(Disclaimer: The purpose of this article is to discuss the facts surrounding the scientific literature and archeological research of the Paleolithic Age and its diet. This is not a smash article, but it does show aspects of the flaws in the use of period specific dieting. This article does not target any one writer or publication. There are merely too many with slight different views. This article discusses the bulk beliefs at the core of the Paleo Diet. If you wish to engage in intelligent debate (which I don’t discourage) in the comments, please keep in mind the use of the word intelligent.)
Grab your spear, tighten your loin cloth and prepare yourself for a truly primal article.
How is the Paleolithic Age Defined?
How is the Paleolithic Age Defined?
There has been a lot of uproar recently over the diet and lifestyle known as “The Paleo Diet.” Labeled by many researchers and scientists as a fad diet, (American Diabetic Association, National Health Service of England) the Paleo Diet derives its name from the Paleolithic Age.
The full Paleolithic age ranges over 250,000 years by some estimations. It should be noted right off the bat, that these times periods are separated by exceptionally small and somewhat arguable differences. The exact start/end points are fuzzy. Beyond that, it isn’t as if we have books to read about the species of that time. We have random bowls, weapons, figures, and drawings. All to put together in a puzzle of information and speculative theory. While we have ideas, there is no definitive answer to a past with no logging. We should always keep that in mind no matter what side we fall on in the discussion.
To focus on the full Paleolithic period is pretty pointless. Humans, as we know them today, didn’t exist in a behavioral or physical sense at least until the Upper Paleolithic period. In fact, by most researchers, this is what defines the turn from Middle to Upper. This becomes an extremely large moral and historical argument that is better for a different type of blog. The point is, it is of agreement of most researches that the humans we are today and the bodies we have, is related closely to the Late Upper Paleolithic period which dates loosely from around 30,000 to 10,000 BC. This is an significant distinction because there were still extremely noticeable physical differences in the bodies of even the Early Upper Paleolithic period.
The take home point is, if you are attempting to compare the humans and the world we are today – to humans and the world we were then – it doesn’t match up.
The World Changes And We Change With It
With anything we are trying to examine or solve, we have to take into account the variables. For instance, in fat loss we look at the variables of activity, intake, body type, health, conditioning, etc. Taking a look at these variables and taking the time to figure out what makes X different from Y helps us determine the solution of the situation. The same (variables) is true with illness. We are still boggled by the increase in some diseases and the removal of others. This has happened for centuries and in every culture. Currently the following diseases are practically extinct due to current health, nutrition, and medical aid – Tuberculous, Mumps, Smallpox, Bubonic Plague, Rickets, Leprosy, Polio and more.
When you look at the past, you can’t help but notice the rampage of poverty and illness that struck a large amount of people. That people died younger is accepted fact, but the debate surrounding why we lived shorter lives is fascinating.
|
Humans by Era |
Average Lifespan at Birth |
|
Upper Paleolithic |
33 |
|
Neolithic |
20 |
|
Bronze Age |
18 |
|
Classical Rome |
20-30 |
|
Pre-Columbian North America |
25-35 |
|
Medieval Britain |
20-30 |
|
Early 20th Century |
30-40 |
|
1700-1900s |
45-55 |
|
Current world average |
67 |
Many scholars believe that the intervention of modern medicine would have increased life expectancy in the past. But as much as we discuss and debate what would have been better back in the day, it’s hearsay. Understanding the diseases of the past is difficult enough, and it’s not as if we have the resources to build fantasy colonies to simulate past ecosystems. The bigger problem is that a lot of modern health problems continue to bewilder us. Take obesity. Most people don’t even know what it means. Some say it simply means being largely overweight. Others bemoan it as a serious disease that can’t be avoided a “curse of genetic chance.” Nonsense.
We can’t deny that certain genetic markers and common threads can cause obesity, but for the majority of the population — and I do mean 99.5 percent — it’s avoidable. This may sound old school, but I’m a purist. Obesity is caused by excess caloric consumption.
But why? Why do obese people eat too much? A cascade of environmental, emotional, genetic, and economic factors contribute to someone who overeats for their needs. Not everyone who’s obese sits around with a tub of ice cream and a Big Gulp. On the flip side, they’re not all innocents and lost causes either. Overeating for caloric need is a serious problem.
The Contradiction of Grain Witch Hunts
The true defining hate in the Paleo Diet is that of grains (as well as beans, legumes, and some starch vegetables) we are told to avoid. This isn’t the only place where we find this. Over and over again we find a writer after writer demonizing the grain, sugar, and starch carbohydrates. Their technical data for this is actually remarkably small. In fact, the data that exists against the use of grains or starch vegetables is limited to a very small set of studies and always in large epidemiology research (which has too many variables to take without a grain of salt). The majority of it uses small or special populations to make invalid points. While I wont get into the already tired debate of why grains aren’t the definitive problem, I will get into the contradiction being that grains and starch were a staple in the Paleo Diet.
Yes, The Grains Were There
Because grains (and vegetables and fruits in general) biodegrade so quickly, it is harder to get a level of presence in the past. Let’s be logical about this. Hard bones and pottery barely stays around. Finding 22,000 year old barely – is a little tougher. Still, it has been found and not only in a mortar and pestle, but in storage bins. This states that even the human species that are least like what we are today started to investigate farming and storage of seeds.
One often ignored piece of research by the Paleo writers is this 2004 Study titled – The broad spectrum revisited: evidence from plant remains. The study stated:
Although these resources undoubtedly included plants, nearly all BSR hypothesis-inspired research has focused on animals because of a dearth of Upper Paleolithic archaeobotanical assemblages. Now, however, a collection of >90,000 plant remains, recently recovered from the Stone Age site Ohalo II (23,000 B.P.), Israel, offers insights into the plant foods of the late Upper Paleolithic. The staple foods of this assemblage were wild grasses, pushing back the dietary shift to grains some 10,000 years earlier than previously recognized…Besides the cereals (wild wheat and barley), small-grained grasses made up a large component of the assemblage, indicating that the BSR in the Levant was even broader than originally conceived…
Grain Use During Transition Times (click to enlarge)
Most people got into an uproar recently about this article, but the truth is this information has been around or sometime now. There are multiple sources pointing to the fact that Paleolithic man ate grains and ate the gluten based grains at that.
While I agree on the importance of protein and quality fats being promoted more, people are getting out of hand with carbohydrate incrimination. Whole grains and carbohydrates provide an extraordinary energy source and health benefit for those who utilize them properly. People sitting all the time don’t need extreme protein or zero carbs – they need more movement and variety in nutrition distribution.
10 years ago I can’t think of a time when I didn’t hear about or see study after study about the benefits of grains. Now, I can’t remember the last time I have seen people not distort or manipulate research to cherry pick data. What makes it worse is that they are wrong in their time period. The diets were moderate to high carbohydrates from every logical estimation. The diets included fruits, veggies and grains.
Still, somehow this benighted time has amassed a small but loyal following. There are those who see the Upper Paleolithic diet as the best way to maintain optimal health, and some of these few actually try to hold to a diet and lifestyle that’s consistent with that time.
This isn’t necessarily a terrible thing. There’s nothing wrong with trying to eat a diet that emphasizes whole foods — fruits, vegetables and proteins. Problems arise when people distort facts while trying to make a point.
The simple truth is, even today in the supposed worst nutritional times in history, we on average get a far wider variety of food and nutrients than they could fathom back in those times. Even from the 1970s to now we have seen vegetable consumption for the average person increase by 18 percent. While it needs to increase more – and there is no doubt we aren’t doing it all right – average life expectancy has increased to roughly 72-75 years. It is still expected to continue an upward trend, and living into our 80s, 90s and 100s will become more common. We’re not doing bad, so I find it fascinating how hard some people try to ignore our progress.
Are We Moving Backward And Gaining a Cult?
It’s easy to forget how much time one thousand years is. Our common accepted calendar is only up to 2,000 A.D. Think of how we have evolved and changed in our environment in 50 years. Once humans started to pick up on things and understanding how to put the pieces together more, we exploded in growth. Why do we resist this growth? Why do we not look at this evidence and say “Wow, ever since farming and grains became a popular part of our life, we have been growing in health and ability.” In fact, a study titled -
Dental indicators of health and stress in early Egyptian and Nubian agriculturalists: a difficult transition and gradual recovery – states -
This suggests that the period surrounding the emergence of early agriculture in the Nile valley was associated with high stress and poor health, but that the health of agriculturalists improved substantially with the increasing urbanization and trade that accompanied the formation of the Egyptian state. This evidence for poor health among proto- and early agriculturalists in the Nile valley supports theories that agricultural intensification occurred as a response to ecological or demographic pressure rather than simply as an innovation over an existing stable subsistence strategy.
Translation? We needed farming to survive and advance as a species. It was brilliant, not a curse.
We are hitting higher and higher numbers, inventing and yet we want to move backwards? Why?
There are a million and one reasons. Desperation, fear of change, hope, religion – you name it. But is the Paleo movement a religious or cult practice? Technically, yes. One set of religion is defined as – a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Cult is defined as – a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator. Both are heavily defined as faith with little to no scientific report or result. While there are some who may argue that there is plenty of research, there isn’t.
If you look specifically at the research in Paleolithic Diet history, it is complete speculation and guess-based on assumed variables and in my opinion – a high narcissism about the past abilities of man. I love that when most people think of “man of the past” they see this stoic figure able to take down a buffalo with a single spear; when in reality he was eating grasses, bugs, and taking part in very old spiritual rituals.
In specific research there are only a handful of trial studies looking at a specific Paleolithic style Diet. The positive results when shown often bring to question, as with most, how much is the decrease of caloric intake and how much is the “actual food” combination. An appropriate study is a 2009 study that looks at the specific restriction of dairy, cereals, and grains. In this study, the overall caloric difference between the two diets was 1581 ± 295 (p) 1878 ± 379 (d). Fruit intake was higher than vegetables with (p) which is usually not supported in the Paleo circles. Also, there wasn’t complete restriction of grains, beer, or beans but they were certainly decreased. This is a study frequently popping up in Paleo circles, but it should be noted that the cases are diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes.
In at least three studies, we see noticeable decrease in calcium levels and a tendency towards under-eating. Under-eating and carbphobic behavior is a common problem with athletic and aggressive physical athletes like Crossfitters. This being a common diet combo to me paints problems, especially for the female population.
Why Would We Want To Be Paleolithic?
Research suggests the defining turning point from Paleolithic to Neolithic is – behavior. It shows extreme leaps and progress in the ability to plan, think, and assess situations on greater levels. The humans of the Paleolithic period are thought to be led by an extreme amount of fear, impulse and superstition. Much like a dog reacts to a severe thunderstorm or Brendon Frasier in Encino Man at MTV. What I find to be so fascinating by the Paleo phenomenon, is the desire to emulate such a underdeveloped mindset. The glorification is beyond me. Especially since it is made mostly out of preconceived notion, rather than literal understanding of those times.
I have a big news flash for people – there is no such thing as simpler times. It is an illusion. An illusion made the worst by the cloud of media and perception in the 50′s to now. The Paleolithic period was violent and desperate. The lifespan was short, and if the individuals were leaner it was due to near starvation. Most reports give hypothesis of ravaging hunger and eating of grass or anything that provided nutrient value. Paleo man did not have Trader Joe’s grass-fed beef. You may be think it is Raquel Welch in a loin cloth, but it was more variety in body composition than you think. Drawings, figurines, and skeletons show a variety of body types – just like we see today. And again, evolution has changed the course and shape of our bodies in small patterns and with it, our internal systems.
While there was herding and leaders, the species was closer to animal packs than how we as humans are today. There are some who enjoy the thought of that type of lifestyle, but I have no problem saying that I appreciate humans movement towards compassion and community, over violence and survival of the fittest. While always there to some degree, I believe in a great quote by the Dalai Lama.
“Compassion is not religious business, it is human business. It is not luxury, it is essential for our own peace and mental stability. It is essential for human survival.”
I also can’t help but find it a regression to go faux hunting in the park with vibram five finger shoes. I am for progression, on all fronts.
Is The Paleo Diet A Solution?
In my critical and humble opinion – no, I don’t think so. I think the Paleo Diet follows suit of many other diets of the past by tying religious or cult movement with research speculation. I think it avoids the real problems by laying restriction and damning foods which have not earned it on any research level to the general population, beyond over consumption. In regards to over consumption, we also have to look at fat, and we know how witch hunting that went down (if you don’t, it failed).
That being said, I think there are very few problems with a typical Paleo Diet consisting of a full range of carbohydrates, fruits, fats, and meat. Let’s be honest and put aside nit picking, nothing is ever wrong with having more veggies. The problem is not the addition of healthy foods. The problem is the exclusion of other healthy foods, the witch hunting of healthy and proven dietary intake (potatoes, grains, legumes) and the manipulation of research for the use of scare tactics and profit. While I don’t think all writers in the Paleo field have negative goals, I do wish they would focus on the positive of addition rather than the incrimination and subtraction. I also urge all diet writers to avoid special population speculation and comparison to general population.
I also see potential problems ranging from eating disorders, phobias, and injuries due to extremists and propaganda – as can happen with any religious base. I also see the potential of a lot of people being helped and lives being changed for the better – as can happen with any religious base.
In the end, the following remains:
1. Extremely small amounts of information are known about the actual Paleolithic Period.
2. Our closes counterparts existed towards the Upper end of the Paleolithic Period.
3. Contrary to popular belief, grains were apart of the Upper Paleolithic Diet.
4. Today, our average lifespan is over double of that of Paleolithic man.
5. Diseases and our bodies evolve quickly from century to century, let alone over the course of 40,000+ years.
6. Obesity and self afflicting diseases are not going to be solved by a fad diet, but by looking at the physical and psychological effects of life we live now, not 40,000+ years ago.
7. Even though there is speculation, literature points to carbohydrates making up at least 50-55% of the Paleolithic Diet.
8. Popular writers and marketers of the Paleolithic Diet do not use proper research and data and commonly seem to cherry pick research. This is likely going to lead to a large base of followers falling off in a few years leaving only a small set of loyalists. This has been seen time again with diets like Ketogenic or Atkins.
9. There are extremely beneficial, researched, health benefits to whole grains and their use in the large population. This is not limited to digestion and diabetes. Excess should not be confused with consumption.
10. While the dogma behind the Paleo Diet is not healthy, the basic nutritional principles seem to be sound, but could lead to problems of improper energy fueling or eating disorders.
11. Using the term Paleo in regards to grain or carbohydrate restriction appears to be factually incorrect.
–
References
Harlan, J.R. 1992. “Origins and Processes of Domestication”. In Grass Evolution and Domestication. Ed: G.P. Chapman. Cambridge U. Press, pgs: 159-166.
Brown, T.A., S. Lindsay, & R.G. Allaby. 2006. “Using Modern Landraces of Wheat to study the Origins of European Agriculture”. In Darwin’s Harvest. Eds: T.J. Motley, N. Zerega, & H. Cross. Columbia U. Press, pgs: 197-212.
Peterson, G., O. Seberg, M. Yde, & K. Berthelsen. 2006. Phylogenetic relationships of Triticum and Aegilops and evidence for the origin of the A, B, and D genomes of common wheat (Triticum aestivum). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 39: 70-82
Salamini, F., H. Ozkan, A. Brandolini, R. Schafer-Pregl, & W. Martin. 2002. Genetics and geography of wild cereal domestication in the Near East. Nature Reviews Genetics Vol. 3 June 2002 429-441.
Piperno DR, Weiss E, Holst I, Nadel D. 2004. Processing of wild cereal grains in the Upper Palaeolithic revealed by starch grain analysis.
Slavin J. Department of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota 2003 Why whole grains are protective: biological mechanisms.
Stephen AM. Division of Nutrition and Dietetics, College of Pharmacy and Nutrition. 1994. Whole grains–impact of consuming whole grains on physiological effects of dietary fiber and starch.
Shackelford, Laura L.1 American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 133, issue 1 (May 2007), p. 655 – 668. Regional variation in the postcranial robusticity of late upper paleolithic humans
Holt, Brigitte M.1. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, Volume 122, issue 3 (November 2003), p. 200 – 215. Mobility in Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europe: Evidence from the lower limb
Am J Phys Anthropol. 2008;Suppl 47:70-99. Hunters of the Ice Age: The biology of Upper Paleolithic people.
Mediterranean and carbohydrate-restricted diets and mortality among elderly men: a cohort study in Sweden.
Low-carbohydrate diets and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: two cohort studies.
A comparison of low-carbohydrate vs. high-carbohydrate diets: energy restriction, nutrient quality and correlation to body mass index.
Paleolithic nutrition revisited: A twelve-year retrospective on its nature and implications
Dental indicators of health and stress in early Egyptian and Nubian agriculturalists: a difficult transition and gradual recovery.
Related posts:
As Dr. Fass would say – Knowledge Bomb! I am itching to read through these studies.
We need an appropriate t-shirt for that.
Good post Leigh. I’m a “paleo” fan myself and reading a criticism of it has not necessarily changed my thoughts about it but definitely opened my eyes. I feel better when I don’t eat gluten and I avoid grains because I don’t really like them all that much aside from the super processed ones when combined with fat (chocolate chip cookies, brownies, yes please). My favorite part of paleo eating, like you said, is the way it forces you to eat more fruits and vegetables. If I don’t eat them, I’m always hungry. This leads me to fill up a plate with veggies in order to feel satiated. I’m ok with that. I do respect your opinion on the matter and agree with a lot of the criticisms you’ve been talking about lately with some primal/paleo people. Keep it up Leigh. I know its cliche but as usual, you’re giving no nonsense advice. Thanks.
-Rob
You know as I stated, the basic dietary principles are pretty hard to disagree with and I think can work for a lot of people. I believe in many sections of the cause, it is just the manner they take to get there that leaves me scratching my head. Regardless, I am glad you are having a positive experience and hope for a little more moderation.
Where is Alan Aragon and his Paleo cream puffs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5kx9FrIhJU
Holy fuck, what an article Leigh! You basically blew anything regarding Paleo and grains out the window. What is the point of using that term after this? Do you think they will change their usage to classic grains like barley?
I know that it has “been around for years” but I honesty would like one of these articles on the benefits of grains. I still have a bit of gluten fear and placebo effects about grains.
KEEP IT UP!
I think a subjective look at grains is a good idea and will work on that in the future.
Hi Leigh,
An excellent and insightful article into the Paleo diet. I agree with both points of view, the Paleo movement is a bit like a cult and secondly that increasing lean proteins and vegetable intake cannot be a bad thing.
At the end of it all, I think we humans have to do a better job at accepting that excessive calories add up to weight gain, no matter how we spin it.
Cheers
Liz N (exercise phys)
Very good article! This is probably my favorite among all your articles Leigh. Funny, I had a debate over Martin fb wall against some paleo faddist about the consumption of grains in the modern diet. Most people take studies as it is without realizing the fact that causation doesn’t imply causation. I don’t know why people nowadays need to subscribe to some diet religion. Probably to be more socially accepted? Misery loves company? The more, the better then it becomes socially correct? Or all of the above. People should also realize that the cavemen were so busy starving themselves to worry about getting fat nor becoming obese. What works for survival doesn’t mean what’s optimal.
Again, great post Leigh!
Very well put.
^correction: I meant causation doesn’t mean correlation. In addition to that, I’d stick to my moderation diet. I keep on telling people that food avoidance leads to nutrients compromise. Funny, that a popular fitness guru said to me on a debate that fruits and vegetables are superior over whole grains. I told him that there’s no comparison that needs to be made because you cannot compare two whole foods from different species. Every whole food has it’s distinct nutritional property. What people need to learn and adapt is just like what you said: utilization of every nutrients properly.
As the saying goes, it’s the dose that makes the poison. But what would you draw, if anything, from the fact that gluten allergies are affecting 1 in 130 people (approx)? That to me, is a rather worrying statistic. Personally, I haven’t been diagnosed with celiac disease nor lactose intolerance, but ever since I decided nevertheless to drastically reduce my wheat intake and dairy products my health has improved dramatically. Could it be that the amount and the persistent consumptions of such products affect our health in unperceived ways (ie showing no causation between the two) and more so in the latter stages of our life? Sure the Paleolithic man ate grains and no doubt stored it too, but it is also very likely that this comprised a small percentage of his total nutrient intake. The dose makes the poison. (ps I’m not a Paleo diet follower. and being a sportsman I fully embrace the need for carb intake. I try and vary as much as possible but do believe in limiting massively grains that contain gluten)
@Leonardo – modern gluten containing grains, especially wheat, have generally been hybridized to increase the amount of gluten content far beyond what the grain originally contained. Makes better bread that way. That’s one reason why many people can tolerate and eat lower gluten grains, like spelt, kamut, and barley, better than modern wheat. An additional wrinkle related to autoimmune diseases is that low Vitamin D levels can have a dramatic effect on the expression of autoimmune disease. Up until even 100 years ago, we spent less time indoors and less time wearing sunscreen, so the Vit D levels were higher.
I have celiac disease. I can tell when my Vit D levels are low because I become much more sensative to minute amounts of gluten (from cross-contamination) in my diet.
Leonardo, celiac disease and wheat allergies are two different things, with different mechanism. You don’t see immediate relief from gluten removal unless you have a allergies to wheat. Allergies show an immediate histimactic response, even low grade. Histimatic is different from bloating due to overeating, which is what most people experience with carbs. People can’t generally control their carb intake, but that isn’t the fault of their ingredient or else I expect you should have an extremely big bone to pick with alcohol, no?
I would like to know direct health effects you have had in regards to removal of grains though, if you don’t mind sharing. Anecdotal is still evidence. While I do believe in allergies and celiac, I don’t believe the rampant message board self-diagnoses is anything more than fear and placebo. You can get true tests for disturbance and without a test, I can’t really take much seriously due to the high level of potiental placebo
yay, thanks for putting out this info. tired of the debates fueled by empty/distorted research claims.
article on a recent grain study: http://www.naturalhealthresearch.org/nhri/?p=3304
an actual clinical trial, not just observation. yes, they’re comparing whole grains to refined grains (which are of course the devil incarnate…), not studying veg/fruits, but it’s still interesting to see.
Their benefits are mass for those it agrees with, along with other starch groups.
Great article Leigh!
Just this morning I was thinking over that the human body has eveloved so much over thousands of years and as we settled into agriculture we also have adapted to consumption of grains.
I’m vegetarian and after reading your article my mind is at rest that I can get the nutrition I need and lose weight without resorting to hunting
We have been involved with agriculture for at least 15000. We have dramatically improved in health in the last 100+ years, since the addition of even more advanced farming techniques. Not farming, isn’t the answer. Farming right, is.
*Applause* Great post Leigh. Diet religions are counterproductive and unnecessary. I’ve found the paleo narrative to be pretty seductive for a lot of folks because it does make some ‘common sense’ before you dig into it a little deeper. Limiting consumption of heavily processed foods is different than saying whole grains are evil and yams are better than white potatoes. Once people learn how to be flexible and are cured of carbophobia, their eating experience tends to be much healthier AND happier. Keep up the good work!
Is this really another article that uses average lifespans of paleolithic humans (~ 30 years) as an example that the paleo diet is inappropriate, or that “cavemen” lived brief and brutal lives?
http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2010/02/paleo-life-expectancy.html
You said: “That people died younger is accepted fact, but the debate surrounding why we lived shorter lives is fascinating.”
To be more accurate regarding paleolithic lifespans you would have said, *young people* died quite frequently, but if you survived adolescence you probably would live a relatively long life. That is until agriculture was developed and chronic nutrition related diseases came about.
David, respectfully that article you linked to is not valid. My favorite part is it ends with a picture of a late 1800 indian farmer, not exactly Paleo man.
Here are a few sources used to determine life expenctanct, amoung others.
# ^ Hillard Kaplan, Kim Hill, Jane Lancaster, and A. Magdalena Hurtado (2000), “A Theory of Human Life History Evolution: Diet, Intelligence and Longevity”, Evolutionary Anthropology 9 (4): 156-185, doi:10.1002/1520-6505(2000)9:43.0.CO;2-7, http://www.unm.edu/~hkaplan/KaplanHillLancasterHurtado_2000_LHEvolution.pdf, retrieved 12 September 2010
# ^ a b Caspari, Rachel & Lee, Sang-Hee (July 27, 2004), “Older age becomes common late in human evolution”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101 (20): 10895-10900, doi:10.1073/pnas.0402857101, http://www.pnas.org/content/101/30/10895.long, retrieved 12 September 2010
# ^ a b Galor, Oded & Moav, Omer (2007), “The Neolithic Revolution and Contemporary Variations in Life Expectancy”, Brown University Working Paper, http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Economics/Papers/2007/2007-14_paper.pdf, retrieved 12 September 2010
# ^ a b Galor.O “Natural selection and the evolution of life expectancy,2005
Also, did you read the article after that? Did you not see the reference (and I can show you loads more) describing the reason for agriculture was for survival, not for laziness or fun? I would like to know how many Paleo dieters are going in to the wild to find their food only, and not using health stores. Yourself included. Explain to me how this adds up logically to your application, because it just doesn’t make sense to me.
You don’t have to reenact a paleo lifestyle to benefit from a paleo diet. That’s just a straw man. Feel free to check out http://www.paleonu.com for a perspective on that. The point of this is eating food that doesn’t make the body sick.
I understand well why agriculture was developed. Surviving does not mean the same thing as thriving.I would contend that some modern people thrive DESPITE grain consumption rather than because of it.
Either way, we could both quote scientific studies till we are blue in the face, so I will refrain from posting any. Needless to say, we can all use Pubmed or Google Scholar and choose which studies we wish to link to. It amounts to “my dad could beat up your dad”.
The fact is, humans do not need to eat grains or legumes. It is either a choice, or a necessity due to overpopulation and poverty. If you cannot refute that, then how can you say a Paleo diet is not a solution?
