Re: Maker's Diet vs NT

[Guest guest]

Is Dr. Rubin advocating a Kosher-type diet? Or is he concerned with parasites

and contamination? These could accout for the ban on shellfish and pork.

Marilyn

[Guest guest]

>>In The Maker's Diet, Jordan Rubin says to avoid pork and shellfish. Can

anyone who has read this comment on this? Thanks!

Connie Bernard<<

~~~I don't know if this is 's reasoning, but supposedly both shellfish and

pork are likely to be more infected with deleterious organisms than other meats.

Typically, I don't eat either one, but don't avoid them either, if I am dining

outside my home.

Carol

[Guest guest]

> First, I'd say it's not Maker's Diet vs. NT because Sally also says to

> avoid shellfish (except shrimp) and try to avoid pork. She says that

> she can't prove that pork is bad for you, but studies sort of show it

> as doing something weird to the body that other meats don't do. Now

> there's a scientific explanation for you. :-P - Steph

You're right. I hadn't thought of that. I don't think she has one pork

recipe either. I understand pigs are genetically very close to humans

as well. We share many diseases. I used to shun pork, but I do have

some occasionally after years of vegetarianism.

Deanna

[Guest guest]

Well, before anyone starts an argument with me, I'll just respond to myself.

:-)

I went back to NT to find those references to pork and shellfish, and I guess I

was a bit off about what Sally says. She does say to avoid the overconsumption

of shellfish. She mentions on page 158 (revised edition), " One objection

against shrimp consumption is that, as the shrimp is a scavenger, shrimp meat is

likely to carry toxins. According to the naturopath Jack Tips, toxins are

quickly eliminated from shrimp's tissue, and shrimp protein is particularly easy

to digest. "

On pork, page 32:

" Two types of meat require further discussion - pork and shellfish.

Investigation into the effects of pork consumption on blood chemistry has

revealed serious changes for several hours after pork is consumed. The pork

used was organic, free of trichinosis, so the changes that occurred in the blood

were due to some other factor, possibly a protein unique to pork. In the

laboratory, pork is one of the best mediums for feeding the growth of cancer

cells. the prohibitions against pork found in the Bible and the Koran thus may

derive from something other than a concern for parasite contamination. However,

in fairness it must be noted that many groups noted for longevity, such as the

inhabitants of Soviet Georgia and Okinawa, consume prok meat and lard in their

diet on a daily basis. Lard is an excellent source of vitamin D. "

Steph

" First, I'd say it's not Maker's Diet vs. NT because Sally also says to avoid

shellfish (except shrimp) and try to avoid pork. She says that she can't prove

that pork is bad for you, but studies sort of show it as doing something weird

to the body that other meats don't do. Now there's a scientific explanation for

you. :-P

Rubin's reasoning is mostly Biblical - he's a Messianic Jew. But, if you look

at the list of animals that God said not to eat, they are primarily scavengers.

Pigs will eat a dead animal no matter what it died from - even some disease that

can be passed on. Shellfish are bottom feeders, eating what the other fish

leave behind and expel. I believe that perhaps the two also don't have very

efficient systems for expelling all this junk out of their own bodies - another

good, scientific description.

HTH. Steph :-)

" In The Maker's Diet, Jordan Rubin says to avoid pork and shellfish. Can

anyone who has read this comment on this? Thanks!

Connie Bernard " "

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " Connie Bernard "

> In The Maker's Diet, Jordan Rubin says to avoid pork and shellfish. Can

> anyone who has read this comment on this?

He's Jewish and these foods aren't kosher.

--s

[Guest guest]

Steph-

>First, I'd say it's not Maker's Diet vs. NT because Sally also says to

>avoid shellfish (except shrimp)

She does? She has a recipe for crab cakes in NT...

-

[Guest guest]

Connie,

I can't say for sure,

but the Bible does state that pig is a creature not for us to eat.

Cloven of hoof AND chews the cud only. It also warns against any

creature from the sea at one point, so maybe that explains the

shellfish. as time progresses, God -the Bible- states more foods that

we are then allowed to consume.

For instance, animals were not meant for humans to eat until after the

