Michael (and others),

> It's called Eat well get well stay well, by Dr.
> Carlton Fredericks. A real
> eye opener. Some one let me know if and where you
> find it.

I find all my out of print books on the internet via
http://bookfinder.com

In this case bookfinder.com told me that usedbooks.com
(among a few other places) had a copy. I ordered the
copy from usedbooks.com. So, if you do the web search
at bookfinder.com and they list the book as existing
at usedbooks.com and you go directly to usedbooks.com
and search there you'll notice the book is gone!
(usedbooks updated their db but apparently bookfinder
doesn't update instantaneously.) So, I recommend
searching directly the site(s) that bookfinder.com
points you to rather than ordering it through
bookfinder.com.

One caveat about ordering used books on the internet:
What the search says a bookstore has might not be on
their shelf anymore if a customer walked into the
store and bought the book before the bookstore updated
their inventory, or if someone ordered it before you
did, like I did.

Also, another useful web site is
http://biddersedge.com which searches a large pile of
auction sites (including eBay, Amazon, and yahoo) for
things. If you search for Carlton Fredericks here
you'll see several books by him, at (currently) pretty
low prices (but not the one you're looking for right
now). You can register to have the web-site search for
things for you every day and send you email when it
finds a match. I practice Aikido (non-paleo, I
imagine) and I get mail every few days from
biddersedge pointing me to Aikido-related auction
items.

Those are my "secrets" for finding out of print
"stuff" and now YOU know!

Sol

--- Michael Audette <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>   Correct me if I'm wrong. Deadly Nightshade,
> Belladonna I believe was known
> to be deadly in the old world. That's why people
> never ate tomatoes in the
> first place. There is a book out there that is about
> the nightshades and how
> they increase one's pain threshold. My sister told
> me about it years ago.
> It's called Eat well get well stay well, by Dr.
> Carlton Fredericks. A real
> eye opener. Some one let me know if and where you
> find it.
> `
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paleolithic Eating Support List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
> Erik Hill
> Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2000 5:37 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [P-F] Nightshades, tomatos
>
>
> On Sat, 01 Jan 2000, you wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > First, let me thank you all for your wonderful
> suggestions along the way
> in
> > determinging the paleoness of a food or not.
> >
> > I am now obsessing on tomatos.  First, I thought
> they were fruits.  Now, I
> > heard they are nightshades.
>
> Sounds like some confusion on how plant foods are
> talked about and
> organized.
> If something is a fruit, I'm referring to it's
> function.  The fruit is only
> part of a plant, and many plants have fruit, even if
> they are from different
> plant famlies.
>
>   Tomatoes are fruits, and they are also
> nightshades.  Nightshade refers to
> a
> botanical family.  Plants are grouped into families
> (as well as more general
> catagories).  Knowledge of these groupings can tell
> you which plants are
> related to each other, and how closely.  This
> information is often used by
> those who suffer from food allergies, because
> occasionally, the protein
> which is
> triggering the allergic reaction in a person is
> shared by other plants in
> the
> same family.  That person then knows which plants to
> try carefully, or to
> suspect, and which to not worry (as much) about.
> Sometimes people can be
> allergic to an entire family (presumably, they are
> allergic to a single,
> shared
> protein).
>
>  >
> > Nightshades include all kinds of potatos except
> the yam (S.
> American--right,
> > the light colored and tan one) and eggplant, and
> tomatos I guess.
>
> Not precisely.  Nightshades include the potato, all
> varieties (russet,
> idaho,
> whatever), as well as tomatoes, eggplant, and
> tobacco, but does not include
> any
> other tuber (sweet potato, yam, malanga, cassava,
> taro, and many others are
> all
> from various other plant famlies).  The confusion
> sometimes sets in because
> of
> naming conventions.  In the US, we call sweet
> potatoes "yams".  There is
> also
> another yam which is more popular in Latin America.
> This other yam, usually
> called a "true yam" in English, is totally unrelated
> to what we call a yam.
> To
> make matters more confusing, a sweet potato, whether
> it's called a yam or a
> sweet potato, is not at all related to potatoes.
>
> >
> > Please, can someone tell me if there are more?
> >
> > Also, I dont understand.  You can eat eggplants or
> tomatos raw.  So that
> is
> > not the point of their paleoness.  Is it when they
> came into being, only
> in
> > neo times?
>
> Whether or not tomatoes are paleo is in dispute.
> It's not when the plants
> came
> into being, but when human beings encountered them,
> that is important.
> Since
> tomatoes (and other nightshades as well) are "new
> world foods" (foods not
> availiable in Africa, Europe, or Asia, until modern
> times) the thinking is
> that
> human beings never encountered them during our long
> history on these
> continents, and therefore, never adapted to them
> properly.
>
> So, how are foods considered paleo?  Well, I've seen
> several ways of talking
> about paleo.  It all depends on what you are
> considering paleo.
>
> #1:  Can you eat the food in a raw, wild state?
>
>   Some foods are considered unpaleo because you
> can't eat them raw.  The
> thinking is, since humankind discovered fire as a
> tool for cooking fairly
> late,
> and even then didn't cook veggies so much, that
> foods that require cooking
> to
> be eaten are suspect.  Many plants contain poisons
> that are rendered
> impotent
> by cooking, making edible what was once inedible.
>
> #2:  Are they in a famliy that human beings have not
> encountered?
>
>   Some foods are considered unpaleo because we never
> encountered them in
> wild
> during our evolutionary history.  The idea is that
> the foods may contain
> some
> element (protein, toxin, or whatever else) that we
> never encountered before,
> or
> in significant amounts. Suddenly, they show up in
> our diet, and we are
> poorly
> adapted to them.
>
> #3:  Does the food take a substantial amount of
> processing, before it's
> edible
> by a human being?
>
>   An argument typically used against grains, which
> require some processing
> before they can be eaten.
>
> #4:  If it's an animal, did the animal live on a
> diet suited for it, based
> on
> its evolutionary past?
>
>   Feeding an animal a diet unsuited to its
> evolutionary past does just as
> dramatic and unfortunate things to its body as it
> does to ours.  Eating the
> animal means eating meat that is in an "unusual
> configuration", for example,
> perhaps the meat is much fattier than what humans
> would have encountered in
> the
> wild.
>
> #5:  Is our whole diet in the composition that would
> have been normal for a
> paleo human?
>
>   Even if we eat nothing but paleo foods, it's
> possible to end up in a
> non-paleo situation.  For example, we strongly
> suspect that paleo people ate
> honey.  But honey was hard to find, a rare treat.
> If we ate 2/3rds of our
> diet
>
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com