Re: [RawPortland] Question
Thanks Nora! What you mention makes perfect sense. I totally understand and agree.
I appreciate your response.
--- On Mon, 7/13/09, Nora Lenz <nmlenz@...> wrote:
From: Nora Lenz <nmlenz@...>
Subject: Re: [RawPortland] Question
Date: Monday, July 13, 2009, 5:34 PMHi Stacey,Ah, it's not so black and white sometimes, is it. :) You're right about cacao but the decision to eat it is a very individual one because there are other criteria to be considered besides toxic load. Namely, does the food represent improvement over what you would normally eat in its place? As harmful as cacao is (imo), there are things that are much worse! The primary job of the new raw fooder is staying entertained so as not to backslide. So for some people cacao can be a great bridge or compromise food. Of course at some point cacao will need to be replaced in the diet, and then the replacement will need to be replaced, ad optimum, if peak health is the desired outcome.Thanks for asking. :)Best wishes,Nora
Thanks for this info Nora!
You make a good point regarding bitterness and toxins. This brings up for me the topic of cacao: maybe we should be more discerning with using it? Cacao as we receive it (from the bean) is very bitter; no animal (including human) would eat it without adding sweetener. There is a good amount of information out there (Paul Nison, Kevin Gianni, John Kohler) regarding cacao and toxins. Since raw food is really about optimal health-I want to share this info.