Sun 23 Sep 2007
Why Paleo Is the Healthiest Diet Possible
Posted by Jeremiah under Dieting, Health, Nutrition, Paleo Diet
Many people that get introduced to the Paleo diet dismiss it immediately as nonsense. They attempt to find quick ways to disregard the entire idea, so they can go on believing that their diet is just fine.
Understanding Evolution
One of the primary reasons that the Paleo diet hasn’t become more popular is because of people underestimating, misunderstanding, or completely rejecting the theory of evolution. Unfortunately, the latter case appears to be very prevalent here in America (where we also enjoy the highest obesity rate in the world):

Belief in Evolution by country (United States second to last in countries surveyed)

Obesity by Country (United States has highest rate)
Charles Darwin proposed the term “natural selection” in his work “The Origin of Species.” I’ll give the summary of his theory shown on wikipedia instead of giving a rambling explanation in my own words:
1. Species have great fertility. They have more offspring than can grow to adulthood.
2. Populations remain roughly the same size, with small changes.
3. Food resources are limited, but are relatively stable over time.
4. An implicit struggle for survival ensues.
5. In sexually reproducing species, generally no two individuals are identical.
6. Some of these variations directly impact the ability of an individual to survive in a given environment.
7. Much of this variation is inheritable.
8. Individuals less suited to the environment are less likely to survive and less likely to reproduce, while individuals more suited to the environment are more likely to survive and more likely to reproduce.
9. The individuals that survive are most likely to leave their inheritable traits to future generations.
10. This slowly effected process results in populations that adapt to the environment over time, and ultimately, after interminable generations, the creations of new varieties, and ultimately, new species.
Two of these central observations are critical here, #6 and #10:
6. “Some of these variations directly impact the ability of an individual to survive in a given environment.”
10. “This slowly effected process results in populations that adapt to the environment over time, and ultimately, after interminable generations, the creations of new varieties, and ultimately, new species.”
Species adapt to their environment more and more over time. It is a gradual process, but it keeps happening as long as the environment remains the same and the variations still have an impact. We had millions of years of years to adapt to our environment. And one of the most pivotal parts of that environment would be the food sources. That is the central reasoning behind the Paleo diet. We became adapted to eat the food that was available during that time, the Paleolithic Era. Then something unexpected happened: civilization.
Natural Selection Grinds to a Halt
The truth is that natural selection is slow. It takes a really long time. When humans developed civilization and agriculture, we changed our own food sources. We started eating grains and dairy, but we didn’t have a long time to adapt. Civilization has only been around for about 10,000 years, a blink of the eye on the evolutionary scale. And for a large part of that time, we’ve had the technology to prevent natural selection from occuring (by keeping almost everyone alive).
Certainly, we have made very, very small adaptations since civilization started, but nothing approaching full adaptation to a new food source. For the most part, we are genetically identitical to our ancestors tens of thousands of years ago.
What does adaptation mean to me?
It means that your body is optimized to run on a certain kind of fuel. It means every function your body performs that is affected by nutrition (virtually all of them), could be performed better if you receieved that fuel.
This is why the Paleo diet doesn’t involve eating foods introduced in the last 10,000 years. Even if there are animals that are adapted to eat these foods, it doesn’t mean we are. Take cow’s milk. Cow’s milk has tons of nutrients. It is a perfect food… for baby cows.
Handling food is a difficult process for the human body. It has to digest the food, harvest the nutrients, process toxins, and dispose of waste. There are hundreds of ways this could go wrong. It’s a mind-bogglingly complex design process, but one that evolution is able to handle. That is if our bodies had sufficient time for adaptation to take place.
Thought experiments
There is certainly an abundance of evidence to support evolution by natural selection, but the great thing about this theory is that it is so simple and inherently understandable because it was formed on observations of nature. Yes, the evidence is there, but you can perform what a professor of mine called a “thought experiment” (talking about a completely different topic) and see that indeed this mechanism could work.
And in the same way, since the Paleo diet is based on the evolution of humans, you can see that it makes a lot of sense. Yes, the studies that have been conducted show nothing but good things about the diet, and my own experience has been great, but you can immediately understand why it works. How many other diets can you say that about?
We are stuck with our genetic material. So, if you want to have the healthiest diet possible, you have two choices:
- Genetically-Engineer yourself a new body.
- Eat foods that you are adapted to eat.
How to go on eating things that aren’t good for you.
And now, a series of pictures to help you convince yourself to continue eating garbage if you so choose:
1. Cover your ears, sing “la la la la”, and reject evolution.

