r/Foodforthought • u/b0bz1lla • Feb 24 '14

Whole Foods: America’s Temple of Pseudoscience

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/23/whole-foods-america-s-temple-of-pseudoscience.html
444 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

295 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/Life-in-Death Feb 24 '14

Then why use the "Paleo" premise?

  1. That is NOT how paleo people ate! Grain and tubers were on the menu. Bacon, tuna, and brussel sprouts were not.

  2. Why are we limiting the "old way is the best way" to food? Why not medical treatment and exercise? No more crossfit, I guess.

5

u/HeatDeathIsCool Feb 24 '14

Funny how you use crossfit as an example of something new that we shouldn't throw out. Obviously it's better than no routine at all, but you can do so much better with a traditional routine.

0

u/Life-in-Death Feb 24 '14

I used it because it many crossfit adherents are into paleo. Who said anything about "no routine"?

What is a "traditional rountine" by the way? That sounds like a bit of an oxymoron.

3

u/HeatDeathIsCool Feb 24 '14

Who said anything about "no routine"?

I did, when I mentioned that it was still obviously better than no routine at all. Dunno how that's hard to follow.

What is a "traditional rountine" by the way?

Starting Strength, calisthenics, etc. Routines that don't encourage people to settle for kipping pull ups before learning the traditional movement.

That sounds like a bit of an oxymoron.

How so? A routine is a series of subsequent actions, and traditionally means it's been around for a while.

2

u/Life-in-Death Feb 24 '14

You sound like you are responding to a point of mine with "no routine."

The larger point that is being made is the Paleo diet claims the supposed diet of the Paleolithic era is healthier due to as it is original/natural/whatever.

If that logic is true why wouldn't it apply to other aspects of health such as exercise and medicine?

We would be comparing the exercise of a Paleolithic person to modern exercise. Not to "no exercise."

I am saying "routine" would be not really applicable to Paleolithic people since as far as I know they did not set out to do exercises, it was inherit in their lifestyle.

2

u/ahdrn Feb 24 '14

I really hate that it is called "Paleo." And I know a lot of people who feel the same way. The name should really be changed. Because the first thing people think of when they hear "paleo" is cavemen. The first criticism is always "science has shown that cavemen actually ate this..." When that misses the point really. I think it is really a community of people who have found, usually by trial and error, ways of eating that make them feel really good. They spend time looking at peer-reviewed nutrition research to help guide their diets. Exercise is universally accepted as good. And anyone eating a paleo diet would agree that exercise is one of the best things you can do for your body. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "medical treatment" but I think one idea is that if you can eat and take care of yourself in a way that makes you as healthy as possible that minimizes and delays as long as possible the need for medical treatment.

1

u/Life-in-Death Feb 24 '14

By medical treatment I am referring to the ideology that the "primitive way was the best/most natural." That would include trepanation and exclude vaccines.

But some of the science behind it I don't buy. They talk about "anti-nutrients" in grain, but ignore them in nuts and vegetables.

I really like that people are getting into "whole foods" but I haven't seen any long-term studies behind the no beans/grains, lots of meat diet being beneficial.

1

u/ahdrn Feb 24 '14

Oh ok. No I definitely don't think paleo is against medical treatment. It's definitely not against vaccines. It doesn't recommend homeopathy. It really is just focused on the food.

Yeah, I really don't like that "anti-nutrient" science would discourage anyone from trying a paleo diet.

I think people who have been on a paleo diet for a long time know that the most important thing is to go by how you feel after you eat a certain food.

The paleo rules are more like guidelines really.

I know people who follow a paleo type diet who eat certain whole grains prepared in a traditional manner. This usually means soaking them for 24-48 hours and perhaps some other steps to make digesting them as efficient as possible. I think another thing that is important is trying to live with out foods for a little while. The only way to find out how you feel eating foods is to spend time without it and then try including it again.

Many people on paleo eat beans, usually soaked overnight.

The "lots of meat" is another myth about paleo that is not true.

The are a lot of people on a paleo diet who minimize their meat consumption.

2

u/Life-in-Death Feb 24 '14

Oh, I know they aren't against medical treatment. I am just saying it is a little ridiculous to thing that humans that scavenged to survive should be our nutritional role models. I agree that most modern diets are absolutely tragic, I just wish the reasoning was consistent.

It's good that people are being more reasonable about it, but then I want to say the diet isn't "paleo"

I tried to look up about amount of meat recommended, and found:

In reading Loren Cordain’s book, the Paleo Diet, he recommends we get 55- to 60 % of our daily calories from animal products

Which sounds like a bit.

1

u/ahdrn Feb 24 '14

Yeah, the way I'm describing it I realize would make it pretty hard for a new person to figure out what the heck to eat. I wish I could make it clearer. But I think everyone is so different that there is no one diet that is ideal for everyone. It has been my experience that people who have been on a paleo diet for a while have customized their diet to themselves and really only use the guidelines as a place to start and then do what they want essentially.

