TL;DR: The paleo diet is built on a compelling evolutionary premise — that our brains evolved on a diet of wild game, fish, vegetables, fruits, nuts, and tubers, not on refined grains, seed oils, and ultra-processed food. That premise is broadly correct, and many of paleo’s core principles align with what neuroscience research supports for brain health: adequate DHA from fish, high-quality protein for neurotransmitter synthesis, elimination of ultra-processed foods, and stable blood glucose. However, the diet’s blanket exclusion of legumes, whole grains, and dairy is not supported by cognitive research — in fact, these foods feature prominently in the Mediterranean and MIND diets, which have far stronger evidence for neuroprotection. Direct clinical studies testing the paleo diet’s effects on cognitive function are virtually nonexistent. The metabolic benefits documented in short-term trials — improved insulin sensitivity, reduced inflammation, weight loss — are genuinely relevant to brain health, but they do not distinguish paleo from other whole-food dietary patterns. The strongest approach is to adopt what paleo gets right (whole foods, fish, vegetables, no ultra-processed food) while retaining what it unnecessarily excludes (legumes, whole grains, fermented dairy).
Introduction
The paleolithic diet — commonly known as the paleo diet — is based on a simple and intuitively appealing argument: the human body, and in particular the human brain, evolved over millions of years on a diet of wild animals, fish, shellfish, vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds, and tubers. Agriculture, which introduced grains, legumes, and dairy into the human diet, began only about 10,000 to 12,000 years ago. Industrialized food processing is barely a century old. The argument is that evolution has not had time to adapt our physiology to these newer foods, and that the mismatch between our ancestral diet and our modern one is driving chronic disease — including neurodegeneration and cognitive decline.
This framework, popularized by Loren Cordain in The Paleo Diet (2002) and by subsequent authors and clinicians, has attracted millions of followers worldwide. The diet typically includes meat, poultry, fish, eggs, vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds, and healthy fats (olive oil, avocado oil, coconut oil), while excluding grains, legumes (including peanuts and soy), dairy, refined sugar, seed oils, and all processed foods.
From a brain health perspective, the paleo diet presents an interesting case. Its core logic — that the brain evolved on nutrient-dense whole foods and suffers when deprived of them — is well supported by evolutionary biology and nutritional neuroscience. Several of its specific recommendations align precisely with what the cognitive research literature supports. But other aspects of the diet rest on oversimplified evolutionary reasoning, and the clinical evidence directly linking paleo eating to improved cognitive function is remarkably thin.
This article examines the paleo diet through the lens of brain science. We will evaluate the evolutionary argument, review what the diet includes and excludes, assess what it gets right and where it overreaches, examine the limited clinical data, and compare it to dietary patterns with stronger cognitive evidence.
The Evolutionary Mismatch Argument
The Case for Mismatch
The evolutionary mismatch hypothesis is the intellectual foundation of the paleo diet. The argument runs as follows: the genus Homo has existed for roughly 2.5 million years. For the vast majority of that time — approximately 99.5 percent of it — our ancestors were hunter-gatherers who ate what they could hunt, fish, forage, and dig up. The human genome, and particularly the metabolic and neurological systems that depend on dietary inputs, was shaped by natural selection operating within this dietary environment.
Agriculture changed the human diet more rapidly and more dramatically than any previous shift. Within a few thousand years, populations that adopted farming shifted from diverse, nutrient-dense wild foods to diets dominated by a small number of cereal grains. More recently, industrial food processing introduced refined flour, refined sugar, seed oils, and an ever-growing array of ultra-processed foods that bear no resemblance to anything available during human evolution.
The mismatch hypothesis proposes that many modern chronic diseases — obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, autoimmune conditions, and neurodegenerative disorders — result at least in part from the collision between our ancient biology and our modern food environment. Cordain and colleagues articulated this framework in a 2005 paper published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, arguing that the discordance between our genetically determined nutritional requirements and the nutritional characteristics of contemporary Western diets was a primary driver of chronic disease.
