Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Hot Topics => Topic started by: PaleoPhil on September 08, 2009, 11:13:00 am
-
Unreferenced. Difficult births occur in all tribes, hardly being insignificant. And Inuit certainly don't have lower rates of difficult births by comparison to others.
Re: A day in the life of TylerDurden
« Reply #184 on: Today at 04:09:35 AM »
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/journals/a-day-in-the-life-of-tylerdurden/msg16684/?topicseen#new
I didn't have the time to fully address 1 issue that Paleophil claimed. It's actually well-known that death in childbirth was endemic in the Palaeolithic. In fact, one reason why female average lifespan was 5.4 years lower than the male average lifespan during the Palaeolithic was because of this factor. When one considers that males were prone to deaths during hunting etc., one can see that the number of deaths from childbirth was pretty high. As for claims re ease of childbirth of zero-carb diets, I have yet to see any real evidence of that.
Here's a link with quote:-
http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w/angel-1984/angel-1984-1a.shtml
"Paleolithic females died younger than males due to the stresses of pregnancy and childbirth while still carrying the burdens of food-collecting and moving camp. "
I figured this being a Paleo forum, you folks would have already heard about the easy childbirths among people on hunter-gatherer-type diets that every anthropologist who studies such people reports, if they discuss childbirth at all, but I guess not. Thank you for the opportunity to share one of the more amazing benefits of Paleo diets. The phenomenon of the excruciatingly painful modern childbirth (dystocia) has become so common and so embedded in our social psyche (I cannot count the number of TV and theater presentations I've seen of women screaming in agony during depictions of childbirth), that some people have trouble accepting the possibility that it might be generally unnecessary and avoidable. So I recommend trying to focus on the positive potential this offers, rather than the unnecessary horrors of the past. This is one of the more exciting topics of paleoanthropology and evolutionary medicine.
I would most appreciate any easy childbirth experiences people here may have had or have heard of to add to my collection. Thanks!
Effects of Modern Foods vs Ancestral/Paleo/Wild Foods on Pregnancy and Childbirth
Accumulating evidence links many complications of pregnancy and birth defects to modern foods (especially among peoples that have genes highly susceptible to damage from modern foods, such as peoples who only recently gave up a hunter gatherer way of life). These problems include the following and more:
Pregnancy problems: gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia, toxemia, intense morning sickness, polyhydramnios (too much amniotic fluid), sciatica, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, dystocia (obstructed pregnancy) ...
Effects on the child (both early on and long term): allergies, nutritional deficiencies, light sensitivity, nightmares, excessive screaming or crying at night, autism, ADD/ADHD, type 1 diabetes, Down Syndrome, Marfan Syndrome, lax ligaments (hypermobility; double jointed) and flat feet (which are commonly caused by lax ligaments in the foot), narrow jaw, arched upper palate with prominent and crowded front teeth, pectus excavatum and carinatum, muscle wasting, ...
In contrast, diets consisting mainly of Paleo foods are linked with easy pregnancy and childbirth and lower rates of birth defects. There is much research and the experience of multiple Paleo dieting mothers to confirm this.
A Darwinian View of Obstructed Labor
Robert P. Roy, MD, FRCSC
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
Address reprint requests to: Robert P. Roy, MD, FRCSC, 4398 Buchanan Street, #1805, Burnaby, BC, V5C 6R7, Canada; E-mail: robertproy@yahoo.ca.
Obstetrics & Gynecology 2003;101:397-401
© 2003 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
http://www.greenjournal.org/cgi/content/abstract/101/2/397
This essay discusses the evolutionary biology of dystocia. From a Darwinian standpoint, the high frequency of dystocia observed today seems evolutionarily untenable. Hunter-gatherers, most notably the Inuit [when eating their traditional diet], appear not to suffer from dystocia. It may be that people from an agriculture-based background are, obstetrically speaking, less well adapted to the good nutrition of a modern affluent diet.
Q: Is NeanderThin safe during pregnancy?
A (Ray Audette): As hunter-gatherers have the easiest births and the lowest incidence of birth defects, it is not only safe but is preferred. But before adopting any changes, you must consult your family physician. The pregnant woman craves added nutrients to nourish and sustain herself and her developing baby. The mother's immune system is also working hard to protect mother and child, so care must be taken to avoid the forbidden foods while satisfying cravings by increasing dietary diversity. In this way the nausea common in pregnancy can be greatly reduced if not eliminated.
