Paleo 2.0
This is a long post at PaNu, but it provides a prospective those those trying to get their hands around what it means to eat "Paleo." If I wouldn't agree with all of it, and if I think in some cases he gets unnecessarily testy about trivial details, still I appreciate the intellectual rigor and common sense that shines through. Interesting summary:
This is a long post at PaNu, but it provides a prospective those those trying to get their hands around what it means to eat "Paleo." If I wouldn't agree with all of it, and if I think in some cases he gets unnecessarily testy about trivial details, still I appreciate the intellectual rigor and common sense that shines through. Interesting summary:
I started reading and thinking about nutrition over 3 ½ years ago and began blogging almost 2 years ago. What I have seen in the past few years is that there are a number of other writers who also emphasize these same Neolithic Agents.
Critically, these other writers also:
1) Reject the alternative hypothesis of saturated fat or cholesterol as a Neolithic agent – the so-called diet/heart hypothesis
2) Believe that obtaining a substantial fraction of nutrition from animal sources is necessary for health
3) Discount the absolute importance of macronutrient ratios in the nutritional transition.
4) Believe that a whole foods diet that includes adequate micronutrients is the best way to eat healthy.
5) Believe that tubers, root vegetables and other sources of starch can be healthy for normal people, but that most grains are a suboptimal source of nutrition in other than small amounts.
No comments:
Post a Comment