From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Apr 21 2003 - 19:47:29 MDT
Damien Sullivan wrote:
> Dec 2002 article on food and nutrition (and a new pyramid, but not
> shown) http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=0007C5B6-7152
> -1DF6-9733809EC588EEDF
>
> Some have argued paleodiet should trump nutrition due to the
> unreliability of the latter, but the latter looks more solid to me
> than often assumed. The article points out that some of the whiplash
> is from some information having been deliberately ignored in order to
> simplify the advice.
I first read this article when it appeared last year at Scientific American
online. At that time it also had a color graphic of the authors' proposed
improvement on the USDA food pyramid. Not sure why the graphic is missing
now.
In any case in general I'm happy with the article. Any improvement on the
USDA foods pyramid is welcome!
If you read it carefully you'll see their proposed food pyramid is a major
step toward a paleolithic diet rather than away from it. It suggests less
dairy and less carb, and more healthy fats such as those from fish. These
are among the most important revelations from paleodiet theory. The authors
are still missing a few points, imo, (for example regarding the
anti-nutrients in legumes like soy and the equivalency of fiber from fruits
and veggies vs grains) but I won't quibble. Progress is not something I want
to criticize.
I see that article as evidence that nutritional science is finally catching
up to paleodiet theory.
As for the authors' assertion that nutritionists deliberately oversimplified
their views originally in their recommendations regarding the current USDA
pyramid, I would say that, if true, it does not speak well for mainstream
nutritionists with respect to their communications to intelligent people
like those in this discussion group. Their approach might be good for
dealing with people at the seventh grade level, (the level at which most
popular literature is aimed), but for us I think it's just another reason to
be skeptical of any un-verified claims from mainstream nutritionists.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 21 2003 - 19:54:32 MDT