Re: FROM THE LIST-OWNER - New Group Description & Other List Business

[Guest guest]

--- Christie <christiekeith@...> wrote:

>

> I absolutely disagree with this. Not that is

> cumbersome, yes, it is,

> but I never use it. I subscribe to this as an EMAIL

> LIST and never use the

> web interface. The day this list stops being an

> email list is the day I'm

> gone. I hate, hate, hate web forums. Hate them. Ick.

I second that opinion! I can't stand web forums

either.

JO

___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW

Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.

[Guest guest]

IMO, the front page of the group should attract people to subscribe.

The following I believe should achieve this objective:

" Native Nutrition is dedicated to reclaiming the vibrant health and

robust constitution that are our birthright by restoring traditional

nutrient-dense foods to the modern diet, banishing toxic pseudo-foods

and anti-nutrients from the table and opposing low-fat dietary

orthodoxy and its legacy of ill health and degenerative disease.

Have questions? Need help? You're in the right place! "

The rest, however, doesn't give people any information that may make

them want to join. It's just a reading list, and to be honest, would

probably put a lot of people off joining if they think it's just

discussion about a lot of rather intense reading! Or if they don't

want to read further just yet, then this will put them off.

Remember, a lot of new people on the list, and a lot of people new to

this form of healthy eating need to take small steps in the right

direction. Making too many changes, trying to take everything on

board from 10 different authors is pretty damn scarey! (1 year on

and I'm still making small steps)

I would like to see the remaining quota of 2000 characters used to

entice people - we are chatty and supportive; there is a wealth of

knowledge on many different aspects of traditional diets and modern

healthy living; we have people from around the world (Italy, UK,

Germany, US, Canada, Australia); we share information and

kefir/kombucha cultures freely and generously. Etc.

There is a facility to send a standard welcome email to all new

members in . This could be used to encourage people to check

out the files, photos, links etc, and to communicate the list rules

(eg putting POLITICS in the subject if relevant) and to state the

list's position on people advertising their own products (not spam,

but someone with a genuine business that may interest list members).

There is also a facility to send a repeating notice monthly, weekly

or whatever, to all list members. This is the ideal place to include

a book list, along the lines of " You may hear about many different

books, authors, diet plans here. If you would like to learn more,

here's a list of the most common ones " . This notice can be updated

as time goes on to keep it relevant. It could also be sent out on

subscription to new members.

I would support putting all new members on moderated status. It

really does cut out spam. With 10-20 new members per week, you

should consider appointing a couple of moderators to check and

release the moderated posts, and remove the moderated status of a new

member once they have proved to be a genuine list member.

Jo

[Guest guest]

> I second that opinion! I can't stand web forums

> either.

What if there were an option to have both a web forum and an email list

and have both feed into each other.

L

------

Lynn Siprelle * web developer, writer, mama, fiber junky

http://www.siprelle.com * http://www.thenewhomemaker.com

http://www.democracyfororegon.com * http://www.wisforwomen.com

http://www.knitting911.net * http://www.tomformayor.org

[Guest guest]

I see that there is a stress on 'beginner-friendly' for the group's

introduction page, but please remember that some/many of us had or will

have already discovered WAP (not necessarily the WAPF group) and NAPD

before discovering this group. Such a population may have been

specifically looking for a NAPD oriented forum and may actually be

looking to see that it is MENTIONED in the forum intro. If the mention of

NAPD is removed because it isn't 'beginner-friendly', then many who are

specifically looking for NAPD support forums may not immediately see the

association.

The reason I subscribed was because I was interested in concepts

surrounding NAPD and integrating it with longevity studies and general

health issues. (not exactly entering the group as a beginner).

FWIW, I tend to view Sally Fallon's bias against some foods like pork

(I'm decended from people for whom pork is a staple), to be somewhat

insular; against the true premise of *Native-Nutrition*, which is

actually the name of this group. Native-nutrition is the foundational

bias of what WAP had studied. Sally's book is a helpful tool, but it is

less helpful for the whole picture than is NAPD.

Speaking as a long time admin to other forums, I realize that forums are

not designed to be democratic<g> (or there would be chaos), but if there

were to be a vote, I would vote - do not remove NAPD and WAP from the

intro of the group. (I also want to say thanks to everyone that has

supported and enriched this forum over the years)

Janice

[Guest guest]

I second this. I've been looking for a WAP-oriented forum

for a long time, searching through raw food, paleo, low-carb,

no grain, whatever. I think people who are looking for this

should be able to find it.

If you want people who stumble across it to get interested,

that's great too.