I think you are missing a really big point here in that PALEO ATE THE GRAINS. So for you to call the Paleo diet a solution, you are saying the solution is to integrate grains. Choose a new word to define your dogma because it is like saying you are a vegetarian, that eats chicken.
I didn’t cherry pick data either, because there isn’t that much data to pick from in the first place. These are archeologists, there aren’t that many of them you know. I know people like to think there are millions digging up old pottery, but there aren’t. They report the results, I am reporting on theirs. No one said here that there weren’t health benefits to eating more veg. However, there are nutrient and logical values to using grains, especially for athletes and those involved in body composition. Grains also HELP with gut mucosa and flora, contrary to YOUR cherry picked dogma. My view is one of moderation, with mixed in use. Your view is one of extreme, with complete eradication.
I would like to know who your sources are and who is doing your research, because if you took the time (it’s been over a year I have been researching this type of material) you would see that the outlier and less impressive material is the one making speculative suggestions about the Paleo diet. Show me the 2009 study, not the 1985 study, a little known problem with pulling research. Dates, they are there for a reason.
People always go to “where I could pull this research or that research” but the truth is, there is a method to using research and a right way. The way I have pulled my research is –
1. Using the latest data available.
2. Looking at as many reviews rather than isolated cases
3. Looking for positives and negatives from both sides of the argument.
What you are saying is – “Leigh, eating veggies, fruits, and meat only can’t be bad”
What I am saying is – “Paleo, it aint.”
Get a new word. Paleolithic, it isn’t if you are talking about being picky and nutritional elitist.
Sorry for the long post…
I certainly agree that paleo is a bad term for a diet. What began with a belief in what paleo man ate being what’s best for us to eat has evolved, ironically, into a diet that should be “as close to natural as possible, while living within the modern world.” That’s on one hand, on the other there are goofballs who don’t wear deodorant and pretend to hunt mastodons, barefoot, with fake spears, down at the beach.
For me, it’s a fine way to eat, but I don’t feel any difference when I do eat grains (or beans or milk). I choose not to eat a lot of grain, despite overwhelming evidence that we should eat whole grains vs refined grains. I’ve not seen much evidence that we are healthier WITH grains vs without. If this has been studied, please let me know. I hear that I’m missing out on vital micronutrients, but when I ask which ones and where that’s been studied, somehow the other guy has to go do something else and never comes back with the answer.
I’ll say that, without any actual evidence, I think it’s likely that many people eventually develop autoimmune conditions after repeated and constant exposure to a lot of things that our bods can’t really take well. Likely the things in wheat (and other grains), seeds, and legumes. 50 years of leaky gut that we don’t actually feel might lead to bad stuff.
On the fitcast, Jon said that we are now better able to diagnose ADD, ADHD, autism, etc. I agree with him. I’ll add dementia, alzheimer’s, crohn’s disease, Celiac, and things like these. We are diagnosing them better, but maybe our bad eating habits drive the numbers higher, too.
Yes, they have a genetic component, which can mean that some people are more genetically disposed to getting something. That doesn’t mean that you won’t go 60 years and suddenly end up with one. If you avoided certain foods, maybe you’d have never gotten it (or developed it far enough to show the bad effects).
I’ll give my opinion of evolving to better handle grains… We evolve because we survive long enough to make kids. Grains don’t kill us or make us sterile, at least not early in life, so we have kids and so do the guys who don’t eat grains. Nowadays, doctors make evolution work even more poorly. They save kids that would have died from diseases, allergies, stupidity, and intolerances. We have not evolved in our ability to eat anything in a long, long time.
In the early man stages, it’s certainly possibly that a lot of us died young from eating _____ or not having enough ____, leading to what we are now.
Adaptation is different, but I haven’t worked that out. I can adapt up to a point, but I don’t pass that adaptation down to my kids and my kids don’t adapt to the same thing any better than I do.
I’ll also say that paleo people give paleo a bad name. Their books are full of accidental misstatements that are just plain sloppy. I read one where he goes off on the ubiquity of HFCS, then soon brings up fructose as another item of concern. All good, so far. Then he slips and starts calling HFCS fructose, which it’s not. He knows better because I’ve heard him say it better, but it’s sloppy editing, and it implies that HFCS is more dangerous than sugar. It’s now low hanging fruit for the ‘everything in moderation” crowd to use as ammo against them. Because if they are wrong ON THAT how can they be right on anything else?
Their books have plenty of references, but there are huge leaps from a reference to a conclusion, if the conclusion is even supported by a reference. Fine if you believe something because you’ve personally worked out what seems to be a logical reason BASED on studies and anecdote, but it’s not fact. Saying inflammation or insulin is the cause of virtually everything without saying how you came up with that is frustrating. Especially when I can almost hear the squeals of delight across the non-paleo universe as they find another chink in the armor.
They make mistakes by confusing concepts like eating for fat loss or health. You can be healthier by losing weight or by eating the right number of calories for your body and activity level, so it might not be just “the paleo.” Likewise, you might eat fewer calories by eating healthier and harder to overeat foods, therefore losing weight. But you can do that with other diets. Then, they go on the internet and use health studies to defend paleo for fat loss and vice versa. They often throw a carb jab in the mix, when the study was really on grain, not “carbs.” It’s too easy to refute, then they’ve got nothing and now they’ve lost another paleo convert forum lurker. Shame.
On the other hand, the non-paleo crowd makes all sorts of leaps, too. The statement “I’m doing fine,” preceded by typist’s statement that he eats grains, legumes, and dairy, is common all across the internet, yet people also feel fine without fish oil and vitamins and whole grains. I also know people eating Pop-Tarts, Oreos, Crisco, soybean oil based mayonnaise, and Big Gulps full of Dr Pepper. They feel fine and I’m sure if you ask them they’d say they’re doing fine, too. Also, just because Asians eat a ton of rice A, doesn’t mean they wouldn’t do better without rice, and B, doesn’t mean that all grains are A-ok. At best, it means rice is okay. …and maybe just for Asians who don’t overeat their calories and are active enough.
I’ll wrap up my rant by saying that I believe in sort of a tipping point effect. Our body is resilient enough to handle a lot of crap, but as soon as it gets “too full,” the cup tips over and we’re in for problems. Maybe we could handle eating high Omega-6, low protein, no veggies, too many grains, lots of sugar for a while, but then one day we start to move less because we got a new video game, and get fat. Now we are adding stress to the body. Then more food or less moving, and we have diabetes, fatter, slower, sicker, fatter, slower, etc.
For thousands of years, we’ve lived well below the tipping point, working “hard” and eating the “right” amount of foods, super healthy foods or not. Recently (evolutionarily speaking), we came up with ways to ass sit and spoon feed ourselves mass quanities of cheap, easy, and “delicious” foods. Many of us are near or above the tipping point. What will spill and when are what’s in question. IMO, since I have no reference.
Paleo is an overreaction with good intentions. There are cultish aspects to some of the people, just like some vegans, vegetarians, Crossfitters, kettlebellers, and people who learn to speak Klingon, but on the non-believing-in-paleo side there’s a shit load of wishful thinking based on “it’s not fair” feelings. Just because a food exists doesn’t mean it’s ok and that you can eat it in moderation (and stay healthy for the long term). Maybe you can, like many of our ancestors have… That doesn’t mean you wouldn’t do better or live longer or do better AND live longer.
When it comes to nutrition, moderation doesn’t have one exact meaning. I highly doubt that most people even know what moderation means. We are living in a society where people believes that “more is better” when it comes to “health foods.” Any food has it’s benefits physiologically, psychologically and emotionally. We, as part of modern civilization like practicing overstating of certain macronutrient, food or what have you. Every person has specific nutritional needs, there’s no one diet that will cater to everyone’s needs. So what is exactly the benefits of whole grains? Many and this has been shown in many studies. Just like what I’ve said, many problems occur once we abuse something for the belief that more is better. I can’t quite come up with an answer why people can’t consider every food as a power food and figure out it’s use to be utilized properly to work towards one goal, be it health or improved body composition.
Some people prefers to eat rice and other types of grains as their form of starch in their diet. We should not neglect the ergogenic/ psychosomatic boost it can give to a person. This is a biggie when it comes to long-term adherence.
Leigh,
Your obvious bias is shining through and through on this post. This is now the third post in the last 30 days where you’ve taken on the “Paleo/Primal” diet. Why is that? Are you feeling a bit inadequate or insecure because others (Sisson, Robb Wolf, DeVany, Nikoley, Pilon, Aragon) are more successful at delivering results and driving readers? Have you been eating too many of your Gluten Free Chocolate Chip cookies (the ones loaded with SUGAR, and other fake food)? Or maybe you are on the same anabol cycle as Tom Venuto? What gives….???
I don’t have the time nor the inclination to go point by point on your cherry picked and twisted research links. I just hope that your readers are smarter than you and can do a few Google searches and research on their own. It sounds like at least one, “Leonardo” is on the right track. Here are a few books by actual scientists that you should read to expand your obvious lack of knowledge in both Epidemiology and Anthropology.
Good Calories, Bad Calories – Gary Taubes
Pandora’s Seed – Spencer Wells
-HealthyCaveman
Healthy Caveman, I find your attack to be interesting – perplexing even. The first is that you list Gary Taubes as a scientist and one of your sources for information. This automatically discredits basically anything you say. To think I am jealous of Aragon, well you are right. Only because of the Jib though. I think Robb Wolf has good intent, even if I don’t agree with his work. I can’t say the same for Sisson.
As to my cookies, they are delicious.
Honestly, the only thing I can’t believe is that you cut on Tom Venuto. I mean, have you no shame man?
-Non-cave person who acknowledges that they are ON A COMPUTER!
No worries Healthy Caveman. We see through it. Like I told Robb Wolff, the proof is in how you feel and at the lab in your blood work and lipid panels. I would NEVER go back to eating grains. Ever.
Personal anecdotes are valid as long as they remain as an anecdote. It doesn’t prove anything
You cannot make a comparison between your previous grain-based diet vs. your paleo diet simply because there are too many variables to consider such as total calorie intake, the macronutrient proportions, activities, body fat level, etc. Or maybe simply because you’re eating more whole foods or less calories now than before? There are many factors that affects our “health.” Causation doesnt imply correlation. It’s hard to make unbias decision once we get too emotional & too religious to a certain belief.
Excellent article Leigh. Once again, the answer seems to lie somwhere in the middle with a hefty dose of “it depends.” As I also am always encouraging people to realize, there is no one answer. Every day there is new evidence that is presented, and the quality of that evidence is wild in it’s fluctuations. A higher level of awareness of what we are putting in our bodies is never a bad thing, as are the basic tenets of eating generally well as espoused by paleo. The key seems to be increasing personal awareness of how we feel after eating/eliminating any given item. That is really the only way to see how any given food may affect you, not whether said item was available to cavemen. Read, learn, evaluate, and then make an independent and informed choice.
Thanks again for the objective view.
Is The Paleo Diet A Solution?
“In my critical and humble opinion – no, I don’t think so.”
So, eating good meat, seafood, nuts, fruits, and vegetables is not a solution? Really? Basically you are saying every solution must include grains and legumes. Why is that? Am I somehow missing something I need in my diet by not eating bread and beans?
Because that is what it basically boils down to. Two sides arguing about whether or not grains and legumes are bad for you, or necessary in the diet.
You can call it a cult or religion all you want, that’s essentially just ad hominem in an attempt to slight a group of people. Your readers quick eagerness to support everything you say could be considered cult-like as well, but it’s not really is it?
Why don’t we just stop with the “cult” “religion” stuff and just accept that there is a group of people in every movement or idea that tend to overzealous fanaticism, and just stick with the facts.
That fact is, I don’t need to eat grains or legumes to be healthy.
The point I think we are disagreeing on is the Paleo Diet is toted as a lifestyle based on (constantly refuted) historic beliefs. Otherwise it would be called the “Carbslective Diet” Start calling it that, and while I don’t fully agree with it, it won’t be so easy to “attack.” It’s the Paleo part that is the problem.
Paleo is just like a modified no-brainer fat loss diet for people who wants to improve their health/ lose weight without worrying much about tracking calories. People love trends, new hype and stuff even without validated scientific evidence. Paleo is generally based on speculations and assumptions made by so-called fitness experts to sell their diet/ product. Although it may sound logically correct, it’s demonization of grains & legumes is plain silly. I’m surprised to see Alan’s name being mentioned in here while Alan never subscribed in the paleo dogma
I know, I found that to be odd as well from the HealthyCaveman.
I couldn’t even stand to get through the article…
Where to start with the misinformation?
Do you know the difference between infectious disease and chronic illness?
Calories in, calories out!?
Evolution doesn’t just happen in a century.
And on and on…
Yes.
Yes.
Not what I said, I said, “Diseases and our bodies evolve quickly from century to century, let alone over the course of 40,000+ years.”
That is a true statement. I find it funny that the same people who discount this are the ones discussing celiac. A real disease that we have only recently taken notice of. Your contradictions don’t add up.
Amazing article!!!!!!
