PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 4 Jun 2012 22:41:24 -0700
Reply-To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
<00f801cd42dd$d88fc9c0$89af5d40$@ca>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From:
Ron Hoggan <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
Geoff, 

Well, I can only judge from the sites of cave-paintings and locations of
mass slaughter of Palaeo animals in Europe I know of, and they were mostly
far away from the shore. 
[Ron] Since sea levels are 300 feet higher than at the last glacial maximum,
the evidence is mostly lost underwater. If you will refer to Steven
Oppenheimer's "The Real Eve" and "Origins of the British" and "Out of Eden",
he repeatedly plots migration routes in keeping with genetic markers. Most,
but not all, migration routes are plotted along seashores.  
 
Major population migration routes along shores such as the Bering Strait
crossing and the Aboriginal migration to Australia occurred mainly only in
the very last part of the Palaeolithic era . 
[Ron] How can that be when Australian Aboriginals' arrival has been dated at
between 40,000 and 60,000 YBP? Are you suggesting that these dates represent
the late Paleolithic? Or are you suggesting that Australian Aboriginals did
not arrive that early?   

But I admit that, at the very least, a small percentage of Palaeo humans
must have lived near the shores at any one time.
[Ron] Actually, the genetics cited by Oppenheimer suggest the opposite. 
However, salt-mines were not started until the Neolithic era.
[Ron] Living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle near the seashore would obviate the
need for salt mines. 

As regards Taubes, I should add that  natural salts are already found in
(healthy) foods in sufficient quantities so there is no nutrient-based
reason to add extra table-salt or sea-salt. 
[Ron] That runs contrary to the results of at least two of the studies he
cites in this article. 

I'll grant that salt has often been used to add flavour to cooked foods, but
someone on a raw, palaeolithic diet doesn't need salt for that purpose.
[Ron]? Volek and Phinney have done extensive testing with low carb diets,
and they believe that low insulin production leads to the kidneys releasing
salt and the excess water needed to retain it. They recommend significant
salt supplements daily to speed and enhance ketoadaptation. They base this
claim on their clinical studies.  On what evidence or data do you base your
assertionthat a raw paleo diet precludes the need for salt? 

Plus, Taubes has a certain negative reputation:-

http://reason.com/archives/2003/03/01/big-fat-fake
[Ron] This is a sorry attack on Taubes that does not warrant the work that
Taubes put into discrediting it at the next url you cite.

http://reason.com/archives/2003/03/01/an-exercise-in-vitriol-rather

http://reason.com/archives/2003/03/01/gary-taubes-tries-to-overwhelm
[Ron] This one is patently ridiculous. He is comparing the number of books
they have each published (2 Vs. 3) Then Fumento lapses into the same
sweeping generalizations and rationalizations without providing specific
data, and without refuting the very pointed criticisms that Taubes offers. 

Best Wishes, 
Ron





 		 	   		  =

ATOM RSS1 RSS2