Where the Mismatch Argument Holds
For the brain specifically, the mismatch argument has real force on several points. The modern Western diet is demonstrably harmful to brain health through mechanisms that are well understood: chronic hyperglycemia damages cerebral vasculature, systemic inflammation impairs synaptic plasticity and neurogenesis, nutrient deficiencies compromise neurotransmitter synthesis and myelin maintenance, and ultra-processed foods disrupt the gut-brain axis. None of these insults would have been present — at least not at modern scale — in an ancestral dietary environment.
The paleolithic diet, whatever its specific composition varied by geography and season, almost certainly provided substantially more omega-3 fatty acids, more micronutrients per calorie, more dietary fiber from vegetables and tubers, more polyphenols and antioxidants, and far less refined carbohydrate than the standard Western diet. To the extent that returning to a whole-food, nutrient-dense diet corrects these deficits, the evolutionary argument is broadly sound.
Where the Mismatch Argument Breaks Down
The mismatch hypothesis becomes problematic when it is applied too rigidly. Several important criticisms have been raised.
First, there was no single paleolithic diet. Human ancestors ate vastly different diets depending on their geographic location, climate, and available food sources. Arctic populations ate almost entirely animal-based diets. Tropical and subtropical populations ate far more plant matter, including starchy tubers and wild grains. The Hadza of Tanzania eat large amounts of honey and fibrous tubers. The idea that there is one “correct” ancestral diet oversimplifies the remarkable dietary flexibility that is itself a hallmark of human evolution.
Second, 10,000 years is not nothing in evolutionary terms. Human populations that adopted agriculture and dairying have, in some cases, undergone substantial genetic adaptation. Lactase persistence — the ability to digest lactose in adulthood — evolved independently in at least five different populations in response to dairying cultures, and it is found in the majority of people with northern European, East African, and some Middle Eastern ancestry. The amylase gene (AMY1) has undergone copy-number variation in agricultural populations, increasing the efficiency of starch digestion. These are precisely the kind of adaptations that a strict mismatch narrative would predict should not exist.
Third, the exclusion of entire food groups (legumes, whole grains, dairy) is not well justified by the evolutionary argument once genetic adaptation is accounted for. Legumes and grains have been part of human diets for far longer than strict paleo proponents acknowledge. There is archaeological evidence that Homo sapiens ground and consumed wild grains at least 30,000 years ago, and that Neanderthals consumed legumes and starchy plants. The argument that these foods are inherently incompatible with human biology does not hold up to scrutiny.
Brain Evolution and Diet
The Expensive Tissue Hypothesis
The relationship between diet and brain evolution is one of the most fascinating areas in biological anthropology. The human brain is metabolically extraordinary — it accounts for roughly 2 percent of body mass but consumes approximately 20 percent of resting metabolic energy. In other primates, the brain claims a much smaller share of total energy expenditure. How did our ancestors fuel the evolution of such a disproportionately large and energy-hungry organ?
The expensive tissue hypothesis, proposed by Aiello and Wheeler in 1995 and published in Current Anthropology, offers one influential answer. They observed that the human gut is substantially smaller relative to body size than would be predicted for a primate of our stature, while the brain is correspondingly larger. They proposed a trade-off: as ancestral humans shifted to higher-quality diets — more animal foods, more nutrient-dense foods — they could afford a smaller, less energy-intensive gut, freeing metabolic energy for brain expansion. In essence, eating better food allowed us to grow bigger brains.
DHA and Brain Growth
One specific nutrient has received enormous attention in the context of brain evolution: docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), a long-chain omega-3 fatty acid that constitutes 10 to 20 percent of the fatty acid content of the cerebral cortex and is essential for neuronal membrane fluidity, synaptogenesis, and neurotransmission.
Crawford and colleagues have argued since the 1970s — most comprehensively in a 1999 paper in Lipids — that access to preformed dietary DHA from fish, shellfish, and aquatic organisms was a critical enabler of human brain evolution. The reasoning is that while the human body can technically convert the plant-based omega-3 alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) into DHA, this conversion is extremely inefficient — typically less than 5 percent in adults. A diet rich in aquatic animal foods would have provided preformed DHA directly, bypassing this metabolic bottleneck.
