It seems it's become rather common recently to insist that paleo is not, by definition, low carb. It might also be a fair generalization to say that this opinion carries with it the presumption of greater sophistication; as if when we were just beginners in the world of paleo we clung to low carb, but now that we know better we understand that the primary diet focus should be eating "real food," avoiding gluten, excessive fructose, processed foods, etc. -- and if this brings with it in general less carbohydrate intake, fine, but this does not necessitate an officially LC diet: less than 100g, less than 50g, whatever.
But, hey: whatever happened to the benefits of eating low carb? Whatever happened to "switching to a fat metabolism"?
When I eat upwards of 100g of carbohydrate (sweet potatoes included here, folks):
-- I cannot go for nearly as long without eating.
-- I cannot work out in the fasted state.
-- I do not ever feel completely full and satisfied.
-- My digestion suffers.
Now I am perfectly happy to admit: It might be the case that these limitations are the result of earlier metabolic "damage"; that had I not messed everything up in the first place I wouldn't "need" to eat low carb.
I am also happy to admit that there is a lot of individual variation on this question. Some people might get what I like to call the "Superman benefits" of paleo by simply dropping below 200g and cutting out the neolithic agents of disease. Or maybe they can do it at 300g, or 125g. To get nice and cynical, I'm sure we all know that every blogger has his or her own particular experience with paleo and then generalizes accordingly.
But is it not true that most of us will see immediate and tangible benefits from just eating meat and vegetables? Am I off my rocker here? Is it not fair to say "most"? Am I just generalizing from my experience? Is it difficult for us to generalize accurately here because each of us is often the only person we know who has gone paleo? And reading about different people's experiences online is one thing but having friends around you describing their experiences is another?
In some cases bloggers go even further and claim things like "no study has shown any benefit from dropping carbohydrate from 150g to 50g." We can note the usual qualifications about studies, but more important is that in claims like these, the bloggers go beyond "everyone should do what makes them feel good" and drift towards "low carb is bunk."
So what do you think? Isn't it time that the pendulum swing back a little bit towards low carb? And please don't say "I'm tired of the debate about carbohydrate" or "eat real food; end of discussion." I think, or I hope, that I've shown I'm aware of these possible responses and am trying to look beyond them.