Paleo... your take

There's nothing wrong with Paleo as long as your eating a fair amount of veggies and carbs from sweet potatos etc. It's only bad if you just eat fat and meat all the time.

I found it overly and unnecessarily restrictive and overall, it caused me to spin my wheels for 9 months.


I rather focus on getting more nutrient dense foods while concentrating on calories and protein as a primary goal, and then I incorporate the occasional treat.

raven56706 wrote: »

psulemon wrote: »

I found it overly and unnecessarily restrictive and overall, it caused me to spin my wheels for 9 months.


I rather focus on getting more nutrient dense foods while concentrating on calories and protein as a primary goal, and then I incorporate the occasional treat.

what does spin my wheels mean?

I tried to eat that lifestyle and I didn't address my goal of weight loss. It also cut out some foods I loved which made it harder to stick with the lifestyle.

raven56706 wrote: »

ok because i have been on it for one week and its fine. Problem is im very limited.

Do you mean limited in what you can consume?

Have a look at marksdailyapple.com for a more moderate approach to paleo with regards to food and drink. Still no grains though.

Nothing special about the Paleo diet. If you like to eat that way go for it. Problem I have is a ridiculous premise which has been debunked by science .



Claims by proponents of the carbohydrate-averse food regimen supposedly based on what our paleolithic ancestors ate do not stand up to scientific scrutiny
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/aug/18/paleo-diet-critics-science




http://scepticalnutritionist.com.au/?p=873

Critic no.2: the archaeological scientist

Dr Christina Warriner from the University of Oklahoma takes aim at present day paleo diets saying they have ‘no basis in archaeological reality’. She should know as she is an archaeological scientist who studies the health and dietary histories of ancient peoples using bone chemistry and ancient DNA.

Warriner dismisses the very idea that there was one diet that adequately describes the way ancient peoples ate. Firstly, primitive diets varied greatly according to latitude. There is no doubt that people living close to the Arctic ate a diet based on meat, fish and seafood – there was little plant food available. But plant foods were abundant in the tropics and undoubtedly formed a larger part of the diets of humans living in these areas.

Primitive diets also varied greatly with the seasons. Plants produce seeds and fruits at different times of the year, and animals migrate and fish spawn on a seasonal cycle. This ensured that primitive diets varied from month to month. It also demanded that people move from area to area to make the most of available food resources.

What about the idea that Palaeolithic peoples did not eat grains and legumes? It’s another myth, according to Warriner. She cites evidence that 30,000 years ago primitive humans were using stone tools similar to a mortar and pestle to grind seeds and grains. More tellingly, studies of fossilised human dental plaque have found remains of grains, legumes and tubers – all on the banned list of modern paleo diets.

Warriner also makes the point that the foods recommended in modern paleo diets bear little resemblance to the foods our ancestors ate. In fact, virtually all of the recommended foods are products of modern agriculture. Modern day carrots, fat and sweet, are nothing like the small, fibrous, bitter wild carrots from which they were bred. Broccoli is ‘a human invention’. Bananas are the ultimate product of modern agriculture, totally dependent on humans for their reproduction. To Palaeolithic peoples meat typically meant lean meat from small game animals, together with the organs and bone marrow – quite different to the meats consumed in quantity by 21st Century cavemen.




We are not biologically identical to our Paleolithic predecessors, nor do we have access to the foods they ate. And deducing dietary guidelines from modern foraging societies is difficult because they vary so much by geography, season and opportunity
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-paleo-diet-half-baked-how-hunter-gatherer-really-eat/

It's a goofy theory and is very restrictive. All you need to do to lose weight is eat fewer calories than you burn over time. You don't need to worry about "carb days" or legumes or anything like that.

Complete and utter nonsense is my take on the whole Paleo Diet.

