Robert A. McGlohon, Jr. wrote:
> I've never felt better in my life, but I'm wondering if my feeling of
> well-being is consistent with the theory underlying Neanderthin.
> Because Neanderthin is premised upon an auto-immune theory (e.g., a
> myriad of problems -- in my case, obesity and hyperinsulinism -- are in
> reality an "allergic" response to non-paleo food), is *partial*
> compliance with a paleo diet beneficial?  In other words, is Neanderthin
> all or nothing?

I don't think it is all or nothing. I try to follow a paleo diet for a
wide variety of reasons that have little to do with Neanderthin's alien
proteins theory, including:
1. Assuming you're not going no-carb or ultra-low-carb, eliminating grains,
legumes, and potatoes practically forces you to eat more vegetables and
fruits. There is a lot of evidence that this is beneficial. I suspect that
the positive health effects of this change outweigh those of any other
single aspect of paleo-eating.
2. When choosing fat sources, you can do much worse than applying a paleo
criteria. No refined vegetable oils. No dairy fat. Lots of MUFAs from nuts,
which are also good sources of minerals and fibre.
  My thinking on animal fats diverges from Neanderthin, in the direction
of Eaton's 'Paleolithic Prescription'. Eating fatty fish, shellfish, and
chicken will provide you with an array of fatty acids that more closely
mirrors that eaten by our paleo ancestors. Compared to wild game and
insects, modern red meat has much more saturated, and much less unsaturated
fat.