American Parkour Forum

Fitness and Training => General Fitness => Diet => Topic started by: stefan87 on April 11, 2008, 08:22:16 AM

Title: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 11, 2008, 08:22:16 AM
From reading a lot of the topics in Diet section I came to a conclusion that we should follow the paleolithic diet.

But there are a lot of problems with that first one being money. Not everyone can afford to buy vegetables, fruit, nuts and lean meat all the time.

Also if all the humans followed this diet we would run out of food in a very short time.

I am also confused how scientists say that our bodies are still used to paleolithic diet while we have been eating grains for 10 000 years now, and I just can't believe that our bodies haven't got used to it yet.

http://www.earth360.com/diet_paleodiet_balzer.html
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: BobT on April 11, 2008, 11:43:47 AM
Tolerance to grains varies widely based on your genetics.  Agriculture was introduced in certain parts of the world very early on and made the rounds on a more gradual basis.

Economics does get involved.  Grains are cheap to grow and cheap to process into foods.  That's why it was adopted - to support growing, localized populations.  If you feel you want to follow a paleo diet, do what you can.  It's your eating trends over time, not one meal, that will make the difference.

A few things to keep in mind (which, granted, you may already know):

You're not dieting - you're making a decision on what foods to eat.
Eat when you're hungry - not when sometime looks like it tastes good.
Don't get too hung up on lean meat - you can't do low carb and low fat - just try to balance your omega 6's and omega 3's

As for feeding the world - people better step up soon and face the challenges of maintaining a supportable eco-system or watch it collapse taking our food supply with it.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Charles Moreland on April 11, 2008, 01:56:03 PM
A few things to keep in mind (which, granted, you may already know):

You're not dieting - you're making a decision on what foods to eat.
Eat when you're hungry - not when sometime looks like it tastes good.
Don't get too hung up on lean meat - you can't do low carb and low fat - just try to balance your omega 6's and omega 3's

Just clearing a few things up. A diet is simply the food consumed by a person or organism over a certain period of time. A person can describe themselves vegetarians meaning their diet consists of fruits and vegetables, for example. A diet is not something specifically to lose weight or to avoid the effects of diabetes or equivalent.

Hunger is a mechanism specifically controlled by the Hypothalamus that is triggered when your body needs something. Appetite is the other function (which you described) and as said, is usually explained as a craving. For example, you always eat a hot dog while watching baseball. Thus, the next time you go to a baseball game you will almost certainly consume a hot dog. It is a wise decision to learn the difference between the two.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 11, 2008, 06:25:44 PM
After doing more research paleolithic diet is like common sense.

From now on I am going to try and follow it a closely as possible (world war III in my house is starting)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Samuel96 on April 11, 2008, 07:01:20 PM
(world war III in my house is starting)
Wow, I thought it ould take another year.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: hardcoretraceur on April 11, 2008, 07:36:10 PM
I'm not going to preach or anything, or even here to start trouble, but to be quite frank...

Quote
But there are a lot of problems with that first one being money. Not everyone can afford to buy vegetables, fruit, nuts and lean meat all the time.

...I think that this is a very lame reason to not eat healthy. People in this world, this country in particular, tend to have an exorbitant amount of things that they don't need. Different people put values on different things, but to say that there is not enough money to take care of your body when so much money goes into clothes and cell phones and video games and televisions and computers.

on top of that, it can cost quite a bit less than you might think. I started trying to eat more healthy, and  prepare my own food, and I've been paying far less for food. i can make a smoothie that costs less than 2 bucks to make that is far better and cheaper for me than a 7 dollar big mac meal.

In the end you make your decisions, your priorities. I ate terrible for a long time, but I feel now, that if I want to be an athlete, I should take care of myself, as traceurs our bodies are our high performance equipment, I for one want to make sure I'm maintaining it correctly.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 11, 2008, 08:20:13 PM
hardcoretraucer I completely agree with you, I was talking about people in general especially Americans who worry about their health a lot but do little about it. And being a society were material values are extremely high we tend to forget about out priorities. 2 months ago I was the same, I needed a new car, TV, computer, xbox 360, ps3 and I realized that I wanted not needed.

Not having enough money to eat healthy is a lame reason. Perfect example is my mother who only buys food thats on sale not caring if its healthy or not.

Oh and yeah littleninja world war 3 did start in my house lol since I decided to be a healthier and more productive. sometimes I even have to skip lunches in my house in order to eat healthy.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Charles Moreland on April 11, 2008, 08:43:03 PM
sometimes I even have to skip lunches in my house in order to eat healthy.

As I've said before unhealthy eating is better than no eating in most situations. Obviously there are extremes involved but skipping meals is just as bad as eating the unhealthy stuff
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 11, 2008, 08:56:25 PM
sometimes I even have to skip lunches in my house in order to eat healthy.

As I've said before unhealthy eating is better than no eating in most situations. Obviously there are extremes involved but skipping meals is just as bad as eating the unhealthy stuff

Sorry I meant to say that I would refuse to eat what my mom or grandma have prepared for lunch, and I would make my own or just go out and buy a healthy meal. Even if it means not eating lunch with my whole family.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 12, 2008, 07:38:22 AM
i wish a mod would sticky this thread so everyone will see it forever... i'll send a p.m.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: gadget23 on April 12, 2008, 10:53:32 AM
sometimes I even have to skip lunches in my house in order to eat healthy.

As I've said before unhealthy eating is better than no eating in most situations. Obviously there are extremes involved but skipping meals is just as bad as eating the unhealthy stuff

Sorry I meant to say that I would refuse to eat what my mom or grandma have prepared for lunch, and I would make my own or just go out and buy a healthy meal. Even if it means not eating lunch with my whole family.

*cringes* yeah, if I told my mom I refused to eat her cooking, it'd be world war III aswell.

and grains are a staple of any indian diet  :-\
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 12, 2008, 06:50:07 PM
I tried following this diet strictly today but It didn't work that well. I felt little sick and didn't have enough energy, so I figured out to start slowly. I am going to eat a healthy breakfast for the first month and then dinner and eventually move on too lunch too.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on April 12, 2008, 07:46:04 PM
I tried following this diet strictly today but It didn't work that well. I felt little sick and didn't have enough energy, so I figured out to start slowly. I am going to eat a healthy breakfast for the first month and then dinner and eventually move on too lunch too.

Anecdotally, from what I've seen it takes about 2-3 weeks for a body to adjust with wholescale changes in diet.

Basically, if you've previously eaten tons of sugar you're gonna feel like crap until your body can clear up everything and start processing good food well.

If you have the discipline to go into it slowly go for it. On the other hand, for some it may be better to jump right in and feel like crap before it turns good.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on April 12, 2008, 07:56:59 PM
I'm with steve...

if you got the willpower and drive, jump right in headfirst and feel like hell for 2 or 3 weeks then u will feel like a champion once u detox.

if you know that you need to take things one step at a time, then go that route.....

you know your body better than anyone else
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Zachary Cohn on April 12, 2008, 08:29:49 PM
When I help people start eating better, I usually try the phased in over stages plan. I usually start by them cutting out soda and replacing it with water. I give them a few days to a week on that (depending on the person, their willpower, etc). Then cut out obvious junk food (cookies at the cafeteria, pretty much anything from a vending machine). Usually cutting out as many things with High Fructose Corn Syrup is next, etc.

For someone who really wants to change, but you suspect might be a bit too weak to give it all up at once, giving up one thing at a time really helps ease into it. 
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 12, 2008, 08:32:59 PM
i will third steve and phreak because i have personally "gone on this diet". yes you will feel drained for about 2 weeks. however, that made me give myself an honest assessment of how many hours i slept a night. when i slept a full 8 it was not so bad  :o . you will find it easier to sleep at night also due to lack of excess sugars and caffeine.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Matt Hudson on April 12, 2008, 08:52:07 PM
This diet plan sounds solid, I'm not gonna lie though, I like to cheat every once in a while, a soda here, a candy bar there.
I'm going to jail soon, probably this coming week due to a probation violation, I won't go into detail but obviously I'll have to eat what they give me, there will be no option of going to the kitchen and fixing a healthy meal.

But when I get out, I'll try to conform as much as I can to this diet.
However with my non-existent budget I'm forced to eat what's in my grandmothers kitchen and I'm gonna be the first to tell you she doesn't have a whole lot of healthy foods in there.. lol
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 12, 2008, 09:03:38 PM
In my opinion jumping right in is a bad idea. Just like parkour you don't want to be doing jumps off a 10ft + heights (I have done that before just to show off) and getting hurt and not being able to do it again. If you jump into something right away it might be so unpleasant that you will get discouraged from doing it ever again. Happens to a lot of people who finally start to exercise and decide to run instead of walking first.

Here are the stages that I am doing

1. Drink water, juice that you made, and tea that you make
2. No more vending machines food (candy,chips etc...)
3. No more McDonald's and such unless you are getting a salad without dressing and croutans (they nasty anyway)
4. Eat as little sugar as possible
5. Cut out unhealthy bread (this is were I am right now)
6. No more grains/dairy (prob the hardest stage because we grew up eating this and our bodies are so used to it for energy)
7. Start paleolithic diet with breakfast only in the beginning and move from there

Comments welcome
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 12, 2008, 09:06:32 PM
This diet plan sounds solid, I'm not gonna lie though, I like to cheat every once in a while, a soda here, a candy bar there.
I'm going to jail soon, probably this coming week due to a probation violation, I won't go into detail but obviously I'll have to eat what they give me, there will be no option of going to the kitchen and fixing a healthy meal.

But when I get out, I'll try to conform as much as I can to this diet.
However with my non-existent budget I'm forced to eat what's in my grandmothers kitchen and I'm gonna be the first to tell you she doesn't have a whole lot of healthy foods in there.. lol

Damn jail? that sucks, I don't even know what to tell you, I have never even been close to being arrested. Good luck

I think that cheating is ok if you can control yourself if not then don't cheat at all, otherwise you might go back to your old habits again
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 12, 2008, 09:07:51 PM
This diet plan sounds solid, I'm not gonna lie though, I like to cheat every once in a while, a soda here, a candy bar there.
I'm going to jail soon, probably this coming week due to a probation violation, I won't go into detail but obviously I'll have to eat what they give me, there will be no option of going to the kitchen and fixing a healthy meal.

But when I get out, I'll try to conform as much as I can to this diet.
However with my non-existent budget I'm forced to eat what's in my grandmothers kitchen and I'm gonna be the first to tell you she doesn't have a whole lot of healthy foods in there.. lol

damn it paddy you better knock the bullshit off! >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
anyways, live and learn. once you get out dont go back. :)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Matt Hudson on April 12, 2008, 09:11:49 PM
This diet plan sounds solid, I'm not gonna lie though, I like to cheat every once in a while, a soda here, a candy bar there.
I'm going to jail soon, probably this coming week due to a probation violation, I won't go into detail but obviously I'll have to eat what they give me, there will be no option of going to the kitchen and fixing a healthy meal.

But when I get out, I'll try to conform as much as I can to this diet.
However with my non-existent budget I'm forced to eat what's in my grandmothers kitchen and I'm gonna be the first to tell you she doesn't have a whole lot of healthy foods in there.. lol

damn it paddy you better knock the bullshit off! >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
anyways, live and learn. once you get out dont go back. :)


I'm glad you feel that way Terry, cause I don't want anyone on these boards to follow in my footsteps.
I don't plan on going back, the only reason I'm going in the first place is because of a probation violation which need not be discussed here now, and I will be asking the judge to keep me in jail for the remainder of my probation  (3 months) so that I will not have to be on probation any longer, because call me a pansy or whatever, but probation is too stressful, and too hard right now.
However, once I am out whether they keep me 20 days or 3 months, I will be on the straight and narrow.
Something I should have been doing all along.

Keep it real Terry.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 12, 2008, 09:17:31 PM
best of luck paddy! sounds like you have a plan and thats the first part of success.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on April 15, 2008, 06:03:00 AM
First, I just want to ask if there are any objections to these?
To me, it just makes logical sense, based on human history, to eat foods that were only available as a primitive being.


Anywho,
Quote
Eat none of the following:

· Grains- including bread, pasta, noodles

· Beans- including string beans, kidney beans, lentils, peanuts, snow-peas and peas

· Potatoes

· Dairy products

· Sugar

· Salt

Eat the following:

· Meat, chicken and fish

· Eggs

· Fruit

· Vegetables (especially root vegetables, but definitely not including potatoes or sweet potatoes)

· Nuts, eg. walnuts, brazil nuts, macadamia, almond. Do not eat peanuts (a bean) or cashews (a family of their own)

· Berries- strawberries, blueberries, raspberries etc.

 Try to increase your intake of:

· Root vegetables- carrots, turnips, parsnips, rutabagas, Swedes

· Organ meats- liver and kidneys (I accept that many people find these unpalatable and won’t eat them)

Expect some minor tuning problems- don’t worry, you can deal with them:

· It will take some time for your body to adjust to the changes after all these years. There is a huge surge in your vitamin intake. There is a huge decrease in your toxin intake.

Milk's gonna be the hardest for me to back off of, it's a great alternative to water, mainly because of consistency and unique taste.
Have to say, didn't know peanut was a bean.
I completely backed off of bread/starch/grain stuff, and haven't had a problem. I personally feel a lot better (must be the lack of sugar spiking) =D


So, simply put, what are the benefits and lack of detriments?
Also, can someone help clear up which vegetables are legit, and which aren't?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Elet ET on April 15, 2008, 07:07:54 AM
Also, can someone help clear up which vegetables are legit, and which aren't?

Well he said potatoes, beans, and wheat were the big three.All beans, peas, and apparently peanuts. Wheats as well. The potato family includes, normal potatoes, sweet potatoes, eggplants, yams, and other stuff, look up the nightshade family.

He said to avoid foods you have to cook(i dont think he includes meat in that), which includes all of the above and then some.




And while it makes sense, i think our bodies have adapted beyond the point of  a pure paleo. diet. i dont think a slight amount of grains dairy and beans would be detrimental, because humans have been consuming them for tens of thousands of years, im not too sure how long ago agriculture was invented, might be exaggeration.  This is pure opinion though im not trying to put it off as fact
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 15, 2008, 08:23:26 AM
Agriculture started about 10,000years ago, and in my opinion our bodies are still not used to grains and dairy's (eggs are exception).

My one rule is make vegetables and meat your staple not grains and dairy. 
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on April 15, 2008, 09:48:00 AM
Most people I talk to say milk is generally okay. Not necessary, but an acceptable addition. Personally, milk has never given me problems. What is it about eggs that makes it a preffered/acceptable form of dairy?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Elet ET on April 15, 2008, 10:40:05 AM
Thanks for the time frame Stefan.
I agree with you on making meat and veggies/fruit your staples.

Did you mean to call eggs dairy?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Matt Hudson on April 15, 2008, 10:43:01 AM
Thanks for the time frame Stefan.
I agree with you on making meat and veggies/fruit your staples.

Did you mean to call eggs dairy?

Eggs are not dairy.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Elet ET on April 15, 2008, 10:44:37 AM
Eggs are not dairy.

im aware of that, i was trying to subtly make him so.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Matt Hudson on April 15, 2008, 10:46:51 AM
Eggs are not dairy.

im aware of that, i was trying to subtly make him so.

lol, k
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 15, 2008, 11:19:53 AM
Yeah I meant to say eggs are not dairy. Chicken's are birds and they were around even before humans, and I am pretty sure that our crazy ancestors were stealing their eggs all the time  ;D
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on April 15, 2008, 02:40:34 PM
Yeah, I didn't think of it like that =$ I'm ashamed of myself...I think it's just generally recognized as such for some reason.

So I'd take it raw eggs are legit (although probably not all that great tasting)?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Elet ET on April 15, 2008, 03:05:00 PM
cook your eggs man, you dont want to get salmonella. But being able to drink raw eggs does look hardass.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on April 15, 2008, 06:50:00 PM
cook your eggs man, you dont want to get salmonella. But being able to drink raw eggs does look hardass.

I was just assuming based on our previous habits... Hmmm
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: hardcoretraceur on April 15, 2008, 08:02:17 PM
not going to suggest anyone else do the same without proper research or consulting their doctor or anything, but i have about half a dozen raw eggs in my daily diet.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 15, 2008, 08:11:16 PM
raw eggs are amazing, I don't eat them that way anymore dunno why.
Just put em in a glass mix with fork and then add maple syrup or natural honey and mix some more and enjoy.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Andy Animus Tran on April 16, 2008, 12:41:18 AM
Raw eggs can be good.  I put a little bit of soy sauce in and eat (I suppose it'd be "drink") it with some crackers or a wheat pita.  Kinda like a soup, I guess.  But it CAN cause salmonella.  Some people have a genetic disposition to catching it, some people a resistance.  I wouldn't suggest trying it unless you're sure.  If you can eat runny eggs without getting sick, try for a litlt erunnier.. then push the envelope furhter.  Of course, there's really no point in doing this, as cooked eggs are just as good as raw ones.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: hardcoretraceur on April 16, 2008, 05:49:04 AM
debateable, from what I've read raw food is generally much richer in nutrients.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 16, 2008, 06:31:41 AM
debateable, from what I've read raw food is generally much richer in nutrients.

yes, but you should be getting enough protein with cooked eggs. imo, im not sure the extra protein vs. the chance of getting sick is worth the risk. i would just cook another egg if i felt that i needed more protein. raw (washed) veggies are a different story.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on April 16, 2008, 09:43:53 AM
So, just to be safe, cook it? Sounds good, I don't know if I'd like the taste of raw egg anyway
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: hardcoretraceur on April 16, 2008, 09:44:32 AM
**again not suggesting anyone else do the same, without research or consulting a medical professional**

i put them in smoothies, they make them totally delicious.

there's are findings that show only like 1 in 30k eggs has salmonella, and that salmonella will mean little more than a sick day for a healthy person.

