4 ms·

The point is that even the guidelines are murky, and that it isn't clear what foods our "evolutionary past" intended us to eat. The best that the evidence seems

by jljljl 12y ago

The point is that even the guidelines are murky, and that it isn't clear what foods our "evolutionary past" intended us to eat. The best that the evidence seems to suggest is that diets varied widely in early humans. So basing your diet, even loosely, off a false or unclear understanding of the diets of early hunter gatherers, is probably a worse strategy than following more contemporary research on the health benefits of different dietary strategies.

scythe 12y ago
>is probably a worse strategy than following more contemporary research on the health benefits of different dietary strategies. You've implicitly assumed that the strategy is not also informed by contemporary research, but the particular framework being criticized, that of Mark Sisson, makes extensive reference to contemporary research. In fact, a reader of Mark's Daily Apple is probably linked to more peer-reviewed articles than a reader of, say, Scientific American. Consider e.g.: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resistant-starch/#axzz38uSWlbfX http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resis...
- jljljl 12y ago
  I'm not attacking Sisson's framework. I haven't read much of his stuff, but the Primal Blueprint does seem to base a lot of its information off of assumptions about what Paleolithic hunter gatherers are supposed to have eaten. The article above makes a pretty good case for why building your diet from this foundation may not be the most reliable framework. If Sisson is using the latest scientific research to develop his system, then fine. But this is hardly a "Paleolithic" diet then. Why not just say "Avoid processed foods because they have been shown in numerous studies to have negative effects?"
marcus_holmes 12y ago
I have tried three different strategies so far (dealing with type 2 diabetes gets you to try new things): - Hacker's diet calorie control - The recommended "dealing with diabetes" diet from the nutritionist based around the standard food pyramid (plenty of fruit and veg, less fats) - The paleo diet. Well, something like it. No dairy or bread, avoid sugars, eat as much meat, nuts, green veg and fat as I like. I've easily had the best results with the least effort from the paleo diet. My blood sugar is down, I've lost weight and gained muscle, and feel fitter and more flexible. It's not "Science", but I believe evidence drawn from experimentation trumps "studies" that can't be replicated, don't publish their negative results, and munge their data before publishing.
- jljljl 12y ago
  Results from one person experimenting cannot trump studies, or even natural experiments that look at a wide cross section of individuals, at least not in terms of applicability to the wider population. That said, I'm glad you found something that works well for you, and that provides such positive results
  - merrua 12y ago
    Depends on if you want to experiment to tweak for you, or learn something about humanity. I'm thinking of seed selection in your own garden/farm compared to seed research.

by jljljl 12y ago

scythe 12y ago

>is probably a worse strategy than following more contemporary research on the health benefits of different dietary strategies. You've implicitly assumed that the strategy is not also informed by contemporary research, but the particular framework being criticized, that of Mark Sisson, makes extensive reference to contemporary research. In fact, a reader of Mark's Daily Apple is probably linked to more peer-reviewed articles than a reader of, say, Scientific American. Consider e.g.: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resistant-starch/#axzz38uSWlbfX http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resis...

jljljl 12y ago
I'm not attacking Sisson's framework. I haven't read much of his stuff, but the Primal Blueprint does seem to base a lot of its information off of assumptions about what Paleolithic hunter gatherers are supposed to have eaten. The article above makes a pretty good case for why building your diet from this foundation may not be the most reliable framework. If Sisson is using the latest scientific research to develop his system, then fine. But this is hardly a "Paleolithic" diet then. Why not just say "Avoid processed foods because they have been shown in numerous studies to have negative effects?"

marcus_holmes 12y ago

I have tried three different strategies so far (dealing with type 2 diabetes gets you to try new things): - Hacker's diet calorie control - The recommended "dealing with diabetes" diet from the nutritionist based around the standard food pyramid (plenty of fruit and veg, less fats) - The paleo diet. Well, something like it. No dairy or bread, avoid sugars, eat as much meat, nuts, green veg and fat as I like. I've easily had the best results with the least effort from the paleo diet. My blood sugar is down, I've lost weight and gained muscle, and feel fitter and more flexible. It's not "Science", but I believe evidence drawn from experimentation trumps "studies" that can't be replicated, don't publish their negative results, and munge their data before publishing.

jljljl 12y ago
Results from one person experimenting cannot trump studies, or even natural experiments that look at a wide cross section of individuals, at least not in terms of applicability to the wider population. That said, I'm glad you found something that works well for you, and that provides such positive results
- merrua 12y ago
  Depends on if you want to experiment to tweak for you, or learn something about humanity. I'm thinking of seed selection in your own garden/farm compared to seed research.