To: <inhs@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2004 6:14 PM
Subject: [INHS] Our anatomically and physiologically compatible diet


The fact that the raw animal products movement simply totally
ignores, yet it stands out like an elephant in the living room, is
that humans simply anatomically and physiologically are not equipped
nor suited to eat animal products. There is so much data on this
subject, so many glaringly obvious reasons, such compelling
evidence, why animal products are incompatible with human anatomy.
I'm outlining a partial list of the info I've come across. In
addition to the great info in the links above, detailed information
can be readily found in the books of the great Hygienist Hereward
Carrington (especially the classic "The Natural Food of Man"); John
Robbins (especially "Diet for a New America"); John McDougall, M.D.,
and Michael Klaper, M.D., among others.

Structure determines function. The structure of our bodies, of body
parts, and their activities, as well as the body as a whole,
determines its capabilities, and its needs.

Humans are not carnivores, nor omnivores. Omnivores are carnivores,
plus frugivores, or plus herbivores, or plus gramnivores, etc. But
omnivore includes carnivore.

Take a look at a mammalian carnivore, such as a cat. Or the
omnivores, such as dogs or bears. They are fully equipped with all
the apparatus necessary to run very fast, to outrun their prey. And
to pounce, to surprise, overwhelm and catch their prey. They all run
on all fours, not on two legs, which cannot take us far or fast. And
if we jump out of a tree, or out of bushes, and try to pounce,
instead of catching any creature with the lightning speed necessary
to do so, we would have to spend time to get our balance.

Take a look at their heads. They have ears that stand up naturally,
and face forward, and can swivel, and their hearing is
astronomically greater than ours--they use hearing for information,
to help them catch prey.

Their sense of smell is up to one million times as strong as a
human's. A carnivore has to be able to tell from miles away where to
find their prey. Human sense of smell is so weak as to only be a few
hundred feet away from the object they are smelling.

That is why fruit is so appropriate for us--the trees and plants
with their fruits and flowers intentionally entice us with their
strong lovely aromas when we get near them.

A carnivore finds their food by a strong sense of hearing and smell.
We lack both, ample evidence right there that we are totally
unequipped to be carnivores.

A carnivore's vision is not nearly as specialized as is a human's.
We see in technicolor. Since our hearing and smell are so weak, we
are meant to find our food by means of sight--the trees and plants
color coordinate their products, and clothe them in vivid colors to
entice us, knowing we are attracted by the sights.

And take a look at a carnivore's face. It has a mouth which
protrudes, teeth which are sharp and can slice and tear through fur,
hide, flesh, grizzle, bone. If we tried that, we'd break our weak
little teeth in an instant.

And our faces are flat, completely unequipped for grasping, tearing,
cutting through anything but the softest substance, and certainly
not equipped for catching a moving target.

Mammalian carnivores have sharp, strong claws, which also can tear
and grasp. We have only our weak little digits, useful for gripping
fruit, or small rocks to break open nutshells.

Carnivores also do not sweat, as we do. Their bodies are full of the
strong toxins of putrefying animal products, which must rush through
the digestive system, not seep out via the pores, as the journey to
the pores would toxify too much of the body.

Carnivores have many many times the hydrochloric acid content we do
in their stomachs. They have the appropriate amount needed to digest
animal products, we totally lack such amounts, making digestion of
animal products difficult and problematic, resulting in putrefaction.

And carnivores have very short, chute-like intestines, for the rapid
elimination of the toxic animal product waste matter. Their entire
digestive and bodily systems are designed for speed, so that the
toxic animal product contents do not sit in any part of the
digestive system to further putrefy and decay, before being
processed and assimilated.

We have of course very long intestines, and slow progress of
foodstuffs through them, resulting in toxification when consuming
animal products.

Most animal products, and certainly carcasses, are highly acid-
producing in the body, resulting in calcium depletion, from having
to neutralize the pH levels. And animal products are far too high in
protein, necessitating exhaustion of the kidneys to constantly flush
it out of the body, which cannot store protein. These are but a few
of the metabolic disturbances resulting from consumption of animal
products, which of course harms the entire body.

Even if we admit we are not carnivores, and therefore not omnivores,
some will point to the fact that other primate species have
sometimes been found eating flesh. It is inconclusive at best. Jane
Goodall had observed the chimps at Gombe for 10 years before she saw
any of them eating flesh. And their habits of hunting and eating
flesh are clearly pathological-frenzied and crazed, full of rage and
screaming, and violent toward each other, not at all that of natural
carnivores, who are methodical and skillful and cooperative with
their siblings, in their natural hunter state.

The animals chimps have been observed to eat are other primates
(cannibalism), another indication that it is unnatural for them to
eat animals-they will eat monkeys, or will eat other chimps,
sometimes killing and eating members of their own immediate families-
mothers eating their young, brothers and sisters eating each other,
clearly unnatural pathological behavior.

And even if other primates are capable of apprehending and eating
flesh, humans are not. Herbert Shelton said that humans are as
different from other primates as other primates are from the rest of
the animal kingdom. If we look at the anatomy of a chimpanzee,
reputed to be our closest relative, we find that they are half the
size of an adult human, yet possess three times the strength.

Non-human primates run on four legs, as do all other land mammals,
and they run very fast. Most importantly, they possess huge powerful
fangs, like those of bears, which enable them to apprehend and tear
flesh. Yet even most non-human primates never eat flesh. Take a look
at the teeth of a gorilla-powerful and able to cut through anything.
Yet the gorilla does not eat flesh! Neither do any of the other
primate species, except the chimps, and it is only certain
individuals, in certain groups, under certain circumstances, which
are more indicative of a desperation to get some sustenance, and an
outlet for aggression, of a species dying due to decimation of their
environment and natural sources of food. In addition, it has been
postulated that chimps may indeed have learned hunting from humans,
by observation.

And chimps are fully equipped to hunt and rip and crush flesh and
bone, by their anatomy.  They have huge, long, powerful fangs, like
that of a bear. Yet most chimps have never hunted nor eaten animals.
What does that tell us, who have no anatomy with which to do any of
that?

Some species of primates, such as gorillas, will eat insects and
eggs. However, if we look at the environments of these primates, we
will find that they have very little source of nutrients in their
current environment, decimated as it is. And gorilla populations
have been forced into the mountains, not their natural home.
Primates species naturally dwell in tropical climates, where fruit
and leaves and nuts are abundant. In the mountains, and these days
even in the lowlands, there is little to eat except bamboo, and some
forms of leaves and trees, not an adequate diet for large primates.
So it is almost impossible to conclude that they are naturally flesh
eaters or insect eaters or egg eaters. And I know of no mammalian
species that eats insects or eggs that does not also eat flesh, so
to claim that we are naturally egg or insect eaters is to claim that
we are carnivores.

But again, we are very different from other primate species. It is
often cited that we purportedly share 98%-99% of our genes with
chimpanzees. If that is true, then it can readily be seen that the
1%-2% that we do not share is a very significant percentage. We
share 50% of our genes with a banana, so it appears that much of our
genetic makeup is common to all forms of life. Indeed, new
information reveals that the differences between chimps and humans
are very significant:
http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,57892,00.html

Some animal product advocates propose that we are secondary hunters,
scavengers eating the remains of animals that other animals have
killed. But keep in mind that all animals who are naturally
carnivores or omnivores are equipped with fangs, talons, sharp
beaks, powerful jaws, to crush bones, as that is often all that is
left of a carcass for the scavengers. And most importantly,
scavengers have to fight for the scraps they get, and they use their
fangs, talons, sharp beaks, powerful jaws, to chase away or hurt any
creature that gets in their way, and the animals that are chased
away run or fly fast to keep out of the way of the stronger ones. We
humans wouldn't have any chance of getting at any part of a carcass
in Nature.

And the parts of the carcass that are left for the scavengers are
usually the least appetizing and least easy to digest-bones,
grizzle, fur, scales. They are not filleted, daintily cut, soft
pieces of muscle or organs, which humans are used to.

Humans can perhaps apprehend without the use of complex tools a
small animal such as a lizard or tiny mammal, and bite into it. But
then, why would a human want to? What is there to gain from such an
act? Even if catching and eating animals were not so unhealthy for
us, eating such small animals as we could apprehend, and as seldom
as we could apprehend them, would not give us sufficient nutrition,
especially since we are completely unequipped to consume most of the
carcass. And we would destroy our teeth in the process, so what have
we gained?

And how appetizing is eating animal products? They are definitely an
acquired taste. Humans unused to eating animal products find them
totally disgusting, and are repulsed by them. Yet we do not find our
natural food repulsive, no matter how unused we are to eating them.
A person may not gravitate toward a piece of fruit, but they will
not find it repulsive.

In Nature we would never drink milk of any species other than our
own. Cows have powerful bulls protecting them, they would not let us
suck from the udders of their females, and the cows themselves would
kick us out of the way, and other milk producing species would
behave in a similarly unwilling manner. If humans are intent upon
drinking milk, they should stick to human milk, as that is the only
one appropriate to our species, and the only milk we would ever get
in Nature. As we can see, products like cream and butter are totally
unnatural for us. Even calves do not consume cream or butter, only
whole milk from their mothers.

The craving for flesh and animal products is pathological. It is the
product of perverted tastes, not of any need for them or of hunger.
Some vegans may claim that they revert to eating animal products
because they feel as though "something is missing" in their diets.
But what's missing is the influx of poisons that they used to
consume, of which they still have residues in their bodies, and that
sets up a craving for them. They are weakened, and stimulated, by
them at the same time, and they seek more of the same stimulation.
The stimulation of the body as a result of eating animal products,
which is of course simply the emergency response of the body to the
ingestion of toxic substances, is mistaken for health and well being.

When the ingestion of toxic substances is drastically reduced, as it
is when one goes vegan, symptoms will begin to appear, evidence of
the body's cleansing and healing. But this is not understood, and
conditioned as people are to palliating, they become frightened at
the appearance of symptoms, not understanding that symptoms are
simply evidence of healing and cleansing going on.

Animal products are used to palliate symptoms, as are other toxic
substances. Toxic substances are palliative-they result in a
lessening or disappearance of symptoms. Ingesting substances which
result in the suppression of symptoms is of course simply the body
abandoning the cleansing and healing it had begun when it was given
the opportunity, in order to whip itself into a frenzy in an
emergency response to the ingestion of the new toxins. That is
mistaken for health and for energy and for well being.

It is easy therefore for animal product advocates to convince people
that they "need" animal products, and that animal products
are "healthy", and that veganism is "dangerous" and that symptoms
are the result of "deficiencies" which are magically fixed by
reverting to eating animal products, because the symptoms disappear
when palliated.

Of course, the symptoms will diminish or disappear from ingesting
other palliatives, i.e., toxins, as well, such as medicinal drugs,
cooked foods, herbs, grains, legumes, anything that is not part of
our natural dietary, and is therefore toxic in the body to greater
or lesser degree.

Our natural dietary, on the other hand, does not produce a
palliative effect, because it is not toxic in our bodies, but is
compatible with our bodies. Therefore, when we eat our natural
dietary of fruits, nuts/seeds, and greens-and especially fruit-our
bodies can cleanse and heal unhampered, and so symptoms will of
course appear, and often become intense and dramatic, so great is
the body's determination to rest and sleep, and thereby to heal and
cleanse. It is easy to mistake this as something "dangerous" and
negative, and of course it is easy to scare vegans with such ideas,
conditioned as people are to worrying about "deficiencies" and to
continually palliating symptoms, which they mistake for health.

Here is a quote from John McDougall, M.D.:

 "Advocates of high-protein diets explain the reason people are fat
is not because of the fat they eat, but because of hyperinsulinism
and insulin resistance. Insulin, the major regulator of fuel storage
and release, is synthesized by the pancreas and secreted into the
blood stream after we eat. Insulin stimulates the synthesis of fat,
proteins, and glycogen (the storage form for sugars). It encourages
fat cells to store fat and prevents the release of fat from these
cells.

