Stop the Madness: Vegans Keep Killing Their Kids

A Juxtaposition: The spotting of a nutritionally fraudulent counterfeit

Last evening I was contemplating yet another post on the nutritional inadequacy of a vegan diet, particularly a raw vegan diet and even more particularly: a raw, fruitarian vegan diet. As you know, there’s an upcoming debate with just such a fruitarian vegan, Harley Johnstone, AKA Durianrider, and it will be hosted by Steven Prussack of Raw Vegan Radio. While I haven’t received a firm date yet, the latest proposal was for April 7, 2011 at 6:00 pm PST.

I know that a lot of my readers wonder why I keep banging this drum. It’s simple. It’s fun, it’s pretty easy — which I guess makes me a bit of a bully — but most importantly is that for well over a year, the weekly blog stats report I get consistently shows vegetarian and vegan themes and search terms at the top, and by a large margin over any other single category. For some reason, Google keeps sending a lot of people looking for information on vegetarianism and veganism over here, so who am I to argue? I’ll just keep giving them what they probably don’t want to hear.

But what got me to thinking about doing another post in the first place was a certain juxtaposition. Someone forwarded me a link to the latest video of a NovNat nature seminar, put on by my good friends Erwan Le Corre and Vic Verdier. While I did the one in West Virginia last summer, this one was in Thailand around the time of the holidays. I had considered going and taking Beatrice along; and now, seeing this video, I sorely regret that I didn’t just make it happen. It’s been way too long since I spent time in that wonderful country (1991) and life’s just too fuckin’ short to not Just Do It, sometimes.

It’s said that the best way to spot a counterfeit, a fraud, is to become very familiar with the real thing. Here’s the real thing. Look at the impressive body composition partout. Look at the feats of strength and skilled technique. Look at the Paleo-styled nourishment that makes it not only possible, but probable — or even a sure bet. Take a good long look at this short video and sear into your mind what and how real humans ought to look like, how they ought to move over land and in the water, and what they need in terms of nutrition to accomplish all — and do make sure to select your resolution at 480p once the video starts.

So, you got that? Now, here, spot the counterfeit. I’ve blogged it before, the latest recently, but this is undoubtedly the best context in which to present it.

Now I find it interesting how Harley kicks off this video talking about how this raw fruitarian vegan diet is so "health" promoting. Really? Then how come I keep reading about the death of infants and children at the hands of their vegan parents? The latest, emailed to me by a number of readers just this morning and is what motivated me to go ahead with this post: French vegans in dock over baby’s death.

Two vegans who fed their 11-month-old daughter only mother’s milk went on trial in northern France on Tuesday charged with neglect after their baby died suffering from vitamin deficiency.

Sergine and Joel Le Moaligou, whose vegan diet forbids consuming any animal product including eggs and cow’s milk, called the emergency services in March 2008 after becoming worried about their baby Louise’s listlessness.

When the ambulance arrived at their home in Saint-Maulvis, a small village 150 kilometres (90 miles) north of Paris, the baby was already dead.

The ambulance workers called the police because the child was pale and thin, weighing 5.7 kilos (12.5 pounds) compared to an average eight kilos for her age.

The baby had only been fed on the milk of her mother, who was aged 37 at the time.

An autopsy showed that Louise was suffering from a vitamin A and B12 deficiency which experts say increases a child’s sensitivity to infection and can be due to an unbalanced diet.

What’s perhaps a bit unique and stands out about this story compared to many others I’ve seen is this, again from the article:

"The problem of vitamin B12 deficiency could be linked to the mother’s diet," said Anne-Laure Sandretto, deputy prosecutor in the city of Amiens where the trial is taking place.

Ya think? See, in other cases I’ve read about, the baby dies because it’s being fed soy milk and fruit juice, or other such nutritionally bankrupt crap. In this case, however, the parents at least had "sense enough" to understand that a new human requires animal products absolutely and exclusively, i.e., milk from its own animal mother. Now what motivates the leap in "logic" to then conclude that at some point, what made the new human grow and attain vibrant health in the first place — animal nutrition — is what will later kill them is, well, incomprehensible and I’ll just leave it at that. It’s just too stupid and ignorant to even attempt to unpack.

So what you have here is that there’s essentially little to no way to grow a baby if you’re a vegan. Not only does it have to have animal products, ideally mother’s milk, or barely satisfactory: a formula fortified with adequate nutrition; but that if the former, the mother needs to be adequately nourished, ideally with animal products or, barely satisfactory: highly supplemented with things such as vitamin A and B12.

And this is a natural human diet? This is an ideal diet for health? My God, what level of cognitive dissonance it must require to believe that. Do you need to watch that first video, again?

Here’s Nina Plank in a New York Times piece from a few years back: Death by Veganism.

WHEN Crown Shakur died of starvation, he was 6 weeks old and weighed 3.5 pounds. His vegan parents, who fed him mainly soy milk and apple juice, were convicted in Atlanta recently of murder, involuntary manslaughter and cruelty. …

I was once a vegan. But well before I became pregnant, I concluded that a vegan pregnancy was irresponsible. You cannot create and nourish a robust baby merely on foods from plants.

Indigenous cuisines offer clues about what humans, naturally omnivorous, need to survive, reproduce and grow: traditional vegetarian diets, as in India, invariably include dairy and eggs for complete protein, essential fats and vitamins. There are no vegan societies for a simple reason: a vegan diet is not adequate in the long run.

Protein deficiency is one danger of a vegan diet for babies. Nutritionists used to speak of proteins as “first class” (from meat, fish, eggs and milk) and “second class” (from plants), but today this is considered denigrating to vegetarians.

The fact remains, though, that humans prefer animal proteins and fats to cereals and tubers, because they contain all the essential amino acids needed for life in the right ratio. This is not true of plant proteins, which are inferior in quantity and quality — even soy. …

Responsible vegan parents know that breast milk is ideal. …

Yet even a breast-fed baby is at risk. Studies show that vegan breast milk lacks enough docosahexaenoic acid, or DHA, the omega-3 fat found in fatty fish. It is difficult to overstate the importance of DHA, vital as it is for eye and brain development.

This was in 2007 and clearly, the madness is still proceeding full force. Well, here’s at least one more blurb on the Internet that perhaps some future parent will stumble upon or go searching for, unsatisfied with the information being dished out by The vegan Menace.

And just as an aside in case any of you vegans out there are going to protest that omnivore babies die too, yes, it’s true. But there are important distinctions to be made. Malnourishment among omnivores is simple neglect. The parents are just Mark 1, Mod A scum, and not out parading their nutritional superiority as virtually all vegans do — and why they feed their kids that way. Second, in the case of obese babies and children, even with fatty livers, I rail agains that all the time (search the blog). But even there, a distinction is on order: these kids aren’t necessarily malnourished — at least not to this degree — they’re over-nourished, and much of it is unnecessary. And at least they have some metabolic and physiologic headroom to work with. Simply restrict the sugar drinks (like "healthy" fruit juice) and they’ll go right back to normal, quickly. But, bottom line: I don’t excuse any mistreatment of children’s nutrition.

…You know, I have in the past also blogged about chimpanzees that hunt & eat other monkeys, if only to highlight to vegans that chimps eat meat. They also eat bugs, worms, grubs, snails and all manner of other stuff they can get their hands on. And they have enormous guts compared to us so that they can actually extract nutrition from all that plant matter they eat. And, of course, they sometimes eat their own shit for adequate B12.

But in watching that video again, of those chimps hunting, and reflecting upon the two videos above, I note that the strength and agility of those paleo MovNat folks is far more like those chimps than are those Vegan Stick Figure folks. That’s because in the case of the former, both are eating the natural diets they evolved to eat. In raw veganism, by eliminating all animal foods, vegans are turning back the evolutionary clock to pre-primate times. What’s next, a diet of plankton?

So, from now on, I’ll not be highlighting vegans as existing on anything like a chimp diet. I think this one will be far more appropriate in the future. The Sloth.

Note the reference to a sloth being a "mobile compost heap" that barely has energy for a few "half-hearted chews," or this: "This extraordinary creature is half-blind, half-deaf, and this is just about as fast as it can move. That is what is going to happen to you… if you eat nothing but leaves."

This is an important subject. Awareness needs to be raised. The lives and well being of innocent kids is at stake and they have no choice in the matter. Imagine going hungry, being malnourished like a refugee or war orphan. Please consider Tweeting this post and sharing it with all your Facebook Friends.

Richard Nikoley

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2021, contains 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from health, diet, and food to travel and lifestyle; to politics, social antagonism, expat-living location and time independent—while you sleep—income. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. Read More


  1. rob on March 29, 2011 at 13:16

    Even if kids are getting 3500 calories a day I think a lot of them are malnourished cause they aren’t getting enough protein. When I was in junior high our phys ed coach used to complain about how little upper body strength we had, that was in the 70’s.

    Here’s a story about a 13 year old who was in the hospital for a week after doing some pushups at school

    The kid is probably getting plenty of calories but has the upper body strength of an 80 year old.

  2. Gary Wu on March 29, 2011 at 13:20

    Anyone know what the Mean Time To Failure (MTTF) is for vegan diets? As in, how long does it typically take for a vegan to realize that the diet is not working out and that they have to give up on it?

    Anecdotally I’ve seen somewhere between 7 and 15 years. I’ll be interested in seeing if anyone has more information on this.

    • D on March 29, 2011 at 14:13

      I have heard at around 12 years your body starts to really fall apart.. They ignore most of the signs until then. It sounds like a long time but the body can withstand a lot. Look at some long term drug addicts or alcoholics. They can remain in their addictions for over a decade, living a low quality life, but still living.

      Someone put it well when they made the distinction between surviving and thriving.

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 14:51

      Gary, you can read my comments at the bottom. I come from a generations-long lacto-vegetarian culture. I became cooked-vegan 10 years ago, raw-vegan 5 years ago.

      I’ve never been healthier or more vibrant, which may not be saying much since I’ve been healthy my entire life, and so has my lacto-veg family.

      If at some point in the future I need to reintroduce a tiny bit of milk or yogurt into my diet from the local ISKCON (international society for krishna consciousness) Hare Krishna farm that doesn’t kill cows – I’ll do it. I’m not a fanatic regarding milk. Nor am I a vegetarian due to “health reasons” – I’m vegetarian due to cultural, religious and ethical reasons only.

      That’s not going to change.

      However, I don’t foresee myself having to need milk – but if I do – so be it. There’s a “compassionate dairy” not to far from me, so I’ll be aight, yo.

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 22:06

        Yeah, I’m sure you feel great. You know why? A lack of animal protein, and your body will digest itself. You’re basically eating your own muscle. Your heart is a muscle, and it’s getting digested too. You’ll feel great for sure, until you run out of muscle to consume. Why do you think the men in that video have so little muscle? Because their body ate it.

        Good luck with that.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 11:44

        I have plenty of muscle and it keeps on increasing. (no problem with the ladies either). Animal is not the only think you can get protein from. Protein is not much of an issue. It’s in almost everything I eat.

      • Another Halocene Human on May 1, 2011 at 02:14

        It’s right to put compassionate in quotes… so compassionate to turn your dairy cattle lose in the streets to go scratch when they can no longer produce.

        We tried this with horsies (hayburners) in the US because some pony fanciers got sick of all the jokes about sending Mr. Ed to the glue factory. Result: poncy horse areas full of emaciated, dying horses when the racehorse bubble crashed. It’s now illegal to send horses you can’t care for to slaughterhouses and if you want to eat horsemeat you have to import it from Canukistan. And forget about rendering that old brokeback lame nag. No, she’ll just have to slowly suffer from her multiple ailments.

        Of course, more recently some entrepreneurs have started poaching horses and crudely slaughtering to sell the meat on the black market. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

        I hope the filly-lovers cried in their satin pillows when they got wind of that!

    • julianne on March 29, 2011 at 15:29

      On a raw vegan diet – it can be as little as 6 months. It really depends on each person. B12, Vit A, amino acids, and essential fatty acids will decline considerably over the first few months.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 16:24

        That decline hasn’t happened to me yet – raw 5 years and counting.

        The last “check-up” I had the doc said she wanted to know my “secret”.

        Greens, greens and more greens.

      • Brendan on March 30, 2011 at 02:23

        Just curious, DRR. How do you get B12, Vit A and essential fatty acids like Omega 3 from your greens? Do you eat unwashed veggies?

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:04

        I eat unwashed veggies when they are from my own garden or the garden of a family or friend. Otherwise produce from the store – I always wash it. For omega 3s – why do you think I mentioned marinephytoplanktons? I also do macedemia nut oil, flaxseed oil and hemp oil. As far as Vitamin A – why do you think I talked about the “rainbow” of a wide variety of vegetables? Carrots, pumpkin, sweet potatoe – there’s your Vitamin A. As far as B 12 – not a problem. Many vegan products are fortified with it, but I use Nutritional Yeast grown on Molasses. Yes, that’s processed, so hardcore raw foodie fundamentalists might reject it – so be it. I already said above that I’m not a purist/fanatic. Just a tiny amount does the trick since the body doesn’t need much of B 12.. In today’s world you can’t be a purist (that’s why I also say real paleo is different from the post-modern suburban neo-quasi-paleo we have here in new millenium America).

        Like I said, the doctor wanted to know my secret to great health and fitness I am in such good shape.

      • Brendan on March 31, 2011 at 03:10

        Thanks for providing the info on your supplements. I guess your diet can work if there is proper planning and correct supplements. I congratulate you for being able to follow such a diet and be in great health.

        I am too poor as a college student (tuition fees..etc) to afford these expensive and unnecessary supplements. That’s why I get all my nutrition from veggies and meat without popping fish oils, vitamins..etc. In the college’s cafeteria, I avoid wheat, food fried in rancid oils and sugary food and drinks after learning about the evolutionary diet from blogs like freetheanimal and markdaily apple. For my effort, I lost about 26 pounds in a year and it is a big thing to be and to look healthy and not fat when you are in college (I did not attend social events as often as i would like when i was overweight and a little pimply from my previous highly inflammatory diet of pizza, pasta, cakes and burgers).

        I am sure your diet is improvement from the SAD. For your information, I am of asian origine and this is not a SWPL for me. This diet is the easiest and most satisfactory for me dietwise and healthwise. Also, I would advice you not to promote a vegan diet to everyone because we are all different. There are some of us who cannot convert beta carotene efficiently:

        “Forty-Seven Percent of Women Genetically Incapable of Getting Adequate Vitamin A From Plants”

      • Sue on March 30, 2011 at 15:48

        How about a pic of yourself without the head if you want to remain anonymous.

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:26

        “Yes, that’s processed”

        So you’re not actually Doing Raw Right, then?

      • TJ on March 30, 2011 at 22:45

        “Dear Penthouse Forum,

        I am young, wealthy and extremely well endowed. But I still can’t believe what happened to me last week. As I was getting out of my Ferrari, I noticed a set of triplets making eye contact with me…”

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 23:43


        Whoa. Serious flashback. 30 + years since I jerked off to that stuff as a teenager.

  3. KarmaPolice on March 29, 2011 at 20:08

    Veganism is a religion and not based on science.

    And like all religions, it’s dangerous to your mental and physical health.

    Religion makes you unhealthy:

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 20:49

      Seems like the paleo cult is poised to become a major SWPL religion as well.

      • KarmaPolice on March 29, 2011 at 20:53

        Keep watching your brave leader, Doktor Oz

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:39

        Never heard of Doctor Oz. Is she a paleo-friendly doctor? I generally don’t trust doctors and I’ve never had to subscribe to one. A friend introduced me to a doctor friend of hers who did all the tests and check-ups on me and I came out on top (but of course!). However, other than that – I’ve never had a need for a doctor.

      • J. Stanton - on March 29, 2011 at 22:07

        But whom am I supposed to be following? Cordain? DeVany? Sisson? Wolf? Gedgaudas? The Jaminets? I’m so confused!

        Richard: you’d better grow a bigger beard and start speaking more elliptically if you want the cult mantle and the harem of brittle divorcees.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 22:49

        I’m working on it, JS. Still working on angles. Bea’s gonna have predictable heartburn with the harem thing.

        Oh, slight precsion: HOT brittle divorcees.

      • econo on March 30, 2011 at 04:30

        Won´t take off in the same way as Veganism / Vegetarianism / Fruitarianism. Even someone as old-school as Nietzsche noticed that Vegetarianism is a cult.

        The various vegetable cults are remarkably resilient, because of the emotional benefits provided. It is exactly because the Vego cults allow people to condemn normal (even essential) human behavior as unethical and inferior that it bestows power on the members. It places you in a superior position to most people by default. Their normal behavior is transformed into sin.

        Paleo offers very little in the way of sanctimony and moral superiority over others, which (I reckon) is the key element to form a successful cult. The benefits are mostly private, and it´s hard to argue that one is a paragon of hard-to-obtain virtue because one is fond of steak while staying clear of Coke.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 05:02

        Well reasoned and then well said, econo.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:45

        “Paleo offers very little in the way of sanctimony and moral superiority over others”

        Not in my experience.

