Re: rooibos

[Guest guest]

Hi, Jazz..

I know you're just meaning to post information. We aren't going to... don't

have the power to... declare Rooibos tea to be SCD legal. Unfortunately, this

list is just not the place for debating whether new foods/herbs/teas should be

added to the legal list.

Like I said in my last post about this, I think anyone who want to use a product

that is not " officially " legal, needs to determine that for themselves... and

make that choice. Many new SCDers have suffered so much pain and illness that

they simply don't want to take ANY chances, and are happy to accept those foods

and beverages that are legal... and just get started getting well.

It's a personal choice people are free to make. We just aren't going to grant

that " legal " status to this tea.. or any other tea. I know it's crazy making for

some of you, but for pecanbread, that's just the way it is. Sorry... and thanks

for trying to understand.

Patti

[Guest guest]

From the herb site I checked, it says the mucilaginous herbs have a

laxative effect, so that would most likely be the reason rooibos is

not legal. Okay, got my answer LOL!

Michele

>

> Hi, Jazz..

>

> I know you're just meaning to post information. We aren't

going to... don't have the power to... declare Rooibos tea to be SCD

legal. Unfortunately, this list is just not the place for debating

whether new foods/herbs/teas should be added to the legal list.

>

> Like I said in my last post about this, I think anyone who want to

use a product that is not " officially " legal, needs to determine

that for themselves... and make that choice. Many new SCDers have

suffered so much pain and illness that they simply don't want to

take ANY chances, and are happy to accept those foods and beverages

that are legal... and just get started getting well.

>

> It's a personal choice people are free to make. We just aren't

going to grant that " legal " status to this tea.. or any other tea. I

know it's crazy making for some of you, but for pecanbread, that's

just the way it is. Sorry... and thanks for trying to understand.

>

> Patti

>

>

[Guest guest]

Then kick me from the list. If someone is asking WHY something isn't legal

- and Elaine had a method for testing foods - which I DID ask about, but no

one has seen fit to address - then I am going to continue to provide

information about that specific food/herb. It is appropriate for people to

make informed decisions.

No one has yet to prove to me that Elaine WANTED the SCD to remain static.

Show me in her writings where she stated that and I will be willing to never

research another food item. Or, at least never post it to the list.

Life is not static. Elaine was researching new foods up to her death.

Doesn't sound to me like she was against new foods joining, or old foods

leaving the diet. Don't sell people short. People aren't lacking in

intelligence, just knowledge. How can you make informed decisions when you

are told that you are a sheep? Lemmings ride over the cliff because they

have a group mentality.

I'm not a sheep. I believe in well researched documentation. Elaine has

provided that. But, anyone who has done any reading at all knows that some

flaws do exist within even her own conclusions. That doesn't mean that her

approach isn't valid - just that she didn't know EVERYTHING. Regardless of

the fanaticism of some people on the list.

If you are, on this list, really wanting to adhere to the spirit of the SCD,

then you are wanting to follow what Elaine started - and that was

determining what was best to heal people. People are body, mind and spirit.

The body has more to it than just static needs. More foods are being

discovered with healing properties all the time. Foods that Elaine were not

aware of are now readily available. Should they be denied to us simply

because they were not available to Elaine to test?

If they are denied to us by ultra-conservative thinking, then that is just

prejudicial thinking. Sure, I know this list boasts many people with

multiple years of healthy living based on eating " just as Elaine laid out " .

But have they ever asked themselves why Elaine was consistently changing her

own list of legal/illegal foods?

If she thought what she had produced first time out was so good wouldn't she

have just let it be?

But, I'm sure people are tired of having to think - which is the complaint I

mostly get when I post to lists. I require people to think and look at

their own self-imposed convictions. What a shame.

I still believe that if Elaine were still alive that the SCD would be a

continually evolving list of foods.

Why is that so difficult for people to grasp?

Jazz

-- Re: rooibos

Hi, Jazz..

I know you're just meaning to post information. We aren't going to... don

t have the power to... declare Rooibos tea to be SCD legal. Unfortunately,

this list is just not the place for debating whether new foods/herbs/teas

should be added to the legal list.

