Jump to content
Acne.org
Search In
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
mike_wf

Paleo diet is bogus

Recommended Posts

* This is an edit. Mrs. Grape doesn't live here anymore.

Cya, the Org.

Edited by Mrs. Grape
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with AshleyNicole "..The diet isn't bogus. It's a personal choice - you obviously don't agree with it as a lifestyle. I agree with some of its principles, but not with being so exclusionary with it..."

Dont shoot down whats not working for you. We are all different and so will be our cures for own unique situation. There are people that have had extremely good results on the Paleo diet.

I am not on any diet but strive towards eating healthy and everything in moderation and balance.

Good luck in finding what works for you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well first off, plant roots =/= grains; this "bread" would have been more like a bread made out of parsnip "flour" than the wheat flour we favor today. These people were basically eating harmless starches in small quantities, not large quantities of starches with inflammatory proteins such as gluten.

Additionally, cavemen lived very active lives without the metabolic derangement that runs rampant in many countries today, and could likely utilize most carbs without harm to their blood sugar, digestion, etc. In a sick and sedentary population, however, excessive consumption of carbs from grains can contribute to blood sugar swings and digestive distress, and eating a "paleo" diet can help sidestep these problems entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) It is not made from grains but from roots (not even like potatoes probably more fiberous/nutrious roots). Without gluten etc. Also it wasnt processed like nowadays.

2) Only 1 is found , more stones like that are found at 10k BC , that means it wasnt used in many places yet at 30k BC also the quantity of usage isnt known of course. Its made from roots so they were propaply gathered. Which means that the usage propably was pretty low. When agriculutre kicks in they really relied on the grains more.

3) Even if it was made from grains, so what. This only means that there has been a little bit more time humans could evolve. It doesnt debunk the science behind paleo.

4) This is not the only thing about paleo diet.

Edited by joris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: at the responses to this thread.

Of course prehistoric people ate grains. There's been plenty of evidence in archeological sites all over the world. They would not have learned to cultivate foods unless they ate them. A lot of them. The idea that grains were added to the diet when agriculture began is goofy. Also, there were many places/periods where agriculture was practiced in limited and part time in combination with a nomadic lifestyle for a very long time before adopting full time agriculture and settlement, if they ever did. Many groups didn't.

Another thing they like to say is that it would be too difficult to gather enough grains for them to be of much use in the diet. But that's not true. The Ojibwe gather wild rice in large quantities by knocking it into their canoes with sticks. I see no reason why people all over the planet would not have figured out how to do something similar with grasses on dry land.

Humans ate whatever they got their hands on and diets varied as people moved in different directions into different ecosystems. As did human ancestors which were most likely primarily vegetarian as most of our modern relatives are.

We are/were able to adapt to many types of diets, provided they contained nutrients rather and aren't based on refined grains and sugars (which should be an occasional treat) and industrialized fats combined with unhealthy lifestyles.

And yes, there are plenty of good principles in paleo type diets and many people have gotten results from the paleo diet. But that doesn't mean they had to stick to that limited a diet. It means they are eating subset of a good diet. Many other people have gotten results from eating what I always recommend--real, whole nutrient dense and predominately anti-inflammatory foods in low to moderate GL meals that don't include anything you have an intolerance to. Even non-paleo approved foods! Conversely, you can follow a paleo diet and not accomplish that.

There are people on the paleo thread talking about 'experimenting' with sweet potatoes. An incredibly beneficial food. That's ridiculous.

Of course, my above statements are not to be misconstrued as a recommendation to base your diet on grains, especially not in the form of refined, processed foods. Or that there aren't negatives (along with positives) involved in eating any seed or that sensitivities to seeds are not common.

Edited by alternativista
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the big problem with grains?

They're generally cheap and affordable. Which is a major benefit to people out there who don't earn enough money to purchase fresh veg, meat and fruit on a daily basis.

