Paleo Foods
- Thread starter guerilla
- Start date
a good intro:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM]Sugar: The Bitter Truth - YouTube[/ame]
a great follow-up (you'll need to find the full video somewhere...)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTUspjZG-wc]Why We Get Fat - Gary Taubes at OSUMC - YouTube[/ame]
get smart: The Psychology, Biology and Politics of Food — Open Yale Courses
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM]Sugar: The Bitter Truth - YouTube[/ame]
a great follow-up (you'll need to find the full video somewhere...)
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTUspjZG-wc]Why We Get Fat - Gary Taubes at OSUMC - YouTube[/ame]
get smart: The Psychology, Biology and Politics of Food — Open Yale Courses
Oils..
Evidence that all oils are bad for you- period.
I was eating a ton of red meat and egg whites along with low carbs, and voila, minor coronary disease started creeping in (and I'm an endurance cyclist and avid cardio freak), so along with a visit to the doc, I started to do my due diligence on cholesterol and diet.
One thing is hard to argue: The one country or region with virtually zero heart disease is a region of China which in essence abstains from meat, all dairy and wheat based foods. Essentially, a plant based diet.
Bears taking a look at it people.. Boring, yes. Healthy? Hell yes.
Evidence that all oils are bad for you- period.
I was eating a ton of red meat and egg whites along with low carbs, and voila, minor coronary disease started creeping in (and I'm an endurance cyclist and avid cardio freak), so along with a visit to the doc, I started to do my due diligence on cholesterol and diet.
One thing is hard to argue: The one country or region with virtually zero heart disease is a region of China which in essence abstains from meat, all dairy and wheat based foods. Essentially, a plant based diet.
Bears taking a look at it people.. Boring, yes. Healthy? Hell yes.
Been doing the slow carb diet ever since the fat loss challenge here in December -
40+ lb. lost.
~~ Typical day ~~
Breakfast: eggs, turkey sausage, black beans
Snack: Beef jerky
Lunch: chili
Dinner: spaghetti squash + tomato & meat sauce (amazing)
Helpful wife = great success
40+ lb. lost.
~~ Typical day ~~
Breakfast: eggs, turkey sausage, black beans
Snack: Beef jerky
Lunch: chili
Dinner: spaghetti squash + tomato & meat sauce (amazing)
Helpful wife = great success
Esselstyn was in a recent documentary called Forks Over Knives which I agree with half of and hate the other half because its flat out wrong. Also dude, realize that Dr. Esselstyn's "20 year study" involved initially 24 people, 6 of which dropped out early on, one of which died due to non-study related causes. So a study of 18 people over 20 years where the only thing that was controlled was their diet, which was self-reported. He calls it "irrefutable" but a class in basic statistics would prove that a retarded statement.
His partner in crime is Dr. Campbell who wrote the book featured in that documentary called the China Study, a 24 year old once-vegan rips that books to shreds here:
The China Study « Raw Food SOS: Troubleshooting on the Raw Food Diet
One interesting thing to note was that Campbell excluded one county that consumed 45% of their food from animals, and they had one of the lowest incidences of heart disease, lower than many of the more vegan counties he studied.
Also, Dr. Cordain ( a prominent paleolithic diet promoter ) debated Campbell (author of China Study ) and IMO, absolutely crushed him. Cordain used over 150 references to peer-reviewed scientific papers in his arguement and rebuttals to Dr. Campbell's book, and Dr. Campbell used...zero. His arguement is something like "From my philosophy of nutrition -> this follows" which is essentially like a religious person saying that "faith is different"
Not disagreeing with you here: plants are important. But eating no meat whatsoever has been proven time and time again to be a generally terrible way to provide your body with appropriate nutrition.
cholesterol
Understood. I'm not talking overall diets or well being in general, I'm talking heart health.
Fact: Meat (all meat) has a shit ton more cholesterol than plants (yes plants have cholesterol/sterols)
Fact: Cholesterol proportions put all of us at more risk for coronary artery disease (the #1 killer people).
Fact: I fucking LOVE meat. I just love living LONGER more.
I occasionally eat a steak (1-2 times a year), no burgers, white meat etc. Fish a few times a week even though fish has cholesterol too..albeit low amounts.
Now I'm done.
Understood. I'm not talking overall diets or well being in general, I'm talking heart health.
