RE: evolution and diet (was: FITNESS: Diet and Exercise)

From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Apr 16 2003 - 01:38:52 MDT

  • Next message: Samantha Atkins: "Re: GOV: US Reputation (RE: Arab World Stunned by Baghdad's Fall)"

    Ramez Naam wrote:

    > Someone on a paleo diet who uses
    > antibiotics or vitamin supplements must do so
    > *despite* the fact that humans are not "adapted" to such
    > modern inventions. So when does a paleo dieter decide to do
    > what humans are adapted for and when do you decided to do
    > something humans are not adapted for?

    They do so when the evidence is clear.

    The key point is that, from a paleodieter's perspective, the *burden of
    proof* is always on those who would deviate from the default paleodiet. It's
    a question of who has the burden of proof.

    For example it is not for paleodieters to prove that dairy and agricultural
    products are unnecessary and not valuable to the diet. The burden of proof
    is rather on those who say dairy and agricultural; products are necessary
    and valuable additions to the diet. In my estimation, and in the estimation
    of others who advocate a paleodiet, grain and dairy farmers have not
    provided any such proof.

    Antibiotics are on the other hand a perfect example of a worthwhile but
    non-paleolithic substance. Medical science has proven beyond any reasonable
    doubt that under certain circumstances antibiotics are a useful adjunct to
    the default paleolithic diet.

    -gts



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 16 2003 - 01:45:47 MDT