ON FERMENTED FOODS
reported to be pre-digested (by bacteria), hence
Alternate Title: On the Definition of
Living Foods - Prelude
by Tom Billings
This article deals specifically with the topic of
fermented foods, and whether they are really
living foods. The significance of this article is that
it was the spark that made me address the topic
of trying to develop an actual definition for the
term living foods (a term that means different
things to different people.) There are two more
articles, to be published in future, that will
address that topic more directly.
Fermented raw foods, such as raw sauerkraut,
pickles, seed "cheese", rejuvelac, sprout milk
yogurt, and even raw miso, raw soy sauce, are
important foods for many raw fooders. On the
other hand, some raw fooders refuse to eat
fermented foods, or limit their consumption of
fermented foods to one or two specific food
items.
The object of this article is examine the topic of
fermented foods, and their role in raw food
lifestyles. To save typing, will use FF as an
abbreviation for the term: fermented foods. Will
begin by specifying some of the positive and
negative points of FF, with questions noted. Note
that only lacto-bacillus based FF are of interest;
yeast based FF (e.g., alcoholic drinks) are ruled
out and are not relevant.
Positive: + most FF contain lacto-bacillus
(Acidophilus) and promote good intestinal
bacteria populations + very high in enzymes +
easier for your digestion + most FF, except for
rejuvelac, are considered tasty + seed cheeses
and almond cream reportedly help underweight
raw-fooders gain and maintain body weight (see
Ann Wigmore, "Rebuild Your Health", pg. 49, for
almond cream recipe; her recipe is FF) + FF are
a major part of Ann Wigmore's living foods
program, which has been used by many people
in healing and overcoming serious illness + raw
cabbage and cabbage family vegetables can
cause severe flatulence if eaten unfermented.
The same vegetables fermented do not cause
flatulence.
Negative: - most FF are very acid-forming foods;
ref: Gabriel Cousens, "Conscious Eating", pg.
129. - soy sauce contains about 1% natural
MSG, mono-sodium glutamate; ref: Glutamic
Acid, Advances in Biochemistry and Physiology;
L. J. Filer, Jr. et. al. eds., pg. 27. Soy sauce, and
possibly miso also, can be 0.5-2% alcohol. The
MSG and alcohol are products of natural
fermentation. - except for yogurt (made from dry
culture, not rejuvelac/seed cheese), FF are
considered "tamasic" by yoga/Ayurveda. Here
tamasic means that in the long term, the food
has a depressing effect. Yoga recommends
avoiding tamasic food. - rejuvelac, if fermented a
few more days with honey added, becomes
alcoholic; ref: Ann Wigmore, "Rebuild Your
Health", pg. 52. - although often referred to as
"living foods", FF can be seen as "dying foods".
Fermentation is the process of bacterial growth
in a base food that ultimately dies. For example,
a pickled carrot or beet will not sprout if planted
in the earth; a raw one will. Wheat sprouts that
are decaying in water (rejuvelac) will not grow if
planted, but regular wheat sprouts will grow. In a
FF, the base food eventually dies; ultimately, the
only living part is the bacteria culture that is
growing on the base food. It is thus reasonable
to ask: does a living bacteria culture on a
dead/dying base qualify as a "living food"?
Q: Is sprout milk yogurt different from other
fermented foods?
A: Maybe: * yogurt (dairy yogurt) is considered
"sattvic" - balancing, soothing, by yoga/
Ayurveda. It is the only sattvic FF recognized in
yoga/Ayurveda, all others are tamasic.
* yogurt culture growth time very short; growth of
culture normally stopped, by refrigeration, before
culture growth by-products (i.e., acids) are at
level that is toxic to bacteria (that is how
fermentation serves as a natural preservative -
e.g., sauerkraut, pickles). Yogurt has the
shortest culture time of any FF. * also as a result
of short culture growth time, yogurt is very
similar in nature to original base food - sprout
milk. Indeed, the base food may still be "alive"
after only 6-10 hours of culture growth. For many
other FF, base food is clearly dead.
My personal evaluation of fermented foods is
that they can be useful in a raw/ living foods diet,
provided one uses them in modest quantities.
Their primary advantage is that they allow one to
eat certain raw vegetables, like cabbage, and
avoid the painful flatulence that can otherwise
occur. Additionally, they may be helpful to people
with impaired digestion. Their biggest drawback
is that they are acid-forming, and it is easy to
overeat them, due to their taste. They also
stimulate digestion, which is a plus for many
people, and a minus for others. Also, they are
some work to prepare.
If one is not concerned with whether FF are
living foods or not, then the most important
factor in deciding whether to consume them, is
how you react to them when you eat them. If the
reaction is bad, avoid them, if it is good then
there is no problem. Here reaction refers to both
the immediate effect and longer term effects, as
well as side effects
P.S. those seeking recipes for raw FF are
referred to books by Ann Wigmore, Viktoras
Kulvinskas, Gabriel Cousens.
ON THE DEFINITION OF LIVING FOODS -
MOTIVATION
What is the precise definition of the term "living
food"? Apparently, there is no single, universally
accepted answer to that question, as I have
heard raw fooders give sharply different answers
to that question. A search for written definitions
of the term, living foods, did not yield an explicit
definition. The closest to a definition can be
found in "Rebuild Your Health", by Ann Wigmore
(pg. 28), where she says: "Living Foods consist
of super nutritious young organic greens, power
packed sprouted nuts, seeds and grains,
fabulous fermented preparations and exciting
dehydrated foods." She specifically mentions
rejuvelac, energy soup, and wheatgrass.
However, with great respect, Dr. Ann has not
given us a definition; instead she has basically
said that "living foods are defined as the foods I
eat". Such an approach does not provide an
informative definition, only a list of foods. A
precise definition would allow one to examine a
food and determine if it qualifies as a "living
food".
The problem in using a list, rather than a
definition, is as follows. One can simply define
living foods as sprouts and fermented foods (in
which case there are questions about some
fermented foods, per my previous article on
fermented foods). On the other hand, if one
defines living foods as those foods with highest
life force energy in them (intuitively, a *very*
desirable definition), then sprouts qualify,
fermented foods are again in question, and
some fresh fruits/veggies consumed within a few
minutes of picking might qualify (but refrigerated,
shipped produce has lost energy and doesn't
qualify). Of course, if one defines living foods as
the foods with highest life force, then dehydrated
foods would not qualify. To make life even more
complicated, some people using the term living
foods, specifically exclude (some) raw fruits/
veggies, even if picked only a few minutes
before eating.
Some brief thoughts on what constitutes a living
food are as follows.
* clearly fresh, raw sprouts are alive and
growing/active; hence they are living
* cooked food is dead so it is not a living food
* unsprouted raw seeds, nuts are alive in the
sense that one can activate them by
soaking/sprouting. In the unsoaked form they
are in suspended animation, or "asleep". As
sleep can be considered philosophically a form
of death, and they are not biologically active,
they are clearly alive but probably not living food
in the sense that most use the term. (The life
force energy in them is dormant, until sprouted.)
* vegetables and fruits present some dilemmas.
Most raw root vegetables, if planted in the
ground, will grow hence are alive until they spoil
in storage. If alive="living" they could qualify as
living, though many raw fooders exclude them
from the term. Things like baby lettuce, greens,
are alive and actively growing at picking time,
and if eaten very soon thereafter might be
considered living; however if they are
refrigerated, shipped long distances, and eaten
2 weeks after picking (while still green, before
turning yellow or brown), it is unclear how much
life energy is still in them.
* the situation with most fruit is similar to lettuce,
but with the additional complication that some
fruits must be picked and ripened off the tree, an
example of which is avocados. Some people
include raw fruits and veggies in the term "living
foods", others specifically exclude them and
refer to them only as raw foods.
* when one considers liquids, such as honey,
sprout milk, fruit and vegetable juices, the
situation is very unclear. Probably the best
guidance here is freshness of the materials used
in making the liquid, and also how long the liquid
is stored. Enzymes - so long as one talks about
original enzymes present in the food, not
enzymes added as a supplement - are a good
measure of freshness. Some raw fooders think
enzymes = life force; that is clearly not true;
enzymes are an agent of the life force but are
not the life force. (The life force is an energy; it
cannot be powdered and sold in pill form, like
enzymes are.) Getting back to liquids, if the
liquid is made from living foods, and is only a few
minutes old, then it should qualify as a living
food itself.

* fermented foods present more definitional

problems, as the base food clearly decomposes
(dies) in time, such that eventually only the
bacteria of fermentation is alive (and in some
fermented foods they produce so much acid that
they literally die in their own acid "waste").

* one more complication - pollen. Is it alive? I

would argue that it is as one can remove pollen
from plants, refrigerate it, then brush it on living
flowers and it works. (Talking about fresh pollen,
not freeze-dried). So, it is alive, but should it
qualify as a living food?

The topic of the definition of the term, living

foods, will be discussed further in a future article.