I have been intending to write an essay on cereal grains but alas the "real
world" has left me far too busy these last few weeks and an end is not in
sight.  So I thought I would offer a few brief comment:

Enig and Fallon, in their piece submitted a few weeks ago, stated that
Paleolithic Nutrition writers are probably wrong about cereal grains being
unnatural foods for humans.  They then gave examples of the use of acorns
and seeds from non-grain plants.  This sincerely seems to dodge the issue
to me.

Many on this list have questioned of late whether it is really possible to
construct a picture of the paleolithic diet in humans.  There also seems to
have been some argument against man as a true, 100% meat-eating,
carbohydrate-free animal, although notably no one I'm aware of seems to
have seriously taken that position for quite some time.  I think much of
this may be time wasted; can it safely be said that it is generally
acknowledged that humans have always eaten a wide variety of foods, and
that the "natural" diet for humans will of necessity vary wildly in content
depending upon region and climate and season?

A review of modern hunter/gatherer diets(1) shows tremendous variation in
diet based on these factors and I don't see how it's possible to argue that
it has not always been so.  In fact I think it can easily be argued that
one of man's primary evolutionary advantages has been the ability to adapt
to an extremely wide array of foods.

I think instead it seems easier to use deductive reasoning in trying to
define a "paleodiet": it can probably best be defined by what it lacks,
rather than by what it contains.  We can never know precisely what a
pre-human living in plains 25,000 years ago ate, but we can probably take
very educated guesses about what he did -not- eat, and from that as a
starting point we can start adding in what we think he -did- eat within
reasonable guessing parameters.

From this perspective I do not think it can be successfully argued that
cereal grains such as rice, wheat, barley, and etc. were ever a part of the
natural human diet prior to but a few millenia ago (2,4).  I have yet to
find any respectable scientific reference which seriously suggests this
might be so.  The best argument that can be made is that possibly early man
may have occasionally munched on wild grass seeds, but the idea that this
would ever have been a daily staple seems quite far-fetched.  I would be
extremely interested in hearing about any research which suggests that it
might be otherwise.  Given the lack of evidence to the contrary and the
simple fact that the idea of eating large quantities of cereal grains on a
daily basis seems extremely difficult to imagine without a system of
agriculture, it surely seems to that there's not much reason to think that
cereal grains as a staple are in any way natural to the human animal.

There is also significant evidence linking the advent of agriculture with
bone and joint disease (2,3). A study of a people eating a high saturated
fat diet that are nearly 100% free of heart disease seems to show that the
most significant difference between their diet and that of Westerners is a
lack of dairy and cereal grain products (5). There is evidence that the
proteins in cereal grains provoke auto-immune reactions (6).  There is also
the troubling existence of Celiac disease, which is a serious condition
caused entirely by sensitivity to the proteins in cereal grains, and which
appears to be quite a bit more common among peoples who have culturally
only been agriculturalist a relatively short time, such as the Irish,
compared to that of, say, the Indians or the Chinese; I do not happen to
have references on the incidence of Celiac right now but perhaps Ron Hoggan
can help us out there (Ron, are you still reading?).  Also Staffan has
given us numerous references in the past which strongly suggest that the
phytic acid in cereal grains causes calcium depletion; I have seen these
references posted in the past but apparently not to this list; Staffan,
could I talk you into posting specific references for this matter to this
list?

I see that this message has rambled more than I intended, and there are
more references that can be offered.  It does seem to me that while it is
probably not possible to construct "a paleodiet" for all humans that gives
specific content, it can be said that there are probably things in common
to most if not all pre-agricultural diets, especially if you start your
definition by what such diets -lack-.

Perhaps others can comment further; my time for this evening (and this
month I suspect!) is done.  :-)

Dean


1. Ember CR.  Myths about hunter gatherers. Ethnology 1978;17:439-48.

2. Eaton S, Nelson D, "Calcium in evolutionary perspective" _Am. J. Clin.
Nutr._1991; 54: 281S - 287S

3  Armelagos G, Van Gerven D, Martin D, Huss-Ashmore R, "Effects of
Nutritional Change on the Skeletal Biology of Northeast African (Sudanese
Nubian) Populations" _From Hunters to Farmers The Causes and Consequences of
Food Production in Africa_ Clark & Brandt (eds.) 1984; II: 37-146

4. Lutz W J, "The Colonisation of Europe and Our Western Diseases" _Medical
Hypotheses_ 1995; 45: 115-120

5. Lindeberg S, et al. "Cardiovascular risk factors in a Melanesian
population apparently free from stroke and ischaemic heart disease: the
Kitava study" _J Intern Med_ 1994 Sep.

6. 11. Ostenstad B, Dybwad A, Lea T, Forre O, Vinje O, Sioud M, "Evidence for
monoclonal expansion of synovial T cells bearing  V Alpha 2.1/V beta 5.5
gene segments and recognizing a syntehtic peptide that shares homology with
a number of putative autoantigens"