstarchy; older ones are starchy.

 

* Starchy foods combine well with all vegetables and non-sweet fruits except tomatoes-–-do not mix tomatoes with starchy foods. Protein/fatty foods combine well with nonstarchy vegetables and cucumbers. Avocado combines well with any kind of vegetable, tuber and non-sweet fruit. Eat avocado minimally until you have overcome illness.

 

• Space out your meals, allowing time for your system to assimilate and rest.

 

* * *

 

Caveats

 

The efficacy of correct food combinations is negated by:

 

* Overeating on fats and starches.(eating beyond your body’s ability to secrete sufficient digestive juices).

 

* Diluting the enzyme-food mixture (chyme) in your stomach by drinking more than a few sips of juices or water.

 

* Eating when tired.

 

* Eating when stressed.

 

* Eating when not hungry.

 

* Eating foods which do not appeal to your senses.

 

* Eating before the digestion of your previous meal is complete. (Wait an hour for fruit, 4 hours for starches and 6 or more hours for fatty foods.)

 

* Eating when the stomach and intestines contain fermenting debris or digesting food from a previous meal.

 

* Eating quickly.

 

* Incomplete chewing.

 

* Exercising vigorously soon after eating.

 

* Going to sleep soon after eating.

 

* Shallow breathing.

 

* Powerful seasonings.

 

* Toxic irritants. (E.g., vinegar, onions, bitter herbs, pepper. Vinegar is acidic – it destroys alkaline digestive secretions.)

 

* Medicines.

 

========

 

Flu Viruses or Combos Abombos?

 

©by David Klein, Ph.D.

 

Holiday meals have the dubious tradition of knocking people out with abominable food combos. Belch . . . grumble grumble . . . plop plop fizz fizz (Alka Seltzer) . . . zzzzzzzzzZZZZZ . . . Then there's the aches and flu – and people blame it all on flu viruses. Not so! When we eat a haphazard meal of anything and everything, we turn our warm bacteria-laden bellies into toxic fermenting chambers that will boil over like Mount Fluvious. It's not the viruses in the turkey (if any) that make you sick--you do it to yourself. Viruses are tiny bits of DNA which are nontoxic in the g.i. tract, thus they cannot cause influenza. When you have gastritis or flu symptoms, your body is urgently trying to get rid of a toxic mess that is fermenting food/chyme, in order to restore inner purity.

 

 

That was the cooked fooder’s scenario. If you think that you are immune to this because you eat all raw, you are mistaken. Gastric eruptions can and will happen almost every time if you eat combo abombo raw meals such as this: cranberry sauce, almond milk, avocado soup, veggie loaf with nuts, seeds, spices and salt, salad with oil dressing and sprouted chickpeas, sweet fruit and nut dessert. That spells G.I. DISASTER and calls for a simpler way of eating.

 

 

Simple combos or mono meal eating is a beautiful experience, and creates peace, serenity, purity, slimness and youthful vitality, while saving us money and time. There is no reward for gluttony. By eating simply, savoring each food item separately, and living healthfully, we’ll live longer and, thus, be able to eat many more delightful meals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

hey guys while I was searching for the old thread started by ChaserHun about food combining principles (and the search engine didn't find it -- or was it located in another section than the raw section?) I found this instead. Thought it could be useful if someone wants to continue the discussion here instead of in "too much protein?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey guys, I'm mostly raw but I take a Multivitamin. How long do you think it takes to digest a multivitamin before I can start eating?
hmm, good question. Some vitamins are harder to digest or for some people it's harder to digest. But usually, on the bottles they advide to take the pills at the same time of the meals. They don't say the reason. But the reason is that they hope that eating real foods at the same time may trick your body so it will think that the pill is food too. Otherwise your body don't see a pill as food and may not bother to digest it and use it's vitamins, the body can see this as an alien and may attack it. Most of those vitamins are synthetic and produced with petrol and tar. Eat some fruits 20-30 minutes before the meal instead, or a green salad with the meal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the doctors (and doctors don't know anything about nutrition, they only deal with drugs) claim that eating in a different way than the Nature's way and that it doesn't cause any disease (like colon cancer and many other cancers), they should back up their claims. Nobody can prove the inocuity of such food habits, so it isn't safe to aprove it or promote it.

 

Read the article for further information concerning the diseases caused by mixing foods against the laws of life.

 

I just have a few questions to ask to the opponents of proper food combining:

 

-why do you all agree that there are certain meals harder to digest than others.

-why do you all agree that bloating, indigestion, stomach pains, etc all exist.

-will you deny all your life that there are things that are easily digested and some not ? Which trainer will give a soy protein smoothie with banana and berries in it to his athlete before the competition ? or potatoes and steak. It would be suicide, the guy will have cramps and won't be able to pass the finish line even by walking. Or the olympic diver with indigestion will not do flips because of his skills but because of convulsions of pain.

-do you seriously think that our digestive system is optimized to deal with, for instance, a meal consisting of these foods at the same time : 1 banana, 1 potato, cooked beans with soy cheese, a small piece of chocolate cake with a glass of pineapple juice ? I will say like DV and ask: "are you stoned?"... The person eating only the banana will end up with more energy.

 

 

I know most people in this world don't see facts that actually happen right in front of their eyes as evidence, they need the aproval of a man of modern science. So they ignore the facts of life and nature, they don't listen to their body anymore and ask a doctor to tell what their own body need, etc...Of course the doctor will tell what the person wants to hear. So just for you guys, here's some scientific proofs, the ones that you like and believe.

 

Just a sample of evidence (I will provide more on my blog soon and explain them further):

 

-We can easily find undigested proteins (or any other nutrients or foods) in excrements of most people. Undigested, not only not absorbed and not assimilated. It means the stomach wasn't even able to break them into amino acids or digest them at all and it went directly into the intestines and then wasted. That's what combining lots of carbs at the same time than proteins, or any other foods requiring opposite digestion, will cause.

 

-The Grapefruit diet. This diet consists simply of eating half of a grapefruit with each meal. Some scientists and dieticians were curious to know if it really works, and if yes, why and how?

They found out it works -- people eating about 200 calories more from grapefruits were losing weight compared to the group eating the exact same foods, minus the grapefruits (so minus 200 cals). They arrived to the conclusion that it would work with any other fruits or sugar, and that the only explanation is because it makes some of the food pass through undigested, or sit so long in the stomach that it ferments and become alcohol. I lost the link of this study but I'll seach. Of course you will say that studies don't prove anything. Well, that's the point, follow the example of the Nature, and don't eat desserts with meals (or don't eat dessers at all). Fruits are the meal. Nature never tell lies or transform the reality.

 

Other ridiculous diets using the same method detrimental to health : the grapefruit/banana/egg diet, the beets and vanilla ice cream diet, or basically the diet of everybody who break the laws of the nature by not following the simple principles of proper food combining.

 

Therefore, eating with proper food combining, will help gaining weight and fat since all the calories are assimilated ? Yes, if you're too lean, or you will lose weight if you are obese. It allows the body to adapt to his natural metabolism and achive his ideal weight. Of course, one must eat according to his own hunger, and know when to stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the post Bigbwii.

I have read this rules of combinations before somewhere else and I can prove that they work very well.

Tomorrow will be my second month doing 100% raw. First, when I started I did not know these rules and tips at all but after I had found them everything changed. Now I can easily consume 3000 or even 4000 calories a day. It is simple

I do not have any problem with my digestion thanks for the combination rules.

 

So I reccomend to everyone to give it a try!

I also say that always wait for true hunger, mostly in the mornings when the digestion system is waking up, and do not eat too sweet or starchy foods for the first meal. Just some vegetables or non sweet fruits, believe me, it helps your digstion system to prepare for "heavier" meals

 

I'm Your Man, I agree with you, great post.

 

As for the multivitamins...

I used to take them, before my journey. But I think it is not neccessary to take pills, in fact I think they are rather unhealthy after a certain level.

If you take pills then eat it with meals, because (as far as I know) it will indeed helps the absorbtion, because when you eat your insuline level in your blod rises and thus it is easier for the nutrients to be absorbed to the cells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Richard-really good stuff. Now I gotta figure out how to download it so I can use it for reference. BTW, I've been 811rv for almost a year now; it's been an incredible journey: my overall health has skyrocketed and I've got what the medical establishment calls an incurable brain disease in check and much less symptomatic. Raw low-fat has changed my life!

 

I have a friend whose had colitis for years; so far, I haven't been able to persuade her to try low-fat raw. It's so sad to see someone suffer so much from something that is so curable. Maybe someday she'll come around....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not going to get into the whole thing because while I don't have a problem with the notion of food combining (MAYBE there's something to it, but nothing concrete that can be proven...), there are some things in the statements that I think are either false or not exactly accurate.

 

If the doctors (and doctors don't know anything about nutrition, they only deal with drugs) claim that eating in a different way than the Nature's way and that it doesn't cause any disease (like colon cancer and many other cancers), they should back up their claims. Nobody can prove the inocuity of such food habits, so it isn't safe to aprove it or promote it.

 

But, just as well, there are people who have been long-time raw who have developed cancer and other not-so-good medical issues. No diet is disease-proof, so nobody can logically say that any one diet is "guaranteed" to prevent disease. Anyone saying that would either A) end up losing their medical license because it is not factual, or B) end up with a potential lawsuit for spreading unproven medical advice that is not true, if someone were to go follow the advice and end up ill despite claims of a diet being disease-proof.

 

Read the article for further information concerning the diseases caused by mixing foods against the laws of life.

 

I just have a few questions to ask to the opponents of proper food combining:

 

-why do you all agree that there are certain meals harder to digest than others.

 

We agree because it is true. I've had raw meals that were hard to digest, and junk food meals that digested quickly and easily. Conversely, I've had raw meals that digested easily and both clean and junk food meals that digested poorly. Raw, particularly simple raw meals, did not guarantee me better digestion, even if it was just a salad, or a few pieces of fruit, or a handful of nuts. Personal experience says to me, even keeping foods individualized does not mean I will process it as best as possible, as it seems other factors will affect digestion.

 

-why do you all agree that bloating, indigestion, stomach pains, etc all exist.

 

Because they do, that's why

 

-will you deny all your life that there are things that are easily digested and some not ? Which trainer will give a soy protein smoothie with banana and berries in it to his athlete before the competition ? or potatoes and steak. It would be suicide, the guy will have cramps and won't be able to pass the finish line even by walking. Or the olympic diver with indigestion will not do flips because of his skills but because of convulsions of pain.

 

I won't deny that some things digest easily and some do not, but I don't think that it's as simple as having individual foods or combining them "correctly". If that were the case, I wouldn't have had the experiences I've listed above with raw single-food meals not always digesting well.

 

As far as it being "suicide" to give something like a smoothie with fruit before a competition, maybe if you drink it as you're walking up to the platform to compete, but taken an hour or two prior to competing, it's pretty silly to believe that something of that sort would cause "convulsions of pain" prior to it. You seem to ignore that 99.9% of professional athletes in all sports/disciplines are not eating raw, combined meals before competition and have performed optimally for thousands of years of sport. And, I'm sure that some of those athletes have in fact eaten a steak and potatoes meal before competing and have ended up doing very well. You're making a major assumption as if raw and combined was the standard instead of the fringe, and those that are not raw or combining are eating things you'd consider "bad choices" and still have excellent performance. Your beliefs on the negative impacts do not negate the truth and history of people eating just about anything/everything before competing in sport and performing well.

 

-do you seriously think that our digestive system is optimized to deal with, for instance, a meal consisting of these foods at the same time : 1 banana, 1 potato, cooked beans with soy cheese, a small piece of chocolate cake with a glass of pineapple juice ? I will say like DV and ask: "are you stoned?"... The person eating only the banana will end up with more energy.

 

If i were to eat both meals and train 1.5 to 2.5 hours post-meal, I can guarantee you that the larger meal of foods that provides more calories for energy will hold me out better than a single banana. I've had both types of meals pre-training, and the ones where I have had just a piece or two of fruit are the workouts where I felt like dying halfway through. Again, you're not accounting for the variances of personal experience - while YOU may find that a simple single-food raw meal gives you more energy, I do not experience the same thing. That's where the raw movement loses me - there's too much hypothetical all-encompassing belief that there's a natural law that makes the same situation apply to everyone, which simply does not work out in the real world for all people. I suppose this is why you and I cannot see eye to eye on the issue of genetics making large individual differences, since you tend to have an all-or-nothing way of seeing things even when there is contradictory evidence.

 

I know most people in this world don't see facts that actually happen right in front of their eyes as evidence, they need the aproval of a man of modern science. So they ignore the facts of life and nature, they don't listen to their body anymore and ask a doctor to tell what their own body need, etc...Of course the doctor will tell what the person wants to hear. So just for you guys, here's some scientific proofs, the ones that you like and believe.

 

I don't require scientific proof of EVERYTHING, however, anything that's claimed to be all-encompassing and the same across the board for all people should be easy to prove, but things like food combining, simple meals, etc. do not work the same for all people, so that's why it needs some science to back it up. Irrefutable proof is irrefutable proof, but when my experience dictates that much of what you've said does not work for me, it proves to me that what you say is more theory than fact.

 

Just a sample of evidence (I will provide more on my blog soon and explain them further):

 

-The Grapefruit diet. This diet consists simply of eating half of a grapefruit with each meal. Some scientists and dieticians were curious to know if it really works, and if yes, why and how?

They found out it works -- people eating about 200 calories more from grapefruits were losing weight compared to the group eating the exact same foods, minus the grapefruits (so minus 200 cals). They arrived to the conclusion that it would work with any other fruits or sugar, and that the only explanation is because it makes some of the food pass through undigested, or sit so long in the stomach that it ferments and become alcohol. I lost the link of this study but I'll seach. Of course you will say that studies don't prove anything. Well, that's the point, follow the example of the Nature, and don't eat desserts with meals (or don't eat dessers at all). Fruits are the meal. Nature never tell lies or transform the reality.

 

I won't even debate the grapefruit notion, because for every source that says it works, there are lots more that say it's a farce, and unfortunately it has not been proven to work for everyone. Just as I will choose to not take a study on it that's pro-grapefruit prior to eating another meal, you also choose to ignore it when people have posted things refuting your own beliefs. Because of that, you really can't credibly accuse anyone of ignoring studies when you're also guilty of doing the same many, many times over, particularly when it is contradictory to what you have convinced yourself of being the truth.

 

Other ridiculous diets using the same method detrimental to health : the grapefruit/banana/egg diet, the beets and vanilla ice cream diet, or basically the diet of everybody who break the laws of the nature by not following the simple principles of proper food combining.

 

So, by this token, the billions of people who have lived healthy lives without following a properly combined raw diet were only figments of our imagination, and were actually terribly unhealthy all along

 

Of course, having diet that was based around something like beets and ice cream is a load of crap - there's something to be said about stupid diets, and something to be said about the fact that plenty of omnis and vegans who do not follow the principles you have outlined have lived long, healthy lives.

 

See, here's the biggest catch of the way that this is debated when trying to "prove" that a raw combined diet is best -

 

You can't take a diet that, for the most part, is still considered relatively "new" (it isn't as if there has been a steady stream of the population who were devoted to raw combined meals for the past few thousand years to base data on) and compare it to what almost everyone has been doing since the dawn of humanity. When a few thousand people have done a diet for only, say, a few documented decades, you can't use their experience as being the overall best comparison to the standard to justify the fine points of why it may be better, simply because there hasn't been enough time/people behind it to offer a conclusive comparison. By saying this, I'm not condemning raw or saying that it isn't healthy - that's not it at all. I'm just saying, you can't take a diet that at this time, maybe 5,000-10,000 living people (just a random guess, but I'd be pretty skeptical to think that there are hundreds of thousands of raw devotees out there currently) have followed strictly for 2+ years consistently, and say that because they may have a lower risk of some bad health conditions that it's guaranteed or that the other diets are guaranteed to make one ill. It will take decades more and many, many more thousands of people on properly combined raw diets who have done it for the majority of their lives before it will be any closer to a conclusion that it is proven to be significantly better than other healthy diets. When we have 500,000 people who have been raw combiners, the same number of whole-food vegan, and the same number of whole-food omnis studied over 100 years then we'll be able to start making "scientific" conclusions about things to a better degree, but still, everyone is different and what works for you may not work for me, and vice versa. That's why I have a problem with anything that claims to be better/healthier/etc. overall when it's still too small and done on too short of a scale to offer much in the way of true evidence.

 

If someone says, "I've been raw for a few years and I haven't had any major illness, therefore, being raw and combining makes me disease proof", they have to expect that the rest of the world is going to look at them with both skepticism and a lot of doubt. You can't base any conclusion of such a diet being the best for preventing illness until you reach your end of days and you can look back on decades of experience to see what you've managed to avoid. A few years raw doesn't mean you can't still come down with cancer or something else terminal later on in life, and that's where there preachy part about "natural law" and the supposedly disease-proofing parts of raw eating are always going to catch the most flak. And, it's rightly deserved for such thinking.

 

Therefore, eating with proper food combining, will help gaining weight and fat since all the calories are assimilated ? Yes, if you're too lean, or you will lose weight if you are obese. It allows the body to adapt to his natural metabolism and achive his ideal weight. Of course, one must eat according to his own hunger, and know when to stop.

 

One last time, I don't believe in this to be true. There simply isn't enough evidence to prove it enough to sway me. I don't require 100% proof to be convinced of everything, but anecdotal evidence from a small handful of people isn't going to make me believe in the power of food combining being that much better than doing what I normally do.

 

Not looking to get into a big debate about this, but just saying, you've got to watch what you state as fact when it is much more personal opinion instead of anything proven. I think it's pretty irresponsible to make all-or-nothing declarations that aren't going to be true for everyone. I've already shown above how some of the things you consider to be all-encompassing "natural law" do not work for me, so it can't be law if it is inconsistent. "Law" in the sense you describe would be the same across the board, much like a statement of "if you do not eat, you will starve". THAT'S all-encompassing, as nobody ever sustained life and propered by not eating. Saying that food combining done properly will make the difference between good athletic performance and bad performance, health and disease, is simply far too much opinion and anything but fact. That's my one complaint about all of this.

 

If you choose to believe that combining is what is best, then by all means, do it. I just don't plan on sitting by without speaking up when ideals with inconsistent results are said to be all-encompassing, because anyone who can think beyond a level of zealotry for their preferred diet can see the absurdity in such a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's his logic and intelligence, don't worry, I'll reply w/ logic, intelligence, science and physiology, in time. You can say there are other factors of digestibility than food combining, but why exclude only this one ? You will say because there is no proof for this one; fine, show me scientific evidence for all the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once you are focused on a low-fat starch-based vegan diet, everything else you worry about (organic, supplements, etc) involves massively diminishing returns, but if people want to play around with combining foods that's great, but to pretend it has a solid scientific basis is laughable. Chronic disease is caused by intake of animal foods and grease (and to a lesser extent simple sugars), period. Remove these causes and you maximize healing potential, without having to worry about magical food combons, etc.

 

 

http://veganmaster.blogspot.com/2008/07/you-are-biological-herbivore.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chronic disease is caused by intake of animal foods and grease (and to a lesser extent simple sugars), period. Remove these causes and you maximize healing potential, without having to worry about magical food combons, etc.
There's way more than that. stress, pollution, too much sun, etc. But perhaps you were only talking about nutrition : even with foods there's more factors : all chemicals they put before, while and after transformation, GMO's... and, guess what : bad food combining ! why do you say it's laughable ? human is the only animal who do not respect good food combining, and the only animal with that much diseases.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really dislike the argument that "humans are the only animals that...". Should we stop doing everything that other animals doesn't do?

Fact: Humans are the only animals that post threads about food combining on online forums and is the only animal with this much diseases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's his logic and intelligence, don't worry, I'll reply w/ logic, intelligence, science and physiology, in time. You can say there are other factors of digestibility than food combining, but why exclude only this one ? You will say because there is no proof for this one; fine, show me scientific evidence for all the others.

 

I'm not an expert at how digestion works, and I don't have much desire to spend my night scouring the internet for info to combat your theories (even if I did, I don't have much confidence that you'd listen to anything that was contradictory to your own beliefs on food combining anyway )

 

I don't know offhand what all the factors may be, but again, I will reiterate my major point in a clear and concise manner:

 

1. You say that there's a "natural law" regarding proper food combining, and that anything other than this "law" will result in less than optimal health and performance.

 

2. I say, I've had single-food raw meals and what would be considered "properly combined" meals that did not digest well, as well as meals that were pure shite that digested well and left me with ample energy and feeling great.

 

3. Therefore, my experience dictates that there is no "natural law" as if it were true, then my experience would have been exactly as you say they should be, regardless of how I wished for different outcomes. Therefore, there's a gaping hole in the "natural law" theory, yet you speak of it as if it were the absolute truth when I've proven to myself that the same foods can vary in quality of digestion and energy output from one meal to the next, even if the same thing is eaten.

 

It's pretty simple, actually. I made a comparison before, but it's like this as well - if you stab me in the chest, I'm going to bleed. THAT is "law" - it's going to be the same outcome every time. Your ideology is far more like if someone were to toss a knife at me - I MIGHT find that the knife pierces the skin if it hits me just right, and if so, I would bleed. However, it might hit me handle-first, and in that case, I'm not going to bleed. Eating is just like that - sometimes you win and feel great afterward, sometimes you lose and feel like crap, and you never know how it is until you're done. There's no set law that dictates that eating the same food will give the same feeling afterward each time - the body is not that simple, as if it were the case, we'd all be able to do the "right" thing and get the most benefit from it. But, as the real world dictates, that just isn't the case at all.

 

Like I said, not trying to get heavily into this, and debating science on it all is a waste of both our time because you don't have anything concrete that will prove it (and, as stated, my experiences prove differently to me anyway), and no matter what I might dig up, you have a penchant for disregarding that which you do not agree with, even if it has better conclusive evidence of being correct. So, where do we go from here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VeganEssentials, You said that you experience dictates that there is no natural law, because you feel greet eating junk food for exmaple but feeling shit after properly combined raw. I do not know how much experience do you have, but think again.

If a man who used to eating junkfood(for decades or all life), eat some fruit, a full meal of fruit or just after the meal he will feel shit. Always the fruit is the guilty. Because you can not ecpect to feel greet if your system is not used to is. Try it for a month and then talk. First the digestion was hard for me also, for a couple of weeks, but now it is different.

There is a natural law about food combining. Someone has a better digestion system someone has not, it is simple.

 

Dont give up after the first meal if you do not feel very well, it takes weeks or months to get used to it and please do not blame the raw foods or the combinations for it because it works for others who did not give it up after the first bad experience.

