Speaking as an anthropologist, I say bullshit.

Indeed. It's a hell of a lot easier to dig up some purple potatoes than chase down an alpaca, you know?

I don't understand.

Many of those links say he's green.

Basically, most modern Paleo folks are looking for foods that they already like that are on the Paleo-Approved list.

This is my beef (SEE WHAT I DID THERE) with the whole Paleo concept. Not the general notion of "foods that are less processed are better for you than Wonder Bread" but that it tends to come out in practice as "steak and eggs for breakfast every morning, rawr, I'm a HUNTER!"

I mean, I doubt many people on a modern "paleo" diet are spending the winter months living off of beef jerky and acorns.

mean, I doubt many people on a modern "paleo" diet are spending the winter months living off of beef jerky and acorns.

I would totally love to live off beef jerky and nuts (not acorns cause they taste like ass and have to be processed, ironically, in some way to be palatable).

In other news, we are moving in 11 days and I have to pack up and move my classroom in 6 days. I feel sick.

I'm not really on board with Paleo being into eggs, though, since an easy supply of eggs is a result of domesticated fowl, and they wouldn't have been available year-round in quantity in the real Paleolithic.

This is part of the argument I hear a lot. Personally, I'm into eating eggs because they have a lot of protein and a lot of nutrients. H/Gs eat eggs whenever they can get them, and they can get them, just not in the abundance we can. But that argument is true for ANY food - modern first-world humans have a larger and easier supply of all foods than our ancestors did. There's a similar argument over honey, and milk. H/Gs couldn't get honey very easily at all, and they don't drink milk because they don't have domesticated animals. OTOH, there are tribes like the Masai who are non-nomadic herders, who eat virtually nothing but the meat, milk, and blood of their livestock (and are overall incredibly healthy). As soon as humans domesticate animals and have access to milk, they start drinking it. (Except for areas of rural China where they think it's gross. There's always an exception.)

Basically, I think humans will eat, drink, smoke, and fuck anything. It may or may not be good for us. The sole fact that our distant ancestors probably did or did not do it is not reason enough for us to do or not do it. Humans have been consuming domesticated grains for thousands of years, and many (most?) of us have adapted to that food supply that we didn't evolve with. Some of us haven't. The fact that Jesus ate bread doesn't mean I should.

Many of those links say he's green.

Nope.

Humans have been consuming domesticated grains for thousands of years, and many (most?) of us have adapted to that food supply that we didn't evolve with.

Exactly. That's why the appendix is obsolete, for one. It was used primarily to digest raw (or rawer) meat, I think.

But you don't get insulin from food -- your pancreas manufactures it to use glucose properly.

Well, yes, but insulin spikes in response to consuming carbohydrates, so a "sugar hit" is also going to be an "insulin hit". (There's evidence that insulin spikes in response to a sweet taste, even if that taste doesn't come with any calories. Which if true could be real problematic for people trying to control their blood sugar by using artificial non-caloric sweeteners.)

Nope.

Weird. I searched for "Is Spock's skin green" (no quotes) but my link is just "is spock". I tried again--same thing.

Exactly. That's why the appendix is obsolete, for one. It was used primarily to digest raw (or rawer) meat, I think.

I could be wrong, but I thought the appendix was the shrunken remains of the cecum or "second stomach", which is used by herbivores to help digest fibrous cellulose-containing plant matter. Since humans learned to process and cook our plant matter, we don't need it anymore.