On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:22:37 -0700, william <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


> How about,instead of a list of hypothetical diets, something like:
>
> If it did not exist in paleolithic age, it is not paleolithic.
This leaves very little that we can eat.  Even most forms of meat  
available to us
today were not available in paleo times.  The wild deer and rabbits in  
this country
wouldn't last a week if they were the only food.

> If it does harm it is not paleolithic.
There were PLENTY of harmful plants in paleo times.  (And plenty of  
harmful animals,
though that's in a different sense.)

> If it destroys nutrients it is not paleolithic.
Famine food even in paleo times probably had downsides, including  
antinutrients.
If the hunting is bad, they ate the veg instead of starving to death.  We  
know that
because there still are humans.

> You might check on the biologist's claim that mammals live to 7 time  
> their age of maturity; ours is said to be 32, so any so-called food that  
> would reduce this lifespan (224) is not paleo.
Our age of maturity is in the range of 12-18, not 32.  15x7 = 105, a
good age.  Perhaps 32 is supposed to be the "age of reason" though there  
are billions
of counter-examples.

> Should be hard core enough for a definition.
It could be, but it would mean that a paleo diet by your definition is  
entirely unobtainable for us in the 21st century.  Don is developing a  
practical definition that can be used by large numbers of modern humans to  
improve their diets and health by extrapolating
paleo nutrition into the practical realities of the 21st century.

	Lynnet