Re: 1 of the main reasons why we suffer from diabetes and other health conditions (pi
You have no idea what you are talking about. Seriously, you have no clue. What are you talking about? This thread was about the dangers of regular sugar and sugar found in our food products. Not about toxins or HFCS, regular sugar.
Alexw. As long as I have been posting on this board, when have you known for me to post about things that I dont know anything about. If I am not very familiar and knowledge about a particular subject, I simply will not comment on it.
Alex. I have been working out for 18 years. I know a lot about the human body and specifically about nutritution.
This initial response illustrates that scientifically, you do not understand the fundamental elements on this argument if you dont understand something as simple at the direct link of artificial sweeters to cancer. This is not even debateable. This has long been scientific fact.
However, you can find no direct link between cancer and overcomsumption of high-sugar content fruits. It simply does not exist.
Furthemore, there is a video ON THIS VERY FUCKING BOARD that provides scientific evidence...documented every day for months of various people being on a raw food diet and CURING their diabetes. Scientifically, it makes sense, if you understand the principles of the raw food diet and basic human biology in terms of the affects on diet and consumption.
Also, a person is going to need to consume a hell of a lot of fruits high on sugar content to promote a diebetic state. Any link to natural fruits is going to be a basic logical problem of confusion correlation with causation. The real culprit is most likely some other factor in the persons health history or diet as opposed to fruit.
And dude, the raw diet is ridiculous. Youre trippen. Any minor nutritionist will tell you that.
This is the classic APPEAL TO AUTHORITY. I have a nutritionist in my gym here in Sao Paulo who is clueless. There are MAJOR nutritionist who support the raw food diet as well. The fact that someone supports any particular thing means nothing. At one point, the entire scientific community argue that the world was flat. The reality of the matter is that something is right because the data and logic support the argument. Who pushes the argument is rather unimportant and irrelevant in most cases.
I know celebrated economists that write some of the most ignorant things about economics.
A degree, etc does not = right.
Furthermore, have you ever use a raw food diet
Have you ever done substantical studies on the raw food diet.
Have you read any books on the raw food diet.
I would be willing to bet a million dollars that you havent read one book on it.
So where is the basic for the statement that the rood raw diet is RIDICULOUS as you state.
What is your scientific or even anecdotal evidence to support such a claim.