from my understanding as human beings we are considerably different from humans who lived in 1900, much less those who lived literally hand to mouth thousands of years ago. Why should we advocate the same approximate diet if our bodies differ so much?

How different we really are, physiologically, from our recent and our distant ancestors, is still a matter of huge debate. There have certainly been some adaptations, like the ability to digest milk and the ability to tolerate grains. Some folks insist that the best, healthiest diet is the diet your own ancestors ate - like, if you're Polynesian, you should be eating coconut and fish, and if you're Asian, you should be eating fish and seaweed and rice, and if you're European you should be eating, I dunno, turnips and borscht.

The purity and almost surreal vibrancy of colors in the new transfer far exceed that of earlier DVD releases.

I just noticed that! I rewatched "The Enterprise Incident" and it was so supertrippy colorful. I had never felt like I was watching a Bava movie watching Star Trek before, but that's what it was like and I really enjoyed it.

like, if you're Polynesian, you should be eating coconut and fish, and if you're Asian, you should be eating fish and seaweed and rice, and if you're European you should be eating, I dunno, turnips and borscht.

My ancestors are primarily Scottish and German, so this logic is really not going to work for me. Can I convert to Thai? Or maybe Mexican? I need to find some ancestors who ate mostly spicy foods with lots of cilantro, is what I'm saying.

I see what you mean about the insulin, but in someone who's not diabetic, it's a normal process, so I don't think it's a big deal. Even on the Paleo diet, you're going to get carbs/natural sugar from fruit.

I agree with you, Amy! It's the natural way the human body deals with sugar, and as long as nothing has gone wrong with that process in a particular human body, it isn't a big deal. However, there are Paleo folks who think we shouldn't be eating much fruit, either, because - oh, god, deep breath - because our H/G ancestors didn't have a steady year-round supply of lots of different fruits and we aren't adapted to handle that much sugar.

I get it, Zen. I just can't imagine being that dedicated to a particular diet. Especially that one, honestly. Baked goods are a lot of my reason for living.

I'm pretty happy that I have the option to eat things other than stored root vegetables through the winter. I mean, speaking as someone with a lot of British/Irish/German heritage.

Baked goods are a lot of my reason for living.

Seriously. I notice that Mr "Grains will kill you in your sleep and then haunt your children's dreams" did not include "BECAUSE PASTA IS FUCKING DELICIOUS" in his reasons for why someone might want to eat it.

I would have been perfectly happy if Mooncake turned out to be a bakery.

like, if you're Polynesian, you should be eating coconut and fish, and if you're Asian, you should be eating fish and seaweed and rice, and if you're European you should be eating, I dunno, turnips and borscht.

I was having this discussion a couple of weeks ago. My problem is eating like any of my ancestors is that I don't eat fish. And why did my crazy amalgam of ancestors end up where they ended up? To fish. Mostly, I just blame my Irish side for everything.

Basically, I think humans will eat, drink, smoke, and fuck anything. It may or may not be good for us. The sole fact that our distant ancestors probably did or did not do it is not reason enough for us to do or not do it.

Oh, indeed. I mean, there are certainly some things which are better for us than others--or at least can be eaten safely in larger quantities. But moderation in all things! There's probably no food that is good for all humans, in all circumstances.