Raw food and cenentarians

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Makaranda...=) on October 16, 2009 at 9:46am

Fish are good because of the omega 3 fats in them. You can get the same types of fats from flax oil and flax seed. If you don't have access to vitamins or flax type oils I would say it's ok every so often. Also if you are feeling weak or feel like you may be low in b vitamins. The thing about soy is that all soy isn't the same.Organic soybeans that have been fermented traditionally are best. Most people eliminate soy because they find it is too hard to find tofu that hasn't been made with gmo soy.
The way tofu was made tradionally- fermented in banana leaves without refrigeration- led to the the forming of b12 which was really good to get. Now stainless steel tanks are used so this benefit is eliminated. I think tofu every so often is ok. Where people ran into problems is that they ate all kinds of soy products that weren't even fermented. These are particularily hard on the body.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by francois on October 16, 2009 at 12:04pm

"Fish are good because of the omega 3 fats in them. You can get the same types of fats from flax oil and flax seed."
True, but plant sources are a richer source of ALA (Alpha Linolenic Acid), which the body converts to EPA and DHA. EPA and DHA are the long-chain fatty acids which the body prefers to utilise. Fish are a richer source of EPA and DHA - so there is no need for the body to do any work in coverting ALA into usable EPA and DHA.

There seems to be mixed opinion on how efficiently the body can do the conversion. I'd think that a child growing up on a plant diet - would have a digestive system accustomed to utilizing and converting the fats available in plant sources.

There's a lot of hype around omega-3's these days, and research does point to it being extremely beneficial to the development and maintenance of the immune & cardiovascular system - as well as many reports of improvements to brain health. Even curing things like depression.

Nature seems to like playing games with itself. There is a fat which provides a host of benefits to those who would consume it...but those who would consume it have reasons not to consume it. Be it ethics, environment, health or whatever other reasons for not eating fish. :)

If the concern is mercury / pollutants - then purified fish oils are available on the shelf.
If the concern is ethical...then do I adhere to my ethics and forfeit the benefits of fish-based fats; Do I restructure my ethics so that I may incorporate those fish-fats? Do I step outside the little world of my own subjective ethical sphere and adopt, evolve another 'worldview'?

If fish fats are really that beneficial to humans - is it not better to consume them and make stronger this body of ours so as to better enjoy, participate and contribute to life? A healthy body is a healthy mind. A healthy mind is a healthy community....etc etc.

I don't eat fish. I'm considering it - not because I feel weak or mentally deficient, but because of how much valid research there is to show the benefits of doing so. As far as food goes - this is one issue I can't seem to get off the fence about.

Oh yes - the Okinawans. Like Kasey has said, they are most likely a very happy people. They probably have little exposure to television and other media outlets. Strong communities, people who know their neighbors and maybe even helped them to build a house in the summer months - these all contribute greatly to health and longevity. More so that unfermented Tofu.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Danny on October 16, 2009 at 9:58am

I've read that there is poor birth records. Since most take their parents name, they are believed to be over 100. Thier diets are pretty much lightly cooked or raw veggi,tofu,fish & some pork. Along with calorie restriction. Now would being a centenarian be the reason you're trying to eat healthy?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by alex anthony on October 16, 2009 at 12:40pm

yeah i eat healthy for longevity's sake.

that said protein makes up less than 10 percent of their diet and in some cases less than 5%. veggies (they don't eat much fruit) make up like 50% of their diet - the rest is grains (mostly rice). it's really interesting what they eat.

the 7th day adventists in california rival the okinawans in longevity and they are ovo lacto vegetarians. jack lalanne's mom or dad was a 7th day adventist - and he credits that upbringing with his thoughts on focus on health and longevity.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kasey on October 16, 2009 at 10:42am

It's misleading to say they eat a lot of soy and that their longevity is because of this. It's false information put out by the soy industries so sell their GM soy kill us all lol.

The fact is, the okinawans eat very little soy, in the form of fermented soy like tamari, miso, and tempeh. They use this as a flavouring, not a meat substitue like most people in the west do. Tofu is very hard to digest, has substances that inhibit protein absorption, is very estrogenic. It's bad news unless fermented, and even then, only good in small amounts.

They live long cause of their happiness. Having a reason to live. Eating unprocessed foods, lots of veggies, some meat. They are far from raw foodists. I don't think there are any centarians on earth that have been 100% raw vegan their entire lives. Noone knows that this is the healthiest way to eat. All the longest lived cultures ate some meat, dairy, or blood lol. If you want fish, I would be more concerned with the quality of fish you get than worrying about not being vegan or something. Definitely don't go eating some farmed salmon and think your doing your body good. It's gotta be wild caught! and even then, I would eat some chlorella with it to latch on to any mercury in this fish.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by alex anthony on October 16, 2009 at 1:23pm

your argument is flawed. maybe it isn't the healthiest way to eat (raw that is). You say it's the healthiest way but have no evidence and are disregarding the evidence to the contrary. none of the long lived populations on the planet are raw foodists.

i think i have an idea as to why it isn't the healthiest and a solution @ the same time tho. let's discuss.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Danny on October 17, 2009 at 12:19pm

Most of us are aware that there are to much variety in these peoples lives(Okinawans) that contribute to the length of it. I personally feel it's all genetics. Since even the decedents that don't live there claim to be over 100. And also lack of birth certificates. There is an image to uphold & will claim to be their father.

Since the word healthy has different meanings to everybody. Arguing it is like arguing religion. Kind of pointless but also fun at times lol. I l ike to keep my mind open & consider other's thoughts before I filter out anything. Please post why it isn't the healthiest & your solution.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by alex anthony on October 17, 2009 at 10:24pm

lets define terms initially. minimizing disease and delaying aging - i.e. healthy longevity. I'm interested, anecdotally, in the alternate definitions of healthy that you might have. To me delaying death in a healthey manner as long as possible is the only definition of healthy and these populations do it better than anyone else.

so on those terms the okinawans have a strong case for meeting the requirements. so do the 7th day adventists - low incidence of metabolic disease, heart disease, and cancer - and much longer than local average life expectancy.

okinawans are essentially vegetarians with meat and fish making up less than 10% of their diet. they are not raw foodists - nor are they teetotalers (they drink one to two glasses of alcohol a day). they eat grains - (a lot of white rice - not brown). they consume tea and miso - lots of cooked root vegetables and greens - and very little fruit (it's expensive there). They eat miso (source of probiotics and digestive enzymes and antioxidants). they consume little to no dairy.

and the okinawan studies show reduced life expectancy for okinawans who leave and live in more modern arts of japan or come west. they also succumb to metabolic disease.

the reason the raw diet is not 100% ideal without supplementation is simple. humans cannot digest plant cell walls. we do not produce cellulase (the enzyme that dissolves cell walls). The reason why the okinawa diet works is because there is aspergillus fungus in it (in miso) in minute amounts. the reason this is pertinent is that aspergillus produces cellulase. `in fact aspergillus produces lipase, protease and amylase as well - a complete complement of digestive enzymes. so this means that the okinawan diet is optimized - they are absorbing nearly all the nutrition they ingest.

now contrast this with the raw diet. if you are not juicing extensively (or supplementing with broad spectrum enzymes daily to mimic miso ingestion), you need to chew your food to a paste in your mouth every time or you're only consuming a fraction of your ingested food. this process is ineffecient and robs you of nutrition you think you're getting. solution: ingestion of a strong broad spectrum enzyme supplement with each and every meal - particularly comprised of cellulase to ensure that the consumptives are dissolved and therefore more likely absorbed. finally a strong probiotic to enhance absorption and ensure endogenous production of b vitamins and lactic acid.

simple solution that optimizes the raw diet to mimic the benefits of the okinawan diet. miso soup is essentially a probiotic and enzyme supplement all in one. interesting to note - if you ever have authentic miso soup the recipe calls for NEVER boiling the broth - because it kills both the bacteria and the enzymes. so they understand the temperature criticality and adhere to it.

finally, the okinawans practice caloric restriction - an act proven to extend life. it's called hara hachi bu - or eating until you're 80% full.

my point is that you can call the pure raw diet ideal - but without evidence or a protocol with evidence behind it - it's not an opinion AT all, it's a feeling - and that feeling is exactly similar to religion - in that it is totally unsubstantiated.

what i've posted however, is substantiated - therefore it is not religion.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Danny on October 19, 2009 at 5:16pm

Good post.

, you need to chew your food to a paste in your mouth every time or you're only consuming a fraction of your ingested food. this process is ineffecient and robs you of nutrition you think you're getting

Do you have any more info on stuff like this? I know it makes it easier on your stomach to digest well chewed food. Never knew it robbed nutrients.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Kasey on October 18, 2009 at 12:36am

Are you even responding to me? when did I ever say the raw diet was healthiest? I'll just assume you meant to reply to someone else cause my mind can't even comprehend that your post was directed at anything I said...

In my opinion, you nor I would ever thrive on an asian diet anyways. Long lived cultures often ate locally, and unless you, your parents, and grandparents were born in okinawa and are currently living there, you probably wouldn't thrive on foods that come from that land.

Most healthy people ate some form of fermented foods regularly. Seems to be a common trend. Asians have their miso, Russians have kefir, Germans got the sauerkraut. So we can key out similarities like these and apply them as best we can with foods native to our land. I'd be much more interested in finding out who the longest living people were in my own country and see what kind of things they were up to instead trying to follow what okinawans are doing.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by alex anthony on October 18, 2009 at 12:44pm

the long lived cultures in every land do the same thing. cooked food - mostly vegetarian, mostly plant based, grain based - with cultured/fermented supplementation daily. this is true for long lived african, asian, and european cultures.

this is the common thread.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Lightlover on October 19, 2009 at 7:44am

Rawfooders don't life that long, because they are bashed, feel social pressure and thus stress?

Just an idea..

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last