Paleo Diet Info

And I would! It’s advice I and others have been giving out for decades. Stupid me, I didn’t get rich by pretending the info was based on what cave men did. :eek:

Well, I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say it doesn’t matter ( :smiley: ) but at least the Paleo “life style” has generally OK info, but it’s also based on false premise, which gets problematic fast. Basic premise:

(a) our paleolithic ancestors ate X, so X is best for modern humans

(b) modern humans eat Y, so Y is bad for modern humans

And the rest of the advice essentially goes from that premise.

Both A and B are wrong both by archeological record and modern science. As a science type and nutrition writer, etc, that’s going to bother me and I can’t overlook the pseudo science involved.

That’s the thing, though, the average person has not done the research or even sought the advice of someone like you. They do what their equally-unqualified friends and acquaintances tell them to do, which is probably just as wrong as what they were doing before. I would argue that someone following the pseudoscience-feel-good-stuff that is marketed under “paleo” is still better than the terrible things they were doing before.

Hopefully, that step is just the first in a series of taking control over their health and doing more research of the real good stuff- no religious devotion required.

Peanuts are legumes and cavemen didn’t eat legumes they ate nuts. Almonds and walnuts are better because they’re nuts, not legumes, which cavemen didn’t eat.

That’s the kind of nonsense I’m talking about related to the paleo diet religion. I agree that eating generally ‘whole’ foods in moderation including fresh fruits and veggies and exercising regularly is healthy. I also agree that as a whole, the least of our problems as a society is whether people are eating a healthy paleo diet or a healthy modern diet.

Diet fads just annoy me and maybe it’s just a pet peeve. Atkins was terrible to deal with. Paleo isn’t as crazy, but it seems like I’ve met a lot of people who are all in with it. Especially the fitness & outdoorsy crowd.

I watched the vid, and the wrap up at the end, as you give in the “cliff note version” above, is what I thought “Paleo” was all along. I recently “went Paleo” in the last six weeks, after having read Cordains book, but that was after some soul searching for awhile.

Maybe I’m wrong, but the message that I got from his book was the same as the cliff notes wrap up, as well as what you wrote in the quotation marks, minus the beans and legumes. I interpreted The Paleo Diet as an attempt to eat as closely and as similarly we could in this modern world, i.e choosing wisely those whole foods found in supermarkets that in their modern forms come CLOSER to replicating what our paleo ancestors would have eaten. Clearly these people didn’t have domesticated cattle, and mostly ate wild game when they could, but in my modern interpretation I’m going to eat a nicely cooked medium rare steak, and it is NOT going to be with wild carrots, but with their modern counterparts.

I don’t really want to come across as a defender of the diet. I lived through my mothers and step fathers Atkins phase where they couldn’t differentiate between the carbs found in vegetables vs. a slice of Wonderbread. I wouldn’t want to put anyone through that dogma.

For myself who has struggled with weight my whole life the diet makes sense to me, largely through an evolutionary lens in that human beings ate “primally” for a far longer time than through agriculture, and perhaps our bodies haven’t caught up and adapted to the circumstance, that those of us living in the modern world are rarely ever too far away from a source of food, unfortunately most of the latter being processed. I combined this with reading from another diet called The Body Code by Jay Cooper, which really has more to do with body typology, i.e. somatotyping, but also gets “new agy” with Indian Ayurvedic Energy typing. I think that there is value to the latter, but I could see how people would be turned off by the new age interpretations. Still even from that book I took away that this was a method in that we all don’t have the same body structure, so the same dietary guidelines won’t work for all of us, but it was not an end all be all answer to solve all your dietary ills.

Now some of you may have had the “privilege” of dealing with Paleo disciples. I don’t think I’m one of them, whatever they may be. Like I said earlier, I thought Cordains book was more of a modern spin on an attempt to eat as closely as we can to our paleo relatives, but clearly with a modern spin, as I stated previously.

I hope this response doesn’t count as a level 4 butt hurt emergency.:stuck_out_tongue:

Best,

Dave

You’ve got to love all these supposed “science based” woo-woo trends. People don’t understand evolution, so they make a fad diet off of their poor understanding. For example, look at how quickly many humans evolved to develop lactose tolerance – it was a matter of a few thousand years.

Same thing happens with Quantum Mechanics all the time. People get these crazy ideas into their heads and you get charlatans like Deepak Chopra trying to get people to believe that all of our consciousness are “one” or some such nonsense.

I am no expert on nutrition but I just try to eat less processed things in general. Peanuts? Yes, but ones that are maybe lightly roasted and not heavily salted or coated in sugary yogurt or chocolate.

Foods that are closer to the natural state one would find them in nature. Raw fruits and veggies as much as possible.

Swapped sugar for agave nectar in my coffee and to sweeten my oatmeal. Better than processed sugar or Equal.

Stay away from fast foods, heavily salted or fried foods as well.

A bunch of smaller steps, along with exercise and lifting and it seems to be helping. I don’t gain weight and my digestive system seems to be more calm as well.

Tend to stay away from those “no cabs” or “no gluten” type diets as well as the South Beach or Atkins stuff. A piece of whole grain bread now and then won’t kill you or make you porky! Ditto for some pasta now and then. LOL

I think moderation and thinking about what you eat works better than any of these fad diets.

-brickboy240

Not picking on you, but I would love someone to explain this to me, how one type of sugar is better than another.

I understand it has the word ‘nectar’ in it, which sounds good, and agave is a plant, so that must be good, but after that I’m lost.

I think the food industry is doing a pretty good job of getting people to focus on buzz words instead of simple macro balance in terms of nutrition.

True enough. Agave Nector is latest greatest “natural” sugar substitute, and it’s just mostly fructose:

"[i]The bottom line is that refined agave sweeteners are not inherently healthier than sugar, honey, high-fructose corn syrup, or any other sweetener. Nutritionally and functionally, agave syrup is similar to high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose (Karo) syrup. It does contain small amounts of calcium, potassium, and magnesium, but not enough to matter nutritionally.

Agave nectar or syrup is as high as 90% concentrated fructose (a simple sugar that occurs naturally in fruit), and the rest glucose. But the agave you can buy ranges from 90% to as little as 55% fructose (similar to high-fructose corn syrup), depending on the processing, says Roger Clemens, professor at the University of Southern California and a spokesman for the Institute of Food Technologists[/i]."

http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/the-truth-about-agave

If one is looking for a true non caloric “natural” sweetener, Stevia is probably your best bet, but can impart an odd after taste some don’t mind and some dislike.

According to sellers of Agave yes. According to the actual science, not so much. As you said, moderation is key, and a little agave in your coffee - assuming it’s accounted for as cals and carbs - is unlikely to be an issue, but all refined sources of sugar (including honey, agave, etc) are best limited as source of cals.

You’re probably right on this one.

The agave nectar seems more sweet than processed granular sugar…so I know I definitely use less of it. That is probably a good thing. It is also less “processed” than granular sugar and lacks the chemicals of Equal or the other synthetic sweeteners. They say it is lower on the glycemic index as well.

That stevia stuff is just too bitter and has a nasty after taste. It reminds me of the old pink stuff…Sweet-n-Low. Yuck.

Still…you are right…moderation even in using agave nectar is the key to it all. A little drop pr two on my morning oatmeal and in one cup of coffee and I am good for the day.

-brickboy240

All good, just don’t get caught up in any of the nonsense about “special” properties of Agave nectar compared to any other source of sugar out there.

It (fructose) is sweeter than regular sugar, which is sucrose. You can use less and get the same sweetness compared with liquid sugar, so that may be a benefit for you.

I am not involved in agave nectar at all, but from what I understand, they don’t squeeze the pulp to get the nectar, they make it from the starch ala HFCS, so it’s really no more natural than HFCS.

Quick sugar tangent:
Incidentally, HFCS is blended the way it is (55% fructose) to mimic the sweetness of liquid sugar. At one time, the cost of HFCS was a fraction of sugar, which is a main reason it became so popular. Now they’re about the same, which is why companies like Pepsi have ad campaigns praising themselves for switching back.

Sucrose = Fructose + glucose
HFCS = Fructose + glucose

See the difference? Your body doesn’t either.

Yes well, when ever you develop an market around a factor, the real information usually get missing in the mix up somewhere unfortunately. the phrase “Paleo Diet” is promotion rubbish at the end of the day.

This thread is rather timely for me as these days my biggest goal is to lose weight and get in shape in order to enlist. I am aware that the kitchen is my final frontier in that battle. I’ve been aware of paleo but have simplified it a bit—I am just trying to avoid foods with refined sugar or flour in them while trying to get more protein from meat, fish, and eggs. Been trying to eat more veggies too and fruit.

Hence simply a decent nutrition plan that really has nothing to do with how your paleolithic ancestors ate, nor FYI, does so called “paleo” diet…

Pretty much. I am just trying not to be a fatass. Also, I try to PT/run hard.

Furthermore, HFCS is combined the way it is (55% fructose) to imitate the sweet taste of fluid glucose. At once, the price of HFCS was a portion of glucose, which is a primary purpose it became so well-known. Now they’re about the same, which is why organizations like Coke have ad strategies enjoying themselves for changing returning.

Holy shit. I’ve finally found my less coherent and accurate twin.

Is this a new kind of spam?

Since the Paleo Diet is about replicating what our paleolithic ancestors ate, who is going to be the first to incorporate carrion into their daily diet? The overwhelming consensus among anthropologists; as opposed to people with a Phd in Exercise Physiology, who stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night and like to play anthropologist is that it was a major component of the human diet at that time.

It seems that our ancestors would eat whatever they could get their hands on.

Right. The Paleo diet as pushed on people today simply falls apart on real inspection by those who really study such things, which is why I posted link to a good vid by such a person. Very few people eat organ meats, suck the marrow out of bones, eat carrion, etc, etc.

Hence, modern “paleo” is simply recommendations for a decent diet and has very little in common with actual dietary intakes of paleolithic ancestors.