2. Dismiss the idea of adaptation. Haven’t you always wanted a penguin as a pet?
3. Consume foods based only on their nutritional content; completely ignore toxins, nutrient absorbability, and digestability:

September 25th, 2007 at 7:33 pm
I have two observations from your data:
1) John D Miller needs to learn how to make better graphs! The 50% mark on the top and bottom don’t match up.
2) I took the data from your two graphs (well, I eyeballed the % of people who believe in creationism) and tried to find a correlation between the two and the R-Squared value was only 0.38 which means that its very weakly correlated (if at all). I know, I know, that was a small sample, but I just thought I’d point that out.
However, with that said, I agree with you that milk is gross for the human body (although I love ice cream and cheese) and I think that the nation is overweight. Your diet is very logical. Nice job overall though, keep it up!
September 26th, 2007 at 6:34 am
You know, the two graphs put next to each other was little more than a joke, but I actually contemplated putting them together to see the correlation. I’m too lazy for that though. Thanks for giving that a try!
I appreciate that. I’m not very good with analogies and examples, so I was trying very hard to lay it out logically. And by the way, I like cheese too, just like I like candies, cakes, pies, pizzas, etc. You can admit to liking it and realize that it’s not very good for you at the same time. Thanks for your comment.
September 28th, 2007 at 7:10 am
Evolution can happen faster than Darwin thought — http://www.physorg.com/news77987584.html
Evolution is a response to the idea that adaptation will either kill us or make us better/fitter/more adapted. So, by eating grains, potatoes, and yes, even milk, I’m ensuring that my children can digest a wider range of foods than my ancestors could.
I have to say I don’t agree with the idea of cutting out food groups. The body is actually pretty amazing at getting nutrition from just about anything — so eating a varied diet seems to me to be the most sensible route?
Where Americans go wrong is not by eating milk, but by not eating fresh fruit, vegetables, and wholegrains.
Just my opinion. I’m not a nutritionist or a doctor.
September 28th, 2007 at 8:49 am
Thanks for providing that link. And I appreciate your opinion; you don’t need to be a doctor to have some insight into nutrition.
However, I’m going to have to disagree with some of the things you said. The article you linked to was specifically about island evolution and I’m not sure how appropriate that is to all of humans. Besides the fact that the article says it only happens three times faster:
I think you also might be a little bit confused about natural selection according to this quote:
Evolution isn’t exactly like the saying “what doesn’t kill you only makes you stronger.” For natural selection to work, organisms with beneficial traits have to be “selected.” What this means is that the other organisms have to either die or not have as many children.
Here’s the problem. With modern shelter, agriculture, and medicine, the large majority of humans are able to survive well past a reproductive age and also have as many children as they would like. In essence, virtually all traits are getting passed on.
I have to say that the statement about allowing your children to eat a wider variety of foods by eating them yourself is just false. For that to work you would have to:
a) already have traits that make you marginally better at digesting those foods than the last generation (through inheritance or mutation) and
b) survive better and reproduce more than other humans
Unless other people are consuming grains and milk and dying or not having many children because they aren’t adapted as well as you, it just isn’t going to work. Even if natural selection was in full force, the generation to generation changes are incredibly small if they occur at all.
And finally, I do agree that increasing our fruit and vegetable intake is important, perhaps more important than cutting out suboptimal foods, if Americans aren’t already getting enough nutrients to begin with. Thanks again, Suzie!