Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 21 Sep 1999 02:00:25 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
Organization: |
Paleolithic Press |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
From: Rob Street <[log in to unmask]>
> Ever since joining this list (Last November) people have occasionally
> mentioned not eating New World food. How is New World defined?
I personally take a much broader view. In describing my diet to strangers,
I often say that I only eat those foods that are edible to Primates in
Nature. This distinction takes the argument to a period of time measured in
tens of millions of years and far beyond the geographical and ethnic
limitations of a somewhat arbitrary line between the Paleolithic and
Neolithic Eras. Humans are very closely related to other Primates sharing
more than 90% of their DNA. It is the flexibility in the remaining DNA that
allows Primates to inhabit a wide range of ecological niches. In spite of
these physiological differences, no Primates are capable of eating grains,
beans, potatoes, milk or refined sugars in Nature. A few Primates eat
things we wouldn't eat (tree leaves and leaches), but overall I think the
monkey test is viable for both New and Old World foods.
Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
http://www.NeanderThin.com (still under construction, suggestions sought)
|
|
|