Dogma and science
Just wondering if anyone is concerned about the recent popularity of the paleo diet and the dogma that may come out of it in terms of people making claims based on "in caveman times.." and disregarding science just because they believe cavemen lived a certain way. Not that my opinion or anyone elses would stop this from happening but I wanted to maybe engage in some conversation regrading this.
For me the main reason I wonder is because I read Loren Cordain's responses on the Q&A at his site on Sat'd fat and they are still anti sat'd fat despite the mounting evidence that sat'd fat is not dangerous and can actually be beneficial. The main reason he seems to still be this way is because cavemen could not have possibly eaten this much sat'd fat. I feel like in this case it is dogma that sat'd fat is bad because cavemen couldn't have eaten that much even though evidence suggests sat'd fat is not bad. Does it really matter what cavemen did when the evidence suggests something else?
Note: This is no way a shot at Prof. Cordain as he has contributed so much to the paleolithic movement, some could even argue it wouldn't exist without him, and for that I am grateful.
|All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:49 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.