Convince me (or not) that Paleo makes sense

SanteMulberry

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.

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I just started Paleo since recommended by my doctor. I am never in the kitchen trolling for food! It is great! I am not constantly thinking of when I can eat next, what am I going to eat, etc.

I do more Primal than Paleo and I agree---you never get hungry, because you are eating lower carb. I usually keep my carbs between 75-100 grams. That's low enough to knock down my high insulin levels (and thus keep hunger at bay) but not so low that it is unhealthy. I wouldn't go below 60 grams because that will put you in ketosis and that is not particularly good for you. The human body has no particular need for grain (especially not high-gluten modern wheat and GMO grain) and the body DEFINITELY has no need for sugar. I eat way more vegetables than I used to eat and have fruit for snacks instead of a high-carby thing. Feeling way healthier and I've taken off 20 pounds so far. I lose about a pound a week and I have a LOT more energy than I ever had while I was loading up on bread, pasta, etc.. I tried the low fat thing---could not stay on it and gained back what I lost--plus more. I could stay on this eating plan forever. I'm assuming I will stop losing weight once I lose most of the blubber. My muscles are actually stronger than they were before. As I get more fit and exercise more, I will probably have to add a bit of grain.

HisangelG

Actually, the body does in fact need sugar (glucose). What it needs little to none of is the refined sugar that many of us eat. Fruits have fructose a form of sugar the body can convert easily to the type of sugar it needs.

SanteMulberry

Actually, the body does in fact need sugar (glucose). What it needs little to none of is the refined sugar that many of us eat. Fruits have fructose a form of sugar the body can convert easily to the type of sugar it needs.

Yes, it does need glucose---that is the primary fuel for your brain. But your body can make glucose out of any type of food. Sucrose is a problem and so is high fructose corn syrup. The body was not meant to get a massive jolt of refined sugar sans fiber and other nutrients. Eating sugar causes nasty biochemical things to go on in the liver and other organs. It has been said that, if sugar were introduced today, it would be promptly banned by government, so bad is its effect on the body over time. The body efficiently handles the small amount of fructose present in a piece of fruit. The absorption is slowed by the fiber present in the piece of fruit and there are other nutrients that are extremely beneficial (just as there are extremely beneficial nutrients in vegetables and other God-made foods). Fruit might not be so beneficial if we ate tons of it but no one does, it seems. No one sits down to eat a dozen oranges. But that is the amount of fructose (from high fructose corn syrup) that is present in ONE 12-oz. can of soda pop. Two or three pieces of fruit a day (most people eat even less) will be beneficial, but drinking three sodas a day is asking for trouble--like type II diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity and heart disease. Think about it---black bears fatten up for the winter by gorging on wild blueberries. A typical black bear will eat his weight in blueberries or other fruit in a few days in the course of fattening up for the winter.