Gary replied privately:

>> Kirt:
>> Thanks for the update. I'd love to look these studies over. Can you share
>> the details?
>
> Correction.  I've read about the studies
> (from a well known? raw food vegan's article, referenced below, so yes,
> there may be bias there), not seen them myself.

Somehow this often is the case. :/

I am familiar with three of the references sited, none of which claim a 100%
plant-based diet for chimps. The other two (the oldest and the newest) don't
appear to be worth the effort to track down. The newest is particularily
puzzling because it essentially argues (if the author's use of the
notation/quote is accurate) it argues that chimp studies wouldn't have much
relevance to modern human diets (a point made repeatedly on beyondveg). Then
again, it appears the idea is to dismiss all paleontologists' research.
Pretty handy, if the goal is to support a vegan ancestry for humans. ;)

Perhaps you can follow up on those two references, and let us know if a 100%
vegan chimp diet is found. If so, I would likely make the effort to read
them for myself.

If you follow primate diet studies at all, you would know that a
"breakthrough" study that concludes that chimps are 100% vegan would be very
big news indeed, since it runs contrary to so much recent research. I
haven't been as into it lately as I was before, so I thought maybe you were
on to something I missed in my lethargy on the subject...

> I suspect you may not give much credence to the article because of the
> identity of the author, but if the information referenced is valid, it
> indicates to me that animal matter is not as much of a necessity as some
> think.

I don't know the author (yes the style of writing is more than a bit obtuse)
but it is your references to chimps eating a 100% vegan diet which would be
very useful. The author states that just because a reference is old does not
make it invalid. I would agree, unless more recent studies with more valid
and reliable methods/observations make it invalid. Such studies are
exhaustively referenced on beyondveg.

> I'd prefer to send this directly to you, so that we don't get a flame war
> here, ok?

There is nothing to flame war about. You referred to studies that support
the notion that there are chimps who eat no animal foods. There are no such
studies in recent years that I know of. I was hoping that there was some new
info out about a group of chimps that ate no animal foods. That is not what
I found at the www site you mention below.

If you are worried I would get into all the rebuttals of vegan folklore
(including chimps are 100% vegans) so explicitly referenced on beyondveg,
worry not. People can read beyondveg and your link and decide for themselves
what primate studies have to say about human nutrition.

> although of course you could share it with the list if you want.

Why not? It's a great big bore lately with Bernarr postings dominating. ;)

> I believe you are aligned with "beyondveg", so this article may get your
> attention, if you haven't already seen it.

There is nothing new in the article that I can see. A recent study showing
that chimps are 100% vegan would certainly get my attention and that is why
I asked you. I am a very minor contributor to beyondveg and don't see it as
an "alignment" but I can understand how rigid lines might be drawn by folks
invested in vegan lore...

> http://venus.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/polemics.htm

Cheers,
Kirt