My doctor put me on Paleo to lose weight. I did. 60 pounds. I still eat that way, but only because it works for me and I enjoy it. It isn't for everyone, and it isn't the only way to lose weight. It worked for me along with MFP because even though Paleo discourages calorie-counting, not all of us are adept at self-control, and there are several calorie dense foods like almonds and avocados that if consumed too much can ruin your calorie intake. So, by taking out grains, dairy, etc. I was/am able to eat more lower calorie foods and stay full. (or, if I eat the higher calorie items, MFP tracking helps me to stay accountable and resist eating the whole bag of almonds)

I agree with the people who say if you don't see yourself maintaining that kind of a lifestyle long-term, or you constantly crave the foods you avoid then it isn't the right way to approach weight loss. But if you like it, and it is working for you then it does feel great. There is a paleo group here is the link: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/37-primal-paleo-support-group

Kimberly_Harper wrote: »

My doctor put me on Paleo to lose weight. I did. 60 pounds. I still eat that way, but only because it works for me and I enjoy it. It isn't for everyone, and it isn't the only way to lose weight. It worked for me along with MFP because even though Paleo discourages calorie-counting, not all of us are adept at self-control, and there are several calorie dense foods like almonds and avocados that if consumed too much can ruin your calorie intake. So, by taking out grains, dairy, etc. I was/am able to eat more lower calorie foods and stay full. (or, if I eat the higher calorie items, MFP tracking helps me to stay accountable and resist eating the whole bag of almonds)

I agree with the people who say if you don't see yourself maintaining that kind of a lifestyle long-term, or you constantly crave the foods you avoid then it isn't the right way to approach weight loss. But if you like it, and it is working for you then it does feel great. There is a paleo group here is the link: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/group/37-primal-paleo-support-group

I like this post very much.

I've heard Paleo as described as "healthy for you by coincidence" . As in, Paleo is that stopped clock that happens to be right twice a day.

Pretty much ALL the health claims by Paleo have been debunked. That a Paleo diet will stop heart disease in its tracks is laughable. We have found evidence of arterial plaque in mummified remains of nomadic hunters and Egyptian noblemen. What you ate or how hard you worked for your food does not seem to factor into how our ancestors developed precursors to heart disease.

Also, how are tequila and red wine Paleo but other alcohol isn't? Primitive man, who wasn't even growing his own wheat yet (one of the earliest staple crop) is somehow drinking some of the most processed alcohols? Sure.

Third, in terms of life expectancy, the data points more towards the Mediterranean diet if you want longevity.

Basically here is where Paleo succeeds:

1. Don't eat a ton of processed food, it's mostly crap.
2. Eat a balance of meat and fresh veggies/produce supplemented with a unsalted nuts/dried fruit.

They're not the only diet that preaches that, but doing those two things is like 80% of a modern healthy diet. Its your body, your choice, but I'd just stick to CICO and IIFYM.

cwolfman13 wrote: »

I like that it introduces people to more whole foods...I do not like that it then turns around and demonizes certain whole foods and unnecessarily eliminates other things for basically being inherently evil...like, there's nothing wrong with a good quality bread...so in that RE, I think it's stupid.

I agree with this, and would add that some of the things demonized, like whole grains and legumes and dairy, are often healthful parts of a good overall diet, and there's no reason one can't eat well and focus on whole foods and vegetables and protein without the nonsensical "paleo" reasoning behind the diet.

But for some people it does help them improve their diet or is an easier way to cut calories than counting. I tried it for a while since I don't care much about bread and figured cutting out grains would be easy and I was curious if I would feel different. I did not, and I realized it was silly to cut out foods I wasn't tempted to overeat or thought were positives in a diet (like legumes), so stopped it.

Here is Australia, it's mostly pushed by Pete Evans who makes me want to put my face in a blender and put it on and make a delicious paleo face-smoothie. He's pushed such idiocy around the diet (such as a cookbook which recommends feeding a bone broth to toddlers which may have actually been fatal - it's ok, he put a disclaimer but said to do it anyway) that I don't trust a word that comes out of his stupid mouth. Plus recent studies have suggested it really isn't all it's cracked up to be, and really - who wants to live like our paleo ancestors?

Plus it's so flipping arbitrary - paleo brownies? really? The way it gets twisted to suit peoples wants make it meaningless.