great flood. Before the flood, we were only to be caretakers for them.

Just a small study on the Bible.

L.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:55:24 -0600, Connie Bernard <cc-bernard@...> wrote:

> In The Maker's Diet, Jordan Rubin says to avoid pork and shellfish. Can

> anyone who has read this comment on this? Thanks!

>

> Connie Bernard

[Guest guest]

This is interesting, . Most Jews follow the covenant and its

various laws, including dietary ones. But, since I don't want to

generalize too much, only Orthodox Jews strictly follow them.

Conservative Jews, Reform Jews and Reconstructionist Jews are more

liberal in their interpretation of the halachah, and are listed here in

order of their strict adherence to liberal (cmiiw, I am not Jewish).

For this latter group of three, the law is living and growing to meet

new needs and circumstances. So some Jews do eat shellfish, but I don't

think many eat pork.

Somewhere on WAPF site, I have seen economic reasons for the dietary

rules; not just in Judaism, but Hinduism and other religions as well.

Religions were powerful in ancient times. Eating pigs that ate wheat

was not as economical as eating the wheat directly. Hence, a ban on

it. Other cloven food animals that don't chew the cud, I don't know why

they would be excluded, but maybe because they don't graze and had to be

fed crops. In Hinduism, cows gave milk and dung, which for them was

more vital to society than the meat. Thus, cows are sacred in Hindu

faith and not eaten.

But then, weren't all animals acceptable to eat after Christ's

resurrection? Didn't the New Covenant change all of that? Biblically,

in Acts 10, the apostle sees a sheet come down with all sorts of

beasts.

Acts 10:13 (KJV): And there came a voice to him, Rise, ; kill, and

eat.

This was symbolic, of course. The apostle goes on to speak quite a

bit about food in his travels, along with circumcision and other

practices that Jews partake in, but Christians may or may not.

Colossians 2:16 (KJV): Let no man therefore judge you in meat or drink,

or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath.

Deanna

Lillig wrote:

> Connie,

> I can't say for sure,

> but the Bible does state that pig is a creature not for us to eat.

> Cloven of hoof AND chews the cud only. It also warns against any

> creature from the sea at one point, so maybe that explains the

> shellfish. as time progresses, God -the Bible- states more foods that

> we are then allowed to consume.

> For instance, animals were not meant for humans to eat until after the

> great flood. Before the flood, we were only to be caretakers for them.

> Just a small study on the Bible.

> L.

>

>

> On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:55:24 -0600, Connie Bernard

> <cc-bernard@...> wrote:

> > In The Maker's Diet, Jordan Rubin says to avoid pork and shellfish. Can

> > anyone who has read this comment on this? Thanks!

> >

> > Connie Bernard

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, that is very true...

but have you ever looked at how the average age range changes at

different points and compared that to what the were " allowed " to eat?

L.

>

> But then, weren't all animals acceptable to eat after Christ's

> resurrection? Didn't the New Covenant change all of that?

[Guest guest]

The comment about pigs is Biblically correct; the seafood descriptive is that

permitted seafood have both fins and scales.

Rebekah

Re: Maker's Diet vs NT

Connie,

I can't say for sure,

but the Bible does state that pig is a creature not for us to eat.

Cloven of hoof AND chews the cud only. It also warns against any

creature from the sea at one point, so maybe that explains the

shellfish. as time progresses, God -the Bible- states more foods that

we are then allowed to consume.

For instance, animals were not meant for humans to eat until after the

great flood. Before the flood, we were only to be caretakers for them.

Just a small study on the Bible.

L.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:55:24 -0600, Connie Bernard <cc-bernard@...> wrote:

> In The Maker's Diet, Jordan Rubin says to avoid pork and shellfish. Can

> anyone who has read this comment on this? Thanks!

>

> Connie Bernard

[Guest guest]

Thank you Rebekah!

I couldn't remember... I just don't like fish! So it is not a problem

for me to not eat it. On the other hand, my dd (among her various food

sensitivites/addictions) is always trying to get pig! So, it has been

a point under discussion since she was old enough to reasonably debate

