Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 22 Feb 1999 08:43:40 -0800 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Tom:
>>Fruitarianism is a failure because it is far beyond the range of
>> diets that we are adapted to by evolution (and the claims of certain
>> fruitarian advocates that we evolved as fruitarians, are nothing more
>> than bogus crank science).
Forest:
>this statement to me takes little logical thinking to find flawed, since even
>modern cultures are consuming fruit in their s.a.d. diets. that proves to me
>that fruit has been a part of diet for a long time. i guess the question is
>then, at what crucial percent of consumption of fruit does it begin to become
>a problem in our health. at about 70% for about 10 years now and after
>numerous other long term diet experiments i have yet to find a more optimum
>diet.
>
>i agree with you, i doubt we evolved from 100% fruitarian heritage, but
Tom:
I define fruitarianism as 75+% raw fruit by weight, where fruit has the
common definition, not botanical.
My statement above is critical of certain crank science claims that humans
evolved on a nearly 100% fruit diet. The "science" behind such claims
is pure nonsense, if you examine it critically.
Tom Billings
|
|
|