1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Paleolithic diet

Discussion in 'Health & Body' started by Boogieman, Jun 29, 2005.

  1. RJman

    RJman Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    18,647
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Location:
    In the not too distant future
    You're in Sweden eh? Maybe you need some more of that sunlight therapy or something. Your diet sounds fine, it was just the name that piqued my interest. Thank you for your ad hominem attacks, though.
     
  2. globetrotter

    globetrotter Senior member

    Messages:
    20,605
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Location:
    greater chicago
    actually, ken, people haven't evolved that much in the past 10,000 years. we are remarkably like our ancestors who hunted and gathered. vegitables, that is another story...
     
  3. FIHTies

    FIHTies Senior member Affiliate Vendor

    Messages:
    2,959
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Back and Better Than Before
    Originally Posted by Boogieman,July 05 2005,14:02
    In case your mothers never told you, this is rude and stupid behaviour. But hey, you're Americans, you're middleaged and you're surely overweight; so I guess that's what I should have expected. You suck.
    You're in Sweden eh? Maybe you need some more of that sunlight therapy or something. Your diet sounds fine, it was just the name that piqued my interest. Thank you for your ad hominem attacks, though.
    RJMan: Please... Thats not ad hominem. Get with the program... Everybody knows that in America we go straight from 12 to 45 with pot bellies. But what can I expect from someone who dated fat and lazy (not to mention ugly and money hungry grubby) people.
     
  4. ken

    ken Senior member

    Messages:
    2,192
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    But do we really know that for sure? The diets of hunter-gatherers can be hugely different than of those in agricultural societies (since most edible plants/animals aren't/can't be domesticated). Doesn't that open up a niche for humans in food-producing societies to fare better on agriculturally produced foods? There has obviously been plenty of time for it (again, think of all the disease immunity we've built up).

    That's another reason this 'paleolithic' diet might be bunk. You can't really eat the foods hunter/gatherers ate unless you actually hunt and gather. I guarantee no indiginous Australian has ever eaten a cow or a 3/4 pound ear of corn.
     
  5. globetrotter

    globetrotter Senior member

    Messages:
    20,605
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Location:
    greater chicago
    (globetrotter @ July 05 2005,18:04) actually, ken, people haven't evolved that much in the past 10,000 years. we are remarkably like our ancestors who hunted and gathered. vegitables, that is another story...
    But do we really know that for sure?  The diets of hunter-gatherers can be hugely different than of those in agricultural societies (since most edible plants/animals aren't/can't be domesticated). Doesn't that open up a niche for humans in food-producing societies to fare better on agriculturally produced foods? There has obviously been plenty of time for it (again, think of all the disease immunity we've built up). That's another reason this 'paleolithic' diet might be bunk. You can't really eat the foods hunter/gatherers ate unless you actually hunt and gather. I guarantee no indiginous  Australian has ever eaten a cow or a 3/4 pound ear of corn.
    actually, these are very different questions. 1. we haven't really evolved in the past 10,000 years very much. we know that from archeological evidence, and from our undrestanding of evolution and DNA development. 2. do people fare better on agriculturally grown products? very possibly, there had to be a reason why people took up animal herding and farming the way that they did. I believe that that main reason was for stability and the ability to accumulate capital - hunter/gatherer economies are very bad at planning for periods of years, and at accumulating capital, but they probrably gave access to richer sources of nutritian, possibly better tasting products (in the early generations) and more overall calories per person. for 9,000 or more years of the agricultural era, the problems facing man have not been too much food, but too little. 3. although the theory that eating foods that are similar to what we evolved on is good for you makes sense, and I find it very interesting, it could very well be that agricultural foods are even better, or wheat grass, for all I know. 4. your last point is the most compelling - hunter gatherers would spend most of their day running and working hard, and then eat some lean meat, maybe a handful of grubs, and some seeds and nuts. their is a huge diffence between that and grain fed beef and some corn on the cob.
     
  6. Dakota rube

    Dakota rube Senior member

    Messages:
    14,501
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Location:
    A bit better than yesterday, all day vomiting for
    in the words of an immortal "” and former "” member: Lets get back to business. You all have alot to learn about health. l will post better arguments in future.
     
  7. Stu

    Stu Senior member

    Messages:
    2,351
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Location:
    Princeton
    And wash it down with some vintage mid-stream piss, as per Marc's instructions.
     
  8. bachbeet

    bachbeet Senior member

    Messages:
    1,212
    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Location:
    San Diego
    A paleolithic diet probably also had a LOT of cholesterol in it. This wasn't so much of a problem when life expectancy wasn't much more than 30. But, today, the high cholesterol diet would kill a person at about half of the current life expectancy.

    And, the diet advocated by the original poster did not include fish/seafood. I refuse to believe that those paleolithic people who lived near the coasts/rivers didn't eat fish. In fact, I guess we know they did as we can see by the Eskimos who live a life close to the paleolithic model.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by