Obesity, waist-hip ratio and hunter-gatherers
LEP Wood (2006)
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 113 (10), 1110-1116.
doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01070.x
Abstract
Obesity is a rapidly growing global problem. It is not simply the result of eating too much, and not all types of obesity have the same significance. Obesity is in part genetic, and one particularly important genetic type of obesity is the tendency to 'truncal obesity',-that is, a raised waist-to-hip ratio. Such obesity is powerfully associated not only with a tendency to diabetes, but also to cardiovascular disease, ('Syndrome X'). Interestingly, this is the type of obesity seen in every hunter-gatherer (HG) population around the globe. Such people are intolerant of carbohydrate, especially refined carbohydrate, especially in the excessive amounts typically consumed in affluent societies. In such pure HG communities, rates of diabetes can be as high as 50% [and higher], when the 'Western' lifestyle is adopted. Many of us, however, share some of their genes and their carbohydrate intolerance-perhaps as many as 20 or 30% of the world's population. Pregnancy can uncover this characteristic, and obesity and glucose intolerance in pregnancy are rapidly burgeoning problems. Quite contrary to the common nutritional dogma of encouraging regular carbohydrates, it is suggested that pregnant women with a high waist-to-hip ratio should be strongly advised to adhere to a low-glycaemic-index diet. Additionally, many dietary interventions, some of them derived from observation of HG populations, are of proven benefit in reducing the expression of glucose intolerance and may well help in tackling the obesity epidemic.
Rising caesarean section rates: can evolution and ecology explain some of the difficulties of modern childbirth?
W A Liston FRCOG
Department of Obstetrics, Simpson Centre for Reproductive Health, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
http://www.jrsm.org/cgi/content/full/96/11/559#REF15
[...] Why is it that modern human childbirth is so frequently associated with difficulty? Only occasionally has anyone attempted to explain this. [...]
With huge increases in population and later industrialization the life of modern woman and man bears little relation to that of the hunter-gatherer. Because biological evolution cannot keep pace, man is a hunter-gatherer living in a 21st century world. Admittedly, where selection pressures have been very strong (e.g. malaria and the haemoglobinopathies) there have been genetic changes, but the species retains much of the physiology of pre-agricultural times. Whereas hunter-gatherers went through tens of thousands of generations there have been only 500 generations of agriculturalists and just a few in the industrial era. Physicians and nutritionists have therefore proposed that certain modern diseases, particularly heart disease and type 2 diabetes, are caused by a maladaption to our current lifestyle. Similar arguments can be applied to reproductive health and obstetric performance.
CHANGES IN HUMAN ECOLOGY
There are four chief ways in which this misfit between biology and lifestyle could affect childbirth-diet, population density, exercise and reproductive behaviour. The diet in palaeolithic times was by most accounts richer in protein and poorer in carbohydrate, with a different pattern of fats.8,9 It was also very varied. In particular the carbohydrate component had little refined starch and sugar with much more fibre. The agriculturalists then moved to a diet with less protein and fat, and more complex carbohydrate. The modern western diet contains a super-abundance of food, especially sugar and fat with less protein than that of early upper palaeolithic man. In poorer parts of the world where protein is scarce, food consists largely of complex carbohydrate, but western tendencies and fast food are spreading to all parts of the globe.8,9 [...]
What is not widely known is that the invention of agriculture and the development of settled living had pronounced affects on physical stature. Study of skeletons points to adverse changes in the teeth11 and a general reduction of height.8,12-14 Angel 15 has charted the patterns over thousands of years. Humans were tall in early upper palaeolithic times and did not become as tall again until the late 20th century in Western Europe and the USA. ....
CONCLUSION
Changes in diet, population density, exercise and reproductive behaviour mean that primigravid women are commonly shorter, older and fatter than is ideal for first childbirth. These adverse factors have been well recorded....
From: TRUTH
By: amg455
Subject: Nutrition
Date/Time 2005-06-21 14:04:19
http://forum.dragondoor.com/nutrition/message/341942%5C
Weston A. Price, DDS, traveled worldwide in the 1930's to investigate the health of primitive peoples who could not obtain foods of the western world. He and his wife found that all of these primitive groups ate a diet very high in fat. Some ate primarily animal meat and fat while others ate primarily seafood. Their diets did not make a difference in their health. They were all extremely healthy, strong, robust and had almost no dental cavities. They all had a broad dental arch (jaw shape) and the women had very easy childbirths because of the broad pelvic structure. Children of these people who moved to a modern society area developed crowded teeth with many cavities, and the women suffered difficulties in childbirth similar to our present western society.
