We don't know what constitutes a true paleo diet!
Replies
-
Excepting of course those who emigrated to North and South America during the upper paleolithic period. Scientist.Any "paleo dieter" who consumes blueberries, tomatoes, potatoes, cashews, brazil nuts, bison, turkey, chocolate, sunflower seeds, avocados is also a fraud! No paleolithic person had access to these delicious New World crops/foods.0 -
Up the ante and go Tru-Paleo(r)
You have to carry a 20 sided Die with you. Come mealtime, you roll .. if you roll a 16 or above, you can eat. 1-15 .. better luck next time.
This is a brilliant idea. The Gamer's Diet. Roleplay is for the kitchen, too!
But the IF peeps would think we were stealing their idea and just making it more fun and exciting.0 -
Up the ante and go Tru-Paleo(r)
You have to carry a 20 sided Die with you. Come mealtime, you roll .. if you roll a 16 or above, you can eat. 1-15 .. better luck next time.
This is a brilliant idea. The Gamer's Diet. Roleplay is for the kitchen, too!
But the IF peeps would think we were stealing their idea and just making it more fun and exciting.
There are no new ideas.
Sabotage could be giving your spouse a weighted dice.0 -
Excepting of course those who emigrated to North and South America during the upper paleolithic period. Scientist.Any "paleo dieter" who consumes blueberries, tomatoes, potatoes, cashews, brazil nuts, bison, turkey, chocolate, sunflower seeds, avocados is also a fraud! No paleolithic person had access to these delicious New World crops/foods.
0 -
True "paleo" diet?
Hmm.
Well, how about the Iceman- 5,000 years old?
His stomach was stuffed with fatty goat meat. Some extra stuff too, but mainly goat meat.
He was probably just on his way home from GoatFest ...0 -
Excepting of course those who emigrated to North and South America during the upper paleolithic period. Scientist.Any "paleo dieter" who consumes blueberries, tomatoes, potatoes, cashews, brazil nuts, bison, turkey, chocolate, sunflower seeds, avocados is also a fraud! No paleolithic person had access to these delicious New World crops/foods.
Matthew and Mary FTW0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
Since when did laughter equate to bitterness? It sounds like someone kidnapped your sense of humor.
I laugh when I see "organic" labels, and if they start labeling pre-packaged foods as "primal" or "paleo," that would be even more hilarious. Find a sense of humor and use it.
snort
Hey guys, glad you could join the party - but where's Johnny?
Don't tell me he's let you lot out on your own. ????✋0 -
In for religious zealot butthurt from both sides.
Yeah, day is pretty much incomplete without it...
0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
Since when did laughter equate to bitterness? It sounds like someone kidnapped your sense of humor.
I laugh when I see "organic" labels, and if they start labeling pre-packaged foods as "primal" or "paleo," that would be even more hilarious. Find a sense of humor and use it.
snort
And there we have it.......
That is hilarious!0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
Since when did laughter equate to bitterness? It sounds like someone kidnapped your sense of humor.
I laugh when I see "organic" labels, and if they start labeling pre-packaged foods as "primal" or "paleo," that would be even more hilarious. Find a sense of humor and use it.
snort
Hey guys, glad you could join the party - but where's Johnny?
Don't tell me he's let you lot out on your own. ????✋
I'm keeping him busy in the clean eating thread :laugh:0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
Since when did laughter equate to bitterness? It sounds like someone kidnapped your sense of humor.
I laugh when I see "organic" labels, and if they start labeling pre-packaged foods as "primal" or "paleo," that would be even more hilarious. Find a sense of humor and use it.
Hey Wendy,
I bet they love you in the audience at the comedy store!!!!
You probably could save a few comedians careers!:laugh:
I laugh very easily. I feel bad for people who take everything so seriously. Stress kills.0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
I'll tell you what you do......... you spread a whole bunch of misinformation about palaeoanthropology and palaeolithic people....
not bitter, but it's annoying. And it's also sad that so many people know so little about their evolutionary origins... it's bad enough the creationists spreading so much misinformation, paleo diet promoters just add to all the confusion out there.... and it's only the truth about our origins, most people wouldn't be happy going through life believing that a stork brought them to their parents' doorstep, so why are people satisfied in believing they're descended from "cavemen" who clubbed people over the head and spoke in grunts and (add stupid stereotypes here).... there are some paleo diet articles on the internet that honestly looks like the person writing it got their info from watching The Flintstones.... and even the better ones their ideas about "cavemen" (WTF is a "caveman"?) are about a century out of date....
look up the word analogy. note it does not mean literal.
nothing that "paleo" dieters eat is even analogous to actual palaeolithic diets, and none of your misconceptions about palaeolithic people are analogies for anything either, so I don't see what your point is....
ETA: you can''t make your ignorance acceptable by trying to claim it's an analogy0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
Since when did laughter equate to bitterness? It sounds like someone kidnapped your sense of humor.
