"What is Paleo?" - Video by Alex Johnson

[Steakeater**]

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. At all...

So paleo dieters are allowed to eat other foods that people in the Paleos never ate because of similar breakdowns in micronutrients, AA, etc, then why is it outlawed to eat anything manmade, had they had similar breakdowns?

 

[T_Money_]

So paleo dieters are allowed to eat other foods that people in the Paleos never ate because of similar breakdowns in micronutrients, AA, etc, then why is it outlawed to eat anything manmade, had they had similar breakdowns?

Ya, that's kind of the point...it doesn't make sense. I'm glad mathias finally showed up. I knew broccoli, spinach, etc. hadn't even been edible for 10,000 years yet alone 2 million. But apparently, it doesn't matter to paleo. I don't know, literally, I have no idea how it makes sense to them.

 

[turbozed]

1. Did you watch the video that this thread is about? The 'live like a caveman' mantra is the theme of it.

2. So all these 'essential to life' nutrients in supplement form we have been eating throughout all of our evolution? The cavemen must of had access to a GNC. It sounds like you're rearranging my post in a poor excuse attempt to make yourself sound superior. Give it a rest.

1. Yes that was the purpose of the video which I've already said I don't agree with. You seem to be confusing that specific mantra with any interpretation that we can learn anything about nutrition from studying the diet of homo sapiens over the past millions of years (which I do advocate). Is this clear now? Because I don't think there's any way to make it more simple.

2. I agree that 'doing everything like the caveman' is stupid because they aren't sitting in front of computers, wearing contact lenses, driving cars, and doing everything that we seem to do in modern society. I'm not defending the video's point of view. Also nobody argued that supplements are 'essential to life' so I don't know where you're getting that impression. I don't even know where you get the impression that 'Paleo' people (especially the extreme ones) are all big into supplements in the first place.

However, since you (randomly) brought it up, here's an explanation: the whole point of supplements is to provide nutrients that our bodies are lacking, and this assumes that our bodies tend to operate better under certain nutritional conditions. The fact is our early human ancestors don't have GNC is exactly the point. They ate a different diet than us so they didn't need it. The idea is that the reason we need GNCs today is because our diets have drastically changed and our food sources are different. Now you don't have to agree with this, but I was hoping you would have at least knew that that is what's being argued by 'Paleo' people (the extreme kind or not).

 

[T_Money_]

Judging by the responses you are getting turbo, I think it's pretty safe that your definition is in the minority. I think all the confusion and debate stems from the fact that most of us (whether right or wrong) view the term paleo to mean a diet devoid of any grains or other food that hasn't been around since 10,000 years ago. You are the only one I know of who defines paleo as equivalent to using anthropological evidence as a guide towards eating.

And I wouldn't start taking shots at mathias about WOE based on evolution. I don't think that will end well, for you.

 

[turbozed]

So paleo dieters are allowed to eat other foods that people in the Paleos never ate because of similar breakdowns in micronutrients, AA, etc, then why is it outlawed to eat anything manmade, had they had similar breakdowns?

A lot of the problems in this conversation seem to be surrounding what 'paleo' is and what is or isn't allowed. Is everyone going to set as 'laws' what some guy put in his youtube video? Because if that's the definition everyone is going to use to question evolutionary inquiry, then I'm not gonna waste time defending that.

I'm under the personal belief that a lot of real 'paleo' science here is mixed with new-age tree-hugging quackery (like T_Money) suggests and it's up to the discerning person to separate that aspect out. I, for one, don't care so much about eating 'natural' because I don't believe the body cares where the specific compound came from prior to metabolizing it if it is the same compound.

 

[turbozed]

Judging by the responses you are getting turbo, I think it's pretty safe that your definition is in the minority. I think all the confusion and debate stems from the fact that most of us (whether right or wrong) view the term paleo to mean a diet devoid of any grains or other food that hasn't been around since 10,000 years ago. You are the only one I know of who defines paleo as equivalent to using anthropological evidence as a guide towards eating.

And I wouldn't start taking shots at mathias about WOE based on evolution. I don't think that will end well, for you.

Well then I guess this does boil down to semantics. I just don't like the fact that people are thinking that the 'Paleo' as we know from the video is like the single interpretation of the science behind an evolutionary approach to nutrition. Seems like people will say something that they think is wrong with 'Paleo' (justifiably and with my agreement) and then the subtext will be that we therefore shouldn't view nutrition through a paleoanthropologic lens. Maybe in this sense, 'Paleo' principles are being hijacked by some loonies.

As far as Mathias goes, I hope he does weigh in on this. If anything becomes clearer afterwards, then I think it will end well (or at least better) for everyone. I thought that was the point of discussion.

 

[T_Money_]

Well then I guess this does boil down to semantics. I just don't like the fact that people are thinking that the 'Paleo' as we know from the video is like the single interpretation of the science behind an evolutionary approach to nutrition. Seems like people will say something that they think is wrong with 'Paleo' (justifiably and with my agreement) and then the subtext will be that we therefore shouldn't view nutrition through a paleoanthropologic lens. Maybe in this sense, 'Paleo' principles are being hijacked by some loonies.

As far as Mathias goes, I hope he does weigh in on this. If anything becomes clearer afterwards, then I think it will end well (or at least better) for everyone. I thought that was the point of discussion.

I still have abso-fucking-lutely no idea where you think these attacks against "an evolutionary approach to nutrition" are coming from. The more I read about paleo, the more I think you are way off base in your definition. Paleo in regards to nutrition (at least in most peoples minds and most of the resources available) is a reccomendation for a WOE. And in my opinion, those recommendations don't make a whole lot of sense.

 

[JSN]

turbo all genetic diversity comes from mutations. any kind of selection is about isolating those variations, although the far more common scenario in breeding is that you'll accumulate many mutations that aren't expressed (either they occur on the indide of a protein where they don't really affect anything, or the variation can allow the protein to function the same way (not to mention mutations that don't change anything because they aren't expressed period)) due to inbreeding.

3 bases is due to the way dna codes. 3 bases on a dna strand code for one amino acid, so proteins are built from amino acids by cellular machinery by reading 3 bases and then bringing an amino acid to that spot and including it in the linear structure of a protein, where it gets bonded to the previous and next amino acids. most aren't that significant in the functioning of the protein, but the proteins can be broken down by your digestive system and for that reason certain mutations can give rise to meats with say a much higher than average content of some essential amino acid, or a larger amino acid profile.

 

[turbozed]

turbo all genetic diversity comes from mutations. any kind of selection is about isolating those variations, although the far more common scenario in breeding is that you'll accumulate many mutations that aren't expressed (either they occur on the indide of a protein where they don't really affect anything, or the variation can allow the protein to function the same way (not to mention mutations that don't change anything because they aren't expressed period)) due to inbreeding.

3 bases is due to the way dna codes. 3 bases on a dna strand code for one amino acid, so proteins are built from amino acids by cellular machinery by reading 3 bases and then bringing an amino acid to that spot and including it in the linear structure of a protein, where it gets bonded to the previous and next amino acids. most aren't that significant in the functioning of the protein, but the proteins can be broken down by your digestive system and for that reason certain mutations can give rise to meats with say a much higher than average content of some essential amino acid, or a larger amino acid profile.

Thanks for the explanation. In any case it's nothing like the directed 'evolve into different animal within a couple thousand years' due to domestication that the other dude was advocating.

 

[JSN]

there are many domesticated species that are different species than their forebears by any definition of species, and besides that, there are plenty of domesticated species that are nutritionally very different. farmed salmon are a great example of this- not only were they nutritionally very different almost immediately due to many environmental factors, but genetically they showed to diverge quite greatly after not many generations at all.

 

[Mathias]

1. Yes that was the purpose of the video which I've already said I don't agree with. You seem to be confusing that specific mantra with any interpretation that we can learn anything about nutrition from studying the diet of homo sapiens over the past millions of years (which I do advocate). Is this clear now? Because I don't think there's any way to make it more simple.

2. I agree that 'doing everything like the caveman' is stupid because they aren't sitting in front of computers, wearing contact lenses, driving cars, and doing everything that we seem to do in modern society. I'm not defending the video's point of view. Also nobody argued that supplements are 'essential to life' so I don't know where you're getting that impression. I don't even know where you get the impression that 'Paleo' people (especially the extreme ones) are all big into supplements in the first place.

However, since you (randomly) brought it up, here's an explanation: the whole point of supplements is to provide nutrients that our bodies are lacking, and this assumes that our bodies tend to operate better under certain nutritional conditions. The fact is our early human ancestors don't have GNC is exactly the point. They ate a different diet than us so they didn't need it. The idea is that the reason we need GNCs today is because our diets have drastically changed and our food sources are different. Now you don't have to agree with this, but I was hoping you would have at least knew that that is what's being argued by 'Paleo' people (the extreme kind or not).

The Paleo diet, as this cult puts it, is all the foods eaten before the Mesolithic era. They claim that these foods are lean meats, lean fish, fruits, vegetables, and nuts. And don't forget to cut any and all fat off your steak which will result in a disgustingly low amount of fat soluble vitamins. The only problem with this is that fruits, vegetables, and nuts can only be gathered in season and they are certainly not like the ones we eat in our supermarkets. Only the rarely seen edible ones can be eaten in the wild and they are not calorie dense by any means, making them not an optimal food. They have all sorts of naturally occuring toxins in them to ward off herbivores and need pesticides to get rid of most of them. That would lead to eating a lot of lean meats which would ultimately lead to rabbit starvation - not a good thing.

If there's one thing that Anthropology shows us about diet, it is that all humans, if available, will hunt relentlessly for animal fat as their primary fuel source. Even Weston Price highly touted this during his conquest through Africa as their annoying activist group points out. The strongest tribes ate the most animal fat and the weaker ones didn't. The Inuit are widely known to have the most robust health/bone structure and ate a diet close to 80% fat. People like Cordain are just out to make a buck capitalizing on people's ignorance.

I courageously brought up the supplement issue because it's funny to see some people supporting the Paleo mob and then talking about their vitamin tool box - the most processed of all processed foods. It totally defeats the caveman mentality of eating as they so proudly support.

 

[Steakeater**]

A lot of the problems in this conversation seem to be surrounding what 'paleo' is and what is or isn't allowed. Is everyone going to set as 'laws' what some guy put in his youtube video? Because if that's the definition everyone is going to use to question evolutionary inquiry, then I'm not gonna waste time defending that.

I'm under the personal belief that a lot of real 'paleo' science here is mixed with new-age tree-hugging quackery (like T_Money) suggests and it's up to the discerning person to separate that aspect out. I, for one, don't care so much about eating 'natural' because I don't believe the body cares where the specific compound came from prior to metabolizing it if it is the same compound.

I agree, Im not attacking Paleo in any way, as their dieting philosophy holds a strong base in the nutritional foundation (meats, veggies, efas). I just think that the term "Paleo" is just too broad. Some people claim they are Paleo, but they drink gallons of milk. Is JB Paleo when he is fine with steel cut oats, etc PWO? I think its just open to interpretation, but at least they all hold a general foundation of eat what you pick and kill

Mike Marital and Xtrainer here seems to be as Paleo as you can get though

 

[BJJHooligan]

Wow it looks like i missed a lot of good conversation. I pretty much agree with the knocks on the Paleo diet. To me it seems like a nutritional fad. Then people use the term modified Paleo which implies they see faults in the Paleo diet. I personally eat oats daily. I eat quinoa pretty often. It drives me crazy when people ask for help and are told their diet is all wrong because they include grains in their diet. I agree with eating meats, veggies, fruits and nuts. I also include milk and unprocessed grains in my diet.

I personally think we are in a position to eat a BETTER diet then paleo man. We can add things to our diet like fish oil supps, mutli vits, creatine, beta alanine. A paleo diet should not include these things because Paleo man did not eat them. Also modern Beef is not Paleo. Bison may be considered Paleo as i have no researched Bison enough to know exactly when they first appeared.

I just find it weird that people feel we cannot improve upon the Paleo diet. It was by no means an ideal diet it was eat as much as you can when you can for the most part as you never knew when your next meal would come.

 

[turbozed]

there are many domesticated species that are different species than their forebears by any definition of species, and besides that, there are plenty of domesticated species that are nutritionally very different. farmed salmon are a great example of this- not only were they nutritionally very different almost immediately due to many environmental factors, but genetically they showed to diverge quite greatly after not many generations at all.

So you're saying there's something about humans raising animals that causes more natural mutations and for some reason other than selection causes major genetic differences? Please elaborate more on this process since this assertion if what we were all confused about.

 

[turbozed]

I courageously brought up the supplement issue because it's funny to see some people supporting the Paleo mob and then talking about their vitamin tool box - the most processed of all processed foods. It totally defeats the caveman mentality of eating as they so proudly support.

Yeah I would agree with that. I think it's helpful to know the lifestyle of humans before the rapid development of modern society as an information base, but ultimately this must be balanced with what we know about our current biology. People take it to an extreme when they become obsessed with emulating 'Grok.' I earlier mentioned a point you brought up again, which is the toxicity of plants and the argument that eating natural growing plants and vegetables *must* be better than eating plants that was sprayed with pesticides. You can do the tests and find that the natural defense toxins of plants are something like a thousandfold more than pesticide sprayed plants. Here, the strict 'Paleo' people seem to prefer the idea of a 'natural' lifestyle and ignore the science (at least in terms of health). I definitely don't approve of this type of thinking and didn't realize that 'Paleo' carried with it this cultish connotation (although perhaps due to the preachy nature of the video, maybe I should've been more wary).

 

[MikeMartial]

Mike Marital and Xtrainer here seems to be as Paleo as you can get though

For the record, I still consume dairy, and daily, in the form of hard cheese and cottage cheese. It's just milk I've eliminated out of curiosity since Jan, and I've found neither positive or negative in that, since I was just using it PWO anyways.

As far as a "strict" definition of Paleo goes, there's not a single soul here doing it, and I honestly don't know anyone waving a Paleo flag. Perhaps Mathias comes close, but I believe he's completely zero carb and zero supplement. But then again, I may be confusing him with Solkanar. :icon_chee

What most of us are doing (if I can speak for most of "us") is more of whole food/low carb diet. Most of these foods just happen to be meat, veggies, nuts, seeds and fruit. By my own definition (and I don't think I'm the first to tag it this way), guys adding in milk and oats would be "Athlete Paleo", just based on the (classic perspective) greater need for carbohydrate intake.

Paleo is just a broad term that's thrown around a lot here to very loosely describe what someone eats and does not eat, guys; getting into details is splitting hairs, and for the most part I find it pointless and non-productive. Christ, I'm glad I never decided to do an actual guide. Imagine the uproar.

 

[IDRISCKY]

Ok, so I'm not Paleo. I'm Athlete-Guy-Does-Some-Research-And-Knows-What-The-Fuck-To-Eat-And-What-Not-To-Eat Paleo.

I think you said it best awhile back.

 

[JSN]

So you're saying there's something about humans raising animals that causes more natural mutations and for some reason other than selection causes major genetic differences? Please elaborate more on this process since this assertion if what we were all confused about.

artificial selection is all about concentrating mutations*- that is the entire essence. actually causing them is something you don't see much, but i think is done with things like flowers more recreationally- exposing seeds to mutagens to see what kind of new variety you might get.



*breeders look for traits that certain individuals have, which ultimately come from mutations. the concentration of mutations increased by a much larger factor, however, because in inbreeding you concentrate mutations that cannot be seen. this is unlikely to be very relevant from a protein standpoint, but there are things like myostatin blockers in certain mutants. it's pretty hard to be general about how mutations may affect a food source nutritionally, but changes in nutrient profiles, both macro and micro, can be pretty significant from species to species.

 

[Mathias]

As far as a "strict" definition of Paleo goes, there's not a single soul here doing it, and I honestly don't know anyone waving a Paleo flag. Perhaps Mathias comes close, but I believe he's completely zero carb and zero supplement. But then again, I may be confusing him with Solkanar. :icon_chee

Yup, you are confused. I am not zero carb and eat some low allergenic carb sources to stay out of ketosis like white rice and low fructose fruits. I've tried to get Sol to come back and post on message boards but he's not interested and says we're all a bunch of food obsessives.

On a side note, how Anthony Colpo's Fat Loss Bible has not caught on here is beyond me. He eats probably the exact diet that you do MM.

Fatty meats, eggs, coconut oil, butter, fruits, vegetables, nuts, PreWO and PWO whey with liquid carbs. Sound familiar?

Not to mention the guy trains MMA, is a competitive cyclist, lifts heavy weights, and has single digit body fat unlike that shitbag Dr. Eades whom he destroyed in their calories vs MAD debate. How Eades still has any followers is something I'll never know. I guess being sedentary and lazy is what sells in English speaking countries.

 

[cheath]

So I have some questions about this stuff. Maybe it should be another thread aimed at lifestyle, but maybe it can sit in here nicely.

1) What are people's thoughts on the extremes to which you should take your diet in order to reap effects? More specifically, do you think that starting off with small changes can be effective? For example, if I switch the little bit of milk I drink to soy milk, take a couple snack products or a dinner staple and replace it with something more Paleo, do you think that's a beneficial start? Or would you argue that unless I really do a serious revamp I'm unlikely to feel/reap any of the benefits at all?

2) What are some changes that people can make? We try to get grassfed beef/chicken at the local farmers market when we can, and we eat the "free range" eggs from the grocery store (which I know is probably nothing more than a waste of an extra dollar). But is switching regular milk to soy milk a good start? I try to eat Kashi cereal rather than other cereals (which trying to do something is *a* step, so don't say it's not...it just might not be a worthwhile/good one).

But if you think it's worth it change what you can where you can in the absence of an immediate overhaul, what are some good places to start? It's not like I can walk into the store and go to the Paleo section. If anybody has readings or something on this, it would be great to see on my own, and have them as a resource for those interested.