The claim that we ate raw vegan in Africa millions of years ago is debunked by the fact that multiple sources show that we started eating lots of meat prior to any emigration out of Africa.
The claim re Eskimoes not living long lives and relating that to diet is laughable since the Eskimoes lived in one of harshest climates in the world, so could hardly be expected to live long, regardless of diet. Plus, they lived in igloos which had some contamination re smoke, as I recall. William mentioned that once.
Stefansson also claimed that Eskimoes aged faster, claiming grandmothers habitually appearing at the age of 23, which is obviously completely bogus.
The claim re constipation and mostly-meat/Eskimo etc. diets is also false as most such dieters report farting a lot LESS, not more. I am a classic example, in that I fart a huge amount if I eat grains or processed foods, and even fart a little if I eat raw fruits, but I hardly fart at all during periods where I eat only raw animal foods. Since Eskimos eat a meat diet that is partially raw, they would not have been susceptible to much farting at all.
The claim re excess animal protein causing problems re the acid/alkali balance theory has already been long debunked:-
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.htmlBesides, raw animal food has a much higher PH value(ie lower acidity) than cooked animal food, with heavily processed precooked animal foods usually having even higher acidity levels:-
http://www.eutechinst.com/techtips/tech-tips35.htmAmusingly, the article cites excess calcium as being responsible for the higher levels of hip-fractures in Eskimoes, but then diverts to pretending that excess protein is the cause. Since excess calcium in diets has been linked to osteoporosis and weak bones in general around the world, the excess calcium notion is way more believable. But, since most raw-meat-eaters don't consume fish-bones they are unlikely to consume excess calcium unless they are foolish enough to consume raw dairy.
Then there's the retarded claim that we didn't start eating meat until very recently. In fact, archaeological records show us starting to eat (raw) meat in a big way from 3 million years ago:-
http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w/hb/hb-interview1c.shtml#timeline%20startAs for the Kung, they lived in a far less harsh climate than the Eskimoes, so naturally they lived longer. Nothing to do with diet. Then he goes on about the supposed health of other hunter-gatherer tribes. Like Weston-Price, he has bugger-all decent info on them, and even grudgingly admits that such tribes had high infant-mortality-rates. The simple fact is that all HG tribes had constant problems re finding resources/poor weather etc. so that citing any of them as paragons of health is just stupid. All one can state is that they were less prone to the diseases of civilisation as they did not have access to heavily overprocessed foods.
The claim re a multitude of studies showing that excess animal protein in one's diet is harmful is, of course, a deliberate lie. All such studies show that COOKED animal protein is a problem, not RAW animal food protein. Indeed, the few studies on raw animal foods,(only ones on raw dairy) have shown some health benefits therefrom.
The link made between atherosclerosis and excess meat consumption again ignores that all such studies focus on cooked animal foods. In fact there are now countless studies focusing on the harm done by heat-created toxins derived from cooked foods(such as advanced glycation end products) and their direct link to the incidence of atherosclerosis:-
http://atvb.ahajournals.org/content/25/10/2157.shortSimiliarly, when the levels of heat-created toxins are reduced, the symptoms of atherosclerosis are reduced, indicating that raw-meat diets, but not cooked diets, are great for RELIEVING atherosclerosis, not increasing it at all:-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15220206He then rails against fats, but we have too many anecdotal pieces of evidence showing that low fat raw vegan diets are extremely harmful to health. And all the scientific literature is against cooked fats, not raw fats, anyway.
