Michael Audette wrote:
>  I think she said there was two types of Paleo. One that ate mostly
meat,
>and one that ate mostly veg, fruit, nuts & berries. This would also
>support lower intelligence in more southern peoples.
Lower intelligence? Hard stuff. Inuit more intelligent then aegypts?

> IF one group ate more meat, and
>thus increased brain capacity,
> would that make Europeans smarter than Africans?
How could meat promote increased brain capacity?
I haven't found a sign yet.
Also (and especially not) from "expensive tissue" theory.

Brains need glucose as fuel. Gain of glucose from meat is inefficient
and produces ammonia - witch is toxic for the brain.

People from Ice age Europe all died off.
Erectines and Neanderthals. Except the last ones:
Cro Magnon Humans which probably come from Africa > 30ky ago
(because the oldest artefacts are from far down there).
Your and my anchestors among them.
Considering anchestral genes for the sake of paleolithic
oriented nutrition should fokus on *them* and not on any
other extinct branches and species.
Not on baboons, not on gorillas, not on erectines. In my opinion.

> Would the time line make that much of a difference? Humans are
>adaptable, but not that much on a genetic level. A paleo diet can vary
>greatly, as long as it stays paleo. I don't see that variances in paleo
>diet had much impact on differences in genetics,
>just before Neolithic times.
The best ice age adapted humans or humanoids
(neanderthal, erectines) have died off.
This is a quick and massive change of the genome isn't it?

Even if you postulate some "neotenized" relicts of neanderthal genes
were among us- they don't show up again, no neanderthal characteristic.

Who stayed, we, called Cro Magnon Humans, are those
who are said to be better adapted to plant food.
We were successfull, at last replacing Neanderthals even
while in peak paleolithic ice-age times (30ky ago).

Later, *less* hunter adaption,  could be the reason,
why the carbohydrate based nutrition
of cereal agriculture was so successfull at last.
Imagine: agricultures emerged exactely in that last interglazial
(worm phase) we are now in.
The quite many interglazials before (though similarily long)
did *not* develope any agricultures (we know of).
Why? Agriculture did arise independentely in different locations
of the world in that last thermal.
But in none of the preceeding thermals.

Why did the thermal phases dominated by neanderthals and erectines
develope no agriculture,
and the current and last one showed several independent agri-cultures?

A guess: because only Cro Magnons were the properly adapted people.

regards
Amadee S.
(only occasionally lurking and off sooooon)

P.S.
interesting on expensive tissue
theory:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/CA/journal/issues/v40n5/995802/995802.html

--
Sent through Global Message Exchange - http://www.gmx.net