Live data from Hacker News

“Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

salon.com

171–180 of 199 posts

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#171
post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Thanks for asking. I'll try a more complicated Google search to track that down. I see you've already looked at Taleb's website, right? http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/ but he no longer has the same list of stories about reviews of his earlier books linked there from the home page.

Yes, I did. The closest I found was http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/fake.htm . Oh! Perhaps archive.org? Nope. It's the same.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Obesity is the result of a caloric surplus. Cavemen didn't have that luxury. No obese cavemen? How about a cavewoman? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Willendorf

The Venus of Willendorf Is widely regarded to represent an exceptional, ideal image not a typical person. People who are short of food idealise a food surplus.

An alternative view, according to the wiki page:

> The nickname, urging a comparison to the classical image of "Venus," is now controversial. According to Christopher Witcombe, "the ironic identification of these figurines as 'Venus' pleasantly satisfied certain assumptions at the time about the primitive, about women, and about taste." Catherine McCoid and LeRoy McDermott hypothesize that the figurines may have been created as self-portraits.

But let's face it, the evidence must be scant either way.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#173
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the links on the Hacker diet, the rubber bag concept sounds interesting, I'll check it out. As for my metaphor - actually I think it holds very true to what you're saying. You pre-qualified that the fire be hot enough to overcome the dampness of the sticks. That's my exact point. Think of the water as insulin and the stick itself as the fat you want to burn. If you're consistently slamming yourself into in…

Now you're using the body's metabolism to explain the metaphor to explain the body's metabolism. I don't think it's supposed to work that way. :) To highlight some of the difficulties: So, insulin shock is the specific heat of water and/or the heat of evaporation? Does fire "slam into" the water? As a technical point, there's a distinction between heat and temperature. The fire does not need to be "hot", it just need…

While I'm amused (Really I am, no sarcasm!) with the extension of the fire concept - I think you're just pulling at semantics of my metaphor =)

You make a valid point - lets pull heat and temperature out of it. I'll take the whole metaphor out. If I were to waterdown the through process of ketogenic diets (which are what I'm talking about and share some things with Paleo) I would explain them as such: Insulin prevents your body from breaking down it's natural stores of energy. When you eat anything with a high glycemic index (Which is most food in the American diet) you have an insulin reaction. While having an insulin reaction, you don't burn fat stores. If you can't burn your fat stores, you don't lose weight. If you can't burn your fat stores and you run out of immediately available energy your bodies 'fire' dims (You crash after that sugar rush)

Ketogenic diets are the only diets that make sense to me, because they so easily explain the different states of weight gain/loss and energy level. I'm interested in hearing other methods of weight management.. but I really feel the ketogenic concept explains the body best.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#174

> 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.

What's more, we have evidence that the lactose processing gene has become widespread in humans in the last 7000 years. Not to mention the genetic changes that have occurred in the foods over those times.

Lactase persistence is simply a gene we're born with failing to turn off. Hardly a radical evolutionary change. Animals which eat plant or grain-based diets have completely different digestive systems than humans.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#175
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

google "The Paleo Diet", first result http://thepaleodiet.com/ : The Paleo Diet is based upon eating wholesome, contemporary foods from the food groups our hunter-gatherer ancestors would have thrived on during the Paleolithic era, the time period from about 2.6 million years ago to the beginning of the agricultural revolution, about 10,000 years ago. These foods include fresh meats (preferably grass-produced or free…

The idea that grains and legumes cause obesity is absurd. Asians have been living largely on both for thousands of years [1,2] and have enjoyed incredibly low obesity rates [3] until recently. Consuming more calories than you expend is the culprit here, not grains and legumes. If we want to single out some of the leading causes for overconsumption, I'd point to refined sugar, oils (pure fat), junk food, and high fruc…

Consuming more calories than you expend is the culprit, but that is a fairly uninteresting fact, as it ignores what makes humans more likely to consume more calories than we expend. Especially in situations where we can easily afford to.

