You're saying one-size-fits-all diet is a myth, but are making the case our ancestors ate Paleo and that's how we should eat, so which is it?
It is both, which I have repeated several times. Everyones ancestors ate different foods, so knowing your ancestory plays a huge part in diet. I am really getting the feeling that you do not read my posts, or the links I provide. Which suggests I am wasting my time. So this will be my last post to you.
--"Do you not also find it odd that they go from "starving" on a vegan diet to thriving on a paleo diet?"
No, because starving on any diet will make you feel like crap. The reason they are "thriving" on a low-carb diet is meat & fat are more calorie-dense, so you get way more calories in per same volume of food.
How do you know they were starving on the vegan diet? You keep suggesting this, yet have no evidence. So everytime someone fails on the vegan diet, by your logic it is because they did it wrong. This sounds like diet fundamentalism to me. This sort of attitude towards diet reminds me of people going on the macrobiotic diets who got charged with child abuse, when their kids ended up with brain damage from the diet. It is very clear if a person goes from feeling poorly, to feeling good and thriving for the long term... they are doing something right.
If the Paleo diet was so great, then most doing the low-carb "Candida diet" would report feeling significantly better, but go check out the candida section, most report no change or feeling worse.
Again it looks like you havent been reading my posts, so I will repeat myself yet again. The people who have "candida" already have health problems. So regardless of what ever diet you want, healing is not necessarily going to occur. However the "Candida diet" is the one that causes the least amount of symptoms in the people with candida. Most of these people with candida have liver and bowel problems that are so bad that recovery is going to take more than just diet. Many of these problems started in childhood, and ended up manifesting on a large scale by the time they realized it. Its going to take cleansing, its going to take changing their attitude towards life, its going to take many many more things than simply diet. A person has to be able to digest/assimilate the food they are eating in order to heal, I dont care how much nutrition there is in the food you eat. If a person passes the nutrients out, or it ferments into something toxic because the organs are not working correctly... sickness will continue.
The Inuit diet is not healthy and it's not because of any recent shift towards SAD diet (I didn't know fast-food restaurants made their way up to the north pole!). Preserved eskimo bodies were found and examined and this is what they found:
Have you ever been to the arctic? Have you ever spoken with inuit? Because I have on both accounts many times. Depending on where you go yes there are fast food restaurants, however there are also grocery stores in every community aswell. There is also alcohol and tobacco. It is naive to believe that western influence is not having an impact on their health.
"We have also seen that ancient Eskimos, far removed from the stresses of modern technological society, suffered from coronary artery disease...This anatomic evidence in Alaska not only confirms the antiquity of arteriosclerotic heart disease, but also its occurrence in a preliterate society..." -M.R. Zimmerman, MD, PhD (5)
These are quotes from the website you linked.
The Inuit do not become obese when eating their original diet, and don't seem to develop type two diabetes, an epidemic currently sweeping the western world. Their teeth and jaws also appear to be better formed than those eating SAD diets.
Beginning in the late 19th century, small amounts of imported grain products and processed food started creeping into the Inuit diet, and that amount has continuously increased.
The health of the Inuit has slid downhill markedly since then, with diabetes, obesity, and other "diseases of affluence," becoming common among the groups consuming the processed foods.
Then the article goes on to demonize fats, which is now long outdated and the antithesis to health. And then promote an entirely raw food diet, which shows me they are bias. Here are some links to that prove that saturated fats aren't the demon that they are made out to be.
Now on top of all that the fact that they found a few inuit with inflammation in their joints that were frozen could mean many things. Inflammation from constantly foraging, they were a very active and mobile people who faced many hazards. My understanding is that they found maybe a couple of frozen cadavers, hardly something to judge a whole culture by. But if you read the links that I posted earlier, with actuall recorded evidence of many living people from the 1800s... not a couple of frozen cadavers... you will see they were very healthy. So I will post the link again.
Clearly the best evidence shows the inuit were a healthy people, without many of the ailments of today.
If the Eskimo diet was so great, it would have filtered down to the rest of society a long long time ago.
Again what works for one kind of people, doesn't work for everyone. You continue with the belief that there is a one size fits all diet for everyone. The whole world doesn't revolve around the diet that you do well on. Just because everyone has a nose on their face, doesn't mean every persons nose is the same. There is something called evolution and adaptation. I will repeat this fact again for you, half of the population of tibet died in one year! when they were forced to farm wheat as opposed to barley.
It boggles my mind that the most praised diet of Paleo movement is from a fringe unsuccessful society. I'm not saying that to bad-mouth the Eskimos, but just telling it like it is.
The eskimos may be the fringe of society, but that doesn't mean you should just throw away the evidence of their health. Thats what scientists do when they cant prove their theories, they take the 20% of evidence that doesn't work in favor of that theory and call it an anomalie.
That being said read the links below about the historical peoples that ate primarily animal protein for their diets. Native Americans, Maasi tribe of africa, Gauchos of south america, Steppe Nomads of Mongolia, Chukotka of Russia.
So now after reading the above it wont be so boggling for your mind anymore to appreciate meat in our diets. Especially since some people can thrive on primarly meat based diet. That being said, the meat of today is not the meat of even 50 years ago. There is a huge difference.
Here is an example I am getting at. Today everything is has changed. The rate of lung cancer from smoking was way lower than it is today, yet millions smoked during world war one and two. The rates of cancer only went up after the 1950's when pesticides came in, and now with GMO's tobacco its even worse. I am not saying smoking is healthy, but just blaming smoking is a smoke screen. Today the same chemicals and such are being sprayed on food. Doesn't it make sense that when people eat foods sprayed by pesticides and herbicides and such that their bowels get sick? Conventional dietary logic these days suggests that all meat, dairy, fruit, veggies, seeds, and grains are the same when they clearly are not.
Everything is interdependent and interconnected. Our ancestors evolved and adapted out of necessity to nature. We do not dictate what our bodies are, nature dictates that. Paleo isnt just about eating meat and veggies, its much more... its about understanding our nature and by supporting that we gain health and happiness. Its not just about the foods we eat, but the sources of the foods we eat. Its about getting into nature, being kind and giving, taking responsibility for our lives as opposed to believing we are a bunch of victims. When we oppose our nature sickness and disease comes.
Finally.... If I cant get through to you. Maybe David Wolf, Daniel Amen, Mark Sisson, Mark Hyman, and many more can.