The “shore-based” hypothesis of human evolution proposes that early Homo populations living near coastlines, rivers, and lakes had privileged access to DHA-rich foods — fish, shellfish, turtle eggs, and aquatic plants — and that this dietary niche facilitated the encephalization (brain enlargement) that distinguishes our lineage. While this hypothesis remains debated and is difficult to test definitively, the biochemical logic is sound: DHA is indispensable for building and maintaining brain tissue, and dietary sources of preformed DHA would have provided a significant advantage.
The paleo diet incorporates this insight correctly by emphasizing fish and seafood consumption. However, this recommendation is not unique to paleo — it is shared by the Mediterranean diet, the MIND diet, and essentially every evidence-based dietary framework for brain health.
The Cooking Hypothesis
Richard Wrangham’s cooking hypothesis, articulated in his 2009 book Catching Fire and supported by a body of anthropological and nutritional research, proposes that the control of fire and the practice of cooking were equally critical to brain evolution. Cooking dramatically increases the caloric availability of food by denaturing proteins, gelatinizing starches, and breaking down cellular structures, allowing far more efficient nutrient extraction from the gut. Wrangham argues that cooking effectively provided the caloric surplus needed to support the metabolic demands of an expanding brain.
This hypothesis is relevant to the paleo discussion because it highlights that human evolution was not only about what we ate, but about how we processed it. The human gut is adapted to cooked food — we literally cannot extract sufficient calories from a raw diet to support our brain’s energy demands. This undermines the notion that any form of food processing is inherently unnatural.
What the Paleo Diet Gets Right for Brain Health
Despite the limitations of its evolutionary reasoning, the paleo diet makes several recommendations that align well with cognitive neuroscience research.
Elimination of Ultra-Processed Foods
This is arguably paleo’s single strongest contribution to brain health. Ultra-processed foods — defined by the NOVA classification system as industrial formulations of refined substances with cosmetic additives — have been consistently linked to cognitive impairment in observational studies. Goncalves and colleagues (2023), in a large analysis published in JAMA Neurology, found that higher ultra-processed food consumption was associated with accelerated cognitive decline in a cohort of over 10,000 adults followed for up to 10 years. Machado and colleagues (2020), in a systematic review published in the British Journal of Nutrition, identified associations between ultra-processed food intake and poorer executive function, memory, and processing speed across multiple populations.
The paleo diet eliminates ultra-processed food by default. Anyone following a genuinely paleo-style diet is eating whole, minimally processed foods — and this alone is likely to produce measurable improvements in metabolic health and, by extension, brain function. The challenge is attributing these benefits to paleo specifically rather than to the removal of ultra-processed food, which any whole-food diet would accomplish equally well.
Adequate Protein and Amino Acids
The paleo diet is typically high in animal protein, providing a complete profile of essential amino acids. This is relevant to brain function because several amino acids serve as direct precursors to neurotransmitters: tryptophan is the precursor to serotonin, tyrosine is the precursor to dopamine and norepinephrine, and histidine is the precursor to histamine. Adequate dietary protein ensures that these synthetic pathways are not substrate-limited.
Additionally, animal protein is the primary dietary source of creatine, which plays a role in brain energy buffering. Rae and colleagues (2003), in a study published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, demonstrated that creatine supplementation improved working memory and processing speed in vegetarians, who had lower baseline creatine stores — suggesting that dietary creatine intake may be relevant to cognitive performance.
Emphasis on Fish and Omega-3 Fats
Paleo diets typically encourage generous fish consumption, which is well supported by the cognitive research literature. As noted above, DHA is structurally critical to the brain, and dietary intake of long-chain omega-3s from fish has been consistently associated with reduced risk of cognitive decline and dementia. The PREDIMED trial demonstrated cognitive benefits from a diet rich in omega-3 sources, and meta-analyses have linked higher fish intake to reduced Alzheimer’s risk.
Vegetable and Fruit Intake
The paleo diet encourages high consumption of non-starchy vegetables and fruits, which provide polyphenols, antioxidants, vitamins, and fiber. Flavonoid-rich foods — berries, leafy greens, cruciferous vegetables — have been linked to better cognitive aging in large cohort studies, including the Nurses’ Health Study and the Rush Memory and Aging Project. The MIND diet, specifically designed for brain health, makes green leafy vegetables and berries two of its top food categories.
