Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Date: |
Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:58:42 -0600 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Sender: |
|
Comments: |
RFC822 error: <W> Incorrect or incomplete address field found and
ignored. |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>What you say about cooking the fat is true
>just starts nudging above the boiling point of water.
Maybe I'm just being dense here, but I'm still having an issue with the concept that - apparently - "cooking" the fat is OK (for the raw foodists), but cooking aything else is not? Or, is it just a few raw foodists who eat pemmican, and the rest avoid/abhor it?
And, certainly pemmican does have a long shelf life. It might be perfect for long journeys, or as a standby in times of scarcity. But, eating it as "the" staple part of the diet? (I've read numerous reports here by some who claim to eat pretty much nothing but pemmican?)
I find the whole concept of a diet of pemmican - and pretty much nothing else - kinda not-so-paleo...
|
|
|