How much is 80 procent raw?
Hi me and my wife are new to raw and have a few questions but first a little introduction.
I am a Norwegian and my wife is Italian she has been vegetarian for 4 years now, I was not but lately i never ate meat at home, only when i ate out so i had/have no problem with vegetarian food.
so now three weeks ago we found some articles on internet about the raw food diett and did some research and found more info. we both got very exiteed and wanted to try and start for it makes sense, and so far it is working very good.
The thing i want to ask is we eat almost everything raw now exept alittle bread every day and one time a week usually we go out with friends and then we eat cooked food. Is that normal?
and how many procentage is to be considered raw?
we have now started sprouting alot and its going fine.We dont have a dehydraiter( and im not sure where to buy one) but we have blender.
The nuts do you buy them raw or toasted(all kind)?we seem only to find toasted nuts here and salted can you soak them?
We both feel good on the diett so far , no problem. We also have a great big healt store very close thats nice.
Helge & Elena
Usually 50% is good to start.
You could call yourself a raw foodist after 60%.
Different people/books will tell you different numbers, and like always, listen to your body.
If it feels good then keep doing it!!!
Personally it's not ruining my life or anything but I don't like those less than 100% calling themselves Raw. It serves to confuse those who are not into raw. It to me almost makes light of it all, like it just doesn't matter that much. This percentage thing isn't used with vegans.
It makes it's way into the books and products also. Like David Wolfe selling Raw chocolate bars that are sweetened with Maple Syrup.
Why call yourself Raw if it is not true. Who are you trying to impress. If you think it means something to be Raw enough that you use it to refer to yourself, then shouldn't you actually think enough of yourself to actually be Raw.
If you believe that 100% Vegan/Mostly Raw is fine then why not describe yourself this way. Why not call yourself Vegan. Are you not proud of your beliefs? You can even add "I tend to eat mainly Raw" if you want to make your case known.
I fast sometimes, If i started fasting 60% of the time would it be OK to call myself a Breatharian? Every time someone mentions a Breatharian on a Raw Food forum the conversation instantly become about whether or not they actually ever eat anything. And if it's decided that they do, then people start calling them a fraud cause they hear that they eat food sometimes. If you call yourself Raw, knowing that you eat cooked food, then are you not a fraud by these peoples standards?
Finally as someone who is 100% Raw, my ego would love to be able to describe my achievement by just saying that I am Raw. I would love to be able to tell people how I changed my life, lost 163 pounds and reversed two fatal diseases by just saying that I went Raw. But since others are using the term so loosely, Just saying "Raw" would not be conveying the truth about how I live and what I believe works. Don't the 100%'ers like myself deserve the luxury of a one word explanation. Have we not truly earned it?
You have accomplished so much and that is awesome.
I don't think this is about "you", but about the person asking the question.
Your saying that 80% raw isn't good enough for "you" and that is fine.
Obviously these people feel good about themselves, and that is the main thing.
So hopefully the continue doing what they are doing, and if they choose 100% raw in the future , that is great.
I like you Chris, and everything that you've done. I have a lot of respect, of course. I do want to put in on a side note that without the "Raw" label you and Zoe wouldn't have a brand. So you do have more than one incentive to be considered the "Raw Guru". I don't hold it against you though :) Although I would be interested in hearing your opinion.
Um, kudos to chris for throwing out there a perfectly good answer to the q. "how many percentage to be considered raw?" The real answer is 100%. Now most people CHOOSE not to go 100% overnight and of course, that's fine. For most its a learning process and a journey. But where on earth did you get your 60% answer?
Lets tell the people researching and preparing for their step into raw "don't worry about what you call yourself and where's the cut off". lol That means nothing. Live your life, keep learning. TAKE NOTE of how you feel when you slip. Not so you can see how much you can get away with (zeesh!) but to REINFORCE the sometimes very challenging choice we have made.
I dont think chris thinks it's about him at all. He was just addressing the answer you gave to a nice new couple to our forum. And I bet it's safe to say those still eating on both sides of the line are probably (unintentionally) incorrect on the percent they are so fond of proclaiming anyhow. Sort of like me fudging my weight for the majority of my adult life. lol Of course, in the hopes of it being true any day now.
Now, finally, to make it about the nice couple asking the question... Hi! Sprouting is a wonderful place to start, delish and fantastically nutritious. I chose to get my dehydrator through eBay, look around and you will find the best deal for a quality item you will use for many years. The internet will be your best bet for so many things just because raw is not as popular as it will be in the near future. Unless big business is allowed to pervert it for a buck. Oops, sorry.
The nuts you find most places are toasted and you should just consider them dead food. Look up raw nuts (all kinds) on the net and go with the places you will find recommended on here. After you get a taste for the raw variety the difference is really noticeable and the old toasted, salted ones will taste so dry and burnt it's amazing. You will really find them to be a huge waste of money and the price of raw well spent. I wouldn't waste the water to soak the toasted, salted ones. They cant germinate.
Keep feeling better, keep ADDING raw foods to each day and you will get there. Where ever THAT is. =)
"But where on earth did you get your 60% answer?"
Let me explain the 60% comment.
I wrote this right after "Different people/books will tell you different numbers, and like always, listen to your body."
And I was correct, different people will give different answers, that was to be suspected.
I got it from here:
And I know I read it somewhere else, basically everyones opinion will vary.
There is no proof that 100% is better than 90%, or 80% is better than 60%.
It does seem logical that the more raw organic natural food one eats in the correct proportions, that the more healthier they will be.
And here is the definition:
"Raw foodism (or rawism) is a lifestyle promoting the consumption of un-cooked, un-processed, and often organic foods as a large percentage of the diet."
I don't think saying somebody has to be 100% promotes the raw diet, or encourages people to try the raw diet.
I thought that this site, Goneraw.com was a support site.
I didn't realize that in order to use this site I must be 100%.
I guess I don't belong here either.
I'm not 100% yet either. Blessings, m
"I don't think saying somebody has to be 100% promotes the raw diet, or encourages people to try the raw diet."
Quite right, rawcanadian.
To suggest that one is either 100% or not raw at all is folly.
Raw is not some club that only the cool kids - who are stringently monitoring every molecule that goes into their mouths for enzymatic activity - can get in. Pish posh to all that raw snobbery and exclusivity. It's not 100% or nothing. It's simply a healthy way of eating - the ideal way of eating - and anyone who strives to be raw, eats primarily raw, and feels they're raw, IS raw. The more raw vegan foods one is able to include in their diet, the better. THAT is the bottom line.
You won't find me wringing my hands, all tragic and overwrought, over a little nutritional yeast or herbal tea, or even the very rare cooked meal. It happens. That's life.
I strive for 100%, often maintain it, occasionally don't (but don't get in a tizzy about it), and I, by cracky, am raw.
I do get what you're saying Chris-- that it would be nice if saying "I'm raw" would communicate the phenomenal achievement of going 100%-- just like saying "i'm vegan' means 100% (not I only eat chicken 20% of the time.. lol)
However, 'eple' is new and looking for support and it feels like you chewed rawcanadian new @$$hole.
Myself? I just tell people that I am vegan and eat mostly raw fruits and veggies. IF I can succeed like you Chris (and your achievements are AWESOME) I would definitely call myself a RAW vagan.
I like what Tonya Kay says about raw food. I'm paraphrasing, but she says while all other diets are diets of exclusion, raw food is a diet of inclusion. Being a vegan means you DON'T eat meat, dairy, etc. If you eat any of these things, you're not vegan. Being a raw foodist means you DO eat raw foods. EVERYONE is a raw foodist - just to varying degrees. I thought that was a nice, happy way of looking at it. Maybe get around the whole issue by not labeling oneself at all... just a thought.
" Don't the 100%'ers like myself deserve the luxury of a one word explanation. Have we not truly earned it?"
