Author Topic: palatable and safe raw food  (Read 82311 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: palatable and safe raw food
« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2009, 05:13:56 pm »
So do you think it was a biotin deficiency that caused your poor digestion of the eggs and/or diarrhea? This is not a recognized symptom of that, AFAIK. Did you experience any of the recognized symptoms of biotin deficiency?
.

I suspect it was a combination of factors. The diarrhea was due to my body not needing the relevant nutrients in the egg so it got rid of it(same happened when I've overate foods like raw liver). I did get depression of a sort, and muscle-pains (part of biotin deficinecy symptoms) but can't remember if I had the others.So, it could have been the avidin and/or the grainfed origin of eggs or maybe something else entirely. But it couldn't have been food-intolerance as I'm sure I'd have noticed some reaction when I only ate tiny amounts of raw eggs.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

carnivore

  • Guest
Re: palatable and safe raw food
« Reply #26 on: August 24, 2009, 08:38:15 pm »
Then that’s something odd. Since 500 or 600 millions years, animals have learned to eat what’s good for their health; the individual who ate some harmful stuff were somehow diminished in their ability to compete and survive. Only the strongest survived and to be strong they had to be able to find and select the right food for them. They evolved along with their environment, are thus adapted to it and adapted to any kind of stuff that has been present in the environment, knowing perfectly what to avoid, what to eat to be fit and in which quantity according to their own actual metabolic state.

How do they know that ? Of course, animals as well as our ancestors in the Paleolithic era don’t and didn’t construct elaborate theories, write nor read books and studies about nutrition  ??? They know by their sensory perceptions, mainly smell and taste : as long as something tastes good, it is good and if it tastes bad, it is bad. GOOD = GOOD

It works fine with everything that has been accessible in the environment for a duration sufficiently long, that is any natural stuff grown in the nature. But ever since mankind has been clever enough to introduce some new mixed, processed, and artificial kinds of stuff, the equation may sometimes become GOOD = BAD !

For example, candy and ethylene glycol taste good but are quite bad for the health. The same can happen more surreptitiously if, for instance, poultry is fed with intensively selected grain such as wheat and deprived of open, natural space. Such eggs may taste good while being bad for our health.

Another condition may be encountered when a perfectly natural, original and good tasting food cause uncomfortable reactions which could be mistaken for harmful. It happens to an animal or human that has been fed for a long duration with processed and cooked food. It is logical to infer that this phenomenon is not directly due to the ingestion of the perfectly natural food, but to the recirculation in view of the elimination of intoxinating cooked stuff or dairy products previously eaten.

So, if it tastes good but seems to make harm, either it is a non original paleo food or a detoxination reaction is incorrectly taken for harmful. Logically, I see no other possibility, except perhaps that the detox becomes so intense and violent that it may lead to the dead of the individual. Experience shows that is normally never the case for humans as long as no processed and neolithic food are reintroduced during the course of the detox. 

Cheers
Francois


When the theory does not explain the experience, then the theory is wrong or unfinished.

We all have a past with junk food that has made more or less damages in our metabolism. A healthy food like eggs can taste good but makes harm because the body is not able to handle properly the antinutrients or other harmful substances contained in this food. For instance, because of a compromised digestive system. Food instinct does not seem to be able to take into account some of these personal conditions. After all, this is a new situation for it : Our paleo-ancestors did not have a past of cooked junk food eater.

Not to mention also that our food instinct can easily be fooled by modern food, like our big hen's eggs.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2009, 09:07:09 pm by carnivore »

Offline Iguana

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: palatable and safe raw food
« Reply #27 on: August 24, 2009, 10:11:11 pm »
When the theory does not explain the experience, then the theory is wrong or unfinished.

No theory is the ultimate truth. But what I took great lengths to unsuccessfully try to explain you is so far the theory that best explain the facts observed during more than 40 years of experiments with thousands of persons and animals (mice, cattle, pigs and poultry). You stick to your analytical approach in a conventional nutritionist way, which leads to inextricable complications and contradictions.     

Quote
A healthy food like eggs can taste good but makes harm because the body is not able to handle properly the antinutrients or other harmful substances contained in this food. For instance, because of a compromised digestive system.

This statement isn't exactly what is observed. Ok, the taste may still be good, but there are others subtle feelings such  as for example a slight nausea warning you to stop eating the stuff or not to eat it at all. 

Quote
Food instinct does not seem to be able to take into account some of these personal conditions.

Yes it is. But then you have to eat 100% raw, instinctively, with a sufficient choice of “paleo quality” foodstuff including meat or seafood or eggs everyday. Of course, one has also to be wary of modern varieties of fruits, plants and even animals. It seems few people are able to do that.

Cheers
Francois     
« Last Edit: August 25, 2009, 01:50:00 am by Iguana »
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline Paleo Donk

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 664
    • View Profile
Re: palatable and safe raw food
« Reply #28 on: September 10, 2009, 10:51:43 pm »
Ok, I kinda idiot. Ive searched the stickies and now this thread and still dont know what forms of raw meat are unsafe to eat. Commercial pork is chalk full of parasites, correct? I think I remember seeing somewhere that deer is as well. Is there any data on the number of infections gotten per year from meat born parasites? How about some papers from the science journals on this topic?

Sorry if this has been talked about before

Offline Raw Kyle

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: palatable and safe raw food
« Reply #29 on: September 10, 2009, 11:03:02 pm »
I've never noticed a problem with parasites. That is not to say I've never had one, but I never noticed any negative symptoms. I haven't eaten raw commercially raised pork, but have eaten raw pastured pork. Also elk and other wild game meats, and I have eaten commercially raised beef raw before. Posting with people on these forums, it's just not much of an issue, this parasite thing. If you're really scared you can freeze meat for a week or so, that supposedly kills parasites. You can also sear it if it's a whole cut, or marinate it in acid like lemon juice. I found this to improve the taste of raw poultry but not red meat, it's good on seafood as well. Good luck.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk