> I am really new to this diet and I'm trying to learn as much as I can.  So
> of course Audette's "Neanderthin" was on my reading list.  I'm just a
> little
> ways into the book at this point, but some of his errors are making it
> hard
> for me to keep reading.  I am not a scientist, but I am well-educated, and
> when I find questionable information,  I wonder what misinformation I'm
> *not* finding. Can I trust this author?  So far, the errors* that irked me
> most really had nothing to do with the diet itself, so maybe I should just
> forge ahead.  What is the general opinion here of this book?

I can't claim to represent the general opinion.  My own opinion is that
_Neanderthin_ is an important and even seminal contribution to the
paleodiet literature, but by no means the last word.  For one thing, Ray
doesn't do much to help the reader distinguish those claims that are
considered part of "accepted" science from those that are more speculative
in nature.  An example of this is his theory that modern humans are
neotenized, "gracile" Neanderthal.  It may be so, but current weight of
opinion is against it, and Ray doesn't adduce any special body of evidence
to reverse the received view.  His thesis that heart disease is in fact an
autoimmune disease may turn out to be true, but this is still pretty
speculative at this time.

It's been pointed out recently (and not for the first time) that he
apparently contradicts himself on the importance of serum
cholesterol--possibly a result of editorial pressure from his publisher.

His take on "foreign proteins" and the immune system is somewhat fanciful.
 In immunologic terms, "foreign" means "non-self" and an intact pork
protein is as foreign to the human body as a molecule of wheat protein is.
 Molecular mimicry is something else again.  The two ideas may be
conflated a bit in the book (I haven't read it in a while).

Still, in terms of the big picture, it gives plenty of good advice, even
if it also leaves us with plenty to argue about.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]