On Mon, 23 Jul 2001 19:49:10 -0700, Peter Brandt <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>Indeed.  However, making up strawman arguments for not eating
>whole categories of foods that are essential to paleo is not.

Hm hmm Peter, you dig out an old posting. Why not.
So, what do you say is essential to "paleo"?
A food category?
How about real things like micronutrients, fiber, antioxidants, minerals?

>Amadeus:
> >Very strange really that many people want me to eat animals.
> >Why so?
>
>Because of the intellectual dishonesty of your omitting an important
>category of paleo foods while being on a paleo list and claiming to
>be trying to emulate a paleo diet.

You, seem to see "paleo" as synonym to upper paleolithicum cold climate
glacial diet.
This is your right.
I don't suscribe to this point of view.

I see that humans and humanoids ate various animals' bodies to some extent
at nearly all times.
But this exten has been rather low for most of the time we consider as
significant for evolutionary adaptions to happen. More than 100,000 years.

If you choosed to adopt a upper paleolithicum cold climate diet, which was
dominated by meat, then you will end up in a nutritional state similar to
these people. That's your choice.

I see this as a significant deviation from all nutritional states of the
millions of years before 60,000 bc in our line of anchestry.

>Amadeus:
> >I would never insist on someone else to eat termites, for example.
>
>Naturally, but you could easily make the argument that insects belong
>in any paleo diet.

Of course insects belonged to nearly any paleo diet,
except in the glaciated area.
Does it mean we have to eat insects?
Probably so, if we want to eat like Lucy did.
Some may choose not to adopt this.
I choose not to adopt other animals' muscles.
This is my deviation, I live with.

On the other hand,I think it's a mistake, maybe a fatal mistake to replace
the insects and small animal prey(whole body) with agricultural produced
cows muscles.
Not to speak of environmental and agricultural toxin accumulation.

Particularly because of the fat composition.
I think it's rather hard to get animal fat like of wild game.
As we've seen "grass fed" os often "grain finished"-
and that's where the fat is from. Appetite for whale blubber?

And also because of the habit of eating predominately muscles, which are the
least valued parts of animals.

>Amadeus:
> >Grains, even cereals and dairy *have* been eaten in the paleolithicum,
> >just to a lesser percentage.
>
>The "just" is the whole point.   The proportions and ratios are crucial
>  - facts that you consistently are choosing to neglect.

And what about the proportions and ratios of animal muscles in your diet and
the real paleo diet? Even in late paleolithicum. Much more so before.

>As I might
>have stated earlier, I could eat a diet consisting exclusively of
>blueberries, grasshoppers, walnuts and spinach and, yet, it could
>never be called a paleo diet.

Or this should be called a paleo diet with much more justification
as when european descendants try to reproduce an inuit diet by eating
domesticated cow instead of whale blubber and fatty fish.

> Paleo diets come in all types and sizes but one thing they
>are never and that is vegetarian.

I've no problem with your personal definition.

Amadeus