Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 8 Sep 1999 10:37:39 -0500 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
When it comes to self, food and health, I am the only study that counts
anymore. Eliminate questionable foods for a period of two months and then
add back, one at a time and watch for negative reaction. It was interesting
for me to note that all the non-paleo foods caused negative reactions.
Some nuts I added back, some I didn't. Peanuts are a no, as are cashews.
No, I still haven't tried raw meat/fish......... Oh groan........ Oliva,
-----Original Message-----
>On Sun, 5 Sep 1999, Wally Day wrote:
>
>> I think we have to measure foods that
>> may be considered paleo with the same yardstick we
>> measure everything else. If a food ain't good for you
>> - it ain't good for you.
>
>I agree. The problem is that it's not always a simple matter to
>use that yardstick. Do we trust epidemiological studies?
>Clinical trials? Case studies? Field studies?
>
>Todd
>
|
|
|