On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:59:14 -0700, Wally Day <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Amadeus wrote:

>> I see this as a derivation from true paleo eating -
>> as others exist.
>> Even so i won't eat insects and not antelope livers.
>
>If it is a consistent percentage, and not a deviation
>by a particular primate or small group of primates,
>then how can it not be "true paleo" eating?

It is true paleo eating (what apes do).
What *I* do i a deviation from true paleo eating, according to the given
numbers.

>
>> If it's not true paleo I'll supplement.
>
>Hold on here a minute. Supplementing is NOT "true
>paleo". If the best method of getting B12 (or any
>other animal-based nutrient), is eating animals, then
>that MUST be "true paleo".

I agree.
Other animal "based" nutrients i did not find,
which would question paleo vegetarianism - but b12.
All the other stuff (like mentioned in beyondveg and discussed on the list)
is found in animal carcass in abundance, because animals,
like humans can make it themselves.
Especially (and often only) in the liver , as the main vitamin storage.

>I think your definition of
>"true paleo" should be reclassified as "idealistic
>paleo".

Yes, maybe something like this.

>
>Admit it, Amadeus, the species appropriate diet FOR
>HUMANS includes at least some animal foods. The
>"original" diet a couple of million years ago may have
>been fruits, nuts, and leaves - but we've obviously
>adapted to a diet that includes animal foods now. Or
>you wouldn't find the need to "supplement" your diet
>to reach the lofty status of "true paleo".

I agree and I admit it.
I've come to the same conclusion as you do, based on some scientific
numbers and also by the supplementation theme.
As far i understand the b12 thematic up to now
it seems probable to me that the b12 in recent human nutrition was to come
from some animal matter.
There is a *weak* possibility that b12 could be ingested in sufficient
amounts from unwashed plant surfaces or from
bacteria in gut regions where it *can* be absorbed, with a more active
gut population (as found in fiber-rich diets).

For all this reasons I cannot and could not (and i think did never)
suggest a pure vegetarian nutrition as *the* true paleo nutrition.

>
>Please, quit trying to twist the evidence to support
>your personal philosophies.

Please don't misunderstand me. I try to seperate my personal
"philosophical" choice from paleonutrition.

I often argue against "heavy" meat or big meat "percentages" as it is my
honest impression, that meat above a certain percentage
(between say 2 to 20 percent) cannot have played a role in human evolution.
This after years of intense working on the theme.
It just doesn't make sense.

Except in the years from 40000 to 10000 BC, (upper paleolithicum) when
some of our anchestry entered glaciated europe and must have had a nutrition
based on meat and fat. Therefore i even have to accept a diet of 2 lbs meat
and 1 lb fat per day as true and valid paleonutrition (without very much
impact on our genetic developement). Animals are also required in deserted
areas.

Paleo eating did not support my vegetarian way of nutrition, but it did
help me very much in my vegetarian diet.
And in my opinion it supported beeing vegetarian as a possible deviation
of "true paleo" with few drawbacks to expect (b12).

We all modern humans have to agree in some tradeoffs between true paleo
(living like Inuit or !Kung) and what's possible to be done.

The last days I've discovered - and I think I've found evidence -
that the formula "steaks replace walrus" is not only a main deviation
from true paleo but also dangerous.

If you have decided to be a meat eater, i hope you can derive fruitful
conclusions out of this. You can buy the expensiver game or true grass fed
animals, you can use fish, you can add much polyunsaturated fat (e.g. from
nuts flax or hemp) to enhance the fat of a reduced part of farmed meat.
You will probably discover, that meat doesn't make sense with an equal high
amount of fat - which is hard to get.

It should be possible to sustain  a satisfying nutrition style, without
having to rely on artificially fed up or fattened animals.
I (think i) have to add vitamin b12 "artificially" every 5 years.
Would you be satisfied in adding fat artificially  everyday?

At least the macronutrients should be matching.
This is a strong sign of paleo eating or not, don't you think so?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Amadeus