The phenomena of humans to create exclusive definitions and labels astounds me. The defintion of "raw" and "vegan" are very different in a sense that there is no degree of veganism (you either eat animal products or you don't), but raw, as someone mentioned just before me, has different meanings based on who you ask.
Why do you need to make boundaries and categories? It's great that you are 100% raw. But why does it matter so much to you what other people chose to define themselves as? Why are you so hurt and "frauded" by their remarks? Does it, in your opinion, somehow put down this exclusive group to which you belong? Do you think that people who call themselves raw, when they are not "100%ers" like yourself, are giving your group a bad name? Perhaps you shouldn't be pre-occupied with all this. You are healthy, enjoying life, and living the way you see fit for you. Placing people in categories just because you want to have some label saying that there is a way in which your lifestyle is superior to theirs, is not going to make much of a difference to you personally, besides of course having the privilege of belonging to some sacred club. Just be proud of what you do and don't let other people's decisions and self-associations affect you.
Assigning people to their places in a specific, rigid construct has never made the world any better. Just let people define themselves as what they choose, even if it goes against your personal standards of what you think it ought to be.
Annabelle77 - "I do get what you're saying Chris-- that it would be nice if saying "I'm raw" would communicate the phenomenal achievement of going 100%-- just like saying "i'm vegan' means 100% (not I only eat chicken 20% of the time.. lol)"
Thank you fro getting my point and not reading any more into it! It's nice to be heard. I guess these other reactions are because...
Annabelle77 - "it feels like you chewed rawcanadian new @$$hole."
I was not aware of this at all. I didn't address my comment towards "Rawcanadian". I didn't even read his post before making mine. The 60% was just a coincidence. Thanks for calling it to my attention.
I have not been on GoneRaw much lately. It used to be a forum that was "less sensitive" and "more relaxed" compared to some others. Has this changed in the last few months? Maybe it's because I haven't been posting a lot here lately and the new GR people don't know that I am in fact a nice guy.
Annabelle77 - "Myself? I just tell people that I am vegan and eat mostly raw fruits and veggies. IF I can succeed like you Chris (and your achievements are AWESOME) I would definitely call myself a RAW vagan."
That's what I say as an intro. I just wish it was more than an intro. I wasn't looking for a solution. I was just expressing. No one ever asks this question, at least I've never seen it in this form before. They just start calling themselves Raw. I thought WOW someone actually has asked at which point one should call themselves Raw. Great I'll say what I think about that! - Spiritual and conscious, does not mean passive and self denying. Gandhi loved everyone but he was always blunt, firm and direct about his beliefs.
This was not anything about which % is right for you. This post is ONLY about my wish that I could easily communicate my lifestyle with just one word. I can't do that! Because Raw does not mean 100% Raw. I can't just tell someone with heart disease to "Go Raw" because that is not specific enough. I have to go into a long explanation.
I WAS VENTING !!!!!!!
I'm sorry if anyone took offense. Ignore my efforts to feel better. I'm glad I made this post though. Having these "bitchy" thoughts and not expressing them kinda makes me feel guilty. Like I'm in a relationship with the entire online community and I owe you all total openness.
pss: WTF has everyone got against labels? What's wrong with using 1 word instead of a paragraph? I get a lot of email, comments on my various profiles, private messages and I also have a open question forum on my website. Do you know how much time it would save me to be able to just say "RAW"? It's impossible I know. That's why I built PurelyRaw in the first place. To communicate what has worked for me. I hate the fact though that it takes a whole website to explain something I understood the first time I heard the term "Raw Food." ~ Raw = still in it's original state, not cooked ~and~ Food = stuff to eat.
VENTING AGAIN !!!
I'll make it all better by using a sweet close.
Hmm, I would just like to point out that there was such a defensive tizzy about what percentage is considered "raw" that Eple's original question, "How much is 80% raw?" was never answered. Anyone care to estimate? I'm guessing you would hit 80% if you didn't eat anything dead until dinnertime, although I suppose that depends on whether you eat more at the beginning of the day or the end of the day.
Have a lovely day
I think if your read epie's entire post, you'll see that "How much is 80% raw?" was not really the question.
In fact they said... "The thing i want to ask is we eat almost everything raw now except a little bread every day and one time a week usually we go out with friends and then we eat cooked food. Is that normal? and how many procentage is to be considered raw?"
I think the last half of this question has been thoroughly covered. As to whether or not it is normal to eat bread or eat cooked once a week when out with friends. This has not been dealt with. I'm gonna leave the "normal" question alone for now. But you are more than welcome to answer that one yourself.
ps: It's not my fault that others have decided to focus on my perfectly OK answer to a perfectly OK question. It almost seems that I am the only one who did answer epie's question, or at least part of it.
Eple - Welcome!! I would concentrate on as much raw as possible. There is no set percentage for being considered raw. Certain areas and lifestyles do not lend themselves to 100%. Health is a journey so enjoy your path :) Toasted nuts are not raw and not helped by soaking. The reason you soak raw nuts is to start the sprouting process, a toasted nut will be unable to sprout. You might want to search this site for forum topics such as buying nuts online, dehydrators etc. Don't worry about small amounts of cooked food as you transition. Use this time to learn about 100% raw and if that is your goal, great and if not, super! Chris and Zoe have a great website that give live and dead food lists.
Chris - I think you bring up a great point of discussion. Vegans never define by percent, nor do SAD folks. I have noticed a lot of contention about truly raw versus raw food community raw foods. It concerns me that those who support such a great way of life help with some miseducation or just lack of clarification. (note: I am not indicating anyone in particular, I state this from listening to several folks over many websites, nor do I wish to name drop for sake of examples.) I think that more education should be done on a 100% raw, simple diet. If you are anywhere on the road to 100% you should be accepted (I myself am still transitioning - 80% if I had to label ha ha!) and supported but facts are facts and should be made available and not veiled, just as a random example, nutritional yeast is not raw but widely used in the raw community. Should you choose to include things in your diet that are not 100% - super! just don't pretend that they are not. I don't think everyone should be 100%, nor do I think that folks should stress over their percentage or ingredients. I commend and respect you Chris for stepping up with honesty and sincerity "Spiritual and conscious, does not mean passive and self denying. Gandhi loved everyone but he was always blunt, firm and direct about his beliefs." We all need to learn to speak our truth, in a polite and respectful way (which :) I think you did.)
I extend much love and respect to all of the community here!
chriscarlton - It's good to see you here again! I think things HAVE changed, but maybe it's like you said - that it's because not everyone is familiar with who you are? Thanks for posting.
eple - Welcome to goneraw! Normal is as different as people are different, but it takes most people some time to transition. If you're wondering what 80% means, it's the percentage of your calories that come from raw foods, and I've never understood why it would be important enough to count calories and figure it out. Raw nuts can be ordered online from multiple raw food specialty sites.
I have to agree with Chris's comments. I didn't see his post as about "HIM" at all. Its simplly about watering down the meaning of something. I also don't think the question is about what percentage of raw is good for you. 60% 80%. It's all good for you. The more the better. It was asking at what point are you a "Raw Foodist."
I was a vegetarian for 20 years. I met so many people who called themselves vegetarian but ate fish. So the majority of the people I met felt that fish was okay for me to eat and actually ARGUE with me that I was SUPPOSED to eat fish. I was served fish especially made for me at dinners. At my work right NOW, every day there are two soup options. One vegetarian, one not. On fridays, they have clam chowder, and one other chicken or beef option. When I complained about it, they said fish is vegetarian. They KNOW because a worker in teh kitchen is vegetarian and eats fish and the clam chowder. Therefore, clam chowder is the vegetarian option. THAT is why I hate when people feel the need to label themsevles something they are not. I am not 100% raw and I doubt I ever will be. I don't consider myself or call myself a raw foodist. But I happily tell people that I make a point to have a very high raw content in my diet. Or I choose to eat high raw. Otherwise people will see me eating that cooked meal I have three times a month when I go out to dinner and think that is what a "Raw Foodist" eats. And then try to serve some poor 100% raw person a nice cooked lasagna or something!!
Oh, and ChrisCarlton, high fives to you on your successful journey to 100% raw and the amazing amount of weight you have lost.
"And then try to serve some poor 100% raw person a nice cooked lasagna or something!!"
Thanks for the nice words also!
Thanks for the welcome back!
I am so annoyed by people who call themselves vegetarians and eat fish! Some people eat everything besides red meat and call themselves vegetarians. I would like to think that I am zen enough to never be bothered by how others self-identify, but this has been bugging me since I went vegetarian 20 years ago.
I do question why I have a need to keep the 'vegetarian' label clean, and why folks like Chris need to know that the world recognizes their purity when they use the 'raw' label. I understand the point that someone made upthread about vegetarian and vegan diets being diets of exclusion, while raw is a diet of inclusion.
That all said, I think I ultimately agree with Chris on this. If you want to say you are "Raw," I think you are implying that everything you eat is raw. It is a hard diet (for most people) to keep, and even though every person who is raw does it for the benefits (or because they have some serious eating disorders or issues and this is a form of self-restriction, but that's another subject...), I think it is also human nature for people to like to be seen for what they are. It's not that Chris wants to wear the mantle of Raw so that others look at him in awe; it's more so that others recognize that this is an important way in which he is different from the norm. (Speaking of course without knowing Chris and with acknowledging that I can be totally wrong about his feelings).
If someone who I invited over for dinner tells me they are vegetarian, I know exactly what to serve. If they tell me they are vegan, I know to make a meal without my beloved cheese. If someone who is coming over tells me they are raw, I'll assume that the person eats no cooked food whatsoever and that I need to accomodate that restriction. If I start dehydrating and sprouting their meal three days ahead of time and they show up asking for some pasta, I'm going to be pissed and ask why they said they're "raw."
For the four or five months when I was 100% raw, I did tell people I was raw. Friends could tell when I ordered a green salad with no cheese, no dressing, and a side of guac at restaurants. Now that I vary somewhere between 60 and 75 percent raw, I would never introduce myself as "raw." I would say that I like raw foods and that I try to eat all organic, locally grown, raw foods and whole foods, but I think it would be very misleading and without purpose for me to simply refer to myself as "raw."
I think it's natural for people on various places of a spectrum to have opinions as to why their place is the best place, and that can lead to us getting defensive as to how we're identified and what it says about our place on that purity continuum of raw food. When I was all raw, I felt a pride in that label and thought it was what other dabblers should strive for. As time went on and I started feeling that all raw is incredibly socially restrictive and perhaps not the healthiest thing in the world for all types - and when I started noting more and more how many folks on this site seem to have traded an eating disorder for being a raw foodist , which made me think more about the commonalities between those states - I became more comfortable being in and being labeled as being in a different place in the spectrum.
I'm not ashamed to be a part-time raw foodist or to be considered slightly apart from true 100% raw foodists. We all get benefits from this diet, and I think there should be a semantic indicator for whether a person tries to incorporate a lot of healthy raw foods in their diet or for whether they go to the hard-earned extreme of never letting a cooked piece of food pass their lips. There's room for all of us here.
I agree with Chris & dagny about what "being raw" really means, too. I went to a raw foods class once where the lady was telling us that cashews aren't really raw - she said, "If you want to eat cashews, fine. But don't call yourself a raw foodist." I agree with that mentality. To me, a "raw foodist" eats raw food. A SAD eater eats the Standard American Diet. A vegan eats plants. A person on a "whole foods" diet eats only whole foods - nothing processed or refined. This is not to be snobbish or ego-centered at all. It just makes sense. A diet that contains lots of raw foods along with some cooked ones could be considered "healthy" or a "whole foods" diet/lifestyle - but it is not a RAW diet if it includes COOKED bread, or STEAMED veggies, or whatever else. I don't believe everyone has to do the same things, the same way, at the same time, etc. but call it what it is. "I eat primarily raw plant foods" or "I eat a lot of raw food" if you eat that way. "I eat a lot of raw food" might work, too, if you're wondering how to describe your diet/lifestyle to others who are curious. People say the raw food diet/lifestyle is about inclusion & not restriction, but it is about inclusion of RAW foods, and it definitely IS about restriction/limitation/elimination - of COOKED foods. Otherwise we wouldn't need to call it raw. :)
This post has been very interesting!
I was %100 for 1 and 1/2 years and during that time I told people that I was a raw foodist, because it got to the point. But then I stated eating vegan whole food cooked meals occasionally and was only %100 raw for stretches of a few weeks to a month or so. This has gone on for about a year and during this time I have struggled with what to label my diet as. I really can't say I'm vegan because that would include wheat and sugar and all kinds of things that I don't eat. Also if I tell people I am vegan they will inevitably try to feed me something that I don't eat. Sometimes I saw that I am macrobiotic/raw. I'm either eating one or the other. Sometimes saying I'm raw is easier though because it includes all of the things that I eat most of the time.
As far as what is normal, well if you have been eating lots of cooked processed foods or even a vegetarian diet then %100 raw will not be normal:) I say add as much raw food to your lifestyle as you can without causing yourself major distress over your diet. I will eat occasional cooked food but I have my list of what I will never ever eat: wheat and other gluten grains, dairy, meat, sugar, processed foods and canned foods, GMO foods. This actually keeps things simple for me.
I myself would not try to answer what is "normal", because I have no idea. I currently eat around 95% raw on most days. I will eat the occasional cooked meal when I go to visit family, since they're still struggling with the vegan thing. Given the fact that I do occasionally eat cooked food and not all of my food on a daily basis is raw (spices, some seaweed), I would not tell people that I am raw (I do say that I am a vegan, however :) ). I did not mean to insult you, Chis, or anyone else on this forum. I just felt that the discussion was getting off track and defensive/aggressive and hoped to break things up a bit before people starting stepping on toes.
I'm guessing too that "normal" for raw depends on where you are in the world, what fruit and veg diversity is like, and how much money you have to spend on produce! So normal must be one of those relative things, maybe?
For me it's actually more about what I believe about food. To me saying I am a Raw Foodist really means that I believe cooked food is bad for me in any form. It means that I use dried spices with a guilty doubt and then remind myself I am still transitioning and not using as much now as I used to. Stating this about myself is the 1 thing that does allow me to socialize, without breaking my beliefs, because people don't expect me to eat cooked food.
It means that I eat 100% Raw for such long periods without exception, that any stray is met with an immediate "slam like" return to earth. As an addict, this has added a new Drug to my repertoire when emotions need suppressing. (by addict I mean someone who has learned that he can alter his mood with outside sources.)
Knowing how cooked food effects me, I can NOT advise that any of it is acceptable in a healthy diet. I don't know/understand how anyone can be purely raw for more than 3 months and not have had this same experience. Maybe I damaged myself a little more than the many of you that are half my age and were never Morbidly Obese with Heart Disease. Hell I've only been 100% since Jan 2005 and that's only 4 years. Should I expect to already be back to a level of health where I don't feel things like that. Who knows? But either way, it begs the question... Why does cooked food effect anyone this way?
I have been to many raw websites, and have read a couple of RAW books.
Non of the the sites, nor the books, nor the definitions of a RAW Foodist suggests that a raw foodist doensn't eat cooked food. Of course a raw foodist eats cooked foods, but the majority is raw.
Some other real life examples:
A cyclist sometimes choses to walk, or ride in a car, are they still considered a cyclist?
A gardener choses to buy some fruits/veggies at the grocery store, are they no longer considered a gardener?
A catholic swears, are they no longer considered catholic?
I only work 8 hours a day , that's 33% so am I a bum??
Why do people label themselves?
"People think that they are better, just by labeling themselves. People should just be themselves and not go by a label."
BTW can anybody confirm that goneraw.com is a 100% raw foodist site??
I would also like to add that our ancestors (cave people lol) probably ate meat, fish, and had fire.
So very small amounts of meat and cooked foods may actually be good for us. There is no proof but I would like to keep an open mind, instead of shutting everybody out, and thinking that I am the best and better than everybody else.
Because I'm not.
Just saw your last post. No insult felt 'tall.
Actually i was re-reading your post where you said "Eple's original question, "How much is 80% raw?" was never answered." And I had to admit to myself that even though epie re-phrased their question in the post. You are deff right "How much is 80% raw?" was the title of the thread and surely therefore the original question.
I'm sorry, my post was deff unjustified.
still friends??? :)
rawcanadian - Please don't feel that you are being attacked. No one is saying you have to eat 100% raw, or that the site is only for those who eat 100% raw, or what is healthiest. This was just a little discussion about what it means to be a "raw foodist" or to be "raw" and there are obviously differing opinions. No worries! :)
I'm with leahceleste....we need a comprehensive title, if only for our own brain, lol.
Geez, if I was the original poster, I might not ever come back. It's too bad that someone used the OP's thread to vent their frustrations.
A raw foodist, by definition (look it up! if you have an issue and if you want to make a new word for yourself, do it) eats 75-80% OR MORE (if they want/choose) raw. That's the definition. However, if something says it's 'raw,' it should be raw. For example, a raw candy bar should be 100% raw if it says it's raw. If it says it's a raw foodist's candy bar, you can probably assume that it's 80% or more raw. It'd be a lot easier if you just went to the produce section of your market, though, and got the 100% veggies and fruits, unprocessed. I don't know why people get so frustrated about packaged foods not being raw - what do you expect? And if a restaurant says it's raw and uses maple granules, for example, it's your job to do the due diligence to ask what's in the food and figure out then if you really want to eat it. You should know you can't count on anyone else to decide what YOU put into your body. Same thing with a fruitarian - it's 80% or more fruit. Vegan's definition is avoiding animal products in LIFESTYLE and diet to the extent possible. If we need a computer for work and it happens to have an animal byproduct in it and we can't find a computer w/o said animal product, we are still vegan. We are living in a world where we do what we can. That's what veganism is about - avoiding the cruelty, the animal products, that other people purchase, seek out, and do nothing to avoid the harm that they cause. (And if someone called themselves a vegan and bought leather shoes, I would think to myself, "Well, they're not a vegan," but there's no point in being angry about it.) (On the other hand, if someone was a raw foodist and they ate a green salad with cooked chickpeas, I might ask, "Hey, what percent are you raw? How do you feel?") If you think YOUR way of life is how everyone should live, good luck with that. It's going to be a frustrating course.....
And there's nothing wrong with anyone on here trying to eat more raw or even just asking us questions. I think this forum is usually great and welcoming. The post by Chris, I don't think was.
To the OP, it sounds like you're about 80% or maybe even more. Good for you and I'm glad you feel well. Feel free to message me if you want. This thread has gotten so off-topic.
This thread is fascinating as always not for what it says about food and diet, but what it says about us.
Helge & Elena, congratulations - I hope you enjoy the journey. I have also heard the 80% term thrown around, and I think what it really means is "You will see huge life-changing health benefits from eating a diet that is 80% raw vegan." This doesn't mean that there will always be more, less, or the same benefits from 85 or 90 or 100 percent raw. It just means that 80% seems to be the "tipping point" for people in terms of how they feel. (At least this is my interpretation.)
I agree that people can become overly hung up on points and percents and calories and pounds and numbers in general when it comes to food, but I can't say I'm 100% anything, ever. I'm not even sure I'm 100% human!