Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: phatdave on August 04, 2009, 09:50:21 am
-
I know amylase breaks down starch into simple sugars. What rawpaleo food contains starch?
I know the answer is perhaps a simple one, but google can be unhelpful if you cannot phrase the question correctly.
Thanks guys/gals!
Dav
-
Covered before here: http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/general-discussion/to-chew-or-not-to-chew/msg14064/#msg14064
This is an example of where a FAQ section or Pinned threads would be helpful.
-
I see 2 possibilities :
Starch is paleo food. (maybe paleolithic animals had more glycogen in their flesh like today's horses ?)
This is a recent adaptation to starchy neolithic food.
-
Bananas are starchy foods.
Maybe bananas are paleo.
-
Starch is paleo food. (maybe paleolithic animals had more glycogen in their flesh like today's horses ?)
Do you exclude the possibility that our Paleolithic ancestors commonly ate plants containing starch such as various roots, peanuts, diverse kinds of lentils, beans and peas? There’s also starch in chestnuts and a little bit in cashew nuts, almonds, hazelnuts, pistachios, pecan nuts and so on !
-
Do you exclude the possibility that our Paleolithic ancestors commonly ate plants containing starch such as various roots, peanuts, diverse kinds of lentils, beans and peas? There’s also starch in chestnuts and a little bit in cashew nuts, almonds, hazelnuts, pistachios, pecan nuts and so on !
I agree. I reckon palaeo peoples must have eaten some starch in the form of raw tubers, bananas or whatever(mostly as famine food).
-
Are peanuts paleo food?
Raw peanuts taste quite good when you've just freshly uprooted them.
-
Are peanuts paleo food?
Raw peanuts taste quite good when you've just freshly uprooted them.
Peanuts are definitely not palaeo.
-
According to Wikipedia, that infallible souce of wisdom
Saliva contains the enzyme amylase that breaks some starches down into maltose and dextrin. Thus, digestion of food begins in the mouth. Salivary glands also secrete enzymes (salivary lipase) to start fat digestion.[4]
So maybe we have the amylase to digest glycogen and maybe occasional tubers etc, but like other things in raw paleo the balance between lipase and amylase has got skewed in response to the diet people have been eating.
Also, similarly to what Lex has said when our ancestors were forced to eat starches those that couldn't produce enough amylase would die, but no real genetic change has taken place that means we can't handle fats.
-
Do you exclude the possibility that our Paleolithic ancestors commonly ate plants containing starch such as various roots, peanuts, diverse kinds of lentils, beans and peas? There’s also starch in chestnuts and a little bit in cashew nuts, almonds, hazelnuts, pistachios, pecan nuts and so on !
Our paleo ancestors may ate some roots and tubers to survive.
However, I am not sure they ate them as a staple, at least before the use of fire to cook. Wild and raw, they are not edible in big amount by human.
Legumes, like grains, and modern fruits and nuts, are not strictly paleo as they could not be available without agriculture.
-
Fruits are available without agriculture. Nuts too. Many fruits are wildcrafted in my country. Must be the tropical climate.
The aetas, some of the last hunter gatherers - a small negroidal people I visited in their mountains say they go hunting setting traps and while waiting in the mountains they eat the wild mountain fruits available in the forest.
-
Our paleo ancestors may ate some roots and tubers to survive.
However, I am not sure they ate them as a staple, at least before the use of fire to cook. Wild and raw, they are not edible in big amount by human.
Legumes, like grains, and modern fruits and nuts, are not strictly paleo as they could not be available without agriculture.
Chestnuts, obviously various kinds of almonds and wild nuts such as pine nuts as well as some edible starchy tubers are certainly not produced by agricultural methods. What about cashew nuts ? Sweet potatoes ?
-
Cashews are native in my country. It grows wild crafted and just wild in the mountains.
The cashew fruit -- the fleshy part you can eat raw as a fruit. Not something as a staple though like papayas, bananas or mangoes.
