I had a great question that involves Katherine Miltons rebuttal to much of Cordain’s work. Here is the question and my response:
I’d love to talk to you about elite level athletes diets (olympian diets), and their high reliance on carbs and not so healthy food, sometime.. but too long to do here.
But on a different note, what do you think of these articles that challenge yours and Loren’s research? http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/71/3/665
[email protected] that’s good shit there! Here is the conclusion from the first link:
In conclusion, it is likely that no hunter-gatherer society, regardless of the proportion of macronutrients consumed, suffered from diseases of civilization. Most wild foods lack high amounts of energy and this feature, in combination with the slow transit of food particles through the human digestive tract, would have served as a natural check to obesity and certain other diseases of civilization. Yet today, all non-Western populations appear to develop diseases of civilization if they consume Western foods and have sedentary lifestyles (24). Given these facts, in combination with the strongly plant-based diet of human ancestors, it seems prudent for modern-day humans to remember their long evolutionary heritage as anthropoid primates and heed current recommendations to increase the number and variety of fresh fruit and vegetables in their diets rather than to increase their intakes of domesticated animal fat and protein.
A number of folks in the dietetics community went bananas over Cordain’s research. He does NOT advocate domestic high fat meats. He recommends low fat varieties especially if the source is not grassfed. It is this very recommendation that gets the WPF/Fallon/Eng crowd whipped into a sat’d fat lov’n frenzy. Cordain’s position is that the preponderance of cals HAD to come from animal sources…he details this via the Ethnographic Atlas and he looks at the two really interesting pieces of info: The energy expenditure of HG’s and the available foods, both plant and animal. I’ve had a post on this cooking for a while, and it is a key section of the book but the main point is: we know HG’s had a very high activity level. We also know the energy density of the foods they ate…and it’s impossible to feed that activity level with a plant based diet. The !Kung of the Kalahari have periods of time when a nut called the Monongo is very available as are numerous varieties of melon and other fruit. Robert V. Lee (who lived among the Kung for more than 20 years) found that their reliance on animal products hit about 10% of cals during this time. During their winter however, which is dry and actually fairly cold (30*F and the Kung make no special clothing to deal with this time) they rely on animal products for more than 90% of their calories.
Milton (the author of the first paper) offers NO counter point to the hard data or the mathematical underpinnings of Cordain’s work. She is a dietitian and I swear they ALL HATE Cordain because he’s an outsider that figured out their “science” and they can make neither heads nor tails of it. She concedes in the paper that the health of pre-industrial people is better in that we see none of the western degenerative diseases…then she just recommends business as usual!! It just makes my head want to pop off my shoulders!
If they really had a clue they would attack his numbers and the data…they don’t so they can’t. The damn dietitians just want to keep counting calories with not an ounce of interest in describing what they actually observe. It is criminal and completely devoid of academic rigor.