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:
Todd Moody <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Feb 2002 16:30:50 -0500
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (64 lines)
On Wed, 27 Feb 2002, Jim Swayze wrote:

> You CAN eat just about any food raw.  Anything you get at McDonald's or
> Burger King COULD be eaten raw.

Not according to Audette.  He claims that white potatoes are not
edible raw, i.e., that eating them raw will make you sick.  I
suspect he's right, if one eats them in any quantity.

> But "edible" raw means to me that it's a
> PREFERRED food source raw rather than a starvation item, that as a
> pre-neolithic person you'd choose to put it on your table along with your
> game meat, wild berries, and such.  I'm just not conviced that
> pre-neolithic man would choose sweet potatoes, but I'll take your word for
> it.

Well, this would tend to eliminate greens and herbs from the
menu.  For obvious reasons, paleo people would prefer calorically
dense foods, since the energy yield compared to the energy needed
to get them is greater.  From this standpoint, low-density carbs
such as lettuce would be largely a waste of time.  And herbs
would be out of the question.  Sweet potatoes, on the other hand,
are more calorically dense than berries, so I don't see why they
wouldn't be favored.

> On your other comments, I am going to go do a little rereading of Ray
> tonight.  My original understanding was that he advocates the foreign
> protein theory over what I've called a fat/calorie calculus.  But I'm not
> so sure that that is the case.  Why, then, would he argue for the
> consumption of lean meat and low-sugar fruit to lose weight?  I'll bet he's
> assuming both.

Ray's claim is that obesity is an immune system disorder.  He
disregards the caloric calculus entirely (see p. 22).

> One more question, though, Todd.  Weight's not the only benefit of paleo
> eating, and I'm lucky in that it is not something I've personally had to
> worry about on Ray's version of paleo.  I've lost about 20 pounds without
> having to trying too hard.  When you were strictly adhering to Ray's
> version of the diet, did you experience any of the other benefits
> (disappearance in allergies, sore joints, fatigue, gas, bloating, sinus
> infections, cold sores, depression)?

I didn't have many of these problems to begin with, although I
think I did get some reduction of hay fever symptoms at the end
of April each year.  On the other hand, I also experienced
palpitations and anxiety attacks after about three months on
Neanderthin, which appears to have been the result of chronically
elevated cortisol from continuous ketosis.  I would also say,
however, that my skin improved.  I cannot say with any
confidence, however, that I saw any clear benefits of Neanderthin
over similar (but not paleo) low-carb experiments.
Philosophically, I agree with the paleo concept, but I don't
regard it as an automatic fix for obesity or other problems.
Nutrition involves risks, and I think paleo nutrition minimizes
those risks.  For obesity, which is also risky, I have to find
additional measures.  I was lured from the Zone to Neanderthin by
the promise of unrestricted eating.  I know now that, in my case
at least, it was a false promise.  That is not sufficient reason
to abandon it altogether, though.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2