[uniconr]

v interesting. the b12 articles (i read five) on the raw foods site are saying that the standard for healthy b12 levels is much higher for high fat and meat oriented diets, due to impediments to absorption, than for the vegan diet. applying one standard to the other diet is incorrect.
im not a medical professional and so i have never asked to see the chemical analysis of my bloodwork, but i was told that said tests showed i had a 'marked deficiency'. its possible that the test results would show my levels were unhealthy for a conventional diet, but healthy for a vegan diet. or its possible that i really do have a deficiency, im lucky enough to be part a very select group, what the articles refer to as 'one or two vegans' being low on b12. i wasnt found to be anemic though
while the link between pernicious anemia and b12 was disputed, there are other problems associated with low b12 levels. things directly associated with b12s function in the body, like cell metabolism and dna synthesis, and problems arising from chronic deficiency, the decay/sclerosis of nervous tissue in the brain and spine.

thanks for the link though! and i apologize for my post reading as 'eat your vitamins or die' or stating that vegans et al. were 'most likely deficient'. i too distrust the medical profession, but i dont have the facilities to do my own blood tests, and thats currently the only way to gauge nutrient levels