"Todd Moody [log in to unmask] " wrote:
>
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2001, Jim Walsh wrote:
>
> > > The reasoning is faulty.  Peanuts and cashews are edible raw.
> >
> > But, they are legumes. Aren't all legumes ruled out regardless of edibility?
> >
> > Or is the no-legume idea based on the no "New World"
> > foods you mention? (I think I read that legumes contain a toxin.)
>
> Peanuts are legumes; cashews are nuts.

Oops!  So that means cashews are ok?
(Goodie! I love cashews!)

> The no-legume idea is Ray Audette's.  But the word "legume"
> refers to a botanical category, not to any nutritional properties
> of foods.  I think it is safe to say that paleolithic people did
> not base their food selections on botanical categories.

Agreed. I suspect palatability would have been the deciding factor. (Accepting of course that modern society/diet has probably somewhat altered my natural palatability scale.)


> It is true that most legumes contains toxins and antinutrients in
> various concentrations, and thus are not edible raw.  In fact,
> many plant foods contain toxins and antrinutrients.  What makes
> many of them edible raw is not the complete absence of these
> compounds, which is uncommon, but sufficiently low levels of
> them.  Some legumes are in fact edible raw, and other primates
> actually eat them during part of the year.  Immature ones
> generally have fewer toxins and antinutrients, and are edible.
> Snow peas, for example.

Exactly. Snow peas are one of the legumes I am thinking of.

> The no-legume rule is based on two false assumptions.  The first
> is that nonhuman primates and paleolithic humans couldn't have
> eaten any at all.  The second is that they contain secondary
> compounds (toxins and antinutrients) completely absent from other
> foods.  The truth is more complicated than this.  My source for
> this information is Annette Stahl's "Hominid Dietary Selection
> Before Fire," for which you will find a full listing in the
> bibliography of Neanderthin.

Unfortunately Neanderthin is not available in Australia and to by it from Amazon would set me back around $70.00 AUS. (Cockle shells are worth more than the Aussi dollar at the moment.)

> Having said all that, it's pretty clear that legumes were not a
> *staple* food during paleolithic times.  Like nuts and berries,
> and probably certain grains, they would only have been eaten
> during a short period of time of the year, when the beans were at
> just the right stage of immaturity.  So I tend to think of
> legumes as minor "adjunct" foods.

So it would probably be safe to eat some legumes. The idea might be for me to grow my own, and only eat them when they are a current crop. Sound reasonable?

Is the "palatable" test safe, or is there a possibility that I might be eating large amounts of toxins without knowing it?

> These are just my heterodox opinions, of course, and not official
> "paleo doctrine," whatever that might be.

He he he  yeah, still looking for that.  :)


Thanks, and bye for now,
Jim.