Paleo vs The China Study - What are your views?
Replies
-
I read an article the other day by (I think, I really can't recall) an evolutionary biologist talking about the Paleo diet. This person said that we don't need to eat like Paleo man because we're NOT Paleo man. For example, we evolved the ability to digest the lactose in cows' milk ~10,000 years ago, so now it IS a natural part of our diet. And the ability to digest lactose probably led to increased survival of populations that could now incorporate a new, high calorie food source into their diets.
Also, an article published in Lancet showed that atherosclerosis was common in mummies of several cultures, sort of negating the idea that it's a disease caused by our crappy modern diets.
Atherosclerosis was found in mummies due to the high grain intake they consumed.
Source? Lancet didn't mention that as the cause.
You are perfectly capable of looking up the sources for yourself. I no longer do the research for others. If you want to know, read and research for yourself.0 -
Both are tied for the large # of zealots that follow the respective diets0
-
Does it matter really? With anything, people are going to be able to put pros and cons on just about any way of eating. And people will come up with some way to 'debunk' anything different than what they advocate.
Like some other have said, you've got to do what works for you.
I get a kick out of people who try to say their way is the best for everyone.
Vegans do it. Paleos do it. Eat right for you type people do it. Zone diet people do it.
You've got to do what's right for YOU.
Personally, I have been a vegetarian for 12 years (pretty much all vegan) and during that time I have raced bicycles competitively, done Crossfit and Strong Lifts, and currently train MMA and Jiu Jitsu. I train, compete, and recover just as well as my friends who choose to eat differently.
What I chose works for me.
^^^This...different ways work for different people. Not everyone is the same, tolerates the same types of foods, or loses weight in the same way.0 -
I read an article the other day by (I think, I really can't recall) an evolutionary biologist talking about the Paleo diet. This person said that we don't need to eat like Paleo man because we're NOT Paleo man. For example, we evolved the ability to digest the lactose in cows' milk ~10,000 years ago, so now it IS a natural part of our diet. And the ability to digest lactose probably led to increased survival of populations that could now incorporate a new, high calorie food source into their diets.
Also, an article published in Lancet showed that atherosclerosis was common in mummies of several cultures, sort of negating the idea that it's a disease caused by our crappy modern diets.
Atherosclerosis was found in mummies due to the high grain intake they consumed.
Source? Lancet didn't mention that as the cause.
You are perfectly capable of looking up the sources for yourself. I no longer do the research for others. If you want to know, read and research for yourself.
So, instead you just post info that could be totally made up for all anyone knows? Seems legit.
OP, The China Study has been pretty thoroughly debunked and that should not be hard to research. That is what Dave tried to tell you but you dismissed it. If you want to eat as you state, just do it. There is no need to follow one diet or another. Make the choices you think are best and just do it.0 -
'Do what works for YOU.
This is the only 100% accurate advice.0 -
No matter what I read or hear, I take everything with a grain of salt, so to speak. I find it's best to do your own research and come to conclusions yourself and not rely on all of these so called "studies" to make your decisions. They're mostly pushed by people who want their own personal biases and agendas out there. And anyone, vegetarian, vegan, paleo, whatever, who claims they have the "end all be all" diet, I would be a little wary. I haven't looked into The China Study yet, but I've been personally dabbling with paleo for a few weeks now to see how it would make me feel. So far I've only removed grains (however I've had beer a few times), but I feel great. My blood pressure has also dropped pretty significantly, though I haven't had any other blood work done yet. Some other inflammatory issues have since subsided. There could be other factors at play, but I would say experiment on yourself and go from there.
I watched this yesterday. It's Robb Wolf, the author of The Paleo Solution, talking about the paleo diet. He used to be a research biochemist. It's long, but I found it pretty interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PpuIKTg6QE 0 -
But my view is that ANY diet that removed refined grains from your diet and sugars is bound to have positive effects on your body and well being? Is eating such large amounts of meat based protein necessary? I am not entirely convinced.
I agree in eating grass fed meats, organic eggs etc... I am just not convinced that removing legumes and all grains is entirely healthy. Wheat, absolutely. I have not seen ANY research that tells me wheat is necessary. I have been wheat free for nearly a year and it has had a huge impact on my well being.
When I see statements like that, I have to wonder if going wheat free was the one and only change to your diet and lifestyle in the past year? If not, how can you state with certainty that any impact on your health and well being is due to a wheat free diet?0 -
A few days ago, Robb Wolf who authored "Paleo Solution" posted an article about skeptics who don't take Paleo seriously because of the lack of evidence-based medicine, and what his response is: http://robbwolf.com/2013/03/15/evidence-based-medicine-fraud-double-standards-ignorance/
It is a very worthwhile read, as are the comments to the article.0 -
I read an article the other day by (I think, I really can't recall) an evolutionary biologist talking about the Paleo diet. This person said that we don't need to eat like Paleo man because we're NOT Paleo man. For example, we evolved the ability to digest the lactose in cows' milk ~10,000 years ago, so now it IS a natural part of our diet. And the ability to digest lactose probably led to increased survival of populations that could now incorporate a new, high calorie food source into their diets.
Also, an article published in Lancet showed that atherosclerosis was common in mummies of several cultures, sort of negating the idea that it's a disease caused by our crappy modern diets.
Atherosclerosis was found in mummies due to the high grain intake they consumed.
Source? Lancet didn't mention that as the cause.
You are perfectly capable of looking up the sources for yourself. I no longer do the research for others. If you want to know, read and research for yourself.
So, instead you just post info that could be totally made up for all anyone knows? Seems legit.
OP, The China Study has been pretty thoroughly debunked and that should not be hard to research. That is what Dave tried to tell you but you dismissed it. If you want to eat as you state, just do it. There is no need to follow one diet or another. Make the choices you think are best and just do it.
I really don't care what you or anyone else thinks. I state what I have read and researched myself. Do the work yourself. I am done trying to prove anything on this website to a bunch of close-minded people that really don't want to learn, but merely argue with others.
I am done, done, done.0 -
I read an article the other day by (I think, I really can't recall) an evolutionary biologist talking about the Paleo diet. This person said that we don't need to eat like Paleo man because we're NOT Paleo man. For example, we evolved the ability to digest the lactose in cows' milk ~10,000 years ago, so now it IS a natural part of our diet. And the ability to digest lactose probably led to increased survival of populations that could now incorporate a new, high calorie food source into their diets.
Also, an article published in Lancet showed that atherosclerosis was common in mummies of several cultures, sort of negating the idea that it's a disease caused by our crappy modern diets.
Atherosclerosis was found in mummies due to the high grain intake they consumed.
Source? Lancet didn't mention that as the cause.
You are perfectly capable of looking up the sources for yourself. I no longer do the research for others. If you want to know, read and research for yourself.
So, instead you just post info that could be totally made up for all anyone knows? Seems legit.
OP, The China Study has been pretty thoroughly debunked and that should not be hard to research. That is what Dave tried to tell you but you dismissed it. If you want to eat as you state, just do it. There is no need to follow one diet or another. Make the choices you think are best and just do it.
I really don't care what you or anyone else thinks. I state what I have read and researched myself. Do the work yourself. I am done trying to prove anything on this website to a bunch of close-minded people that really don't want to learn, but merely argue with others.
I am done, done, done.
Bye!0 -
Granted, I just found the blog recently, but I've really enjoyed reading Go Kaleo (kind of making fun of fad diets). What I like about her blog is that she links to scientific articles to back up her posts. Granted, there are lots of conflicting studies, so people can still cherry pick what they want to support their claims. Recently, she's been doing a series on metabolism and insulin sensitivity. Interestingly, several studies have shown that insulin sensitivity improves with exercise. Because people who embrace "healthier" eating whether paleo, another fad diet, or just overall eating "better" foods also exercise, there might be an overlap between the source causing improvement in sensitivity.
That said, she doesn't think paleo is the worst way of eating, she just doesn't approve of treating it as the "one true way".0 -
Human beings spread across this planet into almost every ecological niche that exists, eating diets that were hugely varied. There is no "one perfect" human diet, and picking and choosing the so-called "superfoods" from diets from every continent and biome isn't going to create The Best Human Diet.
Humans domesticated seeds ... because they were eating seeds. They purposely set down their camps near large stands of seed-bearing grasses, they collected seeds, they carried some of them home for later. Grains and legumes were not given to Grok by time-travellers from Montsanto - they were domesticated precisely because they were being eaten, at least seasonally, in fairly large quantities by at least some human groups. Those human groups adapted to that diet over many thousands of years, both pre-and post-agriculture, which is more than long enough for evolution to shape dietary preferences and requirements.
Yes, not every human today has the genetics to eat wheat. Not every human today has the genetics to eat dairy. I'd also posit that, depending on where you ancestors came from, you may have more or less genetic tolerance for other foods, including certain meats or greens.
(Short answer: Humans are opportunistic omnivores. Highly restrictive diets are not how we ended up with 7 billlion of us)0 -
I have done a ton of "research" but can't really find a study that backs either. Sure, casein made cancer grow faster but the rats all lived longer than those who didn't eat a high protein diet.
The reality is that the all or nothing approach doesn't work and isn't sustainable for MOST individuals. I was vegan for 6 months and I felt good. I did paleo for a while and felt like ****. Now I eat a balance of whole foods and feel the best. I don't buy into paleo (it lacks a fill factor for me). I don't buy into vegan (its easy to be vegan and fill your diet with processed crap). Eat clean. Eat foods that don't have unpronounceable words. I do lean more toward Paleo because its a clean diet... it just restricts things like legumes and nuts. Balance is key.
0 -
My sister went Paleo two years ago. She was close to 300 lb. at the time, now she is below 210 and on her way to onederland! Her doctor advised against Paleo but she had high chol., was borderline diabetic, all her numbers were bad. A year later the same doctor apologized when the same tests were run. All of her numbers were much lower, no more high chol. or risk of diabetes. She made me a believer, even though I am not in a position to go full paleo.
Real numbers!! Not hype.0 -
My sister went Paleo two years ago. She was close to 300 lb. at the time, now she is below 210 and on her way to onederland! Her doctor advised against Paleo but she had high chol., was borderline diabetic, all her numbers were bad. A year later the same doctor apologized when the same tests were run. All of her numbers were much lower, no more high chol. or risk of diabetes. She made me a believer, even though I am not in a position to go full paleo.
Real numbers!! Not hype.
Well, real numbers from one person. And real numbers that could have been accomplished in multiple ways. The key factors were calorie deficit and weight loss. That being said, there in nothing unhealthy about a Paleo diet and many things good about it. The knock on it is that, for most, it is too restrictive and hard to comply with long term. Gave it a try myself for about a month or so. Didn't make any significant difference in either health or weight loss in that short time.0 -
My thoughts are: Everyone else needs to stay high carb, plant based. More meat for me!0
-
I read an article the other day by (I think, I really can't recall) an evolutionary biologist talking about the Paleo diet. This person said that we don't need to eat like Paleo man because we're NOT Paleo man. For example, we evolved the ability to digest the lactose in cows' milk ~10,000 years ago, so now it IS a natural part of our diet. And the ability to digest lactose probably led to increased survival of populations that could now incorporate a new, high calorie food source into their diets.
Also, an article published in Lancet showed that atherosclerosis was common in mummies of several cultures, sort of negating the idea that it's a disease caused by our crappy modern diets.
Atherosclerosis was found in mummies due to the high grain intake they consumed.
Source? Lancet didn't mention that as the cause.
You are perfectly capable of looking up the sources for yourself. I no longer do the research for others. If you want to know, read and research for yourself.
So, instead you just post info that could be totally made up for all anyone knows? Seems legit.
OP, The China Study has been pretty thoroughly debunked and that should not be hard to research. That is what Dave tried to tell you but you dismissed it. If you want to eat as you state, just do it. There is no need to follow one diet or another. Make the choices you think are best and just do it.
I really don't care what you or anyone else thinks. I state what I have read and researched myself. Do the work yourself. I am done trying to prove anything on this website to a bunch of close-minded people that really don't want to learn, but merely argue with others.
I am done, done, done.
0 -
Just jumping in here to add some details about the 'mummies with artherosclerosis' study - the ONLY significant predictor of presence and degree of arterial calcification was age. One of the four populations from which the subjects were drawn was a marine hunter-gatherer that was pre-agricultural - consuming high-fat protein sources (seals, for example) but very little grain. And they showed identical prevalence of artherosclerosis.
So the conclusion here is that age is the primary predictor independent of diet, and is not associated significantly with a diet containing grain.
The China study also has a range of data-analysis and interpretation issues that are quite well documented.
Both Paleo (not aptly names, by the way - paleolithic humans had diets more like VLCD than modern 'paleo', and were highly variable, and in many cases rather protein deficient), and the China Study have multiple issues with their claims about improved health and causation.
Weightloss associated with either regimen is almost certainly due to good old caloric deficit.0 -
I am pro Paleo...The agricultural revolution has been nothing but a bane on our species and has set the human race back thousands of years.0
-
Bump. Looking forward to reading this (I think). Am afraid of the personal attacks which get thrown in when someone doesn't "agree" with an eating plan.0
-
The agricultural revolution is why we are here now.I am pro Paleo...The agricultural revolution has been nothing but a bane on our species and has set the human race back thousands of years.0 -
The agricultural revolution is why we are here now.I am pro Paleo...The agricultural revolution has been nothing but a bane on our species and has set the human race back thousands of years.
shennanigans, all those fresh fruits and vegetables we eat now are not cultivated and are all hand picked, packaged, and shipped throughout the world from their native growing range.0 -
You already have your answer it's both. Balance and moderation. Eat a diet full of wholesome variety, and love your food. There is a reason that both diets work because we are adaptable omnivores and can eat most anything hence why we are successful.
Combine the diets eat the wholesome grains, fruits, fish, and vegetables recommended by the China study and add the rich fat, meat, nuts, and seeds recommended by the paleos.
Believe me no one got to be 100 because they followed one diet. Even if you look at the longest living people in Japan, forget the region, the diet is varied but comes from wholesome sources and has many fiber rich grains, meat on occasion, fish, fruits, and vegetables along with oils like sesame.0 -
I think both are much better options than the Standard American Diet (SAD). I also don't feel that they contradict each other- both are a plant-based diet. Vegan diets (based on the China study) are plant-based and include grains and beans. Paleo is plant-based and includes lean meats. Both agree that highly processed foods, white flour, processed sugar, alcohol, and caffeine should generally be avoided. Vegans eating loads of processed foods are doing it wrong. Likewise Paleo dieters eating loads of meat and skimping on veggies are doing it wrong. In essence both of these diets promote eating whole, unprocessed health food that consists mainly of vegetables. I say start cutting the processed crap and loading up on veggies. Call yourself by whatever label you want.0
-
I was a skeptic too.. my dad died of a heart attack at 38, lots of heart disease in my family and i am obese and have high blood pressure so the thought of a high fat diet scared the crap out of me. But I read Robb Wolfs book the Paleo diet (Robb by the way is a research microbiologist so he knows his stuff) and it really put me to thinking. So I've been paleo 80/20 since Jan 1. I've lost 18 lbs, feel so much better, no pain or aches like I was used too. There's something to be said about all the inflamation we get from the SAD diet (SAD=Standard American Diet).
Read his book, its good science if you want to go that deep in your research.0 -
The China study also has a range of data-analysis and interpretation issues that are quite well documented.
Both Paleo and the China Study have multiple issues with their claims about improved health and causation.
Weightloss associated with either regimen is almost certainly due to good old caloric deficit.
^ That.0 -
The agricultural revolution has been nothing but a bane on our species and has set the human race back thousands of years.
This is, quite possibly, the stupidest thing I have read here. Ever.0 -
I've opted to combine all the benefits of every "diet" into one SUPER-DIET
I call it "balanced"
It's gonna be the next big thing, just wait.0 -
The agricultural revolution has been nothing but a bane on our species and has set the human race back thousands of years.
This is, quite possibly, the stupidest thing I have read here. Ever.
LOL I wasnt going to be that blunt but it did cause me to get quite a chuckle.0 -
The China study also has a range of data-analysis and interpretation issues that are quite well documented.
Both Paleo and the China Study have multiple issues with their claims about improved health and causation.
Weightloss associated with either regimen is almost certainly due to good old caloric deficit.
^ That.
if you're choosing veganism or a paleo diet purely for weight loss, then that's silly, as you can lose weight eating anything.
choosing them because you believe in their health ramifications is something else entirely. there's really great info on both sides of the coin, and my opinion is that a balance of the two is optimal. Eat tons of fruits, veggies, nuts and seeds, and eat smaller amounts of free range meats.
if america simply cut BACK on meat consumption, it would significantly help reduce all the pollution, biproducts of factory farming, and they would also improve their health and put less strain on the healthcare industry.
my opinion is that it isn't black or white, but that there are legitimate points to be made on both sides. For example, I don't eat any more than 20% of my diet as protein - even less is animal protein. The rest is made up of veggies, fruits, etc and good fats, both animal and vegetable. I probably follow paleo more closely these days, but it's a mixture of information I've gleaned from reading The China Study and The Paleo Diet for Athletes, along with perusing Mark's Daily Apple.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions