paleo diet
Replies
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »75poundstogo wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jasperdog52554 wrote: »7. My biggest lesson- I don't have to be fanatical. I spent a lot of time and money the first time buying ingredients to make ketchup and homemade mayo. While maybe not awesome for you, store bought mayo will not kill me. Unless someone calls the paleo policeAlso, that just tends to make things tastier, which can lead to me overeating (there's a real pattern here)
Good luck! @kazzykazz If you try it let us know how it goes
Re: #7
I think this is good advice but it is advice to veer from the Paleo Diet rules, which are pretty fanatical and strict.
For me, I did paleo on and off for about 3 years. I definitely saw some great results (periodic weight loss, energy boost, better digestion) but couldn't keep it up. For me, it wasn't just willpower to stay on the diet that was hard, it was psychologically punishing/oppressive/isolating.
I think its very difficult for humans to completely rule out a food group - unless for medical reasons (recommended by the doctor or a legit harmful addiction). Not only will you start to obsess about the food you cannot absolutely EVER eat...its also psychologically damaging because you often have to turn away meals from friends/family, holiday meals, going out.
When you are eating in moderation and portions you can at least partake (if you want to). If you want to follow paleo 100%, the off limit food are 100% a no go.
Some Paleo people even preach that even the slightest cheat (a drop of milk, or slice of bread) will ruin your results and ruin your gut health...The strict paleo community will say the 80% / 20% rule is **kitten**
Do I think Paleo is bad - absolutely not. Did it work for me? I can say after 3 years of trying, many books bought, many attempts to live the lifestyle - no, it did not work for me.
It doesn't matter much to me what strangers eat, but I do think the Paleo Diet is bad. I think any person, diet, book, blog, etc. that preaches that legumes are unhealthy is bad. There is zero science to back it up.
But that's just my opinion. Everyone should feel free to eat what they want.
Yea, I tend to agree. I don't know that I would say "bad" as I do think that a healthy diet can be obtained without legumes. I think "Pointless" would the word I would use to describe it. It just makes hitting macros and micros a bit harder without any real reason.
This is how I see it. I think it can provide a structure that is helpful for some, but there are much better structures to choose, IMO (ones that include legumes).0 -
Whitezombiegirl wrote: »In general cavemen were stronger, taller, more muscular and better built with less tooth decay than modern man- and had larger brains (our brains are shrinking btw). Some genetic evidence points to less mental illness too. The average lifespan was shorter due to factors such as no antibiotics, no modern health care etc. and higher rates of infant mortality bring the average down.
I think the case can be made for learning lessons from paleo-nutrition.
Except there is no such thing as "paleo nutrition". If we had to add food pickiness to our low birth rates we wouldn't have lasted long. Human species throughout history ate what was available dictated by area, season and luck, including a mostly meat diet, a mostly plant diet, a low carb diet, an extremely high carb diet, no-no "paleo" foods such as grains and legumes, or a good mix of several macro balances and eating schedules depending on season and opportunity. Just like today, modern humans have always had a versatile and adaptable omnivorous diet, and I guarantee they wouldn't have said no to pizza if it was available.
I'm also curious why focus on the paleo era? Go back a few thousand years and you will have humans eating mostly plants and bugs, go forward a few thousand years and you will have humans planting crops. Even the paleo era itself spanned millions of years so even in the same area with roughly similar resources, food and food preparation would have been different. Why go far? What we eat now is not the exact same thing we ate 100 years ago, let alone throughout thousands or millions of years.
Add the fact that we are currently biologically different, so what worked back then may not work now, not to mention how heavily our food has been modified, both by humans and by natural evolution. This diet is a whole lot of romanticizing and not a whole lot of real stock.
I would rather go for what benefits humans today: a good variety of nutrient rich foods in amounts that keep us at a healthy weight, and an active lifestyle, and then leave the rest to genetics. It's just that some people feel they need to slap a label on it to make it sound attractive and then invent some nonsense "don't" rules to set it apart from conventional nutrition advice.8 -
geneticsteacher wrote: »Whitezombiegirl wrote: »In general cavemen were stronger, taller, more muscular and better built with less tooth decay than modern man- and had larger brains (our brains are shrinking btw). Some genetic evidence points to less mental illness too. The average lifespan was shorter due to factors such as no antibiotics, no modern health care etc. and higher rates of infant mortality bring the average down.
