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:
Erik Haugan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:48:13 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
* William:
> Long, slow cooking greatly increases the proportion of free glutamates, a
> known neurotoxin.

One huge problem with this kind of biochemical argument is that you can
argue for _anyting_.  Every food contains both helathy and unhealthy
compounds.  And Cordain actually does argue for the opposite view using
biochemical arguments (nutrient content and bacteria).  Biochemistry may
be an OK hypothesis generator, but it is very risky to draw conclusions
from it.

Another hypothesis generator is the paleolithic prescription, but again,
it should not be taken as proof by itself.  Yet another hypothesis
generator is epidemiological studies, but again, these studies are
notoriously useless as evidence by themselves.

You may increase confidence by using arguments at several levels, but then
again, Cordain argues against staturated fats using biochemical,
evolutionary, epidemiological and even clinical arguments.  I still
believe his arguments are flawed.

I think we (I'm not talking about you in particlular, William, your
response just got me started thinking :-) should be a lot more skeptical
and careful when it comes to specific issues.  Sure, biochemical,
evolutionary and epidemiological arguments are all great tools, but not
when it comes to one specific (anti)nutrient, foodstuff or culinary
practice.

Your safest bet is to eat varied.  We know that there are healthy
poplulations where one or a few foodstuffs are highly dominant, but unless
you intend (and really manage) to mimic the eating habits of a such
population, it is safer to minimize the potentially bad impact of any one
practice by eating varied.

Eat raw food, eat fermented food and eat cooked food.  Eat muscle meat,
organ meats and eggs.  Eat meat from land and sea.  Eat fruits, roots,
nuts, stalks and leaves.  Eat both sugary and starchy vegetables.  And if
you don't think you're allergic or intolerant, you may even include some
non-paleo foods like cultured dairies, cereals, legumes and alcohol.  Of
course, don't regularly include eating habits only found in unhealthy
populations, save those for the special occasions (visiting friends,
eating out, etc).

I believe everyone on this list are aware of the tendency to get fanatic.
It is a natural consequence of knowledge and interest.  The more you
learn, the more questions arise.  Is it really paleo?  Isn't it a little
high carb/GI?  Isn't the lipid profile unhealthy?  Is it really safe?  Is
it right?  Am I a bad person if I eat this?

Apart from the food itself, I believe another huge threat to health is
stress, and worrying about food is one way to get stressed at least three
times a day.  A recent study indicates that too many choices make people
unhappy.  I believe this includes food choices.  There's no way we can be
sure what is the healthiest way to prepare food, so stop worrying about
it.

Erik

ATOM RSS1 RSS2