On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 17:25:28 EDT, Madeline Mason <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >Anyway, it must be pointed out that "vegetarian children in Boston" is a >very >select group of children. Whether or not their parents have made the best >choice in terms of long term health is not the issue. .. and so on and so on. Of course you can ascribe the results of the study to *other* reasons as the reasons for the test (vegetarian IQ's). Like with any other study. However.... we spoke about DHA as a factor for brain functioning, and maybe (some would *love* to see such a result) people with no or very little DHA intake had a less able brain. Vegetarians have a very low to zero intake of dietary DHA. Close to zero for most. Skip the silly struggle "who is *more* intelligent"? My point is: *If* vegetarian children compare well or very well in IQ tests *then* dietary DHA intake cannot be a worsening factor for intelligence. Either the Boston children *had* a significant dietary intake of DHA (unprobable) or intelligence isn't related to dietary DHA. So far I found many sites emphasising the importance of breastfeeding, and some discouraging heavy w-6 use. This seems to be the real important source of DHA. If dietary DHA would be necessary, then both, vegetarians or meateaters would have to *supplement*. Which some on the list already do. Looks unpaleo - that it would be *necessary* to supplement. regards Amadeus