>I'm just giving the argument.  The current view is that human
>beings have been in the americas for about 15,000 years.  Yes,
>that's "millennia" but not much longer than people have been
>eating agricultural foods.  If you're going to allow that 15,000
>years is enough time for adaptation to foods, then the entire
>case against eating neolithic/agricultural foods collapses, since
>agriculture is about 12,000 years old.
>
>Conversely, one could argue that if the Tarahumara and others can
>be extremely fit and healthy eating foods that humans have only
>had access to for 15,000 years or less, the argument collapses
>anyway.


As what you said about grains before,  suggeste  that, what makes grains
problematic is not because it is a new food but because it  artificially
became important in human diet thru the cultivation  and processing of it .
As i am trying to point out there is a huge difference between the nevrotic
relationship to grain (ownership ,  fear of losing the crop , protecting it
from predation , dependence on it for survival etc...) and the trustfull
attitude of hunter gatherers to be fed by the wild  ( absence of expectation
or control )
Just this difference of attitude and so of emotional state can have a
tremendous impact on someone's health.
it is going to be a stretch for  materialist scientific minded peoples ( but
there is material which point out to that recognition ,  check "the secret
life of plant" for ex) : the relationship to food is a 2 way phenomenon ,
the attitude of the peoples while relating ( searching,  growing,  gathering
, eating ... ) to the food  affect the food which by return manifest ,
somatise the intent inside the people , closing the circle that reinforce
itself with time .
One thing that striked me when i quitted grains and dairies  was a huge drop
in my level of anxiety . I stopped participating in the codependent
relationship that have been developped thru the centuries becoming free of
its karmic load ( for people who have encontered this concept).

The relationship to wild foods is necessarelly not co-dependant ( plants and
animals grow and live of their own accord) but interdependant ( each partner
life impact on the other one ).
The relationship to domestic food is a co-dependante relationship where each
one of the partners owe their life to the other one , that kind of
relationship is fine and beneficial in Nature when genetically programmed to
be that way like in a symbiotic association , but certainly problematic when
the association weaken both partners in their relationship with the rest of
creation . ( you know the wheat that can't stand hard rain or wind and
peoples that get cardiovascular or other degenerative  diseases).
MAybe farming practices are not so anecdotal in a paleo way of eating .

jean-claude