PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Amadeus Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:04:31 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
Ben Balzer wrote:

>I think the real point is that tomatoes are fruit- the seeds are not
>meant to be eaten, but the flesh is. ...
>Simply stated, paleolithic diet classes are fruit, edible leaves (eg
>lettuce), edible roots, berries, meat and fish.

I think yes, it's true, that it's well worth thinking about that diet
classes, and fruit is the best because of its symbiontic
living with us.
You expressed it very clear.

Within fruit some thoughts can be added:
1.) commercial fruit has been modified (by selection) to be
sweeter as the wildlife variant.
In this process some ratios of micronutrients
may have changed. For example big bananas as listed in USDA contain
not enough thiamin to burn the carbs in it
(hopefully the smaller and more natural ones do).

2.) some fruit may attempt to select certain spreading "animals"
There are fruit, eaten by very few birds for example
(e.g. black currant).
Ideal for humans who can cope with the acid in it, but the birds
won't.

Anyway i agree that fruit are the best class, better than seeds
and that seeds as leaves probably are the best-protected.

>I know some people express the opinion that nuts are protected by a
>hard shell and therefore don't need toxins to protect them- I tend
>to disagree and think that people eating paleo for treatment of

>disease (eg arthritis, autoimmune disease) should consider giving

>nuts the flick until they are
>stabilised and only reintroduce them cautiously and furtively.

>So, animals and fruit-bearing plants share a symbiotic relationship.

Not only by shells.
Regarding nuts, i do see annother case of symbiontic relationship.
Nut collectors spread nuts, similar to fruit seeds,
but by leaving some spare nuts.

Otherwise it wouldn't make sense for the nut tree to throw down
such masses of nuts which never had a chance to grow.
Except when collected by a nut collecting animal or human.
Some nut-trees (brazils) really make such bombs of nuts
than probably can't grow at all without a spreading animal.

Beeing nutritionally *very* dense, they still have to protect
themselves against the insects - which simply spoil the seed
without an advantage for the tree.

regards,
Amadeus







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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2