In 1994, chronic health problems developed, and I turned to yoga and Ayurveda, the traditional medical/wellness system of India, for help. A blood test done in late December 1994 showed a serious deficiency of vitamin B-12, an apparent legacy of my many years as a vegan and fruitarian. I now use vitamin B-12 supplements (and have been attacked by extremists for doing so) to make up for the deficiencies of the "perfect" 100% raw vegan/fruitarian diet I followed for so many years.

The primary influences on me during this period were, in raw foods: Ann Wigmore, Brian Clement, and Gabriel Cousens. I got into Ayurveda via the writings of Dr. Vasant Lad, Dr. Robert Svoboda, Bhagwan Dash, David Frawley, and others. (Please note that Gabriel Cousens is not, and was not, an Ayurvedic influence for me.) During this period, I also dis-associated myself from Swami Kailashananda (the raw foods yogi), as his behavior over a long period led me to the inescapable view/opinion that he was thoroughly corrupt.

In 1996, under the influence of writers and friends in the yoga and Ayurveda communities, I started experimenting with raw dairy in my diet. This led me to my current diet.

Humanely produced, sanitary, raw cow's milk is readily available in the area I live in (San Francisco area: I use Claravale Farms raw cow milk). Lately (August 2000) I have been using yogurt instead of raw milk, as it is more convenient. Adding dairy to my diet has helped me in many ways:

• Increased my strength and stamina.

• Effectively eliminated physical cravings; milk and yogurt are comfort foods and anti-craving.

• Increased body weight, and the weight is staying on, rather than melting off.

• Increased hydration (many raw vegans are dehydrated--I was, before adding dairy to my diet).

• Increased sense of well-being; in other words, I feel better.

• Helped with my health problems, and also helped balance me, in Ayurvedic terms. There is another benefit of using dairy: it helped free me from the negative mindset of vegan anti-dairy propaganda. Finally, I could appreciate the gentle nature of Mother cow, and her generosity in sharing her milk with us. That is a far cry from the hateful rhetoric about dairy that one often hears from so-called "compassionate" vegans, e.g., "liquid meat," "cow mucus," "sexual harassment," and so on. [P.S. Pardon the sarcasm, but it would not surprise me if the preceding remarks motivate some "compassionate" vegans to send me "compassionate" hate mail.]

Fruitarianism in Retrospect

In 1981, I learned of a type of mental illness, something called anorexia nervosa, a type of eating disorder. I looked back at my fruitarian years and wondered if I had had an eating disorder then. At that time, my research was very limited, and I did not reach any firm conclusions.

In 1983, Karen Carpenter, the famous pop singer, died of heart failure caused by ipecac poisoning. (Ipecac is an emetic or purgative.) She had learned to use ipecac to vomit up food--the behavior known as bulimia. The bulimia was part of her eating disorder; she also suffered from severe anorexia nervosa. After this event, I was harassed quite a bit because I was, in typical raw-fooder fashion, very emaciated at the time. Many of my friends and co-workers asked me if I had anorexia.

Although I did not appreciate such attention at the time, it did motivate me to find out more about anorexia. I read all I could find on the subject. I asked myself whether my experience with fruitarianism was: a spiritual experience, an eating disorder, or some kind of weird food-faddist diet. My conclusion then was that the fruitarian experience was all of those things (but not at the same time).

Some observant readers may note that fruitarianism does not meet the technical diagnostic criteria for anorexia: self-starvation caused by fear of fat. However, fruitarianism often is/can be self-starvation caused by fear--fear of cooked food, protein, mucus; these are a few of the many fears promoted by fruitarian extremists. Also, mental-health professionals often diagnose any kind of self-starvation as an eating disorder; whether it is caused by fear of fat or other fears (fear of cooked food, protein) is not important. The similarities between fruitarianism and eating disorders is striking, and will be explored in a later article.

I would label my experience in fruitarianism in the following way:

Spiritual fruitarianism: up until the crash in 1973.

