fruitarian?

So, I'm not fruitarian nor am I contemplating becoming one, but I'm just curious about it.

As far as I understand fruitarians only eat foods that have already "died" on their own. Like nuts and fruit falling from a tree. Is that right?

So, basically I've been pondering this for awhile, and short of living in a big fruit orchard with lots of nut trees and stuff, how does one survive? (sorry if this is a moronic question... I know I'm frustrated when people think that as a vegetarian I cant possible have enough food choices or fulfill my dietary needs)

So... discuss, inform, tell me more :)

in fruititarianism a person never eats something that will kill the plant. you don't have to wait for fruit to fall off a tree or anything, but you can't eat things like carrots, potatoes or broccoli that are harvested as plants. and fruititarians also eat some seeds and nuts. fruititarianism has quite a few things in common with raw foodism. you can be considered a fruititarian if you follow the dietary restrictions 50-75% of the time. 

This seems a bit extreme. You could make the argument that no matter what you do, you will harm another creature. What about clothing that uses cotton? Doesn't that kill the plants? What about paper, couldn't use that. There would be no food furniture in a fruititarian home. I believe the "fruititarian" is setting herself up for hypocrisy.

Jed

Original Post by cozonie:

This seems a bit extreme. You could make the argument that no matter what you do, you will harm another creature. What about clothing that uses cotton? Doesn't that kill the plants? What about paper, couldn't use that. There would be no food furniture in a fruititarian home. I believe the "fruititarian" is setting herself up for hypocrisy.

Jed

 

From what I've heard it's not a whole lifestyle change like veganism where you have to think about things like clothing and furniture (leather, wool, silk, etc) but just a diet aimed towards health benefits and not so much the animal rights aspect. :)

Can I just say that vegans (or "fruitarians") do not have to do a "whole lifestyle change."  You can be vegan and still own leather shoes and a wool sweater.  Though wool is scratchy so why would you want that?  How about an alpaca sweater, they're much softer.  Technically these two terms (and many others) only concern what food is consumed, anything else is simply up to the individual to decide on their own.

Anyhow, it seems to me that fruitarians (and raw vegans) are needlessly removing whole swaths of delicious, nutritious food from their diet.  I don't, personally, see how less nutritional value can be a good thing.

Umm, when I went vegan 2 years ago after being a vegetarian for about half of my life it was definitely a whole lifestyle change.  Technically speaking veganism tends to be more of a way of life than vegetarianism, as being a vegetarian (usually) means changing only your diet.

No offense here but you seem to be pretty well read on the health aspects of going vegan, but a lot of people, seemingly the majority, go vegan for ethical reasons, including myself.  For my first year of veganism I was a total junk food vegan... and I know a lot of junk food vegans.  Not everyone who is vegan is sitting around reading Eat To Live.  And not everyone who is vegan eventually adopts healthy eating as part of their veganism.

So yeah, I suppose leather and wool would be no problem for people following veganism for their health, but those people generally call themselves "strict vegetarians".  For someone like me who is vegan only for animal welfare... there is no way in hell I'd buy leather or wool, and my veganism is a lifestyle, not a diet.

And that's why I don't particularly like the term vegan.  I'd love to see studies on the reasons why people go vegan.  You make the claim that most people are vegan for ethical not health reasons.  Is that assertion based on fact or is that your assumption based on your personal preferences?  If it is fact, I'd love to see the numbers on that.

In any case, technically speaking, veganism concerns only your diet.  The term was coined when someone got frustrated that vegetarians became synonymous with eating dairy and certain meat products.  So whomever it was took the first 3 letters and the last 2 letters of the word vegetarian and came up with vegan.

Now, if someone has adopted that word to mean the way they live.  Far be it from me to tell them they're wrong.  I don't care enough about it to do so.

