On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:29:41 -0700, Ingrid Bauer/Jean-Claude Catry
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>> Actually they do grow up nicely, ...

>you have to wait few generations of that regimen to see the impact on brain
>size .

There are many such examples.
Janinism exists in India since many generations. Eating with zero intake of
lcFA. Did the develop smaller brains?

You think that over the time/generations the human genome gets somewhat
tired of synthesizing all that DHA, and then prefer to build up smaller brains?
I can't subscribe to you point of view. If it would be really difficult to
get all the DHA and AA for a human baby, then at least some delay in brain
developement should show up. Or an altered brain structure (for
non-brain-eaters).
Or inuit (many generations of DHA surplus) should have particularly big
brains. All this isn't the case.
Or can you provide such a study (of *average* please, not single cases).

>latelly a raw vegan baby died , the 2 older siblings  made it okay but as
>the mother got more years of raw vegan behind ,the last one din't make it .

You can read about such cases once and again.
The cause is a vitamin-B12 deficit, it has nothing to do with lcFA.
I also think it's not wise to cite such single cases.
In the *west* somewhat between 1 or 5% of the population considers itself to
be vegetarian (to some extent). Maybe 0.5% are vegans.
That makes somwhat 1 million vegans in the USA (>250 mio inhabitants).
You wrote about one blind malnourished child.
What about the other 999,999 vegans? Are their children blind?
How many of the other 249 million meat-eaters (but not brain eaters) have
children with birth defects due to malnourishment? Think alone of folic acid
deficitand spine deformation.

Amadeus