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:
Ben Balzer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 30 Jul 1999 22:21:06 +1000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (34 lines)
Animals don't have toxins-. Many non fruit plant foods do- fruit having the
least or none as a rule. The paleo diet is probably THE lowest toxin diet
available once one gets into the range of toxins in plant foods.(most poor
people eating to detoxify probably stock up potatoes, rice and soy... poor
guys)(well potatoes and soy are really bad). Fruits and grains are both
reproductive organs- the fruit requires being eaten to spread, whereas the
grain relies on the wind etc- being eaten destroys its viability. In any
case seed/ grains are full of secondary metabolites and other toxins.

I do worry about fruit skins eg apple skin, pear skin- do these contain
enzyme inhibitors and other toxins??

Ben

----- Original Message -----
From: Todd Moody <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 1999 9:06 PM
Subject: [P-F] Game theory and food


> On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Hans Kylberg wrote:
>
> > We generally agree on this list that fruits are "intended to be
> > eaten" so they do not contain anything we should avoid, but bananas
> > are a very special fruit.
>
> If it is supposed to be a general principle to eat foods that
> "have an interest in being eaten," then how does that apply to
> animals?
>
> Todd Moody
> [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2