劝酒拼酒何时休 辉格 2013年1月4日 多年来，无论在公款消费、官场应酬、商务宴请，还是私人聚宴中，高档酒的地位越来越受尊崇，其在餐饮账单上所占份额也日见高涨，成为许多酒店的主要利润来源；这也让国内高档白酒的股票广受追捧，经年坚挺；最近，军队里传出要限制喝酒的风气，白酒股闻风应声大跌，也可见白酒在腐败类消费中的领导地位。 除了满足个人偏好之外，喝酒很大程度上是一种社会性消费，是为了实现某些社会性功能而喝，因而总是伴随着某些特定的社会活动和人际交往，在此意义上，酒被称为社会交往的润滑剂，倒也贴切；酒类消费中的大部分，大概都可归之于这种功能性需求。 不过，同样是社会性消费，具体的喝法却随所需实现的功能不同而迥然相异，最常见的一类是助兴型的，此时喝酒是为了让人进入某种状态，而这种状态适合于他正在参与的社会活动和交往，因为酒精可以解除大脑对某些低级冲动的抑制，让人变得更加放松、兴奋、甚至放纵。 在诸如歌舞、嬉戏、看球之类的群体娱乐中，这样的状态会让参与者表现更好，而许多社交活动也需要参与者比平时更为松弛，不再拘谨，甚至略带兴奋，容易打开话匣子，所以作为社区社交中心的英国乡村小酒馆，或中国茶馆，作为私人社交场的沙龙客厅、鸡尾酒会，都会以酒助兴。 当参与者平时并不十分亲密，只是为了特定目的而聚在一起时，或者平时碍于等级身份或社会规范约束而不得亲密时，那么，在此类场合借助酒精来解除拘谨和戒备的需要就会变得更强烈。 沙龙客人可能只与主人熟识，相互间并不亲密，而且不时还有新人被引介进圈子，单位同事平日受等级职务拘束，年终聚餐时则需要营造一种平等参与氛围，分离多年的老同学，文化和价值观上已多有隔膜，却仍想重叙旧情，还有大家族的众多亲戚，平时来往寡浅，家族纽带全赖各种节庆婚丧宴席维系，等等。 以酒助兴的习俗在各大文化中都有，不过中国的酒文化还有另一种类型的功能性需求，不妨称之为对抗型，表现为以醉倒对方为目的的高强度劝酒，相互轮番劝酒直至大部分参与者都达到承受极限，这种习俗在其他文化中十分罕见，而且过去二十年，无论官场、商务还是私人交往中，有愈演愈烈之势，也正是这一习俗，创造了酒类消费中的极大一部分。 劝酒拼酒习俗中所涉及的心理因素看来相当复杂微妙，其原因颇难究考，不过从某些线索中还是能看出些渊源；在助兴式喝酒时，借助酒精暂时剥夺某些自控和协调能力，是为了更好地参与社交活动，所以各人自己喝就行了，而在对抗性劝酒中，酒精的这一作用被用作了武器：剥夺对方的自控与协调能力，但尽可能保持自己的。 然后，当所有参与者都意识到别人在用这一武器对付自己时，也都拿起该武器参战，于是战斗轮番升级，最终，博弈各方达成一个规范：确保所有人都被剥夺自控能力，这成了酒桌上的游戏规则；问题是，这究竟有什么社会功能？常见的通俗说法是，这能热络感情，拉近关系，更准确的说，酒精能够解除戒备。 或许正是因为中国文化中横亘于人际关系的种种戒备太多太深，才特别需要通过酒精来解除它；劝酒者在敬酒时，或许是在告诉对方，我同意解除戒备，请你也这样，这类似于握手礼的起源，告诉对方：瞧，我手里没有武器，让我知道你也没有，甚至我们可以想象，劝酒习俗在古代或许真的发挥过确保聚宴各方同时丧失战斗力的作用，因为喝醉酒的人是很难保持格斗能力的。 之所以人际交往中充满了戒备，或许是因为缺乏信任机制和社会规范对行为的约束，社会交往中充斥着尔虞我诈的机会主义行为，为此人人都须时刻保持警惕，才能保护自己的利益不受伤害；在这场长期的机会主义攻防战，导致了心理武库的军备竞赛，精明、理智、审慎、诡诈、圆滑、伪装、设套、声东击西、拐弯抹角……等等心理武器都被一一开发出来，装备在身，而真实意图被却包裹在重重伪装之下，难以看透。 果若如此，我们便可预期，越是那些可能被对方设陷欺骗或伤害，因而越需要加以警惕和戒备的社会交往，劝酒风气便越盛行，而那些真正亲密的，或已经建立了充分信任关系的交往，则会表现的较为平和，事实看来正是如此，酒风炽烈的程度，从官场、涉及国企或政府项目的商务交往，到私人企业间交往、半生不熟的圈子，到亲密朋友、核心家庭，依次递减，高档酒的消费量大概也按此坐标呈梯度分布。 过去二十年酒风日盛的趋势，或许也是社会变迁的结果之一，市场开放，社会流动性增加，各种交往和交易关系大量涌现，但这些关系和交易中所需的规范和信任却未能及时建立，于是传统酒俗被改造而移用过来，为这些交往构造一个可让其顺畅运行的舞台。 可是，尽管发挥了这样的作用，劝酒习俗带给参与者的健康代价却是非常高昂的，很少有人真正乐在其中，更多人出于无奈，并对此苦不堪言，也想出种种办法加以逃避，可以相信，此陋俗以当今之炽烈程度的泛滥，只是阶段性的，随着人们对其健康代价的认知加深，价值观的变化，以及新的社会规范和信任机制的逐渐成型和成熟，新生代当不至于全盘继承这一陋俗。 【2021-06-26】 斯大林用灌酒来考验手下的忠诚，见Simon Montefiore - Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar，第46章。  

或许是戒碳水的结果（欢迎大家以某种纯粹主义姿态对『戒』字进行挑剔，当然这对我不会起任何作用），我变得对甜味十分敏感，如今大部分蔬菜，青椒，（烤熟或炒熟的）胡萝卜，菠菜，地蒲，洋葱……都会让我觉得很甜，甚至太甜，而饼干则多半甜得无法接受了。 ​​​​  

自从换食谱之后，每次我破戒吃甜食后造成的体重反弹都远远超出所吃甜食本身的重量，需要一周或更久才减回去，起先我还以为是称量误差或随机波动，多次反复后发现不是。

澳洲真是食肉者的天堂，是不是素食者的地狱还有待考察:) 我常吃的几种肉类，价格由低到高依次是：鸡-羊-牛-猪，后三种的次序和上海/北京比正好颠倒，而羊肉恰好是我最喜欢的，消费者剩余满满。 牛奶AU$1/升，比上海便宜，但酸奶贵，约为牛奶的4-5倍，打算自己做，鸡蛋便宜的$3一打，略贵。 超市里最多见的鱼是三文鱼，不贵。 多数蔬菜很贵，较便宜的有芦笋、胡萝卜、大白菜、卷心菜，其中芦笋是我见到唯一比上海便宜的蔬菜，可惜没人替你削皮。 相比之下，加工过的冷冻包装蔬菜更合算，也更方便，是做熟后冷冻的，微波炉加热即可，另外，罐头蔬菜也便宜，但口味差些。 番茄酱特别便宜。 经过一番尝试之后，我将食谱调整为： 早饭：5个鸡蛋+1小根胡萝卜+100ml酸奶或牛奶；晚饭：450克牛排或羊排+1小根胡萝卜+100多克蔬菜。 看起来非常简单粗暴，不过执行几天之后，体重已明显下降（之前因为搬家前后食谱失控，体重反弹了两公斤）。 最重大改变是，以我的食谱，在家吃饭变得方便很多，一旦我把烤箱摸透，参数调准，生肉往里一扔，中途翻个面，烤熟，撒盐，开吃，胡萝卜生嚼即可，包装蔬菜微波炉加热，盘子攒上一堆送进洗碗机，现在还没解决的问题是：烤肉时垫点什么才能不用洗烤盘。 烤箱是个好东西。 洗碗机还没摸透，经常效果不好，可能跟碗碟的表面特性有关，以后换成宜家Dinera那种试试。  

