Frogleg wrote:

> On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 16:43:56 -0500, Bob > wrote:
>
>>ASmith1946 wrote:
>>
>>>Like so many other foods, oysters are supposedly aphrodesiacs
>>>
>>>Is this a 20th century invention or historically were oysters considered
>>>aphrodesiacs? Does this go back to the humoral system of medicine?
>>
>>It goes back to the appearance of so many bivalves, mussels being the
>>most obvious. They resemble labia with a small protrusion peeking out
>>from between the "lips."
>
> So why isn't a banana considered an aphrodesiac? :-)

You don't have a VHS or DVD player, do you?

> Modern food science tells us that certain aphrodesiac foods are simply
> good nutrition -- I think it's zinc for oysters.

Presumably to galvanize one to action.

> OTOH, chocolate *does* seem to have an endorphin effect.

It's the mouthfeel...

> Still, "candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker."

Been my experience.

Pastorio