The chasm between the Paleo community and the low carb community seems to be growing wider by the day. There has been a lot of flap about Gary Taubes giving a curt smackdown to Stephen Guyenet during the Q&A after Stephan's presentation on "Food Reward." I just watched the video of the incident, and I must say, up till the very end when Taubes made his flippant remark, it sounded like a good debate.

In the comments section of Dr. Guyenet's post about the "drama," many seem to want to equate Taubes' zeal and opinion about low carb with Ancel Keys disastrous advice that low fat diets prevented heart disease.

I think this is a big mistake, and while I don't think Gary Taubes' final statement in his response was necessary, or kind, I can see the point he was trying to make. Should Taubes take a dose of his own medicine? Perhaps, but I can't agree with everything the "big shots" in the Paleo community have come up with, either.

I've said before and I'll say again, I do not follow any particular "group." I am not Paleo, or Primal; I am not a follower of Atkins, and I had hoped that "Ancestral" might have been a good way to describe my way of eating. However...it seems that "Ancestral" is just another term for Paleo in the mind of the Paleoites. And even though, compared to the SAD, Paleo can be considered low carb by default, they rail against "low carbers" as if they were from another planet entirely, and just utterly stupid.

I have gained a lot of knowledge and wisdom from the Paleo movement, just as I have from Primal enthusiasts AND low carbers, but I don't think any of these groups will ever agree on an optimal diet between them. And that's okay. You all keep debating, and railing against one another. I will sit back, observe, and pick the good parts out of the slop you're making by bashing one another over every little detail.

Isn't the vision to be a unified front against the decades of insane advice from the powers that be? Can't we leave the sensitivity at the door and keep the real discussion going? Admit that there is right and wrong on both sides, and move on? Or is this going to be a huge pissing match - - a challenge between Alpha Males?

Some of the Paleoites need to get over themselves and realize that just because someone considers themselves low carb doesn't mean that they are retarded, and just because we consider one of the macronutrient groups to be pretty much verboten, doesn't mean we don't see value in your criticism about certain aspects of our way of life.

And about the Paleo/Primal people being in better shape than general low carbers? Well, I will bet you a dollar to a coconut flour donut that many of those beautiful, well-built people never had a weight problem in their lives. (Jump back, I didn't say ALL!) There are people in every lifestyle who are at different stages of their journey. To judge someones eating choices by ones appearance from seeing them one time does not a valid observation make.

In addition to that, if someone who has wrecked their metabolism for the majority of their life (not someone who is still in their youth - you know, 20s and 30s) discovers a low carb/Paleo/Primal way of living helps them maintain their health and accomplish weight loss, there is nothing saying that they will ever be able to eat the occasional potato or piece of fruit without it being detrimental to their weight or well being. Gary Taubes is right about many things, and so is the low carb movement. By the same token, there is a lot of good science abounding on all sides. I just hope this dies down and the bickering and caterwauling is kept to a minimum.

I realize my thoughts are sort of disjointed and all over the place in this post, but many of these points are in response to the particular blog post I linked above. I prefer to not involve myself in the discussion on Stephen's post directly. I feel more comfortable addressing them on my homefront. So, pardon my scatteredness, please!