Like I said in my last post about this, I think anyone who want to use a

product that is not " officially " legal, needs to determine that for

themselves... and make that choice. Many new SCDers have suffered so much

pain and illness that they simply don't want to take ANY chances, and are

happy to accept those foods and beverages that are legal... and just get

started getting well.

It's a personal choice people are free to make. We just aren't going to

grant that " legal " status to this tea.. or any other tea. I know it's crazy

making for some of you, but for pecanbread, that's just the way it is. Sorry

... and thanks for trying to understand.

Patti

[Guest guest]

>

> Then kick me from the list. If someone is asking WHY something isn't legal

> - and Elaine had a method for testing foods - which I DID ask about, but no

> one has seen fit to address - then I am going to continue to provide

> information about that specific food/herb. It is appropriate for people to

> make informed decisions.

>

> No one has yet to prove to me that Elaine WANTED the SCD to remain static.

> Show me in her writings where she stated that and I will be willing to never

> research another food item. Or, at least never post it to the list.

>

> Life is not static. Elaine was researching new foods up to her death.

> Doesn't sound to me like she was against new foods joining, or old foods

> leaving the diet. Don't sell people short. People aren't lacking in

> intelligence, just knowledge. How can you make informed decisions when you

> are told that you are a sheep? Lemmings ride over the cliff because they

> have a group mentality.

>

> I'm not a sheep. I believe in well researched documentation. Elaine has

> provided that. But, anyone who has done any reading at all knows that some

> flaws do exist within even her own conclusions. That doesn't mean that her

> approach isn't valid - just that she didn't know EVERYTHING. Regardless of

> the fanaticism of some people on the list.

>

> If you are, on this list, really wanting to adhere to the spirit of the SCD,

> then you are wanting to follow what Elaine started - and that was

> determining what was best to heal people. People are body, mind and spirit.

> The body has more to it than just static needs. More foods are being

> discovered with healing properties all the time. Foods that Elaine were not

> aware of are now readily available. Should they be denied to us simply

> because they were not available to Elaine to test?

>

> If they are denied to us by ultra-conservative thinking, then that is just

> prejudicial thinking. Sure, I know this list boasts many people with

> multiple years of healthy living based on eating " just as Elaine laid out " .

> But have they ever asked themselves why Elaine was consistently changing her

> own list of legal/illegal foods?

>

> If she thought what she had produced first time out was so good wouldn't she

> have just let it be?

>

> But, I'm sure people are tired of having to think - which is the complaint I

> mostly get when I post to lists. I require people to think and look at

> their own self-imposed convictions. What a shame.

>

> I still believe that if Elaine were still alive that the SCD would be a

> continually evolving list of foods.

>

> Why is that so difficult for people to grasp?

>

> Jazz

>

Dear Jazz,

Please accept my comments in a friendly spirit. Your inquiring mind is

commendable.

Research and good science hopefully never ends. And as good as Elaine's science

and that

of Dr. Haas, SCD is not univerally accepted mainly because of lack of formal

studies.

Our strong testimonial affirmation is anecdotal so we get accused of having a

cult

mentality. One small study was done against GFCF and SCD was more effective. You

can

read about it on Elaine's website.

You are not alone in feeling that the end of Elaine's life should not mark the

end of

appropriate changes to SCD. I am not trying to sound like Teacher's Pet as

Elaine formed

strong personal relationships with some of us by phone and email. i lived near

her

geographically so we had a face to face relationship and much of it was spent

discussing

SCD. Itt is based on science, not arbitrary whimsy.

However SCD as it stands today is a trademarked diet. No one is going to be Diet

Police

and prevent you from researching or even choosing your own foods, but if they

are

outside of our parameters and protocols we no longer refer to it as SCD. People

have tried

to combine SCD with several other diets and some claim improvement, others

disaster.

Not everyone on SCD alone gets better either but we have an impressive success

ratio.

