There's something inherently both amusing and annoying about hucksters and gurus speaking with authority on subjects they clearly know little about. But, this is the way with paleo-dieters in general, with all their appeals to evolution:
Is Fruit Meant For Man?
Now, it's true that most of the fruits we eat today are hybrids; but so are most of the animals. Does this health motivator and longevity strategist seriously think that even grass-fed cows existed before the invention of agriculture? Or that paleo-humans took herbal supplements, drank colostrum and brewed fungal-extract tea?
I wonder if he eats bugs. There's darn good evidence that our earliest hominid ancestors ate lots of bugs. Termites in particular. If hominids have an "ancestral" diet at all, it's frugivory and insectivory. And while there are a few paleo-gurus who hint at the benefits of bug-eating, most won't come anywhere near it. They are absurdly and tellingly fixated on big game.
I think maybe we should launch a satirical campaign about the benefits of bug-eating. We should encourage poor people to forage their homes and neighborhoods for beetles, roaches, flies, spiders, grasshoppers, etc., on a daily basis. Calorie-for-calorie, they pack a bigger protein and EFA punch than an equivalent amount of even lean beef or venison.
How many fawning sycophants do you think a body could attract with such a message?