http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

that will explain why we get fat, why all calories are not equal and why sugar is killing us.

I’ll warn you it’s about an hour and half.

@tim yes I was unsure whether to respond or not…

I was under the impression that this blog exists to promote Tim and his business, it also provides Tim and guests the opportunity to write posts to discuss alternative viewpoints on things such as beliefs, values, religion etc. These aren’t peer reviewed journal articles or even referenced articles. They are opinion pieces.

Now my original piece to Tim had a lot of external links in it. However Tim’s response involved many expletives, so rather than pick or choose which links and references to leave in I removed them and offered the suggestion for the reader to perhaps do their own research as I did or perhaps contact me for some links. Why you did neither I am not sure.

However if you would like me to Google it for you …

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Primal+living

Other words you could Google are:

Gary Taubes
Mark Sissons
Art de Vany
Lauren Cordain

These people are all good starting points for finding out more about the concepts and science behind the primal/paleo/evolutionary lifestyle.

I am not going to respond to any of your other points as you have misquoted and misinterpreted me and I think there may even be a straw man in there somewhere and I really can’t be arsed if you can’t be bothered to do your own research.

Anyway I am off to chew on my lovely big bone, got a big day hunting tomorrow ;-)

I just wanted to throw a couple of things in as the person that asked Guy to post.

Firstly, the post was to get people to think and to entertain different opinions in an air of mutual respect. I happen to disagree a lot with what Guy said, but I’ll refrain from saying its a bunch of crap.

You do make some valid points, but you kinda lose some credibility when you say this:

Steady long-time exercise reduces weight and gives longer energy, short interval exercise increases speed and agility. To claim any is “healthier” is bullocks as the question is what the goal is – you want to increase strength and speed or you want to loose weight?

That is simply not true and not been conventional wisdom since the early 80′s.

Leading work by people like Dr Jim Loehr (who has trained some of the greatest sports people in the world) amongst others, has demonstrated that the best way to lose weight is a combination of short burst interval training and free weights.

Of course if you are going to run marathons, then you have to run long distances. But if you want to strengthen your heart, interval training that involves raising the heart rate significantly above 80% max with recovery, out trumps anything in terms of return on time invested. A 30 minute interval work out can improve stamina more than a 90 minute jog.

Thanks for your comment!

First of all.. there is a quote of an MD in heart surgery, which is then one of 50000 or so in the US alone, let alone around the world. Second, there is no source for this quote and no mention of what this guy actually changed his mind around. Just that he at some point made some mistake. So, one guy making one mistake is evidence for a whole load of articles, studies, … being bullocks?

Second: It is absolutely correct that our ancestors lived on meat, berries, nuts and vegetables. But, one of the main points you forgot to mention is that they were likely living on the constant edge on starvation, the point being that they didn’t have much of any of the above. The main cause for obesity is overeating, no matter which type of food. Also carbohydrates are seen as one main cause, the number that is usually far more associated with obesity is: kg of meat. There are several studies showing clear correlations of mass of meat (and other animal products) consumed and BMI and weight.

Third: the cardio stuff is known for a long time already. Steady long-time exercise reduces weight and gives longer energy, short interval exercise increases speed and agility. To claim any is “healthier” is bullocks as the question is what the goal is – you want to increase strength and speed or you want to loose weight? If you see weight-loss as “healthy” in itself that’s quite odd as you then assume that everybody in the first place is unhealthy+fat.

Fourth: It is known that carbs is a cause of obesity. Everybody agrees – if you eat MUCH. The same is valid for oils of all kinds, as they ARE fat, and only that! But I never heard of or read any article that even in the slightest claimed there was such a relation for vegetables and obesity, so to say we should eat more meat to lose weight is quite a strange idea.

If you want to live like the cavemen… well, go, throw your job, starve yourself and then go and hunt and fish and see how you can do. We’re obese because we’re living not in forests but in offices and we don’t hunt for food with our bare hands, but we buy it prepackaged in the supermarket and drive it home with our SUV. So, if you want to live healthy change that first – and not stop eating certain foods.

Well, to finish it. You said you read a lot on it. Would be nice if you would let us know what, so we can check it ourselves. So far everything you said above seems to me like a bunch of crap – show me that I’m wrong, but with some evidence!

