Live data from Hacker News

“Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

salon.com

141–150 of 199 posts

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#141

> Cordain, who has a Ph.D in exercise physiology, assured Zuk that human beings had not had time to adapt to foods that only became staples with the advent of agriculture. “It’s only been ten thousand years,” he explained. Zuk’s response: “Plenty of time.” We have documented measurable evolution in large mammals in timespans of only several hundred years.

"We have documented measurable evolution in large mammals in timespans of only several hundred years."

So, the good news is that in perhaps merely several hundred years, a diet consisting of lifetime unlimited quantities of regular Mt Dew, tv dinners, bacon, and potato chips will none the less evolve humans who successfully reproduce. Oh wait, whoops, all these people are medically crashing with lifestyle diseases at age 40 after having 10 kids. And meanwhile for those couple hundred years, any small segment of the population who avoids evolving will personally benefit..

There is also a horrific ethical component to evolving mankind for profit. So Monsanto, Dow, etc make a lot of money, at the cost of hundreds of years of humanity dying young in agony. Hmm. It sort of like saying we "should" evolve ourselves to tolerate lead in the environment, or tolerate any other poison. I don't think that quantity of human suffering because of the evolutionary process balances out with some megacorps making a couple extra bucks. I mean, if killing ourselves via diet educated us, or permanently improved the ecology of the planet, or sent us to the stars, or improved our culture, well, not definitely yes, but "maybe". But all that suffering merely for a goal of "some rich dirtbag will get richer", well, uh, "no thanks".

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#142
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> "I for one would love proof that the diet is wrong about cereals and legumes." >> "I read reports and testimonies of people getting better on it and athletes performing on it." I think this is the wrong way round. When people make claims that stuff we've been eating for thousands of years (bread, cereals, grains etc.) are actually really bad for us, the burden of proof is on them . If anyone could actually prove t…

>> You're getting all this the wrong way round. When people make claims that stuff we've been eating for thousands of years (bread, cereals, grains etc.) are actually really bad for us, the burden of proof is on them. I'm not sure if this should also apply with stuff that we put inside our body. In any case, not all of us are willing to wait that long, while we obviously see problems with the status quo. I choose to…

But what he is trying to say is you don't need any fancy rules except for:

>> Yes, eating lots of carbs is bad for you. So is eating lots of fatty food. Or lots of anything. Just eat lots of green stuff, and make sure you get adequate amounts of protein & carbs. To lose weight, make sure calories in By agreeing with him, you have to come to the conclusion that following the above advice is what makes any diet good. There is nothing "unholy" about grains. I believe that was the point nqureshi was trying to make.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#143
post #138

There are two things at work: Paleo diet works (not much disputed here) and Paleo diet works because it's like what we ate 10k years ago and we haven't adopted to our "new food" yet (a lot of people dispute that).

1+2 are good. Also: 3. Abundance. People didn't have to "limit themselves" 2000 years ago because they either were usually, or at best occasionally, starving back down to size, along with massive vitamin and mineral deficiencies (so you can eat 3000 calories per day as a sailor, but if you're also simultaneously dying of scurvy, they you don't have to worry so much about getting fat). In the shorter term, religious f…

+1 "but we don't respect farming as a profession"

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#144
post #110

I've recently came to the conclusion that the Paleo diet is beneficial for me not because it tells me what to eat. No, it's because it tells me exactly what not to eat. With respect to what people ate (especially how much meat), the only safe assumption was “whatever they could get,” something that to this day varies greatly depending on where they live. Precisely. I can not tell exactly what and how much they could…

What about all of the exceptions?

Can you eat corn (domesticated some 9,000 years ago), sugar cane (8,000), or bananas (8,000) Wild almonds are toxic, but safe domesticated varieties started appearing some 5,000 years ago. Also, macadamia nuts have a similar problem, and they were domesticated only some 200 years ago.

What about strawberries? Wild strawberries are edible, but tiny. It wasn't until about the 1400s that we started breeding them for size. Cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, kale, Brussels sprouts, savoy, and Chinese kale are cultivars of Brassica oleracea, but no one 10,000 years ago would have been able to get them.

Olives are treated to make them less bitter. Is curing or fermenting permissible, or does one eat only the olives which can be eaten without processing? When does the food become too processed?

By your logic, you've given up on coffee, chocolate, and alcohol, right? No paleolithic person ever tasted a drop of whiskey.

I'm not saying that moderation or abstinence in the foods you list is a bad thing, only commenting that the logic behind it would preclude eating or drinking certain vegetables, fruits, nuts, and berries which were not available 10,000+ years ago.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#145
post #75
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not denying that there certainly are such factors at play at some level, but not sure how decisive they are: I'd wager they won't make a dent if you consume 4500 calories of Paleo a day, and likewise won't if you consume 1200 calories of junk-food a day -- say for the average non-athlete rather-sedentary adult.

One of the primary arguments of a keto/paleo diet is that the different diets affect how many calories your body thinks it needs, how it uses them, and how it influences behavior as a result. (Disclaimer: using imaginary numbers below to illustrate the theory.) Let's say your body typically wants 1000 calories at breakfast, and you eat 1000 calories with a heavy load of carbs. Carbohydrates with a high glycemic index…

There's a pretty good chance this is an over-analysis.

A daily 50 Calorie excess stacked up over 5 years amounts to a gain of about 25 pounds.

So it is certainly possible that a diet could be subtly tipping metabolism in the wrong direction, but between a complex explanation of more calories being stored as fat and a simple explanation of slightly too much consumption, I like the second one.

I guess that it is easy to consume large amounts of carbs makes them a frequent component of weight gain.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#146
post #120

Reading about any type of nutrition research has become beyond frustrating to me. There are constantly new results doing away with old truisms only to have those results, in turn, questioned and overturned by other studies and then there are basically opposing theories being found as valid, too. To make matters worse, there is an overwhelming abundance of less-than-scientific literature following the latest "fad" sci…

I share your sentiment of frustration. I've read "The China Study" by Campbell and various other articles about paleo-diet and others and there is a lot of contradictory informations.

Although they go in opposite directions (Campbell advocates vegan, paleo meat), they seem to agree on at least one thing : unprocessed foods are better. Eat vegetables, fruits, whole grains and meat/fish, but avoid sauces/butter, sodas, white bread and various candies.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#147
post #2

Based on the single review for the book on Amazon and the "15 of 52 found helpful", this seems to be an inflammatory topic: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B007Q6XM1A/?tag=saloncom08-20 I'd be curious to see more scientific reviews of the book first before buying it.

The Amazon review is not by someone who is a verified purchaser of the item under review, nor does the reviewer appear to be, from the reviewer's other reviews I've quickly glanced at, someone who is deeply familiar with the science on the subject. So, yes, the topic is inflammatory, but I wouldn't think less of the book based on a "review" like that. I agree with you that it would be good to read reviews of the new…

That sounds like an story I would like to read. I couldn't find details about it. I did find that Taleb's second book for mass audiences was "The Black Swan", but that knowledge didn't help.

I did find that Taleb is quick critical of poor-quality reviewers, but did not find something which matches your description. I presume it's described in his third book?

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#148
post #92

Disclaimer: I started reading on the paleo diet about a month ago, after friends recommended it as a support for my strength & conditioning routines. I've been loosely following the guidelines for the past 2 weeks. I do see an improvement in my sleep quality and in the past week have noticed a spike in my swimming endurance. This article highlights one aspect of the scientific community that I abhor, the petty disput…

>> "I for one would love proof that the diet is wrong about cereals and legumes." >> "I read reports and testimonies of people getting better on it and athletes performing on it." I think this is the wrong way round. When people make claims that stuff we've been eating for thousands of years (bread, cereals, grains etc.) are actually really bad for us, the burden of proof is on them . If anyone could actually prove t…

Paleo is not a "low carb" diet. The point of Paleo is not to reduce the number of carbohydrates you ingest; nor is it to enter ketosis; nor is the primary goal of Paleo to lose weight. You have been reading the wrong things, and I can't even imagine what lead you to believe that you could run at any serious level without ingesting carbs.

The pop-fad elements of the diet that have been parroted by journalists are generally the "elevator pitch" version of the diet, not the real 'meat' (pun so intended).

The main tenets of the diet are to avoid processed and/or high-sugar food, grains, (non-fermented) legumes, bad fats/oils (especially those from seeds), and dairy, and to seek out whole foods, fish and lean meats (especially from ruminants and organs) and good sources of fat (with good omega 3/6 ratio). Some folks can handle dairy just fine and do so. Some can eat white rice or white potatos and suffer no ill effects. Those are not outright banned by the diet. Carbohydrates can come in many forms that are accessible on the diet.

You were lied to, and I'm sorry that you tried to run without eating carbs, I image that would be unpleasant. But please discontinue spreading misinformation about Paleo, as it has vast benefits when applied correctly and in line with your body's needs.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#149
post #23
post #9

The biggest problem I have with Zuk is that the entire premise of this book is based on a straw man argument. The "Paleo" in paleo diet comes from the fact that there was a clear dip in human health once we entered the neolithic era (i.e. started farming). We are not emulating a caveman's diet per se, we are simply trying to find and remove what caused that original dip in health. To anyone uninformed about the paleo…

Indeed, it's a review by someone with an axe to grind about a book by someone with an axe to grind. I'm not a "Paleo" person, but the hinting in this article that folks trying to infer better living patterns from the past are loons is faintly preposterous. We have just mounds of evidence (which doubters are free to research themselves) that many pre-Agricultural societies had (and have, actually) far lower rates of t…

Pedantically speaking, a paleo-something probably shouldn't have an axe to grind.

(I don't really have a point, but it's interesting how focused pop culture is on chipping rocks when polishing them is one of the foundational aspects of civilization)

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#150
post #92

Disclaimer: I started reading on the paleo diet about a month ago, after friends recommended it as a support for my strength & conditioning routines. I've been loosely following the guidelines for the past 2 weeks. I do see an improvement in my sleep quality and in the past week have noticed a spike in my swimming endurance. This article highlights one aspect of the scientific community that I abhor, the petty disput…

> I do see an improvement in my sleep quality and in the past week have noticed a spike in my swimming endurance. Did that coincide with another change? Is your diet the only thing you changed? Did that reflect the results you were expecting?

The diet represents a significant change in my eating habits. I would have to look really hard to find a different cause.

I significantly reduced bread, rice, potatoes, pasta, legumes in the last 2 weeks. That's extremely unusual for me. In the same time, I probably ate more veggies than I would in 6 months. Broccoli, cauliflower, celery, lettuce, cucumbers, asparagus, kale, swiss chards, butternut and spaghetti squash and a bunch of other stuff. Some tubes for variety (yams and sweet potatoes). My fruit basket is always full and varied (avocados, papaya, bananas, grapes, apples, pears, oranges, tangerines, etc). I eat eggs, meats (including bacon) and seafood exactly like before. I eat nuts like before. I still drink green tea daily. So far my only previous snacking habit that seems to be "legal" in the new context is plantain chips, I'm not sure if it's really allowed, but I don't care, I'm not changing it.

My philosophy regarding diet is to encourage good habits, not discourage bad ones. In other words, fill myself with as much good stuff as not having to crave the bad. My brother bought pizza on friday, I ate it and drank some coke. Yesterday he brought home a sandwich for me, I ate it the same. I won't feel guilty about that.

I did have various cravings in my first week, but I simply increased my meal portions the second week and I've been fine for the most part. I stay extended periods without even thinking of chewing on a candy bar.

Regarding physical activity, I noticed that I recover better from training and swimming sessions and I also have more endurance.

I haven't bought into the grass-fed and organic mindset so far. I'll see where the current regiment carries me in term of performance and well being, before attempting to go "all natural" and see if it really makes a difference.

Post reply on HN