Kirt:
> But there is nothing completely sacred about smell and taste. For me,
> garlic and liver usually smell very interesting but usually taste poor.
> Other useful foods may have very little smell (grapes, fish bones, etc.)
> but still taste good. And I have times when a food (bananas, sweet corn)
> smelled nuetral but tasted great. In the case of the latter, they may
> simply be oversweet foods, but even so they are the foods which are in our
> markets, so relying exclusively on smell/taste for attractions and the
> taste change for quantity can be problematic. What the solution is is an
> open question--wide open...;)

I agree that taste and smell are not the only senses that we should rely
upon. A game I occasionally play is to feed pigeons in public squares,
and watch them eat instinctively. Sometimes they don't even pay attention;
sometimes they approach their beak but don't taste; sometimes they taste
but don't swallow; and sometimes they eat until the "stop". So, I think
that they use eyesight, smell and taste altogether.

However, we humans have used visualisation for so many years that we
lost the habit to use smell/taste, so relying as much as possible on
smell/taste probably helps to be successful in instinctive nutrition.

For the anecdote about instinctos' stools (is it another fecal obsession?),
I haven't noticed any effect on my stools (and their color is normal).
Maybe the problem is that instinctos who claim they use smell/taste
often rely on taste change, which is a bad thing because the stop
generally comes too late. IMO, smell is the most reliable sense...
when the food smells something; otherwise, the sensation of fullness
often comes earlier than the taste change.

BTW: pigeons don't like salad. They sometimes eat mung beans, but don't
like them much; they prefer wheat. But what they like most are
sunflower seeds and chickpeas. They are also attracted to meat, but
it's difficult to eat for them.

Best wishes,

Jean-Louis
[log in to unmask]