4

votes

"Pure Paleo" does it exist?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created April 06, 2011 at 6:32 PM

I wonder if there are some hard core paleo purist in terms of eating only those foods that were available (in almost identical form) some 10 thousand years ago. I will start with fish, seafood: it has not changed, so that would make it. Also meats from any wild animal would be pure-paleo. On the other hand basically all mammals that were domesticated have undergone great changes and great human selection so cows, pigs, or goats would be out of the question. Of course milk and dairy would be non-pure-paleo, and most vegetables and fruits too, since they have been extensively selected and modified through thousands of years of neolithic agriculture. And potatoes, sweet potatoes, cocoa or tomatoes are also non pure-paleo, because they have South American origin (humankind, we are told, did not originate in the Americas). Again I am not at all saying that we embrace this ultra-strict rules and restrict our food sources so much, just wondering whether you are aware of anyone suggesting this pure-paleo view! Now if there are indeed some "pure paleo" followers what do they say that we should eat?

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 07, 2011
at 03:47 PM

hunter gatherers also lived in the southern tip of South America (Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego) for more that 10 thousand years and they also had significant technology to cope with a weather as harsh as the one in the arctic circle. It seems to me that those technologies were not that modern, because otherwise it would have been impossible to survive under extreme cold temperatures.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 07, 2011
at 03:46 PM

hunter gatherers also lived in the southern tip of South America (Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego) for more that 10 thousand years and they also had significant technology to cope with a weather as harssh as the one in the arctic circle. It seems to me that those technologies were not that modern, because otherwise it would have been impossible to survive under extreme cold temperatues.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 07, 2011
at 03:16 PM

Just by labeling "reenactement" to any question on the evolution of nutrition you will not help the advancement of our understanding. the paleo movement started some twenty years ago with the idea of replicating a diet that is as close as possible to the one led by our ancestors many years ago. There is no question that the paleo diet is evolving, based on science. It is important to understand both things: the evolutionary history of humankind and the modern science.

9cfa1ab909f6f89544be665d4ef6e3ea

on April 07, 2011
at 02:22 PM

Unless you're more interested in reenactment than science, I don't see this question, or any potential answers, as being useful to Paleohacks.

9f9fa49265e03ddd2bf2bba5477a556b

(3184)

on April 07, 2011
at 05:29 AM

The Inuit and other people living in the Arctic circle actually have very advanced and refined Paleo technology. My question would be how recently they developed all those techniques? The first folks crossing the Bering Straits obviously headed quickly for greener pastures (judging by how quickly people showed up in South America). I think the colonization of the Arctic circle was a more recent phenomena (would you willingly leave temperate climates for the Arctic?). So I'm still going to say most fish was unobtainable by most people until fairly recently. That said, the Inuits are amazing.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 06, 2011
at 09:54 PM

Actually a wild boar a wild salmon or a prickly pear are exactly alike to their paleo version. Most wild animals, wild fruits or vegetables have not changed at all in ten thousand years.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 06, 2011
at 09:48 PM

perhaps but I wonder how do you measure how much a certain raw food has changed in 10k years. If you compare say pigs to cows in evolutionary terms that might be easier than comparing cows versus apples or spinach...I just do not know how to think about it...

Fac1af832cc3c6a20059c41411fd0f6b

(1548)

on April 06, 2011
at 07:40 PM

The natives around here would use fish traps for halibut and would anchor out baited hooks at low tide. The various aboriginal groups used a variety of bone implements for attaching to a hand line to catch fish. Canoes and kayaks were not the only sort of transportastions and large umiaks, like the ones used for whaling were also used for fishing for cod and halibut with handlines. The seal hunting was a winter thing as seals were pretty easy prey on the ice.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 06, 2011
at 06:51 PM

Why would someone vote to close this question? it is about one of the main reasons why we choose to either have or not to have some food, so I do not see why someone suggests to close it.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 06, 2011
at 06:49 PM

it must be interesting to listen to his arguments

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on April 06, 2011
at 06:38 PM

I know people who pretend to and then fail hilariously because they are so ignorant. There is a guy in the Eating Paleo in NYC meetup who acts like the paleo police and tell us blahblahblah isn't paleo, but then the venison he eats is farmed (corn fed) and the yams he eats are sweet potatoes! Fail!

