From: Damien Sullivan (phoenix@ugcs.caltech.edu)
Date: Thu Apr 24 2003 - 16:20:13 MDT
On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 01:54:21PM -0700, gts wrote:
> The evidence is clear that paleolithic foods are more
> nutrient-dense and healthier than non-paleolithic
> foods, and this evidence comes not only from
"More nutrient-dense", yes. "Healthier" is what's being argued.
Can one get too many nutrients? Is there harm from having to deal with too
much of some stuff? Certainly I've seen worries about too much protein --
gout, calcium interference, kidney stones. And even if they're not harmful,
do beneficial effects level off? Once one has enough nutrients is there any
harm to capping off the calories with 'empty' (clean-burning?) (cheaper)
calories? Again, see the Okinawans. Insofar as the paleodieters are calling
for the elimination of the cheap calories, even after other concerns are met,
I think they're making a strong, and weakly-supported, claim.
-xx- Damien X-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 24 2003 - 16:29:29 MDT