Guest guest Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 > Where I'm from in Texas there was clear evidence of tendence of > stuff like pecans and grapes by the natives... Nuh uh. I'm in Texas too and I seen em! It's dem rodent farmer Neolithic squirrels burying seeds all over. Why I get dem pecan sprouts e'rywhere, dag nab it! If a-they only would plant em in a good spot, why, I'd be a-selling dem organic peacans in the farm market. Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 On 9/21/06, Furbish <efurbish@...> wrote: > At any rate I think it's more dangerous to > conflate lack of archaeological evidence with nonexistence than it is > to follow the intuition that humans would have taken obvious > opportunities... the picture drawn from direct evidence is bound to be > skewed due to the fact that only a tiny bit of the leavings were > nondegradable enough to survive. We see lots of tribes today that use > only tools that would degrade in less than a generation or so. It seems, also, to be a semi-regular occurrence that the date of food-related developments is revised backward as new evidence emerges. Chris -- The Truth About Cholesterol Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 > It seems, also, to be a semi-regular occurrence that the date of > food-related developments is revised backward as new evidence emerges. > Same is true of migration dates of humans across the globe, especially with mtDNA. Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2006 Report Share Posted September 21, 2006 > Or in Texas for that matter. Instead, New Mexico and much of the > arid south-western US was covered in lakes due to higher annual rainfall. > > Not sure where all that's leading anyway-- just trying to point out > that " ice age " doesn't by any stretch mean the whole earth was frozen. Nor does some arbitrary marker called the arrow of time give a rats behind about individual cultures of the earth. The Neolithic " Revolution " as it is named did not encircle the globe in one fell swoop. My people in Sweden didn't adopt anything close to the diet nor the social structure of civilized men until circa AD 1 or later. But by Emma's logic, they were Neolithic once modern man retrospectively deemed it so. Hogwash. That again is why Dr. Price's work was and remains such a modern snapshot with modern equipment of the very real and vibrant past. And his observation of the hunter gatherer groups, who for all practical purposes were following their Paleo ways with little intrusion for millennia, are especially illuminating. Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 Deanna- >as I was a bit put off by Sally Fallon's suggestion in NT that the >best source of all the B complex vitamins is whole grains, even though >the 1980s published anatomy book declared animal foods mostly, including >liver again and again). Join the club! - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 Emma- >Since pottery is neolithic, this limits possible paleo fermenting >vessels to gourds or animal stomachs. It's fairly hard to pound and >chop things in objects that themselves get shredded by pounding and >grinding, so this limits fermenting to soft objects like fruits, which >are limited, seasonal foods, and normally fermented to produce an >alcoholic concoction. Dairy was traditionally fermented in animal stomachs and leather bags in some cultures, and some tribes chewed fruits and then buried the juice and masticated pulp in the ground to ferment. Nor is it necessary to pound and shred meat to ferment it. Game used to be hung, some predators bury their kills for a time, etc. >Are you suggesting that the gardening of vegtables came before the >neolithic revolution? Do you have evidence for this? The pottery >evidence says grains, which are high calorie compared to vegetables. Grains didn't become calorie-dense overnight. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 I think bee pollen is a pretty good source too. Allyn _____ From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Idol Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 10:07 AM Subject: Re: Re: Guidance for minimising amines in foods Deanna- >as I was a bit put off by Sally Fallon's suggestion in NT that the >best source of all the B complex vitamins is whole grains, even though >the 1980s published anatomy book declared animal foods mostly, including >liver again and again). Join the club! - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 >You may see tending a garden as an obvious opportunity, but if you >were a nomad who followed grazing animals for miles across the plains >(or mammoths through the snow), spending hours planting and tending >low-calorie foods would seem a bit of a waste of time if you're going >to move on. Most human tribes made the connection that seeds grow into >plants, but that doesn't mean they always bothered to actively use it >to grow gardens. We know for a fact that a neolithic revolution >happened, it's there in the archeological record. According to Bill Molison in " The Permaculture Book of Ferment and Human Nutrition " West Australian Aboriginies developed extensive yam fields over hundreds of acres of alluvium, where they dwelt *seasonally* as gardeners approx. 