Why the 80/10/10 diet is NOT for everyone and not for everywhere and thus is claiming to much...
Well, I think it is time to make a balanced thread about the 80/10/10 diet and it's claims
which, to my opinion, are to generalizing and can't be supported, neither by it's own theory and nor
by any other theory around.
** I will slowly build up this thread with contra-arguments (and pro arguments, as much as I can find.). ,
and will also give SUPPORTING arguments a place.
** ALL people are invited to post about contra- and pro arguments...., i will process these at this
(opening) place, in the beginning of this thread.
** I assume that my contra-arguments are NOT handled by the 80/10/10 - book of Dr. Graham,
which is my main objection against this book: it's basis is to small, and it doesn't handle
enough the main questions which arise against it's statements, which shows a lack of imagination
and a lack of ability for whole integrated proper discussions.
If I am wrong, I will be glad to correct my objections, if people give quotes from the book...
** Don't get me wrong: I also have some big objections against for example Hippocrates Institute,
(they just ignore my mails, lol..) .I am not choosing a side, I only choose for wide discussions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
contra-arguments against 80/10/10:
1. Geographical objections: 80/10/10 doesn't take into account that people are living in
different geographical places. MOST of the fruit in my country is not tree-riped , when bought by the
consumers. Fruit, when eaten unripe and/or not tree-riped, can be a damage for the body, robbing it
of nutrients of high value. If it isn't damaging, at least fruit, not eaten right from the tree/plant etc..
is less than optimal....
Eating tree-riped papaya in the tropics is a whole different thing to value
than the unripe ones having travelled for weeks in a box....
We also can talk about te loss in nutrients during the transport of these fruits..., wintertime (less
fruits...).
(according to Hippocrates institute..).
2. A minor point: The banana-hype.. This is about having critics on others, about
superfoods etc.., but apparently not looking close enough to one´s own behaviour..
- Unfortunately almost all banana's are monocultured hybrides, and the largest amount
of banana's is made from only 2 types (out of all the possible varieties which could exist,
if for money reasons not just a mere 2 types are being brought into production...) .
This makes the total banana population very sensitive for illness: one very good plague,
and it could be over with banana's.
It is always very good, BEFORE having a certain opinion, to try to falsify this belief.
I hope the falsifying of the BANANA HYPE is made possible by this reaction.
Eating many banana's is supporting the killing of biodiversity. Not for everyone.
3. Sweetness of fruit has been changed. MOST of the fruit-producers/tailers never heard from
80/10/10 or natural hygiene. Because sweet fruit sells better than the original less sweeter types
from the past, a lot of fruit is much more sweet than it used to be. This is in flagrant contradiction with
all the arguments natural hygients use, like "natural" and emphesis on the diets from the past.
4. Depleted soils.
NaturalNews) According to U.S. Senate Study Document Number 264, due to agricultural topsoil depletion, 99 percent of Americans are deficient in minerals and trace elements due to food crop topsoil depletion. No big surprise maybe, except this study was reported in 1936! Since then, there have been USA and UK studies that have shown disturbing decreases in the mineral contents of foods from the soil over the past 50 years.
Just keep eating your high fruits, no problem for anyone. But bashingother people for eating high
density foods (spirulina, chlorella etc..) without argumenting about the depletion of our soils, and the l
lack of nutrients in most of our common foods, is a bit without reasoning....
Most of our farmers are not so health-educated as we are, and I say I can't trust their soils to be top-
filled with nutrition.
5. The ape-argument. We should eat like apes, I read... Some also say we should only eat
what we can grab with our hands. If we eat like apes, in the same logica mentioned by these people
there is a good possibility we re-evolve back into apes (you are what you eat...). Everyone
their own pleasure, and some people are better of being apes,
but may we conclude this is not ideal for everyone?
Can I also say apes sometimes kill little animals and eat them? Should we do the same, following
their diet?
Some say we should not eat foods we can't grab. Is there, besides biological similarity between apes
and humans, not something like a difference called CULTURE?
We also make art, why shouldn't we evolve in the way we harvest our food?
Some foods are mentioned for apes and humans, others are ment for humans
which have been evolved in cultural ways..
BTW: Apes also use tools, for example in order to harvest ants with a stick....
6. Age. Where are the older natural hygientists? Yes, you young ones look all
very pretty, I admit (lol..). Mostly because of the fact you don't eat processed- but only whole foods.
But where does it go after the age of 60? I am aslo a little afraid that every natural hygienist
developping cancer or other serious illness , will have no courage to share in his/her community,
because there is only one perfect diet, and if you get cancer you must have done something wrong
etc, because fruit is the most easiest to digest etc.....The intolerance also works WITHIN the own community, there will be no place for so
called "losers", only the prospering will be in the picture..
7. Bashing Hippocrates What most strict diet pushers won't know, why should you study
ouside your own range, is that the OFFICIAL Hippocrates diet is also 80 10 10, only not with high
fruit, but with healthier slow carbohydrates from algae, sprouts, greens etc.....
Before accusing Hippocrates that this is not possible (like Patenaude does, indirectly..)
it could be a good idea to contact them and ask about a breakdown and to explain these numbers.
No, Hippocrates is also not good in outwards communication and keeping an good imago in the
rawfood-world, they just seem to be busy with healing (quite important, not..?)
Ever noticed that almost no-one actively defends or supports the Hippo-diet at this place,
compared to the hyperactive pushing/defending hygienists?
Because the Hippo's know the diet is self-evident, like all things closer to truth...
Further is the accusation of pushing products, when talking about Hippocrates, completely
besides the truth: most of what they advise is not a moneymaker for them (greens, cucumbers, high
sprouts and wheatgrass) and even most of the supplements on their website don't even name the
ingredients, not smart if you want to sell much. Of cause all these points are known and considered
by the one's with negative info about this institute.
*8. Bashing TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine) herbs, spices etc...Bashing 5000 years of Chines Medicine, because one person, not even a real Doctor, is
saying herbs are irritating, gives me a weird feeling of imbalance.....
There are thousends of studies about for example curcuma, most of them done by universities
and Doctor's, who don't have interests and benefits in selling this spice....
There is almost no illness which doesn't benefit from Curcuma, neither a bodyfunction
in healthy people which isn't waiting for Curcuma. There is no moneytrack behind these studies, the
same is the case for many other studies about herbs and spices. It is a shame to me
for bashing these beautiful products, and an insult right into the face of a part of our sparkling
natural environment.
9. Environmental objections
I think our environment has changed a lot since the times of our apestadium, ans so an ape-diet
(fruit & greens) is NOT enough to balance the changed environment.
I name a few things like: stress, polution in all natural elements, EMF-radiation...,
So 80 10 10 is not for everyone and everywhere...
* More and more animals are getting cancer now, no matter they are eating their natural diet, without
superfoods! It is not enough for them!!
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17358-hidden-cancer-threat-to...
NO DISCUSSION POINTS:
- Whether we used to be frugivores or ominvores in the past, seems not to be a usefull argument by me.
Our knowledge about food has changed so much since the past, so does our culture.
Relying on the past, is more believing than knowing.
I think the presence should have more weight , the past is gone and with it a big part of the
evidence.
Also, when there should be proof for a specific diet in the past, this doesn't say that our bodies and our circumstances, how they are at this time, NOW, would trive with that same diet.
* To be continued....
which, to my opinion, are to generalizing and can't be supported, neither by it's own theory and nor
by any other theory around.
** I will slowly build up this thread with contra-arguments (and pro arguments, as much as I can find.). ,
and will also give SUPPORTING arguments a place.
** ALL people are invited to post about contra- and pro arguments...., i will process these at this
(opening) place, in the beginning of this thread.
** I assume that my contra-arguments are NOT handled by the 80/10/10 - book of Dr. Graham,
which is my main objection against this book: it's basis is to small, and it doesn't handle
enough the main questions which arise against it's statements, which shows a lack of imagination
and a lack of ability for whole integrated proper discussions.
If I am wrong, I will be glad to correct my objections, if people give quotes from the book...
