Answering: Why do you do it?

[zackcentury]

Hello,
I am just wondering how some of you explain your diet to people who are skeptical, disapproving, or just curious. Do you ever try to talk others into trying the diet, or any part of it? Do you try to explain amino acid ratios, trans fats, and nitrogen waste? I usually say "just pretend I'm vegan", but that's not even a good word for it. Most people have never heard of raw paleo, let alone want to help you stay that way. It's amusing how many times I've explained my diet to family and friends, how funny they think it is when I eat raw yolks, yet how they seem to forget about my diet when it comes time to make dinner or eat out.

I have friends that are into raw and vegan diets, but even in those "circles" there is a lot of misinformation. Where does it all come from, and why does it seem that are are more raw dieters who would rather eat some funky sprouted beans than a perfectly ripe banana? Many of the raw foodies I meet are new-agey people who believe in some spiritual nonsense of their foods, and while they seem to have some fabricated some fairly intricate rules about alkalinity, inflammation, and pH, they too are often subject to popular opinions about foods. For example, many raw or vegan dieters seem to be misinformed about macronutrients, which is very unfortunate! Many believe "protein is protein", and that combining beans and rice solves all your problems; "sugar/carbs are bad" seems to be a mantra for the "diet industry" of America now; And everyone seems to spend so much time worrying about diabetes without learning anything about physiology, so that they can safely neglect fats so long as they stay away from sugars too!

Since starting this diet a couple years ago, I have felt some responsibility to help people understand the reasons and benefits of it, but I don't want to be too forceful, especially when my advice is not asked for. What will it take to get more people to understand the Wai diet?

[djkvan]

The best you can do is have them read the free acne book or the 'in short' section of the Wai diet homepage. You cannot help people understand if they don't want to. If you are happy with your experiences and gains let that be enough for you. The overwhelming need humans have to share is unfortunately a burden at times, this being one of them. The most appropriate cliché that comes to mind is: you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. I am pained by my parent's dietary habits as they are seniors now and I would prefer to have them around longer, but there is nothing I can do to force them into any realizations. I am thankful, at least for this forum without which I would certainly feel most alone.

[zackcentury]

Well, I'm certainly not losing sleep over it yet, and I agree with you. I used to offer suggestions on another forum when people asked vegetarian/protein questions, but after posting links to Waisays, I don't seem to have gotten anyone's attention. So, I've mostly given up on that forum haha.

It's interesting, though, that I might have never found this diet if I hadn't wanted to get rid of my cystic acne. For most people, if they don't perceive a problem, or at least don't link their problems to diet, they would never imagine eating any differently.

[Oscar]

I just try to give people (understandable) information without trying to convince them. There are several issues with accepting the Wai info, and thinking about doing something with that info.
First of all, accepting it means your diet is wrong. Most people are not prepared to accept that, let alone face the consequences that conclusion brings. It's worse for vegans, standard raw fooders, etc, because their diet is a religion. Since it's not based upon scientific/biochemical/physiological facts, you have to believe it's true and that it works. Also, many people (rightly) criticize their diet so they really have to convince themselves it is right, thereby becoming some sort of a religious diet fanatic. As a dutch writer has said: "A fanatic is a doubter who has made a decision".

Second, you're not an expert and the general consensus (of the experts) says otherwise. Medical doctors and nutritionists are gods.

Okay, let's assume you've got them (partly) convinced. Now they're thinking about following the Wai diet. Three huge problems immediately arise (from their perspective of course):
1. You have to give up everything you like/love.
2. The diet has an extremely limited scope of foods.
3. You will be a social outcast and your social life will all but disappear.

In my experience people are prepared to die for their addictions (literally).

Anyway, what I tell them is: cooking --> beta-carbolines, oxysterols, transfats - and more in depth why they're bad, LDL/HDL story; why no veggies, beans, grains, no milk products; addiction via opioid peptides and beta-carbolines, appetite enhancers, taste enhancers/MSG. Sometimes about the osteoporosis theory. Depends how long we're talking and what people are interested in.

I'm planning to write a "Wai for dummies" article, which will explain the whole Wai diet in as simple terms as possible.

[panacea]

I firmly believe in giving whatever knowledge I acquired and know makes sense to those who seek it, and also to 'put it out there and make it findable' by those who want to learn. I don't believe in forcing ideas on others though, not in this regard. I don't even eat the Wai diet myself anymore (I tried it for awhile). I still changed my diet substantially for the better, but am doing the path of least-stress right now. It's kind of like fighting a bear when you've lived on a wrong diet your whole life, but 100% definitely my child will be on the wai diet perfectly, that's the main reason I even sought out the best diet. I do plan to transform to 100% wai in time of course, and would never reccomend someone half-ass it like me, but I wouldn't look down on anyone for not doing it even if I was 100% or tell someone who didn't believe in it they were idiots. I would argue with them, but never have it in my mind that they are 'idiots', or 'lower than me', or whatever. Just like an aircraft engineer wouldn't call a psychologist an 'idiot' for not knowing the intricacies of a turbine, or a psychologist wouldn't call an aircraft engineer an idiot for not knowing the names of the different regions in the brain.... So the goal is to inform, to those who want to know, there is no responsibility in it, it just makes sense to speak of things that mean something, help people, etc, to those who want to know stuff, no matter what it is.

[Kasper]

First of all, accepting it means your diet is wrong.

I don't think other diets are wrong... They are maybe less healthy, or (more) unnatural.

But some people that don't follow wai feel healthy, have no acne and live a very long happy life with no illnesses at all.

I believe that calling an other diet wrong is something more religious like.
I mean what does that mean, a wrong diet ?

Is a right diet a diet that makes you happy and a wrong diet a diet that makes you unhappy?
Than, for many people Wai might be a wrong diet.
Although in my case, Wai makes me happier than I have ever been, so for me it's perfect.

It's worse for vegans, standard raw fooders, etc, because their diet is a religion. Since it's not based upon scientific/biochemical/physiological facts, you have to believe it's true and that it works.

I agree that these vegans, standard raw fooders etc. have to believe the thoughts behind their diet are true and that it works.
But I don't believe that they differ from us in that sense.
What do you want to say ?
Those people believe, but we know the thoughts behind our diet are true because it's based upon scientific facts ?

Unless you are an all-knowing God, I don't believe that you, me or any human, is able to know that some thoughts represent reality.

In the case of the truth about Wai:
1. I have to believe RRM and/or Wai studied those scientific publications where the thoughts behind this diet are based on very well.
2. I have to believe that they have interpreted this information accurate and have made logical conclusions from it.
3. I have to believe that those scientists studied those scientific publications where its study is based on very well.
4. I have to believe that those scientist have interpreted this information accurate and have made logical conclusions from it.
5. I have to believe that the observation that those scientist reported to have made are done in a scientific accurate way.

Besides this, I have to believe that the observation made in science tells us something about reality.
The fact is I don't know if any observation done by humans tells us something about reality.
And since all sciences are based on observation (with maybe the expectation of mathematics, but as Albert Einstein stated: "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."),
I have to believe science is true.

It's worse for vegans, standard raw fooders, etc, because their diet is a religion. Since it's not based upon scientific/biochemical/physiological facts, you have to believe it's true and that it works.

In your words: Science is religion.

I know that I think
And I think that I don't know more.
What I do know is that I think a lot more.
These were my thoughts.

[panacea]

Using that kind of "flimsy" (no offense its just the word I came up with today) logic you can reason out anything -- the goal here is not to be able to combat flimsy logic but use hard logic and the studies and experiences of the researchers and wai diet testers here to confirm and evolve the most optimal diet for the human being, rare and special cases omitted.

By optimal of course we mean most efficient for the body and mind in its raw form, no diet can account for all the psychological nuances (pleasure,happiness,sadness,satisfaction,etc), so it is not a factor in the definition of 'optimal diet'.

Interesting points though, it's a very good exercise for the mind

[RRM]

But some people that don't follow wai feel healthy, have no acne and live a very long happy life with no illnesses at all.

Sure.
There are also people who smoke 2 packs of cigarettes a day and experience the same.
But what does that mean?

I believe that calling an other diet wrong is something more religious like.

You may something call wrong if it does not fall in the category that you labeled as right,
based on certain criteria.
I think it depends on how those criteria are created.
Are those criteria solely based on faith, then such labeling may have a religious nature indeed.
If you think that everything is solely based on faith, then to you everything may be religious of nature.
But its also possible to make distinctions.

[Kasper]

You may something call wrong if it does not fall in the category that you labeled as right,
based on certain criteria.
I think it depends on how those criteria are created.
Are those criteria solely based on faith, then such labeling may have a religious nature indeed.
If you think that everything is solely based on faith, then to you everything may be religious of nature.
But its also possible to make distinctions.

I totally agree.
To be honest, I don't think that everything is religious of nature.
But I do think that science and religion are both solely based on faith.
You have to believe it is true.
I believe that both science and religion are similar in this sense, but it is also possible to make distinctions.
Scientist believes that thoughts who are based on empirical evidence (evidence, that is observable by the senses) are true.
Religious people believes that the bible or Qur'an etc. is true.
Books that are 'written' by prophets, who are believed to have been in (in)direct contact with God, the truth.

I believe that science represents reality in a better way than religion does.
But that is solely based on the faith that my logic and observations and, the observations and logic of certain other humans represents reality in a better way than the words of those prophets.

In your words: Science is religion.

I wrote this sentence not because I believe science is the same as religion.
But because Oscar wrote that traditional raw foodism etc. is religion, because you have to believe that is true.
In this sense, science is also religion, because science is also based on things we believe/assume to be true.

Sure.
There are also people who smoke 2 packs of cigarettes a day and experience the same.
But what does that mean?

That for them, that might be a right diet/lifestyle.
If, like you said, such a diet/lifestyle fall in the category that you label to be right.
Some people will label a diet that make them happy to be right.
Others will only believe that a lifestyle following the rules of god is right.
Others will label a diet which is, based on empirical evidence, the most heathy diet, as right.

But, science doesn't tell you which diet is wrong or right.
Science tells you what is healthy for the body. Which chemicals make the brain happy, which chemicals are toxic etc..

Religion does tell you what is right or wrong.
However, I don't believe there is god who decides what is good and bad, and right and wrong. I believe everybody have to decide for themselves what is right and wrong. Therefore I think that it is religious-like to call a diet from another one wrong.

[Kasper]

Oops, I forget to react to panacea, here it is:

Using that kind of "flimsy" (no offense its just the word I came up with today) logic you can reason out anything -- the goal here is not to be able to combat flimsy logic but use hard logic and the studies and experiences of the researchers and wai diet testers here to confirm and evolve the most optimal diet for the human being, rare and special cases omitted.

I don't think you have to combat this kind of logic if you accept that you can reason out anything.
Accepting this doesn't interfere with the goal to evolve the most optimal diet.

However:
1. I believe that you will have to make some assumptions to reach this goal.
2. Even if we can proof scientifically that we find the most optimal diet for the human being.. I don't believe that this will make all other diets wrong.

[Oscar]

I think you misunderstood my meaning. How people feel when they fully accept the ideas of the Wai Diet is: "what I've been doing so far is wrong". For most people it's a hard thing to admit they are wrong about one thing, let alone their complete eating (and drinking) pattern. I'm not saying other diets are wrong.

I agree that everything in life is a belief, but in order to make some sense out of it, we all have to set some axioms and build from there. Every individual puts together his/her own set, but most use a standard set dictated by society. For example, we use a math system based on certain axioms (Euclid). If I would suddenly adopt a different system, then I'd have a hard time functioning in society.
The difference between science and religion is that science (i.c. scientists) keep questioning their own and other's existing theories/results. Questioning the belief system in a religion (so the religion itself) is not condoned. Scientists do have some strict rules about how to conduct research and report about it. I'm not saying this is necessarily a good thing, but it does make it more dependable.

The extra step the Wai Diet offers, is that you can read the scientific articles it's based upon, and draw your own conclusions. In the end it's all about what you choose to be true for you.

[Kasper]

I think you misunderstood my meaning. How people feel when they fully accept the ideas of the Wai Diet is: "what I've been doing so far is wrong". For most people it's a hard thing to admit they are wrong about one thing, let alone their complete eating (and drinking) pattern. I'm not saying other diets are wrong.

Okay, than I agree. Sometimes I experience this too. My mother told me last week that she never gave this diet a change because she didn't liked the feeling she did her whole life a wrong diet. While she was trying to eat the right way all the time.
She has been struggling with food for the last 20 years I think. After every big meal with too much meat/fish or too much fat she felt very sick to her stomach for hours.
But than I advised her too eat raw meat and no trans fats etc. But she just said I was getting totally freaked out with this stuff.

Three months later, my little brother and my father were eating Wai for 70% I think. They still do, they eat only raw fish and raw meat.
They eat no bread, but only fruits with coconut oil or roasted nuts.They eat a lot of roasted nuts anyway.
And they eat ice creams and choclate and things like that.

My brother eat it because he's struggling with weight, and because he loves fruit and raw meat/fish.
Sometimes he is for two weeks 100% but he's on high school so that's almost impossible.

My father eats like this because he thinks it's right and loves it, but also loves roasted nuts..
And than finally she decided to give it a try because, she was tired of eating an other dinner than the rest of the table!
Imagine this, people that are switching to Wai Diet because they want to act like the rest

And now she can eat meat/fish without any problem at all! And all non-cooked fats, she can handle normally.
But also, and that I find strange, roasted nuts. Without any problem... Maybe there is something in nuts that prevents it to become trans fats ?
She is now eating (roasted) nuts, raw fish,raw meat,raw cheese and bread, things you put on bread, cooked vegetables and some more traditional things. As long as it's no cooked meat or heaten fat (except of nuts).

Wow, long story, but back to your post, in the rest of my social life I actually don't find many people with the feeling: "what I've been doing so far is wrong"
Mostly they are like this:
Kasper, I don't give a shit about toxins, I don't give a shit about addictive substances and I don't give shit about trans fats, but I do like my hamburgers, my fried potatoes and my icecreams, and you like them too, so please act normally and let's get some hamburgers.

I agree that everything in life is a belief, but in order to make some sense out of it, we all have to set some axioms and build from there. Every individual puts together his/her own set, but most use a standard set dictated by society. For example, we use a math system based on certain axioms (Euclid).

I love Euclid

If I would suddenly adopt a different system, then I'd have a hard time functioning in society.
The difference between science and religion is that science (i.c. scientists) keep questioning their own and other's existing theories/results. Questioning the belief system in a religion (so the religion itself) is not condoned. Scientists do have some strict rules about how to conduct research and report about it. I'm not saying this is necessarily a good thing, but it does make it more dependable.

Well you can usually question how you should interpret the words of those prophets. But beside this there is not much room for questioning I think.

The extra step the Wai Diet offers, is that you can read the scientific articles it's based upon, and draw your own conclusions. In the end it's all about what you choose to be true for you.

That's indeed an extra step, For me, for example I really needed that to believe this is the most optimal diet for me.
When I was an vegan raw foodist, I tried to find good information about it, but I couldn't find anything as clear as this.

Actually maybe the most beautifull thing I find about Wai is this, I think you need only need one axiom and you get almost the complete list of Wai foods:

Axiom: The foods a human being would choose if:
1. He has never read/heard any information about which food you should eat.
2. He or any other human in his environment is able to make any fire.
3. He has not any experience with heaten food.
is the most optimal diet for a human being.

I think that the foods a human being would choose in this state is almost completely what Wai recommend.
Where it differs is I think:
- Oil, but he will likely replace this with nuts and fruits high in fat.
- He would not be able to consume sugar
- He would probably eat more animal food than advised here if he can get it.
- He would likely consume raw milk from animals if he is able too. This is almost certain if he is not able to get any nuts or fruits high in fat.

But on the other hand, which such a diet, it's easy to discover what gives him acne, and after experiencing that he would maybe choose to eat less animal food and no raw milk.

[Oscar]

Interesting read
Being partly on the diet, your family would still search for addictive substances. My guess is, that they consider nuts (roasted) to be healthier than cooked meat or fish.

Yeah you're right, there are enough people who don't care about health. I would say that they tend to be more younger people, because their bodies are still in a relative good condition. When people get older, they slowly get more health problems and issues, start to feel their mortality, so they tend to get more interested in health.
As such, before people are really interested in hearing about the Wai Diet, they have to be interested in health first.

At point 2. of your axiom, don't you mean "is not" instead of "is"?

[Kasper]

Being partly on the diet, your family would still search for addictive substances. My guess is, that they consider nuts (roasted) to be healthier than cooked meat or fish.

Well, they don't like raw nuts so much. But they love raw meat/fish. And I agree, most nuts taste better roasted. While (tender) meat and fish taste better raw.
Another problem is: My father and mother think like this: It's healthy, or its unhealthy. As they can't believe roasted nuts are unhealthy, they should be healthy. There is nothing in between

We don't have macadamia's or brazil nuts, maybe that should solve the nuts problem. I can try it.
Is there a place I can order brazils or macadamia's online ? I have searched, but I can't find it.

Yeah you're right, there are enough people who don't care about health. I would say that they tend to be more younger people, because their bodies are still in a relative good condition. When people get older, they slowly get more health problems and issues, start to feel their mortality, so they tend to get more interested in health.
As such, before people are really interested in hearing about the Wai Diet, they have to be interested in health first.

I became a vegan raw foodie when I suffered from swine flu. I thought let's find out what is healthy, maybe I feel better than.
But so frustrating to find out what is healthy on internet:
Saturated fats are bad, saturated fats are healthy !
Sugar is poison, sugar is not poison.
Don't eat meat! Eat only meat !
Raw food is good, raw food contains bacteria..
Egg are really bad, egg yolk is the most healthy food on planet...

I'm really glad I found this.

At point 2. of your axiom, don't you mean "is not" instead of "is"?

Yeah, you are right, should be 'is not'.

[panacea]

it's actually not all that complicated. A simple piece of logic could easily destroy 99.99% of the false information out there, and that logic is 'if all other animals do best on raw food, why wouldn't humans' (which some people don't realize are ANIMALS too.

the main reason everything is so hard to figure out in the health realm, as well as in law, or in a lot of other things, is for $$$. Knowledge is power, and lack of knowledge in the masses is a cash cow for those that have it.

take a look at one of those IRS books/legal documents. do you see any intelligible sentences for the layperson? no. are words that have forty different contextual meanings as well as being required to look up in a thick dictionary necessary? no. so why isn't simple English included? why are SPECIFIC writing agencies hired to obscure the legal wording? for $$$ reasons, most of the time to keep the masses unaware of what businesses really are doing or what they mean.