Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Has Paleo had its day?

1235

Replies

  • Calliope610
    Calliope610 Posts: 3,771 Member
    pinuplove wrote: »
    The clean eating and whole foods threads seem to have disappeared too.

    Maybe they finally got the message they were not welcome.

    No. Just wait until January and they'll all be back. All are welcome though. Every thread is an opportunity.

    As for Paleo, I thought it had had its day, but then again, I saw a raspberry ketones thread just last week :tongue:

    And that garcinia cambogia stuff too. Old favorites die hard.
  • fuzzylop72
    fuzzylop72 Posts: 651 Member
    Because that is the first question you should ask when embarking on ANY plan, especially on those that restrict entire food groups.

    I've seen the same question asked when people embark on vegetarian or vegan diets, and it's the right question to ask there as well.

    In none of those cases is it appropriate if they've already made up their mind. If they are merely considering it, then sure that's different. However, challenging their preference for your preference doesn't seem appropriate, particularly when your preference has no physiological advantage.

    Context matters.
  • Diatonic12
    Diatonic12 Posts: 32,344 Member
    I have noticed that whereas there used to be lots of threads asking about Paleo, promoting Paleo, users endorsing it etc - have not seen any of these for a while.

    Keto seems to have taken over as the new In Thing. Yes, along with IF.

    I do not follow either but keto seems more defined to me, is a clear plan - whereas Paleo was vague and following a largely non existent scientific basis IMO - has that consigned it to history? No, because until every dollar can be squeezed out of it with new books and cookbooks coming out every year, until the money dries up and those books end up in the dollar bin at the dollar store, it will still be around.

    Just curious.

  • soufauxgirl
    soufauxgirl Posts: 392 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Mari22na wrote: »
    @tennisdude2004 Don't take the woo's personally. You can't.

    I did a paleo/primal/keto/IF combo/BPC. I ate all of the fat, fat, fat. Fat is where it's at. I ate 85% fat and 10% protein and 5% carbs in the form of a frozen spinach ball and ball of wax.

    When you come off the keto high, do you really believe you can eat 85% for the rest of your life to maintain what you are doing now. Can I get a witness, when you come off this protocol your body will stack the weight back on like pancakes and taking it off again will be as slow as molasses. Unless you throw yourself into another cycle of keto for giant month hunks of time but with each keto excursion the heart grows faint.

    You wake up one day and realize that this cannot go on forever. There are some people here that have garnered respect from everybody. They are not playing games but genuinely want to get the truth out there. Keto is a temporary fix. Start thinking about a strategy that will help keep the positive side effects you like now with your weight and muscle mass.

    So much of paleo is absolute malarkey. During the long winter months, the tribes on the plains, northern Canada and elsewhere lived with about 9 months of snow. Lakes and rivers were frozen. There was no fishing going on and hunting for wildgame during blizzards and -40 below temps were a real hardship. Bulletproof coffee and coconut oil for the big WIN...we haven't got the time.

    No one owns the term and word paleo. The truth has not been told what those people went through to survive. Keto is temporary. I know a woman who did it for over a year. Wrote up her big success story and then went on a trip to Europe. She ate her way through several countries and rebounded back with every pound plus friends.

    She kept trying to get back UP on that high horse and keto wagon but she lost heart.

    Woo's = Boo's. They do. But there are some here who really do have your best interest at heart.

    Open. Mind. Insert. Possibilities.

    I think both Paleo and The Paleo Diet have both been trademarked :wink:

    Keto might have been a temporary fix for you but for many it’s a gateway into LCHF and it a permanent diet model for millions.

    I personally do not eat in a VLCHF model, but I certainly prefer LCHF to a higher carb diet.

    I agree an open mind approach is always best.

    See bolded. I would really like to see some empirical scientific evidence to back up this comment.

    Better still, I would actually like to hear from more than just one person who has had long term success from following LCHF. I can only think of you and one other poster on here that are huge advocates but nobody else.

    Thank you @Mari22na for sharing your keto experience and subsequent failure to keep the weight off long term.

    Why is it so hard for people to understand that all it takes is a CALORIE DEFICIT to lose weight instead of saying only their way of eating is the best.

    Irony alert.

    This is why you don't see many posts from people experimenting with or who have fully embraced things such as paleo or keto, etc. The vast majority of responding participants aren't interested in genuine discussion and understanding of the OPs situation. They just want to bash it, in most cases because they don't understand it. You're guilty of the same charge you're aiming at others.

