From: owner-rawlife-digest@rawtimes.com (rawlife-digest) To: rawlife-digest@rawtimes.com Subject: rawlife-digest V1 #1002 Reply-To: rawlife@rawtimes.com Sender: owner-rawlife-digest@rawtimes.com Errors-To: owner-rawlife-digest@rawtimes.com Precedence: bulk rawlife-digest Thursday, June 6 2002 Volume 01 : Number 1002 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 15:10:55 -0700 From: "Mark Hovila" Subject: Re: [rawlife] re: Fasting Jay, > You may be an animal but I'm not. Humans were created in > the image of their creator and set apart from animals. > cells may operate in exactly the same way, but we have > added qualities that separate us from the animal kingdom > (e.g. a soul). If we are simply animals, what Hitler did > was just survival of the fittest in action. I tend to think that > Hitler was morally wrong. I have come to that conclusion > because I am not an animal. To say that humans are animals is not to denigrate humans. Many animals demonstrate compassion and other noble qualities. The belief that animals have no souls and that, unlike humans, they were not created in the image of their creator, is based, IMO, on blind adherence to dogma. For that matter, the very notions of "soul" and "creator" are, for most people, only hearsay information. I wonder what will happen to these beliefs like this if it should be discovered that there are other creatures, more intelligent than humans, that exist in this universe? What if they have a book that says THEY were the ones created in God's image? Mark - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 16:13:31 -0400 From: (by way of betaman ) Subject: [rawlife] Natural Living Garden Community Hello, This group was created for people wanting to create or join a natural living Garden Community, or eco-village. Natural Living Garden Community Homepage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GardenCommunity/ To subscribe, send a blank email to: GardenCommunity-subscribe@yahoogroups.com To post messages, send to: GardenCommunity@yahoogroups.com We're just getting started. Here are a few messages that have been posted. Please join in the discussion. Add your ideas, experience and opinions. The Fatal Flaw in All "Planned" Communities: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GardenCommunity/message/2 WHAT IS A GARDEN COMMUNITY: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GardenCommunity/message/3 WHERE WILL THE GARDEN COMMUNITY BE LOCATED: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GardenCommunity/message/4 HYGIENIC COMMUNITY NETWORK: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GardenCommunity/message/5 Alpine Sub-Tropical Garden of Eden: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GardenCommunity/message/6 - ------------------------------------------------------------- "Reform the environment, stop trying to reform the people. They will reform themselves if the environment is right." -- R. Buckminster Fuller 'I know the process may not be easy but the formula for success is simple. All it takes is total commitment, burning desire, determination, faith, and persistence. Remember Thomas Edison who created an electric lamp after 10,000 failed trials.' -- Helen Jean Story, on creating a hygienic community - ------------------------------------------------------------- - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 21:36:58 EDT From: TROMPAJO@aol.com Subject: [rawlife] Fasting and hunger In a message dated 6/4/02 4:23:12 PM, owner-rawlife-digest@rawtimes.com From: Bob Avery Subject: Re: [rawlife] re: Fasting writes: << Once you get over the initial hunger, it's clear sailing. My longest fast so far has been 21 days. If I were hungry and thinking about food the whole time I was fasting, I never would have lasted 21 days. >> Hi Bob (and Jay, to whom the comment is directed), My longest water fast was 21 days too, but unlike you, I *do* tend to think about food while fasting! Quite a bit, as a matter of fact. But you're absolutely right -- there's no hunger present -- it just gives me a lot of pleasure to get out all my raw food recipe books and look at all the beautiful pictures, thinking how wonderful even the simplest fare (like a leaf of lettuce!) is going to taste after the fast. This is something I've always done, and whenever I start a fast, people who know me well will ask "Well, have you got your recipe books out yet?" It's kind've like looking at a beautiful work of art -- you can admire it and derive pleasure from it without wanting to eat it (hopefully!). "Did you see the movie?" "No, but I ate the book." I guess you could take it as proof positive that hunger is not a problem during a fast, because if it were, I assure you, I'm not the kind of person who could resist that kind of temptation! I've found there's nothing in the world like fasting (or the Master Cleanse "Lemonade Diet", which I do regularly) to keep me on track, and strengthen my appreciation for beautiful, fresh, raw foods, and the Natural Hygiene lifestyle. Thinking about these things while fasting is a source of pleasure for me, and helps me enjoy the fast even more, without eliciting the faintest desire to hurry and break it so I can eat. The Lemonade Diet I did earlier this year (21 days) was one of the most