Re: Re: Price's Natives: Innate Wisdom or Pragmatism? (was Examining Ayurveda)

[Guest guest]

>While it is true that primitives didn't have access to the same type

>of junk we have, they still made informed choices among the foods they

>had. They had certain foods considered sacred, certain foods

>designated for a pre-natal diet, and certain methods of increasing or

>maintaining soil fertility. They went through great lengths to

>acquire some of the sacred foods, or to acquire certain

>hard-to-acquire foods for goiter, etc. This wisdom wasn't innate; it

>was acquired. But it was wisdom, not just the result of having no

>choice, as this author seems to err in suggesting.

>

>Chris

>

Yes, Chris. And do we know what percentage of natives from the

communities did switch the diet when given the chance (or exposure) from

NAPD? I think he did mention numbers at least in some cases, but memory

fails me. It is not like they all did, else Price would not have been

seeing differences in nutrition and health. I thought I'd reread it,

and that kind of popped up. I like your terms best for the description.

But the guy's remarks on generations continuing on the uniformly poor

diet being catastrophic are pretty spot on. Diabetes mellitus, heart

disease and such in children is evidence of such degeneration over

several generations most likely. Why, I remember as a fitness trainer

in the early 90s, type 2 diabetes was becoming very prevalent in those

over 50. Well, now it is showing up in younger folks and is seen in

teens sometimes!

Back to the book: The forward to the fourth edition by Granville F.

Knight advocates 60% raw foods, and lots of sprouted seeds eaten that

way. It is interesting to see the comments on the book change over time.

Deanna

[Guest guest]

>That gets them into

>trouble because they end up spending their money on treats instead of

>healthy food, and then they end up spending money on doctors and

>medicine (if they're also available...and I figure they are not far

>behind the nonnutritive food).

>

, ain't that the truth. Is it any wonder why pharmaceutical

companies are doing so well? What is advertised on TV? I don't know

first hand, cuz I don't watch commercial TV, but I would bet it's mainly

junk food and drugs. The two go together quite well. Where's the

profit in teaching people to eat well, exercise, laugh and relax?

Deanna