My English 1A students are writing an argumentative essay that defends or refutes the Paleo Diet, but it turns out that the Paleo Diet, as it is marketed today, does not exist, has no archeological basis, and is in fact a gross fraud. So now the whole idea of the argumentative paper, pitting two powerful opposing sides against each other, is gone from my students' assignment. The "Paleo Diet" at a serious disadvantage. We've got a one-sided argument on our hands. Looks like the last time I use this assignment.
This is an interesting talk, Jeff. Thanks for posting it.
Posted by: Gary | May 16, 2013 at 12:45 PM
Looks like an opportunity to explain the word "misnomer" to my students as it pertains to "Paleo."
Posted by: herculodge | May 17, 2013 at 07:10 AM
While the paleo diet never historically existed, I think that the case for eating food that is free of pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, and industrial processing is quite strong. Certainly, it is more appealing aesthetically (who feels good eating processed food -- or food that is full of pesticides, antibiotics, and hormones?)
Posted by: Doug T. | May 18, 2013 at 08:37 PM
As Christina Warriner says, we can learn lessons from the diverse "paleo" diets: eat whole, unprocessed, local, fresh foods and eat a diverse diet.
Posted by: herculodge | May 18, 2013 at 09:40 PM