From: The Ascent of Humanity
by Charles Eisenstein
Penn State University
www.ascentofhumanity.com/chapter1-5.php
Weston Price, an American dentist who lived in the early 20th century .... was curious about the decline of dental health he had seen over the decades of his practice, and hypothesized that the rapid increase in the prevalence of tooth decay, crowded dentition, and so forth, which accompanied a host of other, formerly rare, non-dental maladies had something to do with our diets. So he quit his practice and spent many years traveling to remote corners of the world where people still lived without modern foods. The societies he visited weren't all Stone Age, but they were still primitive by our standards. For example he went to remote Swiss villages accessible only by mule, he went to the outer islands of Scotland, he lived with the Masai in Africa, the Inuit in Alaska, the aborigines in Australia, Polynesians in the Pacific. In all these places he found almost zero tooth decay, zero obesity, zero heart disease, zero cancer, easy childbirth, broad jaws with all 32 teeth. The diets were different everywhere but there were some things in common - for instance, people ate very few concentrated, refined carbohydrates or other processed foods. Price's work lends support to the contention that at least in some respects, primitive people enjoyed better health than is the norm today, even without the modern medicine that we think keeps us healthy.
Anecdotal Reports:
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 02:57:58 GMT
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Stacie Tolen <tolen4@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: paleo & pregnancy
Dear Jeremy,
I am a mother of two, and was a vegetarian during each of my pregnancies-Oops. I am sorry to say that due to the effects my diet had on my uterus and sacrum (and yes I can prove this), I endured a C-section with each of my children. I also suffered severe swelling, extreme fatigue, polyhydramnios, sciatica, and many more complications and such during my pregnancies. Though a longtime vegetarian, I craved buffalo meat like mad. Protein is absolutely essential during pregnancy, 80 mg daily. Conditions such as pre-eclampsia and the dreaded toxemia are attributed to protein deficiency. B-12 (available only in animal ingredients: meat, eggs, milk), folate, iron, calcium and vitamin C are others whose deficiency can cause tremendous problems for the pregnant woman, or worse, can damage the baby. Dairy products, especially those containing traces of hormones (BGH) can cause painful menstrual cramps, and possibly worsen pain with contractions. Soy is especially harmful to the fetus, and I have the child with autistic tendencies who proves that. When I eat grains, it causes problems with my joints (some people get arthritis) and if the pelvic and sacral joints are not functioning optimally, the baby will have problems getting through. While this organization does not speak of paleolithic diet, I do recommend that you check out http://www.bradleybirth.org for info. on prenatal nutritional requirements and, if you're interested, natural childbirth. Please do not confuse Bradley with Lamaze, they couldn't be more different and I personally do NOT recommend Lamaze or, worse, something wich claims to be a combination thereof. Your baby's mother should begin paying attention to her diet now if you plan to conceive in the next few months.
Best wishes, Stacie
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:57:19 -0500
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Brad Cooley <Bcooley@SOUTHDOWN.COM>
Subject: Re: Healthy Babies
Justin,
My first advice for your pregnant coworkers is to read The Continuum Concept by Jean Liedloff (http://www.continuum-concept.org/) and Our Babies, Ourselves by Meredith Small. These books really don't address nutritional aspects of childcare, but do address other issues that affect health. If they would like breastfeeding information, their local La Leche League (http://www.lalecheleague.org/) should have monthly meetings and individuals that can provide information and other support. LLL has been a great resource for my wife.
My wife gave birth to our first child in April 2000. Before she started incorporating paleo philosophy into her eating habits, she was unable to conceive. Within 3 weeks of going paleo, she was pregnant...maybe just a happy coincidence. During her pregnancy she gained only 25 lbs, gave birth to a 7 lb 10 oz girl, was walking within an hour of the birth, and dropped 35 lbs within a month (from pre-birth weight). I should point out that she didnt always eat paleo foods, but stuck to it pretty well. Certainly, her diet contributed to a relatively low weight gain, a successful natural childbirth, and significant loss of weight after childbirth. Also, IMO, because she eats a lot of meat, her milk production has been very good while breastfeeding. The baby is always well-fed, and sleeps very well at night.
Oddly enough many of the diets recommended for pregnant and lactating women are near-paleo, but with an emphasis on fruits and vegetables. The same can be said for children.
Let me know if you would like more info.
Brad
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:28:23 -0600
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 01:22:32 -0500
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Ray Audette <rso456@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject: Re: the "perils of childbirth" -- question for Ray
From: Jana Eagle >
> I am just wondering if you have some evidence about paleolithic
> childbirths and death statistics or if you are taking the modern-day
> media images of the traumatic operating room childbirth and
> transferring it onto paleolithic times.
I didn't mean to leave this impression. From studies cited by [Vilhjalmur] Stefansson,
hunter-gatherers have far less trauma and labor in childbirth than do
agricultural women. Just removing the hazards of gestational diabetes often
found in modern women ( resulting in very large babies) would improve these
statistics considerably but I suspect much more is involved.
