I want to put up the estimates of macronutrients in hunter-gatherer diets, comparing Cordian's 2000 paper with a newer paper. The new paper looks specifically at an East African Paleo diet.
2000 paper 2010 paper
Protein 19 – 35% 25 – 29%
Carbohydrate 22 – 40% 39 – 40%
Fat 28 – 58% 30 – 39%
The main differences are a tightening of the protein range, along with less fat and higher carbohydrates. It should be noted that the minimum carbohydrate percentage is now 39%, which is far away from any Atkins or strict low-carb diet.
So here's what I don't understand: if the research is moving towards showing higher carbs in Paleo diets, then why are more people recommending lower carbs? I've covered this before in the blog, so the issues don't need to be rehashed. However, I think this newer research shows that any low-carb plan is a significant deviation from the best estimate of a Paleo diet.
Further, it has been 10 years since Cordain's original paper has been published. If there was any robust evidence that Paleo diets were actually low-carb, then I think such information would have been published by now. It's not like there's some conspiracy theory suppressing the low-carb evidence. Though populations like the Inuit always get brought up, they are not representative of hunter-gatherer diets.
If some people feel better or heal on a low-carb diet, that's great. But the available research says a low-carb diet is not truly a Paleo diet.
Matt,
Could the difference be attributed to the fact that the 2010 paper looks at East African paleo diets, and the 2000 paper looks at ‘worldwide’ HG diets?
And if so, how would that be important for us?
(I think I’ve never commented on your blog, although I’ve been reading it for a long time. So thank you for your efforts and always fresh and rightly critical ideas)
I think at least the 2 percent range for carbs is a tad suspicious, is there any explanation why it is so narrow compared to other macros? To me it seems like Cordain may estimate that the carb intake stays pretty consistent while others largely depend on the success of a hunt… just pondering
Anyway I may be a bit biased, I can’t get across Cordain’s apparent fear of sat fats…
I think there’s a huge amount of validity to a LC or VLC diet, but it’s dependent on the individual in question; someone who is metabolically deranged due to a sedentary lifestyle and overconsumption of grains/refine carbohydrates/fructose/O6s would benefit greatly—for a specific length of time.
On the flip side, someone with a body comp that emulates a typical HG (low BF%, for men, sub12%) and an energy output could easily tolerate, and thrive, on a 40% CHO intake.
Even if it is a “healthy Paleo” diet, we still have to intelligently apply the macros in proper ratios to individuals.
Yes, they chose East Africa on purpose. From the paper:
“the sites at which the fossil remains of our hominin ancestors have been discovered suggest that the evolution to anatomically modern humans took place in a long-chain n-3 fatty acid-rich diet in an East African land–water ecosystem.”
Cordain has updated his stance on sat fats. I think he will go into this more in the updated Paleo Diet book in December.
As for the lower carb estimate, they go through different models in the paper along with various constraints to come to their conclusion.
Interesting to note here is that east Africans are of the “long and lean” endurance type, whereas west Africans are of a predominantly larger type II musculature make-up, and are the natural born sprinters. It would be interesting to see, in contrast, what the “normal” diet of a hunter-gatherer group from the west breaks down to.
Matt
I’d be interested to read a typical day’s eating for you. I assume you are still grain and dairy free?
It’s pretty bland as I’m not much of a cook. No dairy or grain except for occassional cheat meals. The short version:
Breakfast: Smoothie (berries, egg protein powder, olive oil)
Lunch: Beef or chicken plus veggies and fruit
Snack: Lots of nuts
Dinner: Crockpot of grass-fed beef, veggies, and sweet potato
Matt,
Long time reader, first comment. What do you think about ‘physiological insulin resistance’? I’m a bit bothered by the observation that very low carbers react horribly to an OGTT. In the VLC community this transient glucose tolerance/insulin resistance is explained as perfectly functional, but I wonder if it is optimal. Some intriguing research is suggesting that impaired insulin signaling in one tissue (say bone cells), messes up insulin signaling system wide. Insulin resistant bone tissue induces insulin resistance elsewhere, so to say. I am afraid that VLC-induced periferal insulin resistance over time leads to systemic insulin resistance and thus to, say, osteoporosis.
It’s kind of interesting that ‘paleo’ a la Staffan Lindeberg (not particularly low carb) improves insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance, while VLC reduces it.
Any thoughts? Have you read My Carb Sane Asylum?
Hi Melchior,
I have not read that book. Yes, I think what you are saying makes perfect sense. I think of low-carb as a type of seasonal or temporary situation that would have induced insulin resistance. In the long run, I think you need carbs at some point for proper insulin functioning.
Hi Matt,
Thanks! Sorry, My Carb Sane-Asylum is a blog:
http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/
made by a sharp lady who is asking questions along these same lines. Here’s a popular article about insulin signaling you might like:
http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/57704/
If ‘functional’ IR does mean system wide impaired insulin signaling, then VLC is possibly not a good idea. My question is if this is the case or not.
Thanks Matt – interesting.
Cordain is not studying anyone’s actual diet. Rather, he’s making a bunch of assumptions and looking at available foods based on those assumptions. Those assumptions basically force his conclusions.
It’s not science, it’s someone giving you his opinion and manufacturing data for it.
It doesn’t sound like you’ve actually read the paper.
Matt – I have read the paper and completely agree with Psychohist. Modelling based on assumptions can only ever be considered an educated guess.
I’m not sure what you would consider “science” then. That’s the whole point of the scientific method – hypothesis, data, results, conclusion. This is the norm across scientific disciplines in producing peer-reviewed articles.
Have you not read the full paper? It openly acknowledges the assumptions made.
Probably the biggest leap with regards to assumptions mnade is the plant/animal ratios which were based on observations of modern hunter gatherer groups.
Any conclusions reached based on those assumptions, are obviously more an educated guess than an actual proof based result.
I put far more weight in bone isotope tests and campsite remains than I would this paper.
Of course I’ve read the paper and seen the assumptions. As if looking at campsite remains wouldn’t involve any assumptions???
Short of hopping in a time machine, you have to make assumptions if you are trying to recreate a diet from 2 million years ago.
not all carbs are equal. On a paleo diet you’re not eating artificial/processed carbs. The Atkins/low-carb approach is mainly designed to eliminate the artificial carbs (bread, pasta, etc.). I doubt eating lots of natural carbohydrates from vegetables is going to have a negative influence on health.
But since there are genetic/ethnic differences perhaps different human groups react differently to certain types and quantity of macronutrients. The traditional Inuit diet is +95% meat. Would they get problems if they started eating lots of vegetables? I’m not talking about artificial modern food just a big quantity of vegetables that their ancestors didn’t and couldn’t have access to. That’s an interesting question.
I’m not an east african, I’m not a kitavan, I’m a european. So what are the implications? Knowing what were the types and quantity of food my ancestors had access to would be much more interesting for me than knowing what is the traditional diet of some east african tribe.
There’s probably no such thing as a universal paleo diet. I don’t know why Loren Cordain seems to look for a universal model. It doesn’t make sense
You’re right. I’m not sure whether Inuit would get problems with large amounts of non-starchy vegetables, but as far as I’m informed, large amounts of fruit would be a problem for many, because of wide-spread fructose intolerance among Inuit.