I also try to buy eggs with as many of these descriptors as possible: organic, cage free, free range, no hormones, no pesticides, no antibiotics, omega 3, not fed animal products

with the smoothies, i can throw some good stuff in there, whip it up, chug it down, and rinse it out all in about 5 minutes, no cleaning plates or pans
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Elet ET on April 17, 2008, 07:07:49 AM
^ truth

I had salmonella when i was a baby, we used to live on a farm and i got it from the chickens. Except i was really sick, probably cus i was a little'un. It can rip your system up though.
Ive actually been contemplating putting them in smoothies. I just dont think ther is much of a point to plain raw eggs
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Eso on April 17, 2008, 07:50:43 AM
Hold on, I don't mean to get you guys off the egg thing, but why exactly are beans bad? It's like the two big diet threads are saying opposite things.

Phreaknite, in the White/Wheat thread listed beans/legumes as one of the best carbs:

Quote
1) Fresh Veggies
2) Fresh Fruits
3) Beans/Legumes
3) Fruit Juices (100% Juice)
4) Cooked Veggies
5) Cooked Fruits
6) Dried Fruits
7) Starchy vegetables (Potatoes, etc)
 Grains (Breads, Pastas, etc)
9) Rice
10) Natural unrefined sugars
11) Refined sugars

Everyone agreed with him there. Just wondering.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Eso on April 17, 2008, 07:58:17 AM
Dairy, too! I don't get it. Say you were trying to eat less meat, for whatever reason, where do you get your protein from besides the eggs and a little from the nuts?

Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 17, 2008, 08:04:48 AM
i saw that beans where 3rd on that list also. i disagree but i just thought it was a difference of opinion. beans are not "bad" , and i did not argue there place on that list because its hard to really make a 1-10 healthy list with only healthy food. Imo i would not put cooked vegies below 100% fruit juice. thats due to american's typical serving sizes. to me vegies (cooked or raw) are best, then fruit(fresh), then beans, etc. basically beans are not bad but green leafy vegies are better.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 17, 2008, 08:12:12 AM
Dairy, too! I don't get it. Say you were trying to eat less meat, for whatever reason, where do you get your protein from besides the eggs and a little from the nuts?



dairy gives you less protien then you think if you are trying to replace meat with it (excluding eggs). im not going to judge anyone who wants to eat less meat. however, if you train hard i don't know why you would want less of it and if your ok with eating eggs then i don't see why an adult chicken is worse. try to google a high protein vegetarian diet. im sure there is some way to get your protein that way.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on April 17, 2008, 09:52:35 AM
You're looking at it as an overall 'healthy' issue, but it's not quite like that.
As far as carbs[/i] go, beans are up on the list because they're a lower GI, meaning less of a 'sugar spike' effect. The paleolithic diet shuns beans because they contain toxins. They were inedible before we could cook them. They're saying that sometimes, even after cooking, especially if not cooked well enough, still contain some toxins. Don't think like DEADLY toxins, but they still aren't great for you. You could have beans and still be okay, and if it's all you have to eat, EAT IT. However, if you're going for even more optimal health, avoid them.
Personally, I've found that with only maybe a week or two of adjustment, you can change to a paleolithic diet and have no problem.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: stefan87 on April 17, 2008, 10:54:09 AM
You're looking at it as an overall 'healthy' issue, but it's not quite like that.
As far as carbs[/i] go, beans are up on the list because they're a lower GI, meaning less of a 'sugar spike' effect. The paleolithic diet shuns beans because they contain toxins. They were inedible before we could cook them. They're saying that sometimes, even after cooking, especially if not cooked well enough, still contain some toxins. Don't think like DEADLY toxins, but they still aren't great for you. You could have beans and still be okay, and if it's all you have to eat, EAT IT. However, if you're going for even more optimal health, avoid them.
Personally, I've found that with only maybe a week or two of adjustment, you can change to a paleolithic diet and have no problem.

clap  ;D

Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Eso on April 17, 2008, 01:38:14 PM
I just mentioned eating less meat because I've read about some world-class athletes who are vegetarians or eat little meat. That kind of diet works for them, I suppose. I personally could never cut meat out completely, but I'd be interested in seeing whether I perform better or worse with less of it.

I see what you're saying Aeroblitz. I'd just like to keep a broader range of "healthy" foods to choose from, so I'm not eating eggs every morning and nuts for lunch, you know? Though I'm sure there's a way to keep variety in this diet.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on April 17, 2008, 06:18:50 PM
Hell yeah, there's variety =D
Think about it
Meats:
Simply put,
Livestock
Birds
Fish

Think of the 193751971597 different types of food you have. You can change it up a lot. Personally, I'd keep meat in my diet if I were you.

I can't even go into how many different vegetables and fruits there are, ohmahlord.
It's good stuff. =]


and stefan, thanks for the applause. I'm really glad to be useful with the information I've learned. Thanks. =]
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Andy Animus Tran on April 21, 2008, 09:21:14 PM
No beans?  I don't do well with diets that don't allow Chipotle.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: BobT on April 22, 2008, 08:09:34 AM
You're looking at it as an overall 'healthy' issue, but it's not quite like that.
As far as carbs[/i] go, beans are up on the list because they're a lower GI, meaning less of a 'sugar spike' effect. The paleolithic diet shuns beans because they contain toxins. They were inedible before we could cook them. They're saying that sometimes, even after cooking, especially if not cooked well enough, still contain some toxins. Don't think like DEADLY toxins, but they still aren't great for you. You could have beans and still be okay, and if it's all you have to eat, EAT IT. However, if you're going for even more optimal health, avoid them.
Personally, I've found that with only maybe a week or two of adjustment, you can change to a paleolithic diet and have no problem.

It really depends on the bean in question.  Many plants are inedible prior to cooking because of high concentrations of alkaloids (this is why you can't eat green tomatoes).  Many alkaloids break down with heat which is why we can eat these foods post-cooking.

On the other hand soybeans have a variety of phyto-estrogen compounds that only break down through fermentation and really aren't fit for consumption in any form other than soy sauce (next time you're at the supermarket, check out how many things contain soy-protien isolate... scary).

Read up on the different varieties of beans and decide what's good for your diet.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on April 22, 2008, 12:03:03 PM
No beans?  I don't do well with diets that don't allow Chipotle.

dude you can be paleo and go to chipotle all the time. check out the fajita burrito bowl next time your there. it has no beans and try without rice for the full effect.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Andy Animus Tran on April 22, 2008, 02:35:38 PM
Yeah, I know.. I just like the beans.  :P
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Matt Hudson on April 23, 2008, 09:38:53 AM
it's unhealthy to cut meat out of your diet.
sure you can live without it, but if you watch South Park... you'd know that not eating meat makes it to where you turn into a GIANT PUSSY!!! :D ;D :D
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Christian Greene on June 01, 2008, 10:42:56 AM
So a Paleolithic diet can provide pretty much all your body needs to function? What essentials are being substitued from taking grains, beans, potatoes, and dairy/milk out of your diet? What would you need for a higher intake of Vitamin D in place of milk, etc. esp. if Soymilk is considered Neolithic?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: BobT on June 17, 2008, 12:46:17 PM
So a Paleolithic diet can provide pretty much all your body needs to function? What essentials are being substitued from taking grains, beans, potatoes, and dairy/milk out of your diet? What would you need for a higher intake of Vitamin D in place of milk, etc. esp. if Soymilk is considered Neolithic?

Your body synthesises vitamin D.  Just get out in the sun occasionally.

Soymilk??? :o  Don't even go there.

Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Christian Greene on June 18, 2008, 03:39:56 PM
Why not? That was just an example though, what I guess I'm asking is can you really get everything you need with this diet? And with milk, besides vitamin d is there anything else you need from it? and would that be fufilled with this diet? im so skeptical baha xP
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on June 18, 2008, 04:57:12 PM
Why not? That was just an example though, what I guess I'm asking is can you really get everything you need with this diet? And with milk, besides vitamin d is there anything else you need from it? and would that be fufilled with this diet? im so skeptical baha xP

http://www.performancemenu.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=8
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: BobT on June 19, 2008, 06:58:27 AM
Why not? That was just an example though, what I guess I'm asking is can you really get everything you need with this diet? And with milk, besides vitamin d is there anything else you need from it? and would that be fufilled with this diet? im so skeptical baha xP

As I posted earlier (about 8 items up the list), soy has a number of phyto-estrogen compounds that do not do the body good.  Additionally most soy is a GMO.  Opinions may vary, but I'd suggest avoiding any GMOs in the diet - especially if you have any paleo intentions.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: bjkpersonal@aim.com on June 22, 2008, 02:13:21 PM
I'm not going to preach or anything, or even here to start trouble, but to be quite frank...

Quote
But there are a lot of problems with that first one being money. Not everyone can afford to buy vegetables, fruit, nuts and lean meat all the time.

...I think that this is a very lame reason to not eat healthy. People in this world, this country in particular, tend to have an exorbitant amount of things that they don't need. Different people put values on different things, but to say that there is not enough money to take care of your body when so much money goes into clothes and cell phones and video games and televisions and computers.

on top of that, it can cost quite a bit less than you might think. I started trying to eat more healthy, and  prepare my own food, and I've been paying far less for food. i can make a smoothie that costs less than 2 bucks to make that is far better and cheaper for me than a 7 dollar big mac meal.

In the end you make your decisions, your priorities. I ate terrible for a long time, but I feel now, that if I want to be an athlete, I should take care of myself, as traceurs our bodies are our high performance equipment, I for one want to make sure I'm maintaining it correctly.

          It is true that the paleolithic diet is very healthy for you (I tried something similar for like 3 months and I felt great), but it's not an issue of me affording it but others affording it.  Not only that, but it's not very good on the environment to eat lots of meats, and grain fed animals aren't nearly as good for us.

          The ability to easily grow food and have it portable is possibly the greatest achievement of mankind.  Without it, we wouldn't be able to live in cities because the entire city would have to be enclosed by naturally growing fruits and vegetables along with free roaming animals, just so people could leave their homes and go straight to the fields/plains/whatevers to gather food and hunt.  Plus, once the rations are low, we'd have to move, abandoning any possibly thought of large-scale structures being built or anything of the sort.

          I remember having a similar conversation about vaccinations.  If your kid isn't vaccinated for Polio, they might get Polio, far worse than the extremely low chance of becoming Autistic.  Now-and-days, these diseases, like Smallpox and Polio, are coming back!  The main reason is because people want to ensure their healthinesses.  The only problem is that it puts other in jeopardy by the non-vaccinated becoming hosts.  If everyone ate paleolithic diets, there would be no such things as skyscrapers and monuments because nobody would be able to get all the food they needed unless is somebody caught and raised the animals (not enough grass) or harvested crops (nothing wrong with that, but makes us harvesters, not gatherers).  I guess, if you want to think about it this way, that it's the sacrifice we pay for cultural and civilizational advancements.

          You can probably come close to eating a paleolithic-related diet by only eating grass-fed animals with no additives or whatever in them and eating a LARGE variation of different organic vegetables (for obvious reasons).  I think it's funny that this has come up because most people suggest a very similar diet to those on a low-carb or no-carb diet.  Most harvestable goods cause insulin spikes once eaten, which is (as far as I know of) one of the big reasons that you don't eat carbs on those diets.  The spikes cause you to retain that energy directly into your fat cells, unlike vegetable (complex) carbohydrates which take just about as long as meat to break down, giving an even stream of energy.

          By the way, my goal when I turn 18 is to completely rid simple carbohydrates (sugar, H.F. corn syrup, grains, pastas, etc.) from my diet, fructose permitted.  I hope I can do it without making myself go crazy.  :)

Why not? That was just an example though, what I guess I'm asking is can you really get everything you need with this diet? And with milk, besides vitamin d is there anything else you need from it? and would that be fufilled with this diet? im so skeptical baha xP

          People really don't need dairy after infancy stages.  You can argue that it's healthy, but it's truly not necessary to any degree, unless there's no other way you can possibly get Vitamin D, since the sun burnt out and we're still alive somehow.  :P
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: bjkpersonal@aim.com on June 22, 2008, 02:25:36 PM
In my opinion jumping right in is a bad idea. Just like parkour you don't want to be doing jumps off a 10ft + heights (I have done that before just to show off) and getting hurt and not being able to do it again. If you jump into something right away it might be so unpleasant that you will get discouraged from doing it ever again. Happens to a lot of people who finally start to exercise and decide to run instead of walking first.

Here are the stages that I am doing

1. Drink water, juice that you made, and tea that you make
2. No more vending machines food (candy,chips etc...)
3. No more McDonald's and such unless you are getting a salad without dressing and croutans (they nasty anyway)
4. Eat as little sugar as possible
5. Cut out unhealthy bread (this is were I am right now)
6. No more grains/dairy (prob the hardest stage because we grew up eating this and our bodies are so used to it for energy)
7. Start paleolithic diet with breakfast only in the beginning and move from there

Comments welcome

          Good analogy (I think?) right off the bat.  I'd have to agree with previous repliers and say that the first and sometimes easiest, sometimes hardest step is to replace all beverages with water.  It doesn't make you thirsty or hungry (like pop) and your body will very much appreciate the change.  Plus, it's kind of like drinking chocolate milk after eating chocolate ice cream, everything tastes mediocre when you've had a really good drink.  I switched over to water like a year ago (my family runs on Pepsi and beer) and everything tastes 100 times better afterwards.  Imagine how good things must have tasted in comparison to river water way back when!

1. Drink water, juice that you made, and tea that you make

          I wouldn't recommend juice, rather just whole pieces of fruit.  It's more filling and lets your body know/feel that you just ate 2 pieces of fruit, not just took in the nutrients of 2 pieces of fruit.

3. No more McDonald's and such unless you are getting a salad without dressing and croutans (they nasty anyway)

          Man, make your own salads!  They're delicious, especially if you just toss in some tasty yellow peppers and a good 3 oz. of chicken or steak.  It's one of my favorite things, and it'll fill you up, too.  :)

          Sounds good, dude.  Good step in a good direction.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: BobT on June 23, 2008, 07:52:59 AM
          I remember having a similar conversation about vaccinations.  If your kid isn't vaccinated for Polio, they might get Polio, far worse than the extremely low chance of becoming Autistic.  Now-and-days, these diseases, like Smallpox and Polio, are coming back!  The main reason is because people want to ensure their healthinesses.  The only problem is that it puts other in jeopardy by the non-vaccinated becoming hosts.  If everyone ate paleolithic diets, there would be no such things as skyscrapers and monuments because nobody would be able to get all the food they needed unless is somebody caught and raised the animals (not enough grass) or harvested crops (nothing wrong with that, but makes us harvesters, not gatherers).  I guess, if you want to think about it this way, that it's the sacrifice we pay for cultural and civilizational advancements.

Dude, spend less time posting and more time reading.  I don't mean to be too harsh, but in a very short time you've got more posts than I put up in a year and a lot of it is opinion in complete contradiction to reality.  For example, 1 in 150 children in first world countries is diagnosed with autism yearly.  In 2004 there were less than 1200 cases of polio worldwide.  If you think that autism is less debilitating than polio, you've obviously never seen an institutionallized autisic adult.  I don't intend to hijack this thread, so enough said on that topic - PM me if you'd like to argue more about it.

As for a paleo diet - one does not need to be a hunter gatherer to eat paleo.  Food production in developed countries is what it is because of economics.  The food producers make less money from the consumer that the packagers, distributers and retailers.  US consumers expect food to be cheap, which is why they'll accept high fructose corn syrup, corn feed beef & chicken and pesticide laden produce.  Consumers are, in general more worried about saving for a new cell phone, iPod, etc. than what they put in their bodies.

With proper market pressure (the same kind of pressure that's eradicating partially hydrogenated oils from our foods), food production can be shifted towards the paleo end of the spectrum.  Every person who chooses to eat paleo contributes to that market pressure.

Now you can get pis*ed off at me and think I'm trying to flame you - I'm not.  As was posted in another thread, it's nice that you're enthusiatic and wish to contribute. Just please try to temper that with differentiating your opinion from fact.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on June 23, 2008, 08:38:57 AM
Well, one thing I want to note here is that stuff like corn is ACTUALLY subsidized by the US government because they actually LOSE money to grow that crop. There's a couple other ones like this, and it's kinda sad really because they're subsidizing a crop they think is great for food.. when it's not the best option out there. Well, that and they want to use it for ethanol fuel but even that is losing money as well, heh. So in regards to mass food production because of economics not really -- they could easily grow food that is more healthy but the government is kinda deluded with respect to the "unhealthiness" of certain foods.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: bjkpersonal@aim.com on June 23, 2008, 10:05:26 AM
          I would like everything that I post to be considered a personal opinion.

          I know that it doesn't require a literal hunter-gatherer lifestyle to eat a paleolithic diet, just that with cultivation, there are consequences.  If you have a gigantic field of one kind of vegetable and a certain bug comes by to eat them, what can you do?  Pesticides aren't very healthy, but it was a good option when it came out.  People also thought (and still do think) that genetically altering foods was a good idea.  That's why we have organic foods.  I personally think that the best option would be to grow your own fruits and vegetables on your own land, but with the world's current population being so high (along with everybody already owning property), it'd be hard for people to move out of close-together housing like apartments and into homes with actual yards.  The whole reference to having a city surrounded by a garden is just that, everybody having a certain section of the overall food that they can eat.  In my opinion, there would be no need for bread and preservable goods if every city had its own food supply.