      • TandooriChicken on March 30, 2011 at 19:47

        Not the paleo you’ll find here, in any case. We try to reject the condescending by preserving the irreverent.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 20:09

        The irreverent and the in your face.

        DRR is cool. He just needs to stop acting like a life long celibate monk who believes he’s found the key to sexual happiness

      • Econo on March 30, 2011 at 23:27

        Not surprising – vegans are a rare case where paleos can grandstand on consequentialist grounds. But for the vast majority of people there is simply no moral dimension to paleo, which severely limits the cult appeal.

      • Al Ciampa on March 30, 2011 at 22:58

        I’ve digested this post/comments in one read so far, so forgive when I yell, “WHAT THE FUCK DOES SWPL MEAN?”

        Thank you for that release.


      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 23:46


        I had to Google it.

        Stuff White People Like.

    • Victoria on March 30, 2011 at 09:54

      What I thought first when I heard about this sad story in France was Dawkins’ statements in ‘The God Delusion’. Not a direct quote, but something along the lines of ‘There’s no such thing as a ‘Muslim child’, or a ‘Catholic child’, there is only a ‘child of a Muslim’ or a ‘child of a Catholic'”. Religion (and veganism, in my opinion) is an indoctrination that should not be inflicted on children. There is no such thing as a ‘Vegan child’, only ‘the child of a vegan’.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:35

        Likewise, there’s no such thing as a “paleo child” just a child of a paleo.

        And authentic paleo no longer exists in the post-modern world. It can’t. Post-modern paleo is an oxymoron.

        I have no problem with parents raising their kids as they see fit. Its the parents’ duty to raise their child and instill in them the values they as adults deem valuable. It certainly isn’t the government’s job or media darlings like Dawkins.

        I was raised in a religion and culture and chose to stay in it as an adult even after being exposed to a wide variety of religions and ways of life. In fact, THANKS MOM AND DAD!

        I really appreciate that my parents raised me in such a manner, especially when I see how some other parents are “raising” their kids.

  4. Darya on March 29, 2011 at 11:37

    As you know I agree with you from a nutrition perspective, but some people can’t get over their personal issues with eating animals. I’m hosting a show tonight to help vegetarians (& vegans) make smarter choices and stop killing their babies. I think you’ll like it. Here’s my notes from the most popular vegetarian health book (which is terrible)

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 12:47

      Darya and I agree FAR more than we disagree but I have watched her for a long time, every post, and on Twitter. She is an honest scientist and I consider her non Paleo but nonetheless health centered, real food work to be a real lighthouse in a very dark world.

      I would like her to post more about MEAT dishes, though. Darya?

      • Darya on March 30, 2011 at 00:07

        It’s coming. I have been cooking meat much more lately since I’ve been feeding 2.5 (and way more Y chromosomes than I am accustomed to). I like to test my recipes multiple times before publication, and also be sure that the results I’m seeing aren’t because of the crazy awesome meats I get. Data is being collected, and will be reported. Stay tuned.

  5. Jenny Tolz on March 29, 2011 at 11:39

    I feel sorry for the kid but negative publicity for vegtards is still a good thing.

  6. Jenny on March 29, 2011 at 11:41

    Do those fruitarians look, I don’t know, malnourished?

    • Fred B on March 29, 2011 at 11:45

      Huh? But they’re not obese so that means they’re healthy 🙂

      I honestly chuckled a little when the camera panned the crowd… what marketing genius had that idea?

      Director: “Now show the crowd.”
      Camera Op: “Uhhh, are you sure we should do that?”

    • William on March 29, 2011 at 11:50

      The young females look ok, but the contrast with the “elders” among the group is somewhat horrifying.

      • MademoiselleEchalote on March 30, 2011 at 03:47

        The young women’s bodies are probably more efficient to keep the fat. Most of the young guys look so fragile… I hope they will all realize that they are harming their body before it is too late. When you hear their “guru” say that the reason why he started to eat like that is because he does not want to die from cancer like his father, it sounds quite desperate and it shows that his extreme behaviour is driven by emotions and not reason. It’s quite sad to watch this video, and even sadder to think what the consequences would be if those persons decide to have children and make them eat just fruits!

      • Paul C on March 30, 2011 at 12:45

        That is almost the same thing T. Colin Campbell implied in the infamous Amazon weight loss community thread. His dairy farmer father died of a heart attack, leading him to project his emotion onto meat, resulting in a career of revenge.

        My father died of pancreatic cancer at the age of 63, and I find it tempting to pin the blame on random things all the time. My dad liked to do crossword puzzles because he was afraid of getting Alzheimer’s like his father. Certainly it was the crossword puzzles that caused his cancer, and I will now dedicate my life to ridding the world of the foul things.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:48

        They are not fruitarians. They are raw vegans. That means they eat a wide variety of veggies, plants, and planktons. In fact, I’ll be most of them are not even raw vegans. I’ve done a number of these retreats – both hosting and attending as a guest, and most people are not 100% raw vegans who attend or even speak. It is basically to teach people how to eat more raw veggies and how to prepare them in ways that taste really good and gourmet.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 13:46

        It’s a 30 bananas a day retreat, all fruit. Get your facts straight. Everything in the video is fruit. Go to their website. It’s all about fruit. Search this blog. Some of their people have been here. It’s al about fruit.

    • silcione gel-filled on March 31, 2011 at 00:09

      Look on the bright side–at least Freelee’s implants still look perky.

  7. Fred B on March 29, 2011 at 11:43

    I’ve come to the realization that arguing about diet with a Vegan is like arguing the existence of God with an Evangelist. When the foundation of a system is based on pure belief (we and animals are equal, we shouldn’t hurt animals, whatever) then there is no argument because the believer will not be swayed by logic.

    And using the works of a Vegan researcher as proof that a Vegan based diet is optimal always reminds me of this great analogy (not mine, and I cannot remember where I originally heard it):

    “Its like asking a Catholic priest which religion is best for the soul.”

    • Rob on March 29, 2011 at 11:50

      Want both? Look up the RawBrahs; vegan and fundy!

      • Fred B on March 29, 2011 at 12:02

        Ahhh, no! Seriously, I won’t even go to that site – it’ll drive me crazy. Even more so than when Huffington Post publishes articles written by Neal Barnard “M.D.” who warns about the “dangers” of anything animal related. You know, because it gives you cancer.

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 21:23

        Vegan fundies? Oy.

        I think that a vegan diet would be ideal for fundamentalists, since the lack of saturated animal fat leaves one depressed and unable to think clearly. A vegan diet is definitely the diet of choice for cults. LOL

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 12:50

      Fred, it’s true, but there are a lot of fence sitters and dissilusined. Those are the ones I’m after. They have permission to guiltlessly go back to eating what they crave, meat.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:53

        Never had meat, never craved it. Some of my lovers who have had meat in their childhood never crave it either. But they might crave the sauces that came with the meat. They can get plenty of that from me.


      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 13:52

        “Never had meat”

        Which makes you wholly unqualified on the subject. Just because you bent over like a mindless sap over an ancient, dirt-scatching ideology that’s anti-human nature and wholly ignorant of human evolution and biological processes doesn’t mean anything but that you’re kind of a pathetic laughing stock.

        So cocky, so confident.

        You’re as laughable and ridiculous as would be a priest, celibate for life telling all of us how he never had sex, never craved it, and in his pathetic and laughable ignorance, struts around pretending as though we’re the ones missing out.

    • Heather on March 29, 2011 at 17:36

      Its so funny that vegans don’t want to eat animal products because they think we are equal with animals. The fact that we are equal with animals is exactly the reason why I feel justified eating meat – that is, we are animals, living creatures with integrity, and like all animals, we have every right to act in our own interest, to take life and be nourished with it.

    • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 21:19

      Bingo. Veganism to these people is a religion, and to question it is anathema. To blame it for the child’s death is absurd to them. And you can see that even non-Vegans have bought into that fallacy hook, line and sinker. Just look at some of the comments on the news articles about it.

      All ways are not equal. Some are better than others.

  8. Saja on March 29, 2011 at 11:44

    I am looking for nutritional guidelines for paleo/primal toddlers. I have a 20 month old. It would be nice to know what her diet should look like. Everything I find is geared toward adults. I’ve found some paleo blogs that include children meals, but I’d like to know specific ratios or daily amounts of fats, protein and carbs from veggies/fruit to feed my kid as she grows.

    • David Csonka on March 29, 2011 at 11:53


      Check out Chris Kresser’s how to “Grow a Healthy Baby” program.

    • TandooriChicken on March 29, 2011 at 12:16


      I think you’re overthinking it, to be honest. Just make meat the center of the meal, with a variety of vegetables as side options or “garnish.” If you’ve got a particularly active kid, I don’t think the occasional bit of rice or potato could hurt either – kids have particularly hardy metabolisms anyways. You don’t have to worry about calories or ratios or numbers or anything like that. Those things will work themselves out.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 14:56

        Yikes. Can’t wait to see what a child who was raised on vegetables as a “garnish” looks and feels like 20 years later.

        The veggies should be the main course and meat the “garnish”.

        But paleos will figure that out in about 5 years and then we’ll blogs and websites pop up talking about they all had to “tweak” their so-called “primal” eating regimenes.

        You can never have too many veggies (aka nutrients).

      • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 15:09

        You ought to Google Art De Vany. He’s been eating paleo for 30-40 years. So have many others.

        Oh, and so have millions of ancestors, from equator to arctic circle. That’s why we’re here, and they had nothing and braved ice ages and the elements and still we’re here. This was long, long before the Indian culture came along.

        If you think they ate vegetables primarily and meat as garnish, then you’re simply evading reality and you are at odds with the totality of mainstream, peer reviewed anthropology.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 20:43

        They were hunting and gathering with their own hands and eating the fresh food right there on the spot.

        What passes for “paleo” these days doesn’t come close.

        Let’s be honest and not call it “paleo”. Let’s label it what it is – another urban/suburban SWPL diet fad.

        I’m sure you’ve heard the term SWPL before.

        At any rate, jungle dwellers always ate a wide variety of leaves, berries, fruits, etc.

        Every day. All day.

        Nonetheless I’m not going to call what I eat authentic jungle eating.

        We are comfortable white people. Let’s be real here about what we eat.

        We don’t hunt it, and we don’t gather it.

        Paleo, my *ss.


        Eat your veggies, Richard!

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 21:38

        Excuse you. I do happen to hunt my own meat, thank you very much. Where the hell did your vegetables come from? Half way across the country? In the winter probably from the other side of the globe. So much for being eco-friendly.

        Much of humanity were not “jungle dwellers”. Most of humanity, especially during the ice ages relied on large land animals for their food. There were no fruits or vegetables. By all accounts, the Inuit should not exist in your world!

      • Jared on March 29, 2011 at 22:23


        Looks like most of our calories have always come from animal products. Well, unless you don’t want to be included in homo sapiens sapiens….

      • damaged justice on March 30, 2011 at 04:51

        Anyone using the phrase “stuff white people like” is usually a guilty white person.

        And anyone saying things like “it’s not paleo cuz you use a computer hurr hurr” isn’t just an idiot, but is being fundamentally dishonest about the whole thing. Which is worse.

      • Zach on March 30, 2011 at 08:31

        “You can never have too many veggies (aka nutrients).”

        Because animal products dont have ounce for ounce 100x more nutrients then plant products… Oh wait.

      • HeMan on March 30, 2011 at 10:00

        I hunt my own moose, deer, and elk. Just like my father, and grandfather, and his father… Just like my ancestors.

        Funny thing is, grandpa always refused to eat bread and fruit. He said it made you fat and sick. He lived to a ripe old age of 96 even though the majority of his life he was a trapper (not exactly an easy life) and smoked.

        My parents didn’t follow his words and ended up with type II diabetes. I figured out this shit before the word even existed, as did grandpa, and I’m assuming his father before him (where else did he pick it up)?

        Fuck “paleo”. I don’t follow any dogma, no fucking “plans” or obsessing over nonsense. In fact I hate it, that’s why I won’t identify myself as any particular word. But the general idea, at the core, works.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 10:58


        Your handle suits you in facets of ways. I salute you.

        One day, I hope to get back to the hunting and fishing roots my own maternal grandfather and grandmother instilled in us. He was an artist, by trade, but his freezer was always stocked with his own venison, bird, and fish kills.

        I once saw him catch 76 trout in a late summer afternoon from the Trukee river, just across from his sign painting shop. Of course, he caught and released, keeping only the few very largest.

        He tied his own flies, too.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 11:33

        Tracker, you and who – Daniel Vitalis? Most people do not hunt their own meat. By the way, I don’t call myself “paleo” so I’m not being a hypocrite wrt not getting my food in an authentically paleo way.

        Daniel Vitalis is hunting and gathering and won’t eat an animal unless he has looked him/her in the eye and thanked him/her for the gift of his own health that the animal is giving him.

        He’s probably the closest to “quasi-neo-paleo” that any post-modern human can claim.

        Other than – I suggest just calling yourselves regular ol’ meat-eaters, which is fine.

        Like Richard said, he’d be ok with vegans if they humbled themselves down a notch or 2 and were honest about the way they go about it.

        I feel the same – across the board of fundamentalist foodies.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 11:37

        @ Jared, “Really?”

        Yes Jared, really.


      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:56

        “Anyone using the phrase “stuff white people like” is usually a guilty white person.”

        Not if its used sarcastically. Guilty white people don’t even know what SWPL is. That was created by someone making fun of them, like me.

      • Jared on March 30, 2011 at 15:56

        So don’t want to be confused with the facts?

      • D on March 30, 2011 at 17:17

        Yeah, and why is Daniel Vitalis hunting? Because raw vegan didn’t work. Daniel, David Wolfe and Anthony Anderson were all the big name raw foodists who started the movement.

        Daniel is hunting, David Wolfe is advocating deer placenta and some kind of ant extract and Anthony Anderson is farming chickens and eating heavy cream and cheese. They all started it. They all could not sustain on it.

        So you can go on and on about how great you feel eating this way but so did all these guys. After they fell off the wagon they stated that they were starving all the time and obsessing on food.

        Interesting to note, Durianrider went CRAZY on his blog about this. He currently has a big issue with David Wolfe and the deer placenta.

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:09

        Humans can’t digest plant fiber.

      • gallier2 on March 30, 2011 at 02:18

        Pfff, veggies are vehicle for butter, cream and other good fats. Nothing more.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 11:35

        Who needs a vehicle when you can walk? I suggest you stop eating veggies altogether and just eat your butter, cream and other fats. Get back to me after a few months of that and then we’ll talk.

      • Al Ciampa on March 30, 2011 at 22:20

        “Get back to me after a few months of that and then we’ll talk”

        Ummm, posting after 18 years. What would you like to talk about?


      • kmrn3 on April 2, 2011 at 06:23

        Hey, you know what? I did that exact thing 18 monts ago. Drink a pint of unsweetened heavy whipping cream a day. Eat pastured butter and ghee like cheese, sometimes eating a half pound at a time. Drink pastured pork grease. Munch on grass fed tallow. Most days I eat over a pound of barely cooked steak. Lots of beef liver and eggs.Vegetables? Don’t want them or need them now. I lost 16 lbs. Blood pressure dropped from 150/80 to 140/65. I eat two meals a day. Hardly ever feel hungry. GERD is gone now. Antacids WERE part of my daily diet. And I had a most pleasant surprise from the optometrist the other day. Being 40ish I thought my lifelong bad eyesight had gotten worse. He said I didn’t need a stronger prescription, I need a weaker prescription. My eyes had gotten stronger. My muscle tone was kind of puffy and flaccid even with all the biking, jogging, and body weight exercise. I barely exercise now( its more like play), have a desk job. Now I am lean and firm. I have hollows and bumps and rippling muscle. I recover from exercising so much quicker now. Joints stopped hurting and creaking too. I listened to the opinions of the veggietards/healthniks for nearly 25 years. You’re head is full of crap and your body is made of worse. Your mind spews hollow received wisdom at whoever does not follow your beloved doctrine. Your lifestyle choices destroy mind and body. “Get back to me after a few months of that and then we’ll talk.” No thanks. I am alive now. I have better things to do.

      • Alex Thorn on April 2, 2011 at 12:21

        Same here. Not eaten fruit or veggies for years and never felt better!

      • Another Halocene Human on May 1, 2011 at 01:59

        DRR should get back to us in 3 years when its liver has emptied out all its B12 stores. Should be enlightening.

      • Saja on March 29, 2011 at 16:43

        I appreciate the sentiment, but I should add my daughter is a very enthusiastic eater, she will eat anything we put in front of her and always ask for more, no matter how much she is served. While it’s hopefully a phase and not some real issue, she will actually overeat to the point of burping/puking back up food if we don’t set limits. She’s not a picky eater or very much into self-limitation, even though every resource I come across and every bit of helpful advice assures me she will be because all toddlers are so hey just relax. Well, she’s not now and I’m not going to have her eating herself sick because it hasn’t discouraged her from overeating and I don’t feel like it’s healthy. Guidelines would really help.

