6 ms·

The Paleo diet is all the rage here in The Netherlands as well. While I applaud people being conscious about their nutrition, I find the caveman-parabole hilari

The Paleo diet is all the rage here in The Netherlands as well. While I applaud people being conscious about their nutrition, I find the caveman-parabole hilarious. Most cavemen didn't live to see 40, and there's the little thing called evolution, too. People can adapt to different eating habits even within their own lifespan, let alone in +10,000 years. The magic bullet for diets: a moderate intake of food from a diverse diet consisting mostly of fresh fruit, vegetables and some form of protein, paired with ample exercise. Wether you call it 'Paleo' and leave out 'modern' ingredients, leave out the carbs and call it Atkins, or focus on good carbs and good fat (South Beach), it doesn't matter. My wife lost a good amount of weight by eating until she didn't feel hungry anymore, and exercising regularly.

Dewie 12y ago
> Most cavemen didn't live to see 40, Didn't they? Is that based on the median age, or the average? Because the average age tends to be skewed by infant mortality. > , and there's the little thing called evolution, too. The central argument is that our bodies haven't changed significantly in the time between "cavemen" and present day. So evolution is central to the argument of its usefulness. Whether it is correct that the evolutionary forces is relatively insignificant is, perhaps, up for debate.
monochr 12y ago
This thread is incredibly depressing. All the people complaining about this diet being a fad are just regurgitating the fads from their childhood as facts. Vegetables and fresh fruit needn't form anywhere near a majority of a diet for you to be healthy, there are enough traditional societies for this. The problem for the modern diet is that we have the appetites of an animal that should burn about ~4000 calories a day yet only expend around ~3000 on average. Now if you want to be healthy as well as skinny instead of lowering your calorie intake you're much better off increasing your exercise.
- a8da6b0c91d 12y ago
  Reconstructions of what medieval people ate indicate they were often downing over 4500 calories a day. And their food was probably a lot more nutrient dense than ours in terms of minerals and vitamins. I think with typical modern foods it is somewhat difficult to get adequate micronutrient intake on a sub 3000 calorie diet. This is where the calorie in/out idea falls down. If you undereat you are going to tank your metabolism and also have some deficiency problems. Not only are we made to be walking around getting exercise for much of the day, it is critically important to realize we are made to be doing it outside. Sun light exposure is a huge deal for health. People who spend time outside live longer. Just light exposure on its own boosts metabolism.
  - victorhooi 12y ago
    Yes, but we probably aren't half as active as those medieval people... I agree with you about the activity though. It's like you go to rural China, and you see the farmers eating tonnes of rice and vegetables. And I'm sure the low-carbohydrate crowd is going "OH NO! You'll get fat!!". Well, no, they're farmers, and they work damn hard outside all day. Or the fact that professional swimmers down 20,000 calories a day - well, yes, if you're in the pool 6 hours a day and doing weights out of it. You're still going to look like Thor...
- blisterpeanuts 12y ago
  There is evidence of a "hunger gene" or "starvation gene" that tells us to gorge when we can, because there may be no food for a week. It seems to be more strongly expressed in some groups than in others, for example some of the native Americans who have huge obesity problems in the modern era, apparently because their systems don't know how to handle so many white carbohydrates e.g. sugar. The "thrifty gene" hypothesis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrifty_gene_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrifty_gene_hypothesis For them, it seems that meats, vegetables, fruits and native whole grains probably should be the majority of their diet, and adding sugars, processed grains, and toxins like alcohol have been disastrous.
k-mcgrady 12y ago
>> "Most cavemen didn't live to see 40" I agree with you that the caveman parable is silly but you are also drawing a false conclusion. It probably wasn't a caveman's diet that caused him to die young.
- dirktheman 12y ago
  You're right, but the 'eat like a caveman to stay healthy like a caveman' is exactly what paleo-proponents use for argument. What I meant was that you can't draw any 1:1 conclusions to the diet-to-health relation of cavemen compared to our diet-health relation. As always, people find it hard to understand that correlation is not the same as causation.

Dewie 12y ago

> Most cavemen didn't live to see 40, Didn't they? Is that based on the median age, or the average? Because the average age tends to be skewed by infant mortality. > , and there's the little thing called evolution, too. The central argument is that our bodies haven't changed significantly in the time between "cavemen" and present day. So evolution is central to the argument of its usefulness. Whether it is correct that the evolutionary forces is relatively insignificant is, perhaps, up for debate.

monochr 12y ago

This thread is incredibly depressing. All the people complaining about this diet being a fad are just regurgitating the fads from their childhood as facts. Vegetables and fresh fruit needn't form anywhere near a majority of a diet for you to be healthy, there are enough traditional societies for this. The problem for the modern diet is that we have the appetites of an animal that should burn about ~4000 calories a day yet only expend around ~3000 on average. Now if you want to be healthy as well as skinny instead of lowering your calorie intake you're much better off increasing your exercise.

a8da6b0c91d 12y ago
Reconstructions of what medieval people ate indicate they were often downing over 4500 calories a day. And their food was probably a lot more nutrient dense than ours in terms of minerals and vitamins. I think with typical modern foods it is somewhat difficult to get adequate micronutrient intake on a sub 3000 calorie diet. This is where the calorie in/out idea falls down. If you undereat you are going to tank your metabolism and also have some deficiency problems. Not only are we made to be walking around getting exercise for much of the day, it is critically important to realize we are made to be doing it outside. Sun light exposure is a huge deal for health. People who spend time outside live longer. Just light exposure on its own boosts metabolism.
- victorhooi 12y ago
  Yes, but we probably aren't half as active as those medieval people... I agree with you about the activity though. It's like you go to rural China, and you see the farmers eating tonnes of rice and vegetables. And I'm sure the low-carbohydrate crowd is going "OH NO! You'll get fat!!". Well, no, they're farmers, and they work damn hard outside all day. Or the fact that professional swimmers down 20,000 calories a day - well, yes, if you're in the pool 6 hours a day and doing weights out of it. You're still going to look like Thor...
blisterpeanuts 12y ago
There is evidence of a "hunger gene" or "starvation gene" that tells us to gorge when we can, because there may be no food for a week. It seems to be more strongly expressed in some groups than in others, for example some of the native Americans who have huge obesity problems in the modern era, apparently because their systems don't know how to handle so many white carbohydrates e.g. sugar. The "thrifty gene" hypothesis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrifty_gene_hypothesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrifty_gene_hypothesis For them, it seems that meats, vegetables, fruits and native whole grains probably should be the majority of their diet, and adding sugars, processed grains, and toxins like alcohol have been disastrous.

k-mcgrady 12y ago

>> "Most cavemen didn't live to see 40" I agree with you that the caveman parable is silly but you are also drawing a false conclusion. It probably wasn't a caveman's diet that caused him to die young.

dirktheman 12y ago
You're right, but the 'eat like a caveman to stay healthy like a caveman' is exactly what paleo-proponents use for argument. What I meant was that you can't draw any 1:1 conclusions to the diet-to-health relation of cavemen compared to our diet-health relation. As always, people find it hard to understand that correlation is not the same as causation.