Happy Friday!
Re: the primal/evolutionary/paleolithic/caveman/etc diets: I think they are of value at the minimum simply because they point out that in the last few decades (and -- in the bigger picture -- centuries) food is now readily available that our bodies are not well-adapted to digest. And that we are much more sedentary in general.
I relate to many of the ideas of these diets. What I like about them: emphasis on fruits & veggies, healthy fats and moving around more in general (that's something I am trying to do more - not just "exercising" 1 hour/day and sitting on my butt for the rest of it). But like tkm said, that is all basic sound nutritional advice.
The carbohydrate curve is something to consider. Since I went back to South Beach principles, my carbohydrate levels have been between 70 and ~150 g of carbs (before, was usually >200). According to him, 50-100 g is the "weight loss sweet spot." I'm going to start looking at this more closely.
What I don't like about these diets: for sure I am not giving up beans! And tofu. And I doubt I'd ever give up grains completely.
It made me laugh that the primal diet guy says it's OK to eat tomatoes in cans. I agree that it's OK!! But not very caveman-like
Anyway - based on many considerations, I am strongly reconsidering the role of grains in my life. I love them but maybe they don't love me so much. My newly acquired huge belly seems to deflate when I don't eat as many processed carbs. Maybe oats and quinoa will stay in but whole wheat bread will be out

? Lots of fiddling to be done in this area!
For the last few days I've been eating well (since I started South Beach on Sunday). No more late-night grazing, I'm happy to report. My weight is down to 145.8, which is *only* 2 pounds ABOVE where it was before the holidays
Have a great weekend, Feathers. Be strong if you end up at any SuperBowl parties!