Mime-Version: |
1.0 (Apple Message framework v928.1) |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes |
Date: |
Sun, 7 Sep 2008 20:01:42 +0100 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
<005901c91117$cf2135f0$4100a8c0@KRHOME1> |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Sep 07, 2008, at 7:16 pm, Kathryn Rosenthal wrote:
> I agree. The yolks are high in acid, and Cordain has probably
> become aware that cancer loves an acidic environment. This is
> especially true for people who are eating quite a bit of meat. At
> least that is the only explanation that I can think of as to why
> Cordain would exclude yokes. But, as has been stated here, the
> yolks have a lot of essential nutrients and eating egg whites alone
> would not be healthy over time.
I suspect it's still fat-envy that makes him suggest discarding the
yolks.
But if he is doing it based on the acidic nature of yolkds, that reeks
of microscopic science - or as I usually put it, "blind men elephant
science"*. My body doesn't tell me the arachidonic acid contents of
eggs, it tells me they are really tasty. And I trust its ability to
tell me how many eggs I should eat, seeing they are a natural food
that has always been available to humans. (We never lived in an
environment with no birds, right?)
I do not trust my brain's ability to decide that excess arachidonic
acid is dangerous, calculate the safe dietary limit, calculate the
amount of arachidonic acid in the eggs I am eating, and decide how
many eggs I should eat based on this. In fact I don't trust my brain
do to make *any* decisions about my diet that are based on scientific
research. Well, except archaeology and anthropology; but certainly,
biochemistry and medicine are out.
Ashley
* I'm never sure how transparent that expression is
|
|
|