2005 · Aajonus Vonderplanitz
We Want to Live
What this work is
A book setting out the Primal Diet: raw meat, raw dairy, raw eggs, and raw fats, with no cooked food. It is written partly as the story of Vonderplanitz's own illnesses and recovery and partly as a manual of food remedies. In the cancer section he reports a cohort: of 239 cases, 238 showed indications of reversal and 223 had survived, with roughly 90% reversal when there was no prior medical treatment and about 60% for lung and esophageal cancers. He argues that cooking destroys enzymes and nutrients, that raw foods let the body clear stored toxins and rebuild tissue, and that bacteria are not the cause of disease.
Verdict
SCIENTIFIC
The work follows the scientific method, and the paradigm it assumes passes.
1·This work · inside the paradigm
SCIENTIFIC
Follows the scientific method within Terrain Theory.
2·Paradigm · Terrain Theory
SCIENTIFIC
Passes all three tests.
How the verdict is decided
The verdict grades the whole picture: the paradigm this work assumes, and how the work was carried out inside it. A work can follow the scientific method rigorously and still be unscientific, because rigor inside a paradigm only shows the conclusion was reached carefully. It cannot verify the premise the paradigm rests on. So the paradigm decides the verdict. The work’s own score is kept because it shows how the conclusion was built.
1·This work
Did this work test its claim with methods that are independent, falsifiable, and non-circular?
SCIENTIFIC
A diet of raw animal meats, raw dairy, raw fruits and vegetables, and unheated honey facilitates cancer remission and recovery from serious illness, with 223 of 239 cancer cases surviving. All three tests pass.
Independently Verifiable
Pass
A tumor shrinking, a person surviving, and a person dying are events anyone can witness without first accepting that raw food heals the terrain.
Falsifiable
Pass
The author reports 14 deaths out of 239 cases, a 60% reversal rate for lung and esophageal cancers, and one case that did not reverse, so the diet's success was not guaranteed by the design.
Non-Circular
Pass
The diet is defined by its physical ingredients, not by the outcome it claims to produce, and the observation of survival does not require the terrain model to run first.
Why
Aajonus Vonderplanitz reports 239 cancer cases treated with a diet of raw meats, raw dairy, raw fruits, raw vegetable juices, and unheated honey. He counted 223 survivors and 14 deaths. He reported that 1 case did not achieve reversal. He reported lower success rates for lung and esophageal cancers, around 60%, and lower reversal rates when patients also received medical treatment. Those numbers are visible outcomes. A tumor shrinking is something you can see. A person dying is something you can count. None of that requires the terrain model to be accepted before the observation can exist. The diet is defined by what is on the plate, not by whether the patient got better. The 14 deaths are reported as deaths, with specific reasons given: malnourishment, nausea, pain medication destroying appetite. Those reasons are explanations for reported failures, not escape hatches that would protect the claim no matter what happened. If the diet had produced no reversals at all, the claim would have no support. The premise that raw food can heal the body was tested against visible outcomes, and the outcomes could have gone the other way.
2·Paradigm · Terrain Theory
Does the framework this work assumes pass the three tests?
SCIENTIFIC
Independently Verifiable
Pass
The terrain is the condition of the host, and whether a tumor shrinks or a patient survives is observable without joining any pathogen or genetic model first.
Falsifiable
Pass
If raw food did not produce remission in these cancer cases, the terrain claim would have nothing to stand on, and the reported failures show the outcome was not predetermined.
Non-Circular
Pass
The terrain framework was built from what could be seen in the organism, and this paper's observations of tumor reversal and survival do not require the terrain model to define them before they can be counted.
Why
Terrain theory starts from what is visible in the organism: digestion, degeneration, recovery, and death. This paper applies that framework to cancer. The claim is that raw foods restore the body's terrain and that restoration dissolves tumors. The observations are visible. Tumors shrink or they do not. People survive or they die. The terrain model does not need to run first for those events to be witnessed. The author reported 14 deaths and one non-reversal out of 239 cases. He reported worse outcomes for certain cancer types and worse outcomes when medical treatment was added. Those are reported failures with specific causes, not absorbers that protect the theory from any negative result. If raw food had produced no remissions, the terrain claim would have collapsed. The framework treats symptoms as the body's response to terrain damage rather than as the disease itself. Healing means the terrain recovers and the body repairs itself. That is what this paper claims happened in 223 cases, and the claim lives or dies on whether those people actually recovered.
From the work
Only 1 of 239 cases did not achieve indications of reversal. Of those 239 cases, 223 have survived.
Fourteen of those who died were malnourished and very thin. They either refused to eat because of nausea or were unable to eat enough because of pain medication that destroyed their appetites and/or made them nauseous.
The lowest reversal rate for cancer on the Primal Diet for people who did not receive any medical treatments has been approximately 90% for all cancers except lung and esophageal. The reversal rate for lung and esophageal cancers has been approximately 60% without any medical treatments.
The efficacy of all of the dietary wisdom in this book is from experience
Source
We Want to Live
Aajonus Vonderplanitz
2005 · Primary work
Scored from primary work · Rubric 1.0