In a message dated 6/19/03 12:51:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ginny wilken <
[log in to unmask]>  writes:

(Phillip)
> >For our species, I don't think so.
> >Hence the PaleoDiet (cooked). Not the PrePaleoDiet (raw).
>
> Philip; why don't you think so? Did we not evolve, or were we not designed
> to function, on raw? Do you think we changed to make cooked more correct
> for us? Were we just waiting around to evolve as a species until the advent
> of cooking? I don't understand what you're saying. Where does prototypical
> start?
>
> ginny

I believe that most anthropologists put the advent of cooking at about
250,000 years ago, not a very long time in the scheme of our evolution. However,
Richard Wrangham, professor of biological anthropology at Harvard, presents a
convincing case for a radical new theory, that cooking goes back some 2 million
years. From what I read in this article, it makes a lot of sense to me.

 <A HREF="http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/wrangham/wrangham_index.html">Edge: THE EVOLUTION OF COOKING</A>     (in depth discussion)

 <A HREF="http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/06.13/01-cooking.html">Harvard Gazette: Cooking up quite a story</A>     (brief synopsis)


But Ginny, in answer to your question, YES, from this evidence, it does look
like we evolved as a species with the advent of cooking. That's not to say our
ancestors cooked every berry and nut they pulled off a bush! But I personally
think that cooking has played a substantial enough role in our evolution to
warrant cooking the animal protein foods that I consume.

Furthermore, during the course of our development, Mother Nature's cruel
march of natural selection most likely favored individuals better able to fight
off detrimental bacteria/parasites, etc. from the consumption of raw infected
foods. But today, I do not choose to become a cast off statistic, just in case
my immune system is not in perfect order. And, as has been pointed out so many
times before, much of our food may come from questionable sources, and new
infections abound.

For those who subsist on raw foods and find they do well, that is great, but
I don't think the evidence substantiates that 100% raw is truly Paleo.

Maddy Mason
Hudson Valley, NY