pleasurable experiences I've had. On that, there was no hunger at all, even at the beginning. It never felt for one second like I was being deprived -- I was too busy thinking how good I felt! I've always said that fasting takes you to a place you can't get to any other way. I'd hate to have lived my life without experiencing it. Ronn - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 01:11:40 -0400 From: Bob Avery Subject: Re: [rawlife] re: Fasting Mark, >I wonder what will happen to these beliefs like this if it should be >discovered that there are other creatures, more intelligent than humans, >that exist in this universe? What if they have a book that says THEY were >the ones created in God's image? And what if they decide human flesh makes a good snack? Bob Avery ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 07:50:44 +0000 From: Albert Berge Subject: [rawlife] Re: rawlife-digest V1 #1001 One second is about 30 meters at equator Best, Albert I'm really sailing really, I just had to read the #1001 :-) At 5:22 PM -0400 6/4/02, rawlife-digest wrote: >how many meters long is a second > >as always >žetaman - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 17:49:12 -0700 From: Greg Woolley Subject: Re: [rawlife] re: Fasting Jay Banks wrote: > > >even though I can't find a single example > > >of a wild animal doing extended "fasting" > > > > OK, how hard have you been looking? Bears fast routinely all winter; so > > do other animals. We call it hibernation. Salmon fast during their > > entire spawning period as they rush upstream to their homelands to > > perform their mating rituals. > > Ok, I have often felt the urge to bulk up in summer. I have > often felt the urge to sleep all winter. But not one single > time have I ever felt the urge to not eat all winter long. There's no need for you and Jo to create the arbitrary dividing line between 'bodily urges' vs 'inner knowing', validifying the former motivation yet discounting the other as being somehow 'unnatural'. Fasting is a natural biological process of the body and the motivation for partaking a fast is just as valid whether instigated through acquired knowledge and/or 'inner conviction' as when instigated through bodily disease and/or injury, both are valid in their own right, both reap significant health benefits if done correctly. No need at all to justify one and discount the other. Regards, Greg Woolley > - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 08:36:31 -0700 From: "Hal R. Haley" Subject: Re: [rawlife] Fate of the universe Betaman, > Possibly the difference between an infinite defusing expansion as opposed to > a wavelike periodic contraction. I vote for the wavelike contraction. Everything in the universe vibrates; why not the universe itself? > The debatable question, is how much influence can we, as life, exert on our > universe. Thoreau once wrote that "The mind is dominant over the soil of the Earth. The mind has dominion over the might of the sea. The human mind is all-powerful over the verge of space." We can exert a great influence on our universe; provided we can grow past the point of extincting ourselves. > I can accept, for example the first law of thermodynamics. And the second, I hope! > The first law of thermodynamics gives rise to equations which describe the > unrelenting driving force of the universe to increase entropy and decrease > enthalpy. > > Life makes choices contrary to the predictable futures calculated by the > first law of thermodynamics. While the first law of thermodynamics cannot be > violated; we, as life, can choose to exert force and free will to concentrate > heat and intensify order. What of the simple crystal? It makes no choices that I'm aware of, yet is certainly a measured decrease in entropy, and I'd postulate also a measureable increase in enthalpy. > (Of course to do that we must lower heat and increase randomness somewhere > else.) I suppose that famous T.V. quote is correct: "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature!" > I would never judge the sacredness and substance of the life of my cat as > less than I would for humans. Nor would I, for your cat or mine. However what about the housefly I swatted two weeks ago? Did it have a soul? Does the tiny piece of quartz in my wristwatch have one? > Do we need more people, or do we just need more christian people? More intelligent people. > This human life is not the leadership that we, as life, needs to bend the > universe to sustainability. Sustainability will be achieved by harnessing nature and leveraging the laws of physics, not bending them. > We will never have the cooperation needed to avoid the next black hole, given > our past record. I won't bet on never. Our past record is not great, but only in it's infancy. Recorded history is only in the neighborhood of 6,000 years; a blink of an eye or less in the time frame of the Universe. The scary part is that most life dies in infancy, with only a small percentage reaching maturity. Are we doomed? We've gone from horse and buggy across the plains to rocket ships across the void, in a span of a hundred years; yet are closer than ever to destroying our planet. I don't know. Hal - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 14:22:11 -0500 From: "Jay Banks" Subject: Re: [rawlife] Fasting/Questions Jay: > >You may be an animal but I'm not. Humans were created in > >the image of their creator and set apart from animals. Bob: > Physiologically we are not set apart at all. > > >Our cells may operate in exactly the same way, but we have > >added qualities that separate us from the animal kingdom > >(e.g. a soul). Bob: > This hypothesis may be correct. It may also be correct that it is simply > speciesism, and animals have souls too. It may be correct? It is a pretty serious subject just to be guessing about it. If animals have souls and are on equal with humans, then forcing them to fast/restrict calories just to see what happens is just as unethical as forcing a human. The fact that the outcome was beneficial for the animals in question doesn't override the fact that the animals free will was violated. Even without equality or a soul, the ethics of this is still questionable. > >I don't consider withholding food a true "fast" for animals. If > >food was placed out and the dog chose not to eat, I would > >consider that a fast. > > If you want an animal to fast, and you know it should, you have to get it > started, because like you yourself, your body wants to continue eating. > Once the hunger went away, the dog was fasting voluntarily. Once the person knew he couldn't get an education, a job, food, or even travel without the new, government-mandated biochip implant, he wore it under his skin voluntarily. Of course, the biochip greatly enhanced his quality of life... > No, I don't think so, but if you had never seen a McDonald's burger, > fries, ice cream, and Coke, you might not need to fast for 3 months > either. The people who have seen the McDonald's burger, fries, ice, cream and coke are the ones most in need of the fast. Yet it is the people who don't eat this junk that are the ones fasting. If a raw vegan diet is what people are supposed to eat and those on it are constantly in need of "detoxing" and/or getting sick, it kind of makes you wonder if they are on the right track or not. > Do I really need to answer this? What do you know about statistics and > statistical analysis? How can you tell from a sample of one person what > percentage of his longevity was due to correcy diet, what percentage to > genes, what percentage to fasting or refraining from fasting, what > percentage to optimal sleep and rest patterns, what percentage to food > quality, what percentage a life free of emotional turmoil or persecution? The statistics you mention are not applicable to what we are doing. How many raw fooders has data been kept on over the years? Out of these, how many juiced? And how many were 100% vegan vs. raw vegetable and raw meat eaters? Then it would have to be narrowed down to totally raw vs. a 75%-plus raw to cooked ratio? Out of these, how many were breast fed and how many formula fed? Then, let's narrow it down to raw fooders who fasted and those who didn't. Factor in environment and genes, and that opens up a whole new can of worms. How about a category of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated? The best any of us can do is to either come up with what works for us on our own, or to read, listen or view material composed by someone else and make a decision on its validity. At some point all of us are either making, at best, an educated decision, to, at worst, just flat out taking a leap of faith. > >I don't see a connection between colonics and a colostomies? > > If you don't have a colon, you can be sure you don't have debris building > up in it, right? If this were an aging factor, you would expect people > with colostomies to have an advantage over you. Dr. Walker covered that exact same topic in detail in his book on colon health. It doesn't quite work the way you are suggesting, but an in-depth answer isn't possible at the moment. > >I don't think Dr. Walker had daily enemas, but I could be wrong. > >Working from memory, he advocated a minimum of a couple > >of colonics a year, with enemas as needed for certain specific > >things (e.g. occasional insomnia, after drinking the water in > >Mexico, etc.). Personally, I do tend to think he got a little > >carried away with it from time to time, but then again, look > >at his results. > > It sounds as if he's your hero, so why don't you try to emulate him? There is nothing written in his books that say a person has to start emulating him within 6 months to a year of reading his books. As far as him being my hero, I would compare him more to the Beatles. Sure, other bands sound good, and maybe sold more copies of their CDs...but they never managed to capture the essence that made the Beatles the Beatles. And no matter how good a band gets from that point on, it will always owe a certain amount of its success to the people that laid the groundwork before it that made its music possible, which, in this case, would be the Beatles. > Dr. Walker would not have let something like money be an excuse for him. > He wrote that you should eat the best quality food you can find, whatever > the cost. And he also said not to spend too much time worrying about it if you couldn't get the best quality food. In other words, you do the best you can with what you have got. I, for one, would love to lay