Aven

>Some/many of us had or will

> have already discovered WAP (not necessarily the WAPF group) and NAPD

> before discovering this group. Such a population may have been

> specifically looking for a NAPD oriented forum and may actually be

> looking to see that it is MENTIONED in the forum intro.

[Guest guest]

> RE: FROM THE LIST-OWNER - New Group Description & Other

>List Business

>

>

>

>Suze-

>

>>This group was formed to explore Nourishing Traditions and Weston Price's

>>work (which is what Nourishing Traditions is all about). There is not a

>>single mention of Weston Price in your new description. Weston

>Price and his

>>work is the main focus of this group and always has been.

>

>The main focus of the original description was actually NT,

No, it wasn't. There were 2 or 3 lines of text dedicated to NT and 14 lines

dedicated to Weston Price's work. To my mind, clearly the emphasis is on

Weston Price's work.

Here's the original list description:

" We support one another in exploring Sally Fallon's book " Nourishing

Traditions " ,

a wonderful cookbook and guide to wise food choices and to proper

preparation

techniques.

We address the question " How can we achieve radiant health with the

regenerating

food practices of isolated, non-industrialized populations? - the healthiest

people ever studied. "

We consider the influence of a dentist, Dr. Weston Price. From the preface:

" During the 1930's, Dr. Price traveled the world over to observe population

groups untouched by civilization, living entirely on local foods. While the

diets of these peoples differed in many particulars, they contained several

factors in common. Almost, without exception, the groups he studied ate

liberally of seafood or other animal proteins and fats in the form of organ

meats and dairy products; they values animal fats as absolutely necessary to

good health; and they ate fats, meats, fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts,

seeds and whole grains in their whole, unrefined state. All primitive diets

contained some raw foods, of both animal and vegetable origin. "

" Dr. Price found fourteen groups-from isolated Irish and Swiss, from

Eskimos to Africans-in which almost every member of the tribe or village

enjoyed superb health. They were free of chronic disease, dental decay and

mental illness; they were strong, sturdy and attractive; and they produced

healthy children with ease, generation after generation. "

" Nourishing Traditions " is available through " Radiant Life, " a mail order

company that carries products supporting native nutrition and sustainable

living: (888) 593-8333. (A portion of their proceeds go to the Weston A.

Price Foundation: www.WestonAPrice.org/WestonAPrice@....) Amazon.com

also carries the book.

Please note: This is a labor of love; the list moderator derives no income

from any activities of this list. The intent is to create Internet- and

personal community in the moderator's home (the San Francisco Bay area) and

beyond. "

I truly appreciate the work that you're doing with this list and the efforts

to improve the homepage, but I must say this original description is why I

and so many others (1114 people!) joined this list. I do not think BTVC, DG

or any of the other books on the current homepage have a place on this

list's description *unless* you are changing the focus of the list. If you

are, I would be *extremely* disappointed, and I'm certain I wouldn't be

alone in that feeling. What is wrong with the original description aside

from some minor changes to the last two paras?

but I

>did think

>long and hard (well, relatively speaking, anyway <g>) about including NAPD

>in the list despite the 2,000-character limit (which I'm within a few

>characters of hitting, BTW). The reason I didn't is that NAPD is not a

>beginner-friendly book, while the WAPF site is a relatively

>beginner-friendly introduction to his work, and I was trying to keep the

>intro as beginner-friendly as possible. I should probably try to mention

>his work in the intro, though, so I'll see what I can do on that

>front. As

>I mentioned before, I might be moving the resources onto a whole separate

>page anyway, but we'll see. My time is limited, so this will be a gradual

>process.

As mentioned you can suggest that beginners start with " Traditional

Foods are Your Best Medicine " (formerly titled " Native Nutrition " ) by Ron

Schmid which was Ron's translation of NAPD for beginners. But to totally

ignore the book or work of the man that NT and consequently, this forum, is

based on is an eggregious error, IMHO. Also, I honestly don't think any of

these books have a place on the list description, but really do belong on a

separate " Resources " page.

>

>>For obvioius reasons, I think it's good that you mention NT - as it's also

>>foundational to this group. However, I think BTVC has absolutely *nothing*

>>to do with WAP/NT and should not be listed as a book integral to the focus

>>of this list. I know that YOU really like it personally, but I don't think

>>it fits with the theme of this group, other than being one of MANY books

>>that can be modified to work with a WAP-compatible diet. The same goes for

>>Dr. Atkins book - it's got absolutely nothing to do with WAP/NT other than

>>that it can be modified to fit the WAP/NT paradigm like so many other diet

>>plans. The same critique holds for " Dangerous Grains " .

