On Mon, 3 Jul 2000 13:59:04 MDT, Dori Zook <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I must say, Amadeus, I've often wondered what got you and/or keeps you on
>this list.

I've been wondering too from time to time. Like Robert has noticed.
As far as this list is only a justification tool for ex-vegetarians
or others - I'm really misplaced here, and sometimes it seems to be so.

But on the other hand sometimes there *are* quite interesting discussions
emerging. And I'm more interested in challenge than in boring identicalness.
A real goal of me is also to find out about pitfals in vegetarian ways of
nutrition, where other vegetarians could benefit from.
Common western vegetarians are equally endangered as common western
meat-eaters.

Somehow, I feel to be a little amoung a little paleo-pack of relatives here.
That's also nice, to know the people.
Hey, I'm just the gathering guy in your pack.
(Sorry, I'm a man, women were supposed to have lived this way).

> There's no such thing as a vegetarian paleo diet.

I doubt this. While there were seldom vegetarian times in evolution in
the last 2 mio years,
I think that leaving away the animal parts (for a reasons i needn't mention)
is less modification to the actual average paleo-diet as eating fabric cows
and pigs.

> Meat was a primary part if not the staple of the human
>diet for at least 2 million years.

I doubt the points "primary part" or "staple".
While it was present (no doubt about it) it just isn't interesting
in the overal nutritional paleo picture, in my point of view.

> Name ONE thing that's wrong with eating
>healthy meat, such as wild game or a trout caught in a crystal clear
>stream, nutritionally speaking.
>I'm sure your answer will be interesting.  I
>doubt, however, that it will be logical.

Nutritionally speaking:
Nothing is wrong about the wild game and crystal trout. Point. underline.

Nutritionally speaking:
Increasing the percentage of this game (beyond estimating 10%)
is useless and doesn't make, and made not, sense as long as enough plant
sources are available. Because of the shortage in food energy.

Practically speaking:
The count of humans able to live on *this*, is small enough to
be forgotten at once. You just can't do it.
Most time, you eat your artificially fattened cattle with all its dangers
and only *think* of the deer and trout. You switch over to a meat/fat style
nutrition like in paleo-arctis. And don't recognise, that such
a artificiall obese pig or cattle is far from approaching the
quality of a walrus or a whale in fat quality.

Amadeus S.