Amanda

Amanda

Amanda is a science grad student in Boston whose favorite pastimes are having friendly debates and running amok.

Previous post

The horrible truth about Spiderman

Next post

Is There a Point to Veil Bans?

21 Comments

  1. Profile photo of Andrew Nixon
    July 26, 2012 at 10:07 am —

    The weightlifter’s blog entry in which she talks about the bullies is all kinds of awesome: http://zoepablosmith.wordpress.com/2012/07/23/thanks-but-no-thanks/

  2. Profile photo of BubbaRich
    July 26, 2012 at 10:27 am —

    “Proven wrong”? I might agree with “proven silly,” but that review is ALSO specifically targeted at supporting vegetarians, and is, aside from proving the paleodieters silly, equally silly on the other side.

    Is it really trying to say that a vegetarian diet will make humans lose the power of speech and art and tools? Because that’s what it’s saying.

    • Profile photo of dr. dr. professor
      July 26, 2012 at 11:05 am —

      Bah, people get so emotional about their food. It always seems that challenging the notion that our ancestors weren’t fearsome carnivorous predators brings out their defensive emotions.

      The paleolithic lasted from 3mya-10kya and believe what the article is saying mainly:

      1. Big game type meat (goats, cows, deer, etc.) that we eat today costed a lot of energy and potential injury to catch. So most of the meat was likely tiny, easier to catch stuff like bugs, small lizards, or rodents and was probably a minority part of the diet.

      2. Our gut is incredibly unremarkable and is able to digest pretty much anything.

      3. Diet changed a lot with much more in the later paleolithic and definitely with the advent of human populations living in colder environments, agriculture and pastoral lifestyles than it did for most of the paleolithic. And that there’s genetic evidence to show this (i.e. things like lactose tolerance).

      I’m not sure how that’s “pro-vegetarian”.

  3. Profile photo of dr. dr. professor
    July 26, 2012 at 11:13 am —

    Re: the lady politician cartoon, I have to say, I hear people all of the time saying things like “Hillary Clinton lost because she was too catty/emotional”, “Sarah Palin is a dumb broad”, etc.

    If you’re an effective female politician, it REALLY means you’re a catty bitch.

    • Profile photo of dr. dr. professor
      July 26, 2012 at 11:19 am —

      Nicki Minaj actually gives a great talk on this particular point:

    • Profile photo of absinthia
      July 26, 2012 at 6:45 pm —

      …you don’t think Sarah Palin saying a plethora of stupid things had anything to do with being her called dumb?

      • Profile photo of dr. dr. professor
        July 26, 2012 at 7:05 pm —

        I think it had a part, but if she was a man, it wouldn’t have been nearly as bad. Her being a woman had a lot to do with it.

        Also Sarah Palin isn’t stupid. People’s delivery can make them look stupid, and definitely the press can edit you any way they want to make you look stupid.

        • Profile photo of mrmisconception
          July 27, 2012 at 1:06 pm —

          Actually, while Sarah Palin isn’t dumb she is actually something worse. She has the same problem George W Bush had, she is incurious. She knows of nothing outside of her own sphere and doesn’t care to, ever. Self-imposed ignorance is worse than stupidity.

          Men get called stupid when they are, ask Rick Perry.

  4. Profile photo of mrmisconception
    July 26, 2012 at 12:00 pm —

    I’m with Neil too, but that song is seriously annoying.

  5. Profile photo of shargash
    July 26, 2012 at 3:09 pm —

    I thought the “paleo” article was kind of bizarre. Don’t look at the actual anscestors of humans, look at other surviving primates. Why not look at our actual anscestors? Or how about looking at actual humans that survived into the modern era with pre-agricultural lifestyles? As far as I know, none of them live on nuts and berries. In any case, no one is going to survive on nuts & berries in temperate or sub-polar climates. Also, the article looks only at superficial aspects of the digestive system. That is just inadequate. Dogs (and wolves) generate enzymes to break down carbohydrates. Does that mean they aren’t carnivores? It is a survival advantage to be able to eat low-quality foods, but that doesn’t mean the low-quality foods aren’t low quality.

    • Profile photo of Amanda
      July 26, 2012 at 3:29 pm —

      You know, I’d completely overlooked cultures that subsist (and have long subsisted) on meat heavy diets due to their location. Thanks for pointing that out.

    • Profile photo of dr. dr. professor
      July 26, 2012 at 3:58 pm —

      Well I think the article covered that when they said “what do you mean the paleo diet, the one from 1mya, 500kya, 10kya”. For most of the paleolithic humans and their ancestors survived on whatever was available in their habitats in Africa. It was only in the late paleolithic that diets diversified so much as humans went across the world.

      He acknowledges that many cultures have special adaptations for eating specific foods (like milk, etc.) and that the diet changed in the more recent paleolithic. And I think he rightly says a “paleo” diet would depend on which paleolithic culture you’re talking about.

      It is a survival advantage to be able to eat low-quality foods, but that doesn’t mean the low-quality foods aren’t low quality.

      Plant foods aren’t “low quality”.

  6. Profile photo of kenbakermn
    July 26, 2012 at 4:26 pm —

    If I decided I wanted to go all redneck and start trash talking someone, an olympic weightlifter would not be my first choice.

    • Profile photo of jes3ica
      July 26, 2012 at 9:53 pm —

      COTW – so true!

    • Profile photo of mtheatheist
      July 28, 2012 at 10:09 am —

      Are people seriously harassing a woman for lifting weights? I can no longer understand morons. It is harder than you would think to think like the ignorant.

  7. Profile photo of Bjornar
    July 27, 2012 at 5:15 am —

    The article is an indictment of the paleo-argument, a good one, and a funny one. It’s not an indictment of specific diets or elements of them, it simply states that the paleo-argument is an overused and easily oversimplified one: “Taken too literally, such diets are ridiculous.”

    Well, actually it is an indictment of one “diet”, the “average modern”, but the comments still appear to be a bunch of knee-jerk “my-diet-is-so-supported-by-evidence” nitwittery unrelated to the point or plain wrong.

    Footnote 6: “I know, what I have shown is not that our ancestors were vegetarians but instead that they tended to mostly eat vegetable matter. Here though I am using the definition of vegetarian that most humans use where someone is a vegetarian if they decline meat in public but occasionally, when no one is looking, sneak a beef jerky. The modern vegetarian’s illicit beef jerky is the ancestral vegetarian’s crunchy frog.”

    • Profile photo of mrmisconception
      July 27, 2012 at 1:12 pm —

      The crunchy frog is so much better than the anthrax ripple.

    • Profile photo of dr. dr. professor
      July 27, 2012 at 2:11 pm —

      I agree with you, the author I don’t think is trying to promote vegetarianism (I’m not sure the author is a vegetarian), it’s just that when a lot of people see the word “vegetarian” they tend to start reflexively going on the offensive.

      I think it would be interesting to investigate the homeland(s) of early modern humans in the earlier parts of the paleolithic (like 500k-100kya) and determine what was actually available to eat back then. I searched on google scholar, but couldn’t find a good research article about it (most focused on late paleolithic diets).

Add Comment Register



Leave a reply