Paleo vs. Clean eating?
Replies
-
Yes. String instruments are the same. It's just math.
That's good to know. I'm really no good at the guitar. Why do the different string instruments have to be held differently? Do different hand placements mean anything? Does the size or shape of the guitar matter? Can I make an acoustic sound like an electric guitar? I don't know the answer to any of these questions.
People get all freaky about it because for one thing, people are stating that the diet can help autoimmune diseases, which can be fatal or at the very least bring down the quality of life. There's a reason people with Celiac's really care if there is gluten or not. If Lindsey came over for dinner, and I served her a wheat based cake as part of a Paleo meal plan, because the other 80% was Paleo, do you think that would matter? (Assuming I didn't tell her, because you know. I followed the 80/20 guidelines and because words have no meaning, I had no idea I was possibly endangering her. I wanted some gray cake in my day.)
People with diseases are different. I'm not talking about that.
I'm talking about healthy people looking at external sources for losing weight. What they should do is simply look internally. It's a rather simple problem to solve. The answer isn't in a Paleo, or any other special, diet.
If you have a disease, then of course, you may have to eat a modified diet of some sort to help. But, even that is grey, depending on severity and other issues. Diseases are not uniform.
But what if your health problems are caused by what you eat. Is it not logical to stop eating food your body finds hard to digest?
Or do you think that you should in the words of The Beautiful South - carry on regardless?0 -
Yes. String instruments are the same. It's just math.
That's good to know. I'm really no good at the guitar. Why do the different string instruments have to be held differently? Do different hand placements mean anything? Does the size or shape of the guitar matter? Can I make an acoustic sound like an electric guitar? I don't know the answer to any of these questions.
People get all freaky about it because for one thing, people are stating that the diet can help autoimmune diseases, which can be fatal or at the very least bring down the quality of life. There's a reason people with Celiac's really care if there is gluten or not. If Lindsey came over for dinner, and I served her a wheat based cake as part of a Paleo meal plan, because the other 80% was Paleo, do you think that would matter? (Assuming I didn't tell her, because you know. I followed the 80/20 guidelines and because words have no meaning, I had no idea I was possibly endangering her. I wanted some gray cake in my day.)
This is a very thoughtful reply. Well done, FlaxMilk.0 -
Hey, I play guitar, but it's classical, most people just look at me and say, yeah, that was interesting.Just because some adds peanut butter to their diet but otherwise eats Paleo, does not mean they aren't Paleo. It's just ridiculous to draw such silly boundaries on everything. We're talk about food here people. It's not religion, it's goddamn food. Chill out.
Yes. Chill out, goddamnit. :flowerforyou:
So we can define who is Paleo but not who is not? O-tay.
I actually do care about shades of gray, but that doesn't mean that definitions cease to matter.
I'm sure there is something in your life that is important to you to define.
And while someone eating peanut butter might get a little flack for not being "pure paleo," I doubt most people are bothering discussing that.
I see you play the guitar. Will you teach me to play the violin?
Yes. String instruments are the same. It's just math.
YouTube or it never happened. :laugh:0 -
Hey, I play guitar, but it's classical, most people just look at me and say, yeah, that was interesting.Just because some adds peanut butter to their diet but otherwise eats Paleo, does not mean they aren't Paleo. It's just ridiculous to draw such silly boundaries on everything. We're talk about food here people. It's not religion, it's goddamn food. Chill out.
Yes. Chill out, goddamnit. :flowerforyou:
So we can define who is Paleo but not who is not? O-tay.
I actually do care about shades of gray, but that doesn't mean that definitions cease to matter.
I'm sure there is something in your life that is important to you to define.
And while someone eating peanut butter might get a little flack for not being "pure paleo," I doubt most people are bothering discussing that.
I see you play the guitar. Will you teach me to play the violin?
Yes. String instruments are the same. It's just math.
YouTube or it never happened. :laugh:
I know. It's getting to the point where I'm going to have to at least try to friend neanderthin.0 -
So no like you I entered when the topic was already de-railed and off track.
Cool. So since I'm not talking to myself, and am actually having a discussion, we can agree that neither of us hijacked this thread and are now just participating in what the thread changed to. So that can stop being used as a way to try to discredit my posts, as it's pretty irrelevant, as I'm not sure that anyone but OP stuck to the OP.
I do believe most MFP threads go off-track at about page two.
(FTR, I don't call myself "IIFYM" either.)
According to my official list of personal MFP rules, after page 4 any thread is a free-for-all0 -
Lol.
The OP had no idea what they started here. Lol
You always have the purists that need boundaries and definitions. The world is black and white. You're eating Paleo or your not. You are a Mexican, or you're not. You can't be Mexican if you're not a citizen of Mexico and your mom is Japanese. Other people, like me that see almost everything in shades of grey where there really are no absolutes, that I understand that you are of Mexican descent, therefore you are Mexican. You also may identify more with that culture than with the Japanese culture from your moms side, so mentally, you just feel like you're Mexican. So, you are.
Just because some adds peanut butter to their diet but otherwise eats Paleo, does not mean they aren't Paleo. It's just ridiculous to draw such silly boundaries on everything. We're talk about food here people. It's not religion, it's goddamn food. Chill out.
Religion might be an extreme example, but I wasn't the first to propose it. I certainly didn't involve ethnicity because that's not a choice.
My point being that if you hold yourself up as an example of something... If you choose to be a leader... You should put your money where your mouth is.
When we have no boundaries, words lose their meanings. And therein lies the problem... We've already seen that with "clean eating"... It means nothing, really, because everyone has a different definition of it.
Lol. Black and white world you live in. Sad.
At a certain point, like at border crossings, you better have the definitions squared alway. In order to have any rational debate, you must first define your terms.0 -
So no like you I entered when the topic was already de-railed and off track.
Cool. So since I'm not talking to myself, and am actually having a discussion, we can agree that neither of us hijacked this thread and are now just participating in what the thread changed to. So that can stop being used as a way to try to discredit my posts, as it's pretty irrelevant, as I'm not sure that anyone but OP stuck to the OP.
I do believe most MFP threads go off-track at about page two.
(FTR, I don't call myself "IIFYM" either.)
According to my official list of personal MFP rules, after page 4 any thread is a free-for-all
Ohhhhh!!! Cat gifs!!! :drinker:0 -
No. In fact my TSH levels have been steady for years, with no need for increased medication. There is nothing I restrict from my diet. Immune disorders are tricky because they wax and wane and the reasons for that have remained elusive in most cases.
If I went Paleo and it helped, what would be my response in your opinion? That my thyroid would start producing more hormone? Is that what happened in your case?
How are you T3 and T4 levels? It's my understanding that TSH is wholly unreliable for Hashi's, though I may be incorrect on that. For example, in a round of blood tests a while back, my TSH was totally in the normal range, but both my T3 and T4 were super low.
I believe the idea behind it is that certain things in diet trigger the autoimmune response, so the body attacks your thyroid or thyroid function, you end up initially hypo, your thyroid (to the extent it's still able to do so), kicks into high gear to compensate and you then swing back hyper. If your thyroid is extensively damaged (as it eventually ends up in Hashi's), you may not longer have the ability to even swing hyper anymore -- so just varying levels of hypo/normal or more hypo and less hypo.
So, the idea is that if you can minimize the triggering events, you can keep or maintain more of your normal thyroid function for longer, requiring less medication. Also, I know that there are some endos who believe treating with both T4 and T3 helps Hash's in particular and then there is the debate of synthetic versus natural dessicated.
As for what happened in my case, it's hard to say. I didn't have the diagnosis at the time, so I didn't have a lot the blood tests being monitored. I didn't get the diagnosis until about a year of eating Primal or so. Personally, the big thing I noticed was it helped with fatigue and better sleep (two common hypo symptoms). I had far fewer crushing fatigue episodes -- and those that I had were not as long in duration (were a couple days long versus up to 2-3 weeks). But, it was also found that I have insulin resistance as well, and that may have been contributing to the fatigue.
My endocrinologist at the time was testing all pituitary hormone related levels, of which TSH is one. Your body senses low thyroid hormones and produces thyroid stimulating hormone in an attempt to bring levels back to normal. I was put on replacement hormone until my TSH levels were reduced to 'normal'. I may have had T3 and T4 levels checked at some time, I don't recall. I have not had the money to test for anything other than TSH in many years, and it has remained steady. No fatigue type symptoms at all.
It is my understanding that once your immune system starts destroying your thyroid, it is not going to come back. You can slow the destruction (perhaps) if your immune system is over reacting due to some dietary factor but that is all theoretical at this point as far as I know. I know that some people also suffer physical symptoms from the thyroid inflammation itself, though I never have.
I think that is the traditional approach by many endos -- waiting until the TSH levels fluctuate to treat and treat based on that. Some are starting to look past that, to T3, T4, antibody levels and clinical symptoms rather live and die by TSH as they're finding more and more Hashi's people with symproms, antibodies and low T4 and T3 levels (but normal-ish TSH). Some of the belief is if they treat earlier and find a away to minimize triggers, they can preserve more of the natural thyroid function longer by minimizing the destruction.
Hmm. From what reading I have done, an ultra-sensitive TSH test is considered the most accurate way to determine thyroid function, since TSH is produced by the pituitary and is not effected by Hashimoto's. If TSH is elevated, there is no doubt that something is going on that shouldn't be, whilst folks' T3 and T4 levels may naturally fluctuate. That is my understanding at any rate.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Paleo is stupid, uneccessary, potentially unhealthy and as an idea it is utterly fallicious.
Clean eating is on the same boat, but the level of negatives is dependant on how obsessive you are about what specific foods you're eating or not.
I don't understand why people can't accept that fact that the healthiest way to diet is to track your calories, track your macros, hit your goals, get in sufficient micronutrients and phytonutrients and be sane. Processed foods and whole foods.
Chemicals in foods =/= always bad for you
Natural =/= always good for you
Processed =/= always bad for you
I've never once seed a justified response to someone avoiding "processed foods", as if all processed foods are processed in one way, at one level.0 -
Hi OP here
so I did not know how HOT TOPIC this was.. sorry!
Ok I don't have any health issues, I am finally at a healthy weight.. I'm 5'2 and weigh around 122-125 lbs.. so keeping it that way is my challenge... I'd like to thank everyone for their advice or sharing their info...
I have to admit it is kind of ironic how this thread went since I have a BA in Anthropology and my Thesis was on Neanderthals - Hunter Gatherers or scavengers LOL
Got to look at the funny side of life cause if we don't then whats the point
0 -
I think the idea you're missing is that some degree of variability does not equal no definition. I've explained many of the variables for Primal, and so long as you're within those variables, you'd be considered Primal. Though what that is going to look like for each individual will vary (within said variables). The definition is flexible, not fixed, in that regard, but there still is definition.
When degree of variability = no one can question anyone who announces that they are Paleo no matter what, because rude, then yes, it becomes meaningless.
To Tennisdude, I already said in this thread that I'm not questioning your or Lindsey.0 -
My (off road) ultramarathon yesterday went fine as far as energy levels go.
I suspect the 800g of carbs the day before DID make a reasonable difference - I never found myself feeling significantly down on energy.
By 20 miles I was definitely slowing a good bit from muscle soreness etc - but then the furthest I've ever run was 11 miles on flat road (vs 32 miles with 4400ft of climbs!) - and at that point I still had more than the furthest I'd run to go!
Plenty more carbs when I got back (I didn't record what I ate, but I had a calorie target of 6500 for yesterday) and I can actually move today, while I was a tad stiff/sore yesterday.
Drawing a 'point' from this bit of boasting (for many it's nothing special, but I was quite pleased with myself ). There is no one "healthy" food, diet or way of life. "Healthy" is related to the indivdual and their current needs at the time. 0 -
My (off road) ultramarathon yesterday went fine as far as energy levels go.
I suspect the 800g of carbs the day before DID make a reasonable difference - I never found myself feeling significantly down on energy.
By 20 miles I was definitely slowing a good bit from muscle soreness etc - but then the furthest I've ever run was 11 miles on flat road (vs 32 miles with 4400ft of climbs!) - and at that point I still had more than the furthest I'd run to go!
Plenty more carbs when I got back (I didn't record what I ate, but I had a calorie target of 6500 for yesterday) and I can actually move today, while I was a tad stiff/sore yesterday.
Drawing a 'point' from all this bit of boasting. There is no one "healthy" food, diet or way of life. "Healthy" is related to the indivdual and their current needs at the time.
Well done on the ultramarathon.
I suspect the 800 carbs for that level of activity were essential. lol0 -
Paleo is stupid, uneccessary, potentially unhealthy and as an idea it is utterly fallicious.
Clean eating is on the same boat, but the level of negatives is dependant on how obsessive you are about what specific foods you're eating or not.
I don't understand why people can't accept that fact that the healthiest way to diet is to track your calories, track your macros, hit your goals, get in sufficient micronutrients and phytonutrients and be sane. Processed foods and whole foods.
Chemicals in foods =/= always bad for you
Natural =/= always good for you
Processed =/= always bad for you
I've never once seed a justified response to someone avoiding "processed foods", as if all processed foods are processed in one way, at one level.
I think I love you. It is just food! Bangs head on desk.0 -
Paleo is stupid, uneccessary, potentially unhealthy and as an idea it is utterly fallicious.
Clean eating is on the same boat, but the level of negatives is dependant on how obsessive you are about what specific foods you're eating or not.
I don't understand why people can't accept that fact that the healthiest way to diet is to track your calories, track your macros, hit your goals, get in sufficient micronutrients and phytonutrients and be sane. Processed foods and whole foods.
Chemicals in foods =/= always bad for you
Natural =/= always good for you
Processed =/= always bad for you
I've never once seed a justified response to someone avoiding "processed foods", as if all processed foods are processed in one way, at one level.
That comment is stupid!!
The diet has restrictions - yes (but what diet doesn't), plus not everyone will view those restrictions the same level of fear preserved lack of loss from their diet.
The diet has a lame name - sure, but there are plenty of marketed products and ideas out there that have lame names.
The diet claims to eat what our ancestors ate and how we evolved to eat - that one will always be debatable.
The diet claims the help people with certain diet related issues - a lot of people carrying out there own study of one will agree with statement (others won't - that's the way of the world) - Also unlike some certain members would like to believe - they do not claim to cure everything.
The diet does not exclude any essential micro-nutrients or Macro nutrients so how can anyone (sane or otherwise) claim, or suggest the diet is UNHEALTHY!!!!!!!
Proof on this would be nice.0 -
Have to agree with you on the health part, not so much on the validity part.Paleo is stupid, uneccessary, potentially unhealthy and as an idea it is utterly fallicious.
Clean eating is on the same boat, but the level of negatives is dependant on how obsessive you are about what specific foods you're eating or not.
I don't understand why people can't accept that fact that the healthiest way to diet is to track your calories, track your macros, hit your goals, get in sufficient micronutrients and phytonutrients and be sane. Processed foods and whole foods.
Chemicals in foods =/= always bad for you
Natural =/= always good for you
Processed =/= always bad for you
I've never once seed a justified response to someone avoiding "processed foods", as if all processed foods are processed in one way, at one level.
That comment is stupid!!
The diet has restrictions - yes (but what diet doesn't), plus not everyone will view those restrictions the same level of fear preserved lack of loss from their diet.
The diet has a lame name - sure, but there are plenty of marketed products and ideas out there that have lame names.
The diet claims to eat what our ancestors ate and how we evolved to eat - that one will always be debatable.
The diet claims the help people with certain diet related issues - a lot of people carrying out there own study of one will agree with statement (others won't - that's the way of the world) - Also unlike some certain members would like to believe - they do not claim to cure everything.
The diet does not exclude any essential micro-nutrients or Macro nutrients so how can anyone (sane or otherwise) claim, or suggest the diet is UNHEALTHY!!!!!!!
Proof on this would be nice.0 -
Have to agree with you on the health part, not so much on the validity part.Paleo is stupid, uneccessary, potentially unhealthy and as an idea it is utterly fallicious.
Clean eating is on the same boat, but the level of negatives is dependant on how obsessive you are about what specific foods you're eating or not.
I don't understand why people can't accept that fact that the healthiest way to diet is to track your calories, track your macros, hit your goals, get in sufficient micronutrients and phytonutrients and be sane. Processed foods and whole foods.
Chemicals in foods =/= always bad for you
Natural =/= always good for you
Processed =/= always bad for you
I've never once seed a justified response to someone avoiding "processed foods", as if all processed foods are processed in one way, at one level.
That comment is stupid!!
The diet has restrictions - yes (but what diet doesn't), plus not everyone will view those restrictions with the same level of fear and preserved lack of loss from their diet.
The diet has a lame name - sure, but there are plenty of marketed products and ideas out there that have lame names.
The diet claims to eat what our ancestors ate and how we evolved to eat - that one will always be debatable.
The diet claims the help people with certain diet related issues - a lot of people carrying out there own study of one will agree with statement (others won't - that's the way of the world) - Also unlike some certain members would like to believe - they do not claim to cure everything.
The diet does not exclude any essential micro-nutrients or Macro nutrients so how can anyone (sane or otherwise) claim, or suggest the diet is UNHEALTHY!!!!!!!
Proof on this would be nice.
I think we probably agree on that front as well (in moderation of course) 0 -
Same could be said for the twinky diet bloke, I suspect (he took vitamin etc supplements, I believe.)
The diet does not exclude any essential micro-nutrients or Macro nutrients so how can anyone (sane or otherwise) claim, or suggest the diet is UNHEALTHY!!!!!!!0 -
Then your in agreement.
Same could be said for the twinky diet bloke, I suspect (he took vitamin etc supplements, I believe.)
The diet does not exclude any essential micro-nutrients or Macro nutrients so how can anyone (sane or otherwise) claim, or suggest the diet is UNHEALTHY!!!!!!!0 -
Same could be said for the twinky diet bloke, I suspect (he took vitamin etc supplements, I believe.)
The diet does not exclude any essential micro-nutrients or Macro nutrients so how can anyone (sane or otherwise) claim, or suggest the diet is UNHEALTHY!!!!!!!
I don't know this twinky guy (did he only eat twinkies or something). If he was having to take supplements because he was not getting everything he needed through his diet then I doubt it is the same. - Strange comparison?0 -
Bloke lost weight and tests showed more healthy by eating primarily twinkies and similar snack foods along with some very light exercise (walking for an hour a day, or something.)
The point is that his diet (including vitamin pills) "does not exclude any essential micro-nutrients or Macro nutrients ". If that is justification for " how can anyone (sane or otherwise) claim, or suggest the diet is UNHEALTHY!!!!!!! " for one diet, then it should be for another.
He himself certainly advised against such a diet.0 -
I'm not surprised if he had to take supplements and vitamin's just to get his diet into the healthy range - I'm sure if a majority of his dietary intake was primarily carbs (sugar in particular) then if he was to eat on that basis he would soon be insulin resistant.
I must say though I still do not see your point. A paleo diet - ideally gets all of its micro and macro nutrients from the food you eat.??0 -
all the various health markers improved as a result of the twinkie diet. He had protein powder, not just vitamin pills, and his macro intake was balanced. The diet was twinkies, protein powder, vitamin pills. Balanced macros. His health improved. He wouldn't have become insulin resistant as the amount of twinkies was controlled to keep him in calorie deficit and to prevent him from eating too much carbohydrate.
The main disadvantage with the twinkie diet is that it's not remotely filling or sustainable. The guy must have been constantly starving hungry. The amount of twinkies needed to meet his carb and fat macros wasn't many. He probably got utterly sick to death of twinkies too. And it's a competely unsustainable approach to eating. And relying on a multivitamin/mineral supplement for *all* your micronutrient needs IMO is putting too much faith in the vitamin manufacturers ability to create a pill that can meet all your micronutrient needs.
The take home message should be that it's not individual foods that cause obesity and other food related health problems, it's an unbalanced diet, i.e. too much of some things, not enough of others. the standard American diet has too much fat and carbs and not enough vitamins minerals and fibre, and the result is high levels of obesity and blood sugar issues. Go to some really poor and deprived parts of the world and you'll find diets lacking in protein, carbohydrate, vitamins and minerals and people suffering from kwashiorkor, rickets and similar.
IIFYM does not mean just eat whatever, it means focusing on giving your body the nutrients it needs, without giving up any foods that you want to eat. It's not a free-for-all to eat whatever you want and just stop when you hit your calorie goal. It takes a lot of planning to fit stuff like pizza into your macros. It usually means eating high protein low fat low carb for the rest of the day, but what you have at the end of the day is balance, i.e. everything your body needs and not too much of anything. People need to learn that in most cases, the poison is in the dose. Too much pizza will make you obese, but careful portion control with pizza means you can enjoy it and still be healthy and not become obese. Ditto any other food (food intolerances/allergies excepted... in those cases then yes total avoidance is usually the best course of action).0 -
all the various health markers improved as a result of the twinkie diet. He had protein powder, not just vitamin pills, and his macro intake was balanced. The diet was twinkies, protein powder, vitamin pills. Balanced macros. His health improved. He wouldn't have become insulin resistant as the amount of twinkies was controlled to keep him in calorie deficit and to prevent him from eating too much carbohydrate.
The main disadvantage with the twinkie diet is that it's not remotely filling or sustainable. The guy must have been constantly starving hungry. The amount of twinkies needed to meet his carb and fat macros wasn't many. He probably got utterly sick to death of twinkies too. And it's a competely unsustainable approach to eating. And relying on a multivitamin/mineral supplement for *all* your micronutrient needs IMO is putting too much faith in the vitamin manufacturers ability to create a pill that can meet all your micronutrient needs.
The take home message should be that it's not individual foods that cause obesity and other food related health problems, it's an unbalanced diet, i.e. too much of some things, not enough of others. the standard American diet has too much fat and carbs and not enough vitamins minerals and fibre, and the result is high levels of obesity and blood sugar issues. Go to some really poor and deprived parts of the world and you'll find diets lacking in protein, carbohydrate, vitamins and minerals and people suffering from kwashiorkor, rickets and similar.
IIFYM does not mean just eat whatever, it means focusing on giving your body the nutrients it needs, without giving up any foods that you want to eat. It's not a free-for-all to eat whatever you want and just stop when you hit your calorie goal. It takes a lot of planning to fit stuff like pizza into your macros. It usually means eating high protein low fat low carb for the rest of the day, but what you have at the end of the day is balance, i.e. everything your body needs and not too much of anything. People need to learn that in most cases, the poison is in the dose. Too much pizza will make you obese, but careful portion control with pizza means you can enjoy it and still be healthy and not become obese. Ditto any other food (food intolerances/allergies excepted... in those cases then yes total avoidance is usually the best course of action).
Thanks for the background on the twinky diet - so obviously not a comparison to Paleo (sorry Geeb, don't really no where you were coming from on that one).
I would suggest that as meat, veggies and fruit (nuts) are the staple diet for Paleo that there are literally millions of food combinations that a Paleo meal can consist of. So a few more choices than just twinkies an whey. lol
But I still do not understand how the Paleo diet is considered unhealthy?0 -
all the various health markers improved as a result of the twinkie diet. He had protein powder, not just vitamin pills, and his macro intake was balanced. The diet was twinkies, protein powder, vitamin pills. Balanced macros. His health improved. He wouldn't have become insulin resistant as the amount of twinkies was controlled to keep him in calorie deficit and to prevent him from eating too much carbohydrate.
The main disadvantage with the twinkie diet is that it's not remotely filling or sustainable. The guy must have been constantly starving hungry. The amount of twinkies needed to meet his carb and fat macros wasn't many. He probably got utterly sick to death of twinkies too. And it's a competely unsustainable approach to eating. And relying on a multivitamin/mineral supplement for *all* your micronutrient needs IMO is putting too much faith in the vitamin manufacturers ability to create a pill that can meet all your micronutrient needs.
The take home message should be that it's not individual foods that cause obesity and other food related health problems, it's an unbalanced diet, i.e. too much of some things, not enough of others. the standard American diet has too much fat and carbs and not enough vitamins minerals and fibre, and the result is high levels of obesity and blood sugar issues. Go to some really poor and deprived parts of the world and you'll find diets lacking in protein, carbohydrate, vitamins and minerals and people suffering from kwashiorkor, rickets and similar.
IIFYM does not mean just eat whatever, it means focusing on giving your body the nutrients it needs, without giving up any foods that you want to eat. It's not a free-for-all to eat whatever you want and just stop when you hit your calorie goal. It takes a lot of planning to fit stuff like pizza into your macros. It usually means eating high protein low fat low carb for the rest of the day, but what you have at the end of the day is balance, i.e. everything your body needs and not too much of anything. People need to learn that in most cases, the poison is in the dose. Too much pizza will make you obese, but careful portion control with pizza means you can enjoy it and still be healthy and not become obese. Ditto any other food (food intolerances/allergies excepted... in those cases then yes total avoidance is usually the best course of action).
Thanks for the background on the twinky diet - so obviously not a comparison to Paleo (sorry Geeb, don't really no where you were coming from on that one).
I would suggest that as meat, veggies and fruit (nuts) are the staple diet for Paleo that there are literally millions of food combinations that a Paleo meal can consist of. So a few more choices than just twinkies an whey. lol
But I still do not understand how the Paleo diet is considered unhealthy?
What are the health benefits in people avoiding foods that are not making them ill? If something's difficult to do, and there's no benefit from doing it, then why bother with it? That's the issue. And for people who have a tendency towards anxiety, convincing them that certain foods are making them ill when they're not, resulting in them anxiously avoiding those foods when there's no actual benefit to it, is bad for their mental health.
It's more that the whole approach to paleo eating is utterly pointless and potentially anxiety inducing/worsening, for anyone who isn't actually intolerant to all the foods on the "don't eat" list, than whether the diet provides people with all the nutrients they need. There's more to health than good nutrition. Just like the twinkie diet is inadequate because living off twinkies, protein powder and vitamin pills is inherently unsatisfying and unsustainable... diets that tell people to avoid foods for no reason other than pseudoscience, are also inherently unsatisfying and unsustainable for many people, and potentially anxiety inducing for some. So really, it's at best pointless, for many it's unsustainable, and for some it's bad for mental health.
For people who have actual health issues that are made better by this diet, then there's a benefit for them which outweighs the difficulty that comes from avoiding specific foods. But for everyone else.... not so.0 -
all the various health markers improved as a result of the twinkie diet. He had protein powder, not just vitamin pills, and his macro intake was balanced. The diet was twinkies, protein powder, vitamin pills. Balanced macros. His health improved. He wouldn't have become insulin resistant as the amount of twinkies was controlled to keep him in calorie deficit and to prevent him from eating too much carbohydrate.
The main disadvantage with the twinkie diet is that it's not remotely filling or sustainable. The guy must have been constantly starving hungry. The amount of twinkies needed to meet his carb and fat macros wasn't many. He probably got utterly sick to death of twinkies too. And it's a competely unsustainable approach to eating. And relying on a multivitamin/mineral supplement for *all* your micronutrient needs IMO is putting too much faith in the vitamin manufacturers ability to create a pill that can meet all your micronutrient needs.
The take home message should be that it's not individual foods that cause obesity and other food related health problems, it's an unbalanced diet, i.e. too much of some things, not enough of others. the standard American diet has too much fat and carbs and not enough vitamins minerals and fibre, and the result is high levels of obesity and blood sugar issues. Go to some really poor and deprived parts of the world and you'll find diets lacking in protein, carbohydrate, vitamins and minerals and people suffering from kwashiorkor, rickets and similar.
IIFYM does not mean just eat whatever, it means focusing on giving your body the nutrients it needs, without giving up any foods that you want to eat. It's not a free-for-all to eat whatever you want and just stop when you hit your calorie goal. It takes a lot of planning to fit stuff like pizza into your macros. It usually means eating high protein low fat low carb for the rest of the day, but what you have at the end of the day is balance, i.e. everything your body needs and not too much of anything. People need to learn that in most cases, the poison is in the dose. Too much pizza will make you obese, but careful portion control with pizza means you can enjoy it and still be healthy and not become obese. Ditto any other food (food intolerances/allergies excepted... in those cases then yes total avoidance is usually the best course of action).
Thanks for the background on the twinky diet - so obviously not a comparison to Paleo (sorry Geeb, don't really no where you were coming from on that one).
I would suggest that as meat, veggies and fruit (nuts) are the staple diet for Paleo that there are literally millions of food combinations that a Paleo meal can consist of. So a few more choices than just twinkies an whey. lol
But I still do not understand how the Paleo diet is considered unhealthy?
What are the health benefits in people avoiding foods that are not making them ill? If something's difficult to do, and there's no benefit from doing it, then why bother with it? That's the issue. And for people who have a tendency towards anxiety, convincing them that certain foods are making them ill when they're not, resulting in them anxiously avoiding those foods when there's no actual benefit to it, is bad for their mental health.
It's more that the whole approach to paleo eating is utterly pointless and potentially anxiety inducing/worsening, for anyone who isn't actually intolerant to all the foods on the "don't eat" list, than whether the diet provides people with all the nutrients they need. There's more to health than good nutrition. Just like the twinkie diet is inadequate because living off twinkies, protein powder and vitamin pills is inherently unsatisfying and unsustainable... diets that tell people to avoid foods for no reason other than pseudoscience, are also inherently unsatisfying and unsustainable for many people, and potentially anxiety inducing for some. So really, it's at best pointless, for many it's unsustainable, and for some it's bad for mental health.
For people who have actual health issues that are made better by this diet, then there's a benefit for them which outweighs the difficulty that comes from avoiding specific foods. But for everyone else.... not so.
Yes but that's just your opinion - not fact.
In my opinion the benefits are - I don't have the anxiety of worrying about what I eat or the hassle of having to log everything I consume or the worry that I am eating too much of one type of macro nutrient compared to another.
Also I'm not having to control carving to eat food, which whilst taste good when I eat them I normally feel regretful afterwards.
I have a constant stream of energy and do not normally need to eat until gone noon. I now tend not to snack and don't get insulin spikes when I eat too much or have sugar crashes afterwards.
I did have digestion problems because of all the insoluble fiber I was eating (and was always feeling bloated - now gone). I eat a lot of soluble fiber and my heartburn I used to get on an off has not appeared in the last couple of months.
So I think the take away from this is we are all different - just because you would struggle with cutting out food which may or may not add to possible health issues - doesn't mean it isn't the case for others (it certainly isn't for me or other people eating paleo or primal or other versions of LCHF and believe me there are millions of them).0 -
Hi OP here
so I did not know how HOT TOPIC this was.. sorry!
Ok I don't have any health issues, I am finally at a healthy weight.. I'm 5'2 and weigh around 122-125 lbs.. so keeping it that way is my challenge... I'd like to thank everyone for their advice or sharing their info...
I have to admit it is kind of ironic how this thread went since I have a BA in Anthropology and my Thesis was on Neanderthals - Hunter Gatherers or scavengers LOL
Got to look at the funny side of life cause if we don't then whats the point
OP--don't worry, this topic always turns into a slug out between paleo and the rest of the world. In the end they just all exhaust themselves until the next go-round. However paleo doesn't convince me--not sustainable long-term. Give me someone who's been on it 10 years or more and we'll see. Until then it's just a fad, except for those who do it for health reasons--a minority.0 -
all the various health markers improved as a result of the twinkie diet. He had protein powder, not just vitamin pills, and his macro intake was balanced. The diet was twinkies, protein powder, vitamin pills. Balanced macros. His health improved. He wouldn't have become insulin resistant as the amount of twinkies was controlled to keep him in calorie deficit and to prevent him from eating too much carbohydrate.
