Caveman diet!?!?!?!?! Anyone try this?

bcattoes

Jeez, people, it seems most of the dissenters know absolutely nothing about "eating paleo" besides the five pages they've read on this message board. Why don't you do the actual research if you care that much to argue about it - I'm talking reading medical studies, etc., and maybe even, GEE I DON'T KNOW the actual paleo theory, instead of throwing out random thoughts on a subject you don't even fully understand and believing you know something based on crap you read on a message board. You might learn something. This is about actual science.

While you're at it, look up the actual nutritional values in grains and compare them to other vegetables, before you make sweeping generalizations on the subject. See, then you can make an informed decision and post something valid. You know, something other than "GRRR FAD DIET."

For the record, I could care less if you eat grains or not. This is about making informed decisions and creating valid opinions. I'm not going to sit around and lecture on a subject I know nothing about, and I am sure not going to listen to anything said about a subject by a person who clearly has never even thought about it, much less done the work to understand it fully.

One last thought, as it relates to supposed "marketing schemes" and such - Nothing about the way I eat financially benefits anyone in the world except some local organic farmers, and I'm really fine with that. I'm not purchasing anything from anyone that I don't need to survive. Pretty sure a lot of people making food purchases are getting sucked into much more of a marketing scheme than a true paleo. Now go to the library already.

What you don't seem to understand is that most of the posts are not against the paleo diet. Personally, I think (and have posted several times) that it can be a healthy diet. The "dissenting" posts are mostly in response to those that spout things like "grains are bad for you" or imply that anything other than paleo is not healthy. There is absolutely no medical research showing that paleo is the only healthy wayt to eat. And there is plenty of medical research showing that grains are healthy to eat (again, barring a medical condition, which would be true of any food).

The tables are turning on "grains" being healthy to eat. There is so much medical research to say otherwise. Keep listening to the government.

I listen to my gut. :laugh:

luscadero

bcattoes - sorry, I know you probably thought that was directed at you, but it really wasn't. I know what you mean, I've just seen so many inflammatory posts on this subject in the last couple days that I am wondering if everyone in the world's google and library cards are broken!! I personally do believe that grains cause severe inflammation and insulin resistance in many people, which means they are way less healthy than the USDA would have you believe for a large portion of the population. And that's outside the ridiculous amount of people diagnosed with Celiac disease or gluten intolerance. I highly recommend that anyone simply try it for a few weeks and see how they feel. It's pretty insane what the case studies show.

BEERRUNNER - I'm actually in Chicago all the time, but you'd have to get ripped on some grapes with me AND my fad-dieting husband :flowerforyou:

RangerSteve

The tables are turning on "grains" being healthy to eat. There is so much medical research to say otherwise. Keep listening to the government.

As opposed to a conspiracy theorist on the internet.

RangerSteve

Jeez, people, it seems most of the dissenters know absolutely nothing about "eating paleo" besides the five pages they've read on this message board. Why don't you do the actual research if you care that much to argue about it - I'm talking reading medical studies, etc., and maybe even, GEE I DON'T KNOW the actual paleo theory, instead of throwing out random thoughts on a subject you don't even fully understand and believing you know something based on crap you read on a message board. You might learn something. This is about actual science.

While you're at it, look up the actual nutritional values in grains and compare them to other vegetables, before you make sweeping generalizations on the subject. See, then you can make an informed decision and post something valid. You know, something other than "GRRR FAD DIET."

For the record, I could care less if you eat grains or not. This is about making informed decisions and creating valid opinions. I'm not going to sit around and lecture on a subject I know nothing about, and I am sure not going to listen to anything said about a subject by a person who clearly has never even thought about it, much less done the work to understand it fully.

One last thought, as it relates to supposed "marketing schemes" and such - Nothing about the way I eat financially benefits anyone in the world except some local organic farmers, and I'm really fine with that. I'm not purchasing anything from anyone that I don't need to survive. Pretty sure a lot of people making food purchases are getting sucked into much more of a marketing scheme than a true paleo. Now go to the library already.

The "paleo theory" is flawed in itself. Paleolithic people lived in different areas with different access to different foods. The inuits of north America had a high fat/protein based diet based off of fish, seal and other sea life. The paleo people in Africa grew on a diet of lean game meat that they tracked over long distances in the brush land. The paleo people in the pacific had a diet rich in wild fruits and fish.

Please save holier than thou approach to what you think the paleo diet is. Plenty of us have researched the diet, tried the diet (2 years personally) and have had great success with it. That doesn't mean that grains are bad for you and that the paleo diet is necessarily better than any other diet out there.

The problem with people pushing the paleo diet is similar to that of mainstream religious groups. There are plenty of personal benefits to the paleo diet just like there are in religion. However, the minute you start telling me that my belief system (diet) is wrong is the minute I no longer respect your opinion. I'm not saying you're personally doing this but this seems to be the norm of the cult that is now called paleo. Grains are fine for you. Ice cream is fine for you. Rice is fine for you. All these things can be eaten and blood work shows plenty of people who do eat it and are just as healthy or healthier than people on the paleo diet.

Flawed logic on dieting is not the answer.

questionablemethods

There are plenty of benefits to grains. Hmmm, how about energy production? Glucose is the primary source of energy for anyone exercising above ~65% of their max heart rate. That means foods that break down into glucose faster will fuel exercise faster. Gluconeogenesis and ketosis are not as fast and efficient at breaking down into sugar as sugar. Sugar comes from carbs. Grains are a good source of carbs.

It's not rocket science.

Honest questions since you seem to know a lot about this. Or maybe someone else more versed on this can answer.

1) How much glucose is stored in the body for use?
2) How long does it take to deplete those stores with exercise above ~65% of max heart rate?
3) Can potatoes, fruit or other starchy veggies work? Do they not work as well as grains?

questionablemethods

Your body has evolved, Your diet should too.

Yeah, but those "evolved" diets don't seem to be working out terribly well for humanity. If it doesn't have the term "caveman" or "paleo" slapped in front of it, is a diet of vegetables, meats, fruits and nuts not "evolved"? If not, how is it not?

Is it better to take advantage of the latest in "food technology" offered up by Kraft, General Mills and the like? If so, why? Please point me to the advantage these foods provide besides price and convenience (neither of which are related to the body, which you cited in your comment).

I'm not bashing Paleo or Primal or Caveman or whatever you call it. I don't see any reason they can't be followed healthily. But it's also quite possible to follow a non-paleo/primal/cave diet and NOT eat Kraft, General Mills and the like. Grains taste good and are healthy. Not grains processed to the point that they are little better than sugar. Healthy, yummy, nutitious whole grains.

This of course would not apply to anyone with a medical condition that causes their body to digest grains inappropriately. If your body is diseased or allergic then obviously general food guidelines would not apply.

Perhaps, but the original comment said "Your diet SHOULD evolve too." What is uniquely advantageous to the body about eating grains? I am asking honestly here.

I have no idea if there is any uniquely advantageous to eating grains. But I also know that grains are not unhealthy for humans, while acknowleging that they may be bad for specific humas who have certain medical conditions.

And I was originally responding to the comment that our diet "should evolve" -- assuming that the commenter was not referring to our "evolved" industrial food system, I was taking that to be an implication that grains provided something uniquely beneficial to the diet.

RangerSteve

Honest questions since you seem to know a lot about this. Or maybe someone else more versed on this can answer.

1) How much glucose is stored in the body for use?
2) How long does it take to deplete those stores with exercise above ~65% of max heart rate?
3) Can potatoes, fruit or other starchy veggies work? Do they not work as well as grains?

It's a tough question to answer because of a lot of variables.

1) You don't store much glucose in the body as that's what is in your blood stream. Glucose does get stored as glycogen in skeletal muscle and in the liver. The amount that gets stored in skeletal muscle (which is the majority of it) varies by a massive amount. It's going to depend on how many calories you're eating in your diet, whether or not you're under/over your calorie maintenance, your amount of skeletal muscle, your hormones, types of carbohydrates, and what percentage of Vo2 max you're exercising at and for how long. With this many variables, it's always hard to tell how much you can store. I've read that it can be all the way up to 800g or so for elite level athletes who have a large muscle mass.

