hap. 25 - Extremes in Diet
 
Not all who profess to believe in dietetic reform are really reformers. With many persons the reform consists merely in discarding certain unwholesome foods. They do not understand clearly the principles of health, and their tables, still loaded with harmful dainties, are far from being an example of Christian temperance and moderation. {MH 318.1}
 
Another class, in their desire to set a right example, go to the opposite extreme. Some are unable to obtain the most desirable foods, and, instead of using such things as would best supply the lack, they adopt an impoverished diet. Their food does not supply the elements needed to make good blood. Their health suffers, their usefulness is impaired, and their example tells against, rather than in favor of, reform in diet. {MH 318.2}
 
Others think that since health requires a simple diet, there need be little care in the selection or the preparation of food. Some restrict themselves to a very meager diet, not having sufficient variety to supply the needs of the system, and they suffer in consequence. {MH 318.3}
 
Those who have but a partial understanding of the principles of reform are often the most rigid, not only in carrying out their views themselves, but in urging them on their families and their neighbors. The effect of their mistaken reforms, as seen in their own ill-health, and their efforts to force their views upon others, give many a false idea of dietetic reform, and lead them to reject it altogether. {MH 318.4}
 
Those who understand the laws of health and who are governed by principle, will shun the extremes, both of indulgence and of restriction. Their diet is chosen, not for the mere gratification of appetite, but for the upbuilding of the body. They seek to preserve every power in the best condition for highest service to God and man. The appetite is under the control of reason and conscience, and they are rewarded with health of body and mind. While they do not urge their views offensively upon others, their example is a testimony in favor of right principles. These persons have a wide influence for good. {MH 319.1}
 
There is real common sense in dietetic reform. The subject should be studied broadly and deeply, and no one should criticize others because their practice is not, in all things, in harmony with his own. It is impossible to make an unvarying rule to regulate everyone's habits, and no one should think himself a criterion for all. Not all can eat the same things. Foods that are palatable and wholesome to one person may be distasteful, and even harmful, to another. Some cannot use milk, while others thrive on it. Some persons cannot digest peas and beans; others find them wholesome. For some the coarser grain preparations are good food, while others cannot use them. {MH 319.2}
 
Those who live in new countries or in poverty-stricken districts, where fruits and nuts are scarce, should not be urged to exclude milk and eggs from their dietary. It is true that persons in full flesh and in whom the animal passions are strong need to avoid the use of stimulating foods. Especially in families of children who are given to sensual habits, eggs should not be used. But in the case of persons whose blood-making organs are feeble,--especially if other foods to supply the needed elements cannot be obtained,--milk and eggs should not be wholly discarded. Great care should be taken, however, to obtain milk from healthy cows, and eggs from healthy fowls, that are well fed and well cared for; and the eggs should be so cooked as to be most easily digested. {MH 320.1}
 
The diet reform should be progressive. As disease in animals increases, the use of milk and eggs will become more and more unsafe. An effort should be made to supply their place with other things that are healthful and inexpensive. The people everywhere should be taught how to cook without milk and eggs, so far as possible, and yet have their food wholesome and palatable. {MH 320.2}
 
The practice of eating but two meals a day is generally found a benefit to health; yet under some circumstances persons may require a third meal. This should, however, if taken at all, be very light, and of food most easily digested. "Crackers"--the English biscuit--or zwieback, and fruit, or cereal coffee, are the foods best suited for the evening meal. {MH 321.1}
 
Some are continually anxious lest their food, however simple and healthful, may hurt them. To these let me say, Do not think that your food will injure you; do not think about it at all. Eat according to your best judgment; and when you have asked the Lord to bless the food for the strengthening of your body, believe that He hears your prayer, and be at rest. {MH 321.2}
 
Because principle requires us to discard those things that irritate the stomach and impair health, we should remember that an impoverished diet produces poverty of the blood. Cases of disease most difficult to cure result from this cause. The system is not sufficiently nourished, and dyspepsia and general debility are the result. Those who use such a diet are not always compelled by poverty to do so, but they choose it through ignorance or negligence, or to carry out their erroneous ideas of reform. {MH 321.3}
 
God is not honored when the body is neglected or abused and is thus unfitted for His service. To care for the body by providing for it food that is relishable and strengthening is one of the first duties of the householder. It is far better to have less expensive clothing and furniture than to stint the supply of food. {MH 322.1}
 
Some householders stint the family table in order to provide expensive entertainment for visitors. This is unwise. In the entertainment of guests there should be greater simplicity. Let the needs of the family have first attention. {MH 322.2}
 
