>On Fri, 8 Feb 2002 14:56:12 -0600, Jim Swayze <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>>Cooking came on the scene so late that we haven't had time to adapt to
>>those foods that only became edible by the cooking process.  Thus foods
>>edible raw is a primary requirement for paleo.

As Todd has pointed out, cooking usually lowers the levels of toxins to
a lower level, as it is found in other food items.
Which *are* edible raw.
That means we have ever been "adapted" to (able to detoxify) food items
with "antinutrients" found in food items considered unpaleo by many.
In most cases "edible raw" is a question of dosage.

On the other hand, in the case you have an aquired food sensibility
which already led to disease symptoms, even small dosages of food items,
even edible raw and considered "paleo" by some definition will
do harm. In one particular human.

Like Ray Audette with his rheumatoid athritis, which is a autoimune disease.
If this rheumatoid athritis is connected with his previous legume
consumption he will probably react deadly ill on good paleo food items,
which are related to legumes.
For example peanuts. Or the acacia seeds of the Australian aboriginals.

On Fri, 8 Feb 2002 17:08:12 -0500, Philip Thrift <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
>Cooking was a food technology utilized from 200,000 years ago, and
>may have played a critical role in human adaptations, so I would not say
>"edible raw" is required.
>
>   http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-6b.shtml

That was from a mousterien site, neanderthal.
Which are probably not related to us (no "adaption").

There are other artefacts of stone hearths, which reach 400-500,000 years
back. Dr.Wrangham cites studies which indicate usage of fireplaces up to
2 mio years back. And bases a lot of theory on it.

Adaption to cooked items would involve two abilities
1.beeing able to stand the reductions in vitamins by the cooking.
  Vitamin C,B1 are reduced by cooking. Some coenzymes too (Alpha lipoic and
  CoQ10 ?) as someone has recently reported on the list.
2.digest the altered proteins, which cooking creates.
  If there are any alien proteins then it's the protein created by cooking
  (but I don't believe in alien proteins).
   Cooked food has never been eaten by any living beeing
   before invention of the fire .
   One cooking reaction is called the maillard reaction.
   Beyondveg however defenses maillard proteins
   http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-1b.shtml

Todd wrote:
>Yes, I think that by at least the Upper Paleolithic
> meats were being routinely roasted.

That interferes with the fat loss involved.
Roasting melts the fat, which will drop away or burn.
But fat is a very valuable item, particularly of low fat wild game animals.

Where there are really fat animals, there's not fireplace material.
A walrus is really fat, but there is no wood to roast it.
I think "Eskimo" means "eater of the raw meat".

Cheers, Amadeus