Paleo vs. Clean eating?

likitisplit

Maybe we can do a one paragraph summary of what all "The Regulars" think about paleo and just copy/paste it into each new thread?

Lindsey: I had undiagnosed issues for years and going Paleo both solved them and helped my doctors diagnose my issues.

Varda: The health claims are hyperbolic, the argument that we should eat what our ancestors ate doesn't take into account human physiology, evolution or what we know about our ancestors, and it seems unnecessarily restrictive, but it's not fundamentally unhealthy if you aren't using it to demonize food.

Neandermagon: http://cavepeopleandstuff.wordpress.com/tag/paleo-diet-humor/

Holly: Cake and ice cream are not clean or Paleo, and they're delicious. Why would you want to give that up? Oh wait, you don't have to according to clean eaters and Paleo dieters...

LOL. Because they can have them 20% of the time. Which is more than the rest of us would choose to eat them....

ndj1979

is this thread still going???? lolZ....I think I checked out on page four...

ndj1979

Paleo is basically going back to how your ancestors lived, there we're not chocolate bars on store shelves, no Mr Noodles, no Frozen Lasanga.... i have been living Paleo for a month - I chose Paleo because of poor health, lack of energy, no desire to do anything, and my dr couldnt find anything wrong with me.
So, now i am full of energy, i can think straight again, i have lost inches, and am WAY easier to get a long with.
I dont eat anything processed, this includes, BREAD!.
If i want a chocolate treat, i mix some Organic Powedered unsweaten Cocoa, with some honey, and dip some dates in it, or Orange slices or whatever.. NOT COOKIES
I do eat Dairy, so, some would banish me from the Paleo Group.... Greek - 0 Fat - Yogurt... And i put half n half in my coffee.
And yes, i still drink coffee.
For the most part my diet consists of , Fresh washed fruits and vegetables, 100 Meat products, no Frozen pumped full of chemical chicken breasts.
to Sum it up, read the label, if it contains any form of sugar, and any ingredients that are not naturally part of the product, dont eat it!
Email me if you would like more tips, i am going on 6 weeks, and LOVE LOVE LOVE IT!

This is why we mock.

You're not eating clean. You're not eating Paleo or Primal. You're practicing moderation and enjoying processed foods like everyone else.

You tell people you don't eat any processed foods, and then run down a list of all the processed foods you eat. You tell people that if it contains any form of sugar or ingredients not natural to the product they shouldn't eat it, but you drink half and half and eat store brand yogurt.

You can't even follow the diet you claim to be on and you tell others to ask you for tips on how to do it.

You're not Paleo. You're practicing moderation. Congratulations. You aren't really on the fad diet you claim you're on, and that's a good thing.

Do you find mocking and ridicule to be useful interpersonal tool in you life? Do you regularly mock and ridicule people who think or act differently than you do or may be mistaken about something?

This is what I find ironic, and frankly, downright cowardly. I have a hard time imagining so many people doing this in real life. In my experience, if you do this, you'll lose pretty much all credibility in a group of reasonable adults. It makes you sound like a petulant teenager and complete jerk. And that's what is so confusing to me -- do you have any understanding that you delivery undercuts your supposed message? People look like jerks when they stoop to such levels. And either they really are like this in life -- and if so, it must be very, very lonely -- or they only do this on anonymous internet boards (far too common as a general rule) -- and it's cowardly in my opinion.

I don't know HelwithThis, but if somebody told me IRL they followed Paleo and told me they eat all those things, I would laugh. It has nothing to do with being cowardly, mocking, judging, or anything else.

I find the same thing funny when someone tells me they don't eat carbs but run down the list of fruits and vegetables they now eat. Or another person that says they don't eat sugar but they still drink milk and eat fruit. Basically, I just find it interesting that a person wants to give tips on how to follow a diet when they don't even possess the knowledge of the basis premises of the diet.

It is not wrong to judge others' words. If someone says something that is incorrect, I think it is a fair judgement to point out that it is inccorect. Words matter, especially on a forum where advice is constantly requested and given.

You're intentionally obtuse or you're simply just not that bright. I'm not sure which is which.

If someone said he didn't eat carbs and then ate fruits and vegetables then I would assume when they said carbs they meant processed/refined carbs. That seems pretty obvious. Same thing with sugar. If they're still drinking milk and eating fruit but not eating sugar than they mean processed sugar not naturally occurring types of sugar like lactose, fructose etc. C'mon, that's obvious.

If you'd really laugh at someone for that, you not only look like a jerk but would look stupid as well.

complains about mocking..and then resorts to mocking...legit...

lindsey1979

Really? You don't think you would enter the thread trying to defend it, like you always do?

The second part is a matter of opinion which I doubt we will ever see eye to eye.

No, I wouldn't because I realize it would be (1) a waste of time and (2) unlikely to help anyone that really wanted to learn about Paleo/Primal (since people interested in that wouldn't go to a bashing thread). It's really hard for me to believe that some of you are real people.

Holly_Roman_Empire

Really? You don't think you would enter the thread trying to defend it, like you always do?

The second part is a matter of opinion which I doubt we will ever see eye to eye.

No, I wouldn't because I realize it would be (1) a waste of time and (2) unlikely to help anyone that really wanted to learn about Paleo/Primal (since people interested in that wouldn't go to a bashing thread). It's really hard for me to believe that some of you are real people.

This, coming from someone with no profile pic and no profile info.

lindsey1979

Really? You don't think you would enter the thread trying to defend it, like you always do?

The second part is a matter of opinion which I doubt we will ever see eye to eye.

No, I wouldn't because I realize it would be (1) a waste of time and (2) unlikely to help anyone that really wanted to learn about Paleo/Primal (since people interested in that wouldn't go to a bashing thread). It's really hard for me to believe that some of you are real people.

This, coming from someone with no profile pic and no profile info.

Yes, because a profile pic and profile info provide greater legitimacy than the words I choose to express myself. Yes, makes total sense. Logical extension.

Charlottesometimes23

why do people get soo upset when someone mentions Paleo diet!!?? If that's what they wanna do then the more power to them , who are we to judge?? Geesh!!

We don't judge the diet. We judge the imaginary "caveman" philosophical underpinnings and the bogus reasons to avoid commonly eaten staples.

I judge the diet. Caveman aside it makes completely false assertions like legumes are unhealthy. Legumes are not unheatlhy or toxic.

I don't care if people eat legumes or not, and I don't care what diet strangers choose to follow. But I judge the paleo diet to be a pack of lies! Beans are good food!!

You may not agree with the explanation, but there is a basis. That basis has to do with lectins. You may disagree with the ultimate conclusion that lectins are unhealthy, but there is a reasonable basis for the assertion of why they should be avoided.

Can you show me the reasonable basis for avoidance of lectins because there is some pretty good evidence of several benefits of dietary plant lectins.

Anti-tumour properties http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24033443 and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21329660

Enhanced immune response http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8082415

Antiviral and antifungal activity (from kidney bean lectin) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11732688

I just quoted my own post. Is that bad? :blushing:

Anyway, Paleo/Primal sites and books are forever banging on about the danger of lectins and the need to avoid legumes but clearly a lot of this is cherry picked nonsense. If you do a bit of research excluding sites that promote the standard paleo/primal propaganda about lectins, you will see that they can be beneficial, and that other dietary components modulate their effect. The science behind restrictive diets like these is often faulty and although it doesn't matter to me what people eat, I don't like the way the proponents con people with pseudoscience.

likitisplit

Really? You don't think you would enter the thread trying to defend it, like you always do?

The second part is a matter of opinion which I doubt we will ever see eye to eye.

No, I wouldn't because I realize it would be (1) a waste of time and (2) unlikely to help anyone that really wanted to learn about Paleo/Primal (since people interested in that wouldn't go to a bashing thread). It's really hard for me to believe that some of you are real people.

This, coming from someone with no profile pic and no profile info.

She has, however, made a statement that she has a degree from a top research university.

lindsey1979

Really? You don't think you would enter the thread trying to defend it, like you always do?

The second part is a matter of opinion which I doubt we will ever see eye to eye.

No, I wouldn't because I realize it would be (1) a waste of time and (2) unlikely to help anyone that really wanted to learn about Paleo/Primal (since people interested in that wouldn't go to a bashing thread). It's really hard for me to believe that some of you are real people.

This, coming from someone with no profile pic and no profile info.

She has, however, made a statement that she has a degree from a top research university.

In biology nonetheless, though I think we're ranked #4 overall biology but still have the top spot in both chemistry and molecular biology (shared in both I think).

QuietBloom

For the debate of restriction vs. no restriction, I personally find that the decision turns on what the benefits you receive from the restriction -- whether that result makes it worth it to you. If you can achieve the same goal in a different manner, you may opt to ditch the restriction. But if the restriction gives you what you want, you often will stick with it due to that positive feedback loop.

For example, when I went Paleo/Primal, I was shocked by how much better I felt. Just shocked. So, it was easy for me to keep eating that way because I just felt so much better than I did before -- my whole concept of "normal" for me shifted dramatically. And when I go back to eating grains, I go back to feeling poorly. So, that's an easy restriction for me to adopt into a lifestyle.

I now know I have an underlying condition that probably contributed to that or was the sole cause as I have Hashimoto's thyroiditis -- an autoimmune thyroid disorder. Research isn't definitive, but some thyroid specialists believe that gluten or other items in grains set it off -- just as it is suspected to do for other autoimmune disorders like Celiac, certain rheumatoid arthritis, etc.

Are there other things I avoid that maybe I don't need to avoid? Maybe. I started to add back in dairy and found I had no problems with it, so that's when I shifted from stricter Paleo to the more permissive Primal. I don't generally eat legumes, but they aren't generally things I miss. The only exception is peanut butter. But I like almonds, cashews and macadamia nuts just as much if not more, so the substitution is an easy on for me.

I had a similar experience when I started to cut back the carbs, and then later learned I was insulin resistant. And a low carb diet is specifically recommended for that disorder. Again, the diagnosis came long after the diet change (and, man, do I wish I'd known about these issues 10+ years ago -- would have saved me a LOT of grief).

So, my guess for a lot of people that love Paleo/Primal, keto, low carb, etc. lifestyles it's because there is a real reason they react so much better to those diets -- some reasons that they know about, some that they don't and some that they may never know about (i.e. disorders/sensitivities that are too mild for a formal diagnosis or whose symptoms largely clear up with the different diet). After all, I was told for YEARS everything was fine by my doctors. My fiance feels similarly. He doesn't have any issues that we know of but he says he just feels a ton better eating Primally, especially without the grains. He doesn't know what it is specifically that does it -- but the combo works great for him and he saw increases in his sports performance which was the big deal (he comes from some serious genetic freaks in that department).

Others without any sensitivities or underlying conditions try the diets and go "what's the big deal?" because they feel the same on them as they did on their previous diet. So, to those people that have the luck to be able to tolerate different diets rather well, the restriction seems silly, faulty or just plain not worth it.

But, at least for me, I never would have realized that a change in my diet could lead to feeling SO SO much better. And, it is what ultimately pushed me to push my doctors on figuring out what was up with me as for the previous 6-8 years, they told me everything was "fine" when it really wasn't and I'm finally getting the treatment that is needed and on the best diet for my situation. I think you'll find a lot of similar stories on Paleo/Primal websites -- people just feeling much better or having previous issues just clear up or get remarkably better, and they never really know why necessarily.

Here's the thing, Lindsey: you have health issues that are alleviated when you eat this way. It's certainly a good choice for you. I will always think the name "paleo" or "primal" is dumb because its not an accurate name. I describe your diet as "beneficial for Lindsey (or "insert name here") because that's what it REALLY is.

However, OP is intrigued at the thought of different eating styles, yet she doesn't actually have any dietary / health issues ( at least none she disclosed). Most of us are actually saying the same thing you did: it's probably not worth it for her.
In her case, it probably won't be sustainable... It will end up just being a "fad diet". And there's where the discord enters... No one really wants people to suffer through fad diets. Again, even though its not a fad for you, other people wear it like a trendy accessory.

Dame Piglet (great moniker btw) -- the one point of my story that I think you're missing is that I didn't know I had any issues for years. Yes, the later diagnosis definitely connected the dots for me as to why it worked for me. But, before that diagnosis, I just know that I felt a lot better -- that it was the only thing that I'd seen a real definitive difference in fatigue in particular. I don't believe my story is singular in that regard.

From what I know of people that tried the diet, is that an amazing number of them reported things similar to me -- that they felt a LOT better on it, clearer thinking, more energy, digestive issues cleared up or went away, headaches they used to be plagued by vanished or greatly reduced, sleep a lot better, etc. I do believe a lot of these people, like myself, probably have some underlying issue that the diet alleviated. But, like myself, I bet you a lot of them are undiagnosed or are told by their doctors that it's stress (such a common answer for doctors when no "disorder" is readily apparent). Or simply it's a food sensitivity that they were unaware of until they weren't eating it a lot whatever was causing them issues. I certainly had a huge shift in what was "normal" for me.

Accordingly, I believe that's why so many people that have such experiences praise it so highly. In many ways, it did "cure" them. Was is the only "cure"? Maybe, maybe not. Do they feel a lot better on it? Yes. Does that encourage them to continue it? Yes. If it doesn't work, then they simply stop. It's really nothing that rises to the level of "suffering" that you reference. It's meat, eggs, fruits and vegetables, good fats, nuts, dairy (if it works for you) -- at least for the Primal I follow. There are a lot of choices -- very little "suffering" (#firstworldproblems).

So, you can call it a fad all you want, but I've read a lot of the nutritional science behind many of the concepts, and many of them are reasonable from a biological, biochemical and physiological perspective. Definitive, no. Reasonable, yes. Not everyone agrees with the conclusions -- and that's the nature of so much of science.

What I still fail to understand is where people like you or others on this board care about the semantics of the label, the anthropological accuracy (that's not really what a real Caveman ate!), or other peripheral non-sense. It's not a movement that you're a part of, so why do you care? Why not just keep your eyes on your own paper? If you disagree with the science of the nutritional precepts, fine. State so and enter a lively debate about them. But, most of the anit-Paleo/Primal assertions I've seen are conclusory statements, mockery, ridicule or baseless assertions. Or frankly, self-righteous puffery, which is terribly ironic coming from the very same people complaining about insufferable pretention coming from the Paleo/Primal people. Pot or kettle?

Also where are these people that wear their diets like trendy accessories? I live in Northern California, a place that is pretty focused on food and healthy living, and I've literally never met them. I've met plenty of other types that are plenty obnoxious, but none that brag about their diets -- whether Paleo, IIFYM or otherwise. Do you find them hanging out at the juice bar in the gym or something?

It's almost as if Paleo/Primal did such people some ancestral wrong or ran over their puppy -- that's the level of irrational hostility I see from many (not aimed at you in particular) on this board. It really feels very similar to religious or political zealots who invest themselves in trying to tear down all other ideologies in order to give themselves greater comfort for their own beliefs (or doubt therein). Just what I've observed...

Yet I have Hashimoto's as well, and did not feel any benefit from eating Primal. So there is no basis for assuming everyone with an autoimmune disorder will benefit from eating Paleo/Primal.

lindsey1979

Yet I have Hashimoto's as well, and did not feel any benefit from eating Primal. So there is no basis for assuming everyone with an autoimmune disorder will benefit from eating Paleo/Primal.

I never said everyone does. I rarely say always about anything. But, when I was diagnosed, my endo did say that he was seeing more and more people having that reaction from cutting out grains and it's one of the diets he recommends to his patients for that very reason. There is some evidence out there that it may be gluten that's setting it off or something else in grains, though others think lactose, casein or lectins. I imagine they won't truly figure it out for some time.

Have you noticed anything that triggers yours?

ndj1979

Really? You don't think you would enter the thread trying to defend it, like you always do?

The second part is a matter of opinion which I doubt we will ever see eye to eye.

No, I wouldn't because I realize it would be (1) a waste of time and (2) unlikely to help anyone that really wanted to learn about Paleo/Primal (since people interested in that wouldn't go to a bashing thread). It's really hard for me to believe that some of you are real people.

This, coming from someone with no profile pic and no profile info.

She has, however, made a statement that she has a degree from a top research university.

In biology nonetheless, though I think we're ranked #4 overall biology but still have the top spot in both chemistry and molecular biology (shared in both I think).

and I am a french model ….bonjur…!

Charlottesometimes23

Yet I have Hashimoto's as well, and did not feel any benefit from eating Primal. So there is no basis for assuming everyone with an autoimmune disorder will benefit from eating Paleo/Primal.

I never said everyone does. I rarely say always about anything. But, when I was diagnosed, my endo did say that he was seeing more and more people having that reaction from cutting out grains and it's one of the diets he recommends to his patients for that very reason. There is some evidence out there that it may be gluten that's setting it off or something else in grains, though others think lactose, casein or lectins. I imagine they won't truly figure it out for some time.

Waiting.....waiting....waiting.....to hear all about the dangers of lectins (with credible evidence)

likitisplit

Really? You don't think you would enter the thread trying to defend it, like you always do?

