Enjoyed this one.

On fasting on national TV:

I may be the only one of Colbert’s guests who was in ketosis during the interview.

On why I *downplay* the Paleolithic in some areas of health:

If you want to understand thermoregulation, then you really need to understand every major transition: the rise of warm-bloodedness (Animal Age); the rise of hairlessness, sweating, fire, and clothing (Paleolithic Age); the rise of sweat bathing traditions that introduced temperature extremes (Agricultural Age); and the rise of indoor heating and air conditioning (Industrial Age). We’ve even started to tinker with our *internal* temperature by taking fever-reducing medicines (antipyretics).

The Paleolithic is very important, but it isn’t sufficient.

On critics of paleo:

I sometimes wonder what all the fuss is about.

The way many people actually eat paleo or primal (i.e., often incorporating some traditional dairy) basically boils down to Michael Pollan’s principles but more pro-meat and anti-seed (grains, legumes, nuts, seeds). Is that really so radical a notion that critics need to “debunk” paleo?

At the same time, paleo advocates need to be careful not to overhype it and to approach thoughtful critics with a little humility. I thought it was great how the Paleo Movement Magazine interviewed Alan Aragon, a vocal critic of paleo. Good for him and good for you.

Now let’s step back and put things in perspective. For the last few decades, “healthy whole grains” have been treated entirely uncritically. That paleo has brought attention to the notion that there might be *a few* drawbacks to a heavily grain-based diet is a triumph of the most basic form of critical-thinking: pros and cons. The same point is true of the entirely uncritical attitude towards traditional fats.

Please, tell me— who is being unscientific here? It was the people who treated “healthy whole grains” as nectar of the f*@$ing gods and fat as the evil boogeyman.

Read the whole thing here.

Leave a Reply