all posts post new thread

Time to leave the Paleo diet?

I don’t get the negativity for grains. Hundreds of Millions of healthy people eat cereals without being unhealthy, overweight etc.

Meat and eggs and fruit have been selectively bred and modified as well

It's really hard to think of any whole food one can find in a grocery store, except some wild caught seafood, that hasn't been selectively bred.

Even honey comes from domesticated bees selected for their usefulness as polinators and honey makers.
 
I don’t get the negativity for grains. Hundreds of Millions of healthy people eat cereals without being unhealthy, overweight etc.

Meat and eggs and fruit have been selectively bred and modified as well

Grains and cereals are peasants food invented to feed mass amounts of people gruel. Also see the above article for “Kellogg’s” reason for creating corn flakes. Lol
 
Grains and cereals are peasants food invented to feed mass amounts of people gruel.

Or feed continent-conquering Roman legions.


And gladiators.

The bones revealed that the typical food eaten by gladiators was wheat, barley and beans - and this echoed the contemporary term for gladiators as the "barley men".

There was little sign of meat or dairy products in the diet of almost all of these professional fighters, who performed in front of Roman audiences.

 
But the mongols are a much newer civilization than the Roman’s so their diet is less ancestral and thus less paleo.
 
One author is a chair in human evolutionary studies, the other is a PhD student in archaeology. While they don't directly address this, there have been other instances of people in these and similar fields finding that what we call "paleo" is not, in fact, paleo. A whole food, low-to-moderate carb diet might do a lot of people a lot of good, but what it seems like they find is that our ancestors ate a wider variety of foods than that.

What I am saying here is this. The paleo diet is sold as something "ancestral," when it in fact might not be. It may be a healthy diet, but that doesn't make the "evolutionary diet" argument true.
I don’t think many people actually think it’s the same way our ancestors ate. It’s just a marketing gimmick and an easy answer to “should I eat this or not?”. I have seen the Paleo frozen dessert section at grocery stores, I don’t see many Neanderthals snacking on those.
 
I can’t speak for others in the thread, but I never claimed that. I think our food system does have a lot of problems. All I’m arguing is to look at evidence for what it is, and not extrapolate meanings that might not be there.

I’m not sure there’s as much “strings attached” research as we might be led to believe. Does a study “having strings attached” mean the outcome has to be fudged? I’m not convinced that happens as often as naysayers would have us believe. Someone has to pay the people to do it. I’ve seen vegan/vegetarian doctors get funding from Kelloggs and Quaker Oats, and I’ve seen research on meat funded by cattle farmers. I don’t mean to sound rude, but it seems quite obvious what entities will fund what research. I think the funding is a moot point.

This is part of why I wrote “most people don’t know what a confidence interval or P-value are.” If a study contains data, which all do (and a great deal of it becomes numerical) all the numbers and percents and whatnot that you read in a study mean something that tells the authors how reliable something is or isn’t, or how much of an effect variables have on each other, etc. It doesn’t matter who funded the study if you understand how to interpret all that. You’re just going to have to trust someone at some point. This is also why I have been trying to say that we need to able to trust our professionals. Do we really think they’re spending decades trying to understand something, doing research, testing ideas, and that all of it is just made up to get rich from [donor x]?
A researcher doesn't need to lie, they could simply omit data that fails to support a claim, possibly going so far as to structure research that is all but guaranteed a given outcome even if it means lowering the overall quality. And yes, I personally do not put much stock in studies that back up a claim made by the study's funding source, whether it be pharma or nutrition, some surgical interventions.
 
I fully understand that caveman and hunter gatherers had hard lives.
They surprisingly didn’t according to Sapiens. Food scarcity was less of a thing than you would think(food source runs out you go find a different one), disease was rare (mostly comes from agriculture allowing high population density), and they “worked” about a third of what people do now.
 
But the mongols are a much newer civilization than the Roman’s so their diet is less ancestral and thus less paleo.

Most (all?) military historians also attribute their success to things other than diet.

i.e. mounted horse archers, hit and run tactics, combined arms, etc.

The Mongols also lost to the Japanese when they tried to invade Japan.

Samurai were big rice eaters.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think many people actually think it’s the same way our ancestors ate. It’s just a marketing gimmick and an easy answer to “should I eat this or not?”. I have seen the Paleo frozen dessert section at grocery stores, I don’t see many Neanderthals snacking on those.

What does a paleo frozen dessert even mean?
 
Back
Top Bottom