          As for the vaccination reference, it's a similar conversation, not a different one.  I know the chances, 1 in 150, very low if you ask me.  I've had a retarded cousin, and I've had a friend with an autistic brother.  It's not nice, but imagine, instead of taking care of somebody mentally ill, somebody physically ill.  Badly ill.  The comparison was one of "the worse of two evils" (if you will), along with the good intentions of others.  Nobody wants an autistic child when they think of having kids, but it's just one of those risks, along with birth defects and the such.  I feel as if the progression we've made from cultivating grains far outweighs even the cost of a healthier diet, and we have certain things to support it, such as certain drugs to fight off the negative side effects.  Being able to keep less-perishable foods and concentrated foods have fought off hunger in exchange for consequences in health, but the overall benefit is that we can actually keep the poor alive!  Imagine how hard it would be to have a paleolithic soup kitchen, or to feed entire lunchrooms with these kinds of foods.  It truly is too expensive for many to go with, and I really don't want to hear "well, what if the gov't subsidized it?", because that doesn't seem to be working very well in the corn industry.

          My personal opinion is that the societal benefits of non-natural foods far outweigh the negative side effects.  If you want to use hydrogenated oils as an example of successful removal, you still have hormones, steroids, genetic altering and H.F. corn syrup to go.  Those things don't have almost any positive effects besides lower costs, and now that we can see the negative effects, they should be rid of.  That I can agree in, but overall, I think the paleolithic diet is just one the world's population can't safely support.  It's sad that economics have to get in the way of health, but I can only imagine how bad health was in the American Industrial Revolution..
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Charles Moreland on June 23, 2008, 12:22:33 PM
Vaccines. In many schools now, they require 7 year old girls to get the HPV vaccine...which is an STD acquired through skin to skin contact vaginally or orally. Seems a little crazy to me. I think we as a society are getting a little too vaccine happy.

In regards to your last comment, does HFCS and easily prepared food (McDonald's) help feed the poorer people in communities? Sure. But it also causes them physical harm in the long run. I'm really confused at what you're trying to say here.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: BobT on June 23, 2008, 12:58:02 PM
Well, one thing I want to note here is that stuff like corn is ACTUALLY subsidized by the US government because they actually LOSE money to grow that crop. There's a couple other ones like this, and it's kinda sad really because they're subsidizing a crop they think is great for food.. when it's not the best option out there. Well, that and they want to use it for ethanol fuel but even that is losing money as well, heh. So in regards to mass food production because of economics not really -- they could easily grow food that is more healthy but the government is kinda deluded with respect to the "unhealthiness" of certain foods.

Yes, and this is the nature of the economics.  Since it is subsidized, it is profitable for the farmer to grow as opposed to growing broccoli for example.  Unfortunately, standard market pressures will never influence political pork quite like a good lobbyist.  If however, the market was willing to shell out for broccoli such that it became more profitable to grow than corn, the subsidies wouldn't matter.

I agree that the gov't is living in the dark ages in regards to diet and nutrition...
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: BobT on June 23, 2008, 01:07:21 PM
          My personal opinion is that the societal benefits of non-natural foods far outweigh the negative side effects.  If you want to use hydrogenated oils as an example of successful removal, you still have hormones, steroids, genetic altering and H.F. corn syrup to go.  Those things don't have almost any positive effects besides lower costs, and now that we can see the negative effects, they should be rid of.  That I can agree in, but overall, I think the paleolithic diet is just one the world's population can't safely support.  It's sad that economics have to get in the way of health, but I can only imagine how bad health was in the American Industrial Revolution..

This is why I qualified my comment to apply to developed countries. Sure, in a poor and starving nation, food quantity is more critical than quality.  However, in developed nations that can produce a surplus of food, there is ample headroom for the production of higher quality foods (at least until somebody got the brilliant idea to use agricultural resources to fuel cars...).
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Phytolith on July 10, 2008, 12:11:25 PM
I want to raise an issue with the premise behind paleolithic diet.

I'm a grad student studying physical anthropology, focusing the origins of modern human diet, specifically looking at the plant foods that our ancestors and now-extinct relatives ate.  I look at the starch grains left behind on their tools and stuck in the plaque on their teeth, and my research is showing a trend that directly contradicts what the paleolithic diet presupposes.  Humans have been eating grains and beans for a long time (over 100kyr), at least an order of ten longer than agriculture has been around (since around 10kyr).  That's the direct evidence I've collected, but there is evidence from other researchers that cooking may have been around even longer (on the order of 500kyr-1mya).  So, the whole idea to cut out cooked grains and beans because we aren't evolved to eat them is BS.  More recently, there is strong evidence that the lactase gene (the one responsible for digesting milk) has undergone strong positive selection in the past 8-5kyr in European populations (meaning that these groups are, in fact, adapted to digest milk).

This being said, I am not a nutritionist, so I can't evaluate how good for you or not the diet may be. It makes sense to me to cut out refined sugars and processed foods because these are very very recent (last 50 years or so). However, don't start a hardcore paleolithic diet thinking that you're living up to your evolutionary past, because you're not. 
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Charles Moreland on July 10, 2008, 01:14:37 PM
More recently, there is strong evidence that the lactase gene (the one responsible for digesting milk) has undergone strong positive selection in the past 8-5kyr in European populations (meaning that these groups are, in fact, adapted to digest milk).

Thanks for the info Amanda! Definitely interesting indeed. In response to the quoted section above, my personal abstinence from milk is mainly for the processing that is involved in mass milk production. If I were rich I'd gladly drink milk raw, but alas, this is not the case.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Andy Animus Tran on July 31, 2008, 07:47:58 AM
I've just been backreading this thread a little, and I have one sid ecomment:  Charles, HPV has been linked to cervical cancer ins omething like 97% of cases.  To vaccinate for HPV, it requires that it be done before the age of 12, and the older a woman gets, the more difficult to vaccinate.  The reason for mandatory vaccinations for an STD is to prevent cancer decades later.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on July 31, 2008, 10:42:23 AM
I want to raise an issue with the premise behind paleolithic diet.

I'm a grad student studying physical anthropology, focusing the origins of modern human diet, specifically looking at the plant foods that our ancestors and now-extinct relatives ate.  I look at the starch grains left behind on their tools and stuck in the plaque on their teeth, and my research is showing a trend that directly contradicts what the paleolithic diet presupposes.  Humans have been eating grains and beans for a long time (over 100kyr), at least an order of ten longer than agriculture has been around (since around 10kyr).  That's the direct evidence I've collected, but there is evidence from other researchers that cooking may have been around even longer (on the order of 500kyr-1mya).  So, the whole idea to cut out cooked grains and beans because we aren't evolved to eat them is BS.  More recently, there is strong evidence that the lactase gene (the one responsible for digesting milk) has undergone strong positive selection in the past 8-5kyr in European populations (meaning that these groups are, in fact, adapted to digest milk).

This being said, I am not a nutritionist, so I can't evaluate how good for you or not the diet may be. It makes sense to me to cut out refined sugars and processed foods because these are very very recent (last 50 years or so). However, don't start a hardcore paleolithic diet thinking that you're living up to your evolutionary past, because you're not. 

There's debate on it to be honest. Can check out some of it in this thread:
http://www.performancemenu.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2712


I've just been backreading this thread a little, and I have one sid ecomment:  Charles, HPV has been linked to cervical cancer ins omething like 97% of cases.  To vaccinate for HPV, it requires that it be done before the age of 12, and the older a woman gets, the more difficult to vaccinate.  The reason for mandatory vaccinations for an STD is to prevent cancer decades later.

There's like 30+ variations of HPV. Only one or two of them cause cervical cancer. I know #18 is one of them IIRC but I think there might be another.

Well, just saying that having HPV is necessarily going to cause cancer depending on which strain you get.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Andy Animus Tran on July 31, 2008, 10:45:18 AM
There's a few strains..  The correlation is backwards, not forwards (HPV->cancer ratio is low.. cancer relating back to HPV rather high).  In any case, we took this outside. :D
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Terry McIntosh on July 31, 2008, 01:07:04 PM
I want to raise an issue with the premise behind paleolithic diet.

I'm a grad student studying physical anthropology, focusing the origins of modern human diet, specifically looking at the plant foods that our ancestors and now-extinct relatives ate.  I look at the starch grains left behind on their tools and stuck in the plaque on their teeth, and my research is showing a trend that directly contradicts what the paleolithic diet presupposes.  Humans have been eating grains and beans for a long time (over 100kyr), at least an order of ten longer than agriculture has been around (since around 10kyr).  That's the direct evidence I've collected, but there is evidence from other researchers that cooking may have been around even longer (on the order of 500kyr-1mya).  So, the whole idea to cut out cooked grains and beans because we aren't evolved to eat them is BS.  More recently, there is strong evidence that the lactase gene (the one responsible for digesting milk) has undergone strong positive selection in the past 8-5kyr in European populations (meaning that these groups are, in fact, adapted to digest milk).

