Talk:Paleolithic diet

message: Under the Popularity section/tab
"Politically, the paleolithic diet has found favour with the alt-right as a point of opposition to what is seen as more left-wing veganism."
Is there any need to bring politics into a food diet? Does it add anything of interest? Would many people even consider this? It seems a bit of a stretch to me and I think it could be off putting for some. 143.159.217.31 (talk) 22:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, source is not great. Removed. Bon courage (talk) 03:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics? 

message: Like, I'm trying to learn about a topic and every five seconds I just read about more bitching about the paleo diet. Its really annoying. I'm trying to read a purely neutral and plain description of what the paleo diet is, and usually that's what wikipedia articles offer, but not this time! What gives? Safyrr 16:37, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: we just follow the sources, and they tell us what nonsense the diet is, so that's what we say. simples. - Roxy the dog  16:40, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this article written so negatively 

message: The Paleo Diet, often termed the "Caveman Diet", emphasises a return to the eating patterns believed to have been followed by early humans during the Palaeolithic era.
The premise behind Paleolithic Diet is the notion that many modern diseases and health issues, including obesity, stem from the agricultural revolution and Western industrialised consumption patterns. The diet is framed within the epistemological assumption that there exists a singular and "natural" way of eating which has developed through the course of evolution. Advocates for the diet associate the rise of modern diseases with a departure from Paleolithic eating patterns. However, critics argue that the diet perpetuates a type of food classism, intensifying socio-economic and racialised inequalities. While advocating for authentic and natural food consumption, the diet often overlooks the socio-economic disparities influencing who can realistically adopt such a lifestyle. Anthropologist Ashley Reeves argues that the discourse can inadvertently alienate those unable to access or afford certain foods, and risks overlooking broader systemic issues, such as global food inequities. By romanticizing the diet of Paleolithic hunter-gatherers, relationships between food producers and consumers become commodified, often neglecting the historical and socio-political complexities surrounding food production and consumption. As such, while the Paleolithic Diet raises valuable concerns about modern food habits, it also necessitates a broader discussion on its social implications and limitations.
Catie Gressier attributes the popularity of the paleo diet to two key phenomena – the desire for teleological explanation for periods of decline in health (especially mental and emotional health) in a society that prioritises diagnosis and treatment based on symptoms, and a religious-like moral complex present in such diet regimes. Gressier argues that dissatisfaction with biomedical approaches to disease and individual difficulties within the medical system may be a driving factor in why people choose to follow a Paleolithic lifestyle. The foundations of the Paleolithic diet are rooted in the belief that high-calorie and nutrient-poor diets, and a reliance on medicine and technology are responsible for increasing rates of chronic illness. This provides a moral framework for followers which allows them to experience a form of redemption through strict adherence to the diet.  This mindset allows followers to, in their eyes, redeem themselves from the “morally bad” while attaining a sense of moral virtue through strict adherence to the paleo diet. It also provides followers with a way to explain their periods of suffering, attributing it to phenomena they view as societal failings.
Individual body experiences are subjective and constructed through the social body, influenced by the dominant era's health culture epistemologies.  Therefore, the Palaeolithic diet demonstrates the hunter-gatherer era as being the dominant epistemology.  Furthermore, 'natural' and 'authentic' bodies are seen as unhealthy if they do not fit the social norms of the Palaeolithic diet culture.  Hans Baer suggests that sociocultural systems are all products of evolution and subjective experiences of individuals. Claire Cassidy suggests that often our bodies become the process of modification, suggesting the thought, 'What is a good body'?  Cassidy also states that big bodies are desired in most cultures and that 'big' may be actually average or minor in some cultures. Hunter-gatherers' body mass indicates they were physically fit, twice as active as most Americans and those in post-industrial economies. The Body Mass Index is a mathematical calculation that says anyone registering a score over thirty is obese. However, critics have argued that this calculation is biased and does not consider the variables the individual experiences. Therefore, it tends to privilege the 'authentic' body, the social norm of thinness. Additionally, the Palaeolithic diet culture displays physically fit bodies that often shun those who deviate against their ideologies.
This is a recent expansion by a new editor. I'm not sure what to make of it. I'm not clear that all the refs are usable, the use of Wikipedia's voice is questionable, and I don't see any solution beyond a complete rewrite. - Hipal (talk) 19:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Some of the content is reliable, some is not and some of it is off-topic, like this source . Some of the cited journals are not that good. For example, this  is a weak source "Contingent Horizons: The York University Student Journal of Anthropology". If the content is to be re-added we need to go through it all. I believe the author had good intentions by adding this content but not all of it is reliable content. Psychologist Guy (talk) 23:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limitations section