When discussing the modern Paleo diet versus actual Paleolithic diets, a topic that also comes as part of the same discussion is that of ancestral diets. These are commonly defined as eating whole and unprocessed foods similar to those consumed by contemporary hunter-gatherer tribes. These are diets that contrast sharply with modern eating habits, which emphasise processed foods and refined sugars.
An organisation that is a key proponent of ancestral eating patterns is The Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF). This organisation promotes a nutrient dense, whole food focused diet based on the eating habits of traditional societies. While its philosophy is sometimes compared to the modern Paleo diet, it diverges in several key ways - particularly in its support for raw dairy, grains and legumes.
Research on hunter-gatherer diets supports some aspects of WAPF’s recommendations, however, some of their dietary advice also differs from the consensus of nutritional research and dietary health recommendations. This raises questions about whether these ancestral diets are truly ideal for modern health and longevity.
As ever, please talk to your doctor or medical practitioner most familiar with your medical history before implementing any changes in diet, exercise, or lifestyle, especially if you are under treatment. Links to relevant studies at the bottom of the page.
Where the WAPF Ancestral Diet and Paleolithic Diets Align and Differ
In a recent article we reviewed the Paleo diet in detail, comparing the modern marketed form with the Paleolithic diet (correctly... diets) that our ancient forebears consumed. Below we list some of the areas where the ancestral diet as espoused by WAPF and the Paleolithic archaeological studies match or differ.
Match: Whole, Unprocessed Foods
Both WAPF and hunter-gatherer research support minimally processed, nutrient-rich foods while avoiding modern processed and ultra-processed foods. Paleo and ancestral diets were - of course - whole food diets, though their exact composition varied widely across different populations.
Match: Diverse Macronutrient Ratios
Unlike the modern Paleo Diet, which often prescribes specific macronutrient ranges, WAPF acknowledges that traditional diets varied widely based on geography and food availability. This aligns with Daniel E. Lieberman’s 2023 study, which found no single macronutrient ratio defining pre-agricultural diets. Some hunter-gatherers relied heavily on animal foods, while others consumed mostly plant-based calories.
Match: Carbohydrates from Traditional Sources
WAPF recognises the importance of starchy plants, tubers and properly prepared grains and legumes. This view is supported by archaeological evidence, such as the Gesher Benot Ya’aqov study, which revealed that early humans processed and consumed starch-rich plant foods over 780,000 years ago. Lieberman’s research also indicates that hunter-gatherers regularly consumed honey and carbohydrate-dense plants, challenging the assumption that early human diets were inherently low in carbohydrates.
Match: Importance of Fermentation and Food Preparation
WAPF emphasises fermented foods, sprouting and soaking grains and legumes to improve digestibility. This approach aligns with historical dietary practices, as many pre-industrial cultures developed techniques to reduce anti-nutrients and enhance nutrient absorption.
While hunter-gatherers did not farm grains (but there is increasing evidence that they consumed them), evidence suggests that processing foods to improve digestibility - such as cooking, pounding and fermenting - was an essential part of human evolution.
Differ: Dairy Consumption
WAPF strongly promotes raw dairy, arguing that fermented and unprocessed milk products were a key part of traditional diets. However, research shows that many early human populations lacked lactase persistence, meaning dairy would not have been a major dietary component before agriculture. While genetic adaptations for dairy digestion emerged later, dairy consumption was not universal among early hunter-gatherers.
Differ: Grains and Legumes
WAPF supports properly prepared grains and legumes, whereas the Paleo Diet bans them entirely. Archaeological evidence suggests that legumes and wild grains were part of human diets long before agriculture but cultivated grains were not a staple food until farming developed.
Differ: Saturated Fat and Organ Meats
WAPF encourages a high intake of animal fats, organ meats and saturated fats, based on the belief that traditional diets contained these in abundance. However, research indicates that while animal foods were consumed whenever and wherever possible for survival, many hunter-gatherers also relied on plant-based proteins and fats. Some populations obtained the majority of their dietary fat and protein from plants, suggesting that fat intake varied significantly rather than being uniformly high.
Modern Lines of Nutritional and Dietary Evidence
Within the WAPF website are various sections detailing their stand on dietary specifics. While many are in keeping with standard dietary recommendations (primarily with a focus on whole foods) some contradict well established recommendations for healthy eating.
Saturated Fats and Seed Oils
WAPF strongly endorses high saturated fat intake, while mainstream science and recommendations advise limiting it due to well-established links to cardiovascular disease. The weight of evidence still supports replacing excess saturated fat with unsaturated fats for heart health.
WAPF website article "Saturated Fat Does a Body Good" (dated May 06th, 2016) WAPF's stance on saturated fats selectively frames biochemical evidence in their favour. While saturated fats play structural roles in the body, extrapolating fruit fly studies to human health is tenuous. The comparison to traditional diets (e.g., Pacific Islanders) also confounds causality, as their diets differ from Western diets in many other ways. The critique of polyunsaturated fats oversimplifies lipid oxidation, ignoring the protective benefits of omega-3 fatty acids.
WAPF also opposes industrial seed oils, claiming they cause chronic disease. However, nutritional science recognises that polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs), both omega-3 and omega-6, play critical roles in health. While refined seed oils undergo processing, the claim that they are inherently “not meant for human consumption” lacks scientific basis. The assertion that seed oils directly cause cancer, obesity and infertility is not supported by strong clinical evidence, as these conditions are multifactorial and influenced by diet (say, consuming ultra-processed foods), lifestyle and genetics. PUFAs, including those found in seed oils, are essential for health in balanced amounts. Learn more about seed oils and their role in health, here.
The claim that switching to animal fats improves mood and prevents addiction is also scientifically unsubstantiated. While dietary fats influence hormones and brain function, attributing mental health issues solely to seed oils oversimplifies complex neurological and dietary interactions.
Raw Milk
WAPF website article "Milk: It Does a Body Good?" (dated July 07th 2003). The article raises valid concerns about factory farming, antibiotic overuse and environmental impact but overstates the dangers of pasteurised milk while romanticising raw milk without sufficient evidence. While raw milk contains beneficial bacteria, it also carries significant risks of food-borne illness, including Listeria and E. coli, particularly for vulnerable groups such as infants (who face a real risk of death from food poisoning) and the elderly.
The claim that pasteurisation destroys milk’s nutrients is misleading. While some vitamin loss occurs, pasteurised milk remains a rich source of calcium, protein and essential vitamins. Additionally, the demonisation of homogenisation and ultra-pasteurisation lacks strong scientific backing, making WAPF’s position unbalanced and alarmist rather than evidence-based.
What does the evidence say when it comes to consuming raw milk? The study by Costard et al (2017) found that"Consumers of unpasteurized milk and cheese are a small proportion of the US population (3.2% and 1.6%, respectively), but compared with consumers of pasteurized dairy products, they are 838.8 times more likely to experience an illness and 45.1 times more likely to be hospitalized."
Soy
The WAPF website heavily criticises soy, but its claims are highly selective and often debatable. While concerns about phytoestrogens, anti-nutrients and unfermented soy’s impact on thyroid function have been widely studied, recent evidence offers little support for significant risks. For instance, isoflavones were once thought to disrupt hormones, fertility, and thyroid health but human studies now suggest these effects are overstated.
The claim that soy increases cancer risk remains controversial. While some animal studies suggest high doses of isoflavones might stimulate estrogen-sensitive tumours, human research - especially in Asian populations - show neutral or even protective effects. Similarly, soy’s influence on cognitive function and heart health is inconclusive, though many studies highlight benefits such as improved cholesterol levels and reduced inflammation.
Much of WAPF’s information is biased, selectively citing evidence while ignoring numerous peer-reviewed studies on soy’s benefits. A well-balanced diet that includes fermented soy products like natto, tempeh and miso is linked to cardiovascular health, stronger bones and relief from menopausal symptoms.
Below is a screenshot from the WAPF website "Soy Studies" page, showing the last 3 (the most recent) studies it presents demonstrating "STUDIES SHOWING ADVERSE EFFECTS OF SOY ISOFLAVONES"
"2020: High intake of soy and soy isoflavones increases the risk of prostate cancer. “During 16.9 years follow-up, we registered 221 deaths from prostate cancer. Isoflavones and soy products intake was associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer death.”
What the first study, Sawada et al, specifically said "Regarding the type of soy food, miso intake tended to show a positive association with prostate cancer mortality, but natto and tofu intake showed a null association."
The second study, Hatono et al (2021) does not fully support the WAPF claim that soy causes cancer but highlights equol’s (a metabolite of soy) dose-dependent effects. The study found that low concentrations may promote tumour growth in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer, while high, non-physiological doses show anti-tumor effects.
The final example states "2022: Worldwide collected data for over a decade show an increase in women diagnosed with breast cancer. A case report on the amount of isoflavone consumption and risk of breast cancer diagnosed in population indicates a strong correlation of isoflavone consumption and the risk of breast cancer."
The study itself, Boutas et al (2022), concludes the exact opposite: "The consumption of soy isoflavones can reduce the risk of breast cancer in pre-menopausal and post-menopausal women." (see image below)
A 2024 meta-analysis, Wang et al - including 52 studies on soy consumption and cancer risk - found that eating more soy products, especially tofu and soymilk, was linked to a lower overall cancer risk. A daily increase of 54g of soy products reduced cancer risk by 11%, while 61g of tofu lowered it by 12%, and 23g of soymilk by 28%. However, fermented soy foods like miso, natto and soy paste showed no clear link to cancer risk. More research is needed to confirm if soy directly lowers cancer risk.
Survival vs. Longevity
A key critique of WAPF’s dietary philosophy is that it romanticises traditional diets without fully addressing the distinction between survival and longevity. Many ancestral diets evolved to support short-term survival and reproductive success, ensuring that individuals reached reproductive age and could pass on their genes. However, these diets were not necessarily optimised for long-term health or chronic disease prevention, as most traditional populations did not live long enough to develop age-related illnesses like heart disease, cancer or neurodegenerative disorders.
Modern humans, in contrast, live significantly longer lifespans, largely due to advancements in medicine, sanitation and nutrition. While ancestral diets provided essential nutrients for immediate survival, they were not designed to prevent chronic diseases that develop over decades. For example, hunter-gatherers rarely experienced obesity or type 2 diabetes, but they also did not commonly reach ages where cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, or cognitive decline became significant concerns.
Additionally, some foods that may have been scarce or unnecessary in ancient diets - such as fibre rich whole grains or moderate amounts of omega-6-rich seed oils - may contribute to longevity in modern contexts. Epidemiological research on Blue Zone populations, where people routinely live past 90 to 100, suggests that moderate carbohydrate intake, plant-based fats and fermented dairy contribute to long-term health, even though these foods were not always staples of Paleolithic diets.
Ultimately, while ancestral diets provide valuable insights into metabolic health and nutrient density, they must be adapted to modern lifestyles, longer lifespans, and current scientific understanding of chronic disease prevention. A diet that ensured survival in pre-industrial societies is not necessarily the ideal blueprint for maximising healthspan in the 21st century.
Final Thoughts
There is much that WAPF and modern Paleo diet practices get right, particularly their focus on whole, unprocessed foods and nutrient density. However, WAPF’s romanticisation of ancestral diets and reliance on outdated research sometimes leads to scientific inaccuracies. The Paleo Diet, in its strictest form, may also oversimplify human dietary evolution by excluding foods that were, in fact, part of some ancient diets.
While ancestral eating can be informative, modern dietary recommendations must also consider contemporary health challenges and large-scale nutritional studies that both support and contradict aspects of WAPF and Paleo principles.
For most people, improving health is about finding motivation and prioritising self-care with an ultimate goal of taking action. If you want to take effective and targeted steps that fit into your unique lifestyle, The Whole Health Practice is here to help.
Whether your interest is healthspan and longevity, to beat chronic illness or to enhance your mental health and well-being, our consultations and programs deliver results that are tailored to your needs.
Our foundational Whole Health Consult identifies and prioritises the key factors - known and unknown - that affect health and wellbeing. It provides targeted recommendations tailored to you, the individual, and your unique lifestyle.
Stay Healthy,
Alastair
Join me, or scroll down to contact us and learn more about our services:
Achieve your Dietary and Health Goals
Your health, physical – mental – social - is complex and affected by multiple factors within and outside of your control. Our consults and programmes address the whole person, the root causes of ill health and maximising your health, performance & vitality.
Contact us to arrange an introductory call, to discuss how we can support your journey to health. We are based in Singapore and work with clients globally.
Consider a Whole Health Consult to assess, identify and prioritise key factors (known and unknown) that affect your health. And receive personalised recommendations on how to address them.
Want to put recommendations into action? Learn more about our programmes for individuals or teams.
Related Studies
Ahituv H, Henry AG, Melamed Y, Goren-Inbar N, Bakels C, Shumilovskikh L, Cabanes D, Stone JR, Rowe WF, Alperson-Afil N. Starch-rich plant foods 780,000 y ago: Evidence from Acheulian percussive stone tools. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Jan 21;122(3):e2418661121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2418661121. Epub 2025 Jan 6. Erratum in: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Mar 4;122(9):e2501154122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2501154122. PMID: 39761385; PMCID: PMC11760500.
Wang C, Ding K, Xie X, Zhou J, Liu P, Wang S, Fang T, Xu G, Tang C, Hong H. Soy Product Consumption and the Risk of Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Nutrients. 2024 Mar 28;16(7):986. doi: 10.3390/nu16070986. PMID: 38613019; PMCID: PMC11013307.
Lieberman DE, Worthington S, Schell LD, Parkent CM, Devinsky O, Carmody RN. Comparing measured dietary variation within and between tropical hunter-gatherer groups to the Paleo Diet. Am J Clin Nutr. 2023 Sep;118(3):549-560. doi: 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2023.06.013. Epub 2023 Jun 19. PMID: 37343704.
Ruffett A, Collard M. An assessment of the impact of cross-cultural variation in plant macronutrients on the recommendations of the Paleo Diet. Am J Clin Nutr. 2023 Apr;117(4):777-784. doi: 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2022.12.003. Epub 2022 Dec 22. PMID: 36828769.
Boutas I, Kontogeorgi A, Dimitrakakis C, Kalantaridou SN. Soy Isoflavones and Breast Cancer Risk: A Meta-analysis. In Vivo. 2022 Mar-Apr;36(2):556-562. doi: 10.21873/invivo.12737. PMID: 35241506; PMCID: PMC8931889.
Hatono M, Ikeda H, Suzuki Y, Kajiwara Y, Kawada K, Tsukioki T, Kochi M, Suzawa K, Iwamoto T, Yamamoto H, Shien T, Yamane M, Taira N, Doihara H, Toyooka S. Effect of isoflavones on breast cancer cell development and their impact on breast cancer treatments. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021 Jan;185(2):307-316. doi: 10.1007/s10549-020-05957-z. Epub 2020 Oct 9. PMID: 33034801.
Otun J, Sahebkar A, Östlundh L, Atkin SL, Sathyapalan T. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on the Effect of Soy on Thyroid Function. Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 8;9(1):3964. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-40647-x. PMID: 30850697; PMCID: PMC6408586.
Costard S, Espejo L, Groenendaal H, Zagmutt FJ. Outbreak-Related Disease Burden Associated with Consumption of Unpasteurized Cow's Milk and Cheese, United States, 2009-2014. Emerg Infect Dis. 2017 Jun;23(6):957-964. doi: 10.3201/eid2306.151603. PMID: 28518026; PMCID: PMC5443421.
Cordain L, Miller JB, Eaton SB, Mann N, Holt SH, Speth JD. Plant-animal subsistence ratios and macronutrient energy estimations in worldwide hunter-gatherer diets. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Mar;71(3):682-92. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/71.3.682. PMID: 10702160.