Guest guest Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 Thanks Mike, for your well thought out and articulated post. I will reread it immediately before I do my class so that I don't come accross as a single- minded countercultural fanatic, even if I may be one! Kathy > > , > > > > I was hoping to hear from you! Thank you for your advice and > support. I will > > incorporate the concept into my talk-that won't be difficult! And > practice saying > > " fresh " instead of " raw " -that might be more of a challenge! > > > > Kathy > @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ > > I definitely agree about the word " fresh " as an alternative to " raw " > for new audiences. I would use the phrase " fresh, unprocessed " to > draw attention to the larger issue of milk processing, with issues > independent of heat treatment, like homogenization, fortification, > reconstitution, etc. This more general concept of quality goes hand- > in-hand with the issue of the animal's diet, pasturing, etc, and > these are crucial issues that should appeal to most people's > intuition and may be even more important than the heat treatment > issue. After all, getting unfortified milk reduces to the same > problem as getting unpasteurized milk,so these issues are mutually > reinforcing at the practical level of a person's lifestyle choices. > By placing rawness in this broader context and not singling it out, > you can imply that it's a normal, natural thing, not a big deal. It > also minimizes the risk of coming across as a single-minded > countercultural fanatic. By using the word " raw " one foregrounds a > binary opposition of raw/heated that requires special specification, > a reaction to the negative of pasteurization, whereas " fresh " > emphasizes the positive as a larger concept subsuming rawness. By > expressing rawness as an inherent part of a general condition of > freshness, one implies it's the normal, natural, default state of > affairs and doesn't require special mention, This is related to the > deep point that dirty/clean is a natural opposition, while > dirty/pasteurized is not. Everybody knows fresh is good, and anyone > who pursues the heat treatment topic with you individually can simply > and casually be referred to Ron Schmid's book. I don't think many > people respond well to passionate " sales pitches " , which give a > feeling of tension, polarization, and controversy. (Maybe some kind > of irony/complication in here since you're addressing a religious > audience!!) Conversely, a confident and easy-mannered remark to the > effect that unheated milk is healthier and there are doctors who > recommend it their patients, followed by a single solid book > recommendation, should convey the more appropriate feeling that > they're simply in the dark about a potentially important topic and > that the burden of being convinced can be taken upon themselves with > the friendly support of a fellow community member. > > I think the deeper NT/WAP theme of traditional food culture and the > absence of 20th century health epidemics in previous times is a > better way to kindle interest in these matters, rather than diving > into narrow topics like dairy, especially since dairy is far from > being a universal food and could easily be dispensed with in favor of > dozens of other food choices. For those with an inclination towards > dairy, the more universal concept of quality (source, soil, nutrient- > density, lack of harmful processing, use of helpful processing, > ecological sustainability, freedom from toxins, etc) will lead > directly and inevitably to our pet issues of dairy quality, including > rawness. > > I would mention soil quality, proper feeding/raising of animals, the > nutritional importance of animal foods, the universality > of " dirty " /raw/fermented foods and their importance to our digestion, > the problems of processed sugar/grains, etc. Dairy could be covered > under the topic of fermented foods by mentioning the near- > universality of fermented dairy in various forms among dairy- > consuming cultures. This kind of broad, historical perspective was > the most compelling part of the NT/WAP teachings when I was > converting to this worldview. The simple statement that most foods > eaten by members of your audience didn't exist before the 20th > century has overwhelming import. > > Mike > SE Pennsylvania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ > " Properly handled fresh, unprocessed milk from healthy cows grazing on organic pasture is as God intended it! " There you go! > Sara @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ That's great! And it can easily be converted to a noun phrase by dropping the copula. I really like the tie-in with the " intent of God " concept; there's a variant of that concept for just about any worldview and it's is a deep message that should hit home with a lot people, making it consistent with their belief systems. If they thought about it, nobody would think that God envisioned huge milk factories with stainless steel processing equipment and cows confined to stalls! It's so obvious! It's these kinds of self-evident overarching ideas that make me feel like I'm on the right track with all this food/health stuff. Mike SE Pennsylvania Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.