One of the greatest distortions of the truth promoted by high-
protein diet advocates is that protein causes little or no increase
in production of insulin. However, research shows just the opposite.
Dr. Atkins.believes human beings are carnivores -- an observation
contradicted by all aspects of our anatomy and physiology. Our teeth
are not like a cat's, we have no claws for tearing apart meat, our
intestine is designed for digesting plant foods, not meat, and our
livers have a limited capacity to metabolize cholesterol, which is
one big reason our cholesterol levels rise on the Western diet."
And from www.pcrm.org:

"Many people choose not to use eggs in their diet. About 70 percent
of the calories in eggs are from fat, and a large portion of that
fat is saturated. They are also loaded with cholesterol-about 213
milligrams for an average-sized egg. Because egg shells are fragile
and porous, and conditions on egg farms are crowded, eggs are the
perfect host to salmonella-the bacteria that is the leading cause of
food poisoning in the U.S."

Cows, bison, elephants, hippos, etc., have plenty of fat on their
bodies in their natural environments. How do they do it? They eat
nothing but greens! Obviously, they do not need huge amounts of fat
in their diets, since their bodies convert the greens to fat.
Similarly, since we are also naturally plant eaters, we do not need
to get copious amounts of fat from our diets. And in fact,
overindulging in fats is problematic. At best, our bodies will
excrete the excess fat. At worst, it will deposit in our bodies.

Animal product advocates and other raw or cooked fat advocates
sometimes advise people to consume denatured oils, with the idea
that dietary fat is going to somehow "wash away" or dissolve cancer
or any other seeming problem. It is a mistake to think that
substances have magical powers to act on their own. No substance has
any power to do anything. And overconsumption of fat is not to
anyone's advantage. Even the eaters of the high protein, high fat
diets as promoted by popular diet gurus, include carbohydrates.

The promoters of animal product diets are playing Russian roulette.
The only cultures which have had almost exclusively animal product
diets, have been those of the far north, where plants are scarce,
and animal products are the only food available. And they have
usually a raw animal products diet. Typically, these cultures do not
live long. And in lieu of cooking, women are used to chew and thus
pre-digest the carcasses-they lose their teeth at a relatively young
age, and these women are soon disposed of. Animal flesh is not
easily digestible so it needs to be pre-digested, the function which
in our modern cultures is done by cooking, smoking, curing, etc.,
further evidence that these are not natural foods for us, since they
cannot be easily and pleasantly digested in their raw unprocessed
state.

Animal products advocates point out that humans have been eating
animal products for thousands, perhaps millions, of years, and claim
that these peoples have done well on it. In actuality, humans
resorted to eating animal products because of the ice age which
covered most of the Earth for many tens or hundreds of thousands of
years, some sources state it has endured millions of years, the
figures vary depending on the source. Animal products were the only
available alternative to starvation, so humans ate them. But the
most long lived of cultures were always, and still are, the ones
which ate very little of animal products.

Animal products are, at best, secondary, and inferior, sources for
us to get our compatible nutrition, which comes from plants. An
herbivorous or frugivorous animal, which humans choose to eat, gets
his or her nutrition from the plants and products of plants. The
only reason animal products have been at all able to sustain life
for humans is that they are recycled plant products-the animal ate
the plant, which became part of his or her body, so the animal
product eater is getting the plant in that form. However, it is full
of toxins as well, and therefore harmful to humans, who have not the
means to neutralize these toxins, so any nutrition from the animal
products is far outweighed by the harm. How much better to get our
food directly from the plants, rather than the inferior, secondary,
source of animal products!

