First, the full citation for the Cordain article: "The paradoxical nature of hunter-gatherer diets: meat-based, yet non-atherogenic," L. Cordain, S.B. Eaton, J. Brand Miller, N. Mann, and K. Hill. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2002) 56, suppl 1, S1-S11. The table of "Quantitatively determined proportions of plant and animal food in hunter-gatherer diets" is on page S3. It is adapted from "Human Subsistence Behavior," L. Kaplan, in Evolution, Ecology, and Human Behavior, ed. E.A. Smith and B. Winterhalder (Chicago, IL: Aldine, 1992), pp. 167-202. Kaplan's source is M. McArthur, "Food consumption and dietary levels of groups of aborigines living on naturally occurring foods," in Records of the American-Australian Scientific Expedition to Arnhem Land, ed. C.P. Mountford, pp. 90-135 (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1960). For the curious, here are the other entries from the table, in terms of percentage of energy from plants: Ache (Paraguay): 22% Anbarra (Australia): 25% Efe (Africa): 56% Eskimo (Greenland): 4% Gwi (Africa): 26% Hadza (Africa): 52% Hiwi (Venezuela): 25% !Kung (Africa): 67% !Kung (Africa): 32% Nukak (Columbia): 59% Nunamiut (Alaska): 1% Onge (Anadman islands): 21% Note that the two values for the !Kung are from two different researchers. Todd Moody [log in to unmask]