or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Have we defined 'health' yet?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Have we defined 'health' yet?

post #1 of 3
Thread Starter 
Any philosophical discussion (which marc's is turning into) has to start with a definition of terms (it usually ends there, too). As far as I know, nobody has defined what it means to be healthy yet. Marc, if I define 'good health' as being able to withstand ancient threats to life, such as icy temperatures and hungry mastadons, does your diet still prove best? We are decendants from these 'healthy' people. The less 'healthy' would have died before they could reproduce. So, healthy = lots of muscle and endurance. Can your foods promise that? I don't define health exactly that way, but some definitely do. Please give us your definition.
post #2 of 3
Yes, raw food diets do withstand any icey conditions. l will bring a discussion on this within the next week. l am busy [at present] so it makes it hard to make posts right now. l will attempt to answer this question soon. Thanks for your question ken, and thankyou for your interest.
post #3 of 3
l could define good and perfect health but l am afraid that it will freak people out too much.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Have we defined 'health' yet?