>    Subject: Meat vs. grain/legume
>
>    ...Could grain/legume be and
>    "anti-meat" and vice-versa?
>
Possible, but you could upgrade your conjecture
to an hypothesis by citing some statistics or
research evidence to support it. The caveat is
of course that absence of evidence does not
equate to evidence of absence

A starting point might be to see if anybody's
bothered to analyze the steady-state metabolic
& enzyme systems that each dietary paradigm requires.

As Paleo WOE'ers know, there is often
an energy dip during the transition away from
SAD/Neolithic towards Paleolithic -- presumably
from the metabolic lag between high-carbo-
burning to high-fat/protein burning. Conversely,
Paleos & strict vegans "sinning" with a grain-
and dairy-heavy meal often become quite ill.

Has any researcher documented what's really going
on during such a changeover? Probably not,
considering where research money comes from
these days.

Ray did his library work and came up with
the Paleodiet hypothesis. Please feel free
to do the same and share with us.

IMO grain/legume is and always will be
a second-best meat substitute. It is simply
not possible to provide any but the grossest
approximation to the amino acid profiles; like-
wise for most of the vitamins, enzymes and
minerals in meat-like proportions. And even
if it were possible, the economics would make
it prohibitively expensive to produce.

As for how grain/legume digests poorly and
afflicts the consumer with allergens, addictive
opiate-like peptides etc, that's old news.