>>> Bernard Lischer <[log in to unmask]> 05/03/99 08:58PM >>>
>Richard,

>Your comments on a person named Zephyr's book and everything that
follows
>them are truly baffling.  Firstly, there has been no mention of this
book on
>this list since December, and even then it was very scant.  That in
itself
>is not so strange - perhaps you want to share a new book with the list
that
>you think relates to the list's topic.  However, after the first few
>sentences on Zephyr, you embark on a lengthy moral and religious
commentary
>that, aside from two (2) sentence that seem to be forced into the
text
>solely for the purpose of maintaining on-topicness, has nothing to do
with
>the subject of this list.  Furthermore, having not personally read or
even
>heard of this Zephyr book, I find your arguments against it hard to
follow.

The book is one of the major works on Instinctive Eating  and that has
been talked about a lot on this list.  I wrote the posting as a kind
of book review. I apologize, I didn't make that clear.

>I really don't mean to be harsh,

That's OK, I have rather thick skin and am not easily offended. What
I can't stand is people that won't express their viewpoint !  I like
people that express viewpoints even when they don't agree with mine.

> but I think that most of us here would
>agree that religions, especially those that occur only during the last
2000
>years (and originated in the vicinity of the first agricultural

There is an extreme difference here in our opinions of what
"Christianity"
is, but that would be waaaaaay off topic.  Feel free to email me
directly
if you want me to elaborate.

>settlements, no less), have little to do with the topic of
replicating
>paleolithic eating patterns in a modern world.  Exceptions might be
>questions as to whether or not certain religious food are "paleo," or
how
>did paleolithic art and religion influence dietary patterns.

The difference of world view here is so deep  and multifaceted
as to be almost unapproachable.
There are two ways to look at
Paleo Nutrition that are very different.  One is the

"Man evolved from
apes, and from the theory of evolution we deduce the diet.  Then
experiment and adapt to make it work in the real modern world."

Another approach ( I've never seen it mentioned on this list ) is

"God created man with the ability to survive on planet Earth
and modern technology has messed diet up, and through
experimentation and intelligence we can try to arrive at
a good healthy diet."

The amazing thing is that both approaches arrive at the
same diet from diametrically opposed world views.

While I'm not what most on the internet would consider
to be a Creationist, I do believe that God plays a role
in the world, and thus is relevant to diet.  Most of the
scriptures say very little about diet since it is realy
not very important in the very long run.

( "Creationists" tend to be radically anti-science and
   most of their explanations don't hold water. The
   universe is far more complex that "Creationsist"
   or Scientists think it is. )

The point of my posting was two fold. First, to
be a review of a very interesting book.  And second,
to express a very different world view of the basis of diet
and what the "perfect" diet might be.  This is exactly what
the book is about, and I think the books overall world
view and some of it conclusions are very wrong.

>Respectfully,

>B. Lischer