PALEO: pros, cons and whatever else you may think?

What about nutrient absorption and bio-availability? Some of the "demon foods" are believed to have anti-nutrients that make absorbing the nutrients from your fruits & veggies impossible. Some of the recommended foods are thought to help with nutrient absorption.

If you believe that, then don't eat those foods.

So... then why spend so much time jumping into every paleo thread and saying how silly it is? I'm sure there are foods that you don't eat (for whatever reason)?

And you still haven't answered my question. Does IIFYM address things like nutrient absorption and bio-availability?

IIFYM doesn't compete with paleo. You should start another thread if you have in-depth questions about IIFYM.

Great idea! I'm sure there are threads like that out there already, but they are probably (like this one) full of garbage arguments that I don't have time to read through.

I don't think there's an IIFYM group, but there are a lot of people on the forum very knowledgeable about the practice. It's really simple though. Set nutrition goals that matter to YOU and hit them. Consider any aspects you feel are appropriate.

So paleo is just IIFYM without the counting? :bigsmile:

Paleo is compatible with IIFYM. They are not competing diets. You can do IIFYM and paleo at the same time.

Yep..There is a paleo IIFYM group on the IIFYM site forums...

If you're going to stop doing it at some point, why bother in the first place?

A fantastic way to look at any approach to diet. Sustainable health is created through lifestyle changes, not diet "challenges." If you're just thinking this is the final push you need to start a paleo diet, then go for it. If you're planning to do it for 30 days just to be a part of the challenge, it's a waste of time.

No matter what anyone says, if you want to try it, try it. If you don't, don't. Some people are "pro", most are "anti" b/c they've either never tried it or only tried it half-a$$ed and didn't see results.

This implies that you can't have a valid reason to be "anti" unless you've tried it.

I'd agree with that. Only I see no reason for people who are so very 'anti' not to try it. What's it gonna hurt? Maybe some buttz. I'm all for it. Try it for a month, whole-a$$edly, then come on back and knock it all you like!

You'll most likely find that, for the vastly large majority, people who ditch grains and added sugars actually aren't too sad about it. Being a former cupcake, poptart, and Oreo FIEND myself, I can happily say that my life is just as awesome without them. Now I'm just an avocado-on-scrambled eggs FIEND. Sure, some will get the cravings and the carb-flu, but hell, why not just replace the carbs from grains with fruit and taper it? Carb-flu cured.

That being said, that's why the crowd is so vociferous. We feel great, we look great, it's easy as *kitten*, we gots alllll the energies, and we want everyone else to have that too. Because why not?!

Edit: Maybe not everyone thinks it's easy as *kitten*. I think it is. It's easy as *kitten* if you keep it simple.

Everyone should try every diet? That doesn't make sense.

Some of my meals would be considered paleo. Most aren't. Why stop eating a bunch of my favorite foods for no good reason at all?

It would take years to try all these fad diets for a month each.

.
Not every diet- you seem to be very anti- this 'diet' as you would call it. Quit taking things to extremes.

No matter what anyone says, if you want to try it, try it. If you don't, don't. Some people are "pro", most are "anti" b/c they've either never tried it or only tried it half-a$$ed and didn't see results.

This implies that you can't have a valid reason to be "anti" unless you've tried it.

I'd agree with that. Only I see no reason for people who are so very 'anti' not to try it. What's it gonna hurt? Maybe some buttz. I'm all for it. Try it for a month, whole-a$$edly, then come on back and knock it all you like!

You'll most likely find that, for the vastly large majority, people who ditch grains and added sugars actually aren't too sad about it. Being a former cupcake, poptart, and Oreo FIEND myself, I can happily say that my life is just as awesome without them. Now I'm just an avocado-on-scrambled eggs FIEND. Sure, some will get the cravings and the carb-flu, but hell, why not just replace the carbs from grains with fruit and taper it? Carb-flu cured.

That being said, that's why the crowd is so vociferous. We feel great, we look great, it's easy as *kitten*, we gots alllll the energies, and we want everyone else to have that too. Because why not?!

Edit: Maybe not everyone thinks it's easy as *kitten*. I think it is. It's easy as *kitten* if you keep it simple.

Everyone should try every diet? That doesn't make sense.

Some of my meals would be considered paleo. Most aren't. Why stop eating a bunch of my favorite foods for no good reason at all?

It would take years to try all these fad diets for a month each.

Bahaha why keep badgering other people for what they eat for no reason at all? I predict lots of circular arguments, and I also predict myself not participating in them.

I don't badger anyone for what they eat. I am critical when people spread misinformation about the supposed benefits of their fad diet or the supposed dangers of foods their fad diet doesn't approve of.

I don't badger anyone for what they eat. I am critical when people spread misinformation about the supposed benefits of their fad diet or the supposed dangers of foods their fad diet doesn't approve of.

This pretty much sums up my feelings on Paleo and really any "fad" diet. I don't care what anyone else eats or doesn't eat, and I have no judgement for anyone who eats Paleo/Primal/Keto, etc, or even those who recommend it to others as an option to try when they ask for advice.

I do, however, get tired of the people who insist that their exact eating style is the cure-all for every health and weight issue that comes along. And I can't STAND it when people make claims that are just flat out untrue or spout opinion as if it were scientific fact.

I think the horse has long since been dead and beaten, but where on this thread did anyone "bash" healthy foods or say they were dangerous? IIRC, most people were talking about how they felt, weight they loss, and their own experiences. I must have missed people telling OP about the dangers of any foods. Maybe it has happened on other threads and the contrary posts were preemptive strikes?

My reason for following Paleo is my age. I found that when I hit 50 my body just wasn't using calories like it used to. I was getting that dreaded tire around the middle which I hadn't had in years. My main focus is giving up foods that cause inflammation... beans, grains, processed foods, etc... I searched and found a few lists of foods that do that. I didn't want to just follow a plan "just because". I wanted it to matter for my body and my life. I eat vegetables with every meal.

The advantages for me have been 1st: I no longer wake up feeling groggy and sluggish. 2nd: I have much more energy and 3rd: the tire around my waist is definitely going down.

I think we are all different. I think we should eat healthy no matter what. And I think we should listen to our own bodies as to what works for us. Experiment. Pay attention to what different foods make you feel like.

I'm not Paleo 100%. I enjoy my cappuccino in the morning and an occasional treat. Especially ice cream. I'm only human.

And yes, even cake.

I wonder how many (if any) people really eat Paleo. This ^^ is the most common type of post I see for Paleo eaters. I eat Paleo, except for when I want something that is not on the Paleo diet.

Giving up healthy foods like oats and beans but keeping things like cake and ice cream doesn't really sound like a healthy trade to me.

Agreed

Because I feel that following Paleo gives me good guidelines and even cutting out a good portion of the sugary and inflammatory foods is a step in the right direction. I do not believe beans are healthy for me. They make my gut hurt and give me gas. How can that be healthy? I should add that I only eat ice cream on special occasions, like a birthday or something. I used to eat it every day. Yes, every day. And I wasn't all that heavy. I could burn off the calories very well back in the day. Yes, I eat foods that aren't classified as Paleo but you don't have to go 100% Paleo. I shoot for 80% and, to me, that is much better than how I used to eat. Plus, the weight that I did gain finally came off when I adopted this lifestyle.

I think the horse has long since been dead and beaten, but where on this thread did anyone "bash" healthy foods or say they were dangerous? IIRC, most people were talking about how they felt, weight they loss, and their own experiences. I must have missed people telling OP about the dangers of any foods. Maybe it has happened on other threads and the contrary posts were preemptive strikes?

I have been told that both grains (all grains, regardless if gluten free, except for paleo approved grains like quinoa) and legumes are "poison". Now granted, I believe both posts were by the same user, who does seem to be a bit of a paleo zealot.

Though many have told me that both are not healthy and I'd probably feel better if I didn't eat them. Grains will make my gut leak and beans are full of toxins. Stuff like that.

So because people share their food beliefs (their interpretations of scientific studies), these people are somehow doing something wrong? Is it bad on a site about health and weight loss to say that some scientific studies suggest or show that grains CAN cause leaky gut syndrome, and that beans DO either impair bioavailability unless properly prepared or contain toxins? You can choose to believe it or not, no one's forcing you to believe them or their evidence, but I fail to see how sharing information is somehow wrong. Many people DO believe grains/beans etc are not healthy and that many people feel better not eating them; there's evidence to support this (though yes, many people live perfectly healthy lives including these foods as staples too).

I'm not taking a stance in this particular post about whether or not those beliefs are true, just that I don't see what's wrong with sharing this information. Would you have an issue with them if they said that Twinkies weren't healthy?

I think the horse has long since been dead and beaten, but where on this thread did anyone "bash" healthy foods or say they were dangerous? IIRC, most people were talking about how they felt, weight they loss, and their own experiences. I must have missed people telling OP about the dangers of any foods. Maybe it has happened on other threads and the contrary posts were preemptive strikes?

I have been told that both grains (all grains, regardless if gluten free, except for paleo approved grains like quinoa) and legumes are "poison". Now granted, I believe both posts were by the same user, who does seem to be a bit of a paleo zealot.

Though many have told me that both are not healthy and I'd probably feel better if I didn't eat them. Grains will make my gut leak and beans are full of toxins. Stuff like that.

So because people share their food beliefs (their interpretations of scientific studies), these people are somehow doing something wrong? Is it bad on a site about health and weight loss to say that some scientific studies suggest or show that grains CAN cause leaky gut syndrome, and that beans DO either impair bioavailability unless properly prepared or contain toxins? You can choose to believe it or not, no one's forcing you to believe them or their evidence, but I fail to see how sharing information is somehow wrong. Many people DO believe grains/beans etc are not healthy and that many people feel better not eating them; there's evidence to support this (though yes, many people live perfectly healthy lives including these foods as staples too).

I'm not taking a stance in this particular post about whether or not those beliefs are true, just that I don't see what's wrong with sharing this information. Would you have an issue with them if they said that Twinkies weren't healthy?

I have never been offered any studies that showed any negative health affects for either grains or beans. I have, however, been referred often to an online blog when I offer evidence that whole grains and legumes are heatlhy.

ETA: No, to the question about Twinkies. Though I would have an issue if they said they were poison. I wouldn't care, since I don't like Twinkies, but it would still be wrong.

So because people share their food beliefs (their interpretations of scientific studies), these people are somehow doing something wrong?

Yes, if those "beliefs" are unjustified, fear-mongering, and wrong.

I think it's more wrong to promote eating fast food, soda and sugar, but I see that around here all the time. Promoting foods that are attributed to developing type 2 diabetes, among other things, is unethical. And granted, the problem is more likely that people are delusional, not actively trying to hurt others. But just because you have gotten away with eating gobs of sugar and junk food for a certain number of years without developing diabetes or heart disease or whatever, or have been able to lose weight while still eating them, doesn't equal long term health. And there are some just genetically lucky people out there who can probably get away with it, but eating poorly for the long term and hoping you won the genetic lottery is just stupid.

So you think fast food hamburgers and ice cream cause diabetes? You have a lot to learn.

So because people share their food beliefs (their interpretations of scientific studies), these people are somehow doing something wrong?

Yes, if those "beliefs" are unjustified, fear-mongering, and wrong.

And who gets to determine that those beliefs are unjustified, fear-mongering, and wrong? You?

Most of the people I've seen sharing these beliefs, myself included, have justification for them - scientific studies. Since the science is, admittedly, generally divided on most of these foods, you can't say either side is right OR wrong. As for fear-mongering, since all that means is someone who spreads alarming news, I guess that depends on who receive the news - if it's alarming to you that those foods might not be healthy, then I guess it is fear-mongering, but what's the problem with it if it might be true?

Just because YOU believe something different doesn't make other beliefs wrong you know.

Please, show us these studies.

Since the science is, admittedly, generally divided on most of these foods, you can't say either side is right OR wrong.

I don't believe this is true. What nutrition scientists think legumes are unhealthy?

if you already eat the types of food like this and can live the rest of your life on eating "paleo" foods. Go ahead, if you enjoy eating processed foods, then this diet isnt for you.


IS IT SUSTAINABLE FOR YOU? is the question you should ask yourself by joining any fad diet

totally this


IMO, there are no evil foods, thus it would never work for me personally. But if you don't eat. don't like, or have a reaction to the certain omitted foods on this plan, then go for it.

Since the science is, admittedly, generally divided on most of these foods, you can't say either side is right OR wrong.

I don't believe this is true. What nutrition scientists think legumes are unhealthy?

It is; there are studies about legumes and their downsides. I've neither the time nor inclination to go looking for them myself since I've got other things to do right now but if you're genuinely interested, take a few minutes to look it up. Doesn't take long.

In my opinion, until something has been conclusively proven one way or the other, you can't say it's right OR wrong because no one knows for sure.

Since the science is, admittedly, generally divided on most of these foods, you can't say either side is right OR wrong.

I don't believe this is true. What nutrition scientists think legumes are unhealthy?

It is; there are studies about legumes and their downsides. I've neither the time nor inclination to go looking for them myself since I've got other things to do right now but if you're genuinely interested, take a few minutes to look it up. Doesn't take long.

In my opinion, until something has been conclusively proven one way or the other, you can't say it's right OR wrong because no one knows for sure.

If a subject has been studied, there will be conflicting results. This is true of anything that has been thoroughly studies. This back and forth is the way studies work. But it does not necessarily mean that the conculusions are unclear. One must look at all the data on any subject to form a clear picture. Pickiing one or two studies and throwing out the rest is not science.

No one said anything about using only one or two studies. I agree if you look at every study on a subject there will have been conflicting result, but if a clear conclusion has been drawn and is currently agreed upon as being right then I would say it's no longer really in debate. There's "science" (as it existed at the time) on the world being flat, but we now agree it's round, for example. Nutrition is obviously harder because most foods have good and bad to them, but sometimes those traits can be agreed upon pretty conclusively. The problem with most of the Paleo beliefs is that there is no such generally agreed upon conclusion that amounts to being able to say something has been scientifically proven one way OR the other. I 100% agree that it's not been conclusively proven that grains/legumes/etc. are unhealthy; I just don't believe it's been 100% conclusively proven that they aren't unhealthy either.