This being said, I am not a nutritionist, so I can't evaluate how good for you or not the diet may be. It makes sense to me to cut out refined sugars and processed foods because these are very very recent (last 50 years or so). However, don't start a hardcore paleolithic diet thinking that you're living up to your evolutionary past, because you're not. 

so the real question is, how many grains, beans, etc. can we eat with this in mind? is it cool if i get it all from a farmer and stay away from a super market? cause it seems like most of these foods have food labels, which usually equals processing.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: KC Parsons on July 31, 2008, 01:50:48 PM
While this diet may not be perfect on an evolutionary scale, it's still a good diet for you nonetheless. Potatoes are bad because of starch, grains aren't great either (read the white/wheat bread dilemma thread.)

It also helps to keep in mind what you want to do, and eat accordingly.

Ex:
Tired? Eat carbohydrates (low GI, though.)
Just got done resistance training? Eat protein and carbohydrates (if you want that session to be useful.)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Ryan Nicolai on October 26, 2008, 04:32:33 PM
I eat a lot of straight organic(like, from Amish country) food, e.g.; eggs, vegetables, meats. My parents order their bulk meat from an organic butcher. The milk I drink is usually organic except for the soymilk my Mom has been buying the last couple of months. The whole soy thing is interesting, so is it ok to eat the "soy" in soy sauce... disregarding it's other problems.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Kalagaraz on February 25, 2009, 02:16:50 PM
Is this diet really that good? It's listed as a fad diet by several organizations, and studies on it haven't gone so well:

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2008/05May/Pages/Cavemanfaddiet.aspx

6 out of 20 people dropped the diet (probably from tiredness)
Also, every participate had a horrible decrease in calcium levels.

I can see where people are coming from "Our ancestors lived for thousands of years on this stuff, so it must be healthy). I can see where that could be believable, but also look at the average life expectancy in the "paleolithic" days (33), whereas today it's 66, double off the "unhealthy" foods we eat.

Just wondering if anyone else has done actual research on this diet?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on February 25, 2009, 06:31:26 PM
Is this diet really that good? It's listed as a fad diet by several organizations, and studies on it haven't gone so well:

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2008/05May/Pages/Cavemanfaddiet.aspx

6 out of 20 people dropped the diet (probably from tiredness)
Also, every participate had a horrible decrease in calcium levels.

Of course the studies don't go well.

They don't give the participants enough time to have their metabolism adapt from a "mostly" sugar diet to one higher in fat and protein.

Quote
I can see where people are coming from "Our ancestors lived for thousands of years on this stuff, so it must be healthy). I can see where that could be believable, but also look at the average life expectancy in the "paleolithic" days (33), whereas today it's 66, double off the "unhealthy" foods we eat.

That's wrong. Most of them lived well into the 70s... it's the fact that their sanitation was terrible that all of the infants and kids who died under the age of 10 bring the life expectancy down into the 30s.

Quote
Just wondering if anyone else has done actual research on this diet?
See this site:
http://www.thepaleodiet.com/
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: mospunk on March 25, 2009, 04:58:56 PM
I must say that I've been extremely intrigued by this whole diet concept, and have been reading a lot on it lately. I'm still not totally convinced from the perspective of a serious athlete in terms of fuel intake, but I can definitely see the benefits of it in general, specifically for "average" people, or those who don't exercise much.  A few thoughts I had (don't take them as things I believe strongly, but rather making a point for arguments sake):

1.  Being so extreme in any diet seems like a bad idea.  It seems that everything we know about health changes regularly, evidenced by the many diets that have come and gone (Atkins?).  One small example that comes to mind is giving up on all salt.  Now, salt is on the whole not healthy for us, but there is one ingredient in modern salt that becomes quite important for us - iodine.  Most salt nowadays is iodized, which helps prevent goiters (ugly and painful), depression, fatigue, weakness, and weight gain.  There are plenty of foods that naturally contain iodine, but if one is trying to eat locally and sustainably (as I have set out to do), it may be difficult in certain regions.  Minnesota, for one, has relatively low iodine content in the soil, which is partly where foods get their iodine (as far as I understand it).  This isn't a huge issue, but one small example of taking out huge groups of food, simply because our ancestors 10000 years ago did not eat it.  I also find it hard to believe that there has been no genetic adaptation to at least some degree in 10000 years. 

2.  Steve Low referenced the performancemenu.com site for paleo stuff, and a few people there seemed to think that at least for them personally, they would have trouble gaining muscle mass with a strictly paleo diet, simply due to the difficulty of consuming enough calories (looks to me that you'd have to eat constantly).  Check it out:  http://www.performancemenu.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3489 

3.  On the defense for dropping grains and carbs, here's an interesting article that my friend posted on Facebook, who just graduated from PT school.  Read toward the bottom to find the culprit.
http://www.leadertelegram.com/story-news.asp?id=BJAKV393I4K 

Overall I think the idea is interesting, as I said, and I'm already changing things up in my diet to see how it feels.  I cut out the pasta and just had chicken with a slew of tasty veggies sauteed in olive oil and spices last night, and it was delicious.  I don't think I'll ever be able to give up the all-natural artisan bread that my baker friend makes, nor the delicious cheeses I love, or the breakfast cereal, but I will definitely work at cutting out the bulk of it, which I think will help a great deal.  For a guy who doesn't need to lose weight, I don't feel like this diet will be all that beneficial, except to reduce toxins. I don't eat a lot of the toxic things like potatoes and beans anyway.  Grains are the only thing I consume a lot of, and I'll work on that.   Cheers to all on their personal journeys!
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on March 28, 2009, 07:15:13 PM
1. Atkins isn't a "bad" diet. Ketogenic diets have their uses.

2. Yup, it's tough to get a lot of quality cals on Paleo... that's why if you're mass gaining usually you need to up cals in liquid form. Such as whole milk.

3.

Quote
Chapin has changed his diet to include more good cholesterol and less sugar and is taking cholesterol-controlling medicines and niacin, or vitamin B3.

Dietary cholesterol and all that stuff doesn't influence blood cholesterol.

Less sugar (and processed foods for that matter) are good. I don't really agree with the meds, but it is what it is.

------

Basically, take home point is to eat less sugar and processed foods. Paleo is just one way to go about it.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Tsingle93 on October 27, 2009, 05:17:28 PM
This thread caught my attention, and I am currently trying out the paleo diet as of this morning, with a couple exceptions, mainly dinner food. Anyways, I decided to see what arguments there were against the paleolithic diet, and found this. It was kinda discouraging, would someone like to disprove this article?            http://www.westonaprice.org/bookreviews/paleodiet.html
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on October 27, 2009, 05:59:10 PM
Sounds more hateful than critical...

Just stick to eating whole foods without much processing and you will be a step ahead.  You will feel better if you do paleo for 30 days -- but going without things like salt is a bit absurd -- just avoid processed foods, grains, dairy and legumes and you will get the "paleo" experience.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Tsingle93 on October 27, 2009, 08:42:23 PM
yea that's true. The only thing that I really took out of that article that seemed it could have a point is that the hunter gatherers did not only kill animals with lean meats, but also animals with fatty meats as well. Anyways, I am starting paleo mainly in breakfast and lunch. This morning, I had 3 scrambled eggs, a banana covered with peanut butter, and water. Is this a pretty balanced/paleo meal? I think it is, the only thing is when I try to generally balance carbs, fats, and proteins, oftentimes in breakfast and lunch I have difficulty finding a source of fat, I don't really like nuts for breakfast much. Any good ideas for how to eat a more balanced/fatty breakfast and lunch? I am not trying to gain weight or lose weight, I just want to gain muscle in general and be the best I physically can be and I want to get the most benefit from what I eat. Thanks
- Tsingle
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Tsingle93 on October 27, 2009, 09:09:15 PM
oh also when you say dairy do you include eggs? cuz I thought eggs were a good thing in a paleo diet??
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on October 28, 2009, 04:59:07 AM
oh also when you say dairy do you include eggs? cuz I thought eggs were a good thing in a paleo diet??

Eggs are not dairy.  Dairy is something that comes from the utters of an animal like a cow or a goat.

Your breakfast seemed fine.  If you are going to eat fatty meats you should make sure you supplement with omega 3 fish oils every day -- at least 2000-5000 mg of EPA+DHA or buy grassfed meat.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Faithkeeper on January 02, 2010, 08:01:51 PM
So I've been trying this diet out recently...

Unlike some others, I haven't felt too bad in the first 2 weeks (thus far). I had a really minor headache once, but that's all. (But the lack of negative side effects could be because I've been getting plenty of sleep all along and didn't drink much caffeine.)

I do, however, have one interesting bit, that I call a complaint, but it may also be a blessing: After a small while on the diet, any time I "cheat" I get stomach aches. Usually within an hour of the meal. Is this normal?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Rafe on January 02, 2010, 09:00:54 PM
Steven just wanted to point out that is misinformation on hunter forager life spans mortality rates mean life span is was probably around 30 years for most of our history, if you lived to 15 you were likely to live into your 40's and 50's and living in to the 70's was not uncommon but was certianly not the mean.
http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/life_history/aging_evolution/hill_2007_hiwi_mortality.html
http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/gurven/papers/GurvenKaplan2007pdr.pdf
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on January 03, 2010, 12:29:04 PM
thx for the info Rafe.


