and When to Be Your Own Doctor
by Dr. Isabelle A. Moser with Steve Solomon
From The Hygienic Dictionary
Autointoxication.  the accumulations on the bowel
wall become a breeding ground for unhealthy bacterial life
forms. The heavy mucus coating in the colon thickens and
becomes a host for putrefaction. The blood capillaries to
the colon begin to pick up the toxins, poisons and noxious
debris as it seeps through the bowel wall. All tissues and
organs of the body are now taking on toxic substances. Here
is the beginning of true autointoxication on a physiological
level. Bernard Jensen, Tissue Cleansing Through Bowel
Management.  All maladies are due to the lack of certain
food principles, such as mineral salts or vitamins, or to
the absence of the normal defenses of the body, such as the
natural protective flora. When this occurs, toxic bacteria
invade the lower alimentary canal, and the poisons thus generated
pollute the bloodstream and gradually deteriorate and destroy
every tissue, gland and organ of the body. Sir Arbuthnot
Lane.  The common cause of gastro-intestinal indigestion
is enervation and overeating When food is not digested, it
becomes a poison. Dr. John.H. Tllden, Impaired Health: Its
Cause and Cure, 1921.  a clogging up of the large intestine
by a building up (on) the bowel wall to such an extent that
feces can hardly pass through. autointoxication is a direct
result of intestinal constipation. Faulty nutrition is a
major underlying factor in constipation. The frequency or
quantity of fecal elimination is not an indication of the
lack of constipation in the bowel. Bernard Jensen, Tissue
Cleansing Through Bowel Management.
I am not a true believer in any single healing method
or system. I find much truth in many schools and use a wide variety of techniques.
The word for my inclination is eclectic.
The most effective medicine in my arsenal is water fasting
followed closely in potency by other, less rigorous detoxifying diets. Colon
cleansing ranks next in healing power. In fact it is difficult to separate colon
cleansing from fasting because detoxification programs should always be accompanied
by colon cleansing. Further down the scale of efficatiousness comes dietary reform
to eliminate allergic reactions and to present the body with foods it is capable
of digesting without creating toxemia. Last, and usually least in effectiveness
in my arsenal, are orthotropic substances (in the form of little pills and capsules)
commonly known as vitamins or food supplements.
Interestingly, acceptance of these methods by my clients
runs in exact opposition to their effectiveness. People prefer taking vitamins
because they seem like the allopaths' pills, taking pills demands little or no
responsibility for change. The least popular prescription I can write is a monodiet
of water for several weeks or a month. Yet this is my most powerful medicine.
It is possible to resolve many health complaints without
fasting, simply by cleansing the colon and regaining normal lower bowel function.
Colonics take little personal effort and are much easier to get people to accept
than fasting. So I can fully understand how perfectly honest and ethical naturopaths
have developed obsessions with colon cleansing. Some healers have loudly and
repeatedly (and wrongly) proclaimed that constipation is the sole cause of disease,
and thus, the only real cure for any illness is colon cleansing.
Even though it is possible to have a lot of successes
with the simple (though unpleasant to administer) technique of colon cleansing,
degenerated lower bowels are the only cause of disease. I prefer to use bowel
cleansing as an adjunct to more complete healing programs. However, old classics
of hygiene and even a few new books strongly make the case for colonics. Some
of these books are entirely one-sided, single-cause single-cure approaches, and
sound convincing to the layperson. For this reason, I think I should take a few
paragraphs and explain why some otherwise well-intentioned health professionals
have overly-advocated colonics (and other practices as well).
Most Diseases Cure Themselves
If you ask any honest medical doctor how they cure diseases,
they will tell you that most acute disease conditions and a smaller, though significant
percentage (probably a majority) of chronic disease conditions are self-limiting
and will, given time, get better all by themselves. So for most complaints, the
honest allopathic doctor sees their job as giving comfort and easing the severity
of the symptoms until a cure happens.
This same scenario, when viewed from a hygienist's perspective,
is that almost all acute and many chronic conditions are simply the body's attempt
to handle a crisis of toxemia. For two reasons the current crisis will probably
go away by itself. The positive reason is that the toxic overload will be resolved:
the person changes their dietary habits or the stressor that temporarily lowered
their vital force and produced enervation is removed, then digestion improves
and the level of self-generated toxins is reduced. The negative reason for a
complaint to "cure" itself is that the suffering person's vital force
drops below the level that the symptom can be manifested and the complaint goes
away because a new, more serious disease is developing.
I view this second possibility as highly undesirable
because strong, healthy bodies possessing a high degree of vital force are able
to eliminate toxins rather violently, frequently producing very uncomfortable
symptoms that are not life-threatening. However, as the vital force drops, the
body changes its routes of secondary elimination and begins using more centrally
located vital organs and systems to dispose of toxemia. This degeneration producing
less unpleasant symptoms, but in the long run, damages essential organs and moves
the person closer to their final disease.
A young vigorous body possessing a large degree of vital
force will almost always route surplus toxins through skin tissues and skin-like
mucus membranes, producing repeated bouts of sinusitis, or asthma, or colds,
or a combination of all these. Each acute manifestation will "cure" itself
by itself eventually. But eventually the body's vital force can no longer create
these aggressive cleansing phenomena and the toxemia begins to go deeper. When
the allopathic doctor gets a patient complaining of sinusitis, they know they
will eventually get a cure. The "cure" however, might well be a case
This unfortunate reality tends to make young, idealistic
physicians become rather disillusioned about treating degenerative conditions
because the end result of all their efforts is, in the end, death anyway. The
best they can do is to alleviate suffering and to a degree, prolong life. The
worst they can do is to prolong suffering.
Thus, the physicians main job is to get the patient to
be patient, to wait until the body corrects itself and stops manifesting the
undesired symptom. Thus comes the prime rule of all humane medicine: first of
all, do no harm! If the doctor simply refrains from making the body worse, it
will probably get better by itself. But the patient, rarely resigned to quiet
suffering, comes in demanding fast relief, demanding a cure. In fact, if the
patient were resigned to quiet suffering they would not consult a doctor. So
if the doctor wants to keep this patient and make a living they must do something.
If that something the doctor must do does little or no harm and better yet, can
also alleviate the symptoms, the doctor is practicing good medicine and will
have a very high cure rate and be financially successful if they have a good
bedside manner. This kind of doctor may be allopathic and/or "natural," may
use herbs or practice homeopathy.
The story of Dr. Jennings, a very successful and famous
or infamous (depending on your viewpoint) physician, who practiced in Connecticut
in the early 1800s exemplifies this type of approach.
Dr. Jennings had his own unique medicines. Their composition
was of his own devising, and were absolutely secret. He had pills and colored
bitter drops of various sorts that were compounded himself in his own pharmacy.
Dr. Jennings' patients generally recovered and had few or no complications. This
must be viewed in contrast to the practices of his fellow doctors of that era,
whose black bags were full of mercury and arsenic and strychnine, whose practices
included obligatory bleeding. These techniques and medicines "worked" by
poisoning the body or by reducing its blood supply and thus lowering its vital
force, ending the body's ability to manifest the undesirable symptom. If the
poor patient survived being victimized by their own physician, they were tough
enough to survive both their disease and the doctor's cure. Typically, the sick
had many, lengthy complications, long illnesses, and many "setbacks" requiring
many visits, earning the physician a great living.
Dr. Jennings operated differently. He would prescribe
one or two secret medicines from his black bag and instruct the patient to stay
in bed, get lots of rest, drink lots of water, eat little and lightly, and continue
taking the medicine until they were well. His cure rate was phenomenal. Demand
they might, but Dr. Jennings would never reveal what was in his pills and vials.
Finally at the end of his career, to instruct his fellow man, Dr. Jennings confessed.
His pills were made from flour dough, various bitter but harmless herbal substances,
and a little sugar. His red and green and black tinctures, prescribed five or
ten drips at a time mixed in a glass of water several times daily, were only
water and alcohol, some colorant and something bitter tasting, but harmless.
Placebos in other words.
Upon confessing, Dr. Jennings had to run for his life.
I believe he ended up retiring on the western frontier, in Indiana. Some of his
former patients were extremely angry because they had paid good money, top dollar
for "real" medicines, but were given only flour and water. The fact
that they got better didn't seem to count.
If the physicians curative procedure suppresses the
symptom and/or lowers the vital force with toxic drugs or surgery, (either result
will often as not end the complaint) the allopathic doctor is practicing bad
medicine. This doctor too will have a high cure rate and a good business (if
they have an effective bedside manner) because their drugs really do make the
current symptoms vanish very rapidly. Additionally, their practice harmonizes
with a common but vicious dramatization of many people which goes: when a body
is malfunctioning, it is a bad body and needs to be punished. So lets punish
it with poisons and if that don't work, lets really punish it by cutting out
the offending part.
However, if the physician can do something that will
do no harm but raises the vital force and/or lowers the level of toxemia, this
doctor will have a genuine cure rate higher than either of the two techniques.
Why does raising the vital force help? Because it reduces enervation, improves
the digestion, lowers the creation of new toxins and improves the function of
the organs of elimination, also reducing the toxic overload that is causing the
Techniques that temporarily and quickly raise the vital
force include homeopathy, chiropractic, vitamin therapy, massage, acupuncture
and acupressure and many more spiritually oriented practices. Healers who use
these approaches and have a good bedside manner can have a very good business,
they can have an especially-profitable practice if they do nothing to lower the
level of toxemia being currently generated. Their patients do experience prompt
relief but must repeatedly take the remedy. This makes for satisfied customers
and a repeat business.
The best approach of all focuses on reducing the self-generated
level of toxemia, cleansing to remove deposits of old toxemia, rebuilding the
organs of elimination and digestion to prevent the formation of new toxemia,
and then, to alleviate the current symptoms and make it easier for the patient
to be patient while their body heals, the healer raises artificially and temporarily
the vital force with vitamins, massage, acupressure, etc. This wise and benevolent
physician is going to have the highest cure rate among those wise patients who
will accept the prescription, but will not make as much money because the patients
permanently get better and no longer need a physician. There's not nearly as
much repeat business.
Colonics are one of the best types of medicine. They
clean up deposits of old toxemia (though there are sure to be other deposits
in the body's tissues colonics do not touch). Colon cleansing reduces the formation
of new toxemia from putrefying fecal matter (but dietary reform is necessary
to maximize this benefit). Most noticeable to the patient, a colonic immediately
alleviates current symptoms by almost instantly reducing the current toxic load.
A well-done enema or colonic is such a powerful technique that a single one will
often make a severe headache vanish, make an onsetting cold go away, end a bout
of sinusitis, end an asthmatic attack, reduce the pain of acute arthritic inflammation,
reduce or stop an allergic reaction. Enemas are also thrifty: they are self-administered
and can prevent most doctor's visits seeking relief for acute conditions.
Diseases of the colon itself, including chronic constipation,
colitis, diverteculitis, hemorrhoids, irritable bowel syndrome, and mucous colitis,
are often cured solely by an intensive series of several dozen colonics given
close together. Contrary to popular belief, many people think that if they have
dysentery or other forms of loose stools that a colonic is the last thing they
need. Surprisingly, a series of colonics will eliminate many of these conditions
as well. People with chronic diarrhea or loose stools are usually very badly
constipated. This may seem a contradiction in terms but it will be explained
A century ago there was much less scientific data about
the functioning of the human body. Then it was easy for a hygienically-oriented
physician to come to believe that colonics were the single best medicine available.
The doctor practicing nothing but colonics will have a very high rate of cure
and a lot of very satisfied clients. Most importantly, this medicine will have
done no harm.
The Repugnant Bowel
I don't know why, but people of our culture have a deep-seated
reluctance to relate to the colon or it's functions. People don't want to think
about the colon or personally get involved with it by giving themselves enemas
or colonics. They become deeply embarrassed at having someone else do it for
them. People are also shy about farts, and most Americans have a hard time not
smiling or reacting in some way when someone in their presence breaks wind, although
the polite amongst us pretend that we didn't notice. Comedians usually succeed
in getting a laugh out of an audience when they come up with a fart or make reference
to some other bowel function. People don't react the same way to urinary functions
or discharges, although these also may have an unpleasant odor and originate
from the same "private" area.
When I first mention to clients
that they need a minimum of 12 colonics or many more enemas
than 12 during a fasting or cleansing program they are inevitably
shocked. To most it seems that no one in their right mind
would recommend such a treatment, and that I must certainly
be motivated by greed or some kind of a psychological quirk.
Then I routinely show them reproductions of X-rays of the
large intestine showing obvious loss of normal structure
and function resulting from a combination of constipation,
the effects of gravity, poor abdominal muscle tone, emotional
stress, and poor diet. In the average colon more than 50%
of the hastrum (muscles that impel fecal matter through the
organ) are dysfunctional due to loss of tone caused by impaction
of fecal matter and/or constriction of the large intestine
secondary to stress (holding muscular tension in the abdominal
area) and straining during bowel movement.
A typical diseased colon
The average person also has a prolapsed
(sagging) transverse colon, and a distorted misplaced ascending
and descending colon. I took a course in colon therapy before
purchasing my first colonic machine. The chiropractor teaching
the class required all of his patients scheduled for colonics
to take a barium enema followed by an X-ray of their large
intestine prior to having colonics and then make subsequent
X-rays after each series of 12 colonics. Most of his patients
experienced so much immediate relief they voluntarily took
at least four complete series, or 48 colonics, before their
X-rays began to look normal in terms of structure. It also
took about the same number, 48 colonics, for the patients to
notice a significant improvement in the function of the colon.
In reviewing over 10,000 X-rays taken at his clinic prior to
starting colonics, the chiropractor had seen only two normal
colon X-rays and these were from farm boys who grew up eating
simple foods from the garden and doing lots of hard work.
The X-rays showed that it took a minimum of 12 colon
treatments to bring about a minimal but observable change in the structure of
the colon in the desired direction, and for the patient to begin to notice that
bowel function was improving, plus the fact that they started to feel better.
A Healthy Colon
From my point of view the most amazing part of this whole
experience was that the chiropractor did not recommend any dietary changes whatsoever.
His patients were achieving great success from colonics alone. I had thought
dietary changes would be necessary to avoid having the same dismal bowel condition
return. I still think colonics are far more effective if people are on a cleansing
diet too. However, I was delighted to see the potential for helping people through
For me, the most interesting part of this colonic school
was that I personally was required to have my own barium enema and X-ray. I was
privately certain that mine would look normal, because after all, I had been
on a raw food diet for six years, and done considerable amount of fasting, all
of which was reputed to repair a civilized colon. Much to my surprise my colon
looked just as mangled and dysfunctional as everyone else's', only somewhat worse
because it had a loop in the descending colon similar to a cursive letter "e" which
doctors call a volvulus. Surgeons like to cut volvululii out because they frequently
cause bowel obstructions. It seemed quite unfair. All those other people with
lousy looking colons had been eating the average American diet their whole life,
but I had been so ‘pure!'
On further reflection I remembered that I had a tendency
toward constipation all through my childhood and young adulthood, and that during
my two pregnancies the pressure of the fetus on an already constipated bowel
had made it worse resulting in the distorted structure seen in the X-ray. This
experience made it very clear that fasting, cleansing diets, and corrected diet
would not reverse damage already done. Proper diet and fasting would however,
prevent the condition of the colon from getting any worse than it already was.
I then realized that I had just purchased the very tool
I needed to correct my own colon, and I was eager to get home to get started
on it. I had previously thought that I was just going to use this machine for
my patients, because they had been asking for this kind of an adjunct to my services
for some time. I ended up giving myself over a hundred colonics at the rate of
three a week over many months. I then out of curiosity had another barium enema
and X-ray to validate my results. Sure enough the picture showed a colon that
looked far more ‘normal' with no vulvulus. That little "e" had disappeared.
What Is Constipation?
Most people think they are not constipated because they
have a bowel movement almost every day, accomplished without straining. I have
even had clients tell me that they have a bowel movement once a week, and they
are quite certain that they are not constipated. The most surprising thing to
novice fasters is that repeated enemas or colonics during fasting begins to release
many pounds of undeniably real, old, caked fecal matter and/or huge mucus strings.
The first-time faster can hardly believe these were present. These old fecal
deposits do not come out the first time one has enemas or necessarily the fifth
time. And all of them will not be removed by the tenth enema. But over the course
of extended fasting or a long spell of light raw food eating with repeated daily
enemas, amazing changes do begin to occur. It seems that no one who has eaten
a civilized diet has escaped the formation of caked deposits lining the colon's
walls, interfering with its function. This material does not respond to laxatives
or casually administered enemas.
Anyone who has not actually seen (and smelled) what comes
out of an "average" apparently healthy person during colonics will
really believe it could happen or can accurately imagine it. Often there are
dark black lumpy strings, lumps, or gravel, evil smelling discs shaped like sculpted
hemispheres similar to the pockets lining the wall of the colon itself. These
discs are rock-hard and may come out looking like long black braids. There may
also be long tangled strings of gray/brown mucous, sheets and flakes of mucous,
and worse yet, an occasional worm (tape worm) or many smaller ones. Once confronted
however, it is not hard to imagine how these fecal rocks and other obnoxious
debris interfere with the proper function of the colon. They make the colon's
wall rigid and interfere with peristalsis thus leading to further problems with
constipation, and interfere with adsorption of nutrients.
Our modern diet is by its "de-"nature, very
constipating. In the trenches of the First World War, cheese was given the name ‘chokem
ass' because the soldiers eating this as a part of their daily ration developed
severe constipation. Eaten by itself or with other whole foods, moderate amounts
of cheese may not produce health problems in people who are capable of digesting
dairy products. But cheese when combined with white flour becomes especially
constipating. White bread or most white-flour crackers contain a lot of gluten,
a very sticky wheat protein that makes the bread bind together and raise well.
But white flour is lacking the bran, where most of the fiber is located. And
many other processed foods are missing their fiber.
In an earlier chapter I briefly showed how digestion
works by following food from the mouth to the large intestine. To fully grasp
why becoming constipated is almost a certainty in our civilization a few more
details are required. Food leaving the small intestine is called chyme, a semi-liquid
mixture of fiber, undigested bits, indigestible bits, and the remains of digestive
enzymes. Chyme is propelled through the large intestine by muscular contractions.
The large intestine operates on what I dub the "chew chew train" principle,
where the most recent meal you ate enters the large intestine as the caboose
(the last car of a train) and helps to push out the train engine (the car at
the front that toots), which in a healthy colon should represent the meal eaten
perhaps twelve hours earlier. The muscles in the colon only contract when they
are stretched, so it is the volume of the fecal matter stretching the large intestine
that triggers the muscles to push the waste material along toward the rectum
Eating food lacking fiber greatly reduces the volume
of the chyme and slows peristalsis. But moving through fast or slow, the colon
still keeps on doing another of its jobs, which is to transfer the water in the
chime back into the bloodstream, reducing dehydration. So the longer chime remains
in the colon, the dryer and harder and stickier it gets. That's why once arrived
at the "end of the tracks" fecal matter should be evacuated in a timely
manner before it gets to dry and too hard to be moved easily. Some constipated
people do have a bowel movement every day but are evacuating the meal eaten many
days or even a week previously.
Most hygienists believe that when the colon becomes lined
with hardened fecal matter it is permanently and by the very definition of the
word itself, constipated. This type of constipation is not perceived as an uncomfortable
or overly full feeling or a desire to have a bowel movement that won't pass.
But it has insidious effects. Usually constipation delays transit time, increasing
the adsorption of toxins generated from misdigestion of food; by coating and
locking up significant portions of colon it also reduces the adsorption of certain
minerals and electrolytes.
Sometimes, extremely constipated people have almost constant
runny bowels because the colon has become so thickly and impenetrably lined with
old fecal matter that it no longer removes much moisture. This condition is often
misinterpreted as diarrhea. The large intestine's most important task is to transfer
water-soluble minerals from digested food to the blood. When a significant part
of the colon's surface becomes coated with impermeable dried rigid fecal matter
or mucus it can no longer assimilate effectively and the body begins to experience
partial mineral starvation in the presence of plenty. It is my observation from
dozens of cases that when the colon has been effectively cleansed the person
has a tendency to gain weight while eating amounts of food that before only maintained
body weight, while people who could not gain weight or who were wasting away
despite eating heavily begin to gain. And problems like soft fingernails, bone
loss around teeth or porous bones tend to improve.
The Development Of My Own Constipation
The history of my own constipation, though it especially
relates to a very rustic childhood, is typical of many people. I was also raised
on a very constipating diet which consisted largely of processed cheese and crackers.
Mine was accelerated by shyness, amplified by lack of comfortable facilities.
I spent my early years on the Canadian prairies, where
everybody had an outhouse. The fancy modern versions are frequently seen on construction
sites. These are chemical toilets, quiet different than the ones I was raised
with because somebody or something mysteriously comes along, empties them and
installs toilet paper. The ones I'm familiar with quickly developed a bad-smelling
steaming mound in the center--or it was winter when the outhouse was so cold
that everything froze almost before it hit the ground in the hole below. (And
my rear end seemed to almost freeze to the seat!) The toilet paper was usually
an out of season issue of Eatons mail order catalogue with crisp glossy paper.
Perhaps it is a peculiarity of the north country, but at night there are always
monsters lurking along the path to the outhouse, and darkness comes early and
When nature called and it was daylight, and there was
no blizzard outside, the outhouse received a visit from me. If on the other hand,
when it was dark (we had no electricity), and there was a cold wind creating
huge banks of snow, I would ‘just skip it,' because the alternative--an indoor
chamber pot, white enamel with a lid--was worse. This potty had to be used more
or less publicly because the bedrooms were shared and there was no indoor bathroom.
I was always very modest about my private parts and private functions, and potty's
were only used in emergencies, and usually with considerable embarrassment. No
one ever explained to me that it was not good for me to retain fecal matter,
and I never thought about it unless my movements became so hard that it was painful
Later in life, I continued this pattern of putting off
bowel movements, even though outhouses and potties were a thing of the past.
As a young adult I could always think of something more interesting to do than
sitting on a pot, besides it was messy and sometimes accompanied by embarrassing
sound effects which were definitely not romantic if I was in the company of a
young man. During two pregnancies the tendency to constipation was aggravated
by the weight of the fetus resting on an already sluggish bowel, and the discomfort
of straining to pass my first hard bowel movement after childbirth with a torn
perineum I won't forget.
Rapid Relief From Colon Cleansing
During fasting the liver is hard at work processing toxins
released from fat and other body deposits. The liver still dumps its wastes into
the intestines through the bile duct. While eating normally, bile, which contains
highly toxic substances, is passed through the intestines and is eliminated before
too much is reabsorbed. (It is the bile that usually makes the fecal matter so
dark in color.) However, reduction of food bulk reduces or completely eliminates
peristalsis, thus allowing intestinal contents to sit for extended periods. And
the toxins in the bile are readsorbed, forming a continuous loop, further burdening
The mucus membranes lining the colon constantly secrete
lubricants to ease fecal matter through smoothly. This secretion does not stop
during fasting; in fact, it may increase because intestinal mucus often becomes
a secondary route of elimination. Allowed to remain in the bowel, toxic mucus
is an irritant while the toxins in it may be reabsorbed, forming yet another
closed loop and further burdening the liver.
Daily enemas or colonics administered during fasting
or while on cleansing diets effectively remove old fecal material stored in the
colon and immediately ease the livers load, immediately relieve discomfort by
allowing the liver's efforts to further detoxify the blood, and speed healing.
Fasters cleansing on juice or raw food should administer two or three enemas
in short succession every day for the first three days to get a good start on
the cleansing process, and then every other day or at very minimum, every few
days. Enemas or colonics should also be taken whenever symptoms become uncomfortable,
regardless of whether you have already cleaned the colon that day or not. Once
the faster has experienced the relief from symptoms that usually comes from an
enema they become more than willing to repeat this mildly unpleasant experience.
Occasionally enemas, by filling the colon and making
it press on the liver, induce discharges of highly toxic bile that may cause
temporary nausea. Despite the induced nausea it is still far better to continue
with colonics because of the great relief experienced after the treatment. If
nausea exists or persists during colon cleansing, consider trying slight modifications
such as less or no massage of the colon in the area of the gall bladder (abdominal
area close to the bottom of the right rib cage), and putting slightly less water
in the colon when filling it up. It also helps to make sure that the stomach
is empty of any fluid for one hour prior to the colonic. Resume drinking after
the colonic sessions is completed. If you are one of these rare people who ‘toss
their bile', just keep a plastic bucket handy and some water to rinse out the
mouth after, and carry on as usual.
Enemas Versus Colonics
People frequently wonder what is the difference between
a colonic and an enema.
First of all enemas are a lot cheaper because you give
them to yourself; an enema bag usually costs about ten dollars, is available
at any large drug store, and is indefinitely reusable. Colonics cost anywhere
from 30 to 75 dollars a session.
Chiropractors and naturopaths who offer this service
hire a colonic technician that may or may not be a skilled operator. It is a
good idea to find a person who has a very agreeable and professional manner,
who can make you feel at ease since relaxation is very important. It is also
beneficial to have a colonic therapist who massages the abdomen and foot reflexes
appropriately during the session.
Enemas and colonics can accomplish exactly the same beneficial
work. But colonics accomplish more improvement in less time than enemas for several
reasons. During a colonic from 30 to 50 gallons of water are flushed through
the large intestines, usually in a repetitive series of fill-ups followed by
flushing with a continuous flow of water. This efficiency cannot even be approached
with an enema. But by repeating the enema three times in close succession a satisfactory
cleanse can be achieved. Persisted with long enough, enemas will clean the colon
every bit as well as a colonic machine can.
Enemas given at home take a lot less time than traveling
to receive a colonics at someone's clinic, and can be done entirely at you own
convenience--a great advantage when fasting because you can save your energy
for internal healing. But colonics are more appropriate for some. There are fasters
who are unable to give themselves an enema either because their arms are too
short and their body is too long and they lack flexibility, or because of a physical
handicap or they can't confront their colon, so they let someone else do it.
Some don't have the motivation to give themselves a little discomfort but are
comfortable with someone else doing it to them. Some very sick people are too
weak to cleanse their own colon, so they should find someone to assist them with
an at-home enema or have someone take them to a colonic therapist.
Few people these days have any idea how to properly give
themselves an enema. The practice has been discredited by traditional medical
doctors as slightly dangerous, perhaps addictive and a sign of psychological
weirdness. Yet Northamericans on their civilized, low fiber, poorly combined
diets suffer widely from constipation. One proof of this is the fact that chemical
laxatives, with their own set of dangers and liabilities, occupy many feet of
drug store shelf space and are widely advertised. Is the medical profession's
disapproval of the enema related to the fact that once the initial purchase of
an enema bag has been made there are no further expenses for laxatives? Or perhaps
it might be that once a person discovers they can cure a headache, stop a cold
dead in its tracks with an enema, they aren't visiting the M.D.s so often.
The enema has also been wrongly accused of causing a
gradual loss of colon muscle tone, eventually preventing bowel movements without
the stimulation of an enema, leading finally to flaccidity and enlargement of
the lower bowel. This actually can happen; when it does occur it is the result
of frequent administration of small amounts of water (fleet enemas) for the purpose
of stimulating a normal bowel movement. The result is constant stretching of
the rectum without sufficient fluid to enter the descending colon. A completely
opposite, highly positive effect comes from properly administered enemas while
The difference between helpful and potentially harmful
enemas lies in the amount of water injected and the frequency of use. Using a
cup or two of water to induce a bowel movement may eventually cause dependency,
will not strengthen the colon and may after years of this practice, result in
distention and enlargement of the rectum or sigmoid colon. However, a completely
empty average-sized colon has the capacity of about a gallon of water. When increasingly
larger enemas are administered until the colon is nearly emptied of fecal matter
and the injection of close to a gallon of water is achieved, beneficial exercise
and an increase in overall muscle tone are the results.
Correctly given, enemas (and especially colonics) serve
as strengthening exercises for the colon. This long tubular muscle is repeatedly
and completely filled with water, inducing it to vigorously exercise while evacuating
itself multiple times. The result is a great increase in muscle tone, acceleration
of peristalsis and eventually, after several dozens of repetitions, a considerable
reduction of transit time. Well-done enemas work the colon somewhat less effectively
and do not improve muscle tone quite as much as colonics.
Injecting an entire gallon of water with an enema bag
is very impractical when a person is eating normally. But on a light cleansing
diet or while fasting the amount of new material passing into the colon is small
or negligible. During the first few days of fasting if two or three enemas are
administered each day in immediate succession the colon is soon completely emptied
of recently eaten food and it becomes progressively easier to introduce larger
amounts of water. Within a few days of this regimen, injecting half a gallon
or more of water is easy and painless.
Probably for psychological reasons, some peoples' colons
allow water to be injected one time but then "freeze up" and resist
successive enemas. For this reason better results are often obtained by having
one enema, waiting a half hour, another enema, wait a half hour, and have a final
A colonic machine in the hands of an expert operator
can administer the equivalent of six or seven big enemas in less than one hour,
and do this without undue discomfort or effort from the person receiving the
colonic. However, the AMA has suppressed the use of colonics; they are illegal
to administer in many states. Where colonics are legal, the chiropractors now
consider this practice messy and not very profitable compared to manipulations.
So it is not easy to find a skilled and willing colonic technician.
Anyone who plans to give themselves therapeutic enemas
while fasting would be well advised to first seek out a colonic therapist and
receive two or three colonics delivered one day apart while eating lightly and
then immediately begin the fast. Three colonics given on three successive days
of a light, raw food diet are sufficient to empty all recently eaten food even
from a very constipated, distended and bloated colon, while acquainting a person
with their own bowel. Having an empty colon is actually a pleasant and to most
people a thoroughly novel experience. A few well-delivered colonics can quickly
accustom a person to the sensations accompanying the enema and demonstrate the
effect to be achieved by oneself with an enema bag, something not quickly discoverable
any other way.
How To Give Yourself An Enema
Enemas have been medically out of favor for a long time.
Most people have never had one. So here are simple directions to self-administer
an effective enema series.
The enema bag you select is important. It must hold at
least two quarts and be rapidly refillable. The best American-made brand is made
of rubber with about five feet of rubber hose ending in one of two different
white hard plastic insertion tips. The bag is designed for either enemas or vaginal
douches. It hangs from a detachable plastic "S" hook. When filled to
the brim it holds exactly one-half gallon. The maker of this bag offers another
model that costs about a dollar more and also functions as a hot water bottle.
A good comforter it may make, but the dual purpose construction makes the bag
very awkward to rapidly refill. I recommend the inexpensive model.
The plastic insertion tips vary somewhat. The straight
tubular tip is intended for enemas; the flared vaginal douche tip can be useful
for enemas too, in that it somewhat restrains unintentional expulsion of the
nozzle while filling the colon. However, its four small holes do not allow a
very rapid rate of flow.
To give yourself an enema, completely fill the bag with
tepid water that does not exceed body temperature. The rectum is surprisingly
sensitive to heat and you will flinch at temperatures only a degree or two higher
than 98 Fahrenheit. Cooler water is no problem; some find the cold stimulating
and invigorating. Fasters having difficulty staying warm should be wary of cold
water enemas. These can drop core body temperature below the point of comfort.
Make sure the flow clamp on the tube is tightly shut
and located a few inches up the tube from the nozzle. Hang the filled bag from
a clothes or towel hook, shower nozzle, curtain rod, or other convenient spot
about four to five feet above the bathroom floor or tub bottom. The higher the
bag the greater the water pressure and speed of filling. But too much pressure
can also be uncomfortable. You may have to experiment a bit with this.
Various body positions are possible for filling the colon.
None is correct or necessarily more effective than another. Experiment and find
the one you prefer. Some fill their colon kneeling and bending forward in the
bathtub or shower because there will likely be small dribbles of water leaking
from around the nozzle. Usually these leaks do not contain fecal matter. Others
prefer to use the bathroom floor. For the bony, a little padding in the form
of a folded towel under knees and elbows may make the process more comfortable.
You may kneel and bend over while placing your elbows or hands on the floor,
reach behind yourself and insert the nozzle. You may also lie on your back or
on your side. Some think the left side is preferable because the colon attaches
to the rectum on the left side of the body, ascends up the left side of the abdomen
to a line almost as high as the solar plexus, then transverses the body to the
right side where it descends again on the right almost to the groin. The small
intestine attaches to the colon near its lower-right extremity. In fact these
are the correct names given for the parts of the colon: Ascending, Descending
and Transverse Colon along with the Sigmoid Colon or Rectum at the exit end.
As you become more expert at filling your colon with
water you will begin to become aware of its location by the weight, pressure
and sometimes temperature of the water you're injecting. You will come to know
how much of the colon has been filled by feel. You will also become aware of
peristalsis as the water is evacuated vigorously and discover that sensations
from a colon hard at work, though a bit uncomfortable, are not necessarily pain.
Insertion of the nozzle is sometimes eased with a little
lubricant. A bit of soap or KY jelly is commonly used. If the nozzle can be inserted
without lubricant it will have less tendency to slip out. However, do not tear
or damage the anus by avoiding necessary lubrication. After insertion, grip the
clamp with one hand and open it. The flow rate can be controlled with this clamp.
Keeping a hand on the clamp also prevents the nozzle from being expelled.
Water will begin flowing into the colon. Your goal is
to empty the entire bag into the colon before sensations of pressure or urgency
to evacuate the water force you to remove the nozzle and head for the toilet.
Relaxation of mind and body helps achieve this. You are very unlikely to achieve
a half-gallon fill up on the first attempt. If painful pressure is experienced
try closing the clamp for a moment to allow the water to begin working its way
around the obstacle. Or, next time try hanging the bag lower, reducing its height
above the body and thus lowering the water pressure. Or, try opening the clamp
only partially. Or, try panting hard, so as to make the abdomen move rapidly
in and out, sort of shaking the colon. This last technique is particularly good
to get the water past a blockage of intestinal gas.
It is especially important for Americans, whose culture
does not teach one to be tolerant of discomfort, to keep in mind that pain is
the body's warning that actual damage is being done to tissues. Enemas can do
no damage and pose no risk except to that rare individual with weak spots in
the colon's wall from cancers. When an enema is momentarily perceived unpleasantly,
the correct name for the experience is a sensation, not pain. You may have to
work at increasing your tolerance for unpleasant sensations or it will take you
a long time to achieve the goal of totally filling the colon with water. Be brave!
And relax. A wise philosopher once said that it is a rough Universe in which
only the tigers survive--and sometimes they have a hard time.
Eventually it will be time to remove the nozzle and evacuate
the water. Either a blockage (usually fecal matter, an air bubble, or a tight ‘U'
turn in the colon, usually at either the splenetic, or hepatic flexures located
right below the rib cage) will prevent further inflow (undesirable) or else the
bag will completely empty (good!) or the sensation of bursting will no longer
be tolerable. Go sit on the toilet and wait until all the water has passed. Then
refill the bag and repeat the process. Each time you fill the colon it will allow
more water to enter more easily with less unpleasantness. Fasters and cleansers
should make at least three attempts at a complete fill-up each time they do an
Water and juice fasters will find that after the first
few enemas, it will become very easy to inject the entire half-gallon of water.
That is because there is little or no chime entering the colon. After a few days
the entire colon will seem (this is incorrect) to be empty except when it is
filled with water. This is the point to learn an advanced self-administered enema
technique. An average colon empty of new food will usually hold about one gallon
of water. That is average. A small colon might only hold 3/4 gallon, a large
one might accept a gallon and a half, or even more. You'll need to learn to simultaneously
refill the bag while injecting water, so as to achieve a complete irrigation
of the whole colon. There are several possible methods. You might try placing
a pitcher or half-gallon mason jar of tepid water next to the bag and after the
bag has emptied the first time, stand up while holding the tube in the anus,
refill the bag and then lie down again and continue filling. You might have an
assistant do this for you. You might try hanging the bag from the shower head
and direct a slow, continuous dribble of lukewarm water from the shower into
the bag while you kneel or lie relaxed in the tub. This way the bag will never
empty and you stop filling only when you feel fullness and pressure all the way
back to the beginning of the ascending colon. Of course, hanging from a slowly
running shower head the bag will probably overflow and you will get splashed
and so will the bathroom floor when your wet body moves rapidly from the tub
to the toilet. I've imagined making an enema bag from a two gallon plastic bucket
with a small plastic hose barb glued into a hole drilled in the bottom or lower
edge. If I were in the business of manufacturing enema bags I'd make them hold
at least one gallon.
A word of caution to those folks who have a pattern of
overdoing it, or tend to think that more is better. This is not true when it
comes to colon cleansing. Do not make more than three attempts to fill and clean
the colon with an enema bag. Usually the colon begins to protest and won't accept
any more fill-ups. When having colonics on a colonic machine it is a good idea
to continue until the water comes back reasonably clear for that session. It
is not a good idea for a faster to have colonics that last more than three-quarters
of an hour to an hour maximum, or it will be too tiring. Even non-fasters find
colonics tiring. After all, the colon is basically a big muscle that has become
very lazy on a low-fiber diet.
I've personally administered over five thousand colonics,
taught several dozen fasters to self-administer their own and stood by while
they gave themselves one until they were quite expert. In all that experience
I've only seen one person have a seriously bad result. This was a suicidally
depressed water faster that I (mistakenly) allowed to administer their own colonics
with my machine. This person not only took daily colonics, but allowed water
to flow through their colon for as long as two hours at a time. Perhaps they
were trying to wash out their mind? After several weeks of this extreme excess,
the faster became highly confused and disoriented due to a severe electrolyte
imbalance. They had to be taken off water fasting immediately and recovered their
mental clarity in a few days. The loss of blood electrolytes happened because
during colonics there occurs a sort of low-grade very slow reverse osmosis.
Curing With Enemas
It is not wise to continue regular colonics or enemas
once a detoxification program has been completed and you have returned to a maintenance
diet. The body should be allowed its regular functioning.
But because enemas immediately lower the toxic load on
the liver, I do recommend people use them for prevention of an acute illness
(you feel like you are coming down with something), and for the treatment of
acute illnesses such as a cold. I also like to take one if I have been away traveling
for extended periods, eating carelessly. But do not fall into a pattern of bingeing
on bad food, and then trying to get rid of it through colonics or laxative. This
is bulimia, the eating disorder discussed earlier.
The Sheltonite capital "N" Natural capital "H" Hygienists
do not recommend any colon cleansing, ever!. They think that the colon will spontaneously
cleanse itself on a long water fast, but my experience learned from monitoring
hundreds of fasters is that it doesn't really. Herbert Shelton also considered
colon cleansing enervating and therefore undesirable. Colon cleansing does use
the faster's energy but on the balance, colon cleansing saves more work on the
part of an overburdened liver than it uses up.
How and When to Be Your Own Doctor
by Dr. Isabelle A. Moser with Steve Solomon
Diet and Nutrition
From The Hygienic Dictionary
Food.  Life is a tragedy of nutrition.
In food lies 99.99% of the causes of all diseases and imperfect health of any
kind. Prof. Arnold Ehret, Mucusless Diet Healing System.  But elimination
will never heal perfectly just so long as you fail to discontinue the supply
of inside waste caused by eating and "wrong" eating. You may clean
and continue to clean indefinitely, but never with complete results up to a
perfect cleanliness, as long as the intake of wrong or even too much right
foods, is not stopped. Prof. Arnold Ehret, Mucusless Diet Healing System. 
Cooked food favors bacterial, or organized, ferment preponderance, because
cooking kills the unorganized and organized ferments, and both are needed to
carry on the body's digestion. Raw foods–fruits and vegetables–favor unorganized
ferment digestion, because these foods carry vitamins, which are unorganized
ferments–enzymes. Dr. John.H. Tllden, Impaired Health: Its Cause and Cure,
Recently, my younger (adult) daughter asked my advice
choosing between a root canal or having a bridge made. This led to a discussion
of her eating habits in general. Defending her currently less-than-optimum diet
against my gentle criticism, she threw me a tough riposte. "Why," she
asked, when I was raised so perfectly as a child, "when I ate only Organic
food until I was ten and old enough to make you send me to public school where
I could eat those lousy school lunches" (her unfeeling, heartless mother
home-schooled her), "why even at that young age, (before she spent her adolescent
rebellion eating junk food) why at that point did I still have a mouthful of
cavities?" And she did. At age ten my daughter needed about ten fillings.
This beautiful daughter of a practicing naturopath had
received what, at the time, I considered virtually perfect nutrition. She suckled
hugely at her mother's abundant breast until age two. During this time her mother
ate a natural foods diet. After weaning my daughter got only whole grains, a
little fresh goat's milk from my goat, fruits and lots of Organic vegetables.
I started my spa when my daughter was about five years old and from that point
she was, like it or not, a raw fooder. And all that raw food was Organic and
much of it from Great Oaks School's huge vegetable garden.
For my daughter to develop cavities on this diet is reminiscent
of Woody Allen's joke in his movie "Sleeper." Do you recall this one,
made about 1973? The plot is a take off on Rip Van Winkle. Woody goes into the
hospital for minor surgery. Unexpectedly he expires on the operating table and
his body is frozen in hopes that someday he can be revived. One hundred and fifty
years later he is revived.
The priceless scene I always think of takes place in
his hospital room immediately after he comes to consciousness. The doctor in
charge of his case is explaining to Woody what has happened. Woody refuses to
believe he died and was frozen, asserting that the whole story is a put on. Woody
insists that the 'doctor' is clearly an actor hired by his friends! It absolutely
can't be the year 2123. 'Oh, but it really is 2123,' insists the doctor. 'And
it is no put on by his friends; all his friends are long dead; Woody knows no
one at all in 2123 and had better prepare himself to start a new life.'
Woody still insists it is a put on. "I had a healthfood
store," he says, "and all my friends ate brown rice. They can't be
And my perfectly nourished daughter couldn't have developed
cavities! But she did. And if she cheated on her perfect diet, bad food could
not have amounted to more than two percent of her total caloric intake from birth
to age ten. I was a responsible mom and I made sure she ate right! Now my daughter
was demanding to know why she had tooth decay. Fortunately, I now know the answer.
The answer is rather complex, but I can give a simplified explanation.
The Confusions About Diets and Foods
Like my daughter, many people of all ages are muddled
about the relationship between health and diet. Their confusions have created
a profitable market for health-related information. And equally, their confusions
have been created by books, magazine articles, and TV news features. This avalanche
of data is highly contradictory. In fact, one reason I found it hard to make
myself write my own book is that I wondered if my book too would become just
another part of the confusion.
Few people are willing to tolerate very much uncertainty.
Rather than live with the discomfort of not knowing why, they will create an
explanation or find some answer, any answer, and then ever after, assert its
rightness like a shipwrecked person clings to a floating spar in a storm. This
is how I explain the genesis of many contemporary food religions.
Appropriately new agey and spiritual, Macrobiotics teaches
the way to perfect health is to eat like a Japanese whole foods vegetarian–the
endless staple being brown rice, some cooked vegetables and seaweeds, meanwhile
balancing the "yin" and "yang" of the foods. And Macrobiotics
works great for a lot of people. But not all people. Because there's next to
nothing raw in the Macrobiotic diet and some people are allergic to rice, or
can get allergic to rice on that diet.
Linda Clark's Diet for a Small Planet also has hundreds
of thousands of dedicated followers. This system balances the proportions of
essential amino acids at every, single meal and is vegetarian. This diet also
works and really helps some people, but not as well as Macrobiotics in my opinion
because obsessed with protein, Clark's diet contains too many hard-to-digest
soy products and makes poor food combinations from the point of digestive capacity.
Then there are the raw fooders. Most of them are raw,
Organic fooders who go so far as to eat only unfired, unground cereals that have
been soaked in warm water (at less than 115 degrees or you'll kill the enzymes)
for many hours to soften the seeds up and start them sprouting. This diet works
and really helps a lot of people. Raw organic foodism is especially good for "holy
joes," a sort of better-than-everyone-else person who enjoys great self-righteousness
by owning this system. But raw fooding does not help all people nor solve all
diseases because raw food irritates the digestive tracts of some people and in
northern climates it is hard to maintain body heat on this diet because it is
difficult to consume enough concentrated vegetable food in a raw state. And some
raw fooders eat far too much fruit. I've seen them lose their teeth because of
fruit's low mineral content, high sugar level and constant fruit acids in their
Then there are vegetarians of various varieties including
vegans (vegetarians that will not eat dairy products and eggs), and then, there
are their exact opposites, Atkins dieters focusing on protein and eating lots
of meat. There's the Adelle Davis school, people eating whole grains, handfuls
of vitamins, lots of dairy and brewers yeast and wheat germ, and even raw liver.
Then there's the Organic school. These folks will eat anything in any combination,
just so long as it is organically produced, including organically raised beef,
chicken, lamb, eggs, rabbit, wild meats, milk and diary products, natural sea
salt in large quantities and of course, organically grown fruits, vegetables
grains and nuts. And what is "Organic?" The word means food raised
in compliance with a set of rules contrived by a certification bureaucracy. When
carefully analyzed, the somewhat illogical rules are not all that different in
spirit than the rules of kashsruth or kosher. And the Organic certification bureaucrats
aren't all that different than the rabbis who certify food as being kosher, either.
There are now millions of frightened Americans who, following
the advice of mainstream Authority, have eliminated red meat from their diets
and greatly reduced what they (mistakenly) understand as high-cholesterol foods.
All these diets work too–or some–and all demonstrate
some of the truth.
The only area concerning health that contains more confusion
and contradictory data than diet is vitamins. What a rats nest that is!
The Fundamental Principle
If you are a true believer in any of the above food religions,
I expect that you will find my views unsettling. But what I consider "good
diet" results from my clinical work with thousands of cases. It is what
has worked with those cases. My eclectic views incorporate bits and pieces of
all the above. In my own case, I started out by following the Organic school,
and I was once a raw food vegetarian who ate nothing but raw food for six years.
I also ate Macrobiotic for about one year until I became violently allergic to
I have arrived at a point where I understand that each
person's biochemistry is unique and each must work out their own diet to suit
their life goals, life style, genetic predisposition and current state of health.
There is no single, one, all-encompassing, correct diet. But, there is a single,
basic, underlying Principle of Nutrition that is universally true. In its most
simplified form, the basic equation of human health goes: Health = Nutrition
/ Calories. The equation falls far short of explaining the origin of each individuals
diseases or how to cure diseases but Health = Nutrition / Calories does show
the general path toward healthful eating and proper medicine.
All animals have the exact same dietary problem: finding
enough nutrition to build and maintain their bodies within the limits of their
digestive capacity. Rarely in nature (except for predatory carnivores) is there
any significant restriction on the number of calories or serious limitation of
the amount of low-nutrition foods available to eat. There's rarely any shortage
of natural junk food on Earth. Except for domesticated house pets, animals are
sensible enough to prefer the most nutritional fare available and tend to shun
empty calories unless they are starving.
