Paleo? For or against?

fortune wookiee wrote: »

It's not without its critics either: http://www.outlawfitnesshq.com/the-paleo-diet/

That's the dumbest critique of paleo I've ever read.

#1: Do we really know what cavemen ate?
We've actually got a pretty good idea from anthropology and archaeology, just because the author is ignorant doesn't mean everyone else is. We also know they definitely didn't eat grains, simple sugars and vegetables oils.

#2: Diet location dependant?
Macro levels were probably different depending on the area but I don't think many paleo proponents dictate exact macro-nutrient ratios, and if they do it's probably related to hormonal food response.

#3: Can't replicate it?
Strawman, no one I've read states you can accurately replicate a stone age diet. You can get closer to optimal though (certainly closer than a normal western diet).

#4: They didn't live long enough to get diseases?
A common fallacy, the average age of cavemen was low because of lack of medicine, high chold mortality etc...Modern hunter gatherers live to ripe old ages (largely) without suffering all the diseases mentioned.

#5: Who Says We Haven’t Evolved?
Another strawman. Some populations have clearly evolved lactose tolerance but the fact that grains contain lots of antinutrients for which we have no defence is an indication that we are not designed to eat them as a staple of our diet.

#6: Who Says Our Digestive Physiology Changes Significantly At All?
I don't know what he's getting at here. We have evolved from frugivores to omnivores over millions of years, this a biological and anthropological fact.

#7: Animal to Plant Ratio.
Looking at modern hunter gatherers, the ratio varies but again, none of them eat grains, vegetables oils or simple sugars.

#8: They weren’t eating to ‘be healthy’. They were eating to survive.
No shit Sherlock.

fortune wookiee wrote: »

Excellent post Kaiser.

I guess I'm also somewhat concerned about the levels of purines in a paleo diet as someone who's very prone to gout attacks..

I don't know much about it but here's an article on the subject
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/gout-primal-paleo-diet/#axzz2QdhHRMNe

I am grain and egg intolerant among others and have found the new diet has improved my health immensely and I have lost weight which is always a plus - buy I am only just getting used to planning my food to avoid hunger periods. The egg intolerance is probably the hardest as I was pretty dependent on eggs for protein in my diet - but I am going to make some home made protein bars with whey protein and crushed dates and almonds - thanks to some fab advice from Collette in Evergreen in Galway at the weekend.
I guess balance in your diet is the most important thing when you give up grains etc and eating out in restaurants becomes a bit of a nightmare as not everyone is clued in or helpful and it can be trial and error and a bit embarrassing in company!
A lot of food outlets are conscious and helpful with gluten free options but grain free and egg free options seem to be non existent - it would be nice to have a listing of Special Diet Catering outlets when you are planning a night out!

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Let's not split hairs, for the most part, and for most of our existence, our ancestors were not eating grains.

Well sure. I mean grasses only evolved, what, 100 million years ago? And we can trace our ancestors back a few billion years. The point is where do you draw the line with what is "natural" human diet? How far back do you go? Why is 30 thousand years of grain consumption not enough?

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

And a comprehensive rebuttal here. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of criticisms that can be levelled at the paleo movement, but most of the criticisms I've read are based on strawman arguments

That is not much of a rebuttal really. The criticism seems to be on rather minor points of the talk such as which sex the diet is targeted at, what date it was established, and whether it is a "fad" or a "trend". To use your on phrase this seems like hair splitting.

With regards to the actual science Wolf seems quite happy and, even, complimentary.

"Prof. Warinner’s analysis of the limitations of stable isotopic readings is VERY interesting and important. "

"There are some very interesting developments with dental plaque analysis indicating consumption of tubers, grains, and legumes much earlier than was previously thought. "

"This is a FANTASTIC section. It is true, unless you do significant foraging on your own, most of what we consume has been “Luther Burbanked” into large, tasty, low toxin-load fruits and veggies."

"This is a great description of what HG’s of central Mexico ate, and the fact they moved with the seasons and availability of food. Beautiful, very interesting piece…I wish we had an hour on this alone."

"This is a simply OUTSTANDING section. Diversity of food sources, locality, and understanding of the neuro-regulation of appetite, changes in the gut biome…how easy it is to eat a caloric level that is completely inappropriate with our genetics, eat the whole animal…"


Perhaps I should have qualified my earlier post. I have nothing against the "paleo diet". It seems perfectly healthy and probably far healthier than many most diets. My problem is with the pseudoscientific language it takes and massive unfounded assumptions it makes.

It's a tough one really. My experience for what it's worth is this.

I have been "mostly" Paleo now for over a year and yes I have lost weight and generally feel healthier in the process.

Within that time I decided to go full on Paleo for a few weeks here and there.

What happened in those periods was my energy levels plummeted when I tried to carry out intensive exercise programmes. I needed more carbs and even though I persevered with more fruit and veg it was not working. Now I know the old adage of co-relation does not imply causation but in my case when I re-introduced my Pinhead oats that I had always taken for brekkie I definitely noticed a sharp increase in energy levels and my performance improved quite dramatically. For me oats are awesome!

However when I tried wholegrain breads again I bloated out and felt knackered again, I don't do dairy or cheese either.

Basically I eat a lot of fish chicken and beef once a week as well as fruits and veggies every day twice a day, I have also cut right down on nuts as they seem to put the weight on me. Strangely though I have no issues with small amounts of sugar, meaning I can have the odd chocolate bar (dark) on occasion. If I even look at a potato or pasta of any kind my weight goes up and my energy the opposite way.

OP I think what you must remember when choosing a new way of eating is that effectively you are an experiment of one. No two bodies react the same way to certain foods so you really must experiment and see what suits both you energy levels as well as your waistline. Paleo is not perfect but it is a good baseline that much is certain.

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Sorry, I meant manganese. Unless you eat a lot of nuts, or shellfish every day. It was something I always came up low on in cronometer.

Hmmm, I put in what I ate yesterday (great app, btw) and came up with 76% on maganese which isn't too bad, the only only other vitamin/mineral I was coming up low with was calcium....but I did eat some chicken bones

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

If you eat a single oatcake that pops over 100%

Actually I forgot to add the bag of nuts I ate yesterday which brings me up to 161% for magnanese, so ha!