Unwise economy and artificial customs often prevent the exercise of hospitality where it is needed and would be a blessing. The regular supply of food for our tables should be such that the unexpected guest can be made welcome withou tburdening the housewife to make extra preparation. {MH 322.3}
 
All should learn what to eat and how to cook it. Men, as well as women, need to understand the simple, healthful preparation of food. Their business often calls them where they cannot obtain wholesome food; then, if they have a knowledge of cookery, they can use it to good purpose. {MH 323.1}
 
Carefully consider your diet. Study from cause to effect. Cultivate self-control. Keep appetite under the control of reason. Never abuse the stomach by overeating, but do not deprive yourself of the wholesome, palatable food that health demands. {MH 323.2}
 
The narrow ideas of some would-be health reformers have been a great injury to the cause of hygiene. Hygienists should remember that dietetic reform will be judged, to a great degree, by the provision they make for their tables; and instead of taking a course that will bring discredit upon it, they should so exemplify its principles as to commend them to candid minds. There is a large class who will oppose any reform movement, however reasonable, if it places a restriction on the appetite. They consult taste instead of reason or the laws of health. By this class, all who leave the beaten track of custom and advocate reform will be accounted radical, no matter how consistent their course. That these persons may have no ground for criticism, hygienists should not try to see how different they can be from others, but should come as near to them as possible without the sacrifice of principle. {MH 323.3}
 
When those who advocate hygienic reform go to extremes, it is no wonder that many who regard these persons as representing health principles reject the reform altogether. These extremes frequently do more harm in a short time than could be undone by a lifetime of consistent living. {MH 324.1}
 
Hygienic reform is based upon principles that are broad and far-reaching, and we should not belittle it by narrow views and practices. But no one should permit opposition or ridicule, or a desire to please or influence others, to turn him from true principles, or cause him lightly to regard them. Those who are governed by principle will be firm and decided in standing for the right; yet in all their associations they will manifest a generous, Christlike spirit and true moderation. {MH 324.2}
 
 
1) people RARELYy know the condition of their animals wherentheir milk and/or eggs comes from.
2) people in poor countries who do not not be asked to give up milk and eggs IF they can't replace them.
3) Milk and eggs are are becoming (in (1905) unhealthful. What about NOW?
4) we should teach people to cook without milk or eggs.
 
Only those who truly understand health reform should advocate for it.

Yes, Green, I agree, the word "how" is very important.
"How" do we provide healthy meals without eggs and milk, must FIRST be taught and considered and practiced BEFORE laying aside eggs and milk.

To simply banish eggs and milk is foolish IF the HOW to replace them has not received serious thought and attention.

But we are to learn the HOW, and move forward. Not just learn HOW and remain in the old eating patterns. In fact if we don't move forward we soon forget the HOW.

We all know there are Vegans and then there are vegans
I've seen both types

The word "vegan" has deep spiritual roots associated with eastern religions. It has ethical implications and moral commitment. A true Vegan sees the whole matter as "sin" and "righteous works".
It's difficult to invite them for a meal,for not only will they not eat eggs and milk, they won't eat a whole long list of things. Also they are usually on a two meal a day diet, which further restricts their already restricted intake of nutrients. It's almost as if food becomes sin to them and they will eat only certain items prepared in a certain way. And yes, they do tend to give the impression you won't earn heaven unless you eat like them. Indeed that is Pharisaic, and not only results in a critical spirit but also nutritional deprivation.

But not all who move away from eggs and other animal products are like that:
There are others who follow a plant based diet, who may refer to their eating as vegan, but it's not the same as the above.

The second group have decided to move away from eggs and milk products and to learn to cook with other foods.
They still cook pleasant tasting meals and experiment with many different foods to make delicious and nutritious meals. They do not condemn others, who have not embarked on the same journey, but are happy to share recipes and encourage people to try the recipes. Their focus is to eat for health, not for salvation. When they are invited out to someones home for a meal, they don't make a big issue over whether something may have an egg, cottage cheese, or milk in it. They no it's not a sin to eat an occasional egg. It's a learning journey, not a rigid journey. They are happy to share their discoveries and recipes and encourage people to try them, but don't belittle or put people on guilt trips.
There's a difference in sharing and encouraging others to try it, as opposed to demanding that they do it or perish eternally.

It's true those in the first group tend to get sick. And if you reread your quotes you will find those reprimanded had taken the first approach.
Knocked out a number of foods, not just eggs and milk, and taught it as a doctrine.

"The DOCTRINE of dispensing with eggs and milk should not be taught." It's not to be taught as a DOCTRINE. It's a journey, a progressive journey of learning to cook good healthy meals without eggs and milk, not a DOCTRINE. It's not a sin to eat an occasional egg. It's a journey into eating other nutritious foods to replace the eggs and milk. As one learns one advances gradually into new eating patterns.

So while it should not be taught as a DOCTRINE, we are to teach people, and learn ourselves, how to replace eggs and milk with other nutritious foods.
We are to learn the HOW, and move forward with common sense and respect for others. But I don't think we are to just learn HOW and remain in the old eating patterns

Well, Mrs. White makes it clear that we are not to give up milk and eggs until God reveals it is time. She doesn't say until we think it is time. She doesn't say until we see signs that it must be time. She doesn't say until the church tells us it is time, or until the food industry has made something delicious to replace the eggs--as if we were simply waiting to be able to please our palate on something new. She doesn't even say we are to give them up gradually over time. Here is what she says . . . .

[I've inserted reference numbers, but no text, to correspond with the list below.]

An unbiased reader, looking at the above passage, might acknowledge the following points:

1) We might have to give up milk and eggs at some point.
2) To give them up too soon will result in death.
3) Giving them up is considered by Mrs. White to be straining our health reforms "to the highest tension."
4) Only "a very small minority of the people" can be accommodated (health wise) by this extreme level of reform, having the ability to get everything they need (nutritionally) without the milk and eggs.
5) Anyone else (a member of the great majority) who listens to the voices of those who declare milk and eggs to be harmful, will "fail to supply the system with proper nourishment," and bring health reform into disrepute.
6) God has not required that milk and eggs be given up.
7) God will interfere to prevent the results of these too-strenuous ideas (it's too strenuous to give up milk and eggs).
8) When it's time to give them up, God will reveal this.
9) No extremes (i.e. giving up milk and eggs) in health reform are to be advocated (urged or called for).
10) We are not to teach people to give them up, but to "let [our] moderation be known unto all."

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Green Cochoa,
I apologize for overlooking the fact that you did indeed quote my full statement. Sorry

I wasn?t chastising you as you claimed, I just thought from your response to my statement that you were overlooking the caveat I attached to the last part and then I wrongly assumed (without checking) that you omitted it.

You said?

I did not quote the whole paragraph because I had already done so earlier in a post to you. Please see my post #101749. Also I do not see how the full statement changes the point I was making, i.e. animal food including eggs and dairy are stimulating foods. I left it out because it was not relevant to the point I was making. Please don?t attach some unseemly motive to its omission.

You said
Maybe where you live, you can't be a vegan. But where I live, and in most of N. America we can choose to be on plan A. I have been a vegan on plan A for 27 years .

I had some health problems back in my early 50?s, and a friend loaned me the book Counsels on Diet and Foods. I was highly motivated and read almost the whole book in a day or two. I immediately became a strict vegan- no animal products except some honey at times.I have never knowingly used animal milk during this period. My wife has slipped eggs into a menu from time to time, and, to keep the peace, I have knowingly eaten a dish containing eggs about a dozen times, maybe a little more.

I am now 80 years old, and I attribute my excellent health to God?s grace and the Adventist health message. I believed Mrs.White?s inspired word when she said:


I have never given much credence to all anti-vegetarian articles listing the dangers of a strict plant food diet. But I am quite aware that one can be a junk food vegan and that can be more dangerous than being a meat eater. There is an adage that all all vegetarians should be mindful of when shopping for food-

I am fortunate. I live in a place where I can get a great variety of fresh fruits and vegetables 365 days a year. Organic nuts and grains are readily available. My wife loves to garden, so we have God?s food for the picking.

If I lived during Mrs. White?s time I would have probably opted for plan B, but God has given many of us here and now in North America the priviledge going to plan A.

My situation is not all that different from many other Adventists, and I see no reason why, with much prayer and diligent effort, many can get back to Plan A, - the diet God provided for His lapsarian people.

By the way, when I saw such wonderful benefit from following the 8 laws of health contained in our health message I began looking further into Adventism, and was soon baptized into the faith.

TSDF is a compilation, but green knows this. Green LOVES eggs! He can have them, don;t make everyone else eat them. We should TEACH everyone NOW how to cook without them. Green will never hear God say, give up eggs and milk.Nor acknowledge what God has SAID in The Ministry of Healing...

You mean we shouldn't teach people HOW to stop smoking but not actually intend for them to ever to stop?

I'm curious as to what ways does Green consider honey an animal product.

How long have you been a vegan, kland? It seems you need to put something back into your diet that you have left out. Your reasoning skills are beginning to suffer already.

Mrs. White never once recommended smoking; on the contrary, she condemned it in the strongest of terms. That she recommended both milk and eggs, even including milk and cream as part of "the most healthful diet," and that she told a doctor not to teach people to give them up, shows they are entirely unlike smoking. How then would you arrive at such an invalid conclusion?

