I agree Erik that gene interpretation is more significant, [the name is Dedy BTW, Rundle being our surname].

this however takes me to my next 'bee' under the bonnet [no honey there I'm afraid]... recently, some people on the list have express 'worries' that we shouldn't eat 'new world' produce as in tomatoes, peppers, avocados, chillies etc. because *we* [who's that?] haven't had enough evolutionary time to adapt to those.... by the same token hardly any of us not indigenous to the tropics should eat coconut and it's products, palm oil, tropical fruits etc.... no one but some Chinese people should eat citrus fruit or many other fruits commonly now grown all over the world which originated in china... similar restrictions would be placed on kiwi fruits.... 

of course the 'gene interpretation'  of paleo nutrition would provide the answer here too... guess it's the whiff of faith/dogma from some quarters that gets my 'bees' buzzing...

Dedy

----- Original Message ----- From: Erik Fridén To: [log in to unmask] 
  Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2003 2:58 PM
  Subject: Re: list topics - olive oil


  Hello Rundle!
  If you look at my recent post "What is paleo?", you'll see there are (at least) two ways of understanding the word "paleo": food accessable through pre-neolithic tech and food agreeable to our pre-neolithic genes. If olives are agreeable, then a carefully considered and balanced consumption of an olive-based product which takes neolithic tech to extract efficiently would also be paleo (or "quasi-paleo"). In my opinion the gene interpretation is more significant than the tech interpretation, though dependent on it.
  Erik F.