[ExI] More evidence for incomplete human adaptation to grain-based diets

[Stefano Vaj]

On 18 November 2010 02:40, Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com> wrote:
> Or we could re-engineer grains to be more digestible and more nutritious.

Or we could cultivate protheins in the lab which taste like grain, for
those unfortunate fellow who having a choice actually like them... ;-)

BTW, we already have sugar substitutes. But if I believe it is a
nutritionally bad habit to gorge on surgar, I also think it is a
*gastronomically* bad habit to sweeten one's food and beverage
irrespective of whether one also poison oneself in the process. Of
course, the second may be a much more subjective stance. But it is
undeniable that most of the subtletest differences and flavours in
tea, coffee, cocoa, fruit simply go away when adding a few spoonfuls
of sugar or sugar-tasting substances...

>> The real question is: why?
>
> Because we need them to feed the current population?

I may well agree upon the fact that the paleo diet for all the human
beings (and their carnivorous pets forced to a similarly
less-than-optimal diet?) is not currently "sustainable" on a general
and global basis - this is why it was abandoned in the first place at
least for the largest part of the post-neolithic populations
(aristocracies in fact used to know better until the XVIII century).

But so is modern, let alone cutting-edge, medicine. So are cars. Or
ideal physical training.

Yet we are neither prohibiting those things, nor pretend that they are
not desirable in the first place.

> But pushing the "paleo" angle and the "rightness" of
> the "paleo diet" is just marketing designed to sell books or
> supplements or ..., and it's likely to crash and burn if some million
> year old granary or mill is discovered someday, or genetic evidence of
> long-term grain adaptation in the human genome is discovered someday.

OK, "paleo" is a simplification. In fact, even the weakness of control
mechanism as to the assumption of sugar-rich food may simply be an
adaptive feature involved in the convenience of risking indigestion or
high-insuline related prob against wasting that very rare treat which
could be put away as fat for starving days.

But I think that most paleo proponents would be ready to admit that
they refer to a somewhat "idealised" hunting-and-gathering regime. A
paleolithic fellow might well be ready to eat rotten rats, trading a
few calories more with putrefaction toxins and pathogenes, or ingest
non-digestible cellulose to calm the bites of hunger. This does not
mean we should follow this possible example.

> And the anti-grain thing is just one aspect of the "paleo diet".
> Another keystone is eliminating dairy. Now, I realize there are
> differences between various mammal's milk, but to assert that we're
> not adapted to a diet of milk is a little absurd.

Interesting issue. In fact, it is absolutely "unnatural" for mammals
to eat milk or dairy products after weaning, and doing so does have
many documented inconvenients for most human beings.

Only, a few millennia ago a mutation became widespread - but not
absolutely generalised - amongst Europoids allowing us to retain the
enzymes which are necessary to its proper digestion even in our adult
days (another, totally different and less dominant, appears to have
generated similar consequences amongst the stockbreeders of West
Africa), provided that administration of dairy products and/or milk is
never interrupted for any substantial amount of time.

There again, I am not sure that such opportunistic mutation actually
improves not only the range of edible sources of calories, but also
the well-being and life span of those concerned. Accordingly, I choose
to keep eating a little diary products first not to lose the option,
second because I think they are gastronomically interesting, but I
think it is best and safest to limit oneself to occasional consumption
(say, one time a week over a full meal?).

> Honey is on some "paleo diets", grudgingly, but what about
> various other natural sweeteners like date sugar, fruit juice, stevia,
> etc.?

As I mentioned before, honey or sugar-rich fruit were probably very
rare treats to be profited from at whatever bodily cost in a scenario
of high demand, little offer in terms of calories.

I assume however that if somebody on a paleo diet has a desperate need
to gain quickly weight and body fat in view of an expected famine (a
quite hypothetical scenario...), it may still be better for them to
try to do so with honey or fruit and absolute rest than with popcorns
or twinkies and long sessions before TV sets. :-)

--
Stefano Vaj