I think the case can be made for learning lessons from paleo-nutrition.
Taller? References please.
I was taught at uni that they were taller, but only because farming hadn't been invented yet! Once we became farmers it was more of an advantage to be close to the ground for easier bending, so we got smaller. How is being tall a good thing or a bad thing, anyway? It has advantages and disadvantages.
They were only stronger because of the work they had to do, not their diet. Your average weightlifter today is probably far stronger than a caveman. They had less tooth decay because they didn't have much sugar in their diet - Limited fruit. I eat a lot of sugar, but have perfect teeth because I look after them. Also, a large brain means absolutely nothing. A whale has a huge brain compared to a human, but we're far more intelligent (or at the very least, AS intelligent). It's all about how many connections the brain has. Our brains are shrinking because they are becoming more efficient. Nothing to do with our diets.
I'm not saying paleo can't be healthy. I'm saying cavemen were not healthier than us, and I'm saying that non-paleo certainly is not unhealthy. Comparing us to our ancestors at all is just a bit silly. Eat paleo if you want. Don't if you don't want. Find a way of eating that works for you, OP!2 -
I have done paleo but I found that I really missed some full fat dairy (cheese), although I do find I lose better without it. I now consider myself primal. I eat a low carb version of it.geneticsteacher wrote: »Whitezombiegirl wrote: »In general cavemen were stronger, taller, more muscular and better built with less tooth decay than modern man- and had larger brains (our brains are shrinking btw). Some genetic evidence points to less mental illness too. The average lifespan was shorter due to factors such as no antibiotics, no modern health care etc. and higher rates of infant mortality bring the average down.
I think the case can be made for learning lessons from paleo-nutrition.
Taller? References please.
If you look into that for first nations and native Americans, there are many accounts of their unusual height (to European standards). They've since ...shrunk.
I think I've seen than man was taller before the agricultural revolution too but I can't remember the source for that.0 -
Hmmm, can't find much myself, except that average male Neanderthal was 5'6".1
-
I have done paleo but I found that I really missed some full fat dairy (cheese), although I do find I lose better without it. I now consider myself primal. I eat a low carb version of it.geneticsteacher wrote: »Whitezombiegirl wrote: »In general cavemen were stronger, taller, more muscular and better built with less tooth decay than modern man- and had larger brains (our brains are shrinking btw). Some genetic evidence points to less mental illness too. The average lifespan was shorter due to factors such as no antibiotics, no modern health care etc. and higher rates of infant mortality bring the average down.
I think the case can be made for learning lessons from paleo-nutrition.
Taller? References please.
If you look into that for first nations and native Americans, there are many accounts of their unusual height (to European standards). They've since ...shrunk.
I think I've seen than man was taller before the agricultural revolution too but I can't remember the source for that.
It's true. I do remember seeing something about that. They weren't much taller than the current average though. Apparently humans started to shrink mid paleolithic, reaching the shortest around neolithic then growing back, shrinking back, then growing again in the last century.
I'm not sure how accurate these findings would be, though, given than the sample size of human fossils is kind of limited. If some thousands of years in the future scientists find fossils of current humans and these samples happen to be mostly from Asian countries, they would estimate the average height of a male to be around 160 cm or something, but if they happen to be mostly from Scandinavian countries, they'd estimate the average to be around 180 cm or more (higher than the current estimate for a paleolithic human male which is around the average of an American male).
Edit: found it.
0 -
Whitezombiegirl wrote: »In general cavemen were stronger, taller, more muscular and better built with less tooth decay than modern man- and had larger brains (our brains are shrinking btw). Some genetic evidence points to less mental illness too. The average lifespan was shorter due to factors such as no antibiotics, no modern health care etc. and higher rates of infant mortality bring the average down.
I think the case can be made for learning lessons from paleo-nutrition.
Lol...do you actually think the paleo diet really resembles the actual diet of the paleolithic time? That's hilarious...3 -
As to the original q, I'll tell you what works for me in the hope it helps. I suppose different results are always achieved based on one's normal weight and/or weight struggle, age & sex, health condition, activity level & normal diet.
For me there are 2 diets.
A weight loss diet, which I've only needed once after an unexpectedly long recovery time following foot surgery, in which I ate whatever anyone brought me (pizza & fried chicken) or what I was capable of making myself (lots of peanut butter toast). I had 20-lbs to lose once recovered & lost it all in 10-wks on the Dukan Diet, an Atkins-ish/paleo-ish diet, with no exercise cuz I was still fairly immobile with foot pain. Basically, unlimited protein & non-starchy vegs... no carbs or fruit or processed food, no alcohol. I would not want to live on that weight loss portion of the DD forever & the nice part is it transitions into a sustainable lifestyle, adding fruit, carbs & dessert each day with 1 strict protein-only day/wk.
(Note: I'm having to do it again now after another long surgery recovery & the only modification I'll make it adding in 1 piece of fruit/day & taking vitamins, since I was rundown after 10-wks of no fruit... the bulk of my usual diet).
After weight loss, I think where most have the problem is they return to pre-diet eating, meaning, whatever made them gain weight in the first place is now the bulk of their diet again.
The 2nd diet is what one can enjoy long term & for me, that's coincidentally the final Dukan Diet stage... protein, a lot of fruit, any veggie & healthy carbs (for me, potatoes & bread... I can live without rice, pasta & cereal-ish foods & always have). You're allowed to eat anything, but I find it easy to remain stricter as I'm a fresh-only, fairly simple eater... I don't need fatty dressings & treats & giant plates of rice dishes with 50 ingredients & gooey stuff. I can live with a nice cut of steak, a couple servings of mashed potatoes & a big salad for many dinners & feel satisfied.
I know you asked about paleo & wasn't sure if you were beginning for weight loss purposes, but I consider those restrictive, high protein diets to be fairly similar with small differences. Remaining on them & being very strict is easy for a few months to lose weight... after that, opening up the menu to enjoy a large variety of fresh produce for me, is the key to sustaining weight & health.
So, yes, I find them easy to follow & of them all, I just find DD to be easier & more straight forward. Good luck.2 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »75poundstogo wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »jasperdog52554 wrote: »7. My biggest lesson- I don't have to be fanatical. I spent a lot of time and money the first time buying ingredients to make ketchup and homemade mayo. While maybe not awesome for you, store bought mayo will not kill me. Unless someone calls the paleo policeAlso, that just tends to make things tastier, which can lead to me overeating (there's a real pattern here)
Good luck! @kazzykazz If you try it let us know how it goes
Re: #7
I think this is good advice but it is advice to veer from the Paleo Diet rules, which are pretty fanatical and strict.
For me, I did paleo on and off for about 3 years. I definitely saw some great results (periodic weight loss, energy boost, better digestion) but couldn't keep it up. For me, it wasn't just willpower to stay on the diet that was hard, it was psychologically punishing/oppressive/isolating.
I think its very difficult for humans to completely rule out a food group - unless for medical reasons (recommended by the doctor or a legit harmful addiction). Not only will you start to obsess about the food you cannot absolutely EVER eat...its also psychologically damaging because you often have to turn away meals from friends/family, holiday meals, going out.
When you are eating in moderation and portions you can at least partake (if you want to). If you want to follow paleo 100%, the off limit food are 100% a no go.
Some Paleo people even preach that even the slightest cheat (a drop of milk, or slice of bread) will ruin your results and ruin your gut health...The strict paleo community will say the 80% / 20% rule is **kitten**
Do I think Paleo is bad - absolutely not. Did it work for me? I can say after 3 years of trying, many books bought, many attempts to live the lifestyle - no, it did not work for me.
It doesn't matter much to me what strangers eat, but I do think the Paleo Diet is bad. I think any person, diet, book, blog, etc. that preaches that legumes are unhealthy is bad. There is zero science to back it up.
But that's just my opinion. Everyone should feel free to eat what they want.
Yea, I tend to agree. I don't know that I would say "bad" as I do think that a healthy diet can be obtained without legumes. I think "Pointless" would the word I would use to describe it. It just makes hitting macros and micros a bit harder without any real reason.
I think a healthy diet can be obtained without legumes too. But I still think it's reckless, inappropriate, unhelpful, and just plain wrong to say legumes are unhealthy. Therefore, it gets a bad label from me. Bad, bad, bad, baddity, bad! I fart in it's general direction!
Paleo definitely lost credibility with me with the "legumes are bad" stance.
Any Paleo fans have links to the rationale behind this?0 -
I think that legumes are not included in the paleo because "cavemen" did not cook beans, maybe??? Not because they are bad. Please don't ask for references; I am just making a possible supposition. There is some "good" in every diet that includes "real" foods.0
-
No, they are supposed to be bad, because of "toxic anti-nutrients like lectin and phytic acid."
Here's Chris Kresser arguing against the paleo dogma saying they are bad and trying to redefine the diet: https://chriskresser.com/are-legumes-paleo/
Here's Loren Cordain (one of the main people responsible for the paleo diet and it's popularity) arguing against legumes: http://thepaleodiet.com/beans-and-legumes-are-they-paleo/
Note: I am not agreeing with this position, obviously -- I think legumes are healthy. But since the question came up.0 -
Pattycake755 wrote: »I think that legumes are not included in the paleo because "cavemen" did not cook beans, maybe??? Not because they are bad. Please don't ask for references; I am just making a possible supposition. There is some "good" in every diet that includes "real" foods.
Thanks for the info on Paleo dogma, but legumes were supposedly "not eaten by cavemen" is one of the reason legumes are not in the Paleo diet. Plus there are different forms of the diet. Some people include beans. Some forms of the diet exclude some fruit, and I think all fruit is healthy.
This directly contradicts Paleo dogma on legumes, which holds that we should strictly avoid them because 1) they aren’t part of our ancestral diet, and 2) they contain toxic anti-nutrients like lectin and phytic acid.
https://chriskresser.com/are-legumes-paleo/
Although, I was just making a supposition and was not really asking a question, this part of my statement was true. I still think there is some good in every diet, including Paleo.0 -
Pattycake755 wrote: »Pattycake755 wrote: »I think that legumes are not included in the paleo because "cavemen" did not cook beans, maybe??? Not because they are bad. Please don't ask for references; I am just making a possible supposition. There is some "good" in every diet that includes "real" foods.
Thanks for the info on Paleo dogma, but legumes were supposedly "not eaten by cavemen" is one of the reason legumes are not in the Paleo diet. Plus there are different forms of the diet. Some people include beans. Some forms of the diet exclude some fruit, and I think all fruit is healthy.
This directly contradicts Paleo dogma on legumes, which holds that we should strictly avoid them because 1) they aren’t part of our ancestral diet, and 2) they contain toxic anti-nutrients like lectin and phytic acid.
https://chriskresser.com/are-legumes-paleo/
Although, I was just making a supposition and was not really asking a question, this part of my statement was true. I still think there is some good in every diet, including Paleo.
Interesting how they don't include beans because of lectin and phytic acid but happily enjoy nightshades, nuts, sweet potatoes, mushrooms, sesame seeds and a bunch of other foods that contain them.1 -
I don't like any diet that unnecessarily restricts foods. Grains are a big one for me; here is an interesting article on paleo/grains:
theplate.nationalgeographic.com/2015/09/11/ancient-oat-discovery-may-poke-more-holes-in-paleo-diet/0 -
Paleo has become a more umbrella term. Some people eat dairy, legume, and grains within reason and if they're prepared properly (i.e. soaking legumes before cooking them). Some Paleo gurus just argue that you shouldn't eat them if you're sensitive (obviously), or that there are more nutrient dense foods that these aren't needed in your diet. Loren Cordain hasn't budged much since he first "founded" the diet, so I would take any information of his with a grain of salt.
It is possible to eat Paleo no matter what your weight goals are. It does take commitment, but it gets easier. There are plenty of support groups online, especially for those with families.1 -
Pattycake755 wrote: »Pattycake755 wrote: »I think that legumes are not included in the paleo because "cavemen" did not cook beans, maybe??? Not because they are bad. Please don't ask for references; I am just making a possible supposition. There is some "good" in every diet that includes "real" foods.
Thanks for the info on Paleo dogma, but legumes were supposedly "not eaten by cavemen" is one of the reason legumes are not in the Paleo diet.
