From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Sat May 10 1997 - 09:17:47 MDT
In a message dated 5/10/97 6:00:03 AM, you wrote:
> tried a food-combining diet by a Frenchman called Michel Montignac,
>which is quite well known in Europe. Subjectively I felt great and
>slimmed down quite a lot - although that might be mainly because he
>recommended cutting out anything with sugar altogether. His idea is to
>cut out stuff like potatoes and rice and refined flour breads altogether
>; occasionally eat wholemeal bread on its own with almost nothing else;
>for main meals eat vegetables + a bit of meat; and lots of fruit, but
>separately from anything else. The diet was very much a gourmet sort of
>diet (it allowed oddities like nibbling cheese whenever you like, and a
>bit of red wine and pure chocolate every now and then - very French!).
That sound like an good diet, as long as you don't pig out on the cheese.
I'd probably be in trouble. This kind of diet would make many people lose
weight and feel good; no need for food combining to explain anything.
>It seems to me that the main plausibility about food combining is that
>our ancestors wouldn't have been likely to have had combinations of food
>at all - they would probably have gorged themselves on one kind of food
>at a time, as they found it. Right or wrong?
Really, there's no good way to know. Food in the wild tends not to come in
enormous quantity, although there are exceptions.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:25 MST