Walter:
>>The oldest man on earth was a chinese man who lived to be about 250
>>years old.
>Jean-Louis:
>There have been many lies and inaccuracies due to illiteracy throughout
>history. You can read "How and why we age", by Leonard Hayflick, PhD
>or any other book on the subject.
It is fairly easy to track down the life of famous persons in history if
there exist written notes. So I think Walter (and the persons doing this
research) are right here.
Jean-Louis:
>Check the history of Tai Chi Chuan and you will see masters who died
>at the early age of 53...
Now it seems, you a r e trusting results of history researches. And
you are the master who decides which results can be trusted and which
not. ;-)
Well, until you give a rational reason for your decision, the whole=20
discussion is reduced to a matter of believe then. Not very refreshing,
especially given your scientific background, Sir!
>>Stefan:
>>Yes, but compare the amount of offending substances. With SAD: one
>>kilogram daily. With 100% raw: only environmental substances can
>>intrude in your body (polluted water, air) and viruses/bacteria
>>(micrograms of material)
>Jean-Louis:
>And don't forget solar/cosmic radiations. And there are also internal
>damages: the body needs free radicals anyway; errors appear when DNA
>is duplicated, etc...
Perhaps less errors would appear if people wouldn't load their body with
one kilogram of denatured substances daily. (BTW: 1 kilogram app. 2 lb.)
Anyway I wanted to point out, that compared to this huge amount of work
forced to the immune system by the SAD owner of the body, the natural
influences are tiny.
>Stefan:
>>Not even that. It's simply wrong. I don't remember, if it was here or
>>on the paleofood-list but there is definitively a function for grand-
>>parents. The tribe/society benefits from their knowledge and wisdom.
>>There could be a big advantage if there are some centuries old people
>>in tribes. They would have knowledge about rare events and would
>>know how to deal with them.
Jean-Louis:
>Would you have enough knowledge to teach for 1000 years??? Honestly,
>the amount of knowledge accumulated over a few decades is largely
>enough for survival in Paleo societies.
You should have given this a "IMHO" or even "IMVHO" (V =3D very). As it
stands here it is simply ridiculous.
If you can't figure out which use there might have been in ancient
tribes for 800 years old people I c a n.
I haven't got it at hand but there is scientific background for my
claim and you would better study it instead of judging, that some ridi-
culous decades of experience would have been enough for survival in
paleolithic times.
You haven't commented my calculation with oxidative stress and life-
span. And my conclusion, that it might be v e r y useful, to go
99.99% raw, not only 95%. Any suggestions?
Best centuries old wishes,
Stefan
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
|
