Todd Moody wrote:
> I don't know Ray's take on this, but in a way it's *obvious* that
> some people have evolved the ability to thrive on non-paleo
> foods.  The Japanese are the longest-lived people on the planet
> and, although their diet is quite different from most Western
> diets, it includes plenty of non-paleo items, such as rice, soy,
> and noodles.  The Swiss are also quite long-lived, despite a diet
> high in dairy products, especially cheeses.  The celebrated
> "Mediterranean" diet makes use of goat cheese and whole-grain
> flours.  At least *some* ovo-lacto vegetarians enjoy long and
> healthy lives (as, in fact, John Harvey Kellogg did), even though
> many seemingly encounter problems.

Playing devil's advocate for a sec: is it possible that these peoples
would do even better if they eliminated the offending foods? There
are no doubt a number of factors responsible for their longevity
relative to Americans, which I'm sure you could enumerate as easily
as I could (or more so). Putting the question in my first sentence
another way, maybe if these people lived more like Americans, their
apparent ability to resist the negative effects of neolithic foods
would fade.

So, if there's any merit to what I'm saying, maybe your first
sentence should be changed to: "obviously some people have
the ability to live long and avoid CHD, despite neolithic elements
in their diet. This ability may due to any or all of several
factors: (a) evolutionary change, allowing them to make better use
of neolithic foods, and avoid negative effects, (b) benefits from
other dietary factors, which differ from the standard American
diet (e.g. lots of fish for Japanese), or (c) other lifestyle
factors, like more exercise (or more wine for the French).