"Tad" wrote:

> > Bruce Kleisner:
> > http://www.scdiet.org/
> > http://www.scdiet.com/
> ... the reason it is called the Paleolithic diet
> and not the "Exclude bad lectins diet" or the "Improve
> your enzymes diet" or the "Control intestinal bacteria diet"
...
> There are many possible reasons why certain foods are good/bad
> for us, but these reasons are irrelevant to a Paleolithic diet.

Because I like to know how/why things work, I would defend
the relevance of research supporting (or refuting) various
aspects of the paleo diet. We don't need reasons to make a
choice, of course. We can rely on intuition, feeling, luck,
opinion, chance, prejudice, speculation, and guesses.

> we as Paleolithic eaters choose ...
> only those foods which we have evolved to eat. We
> have not sufficiently adapted to recently (last 40k years)

Do we have to identify ourselves as "paleolithic eaters",
or can we just substitute "rational humans"? Also, do we
know for sure that we need to adapt in all cases where a
"new" food is eaten? Remember, there's nothing new under
the sun. I hope we can all debate those issues here, and
others, lest this become a sort of cult.

-Bruce Kleisner