PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Eric LoVullo <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 28 May 2005 12:50:59 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (46 lines)
Keith,


>Yes, but would it have been regular enough across the species (Homo sapiens or >Homo heidelbergensis) to have caused phenotypic change?

I can induce phenotypic change in myself, or others; it is not hard to do at all.  My phenotype has not been stable for any significant amount of time.  You might want to go with "genotypic change".  VERY significant difference.

>True, but we can come closer to the Palaeo originals in our own gardens (see my >posts earlier this
>month and in January and February this year on tomatoes. In the case of plants, >heirloom varieties
>grown in an organic or Permaculture way come reasonably close.

Tomatoes would not have been consumed in the Paleolithic.  Nor would have any of your heirloom varieties.

>Try: Loren Cordain, S. Boyd Eaton, Anthony Sebastian, Neil Mann, Staffan >Lindeberg, Bruce A.
>Watkins, James H. O’Keefe, Janette Brand Miller. Origins and evolution of the >western diet: Health
>implications for the 21st century. Am J Clin Nutr 2005;81:341-54.


Umm this is a review.  Not a study.  I did look through the bibliography and have acquired a few of the papers mentioned in the ruminant analysis.  They are very tenuous as they immediately subscribe to the lipid hypothesis, make their hypothesis from that(ie natural ruminants are healthier, here is why.)  Then go about trying to show you why they are correct.  Not especially good science.


>Interesting science, but it counts for zip in deciding what foods are Palaeo and what >are not.

Accepting one point, and discarding another to fit your beliefs is indeed a very slanted view to take, and an extremely wrong way to find a truth.


>Well, not a concession – it's based solely of the evolved tolerances of my own body. >Just because
>the tolerances may have evolved in the Neolithic does not discount the fact that >dairy foods
>appear to be quite compatible with my body's physiology.

Again physiology has nothing to do with compatibility or health or anything else.  It is the study of functions.  Also you didn't evolve tolerance to milk.  It was too short of a period of time, and the gene pool had grown too large in the neolithic.

And if were saying tolerances, well I built up quite a tolerance for beer in college.  I can eat anything without any problems.  I just eat my paleo way because of my future; not the present.

>glass of red wine most evenings.

Hunter-gatherer or pastoral-agriculturist.  My bet is you truly follow the second one.

Eric


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

ATOM RSS1 RSS2