PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Elizabeth Miller <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 26 Jul 2002 18:51:18 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (53 lines)
In a message dated 7/26/02 11:58:52 AM, [log in to unmask] writes:

>The comparison is not
>> applicable since it was stated that the Amazonians ate junk food and
>not
>> fresh, whole grains which would have been consumed by very early man.

One of the reasons that I finally dropped grains (for the most part) from my
diet is that after I took a cold, hard look at the nutritional data comparing
grains, whole and otherwise, I was not very impressed with their nutritional
value in comparison to their caloric load and GI values. Not much bang for my
buck. Actually refined wheat for instance has a few 'nutritional' advantages
over the whole stuff -- enrichment actually makes it a better source of a few
vitamins and the lack of phytates makes it less likely to interfere with
calcium/mineral absorption. I used to live under the illusion that the
distinction between processed grains and whole grains made a big difference
-- but frankly, the body registers it all as sugar -- in lickety split
fashion. Click onto my website and read my about my experience with whole,
complex grains and carbos. Ate myself into a first class case of insulin
resistance with shades of syndrome X. The analogy between the Amazonians and
early man is actually probably worth thinking about. The documentary that I
saw was unique in that it captured a real life before and after sequence that
we can only imagine for early man. His immersion into grain eating was
probably not as swift/complete as for the Amazonians, but the evidence
indicates that the health consequences were pretty darn severe for both early
man as indicated by the archeological record and more recent hunter-gatherers
who transitioned into grain based diets.  As Joseph Brasco says: "In most
parts of the world, whenever cereal-based diets were first adopted as a
staple food replacing the primarily animal-based diets of hunter-gatherers,
there was a characteristic reduction in stature, a reduction in life span, an
increase in infant mortality, an increased incidence of infectious disease,
an increase in diseases of nutritional deficiencies (i.e., iron deficiency,
pellagra), and an increase in the number of dental caries and enamel defects.
In a review of 51 references examining human populations from around the
earth and from differing chronologies, as they transitioned from
hunter-gathers to farmers, one investigator concluded that there was an
overall decline in both the quality and quantity of life. " There has also
been a documented loss of brain mass.  Whatever the reasons our ancestors
adopted grains as the mainstay of their diet (hunger, curiosity, starch
addiction, opioids, convenience, or some combination of factors) they
certainly signed a compact with the devil on behalf of their progeny. More
recently the powers that be at the USDA made another compact with the
powerful Agribusiness bunch and recommended that we eat even more of the
stuff, but now in a low fat form. With artificial lights blaring constantly
mimicking the long days of summer which informs our ancient hormonal systems
that it's time to load up on carbs to prepare for winter, this bit of advice
might just do us in. But that's another discussion.


Namaste, Liz
<A HREF="http://www.csun.edu/~ecm59556/Healthycarb/index.html">
http://www.csun.edu/~ecm59556/Healthycarb/index.html</A>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2