PALEO: pros, cons and whatever else you may think?

Options
1252628303133

Replies

  • sluggz
    sluggz Posts: 134
    Options
    *sigh*

    ESB > SW...Shrek 2 > Shrek...Terminator 2 > Terminator 1 (although I'm not certain about this one)...

    ...but I will *not* accept Evil Dead 2 > Evil Dead 1.

    That's it. No more.

    Whether you accept it or not it's still true.
    Comparing Evil Dead 1 and 2 is like comparing Star Wars to Space Balls.

    This makes no sense at all.

    The original Evil Dead is a horror movie. Evil Dead 2 is a comedy.
    Doesn't matter. Still a sequel, and still better than the original... And it's not even close.
  • darkangel45422
    darkangel45422 Posts: 234 Member
    Options
    The only reason the "we didn't evolve eating that" theory exists is for foods that the body hasn't evolved to handle very well.

    Ok, let's go with that standard instead, then.

    "The vast majority of people handle grain as well as they can handle avocados, therefore both grains and avocados are paleo."

    The ever growing number of people with intolerances or sensitivities to grains proves that to be incorrect, whereas as far as I know, there isn't widespread intolerance or sensitivity to avocadoes.

    Besides which, even if you do forget any kind of logic or reasoning in the decision making behind those guidelines, you can't just decide something is or isn't Paleo because you say so. The creators of the individual plans are the only ones with that ability, and pretty much by definition any Paleo plan will exclude grains but include fruits and veggies.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    The ever growing number of people with intolerances or sensitivities to grains proves that to be incorrect...

    There isn't "an ever growing number", there is an ever-decreasing percentage of the population.

    Your premise is not congruent with reality.
  • darkangel45422
    darkangel45422 Posts: 234 Member
    Options
    The ever growing number of people with intolerances or sensitivities to grains proves that to be incorrect...

    There isn't "an ever growing number", there is an ever-decreasing percentage of the population.

    Your premise is not congruent with reality.

    You know what, I'm giving up on attempting to educate you about the basics of Paleo. It's quite clear that you just want to sit behind your computer and be the jerk making fun of other people's lifestyles rather than participating in actual discussion or attempting to learn anything.
  • links_slayer
    links_slayer Posts: 1,151 Member
    Options
    The ever growing number of people with intolerances or sensitivities to grains proves that to be incorrect...

    There isn't "an ever growing number", there is an ever-decreasing percentage of the population.

    Your premise is not congruent with reality.

    You know what, I'm giving up on attempting to educate you about the basics of Paleo. It's quite clear that you just want to sit behind your computer and be the jerk making fun of other people's lifestyles rather than participating in actual discussion or attempting to learn anything.

    finally. take your ball and go home.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    You know what, I'm giving up on attempting to educate you about the basics of Paleo.

    Why? You've done an *excellent* job of sharing "the basics of Paleo".
  • kkerri
    kkerri Posts: 276 Member
    Options

    But my question would be, why should I care about some undetectable symptoms if they don't affect my heatlh or make me feel bad?
  • kkerri
    kkerri Posts: 276 Member
    Options

    But my question would be, why should I care about some undetectable symptoms if they don't affect my heatlh or make me feel bad?

    (Sorry - my quoting skills are poor). I have vitiligo. It doesn't make me feel badly and it took about 3 years to spread (fortunately I am pretty pale, so it's not as not noticeable as if I was dark skinned, but my point is, you can have things that are amiss that don't make you feel "badly." I am trying to change my diet because I do think that it may have caused or exacerbated my disorder.
  • kkerri
    kkerri Posts: 276 Member
    Options
    I don't see how "Whole 30" is really that great of a predictor if food bothers you unless its digestive. I am trying to eliminate gluten b/c there are studies that it's connected with my disorder. But, since my disorder took years to really be a noticeable problem, I am guessing 30 days of changing my food is not going to matter. I am looking at this as a 6-12 month experiment.
  • DatMurse
    DatMurse Posts: 1,501 Member
    Options
    The only reason the "we didn't evolve eating that" theory exists is for foods that the body hasn't evolved to handle very well.

    Ok, let's go with that standard instead, then.

    "The vast majority of people handle grain as well as they can handle avocados, therefore both grains and avocados are paleo."

    The ever growing number of people with intolerances or sensitivities to grains proves that to be incorrect, whereas as far as I know, there isn't widespread intolerance or sensitivity to avocadoes.

    Besides which, even if you do forget any kind of logic or reasoning in the decision making behind those guidelines, you can't just decide something is or isn't Paleo because you say so. The creators of the individual plans are the only ones with that ability, and pretty much by definition any Paleo plan will exclude grains but include fruits and veggies.

    what number of people? people being diagnosed or people becoming born with gluten intoelrance?

    please go
  • jimmmer
    jimmmer Posts: 3,515 Member
    Options
    In for round 2.

    Ditto

    The sequel is never as good as the original.

    Except for Empire Strikes Back... IMO blew away Star Wars =)

    Okay, so that's one vote for ESB > SW and one (really suspect) vote for Shrek 2 > Shrek...

    ...but those are the *only* exceptions. Ever.

    Godfather 2 > Godfather
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Options
    In for round 2.

