The High Fat Candida Theory

[Guest guest]

Hi all. I haven't been following this forum as of late and haven't

posted in a really long time but I was just doing some internet surfing

and came across a theory by a Dr. Graham. He believes that many people

are unable to beat Candida while on high fat diets because the high fat

content which enters the lymph system and gradually enters into the

blood vessels slows the detoxification and oxygen delivering capacity

of the blood. I found a bunch of blogs by proponents of this theory who

claim to have beat Candida by eating less fat and continuing to eat a

lot of fruit. I have been a follower of the Weston A. Price, Dr.

Mercola school of thought for some time. To be honest, I am quite

confused. Both their theories and those of the low fat ideologies seem

to make a lot of sense to me. I am so confused. Any thoughts? Crystal

[Guest guest]

Members don't seem to have file posting privileges here so I've pasted

in an article for you. Pretty interesting considering I've never met a

raw foodist who has type 2 diabetes and that's discussed here as well.

Personally I think it's important to stick to ONE way of eating.

Whether it's high fat and high protein OR low fat, high fruit, it

seems to be when everything is mixed together or eaten haphazardly or

a diet is blown for a day that things get crazy. Human beings simply

overeat, under chew and for some reason feel the need to analyze

everything rather than just eat what's natural for us and they create

theories as to what our ancestors ate. I don't like Doug Graham's

diet myself and to put someone on it after they've eaten a SAD diet is

not that smart.

I probably won't be around to respond if there are replies. I've got

a very busy few weeks ahead but feel free to email me directly. I'll

be scanning the digest as I have the possibility.

Sharon Hoehner

www.sharethecause.com/detoxqueeen

The Top 10 Myths About Eating Fruit

by Frederic Patenaude

I'm literally shocked by the amount of confusion around nutrition that

exists in the natural movement, especially the confusion surrounding

the particular issues with eating fruit.

Fruit has universally been recognized as the healthiest food there is,

yet it's also the one natural food that's vilified the most by many

trends of the natural health and raw food movements. This of course

started with the dangerous low-carb trend, which would like you to

believe that eating slabs of butter on grilled steaks is actually

healthier than eating the natural " sugar " in fruit.

This unscientific trend has also been picked up by the largest

proportion of the raw food theorists, many of which go to the extreme

of saying that eating lots of sweet fruit is actually unnatural and

unhealthy.

Even the popular Hippocrates Health Institute has launched a fear

campaign on eating fruit, claiming that fruit eating is responsible

for the common health problems experienced by the majority of raw

foodists.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that a lot of people in the raw

food movement are actually scared of eating fruit. Literally.

So let's take a look at the most common statements made about fruit,

and bust them once and for all.

1-Eating too much fruit will cause symptoms of blood sugar problems.

It's no secret that a proper, healthy raw food diet contains a lot of

fruit. In fact, the quantity of fruit that I consume in one single day

probably exceeds the quantity consumed by an average family on a

weekly, if not monthly basis.

When people look at all that fruit, they're suddenly afraid that

eating so much of it will cause them health problems, the most common

being cited is blood sugar issues.

I've known many people who are absolutely convinced that whenever they

eat a lot of sweet fruit, their blood sugar " goes out of wack. " Their

interpretation of what is happening to them is often " getting sudden

energy, followed by a blood sugar crash. "

In other words, they compare their body's response to eating fruit to

a common response to stimulants such as alcohol or caffeine: a sudden

stimulation followed by a depressed, " recovery " state.

In reality, in a fairly healthy individual, blood sugar will remain

stable no matter how much fruit is eaten. I have tested this myself by

testing my blood sugar throughout the day, and I found that it didn't

matter how many bananas I ate: my blood sugar remained normal

throughout the day.

In fact, even when I eat more than 20 bananas in a day (which I do

regularly), my blood sugar stays absolutely normal.

