Fruit and the Oxalic Acid Bogey.
Many and varied are the creeds of Health Reformers, but all may be included within two main camps. And the opposing battle-cries are Instinct versus Intellect, Taste versus Theory, à priori versus à posteriori, Motives versus Purposes. Some overlapping and confusion of creed may be found in both camps, but in the main one is filled with lovers of Nature, the other with devotees of Science.
“We believe in simplicity,” cries the Nature-lover from the meadow where he is taking a sun-bath; “you are so complex, so artificial.”
“We believe in being ‘sensible,’” retorts the devotee of Science from the cabinet where he is taking an electric light bath, “you are so extreme.”
“Not extreme—consistent. Your treatment varies every month as the decrees of ‘Science’ change.”
“But your treatment varies every minute as the wind and clouds change. I can keep mine constant with mathematical accuracy, or vary the light to a nicety by pressing a button.”
And so also is it with regard to diet. The person who talks learnedly about germs and calories (though he never saw a germ or measured a calorie in his life) will be found in the same camp with the electric light advocate, while this other who cultivates a taste in harmony with Nature by consuming what he likes best of her unaltered products, he is found arm in arm with the sun-bather. But Science will by no means allow him to eat his uncooked food in peace. “If we all adopt that diet,” her pseudo-disciples cry, “what is to become of the potatoes?”
Now, with regard to uncooked foods, it would seem that as little fault can be found with ripe fruit in its natural state as with any article of diet. Yet even here “Science” holds up a warning hand and is succeeding in scaring people away from one of the most harmless, most wholesome and most neglected of foods.
Leaving generalities, let us come to a specific case, an actual difficulty propounded to me by a sufferer, one who had spent her substance till she could spend no more in having various parts of herself examined and in learned prescriptions and processes of cure, but who found herself as far from health as ever. Obsessed by certain theories of “Science,” this lady had acquired a dread of sugar in every form. Hence her query addressed to me: “In your book, No Rheumatism, you say that sugar is to be avoided. Why, then, do you recommend fruit, which is mostly sugar?”
I replied as follows: “The reason I recommend ripe uncooked fruit—in spite of its containing a certain quantity of sugar—is that it contains also purifying salts, and that for most people it is the pleasantest form in which these salts can be taken. Moreover, fruit sugar appears to be more wholesome than that formed from starch. When you say that ‘fruit is mostly sugar,’ are you not leaving the water of the fruit out of account? As the water often amounts to 90 per cent. this makes all the difference. Taking the fruits generally grown in this country the average proportion of sugar is seven per cent.
[This statement is based on the following figures given in Goodale's Physiological Botany:—
| Apples | contain | 7.73 per cent. sugar |
| Pears | " | 8.26 " " |
| Plums | " | 3.56 " " |
| Strawberries | 6.28 " " | |
| Gooseberries | 7.03 " " |
Grapes are stated to contain 24.36 per cent, but often contain much less and sometimes even more.]
“Now a person eating fruit ad lib., but allowed other foods, will hardly ever eat more than a pound or two a day (generally less). But suppose him to eat two pounds. Seven per cent. of this is 2¼ oz. If he eats only 1 lb. he takes 1⅛ oz. sugar. Now compare this with the amount he gets from starchy foods, say, bread, which contains fifty per cent. of starch and sugar. As the starch, if it is to be assimilated, must be (and as a general rule practically all is) converted into sugar during digestion, we get from 1 lb. of bread 8 oz. of sugar (to be exact, nearly 9 oz., because starch forms rather more than its own weight of sugar). But the weight of bread allowed for daily food, if no other starchy or sugary food is taken, is—according to orthodox physiology books—1 lb., 11 oz., yielding over 14 oz. of sugar. Now I reduce the starchy food to 8 oz. or less (No Rheumatism, p. 34), yielding at most about 4½ oz. of sugar. You see, then, that the patient can now afford to take even 2 lbs. of fruit, because this will bring his total of sugar up to only 6¾ oz., as against 14 oz. allowed by the orthodox. And if, as I recommend (p. 33), fruits containing but little sugar (especially cucumbers) are taken, his total sugar under my regime will be even less than 6¾ oz.
“As so many people fail to distinguish between fruit sugar occurring naturally in fruit and ordinary separated and concentrated cane sugar, or even beet sugar separated by various chemicals—‘shop sugar,’ in fact—I translate for you a passage from Dr Carton's Trois Aliments Meurtriers[20]:—
[20] Some Popular Foodstuffs Exposed, translated by D.M. Richardson. 1s. net. Daniel.
“‘Let us proceed now to the study of the third deadly food. The sugar contained in vegetables and raw fruits is a living aliment, physiologically combined with the protoplasm of the vegetable cells, associated with ferments and with vitalised chemical salts. The absorption of this natural sugar is effected by a harmonious contact, by an exchange of energy between the living vegetable cells and our living digestive cells.
“‘The sugar of commerce, on the contrary, is a dead food which has lost all association with vegetable protoplasm, with vitalised mineral salts and with oxidising ferments which would render it physiological. It is nothing more than a drug, a dangerous chemical, because Nature has nowhere presented it to us in this form.... Its absorption involves an anti-physiological irritation which over-excites the viscera, and when repeated ends by profoundly altering them.’”
“This is all very well,” cries Pseudo-Science, “but people may eat too much fruit.”
“Certainly, but then I warn them at once,” quoth Taste.
“But they have an idea it is good for them, and they disregard your warnings.”
“If they ‘have an idea’ which runs counter to my warnings and my penalties, to say nothing of my promises and my rewards, then they can only get that idea from you, Mr Pseudo-Science, with your theories and your figures and your long words.”
“Why not from your relative, Unnatural Taste? Anyhow, it is my duty to warn them.”
“If they don't heed my warning, they certainly won't heed yours,” says Taste.
“But I can paint such a picture of the trouble they store up for the future if they persist in excessive fruit eating!”
“Never mind about persisting and storing up for the future. I punish excess in fruit eating as in everything else by prompt discomfort and pain.”
“But what do you know about oxalic acid?”
“Enough to avoid it. Like every other poison it is repugnant to me.”
“Yet fruit which is so nice in the mouth may ferment in the intestines and form that very poison. Then what are you going to do about it?”
“Take care that not too much fruit is eaten another time.”
“But in the meantime the oxalic acid already formed must be neutralised at once.”
“No, no! It would be a pity to do that. Oxalic acid is the latest fashion. What would your patients do without it? And what would you do without your patients?”
“It must be neutralised at once. It can only be neutralised at the cost of abstracting lime from the system. Result: oxalate of lime, forming calculus, or ‘stone,’ which you don't want, and tissues depleted of lime which you do want.”
“So you get your patients after all. In fact, having ‘neutralised their oxalic acid’ to escape you, they come back to you with two diseases instead of one. It seems to me you are a very profitable investment, Mr Pseudo-Science.”
“Really, Mr Taste, you would not, I presume, have me suppress the truth simply because it happens to be profitable?”
“But is it the truth? What proof have you?”
“I presume you are ignorant of the fact that animals have died with all the symptoms of oxalic acid poisoning, simply through taking too much sugar.”
“What kind of animals? You chose such as are used to taking shop sugar as part of their ordinary food, of course?”
“Well—no; not in that form. The subjects of the experiment were rabbits.”
“Ah! And from these you draw deductions about man who has been eating artificial sugar for ages. How like a vivisectionist! But what doses of sugar did the rabbits get?”
“About one-fortieth of the body-weight.”
“That would be as if a man of 150 lbs. weight should take 3¾ lbs. sugar at a meal! And since it is excessive fruit you are warning us against, can you tell me how many pounds of fruit—say, apples—one must take in order to get that amount of sugar in a day? No less than sixty pounds. Really your warning seems a little superfluous.”
“It is all very well for you to scoff, Mr Taste, but if it were not for me you would know nothing about the latest diseases. I really believe you would be content to go right through life without knowing that you had a duodenum or an appendix.”
“Quite” assented Taste cheerfully.
Arnold Eiloart, B.Sc.
A SYMPOSIUM ON UNFIRED FOOD.
In November, 1912, we published a letter from a reader containing the excellent suggestion that readers who had experimented to any fair extent with unfired diet should be invited to contribute to a conference on the subject in The Healthy Life, and that the symposium should be gathered round the following points:—
(1) The effect of the diet in curing chronic disease.
(2) Its effect on children so brought up—e.g. do they get the so-called “inevitable” diseases of chicken-pox, measles, etc., and especially have they good (i.e. perfect) teeth?
(3) The effect of the diet in childbirth.
(4) The cost of maintaining a household in this way, as compared with the cost under ordinary conditions.
(5) Is the diet satisfying, or is there a longing for conventional dietary (often found amongst food reformers)?
(6) Is the diet quite satisfactory in winter?
A number of interesting letters have been published this year, and we shall be glad to receive a large number of personal experiences, but they must be brief, and classified under the above heads as far as possible. The following is a striking piece of personal evidence.—[Eds.]
Buckhurst Hill, Essex,
28th April 1913.To the Editors of The Healthy Life.
Dear Sirs,
As a slight contribution to the interesting discussion which is taking place in your magazine, will you allow me to give you a short summary of nearly sixty years experience of the effects, in my own case, of flesh eating, vegetarianism and the uncooked food diet.
This is not a fairy tale, as some may be inclined to think, but a plain unvarnished statement of facts.
The flesh-eating period lasted for seventeen years. When three months old I was the unfortunate victim of vaccination poisoning, and for years afterwards was continually in the doctor's hands. The best medical men in this country and America were consulted; for months daily visits were paid to a noted Chicago specialist in the hope that he might be able to effect a cure, but it was a case of “love's labour lost,” and, instead of improving, my condition grew steadily worse.
During all these years, drugging was constantly going on, the pills and potions ordered were religiously swallowed, and, strange as it may seem, the ordeal was survived. Flesh meat was eaten daily, and, of all the members of the medical profession consulted, not one of them ever hinted that a change of diet might be beneficial.
When 17 years of age my attention was drawn to an article in The Phonetic Journal on the advantages of a non-flesh diet. By this time, being thoroughly tired of taking endless quantities of useless, poisonous and expensive drugs, I decided, there and then, to throw “physic to the dogs,” making up my mind that if death did come, and it seemed to be staring me in the face, I would, at any rate, die a vegetarian.
Within six months the most dangerous symptom had completely disappeared and has never recurred, but, although greatly benefitting by the new diet, and enjoying on the whole fairly good health, yet there were frequent attacks of rheumatism, lumbago and neuralgia; dyspepsia, with its attendant pain and flatulence, often made life miserable; now and again the liver would rise up in rebellion, bringing in its train vertigo, blurred vision and severe headaches; constipation, that bane of modern life, was a source of endless trouble, in fact, for many years the enema had to be used once or twice a week, and last, but worst of all, came those sharp, shooting, lancinating pains, one of the premonitory symptoms of cancer.
Obviously, there was still something radically wrong somewhere, and on retiring from practice, a great deal of time and attention was devoted to the subject, innumerable experiments were made, and, ultimately, results obtained, the value of which cannot be exaggerated.
Five years ago the uncooked food diet was commenced, and from the very first week a steady improvement took place. The constipation vanished as if by magic; there has not been the slightest touch of rheumatism or neuralgia for at least three years the liver is now an unknown quantity, the dyspepsia is a thing of the past, and, most important of all, the cancer symptoms are entirely gone, and in their place has come an abounding health, vigour and vitality that is marvellous. The years seem to have “rolled back in their flight”; all the centres of life are rejuvenated; and the hopes, feelings and aspirations of youth sway me now as they did nearly half-a-century ago. Work, mental or physical, is a perfect pleasure, and to feel fatigue is almost unknown.
What a glorious gift life really is has never been realised till now, and the wealth of the Indies would not induce me to go back to the flesh-pots, or live on cooked foods again. This diet gives two important advantages: firstly, the elimination of all excess of starchy matter prevents the formation of needless fat, and, secondly, the entire absence of artificially sweetened food removes one of the main causes of over-eating.
Will people ever learn that fat, instead of being a sign of health, is the very reverse, that every ounce of superfluous adipose tissue means more work for the heart, diminished vitality, lessened energy, and, when excessive, is not only a distinct menace to longevity, but to life itself?
I never take more than two meals a day and very often only one, which consists of raw vegetables, nuts, olive oil and unfired bread; the second meal, when required, is a simple fruit salad.
When a vegetarian the writer lived for years on a shilling a week; it costs rather more now, the oil, nuts, fruit and bread being more expensive than beans, rice, meal, etc., but the difference is so trifling that it is not worth talking about.
Whilst “Fletcherising,” deep breathing, distilled water, olive oil, fasting, saltless food, the open-air life, regular exercise, etc., were valuable allies, it was not until the powerful aid of uncooked food was invoked that the real benefits began to appear and life became a real joy. Yours, etc.,
John Reid, M.B., C.M.
HEALTH QUERIES.
Under this heading our contributor, Dr Valentine Knaggs, deals briefly month by month, and according as space permits, with questions of general interest to health seekers and others.
In all Queries relating to health difficulties it is essential that full details of the correspondent's customary diet should be clearly given.
Correspondents are earnestly requested to write on one side only of the paper, giving full name and address, not for publication, but as a guarantee of good faith. When an answer is required by post a stamped addressed envelope must be enclosed.—[Eds.]
Every inquiry must be accompanied by the front cover (or upper part of same showing date) of a recent number of The Healthy Life.
ONION JUICE AS HAIR RESTORER.
Mrs M. McC. writes:—In your book, Onions and Cress,[21] on p. 49, it is stated that the juice of onions mixed with honey will change the colour of hair from grey to black. Will you be kind enough to tell me in what proportion these should be mixed, as, of course, if not in a proper mixture, the hair would become so clogged. And will you also kindly tell me how one is to extract the juice from the onions, whether they are to be boiled or squeezed when raw.
With regard to the use of a mixture of onion juice and honey as a hair restorative the reader of my little book must remember that it is largely a compilation of quotations from old herbal books, and it gives the history, use and folklore of these interesting edibles. I am not responsible for this recipe and cannot therefore vouch for its utility. We know, however, that onions contain a wonderful sulphured oil and that sulphur in one form or another is an important ingredient of most hair preparations which restore colour. The raw juice evidently should be used, and this can be extracted either by pounding and grating and then extracting the juice under pressure, or it can be readily obtained in any quantity by putting onions through the Enterprise Juice Press. The amount of honey, I think, to be added to this juice should be very small, otherwise, as our correspondent surmises, the preparation would be very sticky and objectionable. Would any reader care to try this and report upon it?
[21] Onions and Cress, 6d. net (postage 1d).
SCIATICA.
Mrs M.G. writes:—My husband is a sufferer from sciatica; has had it for some years, on and off, but just lately he seems is to get it constantly—sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. He has been taking some salicylate of soda, and I have tried to persuade him to give it up. His age is 42. For his meals he takes, on rising, an apple or a cup of apple tea; an hour afterwards his breakfast, which consists of two tablespoonfuls of a proteid food mixed with distilled water, and a hard biscuit, two slices of whole meal brown bread, nut butter, and watercress or lettuce. During the morning he drinks barley water. For dinner, a salad and a few ground nuts and hard biscuits and an apple; sometimes home-made nut meat and spinach, hard biscuits and dried or fresh fruit. For tea, a salad or lettuce, tomatoes, onions and cress, and Shredded Wheat and wholemeal bread. Last thing at night, a few steamed onions and distilled water. His bowels are in good condition, very regular, but he has this constant gnawing pain. If you can help me in any way as to a change in his diet, it will be a relief to me. I do not mind the trouble of preparing things for him. It is about two months ago that he has taken to drinking distilled water, which I make myself. His occupation is very sedentary, with long hours, sometimes from six in the morning till nine at night. He has a bicycle, and gets as much exercise as possible.
