Ad Widget

Collapse

Give me a good reason.

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Give me a good reason.

    I guess this qualifies as trolling. I'm a hunter gatherer, and I'm browsing around my favorite grocery store: the wild. Give me a good reason not to collect wild grains and legumes. Give me a good reason not to locate a source of natural sugar. Give me a good reason not to dig up tubers. Give me a good reason not to eat birds and boar.

    Predicted response: "All those things are totally fine, except the grains and legumes. We shouldn't eat those because they have antinutrients."

    I wonder why all those things are fine, considering eating starch raises insulin, wild birds betray the magical o3-o6 ratio, and sugar is clearly toxic.

    See if you can spot the double standard anywhere.
    Last edited by Timthetaco; 04-14-2013, 01:40 PM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Cierra
    Keep in mind, though, that when modern humans consume grains, legumes, high o6 nuts and seeds, and sugars, it would be exponentially more than what their ancestors could've ever dreamed of gathering in one day!
    I agree, but few in this community apply that same standard to meat consumption.

    Comment


    • #3
      Optimal foraging theory.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
        "All those things are totally fine, except the grains and legumes.
        I'd say eat legumes and grains, but that would probably be just me.

        Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
        I wonder why all those things are fine, considering eating starch raises insulin
        So does protein.

        Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
        wild birds betray the magical o3-o6 ratio
        not really - just enjoy the meat

        Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
        sugar is clearly toxic
        That's debatable.
        Last edited by Darz; 04-14-2013, 02:28 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Unsure about you, but I'd avoid them because they cause me severe pain.

          I agree some people process some grains or legumes quite well but, if I were a HG and I had ate some whole grains or legumes (bar spelt, rice and green legumes), they would make me feel so unwell I wouldn't touch them again. So I wouldn't eat them.

          Snacking on wild or traditional strains of grain and legume probably wouldn't be an issue, just bear in mind our bodies haven't really ever eaten them in such vast quantities, so side-effects may result. (Shouldn't every processed food have that on its label? )
          --
          Perfection is entirely individual. Any philosophy or pursuit that encourages individuality has merit in that it frees people. Any that encourages shackles only has merit in that it shows you how wrong and desperate the human mind can get in its pursuit of truth.

          --
          I get blunter and more narcissistic by the day.
          I'd apologize, but...

          Comment


          • #6
            I think it's time for Paleo to be more honest about Neolithic foods and many of their nutritional BENEFITS. Time to stop forming conclusions by association and using process of elimination to manage symptoms instead of treating underlying problems and their root causes. Fruit, white rice, potatoes, and beans aren't why so many developed countries are having chronic diseases of "civilization." I've said it before and I'll say it again: If Americans actually ate by the standards of the food pyramid, we'd probably be much, much healthier. Americans, if they do follow these guidelines, eat the bastardized versions of the foods recommended, e.g., "whole grain" Eggo waffles, nonfat CAFO yogurts, soybean oil salad dressings, rancid peanut butter, HFCS wheat breads, etc.

            I think the poison is in the dosage (plus, the preparation and source) and also the individual tolerance threshold, not to mention the current state of one's health. If your digestive system is in a state of disarray from reasons that are unrelated to certain foods, but certain foods still aggravate the problem, then you have to fix the underlying problems and not blame the foods that just happen to make a bad situation worse. e.g., hot sauce aggravates your GERD, but are hot peppers the cause of it? Not always. One of my personal pet peeves is the way "Paleo" tends to group all grains into the evil gluten camp when gluten grains only represent a few grains, but then it tries to create a new label and call some grains "safe starches." Silliness. What's safe and delicious to one person might be pure poison to another. I say eat what benefits your health and eat what you enjoy; your personal formula will meet both of those criteria. It's time to stop vilifying certain foods and focus on what's actually beneficial without only focusing on the negatives. I think if we look at the negatives of meats, vegetables, nuts, seeds, AND their sources of origin (molds, distance, bacteria, length of time in storage or shipping vessels, unknown human contact, artificial light exposure) we'd find just as much to avoid, if not more in some cases! I'd eat rice and beans over CAFO bacon any day.
            Last edited by j3nn; 04-14-2013, 03:12 PM.
            | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