40,000 years ago! That was duing the paleolithic era. As someone else already pointed out, paleo folks didn't all live in one spot eating the same foods, namely large game. And, according to the same source, cultivated varieities of yam and taro were present in the New Guinea Uplands 30,000 years ago. He also states that traces of food was found on stone pounders. This also indicates that people in the paleolithic era were cultivating and preparing plants. Suze Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 On 9/22/06, Emma Davies <emma@...> wrote: > If they figured out the connection, what then did they do with it? Did > they carry on eating amines, treating the foods as a delicacy or a > drug, as they would have treated hallucinogenic herbs? Did they try to > ensure the amines were minimised by not fermenting/hanging/drying for > too long? We have an in-built gag reflex when we smell the cadaverine > and putrescine in rotten meat. The native sense of smell was probably > far more attuned through actual need to off-smells and flavours. I've never fermented terrestrial meats, but I've fermented fish, and it lasted for months without developing any putrefication-related scents. Chris -- The Truth About Cholesterol Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 On 9/22/06, Emma Davies <emma@...> wrote: > > > > The point being just that it wouldn't take eons of cultural > > development to realize that stuff... it wouldn't have to be a > > neolithic revelation. > > It would if you were nomadic and follow animals around and move in > order to find new forage, as many, many hunter-gatherer tribes are. Right, but those migratory routes were *cyclical*, and people have always had an excellent grasp of the cyclical. They weren't stupid, they knew they were returning to the same places every year. I'm thinking of Marshack's " The Roots of Civilization " as an example of how paleolithic people were very well aware of cyclical patterns and were even applying them to flora and fauna (this is hard evidence-- patterned markings on bone and rock that follow lunar cycles and are accompanied by pictures). And really almost every primitive mythology incorporated some fundamental notion of a cycle of time. Linear and developmental evolution emerged relatively recently. Which is simply meant to point out the awareness of time and place that people were posessed of since forever. This all feels fundamentally oriented toward stasis rather than progress, which would tend to reinforce tendence and awareness of the local environment. (sort of thinking publicly, always dangerous) > > At any rate I think it's more dangerous to > > conflate lack of archaeological evidence with nonexistence than it is > > to follow the intuition that humans would have taken obvious > > opportunities... > > Vegans " intuitively " believe humans are naturally vegan. > > I just don't think " intuition " is enough to start making value > judgements about what is and is not a " normal " part of humanity. For > that I want to see some actual hard evidence. Of course... People often confuse intuition with opinion, doctrine, conditioning... saying that intuition exists is not the same as saying that everyone's " intuition " is right. Ultimately the only intuition to trust is your own and that of others intimately trustworthy, and I mean that as a fundamental principle of living in the universe. But with respect to prehistorical reconstruction, where are we left if we refuse anything but direct evidence? The link that Deanna sent is a perfect example of how " objective " the ancient evidence is... ultimately every author cited or involved in that article followed some form of intuition in drawing his fundamental conclusions. The final statement was nothing but pure opinion. Surely we can dispense with the illusion of objectivity in such matters. Vastly incomplete and misleading evidence would cry out for intuitive judgement (from someone truly posessed of it... not me, that is, but...). > You may see tending a garden as an obvious opportunity, but if you > were a nomad who followed grazing animals for miles across the plains > (or mammoths through the snow), spending hours planting and tending > low-calorie foods would seem a bit of a waste of time if you're going > to move on. Most human tribes made the connection that seeds grow into > plants, but that doesn't mean they always bothered to actively use it > to grow gardens. We know for a fact that a neolithic revolution > happened, it's there in the archeological record. These aren't exactly trash foods-- nuts, tubers, fruits, these were staples of human diet along with animal foods. And they were foods people actively sought to make plentiful. But as I said above, these people were following well-worn routes their ancestors had followed for generations. The neolithic revolution happened, yes, out a fundamental urge to remain in one place and to have steady, predictable access to food and shelter. And certainly it was a *development*, not an instantaneous transition. So the tendence of wild plants is a step in that direction and amounts to " gardening " in one degree or another. Really that's all I'm trying to point out... humans were never benign environmental factors; they've always significantly altered habitats to their own purposes. This alteration by definition affected the development of every animal and plant in those ecosystems. As an example, the native american alteration of landscape by burning. They created the American grasslands. Reforestation set in after the whites encroached, but early records and subsequent development show clearly how fundamentally the landscape was altered. They did that to expand and tend the habitat of the nomadic animals they hunted. They recognized the seasonal and locational patterns and used them to their advantage, and this is a paleolithic-era phonomenon, arguably. And that's one class of people. Another fact is that not every human ancestor was a nomadic plains hunter. They might have been a relative minority. People also lived in places that didn't require regular migration or pursuit of large game and those people were even better-equipped to turn tendence into agriculture. Really I'm not trying to argue that fermented/aged foods were a priori natural for humans or vice versa-- I'm just taking issue with some of the arguments taken to justify one or the other position. To say that neolithic pottery was necessary to exploit a basic feature of a well-worn and understood environment seems to ignore some fundamental features of humanity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 Emma, > > How do you figure? I have no idea how anyone can have any idea how > > paleolithic man processed his meat, but all traditional cultures that > > have been studied to my knowledge have aged their meat in some way, > > including ones studied and revealed to be *healthy.* And that direct > > observation trumps any speculation or unreliable inference about what > > paleolithic man was doing. > You can't infer from what neolithic people do and assume that's what > paleolithic people do, they live in different parts of the world, eat > different foods, have different enemies and different technologies at > their disposal. Paleo man didn't even bother making pottery, but he > did make a lot of spears. I wasn't making that inference. I explicitly stated " I have no idea how anyone can have any idea how paleolithic man processed his meat. " What I said is that traditional neolithic cultures, especially hunter-gatherers, have been studied and found to be very healthy by the endpoints that were measured, and *they* aged many of their foods. This is direct observation about what some groups of people have done while mataining what is to the best of our knowledge superb health. Any inference about what paleolithic man was doing beyond what hard evidence is left is just speculation. You seem to be applying a bias to this uncertainty by elevating your speculation that they did not do x, y and z over other people's speculation that they did do x, y and z, when the two are equivalently speculatory. The idea of using the absence of hard evidence that paleolithic humans *did* ferment foods as positive evidence that they did *not* ferment foods is invalid, because, as pointed out, there are many ways to ferment foods that would *not* leave hard evidence. > If you were starving on a hot savannah with a bunch of vultures, wild > dogs and lions, would you wet hang your meat for three weeks before > you tucked in? Hanging meat is simply not done in this environment, > because if you leave it for more than a couple of days it's covered in > maggots, and if the maggots don't get it, the vultures do. I honestly don't know much about nutritional anthropology, so maybe I'm speaking out of ignorance, but it seems to me that burying is a more reasonable alternative to hanging, and that meat can be dehydrated over fire and the type of fermentation used when meat is not dried can be modified by modifying the ferementing environment. > We have a > pretty strong gag reflex when we smell cadaverine/putrescine in rotten > meat, and I'm willing to bet it's a genetic survival mechanism. Well I don't expect anyone would want to eat *rotten* meat, but I do not understand why you are conflating this with *fermented* or *aged* meat. > Why is there the assumption that paleolithic people regarded > hung/dried meat as superior to fresh meat? Given the choice, would you > rather eat pemmican or fresh meat? Or, when you'd had your fill and > eaten 5 pounds of fresh meat in one sitting like a Masai warrior, > would you then sit down and process your leftovers (if you had any) by > drying them and saving them for hard times? If I had a herd of cattle waiting to be milked and bled for the rest of the meat-free season I would probably not bother. > And during those hard > times, surely you would complain that things were hard, and you had no > fresh meat? I have no idea how to judge paleolithic man's taste preference, which I doubt where the same for every person, but I would think that I would certainly compain if there were *no* meat, and I'd probably want to save meat the next time the downseason came around. > > Possibly, or maybe they didn't have the defects in enzyme functioning > > that are probably largely attributed to poor nutrition. > No. That is only ONE theory of many for what is going on, you can't > make that judgement until we know more. I think I can make pretty much any judgment beginning with " Possibly, or maybe... " without full confirmative evidence. > However, native people do a lot of strange stuff along with their > clever stuff, like smoke tobacco plants and eat magic mushrooms. The > yanomomo live on a diet that is 90% bananas (which might explain why > they *are* bananas). Amines are just a part of this strange stuff. I don't necessarily think that natives will do something that gives them scombroid poisoning because they will also do something that gets them high. > > Agreed, but your problems metabolising certain food chemicals are not > > universal, so there's no reason to identify the diet that works best > > for you at this time in your life as the ideal human diet. > I can only repeat what I posted earlier: at high enough doses ALL > people react to these chemicals. Most people will rarely cross that > threshold so their diet can be as liberal as they like. But as I > demonstrated in the asthma article on my blog, these problems are > really, really common, and not restricted to a small group of the > population with a strange defect of their metabolism (like autistics). I don't understand all the biochemics of it -- yet -- but isn't the trans-sulfuration pathway important? If that is dependent on vitamin D (as well as certain trace minerals) isn't the fact that nearly everyone is deficient in vitamin D relevant? > If you pick the wrong cheese, 90% of the population are going to get a > tyramine headache from a 100 gram serving. The detox enzymes are > zero-order, rate-limited enzymes, they have a fixed capacity that they > are never going to exceed no matter what the nutritional status of the > individual is. I'm not sure what it means for an enzyme to be zero-order. In a zero-order reaction, the rate of the reaction is not dependent on substrate concentration, but when you add enzymes, it is proportional to the concentration of the enzymes. See figure 1 below: ============== http://www.worthington-biochem.com/introBiochem/enzymeConc.html ============== How can an enzyme itself be zero-order? > When someone shows me evidence that on average, people > eating a native diet can eat 200, 300 or 500 grams of the wrong cheese > without getting a headache, I'll believe them. I think that traditional cheese-eating groups probably would have figured out which cheeses did not give them headaches and used those cheeses. I think that paleolithic humans would have done the same for whatever meat and vegetables they aged/fermented (for example, I doubt that *all* bacteria break salmon down to histamine equally), but I doubt also that the ability to tolerate these chemicals in today's general population is just as high as it was for paleolithic humans. I don't have proof, but I'm using the observation that modern humans eat like crap and and suffer from generational cumulative malnutrition effects -- which I think induce some genetic defects -- that I suspect probably contribute to problems metabolizing these chemicals like they lead to problems metabolizing everything else. Chris -- The Truth About Cholesterol Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 On 9/23/06, Emma Davies <emma@...> wrote: > ...in this rather irrelevant argument ... Sorry, it's what this list does best. Fireworks, grand sweeping arguments, a bunch of people who aren't really sure what the conversation was originally about. Love us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 >On 9/23/06, Emma Davies <emma@...> wrote: >> ...in this rather irrelevant argument ... > >Sorry, it's what this list does best. Fireworks, grand sweeping >arguments, a bunch of people who aren't really sure what the >conversation was originally about. > >Love us. > > ROFLMAO! We're also a bunch of joksters. Suze Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 On 9/22/06, Emma Davies <emma@...> wrote: > > I've never fermented terrestrial meats, but I've fermented fish, and > > it lasted for months without developing any putrefication-related > > scents. > And did you get scromboid poisioning from it? I don't recall getting any problems from it at all, but I only ate it one or two cubes at a time, rather than as a whole meal's worth of protein. Chris -- The Truth About Cholesterol Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 " Emma Davies " emma@... vitaminkgirl wrote: My original point was: Did paleolithic people eat more than 50mg of histamine and tyramine on a regular basis? Wanita: According to the table of phenylalanine and tyrosine foods on pgs. 84 and 85 in The Edge Effect by R. Braverman M.D. 6-8 ozs. of wild game has 1.5 " gms. " of tyrosine and in the same portion is 2.6 " gms. " of phenylalanine. Genes have been found that are associated with asthma, and ADHD. Incidentally, one of the ADHD associated genes, DRD4, which is a dopamine-receptor mutation, appeared between 10,000-40,000 years ago. Wanita: Braverman associates ADHD with dopamine neurotransmitter dominance and/or deficiency. I've posted this article of Braverman's in response to you before. http://douglaslabs.com/pdf/nutrinews/The%20Edge%20Effect%20NN%20(Spring-05).pdf These are some normal degradations of amino acids into amines: histidine > histamine ornithine > putrescine > spermidine lysine > cadaverine arginine > agmatine > putrescine tryptophan > 5-HTP > serotonin tryptophan > tryptamine glutamic acid > glutamate > GABA tyrosine > tyramine tyrosine > levodopa > dopamine phenylalanine > phenylethylamine Wanita: Most of the above Braverman puts to his dopamine, GABA or serotonin natures. That leaves his acetylcholine nature, the only one not requiring amino acids for specific neurotransmitter production. Iirc, you've said before your entire family has CFS and takes acetaminophen but you stopped. You've also said you've spent a lot of money on supplements that didn't work and were wondering about cysteine. Did you know NAC is the treatment for acetaminophen poisoning? Have you found that? http://www.emedicine.com/ped/topic7.htm Please excuse me if my memory doesn't serve me totally on the above. So far people have extrapolated that paleolithic people " must have " eaten fermented meat, quantity unknown. Wanita: I know of no Native American or Canadian First Nations (Inuit excepted) culture that ate fermented meat or other food post paleo as well. All dried and/or smoked. There's less than half a dozen paleo sites in the East. Maybe a dozen throughout the country. If this is the case then they " must have " overdosed on amines sometimes, unless they were possessed with a supernatural ability to produce vastly greater quantities of detoxification enzymes than the general population of today. Wanita: Genetically there is next to no difference between paleo and now. All other environmental factors including and besides food quality aren't comparable then to now. Wanita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Emma, > ... amines are amino acids that have lost their carboxylic acid > group ... they don't exist in significant quantities in fresh > proteins, but are caused when bacteria excrete decarboxylation or > other enzymes. > > These are some normal degradations of amino acids into amines: > histidine > histamine > ornithine > putrescine > spermidine > lysine > cadaverine > arginine > agmatine > putrescine > tryptophan > 5-HTP > serotonin > tryptophan > tryptamine > glutamic acid > glutamate > GABA > tyrosine > tyramine > tyrosine > levodopa > dopamine > phenylalanine > phenylethylamine Verrry interesting. Thanks for all your helpful info. I didn't realize that seratonin was an " amine " . Looks complicated with multiple pathways and effects. Aren't seratonin, GABA, and dopamine important in mental health? Also, I recently read that histamine is one of our primary defenses against viruses like colds and flu. > As biogenic amines are neurotransmitters the body normally tightly > regulates the amount it creates, and destroys any that are eaten as > fast as it is able to. People's ability to do this varies widely, > and that's when we get problems. I can't help but wonder if there are dietary aspects that could influence people's ability to handle amines properly. Perhaps this would be a better approach in the long run to correct improper metabolism of amines than just avoidance. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if I were to say: " amines are bad, therefore they should be avoided in diet and minimized in the body " .... Isn't that a gross over-simplification, rather like saying: " cholesterol is bad, therefore it should be avoided in diet and minimized in the body " . I guess what I'm trying to say is that maybe we need to be careful that people don't get a total amine phobia here. The same may be true to some extent for salicylates and polyphenols? Some people are saying that polyphenols can be good for us http://www.mercola.com/2004/jun/16/pure_polyphenols.htm <...knows just enough to be dangerous ... crash ... burn> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Emma, > We try our best to refrain from making judgements about what is or is > not an optimal human diet that cannot be backed up by proper evidence > - just as a prisoner in the dock is innocent until proven guilty, I > want to see actual evidence that paleolithic people ate " five a day " > fruit and vegetables - when this quantity is enough to make a majority > of asthmatics wheeze - before going out and telling people that it is > " good for you " to eat fruit and vegetables, and part of " a paleolithic > diet " . I have yet to see an example of a traditional group that ate a lot of fruits and vegetables. I do not have calorie data for more than four of Price's groups, but from his extra-NAPD writings Price estimated the following caloric intakes for the specified group: North American Indians -- 100 calories out of 3,000 as " vegetables, barks and roots. " Eskimos -- 100 calories out of 3,000 as " Plants, roots. " Swiss Alps -- 100 calories out of 2,000 as " Vegetables. " Hebrides -- 0 calories out of 2,000 listed. That is, he does not list any vegetables at all. I used to work at Old Sturbridge Village, which is a living history museum set in 1830s New England. I studied a bit about foodways as part of my job. We had time set aside for studying, and I would preferentially study foodways when I had a choice, because I was newly introduced to the NT/WAP paradigm so it interested me. In this time period, vegetables were reagarded as a " condiment. " They kept gardens, but the only use for green vegetables grown in these gardens was to boil the heck out of them into " green sauce, " which was used as a condiment in soups and so on. They also ate berries and so on seasonally, but they never ate plant foods raw, which they considered difficult to digest. Actually, I think food was changing during the 1830s and they had also adopted the use of some vinegar-preserved sauerkraut and so on. The green sauce was the more exclusive use of vegetables in the time periods preceding the 1830s if I remember right. Chris -- The Truth About Cholesterol Find Out What Your Doctor Isn't Telling You: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 >> [suze]> According to Bill Molison in " The Permaculture Book of >> Ferment and Human >> > Nutrition " West Australian Aboriginies developed extensive yam >> fields over >> > hundreds of acres of alluvium, where they dwelt *seasonally* as >> gardeners >> > approx. 40,000 years ago! That was duing the paleolithic era. As >> someone >> > else already pointed out, paleo folks didn't all live in one spot >> eating the >> > same foods, namely large game. > > [Emma] 40,000 years ago doesn't really count as paleo in my book - it > counts > as the pre-neolithic ice ages when a lot of changes were taking place. > Find me something from half a million years ago and I'll believe this > was a paleo way of life. Well, it counts in the books of numerous scholars, and as such, should count as evidence. 40,000 years ago happens to mark the very beginning of the Upper Paleolithic Period, according to the 2004 Encyclopedia Britannica. To require that Suze go as far back as 500,000 years ago to find something to satisfy you is just unreasonable, imho. That happens to be the first evidence of the emergence of our species. We hadn't even gotten into the groove at that time. And as far as humans wasting mammoths: Fine. But you still have not offered anything on what these people ate during the off season. (And I apologize for not referencing that quote here) Fasting for some weeks I can go along with. But they had to eat. They didn't have special markets from which to buy un-aged meat. Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 > I have yet to see an example of a traditional group that ate a lot of > fruits and vegetables. I do not have calorie data for more than four > of Price's groups, but from his extra-NAPD writings Price estimated > the following caloric intakes for the specified group: > > North American Indians -- 100 calories out of 3,000 as " vegetables, > barks and roots. " > > Eskimos -- 100 calories out of 3,000 as " Plants, roots. " > > Swiss Alps -- 100 calories out of 2,000 as " Vegetables. " > > Hebrides -- 0 calories out of 2,000 listed. That is, he does not list > any vegetables at all. Yeah, but you can get a whole lot of some vegetables for 100 calories (over 5 servings in some cases). From the Joy of Cooking list per 100 calories: 2 cups broccoli 5 cups cabbage over 1.5 cups carrots over 1 large head of lettuce over 1 cup black, rasp or blueberries almost 2 cups strawberries 1 cup peas 1.3 cup pumpkin 2.5 cup summer squash and spinach 3 tangerines 2 cups or 4 whole tomatoes 1.5 cantaloupes 32 asparagus stalks about 90 green grapes But besides that, these groups are not Paleo. Not that those traditional groups that never took up farming might not give us a good glimpse of Paleo people, but .... Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Been following this for awhile and I just have to say something here. These people did not live where they had grocery stores where they went in and bought what they wanted. They had to hunt, gather, etc. to get their food and it was seasonal!! In the summer months they probably ate some berries, etc. but they also had to preserve their food to get through the long winter months (of course depends on where they live) but even here in Florida, meats, fruits, veggies are seasonal. I bet most of these people during the cold winter months ate very little veggies and fruits and subsisted on meats, fish etc. and I tend to think most of that was dried or fermented or something. On a good day during the winter they might venture out to hunt but they had to be prepared for the winter and have their food stores ready. Of course I don't have references on any of this only the tons of things I have read over the past 50 years and the natural history museums I have visited around the world to glean my information from. I am an Army brat so I have been around. LOL. I was just in Taos, New Mexico and visited the Indian reservation there and they had store houses. Now this was a 1000 year old Pueblo which is still inhabited but has not been changed in 1000 years. Very interesting trip. Of course that is only 1000 years old but most of the Indians have this information passed down for many, many, many generations. They will also not tell you about their religion, etc. so that other tribes can not find out about it, etc. I don't think a whole lot has changed in that regard. We think because of our life styles and how quickly things are changing that is how it always has been but it took thousands of years for anything to change and I don't think the way they ate or stored their food changed a whole lot over thousands of years. Just my opinion. Allyn _____ From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of yoginidd Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 5:13 PM Subject: Re: Guidance for minimising amines in foods > I have yet to see an example of a traditional group that ate a lot of > fruits and vegetables. I do not have calorie data for more than four > of Price's groups, but from his extra-NAPD writings Price estimated > the following caloric intakes for the specified group: > > North American Indians -- 100 calories out of 3,000 as " vegetables, > barks and roots. " > > Eskimos -- 100 calories out of 3,000 as " Plants, roots. " > > Swiss Alps -- 100 calories out of 2,000 as " Vegetables. " > > Hebrides -- 0 calories out of 2,000 listed. That is, he does not list > any vegetables at all. Yeah, but you can get a whole lot of some vegetables for 100 calories (over 5 servings in some cases). From the Joy of Cooking list per 100 calories: 2 cups broccoli 5 cups cabbage over 1.5 cups carrots over 1 large head of lettuce over 1 cup black, rasp or blueberries almost 2 cups strawberries 1 cup peas 1.3 cup pumpkin 2.5 cup summer squash and spinach 3 tangerines 2 cups or 4 whole tomatoes 1.5 cantaloupes 32 asparagus stalks about 90 green grapes But besides that, these groups are not Paleo. Not that those traditional groups that never took up farming might not give us a good glimpse of Paleo people, but .... Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Emma- >Find me something from half a million years ago and I'll believe this >was a paleo way of life. What are you looking for, a 500k-year-old pickle jar? Such a find would be particularly surprising since Homo sapiens is generally considered to be only about 250kyrs old. So what are you actually asking for? Proof of fermentation by h. heidelbergensis? By h. erectus? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Deanna- >I guess >the real question is: can one get optimal nutrition on such a plan? The magic eight ball says: outlook not good. That doesn't necessarily mean there's no value to a temporary elimination diet, though. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Emma- >I've also found that WAPFers tend to assume that all human health >problems can be solved with the right combination of vitamins. But it >just doesn't work like that. WAPFers generally don't have a clue that >the natural poisons that exist in plants or are produced by >bacteria/yeast are just as harmful as vitamin deficiencies. If by " vitamins " you mean " supplements " , you couldn't be more wrong. The WAPF community is generally pretty strongly anti-supplement -- to its own detriment IMO. As to natural poisons, a lot of WAPF doctrine covers proper preparation of vegetable-kingdom foods specifically to deactivate antinutrients. Of course that doesn't cover anything remotely close to the whole spectrum of problem substances, but compare your average WAFPer's awareness with your average SADer's and then maybe you'll get a different perspective. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 > >I guess > >the real question is: can one get optimal nutrition on such a plan? > > The magic eight ball says: outlook not good. Just like, or similar to the raw food plans? Cuz it sure seems like that is the kind of debate we have going on here. Cooked food(or amines in this case) = poison > That doesn't necessarily mean there's no value to a temporary > elimination diet, though. And might some few people perhaps need to watch it more permanently do you think? Deanna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 >>>The issue I have with this is that we know paleo people used flat stones to crack open bones and nuts on, but a flat stone isn't really a good tool to use when you have some wet vegetable matter...<<< This is going to be tough to convince me about. It's just, I'd bet with some experimentation, I could figure out how to lacto-ferment wild foods, and, with hundreds of thousands of years to experiment, and nutritional gain to be had, I bet ancient humans did too. They figured out a way. This is strictly speculative, of course! But there's a logic to it. >>People have been taking from this discussion the idea that " fermented foods contain amines so they're bad " , which isn't how it works...<< I admit I had been thinking that. >>I don't know whether we have any experts in kefir drinking here, but Iwonder if any of them have noticed what I have noticed - I've read plenty of anecdotes suggesting " normal " people do experience this - that some strains/batches of kefir make you relaxed and calm (GABA), others give you a rush and make you feel overstimulated (glutamate), others send your thyroid into overdrive and keep you up all night (tyramine). This is because it depends exactly what bugs in what proportions produce what results. Would paleolithic and neolithic people not have noticed this and tried to select their ferments for the most favourable effects?<< Well ~I~ do make and drink kefir. I most definitely ~have~ noticed the relaxed/calm rush -- it's pretty noticeable and happens within 2 or 3 minutes of drinking the kefir. I find it pleasant. I assumed it was a kind of alcohol unfamiliar to me that the kefir mother created. So is GABA one of the -amines- you're saying can be toxic? I haven't felt at all stimulated or wired by kefir -- stimulation tends to turn me off to a food or other substance. I don't feel that ancients or primitives would have stuck with the ferments that intoxicated them or not. Like anyone else, they could see the effects these things on their ability to gather food, protect themselves, and have a satisfying dream life, and would have responded in kind. If anything they were probably more aware -- and more responsive -- to chemical sensitivities than us moderns have learned to become..... Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.