As has been argued many times, "paleo" is more closely defined by what we avoid than what we eat.

When "paleo" first began, the "avoid" list was based on archaeology, and included or excluded foods based on "was it eaten in the Paleolithic?"  As we move toward a more nuanced understanding of exactly what components of food are bad for us, we can make finer distinctions.

However, we must be careful not to descend into the opposite of nutritionism, or "anti-nutritionism" as I like to call it.  Just because we've discovered some anti-nutrients (phytate, gluten/gliadin, phytoestrogens) doesn't mean we've discovered all of them -- and just because pressure-cooking decreases some of the known anti-nutrients in beans doesn't automatically mean pressure-cooked beans are good to eat. 

Frankly, we're at the stage that nutritionism was in the early 1900s, when the first vitamins were just being discovered.  I'm reluctant to make sweeping judgments like "legumes are OK" based on knowledge I know to be dramatically incomplete. 

JS

But what are you trying to say here? I may be getting on a bit, but even my grandparents weren't around in the palaeolithic period! 🙂 (Just kidding).

More seriously, grandparents - yes and no actually. They lived in a rural part of northern England, had 7 children, lived well into their 80s, Grandad worked in a shipyard till his 70s, both worked very very hard, and were pretty healthy until old age. He grew a load of vegetables, tomatoes and kept chickens. Even so, during the depression and the war, they went hungry. He was often out of work. And after the war, when things got a bit better, they'd be eating things like white bread spread with margarine and jam, and sugar in their tea (along with healthier things as well). Even so, Grandad remained lean all his life.

Thanks for the link. Very interesting.

However, I was never a big fan of potatoes, (and don't see how my longer term ancestors would have had access to them, and I'm not sure if anything resembling them grew here then), and I think fat in the amount I have it probably leaves me fairly mellow. I've always believed in real food, both before and after low-carbing, and I think I'd describe myself as a Real Food, High Fat, Low-Carber, with a nod back towards my ancestors, whom I follow in spirit, if not in the letter.

Best Wishes,
Mike

I touched upon some of what you said in my little post here: http://paleo.pjgh.co.uk/2011/10/entering-mesolithic.html musing that we benefit from a pastoral lifestyle and one in which some wild grains were eaten, certainly root vegetables, certainly dairy and an increasing tendency towards storage of food while persisting in a largely nomadic lifestyle with an emphasis upon hunting. There was some tendency towards preparing vegetables, cooking vegetables and using stoneware to cook with.

This is the epipaleolithic, or entering the mesolithic.

I think this best describes what "paleo" people actually eat.

I came to low-carb-high-fat thanks mainly to Gary Taubes and Jimmy Moore. People who have read GC, BC may remember that one researcher way back that Taubes writes about asked experts he could find, what foods did people evolve to eat, and got the answer "fatty meat", and that's what he based his reducing diets on (with some optional green vegetables).

That is essentially the approach I took to "low-carbing", except that I allowed myself eggs, butter and cheese (raw if I could get it). I instantly gave up all grains and starchy vegetables (and didn't miss them!), and of course all forms of sugar (including most fruit except on rare occasions).

I figured that (c.f. Stefansson), although agriculture is relatively new, pastoralism is a lot older, and we probably had access to eggs and milk for longer than people may think (and there wasn't much to do with milk except to let it ferment, once you'd drunk as much of the fresh stuff as you could before it went off.). This was without having read anything about "paleo" diets. As far as I was concerned I was just "low-carbing" in the original way it was conceived, and that's how I still think of it. If it happens to (more or less) coincide with what people call "paleo", well that's all right but I'm not going to worry about definitions.

I must say that your description of your interpretation of "paleo" is about the best one I've read to date.

I must say that I'm glad the organisers of AHS used that term "Ancestral Health". It feels closer to what I think I'm sort of doing ... I'm approximating to the diet of my ancestors, although it's a bit of a guess, and the best I can do in the 21st century.

Yes, the naturalistic fallacy is one of the traps people initially fall into, and why I dislike the term "caveman diet".  GROK SMASH! indeed.

The challenge is to come up with a logical framework that includes evolutionary context, but is not limited to it...and that's what this article (which defines "functional paleo") is about.

Thanks for the support, and congratulations on your transformation!  Most people would be happy to have your "before" pictures...which shows that "paleo" isn't just a diet plan for fatties.

JS

I recently posted an article titled "Paleo and the Naturalistic Fallacy" on my blog which was an attempt to speak to this issue albeit from a slightly different angle.

(http://www.fitnessinanevolutionarydirection.com/2011/09/paleo-and-naturalistic-fallacy.html)

That's a very interesting data point...gallstones are a relatively common complaint.  It would be interesting to find out if their incidence inversely tracks fat consumption!

And yes, it's well-known that mouth bacteria feed on sugar.  That, I think, is the best evidence that the natural human diet is low-carb, as Paleolithic humans certainly didn't have toothbrushes, let alone fluoridated toothpaste.

JS

Maybe an overt link over to my new food blog, but I think there will be a few interesting fish recipe combinations for you to try. Keep checking in – I'm always updating it, but one I adore for wild salmon is: http://pjgh.blogspot.com/2011/06/wild-salmon-with-.....ocado.html – pure paleo and damn 'effing tasty!

Look out for smoked mackerel – often plastic packed and freezeable, great for any meal, but a damn nice breakfast. Sole works well with blueberries, firm fish like cod and haddock steamed with lots of veggies, herring, pickled herring, sardines in abundance grilled under a fierce heat over a salad of whatever you choose, baked fish … the world is literally "your oyster".

If you want some ideas for fish and shellfish, just shout! I'm here

If you simply prefer a fish-based diet, it's absolutely possible to be optimally healthy.  In fact, I'll be interested to see what sort of meals and dietary composition you eventually settle on, as I've seen the "what if I'm a pescetarian" question before: please keep us updated!

JS