>

>You might be right about BTVC. I'm not sure. But like it or not,

>low-carbing has become central to this list, even though not everyone on

>the list low-carbs and low-carbing isn't a requirement of NT/WAP-style

>eating. Atkins provided an introductory endorsement to NT, and though

>Sally doesn't generally discuss it, she does acknowledge that for some

>people, low-carb high-fat eating is a necessity. And while I have some

>substantial disagreements with " Dangerous Grains " , there's no

>question that

>gluten-free eating has become a similarly popular focus of this group. I

>admit I put BTVC up partly as what I consider a necessary companion and

>counterpart to " Dangerous Grains " , but while I don't think the SCD is as

>popular as gluten freedom is on this list, I do think it has

>something of a

>following.

>

>Of course, I could be wrong. That's why I solicited comments.

But, but, but NONE of these have anything to do with Price's work and NT! As

others have mentioned they are about macronutrient ratios that are currently

trendy and in the case of BTVC and DG, they discuss problems that *some*

people have with specific dietary items. These are NOT WAP/NT books by any

stretch of the imagination. And is the list description going to change

everytime some new dietary trend becomes *popular*??? I'm not saying these

books are bad or should not be discussed or anything of that nature, I'm

just saying they don't belong on the homepage of a list called NATIVE

nutrition dedicated to *WAP/NT* principles. Additionally, looking at the

homepage, BTVC is given more text than the WAPF! It's given an unjustifiable

amount of weight, IMO. I think you accused of wanting the homepage

to reflect his own viewpoint, but when I look at the current homepage I see

Idol's viewpoint looking at me, NOT the a description of a list

dedicated to WAP/NT principles as the original list description was.

Additionally, only a few people agreed with your changes, while clearly the

vast majority who've spoken have resoundingly asked that it go back to a

WAP/NT focus as it's had since its inception. If this were open to a vote,

we would've outvoted you by a large margin. But we can't do anything but

express our opinions and hope you listen. Maybe a poll would be in order?

>

>> So, my suggestion is to add NAPD, and drop

>>mention of all the others except NT in the group description.

>

>That's not going to accurately characterize the actual group, rather than

>perhaps the theoretical one you'd be interested in,

Um...that is the group description under which 1114 people have subscribed

to this group. It has always been the foundational focus of this group. I

don't at all see it as " theoretical " . Of course we discuss many other

nutritional issues such as gluten intolerance, low carbing etc, but they're

discussed within the WAP/NT context. Unless you are saying this group's

focus is no longer WAP/NT, I think these are the only appropriate works to

mention in the list *description*, although I do think the others *should*

be mentioned in a separate resource list.

and although there are

>limits to how far I'd be willing to see the group diverge from its WAP

>orientation (you'll notice I didn't mention the POLITICS tag, or politics

>generally, in the new intro!) I'm also not interested in ivory tower

>inaccuracy.

What suggestion of mine are you labeling as " ivory tower inaccuracy " ?

>

>> *However* I'd

>>suggest putting all these books and many other related ones in a

>file in the

>>files section AND to send out this list of books to all newcomers upon

>>subscription.

>

>Hmm, send it out to all newcomers? Interesting idea. I'll definitely

>consider that.

>

>Thanks for your post, Suze. Definitely food for thought.

Well, you know me - when I have an opinion I'm not shy expressing it! <g>

But seriously, I DO very much appreciate your work with this list since

taking over from Sol, but *please* do listen to us about changing the list's

description and focus. Thank you :-)

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

" The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

>

[Guest guest]

>I have to agree with both of the posters that the list should stick more

>closely to WAPF principles rather than the gluten-free, etc. tangents.

>Not that they aren't important, but not all of us have gluten

>intolerance, we just want to eat healthier, which may include some

>grains that are properly prepared. I love all the information and

>recipes I'm getting BTW.

>

>Kristi

Actually, I think if Price were alive today he'd be wondering how

much of the affect he found in his photos WAS due to gluten intolerance.

Introducing wheat to isolated peoples has a massive effect on their

health, as documented in more recent times, and much of the effect

is exactly what he noticed (lack of enamel on teeth especially).

I know that in this day and age wheat is an accepted food, but when

it was introduced it was every bit as problematic as soy is now,

and it probably is a real negative to about 1/3 of the population.

No one in Price's day could imagine that as a possibility, because

the science wasn't there yet. But it is definitely in line with the

stuff he was studying. (actually he didn't study soy either, no one

was eating it much back then).

That said, I do feel I go on about gluten too much sometimes ...

it's hard to strike a balance when people have symptoms that

likely *are* gluten related and the stuff is so toxic to some people.

