On 2017-01-11 6:38 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2017 18:37:28 -0500, Dave Smith

>> I pointed out that in the first half of the 20th century the live on the
>> traditional diet because they were very remote and there was no other
>> option, and that their life expectancy int he 1940w was 29 years. I
>> don't know if it was the diet, disease or starvation.
>
> But that means there is no reason to think their diet made them live
> longer. It also doesn't mean their diet made them live shorter.

Perhaps that was why I said I didn't know if it was their diet, disease
or starvation.


> many other factors are at play, that you can't really say anything
> about the effect of their diet on their life expectancy. So why do
> people keep bringing them up to prove that their high "good fat" diet
> is healthy?


Ask the people who you think keep bringing them up to prove that their
high "good fat" diet is healthy. Their people lived in a cold climate
long enough for them to develop a high fat diet that sustained them all
that time. They think it is important for them to have a lot of fat in
their diet to help them cope with the cold. FWIW, while I was
researching about their longevity and diet I came across an article that
had a photo of a bunch of native kids in the north playing hockey. There
is snow on the ground and none of the kids are wearing bulky jackets.
One is in a long sleeved shirt and another is just in a T shirt.