    I've had long-term success (6+ years of over 60lbs from my heaviest) following what most would categorize as LCHF (not keto, as I don't see the benefit for myself and I eat way too many vegetables). Add that one to your list, since it seems to be a scorecard you're keeping.

    Well it sounds like you werent in full blown LCHF mode then if you were eating too many vegetables. Just plain old calorie deficit seems to have done the trick. Well done.

    As I knew you probably would, you have perfectly illustrated the issue with your perspective. I made a single, very general statement about my WOE, and you turned that into several assumptions to drive a smug declarative conclusion. No curiosity, no want to understand. You're attempting to take the high road by doing the same thing you're charging keto adherents (of which I am not) of.

    Let's review.

    I never said anything to indicate that I take issue with the concept of CICO.

    I said LCHF, and you have no idea what my intake looks like. Low/high are relative terms, completely dependent on the volume a person eats. My absolute values are going to be higher than 90% of people here due to my size, but my carb intake is still 10%-15% (20% max) on any given day, with fat 50%+. That, my friend, is LCHF no matter how you'd like to slice it.

    If you don't have useful input when someone asks for it on a specific eating protocol, why are you speaking? The vast majority of people here have zero experience with or have researched (past reading U.S. News and World Report) different ways of eating. Instead of being dogmatic that nothing aside from moderation and chanting CICO in a dark room will get results, just move along and discuss with those who are similarly inclined. You're in as much of an echo chamber as you think others are.

    Ultimately a calorie deficit is how you have achieved weight loss, we are in agreeance with that. Its hard for me to understand why its necessary to have to lower your carb intake so drastically though when in theory its not really necessary. You can still enjoy a moderate carb intake. It would be a miserable angry existence for me to maintain a LCHF regime, but each to their own and kudos to you for being able to keep that up for so long.

    Moderate to high carbs are technically unnecessary.

    Not everyone has the lack of ability to reduce their carb intake as you do by the sounds of it.

    It would probably be best to not judge everybody by your own dietary tastes.

    Low to very low carbs are technically unnecessary too.

    All that's necessary for weight/fat loss is a calorie deficit. By whatever means it is created/maintained.

    Agreed, but as meta analysis proves both low carb and moderate to high carb are optimal.

    So why would anyone advice a person against doing either?

    You advise someone against low carb (or any level of carbs for that matter) when it's arbitrarily chosen because they heard "it works" or got suckered or scared into it. The best advice for a starting dieter is to just start eating at a deficit and adjust their macros based on their experience and preferences. MFP macro levels are fine as a starting point because they're closer to how many people eat than any macro extremes. Even then, people are also told these macros are not set in stone and that as long as they get their minimum protein and fat they can fill the rest with whatever they want. Extra steps are unnecessary until they are. The advice is not against low carb, but against lack of flexibility and arbitrary rules that lack personalization.

    It works for millions of people and is as healthy as IIFYM / Calorie Counting.

    Who are you to assume it will not work for them? I would suggest they they are trying LCHF because they've maybe tried your way of doing things and like millions of others, have found it unsustainable - different horses for different course.

    Why not just focus on giving the OP the tools and information to help them make their diet a success. I'm sure if its not for them they will work it out for themselves, but they have a right to give it a good try without being scupper before they begin.

    I'm really not sure how you read posts. Where in my post did you see me assuming their preference? What I'm basically advocating is that they explore their preferences and situation. If they tried something and it didn't work, then that's exactly the process I'm advocating: to explore what things aren't working for them and how they could adapt them. They may as well arrive at an extra low or extra high level of carbs as their preferred level, but it would be due to their own preference, not because they were told to do it. There is a big difference there. Sustainability comes from personalization, and learning to make personalized decisions early is setting them up for success. That's why most threads start with replies that ask questions without making assumptions: what is your reason for choosing this way of eating?

    QFT
  • fuzzylop72
    fuzzylop72 Posts: 651 Member
    edited June 2018
    annaskiski wrote: »
    Just want to add that I've known several people who started eating vegetarian or vegan because they thought they could lose weight that way.

    I think clarifying why a person wants to eat a certain way is a harmless question...

    In isolation, maybe. However, in my experience if the answer isn't for ethical reasons or specific health reasons, that shouldn't be seen as an invitation to a debate about their woe and the question certainly puts me on edge when i'm not really looking for a debate (I do think it's more appropriate when they're just considering something, though, compared to when they've already made the choice).

    Correcting factual mistakes, on the other hand, is something that can be done by anyone, as long as the information is correct.