            “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

            Comment


            • #7
              PS: And don't forget that Paleo/Primal isn't about "imitating" Grok as much as learning from him. Some of his habits may have been less healthy, or he may have been unable to adopt certain healthy behaviours. We learn from our bodies, our ancestry, modern tribes and science. Not from any single one of those sources but from ALL of them.
              --
              Perfection is entirely individual. Any philosophy or pursuit that encourages individuality has merit in that it frees people. Any that encourages shackles only has merit in that it shows you how wrong and desperate the human mind can get in its pursuit of truth.

              --
              I get blunter and more narcissistic by the day.
              I'd apologize, but...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
                Give me a good reason not to collect wild grains and legumes.
                No reason except that the time and effort would be better spent going after something that is more nutrient dense. If this were not available, sure Grok's version of red beans and rice would do. Yes, there are anti-nutrients, but that is better than going hungry. We are adaptable.

                Give me a good reason not to locate a source of natural sugar.
                Oh, hell yeah. The African bushmen love their wild honey. The thing is you would have to risk getting stung by the bees while smoking them out, then share the honeycomb out for the whole tribe and this wouldn't happen every day. An example of a paleolithic "sensible indulgence".

                Give me a good reason not to dig up tubers.
                As far as nutrient density, these would probably be the first thing sought out in the absence of meat. (I dug up what they called "bush potatoes" with the bushmen ladies)

                Give me a good reason not to eat birds and boar.
                None. The O3/O6 thing is only problematic if you are eating CAFO meat and industrial seed oils thereby taking in too much O6.

                Refined sugar, all the time, in excessive quantities is toxic. That is not the same thing as a bit of honey now and then. There is no double standard.[/QUOTE]

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                  I think it's time for Paleo to be more honest about Neolithic foods and many of their nutritional BENEFITS. Time to stop forming conclusions by association and using process of elimination to manage symptoms instead of treating underlying problems and their root causes. Fruit, white rice, potatoes, and beans aren't why so many developed countries are having chronic diseases of "civilization." I've said it before and I'll say it again: If Americans actually ate by the standards of the food pyramid, we'd probably be much, much healthier. Americans, if they do follow these guidelines, eat the bastardized versions of the foods recommended, e.g., "whole grain" Eggo waffles, nonfat CAFO yogurts, soybean oil salad dressings, rancid peanut butter, HFCS wheat breads, etc.

                  I think the poison is in the dosage (plus, the preparation and source) and also the individual tolerance threshold, not to mention the current state of one's health. If your digestive system is in a state of disarray from reasons that are unrelated to certain foods, but certain foods still aggravate the problem, then you have to fix the underlying problems and not blame the foods that just happen to make a bad situation worse. e.g., hot sauce aggravates your GERD, but are hot peppers the cause of it? Not always. One of my personal pet peeves is the way "Paleo" tends to group all grains into the evil gluten camp when gluten grains only represent a few grains, but then it tries to create a new label and call some grains "safe starches." Silliness. What's safe and delicious to one person might be pure poison to another. I say eat what benefits your health and eat what you enjoy; your personal formula will meet both of those criteria. It's time to stop vilifying certain foods and focus on what's actually beneficial without only focusing on the negatives. I think if we look at the negatives of meats, vegetables, nuts, seeds, AND their sources of origin (molds, distance, bacteria, length of time in storage or shipping vessels, unknown human contact, artificial light exposure) we'd find just as much to avoid, if not more in some cases! I'd eat rice and beans over CAFO bacon any day.
                  Certainly the food pyramid would be better than SAD. Almost anything would be. The problem is that the food pyramid doesn't provide enough protein and fat to keep people satisfied so they continue eating non-stop.

                  Long term caloric reduction requires that a person be fully satiated with their meal and be fully nutrient replete. For many people this is Impossible on SAD, possible on CW diet, highly likely on a paleo type diet.
                  Using low lectin/nightshade free primal to control autoimmune arthritis. (And lost 50 lbs along the way )

                  http://www.krispin.com/lectin.html

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
                    I guess this qualifies as trolling. I'm a hunter gatherer, and I'm browsing around my favorite grocery store: the wild. Give me a good reason not to collect wild grains and legumes. Give me a good reason not to locate a source of natural sugar. Give me a good reason not to dig up tubers. Give me a good reason not to eat birds and boar.
                    Go ahead and gather all the wild grains and legumes you can find in the wild. Make sure you gather as many as you need to satisfy and nourish you and your tribe. Now prepare them so they're edible.

                    I don't think natural grains and legumes are that toxic in the quantities you'd eat by gathering them in the wild. Its excess, modern, over-processed grains that are the problem. If everyone had to work for their food as hard as you hypothesize, nobody would have the chance to get fat.
                    Sandra
                    *My obligatory intro

                    There are no cheat days. There are days when you eat primal and days you don't. As soon as you label a day a cheat day, you're on a diet. Don't be on a diet. ~~ Fernaldo

                    DAINTY CAN KISS MY PRIMAL BACKSIDE. ~~ Crabcakes

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The last three posts were succinct and common-sensible. I agree, one does what they can with what they've got available to them. If the best choice in terms of nutrition isn't available the next best is chosen and so on. Like it or not, some choices are better than others relative to the personal circumstances of the hunter-gatherer of yore or of today's shopper. What bothers me about some of those who post here who seem to identify themselves as "non-primal" are the quick-draw accusations of "obsessiveness" against the folks who scrutinize carefully what they eat and how they prioritize foods. To prioritize is to rank.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
                        I guess this qualifies as trolling. I'm a hunter gatherer, and I'm browsing around my favorite grocery store: the wild. Give me a good reason not to collect wild grains and legumes.
                        I can't speak for legumes but grains are vastly different today than during Grok's time. All of today's wheat is genetically modified to the point where it's detrimental for humans to consume it. Dr William Davis lays it out in detail in http://youtube.com/watch?v=UbBURnqYVzw of the movie Wheat Belly. I really recommend you watch it to get a thorough answer to your grain question.
                        Last edited by ilovesteak; 04-14-2013, 07:12 PM.
                        "It's true, you are a good woman. Then again, you may be the antichrist."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jammies View Post
                          Certainly the food pyramid would be better than SAD. Almost anything would be. The problem is that the food pyramid doesn't provide enough protein and fat to keep people satisfied so they continue eating non-stop.
                          Why do you think the food pyramid doesn't recommend enough fat and protein? It might be plenty for many people, not everyone needs a lot (arbitrary numbers) of fat and protein to achieve optimal health. Besides, how do we know that to be true when most Americans aren't really following the food pyramid recommendations? I just checked the "My Plate" and it recommended 6 teaspoons of added oil per day on 2200 cals; 2 TBSP of additional fat is actually a lot. Then there's the naturally occurring sources in other foods. If you make a mock food template of the (crappy) recommendations, it's not necessarily a low-fat, low-protein diet. It just seems that way on the surface from all of the fat-free and low-fat keywords it promotes.

                          (BTW, I don't think the food pyramid is good or that the government should give any nutritional advice, but for argument's sake, I think the majority of people eating whole foods of any kind would be a great improvement.)

                          When people go on reduced calorie diets, it's generally the low calories coupled with the loss of nutrients that create the unsustainable diet. My argument is that if people actually ate the whole foods version of the food pyramid, society would be much healthier, but not necessarily healthiest. The problem is most Americans do not follow the food pyramid with whole foods, but rather the cheap, processed, nutrient-void versions of things that sort of resemble what the actual food recommendations are. I don't think the food pyramid recommendations are optimal, but I do believe if followed properly they are better than high-processed SAD.

                          Long term caloric reduction requires that a person be fully satiated with their meal and be fully nutrient replete. For many people this is Impossible on SAD, possible on CW diet, highly likely on a paleo type diet.
                          Satiety is crucial for any type of eating plan to be successful, yes. But I think many people can be quite satisfied on a whole foods diet even following the food pyramid. Low-cal diets suck in general, so you would have to really optimize your small allotment to stayed satisfied. It's when you get into the fat-free cookie, baked potato chips, chicken breast, egg whites, and diet soda territory that things go wrong. If more people actually ate a couple of poached eggs with a slice of toast with real butter and a piece of fruit for breakfast, they'd probably feel good and satisfied. A bowl of instant chemically blueberry flavored oats with a 24 oz nonfat latte doesn't translate the same way.
                          | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                          “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I keep a very simple rule.

                            If it can be eaten raw, it's food.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                              I think it's time for Paleo to be more honest about Neolithic foods and many of their nutritional BENEFITS. Time to stop forming conclusions by association and using process of elimination to manage symptoms instead of treating underlying problems and their root causes. Fruit, white rice, potatoes, and beans aren't why so many developed countries are having chronic diseases of "civilization." I've said it before and I'll say it again: If Americans actually ate by the standards of the food pyramid, we'd probably be much, much healthier. Americans, if they do follow these guidelines, eat the bastardized versions of the foods recommended, e.g., "whole grain" Eggo waffles, nonfat CAFO yogurts, soybean oil salad dressings, rancid peanut butter, HFCS wheat breads, etc.

                              I think the poison is in the dosage (plus, the preparation and source) and also the individual tolerance threshold, not to mention the current state of one's health. If your digestive system is in a state of disarray from reasons that are unrelated to certain foods, but certain foods still aggravate the problem, then you have to fix the underlying problems and not blame the foods that just happen to make a bad situation worse. e.g., hot sauce aggravates your GERD, but are hot peppers the cause of it? Not always. One of my personal pet peeves is the way "Paleo" tends to group all grains into the evil gluten camp when gluten grains only represent a few grains, but then it tries to create a new label and call some grains "safe starches." Silliness. What's safe and delicious to one person might be pure poison to another. I say eat what benefits your health and eat what you enjoy; your personal formula will meet both of those criteria. It's time to stop vilifying certain foods and focus on what's actually beneficial without only focusing on the negatives. I think if we look at the negatives of meats, vegetables, nuts, seeds, AND their sources of origin (molds, distance, bacteria, length of time in storage or shipping vessels, unknown human contact, artificial light exposure) we'd find just as much to avoid, if not more in some cases! I'd eat rice and beans over CAFO bacon any day.
                              TRUTH! Thank you! Thank you! I have not been on this forum in a long ass time and, well, this is a great way to dive in again! You nailed it! May I quote you in a blog post? This is so damn true. Many people are "saved" from Paleo but many MORE people end up WORSE. It's true. It's my honest observation. We all need to be honest with ourselves.

                              Grains, legumes and dairy are NOT evil. ALL plant foods have toxins. Every single one. There are millions of people who eat all food groups who are in great health. Most Americans that are really sick still eat pure junk food. And a lot of it. All the damn time. Like daily. For meals. A dude on the bus the other day had 2 MASSIVE bags of cheetos. I am sure he slammed those down with soda pop. The cereal isle is NOT getting smaller at the grocery stores I have been to recently. Neither is the chip isle. Have the sales of McDonalds been decreasing or increasing? What about other fast food restaurants? Grass-fed beef sales are on the rise no doubt but what about fake meat made out of soy?

                              The problem is not grains, legumes or dairy. It simply is not. It's the massive quantity that we eat these foods in and how we eat them.

                              Some folks are going to hate me for saying this but I am no longer going to keep what is on my mind a secret. I think it needs to be discussed. I absolutely love eating Paleo food and hanging out with folks who eat this way because it's hard to find folks that care about their health who actually understand that meat is healthy, saturated fat is not the devil, etc. But grains are not inherently evil. Nuts, for many folks, may be way worse!
                              Find me at aToadontheRoad.com. Cheers!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X