We don't know what constitutes a true paleo diet!
Replies
-
I'm not demonizing anything or trying to advocate a one-size-fits-all approach. Merely pointing out the various reasons people seek out and/or enjoy Paleo/Primal. Some may find that grains don't bother them, so they add them back in to some degree. Some may do the same with dairy or lectins. And go off Primal/Paleo as a result or stay within the whole 80/20 idea of Primal. Others may decide to be strict forever because that's what works for them and they're not interested in pinpointing the exact issue that affects them -- or they tried and found they had issues with them all. Who knows? Who cares? It's their personal choice. But there are reasons why these type of components and food have been identified. And it's not fear mongering.
And, personally, I've seen no such fear mongering or self-righteousness or any other pushing from anyone that's pro-Paleo/Primal on this site. Granted, I've only been active for a short amount of time, but all that bad behavior has been decidedly with the Paleo/Primal bashers. Not the Paleo/Primal people.
It sounds like a hypochondriac to me.
Let's see if I can eliminate a particular part of my diet to figure out if I have an intolerance/disease that doesn't even affect me right now.
<Eliminates gluten.> Ahh, I feel so much better! I have so much energy! Now let's see if I still feel better after I eat some of it.
<Eats gluten.> I am sooooo sleepy. I MUST have an intolerance! Hey everybody, I have a gluten intolerance!
Well, apparently since I was later diagnosed with both Hashimoto's thyroiditis and insulin resistance, apparently not a hypochondriac. But thanks for the insult from your seat of ignorance.
I didn't mean to sound insulting. I was referencing to the part of your quote that says you're not advocating a one-size fits all approach. It sounds like you're advocating to everyone to do without something in their diet to find some disease that's not affecting them.
Like cwsreddy suggesting to DamePiglet to go without gluten to see if it is affecting her negatively without her knowing it. To me it just sounds like a form of hypochondriac. Instead of thinking you are always sick, you think there must be something sick in everyone else.0 -
What credibility does he need? He's presenting the theories and explanations, not claiming to be the author of them. If it helps at all, I agree with the vast majority of what he has said and explained. I've read many of the studies and scientific literatue associated with them, and have a biology degree from one of the best research universities in the world. Is that credibility enough for a fitness website?
No. Do us the courtesy of providing the same academic rigor that one would expect of a graduating high school student.
You're just rude and ignorant.0 -
I thought all the intolerances (gluten, lactose, etc.) were more apparent today mostly because the people who have those intolerances are surviving to a breeding age and having children which may/may not have said intolerances (thusly going to the doctor looking for medicine), rather than getting sick and dying at an early age.
Broadly stated, you can eat penicillin when it's present on food. It's why I avoid eating moldy food.
That is an alternate theory. However, unless you have a severe allergic reaction that would kill you from ingesting them, generally such people can just avoid them in the future and live to breeding age.
As you will find with most folks that enjoy Paleo/Primal, they weren't near death when they switched over, but were pleasantly surprised by how much better they felt eating that way, likely indicating a lesser sensitivity to something that was creating sub-optimal performance/feeling. When they went Paleo/Primal, they felt much better and for some, had some issues resolve -- whether digestive, inflammation, auto-immune, etc. But they could have survived in such discomfort -- it was just wasn't optimal (or less optimal than they feel with Paleo/Primal).
Also see: placebo effect and confirmation bias.
And this. This happens a lot with people doing Advocare 24-day challenges and similar things. They want it to work so badly, they think that is what is actually working.0 -
What credibility does he need? He's presenting the theories and explanations, not claiming to be the author of them. If it helps at all, I agree with the vast majority of what he has said and explained. I've read many of the studies and scientific literatue associated with them, and have a biology degree from one of the best research universities in the world. Is that credibility enough for a fitness website?
No. Do us the courtesy of providing the same academic rigor that one would expect of a graduating high school student.
You're just rude and ignorant.
At least I understand the connection between physics and evolution.0 -
Well, apparently since I was later diagnosed with both Hashimoto's thyroiditis and insulin resistance, apparently not a hypochondriac. But thanks for the insult from your seat of ignorance.
