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