On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Jim Swayze wrote:

> Here we go again.  Defending basic paleo principles on what is supposed to
> be a support list.

What we're doing is challening certain construals of basic paleo
principles.  Why shouldn't we do that?

> I believe the statement above is an absolute falsehood.  The negative
> effects of grain consumption in humans is widely varied, but not one person
> who walks this earth has the physiology to escape its harmful effects.
> We're just not built to consume the stuff,  and the body recognizes this
> fact in various ways from person to person.  (I find it a fascinating
> question, one perhaps not appropriate for this list, why it is that we
> decided to give up Eden for the security of the farm).

The question you should be asking is why people suddenly began to
consume, in increasing quantities, foods that according to you
make them sick in any quantity.

> It's a big assumption that just because you may not see the immediate
> effects of grain consumption that eating grains is a smart thing to do.

It's just as big an assumption to suppose that because
overconsumption of grains is associated with health problems, any
consumption of grains in any quantity does the same.

> It's a basic, basic paleo premise that I see no way around.

Where is the evidence for the premise that eating grains in any
quantity is unhealthy?

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]