considering paleo, can I get your input?
Options
Replies
-
Hi
I have PCOS too.... and have always looked for a diet to help control it.
Last year I Discovered fitter foods ( they have a fb page) and webpage is called fitter london
they take on the paleo princple but not as strict but teaches you about nutrition and really good, I have a personal trainer who really supports the paleo diet so even if you change your lifestyle a little its an improvement ! Thats my take on it
katie x
Thanks for the input! I think my strategy will be tending towards paleo with some exceptions until I have done it for about a month....at that point I figure I should be able to tell if its helpful or not. Thanks!!0 -
no reason to be a paleo-tard...it's an arbitrarily restrictive diet UNLESS you have a diagnosed allergy from a physician. To exclude a food primarily b/c "Grok" didn't eat it 10,000 years ago is absolutely retarded.
Please don't use language that is offensive to the disabled. Most of us learned not to use those words in elementary school. I can't control you, but I'd rather it not be on my thread!
I know the "caveman" idea sounds goofy but when you take a step back from the name, it is really just eating clean, getting good fat and protein, and getting your carbs from veggies rather than processed grain. Many nutritionists would advocate such a diet for people trying to lose weight, and for people with hormonal imbalances like me there has been some indication that it can alleviate those problems. I'm trying to get input on whether or not that's true. If you'd like to learn more about it I suggest researching beyond just the name.
To those that gave feedback thanks again! So far I have found myself annoyed by giving up cheese but other than that it is a pretty tasty way to eat and not as difficult as I was expecting. Tonight I'm making turkey meatballs....on pasta for the bf and with a side of veggies for me. All in all, not bad diet food! I'm going to stick with it about 80/20 or 90/10 for at least a month and see how I feel.
I will definitely check out the paleo group, thanks!0 -
Here's a good article that might lend some balanced input. The support groups here are a good idea as well. There's even a few for ketogenic diet followers which might also be helpful.
http://www.modernpaleo.com/principles.html0 -
I have pretty severe PCOS. Been living a ketogenic lifestyle for 6 months and I've lost 60 pounds. I've dieted on and off my whole life and nothing ever worked until this lifestyle change. Love it, would not go back. Paleo might work, or you might still have some issues if you do have PCOS. Lowering sugar intake to avoid unnecessary insulin release is key in PCOS. It may take trial and error to find out what works for you. 0
-
I have pretty severe PCOS. Been living a ketogenic lifestyle for 6 months and I've lost 60 pounds. I've dieted on and off my whole life and nothing ever worked until this lifestyle change. Love it, would not go back. Paleo might work, or you might still have some issues if you do have PCOS. Lowering sugar intake to avoid unnecessary insulin release is key in PCOS. It may take trial and error to find out what works for you.
congrats so much on your success that is wonderful! thanks for the input.0 -
Show me the research not something from a paleo/primal-advocating site showing how wonderful it is...here is scientific backed research...
http://www.nsca.com/uploadedfiles/nsca/inactive_content/program_books/ptc_2013_program_book/aragon.pdfno reason to be a paleo-tard...it's an arbitrarily restrictive diet UNLESS you have a diagnosed allergy from a physician. To exclude a food primarily b/c "Grok" didn't eat it 10,000 years ago is absolutely retarded.
Please don't use language that is offensive to the disabled. Most of us learned not to use those words in elementary school. I can't control you, but I'd rather it not be on my thread!
I know the "caveman" idea sounds goofy but when you take a step back from the name, it is really just eating clean, getting good fat and protein, and getting your carbs from veggies rather than processed grain. Many nutritionists would advocate such a diet for people trying to lose weight, and for people with hormonal imbalances like me there has been some indication that it can alleviate those problems. I'm trying to get input on whether or not that's true. If you'd like to learn more about it I suggest researching beyond just the name.
To those that gave feedback thanks again! So far I have found myself annoyed by giving up cheese but other than that it is a pretty tasty way to eat and not as difficult as I was expecting. Tonight I'm making turkey meatballs....on pasta for the bf and with a side of veggies for me. All in all, not bad diet food! I'm going to stick with it about 80/20 or 90/10 for at least a month and see how I feel.
I will definitely check out the paleo group, thanks!0 -
Show me the research not something from a paleo/primal-advocating site showing how wonderful it is...here is scientific backed research...
http://www.nsca.com/uploadedfiles/nsca/inactive_content/program_books/ptc_2013_program_book/aragon.pdfno reason to be a paleo-tard...it's an arbitrarily restrictive diet UNLESS you have a diagnosed allergy from a physician. To exclude a food primarily b/c "Grok" didn't eat it 10,000 years ago is absolutely retarded.
Please don't use language that is offensive to the disabled. Most of us learned not to use those words in elementary school. I can't control you, but I'd rather it not be on my thread!
I know the "caveman" idea sounds goofy but when you take a step back from the name, it is really just eating clean, getting good fat and protein, and getting your carbs from veggies rather than processed grain. Many nutritionists would advocate such a diet for people trying to lose weight, and for people with hormonal imbalances like me there has been some indication that it can alleviate those problems. I'm trying to get input on whether or not that's true. If you'd like to learn more about it I suggest researching beyond just the name.
To those that gave feedback thanks again! So far I have found myself annoyed by giving up cheese but other than that it is a pretty tasty way to eat and not as difficult as I was expecting. Tonight I'm making turkey meatballs....on pasta for the bf and with a side of veggies for me. All in all, not bad diet food! I'm going to stick with it about 80/20 or 90/10 for at least a month and see how I feel.
I will definitely check out the paleo group, thanks!
This is hilarious for 2 reasons.
1) If I were to only have OP (squirrelzzrule)'s response and that tunnel-visioned presentation by Aragon, Primal would be the easy choice. That's without including the fact that she conducts herself much more maturely than several others.
2) That presentation by Aragon gets thrown around this website alot like it's gospel. He conveys information above his level of expertise and delves into subject matter that he is not trained in (he has publically confirmed his credentials). This shows!! (to those who ARE trained in the material towards which he extends himself). He is a very convincing presenter to the uninitiated and does have extreme diligence in looking things up. But looking things up doesn't always equate to understanding them. This shows too. He certainly isn't wrong all the time and his arguments aren't way out in left field, but he extends his arguments and conclusions far beyond what they are actually supported by. Many of his reasoning points that I've seen in additional material of his actually have a false premise and are misleading to those with a background, but he is skilled at delivering anything strongly so he wins people over. Because of people who love being skeptical of anything contradictory to convention, including common sense, this man will always have work.
His reasoning and logic are just as loose as the theories he is trying to debunk. There is no conclusive evidence to really support ANY SPECIFIC lifestyle pattern because randomized controlled double blind trials are impossible for lifestyle issues and always will be - there are too many variables to control, and the effects must be monitored over a lifetime. Lock somebody up for 60 years, do your experiments, and then you may have a chance to get "conclusive" evidence. Many of us don't plan on waiting that long for such research to be approved and completed, so we have to default to well thought out subjectivity.
Just because there is no definite evidence to say any specific thing works does not give us permission to throw things that sound like common sense out the window. Just because there is no randomized double blind control study to say that bicycle helmets are safe doesn't mean we send our kids out on bikes without them.
OP was talking common sense and handled immaturity with maturity. Good job.0 -
-
2) That presentation by Aragon gets thrown around this website alot like it's gospel. He conveys information above his level of expertise and delves into subject matter that he is not trained in (he has publically confirmed his credentials). This shows!! (to those who ARE trained in the material towards which he extends himself). He is a very convincing presenter to the uninitiated and does have extreme diligence in looking things up. But looking things up doesn't always equate to understanding them. This shows too. He certainly isn't wrong all the time and his arguments aren't way out in left field, but he extends his arguments and conclusions far beyond what they are actually supported by. Many of his reasoning points that I've seen in additional material of his actually have a false premise and are misleading to those with a background, but he is skilled at delivering anything strongly so he wins people over. Because of people who love being skeptical of anything contradictory to convention, including common sense, this man will always have work.
His reasoning and logic are just as loose as the theories he is trying to debunk. There is no conclusive evidence to really support ANY SPECIFIC lifestyle pattern because randomized controlled double blind trials are impossible for lifestyle issues and always will be - there are too many variables to control, and the effects must be monitored over a lifetime. Lock somebody up for 60 years, do your experiments, and then you may have a chance to get "conclusive" evidence. Many of us don't plan on waiting that long for such research to be approved and completed, so we have to default to well thought out subjectivity.
Just because there is no definite evidence to say any specific thing works does not give us permission to throw things that sound like common sense out the window. Just because there is no randomized double blind control study to say that bicycle helmets are safe doesn't mean we send our kids out on bikes without them.
That's great except all you've done is attack the arguer(Aragon). You haven't addressed any of the points.
So, basically nothing but an ad hominem logical fallacy.0 -
2) That presentation by Aragon gets thrown around this website alot like it's gospel. He conveys information above his level of expertise and delves into subject matter that he is not trained in (he has publically confirmed his credentials). This shows!! (to those who ARE trained in the material towards which he extends himself). He is a very convincing presenter to the uninitiated and does have extreme diligence in looking things up. But looking things up doesn't always equate to understanding them. This shows too. He certainly isn't wrong all the time and his arguments aren't way out in left field, but he extends his arguments and conclusions far beyond what they are actually supported by. Many of his reasoning points that I've seen in additional material of his actually have a false premise and are misleading to those with a background, but he is skilled at delivering anything strongly so he wins people over. Because of people who love being skeptical of anything contradictory to convention, including common sense, this man will always have work.
His reasoning and logic are just as loose as the theories he is trying to debunk. There is no conclusive evidence to really support ANY SPECIFIC lifestyle pattern because randomized controlled double blind trials are impossible for lifestyle issues and always will be - there are too many variables to control, and the effects must be monitored over a lifetime. Lock somebody up for 60 years, do your experiments, and then you may have a chance to get "conclusive" evidence. Many of us don't plan on waiting that long for such research to be approved and completed, so we have to default to well thought out subjectivity.
Just because there is no definite evidence to say any specific thing works does not give us permission to throw things that sound like common sense out the window. Just because there is no randomized double blind control study to say that bicycle helmets are safe doesn't mean we send our kids out on bikes without them.
That's great except all you've done is attack the arguer(Aragon). You haven't addressed any of the points.
So, basically nothing but an ad hominem logical fallacy.
Ad hominem is going after tangential aspects of the GUY to discredit him. I was going after what he DOES. Please re-read.
You can tell by my post that I obviously take exception to a hell of a lot of what he conveys (although there are things that he says that are certainly valid as well). You expect me to dissect his work piece by piece, and spill out things I learned in decades of school/training to provide context on a forum that wants to hear none of it? That's days, maybe weeks, of unpaid work. All that time and energy so that someone can post another misleading link or make some stupid comment to derail the whole train of thought??? People who volunteer their time like that are generous, but are also suckers who get their time wasted.
I'm happy to comment in a general sense to influence the general direction of where things go on a forum, but no, I will not do your homework for you.
A serious private message is another matter.0 -
I would certainly be interested in a few key points that you might have taken exception too, just to keep the ball rolling and of course to get your point of view.
2) That presentation by Aragon gets thrown around this website alot like it's gospel. He conveys information above his level of expertise and delves into subject matter that he is not trained in (he has publically confirmed his credentials). This shows!! (to those who ARE trained in the material towards which he extends himself). He is a very convincing presenter to the uninitiated and does have extreme diligence in looking things up. But looking things up doesn't always equate to understanding them. This shows too. He certainly isn't wrong all the time and his arguments aren't way out in left field, but he extends his arguments and conclusions far beyond what they are actually supported by. Many of his reasoning points that I've seen in additional material of his actually have a false premise and are misleading to those with a background, but he is skilled at delivering anything strongly so he wins people over. Because of people who love being skeptical of anything contradictory to convention, including common sense, this man will always have work.
His reasoning and logic are just as loose as the theories he is trying to debunk. There is no conclusive evidence to really support ANY SPECIFIC lifestyle pattern because randomized controlled double blind trials are impossible for lifestyle issues and always will be - there are too many variables to control, and the effects must be monitored over a lifetime. Lock somebody up for 60 years, do your experiments, and then you may have a chance to get "conclusive" evidence. Many of us don't plan on waiting that long for such research to be approved and completed, so we have to default to well thought out subjectivity.
Just because there is no definite evidence to say any specific thing works does not give us permission to throw things that sound like common sense out the window. Just because there is no randomized double blind control study to say that bicycle helmets are safe doesn't mean we send our kids out on bikes without them.
That's great except all you've done is attack the arguer(Aragon). You haven't addressed any of the points.
So, basically nothing but an ad hominem logical fallacy.
Ad hominem is going after tangential aspects of the GUY to discredit him. I was going after what he DOES. Please re-read.
You can tell by my post that I obviously take exception to a hell of a lot of what he conveys (although there are things that he says that are certainly valid as well). You expect me to dissect his work piece by piece, and spill out things I learned in decades of school/training to provide context on a forum that wants to hear none of it? That's days, maybe weeks, of unpaid work. All that time and energy so that someone can post another misleading link or make some stupid comment to derail the whole train of thought??? People who volunteer their time like that are generous, but are also suckers who get their time wasted.
I'm happy to comment in a general sense to influence the general direction of where things go on a forum, but no, I will not do your homework for you.
A serious private message is another matter.0 -
Ad hominem is going after tangential aspects of the GUY to discredit him. I was going after what he DOES.
It's still a fallacy of irrelevance. If you can't address the arguments instead of attacking unrelated matters, then there is no reason to take you seriously.0 -
I felt like I was reading a post from myself just now. I have experienced the same exact thing as far as PCOS and being put on birth control to "fix" the symptoms. Unfortunately I have a very difficult time losing weight because of the PCOS. For me personally low carb can help quite a bit, but maybe a modified paleo where you incorporate less of the fruits (while not completely eliminating them) would help as well. I just recently started trying to eat paleo so I can't shed much light on how well it has helped me as of yet.
I agree with the comments that you should find a new doctor. I did and they are sending me for bloodwork to check on my hormones and treat the cause rather than just the symptoms. Good luck!! 0 -
I would certainly be interested in a few key points that you might have taken exception too, just to keep the ball rolling and of course to get your point of view.
2) That presentation by Aragon gets thrown around this website alot like it's gospel. He conveys information above his level of expertise and delves into subject matter that he is not trained in (he has publically confirmed his credentials). This shows!! (to those who ARE trained in the material towards which he extends himself). He is a very convincing presenter to the uninitiated and does have extreme diligence in looking things up. But looking things up doesn't always equate to understanding them. This shows too. He certainly isn't wrong all the time and his arguments aren't way out in left field, but he extends his arguments and conclusions far beyond what they are actually supported by. Many of his reasoning points that I've seen in additional material of his actually have a false premise and are misleading to those with a background, but he is skilled at delivering anything strongly so he wins people over. Because of people who love being skeptical of anything contradictory to convention, including common sense, this man will always have work.
His reasoning and logic are just as loose as the theories he is trying to debunk. There is no conclusive evidence to really support ANY SPECIFIC lifestyle pattern because randomized controlled double blind trials are impossible for lifestyle issues and always will be - there are too many variables to control, and the effects must be monitored over a lifetime. Lock somebody up for 60 years, do your experiments, and then you may have a chance to get "conclusive" evidence. Many of us don't plan on waiting that long for such research to be approved and completed, so we have to default to well thought out subjectivity.
Just because there is no definite evidence to say any specific thing works does not give us permission to throw things that sound like common sense out the window. Just because there is no randomized double blind control study to say that bicycle helmets are safe doesn't mean we send our kids out on bikes without them.
