ways to increase energy

[usn_5371]

Hi everyone,

I have been changing my diet from alot of meat, soft drinks, sweets,
& the same food over & over, I still eat meat & want to replace it but
there an awful lot of food I dont like, I now take vitamins, eat fruit
& nuts, & eat soda /whole meal bread, I have given up smoking since
last october & dont drink alcohol,
my problem is that I do be lacking energy & am looking for foods or
ways that can help keep my energy levels up that are recommeded by LO0
or David. Im not very active compared to someone who walk/cycles &
goes to the gym, so maybe if I was more active would I have more
energy.

any help appreciated
Peace, Chris H.

[Del]

"usn_5371" <cjhayden@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=pwk9z2NrZFv3IBfQLVe-twx5znrbZPRwvPzOkFnzjaUGpq9f47NhyeQdWdXBCxjA42pMpl MmiAB1Bw)> wrote:

>Hi everyone,
> I now take vitamins, eat fruit
>& nuts, & eat soda /whole meal bread, I have given up smoking since
>last october & dont drink alcohol,
>my problem is that I do be lacking energy & am looking for foods or
>ways that can help keep my energy levels up that are recommeded by LO0
>or David.

If I remember rightly, David was told to abstain from bread. It's my experience
that grain foods accelerate the aging process, and therefore contribute to a
lack of energy.

> Im not very active compared to someone who walk/cycles &
>goes to the gym, so maybe if I was more active would I have more
>energy.

Indeed! Find something you like to do.

Jon H.


>

__________________________________________________ ________________
Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register

Netscape. Just the Net You Need.

New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp

[Graeme]

Hello,

Sometimes the problem (as was the case with me until recently) is
that diet can inhibit exercise. I was a vegan/vegetarian for about
9 years, and the last year of that as a raw-foodist. I spent most
of these years in relative apathy and inactivity. Towards the end,
I started suffering from vitamin and mineral deficiencies.

I was therefore forced to stop being a vegetarian. I now eat lots
of oily fish (mackerel, salmon etc), live yoghurt and eggs, as well
as root vegetables, fruit, juices, and smoothies, with a moderate
quantity of salad and cooked vegetables. Since making this change I
quickly regained enthusiasm for exercise and study. I've put on 20
pounds of mostly muscle (in a couple months!), I'm more interested
in the world around me, and I'm starting a physics degree in
september. None of this would have happened in my previous state,
eating my previous diet.

I certainly couldn't have sustained my current exercise regime on my
previous diet, even if I'd had the enthusiasm (which I didn't).

David Wilcock has written that he experienced a boost in his energy
levels after adding fish to his diet, I seem to recall.

I have read fairly convincing evidence of the unhealthiness of
grains and beans, even and perhaps especially whole grains. The
main points are (1) that we have only been eating grains for 5,000
or 10,000 years (dependent on your ancestry), (2) that grains and
beans contain chemicals that prevent absorption of minerals (leading
to populations with high consumption of wholegrains having high
rates of rickets and mineral deficiencies), and (3) that grains have
been implicated in at least some cases of auto-immune diseases like
MS. However, I'm not trying to put forward a convincing argument
here (therefore please don't post rebuttals), so if you want to know
more go here:

www.beyondveg.com

And let me assure everyone that spirituality is just as valid for
meat-eaters as for vegetarians. I can vouch for that from my own
experience. If anything, I am more honest and loving now than I was
before (I have more energy to give), and meditation has not suffered
either.

Hope that's useful in some way,

Love and Light,

Graeme

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=9VwEjsXUgPHzOL_2I0wOzNSl4XtU4ZmNmJwhIj DmkQxPpOY7hAVJRhweVmgmLloggsGv6sqccrIUFho33zEuRQ), jonhermys@n... wrote:
> "usn_5371" <cjhayden@e...> wrote:
>
> > I now take vitamins, eat fruit
> >& nuts, & eat soda /whole meal bread

> >my problem is that I do be lacking energy> > Im not very active
compared to someone who walk/cycles &
> >goes to the gym, so maybe if I was more active would I have more
> >energy.

[zenkai]

In a message dated 7/23/2005 10:50:24 AM Pacific Standard Time,
cjhayden@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=y6hOJ7ej6QKR-bfxHN8krii9UDYBxO6ydDwwVymkvqdKPzIe-YqN9vbKVXx5CLGdaCgvv5p1Op4aXoFW) writes:

I want to find better alternatives cause I have a problem with
eating meat including fish.
would it be better to eat white bread only?

any more input appreciated,

Hi Chris,

Go to _www.google.com_ (http://www.google.com) , and type in: dietetic
no-no's

Then click on the top one, which is the All-Inclusive List of Dietetic
No-No's that David Wilcock has received thru his readings.

"The ideal "ET Diet" is indeed quite strict, but it leads to a dramatic
increase in vital energy, psychic awareness and the actual speed of your
spiritual vibrations."
You might then want to click on the next one down:
_Tuesday 11 / 2 / 99 - 8:51 a_ (http://ascension2000.com/11.02.99.htm)
We are revealing an aspect of this dietetic question that we have never
really
... coffee and all the other dietetic no-no's that we have discussed? ...
ascension2000.com/11.02.99.htm - 40k - _Cached_
(<a href="http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:DS-POcIyNKYJ:ascension2000.com/11.02.99.htm+dietetic+no-no">http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:DS-POcIyNKYJ:ascension2000.com/11.02.99.htm+\
dietetic+no-no</a>'s&hl=en&ie=UT
F-8) - _Similar pages_
(<a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=related:ascension2000.com/11.02.99.htm">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=related:ascension2000.com/11.\
02.99.htm</a>)
[ _More results from ascension2000.com_
(<a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=+site:ascension2000.com+dietetic+no-no">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=+site:ascension2000.com+diete\
tic+no-no</a>'s) ]
I found this to be one of David Wilcock's great readings.
Enjoy!
Gerard





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[usn_5371]

Hi,
this is what I would consume in a day,
-half a bowl of friut & nut muesli, -tea with sugar + 2 toast with
butter,
-vitamins
-half a tin plain pizza or 3 slices of soda bread + tea with sugar,
-some type of fruit or fruit drink,
-for dinner I have 2/3 small potatoes or rice + small amount of peas
or beans + meat which could be ham, chicken, lamb, beef or fish.
-then as a snack after dinner I eat nuts either almonds or peanuts.
-after that I'd have 2 toast + slice of soda bread + tea with sugar,
-and the last thing not long before I go to sleep would drink maybe
a 1 or 2 cups of water.
im aware I dont drink much water but I just dont remember to,
allthough when its hot which is not often I would drink it regurlary.

the other thing would be medicine I take for pain relief but am
currently reducing my dose so I can eventually come off it.

I dont eat eggs or anything fryed and dont eat chips either from home
or anything takeaway,
I want to find better alternatives cause I have a problem with
eating meat including fish.
would it be better to eat white bread only?

any more input appreciated,

Peace, Chris H.

[JACK MILLIORN]

The whiter the bread the sooner your dead!

Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: usn_5371
To: asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=wyC9Ibi5mi3V9Vg5DKmXoSuVqhNvmco6_wjfyp 6m_IBEBEtxUc4W2CdNFPQa281kH1DoOjMUce-vADwC8Q8ZmA)
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 9:57 AM
Subject: [asc2k] Re: ways to increase energy


Hi,
this is what I would consume in a day,
-half a bowl of friut & nut muesli, -tea with sugar + 2 toast with
butter,
-vitamins
-half a tin plain pizza or 3 slices of soda bread + tea with sugar,
-some type of fruit or fruit drink,
-for dinner I have 2/3 small potatoes or rice + small amount of peas
or beans + meat which could be ham, chicken, lamb, beef or fish.
-then as a snack after dinner I eat nuts either almonds or peanuts.
-after that I'd have 2 toast + slice of soda bread + tea with sugar,
-and the last thing not long before I go to sleep would drink maybe
a 1 or 2 cups of water.
im aware I dont drink much water but I just dont remember to,
allthough when its hot which is not often I would drink it regurlary.

the other thing would be medicine I take for pain relief but am
currently reducing my dose so I can eventually come off it.

I dont eat eggs or anything fryed and dont eat chips either from home
or anything takeaway,
I want to find better alternatives cause I have a problem with
eating meat including fish.
would it be better to eat white bread only?

any more input appreciated,

Peace, Chris H.











--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "asc2k" on the web.

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=mabjrlwFuzaxM_p7npBQrn6VfYRZiY8wi7izzW q2tpe5322II2DqPII6L46XZg05o4pEEN6zULe0OVoUzzY-4yvtiQyutldQpA)

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[M.W.]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=l4UIAX5z7s0yM3P8KkNw0mb7Lieu_rjZVRYAtc uHE5AFCGmua5jlW0dKKWErkMSDPZVhwkxcZ2--EMsOsOI), "JACK MILLIORN" <jack.mill@v...> wrote:
> The whiter the bread the sooner your dead!
>
> Jack

JACK, this may surprise you, but tests early on during the last
century found that experimental rats died sooner eating whole
wheat bread. Naturally that result was not what the health food
nuts like myself expected.

Some, like Dr. Mercola and Dr Rowen (of the Second Opinion
newletter ) advocate eliminating grains altogether...and in case you
are wondering, that includes Corn. !!Especially!!

Genetically modifed potatoes have been found to early-on kill the
rats being fed them...something wrong had been obviously added or
taken out by thesupposedly innocuous gene modifications.

In case you haven't heard the news, Monsanto is pushing legislature
to legally prohibit criticism of their frankenfoods...the intention
is to equate such contrary foodishness to the same status as "hate"
crimes!

Yeah. the whole world is going crazy...except thee and me....and even
thou seems a bit strange at times.

billybob

[JACK MILLIORN]

Well Billybob I turns out I'm allergic to both wheat and corn so I "try" to stay
away from them often with limited success.

Thanks for the comments.

Jack

From: M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=LyWMEH9AEJfe0PdTmrsmbINa4cJZrzn4UWYcZG tkO5OqFrY3DkfyNhf3iBbKc7_A0M4DrnpRZmPl73ldruV5), "JACK MILLIORN" <jack.mill@v...> wrote:
> The whiter the bread the sooner your dead! Jack

JACK, this may surprise you, but tests early on during the last
century found that experimental rats died sooner eating whole
wheat bread. Naturally that result was not what the health food
nuts like myself expected.

Some, like Dr. Mercola and Dr Rowen (of the Second Opinion
newletter ) advocate eliminating grains altogether...and in case you
are wondering, that includes Corn. !!Especially!!

billybob

[Jane Seymour]

I hope you don't mind me posting this, it's a great
site, very informative.

http://www.watercure.com/

--- JACK MILLIORN <jack.mill@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=D-6AXdCx7SUL56UxFQ_5xg5zF8is_5KhcTpZwGumtPzEHrZM1rR2 Oczbif4pTpvq0O3rhcdoUJqWkRE)> wrote:

> Well Billybob I turns out I'm allergic to both wheat
> and corn so I "try" to stay away from them often
> with limited success.
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> Jack
>
> From: M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng
>
> --- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=TSkOAIQ1NWIQSAcI-JhNh8jv3-KVt3AvPJ_AZBZWnE8sC9-J8AtT6UjlxTSXpP_ciqtHkSxTAgUvZgjL), "JACK MILLIORN"
> <jack.mill@v...> wrote:
> > The whiter the bread the sooner your dead! Jack
>
> JACK, this may surprise you, but tests early on
> during the last
> century found that experimental rats died sooner
> eating whole
> wheat bread. Naturally that result was not what the
> health food
> nuts like myself expected.
>
> Some, like Dr. Mercola and Dr Rowen (of the Second
> Opinion
> newletter ) advocate eliminating grains
> altogether...and in case you
> are wondering, that includes Corn. !!Especially!!
>
> billybob
>
>
>
>


"When the Power of Love overcomes the Love of Power, then we will have Peace!"
Jimi Hendrix

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[zenkai]

In a message dated 7/24/2005 10:17:06 PM Pacific Standard Time,
lealdragon@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=NGWI1xKzPVOtrVviPVKyz_lWg0cEZi6KMdEJml FsH8dLwkD1uStJIFIb_kSzaxeVFlWauyQUqpUqVg) writes:

If we try to follow the advice of the 'experts' on diet,
which 'experts' do we follow? There are those who claim better health
by avoiding grains, others who say grain-and-starch-based vegetarian
is best, others who advocate vegan, others raw-foods vegan, now the
new 'caveman' diet with raw meat...the list goes on.





<< Hey I'll follow the advice of the 'experts' that gave the List of
Dietetic No-No's to David Wilcock any time over 3D earthling 'experts'. RA's
advice
certainly resonates with me! And after all, RA's from 6D and knows a hell
of a lot more than we do. The trick is to find the proper substitutes to the
List of Dietetic No-no's to come up with meals that tasty (good luck with
that :)

Gerard


a


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[lealdragon]

If we try to follow the advice of the 'experts' on diet,
which 'experts' do we follow? There are those who claim better health
by avoiding grains, others who say grain-and-starch-based vegetarian
is best, others who advocate vegan, others raw-foods vegan, now the
new 'caveman' diet with raw meat...the list goes on.

These various diets are so contradictory to one another that it would
be impossible to reconcile them all. Atkins cannot be reconciled with
Ornish, caveman cannot be reconciled with vegan, etc.

Personally I think it's all just a big STS scam that has us scurrying
around trying to find the latest study to back up our diet of choice.
Whatever diet you choose, you can probably find some study to back it
up, as well as some evidence to the contrary. People are worrying
about whether brown rice is bad and that could actually be a
distraction from much bigger concerns, like the pesticides in produce,
sodas, sugar, EMFs, etc.

I really think we need to not lose sight of common sense, as well as
seeking our own personal guidance. For example, it makes no sense to
me that a refined food could somehow be healthier than a whole food.
For rats? Well, who knows? I'm not a rat, so couldn't say.

Something interesting I read recently in a vegan raw foods book, was
that if you look in nature, all the other animals don't fret about
diet; they eat what Mother Nature puts on her table. This was in
alignment with The Essene Gospel of Peace, which is supposedly
advanced teachings attributed to Jesus. This resonated with me, but in
no way is it an absolute.

These same raw-foodists also say that 'strong' foods like garlic are
no-nos. Well, maybe for someone who is in perfect health, but for
someone who still likes ice cream that garlic might come in very handy
in lowering his/her cholesterol.

