I am a bit new to the mailing list and paleodieting. That caveat on the table, I thought the point wasn't to not eat cooked foods, but to avoid those foods which need to be cooked in order to be edible. IS this incorrect? >Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 16:08:56 -0500 >Reply-To: Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]> >From: Ilya <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: Re: [P-F] More Ancient Cooking? >To: [log in to unmask] > >Katie Bretsch wrote: >> My point was simply that, based on the evidence that cooking practices of >> various kinds may in fact be very ancient, the dogmatic stance that only >> raw foods are acceptable seems to me to over state its case. I'm not >> advocating a blanket "all prepared foods are optimal for all people" >> stance, either. Just expressing a personal difficulty with the orthodox >> position. >I believe most paleo munchers see it in a similar way. It's not that >anything that deviates from a raw food, eat only the way our ancestors >ate is bad for you. It's that if you only eat that way you pretty much >guarantee that you are eating foods that you are adapted to eating. There >very well may be non-paleo foods out there that aren't bad, but if you >want to make sure then you eat pure paleo. > >Ilya ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com