Starch Grains Found on 30,000 Year Old Grinding Stones

[MichaelDiamond]

Bread was around 30,000 years ago -study - Yahoo! News

I know the historical/archeological evidence for paleo diets is not the main reason they're adopted by the majority of those who follow them.

Does this study do anything to make anyone consider reconsidering a bread-free diet?

I personally avoid grains because when doing so I feel my best and perform at my best athletically.

Also, if nothing else this article is funny because it makes sure to point out that modern day adherents of paleo diets eat only lean meat, vegetables, and fruit.
Only lean meat?

I almost spit up some bacon grease when I read that.

 

[Dajjal666]

Bread, or flour of various forms may well have been around that long ago.

There may be benefits to having such a diet, most people who adhere to them usually cite the fact that Animals eat Raw-meat, and less of it. That's because when you cook your food, you burn out 85%+ of the nutrients.

Benefits or not, I don't intend to become a caveman, no point in eating like one.

Then again, today's Monsanto-GMO grains and steroid-injected meats, I'd avoid like the plague!

 

[XTrainer]

We discussed the heck out of this study (must have been before it was actually published), or a very similar one, quite awhile ago. Little too busy to search up right now, sorry. EDIT: Ah, here you go:
http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f15/lolwat-human-stone-age-diet-included-processed-grains-1118122/

As far as the lean meat thing, that was more the old-school of Paleo. It was an attempt to control Omega-6 intake (relative to Omega-3). Robb Wolf addresses this topic directly in one of his podcasts, if you want to poke around on his site for more info. Depending on where you're getting your meat from and what the rest of your diet looks like, it may or may not be advisable to eat lean meat.

 

[XMoker]

Ohhh gawd.

More Grok talk?

 

[enright3060]

"Grok" did not eat just lean meat. He ate whatever was around whether it had fat on it or not.

This man clearly only eats lean meat:

 

[fittafeis]

God knows what the tools were used for, could have been anything from making fibers for rope or textiles of sorts, or even grain for bread. Who knows, who cares.

Personally I don't eat grains, simply because I prefer fruit and other carb sources. Also a little while ago when i decided to eat some oatmeal pre-wo i experienced pretty severe heartburn to the point of nausea mid-post workout, which I have never ever experienced before.

Still use dairy products like there's no tomorrow though.

edit;
It's also worth noting that finding some squished grains on a stone is pretty far away from being evidence that they ate it. Think what soy is used for today in our society for example.

 

[Endo]

Depending on where you're getting your meat from and what the rest of your diet looks like, it may or may not be advisable to eat lean meat.

I think a lot of people tend to forget about this. Good post XT.

 

[Beable]

I had to look up exactly when the Paleolithic was, because I found it hard to believe that 35,000 years ago was Paleolithic, but it turns out it was. (Dr. Tuttle would probably shake his head at me forgetting this.) Still, the period was very long and if it ended 12,000 years ago and started over two million years ago...that 35,000 year old grain was only around for a small portion of the age. Humans have apparently been around for 200,000 years.

I do have to disagree with the guy in the other thread who said this:

Very interesting. Of course, it could just be that some random caveman found a weird plant and felt like smashing it with rocks. Archaeologists tend to make absolutely absurd (to me) leaps of faith given the extremely limited evidence they actually find.

While it's true that archaeologists often extrapolate fantastic theories based on little evidence, it's extremely unlikely that some guy smashed something with a rock 35,000 years ago and it was found by an archaeologist. Of all the things that have been destroyed in 35,000 years, it's much more likely that we find things that were in common use.

Note: I find the "paleo" diet name silly, I just felt like commenting because I was thinking about this.

 

[Monger]

Still, the period was very long and if it ended 12,000 years ago and started over two million years ago...that 35,000 year old grain was only around for a small portion of the age.

Just something to note.

The other thread was in reference to a different finding of possible evidence that man ate grains. That one was dated over 100,000 years ago.

 

[Beable]

That is interesting for sure.

Personally I wouldn't eat something just because people ate it a long time ago.

 

[Monger]

That is interesting for sure.

Personally I wouldn't eat something just because people ate it a long time ago.

Camel droppings don

 

[Beable]

How did you guess what I had for breakfast!?

 

[Beechwood]

Thought Dr Eades had an interesting, and blunt, link to the 30,000 year old "bread" on his Twitter sight:

"30,000 Year Old Bread is Bu*&s^it"
Michael Eades, M.D. (DrEades) on Twitter

I avoid grains for the same reason others have mentioned - I feel much better doing so. And because of that, I don't have plans to go back to my old dietary habits. (I have to admit though, I sometimes miss sourdough bead every once in awhile.)

 

[dza76wutang]

Giving up grains was easy, giving up sugar is the hardest part for me, not so much because my sweet tooth is untameable, but moreso because it's EVERYWHERE.

 

[mtruitt76]

For all the people who are anti-grain, any particular articles or authors that influenced your decision to go no grain. I am curious about the rationale and scientific support for the whole anti-grain movement.

 

[dza76wutang]

For all the people who are anti-grain, any particular articles or authors that influenced your decision to go no grain. I am curious about the rationale and scientific support for the whole anti-grain movement.

I read some stuff on here about people switching and feeling better. I switched, and I feel better. I'm not gluten intolerant, I just feel like the macro-nutrient ratios were pulled too deep into carbs by grain products, the reduction in carbs increased my sense of wellness. So while I'm positive I am NOT gluten intolerant, it's possible I may be mildly insulin resistant or something, I did used to be obese.

I didn't follow any rigid scientific protocol, I just experimented until I felt better. I've read a decent amount of stuff on nutrition and a lot of it seems to demonize bread/grains (IIRC Warrior Diet and Max Muscle - Minimum Fat, both by the same author so I'm inbreeding my viewpoints, the Paleo guy at Daily Apple, and the low-carbers here*). I keep my carbs as low possible without getting crazy. As a result, the bread/grain had to go as that stuff is high in carbs by volume.

That's where I'm coming from.

*I have a lot of respect and appreciation for the stuff Sinister in particular puts out here.

 

[DragonofMetsu]

And here comes Sisson....

Bread Found From 30,000 Years Ago | Mark's Daily Apple

 

[Beechwood]

For all the people who are anti-grain, any particular articles or authors that influenced your decision to go no grain. I am curious about the rationale and scientific support for the whole anti-grain movement.

My main influence for avoiding wheat and other grains came from reading a cardiologist's blog. He has seen great improvement in his patients heart disease risk factors after avoiding them. So I avoided grains, found I personally felt much healthier, and have stuck with it ever since.

The cardiologist's blog and some of his wheat/ grain writings.

The Heart Scan Blog: Wheat