“When the knowledge of ecologists, botanists, zoologists and geologists, and sustainability enthusiasts isn’t taken into account because we are labeled ‘non-farmers,”

Most farmers have to have off-farm jobs and have to work with fairly scientific methods. Most farmers I know ARE botanists, accountants, economists, butchers, and a whole host of other things. I mean that’s the classic Jeffersonian Yeoman farmer model, that the farmer be able to excel as a whole person and not just a farmer.

Furthermore, any non-farmers can work on a farm for a summer, intern at a farmer’s market stand, or do a whole host of things to get an education on the realities of working with land. Or you could just ask some farmers or recruit them to help you.

It’s not hard, it’s not the Ivory Tower, it just requires getting your hands dirty. You might be surprised by what you learn in the field. I always am. I’ve offered to connect you with some of these farmers, some of whom even follow a paleo diet.

” These are the same people who tell me how many years of ‘experience’ they have farming as an excuse to not find a better alternative to their current system, as if that inherently means something.”

No, it’s because your positions tend to be frankly a monolith. Like the idea that a whole class of plants can never ever be produced sustainably. It’s the same argument I see from vegans about meat. Most meat produced in this country is produced unsustainably. But anything can be produced sustainably in polyculture. And even pastured beef can be done very very wrong. I’ve been to farms where the soil is obviously garbage because people just cared about the grass-fed label and didn’t bother thinking about the farm. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these farms supply the “paleo” jerky and prepared foods companies that won’t disclose their practices.

I take a lot of my cropping practices from Buffalo Bird Woman’s Garden, a Hidatsa tribal elder who practiced intercropping to produce a variety of foods.

Also I’d like to see you criticize the people within paleo who say that industrially raised meat is A OK like Paul Jaminet. That’s unsustainable grain AND unsustainable meat. It is one reason I lost faith in paleo because no one seemed to want to speak out about how divorced it has become from the ecology.”

Comment on Karen Pendergrass’s blog that probably won’t be published. The background is some time back I saw she had started up a site to certify farmers and I questioned her ability to do that. She was very defensive and I guess posted this post as a response, though she never told me she posted it, I saw it later after she shared her hyperbolic post on how grains can never ever be sustainable and how pastry-eaters are destroying the world. Paleo truly has become like extremist veganism, though quietly a lot of authors promote conventional meat (Paul Jaminet for example) which is all the bad things vegans say about meat + all the bad things Karen says about industrial grain monocultures.

Source: eatpaleosavetheworld.com

Karen Pendergrass tries to get out the word that people are destroying the world with their pastries

