Super health for everyone from foods only
Q: Tell us something about yourself. How did you get acquainted with this kind of raw food diet?
A: There was an evolution to the present advancement of my Primal Diet. It was not something that was taught, or in vogue. Nothing like it existed at the time, in 1976. Before that, I began investigating dietary and nutritional perspectives to improve health, 34 years ago. A year prior to beginning those investigations, I had been diagnosed with cancers of the stomach, blood, bone and lymph with no chance for survival. Also, I had long suffered Type 1 diabetes, psoriasis, angina, bursitis and stomach ulcer. I suffered with pain most every minute of the day and I could not sleep unless I was immersed in a bathtub full of hot water containing 2 cups of raw milk, 2 ounces raw apple cider vinegar and 2 tablespoons of sun-dried sea salt. It made my body somewhat buoyant and relieved enough of my pain, enabling me to sleep. Medical therapies had caused the cancers and crippled me. I chose death at home rather than a hospice.
My dietary journey began when a health volunteer coaxed me into drinking raw carrot juice. He told me about a woman who had supposedly cured her cancer by drinking raw carrot juice. It tasted good so I drank it. I had suffered autism since I was 1 1/2 years old (the side-effects of mercury in a tetanus vaccine). I was unable to comprehend language. My communication skills were limited to sound bites that, I came to recognize, evoked certain responses. Beyond that, I was communicatively incompetent. I could not even comprehend that the word the had a meaning at the age of 21 years. Approximately 10 days after I began drinking the carrot juice on a daily basis, my autism reversed. I had no vocabulary but I comprehended language! I was thrilled. I borrowed $110 and spent it on nutritionally-based books. I studied for 3 1/2 years under the tutelage of Los Angeles' top nutritionist of the time. The rest was experimental, to see what worked, not simply what was reasonable, logical and/or rational.
Q: What is happening in our body? Why do we need this kind of diet?
A: I answered those questions in some detail in my books. We do not have time to give all of those details here. Basically, cooking and/or processing our food causes toxic byproducts to form in the food that gradually and accumulatively degrade our health. Cooking and processing damages or destroys all enzymes, vitamins, minerals, proteins, carbohydrates and fats. The alteration of nutrients gradually causing systemic deficiencies. The accumulations of toxins cause bodily malfunctions that often increase to diseases. Some people have the ability to mask ill symptoms from excessive hormonal production, and other factors, and seem wonderfully healthy most of their lives. However, most of us suffer more and more everyday until we find ourselves in an advanced state of disease.
Q: What are the greatest benefits of this diet?
A: One, we are able to slowly detoxify most if not all of the toxic poisons that have collected in our bodies from a lifetime of cooked and processed food-poisoning that most often causes disease. Two, we have cleaner and more balanced blood, neurological and lymphatic systems, allowing for better bodily function. Three, we immediately or gradually gain more energy, clarity, strength, endurance, stamina, positivism, calmness and a sense that we are getting better everyday. Four, peace of mind that we are actively reversing our direction toward disease. Five, freedom from bacterial worry and a sense that we are in balance with Nature rather than Nature attacking us. Six, unless the food is poisoned by chemicals, such as pesticides, herbicides and/or chemical fertilizers, the proper balance of food on this diet promotes cleansing and healing of our bodies. It never degrades or harms us. And seven, after the initial dietary and social adjustments, freedom to indulge in a life that is less burdensome with anxiety, emotional distraction and pain. We are able to experience more of the joys of life than the suffering.
Q: What kind of results have you had in helping people with this diet and has there been any official research done on the results of this diet?