I didn't mean to sound insulting. I was referencing to the part of your quote that says you're not advocating a one-size fits all approach. It sounds like you're advocating to everyone to do without something in their diet to find some disease that's not affecting them.
Like cwsreddy suggesting to DamePiglet to go without gluten to see if it is affecting her negatively without her knowing it. To me it just sounds like a form of hypochondriac. Instead of thinking you are always sick, you think there must be something sick in everyone else.
I'm not advocating at all, just explaining why some people choose to do this and that there is a basis in science for their experiences (not just in their heads or mistaken belief). I believe cws is saying, hey, you may not realize you have an issue if you haven't tried cutting it out. There are a lot of people, myself included, that had this very same experience. I didn't realize I had an issue with it until I cut it out. Not saying anyone has to do that, but there is some validity in the suggestion (and it's just a suggestion, not a mandate).0 -
Burro and AKC are why we can't have nice things on these forums.
Instead of having a conversation they'd rather troll and flame and attempt to get a thread shut down.
Grow up.
I just get a kick in the pants when an opinion is made off to be fact, it is quite funny
So show me how I'm misguided instead of trolling, and I'd be glad to change my opinion.
see how that works?
your opinions are the ones in conflict with established scientific fact and yet you expect us to bear the burden of proof to convince you otherwise... :laugh:
explain to me how lactase persistence in peoples of European descent is in conflict with established scientific fact.
haven't you already posted a 1000 posts debating milk already?
what i'm referring to is the silliness about how the food supply is drastically different than it was just 50 years ago and that humans have not evolved to digest this "new" food yet. there is so much wrong with this notion that you stated as if it were established fact, that i could only assume you were joking.... have you not been doing stand-up comedy on this whole thread? i sure thought you were.
So you don't believe that wheat, milk, meat, and all animal products in the grocery stores today are vastly different than they were 50 years ago? Fine if that's too recent we can push it back to 100 years. I'm not picky.0 -
At least I understand the connection between physics and evolution.
Unfortunately, you fail to understand the extremely basic concept of an analogy. But, thanks for making arguments that are completely irrelevant.
A battle of wits with the unarmed is not very sporting. Shame on me.0 -
I've had to ask four times now and still no answer. How do you know you're not sensitive to gluten? Have you ever tried going without gluten to compare?
Why would you go gluten-free if you have no issues with it?
A lot of people don't realize they have issues with it until the don't eat it for a while. It's a pretty common experience.
This makes no sense to me. Like, at all. JoRocka's earlier post is coming to mind. Because of the possibility of smashing your finger, everyone should not have hammers.0 -
I'm not demonizing anything or trying to advocate a one-size-fits-all approach. Merely pointing out the various reasons people seek out and/or enjoy Paleo/Primal. Some may find that grains don't bother them, so they add them back in to some degree. Some may do the same with dairy or lectins. And go off Primal/Paleo as a result or stay within the whole 80/20 idea of Primal. Others may decide to be strict forever because that's what works for them and they're not interested in pinpointing the exact issue that affects them -- or they tried and found they had issues with them all. Who knows? Who cares? It's their personal choice. But there are reasons why these type of components and food have been identified. And it's not fear mongering.
And, personally, I've seen no such fear mongering or self-righteousness or any other pushing from anyone that's pro-Paleo/Primal on this site. Granted, I've only been active for a short amount of time, but all that bad behavior has been decidedly with the Paleo/Primal bashers. Not the Paleo/Primal people.
It sounds like a hypochondriac to me.
Let's see if I can eliminate a particular part of my diet to figure out if I have an intolerance/disease that doesn't even affect me right now.
<Eliminates gluten.> Ahh, I feel so much better! I have so much energy! Now let's see if I still feel better after I eat some of it.
<Eats gluten.> I am sooooo sleepy. I MUST have an intolerance! Hey everybody, I have a gluten intolerance!
