Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 105

Thread: Criticisms of Primal/Paleo Lifestyle?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    166

    Criticisms of Primal/Paleo Lifestyle?

    In the interest of avoid confirmation bias:

    What are the major criticisms of our Primal lifestyle, and how do we refute them? I think it would be great to have a discussion stemming from different perspectives here.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Walnut Creek, CA
    Posts
    654
    "you eat too much red meat and fat, its going to give you a heart attack"

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,795
    Quote Originally Posted by Karma View Post
    "you eat too much red meat and fat, its going to give you a heart attack"
    Ruin your kidneys...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,478
    I think this has been hashed out to death already, hasn't it?

    It's not sustainable, woah all that fat, you need carbs, what about fiber, whole grains are nutritious, colon cancer, etc. I think it's all on the forum in great detail.
    I'm going to have another glass of coconut milk.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Stabsville
    Posts
    2,440
    The anti-grain message is met with the most vehement opposition I have ever seen. "our genes have adapted to grains. Our genome has changed". Even if there are changes it doesn't follow that they make grains a healthy food. That would take a complete overhaul of the GI tract and it didn't happen. These people have never gone a month without grains and then tried to reintroduce them. There are biologically plausible mechanisms for why grains are unhealthy and a lot of people who cut them out and feel better, and more importantly feel worse when they reintroduce them.

    *insert epidemiology about beans and rice"

    The world eats junk food or starves. Maybe if you replace wheat bread with beans and rice you get an improvement, but what about eating no grains or legumes? Does any population on the planet eat the kind of paleo diet that most people around here consider to be best? Nah.

    Dairy is contentious. I would say that dairy is contentious and personally can't see anything wrong with butter with pastured butter. Mark and Kurt Harris agree.
    Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

    Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sacramento, California
    Posts
    2,925
    This Wikipedia entry lists some scholarly criticisms of paleo. I have not waded through all of them.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by Hedonist View Post
    This Wikipedia entry lists some scholarly criticisms of paleo. I have not waded through all of them.
    I've noted to myself before how it is VERY apparent that the veggie advocates have so heavily edited that page. There are a lot of Cordain's counter arguments that just aren't there.
    Apathy is tyranny's greatest ally.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Chaohinon View Post
    This isn't really an argument against paleo, it's an argument against overpopulation (which is largely a result of cereal grain production)
    Quote Originally Posted by BoyPrimal View Post
    Completely true. The best defense to this one that I've heard is:
    A) It doesn't have to be sustainable on a global scale because getting even 5% of the global population to embrace this way of eating is unfeasible at best.
    B) Very little of what we're currently doing as a species is sustainable. I'll admit that one is a bit of a red herring, but it's true.

    On a personal level, I couldn't give a damn about global. I'm in this for my own personal, selfish reasons. People can go screw up their own lives all they like; it's just a shame that in doing so they influence policy that affects me.
    This way of eating could be sustainable and is certainly of more benefit to the environment than growing grains. Most of the criticisims against cattle farming are about grain fed cattle. Grains destroy top soil and turn viable farming land arable. Pastured cattle are good for the land (providing you do not over stock them). Grains are a thirsty crop and use a lot of water. Most of the water wasted in cattle production is in growing the grains to feed grain fed cattle. Grass fed cattle require very little water and piss most of it back on the grass (which makes it helps it to grow).

    By the way, there is such a thing as the methane cycle, so the whole argument about cow farts is silly. Anyway, grain production on our current scale requires artificial fertiliser made from petroleum, which is neither sustainable, nor renewable.

    And BTW, all that bio fuel is a scam. Its just another mono crop like grains that is not sustainable and that degrades the soil and needs artificial fertiliser to grow.

  9. #9
    *points finger*
    THAT'S NOT VEGAN!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    19
    I've gotten this one a lot, "Well my Cardiologist says I need more whole grains in my diet". To which I reply, "I'm glad I don't have your Cardiologist."

    I'm amazed at the vigor in which people defend Conventional Wisdom. I started the PB 30 challenge and have probably been a little over zealous in informing people about how great it is. I'm amazed at how quickly I'm accosted for it. People telling me how wrong the diet is, when I ask them what they are basing there info on you get the normal responds of, government/doc/news. But if I ask them specically if they have factual medical data. They don't. It's just amazing how people just go along with the norm without a single independent thought of there own.
    matthew/mofx
    eatprimal.net

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •