On Sat, 13 Jun 1998, Bill Wilcox wrote:

> My take on this is that according to a paleodiet the sugar in fruit is ok
> because you can pick it and eat it.  On the other hand, the sugar that is in
> the food you buy comes from sugar cane.  Sure, you can break off a piece of
> cane and chew it.  Actually it's very good but you don't eat it and the amount
> of sugar that you get in chewing it isn't really that great.  I guess my point
> is that the sugar that is in 'normal' foods is not something that can be eaten
> raw, which is the main idea behind a paleo diet.

As you point out, you can break off a piece of sugar cane and
chew it.  The amount ingested is not great, as you say, but
comparable to the amount in cured bacon, for example.

Again, we come up against the "unnatural concentrations" problem,
which is not adequately sorted out in Neanderthin.  Prehistoric
humans probably did consume small amounts of sugar, in the form
of cane, maple sap, etc., and larger amounts from fruits,
periodically.  The human body appears able to deal with small
amounts of sugar.  It is the constant bombardment of sugar in
large amounts that is unnatural and deleterious to health, in all
likelihood.

However, once we introduce the notion that things should not be
eaten in concentrations greater than what prehistoric people
would have had access to, the diet becomes even more restrictive.
Pemmican, which requires the heating and concentration of kidney
fat, would become forbidden.  Apple juice concentrate, as used in
Neanderthin barbecue sauce, would be forbidden.  Coconut oil,
collected and filtered from more coconuts than one could actually
eat, would be forbidden.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]