I wrote:
>>...enough protein and iron.
>>Since there are very good plant sources of these items i don't

>>think
>>this is justified - and hope this question is worked over in his

>>new
>>book edition.
Ken Stuart wrote:

>Which of these are not dependent on technology?

It was one of my main pleasures on nutrition to discover, that
many food items carry a food composition that is near to optimal,
hardly missing any macro or micronitrients *if* you consider its
natural, unmodified form. Therefore not needing technology, or only
very primitive beginnings of technology.
For example cooking: it's a technology that makes many food items
edible or more edible. Meat for example is also edible by humans
in quantities although we have less acidity in our stomachs than
tigers. It also can kill paratises and bacterial contaminations.
On plants it denaturates many antinutrients they contain, making
therefore extrodinary rich plants (as potatoe) available.

Best availability of macro and micronutrients is guaranteed with any
plant seeds, because fortunately these plants use the same
biological principles as we do (Krebs cycle and more).
And plant seeds need *much* energy to live on their own for the
first time of growing. Energy *together* with the appropiate
micronutrients. Energy in the form of polysacharides or fats.

As most of we need is fuel and not "spare parts" this is exactely
what need, in seeds or plant's storage organs.
On the other hand eating animal bodies, most animals in non-arctic
termerature zone have few storage organs(fat). In this way we
have to use "parts" as "fuel" what means convert protein to
carbohydrate. Fortunately we are able to do this - at some cost.

In this way plant seeds easily match most of our requirements.

You ask for iron or protein- you may ask for many nutrients.
If you try to compose amounts of food which result in an adequate
supply of energy (calories) then it's hard to find items which
have *not* plenty protein (and according to the case iron
or whatever micronutrients).
And this for energy amounts of sedentary people (2600 kcal for ex.)
if you consider what working or exercising people need then
the ratios even increase that effect.

You may end at very large quantities of green herbs or salads
or similar plant bodies (if considering plants without big storage).
I feel that these big quantities are also what we are made for.
It means fiber and filling.
If not working in a factory the whole day but living in the savannah
this *is* good and practical and satisfying.

Please keep in mind that density (ingredient per weight) is not
particularily valuable, ingredient per 1000kcal is more meaningful.

At last i'll leave a few practical examples.

iron): mushrooms (esp. per kcal) seeds (pumpkin) sesame , green vegs.

protein): seeds! (sunflower, nuts, flax buckwheat) are very *dense*
        (i dont' mention cheese)
  any other plant - try to get sum up 2400 kcal

I don't want to speak for veganism or vegetarianism - this is
NOT the place here. But i find it easy and satisfying to
stay such with anchestral- natural- paleo- nutrition principles.

regards

Amadeus


--
Sent through Global Message Exchange - http://www.gmx.net