  • Karen Pendergrass: Alan Aragon "if someone enjoys grains, dairy, & legumes, and can tolerate them just fine, proactively avoiding them to follow the 'rules' of a fad diet is just plain dumb." Is that so? Wow.. talk about a narrow frame of reference there, oh men's health guru http://eatpaleosavetheworld.com/?p=65
  • Éric Lépine: Karen, the article you posted above is *seriously* flawed. I mean, it's comparing industrial agriculture with everything else, and making a case against the former based on soil degradation/erosion. That's like vegans saying meat as a whole is bad, and comparing their permaculture ways with industrial CAFO methods of raising animals. I mean, there are ways of doing any type of agriculture sustainably, while preserving existing ecosystems and preventing soil degradation. Permaculture, biodynamic, forest gardening, etc., all these are not the sole domain of pastured animals. Ultimately, the sustainability of a food system is dependent on many factors and, assuming you can grow what you eat close to your location and without destroying the ecosystem, there are many viable approaches. And, some of them do involve grains and legumes and dairy production, all neolithic foodstuffs.
  • Karen Pendergrass: @Éric Do you suspect that grain agriculture is sustainable? Tell me about a sustainable monoculture, too. Tell me that losses in biodiversity are OK.
  • Karen Pendergrass: And for the record, there is a bell curve of people who have either adapted to an grain-based diet, and who haven't. Some people CAN tolerate grains. That doesn't inherently make them healthy, or nutritious.
  • Éric Lépine: Karen, yes, it can be. Not large, industrial monocultures of course (just like large, industrial CAFO meat production is anything but) and, we should simply be careful not to group all different types of agricultures together. And, some people don't tolerate eggs. Others don't tolerate milk. Some don't tolerate chocolate. Others don't tolerate coconuts. Some don't tolerate chitinases, allergens responsible for reactions to latex, and causing reactions to a host of fruits (bananas, kiwis, avocados, etc.); unlike what you are proposing however, I wouldn't conclude that this means they are inherently unhealthy for everyone. Simply, that any nutritional approach warrants caution based on the individual, and not be derived from some blanket statement-based ideological notion formulated mostly from speculation...
  • Karen Pendergrass: That which is deleterious to biodiversity is unsustainable. Period. Yes I am prepared to back up that statement. Go into a supermarket, and grab any bag of cereal, any loaf of bread, any popcorn, any pastry... and tell me if that was grown in an unsustainable monoculture or not. Then, tell me about the biodiversity found in the land that was used to grow those products. Do look up David Littshwagers "One Cubic Foot" and Apocalyptic Planet by Craig Childs. Then tell me about the health of the soil, rotated crops or not. Yay legumes are nitrogen-fixing, but how much organic matter (which electromagnetically holds 5 times more nutrients than inorganic stuff) is lost? Then, tell me about the deforestation that occurs from expansion of agricultural systems to produce said "nutritionally-void" products. Then we can talk about the climate change that happens in tandem with deforestation, too. Oh, and for shits and giggles.... lets talk about petroleum based fertilizers, Pfisteria and algal blooms that cause dead zones the size of New Jersey (granted, partially CAFO fault too), and the aftermath of what happens when they blow up 35 people in Waco. How about we talk about the money that these large companies make from Price-fixing. And let's pretend like corporate lobbying doesn't change the federal food guidelines... or get Monsanto execs positions as FDA Comissioner or USDA Secretary.... Yes. Go ahead and bag on the Paleo Diet and people who abstain from paying into a system which has arguable set us in motion for the 6th mass extinction period because we want our “food freedom.” Awesome.
  • Karen Pendergrass: I forgot to mention that I recently heard from a friend that there are grain-based agricultural systems that DO seem more sustainable...only problem is the corn looks like crap and doesn't yield well. So I guess it can be done... but is it worth it? I don't think so.
  • Éric Lépine: Karen, do you hunt and gather all your food then, right in your own forested backyard or within walking distance? Otherwise, your whole argument is moot... The whole food system as it stands, even the most sustainable products, are never completely sustainable. I get all my grains (barley, oats, spelt and rye) from small farms that grow and raise dozens of different species (of plant and animals). They are building top soil every year. Fully closed-loop system. Again though, you are talking about extremes. Petroleum-based industrial agriculture is NOT what I am implying here. So, your bringing GMOs, Monsanto, dead zones, the FDA and supermarket food shopping to this discussion is completely irrelevant to the point I am hoping to make. You're seeing this through a completely reductionist, black and white lense and, although your passion is admirable here, you're also making a grave mistake by ascertaining that only "paleo" can bring an end to the suffering you talk of...
  • Karen Pendergrass: Fully closed-loop? Is that what they told you? Or have you studied their system and come to that conclusion? They use zero inputs from petroleum-based fertilizers on their farm? And praytell... where do they get the feed for their animals? Because if the animal feed is outsources and comes from a monoculture, they are relying on an unsustainable form of ariculture for one, and for two— it is no longer a closed system. Especially once you factor in the inputs for that monoculture. If you’d like, I’ll show you some diagrams of an actual closed-loop system, and another system that is what I call “only looks closed loop if you’re not really looking that hard.” Feel free to PM me, or even friend me so you can come argue with me on my page more often. I enjoy it, sincerely. Having said that... if they’re fully closed-loop with grain agriculture I totally want to know about it, because I've never seen/ studied one before. I'm sure it's possible, just not sure it's done yet. And hell no, I’m not living sustainably either.. I still wear cotton and drive 10 miles to get the bulk of my food. My plan in the next 2 years is to move into a tiny house in Eagle, Colorado and raise animals, xeroscape, and hunt. Also, I do my best not to put money towards systems that I don’t think deserve support. At this point, even if I *could* eat grains I wouldn’t. Ignorance was bliss. If everyone did their best not to foster those systems... we’d see a huge change in 10 years. The day we stop financially supporting monocultures is the day they go away. Decreasing the consumption of grains (and CAFO) is far easier than any other measure of conservation. And yeah, it’s extreme. Most conservationist-types are. 99.99999% People in the US get their grains from a monoculture. If monocultures are the problem we say they are, shouldn’t we be acting like it?
  • Éric Lépine: The grain they produce is mostly for their free-range fowl (supplemented year-round, but more important in the winter time). Their goats, lamb, llama and cattle are all exclusively grassfed. Pigs and fowl (turkey, chicken and geese) are free-range, but pigs get tubers and fruits (mostly apples), supplemented with aforementioned grains. They have one old beat-up tractor to run this whole operation. And a solar generator to run the pumps for irrigating the pasture and crops (water comes from natural water sources on their acreage). NO petrochemical fertilizers whatsoever. So, technically speaking, they use petroleum (for that old tractor; and also to run an ATV and a few powertools), so aren't completely closed-loop but, darn, relative to almost anything in this industrial world, they're as close to it as can be. And, if everyone aspired to that, or even as close as possible to that ideal, we would be in good hands, irrespective of the foods being produced. I didn't mean "extreme" in terms of your actions or what we should aspire to. I'm all for it. I've been a WAPF Chapter leader and an active member of the latter and this movement for well over a decade (and half even). And volunteer much time to the cause of everyone acquiring a family farmer, and organizations such as l'Union paysanne (http://www.unionpaysanne.com/) and the Raw milk movement. I only meant that you were using an "extreme" (albeit the dominant approach) definition to describe all grain agricultural processes according to strict parameters, when that is clearly not the only option.