Blood Sugar Stability
By eliminating refined grains, added sugars, and most starchy processed foods, the paleo diet tends to produce more stable blood glucose levels. This is relevant to brain function because the brain is exquisitely sensitive to glycemic fluctuations. Chronic hyperglycemia damages cerebral vasculature, accelerates formation of advanced glycation end-products (AGEs), and promotes neuroinflammation. Acute glucose spikes and crashes impair attention, working memory, and executive function in controlled studies. Crane and colleagues (2013), in a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, demonstrated that higher blood glucose levels — even within the non-diabetic range — were associated with increased dementia risk in a large cohort of over 2,000 older adults.
What the Paleo Diet Gets Wrong or Oversimplifies
The Exclusion of Legumes
The paleo diet excludes all legumes — beans, lentils, chickpeas, peanuts, soy — primarily on the grounds that they contain antinutrients (lectins, phytates, saponins) and were not part of the ancestral diet. Both claims are problematic.
The antinutrient argument is largely invalidated by cooking. Lectins are denatured by heat, and proper cooking eliminates the vast majority of problematic compounds in legumes. Phytates do reduce mineral absorption, but they also have antioxidant properties, and their impact is clinically insignificant in the context of a varied diet.
More importantly, legumes are one of the most consistently beneficial food categories in the cognitive research literature. They are a staple of the Mediterranean diet, which has the strongest evidence base for neuroprotection of any dietary pattern. Legumes provide folate (critical for homocysteine metabolism and one-carbon metabolism in the brain), plant-based protein, resistant starch that feeds beneficial gut bacteria, and magnesium. The Blue Zones — regions with the highest concentrations of centenarians — all feature legumes as a dietary cornerstone. Excluding them on evolutionary grounds while ignoring their documented health benefits is a significant weakness of the paleo framework.
The Exclusion of Whole Grains
The paleo diet eliminates all grains, including whole grains, on the basis that they are a product of agriculture and therefore evolutionarily novel. While refined grains are legitimately problematic — they are rapidly digested, spike blood sugar, and provide minimal micronutrition — whole grains are a different story.
Whole grains are rich in fiber, B vitamins (particularly folate and thiamine, both essential for brain function), magnesium, and polyphenols. Observational studies have consistently linked whole grain consumption to reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and all-cause mortality. The MIND diet includes whole grains as one of its brain-healthy food categories. A meta-analysis by Aune and colleagues (2016), published in the BMJ, found significant dose-response relationships between whole grain intake and reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all-cause mortality.
The paleo objection to whole grains centers largely on gluten and other grain proteins. For individuals with celiac disease (approximately 1 percent of the population) or well-documented non-celiac gluten sensitivity, grain avoidance is medically appropriate. For the remaining majority, the evidence does not support the claim that whole grains are harmful to the brain or to overall health.
The Position on Dairy
The paleo diet typically excludes all dairy, though some “primal” variants permit raw or fermented dairy. The exclusion is based on the argument that dairy is an agricultural product and that many human populations are lactose intolerant.
While lactose intolerance is common globally, fermented dairy products (yogurt, kefir, aged cheeses) contain minimal lactose and are well tolerated by most people, including those with lactose malabsorption. Fermented dairy is a significant source of probiotics, calcium, vitamin K2, and bioactive peptides. Several observational studies have linked fermented dairy consumption to better cardiometabolic health, and the gut microbiome effects of fermented dairy are being actively investigated for their relevance to the gut-brain axis. A blanket exclusion of all dairy is not well supported by the cognitive or metabolic research literature.
Clinical Evidence: What Do the Studies Actually Show?
Direct Cognitive Evidence
This is the paleo diet’s most significant weakness as a brain health strategy: there are essentially no randomized controlled trials testing its effects on cognitive function.
A small number of trials have examined the paleo diet’s metabolic effects — and these are worth reviewing because metabolic health is a powerful determinant of brain health — but cognitive outcomes have not been measured as primary or secondary endpoints in any major paleo diet trial.
