On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 23:38:22 -0700, Peter Brandt <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Amadeus: > >I tend to think so too, but it's always a question of amounts. > >Without nets and fishhooks and in dry areas the amounts would have been > >very low, I think. > >Does this mean that you are now willing to concede the same point when >it comes to plant foods? ;-) Yes. The same thing of course applies to the amounts of particular plants which later became a staple. Legumes, cereals. Not plants in general as in general I can see them as the most reliable and practical source. But with great seasonal variety (not a whole year staple, mabe no staple at all). And with a broad palette to choose of. Same thing with variety applies also to the variety of animal foods. This is very nicely described at this site: http://www.naturalhub.com/natural_food_guide_meat.htm Now only 4 animals are staple and they are even very much modified by agrigulture. Previousls... read yourself. regards Amadeus