You make these statements without any supporting evidence.
I've thought raw food may be helpful because it contains live bacteria which help to keep the gut flora healthy. That doesn't require a diet of all raw food, just that people may need to eat some raw food to be healthy.
what i f ...
you come up with an app that reads your DNA to point out what foods are best for you?
perhaps some have some Neanderthal DNA and require more... something something
well that's that and Whole Foods store is a scam hackery perhaps rightwing sky daddy chumps bent on cutting out unions at all costs~ ? ; )
Just because somebody writes a book extolling raw food doesn't mean they're right. Anyone can write a book. I meant, there's a lack of scientific evidence supporting raw food diets.
I'm sure that some people do well on raw food diets, although in the long run they'll probably develop nutrient deficiencies. Eating a raw food diet is probably an improvement if it replaces eating from Macdonalds.
Probably most people would do better to eat more raw foods - but eating ALL raw foods leads to a nutritionally deficient diet, for most people. People on raw diets tend to eat lots of fruit, few vegetables, and eat a lot of high-fat foods like nuts and coconut oil. It's possible to sprout grains etc. and eat them raw, but most of the raw foodists I've met, don't bother.
So I think there is some truth to the benefits of raw food diets, but a lot of the theories people make up as for why a raw food diet would be good, are wrong.
No, in such claims there is often some grain of truth - as I said earlier.
There are many other grand claims out there, besides the claims for raw food. Claims with little evidence to back them.
Sounds more like Luara is just asking for proof more than just one person saying so.
Or should Luara and the rest of us take this on faith?
I get attacked and stereotyped as an "altie" on "science-based" and "skeptical" websites, for saying that there may be some truth in these kinds of claims.
With both the "skeptics" and the "alternative" types, any questioning of their statements tends to make them think I'm on The Other Side.
Raw food diets can be harmful. Anyone who starts such a diet should at the minimum, use a nutrients tracking program to ensure that they don't develop nutrient deficiencies. Probably they would need to take supplements to make up for missing nutrients. Nutrient deficiencies take a long time to develop, so the person may not associate their symptoms with the diet.
Also, raw animal foods (and some raw plant foods) can be dangerous because of salmonella, toxic chemicals that are neutralized by cooking, etc.
According to the American Cancer Society,
Available scientific evidence does not support claims that oxygen therapies can cure cancer in humans.
Oxygen therapy can harm or kill people.
Tumor cells do apparently tend to become low in oxygen. This leads the tumor to signal for more blood supply to the tumor and this process may drive tumor growth.
The video above is by a naturopath and such information is unreliable.
What do gorillas eat?
Cooking probably originated about 250,000 years ago, plenty of time for humans to evolve to adapt to it (not in Neolithic times as Michelle thinks).
Cooking may have been important in human evolution - the body can get more calories from cooked food, fueling the calorie-hungry human brain. Human jaw size decreased because cooked food is softer.