Paleo Diet is incompetent to a new level: legumes are not antinutrients

The Paleo Diet claims that beans and lentils should be excluded from the diet because they contain antinutrients.  It is obvious that no one claiming this has done a simple "Google scholar" search using the key word "antinutrient", because if they did they would find out the potential problem is compounds called lectins, and doing a search for "lectins" takes you to research papers showing that cooking eliminates the lectins.  I did this search using Google Scholar with Paleo's own "antinutrient" term instead of more sophisticated search processes just to see if the Paleo incompetency was because the promotors are simply scientifically unsophisticated, or if it goes even deeper, meaning flat out laziness to not even bother checking the scientific literature at its simplest possible (Google Scholar) level.  Paleo then takes the laziness even further by promoting the incompetence as science based, which is unethical since they know people are looking for a diet to believe in.  Since peoples' physical health is hurt by following nutrition misinformation, those who try to help others eat healthier have a moral obligation to do their homework.  Saying that everyone should check with their doctor before doing any diet or that each person should do what they believe is best for them RIGHT AFTER telling them how to eat is just covering themselves legally while in their heart actually they care nothing for finding and sharing truth with others, instead sharing their unfounded beliefs.

Here is the truth:  Lectins are natural phytonutrients that plants use as insecticides to protect themselves.  The fact that lectins break down the membranes of cancer cells (reducing prostate, colon and other cancers), fungi, bacteria and viruses (even the HIV-1 retrovirus) is part of the reason that tomatoes, corn, whole grain rice, wheat, oats, nuts, sunflower seeds, peaches, mangos, grapes, cinnamon, citrus, berries, tea and most other plant foods are healthy.  All of these contain significant amounts of lectins.  When there are VERY large amounts of lectins in our food, we start to feel the effects of their hurting the membranes of the cells lining our intestine the same way they hurt cancer cells and bacteria.  As with everything in life, too much of a good thing is a bad thing.  We have known for over half a century that lentils and beans have the highest levels of lectins and therefore can make us sick if we eat them raw ["Toxicity of raw kidney beans", Jaffe WG, Experientia 5 (1949) 81]. We also know that cooking beans for 15 min at 100 C, 2 hrs at 80 C, or 45 min at 15 psi pressure cooking completely denatures lectins, and canning beans is nearly as effective, meaning cooked and canned legumes are not only completely safe but their residual lectin levels fight cancer and fungal / bacterial / viral infection [Thompson LU et al, J Food Science 48 (1983) 235; Dhurandhar NV & Chang KC, J Food Science 55 (1990) 470; Xia L & Ng TB, J Chromatography 844 (2006) 213]. Cooking at temperatures under 80 C does not denature lectins even after many hours.

I recommend against eating more than a few tablespoons of raw legumes at a time, such as those that are sprouted to eat as snacks in some farmer's markets, since even as few as a half dozen raw red kidney beans (the legume highest in lectins; about twice as high as the amount in other beans and lentils) is linked to clinical symptoms in the most susceptible people.  HOWEVER, you SHOULD eat legumes regularly, ideally EVERY DAY, or even EVERY MEAL for the highest levels of health, weight loss, and performance. 

Since legumes are almost always eaten cooked, saying they are unhealthy makes no sense.  Paleo says to eat as much meat as you want, even though choking down a steak without chewing it could hurt you.  They would say "no one eats meat that way".  Well, no one eats legumes uncooked.  If they want to give us rules to follow, at least make it clear when the rules are almost irrelevant.  Drinking 3 galons of water all at once would kill you in minutes (dilutes electrolytes around neurons too much), but no one drinks water that way.  Eating a galon of spinach every day would give you kidney stones within 10 years (oxalic acid), but no one eats spinach that way.  So I don't tell people to avoid lentils, beans, water, and spinach, as well as every other food we could possibly eat, since the way we eat them (when we do eat them) makes us MUCH healthier.  On the flip side, I don't tell people to eat unlimited amounts of meat, which slowly kills you (over decades).  Any time you see a diet that completely eliminates a type of food and/or tells you that you can eat any amount of a type of food (the Paleo Diet does both) you should immediately think "The author of this diet is incompetent and looking to make a buck i.e. they are both mentally and morally deficient, so I'll take my chances elsewhere, even if that means just going it alone and using my own nutritional common sense...I'll be much better off." 