The second part is a matter of opinion which I doubt we will ever see eye to eye.

No, I wouldn't because I realize it would be (1) a waste of time and (2) unlikely to help anyone that really wanted to learn about Paleo/Primal (since people interested in that wouldn't go to a bashing thread). It's really hard for me to believe that some of you are real people.

This, coming from someone with no profile pic and no profile info.

She has, however, made a statement that she has a degree from a top research university.

In biology nonetheless, though I think we're ranked #4 overall biology but still have the top spot in both chemistry and molecular biology (shared in both I think).

and I am a french model ….bonjur…!

QuietBloom

Yet I have Hashimoto's as well, and did not feel any benefit from eating Primal. So there is no basis for assuming everyone with an autoimmune disorder will benefit from eating Paleo/Primal.

I never said everyone does. I rarely say always about anything. But, when I was diagnosed, my endo did say that he was seeing more and more people having that reaction from cutting out grains and it's one of the diets he recommends to his patients for that very reason. There is some evidence out there that it may be gluten that's setting it off or something else in grains, though others think lactose, casein or lectins. I imagine they won't truly figure it out for some time.

Have you noticed anything that triggers yours?

No. In fact my TSH levels have been steady for years, with no need for increased medication. There is nothing I restrict from my diet. Immune disorders are tricky because they wax and wane and the reasons for that have remained elusive in most cases.

If I went Paleo and it helped, what would be my response in your opinion? That my thyroid would start producing more hormone? Is that what happened in your case?

lindsey1979

No. In fact my TSH levels have been steady for years, with no need for increased medication. There is nothing I restrict from my diet. Immune disorders are tricky because they wax and wane and the reasons for that have remained elusive in most cases.

If I went Paleo and it helped, what would be my response in your opinion? That my thyroid would start producing more hormone? Is that what happened in your case?

How are you T3 and T4 levels? It's my understanding that TSH is wholly unreliable for Hashi's, though I may be incorrect on that. For example, in a round of blood tests a while back, my TSH was totally in the normal range, but both my T3 and T4 were super low.

I believe the idea behind it is that certain things in diet trigger the autoimmune response, so the body attacks your thyroid or thyroid function, you end up initially hypo, your thyroid (to the extent it's still able to do so), kicks into high gear to compensate and you then swing back hyper. If your thyroid is extensively damaged (as it eventually ends up in Hashi's), you may not longer have the ability to even swing hyper anymore -- so just varying levels of hypo/normal or more hypo and less hypo.

So, the idea is that if you can minimize the triggering events, you can keep or maintain more of your normal thyroid function for longer, requiring less medication. Also, I know that there are some endos who believe treating with both T4 and T3 helps Hash's in particular and then there is the debate of synthetic versus natural dessicated.

As for what happened in my case, it's hard to say. I didn't have the diagnosis at the time, so I didn't have a lot the blood tests being monitored. I didn't get the diagnosis until about a year of eating Primal or so. Personally, the big thing I noticed was it helped with fatigue and better sleep (two common hypo symptoms). I had far fewer crushing fatigue episodes -- and those that I had were not as long in duration (were a couple days long versus up to 2-3 weeks). But, it was also found that I have insulin resistance as well, and that may have been contributing to the fatigue.

FlaxMilk

I guess I just see a lot of these issues as useless judging. Not the type of judging relative to moral issues, which I think is valuable, but the useless judging as to lifestyle preferences. The type from people that serves no purpose other than to be divisive. I don't see it as respectful, nor helpful, and oftentimes just downright emotionally dishonest (i.e. not from a place of honest desire to help, but out of misplaced self-righteousness and occasionally downright bullying by small, petty people). You're free to do it, of course, but I just disagree with it and see no value in it. But, I guess if it makes you feel better, there's at least that.

I have been open that my interest is less about the specific diet and more so about the belief that gets argued that semantics don't matter.

You mentioned being some form of a scientist. You know why it matters. It matters for the same reason that research uses control groups, tries to assess variables, has very strict guidelines to meet to prove causation and not correlation, and is expected to be peer reviewed and challenged and able to be re-proven.

I would agree with you 100% if this was a Paleo group. I won't take my curiosity about this 80/20 business and semantics there because it's uninvited, unwanted, unwarranted. But everyone here has the right to ask questions or even issue challenges when it's talked about in the general area.

You can't complain about people criticizing or questioning something because it's just "a lifestyle" while simultaneously promoting the benefits, to the point of telling people they should try it to see if they have health issues they don't know about. I don't care about really anyone's lifestyle, until it hurts someone or they start telling others to try it. Once they do that, they've invited questions and essentially, requests for evidence. Like I know you would want if I made negative statements about Paleo.

I'm not attacking you or upset by this. We obviously disagree, but that's part of discussion. Know that I agree that people (on either side) should not be belittling, and I agree that people who want to argue the Paleo diets should stay out of those groups. But as long as you stay here and keep talking to me, I'm going to respond when I see it. This discussion is really interesting to me, and it must be to you, because you stick around, too.

princessblanquisima

id say paleo its very restricting

tennisdude2004

I suppose each person has a different idea of what is restrictive for them.

I personally would find paleo a sacrifice too far but primal for me is spot on - cutting grains is no sacrifice at all for me.

lindsey1979

I guess I just see a lot of these issues as useless judging. Not the type of judging relative to moral issues, which I think is valuable, but the useless judging as to lifestyle preferences. The type from people that serves no purpose other than to be divisive. I don't see it as respectful, nor helpful, and oftentimes just downright emotionally dishonest (i.e. not from a place of honest desire to help, but out of misplaced self-righteousness and occasionally downright bullying by small, petty people). You're free to do it, of course, but I just disagree with it and see no value in it. But, I guess if it makes you feel better, there's at least that.

I have been open that my interest is less about the specific diet and more so about the belief that gets argued that semantics don't matter.

You mentioned being some form of a scientist. You know why it matters. It matters for the same reason that research uses control groups, tries to assess variables, has very strict guidelines to meet to prove causation and not correlation, and is expected to be peer reviewed and challenged and able to be re-proven.

I would agree with you 100% if this was a Paleo group. I won't take my curiosity about this 80/20 business and semantics there because it's uninvited, unwanted, unwarranted. But everyone here has the right to ask questions or even issue challenges when it's talked about in the general area.

You can't complain about people criticizing or questioning something because it's just "a lifestyle" while simultaneously promoting the benefits, to the point of telling people they should try it to see if they have health issues they don't know about. I don't care about really anyone's lifestyle, until it hurts someone or they start telling others to try it. Once they do that, they've invited questions and essentially, requests for evidence. Like I know you would want if I made negative statements about Paleo.

I'm not attacking you or upset by this. We obviously disagree, but that's part of discussion. Know that I agree that people (on either side) should not be belittling, and I agree that people who want to argue the Paleo diets should stay out of those groups. But as long as you stay here and keep talking to me, I'm going to respond when I see it. This discussion is really interesting to me, and it must be to you, because you stick around, too.

I'm all for respectful disagreement, and I completely appreciate your response. Thank you for the courtesy and consideration. Just for the record, I don't consider myself a scientist (as I don't actively do research or otherwise applicable activity), but I do have a biology degree from a top research university, as much as that is mocked by french models on this board.

I agree that semantics matter in certain contexts, I just don't believe it really matters in the context of most of the arguments against Paleo/Primal I've seen on this website. If we're talking scientific studies, absolutely. Legal documents, absolutely. Precision and accuracy are absolutely important in those contexts.

Whether someone adheres to their professed diet 100% is not important in such a context. Whether the label behind the diet is 100% anthropologically correct is also besides the point. The diet is based on nutritional science, not anthropological science (notwithstanding the fact that I bet there were some paleolithic people in certain areas of the world that ate very similarly to the foods outlined in the diet -- not all, but some). I would think that would be understood and wouldn't need to be stated explicitly. But, some think that's a great "gotcha!" moment. And to me, that just underscores the weakness of their arguments or complete lack thereof.

There are some people who have put forth great counterpoints to certain aspects of Paleo/Primal, but there are also many that have argued mostly irrelevant points. I enjoy engaging discussions with the former as I'm always interested in learning more and perhaps changing my mind/conclusions with that new information. So, I have issues with the latter, not the former, especially when they do so in a disrespectful, cruel or belittling way.

In the end, I guess I just don't understand the irrational hostility towards Paleo/Primal I see here or the fact that some people feel the need to police it even though they aren't a member themselves (i.e. not Paleo/Primal). There are plenty of things in this world that I don't agree with or subscribe to, but I don't waste my time and energy going out of my way to tell those people that I think their life choices are ridiculous, absurd, not worth it, etc. What's the point of that?