Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet to Suit You => Instincto / Anopsology => Topic started by: Simone on December 02, 2012, 04:14:33 am
-
Hello everyone, my name is Simone, I live in Italy and I am raw vegan but mine is not an ethical choice. My food "journey" started about two years ago and included various stages in chronological order:
1) standard vegan diet (with fake and refined foods)
2) vegan diet with whole foods in their natural state (only fruit, vegetables, whole grains and legumes, nuts and seeds, cold pressed oil)
3) raw food vegan diet (only fruit, vegetables, nuts and seeds, but low fat high carb)
The reason for my dietary change is the desire to achieve the best possible health and boycott the food industry that produces cooked and handled food.
However, despite the enormous improvements that the new diet have brought I became very skinny and my physical performance are not very good. As a result of these problems led me to further research through which I discovered the anopsology. I've read the Italian translation of "Manger Vrai" by Guy Claude Burger.
But I have some problems that I hope you'll solve and some questions that I hope you'll answer or rather:
1)My nose is pretty clogged with mucus in recent times (probably for detoxification from new chemical species), and this does not allow me to fully feel the smell of food
2)Apart from organic plants and organic eggs I cannot buy meat and fish for economic reasons
3)I cannot recognize what food my body needs despite the smell, let me explain, I cannot understand the mechanism of olfactory and gustatory attraction (I would like you to explain to me how to behave during a meal)
4)The fruit must be cut to be able to smell it? In this case, the instinct would make me throw all the food if I did eat only one and I could not afford this cost
5)As for the eggs you must open them to see if my instincts want? You know I can not make me capable of the fact that an egg will have a good smell from the outside
Thank you for listening, I hope you can help me,
Simone :)
PS: sorry for my english
-
Welcome, Simone!
There are some foodstuff such as eggs which have almost no smell. In this case, we can test it to get their taste. But "organic" doesn't mean much for us: it's ok for plant foods, but for animal foods it's not. You can't buy fish? What about gathering shellfish on the coast or fishing yourself? Do you live in town?
You don't need to cut the fruits to feel their smell.
It's not so complicated, forget the memories you have of various foods, just eat what makes you salivate and what tastes good.
I know, it's simple to say, but in practice we miss the proper training that our parents should have given us. Instead, we have been trained the exact wrong way: to eat whatever is put on our plate, never spit, eat even if we don't like it and so on. We've got get rid of all this wrong habits.
-
Hello everyone, my name is Simone,
But I have some problems that I hope you'll solve and some questions that I hope you'll answer or rather:
1)My nose is pretty clogged with mucus in recent times (probably for detoxification from new chemical species), and this does not allow me to fully feel the smell of food
2)Apart from organic plants and organic eggs I cannot buy meat and fish for economic reasons
3)I cannot recognize what food my body needs despite the smell, let me explain, I cannot understand the mechanism of olfactory and gustatory attraction (I would like you to explain to me how to behave during a meal)
4)The fruit must be cut to be able to smell it? In this case, the instinct would make me throw all the food if I did eat only one and I could not afford this cost
5)As for the eggs you must open them to see if my instincts want? You know I can not make me capable of the fact that an egg will have a good smell from the outside
Thank you for listening, I hope you can help me,
Simone :)
PS: sorry for my english
Hi Simone,
yes, welcome.
For what its worth, meat and fish can often be purchased/procured for little cost.
For example, I have a fellow instinctive eater staying at present and we have eaten heartily. As far as meats/fish go, items like lamb kidneys, liver, heart, beef tongue, marrow bones and less desirable cuts of meat can all be purchased cheaply.
Items such as shellfish, sea-urchin can be foraged for free if you have access to coastline, or alternatively there are many varieties of fish, from small whitebait type to larger open ocean fish, which are not often considered the most desirable fish for one reason or another, but yet taste great, and are not expensive.
As to organic, one can often get quality produce from farmers markets, direct from farmers, friends gardens, foraged yourself and even some supermarkets that is not 'organic', yet is of wonderful quality (and generally cheaper) and so saving money.
One starts to trust in the taste/smell appeal of a food and so whether it is labelled 'organic' or not, may not be so important.
The clogged nose will work itself out as detoxification progresses.
As well as using the senses, also try new foods, particularly animal foods.
Ultimately, in my view, the organism is intelligent, and will not lead us astray if we are aware and mindful observing the responses and attractiveness of certain foods.
Enjoy the journey, one mouthful at a time. :)
Kind wishes, J
-
Where in Italy do you live? Do you speak Italian well? Being able to speak the language is VERY important and will mean you will be far more easily able to locate raw animal foods you can afford.
The problem with Italy is that there is not enough arable land so that some meats, like beef, are a bit more expensive. There isn't any real organic or grassfed meat industry in Italy as yet. However there are certain online organic sources/directories:-
http://www.biobank.it/en/indexBIO.asp (http://www.biobank.it/en/indexBIO.asp)
All that said, maybe I ought to give myself as an example, so as to help you a bit further:-
I know almost no Italian, so, when I go to my Italian home during the summer holidays, I often run into difficulties. In my town in Liguria, I have access to a fish-market which has a lot of very expensive raw seafood(some of which goes up in price by 50(!) euros per kilo as tourist season approaches - unsurprisingly, the market is Mafia-owned). However, it has a lot of very cheap raw seafood as well(less than 5 euros per kilo). I don't always like the taste of the dirt-cheap fish much, admittedly, but they're fine as a substitute, and I also buy a bit of very expensive swordfish here and there. The fish is mostly wildcaught, not farmed, except for the salmon, and probably the shrimp/prawns.
In the past I used to buy raw tongues from local butchers at 17 euros per kilo. Those tongues are tasteless since the cattle are fed on a lot of grains, not recommended. I have since bought raw horsemeat from local horse-butchers(cavalheria). The horsemeat from cavalherias costs anywhere between 4 euros to 20 euros per kilo. More usually, I find meat costing between 7 to 12 euros per kilo, when I go there. I always buy the cheapest meats there, as I find no difference re nutritional quality between different cuts of meat. Now, the horsemeat tastes much better than the grainfed beef tongue I used to buy, so I am guessing that the horses are mostly raised on grass, though probably also on, I fear, some oats/grains.
I live close to the French border but haven't heard of easy sources of meats. I am aware that there are a number of small-time grassfed meat French and Italian farmers in the hills away from the coast from whom I could buy sheep or goat carcasses, but I would need a car/driving-licence and the ability to speak Italian, if in Italy.
I also used to prise raw limpets from the coast where I live, but, sadly, the supply has vanished, I fear due to pollution from boats. I still scavenge for raw eggs from female sea-urchins as they taste amazing. Going harpooning is a waste of time, though, as the area is over-fished like most of the Mediterranean, so only tiny fishes exist right next to where I live.
-
Yes, I concur with Tyler and Wattlebird.
And I forgot to say: don't waste too much money on expensive organic fruits and vegetables. We can very often find very cheap (even sometimes free) ripe or overripe fruits from farmer's markets or shops, not necessarily labeled as organic but nevertheless grown without or with little chemicals. Just avoid the most obviously "chemical" and "industrial" beautifully looking fruits and veggies.
In France and in Switzerland, there is sometimes cheap, vacuum packed "chilled" lamb from New Zealand in supermarkets. This is very good meat from exclusively grass fed mutton raised without any medicine. Australian imported horse meat is fine and cheap too. Meat is very appetizing when aged, hung for some weeks on a hook in a fridge. Sometimes fresh meat is tasty too, but especially at the beginning, aged, somewhat dried meat is generally tastier.
-
To TylerDurden, I live in Italy and I'm Italian... Do you think I am American? So I speak good English ;D
I am aware of the fact that organic does not mean grass fed, however, only few farmers in Italy have grass fed meat but they ship it frozen, which deceives the instinctive stop...
I live in a city, Milan where I can find organic farmed fish (which is always better than conventional) and at the supermarket there are clams and mussels vacuum (but I'm not sure they are caught).
In a natural food store I found some certified organic wild salmon but was treated at -40 ° that is good against anisakis but not for the instinct
-
No, I'd simply forgotten that "Simone" was an Italian male name and assumed you were a French woman called "Simone". Silly me. But you do speak very good English.
I assure you that while prefrozen grassfed meat meat is not 100% perfect, it is WAY healthier for you than nonfrozen grainfed meat. All that freezing does is reduce the taste a bit, but as long as you eat it quickly once thawed, it's OK.
Organic farmed fish is NOT better than nonorganic wildcaught fish. Wildcaught seafood is ALWAYS better than the finest organic-raised type of fish. I have seen very few organic fish farms which fed their farmed fish on decent foods. That said, farmed clams and mussels, while not ideal, are certainly "less worse" than other farmed seafood. I think(?) that farmers just plant them in the sea and let them filter nutrients like their wildcaught versions do.
If you know of any hunters, you might be able to get hold of raw wild game from them very cheaply.
-
This site http://www.grassfedeurope.com/catalog/fatti.php?language=en&osCsid=lahn7hpmbg3ng8s9jb09350353 (http://www.grassfedeurope.com/catalog/fatti.php?language=en&osCsid=lahn7hpmbg3ng8s9jb09350353) sells grass fed meat preserved in this way:
The meat you order will be vacuum packed and delivered in a special cold box. The addition of frozen gel packs maintain the meat at a safe temperature for up to 36 hours or more. Your meat box will be delivered by express courier within 24 hours. The meat will keep for up to 5-6 days in the refrigerator, but we recommend freezing it the day it arrives.
The problem is always the price
-
If they deliver it chilled(ie just filled with ice-packs) then that's even better than prefrozen.
My advice:-
either get raw horsemeat from a local Cavalheria which is not too bad an idea. Or buy raw, grassfed meats and reduce costs by going in for Intermittent Fasting:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermittent_fasting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermittent_fasting)
-
Ah, 21 € / kg is expensive, yes. I get wild boar from a hunter friend for 10 € / kg and NZ lamb is between 7 to 10 € / kg at supermarkets. You should be able to find some in Milano. (BTW, I understand quite well that you can't go fishing around there! ;))
Wild boar front legs are 18.81 € / kg at Orkos.
-
I've tried to buy some cassia fistula on Orkos but is written that there aren't payment methods... It's common?
-
Call them on the phone any day from 6 to 10 pm.
00331 64 60 21 11
They send your order at your address with a bill you can pay within one week or so.
-
However, to start can I always eat organic meat since I cannot find grass fed meat or not?
-
You probably won't have problems by eating once a raw "organic" beefsteak to start, but if it becomes regular it may still cause troubles.
-
After so long, I finally decided to try the instinctive nutrition.
Today at lunch I put on the table dates, stark delicious apples, kind lettuce, romaine lettuce, carrots and tomatoes and I smell one by one these foods. However I could not figure out if there was salivation and especially I could not understand what had smell better. I could solve these problems by going for 1-2 weeks in Perpignan in Mas Belric in France, home to a new istinctive nutrition center but unfortunately I do not have the economic means...
Can you help me? Thank you
-
Perpignan in Mas Belric in France, home to a new istinctive nutrition center
What's that? AFAIK there's nothing at all of that kind.
-
Iguana, I'm not sold on instincto. What do you think about when a wild animal find food after not eating for a few days. Does it smell it, taste out, not like it and walk away?
-
How do you think that animal knows if it's a food for him or not? How do you think a mammal finds food?
-
Not just by smell and taste. You can see a familiar view, a dead carcass.
But it sees a dead carcass, smells it. It didn't like the smell but it's hungry and food is scarce. Does it eat it?
also it seems instincto assumed theres a unlimited and infinite range of foods. Theres not. Unlike humans, most animals can't just pick between bananas or beef. There is what's available so they eat it.
