Rex:
> Jean-Louis, I hope you mean *discussions* instead of *controversies*.
> At any rate, let us take a refractometer and go for a walk in the
> African Bush with our !Kung hosts.  Let us be on the lookout for the
> wild food items you mentioned in your report.  Let us record Brix values
> as we explore.

Yes it would certainly be interesting to measure the Brix of these wild
foods, and also to have some data for other foods than what grows in the
Kalahari desert.

But I don't think that, methodologically, my calculations and the text I
was referring to are wrong. I suppose (although I don't have any proof of
it) that scientists aren't stupid; they know that the contents of a fruit
depend on the tree and the degree of ripeness, so I guess they analyzed
what was effectively eaten by the !Kung.

I also suppose that the !Kung are not stupid: they will choose the most
palatable fruits from the best trees...

So, I "gather" that what was presented in the nutritional tables reflected
approximately what the !Kung put in their mouth, and probably the best
that can be obtained from these wild foods.

In my comparisons (between wild foods and ordinary, commercial,
domesticated foods), I sometimes compared the contents per unit mass of
dry weight. I think that manipulation makes sense, because obviously,
dried fruits are not superior than their fresh counterparts.

By the way, I think that one of the weaknesses of the Brix is that
concentrated fruit juices have a higher Brix than non-concentrated ones;
but obviously, they don't have a higher nutritive value.

Best wishes,

Jean-Louis
[log in to unmask]