Sure, but my point was that they ARE supposed to be bad--that's the point I was addressing. The premise of the diet is that foods that have entered our diet in later times are foods that we aren't as adapted to, or as with legumes/dairy/grains, specifically bad. Not just that we should eat like cavemen for no reason. (I don't agree with them, just explaining the diet.)1 -
@amusedmonkey, it is interesting, but personally, I have taken the good from several different diets and crafted my own. I love beans, but I can live without them, and I am sure that there are others who are on a strict Paleo diet that can live without beans. Some versions of the diet restricts sweet potatoes. It is a sustainable diet/lifestyle for some, and if @kazzykazz75 or anyone else wants to go on a Paleo diet, I cannot stop her from doing that. People can live without beans!
I am just sharing my opinion for what it is worth. I am not one of those people on here that tries to correct everyone's post, and force their opinions down everyone's throat. I am not a self-proclaimed diet guru. I have an opinion, and you have opinion, and I don't mean any harm to anyone when I share mine.0 -
Paleo has become a more umbrella term. Some people eat dairy, legume, and grains within reason and if they're prepared properly (i.e. soaking legumes before cooking them). Some Paleo gurus just argue that you shouldn't eat them if you're sensitive (obviously), or that there are more nutrient dense foods that these aren't needed in your diet. Loren Cordain hasn't budged much since he first "founded" the diet, so I would take any information of his with a grain of salt.
It is possible to eat Paleo no matter what your weight goals are. It does take commitment, but it gets easier. There are plenty of support groups online, especially for those with families.
This! I totally agree. Paleo has come to mean different things to different people. This is why I don't understand the debate (I am not talking about your post). You can use Paleo, Keto, and any other "real food" diet you want to lose weight and get healthy. I did. I have regained my health from following portions of these diets. I have shared this on my newsfeed with my friends. Yes, some versions of Paleo have restrictions, but the lists of foods you can enjoy are healthy, real foods. In my opinion, to label the entire diet as "bad" due to some restrictions is insane to me. This is just my opinion. All diets have restrictions and limitations.
I really hope Kazzykazz5 takes your advice. There are many support groups if she desires to go on a Paleo diet.
0 -
Pattycake755 wrote: »Paleo has become a more umbrella term. Some people eat dairy, legume, and grains within reason and if they're prepared properly (i.e. soaking legumes before cooking them). Some Paleo gurus just argue that you shouldn't eat them if you're sensitive (obviously), or that there are more nutrient dense foods that these aren't needed in your diet. Loren Cordain hasn't budged much since he first "founded" the diet, so I would take any information of his with a grain of salt.
It is possible to eat Paleo no matter what your weight goals are. It does take commitment, but it gets easier. There are plenty of support groups online, especially for those with families.
This! I totally agree. Paleo has come to mean different things to different people. This is why I don't understand the debate (I am not talking about your post). You can use Paleo, Keto, and any other "real food" diet you want to lose weight and get healthy. I did. I have regained my health from following portions of these diets. I have shared this on my newsfeed with my friends. Yes, some versions of Paleo have restrictions, but the lists of foods you can enjoy are healthy, real foods. In my opinion, to label the entire diet as "bad" due to some restrictions is insane to me. This is just my opinion. All diets have restrictions and limitations.
I really hope Kazzykazz5 takes your advice. There are many support groups if she desires to go on a Paleo diet.
I don't really understand what people have against food that isn't "real". Any single food can only be judged within the context of the diet as a whole. My diet today is a Paleo, keto and many other "real foods" diets nightmare. It had lots of dairy, grains, fruits, peas and some foods that some people don't consider "real" like canned tuna, processed meat and store bought ranch, but if you look at the day as a whole, it's pretty decent and nutritionally sound.
0 -
I've tried it but couldn't stick with it as it was too restrictive for me. Primal was a little more manageable for me because dairy/eggs/legumes are allowed. I would say now I try eating a ( not very strict) Mediterranean/Primal -inspired way as much as possible. But bread, pasta, and beer all make regular appearances.0
-
I hunt, I gather, I eat
0 -
I gained 26 pounds when I switched to strict paleo for all of calendar 2012 because I ate at a calorie surplus.
I then switched back to a SAD and lost 10 pounds for the summer because I ate at a calorie deficit.
Now, I eat mostly nutrient dense foods including some promoted by a paleo diet and some that are prohibited by a paleo diet...at either a calorie surplus or deficit depending on my goals at the time...because that's how this "diet" thing actually works.
4 -
2
-
Since I know that you have gone very low carb to no carbs before, Paleo will not be much of a stretch for you.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions