The Raw Food Diet. It's a very controversial diet. Why? David Wolfe, Stephen Arlin, and the other Nature's First Law guys.
God's diet shouldn't be controversial. I agree with what the authors are saying, but they say it in a way that makes you dislike them. Drilling the message into your head like a drill sergeant that "Cooked Food is Poison" might do it for some, but not for me. To me, these guys approach raw foodism as if it's a cult following. Kind of like, "Hey, jump on OUR bandwagon and live right. Everyone else is living wrong." They poke fun at every single diet on the planet, even vegans, who don't even eat animal products.
The abrasive way they deliver their message is unique, but it didn't do it for me. Give me scientific data, not catch phrases and slogans. Give me SOME science at all, not what is 'believed' to be the truth. Do raw foods energize? No doubt they do. Is everyone who eats processed, devitalized foods poisoning themselves? Yes, they are. But are the ones who eat wholesome nutritious foods, mostly vegan, poisoning themselves? No. Poison is a harsh word. Raw foodists can "poison" themselves even worse by overeating on sweet fruit, nuts, seeds, and aggravating a vata condition with the dieuretic action of the sweet fruits. This isn't mentioned in this rah-rah book.
All in all, not a very good intro to raw foodism. This diet is not a cult. It's a healthy way of life, but you must know how to do it properly. For this, I recommend "Conscious Eating" by Gabriel Cousens.