Dieting for Health
and Longevity

   Dieting for health and dieting for longevity are not necessarilythe same thing. Whereas dieting for immediate health improvement is of course worthwhile,a diet which may accomplish this in the short term may not necessarily be good enoughto get the best long-term results. Dieting for longevity therefore must not onlyprovide all the body's present requirements for good health, but do so with the leastamount of strain on the vital organs in order to avoid as long as possible the degenerationwe call old age.

   The health of the body is only as good as the health, collectively,of all the body's individual cells. In turn, the health of the cells is determinedby the quality of the lymph fluid that bathes them, ie the milieu interieur,which again is dependent on the purity of the bloodstream. Toxemia is the enemy.

   So while it has long been a medical dictum that "a manis as old as his arteries", it is equally true that "a man is as healthyas his blood".

   The composition of the blood is very complex and is maintainedby the combined actions of all the vital organs. From the point of view of nutrition,it is the liver which takes in the products of digested food and redistributes theminto the bloodstream to suit the rest of the body's requirements. And it is the liverand kidneys which receive back, also via the blood, the waste products of all thecells from which they sort out what components can be used again and what must bethrown out in the urine. For the maintenance of correct blood sugar levels, the liverdepends on information from the pancreas, a dual purpose organ which not only secretesthe insulin and glucogen used in the control of blood sugar but secretes, as an entirelyseparate function, the primary digestive enzyme juices used in the digestion of food.In the beginning and in the end, the status of health is determined almost entirelyby the quality of the diet, because it is from the materials available in the dietthat the liver constructs and orchestrates the entire spectrum of chemical processesupon which life depends. The design of the system is perfect; it is the quality ofthe diet that lets it down.

The Natural Diet of Man

   Towards the end of World War II when the Americans invaded thePhilippines and recaptured them from the Japanese, a lone Japanese soldier ran offinto the jungle there and hid, firmly believing that sooner or later the tide ofbattle would turn again and Japan would in the end be victorious. He therefore decidedto wait things out in the jungle. He waited twenty-five years, all the while avoidinghuman contact, and then one day emerged from the jungle and surrendered.

   Returned to Japan and medically examined, the soldier amazedeverybody--he looked so young compared to other middle-aged Japanese men. His teethwere perfect and his eyesight too. He displayed none of the usual signs of degenerativedisease considered normal in civilization. And yet his life had not been easy. Theonly possible explanation for his physical preservation was that his diet for thoseyears had been fruit, berries and various plants eaten raw, a diet similar to thatof other wild primates and that of early humans before the discovery of fire.

   Life of all kinds is most prolific in tropical regions bothon land and sea, and this is not to be wondered at because it is in warm and moistconditions that enzymes work most efficiently. In such a warm, moist environmentit is thought that life first appeared on Earth, and it is generally accepted thatit was in the tropics that the early primates evolved from lower forms of life, tobe followed by the evolution of the apes and then by the first humans.

   In the plant kingdom, fruit trees were late arrivals on theevolutionary scene and it is highly probable that both fruit-bearing trees and theprimates evolved concurrently, which accounts for the development in the primatesof stereoscopic color vision, grasping hands, specialized teeth and jaw structure,appetite for sweet-tasting food, medium-length digestive tract, and so on. In theirsymbiotic relationship, the fruit trees provided the primates with food and the primatesunknowingly spread the fruit seeds wherever they ate or defecated, so ensuring thecontinued survival of the trees.

   The study of comparative anatomy and the different natural dietsof animals in the wild indicates strongly that the natural diet of early humans consistedpredominantly of sweet fruits, and that even though millions of years have passed,the anatomy and digestive apparatus of humans has not changed and is therefore stillbest suited to fruit as the most suitable food. That this opinion is not just idlespeculation can be quickly proven by any sick person who can break the addictionto our modern taste-stimulating foods and go on a diet of good quality fruit forjust a few days. Of course the human digestive system is quite capable of handlingfoods of animal origin, including animal fats, but in only very limited amounts canit do so without strain, even when the foods are eaten raw as intended by Nature.

   Thus it can be surmised that the ideal diet for man is one mainlyof sweet fruits supplemented by various berries, green nuts, shoots and occasionallysmall amounts of foods of animal origin, all eaten raw. This is the sort of foodeaten by man's closest relatives in Nature, the orangoutang and chimpanzee, bothof which have an anatomy and digestive system almost identical to man's. Neitherof these animals in the wild display tooth decay or any of the other diseases commonto humans, but soon do so if kept in captivity and fed cooked and processed food.

   If this surmise is correct, and if indeed humans can live inbetter health and for a longer time on such a natural diet, why ever did they change?

   There is not a race of people anywhere today who, as a generalrule, eat uncooked natural food; the majority of the world's populations base theirdiets on cooked grains of some kind or other, and the rest base theirs on cookedanimal products supplemented by grain, dairy products and vegetables, all cooked.Fruit is looked upon more as a mere accessory to the various traditional diets ratherthan a sustaining food. How and why did this change come about?

   Early man lived in small groups and, before the use of fire,ate his food raw like all the other creatures on Earth have done since life firstbegan, their senses of sight, smell and taste indicating to them the foods most suitableto their systems. Population numbers were restricted by the amount of food availablegrowing wild, but eventually with the discovery of fire it was found that variousfoods consumed by other animals but which were distasteful to the human palate couldbe made more edible by cooking, and more tasteful by artificially flavoring themwith herbs and salt.

   By the use of these new sources of food, greater populationscould be supported, not only in areas already occupied, but in territory where foodnaturally suited for humans was not available.

   As population pressures forced surplus people to move into lesshospitable territory outside the tropics, they of necessity became reliant on a differentdiet, and on fire and primitive clothing for warmth. Sickness, when it occurred,was thought to be the work of evil spirits, and so witchdoctors had to be invented.

   Greater challenges in a less benevolent environment led to continuedbrain development, and so it was in the temperate climatic zones of the world thattechnology commenced, leading to the advent of farming and the development of cerealcrops from wild grasses. Continued competition for territory made warfare inevitableand this led again to greater technological development and so on. From all thesechanges a new breed of man emerged--one who had become "civilized" andhad left his natural environment forever.

   Next to the discovery of fire, the development of grain cropswas the greatest factor leading to the human population explosion of today. Graincould be produced easily and, being storable, provided food for all seasons. Moreand more forest land was destroyed to grow crops and to make pasture to raise cattle,and according to their circumstances some populations came to base their diets onmeat and dairy products and others based theirs on rice or wheat or other sorts ofgrain.

   None of these diets provide ideal nutrition, and as civilization"progresses" and food becomes more and more preserved, processed, cookedand generally less and less natural, so humans everywhere display more signs of diseaseearlier and earlier in life. Even primitive races have always had their medicinemen to protect their people from evil spirits and disease, but in civilization thesuperstition of medicine has got out of hand; "scientific medicine" hasbecome a powerful industry consuming a vast amount of the national economy. But whilethe wild animals remain sleek and healthy without medicine, humans spend more andmore money on "health care" and all the while just get sicker and sicker.

   So illness can be seen to be a human phenomenon for which thereare two main causes:

  1. The use of unsuitable foods.
  2. The cooking habit necessary to render unsuitable foods edible.

   The unsuitability of our traditional Western diet has been explainedin Chapter 2, but it may be asked why do people on other diets fare no better thanus? Well, a few isolated populations such as the Hunzas do, but by and large themajority of other races are too heavily dependent on grains of some kind as the stapleof their diets and grains are even less suitable to the human system than flesh foods.

   Grain products (cereals) have been hailed as a health food by"victims" of the Western diet because they are low in fat, contain no cholesterol,are high in complex carbohydrate (starch) and high in fiber, the constipation fixer.Thus, switching to grains from the Western diet produces immediate benefits, butother problems soon arise. Grain products, supplying mainly starch, place' a greatburden on the digestive system. When mature, grains contain enzyme inhibitors whichprevent digestion, but they are digestible when green (like sweet corn) or when cookedor after they have germinated. Grain-eating birds are equipped with crops in whichgrains, swallowed whole, germinate, whereupon the grains become digestible. Grainsare indigestible raw, but even cooked, the complex carbohydrate requires great digestiveeffort to break down, and this is demonstrated by the fact that people of Easternraces, dependent on rice, develop a pancreas double its normal size and other signsof strain such as stunted intestinal villi. And unless rice (and other grains) areaccompanied by liberal amounts of fresh vegetables and fruit in the diet, nutritionaldeficiencies occur and, at the same time, toxemia and acidosis capable of producingskin problems, arthritis, hardened arteries and cancer. That is why Orientals aregenerally smaller in stature and live no longer than Westerners.

Mineral Deficiencies

   A less common and less suspected cause of disease is the deficiency(and sometimes excess) of minerals (trace elements) in food. Essential minerals areneeded by the body to make enzymes, hormones, bone tissue, etc. Deficiencies usuallyoccur because one or more trace minerals may be lacking in the soil in which thefood plant was grown. Crops which are grown in deficient soil display poor conditionand are susceptible to disease and attacks by pests.

   Animals are more prone to display signs of mineral deficienciesthan humans because humans consume food usually imported from all over the placewhereas animals graze in the same areas all the time. There are some more or lessisolated areas where people are dependent on crops grown in deficient soil such asin certain areas of Europe where iodine is lacking, the sign of which is the pronenessof people to goitre. However, the subtleness of biochemistry is demonstrated by thefact that in Tasmania in 1949 it was noted that in some districts where iodine wasplentiful in the soil there was, notwithstanding, a very high incidence of goitrewhich when iodine tablets were given only got worse. It turned out that the goitreswere caused by an anti-thyroid factor contained in the milk of cows which were fedon marrow stem kale. White clover and cabbage under certain conditions of cultivationalso sometimes contain an anti-thyroid factor capable of causing goitre. However,experiments at the Central Veterinary Laboratory in Weybridge, England, showed thatmarrow stem kale did not always contain the anti-thyroid factor which varied withthe soil in which it was grown and the climatic conditions as well.

   Thus it can easily be accepted that all other things aside,mineral imbalance alone in an otherwise healthy diet can severely impair the body'shomeostasis, leading to symptoms of all kinds or the exacerbation of existing symptoms.

   In the book Soil Grass and Cancer by Andre Voisin (CrosbyLockwood, London, 1959), from which the foregoing information was taken, the authordescribed the functions of the various trace minerals in normal metabolism and theoperation of the immune system, in particular the role of magnesium, copper and zincin the functioning of the immune system.

   Voisin emphasised that administering mineral salts to experimentalanimals led to wrong conclusions being formed because the only way the body can propertyassimilate minerals is in organic form, having been first taken up from the soiland changed to a colloid form by the plant used as food.

   That the content of various minerals in a plant can vary enormouslydepending on the soil, the water content of the soil, the weather and so on meansthat the best way to obtain your minerals is from a variety of fresh, raw fruitsand vegetables. Apart from vitamins and other nutrients in raw fruit and vegetables--preferablyorganically grown--the abundance of organic minerals they contain explains why patientswith cancer respond so well when restricted to these foods.

   That the mineral content of seawater is practically the sameas blood is significant, and it is a fact, according to Dr Maynard Murray, that seawatercontains all the trace minerals needed by humans. Dr Murray demonstrated forcefullythat animals fed on his crops fertilized sparingly with diluted seawater exhibitedsuperior growth and health compared to other animals. This is described in Dr Murray'sbook Sea Energy Agriculture (see Chaptere 8). Said Dr Murray:

   "The disease resistance of plants and animals in the sea is remarkably different from disease resistance in land animals and comparisons between animals of the same or similar species are most interesting. For example, fresh-water trout all develop terminal cancer of the liver at the average age of 5-1/2 years; cancer has never been found in sea trout. It is also known that all land animals develop arterio sclerosis, yet sea animals have never been diagnosed as arteriosclerotic. Investigators have also established the startling absence of disease in the sea, citing not only the absence of 'chronic' disease forms, but especially the general vigorous health of sea animals that has apparently lengthened life many times in comparison to similar land species. These longevity differences are especially evident in such sea mammals as whales, seals and porpoises who have identical physiological systems with the majority of land animals important to man. And the major differences between sea and land life appear to be attributable to the superior food chain of the sea!"

   Dr Murray's many experiments with all kinds of crops and animalsall showed dramatic benefits from sea minerals. For instance:

   "Started feeding mice both experimental and control, food that was raised on the Ray Heine and Sons Farm. The experimental food had been raised on soil fertilized with 2200 pounds (per acre) complete sea solids. The control food was the same as the experimental with the exception that it was not fertilized with complete sea solids. The food consisted of a combination of one part soybean, two parts oats, four parts corn, balanced food proteins, carbohydrates and fats for mammals.

   C3H mice were obtained for this feeding experiment. This strain of mice has been bred so all the females develop breast cancer which causes their demise. The mice were two months of age when received and started on the feeding experiments. The life expectancy of this strain for females is no more than nine months which included the production of two or three litters. The experimental and control groups both consisted of 200 C3H mice and those fed on control food were all dead within eight months seven days. The experimental mice that were fed food grown on the sea solids fertilized soil lived until they were sacrificed at 16 months; definitive examination revealed no cancerous tissue. The experimental group produced ten litters compared to the usual two to three litters and none developed breast cancer.

   In the next experiments, twenty-four rabbits were obtained. Twelve were designated experimental and fed on food grown on sea solids while the remaining twelve were labelled control and fed accordingly. All of the rabbits were given a high cholesterol diet for six months which produces hardening of the arteries. The control group did develop hardening of the arteries and all had died within ten months. The experimental group did not exhibit hardening of the arteries."

   Another way people can obtain all the colloidal minerals theyneed is from fresh seawater taken about a teaspoon a day. Health from the Seaand Soil, by Charles B. Ahlson (Exposition Press, NY, 1962), described the remarkablehealth improvements by people with different ailments gained simply by taking freshseawater. It is important that the seawater is fresh and unheated, because once heatedthe minerals lose their colloidal status necessary for the body to properly utilizethem.

   Fresh kelp and even dehydrated kelp is a good source of mineralsfrom the sea and it is becoming common practice for farmers desiring the best cropswhile at the same time avoiding poisonous spraying to fertilize them with fertilizersderived from sea kelp.

   And finally, on the subject of seawater minerals is a recentitem from the Queensland Fruit and Vegetable News:

   "There may be hope for Australian deserts if recent Israeli research is any indication.

   Today thirsty plants are not only drinking but thriving on seawater at an experimental farm near the town of Ashkelon on the Mediterranean Sea.

   Dr Dov Pasternak from the Boyko Institute at Ben Gurion University, is overseeing the project which is studying 150 species of plants irrigated by sea water.

   The research into seawater for irrigation is directly related to the successful efforts of Dr Samuel Mendlinger, also from the Boyko Institute, to produce a special strain of sweet, high quality autumn melon grown on brackish water using drip and sprinkler irrigation.

   Among other fruits and vegetables being successfully irrigated by saline water from underground aquifers are asparagus, broccoli, sorghum, olives, peas, and pomegranates.

   Agricultural production in 14 southern Israel settlements is now based on underground saline water, and instead of costly desalination Israelis are taking advantage of Nature's abundance, learning to harness sea and sub-soil water to grow crops."

The Pros and Cons of Cooking

   All that cooking is good for is that it enables people to utilizegrains for food and it renders other unsuitable foods such as meat and potatoes palatableand edible. Thus cooking enables a lot of people to sustain themselves on the onlyfoods available to them, but there is a penalty to pay.

   Reference has already been made in previous chapter to the problemsencountered by eating cooked food. And the subject has been explained in depth inthe author's previous books, The Health Revolution and Improving on Pritikin.In brief, the natural digestive process utilizes enzymes existing in raw food which,when the food is eaten, perform a considerable amount of predigestion (breaking downthe food) in the upper cardiac section of the stomach before the main digestive systemgets to work on it. Thus a great load is relieved from the pancreas, the organ thatproduces the main supply of digestive juices.

   This natural benefit is entirely missing when cooked food isconsumed because cooking destroys enzymes and, not only that, the pancreas is doublypenalized because of the difficult nature of the sort of food anyway when comparedto the natural food man's system is designed for. Thus, as described by Dr EdwardHowell in his books The Status of Food Enzymes in Digestion and Metabolism (1946)and Enzyme Nutrition (1983), the human pancreas is invariably hypertrophiedand twice its proper size compared with the relative sizes of those in wild animalsand is accompanied by changes in the gonads, adrenals, pituitary and other ductlessglands. Another adverse effect of cooking is that it renders minerals in the foodless assimilable, while when cooking water is poured down the sink some of the mineralsare lost altogether.

   There is an association between the cooking and processing offood and the incidence of all diseases including cancer, and as proven in the sanatoriaaround the world, the best recoveries from chronic, so-called incurable diseasesare made on diets composed of raw fruits and vegetables. This shows that when vitalorgans are at their lowest stage of function only such a diet makes it possible forthem to provide the proper body chemistry to maintain health. That being the case,so must raw food provide the maximum benefit to anybody whether sick or well.

The Pros and Cons of Raw Food

   First, the cons. The traditional foods to which we are accustomedare mostly inedible when raw. Meat and dairy products would be far less harmful consumedraw as they are by some native populations, but most people find the idea of rawmeat, chicken, etc, objectionable, and raw dairy products, because of legal germphobia, unobtainable. But this is as it should be; Nature is trying to tell us something. . .

   The pros: Dr Max Garten in his book The Health Secrets ofa Naturopathic Doctor (1967) described how his health had not much improved bybecoming a vegetarian and how this led him to try a completely raw food regime. Hesaid:

   "The results were electrifying, within a few days I felt much stronger with a return of my former enthusiasm. Many of my patients whom I had been able to convert to this new diet also reported similar results."

   Dr Garten observed that putrefactive bacteria in the colon increasednot only with the eating of meat but also with the degree of heat used in cookingall food, and with this increase so also did the odiferousness of the stool increasealong with the appearance of aches and pains. He said:

   "It could only be deduced that certain agents in the diet were either missing or had been altered by the heat. The respective protein content of the vegetarian diet had also been found to be indicative of changes in the intestinal flora, legumes such as beans, lentils, peas etc. equally contributing to the display of putrefactive changes."

   Thus, although vegetarians usually are healthier and outlivemeat-eaters, they may not maintain very good health or live to a very advanced ageif they continually cook their food.

Raw Fruit: the Natural Food of Primates

   People become vegetarians to improve their health and extendtheir lives. Some vegetarians go a step further and consume their food mainly uncooked,while others go even further and limit their diet to fruit, which they claim to bethe natural food of man.

   Their argument is sound for a number of reasons, but one wayor the other it is a fact that, in reasonable variation, fruit can provide the fullcomplement of all required nutrients in adequate quantities, remembering that therequirement for protein and fat are much lower than generally believed. Therefore,instead of being considered merely an accessory to conventional meals, fruit shouldbe considered in its own right as a staple food. The advantages of a fruitarian dietare:

  1. It provides complete nourishment with the minimum of extraneous substances capable of 'silting' up the tissues.
  2. It is most easily digested, minimizing the energy required for digestion (which is substantial), thereby minimizing total food (kilojoule) requirements.
  3. It is palatable.
  4. It is easily obtained and easily prepared.
  5. It satisfies the appetite when sufficient has been eaten--fruitarians are always lean.
  6. Minimum but adequate protein is provided.
  7. Minimum but adequate essential fats are provided.
  8. Maximum energy is available from what is eaten, with only carbon dioxide and water, which are entirely nontoxic, as the by-products.
  9. It provides the body with adequate amounts of pure water.
  10. It results in a favorable alkaline internal state.
  11. Favorable intestinal flora predominate in the bowel.
  12. No constipation occurs.
  13. No auto-intoxication occurs.
  14. The body detoxifies itself.
  15. The blood is clean and low viscosity; there is good circulation with low blood pressure.
  16. There is the least wear and tear and the least "silting up" of all the body organs and tissues.

   That fruit alone can ideally sustain human health and vigor,even without drinking water, indicates that it indeed provides the basis of man'snatural diet. Further substantiation of this view is that there are about forty distinctanatomical, physiological and biological features of humans which show unquestionablythat the human body is designed mainly for a fruit diet, notwithstanding the factthat, like all animals, they can survive less successfully on a wide variety of foods.These features range from natural fondness for sweet foods, jaw and teeth structure,salivary secretion, length of digestive tract, size of pancreas, stereo color visionand so on. In fact, in all these respects humans are practically identical todaywith the other higher primates in the wild which, whenever possible, live on fruit.

   Evidence of the suitability of fruit as a staple food and notjust as an accessory to the conventional diet is to be seen by observing fruitarianswho live entirely on a wide variety of fresh fruit, and who display lean youthfulbodies, low blood pressure, clear vision and unimpaired faculties, even with advancingyears.

   A well-known human peculiarity never before connected with thisargument but which provides almost conclusive evidence is that humans, like all primates,are incapable of making vitamin C in their bodies, whereas other animals can (exceptingguinea pigs and fruit-eating bats). Basing their argument on this fact, it is stronglyadvocated by many authorities that people should take large amounts of supplementaryVitamin C to compensate for this "error of Nature", which they put downto an unfavorable mutation in our evolutionary past some millions of years ago. Toprove this "unlucky mutation" argument completely wrong, and at the sametime prove that man is a natural fruit eater, consider:

  1. The only mutations which persist to become a universal feature of a species are favorable ones. Unfavorable mutations cannot possibly do so.
  2. A genetic change preventing the synthesis of vitamin C in the body, to become universal to an entire species, must therefore have been, at the time, a favorable change.
  3. The only possibility of such a genetic change being favorable is for the species to have been already getting more than adequate vitamin C, and that any more was undesirable.
  4. The only source of "excess" vitamin C in Nature is a diet of raw fruit. (Only certain tropical fruits contain such high levels of Vitamin C; many fruits contain only small amounts.)

   Therefore it is clear that the human diet ideally should bebased mainly on fresh fruit, and that past errors which have led to widespread vitaminC deficiencies are dietary--not genetic--errors.

   Obviously some fruits are more nutritious than others, and qualitywill vary according to the quality of the soil in which they are grown. Commerciallygrown fruit may contain various levels of insecticide poisons, in which case thefruit should be carefully washed or peeled. At the time of writing, the author hadsubsisted almost entirely on commercially grown fruit for ten years, all the whileworking long hours under stress seven days a week, and has maintained excellent health.I have chosen the fruit at random with a preference for tropical fruits, and includeddried fruits from time to time without any attempt at being scientific about it.It is probably best not to mix the acid fruits with others eaten at the same time.Some people find they experience digestive upsets when at first they embark on afruitarian diet. This may be because of mixing incompatible fruits or possibly notchewing them properly. The fruit should be taken as snacks throughout the day, asfrequently as desired, rather than conventionally as three substantial meals.

   If cooked food is eaten at the same time as fruit, the fruitshould be eaten first as it digests quickly and clears out of the way of the otherfood, which may reside in the stomach for several hours.

   It is claimed by some people that a fruitarian diet will eventuatein high blood triglycerides and this is why Nathan Pritikin limited fruit. The increasein triglycerides is supposed to follow elevated levels of blood sugar after eatingfruit, but this does not occur when eating whole raw fruit, particularly eaten atwhim throughout the day rather than in three large meals. An objection to acid fruitssuch as citrus and pineapples, particularly if unripe, is that, eaten in excess,the acid may cause erosion in the enamel of the teeth. It is interesting to notehere that with good body chemistry and a clean mouth, teeth, like bones, are to agreat extent self-repairable. With half my teeth jammed with fillings, maybe theyare beyond self-repair, but at my yearly pilot medical checkups I enjoy being toldby my doctor I have the arteries and blood pressure of a schoolboy. That makes fruittaste better still, even on a winter's day.

   A convert to fruitarianism was the Indian philosopher and statesmanMahatma Gandhi, who after experiencing poor health throughout his youth became astudent of nature cure at the age of thirty-two. First he became a vegetarian andthen a fruitarian. After six months as a fruitarian, he said (quoted from his bookThe Health Guide ):

   "A period of six months is all too short to arrive at any definite conclusions on such a vital matter as a complete change of diet. This, however, I can say, that, during this period, I have been able to keep well where others have been attacked by disease, and my physical as well as mental powers are now greater than before. I may not be able to lift heavy loads, but I can do hard labor for a much longer time without fatigue. I can also do more mental work, and with better persistence and resoluteness. I have tried a fruit diet on many sickly people, invariably with great advantage. My own experience, as well as my study of the subject, has confirmed me in the conviction that a fruit diet is the best one for us."

   The Japanese soldier who lived wild in the jungles of the Philippinesall those years lived on a natural diet and escaped the degeneration awaiting himback in Japan. In Chapter 3 there is a comparison of the Hunza diet with the Westerndiet; for a comparison of the jungle diet with the Western diet, refer to the tableimmediately below:

                                Natural Diet       Western DietKilojoules (calories) for   adult male (approx.)           8400 (2000)     14,700 (3500)Vitamin C (approx.)               3000-9000 mg    100 mgOther vitamins and minerals       adequate        ?Natural enzymes                   ideal           almost nilProtein % (approx.)               4% (ideal)      15% (hazardous)Fat % (approx.)                   4% (ideal)      40% (dangerous)Natural carbohydrate %   (approx.)                      92% (ideal)     5% (inadequate)Refined carbohydrate %   approx.)                       nil             40% (dangerous)Cholesterol                       almost nil      10.4 mmol/l                                                      (dangerous)Fiber                             adequate        inadequateSalt and condiments               nil             hazardousCaffeine in tea, coffee,   soft drinks                    nil             hazardousPreservatives                     nil             hazardousHeat damage to food               nil             hazardousChemicals                         nil             hazardous

    From this comparison it can be seen that notwithstandingthe Hunzas physical excellence when compared to ours, they still could have donea lot better!

Dieting for Health

   From the foregoing, the subject of dieting for health shouldrequire no further explanation; it is obvious that to get results it is necessaryto eliminate or drastically curtail from our menus the sort of foods that cause toxemiaand lead to ill health. This means denying ourselves a certain amount of pleasurein eating, a denial a lot of people refuse to accept on the grounds that they arenot overweight and that they have "never had a day's sickness in their life"."Moderation in all things" is another good reason.

   Because the Western diet contains adequate quantities of allthe nutrients needed to sustain life, it is considered to be "balanced"and capable of maintaining good health. This is true only to a point, because reasonablehealth can be maintained on the Western diet only as long as the digestive system,liver and other vital organs are capable of enduring the load the diet puts on themin their efforts to provide a pure and complete bloodstream from processed and semi-artificialfood.

   Dieting for better health then has little to do with takingvitamins, minerals and "health foods", because when it is realized thatmost of the malnutrition suffered in civilization eventuates not because of dietdeficiencies but because it is improperly constituted, then it becomes clear thatthe first thing to do is to cut out the harmful things. Without making any changesin the diet at all, great improvements in health can be achieved simply by eatingless and cutting out salt, so accomplishing a purer bloodstream and at the same timegetting rid of excess weight.

   Although overweight is associated with increased risk of diseaseand shortened lifespan, it does not follow that dieting for weight loss and dietingfor health are the same. Whereas proper dieting will achieve both weight adjustmentand good health together, there are some slimming diets which achieve weight lossat the expense of health. Diets such as the Atkins diet, the Stillman diet and theScarsdale diet are effective in reducing weight but are dangerous over a period.They work because they cut down (correctly) on fat and refined carbohydrate, butmake the mistake of substituting high-protein foods as "filleruppers",so increasing the intake of protein from a barely tolerable level to an even lesstolerable level certain to worsen toxemia and increase the risk of kidney failureand cancer.

   Toxemia is the enemy, and lipotoxemia (lipo = fat) is the archenemy of health. The worst feature of the Western diet is all the fat in it, andtherefore regardless of anything else, our main objective must be to drasticallyreduce the intake of fat. By virtue of unsticking the blood and improving its circulationand oxygen content, great benefits are felt within three or four days. With lessimpedance to the digestion by fat, putrefaction in the colon is reduced and thereforetoxemia from that source is reduced too. As fat severely inhibits the function ofthe immune system, reduction of fat brings about vastly improved immune function,also within a few days. Regardless of which "health diet" a person chooses,be it the European grape diet, the Pritikin diet, the Gerson diet, the Macrobioticdiet, the fruit juice diet, or just plain fasting, in all cases a great improvementin wellbeing is experienced in three or four days, the improvement being due to thefact that all these diets are low in fat.

   Medical authorities, slowly getting the message, currently recommendpeople should reduce the amount of fat in their diet to thirty per cent but thisis nowhere near good enough. Some benefit is felt at twenty per cent but for propereffect the maximum should be ten per cent as has already been described in previouschapters.

   There are several alternative methods of reducing fat and cholesterolin the blood. Physical endurance (aerobic) exercise produces what is called the "trainingeffect" by which the body becomes capable of more efficiently metabolizing bloodfats for the production of energy. Athletes in training therefore display lower bloodviscosity, lower blood pressure, higher oxygen levels, better immune function andbetter general health when on the conventional Western diet than do untrained peopleon the same diet. The other way of coping better with high levels of dietary fat(can you guess?) is to eat the fat raw the way the primitive Eskimos do, and allowthe adipose lipase (enzyme) in the fat itself to predigest the fat to allow its morethorough breakdown during digestion. Not that the Western diet ever contained muchwhale blubber, but at least once upon a time the milk, butter and cheese was unpasteurisedand contained valuable enzymes. I guess the easiest way to eliminate fat from thebloodstream is simply not to eat it in the first place, remembering that all foodscontain some, the bad items being foods of animal origin, dairy products, and ofcourse all extracted vegetable oils and anything containing them. Remember too thatthe body makes its own fat out of protein and carbohydrates and that when refinedcarbohydrates, sugar and alcohol are taken, these too will elevate the amount offat (triglycerides) in the blood. Animal fat of course contains lots of cholesteroltoo, so eliminating this fat from the diet serves a double purpose.

   The next step in dietary improvement of course is to reducethe amount of protein in the diet. Cutting out foods of animal origin--meat, chicken,eggs and dairy products--will achieve this because these foods are the major sourceof protein in the conventional diet, and by eliminating them you eliminate in onemove not only excess protein but cholesterol and excess fat as well. Conventionalnutritionalists usually advise vegetarians to maintain their protein intake levelsby using nuts, lentils and beans which are high in vegetable protein, but there isabsolutely no need for this as our aim is to reduce protein to between five and tenper cent. On the strict vegetarian diet it is difficult to get protein down to fiveper cent anyhow.

   By reducing the worst ingredients of the Western diet--excessfat, excess protein, cholesterol and salt--to safe levels, you will have eliminatedto a great extent the factors underlying most of the diseases of modern civilization,particularly atherosclerosis (heart disease), kidney disease and cancer, but it shouldbe pointed out that the substitution of the dangerous fat and cholesterol foods witha lot of grain products can lead to toxemia of a different kind, possibly as harmfulas existed beforehand.

   Reference back to previous pages will remind you that a lotmore improvements can still be made if you are looking for the very best results,because the question comes in two parts: (a) What immediate degree of health do Iwant? and (b) How long do I want it to last? A moderate dietary change may restorea forty year old to good health, whereas the same change may not get the desiredresults in a person of sixty whose vital organs are in worse condition. The fortyyear old, as he gets older, may find he needs to be stricter with his diet to maintaingood health. A lot of people claim they don't need to diet for health at all, becausethey have never had a day's sickness in their life. The trouble is they cannot seethe degeneration going on inside them and they don't even feel it until they perhapsone day start getting chest pains or maybe feel a strange lump inside them, or spitout some blood. Thus someone, proud of their vigorous health, may suddenly overnightbecome a permanent invalid or even be finished for good.

   It is human nature to seek pleasure and to put other thingsaside until forced to attend to them, and for this reason most people only startthinking of their health when it starts to fail. Then they want a "quick fix"so they can return to their indulgences again. When they find medicine is a wasteof time and money they may decide to try diet. There are many diets to choose from.All of them require self-discipline, because to some extent or other the seductiveflavors of the Western diet must be abandoned. We are addicted to these flavors andgiving them up is as hard as giving up any other drug.

Fad Diets for Health

   In Europe, the grape diet has for years been popular in variousspas and sanitaria, where sick people go to spend some weeks to recover their failinghealth. In a short while invalids feel great, lose weight, etc, and then return hometo indulge in their favorite foods again, planning on another spa holiday next year.

   Other people go on fruit juice fasts, grapefruit diets and soon and get the same wonderful results for just as long as they remain away from theWestern-style food. They almost always return to their old eating habits, not becausethey cannot break the habit but because they cannot break the addiction. Habit andaddiction are not the same thing.

   In the mid-1800s a wonderful health diet was invented by DrJ. H. Salisbury of New York. It was of course called the Salisbury diet, and so incrediblygood were the results gained by it that people travelled even from Europe to be treatedby Dr Salisbury. The story of the Salisbury diet is told in a book by Dr Emmet Densmoreof England called How Nature Cures, written almost one hundred years ago.The writer was astonished to read that the diet consisted of nothing other than lean,partially cooked ground beefsteak taken three times a day preceded an hour beforehandby a pint of hot water and another pint of water taken before retiring at night.On this diet the patients all suffered a constant craving for something sweet, butall rapidly improved in health. Although potentially dangerous in the long term,the diet achieved marvellous short-term results simply because it was low in fatand devoid of starch, starch being from Dr Densmore's experience the worst dietaryfactor of all. In effect the diet was equivalent to a partial fast, and the Europeanpatients could have achieved better results and saved themselves a long trip by goingto Germany and eating grapes.


   For people in well enough condition to undertake a fast thisis probably the most rapid and effective way to detoxify the body and return it tofull function and health. For best results the fast should continue until the bodyis completely detoxified and this may take anything from a week or two to severalmonths depending on the individual case. Fasting must be carefully supervised andis outside the scope of this discussion (see "Fasting" in Chapter16).

Health diets for permanent adoption

The Weight Watchers' diet. This diet is calculated more to achieve weightloss than to improve health, but if followed properly both weight loss and improvedhealth will follow. The Weight Watchers' diet could be described as "the Westerndiet in moderation", and health improvement can be expected mainly as a resultof eating fewer kilojoules rather than changing the kind of food. The diet is nowherenear ideal because it still permits too much protein and fat, mayonnaise, cheese,eggs, salt and pepper. But it is better than the conventional Western diet and isa good start in the right direction.

Vegetarian diet. A true vegetarian diet permits no foods of animal originat all. People following such a diet are known as "vegans". People whoeat no animal flesh of any kind (or fish) but include milk, cheese and eggs in theirdiet are referred to as lacto-ovo vegetarians.

   The obvious advantage of vegetarianism is the absence in thediet of animal protein, animal fat and cholesterol. Lacto-ovo vegetarians still takein these harmful substances because dairy products and eggs are high in them, andso they gain only partial benefit.

   As a rule, most vegetarians consume a fair amount of cereal(grain) products, lentils and beans and as a result still take in too much proteinas well as too much starch. As will be explained later, these foods are of very dubiousvalue although they are widely accepted as "health foods". In addition,further harm ensues when vegetable oils are freely used, and when the vegetarianfood is cooked--particularly if overcooked, salted and spiced.

   Thus many vegetarians are not much better off, healthwise, thanthose consuming the traditional diet. However, notwithstanding these mistakes, theadvantages of following the vegetarian way of life are still considerable, as demonstratedby statistics of death rates quoted from the medical journal Circulation,Vol. 58, No. 1, July 1978. The quotation is from the text of a lecture called "Lifestyles,Major Risk Factors, Proof and Public Policy" by noted cardiologist Dr JeremiahStamler.

   "An additional comparison has recently become available, with data on mortality, for three groups of Californian Seventh Day Adventists (nonvegetarian, lacto-ovo-vegetarian and pure vegetarian) compared with the Californian general population. Seventh Day Adventists have lower mean serum cholesterol levels than Americans generally. For 47,000 Seventh Day Adventist men aged 35 and over, age-sex-standardized, mortality rates were 34% lower for non-vegetarians, 57% lower for the lacto-ovo-vegetarians and 77% lower for the pure vegetarians compared to the general population. Seventh Day Adventists differ from the general population in other respects as well, eg abstinence from both alcohol and tobacco.

   Since the data from both animal and human studies indicate that high blood pressure and cigarette smoking are minimally significant for atherogenesis in the absence of the nutritional metabolic prerequisites, it is further reasonable and sound to designate "rich" diet as a PRIMARY, ESSENTIAL, NECESSARY CAUSE of the current epidemic of premature atherosclerotic disease raging in the Western industrialized countries. Cigarette smoking and hypertension are important secondary or complementary causes."

The Macrobiotic diet. Any diet that drastically cuts out fat and cholesterolmust, like the Salisbury diet, show good results. The macrobiotic diet, of Japaneseorigin, endows great health benefits when it is adopted by people who have been onthe Western diet. The diet is based on grain products, principally brown rice steamor boiled , which accounts for over fifty per cent of the total intake, about twenty-fiveper cent cooked vegetables, ten per cent beans or lentils, five per cent miso, fiveper cent seaweed and only five to ten per cent raw vegetables. Fruit is not recommendedand salt is allowed.

   The macrobiotic diet is claimed to be a healthy diet and indeed,by comparison to the Western diet, may appear to be so. The diet's shortcomings willbe already apparent to the reader and will become even more apparent in later discussion.

The Pritikin diet. Nathan Pritikin claimed his diet to be the "healthiestdiet in the world". If he was comparing the Pritikin diet to the traditionaldiets of the major population groups around the world, his claim would have beensubstantially correct. There is no question of the Pritikin diet's superiority overthe Western diet for a start, and its emphasis on complex carbohydrates and reductionof protein and fat make it theoretically a far better diet than the traditional balanceddiet espoused by today's nutritional experts.

   The Pritikin diet achieves rapid, often spectacular results,first and foremost because of its very low fat content. It achieves reversal of atherosclerosisbecause of its low cholesterol content. It achieves reduction of blood pressure byvirtue of unsticking the blood and lowering its viscosity, and by the same meanspermits the body's insulin to work better, so reversing diabetes. Lots of other goodthings happen simply because of improved circulation and more oxygen in the tissues.But the Pritikin diet too has faults which can lead to trouble if not circumvented,the main fault being that, like the macrobiotic diet, it relies too heavily on grainproducts and permits too much cooking.

The Gerson diet. Originally devised to solve the problem of migraine, theGerson diet was found to be effective in arresting other metabolic and degenerativediseases, and has been used with high levels of success in the treatment of cancersince the 1930s. The diet is very low in fat, cholesterol and protein, consistingmainly of raw vegetables, fruit and juices made from these. Some cooked vegetablesand rice are permitted, but the diet does not contain much grains and therefore mustbe considered superior to the Pritikin diet. The results demonstrated by Dr Gerson,and more lately by his daughter Charlotte, clearly demonstrate this superiority.

The Hunza diet. The unsurpassed health and physical endurance of the legendaryHunza race was proven in exhaustive tests by Major General Sir Robert McCarrison,MD, in the 1920s to be directly attributable to the Hunza diet (The Wheel of Health,Dr G. T. Wrench; see also The Health Revolution ). The Hunza diet was similarto the Pritikin diet in that it contained a fair amount of wholegrain foods mainlyin the form of wheatmeal bread, hardly any meat or fish, and a lot of vegetables,boiled and raw. As well, however, the diet contained liberal quantities of raw fruit,raw milk and cheese. There were no chickens, eggs, tea, sugar or rice. In the sevenyears he spent among the Hunzas, Dr McCarrison's medical skills were almost entirelyconfined to the treatment of accidental lesions, operations for granular eyelids,and the removal of senile cataracts, as other health problems were practically unknown.Dr Wrench, in his account, remarked upon the amount of raw food consumed by the Hunzasand attributed this mainly to be why they were so free of disease.

The raw food diet. Nobody can claim to have invented the raw food diet; itis the diet provided by Mother Nature in the first place. Dr Richard Lambe of Englandextolled the virtues of the raw vegetarian diet back in 1809, and described the successfuluse of it in the treatment of cancer patients.

   Diets made up of raw fruits and/or raw vegetables have beenthe key to the success of the famous sanatoria in Europe, USA, Australia and elsewherefor many years. These include the Battle Creek Sanatorium started by Dr Harvey Kelloggof the USA a hundred years ago, the Bircher Benner Sanatorium in Switzerland, theHopewood Health Centre in Australia and Dr Ann Wigmore's Hippocrates Health Centersin the USA. The advantages of eating food uncooked are many and result in healthbenefits unobtainable from cooked food. Some foods, such as cereals and potatoes,are difficult to digest uncooked but, as will be explained later, such foods areof dubious value anyway and are better left alone.

The fruitarian diet. Theoretically, and in practice, a diet composed of highquality, ripe, raw fruits provides the human body with all the nutrients it needswith the very least expenditure of digestive effort, at the same time producing notoxic by-products and so allowing the body to detoxify itself and perform at itspeak. Raw fruits are more palatable and provide more energy for a given amount thanvegetables and can be prepared with less effort and less waste. Not only can thehighest level of health be attained on a fruitarian diet but, because it places somuch less wear and tear on the body's vital organs, degeneration is slowed down andthe lifespan extended.

The facts and fallacies of "health foods"

   When you walk into a health food store and look around, whatdo you see? One wall of shelves is packed with vitamins and mineral products, allexpensive and all unnecessary for people on a reasonable diet. Another section displaysjars of seaweed extracts, sea salt, vegetable salts, lecithin granules and so on,all of which have dubious value. Seaweed undoubtedly contains minerals that may belight on in some people's diet, but sea salt, apart from the fact it contains iodine,an essential trace mineral missing from the soil in a few areas of the world, isstill plain sodium chloride, which is common salt--a dangerous product. Vegetablesalt is a flavoring powder made from vegetable extracts but has little flavor ofits own and so when you read the label on the jar it usually reveals the fact thatordinary salt or sea salt forms part of the mixture.

   Then you see nuts of all kinds, dried lentils, soya beans--binsfull of them--foods which contain high levels of fat and protein and are stressfulto the digestive system. Shelves are stacked with bottles of polyunsaturated vegetableoils--100 per cent fat--which although containing no cholesterol as do animal fats,nevertheless cause red cell and platelet aggregation in the blood and are associatedwith increased risk of cancer.

   Cookies, biscuits and energy bars, some of which are high infat and sugar and none of which are as healthful as a good banana. Bins of brownrice and other grains--fair enough foods if eaten sparingly--and bins of dried fruits.Dried fruits, if they are sun dried and unsulphered, are good foods but they arevery concentrated and better eaten sparingly as snacks when fresh fruit is not available.

   One food item which could be considered as a health-promotingfood is garlic, not because it provides valuable nutrients the body needs, but becauseof its therapeutic medicinal property in a body handicapped by a high-fat diet. Garlic,onions and other herbal extracts such as vitamin E have the effect of unstickingthe blood to permit improved circulation. Used for this purpose these products aremore medicines than foods, but at least garlic tastes good.

   The contents of health food stores can be considered healthgiving only to the extent they are less harmful than meat, chicken and dairy products.The only foods that qualify to be called health foods, using the true meaning ofthe word 'health', are fresh fruits and vegetables; you can maintain good healthindefinitely on these but the same cannot be said for the general run of foods availablein health food stores.

Summarizing health diets

   Apart from observing the fact that in general the cooking offood leads to an overworked digestive system and increased toxemia, the single commondenominator possessed by all effective health diets, cooked or raw, is the drasticlowering of the fat content, which allows the bloodstream to clear itself of fatand allows the red blood cells and blood platelets to unstick, so reducing the bloodviscosity and permitting its free circulation and oxygencarrying ability. The enormousimprovement in wellbeing that results from this single factor of improved blood conditionhas nothing to do with anything contained in the diet--the benefit stems from whathas been taken out of the diet.

   So great is the improvement of health and wellbeing achievedby the simple expedient of improving the circulation that the beneficiaries thinkthey have struck the jackpot; they think they have discovered the perfect diet, beit the grape diet, the macrobiotic diet, the Pritikin diet, the Gerson diet or maybeeven the Salisbury diet. And this is easy to understand, but there is more to goodhealth than just improving the blood circulation. What about the delicate chemistryof the blood? What about the avoidance of toxemia? The wear and tear on our internalorgans? The wastage of digestive energy and valuable enzymes?

   Insidious degeneration can continue undetected in a body apparentlybrimming with vigorous health. Probably the best example of this is the constantoccurrence of sudden death by heart attack of extremely fit athletes and runners.Right up until their sudden collapse, which usually occurs during or just after vigorousactivity, these people display all the signs of good health. Their blood viscosityis low because they can metabolize fat quickly from their blood and so their bloodpressure is good, they feel good because their blood contains plenty of oxygen, andthey don't "catch" colds because their immune systems are performing properly.They are healthy in this sense, but when death overtakes them autopsies reveal coronaryarteries blocked with cholesterol. They had been under the illusion that enduranceexercise prevents heart disease, but the evidence is now clear that physical trainingdoes not prevent the accumulation of dietary cholesterol in the arteries; it merelymaintains a better blood flow and prevents the usual symptoms of heart disease frombeing displayed.

   Nathan Pritikin was the first one to loudly warn the publicof the dangerous illusion that athletes could indulge in a high-cholesterol dietand get away with it. But there are other illusions of which Pritikin was not aware.Avoiding heart disease is not the be all and end all in the quest for good health.

   Clean arteries and thin blood are the prime essentials and theseare easily accomplished on the Pritikin diet providing the diet is properly followed.The next step is attending to the actual chemistry of the blood and how perfect chemistrycan be achieved with the least wear and tear on the vital organs. This involves furtherinvestigation into nutrition and the enzymes that make improved nutrition possible.The subject becomes a little different from that of dieting for immediate healthbenefits, it becomes one of gaining long-term benefit-that is--dieting for longevity.

Dieting for Longevity

   Do tissues and organs wear out, or are they gradually destroyedby processes which could possibly be avoided? Scientific opinion agrees that thehuman life span potential is about 120 years, and some estimates go higher. Theseestimates are probably conservative, because quite a number of people are known tohave exceeded 110 years without making any special efforts at all to preserve themselves.Be that as it may, the consensus of opinion is that by taking reasonable care, thedegeneration which constitutes the aging process can be slowed down so that old ageis postponed.

Old age defined

   Old age is a degenerative disease of the entire body, the progressof which is determined more by the degenerating factors in a person's lifestyle thanby their chronological age.

Old age described

   Everyone knows what old age looks like from the outside, butwhat changes occur inside the body? In his book The Span of Life, Dr WilliamMalisoff described the atrophy and degeneration of every organ and tissue in thebody that accompanies old age and the malfunctions which occur as a result. He said:

   "The system of organs is so thoroughly connected that all these changes have mutual repercussions. Thus too the liver, pancreas, spleen, kidneys, urinary organs, become atrophied, hardened and degenerated. The capsule of the kidney is thickened, the parenchyma hardened; the connective tissue scleroses and compresses tubules and glomeruli, impairing their action. The changes in the brain, in the spinal cord, in the nerves, are of a similar character.

   The description of the changes would fill many volumes. We can summarize that they fall into several classes: the atrophies, which have been commented on; the fibroses as replacements by fiber; pigmentations; metaplasias; hyperkeratoses, or skin changes and the like; renunciation of functions, as those of the germ cells and the instance of fat cells which no longer store fat."

   Dr Arnold Lorand of Austria, in his book Old Age Deferred,described old age as a condition in which there is a diminution of metabolism, iethe assimilation and conversion of food into energy, and is characterized by theabundant growth of connective tissue in vital organs, diminution of oxidation andincreased auto-intoxication.

   Dr Charles de Lacy Evans of England in his book How to ProlongLife: an Enquiry into the Cause of Old Age and Natural Death, written one hundredyears ago, was more specific; he said:

   "The most marked feature in old age is that fibrinous, gelatinous and earthy deposit has taken place in the system; the latter being chiefly of phosphate and carbonate of lime, with small quantities of sulphate of lime, magnesia and traces of other earths."

   He added that the deposits occur in all tissues, including thebones and blood vessels, which harden and reduce in caliber, and quoted a DoctorC. J. B. Williams, who said:

   " 'The process is, therefore, to be viewed as almost entirely of a chemical nature, and as consisting of the concretion and accumulation of calcareous salts, phosphate and carbonate of lime in the debris of animal matter.' "

   Dr de Lacy Evans went on to explain how the fibrinous, gelatinoussubstances were formed by the oxidation within the bloodstream and tissues of excessivealbumin (protein), and how the earthy deposits were derived mainly from grain productsand root and leafy vegetables and to a lesser extent from animal products. Dr Evanstended to blame the formation of the fibrinous, gelatinous substances on the presenceof oxygen, just as some biochemists do today with their 'free radical' theory ofaging. More pertinent to the argument, in the author's opinion, is that if the dietis correct then neither the excess albumin nor the free radicals will present themselvesin the first place to improperly use the body's valuable oxygen. Dr Arthur C. Giese,Professor of Biology Emeritus, Stanford University, in his book Living with OurSun's Ultraviolet Rays said:

   "In our multi-cellular bodies some cells, such as those of the epidermal basal layer, continue to divide throughout life; others--for example nerve and muscle cells--differentiate and cease dividing at birth. Nevertheless, they continue to function for a lifetime, with gradually lessening activity and progressively filling with insoluble wastes and pigments."

   As the tissues slowly acquire these characteristics of old agetheir decline is further characterized by, and is measurable by, a correspondingdecrease in enzyme levels and activity. On the other hand, animal tissue cells grownin cultures in the laboratory, properly cleansed and drained, do not degenerate inthis fashion and may outlast the animal from which they originated many times over.It is held by some researchers (at least in theory) that in ideal circumstances immortalityis possible. Other experiments with live animals fed on minimum rations showed improvedhealth and a life extension of fifty to one hundred per cent over that of unrestrictedcontrol animals on the same diet.

   The longest lived populations in the world are accepted generallyto be the people of Hunza in northern Pakistan, Vilcabarnba in Ecuador, and Georgiain Rassia. An analysis of these peoples' living habits carried out under the auspicesof the National Geographic in 1971 by Dr Alexander Leaf of New York provideda good reason why they outlived people of the Western world. The traditional dietsof these long-lived (by our standards) people contained only half to two thirds thekilojoules of the average American intake, about a quarter the amount of fat andhalf the protein. Their carbohydrate intake was about the same but was unprocessedinstead of processed. As well , these people got more outdoor exercise and were lesssubject to stress than Americans.

   In his book, Dr de Lacy Evans when reviewing a study of centenariansin England in the 19th Century said:

   "On reviewing nearly 2,000 reported cases of persons who lived more than a century, we generally find some peculiarity of diet or habits to account for their alleged longevity; we find some were living amongst all the luxuries life could afford, others in the most abject poverty--begging their bread; some were samples of symmetry and physique, others cripples; some drank large quantities of water, others little; some were total abstainers from alcoholic drinks, other drunkards; some smoked tobacco, others did not; some lived entirely on vegetables, others to a great extent on animal foods; some led active lives, others sedentary; some worked with their brain, others with their hands; some ate only one meal a day, others four or five; some few ate large quantities of food, others a small amount; in fact, we notice great divergence both in habits and diet, but in those cases where we have been able to obtain a reliable account of the diet, we find one great cause which accounts for the majority of cases of longevity, moderation in the quantity of food."

   Thus perhaps the first rule in dieting for longevity is to eatsparingly, whatever the make up of the diet. Even on a bad diet this rule will stillpermit better health and extended life because less wear and tear will have to beendured by the body.

   So it becomes clear that "old age" occurs becausewe take into our bodies, mainly via food, harmful substances which overtax the digestivesystem, cause toxemia of the milieu interieur, overtax the eliminatory organs,and to a greater or lesser extent gradually accumulate in the tissues and cells toincreasingly impede their functions.

   It follows then that old age can be deferred by selecting foodswhich provide the best nutrition with the least digestive effort and the least amountof harmful residues, and consuming such foods in great moderation.

In Conclusion on Longevity

   That "a man is an old as his arteries" was statedfirst by the l7th-Century physician Thomas Sydenham. That "a man's arteriesare as old as he makes them" was stated by Robert Bell, a l9th-Century physician.Perhaps we can proceed one step further to state the obvious: "The arteriesand all the organs and tissues are as young as the cells of which they are made andthe milieu interieur which sustains them."

   Diet is not the only factor in longevity, of course, but itis by far the main one. The closer we can get to an ideal diet and maintain it, theless will be the wear and tear on our organs and the slower the accumulation of thefibrinous, gelatinous growths and calcareous mineral salts in our cells and tissues.

   Think of all those little cells. Says Dr Edward J. Stiegbitz,MS MD FACP, in his book The Second Forty Years:

   "Superficially, the answer is simple; intrinsically, extremely complex. Whether the cells themselves are, or are not, potentially immortal is largely beside the point. The essential fact is that continuance of such perpetual youth, as displayed by Carrel's chick heart cultures*, is absolutely dependent upon the maintenance of an ideal environment. Cultures must be aseptically transplanted to fresh media at frequent intervals or growth stops and the cells die, poisoned by the accumulating chemical debris of their living, and starved because their foodstuffs are used up. Contamination with even minute amounts of toxic substances or any inadequacy of any one of many nutritional requisites' immediately interrupts the marvellous lifestream. The quality of the cellular environment is the determining factor, whether the cells be growing in vitro in a test-tube, or in vivo, in the living and functioning organism."

   Your body is a living and functioning organism and you wantit to stay that way. We know what to do. We have discussed at great length the factorsresponsible for polluting the milieu interieur of the body, and to eliminatethem would appear to be easier said than done. Not everybody can arrange to livein a tropical Garden of Eden. We can only do our best with what we have available,and the first step, wherever your live, is to cut down on the things that do themost harm. Eat as much as you can of your food raw. Cut out salt. Think of thoselittle cells. Think of how clean your arteries will be, how comforting it will benever to worry about cancer. Each step you take will improve your wellbeing and increaseyour life expectancy.

   Think of fruit as sustaining food and not just as an accessoryadding color to the sideboard, although it is admitted that much of the commerciallygrown fruit available today looks a lot better than it tastes. Lack of taste meanslack of nutrition and possibly at the same time the presence of insecticide traces.Quality is important.

   Do the best you can, remembering Dr de Lacy Evans' words ofwisdom:

   "There is, therefore, a simplicity, a reason, a wonderful philosophy in the first command given to man--Man may live entirely upon fruits in better health than the majority of mankind now enjoy. Good, sound, ripe fruits are never the cause of disease, but the vegetable acids, as we have before stated, lower the temperature of the body, decrease the process of combustion or oxidation--therefore the waste of the system---less sleep is required, activity is increased, fatigue or thirst is hardly experienced; still the body is well nourished, and as a comparatively small quantity of earth salts are taken into the system, the cause of old age is in some degree removed, the effect is delayed, and life is prolonged to a period far beyond our 'threescore and ten'."

   "There is little question any more that artery plaquereversal can for the first time be considered possible." Dr Nash in Circulation,official journal of the American Heart Association, September 1977.

   "With a cholesterol level of 150 [3.9] or less, plaquereversal in two years is possible." Dr R. Wissler, Chicago Medical School,addressing the American Heart Association, June 1977.

   "The three major killers in modern society, CoronaryHeart Disease, Cancer and Strokes, can all be linked to what people eat and drink."Dr B. Hetzel, Chief of the CSIRO Division of Human Nutrition and Foundation Professorof Social and Preventive Medicine, Monash University.

   "The major cancers of our time are diet-caused, mainlyby fat and cholesterol." Dr Ernst Wynder, American Health Foundation, addressingthe USA Government Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs.

   "With this kind of approach diet only, 80% of diabeticsin this country could be normal in 30 to 90 days." Dr James Anderson, Universityof Kentucky Medical Centre.

   "Progressive pernicious anaemia, asthma, Bright's disease,diabetes, rheumatism, arthritis, neuritis, gastric or duodenal ulcer, every formof digestive disturbance, eczema, psoriasis. pityriasis, goitres of all types, tumors,tuberculosis-any and all of these varied forms of so-called disease fall under onehead, chemical imbalance of the body, and all subject to restoration to the normalthrough correction of the body chemistry and thorough drainage." WilliamHoward Hay, MD (from The New Health Era, 1933).