Book review for Paleofantasy
Most people try to practice a lifestyle of paleo- a euphemism for cavemen. By that, they east meat too often to mimic what ancestors thrived on many years ago. Today there is a common belief that the modern ill in physical or mental result from a mismatch between people’s genes and artificial environment that is created. Studies have pointed out that individuals were shaped many years ago to live as hunters and gatherers as well as exist in small groups, but today it is the opposite. People are living in crowded cities- unnatural habitats where there is a variety of food supply that individuals are not evolutionarily adapted for. Marlene Zuk, a biologist evolutionary from the University of Minnesota, asserts in her work that human beings are biologically adapted to paleo diet and lifestyle.
Summary
The book Paleofantasy: What Evolution Really Tells Us about Sex, Diet, and How We Live by Marlene Zuk is a pseudoscientific myth about the evolution of human beings. The author aims to direct how people should live today by pointing on the evolutionary past. Zuk points out that humans evolved to eat berries than bagels, live on mud huts compared to condos, and question whether people’s bodies are at odds with modern life. Even though it may look like people have barely had time to shed the legacy of hunters and gatherers, Zuk asserts that the story is not that simple. Theories arguing how individuals should emulate the ways of ancestors are based on speculations but no scientific evidence. The author gives a refection that evolution works fast than realized, implying people are not biologically the same. The central message in the book is that evolution is about change, and all organisms are full of trade-off.
Evaluation and Critique
In the introduction part, the author sets the right tone of her work for the readers. She opens with answering the common questions like why people care about the old fossil. Samples from the ancient DNA are changing the pre-held ides of the speed of human evolution, and this shows ancient bodies do not shackle humans. Zuk claims to think of people as a misfit in today’s era, and this contradicts what scientists understand about the nature of evolution. Traditionally, scientists relied on specific sources of information concerning the early life of human beings- these include fossil fuels, artifacts, modern apes, and lives of modern hunter-gatherers. However, things have changed since now scientists are examining genes to tell the impact of past natural selection.
Zuk builds up a convincing idea that backs up the central premise that people have had time to evolve. As a biologist and behavioral ecologist, I think the author has done much research in various fields to come up with such claims. Typically, some anthropologists study isolated primitives to enhance understanding of pre-historical human beings. By using such approaches, there are accompanying issues. In the modern world, isolated tribes have been impacted by the current society in numerous ways. Although the isolated tribes still help researchers to understand small societies, they cannot aid in enlightening on earlier stages of evolution.
Marlene Zuk’s idea that people are biologically adapted to the paleo diet and lifestyle is plausible on the face of it. For instance, modern homo sapiens have existed for about two hundred thousand years, and only about ten thousand of them were farmers. According to Zuk, “if we really do want to reach back for healthier lifestyles, what should we really emulate?”. The perception supports that human evolution is slow, and this means people have not had enough time to adapt to changes in lifestyles. But according to authors like Zuk, as evolutionary biologists, they do not believe in such.
When seeking to revert the way of life to be that of remote ancestors, there is a problem with what people know about ways of life and is based on guesswork. For instance, people can infer a lot from archeology, due to advancement in techniques, but there will always be an area of ignorance. Zuk addresses some general questions and detailed examination of paleo-fantasy aspects, for instance, the issue of diet. Even though there are benefits pointed about the paleo-diet, there exists little agreement about what the diet should consist of. The idea that people’s genes are fixed to the pre-agrarian period and that it cannot adapt to any later diet is incorrect. The key theme in the book is that evolution occurs over a short time than people believe. A piece of good evidence cited is that of childhood enzyme or lactates that allows grown-up to digest lactose in milk.
Undoubtedly, exercise is good for people until recently when almost every person took much exercise than usual at present. Compared to ancestors, it is a dilemma to chose if their exercise pattern was short sprinting or distance running since evidence supports both views. Zuk points, “Human running has another quirk: it lacks an optimal speed” In this subject, Zuk discusses fashionable or footwear and advice on running barefoot. I would say she doubts the sound of that, and there is a lot of skepticism. Zuk’s focus is on the latest work surrounding recent human evolution. A key argument is that a large modern population has a considerable chance to mutate positively. Precisely, the author targets specific claims by working through the idea of milk, grain or diet, exercises, and sexual relationships. Also, she does is conclude by claims that the evolution of humanity has gone slow drastically. The author does not highlight the relative weakness of paleo lifestyle claims. Suppose a person was planning to hike on top of the mt Alps and decide to scorn modern topography map in favor of studying the Himalayas. If the person uses the studies to re-construct what Alp mountains look like in millions of years ago and use that as a guide in the present, it can be confusing. That is how the paleo argument looks like. On the other hand, when it comes to people’s diet, today, there is wealth information about nutrition ranging from the study of metabolism to large-scale research data. When dietary decisions are made based on the reconstruction of people’s diet during the paleo-era through studies of hunter-gatherers, then it sounds an unusual idea.
What to learn from Zuk’s work surrounds genetic and evolutionary theory. The question of whether and how to learn from the old species is a worthy consideration. A criticism surrounding this kind of thinking is that reflecting on genetic evolution is cherry-picking. Zuk believes that people often decide what they want to believe. I agree with the author on that one because many times, we go looking for what we want in the society that supports our beliefs. Another good point I find agreeing with is that in earlier societies, species were different from those of the modern environment. Early persons lived under different environmental conditions. In that way, whatever was good for them may not be suitable for contemporary individuals, hence the idea, “Our behavior is slippery stuff.” The hard part is knowing what can transfer well with our lives or that which cannot. People have to choose wisely; other times, they do not and end up being picking what they want anyway.
Zuk’s idea of people’s selection relates well with other works from different authors like Jared Diamond. The latter, in his document, The World Until Yesterday, has a lot of thinking that reflects careful research. For example, diamond teaches to learn or teach based on pre-modern society. The question is how to select which society to learn from. Zuk, on the other hand, wants to teach that people should not try to learn from other species or societies from the point of view that would give a privileged position. For example, if the current point of view is a more intelligent and wise society, no other society could have anything to teach about. I see that difficult since I am impressed by the new abilities of humans to invent tools of learning new ways to do things or communicate. in that way, it would be hard to allow another society to color my judgment.
I find Zuk’s book more fun to read as it brings a light skepticism to an array of human evolution topics. The author takes her focus on a collection of paleo ideas. In that way, her approach is not to debunk perspectives but allows full views on how much people know concerning evolution. Zuk applies the term fantasy as an emphatic way to describe hypotheses. As a strength, the author’s brief overview of the evolution of human beings is shorter compared to other books with the same topic. Many books concerning human evolution can be very hard to pick a point, but this one is brief and straightforward. However, I would warn that those looking for the latest news about early humans, the book is not directed that way.
Some parts of this book are good fun; for instance, no one could have thought that cave dwellers could advise on how to eat or exercise. At a glance, the book gives insightful teaching that cave people recommend eating less junk food and exercise more. In that way, someone might take this book as a start off to reflect on personal lifestyles on things like diet, drinking patterns, or exercise. The book can be wrapped around a sense of humor concerning paleo-diets, exercise, and clothing. However, much great deal is on evolution- how it works. Anyone who would enjoy this book, by Marlene Zuk, he or she might as well want to look at other similar works like Spillover by Quammen. The later is simar in that is has a lot to address about viruses, bacteria, and pathogens in broad.
On the contrary, the book is not without weaknesses. For instance, there is insufficient evidence about paleo-advise in the topics pointed by the author. The chapters within this material convey different tones in that some are drier than others. Individuals seeking the actual answers concerning the ancient environment may not get from this book. For many of the topics covered here, there is no ideal answer.
In conclusion, I enjoyed the Paleofantasy book. Still, I could have enjoyed most a hypothetical book by the same author, which is more straightforward addressing human evolution in the last 10000 years.