Leigh, to say your anthropological evidence is outdated is an understatement. No anthropologist believe in the picture you are painting on this post. You are probably a great personal trainer, but you are spreading misinformation. I know you are a layman, but even laymen can read things like Jared Diamond’s The Worst Mistake, Sahlin’s The Original Affluent Society, or the great new book Sex At Dawn. The later has a great explanation of how incorrect the life expectancy data you are presenting here is. Neither the Noble Savage nor the Nasty, Brutish, and Shot explanations are correct. It’s more complex than that.
What about the “Darkside of the Original Affluent Society” and the work of Richard B. Lee or Barnard? These are to be ignored? It is only the theories you want that paint the best picture? Regardless, my article in on the use of grains and progression. Even if we were peaceful and happy little bunnies back in the day, it dosen’t change the fact that progression took place from there, and that grain usage existed during the time. Doesn’t change it.
It also doesn’t change that all of it, is hersay except for what we can dig up. And we are digging up grains.
I see both sides here:
Carbophobia really needs to die; there have been PLENTY of starchy–somewhat less fruit–carbs around for millennia and some of the healthiest, nearly disease free societies on earth eat loads of them. The primitive Kitavans eat around 70% of their calories from starchy tubers (yes, paleo crowd) and commonly live into their 90s without modern medicine and SMOKING MOST THEIR LIVES.
Grains and beans can’t be that bad as Okinawans eat SHIT loads of rice and enjoy great health. Also numerous eastern African tribes documented by Weston Price had been using corn/rice/beans/yams/potatoes/squashes as staples for centuries and enjoyed great health.
While it appears tribes/peoples Price discovered that ate more meat tended to experience more rubust health, the significance wasn’t great.
The greatest drop in health quality came after these people clustered in cities, began to eat large amounts of white flour, sugar, and vegetable oils/shortening.
Leigh,
I do believe you are mistaken about wheat, though. Wheat has proved problematic for many people I know personally. These problems do not show up on allergy tests either. I’m talking rashes, coughing, clouded thinking, diarrhea, constipation, anxiety, etc. I know this because I have been in search of conquering my own health issues and have come into contact with many who have recovered from SERIOUS and mysterious symptoms by simply removing wheat products from their diets.
Wheat, by the way is a very different animal than other grains. The wheat that has been passed down to us through the last few millennia has been more genetically modified than any other plant, save possibly soy and corn. Interestingly enough, these 3 products, along with the highly allergic holstein cow’s milk, tend to be the most problematic of foods.
Remember, allergies are not all the same either; there are different phase groups. Some people can fall prey to anaphylactic shock; others can suffer digestive tract damage due to an allergic auto-immune response.
Leigh,
First and foremost, on your comment that listing Taubes as a scientist discredits anything I say… For the benefit of your readers (you are beyond help), Gary Taubes has several advanced science degrees. One in Applied Physics from Harvard and another in Aerospace Engineering from Stamford. Maybe you’ve not heard of those schools or those scientific fields? If not, I suggest you also look up the definition of Scientist in the dictionary. I won’t get into all of the awards and scientific publications for which he is a regular contributor. The fact you think this discredits me is really a true indication of your ignorance.
According to you, and too many other “nutritionist”, the only thing that matters in health and obesity is: “Calories in, Calories out”. What you don’t seem to get about The Paleo diet is that it is about FOOD QUALITY. Hopefully your readers are smart enough to realize that FOOD QUALITY MATTERS! Your cookies may be delicious but that doesn’t make the SUGAR and fake butter healthy no matter how many other calories you do/don’t consume!
I will get serious for a moment, even if you are calling yourself a healthycaveman.
I believe in food quality. I believe in what food does for you, not to you. If you would take the time to actually read the cookie article, you would find it is a “treat” that I make, not a large percentage of my days diet. That being said, I do not believe in clean eating elitism or cultist behavior. I believe in looking at the social, economical, and nutritional environments of the world (today) and providing the best information based on that.
You can provide ad hominem attacks all you want, it doesn’t change that you are actually wrong in where I stand. Likely, because like normal you are only reading one or two articles.
Leigh,
Thanks for getting serious. I’ll do the same…
I’ll be honest in that I am/was turned off by the cultish dogmatic behavior of some Paleo-ist much like I am with the behavior vegans and other diet dogmatist. However, I had some health issues that caused me to explore alternatives and that led me to consider evolutionary biology and led me to EF/Art Devany and eventually a Paleo-ish approach to my diet. In case you are wondering I also don’t run around in a loin cloth or club my wife.
I have read your posts and I know that you are following a gluten-free, vegetarian diet for health reasons. I STRONGLY encourage you and your readers to do some research on other gluten-free grains/seeds (rice, quinoa) and vegan staples (legumes, soy) that much like gluten can cause problems in our bodies and have caused me and many others serious health/digestive issues. Forget about the Paleo or even “diet” label and focus on foods that are real and whole. Meat, fish, fowl, veggies, and fruit… Watch your Omega 6 consumption from fake/overly processed fats and eat as many carbs as you like as long as they come from real food. It’s hard to argue with that isn’t it?
Grains may have been eaten up to 40K years ago… I don’t care, it doesn’t mean they were a staple. See alternative viewpoint here: http://huntgatherlove.com/content/fun-headlines-did-paleolithic-people-eat-grains
Even if grains were a staple, what matters to me is how they make me feel and how my body reacts to them. Based on your confessed gluten allergy, I find it surprising that you would argue in favor of grains/wheat. Or are you just arguing against Paleo?
Maybe if you gave “real food” a try for 30 days it might change your mind. If it makes you feel better call it the Leigh Peele Perfect Health Diet, your readers will love it…
-HC
I believe this will lead to more of an intelligent discussion. While I don’t think we are going to agree, I think you will see we have more common ground than previously thought.
As to the different view point on grains, I pretty much agree with http://huntgatherlove.com/content/fun-headlines-did-paleolithic-people-eat-grains
.
on the study and article. People were blowing one study out as if it was the end all be all. This shouldn’t work on my side or another side. The problem is though, even if you don’t agree with that study or another one, large review studies and collective research show that wild grasses were a pretty huge stable and that carbohydrates and fats made up a lot more than protein. It was as if the protein they were taking in was lean 96% grass-fed beef. It was the whole animal, and I do mean WHOLE
We also have to take into account averages and not just one tribe. The research I looked at went through the average accounts.
Still, let’s say the whole Paleo name thing is tossed aside. Let’s say it doesn’t matter one way or another.
Your real issue and others is about grain usage, particularly any type that has gluten. While this is a very technical and heavy issue, it is my belief that there is nothing wrong with grains for the majority of the population and in fact, beneficial for some. I will do a proper job of laying out more benefits (and problems) of grains in the future. As it stands now, I couldn’t possibly do that in one blog post.
As to my personal health, I do not have a gluten allergy. My issues are far more complicated than intolerance and I am dealing with true digestive and autoimmune problems. However, I am not what you would consider an average healthy subject. The things I have to deal with, most others do not. I do not believe in taking my problems and tossing them on other people. My isolated case issues do not apply, but my research because of my issues had lead me to far more information on the subject than most of who are against or for the “paleo” diet.
Again, my problem is not with the diet in terms of technical food. I still think there are benefits to grain/bean usage and I will discuss that in the future. My problem is with the reasons for exclusion and the method of doing so.
When all is said and done, I don’t really care what anyone eats – it’s the preaching and fear propaganda I have a problem with. Two very different things.
So Leigh… Let’s pretend that there is nothing “wrong” with grains. Can you then prove that grains/beans ounce for ounce are healthier for me than veggies? I don’t want evidence that other cultures can eat and thrive or survive on them… I want someone to show me that bread/beans are somehow providing something I can’t otherwise get from veggies or meat. Can you honestly say that there is something I am missing in my diet by excluding them? Can you show me improved blood markers if I switch my diet to a grain/legume based focus? Improved body comp or performance? I don’t think so. I can tell you what I am not missing: the bloating, farting, pain, bleeding out of my ass, hemorrhoids, energy spikes, etc. Sorry too graphic but so, so true, and so painful.
As far as the view that Paleo is only about “lean meat”. That has been debunked by Wolf, Sisson, and even Cordain has softened his stance on this. I personally eat the WHOLE animal and I never bought into the whole LEAN meat thing. Can you imagine a Paleo man avoiding the most nutritious organs that are also high in fat…
Once again, I still don’t understand how you choose to exclude grains/gluten from your diet (for unspoken health reasons) but can then turn around and claim that you think they are healthy or “beneficial” for the “majority”. Please explain…??
Finally, I’ll say it again, how about you go on a “real food/high quality” diet call it the “Leigh Peele Perfect Health Diet” do it for 30 days and see how you feel? If you must consume gluten-free cookies then do so with some that don’t have fake ingredients or sugar like these: http://www.freecoconutrecipes.com/recipe_Gluten_Free_Coconut_Flour_Chocolate_Chip_Cookies.htm
What’daya say?
I think Leigh has done a fantastic job painting a very logical breakdown of the fact. I am not surprised to see the Paleo people out in droves when basically their work and belief of the time period is constantly being debunked.
Leigh your work is excellent, and to those who understand how to properly use research and look at the facts of the situation, we applaud you.
Also,
Sure we may not know how life actually was during the paleolithic era, but we DO know life isnt getting better just because we’re living longer. Heart disease, cancer, and diabetes have all risen exponentially in the 20th century. Modern medicine has mostly kept people living longer (not better) with great advances in acute care and fewer instances of infant mortality. Throw in life support and bypass surgeries and you got a complete picture of a hobbling, long-living generation. Not good.
I think the point Leigh made is you can’t talk about what has increased in negative health and not talk about what has decreased.
You fought them all off like a ninja!
I am going to go out on a limb here and say that this and other articles are opening me up to the fact that the Paleo way of life may be another fad. I will still choose to eat lots of meats, but I might think about why I don’t eat other things more. The people in these comments are not providing good arguments. You seems to have missed the disclaimer.
I just recently saw Alan’s work abut Frustose.
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
I guess my biggest question is why would we need grains? What do they provide that veggies or meat don’t? Like the poster above I would like to see an article on this Leigh. I think you have done balanced work and I appreciated the positive Paleo study you linked too.
I haven’t seen one of these people depute the existence of grains. Why is that? What is the point of your diets name if it is based off a lie?
I read this excellent article while eating chicken, broccoli, and big ass serving of brown rice.
I am the post-workout win!
Leigh, you are wasting your time. Even the guys who are supposed to be on the good side of research are too busy patting asses for promotion to agree that Paleo is full of shit. I don’t like Lyle, but at least he doesn’t get caught up in that bullshit. Just do everyone a favor, become pointless and show your pushup bra. You will double your traffic.
Don’t forget to check out Mike Robertson’s new blog!!!!!!
AustinJ #24 has the best question so far: “do we need grains? obviously no. we don’t even “need” vegetables or meat or any one specific genre of food. BUT, what are we gaining from grains that we can’t get from produce or meat? is pushing a vegetable based diet better than a grain based diet? i think so.
as far as reenacting hunts in workouts, that is just silly fun. If someone stops using words and clubs a waring neighbor caveman, then that is “regression”, but people getting caught up and excited in what you say is, factually, a healthy diet/lifestyle is not regression. The core message of try to minimize modern stresses, food, and incorporate as much as possible from the past as we can is a good message.
Yes, some will try to capitalize by selling paleo goods-but it seems as though you are also selling stuff. People want to get paid.
Paleo is thrown half heartedly by the majority-the extremeists are just that. I describe myself as paleoish.
Saying that people will develop an eating disorder from limited choices is weird, right after you point out how many options we have at the supermarket for veggies. as you point out veggie consumption is up 18% from the 70′s, due to importing etc. there are plenty of choices to keep eating lots of variety of plant food, that is nutritionally superior to grains. now you could say “some people can’t afford it” and i’ll accept that, but suggesting people eat veggies and meat and avoid others can’t be blamed for people not eating enough-that lies on the shoulders of whoever isn’t eating, thats just dumb.
the idea of saying that you shouldn’t call it paleo because it is technically upper paleo, or neolithic, or that we weren’t exactly the same now as then, is just a silly little complaint. thats akin to saying don’t call “yoga” at the local gym “yoga” because its not from an indian from the himalayas. Who really gives a shit? say paleo and you know, produce, meat, aka real food.
You have a problem with people suggesting real food? You have a problem with people getting excited about being healthier by emulating some lifestyle ideas we have about our ancestors?
I think that all diets are a “fad” to an extent. I think that in every option there are people who go a little too far and get a little too weird. I also think that paleo can be A solution. Not the only. but even worse than getting involved in a fad, or dressing in a loin cloth is trying to tear down a diet movement that is actually healthy.
What you are saying is that “It doesn’t matter what we call it or how we get there, as long as we get there.” While I understand the good nature of that, I can’t agree with it. As much as I want to, where does the bending stop?
If you try to arrive to a destination through lies or misinformation, that is what hurts your cause. Being as honest as you can about the results, no matter how much it swings you in different direction is the best course of action.
