On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, alexs wrote:

> >That seems reasonable.  We do have a unique metabolic pathway for
> >metabolizing alcohol.
> >
> Huh. To borrow from the old Tonto-Lone Ranger joke,
> "What do you mean WE, paleface?" Certain genotypes,
> including Australian Aboriginals and probably most
> Native Americans and South Sea islanders, did not
> possess sufficient enzymes to detoxify alcohol in
> the liver, hence the heightened toxicity and problems
> with alcoholism after white man invaded their cultures.

This difference is one of degree, not of kind.  WE do have a
metabolic pathway for alcohol, notwithstanding differences in
capacity for detoxifying the stuff.  We also create alcohol in
our own bodies, in small amounts.

This may parallel differences in the ability to handle
carbohydrate loads.  All humans can use carbs, but some can use
more than others.

> But alcohol is still a toxic anti-nutrient, not essential
> for normal function.

There is no evidence that it is toxic in small amounts, and
considerable evidence that it is beneficial.  Complete abstinence
from alcohol is a significant risk factor for heart disease.
Whether it is essential for normal function is beside the point,
since the paleo diet is not limited to what is essential for
normal function (I.e., carbs in general are not essential, but
are part of paleolithic diet).

So if the question is whether small amounts of alcohol should be
considered permissible on a paleo diet, it seems to me the answer
is yes.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]