To me that means past data on obesity quite pointless - that large parts of our populations is able to afford enough food to easily get fat is a relatively recent thing.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#176
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, let me go do that. While I'm at it I'll make sure everyone who Googles "healthy diet" or for that matter "republican", all come away learning exactly the same meanings for those terms. My point in the above post was: Zuk is positioning herself as if she were attacking Paleo as a concept, but all she's really attacking is the mis-application of information by some members in a larger group. I call that a straw…

I haven't read the book, but the review made it sound like Zuk was both attacking Paleo as a concept by pointing out that evolution can actually happen on pretty short timescales and so the idea that we need to eat what paleolithic people ate is logically flawed, and also attacking Paleo as practiced by pointing out its practitioners' misconceptions regarding the diet of paleolithic humans.

Just because evolution of certain details can happen on short timescales does not therefore mean that evolution can or does make any old change in a short timeframe.

Evolution tends to operate as a hill-climbing strategy (not to say it cant clear away exising design details) so it often produce (non-fatal) 'bugs' in its designs that never get fixed.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#177

I'm not a evolution scientist, so I would love to have some educated response to that : Now that we are over 6 billion humans on earth, with migration way easier and common place than before, shouldn't on the contrary human evolution been speeded up ? EDIT : I know evolution is not progressive but happen by sudden steps, but I suppose it still stands.

"shouldn't on the contrary human evolution been speeded up"

Why? We're well adapted to our "niche". There is not much different for us to adapt to.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#178
post #162
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a modern american diet is it possible to eat grains without your laundry list of "sugar, oils, junk food, HFCS"? It doesn't matter if you "can" eat grains although they're almost never available in a format that meets the other requirements. Don't try to tell me every american, especially fat ones, cracks open a can of creamed corn kernels every meal for a vegetable. In a modern fat american diet, grains = wonder…

"Is there any junk food out there made without dairy, soy protein extract, or wheat?" Jell-O gelatin snacks? Its ingredients list is "WATER, HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP, SUGAR, GELATIN, CONTAINS LESS THAN 0.5% OF ADIPIC ACID AND CITRIC ACID (FOR TARTNESS), SODIUM CITRATE (CONTROLS ACIDITY), RED 40, ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR." Fruit roll-ups also look like they foot the bill, but I can't copy&paste the ingredient list. As you sa…

Ok on fruit rollups (which I haven't personally eaten since the early 80s, but if there's still out there, cool), and fritos. Also genuine corn chips without additives and a salsa dip is very American.

"RUFFLES® TAPATIO® Limon Flavored Potato Chips"

At that point I think we need to define the "mainstream american diet" aka most of the stuff at the supermarket. I don't think this or banana chips quite make that cut. Don't get me wrong, they might be tasty, and the banana chips might even be good for you although not as good as fresh banana, but they aren't American as defined by what you'll see on TV or at a typical store. Even fruit rollups are kind of questionable past grade school or so. Likewise I have been informed that roasted crickets are a really yummy nutty tasting junk food, but there's no way you're convincing me thats "american junk food". American junk food is at least 99% HFCS / wheat flour / soy flour / dairy /corn and having to bring up Plantain Chips as a counter example kind of makes my point.

And if you're going to abandon the mainstream diet, or adventure beyond it, or however you phrase it, why not kick just a little further out and try something obviously healthier like paleo diet? Rather than jello and fruit rollups, which are kinda gross if you think about it, try a piece of actual fresh fruit? So very intensely profoundly unamerican, yet so very tasty, yet also more or less good for you...

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#179
post #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 tha…

If I had to invent a new diet with a simple short list of dietary requirements, I would only have two: forbid binary thinking/lists and require mandatory prioritization.

Nothing wrong with a slice of birthday cake at grannie's 80th. Something hugely (lol) wrong with two packs of twinkies every lunch.

The "newer" it is, the worse it probably is to eat, and the older it is, the better it probably is to eat. Do your weekly/monthly meal planning based on that. I intentionally eat roughly 100 times as much apple by weight as chocolate. That doesn't mean I only eat apple or never eat chocolate. Most of my meals look something like a large salad, a large vegetable side dish, a relatively modest hunk of meat, and some citrus / fruit / berries for desert. I'm hardly starving or restraining myself. I'm actually something of a gourmet glutton. I just eat "old school" instead of modern stuff.

BTW in the olden days not every piece of fruit was supermarket scale picture perfect, as anyone who's hand picked their own strawberries probably knows? You're hungry, the somewhat fermented grapes still taste OK-ish... your liver evolved to clean up the poison... Ethanol is not supposed to be a primary source of calories, its a moderately toxic systemic poison which your body is fairly tolerant of, well at least compared to cyanides or organomercury compounds. Drinking it on a regular basis is about as stupid as eating arsenic or lead salts for kicks. Another good comparison is getting buzzed drunk is about as intelligent as sniffing carbon monoxide until dizzy. None the less as per the granny example above a glass of booze once in an occasional while is OK. Just as long as most of the time, lets say 10000 to 1 ratio, you drink water instead of chugging a beer. I actually like beer, I just don't drink 12 per night or even 1 per week. How often would you be comfortable drinking anti-freeze? I drink booze a little more often than that, but not much.

In a similar way there's nothing really wrong with an occasional pack of twinkies, as long as your lifetime average is running around 1000 carrots (or equiv) per twinkie.

I have noticed long term that tastes and physical reaction changes... I used to like jello, but now it kinda grosses me out. I mean I could eat some once in awhile, but I really don't want to anymore. Or ice cream, once you're not carb addicted anymore, lets be realistic, its sickly sweet combined with a mouth feel and texture like cold olive oil pouring down your throat, eww thats just gross, like sugar mixed with crisco shortening or "equal" artificial sweetener mixed with lard. Once in awhile I have some anyway and remind myself why I don't miss it anymore. This is before I start thinking about how it comes out of a cow and is designed to fatten up a calf, but I'm not a baby cow nor do I need any more fattening up.

Re: “Paleofantasy”: Stone Age delusions

#180
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 gene…

Paleo is a low-carb diet. By consequence rather than design, and it's certainly not an Atkins/ketosis diet, but the emphasis is on fish, meat and eggs. If you need to consume a standard ratio of carbs:protein:fat on the paleo diet you're going to have an oddball variation of what most people do on paleo and be eating lots and lots of squash, yams, and sweet potatoes. Some folks can handle dairy just fine and do so. S…

"Paleo is a low-carb diet."

What are you eating and calling it "paleo"? Practically every meal I have ends with citrus / berries / apples / bananas / etc. Sometimes for breakfast we'll have some sliced up apples, that's 30 or so grams of carbs right there. Sometimes an afternoon snack is just a banana or a handful of grapes.

At a typical Atkins level of 20 grams carb per day, I'd be screwed by the time I'm done eating two apples for breakfast, and I've still got the rest of the day to go.

I don't think I'm unusual in that I paleo it around maybe 4 parts veg, 4 part fruit, 1 part meat, and maybe 1 part nuts and "other (possibly non-paleo) stuff" on a very long term average. I don't think its physically possible to low carb if you eat about four times as much fruit as meat. Its not so much that I eat huge amounts of fruit, its that I don't eat so much meat. I ate a 24 oz steak once and literally felt sick, don't know if it was the massive fat content or some kind of protein overdose or just too much in the belly. Lots more filet mignon than t-bone, that kind of thing. I tend toward larger fraction of fruit for breakfast (aka two pieces of fruit per breakfast), larger fraction of veg for lunch (aka salad bar almost every day) and larger fraction of meat for dinner and a chunk of fruit before bedtime. Individual days vary, this is just average.

Post reply on HN