We had a few other list members who felt exactly as you do and posted their own

amendments to the diet. They made a good case but we did not, cannot and will

not

change the diet until someone qualified is able to show good reasons for that

change.

I am so sorry we got off on the wrong foot and I hope my explantion clarifies

things.

Remember too Elaine had many years in which to add new foods and since the diet

is

based mostly on what has to be excluded, what remains is broadly inclusive. As

healing

progresses, sensitivities do diminish and people can and do expand their choices

Since you have only recently started your healing journey, why not go along with

SCD for a

trial period while continuing your research and journaling your findings and

questions

instead of inviting yourself to be kicked off the list?

Just a suggestion.

Carol F.

[Guest guest]

>

> So many people have applauded me for standing up to you on list.

> Unfortunately they have only said that to me off list.

>

> I've been told to just ignore you.

>

Of course you should ignore me. I am not your boss or anyone else's. I have

always been

up front about clarifying how the diet appears to me in the book and from what

Elaine said

to me. I have never failed to tell people to do what they consider best or feel

is essential to

their self preservation.

What yi thought you were wanting then is approval to use the Rooibus tea. I

said to do

what you think is necessary and I am pretty hurt that people on the list are

offended by my

commitment to keep the diet in tact in our responses to questions about it,

No one can force others to eat or not eat any foods. But we have the right to

oppose

making unauthorized changed to SCD itself.

This is not the first time such issues have come up and the last time, people

wrote me and

thanked me for quoting page numbers from the book and being direct.

I will not be posting to the list until the owner and moderator have addressed

this issue

for the benefit of the members not my benefit. Nothing i could possibly say

would evr

please everyone on the list. But i will not compromise SCD in order to be

popular as that

could interfere with someone's progress.

I am here to help, not hurt. I don't think it is helpful endorsing something

that is illegal on

SCD. Thrre is no reason why you, Jazz need my approval to do what you deem best

for

you. I already said that. What is wrong with that? Am I expected to approve

amendments

to the diet?

Carol F.

[Guest guest]

Is someone continuing Elaine's work? Just curious.

Michele

>

> Okay.... I really don't mean to aggravate you.

>

> I get what you're saying... I really do. It's just that this

*particular* list is limited to supporting doing the diet, by the

book. There are other list, as you know, that take SCD beyond that

point.... and I'm not opposed to their existance or their premise,

personally.

>

> Right now, I work for this list.... when I'm here. I stick within

the parameters that this list has set up. I try my best to give

people the answers they need within that.

>

> Elaine has only been gone one year... and it's been HARD, for

everyone in this community to adjust to that. Who knows what the

future will bring for SCD.... or eventually, for Elaine's work.

That's not for me to decide.

>

> I'm not suggesting you, or anyone else, should just be " sheep "

or " lemmings " . I also don't think I'm personally selling anyone

short. Not everyone is as informed or able to discern and make

decisions as you are... and we have a very diverse population of

mostly parents of very sick children here... that just need to know

how to implement SCD as written in BTVC, b/c that's what their kids'

doctors have suggested they do. We are doing the best we can to help

them do that. As the parent of a severely disabled child myself, I

assure you many of us are strapped to the limit.... and trying to do

this diet while juggling a thousand other difficult issues.

>

> *This* list... with over 2500 members.... is just not going to be

able to handle the weight of the sort of " branching off " and

researching that you would like it to. The list owner is the one who

has the say in how things go here.

>

> <<I require people to think and look at

> their own self-imposed convictions. >>

> On your own list, where you set the rules and call the shots, you

may require away.

>

> <<I still believe that if Elaine were still alive that the SCD

would be a

> continually evolving list of foods. >>

>

> You're probably quite right.... and oh, how I wish she were here

today.

>

> <<Then kick me from the list. >>

>

> I am not kicking ANYone off this list.... except maybe myself.

I've tried to be gentle but firm... and it's not easy filling this

position right now. No one else was available to do it, so I said

yes.... for three weeks. Which will SOON be over, thank goodness.

>

> I'm sorry you could not understand where we're coming from here...

and that you couldn't respect that.

>

> Patti

>

>

>