** Don't get me wrong: I also have some big objections against for example Hippocrates Institute,
(they just ignore my mails, lol..) .I am not choosing a side, I only choose for wide discussions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
contra-arguments against 80/10/10:
1. Geographical objections: 80/10/10 doesn't take into account that people are living in
different geographical places. MOST of the fruit in my country is not tree-riped , when bought by the
consumers. Fruit, when eaten unripe and/or not tree-riped, can be a damage for the body, robbing it
of nutrients of high value. If it isn't damaging, at least fruit, not eaten right from the tree/plant etc..
is less than optimal....
Eating tree-riped papaya in the tropics is a whole different thing to value
than the unripe ones having travelled for weeks in a box....
We also can talk about te loss in nutrients during the transport of these fruits..., wintertime (less
fruits...).
(according to Hippocrates institute..).
2. A minor point: The banana-hype.. This is about having critics on others, about
superfoods etc.., but apparently not looking close enough to one´s own behaviour..
- Unfortunately almost all banana's are monocultured hybrides, and the largest amount
of banana's is made from only 2 types (out of all the possible varieties which could exist,
if for money reasons not just a mere 2 types are being brought into production...) .
This makes the total banana population very sensitive for illness: one very good plague,
and it could be over with banana's.
It is always very good, BEFORE having a certain opinion, to try to falsify this belief.
I hope the falsifying of the BANANA HYPE is made possible by this reaction.
Eating many banana's is supporting the killing of biodiversity. Not for everyone.
3. Sweetness of fruit has been changed. MOST of the fruit-producers/tailers never heard from
80/10/10 or natural hygiene. Because sweet fruit sells better than the original less sweeter types
from the past, a lot of fruit is much more sweet than it used to be. This is in flagrant contradiction with
all the arguments natural hygients use, like "natural" and emphesis on the diets from the past.
4. Depleted soils.
NaturalNews) According to U.S. Senate Study Document Number 264, due to agricultural topsoil depletion, 99 percent of Americans are deficient in minerals and trace elements due to food crop topsoil depletion. No big surprise maybe, except this study was reported in 1936! Since then, there have been USA and UK studies that have shown disturbing decreases in the mineral contents of foods from the soil over the past 50 years.
Just keep eating your high fruits, no problem for anyone. But bashingother people for eating high
density foods (spirulina, chlorella etc..) without argumenting about the depletion of our soils, and the l
lack of nutrients in most of our common foods, is a bit without reasoning....
Most of our farmers are not so health-educated as we are, and I say I can't trust their soils to be top-
filled with nutrition.
5. The ape-argument. We should eat like apes, I read... Some also say we should only eat
what we can grab with our hands. If we eat like apes, in the same logica mentioned by these people
there is a good possibility we re-evolve back into apes (you are what you eat...). Everyone
their own pleasure, and some people are better of being apes,
but may we conclude this is not ideal for everyone?
Can I also say apes sometimes kill little animals and eat them? Should we do the same, following
their diet?
Some say we should not eat foods we can't grab. Is there, besides biological similarity between apes
and humans, not something like a difference called CULTURE?
We also make art, why shouldn't we evolve in the way we harvest our food?
Some foods are mentioned for apes and humans, others are ment for humans
which have been evolved in cultural ways..
BTW: Apes also use tools, for example in order to harvest ants with a stick....
6. Age. Where are the older natural hygientists? Yes, you young ones look all
very pretty, I admit (lol..). Mostly because of the fact you don't eat processed- but only whole foods.
But where does it go after the age of 60? I am aslo a little afraid that every natural hygienist
developping cancer or other serious illness , will have no courage to share in his/her community,
because there is only one perfect diet, and if you get cancer you must have done something wrong
etc, because fruit is the most easiest to digest etc.....The intolerance also works WITHIN the own community, there will be no place for so
called "losers", only the prospering will be in the picture..
7. Bashing Hippocrates What most strict diet pushers won't know, why should you study
ouside your own range, is that the OFFICIAL Hippocrates diet is also 80 10 10, only not with high
fruit, but with healthier slow carbohydrates from algae, sprouts, greens etc.....
Before accusing Hippocrates that this is not possible (like Patenaude does, indirectly..)
it could be a good idea to contact them and ask about a breakdown and to explain these numbers.
No, Hippocrates is also not good in outwards communication and keeping an good imago in the
rawfood-world, they just seem to be busy with healing (quite important, not..?)