A: The last fifteen years of Primal-Diet evolution has resulted in reversing 90% of disease. Some diseases, such as lung cancer, have a much lower reversal rate. Lungcancer reversal on this diet averages 50%. Using medical therapies only, late-stage lungcancer reversal is 0. Utilizing the Primal Diet along with medical therapies the reversal rate drops from 90% to approximately 45%. Considering that when cancerous medical therapies are utilized without dietary change, 83% of cases never make it beyond 3 years after diagnosis. That is an abysmal statistic earned by the medical system. People pay enormous amounts of money for toxic and damaging medical therapies that generate more cancer in a cancerous condition for the patient, along with trillions of dollars each year for the medical industry. The medical industry is controlled by pharmaceuticals. The pharmaceutical industry took control of medicine when it began financing medical research at medical universities worldwide. Most everything that doctors believe and prescribe is dictated by the pharmaceutical industry. Most of the data is faulty, biased and illegitimate.
There were several severely anemic attempts to follow some of my patients but because healing is a long-term process, lack of funding disparaged the investigators. Take a look at my books and read the Testimonials. The evidence lies there. Many of those who healed would have had to have spectacular miracles to have been healed from their conditions. If we were to discount the food for having caused thousands of people to have reversed advanced non-reversible diseases, then we would have to exclaim that an unusually high percentage of people have these miracle when they eat the Primal Diet. Which do you think causes that phenomenon?
Q: How do you determine the condition of your patients? What methods do you use?
A: I utilize the much misunderstood and misinterpreted iridolocal science as my method of analysis. By patterns, coloring, and texture variances in the iris, I can determine much of a person's state of health, or lack of. Also, I utilize skin analysis.
Q: Is the raw food diet connected to any larger phenomenon or is it quite a separate issue?
A: That question could have a lot of interpretations. If you are asking, does the diet affect our spiritual nature and progress, my answer is, yes. Because we are naturally bound to the body's nervous system, what we sense is paramount to our focus. If we are chemically imbalanced, especially in tumultuous states, we cannot easily focus on the balance and well-being that is so necessary to spiritual development. It is like driving a car with a faulty electrical system. No matter what we do to the car, until that electrical system is rebuilt, the car will not run properly and it will be difficult to drive without worry, malfunction and dissatisfaction.
Q: Who have been the toughest opponents to your diet?
A: Public health departments and conglomerate media have been major hindrances. Much of what the medical profession espouses is parroted in the media as truth, without proof. A prime example of this occurred when the people of Los Angeles County, California, sought to change the law that disallowed us the freedom to buy natural raw milk in stores. During that campaign, the media gave us attention but their comments basically called us a bunch of heartfelt and wayward food-faddists. The Los Angeles Times quoted doctors but did not once question their science. However, when I espoused science, the Los Angeles Times discounted my words by stating that I had no scientific proof. That was contrary to the actual documents submitted to the managing government body. The Los Angeles County Department of Health Services' entire team, with active help from the California State Department of Health Services and the federal Central Disease Control, constructed a faulty and erroneous report that charged raw milk was dangerous. The report stated 5 incidences of illness that were blamed on raw milk. None of those 5 cases involved more than a few people and each lacked proof of the claim that raw milk caused those people's illnesses. The report also mentioned a raw-milk prejudiced study made by a University-of-California-Los Angeles (UCLA) that ascertained raw milk caused disease. The study was based on interviews from prejudicial questionnaires, not on any science or laboratory tests. It looked good if you blindly accepted it on the basis that doctors' names were attached to the study. However, it was a pap. One of UCLA's graduated biostatistians Dr. Nancy Mann intelligently refuted the study, saying that the entire study was erroneously conducted and executed. On the other side of the issue, I made a report with the help of the world's only medical expert on milk, Dr. William Campbell Douglass, Jr, M.D. In our Supplemental Report In Favor of Raw Milk, I cited numerous universities that utilized raw-milk therapies for many diseases, including lessening infant death-rates in hospitals in the early 1900's when the bacterial rates in milk were enormous. The proof was that raw milk with high counts of bacteria caused health and pasteurized milk with high bacterial counts had been dangerous and deadly. I cited many cases of huge epidemics of food-poisoning caused by pasteurized dairy products. One case involved 197,000 people. The error in the Los Angeles Times' reporting assaulted truth to the public. The public lingers in ignorance because of that article. I contacted the editors several times with my well-researched and credible report but they refused to accept the report and correct their errors.