That's great except all you've done is attack the arguer(Aragon). You haven't addressed any of the points.
So, basically nothing but an ad hominem logical fallacy.
Ad hominem is going after tangential aspects of the GUY to discredit him. I was going after what he DOES. Please re-read.
You can tell by my post that I obviously take exception to a hell of a lot of what he conveys (although there are things that he says that are certainly valid as well). You expect me to dissect his work piece by piece, and spill out things I learned in decades of school/training to provide context on a forum that wants to hear none of it? That's days, maybe weeks, of unpaid work. All that time and energy so that someone can post another misleading link or make some stupid comment to derail the whole train of thought??? People who volunteer their time like that are generous, but are also suckers who get their time wasted.
I'm happy to comment in a general sense to influence the general direction of where things go on a forum, but no, I will not do your homework for you.
A serious private message is another matter.
Hi, I am reluctant to do this on a forum b/c .... it's a forum, you know how things go. If you want you can private message me, but with Aragon's thing (as well as the TED talk that was posted), there's just too much so I don't know how I can address all those points and live a real life I am no fan of dogmatic extreme ridiculously rigid diets, but I am equally cautious about debunkers who like to debunk common sense concepts that OP was talking about. 0 -
Ad hominem is going after tangential aspects of the GUY to discredit him. I was going after what he DOES.
It's still a fallacy of irrelevance. If you can't address the arguments instead of attacking unrelated matters, then there is no reason to take you seriously.
I'm perfectly ok with you not taking me seriously. My life is complete without that. And I'm sure you also don't care if I take you seriously or not. I just ask that people stop taking HIM seriously!0 -
I just ask that people stop taking HIM seriously!
Again, your resorting to logical fallacies as the basis of your rebuttal only demonstrates that you have no compelling response. Either back up your assertions with evidence or don't make them.0 -
Honestly I've tried a lot of diets and exercise like it's my job. Normally I don't buy into hype but I came across a diet called the 3 week diet and it worked like a charm. Obviously you have to continue and make it your lifestyle but It trimmed 21 lbs in three weeks and its stayed off like it guarantees. If you wanna check it out.. It was well worth it!! http://tinyurl.com/psdadtk 0
-
I just ask that people stop taking HIM seriously!
Again, your resorting to logical fallacies as the basis of your rebuttal only demonstrates that you have no compelling response. Either back up your assertions with evidence or don't make them.
Rebuttal???? Please refer to my post regarding time wasted.
Evidence???? If you read my first post that you addressed, you wouldn't have posted this.
A perfect example about not getting sucked into specifics on a forum. Even the general things I was saying aren't digested! But I am getting sucked into a tit-for-tat exchange that can go on all night. So, I'm cutting the cord. Bye.0 -
I just ask that people stop taking HIM seriously!
Again, your resorting to logical fallacies as the basis of your rebuttal only demonstrates that you have no compelling response. Either back up your assertions with evidence or don't make them.
Rebuttal???? Please refer to my post regarding time wasted.
Evidence???? If you read my first post that you addressed, you wouldn't have posted this.
A perfect example about not getting sucked into specifics on a forum. Even the general things I was saying aren't digested! But I am getting sucked into a tit-for-tat exchange that can go on all night. So, I'm cutting the cord. Bye.
Typical puerile response from someone unwilling or unable to back up their assertions. You are dismissed.0 -
The impression that I got was since I am not particularly overweight my doctor wasn't too concerned. I can understand that if she sees a lot of obese women but it was definitely a bit dismissive.
Sounds like you got a real winner. You just got done saying they basically blew you off and before that said you went off the thing they prescribed due to side effects for a condition they didn't do testing to confirm.
Paleo might work well for you if it meshes with your lifestyle and taste buds. I've limited carbs before (think standard diabetic diet) and while my cravings approved it was incompatible with the distances I was biking so I put that on hold until I got back from my big trip of the year. I might do one more smaller trip this year but after that I'm going back to what I was doing.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 399 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 978 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions