On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 16:28:30 -0500, Keith Thomas <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>>>I was not launching a defence of the peer review process. All I was asking for is that criticisms of >Cordain's article be based on recognized evidence or logic. It would be to be capricious to criticize >a well-referenced paper on the basis of armchair speculation, prejudice or personal anecdote >when the paper is published in a different realm of discourse. If Cordain didn't care about the >quality of his evidence, or want his evidence checked, he could publish his stuff on his website. > >Jim Swayse asks why Loren Cordain's paper does not refer to foreign proteins. Good question. >Let's know, Adrienne what you think of the paper. I gave a copy last night to the Medical Director >of the National Heart Foundation - he's young and open-minded and I'm confident it will do some >good there. >Keith You don't want to know what I think, for that would be "merely" personal anecdote. You specifically asked for criticism of his article based upon peer reviewed articles reaching different conclusions. Sorry -- I'm not about to waste time attempting to do that when I do not think much of Cordain's purported paleo-type dietary recommendations in the first place. I've previously posted my personal disasterous experiences (not that it matters -- "mere" anecdote) with Cordain's dietary regime and the fact that the more I lowered saturated fat, the worse my now excellent lipid profile became. I also posted how Cordain was kind enough to respond to my inquiries regarding problems with how I physically felt while following his dietary recommendations but that his suggestions ultimately did not work at all for me. Good luck with your efforts with the Medical Director at the National Heart Foundation -- while I and plenty of others* do not agree with much of what Cordain has to say regarding saturated fat, the acid-base balance theory (I've posted previously about that too) and to a large extent, the glycemic load theory -- his recommendations are nonetheless far preferable in my view to the Standard American Diet. Given that the Heart Association considers junk-food like Pop-Tarts to be "Heart Healthy" -- there's truly nowhere to go but up in terms of improving their current dietary recommendations. However, I would bet the farm that there is no way the grain-loving establishment is going to abandon grains entirely in favor of vegetables and fruit. I believe (not that it matters) that soon we'll be seeing the "Heart Healthy" stamp of approval on items like whole wheat Pop-Tarts. *thincs.org; westonaprice.org; lauricacid.org (I am mentioning this site because Cordain actually refers to lauric acid as "deadly"); second- opinions.co.uk/; bloodph.com (read Kristal's excellent Metabolic Typing or perform tests yourself with ph strips to quickly dispell the one sits fits all acid/alkaline balance theory)