Is paleo a healthier diet than other diets?

Zumaria1

Not sure if Paleo is a healthier diet than others, but there are certain foods that trigger an inflammatory response in people. The problem is, you would have to eliminate things one by one to see which one, or you could get a blood allergy test done. Also, if you don't have a true allergy, maybe just a bit intolerant, it may not show up on an allergy test. So I agree with someone who commented about eliminating say gluten for a month, than diary the next, and comparing your symptoms to see if you notice a difference.

There are also a few natural foods that help your body fight against inflammation. Black cherry juice, is really good for this, get the 100% juice, any natural food store should carry it. Also, tumeric contains curcumin, which is excellent for fighting inflammation. You can buy turmeric raw, it looks similar to ginger, the color is used in curry powder, but it tastes sweet. You can put in boiling water, let it steep, and drink as a tea. It actually tastes pretty good. If you cannot buy the real tumeric, you can get the curcumin in capsule form.

FatFreeFrolicking

No, Paleo is not healthier than any other diet.

Will it work for you? Maybe. Your best bet is to keep your diet as is and drop one thing for a month, but just one thing. Like, do no dairy for a month. Or no gluten for a month. Record how you feel, and be honest. I've known far too many people who have dropped dairy, wheat, and sugar at the same time and experienced no difference in their bodies other than a little weight lost, and concluded that dairy, wheat, and sugar are all bad and make them fat.

I wouldn't say any one thing is making me "fat." I've done tracking for about 3 months and lost 4 lbs., but I don't have that much to lose. I guess I'm more concerned about joint pain. I haven't heard anything about dairy causing that (and even some things about it helping), but I have heard that some grains might cause it. On the other hand, I live in New England, and cold damp weather 4 days out of 7, and "spring" days that have a high of 44 degrees don't help either.

A common misconception is people thinking milk is good for them and will prevent osteoporosis, etc. In reality, milk increases the likelihood of developing osteoporosis because it erodes bone-making cells.

AllonsYtotheTardis

I have both Rheumatoid and Osteoarthritis.

I have never found what foods I consume (or avoid) to have any impact on the arthritis, whatsoever.

Strokingdiction

No, Paleo is not healthier than any other diet.

Will it work for you? Maybe. Your best bet is to keep your diet as is and drop one thing for a month, but just one thing. Like, do no dairy for a month. Or no gluten for a month. Record how you feel, and be honest. I've known far too many people who have dropped dairy, wheat, and sugar at the same time and experienced no difference in their bodies other than a little weight lost, and concluded that dairy, wheat, and sugar are all bad and make them fat.

I wouldn't say any one thing is making me "fat." I've done tracking for about 3 months and lost 4 lbs., but I don't have that much to lose. I guess I'm more concerned about joint pain. I haven't heard anything about dairy causing that (and even some things about it helping), but I have heard that some grains might cause it. On the other hand, I live in New England, and cold damp weather 4 days out of 7, and "spring" days that have a high of 44 degrees don't help either.

A common misconception is people thinking milk is good for them and will prevent osteoporosis, etc. In reality, milk increases the likelihood of developing osteoporosis because it erodes bone-making cells.

rosebette

No, Paleo is not healthier than any other diet.

Will it work for you? Maybe. Your best bet is to keep your diet as is and drop one thing for a month, but just one thing. Like, do no dairy for a month. Or no gluten for a month. Record how you feel, and be honest. I've known far too many people who have dropped dairy, wheat, and sugar at the same time and experienced no difference in their bodies other than a little weight lost, and concluded that dairy, wheat, and sugar are all bad and make them fat.

I wouldn't say any one thing is making me "fat." I've done tracking for about 3 months and lost 4 lbs., but I don't have that much to lose. I guess I'm more concerned about joint pain. I haven't heard anything about dairy causing that (and even some things about it helping), but I have heard that some grains might cause it. On the other hand, I live in New England, and cold damp weather 4 days out of 7, and "spring" days that have a high of 44 degrees don't help either.

A common misconception is people thinking milk is good for them and will prevent osteoporosis, etc. In reality, milk increases the likelihood of developing osteoporosis because it erodes bone-making cells.

I never heard that before. Is there a source for that information? why then the recommendation that women past menopause get 1200 mg of calcium daily and that lowfat dairy is the best source? Should I stop eating yogurt every day?

_John_

I never heard that before. Is there a source for that information? why then the recommendation that women past menopause get 1200 mg of calcium daily and that lowfat dairy is the best source? Should I stop eating yogurt every day?

That seems to be a blog and interweb special that almost never gets actual peer reviewed articles linked in support:

A quick google search shows most of these come from the middle 2000's and I find if almost impossible that if it was in the prevailing scientific literature (which almost universally supports dairy as important sources of dietary Ca and vitamin D) that it would not be mentioned in this article from 2011.

Calcium and phosphate: a duet of ions playing for bone health.

Authors
Bonjour JP.
Journal
J Am Coll Nutr. 2011 Oct;30(5 Suppl 1):438S-48S.
Affiliation

The acquisition and maintenance of bone mass and strength are influenced by environmental factors, including physical activity and nutrition. Among micronutrients, calcium (Ca) and inorganic (i) phosphate (P) are the two main constituents of hydroxyapatite, the bone mineral that strengthens the mechanical resistance of the organic matrix. Bone contains about 99% and 80% of the body's entire supply of Ca and P, respectively. The Ca/P mass ratio in bone is 2.2, which is similar to that measured in human milk. The initial step of Ca-Pi crystal nucleation takes place within matrix vesicles that bud from the plasma membrane of osteogenic cells and migrate into the extracellular skeletal compartment. They are endowed with a transport system that accumulates Pi inside the matrix vesicles, followed by the influx of Ca ions. This process leads to the formation of hydroxyapatite crystal and its subsequent association with the organic matrix collagen fibrils. In addition to this structural role, both Ca and Pi positively influence the activity of bone-forming and bone-resorbing cells. Pi plays a role in the maturation of osteocytes, the most abundant cells in bone. Osteocytes are implicated in bone mineralization and systemic Pi homeostasis. They produce fibroblast growth factor-23, a hormonal regulator of renal Pi reabsorption and 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D production. This relationship is in keeping with the concept proposed several decades ago of a bone-kidney link in Pi homeostasis. In contrast to their tight association in bone formation and resorption, Ca and Pi renal reabsorption processes are independent from each other, driven by distinct molecular machineries. The distinct renal control is related to the different extraskeletal functions that Ca and Pi play in cellular metabolism. At both the renal and the intestinal levels, interactions of Ca and Pi have been documented that have important implications in the acquisition and maintenance of bone health, as well as in osteoporosis management. In the kidney, increased Pi intake enhances Ca reabsorption and Ca balance. During growth and adulthood, administration of Ca-Pi in a ratio close to that of dairy products leads to positive effects on bone health. In contrast, when separately ingested as pharmaceutical salt supplements, thus inducing large differences between Ca and Pi concentrations in the intestinal lumen, they might have adverse effects on bone health. In osteoporotic patients treated with anabolic agents, a Ca-Pi supplement appears to be preferable to carbonate or citrate Ca salt. In conclusion, Ca and Pi constitute a key duo for appropriate bone mineral acquisition and maintenance throughout life. Outside the skeleton, their essential but distinct physiological functions are controlled by specific transporters and hormonal systems that also serve to secure the appropriate supply of Ca and Pi for bone health. Key teaching points: Bone contains about 99% and 80% of the body's supply of Ca and P, respectively, as hydroxyapatite and has a Ca/P mass ratio of about 2.2, close to that measured in human milk. The first step of Ca-Pi crystal nucleation takes place within matrix vesicles that bud from the plasma membrane of osteogenic cells. In addition to their structural role, both Ca and Pi influence bone-forming and bone-resorbing cells. There is a bone-kidney link in Pi homeostasis in which fibroblast growth factor-23, a molecule produced by osteocytes, appears to play a pivotal role. In contrast to their tight association during bone formation and resorption, both intestinal and renal Ca and Pi processes are independent of each other. Observational and interventional studies suggest that Ca-Pi salt or dairy products can exert positive effects on bone acquisition and maintenance.

cwsreddy

It depends on two things really - 1) what your goals are, and 2) whether you choose to believe the science behind paleo rather than the science against paleo (it's pretty controversial right now, with experts on both sides of the fight).

Counting calories and looking at your macros is pretty much solely about weight loss, whereas Paleo tends to be more about health in general - reducing inflammation, increasing vitality, eating nutritious foods while avoiding foods that can be problematic, etc.

As with all lifestyles there are many ways to do Paleo, but some of the most agreed upon basics are 1) no grains and 2) no processed foods. Dairy is up in the air - some are heavily against it, some are totally for it, so that'll really be up to you. But basically it's eating as natural food as possible (without added chemicals, etc. etc.) and avoiding grains.