2) Depletion will depend on Vo2 max percentages and how long you stay at whatever percentage you're exercising. Glycogen is the primary source of energy above 65% of your max heart rate. It's commonly mistaken that glucose is the primary fuel but it's actually glycogen. (Fahey, Brooks, Baldwin 2005). Glycogen depletion rates are usually about 3-5 times greater than that of blood glucose. Even after you're done exercising, glycogen is getting used up because of EPOC (exercise post oxygen consumption) . So glycogen gets used fast and it needs replenishment to maintain that high intensity level of exercise.

3) Yes, potatoes work well for glycogen replenishment. A lot of paleo diets are void of all but sweet potatoes though. Something about saponin levels or some crap like that. Anyway, potatoes are an excellent source of complex carbohydrate. Fruits are also good BUT many fruits are higher in fructose than glucose so the liver will end up processing the fructose first and then it's a lot longer way of getting your skeletal muscles filled up. Of course liver glycogen also plays a role in exercise but this message is already getting too long. Certain fruits are pretty high in glucose as well. Bananas, mangos, peaches are some I can think of off the top of my head. Do they all work as well as grains? I don't know the full answer to that. I did paleo for two years and exercised hard without any super negative results but would it have been more efficient to eat grains? Maybe. I know I ate the sweet potato fries like it was no one's business though.

3b) Also, in terms of exercise intensity and timing of nutrients, certain quick digesting carbohydrates that are high in sugar are beneficial. Things that are glucose based or sucrose based will spike insulin and replenish blood glucose and muscle glycogen levels much faster than slower digesting complex carbs. This is where gels, soda, honey, sugary foods, etc come into play. If you exercise at a high Vo2 max level 2-3 times a day, you don't have time for complex carbs to break down and get stored as glycogen. That's why a lot of elite athletes use very sugary foods to get themselves back on track quickly.

Edit:

Reference:

Exercise Physiology: Human Bioenergetics and Its Applications (Fourth Edition)

George A Brooks
Thomas D Fahey (my professor when I took exercise physiology and principles of strength and conditioning)
Kenneth M Baldwin

RangerSteve

From everything I have researched the whole Jesus ate bread is figurative, not literal..................

EZEKIEL 4:9: "Take also unto thee Wheat, and Barley, and beans, and lentils, and millet, and Spelt, and put them in one vessel, and make bread of it..."

^

---

So I guess all those ingredients are figurative and telling people to put them into a vessel and make bread was also figurative?

GENESIS 1:29: "And God said, 'Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yeilding seed; to you it shall be for meat.'"

^----So God gave us all the plants, herbs, seeds, meats of the land and we aren't supposed to use them if we want? Interesting.


You might want to call up the Ezekiel bread company and tell them they're frauding. I'm sure they'd love to know it after all these years.

SiltyPigeon

The Tapeworm Diet sounds WAY easier. Plus I can eat Twinkies.

questionablemethods

Thanks for the detailed response, RangerSteve. Apologies for getting glucose and glycogen confused. I have trouble keeping it all straight.

Not that I was asking you to provide it, but I still haven't really heard any convincing arguments that we NEED grains or that they provide something beneficial to the body that is unavailable from other sources with the exception of, perhaps, a very serious athlete where eeking out the last fraction of a percentage of performance is a top concern. This all goes back to the comment by someone else about how we have evolved and our diet should evolve too a point which, perhaps said more snarkily than seriously, hasn't been sufficiently defended, in my opinion.

But sure, if you (the general "you") love bread and are losing/maintaining weight just fine eating it and aren't experiencing any of the myriad of problems associated with intestinal permeability, then have it! I didn't think that they were a problem for me, honestly, but I really feel a lot better without them. I used to get "hangry" (hungry + angry) a lot and I would panic when I didn't have decent food handy. Now I can easily go 5+ hours without any inklings of hunger. (The side effect of this is that I am realizing how much I also eat because I am bored because I find myself wanting an excuse to snack, checking my stomach for hints of hunger, not finding any and realizing that it is just me feeling restless.)

luscadero

Jeez, people, it seems most of the dissenters know absolutely nothing about "eating paleo" besides the five pages they've read on this message board. Why don't you do the actual research if you care that much to argue about it - I'm talking reading medical studies, etc., and maybe even, GEE I DON'T KNOW the actual paleo theory, instead of throwing out random thoughts on a subject you don't even fully understand and believing you know something based on crap you read on a message board. You might learn something. This is about actual science.

While you're at it, look up the actual nutritional values in grains and compare them to other vegetables, before you make sweeping generalizations on the subject. See, then you can make an informed decision and post something valid. You know, something other than "GRRR FAD DIET."

For the record, I could care less if you eat grains or not. This is about making informed decisions and creating valid opinions. I'm not going to sit around and lecture on a subject I know nothing about, and I am sure not going to listen to anything said about a subject by a person who clearly has never even thought about it, much less done the work to understand it fully.

One last thought, as it relates to supposed "marketing schemes" and such - Nothing about the way I eat financially benefits anyone in the world except some local organic farmers, and I'm really fine with that. I'm not purchasing anything from anyone that I don't need to survive. Pretty sure a lot of people making food purchases are getting sucked into much more of a marketing scheme than a true paleo. Now go to the library already.

The "paleo theory" is flawed in itself. Paleolithic people lived in different areas with different access to different foods. The inuits of north America had a high fat/protein based diet based off of fish, seal and other sea life. The paleo people in Africa grew on a diet of lean game meat that they tracked over long distances in the brush land. The paleo people in the pacific had a diet rich in wild fruits and fish.

Please save holier than thou approach to what you think the paleo diet is. Plenty of us have researched the diet, tried the diet (2 years personally) and have had great success with it. That doesn't mean that grains are bad for you and that the paleo diet is necessarily better than any other diet out there.

The problem with people pushing the paleo diet is similar to that of mainstream religious groups. There are plenty of personal benefits to the paleo diet just like there are in religion. However, the minute you start telling me that my belief system (diet) is wrong is the minute I no longer respect your opinion. I'm not saying you're personally doing this but this seems to be the norm of the cult that is now called paleo. Grains are fine for you. Ice cream is fine for you. Rice is fine for you. All these things can be eaten and blood work shows plenty of people who do eat it and are just as healthy or healthier than people on the paleo diet.

Flawed logic on dieting is not the answer.

First of all, RangerSteve, I am not "paleo" or whathaveyou. I simply don't eat grains and sugar because I feel like crap when I do. I eat plenty of dairy, and consume many things that are not paleo-approved. I simply get irritated when people say "grains are good for you" and call people fad dieters because they don't eat grains - it's honestly irresponsible in my opinion. There are legitimate health issues (read above, I've said this once) for MANY people when it comes to eating grains. I didn't say ALL people. And I'm not even talking about weight loss. I didn't make these grand sweeping generalization that you are implying, like "grains are good for you." I also don't sound nearly as holier-than-thou. I am not telling anyone they are doing something wrong. I'm just tired of people telling me what I'm doing is wrong - and if you read your earlier comments, that's exactly what it sounds like YOU are doing. People ask the question, and I just give my honest answer based on personal experience and research - I could care less if you eat them if they have no negative effects for you. I'm a runner. I know how useful grains can be.

Secondly, I love ezekial bread and still eat it occasionally. In fact, I had some bread AND a beer last night. Restricting grains is not some kind of religion, it's just what I need to do. I felt horrible afterwards, and it reminded me why I stopped. Then I killed the grain-pain with half a bottle of wine.

Thirdly, I eat sweet potato fries all the freakin' time. Best food ever.

RangerSteve

Thanks for the detailed response, RangerSteve. Apologies for getting glucose and glycogen confused. I have trouble keeping it all straight.

Not that I was asking you to provide it, but I still haven't really heard any convincing arguments that we NEED grains or that they provide something beneficial to the body that is unavailable from other sources with the exception of, perhaps, a very serious athlete where eeking out the last fraction of a percentage of performance is a top concern. This all goes back to the comment by someone else about how we have evolved and our diet should evolve too a point which, perhaps said more snarkily than seriously, hasn't been sufficiently defended, in my opinion.

But sure, if you (the general "you") love bread and are losing/maintaining weight just fine eating it and aren't experiencing any of the myriad of problems associated with intestinal permeability, then have it! I didn't think that they were a problem for me, honestly, but I really feel a lot better without them. I used to get "hangry" (hungry + angry) a lot and I would panic when I didn't have decent food handy. Now I can easily go 5+ hours without any inklings of hunger. (The side effect of this is that I am realizing how much I also eat because I am bored because I find myself wanting an excuse to snack, checking my stomach for hints of hunger, not finding any and realizing that it is just me feeling restless.)

No one NEEDS grains in their diet. Hell, you don't really NEED carbs in your diet at all except to make sure you get enough vitamins/minerals.

Also, as far as health concerns in regards to grain, if you DO have health issues with it, you're in the minority. Billions of people every day eat grains and don't have any issues and their diets have evolved (physically and culturally) to support a grain based approach. If you're one of the people that feel better without grains then go for it, just make sure not to eat potatoes as your only source of complex carbs for exercise as the potassium and phosphorous overload might not be the best for you depending on what else you eat.

As far as your 5+ hours without food and feeling good, that has more to do with glucagon (opposite of insulin) since it's the hormone that regulates blood sugar when food isn't present in your system. Glucagon will kick in regardless of your paleo/non paleo approach to diet.

RangerSteve

First of all, RangerSteve, I am not "paleo" or whathaveyou. I simply don't eat grains and sugar because I feel like crap when I do. I eat plenty of dairy, and consume many things that are not paleo-approved. I simply get irritated when people say "grains are good for you" and call people fad dieters because they don't eat grains - it's honestly irresponsible in my opinion. There are legitimate health issues (read above, I've said this once) for MANY people when it comes to eating grains. I didn't say ALL people. And I'm not even talking about weight loss. I didn't make these grand sweeping generalization that you are implying, like "grains are good for you." I also don't sound nearly as holier-than-thou. I am not telling anyone they are doing something wrong. I'm just tired of people telling me what I'm doing is wrong - and if you read your earlier comments, that's exactly what it sounds like YOU are doing. People ask the question, and I just give my honest answer based on personal experience and research - I could care less if you eat them if they have no negative effects for you. I'm a runner. I know how useful grains can be.

Secondly, I love ezekial bread and still eat it occasionally. In fact, I had some bread AND a beer last night. Restricting grains is not some kind of religion, it's just what I need to do. I felt horrible afterwards, and it reminded me why I stopped. Then I killed the grain-pain with half a bottle of wine.

Thirdly, I eat sweet potato fries all the freakin' time. Best food ever.

Here is your problem with this issue....grains ARE good for you if you don't have any negative side affects from them. If you DO have negative side afffects from them, you're in the minority and you shouldn't be upset if people don't agree with you about it. If I was allergic to milk, should I be upset that you eat dairy and tell you that you're unhealthy for doing so? No I shouldn't.

Nothing in your diet is wrong, assuming you are getting enough of everything you need. However, nothing in my diet is wrong either and I don't eat the same as you. The only difference is that I'm not going to tell anyone else their diet is wrong unless they're doing something severely stupid (HCG, etc). The paleo crowd seems to be the new mainstream religion that tells everyone else their diet is wrong because it's....well, not paleo. Not good enough. If the paleo crowd can prove to me that my blood work is wrong and that the tests the doctors use are wrong and that I'm not really mountain biking, lifting, playing soccer and boxing for hours on end after eating pizza and that it's all in my imagination then I'll listen. Until that evidence comes down the line, grains are just fine in my diet as well as the BILLIONS of other people in the world who eat them and are healthy.

questionablemethods

The paleo crowd seems to be the new mainstream religion that tells everyone else their diet is wrong because it's....well, not paleo.

I'm not saying that there aren't some paleo evangelists out there, but I would just like to refresh everyone about how this particular thread got started.

[I'm summarizing here, not quoting directly.]

OP: Hey, anyone have experience with this whole caveman diet thing?
1st person to respond: I haven't heard about it. I want to know more.
2nd person to respond: I don't buy it. You have evolved. Your diet should evolve too.

Soo.... who exactly is judging about someone else's diet?

Now, I'm not saying that it is you, RangerSteve. I'm simply pointing out the tone that kicked off this thread. So, of course people wanted to come out swinging.