Aw lighten up- to me it is a tongue in cheek short way to describe the paleo way of eating and living in a back to the basics kind of way.

It doesn't even bother me that Grok is probably a guy and there is no equivalent term for a girl grok.

To me, the Primal Blueprint, Grok, etc. represent Paleo Light -- a watered down version for the sake of broader appeal.

I come from a science/technology/engineering background as I'd guess many others here do and, as such, I'm comfortable with the nitty gritty science. The Grok stuff can get a little grating at times and I'm personally more comfortable arguing about the specifics of some study than arguing about what Grok would've done.

However, not everyone comes from such a background and stuff like Grok is a great way of conveying the principles in a very straightforward and memorable manner (though I've always liked "naked with a sharp stick" from NeanderThin for those conversations). The elevator pitch is useful for spreading ideas and Grok can be part of a great elevator pitch, particularly when you're talking to a family member, old high school buddy, etc. who isn't at home with the chemistry, math, etc. required to get this stuff at the low level.

It's your site, Patrik, but I like the "big tent" approach. Mark's blog is immensely popular and I suspect we'll be seeing people coming here who learned about the whole Paleo thing through his blog and who are used to the Grok concept. I don't see value in taking an elitest approach and shunning them because of that.

As a side note, I doubt that anyone really gets confused by the Grok analogy. The people who retort with the "so where's your loincloth?" comments are being intentionally daft and are going to have a similar response no matter how you frame the concept.

Its easier than saying "our paleolithic ancestors..." every time you want to discuss the evolutionary basis for a concept.

I think the term Grok is confusing and misleading.

The driving force behind dietary choices should be using science to support the metabolic environment that we evolved under--which happened during the Paleolithic era. It's not about historical recreation of primitive conditions.

Whatever the crap is decided, "Grok on!" HAS to be banned.

It doesn't bother me, although I certainly see how it can wear thin, and I don't use the term myself.

Stepping back, I like the fact that this place seems to run pretty well without rules, so I would hate to see standards and guidelines about acceptable word usage, etc. Richard likes dropping F-bombs on anti-paleo idiots, Stephan and Kurt and Don like combing through controlled clinical trials, Mark and his fans find the Grok term to be useful/helpful. Is there room for all these approaches here? (Minus, maybe, the f-bombs... hehe)

I understand the complaints, on many levels, but I don't think we need to burn Grok at the stake. Let him die a peaceful, natural death, much like we all might wish to do.

How do most of us respond when someone uses a hackneyed phrase around us? Usually tepidly, but not rudely, and if the other person has much sense they will see this. No need to berate them.

I'm with you Patrick. Grok can be a useful metaphor at times. However when it crosses the not so fine line of metaphor to religion, in my opinion those people should give it a rest.

If you are finding yourself asking yourself "What Would Grok Do?" in the course of your typical day, I might suggest you take some time off the internets and attempt to regain a little perspective. Or, at least, get your own blog.

PS. While agnostic on 'Grok' the Sisson-noun, I have always been fond of 'grok' the Heinlein-verb. :-)

Perhaps "Grok" will evolve... ;)

I have no desire to return to an earlier time and I really don't care what Grok did or thought. I just want to learn more about how our current eating habits influence our health. Any term used repeatedly will certainly wear thin. Except in the case of Heinlein, of course. :-)

I'll come clean. I kinda like Grok as short-hand for referring to ancestral concepts. Doesn't mean that I channel Grok nor ask WWGD? before I make decisions. If anything, I think the biggest baggage it has is that it's like a brand for Sisson's version of paleo. I don't use it in that context.

BTW, I don't know if he had it in mind when he first used the term, but it's kinda cool that it has a double-meaning too. This is what grok means to programmers (via the Jargon File):

When you claim to 'grok' some knowledge or technique, you are asserting that you have not merely learned it in a detached instrumental way but that it has become part of you, part of your identity.

Could be me, but that seems to fit awfully well with modern paleo!

Sorry to have been a jerk. I certainly don't think the Grok thing should be banned from this excellent website. However, I think we should all try to be very careful about basing decisions on oversimplified platonic ideals rather than actual knowledge. Venus of Willendorf is a good example. Our state of knowledge about it is this: it's a carving of a woman and it is about 30,000 years old. Everything else that is said about it - object of worship, fertility cult, goddess, etc. - is speculation. Grok as conceived by Sisson's followers seems to be a fusion of various (generally unsubstantiated) ideas about how people lived in the remote past and Fred Flintstone. I don't think it's particularly useful. Your decisions about how to live and what to eat will probably be better if they are not based on a cartoon. I think that's enough - I promise not to mention it again.

The problem with Grok, imo, is that it paints with a black and white brush. Listen to the first interview he did with Jimmy Moore after the book was released comparing the Korg vs. Grok family. It's not that simple and there are shades of grey. Many, many shades.

I prefer egroks. Yub yub!

I think it's kind of silly, too. No big deal, though, the information on Sisson's more than makes up for it. Like one of the previous posters said, it's just a technique used to show us how/what we should be eating/excercising.

I think Grok deserves credit. He's definitely not doing any harm. A lot of people cannot stomach the "science" behind ANYTHING, but in small, tasty doses. Grok is the "spoonful of sugar" that helps the "medicine go down" (not exactly a "paleo" quote, but you get my point). With something that comes off as more personal, I believe it becomes easier for people who are interested in the lifestyle, but not as keen on the science, to understand the concept. Most can differentiate between a romanticized, conceptual human and what it may have truly been like to live in that time. MOST.