Jean-Louis:
>Suppose that, using your method, two foods A and B (say, cherries and
>strawberries) are eaqually pleasant. What will you do? Maybe toss a
>coin. Then, you eat A first, and you find that you need 1 pound of A
>and 1/2 pound of B. But if you had chosen to begin with B, maybe you
>would have eaten 1 pound of B and 1/2 pound of A.

Okay and what's the problem here? If I eat one pound of A first and then
0.5lb of B and my body would have needed more of B but can't get it because
of the one lb of A, then at the next meal B would be more attractive and
I would start with this (and probably eat one pound of B then.)

I consider it to be useless to think of what would have happened if I
started with A or B. I am too lazy to even toss a coin. If it was very
important that I choose the correct one (e.g. if A and B are proteins and
my need for them is very urgent) I simply would test the taste. See my
post of 5/6/97.

Jean-Louis:
>Concerning monomeals, given that instinctos eat 2 meals/day, a
>RAF-monomeal would weigh 1-2 pounds. I doubt that so much protein can
>be absorbed by the body, probably some proteins are transformed into
>glucose. Moreover, if you really need 1-2 pounds of meat, that means
>your body is really lacking RAF (and thus very disbalanced).

Wrong conclusions in my oppinion. Doubt what you like. Why not draw the
border at 0.2lb or 7lb?

Kind regards,

Stefan