      • Katie @ Wellness Mama on March 29, 2011 at 19:23

        Hi Saja! I’ve got three kids (4, 2, 1) and one on the way, so I understand your desire for some solid guidelines. This is what I’ve found from feeding our kids a primal/paleo diet…
        They do tend to eat more at meals but less often when eating this way, at least from what I can tell. Before, the kids would be constantly hungry, and now, it is just every 3-4 hours. I’ve also found that getting in enough healthy fats is an important key to keeping them from eating too much or not eating enough. For instance, breakfast is always a few eggs (3-4 in the case of the 4 year old) some leftover meat from the night before, some cut up veggies, a piece of fruit and sometimes a coconut flour waffle. I was surprised when we all switched to eating this way how much more they ate, but they are thriving on this. They did eat more in the transition phase, probably because they just needed the proteins and fats and were finally getting enough of them.
        We don’t do any fruit juices and they get the occasional smoothie with coconut milk/oil, avocado, greens, etc. They also love sweet potatoes and will eat as many as I let them, probably because that is the sweetest food in their diets.
        To help with the overeating, I would feed her the small amounts of protein, fat and veggie at each meal, preferably the fat first to help with satiety. From what I can tell, my kids are getting about half of their calories from fats, though volume wise, it isn’t half because fats are more dense. The body has a natural limit for protein and fat consumption, so at some point, she should stop wanting more once she has adjusted. If you are getting about half calories from fat and the other half from protein and veggies, she should be fine.
        For our kids, the adjustment lasted a couple of months, and then they were hungry less often, ate a lot more veggies by choice, etc. They are also now sleeping better, don’t get sick at all, etc.
        Another suggestion… for snacks, I mix shredded coconut, coconut oil, vanilla and a little almond butter and freeze in little clusters to make a fast snack. It has tons of good saturated fats and it fills them up between meals.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 21:09

        He’ll Katie, your a pioneer, but it looks prEtty safe to me.

    • Becky on March 29, 2011 at 13:32

      I agree with TandooriChicken that you’re over thinking it. Your 20 month old can eat whatever you’re eating. Cut/tear it up, place on a plate, serve. Every kid will go through a “picky eating” phase (round about now for you), but I found with my youngest two Paleo eating really limits it. For example, my son (22 months) will only eat meat. Go figure.

    • Phocion Timon on March 29, 2011 at 14:00

      My parents raised six children, all of us in good health and large: even my sister is bigger (and I don’t mean “fat”) and taller than Dad. One of the ways Mom fed us, when we were still too young to actually sit at the table, was to hand the toddler the bone from a t-bone steak with some meat and fat attached. The child would happily gum the t-bone, too occupied to worry about being a fussy, picky eater. (Dad was a dentist and recognised, like Weston A. Price DDS, that meat and zero sugar was damned important to a growing child.

      Just give your child a hunk of bone with some meat and fat attached and they will figure it out all by themselves.

      Don’t over-think this. Give the child meat, fat, and veggies and let her body decide what it needs.

      • julianne on March 29, 2011 at 15:10

        Meat and sweet stuff is generally easily accepted by kids to eat.
        Most vegetables are an acquired taste, kids automatically don’t like the bitterness. It’s an evolutionary safety issue. Teach kids to like veggies any way you can. Small tastes until they learn it is safe and you can enjoy it. We had a teaspoon rule, 1 teaspoon only of food they didn’t like much. Amazing what foods they like now.
        Find veggies they do like and let them eat heaps. My kids will get through a huge bowl of veggie sticks (carrots, capsicum, cucumber etc) in front of the TV. Beat junk snacks.

    • Jorge from Venezuela on March 30, 2011 at 12:55

      Is the same nutritional guidelines as an adult, but in less quantity.
      Consider making bone broths for minerals and adding butter or another vitamin k2 rich source. Also raw dairy if you can find a reliable source. And in general make his nutrition rely in natural and nutritional dense food.

      Also don’t force or threat your kid to eat. Is better let him eat until he is satisfied and if sometimes he don’t want to eat then don’t force him, in that way you will never screw his physical and mental health and he will have a healthy relationship with food.
      Instincs are always right, specially those of a kid.

    • Fern on March 31, 2011 at 05:53

      I offer my toddler whatever we are eating. She has leftovers, bone broth, bacon, nuts, eggs, nut/egg pancakes, veggies, or frozen berries for snacks. For a treat, we might have a coconut milk smoothie (fat bomb). Sometimes we also have raw, 24-hour-fermented, very sour yogurt. Some days, she eats more than I do. Some days, she eats very small portions. She usually eats 2 big meals a day with some snacking in between. It’s like she is naturally IFing.

      My advice, is to not over think it, but to just keep healthy paleo options in the house. My daughter is by far the healthiest 3-year-old child I know. She rarely has symptoms of illness no matter how sick the kids she is playing with are. Her teeth are well spaced and free of cavities. She looks perfectly sturdy and muscular. She never has dark, puffy eyes or chronic sniffles or breathing problems or nose bleeds or rashes like her peers. She has never been sick enough to go to the doctor. Just relax and enjoy giving your child the gift of beautiful health.

  9. David Csonka on March 29, 2011 at 11:51

    I’m guessing the frutarian women are fairly disappointed with their choices of ethically-compatible males.

    • Another Halocene Human on May 1, 2011 at 02:02

      They seem self-absorbed, perhaps auto-erotic, so an asexual mate would fit nicely.

      Of course if you delve deeper into Veg*n community, you will find that not only fat and human body in general are sinful and evil, but sexuality is horrifying and the raw veg*n diet has cured them of this.

  10. Rip on March 29, 2011 at 11:52

    For me, the most astonishing thing about this story is the fact that the couple were French. The French know better than to subject their children to this nonsense. You’ve blogged before about the fact that school dinners in the country are light years ahead of America, and us here in the UK. The French have the good sense not to shun fat and have been sticking to real food for decades. Now that they’re hitting the processed stuff more and more, their overall health is beginning to suffer.

    • gallier2 on March 29, 2011 at 12:22

      You’re a bit idealizing French. We have our fair share of dumbasses (or how do you think we got our nasty little idiot president) here too and the anti fat hysteria has also reached our shores. Furthermore, policies here are nothing more than following orders from oversee. All semblance of independency that was incarnated by De Gaulle has been completly erradicated by current and former politicians. We are in Europe exactly in the same situation as you are, we are at the mercy of the globalized corporatocraty and internationalized oligarchy.

      • Another Halocene Human on May 1, 2011 at 02:05

        France is getting Americanized. They are raping the landscape with cheap sprawl and Walmart-like big box stores as well.

  11. Carly on March 29, 2011 at 11:55

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! LOOK at the vegans!!! Those men are so puny. Ew. Erwan Le Corre however…… ;D

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 12:53

      Carly, I can introduce you to Erwan. 🙂

      • Carly on March 29, 2011 at 13:16

        *swoon* live in England Damn it ;D

  12. Carly on March 29, 2011 at 12:01

    @saja. Just feed your child what you are eating. If it’s paleo food it’ll be nutition dense. My little girl eats what I eat and is thriving. She’s just little person. Why would she be any different?

  13. Tomasz R. on March 30, 2011 at 02:02

    The charges they are pressing against these vegan parents are false. There was no “food deprivation” as the baby was fed according to what is recognized as the best practice – by breastfeeding. There’s no mention of calorie deficits. Food deprivation is where food is not provided.

    Same with neglect. A good case of neglect is that of Korean parents, that played computer game non-stop, forgot about their baby so it died. In the vegans case there was no such thing. I assume they followed the procedures – spend time with baby, changed nappies etc.

    Also this is a clear case of medical condition avitaminosis. Doctor’s fault of not diagnosinig it is clear.

    It seems that prosecutors just don’t have paragraphs for “following wrong ideology”, while feeling that baby’s death needs to revenged. So they falsly accuse these vegans of something they didn’t commit.

    A similar case of following a wrong ideology can be made for vitamin D deficency of fundamentalist muslim women (and consequently their newborns) who wear burka, that doesn’t allow sunshine in. Of course no french court would persecute such case because of PC and fear of being attacked by fundies. Vegans are easier target.

    This is a case where all responsibility is pushed only on those on the lowest ranks – normal people. Governements routinely allow toxic chemicals in foods, even baby formulas, big food utilize them, pharma adds mercury, aluminium etc. to their vaccines then collaborates with government to inject them in babies by force, while being freed by law from responsibility etc. Same with vegetarian or islamic leaders who spread their problem-causing ideology with immunity. But who is to blame when the results of this bad activity show up in a real world? Yes, you guessed it – normal people, who just happended to trust all those leaders and organizations and use their advice or their products in their lives.

    There’s a good article about this:

    • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:20

      “A similar case of following a wrong ideology can be made for vitamin D deficency of fundamentalist muslim women (and consequently their newborns) who wear burka, that doesn’t allow sunshine in. Of course no french court would persecute such case because of PC and fear of being attacked by fundies. Vegans are easier target.”

      VERY GOOD POINT! I also thought there was something “fishy” (or for vegans, “flaxy”) about this.

      I know several very fat, healthy and happy babies who are subsisting on mother’s milk so something did not add up.

      • Jared on March 30, 2011 at 12:31

        You’re making the common error in logic of confusing a sufficient with a necessary condition. Is it necessary that a mother be on a screwed up diet for their milk to be not nourishing enough to sustain life. I would say so. Is it a sufficient condition? Obviously not.

        You can bring up all the anecdotes you want of healthy ‘vegan babies.’ The point is that infant mortality is probably increased, not that vegan breast milk is sufficient condition for dead babies….

        You can eat flax seed, caroteen, and supplement b12 all you want, the point is that these sources are provably inferior. You are letting ideology trump getting the best for yourself and in the case of women incubating and breastfeeding, they are letting it come ahead of the best nutrition for their baby.

        I say fuck that. I deserve the best. My kids deserve the best. But it’s ok. So many things in life are a zero sum game, and while vegan kids have behavioral problems and health problems, my kids will be glad to take what they can’t.

        Why don’t you think you deserve the best?

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 15:21

        We could argue that a vegan mother is sufficient condition for infant death. It’s acknowledged that a vegan diet is deficient. It’s acknowledged that mother’s milk depends almost entirely on her diet. It’s acknowledged that deficiencies can cause death. Consequently, it’s reasonable to conclude infant death was caused by mother’s diet.

        A nutritional deficiency is equivalent to a nutritional absence. Ergo, malnutrition is equivalent to starvation. Therefore, our vegan mother and our Korean gamer parents are equally guilty.

      • Dana on March 30, 2011 at 12:57

        You could walk around naked in full sun and still not be able to make enough vitamin D all year round, plus you’d freeze your ass off in the winter. Diet’s still the best source of vitamin D if you don’t live on the equator.

        The French have no trouble whatsoever attacking Muslims. Neither do Americans–I wouldn’t think the average red-blooded American would want to be that much like the French, but whatever.

        (I’m Cajun–can’t really escape it, and don’t want to. Kind of bemused by all the hatred-of-everything-French, actually. Merci beaucoup, Marquis.)

    • Dana on March 30, 2011 at 13:03

      You cannot make something from nothing. If a breastfeeding mother does not eat properly then she will not have proper nutrition to pass on to her child. If you’ve never breastfed a child then you’ve never been treated to mainstream medicine’s hysteria about vitamin D shortages. I have. It’s ridiculous. No matter what moms wear, a lot of us are short on vitamin D to begin with and then have to feed a baby too. And they don’t tell us to supplement D. They tell us to give vitamin drops to our babies, at a time when their guts are still porous and they should not be consuming anything but mother’s milk. I ignored them, supplemented D, and drove on. My daughter had no problems. She was introduced to solids at eight or nine months, and tested normal for hemoglobin at 12 months–not D, I know, but iron’s another nutrient they claim we don’t give enough of to our babies when we nurse them.

      FYI, it’s none of your business what women wear or don’t wear. A lot of this Western vs. Islamic ideology war is men fighting over who gets to own the women. You can *all* fuck off. If a woman wants to cover her entire body she is perfectly entitled to do so. My only objection to hijab is when it’s legally imposed. Could you imagine the outcry if women from Islamic countries and the West started arguing over whether men should wear beards? The Western media actually thought the Taliban making men grow out their facial hair was a bigger deal than the women being forced to wear burkas. That’s the world we live in, folks.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 14:07

        ” My only objection to hijab is when it’s legally imposed.”

        But husbands and brothers beating their women into submission so that they “want to cover their entire body” that’s just hunky dory.

        But, I suppose it’s better than them being “honor” killed after they get raped because some guy saw an ankle.

        But, at least such a backward, 14th century dirt-scratching, dog-shit culture does give cause for a barrel of laughs, sometimes.

        And no, I do not think a culture deserves any respect just because a bunch of dumbasses practice it for a requisite time, and that goes for a lot of sub-cultures here in the US, too.

      • TJ on March 30, 2011 at 23:15

        The one in the middle’s pretty hot…

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 15:24

        “You cannot make something from nothing. If a breastfeeding mother does not eat properly then she will not have proper nutrition to pass on to her child.”

        Exactly. First Law Of Thermodynamics 101.

    • Bonnie on March 31, 2011 at 05:58

      Of course this baby was being starved. It was a nearly year-old infant, vastly underweight, being EXCLUSIVELY breast-fed. Mother’s milk ALONE is not enough to sustain healthy growth of most infants past 7-8 months. Especially, of course, when that milk was deficient in nutrients necessary for life. If the mother was on a low-fat diet and malnourished herself, her milk was likely calorically deficient as well.

      • Leah on March 31, 2011 at 06:12

        Where are your sources for this? I would venture to guess that if a mother were offering quality breastmilk, it could sustain a child at least until the age of 2. Of course, this would be a pain for the mother as keeping up with a hungry toddler would require nearly constant feedings. When my son was a year old, I was producing about 20-50 oz surplus milk a day (i.e. more than he was eating), so I would imagine that without the little solid food he ate, that would have been enough to sustain him. In fact, a close friend of mine has an almost two year old who still eats very little solids (maybe a few pieces of fruit or pasta/day), and is sustained on breast milk. Not by her mother’s choice, but she will often refuse solid food, and he mother wants her to continue to get nutrition, so she nurses her in place of solids as necessary.

      • Liz Downunder on March 31, 2011 at 14:32

        Rubbish – and typical of the crap new mothers get told by ‘experts’ who know very little about feeding a baby past the first few months and are hell-bent on weaning babies onto rice cereal and milk from other species so they can start being good little consumers.

        Studies have shown breastmilk of a healthy mother to be more than adequate to be the sole nutrition for a child up to and past the age of one. I know mothers who have exclusively breastfed their children til they were one, and the children are thriving, 6-14 years on.

      • Walter Bushell on February 15, 2012 at 10:21

        According to my general understanding modern huntergathers nurse until age 2 or more.

  14. Tuck on March 29, 2011 at 12:10

    The obese kids are also malnourished, not over-nourished. Malnourishment simply means you’re not getting what the body needs.

    Eating too much of the wrong stuff will still leave you malnourished. Starving people have been known to eat sawdust and dirt, much like the grains and sugar that make American kids fat, you may get something out of it, but it’s not what your body needs.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 12:56

      Its possible, Tuck, but not sure, and if so, not much. They are still getting animal products. They’re getting most to all of what they need. The problem is more that they are getting what they don’t need and what is harmful and getting it too often and too concentrated.

      You will find ZERO paleo Puritanism here, ever.

      • David Csonka on March 29, 2011 at 13:38

        In Gary Taubes new book, he talks quite a bit about how some societies with rampant malnourishment have families with fat and skinny people in them. In those cases, the obesity is an alternative phenotypical expression of adult malnourishment.

        Examples include obese mothers showing up to clinics with dangerously malnourished children. Are the mothers starving their kids so they can gorge themselves? Unlikely.

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 21:45

        That depends. Poor people may be eating primarily white bread and ramen. They may not be able to afford much meat. It’s probably not the central part of their diet. But you get someone who eats white bread with a slice of lunch meat on it, and they’ll blame the meat for whatever ills follow.

        There’s a reason why bread is enriched with vitamins…

  15. Brian Scott on March 29, 2011 at 12:19

    You know, being a detrimentally perennial non-contrarian, I was willing to give the benefit of the doubt to raw veganism; there are, supposedly, vegetarian/vegan athletes that are fairly built, and I’m not going to accuse people of cheating their diet (even when I think it’s likely) just to make a point.

    But HOLY CRAP, that second video! My first thought was of those “for 30 cents a day” commercials, where it always shows some poor African or Southern Asian kid that looks like a stick.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I want to lose weight, but not that much!

    I think what sorta confirmed it for me was that, frankly, the guys in the first video are just plain sexier. They’re attractive all over, from head to toe, even that older guy. The second video… to compare a lot of the men to little boys would be an insult to little boys everywhere.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 13:02

      Brian, also note that in many of these cases of vegan athletes, they did not build their muscle on vegan diets but on animal diets with, in many cases, lots of eggs, chicken breasts, dairy, etc.

      The have lots of headroom to, for their own nefarious reasons, tout a vegan diet without being fully honest about things.

      Check them out 10 years from now, assuming they’re still on the fad.

    • David Csonka on March 29, 2011 at 13:40

      Thirty years from now, I want to be that old dude in the MovNat video. That guy is my freakin’ hero.

    • Becky on March 29, 2011 at 13:42

      “My first thought was of those “for 30 cents a day” commercials, where it always shows some poor African or Southern Asian kid that looks like a stick.”

      I had that thought, too. Must be all the radiation from the bananas. =)

  16. julianne on March 29, 2011 at 12:30

    The nutrient deficiencies of raw vegan diets are appalling – even hard core vegan dietitians can’t do it. And warn about supplementing

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 12:59

      Thanks for linking to your great article, Julianne. I was hoping you’d do that in comments. I always welcome valuable additions like that, so keep it up and promote yourself.

      • julianne on March 29, 2011 at 15:21

        Thanks, I was a little concerned after my first article, that the vegan audience would use it to justify that a low fat raw vegan diet covered all nutrient bases if it was done right. And would use this analysis as ‘proof’.
        After looking at the rule (vegan diets are full of rampant deficiencies and health failures) rather than the outlier (Durianrider who just manages to scrape by on nutrient status, but still looks scrawny, probably has amino acid and essential fatty acid deficiencies, and has to take B12) there is no way it should be promoted as a diet fit for humans, let alone pregnant mums and kids.

  17. Jamie on March 29, 2011 at 12:57

    OK a couple of observations from that vegan video… check out the male:female split between the Movnat and Vegan camps. Just an interesting observation that there seems (based on a sample from one each), a male/female preference. Secondly, I am sorry, but those vegans just do not look overly healthy. Perhaps it is the video quality, but there just isn’t the brightness and energy in their eyes that you see in the Movnat video. And I don’t know, maybe I am just projecting my biases, but the vegan bodies on a whole look scrawny compared to the paleo ones seen on the Movnat camp.

    • Joseph on March 29, 2011 at 13:10

      Maybe Richard should have a virtual powerlifting and/or treadmill competition with Harley. Or they could run some bodyweight drills (MovNat or otherwise). Who can do the most burpees in the sand?

      • D on March 29, 2011 at 14:10

        I was thinking that too. Harley has proved he can kick it on the bike, but that is not hard when fueled by so much sugar.

        In a direct weight lifting competition between the veg and the paleo Harley would have no chance.

      • Kevin Hughes on March 30, 2011 at 08:53

        Harley cannot kick it on the bike. He merely says he can. It does not surprise me that his sport of choice is an easy one. He just has to be patient enough to do something slowly and for a long time, which is how I’ve come to see most endurance activities.

    • Jim on March 29, 2011 at 13:54

      Now that you point out the male/female split, I’m thinking vegan might be the way to go 🙂

  18. Jim on March 29, 2011 at 13:06

    Did Harley really claim to eat up to 70 bananas a day? Or did I hear it wrong. 7 would be a lot as it is, clocking in at about 1000 Kcal. 70 would be a Michael Phelpsian level of 10,0000 Kcal (on just bananas!). It’s at the 3:45 mark. I’ve listened a couple times, and it sounds like he says 70.

    • rob on March 29, 2011 at 14:37

      I think he does ultra-distance stuff so 10,000 calories in a day could be necessary just to fuel the ride.

    • julianne on March 29, 2011 at 15:25

      Yep – you heard right, he eats 30 – 70 bananas a day. In case people missed it – I did an analysis of his diet, exactly as he described a days worth of food:

      • jose marti on March 29, 2011 at 16:25

        70 bananas is more than 2000 grams of carbohydrates a day. There is no way his pancreas will survive that onslaugh even with all the exercise. Like Phelps , he is a prime candidate for diabetes . It will only be one more evidence that being fit and healthy are not equivalent.

      • rob on March 29, 2011 at 17:11

        Between being fit and being healthy I would chose being fit … healthy has no meaning, it is not measurable unless you want to get into a “blood work duel” (we stand back-t0-back, walk ten paces, turn around and reveal our blood work for all to see).

        You could be the healthiest person in the world, the finest blood work the world has ever seen, and get run over by a truck tomorrow. Or have a stroke.

        The durianrider guy is a heck of an athlete … his dietary advice is misguided imo but you have to grant him props as an endurance athlete … and like every other endurance athlete he needs glucose like nobody’s business.

        I doubt he is very fit in terms of strength but it’s hard to do both (though I’m trying).

        Athletic ability is worthy of respect even if it is a form of athletics in which you don’t care to participate.

      • jose marti on March 29, 2011 at 17:45

        I do not mean for a moment to be disrepectful to athletic achievements but in this very site has been discussed many times the unhealthy consequences of these maratonic endeavours. Endurance for hours and hours will lead to bad health in many cases. And if someone is fit but unhealthy as a result, what is the point?

      • Tomasz R. on March 31, 2011 at 12:56

        Endurance at your maximum speed (exhaustion) and for top result (stress) causes bad health consequences. On the other hand if by endurance you mean long running at a speed that is a piece of cake for you, let’s say at 40% of your max speed for such distance – that’s actually OK.

      • jose marti on April 1, 2011 at 05:41

        Maximum sprinting for 10-15 seconds does wonders for strenth and conditioning. Long endurance efforts at maximum speed are very detrimental as Tomasz mentioned . At lower paces are safer but do practically nothing for conditioning since the body adapts quite rapidly to the pace.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 09:43

        “Between being fit and being healthy I would chose being fit … healthy has no meaning, it is not measurable unless you want to get into a “blood work duel” (we stand back-t0-back, walk ten paces, turn around and reveal our blood work for all to see).”

        You are exactly right, rob.

        This is why I always say that my pursuit is a natural human body composition through eating real food and doing brief and intense resistance training. The “health” takes care of itself, whatever that means.

      • Mia on March 29, 2011 at 20:49

        How many bananas a day??? That is the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. Here in Australia, our tropical banana-producing regions are frequently battered by storms and cyclones and we usually have a banana shortage every year or two. Hence the price hovering around $15- 20 per kilo at the moment. His diet is ridiculously unsustainable, if we all did it we’d starve.

        Plus he has those crazy eyes that are usually only seen on the faces of serial killers and child molesters. I fear for his sanity.

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 22:02

        With all that fructose, I’d worry more about his liver than his sanity (though I do question that too). Doesn’t really matter if he burns all the carbohydrates off either. He’ll probably die in his fifties of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease if he keeps eating the way he does.

        And you’re right. I think it’s amusing that these vegans talk about sustainable, but in that video they have fruit from Brazil. In most parts of North America the growing season doesn’t last very long. One bad year and there’s nothing local. Guess where my meat comes from? Right outside my back door. No diesel wasted. No jet fuel used. Can’t get more local than that.

      • Joe Brancaleone on March 30, 2011 at 11:36

        “Plus he has those crazy eyes that are usually only seen on the faces of serial killers and child molesters. I fear for his sanity.”

        Ah, that’s what was bugging me about watching videos of this guy! I know its defamatory to say, so apologies… he resembles Michael Palin but with a menacing Charles Manson gaze. *shudder*

  19. Jan on March 29, 2011 at 13:29

    I think to get the full impact of the difference between the “retreats” (to say nothing of the participants) is to watch both videos with the sound off.

    The MovNat video is almost exclusively people, well, moving. Running, jumping, walking, crawling, climbing, hanging, swinging, swimming. It’s not until the last few seconds that you see what they are eating (and it looks damn tasty, too).

    The video of the vegan retreat is more than twice as long, and they spend almost all of it handling food, processing food, preparing food and eating food. There is less than 30 seconds devoted to vegan “fitness” – if you can call half-assed pushing each other around fitness. It was appallingly reminiscent of grammar school P.E. class.

    Makes me glad I decided to go the paleo/primal/low carb route to lose weight and reclaim my health. I’d much rather look like the old guy in the first video than the youngest in the second (little boy excepted, of course).

    • Jim on March 29, 2011 at 13:50

      To be fair, there are some differences between the goals of both videos, and the natures of the two retreats.

      MovNat probably attracts more active people. I wouldn’t be inclined to sign up for MovNat unless already in good shape. I don’t think I’d feel that way about the vegan retreat. So we’re comparing the cream of the primal crop to more average vegans here.

      I also doubt whether they would have shown any particularly limp or tubby participants in the MovNat video even if they had been there. In large part it’s a marketing video, and my guess is that they would show the people that make them look best. (But again, I doubt there were any limp or tubby people there for the reasons in the first paragraph).

      Still, the primal retreat did look a lot more fun than the vegan one. And we do have other reasons for thinking primal to be more healthy.

  20. Amasi on March 29, 2011 at 13:36

    Ok , so I’ve just been introduced to the paleoworld, coming from the Weston A price Foundation. I’m still very active with them. This blog is about my favorite esp. when it comes to exposing the vegan/vegetarian myths of stellar health. Suffice to say the vegan video exposes them for what they are. Complete and utter WHACK-JOBS!!! How do I know? How can I spot the counterfeit as Richard says? I WAS one of them. I used to buy the load of crap they sell and after 7 yrs all I got was very bad health. WAPF and my local farmer got me back on the evolutionary track. Glad to make to jump to paleo.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 14:43


      You’ll find this blog to be very WAPF friendly. Weston A Price is a hero of mine. And, I’m friends with Ann Marie Michaels (Cheeseslave) and Kelly the Kitchen Cop too. 🙂

  21. Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 14:40

    Been lacto-vegetarian my whole life, so have my parents, and their parents. Nobody has ever had health issues. We are healthy as horses.

    I became vegan 10 years ago, raw vegan 5 years ago – I’m even healthier.

    I would not recommend eating fruits alone. We require a wide range of nutrients, vitamins, and minerals to be healthy.

    I make sure I eat a colorful variety of vegetables every day – as you know the more color, the wider variety of nutrients. I also eat marine phytoplanktons – healthiest things ever. I also get plenty of good fats in my avacados, coconuts, durien, macedamia nut oil, etc.

    The raw vegan eating regimen has worked fantastically for me because I do it right.

    I also know babies that have been raw vegan from the womb and grew into healthy adolescents with no problems.

    It depends on what you eat. The wider variety of veggies, nuts, seeds, oils and marine-phyto-planktons that you eat , naturally the healthier you will be because you will be getting a wide variety of the nutrients your human body needs.

    One can also do cooked vegan and lacto-vegetarian right as well. My family has been doing lacto-veg right for generations and I have done cooked vegan right for 5 years. The reason I currently do raw vegan right is because I’ve done the other 2 right.

    I know what I’m doing. Some people don’t.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 14:59

      There’s no comparison between lacto/ovo or both, vegetarian, and vegan. Hell, you could be getting 50% + of calories from eggs and/or milk and call yourself “vegetarian.

      “I know what I’m doing. Some people don’t.”

      A human animal needed have to “know what [it’s] doing” in the context of what you mean. You know, I’d be a lot more patient with the vegans if they would just say:

      “y’know, this is by no means even remotely a natural human animal diet, nor is it optimal, nor is it practicable exept with great care and a variety of foods that a human could never get in any environment need to be shipped virtually from every corner of the globe at all times…”

      Something like that.

      • jose marti on March 29, 2011 at 17:35

        ‘A variety of foods that a human could never get in any environment…”. That is a very great point by Richard that exposes more than anything else the ilusory nature of veganism. The latter is only posible because of the globalized economy that allow the consumption of fruits and vegetables which given the seasonal and geographical constraints would be imposible to get otherwise. Even in the tropics we could only get fruits (citrics excepted) at certain times. Mango from april to august;avocato from august to January and on and on. Now imagine in New York in winter. A vegan would necessarily have to eat eggs and milk. The alternative would be starvation and death.

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 22:11

        “globalized economy”

        Who benefits from people shipping shit half way around the world to fuel their “ethical” diet? Corporations. That is also the answer to why veganism is being pushed. What else would they do with all those genetically modified soybeans?

      • Another Halocene Human on May 1, 2011 at 02:18


      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:10

        Jose, the type of meat you eat, the amount you eat, and HOW you obtain it is also only available because of globalization and big farma. So?

        We are living in 2011, not 2011 BC.

      • Liz Downunder on March 30, 2011 at 22:15

        Wha? My meat gets delivered to me by the farmer who raises it, about 100km away. It’s one of the few food producing systems that is largely sustainable (the animals eat only grass) and less dependent on globalisation than most agriculture. BTW just curious, do you really eat sweet potato and pumpkin raw?

      • Doing Raw Right on March 31, 2011 at 01:57

        Yeah, I grate them, sometimes make them into blended “soups” with spieces and herbs. Yum!

        Its good you get your meat from nearby, what about your veggies? Are you claiming that every single thing you put into your mouth is grown locally?

        Get yourself into Guinness Book of World Records then as the only American who does that. (or Westerner, if you’re not in the US but some other modernized hi-tech nation)

      • jose marti on March 31, 2011 at 07:09

        I was simply saying that globalization is the main factor in being able to eat things “out of season”, in places were there are climatic limitations, basically any regions above the 35th paralell. I grew up in the DR and we used to have long periods in the 60s and 70s were there were almost no food imports and yet we were able to have a very diverse and natural diet . The seasonality in the tropics applies only to fruits but animal protein and tubers are abundant all year round.

      • Liz Downunder on March 31, 2011 at 16:20

        I’m in Australia and no, I’m not claiming that at all – the context of my answer (and your original post) was meat, not vegies. I do aspire to local seasonal produce but hey, my family likes bananas and they don’t grow where we live, so yes, stuff has to be shipped 2000kms. I will take advantage of that availability for as long as it’s there, just as you will continue to use algae (could you grow your own?).

        Animal products from animals fed their natural diet, are a more reliable and sustainable source of nutrition than vegies, no matter where you live.

    • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:29

      “I became vegan 10 years ago”

      So you ate meat before, then?

    • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:32

      “I know what I’m doing. Some people don’t.”

      All other species know exactly nothing about the nutritional content of their diet. Yet look at them go. All healthy and shit. What’s so special about humans that we have to know what we’re doing, or we run the risk of doing it wrong?

  22. Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 14:43

    In addition to the above, most vegetarians I know are not veggies for health reasons. They are veggies for cultural and religious reasons. They will not eat animal flesh, and especially the thought of beef is sacreligious to them.

    I do realize that many in the “health world” choose to become vegetarians for health reasons, which for me as a life long vegetarian from a family that has been lacto-veg for centuries of generations, never made sense. In my opinion the only reason to become a vegetarian is for ethical or religious reasons. As far as health, like you and the other commenters here point out – a vegetarian may or may not be healthy, depending on how they go about it.

    Since my family went about it right, and since I go about raw vegan right, we have always been healthy. But maybe we are exceptions, I don’t know.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 15:04

      I’m guessing you’re of Indian descent. I have lots of Indian readers (some lacto-veg) and my wife and I have a ton of Indian friends, some lacto-veg, some have chicken in their diets, but no other meat I’ve ever seen.

      But even vegetarian Indian food is, I think, a world apart from vegan, cooked or raw. For one, I have never felt deprived eating veg Indian. Hell, the first time I had the milk curds (forget what they are called) in a yellow curry, I mistok it for a chicken curry.

      Fine by me. And, incidently, Indian is my favorite ethnic food, followed by Thai, But I have to admit that I prefer the lamb curries and butter chicken. I do like the chickpea dishes a lot, too. Oh, and butter chicken… OMG.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 15:22

        The milk curds are called “paneer”. The thing with many Indians is that they don’t know how to do lacto-veg right anymore either since the introduction of mono-crops in India.

        You have to give the vegan world credit for bringing light to all of the other types of non-mono grains that are available now such as the non-grain grain quinoa and others.

        And I think we in the raw/living vegan community are bringing information to Americans regarding various nutritious oils and the benefits of more and colorful veggetables in their diets as well as healthful processes like sprouting and dehydrating.

        These are things that benefit the paleos/primals as well.

      • TandooriChicken on March 30, 2011 at 19:33

        DRR, you’re probably of Indian descent, judging from your comments. As am I. I grew up eating mostly vegetarian cuisine (mom’s home-cooked every night) with the occasional chicken curry. Many of my meals are still all veg. However, I’ve consciously pulled back from rotis and rice and I’ve never felt better. I also eat many more eggs and meat now, and I’ve never felt better.

        People are different, and I don’t fault you for being vegan. If it’s working for you, great. It all comes down to being aware that there are other systems out there that are nutrient-dense, junk-free and extremely healthy. I’ve always felt “paleos” and “veg/vegans” can be on the same side of the fence as long as they are decent, respectful people. We’re both trying to get people away from SAD, processed food, and the “diseases of civilization.”

    • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:38

      “a vegetarian may or may not be healthy, depending on how they go about it.”

