Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Is eating natural food necessary to become enlightened?
I see your point about natural WanMin, but I also know as a chemist that 'natural' is a convention. For example fructose in corn syrup is not a different molecule from that found in fruit though of course fruit has more fiber and cannot be consumed as rapidly. The point I am making is that something from a plant is not a different molecule. With foods the difference healthwise is in the matrix and the preparation I think. But lets take herbal supplements. These are more dangerous in some respects than prescribed drugs because they don't need to be tested or studied. Honey is another big example. It is concentrated sugar without fiber or anything. It is just as bad as table sugar but my brothers gf does not eat anything with sugar but eats honey.
2
Toraldris -`-,-{@ Zen Nud... Buddhist @}-,-`- East Coast, USAVeteran
I say if it's good enough for Homer Simpson, it's good enough for me. That guy hasn't aged a day in decades... he must be doing something right. Mmm, donuts.
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
I think you mean "D'oh!"nuts....
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@Jeffrey said: ... But lets take herbal supplements. These are more dangerous in some respects than prescribed drugs because they don't need to be tested or studied.
Excuse me, I beg to differ. Herbal supplements in the UK are forbidden from making any concrete or definitive claims precisely for the reason that evidence of their effectiveness is circumstantial, which is a bit rich when you consider that Aspirin comes from willow bark - as you yourself pointed out, in another thread.
Herbal remedies and supplements are therefore NOT sold as cures or treatments.
And only those with proven records (such as herbal remedies as sleep aids) are marketed as worthy and tried & tested products.
Honey is another big example. It is concentrated sugar without fiber or anything. It is just as bad as table sugar but my brothers gf does not eat anything with sugar but eats honey.
>
Honey is better for you than sugar however, because it is not processed, bleached, refined or tampered with. They found amphorae of honey in Tutankhamen's tomb which was still perfectly edible. It doesn't go off, or spoil.
Honey is not processed (as much) and what you say is true. My point is related to a person saying "NO OH MY GOD FRUCTOSE" And then they eat honey lol. Anything high enough concentration of sugar won't spoil readily because any bacteria will have it's water that it needs for it's cells sucked into the hygroscopic honey or sugar and the cell dies.
Here is a source regarding info on honey versus sugar.
It is interesting to note that dietary supplement manufacturers are allowed to make certain “structure/function” claims, which are often vaguely worded claims of health benefits. For example, an Echinacea product (often used to treat or prevent the common cold) might claim to “support the body’s natural defenses.”
Dietary supplements can be produced, sold, and marketed without first demonstrating safety and efficacy, as is required for pharmaceutical drugs. Also, the FDA bears the regulatory burden of proving that a dietary supplement is unsafe before it can be removed from the market—which is in direct contrast to drugs, where a manufacturer must provide the FDA with evidence of safety and efficacy before a product can be sold.7
Not surprisingly, this regulatory structure has led to problems with the consistency and safety of herbal products. Several recent studies have documented dramatically different levels of suspected active ingredients in herbal products. For example, a recent analysis of 25 available ginseng products found a 15- to 200-fold variation in the concentration of 2 ingredients believed to have biological activity: ginsenosides and eleuthrosides.8 Therefore, it may be difficult for patients to ascertain with certainty the precise contents of the products they may be interested in taking.
@WanMin said:
Though Dhammadragon seems to draw a line between food for the mind and the body. Can we call good techings for inner development spiritual food?
DhammaDragon sits here pondering why anyone would infer from the slogan "Avoid poisonous food" to refer to food for the body in the first place. ..
:scratch: ..
@Jeffrey said:
I see your point about natural WanMin, but I also know as a chemist that 'natural' is a convention. For example fructose in corn syrup is not a different molecule from that found in fruit though of course fruit has more fiber and cannot be consumed as rapidly. The point I am making is that something from a plant is not a different molecule. With foods the difference healthwise is in the matrix and the preparation I think. But lets take herbal supplements. These are more dangerous in some respects than prescribed drugs because they don't need to be tested or studied. Honey is another big example. It is concentrated sugar without fiber or anything. It is just as bad as table sugar but my brothers gf does not eat anything with sugar but eats honey.
Yes I agree with you in several aspects but I should remember I used the word natural to distinguish between processed and unprocessed food not natural and unnatural components.
Honey and dry figs are energy bombs. In fact honey is more effective than energy bars, but it has several other benefits it has enzymes, it has bactericidal effects and it also has vitamins and minerals. The problem of course is to find good quality honey these days.
I agree with you that plant supplements also have side effects and unfortunately they are often not studied. Lets not forget these are processed products also. Honestly I think any kind of suplements are to be avoided.
For instance you probably know this better than me but synthetic vitamins are similar but not so perfect as the original. However personaly I consider as bad to take natural as synthetic suplements. Because the point here is that vitamins are being taken out of the context and in amounts that may be excessive.
In answer to the OP - everything you eat is natural, and it's all 100% you and your own goodness, it's your secretions, excretions and toxic waste, and every single aspect of it comes from the generous offering of your self and delight in receiving yourself! - so as it's you the serpent that is eating your own tail, I beg you to slow down, and look at what lies a head, as you wouldn't want to spoil the savour faire.
Synthetic vitamins have the same main ingredient. It is the 'impurities' that a natural vitamin has. Also (impurities) are the reason why real flavors taste better than synthetic. But the main component the actual unique chemical structure of the main ingredient in synth and nat vitamins is the same. It cannot fail to be due to chemistry and bonds and things.
take a quick peak ^^^ the lines are bonds. Double line is double bond. The angles are carbon atoms. The angles are assumed to be bonded to four things and hydrogen atoms (of the molecule) fill out the angles. S, Cl, etc refer to other atoms than carbon or hydrogen in this case sulphur and chlorine. Check it out!!
That's a beautiful ouroboros dragon, @anataman, for a grande entrée!
I suppose somebody's words, acts and behaviour are a sure sign of that person indulging in a wholesome/unwholesome mental diet, as much as someone's stools are indicative of that person's healthy or unhealthy lifestyle.
@Jeffrey said:
Synthetic vitamins have the same main ingredient. It is the 'impurities' that a natural vitamin has. Also (impurities) are the reason why real flavors taste better than synthetic. But the main component the actual unique chemical structure of the main ingredient in synth and nat vitamins is the same. It cannot fail to be due to chemistry and bonds and things.
take a quick peak ^^^ the lines are bonds. Double line is double bond. The angles are carbon atoms. The angles are assumed to be bonded to four things and hydrogen atoms (of the molecule) fill out the angles. S, Cl, etc refer to other atoms than carbon or hydrogen in this case sulphur and chlorine. Check it out!!
That's also what gives colors to mineral crystals. Thank you for the link, unfortunately our man made sketches of nature may leave behind the details that can make the big difference.
@DhammaDragon said:
That's a beautiful ouroboros dragon, anataman, for a grande entrée!
I suppose somebody's words, acts and behaviour are a sure sign of that person indulging in a wholesome/unwholesome mental diet, as much as someone's stools are indicative of that person's healthy or unhealthy lifestyle.
I used to have a serious addiction to nutrition and health but I Still swear the best book I read was food revolution. Its hard to know what our bodies need anyways. They say no sugar, no salt, no sugar replacements, no red meat, no meat at all, no fruits, no fat, no carb, high protein, low protein, only botanical vegetables, no nuts, no gluten, no tubers, no tomatoes....etc I could go forever. The best food is the food you feel fed and energetic on. Example, if I eat burger king I'm hungry an hour later. So I consider that to not be natural food. As far as if it's good in our practice for optimum success, I think just keeping your mind at optimum levels is success.
Comments
I still don't know what you consider 'spiritual food' to be.....
I was teasing you. It is just that when you put it that way kind of was calling for something more profound.
Though @Dhammadragon seems to draw a line between food for the mind and the body. Can we call good techings for inner development spiritual food?
I see your point about natural WanMin, but I also know as a chemist that 'natural' is a convention. For example fructose in corn syrup is not a different molecule from that found in fruit though of course fruit has more fiber and cannot be consumed as rapidly. The point I am making is that something from a plant is not a different molecule. With foods the difference healthwise is in the matrix and the preparation I think. But lets take herbal supplements. These are more dangerous in some respects than prescribed drugs because they don't need to be tested or studied. Honey is another big example. It is concentrated sugar without fiber or anything. It is just as bad as table sugar but my brothers gf does not eat anything with sugar but eats honey.
I say if it's good enough for Homer Simpson, it's good enough for me. That guy hasn't aged a day in decades... he must be doing something right. Mmm, donuts.
I think you mean "D'oh!"nuts....
Excuse me, I beg to differ. Herbal supplements in the UK are forbidden from making any concrete or definitive claims precisely for the reason that evidence of their effectiveness is circumstantial, which is a bit rich when you consider that Aspirin comes from willow bark - as you yourself pointed out, in another thread.
Herbal remedies and supplements are therefore NOT sold as cures or treatments.
And only those with proven records (such as herbal remedies as sleep aids) are marketed as worthy and tried & tested products.
>
Honey is better for you than sugar however, because it is not processed, bleached, refined or tampered with. They found amphorae of honey in Tutankhamen's tomb which was still perfectly edible. It doesn't go off, or spoil.
And it contains vitamin Bee....
.
In US herbals are not regulated as much.
Honey is not processed (as much) and what you say is true. My point is related to a person saying "NO OH MY GOD FRUCTOSE" And then they eat honey lol. Anything high enough concentration of sugar won't spoil readily because any bacteria will have it's water that it needs for it's cells sucked into the hygroscopic honey or sugar and the cell dies.
Here is a source regarding info on honey versus sugar.
http://goaskalice.columbia.edu/honey-vs-sugar-151-which-healthier
Here is about herbals reguation in the US
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2517879/
DhammaDragon sits here pondering why anyone would infer from the slogan "Avoid poisonous food" to refer to food for the body in the first place. ..
:scratch: ..
Yes I agree with you in several aspects but I should remember I used the word natural to distinguish between processed and unprocessed food not natural and unnatural components.
Honey and dry figs are energy bombs. In fact honey is more effective than energy bars, but it has several other benefits it has enzymes, it has bactericidal effects and it also has vitamins and minerals. The problem of course is to find good quality honey these days.
I agree with you that plant supplements also have side effects and unfortunately they are often not studied. Lets not forget these are processed products also. Honestly I think any kind of suplements are to be avoided.
For instance you probably know this better than me but synthetic vitamins are similar but not so perfect as the original. However personaly I consider as bad to take natural as synthetic suplements. Because the point here is that vitamins are being taken out of the context and in amounts that may be excessive.
Enter the dragon.
In answer to the OP - everything you eat is natural, and it's all 100% you and your own goodness, it's your secretions, excretions and toxic waste, and every single aspect of it comes from the generous offering of your self and delight in receiving yourself! - so as it's you the serpent that is eating your own tail, I beg you to slow down, and look at what lies a head, as you wouldn't want to spoil the savour faire.
And don't let me or ouroborous:
Personally a decent juice does wonders for the body mind and digestion- I posted a little delight here: http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/comment/417934 - halfway down page 2
... \ lol / ...
Synthetic vitamins have the same main ingredient. It is the 'impurities' that a natural vitamin has. Also (impurities) are the reason why real flavors taste better than synthetic. But the main component the actual unique chemical structure of the main ingredient in synth and nat vitamins is the same. It cannot fail to be due to chemistry and bonds and things.
https://www.google.com/search?q=chemical+structure+of+vitamin+c&client=firefox-a&hs=eDL&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=np&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=QzdEVNbDIoiZyASe-IGQAw&ved=0CCIQsAQ&biw=1024&bih=514
take a quick peak ^^^ the lines are bonds. Double line is double bond. The angles are carbon atoms. The angles are assumed to be bonded to four things and hydrogen atoms (of the molecule) fill out the angles. S, Cl, etc refer to other atoms than carbon or hydrogen in this case sulphur and chlorine. Check it out!!
That's a beautiful ouroboros dragon, @anataman, for a grande entrée!
I suppose somebody's words, acts and behaviour are a sure sign of that person indulging in a wholesome/unwholesome mental diet, as much as someone's stools are indicative of that person's healthy or unhealthy lifestyle.
That's also what gives colors to mineral crystals. Thank you for the link, unfortunately our man made sketches of nature may leave behind the details that can make the big difference.
Yes