View Single Post
Old 12-24-2008, 07:10 AM   #13 (permalink)
eww
Registered User
eww's Profile Fields
 
eww's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 713
My Mood:
eww has disabled reputation
Points: 19,287.55
Bank: 332,551.52
Total Points: 351,839.07
Default

The problem I have with the article is that it is written to sound scientific when it is anything but. Anecdotes of what has worked for individuals are one thing, but the style in which it is written and the way the author presents information lends a false feeling of accuracy to the piece. If it was presented as a personal opinion piece, or personal testimonial then I would have far less of an issue with it. If claims are going to be made are broad and sweeping like that women on this diet ovulate and can concieve without issue, then there must be actual evidence to back it up. Otherwise I could claim anything I wanted to be true. My other important issue was that there was no bibliography or works cited included with the article. I would be interested in seeing where the author got the information included and if other sources with different biases were included in the source material. The fact that this was not included takes away from its credibility.

When I commented about cooking technology changing our physical bodies, what I meant is that everything from the size of our torsos (our digestive tract has shrunk considerably) to teeth size and jaw muscles (hence cranial structure) have changed due to the advent of eating cooked food. Cranial capacity (brain size) also shot up around the time that cooking (and meat!) was introduced into the human diet. I'm not saying those who choose to be vegetarians or vegans will have smaller brains or anything. lol. I'm just pointing out the fact that although yes, we CAN eat a raw diet, our bodies are actually NOT designed to eat raw food all the time. We would simply be shaped differently if we were. After all, cows have multiple stomachs.

And I am curious about the idea that our bodies are shaped more like frugivores. Which frugivores are you referring to? I was under the impression that we are more closely related to, and have the most similar physical characteristics, including size with omnivores like primates. Chimpanzees are the obvious example. But I am definitely interested in your ideas on the matter.
__________________
Erinn
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"I've tripped again and things are starting to get interesting..."


Quote of the day: "When my eyes get all glazed and my head starts bobbing, don't try to listen for the music. There is no music. There is just me. I'm dreaming."
eww is offline   Reply With Quote