Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dr. D on June 28, 2013, 05:58:32 am
-
So we could be blind eye and say the frequently occurring Mg deficiency among RPD is due to modern issues concerning lack of knowledge of paleo times, or that paleo man would've lived closer to the water therefore always catching seafood (which is probably fairly true) but we still run into Mg deficiency frequently. In my thirst for knowledge, I've made a recent consideration I haven't seen as an explanation yet and I'd like it to be tested.
Magnesium deficiency is caused by shoes.
Rather, by a lack of touching the soil. We wear shoes and don't touch dirt. Magnesium is absorbed best through the skin. Why could we not at very least make an assumption that our ancestors had little to no issue re Mg deficiency because of living on the dirt always? It's tough to find decent numbers on the subject, especially because soil nutrient content is very localized. Magnesium rich clay holds 50% more water http://www.agtest.com/articles/highmg_soils.pdf (http://www.agtest.com/articles/highmg_soils.pdf) I have often dug my feet into the clay pockets by the river. It's quite enjoyable, I don't see why another human wouldn't want to do the same. At least there is a slight indication of its possibility, leaning towards probable.
The only thing I'd see as an issue for this idea is if someone could point out that soil during paleo times was in fact poor in Mg, but that is near impossible, because Mg is water soluble, so if there was a super heavy downpour, even that would affect how deep Mg is moved throughout the soil. Tough to prove, tough to disprove.
This may also lend to the idea for us that a supplemental Mg may not be that bad, for those of us that can't access great seafood frequently. :'(
Please discuss and let's solve.
-
I love going barefoot, but I doubt that much magnesium can be absorbed through the soles of the feet. The soles are very thick, especially on people who go barefoot a lot.
-
Even calloused hands and feet sweat, wouldn't that mean they uptake nutrients as well? And not just walking around. Gotta go into the water daily. The water soil may have a ton of magnesium, seeing as seafood is fairly big on it. I'm just throwing things out. It's tough to find info but I'll keep looking.
-
Even calloused hands and feet sweat, wouldn't that mean they uptake nutrients as well? And not just walking around. Gotta go into the water daily. The water soil may have a ton of magnesium, seeing as seafood is fairly big on it. I'm just throwing things out. It's tough to find info but I'll keep looking.
Yes, they sweat, but the skin is MUCH thicker there. It's much easier to absorb things through literally any other area of skin on the body.
-
Ah quite true, thin skin will absorb much more easily. Still, the amount of minerals necessary decreases greatly with fewer carbs, so even if some magnesium got through, it could contribute a reasonable percentage.
I wonder as well how much is in water and how much time paleo man spent fishing in water.
maybe I'm just trying to make living away from the ocean work. It does seem the largest civilizations were based on the shore of an ocean.
-
maybe I'm just trying to make living away from the ocean work. It does seem the largest civilizations were based on the shore of an ocean.
All the minerals run downhill into the oceans. That's why seafoods are more nutritious than land foods.
-
Definitely. I'm just guessing at others ways than diet to retrieve our nutrition. Ways that I think paleo man may have got it aside from food.
Raw almost demands a new lifestyle and I just think a lot.
-
Definitely. I'm just guessing at others ways than diet to retrieve our nutrition. Ways that I think paleo man may have got it aside from food.
Raw almost demands a new lifestyle and I just think a lot.
Some places have hot mineral springs (that people even today bathe in for health reasons), natural salt licks, mineral-rich edible clays, etc..
-
By Mg deficiency do you mean lower than the official recommended daily intake (RDI)? If so, don't you think that the RDI for Mg could be too high and that what is found in a typical raw paleo diet is the right amount?
Furthermore, isn't the Mg:Ca ratio more important than actual quantities. In lean meat the Mg:Ca ratio is 3:1 (according to page 112 of 'The Paleo Answer' by Cordain) The lean meats he tested for this were beef, chicken, pork and turkey.
-
By Mg deficiency do you mean lower than the official recommended daily intake (RDI)? If so, don't you think that the RDI for Mg could be too high and that what is found in a typical raw paleo diet is the right amount?
Furthermore, isn't the Mg:Ca ratio more important than actual quantities. In lean meat the Mg:Ca ratio is 3:1 (according to page 112 of 'The Paleo Answer' by Cordain) The lean meats he tested for this were beef, chicken, pork and turkey.
According to Dr. Weston Price, traditional tribes consume anywhere from 7-29 times the amount of magnesium that Americans did. We need a lot more magnesium than we get, except on a high-quality diet.
Also, BOTH the ratio AND the amount of magnesium are important. You have to have both working right.
-
>> Magnesium deficiency is caused by shoes.
I would have to agree with your lead there and investigate further.
I will add my experience with MAGNESIUM OIL
Where of course it is placed on the skin.
I had a bad experience with magnesium oil. Made me too sleepy every single day. And caused me some muscle weakness on my upper thighs.
Maybe I was not magnesium deficient and suffered an overdose?
I stopped that magnesium oil experiment and was back to normal after a few days.
This happened some 3 months ago.
-
According to Dr. Weston Price, traditional tribes consume anywhere from 7-29 times the amount of magnesium that Americans did. We need a lot more magnesium than we get, except on a high-quality diet.
Also, BOTH the ratio AND the amount of magnesium are important. You have to have both working right.
Did Price say where these traditional tribes were getting their Mg from?
By the way, is the following a correct interpretation of the second sentence you wrote? " We [typical Americans/Europeans/westerners/anyone on a standard western diet] need a lot more magnesium than we get, except on a high quality diet [like the Raw Paleo Diet]".
-
should i assume that if i wash my feet less often, i stand a better chance of absorbing mg through the dirty crust that will inevitably build up? is frequent bathing something to consider? mud / clay and dirt were often spread on the body as a means of sunblock, and treatment for skin ailments / conditions... no? what if that crust was left there?
???
was my weekly saturday night (pre-sunday morning church) bath as a young child, forcefully administered by my mother, really the more healthy course of action? no kid wants to bathe, or brush teeth... is this intuitive ancestral behavior, relating to your post?
-
Did Price say where these traditional tribes were getting their Mg from?
By the way, is the following a correct interpretation of the second sentence you wrote? " We [typical Americans/Europeans/westerners/anyone on a standard western diet] need a lot more magnesium than we get, except on a high quality diet [like the Raw Paleo Diet]".
Price just did analyses of food samples that he took from each tribe. Most of the magnesium was from animal foods, I think...and certainly the most ABSORBABLE was.
And yes, you did understand me correctly. Sorry, I don't always take the time to write as clearly as I could. I try. :)
-
I one time tried to find animal foods, not counting from the ocean, high in mg. Couldn't. Although I think it might be found in the blood in good quantities, since mg. stores in animals bodies come from blood. I suspect blood was helpful in balancing the acid effects of nitrogen as a resultant by- product of large protein meals. Or, that blood in good amounts could be less acidic than flesh due to balanced mineral content.
-
Boo; it is quite possible that the more frequent the bathing the less we may absorb through the skin. The principal of my high school took a 4 month trip down the Columbia river. We asked how he bathed. I quote verbatim "funny thing, when you don't wash for a week you stink. If you don't wash for another week, you no longer stink. The body has a natural way of cleansing itself." Those clay packs (seeing as clay has more mg) may be beneficial for more than your skin.
ck; just more info as to why animal foods work so well. Thanks.
van; that's why I bring it up. I'm curious what ways one can get mg from other than seafood while STILL being within paleo lifestyle. That may be an oxymoron because it seems paleo man would've lived close enough to the ocean to fish frequently? Or at least a river I assume. I think there's more in our society that we've changed than processing foods and electronics and toxins that contribute to poor health. I think we've taken many lifestyle aspects away, as shown through fermented foods being a delicacy.
-
Remember we evolved on the African Savannah (inland), not on the coast. I don't think we necessarily require seafood and it's high mineral content to be healthy. Chances are, the amount of Mg found in the diet of our ancestral inland hunter-gatherers, before there even were any coastal hunter-gatherers, is a sufficient amount for good if not optimal health.
Of course as HG (can't be arsed to keep writing hunter-gatherers) populations grew they would have dispersed and reached the coastline eventually and those populations likely supplemented their diet with seafood and coincidentally increased their Mg and other mineral eg. Ca intake. But in my opinion it was by no means a necessity for good health or for further success of the human species. These coastal HGs likely still hunted large game, because seafood alone would not provide enough calories.
I find it interesting that many people today have seafood allergies, myself included, although mainly to shellfish, but also some sea fish (although I do not get life-threatening anaphylaxis). I avoid all seafood now except for salmon. This leads me to think that perhaps all HGs had allergies to seafood at one time and it took time before SOME (which later became 'most', but not 'all') coastal HGs adapted to it to be able to eat it without negative symptoms.
These are just thoughts of mine, which may or may not change.
-
Van, yes, we may need to drink blood more often. Muscle plasma in beef was the recommended daily food for TB cures. Worked for my boy.
Haai, my observation with my kids is that sea food allergy has more to do with polluted waters. No allergies when the aquatic creature comes from pristine sources.
-
I've started eating pumpkin seeds.
-
I've started eating pumpkin seeds.
this is a good source. raw almonds and cashews have some decent doses of mg, as does a crazy amount of raw spinach.
let's make a few assumptions... if "paleo lifestyle" is defined in part by primal type diet, and since some of the veggie, seed, and nut sources we currently consume for supplementation were not food items immediately available to certain ancestral groups, than to pursue "paleo" diet means your primary source for mg would either need to come from animal sources (blood or organs), or enviroment. mg does seem to be readily absorbed through the skin. some sources say animal product would have been more limited in early times (due to limited hunting resources), while foraging / gathering for items would have made up the majority of primitive diet...
your original question regarding absorption through enviroment is indeed intriguing... if vit d can be supplemented through sun exposure (instead of dairy items), then it only makes sense that other vitamins and minerals could be derived from simply the act of more "natural" living...
how to pursue validation?
-
Local soil samples provide an analysis of Nutritional content. Though that is quite localized. Trying to find info on soil samples leads to a lot of agriculture info. Looking for mg specifically leads to even less.
I've been thinking about vans blood thing. How much mg can be found in beef or lamb blood, my two staple land animals? Info is tough to find. Granted even that would be weak because HG probably ate bison or goats more, something other than farm style animals. So much has changed and I agree with the basic premise that our bodies haven't quite adapted. Hell, in my family, not even 60 years ago they were still in Sweden eating surstromming and leutifisk. My generational line MAY be more adapted to seafood than any other food, which may explain the STRONG desire I've had since early childhood to eat seafood. Downing raw oysters at 4 years old.
-
If you do go for pumpkin seeds, ditch all the ones found in stores and on line, and search out the hungarian types that are the only ones that will sprout. They are dark green and I think I got my last batch from Sunfood.. I soak them for one day, changing the water a couple of times,,, then put in colander and let sit on counter for a day, and then if it's sunny in my kitchen I leave them there to dry, otherwise I put the colander in the fridge to let them dry there. They are the only ones worth eating. All other varieties in stores mostly come from China, are light green, and are dead and mostly rancid. Most almonds are pasturized as mentioned here too. But you can search for ones that aren't. They are much better soaked, imo.
-
i've read that in animal product, blood, and (especially) brain, have higher amounts of mg within. which begs the question: in what concentration is mg found in each? if we perceive the hunter / gatherer groups to be just that, then animal product from the "hunt" would need to be shared amongst the group... how far could an animal brain (or two, or three) go between multiple humans in a clan? in the event of a kill, some blood would most likely be lost to the soil... point being, if hunting groups were to dispatch of an animal, the bulk of what would need to be transported back to the clan, is muscle meat... it seems inconceivable that enough animal product could be gathered on a mission, to support a group's needs for mg soley on remaining blood, and small portions of brains... also consider hunting trips were surely not always successful, as evidenced by the animal kingdom, where even top predators go for periods of time without a kill for nourishment.
something else to consider: where does the mg supply in animal product come from? to assume carnivores would only get mg from other animal product, they would require an amount of prey to satisfy a mg requirement large enough for humans to then benefit with occasional kills. foraging prey would also need to consume large amounts of plant matter, for similar reasons.
reliable, year round mg sources with plants seems unlikely... to some extent, the best scenario for adequate mg consumption would be, to be, omnivorous... at least then chances would be better for adequate mg ingestion.
absorption seems very logical. maybe there is a flip side to this equation... instead of wondering how we, as a species, can get mg... what are ways humans can better retain mg? would this lessen the need for constant replenishment? would this also account for areas where ocean foods (plant or animal) are not part of the dietary equation, or where mineral content in soil is low? as we developed, did we lose the knowledge of how, or the ability to, keep minerals and vitamins within ourselves?
am i overthinking this?
-
not overthinking,, that's just what the people in ZIOH suggest, that carbs upset the balance of minerals, etc... especially how they are always citing the need for extra vit c when eating carbs. Who knows. As far as blood is concerned, HG could easily have collected the gallon or so in stomach like bags to take back. The brains and bones were taken back and cracked for eating later,, evidence of this is found often in caves.
-
I wonder if taking a hot bath with epsom salts (MgSO4) can provide a nutritional source of Mg?
-
I have a feeling it does.
Same as soaking your feet in a pail of water with epsom salts.
-
Remember we evolved on the African Savannah (inland), not on the coast. I don't think we necessarily require seafood and it's high mineral content to be healthy. Chances are, the amount of Mg found in the diet of our ancestral inland hunter-gatherers, before there even were any coastal hunter-gatherers, is a sufficient amount for good if not optimal health.
Of course as HG (can't be arsed to keep writing hunter-gatherers) populations grew they would have dispersed and reached the coastline eventually and those populations likely supplemented their diet with seafood and coincidentally increased their Mg and other mineral eg. Ca intake. But in my opinion it was by no means a necessity for good health or for further success of the human species. These coastal HGs likely still hunted large game, because seafood alone would not provide enough calories.
I find it interesting that many people today have seafood allergies, myself included, although mainly to shellfish, but also some sea fish (although I do not get life-threatening anaphylaxis). I avoid all seafood now except for salmon. This leads me to think that perhaps all HGs had allergies to seafood at one time and it took time before SOME (which later became 'most', but not 'all') coastal HGs adapted to it to be able to eat it without negative symptoms.
These are just thoughts of mine, which may or may not change.
Allergies, to be honest, are often controllable with hookworms and vitamin D, and a higher-fat diet. Seafoods are far richer in minerals than land foods, on average. VERY few soils come compare to the ocean in terms of mineral richness. It's a big difference.
-
Seafoods are far richer in minerals than land foods, on average. VERY few soils come compare to the ocean in terms of mineral richness. It's a big difference.
I realise that seafoods are far richer in minerals. The point I was trying to make, though, is that maybe we don't require such a high mineral intake. The earliest evidence for coastal habitat use and consumption of seafood by humans was 164 000 yrs ago, according to: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7164/full/nature06204.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7164/full/nature06204.html)
That's not a hell of a long time ago considering the Paleolithic Era began 2.6 million yrs ago. 164 000 yrs expressed as a percentage of 2.6 million is only 6.3%.
I guess the ideal way so that we can know for sure what the effects are of diets with different mineral contents (eg. raw paleo diet with and without seafood) is through randomized controlled trials.
-
I would imagine the only way to make a raw animal based diet work without the addition of seafood would have to be super fat based, which may not be practical. Lex seemed to do well on his organ mix pet food. But idk if everyone can do that. Magnesium from a blood source seems reasonable possibly. Or from dirt/water/clay absorbed through the skin. We'd ideally like to avoid supplementation for the premise that the diet is enough. I don't see running into mineral deficiency with the addition of specific plant foods an issue, but plant foods not being available year round could be an issue, unless of course the fermentation could compensate.
The other issue with those dates, is they really aren't SURE that those times are correct. What if paleolithic ear began 1 million years ago and people began coastal habitat 800,000 years ago? They really don't have proof other than finding the tools they found, im sure in ceratin "layers" of rock, which they themselves put into place, without really any evidence of those times. What I'm saying is for dating, they find 3 candles, one of which is burning. One is 7 inches, the other is 7 and the burning one is 2 inches. They assume the burning candle was 7 inches when it started.
Also from the article:
Shellfish may have been crucial to the survival of these early humans as they expanded their home ranges to include coastlines and followed the shifting position of the coast when sea level fluctuated over the length of MIS6.
I think seeing the evidence of movement of humans and their use of tools for shellfish is stronger evidence than the timeframe in which they are guessing that it occurred in.
-
I read some of "The Magnesium Miracle" on amazon. One of the things the author recommends is starting by eating magnesium rich foods, and cutting out calcium supplements temporarily while building the mag levels. She says that since magnesium is poorly absorbed from supplements, food is the best way to go. She also suggests cutting out calcium since most people eat so much calcium and so little magnesium.
After reading that I added in magnesium rich foods, and ordered a magnesium glycinate supplement. Mag glycinate is supposed to be absorbed very well since it's bound to an amino acid.
Another thing I think is pretty important is the cal:mag ratio. I think if you consume less calcium you need less magnesium.
-
I realise that seafoods are far richer in minerals. The point I was trying to make, though, is that maybe we don't require such a high mineral intake. The earliest evidence for coastal habitat use and consumption of seafood by humans was 164 000 yrs ago, according to: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7164/full/nature06204.html (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v449/n7164/full/nature06204.html)
That's not a hell of a long time ago considering the Paleolithic Era began 2.6 million yrs ago. 164 000 yrs expressed as a percentage of 2.6 million is only 6.3%.
I guess the ideal way so that we can know for sure what the effects are of diets with different mineral contents (eg. raw paleo diet with and without seafood) is through randomized controlled trials.
Well, you can take my word for it, or I can throw thousands of hours worth of reading your way. It's your choice.
-
Well, you can take my word for it, or I can throw thousands of hours worth of reading your way. It's your choice.
Take your word for what? That humans require a diet with a relatively high mineral content like that obtainable by frequent seafood consumption for good health and that the relatively low mineral content of a diet consisting primarily of large herbivores and no seafood consumption would not provide good health?
If so, then please do throw some reading material at me.
-
Take your word for what? That humans require a diet with a relatively high mineral content like that obtainable by frequent seafood consumption for good health and that the relatively low mineral content of a diet consisting primarily of large herbivores and no seafood consumption would not provide good health?
If so, then please do throw some reading material at me.
Have you read Dr. Price's book, "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration?" Just read chapters 15-20, the rest is mostly repetition.
http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/price/pricetoc.html (http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/price/pricetoc.html)
There's the link. He basically found that nearly every group he studied, even groups in inland areas, valued seafoods more than any other foods, for general health and especially healthy reproduction and healthy growth in children. Especially valued were shellfish and fish eggs. Ocean-caught shellfish are EXTREMELY high in minerals, especially trace minerals.
Also, The Brix Book by Rex Harrell is a good place to start understanding how huge the difference is between plants from higher-mineral soils versus plants from low-mineral soils.
http://crossroads.ws/brixbook/BBook.htm (http://crossroads.ws/brixbook/BBook.htm)
Those two resources ought to keep you busy for a few weeks.
Rex also runs a Yahoo group about Brix and plants, you can do a search on Yahoo groups for it. It's an OK group, but it's chock-full of vegans. Be ready for that.
The reality is, yes, many people do have deadly shellfish or finfish allergies. I had a serious anaphylactic shock reaction the last time I ate shrimp, 4 years ago. However, that's the only seafood I'm allergic to, and seafood is just too rich in minerals and high-quality fats to stop eating it just because of an allergy to one single protein in one species of shrimp.
-
Have you read Dr. Price's book, "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration?" Just read chapters 15-20, the rest is mostly repetition.
http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/price/pricetoc.html (http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/price/pricetoc.html)
There's the link. He basically found that nearly every group he studied, even groups in inland areas, valued seafoods more than any other foods, for general health and especially healthy reproduction and healthy growth in children. Especially valued were shellfish and fish eggs. Ocean-caught shellfish are EXTREMELY high in minerals, especially trace minerals.
Also, The Brix Book by Rex Harrell is a good place to start understanding how huge the difference is between plants from higher-mineral soils versus plants from low-mineral soils.
http://crossroads.ws/brixbook/BBook.htm (http://crossroads.ws/brixbook/BBook.htm)
Those two resources ought to keep you busy for a few weeks.
Rex also runs a Yahoo group about Brix and plants, you can do a search on Yahoo groups for it. It's an OK group, but it's chock-full of vegans. Be ready for that.
The reality is, yes, many people do have deadly shellfish or finfish allergies. I had a serious anaphylactic shock reaction the last time I ate shrimp, 4 years ago. However, that's the only seafood I'm allergic to, and seafood is just too rich in minerals and high-quality fats to stop eating it just because of an allergy to one single protein in one species of shrimp.
Thanks for the links.
I read Prices book a few years ago. I just spent a couple of hours quickly going through chapters 15 to 20 to refresh my memory.
Indeed some, but not all, of the inland groups he studied valued seafood highly. Although, I believe freshwater fish made up part of their diet, however I'm not certain how freshwater and saltwater fish compare regarding mineral content. Though I'm sure anadromous fish, eg. salmon, which essentially take nutrients, including minerals, from the sea to inland areas, would have made up a large, but seasonal, part of the diet of inland HGs in temperate regions.
I just bought a refractometer. I'm interested to find out the brix levels of the very little plant food that I eat (mainly berries).
-
Where can I find raw ones? I tried sprouting the ones from whole foods, days later nothing.
Are these okay? http://www.nuts.com/snacks/pumpkinseeds/?gclid=CPK5nJG1mLgCFUQ6QgodSA4AGg (http://www.nuts.com/snacks/pumpkinseeds/?gclid=CPK5nJG1mLgCFUQ6QgodSA4AGg)
If you do go for pumpkin seeds, ditch all the ones found in stores and on line, and search out the hungarian types that are the only ones that will sprout. They are dark green and I think I got my last batch from Sunfood.. I soak them for one day, changing the water a couple of times,,, then put in colander and let sit on counter for a day, and then if it's sunny in my kitchen I leave them there to dry, otherwise I put the colander in the fridge to let them dry there. They are the only ones worth eating. All other varieties in stores mostly come from China, are light green, and are dead and mostly rancid. Most almonds are pasturized as mentioned here too. But you can search for ones that aren't. They are much better soaked, imo.
-
I read Prices book a few years ago.
Indeed some, but not all, of the inland groups he studied valued seafood highly.
The only one I'm aware of that DIDN'T prize seafoods were the Swiss, and they did not have as good tooth health as many/most of the other groups. For that matter, the African groups that he studied would all eat dried ocean shrimp that was brought several hundred miles inland. I don't know if he mentions that, but it was, and still is, a prized food of inland African groups.
Here's a interesting quote about some Pacific Islanders who took their seafoods VERY seriously:
"The Island of New Caledonia is one of the largest of the Pacific. It is situated in the vicinity of 23 degrees south latitude and 165 degrees east longitude. The New Caledonians are pure Melanesian stock. They are broad shouldererd, very muscular and in the past have been very warlike. These Islands are under French control. The foreign population is chiefly French, and limited mainly to the vicinity of the one port of Noumea. The subjugation of these people has been very difficult and as recently as 1917 a band from the interior in protest against efforts to establish a white colony and sugar plantation on a desirable section of coastal land swept down on the French colony in the night and massacred almost the entire population. Their contact with the required foods from the sea had been cut off. They believe they require sea foods to maintain life and physical efficiency. "--chapter 15.
Here's another passage from chapter 15, that mentions just how crucial seafoods are to these tribes:
" Since Viti Levu, one of the islands of this group, is one of the larger islands of the Pacific Ocean, I had hoped to find on it a district far enough from the sea to make it necessary for the natives to have lived entirely on land foods. Accordingly, with the assistance of the government officials and by using a recently opened government road I was able to get well into the interior of the island by motor vehicle, and from this point to proceed farther inland on foot with two guides.
I was not able, however, to get beyond the piles of sea shells which had been carried into the interior. My guide told me that it had always been essential, as it is today, for the people of the interior to obtain some food from the sea, and that even during the times of most bitter warfare between the inland or hill tribes and the coast tribes, those of the interior would bring down during the night choice plant foods from the mountain areas and place them in caches and return the following night and obtain the sea foods that had been placed in those depositories by the shore tribes. The individuals who carried these foods were never molested, not even during active warfare.[/u] He told me further that they require food from the sea at least every three months, even to this day. ...
Fresh water fish of various kinds are used where available from the mountain streams. Land animal foods, however, are not abundant in the mountainous interior, and no places were found where the native plant foods were not supplemented by sea foods."
Although, I believe freshwater fish made up part of their diet, however I'm not certain how freshwater and saltwater fish compare regarding mineral content.
Well, it depends entirely on the soil quality of the surrounding land. Good land=good streams.
I just bought a refractometer. I'm interested to find out the brix levels of the very little plant food that I eat (mainly berries).
Keep me posted. I'm curious to hear about your findings.
-
Where can I find raw ones? I tried sprouting the ones from whole foods, days later nothing.
Are these okay? http://www.nuts.com/snacks/pumpkinseeds/?gclid=CPK5nJG1mLgCFUQ6QgodSA4AGg (http://www.nuts.com/snacks/pumpkinseeds/?gclid=CPK5nJG1mLgCFUQ6QgodSA4AGg)
NO,, those are the chinese ones. Try looking up Sunfood, they are dark green, totally different. I'll let you know what I find as I am going to order more.
-
damn I'll see if I can get the name of the vendor, but in the fall there are some ridiculously fresh organic pumpkin seeds that grow in either Oregon or Washington, so pretty close to me here in Idaho.
even after soaking and drying and would be the one of the last foods on my list. I think they should be used extremely sparingly, once a week at most. wild greens are a really great source of mag right now, mallow specifically, id eat a handful of that over pumpkin seeds any day. or okra, if you can find okra at your farmers market, hopefully they have healthy soil with lots of mag.
the only time I eat "seeds" now is if I grow sunflower greens
-
It is Sunfood, or Sunfood superfoods... These are totally different from others, especially if soaked and sprouted for a day or so. Not only do they have lots of mg. but are full of zinc, and omega threes. I agree of not eating them if they were chinese, they should never be eaten. I've eaten these Austrian ones for years.
-
We're a little off topic, lemme bring it around.
I am currently trying to move towards completely carnivorous and am running into magnesium deficiency. I eat about 6-7 oz. of salmon a day and the only thing that gets me near feeling right is soaking at least my feet in epsom salt. Today I'll take a full bath in it.
This isn't easy. For breakfast I ate 1/2 pound of suet, same as last night. Probably gonna have another 1/4 pound since I had my salmon today. I have about 2 large tablespoons of celtic sea salt per day and near a gallon of water. As long as I drink the salt I dont pee it all out instantly. But I'm STILL struggling with the magnesium. I feel weak. Not fatigued or tired. I have a minimal headache and sore joints, clearly Mg deficiency. Is suet too much sat. fat? Does that even matter in ketosis? I really dont want to dose with Mg supplements but I'm nearing the point of desperation. When I feel the Mg coming back into me, my heart starts to race a little bit. Should I just ditch the ZC thing and have some leafy greens? It's been 4 days since VLC, only having a small mango. Maybe that set me back in glycogen stores? I also eat plenty of liver (beef or lamb). I don't have access to other organs so maybe I should hold off on carnivorous until I do?
I don't have a big issue with staying in mostly ketosis but having ~30-50g carbs per day, but I have been doing that for a month and still didn't feel like "dear god so this is what pure raw energy feels like" Maybe its because some of the carbs were cooked carbs? Higher insulin spike, longer time to deplete it from my liver? This is the longest I've survived attempting ZC/VLC so I'd say that's pretty cool.
-
It is Sunfood, or Sunfood superfoods... These are totally different from others, especially if soaked and sprouted for a day or so. Not only do they have lots of mg. but are full of zinc, and omega threes. I agree of not eating them if they were chinese, they should never be eaten. I've eaten these Austrian ones for years.
Is this it?
http://www.sunfood.com/nuts-seeds/pumpkin-seeds.html (http://www.sunfood.com/nuts-seeds/pumpkin-seeds.html)
-
I am currently trying to move towards completely carnivorous and am running into magnesium deficiency. I eat about 6-7 oz. of salmon a day and the only thing that gets me near feeling right is soaking at least my feet in epsom salt. Today I'll take a full bath in it.
The thing about the baths is you don't absorb much of it, the majority is rapidly excreted in the urine. I honestly have my doubts about the oil too.
Is suet too much sat. fat?
I personally don't like suet. However it sounds like you're eating a lot of fish, which would make up for it.
I really dont want to dose with Mg supplements but I'm nearing the point of desperation.
Supplements can be a good thing. If you go for supplements go for the chelated (amino acid bound to magnesium form).
Should I just ditch the ZC thing and have some leafy greens?
That's up to you. ZC isn't for everyone. Some do very well others don't
In addition to magnesium low potassium could be a problem too.
-
Salmon is a good source of potassium, in 3 oz there is as much as a banana. So Idk if I'm low on that. But someone posted on another thread that magnesium is required for potassium to uptake and potassium is required for sodium. Low magnesium causes a chain effect. Though he presented no source for this info.
-
Is this it?
http://www.sunfood.com/nuts-seeds/pumpkin-seeds.html (http://www.sunfood.com/nuts-seeds/pumpkin-seeds.html)
that's them,, remember to soak for a day, rinsing at least once, then drain and rinse, and put into big colander with many holes in it. Let sit on counter for a day or two, or more and they'll dry, and or, place in fridge to continue drying. I'm not sure, was it you that wrote that you are taking two tablespoons salt? That's a lot. Try Blue Ocean Minerals for mg. supplement. Simply condensed sea water with the sodium removed.
-
We're a little off topic, lemme bring it around.
I am currently trying to move towards completely carnivorous and am running into magnesium deficiency. I eat about 6-7 oz. of salmon a day and the only thing that gets me near feeling right is soaking at least my feet in epsom salt. Today I'll take a full bath in it.
This isn't easy. For breakfast I ate 1/2 pound of suet, same as last night. Probably gonna have another 1/4 pound since I had my salmon today. I have about 2 large tablespoons of celtic sea salt per day and near a gallon of water. As long as I drink the salt I dont pee it all out instantly. But I'm STILL struggling with the magnesium. I feel weak. Not fatigued or tired. I have a minimal headache and sore joints, clearly Mg deficiency. Is suet too much sat. fat? Does that even matter in ketosis? I really dont want to dose with Mg supplements but I'm nearing the point of desperation. When I feel the Mg coming back into me, my heart starts to race a little bit. Should I just ditch the ZC thing and have some leafy greens? It's been 4 days since VLC, only having a small mango. Maybe that set me back in glycogen stores? I also eat plenty of liver (beef or lamb). I don't have access to other organs so maybe I should hold off on carnivorous until I do?
I don't have a big issue with staying in mostly ketosis but having ~30-50g carbs per day, but I have been doing that for a month and still didn't feel like "dear god so this is what pure raw energy feels like" Maybe its because some of the carbs were cooked carbs? Higher insulin spike, longer time to deplete it from my liver? This is the longest I've survived attempting ZC/VLC so I'd say that's pretty cool.
Suet is around 50% saturated fat.
In my opinion, summer is a very wrong/bad time to be attempting zero carb. It is completely discordant with our evolution. Winter is the natural time of year to be going zero carb/VLC.
-
I personally don't like suet. However it sounds like you're eating a lot of fish, which would make up for it.
What is fish supposed to make up for?
The amount of fat in fish (muscle meat), such as salmon which is considered a fatty fish by most, is very small. We're talking about 5 or 6% by weight. The 7 oz of salmon that Dr D is eating only provides around 12g of fat. Some of which is also saturated fat. To keep on topic, it also provides about 60mg Mg.
-
Suet is around 50% saturated fat.
In my opinion, summer is a very wrong/bad time to be attempting zero carb. It is completely discordant with our evolution. Winter is the natural time of year to be going zero carb/VLC.
I actually agree with you. I notice since cutting carbs my tolerance to cold has dramatically risen as well as an intolerance to heat. I think carbs help that. The problem is unsustained energy. Even lack of energy and weakness. On 2-3 pieces of fruit a day. Any more and I get serious gas and stomach pain. I may however be able to add in spinach and stay in ketosis? That would eliminate mg deficiency, ideally. Idk if I'll be able to complete the adaption but I'm hoping I wake up soon with boundless energy as they say. Today I got electrolytes back into my body and will continue from here on out. I took 400 mg of mag. 400 mg of potassium, and a lot of Celtic sea salt. Feeling better as im ready to sleep. The mag had zinc in it also.
I think daboss was referring to the mag and the omega 3 in salmon being really helpful.
-
You've probably already seen my post on the other thread that I wrote a couple of mins ago about spinach and oxalic acid.
I agree that the omega 3 in salmon is certainly helpful. I usually eat nothing but salmon as my source of flesh for about 1 week every month, when my beef runs out and I have to wait till the next monthly slaughter. I usually still have beef suet to last me the whole month though, otherwise I resort to home made coconut cream/milk and/or avocados for fat.
-
I think daboss was referring to the mag and the omega 3 in salmon being really helpful.
I was referring to the omega 3 content since suet can be very high in saturated fat.
-
Magnesium and potassium work together in the body, and an imbalance in potassium can alter the bodies requirements for magnesium.
I highly suggest for anyone with concerns about mineral imbalances to get a hair analysis. They are fairly inexpensive and offer a view into the bodies tissue composition not available through blood testing. Though not always a direct representation of the tissue composition, it can offer a glimpse of possible imbalances, toxicities , or deficiencies.
My last one was taken a year ago. Magnesium levels were right on par after 3 years of raw paleo, but my potassium was through the roof high. This potassium/ magnesium inversion is something I have had since before raw paleo, and has not resolved.
Also my manganese and aluminum was through the roof, which sucks, but I have yet to know what to do about it. There is a lot of conflicting information regarding the subject.
On an other note, I tested deficient in zinc and selenium, which may be a more common occurrence than magnesium deficiency. I have had these chronic deficiencies going back to childhood, and millions of others have the same issues, but it is almost never properly diagnosis or addressed by the medical establishment.
Its common for pasture animals grazing on deficient soils to become depleted of nutrients. I have witnessed sheep with white muscle disease, which is an obvious sign of selenium deficiency. Even seemingly healthy animals that are grass fed could have mild deficiencies which would be passed on to whoever uses them as a primary food source.
-
Keep me posted. I'm curious to hear about your findings.
The refractometer arrived today.
Readings so far:
Sweet cherry: 15.8
Gooseberry (From the genus Ribes): 10.5
Redcurrant: 11.0
Will get some blueberries, raspberries and strawberries in near future.
-
Our cherries should be no less than 18 at a time. I cant remember all of our pears but we grow a very very sweet novelty pear called a seckel pear. This can sometimes push 21 IIRC. Some of the sweeter apples we grow, like royal gala, can get above 20.
11 from a redcurrant seems so low to me.
-
Our cherries should be no less than 18 at a time. I cant remember all of our pears but we grow a very very sweet novelty pear called a seckel pear. This can sometimes push 21 IIRC. Some of the sweeter apples we grow, like royal gala, can get above 20.
11 from a redcurrant seems so low to me.
I've never had an apple above 19, and that's only a few times. Do you have a fruit orchard? I think it's cool that you are so into Brix readings.
-
We do. It's not organic but I've really been considering starting a thread to allow any questions about pesticides Etc. My dad has been growing fruit for over 30 years. I've been working with him since I was 12, during summers.
we don't do brix on much other than rainer cherries and golden apples. But I know ours are usually quite high sugar.
Funny thing is. I've heard some things being thrown around here that we use on our fruit; fulvic acid for one.
this is also why I brought up this thread. I was gonna have my dad pull up our soil sample and see our nutrient level. Im sure this forum would be interested.
-
Rather, by a lack of touching the soil. We wear shoes and don't touch dirt.
Sounds like a covert argument for grounding.
From "The effect of earthing (grounding) on human physiology" (link (http://www.earthinginstitute.net/studies/earthing_human_physiology_2006_pt1.pdf)):
"Until a few generations ago, most humans walked and slept in direct contact with the surface of the earth. Our modern life style involves wearing insulating shoes and sleeping in buildings that electrically isolate the body from the ground plane.
When humans are in direct contact with the earth (barefoot), free electrons are conducted onto the skin surface and into the body via the mucus membranes of the digestive and respiratory systems. The body is thereby maintained at the same electrical potential as the earth. This has been the natural bioelectrical environment of the human body and of other organisms throughout most of evolutionary history."
Free electrons means free antioxidants. lol. ;D
-
Although I'm interested in grounding and more so barefooting, my intention is solely based on the chemical/mineral aspect.
You may have a point however that because of grounding coupled with a raw diet, a little magnesium absorbed can go a long way.
-
Our cherries should be no less than 18 at a time. I cant remember all of our pears but we grow a very very sweet novelty pear called a seckel pear. This can sometimes push 21 IIRC. Some of the sweeter apples we grow, like royal gala, can get above 20.
11 from a redcurrant seems so low to me.
According to this chart: http://www.honeycreek.us/brix.php (http://www.honeycreek.us/brix.php) , 11 for a redcurrant is at the upper end of average. Nothing to write home about I know, but it's not rediculously low.
-
Tested blueberries today: brix value of 10. It seems the only fruit i've tested so far with a decent brix value is gooseberries. The rest are just average. Not surprising I suppose seeing as it is a(n organic) supermarket where I bought them from, the growers are mainly interested in the money. I will get some from a farmers market some time to see how they compare.
Getting back to magnesium...
perhaps water can be a good source. I don't know to what extent minerals in water are absorbed and utilzed by the body. I found one mineral water from Slovenia, called Donat Mg, which contains more than 1000mg of magnesium per litre!
-
We do. It's not organic but I've really been considering starting a thread to allow any questions about pesticides Etc. My dad has been growing fruit for over 30 years. I've been working with him since I was 12, during summers.
we don't do brix on much other than rainer cherries and golden apples. But I know ours are usually quite high sugar.
Funny thing is. I've heard some things being thrown around here that we use on our fruit; fulvic acid for one.
this is also why I brought up this thread. I was gonna have my dad pull up our soil sample and see our nutrient level. Im sure this forum would be interested.
That's great. Would you mind giving me a list of the soil supplements that you use? What's the location of your orchard? What kind of soil do you have?