-
Not just by smell and taste. You can see a familiar view, a dead carcass.
But it sees a dead carcass, smells it. It didn't like the smell but it's hungry and food is scarce. Does it eat it?
Obviously, scavengers and carnivores are attracted by the smell of a dead carcass, to take your example. They smell it from very far, long before they can see it.
also it seems instincto assumed theres a unlimited and infinite range of foods. Theres not. Unlike humans, most animals can't just pick between bananas or beef. There is what's available so they eat it.
I don’t understand your point. Of course, no one can eat something which is not available.
-
My question is how would instincto work in nature. Where foods is scarce and you eat or starve
-
Ok. Then we eat what is edible. Our senses of smell and taste tell us what is the most edible stuff and prevent us from self-poisoning. This has actually led some of us to discover and eat some unknown foods (at least unknown from the person whether it is edible or toxic), which is a great advantage for surviving in the wild.
-
How about with me when it comes to organs and stuff like that. I don't like the taste of some organs. Does that mean I shouldn't eat them? I feel goods after eating them. But they don't taste or smell appealing.
-
How about with me when it comes to organs and stuff like that. I don't like the taste of some organs. Does that mean I shouldn't eat them? I feel goods after eating them. But they don't taste or smell appealing.
An animal would never eat something which doesn't smell or taste appealing and I would not eat (and even spit) something which I don't like the taste.
There seems to be a contradiction in the facts that you don’t like the taste of some organs but nevertheless feel good after eating them. It seems strange to me, but it is possible just like the fact that most people feel good after drinking a cup of coffee.
“cause and effects are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there is a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Attention is drawn to the symptoms of difficulty rather than the underlying cause. (…) the root cause of the existence of the problem is not addressed (e.g. lack of upfront knowledge and resources, lack of understanding of system interactions and emergent system properties).”
Ronald J. Ziegler, Complexity Reduction in Automotive Design and Development, University of Michigan, 2005
-
So the feeling I get from eating grass fed organ meats is comparable to the effect of coffee, our some other neolithic food? Isn't out possible I derive some benefit from it even if it didn't taste good? The cod I ate didn't taste that good so I added lime ro mask not liking the taste. But after I felt great and did a lot of school work which is usually be to unmotivatedd to do.
My diet has been very deficient on iodine, do based on instincto out should have tasted great since I needed the iodine. After I felt god.
Also how do we know animals really enjoy the taste of all their foods.
-
So the feeling I get from eating grass fed organ meats is comparable to the effect of coffee, or some other neolithic food?
I didn’t mean exactly that, but there are short term effects and long term effects and the firsts can be quite different than the seconds. The assumption we have been experimenting in instinctive nutrition ever since the 60’s is that as long as some raw paleo unprocessed and unmixed food tastes good, then it’s good for us while when it tastes bad, it’s bad for us. This is a general principle which has been supposed to be valid in every aspect of animals’ life. As yet, our experience has never invalidated it.
It’s quite possible that you don’t need to eat so much organs, at least if it tastes bad it certainly means that there are at least some substances in them which are currently detrimental to you in the amount you eat.
Isn't out possible I derive some benefit from it even if it didn't taste good?
It’s possible, I don’t know. A natural foodstuff is composed of millions or even billions of different substances, some which may be useful in a certain amount to our body while some others may be detrimental. It’s always a matter of balance between benefits and nuisances with a threshold at a constantly variable amount.
The cod I ate didn't taste that good so I added lime ro mask not liking the taste. But after I felt great and did a lot of school work which is usually be to unmotivatedd to do.
My diet has been very deficient on iodine, do based on instincto out should have tasted great since I needed the iodine. After I felt god.
We do not think that way in instincto. We don’t search nor care what the different foodstuffs contain: on the contrary we prefer to ignore it, so that our intellect doesn’t influence our alimentary choices. This is a matter much more complex than just iodine, so complex that our analytic science would need a timescale longer the life of the Universe ever since the Big Bang to have a comprehensive view of all the intricate interactions between a food and an animal or human body.
Also how do we know animals really enjoy the taste of all their foods.
We don’t know, we infer it since we fail to see how they could select their food otherwise! That is because they can’t read the gurus’ posts on RawPaleoDietForum to know what and how much to eat… ;)
Anyway, if you ever observed a cat, you must have noticed his apparent pleasure when served a food he likes. :)
-
What's that? AFAIK there's nothing at all of that kind.
The news was spread by the only teacher of anopsology of Italy, you can see the third post at this link: http://www.facebook.com/groups/136658076446141/ (http://www.facebook.com/groups/136658076446141/)
"There is again the possibility to practice stays in learning the practice dell'istintonutrizione. Also in France, no longer in the Paris region, but in the Deep South, in Perpignan, at the Mas Belric.
To see photos of the place, visit http://www.masbelric.com/ (http://www.masbelric.com/)
There are no opening times set, so you can decide when you want your living room. Just book with a little in advance. The cost is about 80 euros per day for one person. If you book for more people, there are reductions in the price. The price is inclusive of accommodation, food and education.
For reservation and more information in Italian / English / French / German please write to the address cdif@hotmail.fr"
-
Ok, yes, sorry there is something and I didn't know.
After so long, I finally decided to try the instinctive nutrition.
Today at lunch I put on the table dates, stark delicious apples, kind lettuce, romaine lettuce, carrots and tomatoes and I smell one by one these foods. However I could not figure out if there was salivation and especially I could not understand what had smell better. I could solve these problems by going for 1-2 weeks in Perpignan in Mas Belric in France, home to a new istinctive nutrition center but unfortunately I do not have the economic means...
Can you help me? Thank you
Usually we do not put together on the table veggies and fruits, because fruits have in general a stronger and more attractive smell than vegetables. Nothing had an appealing smell amongst the products you had on the table? Not even the dates or apples?
-
Something else I feel it didn't consider is most animals kill their prey then taste it. Not the other way around
-
I don't think these recent attempts to debunk instinctive eating by pointing to wild animal behavior disproves instinctive eating. Quite the opposite, animals are driven by such a pure instinct that we humans cannot identify the effortless functioning of pure instinct when we see it. To say that a very hungry animal will eat anything is not true - that's how the animal gets hungry! by passing food opportunities that don't appeal to it's instinct. A hungry tiger never settles for a mouthful of tasty and filling eucalyptus leaves.
I find that food memory plays a role in instinctive eating. I never try to eat foods that made me feel downright bad when I ate them previously. Instinct to eat can modified by food memory throughout the whole animal kingdom, but this instinct can be masked or misled by modifying food tastes with seasonings.
-
I don't think these recent attempts to debunk instinctive eating by pointing to wild animal behavior disproves instinctive eating. Quite the opposite, animals are driven by such a pure instinct that we humans cannot identify the effortless functioning of pure instinct when we see it.
Yes, sure, but I feel that Da Boss is more curious than anything else and it’s always wise to doubt and question any theory. In his seminars GCB used to strongly recommend not to believe but ceaselessly put everything into questioning as a theory is never the absolute truth but only an approximate and provisional tentative to describe the reality, something that will have to be completed, modified or even abandoned in the future when more facts will be known or a better fitting theory, perhaps simpler, will be devised.
Questions and remarks are welcome, they allow us to better understand what we are doing, to think and re-think about it, to search to improve our knowledge and understanding of the world.
To say that a very hungry animal will eat anything is not true - that's how the animal gets hungry! by passing food opportunities that don't appeal to it's instinct. A hungry tiger never settles for a mouthful of tasty and filling eucalyptus leaves.
Sure, animals eating noxious things have died of poisoning before procreating so that their lineage got extinct. Only the ones having the best diet will have survived, the ones eating improper food being weakened and smashed by natural selection.
Something else I feel it didn't consider is most animals kill their prey then taste it. Not the other way around
Yes, I may be wrong but I think most predators try to catch and kill other animals, especially the ones looking like their usual preys. But if they don’t like their smell / taste, they don’t eat it. For example domestic cats kill all the mice they can catch, but they don’t eat the shrews ones.
