We don't know what constitutes a true paleo diet!
Replies
-
Pffttt... I don't know where you live, but "race" isn't so clear cut where I live.
Maybe YOUR body "appreciates a break" but my body ("white" by appearance but not necessarily by heritage, btw) hasn't needed a break in 45 years.
Please stop the fear mongering.
You realize, of course, that you are my case in point?
Have you ever gone off grains to see what the difference is? If not, then how do you know your body hasn't needed a break?
I like grains. They help me make my calories. I like legumes. They help me get my protein.
I don't experience any ill effects.
Why would I "fix" something that isn't broken?
No one is asking you to "fix" anything. I don't think I've seen anyone that says this diet is the right diet for EVERYONE (I don't think any diet can make that claim). But, there are a lot of people that didn't think anything was wrong for them either, and then after going Paleo/Primal, they felt a lot better and realized that their "normal" was suboptimal. Folks with celiac are extreme and realize something is very, very wrong. But food sensitivities and intolerances lie on a spectrum and many people don't realize that until they eliminate them from their diet -- and for some, this results in the clearing up of other issues -- digestive issues, auto-immune issues, etc.
It may not help you personally, but it certainly has helped and is beneficial to others.
This is exactly my understanding of Neandermagon's point. This is a great diet for people with sensitivities.
It has NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING to do with what humans evolved to eat.
If the proponents of the diet framed it in a way that highlighted the benefits of the diet (nutritionally balanced way to live with food sensitivities) and didn't try to apply it to everybody else "Human evolved to eat certain things," the diet would be great and very credible.0 -
Hmmm...seems like there are a lot of fat herbivores out there, especially those that are fed grains...like cows. And yet I see very few fat carnivores...very few overweight tigers, lions, etc.
The domestic cat is an obligate carnivore. That means that they have to eat meat to survive. There are certain amino acids that they need to function that they can only get from eating meat. Here in America, more than half of them are obese. In my work, I've seen x-rays of cats that show a girth to pelvis ratio that doesn't seem possible. I've seen multiple cats who were 4 times as heavy as they should have been ("your cat needs to lose 20 pounds").
Carnivores in the wild aren't trim because they're paleo. They're slim because they don't eat without a significant expenditure of energy first. If you were a hunter gatherer and one day all you found was some wild legume that took you hours to collect and prepare before you could eat it, it's probably not going to make you fat, right?
If you want to emulate the diet of our skinny ancestors, why not imitate their lifestyle? You can start with baby steps. Peeling, chopping and stirring don't burn a lot of calories, but probably more than ordering a pizza. Next, why not walk to the grocery store? Or grow your own vegetables?
Master level: persistence hunting!
Sounds primal. Lol????0 -
I think the kaleo diet looks interesting, but I would never consider doing it because it does not suit my lifestyle or the foods I WANT to eat.
I even like the fact that the name is a cross between kale and paleo (I know that probably gets a lot of your blood boiling) hell they didn't even have kale in Palaeolithic times ( sorry not sure if that's true or not).
I really, really think you should read Amber's blog www.gokaleo.com
I think it would be very helpful to you.
Thanks I have read it several times.
I wasn't be sarcastic (although I normally am). I think it looks like a great diet.
It just doesn't suit me or my eating style. my point is there are some great diets out there, most get us to the same destination, they just use our preferred route.
I'm sorry, I don't understand.
Here is Amber's description of Kaleo:Kale + Paleo = Kaleo. It’s a joke, yo! A word I made up because people always seem to want to label my way of eating, to put me ‘in a box’. Kale and paleo are trendy right now, and I wanted to poke at food fads a little. I kinda liked it though, and it took on a life of it’s own. It grew into something more than a play on words, an anti-dogma if you will. I resist the philosophical dogma that there is only ONE right way to eat.
Everyone’s ‘ideal’ diet is very individual and unique to themselves. Here’s a graphic that depicts how I decide what to eat.
(venn diagram showing intersection between Foods I enjoy, Foods that support my goals, values and culture, Foods that my local food system provides abundantly and sustainably: https://gokaleo.com/about-me/what-is-kaleo-2/)
I try to get as much of my nutrition as possible from foods that fit into the ‘Food Foundation’ intersection. Of course I do eat foods that don’t fit perfectly into this template, like coffee and chocolate, but most of my food choices fall into these intersections. Using this template, everyone’s diet would be unique to their values, goals, personal tastes and local climate. There is no one right way.
My way of eating evolves as I learn, and as my body changes, so flexibility is also a component of my eating philosophy. And most important of all, a sense of perspective: we are unbelievably fortunate that we have the freedom and resources to spend time optimizing our diets. Lets be gracious to others who are just beginning their lifestyle change, and lets be aware of how our food choices impact our environment and the people and creatures we share it with.
Exactly what about that doesn't suit you? Considering how food choices impact the environment? Eating foods you enjoy?
This is a prime example of somebody trying to force a diet on someone
'I don't understand' 'exactly what about that doesn't suit you'
I think this is where primal differs from other 'fad diets kaleo, vegan, IIFYM and yes primal and paleo - there all fad diets don't be naive'. With primal we don't force it on others.
Your diet doesn't float my boat, it's based on cutting out food I really enjoy eating and limiting the macros I really enjoy eating.
The thing is I'm not going to chastise you for having a different diet to me.
DIFFERENT HORSES FOR DIFFERENT COURSES.
Amber realises it - everyone’s ‘ideal’ diet is very individual and unique to themselves.
I'm sorry. I'm still not getting how "eat what you want and listen to your hunger cues" is a fad diet.0 -
I think the kaleo diet looks interesting, but I would never consider doing it because it does not suit my lifestyle or the foods I WANT to eat.
I even like the fact that the name is a cross between kale and paleo (I know that probably gets a lot of your blood boiling) hell they didn't even have kale in Palaeolithic times ( sorry not sure if that's true or not).
I really, really think you should read Amber's blog www.gokaleo.com
I think it would be very helpful to you.
Thanks I have read it several times.
I wasn't be sarcastic (although I normally am). I think it looks like a great diet.
It just doesn't suit me or my eating style. my point is there are some great diets out there, most get us to the same destination, they just use our preferred route.
I'm sorry, I don't understand.
Here is Amber's description of Kaleo:Kale + Paleo = Kaleo. It’s a joke, yo! A word I made up because people always seem to want to label my way of eating, to put me ‘in a box’. Kale and paleo are trendy right now, and I wanted to poke at food fads a little. I kinda liked it though, and it took on a life of it’s own. It grew into something more than a play on words, an anti-dogma if you will. I resist the philosophical dogma that there is only ONE right way to eat.
Everyone’s ‘ideal’ diet is very individual and unique to themselves. Here’s a graphic that depicts how I decide what to eat.
(venn diagram showing intersection between Foods I enjoy, Foods that support my goals, values and culture, Foods that my local food system provides abundantly and sustainably: https://gokaleo.com/about-me/what-is-kaleo-2/)
I try to get as much of my nutrition as possible from foods that fit into the ‘Food Foundation’ intersection. Of course I do eat foods that don’t fit perfectly into this template, like coffee and chocolate, but most of my food choices fall into these intersections. Using this template, everyone’s diet would be unique to their values, goals, personal tastes and local climate. There is no one right way.
My way of eating evolves as I learn, and as my body changes, so flexibility is also a component of my eating philosophy. And most important of all, a sense of perspective: we are unbelievably fortunate that we have the freedom and resources to spend time optimizing our diets. Lets be gracious to others who are just beginning their lifestyle change, and lets be aware of how our food choices impact our environment and the people and creatures we share it with.
Exactly what about that doesn't suit you? Considering how food choices impact the environment? Eating foods you enjoy?
This is a prime example of somebody trying to force a diet on someone
'I don't understand' 'exactly what about that doesn't suit you'
I think this is where primal differs from other 'fad diets kaleo, vegan, IIFYM and yes primal and paleo - there all fad diets don't be naive'. With primal we don't force it on others.
Your diet doesn't float my boat, it's based on cutting out food I really enjoy eating and limiting the macros I really enjoy eating.
The thing is I'm not going to chastise you for having a different diet to me.
DIFFERENT HORSES FOR DIFFERENT COURSES.
Amber realises it - everyone’s ‘ideal’ diet is very individual and unique to themselves.
I'm sorry. I'm still not getting how "eat what you want and listen to your hunger cues" is a fad diet.
And I don't think you or others ever will!!!0 -
This is exactly my understanding of Neandermagon's point. This is a great diet for people with sensitivities.
It has NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING to do with what humans evolved to eat.
If the proponents of the diet framed it in a way that highlighted the benefits of the diet (nutritionally balanced way to live with food sensitivities) and didn't try to apply it to everybody else "Human evolved to eat certain things," the diet would be great and very credible.
But, the argument behind the food sensitivities is due to evolution -- that so many people are having these sensitivities now is because the diet has changed significantly -- whether in consumption of amount of grain products, content of such products (how many vegetables, fruits and grains have been engineered and aren't as nutritious as their ancestral or non-modified version), differences in omega 3-6 balance seen in grain-fed beef, all the chemicals and preservatives in processed foods, etc. Now, if you don't think that's true, we'll just have to agree to disagree.0 -
This is exactly my understanding of Neandermagon's point. This is a great diet for people with sensitivities.
It has NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING to do with what humans evolved to eat.
If the proponents of the diet framed it in a way that highlighted the benefits of the diet (nutritionally balanced way to live with food sensitivities) and didn't try to apply it to everybody else "Human evolved to eat certain things," the diet would be great and very credible.
But, the argument behind the food sensitivities is due to evolution -- that so many people are having these sensitivities now is because the diet has changed significantly -- whether in consumption of amount of grain products, content of such products (how many vegetables, fruits and grains have been engineered and aren't as nutritious as their ancestral or non-modified version), differences in omega 3-6 balance seen in grain-fed beef, etc. Now, if you don't think that's true, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
absolutely. the FOOD of today is vastly different from the food of 50 years ago and our bodies haven't had a chance to catch up, thus higher levels of food sensitivities across the board.
it's pretty simple stuff really.0 -
Pffttt... I don't know where you live, but "race" isn't so clear cut where I live.
Maybe YOUR body "appreciates a break" but my body ("white" by appearance but not necessarily by heritage, btw) hasn't needed a break in 45 years.
Please stop the fear mongering.
You realize, of course, that you are my case in point?
Have you ever gone off grains to see what the difference is? If not, then how do you know your body hasn't needed a break?
I like grains. They help me make my calories. I like legumes. They help me get my protein.
I don't experience any ill effects.
Why would I "fix" something that isn't broken?
No one is asking you to "fix" anything. I don't think I've seen anyone that says this diet is the right diet for EVERYONE (I don't think any diet can make that claim). But, there are a lot of people that didn't think anything was wrong for them either, and then after going Paleo/Primal, they felt a lot better and realized that their "normal" was suboptimal. Folks with celiac are extreme and realize something is very, very wrong. But food sensitivities and intolerances lie on a spectrum and many people don't realize that until they eliminate them from their diet -- and for some, this results in the clearing up of other issues -- digestive issues, auto-immune issues, etc.
It may not help you personally, but it certainly has helped and is beneficial to others.
First off, I don't think you are reading the referenced quotes.
Secondly, you say "this diet isn't right for everyone" then imply that people (me included) don't actually know that they're having problems. Like the previous poster, you're saying that it's NOT for EVERYONE... but EVERYONE should TRY it.
Which addresses my point about fear mongering. "OH YOU MIGHT BE ALL ATE UP WITH THE GASTRIC PLAGUE AND NOT EVEN KNOW IT!"
To that I say, "No."
Knock yourself out eating a diet named after a time period when humans ate grub worms, baby birds and afterbirth. Just stop trying to tell me that I'm 'doing it wrong.'0 -
absolutely. the FOOD of today is vastly different from the food of 50 years ago and our bodies haven't had a chance to catch up, thus higher levels of food sensitivities across the board.
it's pretty simple stuff really.
LOL :laugh:0 -
See, your thinking logically, and this diet is about a belief, not logic.......basically whatever you say will make no difference whatsoever.What the article from the OP fails to mention --- or rather, just skips over willy nilly --- is that humans evolved to eat anything edible. Some societies had to go to great lengths to make certain things edible. But they ate whatever they could, whenever they could. In short, we evolved to be omnivores.
From the article:Let’s say that natural selection adapts an organism to a given environment by selecting for an advantageous trait. What if the environment shifts, as they do, and the trait the original environment selected no longer works the same way? This is an evolutionary mismatch. It can happen with any environmental shift, like a change in diet.
Yes, this is correct in a strict sense. Things like diet can wreak havoc on a population. Look at Pandas or Polar bears. Highly specialized creatures whose habitats and food sources are being threatened, leaving them close to extinction. But we aren't like that. Our greatest specialization is our adaptability. Look at all the food sources we can gain nutrients from; at all the humans who live in extreme climates who eat wildly different foods to others in different extreme climates. Yet both groups manage to survive.
Its this basic misapplication of evolutionary science to try and support this flawed premise that I find most irritating. And this general tenant - we didn't evolve to eat X - that underlies the whole paleo thing. Take away the pseudoscience and you are left with just another fad diet.
So, just want to make sure I understand, you're irritated with the diet because of its incorrect labeling premise? Do you have anything to comment on as to the diet itself?
Maybe, it's just me, but rhetoric bores me.
If you want my opinion on the diet itself, it's unnecessarily restrictive. Nothing wrong with avoiding foods that are actually making you ill, but a lot of people doing paleo are not made ill by those foods and avoiding them has no health benefit for them, but they're scared into avoiding them by people who tell them "cavemen" didn't eat them, even though the people telling them have no idea about anything in palaeoanthropology, never mind what foods cavepeople ate .................. the result is you have people avoiding foods under the mistaken belief that those foods are bad for them, because they've been told palaeolithic people didn't eat them by people who don't have the first idea what palaeolithic people actually ate............................ you don't see a problem there??
Why do you think it's based on a belief? I've seen a few people say that and I just don't understand what the basis is for that, unless you mean belief = reasoned conclusion.
You yourself said it's not scientifically based on what a paleolithic man ate. What else is there to base it on? The opposite of science/facts is opinion/belief.
Just because it's not scientifically based on what paleolithic man ate, doesn't mean that there are not solid scientific principles for the components of the diet -- which there are. A few examples are research on casein, lactose, lectins, gluten, omega 3-6 balance, etc. From scientific facts, you draw conclusions, opinions and possible beliefs, depending on how you choose to define that. They are not mutually exclusive.
admits paleo is not scientifically based, and then goes on to the say that the "science" is "solid"…
LOL ….0 -
Pffttt... I don't know where you live, but "race" isn't so clear cut where I live.
Maybe YOUR body "appreciates a break" but my body ("white" by appearance but not necessarily by heritage, btw) hasn't needed a break in 45 years.
Please stop the fear mongering.
You realize, of course, that you are my case in point?
Have you ever gone off grains to see what the difference is? If not, then how do you know your body hasn't needed a break?
I like grains. They help me make my calories. I like legumes. They help me get my protein.
I don't experience any ill effects.
Why would I "fix" something that isn't broken?
No one is asking you to "fix" anything. I don't think I've seen anyone that says this diet is the right diet for EVERYONE (I don't think any diet can make that claim). But, there are a lot of people that didn't think anything was wrong for them either, and then after going Paleo/Primal, they felt a lot better and realized that their "normal" was suboptimal. Folks with celiac are extreme and realize something is very, very wrong. But food sensitivities and intolerances lie on a spectrum and many people don't realize that until they eliminate them from their diet -- and for some, this results in the clearing up of other issues -- digestive issues, auto-immune issues, etc.
It may not help you personally, but it certainly has helped and is beneficial to others.
First off, I don't think you are reading the referenced quotes.
Secondly, you say "this diet isn't right for everyone" then imply that people (me included) don't actually know that they're having problems. Like the previous poster, you're saying that it's NOT for EVERYONE... but EVERYONE should TRY it.
Which addresses my point about fear mongering. "OH YOU MIGHT BE ALL ATE UP WITH THE GASTRIC PLAGUE AND NOT EVEN KNOW IT!"
To that I say, "No."
Knock yourself out eating a diet named after a time period when humans ate grub worms, baby birds and afterbirth. Just stop trying to tell me that I'm 'doing it wrong.'
you are so angry. lol take it easy, it's really not worth getting worked up about.
no one's saying you have a gastric plague. you're extrapolating to a ridiculous degree.
secondly, yes it IS consistent to say this diet isn't for everyone but everyone could potentially benefit for trying it out because it would provide them with more information and knowledge about how their body works and how it responds to different stimuli. knowledge is... ohh right. power. nothing wrong with more information.
0 -
absolutely. the FOOD of today is vastly different from the food of 50 years ago and our bodies haven't had a chance to catch up, thus higher levels of food sensitivities across the board.
it's pretty simple stuff really.
LOL :laugh:
? care to elaborate? because what i said is pretty widely accepted...0 -
First off, I don't think you are reading the referenced quotes.
Secondly, you say "this diet isn't right for everyone" then imply that people (me included) don't actually know that they're having problems. Like the previous poster, you're saying that it's NOT for EVERYONE... but EVERYONE should TRY it.
Which addresses my point about fear mongering. "OH YOU MIGHT BE ALL ATE UP WITH THE GASTRIC PLAGUE AND NOT EVEN KNOW IT!"
To that I say, "No."
Knock yourself out eating a diet named after a time period when humans ate grub worms, baby birds and afterbirth. Just stop trying to tell me that I'm 'doing it wrong.'
All we're telling you is that experience of ourselves and others. I personally didn't realize how much better I'd feel with the Primal diet -- I likely have some sort of food sensitivity, but it wasn't so great as to notice until the food was eliminated. Some have severe issues, whether gastrointestinal, skin problems, joint problems, etc. and feel much better on the Paleo/Primal diet, likely showing that their former diet was triggering some issues of which they weren't aware.
You don't want to try it, don't. But, there are plenty of people that felt the same way you did and were shocked that they felt so much better later. I'm sure there are others that saw little or no difference too.
But, to say to that there is no scientific basis for its nutritional science or that no one should try it, that's just incorrect.0 -
Just because it's not scientifically based on what paleolithic man ate, doesn't mean that there are not solid scientific principles for the components of the diet -- which there are. A few examples are research on casein, lactose, lectins, gluten, omega 3-6 balance, etc. From scientific facts, you draw conclusions, opinions and possible beliefs, depending on how you choose to define that. They are not mutually exclusive.
admits paleo is not scientifically based, and then goes on to the say that the "science" is "solid"…
LOL ….
Right, because there are different branches of science. Physics isn't based on chemical principles, but it's still science. Duh.0 -
Pffttt... I don't know where you live, but "race" isn't so clear cut where I live.
Maybe YOUR body "appreciates a break" but my body ("white" by appearance but not necessarily by heritage, btw) hasn't needed a break in 45 years.
Please stop the fear mongering.
You realize, of course, that you are my case in point?
Have you ever gone off grains to see what the difference is? If not, then how do you know your body hasn't needed a break?
I like grains. They help me make my calories. I like legumes. They help me get my protein.
I don't experience any ill effects.
Why would I "fix" something that isn't broken?
No one is asking you to "fix" anything. I don't think I've seen anyone that says this diet is the right diet for EVERYONE (I don't think any diet can make that claim). But, there are a lot of people that didn't think anything was wrong for them either, and then after going Paleo/Primal, they felt a lot better and realized that their "normal" was suboptimal. Folks with celiac are extreme and realize something is very, very wrong. But food sensitivities and intolerances lie on a spectrum and many people don't realize that until they eliminate them from their diet -- and for some, this results in the clearing up of other issues -- digestive issues, auto-immune issues, etc.
It may not help you personally, but it certainly has helped and is beneficial to others.
First off, I don't think you are reading the referenced quotes.
Secondly, you say "this diet isn't right for everyone" then imply that people (me included) don't actually know that they're having problems. Like the previous poster, you're saying that it's NOT for EVERYONE... but EVERYONE should TRY it.
Which addresses my point about fear mongering. "OH YOU MIGHT BE ALL ATE UP WITH THE GASTRIC PLAGUE AND NOT EVEN KNOW IT!"
To that I say, "No."
Knock yourself out eating a diet named after a time period when humans ate grub worms, baby birds and afterbirth. Just stop trying to tell me that I'm 'doing it wrong.'
you are so angry. lol take it easy, it's really not worth getting worked up about.
no one's saying you have a gastric plague. you're extrapolating to a ridiculous degree.
secondly, yes it IS consistent to say this diet isn't for everyone but everyone could potentially benefit for trying it out because it would provide them with more information and knowledge about how their body works and how it responds to different stimuli. knowledge is... ohh right. power. nothing wrong with more information.
Condescendence doesn't look good on you.
I think you would benefit from a serving of Triscuits.0 -
First off, I don't think you are reading the referenced quotes.
Secondly, you say "this diet isn't right for everyone" then imply that people (me included) don't actually know that they're having problems. Like the previous poster, you're saying that it's NOT for EVERYONE... but EVERYONE should TRY it.
Which addresses my point about fear mongering. "OH YOU MIGHT BE ALL ATE UP WITH THE GASTRIC PLAGUE AND NOT EVEN KNOW IT!"
To that I say, "No."
Knock yourself out eating a diet named after a time period when humans ate grub worms, baby birds and afterbirth. Just stop trying to tell me that I'm 'doing it wrong.'
All we're telling you is that experience of ourselves and others. I personally didn't realize how much better I'd feel with the Primal diet -- I likely have some sort of food sensitivity, but it wasn't so great as to notice until the food was eliminated. Some have severe issues, whether gastrointestinal, skin problems, joint problems, etc. and feel much better on the Paleo/Primal diet, likely showing that their former diet was triggering some issues of which they weren't aware.
You don't want to try it, don't. But, there are plenty of people that felt the same way you did and were shocked that they felt so much better later. I'm sure there are others that saw little or no difference too.
But, to say to that there is no scientific basis for its nutritional science or that no one should try it, that's just incorrect.
Where or when did I ever assert that paleo was not a nutritionally sound?0 -
First off, I don't think you are reading the referenced quotes.
Secondly, you say "this diet isn't right for everyone" then imply that people (me included) don't actually know that they're having problems. Like the previous poster, you're saying that it's NOT for EVERYONE... but EVERYONE should TRY it.
Which addresses my point about fear mongering. "OH YOU MIGHT BE ALL ATE UP WITH THE GASTRIC PLAGUE AND NOT EVEN KNOW IT!"
To that I say, "No."
Knock yourself out eating a diet named after a time period when humans ate grub worms, baby birds and afterbirth. Just stop trying to tell me that I'm 'doing it wrong.'
All we're telling you is that experience of ourselves and others. I personally didn't realize how much better I'd feel with the Primal diet -- I likely have some sort of food sensitivity, but it wasn't so great as to notice until the food was eliminated. Some have severe issues, whether gastrointestinal, skin problems, joint problems, etc. and feel much better on the Paleo/Primal diet, likely showing that their former diet was triggering some issues of which they weren't aware.
You don't want to try it, don't. But, there are plenty of people that felt the same way you did and were shocked that they felt so much better later. I'm sure there are others that saw little or no difference too.
But, to say to that there is no scientific basis for its nutritional science or that no one should try it, that's just incorrect.
Where or when did I ever assert that paleo was not a nutritionally sound?
Then, what's your big beef with it? And, I do think you called the science behind it "meh". But, perhaps I'm mistaken and got you confused with someone else.0 -
Pffttt... I don't know where you live, but "race" isn't so clear cut where I live.
Maybe YOUR body "appreciates a break" but my body ("white" by appearance but not necessarily by heritage, btw) hasn't needed a break in 45 years.
Please stop the fear mongering.
You realize, of course, that you are my case in point?
Have you ever gone off grains to see what the difference is? If not, then how do you know your body hasn't needed a break?
I like grains. They help me make my calories. I like legumes. They help me get my protein.
I don't experience any ill effects.
Why would I "fix" something that isn't broken?
No one is asking you to "fix" anything. I don't think I've seen anyone that says this diet is the right diet for EVERYONE (I don't think any diet can make that claim). But, there are a lot of people that didn't think anything was wrong for them either, and then after going Paleo/Primal, they felt a lot better and realized that their "normal" was suboptimal. Folks with celiac are extreme and realize something is very, very wrong. But food sensitivities and intolerances lie on a spectrum and many people don't realize that until they eliminate them from their diet -- and for some, this results in the clearing up of other issues -- digestive issues, auto-immune issues, etc.
It may not help you personally, but it certainly has helped and is beneficial to others.
First off, I don't think you are reading the referenced quotes.
Secondly, you say "this diet isn't right for everyone" then imply that people (me included) don't actually know that they're having problems. Like the previous poster, you're saying that it's NOT for EVERYONE... but EVERYONE should TRY it.
Which addresses my point about fear mongering. "OH YOU MIGHT BE ALL ATE UP WITH THE GASTRIC PLAGUE AND NOT EVEN KNOW IT!"
To that I say, "No."
Knock yourself out eating a diet named after a time period when humans ate grub worms, baby birds and afterbirth. Just stop trying to tell me that I'm 'doing it wrong.'
you are so angry. lol take it easy, it's really not worth getting worked up about.
no one's saying you have a gastric plague. you're extrapolating to a ridiculous degree.
secondly, yes it IS consistent to say this diet isn't for everyone but everyone could potentially benefit for trying it out because it would provide them with more information and knowledge about how their body works and how it responds to different stimuli. knowledge is... ohh right. power. nothing wrong with more information.
Condescendence doesn't look good on you.
I think you would benefit from a serving of Triscuits.
*condescension and I'm not paleo. lol0 -
absolutely. the FOOD of today is vastly different from the food of 50 years ago and our bodies haven't had a chance to catch up, thus higher levels of food sensitivities across the board.
it's pretty simple stuff really.
LOL :laugh:
? care to elaborate? because what i said is pretty widely accepted...
widely accepted by who? readers of clean eating blog sites? or of paleo blog sites?
ROTFLMAO :laugh:0 -
I think the kaleo diet looks interesting, but I would never consider doing it because it does not suit my lifestyle or the foods I WANT to eat.
I even like the fact that the name is a cross between kale and paleo (I know that probably gets a lot of your blood boiling) hell they didn't even have kale in Palaeolithic times ( sorry not sure if that's true or not).
I really, really think you should read Amber's blog www.gokaleo.com
I think it would be very helpful to you.
Thanks I have read it several times.
I wasn't be sarcastic (although I normally am). I think it looks like a great diet.
It just doesn't suit me or my eating style. my point is there are some great diets out there, most get us to the same destination, they just use our preferred route.
I'm sorry, I don't understand.
Here is Amber's description of Kaleo:Kale + Paleo = Kaleo. It’s a joke, yo! A word I made up because people always seem to want to label my way of eating, to put me ‘in a box’. Kale and paleo are trendy right now, and I wanted to poke at food fads a little. I kinda liked it though, and it took on a life of it’s own. It grew into something more than a play on words, an anti-dogma if you will. I resist the philosophical dogma that there is only ONE right way to eat.
Everyone’s ‘ideal’ diet is very individual and unique to themselves. Here’s a graphic that depicts how I decide what to eat.
(venn diagram showing intersection between Foods I enjoy, Foods that support my goals, values and culture, Foods that my local food system provides abundantly and sustainably: https://gokaleo.com/about-me/what-is-kaleo-2/)
I try to get as much of my nutrition as possible from foods that fit into the ‘Food Foundation’ intersection. Of course I do eat foods that don’t fit perfectly into this template, like coffee and chocolate, but most of my food choices fall into these intersections. Using this template, everyone’s diet would be unique to their values, goals, personal tastes and local climate. There is no one right way.
