3 ms·

I read the book. It was a sarcastic comment. My point is that the reason why he died doesn't necessarily have to be linked with the Mucusless Diet Healing Syste

I read the book. It was a sarcastic comment. My point is that the reason why he died doesn't necessarily have to be linked with the Mucusless Diet Healing System, especially knowing that he didn't follow all the recommendations from the said book. The reason I made my original comment is because the benefits of fasting described in the submission are known for almost 100 years now (to a certain extent) and one may find it interesting to know where the roots are coming from.

fmihaila 8y ago
> I read the book. It was a sarcastic comment. Your sarcasm was misplaced. You stated that "the problem is that Steve Jobs ignored Ehret’s concept of a “transition diet,” and became taken with the idea of being a fruit-only eater right away." That was not the problem at all, as @stevehawk stated and my quote proves. You are pushing a pseudo-scientific book from 100 years ago and mentioned Jobs's name to enhance the recommendation's credibility. Jobs's belief in pseudoscience cost him his life. > The reason I made my original comment is because the benefits of fasting described in the submission are known for almost 100 years now (to a certain extent) and one may find it interesting to know where the roots are coming from. And the history of modern chemistry traces back to the days of alchemy; it doesn't mean there is any deeper truth to be discovered by reading alchemy books today.
- andreygrehov 8y ago
  I was wrong saying "the problem is", whereas what I should have said instead is that he didn't even follow the book, so there is no reason to avoid an interesting read. > And the history of modern chemistry traces back to the days of alchemy; it doesn't mean there is any deeper truth to be discovered by reading alchemy books today. You don't need a deeper truth, but be aware why the believed truth is truth, ie seeing the problem from all the angles. You don't know what you don't know.

fmihaila 8y ago

> I read the book. It was a sarcastic comment. Your sarcasm was misplaced. You stated that "the problem is that Steve Jobs ignored Ehret’s concept of a “transition diet,” and became taken with the idea of being a fruit-only eater right away." That was not the problem at all, as @stevehawk stated and my quote proves. You are pushing a pseudo-scientific book from 100 years ago and mentioned Jobs's name to enhance the recommendation's credibility. Jobs's belief in pseudoscience cost him his life. > The reason I made my original comment is because the benefits of fasting described in the submission are known for almost 100 years now (to a certain extent) and one may find it interesting to know where the roots are coming from. And the history of modern chemistry traces back to the days of alchemy; it doesn't mean there is any deeper truth to be discovered by reading alchemy books today.

andreygrehov 8y ago
I was wrong saying "the problem is", whereas what I should have said instead is that he didn't even follow the book, so there is no reason to avoid an interesting read. > And the history of modern chemistry traces back to the days of alchemy; it doesn't mean there is any deeper truth to be discovered by reading alchemy books today. You don't need a deeper truth, but be aware why the believed truth is truth, ie seeing the problem from all the angles. You don't know what you don't know.