We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Paleo Backpedaling?
auddii
Posts: 15,357 Member
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resistant-starch/
At least, I kind of feel like this article is saying "you know those foods I told you to avoid because they were bad for you? It turns out they are good for you, so you shouldn't be avoiding them."
Now I'm curious if it's going to extend beyond white potatoes and legumes.
At least, I kind of feel like this article is saying "you know those foods I told you to avoid because they were bad for you? It turns out they are good for you, so you shouldn't be avoiding them."
Now I'm curious if it's going to extend beyond white potatoes and legumes.
0
Replies
-
I'm not sure how it's backpedaling when it's "...we're fast learning". As long as they're not blatantly ignoring new evidence, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
Also, it seems the preparation still has a lot to do with it's effects (this cooked and cooled thing). This means I will go eat a big potato salad to celebrate.0 -
Very true. I'm glad he is not burying his head in the sand and insisting he is right. Kind of nice to see it adapting, but I have a feeling as more and more science comes out, paleo is going to start resembling eating all food groups in moderation with a focus on whole foods (which is a pretty darn reasonable diet).I'm not sure how it's backpedaling when it's "...we're fast learning". As long as they're not blatantly ignoring new evidence, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
Also, it seems the preparation still has a lot to do with it's effects (this cooked and cooled thing). This means I will go eat a big potato salad to celebrate.0 -
http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resistant-starch/
At least, I kind of feel like this article is saying "you know those foods I told you to avoid because they were bad for you? It turns out they are good for you, so you shouldn't be avoiding them."
Now I'm curious if it's going to extend beyond white potatoes and legumes.
I know Mark is bias when it comes to his diet plan and yes he will cherry pick studies to support his opinions (but lets be honest, who doesn't).
But at least he is open minded enough to change his stance on things when he see's new studies or evidence that convinces him it's time for a U-turn.
Personally that's what I like about Marks Daily Apple.
In fact the more he does it the more credible I find him.0 -
There's a big difference between potatoes and potato starch, raw potato starch delivers the benefits he speaks of but not cooked potato and "cooked then cooled" only slightly. More like a supplement thing than a food if you aren't getting 20 grams a day of RS in what you eat.0
-
Also, listening to last weeks pod cast when he spoke about white potatoes, he did still mention to eat them in moderation and suggested adding butter to them to slow down the conversion process to glucose.
I'm already a convert though and will probably not switch back from sweet potato.
Although I am thinking about trying a sweet potato / maris piper, butter / cream - mash combo this weekend.0 -
Very true. I'm glad he is not burying his head in the sand and insisting he is right. Kind of nice to see it adapting, but I have a feeling as more and more science comes out, paleo is going to start resembling eating all food groups in moderation with a focus on whole foods (which is a pretty darn reasonable diet).I'm not sure how it's backpedaling when it's "...we're fast learning". As long as they're not blatantly ignoring new evidence, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
Also, it seems the preparation still has a lot to do with it's effects (this cooked and cooled thing). This means I will go eat a big potato salad to celebrate.
Yeah - I wouldn't be surprised! And ditto, the diet sounds good to me too!! I'm a vaguely paleo, and I've found it was more the 'whole foods' aspect that did me good, above the 'no grains and legumes' stuff.
I'd say, or I would like to see more of a focus on how food reacts to each individual person. More so than the "We ALL have to cut this or that out of our diets!" approach. You know - how some people respond to certain foods a certain way. That's not really Paleo though... or Primal or whatever.
Is it bad that the more scientific evidence comes out about stuff, the less I care and decide to do what I want anyway?!0 -
Ha, I'm completely with you.
Very true. I'm glad he is not burying his head in the sand and insisting he is right. Kind of nice to see it adapting, but I have a feeling as more and more science comes out, paleo is going to start resembling eating all food groups in moderation with a focus on whole foods (which is a pretty darn reasonable diet).I'm not sure how it's backpedaling when it's "...we're fast learning". As long as they're not blatantly ignoring new evidence, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
Also, it seems the preparation still has a lot to do with it's effects (this cooked and cooled thing). This means I will go eat a big potato salad to celebrate.
