Does anyone else find this one to be a terrible specimen of book on Paleo?

[Daniel]

I generally like the ideas of the Paleo Diet, though I find the mythology of it pretty silly. I largely subscribe to it and plan on continuing to do so, but this book is just full of bad thinking and terrible conclusions. What am I missing? Why is this one so popular?

[Lisa]

It is a horrible book based on lies. The Paleo diet centers on meat consumption and, as a consequence, is high in saturated fats. People need to cut way back on meat and fats in general. Also many versions of The Paleo diet recommend eating raw meat. This is very dangerous and can lead to serious infections. I recommend reading THE CHINA STUDY.

[Daniel]

Lisa wrote: "It is a horrible book based on lies. The Paleo diet centers on meat consumption and, as a consequence, is high in saturated fats. People need to cut way back on meat and fats in general. Also many versions of The Paleo diet recommend eating raw meat. This is very dangerous and can lead to serious infections. I recommend reading THE CHINA STUDY"

It's one thing to be incorrect about something, but "lies" are a totally different matter. That's a pretty extreme accusation. What is it based on?

I didn't see anything in this book talk about "raw meat" so that's not even relevant. In fact, I've never seen that recommended, so I don't know where you're getting it from.

Calling "the china study" science is a little like calling alchemy a branch of chemistry.

But that's all neither here nor there. I wasn't talking about the diet. I was talking about the book. Obviously, if you have some specific proof of these "lies" you mention, I'd like to hear it.

Or are you just the same kind of zealot that Wolf is but obsessed with the religion of your particular eating preference?

[Matt]

I think there is some good information in the book and I know for a fact that Robb is in excellent shape, but his writing style is grating.

[Bill]

I thought the book was great. What are some of the conclusions and bad thinking that you're referring to? And also, what do you mean by "mythology" in the book?

One thing I liked about his thinking and conclusions is that he never turned it into a "religion". Like how he says: if you're going to drink alcohol, make it a NorCal Margarita instead of beer, for example. As opposed to "you must forbid all alcohol consumption, it's not 'paleo'" or "you must eat bugs because our paleo ancestors did this"

I also liked that his thinking and conclusions never overrode any actual science. He seems to use the anthropological background conclusions to support the science. As in: our bodies does this/that chemically/hormonally with simple carbohydrates [quotes science]. [and then concludes] oh that makes sense, because our bodies have evolved eating plants and animals, not cupcakes

[Daniel]

Billy wrote: "I thought the book was great. What are some of the conclusions and bad thinking that you're referring to? "

There is literally not enough space to document them all. You can check my review where I walked through some of the bigger ones, but even skipping as many as I did, the space for reviews was full before I reached halfway in the book itself. I finished the book and it only gets worse, but because of space limitation on GR, wasn't able to detail even a fraction of the problems.

Billy wrote: "One thing I liked about his thinking and conclusions is that he never turned it into a "religion". Like how he says: if you're going to drink alcohol, make it a NorCal Margarita instead of beer, for example. As opposed to "you must forbid all alcohol consumption, it's not 'paleo'" or "you must eat bugs because our paleo ancestors did this" "

Not clear on what you mean here. It seems like when you say "he didn't turn it into a religion", what you mean is that he didn't make a bunch of rules. Only there are a bunch of rules, just not the one you mentioned. I think I'm misunderstanding your point. What does having rules have to do with religion?

Billy wrote: "I also liked that his thinking and conclusions never overrode any actual science."

This relates to a kind of trick that people of a certain sort do. He ignores any and all science that does not conform to his agenda (of which there is a lot) and extrapolates bad conclusions from the science he does use. What I mean is that he'll take a small theoretical thing and apply it to a whole range of areas without any science to back up that expansion. Of course, he only does that when it suits his case.

Again, if you're really curious, check out my review for a look at some of the larger examples of bad or dishonest thinking (at least through the first half of the book or so, because GR wouldn't let me type more).

[Bill]

What book would you recommend reading instead of this then?

[Daniel]

Billy wrote: "What book would you recommend reading instead of this then?"

A number of people I know with generally good taste have quite liked The Primal Blueprint. I haven't read it myself, but it's next on my list of Paleo books. I'm looking forward to it.

If you do read it, let me know what you think.

[Paula]

I have been Paleo for over a year. I do wish at times that they named the diet something else. I think people get turned off by the "caveman" thing. Personally, I dont care much about that part of the diet. To me, its the results that count. As far as Robb, he is a great guy and very intelligent, but sometimes his thinking is way out there. I enjoyed the book, but others may not. There are other great books on Paleo for beginners and I have reviewed a few of them. I will also try to answer questions if someone wants to ask me directly. There is a lot more to Paleo than walking around eating beef jerky all the time.

[Daniel]

Paula wrote: "As far as Robb, he is a great guy and very intelligent, but sometimes his thinking is way out there."

Maybe so. Maybe he is a "great guy" who pretends to be a condescending and self-absorbed ass when he writes books. Then again, maybe he is a condescending and self-absorbed ass who pretends to be a "great guy" when he talks to you. The latter seems more likely since it's easier to fake nice with one person that with the whole world, but that's just a guess.

I don't care much one way or the other. My main issue with the book (the book, not the style of eating) was that it was full of bad thinking that was thrown at people as if they were too stupid to realize that it was, in fact, poorly thought out.

Talking down to people when presenting poorly thought-out ideas is a bad combination. Essentially declaring yourself a savior while doing it is even worse.

[Paula]

Its obvious that you didnt like the book to say the least, and hey that happens. But since you dont mention any of the "bad thinking" in particular, its hard to comment on that. I hope it doesnt turn you off of Paleo though because it has a lot to offer. As far as the "mythology" you mention, I look at it this way. No one knows for sure what happened way back then and personally i dont care. BUT, I have had severe allergy type problems all my life. What are the most common food type allergies? Wheat,soy,dairy etc. etc. and by coincidence or not, these are the foods that you avoid on the Paleo diet. You are also avoiding gluten, food preservatives and other items that have been connected with inflammation and auto immune problems. So for me and many others, it works. Therefore I believe they are on to something with their scientific theories, but I dont care too much about the science of it all. The fact that I lost body fat and have improved health conditions that were very serious is enough for me. I believe you said you are interested in Paleo. My advice, is to give it a fair trial. That is the best way to decide. For me, the best books on the subject are the ones that instruct you on what to eat, how to prepare the foods, recipes, food lists and such. Good luck.

[Paula]

Lisa wrote: "It is a horrible book based on lies. The Paleo diet centers on meat consumption and, as a consequence, is high in saturated fats. People need to cut way back on meat and fats in general. Also many..."

Yes as Daniel mentioned, your comment is not true and biased. I and most Paleo people in general eat way more vegetables than meats. There are good fats and bad fats. Perhaps the worst fats are transfats which are found mostly in packaged foods and goodies. Im sure there are fanatics that eat raw meats, but that is not the norm. There are fanatics for every cause. The majority of respected health authorities recommend eating lean meats and healthy fats, so who indeed is the liar?

[Daniel]

Paula wrote: "But since you dont mention any of the "bad thinking" in particular, its hard to comment on that."

I detail some of the more obvious cases in my review here on GR, so it's easy enough to find. No need to put it in quotes as if it's an unsubstantiated claim.

I'm obviously not going to type in pages and pages of commentary on the book when it's already here on the site.

[Paula]

Sorry, i quoted it just as a reply to you. Im new here, dont really know what im doing.