>> If the person sticks to a strict paleo diet, his/her  lupus will improve or,
>> most likely, go away completely.

Todd wrote:
>
>You see, I have a problem with claims like that, because they are
>based on a few anecdotes and no scientific research at all.  If
>Ray just wanted to say that some people with lupus report
>improvements when they try Neanderthin, I'd have nothing to
>quarrel with, and I would join him in urging such people to try
>it.

        Only a fool would require scientific evidence of his experience. Only a
bigger fool would try to provide such evidence. I like your post Todd and
in no way am I insinuating that you are a fool.

>
>But the truth is that nobody knows how likely it is that the
>lupus will go away entirely, and it is irresponsible to make
>claims like that without some solid evidence.  Ray's syllogism
>tried to convey the impression that it is proven that Neanderthin
>cures lupus.  We don't have any such proof, or anything close to
>it.  A person with lupus who attempts Neanderthin as a treatment
>is conducting an *experiment* on himself/herself.  There's
>nothing wrong with that, and I would do exactly the same thing
>myself; it's a relatively safe experiment.  But it's still an
>experiment, and anyone who cares about truth will call it that.

        Truth exist whether or not someone attempts to "scientifically" prove it
or not. If it improves health(which it does) then by default it will have a
positive effect on Lupus or any other condition.

>
>The same complaint applies to sweeping statements about "improved
>blood profiles," weight loss, and absence of side effects.  Not
>everyone agrees on what counts as an improvement in blood
>profiles, and Ray knows that.  Not everyone has great success
>with weight loss on Neanderthin, and Ray knows that too.  And
>some people *do* experience unpleasant side effects, including
>diarrhea, constipation, lethargy, dry eyes, and so on.  You can
>find all this in the archives of this list.

        I define health as being the optimal level of functional ability in the
parameters of mental, physical, and chemical well being and not just the
absence of disease. This a range. They can be measured if this your thing.

>
>Do I sound a little cranky about this?

        No, you sound like a scientist.

>  I am.  I've been doing Neanderthin for a little over 3 years now, and
I'm pretty strict
>about it.  I don't weigh myself often, because I don't like to
>obsess about the numbers on the scale, but I did weigh myself
>recently.  I discovered that of the 40 pounds I lost (33 of them
>on the Zone before starting Neanderthin), I have regained 20. My
>body fat has gone from 17% (the lowest it got) to 22%.  I am in
>the depressing situation of having to buy "fat clothes" for the
>summer, to replace the stuff that I naively gave away, thinking I
>would never need it again.  My LDL cholesterol remains elevated.

        Are you eating and sleeping seasonally? Start with how far away you have
gotten from the initial conditions as Ray suggest in his book. Are you
sleeping enough? Do you work nights or stay up late? Do you eat fruit year
round? Are you getting meat that is free ranging and without drug
treatment? Do you live in the city with very little sunlight or do you not
spend a couple of hours outside each day? Do you eat after the sun goes down?

>
>My trajectory is the classic "dieter's syndrome," in fact:
>Initial success with weight loss, followed by a period of stasis,
>followed by a slow return of fat, *without making any overt
>dietary changes*.

        Just as there is night and day, winter and summer, your body oscillates
between bodyfat levels over time though this should be a downward trend.

>  There are many theories as to why this occurs,
>but nobody really understands it yet.
>
>So, I apologize for my crankiness.

        We still love you man.

>
>Todd Moody
>[log in to unmask]


Dave (who is one cranky bastard)