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