Well, you've kind of got a bunch of paleos swinging from one spectrum to the other. First it was a fat orgy, everyone stuffing fistfuls of bacon in their mouth, just because it turns out fat isn't bad for you, and it's something conventional wisdom-ers "can't" do. Now you have people realizing that some populations do well on high carb, and they're not exceptions.

My guess is that people fail to realize that humans are a rather diverse species, with a good amount of genetic variation. There's also people with certain metabolic conditions that definitely do better on low carb, and other's high carb (think obese person vs. Crossfitter). They, the people who are semi-fanatic, want to have one "perfect diet" that applies to everyone, which just doesn't work.

I like low carb. I tried higher carbs and the results were less than stellar.

I chalk this up to my own binge tendencies, and the fact that when I do binge, it's exclusively on carbs. This is no fault of carbs, but of my own neurosis.

Because of this, I normally advocate a low carb paleo diet for people that show similar binge tendencies in their own testimonies. And yes, especially lately, I've been downvoted on pretty much every thread where I've made this suggestion.

But on the flip side, I do understand that people can, do, and will eat carbohydrates that don't have an issue with them. And nor do I. In fact, I've frequently suggested people eat some potato or fruit.

Mostly, I've suggested people find their own way in their own diets. I am just as wary of the Low Carb Zealots as I am the High Carb Zealots, as both camps seem to be quite dogmatic in their downvotes and downright venom lately... which really detracts from the previous "self-experimentation" vibe that was so heavy here. In fact, it's that kind of zealotry that pushed me away from another, fairly popular Paleolithic diet forum.

Two years ago, the answer to every question posted here was "Eat more fat". Now it seems, the prevalent answer is "eat more carbs". Somewhere in the middle was a golden era of "try it and see how it affects you" - it's unfortunate to continually feel that slipping.

I think it started with the Guyenet/Taubes handbag-swinging incident at AHS 2011. Guyenet then "proved" that the insulin theory was wrong, thus carbohydrates were not a dietary evil. His food reward theory seems more Paleo-friendly given that it focuses on modern manipulations to increase palatability rather than macronutrients. Anyway, two tribes formed and there are still skirmishes going on, and I think your experience reflects that.

Also, there's a marketing and generational aspect. Some of those who'd like to see Paleo diets go mainstream want them associated with fresh, preferably young, faces and new ideas. I think they see low-carb advocates, including Paleo low-carb advocates, as rather dated and stale.

Even if paleo's not necessarily a low carb (i.e. ketogenic) diet, I would guess most (almost all?) paleo eaters get far fewer carbs than an SAD eater. When it comes right down to it, there's simply not nearly as many sources of carbs available if you don't eat grains. So nitpicking between "Oh, I eat less than 50g of carbs a day" v. "I feel great at 150g" is really beside the point. People need to stop taking the recommendations of others so personally and do what's best for themselves (only determinable based on experimentation).

Repeat after me.. "As in everything, Your Mileage May Vary."

Some people feel better on fewer carbs (me, yes, I admit it and I've tried both). Some people feel better on higher carbs. However my personal observation is that those who favor low carb are not likely to get angry and downvote those who like higher carbs. Maybe because there are a lot of other "carbs are evil and should die" message boards for them to hang out at. Maybe carbs make you cranky. I don't know for sure.

But kudos for asking a respectful question about it.

I can't say I've noticed a "jihad" against low-carbers. However, occasionally I will pipe up with "carbs are very helpful for some people" whenever I see a thread where people are clearly trying to assert that LC is the only real way to do Paleo. Unfortunately, I've seen that more often than not, and when I started Paleo it caused some confusion for me, which I want to prevent for any other newbies here.

Since LC can actually be harmful for certain people, it's important that LC and Paleo don't get conflated.

I did Atkins for a long time before getting into paleo. And the way I do paleo is still very Atkins-y because, after a lot of experimentation, I now know I do best on very low carbs.

I get the impression a lot of paleofolk got started with LC before making the shift, and brought a lot of those ideas with them into paleo. I've also seen paleo treated as another form of LC diet on some LC forums--and from the conversations there, you'd never guess it wasn't.

So I imagine there are enough of us low-carbers here to make a significant minority. And I also imagine that many, if not most, of us still operate from a base assumption that paleo is LC--even if we now know better. I know I catch myself doing just that; it's something I have to watch, because it can influence my answers in ways that aren't helpful.

And when you get a sizable minority who share an assumption that's not universally true, and they keep commenting and answering based on that assumption? That gets really goddamned annoying to everyone else. Plus, it's hard enough explaining paleo to people who aren't into it, only to hear them ask, "So it's like Atkins, right?"

So I can understand why some here might not have a whole lot of patience with the LC crowd.

Strange, it seems like a lot MORE people are against moderate carb paleos :D When I started telling people adding in more carbs to my diet in the form of a smoothie has helped me to lose MORE weight, they tell me "No, you need to add more fat, not carbs!" etc.

The FAQ has this to say:

Above all, be honest. If you see misinformation, vote it down. Insert comments indicating what, specifically, is wrong. Even better — edit and improve the information! Provide stronger, faster, superior answers of your own!

I generally do not notice most people using down votes in this thoughtful way, and consider most down votes punitive--sort of the way people use their car horns sometimes, not to alert someone to danger, but to shout "Get the f*%k out of my way a*$%^&e!" What these down votes really say to me: "I don't like your opinion, and would like to limit how many other people can read it." Get out of my way, in other words.

Users with 2,000 or more reputation points who down-vote without comment or editing the reply to fix what's wrong abuse the system. That's just my opinion--and I'm sure it's worth a few down-votes to someone.

By the way, prompted by your question, I reviewed your down-voted answers, and disagreed with the down votes. Since I thought they had value in the discussion, I voted them up myself. I don't see it as a "jihad," just a (small) handful of people acting in a petty way.

Because paleo DOESN'T necessarily mean low carb, but it's an unfortunate and common misconception which needs to be addressed. It's tiring when even people on paleo themselves make that mistake.

Also, low carbing is NOT necessary for weight loss. Talking from experience: eating up to 400g of carbs PWO, and have lost 23kg doing so.

Low carbing is only one option, and too many people sell it as panacea.

edit: if people are so concerned about META and pissing contests, feel free to check my voting history.

Paleo is low carb subjectively speaking when compared to the dietary norm of society.In order to use the fat burning advantage that is the paleo templates strength.One needs to stay between 150g which is high end and 50g which is low.More carbs could be needed for endurance training.

Paleo man would have to risk death climbing trees for fruit.There were no semi-dwarf apple trees like I have in the back yard.Not to mention the selection was crab apple only yummy.

Greens are 100 calories a pound and paleo had wild lettuce no romaine to be had.So take time to gather and 3 days to boil down all the toxins and you have 100 calories.This would be a waste of time and resources.

Can someone call themselves paleo and eat so many carbs that the paleo advantage is lost.Yes and then there are the career dieters who modify every diet to meet there comfort zone requirements.

High carb paleo is similar to low fat ice cream.It is a compromise that will be disappointing.Is it an option yes of coarse.

Paleo, as it is construed today doesn’t have to mean low carb. It's often meant to be lower carb. Most Paleo folks didn’t have access to huge quantities of honey and fruit unless they lived in the tropics. But having access to everything all the time makes it easy to overindulge. And don’t forget, people eat this way for a variety of reasons. So it's easier to not preach and just let folks do it their own way. Because there's no way to know what their rationale is.

I think a lot of it is blowback. When paleo first got started, it WAS synonymous with low carb. When people pointed out that they felt worse under this regimen, a lot of them were told that they were "doing it wrong" or needed to "stick with it". I was one of those folks and things got pretty bad for me before I finally gave up the low-carbing (and got much healthier as a result). It's important to respect that different things work for different people at different times in different circumstances. Having said that, I do understand the residual angst that some of us feel :)

I garnered my PR for downvotes for saying that the mixture of carbs and fats was the atomic bomb of the obesity epidemic. So I've seen nasty backlash for dissing fat, even when that fat is all vegetable, and combined into chips and cakes. I say so what. Paleohacks is a dialectic not a jihad. A Punch n Judy show. Don't go away mad.

I find it very useful to watch documentaries about modern folk visiting primitive folk. There are a bunch of these films on Netflix. Not every tribe visited is fully paleo, but all of the tribes are way closer than we are. One thing that happens quite often is that some tribal person will happen upon a bee's nest. African pygmies have figured out ways to handle the African "killer" bees without get stung. They put the bees to sleep with smoke and then they party. But obviously, they don't do this every day. In fact, one group did it only once or twice per year.

I strongly believe in the evolutionary theory of diet, the paleo diet. But what is the paleo diet. It is not always that same for different people. The folks in the far north got very few veggies and virtually zero fruit. The folks in the tropics got much more fruit and less meat and lots of coconuts. Most of us modern people are going to be a mixture of different genes.

My wife is strictly a tropical girl. If you want to know what the paleo diet is, you need to look at many documentaries about primitive people. The words "caveman" or "paleolithic" is just not very educational. Weston Price found many healthy people amongst the so-called primitives; we can learn plenty from them. (This is another good reason to protect them from the encroachments of modern civilization.)

After being confused for a few days regarding my wife, who was born of Filipino parents, I decided that tell her, "Your diet should correspond to the diet that your ancient ancestors had before Magellan and any other "outsiders" got there." She said, "you mean fish, veggies, and rice." And my hand passed before us and I said, "For you, forget the rice". (Her father died of complications from metabolic syndrome.) For her, knowing what HER paleo diet should be is pretty easy. But my ancestors go back much farther to pre-agricultural ways, 20 times farther back in time, and it is a little more difficult to know what MY paleo diet is. And this does not factor in that 1/4 of my genes come from Portugal and 3/4 (probably, maybe, perhaps) come from northern Europe.

I am probably a part of this "jihad" of which you speak. However, I don't ever down vote because I disagree, and I never do just because they are low carb. Although Joshua's answer is better, just coming from the other side (low carber). I firmly believe that carbs alone do not cause obesity or insulin resistance- that is caused by overconsumption of calories and/or sedentary lifestyle, as far as I'm aware. I think that it is unfortunate carbs have been blamed, when people overeat pizza, donuts, pop tarts, bagels, chips, ice cream, garlic bread, milkshakes, cheeseburgers, and the like. Labeling these foods as carbs is inaccurate- labeling them as processed food is. Actually, a large part if not the majority of the calories in these foods comes from fat, not carbs, so saying overeating carbs is ridiculous. I know a helluva a lot of asians who eat rice at breakfast, lunch, and dinner and are quite lean. I also don't see many obese people eating lots of fruit, vegetables, or plain rice when I have looked around at my campus cafeteria. I know lots of lean athletes who drink gatorade and eat pasta (however damaging it may be to their guts). I do not know any who follow a low carb diet (avg sub 50g per day). Personally, I feel, perform, and look better when I eat carbs. I am not aware of any study linking whole fruit consumption to obesity or insulin resistance, but I am aware of many linking fructose poor health outcomes. Fruit is not just fructose. I do actually really get annoyed by people who demonize this stuff. I don't want to have the athleticism or looks of Kresser, Wolf, Kruse, or Lustig ever, so why would I listen to these armchair nutritionists? Oh, that's right, I don't! I prefer people who are out on the field getting results and not dissecting studies to confirm their low carb bias.

Edit: Now I average roughly 150g per day over the course of the week, I'm guessing, but when I was rowing crew and playing soccer and swimming competitively, it was 300g a day easily. AM I obese and insulin resistant? Hell no. Was I when I was eating more carbs? No way. Do carbs make you fat and obese? Not in the real world.

Among other things, this is a sign of the Paleo way becoming more mainstream. The early adopters tend to be more experimental and open-minded. As a result they are more open to new ideas and actual results (e.g., the validity of n=1 experiments). But now that we've become more popular, the fashionably hip and the like are now jumping on board. They tend to be a bit more reactionary and often hold a desire to be seen as ahead of the crowd. As a result they will be more quick to latch on to whatever looks like the latest Paleo concept of the moment and to let others see/hear them criticize anything contrary.

This is not to put down the serious non-low-carb proponents or anyone on the other side of the discussion; they are all essential to the whole Paleo discovery and have valid insights. Unfortunately, as is often the case, an overly-vociferous few often cause a whole category of folks to get painted in a bad light.

Bottom line, I think this is a sign of Paleo ideas reaching an ever-greater number of people. I say, hang in there .. you are not alone. Hopefully the down-voting etc won't become too discouraging because I am sure this Paleo wave will have increasing positive impact on people and our social and health institutions.

Part of the problem here may be the semantic mistake of not distinguishing between good carbs and bad carbs. Just as there are good fats and bad fats, there are also good carbs and bad carbs. Obviously, for anyone 4 tablespoons of sugar is bad. And obviously, some people do OK if not good with bananas.

And this will vary for different people. Remember that we are all damaged people. Some people have been more damaged than others. We have all been damaged from a phucked up cuisine, the standard American diet, aggravated by the low-fat stupid-science. I am new to all of this, so I can't say exactly what is best for me, but I think that I may be a close-to-no carb person.

My fasting glucose levels are OK, but I still have numbness on the skin on my right knee, as though I were diabetic. Consequently I think that my postprandial (shortly after a meal) glucose levels spike terribly high. This may be because of genetics (as in evolution) and it may be because of being damaged by the standard American diet. But everyone is different.