But humans are perverse, not sensible. Deciding on the
basis of artificially-created flavors, preferring incipid textures, we seem to
prefer junk food and become slaves to our food addictions. For example, in tropical
countries there is a widely grown root crop, called in various places: tapioca,
tavioca, manioc, or yuca. This interesting plant produces the greatest tonnage
of edible, digestible, pleasant-tasting calories per acre compared to any other
food crop I know. Manioc might seem the answer to human starvation because it
will grow abundantly on tropical soils so infertile and/or so droughty that no
other food crop will succeed there. Manioc will do this because it needs virtually
nothing from the soil to construct itself with. And consequently, manioc puts
next to nothing nourishing into its edible parts. The bland-tasting root is virtually
pure starch, a simple carbohydrate not much different than pure corn starch.
Plants construct starches from carbon dioxide gas obtained the air and hydrogen
obtained from water. There is no shortage ever of carbon from CO2 in the air
and rarely a shortage of hydrogen from water. When the highly digestible starch
in manioc is chewed, digestive enzymes readily convert it into sugar. Nutritionally
there is virtually no difference between eating manioc and eating white sugar.
Both are entirely empty calories.
If you made a scale from ideal to worst regarding the
ratio of nutrition to calories, white sugar, manioc and most fats are at the
extreme undesirable end. Frankly I don't know which single food might lie at
the extreme positive end of the scale. Close to perfect might be certain leafy
green vegetables that can be eaten raw. When they are grown on extremely fertile
soil, some greens develop 20 or more percent completely digestible balanced protein
with ideal ratios of all the essential amino acids, lots of vitamins, tons of
minerals, all sorts of enzymes and other nutritional elements–and very few calories.
You could continually fill your stomach to bursting with raw leafy greens and
still have a hard time sustaining your body weight if that was all you ate. Maybe
Popeye the Sailorman was right about eating spinach.
For the moment, lets ignore individual genetic inabilities
to digest specific foods and also ignore the effects stress and enervation can
have on our ability to extract nutrition out of the food we are eating. Without
those factors to consider, it is correct to say that, to the extent one's diet
contains the maximum potential amount of nutrition relative to the number of
calories you are eating, to that extent a person will be healthy. To the extent
the diet is degraded from that ideal, to that extent, disease will develop. Think
Lessons From Nutritional Anthropology
The next logical pair of questions are: how healthy could
good nutrition make people be, and, how much deviation from ideal nutrition could
we allow ourselves before serious disease appears? Luckily, earlier in this century
we could observe living answers to those questions (before the evidence disappeared).
The answers are: we could be amazingly healthy, and, if we wish to enjoy excellent
health we can afford to cut ourselves surprisingly little slack.
Prior to the Second World War there were several dozen
sizable groups of extraordinarily healthy humans remaining on Earth. Today, their
descendants are still in the same remote places, are speaking the same languages
and possess more or less the same cultures. Only today they're watching satellite
TV. wearing jeans, drinking colas–and their superior health has evaporated.
During the early part of this century, at the same era
vitamins and other basic aspects of nutrition were being discovered, a few farsighted
medical explorers sought out these hard-to-reach places with their legendarily
healthy peoples to see what caused the legendary well-being they'd heard of.
Enough evidence was collected and analyzed to derive some very valid principles.
First lets dismiss some apparently logical but incorrect
explanations for the unusually good health of these isolated peoples. It wasn't
racial, genetic superiority. There were extraordinarily healthy blacks, browns,
Orientals, Amerinds, Caucasians. It wasn't living at high altitude; some lived
at sea level. It wasn't temperate climates, some lived in the tropics, some in
the tropics at sea level, a type of location generally thought to be quite unhealthful.
It wasn't a small collection of genetically superior individuals, because when
these peoples left their isolated locale and moved to the city, they rapidly
began to lose their health. And it wasn't genetics because when a young couple
from the isolated healthy village moved to town, their children born in town
were as unhealthy as all the other kids.
And what do I mean by genuinely healthy? Well, imagine
a remote village or a mountain valley or a far island settlement very difficult
to get to, where there lived a thousand or perhaps ten thousand people. Rarely
fewer, rarely more. Among that small population there were no medical doctors
and no dentists, no drugs, no vaccinations, no antibiotics. Usually the isolation
carried with it illiteracy and precluded contact with or awareness of modern
science, so there was little or no notion of public hygiene. And this was before
the era of antibiotics. Yet these unprotected, undoctored, unvaccinated peoples
did not suffer and die from bacterial infections; and the women did not have
to give birth to 13 children to get 2.4 to survive to breeding age–almost all
the children made it through the gauntlet of childhood diseases. There was also
virtually no degenerative disease like heart attacks, hardening of the arteries,
senility, cancer, arthritis. There were few if any birth defects. In fact, there
probably weren't any aspirin in the entire place. Oh, and there was very little
mortality during childbirth, as little or less than we have today with all our
hospitals. And the people uniformly had virtually perfect teeth and kept them
all till death, but did not have toothbrushes nor any notion of dental hygiene.
Nor did they have dentists or physicians. (Price, 1970)
And in those fortunate places the most common causes
of death were accident (trauma) and old age. The typical life span was long into
the 70s and in some places quite a bit longer. One fabled place, Hunza, was renowned
for having an extraordinarily high percentage of vigorous and active people over
100 years old.
I hope I've made you curious. "How could this be?" you're
asking. Well, here's why. First, everyone of those groups lived in places so
entirely remote, so inaccessible that they were of necessity, virtually self-sufficient.
They hardly traded at all with the outside world, and certainly they did not
trade for bulky, hard-to-transport bulk foodstuffs. Virtually everything they
ate was produced by themselves. If they were an agricultural people, naturally,
everything they ate was natural: organic, whole, unsprayed and fertilized with
what ever local materials seemed to produce enhanced plant growth. And, if they
were agricultural, they lived on a soil body that possessed highly superior natural
fertility. If not an agricultural people they lived by the sea and made a large
portion of their diets sea foods. If their soil had not been extraordinarily
fertile, these groups would not have enjoyed superior health and would have conformed
to the currently widely-believed notion that before the modern era, people's
lives were brutish, unhealthful, and short.
What is common between meat-eating Eskimos, isolated
highland Swiss living on rye bread, milk and cheese; isolated Scottish island
Celts with a dietary of oat porridge, kale and sea foods; highland central Africans
(Malawi) eating sorghum, millet tropical root crops and all sorts of garden vegetables,
plus a little meat and dairy; Fijians living on small islands in the humid tropics
at sea level eating sea foods and garden vegetables. What they had in common
was that their foods were all were at the extreme positive end of the Health
= Nutrition / Calories scale. The agriculturists were on very fertile soil that
grew extraordinarily nutrient-rich food, the sea food gatherers were obtaining
their tucker from the place where all the fertility that ever was in the soil
had washed out of the land had been transported–sea foods are also extraordinarily
The group with the very best soil and consequently, the
best health of all were, by lucky accident, the Hunza. I say "lucky" and "accident" because
the Hunza and their resource base unknowingly developed an agricultural system
that produced the most nutritious food that is possible to grow. The Hunza lived
on what has been called super food. There are a lot of interesting books about
the Hunza, some deserving of careful study. (Wrench, 1938; Rodale, 1949)
Finding Your Ideal Dietary
Anyone that is genuinely interested in having the best
possible health should make their own study of the titles listed in the bibliography
in the back of this book. After you do, award yourself a BS nutrition. I draw
certain conclusions from this body of data. I think they help a person sort out
the massive confusion that exists today about proper diet.
First principle: Homo Sapiens clearly can posses extreme
health while eating very different dietary regimens. There is no one right diet
Before the industrial era almost everyone on Earth ate
what was produced locally. Their dietary choices were pretty much restricted
to those foods that were well adapted and productive in their region. Some places
grew rye, others wheat, others millet, others rice. Some places supported cows,
others goats, others had few on no domesticated animals. Some places produced
a lot of fruits and vegetables. Others, did not. Whatever the local dietary,
during thousands of years of eating that dietary natural selection prevailed;
most babies that were allergic to or not able to thrive on the available dietary,
died quickly. Probably of childhood bacterial infections. The result of this
weeding out process was a population closely adapted to the available dietary
of a particular locale.
This has interesting implications for Americans, most
of whose ancestors immigrated from somewhere else; many of our ancestors also "hybridized" or
crossed with immigrants from elsewhere. Trying to discover what dietary substances
your particular genetic endowment is adapted to can be difficult and confusing.
If both your parents were Italian and they were more or less pure Italian going
way back, you might start out trying to eat wheat, olives, garlic, fava beans,
grapes, figs, cow dairy. If pure German, try rye bread, cow dairy, apples, cabbage
family vegetables. If Scottish, try oats, mutton, fish, sheep dairy and cabbage
family vegetables. If Jewish, try goat dairy, wheat, olives and citrus. And certainly
all the above ethnic derivations will thrive on many kinds of vegetables. Afro-Americans,
especially dark-complexioned ones little mixed with Europeans, might do well
to avoid wheat and instead, try sorghum, millet or tropical root crops like sweet
potatoes, yams and taro.
Making it even more difficult for an individual to discover
their optimum diet is the existence of genetic-based allergies and worse, developed
allergies. Later in this chapter I will explain how a body can develop an allergy
to a food that is probably irreversible. A weakened organ can also prevent digestion
of a food or food group.
One more thing about adaptation to dietaries. Pre-industrial
humans could only be extraordinarily healthy on the dietary they were adapted
to if and only if that dietary also was extraordinarily high in nutrients. Few
places on earth have naturally rich soil. Food grown on poor soil is poor in
nutrition; that grown on rich soil is high in nutrition. People do not realize
that the charts and tables in the backs of health books like Adelle Davis's Lets
Cook It Right, are not really true. They are statistics. It is vital to keep
in mind the old saying, "there are lies, there are damned lies, and then
there are statistics. The best way to lie is with statistics."
Statistical tables of the nutrient content of foods were
developed by averaging numerous samples of food from various soils and regions.
These tables basically lie because they do not show the range of possibility
between the different samples. A chart may state authoritatively that 100 grams
of broccoli contains so many milligrams of calcium. What it does not say is that
some broccoli samples contain only half that amount or even less, while other
broccoli contains two or three times that amount. Since calcium is a vital nutrient
hard to come by in digestible form, the high calcium broccoli is far better food
than the low calcium sample. But both samples of broccoli appear and taste more
or less alike. Both could even be organically grown. Yet one sample has a very
positive ratio of nutrition to calories, the other is lousy food. (Schuphan,
1965) Here's another example I hope will really dent the certainties the Linda
Clarkites. Potatoes can range in protein from eight to eleven percent, depending
on the soil that produced them and if they were or were not irrigated. Grown
dry (very low yielding) on semiarid soils, potatoes can be a high-protein staff
of life. Heavily irrigated and fertilized so as to produce bulk yield instead
of nutrition, they'll produce two or three times the tonnage, but at 8 percent
protein instead of 11 percent. Not only does the protein content drop just as
much as yield is boosted, the amino acid ratios change markedly, the content
of scarce nutritional minerals drops massively, and the caloric content increases.
In short, subsisting on irrigated commercially-grown potatoes, or on those grown
on relatively infertile soils receiving abundant rainfall will make you fat and
sick. They're a lot like manioc.
Here's another. Wheat can range from 7 to 19 percent
protein. Before the industrial era ruined most wheat by turning it into white
flour, wheat-eating peoples from regions where the cereal naturally contains
abundant protein tended to be tall, healthy and long-lived. Wheat-eating humans
from regions that produce low protein grain tended to be small, sickly and short-lived.
(McCarrison, 1921, 1936, 1982; Albrecht, 1975)
Even cows have to pay attention to where their grass
is coming from. Some green grass is over 15 percent protein and contains lots
of calcium, phosphorus and magnesium to build strong bodies. Other equally or
even better looking green grass contains only six or seven percent protein and
contains little calcium, phosphorus or magnesium. Cows forced to eat only this
poor type of grass can literally starve to death with full bellies. And they
have a hard time breeding successfully. The reason for the difference: different
soil fertility profiles. (Albrecht, 1975)
When people ate local, those living on fertile soils
or getting a significant portion of their diet from the sea and who because of
physical isolation from industrial foods did not make a practice of eating empty
calories tended to live a long time and be very healthy. But those unfortunates
on poor soils or with unwise cultural life-styles tended to be short-lived, diseased,
small, weak, have bad teeth, and etc. The lesson here is that Homo Sapiens can
adapt to many different dietaries, but like any other animal, the one thing we
can't adapt to is a dietary deficient in nutrition.
So here's another "statistic" to reconsider.
Most people believe that due to modern medical wonders, we live longer than we
used to. Actually, that depends. Compared to badly nourished populations of a
century ago, yes! We do. Chemical medicine keeps sickly, poorly nourished people
going a lot longer (though one wonders about the quality of their dreary existences.)
I hypothesize that before the time most farmers purchased and baked with white
flour and sold their whole, unground wheat, many rural Americans (the ones on
good soil, not all parts of North America have rich soil) eating from their own
self-sufficient farms, lived as long or even longer than we do today. You also
have to wonder who benefits from promulgating this mistaken belief about longevity.
Who gets rich when we are sick? And what huge economic interests are getting
rich helping make us sick?
The Human Comedy
The Organic Versus Chemical Feud
|I know most of my readers have been heavily
indoctrinated about food and think they already know the
truth about dietetics. I also know that so much information
(and misinformation) is coming out about diet that most
of my readers are massively confused about the subject.
These are two powerful reasons many readers will look with
disbelief at what this chapter has to say and take no action
on my data, even to prove me wrong.
Let me warn you. There is a deep-seated human tendency
to put off taking responsibilities, beautifully demonstrated by this old joke.
A 14 year old boy was discovered masturbating by his
father, who said, "son, you shouldn't do that! If you keep it up you'll
eventually go blind!" ` "But father, came the boy's quick reply. "It
feels good. How about if I don't quit until I need to wear glasses?"
Now, regrettably, and at great personal risk to my reputation,
I must try to puncture the very favorite belief of food religionists, the doctrine
that organically grown food is as nutritious as food can possibly be, Like Woody
Allen's brown-rice-eating friends, people think if you eat Organic foods, you
will inevitably live a very long time and be very healthy. Actually, the Organic
vs. chemical feud is in many ways false. Many (not all) samples of organically
grown food are as low or lower in nutrition as foods raised with chemical fertilizers.
Conversely, wisely using chemical fertilizers (not pesticides) can greatly increase
the nutritional value of food. Judiciously used Organic fertilizing substances
can also do that as well or better. And in either case, using chemical fertilizers
or so-called organic fertilizers, to maximize nutrition the humus content of
the soil must be maintained. But, raising soil organic matter levels too high
can result in a massive reduction in the nutritional content of the food being
grown–a very frequent mistake on the part of Organic devotees. In other words,
nutrition is a science, and is not a matter of religion.
The food I fed to my daughter in childhood, though Organic
according to Rodale and the certification bureaucrats, though providing this
organic food to my family and clients gave me a feeling of self-righteousness,
was not grown with an understanding of the nutritional consequences of electing
to use one particular Organic fertilizing substance over another. So we and a
lot of regional Organic market gardeners near us that we bought from, were raising
food that was far from ideally nutritious. At least though, our food was free
The real dichotomy in food is not "chemical" fertilizer
versus "Organic," It is between industrial food and quality food. What
I mean by industrial food is that which is raised with the intention of maximizing
profit or yield. There is no contradiction between raising food
that the "rabbis" running Organic certification bureaucracies would
deem perfectly "kosher" and raising that same food to make the most
possible money or the biggest harvest. When a farmer grows for money, they want
to produce the largest number of bushels, crates, tons, bales per acre. Their
criteria for success is primarily unit volume. Many gardeners think the same
way. To maximize bulk yield they build soil fertility in a certain direction
(organically or chemically) and choose varieties that produce greater bulk. However,
nature is ironic in this respect. The most nutritious food is always lower yielding.
The very soil management practices that maximize production simultaneously reduce
The real problem we are having about our health is not
that there are residues of pesticides in our food. The real problem is that there
are only residues of nutrition left in our foods. Until our culture comes to
understand this and realizes that the health costs of accepting less than optimum
food far exceeds the profits made by growing bulk, it will not be possible to
frequently find the ultimate of food quality in the marketplace, organically
grown or not. It will not be possible to find food that is labeled or identified
according to its real nutritional value. The best I can say about Organic food
these days is that it probably is no less nutritious than chemically-grown food
while at least
it is free of pesticide residues.
The Poor Start
For this reason it makes sense to take vitamins and food
supplements, to be discussed in the next chapter. And because our food supply,
Organic or "conventional," is far from optimum, if a person wants to
be and remain healthy and have a life span that approaches their genetic potential
(and that potential, it seems, approaches or exceeds a century), it is essential
that empty calories are rigorously avoided.
An accurate and quick-to-respond indicator of how well
we are doing in terms of getting enough nutrition is the state of our teeth.
One famous dentally-oriented nutritional doctor, Melvin Page, suggested that
as long as overall nutrition was at least 75 percent of perfection, the body
chemistry could support healthy teeth and gums until death. By healthy here Page
means free of cavities, no bone loss around the teeth (no wobblers), no long-in-the-teeth
mouths from receding gums, no gum diseases at all. But when empty calories or
devitalized foods or misdigestion cuts our nutrient intake we begin experiencing
tooth decay, gum disease and bone loss in the jaw. How are your teeth?
I suppose you could say that I have a food religion,
but mine is to eat so that the equation Nutrition = Health / Calories is strongly
in my favor.
Back to my daughter's teeth. Yes, I innocently fed her
less than ideally nutritious food, but at that time I couldn't buy ideal food
even had I known what I wanted, nor did I have any scientific idea of how to
produce ideal food, nor actually, could I have done so on the impoverished, leached-out
clay soil at Great Oaks School even had I known how. The Organic doctrine says
that you can build a Garden of 'Eatin with large quantities of compost until
any old clay pit or gravel heap produces highly nutritious food. This idea is
not really true. Sadly, what is true about organic matter in soil is that when
it is increased very much above the natural level one finds in untilled soil
in the climate you're working with, the nutritional content of the food begins
to drop markedly. I know this assertion is shocking and perhaps threatening to
believe in the Organic system; I am sorry.
But there is another reason my daughter's teeth were
not perfect, probably could not have been perfect no matter what we fed her,
and why she will probably have at least some health problems as she ages no matter
how perfectly she may choose to eat from here on. My daughters had what Dr. G.T.
called "a poor start." Not as poor as it could have been by any means,
but certainly less than ideal.
You see, the father has very little to do with the health
of the child, unless he happens to carry some particularly undesirable gene.
It is the mother who has the job of constructing the fetus out of prepartum nourishment
and her own body's nutritional reserves. The female body knows from trillenia
of instinctual experience that adequate nutrition from the current food supply
during pregnancy can not always be assured, so the female body stores up very
large quantities of minerals and vitamins and enzymes against that very possibility.
When forming a fetus these reserves are drawn down and depleted. It is virtually
impossible during the pregnancy itself for a mother to extract sufficient nutrition
from current food to build a totally healthy fetus, no matter how nourishing
the food she is eating may be. Thus a mother-to-be needs to be spending her entire
childhood and her adolescence (and have adequate time between babies), building
and rebuilding her reserves.
A mother-to-be also started out at her own birth with
a vitally important stock of nutritional reserves, reserves put there during
own fetal development. If that "start" was less than ideal, the mother-to-be
(as fetus) got "pinched" and nutritionally shortchanged in certain,
predictable ways. Even minor mineral fetal deficiencies degrade the bone structure:
the fetus knows it needs nutritional reserves more than it needs to have a full-sized
jaw bone or a wide pelvic girdle, and when deprived of maximum fetal nourishment,
these non-vital bones become somewhat smaller. Permanently. If mineral deficiencies
continue into infancy and childhood, these same bones continue to be shortchanged,
and the child ends up with a very narrow face, a jaw bone far too small to hold
all the teeth, and in women, a small oven that may have trouble baking babies.
More importantly, those nutrient reserves earmarked especially for making babies
are also deficient. So a deficient mother not only shows certain structural evidence
of physiological degeneration, but she makes deficient babies. A deficient female
baby at birth is unlikely to completely overcome her bad start before she herself
So with females, the quality of a whole lifetime's nutrition,
and the life-nutrition of her mother (and of her mother's mother as well) has
a great deal to do with the outcome of a pregnancy. The sins of the mother can
really be visited unto the third and fourth generation.
This reality was powerfully demonstrated in the 1920s
by a medical doctor, Francis Pottenger. He was not gifted with a good bedside
manner. Rather than struggling with an unsuccessful clinical practice, Dr. Pottenger
decided to make his living running a medical testing laboratory in Pasadena,
California. Dr. Pottenger earned his daily bread performing a rather simple task,
assaying the potency of adrenal hormone extracts. At that time, adrenaline, a
useful drug to temporarily rescue people close to death, was extracted from the
adrenal glands of animals. However, the potency of these crude extracts varied
greatly. Being a very powerful drug, it was essential to measure exactly how
strong your extract
was so its dosage could be controlled.
Quantitative organic chemistry was rather crude in those
days. Instead of assaying in a test tube, Dr. Pottenger kept several big cages
full of cats that he had adrenalectomized. Without their own adrenals, the cats
could not live more than a short time By finding out how much extract was required
to keep the cats from failing, he could measure the strength of the particular
Dr. Pottenger's cats were economically valuable so he
made every effort to keep them healthy, something that proved to be disappointingly
difficult. He kept his cats clean, in airy, bright quarters, fed them to the
very best of his ability on pasteurized whole milk, slaughterhouse meat and organs
(cats in the wild eat organ meats first and there are valuable vitamins and other
substances in organ meats that don't exist in muscle tissue). The meat was carefully
cooked to eliminate any parasites, and the diet was supplemented with cod liver
oil. However, try as he might, Pottenger's cats were sickly, lived short and
had to be frequently replaced. Usually they bred poorly and died young of bacterial
infections, there being no antibiotics in the 1920s. I imagine Dr. Pottenger
was constantly visiting the animal shelter and perhaps even paid quarters out
the back door to a steady stream of young boys who brought him cats in burlap
from who knows where, no questions asked.
Dr. Pottenger's assays must have been accurate, for his
business grew and grew. Eventually he needed more cats than he had cages to house,
so he built a big, roofed, on-the-ground pen outdoors. Because he was overworked,
he was less careful about the feeding of these extra animals. They got the same
pasteurized milk and cod-liver oil, but he did not bother to cook their slaughterhouse
meat. Then, a small miracle happened. This poorly cared for cage of cats fed
on uncooked meat became much healthier than the others, suffering far fewer bacterial
infections or other health problems. Then another miracle happened. Dr. Pottenger
began to meditate on the first miracle.
It occurred to him that cats in the wild did not cook
their food; perhaps cats had a digestive system that couldn't process or assimilate
much out of cooked food. Perhaps the problem he had been having was not because
the cats were without adrenal glands but because they were without sustenance,
suffering a sort of slow starvation in the midst of plenty. So Dr. Pottenger
up some cat feeding experiments.
There were four possible combinations of his regimen:
raw meat and unpasteurized milk; raw meat and pasteurized milk; cooked meat and
raw milk; cooked meat and pasteurized milk, this last one being what he had been
feeding all along. So he divided his cats into four groups and fed each group
differently. The first results of Pottenger's experiments were revealed quickly
though the most valuable results took longer to see. The cats on raw meat and
raw milk did best. The ones on raw meat and pasteurized milk did okay but not
as well. The ones on cooked meat and raw milk did even less well and those on
all cooked food continued to do as poorly as ever.
Clearly, cats can't digest cooked food; all animals do
better fed on what they can digest. A lot of people have taken Pottenger's data
and mistakenly concluded that humans also should eat only raw food. This idea
is debatable. However, the most important result of the cat experiments took
years to reveal itself and is not paid much attention to, probably because its
implications are very depressing. Dr. Pottenger continued his experiments for
several generations. It was the transgenerational changes that showed the most
valuable lesson. Over several generations, the cats on all raw foods began to
alter their appearance. Their faces got wider, their pelvic girdles broader,
bones solider, teeth better.
They began to breed very successfully.
After quite a few generations, the healthiest group,
the one on all raw foods, seemed to have improved as much as it could. So Dr.
Pottenger took some of these cats and began feeding them only cooked food to
study the process
of nutritional degeneration. After three "de"generations on cooked
fodder the group had deteriorated so much that the animals could barely breed.
Their faces had become narrow, their teeth crooked, their pelvic girdles narrow,
their bones and body structure very small, and their dispositions poor. Mothers
wouldn't nurse their young and sometimes became cannibalistic. They no longer
Before the degenerating group completely lost the ability
to breed, Pottenger began to again feed them all raw food. It took four generations
on a perfect, raw food diet before some perfect appearing individuals showed
up in the group. It takes longer to repair the damage than it does to cause it
it takes generations of unflagging persistence.
I think much the same process has happened to humans
in this century. With the invention of the roller mill and the consequent degradation
of our daily bread to white flour; with the birth of industrial farming and the
generalized lowering of the nutritional content of all of our crops; our overall
ratio of nutrition to calories worsened. Then it worsened again because we began
to have industrial food manufacturing and national brand prepared food marketing
systems; we began subsisting on devitalized, processed foods. The result has
an even greater worsening of our ratio of nutrition to calories.
And just like Pottenger's cats, we civilized humans in
so-called advanced countries are losing the ability to breed, our willingness
(or the energy) to mother our young; we're losing our good humor in the same
way Pottenger's degenerated cats became bad tempered. As a group we feel so poorly
that we desperately need to feel better fast, and what better way to do that
than with drugs. Is it any wonder that the United States, the country furthest
down the road of industrial food degeneration, spends 14 percent of its gross
domestic product on medical services. Any wonder that so many babies are born
by Cesarean, any wonder that so many of our children have crooked teeth needing
an orthodontist? The most depressing aspect of this comes into view when considering
that Pottenger's cats took four generations on perfect food to repair most of
the nutritional damage.
In the specific case of my daughter, I know somethings
about the nutritional history of her maternal ancestors. My daughter's grandmother
grew up on a Saskatchewan farm. Though they certainly grew their own rich wheat
on virgin semi-arid prairie soil, I'm sure the family bought white flour at the
store for daily use. Still, there was a garden and a cow producing raw milk and
free-range fertile eggs and chicken and other animals. There probably were lots
of canned vegetables in winter, canned but still highly nutritious because of
the fertility of their prairie garden. My mother consequently had perfect teeth
until the Great Depression forced her to live for too many years on lard and
During this time of severe malnutrition she had her three
babies. The first one got the best of her nutritional reserves. The second, born
after the worst of the malnutrition, was very small and weak and had a hard time
growing up. Fortunately for me, for a few years before I (the last child) was
born, the worst of the economic times had past and the family had been living
on a farm. There were vegetables and fresh raw milk and fruit. My mother had
good years to rebuild her nutritional reserves. But "Grannybell" did
not managed to replace enough. Shortly after I was born my mother lost every
of her teeth all at once. The bone just disappeared around them.
Thus, I was born deficient. And my childhood and adolescent
nutrition was poor too: soda crackers, pasteurized processed artificial cheese,
evaporated milk from cans, hotdogs and canned beans, hotdogs and cabbage. It
wasn't until I was pregnant with my first baby that I started to straighten up
my diet. I continued eating very well after my first daughter, so my youngest
daughter had another three years of good diet to draw on. Thus both my own daughters
a somewhat better start than I had had.
My teeth were not as good as my mother's had been before
those years of malnutrition took them all. Instead of perfect straight undecayed
teeth like a healthy farm girl should have, mine were somewhat crowded, with
numerous cavities. My jaw bone had not received enough minerals to develop to
its full size. My pelvic girdle also was smaller than my mother's was. I had
had a poor
My daughters did better. The older one (the first child
typically gets the best of the nutritional reserves) has such a wide jaw that
there are small spaces between her teeth. My second daughter has only one crooked
tooth, she has wider, more solid hips, stronger bones and a broader face than
I do. If my younger daughter will but from this point in her life, eat perfectly
and choose her food wisely to responsibly avoid empty calories and maximize her
ratio of nutrition to calories, her daughter (if she gives us granddaughters
as her older sister already has done) may exhibit the perfect physiology that
Along the lines of helping you avoid empty calories I
will give you some information about various common foods that most people don't
know and that most books about food and health don't tell, or misunderstand.
Butter, Margarine and Fats in General.
Recently, enormous propaganda has been generated against
eating butter. Its been smeared in the health magazines as a saturated animal
fat, one containing that evil substance, cholesterol. Many people are now avoiding
it and instead, using margarine.
Composition of Oils
This is a major and serious misunderstanding. First of
all, margarine is almost indigestible, chemically very much like shortening–an
artificially saturated or hydrogenated vegetable fat. Hydrogenated fats can't
be properly broken down by the body's digestive enzymes, adding to the body's
toxic load. Margarine, being a chemically-treated vegetable oil with artificial
yellow color and artificial flavorings to make it seem like butter, also releases
free radicals in the body that accelerate aging. So, to avoid the dangers of
cholesterol-containing butter, people eat something far worse for them!
There are severe inconsistencies with the entire "cholesterol-is-evil" theory.
Ethnic groups like the Danes, who eat enormous quantities of cholesterol-containing
foods, have little circulatory disease. Actually, the liver itself produces cholesterol;
it's presence in the blood is an important part of the body chemistry. Cholesterol
only becomes a problem because of deranged body chemistry due to the kind of
overall malnutrition Americans usually experience on their junk food diets. Avoiding
cholesterol in foods does little good, but eating a low-fat, low-sugar, complex-carbohydrate
(whole foods) diet high in minerals does lower blood cholesterol enormously.
Actually, high quality fresh (not rancid) butter in moderate
quantities is about the finest fat a person could eat. But high quality butter
is almost unobtainable. First of all, it has to be raw, made from unpasteurized
cream. Second, butter can contain very high levels of fat-soluble vitamins, but
doesn't have to. Vitamin-rich butter's color is naturally bright yellow, almost
orange. This color does not come from a test tube. Pale yellow butter as is found
in the commercial trade was probably almost white before it was artificially
tinted. Butter from grass-pastured cows naturally changes from yellow-orange
to white and back again through the year as the seasons change. Spring grass,
growing in the most intense sunlight of the year contains very high levels of
chlorophyll and vitamins. Cows eating this grass put high levels of vitamins
A and D into their cream, evidenced by the orange color of vitamin A. By July,
natural butter has degraded to medium-yellow in color. By August, it is pale
yellow. Industrial dairy cows fed exclusively on hay or artificial, processed
feeds (lacking in these
vitamins), produce butterfat that is almost white.
I prefer to obtain my butter from a neighbor who has
several dairy cows grazing on fertile bottom land pasture. We always freeze a
year's supply in late spring when butter is at its best. Interestingly, that
is also the time of year when my neighbor gets the most production from her cows
and is most willing
to part with 25 pounds of extra butter.
In general, fats are poor foods that should be avoided.
Their ratio of nutrition to calories is absolutely the worst of all food types,
except perhaps for pure white sugar, which is all calories and absolutely no
nutrition (this is also true for other forms of sugar. Honey, too, contains almost
no nutrition.). Gram for gram, fats contain many more calories than do sugars
or starches. Yet gram for gram, fats contain virtually no nutrition except for
of essential fatty acids.
The perverse reason people like to eat fats is that they
are very hard to digest and greatly slow the digestive action of the stomach.
Another way of saying that is that they have a very high satiety value. Fats
make a person feel full for a long time because their presence in the stomach
makes it churn and churn and churn. Fats coat proteins and starches and delay
their digestion, often causing them to begin fermenting (starches) or putrefying
in the digestive tract.
The best fats contain high levels of monosaturated vegetable
oils that have never been exposed to heat or chemicals–like virgin olive oil.
Use small quantities of olive oil for salad dressing. Monosaturated fats also
have far less tendency to go rancid than any other type. Vegetable oils with
high proportions of unsaturated fats, the kind that all the authorities push
because they contain no cholesterol, go rancid rapidly upon very brief exposure
to air. The danger here is that rancidity in vegetable oil is virtually unnoticeable.
Rancid animal fat on the other hand, smells "off." Eating rancid oil
is a sure-fire way to accelerate aging, invite degenerative conditions in general,
and enhance the likelihood of cancer. I recommend that you use only high-quality
virgin olive oil, the only generally-available fat that is largely monosaturated.
(Pearson and Shaw, 1983)
When you buy vegetable oil, even olive oil, get small
bottles so you use them up before the oil has much time being exposed to air
(as you use the oil air fills the bottle) or, if you buy olive oil in a large
can to save money, immediately upon opening it, transfer the oil to pint jars
filled to the very brim to exclude virtually all air, and seal the jars securely.
In either case, keep now-opened, in-use small bottles of oil in the refrigerator
because rancidity is simply the combination of oil with oxygen from the air and
this chemical reaction is accelerated at warmer temperatures and slowed greatly
at cold ones.
Chemical reactions typically double in speed with every
10 degrees C. increase in temperature. So oil goes rancid about six times faster
at normal room temperature than it does in the fridge. If you'll think about
the implications of this data you'll see there are two powerful reasons not to
fry food. One, the food is coated with oil and gains in satiety value at the
expense of becoming relatively indigestible and productive of toxemia. Secondly,
if frying occurs at 150 degrees Centigrade and normal room temperature is 20
degrees Centigrade, then oil goes rancid 2 to the 13th power faster in the frying
pan, or about 8,200 times faster. Heating oil for only ten minutes in a hot skillet
induces as much rancidity as about 6 weeks of sitting open and exposed to air
at room temperature. Think about that the next time you're tempted to eat something
from a fast food restaurant where the hot fat in the deep fryer has been reacting
with oxygen all
day, or even for several days.
Back to butter, where we started. If you must have something
traditionally northern European on your bread, you are far better off to use
butter, not margarine. However, Mediterranean peoples traditionally dip their
bread in high-quality extra-virgin olive oil that smells and tastes like olives.
Its delicious, why not try it. But best yet, put low-sugar fruit preserves on
your toast or develop a taste for dry toast. Probably the finest use for butter
is melted over steamed vegetables. This way only small quantities are needed
and the fat goes on something that is otherwise very easy to digest so its presence
will not produce as many
toxins in the digestive tract.
Milk, Meat, And Other Protein Foods
Speaking of butter, how about milk? The dairy lobby is
very powerful in North America. Its political clout and campaign contributions
have the governments of both the United States and especially that of Canada
eating out of its hand (literally), providing the dairy industry with price supports.
Because of these price supports, in Canada cheese costs half again more than
it does in the United States. The dairy lobby is also very cozy with the medical
profession so licensed nutritionists constantly bombard us with "drink milk" and "cheese
is good for you" propaganda.
And people naturally like dairy foods. They taste good
and are fat-rich with a high satiety value. Dairy makes you feel full for a long
time. Dairy is also high in protein; protein is hard to digest and this too keeps
one feeling full for a long time. But many people, especially those from cultures
who traditionally (genetically) didn't have dairy cows, particularly Africans,
Asians and Jews, just do not produce the enzymes necessary to digest cows milk.
Some individuals belonging to these groups can digest goats milk. Some can't
digest any kind except human breast milk. And some can digest fermented milk
products like yogurt and kiefer. Whenever one eats a protein food that is not
fully digestible, it putrefies in the digestive tract, with all the bad consequences
But no one, absolutely no one can fully digest pasteurized
cows milk, which is what most people use because they have been made to fear
cow-transmitted diseases and/or they are forced to use pasteurized dairy products
by health authorities. I suspect drinking pasteurized milk or eating cheese made
from pasteurized milk is one of the reasons so many people develop allergic reactions
to milk. Yet many states do not allow unpasteurized dairy to be sold, even privately
between neighbors. To explain all this, I first have to explain a bit more about
protein digestion in general and then talk about allergies and how they can be
Proteins are long, complex molecules, intricate chains
whose individual links are amino acids. Proteins are the very stuff of life.
All living protoplasm, animal or plant, is largely composed of proteins. There
are virtually an infinite number of different proteins but all are composed of
the same few dozen amino acids hooked together in highly variable patterns. Amino
acids themselves are highly complex organic molecules too. The human body custom-assembles
all its proteins from amino acids derived from digesting protein foods, and can
also manufacture small quantities of certain of its own amino acids to order,
but there are eight amino acids it cannot make and these are for that reason
called essential amino acids. Essential amino acids must be contained in the
Few proteins are water soluble. When we eat proteins
the digestive apparatus must first break them down into their water-soluble components,
amino acids, so these can pass into the blood and then be reassembled into the
various proteins the body uses. The body has an interesting mechanism to digest
proteins; it uses enzymes. An enzyme is like the key for a lock. It is a complex
molecule that latches to a protein molecule and then breaks it apart into amino
acids. Then the enzyme finds yet another protein molecule to free. Enzymes are
efficient, reusable many many times.
Enzymes that digest proteins are effective only in the
very acid environment of the stomach, are manufactured by the pancreas and are
released when protein foods are present. The stomach then releases hydrochloric
acid and churns away like a washing machine, mixing the enzymes and the acid
the proteins until everything has digested.
So far so good. That's how its supposed to be. But. Dr.
Henry Bieler, who wrote Food Is Your Best Medicine, came up with the finest metaphor
I know of to explain how protein digestion goes wrong. He compared all proteins
to the white of an egg (which is actually a form of protein). When raw and liquid,
the long chains of albumen (egg white) proteins are in their natural form. However,
cook the egg and the egg white both solidifies and becomes smaller. What has
happened is that the protein chains have shriveled and literally tied themselves
into knots. Once this happens, pancreatic enzymes no longer fit and cannot separate
all the amino acids. Cooked proteins may churn and churn and churn in the presence
of acid and pancreatic enzymes but they will not digest completely. Part becomes
water soluble; part does not.
But, indigestible protein is still subject to an undesirable
form of consumption in the gut. Various bacteria make their home in our airless,
warm intestines. Some of these live on protein. In the process of consuming undigested
proteins, they release highly toxic substances. They poison us.
What is true of the white of an egg is also true of flesh
foods and dairy. Raw meat and raw fish are actually easily digestible foods and
if not wrongly combined will not produce toxemia in a person that still has a
strong pancreas. However, eating raw meat and fish can be a dicey proposition,
both for reasons of cultural sensibility (people think it is disgusting) and
because there may be living parasites in uncooked flesh that can attack, sicken
and even kill people. It has been argued that a healthy stomach containing its
proper degree of acidity provides an impenetrable barrier to parasites. Perhaps.
But how many of us are that healthy these days? Cooked flesh and fish seems more
to our refined, civilized sensibilities, but are a poor food.
In my household we have no moral objection to eating
meat. We do have an ethical objection in that meat eating does not contribute
to our health. But still, we do eat it. A few times a year, for traditional celebrations
we may invite the children over and cook a turkey. A few times for Thanksgiving
when the children were going through their holier-than-thou vegetarian stage,
I purchased the largest, thickest porterhouse steak I could find at the natural
meat store and ate it medium-rare, with relish. It was delicious. It made me
feel full for hours and hours and hours. I stayed flat on the couch and groggily
worked on digesting it all evening. After that I'd had enough of meat to last
When milk is pasteurized, the proteins in it are also
altered in structure. Not so severely as egg white is altered by cooking because
pasteurization happens at a lower temperature. But altered none the less. And
made less digestible. Pasteurizing also makes milk calcium far less assimilable.
That's ironic because so many people are drinking milk because they fear they
need more calcium to avoid osteoporosis and to give their children good teeth.
What pasteurized milk actually does to their children is make them calcium deficient
and makes the children toxic, provoking many colds, ear infections, sinusitis,
inflammations of the tonsils and lung infections, and, induces an allergy to
in the children.
The Development Of Allergies
There are three ways a body can become allergic. (1)
It can have a genetic predisposition for a specific allergy to start with. (2)
It can be repeatedly exposed to an irritating substance such as pollen when,
at the same time, the body's mechanism for dealing with irritations is weakened.
Generally weak adrenals causes this because the adrenal's job is to produce hormones
that reduce inflammation. Once the irritating substance succeeds at producing
a significant inflammation, a secondary reaction may be set up, called an allergy.
an allergy is very hard to get rid of.
(3) in a way very similar to the second, but instead
of being irritated by an external substance, it is irritated by repeatedly failing
to properly, fully digest something. Pasteurized milk for example, basically
impossible to completely digest even in its low-fat form, often sets up an allergy
that applies to other forms of cows milk, even raw, unpasteurized cows milk or
yogurt. Eating too much white flour can eventually set off a wheat allergy. My
husband developed a severe allergy to barley after drinking too much home-brewed
beer; he also became highly intolerant to alcohol. Now he has allergic reactions
to both alcohol and barley. And gets far sicker from drinking beer (two separate
allergies) than from
wheat beer, hard liquor or wine (only one allergy).
Eating too much of any single food, or repeatedly eating
too much of an otherwise very good food at one time, can eventually overwhelm
the body's ability to digest it fully. Then, the finest whole food products may
set up an allergic reaction. Worse, this allergic reaction itself subsequently
prevents proper digestion even when only moderate quantities are eaten.
An allergy may not be recognized as an allergy because
it may not manifest as the instant skin rash or stuffy nose or swollen glands
or sticky eyes. that people usually think of when they think "allergic reaction." Food
allergies can cause many kinds of symptoms, from sinusitis to psychosis, from
asthma to arthritis, from hyperactivity to depression, insomnia to narcolepsy–and
commonly the symptoms don't manifest immediately after eating. Frequently, allergic
reactions are so low grade as to be unnoticeable and may not produce an observable
condition until many years of their grinding down the vital force has passed.
When the condition finally appears it is hard to associate it with some food
has been consumed for years, apparently with impunity.
Thus it is that many North Americans have developed allergies
to wheat, dairy, soy products (because many soy foods are very hard to digest),
corn and eggs. These are such common, widespread, frequently found allergies
that anyone considering a dietary cause of their complaints might just cut all
these foods out of the diet for a few weeks just to see what happens. And individuals
may be allergic to anything from broccoli to bacon, strawberries to bean sprouts.
Unraveling food allergies sometimes requires the deductions of a Sherlock Holmes.
However, food allergies are very easy to cure if you
can get the suffered to take the medicine. Inevitably, allergic reactions vanish
in about five days of abstinence. Anyone with sufficient self-discipline to water
fast for five days can cure themselves of all food allergies at one step. Then,
by a controlled, gradual reintroduction of foods, they can discover which individual
items cause trouble. See Coca's Pulse Test in the Appendix where you'll find
step-by-step instructions for allergy testing that are less rigorous, not requiring
Flour, And Other Matters Relating To Seeds
One of the largest degradations to human health was caused
by the roller mill. This apparently profitable machine permitted the miller to
efficiently separate wheat flour into three components: bran, germ and endosperm.
Since bread made without bran and germ is lighter and appears more "upper
class" it became instantly popular. Flour without germ and bran also had
an industrial application–it could be stored virtually forever without being
infested by insects because white flour does not contain enough nutrition to
support life. Most health conscious people are aware that white flour products
healthful human life either.
Essentially, white flour's effect on humans is another
demonstration of Health = Nutrition / Calories. When the bran and germ are discarded,
remaining are the calories and much of the protein, lacking are many vitamins
and minerals and other vital nutritional substances.
Whole wheat bread has been called the staff of life.
In ages past, healthy cultures have made bread the predominant staple in their
diet. Does that mean you can just go to the bakery and buy whole grain bread,
or go to the healthfood store and buy organically grown whole wheat flour, bake
your own, and be as healthy as the ancients? Sorry, the answer is almost certainly
no. There are pitfalls, many of them, waiting for the unwary.
White flour has one other advantage over whole wheat
flour. It not only remains free of insect infestation, it doesn't become stale
(meaning rancid). In the wheat germ (where the embryo resides) there is considerable
oil, containing among other things, about the best natural source of vitamin
E. This oil is highly unsaturated and once the seed is ground the oil goes rancid
in a matter of days. Whole wheat flour kept on the unrefrigerated shelf of the
store is almost certainly rancid. A lot of its other vitamin content has been
oxidized too. If the wheat flour had flowed directly from the grinder into an
airtight sack and from there directly to the freezer, if it had been flash frozen
and kept extremely cold, it might have a storage life of some months. Of course
that was not the case. Maybe you're lucky and your healthfood store is one of
the very few that has its own small-scale flour mill and grinds daily. Probably
How about your baker's whole wheat bread? Where does
the baker get flour? From the wholesaler's or distributor's warehouse! In fifty
pound kraftpaper sacks! How much time had elapsed from milling to wholesaler
to baker to baking? The answer has to be in the order of magnitude of weeks.
And it might
be months. Was the flour stored frozen? Or airtight? Of course not.
If you want bread made from freshly ground flour you
are almost certainly have to grind and bake it yourself. Is it worth the trouble?
You bet. Once you've tasted real bread you'll instantly see by comparison what
stale, rancid whole wheat flour tastes like. Freshly ground flour makes bread
that can be the staff of life and can enormously upgrade your health–if the wheat
you use is any good.
But before we talk about wheat quality, a more few words
of warning. If you think wheat goes rancid rapidly, rye is even worse. Rye flour
goes bad so fast that when you buy it in the store it usually is the rye equivalent
of white wheat flour. The germ has been removed. The bag may not say so. But
it probably has. If you are going to make rye breads, even more reason to grind
your own. Corn meal from the grocery store has usually been degerminated too.
hasn't been, the oil in the seed's germ has probably gone rancid.
Grinding flour at home is easy these days. There is an
abundance of at-home milling products and no shortage of hype about them. You'll
find staunch advocates of stone mills. These produce the finest-textured flour,
but are costly. The sales pitch is that stones grind at low temperature and do
not damage the oils (remember the development of rancidity is a function of temperature)
or the vitamins, which are also destroyed at high temperature. This assertion
is half true. If you are going to store your flour it is far better to grind
it cool. However, if you are, as we do, going to immediately bake your flour,
what difference does it make if it gets a little warm before baking. That only
the action of the yeast.
On the negative side, stone mills grind slowly and are
very fussy about which grains they will grind. If the cereal is a bit moist or
if the seed being ground is a little bit oily, the mill becomes instantly blocked.
Steel burr mills grind fast and coarsely and are inexpensive.
Coarse flour makes heavy bread. The metal grinding faces tend to wear out and
have to be replaced occasionally–if they can be replaced. Breads on the heavy
side are still delicious; for many years I made bread with an inexpensive steel
burr mill attachment that came with my juicer.
Some steel burr mills will also grind oily seed like
sesame and sunflower. However, oily seeds can be ground far more easily half-a-cup
at a time in a little inexpensive electric spice/coffee mill, the sort with a
I currently think the best compromise are hammermills.
The grain dribbles into a chamber full of fast-spinning teeth that literally
pound the grain into powder. Since air flows through with the grain the flour
is not heated very much. This type of mill is small, very fast, intermediate
in price between steel mills and stone mill, lasts a long time, but when grinding,
sounds like a Boeing 747 about to take off. It is essential to wear hearing protectors
when using it.