Most of the public are fated to the medical model that seeks to attack the body rather than nurture and heal it because the media acts as a public relations voice for them.
When my Report was submitted, I put it with a legal cover letter that threatened the County that they would suffer and lose a class-action lawsuit if they failed to allow us raw milk in the stores. That forced the governing body to read the data. The vote was 4 to 1 in favor of raw-milk sales. Even that did not motivate the LA Times to correct their article.
Since that time of our milk victory in Los Angeles County, March 2000, three other groups used my materials to alter the laws in their governments. If you would like to read every document that I wrote to change the laws in your city, state and/or country, go to this website: www.rawmilk.org. Anyone can copy and paste that information and use it.
Q: How do you see the role of the food industry in regard to the food culture in the United States?
A: The food industry may have gotten it roots in the USA first through its powerful political connections to government but the problem is not restricted to the USA. The problem is worldwide. The food industry loves the "bacterial phobia" frenzy. They know that the politicians are easily manipulated by it. They garnish their plates with fear-based health officials, which are mostly doctors. They sell government and the misinformed public on the idea that their food processes save the public from raw bacterial problems. The facts are contrary. No epidemic has ever been caused by a raw food. It is always cooked or partially cooked food that has sat and bacteria has fed on it. Bacteria, like animals, get diseases and mutate when fed cooked food. Their waste byproducts are 10- 100 times more toxic. Where raw fish has been blamed for food-poisoning in sushi restaurants, it has always been the fish that had been partially cooked, not raw. Recently in the USA, a few misguided mothers and Coca Cola Company (that bought a major juice company) got the federal government to enact a law that outlaws selling fresh preprepared raw fruit and vegetable juices in retail stores. Only pasteurized or processed juices can be sold according to federal law. Coca Cola profited from that law because pasteurization extends the shelf-life of the juice. They lose fewer products to spoilage. That the juices no longer contain enzymes and unadulterated vitamins and other nutrients should have been the issue. The disease that processed food creates versus industry's profit-losses should have been part of the issue. Now people drink the inferior juices thinking that their health is better by the processing of it. They feel safe. The reality is starkly different. If bacteria get into the processed juice, they have a great chance of being seriously injured. The worst that happens on raw food is an occasional case of vomit or diarrhea without lasting damage to health. The average food-companies are Hollywoodlevel blockbuster monsters disguised as benefits to humanity. That may have sounded harsh but the reality of disease and its main causes are harsh.
Q: What do you see as the most challenging dietary habits to be changed at the moment?
A: Because of the pervading bacterial phobia worldwide, the challenge is to get people to realize that raw-meat-consumption, even when full of bacteria, is not dangerous or harmful but healthful. Bacteria feeding on raw meat predigest it and add to our protein and Vitamin B absorption and utilization, the same as bacteria feeds on milk to make yogurt or kefir. I proved the harmlessness of eating up to a pound of 3-year-old meat, including glands, that were literally green, black, blue and white with high-bacteria for the television show Ripley's Believe It Or Not. It aired on July 17 and again in August 2002. It was televised worldwide. A German-based TV-news program saw it and came to America and taped me eating another pound of the same meat that was then several months older. I did not suffer diarrhea or vomit either time. High-bacterial meat has proved to rapidly reverse long-term chronic psychological problems without medication.
Q: According to your Primal Diet, using raw dairy products is very helpful, and using pasteurized products is very harmful for the body. In Finland, all diary products suffer pasteurization and homogenation. Grocery stores and health stores are not allowed to sell any unpasteurized dairy products, except a few central European cheeses that are sold in a few special cheese shops in our capital city. Also there are less and less cows in Finland. Do you think it would be better to stop using dairy products completely if nonpasteurized products are not available, or should we in that case use products with low fat or no fat at all?
A: In my milk report that I mentioned earlier, I documented many doctor-based reports that raw milk drinkers did not have disease and pasteurized dairy drinkers suffered certain diseases, from diabetes to osteoporosis. All cooked food promotes disease. I would avoid as much cooked food as possible, including pasteurized milk products. However, I suggest that you translate my milk report and use it to get the law changed in Finland. There is no reason you should not have the freedom to have and drink raw milk.
Q: Many people are afraid of getting bacteria, parasites etc into their body. Some people are even afraid that their body might go into shock when changing their current diet into a raw food diet. What can you say to these people?
A: It appears to me to be all mythical. Man has been running around the planet with bacteria and parasites for millions of years. He wiped his rectum with the same hands with which he hunted, butchered and ate his meat. Apes lick the fecal matter off of their infants and never suffer the propagandized symptoms of E. coli. We developed a symbiotic relationship with them. They help us, we help them. My experience supports that bacteria and parasites are the janitors of degenerative tissue in our bodies. Like vultures and crows, they do not attack living creatures. Bacteria and parasites feed on dying and decaying cells. Bacteria and parasites help clean our bodily environment much faster and with a lot less toxic-byproducts than we can clean ourselves with solvents, such as internal body-soaps, such as virus. There is no evidence that any tribe or race perished or developed disease as the result of bacteria in food.
I have to tell you that after I began eating raw meat, I worried for the first 13 years that some parasite from the raw meat would invade my brain and I would be mentally deficient again. I continued to eat it anyway because it was the only food that gave me the strength, calmness and clarity that made my life not only livable and improvable but enjoyable. After 13 years of raw-meat-eating (including some that was parasite infested) and no harmful effects, I realized that the "get-parasites-from-raw-meat-eating" phenomenon was mythical. I realized that I had spent many hours of many days of many weeks of those 13 years in senseless worry and anxiety.
I had worried because the doctors severed my vagus nerve to my stomach for stomach cancer when I was 20 years old. They said that the surgery placed me in the category of those most likely to perish from bacterial and parasitical invasion from food. I was warned never to eat raw food again in my life, not even salad. The reality is that everything the medical profession told me was the opposite. When I realized that, a load of fears and anxiety left my daily experience. It is easy for me to enjoy my life now that I know we are beings who are favored in Nature rather than threatened by Nature. Industrial man, on the other hand, is to be feared for making the toxic food and environment that is dangerous to our health.
Q: Finnish people eat a lot of cooked potato and grain products, especially rye. Are these products recommended according to this diet, if they are eaten raw?
A: Any raw food is better than cooked however, the toxic glycogenic byproducts of high carbohydrate foods, such as grains and potatoes, are enormous in the human body. That toxicity stores at a rate of 70-90% depending on a person's health. Notice that the healthiest person stores at a rate of at least 70%. Those glycotoxins cause many problems, the least of which is stretch marks when following a low-fat diet, and the worst are cancer and multiple sclerosis on cooked diets high in grain and potato products.
Q: How do you see other diets that have similarities to your diet, such as the Blood-Type diet and various Paleolithic diets?
A: The similarity is an illusion. Comparing Paleolithic diets to the Primal Diet would be like comparing a car in a junk yard to an F16 jet. The only similarity paleo-diets have to the Primal Diet is that meat is a major factor. Paleo-thinkers analyze historical assumptions and hypothesize what caveman ate. The Primal Diet was developed entirely on what proved to be most beneficial and more efficient for present-day diseased and healthy people. The blood-type diet is another vehicle altogether. It assumes that bloodtypes should eat or not eat certain foods. Consuming raw or cooked has little concern for them. I can image someone going back into the caveman era and telling a blood-Type A healthy caveman that he shouldn't eat red meat, that it is unhealthy for him and will give him disease. Consider that the Masai, Samburu, primitive Inuit and Fulani eat raw meat and dairy, have all of the various blood-types, eat the same dairy and red meat that is not supposed to be good for some of them, and they have no disease. I do not know how such theorists can be taken seriously when there is no direct experience to show to what extent a particular diet may or may not be beneficial.
Q: Do you recommend the use of food supplements when on this diet?
A: Any time that a substances is removed from a food, heat or solvents are used, altering the nature and structure. Basically, the remaining material is a chemical, not a bio-active food-substance. The use of solvents for extraction is like soaking your food in alcohol or kerosene before you eat it. Would you? Heating, as we discussed, alters the nature, too. It is another animal altogether, deficient or devoid in bio-active ingredients. Most supplements are entirely chemically produced and have no relationship to the benefits produced by fresh raw food. Supplements are toxic, producing a toxic high that is misinterpreted as producing energy, and that is misconstrued as improved health. That is an illusion. I experimented with and utilized vitamin supplements during my training with my nutritional tutor early in my nutritional journey, and again when I managed the nutritional department of a major healthfood store in Los Angeles, California. I saw the toxicity collect in people from supplement-consumption. Our vitamin, mineral and enzyme supplementation is best derived by drinking raw green vegetable juices.
Q: Why do you not recommend freezers for storing food?
A: In my experiments, I found that animals fed frozen foods developed slower, some remained underdeveloped by as much as 25%.
Q: You have recently published a recipe book containing some other than food recipes, like the Primal Facial Body Care Cream, deodorant and antiperspirant. Are you going to expand more in that direction?
A: Let me make it clear to the reader that those recipes are made of food that we eat. I suggest that if we cannot eat it, it should not be put on our skin. At this time, expanding those recipes it is not on my agenda. I have 3 other books to finish that do not include that exploration.
Q: What are you researching at the moment?
A: I am trying to reverse balding. So many men and women in this toxic world have severe hair-thinning or balding. With women, hair-thinning and/or balding causes severe anxiety. I want to try and lessen that suffering. At present, my experiment with a certain food powdered and soaked in distilled water at room temperature has been very promising. I will let you know when the results are in after 2 years of experimentation.
Q: What kind of answer would you give to those who are devoted vegetarians for ethical reasons?
A: I would ask them to consider that half of my cancer patients were longtime vegetarians (12-35 years), we were meant to eat meat as a species for survival, eating most vegetables kills the plants, no vegetarian culture lived without disease, and tribes eating all raw animal-based diets do not suffer disease. If that is so, why would eating vegetation be more moral or spiritual if it causes so much suffering in the human condition? The suffering makes it very difficult to achieve the tranquility needed to easily develop morally and spiritually. The most notable vegan, who postulated that because of her vegan diet she would never get cancer, died of a devastatingly aggressive cancer. That person was Linda McCartney.
Q: Does our body have natural rhythms for daily eating and monthly or longer cleansing periods that the diet considers?
A: Yes, the Chinese did a good job of observing and recording daily glandular rhythms. The lymphatic and neurologic systems do their major detoxification and subsequent healing approximately every 2-3 years. The digestive organs usually experience a major cleanse and healing every 1 1/2 - 2 1/2 years, such as a stomach flu. The respiratory system usually experiences major detoxification and healing yearly, such as a cold or flu. Those "illness" are beneficial. They are our bodies' ways of cleansing.
My next book will explain why and how to evoke detoxification and heal. Normally, I do not encourage aggressive detoxification unless a person is near death, or a person is healthy. People have to experience symptoms that sometimes involve pain during detoxification. Our bodies naturally pass through those states without our help in a timely and considerate fashion.
Q: Could you please explain how much is 1 ounce by volume in liters? I guess your 'cup' means about 1,5 deciliters?
A: I do not have any tools or references to make those calculations at this time but basically 1 ounce is twice the volume of 2 very large spoons.
Q: Do you think the Primal Facial Body Care Cream and Lubrication Formula Drink are good for treating irritated and itchy psoriasis skin? I have this idea that citrus fruits and honey irritate the skin. What to use instead of coconut cream - coconuts are very rare here?
A: There is not enough citrus or honey to cause a problem in those formulas. There is nothing that will replace the coconut cream but the formula will still be mostly effective without coconut cream.