in the sun for two hours a day, work out for another hour, and spend three months out of the year lying around water fasting. How about having a person just dedicated to soaking my nuts and sprouting my sprouts for me? Bet that would increase my life span a bit (anyone care to guess the salary of a nut soaker? ). But some of that just isn't going to happen unless I win the lottery. Jay - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 14:20:54 -0400 From: betaman Subject: Re: [rawlife] Fate of the universe At 08:36 AM 6/5/02 -0700, hal wrote: >I vote for the wavelike contraction. Everything in the universe vibrates; why >not the universe itself? your vote has been noted >And the second, I hope! its funny you should put it like that. because one of the interpretations of the second law is: "abandon all hope, ye who enter" >What of the simple crystal? It makes no choices that I'm aware of, yet is >certainly a measured decrease in entropy, and I'd postulate also a measureable >increase in enthalpy. i am pretty sure you are not going to be the first human to disprove the laws of thermodynamics excuse me if you feel i am underestimating you with the utmost respect i would like to briefly elaborate bearing in mind of course, that i was not the first human to discover any of these laws i assume the crystal was under so much heat and pressure that it has no choice but to absorb the increase in order. while the tendency of the crystal would and will be to scatter, it can only take that course should it reach an activation complex usually not available to it while you are watching. >Nor would I, for your cat or mine. However what about the housefly I swatted >two weeks ago? Did it have a soul? Does the tiny piece of quartz in my >wristwatch have one? crystals are not animals and while i consider them to be fascinating or even helpful in healing and realization i do not consider them life (although i try to be open minded about it) as far as the housefly if it becomes a real pest and won't leave you alone its okay if you kill it that also goes for suicide bombers, policeman, and tax collectors > > Do we need more people, or do we just need more christian people? >More intelligent people. i would prefer the main qualification to be more loving people but i would like to have the final sayso on it in each individual case >Sustainability will be achieved by harnessing nature and leveraging the >laws of >physics, not bending them. you just feel like disagreeing - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- maybe i should apologize for being harsh and cold in my original email i am sorry but i have had a tough childhood i grew up in a wasp community where i was one of two jews in school and as far as i knew, everyone else was protestant i wanted to be protestant i wanted santa claus and communion wafers i resented not being accepted of course, its just as well that i missed it i find out that there are lots more asians around than there are protestants so i would still have been a minority when i was ten i moved to a jewish community where more than 95% of the people were jews it was like gulivers travels it wasn't until i became raw and started to have my own feelings of god that i really turned favor on all religions At 02:22 PM 6/5/02 -0500, Jay wrote: >The fact that the outcome was beneficial for the animals >in question doesn't override the fact that the animals >free will was violated. i agree what to eat and when to not eat is best left up to the individual when we have pets, we control their food and usually can't know what is best >How about having a person just dedicated to soaking >my nuts and sprouting my sprouts for me? thats not a full time job she would have to have other duties like holding clumps of grapes and every once in a while saying something like boy, are you big - ---------------------------------------------------- At 08:04 AM 6/4/02 -0600, Jo wrote: >Hi Adriana - you may not like my opinion >but my experience is that fasting and >a concurrent exercise schedule >like the one you described will eventually conflict. ... >I should ask, what is the basis of your need to fast? stranger things have happened just not too often i agree with jo on two counts 1. what is the basis of your need to fast i haven't seen enough information to give any advice 2. i don't believe in premature activity planning for fasts its important to take it day by day love jrellis - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 03:28:24 -0700 From: Greg Woolley Subject: Re: [rawlife] Fasting/Questions Jay Banks wrote: > Jay: > > No, I don't think so, but if you had never seen a McDonald's burger, > > fries, ice cream, and Coke, you might not need to fast for 3 months > > either. > > The people who have seen the McDonald's burger, fries, > ice, cream and coke are the ones most in need of the fast. > > Yet it is the people who don't eat this junk that are the > ones fasting. > > If a raw vegan diet is what people are supposed to eat and > those on it are constantly in need of "detoxing" and/or > getting sick, it kind of makes you wonder if they are on the > right track or not. Jay, the reason why so many raw vegans fast is not because their diet is toxic but because they understand the benefits therein, whereas