Frontpage book

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

6 Answers

2
9f9fa49265e03ddd2bf2bba5477a556b

(3184)

on April 06, 2011
at 07:06 PM

Actually most fish would be off the menu as well. Folks weren't going out and catching tuna or flounder or sea bass or cod or netting big hauls of sardines. The Inuit, for example, focus their hunting on marine mammals--big targets. Trying to catch fast swimming schooling fish or bottom dwelling ocean fish in a canoe or kayak isn't terribly easy, feasible, or worth the effort relative to trying to harpoon a seal or nailing salmon swimming upstream or picking off a trout in a stream. So seafood would consist of whatever mollusks and crustaceans are easy pickings on the shoreline, marine mammals (which you can't legally eat except for the Inuit), and probably whatever fish you can get in rivers and streams. Or, if you're lucky enough to live near a reef, you can probably swim out to the reef and nail some fish that way. But in a lot of places, going out to sea would have been a bad idea compared to foraging in tide pools or camping out near salmon spawning grounds. Here in Southern California, for example, you'd have to contend with the cold water, strong currents, rocky shores, and a healthy population of Great Whites. I'd probably do what the natives here did, namely, kill myself a dear, get a bunch of acorns and call it a day.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 07, 2011
at 03:47 PM

hunter gatherers also lived in the southern tip of South America (Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego) for more that 10 thousand years and they also had significant technology to cope with a weather as harsh as the one in the arctic circle. It seems to me that those technologies were not that modern, because otherwise it would have been impossible to survive under extreme cold temperatures.

Fac1af832cc3c6a20059c41411fd0f6b

(1548)

on April 06, 2011
at 07:40 PM

The natives around here would use fish traps for halibut and would anchor out baited hooks at low tide. The various aboriginal groups used a variety of bone implements for attaching to a hand line to catch fish. Canoes and kayaks were not the only sort of transportastions and large umiaks, like the ones used for whaling were also used for fishing for cod and halibut with handlines. The seal hunting was a winter thing as seals were pretty easy prey on the ice.

9f9fa49265e03ddd2bf2bba5477a556b

(3184)

on April 07, 2011
at 05:29 AM

The Inuit and other people living in the Arctic circle actually have very advanced and refined Paleo technology. My question would be how recently they developed all those techniques? The first folks crossing the Bering Straits obviously headed quickly for greener pastures (judging by how quickly people showed up in South America). I think the colonization of the Arctic circle was a more recent phenomena (would you willingly leave temperate climates for the Arctic?). So I'm still going to say most fish was unobtainable by most people until fairly recently. That said, the Inuits are amazing.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 07, 2011
at 03:46 PM

hunter gatherers also lived in the southern tip of South America (Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego) for more that 10 thousand years and they also had significant technology to cope with a weather as harssh as the one in the arctic circle. It seems to me that those technologies were not that modern, because otherwise it would have been impossible to survive under extreme cold temperatues.

1
B3c62d89cd47b7d7209b6a99243d0ded

on April 07, 2011
at 01:54 PM

If pure paleo exists, I'm not one to be tempted by it. I'm here to see how I can best use modern resources to be happy and healthy.

0
13c5a9f1678d75b93f269cdcf69f14d5

(2339)

on April 07, 2011
at 12:14 AM

Neanderthin is the "sharp stick on the savannah plain" book and he describes a pretty pure form of Paleo. Hard to get a copy, ut there's an old website at neanderthin.com the author, Ray Audette, had RA and diabetes when he started researching nutrition.

0
7df8f3cc7f1475c3ecbbd4a4feb87d04

(514)

on April 06, 2011
at 11:32 PM

We've got toxins now that have been detected even in the most remote spots. And beyond that, I don't think we can ever quite know for sure how things were back then, there may be factors no one has thought to consider. I think we should put more energy into figuring out how things stand today and how food is actually interacting with our bodies rather than speculating overmuch about the unknowable past.

0
5e36f73c3f95eb4ea13a009f4936449f

(8280)

on April 06, 2011
at 09:46 PM

No, I don't think any common food exists now that is the same as what existed 10,000 years ago. Everything's changed over the years due to human influence.

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 06, 2011
at 09:54 PM

Actually a wild boar a wild salmon or a prickly pear are exactly alike to their paleo version. Most wild animals, wild fruits or vegetables have not changed at all in ten thousand years.

0
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on April 06, 2011
at 09:10 PM

still, i reckon that the difference between a 'paleo' cow and a modern (even CAFO) one is much less than the difference between a wild 'paleo' apple and a highly palatable one (aka 'fruit candy') you can find in a modern supermarket

Ac1e55cf06c2180f4008ff01953d10dd

(3524)

on April 06, 2011
at 09:48 PM

perhaps but I wonder how do you measure how much a certain raw food has changed in 10k years. If you compare say pigs to cows in evolutionary terms that might be easier than comparing cows versus apples or spinach...I just do not know how to think about it...

Answer Question


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