34
« on: October 13, 2012, 07:58:27 am »
Perhaps the Primal diet is low on carbs, but raw paleo in general has no carb restrictions beyond that of the digestive limit. Personally I eat lots and lots of fiber and some high carb fruits, though I do not think carbohyrates are an issue at all because it is a MACROnutrient.
From a dietary point of view, the most important things to worry about are MICROnutrients, and to be honest the micronutrient density in primal and paleo foods far exceed that of almost all high carbohydrate deits.
"The Primal Diet = The Inuit (Eskimo) Diet" THIS IS NOT TRUE. Biggest fallacy in the article, and simply ridiculous statement. Considering it is so early in the article, and with such a bold and green text I enter into the article with doubt.
Paleo diets promote high antioxidant fruits and vegetables and herbs and seeds, and you will find both the ORAC values and vitamins and minerals in these promoted foods have at least 3 times the amount compared to that of starches or grains or legumes.
Then we start to look at offal and whole seafood, which we eat a lot of (muscle meat is the reject meat, and you will find a lot of westerners will ONLY eat muscle meat cuts). We injest far more omega 3 DHA and EPA than any other diet, we injest far more vitamin A, vitamin D, vitamin K2, and far more healthy sourced CLA and far more butyrate than any other diet. We have adequate selenium and magnesium consumption, no other diet can boast.
If you look up all of these, people are told to supplement for them all because the average person will benefit from extra consumption of them... usually because they are deficient in them because their western, or vege-tarian/egan or any other diet does not supply them with any of these things.
We now we look at the aging effect, we have basically no consumption of carcinogenic Nitrosamines, no consumption of AGEs or PAHs... and so basically no cause for disease beyond the toxic disease that is unavoidable because of our wrecked environment.
The science is on our side...
Now I cannot speak for the Primal diet directly, but the Primal diet does not represent all of our eating habits here at Raw Paleo. People find different things work for them and so some of us are Primal, others eat lots of fruit and fish, others eat carnivorous... it really depends on your genetics, your epigenetics and your personal taste and current state of disease.
Now lets look at the faults of the article directly: he looks at a single documented tribe. He refers to modern anti dietary-cholesterol studies, which have been debunked thousands of times and so are of no value to the study of meat consumption and disease. He quotes William C. Roberts, who does studies on herbivores, and thus his research has no correlation to us because we are obviously adapted omnivores.
If you are confused about where to go from here, then simply don't eat muscle meat and raw fat alone. Stick to fish and grass fed organs as all of the long lived tribes did. If you really want to eat lots of fruit and veg like he says, remember that our domesticated fruits in the supermarket are not in fact ANYTHING like those the Kung or the Trobriander ate, so stick to undomesticated fruits and veg and you MIGHT be able to replicate their experience with 'high carbohydrate' paleo.
I hope I could give you some insight into things without troubling you too much. Good luck figuring out your own journey!
Show Posts
if I eat more than a little bit of certain foods, though I feel I would be healthier eating more of them (organ meats, fish, etc)... Now you can't tell me that I should eat what is purely instinctual, because I don't think I have the right instincts. If I limit myself to raw foods and listened to my body I would most certainly lose a lot of muscle weight, and eventually enter into starvation anyway...