Let's talk about...the Paleo Diet

suziecue66

It just seems like low carb + no dairy wrapped up in shiny new paper to me. I've quit following several formerly useful healthy living/food blogs because they got on the Paleo bandwagon. I know people (Urban Legend!) that say their stomach problems have cleared up because they eat this way, but as with most elimination diets I strongly question the ability to sustain this way of eating in the long term.

tl;dr~My main issue with it is eliminating food groups + annoying semantics

Those that fix stomach problems with this way of eating have a strong reason to keep doing it. So for them it is sustainable in the long term if it keeps the stomach problems from appearing again.

ElPumaMex

I think that yes, there is out there to be found an "ultimate diet" for humans.
Reason: if you look at the diet of different species of animals, they all have very specific, ideal diets that are optimal.
And they don't deviate from that diet. It is automatic for them.

We humans have distorted that diet, and now we don't know what that "original" one was !

Will we ever find that "ultimate diet"? Likely
Will humans follow that diet once found? Very unlikely :bigsmile:

This isn't really true for top predator species. Often, mid-chain carnivores and herbivores are very specific about which prey items they choose, but top predators will often turn to scavaging, eating bones, hide, and periodically herbivory to keep themselves going. This also varies significantly if the species is distributed widely globally or is migratory.

Yes, you have a good point.
Diets not only change betweem species, but within a species based on geographical location, etc.

So if we ever find the "ultimate diet" for the humans, it would need to be adapted per the specific circumstances of the humans.
For example, eskimos probably need a diet very different than humans at the african desert.

So the search continues...

... but doesn't that just prove that there is no ideal diet for human beings? If we have to adapt it significantly for subpopulations, then that would mean that there is no universally ideal diet.

Not really:

Even for the examples you had proving your point, the variation of the diet for a particular species is not that great.
Of course, you would need to "tweak" the diet for humans living under different extreme regions, but I would expect that for most of the humans living in "civilized" urban environemnts, the ideal diet would be very much the same.

Now, as I stated later, no matter if we find that ideal diet or not, humans will keep eating to whatever they think best for their situation.

All I ever hope for in the long run, is to answer generic questions as:
Are humans designed to be vegetarians, or are we truly omnivorous? etc

Actually it is quite different. Many species of large cats have been known to go from active hunting to eating shrubs and grass during times of starvation or inadequate prey availability. In fish, especially teleosts (tunas, marlin, etc.) and elasmobranchs (sharks, rays, etc.), there have been studies showing that these animals have gone from eating live prey (usually other smaller teleost fish) to scavaging marine mammal carcasses and other alternatives sources of food. Some fish even eat rocks to get mineral supplements lacking in their normal carnivorous diets.

My point is that you're saying that people who live a certain way require a certain diet. The fact that people live differently implies (combied with previous statement) that the diet must also change. This means that there is no ideal diet. Whether those changes are large or small is irrelevant. If the "ideal" exists, it must exists across all individuals regardless of habitat, culture, or other physiological needs. Otherwise, the ideal can only exist FOR THAT SUBPOPULATION under those rules, not for all humans.

I did understand your point, but let me clarify based on your last statement:

The "ideal diet" I am talking about, would be applicable for "normal" circumstances.

It is very clear, that any animal or human, will resort to drastic changes of their diet, under starvation.
So your examples of how starving animals change their diets, does not really apply for this argument.

Let me ask you:
If those animals had full choice of what to eat, no starvation, would they choose a specific diet?
I say yes, but you seem to be very much instructed on animals so I am looking forward to your response.

So if we constrain the "ideal diet" to the following restrictions, would you agree one can exist?
a) Humans living in urban environments
b) Not starving; they will have a choice of any food
c) Not living under extreme environmental conditions
d) Not professional or high-performance athletes

islandjumper

Not really about the paleo diet exactly, but if anyone is interested in some good reading about human evolution and eating habits:
Against the Grain: How Agriculture Has Hijacked Civilization by Richard Manning
The Third Chimpanzee - Jared Diamond

unsuspectingfish

I have to applaud you for making a logical, fact-based argument and citing sources. Not that I would ever follow the paleo diet, but I learned stuff I didn't already know about history (and I love history). You also confirmed some of my issues with the diet. So, thanks!

angenz

Very interesting.... I was thinking about this exact thing over the weekend.

