Edge Rewrite
Jump to content

Talk:Paleolithic diet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 27 days ago by Carrot juice in topic NPOV problem: Pseudoscience or controversy?
Former featured articlePaleolithic diet is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 20, 2008.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 3, 2008Good article nomineeListed
March 5, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
March 18, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Paul Saladino

[edit]

I have created the article Paul Saladino after a thorough review of reliable sources. Editors of this article may find material of use there. BobFromBrockley (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

Change of grammar - lead sentence

[edit]

I corrected the grammar of the lead sentence, a user made a change to the sentence following my correction which was marked as "restoring lead sentence."

The lead sentence wasn't restored, it was changed from the original. Euphoriac666 (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi. It was me who changed it. I noticed that the long-standing lead definition was changed in one of the recent edits, so I reverted it back to the stable definition. Rasnaboy (talk) 03:04, 17 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

NPOV problem: Pseudoscience or controversy?

[edit]

I have noticed that Category:Pseudoscience is added to the page. But actually Mayo Clinic has admitted both benefits and risks of paleolithic diet. In my personal opinion, according to WP:NPOV, it seems more likely to be a science controversy rather than complete pseudoscience. --Vack Xu (talk) 15:35, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

We will go by the sources, rather than the personal opinion of somebody on the internetz. - Walter using an LLM? Ego 15:50, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Here are the sources:
  • Book 2025: "Some studies of Paleo adherents have demonstrated an improvement in the components of metabolic syndrome, with decreased waist circumference, triglycerides, [...] and improved lipid profiles in individuals following the Paleo diet" "Clinicians need not endorse or oppose the Paleo diet"
  • Study 2017: "Study suggest that diets closer to Paleolithic or Mediterranean diet patterns may be inversely associated with all-cause and cause-specific mortality"
  • Study 2013: "The Paleolithic diet was seen as instrumental in weight loss, albeit it was difficult to adhere to"
More likely to be a controversy. --Vack Xu (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
I'm unclear what you see in those sources that addresses the concern. --Hipal (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Moving from Category:Pseudoscience to Category:Scientific controversies or Category:Biology controversies is more likely to meet NPOV. Vack Xu (talk) 22:30, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Those are changes you prefer. I'm unclear why, from those sources.
Also, I don't believe the first is reliable at all. --Hipal (talk) 23:21, 13 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
It is a diet that makes pseudoscientific claims, categorized as a fad diet so the category is accurate, however, the Paleolithic diet article is already included in the fad diets category which is part of the pseudoscience category so its not a big issue if it was removed. Carrot juice (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2026 (UTC)Reply