Awareness of bread quality is growing. One excellent
new U.S. business, called Great Harvest Bakery is a fast-growing national franchise
chain. They bake and sell only whole grain breads; all their wheat flour is freshly
ground daily on the premises in the back. Unfortunately, as of the writing of
this book, they do not grind their rye flour but bring it in sacks. I can't recommend
their rye breads. The founder of Great Harvest is a knowledgeable buyer who fully
understands my next topic, which is that wheat is not wheat.
There are great differences between hard bread wheats;
being organically grown is no cure all for making good or nutritious bread. Great
Harvest understands this and uses top quality grain that is also Organic.
When I first stated making my own bread from my own at-home-ground
flour I was puzzled by variations in the dough. Sometimes the bread rose well
and was spongy after baking like I wanted it to be. Sometimes it kneaded stickily
and ended up flat and crumbly like a cake. Since I had done everything the same
way except that I may have bought my wheat berries from different healthfood
I began to investigate the subject of wheat quality.
The element in the cereal that forms the rubbery sponge
in risen bread so it doesn't crumble and rises high without collapsing, is gluten.
The word glue derives from gluten. The gluten content of various wheats varies.
Bread bakers use "hard wheat" because of its high gluten content. Gluten
is a protein and gluten comprises most of the protein in bread wheat; the protein
content and the gluten content are almost identical.
Try this. Ask your healthfood store buyer or owner what
the protein content is of the hard red wheat seeds they're selling. You'll almost
certainly get a puzzled look and your answer will almost certainly be, "we
have Organic and conventional." Demand that the store buyer ask this question
of their distributor/wholesaler and then report back to you. If the distributor
deigns to answer, the answer will be the same–I sell Organic or conventional
hard red wheat. Period. When I got these non-answers I looked further and discovered
that hard bread wheats run from about 12 percent protein to about 19 percent
and this difference has everything to do with the soil fertility (and to an extent
the amount of rainfall during the season), and almost nothing to do with Organic
This difference also has everything to do with how your
dough behaves and how your bread comes out. And how well your bread nourishes
you. Thirteen percent wheat will not make a decent loaf–fourteen percent is generally
considered #2 quality and comprises the bulk of cheap bread grain. When you hear
in the financial news that a bushel of wheat is selling for a certain price,
they mean #2. Bakers compete for higher protein lots and pay far higher prices
We prefer our bread about 25% rye, but rye contains no
gluten at all. Mix any rye flour into fourteen percent wheat flour and the dough
becomes very heavy, won't rise, and after baking, crumbles. So I kept looking
for better grain and finally discovered a knowledgeable lady that sold flour
mills and who also was a serious baker herself. She had located a source of quality
wheat with an assayed protein content and sold it by the 50 pound sack. When
I asked her if her wheat was Organic she said it was either sixteen or seventeen
percent protein depending on whether you wanted hard red spring wheat or hard
white spring wheat. Organic or conventional? I persisted. No, she said. High
So, I said to myself, since protein content is a function
of soil fertility and since my body needs protein, I figured I am better off
eating the best quality wheat, pesticide/herbicide residues (if there are any)
be damned. Think about it! The difference between seventeen percent and fourteen
percent protein is about 25 percent. That percentage difference is the key threshold
of nutritional deficiency that makes teeth fall out. We can't afford to accept
25% degradations in our nutritional quality in something that we eat every day
that forms the very basis of our dietary.
Please understand here that I am not saying that high
protein wheats can't be grown organically. They certainly can. The founder of
Great Harvest Bakery performs a valuable service locating and securing high-protein
lots of organically grown wheats for his outlets. But often as not Organic products
are no more nourishing than those grown with chemicals. Until the buyers at Organic
whole food wholesalers get better educated about grain, obtaining one's personal
milling stock from them will be a dicey proposition.
Sometimes Organic cereal can be far worse than conventional.
To make a cereal Organic is a negative definition; if it hasn't had chemicals,
then its Organic. Grain is one of the few foods that will still produce economic
yields of low quality seed on extremely infertile soil or when half-smothered
in weeds because herbicides weren't used for reasons of ideological purity. Vegetables
will hardly produce anything under those conditions; carelessly grown fruits
and vegetables are inevitably small, misshapen, unmarketable. But seed cleaning
can remove the contamination of weed seeds in cereal grains (at a cost.)
The price the farmer receives for Organic cereal grain
is much higher, so it is possible to accept rather low yields or expend more
money for cleaning out high levels of weed seeds from the field-run harvest,
and still make a good profit. A lousy Organic cereal crop like this might even
make a higher profit because the farmer has been spared the expense of fertilization,
of rotation, of weed control. I remember once I bought a sack of Organic whole
oats that were the smallest, most shriveled, bitterest oats I've ever tried to
eat. We ended up throwing out that tiny, light (lacking density) seed in favor
of using the "conventional" whole oats that were plump, heavy and sweet.
Wheat is not the only cereal that is damaged by industrial
milling. So are oats. Most consumers have never seen whole oats; they look very
much like wheat berries. But rolled oats become rancid and stale on the shelf
much like wheat flour on the shelf.
Another pitfall about using whole grains is that to be
nutritious they must still be fresh enough to sprout vigorously. A seed is a
package of food surrounding an embryo. The living embryo is waiting for the right
conditions (temperature and moisture) to begin sprouting. Sprouting means the
embryo begins eating up stored food and making a plant out of it. All foods are
damaged by exposure to oxygen, so to protect the embryo's food supply, the seed
is surrounded by a virtually airtight seed coat that permits only enough oxygen
to enter for the embryo's respiration (yes, seed breaths slowly). Often the embryo
is located at the edge of the seed and has its own air intake port. When the
seed coat is removed or damaged, the innards are exposed to air and begin deteriorating
rapidly. In the case of oats, especially rapidly, because oats are the only grass-based
that contains large quantities of oil–five percent oil, more or less. That's
oats "stick to your ribs." Rolled oats become stale and lose their
flavor (and nutritional content) and perhaps become rancid very rapidly. So we
make porridge from whole oat groats that we coarsely grind to grits (steel-cut
oats) in an electric
seed/spice mill just before cooking.
It is not easy to cook oat grits. They take a lot longer
than rolled oats and if not done exactly to the recipe I'm about to give you,
will almost inevitably stick to the pot badly and may also froth over and mess
the stove. Here's how to cook them. Coarsely grind (like corn meal) your whole
oats until you have one cup of oat grits. Bring exactly four cups of water (no
salt) to a very hard boil at your highest heat. You may add a handful of raisins.
Light or turn on a second, small-sized burner on the stove and set it as low
as possible. Into the fast boiling water, slowly pour the ground oats, stirring
continuously. Take about 30 seconds to pour it all or you'll make clumps. Keep
on the high heat until the water again boils vigorously. Suddenly, the mixture
will begin rising in the pot and will try to pour all over the stove. This means
it is all at boiling temperature again. Quickly move the pot to the low burner;
that instantly stops the frothing. Then cover. Let the porridge cook for 30 minutes,
stirring once or twice to prevent sticking. Then, keeping it covered, turn off
the heat. They can be eaten at this point but I think it is better to let the
oats finish soaking on the stove for at least two to four hours. Then reheat
in a double boiler, or
warm in a microwave.
We usually start a pot of oats at bedtime for the next
morning. See why people prefer the convenience of using rolled oats? But once
you've eaten oats made right, you'll never prefer the flavor of rolled oats again.
And if the human body has any natural method of assaying nutritional content,
it is flavor.
Nutritionally, millet is almost the same story as oats.
Millet seed is protected by a very hard hull. Cooking unhulled millet is almost
impossible. After hours of boiling the small round seeds will still be hard and
the hulls remain entirely indigestible. Worse, the half-round hulls (they split
eventually) stick in your teeth. But prehulled millet, sitting in the sack for
weeks and months, loses a lot of nutrition and tastes very second-rate compared
to freshly-hulled millet. It is possible to buy unhulled millet, usually by special
order from the health food distributor–if you'll take a whole sack. Millet can
be hulled at home in small batches. Here's how we figured out how to do it. There
probably are better ways.
Using a cheap steel-burr flour mill, set the burrs just
far enough apart that the seed is ground to grits, but not flour. This pops the
hulls loose. An old mill with worn-out burrs works great for this job. Then you
have to get some hand seed cleaning screens just large enough to pass the grits
but not pass the hulls (most of them). Window screen or other hardware cloths
won't work. Seed cleaning screens come in increments of 1/128 inch; we use a
6/64" round screen. Other batches of millet might work better with a screen
one step larger or smaller. It will take you a little ingenuity to find hand-held
screens. They're used by seed companies and farmers to clean small batches of
seed for inspection and are usually about one square foot in size with a quality
wooden frame. Larger frames made of the same screening material are used in big
seed cleaning machines. (The hulls could also be winnowed out by repeatedly pouring
the grit/hulls mixture back and forth between two buckets in a gentle breeze.)
After you've screened out most of the hulls, the rest
will rinse out, floating off as you wash the grain prior to cooking. We never
hull more than enough millet for two or three meals and keep the uncooked (unwashed)
millet in the freezer in an airtight jar. It is interesting how people will accept
poor nutrition and its consequent sickness as the price of convenience.
If you eat much buckwheat you should also figure out
how to hull (sometimes called groating) it yourself. Someone should write a thorough
book on the home milling of cereals. And perhaps sell the equipment by mail.
would be a good little homestead business.
Something else you need to keep in mind about seed. Even
though the embryo's food supply is protected by the seed coat, it still slowly
deteriorates, steadily oxidizing and losing nutritional value. Eventually old
seed looses the ability to sprout. The decline in germination ability matches
a decline in nutritional quality. Any seed you are going to use for eating should
possess the ability to sprout, strongly and rapidly. (After you've comparatively
sprouted a few grain samples, you'll know what I mean by this.) Fortunately,
cereal grains usually sprout well for quite a few years after harvest if they
have been stored cool and dry. Eating dead or near-dead seeds will help move
to the same condition yourself.
Finally, one more warning about buying store bread. Salt-free
bread tastes "funny" to most people. It bakes fine, salt is not necessary
to the leavening process, but no bakery could stay in business without salting
their bread. The standard level of salt is two percent by weight. That is quite
a lot! Two percent equals one teaspoonful per pound. I'll have more to say about
the evils of salt later on.
I imagine some of my readers are feeling a little overwhelmed
by all these warnings and "bewares ofs," and intricacies. They are
used to taking no responsibility for securing their own food supply quality and
come to expect the "system" to protect them. I believe it is not because
of lack of government intervention, but because of government intervention itself,
our food system is very perverse. Until our mass consciousness changes, if you
wish to make yourself and your family truly healthy, you are going to have to
take charge and become quite a discriminating shopper. Unconscious consumers
on a rapid road to the total unconsciousness of death.
And again, let me remind you here that this one small
book cannot contain everything you should know. The bibliography at the end of
should become your guide to earning your post-graduate education in nutritional
Freshness Of Fruits And Vegetables
Most people do not realize the crucial importance of
freshness when it comes to produce. In the same way that seeds gradually die,
fruits and vegetables go through a similar process as their nutritional content
gradually oxidizes or is broken down by the vegetables own enzymes, but vegetables
lose nutrition hundreds of times more rapidly than cereals. Produce was recently
part of a living plant. It was connected to the vascular system of a plant and
with few exceptions, is not intended by nature to remain intact after being cut.
A lettuce or a zucchini was entirely alive at the moment of harvest, but from
that point, its cells begin to die. Even if it is not yet attacked by bacteria,
and fungi, its own internal enzymes have begun breaking down its own substances.
Vegetables, especially leafy vegetables, are far more
critical in this respect than most ripe fruits. All, however, deteriorate much
like radioactive material; they have a sort of half-life. The mineral content
is stable, but in respect to the vitamins and enzymes and other complex organic
components, each time period or "half life" results in the loss of
half the nutrition. Suppose a lettuce has a half life of 48 hours, two days after
harvest only 50 percent of the original nutrition remains. After two more days,
half the remaining half is gone and only 25 percent is left. After two more days
half of that 25 percent is lost. Thus six days after harvest and a lettuce contains
only bout 12 percent of its original nutrition. A two day half-life is only hypothetical.
Those types of produce I classify as very perishable probably do have a half-life
of from 36 to 48 hours. Moderately perishable produce has a half life of about
72 hours; durable types of produce have half lives of 96 hours or longer.
Vegetable Storage Potential
The half life of produce can be lengthened by lowering
its temperature. For that reason, sophisticated produce growers usually use hydrocooling.
This process dumps a just-cut vegetable into icy water within minutes of being
harvested, lowering core temperature to a few degrees above freezing almost immediately.
When cut vegetables are crated up at field temperatures, and stacks of those
crates are put in a cooler, it can take the inside of the stack 24 hours, or
longer, to become chilled. Home gardeners should also practice hydrocooling.
Fill your sink with cold water and wash/soak your harvest until it is thoroughly
chilled before draining and refrigerating it. Or, harvest your garden early in
when temperatures are lowest.
Still, when you buy produce in the store it may have
sitting at room temperature for hours or possibly days.
The bottom line here: fresh is equally as important as
unsprayed or organically grown!
The Real Truth About Salt And Sugar
First, let me remind certain food religionists: salt
is salt is salt is salt and sugar is sugar is sugar. There are no good forms
of salt and no good forms of sugar. Salt from a mine and salt from the sea both
have the same harmful effect; white sugar, natural brown sugar, honey, molasses,
corn syrup, maple syrup, whatever sweet have you. All are sugars and all have
the similar harmful effects. I know of no harmless salt substitute that really
tastes salty. Nutrisweet is basically harmless to most people and can be used
as a very satisfactory replacement for sugars. (A few people are unable to tolerate
nutrisweet, causing the anti-chemicalists to circulate much anti-nutrisweet propaganda,
but you should
carefully consider this thought before dismissing nutrisweet–there is almost
no food substance that some people are not allergic to or unable to digest. The
fact that nutrisweet is made in a chemical vat and the fact that some cannot
nutrisweet does not make it "of the devil."
And its not all black and white with the other items
either. Sea salt does have certain redeeming qualities not found in mined salt
and under certain very special conditions, eating small quantities of salt may
be acceptable. Similarly, some forms of sugar are not quite as harmful as other
all are harmful.
The primary health problem caused by table salt is not
that it contributes to high blood pressure in people with poor kidneys, though
it does that. It is not that eating salt ruins the kidneys; salt probably does
not do that. The real problem with salt is that sodium chloride is an adrenal
stimulant, triggering the release of adrenal hormones, especially natural steroids
that resist inflammation. When these hormones are at high levels in the blood,
the person often feels very good, has a sense of well-being. Thus salt is a drug!
And like many drugs of its type, salt is a habituating drug. However, we are
so used to whipping our adrenals with salt that we don't notice it. What we do
notice is that we think we like the taste of salted food and consider that food
tastes flat without it. But take away a person's salt shaker and they become
That's because the addict isn't getting their regular dose.
What's wrong with repetitive adrenal whipping is that
adrenal fortitude is variable; many people's adrenals eventually fail to respond
to the prod of salt and the body begins to suffer from a lack of adrenal hormones.
Often those inheriting weak adrenals manifest semi-failure in childhood. The
consequence is that ordinary, irritating substances begin causing severe irritation.
The person becomes allergic to pollen, dust, foods, animal danders, etc. We see
asthma, hay fever, sinusitis, etc. Though one can then discover specific allergens
and try to remove them from the environment or diet, often this case can be solved
far more easily by complete withdrawal from all salt. This rests the adrenals
and they may recover their full function; almost certainly their function will
The asthma, allergies and etc., gradually vanish.
Most of us don't need to eat salt as a nutrient. There's
enough sodium in one dill pickle to run a human body for a year. There's enough
natural sodium in many types of vegetables to supply normal needs without using
table salt. Perhaps athletes or other hard working people in the tropics eating
deficient food grown on leached-out depleted soils, people that sweat buckets
day after day may need a little extra sodium. Perhaps. Not having practiced in
the humid tropics myself, I have no definitive answer about this.
Unfortunately, the average American is entirely addicted
to salt and thinks food tastes lousy without it. To please the average consumer,
almost all prepared foods contain far too much salt for someone suffering from
exhausted adrenals. Interestingly, Canadians do not like their foods nearly as
salty as Americans, and prepared foods like soups and the like in cans and packages
that look just like the ones in American supermarkets (though with French on
the back panel) have to be reformulated for our northern neighbors. I've observed
that Canadians are generally healthier than Americans in many respects.
We would all be far better off consuming no salt at all.
Those with allergies or asthma should completely eliminate it for a month or
two and discover if that simple step doesn't pretty much cure them. The trouble
is that bakery bread is routinely two percent salt by weight. Cheese is equally
salted or even more so. Canned and frozen prepared food products are all heavily
salted. Restaurant meals are always highly salted in the kitchen. If you want
to avoid salt you almost have to prepare everything yourself, bake your own bread,
abstain from cheese (though there are unsalted cheeses but even I don't like
the flavor of these), and abstain from restaurants. My family has managed to
eliminate all salt from our own kitchen except for that in cheese, and we eat
Sugar is a high-caloric non-food with enormous liabilities.
First, from the viewpoint of the universal formula for health, no form of non-artificial
sweetener carries enough nutrients with it to justify the number of calories
it contains, not even malt extract. White refined sugar contains absolutely no
at all; the "good" or "natural" sweets also carry so little
nutrition as to be next to useless. Sweets are so far over on the bad end of
the Health = Nutrition / Calories scale that for this reason alone they should
However, healthy people can usually afford a small amount
of sin; why not make it sweets? In small quantity, sugars are probably the easiest
indiscretion to digest and the least damaging to the organ systems. Although,
speaking of sin, as Edgar Guest, the peoples' poet, once so wisely quipped, (and
my husband agrees) "Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker." Sugar is
a powerful drug! People who abuse sweets set up a cycle of addiction that can
be very hard to break. It starts when the body tries to regulate blood sugar.
Kicked up to high levels by eating sugar, the pancreas releases insulin. But
that is not the end of the chain reaction. Insulin regulates blood sugar levels
but also raises brain levels of an amino acid called tryptophan. Tryptophan is
the raw material the brain uses to manufacture a neurotransmitter called serotonin.
And serotonin plays a huge role in regulating mood. Higher brain levels of serotonin
create a feeling of well-being. Eating sugar gives a person a chemical jolt of
happiness. Heavy hits of high-glycemic index starch foods are also rapidly converted
to sugar. So don't give your kids sweets! Or huge servings of starch to mellow
them out. It is wise not to start out life a happiness addict with a severe weight
Now that the chemistry of sugar addiction is understood,
there currently is a movement afoot to cast the obese as helpless victims of
imbalances and to "treat" them with the same kinds of serotonin-increasing
happy drugs (like Prozac) that are becoming so popular with the psychiatric set.
This promises to be a multiple billion dollar business that will capture all
the money currently flowing into other dieting systems and bring it right back
to the AMA/drug company/FDA nexus. The pitch is that when serotonin levels are
upped, the desire to eat drops and so is weight. This approach is popular with
the obese because it requires no personal responsibility other than taking a
pill that really does make them feel happy. However, the same benefit can be
had by strict adherence to a low-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. Eventually, the
brain chemistry rebalances
itself and serotonin levels stabilize.
(compared to glucose, which is 100)
|whole wheat spagetti
||whole rye bread
Remember, the pancreas has another major service to perform
for the body: secreting digestive enzymes to aid in the digestion of proteins.
When the diet contains either too much protein or too much sugar and/or high-glycemic
index starch foods, the overworked pancreas begins to be less and less efficient
at maintaining both of these functions.
Sometimes a stressed-out pancreas gets overactive and
does too good a job lowering the blood sugar, producing hypoglycemia. Hypoglycemia
is generally accompanied by unpleasant symptoms such as fatigue, dizziness, blurred
vision, irritability, confusion, headache, etc. This condition is typically alleviated
by yet another hit of sugar which builds an addiction not only to sugar, but
to food in general. If the hypoglycemic then keeps on eating sugar to relieve
the symptoms of sugar ingestion, eventually the pancreas becomes exhausted, producing
an insulin deficiency, called diabetes. Medical doctors treat diabetes with insulin
supplements either oral or intramuscular plus a careful diet with very low and
measured amounts of sugar and starch for the remainder of the persons inevitably
shortened and far less pleasant life. However, sometimes diabetes can be controlled
with diet alone, though medical doctors have not had nearly as much success with
this approach as talented naturopaths. Sometimes, long fasting can regenerate
a pancreas. It is far better to avoid creating this disease!
The dietary management of hypoglycemia requires that
not only refined but also unrefined sugars and starches with a high glycemic
index be removed from the diet. (The glycemic index measures the ease with which
the starch is converted into glucose in the body, and estimates the amount of
insulin needed to balance it out.) This means no sugar, no honey, no white flour,
no whole grains sweetened with honey, no sweet fruits such as watermelons, bananas,
raisins, dates or figs. Potatoes are too readily converted into sugar. Jerusalem
are a good substitute.
People with hypoglycemia can often control their symptoms
with frequent small meals containing vegetable protein every two hours. When
a non-sweet fruit is eaten such as an apple, it should be eaten with some almonds
or other nut or seed that slows the absorption of fruit sugar. Hypoglycemics
can improve their condition with vitamins and food supplements. See the next
Allergies to foods and environmental irritants are frequently
triggered by low blood sugar. Mental conditions are also triggered by low blood
sugar levels, frequently contributing to or causing a cycle of acting out behavior
accompanied by destruction of property and interpersonal violence, as well as
psychosis and bouts of depression. It is not possible to easily deal with the
resulting behavior problems unless the hypoglycemia is controlled. Unfortunately
most institutions such as mental hospitals and jails serve large amounts of sugar
and starch and usually caffeinated beverages, with a high availability of soda
pop, candy, and cigarettes at concessions. If the diet were drastically improved,
the drugs given to control behavior in mental hospitals would be much more effective
at a lower dose, or unnecessary.
The insulin-cycle overworked pancreas may eventually
not be able to secrete enough enzymes to allow for the efficient digestion of
foods high in protein. As stated earlier, poor protein digestion leads to a highly
toxic condition from putrefied protein in the intestines. This condition is alleviated
by eliminating animal proteins from the diet and taking digestive aids such as
pancreatin pills with meals to assist in the digestion of vegetable proteins.
Food Combining And "Healthfood Junkfood."
This brings us to a topic I call healthfood junkfood.
Many people improve their diet, eliminating meat and chemicalized food in favor
of whole grains and organically grown foods, but they then proceed to make these
otherwise good foods into virtual junkfood by preparing them incorrectly. In
my travels, I've noticed this same thing happens everywhere on Earth. What should
be health-producing dietaries are ruined by frying, salting and sugaring.
Healthfood junkfoods include organically grown potato
chips deep fried in cold pressed organic unsaturated canola oil (made rancid
by frying) sprinkled with natural sea salt; organically grown oat and nut granola
roasted with cold-pressed unsaturated oil (made rancid by roasting) hideously
sweetened with honey; carrot cake made with rancid whole wheat flour, cold pressed
unsaturated oil (made rancid by baking), honey, and cream cheese (salted); whole
wheat cookies (stale, rancid flour) sweetened with honey, made with vegetable
oil baked at high heat (rancid); whole wheat pizza vegetarian style with lots
of soy cheese; whole wheat pizza vegan style with lots of real raw milk cheese;
organically grown corn chips deep fried in cold pressed vegetable oil with or
without natural sea salt, yogurts made from powdered milk without an active culture
of beneficial bacteria and covered with highly sugared fruits, etc. These foods
may well represent an improvement over the average American diet, but they still
are not healthy foods, and should never be used in a diet for a sick person.
are they worthy of a person attempting to maximize health.
