"Bob" > wrote in message
...
> 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?

I must admit Bob, that you have lost me here. What are you talking about?

Charlie

> > 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
>