I don’t have a problem with healthy food. I don’t have a problem with making better eating decision – I promote it. I have a problem with telling people eating bread is going to rip up your insides so don’t ever let it tough your lips. That is a problem.
And I assure you, people are very much developing eating disorders over these sorts of diets. Being that I live up to my neck in eating disorder clients and readers, you would be surprised what this type of movement can do to the minds of dieters – especially frustrated women in American society.
You may see it as an OCD behavior to point out useless facts which clog a mission. However, I see it as arriving to the truth in the best manner possible. To me, it is much like getting an A+ on a test honestly or by cheating. You may think your Yoga analogy doesn’t bother people, but it does and technically what has destroyed that community and made it a Wii game fad.
Another great example is Jillian Michael’s and her Kettlebell instruction. Some could say, “who cares, as long as she is helping people and getting the word out!” I bet those Kettlebell instructors care because they devote their life to something that has names, forms, technique and words that mean something.
I really don’t care about the word Paleo or where it came from. If it was left to just pushing the benefits of more nutrients – great. The problem is it time and time again goes after dairy, grains, and legumes claiming them to be dangerous, addictive, and infectious. That is not a healthy movement, that is fear mongering.
Good point re:Jillian michaels. I am an rkc, and yeah, that’s not good for anyone. How do you feel about people trying the one month elimination diet and reintroducing those things? Like most people touting the benefits, I feel much better without what and rice. Corn tortillas I feel good, dairy I’m good, beans no bueno. Also, creating stress in eating by saying eat as much of these foods as you’d like, to me, is much less sucky than saying just keep under 1500 cals…
I actually believe a lot in elimination/reintroduction diets. The only problem I find is people being objective and being able to control the elimination process. But if done ideally, I think it is the perfect way to go if you feel something in your diet isn’t optimal or agreeing with you.
I have to commend you on the level of maturity and ability to put forth your thoughts on this subject. I do claim the title of Paleo, but I do so because it is a easy way to describe my diet. I am loose about it and not overly rigid. I will have beer or a cheat meal once a week. I don’t have a problem physically with dairy or grains, but I do have a problem controlling them!
I think everyone has made some good conversation and dialogue here. I think the Gatherer chick should look at the studies you posted. You clearly made a logical point. The writing is easy to read and very inspiring of thought. I would love for you and Robb Wolf to get together and have a conversation.
Thank you for allowing real debate to happen.
I don’t have a problem physically with dairy or grains, but I do have a problem controlling them!
I guess this is something most people often forget to realize to themselves- their self-denial that they cannot have the control. They blame grains, refined stuff and other stuff while denying their own lack of control to themselves.
Just a hypothesis here, but could we be looking too far back in history for clues as to why we have epidemiological problems such as obesity, diabetes, food allergies, ect..? It’s probably not the grains or agriculture as much as it is “modern industrial agriculture” that is temporarily pushing our metabolic and systemic limits. Like a previous post stated, we should maybe focus more on the “quality” of our food. Monoculture crops, grain finished livestock, and GMO seeds yield foods that are lacking in nutritional value (as compared to their alternatives). Not to mention that this low quality version of food is proportionally cheaper and infinitely more available than it was 100 years ago.
Thrive? Technically, yes, without industrial agriculture there wouldn’t (couldn’t) be 6.7billion people on the planet. Sustainable? Maybe… life has a way of sorting this crap out. My ancestors lived for hundreds of productive years in Europe eating legumes, cereals, meat, and potatoes (it was those damn Nazis that were the problem). In fact, none my first generation relatives who grew up on a traditional polish diet died from any of the chronic diseases most discussed in this argument. They may have died with a few extra lbs on their bones, however all were physically independent and happy up to the last months of their lives (every one made it past 80 y/o). The point is that according to paleo experts, their bodies should have been rejecting nearly everything they ate!
I’ve personally experimented with rules of Paleo. It forced me to eat more veggies than I was used to and lay off the pizza, bread and beer. The fact that I lost weight without counting calories didn’t surprise me. However, a Paleo expert convinced me I could have Tequilla because it was Agave. Another expert told me I could have diet Coke because its not really sugar. I finally gave up because there were too many discrepancies as to what paleo really was. I’m starting a new diet trend called “Paleolish: with pizza and beer”. I’ve been able to maintain a normal body composition, blood panel and achieved more strength and fitness PR’s on this diet than ever in my life! Whats good for ME is good for EVERYONE. Paleolish is the end all in nutrition! Given time, I’ll google enough scientific data points to assemble into important looking 3D bar graphs and I’ll make you all believers! Then I’ll publish ebooks and recipe sites that you’ll all pay for… Lemmings!
Man, what’s with that Bronze Age? Only 18?
Anyways since Gary Taubes was name-dropped here, I’ll default to James Krieger’s comments on his book:
http://weightology.net/?p=251
Although the most random comment I read was the shout out to Mike Robertson’s updated site.
I’ve seen countless times how people “feel great” on some new diet, myself included. I would submit that often times it is the change itself that brings about more effects than the content of the diet itself. I’ve seen the testimonials of both raw-food vegans and paleos, gushing how much better they feel, how their health has improved, and so forth.
I offer an explanation that a change in diet is often accompanied by changes in excess, bad habits, over-consumption, denying food cravings, introduction of new nutrient profiles, etc. The common thread in most changes in diet is the calorie reduction, a much-needed key to living our modern way of eating. Absolute calories aside, some of this calorie restriction comes about not just because of the change in amount of food but also because the body is adjusting the efficiency of absorbing new types of foods. Whether you’re cutting-out grains or cutting-out meat, if you’re cutting calories anywhere down from excessive, it’s going to lead to greater health, in the near-term anyways.
I was obese and I tried everything to lose weight like going vegan, reducing calories, doing tons of exercise. After I switched to primal the weight fell off of me and it was super easy. I am now at 10% body fat and have never felt better. Everyone I know who saw me go from fat to skinny has tried primal lifestyle and had the same results and have had other ailments and injuries clear up or improve. We know that a primal diet works, is extremely easy to follow, and the food is amazing. I remember when first starting out and making amazing salads and dishes and just giggling over how delicious it was while losing 2 pounds a week and not having to watch my quantities. Why in the world would a so-called fitness person attack something that works so well and with such bias and contempt!? Shameful!
Because it’s not the “paleo” logic that helped you improved your health/ body composition. There are so many confounding factors that are involved other than the avoid grains principle. Most people simply had a crappy diet before and after seeing good results from paleo, they now begun to religiously think/ believe that their diet religion is some kind of magical solution. If it works for you, that’s great but claiming that paleo diet is the superior/ optimal diet everyone should aim for is totally incorrect. Numerous people have improved their health/ body composition following different diets. Maybe it’s just the paleo diet that you can adhere to but that’s about it.
Consider this…. 99.99% of the species that have ever existed on this planet are now extinct (kinda scary considering we’re a species on this planet). With that said, I doubt the free range chicken and organic sun butter that you modern day cavemen are eating even slightly resembles what was available to our counterparts 40,000 years ago! Also, we prepare our foods and eat them a lot different than they would have in those days. I’m pretty sure most of it was eaten raw (cooking is a form of processing because it changes the chemical structure of the proteins). Then there’s the question of availability/quantity of food. How many almonds and how much butternut squash should you have with your sabertooth?
Also…Jesus rode dinosaurs… just thought I’d throw that out there.
http://gorightly.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/jesus_and_the_dinosaurs.jpg
This is an amazing well written and researched article Leigh, and I thank you for it.
Hi Leigh,
With regards to my problematic, I unfortunately removed both dairy and wheat from my diet simultaneously and so I can’t say for certain which had a grater impact on my health. Given that I’m a keen sportsman, I am extremely lean. Consequently, the bloating was becoming more and more apparent and was definitely not a consequence from over feeding. I monitor my total daily calorie intake, not religiously, but I definitely don’t go to excesses. Further, my stool was becoming looser with time. Physically, I was slowly starting to lack strength in my training (not constantly but the frequency was increasingly noticeable) but the real clue came from my soccer training & matches. I was having increasing difficulty in my capacity to run and keeping up with the pace during a match. It was as if I was going backwards in my fitness the more I trained and played. I believe that dairy had for sure a greater impact as I noticed an almost immediate reaction with my stomach when I have had the occasional afternoon ice cream since giving up (away from major meals and the proper home-maded kind, as I live in Italy!). Not only, my stool became extremely loose almost immediately again. I would love to hear your thought on dairy intake (maybe a post?) as this seems to be another area of controversy irrespective if one is intolerant or not. Occasionally I also have had a pizza and again I react but not as much as dairy. My tests for celiac are negative and so my conclusion is that I have a slight intoxication to wheat (perhaps due to the persistent intake) and therefore a 5/6 months detox may do the trick but I remind you, i definitely do not over feed on carbs. On a similar note, a friend of mine who never had any symptoms whatsoever, went for a regular check-up and following several tests, was diagnosed with full-on celiac. I kid you not, no symptoms, nada. As I said in the other post, it’s the dose that makes the poison. Moderation and variety are the is key to a healthy life in my opinion. Thanks,
I’m not going to touch on the points others have made about the anthropology, but suffice it to say that it is my opinion that you’re vastly over-representing the importance of grains in pre-neolithic humans, and vastly under-representing the importance of meat. Isotope studies are actually very accurate, and to suggest otherwise just seems foolish. Further, you are greatly misrepresenting the robust health that pre-neolithic humans experienced; an almost complete lack of chronic disease, including heart disease and cancer; despite many more than you are giving credit to living into their 60s, 70s and 80s. Not to mention the straight teeth, lack of cavities, and appropriate growth of wisdom teeth.
Just to be clear, when the paleo guys say “lean meat,” they are assuming that you are eating grain fed meat. It has been stated over and over by guys like Robb Wolf, Mark Sisson, Dr. Harris, Dr. Eades, Dr. McGuff etc. that if you are eating grass fed ruminants, you want to be eating the fatty varieties. And in the absence of grass fed varieties, they all recommend supplementing fat intake with coconut oil, olive oil, avocado etc.
This point about paleo nutrition being a religion or a cult doesn’t ring true with my experience at all. In fact, I would say that it is almost universally the opposite. There may be some zealots, but they are actually quite few and far between. You specifically called out Mark Sisson as someone who is dogmatic and unscientific, but this is a guy who sells a protein powder and vitamin supplements. You can call him a hypocritical opportunist, but it seems to me that he is actually quite level headed and pragmatic, the complete opposite of a zealot. Here’s his post on rice, I dare you to read it and call it in any way “cultish”: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-rice-unhealthy/.
The evolutionary fitness community uses theories about ancestral living to pose questions, hypotheses that can be tested, not to pose solutions. The argument against cereal grains is backed up by biochemical evidence, not just epidemiological evidence. In fact, the biochemists with evolutionary nutrition leanings seem to be the only ones that I’ve seen to pose plausible biochemical mechanisms that could be causing nearly all of the chronic diseases that we experience today. The mechanisms by which a leaky gut caused by gut irritating lectins can lead to molecular mimicry causing autoimmunity; the mechanism by which hyperinsulinemia reduces retinoic acid effectively taking apoptosis offline, allowing cells with cancerous mutations to freely divide; the mechanism by which, via a ketogenic diet, depriving that same cancer cell of the glucose it uses to derive energy via the process of glycolysis causes it to die (these cells do not have mitochondria and as a result cannot process fatty acids into energy), with the exception of certain cancers that can convert glutamine into glutamate and run it through the TCA cycle.
I was going to sum up by saying that based on the autoimmunity issues mentioned above, you almost definitely have leaky gut, but a quick search of your site led me to this post: http://www.leighpeele.com/do-as-teacher-say. Have you read Robb Wolf’s book? The whole first chapter is about his struggle with vegetarianism and all of the problems it caused, sounds almost identical to what you describe in that post with the allergies, the digestive problems, the inflammation etc. The only way to heal a leaky gut is to remove the gut irritating lectins so that the gut has time to heal. Gluten may have been the initial problem, but that doesn’t mean that soy and bean and corn lectins are not going to be making it worse now that you are inflamed. If you are truly as unbiased and open minded as you claim to be, you would stop looking at paleo as the enemy, and give it a test run as a potential solution. You don’t have to label it paleo if you don’t want to, just go completely grain, legume and dairy free for 30 days and see what happens. Track your A1c and your C-Reactive Protein, see if they go in a favorable direction.
As to MDA – They get tattoos on their body of a fictional character called Grok. I don’t know what to say other than that.
RE: Anthro – Geoff it is of my opinion and with the research I have seen I believe you are vastly overestimating average protein consumption. RE: my numbers please see my response to BenjiCaveman.
RE: My health – I say this respectfully, you don’t have a clue what you are talking about in regards to my health. I am seeing massive improvements with my gut and immune system NOT having any meat in my diet. Prior to this I ate a very meat/veg heavy diet with little daily grain. I cooked (and still do) all my food, I don’t eat out for the most part. I don’t use artificial sweeteners. My diet prior was actually pretty clean by most people standards (thought I don’t give a crap). I enjoy the taste of well cooked and fresh food. Do not make your assumptions about what I need to get checked or doctor me from the web. I talk to real doctors, take actual tests, and leave placebo and fads behind. I am extremely educated in the field of celiac, gluten, digestive disorders, etc and am doing what I need. Funny enough, the diet I have right now is more “dirty” than my old one and practically vegan and I feel better – not perfect, but I am getting there. That being said, it is anecdotal and you don’t see me pushing my problems on my readers. I am responsible with my power and persuasion.
Grains can help and even heal gut flora. So can dairy and even whey. Grains and dairy can also hinder and make things worse – it is not a one size fits all scenario. To say any food group is all bad say how much you ignore giant fields of research and are bias. I can see the benefits of a Paleo diet when it is kept to the diet and restrictions if for psychological factors. I don’t agree, again, with incrimination of food. I can see how Paleo can help and hurt some digestive issues.
Since everyone is throwing around their anacdtoal evidence here is mine.
For years I ate a 90% clean meat, veg, fruit diet. I am lactose intolerant so dairy is limited for me to yogurt with use of enzymes for the most part. Since switching my diet to a vegetable protein heavy diet with no meat and more caloric dense foods, I finally am feeling better. I am also utilizing supplement support. I wont go into in more detail than that because it involves real tests, doctors, and monitoring. It will be a long time before I can reintroduce things and test, but I do plan on it and will see what happen. I don’t have celiac disease for the record. My limitation of gluten-grains is cautious only due to allergies and will be reintroduced when I feel better to get a logical and non-placebo look.
At the end of the day, please keep your comments to the research or your anecdotal information.
Leigh please tell me how you dervived at 50-55% carbohydrate intake? Thank you. PS – I have to agree with you being a stupid bitch, Let’s see if you approve that!
Sure, not problem Benji. I can tell you how I arrived at those numbers. Here is what I wrote already on facebook.
–
In 1988 I believe Eaton tops out at 48% daily intake for carbohydrate intake. He adjusts it in 1997 at …41% and I believe it has gone up and down a few more times. That is just Eaton. Others believe in a much higher level than 50% saying meat was rarely eaten during various times of the year. Add to that the constant problem with grain/starch reading in a dig production.
While all of it is speculative, I find it hard to imagine when you average up tribes over thousands of years with various climate conditions, that it wasn’t approaching on higher carbohydrate numbers. However, my estimations are from and average of people like Eaton, Cordain, Richards, etc.
To be truthful, trying to attach one macronutrient number to a whole species over thousands of years, is pretty ridiculous (even for myself to do so). Regardless, there are multiple studies saying starches and grains were around much more than we thought and that is new evidence to take into consideration.
If you care to interject more of your intelligent debate, feel free.
Leigh:
i apologize if thus has been answered already but I will ask anyway. How long did you try the paleo diet before you determined it wasn’t effective for you?
Don’t use the diet. If your point is curiosity – that is the answer.
If your point is to suggest that I can’t “knock it until I tried it” – it is going to be a jab left unconnected.
A “paleo” approach to health uses the evolutionary history of homo sapiens, plus the best of modern science, as a broad framework for guiding daily choices about diet, fitness, medicine, and supplementation. The core of paleo is the diet: it eschews grains, sugars, and modern vegetable oils in favor of high-quality meat, fish, eggs, and vegetables.
The horror.
PS. nice way to drive traffic to your site.
What is the difference between a whole foods diet with occasional treat and paleo? Just the exclusion of grains. Paleo is just a low-calorie, no-brainer fat loss diet in disguise of a tusk. Funny you guys come here on Leigh’s site claiming that there is an exact science about paleo way of eating. Didn’t you know that our ancestors only ate what’s available depending onthe geographical structure of the land where they lived? Starvation/ being eaten by a predator were a bigger priority than being picky to what they should eat. It’s not that they have a choice, they eat for survival. In the world of survival, optimum health/ getting ripped is at least on the bottom priority.
I appreciate your comments Jean. You and Leigh have made good points
Thank you Stephan. Glad to know that there are still open-minded people these days. There’s really nothing wrong with paleo in my opinion. The incorrect part is creating the belief system of another food avoidance diet and religiously following the “paleo experts” who cherrypick their data to support pseudoscience. People deserve to know the rationale how nutrition work and not just by seeing “results.”
I have never seen people act so moronic and irrational in discussion before. OP! Yes, I have, in any religious conversation I have ever seen!!!
I am a practicing Paleo dieter and I want to say I do not align myself with this type of conversation. I was curious of how to came to those carbohydrate numbers, but that does make sense.
What is your take on Robb Woff and his work?
I can’t say I know a ton of Robb’s work, but I do know he is passionate about his job. I think he generally cares about his readers first and then markets. At least he does his own research. I don’t agree with him the most about the things he says regarding disease and digestion. I think the basic eating style/diet is fine. Like I have said, over and over, my problem is not with what is promoted, it is about what is demonized. Generally, I don’t read a lot of blogs or books. I try to stick to more research and studies and move from piece to piece.
Wow, that is good writing.
Leigh, you are really, really good at this.
This was an amazing post that really hit the nail on the head in my opinion. I too am sort of “paleo” most of the time. Screw that. I eat whatever I know reacts well with my body and makes me feel good. I eat vegetables, fruit, meat, dairy and even grains and legumes. I just know when to limit which to achieve great health and appearance. The one thing that I’ve been preaching ever since I got into the whole “paleo/primal” movement is the calories. Most people just convert – another religious term – and don’t care about their calories and then wonder why they aren’t losing weight. Then they proceed to Crossfit more or fast like every other day and other stuff like that when all they have to do is eat less. This was a great post targeting a lot of my thoughts on the subject. I will definitely be passing it around.
I’m not saying that a proper ancestral diet should be high protein, not at all. In fact, I believe that protein should be relatively limited. An examination of disease free hunter-gatherer societies shows protein mostly in the 12-20% range of calories. One can probably avoid toxic levels of protein, starting from a healthy blank slate, on higher protein intake though. The ancestral diet should be mostly fat. Low in PUFA with 3:1 or better n-6:n-3 ratio, high in monounsaturated and saturated fats.
Obviously I have very little information on what you currently eat now and have eaten throughout your life, but it sounds to me like you are misrepresenting your lectin intake, given the wealth of problems stemming from gut permeability that you experienced. Leaky gut is caused by lectins, gluten being the most nefarious. If you disagree, I would ask that you propose an alternative hypothesis, or at least evidence to the contrary (e.g. evidence of leaky gut in grain and legume free populations, some kind of biochemical study that identifies some alternative mechanism, etc.).
Grains and legumes are plant seeds. They don’t want to be eaten. Unlike fruit, which have adapted themselves to be eaten and passed through animal digestion intact, grains and legumes have lectins, which are proteins that have evolved in these seeds to deter herbivores from eating them. In other words, they are low grade poisons by any definition of the word. Birds have evolutionary adaptations for digesting these proteins unharmed, humans do not. I fail to see what benefits to gut flora you can obtain from grains that you cannot obtain from root tubers like yams and sweet potatoes.
The lectins and aintinutrients of seeds, grains, and legumes protect the seed as it passes through the animal and does nothing to keep something from eating them. Assuming leaky gut, etc. is caused by these foods, a cow (or man) doesn’t know he has leaky gut or irritable bowel syndrome from what he ate the past 20 years and continues to eat to this day.
Millions of years ago, the beans, grains, and seeds that were broken down when eaten did not grow into a new plant and we no longer have them. The ones that did are here, hypothetically, inflaming our gut linings, despite the fact that we’ve ground and cooked them and they can’t survive to turn into little plant babies anymore.
Also, while they don’t actually want anything, since they are seeds, if they did have desires, the desire might be to be eaten, so they could be make a new plant over there, instead of right here.
50% Carbs
30% Fat
20% Protein
I have taken time to read a lot of studies and these are the general averages I am seeing too Leigh. I think people want to stay tied to what they follow. I am a student of geology and nutrition and think this is brilliant work.
Roland, it is true that these lectins prevent the seed from being broken down as it passes through the animal, but the way it does it is by irritating the gut, effectively causing diarrhea. Your argument seems to be that this mechanism is relatively ineffective due to a delay in response between the ingestion of the lectin and the problems that arise (in this case leaky gut). But I dare you to eat some wheat straight off the stalk, and tell me how that effects your stomach. I’ll bet the farm that you experience nearly instant feedback. Doubly so if you are starting from the place of a proper human diet. When we process these things, we make them palatable in the short term, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t doing damage.
Seeds don’t have “desires” in the same way that humans do, obviously, but they do have an evolutionary imperative to reproduce, the same one that all living things have. Grains are not fruits, they are not adapted to pass through an animal undigested to spread. Grains are spread primarily via the wind. Their ecological niche is to be the first plant into a wetland after flood, before perennial grasses can come in and take root. This is why they are nutrient depleting by nature, and when we over produce them, as we do, they are completely unsustainable and damaging to ecosystems.
Not being a fruit, as I mentioned above, they absolutely do not want to be eaten. Your argument about the ones that happen to have evolved to be harmful being eaten and broken down, thus not getting planted elsewhere and dying off doesn’t really make much sense. Classical conditioning is a real thing, and poisons like grain lectins are probably precisely the reason why animals like dogs (and cows) have developed it. If a cow makes a mistake and eats a stalk of wheat, and experiences diarrhea from it, you bet your ass that it will not eat wheat again when it has endless plains of grass to feed on. We see plenty of species that deter predators either by being poisonous (frogs, plants, fish, etc.) or even just evolving a color scheme that makes predators think they are poisonous. If being poisonous was not an effective reproductive strategy (for a population, not for an individual), then why would we see this?
I have actually done quite a lot of reading on this as a former pastaholic. Man, even when I first went paleo, on my cheat days, I would absolutely pound some pasta. Once in a while I still will, but these are few and far between (maybe once a month or less?), and don’t seem to have much of an impact. I would love to eat pasta with every meal, trust me. This isn’t some religious gospel here, when I eat wheat, I feel it immediately. I didn’t used to, but in hindsight this is really just because I didn’t have a baseline of good health to compare it with, not because this inflammation was not occurring. As someone who has done quite a lot of reading on the subject, it is my opinion that saying that grain and legume lectins (and casein, particularly of the A1 breed of cows) do not cause gut permeability is on par with saying that HIV does not cause AIDS. That said, I am not a zealot, if you have information to the contrary, I encourage you to share it, as I’m always interested in new information.
I would argue that people like Leigh who have such a strong reaction to these foods are the lucky ones, as their bodies are giving them the clear message of what is okay and not okay to eat. It’s the people who get heart attacks at 45 despite being given a clean bill of health their whole life that are the unlucky ones.
“I would argue that people like Leigh who have such a strong reaction to these foods are the lucky ones, as their bodies are giving them the clear message of what is okay and not okay to eat. It’s the people who get heart attacks at 45 despite being given a clean bill of health their whole life that are the unlucky ones.”
You are a fucking paranoid nut. To call anyone lucky who is in pain and trying to fight being sick (leigh or not) is the not only stupid but insulting. You don’t knwo what you are talking about and are a lacky of other people doing research who don’t know what they are talking about. Fucking loony.
I’ll give you some of this, but I think we are arguing (me, too) over semantics.
Whole grain wheat is not cooked out of the bag, and I have eaten it raw (not tasty). Wheat germ and/or bran is not cooked, and many people add it to shakes. That’s basically the outside of the grain, which is the part that has the protective stuff. No diarrhea.
I’m not arguing that poison is not a good deterrent, just that it’s not the one that grains have. They can be eaten (whole) and pass through. In fact, it’s a problem when cows eat problem plants (like dock) and spread them around via their poop.
Certain people (and animals) have almost immediate reactions to grains, but most don’t. Going from a diet without probably speeds up the reaction in some people, too. Just like low fat eaters, and SAD eaters might get diarrhea from too much fish oil, too fast until they get used to it.
I believe the “poisons” or irritants are there, but the immediate effects are felt by only certain populations. IMO.
Have you peeps read your messages yet? At most, your “scientific evidence” strongly relies on “I”, “He/ she” = which is invalid assumptions. Those anti-nutrients doesn’t apply to everyone. Since personal anecdotes seem to be more factual to most of you guys, how come people in Asia live longer than the average life expectancy than western society despite of eating rice as their primary source of starch which also contributes to the bulk of their diet? My grandfather who eats rice 3x a day who is 97 yrs old, healthy, can still walk, free of disease never followed paleo or some diet of any sort, how would you guys explain that? All I know is that he based his diet around mostly whole foods with occasional consumption of “junkfoods” and stayed active during his early age in the form of biking and jogging everyday.
I agree, who says that?!
If you are concerned, go to a gastrologist and get a biopsy. Problem may not be solved, but you will know what is going on.
You need to do your research Geoff.
Look into the positive effects of Lectin and the immune system. As Leigh stated, Whey can be good too. Here is an article on Whey and tummy health. http://www.wheyoflife.org/news/WheyFeature.pdf
As long as food is properly good/heated, it digests fine.
@James First of all, thanks for the ad hominem attack, really appreciate it. I haven’t exactly had a clean bill of health my entire life either, so I don’t really think I’m unjustified in making that statement. It’s kind of like Larry David making jokes about Jews on Curb.
I couple days before my 16th birthday, I was diagnosed with systemic scleroderma, which, if you haven’t heard of it, is in the same family as lupus and arthritis. In hindsight, I started developing symptoms when I was 15 years old, and it essentially robbed me of my years from the age of 15 until right around my 22nd birthday. The scleroderma was pretty much put into remission long before that via some nasty chemotherapy drugs (methotrexate, cytoxan, cyclosporin, rhetuxan), but I didn’t have my HEART TRANSPLANT until a couple months after my 21st birthday, and for almost the entirety of my senior year of college, I was tweaking my anti-rejection meds.
Systemic scleroderma, and all other autoimmune diseases, are caused by leaky gut leading to molecular mimicry. That is merely a hypothesis, but it is a logical jump that I am willing to make based on the evidence. For example, we have peer reviewed case studies in which similar diseases, such as Rheumatoid Arthritis, Multiple Sclerosis and Lupus, have been REVERSED by eliminating grains, legumes and dairy from the diet. We also see that people with celiac are something like 10x more likely to develop these diseases than the rest of the population, and leaky gut is a universal phenomenon in all of these patients.
@Jean Paulo Again, I’d be really interested to see even a single case study of someone who was totally unaffected by lectins. Measure those biomarkers, HDL, LDL, LDL particle size, Triglycerides, A1c and c reactive protein, then go 30 days grain/legume/dairy free and measure them again. Show me someone who goes in the wrong direction, or stays the same to a statistically significant degree. Even people who are seemingly healthy in spite of their lectin filled diet will see improvements in their biomarkers.
Also, you do realize that you just attacked “scientific evidence” in the form of first hand anecdotal evidence only to present anecdotal evidence of your own, right? Ancel Keyes, the father of the lipid hypothesis, which I’m sure even Leigh would agree is total bullsh*t, lived to 100. But did you see him at 100? He was not what you’d call “high functioning,” more on that here: http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/low-carb-diets/jack-lalanne-vs-ancel-keys/.
To your point about rice, I actually eat quite a bit of white rice. On average, about two of my meals a week post workout contain white rice. I’ve already posted a link above to Mark Sisson, “primal zealout’s” take on it, but just to clarify my position, if you have healthy gut lining and healthy insulin sensitivity, white rice is probably not problematic. Your grandfather grew up in a time long before lipophobia set in, and as a result likely grew up with a very healthy, high fat and whole food diet during his formative years, and was indeed born of parents who were also on such a diet. Compared to my generation, which is the first to both have been lipophobic during their lifetime and born to lipophobic parents (were deprived of adequate nutrition en-utero), this absolutely makes a huge difference to development later in life.
Perfect example of what Geoff is talking about: http://vimeo.com/13441566
Look, any more comments that don’t have to do with the pure fact and research aren’t going to be responded too. I can tell you countless of clients of mine who have made amazing transformations, physically and mentally, on high carb diets.
Low carb, If’ing, cycling, etc. All has their place, all has various health benefits and success. Different cultures, different systems.
What about the vast research about the Mediterranean diet? Taubes is always talking about the Eskimo outliers, what about the high carb outliers? What about the villages in Italy filled with low disease and death rate where their diets are practically pastries and fat? You can’t ignore some to see what you want to see. There is benefit after benefit touted both in case trials and epidemiology.
You are playing emotional cards and frankly, it’s getting silly and not helping your team. Your “I feel better” while great, has nothing to do with this article or the research. Period.
I am glad people feel better. That doesn’t change the fact that misinformation is being exposed about dairy, grains, and legumes.
I’m not claiming my grandfather’s case as a scientific evidence but a valid anecdote. If you guys will only read Alan Aragon’s August AARR issue 2010, he critically analyzed the flaws of the study conducted about the gut lining ill effects of grains but numerous studies in fact improved health biomarkers in the presence of grains. Here’s the problem with most people including myself: only few of us has the ability to critically analyzed studies, it’s designs, flaws, strengths and weaknesses. Studies are not be end all judge but they serve as a reference for future scientific studies.
I bet that most people here probably don’t even read studies but blogs, articles and websites that sells diet/ product that supports their theory while ditching valid facts which obviously has a bias subjective point of view.
If I remember correctly, the study that he cited compared grains vs grains that were “treated” by a method that I couldn’t follow, but it was still grains vs grains. Neither one was shown to be better than the other and both improved the IBS (I think that’s what they had). All that showed is that IBS can get better while still including grains, but we don’t know if they would have been better still with no grains at all. I love Alan, but that’s cherry picking to bring paleo down a notch (I believe subconsciously, however.).
Here’s where I have to ask people in the know, who’ve researched this stuff. Are there studies that show IBS, etc. gets better faster without grains vs with grains?
I’ll use this little scenario here to bring up a point about people and their intentions. Stop assuming that everyone is anti-this and anti-that, pro-this and pro-than, to the point where they will do anything to make the other side look bad. People can have the best intentions and still be wrong, (or the opposite). People can be wrong without lying. People can want clarity and honesty without specifically wanting to ruin the other side.
That isn’t cherry picking. Is there any evidence to suggest fish would be better? What about a banana? No. Currently the data shows grains helps, not hurt a digestive disorder. Optimal is not the discussion. The argument was put forth because Paleoman is saying “grain kill and only do bad” and at least in one area (and others) it is not true. If a sweet potato (not white of course because god forbid!) performs better, it would be stated as such. However, there is no such data.
I actually think the treatment of IBS has to do more with the combination of starch, fat, and water than just starch/grain but that is different debate all together.
That’s exactly the point, there’s not enough studies proving whole grains is either good or bad.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1326203/
So far, the benefits of whole grains outweighs it’s hypothetical ill effects on health therefore claiming that whole grains is the real enemy has no valid evidence. Numerous people have also improved their health on a grain-based diet. So how do we apply that in real life? If you like grains and makes you feel good then eat it but no one is forcing you to do so, in picking/ designing a diet, taste preference/ individual palatability should be consider too. If X chooses to eat starch and prefers rice, quinoa, pasta, etc over potatoes and other tubers factored in his/ her calorie budget thus may improve his/ her training performance or feeling of well-being, I don’t see a valid reaso to totally demonize certain food just because X says so.
I think vegans are full of it, but you can’t ignore that they have had amazing transformations. Nice Oprah stories guys. Where are the facts?
Skyler, no one is talking about whey, casein is the problematic milk protein. Again, not problematic for everyone, including myself, but for people with leaky gut and autoimmunity, it’s definitely not recommended.
Wow Leigh, talk about straw men. No one is talking about carbohydrates. We’re talking about lectins. While I would argue that the optimal human diet is a ketogenic, cyclical low carb (post workout) diet, I am not saying that high carb is a problem for humans tabula rasa. There are plenty of populations who have lived long lives in very good health, most notably Kitavans, on high carb diets that were still grain and legume free. Carbohydrates are generally only problematic for people with metabolic derangement in the form of systemic inflammation and insulin resistance/hyperinsulinemia.
But you wanted to stick to the research, even though it’s pretty clear that you’re not really giving any research counter points. Ben just linked to one example of someone who cured lupus with a paleo diet. Honestly a quick search on google scholar of “grains and leaky gut” pulls up thousands of results. I’d link to some, but I don’t want to get my comment spammed. I will leave you with one published research paper from Professor Cordain:
Cordain L, Toohey L, Smith MJ, Hickey MS. Modulation of immune function by dietary lectins in rheumatoid arthritis. Brit J Nutr 2000, 83:207-217.
If you really implore me to cite others, I can, but again, the research is pretty clear that lectins from grains and legumes are directly responsible for leaky gut, and leaky gut is responsible for autoimmunity. From where I’m standing, the only misinformation is coming from your direction.
Geoff do you even know what a strawman is?
Leigh specifically said “What about the villages in Italy filled with low disease and death rate where their diets are practically pastries and fat” That was a specific point, as were her other points. Can you read at all?
So by your standards, everyone should go on a Ketogenic diet because it helps those suffering from Epilepsy? Since we all have that, right? Fucking moron.
As for your study it is ON A SPECIAL POPULATION WITH A RARE DISEASE YOU FUCKING IDIOT!!!
Ketogenic diets have no metabolic advantage over low-carbohydrate non-ketogenic diets. In fact, there is a slight benefits in terms of better mood and performance that has been shown in this study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16685046
The only people who would probably benefit from a Keto diet are the people whom suffer from extreme carbohydrate/food addiction since keto diets are known for it’s appetite-suppressing effects. However, that didn’t mention the adverse effects of keto diets on thyroid. Anyway, we are getting off topic since the topic here is paleo and not low carb diets.
Here are statements from your so-called non-zelot/non-extremists.
“OK, calm down, I get it. Bread, pasta, and cookies are yummy. They are also likely killing you” – Robb Wolf
“Why does all this happen? Because grains are pissed that you want to eat them and they are willing, and able, to fight back.” – Robb Wolf
“dairy products and milk in particular (whether whole, skimmed or fermented) is highly insulinotropic and has been demonstrated to cause insulin resistance in children ” – Cordain
“I believe that all dairy products are problematic.” – Cordain
“Disclaimer: The purpose of this article is to discuss the facts surrounding the scientific literature and archeological research of the Paleolithic Age and its diet. This is not a smash article, but it does show aspects of the flaws in the use of period specific dieting. This article does not target any one writer or publication. There are merely too many with slight different views. This article discusses the bulk beliefs at the core of the Paleo Diet. If you wish to engage in intelligent debate (which I don’t discourage) in the comments, please keep in mind the use of the word intelligent.)”
Riiiiiiight.
Fu**ing moron? Wow. I am done in this sandbox.
Congratulations Leigh on creating a shit storm concerning something you and your devotees are so utterly ill qualified to assess.
Carry on!
Check this out:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20685951
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19502018
Check this studies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19502018
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20685951
I must add that science is about moving forward. I can’t understand why the paleo community likes moving backwards while in reality, our present lives has much more to offer: food, shelter, gadgets, automation, medicine etc. Now, let’s put it this way, to purely claim yourself as paleo, one must not add modern nutritional strategies unless one can provide a tub of whey powder or an ancient creatine bottle artifacts. We are living in reality folks, instead of comparing past vs. future, the best solution IMHO is to adapt and adjust. Sure, we share the same prehistoric genes like the cavemen but we should also realize that humans are really efficient at adaptation.
Wow Jean Paulo, talk about straw man, again. Posting links to studies comparing a whole wheat diet do a refined wheat diet with regard to their effect on biomarkers of health is attacking a straw man. As is saying that ketogenic diets have no metabolic advantage over other diets. We are talking about gut permeability specifically, and how lectins cause it.
James, I asserted that lectins cause leaky gut, and Leigh shot back asking about all of the people in Italy on high carbohydrate Mediterranean diets as a counterpoint. That is attacking a straw man in carbohydrates, because no one was talking about them. That research paper on rheumatoid arthritis both discusses the biochemistry behind how lectins cause leaky gut and discusses case studies of people who have cured rheumatoid arthritis, an incurable disease, by removing them from their diet.
Robb Wolf and Professor Cordain are both research biochemists. They are making those statements based on what they see in the lab. Just because someone says something that is extreme in nature does not make them an “extremist.” When what they are saying is backed up with mountains of scientific evidence, it makes them ‘right.” Would you label Galileo an extremist for saying that in a vaccum all objects fall at the same rate independent of mass? That’s a very extreme statement, but it’s freaking true!
I’m done man. This blog post is born out of some anti-paleo witch hunt with no bearing in reality, and this comment thread is going no where. No one is saying you can’t eat grains and legumes, it’s a free country, do whatever you want. We’re just saying that there is a mounting body of research that suggests they are bad for you in the long run. If eaten on occasion, you can get away with it, probably without experiencing any ill long term effects, but if you already have autoimmune issues, you are going to need to totally remove the irritants from your diet if you want to heal the gut lining.
Good day, sir.
The studies I posted only shown the positive effects of whole grains in reducing inflammation. It’s not about being anti-paleo but rather about being anti-false information about whole grains. Do you realize that it is incorrect to religiously follow a diet based on assumptions? The diets of Paleolithic man depended on what’s available around them meaning it depends on the geographical structure of the land. It’s not that trade is easily accessible during those times allowing transportation.
Dude, you’re the one who mentioned ketogenic diets first that’s why I posted the study. That’s the problem with diet religious folks – it’s okay to post cherrypicked studies backing up their belief but ignoring the facts than disproves it.
I agree with Jeff 100%! These comments are going absolutely nowhere. I have also attached an illustration to further depict my complete agreement. http://www.sadanduseless.com/image.php?n=959
Geoff*
@Jean Paulo No one is “blindly following a diet based on assumptions.” We have a convergence of four different scientific disciplines leading to the paleo diet: archeology, anthropology, experimental research and biochemistry. The “assumptions” about our ancestors are used to pose questions that we then test experimentally. The theory of evolution is the foundation of all biological sciences, and human nutrition is no exception. Again though, this is all meaningless if our lab results don’t back it up. They do though.
