I agree with Pixie, specifically on point #3. I'm not really into some of the negative and emotionally-charged comments I've seen on the forums in general lately. Getting upset and informing someone of their "complete lack of ignorance" [sic] is not progressing the conversation, nor is it informative for those of us stumbling upon a particular thread for the first time. A single person's experience does not translate to all those who utilize these forums and voicing an opinion respectfully and calmly certainly does no one harm. There are many ways to lose weight, get healthy, and -- most importantly! -- feel good.
Incidentally, I happen to be an archaeologist specializing in paleolithic arctic cultures and from that bias/perspective I would advise skepticism toward the so-called Paleo Diet/Primal Blueprint as it is "packaged". Before you jump all over me, all I mean by this is that these diets, as products, are not what they claim to be -- Grok (i.e. paleolithic humans) gained nourishment, sometimes incomplete, from an unbelievably wide variety of food sources and many of the macronutrient percentages given in the variations of this diet are not always what a "standard" (if there were such a thing) hunter-gatherer would consume. If I had to generalize, most paleolithic peoples partook in a seasonal round, a "migration" of sometimes extraordinary scale, in order to exploit resources available at different times of the year. This is especially true of arctic peoples, as seasonal resource availability so pronounced. The misconception that arctic peoples subsisted almost solely on animal fat and protein is partially based on the archaeological record, which is biased toward preservation of faunal (animal) remains rather than floral (plant-based). Historic accounts, while amazingly detailed, are also biased – simply put, Jesuit missionaries and intrepid explorers were looking for differences rather than similarities to their own cultures. Consumption of seal oil and five year old fermented fish heads would certainly turn up on their radar while marine grasses and berries would not!
In any case, the Inuit are an extreme example. As a general rule, "primitive" diets become more carbohydrate rich and nutritionally varied the closer you get to the equator. Paleo diet gurus (who often are hawking books and supplements in addition to the diet itself) would like us to believe there are some foods we can't or shouldn't eat, however paleolithic humankind in all its variation is proof positive that we are nothing if not adaptable. Furthermore, these diets, though they claim to be based on current research, are riddled with what I would consider "old school" anthropological thought (optimal foraging theory, for example). Anyway, just some "food" for thought (haha! I'll be here all night!). As 135 touched on, I'm certainly not saying that the Primal/Paleo type diet will not help you feel better, lose weight, or even become healthier (any diet can do that -- just ask a vegan), but the anthropologist in me feels compelled to point out that there's no "one way" we're supposed to eat, feel, or live.