Talk:Taoist diet

Untitled

re: move to wikisource... I believe the recipes belong in there. Or in wikicook :). The rest of the article should probably stay here. Radiant! 10:56, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

How about renaming this article to Taoist Diet? Would anyone mind? Ajnewbold 15:42, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Whatever anybody does, it can't stay at "Taoist Food" - it needs to go to something like "Taoist food" or "Taoist diet". --VivaEmilyDavies 21:46, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Since there didn't seem to be any opposition, I've renamed this article to Taoist diet (from Taoist Food) and also did a bit of cleanup on the article itself. The three recipes that were included have been moved to the Wikibooks Cookbook (links to them have been left in this article), and some of the main text was reworded to ensure neutrality. --Ajnewbold 05:10, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've done some more rewording. Taoism is a vast study with many schools that often have disagreed with each other. The article seemed to present a modern, New Age take on diet that didn't necessarily reflect the many different historical Taoist attitudes accurately. Many Taoists were vegetarians, many were (and are) not. Many drank alchohol and tea, many did not. To say that one diet or another is "ideal" is like saying there is an ideal Presbyterian diet and rather misses the point. Fire Star 16:35, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Good point, and nice work. Thanks for making the article better! Ajnewbold 21:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Context?

I find this article strange. What exactly is Taoist diet? Which sources are used to define it? If that's not clear, it's impossible to agree on what food should be in included. Fire Star put some of the complexities well, but until they're cleared up I don't know what this article should be. Greenman 21:03, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I have added some links to a more detailed Taoist Diet sheet and discussion forum which may be of interest. The original article seems to have been summarized from our website which I don't mind but it would have been nice to have received a mention. www.seahorsearts.co.uk --Chuangzu 09:52, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

--68.113.44.22 12:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

No offense to anyone, but this page amounts to New Age garbage

What should a Taoist eat? I can think of one answer supported by Taoist texts -- "You eat what you eat." Taoism's main premise is that we should strive to behave in a manner aligned with the natural flow of the universe, much like water naturally flows downhill and takes the shape of it's vessel. The true Taoist removes all thought from action, and just is. For someone who doesn't study Tao, the answer might take the shape of "you eat what the universe wants you to eat," but the universe, like gravity, doesn't exactly put thought into how it pushes and pulls us. We merely must go with the flow. For this reason you also can't say "you eat what feels right" because the point is to operate on a level free from the ego, and thus thoughts/desires/etc. Thus "you eat what you eat" is probably what's most in the spirit of the teachings. The universe should naturally push you to eat what you're supposed to (like every other behavior), and there's no indication that this would be the same for every person.

The question of "What I should eat" is probably something that everyone should come to on their own after deep meditation. M00

--Just wanted to add that a central tenet of Taoism is Everything in Moderation. I think that as long as you don't overindulge, virtually everything's okay. I, as a Taoist, don't eat much meat because of the treatment of farm animals which, in my opinion, goes against the natural and is unnecessarily painful for the animals. However, this is a personal opinion and if it would make another Taoist uncomfortable, then he or she should not follow me. Also worth noting: I am a philosophical Taoist, not a religious one, so the religious among us may have different diet requirements.

The user above me expresses everything else I was thinking exactly, so I second him or her.

Namaste!

---

I disagree. No offence meant to anyone but the above comments sound like New Age Gobbledegook. Taoism is more about 'You are what you eat', if it was the Universe constantly governing people's diets why are so many in the Western nations so obese and eating such unnatural foods? No amount of deep meditation is going to help you if you're addicted to Junk foods, you need the advice of someone who knows what they are talking about and let's face it Traditional Chinese Medicine has a history going back thousands of years, something the Western Scientific tradition can only dream about. 'Everything in moderation' is just a vague statement, would you eat Rat Poison in moderation? I doubt it.(THis is abousulty correct, yea "give me a side of rat poison, in moderation of course)

• Actually I would if it was prescribed by my Western physician. See Warfarin. The human body is remarkably robust but even things like table salt and water (two of our primary constituents) are toxic in large doses. "Everything in moderation" includes moderating acts of stupidity - like eating too much warfarin, table salt, ice cream, nitroglycerin, soy beans or beef tartare(overeating tartarte is almost impossible). JohnJardine 21:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Taoism is not about 'do whatever you like', that is a child's interpretation. Taoism is an ancient philosophy with texts going back to the time of the Yellow Emperor and it's based on Nature and Traditional Chinese Medicine, it's nothing whatsoever to do with Yoga or other New Age philosophies. And whoever made that statement about Chi being a 'metaphysical concept' is basically living at the bottom of a well. Taoists don't eat cold foods because this is what is recommended by Chinese Medicine practitioners as cold energy weakens the spleen. --Chuangzu 23:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Acually, Traditional Chinese Medicine is based on Daoism more than the other way around. There are innumerable references to meditation in Daoist texts going all the way back to and including the Laozi. And Qi is an important metaphysical concept which in the Laozi filled the cosmological role taken by water in the Taiyi Sheng Shui, from which Laozi derives much of its cosmology and cosmogony.