Source: facebook.com

We are very sorry you feel this way. I don’t know how you got the idea that our ultimate solution to the micronutrient deficiency pandemic is to take nutreince. In fact we NEVER mention nutreince AT ALL ANYWHERE in the book!!!! Our solution as you would know if you all took the time to really read NAKED CALORIES, and not just jump on the haters bandwagon, is FIRST and FOREMOST to eat micronutrient RICH FOODS, (we are and always have been FOOD FIRST people - As is evidenced by our writing of our second book RICH FOOD, POOR FOOD which explains to people how to find the most micronutrient RICH FOODs in every aisle of the grocery story - and does not talk about supplementation at ALL) SECOND, to drive down depletion by identifying all the EMDs in your life and taking an honest evaluation as to just how many micronutrients you personally may be losing each day due to your personal lifestyle, and LASTLY!!! Supplement using a properly formulated multivitamin. We did not say go buy our multivitamin nor did we use Naked Calories to promote or advertise our product, (against the advice of everyone who said we should promote the product) Which by the way came out AFTER we wrote Naked Calories. In fact we didn’t even know if we were going to put out a product when we were writing NC). Having said this, what would you have had us do? Not talk about supplements or not explain the glaring flaws in the typical multivitamin to the nearly 50% of the general public who takes some kind of a multivitamin? So just because Standard Process, Quantum Research, Garden of Life, Synergy, Thorne or NOW didn’t bother writing a book to actually educate people about micronutrients or make them aware of ways they may be loosing micronutrients based on their lifestyle or known competitions, but just sell vitamins they are reputable, but because we wrote a book that we believe addresses a very real and important issue, but have a multivitamin you chalk it all up to a crummy commercial? WOW! Did you go after Steve Jobs the same way - I would imagine he wanted you to buy his Apple computers or how about Dr. Weil or Dr. Amen or Dr. Hyman all of which make money selling supplements and Dr. Weil and Dr. Amen have their own lines. Can’t a person be an author be an innovator at the same time. Just so you know we didn’t create nutreince just to have our own vitamin. If just one other company had been making a multivitamin that meet all the components for proper absorption and utilization we outlined in the ABC’s of Optimal Supplementation Guidelines then we would have just recommended their product, but there wasn’t one. Whether you want to believe it or not, until multivitamins are manufactured using anti-competition technology and according the the ABCs of Optimal Supplementation Guidelines then people will not be getting benefits they could be receiving. Dreamweaver444 said that we have the trademark on anti-competition technology - should we not have done that either? Don’t all companies trademark their own technology? And we agreed to put anti-competition technology in the book because we did, and still do, fully intend to license the right to use this technology to other vitamin manufactures that would like to use it. We are already working with one company to formulate their multivitamin using anti-competion technology. Richard D voiced doubt about ACT without independent double blind studies, while we would love to do this, studies like this can take years and thousands of dollars. While we do intend to do this in the future, if science has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that when two micronutrients are taken together they compete for absorption or in some way decrease the utilization of one or both, then if they were separated, so as not to be in the same formula, than do we really need an independent double blind studies to prove to us that the competition between the two micronutrients would be eliminated and due to that eliminated competition the absorption and/or utilization would be improved compared to a multivitamin that combined them in its formulation? Separating competing micronutrients is the premise behind ACT. Others have said Naked Calories doesn’t say much - too many words too little content. Well, I would bet that there is as much if not more information on micronutrients in Naked Calories than any other book on the subject. I know that if our readers follow the three steps we outline in the book, no matter what kind of diet they follow they will have a very high likelihood of reaching and maintaining micronutrient sufficiency, which is what we wanted to provide for people. You say we couple our information with fear. That was not our intention. While it is true that we wanted to make sure people realized the micronutrient deficiency is a very real and dangerous problem, we also offered a very realistic and sustainable 3 step program readers can use to protect themselves without throwing their lives upside down and demanding they eat a rigorous and unrealistic diet. Mira and I used this program to reverse here osteoporosis in just 2 years - millions of Americans are eating what their doctors are telling them to eat, and are taking the vitamins they were told to take and even taking medication, but yet, very few if any, will see the kind of reversal Mira did, because no one is educating them about micronutrients and how they interact with each other. I know micronutrients are not a popular topic, and Naked Calories was not the book our publisher wanted us to write because of this fact, but we felt it was important to start at the beginning with people and talk about an aspect of nutrition that is often overlooked. Its hard enough to try to sell a book about micronutrients to the general public, but now thanks to your harsh and scathing reviews, it just became a lot harder. I wish you would have taking the time to put yourselves in our shoes before writing such hurtful reviews. Or would have written us and allowed us to explain ourselves before convicting us of writing nothing more than an infomercial. You know, just because a farmer educates people, or even writes a book about the benefits of grass fed meat, pasture raised chickens, or organic produce it doesn’t mean its all just a crummy commercial, even though he or she dedicated their lives to raising and selling those products. Why would you say that about us, two nutritionists who just want to try to make the world a better place?
The new Sisson content farm golden boys, the Caltons, go postal on someone who calls them out for basically being a supplement company in paleo nutrition clothing. I asked Jayson where he got his PhD from on Twitter. No reply.

Source: amazon.com

I believe that the disavowing (and poisoning) of the word “feminist” reflects a couple of very insidious things about our culture: the intense pressure on women to be liked/accepted/”good” on one end, and the unbelievably negative and dismissive reactions that women get (from both women and men) when they try to address the experiences and problems of being female.
http://laurahudson.tumblr.com/post/47403127563/you-were-talking-about-that-salon-article-where-famous

haring racist links and threats against women, you’d think in 2013 people wouldn’t want that kind of stuff around in a health community…thus my comment on Sisson’s thread.

I commented because I generally agree with him … but also brought up a point directly related to why he tweeted this in the first place.Generally most ppl are aware that sharing a link doesn’t imply a blanket endorsement. But when you share violent, racist or misogynistic links, that is a problem.

There’s a lil difference when the links are racist or violent towards women.
Racism and misogyny are not cool and should not be tolerated in a health community.

That was the problem.
At least Sisson hasn’t done such a thing.

This whole topic came from Jaminet, Jimmy Moore, Davis, McGuff sharing ‘controversial’ links. They linked David Duke, former Grand Wizard of KKK
Jaminet’s was less offensive, white nationalists nonetheless.

…and also was in reference to people linking to Nikoley, promoting his demeaning, bigoted blog posts.

This is the problem, get it?

Nikoley’s blog is a hotbed for inexcusable and offensive anti woman rhetoric. It’s hateful. The main post that brought all this up was not only demeaning, it was violent, with rape threats.

It should be called out and people made aware that so called ‘health’ gurus do this type of shit, which thankfully isn’t often.

This was all happening around the time of Stebenville trial. You and others are evading an important issue and shifting blame. This is what the media did after the verdict, blame the victim, praise the bully. This is why people call this ‘rape culture’ – because when threats (or violence) against women are made, you resort to blaming the victim not holding the aggressor accountable.

Paleodrama catalogs all these offensive links. Can’t delete all your regrets on the interwebz. You’re just defending your friends/gurus. Honorable, I must say, you’re a true friend. Rare indeed. Unfortunately, you’ll need to do better research for your next article as your claims are incorrect.

Hatred & internet threats should not be tolerated. People sharing these links will get called out, that’s a normal part of human societies. We keep each other in check.

Expect people to speak up if you’re (not you author, but the aforementioned Gurus) going to promote hate, sexism or racism. Pretty simple actually.

Antonio on a blog post that is rather hostile to this site because according to them, I deserve it because I “created a fake account.” That’s kind of exactly why Nikoley saying he was blackmailing people is laughable. He doesn’t need to because he makes stuff up.

What is now YEARS ago, when I was in my early twenties, I made a comment under a moniker in his comments. There was no fake account, there was a single comment. And no matter how dislikable a woman is, there is no reason to harass her, but the Adria Richards fiasco is a good reminder that no matter what a woman does, a mis-step is one that gives ALL women a bad name (this blog post says “What a way to make women look bad!”) and anything that happens to her is deserved. I don’t think even the worst woman in the world deserves to be harassed.

The good news is that positive changes are afoot, that some leaders recognize that there is an issue. 

The hilarious irony is that the blogger of the post in question won’t link to a hate site because they don’t want to bring traffic there. It’s almost too hilarious to be true since I’ve been saying the same thing. But the site they won’t link to is this one. To some corners of the paleo community, this is a hate site, whereas sites with actual misogyny, racism, and other serious bigotry are fine to link to as long as they link to a specific non-hate post. 

Source: manbicep.com

“Heheh, don’t worry. I’m no delicate flower.”

That’s what I wrote on Richard’ blog the first time he used misogynistic language to dismiss my arguments, that time against Kruse’s quackery. I think I was in the mindset of many other women who think “acting cool” is the best response. That as long as they are “cool” then men will refrain from bullying them.

But the truth was that it hurt me. That as much as I put on a tough persona, it was hard on me. And exactly why that kind of language is so detrimental to the paleosphere’s efforts to be intellectual, this abuse silences and excludes people.

Ironically, because of that and the even worse exchanges over the years, I am less and less phased by such languages, but at this point I’ve kind of just given up. He is right, I was respected paleo blogger, but acting cool in the fact of abuse and quackery stopped being worth it as some point, especially since over time I realized the paleo diet wasn’t all it was cracked up to be.

My health on paleo had been frail, so no wonder I didn’t stand up to myself at first. I was barely holding myself together. Paleo was abusive both physically and psychologically. There were times when I thought they were right, that I was just a “bitch” and I should shut up and stay in my place if I wanted to be included.

It makes me so sad to see other paleo bloggers lately admit they are suffering too, but blaming themselves instead of the diet, saying it’s not the diet’s fault. How do they even know that if they won’t try something else? It’s almost a form of Stockholm syndrome.

But armed with better health from a more rational evidence-based approach and no longer feeling the need for approval, I created this site. I get emails every single day from other ex-paleos whose health has gotten better because of rejecting paleo dogma, which I’ve realized is just as harmful as vegan dogma. But this isn’t about testimonials, that is not how to prove something right or wrong. I have a strong community of support, which allows me to get through things like people hatefully dissecting my personal life and threatening to rape and murder me. I’m not a victim, I’ve been through worse (though I refuse to engage in Oppression Olympics), but that doesn’t mean it is harmless. 

I got right to work, dug up some worse dirt on Stefani, emailed her and just made sure she knew who the more capable bully was. Then I decided to be proactive. I got dirt on a bunch of others and made it clear to them that “denouncing me” would be far worse for them than acquiescing to Melissa’s demands. It wasn’t easy. Any idea how difficult it is to find dirt on Paul Jaminet? Well, at least Robb Wolf made up for it. That was an easy one.

http://freetheanimal.com/2013/03/bigger-letter-frauenfelder.html

IMHO this is B.S. He doesn’t need to dig up dirt on people, he just makes stuff up like he did with me. Maybe that’s the threat: that he’ll make up a story and his dim-witted followers will believe it.

It’s one thing to like to a site that is imperfect like many are, another to like to a site that is full of open hate. I’ve been comparing the paleo community unfavorably with the tech community, despite the tech community being overwhelmingly known for not being particularly sensitive. Here’s the fact- the behavior that is poisoning paleo is not acceptable in tech at all, except from anonymous trolls, and people are not afraid to call it out. In paleo it’s hush-hush.  Popular tech site Boing Boing not only said they would not link to Nikoley’s site after learning about what it contained, they scrubbed past posts of links to it. Sisson is fully aware of it, having been emailed about it privately multiple times over the past two years. Not only that, an editor at Boing Boing personally apologized for having sent his readers to Nikoley’s site. Mark Sisson digging his heels in is especially upsetting since he indicated to me and others in correspondence that he was not going to associate with that site either. 
View Separately

It’s one thing to like to a site that is imperfect like many are, another to like to a site that is full of open hate. I’ve been comparing the paleo community unfavorably with the tech community, despite the tech community being overwhelmingly known for not being particularly sensitive. Here’s the fact- the behavior that is poisoning paleo is not acceptable in tech at all, except from anonymous trolls, and people are not afraid to call it out. In paleo it’s hush-hush. 

Popular tech site Boing Boing not only said they would not link to Nikoley’s site after learning about what it contained, they scrubbed past posts of links to it. Sisson is fully aware of it, having been emailed about it privately multiple times over the past two years.

Not only that, an editor at Boing Boing personally apologized for having sent his readers to Nikoley’s site. Mark Sisson digging his heels in is especially upsetting since he indicated to me and others in correspondence that he was not going to associate with that site either.