0

votes

Is The New York Times anti-paleo?!

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created July 14, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Just to clarify, the title was just a way of posing this as a question. Obviously the NY times just report the news, so I don't hold them responsible for reporting this crap, but it was prescient enough and is trending on a prolific tech news board, so I wanted to share it and express my sincere disdain for this irresponsible interviewee.

"so something [genetic] happened early in a persons life which led them to store more fat?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/health/nutrition/q-and-a-are-high-protein-low-carb-diets-effective.html

7fb4e9fb1162999cdd5099fee49dd0a7

on July 20, 2012
at 04:17 PM

@Matt - I'm posting on a 'paleo' Q&A board, I think that's clearly not an issue. I quoted that specific passage as, if we hold true that 10,000 years is 'too soon' for us to be processing grains & the likes efficiently, surely the broad distinction of 'something [genetic]' happening 'early' in a persons life is not what is causing an obesity epidemic. Surely with this many obese people on the planet, the correlation of this 'early event' would be well documented seeming as it has taken place during a period of extended medical advance.

7fb4e9fb1162999cdd5099fee49dd0a7

on July 20, 2012
at 04:12 PM

Apologies folks, I should have been more succinct in my post. @RaiseFitness - Totally understood that the article had no bias towards paleo whatsoever. The study however attempts to poke holes in a lot of what we consider factual as paleo followers e.g. a calorie is not a calorie. I feel it is irresponsible and downright ignorant to make these claims and lead people down this continued path of ill-health, which is what the interviewee is professing with such bold answers. The answers are not speculative nor are they open to interpretation, they are being reported as gospel.

C45d7e96acd83d3a6f58193dbc140e86

on July 14, 2012
at 11:43 PM

+1 for the "anti-evidence based" comment.

C45d7e96acd83d3a6f58193dbc140e86

on July 14, 2012
at 08:06 PM

I don't think that is true. I am approaching 33, and am far healthier than at any point in my life, and I used to run cross country in high school, and at one time was the best high school pound for pound bench presser in the state of Alabama. Yet I am in my prime now. I was surely not raised paleo, and have eaten more vegetables just this year than in my first 30 yrs.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41747)

on July 14, 2012
at 04:36 PM

Do you take issue with the idea that our past influences what our current and future health is?

276a5e631b62f8e0793987c0496364bb

(1644)

on July 14, 2012
at 02:45 PM

Duplicate, brah.

C45d7e96acd83d3a6f58193dbc140e86

on July 14, 2012
at 02:37 PM

Paleo isn't even in the article. They were comparing an Atkins based diet to a high carb diet. Paleo is neither of those things. Paleo is NOT a low carb diet, it is a diet composed of real, whole foods. Some people do paleo low carb, some medium or high carb. Also, the study has been picked apart before. Trying to find the link.

Frontpage book

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

1 Answers

4
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on July 14, 2012
at 11:40 PM

This part is particularly troubling:

"Did people unexpectedly gain or lose weight when they had the same amount of calories but in a diet of a different composition?"

No. There was zero difference between high-fat and low-fat diets.

Despite his response being confined to low fat versus high fat (he may associate high fat with high protein), no distinction is made on the type of fat either.

Consider this one for an obese teenager whose diet revolves around fast food:

"What would you tell someone who wanted to lose weight?"

I would have them eat a lower-calorie diet. They should eat whatever they normally eat, but eat less. You must carefully measure this. Eat as little as you can get away with, and try to exercise more.

(my italicisation)

Despite the fact that he would be a highly respected paragon of medical experience he is an emeritus professor, that is retired, and perhaps not the most reliable authority on the latest evidence based approaches that converge on the intersection of food manufacturing, nutrition, biochemistry, endocrinology, toxicology, genetics, epigenetics, intestinal flora and evolution.

No, in respect to this particular article the NY Times is not anti-paleo, its anti-evidence based.

C45d7e96acd83d3a6f58193dbc140e86

on July 14, 2012
at 11:43 PM

+1 for the "anti-evidence based" comment.

Answer Question


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