Paleo Diet??
Options
Replies
-
Paleo is awesome. It's based on what is good for your body and what your body is capable of processing. Lean meats, vegetables, and good healthy fats (i.e. avocados, eggs, etc).
The average human is capable of processing grains, beans, and other legumes just fine. These are staple foods in most of the healthiest populations in the world. And they are packed with vital nutrients.0 -
Paleo is awesome. It's based on what is good for your body and what your body is capable of processing. Lean meats, vegetables, and good healthy fats (i.e. avocados, eggs, etc).
I am not anti paleo at all--I think it works for lots of people and plenty of the things I do overlap with those that people who are paleo do. However, it's simply not true that it's based on what your body is capable of processing. My body is perfectly capable of processing beans, grains, and dairy (and sugar too). In fact, I think I'm generally eating better when eat dairy and beans on a regular basis.0 -
"The only diet that works is Calories in < Calories Out"
Yeah.... um.... this is outdated thought. Your biochemistry determines how well your body will burn or store calories. If you have leptin resistance, as 1.5 billion people do, then it's possible to gain weight on just 500 calories. The key is to identify your own biochemistry/hormone imbalances and adjust your diet based on that. For example, I have insulin resistance as a result of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, and eating a low carb diet is best for me. Though I workout regularly, my body does not do well with carbohydrates. The carb to protein ratio that works for me might cause kidney damage in an ultramarathoner, even if we consumed the same total caloric intake. I also eat a lot of fat, and my body does well with it.
One size does not fit all. That's the moral of my blurb.
Feel free to add me as a friend.0 -
OP, why do a specific diet? Why not just modify how you eat to lower the calories or add in foods to make it more balanced and nutritious overall.
I don't see the point of doing some named diet. Losing weight and eating in a healthy manner is so much simpler and more flexible.0 -
MelonFlower wrote: »"The only diet that works is Calories in < Calories Out"
Yeah.... um.... this is outdated thought. Your biochemistry determines how well your body will burn or store calories. If you have leptin resistance, as 1.5 billion people do, then it's possible to gain weight on just 500 calories. The key is to identify your own biochemistry/hormone imbalances and adjust your diet based on that. For example, I have insulin resistance as a result of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, and eating a low carb diet is best for me. Though I workout regularly, my body does not do well with carbohydrates. The carb to protein ratio that works for me might cause kidney damage in an ultramarathoner, even if we consumed the same total caloric intake. I also eat a lot of fat, and my body does well with it.
One size does not fit all. That's the moral of my blurb.
Feel free to add me as a friend.
All the things you mention change the calories out side of the equation. You still have to adjust to create a deficit to lose weight0 -
MelonFlower wrote: »"The only diet that works is Calories in < Calories Out"
Yeah.... um.... this is outdated thought. Your biochemistry determines how well your body will burn or store calories. If you have leptin resistance, as 1.5 billion people do, then it's possible to gain weight on just 500 calories. The key is to identify your own biochemistry/hormone imbalances and adjust your diet based on that. For example, I have insulin resistance as a result of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, and eating a low carb diet is best for me. Though I workout regularly, my body does not do well with carbohydrates. The carb to protein ratio that works for me might cause kidney damage in an ultramarathoner, even if we consumed the same total caloric intake. I also eat a lot of fat, and my body does well with it.
One size does not fit all. That's the moral of my blurb.
Feel free to add me as a friend.
Yeah, no its not. You can not defy physics. If you are gaining, you are not in a deficit. Increasing your calories would just cause more weight gain.
Unless you are saying you have found a new scientific break through in the field of physics. If so, what university will be sponsoring your research?
Oh and 500 cals is NOT enough for ANY human.0 -
freqzinbigd wrote: »I've been paleoish for 4 years.
Paleo is 'what' you eat, not necessarily how much.
Most paleo types will trade some carb calories for fat calories. Some will claim paleo is low carb-- it's not necessarily, although it can be done that way. It is almost always moderate carb; I get about 200g of carbs per day but I'm a big, active guy. Less than 150 and my performance at the gym suffers and more than 250 or so and I get grumpy and tired.
A lot of paleos eat more protein than they need.
I personally find it really hard to eat at maintenance level (3600 calories per day) or above and get 50% or more of my calories from fat. Heck, a lot of days I have a hard time getting 2800 calories...
Paleoish??
