Just as an aside, almost every client that I work with dietarily is already on a ketogenic diet.
odyssic,
I think the most important thing to remember here is context. Different diets suit different people, and this is probably based on one's environment, genetics etc. I personally know of a couple of vegans who appear to be doing quite well with their health, but at the same time I know others who's health is falling apart.
The problem here for me is that a diet like fruitarianism is so restrictive, and since I have some training in nutrition, this sticks out like a big red flag for me. Generally, if a diet is restrictive, it needs to be very well formulated to be achieving good micro nutrient levels. Honestly, this is hard to do. This is why there is such a thing as the "well-formulated ketogenic diet" instead of the standard "ketogenic diet", because typically a ketogenic/paleo diet is massively lacking in calcium and magnesium and a bunch of other things which need to be carefully calculated and tailored in individually. Likewise, vegan/fruitarianism is shocking for certain nutrients. You should go onto the "chronometer" website for a free trial to plug in your nutrient data and take a look at what the diet is lacking in. This can be an eye opening experience.
If you take a look at Dr Weston A Price's work, you will see that there were no traditional societies which completely omitted animal foods. Each one had some dairy, or eggs, or meat, or fish, or a mixture of all of them. A "traditional" diet based purely on fruit does not (as per my knowledge) exist anywhere on earth - or at least in any population-wide case that has been documented and verified.
There are personal accounts of this diet just like breatharianism, but ultimately these are just hearsay. Can anyone provide any hard data on the efficacy of a fruitarian diet long-term? I can't find ANYTHING on pubmed. On the other hand, there are plenty of studies showing how detrimental an essential amino acid deficiency can be, and I struggle to see how fruit can provide enough amino acids to fuel metabolism. Similarly, research demonstrating deficiencies in primarily animal-derived nutrients like choline + retinol + zinc + carnitine + CLA + menaquinone + etc can all be fatal. So we are in a situation where we have two choices : 1.act based on objective/semi-objective data and personal experience, or 2. act on anecdotal accounts of things happening a couple of centuries ago.
Thanks for the information and the thoughts. I've also obsessively researched these traditional societies, and there is another crucial distinction to make. These traditional societies already had a baseline of health, so these diets may be sustaining. However, in times of healing, something more extreme is often undertaken, and many of these societies were in touch with fasting and limiting diets during times of healing. I've found that in our culture, you can eat a very clean diet, ketogenic or otherwise, which would sustain a healthy body, but which does not allow the body to heal from whatever budding afflictions it is already carrying.
This is why I turned to this path for healing. Also, as we know (it being one of the more popular dietary trends in America), many are already on a variant of the ketogenic diet, and while they stabilize their symptoms, usually the underlying condition is not healed.
So for healing, even Dom D'angostino (while he is interviewed by Tim Ferriss), says that ketogenic approaches are full of promise (particularly "A medically therapeutic ketogenic diet, traditionally used to support childhood epilepsy, is typically very low in protein, contains dairy and some other things, is very high in fat, and does not necessarily include much variation.") , for brain development, cancer treatment, and strength building, etc, however, the most they can do at this point is increase the healing response after traditional cancer therapies, if a fast is undertaken before treatment, if the body has enough extra weight. I believe ketogenic diets were developed for the specific treatment of disease, and abandoned when they were found not to work. A fruit of vegan-ish diet often allows one to bypass the need for cancer treatment, which may be more harmful than effective in most cases.
The limiting of dietary intake, calorie restriction, reduced food groups, all seem to aid healing, which perhaps counters the idea that lacking certain nutrients is the cause of most disease. Ehret thought that once the system was clear, the body could synthesize certain nutrients from the air, the sunlight, that we, as more congested 'omnivores', think we need to get from food. I haven't seen a study on this, because I don't know where they'd get the subjects!
The challenge is, sometimes 'heresay' is the only way information can reach us, because scientific agendas skew the results, so it often merits further investigation, and that's what I'm doing, through testing on myself, and then with clients. I've pointed out that Dr. Morse runs a clinic that specializes in healing cancer with just fruit and herbs, so this approach for healing is certainly beyond conjecture, in my mind.
Hilton Hotema was an interesting if eccentric thinker. He did spend 50 years looking for articles in newspapers, and saved the ones that seemed to merit further investigation. Often, his stories begin with 'in 1940, the London Times posted an article that said... '
So, whether a fruitarian, vegetarian, or vegan diet is the long term solution for humanity is as of yet unproven, however, for healing, it seems dramatically more effective than other approaches. Most of the 'raw food / fasting' clinics in the late 19th, early 20th century report astounding successes, and they probably have records somewhere if one were so inclined to dig them up. However, I'm unaware of a ketogenic clinic which can report such success in healing mental and physical conditions. Another issue, is that while I understand the use of fats to nourish brain chemistry, many of these clinics were foremost 'sanitariums' for mental issues, and many seem to have been healed of their affliction by simply clearing congestion from the head.
Atherov published his groundbreaking book, Raw Eating, and raised a raw vegan daughter, and sent his book, at his own expense, to 400 heads of state to spread the word. He died in his 90's in Iran in a prison 'for his beliefs', from what I could gather. But, as a doctor, he did write pretty extensively on his experience with healing patients, as did Bircher-Benner, another that came to the raw food (mostly) approach with astounding success.
In my opinion, studies are, by their nature, inherently incomplete. They are based on assumptions. They only provide some evidence, and can be used to prove just about anything. Ie, how the tobacco studies were used, in spite of that fact the people smoke in most of the longest living cultures in the world. Semi- objective would be more objective than I'd be willing to concede for most studies.
Joanna Brandt wrote the Grape Cure, because her family and friends in South Africa were dying of cancer and other diseases (late 19th century) at relatively young ages. She writes at the introduction that they mostly lived on 'game meats'.
In most ways, I feel better than I've felt in my life (more energy, better hair growth, better skin, better muscle tone, level moods, no dark circles under eyes, less congestion, better sleep), so I'm not at this moment compelled to receive a reading from a 'chronometer', a device and a mentality which would probably not have existed in any of the cultures that Weston Price studied. And while the Weston Price work is edifying and interesting, I'd have to go through and see how long-lived the cultures he studied were... my guess is that their longevity was not remarkable, though being relatively free of disease, and mineral rich in the bones, is certainly an important consideration.
The Ahkhazians seem to be the incontestable ancient people, at least on record, though perhaps there are people's in remote regions somewhere that live longer. The work on them makes them more accessible than most, and there are many cases of them living over 150.
I suggest reading How to Live to Be 100, for their dietary practices in the 70's.
Which we can sum up like this:
"Fresh food, as far as we know, has been appreciated in both preliterate and modern Caucasian cultures. They do use dried meat when fresh is not available, and some pickled foods. Leftovers are discarded. They are aware that the loss of freshness means the loss of nutrients and good taste. The Caucasians consider storing unclean and unhealthy. Spices are ground just before they are used, and Caucasians avoid storing herbs, which gradually lose their flavor and color.
Wild growing plants are plentiful in the woods and meadows of the Caucasus and are collected eagerly. They are equal if not superior to the cultivated species in vitamins, oils, protein, and natural sugars.
The Rules of Diet
Two factors remain constant in the Caucasian diet:
No overeating. Fewer calories are consumed in all areas of the Caucasus than the AMA recommends for Americans. Experiments conducted at Cornell University by Clive McKay showed that restricting caloric intake prolongs the life of rats, but only in the early period of life. A similar stretching out of earlier life was achieved by Denham Harman of the University of Nebraska.
An extremely high intake of natural vitamins in fresh vegetables, both cultivated and wild. They replace meat and sweet foods in the diet of the Caucasians. This massive vitamin C intake could immunize the organism against many diseases."
An interesting passage:
"Hippocrates reported that the people of the Caucasus lived on cherries, pine cones, apples, melons, and berries which grew wild in the woods. Even at that time the area was famous for longevity, and the Greeks may have sought dietary clues as to why these people attained such unusual ages. " Page 103.
Pine cones are a good source of fat (pine nuts), which Ehret advised to avoid entirely.
So it's possible that they introduced meat, and their lifespan actually declined some. Though, even they would only eat meat 'when the head was on the table' so they could ascertain freshness. Otherwise, they believed that the meat was unhealthy (parasites and the like, probably). And they ate small amounts of meat, usually just as on special occasions or at feasts.
For healing, in my opinion, fruit is easier, safer, more predictable to acquire, as many people may not even have access to the freshly processed meats that even the Weston Price societies had access to, so, in addition to the meat, they may be getting some parasite friends, which could hinder the benefits.
Just a few more thoughts.
I'm not on here much, but just feel it is supportive to share my experience, as a counter to the more mainstream ketogenic approach, in case some people find healing in it.
I've never supplemented calcium.
).
