How do I love thee, neolithic foods

Have you seen Chris Masterjohn's latest post? Since his last posts have been rather serious, I thought he was seriously going to write a paleo book. ANd I thought...well that's quite a bit unlike the Chris I know and a little odd to boot. But seriously, it reminds me of all the reasons I'm not writing a book any time soon.

First, my unabashed love of many neolithic things. It brings to mind this comment I saw on a Meghan McArdle blog post about Nestle selling in the Amazon:

Makes me think of an account I read, I can't remember where, of some travelers or explorers in a very remote area on some island I think in Indonesia or somewhere like that. Anyway, the travelers met a local hunter gatherer and shared their dinner of white rice with him. They wrote that he cried because he had never tasted anything so delicious before. Imagine living on roots and leaves and then having people complain if you get something tastier.

I have a little book written by an actual archaeologist on prehistoric cookery. Needless to say, I have not made any of the bland and miserable-sounding recipes in that book.

I have no desire for asceticism for the sake of asceticism. Yes, I like to eat with evolution in mind, but unless someone comes up with a study that shows that my lovely neolithic goose rilettes are culpable for ruining health, I am unlikely to trade them for soggy sea weed and unseasoned muskrat stew.

It's been quite some time since I read this book, but it has the most honest title: Evolution of the Human Diet: The Known, The Unknown, and The Unknowable. Yes, there is much not known and even more that is unknowable. We know very basic things about the paleolithic diet, enough for a very basic framework. But not much more. We know their diets were high in protein from isotope studies, we know they ate nose to tail from butchery marks, we know they ate some plants from coprolites (though these studies have the worst methodology), and yeah...

There is SO much pop anthropology floating out there right now. Like the idea that cultures like the Inuit or the Kitavans are paleolithic relics. It shows just how far this movement has gone away from actual anthropology, which recognizes that the paleolithic is an era that is OVER. There are no more paleolithic cultures. There are some foragers left, but ALL of these groups have had significant contact with agriculturalists and many have also been agriculturalists at some point in history. This is called agricultural regression and its well-known in anthropology, but apparently has not taken hold of pop culture, though the Boston Globe had an article on SE Asia that featured it recently. So most modern foragers are NOT living fossils. Laughably, many of these cultures mistakenly held up as examples of the Stone Age are not even foragers. The Kitavans, for example, are horticulturalists. Horticulture is a form of agriculture, which differs in some very significant social, cultural, and environmental ways from agrarianism. It's shifting vs. settled, communalism vs. private property, hoe vs. plough, agrobiodiversity vs. monoculture. It's different from the agriculture we know and it's almost always accompanied by foraging, but some foraging does not a forager make.

I wish mainly in this post to demolish the arrogance that is pervading the "paleo" movement. It's rather extraordinary since in many ways the movement is a reaction to the arrogance of mainstream health authorities.

I was happy to see that it seems Erwan wishes to do this as well:

The whole Paleo approach has become very fashionable with various camps arguing over a number of things that we really can’t know about for sure. How do you answer the critics who say this approach romanticises a brutish existence?

Let me be a bit provocative here, purposely: I do not care about my ancestors. They’re all dead!

An evolutionary approach is only interesting if it helps us, people of today, people that are still alive. In that sense, I am not interested in a so called “truth”, but in what we can experience today, and how understanding our past may help us improve our present lives. I am not living a caveman lifestyle, I’m sorry. I am a man of today, I’m in the here and now. I am not “sprinting and lifting heavy things” thinking that I am mimicking a caveman lifestyle. That is BULLSHIT. I am sprinting and lifting heavy things (among many other things I train) in order to be ready to do so in today’s world when the need arises. It’s about real-life preparedness and not role playing. MovNat is about connecting to reality, not to a reality that does not exist anymore.

Comments

In response to NorCal: Most

In response to NorCal: Most hunter-gatherers consider life to begin at age 2, but we quibble over conception or birth. So, we include infanticide in their [paleo humans] averages, but not our own abortions. Seems like ethnocentric skewing, to me.

The acceptance of infantacide has strong materialist roots, just as our shirking of it does, so I would expect that Paleolithic foragers, bound by the same material pressures, had similar beliefs. That said, Karen Rosenberg’s “Living longer: Information revolution, population expansion, and modern human origins,” Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Jul 27;101(30) argues that we can trace a trend of longer life expectancies (minus a disastrous Neolithic mortality crisis from which we have only recently recovered) to the Upper Paleolithic, rather than the Neolithic or Industrial Revolutions.