I am a bioarchaeologist, studying the impact on human health with the intensification of rice agriculture in mainland Southeast Asia. So, I have a vested interest in this topic and enjoy reading scientific articles about the subject.

Although I don't "follow" the Palaeo-diet, I do not eat grains and not much dairy. This is a personal choice as I have suffered from IBS over the past 10 years and when I cut white and wholemeal bread, pasta, rice, anything wheat based etc. I felt a lot better. No more spasms or bloating. I also developed a lactose intolerance in 2008, after traveling in Asian countries and not eating any dairy at all for 6 months or so. This is just starting to change, over the past few months I can now take some milk in a cup of tea and not feel nauseous!

One amazing thing I that I know about the human condition, through my own personal experiences and what I see in the human skeletal record, is that we can adapt! Adapting to our environment, being cultural, natural and social, is what human beings do best. Without this adaptation we would just not survive and be, as a species, where we are today.

It is implausible to think that human beings have not adapted in the last 10'000 years to agricultural products. However, the extent of individual adaptation based on our genetics has not yet been fully established. Some people have NO problems, whilst other have severe ones. Think about the adaptation to lactose tolerance for instance, this has developed over a relatively short time-span in some human populations, yet, for me it reversed in a matter of months.

The most convincing evidence for me, against the adoption of the palaeo-diet is that grains have always been there, and Homo sapiens have always eaten them. However, these grains were in a wild form, and eaten in moderation and seasonally. It is not the question of whether we should eat them or not, but it how much we eat. But also, processed grains are very, very different from the raw, wild grains our Palaeolithic ancestors ate.

Not sure if I can give any firm conclusions here, as my body tells me one things and the science indicates something else. So, I think that for any diet, you have to do what is good for you and not follow a fad or trend, just because it is acceptable for some people.

Silverkittycat

I think that yes, there is out there to be found an "ultimate diet" for humans.
Reason: if you look at the diet of different species of animals, they all have very specific, ideal diets that are optimal.
And they don't deviate from that diet. It is automatic for them.

We humans have distorted that diet, and now we don't know what that "original" one was !

Will we ever find that "ultimate diet"? Likely
Will humans follow that diet once found? Very unlikely :bigsmile:

This isn't really true for top predator species. Often, mid-chain carnivores and herbivores are very specific about which prey items they choose, but top predators will often turn to scavaging, eating bones, hide, and periodically herbivory to keep themselves going. This also varies significantly if the species is distributed widely globally or is migratory.

Yes, you have a good point.
Diets not only change betweem species, but within a species based on geographical location, etc.

So if we ever find the "ultimate diet" for the humans, it would need to be adapted per the specific circumstances of the humans.
For example, eskimos probably need a diet very different than humans at the african desert.

So the search continues...

... but doesn't that just prove that there is no ideal diet for human beings? If we have to adapt it significantly for subpopulations, then that would mean that there is no universally ideal diet.

Not really:

Even for the examples you had proving your point, the variation of the diet for a particular species is not that great.
Of course, you would need to "tweak" the diet for humans living under different extreme regions, but I would expect that for most of the humans living in "civilized" urban environemnts, the ideal diet would be very much the same.

Now, as I stated later, no matter if we find that ideal diet or not, humans will keep eating to whatever they think best for their situation.

All I ever hope for in the long run, is to answer generic questions as:
Are humans designed to be vegetarians, or are we truly omnivorous? etc

Actually it is quite different. Many species of large cats have been known to go from active hunting to eating shrubs and grass during times of starvation or inadequate prey availability. In fish, especially teleosts (tunas, marlin, etc.) and elasmobranchs (sharks, rays, etc.), there have been studies showing that these animals have gone from eating live prey (usually other smaller teleost fish) to scavaging marine mammal carcasses and other alternatives sources of food. Some fish even eat rocks to get mineral supplements lacking in their normal carnivorous diets.

My point is that you're saying that people who live a certain way require a certain diet. The fact that people live differently implies (combied with previous statement) that the diet must also change. This means that there is no ideal diet for human beings. Whether those changes are large or small is irrelevant. If the "ideal" exists, it must exists across all individuals regardless of habitat, culture, or other physiological needs. Otherwise, the ideal can only exist FOR THAT SUBPOPULATION under those rules, not for all humans.

I'm with Elizabeth.
I also think that where your ancestors came from, how they adapted to their environment and where you live today would play a pretty big part in determining one's ideal diet. By ancestors I mean more recent though, like..grandmothers!

angenz

What about the Paleo women vs men diet?
Women were not generally hunters... so did they eat different than the Paleo men? :glasses:

This is very important, and raises the question of whether there is an inherent genetic difference and therefore females and males would require different foods OR these differences are cultural and therefore there should be no difference from a biological sense.

angenz

You know, wasn't the lifespan of a caveman something ridiculously low like 30 years old?

I'm not sure I want to follow that diet...

I know this is a mistake, I should have learned my lesson earlier today on the other Paleo thread...

Yes, the lifespan was 30ys HOWEVER, scientists have found very little evidence of heart disease, diabetes, and other illnesses associated with being unhealthy. The general consensus among scientists is that they simply died early due to a lack of common over the counter medications to prevent infections or provide proper hygiene. Things like that.

Right, but you forgot to copy the rest of the Wikipedia quote: "and because the average lifespan was shorter than the age of common-onset of these conditions."
In other words, they died well before any possible negative effects of their diet could develop ! :bigsmile:

Here is the complete paragraph:
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic#Diet_and_nutrition )

" It is also unlikely that Paleolithic hunter-gatherers were affected by modern diseases of affluence and extended life such as Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, because they ate mostly lean meats and plants and frequently engaged in intense physical activity [99][100], and because the average lifespan was shorter than the age of common-onset of these conditions."

Please, please let me HOW you can tell this from human skeletal remains?!?!
(I would love to know so I can make a new career from this!)

Yes, we can tell a certain amount from the bones but we cannot see whether the people had "Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease" this is not visible in the skeletal record, and therefore no definite conclusion can be drawn, only assumptions made.

The "live till 30 years" is a fallacy and something that is annoying "out-there" in the public domain but not some standard for the Palaeolithic era, also given that the Palaeolithic period lasted from 2.6 million years ago to 10'000 years BC!!!! It is crazy to make such absurd generalisations. Personally, I think that modern humans want to feel superior from their ancestors, and one way we can do that is by seemingly living longer. It is a joke, we all have a genetic potential for age that has been ingrained in us as a species, living longer has been possible due to modern technologies, however we ourselves have not changed in this regard.

katiew00t

I have ulcerative colitis, and did a quick search to see if the Paleo diet is recommended to help with UC. It's not.


"Ulcerative colitis is an inflammatory bowel disease that causes chronic diarrhea. incontinence and loose and bloody stools. The exact cause of ulcerative colitis is unknown, asserts the United States government's Digestive Diseases Information Clearing House, but advocates of the paleo or Paleolithic Diet blame our modern, Neolithic era eating habits.

The Premise
Loren Cordain, author of "The Paleo Diet," characterizes the chronic illnesses of the the Western world as "diseases of civilization." Cordain believes that the human body is genetically programmed to eat like our Paleolithic ancestors, and that once we stray from a basic, hunter/gatherer diet, we become susceptible to all sorts of illnesses. In order to remain healthy, we need to restrict our food intake to foods that could be hunted, gathered or fished during the Paleolithic era, says Cordain. These include fish, meat, eggs, nuts, fruits and vegetables.

Restricted Foods
The diet restricts foods such as grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes or any type of food that agricultural development helped create. Grains, dairy products and beans have a high lectin content. Lectins contain toxic compounds designed to ward off insect attacks. Paleo diet supporters believe that lectins may also attack the human body. Lectins, says Cordain, have a carbohydrate and a protein component. The protein component resembles proteins in the human body. Your immune system attacks lectins when they escape your bowels. After the attack, it memorizes the lectin structure in the same way that a police officer memorizes the face of a frequent perpetrator.

Lectins and Colitis
Paleo diet proponents believe that lectin's similarity to your body's natural proteins make people susceptible to ulcerative colitis and other inflammatory bowel diseases. Your immune system is intelligent, but it in people with ulcerative colitis, it is not smart enough to distinguish between your body's own proteins and the lectin. It, therefore, attacks your body's cells in the same way it attacked the lectin. An autoimmune response ensues, causing leaky gut and other common symptoms of ulcerative colitis.

Criticism
Despite the logic behind the theories of the Paleo Diet, both the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation and the Mayo Clinic assert there is no link between specific foods and susceptibility to ulcerative colitis. Respected nutritionists also take issue with the Paleo Diet, reports the "Chicago Tribune." Keith Ayoob, a pediatric nutritionist at New York's Albert Einstein College of Medicine, argues against the Paleo Diet's restrictions on grains. Grains have folic acid, which reduces your risk of neural tube defects. Folic acid is also a B vitamin that prevents anemia. Sulfasalazine, a common ulcerative colitis drug, impairs folic acid absorption, reports the University of Purdue. Since ulcerative colitis involves frequent blood loss, restricting folic acid rich foods is inadvisable.

References
"The Paleo Diet"; Loren Cordain; December; 2010
"Chicago Tribune"; Caveman Diet Draws Grunts from Nutritionists; Anne Stein; April 2011
Crohns and Colitis Foundation: Diet and Nutrition
Mayo Clinic: Ulcerative Colitis Lifestyle and Home Remedies
National Digestive Diseases Information Clearing House: Ulcerative Colitis
Purdue University: Sulfasalazine"



Taken from: http://www.livestrong.com/article/478718-paleo-diet-for-ulcerative-colitis/#ixzz1ot099J7m

angenz

I like your posts best. You're right how can we even conclude what they ate??? Isn't carbon half life used to analyze bones? That doesn't tell us much. I guess the best thing we can do is go by bone density, or damage... but that doesn't tell us much. So once again about the study (BS).

Stable isotopes are used to make inferences about the diet in past human populations. Generally these are Carbon and Nitrogen and can tell us what kind of diet a person had. It is generally said "you are what you eat", plant crops, land animals and marine animals have there own isotopic signature which is left in the bone after someone eats that food. It's great what can be found out from these chemicals and does give a great insight into the past human diet. These studies have been conducted for a lot of human populations, but not too sure how far back into the past these studies go.

angenz

Restricted Foods
The diet restricts foods such as grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes or any type of food that agricultural development helped create. Grains, dairy products and beans have a high lectin content. Lectins contain toxic compounds designed to ward off insect attacks. Paleo diet supporters believe that lectins may also attack the human body. Lectins, says Cordain, have a carbohydrate and a protein component. The protein component resembles proteins in the human body. Your immune system attacks lectins when they escape your bowels. After the attack, it memorizes the lectin structure in the same way that a police officer memorizes the face of a frequent perpetrator.

Taken from: http://www.livestrong.com/article/478718-paleo-diet-for-ulcerative-colitis/#ixzz1ot099J7m

"The diet restricts foods such as grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes or any type of food that agricultural development helped create"

THIS IS RUBBISH!!! All of those foods existed!!! They are NATURAL! How can anybody even believe that agricultural developed created food. It certainly created MORE food, but only in our modern chemical world have we been able to develop synthetic chemicals as food replacements. There is where the real problems lie.

AntWrig

Restricted Foods
The diet restricts foods such as grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes or any type of food that agricultural development helped create. Grains, dairy products and beans have a high lectin content. Lectins contain toxic compounds designed to ward off insect attacks. Paleo diet supporters believe that lectins may also attack the human body. Lectins, says Cordain, have a carbohydrate and a protein component. The protein component resembles proteins in the human body. Your immune system attacks lectins when they escape your bowels. After the attack, it memorizes the lectin structure in the same way that a police officer memorizes the face of a frequent perpetrator.

Taken from: http://www.livestrong.com/article/478718-paleo-diet-for-ulcerative-colitis/#ixzz1ot099J7m

"The diet restricts foods such as grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes or any type of food that agricultural development helped create"

THIS IS RUBBISH!!! All of those foods existed!!! They are NATURAL! How can anybody even believe that agricultural developed created food. It certainly created MORE food, but only in our modern chemical world have we been able to develop synthetic chemicals as food replacements. There is where the real problems lie.

You missed the memo. Grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes all ascended from the depths of hell. Since the devil couldn't get our souls, he decided to make humans fat.

CaitlinR85

Very interesting thread. Nice posts Angenz, I think you really brought some great arguments and perspective to the discussion.

Goldenbast

bump to read later

suziecue66

I have ulcerative colitis, and did a quick search to see if the Paleo diet is recommended to help with UC. It's not.


"Ulcerative colitis is an inflammatory bowel disease that causes chronic diarrhea. incontinence and loose and bloody stools. The exact cause of ulcerative colitis is unknown, asserts the United States government's Digestive Diseases Information Clearing House, but advocates of the paleo or Paleolithic Diet blame our modern, Neolithic era eating habits.

The Premise
Loren Cordain, author of "The Paleo Diet," characterizes the chronic illnesses of the the Western world as "diseases of civilization." Cordain believes that the human body is genetically programmed to eat like our Paleolithic ancestors, and that once we stray from a basic, hunter/gatherer diet, we become susceptible to all sorts of illnesses. In order to remain healthy, we need to restrict our food intake to foods that could be hunted, gathered or fished during the Paleolithic era, says Cordain. These include fish, meat, eggs, nuts, fruits and vegetables.

Restricted Foods
The diet restricts foods such as grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes or any type of food that agricultural development helped create. Grains, dairy products and beans have a high lectin content. Lectins contain toxic compounds designed to ward off insect attacks. Paleo diet supporters believe that lectins may also attack the human body. Lectins, says Cordain, have a carbohydrate and a protein component. The protein component resembles proteins in the human body. Your immune system attacks lectins when they escape your bowels. After the attack, it memorizes the lectin structure in the same way that a police officer memorizes the face of a frequent perpetrator.

Lectins and Colitis
Paleo diet proponents believe that lectin's similarity to your body's natural proteins make people susceptible to ulcerative colitis and other inflammatory bowel diseases. Your immune system is intelligent, but it in people with ulcerative colitis, it is not smart enough to distinguish between your body's own proteins and the lectin. It, therefore, attacks your body's cells in the same way it attacked the lectin. An autoimmune response ensues, causing leaky gut and other common symptoms of ulcerative colitis.

Criticism
Despite the logic behind the theories of the Paleo Diet, both the Crohn's and Colitis Foundation and the Mayo Clinic assert there is no link between specific foods and susceptibility to ulcerative colitis. Respected nutritionists also take issue with the Paleo Diet, reports the "Chicago Tribune." Keith Ayoob, a pediatric nutritionist at New York's Albert Einstein College of Medicine, argues against the Paleo Diet's restrictions on grains. Grains have folic acid, which reduces your risk of neural tube defects. Folic acid is also a B vitamin that prevents anemia. Sulfasalazine, a common ulcerative colitis drug, impairs folic acid absorption, reports the University of Purdue. Since ulcerative colitis involves frequent blood loss, restricting folic acid rich foods is inadvisable.