    Ditto

    The sequel is never as good as the original.

    Except for Empire Strikes Back... IMO blew away Star Wars =)

    Okay, so that's one vote for ESB > SW and one (really suspect) vote for Shrek 2 > Shrek...

    ...but those are the *only* exceptions. Ever.

    Godfather 2 > Godfather

    Aliens > Alien
  • jimmmer
    jimmmer Posts: 3,515 Member
    Options
    In for round 2.

    Ditto

    The sequel is never as good as the original.

    Except for Empire Strikes Back... IMO blew away Star Wars =)

    Okay, so that's one vote for ESB > SW and one (really suspect) vote for Shrek 2 > Shrek...

    ...but those are the *only* exceptions. Ever.

    Godfather 2 > Godfather

    Aliens > Alien

    No way!

    Alien is a classic.

    Aliens is ok....
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Options

    No way!

    Alien is a classic.

    Aliens is ok....

    You must be crazy.

    Alien is a good "horror / sci fi" film but Aliens is a master class in action.

    That reminds me: Rambo II > Rambo
  • jimmmer
    jimmmer Posts: 3,515 Member
    Options

    No way!

    Alien is a classic.

    Aliens is ok....

    You must be crazy.

    Alien is a good "horror / sci fi" film but Aliens is a master class in action.

    That reminds me: Rambo II > Rambo

    Aliens is a masterclass in action, sure.

    Alien is a masterclass. It transcends it's genre beginnings, whereas Aliens is still firmly stuck there. That is the difference.
  • msf74
    msf74 Posts: 3,498 Member
    Options

    Aliens is a masterclass in action, sure.

    Alien is a masterclass. It transcends it's genre beginnings, whereas Aliens is still firmly stuck there. That is the difference.

    True enough. Aliens is very much "what it says on the tin" action movie whereas Alien is different type of movie altogether. Obviously Scott and Cameron have different directing styles which plays out.

    There's only one way I can decide this. I will have to watch both again ;)
  • sluggz
    sluggz Posts: 134
    Options
    In for round 2.

    Ditto

    The sequel is never as good as the original.

    Except for Empire Strikes Back... IMO blew away Star Wars =)

    Okay, so that's one vote for ESB > SW and one (really suspect) vote for Shrek 2 > Shrek...

    ...but those are the *only* exceptions. Ever.

    Godfather 2 > Godfather

    Aliens > Alien

    Amen to both of those. I think what we see here is that unless there is a independent, peer reviewed, double blind study proving certain sequels should definitively be excluded from this list, we can enjoy all movies in moderation.
  • Hezzietiger1
    Hezzietiger1 Posts: 1,256 Member
    Options
    So i'm a crossfitter, but I don't eat paleo. I get great energy from whole oats, sweet potatoes, and brown rice.. I wouldn't want to leave those out. I do love paleo b/c it's clean and clean eating is in my opinion the best way to go.. but most crossfitters I personally know that follow paleo maintain a bodyfat % that is slightly above "fit". They are good with it b/c they are strong and perform well.. but I want to be lean, have abs, and still be a good crossfitter. Most games athletes are not paleo.
  • darkangel45422
    darkangel45422 Posts: 234 Member
    Options
    The only reason the "we didn't evolve eating that" theory exists is for foods that the body hasn't evolved to handle very well.

    Ok, let's go with that standard instead, then.

    "The vast majority of people handle grain as well as they can handle avocados, therefore both grains and avocados are paleo."

    The ever growing number of people with intolerances or sensitivities to grains proves that to be incorrect, whereas as far as I know, there isn't widespread intolerance or sensitivity to avocadoes.

    Besides which, even if you do forget any kind of logic or reasoning in the decision making behind those guidelines, you can't just decide something is or isn't Paleo because you say so. The creators of the individual plans are the only ones with that ability, and pretty much by definition any Paleo plan will exclude grains but include fruits and veggies.

    what number of people? people being diagnosed or people becoming born with gluten intoelrance?

    please go

    I would assume they're being diagnosed and/or are discovering it rather than more people are being born with these sensitivities (and I'm not just talking outright gluten intolerance / celiac's disease / etc. though those are included) but I haven't actually studied that area since it's not of particular importance to me.

    The end point basically is, there are a lot of people who find that they don't react well when they digest grains, etc. You don't see this trend as often with vegetables, fruits, etc. The entire point of the Whole30 and even Paleo/Primal is to figure out if you might be one of these people - if you're not then more power to you. That doesn't somehow dismiss the existence of people who do find they live healthier happier lives without grains forming a large part of their diet.
  • TheVimFuego
    TheVimFuego Posts: 2,412 Member
    Options
    Pros - It can turn you on to eating more nutrient dense foods compared to yer typical diet. The 'community' is entertaing for a while.

    Cons - It can turn you into a orthorexic food nazi who does not realise that, when it comes down to losing the blubber, calories in/out are still king. And, unless you are diagnosed with an intolerance, then there is no need to restrict anything. And the underlying fact that there was no one Paleo diet, it depends where you lived. AND Mark Sisson's carbohydrate curve is beyond laughable and Robb Wolf on carbs has changed positions more times than a cheap prostitute.

    I'm glad I went through my Paleo phase but I do look back and laugh at myself .... :)