On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Amadeus Schmidt wrote:

> Nice case studies of diseases and fat loss.
>
> I buyed it, because i hope to find some good evolutionary arguments for the
> authors main topic: "no carbohydrate".

That's not the main topic.  According to Lutz's research, there
is little health benefit to reducing carbs below 72g/day, which
is far from no carbohydrate.

> So far I didn't find more than the "because our paleolithic anchestors ate
> mostly wild game" view.

But you *did* find more, as you stated above.  You found the case
studies *and* clinical studies that you mentioned above.  This,
incidentally, is the main reason why I think highly of this book.
The authors don't just base their claims on arguments about what
ought to work.  Instead, they use Dr. Lutz's extensive clinical
experience with many patients over decades, including his
published studies.

> Which i think is basically *wrong* like i have debated with you in many
> threads and sessions.

I think what you have established is that the "mostly wild game"
diet was not available in certain environments.  I think you also
concede that it *was* dominant in certain other environments
(cooler, wetter).  What is not yet established is which sort of
environment has driven the dietary adaptations of modern humans.

In purely theoretical terms, later adaptations would tend to
override earlier ones.  We also know, from some contemporary
hunter-gatherer populations, that human beings can indeed thrive
on diets dominated by animal foods.  Dr. Lutz's work provides
further confirmation.

> The simplest way of course is to eat much meat with very much fat.
> This has some problems, most of which could be solved by a sufficient
> vegetables and fruit in the diet and a very good meat quality.

Very true, and Dr. Lutz's research suggests that 72g of
utilizable carbohydrate is sufficient.  In the form of fresh
fruit and vegetables, this is a pretty significant quantity.

> If you wan to live vegetarian (avoiding meat for some reason) the modern
> implementation is more difficult.

I think it was always rather difficult, which is probably why
humans have mostly tried to avoid it.

> Not if you include milk protein (quark).

Quark?  I agree that if you include milk protein, preferably in
the form of fermented milk products, and eggs, then you can
probably enjoy good health without having to kill any animals,
and I assume that this is the "some reason" alluded to above.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]