The cashew nut is just the top part, inedible when raw, it's got some kind of acid that will burn your skin. Very dangerous, do not try it with your kids. You are obligated to cook the cashew nut for the nut to be edible to dissipate the acid.
The cashew acid is very useful. Its use was patented by a local inventor as a cure for warts. He has a chain of stores that treats warts and moles.
-
I don't know in the Philippines, but in Sri Lanka cashew are burned on a fire to get to the edible nut inside. There's a way to extract that nut without fire so that it remains raw, unheated. I can order such nuts from a French company run by some Instinctos. The taste of these nuts is quite different of the commercial heated ones.
-
Do pass on the technique how to extract the cashew nut without heating it. Will try it out here.
-
Sorry, I don't know myself how it is done, but I will ask them and let you know if they are willing to answer. You can see two zoomable pictures here: http://store.orkos.com/fra/noix-de-cajou.html
-
Fruits are available without agriculture. Nuts too. Many fruits are wildcrafted in my country. Must be the tropical climate.
The aetas, some of the last hunter gatherers - a small negroidal people I visited in their mountains say they go hunting setting traps and while waiting in the mountains they eat the wild mountain fruits available in the forest.
I can believe that certain hunter gatherers still eat some wild mountain fruits, but I would be very surprised that civilized people on a standard cooked diet eat raw wild fruits...
In Polynesia for instance, they are fruits (especially bananas and coconuts) everywhere, thanks to the favorable climate. People wildcraft them. But these are not wild fruits!
The only "hardy" banana I found there is always cooked. It is simply inedible raw, even overriped. And I am quite sure it is not really wild.
Wild fruits are full of seeds, fibers, small, with a thick skin, and with less water and sugar than modern fruits.
Selection, hybridation, intensive cultivation, use of chemical products, modern means of transportation, etc. are all required to product modern fruits.
-
Maybe Polynesia is like the Philippines.
Bananas, Coconuts, Papayas and many many fruits grow without care.
The mountains are near where we live and some fruit that grow in the mountains do taste great.
These aren't totally wild fruits, but close enough to what we need nutritionally.
Same as beef is not wild anymore even if grass fed
The only wild food out there I have access to is wild animal sea food.
Selection, hybridation, intensive cultivation, use of chemical products, modern means of transportation, etc. are all required to product modern fruits.
These "modern" fruits you talk about are the ones the Philippines exports. The locals don't eat these. Cavendish Bananas, Multinational Branded Pineapples, Branded Yellow Mangoes.
-
Wild fruits are full of seeds, fibers, small, with a thick skin, and with less water and sugar than modern fruits.
What about cempedaks, jackfruits, rambutans, leeches, wild sherries, blackberries, blueberries, figs, some kinds of prunes… ??
Selection, hybridation, intensive cultivation, use of chemical products, modern means of transportation, etc. are all required to product modern fruits.
No, that's wrong. Many kinds of fruit ("modern" ?) still grow naturally today without all those artifices and can be eaten on the trees or on the ground.
These aren't totally wild fruits, but close enough to what we need nutritionally.
Same as beef is not wild anymore even if grass fed
The only wild food out there I have access to is wild animal sea food.
Exactly ! :D
-
What about cempedaks, jackfruits, rambutans, leeches, wild sherries, blackberries, blueberries, figs, some kinds of prunes… ??
No, that's wrong. Many kinds of fruit ("modern" ?) still grow naturally today without all those artifices and can be eaten on the trees or on the ground.
Exactly ! :D
What makes you think that the fruits you cited have not been manipulated like all the others ?
Don't forget that all the modern fruits have been manipulated these last centuries to suit the taste of the majority of people who eat a cooked food diet, and who could not handle anymore the taste of wild fruits. It is thus not surprising that the water and sugar content have been increased, while all the rough material (fiber, seed, skin, etc.) have been reduced.
Some modern fruits indeed can grow alone if the climat is very favourable, like in the tropics. And even over there, trees need to be pruned, well spaced and have enough sun, if you want a good crop. I have worked several months in a fruits tropical garden on a Polynesian island (Wahine), and I can assure you that even bananas trees need to be maintained if you want a good crop on the long term. And not to talk about the daily clear of brushwood to access the fruits!
-
Maybe Polynesia is like the Philippines.
Bananas, Coconuts, Papayas and many many fruits grow without care.
The mountains are near where we live and some fruit that grow in the mountains do taste great.
These aren't totally wild fruits, but close enough to what we need nutritionally.
Same as beef is not wild anymore even if grass fed
The only wild food out there I have access to is wild animal sea food.
These "modern" fruits you talk about are the ones the Philippines exports. The locals don't eat these. Cavendish Bananas, Multinational Branded Pineapples, Branded Yellow Mangoes.
Well, if the diet of our paleo ancestors was based on wild animal products, as I believe it was, then the best we can do to mimic the paleo diet is to eat the animal products that are available today, wild being the best of course, otherwise pastured. We still get the protein, fat and micronutrients we need from modern cattle if they are bred according to their specie.
If wild fruits and plants were just an appetizer for our paleo ancestors, then modern fruits full of water and sugar can be eaten in tiny amount, or best totally avoid for many.
Instinctos are aware of the danger of modern fruits, but nevertheless many overeat them, and suffer all the symptoms associated with malnutrition (thinness, tiredness, food obsession, etc.).
-
How about sea weed? Would that require amylase?
If at one time humans were of the aquatic ape theory time?
Humans may have had sea weed, fish and shellfish as staple food.
-
Well, if the diet of our paleo ancestors was based on wild animal products, as I believe it was, then the best we can do to mimic the paleo diet is to eat the animal products that are available today, wild being the best of course, otherwise pastured. We still get the protein, fat and micronutrients we need from modern cattle if they are bred according to their specie.
Probably some of our paleo ancestors thrived mainly on land animal products (small animals, insects and worms previously to organized hunting of big animals) while some other groups in different locations, different climates, different environments, fed essentially on plants or on seafood or both.
If wild fruits and plants were just an appetizer for our paleo ancestors, then modern fruits full of water and sugar can be eaten in tiny amount, or best totally avoid for many.
“If it were just an appetizer”, IF being the key word. It’s not because you seem in a somewhat better shape by avoiding totally any fruit and plant food ever since a few months that the same is good for everyone and that it will be ok over a much longer duration, even for yourself. Can’t you admit for once and for good that everybody is different and that what seems to work ok for you since a few months won’t necessarily work for everybody and during a whole lifetime ?
Instinctos are aware of the danger of modern fruits, but nevertheless many overeat them, and suffer all the symptoms associated with malnutrition (thinness, tiredness, food obsession, etc.).
To be fair, you should refer to individual having eaten exclusively raw and instinctively since childhood or birth or at least for a very longtime rather than to some few whom we don’t know neither how they eat (sometimes vegetarians or almost) nor how their health was before starting eating raw. These persons could well be death or in an hospital bed if they had proceeded any longer with cooked food and dairy products. You know very well that our instincto friends Herve and family as well as GC Burger and his children which are still eating 100% instincto are in a wonderful shape. Same for Fabrice, his sister, mother and father, for Bernard and son as well as for several others we know, such as Julie for example.
Of course, if one considers obesity being a normal state, than most instinctos are not obese and one tend to adopt a critical look such as yours.
Cheers
Francois
-
here's my own theory (c)2009:
amylase = a neolithic addition to the human physiology
it may have been easier, it seems, for the body to genetically engineer amylase into the saliva than further down in the digestive tract (where the other digestive enzymes are located)
here's something in support of my theory:
domestic cats & dogs, 2 natural carnivores -- domestic cats, poor things, are incapable of producing salivary amylase; domestic dogs, however, do create salivary amylase if their owners feed them plant matter
you may want to google amylase cats dogs
{incidentally, human salivary amylase does not interfere w/ the digestion of meat since it becomes deactivated when the person eats acidic food such as raw meat}
-
Probably some of our paleo ancestors thrived mainly on land animal products (small animals, insects and worms previously to organized hunting of big animals) while some other groups in different locations, different climates, different environments, fed essentially on plants or on seafood or both.
Perhaps, I don't know, it is why I wrote "if", and "I believe".
“If it were just an appetizer”, IF being the key word. It’s not because you seem in a somewhat better shape by avoiding totally any fruit and plant food ever since a few months that the same is good for everyone and that it will be ok over a much longer duration, even for yourself. Can’t you admit for once and for good that everybody is different and that what seems to work ok for you since a few months won’t necessarily work for everybody and during a whole lifetime ?
Right. Time will tell.
To be fair, you should refer to individual having eaten exclusively raw and instinctively since childhood or birth or at least for a very longtime rather than to some few whom we don’t know neither how they eat (sometimes vegetarians or almost) nor how their health was before starting eating raw. These persons could well be death or in an hospital bed if they had proceeded any longer with cooked food and dairy products. You know very well that our instincto friends Herve and family as well as GC Burger and his children which are still eating 100% instincto are in a wonderful shape. Same for Fabrice, his sister, mother and father, for Bernard and son as well as for several others we know, such as Julie for example.
Well, I've had the opportunity to meet the majority of instinctos in France, and in general, except for young people like the ones you refer to (I was also in good shape at their age with SAD), they don't look healthy to me. (By the way, I looked like them when I was instincto). I agree that some have saved their life thank's to instincto, but I still think they could do better with more animal products and less fruits and vegetable.
Of course, if one considers obesity being a normal state, than most instinctos are not obese and one tend to adopt a critical look such as yours.
I am talking about skinny underweight people.
-
Well, I've had the opportunity to meet the majority of instinctos in France, and in general, except for young people like the ones you refer to (I was also in good shape at their age with SAD), they don't look healthy to me. (By the way, I looked like them when I was instincto). I agree that some have saved their life thank's to instincto, but I still think they could do better with more animal products and less fruits and vegetable.
Me too and I don't have the same impression. I cited Monique, Jean-Daniel, GC Burger, Bernard, Herve's father and mother. Most of them eat a lot of animal products. They are not young people although they look younger than their age and they are not thin at all, except perhaps GCB which is tall and slim. Two of GCB children are about your age. Am I right or wrong ??? ?
Typical example, a certain JC (that you may know and that I've known for 21 years) looked thin after he started eating instincto, when I met him. Some years latter, he has returned to cooked food, taken weight and he looks in good health... small problem, he got Alzheimer ! But he "looks good" -d
My sister was too fat but she found almost immediately a normal good and nice weight during the 10 years she ate instincto. In one or two weeks after returning to cooked food for social reasons, she has awfully fatten. She looks now like she's pregnant -X... but for some, that's a "healty look" >:
Cheers
François
-
Covered before here: http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/general-discussion/to-chew-or-not-to-chew/msg14064/#msg14064
This is an example of where a FAQ section or Pinned threads would be helpful.
Based on the posts, it appears most people ignored the link I provided, so I'll excerpt the relevant part:
"Many people (non-RPD) would undoubtedly point to the presence of amylase in saliva as prima facie evidence that man is meant to eat starchy vegetables. Else, they would argue, why would we have this adaptation if it served no use? Its a good argument. Indeed the presence of ptyalin in saliva appears to be a digestive adaptation to eating something starchy, on the basis that the resultant sugars are needed by some metabolic processes. However, it falls short in assuming that only starchy veggies have starch, which many here know to be false, as certain organs (liver) are relatively high in glycogen, an animal starch. ..." --sanilbd
6% of calories in liver come from carbs. This doesn't eliminate the possibility that the ptyalin is in human saliva to digest plants, but it does undercut the veg claim that humans aren't designed to eat meats because they have amylase in their saliva.