Yeah - I wouldn't be surprised! And ditto, the diet sounds good to me too!! I'm a vaguely paleo, and I've found it was more the 'whole foods' aspect that did me good, above the 'no grains and legumes' stuff.
I'd say, or I would like to see more of a focus on how food reacts to each individual person. More so than the "We ALL have to cut this or that out of our diets!" approach. You know - how some people respond to certain foods a certain way. That's not really Paleo though... or Primal or whatever.
Is it bad that the more scientific evidence comes out about stuff, the less I care and decide to do what I want anyway?!
I found I had really bad blood sugar issues when I cut out a lot of carbs and focused on low GI carbs, the exact opposite of most people. I can't say the carbs alone contributed to my issues, but it seems to be correlated. I'm odd what can I say. So, now I eat what works for me. What a concept.
0 -
Tagging, for the info on resistant starch and to see if some of my questions about the article end up getting answered. (Does that mean Paleo no longer advises against legumes? Were potatoes formerly not ok foods but are now?)
As for the thread title, I think the author did a great job of owning that he didn't put as much time into addressing a topic originally as he could have. Humility + honesty + info =/= backpedaling.0 -
I know Mark is bias when it comes to his diet plan and yes he will cherry pick studies to support his opinions (but lets be honest, who doesn't).
Honest people who respect the scientific process.0 -
Tagging, for the info on resistant starch and to see if some of my questions about the article end up getting answered. (Does that mean Paleo no longer advises against legumes? Were potatoes formerly not ok foods but are now?)
As for the thread title, I think the author did a great job of owning that he didn't put as much time into addressing a topic originally as he could have. Humility + honesty + info =/= backpedaling.
If I understand correctly, Mark is not Paleo, but a modified version he calls Primal. A lot of people, myself included, liked the concept of Paleo, but adapted it to fit our lifestyles and health needs.
I basically figured out that processed sugars and some grains, mostly wheat, cause a lot of inflammation in my body and cutting out these foods as much as possible, lowers my joint and body pains significantly.
But I am fine with eating cheese, peanuts, non- grassfed proteins, and even artificial sweeteners. So basically I am not Paleo at all, just lower carb and Gluten-free, and lower processed sugar. But it would be much easier to say I am Paleo/Primal- ish!
But I just listen to my body and eat what makes it happy. There is no diet name for that, tho.0 -
...and I'll provide a 4 year old research article as evidence. Perhaps I should have thought of this 4 years ago, but never mind, enjoy your potato salad". :laugh:http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resistant-starch/
At least, I kind of feel like this article is saying "you know those foods I told you to avoid because they were bad for you? It turns out they are good for you, so you shouldn't be avoiding them."0 -
Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall Mark ever saying white potatoes were bad, just saying to eat them sparingly (like rice) to prevent possible significant insulin responses and increased sugar cravings as a result. And he's also said legumes are ok, sprouted and fermented. Same with soy - fermented and wheat free.
It's interesting to me how many people bash Paleo/Primal without fully understanding the concept or all of the multiple "exceptions" such as those I listed above.0 -
Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall Mark ever saying white potatoes were bad, just saying to eat them sparingly (like rice) to prevent possible significant insulin responses and increased sugar cravings as a result. And he's also said legumes are ok, sprouted and fermented. Same with soy - fermented and wheat free.
It's interesting to me how many people bash Paleo/Primal without fully understanding the concept or all of the multiple "exceptions" such as those I listed above.
I have a definite list of 12 regulars. lol0 -
I know Mark is bias when it comes to his diet plan and yes he will cherry pick studies to support his opinions (but lets be honest, who doesn't).
People with credibility.0 -
It's interesting to me how many people bash Paleo/Primal without fully understanding the concept or all of the multiple "exceptions" such as those I listed above.
That would take us back to an old argument that people here have-that an anything goes approach to Paleo dilutes the meaning and makes it impossible to understand.
We don't really want to go there again, do we? (I actually don't. I'm really in here to learn about resistant starch. It's an exciting life, but someone has to lead it. I hope this thread is still here by the time I get home.) 0 -
But I just listen to my body and eat what makes it happy. There is no diet name for that, tho.
You could make a buck if you came up with a name. The Believe Your Body diet?
I actually feel my best eating a diet similar to what you describe.0 -
Resistant Starch is the cornerstone of the Carb Lovers Diet. http://www.webmd.com/diet/carb-lovers-diet
Resistant Starch is found in beans and brown rice (among other foods). You can also buy pasta that has half the calories of regular because some of the flour has been replaced by resistant starch (Fiber Gourmet brand pasta).0 -
I know Mark is bias when it comes to his diet plan and yes he will cherry pick studies to support his opinions (but lets be honest, who doesn't).
People with credibility.
Can you cherry pick some for me to look at? lol0 -
Very true. I'm glad he is not burying his head in the sand and insisting he is right. Kind of nice to see it adapting, but I have a feeling as more and more science comes out, paleo is going to start resembling eating all food groups in moderation with a focus on whole foods (which is a pretty darn reasonable diet).I'm not sure how it's backpedaling when it's "...we're fast learning". As long as they're not blatantly ignoring new evidence, it's all good as far as I'm concerned.
Also, it seems the preparation still has a lot to do with it's effects (this cooked and cooled thing). This means I will go eat a big potato salad to celebrate.
This is how I see it developing as well...0 -
Regardless of the topic, I always have the utmost respect for individuals who can turn around and acknowledge the other side of the coin. Credibility, especially online, is a wonderful thing.0
-
Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall Mark ever saying white potatoes were bad, just saying to eat them sparingly (like rice) to prevent possible significant insulin responses and increased sugar cravings as a result. And he's also said legumes are ok, sprouted and fermented. Same with soy - fermented and wheat free.
It's interesting to me how many people bash Paleo/Primal without fully understanding the concept or all of the multiple "exceptions" such as those I listed above.
^ Also interesting how many Paleo/Primal people are completely ignorant to nutrition.0 -
Perhaps Mark could teach me how
I know Mark is bias when it comes to his diet plan and yes he will cherry pick studies to support his opinions (but lets be honest, who doesn't).
People with credibility.
Can you cherry pick some for me to look at? lol0 -
I don't read all of his articles, but I was going off his published book, primal blueprint which starts off describing grains as:Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall Mark ever saying white potatoes were bad, just saying to eat them sparingly (like rice) to prevent possible significant insulin responses and increased sugar cravings as a result. And he's also said legumes are ok, sprouted and fermented. Same with soy - fermented and wheat free.
It's interesting to me how many people bash Paleo/Primal without fully understanding the concept or all of the multiple "exceptions" such as those I listed above."Worst mistake in the history of the human race" (UCLA evolutionary biologist Jarod Diamond). Drives excess insulin production, fat storage, and heart disease. Allergenic, immune-suppressing, nutritional value inferior to plants and animals. Whole grains possibly worse due to "anit-nutrients" that compromise the immune and digestive function and promote systemic inflation.
And later under the heading of "Avoid Poisons":What’s more insidious as a dietary “poison” are cultivated grain foods (wheat, rice, corn, pasta, cereal, and derivative products such as bread, chips, crackers, muffins, pancakes, tortillas, waffles, etc.); cooking grains such as barley, millet, rye, and amaranth; and–to a slightly lesser extent–legumes (beans, lentils, peanuts, peas, and soy products).0 -
I don't read all of his articles, but I was going off his published book, primal blueprint which starts off describing grains as:Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall Mark ever saying white potatoes were bad, just saying to eat them sparingly (like rice) to prevent possible significant insulin responses and increased sugar cravings as a result. And he's also said legumes are ok, sprouted and fermented. Same with soy - fermented and wheat free.
It's interesting to me how many people bash Paleo/Primal without fully understanding the concept or all of the multiple "exceptions" such as those I listed above."Worst mistake in the history of the human race" (UCLA evolutionary biologist Jarod Diamond). Drives excess insulin production, fat storage, and heart disease. Allergenic, immune-suppressing, nutritional value inferior to plants and animals. Whole grains possibly worse due to "anit-nutrients" that compromise the immune and digestive function and promote systemic inflation.
And later under the heading of "Avoid Poisons":What’s more insidious as a dietary “poison” are cultivated grain foods (wheat, rice, corn, pasta, cereal, and derivative products such as bread, chips, crackers, muffins, pancakes, tortillas, waffles, etc.); cooking grains such as barley, millet, rye, and amaranth; and–to a slightly lesser extent–legumes (beans, lentils, peanuts, peas, and soy products).
No he pretty much has the same stance on most grains - although he is a bit more chilled on rice (white in particular). Also more relaxed on legumes.
But must keep in context - these are Marks beliefs and as adults we have the choice to research and share the beliefs or research and not believe them.
And he's pretty cool with that way of thinking.0 -
So now it's what healthy people have been eating their whole life diet...
Grannyeo and Grampeo diet. He seems to have backpedalled all the way from the paleolithic up to the 20th century.
Surprise, surprise.0 -
I'd say, or I would like to see more of a focus on how food reacts to each individual person. More so than the "We ALL have to cut this or that out of our diets!" approach. You know - how some people respond to certain foods a certain way.
There is quite a bit of research being done in this area. And the results point to genetics playing a bigger role than most people give them credit for when it comes to nutrition.0 -
I'd say, or I would like to see more of a focus on how food reacts to each individual person. More so than the "We ALL have to cut this or that out of our diets!" approach. You know - how some people respond to certain foods a certain way.
There is quite a bit of research being done in this area. And the results point to genetics playing a bigger role than most people give them credit for when it comes to nutrition.
Yeah, I was very surprised when I heard about the percentages of lactose intolerance in various ethnic groups. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was somewhere around 10% Caucasian, 60% African American, and 90% of Asian populations were intolerant. That is pretty wild to see such a vast difference. Apparently some of the cultures lack the enzymes to break down the lactose in dairy.
Similar to how some ethnicities cannot break down alcohol properly.
So we really are NOT all the same after all when it comes to nutrition? Mind blown.0 -
I'm pretty sure there were no bicycles in the palaeolithic era to be backpedaling with.... :bigsmile:0
-
I'd say, or I would like to see more of a focus on how food reacts to each individual person. More so than the "We ALL have to cut this or that out of our diets!" approach. You know - how some people respond to certain foods a certain way.
There is quite a bit of research being done in this area. And the results point to genetics playing a bigger role than most people give them credit for when it comes to nutrition.
Yeah, I was very surprised when I heard about the percentages of lactose intolerance in various ethnic groups. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was somewhere around 10% Caucasian, 60% African American, and 90% of Asian populations were intolerant. That is pretty wild to see such a vast difference. Apparently some of the cultures lack the enzymes to break down the lactose in dairy.
Similar to how some ethnicities cannot break down alcohol properly.
So we really are NOT all the same after all when it comes to nutrition? Mind blown.
if you're descended from a population with a long tradition of dairy farming/herding then you're likely able to digest lactose. If you're not, then you're likely not. This is an example of natural selection happening in modern times. Dairy farming/herding populations have evolved the ability to digest lactose as adults.0 -
...and I'll provide a 4 year old research article as evidence. Perhaps I should have thought of this 4 years ago, but never mind, enjoy your potato salad". :laugh:http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-definitive-guide-to-resistant-starch/
At least, I kind of feel like this article is saying "you know those foods I told you to avoid because they were bad for you? It turns out they are good for you, so you shouldn't be avoiding them."
agreed.
yeah I'm still not buying it- he was bombastic to being with- none of this stuff is that new- he picked a bandwagon and a sword to fall on and made it a thing. I don't really feel like he gets a gold star for backpedaling. He was way off into the wild fields of whatever land to begin with.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.6K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions