The Paleo Diet

I'm looking into the Paleo diet. Not as a weight-loss measure, but as a lifelong dietary and culinary lifestyle.

I have to say I'm highly skeptical of it. It fkies in the fae of everything I know about nutrition, plus it's one more type of the low-carb/high-protein model. It's easier to define it by what you can't eat:

No grains
No legumes (beans, peas, lentils, etc)
No sugar
No "processed" oils (mostly this means animal fat and olive, advocado and coconut oil are ok)
No salt
No diary (though this varies a lot between proponents)

Now, if you've read my recipe blog, you know that would be quite hard for me. I love legumes and grains. Additionally I get most of my calories from vegetables, most of the time, which means it's high in carbs but low in fat. I often use legumes, including soy varieties, for protein.

I can see giving up wheat entirely (Paleo seems to positively hate gluten), and barley as well (though I LOVE it!). But other grains not so much. I also love rice and corn. And legumes, that would be really, really, really hard. Dairy shoudl be easy. I rarely sue sugar, and I never add salt to anything.

So why am I even considering it?

Two reasons: One, some people whose judgment I respect, because of their podcasts about ethics, have adopted it and sing its praises loudly. Second, a recent podcast by one of them was an itnerview with Robb Wolf, a big Paleo propponent. In the interview he claimed people on a Paleo diet experience little to no inflamation. This is a big deal, as inflamation causes all sorts of health problems, particualrly later in life.

But, aside rfom my doubts, I'd need to find confirmation about that claim from independent sources.

another BIG problem would be breakfast. I'm perfectly capable of cooking breakfast every day, but I lack the time. oatmeal takes me under 3 minutes, and cold cereal under 1 minute. Over the weekend I tried an omelette and some grilled veggies with bacon. Very good, but either one takes nearly thirty minutes to make.

So I'm looking into it.

Any eating plan that advises against the consumption of all major food groups or "flies in the face of everything you know about nutrition" is unhealthy as anything other than a short-term weight loss program.

Beans and peas provide protein and vitamins, dairy provides nutrients essential to muscle and bone development, sodium in small quantities is a necessary mineral, and grains are necessary for maintaining intestinal health. To completely eliminate all these foods over an extended period can be dangerous, especially, as you say, "later in life".

The best "lifelong diet and culinary lifestyle" anyone can adopt is to maintain a balanced diet, and to consume all foods in small quantities. The only difference between medicine and poison is dosage. A teaspoon of sugar in your coffee won't kill you, nor will a teaspoon of salt in boiling water when you're cooking vegetables; it's when taken to extremes that it causes problems.

BTW, where did the name "Paleo Diet" come from? Is it because it harkens back to what cavemen ate? There's your first clue right there that tells you it's no good ... how many cavemen do you see walking around today? Didn't do them much good, did it?

Quote: 123Smitty

BTW, where did the name "Paleo Diet" come from? Is it because it harkens back to what cavemen ate? There's your first clue right there that tells you it's no good ... how many cavemen do you see walking around today? Didn't do them much good, did it?

Your typing at this computer. You're doing okay. Cavemen from 10,000 BC and me are pretty similar biologically. By 'pretty similar' I mean - you really can't tell the difference on the insides.

This doesn't defend the Paleo diet.

I can do eggs for breakfast in about 5 minutes, with veggies.

Quote: 123Smitty

BTW, where did the name "Paleo Diet" come from? Is it because it harkens back to what cavemen ate? There's your first clue right there that tells you it's no good ... how many cavemen do you see walking around today? Didn't do them much good, did it?

I don't disagree with any of the rest of your post. The name is short for "Modern Paleolithic Diet." the idea is to eat what we've evolved to eat. In itself it's not a bad idea. We're surely close, genetically, to our cave-dwelling ancestors. The one big red flag is the proscription on dairy. We have evolved lactose tolerance, after all, and so may ahve some of our domesticated animals. All other animals can't digest lactose, except for infant mammals.

The basic question is: what is food? or Why do we need to eat?

For two reasons: energy and raw materials, or fuel and nutrients.

Now, fuel is sugar. Period. Our cells, through mitochndria, turn glucose, a type of sugar, into adenosine tri-phophate (ATP) in order to provide themselves with energy. The rest is raw material for different cells, where other organelles make proteins, aminoacids, fats, etc.

Different beings eat different things. Cats, for instance, are carnivores. They can't digest vegetables well, at elast not unproessed. Dogs are omnivores. So are people. But what should we eat? We can digest just about anything that's living matter, almost. but did we evolve for certain foods?

Probably. Still, we can't say for sure what cavemen ate and in what portions. In itself that doesn't matter. In the end the test of a diet is "what effect does this diet have on people?" On another level, it does matter as it points the way to what humans should "naturally" eat. I'll post some musings on that later.

I don't understand why you posted about this Paleo diet to being with. On one hand you say you're highly skeptical of it and would have trouble keeping to its regimen, then a few sentences later you say you're seriously considering trying it but apparently only because certain people are recommending it on the Internet.

You say we should eat like the caveman and then you say we don't know what they ate or how much of it. What cats and dogs eat has nothing to with any of it.

Talk to a board-certified nutritionist and see what s/he says about this Paleo Diet ... once s/he stops laughing that is.

BTW, there is no reason for anyone to avoid gluten unless they are allergic to it.

I think there are two main things to consider regarding what early humans ate: availability and cooking. That is, how easy were some foods to come by, and how much processing did they need to be made edible.

Humans did not invent tool making. That was actually a development by our hominid ancestors. Homo Habilis, for example, is named after his ability to handle and make tools (the name means "Handy Man"). So we know that early humans did process their food in some ways, rather than just eat it raw like animals.

Grains are easy to come by in grassy reagions, like the African plains where some of our ancestors lived. Legumes are easy to come by, to. But most grains can't be eaten raw, as can't most legumes. With exceptions, of course. Corn and peanuts, to name one of each, can easily be eaten and digested raw. Not so wheat, beans, barley, peas, etc.

So what did early man do with grains and legumes? We know they did something, because when agriculture took off these were among the crops they planted. But early, pre-agriculture Man might not have consumed much grain and legumes regularly, until agriculture became commonplace.

More later. This is somewhat disjointed and unstructured.

Ok, the point regarding grains and legumes is that ancient hunter-gatherer Man must have gathered some grains and legumes and learned how to cook them. Either our Homo Spaiens ancestors, or one fo the preceding hominid species. But lacking agriculture, as yet, they'd find such foods seldom.

This is pure specualtion, but to me it amkes sense. So maybe we evolved to eat small amoutns of grains, rather than large amounts. Consider that, alelrgies aside, few foods cause disease. One that does is wheat, as people with Celiac disease get very ill if they eat any gluten (a protein foudn in wheat). There are also people sensitive to gluten. they are not allergic, but if they eat gluten they get ill for a time.

Anyway, if anyone has some useful info on Paleo, that would be highhly appreciated. Particularly I'd like to find studies about it, or other low-carb diets.

Quote: Nareed

Ok, the point regarding grains and legumes is that ancient hunter-gatherer Man must have gathered some grains and legumes and learned how to cook them. Either our Homo Spaiens ancestors, or one fo the preceding hominid species. But lacking agriculture, as yet, they'd find such foods seldom.

This is pure specualtion, but to me it amkes sense. So maybe we evolved to eat small amoutns of grains, rather than large amounts. Consider that, alelrgies aside, few foods cause disease. One that does is wheat, as people with Celiac disease get very ill if they eat any gluten (a protein foudn in wheat). There are also people sensitive to gluten. they are not allergic, but if they eat gluten they get ill for a time.

Anyway, if anyone has some useful info on Paleo, that would be highhly appreciated. Particularly I'd like to find studies about it, or other low-carb diets.

My friend and her husband are losing weight on the south beach diet. Low carb....

Quote: boopsahoy

My friend and her husband are losing weight on the south beach diet. Low carb....

Thanks!

I'm still skeptical of the low carb approach. And like as not, all low carb diets, paleo included, use too much meat in my opinion.

Between that and the really heavy work season I'm in right now, I've decided to postpone any decision until January or so. This means now I have to come up with a new recipe for next weekend (what's the emoticon for "good news/bad news"?) I'm thinking soy burgers...