Hi Phil, what have you noticed by taking more magnesium and what kind are you taking? I'm only taking this "ocean gold"; it's not like one of those supplements with a lot of magnesium (we wouldn't be getting that in nature). William mentioned that C. Louis Kervran tested oil workers in Algeria in the 1960s, and found that although their diet was very low in magnesium, their body wastes had lots of it. This was part of the database that he used to show that transmutation of the elements by microbes happens in the human body.

How much vitamin D3 are you taking - Dr. Harris once again; http://www.paleonu.com/panu-weblog/2009/8/9/vitamin-d.html

I still don't know how people can drink big amounts of water just sitting - it doesn't feel right! Do you drink after/with eating raw meat? How did the cooked meat digest?

Nicola

Nicola, first of all, DON`T cross-post from other forums in future, under any circumstances, it`s not netiquette. Secondly, I have come across many such silly claims from cooked ZCers in the past and they all turned out to be bogus, once I checked others accounts etc. The only genuine long-term cooked ZCer is The Bear and we RPDers have all read numerous accounts which thoroughly debunk The Bear`s claims re health, re mentions of his  heart-disease and throat-cancer etc. etc.

Look you are sooo negative I feel off to get stuck with this ...again life is all about our attitude!

Nicola

For those living in the UK Barry Groves will be speaking at the "Westonaprice Festival For Traditional Nutrition" in London on 21st March 2010

http://www.westonaprice.org/Wise-Traditions-UK-2010.html

Nicola

Nicola - but you can eat horse meat and lamb fat
What's the problem?
From time to time I've got some fatty parts of horse - they are a huge delicacy

As raw meat man (new member? I just read some posts and didn't like them - too extreme; I like people to keep their feet on the ground) said; horse meat is very sweet - not even lambs fat could kill that!

Horse bone marrow is quite liquid - very special to eat. It is used for medicine and in cosmetics.

Nicola

MyHealthblog.org is not a paleo blog. 
I put other stuff in it.
That herbal colon cleanser is not for me.
It's for the people in the household who have trouble pooping because their diet is too low on fat and they keep eating constipating wheat products: maids, driver, mother in law, etc.

If we are eating a lot of fat and raw meat then that is all liquid - you may be eating a little fruit which should not have much to it...how the hell is one able/need to poo??? The whole picture does not make sense to me...that's how I could understand that Delfuego (the man who eats pemmican) only has a runny discharge every now and then!

Then again when I read about this colon tea...are we meant to be full of and drinking that tea just upsets the whole system?

Nicola

Sorry about my last question - I am just taking the krilloil and getting on with life; I tend to question things even if I try to keep things simple!

Check this out if you find time; it's an interesting discussion about vitamin D

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=408245

Nicola

As I mentioned in Tylers journal I have been looking at Dr. Cordains blog and the way he sees things. This got me a little upset again - a new picture...not just meat and fat but plants, fruit, nuts and less fat!

Tyler has often mentioned the "need" for fruit and fruit is healthy as long at it is bio and raw...Goodsamaritan needs fruit for hydration (how can he make up for 3-4 liters of water as Lex seems to need by eating the amount of fruit he mentioned I do not know), energy plus for bowel movements!

Well again...are we all just in the dark, missing something...this is what "The Bear" has to say:

Did I tell you that one of the subjects I specialized in was Anthropology?

You should know the so called "Paleolithic diet" is bogus, as described by its various proponents, like Ray Audette. (He has a severe metabolic problem, by the way and is very underfat and undermuscled). This "paleo" diet is actually early neolithic, not Paleolithic, as there is no evidence whatsoever for any vegetable matter being brought into Paleolithic camps as food. Only animal remains have been found associated with Paleolithic camp digs. True, women most likely ate whatever berries etc., they found, on the spot, but he men and the tribe in general ate meat exclusively.

Paleo means "old"; neo, "new". The old stone age, or Paleolithic comprises most of man's history and evolution. It is characterized by tools made of chipped glass of volcanic origin, the best, and sharpest knives, spear and arrow heads known to science (unfortunately they are brittle). The are the tools of hunters. This period is four million years long. The Neolithic, (new stone age) is the age of the beginnings of agriculture, and it begins with the extensive gathering of plants, the breeding of strains with reduced toxins and the tools of this era were ground rather than chipped, and were very inferior.

Basically, there is a lot of bad food advice in this book (Ray Audette’s “Neanderthin”), and I advise you not to follow his recommendations, especially stay away from high carb foods like nuts and fruit (fruit is the absolutely most fattening of all the carb sources. It is high in fructose, an isomer of glucose which is instantly absorbed from the stomach, and makes your blood sugar skyrocket). The Atkins diet is also very flawed. A "fad" diet of the time, it doesn't work very well. Fat loss stops after a short period on it due to the carbs in it.

Man has NEVER (until the last 4000 years in the west) eaten a high carb diet, and I might point out that "berries", which were always gathered in season, are in very short availability periods.

For hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of years, the Eskimo have eaten no carbs in their diet, simply because there were none available. They lived to advanced ages near 100 years if they didn't die from accident or had been exposed to too many bouts of starvation, or developed too heavy an infestation of trichinosis, (common in the meat of arctic bears, wolves and foxes). There is NOTHING wrong with this diet. No matter what anyone says, they are quite simply wrong. Only the Eskimos raised with a zero-carb diet have no damage in those arteries.

I don't care what some idiot (friend or not) who wants to promote a vegetarian diet says, he cannot alter the facts. North American Indians were mostly exclusively meat eaters with only two or three groups cultivating some maize , and one group in Ca who were 50% veggie eaters (a weak tribe which was overrun and extinguished in the eighteenth century). The destruction of the bison herds nearly starved the plains Indians to extinction, as they had no other food. Thoughts are needed
Nicola

My point was that fruits, even Neolithic fruits, are very low in fructose by comparison to corn-syrup, plus they are accompanied by other substances such as antioxidants/vitamins etc., so it's not an issue on a rawpalaeodiet, besides the fructose in fruits is UNrefined natural fructose. So unless one is eating 100% fruitarian, there's no danger whatsoever. It's no coincidence that diets high in raw veg/fruit and low in cooked animal foods are healthier than other SAD-diets out there.

Well I would believe that the amount of fruit is an issue - just because it's raw does not mean it's healthy; lots of blogs take about the fructose in fruit with out the thought of raw vs. cooked (or corn-syrup!)

Eating fruit your triglyceridescount shoots up...

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/01/14/fructose-part-one.aspx

I know it's "only" Mercola but he is just one of the many.

Nicola

In that blog post Matt stone was NOT talking about RAW Paleo Diet in particular.

Matt stone was talking about very low carb diets (not necessarily RAW) where some people have this ketosis and cortisol issues he's blabbing about.

Just to clear this up.  I think you misunderstood Matt Stone's blog.  He was not talking about Paleo being another eating disorder.  He was talking about long term very low carb diets.

On his blog Matt Stone has often quoted the Paleo Diet. What I find more interesting are the answers from people who reported going down hill on a paleo, low carb and many other diets.

I always look for the positive but I just happen to question things and come on - quite a few are suffering in one way or another.

Nicola

Almost all of the extra fat I add to my meals is raw suet and this is intentional. I find that the suet is more sustaining for my energy levels than softer fats so while I don't get a spike in energy immediately following ingestion I don't notice a decline at any point in my day. If I supplement with softer fats I do notice this dip in energy and focus.
FWIW I did find suet harder to digest at first but over time I adapted to handling it better and now I have no undigested fat in a stool even if I eat a third of a pound of the stuff with a meal.

I do one day suet and one day muscle fat / marrow; they both feel different in the system and I could not deal just feeling my belly with muscle fat - for those that are active I believe would notice this as well.

Nicola

Just another troll, i guess. All sorts of paranoia re "plotting" mentions etc.

You mean you didn't write this? Is the internet that full of people that don't have anything better to do in life?

I hope it wasn't you because that was just too much and I thought more of you!

Nicola

I concur with that person, when i got off cooked-ZC and ate some plant/grains, i remember pooping the next day like i had never pooped before, it was all solid. I estimate i pooped 2-3 weeks worth of waste in 2 days. I was definitely very constipated on cooked-ZC. Iirc, some people on the ZIOH forum have 1 bowel movement a week and Cult Leader Charles and sidekick Suzanne say it's normal but my experience tell me it's not.

First, why did you eat plant/grains? Do they make you feel any better - I would rather have meat and fat in my system than posting down plants/grains!

Second...I don't know what your story is but just reading it caused me to ask and trust a person doing zerocarb (cooked) who has children and animals and this sounds much more acceptable for me:

Well I do not know about once a week... maybe in some extreme cases but it is probably not all the time. I think it is more normal for one to go every 2-4 days.

Now what I think, (and this is only what I think)... is that when people are pooping more solids and volume, that might mean that whatever it is that they added, is making the intestines push more of the food through without being absorbed. When there is LESS volume and less frequency, it is because the intestines are not under stress and is getting every last little bit of nutrition out of the food as possible, therefore leaving less to come out the other end.

My hubby used to go once every 7-10 days when he was eating carbs. He was miserable and bloated and when he did poop it was massive amounts, almost always plugging the toilet and it was very uncomfortable. Now that he has eliminated the carbs, he goes every 2-4 days and it is soft (not runny), never plugs the toilet and he is done in a few seconds. He used to spend up to 30 minutes on the toilet...

He is no longer bloated or uncomfortable, so I would think that if someone had 2-3 weeks of food built up in their intestines they would most certainly know.

So I personally think that this is a load of shit what people are saying that there is food sitting in their intestines. And if they eat or add something that makes them poop MORE, then they are only doing damage to themselves because they are doing something that is making the food NOT be absorbed, therefore making it look like they are pooping out more stuff.

I can compare this to my dog and 2 cats. When they were eating crappy food full of grains and such, there poops were HUGE and stinky and there was so much volume I though I had a cow in my backyard and not a dog. Since I switched him to raw meat 8 years ago and my cats to zero carbs, his poops are small and compact and do not smell, and same with my cats. I could leave their litter box in the kitchen and never know if there was poop in it.. it is so tiny and totally odorless. So if I fed them something that made them poop more often and in bigger volume, I would be worried that they were not getting everything they needed from their food.

I hope this makes senses.. these are only my own observations. I personally do not think that huge volumes of poop mean anything good. I also do not think that solid poop mean anything good either.... they should be soft and pass easily and be no bigger than say your thumb around. This is according to the 'bristol chart' if you google it.

I also think that runny poop all the time means someone is eating too much fat and that is how their body gets rid of it. I get the runs if I overdo fat.

Different views on zerocarb...and still, all I have is hope and trust

Nicola

Yes, the sweetness of water on a high animal-fat diet due to some ketone spillage into the saliva, and presumably knowledge passed down the generations to avoid illness, are so far the explanations I can think of for the high consumption of water by Inuit. There may be other reasons as well. It's total speculation on my part, but I'm guessing that eating enough fat to produce a small amount of ketones so that water is slightly sweet may be an optimal level for someone on a VLC, ZC or carnivore diet, so as to encourage the right amount of water consumption. This could be a temporary effect, though, as over time it takes increasing amounts of fat to produce a very slightly sweet taste in my saliva and water, whereas early on less fat produced a very strong sweet taste.

Well I always have this sweet taste in my mouth and I notice it a lot - not just when I drink water! I thought it was the body making carbs (carbs...sweet) and I tend to feel guilty - that I don't need to eat if my whole system is so sweet. I hope we are doing the right thing...I mean I get to believe the whole time that this is not healthy - not a balanced diet; no fiber (my Dad).

Nicola