On Wednesday, November 23, 2005, at 04:51  AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:

> 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?

Not strictly true, according to the 'grandma hypothesis', which is that
old folks help their grandkids survive by babysitting, passing along
folk wisdom and the like. But mainly true in my opinion. Once we are
past reproductive age it is simply a countdown till something important
breaks. That is where calorie reduction comes in, slowing the pace of
breakdown.

As for the Okinawans, the Japanese have various explanations for why
they live longest: sunshine and fresh air, healthy vegetables like
bitter gourd, seaweed, low stress lifestyle...... etc. A researcher I
did some work with thought it was all the pork in the traditional diet.
He claimed that pork protects the kidneys.