As an adherent to a particular Taoist sect, I find the above assumptions regarding "New Age Garbage" to be incorrect. My particular sect adheres to a specific diet, though failing to follow the suggested diet is not considered sacrilege (as in Judaism, Hinduism, or Islam). It is merely considered poor judgment and likely harmful to oneself.

• Western diets resulting in obesity is the result of tampering with nature and lack of moderation. I can see Taoist diets being a good guideline and recommendation to eat healthy, but Taoism in general already gives a good guideline by explaining one should use better judgement and moderation. I would never take any strict diet seriously because the requirement to follow a diet just doesn't make sense. A lot of the information in the article does read like New Age junk, and to imply that following a specific diet is required in religious Taoism makes it look like yet another New Age system. 173.74.245.34 (talk) 16:07, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

COLD DRINKS?

What is meant by cold drinks? What health benefit does room temperature water offer?

---

Cold foods and drinks weaken the spleen which in Traditonal Chinese Medicine is considered to be the internal organ most closely linked to digestion along with the stomach (Earth element). The body has to heat things to assimilate them so imbibing cold drinks costs energy and is inefficient. Humans have become adapted to cooking now for over ten thousand years unlike the other animals who cannot build fires. Over consumption of cold fluids is likely to produce Yin type illnesses. --Chuangzu 22:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Consumption of cold water or food also means that the body has to expend energy to heat it up (to body temperature). Keeping one's energy levels and not wasting energy is also an important concept in Taoist "long life" practises.

-- User:T'ien Ti Tao Ch'uan-shu P'ai 13:25, 20 December 2013. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.22.200.86 (talk)

New Sections

I added a couple of sections with references. I'd like to furhter improve the article with further scholarly references. This might take a while though. Zeus1234 19:15, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Weasel Words

Added weasel words to the Diet section for the overuse of "some critics". Name them! FoiledAgain 04:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

This section should probably simply be deleted. If one removes the weasel words then the section makes a factually unsound argument relating to iron, B12, and calcium deficiencies. The human body simply does not requires large quantities of meat and dairy to maintain normal levels of these nutrients, and the Taoist diet as I understand it does not require total abstention from either. As a Taoist who adheres to the diet prescribed by his particular sect of Taoism (no beef, no dog, little red meat of other types, vegetarian fasts every new and full moon, mindful eating otherwise) I find this section to simply make no sense. For the record, at my last physical (less than a week ago), my iron levels were on the high side.

Fixing of Weasel Words

Motion to delete entire "criticisms" section, as they are editorially unnecessary and disrespectful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.59.180 (talk) 01:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Clean-up

This article doesn't conform to the Wiki format guidelines and could use some cleaning up. I removed some link spam but I would recommend differentiating References from External Links. -- Levine2112 ^discuss 22:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, I would recommend the entire article for deletion mind you. Shot info 23:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It's worth a "shot". Go for it. -- Levine2112 ^discuss 23:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Somebody didn't read the deleted reference

Diet: Survival, Longevity, and Quality of Life. NCAHF recognizes that humans can survive on many different kinds of diets, and individual's diets are rooted more in culture and personal preference than science. Hindus are largely vegetarians. Eskimos and Canada's Inuits subsist exclusively on raw meat. Australian aborigines eat lizards and insects. Coastal Indians eat seafood. Nomads eat grazing animals that move with them in their ceaseless journeys. Many religions have dietary restrictions. Despite such wide variations, they all survive. However, survival does not equate with longevity. Natural selection only requires that people live long enough to propagate and rear their young. Epidemiologists, who must quantify "health" so differing groups can be compared, have determined that the gauge of the health of a society is life expectancy. Life expectancy in primitive settings is only 22-29 years [14]. Non-experts focus too much upon causes of death without realizing that a higher rate of heart disease, cancer, and stroke reflects a population that has lived long enough to develop such diseases. Longevity is a consistent feature of a modern technological society. Besides survival and longevity, public health experts also take into account quality of life. If longevity means just more time spent in boredom, the prospects for an a meaningful life are bleak indeed. Underdeveloped nations are usually deprived of many of the things that make people's lives more enjoyable, including festive foods. The diets of the poor nations are largely vegetarian. As societies become more prosperous, they also eat more meat and animal products.

NCAHF wonders if the vegetarian ideologist is merely today's ascetic who revels in self-denial and wars against pleasure. Animal rights devotees reflect the Taoist worldview. On April 24, 1996, PETA's Ingrid Newkirk appeared on the television show Day & Date opposing sport fishing. Her arguments began by eliciting sympathy for fish as living creatures who suffocate when taken out of the water. She then said that fish were unhealthful food because they contain mercury and other environmental contaminants. Her ultimate solution was for people to "go vegetarian." Her opponent, a television talk-show hostess pressed her into acknowledging the PETA creed. She recalled an on-air encounter with a PETA representative where a scenario was presented in which her daughter needed a vital organ of a beloved household pet to survive. The ethical question centered around placing a value on the life of a child versus a household pet. The PETA representative held that the child has no more value than the pet, reflecting the Taoist view that all life is equally sacred. An individual is free to choose such a belief if they wish, but should neither force such a value on others by law or by using mind control techniques.

NCAHF supports efforts to prevent cruelty to animals. It deplores the public torture and maiming of animals in cultural rituals such as bull fighting, cock fighting, dog fighting, animal beheading on horseback, and so forth. NCAHF deplores the poaching of endangered species for the purpose of obtaining their body parts for medicinal purposes based upon superstition. NCAHF deplores the plunder of sharks for the purpose of supplying the quack remedy shark cartilage. NCAHF endorses the responsible use of animals in medical research. NCAHF considers vegetarianism, particularly veganism, a hygienic religion that meets deep emotional needs of its followers. Adherents cannot be trusted to be objective, reliable sources of information on anything that bears upon its fundamental paradigm. PCRM pretends to speak for physicians who are functioning as medical experts. In reality, it is speaking for a handful of ideologists who happen to be physicians, but who are functioning as vege-evangelists.

The essence of sound nutrition is in three guiding words; four basic food groups, and the seven Dietary Guidelines for Americans. The three guiding words are: variety, moderation, and balance. Food groups help balance the variety from which diets may be selected. All food is "health food" in moderation; any food is "junk food" in excess -- there are no inherently "good" or "bad" foods, just good and bad total diets. More than anything else in food, it is excessive calories producing too much body fat (rather than dietary fat per se) that is associated with our high frequency of high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes and cancer. Exercise, which also should be done in moderation with variety and balance, is inseparable from diet for good health. NCAHF highly recommends Total Nutrition by Victor Herbert as a comprehensive guide to sound nutrition information (see attached book list).

It often helps to read a previously deleted reference in the context of the article, rather than trying to make a WP:POINT. Shot info 23:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I read it thoroughly. And I don't think one or two mentions of the word "Taoist" qualifies this source as a good reference or even an external link for this article. -- Levine2112 ^discuss 23:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

It is a reference. It discusses the benefits of vegetarian diet, of which the Taoist Diet is a subset. You couldn't have read it throughly at all if you cannot see the obvious discussion points and critisms. However as has been articulated elsewhere, your antipathy to the article's author is well known. You should probably exclude yourself from these sorts of edits in the future. It is recommended however, that you look to clean up the overall article, rather than just concentrate on a link that has merit, vertifiable, reliable and does discuss/critique the article. Shot info 02:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that this reference is out of place. This is not an article about the health benefits of a plant based diet. The only objective for this article should be to express those concepts within the Taoist world view that contribute to a Taoist's understanding of food. If you insist on promoting this article to communicate your concern about plant based diets, this is not the place to do it. (CraigWenner 01:32, 13 November 2007 (UTC))

Nonsense Spam

A large portion of this article seems like junk added by one person about a raw food diet that has no place here. Statements such as

"I highly recommend everyone get some greens into heir diet everyday. As for the fruitarian diet, I believe that fruit today has way too much sugar, and we should not eat most fruits. Here at The Hippocrates Health Institute, only a very small percent of the diet consists of fruit. I think it was a viable diet when we began as the human race. Without question, humans definitely ate that way. When the fruit was ripe, it would fall to the ground and you would eat it and spit out the pits. What happened though at least what we know from the writings that are at least five and a half thousand years ago, the fruits were hybridized. They mixed them together. They did this to decrease perish ability. They had to grow them in colder climates and hybridization made them more resistant to the colder weather. Hybridization made the fruits much sweeter and when it first happened that is what the people took into account. From what we know, the average fruit today has thirty times more sugar than the original. These high amounts of sugar no longer make them a truly natural food. We also have to take into consideration that we pick most fruit today when it is not ripe." has no place in Wikipedia. If someone disagrees I think they're going to need a pretty good explanation as to why statements that begin with "I highly recommend" and "I believe" should be in this article. BrainDance (talk) 02:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Chang Ming diet

I would like to add some reference to the Chang Ming diet, it is a Taoist diet published in a book published by a reputable publisher and was translated into many languages around the world from 1979 onwards. It is still practised by many people today, read the main page if you're interested Chang Ming. By the way there is also a page called Chinese food therapy.Chuangzu (talk) 13:54, 8 March 2017 (UTC)