Fact: Meat (all meat) has a shit ton more cholesterol than plants (yes plants have cholesterol/sterols)
Fact: Cholesterol proportions put all of us at more risk for coronary artery disease (the #1 killer people).
Fact: I fucking LOVE meat. I just love living LONGER more.
I occasionally eat a steak (1-2 times a year), no burgers, white meat etc. Fish a few times a week even though fish has cholesterol too..albeit low amounts.
Now I'm done.
Do anyone of you paleo people combine intermittent fasting? I usually alternate between eating 1 and 2 meals every day (1 meal today, 2 tomorrow, repeat). I was surprised how much more energy this gave me (kinda counter-intuitive), as well as rarely feeling hungry, and therefore uncomfortable.
Most of the research (that I've read at least) points to it being long-term healthy, but I mainly just do it for the immediate benefits.
Most of the research (that I've read at least) points to it being long-term healthy, but I mainly just do it for the immediate benefits.
yea affiliate army not trying to derail or do anything crazy, I just fucking love nutrition and health so I can go off for a while on it.
The whole point that I was trying to make was that Ancel Keys' hypothesis (which is false) is that lots of fat -> higher cholestrol -> more heart disease and heart attacks. Which is not true. The "Bad" cholestrol comes in two sizes - only the smaller one is the problem.
These small LDL cholesterols get stuck in the arteries as a response to inflammation - its job is to repair and mitigate inflammation in the tissues. The reason inflammation happens in the tissues is caused by carbohydrates. Sugars and processed carbs are the biggest problems. LDL rises not because of increased cholesterol intake, but with the levels of inflammation in your body caused by these carbohydrates. Remove the cause for inflammation, you remove the need for cholesterol to DO its job so often and therefore there are less chances for it to actually build plaque in your arteries.
I'm done too!
The whole point that I was trying to make was that Ancel Keys' hypothesis (which is false) is that lots of fat -> higher cholestrol -> more heart disease and heart attacks. Which is not true. The "Bad" cholestrol comes in two sizes - only the smaller one is the problem.
These small LDL cholesterols get stuck in the arteries as a response to inflammation - its job is to repair and mitigate inflammation in the tissues. The reason inflammation happens in the tissues is caused by carbohydrates. Sugars and processed carbs are the biggest problems. LDL rises not because of increased cholesterol intake, but with the levels of inflammation in your body caused by these carbohydrates. Remove the cause for inflammation, you remove the need for cholesterol to DO its job so often and therefore there are less chances for it to actually build plaque in your arteries.
I'm done too!
Was your meat grass fed, organic? Were your eggs organic/pasture raised? If not, the "red meat" you were eating is not really red meat -- it's some mutant freak meat from unhealthy cows. You can't get healthy eating sick animals. Eating cholesterol is not bad for you as phoenix said -- bad cholesterol is usually raised from other sources than actually eating it.
Also, endurance cycling and being a "cardio freak" are not as healthy as you think they are. Look up oxidative stress.
Pretty sure that it's not carbohydrates in general that cause this inflammation, rather the source of the carbohydrates - though I could be wrong -- I guess eating ANYTHING is going to generate glucose/insulin which (I think?) would cause low level inflammation.
But what would really cause a TON of systemic inflammation would be endurance exercises, which affiliatearmy says he does.
It's funny how many fucking misconceptions there are about what's really good for you.
Finally - one thing is for certain like g1c9 was saying before - nutrition is HIGHLY individualized. There are definitely basic guidelines to follow, however, if you're really looking to be top 90% health wise, you need to figure out exactly what works for you (metabolic typing and all that). Unfortunately, it's almost impossible to prove most food claims (i.e. that veganism is really bad for you, that paleo is really good for you, etc.) because it (at least it seems like) is basically impossible to run a study on peoples food habits, because there are SO many other variables that could get in the way and skew the data. Though I guess that hasn't stopped stupid fuck douchebag fake scientists like Ancel Keys from spreading their infoz.
oh and props to the dude who brought up weston price. weston price foundation is fucking legit.
How exactly do you do an elimination diet if you have feel good and don't have any health problems?
Well, depends. What do you eat regularly? I also am very skeptical of anyone that doesn't really know much about health (not saying that's you, just in general), that tells me that they "feel good" and are "healthy". Because they usually aren't even close to it, and their definition of "feeling good" is more like "feeling average". I don't think people really have a feel for how you should feel, physically and mentally, as a healthy person. Granted, all of that is pretty hard to measure and whatnot, but whatever.
To me, the first step would be cutting out grains/gluten, dairy, and processed foods for 30 days. And then see how you feel. After the 30 days are over, I'd wait one more week, and then try to introduce grains slowly back into your diet. The point isn't to actually get them back in your diet (personally, I don't think there is a single person on this planet who can truly eat gluten without any issues, as the "grains" we eat today are not really grains), but to see how they make you feel.
For me, I stopped eating grains for 30 days to see what was up - because I didn't feel like grains were causing me any issues. When I tried to eat them again on day 35 or so, I would get headaches, my stomach would be insanely bloated, and I would feel like shit for the rest of the day - symptoms that I didn't have before. My theory on why this happened is that I had fucked up my system so bad that I couldn't really feel the damage it was doing. When I took it out and my system had time to actually repair, when I reintroduced it it was like "what the FUCK is this shit" and went haywire.
Anyway, I think that's a good place to start.
To me, the first step would be cutting out grains/gluten, dairy, and processed foods for 30 days. And then see how you feel. After the 30 days are over, I'd wait one more week, and then try to introduce grains slowly back into your diet. The point isn't to actually get them back in your diet (personally, I don't think there is a single person on this planet who can truly eat gluten without any issues, as the "grains" we eat today are not really grains), but to see how they make you feel.
For me, I stopped eating grains for 30 days to see what was up - because I didn't feel like grains were causing me any issues. When I tried to eat them again on day 35 or so, I would get headaches, my stomach would be insanely bloated, and I would feel like shit for the rest of the day - symptoms that I didn't have before. My theory on why this happened is that I had fucked up my system so bad that I couldn't really feel the damage it was doing. When I took it out and my system had time to actually repair, when I reintroduced it it was like "what the FUCK is this shit" and went haywire.
Anyway, I think that's a good place to start.
These experiments are interesting but are you 100% sure that your conclusions are accurate?
[FACT] You eliminated grains for 30 days.
[FACT] You started eating grans again on day 35.
[FACT] You didn't feel good after eating grains.
[YOUR CONCLUSION] Grains are bad for you.
To explain why your conclusion might be (I'm not saying it is) inaccurate, I'll refer to cardio for a moment. In my opinion, cardio is great (for example, 30 minutes of moderate cardio per day) for you but excessive cardio (a marathon, for example) isn't.
Do you agree that for most people, 30 minutes of moderate cardio per day = healthy?
I'm pretty sure most of you guys agree, so I'll try to illustrate why your "good or bad for me?" algorithm might be flawed.
Let's assume that 30 minutes of moderate cardio used to be a daily habit. And let's assume that, just like you did with grains, you try to eliminate the 30 minutes of moderate cardio from your daily routine for x days/months. After x days/months, you start jogging again for 30 minutes and obviously don't feel great afterward (something that tends to happen if you eliminate cardio from your daily routine and start over after x days/months).
[FACT] 30 minutes of moderate cardio used to be a daily habit.
[FACT] You eliminated the 30 minutes of moderate cardio from your daily routine for x days/months.
[FACT] After x days/months, you started jogging again and didn't feel good afterward.
[YOUR CONCLUSION] 30 minutes of moderate cardio per day = bad for you
Do you agree that the "30 minutes of moderate cardio per day = bad for you" conclusion is inaccurate?
Ultimately it's impossible to come to any conclusion with 100% certainty. The human body is WAY too fucking complex to do that. However, when I say it made me feel bad, I mean it made me feel bad IMMEDIATELY after eating it.
So the conclusion that I drew was that I have an issue with grains. I think that is a fair statement. I don't know how else I could make that determination other than how the food made me feel. It wasn't like I added in a new medication or something during that time, you know?
My conclusion that grains are bad for "you" (if you mean "you" as in everyone), was drawn not just from my own personal experience, but through a lot of research, talking to experts, books, seeing other people's experience, etc.
Again like I said in my previous post, unfortunately we can't really come to definitive (ABSOLUTE, 100%) conclusions on what is "good" and "bad" for you, but based on what I have seen and what I know I am pretty confident that most people can't tolerate, and shouldn't eat grains, (or processed foods, or pasteurized dairy for that matter).
And why the fuck would anyone want to put shit chemicals in their body anyway? You literally are what you eat. Why anyone would put something in their body that has chemically manufactured ingredients in it is beyond me.
It's really funny to think about, actually. Just fucking shoving some shit down your throat without even knowing what it is you're eating. Not the best thing for your health.
Also, I don't think the cardio --> food comparison is fair. Your body adapts to the cardiovascular activity so that it can run (you're forcing that change) more efficiently. Your body doesn't adapt to gluten and build up a tolerance to it. It just gets raped by it.
I shouldn't keep posting here but I'll note 3 things:
1. People do in fact develop a tolerance to their intolerances when consuming them regularly, and get better at digesting them.
2. Many nutritionists would agree that Variation is the most important food group in the human diet.
3. While it's totally up to them how careful they want to be, intolerances are not allergies. For the vast majority of people, they don't feel shitty because they forgot to wipe the bread crumbs off a cutting board, they feel shitty because they ate a butterfinger earlier.
Elimination diets are not perfect. They are, however, pretty much as close as we can get to controlled experiments in a home setting.
It's actually weird how intimately an elimination diet will let you get to know your body. Measurable and predictable effects happen like clockwork after consuming offensive foods. After a month or three, there are absolutely no guess-and-check or second tries needed at all.
I always decide to respond to a post and then forget the question but can't check it because I'm on a phone lol
1. People do in fact develop a tolerance to their intolerances when consuming them regularly, and get better at digesting them.
2. Many nutritionists would agree that Variation is the most important food group in the human diet.
3. While it's totally up to them how careful they want to be, intolerances are not allergies. For the vast majority of people, they don't feel shitty because they forgot to wipe the bread crumbs off a cutting board, they feel shitty because they ate a butterfinger earlier.
Elimination diets are not perfect. They are, however, pretty much as close as we can get to controlled experiments in a home setting.
It's actually weird how intimately an elimination diet will let you get to know your body. Measurable and predictable effects happen like clockwork after consuming offensive foods. After a month or three, there are absolutely no guess-and-check or second tries needed at all.
I always decide to respond to a post and then forget the question but can't check it because I'm on a phone lol
On the other hand though, there are several studies which indicate that grains might be good for you.
One of these studies (conducted by the National Institutes of Health and AARP) included ~388,000 adults who had to fill out out a questionnaire in 1995-1996 about their eating habits (they were asked to estimate how often they ate 124 food items).
According to Dr. Yikyung Park (National Cancer Institute), the people who ate the highest amount of fiber were 22% less likely to die from any cause compared to those who ate the lowest amount. And that's not all, the strongest overall benefits are associated with diets high in fiber from grains.
Trying to figure out what's good for you and what isn't is pretty frustrating because there's a lot of contradictory (or at the very least seemingly contradictory) information out there. That's why (in my opinion) making decisions such as eliminating grains from your diet altogether is risky unless we're talking about overwhelming evidence.
I've always been passionate about nutrition/healthy lifestyles and based on my research/experience, there are a few fundamental guidelines that everyone needs to keep in mind such as:
1) the less processed food you eat, the better
2) if you can buy meat from farmers who don't use hormones and shit, buy meat from farmers who don't use hormones and shit
3) if you can buy fruits and vegetables from people who don't use shitloads of chemicals, buy fruits and vegetables from people who don't use shitloads of chemicals
4) moderate physical activity on a regular basis = good for you
5) excessive physical activity = bad for you
6) pay attention to what you DRINK as well
7) don't forget about sleep
... and so on.
If you keep these guidelines in mind and act accordingly, I'm pretty sure that you can consider yourself a member of the "I'm not ignorant when it comes to health-related aspects" crowd and the long-term results will make everything worth it.
As far as drastic decisions such as eliminating grains altogether are concerned, I'd recommend thinking twice before implementing such changes unless we're talking about overwhelming evidence. For example, pretty much everyone agrees that smoking is bad for you but the same thing can't be said about the "are grains bad for you?" question because there are compelling arguments both for and against eliminating them from your diet.
For me, I basically try to eat things that humans have touched or modified the least amount as possible.
Also, I recently started drinking almond milk and love it, especially when I make my fruit smoothies, anyone else drink it?
Also, I recently started drinking almond milk and love it, especially when I make my fruit smoothies, anyone else drink it?