The main disadvantage with the twinkie diet is that it's not remotely filling or sustainable. The guy must have been constantly starving hungry. The amount of twinkies needed to meet his carb and fat macros wasn't many. He probably got utterly sick to death of twinkies too. And it's a competely unsustainable approach to eating. And relying on a multivitamin/mineral supplement for *all* your micronutrient needs IMO is putting too much faith in the vitamin manufacturers ability to create a pill that can meet all your micronutrient needs.
The take home message should be that it's not individual foods that cause obesity and other food related health problems, it's an unbalanced diet, i.e. too much of some things, not enough of others. the standard American diet has too much fat and carbs and not enough vitamins minerals and fibre, and the result is high levels of obesity and blood sugar issues. Go to some really poor and deprived parts of the world and you'll find diets lacking in protein, carbohydrate, vitamins and minerals and people suffering from kwashiorkor, rickets and similar.
IIFYM does not mean just eat whatever, it means focusing on giving your body the nutrients it needs, without giving up any foods that you want to eat. It's not a free-for-all to eat whatever you want and just stop when you hit your calorie goal. It takes a lot of planning to fit stuff like pizza into your macros. It usually means eating high protein low fat low carb for the rest of the day, but what you have at the end of the day is balance, i.e. everything your body needs and not too much of anything. People need to learn that in most cases, the poison is in the dose. Too much pizza will make you obese, but careful portion control with pizza means you can enjoy it and still be healthy and not become obese. Ditto any other food (food intolerances/allergies excepted... in those cases then yes total avoidance is usually the best course of action).
Thanks for the background on the twinky diet - so obviously not a comparison to Paleo (sorry Geeb, don't really no where you were coming from on that one).
I would suggest that as meat, veggies and fruit (nuts) are the staple diet for Paleo that there are literally millions of food combinations that a Paleo meal can consist of. So a few more choices than just twinkies an whey. lol
But I still do not understand how the Paleo diet is considered unhealthy?
What are the health benefits in people avoiding foods that are not making them ill? If something's difficult to do, and there's no benefit from doing it, then why bother with it? That's the issue. And for people who have a tendency towards anxiety, convincing them that certain foods are making them ill when they're not, resulting in them anxiously avoiding those foods when there's no actual benefit to it, is bad for their mental health.
It's more that the whole approach to paleo eating is utterly pointless and potentially anxiety inducing/worsening, for anyone who isn't actually intolerant to all the foods on the "don't eat" list, than whether the diet provides people with all the nutrients they need. There's more to health than good nutrition. Just like the twinkie diet is inadequate because living off twinkies, protein powder and vitamin pills is inherently unsatisfying and unsustainable... diets that tell people to avoid foods for no reason other than pseudoscience, are also inherently unsatisfying and unsustainable for many people, and potentially anxiety inducing for some. So really, it's at best pointless, for many it's unsustainable, and for some it's bad for mental health.
For people who have actual health issues that are made better by this diet, then there's a benefit for them which outweighs the difficulty that comes from avoiding specific foods. But for everyone else.... not so.
Excellent post!0 -
Paleo is stupid, uneccessary, potentially unhealthy and as an idea it is utterly fallicious.
Clean eating is on the same boat, but the level of negatives is dependant on how obsessive you are about what specific foods you're eating or not.
I don't understand why people can't accept that fact that the healthiest way to diet is to track your calories, track your macros, hit your goals, get in sufficient micronutrients and phytonutrients and be sane. Processed foods and whole foods.
Chemicals in foods =/= always bad for you
Natural =/= always good for you
Processed =/= always bad for you
I've never once seed a justified response to someone avoiding "processed foods", as if all processed foods are processed in one way, at one level.
We have eaten what is considered clean since newlyweds well over 30 years ago and even growing up. We don't call it clean eating just simply eating. I certainly don't consider it stupid in any way, shape or form. We don't buy: canned soups, ready meals, boxed foods, frozen meals, ready snacks, most dry cereals, mass produced baked foods, lunch meat, processed cheese products and mass produced canned foods so that is about as close to avoiding processed foods as you can get. Very little of our food dollar is spent at a grocery store. I can't say we don't eat processed foods as we dry, freeze and can our foods ourselves and yes, the produce is either home grown or purchased from local organic growers and our meats are both local, and hormone free. Most of the fish we eat is locally caught. Stupid? No! Healthy? Yes! Frugal? Yes!
BTW, you don't need to eat Paleo, vegan, clean, upside down or right side up to lose weight. All you need is a calorie deficit.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