Blog

3

Possible Duplicate:
Is the Paleo lifestyle Narcissistic/Self-Indulgent or Paleo Public Health

Simple question. And with the whole world I mean, humans and their lifestock. I guess the rest still is pretty much paleo?

I ask this because non paleo people often use this to argument against a paleo diet (not that that would imply something about the health benefits)

There are some possible negative issues (e.g. sustainability), but also many possible positive ones (health budgets, more productive and creative people, ...)

So, what do you think?

flag

closed as exact duplicate by Bread-Eating Beelzebub Mar 5 2011 at 15:42

4 Answers

1

There are seven billion people on the planet. In the Paleolithic, there were several million.

The math doesn't work.

Now, this is not a real criticism of paleo - there probably isn't a sustainable way to deal with seven billion people. So whenever a vegan or someone says "But we can't all eat that way!" simply reply, "yep, and we can't all drive cars either." The point being that the world is quite an unfair place, and in the next few generations we'll either solve the fundamental issue (energy and overpopulation) or we won't. Your diet will be totally irrelevant to how things turn out.

A better question is, "what would a sustainable paleo diet look like?" and that's more interesting. We'd have to return the midwest to pasture, and may be we could do it in America in isolation. There is simply no way India or China would be able to do it, though, even putting aside religious concerns. Too many people and not enough land.

link|flag
1 
 it works.....Survival of the fittest works no matter the math. There are 95% of the planet eating the exact opposite way. Change for humans occurs slowly unless their survival depends upon it. Eat fat get thin avoid me. – The Quilt Mar 5 2011 at 15:56
0

More people buying grass-fed beef would drive prices down, right?

link|flag
More demand leads to higher prices in the short run. That can lead to an expansion of the industry, an economising of costs and improvement of techniques of production, increased supply, etc - bringing prices down again (perhaps even below the original price if previously the market was quite niche.) However, external factors in this case -such as the scarcity of land- would come into play, restricting supply - so I'd expect prices to remain higher. – Stephen Mar 5 2011 at 15:26
Good point. Is land really that scarce? When I fly all I see is miles and miles of unused land. – Eric Mar 5 2011 at 15:58
0

Here's a news flash for you. The current system of massive monoculture cultivation dependent on fossil fuel based fertilization is unsustainable. Couple that with the fact that billions of people would starve to death if it were not for Western technology and foreign aid and the picture is clear to anyone with the courage to accept reality; there are entirely too many humanoids on this planet. The sooner we come to terms with this ugly truth the sooner we can salvage our environment and health.

link|flag
they can sustain it with a new source of energy. It will happen at some point. – The Quilt Mar 5 2011 at 15:57
0

It is sustainable and was covered in robb wolfs podcast recently.

link|flag
Not so sure Robb got that one correct. Its an arguable point. – The Quilt Mar 5 2011 at 15:57

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.