why she should be allowed to eat certain things! Ah well, at least she

is interested in what effects different foods have on her and why

there are foods we don't eat that " everyone else does " !

Catz

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:30:45 -0500, Rebekah Dowd <rmdowd13@...> wrote:

> The comment about pigs is Biblically correct; the seafood descriptive is

> that permitted seafood have both fins and scales.

>

> Rebekah

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:55:23 -0500

" Suzanne Noakes " <snoakes@...> wrote:

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: " Connie Bernard "

>

>

> > In The Maker's Diet, Jordan Rubin says to avoid pork and shellfish. Can

> > anyone who has read this comment on this?

>

> He's Jewish and these foods aren't kosher.

>

> --s

For the record, he is a professing Christian (although Jewish by birth)

and he speaks against these foods because they are prohibited in the

Mosaic dietary laws as being unclean, thus the title, " The Makers Diet. "

That said the Biblical record is such that mankind was originally vegan

and possibly vegetarian. That after the flood all things were allowed to

be eaten, even foods that were labeled unclean for ritualistic purposes.

Under the Mosaic covenant these unclean foods were prohibited for

consumption. In the New Testament that prohibition is once again removed

as during the Noahic covenant, and it would appear that at some future

date mankind will be vegan/vegetarian once again.

There are many reasons why those foods were labeled as such even before

they were prohibited from the diet, but one is that they were literally

unclean, that is they *could* be more dangerous than many other foods

and often were..

On the other hand, they can be used, if judiciously handled, for the

promotion and even building of health.

So you won't go wrong following Rubin's advice, and he is taking WAP to

the masses, but you won't go wrong ignoring either, IMO.

However I have always been interested in that reference in NT

(Nourishing Traditions) about the study linking pork with creating a

precancerous state in the blood. So I reserve the right to change my

mind upon further evidence, lol!

" Scholarship is essentially confirming your early paranoia through

a deeper factual analysis. "

Murray Rothbard

" Vegetarians, come away from The Dark Side.

Pork is the other white meat; beef is what’s for dinner;

and a day without pepper-crusted venison tenderloin is

like a day without sunshine. "

Brad Edmonds

[Guest guest]

-

>However I have always been interested in that reference in NT

>(Nourishing Traditions) about the study linking pork with creating a

>precancerous state in the blood. So I reserve the right to change my

>mind upon further evidence, lol!

My strong suspicion is that this phenomenon is related entirely to the

modern industrial practice of feeding factory farm pigs the worst

imaginable garbage -- used fryer oil being a leading example, though it's

not the worst. I don't have any hard, systematic evidence to back this up,

but there were healthy indigenous peoples who ate lots of fatty pork, and

no other food animals are fed anything remotely as noxious as what pigs get.

-

[Guest guest]

wrote-

>>>However I have always been interested in that reference in NT

>>>(Nourishing Traditions) about the study linking pork with creating a

>>>precancerous state in the blood.

Idol wrote:

>My strong suspicion is that this phenomenon is related entirely to the

>modern industrial practice of feeding factory farm pigs the worst

>imaginable garbage -- used fryer oil being a leading example, though it's

>not the worst.

** This is what I am thinking. Also, I noticed statement on the side of my

package of Beeler's Bacon that said that they don't use commercial bogs or

sludge or something to that effect. (I can't find a package here to verify

exactly what it says and I bet I am getting the terminology wrong.) The

Beeler's web site does not mention this anywhere.

**I also get pork from my grass fed beef farmer and he is really adhering to

the highest standards with his beef. He says he feeds the hogs no grain

except a tiny handful when he needs to call them.

**I'd like to see more info on pork and it's nutritional profile and on the

nutritional profile of pork meat from hogs raised by various methods.

That's why I asked this question in the first place; not because I was

particularly interested in old testament vs. new testament dogma about the

