On Fri, 30 Aug 2002 00:10:58 -0700, Ken Stuart <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>The problem I have with this breakdown is that the philosophical objection
>to eating animals ultimately boils down to a difference of viewpoint,
>while, on
>the other hand, the health reasons for vegetarianism are factually
>incorrect.

Ok, now some words on vegetarian instead of paleolithic.
Let's say you found reasons for yourself to take several vegetarian health
topics as solved for yourself  and other health topics you found reasons to
feel superior with.
There are vegetarian' (I hate that cliché as a oversimplification) health
topics, where vegetarians *in general* have better values than omnivores in
general. For example cholesterol, other blood lipids, several vitamins
(folate,B1,C,E,calcium).
In statistics vegetarians *in average* do better in obesity, coronary artery
disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and some types of cancer.
You can dispute that away only on single cases and signle aspects (...
"which lead us to the conclusion that"... bla bla bla...)

Now I hear an outcry in the community "what, diabetes" because many of you
follow a lc-approach which is even a cure for mild diabetes.
But this doesn't apply to "omnivores" in *general*.
Statistically you can find superiority if vegetarianism and and reason it.
Like this:

  Average meat-eaters eat all their protein as meat, but it's still too low
  in energy (desplite 20% fat in tissue). So they need additional food
  energy - without protein. This usually comes in the form of desserts,
  sweets, caces etc.. With the bad effects to expect- high insulin and low
  vitamin.
  Vegetarians need to derive their *protein* from plant sources, therefore
  they *have to* take more of unmodified, whole plant sources.
  Otherwise they would become unsuccesfull in the diet and stop it soon.
  Therefore they get more vitamins and vitaminoids.

*This* is the real health benefit for beeing vegetarian in our society.IMO
And it's in the direction of paleo. Generally meat-eating facilitates to eat
a lot if "crap-food" (like sweets) and this is the real disadvantage of not
beeing vegetarian, in general, in our society. I M O.

Now of course you can find healthy vegetarians and unhealthy vegetarians,
because the question is not if you eat meat or not, the question is *what*
you select of the food items acceptable to you.
Likewise you find healthy meat eaters and many many very unhealthy meat
eaters. And what is necessary to be a healthy meat eater is exactely what
some paleo principles demand!

I think it's not reasonable to point only to the bad subjects of each
lifestyle or emphasise only the good ones.

A healthy diet is not the question to include meat or to avoid it.
Both not.
IMO the necessary approach is to
1. avoid intoxicating situations (there are a lot)   and then
2. get reasonable amounts from what is necessary.

regards,

Amadeus