So I've had a bit more time on my hands of late, and it's given me an opportunity to put a bit more energy toward the random, fleeting thoughts that far too often across my mind. Of course, recently watching "The Last Samurai" and "Dances With Wolves" (and then thinking about "Pocahontas" and "Avatar") really contributed to this particular opinion...
Here's what I'm thinking: the Paleo-Diet may very well be the latest incarnation of the "Noble Savage" myth (please don't yell at me for the use of the term. It was coined in 1971 in William Burch's Daydreams and Nightmares: A Sociological Essay on the American Environment so yell at him for not being more politically correct). This myth, essentially, romanticizes the past, particularly the cultures of the indigenous people of any given area, and was originally used in the context of environmental sustainability. James Henslin goes into this are in more detail in Social Problems, 7th ed. (2006), but for the purpose of this argument, let's just focus on contemporary media portrayals and consider the parallels to the Paeo-Diet.
In all the aforementioned films, we encounter two groups of people: the indigenous population (or in the case of "The Last Samurai", a group of people trying to hold onto their culture) and the group trying to take something or simply eradicate them (often a bunch of white dudes). Eventually, one of the cruel invaders is taken in by the native group and sees their lifestyle; living off the land, a simple existence where the natural world is greatly respected, cultural values and morality run deep, and there is a profound sense that perhaps this group has it right after all. Especially when put in contrast with the modernized, fast-paced lifestyle of the clear-cutting, nature-hating, greedy, vengeful, warmongering invader. Quick tangent: notice that our protagonist takes this to heart and changes sides to help the native culture win in the end - a concept referred to "the great white hope" incidentally.
But I digress. Coming back to the matter at hand, I'm not saying one way or another if these representations are an exaggeration or, perhaps, if they're spot on. Not really the point. Instead, what we see is that going back to simpler way of life is, in fact, the end all and be all of international bliss. Now let's compare that to the Paleo-Diet. We're told that if we change our diet to exclusively home-grown produce, unprocessed meats, and lay off the dairy, grains, and legumes, we'll all become lithe, muscular physical Adonis's. Now I'm not arguing with the tenets of the diet, that laying off overly-processed foods, especially fast food and the like, and adding more fresh fruits and vegetables to our eating habits is a bad thing. Quite the opposite. I fully agree that far too many of us rely on the quick and dirty McDonald's run, Dominoes delivery, or frozen pizza and Hamburger Helper for dinner and really should take better care of what we eat.
No, what I would argue is that the fundamental principle of the Paleo-Diet, the concept that paleolithic people lived lives of health and wellness due to their diet, is an inappropriate concept. Aside from the 30-year life expectancy, we're not taking into account the immense amount of physical activity required to sustain a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, as well as ignoring the sociological benefits of agriculture - settling down and creating the framework for modernization being the least of it.
Long story short, please feel free to be more mindful of what you eat, especially in terms of high fat and processed foods. But please don't make any argument that begins with "Well 50,000 years ago people were healthier..." I would personally leave that argument to the paleoanthropologists...