References
"The Paleo Diet"; Loren Cordain; December; 2010
"Chicago Tribune"; Caveman Diet Draws Grunts from Nutritionists; Anne Stein; April 2011
Crohns and Colitis Foundation: Diet and Nutrition
Mayo Clinic: Ulcerative Colitis Lifestyle and Home Remedies
National Digestive Diseases Information Clearing House: Ulcerative Colitis
Purdue University: Sulfasalazine"



Taken from: http://www.livestrong.com/article/478718-paleo-diet-for-ulcerative-colitis/#ixzz1ot099J7m

The only way to know for sure is try it.
http://www.robbwolf.com/2012/01/23/testimonial-reversing-ulcerative-colitis/

Martucha123

You know, wasn't the lifespan of a caveman something ridiculously low like 30 years old?

I'm not sure I want to follow that diet...

I know this is a mistake, I should have learned my lesson earlier today on the other Paleo thread...

Yes, the lifespan was 30ys HOWEVER, scientists have found very little evidence of heart disease, diabetes, and other illnesses associated with being unhealthy. The general consensus among scientists is that they simply died early due to a lack of common over the counter medications to prevent infections or provide proper hygiene. Things like that.

The other alternative is that they didn't have time to develop heart disease, diabetes, or other diet-related diseases. (Yes, I know not all diabetes is caused by diet, but a significant number of cases are diet and obesity related). The human body is pretty damn resilient. It often takes many years for poor eating habits and obesity to kill or cause chronic disease.

That's a good one elizabeth.

this!

all those diseases develop mostly in people weel over 30. I'm planing to live at least until 80, so no, now paleo for me!

Isolt

In all these threads there seems to be a big assumption that the only reason for eating this way is for health......what about the ethical, political and ecological reasons?

I can't speak for anyone else, but a lot of the foods I cut out are cut out because they don't grow naturally in this country and I don't like to import food nor to feed the wholesale destruction of virgin land that is happening right now to keep the global desire for such things as palm oil and soy satisfied.

All the meat I eat comes from farms within a 5 mile radius and it's organic, pasture-fed (where applicable) and comes from traditional breeds. All the vegetables I eat I either grow myself, or they're grown on an organic farm up the road. I personally do eat dairy and again, that comes from a local farm who sell milk, butter and cheese made on the premisis direct to the public. I forage, eat game killed by friends who shoot (our gun laws in the UK being rather stricter than yours in the US) and fish when I can.

I don't eat starchy carbs *at all* (which I guess is akin to Atkins in that respect), because I had ME/CFS and my specialist treats the symptoms of ME with a low-carb natural diet - which is a very common way to treat it. Now the FACT is that, once I did swap to a low-carb natural diet my ME symptoms cleared up and my red blood cell magnesium levels went from dangerously low to a healthy level. I'll also add that my 'bad cholesterol' also dropped.

On the political side, I simply refuse to help fund the multi-national food manufacturers by eating their products and I absolutely believe that they, along with the drug companies, have a vested interest in keeping people fat and unhealthy......the fact that the American Diabetes Association is funded by corporations like Kraft and Glaxosmithkline is a bit of a clue that these companies have no real interest in fixing the obesity/diabetes epidemic.

Now frankly, I don't really care if people think it odd that I'll eat offal, or squirrel, or foraged leaves and I don't really care that other people think that what I do is unsustainable, a 'fad', or unhealthy. It works for me, it keeps ME healthy and it fits my personal ethics. Likewise, I don't give a damn if people want to load up on protein powders and lift weights from dawn till dusk.....I *personally* would rather go out and do a 10 mile walk through some lovely countryside and eat a steak.

I have pretty much zero interest in anyone else's health or weight so do whatever works for you and try to avoid slamming what works for me.

Acg67

Very interesting.... I was thinking about this exact thing over the weekend.

I am a bioarchaeologist, studying the impact on human health with the intensification of rice agriculture in mainland Southeast Asia. So, I have a vested interest in this topic and enjoy reading scientific articles about the subject.