Here's one that would be more representative: Mrs. White has told us that a Sunday law will come. Because it must come, should we do all in our power to bring it about? or should we seek to delay it as long as possible? Then, when it comes, shall we continue our ordinary work on that day, or use the day, instead, for visitation of our neighbors in Christian evangelism?

Mrs. White said our church should avoid taking an official position about what to do on Sunday when the legislation comes--until that time has arrived. Many still try to cross their bridges before they have come to them.



The principle is the same today as it has always been, FOLLOW the Pillar of Cloud, don't run ahead of it. We may, today, teach people that when that time comes, we may have to give up our ordinary labors on the Sunday--but we must not take this step until God reveals that it is time to do so.

That is just as things stand on the vegan question. We are expressly told to wait until God reveals it is time before we give up milk and eggs.




I recall posting here once before that I have worked as a beekeeper. One of the other posters here has also--Rick, I think. I know bees well. And I know that they are animals. Honey is their product. You will have a hard time finding anyone, scientist or otherwise, who would deny that honey is an animal product. While it may be largely from the nectar of flowers, it is not entirely so, nor it is unchanged in its state from its original condition. Bees process the honey, both in their bodies (mostly storing it, but it passes their salivary glands as well), and in their hives. They dehydrate the honey until it reaches a humidity point at which it will not spoil, but be preserved. And, they may convert some of the honey to wax to help store the honey and build their hive.

The very definition of "vegan" has excluded honey from the outset.



But, you will argue, you aren't a religious vegan, just a dietary vegan. Alright, then, perhaps you would like to know that honey is not purely of plant origin. The following scientific article describes the process in more technical terms than most would like to know.

https://www.livescience.com/37611-what-is-honey-honeybees.html

Here's a pertinent quote from that page:



Perhaps more importantly, for those preparing for translation to heaven per Ellen White's recommendations, honey is off the list. Fruits and grains--that's it. No honey. No nuts. No vegetables. No milk. No eggs. No mushrooms. No meat. Those wishing to get to Heaven by their own works, on their own merits and laurels, should be consuming only fruits and grains--at least, if they choose to interpret Ellen White so narrowly as they seem want to do.


(Sorry, APL, that's from a compilation. You might not like that.)

Have you given up your almonds and potatoes yet?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

P.S. For those who see this last quote by Ellen White as being used in an imbalanced, out-of-context manner, I fully agree. The point I make is not that we should be giving up nuts, honey, or vegetables; it is that Mrs. White did not customarily choose to list all things when making a point. The statement is intended, based on its context, to contrast a vegetarian diet with a flesh diet. The same is true of the statement that says all nutrients may be found in the fruits, vegetables, and grains. She was contrasting a vegetarian diet with one of a meat-eater--she was not making any statement about milk and eggs in that statement. -- GC.

What is Mrs. White's counsel for the optimum Adventist diet for our day..?

The optimum diet:


So why did she, in her day, caution against the complete elimination of milk and eggs? They were not included in the ideal diet, so why not eliminate them?

She answers this clearly in the following inspired statements:


So, one can logically gather from these statements that eggs and milk are less objectionable than flesh foods. They provided essential nutrients to diets deficient in a variety of fruits, nuts grains and vegetables. Not only was it the poor who needed milk and egg supplementation, but during Mrs. White's time even prosperous families could not always obtain wholesome plant foods in sufficeint quantities year riound. Milk and eggs, then, were necessary to make up for the nutrional deficiencies of an inadequate diet.

Milk and eggs, can be discarded when God arranges circumstances where the best foods are available. The Lord does not always speak to us audibly in a still small voice. Many times we must wait until He opens a way for us, and when we see His providence in arranging favorable circumstances, that is evidence that He is speaking to us. Then we venture forth in prayer, faith and study.

We must always be open to new light that God brings to us after Mrs. White;s time. Overly washed and sanitized produce means we will need B12 vitamin supplementation. Living in cloudy climates may necessitate some Vitamin D3 supplementation. But God will make such information available to us as we sincerely choose to live out the health message.

The health message is our endtime manna.

There is no evidence that adequate B12 will be supplied from either not brushing one's teeth or eating unwashed vegetables. If either of these were a suitable replacement for milk and eggs, surely Mrs. White could have told us so, for those options existed in her day. Instead, she promoted "hygienic" cooking schools. Not washing one's produce is certainly not a part of the definition of "hygienic."



Eggs and milk were not flesh meats. We are to teach people both to give up the flesh foods and to cook hygienically. If you're trying to get B12 by the lack of hygiene in cooking, you're looking in the wrong direction to find either truth or health.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.