Quite right about adaptation. We are all at least a little familiar with evolutionary theory here and one thing that doesn't get acknowledged a lot in the paleolithic community is that while MACROevolution has not progressed much since agricultural revolution, MICROevolution and adaptation has. Populations adapt to their environments to best thrive within them. That is why I am white but Grok was black. My ancestors needed lighter skin pigmentation to synthesize enough vitamin d in Europe. Food source can also create adaptations which isn't surprising as it is one of, if not the biggest, environmental factors. Most Chinese are what can be known as carb types (as opposed to protein or mixed types) as detailed in William Wolcott's book :The Metabolic Typing Diet and demonstrated in alternative medicine for decades.
Now the problem I have with Wolcott and his adherents is that they are trying to get a "should" from a "can". Yes, some people, not very many Europeans, can live a "healthy" life eating a large amount of rice or the less offensive grains, but 10000 years of adaptation can not completely undermine 3 million years worth of evolution. Generally most of us are best off with some carbohydrates, mainly vegetables, but I'm willing to put my money on it that a Chinese person will still thrive on a ketogenic diet so long as acid/alkaline balance is accounted for.
The average lifespan in China is 75 years and while they do have less chronic degenerative disease than in North America, they are only just beginning to be introduced to the fructose en mass, and they never had the industrial hydrogenated oils and processed, nutrient devoid crap so we can hardly point our fingers and say "look look eating rice is so much healthier than our meat-heavy western diet CHINA STUDY CHINA STUDY LALALALALALA
Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.
Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!