Are we really genetically similar to the paleo men and women? page 6

[J. Stanton]

The fact of the matter is, NEANDERTHALS ATE GRAINS, THIS IS A FACT

Tip: "grains of starch" are not the same thing as "cereal grains". (As Scott F has kindly pointed out.) You're repeatedly shouting a claim you don't understand.

You're not the only one, though. This mistake is made by just about everyone repeating the "CAVEMEN ATE BREAD!!11!!1" mantra. Even the oft-misquoted and misrepresented Mercader paper ("100,000 YEAR OLD BREAD!!1!!1") found over twenty different types of starch residue on tools found in the cave...only one of which (sorghum) qualifies as a cereal grain.

Furthermore, as Cordain has pointed out, there is no evidence of any storage vessels, required if the population were depending on sorghum as a food source -- nor of any of the other tools required to make sorghum edible to humans.

The most likely scenario seems to be that Paleolithic humans may have gathered grass seeds ("grains") periodically, when they were available, and ate them if they were hungry enough. This is a long way from depending on them as a food source, or even making up a significant fraction of their diet. (Remember, over 20 kinds of starch...only one of which was a cereal grain.)

First, go without food for a day and you'll start thinking tree bark is tasty. The residents of the cave might well have been starving to death. That happened in the Paleolithic.

Second, and most importantly, non-domesticated grains have a very short harvest season. Domesticated grains have been specifically bred to hold onto their seeds after they've ripened -- instead of immediately dropping them on the ground, where they either rot, are eaten by birds and rodents, or are buried and germinate next year. And we have ample physical evidence that this change occurred in the Neolithic, after the invention of organized agriculture.

Therefore, even if we claim that Paleolithic people subsisted entirely on grains during the time they were available (a claim for which there is no evidence, and plenty to the contrary) it would have been impossible to do so for more than a week or two in the fall. To choose a modern example, the wild rice harvest season is measured in days.

JS

[The Scientist]

Dear The Scientist,

I adore you and your well educated, informed, scientifically accurate, and articulately written posts.

A hearty Primal welcome to you. Please stick around. This forum could always use more folks like you.

Robin

It is great to know my input is appreciated. This is my first time contributing to a forum. I'm sure I will stick around. The problem is that when I get going about science, or stuck in an argument, I have a hard time putting it down. I'll have to be careful to keep myself away once I'm back in the lab tomorrow or I'll never get any work done.

[Paleobird]

It is great to know my input is appreciated. This is my first time contributing to a forum. I'm sure I will stick around. The problem is that when I get going about science, or stuck in an argument, I have a hard time putting it down. I'll have to be careful to keep myself away once I'm back in the lab tomorrow or I'll never get any work done.

Yes, I once found myself going around and around with someone who honestly believed that cancer was a fungus (because that Italian pseudo doc's website said so). That is when you know you need to put down the mouse and back away from the keyboard. But despite glaring episodes of ignorance such as that, there are a lot of well informed people around here and many more who are really searching with an open critically thinking mind for their answers. You could help with that.

[Paleobird]

The most likely scenario seems to be that Paleolithic humans may have gathered grass seeds ("grains") periodically, when they were available, and ate them if they were hungry enough. This is a long way from depending on them as a food source, or even making up a significant fraction of their diet.

Second, and most importantly, non-domesticated grains have a very short harvest season. Therefore, even if we claim that Paleolithic people subsisted entirely on grains during the time they were available (a claim for which there is no evidence, and plenty to the contrary) it would have been impossible to do so for more than a week or two in the fall.

JS

This should be made into a sticky. Would you mind if I quoted this to the next person going on about how cutting out grains "isn't natural"?

p.s. Good to see you, JS. I love the Gnolls site. I read the fist chapter of the Credo and keep meaning to download the rest of it.

[Whitefox]

Loving the factoids guys, and the ability to listen to science (and the scientist). Paleobird how many years have you been posting?? You have almost 8000 posts in case you didn't know

Anyways, The Scientist you're a PhD in Cell Bio, and you work in a lab? Do tell (aspiring researcher/medical student here, though I'm an undergraduate. My sister is applying for PhD programs in cell bio or biophysics right now, in fact, so any insights into the Life of Sci would be cool).

