As impressed as I am with the knowledge and commitment of the debaters, I must admit to becoming a bit weary.  Can we agree that:
1)  paleo folks probably occasionally ate oats,
2)  paleo folks occasionally ate things that were bad for them or even poisonous and they paid the price for their random sampling of potential food items, and
3)  that everything that any paleo person ever ate may not be good for every one of us?

Now to my question.  Your discussion of the Okinawans raises a question concerning optimum caloric intake.  I recently read *The Rosedale Diet.*  Dr. Rosedale espouses reduced overall caloric consumption, low carbs limited to leafy, fibrous veggies, moderate protein - generally about 1 gram for every 2.2 lbs. of lean body mass, and good fats to satieity.  Any thoughts on his plan and the optimum level of reduction in overall caloric intake to maximize health and longevity?

Rosedale also raises an interesting question about being blindly paleo in eating.  He argues that from an evolutionary (i.e., reproductive) standpoint, the diet that would thrive would not be a diet that fosters longevity because there is no evolutionary reason for humans to live beyond the point that they can reproduce!  Thus, what would be favored would be a diet that supports vigorous competing for the availability of reproduction rather than for longevity.

Any thoughts?

-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 09:37:25 -0700
Subject: Re: Oats and paleo heterodoxy