On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Ben Balzer wrote:

> May I add that as
> they don't have refrigerators, they were far more dependent on root
> vegetables (not potatoes which are tubers anyway). There is very little
> information on the properties of root vegetables. I've been unable to find a
> single reference to their antioxidant level (direct-measured, not inferred
> from vitamin content).

I share your interest in learning more about root vegetables, as
I suspect they were a very important food source.  Hands and a
sharp stick are good for digging as well as spear-wielding.

It would be useful to develop as complete a list of the root
vegetables, common and obscure, as possible.  I suspect there are
many that have become forgotten foods in developed societies.

In one of his books, Barry Sears comments that most modern people
don't eat that many different foods anyway, and when I think
about this from a paleo perspective it seems even more correct.
When you leave out processed, packaged foods, many of us do not
consume a very wide variety of animal and plant foods.  We tend
to use the same small number of foods over and over, I think (and
I am as guilty of this as anyone).  There are still plenty of
things in the produce aisle of the supermarket that I have never
eaten, and don't even know what to do with.

But I have discovered a useful paleo snack food: "pork
cracklings".  These are not the same as pork rinds; they are
fairly hard and crunchy, more protein than fat.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]