Comparing whole grains to refined grains and then calling whole grains “anti-inflammatory” is pseudo-science at its best and straight up fraud at its worst. If I need to explain why, you have no business being involved in this discussion.
I brought up ketogenic diets as a TREATMENT FOR CANCER. Look up Dr. Thomas Seyfried’s published research on the subject. It was an example of how we have a relatively comprehensive understanding of the biochemical mechanisms of chronic disease, and how our neolithic diets relate. I could go on and on all day about ketosis and how it is the default state of human metabolism; how prolonged glucose metabolism can actually lead to mitochondrial damage that may be causal in creating cancerous cells. How all of our organs operate more efficiently on ketone bodies than glucose, how idiotic it is to imagine humans running around in the wild eating 3 meals a day because they are carb addicts, versus being able to eat as frequently or infrequently as they please because they are running on fat metabolism.
None of that is relevant though, because the paleo diet is carb agnostic. My only purpose in taking up this debate in the first place is to say that grains and legumes are demonized for a reason. They are uniquely bad, and they are forged this way by millions of years of natural selection. It’s not in any way unreasonable to suggest that seeds have evolved defense mechanisms against predation, and as a result they have no place in an OPTIMAL human diet. Not unreasonable, and as it turns out, actually completely backed up by the science.
Okay now I’m really done.
The problem, Geoff is that you and others are making conclusive leaps and assumptions based on inconclusive and otherwise shodddy evidence. The confirmation bias is strong in the paleo jedi. The fact that you feel that a ketogenic diet is the universally optimal dietary pattern speaks volumes. There are substantial variances in terms of what people thrive on from a dietary pattern perspective. If you have strong in vivo research that grains cause gut illness, I’m all ears.
I’ll summarize the pro-paleo arguments and their corresponding logical fallacies;
1. It works for me (my clients/friends/aunts/cousin’s hairdresser) – confirmation bias and use of anectdote as proof.
2. All you have to do is read Robbbb Wolf, Mark $i$$on, Cordain and you will understand everything and be eternally nutritionally enlightened. – Appeal to authoirity and more confirmation bias.
3. What is unhealthy about paleo? straw man – nobody on any of the 100+ comments suggested as much.
4. You don’t need grains to be healthy – another straw man. Nobody is making the argument that you need x amount of grains/legumes what-have-you. The argument is that said grains aren’t a recipe for intestinal disaster like the paleo crowds claim.
5. “Leigh – you just want traffic” – much better than trying to provide logical and otherwise intelligent thought to the discussion. It’s much easier to send links to pictures of wires.
No rosemary444, Leigh isn’t here to appease your nutritional dogma – or anyone else’s for that matter.
Insofar as the argument that paleos only have a few zealots, I beg to differ. Post anything even remotely not in line with paleo lore on Mark $i$$on’s site and you’ll be called a troll and have the same ad hominem, red herring, straw man and confirmation bias fallacies launched at you. It’s not a few bad apples spoiling the bunch – it’s a bunch of rotten apples overwhelming the few that are able to look at counter arguments with any form of objectivity.
@Mike Howard
My post was in response to the nonsense being passed around here as fact . Nonsense begets nonsense. I have no desire to get into an internet pissing match with a complete stranger. If you don’t think bloggers like Leigh Peele have ulterior motives concerning traffic and hits then you are very naive. And yes, paleo bloggers do too! I would follow the research and advice of people like Eades and Wolff and Taubes and Cordain and Stephen Guyenet and Kurt Harris hands down ANY DAY over Leigh Peele. And as far “how one feels” being shunted off into anecdotal evidence, that may very well be true, however, I have always “listened to my body” and for me this is what works. If you feel better not eating certain foods then your body is telling you something! Each person is different and everyone has different tolerances for different foods. Why can’t we all just agree that we have the same goals here, to feel our best. For me, that is the paleo diet and I take great offense to it being likened to a cult or religion. It is exciting when you discover something that is reversing autoimmune disease, aiding weight loss, improving borderline lipid panels to above excellent, increasing energy and giving me great skin. Damn right I am excited and am telling anyone that wants to listen. If this makes me culty then pass the Koolaid! Most people are happy to learn because you can’t argue with the healthy hotness that has morphed into being right before their eyes.
Good to see you guys are playing nice.
I am going to reply to a few specific things. If it seems like you can all calm down and read things that are written, a civil conversation can take place. I am specifically talking to Geoff, Rosemary and James. Name calling gets us nowhere and some of you aren’t making any sense and directly contradicting. I am this close to closing the comments, only because I feel at this point you have infected them with neurotic behavior to the point of non-recovery.
@Rosemary – You have not directly shown any evidence yourself of anything. If you feel better great. Otherwise you really have nothing to contribute other than “I am a person helped by Paleo. I can read others have been helped by Paleo.” Nothing more.
@Geoff - You are all over the place and you don’t make sense. You obviously are coming from a highly emotional and frustrated place.
The problem with your arguments, again, is you are only discussing things in regards to special populations. You are making blanket assumptions about the act of inflammation and histamine response in the body. You can’t show me any evidence that a healthy person without a digestive disorder can’t eat grains. You can’t show me evidence that all digestive orders need to be treated by the removal of grains. IBS is one such digestive disorder than can be improved by grains. Leaky gut is one that would be improved by removal of grains. It’s called taking a case-by-case look at the response of specific disorders and the person.
Let me pull from your body of work.
“the research is pretty clear that lectins from grains and legumes are directly responsible for leaky gut”
Actually, this isn’t true. Google is pretty clear that lectins, grains, and legumes are responsible. Google is operated merely out of search engine optimization – not science. Science isn’t clear of anything yet, but does point to a connection of certain diseases. One such disease is Celiac disease, but not the only disease that is a precursor to leaky gut. There are (animal) protein based allergies that make low level response which also can create leaky gut. Excessive drug (prescription and recreational) use can cause a leaky gut response. Cancer patients can develop leaky gut post radiation. Again, you are over simplifying an extremely complex disease. Aside from that, only very small amount of the population has leaky gut.
If you do have leaky gut due to Celiac disease, than yes it would be wise to remove all grain items (and perhaps even oats) on the change that gluten would continue to break down the vila. However, you are extremely oversimplifying repair of the gut as well. It takes a long time to return to a relative “normal” state – if ever. You don’t remove grains for a month and go “OH, I feel better!” It doesn’t work that way. It is not instantaneous.
The only time instant reactions happen is if there is a low grade inflammation response to eating an item. This may or may not be an allergic response.
In addition to leaky gut you stated –
“If eaten on occasion (grains), you can get away with it, probably without experiencing any ill long term effects, but if you already have autoimmune issues, you are going to need to totally remove the irritants from your diet if you want to heal the gut lining.”
To suggest for a moment that all autoimmune issues are directly related to the gut – I don’t even know where to begin. That being said, because of the vast difference from disease to disease, you are assuming an awful lot without any, and I do mean any, research to back it up.
Also, there are a lot of autoimmune diseases that are genetic based. Meaning you have to be born with it. They may take time to develop (celiac disease) but you are born with them. If overly concerned with being struck by it one day to the point of avoiding grains based out of fear – get tested.
For the problems that all of you people are saying grains have – there are tests for them. Allergies, inflammation, gut health – all have blood tests, markers, and surgical procedures to determine if something is happening to you. Go there if so paranoid.
What I find incredibly ironic is somewhere someone stated that they didn’t think Paleo people where extreme and just trying to help people. I think these comments not only proved the point of my article, but gave face to the illogical based fears people have about foods. Be it guided by your guru or guided by your own phobias and health problems – it doesn’t apply to everyone and that is your problem.
Rosemary,
What specifically are you referring to when you say “nonsense being passed around as fact”.
I’m not suggesting bloggers don’t want traffic – I’m calling you out on your assertion that Leigh’s sole purpose of writing this was to get traffic. Do you go on pro-paleo sites and level them with the same accusations?
And don’t worry, I know exactly who’s work you follow. Their work is in line with your thinking and you will by default filter out anything that does not agree with them.
Speaking of which, I don’t care much for straw man arguments, rosemary. There is a very fine line between “listening to your body” (something I not only DON’T disagree with but something I firmly believe in) and declaring your way of eating as gospel whilst begrudging those who question it. You would look like much less of a zealot if you would bring some scientific discussion to the table rather than relying on unsubstantiated and vacuous comments. Your last comment would not have garnered a single negative response I assure you.
As to you being irritated by the implication that paleo is “cultish”, I suggest you blame your fellow paleo bretheren for this and not those who are calling it like they see it.
I may not be a scientist Leigh, but I certainly wouldn’t insult a reader with a comment that is condescending and dismissive. Next time you or your family have any trouble with law, I’ll be sure to see to it that I or my colleagues chastise you for your ignorance of said law and fail to show up to bail you out of jail. Just because someone is not an “expert” in a field or topic of discussion does not mean they have nothing to contribute.
Rosemary I do not get mean to readers. In fact, I think I have shown a massive amount of calm and respect in the face of some pretty harsh attacks of both character and work. My point was to please keep it to the fact. Simply state the following: “Leigh, I may not understand all the science and I may not agree with you, but I have had a great response and seen other people have a great response from Paleo. I don’t think that should be overlooked.”
My response to that is great. Not a condescending great – just great. You are the one high with the emotions. I am not. I have never one attacked a reader who just stated how they feel and that it made them happy. Why should I?
I also sent you a personal message to make sure things are clear. Like I said at the very beginning. I wanted intelligent debate and I am one of the few people who have stuck to the facts and not got mean or personal.
As someone who is reading along, it’s a fascinating read. I don’t know much about this stuff. I just wanted to say to Rosemary that I don’t think Leigh was being mean to you and your comment struck me as odd. Leigh is pretty reasonable if you talk to her with respect. I have found that out myself. Just giving my view!!
*face palm*
You just don’t get it. Look at the title of this post. Fad religion? What the …? You are so obviously trying to incite rancor intentionally. It is really very transparent. And I didn’t say “mean.” I said condescending and dismissive. Perception is reality when debating and negotiating, Leigh. That is how I perceived it. And yes, I am the one with high emotions, I must be pre-menstrual. Oh wait. I forgot. I cured my mood swings and pms with the paleo diet.
It is a question Rosemary. I am asking “Is this a fad, is it a solution, etc?” Low carb has religious type sections to it. So do marathoners or crossfit. Did I even say religious was bad? No one bothered to ask that, did they? I stated religion has both good and negative qualities to it. I said the same thing about Paleo for that matter. The only thing I state as fact in that article is that grains were around and eaten more than is claimed by writers. That is all.
You can seriously say your reaction, just now, is a calm one? I have spoken to your with respect, I even sent you an email. Throwing up PMS and claiming I am playing some “you are a overly emotional chick card” is assumptive and directly against what I said.
Even if I hated Paleo, which I don’t, I never said I hated people who did it. I have friends who are hardcore paleoites (and claim so). My only beef, again, is with stating certain foods will harm you when they have no evidence to say that is the case in people that aren’t in special population groups.
@Ginger
I didn’t say she was being mean. I said she was being condescending and dismissive. Which she was, by telling me I had nothing to contribute if it was anecdotal and not scientific. She also felt the need to reiterate this in a private email which is puzzling.
I didn’t say you have nothing to contribute, I said to state that what you were contributing was personal account – not fact so that people following don’t get confused. When people don’t understand this stuff, no matter what side, being clear between research and personal experience is important. I didn’t say it didn’t matter.
As of now the comments are closed. I will write a future article to look specifically at grains. If the people involved want to comment, they can. The topic and comment conversation skewed in the wrong direction and it not going to help anyone. I appreciate those who spoke, your comments will not be removed.
[...] by vegetarians and flocked with attacks. It is also why the same kind of articles pointing out flawed ideology in the Paleo Diet or the fallacies behind ‘Clean Eating’ receive the same type of ire. People tend to [...]
[...] Check it out for yourself here: http://www.leighpeele.com/the-paleo-diet-fad-religion-or-solution?ref=nf# [...]
[...] 1. The Paleo Diet – Fad, Religion, or Solution by Leigh Peele [...]
[...] 1. The Paleo Diet – Fad, Religion, or Solution by Leigh Peele [...]
[...] that doesn’t mean I’m going Paleo either. Leigh Peele explains very well why the Paleo framework has a lot of fallacies. The problem with Paleo is not the stuff it [...]
[...] Link here [...]
[...] i googled up “‘leaky gut’ paleo,” i found this mildly interesting article: “the paleo diet: fad, religion, or solution” by leigh peele on 2010년10월22일 (october 22, 2010). it doesn’t say a single thing about [...]
[...] detail, depth, and so forth. I read an interesting article about the Paleolithic era here: The Paleo Diet: Fad, Religion, or Solution? | Leigh Peele. It's definitely interesting and I'd like to know more in order to pick a side in this debate. [...]
[...] Paleo diet fad – religion or solution? (Old post, but I only just came across it. I mostly agree with her.) [...]