...
Another example is the south African bushmen
For the Koisan they use over 150 wild plant species for food, but the main ones are:...
Jared Diamond, in "Guns, Germs and Steel", narrates how indigenous New Guineans have distinct words for a thousand different plants that are part of everyone's vocabulary, and that most everybody also knows something useful about each of those plants - like which have which edible parts, and which to avoid, and how to make inedible plants edible.
This suggests that hunter-gatherer societies everywhere have far more diet options than most "civilized" people can appreciate.
The more different organisms you sample and include in your diet, the better your chance all essential substances will be included
somewhere.
And that is the problem with any diet that severely limits the number of organisms you eat as an omnivore: I can believe that a "paleo diet" modeled on what an Ice Age European might have eaten - 70% animals of all kinds, 30% plant parts, each as you can find them during the course of the year - is sustainable. That would include dozens
[*] of species of animals (mammals, insects, fish, birds, worms, ...) and hundreds of species of plants. But Peterson's "
beef only"? No way!
---
[*] "Dozens" may be a severe undercount: I once compiled a list of all the different animal species I have eaten on purpose in my life time, and the result was in the 80s - more than half of which living in water. This includes thus far zero insects, only one species of amphibians, no more than three species of reptiles. I would think that hunter-gatherers will sample a lot more than I have and easily include more than 100 species of animals in their diet each year.