Steve Pavlina, who's a professional author and speaker and whose

website is one of the most visited on the web, did a 30-day trial of a

100%, low-fat, fruit-based raw food diet. During these 30 days, he

recorded every single meal he ate. He also monitored closely his blood

sugar, weight, blood pressure and other key stats. Here's what he has

to say about the effects of eating fruit on his blood sugar:

I monitored my blood sugar using a blood sugar testing device, the

same kind diabetics may use. It showed no discernible spikes in blood

sugar throughout the trial whatsoever — absolutely none. In fact, my

blood sugar remained incredibly steady throughout the trial. My

highest blood sugar reading of the trial was 94, which is still

medium-low. All that sweet fruit in my diet simply did not have any

adverse effect on my blood sugar.

Eating this way gave my blood sugar more consistency than ever. I

couldn't spike my blood sugar on this diet if I tried. Even eating 19

bananas in one day made no difference.

(from: http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2008/02/raw-food-diet/)

Dr. Graham, author of the book " The 80-10-10 Diet " , also told me that

whenever people came to him thinking that their " blood sugar was out

of balance " due to sweet fruit consumption, they were found to have

perfectly normal blood sugar after being tested.

That being said, I think that it's still possible for some people to

experience a negative reaction from eating sweet fruit. However, it's

not the fruit that's to blame in this case, but their overall diet

which is too high in fat. This situation is best explained in the book

" Breaking the Food Seduction " , by Dr. Neal Barnard, M.D.

" It may surprise you to know that you can actually change your body's

response to any food so that you are better able to handle whatever

sugars it might contain. (...)

Marjorie was one of our research volunteers. In a laboratory test, we

asked her to drink a syrup containing 75 grams of pure sugar. Taking

blood samples over the next two hours, we saw what happened to her

blood sugar. (...) It peaked at about thirty minutes, then quickly

cascaded downward. That's a pretty typical pattern. If your blood

sugar falls too precipitously you may be set up for another binge,

which is your body's way of bringing your blood sugar back up again.

Here's the problem: insulin is the hormone that escorts sugar from

your blood stream into the cells of the body. It is like a doorman who

turns the knob on the door to each cell, helps sugar go inside, and

then closes the door. (...)

But everything changes when you eat fatty foods, or when you gain a

significant amount of weight. Insulin can't work in an oil slick. When

there is too much fat in the bloodstream, insulin's hand slips on the

knob. Unable to open the door to the cells, insulin lets sugar build

up in the blood. Your body responds by making more and more insulin

and eventually it will get the sugar into the cells.

(...) Cutting fat from your meals improves what is called insulin

sensitivity, meaning that insulin efficiently escorts sugar into the

cells of the body. (...)

With our guidance, Marjorie adjusted her diet to scrupulously cut fat

and boost fiber. A few weeks later we repeated the test. She again

drank exactly the same sugar solution, but the changes in her blood

sugar were very different. Because the low-fat diet had tuned up her

insulin, the blood-sugar was more muted, the peak was lower, and the

fall was gentler than before. (...) In our clinical studies, we have

found that simple diet changes alone boost insulin sensitivity by an

average of 24 percent, and it can increase even more if you also

exercise. "

So again, fruit has been blamed for a problem it did not cause. In

most cases, people who think they have blood sugar spikes have in fact

perfectly normal blood sugar. And in the few cases when they truly are

not handling the sweet fruit they eat properly, their high-fat diet is

to blame, not the fruit.

2- Diabetics Should Not Eat Fruit

What about diabetes? Should diabetics avoid fruit altogether or should

they not worry about it?

Again, it's best to look at the root of the problem, rather than

analyze it superficially.

Fruit eating does NOT cause diabetes. Diabetes is actually caused by a

high-fat diet, combined with other factors (some possibly genetic)

that will cause insulin sensitivity.

While type 1 diabetes occurs early in life and is rarely reversible,

type 2 diabetes is simply an acute form of insulin resistance or

" reduced insulin sensitivity. " This type is completely reversible when

the root of the problem is addressed in time.

If you want to improve your body's response to the natural sugar in

fruit — and all of the food you eat for that matter — all you have to

do is improve your insulin sensitivity by doing the following:

- Reduce your body fat to a healthy level

- Eat a high-fiber diet (or should we say, an " adequate " fiber diet)

- Eat a low fat diet (10% or less by total calories)

- Exercise regularly (and favor cardio type of exercises)

- Avoid animal foods

These recommendations, endorsed by many health professionals with

extensive experience healing with diabetes naturally (Fuhrman,

Mc.Dougall, Ornish, Barnard, etc.), are actually perfectly compatible

with a high-fruit, low fat diet.

Most diabetics I know have done incredibly well on a fruit-based diet

(as long as it's a low-fat one), by reducing dramatically the quantity

of insulin they have to take, or eliminating it completely.

The problem of diabetes should be addressed by looking at the root of

the problem rather than superficially claiming that sweet fruit will

only exacerbate it. You should pay attention to all the important

factors that can improve insulin sensitivity, the main ones being: a

low fat diet, regular exercise, low body fat, and a raw food diet.

3- Fruit Causes Candida.

It seems like every other person I meet in the raw food movement has

issues with Candida. Usually, the main culprit blamed is sweet fruit.

The question remains whether they actually have a real overgrowth of

the yeast " Candida Albicans " or not. I'm personally very skeptical of

the self-diagnosis that most " Candida " sufferers come up with. In most

cases, I believe they are simply showing symptoms of a diet that

doesn't work, whether it's related to Candida or not.

The real problem with Candida is once you are convinced of the

problem, you generally follow what is called the " Candida Diet, " which

does exactly what it claims in its name: it gives you more Candida!

It's funny that they don't call it the " Anti-Candida diet " but the

" Candida Diet. "

When you analyze the diet you will find yet another variation of the

medical model for dieting: elimination of carbohydrates and increase

in fat and protein. Fortunately for the promoters of this diet, these

recommendations actually cause your Candida to stay for a long time.

The elimination of sugar might control some of the symptoms, but the

root of the problem is being fed with every meal.

Issues with Candida are easily solved once you understand the concept

of insulin sensitivity and realize how a high-fat diet actually

contributes to elevated blood sugar, which in turn will feed the

Candida yeast.

Every food that you eat will be transformed to sugar to feed the

cells. The word sugar has been slandered so much that some people seem

to be afraid to have sugar run in their bloodstream at any time! But

without blood sugar, your cells will die, and your muscles and brain

function will stop working.

Your goal should be to keep your blood sugar stable and normal, and

not let the sugar accumulate in the blood. It should be swiftly

escorted to the cells when they need it. And the way to do that is to

simply improve your insulin sensitivity.

So the " Anti-Candida diet " is quite counter intuitive, but addresses

the root of the problems, not the superficial symptoms. On this

program, you will eliminate any overly fatty foods from your diet

(such as oils, avocados, nuts and seeds) for a period of several weeks

or months. You will also pay attention to the other factors I have

mentioned that can improve your insulin sensitivity.

And if you're afraid of going on a " no-fat " diet, remember that all

fruits and vegetables contain a tiny but sufficient percentage of fat,

enough to meet your basic needs.

4- Eating too much fruit, especially bananas, will have you overdose

on potassium

It's important to make the difference between artificial, supplemental

potassium (K), and the naturally occurring potassium in fruits. The

FDA does not allow a supplement to contain more than 99 mg. of

potassium, and injecting yourself with 200 mg of artificial potassium

can rush you to the hospital. But three bananas contain up to 1,200 mg

of natural potassium, which will not cause any negative symptoms.

There's really no point to fear any potassium " overdose " even when

eating a fair number of bananas. Research done on wild monkeys showed

that they eat over 6500 milligrams of potassium per day. It would take

you over 15 bananas to eat as much potassium as they do. Plus wild

monkeys are much smaller in size than we are, so we could eat even

more bananas and not even reach the potassium intake of a monkey on a

daily basis.

I have previously stated in my e-zine that early humans consumed 40

times as much potassium as sodium. It makes sense because we lose

potassium a lot faster than sodium.

The " official " recommendations by nutritionists are to eat more

potassium and less sodium.

Even standard nutritionists agree that most people do not eat enough

potassium and that ideally they should consume close to 5000

milligrams per day, and even more for active people.

