Is it a fad? An interesting interview by Ben Domenech:
…the existing food movement that sprang up around organic food was largely driven by, particularly in the early years, the vegetarian world and the plant-based diet world, with a good bit of progressive ideology. And so that is alienating to a lot of people who might want to be healthier, who do care about where their food comes from. We saw the same thing happen in the environmental movement. You’ve got scores of hunters who care deeply about conservation and practice it in their own lives, and but due to differences in culture hunters have largely been excluded from the environmental movement.
I think there was a latent demand for an alternative approach to healthy eating and healthy living that wasn’t, that didn’t require you to buy in to all this other ideology. Because basically until paleo, until this general evolutionary approach came along, the only options were, you can be a sort of like a hippie vegan progressive, or you can eat tons of McDonalds and become obese and proudly tout that you don’t care where your food comes from, or you can go on some fad diet. And those aren’t actually very good options for a lot of people.
So, first I just think there was latent demand for it. And then there there’s definitely something to the fact that paleo doesn’t look down on eating meat and that definitely appeals to a slightly more masculine group of folks. The latest surveys have shown that paleo is actually split about 50/50 between men and women, but that’s far more men relative to all other dietary movements, which tend to be 70, 80% women. So, people will say it’s all macho, all these men are into it. It’s actually about 50/50, but it just feels a little bit more masculine relative to everything else.
It really has taken off more among libertarians than the general population, I think.
Apart from the results, I think it has taken off because it is supported by biochemistry as opposed to epidemiological evidence from which one cannot infer causality.
Evolution cannot act to adapt individuals to diet or lifestyle changes beyond the age of child bearing (or, perhaps, rearing children to adulthood). If you’re older than that, you have no genetic adaptation to a diet adopted very recently, so it’s wise to avoid such innovations.
Ever since I started writing about Paleo, I’ve invited people to contribute horror stories about their disastrous attempts to adopt it. So far: hundreds of reports of success and not a single thumbs down.
Whoa! I just started a beginner’s evening course in AutoCAD. 🙂 Nice to meet you!
About a month ago I had my annual checkup and the blood test showed my total cholesterol and triglycerides were a little high. I was told to come back in three months to be retested.
Although I haven’t actually studied the paleo diet in detail, I’m trying to cut down on carbs while not worrying about animal fat. For instance, my usual workday breakfast was a Sausage McMuffin, hash browns, and apple juice from McDonald’s. I’ve cut out the hash browns and substituted coffee for the apple juice. I suppose I should throw away the muffin, too, but I haven’t done that.
I’m substituting salads for sandwiches a couple of days per week, with regular dressing, not low fat. I’m trying to cut down on rice and mashed potatoes as side dishes with dinner, but that’s hard to do as I really like them. I do make my mashed potatoes with butter and half-and-half, so there’s that.
Hah. I started reading the article as I was cooking dinner tonight – ground beef stir fried with cubes of sour pickles, tossed with Sriracha (rooster sauce). I cracked up when I got to the last response in the interview. I think I’ll get the book.
I’m down to 218 from 246 in February; spending less money overall because I don’t eat out; my last physical was very good indeed… admittedly there’s a tiny snob factor but mostly it’s results. There’s very little you can say about a diet’s political or social standing that isn’t eclipsed by losing almost 30 pounds (and counting!) and keeping it off.
This guy has a chapter in which he makes some good points (or at least they sounded good to me) contra the Paleo Diet.
http://www.amazon.com/Beef-Meat-Healthiest-Plant-Strong-Diet–Plus/dp/1455509361/ref=la_B001UEU4C4_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1381615695&sr=1-2
FWIW I was fine with the Atkins diet until my kidney and joint problems started. I did drink a lot of water as advised but it is a problem eating all that protein even if does improve your overall health. My liver and blood cholesterol levels improved when under the diet. At least the Paleo diet does not force you to eat just meat. You only need to refrain and eat hunter-gatherer food. i.e. anything which can be eaten raw, roasted or cooked is fine. What you cannot do is to eat fried, milled, polished, etc foods. In theory you should not drink milk or eat beans either.
Personally I think these diets are more general indicators of possible directions than anything. Following them too closely is IMO a waste of time. e.g. if you are not allergic to milk why not drink it? The only problem is the lactose everything else in cow’s milk is perfectly fine for human consumption.
It still sounds like a fad diet; it’s a fad diet intended to appeal to a different demographic.
Paleontologist Dr. Alan Walker, of Johns Hopkins University, led a comprehensive study on the teeth markings on humanoid fossils. A NY Times article reported his conclusions: “Every tooth of the hominids of the 12 million year period leading up to Homo Erectus appeared to be that of a fruit eater.” So meat eating probably played a very small role in human development. The diets of our closest primate relatives of today may include small amounts of meat and insects, but they probably account for no more than 1-3% of calorie intake. In the last 75 years, animal product consumption in Western society has zoomed to unprecedented levels, and now provides about 30% of our calories. Which would seem to explain why nearly all Americans have cardiovascular disease. Carnivores and genuine omnivores can eat all the animal fat and cholesterol they want without requiring bypass surgery. Not so true for humans…
No matter what advancements we make in nutritional science, we will always have people who remain in the stone age.
Paleontologist Dr. Alan Walker, of Johns Hopkins University, led a comprehensive study on the teeth markings on humanoid fossils. A NY Times article reported his conclusions: “Every tooth of the hominids of the 12 million year period leading up to Homo Erectus appeared to be that of a fruit eater.” So meat eating probably played a very small role in human development.
The last sentence doesn’t follow from what came before. Meat eating has been very important in recent (for the last hundred thousand years or so) development, which is all that matters. Our dentition is that of an omnivore, not a fruit eater (hint, check out those canines and incisors for tearing meat).
Carnivores and genuine omnivores can eat all the animal fat and cholesterol they want without requiring bypass surgery. Not so true for humans…
Bypass surgery has absolutely nothing to so with eating animal fats and cholesterol. Eating fat doesn’t make you fat, and eating cholesterol doesn’t raise your cholesterol. You are not what you eat. To think you are is primitive thinking. The actual biochemistry and real science indicates otherwise.
Well jc the interesting thing is that Man starts to be clearly split from Ape with Homo Erectus. Which did eat meat. Plus we had the concept of tools and learned how to use fire for cooking.