Our eyes are our foremost organs of discovery. Experience and instinct must fix a recognition of the food as desirable. 2. A natural food must tantalize the 
sense of smell. To be a natural food it must be redolent, aromatic or fra -
grant enough to arouse desire in those that smell it with their olfactory
 
senses. 3. A natural food must be easy to apprehend and acquire with our natural faculties. The 
third requisite of a natural food is ease of discovery and acquisition with our natural fac -
ulties. With our eyes, sense of smell, physical faculties, especially our legs, feet, arms and hands , we must be able to ac quir 
e quantities sufficient to meet our needs within our di -
urnal time frame. Our Natural F o
ods Must be Easily Consumed in Their Natural State as Modified By 
Our Natural Faculties OnlyFoods of our biological and symbiotic nature are not always ready to consume. After ac -
quisition they usually require some external processing in order that their nutrients be 
easily bitten off, chewed and sw allo
wed. Humans are the most fastidious of all eaters on 
earth, rivaled perhaps only by other primates such as the chimp, orangutan and gorilla. External food processing for humans means we must prepare the food for mouth by 
peeling off skins, cracking of shells, and otherwise exposing the food portion to the teeth such that bite-sized morsels may be facilitated. Our Natural Foods Must Be a Gustatory Delight in Their Natural StateHumans lived for millennia in nature before they became tool users and mastered fire. Tools do not occasion evolvement, but rather the fixation of existing faculties. Therefore 
45
Fruiticultureany food, to be natural, must excite our palate and be delightful in the natural unfired 
state. The eating of a natural food must be a cherished and palate-ravishing experience, as all acts necessary to our well-being are blissful. Endogenous Requirements of Our Natural FoodsOur natural foods are the raw materials the body’s internal faculties use to meet its 
requirements. Our natural foods must be replete with our nutrient needs and contain no components 
which devitalize or poison the body. Our Natural Foods Will Not Intoxicate or Poison Us!The first commandment of eating is: “Thou shalt not poison thyself. ”  The average 
American commits from 10 to 80 poisonings acts daily. Our natural foods contain only components which have inherent enzymes that break them down into their basic nutri -
ents or simplest forms. Our natural foods require almost no enzyme secretion from our secr etory faculties f or basic digestion. I
f a food has components or compounds for which 
we secrete no digestive enzymes, that component is toxic to our bodies and occasions considerable distress to most. Such components or compounds are often referred to as “allergens. ”  A natural food has no “allergens” at all though some of us may be abnormally sensitive to biologically correct foods. The foremost “allergens” are really proper body objection to toxic substances or substances that its faculties cannot digest. Poisons the average American consumes consist not only of recreational drugs, but of foods in -
gested with toxic components or which, in the course of intestinal transit, are bacterially and/or fungally transformed in t
o toxic putrefactive and/or fermentative products. Our Natural Foods Must Be Easily and Efficiently Digested and Utilized
Animals in nature are equipped to easily and efficiently handle their natural foods. This 
is true of humans as well. What other animals may easily digest and assimilate may be impossible for us. We must recognize that many foods are predigested, that is, the en -
zymes of the foods break themselves down into simple nutrients as needed by their biological symbionts. Pr
edigestion is, of course, the ultimate accommodation between 
symbionts. The less efficiently the food is digested, the worse it is for you. The more ef -
ficiently the food is digested, the better it is for you. Perhaps it can better be expressed 46
Fruiticulturethis way: More strain, more drain. Less strain, more gain. Our Natural Foods Must Have Nutrient Adequacy That Proportionately Supplies Our 
Various Needs
Editor David Klein’s note: I have updated Dr. Fry’s dietary reference figures, replacing the 
Nutritional Research Council RDAs (Recommended Daily Allowances) with modern-day DRIs (Daily Reference Intakes) per the Food and Nutrition Board (FNB), which operates under the US’s Institute of Medicine (IOM), within the National Academies (http://nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Nutrition/DRI-Tables/1_%20EARs.pdf?la=en). Estimated calorie needs per age, gender and physical activity level were tabulated by the US’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, operating under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCalorieNeedsPerDayTable.pdf). Food symbiotic to a species amply supplies every nutrient need. This means that it does 
not undersupply or oversupply any of our nutrient requirements to a burdensome or pathological extent. For instance, grass is a complete food for cattle. If foods are not symbiotic with the consuming species, certain nutrient needs must necessarily be met. Failure to meet nutrient needs results in deficiencies. Deficiencies give rise to many problems other than the obvious deficiency. The Daily Reference Intakes (DRIs) established by the US’s Food and Nutrition Board 
(FNB) is deemed the most authoritative there is in this country, even though it is partially askew. The parameters and criteria they observed in the setting of the DRIs are relevant only to conventional-living Americans and quite out of line for a healthy person’s re -
quirements living on natural foods. Nevertheless, knowing FNB’s guidelines and meth -
odologies gives us ballpark proportions of our nutrient needs. The DRI for an activ e 50 y
ear-old man is 2,800 calories per day for conventional eaters. If 35% of those calories are from fat, which is the maximum the FNB recommends, that 
means there are roughly 980 fat calories or roughly 109 grams of pure fat or fats in the solid state, thus leaving 1,820 calories to be supplied by proteins and carbohydrates. As the RDI is 56 grams of protein, 224 calories worth (which we really do not use for fuel), this leaves 1,594 calories to come from carbohydrates. That figures to be about 399 grams of pure carbohydrate. The DRI for the aggregate amount of mineral matter and 47
Fruiticulturevitamins figure out to about 7 grams of solids of the 583 grams of food solids computed 
above. The RDAs have us consuming, in practice, the following as a percentage or pro -
portion of our diet:
 •  Carbohydr
ates: 62% by weight of solids, 57% of calories
 •  Proteins: 8% by w
eight of solids, 10% by calories
 •  Fats: 19% by weigh
t of solids, 35% by calories
 •  Mineral matter
: 1% by weight but as a part of the primary nutrients
It should be noted that mineral matter is actually a part of the protein, carbohydrate and fat portions and has no separate consideration in the DRIs by weight. Vitamins consti -
tute such a small part, 1%, as to have neither weight nor caloric considerations. As the calories of prot eins ar
e for measurement only, there being a greater expenditure 
of calories in humans in their digestion, deamination and use than is obtained from 
them, we may not take them into account in the consideration of caloric requirements. Our Natural Foods Must Adequately Supply Our Caloric NeedsThe DRI for our caloric needs is about 50% too high, considering that our natural foods 
in their natural state yield more usable calories than cooked foods. Let’s look at a study by Drs. Alexander Leaf and Mark Hegstead of Harvard University: the 
caloric need of an active 154-pound man per day is actually about 1,800 calories. Our essential fatty acid needs are really only about 1% to 2% of our net nutrient needs 
by weight according to RDIs, and about 2.25% to 4.5% of our caloric needs. Thus, for nutrient considerations, carbohydrate food solids from which we derive calories can be, and perhaps should be, weight-wise, near 90%. As fiber is a neutral factor, being virtually unused in its passage through the intestinal 
tract, we need not consider it as a nutrient even though its caloric values are included in conventional figures because it is a firebox calorie. For convenience sake we’ll leave our caloric requirements as being weight-wise and calorie-wise about 90% of our utile diet. It is perhaps an accurate figure for natural food eaters. Our foremost fuel is glucose and fructose. The body can use these as is. If we eat starch -
es we must heat them to dextrinize them, thus facilitating their breakdown into glucose. 48
FruiticultureOur starch-eating capability is very limited, which indicates it is not a natural food. As 
glucose and fructose are our natural sugars, there is about 95% energy gain if we get these directly from our foods, whereas an equal amount of energy in raw starches yields perhaps 40% of its potential (humans secrete no enzymes needed to break down the cellular membranes that protect starch globules—all breakdown is due to crushing and chewing), as long as our limited secretion of the starch-splitting enzyme amylase holds out. When heated to the point of dextrinization of the starch, the cellular membranes burst by expansion. Even so, because of the problems involved with cooked fare, the body can realize only 65% to 70% of the energy potential of starchy foods. Our Natural Foods Must Adequately Supply Our Amino Acid NeedsNote that I have said amino acids because our actual needs are for amino acids, not pro -
teins. If we eat proteins, they must be laboriously digested, that is, broken down by body 
enzymatic action in t
o amino acids. Per Dr. Mark Hegstead of Harvard University, the true need for amino acids by an 154-pound (70 kg) man is about 21 grams per day, or 84 calories. Very active people will need close to 30 grams. The FNB’s protein numbers for a 154-pound man are high: 46.2 grams. The FNB’s are so high because they agree with Dr. Hegstead’s numbers; however, they almost double them to give a safety margin. Beware: when you’ve got your build -
ing built, throwing extra bricks into it may mess things up! Any amount of cooked pro -
tein will cause your body-temple structural weakness and reduced vitality! Twent y
-one grams of amino proteins in a diet consisting of about 500 grams of usable 
nutrient solids required daily is about 4%. In our natural diet the amino acids are about 
100% usable whereas in the conventional American diet they are only about 20% us -
able! The average American consumes about 105 grams of protein daily, but mostly in a cooked form. C ook 
ing coagulates, deranges and deaminates proteins and amino ac -
ids, thus rendering them unusable except as carbohydrates. In the cooked and oxidized form they are v er 
y readily putrefiable. Ninety percent of amino acid and protein wastes of the body are recycled. This means that proteins involved in body processes are providentially used and reused. It also means that losses through cellular death are largely reclaimed and reused. The overall loss is thus about 10% of the daily usage. It is estimated that the body of the average 49
Fruiticultureman requires about 230 grams of new protein formation daily. If 90% of this is supplied 
by recycling spent proteins, then only about 23 grams of new protein need to be con -
sumed. Make it raw amino acids! Our Natural F o
ods Must Supply Our Needs For Mineral Matter
Mineral matter that the human body uses consists of minerals in an organic context, 
that is, in a colloidal form within living substance. Heat quickly destroys the organic context, thus returning mineral matter to an inorganic state. Though super fine in con -
sistency, minerals that were in the organic state become, through the agency of heat or dec omposition of their medium, inorganic the same as they occur in soil , r
ocks, ores, etc. In this form they are not utile by the human body except in certain applications. For example, base minerals will alkalinize the intestinal tract even though they cannot be assimilated. Minerals which the body requires become toxic if appropriated in an inorganic context. This is easily demonstrable. Leukocytosis is recognized as a pathological state. This is a proliferation of white blood cells, the whole of which is often referred to as our im -
mune system. If the components of a cooked or heat-deranged meal are taken, leu -
kocytosis results. If only inorganic minerals are ingested, leukocytosis likewise results. Leukocytosis is a body def ensiv
e act wherein the body unleashes huge armies of white 
blood cells to apprehend and carry toxic substances to the nearest exit or put them harmlessly under the rug somewhere. Thus the body must have, according to the RDIs, about 1% of its solid food intake as 
minerals. To be usable these minerals must be in an un-deranged organic state. Our Natural Foods Must Supply Our Needs For Fatty AcidsThere was, at one time, proclaimed to be three essential fatty acids, namely arachidonic, 
linoleic and linolenic. Today only linoleic is said by nutritional researchers to be essen -
tial. Popularly, linolenic fatty acids are referred to as omega-3 while linoleic fatty acids are referr
ed to as omega-6. Essential means that the body has a need of a component or 
components, in this case fatty acids, because it cannot itself synthesize them. Our natu -
ral foods must, of course, contain our needs for essential fatty acids, because the body never found it necessar y t 
o develop faculties to produce them or they were so plentiful 
in the food the body ceased to produce them and lost its ability to do so as it did with 50
Fruiticulturevitamin C and certain amino acids recognized as essential. Our Natural Vibrant Foods Must Supply Our Needs For VitaminsWhile vitamins comprise such a small portion of our total dietary need that all the RDIs 
taken together on an annual basis could be put into a sewing thimble, they are, never -
theless, essential to our well-being. The RDIs for vitamins vary with each vitamin. Here I will not deal with individual vitamins as separate c omponen
ts. At this time only the ob -
servation need be made that our natural foods must adequately contain these vitamins or g ive rise t o them in absor 
bable form while in the intestinal tract. Our Natural Foods Must Supply Our Needs For Miscellaneous Nutrients
The above nutrients are said to be macronutrients though, as can be seen, vitamins are 
really micronutrients. Other micronutrients which the body may require are auxones (certain plant hormones). The science of nutrition is yet young. Whether or not there are needed nutrients in foods other than the five categories of solids treated above remains open to question. In any event you can be sure our natural foods are replete with all the nutrients we need 
in the quantities we require. After all, our virtual abandonment of our natural dietary fare is only a few seconds on the clock if we regard our earthly existence as being 24 hours thus far. And our natural fare is scientifically established as responsible for our high state of development. Our Natural Foods Should Supply Our Water NeedsInasmuch as humans, like many desert creatures, are not designed with the oral equip -
ment to naturally drink water, our natural diet should be water-sufficient just as it is in 
the case of desert animals as well as numerous other crea
tures in nature. Healthy people eating their natural diet usually have a surplus of water without drinking. The addition of some foods without sufficient water, less than 25% water content, does not occasion thirst. However, substances with water content equal to or greater than our natural foods occasion thirst if ingested cooked, if they are biologically incorrect, if they are condimented, especially with salt, and toxic substances in general. While thirst generally arises from pathogenic conditions within, there are exceptions: 
extraordinarily warm climatic conditions, extraordinarily low humidity, periods without 51
Fruiticulturenormal food intake, partaking of good foods that have been dried, heavy labor or exer -
cise under warm conditions, and yet other conditions. When thirst arises, always drink 
water —pur
e water. With ready supplies of pure water and tools that facilitate drinking 
such as cups, glasses, etc., we can easily drink the water necessary to make up deficits. Our Diet Must be Alkaline, Overall, in Metabolic End-ProductsHumans require a diet that is alkaline in its metabolic end-products. For practical pur -
poses this means at least 80% of alkaline-forming foods against not more than 20% of 
acid end-pr oduct foods . The human homeostatic condition is alkaline with essential flu -
ids normally having a pH of 7.40. Any significant variation in the pH can result in coma and dea th. Acidosis is deadlier than alkalosis . The body can rather easily discharge ex -
cess organic alkalis, but must first neutralize excess acids. In the absence of sufficient alkalis, the body must take alkaline miner als 
, including calcium, from bones and fluids to 
effect neutralization. Americans eat a predominantly acid-forming diet, a diet that is not only pathogenic in itself, but causes such complications as base mineral depletion char -
acterized by osteoporosis and metabolic disorders. What W ould 
Y ou Eat in Nature? Considering Various Foods and Our Natural 
DispositionDespite the gross perversion of our instincts, they are still alive and well and will reas -
sert should we be relegated back to nature. Therefore, this quest is to ascertain what we 
would eat in natur e
. Our instinctive foods, the foods which helped to develop us to our 
magnificence, necessarily contain all that we need to thrive on. This assurance being soundly based, as you will soon determine for yourself, it then behooves us, as respon -
sible members of society, to undertake the course which makes us the most we can be so tha t we can maximally serv e ourselv
es and those who depend on us. This is a mutual 
arrangement, as those whom we serve in turn serve us better. This exalts everyone and has a ripple effect that makes all in our society healthier and happier, more loving and more caring. In serving yourself best, you at the same time serve others best. This inqui -
ry will survey almost all the foods that humans, in their varied habits, eat. We’ll consider each as a possible food for ourselves as it oc curs in na
ture without benefit of cooking 
apparati, tools and containers. Remember, your instincts will reject or cherish each food on its merits; that is, its appeals 52
Fruiticultureto your senses and palate; the only criteria that guided us to food selection in plentiful 
nature. Our premises are: that Mother Nature, i.e., the sum of all factors and influences under which we lived in nature, served us correctly to start with, inasmuch as we thrived and attained our high station in its midst; that what was right for us then is still right for us in view that we’re still structurally and physiologically the same as we were during most of our sojourn as humans in Nature; that we can still, within our modern context, supply ourselves with natural foods substantially and significantly; and that we can also observe, meaningfully, the other requisites of life in our modern context. Pertinent Questions—the Answers to Which Determine Our Natural DietAre we herbivores?Are we graminivores?Are we root grubbers?Are we insectivores?Are we carnivores?Are we eaters of fermented and rotten foods?Are we sucklings of animals?Are we frugivores?Are we vegetarians?Are we nut and seed eaters?Are we fat eaters?Are we protein eaters?Are we starch eaters?Are we all the foregoing, that is, omnivores?Are We Herbivores?Herbivores are natural consumers of herbage such as grass, weeds, leaves, stalks and 
stems. Does foraging in nature for grass, weeds and leaves appeal to you? Do grass and weeds attract your eye, tantalize your sense of smell and excite your palate?53
FruiticultureOf course it is repulsive to you for 
the very simple reason that it can-not satisfy your needs. You do not secr ete cellulase or other enz ymes
 
that break down these plants as herbivores do. Therefore you can -
not derive your foremost need from them, namely simple sugars 
which is your body ’ 
s primary fuel. Rather, the processing and prob -
lems caused by their ingestion oc -
casion a net loss of energies. Of course, humans do c onsume some her
bage such as lettuce, celery, cabbage family 
members (kale, cabbage, collards, Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, broccoli, bok choy, etc. ), spinach and yet other leafy greens. Plain, as they occur in nature, these vegetables real -
ly do not appeal to us though we can cultivate a taste for much of it. At least cauliflower and broccoli do yield some calor ies and all yield
, to the extent when digested, proteins, 
some essential fatty acids, mineral matter and vitamins. But, if we get enough of these nutrients from our natural foods, then these are not needed from plants that we do not eat raw with keen relish. If we had to rely on herbage exclusively for our foods, we’d adjust somewhat but, in all 
likelihood, slowly starve as the calorie yield is negative or very low. While cooking de -
stroys most of the abundant nutrients, it also converts the cellulose, fibers and other components int o usable calor
ic values. Let’s face it: although we will include vegetables in our dietary, we’re not primarily veg -
etable eaters by nature. Obviously we’re not herbivores. Are We G
raminivores? Being graminivorous means we live from grasses and grass seeds though grass eaters 
are really called herbivores. Strict grain eaters are called graminivores. Many birds in nature live on grass and weed seeds. Gramnivorous land mammals, such as horses, have large, flat teeth for grinding hard grain kernels and tough grasses. Grass seeds include 
54
Fruiticulturewheat, oats, rye, barley and rice which were de -
veloped by human mastery of nature only with-
in the last 10,000 years. There are thousands of other g rass seeds that oc cur thr 
oughout nature. Of course, we’d all reject grass seeds as items of diet in nature. First, they are in a condition we can neither masticate nor digest. Being heavy on starches, we would gag on the equivalent of a spoonful or two. You might try a mouthful of 
wheat berries without husks removed as you must eat them in nature. Won’t work for us. Furthermore, if you ate a tablespoon of raw flour made from grass seeds (cereal grains), you’d gag. As grass seeds neither attract, tantalize nor arouse us in their raw natural state, we can 
reject them as natural human fare even though most of the human race presently con -
sumes grains. Thus, we are not natural graminivores. Are W e Na
tural Root Grubbers? Animals that naturally grub for roots have snouts. As most roots are starchy, root grub -
bers secrete a plethora of starch-splitting enzymes whereas humans secrete only one 
such enz yme, amylase , in v
ery limited quantities. Humans abhor dirt, are quite fastidi -
ous and refuse to eat anything dirt-covered or even dirt-tinged. Grubbers such as hogs and boars pass lots of dir t through their bodies. W 
ithout tools, humans are very poor 
diggers. They have no motivation to do so for there are no foods below ground that, in their natural state, please the palate. Humans can handle very little that comes out of the ground in its raw natural state. Some roots, notably turnips, rutabagas, sweet potatoes, yams, ground nuts, beets, carrots, parsnips and salsify can be eaten raw. In Nature we would be obligated to do without tools and would have to eat them raw or not at all. In our natural habitat of plenitude, we can be 
55
Fruiticulturesure that roots which man could handle without tools received precious little attention 
as food. In view of the considerations, you can write off humans as natural root grubbers and I’m 
sure you’ll concur. Are We Insectivores? There are humans who eat insects, especially 
grasshoppers and ants. But, by and large, hu -
mans would give insects a big “yuk” when it comes to eating them, especially in the r a 
w 
state. For the gourmands who eat them, they must fry them in batter or chocolate-coat them, 
a way of saying they are not delicious fare in themselves. There are many birds that live exclusively on insects when and where they are plentiful. There are bats which live on insects. But I know of no humans who do. The average person is repulsed by insects rather than attracted to them as yummy 
foods. I don’t relish them raw or cooked and I don’t think you do either. Are We Carnivores?A carnivore is an eater of carnage or flesh. This does not accurately portray animals 
said to be carnivores. Animals that live on other animals usually consume most of the animal, not merely the flesh. True carnivores lap the flowing and oozing blood of their prey with relish. They delight in the guts and its partially digested contents. And they will consume the bones and gristle (collagen or cartilage). Dogs, for instance, require about 1,700% as much calcium as humans, for animal flesh is extremely acid-forming. Blood and bones are required to offset the acidic end materials. They also require about 1,200% more protein than humans. When you note the relish and gusto with which dogs go for whole animals, you can be sure that what carnivores need for their nourish -
ment is quite delicious to them. 56
FruiticultureDo you relish the idea of crushing the life of a rabbit with your bare hands and teeth? Can you lick its blood with gusto, getting it over your face, hands and body? Would you dig into its guts with pleasure? Would you love to chew on its bones and gristle? Would you love to swallow chunks of its flesh, not being fastidious about swallowing hair and vermin that might be involved? Would you like to do the same for any plant-eating ani -
mal that you could apprehend, kill and consume while still in its warm and fresh state? Of course, y ou and ev
ery unperverted person loves animals as fellow creatures on earth. Killing them is repulsive to you and eating them in the freshly-killed state is even more 
disgusting to you. Yet, most of us do consume flesh and some organ meats while reject -
ing blood, bone, most fats and the entrails or offal. But we kill our animals by proxy. We denature and derange flesh and or gans with hea 
t and camouflage it with condiments. Does this describe a carnivore to you? Would you, in a state of nature, relish chasing down animals and eating them? Again, this is alien to your natural disposition and actu -
ally sickening. True carnivor es also secr
ete an enzyme called uricase to metabolize the some 5% uric 
acid in flesh. We secrete none and thusly must neutralize it with our alkaline minerals, 
primarily calcium. The resulting calcium urate crystals are one of the many pathogens of meat eating, in this case giving rise to or contributing to gout, arthritis, rheumatism and bursitis. Are humans natural meat-
eaters? There are too many considerations in physiology, structure (miscalled anatomy), aesthetic disposition and psy -
chology that characterize us as non-flesh-eaters t o ev
en seri-
ously entertain such notions. I had a nutr itionist tell me in 
fron
t of an audience that we 
had canine teeth and that 
proved our meat-eating character. I responded with: “You really mean dog teeth, don’t 
57
Fruiticultureyou? Like fangs?”  This caused her to redden. Then I related one of Abraham Lincoln’s 
favorite retorts: “If you counted a sheep’s tail as a leg, how many legs would it have?”  Invariably the answer was “five. ” To which Lincoln would respond: “Only four. Counting the tail as a leg doesn’t make it one. ”
I think you’ll agree that we are not equipped in any aspect of our being as carnivores. Are We Eaters of Fermented and Rotten Foods?Substantially all of Americans eat fermented and putrefied substances that are 
called foods. When fats oxidize and decompose they become rancid and repulsive. Carbohydrates ferment when decomposed by fungi (yeast) and bacteria. And proteins putrefy (rot) when decomposed by bacteria and fungi. It is odd that we will discard fermented grapes, yet drink their fermentation end-product 
called wine. Odder still, most Americans consume with relish something that never oc -
curred in nature: a pathogenic putrefactive product called cheese. Cheese represents about all the decomposition products in a single package: r
ancid fats, putrefactive prod -
ucts and fermentation products. Bacterial and fungal (y east) f
ermentation produce 
alcohol, vinegar (acetic acid) and lactic acid with other byproducts of methane and carbon dioxide. Proteins, decomposed primarily by anaerobic bac -
teria but also by fungi and aerobic bacteria, have as dec omposition end-products pt omaines (putr
es-
cine, muscarine, neurine, cadaverine, ptomatropine 
and y et other toxic c ompounds), indoles
, leukomaines, skatoles, mercaptans, ammonia, 
methane, hydrogen sulfide and yet other toxic compounds. You need only to refer to a good dictionary to learn just how poisonous these products are. Yet, Americans eat bil -
lions upon billions of pounds of cheese annually. Cheese is made b y taking the casein portion of milk and r otting it with t
ypes of bacteria 
that yield byproducts that many palates have come to treasure. That all these poisons 
going into the system cause anything less than sicknesses, diseases and debility is mis -
representation. Tumors and cancer are often the result. 58
FruiticultureHumans consume many fermentation, rancid and putrefactive products. Most are de -
rived from milk. Some are derived from grains (especially the alcohols), fruits (wines and 
certain vinegars), legumes (especially the soybean and its tr ain of putr
efactive prod -
ucts), and decomposed meats. As humans could not consume these dec omposed pr
oducts in nature without tools and 
containerization, we may safely categorize them as unnatural. I dare say that you agree.Are We Sucklings of Animals?I doubt that humans ever directly suckled cattle, goats, mares, camels, sheep and other 
animals. And, of course, the idea of doing this is obnoxious to our disposition. I refer,  
facetiously, to milk drinkers as secondhand grass eaters although, to be sure, grass has all the nutr ients necessar y t
o support life. While we can live on milks (certain Africans, like the Masai, live substantially on milk and blood, thus reducing themselves to parasite status), these are by no means our natural foods. Milk-drinking as a regular part of our intake is only a few hun -
dred years old with the exception of certain Arabic and A frican peoples. M ilk
-drinking is pathogenic. If milk and milk products were discontinued today, millions of people would cease to suffer sicknesses and pathologies within a short pe -
riod. In fact, if this alone was discontinued, the hospitals would virtually empty out and physicians’  w
aiting rooms would be mostly vacated. Milk-drinking is also an act by proxy. If we had to get milk directly from the teats of ani -
mals by suction, I’m sure we’d skirt milk altogether. I would and I’m sure you would too. Are We F
rugivores? Are we a species of fruit eaters? Would you, in nature, relish ripe, vibrant grapes, peach -
es, melons, bananas, apples, plums, oranges, mangos, avocados, tomatoes, figs, berries 
and the thousands of other fruits? Would fruits attr ac
t your eye, tantalize your sense of 
smell, and be a gustatory delight in their raw natural ripe state? Would you prefer any -
thing that occurs in nature to a juicy sweet watermelon? 59
FruiticultureMan has always had a love affair going 
with fruits. Even through all his perver -
sions, he has continued to relish fruits. Fruits are the natur al f 
ood of humans 
and the only food category ideally suit -
ed to all their faculties. This does not mean we should eat fruits totally and  
e
xclusively in our present circumstances, 
but it does mean that, in nature, that’s all we ate as attested to by anthropo -
logical evidence scientists have uncovered, notably Dr. Alan Walker of Johns Hopkins University. Of c
ourse, you go for fruits in their raw state regardless of what else your acculturization 
and circumstances dispose you to eat. Your instincts are still alive and well despite per -
versions. Many myths have been built around and about fruits. As a fruitarian I can offer 
a new dietary for those who say w e
’re not—their own words! Nutritionists, so-called, are the creatures of training dictated by the meat, grain and milk trusts. These trusts are part of the dominant commercial interests that dictate what will be taught in our educational institutions from universities down to kindergarten. Nutritionists are trained like seals to parrot the propaganda which will induce the popu -
lace to consume their masters’ products, with the basic five food groups being one of the primary propaganda w eapons put a
t their disposal to serve their masters. Of course, 
there are renegade nutritionists and dietitians who have revolted against the basic four except for the fruit and vegetable category. Most nutritionists are ashamed of the fifth food category and don’t even mention it though it is on the books along with the basic four. The fifth category consists of what might broadly be termed “accessory foods” such as 
oils, syrups, snack foods, sugars, wines, seasonings, jams, preserves, etc. Even though we are admonished to eat from all five food categories daily by the framers of this scheme to peddle commercial products, nutritionists and dietitians are not keen on mouthing this part of the propaganda even though they include it liberally in their recipes. 60
FruiticultureWhile some nutritionists and dietitians praise fruits and vegetables, they still charac -
terize those who point out our biologically correct foods as faddists and nutritional 
quacks. Yet , ev
en in seminars, those who sharply question me must admit that, aestheti -
cally, they would eat little besides fruits in nature and that we humans are naturally fruitar ians. All the cr it
eria heretofore cited as the requirements of our natural foods are amply met 
by fruits. In short, they are replete with our nutrient requirements in practically the pro -
portions that we need them. We are biological symbionts of fruit-bearing plants, and in nature would ea t v 
ery little besides fruits. Despite all this, there’s no particular harm in 
eating green leafy vegetables, stalks, stems and their fresh juices in the raw state. Even some steaming or conservative cooking of tu -
bers, stalks, stems, roots, corms and selected legumes and g rains (pref er
ably sprouted), are 
not sufficiently deleterious to seriously harm our health. Of course, there are some toxic re -
sults from eating all this fare. We’re better off without them. Yet, I r epea
t, there is no great 
harm in their consumption relative to what is suffered from conventional fare. Dr. Bruce Ames of the University of California, Berkeley, has created a catalog of poi -
sons in vegetables and published an extensive article in the September 23, 1983 issue 
of Science magazine. No indic tmen 
t of fruits as having toxic substances was made or 
can be made. Virtually every vegetable was indicted. All were a part of the same study. Humans are biologically equipped to handle most fruits. When ripened, fruits accommodatingly convert their carbohydrate components into glu -
cose and fructose, simple sugars we can use without further digestion. Their enzymes 
conver t their pr 
oteins into amino acids and their fats into fatty acids and glycerols. Thus, 
when we eat fruits, all we need do is savor their goodness. The fruit portions, that is, mesocarps, were specifically compounded to attract biological symbionts. Fruits meet their nutrient needs rather ideally with predigested nutrients. For humans, no other food compares with fruits in satisfying all needs including, of course, our requirement for deli -
61
Fruiticultureciously vibrant soul-exalting fare. I’m sure that you will agree through your own senses that fruits would be your primary 
food in a state of nature. Are We Vegetarian?The average American understands the term vegetarian to mean an “eater of vegetables. ”   
But, in reality a vegetarian is someone who eats only plant-derived foods. This may in -
clude a preponderance of fruits but, in practice, it means anything and everything be -
sides animal products. The word v egetable der 
ives from the Latin vegetus, meaning lively, exciting or animated. It does not mean specific types of foods other than those which enliven or sustain us in 
an energetic mode. Necessarily, by this definition, fruits are high-energy foods whereas vegetables are either low-energy foods or have drawbacks. Typical present-day vegetari -
an fare includes grains, tubers, root, stalks, stems, leaves, nuts, seeds, fruits, legumes and about ev erything else that does not mo v
e, bleed, cry or resist acquisition. Even though those who eat all fruits or a preponderance of them can correctly be called fruitarians, they may also be correctly called vegetarians. Personally, my intake is mostly fruit. I prefer to be called a fruitarian, though I do not object to being called a vegetar -
ian. Do you agree that, naturally, we are fruit-eaters? Are W e Nut and S
eed Eaters? In nature there is no doubt but that humans did consume some nuts. Even so, our ability 
to derive nuts from their hard shells is limited. We do not have razor sharp teeth and tons of pressure per bite or jaw-power as have squirrels. Humans can crack certain nuts with their teeth. Very few of today’s degenerated version of humans can do it, but most nuts 
can be cracked with strong jaws and good teeth. Even strong hands can crush nuts if at least two are taken and pressed against each other. Most nuts are delicious to us in their raw state. Unfortunately, our ability to handle nuts is rather poor—we’d need pointed, durable teeth, as rodents have, to gnaw through nut shells. Nuts that we savor are in a storage form, 
62
Fruiticulturethat is, as fats, proteins and invert sugars or starches. Digestion of nuts into fatty acids, 
amino acids, and glucose is a long drawn out process, most often taking hours. Whether we did or did not consume nuts in nature makes little difference to us today. Most of us do consume nuts but disadvantageously as cooked fare. Heated fats and proteins are quite pathogenic, yes, even carcinogenic. Nuts should be eaten raw or not at all. Technically and botanically nuts are fruits. I do not buy that because the word fruit re -
ally means product or result. Fruits are really the mesocarps of seed packages which 
plants creat ed specifically as a pr
oduct to be consumed by a biological symbiont who 
would incidentally discard and distribute the seeds. Nuts and seeds were created by plants for broadcast and reproduction by other methods. All nuts are seeds. Most seeds are in a storage form to survive the vagaries of climatic and consuming elements so that they may be instrumental in reproducing and perpetuating their kind. Nuts, however, have extra protection in that they have hard woody shells. Seeds usually have only fi -
brous coatings as their protection. Both seeds and nuts are heavily endowed with nutri-ents sufficient to initiate and sustain a certain minimum growth of their plants. We can benefit from these nutrients . But if w
e eat more than two or three ounces, we’re likely to 
get more protein and fats than we can readily handle. Certainly nuts and seeds were not created by plants for consumption but, rather, for 
reproduction. That some animals have adapted to their consumption has not been a two-sided affair as it has been with fruits where the love affair has been and still is mu -
tual. There are many types of seeds: legumes, grains, weeds, nuts, and fruit seeds being among the most prominent. I n their na
tural state humans can handle very few of these 
seeds. Nuts can be digested and used in very small amounts. Likewise, sesame, pump -
kin, squash, sunflower, pignolias, and some other seeds can be used. We are primar ily car
bohydrate eaters, not fat and protein eaters. I dare say you agree 
with my assessment of nuts and seeds as human fare.Are We Fat Eaters?In nature there are very few fats we can get in any quantity without violating our biolog -
ical disposition. Avocados, durians, olives, coconuts, nuts and seeds are heavy on fats. Avocados and durians fur nish fa
ts in a predigested state when ripe. Coconuts furnish 
fats as monoglycerides/glycerols before they set their fats as triglycerides in a storage 63
Fruiticultureform. Coconuts are, therefore, in the jelly-like state, easily digested. When matured and 
hardened, it is almost impossible to digest them. Broccoli and cauliflower have con -
siderable fatty acids in an easily us-
able state when eaten in the raw fresh condition. How ev 
er, they give 
some unwanted toxic sulfur com -
pounds. We get predigested fats ad-equate to meet our fatty acid needs from fruits. An oc casional a
vocado or 
seeds and nuts are quite satisfying. Those who subsist substantially on fats do not do well. Eskimos are very short-lived. They consume about 200 grams, about 1,800 calories, dai -
ly. Their short-lived condition is probably more attributable to their heavy protein con-sumption than fats. They consume about 200 grams of protein daily incidental to their fat-ea ting and this plac
es a great burden upon their organs, especially liver and kidneys. Because of the acid-forming properties of metabolized proteins, Eskimos lose their teeth at an early age and suffer severe osteoporosis. Eskimos are eaters of animal fats and pro -
teins, primarily as derived from fish. Be it noted that, during the berry-picking season, Eskimos are said to ea t only ber
ries during the short season they are ripening. Biologically we are not a species of fat eaters, but incidental eaters of fats. We do not need to store great quanties of fat, as do bears and sea lions. Ripe fruits contain ad -
equate quantities of predigested fats in the form of fatty acids that are easily handled. Other forms of fa t r
equire hours for their digestion, quite atypical of fruits to which we 
are most favorably disposed. Fats may lie in the small intestine several hours before bile is secreted into it with which to emulsify them, thus exposing them to lipases which re -
duce them to monoglycerides (fatty acids) and glycerols. I adjudge tha t we are not a species of fa t ea
ters except incidental to our fruitarian 
disposition. 64
FruiticultureAre We Protein Eaters? To hear the exponents of the meat trust, you’d think we’re in imminent danger of disease 
and death if we fail to eat meat three times a day. The truth is that eating meat three times daily will cause the very conditions we’re taught to fear. We’re in no danger of pro -
tein deficiency unless we’re eating a 100% cooked food diet. On the other hand, there are gra v
e dangers in eating cooked proteins. At normal cooking temperatures, proteins 
are coagulated, deaminated and largely oxidized. The nitrogenous materials are soil for putrefactive bacteria. The carbohydrate portions of cooked proteins are usable for ca -
loric values but still present the problems that cooked carbohydrates pose. If we must eat pr ot
eins, we must eat them raw to 
derive their full benefit. But proteins, per se, are 
not created as food. They are created by plant and animal life as components of organisms, seeds, en -
zymes, ova, etc. Most proteins of this nature have toxic prot ec
tive compounds. The bean family have 
anti-enzyme factors. Eggs have avidin. Nuts also have anti-enzyme factors. Seeds of peaches, apples and many other fruits have hydrocyanide. Humans do not secrete the enzymes to ne -
gate or break down these toxic substances. From fruits we der iv
e as much protein as is present in mother’s milk for a growing baby! Moreover, fruit proteins come to us predigested as do other ripened fruit components. There are many alarmists who warn us about protein deficiencies of fruits and many other presumed deficiencies. If we developed in nature on fruits to our high state as an -
thropologists have found, then the real deficiencies are in the thinking of those who pro -
claim deficiencies. Their evidence is usually based on researches with pathological spec -
imens, especially those whose metabolic and assimilative faculties are very impaired. They base their thinking from a standpoin
t of disease rather than health, from a modality 
and curing mentality rather than a correction of pathogenic practices. In saying that our natural foods are deficient, they are simultaneously proclaiming improvidence in nature. Or, in effect, saying: “God, you made a terrible mistake in providing for us and especially in giving us a sweet tooth. ” Advocating the consumption of proteins and yet more pro -
teins when those so advising know by their own researches and knowledge that the pro -
65
Fruiticultureteins will be cooked and contribute to heavy pathology is nothing less than criminal. One more consideration: If we ate only proteins in their raw state we’d quickly become 
diseased and perhaps even suffer death! Why? Because various amino acids require from about 60% to 137% of their carbohydrate energy potential for their deamination and utilization. The net result would be starvation. That’s one reason so much weight is lost by the obese on protein diets. And the intoxication that results from putrefaction is the reason so many of these dieters become diseased with some dying. Are we protein eaters? Emphatically, no!Are We Starch Eaters?To test this question I will not ask you to do the impossible, i.e., take a handful of grass 
seeds (presuming you could gather them in nature) and start chewing. Or, try a spoonful of flour of any grain. You’d choke up on the first spoon of it as your starch enzyme sup -
ply (salivary amylase) would be speedily exhausted. This would amply prove to you that we were not starch ea
ters in nature when we had not mastered fire. Instead of being a 
palate-tingling delight, starches are a torturesome affair. When humans can freely eat starchy roots, grains and tubers such as cassava, taro, po -
tatoes and wheat in their raw state to satiation and proclaim the experience a gourmet 
treat, then both y ou and I migh
t accede that we’re starch eaters. Are We Omnivores, That is, All of the Foregoing? Of course, humans are 
omnivores in practice with the aid of condi -
ments, taste excitants, dena turalization b y
 
cooking, camouflag -
ing seasonings, spices and so on. But, in Natur e 
, we could not 
66
Fruiticulturedo more than eat foods in season, and we’d have to eat them in the raw state on their 
own merits with our tastebuds. In nature we were frugivores only. Humans & Fruit: Symbiotic Partners in LifeWhile few biology books proclaim symbiosis and none that I’ve encountered pro -
claim our own symbiotic role in nature, we are symbionts as are thousands of species. Symbiosis is coopera tion bet
ween dissimilar organisms for mutual benefit. Symbionts 
are cooperators in symbiotic living. While the word symbi -
ont is supposed to apply only to the lesser of two c ooper
at-
ing organisms, I prefer to call both of the c omplementary  
c
ooperators symbionts for 
that is the only nomencla -
ture that makes sense. Let’s obser ve this phenomenon in 
natur
e.
We see flowers bloom and put forth tons upon tons of pollen for fertilizing the ovaries of female flowers. Both male and female flowers secrete nectar at their inner base to at -
tract consumption by bees and other insects. In taking such a large reward the bees and insec ts become con tamina
ted with pollen in the male flowers only to have it removed 
when they take the nectar of female flowers. The ovaries of female flowers secrete a sticky substance which the bee or insect must come in contact with in taking their nec -
tars. Instances of symbiosis abound in nature. The above is cit ed t
o demonstrate natural cooperativeness or symbiosis. In this case we 
see that the flowers of plants, both woody and nonwoody, attracted bees and insects to 
take the free meals provided. This is the way that plants uncannily solved the problem of fertilization, attesting to a high order of intelligence in plant life (which is perceived by few). Humans do not collect nectar. Even if they did, it would be a very poor food though it 
sustains bees and insects well. Fertilization in this manner is necessary to certain forms 
67
Fruiticultureof plant life to insure that seeds be created with which to propagate the species. As we 
know, plant life is stationary. Once it has created its seed progeny, a new problem arises, that of scattering the seeds so they will flourish. How did this uncanny wisdom in nature accomplish this? Among the many solutions was that of creating yet another food around the seed or 
seeds. In attracting consumption of this food by mobile creature, there was the inci -
dental distribution of its seeds to areas where they would not compete for space and raw mat er
ials with the parent plant. Of course, that same immense wisdom dictated 
the creation of seeds that were unappetizing so they would be discarded rather than consumed. But the greatest wisdom of all, perhaps, was that which created the food package to pro -
portionately meet the precise needs of its eaters:  Those creatures which, in taking and 
bec oming dependent on these foods , became the fruit plan 
t’s biological symbiont. That 
this method of seed distribution was successful is evidenced by the thousands of kinds 
of fruits created around seeds in nature. Fruits attract human senses in nature and are gourmet delights in their natural ripened state, which ensures their sur -
vival. Also, fruits contain no poisons in the fresh ripened state wher
eas almost 
all plants and seeds contain components which we cannot metabolize, hence are toxic directly or indirectly. Fruits in nature are in a predigested form when they ripen. Fruits ripen when their seeds are at a mature stage ready for reproduction. When fruits ripen, they change to brilliant colors and emit seductive fragrances to attract consumption from a biological symbiont. The tree, stalk or vine is rewarded in that its seeds are distributed, thus perpetuating its kind. They are beautiful to behold and emit captivating aromas and fragrances. This makes them irresistibly attractive to their biological symbionts. If all the water and fiber are removed from most of these fruits, the predigested carbohydrates are almost all the same, about 350 calories per 100 grams on average, more than enough to meet the en -
ergy needs of biological symbionts. This is about 88% of solids. 68
FruiticultureIn like manner, fruits supply from 4 to 8 grams of amino acids per 100 grams, almost ev -
ery one of them with all the essential amino acids in about the proportions that humans 
require, plus , of c
ourse, other amino acids. The average amino acid content is about the 
same as mother’s milk for a growing baby. The average is about 6% of solids. When suf -
ficient calories have been consumed to meet caloric needs, intake is almost double our actual daily amino acid shortfall from r ec 
ycling. Furthermore, the fatty acids from almost all fruits other than avocados and olives consti -
tute about 1% to 5% of solids other than fiber. These fatty acids are liberal in their supply of the essential fatty acids. The average fatty acid content of fruits is about 2%. But, importantly, fruits are rich in mineral matter in the most utilizable form in all Nature! Of its solids, about 3% are minerals including, of course, ample calcium to meet our needs if we do not eat more than 20% acid-forming foods and if we do not cook and derange fruit nutrients. Of the labeled macronutrients, there are vitamins 
which are really micronutrients; so little as not to be ordinarily measurable. A year of the RDIs for vita -
mins would not fill a sewing thimble! Yet fruits sup -
ply many multiples of the RDIs of vitamins in almost every instance . F
or instance, vitamin C in fruits suffi-
cient to meet our caloric needs is about ten times as much, on a verage , as the RDI f 
or it. Those on the fruit diet have 60% to 70% less need for water than those on the conven -
tional diet, primarily because pathogens require inordinate amounts of water to hold them in suspension and carry them out of the body. Fruits supply ample w
ater in its pur -
est form to meet our needs. Fruitarians do not normally drink water but make as many trips to the urinal as an y 
one. As a last consideration, fruits are alkaline in their metabolic end-products. The body readily excretes excess alkalis whereas it must neutralize objectionable acids and excrete them if able. (Arthritis, bursitis, rheumatism, gout and yet other problems are caused by 
69
Fruiticulturethe body’s inability to excrete base salts from acid neutralization, usually calcium salts. For instance the uric acid of meats are neutralized into calcium urate crystals because we do not secrete the enzyme, uricase, as carnivores do. These salts have an affinity for cartilage in joints. Also having this affinity are the acid end-products of grains, oxalic ac -
ids in vegetables like spinach, chard, beets and lamb’s quarter, most cooked foods, and mea ts.) Are w
e a species of fruit eaters? I’m sure that you will agree through your own senses 
that fruits would be your primary food in a state of nature. Would you, in nature, rel -
ish ripe grapes, peaches, melons, bananas, apples, plums, oranges, mangoes, avocados, tomatoes , figs 
, berries and the thousands of other fruits? Would fruits attract your eye, 
tantalize your sense of smell, and be a gustatory delight in their raw natural ripe state? Would you prefer anything that occurs in nature to a juicy sweet watermelon? Man has always had a love affair going with fruits. Even through all his perversions, he has con -
tinued to relish fruits. Fruits are the natur al f
ood of humans and the 
only food category ideally suited to all their faculties. This does not mean we should eat fruits totally and exclusively in our present circumstances, but it does mean that, in na -
ture, that’s all we ate as attested to by anthro -
pological evidence scientists have uncovered, notably Dr . Alan W alker of Johns Hopk
ins 
University. Fruits really have it all; all that it took to make 
us into superb human beings; all that is re -
quired to sustain us in a healthy state insofar as food contributes to this condition; and all tha t we need to liv e a long 
, rewarding vibrant and happy life. Conclusions and Observations
That we are biologically fruitarians is an inescapable conclusion on every count that we 
can relevantly and validly cite. What does this mean in practical application? Almost everyone you meet will condemn fruitarian fare. Almost everyone thinks from the 
70
Fruiticulturestandpoint that sickness is inevitable and must be 
prevented whereas, in fact, diseases simply will not occur unless we cause them, either through deficien -
cies or intoxications or both. If you eat 70% to 80% fruits and the balance in leafy green salads along  
with c
onservatively cooked tubers, roots and even 
grain products, along with some raw nuts and seeds, you will not significantly or even noticeably impair yourself assuming, of course, that your other prac -
tices are good. There are social c onsider
ations that make some concessions on dietary intake prefer -
able to social ostracism. In my own case I merely tell those who inquire about why I’m 
not ea ting, or who urge me t o ea
t meat dishes or obnoxious fare, that I’m on a special 
diet and that, while I’d love to have what is being offered, I don’t dare touch it lest I suf -
fer problems. You’ll inevitably be assailed by those who tell you about vitamin B12 defi-
ciency and anemia. This vitamin is created by both fermentative and putrefactive bac -
teria. Grass contains no vitamin B12 either, yet we are told to eat beef liver among others 
for B12. Mother Nature was, indeed, provident and provides us amply with our B12 needs 
from our intestinal tract through symbiotic bacterial flora just as with other animals in nature. Experiments with baboons on a fruit diet only for many years could not induce a vitamin B
12 deficiency in any of them. It is also rewarding to learn that, in a research to put the fruit-eating fad to rest, Professor Meyer of the University of Pretoria fed 50 controls fruits and nuts only for a period of six months. Instead of deficiencies and dis -
ease, the controls became rather sickness-free and greatly impr o
ved in health and weight. The results were published in the February 20, 1971 issue of the South African Medical Journal. 71
Fruiticulturef
Fresh Food Festival Fruitarians, Denmark  n
“Fruit is great fuel. Bananas are the perfect food for people who have an “Fruit is great fuel. Bananas are the perfect food for people who have an 
active lifestyle. Self-contained, tasty, eat to eat, satisfying, available year-active lifestyle. Self-contained, tasty, eat to eat, satisfying, available year-
round, inexpensive, and with the a perfect mix of nutrients, bananas proround, inexpensive, and with the a perfect mix of nutrients, bananas pro --
vide practically all of the active person’s food requirements. After a long, vide practically all of the active person’s food requirements. After a long, 
strenuous workout, what could possibly be more satisfying thanstrenuous workout, what could possibly be more satisfying than   
a big plate of fresh, cool fruit?”a big plate of fresh, cool fruit?”   
-Dr. Douglas Graham-Dr. Douglas Graham72
FruiticultureThe Fruitarian Diet
by David Klein, Ph.D. & Dr. T. C. Fry
Humans have a specific natural biological diet, one which offers complete alkalizing nu-
trition with virtually no toxicity and is comprised of the most delicious, satisfying and health-promoting foods offer ed up b 
y Nature. The Fruitarian Diet is based on conclusive 
evidence that we are biologically, physiologically and anatomically Frugivores. Humans were designed to eat fruit! As such, fruit stands as our natural and most healthful food. Our natural biological diet sets us free of aberrant behavior, rapid aging, disease and suffering, and opens the doors to manifesting the Vibrant Health of our dreams! We call it the Fruitarian Diet. It is also known as the Vibrant Diet, the Hygienic Diet and the 80/10/10 Diet. The Fruitarian Diet consists of our most naturally healthful, delicious and satisfying 
foods: raw fruits and vegetables with minimal-to-moderate amounts of seeds, and nuts. The Fruitarian Diet is comprised of a 90% alkalizing foods (minimum) averaging the fol -
lowing caloronutrient ratio: 80% carbohydrates (minimum), 10% protein (maximum), 10% fat (maximum). Sevent
y-five percent raw is a good place to start, with the goal 
of working one’s way up to 100 percent raw. The Fruitarian Diet reverses and prevents 
73
Fruiticultureacidosis, the predominant underlying condition which causes most diseases and the 
physical degeneration humanity experiences, and it promotes complete healing of most disease conditions and complete rejuvenation, attended by peak strength, endurance, longevity, and a joyful sense of vibrant health. Many have realized these wonderful ben -
efits for themselves, and many more need to receive our vital message and our help in adopting the F ruitarian Diet. Based soundly and scien tifically upon our na
tural biological disposition—upon our natu -
ral physical, mental, emotional, sensory and spiritual needs—you can expect sensational improvemen ts when y 
ou eat a vibrant raw food diet and practice the totally effective 
health system of which it is a part. The health system of which the natural raw food diet is a part is the basis for vibrant, sickness-free well-being! By following this natural and ef -
fective system in practice, you almost surely will:
 •  Detoxify and ov
ercome, once and for all time, occasional illnesses or annoying ail-
ments. Whether it be indigestion, colds, flu bouts, mucus expectoration, headaches, back aches, fev ers and 
“itises” or even such “incurable” problems as acne, allergy, arthri -
tis, asthma, constipation, heart and cardiovascular problems, herpes, psoriasis, skin problems, sinusitis, tinnitus , tumors or wha 
tever, this systems enables you to overcome 
almost anything simply by discontinuing and removing easily recognized causes, and es -
tablishing conditions that build great health. 74
Fruiticulture •  Because you’ll discontinue and avoid easily recognizable causes of discomforts, sick -
nesses and disease, you need not suffer ev
en so much as another case of indigestion, 
aches and pains, fever (itis), sor e thr
oat, cough, cold or anything else! •  Normalize your weigh
t if it is excessive. Without dieting or counting calories, a 
healthful living regimen born of properly meeting our needs causes the overweight to 
quickly, naturally, safely, surely, and permanently lose down to a naturally normal weight set-point. •  Eliminate physicians
, hospitals, drugs, and nostrums from your and your family’s 
lives. You’ll also be spared their astronomical costs as well as the aches, pains, discom -
forts, agonies, and lost time. •  Save thousands of dollars ever
y year in food, energy, medical, hospital, drug, labor, 
insurance, and other outlays! • Energize yourself! You’ll get more done when your energy levels go up! You become 
more lovable and charming as you become happier, more radiant and more dynamic. •  Increase your brainpo
wer and mental alertness. Your thinking will be clearer, sharp -
er and more focused. Your IQ and wisdom will increase significantly. •  Have newfound strength, stamina, vigor
, and vibrant vitality. •  Enjoy clearer complexion with a glo
wing and radiant skin tone. •  Speak with an improved voic
e that tends to bell clearness. •  Restore yourself t
o relative youth! You’ll look, act and feel up to 20 years younger 
within one to four months. •  Eliminate most digestive problems within 24 hours af
ter going on this marvelous 
diet. •  Improve y
our productivity and job performance, thus increasing your income 
appreciably. •  Feel like a million! You’ll ha
ve a buoyancy and bounce that even younger people do 
not have! •  Decrease your sleep needs by about an hour daily ev
en though you’ll be better slept, 75
Fruiticulture
more alert, and better rested. •		You’ll	be	sharper ,	more	precise 	and	cor rect	in	your	judgmen ts	and	assessments ,	thus	
enabling 	you	to	more	accurately 	and	quickly 	perform 	both	physical 	and	mental 	tasks. •		When	you	start	doing	what	you	should 	alwa ys	hav e	been	doing,	you ’ll	start	being	
what	you	always	should 	have	been! When	you	do	righ t,	you ’ll	become 	righ t.
Note:		To	assure	that	the	diet	you	choose 	is	nutritionally 	complet e	and	well	assimilat ed	
over	years	and	decades, 	it	is	prudent 	to	periodically 	undergo 	comprehensive 	blood	tests	
and	full	health	evaluations 	by	a	wholistic 	doctor. Supplementation 	with	vitamin 	B12 and 
other	nutrients 	might	be	necessary 	for	some	individuals. When	the	soils	you	depend 	
upon	are	remineralized, 	soil-life 	systems 	are	brought 	back	to	high	levels	of	bountiful 	fer-
tility,	and	your	natural 	foods	reach	their	peak	nutrient 	potential, 	there	might	be	no	need	
for	nutrient 	supplementation, 	provided 	that	you	live	healthfully. n
“Fruits and seeds, the noblest and highest products of plant life, form the most luscious and 
compact representation of condensed sunlight, the highest accumulation of vital energy. They are the perfect foods for man. ”  
-O.L.M. Abramowski, M.D., Fruit Can Heal You! f
AD76
Fruiticulture
The UK Fruit Festival77
Fruiticulture
Fruitarian potluck, Haiku, Maui, Hawaiii78
Fruiticulture
A Fruitarian potluck table79
Fruiticulture
Above: “Frubundance”
Below: Apple Bananas and Green Sapote80
Fruiticulture
Above: Pea molé by Rawfood Chef Christina Chadney
Below: Fruitarian potluck offerings81
Fruiticulture
Above: Mango-avocado dish by Rawfood Chef Christina Chadney
Below: “Veggie Tacos” by Rawfood Chef Christina Chadney82
Fruiticulture
Above and below: Rollinia
83
Fruiticulture
Above and below: Salads by Rawfood Chef Christina Chadney84
Fruiticulture
Above and below: “Veggie Handwiches” by Rawfood Chef Christina Chadney85
Fruiticulture
Above: Cherries, strawberries, grapes  •  Below: Halawai Dates86
Fruiticulture
Above: Sapodillas  •  Below: Star Apples87
Fruiticulture
Above: White Mulberries  •  Below: Red Dragon Fruit88
Fruiticulture
Tomato-Mango Salads by Annette Davidsson
89
Fruiticulture
Above: Red Durian  •  Below: Black/Chocolate Sapote90
Fruiticulture
Above: Chocolate Persimmons  •  Below: Longans
91
Fruiticulture
Above, clockwise from top:  Papaya, Star Fruit, Cherimoya, Durian, Mamey Sapote
Below: A roadside fruit stand on Maui92
FruiticultureRevealing the Sweet Truth About Fruit 
by David Klein, Ph.D.
Fruiticulture-2018.txt
Summarize the following text section accurately and concisely. Maintain specific details and numerical information, and use anti-repetition mechanisms:

        Our eyes are our foremost organs of discovery. Experience and instinct must fix a recognition of the food as desirable. 2. A natural food must tantalize the 
sense of smell. To be a natural food it must be redolent, aromatic or fra -
grant enough to arouse desire in those that smell it with their olfactory
 
senses. 3. A natural food must be easy to apprehend and acquire with our natural faculties. The 
third requisite of a natural food is ease of discovery and acquisition with our natural fac -
ulties. With our eyes, sense of smell, physical faculties, especially our legs, feet, arms and hands, we must be able to ac quir 
e quantities sufficient to meet our needs within our di -
urnal time frame. Our Natural F o
ods Must be Easily Consumed in Their Natural State as Modified By 
Our Natural Faculties OnlyFoods of our biological and symbiotic nature are not always ready to consume. After ac -
quisition they usually require some external processing in order that their nutrients be 
easily bitten off, chewed and sw allo
wed. Humans are the most fastidious of all eaters on 
earth, rivaled perhaps only by other primates such as the chimp, orangutan and gorilla. External food processing for humans means we must prepare the food for mouth by 
peeling off skins, cracking of shells, and otherwise exposing the food portion to the teeth such that bite-sized morsels may be facilitated. Our Natural Foods Must Be a Gustatory Delight in Their Natural StateHumans lived for millennia in nature before they became tool users and mastered fire. Tools do not occasion evolvement, but rather the fixation of existing faculties. Therefore 
45
Fruiticultureany food, to be natural, must excite our palate and be delightful in the natural unfired 
state. The eating of a natural food must be a cherished and palate-ravishing experience, as all acts necessary to our well-being are blissful. Endogenous Requirements of Our Natural FoodsOur natural foods are the raw materials the body’s internal faculties use to meet its 
requirements. Our natural foods must be replete with our nutrient needs and contain no components 
which devitalize or poison the body. Our Natural Foods Will Not Intoxicate or Poison Us. The first commandment of eating is: “Thou shalt not poison thyself. ”  The average 
American commits from 10 to 80 poisonings acts daily. Our natural foods contain only components which have inherent enzymes that break them down into their basic nutri -
ents or simplest forms. Our natural foods require almost no enzyme secretion from our secr etory faculties f or basic digestion. I
f a food has components or compounds for which 
we secrete no digestive enzymes, that component is toxic to our bodies and occasions considerable distress to most. Such components or compounds are often referred to as “allergens. ”  A natural food has no “allergens” at all though some of us may be abnormally sensitive to biologically correct foods. The foremost “allergens” are really proper body objection to toxic substances or substances that its faculties cannot digest. Poisons the average American consumes consist not only of recreational drugs, but of foods in -
gested with toxic components or which, in the course of intestinal transit, are bacterially and/or fungally transformed in t
o toxic putrefactive and/or fermentative products. Our Natural Foods Must Be Easily and Efficiently Digested and Utilized
Animals in nature are equipped to easily and efficiently handle their natural foods. This 
is true of humans as well. What other animals may easily digest and assimilate may be impossible for us. We must recognize that many foods are predigested, that is, the en -
zymes of the foods break themselves down into simple nutrients as needed by their biological symbionts. Pr
edigestion is, of course, the ultimate accommodation between 
symbionts. The less efficiently the food is digested, the worse it is for you. The more ef -
ficiently the food is digested, the better it is for you. Perhaps it can better be expressed 46
Fruiticulturethis way: More strain, more drain. Less strain, more gain. Our Natural Foods Must Have Nutrient Adequacy That Proportionately Supplies Our 
Various Needs
Editor David Klein’s note: I have updated Dr. Fry’s dietary reference figures, replacing the 
Nutritional Research Council RDAs (Recommended Daily Allowances) with modern-day DRIs (Daily Reference Intakes) per the Food and Nutrition Board (FNB), which operates under the US’s Institute of Medicine (IOM), within the National Academies (http://nationalacademies. org/hmd/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Nutrition/DRI-Tables/1_%20EARs. pdf. la=en). Estimated calorie needs per age, gender and physical activity level were tabulated by the US’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, operating under the U. S. Department of Agriculture (https://www. cnpp. usda. gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_patterns/EstimatedCalorieNeedsPerDayTable. pdf). Food symbiotic to a species amply supplies every nutrient need. This means that it does 
not undersupply or oversupply any of our nutrient requirements to a burdensome or pathological extent. For instance, grass is a complete food for cattle. If foods are not symbiotic with the consuming species, certain nutrient needs must necessarily be met. Failure to meet nutrient needs results in deficiencies. Deficiencies give rise to many problems other than the obvious deficiency. The Daily Reference Intakes (DRIs) established by the US’s Food and Nutrition Board 
(FNB) is deemed the most authoritative there is in this country, even though it is partially askew. The parameters and criteria they observed in the setting of the DRIs are relevant only to conventional-living Americans and quite out of line for a healthy person’s re -
quirements living on natural foods. Nevertheless, knowing FNB’s guidelines and meth -
odologies gives us ballpark proportions of our nutrient needs. The DRI for an activ e 50 y
ear-old man is 2,800 calories per day for conventional eaters. If 35% of those calories are from fat, which is the maximum the FNB recommends, that 
means there are roughly 980 fat calories or roughly 109 grams of pure fat or fats in the solid state, thus leaving 1,820 calories to be supplied by proteins and carbohydrates. As the RDI is 56 grams of protein, 224 calories worth (which we really do not use for fuel), this leaves 1,594 calories to come from carbohydrates. That figures to be about 399 grams of pure carbohydrate. The DRI for the aggregate amount of mineral matter and 47
Fruiticulturevitamins figure out to about 7 grams of solids of the 583 grams of food solids computed 
above. The RDAs have us consuming, in practice, the following as a percentage or pro -
portion of our diet:
 •  Carbohydr
ates: 62% by weight of solids, 57% of calories
 •  Proteins: 8% by w
eight of solids, 10% by calories
 •  Fats: 19% by weigh
t of solids, 35% by calories
 •  Mineral matter
: 1% by weight but as a part of the primary nutrients
It should be noted that mineral matter is actually a part of the protein, carbohydrate and fat portions and has no separate consideration in the DRIs by weight. Vitamins consti -
tute such a small part, 1%, as to have neither weight nor caloric considerations. As the calories of prot eins ar
e for measurement only, there being a greater expenditure 
of calories in humans in their digestion, deamination and use than is obtained from 
them, we may not take them into account in the consideration of caloric requirements. Our Natural Foods Must Adequately Supply Our Caloric NeedsThe DRI for our caloric needs is about 50% too high, considering that our natural foods 
in their natural state yield more usable calories than cooked foods. Let’s look at a study by Drs. Alexander Leaf and Mark Hegstead of Harvard University: the 
caloric need of an active 154-pound man per day is actually about 1,800 calories. Our essential fatty acid needs are really only about 1% to 2% of our net nutrient needs 
by weight according to RDIs, and about 2. 25% to 4. 5% of our caloric needs. Thus, for nutrient considerations, carbohydrate food solids from which we derive calories can be, and perhaps should be, weight-wise, near 90%. As fiber is a neutral factor, being virtually unused in its passage through the intestinal 
tract, we need not consider it as a nutrient even though its caloric values are included in conventional figures because it is a firebox calorie. For convenience sake we’ll leave our caloric requirements as being weight-wise and calorie-wise about 90% of our utile diet. It is perhaps an accurate figure for natural food eaters. Our foremost fuel is glucose and fructose. The body can use these as is. If we eat starch -
es we must heat them to dextrinize them, thus facilitating their breakdown into glucose. 48
FruiticultureOur starch-eating capability is very limited, which indicates it is not a natural food. As 
glucose and fructose are our natural sugars, there is about 95% energy gain if we get these directly from our foods, whereas an equal amount of energy in raw starches yields perhaps 40% of its potential (humans secrete no enzymes needed to break down the cellular membranes that protect starch globules—all breakdown is due to crushing and chewing), as long as our limited secretion of the starch-splitting enzyme amylase holds out. When heated to the point of dextrinization of the starch, the cellular membranes burst by expansion. Even so, because of the problems involved with cooked fare, the body can realize only 65% to 70% of the energy potential of starchy foods. Our Natural Foods Must Adequately Supply Our Amino Acid NeedsNote that I have said amino acids because our actual needs are for amino acids, not pro -
teins. If we eat proteins, they must be laboriously digested, that is, broken down by body 
enzymatic action in t
o amino acids. Per Dr. Mark Hegstead of Harvard University, the true need for amino acids by an 154-pound (70 kg) man is about 21 grams per day, or 84 calories. Very active people will need close to 30 grams. The FNB’s protein numbers for a 154-pound man are high: 46. 2 grams. The FNB’s are so high because they agree with Dr. Hegstead’s numbers; however, they almost double them to give a safety margin. Beware: when you’ve got your build -
ing built, throwing extra bricks into it may mess things up. Any amount of cooked pro -
tein will cause your body-temple structural weakness and reduced vitality. Twent y
-one grams of amino proteins in a diet consisting of about 500 grams of usable 
nutrient solids required daily is about 4%. In our natural diet the amino acids are about 
100% usable whereas in the conventional American diet they are only about 20% us -
able. The average American consumes about 105 grams of protein daily, but mostly in a cooked form. C ook 
ing coagulates, deranges and deaminates proteins and amino ac -
ids, thus rendering them unusable except as carbohydrates. In the cooked and oxidized form they are v er 
y readily putrefiable. Ninety percent of amino acid and protein wastes of the body are recycled. This means that proteins involved in body processes are providentially used and reused. It also means that losses through cellular death are largely reclaimed and reused. The overall loss is thus about 10% of the daily usage. It is estimated that the body of the average 49
Fruiticultureman requires about 230 grams of new protein formation daily. If 90% of this is supplied 
by recycling spent proteins, then only about 23 grams of new protein need to be con -
sumed. Make it raw amino acids. Our Natural F o
ods Must Supply Our Needs For Mineral Matter
Mineral matter that the human body uses consists of minerals in an organic context, 
that is, in a colloidal form within living substance. Heat quickly destroys the organic context, thus returning mineral matter to an inorganic state. Though super fine in con -
sistency, minerals that were in the organic state become, through the agency of heat or dec omposition of their medium, inorganic the same as they occur in soil, r
ocks, ores, etc. In this form they are not utile by the human body except in certain applications. For example, base minerals will alkalinize the intestinal tract even though they cannot be assimilated. Minerals which the body requires become toxic if appropriated in an inorganic context. This is easily demonstrable. Leukocytosis is recognized as a pathological state. This is a proliferation of white blood cells, the whole of which is often referred to as our im -
mune system. If the components of a cooked or heat-deranged meal are taken, leu -
kocytosis results. If only inorganic minerals are ingested, leukocytosis likewise results. Leukocytosis is a body def ensiv
e act wherein the body unleashes huge armies of white 
blood cells to apprehend and carry toxic substances to the nearest exit or put them harmlessly under the rug somewhere. Thus the body must have, according to the RDIs, about 1% of its solid food intake as 
minerals. To be usable these minerals must be in an un-deranged organic state. Our Natural Foods Must Supply Our Needs For Fatty AcidsThere was, at one time, proclaimed to be three essential fatty acids, namely arachidonic, 
linoleic and linolenic. Today only linoleic is said by nutritional researchers to be essen -
tial. Popularly, linolenic fatty acids are referred to as omega-3 while linoleic fatty acids are referr
ed to as omega-6. Essential means that the body has a need of a component or 
components, in this case fatty acids, because it cannot itself synthesize them. Our natu -
ral foods must, of course, contain our needs for essential fatty acids, because the body never found it necessar y t 
o develop faculties to produce them or they were so plentiful 
in the food the body ceased to produce them and lost its ability to do so as it did with 50
Fruiticulturevitamin C and certain amino acids recognized as essential. Our Natural Vibrant Foods Must Supply Our Needs For VitaminsWhile vitamins comprise such a small portion of our total dietary need that all the RDIs 
taken together on an annual basis could be put into a sewing thimble, they are, never -
theless, essential to our well-being. The RDIs for vitamins vary with each vitamin. Here I will not deal with individual vitamins as separate c omponen
ts. At this time only the ob -
servation need be made that our natural foods must adequately contain these vitamins or g ive rise t o them in absor 
bable form while in the intestinal tract. Our Natural Foods Must Supply Our Needs For Miscellaneous Nutrients
The above nutrients are said to be macronutrients though, as can be seen, vitamins are 
really micronutrients. Other micronutrients which the body may require are auxones (certain plant hormones). The science of nutrition is yet young. Whether or not there are needed nutrients in foods other than the five categories of solids treated above remains open to question. In any event you can be sure our natural foods are replete with all the nutrients we need 
in the quantities we require. After all, our virtual abandonment of our natural dietary fare is only a few seconds on the clock if we regard our earthly existence as being 24 hours thus far. And our natural fare is scientifically established as responsible for our high state of development. Our Natural Foods Should Supply Our Water NeedsInasmuch as humans, like many desert creatures, are not designed with the oral equip -
ment to naturally drink water, our natural diet should be water-sufficient just as it is in 
the case of desert animals as well as numerous other crea
tures in nature. Healthy people eating their natural diet usually have a surplus of water without drinking. The addition of some foods without sufficient water, less than 25% water content, does not occasion thirst. However, substances with water content equal to or greater than our natural foods occasion thirst if ingested cooked, if they are biologically incorrect, if they are condimented, especially with salt, and toxic substances in general. While thirst generally arises from pathogenic conditions within, there are exceptions: 
extraordinarily warm climatic conditions, extraordinarily low humidity, periods without 51
Fruiticulturenormal food intake, partaking of good foods that have been dried, heavy labor or exer -
cise under warm conditions, and yet other conditions. When thirst arises, always drink 
water —pur
e water. With ready supplies of pure water and tools that facilitate drinking 
such as cups, glasses, etc. , we can easily drink the water necessary to make up deficits. Our Diet Must be Alkaline, Overall, in Metabolic End-ProductsHumans require a diet that is alkaline in its metabolic end-products. For practical pur -
poses this means at least 80% of alkaline-forming foods against not more than 20% of 
acid end-pr oduct foods. The human homeostatic condition is alkaline with essential flu -
ids normally having a pH of 7. 40. Any significant variation in the pH can result in coma and dea th. Acidosis is deadlier than alkalosis. The body can rather easily discharge ex -
cess organic alkalis, but must first neutralize excess acids. In the absence of sufficient alkalis, the body must take alkaline miner als 
, including calcium, from bones and fluids to 
effect neutralization. Americans eat a predominantly acid-forming diet, a diet that is not only pathogenic in itself, but causes such complications as base mineral depletion char -
acterized by osteoporosis and metabolic disorders. What W ould 
Y ou Eat in Nature. Considering Various Foods and Our Natural 
DispositionDespite the gross perversion of our instincts, they are still alive and well and will reas -
sert should we be relegated back to nature. Therefore, this quest is to ascertain what we 
would eat in natur e. Our instinctive foods, the foods which helped to develop us to our 
magnificence, necessarily contain all that we need to thrive on. This assurance being soundly based, as you will soon determine for yourself, it then behooves us, as respon -
sible members of society, to undertake the course which makes us the most we can be so tha t we can maximally serv e ourselv
es and those who depend on us. This is a mutual 
arrangement, as those whom we serve in turn serve us better. This exalts everyone and has a ripple effect that makes all in our society healthier and happier, more loving and more caring. In serving yourself best, you at the same time serve others best. This inqui -
ry will survey almost all the foods that humans, in their varied habits, eat. We’ll consider each as a possible food for ourselves as it oc curs in na
ture without benefit of cooking 
apparati, tools and containers. Remember, your instincts will reject or cherish each food on its merits; that is, its appeals 52
Fruiticultureto your senses and palate; the only criteria that guided us to food selection in plentiful 
nature. Our premises are: that Mother Nature, i. e. , the sum of all factors and influences under which we lived in nature, served us correctly to start with, inasmuch as we thrived and attained our high station in its midst; that what was right for us then is still right for us in view that we’re still structurally and physiologically the same as we were during most of our sojourn as humans in Nature; that we can still, within our modern context, supply ourselves with natural foods substantially and significantly; and that we can also observe, meaningfully, the other requisites of life in our modern context. Pertinent Questions—the Answers to Which Determine Our Natural DietAre we herbivores. Are we graminivores. Are we root grubbers. Are we insectivores. Are we carnivores. Are we eaters of fermented and rotten foods. Are we sucklings of animals. Are we frugivores. Are we vegetarians. Are we nut and seed eaters. Are we fat eaters. Are we protein eaters. Are we starch eaters. Are we all the foregoing, that is, omnivores. Are We Herbivores. Herbivores are natural consumers of herbage such as grass, weeds, leaves, stalks and 
stems. Does foraging in nature for grass, weeds and leaves appeal to you. Do grass and weeds attract your eye, tantalize your sense of smell and excite your palate. 53
FruiticultureOf course it is repulsive to you for 
the very simple reason that it can-not satisfy your needs. You do not secr ete cellulase or other enz ymes
 
that break down these plants as herbivores do. Therefore you can -
not derive your foremost need from them, namely simple sugars 
which is your body ’ 
s primary fuel. Rather, the processing and prob -
lems caused by their ingestion oc -
casion a net loss of energies. Of course, humans do c onsume some her
bage such as lettuce, celery, cabbage family 
members (kale, cabbage, collards, Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, broccoli, bok choy, etc. ), spinach and yet other leafy greens. Plain, as they occur in nature, these vegetables real -
ly do not appeal to us though we can cultivate a taste for much of it. At least cauliflower and broccoli do yield some calor ies and all yield
, to the extent when digested, proteins, 
some essential fatty acids, mineral matter and vitamins. But, if we get enough of these nutrients from our natural foods, then these are not needed from plants that we do not eat raw with keen relish. If we had to rely on herbage exclusively for our foods, we’d adjust somewhat but, in all 
likelihood, slowly starve as the calorie yield is negative or very low. While cooking de -
stroys most of the abundant nutrients, it also converts the cellulose, fibers and other components int o usable calor
ic values. Let’s face it: although we will include vegetables in our dietary, we’re not primarily veg -
etable eaters by nature. Obviously we’re not herbivores. Are We G
raminivores. Being graminivorous means we live from grasses and grass seeds though grass eaters 
are really called herbivores. Strict grain eaters are called graminivores. Many birds in nature live on grass and weed seeds. Gramnivorous land mammals, such as horses, have large, flat teeth for grinding hard grain kernels and tough grasses. Grass seeds include 
54
Fruiticulturewheat, oats, rye, barley and rice which were de -
veloped by human mastery of nature only with-
in the last 10,000 years. There are thousands of other g rass seeds that oc cur thr 
oughout nature. Of course, we’d all reject grass seeds as items of diet in nature. First, they are in a condition we can neither masticate nor digest. Being heavy on starches, we would gag on the equivalent of a spoonful or two. You might try a mouthful of 
wheat berries without husks removed as you must eat them in nature. Won’t work for us. Furthermore, if you ate a tablespoon of raw flour made from grass seeds (cereal grains), you’d gag. As grass seeds neither attract, tantalize nor arouse us in their raw natural state, we can 
reject them as natural human fare even though most of the human race presently con -
sumes grains. Thus, we are not natural graminivores. Are W e Na
tural Root Grubbers. Animals that naturally grub for roots have snouts. As most roots are starchy, root grub -
bers secrete a plethora of starch-splitting enzymes whereas humans secrete only one 
such enz yme, amylase, in v
ery limited quantities. Humans abhor dirt, are quite fastidi -
ous and refuse to eat anything dirt-covered or even dirt-tinged. Grubbers such as hogs and boars pass lots of dir t through their bodies. W 
ithout tools, humans are very poor 
diggers. They have no motivation to do so for there are no foods below ground that, in their natural state, please the palate. Humans can handle very little that comes out of the ground in its raw natural state. Some roots, notably turnips, rutabagas, sweet potatoes, yams, ground nuts, beets, carrots, parsnips and salsify can be eaten raw. In Nature we would be obligated to do without tools and would have to eat them raw or not at all. In our natural habitat of plenitude, we can be 
55
Fruiticulturesure that roots which man could handle without tools received precious little attention 
as food. In view of the considerations, you can write off humans as natural root grubbers and I’m 
sure you’ll concur. Are We Insectivores. There are humans who eat insects, especially 
grasshoppers and ants. But, by and large, hu -
mans would give insects a big “yuk” when it comes to eating them, especially in the r a 
w 
state. For the gourmands who eat them, they must fry them in batter or chocolate-coat them, 
a way of saying they are not delicious fare in themselves. There are many birds that live exclusively on insects when and where they are plentiful. There are bats which live on insects. But I know of no humans who do. The average person is repulsed by insects rather than attracted to them as yummy 
foods. I don’t relish them raw or cooked and I don’t think you do either. Are We Carnivores. A carnivore is an eater of carnage or flesh. This does not accurately portray animals 
said to be carnivores. Animals that live on other animals usually consume most of the animal, not merely the flesh. True carnivores lap the flowing and oozing blood of their prey with relish. They delight in the guts and its partially digested contents. And they will consume the bones and gristle (collagen or cartilage). Dogs, for instance, require about 1,700% as much calcium as humans, for animal flesh is extremely acid-forming. Blood and bones are required to offset the acidic end materials. They also require about 1,200% more protein than humans. When you note the relish and gusto with which dogs go for whole animals, you can be sure that what carnivores need for their nourish -
ment is quite delicious to them. 56
FruiticultureDo you relish the idea of crushing the life of a rabbit with your bare hands and teeth. Can you lick its blood with gusto, getting it over your face, hands and body. Would you dig into its guts with pleasure. Would you love to chew on its bones and gristle. Would you love to swallow chunks of its flesh, not being fastidious about swallowing hair and vermin that might be involved. Would you like to do the same for any plant-eating ani -
mal that you could apprehend, kill and consume while still in its warm and fresh state. Of course, y ou and ev
ery unperverted person loves animals as fellow creatures on earth. Killing them is repulsive to you and eating them in the freshly-killed state is even more 
disgusting to you. Yet, most of us do consume flesh and some organ meats while reject -
ing blood, bone, most fats and the entrails or offal. But we kill our animals by proxy. We denature and derange flesh and or gans with hea 
t and camouflage it with condiments. Does this describe a carnivore to you. Would you, in a state of nature, relish chasing down animals and eating them. Again, this is alien to your natural disposition and actu -
ally sickening. True carnivor es also secr
ete an enzyme called uricase to metabolize the some 5% uric 
acid in flesh. We secrete none and thusly must neutralize it with our alkaline minerals, 
primarily calcium. The resulting calcium urate crystals are one of the many pathogens of meat eating, in this case giving rise to or contributing to gout, arthritis, rheumatism and bursitis. Are humans natural meat-
eaters. There are too many considerations in physiology, structure (miscalled anatomy), aesthetic disposition and psy -
chology that characterize us as non-flesh-eaters t o ev
en seri-
ously entertain such notions. I had a nutr itionist tell me in 
fron
t of an audience that we 
had canine teeth and that 
proved our meat-eating character. I responded with: “You really mean dog teeth, don’t 
57
Fruiticultureyou. Like fangs. ”  This caused her to redden. Then I related one of Abraham Lincoln’s 
favorite retorts: “If you counted a sheep’s tail as a leg, how many legs would it have. ”  Invariably the answer was “five. ” To which Lincoln would respond: “Only four. Counting the tail as a leg doesn’t make it one. ”
I think you’ll agree that we are not equipped in any aspect of our being as carnivores. Are We Eaters of Fermented and Rotten Foods. Substantially all of Americans eat fermented and putrefied substances that are 
called foods. When fats oxidize and decompose they become rancid and repulsive. Carbohydrates ferment when decomposed by fungi (yeast) and bacteria. And proteins putrefy (rot) when decomposed by bacteria and fungi. It is odd that we will discard fermented grapes, yet drink their fermentation end-product 
called wine. Odder still, most Americans consume with relish something that never oc -
curred in nature: a pathogenic putrefactive product called cheese. Cheese represents about all the decomposition products in a single package: r
ancid fats, putrefactive prod -
ucts and fermentation products. Bacterial and fungal (y east) f
ermentation produce 
alcohol, vinegar (acetic acid) and lactic acid with other byproducts of methane and carbon dioxide. Proteins, decomposed primarily by anaerobic bac -
teria but also by fungi and aerobic bacteria, have as dec omposition end-products pt omaines (putr
es-
cine, muscarine, neurine, cadaverine, ptomatropine 
and y et other toxic c ompounds), indoles
, leukomaines, skatoles, mercaptans, ammonia, 
methane, hydrogen sulfide and yet other toxic compounds. You need only to refer to a good dictionary to learn just how poisonous these products are. Yet, Americans eat bil -
lions upon billions of pounds of cheese annually. Cheese is made b y taking the casein portion of milk and r otting it with t
ypes of bacteria 
that yield byproducts that many palates have come to treasure. That all these poisons 
going into the system cause anything less than sicknesses, diseases and debility is mis -
representation. Tumors and cancer are often the result. 58
FruiticultureHumans consume many fermentation, rancid and putrefactive products. Most are de -
rived from milk. Some are derived from grains (especially the alcohols), fruits (wines and 
certain vinegars), legumes (especially the soybean and its tr ain of putr
efactive prod -
ucts), and decomposed meats. As humans could not consume these dec omposed pr
oducts in nature without tools and 
containerization, we may safely categorize them as unnatural. I dare say that you agree. Are We Sucklings of Animals. I doubt that humans ever directly suckled cattle, goats, mares, camels, sheep and other 
animals. And, of course, the idea of doing this is obnoxious to our disposition. I refer,  
facetiously, to milk drinkers as secondhand grass eaters although, to be sure, grass has all the nutr ients necessar y t
o support life. While we can live on milks (certain Africans, like the Masai, live substantially on milk and blood, thus reducing themselves to parasite status), these are by no means our natural foods. Milk-drinking as a regular part of our intake is only a few hun -
dred years old with the exception of certain Arabic and A frican peoples. M ilk
-drinking is pathogenic. If milk and milk products were discontinued today, millions of people would cease to suffer sicknesses and pathologies within a short pe -
riod. In fact, if this alone was discontinued, the hospitals would virtually empty out and physicians’  w
aiting rooms would be mostly vacated. Milk-drinking is also an act by proxy. If we had to get milk directly from the teats of ani -
mals by suction, I’m sure we’d skirt milk altogether. I would and I’m sure you would too. Are We F
rugivores. Are we a species of fruit eaters. Would you, in nature, relish ripe, vibrant grapes, peach -
es, melons, bananas, apples, plums, oranges, mangos, avocados, tomatoes, figs, berries 
and the thousands of other fruits. Would fruits attr ac
t your eye, tantalize your sense of 
smell, and be a gustatory delight in their raw natural ripe state. Would you prefer any -
thing that occurs in nature to a juicy sweet watermelon. 59
FruiticultureMan has always had a love affair going 
with fruits. Even through all his perver -
sions, he has continued to relish fruits. Fruits are the natur al f 
ood of humans 
and the only food category ideally suit -
ed to all their faculties. This does not mean we should eat fruits totally and  
e
xclusively in our present circumstances, 
but it does mean that, in nature, that’s all we ate as attested to by anthropo -
logical evidence scientists have uncovered, notably Dr. Alan Walker of Johns Hopkins University. Of c
ourse, you go for fruits in their raw state regardless of what else your acculturization 
and circumstances dispose you to eat. Your instincts are still alive and well despite per -
versions. Many myths have been built around and about fruits. As a fruitarian I can offer 
a new dietary for those who say w e
’re not—their own words. Nutritionists, so-called, are the creatures of training dictated by the meat, grain and milk trusts. These trusts are part of the dominant commercial interests that dictate what will be taught in our educational institutions from universities down to kindergarten. Nutritionists are trained like seals to parrot the propaganda which will induce the popu -
lace to consume their masters’ products, with the basic five food groups being one of the primary propaganda w eapons put a
t their disposal to serve their masters. Of course, 
there are renegade nutritionists and dietitians who have revolted against the basic four except for the fruit and vegetable category. Most nutritionists are ashamed of the fifth food category and don’t even mention it though it is on the books along with the basic four. The fifth category consists of what might broadly be termed “accessory foods” such as 
oils, syrups, snack foods, sugars, wines, seasonings, jams, preserves, etc. Even though we are admonished to eat from all five food categories daily by the framers of this scheme to peddle commercial products, nutritionists and dietitians are not keen on mouthing this part of the propaganda even though they include it liberally in their recipes. 60
FruiticultureWhile some nutritionists and dietitians praise fruits and vegetables, they still charac -
terize those who point out our biologically correct foods as faddists and nutritional 
quacks. Yet, ev
en in seminars, those who sharply question me must admit that, aestheti -
cally, they would eat little besides fruits in nature and that we humans are naturally fruitar ians. All the cr it
eria heretofore cited as the requirements of our natural foods are amply met 
by fruits. In short, they are replete with our nutrient requirements in practically the pro -
portions that we need them. We are biological symbionts of fruit-bearing plants, and in nature would ea t v 
ery little besides fruits. Despite all this, there’s no particular harm in 
eating green leafy vegetables, stalks, stems and their fresh juices in the raw state. Even some steaming or conservative cooking of tu -
bers, stalks, stems, roots, corms and selected legumes and g rains (pref er
ably sprouted), are 
not sufficiently deleterious to seriously harm our health. Of course, there are some toxic re -
sults from eating all this fare. We’re better off without them. Yet, I r epea
t, there is no great 
harm in their consumption relative to what is suffered from conventional fare. Dr. Bruce Ames of the University of California, Berkeley, has created a catalog of poi -
sons in vegetables and published an extensive article in the September 23, 1983 issue 
of Science magazine. No indic tmen 
t of fruits as having toxic substances was made or 
can be made. Virtually every vegetable was indicted. All were a part of the same study. Humans are biologically equipped to handle most fruits. When ripened, fruits accommodatingly convert their carbohydrate components into glu -
cose and fructose, simple sugars we can use without further digestion. Their enzymes 
conver t their pr 
oteins into amino acids and their fats into fatty acids and glycerols. Thus, 
when we eat fruits, all we need do is savor their goodness. The fruit portions, that is, mesocarps, were specifically compounded to attract biological symbionts. Fruits meet their nutrient needs rather ideally with predigested nutrients. For humans, no other food compares with fruits in satisfying all needs including, of course, our requirement for deli -
61
Fruiticultureciously vibrant soul-exalting fare. I’m sure that you will agree through your own senses that fruits would be your primary 
food in a state of nature. Are We Vegetarian. The average American understands the term vegetarian to mean an “eater of vegetables. ”   
But, in reality a vegetarian is someone who eats only plant-derived foods. This may in -
clude a preponderance of fruits but, in practice, it means anything and everything be -
sides animal products. The word v egetable der 
ives from the Latin vegetus, meaning lively, exciting or animated. It does not mean specific types of foods other than those which enliven or sustain us in 
an energetic mode. Necessarily, by this definition, fruits are high-energy foods whereas vegetables are either low-energy foods or have drawbacks. Typical present-day vegetari -
an fare includes grains, tubers, root, stalks, stems, leaves, nuts, seeds, fruits, legumes and about ev erything else that does not mo v
e, bleed, cry or resist acquisition. Even though those who eat all fruits or a preponderance of them can correctly be called fruitarians, they may also be correctly called vegetarians. Personally, my intake is mostly fruit. I prefer to be called a fruitarian, though I do not object to being called a vegetar -
ian. Do you agree that, naturally, we are fruit-eaters. Are W e Nut and S
eed Eaters. In nature there is no doubt but that humans did consume some nuts. Even so, our ability 
to derive nuts from their hard shells is limited. We do not have razor sharp teeth and tons of pressure per bite or jaw-power as have squirrels. Humans can crack certain nuts with their teeth. Very few of today’s degenerated version of humans can do it, but most nuts 
can be cracked with strong jaws and good teeth. Even strong hands can crush nuts if at least two are taken and pressed against each other. Most nuts are delicious to us in their raw state. Unfortunately, our ability to handle nuts is rather poor—we’d need pointed, durable teeth, as rodents have, to gnaw through nut shells. Nuts that we savor are in a storage form, 
62
Fruiticulturethat is, as fats, proteins and invert sugars or starches. Digestion of nuts into fatty acids, 
amino acids, and glucose is a long drawn out process, most often taking hours. Whether we did or did not consume nuts in nature makes little difference to us today. Most of us do consume nuts but disadvantageously as cooked fare. Heated fats and proteins are quite pathogenic, yes, even carcinogenic. Nuts should be eaten raw or not at all. Technically and botanically nuts are fruits. I do not buy that because the word fruit re -
ally means product or result. Fruits are really the mesocarps of seed packages which 
plants creat ed specifically as a pr
oduct to be consumed by a biological symbiont who 
would incidentally discard and distribute the seeds. Nuts and seeds were created by plants for broadcast and reproduction by other methods. All nuts are seeds. Most seeds are in a storage form to survive the vagaries of climatic and consuming elements so that they may be instrumental in reproducing and perpetuating their kind. Nuts, however, have extra protection in that they have hard woody shells. Seeds usually have only fi -
brous coatings as their protection. Both seeds and nuts are heavily endowed with nutri-ents sufficient to initiate and sustain a certain minimum growth of their plants. We can benefit from these nutrients. But if w
e eat more than two or three ounces, we’re likely to 
get more protein and fats than we can readily handle. Certainly nuts and seeds were not created by plants for consumption but, rather, for 
reproduction. That some animals have adapted to their consumption has not been a two-sided affair as it has been with fruits where the love affair has been and still is mu -
tual. There are many types of seeds: legumes, grains, weeds, nuts, and fruit seeds being among the most prominent. I n their na
tural state humans can handle very few of these 
seeds. Nuts can be digested and used in very small amounts. Likewise, sesame, pump -
kin, squash, sunflower, pignolias, and some other seeds can be used. We are primar ily car
bohydrate eaters, not fat and protein eaters. I dare say you agree 
with my assessment of nuts and seeds as human fare. Are We Fat Eaters. In nature there are very few fats we can get in any quantity without violating our biolog -
ical disposition. Avocados, durians, olives, coconuts, nuts and seeds are heavy on fats. Avocados and durians fur nish fa
ts in a predigested state when ripe. Coconuts furnish 
fats as monoglycerides/glycerols before they set their fats as triglycerides in a storage 63
Fruiticultureform. Coconuts are, therefore, in the jelly-like state, easily digested. When matured and 
hardened, it is almost impossible to digest them. Broccoli and cauliflower have con -
siderable fatty acids in an easily us-
able state when eaten in the raw fresh condition. How ev 
er, they give 
some unwanted toxic sulfur com -
pounds. We get predigested fats ad-equate to meet our fatty acid needs from fruits. An oc casional a
vocado or 
seeds and nuts are quite satisfying. Those who subsist substantially on fats do not do well. Eskimos are very short-lived. They consume about 200 grams, about 1,800 calories, dai -
ly. Their short-lived condition is probably more attributable to their heavy protein con-sumption than fats. They consume about 200 grams of protein daily incidental to their fat-ea ting and this plac
es a great burden upon their organs, especially liver and kidneys. Because of the acid-forming properties of metabolized proteins, Eskimos lose their teeth at an early age and suffer severe osteoporosis. Eskimos are eaters of animal fats and pro -
teins, primarily as derived from fish. Be it noted that, during the berry-picking season, Eskimos are said to ea t only ber
ries during the short season they are ripening. Biologically we are not a species of fat eaters, but incidental eaters of fats. We do not need to store great quanties of fat, as do bears and sea lions. Ripe fruits contain ad -
equate quantities of predigested fats in the form of fatty acids that are easily handled. Other forms of fa t r
equire hours for their digestion, quite atypical of fruits to which we 
are most favorably disposed. Fats may lie in the small intestine several hours before bile is secreted into it with which to emulsify them, thus exposing them to lipases which re -
duce them to monoglycerides (fatty acids) and glycerols. I adjudge tha t we are not a species of fa t ea
ters except incidental to our fruitarian 
disposition. 64
FruiticultureAre We Protein Eaters. To hear the exponents of the meat trust, you’d think we’re in imminent danger of disease 
and death if we fail to eat meat three times a day. The truth is that eating meat three times daily will cause the very conditions we’re taught to fear. We’re in no danger of pro -
tein deficiency unless we’re eating a 100% cooked food diet. On the other hand, there are gra v
e dangers in eating cooked proteins. At normal cooking temperatures, proteins 
are coagulated, deaminated and largely oxidized. The nitrogenous materials are soil for putrefactive bacteria. The carbohydrate portions of cooked proteins are usable for ca -
loric values but still present the problems that cooked carbohydrates pose. If we must eat pr ot
eins, we must eat them raw to 
derive their full benefit. But proteins, per se, are 
not created as food. They are created by plant and animal life as components of organisms, seeds, en -
zymes, ova, etc. Most proteins of this nature have toxic prot ec
tive compounds. The bean family have 
anti-enzyme factors. Eggs have avidin. Nuts also have anti-enzyme factors. Seeds of peaches, apples and many other fruits have hydrocyanide. Humans do not secrete the enzymes to ne -
gate or break down these toxic substances. From fruits we der iv
e as much protein as is present in mother’s milk for a growing baby. Moreover, fruit proteins come to us predigested as do other ripened fruit components. There are many alarmists who warn us about protein deficiencies of fruits and many other presumed deficiencies. If we developed in nature on fruits to our high state as an -
thropologists have found, then the real deficiencies are in the thinking of those who pro -
claim deficiencies. Their evidence is usually based on researches with pathological spec -
imens, especially those whose metabolic and assimilative faculties are very impaired. They base their thinking from a standpoin
t of disease rather than health, from a modality 
and curing mentality rather than a correction of pathogenic practices. In saying that our natural foods are deficient, they are simultaneously proclaiming improvidence in nature. Or, in effect, saying: “God, you made a terrible mistake in providing for us and especially in giving us a sweet tooth. ” Advocating the consumption of proteins and yet more pro -
teins when those so advising know by their own researches and knowledge that the pro -
65
Fruiticultureteins will be cooked and contribute to heavy pathology is nothing less than criminal. One more consideration: If we ate only proteins in their raw state we’d quickly become 
diseased and perhaps even suffer death. Why. Because various amino acids require from about 60% to 137% of their carbohydrate energy potential for their deamination and utilization. The net result would be starvation. That’s one reason so much weight is lost by the obese on protein diets. And the intoxication that results from putrefaction is the reason so many of these dieters become diseased with some dying.
"Thou shalt not poison thyself."
What is the first commandment of eating, according to the author?
The author strongly advises against consuming fermented and rotten foods, as they can lead to various health problems.
What is the author's stance on the consumption of fermented and rotten foods?
The author believes that humans are not designed to consume grains, as they are not easily digestible and can cause harm.
What is the author's opinion on the consumption of grains?
The author advises against eating nuts and seeds in large quantities, as they are difficult to digest and can cause health issues.
What is the author's perspective on the consumption of nuts and seeds?
The author is strongly against the consumption of milk and dairy products, as they are unnatural and can cause harm to the body.
What is the author's stance on the consumption of milk and dairy products?