The problem with healthfood junkfoods is not their major
ingredients, but how they were combined and processed and adulterated. Remember,
fats, animal or vegetable, subjected to high heat become indigestible and toxic
and make anything they're cooked with indigestible; salt is a toxic drug; cheese,
hard enough to digest as it is, when raised to high temperatures as it is when
making pizza, becomes virtually indigestible and cheese inevitably contains a
lot of butterfat which, though saturated animal fat, when raised to high temperatures,
still becomes slightly rancid. And all these foods represent indigestible combinations.
My clients almost never believe me when I first explain
the idea of food combining. They think if it goes in one end, comes out the other,
and they don't feel any unpleasant symptoms in between, then it was digested.
But bad food combinations have a cumulative degenerative effect over a long period
of time. When the symptoms arrive the victim never associates the food combination
with the symptom because it seems to them that they've always been eating the
Mainstream nutritionists have brainwashed the public
thinking that we should have a representative serving from each of the "four
basic food groups" at each and every meal, plus a beverage and a desert.
Or, as my husband Steve is fond of quipping, a "balanced meal" has
four colors on every plate: something red, something green, something white and
something yellow. But the balanced meal is a gastronomic catastrophe that can
only be processed by the very young with high digestive vitality, the exceptionally
vital of any age, people with cast iron stomachs which usually refers to their
and those who are very physically active.
Few seem to realize that each type of food requires specific
and different digestive enzymes in the mouth, stomach, and intestine. Carbohydrates,
fats, proteins–each requires differing acid or alkaline environments in order
to be digested. Proteins require an acid environment. Starch digestion requires
an alkaline environment. When foods in complex combinations are presented to
the stomach all together, like a meal with meat, potatoes, gravy, vegetables,
bread, butter, a glass of milk, plus a starchy sweet desert, followed by coffee
or tea, the stomach, pancreas, liver and small intestine are overwhelmed, resulting
in the fermentation of the sugars and starches, and the putrefaction of the proteins,
and poor digestion of the whole. It is little wonder that most people feel so
tired after a large meal and need several cups of strong coffee to be able to
even get up from the table. They have just presented their digestive tract with
an immensely difficult and for some an impossible task.
For the most efficient digestion, the body should be
presented with one simple food at a time, the one bowl concept, easily achieved
to the old saying, "one food at a meal is the ideal." An example of
this approach would be eating fruits for breakfast, a plain cereal grain for
lunch, and vegetables for supper. If you can't eat quite that simply, then proper
food combining rules should be followed to minimize digestive difficulty, maximize
the adsorption of nutrients from your food, and reduce or eliminate the formation
of toxemia, and of course foul gas.
In general, fruit should be eaten alone unless you happen
to be hypoglycemic or diabetic in which case fruit should be eaten with small
quantities of a vegetable protein such as nuts, or yogurt and/or cheese if able
to digest dairy. Starches should be eaten with vegetables, which means that a
well combined meal would include a grain such as rice, millet, buckwheat, amaranth,
quinoa, corn, wheat, rye, oats, spelt, potatoes, or starchy winter squash combined
with raw or cooked vegetables. Protein foods such as meat, eggs, beans, lentils,
tofu, split peas, should be combined with vegetables, raw or cooked. But protein
should never be combined with starches. The most popular North American snacks
and meals always have a starch/protein combination, for example: meat and potatoes,
hamburger in a bun, hot dog with bun, burrito with meat or cheese, meat sandwiches,
etc. It is little wonder that intestinal gas is accepted as normal, and that
over time these hard to digest combinations eventually cause health problems
Another sure fire way to ruin any food, including the
very best available is to eat in the presence of negative emotions generated
by yourself or others. Negative emotions include fear, anger, frustration, envy,
resentment, etc. The digestive tract is immediately responsive to stress and
or negative thoughts. It becomes paralyzed in negative emotional states; any
eaten are poorly digested, causing toxemia.
It is natural for a person who has lost a loved one or
suffered a great loss of any kind to lose their appetite for a period of time.
This reaction is pro-survival, because while grieving, the body is griped by
powerful negative emotions. There are people who, under stress or when experiencing
a loss, eat ravenously in an attempt to comfort themselves. If this goes on for
person can expect to create a serious illness of some kind.
Individual sensitivity to this type of overeating is
dependent upon genetics and personality and who is generating the negative emotions.
Self generated negative emotions are very difficult to avoid. If you are unable
to change your own emotional tone or that of others around you, then it is important
to eat very lightly, eat only easily digested foods such as raw fruits and vegetables,
raw juices, steamed vegetables, and small servings of whole grains, nuts and
Diets To Heal The Critically Ill
A critically ill person is someone who could expire at
any moment; therapeutic interventions are racing against death. Can the body
repair itself enough before some essential function ceases altogether? If there
already exists too much damage to vital organs the person will die. If there
remains sufficient organ function to support life, enough vital force to power
those functions, and a will to live, the body may heal itself if helped by the
correct therapeutic approach. But the therapy does not do the healing; the body
does that by itself–if
it can. This reality is also true of allopathic medicine.
I believe fasting is the therapy that almost invariably
gives a critically ill person their very best chance of recovery. If a patient
dies while fasting they almost certainly would have died anyway, and if death
comes while fasting, it will be more comfortable, with less pain, and with more
Critically ill people may have, among other things, any
of the following diagnoses: advanced cancer, advanced aids, heart failure, very
high blood pressure, kidney failure, advanced liver disease, advanced emphysema,
pneumonia or other catastrophic infections, especially those that seem unresponsive
to antibiotics, strokes, emboli, sclerotic vessels as found in arteriosclerosis,
severe nerve degeneration interfering with nerve transmission to vital organs.
Treating the critically ill does not have to be an all
or nothing, ideological choice between holistic medicine and AMA style medicine.
It is important for the critically ill and their families to know that if they
use standard medical treatment such as drugs or surgery, these measures can and
should be combined with natural healing methods. It is always desirable to quit
all addicting substances, start a whole foods diet, (as light as possible), and
add meganutrition (supplements) to the medical doctor's treatments. Few medical
doctors are so arrogantly partisan as to assert that natural measures will do
any harm as long as the MD is still allowed to prescribe as they please.
Holistic support will not only lessen the side effects
of the medical treatments but will speed up healing and often reduce the required
dose of prescribed drugs. I have had several clients with cancer who chose to
have surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, but stayed on a raw food diet and took
high doses of supplements throughout the treatment. These people amazed the attending
physician by feeling good with little if any fatigue, no hair loss, or flu symptoms.
The same can be true of other conditions.
Food In The Order Of Digestive Difficulty
Individual digestive weaknesses and allergies are not
taken into account in this list.
- Hard To Digest: Meat, fish, chicken, eggs (if cooked), all legumes
including soy products, peanuts and peanut butter, beans, split peas, lentils,
chick peas, dairy products such as cheese, milk, butter milk, nuts and seeds
and their butters.
- Intermediate: all grains–quinoa, amaranth, millet, spelt, rye,
wheat, oats, barley.
- Fairly Easy: Brussels sprouts, green beans, green peas, broccoli,
cauliflower, raw cultured milk products, asparagus, cabbage, sprouts especially
bean sprouts, kale, other leafy greens.
- Very Easy: fruits, vegetable juices, fruit juices, broth (clear).
- No Effort: herb tea, water.
Ethyl always comes to my mind when I think of how
much healing power can still be left in a dying body. She (accompanied by her
husband for support) came to Great Oaks School with terminal cancer, heart
failure, advanced diabetes, extreme weakness, and complete inability to digest.
Any food ingested just came back up immediately. Ethyl had large tumors taking
over the breast, sticking out from her skull, and protruding from her body
in general. The largest was the one in the left breast which was the size of
a big man's fist.
She did have one crucial thing going for her, Ethyl was
a feisty Irish red head who still had a will to live, and a reason to do so.
She and her husband, who had just retired, had dreamed their whole life of touring
the US and Canada in their own RV the minute he retired. The time had finally
arrived but Ethyl was too ill to support her own weight (only 90 pounds) and
to top it off was blind from diabetic retinopathy. The doctors had done everything
they could to her, and now judged her too weak to withstand any more surgery
(she had already had her right breast removed). Radiation or chemotherapy were
also considered impossible due to heart failure. They sent Ethyl home to die,
giving her a few days to a month at most.
Any sensible hygienist trying to stay out of jail would
have refused to take on this type of case because it was a cancer case where
death was likely. Treatment of this highly lucrative disease is considered the
AMA's exclusive franchise, even when the medical doctors have given up after
having done everything to a body the family can pay for or owe for. Whenever
a person dies under the care of any person who is not a licensed M.D. there must
be an autopsy and a criminal investigation in search of negligence. If the person
dies under the care of an M.D. the sheriff's assumption is that the doctor most
assuredly did everything he could and should have done and death was inevitable.
By accepting Ethyl I had a reasonable likelihood of ending up in trouble; but
being foolish, brave and (stupidly) feeling relatively immune to such consequences
(I was under 40 at the time), it seemed important to try to help her. So, undaunted
by the task, regardless of the outcome, I proceeded logically, one step at a
time. Today, with more experience and a modest net worth I wouldn't want to have
to defend in a lawsuit, and at age 55. possessing no spare five to ten years
to give to the State to "pay" for my bravery, I would probably refuse
such a case. Fortunately I have not been confronted with this problem lately.
Since Ethyl was unable to digest anything given by mouth,
she was fed rectally with wheat grass juice implants three times a day. She was
carried to the colonic table for a daily colonic. Wheat grass and clay poultices
were applied to her tumors three times a day. She received an acupressure massage
and reflexology treatments during the day, plus a lot of tender loving care.
This program continued for a month during which the tumors were being reabsorbed
by the body, including the large, extremely hard tumor sticking out the flesh
of the right breast.
Ethyl complained of severe pain as the large tumor in
her breast shrank. While it had been getting larger and pressing ever harder
on all the nerves, she had little or no sensation, but as it shrank, the nerves
were reactivated. Most people think that a growing tumor would cause more pain
than a shrinking one. Often the opposite is true. Pain can be a good sign that
the body is winning, an indicator to proceed.
By the second month, Ethyl, gradually gaining strength,
was able to take wheat grass and carrot juice orally, and gradually eased into
raw foods, mostly sprouts and leafy greens such as sunflower and buckwheat greens
grown in trays. She started to walk with assistance up and down the halls, no
longer experiencing the intense pain formerly caused by a failing heart, and
most surprising of all, her eyesight returned, at first seeing only outlines,
and then details.
The third month Ethyl enlarged her food intake to include
raw foods as well as the carrot and wheat grass juice and sprouts, plus vitamin
and mineral supplements to help support her immune system and the healing process.
All the tumors had been reabsorbed by her body and were no longer visible, her
heart was able to support normal activity such as walking, and nonstrenuous household
chores, and her diabetes had corrected itself to the point that she no longer
required insulin and was able to control her blood sugar with diet.
Her husband was then instructed in her maintenance and
they went home to continue the program. The last I heard from them they had made
two lengthy trips around the US in their RV and were enjoying their retirement
together after all.
My treatment worked because the most important factor
in the healing of the critically ill person is not give them more nourishment
than their body is able to process. The moment the digestive capacity of the
sick person is exceeded, the condition will be exacerbated and in a critically
illness, the person is likely to die. If the body still has sufficient organ
integrity and vital force to heal itself, it will do so only if given the least
possible nourishment that will support life–provided no essential organs are
hopelessly damaged. If the liver and kidneys are functional, and the person has
done some previous dietary improvement and/or cleansing, success is likely, especially
if the person wants to live.
A person in critical condition does not have time to
ease into fasting by first spending a month or two on a raw foods diet. This
means that the person who is taking care of the critically ill person must be
experienced enough to adjust the intensity of the body's healing efforts and
accurately assess the ability of the person to process toxic waste products clamoring
for removal so the ailing body is not drowned in it's own poisons. It is often
necessary to use clear vegetable broth, vegetable and wheat grass juices, and
fruits juices, or whole sprouts to slow down the cleansing gradient and sometimes,
to resupply the tissue's exhausted nutritional reserves.
I wish all cases of critical illness had such a positive
outcome as Ethyl's, but unfortunately they don't. I had Marge on the same program
at the same time. She also had cancerous tumors all over her body and had similarly
been sent home to die. In some ways Marge's body was a more likely candidate
for survival than Ethyl's. Marge did not have heart failure or diabetes and was
still able on arrival to at least take small amount of water orally and walk
to the bathroom. Put on a similar program, her tumors also shrunk and were reabsorbed
and she too went home.
But Marge did not really have a strong reason to live.
Although her husband was by her side throughout the treatment program, Marge
was deeply upset because she was estranged from one of her sons who she had not
seen for over 10 years. When she went home from Great Oaks, the son finally consented
to see his mother, went to the effort of trying to work things out with her,
and finally confessed that under it all he still loved her.
At that point Marge died in peace. She had accomplished
the last thing she wanted to take care of and her will to live did not extend
beyond that point. Had she died several months earlier as predicted by the medical
profession, Marge would have been unable to resolve this relationship. This was
what Marge's life was pivoting on at the end. I was glad to assist her in doing
what she needed to do. Her husband and other family members found it difficult
to understand, and they were hurt that Marge did not wish to continue her life
Diet For The Chronically Ill.
The chronically ill person has a long-term degenerative
condition that is not immediately life threatening. This condition usually causes
more-or-less continuous symptoms that are painful, perhaps unsightly, and ultimately
will be disabling or eventually capable of causing death. To qualify as "chronic" the
symptoms must have been present a minimum of six months, with no relief in sight.
People with these conditions have usually sought medical assistance, frequently
have had surgery, and have taken and probably are taking numerous prescription
Some examples of chronic conditions are: arthritis, rheumatism,
diabetes, early onset of cancer and aids, asthma, colitis, diverticulitis, irritable
bowel syndrome, some mental disorders, arterial deposit diseases, most of the
Before fasting, the chronically ill often do have time
to prepare the way with limited dietary reform, and frequently begin to feel
relief quite quickly. Before actually fasting they should limit their diet to
raw foods and eliminate all toxic foods like alcohol, coffee, tea, salt, sugar
and recreational drugs for two months if they have been following a typical American
If the chronically ill had been following a vegetarian
diet, perhaps a diet including with eggs and dairy, if they had been using no
addicting substances, then one month on raw foods is sufficient preparation for
fasting. If the person had water or juice fasted for at least a week or two within
the last two years, and followed a healthy diet since that time, one or two weeks
on raw foods should be a sufficient runway.
During preparation for a fast, I never recommend that
a chronically ill person quit taking prescription medicines because doing so
can seriously disrupt their homeostasis. However, if their symptoms lessen or
vanish during the pre-fasting clean up, the person might try tapering off medications.
The length and type of fast chosen to resolve a chronic
illness depends largely on available time, finances, availability of support
people, work responsibilities, and mental toughness. If you are one of those
fortunate people 'rich' enough to give their health first priority, long water
fasting is ideal. If on the other hand you can't afford to stop working, have
no one to take care of you and assist with some household chores, and/or you
are not mentally tough enough to deal with self-denial, compromise is necessary.
Ideally the chronically ill person would fast for an
extended period under supervision until their symptoms were gone or greatly improved,
with a fall-back plan to repeat the whole process again in three to six months
if necessary. If you are not able to do that, the next best program is to fast
for a short period, like one or two weeks, with a plan to repeat the process
as often as possible until you are healed.
I have had clients with potentially life-threatening
conditions such as obesity with incipient heart failure, or who came to me with
cancer, that were unable to stop work for financial reasons, or who could not
afford a residential fasting program, or who felt confident in their own ability
to deal with detoxification in their own home. These people have fasted successfully
at home, coming to see me once a week. Almost inevitably, successful at-home
fasters had already done a lot of research on self healing, believed in it, and
had the personal discipline to carry it out properly, including breaking the
fast properly without overeating.
Foods To Heal Chronic Illness
Fruits should be watery and lower in sugar. Some examples
of poor fruit choices would be pineapple, ripe mango, bananas, dates, raisins,
figs. Fruits should not be combined with vegetables.
Vegetables should not be starchy, packed-full of energy.
Poor vegetable choices would be potato, parsnip, turnip, corn, sweet potato,
yam, beet, winter squash. Sprouts and baby greens are vegetables and may be
included in salads.
Juices should not be extremely sweet. Apple, orange,
beet and carrot juice should be diluted with 50% water. Fruit juices should
mixed with vegetable juices or with vegetables at the same meal.
Salads should include no fruit. Salad dressings should
be lemon or lime juice, very small quantities of olive oil, and herbs. No salt,
soy sauce nor black pepper. Cayenne can be okay for some.
I have also helped chronically ill people that were not
mentally prepared to water fast, but were able to face the long-term self-control
and deprivation of a raw food cleansing diet that included careful food combining.
These people also regained their health, but it took them a year at minimum,
and once well they had to remain on a diet tailor-made to their digestive capacity
for the rest of their life, usually along with food supplements.
Jim was such a case. He was 55 years old, very obese,
had dangerously high blood pressure poorly controlled with medication, and
was going into congestive heart failure. He was on digitalis and several other
medications plus diuretics, but in no way was his condition under control.
He had severe edema in the feet and legs with pitting, and fluid retention in
abdominal region caused a huge paunch that was solid to the touch not soft
and squishy like fatty tissue.
Jim had dreamed of having his own homestead with an Organic
garden, now he had these things but was too sick to enjoy them or work in his
garden without severe heart pain and shortness of breath. Jim had retired early
in order to enjoy many years without the stresses of work, and he was alarmed
to realize that he was unlikely to survive a year.
The day Jim came to see me the first time I would have
classified his condition as critically ill because his life was in immediate
danger; but he responded so quickly to his detox program that he was very soon
out of danger and would be more accurately described as a chronically ill person.
Jim was not prepared to water fast. He was attached to having his food and
he was aware that at his extreme weight he was going to have stay on a dietary
for a long, long time. He also wanted to choose a gradient that he could manage
by himself at home with little assistance from his wife. He had been on a typical
American diet with meat, coffee, etc., so that in spite of his dangerous condition
it did not seem wise to me to add the heavy eliminatory burden of a water fast
to a body that was already overwhelmed with fluids and waste products.
Jim immediately went on a raw food cleansing diet, with
no concentrated foods like nuts, seeds, or avocados, and with one day each
week fasting on vegetable juice and broth. He did enemas daily even though it
his favorite thing. In one month he had lost 30 pounds, his eyes had started
to sparkle, and his complexion was rosy. The swelling had disappeared from
and legs, and he had to buy new pants.
Starting the second month he gradually withdrew from
prescription medications. From the beginning I had put Jim on a program of
nutritional supplements including protomorphogens (see chapter on vitamins and
to help the body repair it's heart and the kidneys. In only four months he
had returned his body to glowing health, and looked great for his age, though
was still overweight. At the end of one year he had returned to a normal weight
for his height, and only cheated on the diet a couple of times when attending
event, and then it was only a baked potato with no dressing.
He was probably going to have many qualitative years
working his garden and living out his dreams. The local intensive care ward
lost a lot
of money when they failed to get Jim.
Diet For The Acutely Ill
The acutely ill person experiences occasional attacks
of distressing symptoms, usually after indiscretions in living or emotional
upsets. They have a cold, or a flu, or sinusitis, or a first bout of pneumonia,
spring allergy attack. The intense symptoms knock them flat and force them
to bed for a few days or a week. If they are sick more often than that, they
the chronically ill category.
People who are acutely ill should stop eating to whatever
extent that they are able until the symptoms are gone. During an acute illness,
the appetites is probably pretty dull anyway, so why not give a brief fast
on water or fruit juice a try.
Most acute conditions are short in duration, usually
not lasting more than a week. Allergy attacks, some types of flu, and a first
bout of pneumonia may well last for three weeks or a month. The general rule
is to eat as little as possible until the symptoms have passed, self-administer
colon cleansing, even if you have a horror of such things, and take vitamin
supplements, including megadoses of Vitamin C, bioflavinoids, and zinc. (See
the chapter on
vitamins.) Those having a little experience with natural medicine make teas
of echinacea, fenugreek seeds and red clover and quit eating. Eating as little
possible can mean only water and herb teas, only vegetable broth, only vegetable
juice or non-sweet fruit juice, even only cleansing raw foods. If you eat more
than this you have not relieved your system of enough digestive effort.
After your symptoms are gone it is very important to
change your life-style and improve your diet so that you aren't so toxic and
don't have to experience an acute illness several times a year when your body
is forced to
try an energetic detox.
Diet For A Healthy Person
I doubt that it is possible to be totally healthy in
the twentieth century. Doctors Alsleben and Shute in their book How to Survive
the New Health Catastrophes state that in-depth laboratory testing of the population
at large demonstrated four universally present pathological conditions: heavy
metal poisoning, arteriosclerosis, sub-clinical infections, and vitamin/mineral
deficiencies. Those of us who consider ourselves healthy, including young people,
are not really healthy, and at the very least would benefit from nutritional
supplementation. In fact the odds against most people receiving adequate vitamin
and mineral nutrition without supplements are very poor as demonstrated by
the following chart.
Problem Nutrients in America
||Percent Receiving Less than the RDA
A genuinely healthy person almost never becomes acutely
ill, and does not have any disturbing or distracting symptoms; nothing interferes
with or handicaps their daily life or work. A healthy person has good energy
most of the time, a positive state of mind, restful sleep, good digestion and
Healthy people do not have to live simon-pure lives to
remain that way. Healthy people can afford 10% dietary indiscretions by calorie
count–eating or drinking those things that they know are not good for them but
that are fun to eat or are "recreational foods or beverages." Such "sinning" could
mean a restaurant bash twice a month, having a pizza, French bread, beer or wine
in moderation, ice cream, cookies, cake, turkey for festive occasions, etc. The
key concept of responsible sinning is keeping within that ten percent limit.
A diet for a healthy person that wants to remain healthy
should not exceed the digestive capacity of the individual, either in terms of
quantity or quality. All foods that can not be efficiently digested should be
removed from the regular diet and relegated to the "sin" category,
including those you are allergic to and those for which you have inadequate digestive
enzymes. I have encountered very few people that can efficiently digest cooked
meat, chicken, or fish, but some can, and some can with the assistance of digestive
enzyme supplements. In order to digest meats, the stomach must be sufficiently
acid, there must be enough pepsin, pancreatin, and bile, etc., and the meat should
be eaten on the extremely rare side (not pork), in small quantities (not more
than five or six ounces), and not combined with anything except nonstarchy vegetables.
If you must include meat in your dietary, it should represent a very small percentage
of your total caloric intake, be eaten infrequently, with the bulk of the calories
coming from complex carbohydrates such grains, legumes and nuts, as well as large
quantities of vegetables and fruits.
The healthy person that wants to stay that way for many,
years is advised to fast one day a week, to give the organs of elimination a
chance to catch up on their internal housecleaning. If water fasting seems impossible,
try a day of juicing it; if that is too rigorous, try a day on raw foods. A similar
technique, though less beneficial than even a one day each week on raw foods,
is delaying breaking your overnight fast for as long as possible each day. Try
giving up breakfast altogether or postponing breaking your overnight fast, because
from the time you stop eating at the end of one day to the time you start eating
the next is actually a brief, detoxifying fast.
