> It's possible that grain causes subtle long-term damage that mostly kills people past reproductive age, whereas lactose tolerance is of immediate benefit. Su

> It's possible that grain causes subtle long-term damage that mostly kills people past reproductive age, whereas lactose tolerance is of immediate benefit. Sure, and it's also possible the human body has already adapted to processing grains without long term damage, and it's possible that there was never any damage by consuming grains in the first place (the body is highly adaptable). All this line of argument is stating is that without any information, we have no information. What Retric was stating is different though. There exists digestive adaptations that have happened relatively rapidly in relatively recent history, therefore merely the fact that foods were not available in more ancient history is not sufficient to argue that they "aren't good" for the body.