Lists like this tend to attract the " constantly ill " , which most gluten

intolerant folks are. And personally I DO think a diet can include

some grains, just not wheat/barley/rye for some folks (there are

lots and lots of other grains!).

Heidi Jean

[Guest guest]

I'm in the midst of reading this thread, and have just stopped to read the

new intro.

I think the first paragraph is great, and think the linquistic craft is

excellent.

On the other hand, I don't like the recommended reading list at all. I'm

with , Suze, Jackie, and others here. While the reading list is good as

a

summary of books and material *discussed* on the list, it does not represent

a common point of origin from which each of us list members departs in our

discussion of such material, which is what it should be.

If the intro is designed to give people a summary of *what is discussed*,

then it should list books on libertarianism and other political subjects, and

should even include books on veganism like _Diet For a New America_. When we

discuss various subjects such as low-carb diets or politics or whatever, we'd

always justified it as topical in part by the fact that we had a common tie in

departing from a specific theoretical origin that framed the context of our

discussions, and that origin was/is the work of Weston Price and the

elaborations

of the Weston A Price Foundation. If the intro fails to make the WAPF, WAP,

and NT central defining texts of the list, then we will lose that.

If the variety of books currently listed is presented as a general

representation of what we are about, then this will fundamentally change the

nature of

the list. While many of us will discuss, say, _BTVC_ or _DG_, what differs us

from many other lists that would discuss these topics is that we all discuss

these books within the context framed by our common theoretical point of

origin, Weston Price's work, whereas people on a different list might discuss

_DG_

with nothing in common with each other than that they discuss gluten topics, or

_BTVC_ with nothing in common other than they practice the SCD. We are

clearly a fundamentally different list in two respects: 1) we DO have

fundamental

commonalities unrelated to, e.g., the SCD and 2) we do NOT necessarily practice

or condone the SCD (or gluten-free, etc).

The list intro should maintain the *CENTRALITY* of Weston Price's work, and

should relegate any other material to a topic of discussion, clearly

distinguished from a definitional characteristic, or else the nature of the list

will in

my eyes be changed from what it has been and currently is.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/8/04 10:29:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

Idol@... writes:

You might be right about BTVC. I'm not sure. But like it or not,

low-carbing has become central to this list, even though not everyone on

the list low-carbs and low-carbing isn't a requirement of NT/WAP-style

eating. Atkins provided an introductory endorsement to NT, and though

Sally doesn't generally discuss it, she does acknowledge that for some

people, low-carb high-fat eating is a necessity. And while I have some

substantial disagreements with " Dangerous Grains " , there's no question that

gluten-free eating has become a similarly popular focus of this group. I

admit I put BTVC up partly as what I consider a necessary companion and

counterpart to " Dangerous Grains " , but while I don't think the SCD is as

popular as gluten freedom is on this list, I do think it has something of a

following.

_____

~~~~~> Hi ,

But given that these are clearly not commonalities of the list in toto, but

clearly supplemental, why bother having the recommended reading list in the

intro? Not only would it more clearly delineate the principles central to the

list, but it would also help you elaborate more within the word limit to move

the recommended reading list to the " files " section and simply link to it in the

intro.

Chris

[Guest guest]

> Here's the original list description:

>

> " We support one another in exploring Sally Fallon's book " Nourishing

> Traditions " , a wonderful cookbook and guide to wise food choices and to proper

> preparation techniques.

>

For anyone who would like to view the original homepage Google has it cached:

http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:q0p9RKFlOnoJ:health./group/\

/

Bruce

[Guest guest]

I was just looking at a chart (I think it was on the

Price-Pottenger web site) that showed the

incidence of dental caries for various groups

Price studied. The Swiss (dairy & rye) had a much higher

incidence than the Eskimos (raw fish & blubber) or the

Masai (meat & milk). Of course they were still much,

much healthier than modern folks, but it made me

wonder if perhaps rye is not an ideal food.

Aven

> Actually, I think if Price were alive today he'd be wondering how

> much of the affect he found in his photos WAS due to gluten intolerance.

[Guest guest]

Garden of Eating recommends against grain consumption for this reason.

Elaine

> I was just looking at a chart (I think it was on the

> Price-Pottenger web site) that showed the

> incidence of dental caries for various groups

> Price studied. The Swiss (dairy & rye) had a much higher

> incidence than the Eskimos (raw fish & blubber) or the

> Masai (meat & milk). Of course they were still much,

> much healthier than modern folks, but it made me

> wonder if perhaps rye is not an ideal food.