On Fri, 22 Dec 2000 19:02:32 -0700, Dori Zook <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>nervegas writes:
>>Sometimes, I go a whole week with only one bowel movement.
>
>WHAT you're eating is the gist of it.  Thriftiness has been mentioned here;
>meat is a very thrifty food in that the body uses nearly all of it.

I think you mean that the digestion of meat remainders are small in volume.
What's the advantage? The gut has a hard job moving this small volume
through all the 6 meters or so until it can be thrown out to what you call
Mr.Whipple. Sound that thrifty?
If you read about paleolithic nutrition (the actual one, not Ray's
implementation of his striking principle) -
you usually get to know that it was very high in fiber.
Which enables quick bowel movements and a healthy bowel flora.

> When
>you're eating mostly meat; what's there to get rid of?

From meat the body has to get rid of excess nitrogen,
which is one part of the protein if the other part is fueled as
carbohydrate. To get rid of is ammonia and urea.

Sometimes it looks as some bodies had problems to get rid of fat too.
If you think of agricultural meat (pig..) which are fat, then the body
has to get rid of ketones (in piss and breath), because the body can't break
fat the normal way down in absence of carbohydrate.
Basically you are pissing and exhaling more of the waste as throwing it out.

What really could be a urgent problem to get rid of are the toxins
of bacteria which prefer to multiply in slow moving ..waste.. .

>If you want to  flirt
>with disaster, ...

If you don't want to flirt with disaster , i think it would be a good idea
to leave the gut the chance to thow it's waste out after short time.
Like some intense carnivores on the list reported to experience.
To my astonishment - but certainly paleolithically correct.

Amadeus S.