I feel like this is one of those instances where someone is responding to a different conversation (not necessarily you, but many of the respondents). Who said Paleo is scientific? A diet along those lines, for me, reduces mood swings, hunger, and the combination (hangriness), while being tasty and improving the list of numbers they measure at the doctor's office. We do all have to live with our n=1, after all. Eat what's truly tasty and makes your life good!
Somewhere there is a flame war about what the Paleolithic humans ate, and whether that was what we are nicknaming "paleo" now. We shouldn't take the names too seriously, though, or we'll be confused about what the South Beach diet is (big macs?), the Beyonce diet (...?), etc. Low-fat and low-cholesterol diets have accurately descriptive names. Not catchy. Also once seemingly backed by science, which was incomplete enough to be wrong or influenced heavily by agricultural lobbyists.
An discussion about whether "reducing inflammation" as discussed on the internet is scientific would be interesting. The article mentions curcumin and omega-3s: what do we really know?
Somewhere there is a flame war about what the Paleolithic humans ate, and whether that was what we are nicknaming "paleo" now. We shouldn't take the names too seriously, though, or we'll be confused about what the South Beach diet is (big macs?), the Beyonce diet (...?), etc. Low-fat and low-cholesterol diets have accurately descriptive names. Not catchy. Also once seemingly backed by science, which was incomplete enough to be wrong or influenced heavily by agricultural lobbyists.
An discussion about whether "reducing inflammation" as discussed on the internet is scientific would be interesting. The article mentions curcumin and omega-3s: what do we really know?