the reason why SAD eaters don't usually fast is because they generally have an erroneous understanding of fasting and don't have the desire for fasting anyway. I'm wondering why you feel fasting is not all that good for us? Have you fasted yourself? Have you done many fasts? I've done a fair few and without exception my fasts have yielded almost unimaginable results. Without fail they've exceeding my best hopes and expectations, without fail making me biologically younger, fresher, more vital, more aware, more sensitive, more centered, more peaceful, more joyful, more in-tune with myself and with life around me. Without doubt fasting has been the most profound life enhancing physical action I've undertaken. Besides the temporary weakness and discomfort fasting has produced for me nothing but beneficial results and I get the strong impression most other fasters feel the same way. So I'm wondering why you feel so aversed to the idea of making the conscious decision to fast when it is perhaps the most physically and spiritual rejuvenating action we can take? Do you feel it is kind of sinful to consciously help ourselves attain our full inheritance of spiritual happiness and joy? I mean, do you feel divine happiness is supposed to come to us all by itself and that we needn't make any personal efforts to that effect? Am just wondering why you've seemingly shut the door on such a beneficial god given gift as fasting. Regards, Greg Woolley - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2002 17:49:21 -0400 From: "Linda" (by way of betaman ) Subject: [rawlife] Nudist Commune in Maui I'm planning to be in Maui for three months, September, October and November and would like to live in a community with fellow nudists. I'd appreciate any information you have for me. Linda Gerber from Boston, MA - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 22:36:46 -0400 From: Bob Avery Subject: Re: [rawlife] Nudist Commune in Maui Linda, >I'm planning to be in Maui for three months, September, October and >November and would like to live in a community with fellow nudists. I'd >appreciate any information you have for me. This newslist is starting to get very interesting all of a sudden. (:-) Jay, >It may be correct? It is a pretty serious subject just to be >guessing about it. If animals have souls and are on equal >with humans, then forcing them to fast/restrict calories just >to see what happens is just as unethical as forcing a human. I notice you make a leap from "having a soul" to "equal," but ignoring that, I agree that animal experimentation is cruel and unwarranted. >The people who have seen the McDonald's burger, fries, >ice, cream and coke are the ones most in need of the fast. > >Yet it is the people who don't eat this junk that are the >ones fasting. Life is full of little ironies. >If a raw vegan diet is what people are supposed to eat and >those on it are constantly in need of "detoxing" and/or >getting sick, it kind of makes you wonder if they are on the >right track or not. Getting intoxicated is a fact of life, no matter what diet you are on, especially in this polluted world we live in. >At some point all of us are either >making, at best, an educated decision, to, at worst, just flat out taking a >leap of faith. Right. That was my point. >Dr. Walker covered that exact same topic in detail in his book on >colon health. It doesn't quite work the way you are suggesting, >but an in-depth answer isn't possible at the moment. OK, let me know if it becomes possible. >And he also said not to spend too much time worrying >about it if you couldn't get the best quality food. In other >words, you do the best you can with what you have got. Yes. Worry is a life-shortener. >Bet that >would increase my life span a bit (anyone care to >guess the salary of a nut soaker? ). A few minutes a day is all it takes me. >But some of that just isn't going to happen unless >I win the lottery. Good luck. jr, >thats not a full time job >she would have to have other duties >like holding clumps of grapes >and every once in a while saying something like >boy, are you big Better than my answer. (:-) >2. i don't believe in premature activity planning for fasts >its important to take it day by day I like to plan first so there will be as few distractions as possible, and THEN take it day by day. Hal, >What of the simple crystal? It makes no choices that I'm aware of, yet is >certainly a measured decrease in entropy, and I'd postulate also a measureable >increase in enthalpy. This is no violation of the laws of thermodynamics. They are meant to apply to closed systems. Crystal formation is not a closed system. It gets energy from without. Neither is the planet Earth a closed system, fortunately for us, since we get more energy from the sun than we dissipate into space. Otherwise, life might never have evolved here -- if it did in the first place. Bob Avery ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - -- rawlife - http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html ------------------------------ End of rawlife-digest V1 #1002 ****************************** --- ******************* END OF POST ****************************** RAWLIFE-DIGEST - faq at http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlife.html