From the description given one would assume that the sedentary occupation and long hours of work have caused this correspondent to fall into bad postural habits of sitting and standing, coupled with excessive depletion of his nervous energy. The diet given is on good lines and, with the addition of home-made curd cheese and eggs as proteid, might certainly be continued as it stands, especially as the bowel action is regular. What the correspondent does need is less hours of work; more physical exercises of a brisk back-stretching nature, and certain spinal stretching manipulations of an Osteopathic nature. Full deep breathing in fresh air will also be beneficial. The lower part of the spine, from which the sciatic nerves originate, needs the most attention.
REFINED PARAFFIN AS A CONSTIPATION REMEDY.
Mr E.H. writes:—Will Dr Knaggs very kindly say whether Refined Paraffin, now being given so generally for the relief of constipation, may be regarded as a harmless method of overcoming this trouble or whether its use might lead to harmful results. I am told that this preparation of oil is not assimilated, and is therefore harmless, but I should much appreciate Dr Knaggs' opinion on this matter.
The use of refined paraffin as a remedy for constipation is just now all the rage with the orthodox medical profession. There is nothing really to be said against its right use, provided it is made to serve as one of the means to an end. It has been proved that this paraffin, which is quite tasteless, odourless and easy to swallow, is not absorbed by the system but passes unchanged and unaltered through it. It acts therefore as a mere mechanical lubricant. The one thing to remember is that its use should be combined with a curative diet, so that it need not be taken indefinitely.
(1) DRY THROAT; (2) SACCHARINE; (3) DILATED HEART.
Mr L.S. writes:—I have read The Healthy Life from the appearance of the first number, and I have studied the Answers to Correspondents, but have not observed a case identical with my own, hence my reason for troubling you.
(1) The back part of mouth next throat has a curious glazed appearance—no cough or expectoration. I am inclined to think it extends to and includes the stomach. I have always a good appetite, but am not well nourished; much under weight. Age 44 years; school officer; cycle 25 miles a week.
Eat meat sparingly, not a pound a week. Live principally upon eggs and bread and butter—(three eggs a day): “Digestive Tea” two and three times a day.
2. Is saccharine less harmful than sugar for sweetening?
3. As the result of a nervous breakdown I had five years ago I suffer from a dilated heart, consequently—I suppose—I have palpitation occasionally, oftener when in bed. I don't think my heart is really normal since my breakdown five years ago.
4. Would bathing myself with cold water over the region of the heart strengthen the muscles? Would you please suggest anything for strengthening heart. Are lemons or eggs injurious to the heart?
1. The throat symptoms indicate a dry, irritable, heated condition of the mouth and throat which, as the correspondent surmises, equally affects the stomach and the rest of the digestive organs. He should have a breakfast of fresh fruit only, take salads and grated raw roots with his meals and stop tea altogether. He can drink distilled water and vegetable or lemon drinks (unsweetened) instead.
2. Saccharine is a mineral substance, a fossilised product of putrefactive action in the coal age. It is closely analogous to carbolic acid, which equally originates from microbic action. By leaving off sugar and replacing it by saccharine our correspondent gains nothing. He is simply leaping from the frying pan into the fire. It is best for him to cultivate a taste for unsweetened or even acid drinks.
3. A dilated heart is usually an after effect of a dilated stomach, which strains it, just as it does every other organ, whether in the chest or the abdomen.
4. Bathing the chest with cold water is not desirable. What is needed is that the correspondent should drink as little fluid as possible and pay close attention to the condition of his digestive mechanism. If the organs are dilated or misplaced he should wear a belt and take suitable gentle Osteopathic exercises.
TREATMENT FOR STAMMERING.
A.M.D. writes:—Could you kindly give in The Healthy Life magazine some suggestions as to the best method to follow in a case of stammering (slight) in a boy of ten or eleven years who has been rather left to himself, the hesitancy in speech being regarded as incurable?
This boy should be trained by someone who understands how to cure stammering. The correspondent would do well to consult Miss Behncke of 18 Earl's Court Square, S.W., who makes a speciality of treating such cases.
WHY THE RED CORPUSCLES ARE DEFICIENT IN ANÆMIA.
A.M.D. writes:—Is there any way, independent of diet, of increasing the red corpuscles in the blood? I have tried walking nine miles a day, thus getting up free perspirations. What of this method? I did imagine that this resulted in a better condition of the skin, the latter losing in a measure the white and parched appearance.
A deficiency of red corpuscles in the blood, which shows in anæmia, is usually caused by self-poisoning. When food ferments or putrifies in the colon, owing to faulty diet and other causes, certain toxins are created. These become absorbed into the blood and there destroy the red corpuscles. Walking is a good form of exercise, but it will not suffice alone to remedy this type of anæmia unless the diet and general habits of the patient are so arranged that the unsanitary condition of the colon is also remedied. The correspondent will find, if she studies the replies to others in this magazine, many details as to diet, etc., for rectifying bad conditions in the bowels.
THE CORRECT BLENDING OF FOODS.
T.B.W. writes:—Is it inadvisable for a dyspeptic (and sufferer from constipation) to eat salad, or cooked vegetables, and stewed fruit at the same meal; also, do I do right in eating bread and butter (preferably crust) or hard biscuits with stewed fruit or soft vegetables, etc.? Would you please inform me the best Still that I can obtain—preferably one that does not require much attention, and is fairly portable, and that does not cost much to work?
I do not believe that it is right to mix salads or cooked vegetables with stewed fruits. It is better to take them at separate meals.
It is, in my view, equally bad to take cereals (i.e. bread, biscuits, etc.) with stewed fruits. The reason is that cereals call for an alkaline form of digestion in the mouth which the acid fruits or the added sugar greatly retard.
I believe strongly in the all-fruit breakfast or all-fruit supper, when fresh, dried, or even stewed dried fruits (possibly with some fresh cream) can be taken alone, without either cereals or vegetables.
Cereals go best with salads and cooked vegetables, because of the alkalinity of the latter which harmonises with the salivary secretion intended for the digestion of grains.
The Gem Still is the best to buy. It is well made and does not need much attention. The large automatic commercial size is, however, the best if any quantity is needed, as it works throughout the day with practically no attention when properly adjusted.
DIFFICULTIES IN CHANGING TO NON-FLESH DIET.
F.C.W. writes:—I shall be glad if you will inform me from your experience whether, after one has broken from the customary meat diet and adopted a “reform” diet, there is any real difficulty in reverting to the former state. I have seen it stated that vegetarian diet did not call into action all the natural powers of the digestive organs, and, this being so, the tendency was for them to become weakened so that the food reformer eventually found himself unable to digest meat. I believe some health culturists make practice of taking meat twice a week. I have been about seven or eight weeks on reform diet, and though better in some ways have to confess to a feeling of deficient energy and nerve power. I was once told by a doctor that I could not afford to do without the stimulating effect derived from meat. I propose making a test of the two methods, but should like to hear from you in reply to the above query. Another new feature I have noticed on the new diet is a thinness of the teeth and a feeling of weakness in them generally.
This correspondent omitted to supply his amended diet, so this was asked for and is as follows:—
On rising (6.40).—Cup of cold water.
Breakfast (8 a.m.).—Porridge, boiled egg or white fish done in oven. Turog brown bread and butter; a banana; cup of coffee.
Lunch (12.45, at The Home Restaurant)—Nut or cheese savoury and one vegetable, a sweet dish, a few dates or a nut and fruit cake.
Tea meal (in office at 5).—Bread and butter, piece of cake, large cup of cocoa.
Supper.—One of following:—
(a) “Force” with stewed prunes and junket; small piece of cheese with wholemeal biscuit.
(b) Milk pudding and stewed fruit; small piece of cheese and biscuit.
(c) Vegetable soup with toast.
(d) Bread and milk and fruit cake.
On retiring (10 p.m.).—Cup of hot milk.
The correspondent adds further:—
I have only been about eight weeks on food reform and the general result, so far, is less susceptibility to draughts and ability to sleep with windows open top and bottom, which I could not do before, and a feeling of lightness and freshness. On the other hand, I have not the same nerve force or power. I am of a highly sensitive nervous disposition, and the latest trouble is with my teeth. I was told yesterday by a dentist that a non-flesh diet is harmful to them and that were one to eat meat only, there would be no trouble! Perhaps it is owing to the dates and nut-and-fruit cakes which I have been eating, or to a general weakened condition due to want of finding my natural diet. I have a friend who is a fine specimen of physical development, and on his going on to food reform he had to have his teeth seen to. I suppose it would not be the softer diet giving his teeth less to do. I am at a disadvantage as I can get nothing specially prepared at home and can only add to my diet articles which I can prepare myself. I like my liquids fairly sweet and I like liquid foods. I am a catarrhal subject and when this starts at the back of the nose the hearing is affected.
Whenever a person changes from a meat diet to one that is of the non-flesh order the digestive organs have to learn how to adjust their secretions to the altered diet. This applies just as forcibly when a food reformer wishes to return to the “flesh-pots.” After a long course of abstinence from meat the food reformer does find it difficult to return to it. This is due not so much to the difficulty in digesting it as to the violent stimulation and grossening of the body which it induces.
I have never heard of any food reformer who discarded meat for ethical or humane reasons who willingly returned to meat so that he could if necessary be in a position to digest it.
With regard to the loss of energy and nerve power the correspondent must distinguish between real weakness and absence of stimulation. The first effects of discarding meat show a deficient energy due to the absence of stimulation. When this has passed it gives place to a feeling of buoyancy and energy which is permanent.
The dental weakness is aggravated, if indeed it is not actually caused, by the milk puddings, porridge, cake and sugared beverages which are a feature of this correspondent's diet, and to the absence of salad vegetables. If he amended his diet somewhat as follows he should make steady progress in energy and general fitness:—
On rising.—Tumblerful of cold water.
Breakfast (7.15).—One lightly boiled, baked or poached egg; Veda bread and butter, a little watercress or other salad. A small cup of Hygiama in place of the sugared cocoa.
Lunch (12.45).—Nut or cheese savoury and one vegetable; baked pudding by preference for second course, or simply a nut and fruit cake; no dates.
Or salad with grated cheese or cream cheese, or flaked pine nuts; followed by a piece of the excellent wholemeal cake supplied at the restaurant this correspondent frequents.
Tea meal.—One cup of Salfon cocoa (unsweetened), preferably without other food.
Supper (6 to 7) (This meal is at present far too mushy).—Cream cheese, Veda bread with fresh butter or nut butter, salad, tomatoes, cucumber, etc., with dressing of pure oil and lemon juice.
Or simply fresh ripe fruit, with dried fruit and cream; no cereals.
On retiring.—Cupful of hot unsweetened lemon water, or weak barley water; no milk.
H. Valentine Knaggs.
CORRESPONDENCE.
All Correspondence should be addressed (and all contributions submitted) to the Editors, The Healthy Life, 3 Tudor Street, London, E.C.
COTTAGE CHEESE.
Wilderton, Bournemouth.
Bournemouth.To the Editors,
Dear Sirs,
Re Mrs C.E.J.'s letter and the reply thereto: I should be inclined to doubt the wisdom of making this from unboiled or uncooked milk unless one had it from one's own cows and could supervise the dairy oneself. The average milk that comes into towns from country farms is—well, it's unthinkable. There's a saying that what the eye doesn't see the heart doesn't grieve over, but that doesn't alter the fact that the average cow is none too clean, the average milker's hands and clothes (to say nothing of his face, hat and head) none too clean, the milking-place none too clean, and the circumstances of transit such as don't make for cleanliness. I have put it very moderately, as those who know country dairy farms will admit. Those who particularly want clean cheese from uncooked milk should buy it from a County Council dairy farm or similar institution. Yours truly,
B.C. Forder.