-
Iguana, in the light of the experience that animals both wild and domestic creatures prefer Lugol's iodine in their drinking water, can you comment on the apparent failure of instincto theory with respect to this:
http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/journals/daboss88's-healing-schizophrenia-journal/msg107745/#new (http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/journals/daboss88's-healing-schizophrenia-journal/msg107745/#new)
-
Right iguana. I'm not trying to debunk instincto. . But learn more. I feel my instincts don't necessarily get me eating the tastiest foods, but those most nourishing. After all my taste buds are still pretty accustomed to unhealthy foods. I'm not even 3 weeks into this diet.
-
Also I'm noticing sweet fruit isn't as appealing or tasty any more. I've been eating less and less fruit. At first I snacked on fruit, now I go for eggs instead, some times marrow bones.
-
Also I'm noticing sweet fruit isn't as appealing or tasty any more. I've been eating less and less fruit. At first I snacked on fruit, now I go for eggs instead, some times marrow bones.
Aren't you following your instincts then? ;)
-
If instincto worked perfectly, then people eating that way wouldn't commonly overeat sweet fruit, and undereat animal fats.
That's not to say I don't agree with the general principle. I more or less eat mono-style, myself. I never mix fruits, nuts, or honey before eating, I only eat them mono-style. The only food I don't eat mono-style would be meat/fish/fat, because I haven't noticed any digestive problems when I freely mix different types of meat, fish, and animal fat.
I definitely DO notice digestive problems when I mix fruits, nuts, and/or honey up, so I don't do it.
It's a useful technique, but it's just that, a technique. There's no need to make a belief system out of it, because it has its limitations.
-
Also I'm noticing sweet fruit isn't as appealing or tasty any more. I've been eating less and less fruit. At first I snacked on fruit, now I go for eggs instead, some times marrow bones.
-
If instincto worked perfectly, then people eating that way wouldn't commonly overeat sweet fruit, and undereat animal fats.
Why exactly is that a problem? Do you think that our instincts for sweet fruit (or animal fats) are flawed?
-
I also eat mono. Except I mix different kinds of plant foods. Ie I might eat some soaked nuts with an apple and avocado.
I also mix animal foods with other animal foods. I never have digestive problems.
-
Iguana, in the light of the experience that animals both wild and domestic creatures prefer Lugol's iodine in their drinking water,
Do they? Is Lugol’s iodine something commonly found in nature?
can you comment on the apparent failure of instincto theory with respect to this:
http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/journals/daboss88's-healing-schizophrenia-journal/msg107745/#new (http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/journals/daboss88's-healing-schizophrenia-journal/msg107745/#new)
Your link leads to a post saying “What exactly is bromine and fluorine” .
Are you supposing that the instincto theory fails to explain why animals get poisoned with processed and artificial substances? If that’s your point (is it?) the instincto theory assumes that the instinctive alimentary regulation works properly only with raw, unprocessed, unmixed paleo stuff. For example, animals and children also like the sweet taste of ethylene glycol (the common antifreeze for engine’s cooling system) and get poisoned with it. That’s something quite well explained by the instincto theory.
But I’m not sure what your point is.
Right iguana. I'm not trying to debunk instincto. . But learn more. I feel my instincts don't necessarily get me eating the tastiest foods, but those most nourishing. After all my taste buds are still pretty accustomed to unhealthy foods. I'm not even 3 weeks into this diet.
Also I'm noticing sweet fruit isn't as appealing or tasty any more. I've been eating less and less fruit. At first I snacked on fruit, now I go for eggs instead, some times marrow bones.
