Hi Ken,
You appear to be making several assumptions here:
1. That some specific proportions of meat, vegetables, and fruits can 
constitute an ideal nutritional strategy;
2. That meat and fat consumption can and does induce acidity;
3. That we should accept Cordain's assertions without question.

Each of these assumptions is, when examined independently, difficult to 
defend. Taken together, they appear almost impossible to credit, never 
mind argue. The first assumption reflects a widespread nutritional 
perspective. Yet a whole population of people (the Inuit) have 
demonstrated, over thousands of years, that a healthful diet need not 
include significant quantities of vegetables or fruits. The second 
assumption is limited by the contradicting evidence provided by the 
robust health of the same population at the time of first contact with 
European eating habits. The third assumption is flawed, not by any 
list-wide disdain for Cordain, but by the notion that any individual is 
above question on a scientific topic. Simply because Loren Cordain says 
it, doesn't make it so. If, on the other hand,  my wife says something, 
I know it to be true because the alternative is at least very dangerous 
and possibly unthinkable. :-)

Please excuse that last lapse into levity. My point is that Cordain, 
although impressive in many ways, is far from perfect. Honoring peoples' 
achievements  is very different from mindlessly accepting their 
pronouncements, especially when those individuals resist exploring any 
possibility that their theoretical conjecture could be wrong. I suppose 
that you could argue that I am accepting V. Stefansson's observations of 
the Inuit in the same way that you are accepting Cordain's. However, if 
Cordain reported observations wherein people eating a diet that was 80% 
fat and 20% protein were losing bone calcium and could demonstrate that 
calcium losses were tied to buffering acidity induced by meat 
consumption, I'd give it a long, hard look. However,  I haven't seen any 
observations or solid science to support Cordain's claims, and I am 
aware of data that clearly demonstrate the contrary. How could I 
honestly accept Cordain's claims without question? That would constitute 
a huge betrayal of myself.

Best Wishes,
Ron


> Cordain is talking about the acid/base balance, the right Balance of
> meat and vegs and fruit, the balance is the problem, how can there be
> this balance if only acid-based meat and fat are consumed?  I can only
> use Cordain as my source and he obviously does not impress most of you
> regarding the acid/base balance.
>
> Ken
>
>   


-- 
PK