I didn’t want to interfere anymore with your holly debunking mission, but your posts contain such crocks of shit (amongst interesting and remarkable info) that I feel compelled to reestablish some facts.
Hanna,
The so called " partial answer" to my argument has already been commented on before. It is either irrelevant or just plain wrong and ridiculously contradictory with what Burger "teached" us up to now.
I fail to see any ridiculous contradiction between what Burger "taught" before and "teaches" now. Since you never followed his teaching but rather those of FvB, I wonder how you can write such a statement.
Figs are available 3 months in France (and even whole year round if dried 
) but nobody except foolish instinctos (when there were still some of them 
) ate them up to so-called "stop" whenever they wanted to or their supposed "instinct" told them.
May I remind you that you were one of those “foolish instinctos” for several years (shame on you…
) and that you ate figs up to the “so called stop” along with me for weeks without the slightest trouble appearing .
This availabilty of figs is a sheer neolithic phenomenon and normal people precisely have adapted to it by culture and know perfectly well that they have to restrict their intake willfully. So this is absolutely irrelevant to what happened in nature or paleotimes.
Are you so sure there were no fruits in hominid’s environment during the Paleolithic era? How comes there’s a lot of different fruits in the Amazonian rain forest as well as wild rambutans, durians, jacks and cempedaks in the Southeast Asian rain forest inhabited by apes? “Normal people”… do you consider people on SWD as normal and RPDers as abnormal morons? Of course, when you eat bread, pizzas, raviolis, chips and cheeseburgers you’re not attracted by figs. These guys don’t even have to willfully restrict their intake of figs (or other fruits): they simply can’t eat it in bigger amounts than tiny samples.
In nature or paleotimes animals or man do or did by no means nicely "limit spontaneously" the intake of sweet or fatty foods to their strict, according to intincto dogma "present nutritional needs". They rather eat as much as they can usually up to repletion.
Even supposing you’re right (which I hope you’ll grant me the right to doubt) how do they know they reach repletion, hey? Do they also eat so called “medicinal plants” up to repletion?
Pygmees for instance have been observed to gorge on wild honey when they are lucky enough to get at it. There would be satiety signals preventing them to gorge if the pygmee had just a meal before but a normal pygmee would then not have gone and look for honeycomb with the risks of the confrontation with the bees that don't like so much their honey to be stolen Satiety signals do not usually just by themselves have to ensure limited intake. Things are much more involved and subtle.
Ok, would you like to go and live with them to experience their diet and way of live?
We have obviously evolved to adapt to a world where very sweet or fatty foods were most of the time fairly difficult to obtain, the only serious way to explain the reality of (too, in civilized world) strong attraction towards such foods
Big animals have always been very easy to catch, skin and eat, isn’t it? How comes hence that we have a very strong attraction for their meat?
The pygmees of course do not "need" presently so much sugar and get then certainly a huge insulin spike and become sleepy with temporary "impaired capacity to flee or respond to a predator's attack". But this is not a daily phenomenon with strong statistical weight in terms of being killed or having their sugar regulation machinery impaired on the one hand and on the other hand permits them to store the excess of nutriments in the form of fat for less fortunate days.
Right, they may eat more than immediately needed and store it for tomorrow. I too do it sometimes. What’s the problem if there’s no predator around?
BTW an organism has nothing like "present or instantaneous often rapidly varying from day to day or hour to hour needs" in terms of nutriments as repeatedly invoked in instincto dogma. Pure civilized man fad. So there is also no reason to invoke the existence of supposed "finely tuned instinctive stop" signals during each individual meal. Animals are actually equipped with powerful biochemical means to adapt to both temporary excess or lack of food or nutriments. Nutritional regulation and balance has just to be ensured and take place over many weeks or months and actually a whole year period.
Yes, I think your’re not completely wrong here, at least in regard to organisms in perfect health. The name “instinctotherapy” means it is intended for ill persons (as we civilized are all more or less) and in such cases it has been found very advantageous to fill as much as possible the instantaneous needs of those poor “pure civilized “ women and men.
Moreover, as well as others, I've already commented briefly on the ridiculous contradictions in Burger's recent and former statements. Confronted to the overwhelming evidence, Burger now perversely feigns to call "alimentary instinct" the trivial fact well known since long before Burger that there is an "intrinsic part" in food regulation and intake such as the attractions or repulsions or encoded satiety signals. In other words in his new version his so-called "alimentary instinct" just no longer ensures nutritional regulation and health. This converts instincto de facto into a plain triviality and I challenge the rare remaining instinctos to demonstrate what's the usefullness or purpose of further invoking such a ridiculous "instinct" And this new form of instincto would have absolutely nothing to do and be completely at odds with the former spectacular and arrogant instincto claims and version (the very heart of instincto message actually) such as stated Burger's Anopsology and which is also actually the very reason of instincto failure.
Uuhhhhg?
Finally for charity reason I won't further insist, but what's emergent in this respect in nature cannot be a supposed "function ensuring nutritional regulation" but is merely the specific order in the form of a healthy (or ill) organism (with thus balanced (or not) nutrition) embedded in a healthy (or ill) ecosystem.
What to do then if we are ill at the start and have no way to be embedded anymore into a healthy ecosystem?
Note also that I do not of course deny the « utility » of sensory and satiety signals as Burger again feigns to believe. They just do not and do not even have by themselves to ensure food intake regulation in nature as instincto dogma postulates, not even during a single fruit season.
And simultaneously you maintain that these sensory and satiety signals are not an intrinsic part of an instinct?
HGs were generally in much better health than instinctos in spite of a fraction of cooked food in their diet.
Do you expect individuals grown on cooked diet, wheat and dairy for several generation and even often having been deprived of breastfeeding to miraculously regain a health state comparable to HG having been subject to an intense natural selection up to the latest generation? Don’t forget that many instinctos were in a very bad shape before and would be in hospital bed or even dead by now had they not switched to instinctive nutrition.
What do you think of the health state of GCB offsprings who have almost always been eating instincto?
Moreover instinctos routinely overeat honey or sweet food in spite of their 100% raw diet.
On what base do you determine the threshold to overeating sweet foodstuff ? How do you know they overeat sweet food? How comes that the diabetics swapping to instinctive nutrition see their symptoms disappear?
My diet is Raw Paleo with fatty meat and organs, fish ,shellfish, eggs etc with a modest part of fruit and plant food (essentially greens plus some nuts) in winter and more in summer. Fruit is rarely tropical. Typically around 1800 kcal a day only even in case of important physical activity. I know in advance what kind of food might be appropriate. Nothing to do with an "instinct" IMO, just initial training.
About the same than mine except that I probably eat more fruits than you (I ever ate a lot of fruits and sweet stuff, even when I was on cooked diet). After the usual initial instincto training and following several years of practice, I also know most of the time in advance (instinctively, mind you!) what food will be appropriate. But anyway, my nose located just over my mouth is there to check what comes in. A second check takes place in my mouth.
