In a message dated 10/13/02 11:08:31 PM, Todd Moody <[log in to unmask] writes:

(Maddy wrote)
<< >I'm not so sure about that. According to Wiley and Formby in the book,
Lights
>Out, we (back then) gobbled up large amounts of available high carbohydrates
>fruits in the summer, putting weight on for the coming scarcity of winter. In
>winter, when there were no high carb fruits around, we lived on still
>available high fat megafauna, and lost weight.
>

(Todd wrote)
What, then, was the point of putting on weight "for the scarcity of
winter"?  What scarcity?  If fat was plentiful in the winter then there
was no scarcity, and no need to prepare for it by putting on weight.
 Remember, in gobbling up those fruits we could not store more than a
day's worth of glucose as glycogen.  The rest had to be stored as fat,
and used as fat.

A more plausible interpretation, to my mind, is that the "scarcity of
winter" refers to food in general -- protein, fat, and carbohydrate.
 >>

Fat may have been plentiful in the winter, but carbohydrates were not. This
is the theory behind all of the low-carb weight loss programs- that cutting
carbs to very low levels, while eating plenty of fat and protein, will help
with weight loss. And this very scarcity would also have meant fewer calories
in general, because one can only eat so much fat and protein. But Wiley and
Formby feel that the increased daylight in the summer was one of the driving
forces behind our cravings for carbohydrates to begin with- which is why
"endless summer" caused by electric lights in the winter drives us to crave
carbohydrates at a time of year when they wouldn't ordinarily be available.

I realize that this theory does not address the environment that might have
existed around the equator, where there isn't much winter. But perhaps there
was (is) enough seasonal variation to make somewhat of a difference. But this
is a whole different ball of wax.

Maddy Mason
Hudson Valley, NY