Amadeus:
 >>>>>>So, what do you say is essential to "paleo"?
 >>>>>>A food category?

Peter:
 >>>>>Yes, the category of animal foods.

Amadeus:
 >>>How about real things like micronutrients, fiber, antioxidants, minerals?

Peter:
 >>It is well established that these elements are essential as well.

Amadeus:
 >Why "as well"?  Where is it well established that the category of animal
 > foods is essential?

My original statement was that animal foods are essential to paleo.
If animal foods have been part of our ancestors diet for the past
several millions of years, how can they not be essential to a paleo diet?

Amadeus:
 >>>If you choosed to adopt a upper paleolithicum cold climate diet, which
 >>> was dominated by meat, then you will end up in a nutritional state
 >>>similar to these people. That's your choice.

Peter:
 >>It seems I could be making a lot worse choices, no? ;-)

Amadeus:
 >There are always worse choices.

Yes, like going to the other extreme and eliminating all animal
foods.

Amadeus:
 >But what are good choices?

How about a varied, paleo foods diet?

Amadeus:
 >The nutritional status of a Cro Magnon from 30,000 BC from, say the Chauvet
 >cave was good enough to allow these people to spread over whole Europe, in
 >very small numbers. They died early. They could have had a lot of
 >degenerative diseases after the age of 40. We don't know.
 >Personally I think these people had a good nutritional status, because
 >they had only fresh and best quality things to eat, more greens as inuit.
 >But in a few 100 years all of them were converted to neolithic Linearband
 >culture, in whole Europe, whereever. There are some genetic studies that
 >suggest that 75% of the todays (northern) genes are from the previous
 >hunter/gatherers. There must have been some advantage in it.

Again, I have never argued this.  It is time to burn the straw man.

Amadeus:
 >>>Of course insects belonged to nearly any paleo diet,
 >>>except in the glaciated area.
 >>>Does it mean we have to eat insects?

Peter:
 >>It is certainly an argument I would entertain, especially if I were
 >>a vegetarian like yourself. In fact, I have some interesting insect
 >>recipes if you are interested. ;-)

Amadeus:
 >Are insects not animals in you opinion?

Of course.  I was just trying to support you in your original assessment
of insects' place in paleo.  ;-)

Peter:
 >>The lack of true paleo quality animal foods is a poor excuse for
 >> simply eliminating them completely.

Amadeus:
 >A good reason to eliminate the bad quality completely, I think.

Naturally, but a bad reason to eliminate the moderate to good quality.

Peter:
 >>I imagine it would be for you the ultimate living nightmare if you were
 >>suddenly surrounded by abundant supplies of animal foods of a paleo
 >>quality that even you could not question.

Amadeus:
 >That would be good for the animals and good for the "predators" (eaters).
 >For me it would be a problem if *nothing else was available*.
 >What would you do in say the Australian outback and left only
 >with some maggots and slimy snails to survive?
 >Probably overcome the shudder and live.
'>ll not do this before I really have to. Snails or other animals.

What has "have to" or surviving an acute predicament in the
outback go to do with whether or not animal foods belong in a
paleo diet?

Amadeus:
 >>>And what about the proportions and ratios of animal muscles in
 >>>your diet and the real paleo diet? Even in late paleolithicum.
 >>> Much more so before.

Peter:
 >>Good point.  However, muscle meats are still paleo foods while
 >>avoiding all animal foods per definition is not paleo.

Amadeus:
 >I hope your definition of paleo will lead you to a healthy eating.

I am not worthy.  :)

Peter