So I've been trying this diet out recently...

Unlike some others, I haven't felt too bad in the first 2 weeks (thus far). I had a really minor headache once, but that's all. (But the lack of negative side effects could be because I've been getting plenty of sleep all along and didn't drink much caffeine.)

I do, however, have one interesting bit, that I call a complaint, but it may also be a blessing: After a small while on the diet, any time I "cheat" I get stomach aches. Usually within an hour of the meal. Is this normal?

Yup, I get that too. That's normal.

Eating trash food makes you sick.

-----------------

BTW, for those of you interested in practical implementation of Paleo and surround issues you should listen to Robb Wolf's podcasts:

http://robbwolf.com/?feed=podcast

There's 8 so far so only 8 hours of listen. Very good stuff.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Faithkeeper on January 03, 2010, 04:28:35 PM
Yup, I get that too. That's normal.

Eating trash food makes you sick.

What's interesting about that (to me) is that most of the food I cheat with is better than what I used to eat. (It's how I justify cheating)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Michael Himes on January 03, 2010, 06:09:34 PM
I would think about going Paleo but I'm at a lack of money being still sixteen and no job. Though I'm looking for one so once I do that and my mom cooks something I can have just bought my own food and cook that. Though of course I can easily give up soda and milk (maybe, depending on what she cooks and if she adds milk.) Pasta might be a bit trouble, I grew up on it. And we have it about twice a week. That will be a challenge to drop.

Though I have a question, I'm under weight (hardly on the age to weight scale). So is it actually wise to try this diet or maybe find some other eating habit that's still healthy
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: evilpenguin on February 04, 2010, 11:27:49 PM
I'm not really contemplating the paleo diet but I am thinking about trying to eat at least a little healthier. Problem is that I'm trying to gain muscle and I've heard milk is good for a little extra weight (plus its how I get most if not all of my calcium and vitamin D and also it's pretty much my favorite drink). If I cut out foods like mcdonalds, candy, soda, etc would the milk be too much of a problem?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on February 05, 2010, 06:35:38 AM
You may want to read this article first - it will help you move away from bad foods before going into something like paleo, atkins, or whatever else you are contemplating.

http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2009/05/eating-right-how-to-get-started/
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: sparta98 on February 07, 2010, 10:11:19 AM
First, I just want to ask if there are any objections to these?
To me, it just makes logical sense, based on human history, to eat foods that were only available as a primitive being.


Anywho,
Milk's gonna be the hardest for me to back off of, it's a great alternative to water, mainly because of consistency and unique taste.
Have to say, didn't know peanut was a bean.
I completely backed off of bread/starch/grain stuff, and haven't had a problem. I personally feel a lot better (must be the lack of sugar spiking) =D


So, simply put, what are the benefits and lack of detriments?
Also, can someone help clear up which vegetables are legit, and which aren't?
peanuts are actually legumes
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Woody369 on February 18, 2010, 03:17:03 AM
I was just going to put that peanuts and cashews are legumes so are not paleo. They contain toxins which may be poisionous to humans.

However some sources also say bell peppers, tomatoes and egg plant, as part of the night shade family aren't paleo, but they have too much awesomenuss to cut out.

In addition, I didn't read all the pages, but if it wasn't mentioned, even authors of paleos books don't recommend strict diets for athletes. Pre and peri workout nutrition (before and after) need a quick carb source, beans maybe, or oats, potatoes brown rice..

Cutting them out completely is not recommended by most for athletes. So then it is a decision between eating something that may contain poisons and disrupt our bodies, and giving our body what it needs to repair after heavy work.

Also never having carbs will decrease your insulin sensitivity so the time you can only get hold of a bagel the spike will be crazy.

Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on February 18, 2010, 06:18:48 AM
I was just going to put that peanuts and cashews are legumes so are not paleo. They contain toxins which may be poisionous to humans.

However some sources also say bell peppers, tomatoes and egg plant, as part of the night shade family aren't paleo, but they have too much awesomenuss to cut out.

In addition, I didn't read all the pages, but if it wasn't mentioned, even authors of paleos books don't recommend strict diets for athletes. Pre and peri workout nutrition (before and after) need a quick carb source, beans maybe, or oats, potatoes brown rice..

Cutting them out completely is not recommended by most for athletes. So then it is a decision between eating something that may contain poisons and disrupt our bodies, and giving our body what it needs to repair after heavy work.

Also never having carbs will decrease your insulin sensitivity so the time you can only get hold of a bagel the spike will be crazy.



Botanically speaking, cashews are a seed, not a legume.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Trevor on February 26, 2010, 10:17:07 PM
Question: I know milk is a dairy product but I would like to add milk to my paleo, for calcium, is it good to drink 1% or skim for this?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on February 26, 2010, 10:26:08 PM
Paleo dieters claim they don't need calcium from milk.  Milk establishes an acidic environment so most of that calcium doesn't even get absorbed.  An alkaline environment with calcium is more beneficial, usually.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Trevor on February 26, 2010, 10:42:47 PM
Ok. Cool. Thanks!
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Woody369 on March 12, 2010, 12:29:29 AM
If you really want to add milk. Try to get hold of raw milk (from non drugged up cows). The fats are about the only good thing about it. Calcium and protein content are pretty useless. And the carb content from milk sugars isn't a good source either.

Ideally avoid it. If you only want milk for calcium you are better off eating almond, broccoli etc. Or egg shells, small fish with bones...
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Rafe on March 12, 2010, 11:13:35 AM
If your lactose tolerant whole milk preferably raw is good for you. Dairying cultures have arguably the best overall health profiles compared to agrarian and hunter foragers. In east africa for instance, pastoralists are about 5^8 on average, agrarian peoples are about 5^5 and hunter foragers are about 5^2(male heights) while not a perfect guide height is often used a metric indicating overall health of population. Reading through ethnographies you will find that the pastoralists are often remarked upon as being not just tall but well built, symetrical and having excellent teath and skin compared to other groups.

You have to have the genetics to digest milk and you have to get clean dairy sources but dairy is pretty beneficial food source from what I can see.

Also if you want to grow muscles there is no better food.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Brien on April 25, 2010, 05:47:00 PM
peanuts are actually legumes

beans and legumes are pretty much interchangeable in terms of what food group they actually are.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: FrostySTL on April 30, 2010, 03:29:11 PM
Well, if you are really going to want to follow the Paleolithic Diet, you are going to need to throw in some insects, as well as rabbit, squirrel, a WHOLE lot of deer...

Basically, it's great to eat healthier, but trying to do it with "What we have available to us today" is not going to equal the same nutritional intake they had. For instance, when they consumed rabbits and squirrels, did they eat some of the small bones along with the meat? That might explain why some on this diet today suffer from reduced levels of calcium.

You know, just try to use some common sense, and DON'T believe everything you read on these diet sites. They, like a lot of places out there, are just trying to make a buck. (And yes, they make money from ads everytime you visit their site) The more "realistic" it sounds, the more people will visit, the more money they make.

Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on April 30, 2010, 03:52:42 PM
Well, if you are really going to want to follow the Paleolithic Diet, you are going to need to throw in some insects, as well as rabbit, squirrel, a WHOLE lot of deer...

Basically, it's great to eat healthier, but trying to do it with "What we have available to us today" is not going to equal the same nutritional intake they had. For instance, when they consumed rabbits and squirrels, did they eat some of the small bones along with the meat? That might explain why some on this diet today suffer from reduced levels of calcium.

You know, just try to use some common sense, and DON'T believe everything you read on these diet sites. They, like a lot of places out there, are just trying to make a buck. (And yes, they make money from ads everytime you visit their site) The more "realistic" it sounds, the more people will visit, the more money they make.



Thanks for that straw man argument that added nothing to the conversation.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on April 30, 2010, 04:11:50 PM
Well, if you are really going to want to follow the Paleolithic Diet, you are going to need to throw in some insects, as well as rabbit, squirrel, a WHOLE lot of deer...

Basically, it's great to eat healthier, but trying to do it with "What we have available to us today" is not going to equal the same nutritional intake they had. For instance, when they consumed rabbits and squirrels, did they eat some of the small bones along with the meat? That might explain why some on this diet today suffer from reduced levels of calcium.

You know, just try to use some common sense, and DON'T believe everything you read on these diet sites. They, like a lot of places out there, are just trying to make a buck. (And yes, they make money from ads everytime you visit their site) The more "realistic" it sounds, the more people will visit, the more money they make.



What is the take home message here?  Paleo is pretty legit, though its not some end-all-be-all.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: FrostySTL on April 30, 2010, 04:31:32 PM
Never mind, I've already wasted enough of my time here.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Flyergen on June 08, 2010, 04:16:42 PM
Yeah the first time my family ate lean hamburger meat everyone in the house(even the dog who we gave a pinch of it to) was sick for a week
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on June 08, 2010, 07:34:58 PM
Sounds like a case of bad meat, not lean meat...
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: EpicNinja on August 06, 2010, 01:39:33 PM
I think this is cool, I heard about it before. I would do most of it, but I don't care what ANYTHING says, I like milk to much. =D
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Austin "iSHREDbanez" on September 19, 2010, 09:11:11 AM
I guess what Frosty is saying is that its not a TRUE paleo diet. If it were, it would've included all those things he mentioned.