Interestingly, both the raw-foods vegan and the raw-foods-with-meat
are against cooked grains. But many people assume that if you
eliminate the grains, then you MUST eat meat. Vegan raw-foods diet
advocates eating grains in their sprouted form. Then there is
macrobiotics, which relies heavily on cooked grains such as brown rice.

Re raw foods: why does it have to be a black-and-white issue? There
are countless testimonials of people thriving on raw foods diets,
while at the same time many stories of people who felt better after
adding fish back in. What I don't understand, as a vegetarian, is why
it had to be fish that got added back. What about adding some tofu,
organic cheese, raw goat's milk? Maybe for some, the fish works
better, but for others, the lacto-ovo middle-of-the-road vegetarian
diet might be more appropriate.

There are just so many factors, such as genetics, lifestyle, etc. I
personally don't think diet is a one-size-fits-all.



>
> JACK, this may surprise you, but tests early on during the last
> century found that experimental rats died sooner eating whole
> wheat bread. Naturally that result was not what the health food
> nuts like myself expected.
>
> Some, like Dr. Mercola and Dr Rowen (of the Second Opinion
> newletter ) advocate eliminating grains altogether...and in case you
> are wondering, that includes Corn.

[M.W.]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=FddZo22tKNLTOHc_wvKqqBZ31sLgAKzxl1UQdF RWqY7ECbqgrcI_UKyYGNZFwb-MsAxwhzdp9FqekJuTcuTF6w), "lealdragon" <lealdragon@g...> wrote:
> If we try to follow the advice of the 'experts' on diet,
> which 'experts' do we follow? There are those who claim better
health
> by avoiding grains,

### I reccomended Dr. Mercola as he is easy
to asess and has a test that one can take
to help determine their metabolic type.(*some
will just not do well without meat despite their
philosophical determination otherwise) He
is an advocate of Dr. Rubin and many of his
Garden of Life Products.

I have been taking Dr. Rowen's newsletter for
several years and found him well ahead of the
curve ... I've always been interested in
advancements in supplemental nutrition and he
doesn't dissapoint me with what he delivers.

Rowen does advocate a vegetarian diet but
warns that for most is will take time to
whittle down the diet to avoid shock to
the system .... And I like the fact that
he follows what he preaches. Also I suggested
these two as food guides since the "diet"
that one indivdual in question listed would
kill a cockroach in short order

Another food expertI like is Robert Young,
PhD. He has written several books that are
well worth reading in that he bases his work
on microscopic examination of just what makes
blood repond in a healthy manner. Another
aspect of his work is that he has demonstrated
on video that a toxic body forces cells to survive
by switching from oxygentaion to fermentation
to keep alive... of course it is cancer cells
that live by fermenttion. He has shown the meta-
morphus of blood cells to candida yeast to
bacteria and BACK again when the acidity of the
body was altered.

The needed nano-intelligences that underlie all
these instant evolutionary changes of FORM does
fits in well with what we study here.

About the paradox of refined food sometimes testing
better... The whole wheat -- and other grains --
contains a high level of phytic acid which, tho
helpful in certain cases, has a drawback in that it
will tie up minerals making them unavailable along
with interfering with enzymatic reactions which effects
digestion. Another problem is that whole wheat needs
more perservatives to keep the germ from going rancid.

Minerals are the great missing ingredient in the
American "diet". But that is another story.

Fish fill a need especially in providing the vitally
needed Omega 3 fatty acids...Flax will supply it BUT
in an inferior form...in fact it needs saturated fat
to modulate the seed oil. (coconut oil works well)
most vegetarians are overloaded with the the Omega 6
fatty acids...they cause heart problems and cancer.

Darn. there is not enough room to cover all the things
touched on. One cannot live well without supplementation
...the minerals are so deleted in our soil as to screw
up the works big time ...we are really a very sick nation.

And it should go without saying to this spiritually-minded
group that pesticides and artificial additions are hurtful.
[snip].Russians found years ago that microwaving even lunch made
factory workers's illnesses and complaints skyrocket...
They threw the damnable things into the junk pile.

I have eliminated grains. And beans. If grains are used
they are best soaked overnight to start the sprouting
process. Edgar Cayce in a reading mentioned that raw oats
weren't good for any body (now that stretches my memory
back about 55 years ago so I may be misquoting)

One warning. Keep the fruit down to a minimum! Way TOO
much sugar for most. I use frozen blueberries and cherries
but even tho comparitively low in sugar I have to limit
them drastically (they sure taste good --too good!
in smoothies)

A big item right now is the frankenfoods from Monsanto.
Just out on Rense is a finding that the modified corn
is deadly!

...animals may eat naturally but there is
not enough food out in the hills to feed us...we
have to use the groceries somewhat.

If I write anymore I will get axed...

I hope I haven't affended anyone by sounding like a
know-it-all...that is impossibe for me to be THAT as
I've forgoten most of what I've learned -- the downside
of old brain cells...

Love to all...even to the necessary nasties out there!

Bill Gieskieng, AKA, billous g
!

[usn_5371]

Hi everyone,

Bill thanks for the info in the email, I did the test
and got a score of 71 although a few questions was hard to answer
correctly, this is what it said;

"Your Basic Metabolic Type Test Score Is 71.
A score over 60 indicates a Protein Type. The higher your score
above 60, the more likely you are truly a Protein Type."
"Protein Type: 40% Protein / 30% Fat / 30% Carbohydrate "
"some Protein or Mixed Types"
Beef (grass-fed)
Turkey, dark meat
Bison meat
Asparagus
Spinach
Avocados
Cauliflower

the only thing I eat there is beef and thats rare cause of BSE,

it might be helpful but it seams a bit gimicky, the way I think of
that is anybody selling you something rarely has your best interests
at heart no matter how good it looks & usually the better it looks
the more careful I'd be, thats just from experience.

Bill- "Also I suggested
these two as food guides since the "diet"
that one indivdual in question listed would
kill a cockroach in short order"

Lealdragron- "If we try to follow the advice of the 'experts' on
diet, which 'experts' do we follow?"

well if u cut my head off I doubt I be still running about ;)
that diet is an improved one, I have also been through half
my life (im 25 now) of chemical dependance & am still taking
medicine for that which as I already said is being reduced all the
time, but have & am still doing a total u-turn. I have been through
alot but why I think im still going is my mind set,
maybe it does'nt matter which diet you use to a degree (like we know
fizzy drinks & chemicals are not good), if your constantly thinking
negitive things then that is going to contribute to ur health
degrading & vice-versa I suppose.
just find whats best for ur self, my nan would'nt eat anything
canned, only fresh veg-greens-fruit all that stuff, worked very hard
most of her life, raised 12 kids & live to 84, she was tough but a
good natured & generally happy person. my uncle (my nans son) eats
about 3 squares a day, eats plenty of veg greens & fruit, worked a
very hard working life, tough as ole boots, is 58/9 still active
playing golf which can beat people half his age. and another still
works on building sites, he still acts like hes a young man.

something i've noticed with these people who live very long lives
is they ALLWAYS talk about a routine they half, what I think is its
not the the actuall thing they do but the mind-set, they Belive that
it works for them & they enjoy it.

Peace, Chris

[JACK MILLIORN]

Jane,
Thanks for the link, I read it and certainly agree. What I don't agree with are
the "Water Fanatics" that say you should drink a gallon of water a day, good
grief a person could wear out the water works. Not only that you can't get five
minutes away from a rest room at any given time. With that said I probably
drink two quarts a day but sometimes less or more depending on the
circumstances.

One thing I like was the confirmation that drinking water helps ulcers. I don't
have an ulcer but I do get reflux and when that happens I drink a lot of water
and the reflux goes away.

Regards,

Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: Jane Seymour
I hope you don't mind me posting this, it's a great
site, very informative.

http://www.watercure.com/

[lealdragon]

This is precisely my point. I'm glad that Dr. Mercola's philosophy
works well for you, but he does not quite fit well for me.

He has alot of scientific research to back up his claims, but then so
do Dr. Dean Ornish and Dr. John McDougall, both of whom advocate a low-
fat vegetarian diet, both of whom have a huge amount of research to
back up their claims that such a diet can actually reverse heart
disease and other degenerative diseases, in over 90% of the cases.

For that matter, Frederic Patenaude also has some compelling claims to
back up his recommendation of a completely vegan, raw, FRUIT-BASED
diet! I just got his ebook and am VERY impressed! (and I have read
ALOT of raw foods books that did NOT impress me.) He is very radical,
but then, aren't we radical in our own way?

What attracted me to Frederic's info is his claim to be able to
address the common pitfalls of raw-foods diet. I was one of those for
whom a raw-foods diet did NOT work, but admittedly I did not follow
the important cautions, so it's no wonder. I still feel very drawn to
this diet, with the modification of raw goat's milk and organic eggs
(in other words not 100% raw, but mostly) so I still consider it an
ideal to work towards.

Point being, again, there are just so many 'experts' out there, many
with quite impressive 'credentials' that it doesn't really mean that
much anymore. Even in scientific studies, WHOSE blood was tested? And
why should someone else's blood tested in a lab have any relevance to
me? Why should a test done on rats have any relevance to me?

I'll take it a step further: why should it matter to me what
the 'ideal' diet was for the entities who inhabited this planet in the
early days (the 'cavemen')? That's like saying, 'historically humans
have fought alot of wars, therefore we must be designed to fight
wars'. ??? Aren't we supposed to be evolving?

I'm more interested in where I'm going, not where I came from.

I'm not saying that Mercola et al don't have some valid things to say -
I subscribe to Mercola's newsletter myself. But, I filter out his
recommendations for raw meat and his ranting against vegetarianism, as
those do not ring true for me. Just as I filter out Frederic's
cautions against garlic.

It's difficult to say what I really want to say without sounding
judgemental towards those who think eating meat is ok. As I described
in an earlier post, I myself, a very 'self-righteous' raw-foods vegan
for several years, also started eating fish and chicken again for
awhile to regain balance after being on a very UNbalanced diet.

But, once I balanced out, and followed a more middle-of-the-road whole
foods (yes, including brown rice) diet, the symptoms of deficiency
stayed gone and I did great. Which leads me to believe, in MY case
anyway, that the meat was just a potent push, used medicinally you
could say. As in, the pendulum had swung way too far in one direction,
so then I had to use meat (the other extreme) to force it back in the
middle. However, if I follow the middle path (which is different for
everyone, but for ME it appears to be a vegetarian diet) then I tend
to stay in the middle. ('middle' meaning balance, no deficiency or
excess) So for ME, the meat was a temporary thing.

So, I honestly do not intend this to sound judgemental in any way.
But, when we start justifying meat-eating, or avoiding grains, or
whatever, based on some isolated study, when there are plenty of other
studies that contradict that study, then maybe it is time to question
our motivation. Is it fear? Or is it an unwillingness to change? Or is
it confusion?

I love cheese and that's a challenge for me. But, as I consciously
choose the raw-foods 'liveit' I expect that will begin to fall away,
just as other cravings have fallen away.

I admit that I'm personally against meat-eating, and therein lies the
challenge as I don't want to debate anyone about that. I'm just
raising the question: will we still be killing animals in 4D?



--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=zZJF79RdMOyGVJG0lNPu79BE6Dq1YTJMdgi33i MPiG6VQounIFLETUBcyhIlptDxDoSl3hLj65ZWKBs), "M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng" <skykieng@i...>
wrote:

> ### I reccomended Dr. Mercola as he is easy
> to asess and has a test that one can take
> to help determine their metabolic type

[lealdragon]

I don't think that's necessarily true. Nearly all the info out there
has some connection to someone making a living, either directly or
indirectly. I definitely agree that there is a tremendous amount of
greed - case in point is the pharmaceutical companies which most
people trust, yet the entire medical establishment is a multi-billion
$$ - a year industry. So yeah, I would definitely question their info.

On the other hand, there are many wholistic practitioners, natural
foods companies etc. that DO have good info. Obviously some of these
are just greedy and not to be trusted, but I wouldn't throw the baby
out with the bath water. There's plenty of info out there that IS
valid that came from legitimate honest people trying to make a living
with 'right livelihood' - following their passion to want to help
people.

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=z1xztFMf9A4V3r7WrUOql5QIXMppE5-d032WMAlUTwWbUsZI6DdoSow5_Njub3a7a8XFR3m7Tv-Dl713yFUJFg), "usn_5371" <cjhayden@e...> wrote:

> that is anybody selling you something rarely has your best interests
> at heart no matter how good it looks & usually the better it looks
> the more careful I'd be, thats just from experience.
>



> Bill- "Also I suggested
> these two as food guides since the "diet"
> that one indivdual in question listed would
> kill a cockroach in short order"
>
Which diet would kill a cockroach? (cockroaches can live a month on
the glue from a postage stamp, btw, so I wouldn't trust any studies
done on cockroaches. ;-) )

[lealdragon]

Dr. Bat has some very good info on water but one thing to keep in
mind is that he advocates any water and lots of salt, any salt. He
doesn't seem to acknowledge that tap water is not the same as good-
quality purified, alkaline water or that table salt is any different
from natural mineral-rich salt.

Another example of how some 'experts' might have a piece of the
puzzle, but not necessarily the whole picture. Good to cross-
reference.

Maybe water is like garlic in this sense. The raw foodists say to
avoid 'strong' foods like garlic, but those foods might be helpful
to people who have fatty diets. The raw foodists also say not to
drink so much water, but they are getting plenty of water from
fruit. Someone who eats less 'watery' foods like fruit might need
more water. Also, the climate/season/activity level are also factors.

Re the meat question: Another point to consider is that, if we want
to reduce discord on the planet at this time of transition, what
about all the fear and suffering in the slaughterhouses? there IS
alot of killing and suffering going on in the animal world, and
doesn't that add to the overall negative energy of the planet?



--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=QzoVhqm5YPTRAe0s30S033KNHRbz9tBdbpiVbl fJGczr8kHD4pv7HJzBJ39v8H4-ORzSVUWN5m-qi85x8Z8KpQ), "JACK MILLIORN" <jack.mill@v...> wrote:
> Jane,
> Thanks for the link, I read it and certainly agree. What I don't
agree with are the "Water Fanatics" that say you should drink a
gallon of water a day, good grief a person could wear out the water
works.

[Carol Spooner]

At 01:14 PM 7/25/2005 +0000, usn_5371 wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>Bill thanks for the info in the email, I did the test
>and got a score of 71 although a few questions was hard to answer
>correctly, this is what it said;


What test is that?

Thanks,
Carol

[M.W.]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=BOBLPS_4gMqbeyaTUQiOZH8ULzva9SG5ms-ufm51wyh9KDNKmosr2pjEQ2dY-IFBsy9ycjaz6FrICNa_8qBXXA), "lealdragon" <lealdragon@g...> wrote:
> This is precisely my point. I'm glad that Dr. Mercola's philosophy
> works well for you, but he does not quite fit well for me.

Hi, Leal

Correction: I don't USE Dr. Mercola's diet as such but
rather feed his information into my mental hopper.

As you probably realize we are rather closer together
in our take on this complex subject rather than in
opposition.

I don't approve of slaughtering animals either.
The methods used are beyond barbaric. I have had meat
probably once or twice in the last six months even tho
my metabolism is partially geared for it (I'm a blood type
AB, which is genetically set for meat by the B component
butI don't produce enough hydrochloric acid to correctly
digest it due to the vegetarian inclined A factor)

As for the Ornish low fat high carb diet it is like a
time bomb.

And yeah, dear Dr. Bat's reccomendation to use tap water
is incredible.

There is a correlation between blood types and sensitivity
to particular food leptins to various dietary inputs...
I've seen samples pulled from persons placed under a dark
field microscope. Most examples were engaged in corpucscular
warfare! not good.

I have no idea what good things this guy has to say about
fruit. I guess I will have to go see. I know the overuse
of fruit caused me to lose some teeth. I do use lemons in
my drinks. They are not juiced...I include most of the pulp.

For sweetening I use stevia powder or a special sugar,
erythritol.

I use RAW goat cheese and raw cfo3 eggs (eggs in the blender)

The point is that I'm in far better health at age 74 than
when I did physique photo modeling in 1950 and looked like
an Adonis.

Time to go trap some wild aspargus for breakfast (:>))

billious g

[lealdragon]

What do you mean by 'like a time bomb'?



--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=xHp0ZshFgV-Y056ged2DxBJvKbDylBv9p0MhtPRxxfYeJe1OgIG0CKKsKL8-ebnUSf267n0UgtDd8quOP214), "M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng" <skykieng@i...>
wrote:
>
> As for the Ornish low fat high carb diet it is like a
> time bomb.
>

[Ed]

JACK MILLIORN wrote:
>
> Jane,
> Thanks for the link, I read it and certainly agree. What I don't agree with
are the "Water Fanatics" that say you should drink a gallon of water a day, good
grief a person could wear out the water works. Not only that you can't get five
minutes away from a rest room at any given time. With that said I probably
drink two quarts a day but sometimes less or more depending on the
circumstances.

The basic way to know whether you are getting enough water is
this: too little water, hard stools or constipation. Too much water,
your urine is clear or very pale.

All the best, Ed


> One thing I like was the confirmation that drinking water helps ulcers. I
don't have an ulcer but I do get reflux and when that happens I drink a lot of
water and the reflux goes away.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jack

[M.W.]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=_vszHJNIFCXMQ2rP4sAQfttAhz3AHBkez8VCcs HsjIZAiHqtM3hwvuJ3CLBGwAGGLgUwSAa30JL9HY_TGMg), "lealdragon" <lealdragon@g...> wrote:
> What do you mean by 'like a time bomb'?

Hi, Dragon.

The immediate effects of the Ornish diet -- and
others like it can be helpful. in fact I was on it for a
while, about 15 years ago.(not many diets I have not
tried!) What concerned some dieticians and medics from
follow ups and projections was that over time it could
lay the groundwork for diabetes in suceptible individuals.

I do not do well with starchy carbohydrates so didn't last
long on it since it didn't fulfill its promise. The diet
was following the popular ideas of the time to reduce fat
to a minimum...body builders followed suit for awhile with
the supplement companies completely eliminating fats in
their products. Of course the pendulum has swung the other
way and (proper) fats are regaining respectability. Complex
carbs that were once put on a pedestal have been found to
feet of clay...that is quick, deadly sugar!

I found the guy you mentioned and subscribed to his
newsletter.He is certainly not a "fruitarian" such as
Fry. Looks like he makes sense. his warnings against
fats I would imagine are directed to veg oils of high
omega 6... when heart problems were minimal back in
1900 saturated fats comprised 80% of the fats!


BUT the big problem with eating raw and thinking that
accomplishes something is that the basic idea is flawed
in that modern foods don't have the enzymes they once
had back in the good old days ...Whatever your diet --
and particularly as you age when the body's reserves run
out -- you need high-powered enzyme supplementation
but most on the market are pathetic JUNK!

What you can get away with when young will not work
when the body ages and ITS alloted enzymes are gone
your faithfull 2d body pulls the plug and dies
because it can't utilize food that won't digest.

Sorry. Gave you more than you asked for.

your good bud, bill g.

>
>
> --- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=_vszHJNIFCXMQ2rP4sAQfttAhz3AHBkez8VCcs HsjIZAiHqtM3hwvuJ3CLBGwAGGLgUwSAa30JL9HY_TGMg), "M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng"
<skykieng@i...>
> wrote:
> >
> > As for the Ornish low fat high carb diet it is like a
> > time bomb.
> >

[lealdragon]

Hey good bud! I agree that we agree on more than we disagree, so no
prob, ok?

I'm not trying to debate with you, honest! It's just that I no
longer believe that any dietary decision can be completely justified
with 'evidence' - it's more a matter of trust and guidance. That's
not to say that the evidence shouldn't be considered, just that it
shouldn't be considered absolute.

My point is that, I don't think there are any absolutes with this
diet thing. Every point you make, I could make a counter point: for
example, look at how many diabetics there are who eat meat, meaning,
how can the vegetarian diet be blamed for diabetes? (then you could
counter me, of course, see?)

I always find it interesting when the vegetarian diet is blamed for
this or that, when statistics show that, across the board and
despite other contributing factors, vegetarians consistently have
much lower rates of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, obesity, and
stroke.

So despite its shortcomings, vegetarian diet still has its obvious
strengths. Evidently no diet is perfect, and there are still so many
other factors, plus the environmental poisons to deal with. All we
can do is do the best we can! But I find it amusing when people are
told to eat meat out of FEAR of some such deficiency, when meat-
eaters have more diet problems than vegetarians. Yes, alot of those
problems are from junk, but that factor was already taken into
consideration too, since many vegetarians eat junk foods also. (I
know some vegetarians who smoke!)

And, even tho I agree with you that foods lack enzymes, there is
also controversy about taking enzymes - the company I distribute
sells excellent enzymes, but I am now questioning them - there are
some who say that when a person uses enzymes the body gets dependent
and quits making its own, just as with the 'natural' hormones (which
I have experienced, to my horror, btw). Is this true? I don't know.
I know people who've lowered their cholesterol with enzymes. Point
being, that there's always another angle to consider.

And, of course the 'no oils' thing went to far, and yes we do need
some oils. Do we need animal oils? Don't know.

That's just it - I DON'T KNOW. I have not been into health foods as
long as you - I'm only 45 compared to your ripe old age ;) and have
only been into this for 24 years.

But, I too have tried nearly every diet, nearly every supplement.
There are some things I have stuck with, such as organic foods,
juicing, superfoods, etc. (I agree with you that modern foods do not
have the nutrients they once did, hence the need for superfoods.)

And, my conclusion is, that the more I think I 'know' based
on 'research' the more I realize how it is all so skewed and
contradictory.

Therefore, rather than debate 'this' research with 'that' research
ad infinitum, I am simply saying that it is possible to find
evidence to back up or refute any diet one chooses.

Ultimately, it all comes down to what works for the individual. For
example, it really doesn't matter to me what latest 'research' might
say about eating meat - I'm just not gonna eat meat. And to someone
who knows they do better with meat, it's not gonna matter if we tell
them to not eat meat - they have their own experience and that will
mean more to them.

Many people know me as a 'health nut', yet, as important as I think
diet is, I've been realizing lately that, surprise, it's not
the 'end all' - while most people perhaps don't pay ENOUGH attention
to their diets and put all manner of nasty things into their bodies,
I actually have been TOO fixated on diet for too many years, and I
am actually trying to loosen up a bit and not worry about it so
much. (There's that 'balance' thing again.) Even something as
important as diet can be a distraction too, at least in my
experience. I just no longer believe it is possible, or even
important, to find ALL the answers. There will ALWAYS be some latest
supplement, some new study. That's why I'm questioning now where
some of this info is coming from.

I think 'evidence' for or against any diet should best be viewed the
way we view channeled material - use that which resonates and
discard that which doesn't.

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=6S9LsxbcZG4ecSWFbv44CI6oa171JUkfSf7Fdb CFetMoBoP2ao1dKcN72gjAiOLJqS9HyFoyUK6552HjUg), "M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng"
<skykieng@i...> wrote:

> ...not many diets I have not
> tried!) ... over time it could
> lay the groundwork for diabetes in suceptible individuals.
>
>... Of course the pendulum has swung the other
> way and (proper) fats are regaining respectability. Complex
> carbs that were once put on a pedestal have been found to
> feet of clay...that is quick, deadly sugar!
>
> BUT the big problem with eating raw and thinking that
> accomplishes something is that the basic idea is flawed
> in that modern foods don't have the enzymes they once
> had back in the good old days ...>
> >>
> your good bud, bill g.

[Graeme]

Just because it rhymes doesn't mean it's true!

Actually I'd recommend limiting consumption of bread of any sort, and
grains and beans generally. There seem to be different drawbacks to
both white and wholegrain bread.

Love and Light,

Graeme

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=5JhgYv6-QCmCIu-1Aco0WfupMl6eqiReaGXtq_dEIA3x9A_2i8WpOsXujj4NdSdWw QOTSuz59u9GoRT8Xg), "JACK MILLIORN" <jack.mill@v...> wrote:
> The whiter the bread the sooner your dead!

[Graeme]

You raise some interesting points, which I feel compelled to reply
to:

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=lLfjrZf8kg_bdv1r_QyOKiuMkoBDn2T3el-rpR_EaPxsMq2NFy3Wu3xsYq0L8f5lagpWJyAcjcGbDJfq), "lealdragon" <lealdragon@g...> wrote:
There are those who claim better health
> by avoiding grains, others who say grain-and-starch-based
vegetarian
> is best, others who advocate vegan, others raw-foods vegan, now
the
> new 'caveman' diet with raw meat...

G: It's important to look into the psychology and motivation of
various diets, and also the impact that diets themselves can have on
psychology. Advocates of vegan diets usually have an ethical
motivation, at least in part, and that can lead them to ignore
evidence that vegan diets could be unhealthy. There can also be
a 'holier-than-thou' aspect, especially with extremely puritanical
diets like raw vegan and so forth. I know what I'm talking about
here, as I have been both a vegan and a raw-foodist.

I'm amused by your oxymoron about the 'new caveman diet'... :-D


> Personally I think it's all just a big STS scam that has us
scurrying
> around trying to find the latest study to back up our diet of
choice.
> Whatever diet you choose, you can probably find some study to back
it
> up

G: It's certainly true that certain people are making big bucks by
marketing this or that diet. This is obviously a factor
compromising the integrity of some. For instance I have heard
stories from more than one source of raw-vegan gurus eating cooked
food and otherwise having difficulties with their diets, but not
revealing this publicly, presumably for the harm it would do to
their careers. And I have heard that Dr. Atkins was obese when he
died, not wishing to speak ill of the dead, but there you go.

> I really think we need to not lose sight of common sense, as well
as
> seeking our own personal guidance. For example, it makes no sense
to
> me that a refined food could somehow be healthier than a whole
food.

G: Well, this could be good as a rule of thumb, but it's not always
the case. The high consumption of unleavened whole grains in
certain human populations causes rickets, mineral deficiencies and
hypogonadal dwarfism. Soya beans are processed into various forms
(tofu, tempeh, miso etc) because they are so hard to digest when
whole. Raw lima beans are deadly poisonous. Yoghurt is processed
milk. And so forth.

> Something interesting I read recently in a vegan raw foods book,
was
> that if you look in nature, all the other animals don't fret about
> diet; they eat what Mother Nature puts on her table. This was in
> alignment with The Essene Gospel of Peace, which is supposedly
> advanced teachings attributed to Jesus.

G: Raw-vegan books are notorious for simplistic propaganda. For
instance, it is often claimed that different trees don't grow next
to each other in nature, therefore we should only eat one kind of
fruit at a time. This is quite obviously untrue, as anyone who has
been in a forest knows. Most animals are in fact quite picky about
what they eat, and are biologically specialised for certain diets.
In my garden, some birds go for seeds, some for peanuts, some for
grains, some for apples.

Not wishing to cast dispersions, but the essene gospel of peace, or
what I have read of it, seems to obviously be a very badly written,
contrived, propaganda device for modern-day natural hygienists. I
cannot believe that it is a true gospel.

> These same raw-foodists also say that 'strong' foods like garlic
are
> no-nos. Well, maybe for someone who is in perfect health, but for
> someone who still likes ice cream that garlic might come in very
handy
> in lowering his/her cholesterol.

G: Yes, I quite agree with this sort of dietetic relativism.

> Re raw foods: why does it have to be a black-and-white issue?
There
> are countless testimonials of people thriving on raw foods diets

G: I have also read countless testamonials of people suffering from
very severe health difficulties as a result of a raw vegan diet.
These testamonials had actually been selectively deleted from a raw-
foods forum, but fortunately someone had saved them. I should add
that a long term part-vegan, part-vegetarian (if you get what I
mean) diet, lead me into health problems of my own.

What I don't understand, as a vegetarian, is why
> it had to be fish that got added back. What about adding some
tofu,
> organic cheese, raw goat's milk?

G: Well, tofu would not bring anything new to the diet, other than
protien. As for the goat's milk and cheese, you have a better
point, but I think a more nutritionally inclusive option is eggs. I
have mine raw, blended into carrot and apple juice. I'm also eating
fish, at least for now, because since my health got so bad, I don't
want to take any chances. That said, I will probably continue
eating fish, because from very early man to the dawn of agriculture,
and still today in non-agricultural tribes, humans have consumed
very large amounts of animal products. I really doubt I can
overturn evolution just because I'd like the lion to lie down with
the lamb.

> There are just so many factors, such as genetics, lifestyle, etc.
I
> personally don't think diet is a one-size-fits-all.

G: I completely agree with you there.

Hope you find all that interesting.

Love and Light,

Graeme

[Graeme]

THe body synthesises enzymes all the time. I have seen no evidence
that it 'runs out' of them. Sure, its ability to synthesise them
could conceivably become eroded as part of the aging process, but
that's not the same thing.

Love and Light,

Graeme

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=5WWLZkqderbbnurFJDkvsEh3vwE-InaGqp8YGcf4xKSt8RJihODbyiMirA1ItDqUnkYQiFJzy82rbh yV), "M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng" <skykieng@i...>
wrote:

> What you can get away with when young will not work
> when the body ages and ITS alloted enzymes are gone
> your faithfull 2d body pulls the plug and dies
> because it can't utilize food that won't digest.

[lealdragon]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=3ENmS9FoNu9PmbunCOGCMPL68jtCH9zH0DcqDT H9bjX-auISt65FLK1n6LgaIApzHVGGAtmbFuaJTHd5pw), "Graeme" <kimonokraken@y...> wrote:
> ...Advocates of vegan diets usually have an ethical
> motivation... can lead them to ignore evidence that vegan diets
could be unhealthy. There can also be a 'holier-than-thou'
aspect...
> I'm amused by your oxymoron about the 'new caveman diet'... :-D

Not an oxymoron - it's new in the sense of being trendy.

So what if vegans aren't 'perfect'? Look at how many meat-eaters
ignore evidence because they simply don't want to quit eating
cheeseburgers?

I agree with the 'holier than thou' aspect - I was very guilty of
that myself. But again, so what? That is no reason to throw it all
out, just because it still needs some improvement. My raw foods diet
failed because I didn't follow it correctly. Rather than say
it's 'unhealthy' I would rather seek to improve my understanding of
it.

In the meantime, most vegans would probably prefer to add eggs
and/or raw goat's milk if they want to err on the side of caution,
rather than fish. The valid concerns seems to be with vegans
(whether raw foods or not) NOT with lacto-ovo vegetarians. So, I
don't understand why there is so much emphasis on eating meat. That
is NOT necessary - eggs and dairy will suffice.

> ...of raw-vegan gurus eating cooked food ...Dr. Atkins was obese

Sure. And look at all the cases of televangelists found to be
corrupt. Does that mean that the people who resonate with that
religion should give it up just because their preacher was not
perfect?

Remember the story in the LoO where Ra said many gurus fall off
their pedestal, and this too is their service, because they are
teaching us to not put anyone on a pedestal.

One of the early advocates of raw foods diet, Viktoras Kulvinskas,
said in his book 'please do not judge me for not following my own
teachings. I often fail. Please judge the info itself, not me. I am
trying to follow these teachings just as you are.'

>...Yoghurt is processed milk...

Terminology issue here. 'Refined' is not the same as 'processed.'
Fermenting and sprouting are examples of processing that can improve
the value of the food. As I intended its meaning, refining, on the
other hand, means denatured, as in, removing the nutrients, such as
is done when they remove the minerals from wheat, sugar, and salt,
then bleach the foods with chemicals. A processed food can actually
be healthier, whereas a refined food becomes more like a drug
(isolated nutrients) than a food.


> ...Raw-vegan books are notorious for simplistic propaganda.

I agree with you here. That's why I no longer believe in it as a
dogma. I used to make it into a religion (hence the holier than thou
attitude) and think that if I ate cooked food I wouldn't ascend. How
silly! I now consider it an ideal to work towards, at whatever pace
fits in comfortably with where I'm at. I may adopt as much of the
philosphy as seems appropriate, but I'm no longer going to feel
guilty if I eat some cheese or whatever.

>
> ...essene gospel of peace...seems to obviously be a very badly
written, contrived, propaganda device for modern-day natural
hygienists. I cannot believe that it is a true gospel.

Hmmmm... interesting; I found it very beautiful and inspiring. In
fact I liked it better than most of the writings attributed to
Jesus, such as those found in that popular bestseller. But, what do
you mean by 'true gospel'? What is that?


> > are countless testimonials of people thriving on raw foods diets
>
> G: I have also read countless testamonials of people suffering
from
> very severe health difficulties as a result of a raw vegan diet.
> These testamonials had actually been selectively deleted from a
raw-
> foods forum, but fortunately someone had saved them. I should add
> that a long term part-vegan, part-vegetarian (if you get what I
> mean) diet, lead me into health problems of my own.

It works both ways! And that is my point - you can find evidence to
support each side of the issue, for any diet. Of course there are
people for whom the diet didn't work; there are also vibrantly
healthy people for whom the diet DID work.

How do you know it was the diet that didn't 'work'? I too had some
major health issues, and I kept changing my diet trying to figure it
out. Well, in my case, it turned out to be distilled water (uh-oh,
another controversial subject here) and 'natural' progesterone
cream, both of which have loyal advocates, both of which proved
disasterous FOR ME.


>
> G: Well, tofu would not bring anything new to the diet, other than
> protien.

Well that's what's supposedly missing, is protein, right?


>As for the goat's milk and cheese, you have a better
> point, but I think a more nutritionally inclusive option is eggs.

I agree, which is why I now do eggs and raw goat's milk.


> I'm also eating
> fish, ...will probably continue
> eating fish, because from very early man to the dawn of
agriculture,
> and still today in non-agricultural tribes, humans have consumed
> very large amounts of animal products. I really doubt I can
> overturn evolution just because I'd like the lion to lie down with
> the lamb.

That's totally fine for you, since you are evidently ok with fish.
I'm NOT criticizing your choice! I'm just saying that for some, fish
is really not an option. And I don't think it NEEDS to be in most
cases, since eggs and dairy have the same elements as fish,
including the essential fatty acids (Omegas) if you get organic,
raw.

I would have to respectfully disagree with you about overturning
evolution, though. I thought that was what this forum was about: a
major SHIFT.

PEACE!!! And may the lion lie down with lamb, despite our
confusion... =)

[lealdragon]

I've seen evidence on both sides of the issue. That's why I really
don't know. After that horrible experience with the 'natural'
hormones, I am questioning the thing with enzymes. I tend to agree
with you, that maybe there are ways to encourage our bodies to
continue creating its own enzymes, optimally. But, sometimes people
need to use crutches when their legs aren't working properly.

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=BL6r8CkXGEeolONxPvIe8jcSp0azzOnfjJoP6K hpLHaJfTdWFrqbJbWtS8bA6XI-92XO8CTH-phS7qU), "Graeme" <kimonokraken@y...> wrote:
> THe body synthesises enzymes all the time. I have seen no evidence
> that it 'runs out' of them. Sure, its ability to synthesise them
> could conceivably become eroded as part of the aging process, but
> that's not the same thing.
>

[M.W.]

Hi, Graeme

Dr The late Dr. Edwin Howell, in his book concerning the
nature of digestive enzymes, compared them as a "bank account"
of enzyme capabilty given to us at birth. There are two
types,i.e., metabolic and digestive. So, whether we run out
of them, or can no longer produce them, the end effect is
an approach to an exhaustion of the needed level of enzymes.

Enzymes beyond what is needed for digestion are used for
metabolic purposes -- such as cleaning out the accumulated
crud in the system... so I take as many enzymes between
meals as I do with them. Enzymes are also considered as
available "energy". I DO NOT think that taking extraneous
enzymes reduced the capabiltiy of the body to produce them.
...it need all the help it can get after the bloom of youth
starts to wither a bit.

Interesting note.

One enzyme discovered as being the means that silk worms
use to disolve tough silk fibres to escape from their cocoons
is named Serrapeptase. (It can be produced by using recombinant
bacteria rather than needing to crush up poor hapless wormies)

Anyway, this powerful stuff has been shown to clean out arteries
slick as a whistle. The enzyme produced from Nanno is now
gaining a strong following as possibly an even stronger ability
in preventing heart problems. If one has a strong stomach it
can be cultured as the Japanese do on a soybean base...but I
understand it is really nasty tasting stuff... more akin to
what comes out of the body than what one would put into it,so
I gave up any idea of it being a do-it-yourself project.

Also, I want to thank you for backing up my perception of the
Oxford Don and his wild assesment of the 97% probability for the
resurection etc. et al. Maybe he is trying to accumulate
brownie points to get past St. Peter at the celestial gate.

I have been one in denying the historicity of Jesus, but just
the other night in reading some quite singular material from
LLResearch there was an interaction with an entity who claimed
to have walked with "Jesus"...so it looks as though I will have
to revise my convictions ... I think I recently read -- probably
on this group-- that the entity doing Jesus was also the one
involved previously as the others of the great salvation figures
...right of wrong that sceario would clear up some problems in my
mind.


I have also enjoyed your discussions with the gentle Dragon.
Both of you are very good at stimulating my own thinking.

I do want to point out that besides my interest in health issues
I still do my needed homework on the spiritual issues herein the
whole Ascension2000 complex ...I mean I am thrilled at the vast
resources that David W. has pulled together!

we are all the square root of one. Is that right? Or am I being too
cute?

Love to alll, Bill G

PS the story about Dr.Atkins being grossly obese at his death
has been countered by his associates as being wrong. They claime
his body was swollen following the death process. I believe them.
I saw a video of him playing tennis shortly before his death
--and except for looking a bit stiff -- he otherwise looked normal.


--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=CcCNiqoJacqIX3dlzTz8RgOhhv6sSAqsTzPcaV CPKtyXE6VAWTdg-B3AfnWkzwuKuW3VWc5iCCV1ZMhnmQ4dHw), "Graeme" <kimonokraken@y...> wrote:
> THe body synthesises enzymes all the time. I have seen no evidence
> that it 'runs out' of them. Sure, its ability to synthesise them
> could conceivably become eroded as part of the aging process, but
> that's not the same thing.
>
> Love and Light,
>
> Graeme
>
> --- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=CcCNiqoJacqIX3dlzTz8RgOhhv6sSAqsTzPcaV CPKtyXE6VAWTdg-B3AfnWkzwuKuW3VWc5iCCV1ZMhnmQ4dHw), "M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng"
<skykieng@i...>
> wrote:
>
> > What you can get away with when young will not work
> > when the body ages and ITS alloted enzymes are gone
> > your faithfull 2d body pulls the plug and dies
> > because it can't utilize food that won't digest.

[lealdragon]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=f9au9FhXFCZ-eJ6ogyqUwShr6weFGOiTGHqAAXV9hhInSwol1o1TwDR13kOIgj vi2JJEa2Rc3P2rrt2Uv34djw), "Graeme" <kimonokraken@y...> wrote:
> ...I'm also eating fish, at least for now, because since my health
got so bad, I don't want to take any chances...

It's just so tricky when we discuss controversial subjects, even
among such an open-minded and wonderful group. I know there've been
some sticky discussions in the past about some other controversial
subjects, too.

I just want to say that I apologize if I have inadvertently offended
anyone about the meat issue. It's very difficult to speak about
something we have convictions about, without offending someone who
feels differently.

My intention is NOT to criticize those who choose to eat meat.
Rather, my main point is that, for people who have ALREADY chosen to
be vegetarians, for whatever reasons, be they ethical,
environmental, spiritual, or health, it might not be necessary to go
back to eating meat just because some aspect of the diet did not
work out.

Often, it's not even the diet anyway ? there are just so many other
possible factors, but it is so easy to assume the problem is diet-
related.

There seems to be such a trend towards FEAR of a vegetarian diet,
and I too got caught up in it for awhile. I now seem to be coming
full circle, but that is only my own personal experience. Evidently
I needed to go thru this experience to learn certain things.

What happened to me was, I got really caught up in the holier-than-
thou raw foods movement, to the point that I was like a religious
fanatic. I tried to cram it down people's throats and turned a lot
of people off. I was horrible!

So my Higher Self let me fall flat on my face, and am I ever
thankful! This might not sound like a big deal to some people, but
to me the idea of eating meat was revolting, so it was an extremely
humbling experience!

So then I went to the other extreme and worried about whether it was
possible for me to ever be a vegetarian again.

Eating meat (fish & chicken) did help me temporarily, but then I had
other health issues that did NOT respond to diet, no matter WHAT I
did. (And I did a lot of things!) So eating meat certainly did NOT
solve my problems; in fact all it did was give me HORRIBLE
nightmares!

In MY case, I needed to address OTHER issues ? emotional and
spiritual issues. I had been placing TOO MUCH emphasis on diet.

That's just my own experience, and I certainly don't have it all
figured out yet!

I do know that a lot of the problems that I THOUGHT were caused by
the vegan raw-foods diet turned out to be caused by either distilled
water (leached minerals), progesterone hormone cream (really messed
me up) or emotional/karmic issues.

So, I am only sharing my story in the hopes that it might be useful
to some who might prefer to be vegetarian but are eating meat out of
FEAR.

I feel like my eyes have been opened and now see this whole `must
eat meat' propaganda as a scam to promote fear and confusion. I
really, really do think that it is a scam to get people to eat more
meat, thus resulting in more fear being unleashed into the planet by
the animals as they get slaughtered.

No animals died or suffered from giving us humanely-raised organic
eggs and milk, so a middle road DOES exist. Personally I am leaning
more towards MOSTLY raw vegan with moderate amounts of raw goat's
milk, yogurt, and organic eggs. (The Essene Gospel of Peace, btw, is
mostly raw but not vegan - it advocates raw milk. It also advocates
sprouting the grains, eating what's local and in season, and
allowing the Sun to cook the food.)

That's just my own personal balance, and it seems to be working
well. I know that some people feel that they are healthier when they
eat meat, and it is not my place to comment on their choice. This
message is for those who would prefer to be vegetarian, but are
afraid to do so, out of fear of some deficiency. Or, as in my case,
had health problems while on a vegetarian diet so assumed it was the
diet.

I'm just suggesting that the solution might often be something other
than adding meat back into the diet. For someone who considers that
a drastic measure, there are many other possibilities, such as the
water issue in my case, or maybe switching to vegetarian rather than
vegan.

[lealdragon]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=KN9_UsWlHOaLCeaXb4z9HvXqIqoabyg0t_rgnj Am5AcCphn6G5nRKNcmHXxqfBteignH4Nt5YhZSTxpY), "lealdragon" <lealdragon@g...> wrote:
> had health problems while on a vegetarian diet so assumed it was the
> diet.
>
Correction: meant to say, 'while on a vegan diet.'