>You persist in describing the gathering of plant foods as >laborious and
dicey while the obtaining of animal foods is
>effortless.
no, just read what i said. the caloric return is far greater for caloric
input.

>And you argue that for these reasons paleo people ignore
>plant foods unless starving from lack of animal foods.
i think something we have both neglected, and it has just occurred to me, is
that  in the case of aborigines at least the men did the hunting, and women
collecting [maybe there were some cultures where women hunted as well, i
dont know].  so while your collecting grubs, shellfish you can obviously
collect orchids, berries.  so it beats doing nothing. but how many calories
did they provide in terms of percentages? i doubt more than 5-10%. i
maintain aborigines had access to no carbohydrate-rich food apart from
macadamia. the telling point: no other plant foods here have been
commercialised.  because the effort to extract any nourishment is steep
compared to getting hold of animal foods. hence they have not adapted to a
high carb diet and get diabetes.

so, which yam are we talkign about? let's get specific.

andrew