On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Jim Swayze wrote:

> Todd > The thing you're missing is that the simple versions of the diet
> don't work for everybody.
>
> It bears repeating that virtually any human being following the diet as
> prescribed Ray and Loren (they don't really differ that much after all)
> will get 90-95% of its benefits by not worrying about the esoterica.

There are some *very* significant differences between the two
approaches.  Ray, for example, argues that calories don't matter
and that obesity is caused by foreign proteins.  Cordain makes
neither claim.

> Back to the immediate subject.  You specifically mentioned weight as an
> issue.  I'd be interested in hearing whether you've tried Ray's
> recommendations for weight loss: Cut out fruit, or if you must have it, go
> for fruits with low sugar content: pears, plums, oranges, berries.

In a word, yes.  It's approaching five years that I have been on
some version or other of paleo.  My first foray was *strict*
Neanderthin: I made pemmican and consumed lots of it; soaked
bacon and ate lots of it; ate almost no fruit at all.  This
period included an all-meat experiment of about two months
duration.  But mostly I was eating meat, mushrooms, zucchini,
peppers, salad greens, and walnuts.  As I reported in the other
message, I did lose a bit of weight initially (about 7 lbs.), it
began to creep back on.  Calorically, I found that I was eating
more and more.

At various times during these years, I have kept careful food
journals, and I have learned that my weight fluctuates according
to my caloric intake, no matter what I am eating.  If I give
myself the liberty of eating unrestricted amounts of high-fat
paleo foods, such as pemmican, bacon, nuts, roasted chicken
wings, etc., I simply eat too much of them and gain weight.

> Common sense says never, ever, ever cheat if you're worried about weight
> loss.  If I'm not being fair at least I'm being honest in that I believe
> that it's generally the case that those most prone to obesity are those who
> feel that they just have to try to incorporate non-paleo items such as rice
> or butter or sweet potatoes into their dietary reportoire.

In my case, at least, it's simply false.  My *best* weight-loss
experiment was on the semi-paleo "Steak Lover's Diet", which I
tried a couple of years ago as an experiment.  This diet, by
Melvin Anchell, involves plenty of meat and restricted portions
from a short list (10) of non-meat foods, some of which were not
paleo (white potatoes and rice).  I lost weight speedily on this
plan, but found it difficult to adhere to, because of the
restricted assortment of non-meat foods.

Incidentally, there is simply no rationale for categorizing sweet
potatoes as non-paleo.  These tubers are *completely* edible raw,
in whatever quantity you like.  Plenty of people eat raw white
potatoes too, but I don't know if they can eat a lot of them.

I went through a period when I figured I must be "doing the diet
wrong", and obsessed on finding the hidden "forbidden fruits."
But there weren't any.  I was just eating too much, and I was
failing to figure out *why* I was eating too much.  I am still
trying to figure that out.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]