" cleanliness " and spiritual appropriateness of consuming any particular

animal flesh.

Connie Bernard

http://www.PandoraPads.com

Organic Cotton Feminine Pads, Tampons, Nursing Pads,

Natural Progesterone Cream, and Children's Supplements. 

On-line Discount Voucher: NN242G223

[Guest guest]

Connie-

>**I'd like to see more info on pork and it's nutritional profile and on the

>nutritional profile of pork meat from hogs raised by various methods.

Unfortunately I've been unable to find it for at least a year, but at one

point I came across a fascinating site with detailed information on the

correlation between the lipid profiles of pigs and the nature of their

feeds. Not being ruminants, their fat largely resembles the fats they eat,

so different feeds really make a big difference.

-

[Guest guest]

>**I'd like to see more info on pork and it's nutritional profile and on the

>nutritional profile of pork meat from hogs raised by various methods.

>That's why I asked this question in the first place; not because I was

>particularly interested in old testament vs. new testament dogma about the

> " cleanliness " and spiritual appropriateness of consuming any particular

>animal flesh.

Traditionally, hogs were raised by a variety of methods, which may be

why some religions regard them as unclean. For folks living in

the wilderness, the hogs could scavenge fairly good stuff. But

hogs were usually kept in the city also, rooting in the streets, where

they ate such appetizing stuff as dung from various animals (including

human), garbage thrown out the window, and dead animals (and in

some places, dead people), and rats.

When wild hogs were finally banned in the US, one main objection

was that the hogs provided free food for poor folks. The hogs

were also the main street cleaners, I think. Said hogs probably were

vectors for all kinds of diseases, since viruses can pass pretty

easily between pigs and people, AND the pigs pick up viruses

from other animals easily too. In fact, that is where the new

strains of flu appear to come from each year: the hogs in

China are kept with waterfowl. The hogs pick up waterfowl

flu, and it modifies in the hog, and becomes transmissible to

people.

Orthodox Jewish folks tell me that the Mosaic laws have nothing to do

with health, just purification for God. But on either count, eating an

animal that commonly eats dead rats and human excrement would NOT

seem to be " a good thing " !

(Note that this does not apply to hogs kept in cleaner conditions ...)

http://www.cet.nau.edu/Projects/WDP/resources/History/History.htm

Moving back to the Mediterranean cultures, we see developments in waste

treatment technologies. In the Egyptian city of Herakopolis (B.C.E. 2100), the

average person treated their wastes much like those in Ur, they threw the wastes

into the streets. However, “in the elite and religious quarters, there was a

deliberate effort made to remove all wastes, organic and inorganic to locations

outside the living and/or communal areas, which usually meant the rivers.”

There is also religious teachings that dealt with waste. Mosaic law (B.C.E.

1300) tells “to remove his own refuse and bury it in the earth.” Nehemiah tells

of rebuilding Jerusalem where there was a refuse gate where the city wastes were

to be dumped. And the Talmud called for the streets of Jerusalem to be washed

daily (Savas, 1977:12).

The Minoan Culture on the Island of Crete between 1500-1700 B.C.E. had a highly

developed waste management system. They had very advanced plumbing and designed

places to dispose of organic wastes. Knossos, the capital city, had a central

courtyard with baths that were filled and emptied using terra-cotta pipes. This

piping system is similar to techniques used today. They had flushing toilets,

with wooden seats and an overhead reservoir. “Excavations reveal four large

separate drainage systems that emptied into large sewers built of stone.” The

Minoan royals were the last group to use flushing toilets until the

re-development of that technology in 1596 (Kahn, 2000: 119-120).

Heidi Jean

The trouble with the world is that the

stupid are cocksure and the

intelligent are full of doubt. -Bertrand

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/26/04 11:52:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,

Idol@... writes:

> >First, I'd say it's not Maker's Diet vs. NT because Sally also says to

> >avoid shellfish (except shrimp)

>

> She does? She has a recipe for crab cakes in NT...

____

~~~> All I've heard from Sally is that shellfish are excellent foods. She

highly recommends oysters, and says they are best eaten raw but she hates them

raw and eats them fried.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/27/04 12:04:41 AM Eastern Standard Time,

catzandturtles@... writes:

> I can't say for sure,

> but the Bible does state that pig is a creature not for us to eat.

> Cloven of hoof AND chews the cud only. It also warns against any

> creature from the sea at one point, so maybe that explains the

> shellfish. as time progresses, God -the Bible- states more foods that

> we are then allowed to consume.

> For instance, animals were not meant for humans to eat until after the

> great flood. Before the flood, we were only to be caretakers for them.

> Just a small study on the Bible.

_____

~~~> All of those restrictions are part of the Mosaic law. In the Old

Testament, there are increasing restrictions over time, after the flood. God

said

to Noah, " As I gave you the green plants for food, I now give you everything, "

meaning all animal foods. Christians usually interpret 's vision where

he was instructed to kill and eat unclean animals, and told not to call

" unclean " what God has cleansed, as lifting the restrictions of the Mosaic law.

Chris

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/9/2004 9:03:44 PM Central Standard Time,

writes:

just thought i'd comment as a Christian i realize that many OT laws are no

longer binding-however that doesn't mean they aren't helpful...surely i am not

only one who think that those laws many of which weren't proven to have

scientific benefits until the last 100 years. when did we learn for example that

babies don't have blood clotting properties until they are 8 days old? and

Biblically they aren't supposed to be circumcised until the 8th day.

or how about the teachings on living in a leaperous (moldy) house? i'm sure

most of us have read about the effects of mold on our health

shellfish taste good but they absorb toxicities at much higher rates than

other fish..they also spoil incredibly easily. people can die from contaminated

shellfish...pork can be kept clean, but pigs themselves can contract viruses

from other animals, mutate them and pass them on to humans. it's *normal* for

pork to have worms. if you leave pork sitting at room temp in a plastic bag

you will see them in a few days. this isn't the case with beef or even

chicken. catfish (and " unclean " fish) are known to die when pesticides from

surrounding areas flow into ponds-they are cleaning the water. shrimp are also

amazing at purifying water. both store the toxins cleaned in their systems

which

people eat.

anyhoo, i certainly would never desire to forve my beliefs or preferences on

anyone, but had to comment as someone said he felt this way because he was

jewish. i'm not jewish, but can see why someone would want to follow OT laws in

areas such as these. just my $0.02 for what its worth

in Christ,

stefanie

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/27/04 12:04:41 AM Eastern Standard Time,

catzandturtles@... writes:

> I can't say for sure,

> but the Bible does state that pig is a creature not for us to eat.

> Cloven of hoof AND chews the cud only. It also warns against any

> creature from the sea at one point, so maybe that explains the

> shellfish. as time progresses, God -the Bible- states more foods that

> we are then allowed to consume.

> For instance, animals were not meant for humans to eat until after the

> great flood. Before the flood, we were only to be caretakers for them.

> Just a small study on the Bible.

_____

~~~> All of those restrictions are part of the Mosaic law. In the Old

Testament, there are increasing restrictions over time, after the flood. God

said

to Noah, " As I gave you the green plants for food, I now give you everything, "

meaning all animal foods. Christians usually interpret 's vision where

he was instructed to kill and eat unclean animals, and told not to call

" unclean " what God has cleansed, as lifting the restrictions of the Mosaic

law.

Chris

Which is a really interesting assumption, to me, because in that passage God

was using the analogy of food to try to get to go visit a group of

Gentiles to proselyte them for Christ. God wasn't explicitly teaching to

discontinue the Mosaic food laws, but to change his racial bias, and socialize

with non-Jews ! I guess it goes to show that religious documents can be

interpreted many ways by many people.

Rebekah

[Guest guest]

Isn't it possible to raise pigs without feeding them garbage???

In the wild, away from man and his garbage and " dungheaps " , what do

they eat?

--- In , Idol <Idol@c...>

wrote:

> -

>

> >However I have always been interested in that reference in NT

> >(Nourishing Traditions) about the study linking pork with creating

a

> >precancerous state in the blood. So I reserve the right to change

my

> >mind upon further evidence, lol!

>

> My strong suspicion is that this phenomenon is related entirely to

the

> modern industrial practice of feeding factory farm pigs the worst

> imaginable garbage -- used fryer oil being a leading example,

though it's

> not the worst. I don't have any hard, systematic evidence to back

this up,

> but there were healthy indigenous peoples who ate lots of fatty

pork, and

> no other food animals are fed anything remotely as noxious as what

pigs get.

>

>

>

>

> -

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 20:53:46 -0000, <toyotaokiec@...> wrote:

>

>

> Isn't it possible to raise pigs without feeding them garbage???

>

> In the wild, away from man and his garbage and " dungheaps " , what do

> they eat?

Truffles, of course!

B.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

-

>Isn't it possible to raise pigs without feeding them garbage???

>

>In the wild, away from man and his garbage and " dungheaps " , what do

>they eat?

Of course it's possible! And I regularly buy pork from organic producers

who pasture their pigs and feed them at least relatively decent stuff.

Wild boars are omnivores and eat all sorts of things -- roots, tubers,

fruits, nuts, insects, lizards, small animals, carrion, mushrooms...

probably other things I'm forgetting. Unfortunately, I've yet to find pork

producers who fatten their pigs on roots and tubers (they all seem to use

grains and/or legumes) but hope springs eternal. Or maybe someday I'll

have to raise my own pigs.

-