This is interesting I've been

This is interesting I've been noticing a bit of tension between Paleo and what is essentially a Neolithic diet. I've recently read Blue Zones by Dan Buettner and he says that the diet most conducive to longevity is one based on whole foods nothing processed with some staple starch but not much meat. Then you have the Paleo which is whole foods but meat and fat heavy with no starch or very little. I guess everyone has to experiment for themselves as to what makes them feel better. And always eat your vegetables.

This is a great post. The

This is a great post. The Paleo "movement" for lack of a better word, is a mixed bag, and sometimes I think that people take it and themselves way too seriously. Not all of us want to be amateur or professional archeologists, anthropologists, or paleontologists. Some of us arrived at Paleo because we have health/weight problems. We've found that this way of eating results in good health, and that's all we need to know. We don't fuss about whether a carrot or spinach is truly Paleo. We just relax and enjoy our food, and we look toward the future to a point in time when our health will be totally restored.

Funny, I just wrote a post

Funny, I just wrote a post about the limits of our knowledge. That should be the starting point IMO.

1. We know a little about the past.
2. So let's start experimenting and see what happens.

I like that end-quote too,

I like that end-quote too, but before I'd say anything he said in response, I'd first argue that hunter-gatherers' existence wasn't brutish. There was higher infant mortality, which is the way of all life on earth, and you could die more easily from some stupid infection that today would be nothing for medical science to cure.

But the H-Gs might easily argue that the cancer, diabetes, arthritis, long and intense work weeks, and extreme stress we face are far more brutish.

Hmm- I wonder if people are

Hmm- I wonder if people are going to become post-paleo?

I know a big part of how I got into all this was the primitivist critique of civilization. I learned about permaculture later and realized that there probably ahs never been a 'pure' forager, and all foragers engage in some degree of cultivation. That is to say, foraging and horticulture exist on a continuum, though I think you can make an argument that agriculture is aligned with monocrops and catastrophic cultivation, and migth reasonably be seen as distinct.

All of which is to say- maybe paleo's moving that way too, slowly backing off from its early and hard line stances and holding on to the most important aspects. That seems like good to me.

Oh, I love this "MovNat is

Oh, I love this "MovNat is about connecting to reality, not to a reality that does not exist anymore." I think the concept of "Paleo" is a good one to help people to understand the basic framework from which the topics I'm going to discuss in my workshop spawn. That said, the science and basic biochemistry about how food works in the body are what really drive the topics I discuss and I think that shredding the Paleo name from it would be AOK with me. I tend to talk to people about eating WHOLE FOODS and then mention the categories that have been pushed by the government that are pretty unnecessary to eat and are irritating to our systems.

I just wanted to share that quick reaction as I ponder stripping the Paleo name from my workshop title. I think, for now, it's still the best way to inform people ahead of time what they're getting themselves into before they sign up to spend 3 hours listening to me talk to them about what to eat!

Diane @ Balanced Bites
http://www.balancedbites.com

As someone at the coalface

As someone at the coalface trying to help people improve their health, whilst I can see what Melissa and Erwan are getting at, people who are coming across this for the first time, need some context for it all. So I wholeheartedly support Diane's comments.

For those of us who are well-embedded in this movement, we are probably all at the point where we can ditch the very labels (paleo, primal, caveman, hunter-gather, evo), that likely appealed to us and got us involved.

And whilst I agree that there is an arrogance developing within the 'paleo' movement, we have to guard against an arrogance that says we are all grown up, everyone gets it now, and we just ditch all the labels. I can tell you that if I just walked into a workshop and told everyone to ditch grains, vegetable oils, and fructose, and to focus on sunlight and 'natural' movements for exercise, without giving them context, I'd be on a hiding to nothing.

The Erwan LeCorre quote at

The Erwan LeCorre quote at the end got me, but for a different reason than the paleo role play issue. I often have people I know talk about exercising and what they do day after day. As if that were the endpoint. I stay fit for the same reason Erwan said. That if I need to run for my life or lift an unconscious family member to get them out of a burning building, I can. A lot of people don't realize that is the end result you want. Not 5 miles on a treadmill or what you "bench".