Eggs, milk, cheese and yogurt can be assimilated by some
healthy people with or without digestive aids. It is possible to take lactase
to break down the milk sugars for example; sometimes aids such as hydrochloric
acid, pepsin, and pancreatin help. If you can buy it or are willing to make it
raw milk yogurt containing lactobacillus bulgaris or acidophilus may be digested
more readily, especially if it prepared from healthy cows or goats fed on unsprayed
food, and served very fresh. Eggs should come from chickens that run around outside,
eating weeds, and scratching bugs. The yokes of those eggs will be intense orange,
not yellow. Few people these days have ever eaten a real egg. Surprisingly, for
those of you who fear cholesterol, the healthy way to eat eggs is use just the
raw yolk from fertile eggs. It is enjoyed by many people in a smoothie–fresh
fruit blended up with water or milk. Eggs contain lecithin, a nutrient that naturally
prevents the body from forming harmful fatty deposits in the arteries.
Sea weeds are a wonderful source of minerals and should
be eaten in soups and salads. Other invaluable fortifying foods are algae of
all kinds (such as chlorella and spirulina), lecithin, brewers yeast, and fresh
bakers yeast. Many people have had very unpleasant experiences trying to eat
living bakers yeast and so use brewers yeast instead. But brewers yeast is cooked
and the proteins it contains are not nearly as assimilable as those in raw yeast.
Raw yeast is so powerful, it feels like pep pills!
It takes a special technique to eat raw yeast because
in the stomach and intestines the yeast does the job it is supposed to do: convert
sugars into alcohol and carbon dioxide gas. The entire digestive tract then bloats
with gas and the person will feel very uncomfortable for some time. However,
raw yeast is a marvelous source of B vitamins and proteins and can make someone
feel very energetic–if they know how to use it. The secret is to eat live yeast
very first thing in the morning on an empty stomach and then, not eat anything
at all for about two hours, giving the stomach acids and enzymes time to kill
the yeasts and digest them before adding sugars from another meal. Some like
to eat yeast in fresh cake form, buying it from a bakery. Others prefer dry granular
baker's yeast blended with water into a sort of "shake." This is not
a bad place to put your raw egg yoke either. If you need it sweetened to drink
it, use an artificial or herbal sweetener like nutrisweet or stevia. Live yeast
cannot consume milk sugars very well. So if you can handle dairy, try one or
two tablespoons of granulated live yeast, an egg yoke and a little raw milk or
yogurt, well whizzed.
Wheat germ is also a great, rich food, but is usually
rancid unless it is taken out of the refrigerated display; unless it is refrigerated,
in a dated package and fresh, don't eat it. Herb teas and roasted grain beverages
are healthy beverages, along with mineral and distilled water avoiding where
possible chlorinated and fluoridated water.
Diet Is Not Enough
Those isolated, long-lived peoples discovered by Weston
A. Price had to do hard physical labor to eat, had to walk briskly up and down
steep terrain to get anywhere. But today, few North Americans output very much
physical energy in process of daily life or work. Not only cars, but all of our
modern conveniences make it possible to live without ever breaking into a sweat.
We pay for this ease; it costs us a significant degree of health.
Exercise has many benefits when combined with excellent
nutrition. It creates an overall feeling of well-being that can not be created
by diet alone. Exercising temporarily makes the heart beat faster, increasing
blood circulation throughout the body right out to the tips of your fingers and
toes. This short-term elevated flow of blood flow brings increased supplies of
oxygen and nutrients to all parts of the body, facilitating healing and repair.
Without revving up your engine every day many of the body's systems never get
the sludge burned out of them and never perform optimally.
Exercise also changes the metabolic rate so your body
burns more calories–not only while you are exercising, but also for a 24 hour
period following exercise. This maintains a healthful body weight into old age,
or helps to lose weight. Most people find that exercise in moderation does not
increase appetite, so that it is possible to consistently burn more calories
in a day, and gradually reduce weight if that is desirable. It is necessary to
burn 3,500 calories to lose a pound of weight. Most forms of exercise allow you
to burn 300 to 600 calories per hour at a moderate pace which would be achieved
by doubling the resting pulse. Without even considering the weight-loss benefit
of achieving a raised metabolism, an hour of daily exercise continued for a week
or two dependent upon the type of exercise and pace should lead to one pound
of weight loss if the caloric intake is held constant.
The flip side of having a higher metabolism is rarely
appreciated but is extremely important. Recall the basic equation of health:
Health = Nutrition / Calories. Exercise permits a person to eat somewhat more
while not gaining weight. If the food is nutrient rich, the body has a chance
to extract more vitamins, more minerals, more amino acids. The person who remains
slender by rigidly reducing their food intake to near starvation levels may lack
vital, health-building nutrition.
And only exercise moves lymphatic fluid. The blood is
pumped through the body by the heart, but the lymphatic system, lacking a heart,
requires muscular contractions to move from the extremities of the body to the
central cavity. The lymphatic system picks up cellular waste products and conducts
these toxins to disposal. Frequently, people with rheumatic aches and pains or
other generalized muscular discomforts physicians like to give Latin diagnostic
names to can give up taking pain pills if they will but begin exercising regularly.
Only when they begin moving their lymph can they begin to detoxify properly.
There is another benefit from exercise which is not to
be ignored, and that is that it gives the person a chemical sense of well being.
It actually will help to emotionally boost up people who are chronically depressed
and make them smile. After a good workout, especially one done outside, everything
seems brighter, more positive; whatever was bothering you somehow just doesn't
seem like that big of a deal now. I am not making pro-exercise propaganda. This
is not a figment of the imagination. An exercising body really does make antidepressant
neurochemicals called endorphins, but only after about 45 minutes to an hour
of aerobic workout.
Endorphins are powerful, with painkilling and euphoric
effects equal to or greater than heroin, but without any undesirable side effects.
If chemists could learn to cheaply synthesize endorphins I'm sure that millions
of people would want to become addicted to them. Because I make such a point
of getting in my workout every day, my husband has accused me of being an endorphin
junkie, and he is right! I admit it, I'm really hooked on the feeling of well
being I consistently get from any sustained exercise. I defend my addiction staunchly
because it is the healthiest addiction I know of.
I have also been accused of carrying exercise to extremes,
and I admit to that also. For a few years I trained for Ironman triathlons. I
now think doing ironman distances is immoderate and except for a few remarkable
individuals with "iron" constitutions, training that hard can only
lead to a form of exhaustion that is not health promoting. I have become much
more sensible in my "old" age, and in recent years have limited my
participation to the Olympic distance triathlons. I was on the Canadian team
at the World Championship in 1992, and intend to do it again in 1995. I do not
find the Olympic distance exhausting, in fact I think it is great fun and truly
exhilarating. I get to see all these wonderful age group competitors from all
over the world who look and feel fantastic. It does my soul good to see a group
of people aging so gracefully, not buying into the popular notion that old age
is inevitably disabling, depressing, and ugly. Sport brings a degree of balance
to my life after spending so much time in the presence of the sick. I plan to
maintain my athletic activities into old age, barring accident or other unforeseen
obstacles to fitness.
To maintain basic fitness it does not matter so much
what form of exercise is chosen, as long as it is not damaging to the skeletal
system or connective tissues. Many people are unable to run due to foot, knee,
hip, or back problems, but almost everyone can walk. Walking outside is better
than inside on a treadmill, and walking hills is better than walking on flat
ground. Exercise machines such as stationary bikes, cross country ski machines,
and stair steppers work well for a lot of people who live in the city, especially
in the winter, or for those who hate exercise. Whatever you choose to do, it
is important to at least double the resting pulse for 30 minutes no less than
four days a week. This is the absolute minimum required to maintain the health
and function of the cardiovascular-pulmonary system. If your resting pulse is
70, you must walk, jog, ski, bike, swim or what have you, fast enough to keep
the pulse at 140 beats per minute for at least 30 minutes.
I have a strong preference to exercising outside in isolated
places where there is only me and the forest, or only me and the river. Running
along logging roads in the hilly back country, or swimming in the green unpolluted
water of a forest river is a spiritual experience for me. It is a time to meditate,
to commune with nature, and to clear my mind and create new solutions. The repetitive
action of running or walking or swimming, along with the regular deep breathing
in clean air, with no distractions except what nature provides is truly health
promoting. Sharing these activities with friends or family can also be great
fun and some of the best in social interactions. It is one of my favorite ways
of visiting with people. I don't expect other people to be as enthusiastic about
exercise as I am, but I do hope that everyone will make an effort to be minimally
fit as an ongoing part of their health program into old age.
Diet For A Long, Long Life
Some people not only want to be healthy, but they want
to live in good health long past the normal life span projected by statistical
tables for Homo Sapiens. Dr. Roy Walford, a well-respected medical research gerontologist
who has been actively studying longevity for many years, is one of those. He
has scientifically demonstrated with accepted studies that a qualitative life
span up to at least 115 years of age is reasonably attainable by the average
person if they start working on it no later than about 50 years of age, though
earlier is much better.
Walford's principles of extending life are very simple.
All you have to do is restrict your caloric intake to about 1,500 per day, and
water fast two days a week. Or alternatively, reduce your caloric intake to 1,200
per day and fast only one day a week on water. And make sure that every single
bit of food you do eat is packed with nutrition, every single calorie, without
exception. You continue this program for the rest of your life along with moderate
daily exercise and high but reasonable dosages of vitamins, minerals, and also
take a few exotic food supplements. The supplement program is not particularly
expensive nor extreme, Walford's supplement program is more moderate than the
life extension program I recommend for all middle-aged and older people. The
best foods for this type of program is a largely raw food diet (80%) with a predominance
of sprouts and baby greens, some cooked vegetables, and raw nuts and seeds. And
make sure you get 30 minutes of cardiovascular exercise every other day.
While Dr. Walford's focus is on caloric reduction while
maintaining sufficient nutrition, most other life extensionists focus on increasing
the nutrition side of the equation for health without bothering to reduce caloric
intake. This approach is much easier because essentially, it involves gobbling
nutritional supplements by the handfuls without requiring self-discipline, though
it can get quite expensive. I'll have more to say about this approach in the
next chapter, which is about vitamins.
In this book I can't explain all the aspects of prolongation
of life through conscious life-style choice. Those who are interested are referred
to the Bibliography.
How and When to Be Your Own Doctor
by Dr. Isabelle A. Moser with Steve Solomon
Vitamins and Other Food Supplements
From The Hygienic Dictionary
Vitamins.  The staple foods may not contain
the same nutritive substances as in former times. . . . Chemical fertilizers,
by increasing the abundance of the crops without replacing all the exhausted
elements of the soil, may have indirectly contributed to change the nutritive
value of cereal grains and of vegetables. . . . Hygienists have not paid sufficient
attention to the genesis of diseases. Their studies of conditions of life and
diet, and of their effects on the physiological and mental state of modern
man are superficial, incomplete, and of too short duration. They have, thus,
contributed to the weakening of our body and our soul. Alexis Carrel, Man
I have already explained the hygienist's view of why
people get sick. The sequence of causation goes: enervation, toxemia, alternative
elimination, disease. However, there is one more link in this chain, a precursor
to enervation that, for good and understandable reasons, seemed unknown to the
earlier hygienists. That precursor is long term sub-clinical malnutrition. Lack
of nutrition effects virtually everybody today. Almost all of us are overfed
I have already explained that one particular head of
broccoli does not necessarily equal another head of broccoli; the nutritional
composition of apparently identical foods can be highly variable. Not only do
different samples of the same type of food differ wildly in protein content,
amino acid ratios and mineral content, their vitamin and vitamin-like substances
also vary according to soil fertility and the variety grown.
These days, food crop varieties are bred for yield and
other commercial considerations, such as shipability, storage life, and ease
of processing. In pre-industrial times when each family propagated its own unique
open-pollinated varieties, a natural selection process for healthy outcomes prevailed.
If the family's particular, unique varieties carried genes for highly nutritious
food, and if the family's land was fertile enough to allow those genes to manifest,
and if the family kept up its land's fertility by wise management, their children
tended to survive the gauntlet of childhood illness and lived to propagate the
family's varieties and continue the family name. Thus, over time, human food
cultivars were selected for their nutritional content.
But not any longer! These days, farming technology with
its focus on bulk yield and profit, degrades the nutritional content of our entire
food supply. Even commercial organically grown food is no better in this respect.
Sub-clinical, life-long, vitamin and mineral deficiencies
contribute to the onset of disease; the malnourished body becomes increasingly
enervated, beginning the process of disease. Vitamin supplements can increase
the body's vital force, reversing to a degree the natural tendency towards degeneration.
In fact, some medical gerontologists theorize that by using vitamins it might
be possible to restore human life span to its genetically programmed 115 years
without doing anything else about increasing nutrition from our degraded foods
or paying much attention to dietary indiscretions. Knowing what I do about toxemia's
effects I doubt vitamins can allow us to totally ignore what we eat, though supplements
can certainly help.
More than degraded nutritional content of food prompts
a thinking person to use food supplements. Our bodies and spirits are constantly
assaulted and insulted by modern life in ways our genetics never intended us
to deal with. Today the entire environment is mildly toxic. Air is polluted;
water is polluted; our food supply contains traces of highly poisonous artificial
molecules that our bodies have no natural ability to process and eliminate. Our
cities and work places are full of loud, shocking noises that trigger frequent
adrenaline rushes and other stress adaptations. Our work places are full of psychological
stresses that humans never had to deal with before.
Historically, humans who were not enslaved have been
in control of determining their own hour to hour, day to day activities, living
on their own largely self-sufficient farms. The idea of working for another,
at regular hours, without personal liberty, ignoring or suppressing one's own
agenda and inclinations over an entire lifetime is quite new and not at all healthy.
It takes continual subconscious applications of mental and psychic energies to
protect ourselves against the stresses of modern life, energies that we don't
know we're expending. This is also highly enervating. Thus to remain healthy
we may need nutrition at levels far higher than might be possible through eating
food; even ideal food might not contain enough vitamins to sustain us against
the strains and stresses of this century.
And think about Dr. Pottenger's cats. Our bodies are
at the poorer end of a century-long process of mass degeneration that started
with white flour from the roller mill. Compared to my older clients I have noticed
that my younger patients seem to possess less vital force on the average, show
evidence of poorer skeletal development, have poorer teeth, less energy, have
far more difficulty breeding and coping with their family life, and are far more
likely to develop degenerative conditions early. Most of my younger patients
had a poor start because they were raised on highly refined, devitalized, deficient
foods, and grew up without much exercise. Their parents had somewhat better food.
Some of their grandparents may have even grown up on raw milk and a vegetable
garden, and actually had to walk, not owning cars when they were young. Their
great grandparents had a high likelihood of enjoying decent nutrition and a healthful
Unfortunately, most of my patients like the idea of taking
vitamins too much for their own good. The AMA medical model has conditioned people
to swallow something for every little discomfort, and taking a pill is also by
far the easiest thing to do because a pill requires no life-style changes, nor
self-discipline, nor personal responsibility. But vitamins are much more frugal
than drugs. Compared to prescriptions, even the most exotic life extension supplements
are much less expensive. I am saddened when my clients tell me they can't afford
supplements. When their MD prescribes a medicine that costs many times more they
never have trouble finding the money.
I am also saddened that people are so willing to take
supplements, because I can usually do a lot more to genuinely help their bodies
heal with dietary modification and detoxification. Of all the tools at my disposal
that help people heal, last in the race comes supplements.
One of the best aspects of using vitamins as though they
were healing agents is that food supplements almost never have harmful side effects,
even when they are taken in what might seem enormous overdoses. If someone with
a health condition reads or hears about some vitamin being curative, goes out
and buys some and takes it, they will at very least have followed the basic principle
of good medicine: first of all do no harm. At worst, if the supplements did nothing
for them at all, they are practicing the same kind of benevolent medicine that
Dr. Jennings did almost two centuries ago. Not only that, but having done something
to treat their symptoms, they have become patients facilitating their own patience,
giving their body a chance to correct its problem. They well may get better,
but not because of the action of the particular vitamin they took. Or, luckily,
the vitamin or vitamins they take may have been just what was needed, raising
their body's vital force and accelerating the body's ability to solve its problem.
One reason vitamin therapies frequently do not work as
well as they might is that, having been intimidated by AMA propaganda that has
created largely false fears in the public mind about harmful effects of vitamin
overdoses, the person may not take enough of the right vitamin. The minimum daily
requirements of vitamins and minerals as outlined in nutrition texts are only
sufficient to prevent the most obvious forms of deficiency diseases. If a person
takes supplements at or near the minimum daily requirement (the dose recommended
by the FDA as being 'generally recognized as safe') they should not expect to
see any therapeutic effect unless they have scurvy, beri beri, rickets, goiter,
In these days of vitamin-fortified bread and iodized
salt, and even vitamin C fortified soft drinks, you almost never see the kind
of life-threatening deficiency states people first learned to recognize, such
as scurvy. Sailors on long sea voyages used to develop a debilitating form of
vitamin C deficiency that could kill. Scurvy could be quickly cured by as little
as one lime a day. For this reason the British Government legislated the carrying
of limes on long voyages and today that is why British sailors are still called
limeys. A lime has less than 30 milligrams of vitamin C. But to make a cold clear
up faster with vitamin C a mere 30 mg does absolutely nothing! To begin to dent
an infection with vitamin C takes 10,000 milligrams a day, and to make a life
threatening infection like pneumonia go away faster might require 25,000 to 150,000
milligrams of vitamin C daily, administered intravenously. In terms of supplying
that much C with limes, that's 300 to 750 of them daily–clearly impossible.
Similarly, pellagra can be cured with a few milligrams
of vitamin B 3, but schizophrenia can sometimes be cured with 3,000 milligrams,
roughly a thousand times as much as the MDR.
There are many many common diseases that the medical
profession does not see as being caused by vitamin deficiencies. Senility and
many mental disorders fall in this category. Many old people live on extremely
deficient diets comprised largely of devitalized starches, sugars, and fats,
partly because many do not have good enough teeth to chew vegetables and other
high roughage foods, and they do not have the energy it takes to prepare more
nourishing foods. Virtually all old people have deficiency diseases. As vital
force inevitably declines with age, the quantity and quality of digestive enzymes
decreases, then the ability to breakdown and extract soluble nutrients from food
is diminished, frequently leading to serious deficiencies. These deficiencies
are inevitably misdiagnosed as disease and as aging.
Suppose a body needs 30 milligrams a day of niacin to
not develop pellagra, but to be fully healthy, needs 500 milligrams daily. If
that body receives 50 milligrams per day from a vitamin pill, to the medical
doctor it could not possibly be deficient in this vitamin. However, over time,
the insidious sub-clinical deficiency may degrade some other system and produce
a different disease, such as colitis. But the medical doctor sees no relationship.
Let me give you an actual example. Medical researchers studying vitamin B 5
or pantothenic acid noticed that it could, in what seemed to be megadoses (compared
to the minimum daily requirement) largely reverse certain degenerative effects
of aging. These researchers were measuring endurance in rats as it decreased
through the aging process. How they made this measurement may appear to some
readers to be heartless, but the best way to gauge the endurance of a rat is
to toss it into a five gallon bucket of cold water and see how long it swims
before it drowns. Under these conditions, the researcher can be absolutely confident
that the rat does its very best to stay alive.
Young healthy rats can swim for 45 minutes in 50° Fahrenheit
water before drowning. Old rats can only last about 15 minutes. And old rats
swim differently, less efficiently, with their lower bodies more or less vertical,
sort of dog paddling. But when old rats were fed pantothenic acid at a very high
dose for a few weeks before the test, they swam 45 minutes too. And swam more
efficiently, like the young rats did. More interestingly, their coats changed
color (the gray went away) and improved in texture; they began to appear like
young rats. And the rats on megadoses of B 5 lived lot longer–25 to 33 percent
longer than rats not on large doses of B 5. Does that mean "megadoses" of
B 5 have an unknown drug-like effect? Or does that mean the real nutritional
requirement for B 5 is a lot higher than most people think? I believe the
second choice is correct. To give you an idea of how much B 5 the old rats
were given in human terms, the FDA says the minimum daily requirement for B 5
is about 10 milligrams but if humans took as much B 5 as the rats, they
would take about 750 milligrams per day. Incidentally, I figure I am as worthy
as any lab rat and take over 500 milligrams daily.
My point is that there is a big difference between preventing
a gross vitamin deficiency disease, and using vitamins to create optimum functioning.
Any sick person or anyone with a health complaint needs to improve their overall
functioning in any way that won't be harmful over the long term. Vitamin therapy
can be an amazingly effective adjunct to dietary reform and detoxification.
Some of the earlier natural hygienists were opposed to
using vitamins. However, these doctors lived in an era when the food supply was
better, when mass human degeneration had not proceeded as far as it has today.
From their perspective, it was possible to obtain all the nutrition one needed
from food. In our time this is unlikely unless a person knowingly and intelligently
produces virtually all their own food on a highly fertile soil body whose fertility
is maintained and adjusted with a conscious intent to maximize the nutritive
content of the food. Unfortunately, ignorance of the degraded nature of industrial
food seems to extend to otherwise admirable natural healing methods such as Macrobiotics
and homeopathy because these disciplines also downplay any need for food supplementation.
Vitamins For Young Persons And Children
Young healthy people from weaning through their thirties
should also take nutritional supplements even though young people usually feel
so good that they find it impossible to conceive that anything could harm them
or that they ever could become seriously sick or actually die. I know this is
true because I remember my own youth and besides, why else would young people
so glibly ride motorcycles or, after only a few months of brainwashing, charge
up a hill into the barrel of a machine gun. Or have unsafe sex in this age of
multiple venereal diseases. Until they get a little sense, vitamin supplements
help to counteract their inevitable and unpreventable use of recreational foods.
Vitamins are the cheapest long life and health insurance plan now available.
Parents are generally very surprised at the thought that even their children
need nutritional supplements; very few healthy children receive them. A few are
given extra vitamin C when acutely ill, when they have colds or communicable
diseases such as chicken pox.
Young people require a low dose supplement compared to
those of us middle-aged or older, but it should be a broad formula with the full
range of vitamins and minerals. Some of the best products I have found over 25
years of research and experimentation with young people are Douglas Cooper's "Basic
Formula" (low dose and excellent for children) and "Super T Formula" (double
the dose of Basic Formula, therefore better for adolescents and young adults),
also from Douglas Cooper Company; Bronson's "Vitamin and Mineral Formula
for Active Men and Women" and Bronson's "Insurance Formula." "Vitamin
75 Plus;" and "Formula 2" from Now Natural Foods are also good
and less costly.
Healthy very small children who will swallow pills can
take these same products at half the recommended dose. If they won't swallow
pills the pills can be blended into a fruit smoothie or finely crushed and then
stirred into apple sauce. There are also "Children's Chewable Multi-Vitamins
+ Iron" (1-5 years old) from Douglas Cooper that contains no minerals except
iron, Bronson's "Chewable Vitamins" (make sure it is the one for small
children, Bronson makes several types of chewables) and a liquid vitamin product
from Bronson called Multivitamin Drops for Infants . These will be a little more
costly than cutting pills in half.
There is also an extraordinarily high quality multivitamin/mineral
formula for children called "Children's Formula Life Extension Mix" from
Prolongevity, Ltd. (the Life Extension Foundation), it is in tablet form, and
slightly more expensive.
I hope that my book will be around for several generations.
The businesses whose vitamin products I recommend will not likely exist in twenty
years. Even sooner than that the product names and details of the formulations
will almost certainly be altered. So, for future readers discovering this book
in a library or dusty shelve of a used book store, if I, at my current level
of understanding, were manufacturing a childrens and young adults vitamin formula
myself, this is what it would contain. Any commercial formulation within 25 percent
of these figures plus or minus would probably be fine as long as the vitamins
in the pills were of high quality.
||Iodine (as kelp)
Vitamins For An Older Healthy Person
Someone who is beyond 35 to 40 years of age should still
feel good almost all of the time. That is how life should be. But enjoying well-being
does not mean that no dietary supplementation is called for. The onset of middle
age is the appropriate time to begin working on continuing to feel well for as
long as possible. Just like a car, if you take very good care of it from the
beginning, it is likely to run smoothly for many years into the future. If on
the other hand you drive it hard and fast with a lot of deferred maintenance
you will probably have to trade it in on a new one after a very few years. Most
people in their 70s and older who are struggling with many uncomfortable symptoms
and low energy lament, 'if I'd only known I was going to live so long I would
have taken better care of myself.' But at that point it is too late for the old
donkey; time for a trade in.
Gerontologists refer to combating the aging process as "squaring
the curve." We arrive at the peak of our physical function at about age
eighteen. How high that peak level is depends on a person's genetic endowment,
the quality of the start they received through their mother's nutritional reserves,
and the quality of their childhood nutrition and life experience. From that peak
our function begins to drop. The rate of drop is not uniform, but is a cascade
where each bit of deterioration creates more deterioration, accelerating the
rate of deterioration. If various aging experiences were graphed, they would
make curves like those on the chart on this page.
Because deterioration starts out so slowly, people usually
do not begin to notice there has been any decline until they reach their late
30s. A few fortunate ones don't notice it until their 40s. A few (usually) dishonest
ones claim no losses into their 50s but they are almost inevitably lying, either
to you or to themselves, or both. Though it might be wisest to begin combating
the aging process at age 19, practically speaking, no one is going to start spending
substantial money on food supplements until they actually notice significant
lost function. For non-athletes this point usually comes when function has dropped
to about 90 percent of what it was in our youth. If they're lucky what people
usually notice with the beginnings of middle age is an increasing inability for
their bodies to tolerate insults such as a night on the town or a big meal. Or
they may begin to get colds that just won't seem to go away. Or they may begin
coming home after work so tired that they can hardly stay awake and begin falling
asleep in their Lazy Boy recliner in front of the TV even before prime time.
If they're not so lucky they'll begin suffering the initial twinges of a non-life-threatening
chronic condition like arthritis.
The thinnest line demonstrates the worst possible life
from a purely physical point of view, where a person started out life with significantly
lowered function, lost quite a bit more and then hung on to life for many years
without the mercy of death.
If one can postpone the deterioration of aging, they
extend and hopefully square the curve (retard loss of function until later and
then have the loss occur more rapidly). Someone whose lifetime function resembled
a "square curve"(the thickest, topmost line) would experience little
or no deterioration until the very end and then would lose function precipitously.
At this point we do not know how to eliminate the deterioration but we do know
how to slow it down, living longer and feeling better, at least to a point close
to the very end.
Vitamin supplements can actually slow or even to a degree,
reverse, the aging process. However, to accomplish that task, they have to be
taken in amounts far greater than so-called minimum daily requirements, using
vitamins as though they were drugs, a therapeutic approach to changing body chemistry
profiles and making them resemble a younger body. For example, research gerontologists
like Walford reason that if pantothenic acid (vitamin B 5, in fairly substantial
(but quite safe) doses can extend the life and improve the function of old rats,
there is every indication that it will do a similar job on humans. Medical researchers
and research gerontologists have noticed that many other vitamin and vitamin-like
substances have similar effects on laboratory animals.
Some will object that what helps rats and mice is in
no way proven to cause the same result on humans. I agree. Proven with full scientific
rigor, no. In fact, at present, the contention is unprovable. Demonstrable as
having a high likelihood's of being so, yes! So likely so as to be almost incontrovertible,
yes! But provable to the most open-minded, scientific sort–probably not for a
long time. However, the Life Extension Foundation is working hard to find some
quantifiable method of gauging the aging process in humans without waiting for
the inarguable indicator, death. Once this is accomplished and solidly recognized,
probably no rational person will be able to doubt that human life span can be
Experiments work far better with short-lived laboratory
animals for another reason; we can not control the food and supplement intakes
of humans as we can with caged mice. In fact, there are special types of laboratory
mice that have been bred to have uniformly short life spans, especially to accelerate
this kind of research. With mice we can state accurately that compared to a control
group, feeding such and such a dose of such and such a supplement extended the
life-span or functional performance by such and such a percent.
A lot of these very same medical gerontologists nourish
their own bodies as thoroughly as the laboratory animals they are studying, taking
broad mixes of food supplements at doses proportional to those that extend the
life spans of their research animals. This approach to using supplementation
is at the other end of the scale compared to using supplements to prevent gross
deficiencies. In the life extension approach, vitamins and vitamin-like substances
are used as a therapy against the aging process itself.
Will it work? Well, some of these human guinea pigs have
been on heavy vitamin supplementation for over thirty years (as of 1995) and
none seem to be suffering any damage. Will they live longer? It is impossible
to say with full scientific rigor? To know if life extension works, we would
have to first determine "live longer than what?" After all, we don't
know how long any person might have lived without life extending vitamin supplements.
Though it can't be "proven," it makes perfect sense to me to spend
far less money on an intensive life extension vitamin program than I would certainly
lose as a result of age-related sickness.
Besides, I've already observed from personal use and
from results in my clinical practice that life extension vitamin programs do
work. Whether I and my clients will ultimately live longer or not, the people
who I have put on these programs, including myself and my husband, usually report
that for several years after starting they find themselves feeling progressively
younger, gradually returning to an overall state of greater well-being they knew
five or ten or fifteen years ago. They have more energy, feel clearer mentally,
have fewer unwanted somatic symptoms.
Sometimes the improvements seem rather miraculous. After
a few months on the program one ninety year old man, an independent-minded Oregonian
farmer, reported that he began awakening with an erection every morning; unfortunately,
his 89 year old cranky and somewhat estranged wife, who would not take vitamins,
did not appreciate this youthfulness. A few months later (he had a small farm)
he planted a holly orchard. Most of you won't appreciate what this means without
a bit of explanation, but in Oregon, holly is grown as a high-priced and highly
profitable ornamental for the clusters of leaves and berries. But a slow-growing
holly orchard takes 25 years to began making a profit!
A few older clients of mine reported that they noticed
nothing from the life extension program, but these are unique people who have
developed the ability to dominate their bodies with their minds and routinely
pay their bodies absolutely no attention, driving them relentlessly to do their
will. Usually they use their energies to accomplish good, Christian works. Eventually,
these dedicated and high-toned people break down and die like everyone else.
Will they do so later on life extending vitamins than they would have otherwise?
I couldn't know because I can't know how long they might have lived without supplementation
and since they refuse to admit the vitamins do them any good, they won't pay
Many on life extension programs experience a reverse
aging process for awhile. However, after the full benefit of the supplementation
has worked itself through their body chemistry, they again begin to experience
the aging process. I believe the process will then be slowed by their vitamins
compared to what it would have been without supplements. But I can't prove it.
Maybe we will have some idea if the program worked 20 to 40 years from now.
At this time I know of only two companies that make top
quality life extension vitamin supplement formulas. One is Prolongevity (Life
Extension Foundation), the other, Vitamin Research Products. I prefer to support
what I view as the altruistic motives behind Prolongevity and buy my products
from them. Unfortunately, these vitamin compounders can not put every possibly
beneficial substance in a single bottle of tablets. The main reason they do not
is fear of the power-grabbing Food and Drug Administration. This agency is threatening
constantly to remove certain of the most useful life-extending substances from
the vitamin trade and make them the exclusive property of prescription-writing
medical doctors. So far, public pressure has been mobilized against the FDA every
time action was threatened and has not permitted this. If some product were included
in a mix and that product were prohibited, the entire mixed, bottled and labeled
batch that remained unsold at that time would be wasted, at enormous cost.
Were I manufacturing my own life extension supplement
I would include the following. By the way, to get this all in one day, it is
necessary to take 6 to 12 large tablets daily, usually spread throughout the
day, taken a few at a time with each meal. If you compare my suggested formulation
to another one, keep in mind that variations of 25 percent one way or another
won't make a significant difference, and adding other beneficial substances to
my recommendations probably is only helpful. However, I would not want to eliminate
anything in the list below, it is the minimum:
||Iodine (as kelp)
Please also keep in mind that there are many other useful
substances not listed above. For example, every day I have a "green drink," an
herbal preparation containing numerous tonic substances like ginseng and also
various forms of algae and chlorophyll extracts. My green drink makes my body
feel very peppy all day, so it certainly enhances my life and may extend it.
It costs about $25,00 a month to enjoy that. I also use various pure amino acids
at times. Phenylalyanine will make me get more aggressive whenever I am feeling
a little lackluster; this nutrient has also been used as an effective therapy
against depression. Melatonin taken at bedtime really does help me get to sleep
and may have remarkable life-extending properties. Other amino acids help my
body manufacture growth hormones and I use them from the time I begin training
seriously in spring through the end of the summer triathlon competition season.
Pearson and Shaw's book (see Bibliography) is a good starting point to begin
learning about this remarkably useful subject.
The Future Of Life Extension
I beg the readers indulgence for a bit of futurology
about what things may look like if the life extension movement continues to develop.
Right now, a full vitamin and vitamin-like substance
life extension program costs between $50 and $100 dollars per month. However,
pharmaceutical researchers occasionally notice that drugs meant to treat and
cure diseases, when tested on lab animals for safety, make these animals live
quite a bit longer and function better. Though the FDA doesn't allow any word
of this to be printed in official prescribing data, the word does get around
to other researchers, to gerontologists and eventually to that part of the public
that is eagerly looking for longer life. Today there are numerous people who
routinely take prescription medicines meant to cure a disease they do not have
and plan to take those medicines for the rest of their long, long life.
These drugs being patented, the tariff gets a lot steeper
compared to taking vitamins. (Since they are naturally-occurring substances,
vitamins can't be patented and therefore, aren't big-profit items. Perhaps that's
one reason the FDA is so covertly opposed to vitamins.) Right now it would be
quite possible to spend many hundred dollars per month on a life extension program
that included most of these potentially beneficent prescription drugs.
As more of life-extending substances are discovered,
the cost of participating in a maximally effective life extension program will
escalate. However, those who can afford chemically enhanced functioning will
enjoy certain side-benefits. Their productive, enjoyable life spans may measure
well over a century, perhaps approaching two centuries or more. Some of these
substances greatly improve intelligence so they will become brighter and have
faster reaction times. With more time to accumulate more wisdom and experience
than "short livers" these folks will become wiser, too. They will have
more time to compound their investment assets and thus will become far more wealthy.
They will become an obvious and recognizable aristocracy. This new upper class
will immediately recognize each other on the street because they will look entirely
different than the short-lived poorer folk and will probably run the political
And this new aristocratic society I see coming may be
far more pleasant than the one dominated by the oligarchy we now have covertly
running things. For with greater age and experience does really come greater
wisdom. I have long felt that the biggest problem with Earth is that we did not
live long enough. As George Bernard Shaw quipped when he was 90 (he lived to
96), "here I am, 90 years old, just getting out of my adolescence and getting
some sense, and my body is falling apart as fast as it can."
Vitamin Program For The Sick
No matter which way you look at it or how well insured
you may be against it, being sick is expensive (not to mention what it does to
one's quality of life), and by far the best thing to do is to prevent it from
happening in the first place. However, most people do not do anything about their
health until forced to by some painful condition. If you are already sick there
are a number of supplements you can take which have the potential to shorten
the duration and severity of the illness, and hopefully prevent a recurrence.
The sicker you are, the more supplements you will require;
as health is regained, the dosage and variety of substances can be reduced. In
chronic illness, megadoses of many nutrients are usually beneficial. Any sick
adult should begin a life extension vitamin program unless they are highly allergic
to so many things already that they can not tolerate many kinds of vitamins as
well. In addition to the life extension program, vitamin C should be taken by
the chronically ill at a dose from 10 to 25 grams daily, depending on the severity
of the condition.
Many people want to know whether or not they should take
their regular food supplements during a fast. On a water fast most supplements
in a hard tablet form will not be broken down at all, and often can be seen floating
by in the colonic viewing tube looking exactly like it did when you swallowed
it. This waste can be avoided by crushing or chewing (yuck) the tablets, before
swallowing. Encapsulated vitamins usually are absorbed, but if you want to make
sure, open the capsule and dump it in the back of your mouth before swallowing
with water. Powdered vitamins are well absorbed.
On a water fast the body is much more sensitive to any
substance introduced, so as a general rule it is not a good idea to take more
than one half your regular dose of food supplements. Most fasters do fine without
any supplements. Many people get an upset stomach from supplements on an empty
stomach, and these people should not take any during a water fast unless they
develop symptoms of mineral deficiencies (usually a pre-existing condition) such
as leg cramps and tremors, these symptoms necessitate powdered or well-chewed-up
mineral supplement. Minerals don't taste too bad to chew, just chalky.
The same suggestions regarding dosage of supplements
for a water fast are also true for a juice fast or vegetable broth fast. On a
raw food cleansing diet the full dose of supplements should be taken with meals.
There exists an enormous body of data about vitamins;
books and magazine articles are always touting some new product or explaining
the uses of an old one. If you want to know more about using ordinary vitamins
you'll find leads in the bibliography to guide your reading. However, there is
one "old" vitamin and a few newer and relatively unknown life extending
substances that are so useful and important to handling illness that I would
like to tell you more about them.
Vitamin C is not a newly discovered vitamin, but
was one of the first ever identified. If you are one of those people that just
hate taking vitamins, and you were for some reason willing to take only one,
vitamin C would be your best choice. Vitamin C would be the clear winner because
it helps enormously with any infection and in invaluable in tissue healing and
rebuilding collagen. If I was going on a long trip and didn't want to pack a
lot of weight, my first choice would be to insure three to six grams of vitamin
C for daily use when I was healthy (I'd take the optimum dose–ten grams a day–if
weight were no limitation). I'd also carry enough extra C to really beef up my
intake when dealing with an unexpected acute illness or accident.
When traveling to far away places, exposed to a whole
new batch of organisms, frequently having difficulty finding healthy foods, going
through time zones, losing nights of sleep, it is easy to become enervated enough
to catch a local cold or flu. If I have brought lots of extra vitamin C with
me I know that my immune system will be able to conquer just about anything–as
long as I also stop eating and can take an enema. I also like to have vitamin
C as a part of my first aid kit because if I experience a laceration, a sprain,
broken bone, or a burn, I can increase my internal intake as well as apply it
liberally directly on the damaged skin surface. Vitamin C can be put directly
in the eye in a dilute solution with distilled water for infections and injuries,
in the ear for ear infections, and in the nose for sinus infections. If you are
using the acid form of C (ascorbic acid) and it smarts too much, make a more
dilute solution, or switch to the alkaline form of C (calcium ascorbate) which
can be used as a much more concentrated solution without a stinging sensation.
Applied directly on the skin C in solution makes a very effective substitute
for sun screen. It doesn't filter out ultraviolet, it beefs up the skin to better
deal with the insult.
I believe vitamin C can deal with a raging infection
such as pneumonia as well or better than antibiotics. But to do that, C is going
to have to be administered at the maximum dose the body can process. This is
easily discoverable by a 'bowel tolerance test' which basically means you keep
taking two or three grams of C each hour, (preferably in the powdered, most rapidly
assimilable form) until you get a runny stool (the trots). The loose stool happens
when there is so much C entering the small intestine that it is not all absorbed,
but is instead, passed through to the large intestine. At that point cut back
just enough that the stool is only a little loose, not runny. At this dose, your
blood stream will be as saturated by vitamin C as you can achieve by oral ingestion.
It can make an important difference which type of vitamin
C is taken because many people are unable to tolerate the acid form of C beyond
8 or 10 grams a day, but they can achieve a therapeutic dose without discomfort
with the alkaline (buffered) vitamin C products such as calcium ascorbate, sodium
ascorbate, or magnesium-potassium ascorbates.
Vitamin C also speeds up the healing of internal tissues
and damaged connective tissue. Damaged internal tissues might include stomach
ulcers (use the alkaline form of vitamin C only), bladder and kidney infections
(acid form usually best), arthritic disorders with damage to joints and connective
tissue (alkaline form usually best). Sports injuries heal up a lot faster with
a therapeutic dose of vitamin C. As medicine, vitamin C should be taken at the
rate of one or two grams every two hours (depending on the severity of the condition),
spaced out to avoid unnecessary losses in the urine which happens if it were
taken ten grams at a time. If you regularly use the acid form of vitamin C powder,
which is the cheapest, be sure to use a straw and dissolve it in water or juice
so that the acid does not dissolve the enamel on your teeth over time.
And this is as good a point as any to mention that just
like broccoli is not broccoli, a vitamin is not necessarily a vitamin. Vitamins
are made by chemical and pharmaceutical companies. To make this confusion even
more interesting, the business names that appear on vitamin bottles are not the
real manufacturers. Bronson's Pharmaceuticals is a distributor and marketer,
not a manufacturer. The same is true of every vitamin company I know of. These
companies buy bulk product by the barrel or sack; then encapsulate, blend and
roll pills, bottle and label, advertise and make profit. The point of all this
is that some actual vitamin manufacturers produce very high quality products
and others shortcut. Vitamin distributors must make ethical (or unethical) choices
about their suppliers.
It is beyond the scope of this book to be a manual for
going into the vitamin business. However, there are big differences in how effective
vitamins with the same chemical name are and the differences hinge on who actually
brewed them up.
For example, there are at least two quality levels of
vitamin C on the market right now. The pharmaceutical grade is made by Roche
or BASF. Another form, it could be called "the bargain barrel brew," is
made in China. Top quality vitamin C is quite a bit more costly; as I write this,
the price differential is about 40 percent between the cheap stuff and the best.
This can make a big difference in bottle price and profit. Most of the discount
retail vitamin companies use the Chinese product.
There's more than a price difference. The vitamin C from
China contains measurable levels of lead, cadmium, mercury, iron and other toxic
metals. The FDA allows this slightly contaminated product to be sold in the US
because the Recommended Daily Allowance for vitamin C is a mere 60 milligrams
per day. Taken at that level, the toxic metals would, as the FDA sees it, do
no harm. However, many users of vitamin C take 100 -200 times the RDA. The cheap
form of C would expose them to potentially toxic levels of heavy metal poisons.
The highly refined top-quality product removes impurities to a virtually undetectable
I buy my C from Bronson who ethically gives me the quality
stuff. I know for a fact that the vitamin C sold by Prolongevity is also top
quality. I've had clients who bought cheaper C than Bronson's and discovered
it was not quite like Bronson's in appearance or taste. More importantly, it
did not seem to have the same therapeutic effect.
The distributors I've mentioned so far, Bronson, NOW,
Cooper, Prolongevity and Vitamin Research Products are all knowledgeable about
differences between actual manufacturers and are ethical, buying and reselling
only high quality products. Other distributors I believe to be reputable include
Twin Labs, Schiff and Plus. I know there are many other distributors with high
ethic levels but I can not evaluate all their product lines. And as I've mentioned
earlier, businesses come and go rather quickly, but I hope my book will be read
for decades. I do know that I would be very reluctant to buy my vitamins at a
discount department store or supermarket; when experimenting with new suppliers
I have at times been severely disappointed.
Co-enzyme Q-10. This substance is normally manufactured
in the human body and is also found in minuscule amounts in almost every cell
on Earth. For that reason it is also called "ubiquinone." But this
vitamin has been only recently discovered, so as I write this book Co-enzyme
Q-10 is not widely known.
Q-10 is essential to the functioning of the mitochondria,
that part of the cell that produces energy. With less Q-10 in heart cells, for
example, the heart has less energy and pumps less. The same is true of the immune
system cells, the liver cells, every cell. As we age the body is able to make
less and less Q-10, contributing to the loss of energy frequently experienced
with age, as well as the diminished effectiveness of the immune system, and a
shortened life span.
Q-10 was first used for its ability to revitalize heart
cells. It was a prescription medicine in Japan. But unlike other drugs used to
stimulate the heart, at any reasonable dose Q-10 has no harmful side effects.
It also tends to give people the extra pick up they are trying to get out of
a cup of coffee. But Q-10 does so by improving the function of every cell in
the body, not by whipping exhausted adrenals like caffeine does. Q-10 is becoming
very popular with athletes who measure their overall cellular output against
Besides acting as a general tonic, when fed to lab animals,
Co-Enzyme Q-10 makes them live 33 to 45 percent longer!
DMAE is another extremely valuable vitamin-like
substance that is not widely known. It is a basic building material that the
body uses to make acetylcholine, the most generalized neurotransmitter in the
body. Small quantities of DMAE are found in fish, but the body usually makes
it in a multi-stage synthesis that starts with the amino acid choline, arrives
at DMAE at about step number three and ends up finally with acetylcholine.
The body's nerves are wrapped in fatty tissue that should
be saturated with acetylcholine. Every time a nerve impulse is transmitted from
one nerve cell to the next, a molecule of acetylcholine is consumed. Thus acetylcholine
has to be constantly replaced. As the body ages, levels of acetylcholine surrounding
the nerves drop and in consequence, the nerves begin to deteriorate. DMAE is
rapidly and easily converted into acetylcholine and helps maintain acetylcholine
levels in older people at a youthful level.
When laboratory rats are fed DMAE they solve mazes more
rapidly, remember better, live about 40 percent longer than rats not fed DMAE
and most interestingly, when autopsied, their nervous systems resemble those
of a young rat, without any evidence of the usual deterioration of aging. Human
nervous systems also deteriorate with age, especially those of people suffering
from senility. It is highly probable that DMAE will do the same thing to us.
DMAE also smoothes out mood swings in humans and seems to help my husband, Steve,
when he has a big writing project. He can keep working without getting 'writers
block', fogged out, or rollercoastering.
DMAE is a little hard to find. Prolongevity and VRP sell
it in powder form. Since the FDA doesn't know any MDR and since the product is
not capped up, the bottle of powder sagely states that one-quarter teaspoonful
contains 333 milligrams. Get the hint? DMAE tastes a little like sour salt and
one-quarter teaspoonful dissolves readily in water every morning before breakfast,
or anytime for that matter. DMAE is also very inexpensive considering what it
does. A year's supply costs about $20.
Lecithin is a highly tonic and inexpensive food
supplement that is underutilized by many people even though it is easily obtainable
in healthfood stores. It is an emulsifier, breaking fats down into small separate
particles, keeping blood cholesterol emulsified to prevent arterial deposits.
Taken persistently, lecithin partially and slowly eliminates existing cholesterol
deposits from the circulatory system.
In our cholesterol-frightened society lecithin should
be a far more popular supplement than it currently is. It is easy to take either
as a food in the granular form or when encapsulated. Lecithin granules have very
little flavor and can be added to a home-made vinegar and oil salad dressing,
where they emulsify the oil and make it blend with the vinegar, thickening the
mixture and causing it to stick to the salad better. Lecithin can also be put
in a fruits smoothie. A scant tablespoon a day is sufficient. Try to buy the
kind of lecithin that has the highest phosphatidyl choline content because this
substance is the second benefit of taking lecithin. Phosphatidyl choline is another
precursor used by the body to build acetylcholine and helps maintain the nervous
Algae. Spirulina or sun dried chlorella are also
great food supplements. Both make many people feel energized, pepped-up. It is
possible to fast on either product and still maintain sufficient energy levels
to take of minimal work responsibilities. Algae reduces appetite and as a dietary
supplement can assist in weight loss. It contains large amounts of highly-assimilable
protein due to it's high chlorophyll content, as well as a large amount of beta
carotene. It also assists in detoxification of the lymphatic system. It can be
purchased as tablets or powder. Take a heaping teaspoon daily, or at least six
a very simple CURE for cancer1