And maybe vegans should be sitting around reading eat to live or the china study :) 

A quick search of google:

Vegan:
"Refers to a vegetarian who eats no animal products or animal by-products (dairy, eggs) and uses no animal products (fur, silk, wool) or skin"  (http://www.menupause.info/glossary/)

Vegetarian
"a person who does not eat or does not believe in eating meat, fish, fowl, or, in some cases, any food derived from animals, as eggs or cheese, but subsists on vegetables, fruits, nuts, grain, etc."  (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/vegeta rian)

one of my best friends has been only eating a vegan diet since she was, i'm guessing, 16... she's now 30. she doesn't do it for the animal's sake. only that the thought of putting in her body something that was living is horrifying and sickening to her. she is also extremely health conscious and will only eat pure organic foods. she goes as far as possible with her diet, will not eat any red dye, is extremely cautious about taking any pill for the fear it may have gelatin in it, etc.

she still wears clothing made from leather and wool. i would never ever not consider her a vegan. i truely believe one can be a vegan, regardless of their ethics. she does a hell of a job with her amazing diet, and i think she deserves to be able to call herself one, not that she does it to own any title.

Dagicat - a strict 'vegan' would never consider your friend a fellow vegan.  Most hardcore Vegans are as difficult to reason with as evangelical christians.  I prefer to avoid them all together.  They do have one thing in common though.  Neither understands evolution.

Fruitarianism seems like a hard diet to maintain especially if its taken to the lifestyle level.  Do you live in plastic or steel houses? 

O well, I'm a vegetarian 95% of the time.  Every now and again I eat poultry.  I forget the last time I made meat though.

I think a lot of the times, its so silly how we 'classify' what we are, and how offended many people get if their definition isn't accepted. I admit, I get huffy when I hear people refer to themselves as 'vegetarians' even if they eat fish or seafood. However, it's their choice to label themselves as such.

On the vegan/vegetarian thing, I think veganism is more of a way of life, however, I wouldn't say that someone isn't a vegan if they used animal bi-products like leather if they stayed to the strict diet of a vegan.  I wouldn't call myself a vegan if I used leather, animal tested products, etc. However, I wouldn't call someone out if they did.

 

As for the fruitarian diet, if you are truly interested in following it, I say do more research before you invest yourself in it. I did a lot of research before I became fully committed to vegetarianism, and it has helped me stick to it.  

I love how this forum asking a simple question about fruitarianism has become a discussion on labels!  And i'm not being sarcastic.  Why do we care about labels anyway?  why is it so important to call yourself a "vegan"  or "vegetarian"  anyway?  what about other labels like  "punk"  or "jock" or even,"middle class" ?  who cares how you label yourself?  live however you want -why do you have to name your "lifestyle"?  and why do you have to become egotistical about what ever you named it?

I have been doing a lot of research on raw food diets and I think that being a fruitarian (a high percentage one) would be rather unhealthy.  I have heard of people have serious side affects like their teeth being harmed and having a serious addiction to sugar once they leave the diet.  I also heard that it can be destructive to your digestive system making it hard to digest non-fruit foods in the future.  I don't think many people have been on this diet for long and still be healthy.  My two cents.  Seems a little too extreme and this is coming from someone that is transitioning to a largely raw diet.

Original Post by kindoflikesarah:

So yeah, I suppose leather and wool would be no problem for people following veganism for their health, but those people generally call themselves "strict vegetarians".  For someone like me who is vegan only for animal welfare... there is no way in hell I'd buy leather or wool, and my veganism is a lifestyle, not a diet.

 I've know people who are vegans for many reasons.
Much like other aspects of life, in my experience the vegans you hear the most from are those that don't touch any animal products for any reason. I don't think they are necessarily the majority, just the majority of those that want to tell others about their lifestyle.

The vegans I've met that are concerned with animal welfare or lowering some of their impact, aren't always so 100%. Sometimes, even for ethical reasons, they're goals are to do the best the can within their financial and convenience comfort zones. So they typically don't eat any animal products, but may wear used leather/wool. They also typically don't offer up their lifestyle in conversation because non-vegans and pure vegans will call them hypocrites, when in reality, their focus is on 'better' not 'perfect.' Maybe the 'label' vegan isn't perfect for them, but it's the easiest.