      A little meat here and there is the right way to do vegetarianism. Funny that.

  23. Asclepius on March 29, 2011 at 14:57

    Watching that vegan video you have to ask yourself where is the exuberance? Where is the vitality? Most of the participants seem to be rather sedentary and the main activity is manual labour to process their food. Where was the ‘play’? The short exercise section showed piss-poor physical ‘hustle’. I have seen more vigourous exercise in an old folks home. I suspect that the ‘vegan retreat’ focuses perdominantly on food because at a subconciously there is an obsession born of malnourishment.

    The other thing I note is that the vegans seem to be androgenous. You cannot tell the difference between many of the men and the women. They are all stick thin. I guess that is the evolutionary factor coming in to play. When times are lean, procreation is superceded by survival.

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 15:12

      Asclepius, I’ve been on a number of raw/living foods retreats and they were exuberant in a wide variety of ways – hear me?


  24. Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 15:16

    I do think you are correct that many vegans do not eat healthy. That is because their diet consists of a large amount of heavily processed foods. We are living in the US which is the land of abundance in terms “junk”.

    I had the recent experience just a while ago. I was on a road trip with 2 other vegans. Long hours driving and of course we would get hungry or just want to “snack” out of boredom. We would find a health food store and the other 2 would stock up on vegan crackers, cookies, cup-cakes, etc.

    I stocked up on tomatoes, avacadoes, different colored bell peppers, nut cheeses, etc.

    That’s the way to do vegan right . Not processed grains and sugars.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 15:21

      While I don’t think there’s a way to do vegan right (and cheese isn’t vegan) — and as I point out — there is NO SUCH THING as a vegan mamal that I’m aware of. Besides the protein sources pointed out for other primates,even herbivores inject important amounts of bugs while grazing.

      Veganism is a MYTH, through and through.

      But, if you’re going to do it for sure, you need the highest quality food you can get, and you definitely want to get decent amounts of fat from avocados, coconuts, macadamia.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 15:24

        Nut cheese is not vegan? How so?

      • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 15:45

        I thought you meant nuts, cheese.

      • Michal on March 29, 2011 at 20:50

        Wtf is nut cheese?

        Nevermind, if you get nut cheese then you should shower more often.

      • Adam on March 29, 2011 at 22:46

        Damn Michal, that made my day! Can’t stop laughing!

      • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 22:53

        And you don’t even need soap!

    • Jorge from Venezuela on March 31, 2011 at 10:02

      “I was on a road trip with 2 other vegans. Long hours driving and of course we would get hungry or just want to “snack” out of boredom”

      Are you doing raw vegan right?
      Do you think you are stronger or superior to your vegan’s friends?
      That is why you need to be grazing constantly?

      Hahaha! what a joker!

      How many hours was your trip?
      Also define “snack out of boredom”.
      I don’t get it, such situation doesn’t exist in my world.

      Grazing all the time, so you don’t get bored hahaha!
      Hey man you can use your brain and think and rationalize. Well only if your undernourished diet allowed it.

      As a human apex predator, I can fast during a trip up to 2 or 3 days. I only need water.
      I don’t worry about food.

      Is easy: fasting and upon arriving break fast eating big prey.

      I read some of your above replies and at most, I think your “right or wrong dilemma” is funny, but this was the most funny of all.
      A vegan bashing his vegan’s friends for their food choices. Hahaha! priceless

      In my humble opinion there is nothing like doing raw vegan right, because veganism is a food obssesion, a delusion that goes againts human nature, againts human evolution, againts yourself and so on.
      Don’t try to defend the undefendable.
      Listen to your body, your constant hungry is just a sing that something must be wrong.

    • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:46

      “That’s the way to do vegan right”

      Wikipedia says:
      “Veganism is the practice of eliminating the use of animal products.”

      Seems to me it would be really hard to fuck this up.

  25. Kelly on March 29, 2011 at 15:27

    70 bananas and 20 pounds of watermelon? WTF???

    As soon as he talked about The China Study, I turned the video off.

    I’m fairly new with primal/paleo/very low carb, after reading Taubes’ Good Calories, Bad Calories last fall.
    I just plain don’t understand the vegan, or even vegetarian thought process now (I was both of these at different points in the 90s, because I listened to McDougall and Barnard, was gassy, bloated, lethargic, headaches and gained 40 pounds. I’m just glad I figured it out by researching and reading.)

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 15:40

      “I just plain don’t understand the vegan, or even vegetarian thought process now ”

      That’s because you had no foundational basis for your vegetarianism.

      I’m a vegetarian for cultural, religious and ethical reasons – not health.

      That will not change. I am firm in my convictions.

      I never understood people who became vegetarian for “health reasons”.

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:53

        “That will not change. I am firm in my convictions.”

        Until you get sick. At which point you’ll review your priorities. You _are_ smart, right?

  26. Tomasz R. on March 29, 2011 at 15:46

    This example proves that in modern western society it’s no good for you to have children. With children you are in danger from being attacked by a law system, with either full-scale many years prison term, or a prolonged drama of divorce, or perhaps only kidnapping by government.

    And if you don’t have a business to inherit then it doesn’t make sense financially. It works like that: a parent is the one who pays to grow a child into an adult, while profits from the labor of this adult go to a corporation that hires him and to government in form of taxes.

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 18:47

      MRA alert!

  27. Kelly on March 29, 2011 at 15:48

    Becoming vegetarian for “health reasons” makes just as much sense as doing anything else people do to *think they are going to be healthier for it.
    I’m glad you are firm in your convictions, to each their own.

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 16:26

      “Becoming vegetarian for “health reasons” makes just as much sense as doing anything else people do to *think they are going to be healthier for it.”

      Oh, so now you “get” the “vegetarian thought process”?

  28. phill on March 29, 2011 at 15:51

    It’s always sadening to hear that a parent is enforsing there children to be vegan. I never knew it could lead to death though. Your post has opened my eyes. So sad.

  29. Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 16:22

    “Becoming vegetarian for “health reasons” makes just as much sense as doing anything else people do to *think they are going to be healthier for it.”

    Oh, so now you “get” the “vegetarian thought process”?

  30. keithallenlaw on March 29, 2011 at 16:27

    Not for once Richard, should you in the slightest consider yourself a bully
    on this issue. Especially when it involves innocent helpless children.

    I consider this a great service to humanity, and the health of our future
    leaders, the children. Thanks for being bold enough to express these
    dietary fundamental axioms.

    • keithallenlaw on March 29, 2011 at 16:29

      And WTF am I doing that gets my text here so f’ed up??? Arrrggg!

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 16:30

      “I consider this a great service to humanity, and the health of our future
      leaders, the children. Thanks for being bold enough to express these
      dietary fundamental axioms.”

      But didn’t you see the other comment Keith, the one where I’m being a disservice because this post is so negative?

      • keithallenlaw on March 29, 2011 at 16:52

        Nope. I only took the time to read what you posted. Am I too biased???

  31. Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 16:33

    Richard Nikoley, despite all of my extended family (cousins, aunts, uncles, etc) being lacto-veg, which you say is healthy, none of them are as healthy as me – a raw vegan. Why? They eat the paneer, the milk, the yogurt, the white rice, the wheat, and very little vegetables. Like I said, since the mono-crop revolution in India, the Indian diet has gone to hell.

    That’s why diabetes is epidemic in India. They see me sit down to a plate full of live, enzyme-rich food like sprouts 3 types of raw, uncooked and marinated greens tossed with garden fresh tomatoes, bell peppers, avacados and sprinkled with macademia nut oil and sesame seeds and marine phyto planktons and they think I’m nuts. Meanwhile what little organic veggies are found on their plates are so overcooked to have lost all nutritional value.

    That’s why I’m healthy and they ain’t.

    The only way paleo can work is if you eat a very large portion of a wide variety of vegetables along with it.

    The raw-er, live-er the better.

    • Morrigan on March 29, 2011 at 17:40

      How do the “live” enzymes make it pass your stomach acid?

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 14:55

        Easy: They’re protected by the indigestible plant fiber they’re encased in!

    • Brian Scott on March 29, 2011 at 18:15

      I’m curious as to what nutrients would be missing from a meat or lacto-/ovo- based diet that can be made up through vegetables. I expect a fair amount of the vegetables are fermented as well, right?

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 18:45

        Yes Brian, fermented veggies are excellent for health and easy to ferment at home.

        I get all my nutrients , fats, acids, minerals, vitamins, enzymes, etc from veggies, marine phytoplanktons (algae), nuts and seeds.

        One doesn’t need meat to meet their nutritional needs.

        The reason why new paleos diss the vegetarianism or veganism is because the vegans around them eat crap so they think one cannot be healthy on a vegan diet. But if one is eating non-processed raw food and enough of a variety of it that covers the nutrients, they will be healthy.

        I feel the “raw foods movement” has shared alot of nutritional information with us that the regular cooked vegan movement has not. That is because of their extensive research into the nutritional content of vegetables and their emphasis on veggies and not on “whole grains”.

        Nonetheless, not ALL grains are bad for you. In moderation they are just fine.

        Then you have things like quinoa, amaranth and wild (black) rice that are good for you.

        We’ll see a few years down the line how all these big time meat eating paleos are going to fair. They are enthusiastic now because just like new vegans, they are feeling the benefits of switching up a food regimen. However, they WILL have to tweak their diet when they reach a plateau and some illnesses start showing up.

        My hunch is that they will HAVE to add more raw greens, sprouts, fermented veggies, marine phytoplanktons – the stuff I eat.

        Time will tell, indeed.

      • keithallenlaw on March 29, 2011 at 19:23

        If it makes you feel better I do eat some raw beef once in a while.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 19:40

        Keith, why in the world would you think what you eat would make me feel any type of way? Narcissistic, much?

      • keithallenlaw on March 29, 2011 at 23:58

        Then go beat your drum somewhere else then. Geez…Is there a blog anywhere where one can share their believes without someone trying to change those believes within??? Cant find one that shares your ideas?

        “One doesn’t need meat to meet their nutritional needs”

        Your delusional!

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 10:20

        “We’ll see a few years down the line how all these big time meat eating paleos are going to fair. They are enthusiastic now because just like new vegans, they are feeling the benefits of switching up a food regimen. However, they WILL have to tweak their diet when they reach a plateau and some illnesses start showing up.”

        Google Kleiber’s Law and The Expensive Tissue Hypothesis.

        Meat eating (scavenging, at first) is what gave us the inversely proportional brain/gut to apes (exactly inverse proportional in terms of total energy) beginning probably around 4 mya.

        That’s more than “a few years down the road.” Moreover, it was only scavenging of meat, gathering from tide pools, and hunting that enabled the mass of migration around the globe with zero modern convenience or protection from the elements.

        All the while, as H. Sapiens is migrating and surviving an ice age, the plant eaters are stuck back in the forrest.

        I plain point of fact, there is simply no reason in the world to assume that vegetables even come close to offering the nutrition, health, longevity of animal foods.

        Your problem, DRR, is that you’re really not thinking for yourself. Here’s an old post that speaks to this.

        Oh, an ever heard of Malhotra?

        “For six years Indian researcher Malhotra registered how many died from a heart attack among the more than one million employees of the Indian railways.

        “According to Malhotra’s report employees who lived in Madras had the highest mortality. It was six to seven times higher than in Punjab, the district with the lowest mortality, and they died at a much younger age. But people in Punjab ate almost seventeen times more fat than people from Madras and most of it was animal fat. In addition they smoked much more.”

        Here’s the paper, just in case you want to start thinking for yourself.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 31, 2011 at 02:01

        Madrasis also eat animal fat. They are lacto-vegetarians or meat-eaters, not vegans.

      • Al Ciampa on March 30, 2011 at 22:44

        “Time will tell, indeed.”

        Still at 18 years. What do you want to know?


      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 15:03

        “However, they WILL have to tweak their diet when they reach a plateau and some illnesses start showing up.”

        Funny, that’s the same argument used against vegetarianism. You know your argument is bullshit when it’s used to refute both sides. Oh, but my side knows the truth! That’s even worse. Tell you what, bring evidence to support your shit, or cut the shit altogether.

    • EdwinB on March 29, 2011 at 21:20

      Doing Raw Right do you just enjoy typing things to self-congratulate yourself on your cleverness? Outside of the tropical and equatorial regions most people have never had any sort of diversity or year round vegetables until perhaps the last 50 years.

      The only thing available in winter and early spring would have been root vegetables or pickled/fermented vegetables.

      Cooking most vegetables will make whatever nutrition they have more available.

      I’m always supicious when I see people talking about enzymes. What’s your source of celluase? What specific enzymes do you think are present in raw foods?

      What does paleo

      • EdwinB on March 29, 2011 at 21:22

        What does eating wheat have to do with paleo? Tossing up dietary choices here as a “paleo-fad” is a nice straw man but completely irrelevant. This site in particular doesn’t claim to advocate any type of food re-enactment.

    • J. Stanton - on March 29, 2011 at 21:56

      “The only way paleo can work is if you eat a very large portion of a wide variety of vegetables along with it.”


      Vilhjalmur Stefansson would like a word with you, followed by millions of Plains Indians, quite a few Inuit and Yupik, and the entire population of Europe and Northern Asia previous to agriculture.

      I’m pretty sure all of them could kick our butts, too.

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 22:21

        My money’s on Vilhjalmur and his friends LOL

        I doubt Mr. Doing-it-right has heard of Stefansson though. His lack of saturated animal fat has adversely affected his critical thinking skills, so there’ll be no reasoning with him. I know they say don’t feed the trolls, but maybe we should feed them some saturated fat…

      • keithallenlaw on March 30, 2011 at 00:01

        Hear hear!

    • Adam on March 29, 2011 at 23:08

      Pretty irrelevant really.

      You are healthy on a raw vegan diet done correctly, great. How would eating a exactly how you eat now with the addition of grassfed/pastured animal products do to your health? Would you be worse off?

      A dear friend of mine started eating a vegan diet 15 years ago. She started it because she was pretty obese and unhealthy. Within a year, she lost all the weight she had wanted. The first 5 years on the diet, she was an avid runner/cyclist. Today, she no longer exercises, she hasn’t had her period in 4 years (she’s 38 this year), she is almost bald cos more than half her hair has fallen out, she is always in a foul mood and brooding all the time (10 years ago, she was fat BUT happy)…

      Before you think she’s eating the wrong stuff, let me assure you she is meticulous about her diet. Raw organic vegetables of all colors makes up the bulk of her diet, avacados, nuts, beans, olive oil… She makes her own bread so she can control what goes into it.

      She was very intrigued by my diet as in the last 2 years, I have lost over 10″ on my waist, cured my diabetes, regained hair on my bald spot, cured my decayed molar that my dentist was about to pull out (should’ve seen his face when he saw my tooth literally remineralize!)….etc. But when she saw what I ate, which is pretty much the same, except with plenty of animal fat and meat, she lost interest. She didn’t even want to hear the science.

      Sure, she WAS healthy on a vegan diet. Sure, she thrivED.

      Not anymore.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 08:21

      “Richard Nikoley, despite all of my extended family (cousins, aunts, uncles, etc) being lacto-veg, which you say is healthy”

      Didn’t say that. I said that it’s nothing like veganism. By definition it includes animal products so there is the potential to make it very healthy.

      I am ver well aware, from all the commenters of Indian descent over the years that there are now serious health problems and also, the body compositions I see are almost uniformly not good with largely overweight women and pot-bellied men.

      Going back to cooking with ghee, coconut oil, palm oil, using coconut milk, and focussing more on rice than on the various nan and grain based equivalents for carbohydrate would probably be a positive step in the right direction.

      I don’t think there’s anything magical about your diet. That you work to achieve high levels of variety is good. Since most plants evolved various toxins for defense against animals eating them (fruit being an exception where eating them is what multiplies them) it makes sense to vary the load of toxins you ingest over time.

      Or, you could just eat meat predominately.

      Here’s something you ought to try, just for the eye opening experience. Go to fitday, USDA database or whatever you like and put in some amount of beef, calf, or venison liver. Then for whatever caloric value, put in the same total calories in whatever mix of varried vegetables and/or fruits you eat. Feel free to use what you consider the most nutritious. Now, compare the nutritional profile.

      Next, keep upping the amount of your fruit & veggie mix until you achieve a nutritional profile on par with the liver.

      Reflect. The implications should be clear.

      • Tomasz R. on March 31, 2011 at 13:05

        The highest amount of per-calorie nutritients comes from herbs and natural spices. This includes medicinal benefits (eg. turmeric combined with black pepper fights cancer). Junk food diet has them replaced with MSG and petroleum-based artificial flavors from factories, which adds to the reasons why it’s so devastating for the body. I haven’t heard of fruitarians spicing their fruits too. I’m not sure if there’s anthropological data how much herbs and spices were used in paleolithic, but a common assumption is that at least shamans new how to use them. Traditional neolithic diets and indian-type vegetarian diets tend use a lot of spices and herbs.

      • Jared on March 31, 2011 at 13:32

        @Tomasz Do you often pull random “facts” like this out of your ass? You realize that to make such an extraordinary claim like turmeric and black pepper fighting cancer you need proof? Those of us who believe in empiricism are not on the same page as you. Thanks.

      • Tomasz R. on April 2, 2011 at 09:36

        There is a problem with proofs in health. They come too late! It was a common knowledge, for many years, that turmeric and black pepper fight cancer. Same with garlic or brocolli sprouts. But proofs start to appear only recently. Which is few thousands years since turmeric is used.

        Imagine a situation before proof appeared. People get cancer. Those who are “empiricists”, “sceptics” or whatever who shun folk knowledge of curcumin and black pepper’s power to fight cancer don’t use them and thus die. Those who are either enthusiasts, willing to try things, or conservatives following ancient spicing customs use turmeric and black pepper and have a greater chance to live. Cost is almost zero, as those spices are cheap, and have no negative effect.

        Finally, after many years, proof comes, and those who rejected using natural substances to fight cancer can be added to Darwin’s awards list.

        The first time I’ve heard from this:

      • Jared on April 2, 2011 at 17:36

        Sorry Tomasz, but you can say what you just said about any other crackpot idea as well. The likelihood that tumeric and pepper fight cancer is exceedingly low. Can you even describe what kind of mechanism that would take?

        The problem with your supposition is that there is very little negative to believing it. So a false positive is incredibly cheap. A false negative on the other hand is very expensive. This is true of most crackpot ideas. Our monkey brain often finds patterns where they don’t exist and is much more likely to make a false positive mistake than a false negative. This is why, again, we must rely on empiricism to save us from ourselves….

      • Tomasz R. on April 3, 2011 at 09:29

        You don’t have to have science as a religion, up to the point of being impotent to make decisions if there’s no scientific work describing topic of the decision. The main point about Paleo and Weston A Price Foundation-type lifestyles is that you can trust experiences of native or traditional cultures. And they tend to value herbs and spices for both healing and culinary effects (also geting high effects and libido enhancing effects and others). Traditional knowledge is empirical, it’s based on real-world experiences of using or consuming particular substances, and observing what had happened to the users. It’s no scientific though, so it’s perhaps not good enough for “empiricists” like you.

      • Jared on April 3, 2011 at 12:05

        Ok, as a disease of civilization, cancer is exceedingly rare in these people. Why exactly do they know how to cure it then? Or even anything about it? Do you see how believing this idea should require at least some preliminary proof or evidence since it doesn’t make sense within the context of everything else we know.

        It doesn’t take anything more than a healthy skepticism to find these ideas farfetched and just pulled out of someone’s ass.

    • TandooriChicken on March 30, 2011 at 19:40

      Hint DRR – It’s the wheat and the white rice. Plain and simple. Way too much of it in the SID (Standard Indian Diet). Where we come from (Maharashtra) we also have tapioca starch pearls as a snack (sabu dana). Also, the pre-occupation from leaner times with force feeding you at every meal, disguised as caring and concerned aunties that tell your mother, “don’t you feed him?”

      Nothing wrong IMHO with the paneer, raw milk, ghee (YUM), or copious use of coconut.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 31, 2011 at 02:08

        I know all about the dysfunctions of the current Indian diet, Tandoori. As well as other dysfunctions in Indian culture. Fortunately my parents raised us on healthy food and healthy mindsets, but I’ve still got my share of extremely intrusive and oppressive Desi uncles and aunties.

        You can take the Indian out of India but you can never take India out of the Indian.

  32. kateryna on March 29, 2011 at 16:43

    “Marine Phytoplankton is a single-celled aquatic organism, or micro-algae. It is not a plant, seaweed, fungus or herb”

    So single-celled aquatic organisms are vegan?

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 16:51

      C. Weed.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 16:52

        Yes, algae is vegan. Vegans even eat things that are still growing (sprouts). The live-er, the better.

    • Ruben on March 31, 2011 at 01:36

      Eating single-celled creatures is no problem. That’s still vegan. The threshold for eating meat is at exactly 189763 cells per organism. Didn’t you know?

  33. Stop the Madness: Vegans Keep Killing Their Kids | Free The Animal | Kids For Nutrition on March 29, 2011 at 18:13

    […] in the case of obese babies and children, even with fatty livers, … … Read more: Stop the Madness: Vegans Keep Killing Their Kids | Free The Animal ← Gluten free for autistic kids? – Ask Health […]

  34. Sue on March 29, 2011 at 18:15

    I was shocked at how skinny this guy was who posts over at bananas.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 18:47


      I have a bead I’m investigating and it is that there may be a high degree of anorexic disorder in the fruitarian sect. I think these people see themselves as bigger than they really are.

      And so, I’m henceforth going to be a little “gentle” on that specifically. Until I know more.

      But yes, this is a stark example of how a Jewish concentration camp victim in WWII sees himself as starving while someone who looks nearly or completely the same sees himself as the picture of health.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 18:50

        And what if we don’t need all the weight and muscle we think we do? They look skinny to me too, but as long as they are healthy – as they claim – who’s to say they are too skinny?

        Chubby people can also be in optimal health but someone else might think they are “obese”.

      • CG on March 29, 2011 at 19:06

        That’s completely backwards. By definition, being obese IS NOT healthy. I means your level of fat is too high and you are either over-feeding or in the middle of malnutrition (which I’m using to mean starving in this case e.g. mothers of tribes who give kids their food yet look overweight as discussed earlier).

      • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 21:05

        You need to research a bit ther DRR. What fuels our immune system? Our own amino acids do. One way to describe natural aging and death is a continual and slow loss of lean mass.

        Basically, when you’ve lost about 40% of your lean mass combined with old age, you die.

        Guarding lean mass within the context of a rational diet is one of the best if not the best things you can do for longevity.

      • EdwinB on March 29, 2011 at 22:18

        All aboard the frail train? I’ll take a pass on that one.

      • Emily Deans MD on March 30, 2011 at 04:58

        There have been some studies (though not particularly good ones) linking eating disorders and vegetarianism:

        My patients will tell me they tell people they are vegetarians so they don’t have to eat at restaurants or family BBQs, etc, which is obviously not the same thing as vegetarianism *causing* eating disorders. However, there are some suggestions that zinc deficiency and tryptophan deficiency that is more likely on a vegetarian diet, for example, will make one more prone to obsessive behavior. I don’t know that has ever been proven, though anyone who is anorexic should be taking a zinc supplement.

        Fruitarianism is a hard row to hoe – very restrictive, lots of work to get the basic nutrients you need (excepting B12 and DHA/EPA, of course as essential and that you cannot get without supplementing on such a diet, and many others that are likely optimal, such as taurine, creatine, carnosine, etc.). It can be done and to say something positive about 30BAD at least there they recommend lots of calories (only way possible to get nearly all the micronutrients from fruit, raw veg) and ban anyone who seems to be frankly anorexic or promoting eating disorders. I haven’t made a scientific investigation of it, but in some other raw food/extreme food forums moderators disappear for a while to do extended fasts and other things which is quite suspicious for eating disordered behavior. And certainly the process of semi-starvation and very low calorie diets is known to lead to food obsession, food rituals, body image changes, thinking normal weight people are fat, etc. It’s well documented in the literature.

        I also think the SAD promotes eating disorders, particularly in women, by virtue of making it nearly impossible to maintain weight without being obsessive and counting, and making it highly likely at low calorie counts that you will be malnourished. Eating disorders have been popping up in younger and younger populations – used to be anorexia was a disease of older teenaged girls, now it seems to extend to kids as young as 7, boys and girls. Overall the percentage of people with anorexia remains about the same – I think only a certain small percentage of people have the mental capacity to deliberately starve themselves. However, binge eating and bulimia numbers have skyrocketed in the past 30 years (and also populations sturggling with these disorders have gotten younger too) which I (personally) attribute to the SAD and the ridiculous government dieting advice, though it has not been systematically studied.

      • Mark Sisson on March 30, 2011 at 18:32

        Good points, Emily. I apologize to anyone with an eating disorder who reads this, but I have to chime in here. Clearly, not all fruitarians are anorexic, but I suspect that a significant number of anorexics and other ED sufferers are drawn to fruitarianism for the perceived benefits of being able to exert control over their bodies while being given free rein to “eat all they want” of a narrow range of foods. It’s the perfect segue. In fact, fruitarianism may be to anorexia what methadone is to a heroin addict (which also makes fruitarianism a great move for drug addicts): a slightly more palatable way to continue living in your condition and feel better about yourself. But it doesn’t deal with the underlying psychological issues and the addiction aspects of anorexia. Think about it. As a fruitarian, you get to exclude 100% of a vast array of well-documented healthy foods (that’s the control part) and then feel justified in consuming all the so-called “healthy” fruit you want. All that sugar, all day long, feeding that addiction. No guilt, no ostensible self-loathing. And you can’t possibly gain muscle using this strategy, so your self-perception of being larger than you actually are is limited, regardless of how much strength training you try to do. Furthermore, I note the admonition rampant in the fruitarian community that everyone should do some cardio every day (to burn off all the stored glycogen that would otherwise have you converting excess fructose to fat?). Chronic cardio is another hallmark of the anorexic mindset: demonstrating self-control by over-exerting the body in a desperate effort to burn off those nasty calories. This regular overdose of endorphins and sugar every few hours can be as addictive as cocaine or heroin to some people. It’s no wonder they so adamantly defend their territory. I will be looking more deeply into this myself.

  35. Brian Scott on March 29, 2011 at 18:21

    Richard, random note: there used to be a sidebar on the front page that showed the newest comments, but it seems to be missing now. I liked it to check if any new comments were made in posts.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 20:57

      I dunno, I change things sometimes. There is an RSS feed for all comments which is a lot more efficient then taking up R/E on the sidebar. It’s the link farthest to the right on the header.

  36. Brock in HK on March 29, 2011 at 18:43

    My key learning from the article on the lack of nutrients in this vegan mother’s breastmilk is that we should be very concerned about what we feed to the animals that produce the products we eat. It hadn’t hit home for me as soundly until this article. Malnourished mom produces malnourished milk and malnourished baby dies – this is an extreme example. However the circle of life extends: Feed a cow or other ruminant things it was not designed to eat, end up with beef / bacon etc. with nutrients we were not designed to eat, and we’ll be malnourished and suffer ills as well

  37. Katie @ Wellness Mama on March 29, 2011 at 19:36

    Great post Richard, as always. As a mom who has nursed three kids and is pregnant now, this makes me so sad to read stories like this! Even if adults can subsist on a fruitarian vegan diet, babies and children can’t! There is so much research connecting low-fat/low-protein diets in kids with a bevy of problems including hyperactivity, sleep problems, and nutrient deficiencies. When I’m pregnant or nursing, I’m extremely careful to make sure I’m getting enough fats (especially saturated), proteins (especially grassfed beef) and veggies (because I like them!). I also keep my Vitamin D levels up and have blood levels tested occasionally.
    Reading this definitely made me look forward to cooking eggs and bacon for my kids tomorrow morning!

    • Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 19:44

      And yet I know plenty of healthy raw vegan moms and babies. Go figure.

      • Leah on March 30, 2011 at 06:24

        It’s amazing what the human body is capable of. Malnourishment in the mother generally does not affect the quantity of breast milk a nursing mother produces, except in extreme cases. I could also say that babies that are fed formula are not undernourished, after all, they are getting ENOUGH food, but that says nothing about the quality of the food they receive. I don’t think most people here, or anywhere, would say that formula is an equal to breast milk, the same way I don’t think it’s right to say that breast milk from a poorly nourished mother is equal to breast milk from a well nourished mother. This falls into the same category of “surviving” does not equate to “thriving”.
        (I was up all night with a sick toddler, so pardon me if I did not explain my point clearly, I hope I am making sense 🙂 )

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 11:50

        “And yet I know plenty of healthy raw vegan moms and babies.”

        And you know this, how?

  38. Doing Raw Right on March 29, 2011 at 19:42

    Richard, off topic but I read this elsewhere, “”Don’t use shampoo; use real poo.” Cracks me up to this day. How weird am I?”
    ……………. you’ve not heard of urine therapy? Yes, can be used in hair.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 29, 2011 at 21:14

      One of my favorites from the comment archives, DRR.

  39. Michal on March 29, 2011 at 21:01

    One group looks better than the other, but both are doing some feel good hippy shit.

  40. EdwinB on March 29, 2011 at 21:26

    SWPL is stuff white people like? Get the fuck out of here. My Hawaiian wife is digging it. There’s no guilt for you to exploit here. Seriously your trying to appeal to some limp wristed sense of guilt? May I suggest you break your vegan fast with an entirely different brand of nut chese?

    • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 22:33

      LOL, that cracked me up.

      You can think Mr. Doing-it-right for the reminder that racism isn’t the sole domain of white people. I mean, after all, Indians are probably the most racist people on earth after the Japanese. In what other civilization is institutionalized discrimination not only allowed, but idolized? There’s only one thing I hate more than classist bastards, and that’s sexist, racist trolls.

      • tracker on March 29, 2011 at 22:34

        *thank, not think

      • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:28

        “I mean, after all, Indians are probably the most racist people on earth after the Japanese.”

        I can vouch for that.

        ” In what other civilization is institutionalized discrimination not only allowed, but idolized? ”

        Are you referring to casteism? That’s not racism, but still, point taken.

        By the way, my SWPL comment was a joke. And you don’t have to be white to be “right” – meaning SWPL.

        It just means a post-modern trend-setting or trend-following type – which most people who jump on a foodie ideological bandwagon are.


    • econo on March 30, 2011 at 04:34

      “White people” in the SWPL context refers not to white people in general, but to our anointed New Class white people. The ones who strive to maintain the latest opinions, behaviors, fashions, etc. at all times.

      Most white people fall into the SWPL category of “The Wrong Kind of White People”, I.e. people who shop at WalMart and believe in God (in the US context).

      It´s not a perfect taxonomy, but it´s kind of entertaining. See more here:

    • HeMan on March 30, 2011 at 10:21

      Good point. My significant other is of mixed race – Indian and Native (South American).

      She’s quite the fan of eating “my” way — similar to that which Richard and folks advocate these days.

      Fuck off with the race shit.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 11:03

        I think you’ve earned the dispensation to just say fuck off in general, HeMan. 🙂

  41. J. Stanton on March 29, 2011 at 22:01

    There’s a sound biological reason that LFRV people tend to look emaciated, and it’s for the same reason that people on the SAD are fat.

    It’s because eating carbohydrates without protein is proteolytic — even more so if your blood glucose is high.


    • EdwinB on March 29, 2011 at 22:15

      Interesting read there JS. From my N=1 studies, that seems to be consistent with the muscle i’ve put on since ditching my soda habit.

    • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:24

      I’m a raw vegan and protein has never been an issue – its in most things I eat.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 13:25

        “I’m a raw vegan and protein has never been an issue”

        Now you’re being a dishonest raw vegan. While you still haven’t given any details as to age and whatnot, you have said that you were lacto-veg al your life, went vegan 10 years ago and then raw 5 years ago.

        Your lean mass was grown partly or majorly on animal products.

        Consequently, you don’t qualify to make an argument as to the suitability of protein.

        We’ll have to wait on a a well muscled muscled raw vegan from birth (or, at least after being weraned from the essential animal food it needs) to come along. I’m not going to hold my breath.

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 15:11

        “I’m a raw vegan and protein has never been an issue – its in most things I eat.”

        That’s true. But since you can’t digest the plant fiber, and since the protein that is in the plants is encased inside that indigestible plant fiber, the question of whether the plant contains protein or not seems irrelevant at this point.

    • labbygail on March 30, 2011 at 17:05

      Great article, JS, thanks!

  42. Rafael on March 30, 2011 at 01:19

    Human needs meat. That is the only truth.

  43. Janey on March 30, 2011 at 15:23

    Richard –

    The science seems to be on your side. I’m on your side – at least for the last month that I’ve been primal. BUT…help me with this…

    I’m sincere and not trolling. This is the reason I went vegan in the first place (a year or so ago) and the reason that primal/paleo is failing me (or I’m failing at it.) I believe in the science of paleo, but THIS is just killing me. Any thoughts? Thanks.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 15:35


      Well, other than packing up, getting in your car and heading out into the wilderness and staying there until the point that you understand who you are and what you would do to survive, willing to kill an animal with your bare hands, I’d say stop watching OUT-OF-CONTEXT videos designed to tug at your heartstrings.

      It’s like the commercials of the starving kids all over the world. Are you emptying your bank account each time you see one?

      The interesting thing about that video is there’s no location, no company, no context.

      Now, here, this might help. Read the whole thing and watch the video.

      But, in the end, if sacrificing your health for ideals is what you want to do, it’s your choice. People sacrifice for ideals al the time. Whole religious institutions are built on it.

      • Janey on March 31, 2011 at 04:47

        Whew…excellent post by Dr. Eades. The video was tough to watch, but apparenly something I really needed to see and process. Thanks.

    • Jared on March 30, 2011 at 15:43

      Watch the start of the lion king.

      Now think about the fact that the circle of life is really all of those animals eating each other….

      We are all taking turns eating each other. You’re going to die someday, why do you care about the cow? Care about your family. Care about your friends. Care about yourself.

      Beyond that, support local, sustainable farming and animal husbandry. If you’re really upset about the cows, just eat chickens and stupid fishies. Eat eggs, whatever…

      In the meantime, like Richard said, going out into the wilderness does actually help. Watch Survivor, every season people get a little hungry and soccer moms and lawyers are suddenly killing and plucking the feathers out of a chicken and eating it to the bone. Go camping and think about what you would eat if you got hungry. Would you have what it takes to keep yourself alive?

    • J. Stanton - on March 30, 2011 at 17:09

      Just because you eat plants doesn’t mean animals didn’t die to make room for you to live on this Earth.

      What happens when land is cleared, plowed, sterilized, and planted with crops? All the wild animals that used to live there starve and die – or are crushed beneath the wheels of the plow and combine.

      “Habitat loss” is the reason wild animals die and species are endangered – and it’s not a passive, consequence-less act. It’s because we’re killing everything that used to be on the land, and redirecting all of its productivity straight into our mouths.

      You cannot disappear on this Earth. In order for you to live, many other creatures must die. All that veg*anism does is push the suffering to somewhere you can’t see it happen.


      • Doing Raw Right on March 31, 2011 at 09:42

        Who said the agenda was to live in a world free of suffering? Ain’t gonna happen. The Buddha’s 4 Noble Truths, anyone? That’s why veganism is not my religion. Rather, I have a religion and one of its tenents is a lacto-vegetarian diet. I am a vegan by choice that has nothing to do with religion or spirituality. I am not wed the vegan food ideology.

      • Liz Downunder on March 31, 2011 at 16:26

        But you said earlier: “I’m vegetarian due to cultural, religious and ethical reasons only.”

        Now I’m confused…

      • Doing Raw Right on April 1, 2011 at 12:39

        Liz, your from Australia? I don’t know how it is there, but in the US, people get kind of fanatical about their eating regimens. Hence why some say “veganism is a religion” or “vegetarianism is a religion” or “Atkins Diet is a religion”. Meaning, they make their eating habits a religion – most likely because they don’t HAVE a real religion, or feel a cultural vacuum or such. I don’t. I grew up in a very rich culture and was born into a readymade religion already.

        The vegetarian diet is just one tenent of that religion.

        I’ve never had to jump on an idealogical foodie bandwagon in order to make my life “relevant”.

      • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2011 at 17:05

        “I don’t know how it is there, but in the US, people get kind of fanatical about their eating regimens. Hence why some say “veganism is a religion” or “vegetarianism is a religion” … Meaning, they make their eating habits a religion – most likely because they don’t HAVE a real religion, or feel a cultural vacuum or such.” I don’t. I grew up in a very rich culture and was born into a readymade religion already.”

        The vegetarian diet is just one tenent of that religion.

        I’ve never had to jump on an idealogical foodie bandwagon in order to make my life “relevant”.”

        Jesus Fucking Chist that gives me a belly laugh.

        Here’s a shorter version:

        “Y’all take your eating habits so seriously it’s as though you believe in stoopid shit that isn’t real. In my case, my peeps believed in the same stupid shit that isn’t real for centuries and because it was a long fucking time, I never questioned it. So don’t believe in new stoopid shit that isn’t real cause we’ll laugh at that, believe only in old stoopid shit that isn’t real and we’ll pretend like it’s really real.

      • Liz Downunder on April 1, 2011 at 19:11

        Aussies don’t get fanatical about much other than footy and crappy reality shows. Yeah, life lacks meaning here too and as for diet, well you could substitute ‘Australian’ in ‘SAD’ and they would be the same. Although we don’t have HFCS here…yet.

        As to being relevant? I don’t define myself by my eating habits. I even give my real name on discussion boards. It seems you need to define yourself not even by your real name but by how you eat and the religion you were born into. And you need to tell all who’ll listen that you’re doing it right, and therefore we’re not because we’re not doing it the same as you.

        You said earlier that you were: ‘vegetarian due to cultural, religious and ethical reasons only”, then later stated that you were NOT vegetarian for religious reasons. So, I’m quite happy to have a civil debate with you but if you keep changing your tune to support your idealogy then we don’t have much hope.

        I am not following an ideology, but it certainly sounds as though you are, and you bring with that ideology all the hypocrisy and preconceived notions about being better than others, or ‘right’, that I would expect from someone who is wed to an ideology. I have no problem with how you eat but I know you’re not doing it any better than I am.

        Oh, and BTW, humans belong to tribes – that’s how we evolved. Today’s society typically lacks a common purpose that keeps the tribe cohesive – it’s all about the individual and fuck everybody else (yes, even to some extent in so-called Eastern cultures). So, we seek out others who share our views and a common purpose. Nothing wrong with that, but if that is all one has to make them feel relevant then that’s pretty sad, I guess.

        Oh, and one more thing – your assertion about “foodie bandwagons”. Sure, some people try the latest fad, however I think Richard already touched on it, but YOU WERE BORN INTO AN IDEOLOGICAL FOODIE BANDWAGON. I eat the way I do by informed, intelligent, considered, constantly-questioning CHOICE.

    • Eric W. on March 30, 2011 at 22:35

      Easy. Don’t eat farmed meat. Stick to wild-caught seafood etc.

  44. Liam on March 30, 2011 at 06:44

    I eat a lot like those vegans loads of veggies, some fruit, but also a whole whack of MEAT. That’s because eating for me is about being a human being not a receptacle for some moonbat’s ideology.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 07:34

      ” That’s because eating for me is about being a human being not a receptacle for some moonbat’s ideology.”

      I think they’d prefer the word “vessel.” 🙂

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 07:36

      Oh, and “moonbat” today, high priest, sage, prophet, pope, yogi, master a few hundred years hence.

  45. Noa on March 30, 2011 at 10:09

    “What’s next, a diet of plankton?”

    Also, ‘Quorn’. nuff said

    • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:16

      I love planktons!

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 15:28

        “I love planktons!”

        Don’t you mean you love phytoplankton? Plankton includes animals. You don’t eat animals.

  46. Marten on March 30, 2011 at 10:41

    This calls for an experiment. Join the 2 tribes together (meat eaters and the raw vegans.) Teach the meateaters how to fish, hunt and forage, and teach the vegans just how to forage, place in a wild environment and leave to fend for themselves for a period of time.

    No boats, planes, trains or truckloads of ridiculous amounts of bananas shipped in from the other side of the world!…

    I can guarantee it will only be a matter of days before you are fighting a rabid-eyed, salivating vegan off your fresh kill

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 11:05

      There can be absolutely zero doubt about that, Marten.

  47. Vincent on March 30, 2011 at 10:53

    Never was a vegan and definitely never will be one. But also no longer a reader of what I thoughtwas a very interesting blog. The part about the French parents is true but lacks a whole lot of information. The only one you kept, VEGANS!! Pneumonia? forgot about it. The mistrust of modern medicine by the parents? forgot about it. And the list goes on and on. But VEGANS!!! That you kept. Using this baby’s death and misinformation to strike again the vegan community makes me sick. I could go on on and on and write what I really think about you and some of your readers who commented on this post but it’ll be a waste of my time. This post has proven just one thing … Vegans and Paleo/Primal are just a way of eating. If you’re a pathetic human being whether you eat plants or animals don’t matter, you’re a piece of s**t !!

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 11:09

      Bye, bye, Vincent.

      • Vincent on March 30, 2011 at 11:19

        May we expect to see the whole information about that child’s death or will you let your post stay that way? For somebody so intent on giving advice and showing the right way of living, on this particular occasion you definitely screwed up. You went so many times in France you surely can translate the Yahoo France information about this and not give the vegan community a VERY good reason to describe us the way you described them on so many occasion …

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 12:09

        I am not aware of any additional information beyond the story as published.

        as a habit, I stay away from the news in general. I knew about this because about a dozen readers emailed it to me.

        Feel free to post a link. Run it through the translator yourself. Or, are you, as I suspect, one of those entitlement types where everything has to be done for you, and you get spoon fed dessert?

      • Vincent on March 30, 2011 at 15:38
        Some news articles about the case … And you suspect wrong. I don’t need the translation for myself, it was for your readers. I hoped that maybe you would do the right thing and write the all story not just the part that support your case against veganism.

      • Vincent on March 30, 2011 at 15:46

        If you want veganism to be shown as the unnatural, unhealthy and dangerous way of eating it is, you cannot post false or uncomplete information. For veganism to become a thing from the past, information must be accurate, provable and without bias.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 16:07

        Oh fuck off.

        In the first place, nothing I posted was false. Read it again. Secondly, I was unaware of additional information until you posted about it.

        It the third case, I don’t really care. I don’t originate news. I comment on news originated by news outlets.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 16:21

        I read the first article. I really don’t see what you’re going on about.

        Pneumonia and diarhea. I should think a lot of things could come along and kill an infant who would otherwise survive, if that infant were severely malnourished. And an infant doesn’t lose 30% of normal body weight overnight. Instead, she never had a normal weight because she was malnourished. Because her mother wasn’t even eating a diet suitable to a chimp.

        And how did the infant get thighs with skin that was as the skin of a grandmother?

        Probably a severer lack of necessary fats, among other things.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 16:30

        And now I’ve read all the articles linked, in full, in the original.

        What part about severe vitamin A and B12 deficiency don’t you get, and the fact that such deficiency is linked to susceptibility to infection – like pneumonia, for example?

        Or, does pneumonia cause vitamin A and B12 deficiencies?

      • gallier2 on March 31, 2011 at 04:35

        Furthermore, one can not conclude that it is lack of education or poverty of the parents, the father had an shop for organic products and the other child was home-schooled, thing which is a real hassle to do in France (virtually no one does it and I didn’t even know it was possible as the first artcile sugests).
        The first article also states that they could not link veganism to her death but for ‘juridic’ reasons, not logical reasons (it can only ‘judiciarily’ linked if that case can be categorized in one of the specific cases noted in the law, B12 deficiency is probably not one of them as these kind of laws tend to be quite old (going back to 1792 for some). Without specific amendment, it can not legally be ruled as the cause of death, but it’s quite obvious and the articles are quite clear about it, that it is the veganism of the mother that is the direct cause of the death. The pneumonia, as you rightly noted, had easy play on that poor weakend girl.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 31, 2011 at 07:12

        Thanks for the clarification, Gallier. I wasn’t sure I fully understood what was meant by that judicial part but that clears it up.

      • jose marti on April 1, 2011 at 08:54

        The article in Le Post even quotes a pediatrician referring to the inadequacy of a vegetarian diet in breast-feeding mothers. The couple seems at best awkward. Just imagine giving home-schooling to their children in France where public education is first rate.

  48. Christ on March 30, 2011 at 10:55

    could somebody do a post to finally lay to rest the myth of “live enzymes”.
    Plant enzymes in almost all cases(except papaya,pineapple) are there for the metabolic functions of the plant and have nothing at all to do with human digestion.

  49. Kris @ Health Blog on March 30, 2011 at 11:07

    I really hope those people will get sent to jail, I’m sure they didn’t have the intention of causing harm but people that are this stupid should really be locked inside somewhere as to not cause any more damage.

    • Vincent on March 30, 2011 at 11:14

      Before hoping something like that toward another human being may I remind you that those parents have lost their child???? And like I wrote earlier, Mr Nikoley conviniently forgot a whole lot of information about this baby’s death. Basically, everything that tend to prove that the parents veganism is just one of many factors that lead to that child’s death !!!

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 11:46


        I didn’t conveniently forget anything. I used them for my own purposes. And it’s an honest purpose, because we are biological organisms, we require certain things as such, and this is but one example of many failures along the same lines. One doesn’t raise a baby on ideology.

        You know what? It’s sad that this baby died. The loss of the parents? Fuck them, and I do not “morn their loss.” I morn an individual who will never have a shot at a great life because in her helpless state, she was let down.

        Now, you’re welcome to raise all coincidental variables you want. In my world, when you ignore nature explicitly, nature bites back. Humans are remarkably resilient, having evolved to survive an ice age without a “safety net.” All other potential variables pale in comparison. Pneumonia? Gimme a break. Unless you can show that she lost 3 kilos from it. If that even was the proximate cause, it’s because she was ill suited to resist infection in the first place, and AWOL when it came to fighting it off.

        If the child had not been severely underweight, compromising its immune system which is fueled by one’s own amino acids (lose 40% of your lean mass, you die), but died anyway, nobody would have the slightest question in the matter.

        BTW, I thought you were out of here. There’s so many other Paleo blogs with vibrant comments sections to go to, after all.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 12:00

        I might just add that the baby was 29% underweight from average.

        Just a coincidence, I guess. Move along. Nothing to see here.

    • Doing Raw Right on March 30, 2011 at 12:13

      Then my tax dollars go to feeding them 3 meals per day in jail, as well as medical insurance, which I myself don’t even have. Nope. Better they get sterelized.

      • Dana on March 30, 2011 at 12:51

        Yeah, they get great medical care in jail. Great food, too. Look into the Illinois jails sometime–the Weston A. Price Foundation is all over their asses for feeding prisoners soy. Like anyone has a prayer of getting their life back on track after prison time if they’re gonzo out of their minds from being fed poison for the past ten years or so.

        How about we quit invoking the powers of the state to ruin other people’s lives when they’ve already been met with the natural consequences of maltreating their child. Going to prison will have the same effect as sterilization as long as the guards don’t rape the wife; a good thirty years or so will give them plenty of time to reconsider their stupid dietary strategies and by the time they get out, the wife won’t even be fertile anymore.

        I’m more concerned for their older child who will now be at the mercy of whatever passes for a foster care system in France. (Hopefully it is better than ours is–they better be getting *something* back for all those taxes they pay.) Maybe she’s got extended family who can take her in, and her parents were the throwbacks in the bunch. If she’s lucky.

      • Dana on March 30, 2011 at 12:52

        Oh yeah I forgot–this happened in France, so your tax dollars aren’t even involved in the first place. Tsk.

        Although, if you’re so broke you can’t afford health insurance, you’re getting it all back in a refund anyway.

      • Doing Raw Right on March 31, 2011 at 02:32

        What refund? Getting it back from whom?

  50. Thompson on March 30, 2011 at 11:16

    Irresponsible mother stops feeding kids properly, one develops epileptic symptoms:

    Hilariously tragic.

    • J. Stanton - on March 30, 2011 at 11:43

      The best response: “I would pray about it a lot.”

      • Tomasz R. on March 30, 2011 at 13:01

        Best reply: “Some forms of epilepsy are symptoms of B12 deficiency. My temporal lobe epilepsy was. It’s been over a year since I started supplementing and I haven’t had a single relapse.”

        BTW. Temporal lobe epilsepsy is suspected to cause spiritual and religious experiences, like seeing gods or spirits presence.

        BBC Horizon – God On The Brain

    • CG on March 30, 2011 at 12:38

      What’s even more disturbing is, what can we do as helpful people, when we know parents are sending their kids down this path?

      From my perspective it’s like looking at the cafeteria at schools. Who is going to listen to me? How can I get millions of people to change? How can I move entire companies? That’s not to say I’m not doing my best personally, but looking at the scale of the whole thing seems monumental.

  51. Dana on March 30, 2011 at 12:42

    I disagree that there can possibly be such a thing as “overnourishing.” A child with fatty liver is as malnourished as a child who dies from drinking nothing but soy milk and apple juice. The difference is that the child with fatty liver is not being shorted enough on this or that nutrient that they die from the shortage. Or, if they do die, they take longer to do it.

    Nourishment is one of those either/or things. Either you are nourished or you are not. If you aren’t getting enough nourishment, by definition you are not nourished. Fatty liver comes from not enough of certain nutrients, choline in particular. Fatty liver is also linked with fructose overconsumption but I don’t consider fructose a nutrient. I have yet to hear of someone who’s died from fructose deficiency.

    Agreed about the differences between vegan and omni malnutrition of children, though. You have to *not give a child enough food* on a suitably omnivorous diet to kill them. By sheer accident you tend to get at least enough nutrients on an omni diet to not die outright of deficiency. But you could overfeed a child on a vegan diet–if an 11 month old child will let you overfeed him or her to begin with, which is debatable–and they’ll still sicken and die.

    Someone on Facebook tried saying today that they know vegan parents with thriving kids. I said, “How many supplements are they taking?” I know Paleo folks will sometimes supplement, but it’s not because the nutrients aren’t there at all. Good luck getting methylcobalamin, retinol, cholecalciferol, or menaquinone without eating animals or their “products.” (Even people in San Diego have trouble getting enough sun for adequate vitamin D3 production.)

    I had to have two sets of orthodontic braces when I was a kid because my mother would rather eat junk food than think about her children’s health. (It doesn’t help that we’ve become so divorced from our biology, philosophically speaking, that we apparently believe human bodies are grown on wishes and prayers.) All three of us were born at over 10 pounds, all three of us have weight issues and Mom was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes at age forty. I can’t even imagine what hell I’d have gone through had she been vegan.

    • A Eilola on March 30, 2011 at 13:32

      If you ate a liver and lots of carrots every day, wouldn’t you “overnourish” yourself on Vitamin A?

      • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 14:08

        You could potentially do it with liver, not carrots. That’s beta carotene, not vitamin A.

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 15:44

        “If you ate a liver and lots of carrots every day, wouldn’t you “overnourish” yourself on Vitamin A?”

        The question is not if we could. But who in their right mind would do it intentionally? And obesity takes years to create. Who in their right mind would do it intentionally day after day, meal after meal for years on end?

        A child grows because of growth hormone. He eats more to compensate. If he grows fat, it’s because of insulin. He eats more to compensate for that too. In either case, the overeating is not intentional, it is driven by growth, which is not intentional either. The only intentional overeating I’ve heard of is from clinical studies. The same thing that applies to overeating and obesity, also applies to over-nourishment and vitamin A poisoning.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 13:39

      Your splitting hairs and taking semantics, Dana.

      Sugar is a nutrient. And nutient is where the word nourishment comes from. It is, literally, to apply or imbibe with nutrients.

      Moreover overnourished is not opposite of malnourished. The former is simply an excess of nutrients with no regard to quality and the latter implies quality suitable to purpose. Consequently, an individual can be botth overnourished and malnourished.

      “but I don’t consider fructose a nutrient”

      Then you are very sorely at odds with biology, chemistry and plain old reality and you’re doing it on ideological grounds, which is a real fucking shame for an intellect of your caliber.

      You’re conflating non-essential with general.

      • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 15:52

        Forget semantics. Just go with the hypotheses that you’re dealing with instead. When you speak of over-nourishment, that’s the Ein-Eout hypothesis. But when you’re talking about veganism, that’s the carbohydrate hypothesis, i.e. hormones, physiology, nutrients, essential elements, etc. The two hypotheses are mutually exclusive. When you talk about veganism, you talk about physiology, you explicitly acknowledge that calories is not what makes people fat. Therein lies the questions about fat kids and over-nourishment. They’re fat not because they eat too much food, but because, just like vegans, what they east isn’t actually food.

  52. Dana on March 30, 2011 at 12:45

    Oh and I used to be online buddies on LiveJournal with a woman with three kids. She’s vegetarian. She feeds them vegetarian. (I don’t remember if she’s vegan–I don’t think so, though, last I heard.) All three of her boys have ADHD. Their dad’s mentally ill from the way she described him, but it seems like half the time mental illness comes from malnutrition as well–who knows what sort of background *he* had to contend with in his own development. Her solution is to put her kids on Ritalin and get them government help. Doesn’t even occur to her that nutrition could be the problem.

    (I don’t object to government help on principle. I see programs for kids with mental issues as similar in principle to having a police or fire department. But if you’re DOING something to make your kids be messed up in that way, your first step is to put out the damn cigarette before you go to bed, in a manner of speaking.)

    • Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 13:42

      “I see programs for kids with mental issues as similar in principle to having a police or fire department.”

      So I’m going to be getting kids with mental issues coming over if I have a break in, or my house catches on fire?


      • Al Ciampa on March 30, 2011 at 23:19

        As much as I hate getting caught up driving under the influence through a roadblock, this was classic!

        Maybe they should post the kids at the roadblock instead. Cops would get a night off, and I would be home free!


    • Doing Raw Right on March 31, 2011 at 02:35

      Scroll down to see my comments about ADD/ADHD at the bottom.

  53. I gotcher animal cruelty right here, shitheads | The Low-Carb Curmudgeon on March 30, 2011 at 13:40

    […] these happy assholes. I’d seen their story mentioned around Facebook and when Richard at Free The Animal finally weighed in I figured I might as well put in my two cents […]

  54. Ken on March 30, 2011 at 17:01

    What’s really interesting is that no one has commented on the fact that they are in a napoleonic code based legal system. Whereas Americans (and anyone from a country that was one part of the British Empire) is based on common law (or some form of). In France, the burden of guilt lies on the accused not the accuser.

    • gallier2 on March 31, 2011 at 04:58

      In civil right it’s partly true in crime law it’s definitly false. We have what’s called “présomption d’innocence” and it’s a big deal. Sarkösy managed to violate that law during his process against Villepin and only due to his presidential immunity and the “tameness” of the media could he get away with it.

  55. Richard Nikoley on March 30, 2011 at 17:38

    Just for the record, my interest in this is primarily that people become wary of the hype surrounding a vegan diet. I think it’s profoundly unhealthy and if you’re pregnant, going to be soon, or have kids you ought to be doubly cautious.

    Nobody ought be surprised that when you feed an animal radically different from the way it evolved to eat, bad things are likely to happen. And I always hold to Occam’s Razor: the simplest explanation that accounts for all the facts is usually the correct one or, alternatively, the explanation that requires the fewest assumptions is usually the closest.

    Accordingly, what happened here is pretty clear to me.

    That said, I have not said anything like I hope the state gets ’em, throws ’em in jail, or anything like that. It’s none of my business, nor is it any of yours, nor it is the state’s. It’s the business of those parents, grandparents and most particularly, the other child.

    Tossing ’em in the can for 30 years isn’t going to bring the infant back, nor is it going to cure any harm to you or me or anyone outside the family in France, because none of them suffered any harm.

    There’s no such thing as a “debt to society.”

    The very best that can come of this primarily is that they see the error of their ways and minimally, do right by their other child going forward or, if they can, hand the child over to someone who will. Secondly, that others take this sort of thing to heart.

    Now, had they purposefully harmed their daughter rather than simply being ignorant and stupid, It would still be none of my business but I would not care what the state or anyone else did to them. In an earlier comment I wrote something to the effect that I don’t care about their loss, fuck’ ’em, something like that and I retract that, actually. I had not really spent much time thinking about the issue beyond just wanting to get the cautionary word out.

  56. 03/31/11 – Yoursday on March 30, 2011 at 19:02

    […] Stop The Madness: Vegans Keep Killing Their Kids – Free The Animal […]

  57. Flying Burrito on March 30, 2011 at 21:34

    Regarding the video juxtaposition; good gawd, it couldn’t be more black and white which ones are healthy and fit and which ones are dying of starvation, malnutrition and malnourishment! One day I hope my injuries are healed-up well enough to do Mov-Nat too. But old rotator cuff and ankle injuries keep me hobbling along at Mark Sisson’s 80 percent rule, hoping one day to incorporate the other 20.

  58. EdwinB on March 31, 2011 at 00:48

    Interestingly enough the only fruit wrangler who looks like he has any muscles is the coconut guy in the video. Probably because hes getting a ton more fat (than the Auschwitz Allstars) from the coconut he presumably eats.

    • noa on March 31, 2011 at 03:08

      And it should be noted that he does look genuinely good. Not just for his (assumed) age. The guy looks like a powerhouse. But we dont know anything about his dietary habbits. What if he just recently went raw from a e.g vegetarian diet or a well supplemented vegan diet. perhaps he is just one of those folks that can eat anything and get away with it. I have a friend like that, who can stuff himself with garbage and still have an excellent health profile and a build to envy.

  59. Doing Raw Right on March 31, 2011 at 02:28

    Here’s some more starving vegan babies that need to be taken away from the parents by Big Brother;

    @Dana, what do you mean if I’m broke and can’t affored health insurance I will get a “refund”?

    I’m convinced that what passes for many cases of ADD and ADHD is just kids being overly stimulated on computers, TV, video games and other such nerve racking sh*t.

    They need to get out doors into nature, breathe fresh air, run around, and exhaust themselves like kids used to do.

    And also – homelife. I see many kids of single parent homes with issues like that.

    You said the kids’ father had a mental illness so that would most likely contribute – if not genetically – the stress of having a mentally ill father is equal to or great than the stress of growing up in a single parent household.

    I work with kids from dysfunctional homes and really – if their parents would have made better relationship choices……………….. well, woulda, shoulda, coulda.

    And parents these days honestly believe that divorce does not affect kids negatively. Don’t know where they got that idea from – certainly not from the kids because its as obvious as day to me.

    • TandooriChicken on March 31, 2011 at 09:13

      Well, here’s somewhere we can agree. How does one expect kids to sit in one place, or drain their brain on TV and get something positive out of it. Kids have a lot of energy, and are meant to get sun, run around, run into things, run into each other, climb trees, play tag, get bruised and scratched, and then sleep well at night. Not sit in a chair all day, take “accelerated learning” classes starting in elementary school and then have their parents wonder why they are so distracted and can’t sleep at night.

      Homelife also has a lot to do with it. Kids also need guidance and discipline to direct their energy to positive ends and while I applaud the single parents who can do this it certainly can’t be easy based on the sheer number of screwed up cases I know of.

    • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 16:09

      “I’m convinced that what passes for many cases of ADD and ADHD is just kids being overly stimulated on computers, TV, video games and other such nerve racking sh*t.”

      You’re also convinced a vegan diet is good for humans.

  60. Walter on March 31, 2011 at 02:49


    I’ve been read through Jimmy Moore’s old posts. I’ve two thoughts. He might have started his second podcast “Jimmy Moore & Friends” cause he heard that you said he couldn’t interview everybody 🙂

    And Jimmy Moore stirs up vegans even more than you do and that can’t be good for your image 🙂

  61. Jim Arkus on March 31, 2011 at 03:36

    I just got around to watching the videos.. that second scene in the fruitarian one.. God help me, I thought that was a woman until he started talking! And the rest of them aren’t faring much better…

  62. Ali Santiano on March 31, 2011 at 15:35

    i wonder what it would look like to have a paleo vs. frutarian competition in crossfit 🙂
    Deadlifts, pull ups, sprints, all that… anyone got any links for something like this?

    • EdwinB on March 31, 2011 at 18:21

      Deadlifts they would be absolutely pathetic, in face any measure of limit strength. Frutarians always post up slow-twitch muscle fiber/endurance athletes. I’m not even sure DR could obtain much lifting strenght at this point I think his tendons have to be like tissue paper.

      There is a vegan lifter they throw up as the Australian Bench Press Champion. He’s relatively but not remarkbly strong and seems to be perpetually injured – he’s also not a frutarian.

      Frutarianism appears to be an excellent diet if you want to be a human on a hamster wheel. Running or biking endlessly with no destination in site.

      • Richard Nikoley on March 31, 2011 at 19:06

        And how did he built his lifting bulk in the first place.

        Powerlifters who built their bulk on th animal and then repented and got saved are nothing to consider.

      • EdwinB on March 31, 2011 at 21:18

        I agree, I don’t think you can find a frutarian strength athlete that ranks anywhere. It’s an extremely poor diet to develop strength on. Even full on cooked vegan I can’t think of any that are in the top 10 of their respective weight classess. I know theire are some strength-endurance athletes like Mike Mahler who are vegan but protein supplementation factor heavily in their diets.

  63. Doing Raw Right on April 1, 2011 at 12:41

    Is being muscle bound and being able to lift a heavy amount of weights important to people who follow the “paleo” diet?

    • Jared on April 1, 2011 at 12:47

      It should be important to everyone who doesn’t want to spend the last decade or so of their life in a nursing home.

    • noa on April 1, 2011 at 13:25

      Being strong and fit is important to all animals, humans included. Eating what is appropriate for the individual species help in this regard. Bulls get huge and strong on grass, or what about elephants?

      Vegans will point towards the large apes to explain their dietary habbits, but there is part of the equation that they seem to miss completely. These apes are STRONG. The muscularity of gorillas is downright awe inspiring. But smaller apes like chimpanzes too are fiercely strong. I certainly wouldnt want to wrestle one even if it had no fangs. So I am thinking. Why doesnt vegan humans look anything like that?. Why doesnt their diet followed by what amounts to playing about for a couple of hours a day make them strong and muscular?

      Then I look at ‘primitive’ people. Like in French Polynesia where you can still find tribes that just never cared much for us silly romans and our traditions and stayed put in the forrests. I wouldnt want to wrestle their elder even though I have atleast 60 pounds on him and he 45+ years on me. His fibrous, bulky muscles with a cut that would make european athletes misty eyed with envy, tell me that I

      (1).am probably not at the advantage first assumed
      (2).he probably kills wolverines and honey badgers with his bare hands for fun and have done so for the past 40 years of his life.

      I know that they will eat anything that moves, can be dug up or scrabed off a rock with little discrimination and that if you suggested to him that he ate only plants he would laugh and still be laughing as you went back to the boat and all the way back to your house.

      • noa on April 1, 2011 at 13:52


        Our physiology doesnt care what tools brought about its fuel. It doesnt care if it came from someones field or the end of your spear. All it cares about is that it gets what it wants, which is plenty of animal fat and protein and whatever else we would have crossed path with when we were out looking for those 2.

        I will give you this. Modern paleo imitators are probably too discriminatory. Apparently we are missing out big time on bugs, larvae and large tarantula spiders. The actual still living paleo folks cant get enough of it. …but spider, bleh…

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2011 at 16:47

      “Is being muscle bound and being able to lift a heavy amount of weights important to people who follow the “paleo” diet?”

      Such ignorance. As though relative lean mass is unimportant or uncritical in in aging and longevity. As if immune systems are powered by a stupid religion and not amino acids.

    • EdwinB on April 3, 2011 at 03:26

      DRR, muscle bound? Meaning having a limitted range of motion? Completely inapplicable.

      I do power-snatches to warm up for deadlifts, its bringing the bar from the ground to completely overhead in one smooth fast motion. My range of motion isn’t limitted at all. Is being weak and having the appearance of fraility, important so vegans?

  64. Josh on April 1, 2011 at 20:03

    Jesus…that Adrian dude with the big white beard was the only one in the raw vegan video who looked like he could fight his way out of a wet paper bag…

  65. joe on April 2, 2011 at 09:08

    So what we really want to know is…who is the badass-lookin-old-dude in the movnat video?

  66. […] few hours later Richard Nikoley blogged the story. Vegans, head over there for some […]

  67. David H on April 3, 2011 at 11:55

    What a nice read, I think I found another nice blog that reports the truth. Richard, even though other people might call you angry, I’m just as pissed off with vegan lies and how the media demonizes animal foods

    • David H on April 3, 2011 at 11:57

      and you have the right to be pissed at blatant lies. Cheers! I look forward to future reads and to dig through previous posts.

  68. Gaylord on April 3, 2011 at 23:45


    • Richard Nikoley on April 4, 2011 at 01:34

      Shout for yourself, Gaylord.

    • Brian Scott on April 4, 2011 at 05:46

      That was a rather large non-sequitur.

  69. Bob Connors on April 4, 2011 at 09:15

    Holy shit, watching the “exercising” in that 30bad video was hysterical!

    I could actually hear the Mutual Of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom voiceover in my head:

    Marlin Perkins: “Now this is just amazing” dramatic pause. “Let’s watch as Jim approaches the tribe of stick people for a closer look. Maybe we’ll be lucky enough to see a full grown male. By the looks of these tykes I’d assume momma is close by keeping a watchful eye on her still-developing brood. We’ll have to keep our wits about us. These babies look hungry!”

  70. How To Get Abs on June 21, 2011 at 04:13

    How To Get Abs…

    Hey! This is kind of off topic but I need some guidance from an established blog. Is it very hard to set up your own blog? I’m not very techincal but I can figure things out pretty fast. I’m thinking about creating my own but I’m not sure where to s…

  71. Eliza on June 26, 2011 at 16:59

    The problem is you pick out the very rare occasions and make them sound like EVERY vegan child dies. The fact is they don’t.

    But we see more babies and children who are way too fat, being fed rubbish by their parents who don’t know better.

    Vegetarians and Vegans usually have a much greater understanding of nutrition, you can’t pull out the odd and unusual examples of the ones that got it wrong as examples of the whole.

    • Richard Nikoley on June 26, 2011 at 18:56

      Bullshit, Eliza, and if you read your last para, that’s the point. Omnivore kids die from neglect. When a vegan kid dies, it’s in spite of all concern. We are not plant eaters. It’s that simple.

    • Martin Levac on December 30, 2011 at 16:29

      “Vegetarians and Vegans usually have a much greater understanding of nutrition”

      Are you suggesting that greater knowledge of nutrition will produce better health? Let me remind that you that we know more than ever about nutrition and physiology yet we are fatter and sicker than we’ve ever been. It might even be a direct cause and effect relationship.

      If I sold food for a living, and if I knew that people who grow fat need to eat more to compensate, and if I knew how to make people fat, then I’d use this knowledge to sell more food, and ultimately increase my profits. Do you think others don’t already do this? Considering our state of affairs, it looks like lots of people are already doing just that with great success.

  72. D on November 23, 2011 at 07:18

    Harley’s performances are not impressive. They might qualify as decent for a competitive amateur, but that is it.

    Aside from that, you will never find an empty Kool-Aid jug near a vegan. Ever.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow by Email8k