Ever noticed that almost no-one actively defends or supports the Hippo-diet at this place,
compared to the hyperactive pushing/defending hygienists?
Because the Hippo's know the diet is self-evident, like all things closer to truth...
Further is the accusation of pushing products, when talking about Hippocrates, completely
besides the truth: most of what they advise is not a moneymaker for them (greens, cucumbers, high
sprouts and wheatgrass) and even most of the supplements on their website don't even name the
ingredients, not smart if you want to sell much. Of cause all these points are known and considered
by the one's with negative info about this institute.
*8. Bashing TCM (Traditional Chinese Medicine) herbs, spices etc...Bashing 5000 years of Chines Medicine, because one person, not even a real Doctor, is
saying herbs are irritating, gives me a weird feeling of imbalance.....
There are thousends of studies about for example curcuma, most of them done by universities
and Doctor's, who don't have interests and benefits in selling this spice....
There is almost no illness which doesn't benefit from Curcuma, neither a bodyfunction
in healthy people which isn't waiting for Curcuma. There is no moneytrack behind these studies, the
same is the case for many other studies about herbs and spices. It is a shame to me
for bashing these beautiful products, and an insult right into the face of a part of our sparkling
natural environment.
9. Environmental objections
I think our environment has changed a lot since the times of our apestadium, ans so an ape-diet
(fruit & greens) is NOT enough to balance the changed environment.
I name a few things like: stress, polution in all natural elements, EMF-radiation...,
So 80 10 10 is not for everyone and everywhere...
* More and more animals are getting cancer now, no matter they are eating their natural diet, without
superfoods! It is not enough for them!!
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17358-hidden-cancer-threat-to...
NO DISCUSSION POINTS:
- Whether we used to be frugivores or ominvores in the past, seems not to be a usefull argument by me.
Our knowledge about food has changed so much since the past, so does our culture.
Relying on the past, is more believing than knowing.
I think the presence should have more weight , the past is gone and with it a big part of the
evidence.
Also, when there should be proof for a specific diet in the past, this doesn't say that our bodies and our circumstances, how they are at this time, NOW, would trive with that same diet.
* To be continued....
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Rawzilla on -
I guess not enough to keep all the fruitarians and vegans from low B12 levels.
I have heard we used to get our B12 from the soil--not sure if I believe it anymore. I certainly would not rely on soil or stuff that washes off the fruit for an essential nutrient!
Nonetheless, B12 deficiency in vegans is well documented. DR's made the news. ; )
-
Permalink Reply by ben "the beekeeper" stiller on -
Where did you find info on the Schwarztbein Principle?
-
Permalink Reply by Erin on -
I had seen the book "The Schwarztbein Principle" in book catalogs back when I was a book buyer for Whole Foods. The name caught my attention, but at the time, the content didn't. I came across it again recently and found that large portions of it are on google books, so I've been reading.
Dr. Schwartzbein shares a lot of her patients stories and progress and I like reading about real people, not just theory. She is very holistically minded endocrinologist and explains how cellular aging works and the factors that play into it. She also explains the role of fat, glycogen and how insulin receptors work.
I've found that so many "health experts" are totally clueless about the endocrine system and tend to give very uninformed advice. It's kind of horrifying, really!
Here is Dr. Schwartbein's site:
http://www.schwarzbeinprinciple.com/pgs/home.html
-
Permalink Reply by cindy on -
ok, so far your arguments include ... it's cold here and bananas are hybridised.
my answer .. move house and plant you own bananas!
i dont see any legit arguments against 811 ... i thought this was suposed to be a balanced discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Mark on -
I agree, especially with the last part. Also there are plenty of other fruits to eat other than bananas. I don't eat many bananas.
-
Permalink Reply by Burke Bryant on -
Just out of curiosity, I have a quick question you might be able to help me with here. Fruit, as I'm sure you are completely aware of, is perhaps one of the most hybridized things on the face of this planet. It's been hybridized to not only be seedless, which in most cases is really bad considering the seed provides an anti-fungal, ant-bacteria ward off, but more importantly it's been hybridized and bred for sugar content. The largest perrinial herb, the banana, has become so hybridized as well that it simply cannot live without being tended to by man. My question.... if fruit is NOT what it was initially, and has been bred meerly for sugar content then how can this be good for anyone in large doses??? I mean candida would be a great place to start, and sure the sugar might not be in the system long enough, but what sugar.. the sugan of the NOW fruits, or the sugar of the OLD fruits... there is a HUGE difference, and please dont get me wrong, I eat a lot of fruit, but when I see people brag about eating 30 bananas in 45 minutes or 45 apricots a day I can't help but to be sorry for them in some way.... I mean that has to be a joke right?