Comments

[Kristoffer Liland]

The interesting thing about the paleo diet is that early humans didn't eat meat, at least not before they moved into the cold, non-tropical areas where raw food was harder to come by, and making bonfires were more common, killing animals and treating the meat in that regard became a necessity UNTILL we became capable of Agriculture some 13 000 years ago, it is for example proven that warriors of caesar and gladiators did not like eating meat because it made them sloppy and bad fighters. In that regard I find it strange that the paleo diet has such a high focus on meats, much like the atkins, low-carb diet, when carbs should be the major food source we take in, with 60% being carbs, 20% being protein, and 20% being fat respectively. That is a balanced diet. It is true that gluten-based grains are un-natural in the human body, it took us thousands of years to develop gluten tolerance, and there are still millions of people who have celiac disease. The same goes for lactose, for example 95% of Asia is still lactose intolerant because they never drank milk, thus I find it strange how the paleo diet also embraces lacto-products. If we should go the farthest way back in time we'll find that humans, for the most part, lived a raw vegan lifestyle, maybe consuming insects to some extent. There are still many indiginous cultures around the world who live raw vegan diets, and scientists are puzzled as to why these cultures don't show any sign of B12 deficiency.

In the end, a lot of our diets are affected by our genes.

I have a lot more to say about lacto-based diets (which are very bad for the human health) but I'll stop here because I've put enough information in already.

[Rick]

Since one year ago, I started a diet similar to the paleo diet, but I do eat legumes, particularly pinto beans on a regular basis. At the time, I had developed resistance to insulin and high blood pressure. My triglycerides and VLDL cholesterol were almost twice the maximum value. About two months after I stopped eating sugars and grains (even whole grains) my blood pressure went back to normal, and my triglycerides and VLDL cholesterol are now within normal parameters.

My experience in avoiding sugar and grains has been very positive.

[Mike]

I like some things about the Paleo diet but the thing of taking out legumes and whole grains I believe to be I mistake.
Legumes bring so many precious nutrients to the table plus they are a good source of vegetable protein.
Also, there is so much controversy around paleo that it makes me wonder a little bit!

[Robert]

I completed a course in nutritional biochemistry and a course in toxicology at third-year level. I may not be a physician, but it is clear to me that the Paleo diet is similar to the Atkins diet. It involves consumption of animal protein as the primary souce of energy together with the avoidance of grains and legumes. Anyone who follow this diet over the long term will be more likely to develop heart diseases or ketosis.

Furthermore, such diets are a waste of the resources of the Earth. A significantly larger amount of farmland would be needed to feed a population that on the Atkins- or Paleo diet than a population consuming wholegrains and legumes. Pigs and some fish can be fed waste, but other farm animals are fed grains, kept on (non-natural) meadows or allowed to destroy natural habitats.

[adam]

Ummm, I was on a Paleo diet for quite a while. it was fine except that I missed something. I haven't missed the sugar or flour or most ggrains, but I've started eating legumes again.
It was the thing that my body needed.
I should say that I eat legumes raw all the time, and have no effects from them, it seems some people don't get a bad reaction.
I have a lot of Paleo die hards telling me that I shouldn't do this , it will make me gain weight again blah blah. But it hasn't. All bodies are different. Mine can handle legumes.
I'm Hiv+, and have been for twenty two years. Still not on anti-retrovirals, and still very healthy. I have a feeling this is due to the amounts of Lectins I consume. Thanks for the article. Finally a sane voice. If ardent Paleo people were really that ardent, why don't they eat raw meat.? and what's with the salt and milk, and cooking oils.? I had one person tell me in one breath that nobody knows for sure what the Paleo diet was , they can only guess, and in the next breath tell me they know for sure that all grains were off the menu. Sheesh. It seems there are another new group of food nazis out there. And like you say, ill informed and vehemently opposed to anyone else being right. It must be an ego thing.

[Amy Hudson]

DR. CLYDE'S RESPONSE: WHERE A PERSON WAS EDUCATED OR WHERE THEY TEACH OR DO RESEARCH IS IRRELEVANT. YOU AND THE AUTHORS OF PALEO SHOULD READ THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE INSTEAD OF BEING LAZY, INCOMPETENT, AND IMMORAL. YOU DON'T KNOW THE FACTS AND INSTEAD SPOUT CRAP THAT HURTS THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE PUBLIC ABOUT HUMAN HEALTH. GOOD JOB.

You're missing the big picture on the legumes. It is believed that Paleolithic man didn't eat legumes on a regular basis, probably because the lectins caused intestinal distress. So we didn't evolve while eating legumes and grains. It is now that we understand why that is, ie lectins. Regardless of lectins being present, the main argument for not eating legumes is that we did not eat them during 99% of human history, so our digestive system is ill equipped to handle those foods. There is also the issue of phytates, another anti-nutrient.

In addition, legumes are also high in carbohydrates, and comparatively low in protein.

In your claim that those who promote Paleo are being "lazy" or "scientifically unsophisticated," you expose your own lack of research or intellectual dishonesty. The pioneers of the Paleo diet like, Loren Cordain, who obtained his Ph.D. in Health from the University of Utah. Robb Wolf is a former biochemist researcher. Matt Lalonde is another biochemist researcher who has a PhD from a fairly well know institution, Harvard-- perhaps you've heard of it. These are all people who are well steeped in research.

Furthermore, I have seen the benefits of the Paleo diet, both personally and with the people I coach-- people who have tried every diet to lose weight, people who have gone low fat, eaten their whole grains, cut out red meat, you name it.

I hope in the future you do a better job researching a topic before you lambast it. People trust your advice and opinion, you owe it to them to give the best information you can.

[Rita]

The basis of Paleo is to shed light on the eating habits of early man predating agriculture and to incorporate that into modern life styles.

[Clyde Wilson]

Hello Russel,
Note that I never replied to Serena. That was someone named Jeff. I am Clyde, the author of this blog. My first response to your saying my thinking is flawed is "great!" because I love to learn new things and improve my understanding of things. Unfortunately my excitement was replaced by realizing you do not understand that any boiling whatsoever means that the was has reached 100 C or 212 F at the bottom of the cooking container and will simmer up to the top to still be over 80 C. A slower boil does not mean a lower temperature, just a lower rate of heat entering the food from the burner; this is chemistry, not nutrition, and I do not fault you for not knowing that.

[Russell]

While your statements concerning the cooking of beans, and the resulting neutralizing effect on the lectins, are technically true, your thinking is flawed. I don't believe that most people cook the way you describe. Beans are normally soaked before cooking, which means they would be cooked for much less time than 2 hours at 80C. When I have beans now, I do make sure I boil them for 15-20 minutes, but before I discovered lectins I would: soak the beans, bring them to a boil, and then simmer until done (generally 20-50 minutes, depending on the bean). I believe this is how most people cook their beans and it is not adequate for neutralizing the lectin content.

You also completely ignore that lectins are present in relatively large doses in grains, nightshade family vegetables, and dairy from grain feed livestock. These foodstuffs would rarely be cooked in a way that would neutralize the lectins, if cooked at all.

Also, your comment to Serena does not address her point. You are obviously correct that correlation does not equal causation, but neither does it rule out causation. Nor does your assumption of other factors rule it out. It also seems perfectly reasonable to lump whole grains in with processed grains once you take into consideration that we do not cook, for example, wheat, tomatoes or milk for 2hours at 80C.

By the way, I'm not a strict Paleodieter, but I find that many of the problematic issues concerning the human diet are addressed in a relevant and helpful way by the concepts explored by the diet.

[Jeff]

Serena,
When are all you diet fiends going to realize that correlation does not equal causation.
The problem with your logic is two fold:
1) It assumes there were no other changes in human history at that time. Given that grains were a result of the development of modern agriculture, I assume there were a lot of other significant developments at that time that could have caused the ailments you describe.
2) You're blanketing all grains together. As I'm sure you are aware, there are a lot of unhealthy ways grains can be processed and served up (although I assume you believe all grains are unhealthy). Lumping hearty whole grains in with heavily processed flours, sugars, etc is silly.

[Serena]

Thanks for posting about the Paleo diet!

Could you shed some light on the role of grains in our diet? Humans didn't eat grains for the past 99.5% of human history, and when they did begin eating grains, according to my textbook for history class, men became shorter by five inches, women became shorter by four inches, people became anemic, people developed more tooth decay, and life spans decreased. Are we better off eating more healthy fats and meat, and getting our carbs from fruits and veggies?