0

votes

Anyone read the interview with Alan Aragon?

Commented on April 30, 2014
Created September 27, 2013 at 8:30 AM

I did a search to see if anyone posted this already, but apparently not?

Worth reading: http://paleomovement.com/alan-aragon-paleo-critic/

26a34b08f45f43d7c604c5c8e69a0f9e

(0)

on April 30, 2014
at 05:34 PM

So you're saying he should've ignored the stupid part and just stuck to the good?

7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on September 28, 2013
at 01:24 PM

i dont think its wise to label a diet as extreme akin to religion, especially when you dont even understand what the guidelines are.

there are very good reasons grain and fructose even if you are not diabetic, these thoughts are not unique to paleo although paleo does tend to assert that gluten sensitivity (far less severe than celiacs) is a issue worth addressing, while conventional science hasnt really jumped on board; maybe for good reason,(lack hard evidence) keeping in mind that just because there isnt rock solid evidence for it now doesnt mean the idea is false.

7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on September 28, 2013
at 01:21 PM

im sure many here would disagree, many paleo dieters consume plenty of carbs and dont really try to restrict them in any way. they do ofcourse add in more vegies/fats/meats which offsets some of the carbs in the diet... but that is just math unless you wanted to increase your calorie consumption dramatically while switching to paleo. the only carbs paleo says to restrict is carbs with toxins and low nutrient density aswell as limiting(not avoiding) carbs that some would define as high GI.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 28, 2013
at 11:50 AM

Losing weight usually takes some form of regimented extremism. The part that successful weight-losers don't get is that there are different routes to the same objective. If you're dealing with diabetes, restricting fructose and grain starches works as well as banning them because they're "evil". The effects of carb counting and paleo are the same, yet paleos want to introduce a religious aspect akin to ancient Neolithic dietary laws.

7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on September 27, 2013
at 04:13 PM

anecdotes are not evidence. people could very well eat SAD and gain muscle/lose weight, eat vegan and gain muscle/lose weight, eat fruitarian and gain muscle/lose weight(and im sure many have); like the comment above said proof is nice, science is good, skepticism is important.

i would imagine its that site trying to make a buck off people hating on this guy.

72cf727474b8bf815fdc505e58cadfea

on September 27, 2013
at 03:33 PM

It's appropriate for others to be critical when someone on a diet makes factual claims about its health effects. You see the same thing on paleohacks: People generally respect vegetarians who say they don't eat animals for moral reasons, but go on the attack when they argue that meat causes cancer and is hard to digest and lacquers the inside of your colon with tarry sludge.

  • Ca2c940a1947e6200883908592956680

    asked by

    (8574)
  • Views
    3.5K
  • Last Activity
    1390D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

5 Answers

0
Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 28, 2013
at 11:55 AM

My major complaint is that Aragon targeted avoidance behavior rather than supporting the clearly positive effects of including meats, fruits and fresh vegetables in a diet. Altering your eating patterns to focus on these foods necessarily pushes the consumption of the other foods out.

26a34b08f45f43d7c604c5c8e69a0f9e

(0)

on April 30, 2014
at 05:34 PM

So you're saying he should've ignored the stupid part and just stuck to the good?

0
Be803dcde63e3cf5e21cc121097b8158

on September 28, 2013
at 04:30 AM

Only a short time ago, Paul Jaminet called bullshit on this community's view of starches (and glucose in general), resulting in a major self-correction (or branching?) in the Paleo movement.

I hope it's not the last time someone challenges our most deeply held beliefs and gets us to think again.