Well, apparently since I was later diagnosed with both Hashimoto's thyroiditis and insulin resistance, apparently not a hypochondriac. But thanks for the insult from your seat of ignorance.
I didn't mean to sound insulting. I was referencing to the part of your quote that says you're not advocating a one-size fits all approach. It sounds like you're advocating to everyone to do without something in their diet to find some disease that's not affecting them.
Like cwsreddy suggesting to DamePiglet to go without gluten to see if it is affecting her negatively without her knowing it. To me it just sounds like a form of hypochondriac. Instead of thinking you are always sick, you think there must be something sick in everyone else.
nope, there's just no reliable way to detect gluten sensitivity at this point in time. blood tests aren't conclusive. the only way to know is to try it out.0 -
I've had to ask four times now and still no answer. How do you know you're not sensitive to gluten? Have you ever tried going without gluten to compare?
Why would you go gluten-free if you have no issues with it?
A lot of people don't realize they have issues with it until the don't eat it for a while. It's a pretty common experience.
This makes no sense to me. Like, at all. JoRocka's earlier post is coming to mind. Because of the possibility of smashing your finger, everyone should not have hammers.
Think about it this way - if you're slightly gluten sensitive but have been eating wheat all your life, are you going to know something is wrong? No. Because the way you feel on a day to day basis is the way you've felt your whole life and it's "normal" for you. Many MANY times people only realize there is actually a different normal (often better) when they cut out gluten for a month to see what happens.
Make sense? If you don't have anything else to compare with your experience of "normal" then you have no frame of reference to call it normal in the first place.0 -
um... it's not difficult but I'll try to spell it out.
the only evolutionary science that's applicable is the fact that our bodies HAVE NOT evolved to be able to process the genetic modifications of things like wheat grains that has taken place in the last 50 years.
make sense?
Except mine. I guess because I'm special.
you think that because you dont have full blown celiac disease, something 1 in 100 people have, that the above is untrue?
yikes.
Nope. You said that.
You also said "the fact that our bodies HAVE NOT evolved to be able to process the genetic modifications of things like wheat grains that has taken place in the last 50 years"
So according to you, I cheated evolution.
how do you know? have you tried going gluten free? again I ask you what frame of reference do you have? I'll ask this all day until you answer it.
do you have any credibility when it comes to this topic? do you know how your body would respond without gluten?
how do you know you cheated evolution?
Not MY definition of evolution. That's yours.
I'm not the one making statements about other peoples' bodies and evolution. Those statements are yours to defend.
What credibility do you bring to the topic?
What credibility does he need? He's presenting the theories and explanations, not claiming to be the author of them. If it helps at all, I agree with the vast majority of what he has said and explained. I've read many of the studies and scientific literatue associated with them, and have a biology degree from one of the best research universities in the world. Is that credibility enough for a fitness website?
Why don't you re-read the exchange between reddy and I to get some context for my statements?
I'm not asserting anything that requires "credibility" beyond the fact that the "Paleo" diet isn't an accurate representation of the diet of people living in the time period that it's named for.
Oh, that and that I digest food properly. He can't seem to comprehend that I digest food adequately and am quite healthy. Perhaps you agree with that, also?
Hon, he's just yanking everyone around. He's being obtuse on purpose.0 -
I've had to ask four times now and still no answer. How do you know you're not sensitive to gluten? Have you ever tried going without gluten to compare?
Why would you go gluten-free if you have no issues with it?
A lot of people don't realize they have issues with it until the don't eat it for a while. It's a pretty common experience.
This makes no sense to me. Like, at all. JoRocka's earlier post is coming to mind. Because of the possibility of smashing your finger, everyone should not have hammers.
Just curious about this line of thinking. If one feels completely fine and healthy would it still be suggested to systematically cut out all foods that could cause sensitivities? Would you advise taking a month without gluten, then a month without dairy, etc. etc.? Or would you suggest just going full on paleo for a month, then adding things back, like gluten? What would be advised?0 -
um... it's not difficult but I'll try to spell it out.
the only evolutionary science that's applicable is the fact that our bodies HAVE NOT evolved to be able to process the genetic modifications of things like wheat grains that has taken place in the last 50 years.
make sense?
Except mine. I guess because I'm special.
you think that because you dont have full blown celiac disease, something 1 in 100 people have, that the above is untrue?
yikes.
Nope. You said that.
You also said "the fact that our bodies HAVE NOT evolved to be able to process the genetic modifications of things like wheat grains that has taken place in the last 50 years"
So according to you, I cheated evolution.
how do you know? have you tried going gluten free? again I ask you what frame of reference do you have? I'll ask this all day until you answer it.
do you have any credibility when it comes to this topic? do you know how your body would respond without gluten?
how do you know you cheated evolution?
Not MY definition of evolution. That's yours.
I'm not the one making statements about other peoples' bodies and evolution. Those statements are yours to defend.
What credibility do you bring to the topic?
What credibility does he need? He's presenting the theories and explanations, not claiming to be the author of them. If it helps at all, I agree with the vast majority of what he has said and explained. I've read many of the studies and scientific literatue associated with them, and have a biology degree from one of the best research universities in the world. Is that credibility enough for a fitness website?
Why don't you re-read the exchange between reddy and I to get some context for my statements?
I'm not asserting anything that requires "credibility" beyond the fact that the "Paleo" diet isn't an accurate representation of the diet of people living in the time period that it's named for.
Oh, that and that I digest food properly. He can't seem to comprehend that I digest food adequately and am quite healthy. Perhaps you agree with that, also?
Hon, he's just yanking everyone around. He's being obtuse on purpose.
wow. ok. see I feel like YOU'RE being obtuse on purpose because you're using the N=1 fallacy of your own experience to disprove everything I've said, EVEN THOUGH you don't even have a frame of reference from which to DO that. So you're even using your fallacious argument incorrectly!
come on now you gotta see the hilarity in this.0 -
I've had to ask four times now and still no answer. How do you know you're not sensitive to gluten? Have you ever tried going without gluten to compare?
Why would you go gluten-free if you have no issues with it?
A lot of people don't realize they have issues with it until the don't eat it for a while. It's a pretty common experience.
This makes no sense to me. Like, at all. JoRocka's earlier post is coming to mind. Because of the possibility of smashing your finger, everyone should not have hammers.
Just curious about this line of thinking. If one feels completely fine and healthy would it still be suggested to systematically cut out all foods that could cause sensitivities? Would you advise taking a month without gluten, then a month without dairy, etc. etc.? Or would you suggest just going full on paleo for a month, then adding things back, like gluten? What would be advised?
Easier to go full paleo and then slowly reintroduce and see how each thing affects you than it is to cut one thing out at a time. Would save you time this way too.0 -
I'm not demonizing anything or trying to advocate a one-size-fits-all approach. Merely pointing out the various reasons people seek out and/or enjoy Paleo/Primal. Some may find that grains don't bother them, so they add them back in to some degree. Some may do the same with dairy or lectins. And go off Primal/Paleo as a result or stay within the whole 80/20 idea of Primal. Others may decide to be strict forever because that's what works for them and they're not interested in pinpointing the exact issue that affects them -- or they tried and found they had issues with them all. Who knows? Who cares? It's their personal choice. But there are reasons why these type of components and food have been identified. And it's not fear mongering.
And, personally, I've seen no such fear mongering or self-righteousness or any other pushing from anyone that's pro-Paleo/Primal on this site. Granted, I've only been active for a short amount of time, but all that bad behavior has been decidedly with the Paleo/Primal bashers. Not the Paleo/Primal people.
It sounds like a hypochondriac to me.
Let's see if I can eliminate a particular part of my diet to figure out if I have an intolerance/disease that doesn't even affect me right now.
<Eliminates gluten.> Ahh, I feel so much better! I have so much energy! Now let's see if I still feel better after I eat some of it.
<Eats gluten.> I am sooooo sleepy. I MUST have an intolerance! Hey everybody, I have a gluten intolerance!
Well, apparently since I was later diagnosed with both Hashimoto's thyroiditis and insulin resistance, apparently not a hypochondriac. But thanks for the insult from your seat of ignorance.
I didn't mean to sound insulting. I was referencing to the part of your quote that says you're not advocating a one-size fits all approach. It sounds like you're advocating to everyone to do without something in their diet to find some disease that's not affecting them.
Like cwsreddy suggesting to DamePiglet to go without gluten to see if it is affecting her negatively without her knowing it. To me it just sounds like a form of hypochondriac. Instead of thinking you are always sick, you think there must be something sick in everyone else.
nope, there's just no reliable way to detect gluten sensitivity at this point in time. blood tests aren't conclusive. the only way to know is to try it out.
By your logic, everyone should try out cross-dressing just to make sure they are comfortable in their gender roles.
I'll send you a dress.0 -
Why would you go gluten-free if you have no issues with it?
A lot of people don't realize they have issues with it until the don't eat it for a while. It's a pretty common experience.
This makes no sense to me. Like, at all. JoRocka's earlier post is coming to mind. Because of the possibility of smashing your finger, everyone should not have hammers.
How does that not make sense? If you already feel that you're feeling optimal in every way, sure, then it makes no sense. But do you think a lot of people can say that? That there is no room for them to feel better or perform at a higher level?
I definitely know a lot of people who feel like they could use more energy, be less tired/fatigued, etc. Sure, they may attribute it to other causes, which could be contributors or not at all. But, unless you're feeling 100% awesome about your physical health, why does such a suggestion not seem reasonable?0 -
I'm not demonizing anything or trying to advocate a one-size-fits-all approach. Merely pointing out the various reasons people seek out and/or enjoy Paleo/Primal. Some may find that grains don't bother them, so they add them back in to some degree. Some may do the same with dairy or lectins. And go off Primal/Paleo as a result or stay within the whole 80/20 idea of Primal. Others may decide to be strict forever because that's what works for them and they're not interested in pinpointing the exact issue that affects them -- or they tried and found they had issues with them all. Who knows? Who cares? It's their personal choice. But there are reasons why these type of components and food have been identified. And it's not fear mongering.
And, personally, I've seen no such fear mongering or self-righteousness or any other pushing from anyone that's pro-Paleo/Primal on this site. Granted, I've only been active for a short amount of time, but all that bad behavior has been decidedly with the Paleo/Primal bashers. Not the Paleo/Primal people.
It sounds like a hypochondriac to me.
Let's see if I can eliminate a particular part of my diet to figure out if I have an intolerance/disease that doesn't even affect me right now.
<Eliminates gluten.> Ahh, I feel so much better! I have so much energy! Now let's see if I still feel better after I eat some of it.
<Eats gluten.> I am sooooo sleepy. I MUST have an intolerance! Hey everybody, I have a gluten intolerance!
Well, apparently since I was later diagnosed with both Hashimoto's thyroiditis and insulin resistance, apparently not a hypochondriac. But thanks for the insult from your seat of ignorance.
I didn't mean to sound insulting. I was referencing to the part of your quote that says you're not advocating a one-size fits all approach. It sounds like you're advocating to everyone to do without something in their diet to find some disease that's not affecting them.
Like cwsreddy suggesting to DamePiglet to go without gluten to see if it is affecting her negatively without her knowing it. To me it just sounds like a form of hypochondriac. Instead of thinking you are always sick, you think there must be something sick in everyone else.
nope, there's just no reliable way to detect gluten sensitivity at this point in time. blood tests aren't conclusive. the only way to know is to try it out.
By your logic, everyone should try out cross-dressing just to make sure they are comfortable in their gender roles.
I'll send you a dress.
wow that's incredibly ignorant.
EDIT: although I will say that the majority of people DO experiment sexually at some point in their lives... and yes, I've worn a dress on numerous occasions. :bigsmile:0 -
mistake post. derp.0
-
Not MY definition of evolution. That's yours.
I'm not the one making statements about other peoples' bodies and evolution. Those statements are yours to defend.
What credibility do you bring to the topic?
What credibility does he need? He's presenting the theories and explanations, not claiming to be the author of them. If it helps at all, I agree with the vast majority of what he has said and explained. I've read many of the studies and scientific literatue associated with them, and have a biology degree from one of the best research universities in the world. Is that credibility enough for a fitness website?
Why don't you re-read the exchange between reddy and I to get some context for my statements?
I'm not asserting anything that requires "credibility" beyond the fact that the "Paleo" diet isn't an accurate representation of the diet of people living in the time period that it's named for.
Oh, that and that I digest food properly. He can't seem to comprehend that I digest food adequately and am quite healthy. Perhaps you agree with that, also?
Hon, he's just yanking everyone around. He's being obtuse on purpose.
Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I don't see him being intentionally obtuse, just trying to explain his assertions. You may not agree with the assertions or the explanations, but I think that's a different thing. And I don't see him as yanking people around at all.0 -
I'm not demonizing anything or trying to advocate a one-size-fits-all approach. Merely pointing out the various reasons people seek out and/or enjoy Paleo/Primal. Some may find that grains don't bother them, so they add them back in to some degree. Some may do the same with dairy or lectins. And go off Primal/Paleo as a result or stay within the whole 80/20 idea of Primal. Others may decide to be strict forever because that's what works for them and they're not interested in pinpointing the exact issue that affects them -- or they tried and found they had issues with them all. Who knows? Who cares? It's their personal choice. But there are reasons why these type of components and food have been identified. And it's not fear mongering.
And, personally, I've seen no such fear mongering or self-righteousness or any other pushing from anyone that's pro-Paleo/Primal on this site. Granted, I've only been active for a short amount of time, but all that bad behavior has been decidedly with the Paleo/Primal bashers. Not the Paleo/Primal people.
It sounds like a hypochondriac to me.
Let's see if I can eliminate a particular part of my diet to figure out if I have an intolerance/disease that doesn't even affect me right now.
<Eliminates gluten.> Ahh, I feel so much better! I have so much energy! Now let's see if I still feel better after I eat some of it.
<Eats gluten.> I am sooooo sleepy. I MUST have an intolerance! Hey everybody, I have a gluten intolerance!
Well, apparently since I was later diagnosed with both Hashimoto's thyroiditis and insulin resistance, apparently not a hypochondriac. But thanks for the insult from your seat of ignorance.
I didn't mean to sound insulting. I was referencing to the part of your quote that says you're not advocating a one-size fits all approach. It sounds like you're advocating to everyone to do without something in their diet to find some disease that's not affecting them.
Like cwsreddy suggesting to DamePiglet to go without gluten to see if it is affecting her negatively without her knowing it. To me it just sounds like a form of hypochondriac. Instead of thinking you are always sick, you think there must be something sick in everyone else.
nope, there's just no reliable way to detect gluten sensitivity at this point in time. blood tests aren't conclusive. the only way to know is to try it out.
By your logic, everyone should try out cross-dressing just to make sure they are comfortable in their gender roles.
I'll send you a dress.
wow that's incredibly ignorant.
Nice try.
The analogy stands.
Why should I change something that doesn't need to be changed?0 -
wow that's incredibly ignorant.
Nice try.
The analogy stands.
Why should I change something that doesn't need to be changed?
K i'll ask for the fifth time.
How do you know it doesn't need to be changed? How do you know your body is operating 100% optimally? What is your frame of reference?0 -
Burro and AKC are why we can't have nice things on these forums.
Instead of having a conversation they'd rather troll and flame and attempt to get a thread shut down.
Grow up.
I just get a kick in the pants when an opinion is made off to be fact, it is quite funny
So show me how I'm misguided instead of trolling, and I'd be glad to change my opinion.
see how that works?
your opinions are the ones in conflict with established scientific fact and yet you expect us to bear the burden of proof to convince you otherwise... :laugh:
explain to me how lactase persistence in peoples of European descent is in conflict with established scientific fact.
haven't you already posted a 1000 posts debating milk already?
what i'm referring to is the silliness about how the food supply is drastically different than it was just 50 years ago and that humans have not evolved to digest this "new" food yet. there is so much wrong with this notion that you stated as if it were established fact, that i could only assume you were joking.... have you not been doing stand-up comedy on this whole thread? i sure thought you were.
So you don't believe that wheat, milk, meat, and all animal products in the grocery stores today are vastly different than they were 50 years ago? Fine if that's too recent we can push it back to 100 years. I'm not picky.
We can push it back as far as we want if you don't provide any evidence.0 -
Not MY definition of evolution. That's yours.
I'm not the one making statements about other peoples' bodies and evolution. Those statements are yours to defend.
What credibility do you bring to the topic?
What credibility does he need? He's presenting the theories and explanations, not claiming to be the author of them. If it helps at all, I agree with the vast majority of what he has said and explained. I've read many of the studies and scientific literatue associated with them, and have a biology degree from one of the best research universities in the world. Is that credibility enough for a fitness website?
Why don't you re-read the exchange between reddy and I to get some context for my statements?
I'm not asserting anything that requires "credibility" beyond the fact that the "Paleo" diet isn't an accurate representation of the diet of people living in the time period that it's named for.
Oh, that and that I digest food properly. He can't seem to comprehend that I digest food adequately and am quite healthy. Perhaps you agree with that, also?
Hon, he's just yanking everyone around. He's being obtuse on purpose.
Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I don't see him being intentionally obtuse, just trying to explain his assertions. You may not agree with the assertions or the explanations, but I think that's a different thing. And I don't see him as yanking people around at all.
So do you agree with him that I should cut foods that I enjoy and have never had difficulty digesting that help me maintain a well-balanced diet on the slight chance that I might have a sensitivity that I don't know that I have?0 -
Just curious about this line of thinking. If one feels completely fine and healthy would it still be suggested to systematically cut out all foods that could cause sensitivities? Would you advise taking a month without gluten, then a month without dairy, etc. etc.? Or would you suggest just going full on paleo for a month, then adding things back, like gluten? What would be advised?
I can't say what's best for you, but I can share experiences I've had or heard from others. It seems like a lot of people come to Paleo because they're not feeling awesome -- oftentimes fatigue, digestive issues, specific disease (Hashinmoto's, PCOS, insulin resistance, etc.) other random issues, overweight (which they suspect is the source of fatigue, but oftentimes is not the only reasons), etc. So, they give the diet a try, oftentimes with a low-ish carb approach too if they're looking to lose weight. And, those who like it, are sort of shocked by how much better they feel and how some the issues they had resolved or reduced. Others come to it because they meet someone that spoke highly of their experience with it (often people that have done major body recomp) and decide to give it a try.
At that point, some stay strictly Paloe forever. Others, start adding back in certain things. Some go off Paleo altogether and just identify that one thing they don't do well with and avoid it. Some turn into a less strict approach like Primal. It really varies on the individual, what works for them and what they're looking to accomplish.0 -
Burro and AKC are why we can't have nice things on these forums.
Instead of having a conversation they'd rather troll and flame and attempt to get a thread shut down.
Grow up.
I just get a kick in the pants when an opinion is made off to be fact, it is quite funny
So show me how I'm misguided instead of trolling, and I'd be glad to change my opinion.
see how that works?
your opinions are the ones in conflict with established scientific fact and yet you expect us to bear the burden of proof to convince you otherwise... :laugh:
explain to me how lactase persistence in peoples of European descent is in conflict with established scientific fact.
haven't you already posted a 1000 posts debating milk already?
what i'm referring to is the silliness about how the food supply is drastically different than it was just 50 years ago and that humans have not evolved to digest this "new" food yet. there is so much wrong with this notion that you stated as if it were established fact, that i could only assume you were joking.... have you not been doing stand-up comedy on this whole thread? i sure thought you were.
So you don't believe that wheat, milk, meat, and all animal products in the grocery stores today are vastly different than they were 50 years ago? Fine if that's too recent we can push it back to 100 years. I'm not picky.
We can push it back as far as we want if you don't provide any evidence.
Grass fed beef (the kind available exclusively 100-50 years ago) has more omega 3 fatty acids than omega 6s by a significant margine. Commercially produced beef available today flips that ratio on its head and there are now more omega 6's than 3's leading to the common heart health advice to "cut back on red meat"
do you want more examples?0 -
Not MY definition of evolution. That's yours.
I'm not the one making statements about other peoples' bodies and evolution. Those statements are yours to defend.
What credibility do you bring to the topic?
What credibility does he need? He's presenting the theories and explanations, not claiming to be the author of them. If it helps at all, I agree with the vast majority of what he has said and explained. I've read many of the studies and scientific literatue associated with them, and have a biology degree from one of the best research universities in the world. Is that credibility enough for a fitness website?
Why don't you re-read the exchange between reddy and I to get some context for my statements?
I'm not asserting anything that requires "credibility" beyond the fact that the "Paleo" diet isn't an accurate representation of the diet of people living in the time period that it's named for.
Oh, that and that I digest food properly. He can't seem to comprehend that I digest food adequately and am quite healthy. Perhaps you agree with that, also?
Hon, he's just yanking everyone around. He's being obtuse on purpose.
Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I don't see him being intentionally obtuse, just trying to explain his assertions. You may not agree with the assertions or the explanations, but I think that's a different thing. And I don't see him as yanking people around at all.
So do you agree with him that I should cut foods that I enjoy and have never had difficulty digesting that help me maintain a well-balanced diet on the slight chance that I might have a sensitivity that I don't know that I have?
not if you don't want to, which you clearly don't. lol this was never about YOU until you made it all about you. But hey I'm not really surprised - you seem to need the attention.0 -
So do you agree with him that I should cut foods that I enjoy and have never had difficulty digesting that help me maintain a well-balanced diet on the slight chance that I might have a sensitivity that I don't know that I have?
I don't think it's a bad idea or wouldn't have any merit, and you may find yourself pleasantly surprised as more than a few people have. Whether you want to is totally up to you, of course.0 -
wow that's incredibly ignorant.
Nice try.
The analogy stands.
Why should I change something that doesn't need to be changed?
K i'll ask for the fifth time.
How do you know it doesn't need to be changed? How do you know your body is operating 100% optimally? What is your frame of reference?
No one's body operates 100% optimally.
Have you ever lived as a woman? How do you know that you are in the correct gender if you haven't lived as a woman for awhile?0 -
I've had to ask four times now and still no answer. How do you know you're not sensitive to gluten? Have you ever tried going without gluten to compare?
Why would you go gluten-free if you have no issues with it?
A lot of people don't realize they have issues with it until the don't eat it for a while. It's a pretty common experience.
This makes no sense to me. Like, at all. JoRocka's earlier post is coming to mind. Because of the possibility of smashing your finger, everyone should not have hammers.
Think about it this way - if you're slightly gluten sensitive but have been eating wheat all your life, are you going to know something is wrong? No. Because the way you feel on a day to day basis is the way you've felt your whole life and it's "normal" for you. Many MANY times people only realize there is actually a different normal (often better) when they cut out gluten for a month to see what happens.
Make sense? If you don't have anything else to compare with your experience of "normal" then you have no frame of reference to call it normal in the first place.
I question whether "slightly gluten sensitive" is even a thing. Either you have a reaction or you don't. I'm more in line with thinking that cutting out something like gluten makes a person "feel better" because they are either cutting those calories entirely, or replacing those calories with something other macro that their body needs.0 -
At least I understand the connection between physics and evolution.
Unfortunately, you fail to understand the extremely basic concept of an analogy. But, thanks for making arguments that are completely irrelevant.
A battle of wits with the unarmed is not very sporting. Shame on me.
There is a direct physical link between atomic interaction and the expression of alleles in an environment. Since it seems that your awesome biology degree skipped over that, I have a hard time accepting your assertion of that degree as a source of expertise to provide credibility to your arguments.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions