Punctuated Equilibrium? page 2

[dragonmamma]

I'm not suggesting that we've changed quickly enough to adapt to Frank-n-foods in a hundred years, but that we MAY have broken into various groups more agreeable to various food sources within a 10,000 year time span.


Why does everyone assume that we STARTED OUT with a grain intolerance?

[SerialSinner]

Dragonmamma, everything is possible.


Science talks about scenarios with different degrees of certainties, not absolutes.


If you are convinced that you have evolved to thrive on a diet composed of potatoes because you feel good eating them, then I have nothing else to add.

[grandma]

but why does it matter unless you have a time machine and are going to go back and get us some of the good grains of the past. I may be wrong but I don't think the "grass-fed" analog to grains exists? Maybe spelt or something like that is a link to the past, but still why? If you want to eat them, by all means read up on fermenting grains and have at it.

[dragonmamma]

Jeez-louise! Did I say I was living on potatoes?? My daily carb intake is 100-150 grams. I have a sweet potato maybe every third day. I don't consider that to be the least bit excessive, and I just betcha Mark Sisson doesn't, either.

[grandma]

Maybe you are right, maybe we started out completely tolerant, but damn if evolution didn't back fire on us and a large majority of us are now suffering from intolerance.

[dragonmamma]

I'm still amazed that I get more grief by eating a potato than the beer drinkers are getting over on their thread.

[Shine]

[quote]

The typical intolerant individual today does not develop a disease which kills them before they pass on those genes.
</blockquote>


This was my point.


However, as to whether there was an initial range of grain tolerance, again I don&#39;t know how you would establish this. Are there any identified genes that determine tolerance of grain and susceptibility to detrimental effects as a result of consumption? I think that it is safe to say that we started off intolerant of raw grains; unless I am mistaken (entirely possible), ancient cultures underwent long processes of fermentation, soaking, and grinding to extract edible material from wild grains. Without these processes, we were unable to consume the plant; I believe this would qualify as intolerance.


I don&#39;t think that anyone is getting on your case about eating the occasional sweet potato; it is your argument defending tuber consumption that is being attacked. I have actually been wondering about similar ideas in relation to steel-cut oats prepared using traditional methods of soaking and fermentation. However, I am arriving at the conclusion that I am only deluding myself with unfounded justifications. I am only critical of your ideas because I am also assessing my own similar ones.

[SerialSinner]

There&#39;s no grief dragonmamma!


The discussion started when you suggested that you could include potatoes in your diet and still thrive because you feel good while eating them.

[grandma]

well said Shine. I think that sums up my comments in various threads today as well. We have all been reacting to little things. There must be something in the air.

[dragonmamma]

Let&#39;s not forget the other primates; chimpanzees definitely aren&#39;t fermenting anything. They don&#39;t just eat leaves, either; I know I&#39;ve seen videos of them stripping bark off of branches and eating it. (I&#39;m assuming that&#39;s high fiber carbs?) and of course we know they eat fruit.


As Shine points out, there is no specific test for grain intolerance. Unless, of course, you&#39;ve developed celiac disease; that&#39;s pretty definite.


I still think my original ideas have not been refuted. Current percentages of intolerance doesn&#39;t mean that evolution has back-fired, it just means that those people may have descended from the original humans with less tolerance.