I am glad Dr Kurt Harris over at PaNu wrote his Paleo 2.0 post, as it articulated something that had been on the tip of my tongue for a while now.
The problem with new ideas or ‘movements’ similar as paleo is that the basic principles which got them their fame, become biblical in nature and rather than the ideas growing and developing along with the world, they become stale, dogmatic and superseded (see the catholic church, Microsoft, every fucking fad diet et al.).
Unlike other diets or lifestyles, the paleo movement should evolve (pun?) as the research develops. The Paleo definition should mutate and change as we gather more and more information. We should constantly be reviewing our practices, removing ideas that no longer apply or have been proven false and accept new ideas as they arrive. When a study in favour of a paleo principle is released, we should scrutinize it with the same voracity as any other study. When a study goes against our current paleo ideals, we should not be offended and dismiss it, but study it and find it’s faults (should it have any). I am sure Einstein wouldn’t take offence if he saw how many times people have tried to prove relatively wrong.
Paleo 2.0 Is a great moniker Dr Harris used. It shows one iterative step further from the previous version and I am excited to see what paleo 3.0 and 4.0 etc. will hold.
Let’s make this movement different from the others out there. What do you think?
Good health to you all.