My way of eating evolves as I learn, and as my body changes, so flexibility is also a component of my eating philosophy. And most important of all, a sense of perspective: we are unbelievably fortunate that we have the freedom and resources to spend time optimizing our diets. Lets be gracious to others who are just beginning their lifestyle change, and lets be aware of how our food choices impact our environment and the people and creatures we share it with.
Exactly what about that doesn't suit you? Considering how food choices impact the environment? Eating foods you enjoy?
This is a prime example of somebody trying to force a diet on someone
'I don't understand' 'exactly what about that doesn't suit you'
I think this is where primal differs from other 'fad diets kaleo, vegan, IIFYM and yes primal and paleo - there all fad diets don't be naive'. With primal we don't force it on others.
Your diet doesn't float my boat, it's based on cutting out food I really enjoy eating and limiting the macros I really enjoy eating.
The thing is I'm not going to chastise you for having a different diet to me.
DIFFERENT HORSES FOR DIFFERENT COURSES.
Amber realises it - everyone’s ‘ideal’ diet is very individual and unique to themselves.
I'm sorry. I'm still not getting how "eat what you want and listen to your hunger cues" is a fad diet.
And I don't think you or others ever will!!!
Let's define our terms:Food fad is a term originally used to describe simple, catchy diets that often focused on a single element such as cabbage, grapefruit or cottage cheese. In 1974, the term was defined as three categories of food fads.[5]
- A particular food or food group is exaggerated and purported to cure specific diseases.
- Foods are eliminated from an individual’s diet because they are viewed as harmful.
- An emphasis is placed on eating certain foods to express a particular lifestyle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_faddism
If you have an alternate definition that includes Amber's philosophy, please let me know.0 -
But, to say to that there is no scientific basis for its nutritional science or that no one should try it, that's just incorrect.
it's perfectly correct to say that because it's true. It's based on someone's feelings about food- not reality or science.
it's the Christianity of the food world. Seriously.
And yes- I have gone paleo/paleo-ish- I tend to still eat a whole foods based diet- supplemented with bacon, coffee ice cream and oreos'. Because all of those things are delicious. I don't call it anything but this is what I eat. It's not clean- it's not paleo- it's not "whole foods" it's not organic- it's just what I eat.
Also- you said bacon was calorie dense- do you even lift bro?
bacon is a joke in the "calorie" world.
6 slices is something like 200 calories- compared to everything else it's a joke. it's delicious and tasty.0 -
you must have been on the debate team in high schoolabsolutely. the FOOD of today is vastly different from the food of 50 years ago and our bodies haven't had a chance to catch up, thus higher levels of food sensitivities across the board.
it's pretty simple stuff really.
LOL :laugh:
? care to elaborate? because what i said is pretty widely accepted...
widely accepted by who? readers of clean eating blog sites? or of paleo blog sites?
ROTFLMAO :laugh:0 -
Food fad is a term originally used to describe simple, catchy diets that often focused on a single element such as cabbage, grapefruit or cottage cheese. In 1974, the term was defined as three categories of food fads.[5]
- A particular food or food group is exaggerated and purported to cure specific diseases.
- Foods are eliminated from an individual’s diet because they are viewed as harmful.
- An emphasis is placed on eating certain foods to express a particular lifestyle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_faddism
If you have an alternate definition that includes Amber's philosophy, please let me know.
[/quote]
Based on this definition, wouldn't any change be a fad then? Stop eating McDonalds, fad. Stop eating processed food, fad. Stop eating trans fat, fad. Sort of a useless definition.0 -
Just because it's not scientifically based on what paleolithic man ate, doesn't mean that there are not solid scientific principles for the components of the diet -- which there are. A few examples are research on casein, lactose, lectins, gluten, omega 3-6 balance, etc. From scientific facts, you draw conclusions, opinions and possible beliefs, depending on how you choose to define that. They are not mutually exclusive.
admits paleo is not scientifically based, and then goes on to the say that the "science" is "solid"…
LOL ….
Right, because there are different branches of science. Physics isn't based on chemical principles, but it's still science. Duh.
Actually, the science behind chemistry is the same science behind physics. Chemical atoms obey physical laws. And the scientific process works the same way in both fields.0 -
But, to say to that there is no scientific basis for its nutritional science or that no one should try it, that's just incorrect.
it's perfectly correct to say that because it's true. It's based on someone's feelings about food- not reality or science.
it's the Christianity of the food world. Seriously.