Toxic fruitarianism: (fruitarianism as an eating disorder) 1973 to second crash, i.e., end of 1975/76.

Conventional fruitarianism: second crash to phase-out (burnout) of the diet, in 1980.

The above types of fruitarianism are discussed and explored in depth in a separate (offsite) article I have written. [A second, related offsite article is also available.]

Spiritual fruitarianism was a generally positive experience for me, while it lasted. I moved from spiritual fruitarianism to toxic fruitarianism when I allowed the bogus fear of mucus, and the drive to be "pure" (mucusless, per the title of Ehret's book), to dominate me. When fear dominates you, it poisons you (your mind), just as surely as drinking deadly poison will poison your body. Those extremists who promote fear (of cooked food, protein, mucus) are spreading mental poison, and are promoting eating disorders under the guise of their "ideal, perfect, natural" diet. Fear is not the basis for a diet; it is, however, a basis for an eating disorder! (I should mention that one can have a rational, scientific discussion regarding the pros and cons of cooked food, and one can even believe in the mucus theory, and not be an extremist. Such fear develops into an eating disorder when it becomes obsessive and/or has a significant negative impact on one's life.)

While on the subject of spiritual fruitarianism, the following comments are relevant.

• When I experienced the "light" mental feeling one gets on a fruit diet, I thought it was pretty neat, and an indicator of spiritual progress. Since then, I have had the opportunity to do real spiritual work (yoga) on a different raw vegan diet, and I can vouch that, from direct firsthand experience, the "light" mental feeling one gets on a fruit diet is not a real spiritual feeling. The light feeling of a fruit diet is ungrounded, airy, a feeling of apathy and not being connected. [Such "light" mental feelings may actually be a symptom of a zinc deficiency. Further, in Ayurvedic terms, it may indicate a vata imbalance in the nervous system.] A spiritual feeling is warm, grounded, secure, loving, and one retains interest in things around them. It is not "spacy" like the light mental feeling of fruit; instead it is blissful.

• Spiritual fruitarianism, in my experience (and that of others I know, or know of), is a phase one passes through. It is not an end, but a transient growth path.

• Perfectionism and obsession with dietary purity can be very harmful if they drive you to self-starvation (whether via fruit diet, fasting, or other methods). The eating disorder anorexia nervosa is often characterized as involving the issues of self-control and perfectionism. These issues are also relevant to one who seeks perfection via controlling their diet, limiting it to the "perfect" food--(supposedly) fruit. However, underneath the self-control and perfectionism issues, it is my opinion there is another, even deeper issue that is relevant to both fruitarians and those with anorexia: love for yourself. We need to accept ourselves, and love ourselves, as we are right now. If changes are needed, acknowledge same, and work for change in a loving, sane, moderate, self-respectful way. Clearly, starving yourself to be "pure" (e.g., fruitarianism and the delusion of impurity) or because you are "fat" (anorexia and the delusion that you are not perfect because you are overweight) is not a sane or moderate approach.

• Many of the writers and so-called role models in fruitarianism are, in my opinion and experience, extremists and/or potentially dishonest about their diet. [The only fruitarian writers I can recommend are: Sapoty Brook, some of the folks involved in REAL News (Australia), and Morris Krok. By the way, Morris Krok now advises against a diet of only fruit, and he is an open, honest, and very nice person.] It is my experience and opinion that many of the advocates of fruitarianism, on closer look, reveal that they don't really follow the diet as closely as they claim to. Other advocates disqualify themselves by displaying the hostile, mentally unstable behavior of zealots (fanatics, extremists).

  Regarding the dubious honesty of some advocates of fruitarianism, I must tell you that for a time in the 1980s, I was probably no better. I continued to identify with fruitarianism, even though I was not fully on the diet, for some time--from 1980 into the mid-1980s. I finally realized that I was self-identifying with my lunch, and that doing so was a bad idea. I broke free from the "golden cage" of lunch-identification. (See my article, Functional and Dysfunctional Lunch-Attitudes, on the site for more on this subject.)

• Over and above the eating disorder behaviors so common in fruitarianism, I can now say (in 1997) that in my opinion, the biggest criticism of fruitarianism is that it is dishonest in so many ways:
  • Extremists promoting the diet as "ideal" and/or "natural" when it is neither--such claims are based on a false model of nature, and fallacious rhetoric, e.g., "apes are fruitarians," "humans evolved as fruitarians." Meanwhile, in reality, all the great apes deliberately eat some animal foods, because that is their natural diet, and the fossil record provides overwhelming evidence that the evolutionary diet of humans included animal foods.

  • The experts/role models who claim to strictly follow the diet (100% raw and 75+% fruit), but who binge-eat, eat in secret, and generally cheat on the diet.

  • The extremists who proclaim themselves as perfectly healthy, when they are so emotionally unhealthy that they cannot respond to criticism of their ideal diet in a civil, rational manner. (Unfortunately, I have encountered many such extremists in the past.)

As my knowledge of Herbert Shelton was limited at the time, I did not realize (until later) that having the dubious T.C. Fry as my introduction to natural hygiene was, in a sense, optimal. Because of this, and my skepticism of Fry, I did not fall into the trap of worshiping Herbert Shelton that I see many hygienists in. (Many of these folks are really good people and are sincere; some of them are not even aware that their view of Shelton is unrealistic and spiritually/mentally unhealthy.) I refer to the syndrome of worshiping Shelton as:

"Turn ON Herbert Shelton, Turn OFF Your Brain." ;-)

Please note here that:

1. One can respect (and quote) Shelton without worshiping him. I am not suggesting that anyone/everyone who quotes or admires Shelton worships him.

2. Although I disagree with Shelton on a number of points, I respect his positive achievements. Shelton went to jail a number of times for his beliefs--I think that deserves some respect! Indeed, the courage Shelton displayed by standing up for the principles he believed in, is in sharp contrast to the blatant corruption, dishonesty, and moral cowardice that characterize the current raw foods movement.

A minor but important point: I did not (and do not) describe myself as a "natural hygienist." I use the term natural hygiene-style here because it provides a convenient way to describe my diet during a certain period, and because the natural hygiene movement was an influence on me. Most readers will realize this from the material above. However, I thought it best to make it an explicit statement, as I have received hate mail from fundamentalist natural hygienists who apparently don't (or can't?) read very carefully, and who attacked me starting from the false premise that I was a natural hygienist.

• A diverse raw diet in which fruit is only a minor component is better than a diet in which fruit is the dominant food, as sweet fruit (with its ample sugar content) promotes cravings.

• A long-term pattern of frequent short-term changes in diet (e.g., frequent rapid shifts from cooked to 100% raw and back) is not good for you in the long run--it disrupts digestion and promotes cravings. By Ayurvedic principles, it may also promote hypoglycemia (common among long-time rawists).

• It is wise to be very skeptical of the "experts" and "diet gurus," especially if their writings contain a lot of nonsense and very little factual content. Note here that factual content can be real-world experience/observation and/or valid scientific research; needless to say, crank science--far too common in fruitarianism--does not count. (Note that these comments apply to certain recent well-known raw vegan writers as well; it is not limited to hygienists.)

• Raw diets do not guarantee perfect or even just plain old "excellent" health. My own health problems and those of others (friends and rawists on the email listgroups) attest to that. By the way, wild animals eating a raw, truly natural diet often die of disease. This is overlooked (or dismissed via weak rationalizations) by the extremists, of course. Truth often gets in the way of those peddling simplistic dietary dogma and solutions.

• Don't ignore health problems that occur on the diet because you think they are detox, or you have swallowed the lie that medical doctors are bad. See a qualified health professional if you have problems; things are not always what they seem. Your problem might be a deficiency, or something else. Don't let the extremist poison regarding medical doctors make you close the door to possible information and/or help. Don't sacrifice your health on the altar of raw dietary dogma!

• Self-healing is not the only form of healing. (A separate article on this is planned--not yet available). All healing modalities, even the ones that seem silly, have good and bad points. If one has enough faith in something, it often works, whether it is nature cure, drugs, healing crystals, or whatever. One can argue that it is the "placebo effect," but that does not matter to those sincerely seeking healing. Healing is wherever you find it!

  Our job, then, is to match the healing modality to the individual, the ailment, and the circumstances. One extremist who firmly believes that self-healing is the only healing tried to defend self-healing by claiming that nature is not a multiple-choice proposition, but operates only according to certain laws. That may be true, but it is also ego and ignorance that drives the extremist to believe that THEIR "knowledge" of nature and its laws is perfect and complete. Nature has many mysteries, and healing is, at least in part, one of them.

• Extremists are not your friend. They regard their simplistic dietary dogma as infallible. If the raw diet does not work for you, then they will tell you that it is your fault, you aren't following every single detail of their dogma, you are inferior, you are a failure, and so on. Those are the falsehoods such advocates raise to defend their bogus dogma. In effect, the extremists are saying something else between the lines: that their dogma is more important to them than you (a person) are, and more important to them than your health and well-being.

• Be open to new ideas and information. Adding dairy was a difficult thing for me to do, as I had to overcome the mental poisons of my own vegan self-indoctrination (i.e., vegan anti-dairy propaganda). When you are open to new ideas, a whole new world awaits you. I invite you to join me--and the others on this site--in exploring this world, the world called reality. Abandon dietary dogma, start thinking for yourself, and enjoy the challenges of an open relationship with reality. I think you will enjoy it!

However, when I was asked if I would contribute my experiences for this site, I psyched myself up to do it. Having done it, I hope that my story helps you to avoid some of the problems I experienced. You can learn from my mistakes, or do the same things and learn the hard way--ultimately, the choice is yours.

Because previous bio info relating to what I have discussed above has previously been released only on a piecemeal basis, and because some of the dates herein are best guesses, there may be very minor differences with information released previously. Such differences are due to the uncertainty regarding the dates of certain events (for years, I tried to forget parts of my fruitarian experience), and the off-the-cuff/reluctant nature of earlier releases of information. I state this because, if extremists can find the slightest discrepancies with earlier, partial info releases, experience has shown they will likely be quick to attack and call me a liar to deflect attention from the numerous other observations made here. Such tactics merely reflect on the desperation of the extremists, who want you to follow their dogma rather than think for yourself. (Encouraging you to think for yourself is a prime goal of this site.) If enough people think for themselves, the extremists will quickly go out of business.

• Some extremists will tell you that I am not a raw-fooder, because I am "only" 75-90% raw. Generally, however, you will find in the real world that those who are eating at least 75% raw or so (by weight) consider themselves serious raw-fooders. Those who promote 100% as the only standard are promoting their own pathological obsession with dietary purity. See the excellent Health Food Junkie article on this site for insight into how obsession with dietary purity can be considered an eating disorder (i.e., a mental illness).

• As one who is publicly critical of the excessive idealism and extremism so prevalent in the raw vegan movement, I have been, and will probably continue to be, a target of attack by extremists. In particular, if they can find anything here that they can use to attack me with, they will probably do so. Such attacks merely reflect on the immaturity and mental unbalance of the extremists.

I wish you good luck in your diet and health experiments!

--Tom Billings, August, 2000

Before writing to Beyond Veg contributors, please be aware of our email policy about what types of email we can and cannot respond to. Also note that unless you explicitly state otherwise, email received will be considered eligible for reprinting on our reader reactions page, and possible further comment from the relevant contributor and/or the site editor.

Back to Dietary Problems in the Real World
Back to Waking Up from the Fruitarian Dreamtime

Return to beginning of article