It's more of an updated, modern paleo diet.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Steve Low on September 20, 2010, 04:36:32 PM
Robb's Wolf book (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0982565844?ie=UTF8&tag=eatmovimp-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0982565844) is good
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Christie on January 11, 2011, 11:55:02 AM
i origanilly don't drink soda often (i always fell like i'm gonna puke when i have the diet shit) so i guess i'm ok on that part. i'm gonna have to get the guts to tell my dad i'm not interested in pankackes in the morning, though. hate beans. i guess i was on the right track in the first place!
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chantelle on January 26, 2011, 09:35:09 PM
I think my love of beer would make me fail at this diet.

For those on the diet, how does alcohol (specifically beer) affect you, as opposed to how it would affect you before the diet.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: mickeynotmouse on February 04, 2011, 11:51:00 PM
So...

What do these "toxins" actually do?

(Eating cake while reading this thread)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Dan Elric on February 06, 2011, 03:17:12 PM
I think my love of beer would make me fail at this diet.

For those on the diet, how does alcohol (specifically beer) affect you, as opposed to how it would affect you before the diet.

Beer contains a lot of carbs, >_>

So...

What do these "toxins" actually do?

(Eating cake while reading this thread)

Which ones?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: mickeynotmouse on February 07, 2011, 08:34:42 PM

Which ones?

You know,

the "antinutrients" or whatever that they say are in bread and beans and potatoes and such.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chris Salvato on February 07, 2011, 10:05:37 PM
You know,

the "antinutrients" or whatever that they say are in bread and beans and potatoes and such.

What on earth are you talking about?  Can we get an article or quote?

Are you talking about gluten?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: mickeynotmouse on February 07, 2011, 10:32:12 PM
Quote
· Cooking destroys most but not all of the toxins. Insufficient cooking can lead to sickness such as acute gastroenteritis.
Quote
· Contain toxins in small amounts
Quote
As grains, beans and potatoes form such a large proportion of the modern diet, you can now understand why it is so common for people to feel they need supplements or that they need to detoxify (ie that they have toxins in their system)- indeed both feelings are absolutely correct.
Quote
when people go on detoxification diets they unfortunately often consume even more Neolithic foods (eg soy beans) and therefore more toxins than usual
Quote
The reason why grains, beans and potatoes store so well is simply because of the toxins that they contain.
Quote
The lectins and other toxins are natural pesticides and can attack bacteria, insects, worms, rodents and other pests (and humans too of course).
Quote
We all know that foods contain a variety of nutrients. There is less awareness that many foods contain small amounts of potentially harmful substances. These are toxins, as they have toxic effects. They are normally called "antinutrients" by the scientific community as toxins sounds too alarmist.
Quote
Potatoes contain enzyme blockers, lectins and another family of toxins called glycoalkaloids. Glycoalkaloids (GA) unlike lectins and enzyme blockers aren't destroyed by cooking, even deep-frying.


Okay. Now that we know what I'm talking about... A little help on what these are and/or what they do?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Joe Brock on February 07, 2011, 10:41:46 PM
Potatoes contain toxic compounds known as glycoalkaloids, of which the most prevalent are solanine and chaconine. Solanine is also found in other plants in the family Solanaceae, which includes such plants as the deadly nightshade (Atropa belladonna), henbane (Hyoscyamus niger) and tobacco (Nicotiana) as well as the potato, eggplant, and tomato. This toxin affects the nervous system, causing weakness and confusion.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Joe Brock on February 07, 2011, 10:43:38 PM
...and

These compounds, which protect the plant from its predators, are, in general, concentrated in its leaves, stems, sprouts, and fruits.[63] Exposure to light, physical damage, and age increase glycoalkaloid content within the tuber;[64] the highest concentrations occur just underneath the skin. Cooking at high temperatures (over 170 °C or 340 °F) partly destroys these. The concentration of glycoalkaloid in wild potatoes suffices to produce toxic effects in humans. Glycoalkaloids may cause headaches, diarrhea, cramps, and in severe cases coma and death; however, poisoning from potatoes occurs very rarely. Light exposure causes greening from chlorophyll synthesis, thus giving a visual clue as to areas of the tuber that may have become more toxic; however, this does not provide a definitive guide, as greening and glycoalkaloid accumulation can occur independently of each other. Some varieties of potato contain greater glycoalkaloid concentrations than others; breeders developing new varieties test for this, and sometimes have to discard an otherwise promising cultivar.

The toxic fruits produced by mature potato plants
Breeders try to keep solanine levels below 200 mg/kg (200 ppmw). However, when these commercial varieties turn green, even they can approach concentrations of solanine of 1000 mg/kg (1000 ppmw). In normal potatoes, analysis has shown solanine levels may be as little as 3.5% of the breeders' maximum, with 7–187 mg/kg being found.[65]
The U.S. National Toxicology Program suggests that the average American consume at most 12.5 mg/day of solanine from potatoes (the toxic dose is actually several times this, depending on body weight). Douglas L. Holt, the State Extension Specialist for Food Safety at the University of Missouri, notes that no reported cases of potato-source solanine poisoning have occurred in the U.S. in the last 50 years, and most cases involved eating green potatoes or drinking potato-leaf tea
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chantelle on February 07, 2011, 11:02:05 PM
Beer contains a lot of carbs, >_>



You didn't address my question specifically enough.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Joe Brock on February 07, 2011, 11:08:37 PM
Gumby...Considering that one of the tenets of the diet is avoiding grains, such as barley, plus highly processed foods/drinks, then really beer is one of the things that you would have to cut out altogether.  I mean, you're essentially talking about liquid bread, and on a diet that cuts out breads, it's an impossibility to ask, "How would beer affect this diet?"  By drinking beer, you'd be 'not dieting' at all.   ;)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: mickeynotmouse on February 07, 2011, 11:25:56 PM
So confused and tired?

But it's not for sure.

I'm guessing I can take my chances if it's easier?

And also, are these effects temporary?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Joe Brock on February 07, 2011, 11:31:09 PM
Glycoalkaloids may cause headaches, diarrhea, cramps, and in severe cases coma and death;

Uhhh...death may be temporary, but it's one of the forum rules that we don't discuss these things. ;)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Chantelle on February 07, 2011, 11:52:40 PM
Gumby...Considering that one of the tenets of the diet is avoiding grains, such as barley, plus highly processed foods/drinks, then really beer is one of the things that you would have to cut out altogether.  I mean, you're essentially talking about liquid bread, and on a diet that cuts out breads, it's an impossibility to ask, "How would beer affect this diet?"  By drinking beer, you'd be 'not dieting' at all.   ;)

Ok, thanks man.  I would do this diet for the fact that it stabilizes sugars and what not, not to lose weight.  I was wondering how beer would affect mood, sugar levels, etc.  I'll just have to cheat then. ;)
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Nick Fernandez on February 12, 2012, 01:22:53 PM
Is there any drawback from buying frozen berries as opposed to fresh ones?
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Tori on March 12, 2012, 08:19:04 AM

But there are a lot of problems with that first one being money. Not everyone can afford to buy vegetables, fruit, nuts and lean meat all the time.

I'd just like to interject and say that I'm a starving college student, and I've found ways to stick to the Paleo diet. The trick is to buy more veggies, especially when they are in season, and find local grocery stores that occasionally sell bulk meat at a low price. For example, my boyfriend and I recently bought a 8-lb hunk of pork for $12, and that was enough for almost 2 weeks. I generally spend about $100 per month max for groceries, hardly ever eat out (most places don't have a whole lot of paleo anyway), and make meals in advance so I'm not tempted to go for something more expensive.

My boyfriend also taught me a little trick: spend one day per week pre-cutting veggies/fruit/meat to make it a little easier to cook throughout the week. It certainly makes it less frustrating to cook and a little easier to maximize use of food.

I hope this helps! :) Just remember that it becomes easier once you learn the tips and tricks of eating Paleo.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: Christopher De Bow on May 14, 2013, 12:58:45 PM
API've been on the paleo diet for a couple of years now, and I have one piece of advice for anyone interested in it:
Progression
Don't go all out in the first couple months and try to slap your brain around with cold turkey.
Give things up one at a time.
Acclimate.
I'm still having problems with binging, because I built up the reflex to binge when I was "good" during the first couple months on Paleo.
Progression and patience will win this war, not brute force.
Title: Re: paleolithic diet
Post by: ebaillargeon82 on June 23, 2014, 11:01:21 PM
That's wrong. Most of them lived well into the 70s... it's the fact that their sanitation was terrible that all of the infants and kids who died under the age of 10 bring the life expectancy down into the 30s.

Um no, I'm pretty sure they lived until their 30s.