We are now in a thaw from the ice age. Trees and plants are coming
out of their atrophy and dormancy. And our naturally compatible
foods are cultivated and shipped globally. With the availability of
our natural foods-fruits, leafy greens/veggies, nuts and seeds-which
are superior for human nutrition, and which are the only compatible
foods with human anatomy, there is no longer any need to consume
animal products, or grains, or any other foods or non-foods which
have been the substitute for our natural diet, which was not
available to humans for so long. We can now come out of the dark
ages of poor health, of ignorance and superstition, of shortened
life, into the sunshine, into the wonderful deliciousness and
abundance of our natural foods, ceasing to put anything else into
our bodies. Fruits, leafy greens/veggies, nuts and edible seeds, in
their raw state, unwashed and unsterilized, these constitute the
total of human dietary compatibility and optimal nutrition.

here are some great articles and excerpts which explain so well the
anatomical incompatibility of animal products for humans, and the
compatibility of the vegan, fruitarian, raw diet with human anatomy
and physiology:
Herbert Shelton, D.P., N.D., D.C., D.N.T., D.N.Sc., D.N.Ph.,
D.N.Litt, Ph.D., D.Orthp.:
http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0201hyglibcat/020126shelton.orthotrop
hy/020126.ch17.htm

Art Baker:

http://www.iol.ie/~creature/BiologicalAdaptations.htm

Michael Klaper, M.D.:

http://www.vegsource.com/klaper/optimum.htm

http://www.newveg.av.org/intro.htm

Laurie Forti:

http://www.ecologos.org/meat-eating.htm

http://www.ecologos.org/articles.htm#bv

http://www.ecologos.org/articles.htm#sa

http://www.ecologos.org/omni.htm

John Coleman:

http://www.ecologos.org/articles.htm#bv

http://www.ecologos.org/omni.htm

http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlifedigest/v01.n716

http://www.agco.dk/veganmc/origins.htm

http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/encephal.htm

http://www.rawtimes.com/rawlifedigest/v01.n716

http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/chimps.txt

http://www.agco.dk/veganmc/polemics.htm

http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/rawfood.txt

http://www.agco.dk/veganmc/forum.htm

http://www.ecologos.org/meat-eating.htm

The Frugivorous Nature of Man:

http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0203CAT/020310frugivorous/020310BRAND
T.html

Ethical Raw Veganism:

http://www.rawvegan.com/ethical_raw_veganism.html

Milton R. Mills, M.D.:

http://www.newveg.av.org/anatomy.htm

Dover Clifton:

http://www.rawvegan.com/fruitarian_evidence.html

http://www.rawvegan.com/fruitarian_diet.html

Mark Blackburn:

http://www.markblackburn.org/diet1.htm

David Klein:

http://www.alternativehealthtalk.com/living%20foods%
20what_the_world_is_dying_for%20D%20Klein.htm

Human and ape dentition:

http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci590/9_2TH.htm

Wes Peterson:

http://www.towardsfreedom.com/articles/AbitaboutWes.html

Joel Carbonnel:

http://www.positivehealth.com/permit/Articles/Regular/joel67.htm

Keki Sidhwa:

http://members.rotfl.com/sidhwa/food.html

Tasha, from T.C. Fry:

http://www.towardsfreedom.com/articles/TheIdealDiet.html

Hallelujah diet:

http://hills.ccsf.cc.ca.us/~jinouy01/bible-nutrition.html

Roe Gallo:

http://www.livingnutrition.com/articles/naturalway.html

Anatomical comparison of frugivores and carnivores:

http://www.vegetarismus.ch/pdf/12e.pdf

Comparative anatomy and taxonomy:

http://www.vegan-straight-edge.org.uk/taxonomy.htm

Are You Sure You're Not A Vegetarian?

http://jen.fluxcapacitor.net/html/veggie/

Encyclopedia:

http://www.student.nada.kth.se/~f95-mwi/fun/encyclopedia.html

Fruitarian, vegetarian and raw food links:

http://www.islandnet.com/~arton/fruitlink.html
http://www.celestialhealing.net/physicalveg3.htm
Some available book references:

http://www.rawfood.com/fruitarian.html

The Light Side:

http://www.light-mission.org/lightside56t.html

Omraam Mikhael Aivanhov:

http://www.videlinata.ch/w_veget03_gb.html

Ken Saxton:

http://www.cecs.csulb.edu/~ksaxton/Food.html

Sankara Saranam:

http://www.pranayama.org/messages/message_06-27-99.html

David Wolfe/John Robbins:

http://www.angelfire.com/theforce/ofsatan/faxnstats.html

Zsuzsa