The most nourishing can often be the tastiest. It’s not the strength of the smell which is relevant, but its attractiveness at the moment. What is the tastiest constantly changes. For example I found this morning very nice, ripe cherimoyas and mangoes from Malaga region, Spain, and I was looking forward to eat them for my lunch. But when I put them on the table, I couldn’t feel any smell from the cherimoyas and the smell of the nice ripe mangoes was not that appetizing at the moment, so I was rather disappointed and I put a goose egg under my nose. Usually it’s very hard to feel a smell from an egg, but this time I felt a slight but very appetizing smell from that egg, so I had two of them plus one hen’s egg and it was a very satisfying lunch. (It’s not recommended to have two different animals food at a meal because it can make the digestion difficult and/or lead to an overload, but after some years of practice you can easily get rid of all the rules, those rules being only there to guide the beginners).
If instincto worked perfectly, then people eating that way wouldn't commonly overeat sweet fruit, and undereat animal fats.
What makes you think that? Do you know many people eating that way and taking into account (as they should) the fact that modern heavily selected fruits can be eaten in too large amounts? Of course, “instincto” cannot work perfectly with intensely selected modern foods. To work perfectly, we should be in our primitive environment, which is lost, and eat only wild foods. But perfection doesn’t belong to this world.
It's a useful technique, but it's just that, a technique. There's no need to make a belief system out of it, because it has its limitations.
I see it as a theory. A theory can never be a belief system when one properly understands that every scientific theory is only a provisional approximation of the reality which should relentlessly be questioned. The practice is something else and everyone has more or less a different way of practicing.
-
Why exactly is that a problem? Do you think that our instincts for sweet fruit (or animal fats) are flawed?
Well, instinctos would blame modern fruit for being overly-selected for sweetness, and would say that wild fruit is generally less sweet, and more bitter/sour. That's not always true, though. Wild strawberries are quite sweet, as are wild papaya, wild persimmons, and quite a few other wild fruits. Generally, though, there is some truth to that.
-
Do they? Is Lugol’s iodine something commonly found in nature?
Your link leads to a post saying “What exactly is bromine and fluorine” .
Yes and yes. Iodine is found in every cell of a healthy body, certainly was so in paleolithic man.
I mention Lugol's because it works as a nutrient. There are other forms used in medicine and as supplements.
Are you supposing that the instincto theory fails to explain why animals get poisoned with processed and artificial substances?
Animals prefer it instinctively, and there are ~150 years of human consumption that shows that Lugol's is a nutrient and not a poison.
So why do people need to be told ad nauseum that iodine is not a poison, but a nutrient?
Is the instinctive sense of taste so easily deceived?
-
I understand the role of iodine and potassium iodide in the body, and I understand that there is a difference in "typical*" dietary vs. supplementary potencies, but for the purpose of understanding iodine's role in instinctive eating, I was wondering where animals that prefer it instinctively get this more-concentrated (Lugol-like) dose? Are we talking about mineral water springs, or what?
*I'm not talking about Japanese or Okinawans here
-
For Instincto to work and be a healthy diet it would have to base on what grows in the season where you live.
ONLY that way I can agree it might a great theory. Any other way is just an illusion and a lie. Sorry to be harsh but it is a biologic fact we can only consume carbs when we get plenty of sunlight on our skin, without getting hurt in one way or another. The sicker we are the more it will hurt to live in such a mismatch.
There is a reason why fruit grows only in seasons or places with lots of sun and not too cold.
There is a reason to that.
Everything in nature happends for a reason.
As long as Instincto do not see this fact, the theory is flawed to me.
-
What makes you think that? Do you know many people eating that way and taking into account (as they should) the fact that modern heavily selected fruits can be eaten in too large amounts? Of course, “instincto” cannot work perfectly with intensely selected modern foods. To work perfectly, we should be in our primitive environment, which is lost, and eat only wild foods.
I fail to see why "instincto" could not work with modern "heavily selected" fruits. Your instinctive stop should in theory come depending on various factors, including amount of sugar, fat, and other nutrients. So if you eat modern, more sugary fruits, you will simply eat less (e.g. one modern apple instead of two wild ones), as long as you eat slowly and pay attention to your senses and reactions. You can not eat too much sugar, unless you're either consuming cooked food/dairy (which can skew your senses) or you ignore your instincts.
-
Yes, it works anyway but we have to pay more attention to the instinctive stops because they are less marked with foods having been selected to be more easily eaten. That stands true for meats of domesticated animals as well as for cultivated fruits.
Inger, there’s nothing in the instincto theory saying that our diet should not vary according to the season. It actually varies: we spontaneously tend to eat more fat and proteins in winter and more juicy fruits in summer. We typically don’t eat watermelons in winter — when they are not available anyway — but we are very fond of it in the hottest summer days. There are usually no eggs in winter, so we can’t eat them then.
-
Yes and yes. Iodine is found in every cell of a healthy body, certainly was so in paleolithic man.
I mention Lugol's because it works as a nutrient. There are other forms used in medicine and as supplements.
Animals prefer it instinctively, and there are ~150 years of human consumption that shows that Lugol's is a nutrient and not a poison.
So why do people need to be told ad nauseum that iodine is not a poison, but a nutrient?
Is the instinctive sense of taste so easily deceived?
Iodine is certainly a nutrient in the correct form and dose while it becomes a poison in overdose. It’s always the same, the instinct can properly regulate the amount of natural (primitive, primal) unprocessed stuff, but is deceived with processed stuff.
As for everything, there’s a huge difference between chemically pure iodine and iodine naturally contained in complex organic molecules of living beings.
-
for the purpose of understanding iodine's role in instinctive eating, I was wondering where animals that prefer it instinctively get this more-concentrated (Lugol-like) dose?
AFAIK only from Man. That's what I'm trying to find out. A great mystery to me, which leads to questions; for instance are wild animals including hummingbirds connected to the Akashic record? Are they reading our minds? Is all life one?
Thought experiments result is -> Duh!
So I asked why.
-
Iodine is certainly a nutrient in the correct form and dose while it becomes a poison in overdose.
D'accord, but it requires so much volume that nobody has done that.
It’s always the same, the instinct can properly regulate the amount of natural (primitive, primal) unprocessed stuff, but is deceived with processed stuff. As for everything, there’s a huge difference between chemically pure iodine and iodine naturally contained in complex organic molecules of living beings.
The problem is that nobody AFAIK has enabled their immune system with iodine naturally contained in complex organic molecules of living beings.
Only molecular iodine and potassium iodide succeed at enabling the immune system. I know that this does not make sense, but it is what is reported as happening.
-
Simone, how are you doing? Still stick to instinctive eating?
-
For Instincto to work and be a healthy diet it would have to base on what grows in the season where you live.
ONLY that way I can agree it might a great theory. Any other way is just an illusion and a lie. Sorry to be harsh but it is a biologic fact we can only consume carbs when we get plenty of sunlight on our skin, without getting hurt in one way or another. The sicker we are the more it will hurt to live in such a mismatch.
There is a reason why fruit grows only in seasons or places with lots of sun and not too cold.
There is a reason to that.
Everything in nature happends for a reason.
As long as Instincto do not see this fact, the theory is flawed to me.
Inger, eating in season is favorable. I agree with that. But as long as you are suffering of diseases one should eat foodstuff that helps your body rebuilding/healing most. Apparently there is a heavy bias towards exotic (tropical) fruits in such conditions. Maybe we are most adapted to these fruits?
-
Simone, how are you doing? Still stick to instinctive eating?
The progresses I've made are:
- I only eat at lunch and dinner and no more throughout the day, as Burger recommend (I realized that after I stopped eating when I was not hungry the problem of mucus is gone)
- As regards the fruit I do only mono meals and as regards the vegetables sometimes mono meals, other times I eat foods together (usually not more than two)
- Unfortunately I have not yet begun to eat animal foods because I can not find it cheap and high quality
I managed to find only: oysters reared in France, sardines fished in the Mediterranean Sea, organic eggs, tuna caught in the Pacific and in the Atlantic. The meat is raised only with cereals (not including antibiotics and synthetic hormones). Regarding the fish, however, fear the parasite anisakis...