Paleo or Creationist or Both? Thank Bio-Anthropology.
In a state that recently debated whether to give K-12 science educators the option to forego the teaching of evolution, Professor Christopher Lynn is preparing undergraduates for careers that revolve around that very topic. Lynn teaches biological anthropology at the University of Alabama and conducts research into the way cultural behaviors affect biomarkers for stress, immunity, and relaxation, often probing into how these behaviors have evolved. He’s training his students to leverage this knowledge for modern-day applications in fields ranging from medicine and fitness to NGO work.
This discipline was long characterized as “physical anthropology” to separate it from archaeology and the segment of anthropology focusing on linguistics and culture. The shift is noteworthy, as it reflects how the field has both expanded into genetics and abandoned scrutiny of physical and racialized traits, aspects that were once studied by the field’s founders.
By studying communities qualitatively as participants and as observers, while collecting quantitative biological data, bio-anthropologists essentially seek the scientific underpinnings of culture. “It’s one of the most meta-disciplines in academia,” Lynn explained, “where a researcher’s findings can shed light on his/her own behavior.”
For his part, Lynn’s most prominent study looked at the relaxation response induced in people sitting around campfires. He has shown the physiological response of this experience to be similar to that evoked by watching television today.
Director of Evolutionary Studies at the University of Alabama
“Watching fire, while maybe also hearing oral histories is a way that we ground and center ourselves at the end of the day, and it’s something we have done for hundreds of thousands of years,” he said.
Unlike many other academic disciplines, research into the evolutionary origins of our behavior doesn’t languish in obscure journals and stolid conferences — it fuels vituperative public debates. Scholars in the field duke it out with evolutionary biologists who claim to identify genetic racial differences that anthropologists largely claim are culturally constructed. Anthropologists who depend upon primate research in laboratories defend themselves against animal activists. Then there is the creationist, “intelligent design” movement and now the paleo diet, which have sprung the discipline into the limelight.
An Evolving View of Human Origins
Lynn’s introductory course, Evolution for Everyone, regularly draws students who come from devoutly Christian backgrounds. Though he is not a believer himself, he’s no stranger to fundamentalist Christianity. His PhD dissertation at SUNY examined a New York Pentecostal church and the dissociation experienced by its members when they “speak in tongues” — a phenomenon called glossolalia. Now, when Lynn encounters Southern Baptists (who account for as much as a fifth of the University of Alabama’s student population, according to the school), he can understand what they may experience when studying science that conflicts with their religious beliefs, particularly in the field of evolution.
“In Alabama, we have a creationist dermatologist governor. Our doctors here are largely creationists. They are capable of understanding biology without understanding the implications of it. They know it is based in evolutionary theory but they have not internalized it, and that is normal for here,” Lynn said.
Amanda Glaze is a scientist who happened to grow up as a creationist and Southern Baptist believer. She said that she came from a background where evolution was considered taboo and where even her family, upon learning she was conducting research involving evolution, became afraid that she was “going to hell” as a result. Glaze, with a Ph.D. in Science Education and Biology, now researches intersections of science and society, specifically evolutionary perspectives in the “Deep South” among the public, teachers and students from K-12 through university. In her research, she highlights the importance of learning about the cultural and scientific elements of evolution to truly understand its existence.
Through survey and interview studies, Glaze has found that knowledge of evolution doesn’t always directly affect an individual’s acceptance of the theory.
“The more someone knows about photosynthesis, the more they accept it to be true. The same is true for gravity, but there is not always the same relationship when it comes to evolution,” she said. “Other factors, like their worldview, the cultural beliefs, experiences, and understandings that frame our ‘lens’ on the world, often strongly impact acceptance. Understanding those worldviews—like what an anthropologist would do—is how you make sense of them.”
Indeed, recent ethnographies document creationist advocate communities in the U.S., showing how anthropology provides a framework to study how people react to anthropological findings.
Surprisingly, though, the discipline has not borne the brunt of creationist criticism, despite being the center of human evolution research. Lynn says that his students in the anthropology department self-select along the typically liberal bias of the discipline, so he hasn’t needed to convince any Creationist students of the merits of his syllabus. He’s also never endured any pushback from intelligent design advocates in the university administration or state government.
What Would Jesus Eat?
One place where a cultural trend has influenced perceptions around evolution is at the dinner table. The contemporary paleo movement promulgates the notion that for optimal health, humans should eat a diet and live a lifestyle closer to our evolutionary heritage. Its tenets have become recognizable in mainstream culture: meat and saturated fat are good for you, cross fit training, and barefoot running are optimal physical activity; it’s best to eliminate processed foods, dairy, and grains because these were not eaten before 10,000 years ago.
The rise of the paleo diet movement is directly traceable to a 1985 paper in the New England Journal of Medicine co-written by the Emory University biological anthropologist Melvin Konner and medical doctor S. Boyd Eaton. They studied the nutritional intake of 20th-century hunter-gatherer communities and concluded that ancestral human diets that dominated over the bulk of human history contained much lower amounts of refined carbohydrates and sodium, and included significantly more protein, fiber, and saturated fat than contemporary diets.
Over the following 30 years, their findings were used to promote a new way of eating that emphasizes diets comprised of up to 50% red meat. Konner, who now teaches anthropology at Emory University, takes issue with how grains and other nutritious plants have been shunned.
“I don’t talk about paleolithic people,” he said. “This is the hunter-gatherer diet as it has been studied in the anthropological context, where we have reason to believe that they are representative of our ancestors.” He explained that the evidence must be matched up with findings in the fossil record in order to claim anything about a paleo diet. As archaeologists look at the record, they are amassing evidence that numerous past hunter gatherer societies subsisted on starchy, high-carbohydrate foods, and that these foods may have propelled the evolution of our oversized brains.
The evolutionary biologist Marlene Zuk and author of the book Paleofantasy: What Evolution Really Tells Us about Sex, Diet, and How We Live notes,
“I’m really interested in the ways people use evolution to justify their lives. People will say that their health or their families are one way or another because of our evolutionary history. They’ll say that we are naturally predetermined to have certain behaviors.”
Interestingly, she says, when people discuss how ancestral culture has shaped their present lives, even those who don’t believe in evolution see the impact that previous generations have had on present-day behavior and how it’s changed over time. “You’ll see that the creationists do it too — everybody has an idea of somewhere humans came from that is different now.”
Indeed, there is even a growing community of creationists who embrace the paleo movement — a jarring contradiction, even for individuals used to separating religious belief and science.
On Unrefined Kitchen, a paleo food blog by Jennifer Maltby, the author writes: “I want to make very clear that even though we do “the Paleo Diet,” we do NOT agree with the evolutionary beliefs it stems from… Sure, our ancestors maybe ate this way, but I don’t believe the earth has been around for millions of years and I certainly don’t believe we evolved from animals. I believe God created man on the sixth day of creation.” There are dozens of similar blogs and community forums on Facebook, propounding the benefits of the paleo diet for anti-evolution Christians.
While one could argue that many scientific disciplines don’t require a belief in evolution to function effectively, (see the previous creationist dermatologist example,) the very premise of the paleo diet draws on evolutionary theory. “It’s about adaptive evolutionary environments, so it’s very ironic to see creationist paleo advocates,” Lynn said. He has noticed that the paleo diet trend has provoked a slight uptick in interest in his evolutionary studies program, and mentioned that a few schools are considering offering nutrition certificate programs within evolutionary studies.
Konner, at Emory, also interacts regularly with paleo advocates who plumb his research on the Hadza tribe of Tanzania for more diet justifications.
“But you really can’t use anthropology to make dietary recommendations,” he said, explaining that it’s difficult to replicate the same conditions as hunter-gatherers, and that the best diet advice is personalized.
However, in the ultimate meta-twist, anthropological study can reveal truths about communities inspired by anthropological research. Since at least 2009, the annual American Anthropological Association meeting has held dozens of sessions showcasing research on the growing subculture of paleo enthusiasts. Lynn also says that many of his colleagues have adopted the diet themselves, not an uncommon practice for this group, long known to “go native” after extended periods of fieldwork.