I laugh when I see "organic" labels, and if they start labeling pre-packaged foods as "primal" or "paleo," that would be even more hilarious. Find a sense of humor and use it.
snort
And there we have it.......
That is hilarious!
Wendy, you find everything hilarious!0 -
True "paleo" diet?
Hmm.
Well, how about the Iceman- 5,000 years old?
His stomach was stuffed with fatty goat meat. Some extra stuff too, but mainly goat meat.
he was chalcolithic, not palaeolithic. and the neolithic came before the chalcolithic0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
Since when did laughter equate to bitterness? It sounds like someone kidnapped your sense of humor.
I laugh when I see "organic" labels, and if they start labeling pre-packaged foods as "primal" or "paleo," that would be even more hilarious. Find a sense of humor and use it.
snort
Hey guys, glad you could join the party - but where's Johnny?
Don't tell me he's let you lot out on your own. ????✋
I'm keeping him busy in the clean eating thread :laugh:
Lol????0 -
Up the ante and go Tru-Paleo(r)
You have to carry a 20 sided Die with you. Come mealtime, you roll .. if you roll a 16 or above, you can eat. 1-15 .. better luck next time.
if you want to live action roleplay palaeolithic hunting: http://cavepeopleandstuff.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/palaeolithic-workouts/0 -
What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.0 -
Up the ante and go Tru-Paleo(r)
You have to carry a 20 sided Die with you. Come mealtime, you roll .. if you roll a 16 or above, you can eat. 1-15 .. better luck next time.
if you want to live action roleplay palaeolithic hunting: http://cavepeopleandstuff.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/palaeolithic-workouts/
Live hunting - did they have cameras back then?0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
I'll tell you what you do......... you spread a whole bunch of misinformation about palaeoanthropology and palaeolithic people....
not bitter, but it's annoying. And it's also sad that so many people know so little about their evolutionary origins... it's bad enough the creationists spreading so much misinformation, paleo diet promoters just add to all the confusion out there.... and it's only the truth about our origins, most people wouldn't be happy going through life believing that a stork brought them to their parents' doorstep, so why are people satisfied in believing they're descended from "cavemen" who clubbed people over the head and spoke in grunts and (add stupid stereotypes here).... there are some paleo diet articles on the internet that honestly looks like the person writing it got their info from watching The Flintstones.... and even the better ones their ideas about "cavemen" (WTF is a "caveman"?) are about a century out of date....
look up the word analogy. note it does not mean literal.
nothing that "paleo" dieters eat is even analogous to actual palaeolithic diets, and none of your misconceptions about palaeolithic people are analogies for anything either, so I don't see what your point is....
ETA: you can''t make your ignorance acceptable by trying to claim it's an analogy
Doesn't arguing semantics get boring?0 -
Up the ante and go Tru-Paleo(r)
You have to carry a 20 sided Die with you. Come mealtime, you roll .. if you roll a 16 or above, you can eat. 1-15 .. better luck next time.
if you want to live action roleplay palaeolithic hunting: http://cavepeopleandstuff.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/palaeolithic-workouts/
Live hunting - did they have cameras back then?
You could always just do a persistence hunt.0 -
What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
So, just want to make sure I understand, you're irritated with the diet because of its incorrect labeling premise? Do you have anything to comment on as to the diet itself?
Maybe, it's just me, but rhetoric bores me.0 -
What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
Your first comment is a bit confusing. I think the article states quite clearly that as a human race we've evolved to eat pretty much anything that moves.
Have a re-read????0 -
What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
So, just want to make sure I understand, you're irritated with the diet because of its incorrect labeling premise? Do you have anything to comment on as to the diet itself?
Maybe, it's just me, but rhetoric bores me.
i don't think anyone cares that you are bored.
the universe does not revolve around you.0 -
Honestly, I'm looking forward to the day when marketers begin labeling their packaging as "paleo/primal" like they did with organic and gluten-free.
I will laugh and laugh... :laugh:
why so bitter about the world? what'd paleo/primal eaters ever do to you? sounds like they kidnapped your parents or something the way you talk about them. lol
live and let live babycakes.
I'll tell you what you do......... you spread a whole bunch of misinformation about palaeoanthropology and palaeolithic people....
not bitter, but it's annoying. And it's also sad that so many people know so little about their evolutionary origins... it's bad enough the creationists spreading so much misinformation, paleo diet promoters just add to all the confusion out there.... and it's only the truth about our origins, most people wouldn't be happy going through life believing that a stork brought them to their parents' doorstep, so why are people satisfied in believing they're descended from "cavemen" who clubbed people over the head and spoke in grunts and (add stupid stereotypes here).... there are some paleo diet articles on the internet that honestly looks like the person writing it got their info from watching The Flintstones.... and even the better ones their ideas about "cavemen" (WTF is a "caveman"?) are about a century out of date....
look up the word analogy. note it does not mean literal.
nothing that "paleo" dieters eat is even analogous to actual palaeolithic diets, and none of your misconceptions about palaeolithic people are analogies for anything either, so I don't see what your point is....
ETA: you can''t make your ignorance acceptable by trying to claim it's an analogy
Doesn't arguing semantics get boring?
It's not semantics.
I've never seen an artcile or book on the "paleo" diet written by anyone who has accurate, up to date knowledge of palaeoanthropology. the better articles, their info is way out of date. Like decades out of date. The worst ones they don't seem to even be aware that humans didn't co-exist with dinosaurs and whose ideas of "cavemen" seem to come from cartoons.
Why follow a diet that claims to be something, when the people who are making the diet up know nothing about the something that it's claimed to be?0 -
"There has never been a traditionally vegetarian culture"
*looks an India*
You sure about that?0 -
What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
So, just want to make sure I understand, you're irritated with the diet because of its incorrect labeling premise? Do you have anything to comment on as to the diet itself?
Maybe, it's just me, but rhetoric bores me.
No. Pseudoscience irritates me.
As to the diet, eat what you want. I'm sure it isn't unhealthy, when done well (but then "done well" can be applied to any diet). But I do think Paleo is unsustainable for most people and not *required* for good health.
And if rhetoric bores you, what are you doing on a discussion board?0 -
What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
So, just want to make sure I understand, you're irritated with the diet because of its incorrect labeling premise? Do you have anything to comment on as to the diet itself?
Maybe, it's just me, but rhetoric bores me.
If you want my opinion on the diet itself, it's unnecessarily restrictive. Nothing wrong with avoiding foods that are actually making you ill, but a lot of people doing paleo are not made ill by those foods and avoiding them has no health benefit for them, but they're scared into avoiding them by people who tell them "cavemen" didn't eat them, even though the people telling them have no idea about anything in palaeoanthropology, never mind what foods cavepeople ate .................. the result is you have people avoiding foods under the mistaken belief that those foods are bad for them, because they've been told palaeolithic people didn't eat them by people who don't have the first idea what palaeolithic people actually ate............................ you don't see a problem there??0 -
See, your thinking logically, and this diet is about a belief, not logic.......basically whatever you say will make no difference whatsoever.What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
So, just want to make sure I understand, you're irritated with the diet because of its incorrect labeling premise? Do you have anything to comment on as to the diet itself?
Maybe, it's just me, but rhetoric bores me.
If you want my opinion on the diet itself, it's unnecessarily restrictive. Nothing wrong with avoiding foods that are actually making you ill, but a lot of people doing paleo are not made ill by those foods and avoiding them has no health benefit for them, but they're scared into avoiding them by people who tell them "cavemen" didn't eat them, even though the people telling them have no idea about anything in palaeoanthropology, never mind what foods cavepeople ate .................. the result is you have people avoiding foods under the mistaken belief that those foods are bad for them, because they've been told palaeolithic people didn't eat them by people who don't have the first idea what palaeolithic people actually ate............................ you don't see a problem there??0 -
Doesn't arguing semantics get boring?
It's not semantics.
I've never seen an artcile or book on the "paleo" diet written by anyone who has accurate, up to date knowledge of palaeoanthropology. the better articles, their info is way out of date. Like decades out of date. The worst ones they don't seem to even be aware that humans didn't co-exist with dinosaurs and whose ideas of "cavemen" seem to come from cartoons.
Why follow a diet that claims to be something, when the people who are making the diet up know nothing about the something that it's claimed to be?
It is semantics. They chose a name that has a pop culture reference to the general diet -- meat, veggies, fruits, seeds, etc. -- like what a "caveman" would eat through a hunter gatherer lifestyle. It's not supposed to be an all inclusive statement on the diet, but just a catch phrase that gets the 50,000 ft view right. Beyond that, you need to look into the diets closer for further details -- why they avoid legumes or love coconut oil. Primal or more permissive Paleo will also include modern day foods that mimic the food profile of those major groups or are beneficial for other reasons (e.g. dairy). "Cavemen" didn't live on just one area of the earth, so there is a good deal of variation.
There are tons of things in the modern world that name such things accordingly. Do you refuse to drive cars that have such inaccurate names? The Murano is an SUV by Nissan named after an island in Italy off of Venice where cars aren't even driven/allowed. How can they expect ANYONE to drive one being named as such?!!!
Isn't that sort of failing to see the forest for the trees?0 -
What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
So, just want to make sure I understand, you're irritated with the diet because of its incorrect labeling premise? Do you have anything to comment on as to the diet itself?
Maybe, it's just me, but rhetoric bores me.
No. Pseudoscience irritates me.
It irritates me too!!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions