First, the full citation for the Cordain article: "The paradoxical
nature of hunter-gatherer diets: meat-based, yet non-atherogenic," L.
Cordain, S.B. Eaton, J. Brand Miller, N. Mann, and K. Hill. European
Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2002) 56, suppl 1, S1-S11.  The table of
"Quantitatively determined proportions of plant and animal food in
hunter-gatherer diets" is on page S3.  It is adapted from "Human
Subsistence Behavior," L. Kaplan, in Evolution, Ecology, and Human
Behavior, ed. E.A. Smith and B. Winterhalder (Chicago, IL: Aldine,
1992), pp. 167-202.  Kaplan's source is M. McArthur, "Food consumption
and dietary levels of groups of aborigines living on naturally
occurring foods," in Records of the American-Australian Scientific
Expedition to Arnhem Land, ed. C.P. Mountford, pp. 90-135 (Melbourne:
Melbourne University Press, 1960).

For the curious, here are the other entries from the table, in terms of
percentage of energy from plants:

Ache (Paraguay): 22%
Anbarra (Australia): 25%
Efe (Africa): 56%
Eskimo (Greenland): 4%
Gwi (Africa): 26%
Hadza (Africa): 52%
Hiwi (Venezuela): 25%
!Kung (Africa): 67%
!Kung (Africa): 32%
Nukak (Columbia): 59%
Nunamiut (Alaska): 1%
Onge (Anadman islands): 21%

Note that the two values for the !Kung are from two different
researchers.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]