Metabolic Evidence with Brain Health Implications
Jonsson and colleagues (2009), in a randomized crossover trial published in Cardiovascular Diabetology, compared a paleo diet to a diabetes diet (based on standard dietary guidelines) in 13 patients with type 2 diabetes over two three-month periods. The paleo diet produced greater improvements in glycemic control (measured by HbA1c), triglycerides, diastolic blood pressure, weight, waist circumference, and HDL cholesterol. All of these metabolic parameters are independently associated with brain health and dementia risk.
Lindeberg and colleagues (2007), in a randomized trial published in Diabetologia, compared a paleo diet to a Mediterranean-like diet in 29 patients with ischemic heart disease and either glucose intolerance or type 2 diabetes. The paleo group showed greater improvements in glucose tolerance. A follow-up study by Jonsson and colleagues (2010), published in Nutrition and Metabolism, found that the paleo diet was more satiating per calorie than a Mediterranean diet, with favorable effects on the satiety hormone leptin.
Boers and colleagues (2014), in a randomized controlled trial published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, examined the effects of a two-week paleo diet in healthy adults and observed reductions in blood pressure, total cholesterol, and triglycerides, along with improved arterial distensibility. These are relevant vascular improvements — cerebrovascular health is a major determinant of long-term cognitive function — but the study was very short and did not measure cognition.
Manheimer and colleagues (2015), in a systematic review and meta-analysis published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, pooled data from four randomized trials comparing the paleo diet to other dietary patterns. They concluded that the paleo diet produced greater short-term improvements in metabolic syndrome components (waist circumference, triglycerides, blood pressure, fasting blood sugar, HDL cholesterol) than control diets. However, the trials were small, short, and heterogeneous, and the authors noted that long-term data were lacking.
The Inference Gap
The metabolic improvements documented in paleo diet trials are genuinely relevant to brain health. Insulin resistance, systemic inflammation, hypertension, and dyslipidemia are all established risk factors for cognitive decline and dementia. A diet that improves these markers can reasonably be expected to benefit the brain over time.
However, this is an inference, not a demonstration. The same metabolic improvements have been documented for the Mediterranean diet, the DASH diet, plant-based diets, and other whole-food dietary patterns — several of which have also been directly tested for cognitive outcomes with positive results. The paleo diet has not cleared this evidentiary bar. Until controlled trials measure cognitive endpoints in paleo diet interventions, the diet’s brain health claims rest on plausible extrapolation rather than direct evidence.
Paleo vs. Mediterranean: A Comparison
The comparison between the paleo diet and the Mediterranean diet is instructive because they share substantial overlap but differ in important ways.
Overlap: Both diets emphasize whole, minimally processed foods. Both encourage generous vegetable and fruit intake. Both prioritize fish and seafood. Both limit or eliminate refined sugar, refined grains, and ultra-processed foods. Both include nuts and seeds. Both promote the use of high-quality fats (olive oil features in both, though paleo also permits coconut oil and animal fats more liberally).
Divergence: The Mediterranean diet includes whole grains, legumes, and moderate dairy (particularly yogurt and cheese) — all of which the paleo diet excludes. The Mediterranean diet permits moderate red wine consumption, while paleo generally does not. The paleo diet tends to be higher in animal protein and lower in carbohydrate than the Mediterranean diet, though this varies with individual implementation.
Evidence: The Mediterranean diet has been tested in major randomized controlled trials (PREDIMED and its sub-studies) with cognitive outcomes as endpoints. It has decades of supportive observational data from large cohort studies across multiple countries. The MIND diet, a hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH diets, was specifically designed for neuroprotection and has shown strong associations with reduced Alzheimer’s risk. The paleo diet has none of this direct cognitive evidence.
From a purely evidence-based standpoint, the Mediterranean diet is the superior choice for anyone prioritizing brain health. Its food list is less restrictive, its evidence base is far deeper, and its inclusion of legumes and whole grains provides nutrients and prebiotic fiber that the paleo diet unnecessarily eliminates.
