In a message dated 6/25/99 9:03:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<<
 What a fine example of convoluted reasoning, evidently from
 one who likes consuming alcohol and builds a case for
 making it all okay, even tho it's clearly at odds with

 I personally see the convoluted reasoning in the arguments against alcohol
consumption in any amount. Invoking the French-wine-fat arguments is
worthless because all of that is under renewed scrutiny {THE MOST CURRENT
THINKING IS THAT THE SEVERE POVERTY AND MALNUTRITION AFTER THE
FRANCO_PRUSSIAN WAR RESULTED IN INSTITUTING MEANINGFUL SUPPLEMENTATION TO
YOUNGSTERS IN SCHOOL AND CHILDBEARING WOMEN AND THAT THIS IS STILL BEING
ENJOYED IN LESS HEART DISEASE DUE TO HEALTHIER IN_UTERO AND POST_NATAL
GROWTH} ; thinking that sugar and starch are turned to alcohol in the gut
really comes from outer left field; invoking the toxic in any amount is
standard non-linear statistical cheating. You do not really need any
justification at all to  abstain. Combining junk science and unrelated
fragments of information does not strengthen   a conviction but seems to give
it an unrelible foundation. The label of Paleo or not is determined only by
Mr. Audette, by definition.