As for the actual topic of debate, I'd point out Mat Lalonde's talk on the "science of the paleo diet": What Science Really Says About the Paleo Diet – With Mat Lalonde

As a side note, his criticisms of the first three paleo concepts make some good points about correlation/causation and living like our ancestors, but they're overly harsh (as he then basically re-iterates the paleo/darwin concepts by quoting evolutionary biology in his statement: "There has been insufficient time and evolutionally pressure for complete adaptation to seed consumption arise in homosapiens". From our discussions here, you can see that's true. As an example, lactase persistence is a super-fast genetic change to the tune of 8000 years, but this was only a "simple adaptation" as Mat calls it, involving the one lactase enzyme. Thus, we can absorb calories from milk, but there weren't complex adaptations to things like casein or protease inhibitors (though from the literature I can't tell if protease inhibitors in milk are a bad thing or not, and thus would require adaptations at all: ScienceDirect.com - Food Research International - Cysteine protease inhibitors in various milk preparations and its importance as a food ).

[otzi]

It is great to know my input is appreciated. This is my first time contributing to a forum. I'm sure I will stick around. The problem is that when I get going about science, or stuck in an argument, I have a hard time putting it down. I'll have to be careful to keep myself away once I'm back in the lab tomorrow or I'll never get any work done.

Hopefully you don't get chased off from here by our resident crazies, but since Paleobird (just kidding...) has taken a liking to you, that may not happen...

I do have a serious question for you, and it kind of fits into this thread topic. I read this article a while back: The sweet thing about Type 1 diabetes: a cryo... [Med Hypotheses. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

The authors believe that diabetes is an adaptation to the cold weather our ancestors encountered on their journey North. If this is true, we may be looking at diabetes and other 'diseases' in the wrong light. From the abstract:

"When life expectancy was short, factors predisposing to Type 1 diabetes provided a survival advantage. However, deleterious consequences of this condition have become significant only in more modern times, as life expectancy has increased, thus outweighing their protective value. Examples of evolutionary adaptations conferring selection advantages against human pathogens that result in deleterious effects have been previously reported as epidemic pathogenic selection (EPS). Such proposed examples include the cystic fibrosis mutations in the CFTR gene bestowing resistance to Salmonella typhi and hemochromatosis mutations conferring protection against iron-seeking intracellular pathogens. This paper is one of the first accounts of a metabolic disorder providing a selection advantage not against a pathogenic stressor alone, but rather against a climatic change. We thus believe that the concept of EPS should now include environmental factors that may be nonorganismal in nature. In so doing we propose that factors resulting in Type 1 diabetes be considered a result of environmental pathogenic selection (EnPS)."

Any thoughts on this line of thinking and how we can use it to our advantage?

[The Scientist]

Loving the factoids guys, and the ability to listen to science (and the scientist). Paleobird how many years have you been posting?? You have almost 8000 posts in case you didn't know

Anyways, The Scientist you're a PhD in Cell Bio, and you work in a lab? Do tell (aspiring researcher/medical student here, though I'm an undergraduate. My sister is applying for PhD programs in cell bio or biophysics right now, in fact, so any insights into the Life of Sci would be cool).

As for the actual topic of debate, I'd point out Mat Lalonde's talk on the "science of the paleo diet": What Science Really Says About the Paleo Diet – With Mat Lalonde

I'll have to listen to the podcast you linked when I get a chance. As for advice about medical and research careers, I can help here and would live to, but I'm guessing it will be a big discussion. I am very happy with my decision to do the PhD, but many are not and the reasons why are important for anyone considering it. We should probably start a new thread. Maybe in the research section?

[Whitefox]

Haha back to the love of ice Otzi (I remember joining those CT discussions).

Reminds me of those self-freezing frogs: Antifreeze-Like Blood Lets Frogs Freeze and Thaw With Winter's Whims

I'm a little confused as to the mechanism of the frogs vs. humans, because in frogs it said all of the glucose goes into their cells to prevent freezing, but in humans with T1D, without insulin all the glucose would stay in the bloodstream, so the blood wouldn't freeze.. and that prevents crystal formation outside cells, which somehow prevents the crystal formation inside cells that's needed to take cells out of supercooling (and turn them solid b/c they're below their freezing point?).

I read Sharon Moalem's book "Survival of the Sickest" and it was awesome - have you?

[Whitefox]

I'll have to listen to the podcast you linked when I get a chance. As for advice about medical and research careers, I can help here and would live to, but I'm guessing it will be a big discussion. I am very happy with my decision to do the PhD, but many are not and the reasons why are important for anyone considering it. We should probably start a new thread. Maybe in the research section?

Sure thing

[otzi]

Haha back to the love of ice Otzi (I remember joining those CT discussions).

I wasn't even thinking about cold thermogenesis when I wrote that, more along the lines of seasonal eating. I think that eating the exact same way, even paleo/primal, isn't the best plan. Seems to me we'd want to change up our habits based on sunlight/vit D/temperatures/etc...