On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, Philip Thrift wrote:

> Lest anyone be confused about the application of NeanderThin to
> fat loss; I would not put it this way. A *variety* of non-meats
> is allowed, but in concentrating on fat loss, the *amount* of
> non-meats may need to be *very restricted* to achieve results.

This may be the case, but it's not what Neanderthin itself
prescribes for fat loss.  The sample menus include liberal
amounts of non-meat foods.  Remember, Neanderthin is based on the
theory that obesity is an auto-immune disorder triggered by
foreign proteins in the diet.  Removing those proteins is
supposed to correct the problem.  Based on my own experience and
that of others on this list, there is convincing evidence that
this theory is incorrect.  That is, the mere removal of non-paleo
foods from the diet does not invariably correct the problem of
obesity.  Many people, ourselves included, have had to resort to
further restrictions of one sort or another to lose fat.

This is not to say that I think the Anchell/Pennington pyruvate
theory of obesity is correct.  Hell, I don't even *understand*
the theory.  And I haven't put it to the test yet.  I am still
establishing a baseline with the strict form of the diet.  But I
have established one thing to my satisfaction: the consumption of
the neolithic foods rice and potatoes doesn't screw up what is
otherwise a restricted kind of paleo diet.  What the long-term
health consequences are, I can't guess.  The longest-lived people
on this planet, the Okinawans, are rice-eaters, so I don't
suppose it's too deadly.  There's more to it than just the
carb-insulin connection too.  But beyond that, there's not much I
can say.  It's too weird.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]