> I find this an interesting thought. I can't offhand
> think of a fruit that
> is unaltered by selective breeding, except for wild
> berries. How about
> bananas? For that matter, what about nuts? Are any
> of them close to
> original form? Brazil nuts? Macadamias? Coconuts?

Personally, I doubt *any* food available today is
exactly the same as it was in 'Paleo times'. Not only
have humans been interfering with most of them for the
past 10-15,000 years, many of them have undoubtedly
modified themselves because of environmental
pressures.

Consider this. Could a fruit become sweeter (higher
sugar content) without human intervention? Of course
it could. Many fruits use animal feces as a medium for
dispersal. Many animals - besides humans - prefer
sweeter fruit. So, if they eat more sweet fruit, then
they will 'spread' more sweet fruit seeds (which is
probably a reason fruit is naturally 'sweet' to begin
with).

I'm with Ken on this. We're not going to duplicate a
truly paleo cuisine in this era. The best we can hope
for is an approximation of it with what we have
available. So, it makes no sense to continually try to
get it 'exact' because it just ain't gonna happen. The
stress of worrying about is probably worse than the
added sugar content.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com