Kirt:
>>Maybe so; maybe not. Wild living animals eat cooked foods (forest fires,
>>steam vents, etc),
jean-claude:
>how often can this happen once in a life time?
If you happen to live in a geothermal area it would likely happen
throughout
one's life. Forest fires are a normal part of life in forested
areas--so I
would say at least several times in a lifetime for those animals lucky
enough not to get cooked. You would have to show that animals living
near,
and consuming, naturally cooked foods were in worse health than those
who
never touched a "denatured" morsel to give your idea credence.
> frozen foods (all along the snowline in both hemispheres),
>
>Species who evolved on the temperate climates do but it is not what they
>favor and it is not a main source of foods
So? And even if your interpretation is accurate (and I severely
question
the "main source of foods" bit) it doesn't argue that animals will
become
ill when eating frozen/thawed food.
>The humans ocupation of thoses regions are not so old
So? Humans haven't lived where you live (BC Canada) for so terribly
long
either. ;)
>mix foods (wadging, going back and forth between foods and
>>often not eating their foods in instincto-like sequence), even have been
>>seen to dip foods into the ocean in an apparent effort to salt them. And
>>all animals seem to avail themselves of natural salt licks where ever
>>available.
>
>all those things are very much self limited and regulated for the other
>species ,only humans have a capacity now to make it a way of life. How
much
>mixing can you pratically do without a salad bowl?
You can mix two items which is all it takes to throw instincto theory
out
as the "truth according to nature". And switching back and forth
between
foods is not self-limiting. You report that you raised some grazing
animals
in France so this should hardly be news for you.
My point is that the all-or-nothing-at-all tenents of instincto are
not
well-mirrored in nature.
>. I personally at time mix diferrent greens while harvesting them but
>basicaly without the use of seasonning it is very much limited and when i
>enjoy arugula i take the time to harvest only that, leave by leave ( humans
>have an amazing tool to do that , their hands) despite that all my greens
>are growing together. I saw horses doing the same , sorting out grass when
>they want clover( their lips are amazing of ability to do that )
Yes, that is my point I think. They switched back and forth much of
the
time. Shame on them--don't they know that they are not supposed to
return
to a previously eaten food in a single course or else they are risking
toxic overload. Come on, admit it, your instincto from birth son does
this
quite regularily I'd guess. Or have you taught him better. ;)
>Note on the instincto sequence it is not necessarely a way of life but an
>important tool to reappropriate the instinctive response to foods, and it
is
>the most aproximate model of natural food intake that i know. for all
>species .
Most approximate? OK, then don't consider it a naturalistic
truth--which it
is clearly not.
>Animals travel a lot to look for a special source of food. Here
>when i walk thru the woods there is one place and time for nettles , one
>for miners lettuce , and one for Pigeon ( today i stole a pigeon that a
>was killing by pushing it in the water, he was eating it alive ,i had to
>crow kill it , my all focus was on the pigeon and had no interest to catch
>a crab that i saw going by or harvesting oysters that were there too. )
It's a great story. But so what? I mean, what does that show/prove?
BTW,
did your son switch back and forth between different parts of the
pigeon? ;)
>Instinctive approach is the antithesis of litteral interpretation of the
>guidelines.
Do you, or have you, eaten too much fruit as an instincto? What
litteral
interpretation were you following when you over-ate fruit? What
litteral
interpretation where you following when you stopped eating as much
fruit as
you really wanted too?
Cheers,
Kirt
Secola /\ Nieft
[log in to unmask]
|