You say: “No, the point I am making is that sometimes society gets it wrong. You must not take everything experts or governments say as being right.”
You make a grave mistake here. Humans are social beings and our today’s culture relies on specialisation. Everybody knows something specific, is an expert, that’s why we’re efficient as we are – so you need to rely on experts, be it those building your house (should not break), your car, the plane you’re in, … – and also the information you have. So, you will have to rely on experts, what you have to decide is: on which!

You’re absolutely right. There’s always two sides to an argument and that’s why it’s so important for each of us to take responsibility and educate ourselves to make informed decisions.

I’ve done enough reading to be convinced myself to base many of my lifestyle choices on the age old habits that got us through millions of years. There’s always room for a difference in opinion and I’m just happy to open peoples mind to another way of thinking. :)

As you mentioned, there’s certainly a lot of factors that can contribute to height and brain size. I don’t necessarily think they’re the most important considerations when evaluating the implementation of primal principles into one’s lifestyle, but it’s certainly worthy of attention.

It’s in Dangerous Grains by Braly and Hoggan that I read we lost 5″ to 6″ in height and 11% in brain size after the advent of agriculture (page 24 to be exact). However, I’m not sure which of the many references provided at the end of the chapter backs up these numbers. I’ve come across similar numbers other places as well, but don’t remember where off the top of my head.

Here’s an interesting article about
Paleopathology at the Origins of Agriculture by Stephan Guyenet’s Whole Health Source blog. I’d love to read this book, but it’s not easy to get. There’s one used copy on Amazon for $350!

Here’s a paper by Loren Cordain that addresses the popular life span argument. I think The Paleo Diet (his book) errors far too much on the side of being politically correct (i.e. saturated fat), but that shouldn’t discount all the research he’s done.

In the paper, Cordain claims that “About 20% of hunter-gatherers reach age 60 or beyond [6,7], but even in this age bracket, individuals from foraging and other technologically primitive cultures appear almost completely free from manifestations of most chronic degenerative diseases [8,9]”

References 6 and 7 are Demography of the Dobe !Kung by N. Howell and Ache Life History by K. Hill and A. Hurtado. Sections of both can be read on Google books, and if I remember correctly, both give instances of some people from these primitive tribes living into their 70s and 80s and still being able to function well with the exception of hunting.

Vin – NaturalBiass last blog post..Vitamin D’s Flawed Recommended Daily Allowance

There’s a frequently-encountered assumption that the average height of humans has grown steadily taller as the centuries have progressed. However, studies have shown that the average height of a population is related to general health and economic well-being, which is affected by such factors as climate changes, the growth of cities, war and population cycles. Thus, average height fluctuated throughout history.

And it turns out medieval men weren’t a whole lot shorter, on average, than men of the new millennium.

A recent study conducted at Ohio State University, based on skeletal data from 30 previous studies, reveals that men living during the 9th to 11th centuries had an average height of about 5 feet 8 inches. Average height then steadily declined until it reached a low point of 5 feet 5.5 inches in the 17th and 18th centuries, rising again through the 19th century and only reaching prior heights in the first half of the 20th century. An article on the study by Richard Steckel appears in the Social Science History journal.

According to the feature by Jennifer Warner at WebMD, Dr. Steckel noted that “Average height is a good way to measure the availability and consumption of basic necessities such as food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and exposure to disease.” Frequent wars and a rise in the spread of deadly diseases impacted population health and height, as well.

Today, average height in American men is about 5 feet 9 inches and in American women 5 feet 4 inches. According to a study completed in 2002 (see the article by John Carvel at the Guardian), Britons have similar average heights, while most Europeans are an inch or two shorter. The exception is the Dutch, who are about an inch taller than Brits and Americans

@ Vin – That’s all cool stuff and I’d like to read the Mark Sisson book. My concern is I am damn sure there are people just as well qualified saying the complete opposite and backing it up with solid science.

I would like a link to the reports that we have shrunk as have our brains, because that is in direct conflict with stuff I seem to remember reading. I’ll have a dig around.

Quite frankly, I’m confused!