 

no offense

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the topic of food combining, therefore on the topic of diet:

 

Our closest relative, the chimpanzee has a vastly different diet & eating habits than we do.

 

Chimpanzee diets are composed mainly of ripe fruits but vary according to the time of the year and abundance of specific food items. They will spend many hours a day eating about 20 different species of plants and up to about 300 different species during a one year period. They do not store food and will eat it at the place they find it. They also enjoy eating young leaves particularly in the afternoon. In long dry seasons when fruit is scarce, tree seeds, flowers, soft pith, galls, resin and bark become an important part of their diet.

 

They also eat many different types of insects, however termites are the most nutritionally important. Termites are collected either by hand or with tools which are modified by the chimp and specifically used for this purpose.Females spend twice as much time eating insects as males do. Birds are occasionally eaten. Mammals such as monkeys, pigs and antelope are also eaten, particularly by males, but along with termites only account for about 5% of their diet.

 

Chimpanzees do not cook their food, & therefore do not eat potatoes, rice, or any other food that requires cooking to be edible/beneficial.

 

Our diets are vastly different to this & it is highly likely that because of these differences, our health decreases & our vulnerability to disease increases.

 

However there are a huge number of other factors that contribute to our vulnerability to diseases which chimpanzees & all other animals are less affected by.These factors are as follows:

 

>Eating meat

>Contaminated water

>A recognised genetic tendency to cancer in our sub-species of the monkey family

>Air pollution in built up urban areas

>Using chemicals on our food, in our water, in our "cleaning" products, in our manufacture of clothes & furniture, & just about everything we make.

>A breakaway from the general diet & eating habits of our ancestor, the chimpanzee

>Medical advances which keep humans with illnesses alive, that would naturally die in the wild state, which contributes to a weakened & infected gene pool, which in turn makes us more succeptible to future disease.

>Movement in habitat away from Sub-tropical & temperate environments, and into all the other less suitable environments.

 

Just thought the comparison of us & chimpanzees diets & environments would be relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will add that chimpanzees have eaten the same diet I listed, for vast periods of time.

 

Our biological systems are virtually identical, & yet we eat in such a vastly different way.

 

That is bound to have some negative consequences.

 

The rawists on this forum, are eating a diet, much closer to the chimps, & therefore are likely to feel & be healthier than the rest of us vegans eating cooked & processed foods, & even more healthy than omnivores who are doing what we do, & also eating dairy & meat.

 

This is my opinion, not fact.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chimpanzees are only similar to human beings, they are not the same.

 

I'm not saying you or anyone else here is asinine, but I am saying it is asinine for someone who has not studied a subject to claim superior knowledge to people who went to schools that taught information gathered over centuries of research by trained professionals.

 

Saying "I feel better and/or lost weight" isn't proof. Simply eating more vegetables in simpler meals will reduce calories and boost nutrition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are not the same, no.That would mean they are 100% the same.

 

They are not as you say similar either.Similar is maybe between 50% & 80% the same.

 

Chimpanzees are 99% identical to us (in terms of DNA)

 

That is verging on nearly identical.

 

I am not sure what your point is anyway.I am simply stating what they eat, what we eat, & that the difference is probabaly bad for our health, you cant argue with that, surely?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not agree that we are almost identical to a primate that shares 98% of our DNA. I am very different from my male husband and we share almost 100% human DNA (except for his lacking a bit of DNA in that Y chromosome). If that little bit of genetic difference can completely change our hormones and sex organs, what could 1-2% do to our digestive tracts? Why would we have a similar diet to a creature that does not have a similar brain? To underestimate the significant differences that a 1-2% difference in DNA can express is to overly simplify genetic similarity. Subtle differences can be significant in the ways that they differentiate humans from chimps.

 

It is difficult to have these types of discussions without knowing the knowledge base of those involved. If anyone has questions about the importance of DNA differences, there are many basic genetics text books available at public libraries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...