Although I don't "follow" the Palaeo-diet, I do not eat grains and not much dairy. This is a personal choice as I have suffered from IBS over the past 10 years and when I cut white and wholemeal bread, pasta, rice, anything wheat based etc. I felt a lot better. No more spasms or bloating. I also developed a lactose intolerance in 2008, after traveling in Asian countries and not eating any dairy at all for 6 months or so. This is just starting to change, over the past few months I can now take some milk in a cup of tea and not feel nauseous!

One amazing thing I that I know about the human condition, through my own personal experiences and what I see in the human skeletal record, is that we can adapt! Adapting to our environment, being cultural, natural and social, is what human beings do best. Without this adaptation we would just not survive and be, as a species, where we are today.

It is implausible to think that human beings have not adapted in the last 10'000 years to agricultural products. However, the extent of individual adaptation based on our genetics has not yet been fully established. Some people have NO problems, whilst other have severe ones. Think about the adaptation to lactose tolerance for instance, this has developed over a relatively short time-span in some human populations, yet, for me it reversed in a matter of months.

The most convincing evidence for me, against the adoption of the palaeo-diet is that grains have always been there, and Homo sapiens have always eaten them. However, these grains were in a wild form, and eaten in moderation and seasonally. It is not the question of whether we should eat them or not, but it how much we eat. But also, processed grains are very, very different from the raw, wild grains our Palaeolithic ancestors ate.

Not sure if I can give any firm conclusions here, as my body tells me one things and the science indicates something else. So, I think that for any diet, you have to do what is good for you and not follow a fad or trend, just because it is acceptable for some people.

Have you read, The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465020429?ie=UTF8&tag=totalfitnessp-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0465020429

I have it, just haven't gotten around to reading it yet

Sidesteal

You missed the memo. Grains, beans, dairy products, salt, sugar, potatoes all ascended from the depths of hell. Since the devil couldn't get our souls, he decided to make humans fat.

Corn killed my family in a horrible confrontation over the loan of a $5 bill. I lost both grandparents, and five bucks.

twinmom01

Here is the thing....every body is different -

I spent years and years eating the "recommended" way - low fat, complex carbs - I counted my calories down to the last hersey kiss...I worked out and burned calories...and yeah...the recommended way didn't work for me...

So i started reading and reading and reading...and slowly over the past 2 years cut out various things..first to go was soda...then white breads/flours/pastas...then most processed foods...since last October I decided to cut out most grains over all (except for an occasional bowl of steel cut oats) and reduce my dairy quite a bit (wasn't a big fan of dairy to begin with) = all I know is I have seen the greatest improvements (to my energy, my skin, my sleep, my body composition, my scale weight) since October then I did the year and half prior...Since the end of January I cut out eating the oats and pretty much all dairy...

Yes there are diehards...I won't dispute that - but I would bet a vast majority of people who say they eat a Paleo or Primal lifestyle aren't super strict - meaning they will occasional have some grains or beans or white potatoes...it is just that it isn't a specific part of thier everyday life...rather than including these things on a daily basis it may be more like once a week or 2-3 times a month...

I have found eating towards this lifestyle - I would rather have some homemade quiche for breakfast instead of a bowl of oatmeal...I would rather have some sweet potato/onion/cauliflower hash than some french fries...I would rather have a handful of nice buttery pecans then some M&M's

Like I said it isn't for everyone - if you eat grains and beans and tons of dairy and eat low fat and that lifestyle works well for you then that is great...There is a segment of the population where grains and dairy can cause serious problems...in my own personal life my daughter was diagnosed as lactose and casien sensitive and the removal of lactose and casien from her diet did wonders - no more stomach problems every day, no more headaches and her execma while not totally gone at least isn't as bad as it was before where her skin was cracking and bleeding (and therefore prone to infections like strep) - so I have seen first hand how eliminating an entire group of foods can have a + impact on her body. I know for myself since October when I do occasionally have something with dairy or something like pasta - my body is NOT happy AT ALL...so for me it is easier to avoid that and choose something different to eat...

There is a reason there are so many different ways to eat...because everyone is different...