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
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.
