Here’s an excerpt:
Arguments about diet typically rely on scientific studies; yours are more based on theories culled from evolutionary psychology and historical evidence. But don’t we need to see large studies that prove the Paleo approach works?
The reality is that people don’t really understand how the human body works. Even the top scientists. And when you don’t understand, you need to use nature as a model, to get an approximation or some good hypotheses for what works. Evolutionary theory is wonderful for generating really smart hypotheses.
And on meaning:
One of the things you suggest people do to thrive is to “make food meaningful.” How is this part of the Paleo approach?
That theme is partly Michael Pollan’s influence, and he’s been very critical of what’s called nutritionism, basically reducing foods into their parts, like vitamin C and calories and fats. Deconstructing food like that takes away its meaning. Diets that depend on counting calories and macro-nutrients, they’re not the type that motivate people to stick to them in the long-term. I didn’t want this book to be a list of foods that you’re not allowed to eat and a list of beneficial micro- and macro-nutrients—that doesn’t motivate me in my daily life. What motivates me is actually making chicken stock for a friend who’s ill instead of heating up a can of soup on the stove. Traditional family recipes are more meaningful than ones that come out of a cookbook. The key to turning a diet into a lifestyle is making it meaningful, integrating it into your life, so that it doesn’t require discipline, it’s just what you do.
You can read the full interview here.