Now how ironic is that?

Let's not forget that we didn't even start to find paleoliths or fossils of early humans until 1920.

Until then the idea that modern man evolved from something other than modern man (or that "Man/Apes" ever existed) was all speculation based on people's best guesses and judgement.

I'm pretty sure the Paleolithic era existed prior to 1920. I'm also pretty sure that atoms existed prior to their "discovery."

Some scientists call the idea of any planets in the outer solar system that haven't been discovered yet Planet X! There's not even evidence for them, but they have a name! Scientists are assuming there is much left to be discovered. Just because they don't see those planets yet doesn't mean they aren't there.

When scientists think something might exist but there's no evidence yet, they call their idea a "hypothesis." It sounds like your hypothesis regarding that elephant on your lawn is going to be difficult for your to test. Good luck with that!

ANYWAY!

I'm asking for the "plenty of evidence to disprove the theory" that some Paleolithic people may have consumed milk and/or milk products. I'm asking for this evidence because Tarlach said there was plenty. I'm not asking for him to "prove" his point because he can't.

I'm not sure how much evidence you have for that weightless pink invisible elephant Nancy, but we'll see how it compares to the quantity of evidence that Tarlach has!

I like you, I<3Splenda, you vomit up your sleeve. There's something intrinsically ok about someone that does that, in my book. But coming to the Paleo sub-forum where the guidelines for all the paleo diets out there are pretty clear, no dairy, and arguing that dairy is part of the paleo diet is like going to the Atkins forum (or one of the other low carb forums) and arguing that sugar and potatoes are valid low carb foods.

It's something that we have to deal with on a regular basis and it does get pretty annoying after awhile. Although I am getting better at ignoring such discussions, I'm not, as you can see, entirely immune to responding to them.

I disagree, however I cede!

Thanks for lightening up the tone... this is starting to get fun again.

In the 19th century, the existence of Planet X was hypothesized because the orbit of Uranus appeared to be perturbed by another mass. The search for planet X led to the discovery of Pluto, but Pluto is too small to affect Uranus's orbit that much, and the search went on. In 1989, Voyager 2 revealed that Neptune's mass had been overestimated, and the correction accounted for the orbit of Uranus without the need for Planet X.

The idea of Planet X as representing any sort of undiscovered thing entered the public consciousness during all this, and has filtered back into the scientific community that way, but there really was evidence that caused them to look for a specific planet originally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_X

Might want to give the raw dairy a miss if you're pregnant, maybe fungi too.

Pre-Eclampsia And Diet: New Link Discovered

That's not really what the article says.




Tom Brewer made a pretty good case for it being caused by a high-carb, low-protein, restricted-salt diet.

It isn't? You sure about that?

It didn't sound like a clear conclusion that it was bad. It brought to mind the Hyperlipid article about endotoxin.

Hey Nancy! This link was posted to a Natural Parenting forum:



http://www.physorg.com/news134143992.html

Interesting!

Nancy, this is from your article:




This idea wouldn't explain the high rates of preeclampsia among American women where most dairy products are pasturized, opposed to the lower rates of preeclampsia in European countries where unpasturized dairy products are prevelent and not necessarily advised against during pregnancy. I highly doubt American women consume more fungi than Europeans.

I've heard this theory and it doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If it were the body reacting to something toxic then why does it occur in the morning when your stomach is likely empty? It seems like it would occur immediately after eating, like cats seem to do. And then it seems like some women are really drawn to some stuff that seems pretty toxic to me, saltine crackers, and reject things that should be pretty healthy like meat and veggies.

Nancy, as any pregnant woman would clue you in - "Morning" sickness is not limited to morning. I don't know any pregnant women who have only been sick in the morning. It mentions that in the article as well

And, as illustrated by my puking up the sleeve incident - sickness does occur immediately after eating (even before)

The article also explains why foods that are "healthy like meat and veggies" are rejected - did you read it?

Anyway! You're free to disagree with experts in Darwinian medicine, evolutionary behaviorism & neurobiolgy. I thought their credentials would be interesting to you since you were speculating in an evolutionary perspective

Ok, I read the whole thing, not just your snippet. So it would seem that rejecting meat and veggies goes back to an era when they're likely to be tainted. So your body isn't reacting to the taint, but the potential of taint. Probably the stuff women seem to hold down, carby products and dairy perhaps, haven't been around long enough to set up any sort of natural selection towards rejecting them.

I wonder what women of yore ate to keep themselves and their fetuses from starving.

Good for you!

Yes, meat would have been a source of parasites & harmful microorganisms and vegetables can harbor harmful bacteria and mold. I don't know what you mean by "goes back to an era" - both can still be contaminated (in any country, "developed" or "primitive"). I know many vegetarian and vegan mothers who were even adverse to meat substitutes. Even the idea of these foods can make some women spew. That's a strong compulsion!

Carby products are processed. The chances of your transmitting a parasite from a cracker are pretty non existant, opposed to a wild animal that is likely to have a parasite.

Also remember that your villification of carbs is specific to you and a small percentage of population. Most people don't consider a cracker to be "toxic"

I wonder what women ate too! It's still common for women to be so adverse to foods and so sick that they to lose weight in the first trimester. Women's bodies feed babies first, so the likelyhood of a fetus starving in those first few months are slim provided the woman survives. As mentioned in the article, the nausea typically only lasts through that volitaile first trimester.

As I was reaching for my homemade pickles I wondered if the notorious "pickle cravings" could be related to craving foods that are least likely to harbor bacteria. It's possible! Who knows?

Well, cooking pretty much takes care of the parasites, bacteria and such. So if they're upchucking raw veggies, I could understand. Cooked, not so much.