Does the Fuhrman Diet indicate anything about the past? Acc. to this
diet, or non-diet, articulated int he book Eat To Live, the human body is
evolved to eat large amounts of raw and cooked green vegetables, and fresh
fruits; a cup or more of beans, a cup of starchy vegetables or whole
grains,
and a cupped palmful of raw nuts. On this diet, one loses weight, feels
full, and gets healthier.
Foods to be avoided are: all meats of any type, including all dairy
products, although one might have small amounts of dairy products
occasionally; cooking oils, salt, and sugar, and etc.
So, assuming this diet reflects evolution, how did the human diet
evolve?
It would seem to me as if most of the time man was eating raw green leafy
vegetables; or,if not man, then his evolutionary predecessors? What kind
of
a world does this mean? Was it a world rich in edible foliage, or was man
growing gardens?
Beans were less common, and nuts were still less plentiful in the diet.
He
was not eating meat or dairy at all.
So he was not a hunter. He was not on The Paleolithic Prescriptiuon
Diet,
unless he ate meat very infrequently.
My guess would be that the world was rich in vegetation, but that then
there must have been long periods of famine due to climate changesd or
perhaps asteroid strikes, in which plant food was not available in
sufficient amounts, and man had to compensate by eating meat, or by
cultivating domestiated cattle, which could include dairy products.
Another idea is that human ancestors, and maybe man, lived in a world
of
carnivorous animals, and he had to rely on plants for food, because, if he
hunted an animal, it's scent would attract carnivores that might eat him.
Some fruits and edible plants, such as pomegranate4s and garlic, seem
to
have so much health benefits for man, one wonders if they were part of an
ancient diet, or if they were cultivated plants?
|
