for an alternative perspective on paleo, written by a younger pair of
scientists, please read:
http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_science/built_like_a_neanderthal_1%3bjsessionid=0CB34468C70E368151A92B39B439D258.hydra

and
http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance_science/built_like_a_neanderthal_ii&cr=

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:44 PM, Neil Timms <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> As I follow this discussion it seems that much of the point of
> approximating a Paleolithic eating is lost on some
>
> Real Paleo eating has little to do with close examination of this or
> that effect of certain foods on the body. Our starting point is eating
> those foods that approximate the the foods that we might eat in a
> pre-agriculture setting. More detailed study might tell us more about
> why Paleo is a better way to eat. But we have a problem. When it comes
> to nutrition the 'science' is so sketchy that most people in the world
> will either suffer from diet induced health problems or they have them
> already. The studies look good, grab headlines, but in the end kill us
> slowly.
>
> Cordain's the 'Paleo Diet' seems to me to be a much better 'diet' than
> most but it is presented as a 'diet' - and 'diets' as part of a
> 'Western' culture are not necessarily the final word on nutrition, or
> something that endures; 'diets' are a fashion. They come and they go -
> the next supposedly better than all those that came before, and often
> associated with a personality or 'scientist' and 'research'.
>
> The world does not need in depth research into what foods do to us
> except that this is to understand the processes of our lives - and
> these processes need to be placed in the human context. Animals
> evolved in an environment. Without that context nutritional research
> tells us nothing of any use. It is like trying to work out how a
> bicycle works by looking at it through a microscope.
>
> To me at least it is clear that meat and fat consumption were a
> significant part of a pre-agricultural diet; and woven in with our
> evolution as a relatively large brained species. No meat and fat, no
> big brain. The fruits and vegetables that nutritional 'science'
> examines are not the same as those that we might have eating before
> agriculture: ours are bred for sweetness and color and shape, or an
> emphasized nutritional factor. The same is sadly true about much of
> our meat. It is just not possible to do real nutritional science
> starting with modern analogs of meats, fruits, and vegetables. So I
> think we should approach all nutritional studies with a pinch of salt
> as it were.
>
> I think that Cordain is obviously wrong to present his idea of acid
> balance in a Paleo diet as definitive because the raw material for his
> research is not the same as a real Paleolithic diet. It also does not
> fit the 'big picture'.
>
> But what is a real Paleolithic diet? Subject to discussion I expect!
>
> I could go on and frequently do but I'll go back to my cave now.
>
> Cheers
>
> Neil
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Robert Kesterson <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:20:20 -0600, Kenneth Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The body will maintain its own pH balance, for the most part regardless
> >>> of (or in spite of) diet.
> >>>
> >>>  Robert Kesterson
> >>>  [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >> Not according to Dr Cordain.  Repeat: There are a number of adverse
> >> health effects either partially or wholly caused by a net acid
> >> yielding diet (cereal grains, meats, cheeses, fish and salt. The only
> >> base yielding foods are fruits and vegetables.
> >
> > By that reasoning, we should all be vegetarians.  All the people who eat
> > low-carb or zero-carb (as do some on this list) should be keeling over by
> > now, or at least toppling from bone disintegration.
> >
> > --
> >  Robert Kesterson
> >  [log in to unmask]
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Neil C Timms
>