> This is my first post but I thought something had to be said to this load
of tripe.  with statements being taken completely out of context.

Ok, so refute the rest of the information on the Eskimos's diet. So you make
a good point on this one point and do not address another single issue of
the message. The point is, that people who think that eating nothing but
meat is ok because the Eskimos did it, are not eating anywhere near close to
what the Eskimos actually ate or the manner in which they ate it. Even if
they didn't eat the stomach contents, most Primitive diets usually included
the organ meats as well, which is something I only see a minority
high-protein eaters doing.

> To summarize Steffanson,

Ray Audette's Neanderthin, page 68:

   Vilhjalmur Stefansson adopted the Inuit diet
   in his early twenties and kept to it nearly his
   entire life (he died at the age of eighty-three).

My grandfather lived to be that old and ate basically the SAD diet, although
he very rarely ate out.

As Dr. Howell wrote in Enzyme Nutrition, "I am not suggesting that you
emulate the primitive Eskimo and try living on raw meat. Plant food is
virtually nonexistent in the far north. The Eskimo had to adapt to what was
available and was forced to modify animal flesh in ways to serve not only as
fuel but to maintain excellent health and prevent disease."

If you live in conditions like that you *have* to eat like that. Personally,
I think it is great the Eskimos had no cancer and they are worthy of
studying if for nothing but that fact, but Eskimos are not known for their
longevity, nor or they the only group on earth who had no cancer. The Hunzas
were an isolated group who, upon visitation from the West, were found to
also have no cancer...and they are also noted for their extreme longevity
(although I'm hesitant to call them vegetarians because it was my
understanding they did include some meat in their diets. Anybody know on
this?).

Jay