PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Balzer, Ben" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 25 May 2011 20:23:40 +1000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
Camping and wilderness survival experts:
This story is a puzzle and a question for those of you who know camping 
and wilderness survival (without supplies!).

The main benefit of changes in diet has often been to find ways to 
increase the intake of energy (calorie/kJ).
This has the benefit of stopping starvation, particularly during the 
long cold winters at the end of the last Ice Age.
While all the other aspects of nutrition are fascinating, priority-one 
is to get energy to prevent starvation. All other considerations are 
secondary. That's how we got into this jam with the Neolithic diet. In 
the West we have too much food, a novel phenomenon  on the evolutionary 
scale.

A story of an African jungle warfare camp sheds light on another aspect 
of cooking increasing energy available.
On day one at the camp the new recruits observe a dead baboon swinging 
from a post. The Sergeant says, "don't laugh, in 7 days you'll be eating 
that". Aghast the recruits go and do warfare training. A week later, the 
baboon is hauled down. "OK lads, if you are stranded and starving, you 
might have the good fortune to come across a nice fresh carcass like this".

The baboon is cut up and cooked (not sure if boiled or roasted). The 
recruits all eat it up. It does not taste good.

"Lads, you can eat the animal once, but you must NEVER try to reheat 
some of it later on". Once is all you can eat it. Try it again, and you 
might die".

Point being. A first hand story.
I can only guess the reasons if this is true:
- the animal is presumably dangerous to eat after 7 days due to bacteria
- cooking destroys the vegetative bacteria but not the spores. So you 
can eat it once and hopefully get away with it.
- after cooking and cooling the spores can germinate and breed. These 
type of germs being more dangerous.

Any truth?
If so, then it shows cooking of ANIMAL can yield a lot of bonus calories 
by making inedible/ toxic carcass yield edible calories.
These calories can be obtained with minimal planning and energy input- 
just stray on a dead animal.

As we all know the cooking of inedible plant foods led to the eating of 
cereals and beans and potatoes, with massive increases in bonus 
calories. Then farming increased it again. Farming being the wilful 
destruction of the environment to replace it with preferred flora and 
fauna (and thus ecologically carnivore farming and herbivore farming are 
both equally bad)(too bad vegetarians, you are bad for the environment).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2