William wrote:
> On Mon, 08 May 2006 07:49:20 -0400, susan barry <[log in to unmask]> 
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> My question is this: Are there any good, reputable, but basic scientific
>> articles that support the paleo principles?
>
> Regret that I can't answer that question - I use the experience of 
> millions of years of life to support the paleo priciple. Compared to 
> that, the flawed reports of scientists are insignificant. IMHO.
Socrates stated that wisdom is defined by knowing what we do not know. 
I'm going to go ahead and assume that your *actual* experience and that 
of the last several dozen generations of your ancestors is restricted to 
modern times and all that goes along with them. Therefore, what you 
*think* you know about "millions of years of life" had to come from 
somewhere. After all neither you nor anyone you know was there. Or maybe 
you are just guessing? There seems to be a lot of that going on around 
here.

What we, as a community, believe about the lifestyle and dietary habits 
of the original humans is based on decades of research by 
archaeologists, primatologists, paleoanthropologists, etc. all of whom 
relied heavily on the empirical scientific method to arrive at their 
understanding based on the evidence available to them. This picture is 
evolving all the time.

What you, and a few others on this list, seem to be doing is advocating 
for a particular set of beliefs by attacking the very principles on 
which those beliefs are founded. Is it true that scientists sometimes 
ignore the evidence in favor of what they believe? Sure. Are dietary 
studies often fundamentally flawed in that they assume too much and fail 
to control for an immense number of variables? Absolutely. Does this 
mean that the principles of science are themselves flawed? I sincerely 
doubt it. If this were true then the paleo diet would be equally flawed, 
because it too is founded on scientific principles.

As to the original question: there are many studies which support the 
individual assertions that taken together form the "paleo principles." 
Which ones of these are most important depends on who you ask. 
Individual assertions that can be supported by scientific research include:

1) Early humans and some other hominids were big game hunters who relied 
heavily on animal flesh for their diet.
2) Eating animal fat is not bad for you.
3) Eating large quantities of protein (Provided that *some* calories 
come from fat and or carbs as well) is not bad for you (And it will 
certainly not make you fat, as some "scientists" have claimed. A calorie 
*is not* a calorie.)
4) Ketosis is not bad for you (Provided that your intake of fat is adequate)
5) Gluconeogenesis is not bad for you (Provided that your intake of 
protein is adequate)
6) Refined carbohydrates are a) not necessary to the diet. b) harmful in 
large quantities. c) potentially harmful in moderate quantities.
7) Vegetable oil is a) unnecessary to the diet. b) harmful in large 
quantities. c) potentially harmful in moderate quantities.
8) Neither saturated fat nor cholesterol in the diet cause heart disease.
9) Sodium does not cause high blood pressure.

I'm sure that others will fill in what I am leaving out. And, there are 
citations to be had somewhere...