Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:16:41 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
In-Reply-To: |
<02e101c3922b$5a4ed270$0b37a8c0@silver> |
Organization: |
some |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Quick definition of food:
What keeps me in good health.
I am not in good health. I cannot get the same food as our paleolithic
ancestors. I cannot get the modern equivalent of paleolithic food.
By testing various foods on myself, and reading this list (and others), I
am guided into a better state of health than I could otherwise realise.
I (and I think all of us) accept what we permit ourselves to believe,
sometimes as a result of evidence.
William
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 10:15:31 +0200, Eva Hedin <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Coming from a country where there are not so many foods to choose from
> I'm
> interested in what you people think is paleolithic food. I would also
> like
> to know why you accept this but not that.
>
> Eva
>
>
>> From paleo-perspective, none of the veg listed qualifies as food.
>> From my own experience, all of the listed veg. are mistakes.
>> From a book entitled "cellular nutrition", these are not food.
>>
>> Your question is puzzling; if these "foods" are not good for us, what
>> makes you think they are good for babies?
>>
>> William
>>
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
|
|
|