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:
Ingrid Bauer/J-C Catry <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 8 Jun 2000 00:52:53 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (144 lines)
>>>I never read anywhere on the
>>instincto litterature the claim that cooking started 10000 years ago .
>
>Try "Maximize Immunity" by Bruno Comby, p141:

I am surprised because i read the french edition and it is giving a rather
different tone to the discourse
1st the french version is using the same characters than the english one but
contain 350 pages versus 254 ,the format of the French one allow 64
characters spaces on one line versus 58 on the translation,and have 41 lines
against 37. So that is quite a bit more text.
On top of that the translation have been done quickly.
I didn't know that translated books could be as much different than their
original.
i think than not only the translator but also Bruno himself was in a hurry
to have this book out ( he is quite of a prolific fellow) and effectively
there is statements that are rather short of explanation and quickly made
like< all foods were eated raw> ( he doesn't say when)
I hope Bruno's work  is more  thorough and researched now that he is
promoting nuclear energy in France ,at least there is lot of scientists on
that subject  there to back him up.
so i am going to try  to correct the sentences that have been misstranslated
and add the relevant missing parts
s
>"Prior to the widespread use of fire for cooking about 10,000 years ago,

until the regular use of fire for cooking of foods( at the neolithic ) about
10000 years ago

>the human diet consisted of fruits, grains, vegetables and insects.

Man , hunter-gatherers was feeding principally from the harvesting of ....

>available...

available also ....

 were legumes, leaves, roots, tree bark, and occasionally eggs,
>meat, fish and honey. Water was the only beverage. Diets and regimens did
>not yet exist, and the make-up of a meal was determined instinctively,
>based on the odor and taste of the foods that were available, as is still
>the case today for wild animals. All foods were eaten in the raw state."
>etc etc

>[There are so many errors in this paragraph that it would take several
>posts to point them out--but apparently he considers that hunting wasn't
>much occurring before 10,000 years ago. =:O ]

Yes he seems to say that and that is strange because when i asked him 2
years ago about me eating more animals products ,he answered ,  saying that
he was known at Montrame as somebody abusing on meats.and had allways
promoted more animals proteins than Burger.

After this preceding paragraph ,there is In the original book a page long
sidebar recapitulating the important moments in our history
i noted 3 importants ones after birth of universe 15 billons years and
separation of humans and chimpanzees 7 millions etc...
first tools and fire place found about 2 milions years
our ancestors were hunter gatherers and were eating raw until 10000 years
sendentarisation, regular use of fire for cooking, the hunter gatherers
becomes agriculturist,pastor, ....
>
>p142:
>
>"The notion that prehistoric man cooked his food is a myth. This is
>affirmed by the anthropologist, Dr. Vaughn Bryant, head of the Department
>of Anthropology at The Texas A and M University (College Station, Texas."
>
>Bruno makes the following citation and goes on to briefly describe the
>research on fossilized feces:

>
>Bryant Dr., Prevention Magazine, September 1979 [Quite a source!!!]

did you read this article what period is it in our evolution? he report that
grains were chewed and not grinded.
>
>He then goes on to speak of H. L. Abrams ((elsewhere citing material from
>1979-1983 published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition (OK, but ancient,
>though I would like to see if no cooking before 10K ya is a conclusion
>Abrams came to in any of those articles)--and a pop book, "Your Body is
>Your Best Doctor" he co-wrote in 1972)).

this paragraph is 6 lines long in English,14 in french
the sentence <...paleolithic fed himself prior to the invention of fire...>
is completly fantaisist because in the french text there is no mention of
fire at all ,it is just comparing paleolithic diet with the dairy and grains
based diet  plus sugar of today .


>Later on page 142 he says again:
>
>"Only within in the last ten thousand years have the following spread
>throughout all human populations:

it is since around 10000 years ago that have been progressively developped
>
>1] the use of fire for cooking food."
>etc
>
>Maybe this could be found technically true (as in unfalsifyable ;) because
>of the _all_, but then don't instinctos count? ;)

No mention of <all human populations> in French

 Then again he gets away
>with an interesting play around with "widespread" and "all" in the first
>quotation. Then further again, the book is a translation from French so
>I'll quit nit-picking. ;)

no widespread either.

like you might see the translation gave you a different taste than the
original book
All what he is saying is that 10000 years ago was a marking point in the
change toward systematic use of cooking .
I don't think he will have ever believed than there was no cooking at all
before the neolithic.
>
>(I remember that Abrams was also cited by Burger--but now that I am eating
>cooked foods my short-term memory may be falling off...;))
>
>I'd cut Bruno some slack if I wasn't quoting from a second edition of the
>book which came out "updated" in 1994! I still think the book is landmark,
>but well-researched it isn't. Too bad too, cause he says stuff that should
>be debated by rigorous researchers IMO. But why would anyone bother with
>such shoddy errors?

i have "maximise immunity" published in july 1994 and it is the first
edition.
and i have the french version published in Canada in the 4th trimester of 94
so it seems unless there is a french french edition prior to thoses ones
that the english came first.

>Of course, beyondveg is biased--everything is. What BV is that most
>everything in the alternative dietary world isn't, is more balanced and,
>dare I say, more intellectually honest. The article on Maillard molecules
>is a one of the best examples of this on the site IMO.

still there is a strong tendancy to makes other points of view wrong when
just stating what is yours will be just enough.
>
jean-claude

ATOM RSS1 RSS2