How Americans Got Red Meat Wrong 美国人对红肉的理解怎么错了 作者:Nina Teicholz @ 2014-06-02 译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 来源:The Atlantic,http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/06/how-americans-used-to-eat/371895/ Early diets in the country weren't as plant-based as you might think. 我国的早期饮食并不像你所想的那样以植物为主。 The idea that red meat is a principal dietary culprit has pervaded our national conversation for decades. We have been led to believe that we’ve strayed from a more perfect, less meat-filled past. Most prominently, when Senator McGovern announced his Senate committee’s report, called Dietary Goals, at a press conference in 1977, he expressed a gloomy outlook about where the American diet was heading. 几十年来，红肉乃饮食首恶的观念一直在我们国家的争论中普遍流行。有人告诉我们，现在我们已经偏离了过去那种更为健康、吃肉更少的传统。最出名的一件事是，在1977年一次媒体发布会上，参议员McGovern代表其所在的参院委员会宣读了名为《膳食指导》的报告。会上他曾对美国人饮食的演变提出了一种非常悲观的展望。 “Our diets have changed radically within the past 50 years,” he explained, “with great and often harmful effects on our health.” These were the “killer diseases,” said McGovern. The solution, he declared, was for Americans to return to the healthier, plant-based diet they once ate. “过去50年，我们的饮食发生了剧烈变化，”他解释道，“对我们的健康构成了巨大且往往是有害的影响。”McGovern还说，“这些都是致命的疾病”。他宣称，解决办法就是：美国人要回归他们以前食用的那种更为健康、以植物为主体的饮食。 The justification for this idea, that our ancestors lived mainly on fruits, vegetables, and grains, comes mainly from the USDA “food disappearance data.” The “disappearance” of food is an approximation of supply; most of it is probably being eaten, but much is wasted, too. Experts therefore acknowledge that the disappearance numbers are merely rough estimates of consumption. 我们的祖先主要吃水果、蔬菜和粮食，这种想法的依据主要来自美国农业部的“食物消散数据”。食物的“消散”只是供给量的近似值；其中大部分大概是被食用了，但也有许多是被浪费了。因此，专家们承认，食物消散数据只是对食物消费量的大概估计。 "I hold a family to be in a desperate way when the mother can see the bottom of the pork barrel." “我认为，如果一个主妇的猪肉桶都见底了，那这个家庭应该很窘迫。” The data from the early 1900s, which is what McGovern and others used, are known to be especially poor. Among other things, these data accounted only for the meat, dairy, and other fresh foods shipped across state lines in those early years, so anything produced and eaten locally, such as meat from a cow or eggs from chickens, would not have been included. McGovern和其他许多人使用的数据来自1900年代，这些数据质量之糟糕是出了名的。不说其他，这些数据只体现了早年间跨州贩卖的肉类、乳品和其他新鲜食物。因此，本地生产并消耗的一切东西，比如牛所产之肉或母鸡所产鸡蛋，都没有计算在内。 And since farmers made up more than a quarter of all workers during these years, local foods must have amounted to quite a lot. Experts agree that this early availability data are not adequate for serious use, yet they cite the numbers anyway, because no other data are available. And for the years before 1900, there are no “scientific” data at all. 由于那时候农牧民在劳动力中占到了四分之一强，因此本地食品总量必定相当大。尽管专家们同意，早期的这一食物可获得性数据并不能够用于严肃场合，可他们还是会引用这些数字，因为没有其他数据可用。至于1900年之前，那就根本没有任何“科学”数据了。 In the absence of scientific data, history can provide a picture of food consumption in the late-18th- to 19th-century in America. 尽管缺乏科学数据，但有关18世纪晚期至19世纪美国的食物消费，历史仍能给我们提供一幅画面。 Early Americans settlers were “indifferent” farmers, according to many accounts. They were fairly lazy in their efforts at both animal husbandry and agriculture, with “the grain fields, the meadows, the forests, the cattle, etc, treated with equal carelessness,” as one 18th-century Swedish visitor described—and there was little point in farming since meat was so readily available. 根据许多记录，早期的美洲殖民者都是“漫不经心”的农牧民。不管是在牲畜饲养，还是在农业种植方面，他们的工作都相当懒惰。正如18世纪一位瑞士访客所说，他们“对于粮田、牧场、森林和牲畜等等，都一样的随意对待”。由于肉食唾手可得，费力农牧也没多大意义。 Settlers recorded the extraordinary abundance of wild turkeys, ducks, grouse, pheasant, and more. Migrating flocks of birds would darken the skies for days. The tasty Eskimo curlew was apparently so fat that it would burst upon falling to the earth, covering the ground with a sort of fatty meat paste. (New Englanders called this now-extinct species the “doughbird.”) 在殖民者的笔下，此地的野生火鸡、鸭子、松鸡、野鸡等等都异常丰富。迁徙的鸟群遮天蔽日，好几天都没完。极北杓鹬美味可口，而且极为肥硕，掉到地上竟然还会炸开，能让泥土表面盖上一层肥腻的肉糊。（新英格兰人将这一现已灭绝的物种称作“面团鸟”。） In the woods, there were bears (prized for their fat), raccoons, bobo­links, opossums, hares, and virtual thickets of deer—so much that the colo­nists didn’t even bother hunting elk, moose, or bison, since hauling and conserving so much meat was considered too great an effort. A European traveler describing his visit to a Southern plantation noted that the food included beef, veal, mutton, venison, turkeys, and geese, but he does not mention a single vegetable. 森林里还有熊（因其肉肥而贵重）、浣熊、食米鸟、负鼠、野兔以及跟灌木一样密集的野鹿——猎物如此繁多，以至于殖民者都不愿意费力去捕杀麋鹿、驼鹿或野牛，因为他们觉得要把这么多肉拖回家保存实在太费劲了。一位造访南部某种植园的欧洲旅客提到，当地人的食物包括牛肉、小牛肉、羊肉、鹿肉、火鸡和鹅，他可没有提及任何一种蔬菜。 Infants were fed beef even before their teeth had grown in. The English novelist Anthony Trollope reported, during a trip to the United States in 1861, that Americans ate twice as much beef as did Englishmen. Charles Dickens, when he visited, wrote that “no breakfast was breakfast” without a T-bone steak. Apparently, starting a day on puffed wheat and low-fat milk—our “Breakfast of Champions!”—would not have been considered adequate even for a servant. 小孩子牙都还没长齐，就已经开始喂食牛肉。英国小说家Anthony Trollope于1861年造访美国后曾说，美国人所吃牛肉是英国人的两倍。Charles Dickens访美后则写道，如果没有一块T骨牛排，“早餐就不成其为早餐”。显然，即便是对仆人而言，早上吃点膨化小麦和低脂牛奶——我们的“早餐之冠”——也是不够的。 Indeed, for the first 250 years of American history, even the poor in the United States could afford meat or fish for every meal. The fact that the workers had so much access to meat was precisely why observers regarded the diet of the New World to be superior to that of the Old. 实际上，在美国人最初的250年历史中，即便是国内最穷的人，每顿也能吃得起肉或者鱼。劳动者如此容易吃上肉，这一事实正是当时的观察者认为新大陆饮食优于旧大陆的原因所在。 “I hold a family to be in a desperate way when the mother can see the bottom of the pork barrel,” says a frontier housewife in James Fenimore Cooper’s novel The Chainbearer. “我认为，如果一个主妇的猪肉桶都见底了，那这个家庭应该很窘迫。”在James Fenimore Cooper的小说《戴锁链的人》中，一位西部边疆家庭主妇如此说道。 In the book Putting Meat on the American Table, researcher Roger Horowitz scours the literature for data on how much meat Americans actually ate. A survey of 8,000 urban Americans in 1909 showed that the poorest among them ate 136 pounds a year, and the wealthiest more than 200 pounds. 研究者Roger Horowitz在其著作《把肉食端上美国餐桌》中四处搜求文献，想要找到美国人到底食用多少肉食的数据。1909年针对8000位美国城市居民的一份调查显示，受访者中最贫穷的每年食肉136磅，最富裕的则超过200磅。 A food budget published in the New York Tribune in 1851 allots two pounds of meat per day for a family of five. Even slaves at the turn of the 18th century were allocated an average of 150 pounds of meat a year. As Horowitz concludes, “These sources do give us some confidence in suggesting an average annual consumption of 150–200 pounds of meat per person in the nineteenth century.” 在1851年发表于《纽约论坛报》上的一份食品预算中，一个五口之家每天可以得到2磅肉。在18世纪初，即便是奴隶，每年平均也可以得到150磅肉。正如Horowitz所总结的，“这些资料让我们可以多少有点自信地推测：在19世纪，每年的人均肉食消耗量平均大概是150至200磅。” About 175 pounds of meat per person per year—compared to the roughly 100 pounds of meat per year that an average adult American eats today. And of that 100 pounds of meat, about half is poultry—chicken and turkey—whereas until the mid-20th century, chicken was considered a luxury meat, on the menu only for special occasions (chickens were valued mainly for their eggs). 也就是说，每人每年大概175磅肉。与之对比，平均每个成年美国人现在每年大概食肉100磅。在这100磅肉中，大概有一半是禽肉——即鸡肉和火鸡。与之相比，在20世纪中叶以前，鸡肉一直被视作为奢侈肉类，只在特殊场合才能进菜谱（母鸡因为能生蛋而价值颇高）。 Yet this drop in red meat consumption is the exact opposite of the picture we get from public authorities. A recent USDA report says that our consumption of meat is at a “record high,” and this impression is repeated in the media. 然而，红肉消耗量下降这一事实，与我们从公共权威那里得到的印象大相径庭。美国农业部近期的一份报告说，我们的肉食消耗量正处于“历史最高记录”，而且这一说法还在媒体上反复流传。 It implies that our health problems are associated with this rise in meat consumption, but these analyses are misleading because they lump together red meat and chicken into one category to show the growth of meat eating overall, when it’s just the chicken consumption that has gone up astronomically since the 1970s. The wider-lens picture is clearly that we eat far less red meat today than did our forefathers. 这一说法暗示，我们的健康问题与肉食消耗量增加有关。但是这种分析是误导性的，因为它们将红肉和鸡肉并为一类、混为一谈，以此来证明总体食肉量的增加。实际上，只有鸡肉消耗量才于1970年代以后出现了极大增长。把视野放宽的话，图景很清晰：今天我们所食用的红肉量远远不能与我们的祖先相比。 Meanwhile, also contrary to our common impression, early Americans appeared to eat few vegetables. Leafy greens had short growing seasons and were ultimately considered not worth the effort. And before large supermarket chains started importing kiwis from Australia and avocados from Israel, a regular supply of fruits and vegetables could hardly have been possible in America outside the growing season. 同时，还有一件事也与我们通常的印象相反，早期美国人似乎蔬菜吃得很少。绿叶蔬菜生长季节短，人们最终觉得它们不值得费心种植。而且在大型连锁超市为我们从澳大利亚进口猕猴桃、从以色列进口鳄梨之前，只要生长季节一过，要想在美国实现果蔬的常规供应就几乎不可能了。 Even in the warmer months, fruit and salad were avoided, for fear of cholera. (Only with the Civil War did the canning industry flourish, and then only for a handful of vegetables, the most common of which were sweet corn, tomatoes, and peas.) 即便是在温暖的月份，因为担心霍乱，人们也会避开水果和生吃蔬菜。（罐头行业只是内战以后才开始兴盛起来，而且那也只是罐装少量蔬菜，最常见的主要有甜玉米、西红柿和豌豆。） So it would be “incorrect to describe Americans as great eaters of either [fruits or vegetables],” wrote the historians Waverly Root and Rich­ard de Rochemont. Although a vegetarian movement did establish itself in the United States by 1870, the general mistrust of these fresh foods, which spoiled so easily and could carry disease, did not dissipate until after World War I, with the advent of the home refrigerator. By these accounts, for the first 250 years of American history, the entire nation would have earned a failing grade according to our modern mainstream nutritional advice. 所以，历史学家Waverly Root和Richard de Rochemont说，“认为美国人是水果或蔬菜的大量食用者，这种说法是错的”。尽管美国在1870年确实出现了一次素食运动，但美国人对这类非常容易腐烂、可能携带疾病的新鲜食物普遍存疑，这种疑虑直到一战以后随着家用冰箱的出现方才消散。根据这些资料，在美国历史的头250年，要是参照我们现在主流的营养学建议，整个国家得分都会不及格。 During all this time, however, heart disease was almost certainly rare. Reliable data from death certificates is not available, but other sources of information make a persuasive case against the widespread appearance of the disease before the early 1920s. 然而，在整个这一时期，心脏病几乎难得一见。基于死亡证明的可靠数据现在还没有，但其他方面的信息令人信服地证明，在1920年代前期以前，心脏病并没有大面积出现。 Fat intake rose 12 percent from 1909 to 1961, but it was owing to an increase in the supply of vegetable oils, which had recently been invented. 从1909年至1961年，脂肪摄入量提高了12%，但这是因为人类新近发明了植物油，其供给增加了。 Austin Flint, the most authoritative expert on heart disease in the United States, scoured the country for reports of heart abnormalities in the mid-1800s, yet reported that he had seen very few cases, despite running a busy practice in New York City. Nor did William Osler, one of the founding professors of Johns Hopkins Hospi­tal, report any cases of heart disease during the 1870s and eighties when working at Montreal General Hospital. 19世纪中期，美国最权威的心脏病专家Austin Flint曾在全国上下搜集心脏异常病例的报告，最后却说案例寥寥无几，尽管他当时在纽约的生意非常繁忙。约翰·霍普金斯医院的创始教授之一William Osler，在他于1870年代及1880年代在蒙特利尔综合医院工作期间，也未提及任何心脏病案例。 The first clinical description of coronary thrombosis came in 1912, and an authoritative textbook in 1915, Diseases of the Arteries including Angina Pectoris, makes no mention at all of coronary thrombosis. On the eve of World War I, the young Paul Dudley White, who later became President Eisenhower’s doctor, wrote that of his 700 male patients at Massachusetts General Hospital, only four reported chest pain, “even though there were plenty of them over 60 years of age then.” 关于冠状动脉血栓的首份临床描述出现于1912年，而1915年的一本权威教材——《动脉疾病及心绞痛》——则根本没有提及冠状动脉血栓。一战前夜，年轻的Paul Dudley White（后来曾为艾森豪威尔总统担任医生）写道，他在马萨诸塞综合医院的700名男性病人中，只有4个报告有胸痛，“尽管他们中许多人已经过了60岁年纪。” About one fifth of the U.S. population was over 50 years old in 1900. This number would seem to refute the familiar argument that people formerly didn’t live long enough for heart disease to emerge as an observable problem. Simply put, there were some 10 million Americans of a prime age for having a heart attack at the turn of the 20th century, but heart attacks appeared not to have been a common problem. 1900年，美国人口中大约有五分之一超过50岁。有种常见的论调认为，以前的人寿命不够长，所以心脏病根本还来不及成为一个显著问题。不过上述数字似乎能够驳斥这种论调。简单地说，在20世纪初，大约有1000万美国人已经到了容易发生心脏病的年纪，但那时候心脏病似乎并不是一个常见问题。 Ironically—or perhaps tellingly—the heart disease “epidemic” began after a period of exceptionally reduce meat eating. The publication of The Jungle, Upton Sinclair’s fictionalized exposé of the meatpacking industry, caused meat sales in the United States to fall by half in 1906, and they did not revive for another 20 years. 讽刺地是，或者说颇能说明问题的是，心脏病的“流行”发生在食肉量出现异常减少之后。Upton Sinclair出版的《屠宰场》一书以小说形式对肉类加工业进行了揭露曝光，导致1906年美国肉类销售量直接减半，此后20年都没能恢复。 In other words, meat eating went down just before coronary disease took off. Fat intake did rise during those years, from 1909 to 1961, when heart attacks surged, but this 12 percent increase in fat consumption was not due to a rise in animal fat. It was instead owing to an increase in the supply of vegetable oils, which had recently been invented. 换句话说，食肉量的减少恰好发生于冠心病猛增之前。1909年到1961年期间，当心脏病出现激增时，脂肪摄入量确实也增加了，但是脂肪消耗量上增加的这12%并不来自动物脂肪的增加。相反，它来自植物油供给的增加，后者新近才被发明出来。 Nevertheless, the idea that Americans once ate little meat and “mostly plants”—espoused by McGovern and a multitude of experts—continues to endure. And Americans have for decades now been instructed to go back to this earlier, “healthier” diet that seems, upon examination, never to have existed. 尽管如此，美国人过去吃肉很少、“主要吃植物”的观念——McGovern和许多专家都信奉这一点——还在继续流传。而且，过去几十年，美国人接受的指导一直是，他们应该回归这种更早、“更健康”的饮食。只不过，经验证发现，这种饮食习惯从未存在过。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