0
7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on September 27, 2013
at 04:08 PM

seems to me that this is just bad reporting or bad logic, first sentence of his 'biggest gripes' section is

"biggest gripes with the Paleo Movement is the extreme-ism and absolute-ism that some folks apply to food avoidance"

second is

"And even the “Primal” model of going 80% Paleo while leaving 20% for the non-Paleo stuff is rather humorous"

in the first hes criticizing the fact that paleo is too strict and concise, in the second.. like 5 words later hes saying that "primal" (different from paleo?) is far too lenient because it allows 20% of the diet to be conventional foods.

plenty of miss-direction and straw-manning going on in that article, probably just sensationalist reporting, although im not familiar with aragon so im not sure if thats how he would like to be represented. the fact that its on a paleo website makes me think they were trying to make him look bad, even though he had quite a few valid points.(not really against paleo though)

the only real possibly valid criticism that i got from that article is the avoidance of grains/dairy/legumes may be unnecessary for some/many? but at the same time while avoiding a food may not be necessary at the same time it may very well be beneficial, so its really cost/benefit choice unless it turns out grains/dairy/legumes have no negative impact for the majority of the population. (dont see this being true)

tl :dr - thats not a very good site, eat non-paleo foods if you want, preferably ones that dont hurt your health.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on September 28, 2013
at 11:50 AM

Losing weight usually takes some form of regimented extremism. The part that successful weight-losers don't get is that there are different routes to the same objective. If you're dealing with diabetes, restricting fructose and grain starches works as well as banning them because they're "evil". The effects of carb counting and paleo are the same, yet paleos want to introduce a religious aspect akin to ancient Neolithic dietary laws.

0
Medium avatar

(238)

on September 27, 2013
at 03:07 PM

"My biggest gripes with the Paleo Movement is the extreme-ism and absolute-ism that some folks apply to food avoidance despite a lack of supporting research evidence."

Why does anyone else care about this? It's like someone getting all worked up because others are Vegan or Vegetarians. Nobody is forcing this guy to eat Paleo and his attitude tells me he is looking to make a buck off of being anti paleo.

For myself and many others, the proof is in the Paleo Pudding, i.e., we feel great, we've lost a lot of weight and we look better than we did with 20 or 50 or 100 lbs less fat and added muscle. Chew on that fat ye nay sayers!

72cf727474b8bf815fdc505e58cadfea

on September 27, 2013
at 03:33 PM

It's appropriate for others to be critical when someone on a diet makes factual claims about its health effects. You see the same thing on paleohacks: People generally respect vegetarians who say they don't eat animals for moral reasons, but go on the attack when they argue that meat causes cancer and is hard to digest and lacquers the inside of your colon with tarry sludge.

7904c7276d7e48f1be887fabd263bfd9

(300)

on September 27, 2013
at 04:13 PM

anecdotes are not evidence. people could very well eat SAD and gain muscle/lose weight, eat vegan and gain muscle/lose weight, eat fruitarian and gain muscle/lose weight(and im sure many have); like the comment above said proof is nice, science is good, skepticism is important.

i would imagine its that site trying to make a buck off people hating on this guy.

0
C6648ab69e5a1560c7585fe3ba7108fb

on September 27, 2013
at 01:15 PM

Saw this come up on FB newsfeed as well; never heard of Aragon before this.

I think he makes some good points, especially about the extremism that Paleo seems to encourage. I've found that as I've been longer on Paleo, I've relaxed the list of foods that I never eat as I've found ways to reintroduce them. However, there's no point in blanketly condemming the concept of the Paleo diet just because there's a sector of it that takes it too far; I still very strongly believe in evolutionary guidelines for health, especially in diet.

I can see an argument for a more relaxed Paleo diet for those who have trouble conforming to the standard, but honestly, I've found that the limiting factor of the diet has helped restore my relationship to food to a more natural level (i.e. I have food in proper perspective now); if you look at information on addictions, especially in regard to pornography and food, you'll see that one of the four factors that make a habit more likely to be addictive is a massive variety that provides constant uniqueness, which sounds a lot like modern grocery stores. If you limit yourself to things that don't come in a box, it's a lot easier to not let food control your life and I honestly think that helps a lot of people who struggle with their relationship with food.

Ultimately, you have to keep in mind that while he's absolutely correct in saying that a lot of people in the Paleo movement are trying to sell you something, so is he ;) As much as we'd like to think that the bloggers and writers out there are only concerned about our health, the big ones (the ones you hear from most often and are most respected) make their money by spreading that information, and sometimes that means you put consisentency of the message (or picking a target and sticking to your guns) above the science itself :\

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!