Ken Stuart wrote:

>The evidence is pretty substantial that insulin levels have more to do
>with health and longevity than any other factors (other than, of
>course, avoiding short-term poisons like arsenic).
>
>

I really agree with this.  When we look at plant foods we soon realize
that just about all of them have something or other that could be
regarded as an antinutrient or a toxin, and virtually all have lectins
(these things referred to collectively as "secondary compounds").  The
difference between what is edible and what isn't lies in the
concentrations of these things.  And the whole point of the various food
preparation methods that humans have developed over untold milennia is
to make the inedible edible by reducing the concentrations of secondary
compounds in "inedible" foods to levels comparable to those of "edible"
foods.  These are the levels at which we are apparently equipped to deal
with these secondary compounds.

What we are not equipped to deal with, many of us anyway, is the
relentless hammering of our metabolisms with large quantities of
carbohydrate, and the resultant insulin resistance and chronically
elevated insulin levels.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]