PaleoBUST: A Critical Review of the Pitfalls of the Trendy Paleodiet

You may be hearing a lot about ways to lose weight after the holiday season, and one such  method for weight loss that you may be hearing about (if not have already heard) is the Paleodiet.  The Paleodiet is based on the idea that our Paleolithic (circa 2.5 million years ago to 10,000 years ago) hunter-gatherer ancestors were far healthier than our modern populations.  Support for this idea comes from archaeological evidence and stark differences in diets between hunter-gatherer and agricultural groups, as well as the high obesity rates associated with modern Western populations.  This supporting evidence, however, has come under heavy scrutiny recently and several scholars have come forward to speak against the Paleodiet.  This blog post is dedicated to critically analyzing the Paleodiet by discussing the realities of Paleolithic groups and the bona fide pitfalls of the modern interpretation of the Paleodiet.

The Paleodiet promotes the idea that Paleolithic hunter-gatherer groups were nutritionally better off than modern agricultural groups.  Advocates of the Paleodiet claim that Paleolithic hunter-gatherer groups subsisted on a diet principally based on large quantities of lean proteins; raw fruits and vegetables; very few refined, starchy, and sugary grains; and no legumes (e.g. peanuts, beans, peas, etc.).  Paleolithic peoples collected these items through hunting and gathering natural resources, all of which were activities that assisted them in maintaining lean and buff physiques and healthy lifestyles. 

But how valid are these ideas?  There is some archaeological evidence to support this idea.  Archaeological and physical anthropological scholars came together in the early 1980s to discuss the health differences between premodern hunter-gatherer and early agricultural groups, and the majority of these scholars came to the conclusion that the hunter-gatherer groups were indeed healthier than their agricultural counterparts.  The scholars concluded that the primary reason for the differences in health statuses between established hunter-gatherers, who had existed for several millennia, versus the early agriculturalists was the fact that agriculturalists relied primarily on very few staple foods for their diets, while hunter-gatherers had a more diversified diet.  The specialization in agricultural diets led to an increase in nutritional deficiencies as compared to the premodern hunter-gatherer groups. 

BUT the fundamental difference between the very valid conclusions reached by the scholars in the 1980s and the realities of the Paleolithic groups is the substantial time difference between the two different hunter-gather groups: the Paleolithic vs the premodern.  The premodern hunter-gatherer groups existed several millennia after the Paleolithic groups to which the Paleodiet is based.  These premodern groups had developed specialized tools that enabled them to be successful hunters and established seasonality trends where they learned to exploit different resources within a large contained area based on seasonal availability of resources.  Early Paleolithic groups had very rudimentary tools that do not support the existence of sustainable hunting practices (with some scholars debating the existence of any hunting among the groups) and most likely did not have the generations of experience and knowledge to practice seasonality.  Furthermore, studies of both premodern and modern hunter-gatherer groups have demonstrated that they are not any healthier than modern agricultural or industrial societies.  The average lifespan of premodern hunter-gatherers was mid-adolescence and the top end of the age scale was in the 40s.  As well, both premodern and modern hunter-gatherers suffer from a myriad of pathological conditions, including but not limited to parasitic infections and nutritional deficiencies. 

Furthermore, the environmental conditions between the Paleolithic Period and today were drastically different.  The Paleolithic Period was an environment full of different floral (vegetation) and faunal (animal) resources.  Paleolithic Period groups had wooly mammoths and rhinoceros, ibexes, horses, foxes, and buffalos, all of which were much larger than modern day animals, available to them, and these creatures subsisted off of the natural flora around them.  These lead to two strong criticisms against the modern interpretation of the Paleodiet: First, the archaeological evidence demonstrate that hunting came about in the later stages of the Paleolithic Period and earlier Paleolithic peoples were scavengers.  Therefore, the proportions of protein consumed by Paleolithic groups were not as high as modern Paleodiet advocates claim.  Second, the types of proteins were different not just in faunal type but also based on the composition of those faunal resources.  Paleolithic peoples would have had access to lean meats as these game animals would have only subsisted on natural resources.  Today, modern peoples most often purchase their meats from a supermarket or butcher, and these meats come from animals that are full of antibiotics and hormones.  Modern peoples who only consume organic meats get these resources from animals that are not full of antibiotics and hormones but most likely subsisted on a limited diet, which leads to fatty, not lean, meats.  This means that contemporary subscribers to the Paleodiet are not actually consuming a true Paleodiet because the proportions and types of proteins are not the same.

As well, the limitations of the Paleodiet will actually lead to further nutritional deficiencies, which leads to a poorer health status overall.  The Paleodiet requires that one eat raw fruits and veggies and abstain from legumes and dairy products because these did not exist in the past.  While overcooking of fruits and vegetables can actually leach out vitamins and minerals subsisting on only raw fruits and vegetables is problematic as well because these items in their raw state cannot be digested by humans in a way that allows for the full exploitation of all of their vitamins and minerals.  If one only subsists on raw fruits and vegetables the amount of food that would need to be consumed for nutritional sustainability is substantial, and majority of one’s day would be spent eating.  Slight cooking, such as steaming, these items will actually release many of those beneficial vitamins and minerals, which is advantageous to modern humans for several reasons.  Also, abstention from consuming legumes and dairy products causes one to be extremely nutritionally deficient and leads to several pathological conditions, including iron, vitamin D, and calcium deficiency diseases and conditions such as anemia, rickets, and osteoporosis.

Overall, the Paleodiet is problematic, but some of the ideas of the Paleodiet are valuable take away lessons: eating less processed foods, eating less, and exercising.  Cooked food is not necessarily the enemy, but how the food is cooked can be.  Steaming and baking food is better than frying food as these former methods do not leach out nutrients and do not add unnecessary and unhealthy fats.  As well, over consuming food is not beneficial as it leads the body to storing the excess food in the form of fat.  One should eat balanced and proportioned meals instead of large meals throughout the day.  Finally, exercise is a basic necessity for a healthy lifestyle.   So while the Paleodiet is largely a bust there are still some valuable lessons that can be taken from it.     

References

• Cohen & Armelagos 1984.  Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture.  Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
• Feder & Park.  Human Antiquity: An Introduction to Physical Anthropology and Archeology, McGraw-Hill.  
• Graber 2014.  Michael Pollan Explains What's Wrong With the Paleo Diet.  Mother Jones.
• Jabr 2013.  How to Really Eat Like a Hunter-Gatherer: Why the Paleo Diet Is Half-Baked. Scientific American.
• Sachs 2014. The Paleo Diet Craze: What’s Right and Wrong About Eating Like a Caveman. Time Magazine.