On Mon, 13 Jul 1998 15:47:01 EDT, Aaron Sugarman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>In a message dated 98-07-12 08:38:46 EDT, you write:
>Amadeus,
>
>Can you elaborate on this?
>
>As a combined meal?
>
>What is the current situation on combining proteins?
>
>Is that theory dead as I have read recently?
>
>aaron
Aaron, please look on my response heading "2 Grains" to James Crocker that
somehow split off this thread....
The food composition requires the mixing to occur within some hours,
since the amino-acid depots in out bodies bave only about 24 hours worth.
Of course of you eat a wide variety, any attempts to compute protein values
could be done  maybe on a computer.. but i don't know
 any program
that supports the outcome of the amino-acid composition.
(somebody else here knows????)
The theory is not dead, but you don't have to worry to get _enough_ as long
as you eat unprocessed food, as has been found.
Nearly all natural food items provide more than enough proteins as long
as the remain _unprocessed_, except maybe fruits.
But for shure there _is_ a health advantage, consuming complete proteins,
since body doesn't have to get rid of so much unnecessary, unwanted
amino acids then.
Maybe that was one advantage for the neolithic people to conquer
middle europe so fast and complete at 4400BC.
First neolithic grains were: barley and emmer(similar to spelt)  besides
lentils.
There was still much fruit: hedges around the fields were of sloe,
then wild roses, lilac (sambucus nigra or sambucus racemosa),
medlar (mespilus germanica), wild cherries and pears, h
azel...
These are still paleolithic choices for us!

regards
Amadeus