4

votes

Oh NPR...has anyone seen this article about Paleo going Prescription?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created September 07, 2013 at 12:44 AM

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/06/02/154166626/the-paleo-diet-moves-from-the-gym-to-the-doctors-office?sc=17&f=1001

There's the article in all its glory. And of course, the diet is immediately swatted down. Neolithic gods forbid doctors are starting to look at diet as a treatment option.

Oh, and I love the part where they mention the lack of clinical trials. Ahem Logic time!

Clinical trials need funding. A lot of funding.

Funding usually comes from drug companies, charities or they are government funded. Governments and drug companies have been in bed together for--well they most likely have ALWAYS been in bed together. As for charities, thanks to the PR campaigns of drug companies and government through their little media outlets like NPR, CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ect. people would be PISSED if they thought their donations were going to new, not government/drug company approved research.

The only way to get paleo/primal/ancestral eating into the works is to force it in (yeah, ahem that sounded kind of dirty though...). But in all serious business, diet (whether it be paleo or whatever) is never going to be thoroughly examined like drugs are because it's not profitable.

Thanks for maintaing the status quo, NPR. Keep on spinning! (that's not a Papa Bear quote, by the way).

Thoughts on this?

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 08:15 PM

I agree wholeheartedly with dropping the "crap foods" from any diet. I think that's the common denominator of why so many people see initial improvement on all of the diets you mentioned. And I'm not so sure from personal experience that variation plays a bigger role than strict adherence. After all, our ancestors ate what they could get. They didn't have meat, veggies, fruit and tubers all available to them 24-7.

Ec39179d4c06199471827a706adb2896

(242)

on June 05, 2012
at 07:57 PM

Part of the problem with the nutritional studies is that we're spending a lot of money on bad research methods (weak epidemiological studies, ahem, looking at you Harvard!).

Fc6a9e07f6056d465573c8969d3a2ddd

(370)

on June 05, 2012
at 07:38 PM

Agreed. Also, "adapting to survive" and "adapting to thrive" have different thresholds.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on June 05, 2012
at 07:10 PM

The idea of modeling your diet after your ancestors may be a perfectly fine premise and dietary strategy, but the “science” of eating like a caveman is kind of shallow. The arguments against legumes and grains (and dairy for most Americans) are mainly conjecture and speculation. I think the energy could be better spent focusing on removing modern crap foods from the diet instead of worrying about Paleolithic man and his dietary habits or speculating about lectins and phytates.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on June 05, 2012
at 07:06 PM

The article wasn’t an investigative report about the Paleo diet; it was an article about the Paleo diet moving from the gym to the doctor’s office under the auspices of “evolutionary medicine.” I don’t know if they were “slamming the door” on it more than just bringing up certain valid issues (especially since it was Cordain’s version of Paleo being cited.) The China Study, Good Calories Bad Calories, and The Paleo Diet all have their proponents who want doctors to adopt their message. People do need to raise questions.

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 05:41 PM

If you want to call the paleo diet imperfect, that's fine. If you want to claim the Paleo diet has no merit whatsoever because it doesn't include these things...

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 05:39 PM

Minus the "Fox", yes. I agree with your second point far more than your first. But my point was, it doesn't help when NPR shoot down a theory for lack of clinical testing that it won't get because groups like NPR are immediately slamming the door on it. There was a point when journalists said "F*ck you!" to big business and government and did their OWN investigations. Now, they just regurgitate whatever's the norm/their advertisers tell them to say. Plus, while the legumes and grains may be up for debate to some, it's ri-fing-diculous to throw away every bit of Paleo.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on June 05, 2012
at 05:14 PM

I guess you wanted more of a Fox News style "fair and balanced" article...

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:45 PM

When I got a copy of the article, it said, I was "unemployed and currently living off welfare." I laughed pretty hard, but still. Oh, and if you question them about it, it's your word against their's and they're usually the ones with the tape recorder/notes.

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:43 PM

Now, as for the person familiar with evolutionary medicine, remember that whole ordeal where NC threatened legal action against a guy giving medical advice/nutritional advice? Yeah. That's a very real practice--Monsanto does it ALL. THE. TIME. Some people aren't going to say what they really feel for fear of being prosecuted. OH! And I almost forgot, journalists/reporters make shit up all the time. All the time. I've had it done to me numerous times by different journalists in my area. In fact, they once asked what I was interested in pursuing as a career. I said, "comic writer".