My suggestion is that if you're interested, try it. The main criticisms of Paleo have to do with its restrictions, so if those are something you can live happily with then it might suit you well. If they're too difficult for you to maintain as a lifestyle then I suggest you look at a different way of eating.

why did this thread continue after this first response??

great post :drinker:

rm33064

There is a lot of anti milk propaganda floating around lately. Basically the argument is that we are the only species on the planet that consumes milk after childhood which is meant to imply it is unnatural. They will also toss around that 3/4 of the worlds population is lactose intolerant as another sign it's bad for you. There really isn't much science behind the negativity though. The truth is all the really healthy things in milk are lost when the milk is pasteurized anyways, that's why calves fed pasteurized milk don't develop well and often die. If you're just looking for calcium you can get 1/2 your daily dose from a glass of orange juice, it doesn't have to come from dairy. Raw milk if you can find it is very good for you in my opinion.

Lleldiranne

Pseudoscience. Period.

The basis of it as marketed, yes. But in and of itself as a diet, it is fine.

So, in other words, it's a sound or healthy diet, but all that stuff about how we have to eat that way because our bodies are genetically programmed to be incapable of processing grain or anything that has to be cultivated is BS?

Pretty much, yep.

I mean, Paleo can be healthy or unhealthy, depending on whether you plan it well enough to meet your macros & micros or not. But that can go for any type of eating plan.

But the stuff about it being the only healthy way to eat is just propaganda.

paperpudding

There is a lot of anti milk propaganda floating around lately. Basically the argument is that we are the only species on the planet that consumes milk after childhood which is meant to imply it is unnatural. They will also toss around that 3/4 of the worlds population is lactose intolerant as another sign it's bad for you. There really isn't much science behind the negativity though. The truth is all the really healthy things in milk are lost when the milk is pasteurized anyways, that's why calves fed pasteurized milk don't develop well and often die. If you're just looking for calcium you can get 1/2 your daily dose from a glass of orange juice, it doesn't have to come from dairy. Raw milk if you can find it is very good for you in my opinion.

I would imagine the fact that calves fed unpasteurized milk not developing well would relate to pasteurizing removing some of the natural immunity supplied from mothers milk - ie from mother cow to calf.

Same thing would happen if human breast milk were pasteurized and fed back to human babies.

Does this mean raw cows milk is better for human adults than pasteurized cows milk?

I somehow doubt it.

Charlottesometimes23

Actually, I went to the Paleo site to see what foods are allowed, and breakfast would be a big problem for me. I have high cholesterol, and I can't eat eggs every day, just once in a while. If you can't eat dairy or grains, there isn't much else you can eat for breakfast. I think I could manage the rest of the day.

If you are worried about foods causing health issues for you, I would recommend an elimination diet over going Paleo. With paleo you're just cutting out a bunch of foods for no good reason. With an elimination diet you cut out a bunch of stuff and then you gradually add it back in to see which foods (if any) are actually problematic for you. Then you can just not eat those foods while still enjoying the others.

So my next question would be -- what foods are supposed to be "inflammatory" -- i.e., cause arthritis, etc., since I don't have any food allergies. I guess one of the principles behind paleo is that grains are inflammatory. Is there any evidence to back this up?

I don't think that any foods actually cause arthritis, but some foods are claimed to be pro or anti-inflammatory because they affect levels of inflammatory markers in the body. The thing is, do small changes in levels of inflammatory markers actually mean anything anyway?

I don't believe that there's much evidence to back up the Paleo anti-grain inflammation hype or the anti legume hype. In fact, both have been shown to be cardioprotective (legumes and whole-grains).

tennisdude2004

Paleo is certainly a healthy diet - for one example it focuses on food which reduce the risk of excessive inflammation and oxidation.

Is it healthier than all other diets - probably not (it would be as healthy).

Is it healthier than some other diets out there - definitely.

If you really are curious about seeing how you would react on the diet and if it would help with your health issues - give a try for a month and see for yourself.

There are other less restrictive types of diets (which are based on the food choices from paleo) - Primal blue print is one you could look at (and it's free).

I would suggest not getting to hung up on the whole eating like a caveman side of the diet. Most rational thinking people understanding that it is based on - possibly what we did not evolve to eat as opposed to eating what our ancestors did eat (it is based on loose theory's).

Just focus on the foods (millions of food combinations to choose from) that are included.

Good luck with whatever you choose to do.

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

Actually, I went to the Paleo site to see what foods are allowed, and breakfast would be a big problem for me. I have high cholesterol, and I can't eat eggs every day, just once in a while. If you can't eat dairy or grains, there isn't much else you can eat for breakfast. I think I could manage the rest of the day.

If you are worried about foods causing health issues for you, I would recommend an elimination diet over going Paleo. With paleo you're just cutting out a bunch of foods for no good reason. With an elimination diet you cut out a bunch of stuff and then you gradually add it back in to see which foods (if any) are actually problematic for you. Then you can just not eat those foods while still enjoying the others.

So my next question would be -- what foods are supposed to be "inflammatory" -- i.e., cause arthritis, etc., since I don't have any food allergies. I guess one of the principles behind paleo is that grains are inflammatory. Is there any evidence to back this up?

I don't think that any foods actually cause arthritis, but some foods are claimed to be pro or anti-inflammatory because they affect levels of inflammatory markers in the body. The thing is, do small changes in levels of inflammatory markers actually mean anything anyway?

I don't believe that there's much evidence to back up the Paleo anti-grain inflammation hype or the anti legume hype. In fact, both have been shown to be cardioprotective (legumes and whole-grains).

^^this

OP I'd encourage you to ask your rheumatologist. And then if he/she doesn't satisfy you and you still want to try a restrictive diet, look up elimination diets and give it a go. Usually they'll eliminate wheat, sugar, nightshades (tomatoes), and dairy. And then you'd add them back in one at a time.

Like I said, my rheumatologists have always said that it's bunk and my own results seem to back that up. However if you are gluten intolerant, for example, you may get some relief from eliminating wheat. You'd probably have other symptoms though, like digestive issues (which can also be caused by certain autoimmune disorders, it gets very tricky with AI because they mimic a lot of other things).

IronSmasher

I like this thread.

Good luck to you OP!




I always wondered how much pseudoscience intelligent people could handle until the whole thing starts to unravel.

neanderthin

Actually, I went to the Paleo site to see what foods are allowed, and breakfast would be a big problem for me. I have high cholesterol, and I can't eat eggs every day, just once in a while. If you can't eat dairy or grains, there isn't much else you can eat for breakfast. I think I could manage the rest of the day.

If you are worried about foods causing health issues for you, I would recommend an elimination diet over going Paleo. With paleo you're just cutting out a bunch of foods for no good reason. With an elimination diet you cut out a bunch of stuff and then you gradually add it back in to see which foods (if any) are actually problematic for you. Then you can just not eat those foods while still enjoying the others.

So my next question would be -- what foods are supposed to be "inflammatory" -- i.e., cause arthritis, etc., since I don't have any food allergies. I guess one of the principles behind paleo is that grains are inflammatory. Is there any evidence to back this up?

I don't think that any foods actually cause arthritis, but some foods are claimed to be pro or anti-inflammatory because they affect levels of inflammatory markers in the body. The thing is, do small changes in levels of inflammatory markers actually mean anything anyway?

I don't believe that there's much evidence to back up the Paleo anti-grain inflammation hype or the anti legume hype. In fact, both have been shown to be cardioprotective (legumes and whole-grains).

Context and dosage. For the most part I agree with you and I also think it's important to not become blind sided either. For example, when whole grain replaces refined grain it's considered cardio protective and most of the reason falls in the differences in the controlled diet, which generally is completely different on many levels, so it's hard to examine cause. Also while debunking the China Study the 3 or 4 people that did that found rather quickly that wheat and not animal products was associated with CVD and as well know, cardiovascular disease is caused primarily by inflammation.

rosebette

I never heard that before. Is there a source for that information? why then the recommendation that women past menopause get 1200 mg of calcium daily and that lowfat dairy is the best source? Should I stop eating yogurt every day?

That seems to be a blog and interweb special that almost never gets actual peer reviewed articles linked in support:

A quick google search shows most of these come from the middle 2000's and I find if almost impossible that if it was in the prevailing scientific literature (which almost universally supports dairy as important sources of dietary Ca and vitamin D) that it would not be mentioned in this article from 2011.

Calcium and phosphate: a duet of ions playing for bone health.

Authors
Bonjour JP.
Journal
J Am Coll Nutr. 2011 Oct;30(5 Suppl 1):438S-48S.
Affiliation

The acquisition and maintenance of bone mass and strength are influenced by environmental factors, including physical activity and nutrition. Among micronutrients, calcium (Ca) and inorganic (i) phosphate (P) are the two main constituents of hydroxyapatite, the bone mineral that strengthens the mechanical resistance of the organic matrix. Bone contains about 99% and 80% of the body's entire supply of Ca and P, respectively. The Ca/P mass ratio in bone is 2.2, which is similar to that measured in human milk. The initial step of Ca-Pi crystal nucleation takes place within matrix vesicles that bud from the plasma membrane of osteogenic cells and migrate into the extracellular skeletal compartment. They are endowed with a transport system that accumulates Pi inside the matrix vesicles, followed by the influx of Ca ions. This process leads to the formation of hydroxyapatite crystal and its subsequent association with the organic matrix collagen fibrils. In addition to this structural role, both Ca and Pi positively influence the activity of bone-forming and bone-resorbing cells. Pi plays a role in the maturation of osteocytes, the most abundant cells in bone. Osteocytes are implicated in bone mineralization and systemic Pi homeostasis. They produce fibroblast growth factor-23, a hormonal regulator of renal Pi reabsorption and 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D production. This relationship is in keeping with the concept proposed several decades ago of a bone-kidney link in Pi homeostasis. In contrast to their tight association in bone formation and resorption, Ca and Pi renal reabsorption processes are independent from each other, driven by distinct molecular machineries. The distinct renal control is related to the different extraskeletal functions that Ca and Pi play in cellular metabolism. At both the renal and the intestinal levels, interactions of Ca and Pi have been documented that have important implications in the acquisition and maintenance of bone health, as well as in osteoporosis management. In the kidney, increased Pi intake enhances Ca reabsorption and Ca balance. During growth and adulthood, administration of Ca-Pi in a ratio close to that of dairy products leads to positive effects on bone health. In contrast, when separately ingested as pharmaceutical salt supplements, thus inducing large differences between Ca and Pi concentrations in the intestinal lumen, they might have adverse effects on bone health. In osteoporotic patients treated with anabolic agents, a Ca-Pi supplement appears to be preferable to carbonate or citrate Ca salt. In conclusion, Ca and Pi constitute a key duo for appropriate bone mineral acquisition and maintenance throughout life. Outside the skeleton, their essential but distinct physiological functions are controlled by specific transporters and hormonal systems that also serve to secure the appropriate supply of Ca and Pi for bone health. Key teaching points: Bone contains about 99% and 80% of the body's supply of Ca and P, respectively, as hydroxyapatite and has a Ca/P mass ratio of about 2.2, close to that measured in human milk. The first step of Ca-Pi crystal nucleation takes place within matrix vesicles that bud from the plasma membrane of osteogenic cells. In addition to their structural role, both Ca and Pi influence bone-forming and bone-resorbing cells. There is a bone-kidney link in Pi homeostasis in which fibroblast growth factor-23, a molecule produced by osteocytes, appears to play a pivotal role. In contrast to their tight association during bone formation and resorption, both intestinal and renal Ca and Pi processes are independent of each other. Observational and interventional studies suggest that Ca-Pi salt or dairy products can exert positive effects on bone acquisition and maintenance.

So, can you translate this into English for scientifically impaired, like me?

I went online and found a 2005 article that did say what the earlier poster asserted, that dairy damages bone mass, but some later studies said that eating these products improve bone health. The later ones did turn up in one of the academic databases my students use for their research papers.

Also, if the calcium in orange juice is added as a supplement, since it's not naturally found in orange juice, why would that be better for you than the calcium in dairy? I basically reduced my calcium supplements when I increased my consumption of dairy because I thought it was better to get nutrients from food.

WVprankster

In4 paleo "science."

tennisdude2004

So, I was at a Ladies' Night at this wellness center where I get my massages, eating some organic chocolate goodies, and as I was talking to several folk there, who are associated with the chiropractic practice who was hosting the evening, they were talking about how certain diets prevent inflammation, and that this practice advocated the paleo diet. I happen to have some issues with osteoarthritis, especially in my knees (got through my workout today on aleve), and possibly may have the markers for rheumatoid (it's in my family). I don't even know what eating paleo is -- eating like a cave man? But is it a better diet than just tracking and trying to get all your macros in.

You don't necessarily need to, but you can do both - paleo does cover all of the micro / macro nutrient bases.

J72FIT

I think if you already have medical issues and are concerned about food with regard to inflammation, your best bet would be to talk to your doctor or a registered dietitian and see if there are specific foods you should avoid.

^^This...
The Paleo diet can be unnecessarily restrictive if you have no medical reason to avoid the foods they consider unhealthy...

J72FIT

A common misconception is people thinking milk is good for them and will prevent osteoporosis, etc. In reality, milk increases the likelihood of developing osteoporosis because it erodes bone-making cells.

???