You either are or you aren't following Paleo.
OP paleo is a diet (not a weightloss plan but a what you eat kind of diet)
If you consume 1200 calories (which is probably too low for you) you will lose weight.
Just like any diet though if you eat too many calories you will gain weight.
It is a restrictive diet to follow - as they cut out a lot of foods.
The only diet that works is Calories in < Calories Out
How you get there is up to you. Find a "diet" that you will stick with. Be it Paloe, Keto, Moderation, vegan/vegetarian. Doesn't matter you just need CICO
How long have you been Paleo?
I cycle in and out of things that aren't paelo based on my goals and reading. Sometimes I'm eating dairy. Often I'm eating white rice. Both things that aren't technically paleo.
No refined flour, processed food, cleanest meat I can find, etc.
So, yeah, paleoish.
I'd recommend any one who is interested try it for 30 days or so and see for themselves. Even track it here on MFP so you can make sure you're no overdoing it if you like. What's the worst that can happen? You spend a month without bread and actually eat some fruit and veggies? If the CICO guys are right and calories are the only thing that matters then Paleo shouldn't make any difference one way or the other and there is nothing to lose.0 -
MelonFlower wrote: »If you have leptin resistance, as 1.5 billion people do, then it's possible to gain weight on just 500 calories.
Do you have a citation for this rather remarkable claim?
0 -
MelonFlower wrote: »If you have leptin resistance, as 1.5 billion people do, then it's possible to gain weight on just 500 calories.
This is complete horse****.
There isn't a human alive that gains fat on 500 calories. There is no medical condition that can cause it, and there can be no medical condition that can cause it.
The standard concentration camp diet during WW2 was 600-800 calories a day. About 20 million people went through that experience - not a single one came out fatter than they went in.0 -
I really like paleo in that it promotes clean eating by cutting cutting out processed foods. I think that's something everyone can benefit from.
Some of the details like avoiding beans and rice...are goofy in my opinion. Also...almonds are ok but peanuts aren't? This is goofy.0 -
trianglevision wrote: »I really like paleo in that it promotes clean eating by cutting cutting out processed foods. I think that's something everyone can benefit from.
Some of the details like avoiding beans and rice...are goofy in my opinion. Also...almonds are ok but peanuts aren't? This is goofy.
Unless you grow your own food and slaughter your own meat, all of your food it "processed".0 -
trianglevision wrote: »I really like paleo in that it promotes clean eating by cutting cutting out processed foods.
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I know of a business where I am that sells paleo packaged meals, and plenty of people sell packaged treats and convenience items aimed at the paleo market these days. Some of these are even nice options that I'm glad exist.
I do like the fact that paleo has a name that's kind of funny but far less obnoxious than calling yourself a "clean" eater, as if food you didn't eat were somehow "unclean."
Would it kill people to use words that actually convey what they mean in a clear and understandable way rather than some term ("clean") that means something to them and something entirely different to someone else and which is based entirely on a desire to insult others?0 -
trianglevision wrote: »I really like paleo in that it promotes clean eating by cutting cutting out processed foods. I think that's something everyone can benefit from.
Some of the details like avoiding beans and rice...are goofy in my opinion. Also...almonds are ok but peanuts aren't? This is goofy.
Unless you grow your own food and slaughter your own meat, all of your food it "processed".
No need to be obtuse.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »MelonFlower wrote: »If you have leptin resistance, as 1.5 billion people do, then it's possible to gain weight on just 500 calories.
Do you have a citation for this rather remarkable claim?
That does sound rather high. Are there that many people with insulin resistance?0 -
freqzinbigd wrote: »trianglevision wrote: »I really like paleo in that it promotes clean eating by cutting cutting out processed foods. I think that's something everyone can benefit from.
Some of the details like avoiding beans and rice...are goofy in my opinion. Also...almonds are ok but peanuts aren't? This is goofy.
Unless you grow your own food and slaughter your own meat, all of your food it "processed".
No need to be obtuse.
Am I still being obtuse?0 -
trianglevision wrote: »I really like paleo in that it promotes clean eating by cutting cutting out processed foods. I think that's something everyone can benefit from.
Some of the details like avoiding beans and rice...are goofy in my opinion. Also...almonds are ok but peanuts aren't? This is goofy.
My opinion is that it is goofy, too, but almonds vs peanuts == tree nuts vs legumes (and legumes are not accepted on paleo). At least those are demonstrably different food types and they're not coming up with some totally arbitrary new classification.
0 -
I'm doing paleo and am type 1 diabetic. Since starting 10 days ago i have had to lower my insulin pump settings and I do not have to take insulin with my meals. My calorie intake is 1500 consisting of less than 50gm of carbs per day. I eat so much more healthy and have no cravings......yet. I have lost 8 lbs and feel so much better without pastas and sugar.0
-
hollyaeckley wrote: »I'm doing paleo and am type 1 diabetic. Since starting 10 days ago i have had to lower my insulin pump settings and I do not have to take insulin with my meals. My calorie intake is 1500 consisting of less than 50gm of carbs per day. I eat so much more healthy and have no cravings......yet. I have lost 8 lbs and feel so much better without pastas and sugar.
All in 10 days?0 -
I apologize because this will probably turn into a novel of a post:
I studied livestock nutrition in college, so I had to take a lot of metabolic nutrition, including some human nutrition. My take on the Paleo diet is basically: It's a great way to force people to cut out foods that are easy to overeat. You would probably feel pretty sick if you sat down and ate 800 calories of beef in one sitting, but it's very easy to eat, say, that much in chips, breads, etc.
The notion that we need to cut out dairy, legumes, wheat, etc, I think is narrowing someone's diet a bit too much. IF you have an intolerance to these foods, it's easy - don't eat them! My sister is VERY lactose intolerant so she doesn't eat any dairy. I don't have any problems digesting it, so I do. A close friend has Celiacs and obviously can't touch gluten, but she is not the norm. Most people who say they "feel better" from cutting gluten are more likely just noticing the differences between a diet heavy in foods that are easy to overeat and feel bloated on, vs one that isn't, as well as eating more nutritionally dense foods.
It's not about carbs in particular either, since some people who eat Paleo have very high carb diets via potatoes and other starchy foods.
I'm a big believer in portion control, and that you can eat pretty much anything you want within reason and common sense. Common sense says a slice of toast with breakfast is better than a donut for breakfast, but if you want a donut with your breakfast, eat it...and then adjust the rest of your day accordingly. And know that "serving suggestions" for most meals are not really good serving sizes for everything! I think this gets people. Just because a serving is 8oz of something doesn't mean you need to eat 8oz of it at once. I find this is especially true in almost anything you buy at a restaurant, whether it be fast food or sit down. Everyone's caloric needs are different based on their lifestyle and there is no such thing as a "one size fits all" deal. I notice this with cheese. Most cheese has a "1oz serving suggestion" but when I grab some cheese to snack on I usually end up only eating 0.5 oz or even less.
If we want to get more specific, the idea that legumes are "toxic" to humans which is a big deal in Paleo irks me because it oversimplifies things. Some legumes, especially kidney beans, are toxic if not cooked properly. If you prepare them correctly, they are fine to eat and are a great source of protein and fiber. There are some chemical properties of legumes that are "toxic" but the amounts you would need to eat in order to have a physiological affect in your body are so high it's basically impossible for anyone to get to. Reminds me of the aspartame cancer fears - in order to get a risk of cancer from aspartame in soda you'd need to drink something like 20-30 liters of soda A DAY. You would be sick/dead from plenty of other health issues before you had to worry about aspartame consuming that much! Haha.
A big premise of Paleo is thanks to modern agriculture we aren't eating what we used to/should eat, that it isn't natural human food. I agree with this to an extent - most people don't eat a variety of fruits and veggies, and it's always good to have variety in your diet, and when people switch to Paleo they naturally just tend to get a more variety of fruits/veggies. And as far as dairy goes, the gene for lactose tolerance appeared at two different times in human history in two different cultures - it wasn't a fluke, at some point our ancestors started using animals for dairy products and stuck with it, and the fact is the nutritional benefits from dairy (protein, good fats including CLAs which are slowly proving to be effective against heart disease, calcium, etc) are hard to beat assuming you can digest it. Again, if something makes you sick or uncomfortable, cut it out of your diet.
I guess this a long way of saying I think the Paleo diet has good advice in it (eat whole foods, make good choices, stay active, eat a variety of foods, try eating more fish than the average American, etc), but as a whole is too restrictive for my tastes and tends to spook people with claims of what is "natural" and "unnatural" and "healthy" vs "toxic."0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 988 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions