On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 17:25:28 EDT, Madeline Mason <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


>Anyway, it must be pointed out that "vegetarian children in Boston" is a
>very
>select group of children. Whether or not their parents have made the best
>choice in terms of long term health is not the issue.  ..

and so on and so on.

    Of course

you can ascribe the results of the study to *other* reasons as the reasons
for the test (vegetarian IQ's).
Like with any other study.

However....

we spoke about DHA as a factor for brain functioning, and maybe (some would
*love* to see such a result) people with no or very little DHA intake
had a less able brain.
Vegetarians have a very low to zero intake of dietary DHA.
Close to zero for most.

Skip the silly struggle "who is *more* intelligent"?

My point is:
*If* vegetarian children compare well or very well in IQ tests
*then* dietary DHA intake cannot be a worsening factor for intelligence.

Either the Boston children *had* a significant dietary intake of DHA
(unprobable) or intelligence isn't related to dietary DHA.

So far I found many sites emphasising the importance of breastfeeding, and
some discouraging heavy w-6 use.
This seems to be the real important source of DHA.

If dietary DHA would be necessary, then both, vegetarians or meateaters
would have to *supplement*. Which some on the list already do.
Looks unpaleo - that it would be *necessary* to supplement.

regards

Amadeus