Learn how to sit, stand, walk, and lie down like indigenous cultures free from back problems.
From The Archive: Demeter's Legacy

Whenever an article about the paleo diet is published in a major newspaper, at least one commenter expresses dismay that paleo dieters don't realize that humans are adapted to grains and milk. That's a misconception on several levels. First of all, plenty of us are educated enough to know that genetic adaptations can occur rapidly. I remember in high school when I first read The Beak of The Finch, which is about the finches in the Galapagos islands and how their populations genetically respond rapidly to changes in the environment. It takes down the myth that evolution is slow and can't be observed.
In that case, why are we still talking about what our ancestors eat as if it matters? Well, so far the evidence is that some adaptations have occurred in some populations response to neolithic food. Genetic evidence shows that most of the population in modern societies is descended from agriculturalists who had been farming for several thousand years. Clearly, our ancestors were very much able to survive on diets of grains and dairy.
I was just reading this scientific paper, Demeter's Legacy, which is free online and a fascinating read. Yes, there are two major genetic adaptations in agriculturalist populations. One improves the digestion of starch and the other of dairy. Great, we can eat these foods and reproduce. Yay, but it doesn't mean that we are completely adapted to them. There are plenty of foods that are digestible for everyday needs, but damaging in the long term. It's up to us to do the research and figure out if foods are really worth it. I ate bread for most of my life and felt OK, but life for me is not just about surviving, but about thriving. It's important to remember that even though adaptations have occurred, the vast majority of our genes were forged before agriculture.
And for people descended from more recent hunter-gatherers, neolithic foods are even more devastating.
I created a list that I am currently still adding foods to which outlines some pros and cons of various foods from the paleo viewpoint. I think foods should be judged on their merits and there is no "one true" paleo diet...there can't be, since last time I checked I couldn't get wild antelope at the grocery store. It's about learning from the wisdom of the past and choosing food based on those principles, not reenactment.
- huntgatherlove:
- Tags:
- Melissa's blog
- Login to post comments
Post to Twitter


This blog is about the intersection between evolutionary biology and food. But also about practical applications, sustainable agriculture, and general tasty things.
Comments
"Yes, there are two major
"Yes, there are two major genetic adaptations in agriculturalist populations. One improves the digestion of starch and the other of dairy."
Just wanted to add a couple of notes to adaptations for starch digestion. Multiple copies of the gene responsible for the production of amylase are present in both agricultural populations *and* in hunter-gatherer populations from arid regions (presumably do to a relative lack of abundance of animal-derived foods), but fewer copies are prevalent in tropical/sub-tropical HG populations. Agricultural populations are undoubtedly the descendants of arid-climate adapted humans subsisting on lower nutritional density level. In addition to the fact that starch digestion is not synonymous with grain digestion, it would also seem to be simply a famine trait, a deviation from the normative or desirable pattern of natural food consumption among humans. Digging up tubers is a labor intensive process with low reward value.
Adaptation/evolution doesn't
Adaptation/evolution doesn't work for humans anymore.
We are reproducing and passing on genes with the aid of modern medicine and science. We breed despite the fact that we may eventually develop chronic illness. There's no pressure to pass on new genes that allow us to avoid gluten intolerance, etc.
10,000 years ago humans, or groups of humans, with nutritional intolerances might not have produced offspring that thrived as robustly as those without intolerances. Selection at work.