Macro Vs. Raw

[sunrise]

Hello Everyone,

I was hoping that someone could tell me what the benefits of the macrobiotic diet/lifestyle are compared to the raw diet/lifestyle. For the past year or so I have been wavering between the two philosophies and as a result, not sticking to either.

Whenever I read about the raw food lifestyle, it seems so ideal...and the benefits that adherents express are astounding. But then I think that the macrobiotic lifestyle makes more sense because it isn't "natural" for someone in Canada to feast on tropical fruits...etc. as they do in the raw food diet. But I read so much about how great the raw food lifestyle is and how cooking kills enzymes etc., that I just grow more and more confused.

Can someone enlighten me? I want to make a choice and stick to it...

Thanks,

Sunrise

[hans89]

That's something I find interesting as well. I think the two sides just have very different views. The raw foodists think that the fresher, the more vitamins etc., the healthier.
Macrobiotics see things from the perspective of yin-yang balance, an alien concept to most people. George Ohsawa wrote that the vitamins in food are destroyed by digestion anyway, and cooking is beneficial for digestion, so there isn't much sense in eating (a lot of) raw vegetables.
Which one is the "correct" view can only be found out by trial and error, I suppose.