On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Marilyn Harris wrote:

> A few questions;
>
> 1. Human's teeth are not shaped like those of true carnivores or even some
> omnivores (like the bear) and therefore imply that we are from a vegetarian
> origin. Why doesn't the paleo diet reflect our ancestry?

It does.  There have never been vegetarian populations of humans
or hominids.  For at least 2.5 millions years humans and their
predecessors (at least since Australopithecus) have eaten meat,
in addition to plant foods, of course.  During this time they
have used hand-held tools to help kill and eat them, which is
why they haven't depended on claws, fangs, etc.  Amadeus Schmidt
is a subscriber to this list who attempts to achieve an
approximately paleo diet without eating meat, but he does not
argue that paleolithic humans were in fact vegetarians.  Such an
argument simply cannot be supported.

> 2. The human colon is more similar to other vegetarian animals' colons - ie;
> long. Carnivores tend to have short colons. Does this not also point to a
> more vegetarian ancestry?

This is often heard, but not entirely accurate.  There is a lot
of good information about this sort of thing at
http://beyondveg.com, but I suggest in particular that you read
Loren Cordain's summary of the issues in
http://beyondveg.com/cordain-l/metab-carn/metabolic-carnivory-1a.shtml

> 3. What is exactly wrong with grains?

The basic view is that grains were not part of the paleolithic
diet, so our attempts to emulate that diet should also exclude
them.  Although it is clear (to me, anyway) that some people
manage to be quite healthy and long-lived despite eating grains,
it is also true that grains are implicated in the spread of a
number of autoimmune and degenerative diseases.  Again, rather
that repeat what others have done better, I'll refer you again to
Loren Cordain:
http://beyondveg.com/cordain-l/grains-leg/grains-legumes-1a.shtml

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]