And yes- I have gone paleo/paleo-ish- I tend to still eat a whole foods based diet- supplemented with bacon, coffee ice cream and oreos'. Because all of those things are delicious. I don't call it anything but this is what I eat. It's not clean- it's not paleo- it's not "whole foods" it's not organic- it's just what I eat.
Also- you said bacon was calorie dense- do you even lift bro?
bacon is a joke in the "calorie" world.
6 slices is something like 200 calories- compared to everything else it's a joke. it's delicious and tasty.
How is that true? Are there not studies out there on the benefits/detriment of omega-3 fatty acids vs. omega-6? How about the effect of grains and high glycemic carbs on insulin levels and how that impacts insulin resistance, pre-diabetes, diabetes, weight loss, etc.? How about how certain substances (gluten, lactose, etc.) causing or contributing to certain inflammatory responses or or leaky gut? How about the effect of lectins? No, no science at all. Totally made up. Yeah, okay.
What about all that science?0 -
But, to say to that there is no scientific basis for its nutritional science or that no one should try it, that's just incorrect.
it's perfectly correct to say that because it's true. It's based on someone's feelings about food- not reality or science.
it's the Christianity of the food world. Seriously.
And yes- I have gone paleo/paleo-ish- I tend to still eat a whole foods based diet- supplemented with bacon, coffee ice cream and oreos'. Because all of those things are delicious. I don't call it anything but this is what I eat. It's not clean- it's not paleo- it's not "whole foods" it's not organic- it's just what I eat.
Also- you said bacon was calorie dense- do you even lift bro?
bacon is a joke in the "calorie" world.
6 slices is something like 200 calories- compared to everything else it's a joke. it's delicious and tasty.
How is that true? Are there not studies out there on the benefits/detriment of omega-3 fatty acids vs. omega-6? How about the effect of grains and high glycemic carbs on insulin levels and how that impacts insulin resistance, pre-diabetes, diabetes, weight loss, etc.? How about how certain substances (gluten, lactose, etc.) causing or contributing to certain inflammatory responses or or leaky gut? How about the effect of lectins? No, no science at all. Totally made up. Yeah, okay.
What about all that science?
99% percent of that "science" doesn't pass the "So what?" test.
Pick a study and I will analyze it for you.
How about you pick the ones cited in Deep Nutrition and Good Calories Bad Calories? I certainly don't agree with all of them, but I do with some. Report back.0 -
Right, because there are different branches of science. Physics isn't based on chemical principles, but it's still science. Duh.
Actually, the science behind chemistry is the same science behind physics. Chemical atoms obey physical laws. And the scientific process works the same way in both fields.
So, you think because they both study matter and are bound by the same physical laws, that makes them the same branch of science? Really? I really hope that you're not a scientist. That may be the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard.
Or you're being intentionally obtuse, and that's not very productive to a meaningful conversation.0 -
Right, because there are different branches of science. Physics isn't based on chemical principles, but it's still science. Duh.
Actually, the science behind chemistry is the same science behind physics. Chemical atoms obey physical laws. And the scientific process works the same way in both fields.
So, you think because they both study matter and are bound by the same physical laws, that makes them the same branch of science? Really? I really hope that you're not a scientist. That may be the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard.
Or you're being intentionally obtuse, and that's not very productive to a meaningful conversation.
physics is the science of everything.
chemistry is a subset of physics.
the fact that you don't recognize this fundamental truth makes everything you say suspect.0 -
no one's saying you have a gastric plague. you're extrapolating to a ridiculous degree.
secondly, yes it IS consistent to say this diet isn't for everyone but everyone could potentially benefit for trying it out because it would provide them with more information and knowledge about how their body works and how it responds to different stimuli. knowledge is... ohh right. power. nothing wrong with more information.
Condescendence doesn't look good on you.
I think you would benefit from a serving of Triscuits.
*condescension and I'm not paleo. lol
[/quote]
Thanks for correcting with a synonym. lol0 -
you must have been on the debate team in high schoolabsolutely. the FOOD of today is vastly different from the food of 50 years ago and our bodies haven't had a chance to catch up, thus higher levels of food sensitivities across the board.
it's pretty simple stuff really.
LOL :laugh:
? care to elaborate? because what i said is pretty widely accepted...
widely accepted by who? readers of clean eating blog sites? or of paleo blog sites?
ROTFLMAO :laugh:
you're funny. the things you post on here are funny. don't hate me because i have a sense of humor.
0 -
physics is the science of everything.
chemistry is a subset of physics.
the fact that you don't recognize this fundamental truth makes everything you say suspect.
Yes, I understand the fundamentals of physics, but I don't conflate every other science as being the same as physics, regardless of the underlying principles, for the sake of common discourse. Geezus H Krist. It's hard to believe that some of you are real people with such ridiculous 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