Loren Cordain writes:

> The separation of macronutrients would have been a frequent feeding
>pattern for pre-agricultural modern H. sapiens and perhaps the most
>frequent feeding pattern for pre-modern hominids in which there is
>little evidence for storage  of goods or food ( 1 ). Consequently,
>when an animal was killed, it was entirely consumed within a 24 hr
>period, similar to modern day hunter gatherers ( 2 ).  Except for
>some stored hepatic and muscle glycogen, there is virtually no
>carbohydrate in food derived from animal sources; therefore, protein and
>fat meals tended to be consumed together.

Just a socio-historical note here of possible interest on the idea of
food-separation:

As a one-time follower (since reformed :-) ) of the so-called "Natural
Hygiene" school of raw-food vegetarianism (I attempt to follow a Paleodiet
approach now based on the evolutionary evidence), I can say that many of
its practitioners to this day follow a very similar practice which they
somewhat mis-name "food combining" (since it actually focuses more on food
separation than combining). Theirs is the only current group I personally
know of with actual experience intentionally doing this type of thing.

However, in their philosophy, so-called "food combining" (actually
"separation of macronutrients," as Loren calls it) is practiced due to a
belief that foods will digest and assimilate better if eaten separately,
rather than a concern for effect on lipid profiles. Many adherents report
better gastrointestinal function and reduction in gas and/or digestive
distress. Anecdotal of course, but interesting nonetheless.

The theory was that different macronutrients required different types of
digestive enzymes for processing, which would conflict with or partially
neutralize the effectiveness of each other when digesting different
macronutrient food types mixed together at a meal. However, the Natural
Hygienists never could point to any documented evidence to support the
practice other than ideas from musty physiology textbooks on digestion that
were decades old, and some, though not all, modern practitioners are
beginning to abandon the practice. It would be interesting, though, if the
practice were to be found beneficial for the differing reasons Loren cites.

Also, in direct opposition to what would have occurred during evolution,
their belief has been that fats and proteins should *not* be eaten together
(for some kind of poorly-digested-that-way reason I don't recall). Of
course, this view doesn't square well with the evolutionary situation,
where fats and proteins would have been eaten together often since they
occur naturally in foods like nuts and flesh. Another idea, among others,
in their food-combining philosophy were that fruits should be eaten alone
and generally not combined with protein foods. (This does happen to gibe
with Loren's observation that carbs would not tend to have been eaten
together with proteins in Paleolithic times.)

Anyway, these observations are just to offer some additional food for
thought and add to Loren's initial observation out that the idea of food
separation has been around for quite awhile (actually, it still is) in
other forms.

>There was a series of popular diet books in the 1930's in the USA which
>>advocated exactly this eating pattern  (5,6).
>
>5.  Hay WH.  Weight control.  London Harrap, 1936.
>6.  Hay  WH.  A New Health Era.  Mount Pocono, PA, Pocono Haven, 1936.

I checked the standard N.H. text on food-combining (the rather musty-by-now
"Food Combining Made Easy," by Herbert Shelton from 1951, Natural Hygiene
Press: Tampa, FL), but they do not mention Hay, so this makes the
historical notes even more interesting. (Instead they mention Howell's
"Textbook of Physiology" and McLeod's "Physiology in Modern Medicine" as
sources, both probably out-of-print, and neither one of which are footnoted
so that they could be traced easily.)

--Ward Nicholson <[log in to unmask]>