Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Caveman diet 'combats diabetes'

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
02 July 2007
THE diet of a tribe who still follow a Stone Age lifestyle could provide a vital key to combat diabetes, according to a new study.
Inspired by the low incidence of heart disease and diabetes among the Kitava tribe of Papua New Guinea, scientists set out to discover if there was something in the hunter-gatherer lifestyle that helped combat the disease.

The findings of the Swe
dish research show a "paleolithic" diet is considerably more effective than a healthy Mediterranean diet in reducing fluctuations in blood sugar levels.

The main difference between the diets was a much lower consumption of grain and dairy products, and a higher consumption of fruit in the Stone Age group.

Scientists found that patients with poor glucose control greatly improved their ability to handle sugar after switching to prehistoric eating habits.

The paleolithic diet given to the volunteers was similar to what early modern humans were eating when they first walked out of Africa 70,000 years ago.

At that time, before the advent of farming, humans were hunter-gatherers feeding off the land. Diets then consisted of lean meat, fish, fruit, vegetables, root vegetables and nuts.

Cereals, dairy products, refined fat and sugar - which provide most of the calories of the modern diet - only became staple foods with the start of agriculture about 9,000 years ago.

For the study, 14 glucose-intolerant heart patients were asked to copy the diet of their ancient ancestors for 12 weeks.

They were compared with a similar group of 15 patients who adopted a supposedly healthy Mediterranean diet featuring whole-grain cereals, low-fat dairy products, fruit, vegetables and unsaturated fats.

All those taking part suffered from boosted blood sugar after consuming carbohydrates, and most had symptoms of type 2 diabetes.

After 12 weeks, the carbohydrate-linked blood sugar rises had fallen by 26 per cent in the Stone Age diet group, the Swedish researchers found. In contrast, it barely changed for those on the Mediterranean diet, falling by only 7 per cent. At the end of the study, all the patients in the paleolithic group had normal blood glucose.

The main difference between the participants was a much lower intake of dairy products and grain foods, and higher fruit consumption in the paleolithic group.

Something more than calorific reduction and weight loss was responsible for the difference in the results, said Dr Staffan Lindeberg, from Lund University, whose results were released by the Swedish Research Council: "If you want to prevent or treat diabetes type 2, it may be more efficient to avoid some modern foods than to count calories or carbohydrates."



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 July 2007 8:33 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Diabetes
 
1

Gnasher,

02/07/2007 00:27:59

What was the average lifespan of people in the paleolithic times?

2

Scullion,

Canada 02/07/2007 02:16:41

A side effect of the diet was the urge to grab your wife by the hair and drag her into your cave-kinky for some, offensive to others.

3

Boy Wonder,

02/07/2007 04:31:09

What's the trade-off? A desire to slaughter animals and wear their skins???

4

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 02/07/2007 10:10:30

The article isn't entirely correct and is hijacked somewhat by PC thinking.

Hunter gatherers didn't just eat lean meats. The ate as much fat from the meats as they wanted.

Innuit tribes actually ate/eat a vast quantity of blubber. Weston Price observed the diets of many very healthy indigenous people many decades ago. He noted that they ate quite a lot of fat - so that their diet was rich in fat soluble vitamins, far higher than a western diet.

To try and make out that hunter gatherers ate only lean meats is simply plain revisionism.

5

G,

dundy 02/07/2007 12:05:04

#6 - the fats argument only works if you count blubber -which is a very specific dietary source - most wild animal meat is pretty low in fat and certainly lower than dairy! Most hunters gatherers did not have fatty meat every day....

Therefore the article with one little potential but special pleading point is correct.....hardly revisionist......

6

Conrad,

Pboro 02/07/2007 14:49:14

Eating more meat and less carbohydrates from grains etc, usually means we get ill from excess nitrates as the lean meat proteins decompose. You have to eat more fat in an all-meat diet. Check www.second-opinions.co.uk/fat-not-protein.html. Eating more fruit would presumably give simple carbs from the sugars, more vitamins than grains & probably more fibre, yeast from the fruit skin ("probiotic"), and possibly internal alcohol production, but not such long periods of feeling full as we get from complex grain carbs. Fruit acids rot teeth so we'd die mid-30s with no teeth, unable to chew. Natural isn't necessarily healthy.

7

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 02/07/2007 15:42:18

G wrote:
"most wild animal meat is pretty low in fat and certainly lower than dairy! Most hunters gatherers did not have fatty meat every day...."

It is certainly true that wild species has less fat than farmed animals - but they still have quite a lot of fat if you aim for the right cuts.

This is Weston Prices' findings:

"but all the groups he observed went to great lengths to obtain foods high in fat-soluble vitamins—fish, shellfish, fish eggs, organ meats, blubber of sea animals and insects. Without knowing the names of the vitamins contained in these foods, isolated traditional societies recognized their importance in the diet and liberally ate the animal products containing them. They rightly believed such foods to be necessary for fertility and the optimum development of children. Dr. Price analyzed the nutrient content of native diets and found that they consistently provided about ten times more fat soluble vitamins than the American diet of the 1930's. This ratio is probably more extreme today as Americans have deliberately reduced animal fat consumption. Dr. Price realized that these fat-soluble vitamins promoted the beautiful bone structure, wide palate, flawless uncrowded teeth and handsome, well-proportioned faces that characterized members of isolated traditional groups."

The article is certainly revisionist (not the author's fault he is simply quoting another source) since it implies a paleolithic diet aimed at being low fat. This is utter tosh. Fat was highly prized.

In fact if you eat a predominant meat based diet (innuit, masai, certain north american indians) you actually need a high fat content or else you get malnutrition.

Pemmican for instance was used N. American indians as a complete food in times of scarcity. It was also used by explorers of old.

http://www.smokylake.com/history/native/pemmica

8

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 02/07/2007 17:15:25

Scullion from Canada

You are being very naughty again and giving the rest of us a bad reputation.

But keep up the good work - your comments are always trenchant, amusing, and sometimes even wise.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.