In the 1985 article by Eaton and Konner, it is established that a Paleolithic diet was better for humans living thousands of years ago and that a diet of this composition could be extremely beneficial to modern humans today, but the main point of the article was that humans should continue to refine the “standard diet” eaten in their daily lives. Whether this diet is considered paleo or not is not necessarily of high concern, but a diet that starts to shift in the direction of the paleo diet. Eaton and Konner produce significant evidence that the paleo diet performed very well for humans at the time, and that a moderated version of this diet could benefit humans today. One of the first pieces of evidence is over the diseases present in modern
…show more content…
Eaton and Konner back up all of this evidence with facts. Animals butchered for meat today are allowed to eat and become fatter without having to search for food sources or move around to escape predators. Since the agricultural revolution, grains have played a big role in the modern human diet, so a shift away from roots, beans and tubers. Finally, nutrient levels have changed greatly. Fat intake has skyrocketed, and most of it is saturated fat. Sodium levels have risen immensely, daily fiber intake has dropped sharply, and even protein levels have dropped. Eaton and Konner argue that all of these nutritional changes have facilitated the rise of diseases in modern day humans (Eaton and Konner, 1985). The evidence is clear, but many of the values are based on modern day HGs or theoretical guesses. Modern day HGs might be the closest thing to past HGs, but it is still like comparing apples to oranges. Evidence today cannot always definitively prove something in the past, so while it appears that the diet of our ancestors worked for them, it might not be the best diet for modern day humans and should only be used as a rough guideline to where a …show more content…
After 25 years, it appears that the paper was a success, and that many of its claims were backed up with newly found studies. Very few claims were disproved or countered. Konner and Eaton continue to promote the Paleolithic diet, and use new studies to back up their claims. They also now strongly state that humans have not evolved to eat the diet currently being eaten, and that eating like our ancestors could prevent thousands of deaths each year. Still today, humans are eating fattier foods, but Konner and Eaton were far off from their estimation of HGs levels of fat. They estimated that 20% of the HG’s calories came from fat, but scientists judged that level unachievable, and the real estimate is closer to 35% calories from fat. Konner and Eaton remain clear that HGs ate mostly non-grain and non-dairy carbohydrates, but they backed away from the protein levels in HG era vegetables, most likely because HG were shown to eat more protein then Konner and Eaton presented in the past (Konner and Eaton, 2010). Lastly, Konner and Eaton looked at the nutrient values they estimated HGs ate. For fiber, the average daily intake was 45.7 g when estimated in 1985, but now Konner and Eaton move the value closer to 70g with upwards of 150 g of fiber daily for HG diets (Eaton and Konner, 1985; Konner and Eaton, 2010). This recalculation was
Eaton and Konner back up all of this evidence with facts. Animals butchered for meat today are allowed to eat and become fatter without having to search for food sources or move around to escape predators. Since the agricultural revolution, grains have played a big role in the modern human diet, so a shift away from roots, beans and tubers. Finally, nutrient levels have changed greatly. Fat intake has skyrocketed, and most of it is saturated fat. Sodium levels have risen immensely, daily fiber intake has dropped sharply, and even protein levels have dropped. Eaton and Konner argue that all of these nutritional changes have facilitated the rise of diseases in modern day humans (Eaton and Konner, 1985). The evidence is clear, but many of the values are based on modern day HGs or theoretical guesses. Modern day HGs might be the closest thing to past HGs, but it is still like comparing apples to oranges. Evidence today cannot always definitively prove something in the past, so while it appears that the diet of our ancestors worked for them, it might not be the best diet for modern day humans and should only be used as a rough guideline to where a …show more content…
After 25 years, it appears that the paper was a success, and that many of its claims were backed up with newly found studies. Very few claims were disproved or countered. Konner and Eaton continue to promote the Paleolithic diet, and use new studies to back up their claims. They also now strongly state that humans have not evolved to eat the diet currently being eaten, and that eating like our ancestors could prevent thousands of deaths each year. Still today, humans are eating fattier foods, but Konner and Eaton were far off from their estimation of HGs levels of fat. They estimated that 20% of the HG’s calories came from fat, but scientists judged that level unachievable, and the real estimate is closer to 35% calories from fat. Konner and Eaton remain clear that HGs ate mostly non-grain and non-dairy carbohydrates, but they backed away from the protein levels in HG era vegetables, most likely because HG were shown to eat more protein then Konner and Eaton presented in the past (Konner and Eaton, 2010). Lastly, Konner and Eaton looked at the nutrient values they estimated HGs ate. For fiber, the average daily intake was 45.7 g when estimated in 1985, but now Konner and Eaton move the value closer to 70g with upwards of 150 g of fiber daily for HG diets (Eaton and Konner, 1985; Konner and Eaton, 2010). This recalculation was