【2016-05-06】 @小白：因为旧石器时代人类寿命之低，远远达不到食谱（慢性病）导致基因选择的程度。 @whigzhou: 1）旧石器时代人的寿命不是很短，许多狩猎采集社会的平均寿命可达45岁，明显比传统农业社会长 @whigzhou: 2）是否对慢性病构成选择压力，不能只看平均寿命，而要看活到较高年龄的人是否足够多，“平均寿命只有40岁”绝不意味着“活过40岁的人很少”，要考虑极高的婴儿和儿童死亡率，比如100个人，50个全部8岁前死掉，平均寿命4岁，另外50个平均寿命76岁，那么这100人的平均寿命是40岁。 @whigzhou: 3）所以慢性病是否构成选择压力，要看活到生开始得慢性病年龄（A）的人是否足够多，并且在年龄A时的预期寿命是否足够长，我认为是够的 @whigzhou: 4）食谱所影响的不只是慢性病，至少按某些支持者的理论，其健康影响从转换食谱那一刻就开始了，这样的话，选择压力的存在就无须长寿命为前提， @whigzhou: 这么说吧，若以寿命不足为由而认为旧石器食谱是扯蛋，那么祖母假说肯定也是扯蛋，因为祖母假说若要成立，相关的选择压力必须作用于停经后的女性，而旧石器时代女性平均最后一次生育年龄大约39岁，停经年龄40以上——事实是，许多人类学家都严肃对待祖母假说，并不认为是扯蛋。 @whigzhou: 前面几条只是为了回答一个理论质疑，至于对旧石器食谱的个人看法和态度，我能说的出来的，在去年的旧帖里都说过了，不再重复。  

America’s first fisherman bagged Alaskan salmon 11,500 years ago 11500年前，阿拉斯加渔民的鲑鱼 作者：Zach Zorich @ 2015-9-21 译者：沈沉（@你在何地-sxy） 校对：龟海海 来源：AAAS，http://news.sciencemag.org/plants-animals/2015/09/america-s-first-fisherman-bagged-alaskan-salmon-11500-years-ago If you think most fish stinks after 3 days, try 11,500 years: That’s the age of salmon bones that archaeologists have uncovered at the Upward Sun River site, one of Alaska’s oldest human settlements. 如果你觉得大部分鱼放三天就会发臭，试试放11500年，考古学家在在向阳河遗址中发掘出的鲑鱼骨头就有这么古老，那里是阿拉斯加最早的人类聚居点之一。 They say the cooked bones provide the first clear evidence of salmon fishing among the earliest Americans, Paleoindians, who crossed from Siberia into Alaska over the Bering Land Bridge more than 13,000 years ago. 他们说，这些经过烹制的骨头首次明确证实了早期美洲人的鲑鱼捕捞活动；这些古印第安人于13000多年前跨过白令陆桥，由西伯利亚进入阿拉斯加。 The finding, published online today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, helps debunk the idea that America’s first fishermen relied primarily on big game for food. It also explains how they managed to survive in an ice age Arctic environment and adapt to life on a new continent. 这一发现已于今日【译注：9月21日】在线发表于《美国国家科学院院刊》，有助于驳倒认为美洲最早的渔民主要以大型猎物为捕食对象的观点。它也解释了这些人如何在冰河时期的北极世界中维持生存，并使自己适应一个全新大陆上的生活。 These days, salmon is a staple for native Alaskans, but evidence for the origins of salmon fishing has been hard to come by. Wood and rope fishing tools decompose quickly, as do salmon bones. And until recently, most researchers hadn’t been doing the kind of careful excavation necessary for discovering fragile fish skeletons. 目前，鲑鱼是阿拉斯加原住民的一种主食，不过有关鲑鱼捕捞起源的证据一直难以找到。木与绳制成的捕捞工具极易腐化，鲑鱼骨也是如此。并且，要发现易于破碎的鱼类骨骸，必须进行小心细致的发掘，而直至近期，大多数研究者都不曾做过此类发掘。 But building on recent work that suggests big-game hunting was just one part of a “broad-spectrum” strategy among America’s first people, researchers have begun searching for other remains. These include creatures like migratory waterfowl, small mammals, and salmon that would have been part of a more seasonally based diet. 但近期的研究提出，捕杀大型猎物可能只是早期美洲人“宽谱”策略【编注：指将较多种类的食物来源纳入食谱的取食策略，生物学的最优取食理论以一组条件因子来解释或推测动物在特定约束条件下如何选择最优食谱宽度，参见wikipadia词条：optimal foraging theory。】的一部分，有鉴于此，研究者近来已开始搜寻其它残骸。其中包括迁徙性的水禽，小型哺乳动物及鲑鱼等生物，它们都可能构成一个更为季节性的食谱的一部分。 Archaeological sites across the Bering Strait region—including Siberia—support this idea, says John Hoffecker, a University of Colorado, Boulder, archaeologist who specializes in the region. 科罗拉多大学波德分校专门研究这一区域的考古学家John Hoffecker说，遍及白令海峡地区——包括西伯利亚——的考古遗址为上述看法提供了依据。 But finding ancient salmon leftovers has been a challenge. “It’s difficult to capture ancient fishing because of the nature of fish bones—they’re small, fragile bones,” says Carrin Halffman, a biological anthropologist at the University of Alaska (UA), Fairbanks, and the lead author of the new study. And if archaeologists do turn up any fishy remains, she says, it’s hard to know just what kind of fish it was. 不过，寻找古代鲑鱼残留物一直是个挑战。“古代渔猎活动的发现之难源于鱼骨的特性——这种骨头小而脆”，阿拉斯加大学费尔班克斯分校的生物人类学家Carrin Halffman如是说，她是上述研究的发起人。她还说，即便考古学家确实发现了一丁点鱼类残骸，也很难知道那到底是何种鱼类。 As the team tried to find out how the people at Upward Sun River used the resources of the nearby Tanana River, they carefully excavated parts of the site, sifting soil through fine-meshed screens. In the same fire pit where they found the buried remains of two infants, they discovered the salmon bones. 在尝试查明向阳河的人们如何利用附近的塔纳纳河资源时，这个团队小心地发掘了这一遗址的部分区域，用网眼细小的筛子翻检泥巴。在同一个火坑中，他们找到了两具婴儿遗骨，还发现了这些鲑鱼骨头。 Analyzing DNA in a piece of uncooked fish bone, Halffman and her team found that it was chum salmon (Oncorhynchus keta), a hefty fish that weighs 5 to 10 kilograms and grows roughly 60 centimeters long. Thousands of chum salmon still swim up the Tanana River every summer to spawn, and the run remains a central cultural event for the indigenous Athabascan people who live there today. 通过对一份未经烹制的鱼骨进行DNA分析，Halffman及其团队发现它是大马哈鱼（学名Oncorhynchus keta），这是一种重达5-10公斤、长约60公分的大型鱼类。直至今日，每年夏天仍有成千上万大马哈鱼沿塔纳纳河溯游产卵，而且这种洄游至今仍是当地原住民阿萨巴斯卡人的一项核心文化活动。 But could the find be evidence for the beginnings of this annual ritual? It was possible that the salmon were not part of the annual saltwater-to-freshwater migration, but instead were freshwater fish that lived in the river their entire lives. To find out, Halffman analyzed carbon and nitrogen isotopes in the fish bones. Because different versions of the two elements—both with different weights—are found in varying concentrations in seawater and fresh water, that compositions is reflected in the fish bones. 但这一发现是否就是这种年度仪式的起源证据呢？另有一种可能性存在：鲑鱼过去并非每年定期从咸水洄游到淡水，而是终生存活于河流中的淡水鱼。为了查明这一点，Halffman分析了鱼骨中的碳、氮同位素。因为这两种元素的不同同位素——其重量各不相同——在海水和淡水中分别有着不同的富集度，而这一成分差异会体现在鱼骨中。 The bones that Halffman analyzed had higher ratios of heavier carbon and nitrogen isotopes, meaning the fish had lived in the ocean and must have been caught during a spawning run. “What we’re looking at is probably the beginnings of the utilization of salmon,” says Ben Potter, an archaeologist at UA Fairbanks, and a co-author of the study. 在Halffman所分析的鱼骨中，较重的碳、氮同位素占比更大，这意味着这些鱼曾经生活于海洋，必定是在产卵洄游时被人捕捞的。阿拉斯加大学费尔班克斯分校的考古学家、本研究的共同作者Ben Potter说：“我们看到的可能是鲑鱼被人利用的开端。” The discovery boosts the view of Paleoindians as generalists who ate a variety of foods, Hoffecker says. “I don’t think it was possible for people to occupy these environments without this broad-based diet and without this kind of high-tech economy,” he says. Hoffecker说，这一发现为古印第安人是饮食种类繁多的多面手这一观点提供了支撑。“如果没有这种宽泛的食谱，没有这种高技术的经济，我不认为这些人有可能占领这样的自然环境”。 Herb Maschner, an Arctic archaeologist at the University of South Florida in Tampa, agrees and says the careful excavation methods and analysis serve as a good example of what archaeologists need to do to answer questions about ancient people living in central Alaska where the conditions for preserving bones and artifacts are “notoriously” bad. 坦帕市南佛罗里达大学的北极考古学家Herb Maschner对此表示赞同并说，骨头和人工制品在阿拉斯加中部地区的保存环境之恶劣“臭名昭著”，为了回答与生活于此地的古代人有关的问题，考古学家要怎么做？这种细心的发掘方法和分析为此树立了一个良好典范。 Potter and the other researchers are already busy answering other questions. Eventually, they say, the abundance of salmon and the ability to store fish allowed the indigenous people of the Pacific Northwest to settle in large permanent villages, a lifestyle that typically requires agriculture. Potter及其他研究者已经开始忙于回答其它问题。他们说，鲑鱼数量之丰富以及储存鱼类的能力，最终让太平洋西北地区的原住民得以定居于大型永久性村落，而这种生活方式通常要求农业的出现。 The team suspects that salmon fishing became more important over time as big game became scarcer in central Alaska, an idea they hope to test with further excavations. For now, little is known about salmon fishing in the period between 11,500 and 1000 years ago, but Upward Sun River gives the research team a start. Potter says: “You need that beginning to see how the end came about.” 该团队推测，随着阿拉斯加中部地区大型猎物日益稀少，鲑鱼捕捞的重要性可能也日益增加，团队并希望能通过进一步的发掘来验证这一想法。目前而言，人们对于从11500年前到1000年前这一时期的鲑鱼捕捞活动所知甚少，但向阳河给了这个研究团队一个起点。Potter说：“欲知晓终点如何而来，你需要这个开端。” （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

A dangerous myth about who eats fast food is completely false 关于都有谁吃了美国快餐的一个危险误区 作者：Roberto A. Ferdman @ 2015-9-18 译者：沈沉（@你在何地-sxy） 校对：龟海海 来源：The Washington Post，http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/09/18/rich-parents-might-look-down-on-fast-food-but-its-actually-their-kids-who-eat-it-the-most/ There's a popular narrative about poor families and fast food: They eat more of it than anybody else. It’s dangled as evidence for the high rate of obesity among poorer Americans --  and talked about even by some of the country’s foremost voices on food. "[J]unk food is cheaper when measured by the calorie, and that this makes fast food essential for the poor because they need cheap calories," Mark Bittman for The New York Times in 2011. 有个流行的说法讲的是贫困家庭和快餐的关系：他们吃的快餐比谁都多。这种说法被人视为贫困美国人高肥胖率的根据——甚至这个国家食品界的一些权威人物也会这么讲。Mark Bittman 2011年在《纽约时报》上写道：“以卡路里来衡量，垃圾食品更便宜，这就使得快餐成为穷人必备，因为他们需要便宜的卡路里。” But there’s a problem with saying that poor people like fast food better than others. It’s not true. 但是，贫困人口比其他人更喜欢快餐这种说法是错误的。 New data, released by the Centers for Disease Control, show that America's love for fast food is surprisingly income blind. Well-off kids, poor kids, and all those in between tend to get about the same percentage of their calories from fast food, according to a survey of more than 5,000 people. More precisely, though, it's the poorest kids that tend to get the smallest share of their daily energy intake from Big Macs, Whoppers, Chicken McNuggets, and french fries. 疾病控制中心发布的新数据显示，美国人对快餐的狂热出人意料地和收入并无关系。根据一项针对5000多人的调查，富孩子、穷孩子以及所有处于两者之间的孩子，从快餐中获取的卡路里占比趋于相同。不过，更准确而言，在每日的能量摄入中，正是在最穷的孩子身上，来自巨无霸、皇堡、麦乐鸡和炸薯条的份额最小。 As shown in the chart above, children born to families living just above the poverty line and below get roughly 11.5 percent of their calories from fast food. For everyone else, the portion is closer to 13 percent. 上表显示，对于来自刚过贫困线及贫困线以下家庭的孩子，约有11.5%的卡路里来自快餐。对于所有其他人，这个比例接近13%。 Surprisingly, the better-off children—those between the ages of 2 and 11 years—lead the pack. The average percentage of calories coming from fast food for kids with working and middle class parents is 9.1 percent. But poor kids only get 8 percent of their calories food. 令人惊讶的是，在儿童——即2至11岁的孩子——中，富孩子处于领先。父母为工人阶级和中产阶级的孩子，源自快餐的卡路里比例平均为9.1%。贫困线以下的孩子该比例则仅有8%。 For teenagers, it's those born to the poorest families, once again, who rely on fast food the least. 青少年也一样，生于最贫困家庭的，对快餐依赖最少。 The data offer sobering insight into America's seemingly impenetrable love for fast food. More than a third of all children and adolescents living in the country still eat some form of fast food on any given day, a number which hasn't budged in decades, according to the CDC. 美国人对快餐的狂热令人费解，上述数据为此提供的见解发人深省。疾控中心数据表明，任选一天，我国都仍有超过三分之一的儿童和青少年会食用某种快餐，这个数字几十年没有变过。 And many children are getting alarmingly high proportions of their diet from chicken nuggets and french fries. About a quarter of all kids in the United States get 25 percent of their calories from fast food. And 12 percent of kids get more than 40 percent of their calories from fast food. 并且，许多孩子的食谱中炸鸡块和炸薯条的份额之高令人担忧。全美所有孩子中约有四分之一从快餐中获取的卡路里达到25%。有12%的孩子从快餐中获取的卡路里超过40%。 The data also help to discredit the notion that fast food — or, at the very least, unhealthy food — only preys on the poor. The concept of food deserts, lower income areas where healthy food is scarce or expensive or both, has given rise to the idea that poorer populations rely on fast food out of necessity and convenience. 数据同样否定了一个观念：快餐——或至少是不健康食物——只损及穷人。食物沙漠——健康食品或稀有或昂贵或两者兼有的低收入地区——这一概念导致了一种看法：贫困人口出于必然性与便利性的缘故，更为依赖快餐。 While there's evidence that income does appear to affect the relative nutritional value of foods people eat—food stamp participants, for instance, tend to procure the same amount of calories as everyone else but from substantially less healthy foods—there doesn't seem to be the same proof that that gap is attributable to fast food. 当然，有证据表明，收入似乎确实会影响人们所吃食物的相对营养价值。比如，使用食品券的人所获取的卡路里数量与其他人趋于相同，但其中大量来自相对不那么健康的食品。但要说在快餐问题上也存在这样的差距，则没有类似的证据。 Child obesity, though it has fallen off in recent years, is still historically high in the United States. American kids are far more likely to be overweight than those living in most other countries. The epidemic has affected poorer children disproportionately, but it would be foolish to overlook the fact that roughly 12 percent of high income children are obese. The deterioration of the American diet hasn't helped. But nor has kids's sustained love for fast food in this country. 尽管近些年来，儿童肥胖有所下降，但它仍处于美国历史上的高位。与绝大多数其它国家的孩子相比，美国孩子出现体重超标的可能性要高得多。这种流行病对较贫穷的孩子影响更大，但如果我们看不到约12%的高收入家庭孩子患有肥胖症这一事实，那也是不妥的。美国食谱的恶化让问题雪上加霜。同样，我国孩子对快餐的一贯热爱也同样没起到什么好作用。 Fast food remains a problem for the whole of American youth. Children, independent of socioeconomic status, are bombarded with advertisements for fast food. The industry spends billions of dollars each year on marketing, much of which is used to target children and teenagers. A 2012 study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity found that kids were seeing between three to five fast food ads on television every day. 对所有美国年轻人而言，快餐仍是个难题。不分社会经济地位，孩子们都处于快餐广告的狂轰滥炸之中。这个行业每年花费几十亿进行市场推广，其中许多就是针对儿童和青少年。食品政策与肥胖拉德中心2012年一项研究发现，孩子们每天在电视上看到的快餐广告有3-5种。 And those commercials appear to be working. On all children. 这些广告似乎在所有的孩子们身上起作用。 Rich parents might roll their eyes at Big Macs and french fries, but it's their kids who like them most. 富裕的父母可能会对着巨无霸和炸薯条翻白眼，但他们的孩子对这些爱不释手。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

Health Check: the science of ‘hangry’, or why some people get grumpy when they’re hungry 健康检查：“饿怒症”科学，或为什么有些人饿了以后会暴躁 作者：Amanda Salis @ 2015-7-20 译者：黎安林 校对：沈沉（@你在何地-sxy） 来源：The Conversation，https://theconversation.com/health-check-the-science-of-hangry-or-why-some-people-get-grumpy-when-theyre-hungry-37229 There are many reasons why some people get very grumpy when they haven’t eaten for a while. 有些人一段时间没吃东西就变得非常暴躁，这有很多原因。 Have you ever snapped angrily at someone when you were hungry? Or has someone snapped angrily at you when they were hungry? If so, you’ve experienced “hangry” (an amalgam of hungry and angry) – the phenomenon whereby some people get grumpy and short-tempered when they’re overdue for a feed. 你曾在饥肠辘辘时愤怒地呵斥过某人吗？或者，你曾被某人在饥饿时愤怒地呵斥过吗？如果有，你就体验过“饿怒症”（一种饥饿和愤怒的混合体）——即有些人过了吃饭时间没吃东西就会变得暴躁易怒的现象。 But where does hanger come from? And why is it that only some people seem to get hangry? The answer lies in some of the processes that happen inside your body when it needs food. 但是饿怒来自哪里？为什么只是一部分人会饿怒？答案就在你身体需要食物时发生在体内的过程中。 The physiology of hanger 饿怒的生理学 The carbohydrates, proteins and fats in everything you eat are digested into simple sugars (such as glucose), amino acids and free fatty acids. These nutrients pass into your bloodstream from where they are distributed to your organs and tissues and used for energy. 你吃的所有食物中的碳水化合物、蛋白质和脂肪，都被消化成单糖（如葡萄糖）、氨基酸和游离脂肪酸。这些营养物质首先进入你的血液，然后从哪里被分配到你的器官和组织，并用作能量来源。 As time passes after your last meal, the amount of these nutrients circulating in your bloodstream starts to drop. If your blood-glucose levels fall far enough, your brain will perceive it as a life-threatening situation. You see, unlike most other organs and tissues in your body which can use a variety of nutrients to keep functioning, your brain is critically dependent on glucose to do its job. 在你上一次饭后，随着时间流逝，这些在你的血液中循环的营养物质的量开始下降。如果你的血糖水平过低，你的大脑就会把它理解为危及生命的情况。你知道，不像你体内的大多数其他器官和组织，它们可以使用种类繁多的营养物质来保持运转，你的大脑却严重依赖葡萄糖来完成其工作。 You’ve probably already noticed this dependence your brain has on glucose; simple things can become difficult when you’re hungry and your blood glucose levels drop. You may find it hard to concentrate, for instance, or you may make silly mistakes. Or you might have noticed that your words become muddled or slurred. 你可能已经注意到了这种大脑对葡萄糖的依赖；当你饿了，身体的血糖水平下降，简单的事情也会变得困难。比如，你会感到注意力难以集中，或者可能犯一些低级的错误。或者你可能已经注意到，你说话变得混乱而含糊不清。 Another thing that can become more difficult when you’re hungry is behaving within socially acceptable norms, such as not snapping at people. So while you may be able to conjure up enough brain power to avoid being grumpy with important colleagues, you may let your guard down and inadvertently snap at the people you are most relaxed with or care most about, such as partners and friends. Sound familiar? 当你饿了，可能变得更加困难的另一件事情是行为举止符合社会可接受的规范，比如不呵斥人。虽然你可能唤起足够脑力来避免和重要同事相处时出现暴躁，但是在对待如伴侣、朋友等最令人放松或者最在乎的人时，你可能放松警惕，无意识地呵斥他们。是不是听起来很熟悉？ Another bodily response 另一种身体反应 Besides a drop in blood-glucose concentrations, another reason people can become hangry is the glucose counter-regulatory response. Let me explain. 除了血糖浓度的下降，另一个让人饿怒的原因是葡萄糖反馈调节反应。让我解释一下。 When blood-glucose levels drop to a certain threshold, your brain sends instructions to several organs in your body to synthesise and release hormones that increase the amount of glucose in your bloodstream. 当血糖水平下降到一定阈值，大脑会向你身体的几个器官发出指令来合成和释放特定激素，以增加血液中的葡萄糖含量。 The four main glucose counter-regulatory hormones are: growth hormone from the pituitary gland situated deep in the brain; glucagon from the pancreas; and adrenaline, which is sometimes called epinephrine, and cortisol, which are both from the adrenal glands. These latter two glucose counter-regulatory hormones are stress hormones that are released into your bloodstream in all sorts of stressful situations, not just when you experience the physical stress of low blood-glucose levels. 四种主要的葡萄糖反馈调节激素是：位于大脑深处的脑垂体释放的生长激素；胰腺产生的胰高血糖素；肾上腺素和皮质醇，它们都是从肾上腺产生的。后两个葡萄糖反馈调节激素是在各种紧张的情况下（不只是在遭受低血糖水平的生理压力时）释放到血液中的应激激素。 In fact, adrenaline is one of the major hormones released into your bloodstream with the “fight or flight” response to a sudden scare, such as when you see, hear or even think something that threatens your safety. Just as you might easily shout out in anger at someone during the “fight or flight” response, the flood of adrenaline you get during the glucose counter-regulatory response can promote a similar response. 事实上，肾上腺素是当你遭受突然的惊吓，如看到、听到甚至想到有什么东西威胁你的安全，从而作出“战斗或逃跑”反应时，被释放到血液中的主要激素之一。正如你可能很容易在“战斗或逃跑”应激场景中对某人愤怒地咆哮，你在葡萄糖反馈调节反应中产生的大量肾上腺素也可能促发类似的反应。 Nature and nurture 先天和后天 Another reason hunger is linked to anger is that both are controlled by common genes. The product of one such gene is neuropeptide Y, a natural brain chemical released into the brain when you are hungry. It stimulates voracious feeding behaviours by acting on a variety of receptors in the brain, including one called the Y1 receptor. 饥饿与愤怒有关的另一个原因是，两者都被共同的基因所控制。其中一个基因的产物是神经肽Y，这是当你饿了时释放给大脑的脑内天然化学物质。它通过作用于大脑中多种受体，其中一个叫Y1受体，来刺激贪婪的取食行为。 Besides acting in the brain to control hunger, neuropeptide Y and the Y1 receptor also regulate anger or aggression. In keeping with this, people with high levels of neuropeptide Y in their cerebrospinal fluid also tend to show high levels of impulse aggression. 神经肽Y和Y1受体除了作用于大脑以控制饥饿感之外，还能调节愤怒或攻击性。与此一致，当人的脑脊液中神经肽Y水平高时，往往表现出高水平的攻击冲动。 As you can see, there are several pathways that can make you prone to anger when you’re hungry. Hanger is undoubtedly a survival mechanism that has served humans and other animals well. Think about it like this: if hungry organisms stood back and graciously let others eat before them, their species could die out. 正如你所看到的，当你饿了时，有几个途径可以使你易怒。饿怒无疑是作用于人类和其他动物的一种生存机制。这样想想看：如果饿了的生物靠后站，慷慨地让别人在他们头前吃东西，他们的物种将消亡。 While many physical factors contribute to hanger, psychosocial factors also have a role. Culture influences whether you express verbal aggression directly or indirectly, for instance. 虽然有许多物理因素能导致饿怒，社会心理因素也有一定作用。例如，文化能够影响你是直接还是间接地表达言语攻击。 And as we are all different across all of these factors, it’s little wonder there are differences in how angry people seem to get when they’re hungry. 并且，由于人们在所有这些因素上都有所不同，很自然地，当他们饥饿时，他们愤怒的程度也有所不同。 Dealing with hanger 克服饿怒 The easiest way to handle hanger is to eat something before you get too hungry. While you may hanker for quick-fix foods, such as chocolate and potato chips, when you’re in the throes of hanger, junk foods generally induce large rises in blood-glucose levels that come crashing down fast. 应对饿怒的最简单方法是在你太饿之前吃东西。当你在饿怒中挣扎时，你可能会想吃些速战速决的食物，如巧克力和薯片，垃圾食品普遍能促使血糖水平大幅提升，但下降得也非常快。 Ultimately, they may leave you feeling hangrier. So think nutrient-rich, natural foods that help satisfy hunger for as long as possible, without excess kilojoules. 最终，他们可能会让你感到更加饿怒。因此，还是考虑食用营养丰富的天然食品，它们可以尽可能久地给你充饥，且没有多余的能量。 Eating as soon as you are hungry may not always be possible. This may be the case during long shifts at work, for instance, or through religious fasts such as Ramadan, or during weight-loss diets that involve severe energy restriction (such as intermittent fasting diets). All of these should only be done if your doctor has given you the all-clear. 你未必总是能够一饿就立即吃东西。比如，这可能是由工作中的轮班时间很长导致的，或者由宗教斋戒如斋月导致，或正处于严格限制热量的减肥节食（如间歇性禁食减肥）过程中。所有这些只应在医生给了你全面清晰指导后再做。 In these cases, it can help to remember that, with time, your glucose counter-regulatory response will kick in and your blood-glucose levels will stabilise. Also, when you go without food, your body starts breaking down its own fat stores for energy, some of which are converted by your body into ketones, a product of fat metabolism. Ketones are thought to help keep your hunger under control because your brain can use ketones in place of glucose for fuel. 在所有这些情况下，记住以下这一点都是有用的：随着时间推移，你的葡萄糖反馈调节反应会开启，你的血糖水平将趋于稳定。此外，当你没有进食时，你的身体开始分解自己的脂肪储存来提供能量，其中一些将被你的身体转换成酮——脂肪代谢的一种产物。酮被认为有助于控制饥饿，因为你的大脑可以使用酮代替葡萄糖作为能量。 A final – and very civilised – way of handling hanger is to suggest that difficult situations be dealt with after food, not before! 最后一个——并且很文明——的饿怒处理方式是，建议你在进食后再处理复杂的事情，而不是在此之前！ （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

【2015-10-13】 @海德沙龙 本文是Peter Turchin报告他实践旧石器食谱后个人体验的系列博文中最后一篇，此时他转变食谱已有27个月，不过本文大部分篇幅是在介绍人类学家Richard Wrangham有关烹饪与人类进化之关系的著作Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human，这是本非常好的书 °旧石器食谱与火 @whigzhou: Catching Fire很好，在我今年读过的书里排前五，他还教会我用榔头敲牛排。 @whigzhou: 能量均衡等式是生计模式的核心，但以往的研究往往只按食材计算能量，而Richard Wrangham提醒我们，加工方式非常重要，是否加工及如何加工，对于从给定食材中所获取净能量的影响可达30-40% @whigzhou: 其实房屋、炉火和衣服等因素也都应纳入能量均衡式，在温带，冬天若没有保温效果良好的房屋和衣服，代谢水平要高出很多，它们对马尔萨斯极限位置的影响也很大，不过从我读到的文献看，这些因素都还没得到足够关注  

Paleo Diet and Fire 旧石器食谱与火 作者：Peter Turchin ＠ 2014-08-07 译者：Dr啊（＠Dr啊） 校对：Drunkplane（＠Drunkplane-zny） 来源：evolution-institute.org，https://evolution-institute.org/blog/paleo-diet-and-fire/ It’s been a while since my last update on the Paleo diet (perhaps a better name for it is ‘Post-Neolithic diet’). Here are the links to previous blogs on this theme: 自我上次更新关于旧石器食谱（也许更好的名字是‘后新石器食谱’）的情况到现在已经有一段时间了。这是我之前有关这一话题的几篇博文的链接： http://socialevolutionforum.com/2012/08/23/an-update-on-my-so-called-paleo-diet/ http://socialevolutionforum.com/2013/07/20/adventures-in-paleo-eating-bone-marrow/ http://socialevolutionforum.com/2013/05/04/breadfruit/ As long-time readers of my blog remember, I switched to Paleo diet in May of 2012. Within two months I noticed an improvement in my health. After half a year I lost 20 pounds and my health improved dramatically. A number of chronic health problems cleared up. At that point, I made the decision to permanently switch to this diet, and I never looked back. 我博客的长期读者还记得，我在2012年五月转向旧石器食谱。两个月之内我就发现我的健康状况有所改善。半年之后，我减掉了20磅体重，同时健康状况大幅提高。很多长期的健康问题都不见了。在那时，我决定永远的遵循这一食谱，而且再也不会回头了。 Over the last year I noticed another incremental and slow, but real, improvement. I feel better than when I was 10 years ago. I became noticeably stronger – I can now easily lift and carry things that used to give me trouble before. More embarrassingly, people comment on how well I look. I am getting a bit tired of explaining the Paleo diet, over and over again. 在过去的一整年，我发现我的健康状况有了另一种持续增长的，缓慢的，但却很真实的改善。我比十年感觉更好。很明显，我变得更强壮了——我现在可以轻易地举起并搬运之前很难搬动的物体。更让人不好意思的是，人们总是夸我气色看起来有多么好。我都有点疲于一遍遍的解释旧石器食谱这件事了。 The gospel of Paleo diet is spreading. My wife has converted to it, then my mother. My secretary.Several friends and colleagues. I am not urging anybody to switch, but the results speak for themselves. On the other hand, none of the people whom I infected with Paleo had experienced as great improvement as me. 旧石器食谱的福音一直在传播。我妻子已经皈依了，继而是我的母亲，我的秘书，还有几个朋友和同事。我并不是在劝任何人转向这一食谱，但是结果说明了一切。而另一方面，在所有被我带动并遵循该食谱的人当中，没人经历了像我这样巨大的改善。 This can be due to my genetics (I have very few generations of Neolithic ancestors). It could also be due to the fact that I am simply not tempted to stray. When I am home, I stay strictly within the guidelines (no grains, no legumes, no dairy). When I travel I periodically get poisoned because I have no control over the ingredients. 这有可能因为我的基因（大概我的新石器祖先总共才没几代吧，呵呵）。这也可能只是因为我从不试图背离该食谱。当我在家的时候，我严格遵循食谱指示（不吃谷物，不吃豆类，不吃奶制品）。当我偶尔离家在外就难免被那些食物‘毒’到，毕竟我无法控制外面食物的配料。 Anyway, the real purpose of this blog is to discuss the book I just finished reading, which is very relevant to the Paleo diet (but I thought that an update on my own experience was due). The book is by a colleague of mine, Richard Wrangham: Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human. It’s a great book, and I recommend that everybody interested in human evolution read it. 总之，这篇博文其实是要讨论一本我刚刚读过的书，此书跟旧石器食谱非常相关（但我觉得是时候要更新一下我自己的亲身经历了）。这本书是我的一位叫理查德·兰厄姆的同事所作，书名叫《燃起火堆：烹饪如何铸就了人类》。这是本了不起的书，我推荐所有对人类进化感兴趣的人都读一下。 What I found most interesting in Richard’s book is his reconstruction of the dietary shifts that enabled the evolution of large human brains (which then made possible culture, living in large groups, language, art, science, and civilization – and who knows what else). 我认为理查德书中最有趣的一点是他对饮食变化的重构。正是饮食的变化让人类进化出了巨大的大脑（该变化同时也让文化，大型群居，语言，艺术，科学和文明以及其他数不清的事情成为可能）。 The first step, which took place 5-7 million years ago, was the transition from our chimpanzee-like ancestors, forest apes, to australopithecines that inhabited drier savanna-woodlands. Australopithecine brain size (in anthropologese, “cranial capacity”) was 450 cubic cm, compared to 350-400 cm³ in forest apes. 第一阶段发生在500-700万年前，这期间我们黑猩猩般的祖先——森林猿——开始转变成南方古猿，并开始在更加干燥的稀树草原上生活。南方古猿的大脑尺寸（用人类学术语叫‘颅容量’）是450立方厘米，相比之下森林猿的大脑尺寸是350-400立方厘米。 Incidentally, and as an aside, I find slightly amusing, but mostly exasperating, Richard’s dutiful translation of cubic centimeters into cubic inches. Americans, isn’t it time to grow up? Get used to metric units! Does it really help you to know that the cranial capacity of Australopithecus was 27.5 cubic inches? If I show you an object, will you be able to estimate its volume in cubic inches? End of diatribe. 顺带说句题外话，我觉得有一件略微有些喜感但又实在让人恼火的事情，那就是理查德坚定不移的将立方厘米转换成立方英寸。美国同胞们，是时候长大了吧？赶快习惯使用公制单位吧！你真的觉得将南方古猿的大脑说成27.5立方英寸更能帮助你理解？假如我随便拿个物体，你能用立方英寸估算其容量吗？好了，牢骚到此结束。 The food resource that enabled this transition was the underground storage parts of plants, highly concentrated sources of energy-rich starch. Parenthetically, that’s why potatoes, yams, carrots, beets, sweet potatoes, and taro are such great foods for humans – we have been eating them, or equivalents, for millions of years. Australopithecines dug these tubers, rhizomes, and corms (we are now speaking ‘botanese’) with sharpened sticks. 让这一步转变得以发生的食物来源是植物埋在地下的“储能”部分——那富含高能量淀粉的根茎。顺便说一句，这也是为什么土豆，山药，胡萝卜，甜菜根，红薯和芋头是对人类非常好的食物——我们已经食用这些或类似食物几百万年了。南方古猿用削尖了的棍棒将地下的块茎，根状茎，以及球茎（我们好像在说‘不丹语’）挖出来。 The next step was the transition to ‘habilines’ (such as Homo habilis) more than 2 million years ago: from 450 to 612 cm³. The big dietary change that fueled this increase in brain size was probably meat eating. Or marrow eating – see my blog on this issue. 接下来的阶段发生在200多万年前，南方古猿转变成‘人属猿人’（比如‘能人’），其大脑尺寸也从450立方厘米增加到了612立方厘米。造成大脑尺寸增加的饮食变化可能是肉类的摄取或是骨髓的摄取——请参见我的这篇博文(https://evolution-institute.org/blog/adventures-in-paleo-eating-bone-marrow/?source=sef)｡ After that, brain size in early human started growing in a really explosive manner. Early Homo erectus (1.8 million years ago) had brains of 870 cm³. 800 thousand years ago Homo heidelbergensis (which could be simply a subspecies of erectus) had brains of 1200 cm³. That’s awfully close to the modern Homo sapiens, whose cranial capacity is 1400 cm³. 在这之后，早期人类的大脑尺寸开始爆炸式的增长。早期的直立猿人（180万年前）拥有870立方厘米的大脑。80万年前的海德堡人（可能只是直立人的一个亚种）拥有1200立方厘米的大脑。这个尺寸已经非常接近现代智人1400立方厘米的大脑尺寸了。 Where did the energy that fueled these oversize brains come from? Wrangham argues that it came from cooking. I find his argument quite convincing. Thermal processing of tubers and meats doubles the ability of our guts to extract calories and nutrients from these food sources. 支撑这种大尺寸大脑的能量来自什么地方？兰厄姆认为来自烹饪。我亦觉得他的论点很有说服力。对块茎和肉类的热加工让我们的消化系统从这些食材中攫取热量和营养的能力翻了倍。 The use of fire is securely attested at the Gesher Benot Ya’akov site near Jordan River, which is dated to 790,000 years ago. But here we have archaeological evidence of hearths, permanent fires around which human nuclear families would gather around every evening for the most important meal of the day. It is quite likely that hearths were a product of long evolution, with humans using fire for cooking well before the evolution of human family (which as Wrangham argues, was itself a result of cooking food – but you will have to read his book to find out the details of the argument). 现在已经确切证明了，早在79万年前，约旦河附近的Gesher Benot Ya’akov遗址中，火就已经被使用了。现在我们又有了关于灶台的考古学证据，核心家庭成员每天晚上会为了一天当中最重要的一餐而聚集在一堆持续燃烧的火堆周围。灶台很可能是一个长期进化的产物，毕竟人类使用火进行烹饪要远远早于家庭的进化（亦如兰厄姆所提出，家庭这一概念本身也是烹饪食物所带来的结果——但是你得去读他的书来了解这个论点的更多细节）。 Even if you buy Wrangham’s theory (which I do), it raises some questions. When did humans learn how to start fires? Remember The Quest for Fire, where the plot centers on this issue? 就算你同意兰厄姆的理论（我就同意），这其中仍然有些疑问。人类什么时候开始学会生火的？还记得电影《火之战》吗，整部电影的情节都是围绕这个问题展开的。 OK, it’s getting late, so I’d better end this post. But I can’t resist adding one thing. What makes Richard’s arguments particularly compelling is his ‘experimental’ approach to the questions he discusses. He has tried eating like a gorilla (he failed, we simply don’t have the guts for the gorilla diet). Another experiment he tried with his friends was chewing raw goat meat – with or without adding tough leaves. Sure, adding leaves produced better traction to reduce goat’s thigh muscle. But cooking it worked even better. 好啦，时候不早了，我最好给文章结个尾。但是我必须再说一点。让理查德的论证异常有说服力的是，他对所讨论的问题使用了‘实验性’的方法。他曾经尝试像只大猩猩那么吃（他最终失败了，我们就是没有勇气像大猩猩那么吃【译注：原文“gut”为“肠胃”与“勇气”之双关，按兰厄姆的观点，人类无法像大猩猩那么吃，是因为我们的肠胃已经适应了熟食】）。他和他的朋友所尝试的另一个实验是直接进食生的山羊肉——不确定是否同时吃一些硬的植物叶子。诚然，吃生山羊肉的时候加点硬叶子可以增加附着力从而分解山羊紧致的肌肉。但是把羊肉烹饪一下肯定更好。【译注：黑猩猩吃肉时会掺一些叶子一起嚼。】 So what’s the take-home lesson? Fire up that barbecue grill – we evolved to eat meat cooked over the open fire! 所以今天我们学到了什么呢？点燃烧烤炉吧，我们进化到要吃用明火烹饪过的食物了！ （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

An Update on My (So-Called) Paleo Diet 汇报一下我实践（所谓的）旧石器食谱的情况 作者：Peter Turchin @ 2012­8­23 译者：bear，校对：陈小乖（lion_kittyyyyy） 来源：Social Evolution Forum，https://evolution-institute.org/blog/an-update-on-my-so-called-paleo-diet/ As I wrote in this blog, in early May I started on a new diet, which is misleadingly (for reasons I will come back to) called the ‘Paleo Diet.’ 正如我在早先那篇博客中所写的那样【编注：本组翻译了这篇博客，见：http://weibo.com/p/1001603875391709540593 】，五月初我开始尝试一种新食谱，这种食谱有个容易误导人的名字——“旧石器食谱”（我会在之后说明它容易误导人的原因）。 First, a progress report. Over the 3.5 months I lost 15 pounds, or around a pound per week. Not particularly impressive by the standards of super diets that promise that you will lose 20 pounds of fat in a month, or even in a week. On the other hand, I haven’t done anything drastic, like starving myself, or undergoing stomach stapling. In fact, I eat as much as I want, I just don’t eat certain foods (as a reminder – no cereals, no legumes, and no dairy). 首先，报告进度。经过三个半月，我的体重减轻了15磅，大约每周减一磅。以那些保证你在一个月甚至一周内减掉20磅脂肪的超级减肥食谱的标准来说，这一成果并不让人印象深刻。另一方面，我没有采取任何激烈的手段，比如让自己挨饿或去做缩胃手术。事实上，我想吃多少就吃多少，我只是不吃特定种类的食物。（友情提示：不吃谷物、豆类和奶制品）。 In any case, losing weight was never the main purpose, getting healthier was. And it worked remarkably well, much better than I expected. It is difficult to describe, but basically I feel much younger and I have a lot more energy. Probably the best way to put it is that I feel as though I stopped poisoning myself. 无论如何，减重从来不是我的主要目的，变得更健康才是。这个食谱的效果非常好，比我预期的要好得多。这很难形容，但基本上，我感觉自己更年轻、更有精力了。或许对这个食谱带给我的变化最好的表述是——我感觉好像不再毒害自己了。 I was raised in a big city (Moscow) and lived for several years in another one (New York). In 1980 I moved away from NYC and since then I have lived in a succession of small towns or in rural areas (except for two years in Seattle, but it’s hardly a megalopolis). After a while I noticed that when I come for an extended visit to a big city, after a few days I start feeling ‘off,’ not really sick, but not really well either. 我在大城市（莫斯科）长大，然后在另一个大城市（纽约）住了几年。1980年，我搬离了纽约市，之后就一直在一些小城镇或者郊区居住（在这期间我在西雅图住了两年，但它也算不上大都市）。一段时间之后，我注意到当我去大城市进行长期访问时，几天后我就会有一种“宕机”的感觉，不是真的生病，但也不是很健康。 After returning to my rural abode, I almost immediately get better. This happens every time when I have to stay in a city for longer than 3-5 days. I think what happens is that the urban pollution simply poisons your body. People who live in cities all the time are used to it, and stop noticing it (as I did, when I was a megalopolis dweller myself). 回到郊区的住所之后，我几乎立即就会变好。每次待在城市超过3-5天就会这样。我想这是因为城市的污染一直在毒害着你的身体。一直住在城里的人已经习惯了这些污染，而且也不再注意到这些污染（我自己是大城市居民的时候也是这样）。 Well, switching to my new diet was like moving away from New York (although it took a little longer to flush the poisons out of the system, but the effect was even more striking). This is what I mean when I say that I feel as though I stopped poisoning myself. So the diet definitely works. I have not done any blind trials, so it all could be just the placebo effect, but I don’t give a damn. It works. Initially I was going to give it 6 months and then decide whether to stick with it. But now, just past the midpoint, it is clear that I will be sticking with it. 切换到我的新食谱就好比搬离纽约（尽管它需要更多时间排出毒素，但效果甚至更加显著）。这就是之前我说“我感觉好像不再毒害自己了”的意思。所以，这个食谱绝对有效。我没有做过任何盲测，所以这可能仅仅是安慰剂效果，但我才不管呢！它是有效的！起初我打算用六个月时间尝试这个食谱，然后再决定是不是要继续。但现在时间只过了一半我就肯定自己会继续了。 Now to why calling this a ‘Paleo diet’ is a complete misnomer. Most people, when they hear me explain that I am on the paleo diet, at best think that I don’t eat carbs (a la Atkinson). At worst, they think I run around through the bushes barefoot and hunt game with my bare hands. 现在来说说为什么管它叫“旧石器食谱”完全是用词不当。当我给人们解释我在尝试旧石器食谱的时候，大多数人最好的理解就是我不吃碳水化合物（就像Atkins食谱）。最差的理解是，他们认为我光着脚丫在灌木丛中乱跑，赤手空拳进行追猎野兽。 I need to come up with a better name – how about the ‘post-neolithic diet’? I’ll still have to explain it, but at least people will not have any preconceived notions that I will have to dispel. 我要想个好点的名字——“后新石器时代食谱”怎么样？我仍然不得不解释它，但至少大家不会先入为主地以为我必须去追逐猎物。 When I explain to friends that I don’t eat any cereals or grains, legumes, or dairy, a frequent reply is – “what’s left?!” Actually, a lot. All kinds of meat, any seafood, eggs, all kinds of fresh vegetables (salad type – lettuce, tomatoes, cukes, radishes, green scallions, cilantro, peppers), other vegetables (all varieties of cabbages, numerous kinds of squash, avocado, olives, asparagus, onions and leaks, spinach), root vegetables (potatoes, yams, carrots, root parsley, yucca, and a number of others I haven’t explored yet), fruits and berries and nuts. No caveman ate the kind of varied diet that we can obtain by an easy trip to the supermarket. So the ‘paleo diet’ is a complete misnomer. 当我对朋友们说我不吃谷物、豆类和奶制品的时候，得到最多的回答是“那还剩啥？！”事实上，还剩非常多。所有肉类、任何种类的海鲜、蛋类、各种新鲜蔬菜（沙拉类—生菜、番茄、黄瓜、萝卜、葱、香菜、甜椒），还有其他蔬菜（各种卷心菜、种类繁多的南瓜、牛油果、橄榄、芦笋、洋葱、韭葱和菠菜），根类蔬菜（土豆、番薯、胡萝卜、欧洲防风、木薯【译注：此处原文yucca疑为yuca之讹】和其它许多我还没尝试过的根类蔬菜），还有水果、浆果和坚果。没有原始人能够吃到种类这么丰富的食物，而我们只要简单地去超市逛一圈就行。所以旧石器食谱这种叫法完全是用词不当。 Additionally, there is no particular virtue in eating an undomesticated variety, compared to a domesticated one. In particular, I suspect that wild rice is probably worse for you than white rice. Both are grass seeds, and so poisonous by definition. But with the domesticated rice there is at least hope that the most poisonous varieties have been selected out (although it is not a certainty). Interesting how an evolutionary approach makes you look at things from a very different angle. 此外，和吃养殖的食物相比，吃各种野生的食物并没有什么好处。特别是，我怀疑对人类来说菰可能不如大米【编注：菰又称茭米，与水稻同属禾本科稻亚科稻族，虽名为wild rice，但与水稻亲缘并不很近】。两者都是草的种子，所以根据定义都是有毒的。但对于种植的稻米而言，至少可以期望其中多数有毒物质在人类培育选择大米的过程中都已经被排除出去了（尽管这事并不确定）。进化论的思路能让你从不同角度看问题，这很有趣。 Another problem with this diet is that food now takes a larger chunk from the budget. Fresh vegetables are expensive! And you need to eat a lot of them to get an equivalent of a one pound package of pasta, even a fancy one. This is no poor person’s diet… Also, wild-caught salmon is more expensive than cultured salmon. And it goes without saying that a steak from a grass-fed cow will cost an order of magnitude more than a pound of pink slime. Although I haven’t yet been able to find a reliable supplier of grass-fed beef around here. 另一个问题是这种食谱要花更多钱。新鲜蔬菜很贵！并且你需要吃大量的新鲜蔬菜才能和吃一磅意大利面相当，即使是上等意大利面价格也低于这些新鲜蔬菜。这不是穷人能负担得起的食谱……此外，野生三文鱼也比家养的贵。更不用说牛排的价格了，一块草饲牛排的价格可以买到超过一磅的粉红肉泥。尽管我还没在附近找到过能买到可靠的草饲牛肉的地方。 In addition to expense in terms of money, following this diet is more time-consuming. In my family’s division of labor I am the one who cooks. So now I can’t simply stop, on my way from work, for a Chinese take-out or a pizza, I have to cook each and every meal myself. I mean, I like to cook, but doing it every day is a chore. 除了钱上的开销之外，遵照这个食谱需要花费更多时间。在我家的分工中，我是负责做饭的。所以现在我不能简单地在回家路上停车买个中餐外卖或匹萨了，我必须每顿都自己做。我的意思是，尽管我喜欢做饭，但每天都做是一种负担。 Travel has also been complicated. Most restaurants are worthless. Mexican food, for example – it’s all about tortillas, rice, beans, and cheese. There is nothing left. Indian is all about rice, lentils, other  beans, nan. In most other restaurants they add ingredients I can’t eat into almost everything. Because I haven’t eaten wheat-based products for three months, I find that I am now more sensitive to small amounts of flour that may be added to a sauce. 旅行也变得麻烦了。大多数餐馆都不能吃。比如墨西哥菜，都是面饼、米饭、豆子和奶酪，没有别的了。印度菜都是米饭、扁豆、其它豆子和馕。其他大多数餐馆都会在食物中加入我不能吃的食材。由于我已经三个月没吃小麦制品了，所以我发现现在我对酱料中加入的少量面粉更加敏感了。 The best bet is French restaurants (also Italian and Spanish), but they are also the most expensive. I now have to study the menu real careful, and then negotiate substitutions. Fortunately, American waiters seem to be used to all kinds of weird dieting preferences, and in most cases are very gracious and accommodating. 最好的选择是去法式餐厅（还有意大利餐厅和西班牙餐厅），但他们都是最贵的。我现在必须非常认真地研究菜单，然后商量能不能替换掉一些食材。幸运的是，美国的服务员看上去已经习惯了各种特殊的饮食偏好，大多数情况下他们都非常友善和包容。 Finally, I had to give up beer. I still like the taste (now the memory of it…), but when I look at a glass of beer that a friend is drinking, I see the distillation of all the worst grass seed poisons (shudder). So there is no temptation to order one for myself. 最后，我不得不放弃喝啤酒。我还是很喜欢它的味道（此刻正在回想这美味……），可当我看着朋友喝的那杯啤酒时，我看见的是最糟糕的有毒种子的蒸馏提取物（不寒而栗）。所以就没有给自己也来一杯的欲望了。 The psychological aspects of this dietary shift are also very fascinating. My good colleague Jon Haidt has a wonderful metaphor. He compares our conscious mind to the rider of an elephant (the subconscious mind). The rider may be thinking he is in charge, but the elephant will do whatever he wants. That’s why it is so difficult to be on most diets, and that’s why dieters are prone to recurrent bingeing on forbidden foods. I will not embarrass myself with examples, but I have about as much control over my own elephant as an average person. 这个饮食转变引起的心理上的变化同样令人着迷。我的好同事Jon Haidt有个精彩的比喻。他把我们有意识的心智比作骑在大象上的人（大象是潜意识的心智）。骑象人认为他在掌控，但大象其实可以做任何自己想做的事。这就是为什么大多数节食食谱都很难被坚持下来的原因，这也是为什么节食者倾向于重新大吃大喝食谱禁止的食品。很尴尬，我自己就是个例子，但在控制自己大象的能力上，我已经有平均水平了。 But in the case of this diet my elephant and I seem to be of the same mind. My wife continues to eat bread, occasionally pasta and rice, and ice-cream. Today I had a dinner in a restaurant with a good friend, who was eating yammy-looking rolls, among other things. What I find surprising is that I don’t need to exert my will to stay away from these foods. At least so far – we’ll see if it lasts. 但现在这个食谱的情况是，我和我的大象看上去想法一致。我老婆继续吃她的面包，偶尔来点意大利面和米饭，还有冰激凌。今天我和一个好朋友在餐馆吃晚饭，他吃着看上去很好吃的面包卷，还有一些其它东西。让我感到惊喜的是，我不需要使用意志力就能抵制这些食物。至少现在是这样，我们以后会知道这种情况能不能持续。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

最近不少朋友跟我打听有关旧石器食谱（Paleo Diet）的事情，有些因为没有持续关注我的言论，所以不太了解来龙去脉，甚至有些误解，我在这里从头说明一下。 Q: 什么是旧石器食谱？ A：简单说，是对农业时代特有的食物总体上持怀疑态度，具体点说就是：

• 不吃：谷物、奶类、豆类、精制糖和植物油。
• 主要吃：肉（特别是脂肪比例较高的肉）、蛋、低糖高纤蔬菜、坚果、水果。

更多细节可参考维基Paleo Diet词条： https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_diet Q：那你现在吃些什么？ A：我实践的版本和标准定义有所不同，我喝少量酸奶，但排除了薯类，而按标准做法，旧石器食谱是可以包括薯类的；我也不完全排除豆类，特别是嫩豆和外皮比例较高的豆类，前者是因为我特别爱吃，后者是因为纤维量高；另外，和标准做法不同，我也不控制盐。 目前我的食谱大概是这样：

• 主食：牛羊猪肉、鸡鸭肉、鸡蛋、鱼；豇豆、菠菜、白菜、卷心菜、胡萝卜；
• 零食：常吃的有花生和瓜子；水果不多，折合每天不到一个梨；
• 饮料：每天三到四杯咖啡，两壶绿茶，约合三升水；红酒半杯；少量酸奶，每周不到一升；

一顿典型的正餐：

• 一块半牛排（225克）+一斤豇豆，或，
• 半只烤鸭+一斤菠菜，或，
• 五个鸡蛋+一两熏肉+一颗西兰花，或，
• 半斤红烧肉+两颗娃娃菜；

这是平时，上馆子或者周末改善时，会多吃不少。 Q：高脂低碳水的吃法不就是Atkins吗，旧石器食谱有何不同？ A：高脂低碳水这点上，两者确实很像，但Atkins主要关注食物的主营养成分（营养学上叫宏量营养素），不管这些成分是哪儿来的，而旧石器食谱则主要关注食材，所以两者在一些次要成分或微量元素上可能有较大差异。 而且，在主成分上，也有重要差异，Atkins对碳水的排除更彻底，所以不吃薯类，而旧石器排除奶类和豆类。 从上一条可以看出，我的食谱其实是在旧石器的基础上朝Atkins方向修正了一点。 Q：旧石器时代的人真是这么吃的吗？ A：不是。前农业时代，人类已到达所有大陆，所占据生态位千差万别，食谱当然很不一样，所谓旧石器食谱，充其量只可能与其中某些比较接近。 所以这个食谱里的所谓“旧石器”，恰当的理解是，它排除了一些农业时代特有的成分，而不是指它逼真模仿了前农业时代某个狩猎采集群体实际采用的特定食谱。所以我们不必过分细究这个名称，反正已经定义的够清楚了，叫什么名字无所谓。 Q：从小习惯了吃米面，突然戒掉不难受吗？ A：嗯，会有点难受，所以我不是一开始就完全杜绝米面的，经历了三个月的过渡期，在此期间逐渐减少米面，过渡期后半段用饼干代替米饭，因为饼干的量容易调节。 Q：容易做到吗？需要很大毅力才能坚持吗？ A：如果“坚持”是指控制食欲、忍着不吃的话，我觉得根本不需要坚持，很容易做到，相反，有时候要特意使劲吃才行，幸好我原本就爱吃肉而且不怕肥肉，不然的话倒是可能有点困难。 不过，我也并不是遵守的特别严格，和朋友聚餐或者过年回家这种场合就会失控，而且我原先喜欢吃点甜品，现在偶尔还吃一点，不过难得偏离一下关系不大。 Q：吃肉太多会不会蛋白质过量？ A：嗯，我也考虑过这问题，所以要吃肥一点，实际上，这个食谱的重点不是一味增加蛋白质，而是用脂肪代替碳水化合物作为主要能量来源，而蛋白质只须充足即可。 不过这一点对不爱吃肥肉的人确实可能构成障碍。 Q：效果怎么样？ A：感觉很好，容易观察到的效果是体重减掉了12公斤，身体状态也有所改善，不过这不太好描述，也可能只是错觉。 Q：失控的时候体重会反弹吗？ A：会，但也很容易再减回去，可以说非常容易，只要接下去几顿稍微少吃一点就行。 我的体会是，转换食谱之后，身体的代谢模式好像完全不同了，我猜可能是这样：以前吃高碳水饮食时，当血糖水平下降，身体就立即产生饥饿感，促使你去寻找食物，而现在，血糖水平下降时，身体优先消耗体内脂肪，同时也可能有饥饿感，但不如以前强烈。 当然这只是我的猜测，没什么依据。 Q：有负面效果吗？ A：有过，主要是大便量不足，有段时间比以前少了大概一半，所以后来我大幅增加了高纤维蔬菜的量，一开始稍有点困难，比如把一斤多豇豆当饭吃，你可能也会不太习惯，不过大便量的问题倒好像是解决了。 当然，可能还会有其他我没察觉的负面效果。 Q：旧石器食谱的健康价值有科学依据吗？ A：假如“科学依据”是指系统性的经验证据、统计相关性和足够完整的因果链条，那就没有，至少我不认为现在已经有了。 但假如“科学依据”是指有点道理，而且这个道理和科学有点关系，那我认为确实有一点，那就是出于对进化原理的认识，对自然选择作用的信任，即，考虑到农业急剧改变了我们的食谱，我们怀疑，几千年的自然选择还来不及让人类充分适应农业食谱，而即便在某些方面有所适应，也可能是以牺牲另一些方面的健康为代价的。 但这只是对一般原理的信赖，没有统计和生理机制上的证据，至少还没有系统性的证据。所以我总是将这一食谱称为“我们这套迷信”，不过依我看，这是有点道理的迷信。 Q：这点道理听上去很空泛啊，你这么容易就被说服了？ A：嗯，如果只是这点道理的话，不足以让我做出这么大改变，我做出决定，是因为看到有人这么做了，听他说效果很好，而且我对他的见识和判断力相当信任，于是就想，不妨尝试一下吧。 Q：搜了下有关这食谱的文章，好浓一股有机教味道啊，您老不是整天反有机教吗？ A：如果你相信一样东西是好东西，总不能因为有机教徒也很热衷，就不要了吧？那好像有点不划算。 Q：你会向别人推荐这个食谱吗？ A：不会主动推荐，但假如你问我是否值得试试，我会说，值得，但需要满足一些条件： 1）你目前确实有健康问题（比如肥胖）需要对付， 2）你喜欢吃肉，而且不怕吃肥肉， 3）你能方便的凑齐所需食物，据我了解，这对上班族可能不太容易，我现在多半自己做，或者去熟食店买，还算方便。 Q：黄章晋说你两个月瘦了12公斤，有这么神奇？ A：黄章晋老师记性不好，实际上我上次和上上次见他时，已经瘦了很多，我是2014年7月开始转变食谱的，三个月后体重开始稳定下降，高峰期大约每周降0.5公斤，到现在一共降了12公斤，其中只有1.5公斤是最近两个月减掉的。  

【2015-08-25】 @whigzhou: 一个基本历史背景：旧石器时代晚期（也叫中石器时代），人类经历了一次认知革命（也叫文化大爆炸），除其他进步之外，狩猎能力大幅提升，很可能与弓箭的发明有关，导致人类种群及地理分布的又一次大扩张，不像第一波走出非洲时紧贴海岸线，这次扩张横扫欧亚大陆腹地，后来又竖刷美洲大陆…… @whigzhou: 这一过程伴随着大批大型哺乳动物灭绝，而此时人类尚无力破坏动物栖息地，这些动物只能是被吃掉的，所以至少在那几万年里，我们祖先着实吃了很多肉，直到新仙女木到来，吃肉条件恶化，然后一部分族群转向农业，但从农业起源到谷物变成绝对主食，还要过好几千年，而有些族群从未转向谷物…… @从不造谣自干五:美洲的马为啥会被吃掉 @whigzhou: 马最早都是捉来吃的，欧亚也是，马被驯化后的最初几千年里，也是宰了吃的，后来才用来驮物、拉车，再后来才用于骑乘，较普遍的骑乘历史只有三千多年 @whigzhou: 据说早期的马过于矮小，不适合骑乘，而且方便的骑乘还要很多马具，都有待一样样发明出来  

The Dark Side of Cultural Evolution 文化进化的黑暗面 作者：Peter Turchin @ 2012-5-17 译者：林婵娟(@Standingbesideyou)    一校：林翠 来源：evolution-institute.org， https://evolution-institute.org/blog/the-dark-side-of-cultural-evolution-2/ Cultural evolution is what created the – in many ways – wonderful societies that we live in. It created the potential to free our lives from hunger and early death, and made possible the pursuit of science and art. But cultural evolution also has a dark side, in fact, many ‘dark sides.’ 文化进化在许多方面造就了人类赖以生存的美好社会，它让我们有望从饥饿和早夭的命运中解脱出来,也使追求科学和艺术成为可能。但是文化进化也有其黑暗面，事实上，其背后“黑影重重”。 Clearly domestication of plants and animals is what made our civilization possible. All sufficiently complex societies are possible only on the basis of agriculture. But we have paid, and continue paying a huge price for this advance of human knowledge and technology. This idea was brought home to me as a result of several conversations I had with Michael Rose during the Consilience Conference at St. Louis, which I talked about in my previous blog. 众所周知，种植和畜牧使我们发展起文明。任何一个有效运转的复杂社会，都离不开农业基础。然而，过去和如今我们人类都为知识和科学的进步付出了巨大的代价。我开始确信这点，得益于在圣路易斯举行的学科融通研讨会上和Mickael Rose的几次谈话，我在之前的博客上写过。 Michael is an evolutionary biologist at the university of California at Irvine, who studies aging from the evolutionary perspective. I actually read his book Evolutionary Biology of Aging some twenty years ago, but never met him until two weeks ago. Michael 是加利福尼亚大学欧文分校的一位进化生物学家,致力于从进化的角度研究衰老。大约20年前我就读过他的书《衰老的进化生物学》，但直到两周前才有幸和他会面。 One way people talk about the price of civilization is in terms of evolutionary mismatch (which is one of the focus areas at the Evolution Institute). The idea is that our bodies and minds evolved during the Pleistocene, when we lived in small groups of hunter-gatherers. Now we live in a dramatically different environment, and that causes all kinds of problems. The psychological aspect of the problem was recently discussed by Robin Dunbar and commentators on his Focus Article. The physiological problems include rampant obesity, heart disease, and diabetes. 探讨文明发展代价的一种方式是研究进化失配（这也是本站Evolution-Institute.org所专注的领域之一）。失配理论的意思是，人类身心进化的过程发生在旧石器时代，那时我们生活在小型狩猎－采集群体中。而现在我们却面临着截然不同的生存环境，这导致了各种各样问题。最近，Robin Dunbar写的专题文章，以及收到的评论，探讨了失配问题中的心理方面。而生理方面的问题则包括日益严重的肥胖症、心脏病、糖尿病等。 There is currently no consensus on the role of changing diet and other aspects of lifestyle, most notably exercise, in causing modern-day health problems. Some people argue that our Plestocene bodies are not adapted to high-calorie diets and sedentary life-styles of today. 人类饮食和生活方式（尤其是运动方式）的改变，在当今健康问题中到底扮演了什么角色，尚未取得共识。有些人认为，我们在旧石器时代进化出来的身体，并不适应现如今高卡路里的饮食结构和久坐不动的生活方式。 On the other hand, agriculture was invented roughly 10,000 years ago. 400 generations is not an insignificant length of time for evolution to do its thing. Some anthropologists (including another participant of the Consilience conference,Henry Harpending) argue that humans evolved very intensively during this period. One famous example is the evolution of lactose tolerance, that is, ability to digest milk. 另一方面，农业大概出现在距今10000年前，400多代可不是一个小数目，进化所带来的改变不可小觑。一些人类学家（包括同样参加了学科融通研讨会的Honry Harponding）认为，人类在农业时代经历了急剧的进化改变。最著名的例子就是我们进化出了对乳糖的耐受性——即消化奶类的能力。 Michael Rose develops a more subtle and sophisticated argument, which is explained at length in his 55 theses-a New Context for Health. There is a sophisticated mathematical model underlying his argument, but the basic logic of it is actually quite simple. Michael Rose 发展了更加精致灵巧的论证，并在他的网站（55theses.org，副标题“健康新语境”）上做出了详尽的解析。虽然他的论证建立在一个复杂的数学模型之上，但基本逻辑其实十分简单。 We think of people having ‘traits,’ but actually we change quite dramatically as we age. The key ‘trick’ is to realize that people have a suite of traits, and they can be quite different, depending on what stage in life we are talking about. 我们常说人们具有某某“性状”（traits），但其实，随着年龄增长，我们的特性会发生巨大改变。理解这种变化的‘诀窍’在于意识到，性状是一个系列，随年龄变化可能大为不同，取决于所谈论的年龄阶段。 As an extreme example, consider reproductive ability, something of great interest to evolution. Humans do not reproduce until they reach a fairly advanced age of maturation (puberty). Young adults are not very good mothers or fathers, but they improve with age during their twenties. After that reproductive ability declines and eventually disappears. So reproductive ability is actually a trait that varies quite a lot with age. 一个极端的例子就是生育力，这也是物种进化的一大重点。人类在没有达到足够成熟的青春期之前,是不会繁衍后代的。年轻人并不能马上成为优秀的父亲或母亲，但在他们二十多岁的时候，随着年龄增长，情况就有所改善。这个时期过后，生育力就开始慢慢下降直至完全消失。因此生育力就是一个会随年龄而不断改变的性状。 Another example is hair color. One man can have red hair and another blond hair. However, this will be true only while they are relatively young. Older men become grey, and many become bald. So by the time our two men turned 60, they may have the same hair color (grey), or no hair at all (bald). 另一个例子是发色。有人是红发，有人是棕发，但一般只会在相对年轻的时候才体现出这种差异。年老后他们的头发会逐渐变得灰白，许多人还会秃顶。因此当发色不同的两人在60岁后，头发就变成了一样的颜色（灰白），或者都没有头发（秃头）。 By the way, it is likely that the reason is not simple ‘degradation,’ reduced function due to aging, but that greyness and baldness evolved to signal maturity and wisdom. To really describe the phenotype of an individual we need to specify at what age it is expressed. 另外值得一提的是，这种变化的理由，也许不是年龄增长带来的简单功能“退化”，而是人类进化出了灰白头发和秃顶，作为显示其成熟和睿智的信号。因此要准确表述一个人类个体的性状，我们必须先分析这个性状在哪个年龄段被表达。 Ability to digest certain foods can also be age-dependent. I have already mentioned the ability to digest lactose, the sugar present in milk. Before we domesticated animals such as cows and sheep, only very young humans had this ability. Natural selection turned this ability off in adults because they never needed it (and it would be wasteful to continue producing the enzyme lactase that aids in the digestion of milk sugar). 对特定食物的消化能力也可能随年龄而变化。例如上文曾提到过人类消化乳糖（奶类中存在的糖分）的能力。在我们驯化诸如牛羊等动物之前，只有非常年幼的人类能够消化乳糖。自然选择使得成年人类丧失了这种能力，因为他们根本不需要（持续分泌乳糖分解酶来帮助消化乳糖，对身体机能来说也是浪费）。 Now clearly traits expressed at different ages are not completely independent of each other. An ability to digest milk sugar as an adult depends on the presence of an enzyme that evolved in order for babies to digest their mother’s milk. So traits at different ages can be correlated, either positively, or negatively. An example of negative correlation is the reproductive ability – in many animals, putting a lot of effort in reproducing early reduces the reproductive ability later in life. 很明显，性状虽然在不同年龄段各有表达，但不会毫无联系。成年人乳糖消化能力取决于一种酶的存在，这种酶是为了消化母亲的乳汁而在婴儿身上进化出来的。这意味着不同年龄段的性状可能互相关联，它们既可能正相关，也可能负相关。一个负相关的例子就是生育力——许多动物早年投入过多精力在繁衍后代上，会导致晚年生育力的下降。 So the sophisticated mathematical framework for dealing with age-dependent traits has to take into account all kinds of possible correlations, both between the same trait at different ages and between different traits. For example, most individuals have dark eye and dark hair color, or light eye and light hair color, with dark/light and light/dark combinations a relative rarity. 因此，为了研究与年龄有关的性状，精致的数学模型必须考虑到所有可能的相关性，包括同一性状在不同年龄段之间的相关性，以及不同性状之间的相关性。例如，大多数人，要么是深色瞳孔深色头发，要么是浅色瞳孔浅色头发。而深色瞳孔搭配浅色头发，浅色瞳孔搭配深色头发，这样的组合相对罕见。 We can now get to the crux of the matter. Because abilities to do something at the age of 10, 30, 50, etc. are separate (even if correlated) traits, they evolve relatively independently of each other. When grains became a large part of the diet, the ability of children to digest them (and detoxify the chemical compounds plants put into seeds to protect them against predators such as us) became critical. 现在，我们可以着手讨论我们的重点了。由于我们在10岁，20岁以及50岁的各项能力被年龄隔开（哪怕它们是相关联的），因此它们的进化也是相对独立的。当谷物在我们饮食结构中占了很大比例时，儿童消化这些谷物以及分解其中有毒化合物的能力（植物为了从人类这样的掠食者手中保护种子而将这些有毒物置于其中）变得十分重要。 If you don’t have genes to help you deal with this new diet, you don’t survive to adulthood and don’t leave descendants. In other words, evolution worked very hard to adapt the young to the new diet. 如果你没有可以帮助你应付这种新型食谱的基因，那么你就很难存活到成年，也就不会留下后代。换句话说，进化会异常努力地让年轻一辈去适应新的食物类型。 On the other hand, the intensity of selection on the old (e.g., 55 years old) was much less – in large part, because most people did not live to the age of 55 until very recently. Additionally, once an animal gets past its reproductive age, the evolution largely ceases to have an effect (in humans, presence of older individuals was somewhat important for the survival of their genes in their children and grandchildren, so evolution did not entirely cease, but was greatly slowed down). 而另一方面，对于多数年人（例如55岁）来说，自然选择的强度是很弱的，因为近代之前的大多数人类都活不到55岁。此外，一旦动物过了生育年龄之后，进化就几乎不再起效了。（对于人类来说，老人的存在对他们的基因在子孙后代中的延续是有重要意义的，因此进化并不会完全停止，但仍会大幅降速。） What this means is that evolution caused rapid proliferation of genes that enabled children and young adults to easily digest novel foods and detoxify whatever harmful substances were in them. Genes and gene combinations that did the same for older people also increased, but at a much, much slower rate. 换言之，进化促进了帮助婴幼儿和年轻人消化新食物和分解其中毒素的那些基因快速增殖。而对老人产生同样效果那些基因和基因组合，尽管也在增加，但是增长速度却要慢得多。 This may sound puzzling – if we have the detoxifying genes that work for young adults, why shouldn’t they work for older adults? The reason is that one gene-one action model is wrong; it’s not how our bodies work. Most functions are regulated not by a single gene, but by whole networks of them. 听起来这有点令人不解——如果我们身上有解毒基因，为什么对年轻人有效，却对年长者无效呢？这是因为那种认为一个基因对应一种性状的模型是错误的，我们的身体机制并非如此运转。大部分身体机能并不是由单一基因、而是由整个基因组的互相协作来调控的。 As we age, some genes come on, and others go off, and the network changes, often in very subtle and nonlinear ways. That’s why we need the ‘trick’ with which I started, to consider functions at different ages as separate traits. 随着年龄增长，有些基因开始生效，有些则慢慢失效，协调机制也以敏感非线性的方式不断改变。我前文提到的“诀窍”，就是把思考转向被年龄隔开的性状的作用机制。 During the last 10,000 years evolution worked very hard to optimize the gene network operating during earlier ages to deal with novel foods. But the gene network during later ages was under much less selection to become optimized in this way. 过去一万年来的人类进化，尽其所能地优化了那些帮助年轻人消化新食物的基因网络。但是中老年阶段，这组基因网络就很少通过自然选择得以如此优化。 The striking conclusion from this argument is that older people, even those coming from populations that have practiced agriculture for millennia, may suffer adverse health effects from the agricultural diet, despite having no problems when they were younger. 从以上论述中我们会得出一个令人惊讶的结论：老年人，即使是那些生活在有数千年农业生活之中的老年人，还是可能遭受农业时代的食谱所带来的负面健康效果，即使他们年轻的时候适应良好。 The immediate corollary is that one thing they can do to improve their health is to shift to something known as the ‘Paleolithic diet,’ or paleo diet, for short. In the simplest form, this means eliminating from your diet any cereals (wheat, rice, etc), legumes such as beans and peas, and any dairy products (e.g., cheese). 一个直接的推论是，这些老年人可以通过转向“旧石器时代式饮食”（或者简称旧石器食谱）来改善健康。最简单的形式就是，将饮食中所有的谷物（小麦，大米等）去除，同样要减掉的还有豆类（例如各类豆子和豌豆），以及各种乳制品（如奶酪等）。 It is striking that this is almost precisely the opposite of the popular Mediterranean diet, which emphasizes wheat products (bread, pasta), cheese, and legumes (as in the Italian bean soup, in pasta fagioli, and in hummus). 读者可能惊讶地发现，这种饮食方式和流行的地中海式饮食几乎完全相反，后者强调要多吃小麦制品（面包以及意大利面），奶酪以及豆类食物（诸如意式豆汤，意面豆汤和鹰嘴豆泥里的豆类等）。 We are now getting to something I have a personal (rather than a scientific) interest in. I am about to turn 55, and although I am generally in good health, various worrying indicators – cholesterol, sugar – have been inexorably inching up. 现在讲一些涉及我的个人兴趣（而非科学方面的）的事情。我快55岁了，虽然身体大致健康，但类似胆固醇和血糖水平等各种令人担忧的指标却在一路缓慢上升。 A couple of years ago I read Ray Kurzweil Fantastic Voyage, but I was unpersuaded by his prescriptions to better health and longevity. Kurzweil’s prescription is, at basis, a calorie-restricted diet. Like the great majority of human beings, I find it extremely difficult to starve myself. 几年前，我读了Ray Kurzweil的《奇幻之旅》，但是并不认同他针对健康和长寿提出的方法。Kurzweil提出的方法，简单说，可以归结为一种控制卡路里的饮食方法。和大多数人一样，控制饮食、保持饥饿，对我来说简直难如登天。 More generally, his approach to human health and longevity is that of an engineer – you turn that dial down, another one up, and get the result you want (according to his book, he spends one day a week connected to a machine that removes bad things from his blood and adds good things). 总体上说，他改善健康和延长寿命的方式就如一个工程师所做的那样，将身体某个指标调低，又调高另一个指标，通过这样的调节来达到理想效果。（据他书中所述，他每周都会花一天的时间通过某台仪器来去除他血液中的不良物质，然后再添加有益物质。） I am very doubtful that such an approach will work on an evolved system with multiple nonlinear feedbacks, which is the human body. So changing one variable (e.g., reducing the cholesterol level in the blood) may have unintended – and usually negative – consequences elsewhere (perhaps increasing the risk of cancer). 我实在难以相信这种方法能在人体这个高度进化的多重非线性反馈调节系统中发挥作用。改变身体的某一变量（例如降低血液中的胆固醇水平）可能会在别处引起意料之外的——通常是负面的——后果（也许会提高患癌的风险）。 To conclude, the paleo diet is the first diet, of the ones I heard of, that has a sound evolutionary basis going for it. This was a deciding factor in persuading me to try it out, which I did, starting about two weeks ago. It apparently takes about six months to see its full effects, so stay tuned for progress reports. May 17, 2012 结论是，旧石器食谱是我所听说过的第一个有着坚实进化理论基础的食谱。这一点是我决定尝试它的决定性因素，并且两周前我开始了实践。据说大概要经过六个月的时间才能看到它的整体效果，所以敬请期待我的后续汇报。 2012年5月17日 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——