I get really frustrated with people who try to tell me what I should or shouldn't do

That said, I don't bother, it's good for me it may not be for other people and I've only just started on Paleo.

I agree with all of the above wholeheartedly. I've stopped looking around on the main boards completely now...I am tired of being 'proven wrong' at every turn. I don't need to defend the way I am choosing to eat...I feel fantastic, I'm losing weight and that's what matters to me right now. This ISN'T the best lifestyle for everyone, but it's obviously the best for a bunch of us...we don't need to defend ourselves.

Success posts are great, don't get me wrong. But you can get to the Before/After photos many numerous ways. Some people continue to eat fast food and as long as they stay under calories, will lose the weight they want. So before/after photos aren't a good way to "win" the argument.

I just get frustrated mostly with people who are paleo claiming that they aren't eating at a deficit of calories and that just the switch to paleo is causing them to lose weight. there is no quicker way for people to completely disregard what you are saying by 1) claiming that your body defies thermodynamics (uhhhh doubtful)

there's more to it than calories in/ calories out.
I suggest reading some Taubes.

I just get frustrated mostly with people who are paleo claiming that they aren't eating at a deficit of calories and that just the switch to paleo is causing them to lose weight. there is no quicker way for people to completely disregard what you are saying by 1) claiming that your body defies thermodynamics (uhhhh doubtful)

there's more to it than calories in/ calories out.
I suggest reading some Taubes.

One of the things to keep in mind, especially when talking about processes in biology, is the 'law of diminishing returns' (or the '80/20' rule). Even though there are a bunch of modifiers to the rule "calories=calories", those modifiers are really minor to the basic rule. Most health writers (including our paleo/primal heroes) like to talk about these minor processes in black and white terms for ease of understanding, and then most layman miss the point, turn around and give them the same importance as the main process.

So, even though there are various modifiers that can slightly assist or retard the biological process (after all, we are not a simple engine but a complex mechanism) - the idea that calories = calories is still true as a basic rule of thumb.

I would also like to point out a couple factors that have helped me in these discussions.

First of all, the point of this way of eating is NOT WEIGHT LOSS. The point of paleo/primal eating is for our health. Drs.Eades goes into this greatly in the book Protein Power Life plan. When we get back to what our body's are naturally designed to be consuming we have lower risks of high blood pressure, heart disease, diabetes, strokes, heart attacks, and although the data is not conclusive yet perhaps cancer and Alzheimers. Losing weight is just a happy side effect. I always make this point clear up front.

Two, I love to hear the words "fad diet" because that is incredibly easy to refute. I point to this link, a reprinting of a letter written in 1869 entitled, "A letter on Corpulence". This work advocates a diet that avoids gluten and sugar, which is pretty much the main point of paleo. The rest may not be considered "strictly" paleo, but its close enough that it points out that this way of eating is nothing new.http://www.lowcarb.ca/corpulence/

Three I also stop calling it a diet, and use the term "new way of eating". Even with yourself. We all have a mental image of a diet, which like a movie has a beginning, a middle and an end, and implies that there is going to be a time where you will be able to "go back to normal" so to speak. With paleo or primal, and the emphasis of this way of eating being to increase your overall health instead of simply to lose weight, the term diet is, in my opinion, not appropriate. I've even had someone call me on not using the term diet. When I explained that I see this this a permanent shift in my way of eating, that I never plan on stopping. They took what I had to say a bit more seriously.

Lastly, know who you are debating. Most of the very vocal anti-paleo people I see on the boards are fitness trainers. I think they have several good reasons to be so vocal. One they went through a lot of training to learn what they know, we are telling them that all of their instructors are wrong, that can be very hard to believe. Then they go out and put what they learned into practice, and low and behold, it works. This reinforces that they are correct. After a while they've helped many people lose weight and are feeling really good about the work they do. If they accept that our way of eating is correct, that means that they have mislead perhaps hundreds of people, and that is not something they are willing to take responsibility for. So the result is to punch as many holes in the argument as they can. And bear in mind that this is before we get into fighting the double whammy of big pharma and the agribusinesses. However, mentioning any of the big picture problems with the way we eat, like big pharma and the agribusinesses instantly throws you into conspiracy theory nutbar, and anything you say can and will be ignored.

Good luck!

Taubes spent 5 years researching GCBC. Getting through those studies may take you some time!

After I read Why We Get Fat, read Good Calories Bad Calories which was written more for health professionals and has more citations. I've been eating paleo over a year now and rarely post on main boards because of the anti-paleo trolls who apparently take delight in framing paleo solely in caveman eating terms such as, must eat everything raw, must only eat what you hunt and gather, willfully misunderstand life expectancy and lifespan of early modern man, and when, what and how EMM began using grains as a dietary item, among other ludicrous suggestions. I've read everything from scientific literature to lay proponents such as Mark Sisson et al, and Gary Taubes (who is not a paleo/primal writer), and more, and am more than satisfied by the validity of this way of eating. Paleo/primal is just a stupid name.

While I started this for weight loss, I've easily stuck to it because of the vastly, amazing even, improved health. On the boards I say it worked for me and leave it at that. "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still" Impossible to *make* someone change his/her mind ... if they aren't willing to open their mind to try something--the 30 day test of their *own* body--then nothing I, a total stranger, can say will make a difference. Honestly, I came across the paleolithic diet on the internet years ago before Robb Wolf's and Mark Sisson's books and thought, 'no way can I give up pasta and bread, and gimme a break, this is craziness'. Trying it made all the difference. Posters on the main boards for the most part make comments based on hearsay.

On these boards no other way of eating such as herbalife, vegan, vegetarian, nutrisystem, jenny craig, etc. faces the same derision as paleo.

i have noticed that too. like any posts about all types of diets and pills and plans and gimicks and all sorts of stuff are accepted but as soon as paleo is mentioned it becomes fair game to be crucified. annoying

A 'friend' here on MFP asked me to look through his diary and tweak it, in a Primal fashion. After spending an hour of reading through his diary and writing a LONG private message to him, I sent it. Two weeks have gone by and no response. I don't feel like I wasted my time, but you'd think at least a brief thank you would be in order.

Perhaps the concept is just too foreign to standard dieters...who are struggling and not getting anywhere...hmmmm, wouldn't you look for something that worked rather than keep trying the same kind of deprivations?????

My rant is over