Practical Takeaways
For those interested in applying paleo principles to support brain health without the diet’s unnecessary restrictions, the following approach captures the strongest elements:
Prioritize whole, unprocessed foods. This is the single most impactful dietary change for brain health and the strongest element of the paleo framework. Eliminate ultra-processed foods, refined sugars, and industrially manufactured snack foods.
Eat fish and seafood at least two to three times per week. Fatty fish (salmon, sardines, mackerel, herring, anchovies) provide preformed DHA and EPA, which are structurally and functionally critical for the brain. This recommendation is shared by paleo, Mediterranean, and MIND diets.
Do not exclude legumes. Lentils, chickpeas, black beans, and other legumes are among the most neuroprotective foods available. They provide folate, magnesium, fiber, and plant-based protein. Cook them properly and eat them regularly.
Include whole grains unless you have a specific medical reason to avoid them. Oats, quinoa, brown rice, and other whole grains provide B vitamins, fiber, and sustained energy. Avoid refined grains, but do not conflate them with their whole counterparts.
Consider including fermented dairy. Yogurt and kefir provide probiotics that support the gut-brain axis, along with calcium, protein, and vitamin K2. If you tolerate dairy well, there is no evidence-based reason to exclude it.
Eat abundant vegetables and fruits, especially berries and leafy greens. This is uncontroversial across all evidence-based dietary frameworks and is well supported by the cognitive research literature.
Ensure adequate protein from high-quality sources. Protein provides amino acid precursors for neurotransmitter synthesis. Animal sources additionally provide creatine, carnosine, and preformed B12 — all relevant to brain function.
Use extra-virgin olive oil as your primary cooking and finishing fat. The polyphenols in EVOO, particularly oleocanthal and hydroxytyrosol, have demonstrated anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties in preclinical and clinical research.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the paleo diet good for brain health?
The paleo diet includes many foods that are well supported for brain health — fish, vegetables, fruits, nuts, and high-quality protein — and it eliminates ultra-processed foods, which are consistently linked to cognitive harm. However, its blanket exclusion of legumes, whole grains, and dairy removes foods with documented neuroprotective benefits. There are no clinical trials directly testing the paleo diet’s effects on cognitive function. The metabolic improvements observed in paleo diet trials (better insulin sensitivity, lower inflammation) are relevant to brain health but are also achievable with less restrictive whole-food diets.
How does the paleo diet compare to the Mediterranean diet for brain health?
The Mediterranean diet has substantially stronger evidence for cognitive protection. It has been tested in randomized controlled trials with cognitive endpoints (PREDIMED), and it is supported by large observational studies showing 25 to 35 percent reductions in dementia risk with higher adherence. The paleo diet has no equivalent cognitive evidence. The two diets overlap considerably in their emphasis on whole foods, fish, vegetables, and nuts, but the Mediterranean diet additionally includes legumes and whole grains — foods with well-documented brain health benefits.
Did our ancestors really eat a paleo diet?
There was no single ancestral diet. Human diets varied enormously across geography, climate, and available food sources. Some ancestral populations ate mostly animal foods; others ate mostly plants, tubers, and wild grains. Archaeological evidence indicates that early humans consumed wild grains and legumes long before the advent of agriculture. The idea of a single, optimal paleolithic diet is a modern construct that oversimplifies the dietary diversity of our evolutionary past.
Should I avoid grains for brain health?
There is no evidence that whole grains harm the brain in people without celiac disease or documented gluten sensitivity. Refined grains — white flour, white rice, processed cereals — are legitimately problematic because they spike blood sugar and provide minimal nutrition. Whole grains provide B vitamins, fiber, and magnesium, all of which support brain function. The MIND diet, designed specifically for neuroprotection, includes whole grains as a recommended food category.
Can the paleo diet help with brain fog?
Many people report reduced brain fog after adopting a paleo diet. This is plausible and likely real, but the mechanism is probably the elimination of ultra-processed foods, refined sugars, and blood sugar instability rather than anything specific to the paleo framework. Any whole-food diet that stabilizes blood glucose, reduces systemic inflammation, and improves gut health would be expected to produce similar improvements in subjective cognitive clarity.
Is the paleo diet anti-inflammatory?
