Convince me (or not) that Paleo makes sense

kdiamond

I agree with Paleo's focus on whole and minimally processed foods. My problem with it are:

(1) The exclude some foods that are perfectly healthy, such as potatoes, rice, corn, beans and dairy.
(2) If I'm eating 80-90% healthy and covering all my bases, there's no evidence that having some ice cream or cake once in a while is going to harm me in any measurable fashion.

I agree with this.

I try to adhere to eating minimally or unprocessed foods and lots of vegetables and lean meats, and I do this 80% of the time.

But the other 20% I eat what I want. I have done well with this.

I also don't have the desire to buy only grass-fed meats (who wants to spend hours in Whole Foods), and to give up dairy. I like dairy.

As a general rule I don't eat any fast food ever and I only eat out one day a week so pretty much everything I eat I make myself. I think experimentation with cooking is a must.

caribougal

Hi All,

I have never really understood the 'paleo' basics. Besides the fact that semantically the diet makes little sense I want the reason why things like legumes, peanut butter, potatoes, dairy are off limits. I can go with the idea that gains aren't the purest form of what we should be eating (even if I don't adhere and eat whole grains) and even dairy to some extent but I struggle intuitively with the other stuff.

I also am not looking for "I eat paleo and feel great" but more concrete reasons why physically we as a species should not consume these items. If you tell me it has a certain effect on the body I would like a medical study I can look at to learn more.

Finally, I often get the impression Paleo is a bit 'all or nothing'. There are certain non-Paelo items I will never give up. Full stop. Is there benefit/room for a modified version?

Someone earlier posted a link to Mark's Daily Apple blog. You can search his site for your questions about why each of the foods eliminated on the Paleo diet. In each of his responses, he give both his own opinion (he's a blogger, after all, with books and supplements to sell) but also does a nice job of linking to the studies that formed his opinion. Robb Wolf does the same on his site. The Whole9 site is also a great place to explore the reasons, both nutritional and psychological, behind the specific foods eliminated. Reading "It Starts With Food" is very helpful. I have my own reasons for appreciating the "no" list on Paleo, since they are all ones that either I tended to overeat and which messed with my blood sugar, and which tended to crowd out space in my diet for healthier fruits and veg.

As for the "modified' version... there is no one Paleo diet. Each person learns what works best, and makes it their own. It's very strict if you keep it strict. Or, you can decide which parts of it work best for you and stick with that. Even people who are "strict" (and I consider myself one of them) generally choose to "treat" from time to time... we're human. Some people focus more on eliminating grains, but not legumes. Others focus more on just eating produce and meats from local farms who use sustainable farming/animal welfare practices, which is as big a part of Paleo as anything else. Some people eliminate most grains, but eat rice. It's all good if it helps you sustain a healthy eating lifestyle. And, Paleo is one of the few "diets" that also stresses regular fitness, sleep, and fun. Read any book or blog on Paleo, and you'll see that there too. Common sense, of course, but that's why people refer to it as a "lifestyle" as well.

Many people do the "Whole30", which is essentially an elimination diet very similar to ones used for allergy testing. Some people do this to try out Paleo for 30 days, and some people wait until they've been eating Paleo for a while before they try it. The philosophy is that you eat for 30 days according to the very strict elimination of grains, legumes, soy, added sugars, dairy, etc. After the 30 days, you systematically add things back in.

You may find that you tolerate grains just fine. Or, you may find that you tolerate oats, but not wheat. So then you know. You may find that when you add dairy back in, you feel just fine, or you may find allergies that you previously never associated with dairy flare up. It's about learning how your body interacts with foods that tend to cause health issues in some people.

You might find that you are completely fine with eating anything under the sun. Or, you might identify certain nutritional sensitivities or psychological associations you had with food that you were not aware of before eliminating, and then you can decide in an informed way what you will do with that new information.

During the 30 days, you're not supposed to cheat, weigh yourself, or count calories, carbs, etc. It's tough. It requires commitment and preparation. It's your 30 day N=1 experiment. Almost everyone who completes the Whole30 either loses weight and/or inches and feels better after such clean eating, but it's not a weight loss diet. It's a diet that gives your gut 30 days to heal from anything that may be bothering it nutritionally, so you can learn what foods make you feel healthy and what foods don't. And it's a chance to give yourself 30 days to avoid foods that may be psychological triggers for overeating, so that you can gain some mental perspective on those triggers, and then decide how you will deal with them in the future. For people who are great at moderating their diet, this may not be important. But for many, many people who do overeat certain foods, this can be very helpful.

I personally had a huge FAIL when I tried Whole30 (yes, Paleo friends, I'm talking about my hot butcher... or should I say... Akimajuktuk's future husband). I'm going to try again soon.

jofjltncb6

[
Any diet that says some foods are good and some are bad sets you up for emotional food issues bordering on being emotionally disturbed over time.

if you start out as an emotional waste basket, then MAYBE

but these kind of statements are just pure horseshiit

Actually, I think that stating that grains/dairy/legumes are "bad" is the real "horseshiit."

I'm certainly glad you were once again able to share your personal opinion on yet another paleo thread. At least you're consistent.

WendyTerry420

[
Any diet that says some foods are good and some are bad sets you up for emotional food issues bordering on being emotionally disturbed over time.

if you start out as an emotional waste basket, then MAYBE

but these kind of statements are just pure horseshiit

Actually, I think that stating that grains/dairy/legumes are "bad" is the real "horseshiit."

well thats a bit different, no? some foods are bad for SOME people...but blanket statements of any kind usually fail

Exactly! To me, tofu is a "bad" food because it makes me vomit. :laugh:

PetulantOne

http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2010/10/04/the-beginners-guide-to-the-paleo-diet/

Simplest explanation I've seen on paleo.

Disclaimer- I'm not on the diet, and wouldn't even want to try to attempt it. I didn't even really know what it was until I saw the post on Nerd Fitness.

Jxnsmma

I recommend learning to use the search feature first. This topic has been beaten to death already.

I also understand how to use the search feature, thanks for the condescension though. I posted because I was hoping that given the way I phrased the question I would get some knowledgeable responses that would point me to good research. Reading through 20+ pages of people arguing back and forth with little information is not something I consider a good use of my time. So while there are posts on this, yes, I didn't think any of them met my needs. You're welcome not to post on topics you feel are redundant.

Makes sense on the intolerance point.

Now do you see what she meant! LOL! Insert open can o worms riiiiiiiiight HERE! to go along with another 20+ pages of people arguing!

I LOVE these forums!!

:flowerforyou:

HisangelG

I am highly suspicious of any plan that advocates eliminating entire food groups. YMMMV.

QFT.

KeriA

Thanks for this thread. I had a crush on a boy in Junior high school until I realized he was really two seperate people. I really hadn't realized that Primal and Paleo weren't the same and I too am interested in why not legumes. So I googled and found this answer that says that the Paleo Diet was being a bit incompetent in their scientific analysis on legumes and lectin being an antinutrient. Lectin it turns out is eliminated from legumes when cooked. http://drclydewilson.typepad.com/drclydewilson/2011/02/paleo-diet-is-incompetent-legumes-are-not-anti-nutrients.html
Here is a post on the flip side against beans but stating the reason. http://wellnessmama.com/2029/spill-the-beans-are-they-healthy-or-not/ I also can see why you asked the question. I did use the search function to figure out the difference between the two. but like you didn't get the info about beans that you asked specifically about in the first pages of this post (all I have read so far) and the 1st pages of the Paleo vs Primal thread I found. so I gave up and asked google. Good question as far as I am concerned. I know of a diet/system that takes you off most of the foods that may cause problems for you and then lets you add them back in slowly to see which are really an issue for you. It has some similarities to some of the primal and paleo lists but isn't but isn't really very big on red meats. It wasn't developed for weight loss but seems to work well for it. The problem for me remains giving up sugar completely. I am sure it would be really healthy and I would lose better. You had another question that remained unanswered by the initial posts I am going to look into it after finishing the article above (just found more on this topic).

Hope you got your questions answered somewhere in this thread.

redheaddee

Back in those days, men use to beat women on the head with clubs, drag them to the cave, and rape them. Should we go back to that also?
...
Nuff' said.

Seriously....SMH :noway:

calmthundr2

Are you, perhaps, looking for something more like the following:

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2008/05May/Pages/Cavemanfaddiet.aspx

NCT00360516 Paleolithic Diet and Exercise Study
- http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00360516

NCT00692536 Diet Composition - Metabolic Regulation and Long-term Compliance (KNOTA)
- http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00692536

NCT00548782 Paleolithic Diet and Exercise Study
- http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00548782

Beneficial effects of a Paleolithic diet on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes: a randomized cross-over pilot study
- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2724493/


Personally, it doesn't make much sense to me primarily because some of the basic tennets upon which the diet is based seem questionable (see "Thirty thousand-year-old evidence of plant food processing" - http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/10/08/1006993107).

WendyTerry420

there sure are a lot of pretentious people on this site. This person wasn't trying to start an argument, they were just asking for some scientific evidence either for or against paleo diet. I am not going to mention what I think either way, because I don't want to argue. And i am sorry I don't have any evidence to help you out. But seriously, why do so many of you bother to answer with nothing but opinions? I think it is facts that they are after!

Maybe because there is no such thing as a scientific study on the new paleo diet? Perhaps that's why there's nothing but opinions? :flowerforyou:

secretlobster

I don't have science for you. But when I was following a "paleo/primal" dietary lifestyle, over the course of about a year, I didn't stop eating potatoes, legumes, or "nightshades". I don't really feel like I missed out on anything. But almond butter is pretty good. And my energy was INSANE. It felt fantastic.

You CAN reap the benefits of a diet that is more natural and closer to what your ancestors ate without wearing a loincloth and eating nothing but organ meat and kale.

I am personally turned off to the idea of never eating something I like ever again "because a diet said so" but I can still follow the basic principles 90%. It is what you make it.

redheaddee

Here is from the Paleohacks site (which was taken from yet another site) as to what paleo man actually ate:

"Paleolithic diets necessarily included things that most Americans (who are the primary consumers of this woo) wouldn't touch with a 10-foot squeamish pole. Next time you meet a paleo, ask him or her if they eat:

Small game - really small game - like rats, mice and squirrels. *Yummy! Squirell stew is delicious!*


Organ meat - a critical part of paleolithic man's diet. Does the average paleo dieter eat brains, tongues, stomach, eyes, liver, or kidneys? All of these brought important nutrition to our "healthy" ancestors that doesn't exist in white meat and cuts of grazing beef.
*Tongue is wonderful, especially simmered in a nice boulliabaisse (sp?) and red wine, served with a nice, fragrant rice? Oh hell yes.*


Lizards, newts, frogs, turtles and anything else that had meat on its bones. *Again, YUM.*

Marketing aside, this all doesn't mean that the modern paleo diet isn't healthy or doesn't help people.

Y'all must not live in the South, because around here, our churches have Critter Crawls = suppers with all varieties of wild game. Racoon, frogs (and we grow them bullfrogs HUGE at my house), squirrel...you name it, I'll eat it. IIt is all in how you prepare it! :drinker:

Dave198lbs

Thanks for this thread. I had a crush on a boy in Junior high school until I realized he was really two seperate people.

and to think we get all this entertainment for free

redheaddee

there sure are a lot of pretentious people on this site. This person wasn't trying to start an argument, they were just asking for some scientific evidence either for or against paleo diet. I am not going to mention what I think either way, because I don't want to argue. And i am sorry I don't have any evidence to help you out. But seriously, why do so many of you bother to answer with nothing but opinions? I think it is facts that they are after!

Maybe because there is no such thing as a scientific study on the new paleo diet? Perhaps that's why there's nothing but opinions? :flowerforyou:

Opinions are like @ssholes...everyone has one and they all stink! :laugh:

caribougal

Look up. The above poster just posted some. But, there are no long-term studies, that's true. There are lots of studies happening now looking at the impact of diet on the gut microbiome and association with metabolic diseases as well as the link between gut biome and mental disorders. Some interesting studies of the impact of diet on mitochondria. Do a PubMed search.

There's a fascinating TedTalk by this physician who put her MS in remission through diet change (coincidentally, Paleo diet).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLjgBLwH3Wc

edited cuz many posts jumped in between this one and the one I was referring to. Look up higher.

WendyTerry420

I recommend learning to use the search feature first. This topic has been beaten to death already.

I also understand how to use the search feature, thanks for the condescension though. I posted because I was hoping that given the way I phrased the question I would get some knowledgeable responses that would point me to good research. Reading through 20+ pages of people arguing back and forth with little information is not something I consider a good use of my time. So while there are posts on this, yes, I didn't think any of them met my needs. You're welcome not to post on topics you feel are redundant.

Makes sense on the intolerance point.

Now do you see what she meant! LOL! Insert open can o worms riiiiiiiiight HERE! to go along with another 20+ pages of people arguing!

I LOVE these forums!!

:flowerforyou:

^^^^
:laugh:


Especially people who think someone is trying to argue just because they state an opinion! Love it!
I MFP! :laugh:

WendyTerry420

Look up. The above poster just posted some. But, there are no long-term studies, that's true. There are lots of studies happening now looking at the impact of diet on the gut microbiome and association with metabolic diseases as well as the link between gut biome and mental disorders. Some interesting studies of the impact of diet on mitochondria. Do a PubMed search.

There's a fascinating TedTalk by this physician who put her MS in remission through diet change (coincidentally, Paleo diet).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLjgBLwH3Wc

edited cuz many posts jumped in between this one and the one I was referring to. Look up higher.

Actually only one of those studies is completed, and it only studied diabetics. :ohwell:

KeriA

Here is a discussion on potatos from a Paleo 2.0 perspective. http://paleodietlifestyle.com/fatty-meat-potatoes-dairy-and-paleo-2-0/
I guess you can say that it says why it is not allowed in some Paleo diets but not in newer versions. Again it discusses preparation of said vegetable.

Akimajuktuq

I am against it. Why? Because it is not a diet that is environmentally sustainable in a world with 7 billion people. It's also expensive - beans are a big part of my diet because I can't afford to eat meat and fresh vegetables every day. Finally, I would never join a religion or a diet that does not allow me to eat all the wonderful foods on earth. If I was the kind of person who could just give up cheese, pie, biscuits, waffles, etc., I probably wouldn't be overweight in the first place. I would rather die than go Paleo.

^^^ This

I left the church where I was raised for this very reason. No one tells me what I can or can't put in my own body. :drinker:

That's really ironic, because you seem to have some personal vendetta with people who eat differently than you when they choose to share about personal experiences when asked; for instance, this post. You are always out in full force trying to discredit anyone paleo/primal. I'm not telling people what to eat, I am telling them about my OWN EXPERIENCE.

Akimajuktuq

while never, ever being hungry (unless it's real hunger).

I don't understand this remark? Why would your hunger be more real than anyone else's? Are you refering to cravings?

I'm refering to the constant struggle with hunger, cravings, binging that occurs when I eat a "normal" diet. I mean that I am only hungry now when my body really needs food, and then it's not uncomfortable and I have no need to over eat.

I can't count the posts that I've read to the effect of "help me, I'm always hungry" or "I can't stop eating", whatever. Yup, that was me, BEFORE.

Interesting. Binge eating is a psychological disorder rather than a physical one. I've never been a binge eater, but I'm sure people who are binging realize, at least on some level, that they are not really hungry. It is interesting to me that you chose such a restrictive diet that would possibly meet the criteria for orthorexia, another psychological disorder, to cure your binges.

I don't mean that as in insult. I'm glad you found a way to get healthy, but it would be an interesting research topic, don't you think?

Yeah, I knew it wouldn't be long before someone tried to throw the imaginary illness of "orthorexia" in my face. I am nowhere near as strict with my food as I should be exactly because I have no such disorder. I don't think the disorder exists but someone with OCD could certainly manifest the traits. No I do not have OCD. lol So, wanting to eat healthy to be healthy and to help my child be healthy is orthorexic???

If binge eating is only a psychological disorder, why was it only finally resolved by eating a certain way? Do you think I didn't try WW and all the high carb/low fat recommendations a thousand times? Also, my extreme depression and anxiety have been remedied as well. And a huge long list of physical health problems too.

I knew that I was over-eating and couldn't possibly need more food but I have done lots of research and there are processes in the body that when damaged by poor nutrition don't work properly. Hunger signals is just one of those processes.

Yes, further research (that isn't adulterated by a financial agenda of any kind) is definitely needed, but research does include real-life experience of real people. Research isn't just done in a lab. Do you really think that agri-business, the health industry, government agencies, food processors, etc really want us to stop eating wheat, corn, soy, etc? Yeah, not likely.

I did not mean to throw anything in your face. I was merely pointing out that the "rules" of the Paleo diet could meet the criteria for orthorexia, which is not yet a recognized disorder. I apologize for the remark and won't belabor the point since clearly it upsets you. It was just something that popped into my mind as interesting.

But I do not see how the fact that you were able to stop binge eating and rid yourself of the health problems it created through a restrictive diet means that the binge eating was not a psychological problem. Doesn't the very fact that you stopped eating <whatever> when you chose to prove that you were never physically compelled to binge on it? And if not a physical or psychological compulsion, then what?

Just like chronic undereating, chronic overeating is surely a psychological problem.

LOL, I'm not offended just riled up. I think orthorexia is a crock, but it's not an accident that the "disorder" has now been invented. It's easy to ignore someone's opinion and concerns when they can be labelled with a "disorder". I do agree that OCD could manifest into food issues and then look like "orthorexia".

Binge eating, depression, anxiety, etc are normally considered "psychological" diseases. However, is psychological health really separate from physical health? Are we not a WHOLE functioning system (like the Earth) or can all the parts and functions be understood by looking at each only separately and while never truly understanding the whole?

Nevermind. My diet resolved all of my physical problems and almost all of my psychological problems. The PTSD is still there, but manageable. I'm still an introvert, but that's likely a blessing not a curse. lol

So, yes the psychological issues that supposedly warranted a whole bunch of dangerous meds, were cured by diet. Go figure.

1holegrouper

Hi All,

I have never really understood the 'paleo' basics. Besides the fact that semantically the diet makes little sense I want the reason why things like legumes, peanut butter, potatoes, dairy are off limits. I can go with the idea that gains aren't the purest form of what we should be eating (even if I don't adhere and eat whole grains) and even dairy to some extent but I struggle intuitively with the other stuff.

I also am not looking for "I eat paleo and feel great" but more concrete reasons why physically we as a species should not consume these items. If you tell me it has a certain effect on the body I would like a medical study I can look at to learn more.

Finally, I often get the impression Paleo is a bit 'all or nothing'. There are certain non-Paelo items I will never give up. Full stop. Is there benefit/room for a modified version?

I like your approach to doing the proper research. This will help you to see principles from this diet that you will agree with and as well as the ones that you may not agree with. Then, you can make informed decisions. Unfortunately, a forum like this is one of the absolute worst places to go to reach a conclusion but is a great place to go to get started on your info gathering.

Following the advice of my trainer I didn't realize that I was mainly eating this type of diet (Paleo actually covers a spectrum) until later but my trainer and I will not call my diet Paleo. My reasoning may be silly but I don't want to be tied down to a named diet definition.

ETA: as far as not eating certain foods; you need to discover what helps you and hurts you. This varies by individual to a large degree on many types of foods.

Akimajuktuq

Hi All,

I have never really understood the 'paleo' basics. Besides the fact that semantically the diet makes little sense I want the reason why things like legumes, peanut butter, potatoes, dairy are off limits. I can go with the idea that gains aren't the purest form of what we should be eating (even if I don't adhere and eat whole grains) and even dairy to some extent but I struggle intuitively with the other stuff.

I also am not looking for "I eat paleo and feel great" but more concrete reasons why physically we as a species should not consume these items. If you tell me it has a certain effect on the body I would like a medical study I can look at to learn more.

Finally, I often get the impression Paleo is a bit 'all or nothing'. There are certain non-Paelo items I will never give up. Full stop. Is there benefit/room for a modified version?

Someone earlier posted a link to Mark's Daily Apple blog. You can search his site for your questions about why each of the foods eliminated on the Paleo diet. In each of his responses, he give both his own opinion (he's a blogger, after all, with books and supplements to sell) but also does a nice job of linking to the studies that formed his opinion. Robb Wolf does the same on his site. The Whole9 site is also a great place to explore the reasons, both nutritional and psychological, behind the specific foods eliminated. Reading "It Starts With Food" is very helpful. I have my own reasons for appreciating the "no" list on Paleo, since they are all ones that either I tended to overeat and which messed with my blood sugar, and which tended to crowd out space in my diet for healthier fruits and veg.

As for the "modified' version... there is no one Paleo diet. Each person learns what works best, and makes it their own. It's very strict if you keep it strict. Or, you can decide which parts of it work best for you and stick with that. Even people who are "strict" (and I consider myself one of them) generally choose to "treat" from time to time... we're human. Some people focus more on eliminating grains, but not legumes. Others focus more on just eating produce and meats from local farms who use sustainable farming/animal welfare practices, which is as big a part of Paleo as anything else. Some people eliminate most grains, but eat rice. It's all good if it helps you sustain a healthy eating lifestyle. And, Paleo is one of the few "diets" that also stresses regular fitness, sleep, and fun. Read any book or blog on Paleo, and you'll see that there too. Common sense, of course, but that's why people refer to it as a "lifestyle" as well.

Many people do the "Whole30", which is essentially an elimination diet very similar to ones used for allergy testing. Some people do this to try out Paleo for 30 days, and some people wait until they've been eating Paleo for a while before they try it. The philosophy is that you eat for 30 days according to the very strict elimination of grains, legumes, soy, added sugars, dairy, etc. After the 30 days, you systematically add things back in.

You may find that you tolerate grains just fine. Or, you may find that you tolerate oats, but not wheat. So then you know. You may find that when you add dairy back in, you feel just fine, or you may find allergies that you previously never associated with dairy flare up. It's about learning how your body interacts with foods that tend to cause health issues in some people.

You might find that you are completely fine with eating anything under the sun. Or, you might identify certain nutritional sensitivities or psychological associations you had with food that you were not aware of before eliminating, and then you can decide in an informed way what you will do with that new information.

During the 30 days, you're not supposed to cheat, weigh yourself, or count calories, carbs, etc. It's tough. It requires commitment and preparation. It's your 30 day N=1 experiment. Almost everyone who completes the Whole30 either loses weight and/or inches and feels better after such clean eating, but it's not a weight loss diet. It's a diet that gives your gut 30 days to heal from anything that may be bothering it nutritionally, so you can learn what foods make you feel healthy and what foods don't. And it's a chance to give yourself 30 days to avoid foods that may be psychological triggers for overeating, so that you can gain some mental perspective on those triggers, and then decide how you will deal with them in the future. For people who are great at moderating their diet, this may not be important. But for many, many people who do overeat certain foods, this can be very helpful.

I personally had a huge FAIL when I tried Whole30 (yes, Paleo friends, I'm talking about my hot butcher... or should I say... Akimajuktuk's future husband). I'm going to try again soon.

Yes, I want your butcher. I'm planning a trip to Colorado NOW. lol

angiechimpanzee

Back in those days, men use to beat women on the head with clubs, drag them to the cave, and rape them. Should we go back to that also?

Is there any evidence that cavemen lived healthy passed 100 years old? I highly doubt it.

Nuff' said.

Yeah, I really don't get this whole obsession about "going back to our roots"? Its as if everyone has forgotten about the whole concept of evolution & progressing as a human race.. Lol.

deevatude

people on paleo just lose a whole bunch of water weight or is fat also?

since most of the things eaten are low in sodium

secretlobster

Yeah, I really don't get this whole obsession about "going back to our roots"? Its as if everyone has forgotten about the whole concept of evolution & progressing as a human race.. Lol.

If you think of obesity becoming an epidemic in Western civilisation as "evolution" and "progression" then sure.
Most early humans died of infection, not obesity. Modern medicine combined with a natural diet, or as reasonably close to it as you can come, seems like a legitimate thing to study.

Akimajuktuq

Back in those days, men use to beat women on the head with clubs, drag them to the cave, and rape them. Should we go back to that also?

Is there any evidence that cavemen lived healthy passed 100 years old? I highly doubt it.

Nuff' said.

Yeah, I really don't get this whole obsession about "going back to our roots"? Its as if everyone has forgotten about the whole concept of evolution & progressing as a human race.. Lol.

Can we please stop with the assumption that evolution to a completely new diet can happen in just a few thousand years? Besides, for processed foods it's only been a hundred years or so (depends on where one is from). Does a complete evolutionary shift occur in that time?

Is it really "progressing" to process food and make it less healthy than it was in it's natural form? Really?

Eat what you want, but to pull the evolution card to justify our modern diet just isn't logical.

spirit80

For those who are concerned about increasing fats, proteins, and reducing carbs.

This is a common result, I have seen by many other people on this Lifestyle

Good luck to all of you.


Your cholesterol results are as follows:
Cholesterol (mg/dL)
Date Value
9/10/2012 141

---

Your Target Total cholesterol <200
HDL Cholesterol (mg/dL)
Date Value
9/10/2012 78

---

Your Target HDL good cholesterol >45 for men, > 55 for women
LDL Cholesterol (mg/dL)
Date Value
9/10/2012 52*

---

Your Target LDL bad cholesterol <130
Triglyceride (mg/dL)
Date Value
9/10/2012 54

---

Your Target Triglycerides <200

Component Results
Component Your Value Standard Range
Protein, Total 7.1 6.0 - 8.4
Albumin 4.4 3.5 - 5.0
Calcium 9.4 8.5 - 10.5
Bilirubin, Total 0.9 0.0 - 1.5
Alkaline Phosphatase 46 40 - 150
AST 21 7 - 40
Glucose 84 65 - 100
BUN 11 10 - 25
Creatinine 0.70 0.70 - 1.40
Sodium 139 135 - 146
Potassium 4.0 3.5 - 5.0
Chloride 99 98 - 110
CO2 29 23 - 32
Anion Gap 11 0 - 15
ALT 29 5 - 50

Meadows18

I don't have science for you. But when I was following a "paleo/primal" dietary lifestyle, over the course of about a year, I didn't stop eating potatoes, legumes, or "nightshades". I don't really feel like I missed out on anything. But almond butter is pretty good. And my energy was INSANE. It felt fantastic.

You CAN reap the benefits of a diet that is more natural and closer to what your ancestors ate without wearing a loincloth and eating nothing but organ meat and kale.

I am personally turned off to the idea of never eating something I like ever again "because a diet said so" but I can still follow the basic principles 90%. It is what you make it.

Exactly....

PhilyPhresh

there sure are a lot of pretentious people on this site. This person wasn't trying to start an argument, they were just asking for some scientific evidence either for or against paleo diet. I am not going to mention what I think either way, because I don't want to argue. And i am sorry I don't have any evidence to help you out. But seriously, why do so many of you bother to answer with nothing but opinions? I think it is facts that they are after!

Even you know what happens when someone starts one of these threads :laugh:

And I think to answer your question as why no one gives facts over opinions is kinda rhetorical isn't it? I mean the whole topic is based on scientific data, aka, opinions. The only fact about scientific data is that it proves itself wrong day in and day out. You can go study for yourself a number of different things dealing with the Paleolithic era (as well and just about any subject) and it doesn't matter how much you read or how much you "know", you will always find someone who read or "knows" the exact opposite you do... So really, this whole thread (and most threads at that) IS nothing more than an invitation for people to argue and act like, well... cave men...