I know this is obvious, but one thing the original Neanderthin didn't make
clear is that there are several regimens here:
1. low carb Atkins style (includes artificial sweeteners, dairy)
2. paleo without regard to carbs (the original Neanderthin basically
advocated)
3. low carb paleo

I think for a variety of reasons including weight loss, candida, and insulin
sensitivitiy that may be genetic, lots of people need to be on the #3
regimen and it doesn't seem possible to me that you can be on that if you
are vegetarian.

I'm not arguing that you can't be paleo vegetarian, just that you can't be
low carb paleo vegetarian.

--Richard




----- Original Message -----
From: "Amadeus Schmidt" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 2:28 AM
Subject: Re: [P-F] Complementary Proteins (was: Lucy seen)


> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 16:16:22 -0800, Mary <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >>From: Amadeus .
> >>> Thinking historically, it looks that the human animal like any primate
> >>>and
> >>> most mammals *is* designed to live heavily on carbohydrates for
energy.
> >>> ...
>
> Mary:
> >Read Atkins book and see how many thousands of people have recovered from
> >all sorts of disorders on a meat based diet.
>
> I've to acknowledge this. And I attribute this to the fact that quite many
> people are more or less allergic to wheat protein (most on gluten).
> Switching to meat is the simplest way to get rid of wheat proteins.
> Switching to fat is the simplest way to get rid of extracted carbohydrates
> which i consider like poison and responsible for many disorders too.
>
> What i wrote betrays carbohydrates.
> They are quite frequent in nature and impossible to doubt as a true
adapted
> paleolithic -or better all time- energy resource. This is my statement.
> There are fine paleo-style carbohydrates even in a extremistic upper
> paleolithicum tundra nutrition like neanderthin.
>
> What has to be underlined is paleo style for carbohydrate.
> Most food items considered "carbohydrate" today are not really
carbohydrate
> sources in my definition. A cup of sugar is impossible to metabolize
without
> the appropiate natural coenzyms. In this way sugar is a carbohydrate only
> chemically spoken but unavailable as a energy source for the body.
>
> It's mechanistic thinking to think that those tiny amounts of vitamins can
> be "easily" added by some chemical "supplements" and synthetic thiamin is
so
> cheap. They are not in nature and probably not complete with pills.
> Most carbohydrate source have exactely the coenzyme amount which is
> necessary to metabolize them and not much more.
> Heating, storing and cooking in water destores most of it.
>
> Thinking without chemistry - "paleo"-thinking - should teach how to deal
> with carbon fuel properly.
>
> Anyone with a full scale carbohydrate disorder ("diabetic") may no longer
be
> able to handle even natural food properly. Others with only slighter
> symptoms would IMO benefit greatly by natural eating.
>
> regards, Amadeus