Please not that these are not my words, I was merely quoting Susan E. Brown,
Ph.D. to show that the alkaline/base theory of nutrition is not just bunk
with no scientific evidence, as a critical article that was quoted appeared
to imply:
> > "This metabolic acidosis is caused by excess intake of metabolically
> > acid forming foods, such as protein and processed foods, and
> deficient
> > intake of base-forming foods such as vegetables, fruits, spices, nuts
> and
> > seeds. ..."
> 

William:
> It's not that simple, as the traditional Inuit diet shows.
> 

I agree, which is why I mentioned the Inuit quandary (while some claim that
traditional Inuit did have high rates of osteoporosis I have seen no
evidence to back up these claims). Maybe somehow meat does not have nearly
as much of an acidifying effect as grains and cheeses? Acidosis is a known
condition and grains have been shown in studies to be able to cause it, but
all the details on which foods contribute to it and how they do so is still
something of a question. Grains and cheeses do appear to be a contributor to
acidosis. As with most things, more study is needed.

William:
> Science doesn't know it all yet.

Yes, and anyone who claims that science ever will know it all is not a
scientist, because omniscient knowledge is not something that true science
recognizes as attainable for mere mortals during their lifetimes.

Carrie:
> "I'm no expert on human physiology, but carnivorous species that survive
solely on animal products maintain a slightly acidic urinary pH between 6
and 7. It seems to me that if they had to utilize bone stores of calcium to
buffer urine pH, we wouldn't have any carnivore species left by now.
Granted, they are also eating some bone along with meat, fat, connective
tissues, and organs, but bone constitutes a fairly small percentage of
dietary intake except in those species adapted to eat a large amount of
bone, such as hyenas. I don't know how much bone (or other high-calcium
foods), if any, traditional Inuit eat, but I believe many Pac NW Indian
nations ate some bone (in the form of fermented fish, among other things),
as well as plant foods in season as well as stored."

It is an interesting question. How DO carnivores and mostly carnivorous
humans avoid acidosis and keep their urine pH within the normal range
without depleting bone? 

"In the mink [a carnivore] normal range for urine pH is 6.3-7.5"
--www.nsac.ns.ca/pas/staff/krw/calculi.asp

Acidosis can become a problem in carnivores (though it doesn't say whether
it occurs in wild carnivores), according to this veterinary site:


Urinalysis
http://www.vetmed.wsu.edu/courses_vm546/content_links/Clinical_Pathology/Lab
_Tests/urinalysis.htm

"pH
    
Urine pH will be affected by many things including the diet, handling of the
sample, and acid-base balance of the animal.  An alkaline pH is most
indicative of an infectious process.  Normal pH is between 6 and 8 for most
animals depending on their diet.  

pH< 7.1  pH in this range may be considered either acidic or normal.
Carnivores who eat infrequently generally have a more acidic pH.  If the pH
drops below 6, then systemic acidosis should be considered.  Other causes
include: acidifying drugs, increased protein catabolism, and paradoxical
aciduria associated with chloride and potassium depletion."


Maybe carnivores use more bicarbonate and less calcium to buffer the urine?
Sodium bicarbonate "is a component of the mineral natron and is found
dissolved in many mineral springs." (Wikipedia)  Maybe bicarbonate is
obtained from melted snow and ice in the Arctic?

William:
> Cooked meat has been shown to be much more acid forming than raw meat.

Ah, that's interesting. However, even Stefansson reported that the Eskimos
cooked some of their meat, though not well-done. Can you direct me to where
I can learn more about the less-acid-forming properties of raw meat?