RawforLife Goes to the US Part II (Raw Spirit Festival, Sedona, Arizona)

Sedona is an easy one-and-a-half hour's drive from Phoenix (well, bar the storm we ran into at Cottonwood), past hills covered with thousands of cacti taller than houses. The town itself nestles between enormous red rocks and is said to be a magical place - the site of several 'energy vortexes'. Some say that the energy from these vortexes saturates the whole town, and affects people in a very positive way. Consequently, Sedona has become something of a 'New Age' centre. However, I'm really not sure that I felt any differently from how I usually feel attending raw events, which is...happy, relaxed and positive!

Before I take you 'inside' the Raw Spirit Festival, some words about the raw restaurants outside the site that are there for Sedona's lucky raw foodists all the year round - D'Lish and Cafe Raw Bliss - which are at opposite ends of Highway 89a, the main road running through Sedona.

D'Lish

Although D'Lish also serves cooked vegetarian, they always have raw dishes on the menu, and Thursdays are special raw nights. So, on Thursday September 11th - my birthday, and the night before Raw Spirit Festival - D'Lish was packed with raw foodists. I celebrated with a huge 'raw platter', which included amongst many d'lish morsels a red cabbage 'slaw', nut pate, sea vegetables, guacamole and sprouts, all topped with a raw raspberry dressing. The atmosphere was wonderful and Denise played her guitar and sang to us!

Cafe Raw Bliss

Cafe Raw Bliss, at the other end of 89a, we visited on the last day of the Festival. I went for raw pizza, which is not something I'd normally order in the UK, as I find it a little taxing on the digestion. But, here, as at the farmers' market at La Jolla, the pizza was very light, and covered with leaves - I'm experimenting with 'lighter' pizzas at home right now! Leigh had a very good carrot and ginger soup - creamy and sweet. We both drank ginger lemonade, made with lemons, ginger and agave. Now, I'm never quite sure about agave nectar, as even the agave marketed as 'truly raw' is nevertheless highly processed, but, when the temperature is 90 F, ginger lemonade is...nectar.

RAW SPIRIT FESTIVAL

Imagine being in a place where you don't have to explain (let alone apologise for) your food preferences, where there are around 1000+ people just as 'odd' as you, where you can eat (mostly) anything you like from the food on offer, and where everyone is friendly, so that you feel confident (whether alone or in a group) talking to anyone you like, or simply wander around on your own, just taking it all in.

Imagine being able to watch, live, rather than on 'youtube'', a host of top raw food names from around the world speak, including the authors of your favourite raw books, and see chefs demonstrate (with lots of free tasters!), and imagine being able to meet them in person at their booths too!

Imagine being able to meet face-to-face those you feel you've got to know a little, on line, eg through raw food forums.

Imagine wandering around in hot sunny weather (come on, UK raw foodists, I did say 'imagine'!), looking at all sorts of stalls (in US they say 'booths') on all sorts of areas of the raw food lifestyle and those that, for some, are associated with it, eg hemp clothing, yoga, art.

Once you've imagined all those things, you have in your mind something that gets a weeny bit close to what you will experience at the Raw Spirit Festival. If you weren't there this year, and haven't been before, make a visit to RSF something that you intend to do as part of your essential raw food education (visualise... manifest - seemed to work for me!)

The lovely man who sold me coconut butter asked if the UK people had chartered a jet there were so many of us there! 150, he thought, but I certainly only managed to meet up with a small fraction of this contingent so I'd recommend anyone going next year to wear something to encourage other UK raw foodists to make contact. Union Jack hat?

There was a free meal served as part of the ticket price, each day available between 2 and 8 pm. I had this the first two days, and although the second day's meal must have been relatively unremarkable as I can't remember it, the first day's was very good - kebabs with a salad, and what I think was a spirulina-based dish. Very tasty, although in the rest rooms I discovered that instead of giving people what I'd hoped had been beautiful smiles, I'd been wowing them with...green teeth.

Organisation overall - not bad...but a big omission for me (and I should think most people there?) was that the toilets were not marked on the Programme map and there weren't even any posters with arrows telling us where, leaving the volunteers to answer the same question over and over again.

SPEAKERS

Coming up to two years as a UK raw foodist, I'd heard of around a half of the speakers (mostly from the US, but UK speakers included Karen Knowler, Sukie Zoe and Joel Gazdar). There did seem to be a good mix of the really big names and those who have appeared on the raw food scene relatively recently but who have made their presence felt. And of course when one compares being able to listen to all these luminaries over three days at just one venue with the cost of going to see them all individually at various locations...one more argument for booking those 2009 tickets as soon as they become available.

I saw fewer speakers than I wanted, mainly because I did have Leigh's interests to consider, ie I wasn't at RSF all the time we were in Sedona. I would have liked to have seen Dr Doug Graham and Karen Knowler speak, but had seen both in the UK and felt my time should be focused on those speakers that are in the UK less.

I did manage to see:

Philip McLuskey

Philip went raw a couple of years ago, and lost 200 lbs! In fact, he now tours the world giving talks under the banner 'Half the Man'. Philip is not only a very inspirational speaker, but, with many raw foodists coming from vegan, 'alternative' cultures, in contrast his culture was more gangland (and he has the tattoos to prove it). He gives a compelling account of how raw has transformed him physically, psychologically and spiritually. If you know anyone who is overweight, please, please direct them to Philip's site at lovingraw.com.

What resonated with me (do you know I never used the word 'resonated' until discovering raw, but find it so apt so much of the time now!) was Philip's describing how in the early months of raw he listened to all the raw 'gurus' and read everything he could get his hands on, but, in the end, decided treading his own path and eating just what he felt like (as long as it was raw) was the right thing for him. Philip lost masses of weight on what many would describe as a high-fat raw diet, and it was only after he'd been raw for some time that he started to feel like eating fewer nuts, avocados etc. Although I now generally follow a high-fruit, low(ish) fat diet, (because that's what lights my fire right now) my experience in the first few months of raw mirrors Philip's. If you are relatively new to raw, please don't be too concerned about various gurus' pronouncements on what foods you should or shouldn't eat. The experts all disagree with each other anyway; just eat raw! (for some very broad guidelines see the 'What is the Raw Food Diet?' section at my website at rawforlife.co.uk)

David Wolfe

Now, I had actually seen David speak before at Brighton, UK, with Leigh. David is always entertaining, but I didn't stay for the whole talk at RSF, because...he was getting just a little too whacky for me this time around. I left as he was explaining that shamans always carried with them cacao, tobacco and something else I can't remember, as if because shamans did this and that, it must be a great thing to do - a theory I have never subscribed to. Anyhow, there's no doubt that David has brought thousands of people into the raw lifestyle, and transformed many lives in so doing. If you haven't read it already, do consider buying his 'Sunfood Diet Success System' - an interesting, informative, and inspirational book.

Victoria, Sergei and Valya Boutenko

Victoria is the mother in the famous raw family (Sergei and Valya are her adult children - Igor is her husband) whose journey to raw, in which all family members saw all sorts of illnesses disappear, is chronicled in her book 'The Raw Family'. I've reviewed two other of her books - 'Green for Life' and 'Twelve Steps to Raw' - in past RawforLife e-zines. Sergei and Valya are both raw chefs and enthusiastic advocates of raw, and the talks of all three Boutenkos were entertaining and informative.

Sergei talked about those raw foods that are just right for world financial crises - those free greens growing in our gardens or the wild. Valya described how resistant she had felt at times when her mother had questioned her eating of certain foods, and suggested we try reverse psychology on loved ones along these lines, 'You just carry on eating just the way you like to eat, as I love you no matter what you eat. If you changed too much I might not like you so much.' Hmm..could be worth a go!

Victoria included in her talk a reference to a comment made by a figure prominent in the raw food community (she didn't say who, but I think the initials may be BC) that, in blending we lose lots of nutritional value through oxidation. She pointed out that when we cut an apple, yes the cut pieces go brown, due to oxidation. But when we cover the cut pieces with water, they don't go brown. So, use water when making smoothies, and problem solved...seems so simple really!

Dr Gabriel Cousens

Dr GC is the founder/director of the Tree of Life Rejuvenation Centre in Patagonia, Arizona. Gabriel and is well-known for a lifetime of work in raw foods, and has most recently achieved great success in reversing Type II diabetes, culminating in the publication of his book 'There is a Cure for Diabetes.' He was speaking about his diabetes programme, but unfortunately I arrived at the talk a little late. Of course, it was jam-packed, so standing right at the back wasn't ideal, but what I could hear sounded good stuff!

Because many of the stalls were around the Outdoor Main Stage, as I wandered around (stuffing myself with raw food goodies mainly) I also heard snippets of talks from Viktoras Kulvinskas and Matt Monarch.

MUSIC

The music stage was a bit of a poor relation to the other stages, tucked away in a corner, and drowned out to quite an extent by the necessary amplification of speakers' voices on the Outdoor Main Stage.

But one high note for me was seeing one of my RawforLife e-zine subscribers, Emily Cantrell, perform with her husband Al. The Cantrells' music has been described as a 'pop spin on acoustic folk and bluegrass, with detours into Celtic, western swing and Americana.' Their set was a little oasis of tranquillity for me on the Saturday afternoon, and for many others in the audience, some of whom were dancing. My favourite was Emily's own composition, 'Eva Marie', that she had written for a father and his little girl. More about Emily and Al (and some of their music) at http://www.thecantrells.net/

And does anyone know who this is? I'm talking about the lady in the background who, in the photograph, appears to have two heads, although I only remember seeing one on the day. She was on the Main Stage for around 15 minutes midday Sunday, but wasn't listed in the Programme. Her singing was so beautiful (about the sea), and so was she, that I ran after her as she left the stage and asked if she had a website, leaflet...anything? But she didn't! If it wasn't for the fact that I have the photograph, I might think that I'd imagined her. So, if you know who she is, please let me know.

STALLS (or 'booths')

OK - mixed feelings...obviously this comment will reflect my own biases, but there was a plethora of stalls selling supplements, and in my view a fair sprinkling of snake oil around. RSF stalls were in general quite...New Age/alternative. I'm commenting on this only because any of you bringing non-raw partners/friends from mainstream backgrounds need to be aware that RSF for three days could be just a little too much for them...Leigh and I agreed that he would attend all day on Day One, but after that, whilst I attended much of the remaining days, he did his own thing, exploring Sedona and the surrounding area. This worked well!

However, Leigh, following the Venice Boardwalk experience, is certainly a convert to young coconuts, which were sold at one stall (reasonably priced at $3), and, as spoons weren't supplied for the jelly, devised his own method of using the glass straw to scrape around the inside before sucking it through the straw. Although there were a couple of other stalls selling drinks, I feel more were needed; I passed on superfood shakes that appeared to consist of everything but the kitchen sink in the blender for $12 to $15.

There were several stalls selling paid-for food, and I think I must have tried something from each. Lots of nori wraps (I was persuaded that this nori was truly raw and even bought some to take home) and they were all very good. One stall (each day a long queue would form shortly after its opening) sold amazing 'tostadas'. At Chef Bruce Horiwitz's stall I tasted the best dessert ever. It was basically a base of macadamias, topped with bananas and peaches, with a topping made from hemp seed, vanilla and coconut cream. I didn't manage to get the recipe, but one of Bruce's helpers told me what was in it, although she didn't know the quantities. Suffice to say I did try recreating it at home yesterday (using hazelnuts instead of macs as we can't get these raw easily in the UK) and...it wasn't quite the same. If anyone does have the recipe, I'd love to have it.

There were a few raw chocolate stands, but I wondered why most of them found it necessary to include non-raw ingredients such as maple sugar and soy lecithin, as UK raw choc makers don't (OK, I know...agave is a 'debatable'!). Although one vendor did give me a lengthy explanation as to soy lecithin's emulsifying qualities, is is nevertheless interesting that UK raw choc makers appear to be able to make chocolate of all sorts of consistencies without it. I think Gnosis chocolate was free of such ingredients, and did taste very good, but was also very expensive!

Waving the flag for the UK were Sarah Best and Karen Knowler. Sarah was promoting Get Fresh! magazine, which is a glossy magazine that manages to straddle the alternative and mainstream sectors, thus helping to get raw out to 'the masses'. Get Fresh! is now distributed in the US and thousands of readers are very much looking forward to the next issue (http://www.getfreshmagazine.com/). Karen Knowler, as well as speaking, was promoting her international raw food directory, out in October. This is the first of its kind, and I look forward to seeing the first issue (http://www.rawfooddirectory.com/)

Good to see one of my favourite 'gurus' - Dr Doug Graham (author of the high-fruit 80/10/10 Diet) - at his stall, helped by Simon, who was very understanding when he saw me sneaking past with my cacao shake. Although... Dr D's stall would have been even better with an array of fruit on offer. One stall I did find giving out free slices of my favourite watermelon was a Hippocrates one, and the irony of this will not be lost on those who are familiar with the differing pronouncements of Dr Doug and Hippocrates on fruit. (I also found a stall selling yellow-fleshed watermelon; it tastes just like red.)

And, there was an excellent 'farmers market' section, selling all sorts of fruit and other raw plant foods, including a stall manned by Barry Koral, who I'd met back in San Diego.

I enjoyed browsing through the various clothes stalls. The designer hemp clothes, though beautiful, were a little out of my price range, but I did buy two tops made from soy!

At Tonya Zavaste's stall (http://www.beautifulonraw.com/) I was able to try her famous skin cream 'Your Right to be Beautiful'. It was so good to be able to try before buying, as in the past I've wasted money buying creams on-line that were either too heavy or too light. This one was just right, and smelled gorgeous. In fact, Leigh said 'Mmm...I can smell the coconut', which is interesting, as coconut isn't listed in the ingredients. I think he has coconuts on the brain.

I waved goodbye to Raw Spirit at 1pm on the Sunday, as Leigh and I had agreed to go gift shopping in Sedona together in the afternoon before going on to Cafe Raw Bliss. I was to meet him in the carpark at 1 pm. Deciding that I would test the theory that raw fooders don't burn in the sun, and that we don't need sun protection, I threw caution to the (desert) wind, and positioned myself in full sunlight in the middle of a 90 F day, with large areas of skin exposed. Leigh was half an hour late, having fallen into a river, and I can report that later on that day my back was red and a little..sore. It wasn't too bad, in that I could sleep fine, and didn't feel the need to put anything on it, but my feeling is that, although it may be true that raw fooders might not burn (cook?) as much as others, don't push your luck.

And to sum up?

I'd highly recommend Raw Spirit Festival, but, whether it's held in Arizona or California next year, do try to combine it with a few days extra for the California 'raw trail', as explained in Part I. If I could, I'd go every year - it's only the cost of getting there holding me back. On the other hand, that's what I was saying this time last year...

RawforLife Goes to the US Part I (Southern California)

Yes, I've just returned from an amazing trip to the US, or - to be more specific - two small parts of the US - the stretch of Southern California (SoCal) from Los Angeles to San Diego - followed by Sedona, Arizona, for the Raw Spirit Festival.

I've so much to write that the report is split into two parts - SoCal first, Sedona second. And, it's not a travelogue; we holidayed in the US for many non-raw reasons (eg my husband, being in the film business, had 'other things' to do in LA, and I had an amazing birthday trip to the Grand Canyon), but the blog articles will focus on raw food experiences.

And if such a holiday seems a pipe-dream to you right now, believe me when I say that it was exactly the same for me this time last year. Loved the sound of the Raw Spirit Festival, but cost was out of reach, 'we always go to Greece', etc. But just before the end of December persuaded myself that I just had to go for business/research/personal development reasons (!) and floated the idea to husband. Shortly after, found myself booking Raw Spirit Festival tickets for two (note - I saved $100 dollars per ticket by booking nine months in advance), then main flights, then over a period of several months put together the other parts of the holiday and somehow managed to pay for them.

Articles written by other raw foodists on raw food restaurants and Raw Spirit 2007 proved very helpful in planning the holiday, and I hope this article could itself prove useful if there is a seed in any reader's mind of SoCal being a holiday destination one day, and, if you have ever felt that it must be much easier being a raw foodist in California than elsewhere, I can personally confirm that... yes, it is. MUCH easier! Californian raw foodists are very fortunate!

And in fact the 'galloping raw gourmet' holiday 2009 should cost you fewer £ or $ than it did fme, AS...rumour has it that the next Raw Spirit Festival will be held in Southern California itself rather than Sedona, Arizona. Although Sedona is a wonderful place, this did mean a two-location holiday for us, with all the extra cost re accommodation/flights that entails. However, I've heard that the next RSF will be in Santa Barbara. Santa Barbara is just north of LA, halfway between San Francisco (which we didn't manage to include on our trip) and LA.

So, if you spend, say 6-7 days driving down the West Coast between San Francisco and San Diego, you could take in lots of raw food cafes, restaurants, farmers' markets, Wholefoods outlets, AND the Raw Spirit Festival - all within a few hours' drive of each other. In fact, it makes me want to plan another US holiday just thinking about it, but, as I'd like to stay married right now, think it might be Greece next year.

So, first things first..

THE FLIGHT

We flew Heathrow to LA with Virgin Atlantic and, although many airlines now (even budget ones) do offer raw vegetarian meal options, VA doesn't (bar small fruit salads). So, I took lots of fruit and salads to keep me going through the 10-hour flight (yes, it's also good to fast, but I am not the best of flyers, and needed 'comfort food'!). And, having not taken a long-haul flight for a few years, it was good not to experience the blown-up tummy and general discomfort I'd always experienced wedged into a budget airline seat pre-raw.

Shortly before landing, the stewardess informed us that we were not allowed to take fruit and vegetables into the US, and that anyone in possession of said offending items were required to hand them in to her. So, not wanting to waste, I quickly ate my one remaining banana.

On arriving at LA, a sniffer dog made a beeline for my bag and found...banana peel! I was then told to join a special queue with other criminals (eg small boy with banana) and submit the peel to an agricultural specialist. So that held us up a bit. Luckily, I was then allowed into the US. (It wasn't the same going back - when re-entering the UK we were told bananas were fine, but meat, dairy etc wasn't, so no problem there!).

ARRIVING IN CALIFORNIA

Just one non-food thing must say about LA/California generally that hit us as soon as we arrived - FLOWERS!! So many beautiful flowers everywhere. In the UK, we have hedges. In California, hedges have beautiful red flowers growing out of them! The roads are also full of great clusters of the sorts of pink and purple flowers (such as bougainvillaea) we'd previously seen in such abundance only in Greece. What a beautiful place to live.

We had an RV, and were self-catering for some meals, so early on we made a supermarket stop, at 'Ralph's', which had a good selection of fruit and veg, including organic. Differences between US and UK? Far bigger selection of peaches, including those 'squashed'-shaped ones - flavour incomparable to anything I've tasted in the UK recently. Bananas weren't just the long, yellow kind - but RED, and short, fat 'n' stubby! Organic romaine lettuce was a revelation! I love organic romaine at home, but this did have an amazing flavour - quite extraordinary.

The one food that wasn't as good as in the UK was large papaya. Papayas of all sizes have tasted good at home, but this large papaya was...not good. I can quite understand now the anti-papaya comments of those on US forums if papayas of this sort had been their only experience. Reassuringly, small papayas we bought later were fine, so if you think you don't like papaya and have only tried large, please try the small. All the vegetables we see in US recipes but can't (generally) obtain in the UK were available, such as jalapeno peppers, and the root vegetable jicama (which I understand from my San Diego friend Prescilla is pronounced 'hikker-ma'.)

And, a paragraph to itself for the WATERMELON - Oh those lucky Californians, and anyone else in the UK or otherwise living in an area where proper watermelons are still available. About a year ago in the UK (and New York, so I understand), the shops were flooded with small watermelons with pink-red rather than red flesh, a few pale, rather than black, seeds, and insipid-tasting flesh - such a disappointment. The watermelon I had in California was the real thing, and tasted so sweet and flavoursome. The pic shows me in shut-eye bliss on Watermelon Day One. However, I did buy a massive one, and still had some left three days later. I'd detected some fermentation in the taste, but did I listen to my body? No, I scoffed the lot, and suffered with a blown-out belly and pain for the rest of the day. The facial expression on Watermelon Day Three was somewhat different from Day One, so no pic.

Now, at this point I should explain that back home for the preceding few months I'd been following a relatively simple, high-fruit, lowish-fat raw food diet. But I decided to 'relax' this for the trip, and relax it I certainly did...still ate lots of fruit but also ate quite a few complicated raw meals, quite a lot more raw fat than usual, and...enjoyed it very much!

SANTA MONICA/VENICE

The 'shopping/beach' districts of Santa Monica and Venice are on the western edge of LA. We walked from one to another along Main Street. Certainly to a visitor, they seemed relatively trendy/arty compared with other parts of LA, and the walk along the beach was full of the sights we tend to associate with California - upscale beach houses, palm trees, rollerbladers and lots of tanned beautiful people, although should say that California certainly has a lot of overweight/obese people as well - it's not quite as the TV series' portrays it. And, along with relatively healthy-fare restaurants, there are plenty of junk food outlets (and it's just as much of a challenge to get an all-raw salad in a 'cooked' restaurant as it is anywhere).

The raw gourmet tour started in a small way at a juice bar on the Venice Boardwalk where I was able to introduce Leigh to the delights of young coconut juice sipped from the coconut. In the UK, this is occasionally available at raw food events, and it's sometimes possible to buy young coconuts at Tesco (or ethnic markets). However, in the UK we are generally presented with a whole green coconut. Every time I had young coconut in SoCal, or indeed Arizona, the coconuts were white, that is, they'd been shaved of the green outer layer. This I understand is done to save air freight/shipping weight. However, it does mean that the coconuts then spoil quickly so need to be dipped in chemicals. Whilst this is obviously not ideal, I'm assuming (hoping?) that perhaps the chemicals don't get through to the inside of the coconut, as the shaved coconuts are very popular with raw fooders in the US, and if the insides are 'intact', then they would certainly be as good, if not better, than any whole green ones sold at Tesco as I'm told these can be kept in storage for a year before being put on the shelves.

Also at the juice bar I was very excited to see pre-packed gourmet raw food from 'Leaf Cuisine', who also run three raw food restaurants in the US. I bought collard (spring greens) wraps, served with a dipping sauce. Now, non-raw fooders don't quite understand our excitement at finding ready-made stuffed green leaves, butwhat a treat when in an RV with just a few square inches of food preparation space and no gadgets! The Leaf Cuisine foods did include ingredients like 'nama shoyu', which I never use at home, as it's not a raw food, but, as I did want to sample most things, let's just put that in my 0.4% 'non-raw' (please?)

It was in Santa Monica that I was able to test my mosquito theories. For reasons that are probably best left for another article I intend to write one day, I theorised that either a) the mozzies wouldn't bite me at all, or b) the mozzies would bite, but my body wouldn't react much. Seemed both were operable. They feasted on Leigh, and his skin reacted dramatically - he still has sores weeks later. I had a few bites, but they didn't develop; there was the odd spot, but no swelling and virtually no irritation. Although, a sample size of two is hardly conclusive so I'd welcome comments based on your own experience.

'Euphoria Loves Rawvolution'

Walking back down Main Street to Santa Monica, we found Matt Amsden's 'Euphoria Loves Rawvolution' and stopped for lunch there. In the daytime it has a relaxed 'cafe' feel, with people wandering in and out for sit-down food and takeaways. We started with an excellent spiced durian (fresh) shake. For mains, I ordered the 'Big Matt' and Leigh had a 'Cocophoria.' The 'Big Matt' was a burger between onion bread with dressing and salad. Although the burger was actually quite small, it did taste very good, and so did everything else. Altogether a most enjoyable meal, as was Leigh's, which was similar, but with curried coconut.

'Juliano's Planet Raw'

In the evening we went to Juliano's - probably the best-known raw food restaurant in the world. Juliano was there, although I believe his partner, Ariel, is now in charge of the food preparation. For starters we each had a 'platter' including stuffed peppers, tortellini, a soup and chips, and these were delicious.

However, main meals, and the experience from that point onwards - thumbs down I'm afraid. I'd given Leigh quite a big build-up, as I'd heard so many rave reports about Juliano's, and had been told that it was just the place to take non-raw people (although Leigh eats more raw than he used to, he is still 'part-cooked'), as it was reknowned for it's 'imitation cooked food', eg 'cheese' burgers etc. So, for main course Leigh ordered the special - 'meat and potatoes' - and I ordered 'kelp pasta'. Now I think one problem here is that the starters had been very highly-flavoured (spicy, vinegary, fermented) and we were fine eating these sorts of foods in small quantities, but the next course seemed to be more of the same. Leigh's greens were so hot neither of us could eat them. The 'meat' appeared to be a round patty with a vaguely mushroomy taste. He then tried a few mouthfuls of the remaining food on his place but felt no enthusiasm for eating anything more on the plate, which was a pity. I did finish my course (mainly because I'm a pig) but can't say was bowled over by the food. Also, it was so dark (despite candles) that we couldn't really see what we were eating, which didn't help.

I then ordered 'Berry Fruit Crepes' for dessert. The berries and cream tasted good, but the crepes themselves were like boot leather (and no, I've never tasted that, and before anyone shouts, I don't buy leather boots any more either!). But I can't think of a better analogy. I couldn't cut them using cutlery, so tried picking one up and trying my hardest with teeth alone. These crepes would have presented a challenge for the strongest teeth (mine are quite good - I crack nuts with them!). So don't know what happened there - perhaps they had been left for too long after dehydrating.

So, a very 'raw gourmet' day all in all. We both much preferred the lighter raw food at Rawvolution to the complicated food at Juliano's. The next morning got quite a shock when testing the pH of my wee (yes, I'm a sad obsessive who does this quite regularly), and got a highly acidic reading (in the 5's - it's normally 7) and my tummy didn't feel good. Was this something to do with the food at (either of) the raw restaurants? Both restaurant's meals included vinegar, which is something I rarely have at home. More likely explanation is that I ingested far too many digestively incompatible foods in the space of one day.

ORANGE COUNTY

Orange County is between LA and San Diego Counties, also on the coast, although we travelled inland a little.

We had to visit Orange County for non-raw reasons as firstly my children were avid viewers of the TV series 'The OC' a few years ago and secondly because Leigh wanted to visit 'Orange County Choppers' (motorbikes). I hadn't watched 'The OC', so photographed a few suburban streets thinking that maybe they were the sort that the characters lived in, only to be informed on returning that the TV houses probably cost a few million dollars more. Oh, and we discovered that 'Orange County Choppers' is actually in New York (although Leigh did manage to pick up an OCC T-shirt later in San Diego!).

Anyhow, apologies for digression - back to the raw bits! My raw food reason for driving into Orange County was 'Au Lac'.

Au Lac

'Au Lac', in Fountain Valley, Orange County, is basically a restaurant serving Oriental-style food run by Vietnamese (and the faschia advertises 'humanese cuisine'). Situated in a plain precinct, it has an unprepossessing exterior and an interior just like your neighbourhood Chinese/Thai restaurant, with leatherette seats. In other words, the restaurant itself looks quite ordinary, but the food isn't!

'Au Lac' has two menus - a raw, and a cooked vegan/vegetarian menu. I ordered two starters (all in the name of research): 'salmon' rolls with dipping sauce, and 'Love Raw not War' soup. The nori rolls tasted exquisite and were beautifully presented. The soup was also excellent - warmed (but I'll assume not beyond 118 F...) green, with chunks of avocado and sea vegetables. I followed with a 'seafood primavera' including amongst other things courgette noodles, coconut, cauliflower and aubergine, and it reminded me (in the most favourable way) of a cross between a vegetable biryani and a sag aloo from my cooked food days (but less spicy). I wish I could show you photographs of the food, as it all looked so beautiful, but they came out a little blurry.

Leigh chose from the cooked vegan menu, which did include soy textured and shaped to look like meat and fish, but it was very, very good and the prawns so...'prawn-like' that we found ourselves wondering if they'd really just popped in some real ones. I do recommend you visit 'Au Lac', as the food is of such high quality, and it's quite different from standard gourmet raw food. Portions are large; work on the basis that all dishes, whatever the menu says, serve at least two! We had our left-overs boxed and enjoyed the meal all over again later in the day.

SAN DIEGO

Farmers Market, Hillcrest

No farmers' market in the UK I've visited has come anything near this one for variety and quality of fresh produce. You want tomatoes? Tomatoes in every size, shape and colour, often chopped up and handed out on tasting trays by vendors. Same with fruit - sweet, juicy peaches, plums, melons... a financially-challenged fruitarian could probably sustain themselves for a day on the freebies alone! I tried two fruits new to me -prickly pear (soft, sweetish, but with quite large, hard pips), and sapote (vaguely appley but with a fleshy texture).

One stall had trays piled high with different sorts of beautifully-ripe figs (so often in the UK they aren't quite ripe, which makes such a difference to flavour). The black figs are like the ones I buy from my local Waitrose; the greeny-yellow ones are sweeter and taste more like the dried figs we remember from cooked Christmasses. And I discovered that the owner of the stall was a raw foodist! Barry Koral (optimumhealth.org) told us about his own health transformation through raw, and was so sparkly and enthusiastic about the raw life; we later passed his stall and heard him whipping up the passers-by with 'If you love avocados clap your hands!' and we later saw him at Raw Spirit Festival, where he was manning a stall in the Farmers' Market section! Small world indeed.

And...how many farmers' markets near you have a gourmet raw food stall?! (Californians - don't answer - it would be too hard on the rest of us!) Here I sampled some delicious raw pizza quite unlike any I'd had in the UK. The topping was light, eg very little 'cheese' (if any?) and more tomato and other vegetables (including tiny yellow 'grape' tomatoes - about half the size of our 'cherry tomatoes') and the base was essentially a flax cracker mix, made thicker than usual to minimise sogginess.

Prescilla and Ken Molitor

After the farmers' market we went on to visit Prescilla Molitor and her husband Ken in La Jolla (pronounced 'La Hoya'), San Diego. Prescilla is known to members of the giveittomeraw.com forum (which I belonged to until quite recently until I did a little self-counselling re my 'forum addiction') as 'Pink Lady Apple', although when I met her (for the first time) and cried 'Pink Lady Apple!', husband Ken was quite mystified as he'd not been aware of this 'alter-ego'...

I'd brought Prescilla some figs from the market, and noted later she had a fig-tree in her garden (of course!). Prescilla entertained us in style. On arrival she offered us a choice of green juice or freshly-made young coconut juice. Lunch was collard wraps with a selection of delicious fillings: an excellent home-made zucchini (courgette) hummus, sun-dried tomatoes, avocado, long green sprouts she'd grown herself, alfalfa/broccoli sprouts, raw Kalamata olives, and carrot. This was followed by Prescilla's gorgeous home-made raw chocolate.

We had such a lovely time at Prescilla's! Both the conversation, food, oh - and the glorious Californian weather - made for a lovely afternoon. Both our husbands were 'part-raw', so they had the raw fillings, but in cooked tortillas. Prescilla has a beautifully-equipped and large raw foods kitchen, and I know she is thinking of starting classes at some point. Californian readers - I can personally vouch for the quality of Prescilla's food and her level of knowledge and expertise.

Wholefoods, La Jolla

Our last raw food stop in San Diego was the Wholefoods Market at La Jolla. Now, in the UK we only have one branch of Wholefoods, in Kensington High St, London, which is very large and includes a sumptuous range of of fruit, vegetables, nuts, seeds, sprouts and pre-prepared vegetarian and vegan food (as well as a little meat and dairy). I'd heard that the US was covered with branches of Wholefoods and assumed that the average branch would be quite small. Wrong! The Wholefoods Market at La Jolla, although perhaps a little smaller than Kensington, and only on one floor, was nevertheless huge, and, for the raw fooder, better than ours as, of course, it contained many more morsels of interest to us - for example, 'Leaf Cuisine' packed raw food meals, and fresh durian!

So...that's the Southern California bit of my holiday, or at least the 'raw food' bits, and, if any of you are thinking that you really wouldn't mind doing the 'raw gourmet' tour yourself, I do recommend you add to the above key areas we hadn't managed to include - the stretch from San Francisco to Santa Barbara. I know there are many raw venues there - 'Cafe Gratitude' springs to mind. Return fare to California? Roughly £500.

In Part II I'll be taking up the story in Sedona, Arizona.

'Anti' supplements? Why?

Let's start with the disclaimer. Not a doctor. Not a dietician. Not a biochemist. Not a 'raw food guru'. Just a raw food coach who blogs. In fact, I don't even possess a chemistry O-level. As with any blog article, this article represents my personal opinion (together with the opinions of others working in the health field, including a raw food guru or two!) and is not intended to diagnose, treat, etc.

***

Having got all that out of the way...

it is interesting that when people move from a cooked-food diet, where all sorts of enzymes, vitamins and minerals are cooked out of food, to a raw food diet, where all those enzymes, vitamins and minerals are - hooray - left intact, that they are then subjected to sales pitches from those who tell them that their raw food diet is not as wonderful as they thought, that there are very likely things missing in the diet, and that to achieve optimum nutrition...buy their supplements. In fact, one luminary has now gone so far as to say that it is 'not possible' to meet all our mineral needs through a raw food diet, and that if we take his special course we will then find out what minerals will be 'missing' and 'where to get them from'(!). Statements of this kind will concern many a raw fooder,particularly those who can't afford to buy these supplements anyway, so I think it only fair to point out that many people in the raw food world do not share his opinion.

What do I mean by 'supplements'? Extracts, mixtures of extracts, sold in powder, capsule or liquid form. One thing most of them have in common is that they are very expensive - around £50-80.

This article is biased. I'm generally anti supplements. This article outlines the case against supplements. Why? Because, if you want to find the case for any supplement, it's very easy. Just google, and you will find thousands (more) of words extolling its virtues. 95% is written by those selling supplements. The remainder is from users convinced of their benefits.

Please note my use of the word generally. I am generally anti supplements. What this means is that I'll 'never say never', and if at any point I'm convinced that a supplement would be the right thing for me, I'll take one. Whether or not raw vegans need to take Vitamin B12 for example is a hugely-debated area. (Edit Sept '10 - I do take a B12 supplement, but this is the ONLY supplement I will take. Please see July '10 for articles on this.)

Also, I will always support my fellow raw foodists' decisions to do whatever they feel is best for their health, and their children's health. Two raw foodist mothers - Shazzie and Holly - have come under fire on raw food forums recently. Both felt for various reasons that their children's raw vegan diets were not what they could be, and made the decision to add to their diets. Shazzie initially chose vegan+supplements, then added a little raw egg yolk to her daughter's diet. Holly chose to add raw dairy to her children's diets. Behind each of these decisions was a lot of thought and research and the motivation was to do the very best for their children. If it were me, and I felt the raw vegan diet needed something more, I would be more inclined to add raw vegetarian foods than supplement, but that's based on what I have come to understand about supplements and what makes intuitive sense to me. But let's all be prepared to admit that however strongly held our beliefs, and however much 'science' we've found to back our case (and it's always possible to find some!), any one of us could be wrong.

I've written this article because those who say they are 'anti' supplements are challenged regularly. I can quite see why the statement'I don't believe in supplements' can seem narrow/closed-minded. It can seem that the 'anti' supplementers haven't considered the facts, are forgetting that 'we're all different' (and similar...), aren't sufficiently concerned about demineralised soil. Etc. But whilst some raw foodists just instinctively don't want to put anything into their bodies other than raw plant foods in the form in which they grow naturally, others do have a fuller rationale, but find the thought of communicating a view of nutrition (and disease) that is a little different from that of the world at large (and of many raw fooders) somewhat daunting. So...I'm going to have a go here, and if anyone would like to use this article in discussion, please feel free to link to it.

Please note that I am NOT arguing whether supplements are a good idea or not for the average cooked-food eater. I am discussing the case against supplements for those on a diet of raw plant foods, where the majority of the food is organic.

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT RAW FOODISTS ARE NUTRIENT-DEFICIENT?

So many of us switch to raw food, see ailments vanish, feel better than we ever have done before, then join raw food forums, and sooner or later...the dampers kick in, as we're persuaded by other raw foodists, and particularly by those selling supplements, that we are likely to be, or will become, deficient in various nutrients.

We can't be felled on the 'biggies' - protein, calcium...there's ample out there to reassure us that we're not going to go short of those. But vitamins, minerals (many of which we'd never heard of before) - even though we're in fact ingesting far more of them than on our previous cooked diets - according to some, the raw food diet will be failing us there.

But where's the evidence for this? In general, figures on nutrient deficiencies quoted are based on the population as a whole, and this pool will comprise mainly cooked-food meat-eaters. I've also seen figures revealing nutrient deficiencies in ill people. The population in general will very likely be deficient in all sorts of things as much of the food eaten is damaged. The population in general also consumes things that are actively antagonistic to nutrients in the body, eg alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, birth control pills and other drugs. So, for a raw foodist, it's no argument for a supplement seller to say 'x% of people are deficient in' this/that.

It might be relevant to say 'x% of raw foodists are deficient in' this/that, although of course this would need to be based on fact.

Some make claims that raw food diets are deficient based on case studies of isolated raw foodists who had become ill - 'sample size of one' studies! But there could have been so many other things in those people's lives that could have contributed to the ill-health.

If we saw a large-scale controlled study of long-term 100% raw vegans who take no supplements were 'deficient' in a certain nutrient, well, yes, that would be interesting.

But then we'd have to look at what 'deficient' actually means. How are the RDAs (recommended daily allowances) for various nutrients set? Well, please someone tell me different, but googling suggests they are guesstimates based on averages of levels from a 'pool' of 'apparently healthy' people in the population as a whole. Now, as we all know, the population (the majority on a SAD diet for example) isn't that healthy. 'Apparently healthy' people aren't that healthy! For example, one-third of men aged 30-50 have prostate cancer and don't know it (source), I've heard 50% of over 50's have tumours of some sort (no source but plausible, I think you'll agree, after considering the prostate source), and 'apparently healthy' people suffer from a host of ailments that we're told are 'normal', but which raw fooders have seen disappear with a change of diet...

And, what this could mean is: the pool (of, actually, unhealthy people) could have 'x' level of a certain 'nutrient' in their body. It could actually be far too much! And then what happens of course is...the RDA is set from those figures, and ironically the 'health-seeker', who eats and lives far more healthily than the average, gets 'blood-tested' for this nutrient, finds he's 'lacking' (of course...), then supplements and - phew - his level is now up to the level of the pool. He then finds, to his surprise, that his health is not improving, but the reverse.... Just a thought.

If I ever see a large-scale controlled study of 100% raw vegans who take no supplements which shows on average that ill-health is present that could reasonably be linked to a deficiency of a certain nutrient, then I might be persuaded to take a supplement.

Haven't seen one yet.

PRO-SUPPLEMENT ARGUMENTS - TWO EXAMPLES

'It's essential for those living in a cool climate to supplement for Vitamin D.'

Is it? Those who have researched this will find many conflicting opinions on how much sunshine is needed for the body to make Vitamin D. And, as usual, they all disagree. However, a rough average is around 15 minutes a day. True, we have many days in the UK where sunshine isn't present. But we can store Vitamin D. So, being outside for most of the day on just one sunny day in the summer can make up for 24 sunless days. Also, is there any point in the last few weeks where the sun has indeed been shining outside, and you've been on-line? Have your children ever played inside when it's been sunny outdoors? Isn't the answer to adjust our lifestyles rather than take a powder?

(EDIT - see my October 09 article for a closer look at the Vitamin D thing.)

'Aren't you concerned about mineral-depleted soil?'

The piece de resistance of those selling supplements to the smug raw foodist. I'm quite concerned about GM foods, and irradiated foods, but mineral-depleted soil? No, not bothered much. Organic farmers are doing all sorts of things to maximise soil nutrient content, eg adding rock powder to soil, introducing soil-based organisms, and even adding ocean water (sprinkled some on my own garden recently). Victoria Boutenko in 'Green for Life' quotes figures that show the mineral content of organic plant foods to be many times higher than non-organic.

And, I've read that although the mineral content of soil in certain locales may be deficient in one or two important minerals, people who eat plant foods grown on a wide variety of soils are unlikely to develop any deficiencies (an argument perhaps for not always buying local (!)). And for those who say 'not everyone can afford to buy organic' - if they can afford to spend £70 on a 'miracle' mineral supplement, yes - they can.

Also, I'd suggest to anyone who's concerned about 'mineral-depleted soil' to eat more fruit. It's only the topsoil that will be affected to any significant degree by mineral depletion. The roots of fruit trees go down a lot further than that and will bring up minerals from sub-soil, from rock layers deep in the ground. And even if a tree is deficient to any degree in minerals, what will happen is that it will produceno fruit, or less fruit, not 'minerally-deficient' fruit.

SUPPLEMENTS ARE UNNATURAL

In whole fresh plant foods all the nutrients are there in the proportions that enabled the plant to grow. Even those without chemistry O-levels know that chemicals work with each other rather in isolation. So, when we eat a bell pepper all the vitamins and minerals in that pepper will be there in the exact proportions that enabled that pepper to grow. Bell peppers are high in Vitamin C, and quite high in B6. When we eat a bell pepper, there will be all sorts of vitamins and minerals entering our body that will work together to help our bodies use the C and the B6. Isn't it safer to take nutrients in a mix that has been proven to work (the result being a healthy plant) than where the proportions of each nutrient have been decided by men?

Dr T Colin Campbell ('The China Study') says that vitamins and minerals should never be consumed in isolation of their naturally occurring state and that the evidence doesn't support there being any benefits from consuming isolated nutrients that way.

Mike Benton (Natural Hygienist) 'There are now mineral supplements which are advertised as coming from 'organic' sources. These are equally useless because they exist in a fragmented state, extracted from the sources within which they naturally occur. Minerals do not work in isolation. When they are extracted from their natural sources, the other co-existing vitamins, minerals and enzymes are also extracted. Even if they were, the process of laboratory extraction destroys any vital benefits that may have been associated with the minerals. Minerals must be consumed in their natural, unfragmented and organic state to be of any use to the body. The best mineral supplements are those naturally occurring in mineral-rich foods in their unprocessed state - fresh fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds and sprouts.'

Here's a beautiful explanation from Mike ( who incidentally, was writing in the early Eighties, so for those of you about to google him (as I know you do!), he...may not be around now): 'The mineral iron that is present in a cherry, for example, is readily absorbed and used by the body because the other necessary elements for the absorption of iron co-exist in the cherry or food itself. For instance, ascorbic acid aids the absorption of iron in the body by helping to convert ferric to ferrous iron. The cherry has the needed ascorbic acid present with the ferric iron compounds. If you swallowed a pill that had the iron extracted from the cherry but not the accompanying ascorbic acid, then your body would simply not have the needed co-existing elements to use the iron.'

Supplements in powder form are of course also stripped of their fibre and water. Dr Doug Graham ('80/10/10' Diet) 'When the water is removed, the oxidative process that occurs has a degrading impact on the nutrients that remain, leaving supplements far less nutritious than their whole-food counterparts.'

WHEN SUPPLEMENTS CAN BE HARMFUL

The BBC in May 07 reported a study (US National Cancer Institute) showing a link between prostate cancer and taking multivitamins more than once-daily. This was an association only, it was not possible to say that that the multivitamins caused the cancer, but study leader Dr Karla Lawson commented: 'Because multivitamins contain so many different components and men taking a lot of them were more likely to be taking other supplements, the researchers were unable to tease out what was causing the association.' (In other words, all the supplements taken had made things very complicated...)

(April 10 edit - 'A major study has revealed that women who take a daily multi-vitamin pill are nearly 20 per cent more likely to develop breast cancer. The shock finding has rattled Australia's $2.5 billion complementary health industry, which is urging consumers not to panic, News Ltd says. In a 10-year study of more than 35,000 women, researchers discovered those who regularly took a multi-vitamin pill increased the risk of developing a tumour by 19 per cent.
They said the result was concerning and needed investigation as many women use multi-vitamins in the belief they prevent chronic diseases such as cancer. A "biologically plausible" explanation is that taking vitamin and mineral supplements significantly increases the density of breast tissue, a strong risk factor for breast cancer. Folic acid, often present in a potent form in multi-vitamins, may also accelerate tumour growth. The study, conducted by Sweden's Karolinska Institute and published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, has been greeted with interest and caution by Australian experts. Women who took a multi-vitamin pill in the study had higher breast tissue density than those who took no vitamin supplements." )

These studies are showing links, and of course correlation does not imply causality, but...food for thought?

Dr Alan M Immerman DC: 'When one tries to provide proper nutrition by extracting nutrients from food and taking them in various proportions and quantities, there is indeed a risk of creating imbalances. The best way to supply vitamins to the body is to create them as nature provided them - in foods.'

Dr Doug Graham: '...the marketers neglect to mention that too much of that nutrient is harmful in a variety of ways, not the least of which is the inevitable imbalances that result when we consume supplements of any kind. Most supplements are concentrated from plant foods, and despite our American 'more is better' mindset, the body does not appreciate these unnatural concentrates and has to work to expel them similarly to the way it has to eliminate toxic residue from cooked foods...Like an amateur barber who finds himself trimming each side of the hair to make things 'even' until his client is bald, a person who supplements with single nutrients (or any formulation or combination of extracted nutrients) inevitably creates greater and more confounding imbalances, whether or not the cause and effect are discernible in the short term.'

Many raw fooders will be familiar with the Kouchakoff studies, in which it was shown that, after cooked food, there was a rush of white blood cells (leukocytosis) towards the digestive tract - the body perceiving the cooked food as a foreign, toxic substance. The following also resulted in leukocytosis: drugs, medicinal herbs, and...nutritional supplements.

So, in whom do we place our trust? Nature, or man? I've an underlying distrust of what clever men tell me I should ingest, especially if there's a profit motive behind it. Meat marketing boards told us 50 years ago that we needed many more times protein than is actually the case. Little comfort to those who ate lots of beefsteak and are suffering from bowel cancer now. In the same era we were told that smoking was good for us. Men in white coats, men in cloaks, have had us taking all sorts of substances, to our destruction...

Where is the source of wisdom for what nutrients you or I could do with today - this very day? The supplement manufacturer, or our bodies? A few months ago I had a great desire for oranges. They tasted more delicious than at any other time in my life - ate loads of them! I believe that this was because my body at the time very much needed something in oranges. After a while my desire for oranges lessened - perhaps because my body had built up adequate reserves of whatever nutrient had been lacking. And that's how that cliche 'listen to your body' operates. The clever body can correct deficiencies all by itself by generating a desire for certain foods.

How on the other hand can it ever be right for an individual to take 'x' mcg/mg of a supplement every single day - that amount decided by the supplement manufacturer? Yes, the body might expel excess, but ...always? We know that disease occurs when the body is overburdened by the task of elimination.

WHY A SUPPLEMENT MIGHT APPEAR TO WORK

Firstly of course - could be the 'placebo effect'. Perhaps we're feeling a bit 'down', physically and/or psychologically (most likely for some reason unconnected with diet), we're persuaded by a supplement manufacturer's claims, we spend £70 (and sure want to feel that's justified!), we feel excited at taking something that's a buzz word on the raw food forums, we start taking it, we feel a bit better (which could be due to all sorts of reasons), we attribute those good feelings to the supplement, we focus on those good feelings, which in turn create other good feelings, and...we're sold!

We may see a cessation of certain 'symptoms'. Acne is one example of a body's trying to clean up by eliminating toxins via the skin. If we then ingest an excess of certain nutrients via a supplement, the body may then have to divert energies from house-cleaning to eliminating the excess, so...for a while the acne might appear to clear up! So, sadly, the supplement works like a pharmaceutical drug - suppressing symptoms, but doing nothing to address the underlying cause.

We may even experience euphoria - a 'high' from a supplement. Some believe that substances that have been extracted from their naturally occurring form, or contain nutrients in too high a dose for our bodies, are actually toxic, and that when the body senses toxic matter it will certainly move to an 'all systems go' state, but as preparation for elimination, which results in a stimulant effect. A stimulant effect is the calling card of many poisons - caffeine, nicotine etc. And of course we can then get used to this stimulating effect and miss it when it isn't there, resulting in a sink to a lower level of well-being that accompanies any drug withdrawal.

So - many people are quick to link good feelings to the supplement, whether these are actually due to something else in their lives, or whether they're due to the body's efforts to eliminate. Sooner or later they'll have some 'down' days again. Will they link these 'down' days to the supplement as well? As that would be fair, wouldn't it? Well, no they don't and one reason is that it's somewhat uncomfortable to entertain the thought that we parted with a lot of money for nothing. If they're 'sold on supplements', they may decide they need a higher dose. But, more likely, they'll wonder if they've got some other kind of 'deficiency' and go back to the site selling them for another 'wondercure'.

Some people say that when they take certain supplements they feel less hungry afterwards. They interpret this as a good thing and the supplement manufacturers tell us that this is because their powders are so 'nutrient-dense'. But the 'Natural Hygiene' view is that the body will shut down appetite when it has some serious work to do, ie eliminate a toxic invader. Again, this is why cigarettes and coffee can depress appetite and why, when we are unwell, and the body is involved in eliminative processes (eg via sneezing, sweating etc) we do not feel like food.

GREEN POWDERS, WHITE POWDERS, POTIONS, 'NUTRIENT-DENSE'

Green Powders

Here's Frederic Patenaude, well-known raw foodist who's 'not backward in coming forward', on green powders, as he says it so well!

'This might make me a few enemies, but I believe that 99% of supplements and 'superfoods' on the market are an absolute waste of money. It seems like every time you turn your head, someone is offering the latest and greatest 'beauty enhancing' or 'breakthrough' superfood or supplement. But what if I told you something shocking yet so simple to understand: there's no 'food' that arrives in a bottle, having been made in a factory and sold in powdered form, that will ever compare in terms of 'super-nutrition' to fresh fruit and vegetables. But still, almost every day I get an e-mail that says, 'What do you think of ____?' (fill in the blank with whatever supplement or superfood is now being promoted as the latest 'amazing' product).

Almost every supplement company has a variation of the 'green powder' which is basically a powder made with dried grass, dried grass juices or dried vegetables and possibly algae. This powder is supposed to make your body more alkaline and give you nutrition you can't find elsewhere...A powder of vegetables or algae can never compare in nutritional value to fresh vegetables, even if those vegetables are not organic. The real superfoods are dark green vegetables such as spinach, romaine lettuce, black kale, parsley, celery, arugula, and so on. With the use of 'green smoothies' made with fresh green veg and fruit, anyone can obtain superior nutrition in a few minutes a day...green smoothies and fresh raw greens literally put these green powders to shame.'

(I'm sorry to say that when Fred talks of making enemies, this is unfortunately often the case if one speaks out against supplements. Prominent people who've questioned the claims made by supplement promoters have been attacked, and ostracised by others in the raw food 'community'. As a lesser-known raw fooder, I've found that I and others on the raw food forums have been told that we should open our minds, and, of course... the piece de resistance - the implication that we are deficient - oh, that again - but in...lurve... So, can I just say to anyone who is upset by my presenting the arguments against...

I don't give a (ripe, juicy, whole, fresh,) fig. (Love and Light XXX).

White Powders

Some raw fooders rave about MSM - in fact, some even say it gives them a high! But it's not without controversy, and I've seen a forum poster cite it as the direct cause of his mother's health problems.

MSM is sulphur, in the form of a white, crystalline powder. Do we need sulphur? Yes - it helps build collagen (used to bind connective tissue) and maintain healthy joints.

Are raw foodists likely to be deficient in sulphur? The product details supplied by one online supplier include this: 'MSM is destroyed by cooking.' OK - not a problem for raw foodists then. We also read that MSM is deficient in foods grown 'in greenhouses or through irrigation'. My googling reveals that sulphur is present in the following foods (amongst others): avocado, blueberries, broccoli, cabbage, carrots, cherries, coconut, garlic, grapes, grains, nuts, seeds, onions, pulses, pak choi, parsley, red peppers, tomatoes, and green leafy veg generally (eg kale, lettuce, watercress). Well, I suppose some of these may be grown in greenhouses or through irrigation, but can't see that in general there will be a problem. (And if you have any patch of land, it's very easy to grow lettuces).

Mike Benton: 'Almost all diets contain adequate amounts of this mineral.' VitaminsDiary.com: 'A diet sufficient in protein is generally considered to be adequate in sulphur.'

I can't see that there is any reason to think that the average raw foodist isn't getting all the sulphur their bodies need in their food. Surely the raw foodist supplementing with MSM would likely be taking sulphur in excess of the body's requirements, and of course in an isolated form. And sulphur is a substance (along with phosphorus, chlorine, sulfur and silicon) which, when metabolised, forms acids in the body. So is it really sensible to take sulphur in isolation from the (alkalising) foods it is found in naturally?

E3 Live

The only ingredient in E3 Live is a blue-green algae (or, more accurately, a bacteria) called alphanizomem flos-aquae. Before being marketed as a 'health supplement' it was known as 'pond scum' or 'slime'. It grows all over the world.

I've seen much impressive scientific-sounding material from those promoting this, and even raw food gurus make all sorts of health claims for it. Yet, I've not yet heard of any one that has been substantiated by a clinical trial. They also list all the amazing things the pond-scum contains - 'every mineral known to man', antioxidants etc. But, as my friend Roger pointed out, a cow-pat may well contain all sorts of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants etc that are also found in the human body, but that doesn't mean we should be eating it.

If you think that the slime in a lake was designed for human beings to eat, or that for some reason a raw food diet will be inadequate without the ingestion of this, then your idea of a natural diet is different from mine. Again, I wouldn't be surprised to see the body considerably stimulated in an effort to get rid of it.

'Nutrient-dense' foods

This term is used frequently by those selling supplements (and also by those selling dehydrated powdered forms of whole foods). The marketing often includes the words 'contains all eight essential amino-acids'.

Just a reminder that many more mundane foods contain 'all eight essential amino-acids' as well. Here's a clue to one: it's long, it's yellow...

Usually supplement marketing will contain long lists of figures relating to various nutrients. A thought on those...the 'superfood' powders are of course fresh, whole foods that have had water removed.

If we take a fresh, whole plant food with x% protein, x% vitamins in it, by weight, and then remove all the water, and measure the percentages again by weight, because the food weighs far less when dehydrated, all the nutrient percentages will shoot up!

And of course even if the manufacturers look at grams of nutrients rather than percentages, what they'll be then doing is looking at grams per, eg 100g, of the powder. Well, if we compare 100g of the powder with 100g of the fresh, the powder will of course contain many more of the plant food than the fresh, again, because dehydrated food weighs less. So, actual grams of nutrients per 100g will be higher as well.

So you could take any fresh fruit or vegetable, dehydrate it, and, hey presto - 'superfood'!

Now IF we were to ingest the same weight of powder as we would of the fresh whole food it's made from, then we might benefit from this nutrient concentration. But we don't. Typically, we might be directed to have a spoonful or two. And we'd normally rehydrate this in water - perhaps in a smoothie. So that would bring us pretty much back to where we'd be if we'd eaten the fresh whole food instead! And how much better it would have been to have fresh, whole plant food (at a fraction of the price) rather than have it dehydrated, ground, stored, packed and shipped.

I wonder what the price of these foods (often from South America) is over there? Even taking into account transportation, storage costs etc, I'm going to guess that these are high-profit items. Could be that they're quite common-place to the locals and that they'd be quite surprised (amused?) to hear of us paying £15 a bag, and not even fresh...

'Liquid zeolite'

I know raw foodists who swear by this. Here's an alternative view.

***

The spur for writing this article came after seeing someone challenge a raw foodist who advocated no supplements as making a 'blanket statement'. I've tried to show that, behind the 'blanket statement' is a rationale, ie we do have a reason or two for saying what we do.

I did say in the intro that I'd 'never say never' re supplementation, but do believe there is ample evidence to suggest that supplementing is certainly unnecessary for the majority of raw foodists, probably unnecessary for any raw foodist, and that it could even be harmful in some circumstances.

If you're considering spending upwards of £50 on a supplement, ask yourself why. Before you saw the marketing blurb, before you saw the excited testimonies of raw fooders, did you actually feel any symptoms of deficiency? Did you feel that your raw food diet was lacking? Indeed, were you even on a raw food diet? (high-raw diets are excellent - light years healthier than the average cooked diet, but until the diet is 100% raw, raw food has not had a truly fair test). Before you heard about the supplement, were you ill? And if so, are you sure your food was to blame? There are all sorts of things that affect our physical and psychological well-being other than food. Were all these things right? Sleep, fresh air, sunshine, exercise, relationships, occupation? Any conflicts, stresses?

Check out the ingredients list. Use Wikipedia to find out what each thing actually is. If it's a chemical, google it together with 'food sources' and see if it's something that isn't contained in whole, fresh, raw foods you can buy at a fraction of the price. And if it's not found in whole, fresh, raw foods ask yourself whether it should really be going into your body.

Consider the arguments of those 'anti' supplements I've outlined above. Consider whether listening to the desires of your body for certain foods throughout the day, the week, the seasons, might be a more reliable indicator of what vitamins and minerals your body requires than extracts and mixes put together by supplement manufacturers.

Ask yourself whether a diet full of raw foods (ie for the first time in your life you are eating foods with nutrients intact) will be 'lacking' in some way.

Dr Doug Graham: 'All the vitamins, minerals and nutrients any body needs are amply supplied through the variety of fruits, vegetables and leafy greens found in a healthful diet...The raw food kitchen need not include jars, bottles, boxes, cans, bags, capsules, powders, remedies, potions, pills, or tinctures of any kind.'

______________________________________________________

RawforLife at Raw Spirit Festival!

Yes, tomorrow I am taking my first 'proper holiday' for two years - 9 days travelling around/between LA and San Diego, followed by five days in Sedona, Arizona (for Raw Spirit Festival). Hope to meet some of you there. First day I'll be with my part-raw husband, who is gamely accompanying me to every raw food restaurant in the area (and hopefully won't be spotted furtively asking directions to the nearest 'Dunkin Donuts'...) Second day onwards will likely be alone, with a name-band necklace, in case my webpics are less than...accurate...

Comments on this article? Please send them through as usual - they'll be considered for publication shortly after my return date 16th September.

I know that for some of you in the UK Raw Spirit Festival is out of reach (it was for me last year...things can change!), but in that case how about meeting up with me and other raw fooders at one of my raw food classes this Autumn?

Here are the details for my traditional 'raw food preparation' class - 'RawforLife Experience'.

And here are the details for the new 'Fruit & Leaves' class.

If you book now, you'll receive an automated confirmation, and I'll be in touch soon after I get back. Hope to meet you one way or another!

'But people have always cooked food...'

(From http://www.rawforlife.co.uk/)

'We who question the cooking of food are sometimes looked at as if we are quite mad. We are told that cooking of food is 'natural', because people all over the world have cooked food, and that they have done so for thousands of years. It is true that we have traditions of hundreds of years of cooking, great chefs, millions of cookbooks, food magazines, TV programmes...multinational companies have formed on the back of cooked food. Sure, a few human beings a few thousand years ago started heating their food...and the idea spread. Raw fooders believe we took a wrong turn.'

How natural is it for most of our diet to be heat-damaged food?

Have human beings always cooked food? We've all heard the Biblical records of people living hundreds of years. We tell ourselves it's not true. But in doing that we have to patronise the writers - they were mistaken, deluded, perhaps they couldn't count. But what if it were true? What might those patriarchs not have been doing that we are doing today? Any mention of Methuselah stir-frying his veg?

We don't see animals cooking their food, neither do we see them coughing, wheezing or
hobbling.

There's very little information as to when human beings first started cooking food - only conjecture along the lines of cavemen sitting round a fire and throwing a bit of animal into it, but I have been able to find accounts that suggest that not everyone has seen cooking as a 'natural' thing for us to do.

So, as evidence that indeed there were raw food advocates long before David Wolfe, Gabriel Cousens et al, and that many throughout history have suggested that the natural way is to eat food without damaging it, and that it is unnatural to eat cooked food (and animals) I've collected together, for your consideration, a few snippets from writings of long ago.

From historical accounts:

'There is among the Indians a heresy of those who philosophise among the Brahmins, who live a self-sufficient life, abstaining from eating living creatures and all cooked foods.'

Hippolytus, Rome, 225 AD

'The oldest inhabitants of Greece, the Pelasgians, who came before the Dorian, Ionian and Eolian migrations, inhabited Arcadia and Thessaly, possessing the island of Lesbos and Lokemantos, which were full of orange groves. The people, with their diet of dates and oranges, lived on an average of more than 200 years.'

Herodotus, 425-484 BCE (from Hotema 'Man's Higher Consciousness.')

From sacred writings:

('Chinese, Egyptian, Indian and Hebrew accounts indicate that people were expelled from Paradise for using fire to cook food.' (Arthur M Baker 'The Science of Cooked v Raw.')


'Pious men eat what the brilliant forces of nature leave them after the offering. But those ungodly, cooking good food, sin as they eat.'

Bhagavad Gita (ancient Hindu text - the speaker is Krishna), 100-500 BCE

'For I tell you truly, he who kills, kills himself, and whoso eats the flesh of slain beasts, eats of the body of death. For in his blood every drop of their blood turns to poison;'

'Cook not...'

'prepare not your foods with the fire of death, which kills your foods, your bodies and your souls also...eat nothing to which only the fire of death gives savour, for such is of Satan.'

Essene Gospel of Peace (Third Century Aramaic Manuscript and Old Slavonic Texts)


From mythology:

'There was a time, the golden age we call it, happy in fruits and herbs, when no men tainted their lips with blood, and birds went flying safely through the air, and the field's rabbits wandered unfrightened, and no fish was ever hooked by its own credulity: all things were free from treachery and fear and cunning, and all was peaceful. But some innovative, a good-for-nothing, whoever he was, decided, in envy, that what lions ate was better, stuffed meat into his belly like a furnace, and paved the way for crime...one crime leads to another...

There was a man here...he was first to say that animal food should not be eaten. And learned as he was, men did not always believe him when he preached, 'Forbear, O mortals, to spoil your bodies with such impious food!'

(Ovid's Metamorpheses, 8 AD)

***

More recently, the Hunza peoplehave been cited by 20th century commentators as examples of longevity linked to healthy diet. Sadly, this is no longer the case, as Alissa Cohen ('Living on Live Foods') describes:

'The Hunza people, who live in the Himalayas, were once noted for their longevity. Often living well into their hundreds, they remained active, climbing mountains and hiking, among other activities. They ate sparingly, on a diet consisting mostly of raw foods such as sun-baked breads. They had none of the diseases so prevalent in Western culture. Breast cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, and many other of our common disorders were unknown to them. When Western civilisation began building railroads in the mountainous areas of the Himalayas, it also introduced to the Hunza people the processed foods and junk foods we eat here in the US. Within a year, the first case of cancer was detected among the Hunza people. Today these people have many of the same diseases common in America, and their life span has decreased dramatically.'

So, did Methuselah really live to 969? Take a look at the Wikipedia entry - the theories are interesting! Whatever the case, we should be able to get a little nearer his score by ensuring that the raw materials we put into our bodies are undamaged, that enzymes, vitamins and minerals are intact, all in proportions that are just right for them to work together in our bodies.

'It can be said that the greatest single cause of degeneration in man is the use of fire in the preparation of foods.'

Arnold de Vries, The Fountain of Youth 1946.

Who'd be a (shhh...100%) raw foodist?

POSTSCRIPT, ONE YEAR ON....

Loooking back at this post, I'm wondering if it should still be here, as, for a long time now, I've rarely encountered the attitudes I describe below (hooray!).

But, at the time of writing, I was a member of a particular international raw food forum where I and other 100% raw fooders got it all the time... Having left that group, I am very pleased to say that the other forums I frequent are pretty much devoid of this daftness!

But, for now, I'll keep the post on the blog in case any others are getting similar grief, anywhere in the 'raw food world' (!).
_________________________________________________________




I am increasingly feeling that, as a raw foodist I have to don my flak jacket before saying so. And, the crazy thing is...that's not in the cooked-food world, where people are actually quite accepting in a 'oh, so you're a nutter!', or 'oh, how interesting!' sort of way, but, incredibly, in the 'raw food' world, eg on 'raw food' forums!

More and more it seems that raw foodists that choose not to eat cooked food have to say so apologetically, in a very tiny voice (even though '100%' is a very useful label to distinguish us from the increasing numbers who call themselves raw foodists nowadays - oh bar the pizza and beers with the mates at the weekend - and who subscribe to the definition of a raw foodist as suggested on a forum recently as someone who 'includes raw food in their diets and recognises the benefits' (oh well, that would include 99% of the world then...reminds me of the Eighties when everyone wanted to be a vegetarian - 'oh, but we eat white meat!').

Because, as everyone in the 'raw food' world knows, or, if they don't know, will increasingly understand, as they see the 100% raw foodist get shot down in flames again and again, for 'evangelising'...

100% raw foodists are, by definition, guilty of all of the following crimes.

They:

Impose their beliefs on others, that is they insist that everyone else must eat 100% raw food (and overnight of course!) and that anyone who doesn't is a gutless wimp.

Are inflexible. Fancy choosing not to eat cooked food on an aeroplane, or at a social occasion!

Are obsessive. (They really have an eating disorder. )

Are chest-thumpers. They like to show off and laud it over others.

Are 'raw food police' ('food Nazis', etc). They even suggest that if a company is charging a fortune for a 'raw' product it should actually be raw!

Are pedantic. Only a real party-pooper would spoil things by suggesting that a restaurant dish advertised as 'raw' should be made from raw ingredients.

Are 'nit-picking'. What sort of a person would query why someone who would never dream of eating boiled carrots (and tells others not to!) is quite happy munching boiled brazil nuts?

Are stupid. They think that raw food is the 'be-all and end-all', that food is the only thing that affects our health - someone educate them!

Are gullible. 100% raw foodists believe that raw food is going to solve all their problems! They don't understand that life is far more complicated than that!

Are deluded. They don't realise that sooner or later they're going to come up against health issues that the raw food diet just can't address!

Are liars. They all eat cooked food sometimes, but just won't admit it. (note! - I have been known to allow the odd non-raw ingredient within a meal slip down my gullet, but, I'm going to have to disappoint those who think, as I saw on a forum recently, that we're likely slipping out at the dead of night to queue up at the kebab van.)

Are intolerant. They believe that their way is the only way.

Look down on others. They believe that they're somehow 'better people' than those who eat cooked food!

Are judgemental. They just love to give others a good telling-off!

Are UNLOVING. If only they could accept that everyone's different.


Yep, 100% raw foodists are really rather horrid.

And, if you are a 100% raw foodist, believe me - in the eyes of some (not all) of those who are part-raw, you are DEFINITELY all these things! Nope - no good protesting...you're convicted!

Because - it really doesn't matter whether any of the above are true in reality.

It's completely immaterial that all the people closest to you are nothing like 100% raw fooders, and you respect that, and have never tried to impose your beliefs on them. As people really don't want to entertain that thought - it might challenge their cherished image of you.

It doesn't matter if your mission in life is simply to enthuse and to encourage others to try more raw and to get to whatever point is comfortable for them. As - who'd believe that?!

It doesn't matter that you've seen your own life transformed, and waved goodbye to various illnesses with the raw food diet and simply want to reduce the chances of others suffering, as the knockers want very much to believe only the worst of you, not the best.

And it's pointless trying to tell them that you feel just as thrilled when someone moves to 25% raw (roughly!) as 100%. That would be quite threatening - they'd have to revise their 'maps'!

And, by golly, if they started to believe that any of these things were true, they'd have to actually face up themselves to whatever's bugging them rather than wagging their fingers at 'intolerant' 100% raw foodists. Now that wouldn't be fair, would it?

So, just take it as read that, in the eyes of so many 'raw fooders', you have every character defect in the list above.

Some raw fooders who eat a little cooked food are happy with their choice. It's a good choice! And they seem to be able to do that without being unduly perturbed by those who eat raw food only. To those of you out there (I think, the majority) - thank you thank you!

But others really don't seem happy with their choice, else why would they feel the need to constantly portray 100% raw foodists in the ways describely above, either directly, subtlely, obliquely or by making fun. It's sad. And, of course, when they do, they are often applauded by others who aren't happy with their diets making themselves feel better by saying how 'balanced', 'wise' and 'realistic' the poster is.

There's only one picture today. My darling meat-eating, smoking, Tequila-swilling, but 50%-evening-meal-raw-and-starts-each-day-with-juice (hooray!) husband sent me a picture I'd 'commissioned' of him several months ago (just a bit late...). It's of a carrot,which of course would be a 'superfood' if a university research department and a big raw food on-line store gave it 'the treatment'...here's 'Supercarrot', after cooking, courtesy of Leigh Took:

Still feel brave enough to be a 100% raw foodist on a 'raw food' forum? I would suggest applying here for extra skins, but, right now, I need every one I've got!

Do Raw Foodists' Poos Smell Of Roses?

Well, it was a red rag to a bull...on a raw food forum recently someone unconvinced about raw food made fun of raw foodists - 'they think their poo smells of roses!'. And, of course, I had to reply, and that reply was the seed for this article - one I've been meaning to write for a long time, but, yes, felt slightly nervous about possible reactions (hi, Mum!). And, yes, I mentioned this in my Bristol Vegan Fayre Talk, and promise that, once having got this out of my system (as it were...) that may (possibly...) be it!

First of all, a public apology to Dr Gillian McKeith. Dr G presented a show here in the UK called 'You Are What You Eat', and used to go into the bathroom after people had used it, and...sniff the air. I used to 'diss' Dr G regularly. I used to say 'That woman is disgusting! Fancy commenting on that. Everyone's poos smell!'

Well...now I KNOW. I KNOW who, or rather what it was that was 'disgusting'. And it wasn't Dr Gillian McKeith.

It was what I was producing, daily, on a cooked 'fish+vegetarian' diet.

Yes, my poo pre-raw usually smelt bad. Most people would say that's 'normal'. And, of course it is. Most people's poos smell bad, and they're getting worse! Bathrooms come with fans installed and businesses are making millions selling (toxic) sprays and 'fresheners'.

But, here's the thing (and some of you will know)...

since becoming a raw foodist, and particularly in the last couple of months, after tweaking my raw food diet a little,

my poos don't smell bad any more!

About half the time they're odourless.
About half the time they're 'mild'.
Very rarely are they worse than mild.
Occasionally they smell pleasant.

So, yet again, I've found another way in which, since going raw, I'm no longer 'normal' - hooray!!

So, why does poo (usually) smell bad?

Well, I had a pretty good idea myself, but tried googling...well, you'd think with all the millions of words on various depravities we can find on the net, I'd have found quite a bit, but - no - seems people aren't very keen to talk about what comes out of every person every day (well, in most cases). Why? Because most people are aware, deep down, that what's coming out of them isn't good. But they don't like to think about it.

We trust our noses in every other respect. We smell something bad - we know it IS bad. But when it comes to the smell of poo, most people will try very hard to push all thoughts of it out of their conscious mind.

I'm going to suggest to everyone reading that smelly poo isn't something that's inevitable, and it's all down to the unnatural things we put into/do to our bodies, and everyone can do something about it simply by putting only natural, whole, undamaged (raw) foods into our bodies.

Why the whiff?

When food is eaten that takes a relatively long time to digest, eg flesh in the form of meat and fish, and even vegetarian foods such as large quantities of pulses and nuts, it hangs around, it rots, it putrefies (the body calls in bacteria to help - they make smells!) Other food piles in on top and, while its exit is blocked by the slower-to-digest food in front, it also rots, ferments...and, scariest of all, putrefaction creates toxins that can lead to disease.

The standard cooked diet includes abominable mixtures of digestively incompatible foods. Food A needs an acidic stomach medium for digestion, but the same environment inactivates the enzymes needed to digest Food B. Again, means certain foods hang around undigested, meaning our systems work sluggishly, leading to gas, and in some cases constipation.


One source suggested the fattier the food the worse the smell.

Ingestion of toxic substances (all the usual suspects - chemicals in non-organic and processed food, caffeine, alcohol...)

Is it natural for poo to smell bad?

A baby fed on breastmilk produces fragrant poo. When baby graduates to a little mashed banana, still no problem. But as baby eats more and more cooked (damaged) food, the nappies become more and more 'grown-up'. The TV advertisement (think it's for a spray) in which the little boy sitting on the loo says 'It smells!' is a sad indictment of what we are putting into our children.

No, it's not natural for poo to smell bad. A bad smell means BAD. If your poo smells bad, take notice of the huge favour your nose is doing you. And the healthiest thing we can do for ourselves is to take steps to do something about it, rather than trying not to think about it and trying to comfort ourselves with the fact that it's like that for most people. (Most people are unhealthy and will eventually succumb to all those diseases we are told are 'normal').

Now, for those who would pooh-pooh (sorry!) the above and say that, after all, a cow's poo, or a dog's poo smells, I'd ask you whether human beings have had any hand in those animals' diets (and, for the meat-eaters out there - note: dogs have a short digestive tract designed to digest meat quickly; we don't.)

Do raw foodists come out smelling of roses?

Oops - almost answering the original question.

Some raw food experts believe that we are relatively free from problems caused by 'putrefaction', which is decomposition of food by microorganisms, producing toxins and...unpleasant smells. Hannah Allen, ('A Course in Natural Health (Natural Hygiene)') says that when raw food is eaten, 'food wastes don't stay in the bowel long enough to putrefy. The transit time of raw food in a healthy body is 20 to 24 hours, while cooked food may take three days or longer.'

But, a raw foodist will nevertheless produce whiffy ones IF:


lots of foods are mixed together; if raw eating often includes multi-ingredient 'raw gourmet' recipes, high quantities of hard-to-digest nuts, cooked substances such as nama shoyu, nutritional yeast etc, and/or everything but the kitchen sink in the blender (the 'abombo-combo') On a raw diet in which this sort of food predominates, the odourless poo may indeed be elusive.

Over the last couple of months, my raw food diet has become simpler, and I've noticed a huge increase in the frequency of odourless poos with the adoption of a diet that's higher in fruit and leaves, and lower in fat. I also mix fewer ingredients together, often making a complete meal of just one or two foods, eg bananas wrapped in lettuce, or mango and spinach leaves. (Interestingly, I read that when people have cholostomy bags fitted they're given chlorophyll pills to stop odour...of course a diet high in green leaves will contain plenty of chlorophyll.)

And, of course, on such a diet, I go often - perhaps two or three times a day, but - no drama, as visits are quick and easy. On the occasions when mine have been a shade worse than mild, there's usually been an identifiable reason: multi-ingredient meals, greed (stuffing in food when the previous lot hasn't had a chance to be digested), and...ingestion of garlic and onion (interestingly, thought by Taoist monks and Natural Hygienists to be toxic).

So, to answer the original question...

Do Raw Foodists' Poos Smell of Roses?




I can't claim that mine smell of roses, but that's only because I don't eat roses. When I 'mono-eat' papayas, guess what they smell of! Quite pleasant actually (if you like papayas - not everyone does).

To end on a serious note (as this is SO serious)

It may be (sadly, tragically) 'normal' for poo to smell bad, but it's neither natural nor healthy.

Dr Gillian McKeith - will you forgive me? I honestly never realised...