The paleo diet can be anti-inflammatory relative to the standard Western diet, primarily because it eliminates refined sugars, ultra-processed foods, and seed oils while increasing vegetable, fruit, and omega-3 intake. However, the Mediterranean diet is at least equally anti-inflammatory and has far more evidence supporting its anti-inflammatory effects on brain-specific pathways.
Sources
Cordain, L., Eaton, S. B., Sebastian, A., Mann, N., Lindeberg, S., Watkins, B. A., … & Brand-Miller, J. (2005). Origins and evolution of the Western diet: health implications for the 21st century. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 81(2), 341–354.
Aiello, L. C., & Wheeler, P. (1995). The expensive-tissue hypothesis: the brain and the digestive system in human and primate evolution. Current Anthropology, 36(2), 199–221.
Crawford, M. A., Bloom, M., Broadhurst, C. L., Schmidt, W. F., Cunnane, S. C., Galli, C., … & Parkington, J. (1999). Evidence for the unique function of docosahexaenoic acid during the evolution of the modern hominid brain. Lipids, 34(S1), S39–S47.
Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human. Basic Books.
Jonsson, T., Granfeldt, Y., Ahren, B., Branell, U. C., Palsson, G., Hansson, A., … & Lindeberg, S. (2009). Beneficial effects of a Paleolithic diet on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes: a randomized cross-over pilot study. Cardiovascular Diabetology, 8(1), 35.
Lindeberg, S., Jonsson, T., Granfeldt, Y., Borgstrand, E., Soffman, J., Sjostrom, K., & Ahren, B. (2007). A Palaeolithic diet improves glucose tolerance more than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischaemic heart disease. Diabetologia, 50(9), 1795–1807.
Jonsson, T., Granfeldt, Y., Lindeberg, S., & Hallberg, A. C. (2010). Subjective satiety and other experiences of a Paleolithic diet compared to a diabetes diet in patients with type 2 diabetes. Nutrition Journal, 9, 35.
Boers, I., Muskiet, F. A. J., Berkelaar, E., Schut, E., Penders, R., Hoenderdos, K., … & Jong, M. C. (2014). Favourable effects of consuming a Palaeolithic-type diet on characteristics of the metabolic syndrome. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 68(8), 918–921.
Manheimer, E. W., van Zuuren, E. J., Fedorowicz, Z., & Tieu, H. (2015). Paleolithic nutrition for metabolic syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 102(4), 922–932.
Goncalves, N. G., Ferreira, N. V., Khandpur, N., Steele, E. M., Levy, R. B., Lotufo, P. A., … & Suemoto, C. K. (2023). Association between consumption of ultraprocessed foods and cognitive decline. JAMA Neurology, 80(2), 142–150.
Crane, P. K., Walker, R., Hubbard, R. A., Li, G., Nathan, D. M., Zheng, H., … & Larson, E. B. (2013). Glucose levels and risk of dementia. New England Journal of Medicine, 369(6), 540–548.
Aune, D., Keum, N., Giovannucci, E., Fadnes, L. T., Boffetta, P., Greenwood, D. C., … & Norat, T. (2016). Whole grain consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and all cause and cause specific mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMJ, 353, i2716.
Rae, C., Digney, A. L., McEwan, S. R., & Bates, T. C. (2003). Oral creatine monohydrate supplementation improves brain performance: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 270(1529), 2147–2150.
Estruch, R., Ros, E., Salas-Salvado, J., Covas, M. I., Corella, D., Aros, F., … & Martinez-Gonzalez, M. A. (2018). Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet supplemented with extra-virgin olive oil or nuts. New England Journal of Medicine, 378(25), e34.
Machado, P. P., Steele, E. M., Levy, R. B., da Costa Louzada, M. L., Rangan, A., Woods, J., … & Monteiro, C. A. (2020). Ultra-processed food consumption and obesity in the Australian adult population. British Journal of Nutrition, 123(10), 1168–1176.
Morris, M. C., Tangney, C. C., Wang, Y., Sacks, F. M., Barnes, L. L., Bennett, D. A., & Aggarwal, N. T. (2015). MIND diet slows cognitive decline with aging. Alzheimer’s and Dementia, 11(9), 1015–1022.