PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Julie Kangas <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 12 May 2000 09:37:41 -0700
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (117 lines)
On Fri, 12 May 2000, Amadeus Schmidt wrote:

> On Fri, 12 May 2000 05:36:26 -0700, Julie Kangas <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 12 May 2000, Amadeus Schmidt wrote:
> Julie, meat is a superb source of protein (and you need that to compensate
> for isolated carbohydrates).
> But look how meat averages in terms of energy  (Calories)
> between a simple fruit, a root and a nut.
>
>    Nutri     Food 1   Food 2   Food 3   Food 4
> -----------+--------+--------+--------+--------
>   Calories    26.08    29.77   172.08    34.02
>    Pro (g)     0.28     0.48     6.92     6.52
>   Carb (g)     6.63     6.89     3.43        0
>  Fiber (g)     0.68     0.85     1.42        0
>
> Try to find out which one is the meat, without lurking ...
> its:
>  Food 1-BANANA-RAW (09040)-1:1 oz
>  Food 2-SWEETPOTATO-RAW (11507)-1:1 oz
>  Food 3-WALNUT-BLACK-DRIED (12154)-1:1 oz
>  Food 4-DEER- RAW (17164)-1:1 oz

Ok, what is "DEER-RAW"?  Is it lean muscle meat or
does it contain a nice proportion of organs and fats?

>
> In addition, consider that it doesn't contain carbohydrate, which is
> mandatory to fuel the brain.
>

HUH?!?  Did I wake up in a parallel universe this
morning?

My readings of the Eades' two books make me recall that
carbohydrates are _not_ required by the human body.
I don't have my references nearby, so maybe someone
else can chime in.  What is the prefered/mandatory fuel
of the brain?

> However successfull new hunting techniques tend to totally wipe out
> a prey population after some time.
>

Which may very well have happened at the end of the
Pleistocene.  Climate changes certainly didn't help
many animals, but they also had to contend with a new
big bad predator.  Fortunately, we are just learning
how to sucessfully manage predation and care of the prey
population.

> > Herbivores, however, eat almost
> >continuously and must move large distances to find
> >food ...
> Meat is quickly digested, leaving no bulk.
> This is more a disadvantage as an advantage in
> humans. Catchword constipation.

My diet is at least 90% meat.  I have no problem
with constipation.

> Then the article "Fossil Signs of First Human Migration Are Found"
> cites:
> > "With the appearance of Homo, we see bigger bodies that require more
> energy to run, and therefore need these higher quality sources of protein
> as fuel,"  Dr. Anton said of the adaptation to meat-rich diets.
>
> Where is the the runner eating only meat, without much fat or carbohydrate?
> Where is the energy found? Don't they know the basics?

Animal carcases are not 100% lean meat.  There's a lot of
nice fatty parts too.  Brains -  mmMMmmmm.
>
>
> Human societies exploited *every* source of food found. Plants of every
> kind, also animals of every kind. Plants, fruits, nuts are seasonal
> (out of the tropics). Animals may be seasonal too.
> I think humans exactely are the versatile kind, capable to cope with
> the broadest range of food. Even very much expanded by cooking.
>
Yes.  As omnivores we have a great advantage in food sources.
I would argue, though, that only some animal food sources are
seasonal - eggs, for example.  OTOH, big game meat is constant
if you follow the migration of the herds.

As far as cooking - well, I'm not a strict paleoist, I do
cook most of my food, but *cooking* is what got us eating foods
like grains and potatoes.

> Debby read it too and wrote:
> >important phrase for us:
> >          They believe anthropologists will have to look for other
> >          explanations for the move.
> >          "It could have been for biological reasons," David Lordkipanidze
> >          said. "Humans became carnivores and they wanted to expand their
> >          range."
>
> Debbie don't forget, especially *if* he is reasoning or assuming
> right: this are a different species of "humans".

This is the line that gave rise to our species and from my admittedly
layman readings of the subject, it seems that each new
species not only retained its liking for meat, but increased
its desire and ability to obtain it.

> I don't plan
>to die out in the next time, if possible.

Species die out for a number of reasons, especially if they've
got even bigger and badder offspring ;)

BTW, watch out for that asteroid :)

Julie

ATOM RSS1 RSS2