Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Sun, 13 Dec 1998 15:15:07 PST |
Content-Type: |
text/plain |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I am a bit new to the mailing list and paleodieting. That caveat on the
table, I thought the point wasn't to not eat cooked foods, but to avoid
those foods which need to be cooked in order to be edible. IS this
incorrect?
>Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 16:08:56 -0500
>Reply-To: Paleolithic Eating Support List
<[log in to unmask]>
>From: Ilya <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: [P-F] More Ancient Cooking?
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Katie Bretsch wrote:
>> My point was simply that, based on the evidence that cooking
practices of
>> various kinds may in fact be very ancient, the dogmatic stance that
only
>> raw foods are acceptable seems to me to over state its case. I'm not
>> advocating a blanket "all prepared foods are optimal for all people"
>> stance, either. Just expressing a personal difficulty with the
orthodox
>> position.
>I believe most paleo munchers see it in a similar way. It's not that
>anything that deviates from a raw food, eat only the way our ancestors
>ate is bad for you. It's that if you only eat that way you pretty much
>guarantee that you are eating foods that you are adapted to eating.
There
>very well may be non-paleo foods out there that aren't bad, but if you
>want to make sure then you eat pure paleo.
>
>Ilya
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
|
|
|