The real problem with beliefs based mostly on faith is that they can't really be falsified using the scientific method. Now, Ron and others have stated, at times, that modern science has often been wrong. That is, of course,  true, but the whole point is that Science, over time, self-corrects itself with the help of the scientific method as more reliable studies are produced every year with the help of more advanced technology and more information, along with peer-review of those studies etc.

I have encountered this problem a lot with raw, palaeolithic dieters. They would point out that some scientific studies erroneously tried to show that cooked foods were beneficial, and that therefore we should ignore all scientific evidence and just focus on New-Age-oriented "stuff" like Weston-Price's unverified claims or Biblical references to diet. I, in return, pointed out that, actually, many other scientific studies focused on the harm done by cooking, such as the issue of heat-created toxins like polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons etc.

Of course, my other concern, here, is that the whole concept of palaeolithic diets is based on the theory of Evolution. If Evolution is discredited, then there is no reason to follow a palaeolithic diet at all.

Geoff.






"When I first joined this list I appreciated very much the sound scientific
background of many of you. So much so as to change the way I eat - and live.
The strenght of the paleo point of view is it makes sense AND it is backed
by hard scientific evidence. "