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:39 PM

(1) "or that it is better than any other diet" ...http://robbwolf.com/2011/06/09/us-news-best-diets/ It rated below the f*cking Slim Fast diet...(2) *Ahem* http://www.powerdisc.com/blog/item/3-top-10-reasons-why-most-doctors-do-not-know-anything-about-nutrition

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:33 PM

The article also interviewed someone familiar with the idea of evolutionary medicine, not just a nutritionist from the local community college.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:28 PM

In this particular article most of the criticisms were pretty valid. (1) There is not much scientific evidence in support that Cordain’s version of an evolutionary diet is the correct evolutionary approach or that it is better than any other diet. (2) It will be hard to convince people to give up legumes and whole grains when many scientific authorities say otherwise (and Cordain’s evidence is particularly weak.)

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:18 PM

Paleo2.0: the issue is the constant write off of alternative searches. We, as a species, are getting sicker and sicker. And it has jack shit to do with increases in population, or that cavemen didn't live long enough to get sick. Bullshit. For starters, I'm 26 and do you know how sick I and some of my friends have been/are? There is something wrong with the system. And so many keep going with it. Diet might not be the panacea, but it certainly is a major component.

7d64d3988de1b0e493aacf37843c5596

(2861)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:09 PM

I didn't think the article was so bad.

5ccb98f6ae42ce87e206cf3f6a86039f

(11581)

on June 05, 2012
at 02:58 PM

"it's only a theory" reveals that the author, like the cast majority of Americans, has absolutely no idea what theory actually means in a scientific context.

E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 02:58 PM

Ahahahahahahaha!

5ef574d7893bc816ec52e04139e9bc09

(6097)

on June 05, 2012
at 02:52 PM

This is a really stupid article.

  • E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

    asked by

    (1307)
  • Views
    1.4K
  • Last Activity
    1280D AGO
Frontpage book

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

4 Answers

3
E8dd83fe24a0879d8b16ab4ca92b72dd

(1307)

on June 05, 2012
at 03:12 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1RXvBveht0&feature=youtu.be

About the 4 minute marker.

That shows how scientific terminology, along with clinical testing terminology, has been manipulated by corporations.

Remember, if two people eat steak for ten years and one of them dies, I can legally say, "Red meat may cause death in 50% of people."

0
Medium avatar

on June 05, 2012
at 05:19 PM

From the article:

"There's this tendency to want to find the normal human diet," Nesse says. "But every single diet you pick has an advantage of some sort. Humans have lived in all kinds of places and we have adapted to all kinds of diets."

Yes, but never before in our history have we been surrounded by so much manipulated, synthetic, innutritious food to which we've had to adapt. If we don't have to adapt (as by eating Paleo), why should we?

Fc6a9e07f6056d465573c8969d3a2ddd

(370)

on June 05, 2012
at 07:38 PM

Agreed. Also, "adapting to survive" and "adapting to thrive" have different thresholds.

0
58d456f4c4d551a697e65ada8c32ad4f

on June 05, 2012
at 04:55 PM

I thought this article was lacking, lacking a lot actually. It doesn't give any real info, but makes people do their own legwork, which it seems a lot of Americans aren't interested in. It would have been nice if maybe they had listed a few books for follow up reading.

But, I think its great that's out there on something on NPR. Even if it sparks interest in a few people and puts them on a better road to health, I'm for it. Health is wealth.

0
F5a8a14fc6a4d33c2563d0dd3066698a

(714)

on June 05, 2012
at 04:41 PM

Actually, I did not find this article to be all that offensive, either.

Good nutrition studies are very, very hard to do. And very, very expensive. So, sad as it is, it is true we do not have the dispositive clinical evidence-- yet-- proving what our instincts and our anecdotal experiences tell us to be so. But we're getting there.

What is key is that many of us don't have a problem actually admitting this. But virtually everyone who recommends the SAD refuses to acknowledge that they are in the same boat, and their boat is taking on water faster than ours.

Ec39179d4c06199471827a706adb2896

(242)

on June 05, 2012
at 07:57 PM

Part of the problem with the nutritional studies is that we're spending a lot of money on bad research methods (weak epidemiological studies, ahem, looking at you Harvard!).

Answer Question


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