Bromo > wrote in
:
> On 2/15/04 3:22 PM, in article
> , "Frogleg"
> > wrote:
>
>> The caveman (and his family) was mostly after enough calories to
>> support life. It doesn't matter much if you eat a carrot and have
>> enough vitamin A to keep your vision good when that's *all* you
>> have to eat.
>
> Keep in mind that the hunter-gatherer life would have a varied
> diet - whatever they could find or catch - and would probably be
> pretty close to balanced on average. For those of us subscribing
> the evolutionary theory - that is exactly the type of diet we
> evolved to eat!
Archaeological reports of food remains of North American natives
(excluding the Inuit) show that their diet was composed on average of
about 80% starchy foods and other vegetable matter (gathering) and
about 20% meat (hunting). Of course the average lifespan was around
20, with elders being in their late 20's to early 30's. This is not
to say the diet is bad for the place and time.
Europeans had longer lifespans. My ancestor who arrived here in 1634
died at the age of 82, his wife at the age of 84 and many others of
his contemporaries lived well into their 80's.
I doubt it was the presence of meat in the diet. It had more to do
with the salubrious environment and the relative lack of diseases
that ran rampant throughout the cold moist climate of northern
Europe. The Jesuit Relations state that the recovery rate at the
Hôtel-Dieu in Québec was 90% (whereas is was nearly 0% in northern
France). Of course, that could be sheer prpoganda, but there is no
reason to doubt that the recovery rate was significant.
--
"I'm the master of low expectations."
GWB, aboard Air Force One, 04Jun2003