RAW MATERIALS, VEGETARIANSHIP, SEPARATE FOOD – IS IT WANT TO KEEP THESE FOOD SYSTEMS?
How to eat in order not to get sick and always stay healthy – such a question is often asked by those who have either become ill with something, or are trying to lead a healthy lifestyle, but still do not know how to do it right.
There are a lot of healthy eating systems, and to list all of them you need to write a new Big Encyclopedia. But there are three most well-known nutritional schemes, which are most often paid attention to those who think about the contents of their own plate:
● Raw food diet
● Separate food
Definition of Terms
Before starting a discussion of the three named human nutrition systems, it is necessary to determine the meaning of each term in order to avoid ambiguities and misunderstandings.
Raw food diet – a food system that completely eliminates any heat treatment of food in order to maximize the preservation of the nutritional value of products.
Vegetarianism is a food system that involves a complete rejection of food of direct animal origin (meat of animals or birds, fish and seafood).
Separate nutrition is a nutritional concept that states that different groups of products (protein, carbohydrate and fat-containing foods) cannot be fully digested and absorbed when used together.
Raw food diet
If we discard the various philosophical layers that a raw food diet often overgrows, the purpose of the system is simple – return to the “sources” when a person ate the natural food that Nature gave him, without destroying the nutrients by cooking, frying and other types of cooking.
It is noteworthy that within 1-2 weeks after adhering to such a diet, a person notes an unprecedented surge of strength. Tibetan Ayurveda explains this effect as a powerful cleansing that begins after refusing heat-treated foods. But as soon as the cleansing is completed, the raw foodman is faced with the first problems of his diet – protein and carbohydrate hunger.
Carbohydrates from raw foods are absorbed significantly worse than from thermally processed foods, and therefore, if a raw foodist maintains high motor activity, a lack of energy can be acute.
The protein problem is partially solved by nuts or fresh milk, but in some cases this is not enough to cover the urgent needs of the body. If the optimal balance is not found, protein starvation develops with all the ensuing consequences.
Thus, the transition to raw food diet is normally perceived only by people with very low physical activity. For the rest, this scheme is burdensome due to its protein-energy inferiority.
Perhaps the most controversial and controversial food system. Talk about the benefits or dangers of vegetarianism can only be very conditional. There are countries where residents eat a lot of meat food, but do not show sky-high mortality – for example, the Americans, where according to statistics each person accounts for about 120 kg of meat consumption per year. But there is the same India, where the majority of the population does not eat animal food for religious reasons, but also does not show a tendency to extinction.
Real practice shows that a person can really do completely without meat food, while maintaining the usefulness of his physical and intellectual activity. On the other hand, the lifespan of vegetarians is generally similar to those who do not deny themselves meat.
One of the arguments in favor of a vegetarian diet is statistics that excluding meat from a diet significantly reduces the risk of developing cardiovascular and oncological diseases, as well as various metabolic disorders, such as diabetes. But these figures only slightly differ from those who consume meat moderately, without giving up 100% of it.
Thus, we can confidently talk only about the unambiguous harm of excessive eating of animal food, but the value of a complete rejection of meat remains controversial.
Conceptually, this theory is untenable because the digestive enzymes secreted by the pancreas are aimed at breaking down all groups of nutrients – proteins, fats, and carbohydrates. This means that the division of food into groups (protein, carbohydrate, fat) and its separate consumption does not contribute to better digestion. Digestive enzymes equally successfully break down both proteins eaten simultaneously with carbohydrates (meat and potatoes), and the so-called “pure” proteins (a piece of bacon).
And yet, many of those who began to adhere to separate nutrition, note an improvement in well-being. The reason for this is not the system itself, but the fact that a person finally began to monitor his own diet and stopped both overeating and “biting” in between meals, simply because it would be impossible to ensure a full-fledged diet otherwise.