I still haven't seen anything to convince me that all cultures are better
off without having grains.  I'll admit that I am, but I am one person with
one ancestry.  There are, let's face it, billions of people with many
ancestries.

Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Swayze" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: Rate of Evolution


> > Judy:  "Some years ago, I gave a copy of Neanderthin to a prominent
naturopath
> (Dr.Ron Schmid).  His major negative comment was as follows  (quoting
> loosely):'Audette's theory is basically flawed.  Many cultures not only
adapted,
> but thrived beautifully on raw milk and the inclusion of some grains in
their
> diet.  Dr. Weston Price proved that to the world.'"
>
> I'm curious as to how your friend feels that Dr. Price "proved that to the
> world."  If I remember correctly, Price was a dentist who travelled the
world
> seeking out what makes primitive peoples more healthy than their civilized
> counterparts.  His studies were flawed because he started with the
> overwhelmingly prevalent assumption that grains and milk are a natural
> components of a healthy human diet.  He apparently did not consider the
fact
> that these were recent additions to mankind's dietary repertoire.
>
> Despite this bias, the lesson that can be taken from his efforts is that
the
> further one gets from the foods of civilization, the healthier one is
likely to
> be.  This doesn't demonstrate that many cultures "thrive" on raw milk and
some
> grains, just that they are healthier for not having done worse things to
their
> bodies.
>
> It is interesting to note that one group Price singled out as an example
of
> healthy primitives was the Innuit, a group which we all know has
historically
> consumed neither grains or dairy.
>
> Jim Swayze
>
>