I'm all for healthy eating, my diet is actually about 85-90% paleo anyway, but I still think it's an unreasonable diet to follow for most. Especially people still at school, which is probably 2/3's of this site. A better alternative than pills and harsh chemicals, but too disruptive and unrealistic for my likings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess in the end it boils down to the best way for YOU to eat. All of our bodies are different, and they do better on different eating habits. The paleo diet isn't exactly like that of the actual prehistoric people; there's not way for it to be precisely dead-on in our current environment, and based on the foods we have available. I don't believe that the prehistoric people ate grains or tubers because they are impossible to cook without a container, and one of the major advances in human civilization was the invention of the container, so that people could store and cook foods in them (thus ending the hunter-gatherer age). Does this mean we all shouldn't eat grains? No. Does this mean the paleo diet is suited for everyone? No.

Some of us do very well on a diet that includes grains, and some of us can't tolerate them (like myself). I think it's silly to claim that any one diet is perfect for all, and it's silly to claim that because a certain diet didn't work for you, that it's bogus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the big problem with grains?

They're generally cheap and affordable. Which is a major benefit to people out there who don't earn enough money to purchase fresh veg, meat and fruit on a daily basis.

Isn't there something wrong when this is the case? Is this maybe why we are becoming obese and potentially children are living a shorter life than their parents?

What you are saying also applies to fast food. Its usually cheaper to buy than fresh ingredients. Maybe this is where we are going wrong as a society...

I live by a Paleo diet and it actually isn't that expensive. I eat on a budget of £10 - £15 a day (I'm British) and get everything I need. It isn't right that we should be forced to eat cheap, mass produced processed food. It's killing the nation and bumping up health bills!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<!--quoteo(post=2968240:date=Oct 19 2010, 11&#58;54 AM:name=Naturalis)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Naturalis &#064; Oct 19 2010, 11&#58;54 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2968240"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There are also genetic differences in the different areas of the world which make the things even more complicated.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Yes, which indicates that we have done some adapting. Contrary to Cordain's claims.

<!--quoteo(post=2968303:date=Oct 19 2010, 02&#58;56 PM:name=CelloIsLove)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelloIsLove &#064; Oct 19 2010, 02&#58;56 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2968303"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't believe that the prehistoric people ate grains or tubers because they are impossible to cook without a container, and one of the major advances in human civilization was the invention of the container.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Neither require a container. Tubers can be placed near the fire or even on a stick. Grains can be soaked and spread out on rocks. And in Big Bend, there are holes carved into the rocks in which food was placed and a fire built around it. I'm sure that other people, at other times, figured out how to do the same. In addition, a variety of containers from hides, woven plant materials, and clay have been around for quite a while. I've heard a nutrional anthropologist say that they believe grains were among the earliest cooked foods.

Edited by alternativista
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the big problem with grains? They're generally cheap and affordable. Which is a major benefit to people out there who don't earn enough money to purchase fresh veg, meat and fruit on a daily basis.

The purpose of food is to provide nutrients as well as fuel and to fill you up. There's little nutrient value in those cheap grain products produced by our food industry today.

Seeds are high in lectins, anti-nutrient proteins found in all foods. Gluten lectins damage the lining your intestines leading to health problems in many people. However, there are plenty of other foods that repair the lining, as well as substances in foods that bind up and preparation methods that destroy the lectins. Some are found in abundance in new world foods forbidden in the Paleo diet because they didn't evolve in the same hemisphere that humans did.

How sensitive you are to glutin varies, but I think everyone is at least a little sensitive. You may not have a problem provided you eat a lot of real, whole nutrient dense foods to compensate. Regardless, grains should not be a huge part of your diet and don't fool yourself by thinking that bread is a health food.

There's more info on lectins, proper cooking methods, and food combinations in this thread: http

://www.acne.org/messageboard/ZAG-enzym...g-t247794.html

However, while there's plenty of sources of info on lectins and traditional healthy food preparation methods and food combinations, I've only found Cordain's word that the enzyme involved in skin cells exfoliating properly without clogging pores is inhibited by lectins. He doesn't cite sources within the context. It would be nice if one of his disciples would look into it.

Edited by alternativista
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lmao, I'm so fucking sick of this article. This is like the twentieth time I've seen it on various forums.

1. This is completely twisted. "HERP DERP BREAD EXISTED 30,000 YEARS AGO" The particles found were mostly starchy roots and other plant matter. This is evidence of starch and plant processing and consumption, if anything (and nobody's really claiming that starch is the devil). They weren't sitting around baking up loaves of ciabatta for mammoth meat pizza and sandwiches every day. The media just took the grain / bread picture and ran with it because OMG WHOLE GRAIN AND FIBERZ WHERE'S THAT CHECK FROM KELLOGG'S?! Hardly any actual grain was found, they certainly did not make anything like bread as we know it today, and they certainly did not use something as horrible as wheat and the other cereal grains that we've so relentlessly crammed into every nook and cranny of the modern diet.

2. The paleo diet is about MUCH more than the last 30,000 years, which isn't long at all from an evolutionary standpoint. Shit, give 'em 50,000. Still don't care. The paleolithic era is an incredibly long period, one that lasted MILLIONS of years.

3. As far as we know their diets were still heavily centered around meat and, to a lesser extent, plants. Just because something kinda sorta existed if you look at it this way or that, doesn't mean it was consumed regularly. And even if it was, it was almost certainly a VERY small part of an otherwise optimal diet and lifestyle. Do you really think people were sitting around stones all day, grinding shit up to make some nasty, tasteless cracker things? This kind of thing was probably a fallback in times of scarcity.

4. Is this really surprising to anybody? Did you think we just up and waltzed into the neolithic era? One day we're hunter-gatherers and the next we're tilling the land for corn? Of course there's going to be some kind of crude "grain" processing and consumption among paleolithic times, the closer we get to the new era. That doesn't really mean anything at all, as much as Yahoo! News would like you to believe that it does.

5. The modern evidence against grains is still overwhelming. The paleo diet is as much about the present day's research as it is about the past. They're nutritionally void, take heaps of work before safe consumption is possible (still dangerous even in the heavily refined state they are commonly found today), and damaging to our bodies in many ways, especially on top of the already horrible diet and sedentary lifestyles of modern man.

Edited by King Rat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just reading these kinds of threads stresses me out... I dont have an opinion really.... I got clear when I was eating grains and they dont seem to bother my digestion so I'm goina eat em! It's as simple as that! I'll be smart about it though and soak my grains as often as I can and only eat sourdough breads (not very often) because sourdough helps breakdown the grains and makes them easier to digest. I'm going to eat low GI.... no crappy processed foods. I'm on the candida/paleo diet right now but I'm not going to eat like this for the rest of my life, it's just not for me. I never feel fully satisfied being on this diet.... I like the food, but it will be nice to have some oat bran in the mornings and some brown rice with my dinner.

Just listen to your bodies people, if you cant handle grains dont eat them! :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, which indicates that we have done some adapting.

No it doesn't. Who's to say some have gotten stronger, and not the others getting weaker? Considering disease is more widespread than it's ever been, i'm going with weaker genes leading to "diversity".

Acne, baldness, and obesity are pretty much the only new "features" in the common man.

Lmao, I'm so fucking sick of this article. This is like the twentieth time I've seen it on various forums.

1. This is completely twisted. "HERP DERP BREAD EXISTED 30,000 YEARS AGO" The particles found were mostly starchy roots and other plant matter. This is evidence of starch and plant processing and consumption, if anything (and nobody's really claiming that starch is the devil). They weren't sitting around baking up loaves of ciabatta for mammoth meat pizza and sandwiches every day. The media just took the grain / bread picture and ran with it because OMG WHOLE GRAIN AND FIBERZ WHERE'S THAT CHECK FROM KELLOGG'S?! Hardly any actual grain was found, they certainly did not make anything like bread as we know it today, and they certainly did not use something as horrible as wheat and the other cereal grains that we've so relentlessly crammed into every nook and cranny of the modern diet.

2. The paleo diet is about MUCH more than the last 30,000 years, which isn't long at all from an evolutionary standpoint. Shit, give 'em 50,000. Still don't care. The paleolithic era is an incredibly long period, one that lasted MILLIONS of years.

3. As far as we know their diets were still heavily centered around meat and, to a lesser extent, plants. Just because something kinda sorta existed if you look at it this way or that, doesn't mean it was consumed regularly. And even if it was, it was almost certainly a VERY small part of an otherwise optimal diet and lifestyle. Do you really think people were sitting around stones all day, grinding shit up to make some nasty, tasteless cracker things? This kind of thing was probably a fallback in times of scarcity.

4. Is this really surprising to anybody? Did you think we just up and waltzed into the neolithic era? One day we're hunter-gatherers and the next we're tilling the land for corn? Of course there's going to be some kind of crude "grain" processing and consumption among paleolithic times, the closer we get to the new era. That doesn't really mean anything at all, as much as Yahoo! News would like you to believe that it does.

5. The modern evidence against grains is still overwhelming. The paleo diet is as much about the present day's research as it is about the past. They're nutritionally void, take heaps of work before safe consumption is possible (still dangerous even in the heavily refined state they are commonly found today), and damaging to our bodies in many ways, especially on top of the already horrible diet and sedentary lifestyles of modern man.

Excellent post, basically what I wanted to say but didn't think the thread deserved it.

Edited by uncle buck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, which indicates that we have done some adapting.

No it doesn't. Who's to say some have gotten stronger, and not the others getting weaker? Considering disease is more widespread than it's ever been, i'm going with weaker genes leading to "diversity".

Acne, baldness, and obesity are pretty much the only new "features" in the common man.

Those diseases are due to the overabundance of refined industrialized crap replacing nutrient dense foods in our diets combined with unnatural, unhealthy lifestyles. That doesn't mean anyone needs to limit their diet to the foods Cordain, who is not an anthropologist, claims pre-agricultural humans ate. I know of many archeological sites that have evidence that dispute many of his arguments. I've already cited them in my prior posts.

Gluten intolerance is more common among peopls of northern European descent while being less common amongst the people who settled around the Mediterranean and have been consuming grains longer. Indicating that we have done some adapting. In fact, a few of the identified Blue Zones where people frequently live to be healthy active centenarians is in the Mediterranean and they do eat grains.

Edited by alternativista
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I don't have acne it's not bogus. Who gives a shit really. If the diet works for us why would any of us care about what you have to say.

Maybe it's just me but I've had a hard time finding energy on this diet. I do replace my carbs with fat so that's not an issue. I just think my body doesn't want to run on fat because I feel so hungry for carbs sometimes and energyless. I know it's supposed to take awhile to adjust (and trust me I'm sticking with it for an endless amount of reasons) but I'm just wondering how to maybe adjust more quickly and if I should be cutting even more carbs like limiting my veggie portions or maybe eliminating nuts which I'm trying to do already.

Also, this diet is becoming expensive lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I don't have acne it's not bogus. Who gives a shit really. If the diet works for us why would any of us care about what you have to say.

Maybe it's just me but I've had a hard time finding energy on this diet. I do replace my carbs with fat so that's not an issue. I just think my body doesn't want to run on fat because I feel so hungry for carbs sometimes and energyless. I know it's supposed to take awhile to adjust (and trust me I'm sticking with it for an endless amount of reasons) but I'm just wondering how to maybe adjust more quickly and if I should be cutting even more carbs like limiting my veggie portions or maybe eliminating nuts which I'm trying to do already.

Also, this diet is becoming expensive lol.

I'd rather have no energy every day of my life (although I have plenty atm) than have horrible stomach aches and acne all over my face. I have like 2 pimples right now and a ton of red marks. I never thought I even cared about being clear but when I slipped and ate some carbs, I realized the acne from it just wasn't worth it. Besides, you're talking to someone who gets so bad of a reaction from carbs that if I was given the choice between a candy bar and starving, I'd rather starve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Personalized Advice Quiz - All of Acne.org in just a few minutes


×