Weight-Loss The value of a calorie

[Spinner19641]

I have heard about the Paleo diet and wondered why anyone would follow it.

What makes it a superior diet? People didn't live very long back then and maybe the diet was one of the reasons.

The 'see food' diet and 'paleo' diet seem to be extreme ends but there's a lot of middle ground in between. I think we all just make a pitch somewhere between the two and, if it works the person, then what's the problem?

 

[Coach Palfrey]

I have heard about the Paleo diet and wondered why anyone would follow it.

What makes it a superior diet? People didn't live very long back then and maybe the diet was one of the reasons.

The 'see food' diet and 'paleo' diet seem to be extreme ends but there's a lot of middle ground in between. I think we all just make a pitch somewhere between the two and, if it works the person, then what's the problem?

I'm sure that people died due to other factors than eating the foods that are naturally available. I've read a few research articles that state that we're actually only living longer now because of emergency medicine and vaccinations against disease.

I never said that Paleo was superior.

 

[Coach Palfrey]

Also, I'd point out that there's a difference in what's commonly conceived of as a 'sensible' diet, and the paleo diet. Paleo is a lot more restrictive than say, 'Mostly plants' and 'Stuff I could make at home, and my grandma would probably recognize the ingredients.' It's also more restrictive than just 'foods available in nature'.

So there's a difference in saying that people can just lose weight by eating sensibly and saying that 'maintaining sensible dietary choices' = paleo.

I'd argue that the common perception of sensible eating is wrong ie. whole grains, low fat etc.

And perhaps restriction is a good thing?

 

[Spinner19641]

I'm sure that people died due to other factors than eating the foods that are naturally available. I've read a few research articles that state that we're actually only living longer now because of emergency medicine and vaccinations against disease.

I never said that Paleo was superior.

I didn't say you did. I'm just asking what makes it superior to the other options. In other words, why would I pick it over any other option? Just because it was all people had to eat back then doesn't make it better for you by default. In fact, for all I know it could be worse for you and is a contributing factor to early death.

All I am saying is I haven't heard any reasons why this a better diet than pitching somewhere between the 'see food' and 'paleo'.

However, if there is a reason then I'd be interested to hear it.

 

[Jeanette401]

I'd argue that the common perception of sensible eating is wrong ie. whole grains, low fat etc.

Whether or not it's wrong (I don't particularly agree with the low fat craze, but that's fading out of the definition of 'sensible' eating), your first post was talking about calorie counting vs. 'maintaining sensible dietary choices'. If you really meant vs paleo, than you probably should have said so. When you asked the question, I was envisioning a more Mediterranean diet or some rules on sensible eating, like eat lots of plants, less processed foods etc.

I also don't know why refusing to eat lentils or steel cut oats or quinoa or even dairy is 'sensible'. Especially given the number of studies that say good things about eating all of the above.

Note - my info on the paleo diet and what's allowed and what isn't comes from

And perhaps restriction is a good thing?

Perhaps certainly leaves a lot of wiggle room - but to reiterate Spinner's question... why is that much restriction better than a middle ground. Where you don't eat the 'see food' diet, but you're not going full paleo. What's wrong with a Mediterranean diet? What's wrong with the Okinawan diet replete with rice and sweet potato?

And why would I need more restriction on my food choices if my current one keeps me happy and healthy?

Don't get me wrong, if someone finds paleo easier than whatever I'm doing - more power to them! But people are so varied in so many ways, I don't know how you could say that all people would be better off with one plan or another. Generally they're better off with the plan that works best for them, whatever that happens to be.

Personally I haven't seen anything in paleo that offers enough advantages to try it. I've already been down a slightly less restrictive path before and that was hard enough. Cut out beans and sweet potato and canola and quinoa and omg cheese and yogurt and milk... I'd have to be dealing with severe allergies to make the stress worth it to me. (I've also done a 6 week anti-allergen diet. No dairy, no wheat, no sugar, no 'fake' sugars, mostly no preservatives beyond calcium citrate and similar... It was super duper hard)

 

[Toddless]

You're mildly frustrated that I have a Paleo diet?!

It's strange that you say you agree with certain tenets of the Paleo diet but you'd advocate certain cookies and donuts. The Paleo diet is simply one of a hunter gatherer. Therefore it doesn't include processed foods at all.

And the thread isn't about the Paleo diet - I was interested in finding out others opinions about calorie counting (I just happen to follow a Paleo Diet)

I realize the thread has since wandered from this, but to answer your questions:

I was frustrated because your post seemed to have an agenda of pushing the paleo-diet, but it was couched in other questions and observations. If you want to push the paleo-diet, start a thread on why the paleo-diet is good. If this wasn't your intention, however, I sincerely apologize. Advocating your own diet is different than suggesting it to others.

And I agree with the paleo-diet in that it cuts out a lot of processed foods, much like the Atkins diet. I don't think that's a bad thing. I just enjoy cookies and milk too much to go full paleo or atkins.