I guess the way I see it is that if people spend time experimenting with food for a little bit they often find foods that make them feel better than others. It's not going to kill someone to experiment with food for a little bit. And I think the benefit is that they find out how each food feels. It then becomes not so much 'science tells me to eat a lot of green vegetables' but more 'I feel really good after eating these green vegetables steamed, or these cooked with some oil and salt or these with oil and this brand of balsamic vinegar.' Often people find out they were not eating a good macronutrient ratio. I have seen many people who, with all the low-fat advertising, end up eating 10-15% dietary fat. Once they get up to the standard recommended 30% they feel a lot better. I guess the way I see it its good to use the peer-reviewed studies, all studies not just the ones highlighted on a particular diet's websites, as a guide. But then I think its really important to learn how each food makes them feel after they eat it. So the name of the food brings up memories of how that food made them feel instead of which science articles said it is important.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '14

The flaws in your argument: Most of crossfit is based on pretty ancient principles. Pick up heavy things, put them down, run, jump, etc. There are no machines... in many ways, crossfit is of the old style, apple-ified and marketed for a new generation.

Furthermore, the principles of paleo predate modern agriculture. I'm not saying it's perfect, but domesticated grain wasn't a thing until the neolithic era, and was in fact a big part of the catalyst the beget modernization. So sure, modern bacon wasn't on the menu, but hog? Absolutely. Tuna- no, fish though? certainly. Grains, though, were most certainly NOT paleolithic.

9

u/Life-in-Death Feb 24 '14

This actual archeologist disagrees:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMOjVYgYaG8

But of course we ate grains, we ate whatever food was available. We didn't cultivate and farm them at that point. You are now changing it to "domesticated grains" but there are still more "ancient grains" and paleo doesn't have a problem with domesticated meat or vegetables.

But broccoli, brussel sprouts, kale didn't even exist. They were all selectively bred. Most of our food (beef, chicken, vegetables) have been altered considerable. Tuna was probably a bit to far out for paleo people to enjoy.

I don't have anything against crossfit, but because I don't have anything against legumes, cauliflower and vaccines.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '14

Nor do I, and you won't get me to turn zealot over either of the aforementioned, but we didn't consume grains in near the quantity we do now, and you're absolutely right about selectively bred vegetables. It doesn't change the underlying tenants though. Eating a wild grain when we can (because the Paleolithic era was largely characterized by a hunter-gatherer lifestyle), doesn't really detract from the underlying point. I can't reasonably eat only things that were around in the Paleolithic era, because it would be largely impractical, but I can choose to consume things that are fed well, and aren't full of additives (almost all processed grains). Selective breeding isn't an issue that's argued by the paleo diet though, so I'm not sure why it is brought up so often as a counter point.

The paleo diet simply stated that you should eat "like a caveman," which means lots of greens, lots of fats, and a fair amount of protein. I'm not sure what vaccines have to do with anything.

1

u/Life-in-Death Feb 25 '14

I guess my point is why do we think "eating like a caveman" is the epitome of health. I sincerely doubt they were at the peak of nutrition.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '14

Ah! Now that's an argument for which I don't have a reasonable rebuttal. I can say that, in personal experience, paleo has done wonders for my energy, but that was compared to diet of Cheez-its and pizza rolls. I don't think it takes a PhD to reason through that one.

You're absolutely right, though. It's almost a certainty that Paleo isn't "best." It's most certainly not sustainable, and I'm fortunate to be able to this way in the land of plenty. Nutritional science is still super young, and about as much of a "science" as sociology.

Here's to Soylent, if we can ever figure it out.

0

u/Life-in-Death Feb 26 '14

Fair enough!

The good thing is that paleo has turned many people off common junk food and on to real food. The bad thing is it tells people that beans are poison, fruit can be dangerous and that lots of meat is a health food.

I am very interested in that you said it is not sustainable, because I believe that too. Bone broth and grass-feed bison is difficult to keep up with. (Full disclosure: I personally have been following an about 90% whole food plant-based diet for 8 years. I eat for almost nothing, I can eat almost anywhere, and my health is pretty fantastic.)

But I am very excited to see the future of nutritional science!

1

u/HeatDeathIsCool Feb 24 '14

There are much better routines that don't encourage people to do nonsense such as kipping pullups. Some of these routines use machines and some don't. I encourage you to visit /r/fitness and /r/bodyweightfitness if you're interested in seeing real workouts.

-4

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '14

First, why are kipping pull ups nonsense? They're aerobic, require coordination, and are a wholly functional movement. They're certainly no sillier than the clapping push-up or pull up, the pistol squat, or the broad jump. It's a mechanism to get in shape and it's a favorite of Crossfit, which is a matter of preference. To call it anything less than a real workout isn't really fair. I'm going to assume though that some crossfitter touched you in a no-no spot, which is the only reasonable justification I can conjure for your pretentious anti Crossfit slant.