>The cave man had no mechanism to determine what was and was not healthy for
>him.  He did not have Linus Pauling's books to read and he didn't have the
>internet to look things up on.  He basically ate what he could find and
>what he liked and nature took care of the rest.

The caveman as well as any other animals from bacterias to modern humans
have an inherent mechanism to regulate which part of their environment ,they
are going to integrate by eating it.
that mechanism that is mostly of instinctive nature ( but also working with
memory) , find its expression thru the senses .
depending on the species , the importance of the  differents senses involved
in  bringing  the attention to a potential food, varies.

for humans as well as many mammals the sens of  smell take care of the
attraction part, and the sens of taste,  the regulating of intake part.
that mechanism works with the principle of pleasure . ( animals eat what
tastes good  because it is what they need and consequently what makes them
healthy  )
there is many examples in the wild , of animal behavior demonstrating  that
they don't eat what they find at random but that  they  actively seek for
specific foods at specific times ( some insects can "smell" from very long
distance a specific food., or chimpanzee travelling  long distance to get to
a specific fruit tree etc... i have seen horses too , climbing up the high
ridge of the pyrennees to get to the wild clover growing specifically there
at a specific time).

In the wild environment what is attractive to the smell and taste is what is
healthy.
in an artificial environment where the food lost its original information
thru "denaturation" (  lost of diversity, domestication, artificial feeding
of plants,  cooking, processing,   seasonning etc...) there is an open door
to the complete opposite.
what is attractive becomes harmfull. ( and more the food is denatured and
more it is true).
so yes in that frame work and at the point of transformation of our foods
where we are at,  it seems that there is no mechanism to eat healthfully
apart the science of dietetic.( and there there is lot of sorting out of
informations that need to occur.)

step back to a paleo way of eating and allready there is less confusion of
the senses.
exclude the cooking  and the seasonning and that natural regulation of
eating start to fall into place.
eat wild foods and it become even more accurate and fine tuned ( let me know
when somebody will be overeating dandelion or wild fruits).

i choose myself to eat as much  "undenatured "as i can , because i found out
to be  the surest  and safest way of eating healthy.
when i was allowing cooking of whole foods, i could not stop eating
when i was allowing grains and dairies i made bread and cheese my stapple
foods and abused them.
When i was eating processed foods i was really at a lost ...
jean-claude

Ps plants also are  a good example of the importance of an healthy microlife
food web that sustain them , to regulate their food intake and be healthy.
there is no optimum health without an optimum sens of wholeness ( that
manifest in our relationship with our environment).



>,
>We, on the other hand, have a plethora of information available to us
>backed up by scientific data.  Can Mark McGuire hit more home runs if he
>takes Creatine?  Sure looks like it.  Could the cave man have increased his
>physical abilities with it?  Seems logical to me.  And by the same token,
>we can use our scientific knowledge to improve our physical
>health.  Vitamins are simply one way of doing that.
>
>I can't think of any reason to start my day without my Life Extension Mix,
>among other things.
>
>--Dena