-
Permalink Reply by Swayze on -
Certainly it is better to eat organic fruit that is freshly picked, rather than bananas with less-than-perfect growing methods.
But this "banana-hype" is not attacking the high fruit diet directly. 80/10/10 is not the banana diet. It is a diet that focuses lots of whole, fresh, ripe, raw, organic fruits...of any kind.
If you want to foster critique of the program itself, look into what it actually advocates, rather than the conditions of our times that affect the way in which we apply it.
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on -
"Those on high-fruit diets are accustomed to the dire warnings about all the nutrient loss that occurs through shipping. Could someone please supply scientific proof of this, eg for one fruit even - actual measures of all the levels of different vitamins and minerals, in grams, micrograms, whatever, when picked off the tree, and a measure of all the levels of different vitamins and minerals when it's in the home of us poor saps? "
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Debbie, I changed the text (see opening...) saying now, that when fruit, not eaten right from the growing
tree/plant, is not a damage to the body, at least we can say it is less than optimal, thus saying that for
many people a high fruit-diet (without so called superfoods..) will be less than optimal.
I guess this is general logic and doesn't need scientific literature..?
Anyone can find it's own sources about this, as also naming sources won't convert people to believing this...
I also changed the words "ripe fruit", into tree/plant riped fruit, as some people don't understand that
with the original words I don't expect people to eat unripe fruit, but am pointing at the moment the fruit was picked (unripe..) AND
the delay between picking and eating...
Thanks for comments.
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on
-
A little thing: this is not especialy about grains, eating cooked, meat or or so: it is not about
comparing certain food categories: this is more about whether special strict diets are the best for
everyone, everywhere, or not....
As the natural hygienists are the people who seem to believe the most in answering this question with
"yes", I concentrate on them, but the same question would arise for anyone pushing ANOTHER
certian strict diet for anyone, everywhere.
-
Permalink Reply by Lightlover on
-
"Durian is about 20 to 30% whereas avocado is about 70% fat. Durian, however, usually comes frozen in this country so I don't recommend it. Other foods not mentioned here such as nuts are not only high in fat but acid forming. The same would apply to grain and beans, even if raw and sprouted"
-------------------------
Nutritiondata says avocado has 10% fat...let's make it twenty...
I don't know where the 70% is coming from...Dr Graham maybe?
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/fruits-and-fruit-juices/1845/2
Latest Activity
Me too :)
There seem to be a lot of raw foodists in the UK, but what about those of us in other European countries?
I like to do fasts as well and I think the power in fasting is that its a remedial action, one part of the process of purifiying. For instance if you feel you have a lot of non-virtuous residue or spiritual obstacles to remove, you generate regret...
For all you artists who just happen to be Raw! Or... for all you Raw foodists who just happen to be artists!
Loren,
Was your fast that regained your health a supervised one, and with whom? How long was your fast? What did you eat like before that?
Do you mind me asking what health challenges you were experiencing?
Who did you intern under yourself? I ...
For People who love to write.
thanks Danny :)
A group for people who are still transitioning, just learned about raw, or are struggling at all and want to help each other out with tips, support, questions and answers.
ohhhh ha ha ha that so funny Jodykwik....i can just imagine you jumping out of your skin,naughty kitty he he lmao!
I love yoga. It has brought so much peace and centeredness to my life.
oh i had a cat that would bite the tip of my nose when i was fast asleep...freaked me right the hell out!
... and this is what happened next!
nice this looks great!
don't agree with the whole raw food creating a damp environment thing because of the wildly different effects of different raw foods. i've found candida to respond to 100% raw, several different approaches.
it would be interesting Mica...
I would love a fasting thread linked with a fruit diet Loren, pleeease :)
Community by WLIR:
© 2009 Created by Dhrumil
