On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:51:18 -0500, Robert Kesterson <[log in to unmask]>  
wrote:

   The
> article says that mankind's genes *have* adapted to the "new" foods, and  
> that if true, that calls into premise the adaptation reasoning.

There is also the argument that "new" foods can switch on or off genes,  
not AFAIK disproven.


>
  This is also shown in the
> studies by Weston Price -- the diets of all the micro-cultures he  
> studied varied widely, including in some cases, large proportions of  
> things that were not paleo, yet those people thrived on it.

Yet they didn't live any longer than us.


>
> It seems to pose the question of whether it is the foods themselves  
> (grains, legumes, dairy, etc) that are at fault, or whether it is merely  
> what we *do* to those foods that puts our health at risk (excepting of  
> course food allergies etc.).


If food can change our genetic composition, then it is the foods  
themselves.

>
> (I also think it's what we *don't* do with our *bodies* that leads to a  
> lot of problems (ie lack of hard physical work and exercise on a routine  
> bases), but that's probably off topic for this list.)
>
>
My last living aunt died recently, she never did any hard physical work or  
exercise. She was 99, and healthier than most.

William