Question Of The Day #14

michaelnatkin

What’s your opinion of the paleo craze—is it a passing fad, or a smart set of parameters to eating healthier?

Find more posts tagged with

QOTD

Comments

Brendan_Lee_56950

So let me put my psychology professor hat on for a second.

The problem with crazes like paleo or the mediterranean diet or any other fancy named crazes is that it becomes only about the name and not about the principles. We see this all the time with individuals diagnosed with serious mental illness, they start to lose their identity and are just labels and often times it makes them worse.

So paleo for example, has become a household name, but the average person doesn't really understand what it is and why you should consider doing it. They just know the name and what it evokes, namely eating like a caveman. Without an intimate knowledge of the process and science behind the diet people are ending up with gout (3 of my friends who have tried the diet have thus far) and other health complications because they take it to the extreme. They aren't doing it on purpose, in fact they think they are doing a great job at adhering to the diet, but since the diet is reduced to a name and not a process there is very little learning going on.

/class dismissed.

michaelnatkin

I'm definitely in the "wide variety of foods in moderation" camp, so anything like strict paleo doesn't appeal to me. One interesting issue I heard raised in a podcast the other day is that the paleolithic diet was optimized for reproduction, not necessarily longevity or even health, so copying it might be a poor idea from that point of view. All of that said, I do recognize that going too heavy on the carbs, especially white carbs, isn't good for you, and I've been looking for ways to adjust that a bit.

robmcquarrie

It's mostly nonsense. Only diet more annoying to me is quack naturopaths and chiros telling people not to eat gluten.

Matthew_Snyder_68770

Paleo - as with any other fad diet - is stupid.

I refuse to take a paleo dieter seriously unless they are hunting mammoths and foraging their own wild beets, and living in a hovel. If you're going to advocate a diet because that's how cavemen ate, then own it. Don't puss out at the food, go all in an really put your money where your loincloth is.

Tim_Sutherland_52834

The paleo craze has some good points, mainly cutting out processed food. Most of the rest of the diet is junk though. Christina Warinner's TED talk is a good one to listen to.

Most of the people shown that have lost a great deal of weight on the diet have also been doing elite athlete level exercise at the same time. It wouldn't matter what they ate they would lose weight.

The average person that jumps on the de jour diet wants to lose weight. The intentions are good at the start, but they quickly fall off the wagon when they realise it is hard work, both with the exercise required and the restriction of food. Replacing the same amount of crappy cheap processed food with expensive gluten free, organic, free range, foraged by hand at 3am by naked nymphs, seasoned with the tears of endangered dolphins, local, artisanal, non-GMO, processed food will not make you any better off. I have had people tell me that want to follow a paleo diet, when I ask them what region of the world, the northern arctic, plains of Africa, or Pacific islands I get weird looks. When I am told they would like more meat like the cave man had, they get shocked when brains, liver, kidney, bone marrow, and fat turn up on the plate. By more meat they meant skinless boneless chicken breasts and super lean beef (cooked well done).

Most people that jump of the current fad are after a silver bullet that will make them better. It ain't going to happen. The only thing you have done with replacing soda with OJ, is changed carbonated sugar water into uncarbonated sugar water - they both have the same amount of sugar (~23-26g per 245g serving - the USDA National Nutrient Database is a frightening place to visit at times.)

A diet is more than the food you shovel into your mouth. A diet is a lifestyle. It is what you eat, when you eat, who you eat with, what exercise you do, and your attitude to food (fuel vs social interaction).

Jess_Voelker_90708

I'd never followed any sort of strict diet but I have benefitted from Paleo's popularity in that I've gotten some great ideas for making meals that don't include carbs or dairy. I could live on bread and cheese alone and be happy, but—as Michael touched on—that's not really a great idea from a health point of view. So I like the creative preparations that I steal from Paleo people.

tshewman

The Paleo principles are good on paper, however, are somewhat limiting and assume a "one size fits all" approach. I suspect in large part to keep things simple, however, the emerging evidence leans toward an individualized diet approach for those in need. Their stance behind limiting higher glycemic foods (grains) and some grain proteins (e.g. gluten) is supported by the physiology, but may also stimulate over-reaction from a public perspective (tell people that they can't eat wheat and how the wheat has changed and some don't take that too kindly). They appear to promote eating non-gmo foods and presumably reducing insecticide ingestion is part of the reason and is supported by the evidence. They seem to limit both fructose intake and high glycemic foods (which physiologically is better for the body as fructose is taken on by the liver not glucose-which is why High Fructose Corn syrup is not a good thing-insulin goes up to look after the sugar in the bl while the liver does its job). So, some core "eat good foods and limit processed foods" is a good message (IMHO), however imo Paleo is not suited for everyone. Some may tolerate it, some may not (there's actually pretty elaborate tests now that help to look at the various metabolic pathways) as it might leave some nutrient deficient (and others not). I suspect extremes would be the important thing to avoid (as with any diet approach).

lfmichaud

One of these stupid fad diet that is mostly based on an Hollywood version of cavemen. I don't see many of these diet recommending a lot of insects, grass and plant roots. And all of the fruits, vegetables and animals are quite far from what was they were a million year ago. Finally most of the hominid species that ate that diet went extinct...

Brandon_Byrd_40557

I don't know where you're coming from here. If you follow paleo dietary restrictions and focus on keeping your carb intake low, weight loss is virtually guaranteed (as it is on any ketogenic diet). No elite athlete level training necessary.

Organ meats like liver, kidney, bones/marrow, and fat are all championed by leaders in the paleo/primal movement because of their nutrient density. (Brains less so, but that's largely because of concerns with mad cow.) If purportedly paleo people freak out when organs end up on the plate, they probably aren't really paleo people.

The remark about replacing soda with OJ totally misses the mark; the paleo diet excludes both.

And you're right that a diet is more than the food you shovel into your mouth. Which is why many in the paleo/primal community advocate an entire lifestyle in addition to the diet.

Brandon_Byrd_40557

Ironically, paleo is what ended up getting me into modernist cooking. While I was doing some research on how to make better bone broth, I came across a discussion of why Heston Bluemnthal loves pressure cookers for making stock. The rest, as they say, is history.

Paleo takes a lot of flack because many people (even some who claim to be paleo) don't really understand what it entails. To some extent, this is because there is no such thing as _the_ paleo diet, but rather a group of different guidelines designed by various people that are united by a family resemblance. Compare, for instance, Loren Cordain's "official" version of The Paleo Diet (which advocates lean protein, limited fat consumption, and the elimination of dairy) with Mark Sisson's Primal diet (which allows dairy [if you tolerate it well as an individual] and is fat-friendly [provided that it is from the right sources]). Though they may differ in some specific recommendations, they're united by the fact that they suggest consuming nutrient-dense whole plant and animal foods while limiting consumption of grains, sugars, and heavily processed oils. And generally speaking, I think that's a great recommendation. Wheat, soy, and corn are not especially healthy foods yet they're the basis of the standard American diet. When combined with sugar and highly refined seed oils, you've got a recipe for obesity, diabetes, inflammation, and auto-immune disorders (which were much less prevalent 100 years ago than they are today).

There are some "paleo" people who basically treat the diet as a version of Atkins and use it as an excuse to eat 10 pounds of bacon a day. Some even go so far as to try to be carnivorous (which is not advocated by any serious figure in the paleo community). These people are morons. If you're really following the guidelines, you'll end up eating a boatload of vegetables. I used to joke that I ate more vegetables than most of the vegetarians I knew (which was true at the time).

Many of the criticisms directed at paleo are ill informed and focus too much attention on the name of the diet rather than the substantive content of the diet and its rationale. "You don't eat mammoth? You don't eat worms? You eat produce that wasn't available 10000 years ago? Then you're not really paleo! LOLZ!" Historical reenactment is not and never has been the point of paleo. The particulars of hunter gatherer diets aren't what matter, but rather the more abstract issue of how much of our food energy comes from animal and plant sources (and how much energy comes from protein, fat, and carbohydrates).

For people who are really into paleo, it's not a diet so much as a lifestyle. It's not a temporary thing that they do to lose weight before they go back to scarfing down Big Macs like they used to. The reason it's not a fad diet is that, unlike most other "diets," you get to eat delicious food that is deeply satisfying. Go check out a paleo cookbook such as Nom Nom Paleo by Michele Tam or Well Fed by Melissa Joulwan (and imagine that you're not the type of person who enjoys recreating dishes from The Fat Duck and Alinea in your home kitchen). The food is pretty killer -- it's stuff you actually want to eat. Eating well doesn't mean that you have to sacrifice pleasure (as Michael Natkin well knows!). The point of the diet isn't temporary weight loss, but long-term health through food that satisfies. And that's something I can definitely get behind.

I don't really adhere to paleo/primal dietary restrictions anymore, but when I did, I effortlessly lost 35 pounds over six months. Eliminating foods that spike blood sugar also had the side effect that my mood was much more even over the course of the day, and I never became intensely hungry when I hadn't eaten in a while. (Which is to say, I never became hangry.) I felt better at that point -- both physically and mentally -- than I ever had before. And I think paleo deserves most of the credit.

Johan_Edstrom_5586

Meh.

Manfred_18311

The plain core and foundation of any diet is, whether followed the low carb or low fat diet, you have to change your life style and submit it permanently to the chosen diet, otherwise your back quite fast. True, weights regain occurs faster on the low fat diet but for both, if the diet is interrupted, weight regains are inevitable.

The point is, paleo diet offers not much more than the great many other low carb diets of the past with the exemption if taken to extreme its followers expose them to a higher risk of stroke, ASVD and a heart attack. A proper amount of exercise or even higher sportive activities are a must to go along with any diet based life style to prevent uniliteral extremes, a diet alone, any of them, cannot compensate for the lack of muscular cell oxygen saturation.

The number of people desperately looking for a way to lose weight is rising and quick to fall prey to the “le denier cri” in diets even if anything of fact was said long time ago. Selling diets (any) is one of the most lucrative businesses around, If it’s resulting in a considerable healthier life style, ok, but if you take the avenue of food/ cooking and food science in depth, you will come to all the same results without coating yourself in a life style ideology. All promoted diets have some sort of cult wavering around them and paleo is not an exeption from it.

So QOTD#14.1: Can diets worth it at all, or is it all in and about the gens? Can diets produce everlasting results without harming the body sytem from another side?

Brandon_Byrd_40557

A lot of the focus here is on paleo as a weight-loss plan, which I think is misguided. Sure, there are a lot of people who adopt it for weight loss purposes, but there are just as many (if not more) who eat paleo for other reasons. And it's not even necessarily low carb, depending on your goals, activity level and nutritional needs (though it's going to be lower carb than the typical Western diet).

"Paleo diet offers not much more than the great many other low carb diets of the past with the exemption if taken to extreme its followers expose them to a higher risk of stroke, ASVD and a heart attack. "

I don't agree with this at all. Unlike other low carb diets, paleo emphasizes the consumption of high quality, nutrient-dense foods including a wide variety of vegetables, which makes it nutritionally superior to Atkins (and their garbage pre-packaged foods). It also has an anti-inflammatory focus and limits the lipids one consumes to those that have a balanced combination of omega 3/6. This typically results in improved blood lipid profile, which is associated with a reduction of risk of stroke, atherosclerosis, and heart attack.

I do agree with you that diets do tend to have cults around them (including paleo) but I think that's more a fault with human psychology than it is with dietary systems per se. It's no accident that religions all include norms governing what sorts of food can be consumed and which ones are forbidden. But I think the sensible position - for paleo, at least - is Mark Sisson's view that you should strive for an 80/20 balance of pure paleo foods to other sorts of foods that you might enjoy (unless you're really trying to lose weight). His view (more or less) is that paleo provides a set of principles by which you can guide your eating choices, and that it's not a set of commandments that you can't ever break under any circumstances. It's supposed to be a benefit, not a hindrance, to enjoying life and living well.

michaelnatkin

Great explanation, Brandon!