5- Fruit causes cancer.

Every single week, it seems like a new anti-cancer antioxidant is

discovered in some fruit or vegetable. In fact, if you really do some

research on the subject, you will find overwhelming evidence linking

fruit eating to reduced incidence of cancer. The American Cancer

Society also recommends to increase fruit consumption

(http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/content/full/52/2/92)

So it's beyond me how some knucklehead naturopath could make the

outrageous claim that eating sweet fruit can cause cancer, or that

cancer patients should avoid it completely.

The theory is that since cancer cells feed on sugar, cancer patients

should avoid fruit to make sure those cells don't grow out of control.

Obviously, they don't realize that blood glucose can be created by any

food you eat. Even if you avoid sweet fruit but eat more protein or

fat, those nutrients will be converted to glucose and fed to the

cells. So what's the solution, not eat anything at all and waste away?

Again, it's best to address the root of the problem. Does eating fruit

cause cancer? If it did, how many scientific studies can you cite that

have linked sweet fruit consumption to increased incidence of cancer?

You haven't heard of these studies simply because they don't exist.

For a better understanding of the nutritional causes of cancer, read

" The China Study " by T. Colin .

Myth # 6 — Today's fruits are too hybridized and contain too much sugar.

We often hear the claim that " modern " fruit contains too much sugar,

as opposed to the low-sugar wild fruits, which are generally not

available for sale in most grocery store. The critics of fruit tend to

view the cultivars and varieties that are available today as

" unnatural " . Their claim is that the artificial hybridization of fruit

creates an inferior product that is too high in sugar and too low in

minerals.

Let's take a look at these claims one by one.

First, the whole idea that cultivated fruit contains " too much " sugar.

It's entirely possible that on average, cultivated fruits contain more

sugar than wild fruits. There are a variety of reasons for that and I

won't go into all of them.

One of those reasons is simply because as humans moved away from a

hunter-gatherer type of lifestyle to a more agricultural one,

thousands of years ago, we have perfected certain techniques for fruit

cultivation which enabled us to get the best varieties that we

preferred. Many wild fruits were left on their own, so to speak, and

didn't evolve with the qualities that we normally seek (such as

sweetness).

This is not to say that all wild fruit is sour and low in sugar. I

have tasted various types of completely unknown fruits in my travels.

Many of them were quite sweet and tasty.

For example, in Brazil I tasted at least 5 different types of fruits I

had never seen before — all of which grew 100% wild. The sweetness was

comparable to a very sweet white peach.

But even if it were true that commercial fruits contain more sugar

than wild ones, the real question is: does it contain too much?

An anti-fruitarian site states the following:

" As I have seen an elaborate argument purporting to prove that, in

effect, fruits cannot contain excess sugar, let me list some of the

symptoms of excess sugar consumption: excess urination, frequent

thirst, mood swings such as exhilaration followed by depression (sugar

highs/lows), frequent fatigue, intermittent blurred vision, pains in

large joints, etc. Such symptoms are more common among fruitarians

(and are usually dismissed as " detox " ) than the extremists care to

admit. "

In the same line of thought, author Wolfe points out that

" hybridized " fruit acts like processed sugar in the body. He does not

exactly explain how, but says that overconsumption of these fruit can

lead to dehydration and a slightly diabetic situation.

Now, all of the symptoms that are blamed on hybridized, sweet fruit

are clearly attributable to the high-fat diet that is so common in the

raw food world. All of these symptoms, and more, are 100% caused by

the excessive fat content that most of these so-called fruitarians

forget to mention when they describe their diet.

As I explained in the first part of this article, I can personally

consume over 20 bananas in a day and not get the slightest symptom of

blood sugar imbalance. But when I was eating a high-fat diet and

probably less fruit than I am eating today, I was constantly plagued

by low-energy, blood sugar swings, frequent thirst, and many other

problems.

So does modern fruit contain " too much sugar " ? The answer is a

definite no. Unless you consumed more calories than you actually need,

you will not take in " too much sugar " , even if all you ate was dates.

As for the mineral content of fruits, it's fair to say that it's

probably not as high as it could be. But it's not that much of an

issue since the diet I recommend includes more vegetables than any

other diet. Vegetables contain a higher mineral content than most

fruits, and will perfectly balance an otherwise high-fruit diet.

As for the entire issue of hybridization, I find it funny that many of

these authors would like us to stop eating " hybridized " bananas,

carrots and grapes, while they promote a diet which is composed of a

tiny portion of vegetables and a generous serving of artery-clogging,

mineral-free oils and fats, and other exotic, packaged foods that are

apparently better for us than fresh fruit.

The word " hybrid " means nothing bad. It's simply the description of a

process that also occurs in nature. The fruits and plants that are

preferred by animals are spread around more and tend to be

" hybridized " naturally.

The truth is that every single fruit OR vegetable you buy has been

hybridized to the point of being almost totally unrecognizable from

its wild counterpart. Is that a bad thing? Well, a complete return to

the wild would mean eating absolutely bitter celery, ridiculously sour

oranges and mushy and tasteless watermelon. I don't know about you but

I think I'll stick to the delicious cultivated fruits I'm eating now

rather than go back to the jungle.

Myth #7 — Tropical fruits are too high on the glycemic index

Another strange recommendation that I hear a lot these days is to

avoid certain fruits because they are too high on the glycemic index.

The culprits are generally the high-sugar, tropic fruits such as

bananas and mangoes.

I could completely destroy this claim, but instead I will explain why

I don't even consider the glycemic index a valid and reliable guide to

tell us what to eat.

What is the glycemic index? Basically, it's a table which describes

the average response in blood sugar after the ingestion of a fixed

portion of carbohydrate.

Now how is this average created? By averaging the data collected by a

certain number of human subjects.

So here's my problem: about 99.9% of the American population eats a

diet that is too high in fat, and that on averages contains 45% fat

per calorie. Their response to food is not going to be healthy, no

matter what they eat! I explained the reasons for that in the first

part of my article.

Therefore, this so-called index is completely unreliable because the

blood sugar response to food eaten will vary tremendously from one

individual to the next, and even from day to day.

The factors that will influence it will be: fitness levels, activity

levels in any given day, blood glucose level at the time of the meal,

insulin sensitivity, age, body fat levels, and more!

If you want to improve your blood sugar response to the foods you eat,

focus on improving your health by lowering the fat content of your

diet and engaging in daily fitness activities, rather than focusing

simply on eating foods that are low on the glycemic index.

By the way, even on this index, every single fruit is listed as " low "

to " moderate " on the index.

Myth #8 — Fruit Causes Dental Decay

It's quite legitimate to worry about the possible effects of a diet

high in sweet fruit on your dental health. To answer this question, we

have to first understand the true cause of dental decay: a

proliferation of certain types of bacteria in the oral environment. As

we know, these bacteria will feed on carbohydrates and produce acid

by-products, which will eat into the enamel, causing decay.

In a healthy individual, fresh sweet fruits such as oranges, bananas

and peaches will not cause decay because of the fiber and water in the

fruit, which will naturally cleanse the teeth. On the other hand,

dried fruits and nuts can be a disaster on the teeth because they tend

to stick to form a sticky paste that is the perfect breeding ground

for bacteria.

But if someone already has dental problems to begin with (even just

one cavity), there can be potential dangers to introducing greater

quantities of carbohydrates in the diet.

The solution is obviously to deal with the problem at its root by

stopping the proliferation of the bacteria. This means to go on a more

aggressive dental hygiene program which will dramatically reduce the

bacteria count and keep it under control. To know more about this,

please consult my eBook " How to End Dental Decay Forever: a Daily

Checklist " , available with any order of Toothsoap, at

http://www.fredericpatenaude.com/toothsoap.html

If you pay attention to some simple dental hygiene rules, the

consumption of fresh fruit will not result in dental decay, as long as

you avoid dried fruits such as figs and dates or immediately brush

your teeth after eating them.

As for the acidity in fruit and its effects on the enamel, I have a

few simple tips:

• Only eat acid fruits once a day, and not every day. This includes

oranges, grapefruits, kiwis, pineapples, and other very acid fruits.

• If you eat more than one fruit meal per day, make one of those meal

of a fruit with little or no acidity, such as bananas, figs or

persimmons.

• Rinse your mouth with water after eating acid foods

Myth #9 — Sugar is sugar, and too much of it is bad, even if it comes

from fruit

There's this growing trend of people who are starting to think that

because sweet fruit contains simple sugars, that automatically that

sugar is the same as the refined white sugar we all know is bad for us.

First of all, most of the diseases that people associate with sugar

consumption are actually caused or exacerbated by a high-fat diet. For

example, conditions such as candida, hypoglycemia and diabetes would

not occur if on a low-fat diet, even if your diet contained some

refined sugar.

Of course, by eliminating ALL sugar you can partially mask the

symptoms of the disease, but you'll never fully heal from it until you

attack it at its very roots, which is done again by:

• Lowering your body fat to healthy levels

• Lowering the fat content in your diet to 10% or less by calories

• Increasing your fitness levels and exercising regularly

• Paying attention to the other important factors of health (sunshine,

fresh air, sleep, etc.)

Secondly, the " sugar " found in fruit is not exactly comparable to the

refined sugar found in a cake. It's in a form that's readily

digestible, but also comes in a complete package which includes water,

fiber, vitamins, minerals, enzymes and co-enzymes.

Finally, you might want to ask yourself " how much fruit sugar is too

much? "

If you've never eaten 20 bananas in a day, it might sound to you like

this would be too much. And indeed, it might be too much, for you,

because your nutritional requirements are different. But if all you

eat is fruits and vegetables with minimal quantities of fat, and if

you need about 2500 to 3000 calories in a day, then eating 20 bananas

is certainly not " too much " . It's the right amount.

The same energy could be found by eating other fruits, but in the end

it would still look like a lot of fruit to most people! It's only by

doing the nutritional analysis of what's eaten that you'll find that

this amount is just amount right to cover your nutritional needs.

A person needing 1500 calories a day will eat less fruit than a

training athlete. So how much " too much " is, is simply determined by

your daily caloric needs, which will be dictated by your hunger. In

other words, if you're still hungry, it's because you haven't eaten

enough, even if eating more fruit beyond that point would seem to you

like being " too much. "

Myth #10 — Eating only fruits will lead to dangerous deficiencies

It might come as a surprise for you to learn that most deficiencies

come from a " surplus, " rather than a lack of any particular nutrient.

For example, osteoporosis is not really caused by a lack of calcium in

the diet, but by certain lifestyle and diet factors that prevent its

proper absorption and assimilation. Eating all the calcium in the

world won't make a difference if you want to " prevent " osteoporosis.

To prove that point, just look at the countries in the world that have

the highest calcium intake… they also have the highest rates of

osteoporosis.

If you were to eat fruit only, and stay within the guidelines of a

low-fat diet, you would not develop any deficiencies as long as you

consumed enough to meet your caloric needs. You could maintain this

diet for months or years and stay in perfect health during that time.

At some point however, you could get certain imbalances caused by a

lack of minerals that are generally more abundant in vegetation. For

this reason, I do not recommend a pure fruitarian diet. You should

include vegetables such as lettuce, celery, spinach, tomatoes and

cucumbers in your daily diet.

If you're afraid of a particular deficiency, I'd like to ask yourself

the following:

Upon what information are you relying to claim that you are either

deficient or that you might become deficient in any particular nutrient?

Remember that all standards for human health are based on an average

of " average " individuals, in " average " health eating an " average "

diet. So if your goal would be to meet these standards of health, then

I would tell you to go ahead and try to mimic their averages.

But remember that in this " average " life you will likely:

• Suffer from high blood pressure as you get older (like 90% of the

population)

• Die of cancer or heart disease (main causes of death)

• Watch your prostate enlarge as you get older, if you're a man

(almost every single man will)

• Become dependent on some kind medicine or drug (like almost everyone

over the age of 55)

• And so on and so forth!

The standards for health are simply not reliable if you want " above

average " health. Let me give you some examples:

• The blood pressure of a healthy individual could actually be

considered on the " low " side of the average

• The body fat of a healthy athlete is considered too low for an

" average " person

• The resting heart rate of a truly healthy individual could almost

cause some doctors to worry about their life

• The average body temperature of a raw vegan is slightly lower than

the national average

The same goes for averages for cholesterol levels, iron levels, levels

of certain vitamins, and so on and so forth.

I personally do not rely on these averages to evaluate my health

because I have completely different standards for optimal health.

I also reject the idea of eating certain types of foods in order to

get certain types of nutrients. For example:

• Eating cacao beans for magnesium

• Eating bananas for potassium

• Eating a certain types of salt for its minerals (without taking in

account that it's 99.9% sodium chloride!)

This is just compartmentalized nutrition and doesn't take into account

the incredible complexity of the entire process of digestion and

assimilation! Like I said, most deficiencies are caused by a " surplus "

of something. In other words, something you're doing is preventing you

from assimilitating some of the nutrients in the foods you eat. Rather

than stuffing yourself with those nutrients, you have to address the

root of the problems by evaluating your entire lifestyle, not just the

foods that you eat.

Eat a variety of fruits and vegetables over the course of a year, and

your nutrient needs will take care of themselves.

I will tell you however that the biggest " deficiency " that people

experience when they try a raw food diet is a " calorie deficiency " or

deficit. They are simply not eating enough! By not eating enough

calories, they might lose weight faster but are compromising their

health and their ability to stay on the program.

If you'd like to get some more practical applications of making the

diet work in the real world, including a deeper discussion on this

topic of deficiencies and " what to eat " (including what to do for

Vitamin B12), you owe it to yourself to check out my " Raw Health

Starter Kit " , the most complete kit of information available on the

topic. For more information, click here.

Conclusion

If you were afraid somewhat of fruit, I hope that reading this article

has helped you eliminate your fears of it completely. Remember that

every study ever done on the effects of eating a lot of fruit in the

diet has only come up with positive results in favor of fruit

consumption.

Nobody gets sick from eating fruit. But because it's easy or they have

something to sell, they might try to make you believe that fruit was

the reason for your problems.

All of the so-called " fruitarians " who crashed on the diet were making

some obvious mistakes, such as:

• Not eating enough calories

• Eating lots of dried fruits and dates

• Eating large quantities of avocados, thinking that's it's okay

because it's a " fruit " (botanically speaking, it is)

For the record, I do not recommend a diet of only fruit, but one where

fruit dominates by calories, with plenty of vegetable matter added for

variety and overall nutrition. Fats such as avocados, nuts and seeds

can be consumed, but in small amounts.

To get complete, step-by-step directions for making this diet work in

the real world, check out the " Raw Health Starter Kit " , it contains

everything you need, whether you're just getting started or you're an

experienced raw foodist who wants to take things to the next level!

Click here for more information.

–

Want to Use This Article In Your Website or E-Zine? You can, as long

as you include this blurb with it: " Frederic Patenaude, is the author

of the best-selling e-book " The Raw Secrets " . He is currently giving

away free access to his private library of over 100 exclusive articles

along with a subscription to his newsletter Pure Health & Nutrition.

Visit http://www.fredericpatenaude.com while charter subscriptions last. "

>

> Hi all. I haven't been following this forum as of late and haven't

> posted in a really long time but I was just doing some internet surfing

> and came across a theory by a Dr. Graham. He believes that many people

> are unable to beat Candida while on high fat diets because the high fat

> content which enters the lymph system and gradually enters into the

> blood vessels slows the detoxification and oxygen delivering capacity

> of the blood. I found a bunch of blogs by proponents of this theory who

> claim to have beat Candida by eating less fat and continuing to eat a

> lot of fruit. I have been a follower of the Weston A. Price, Dr.

> Mercola school of thought for some time. To be honest, I am quite

> confused. Both their theories and those of the low fat ideologies seem

> to make a lot of sense to me. I am so confused. Any thoughts? Crystal

>