When Gray-Hawk ( seven on May 14th ) was born, it was without doctors or
drugs. We arrived at the mid-wives['] at 3:15 PM and he arrived at 5:20 after
2 hours of mild labor […]. As my prediction, five months earlier, of the easiest birth they had ever seen came true, the midwives bought six copies of my book.
After one year he weaned himself from his mother and would eat almost
nothing but Pemmican for the next year. About the only exceptions were
watered-down fruit juice and pork rinds for teething.
Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:07:05 -0600
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Jana Eagle <jana@FIG.ORG>
Subject: toddlers and paleo
Rebecca Fincher <meegok2@HOTMAIL.COM> writes:
> 1. I was reading in the archives a chain titled "pain in childbirth?" that
> interested me because of my experience with PPD (not known to be present in
> tribal cultures or most "traditional" cultures)and because I have had 2
> C-sections (intended to have a natural birth both times). Is Ray Audette's
> wife an isolated example of paleodiet eaters who give birth quickly and w/o
> complications? Anyone else out there? Anyone with experience to the
> contrary? Is there any research on this available?
I can find out more about this, depending on your interest. I do know someone personally who had a very easy, painless birth and was following a paleo diet. I wish I knew of more paleo eaters and their birth experiences. I imagine there are so many circumstances that affect birth that every situation is different...
> 2. I have corresponded some with Stacie Tolen on this subject, but if there
> is anyone out there who has raised a toddler on this diet, I would
> appreciate your input. How do you keep enough calcium in the diet? (Both
> my kids still bf; maybe it's not a concern.) What foods do you prepare that
> your kids like/can eat?
believe it or not, I talked to my two year old and explained that sugar wasn't good for her body, and she doesn't ask for cookies, ice cream, candy like i thought she would. she will ask me if something has sugar in it and if it does she understands that we're not going to eat it. everywhere we go, people are offering her sugar, though. it makes me realize how much candy kids really do eat
we have this little game about food that "grows on trees". if it grows on trees or on a plant, we eat it. so she asks does coconut grow on trees? do kiwis grow on trees? and we talk about all the food that grows on trees.
i prepare almost all our meals at home and always pack snacks to take along on outings. she likes meat a lot, and goes through phases on fruits and vegetables and nuts, where she will really like one thing and eat a lot of it, and then a week later seems "finished" and moves on to something else. the freshest, in season produce seems the most attractive. also she likes jerky.
JAna
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:18:49 -0700
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Susan Carmack <scarmack@DOWCO.COM>
Subject: Paleo is in the Bible too!
Hi Kristina and paleopeoples,
....
I have a friend who went completely paleo - no grains - who just had a baby at her house in a tub of water. NO pain. 3 1/2 hours of labour. She is 40 and said it was so easy, she would have 'a million more'. Her husband agreed to one. She has 2 toddlers at home already!! This woman was originally scheduled for a Caesarian … because she almost died last time from heart disease/or an allergic reaction to penicillin.
Is this pain free birth indication that we could be close to going back to the Garden?
> Planting and tilling and harvesting,
> sweating in the fields from dawn to dusk,
> Until you return to that ground yourself, dead and buried;
> you started out as dirt, you'll end up dirt."
The advent of agricultural revolution and the cultivation of grains! This is coincident to Eliots post about the grains for slaves project. We became slaves when Adam and Eve got the boot! Adam and Eve had everything to eat in the Garden, no sweat involved:
(Genesis 2:8-9) . . .. 9 Thus God made to grow out of the ground every tree desirable to one's sight and good for food and also the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.
...but it didn't take long to wreck the Place.
Paleobest,
Susan
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:21:11 -0700
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Mermaid Rose <mermaidxrose@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Paleo pregnancy
To all the mamas-to-be, congratulations, and thanks for bringing healthy babies to the world. Midwife here, doiing home births for 20 years, water births as well... very ancient practices (duh, lol).
I believe paleo is the way of eating that creates healthier pregnancies. Obviously we are here today because of how we ate. There are pregnancy related health conditions that can be avoided by eating this way...ie gestational diabetes and toxemia (both which are treated by upping consumption of protein).
As far as the fish oil...it is the only supplement I recommend to my mamas....I am just not sure if the amount you are taking may be too much...wish I knew the answer. I would not recommend that much myself. Not based on anything other than gut feelings. I wish I could get everyone in my practice to eat the plaeo way....but alas...there are a bunch of vegetarians in the crowd! I love them all!
Remember to eat frequently...helps keep blood glucose even...helps especially with nausea (for which, btw, I also recommend protein). Snacking is a good way of getting all that. Especially nuts. Since you are wanting snacky foods, a nutty trail mix is a good way to take care of the desire of something crunchy and something sweet (put dried apples or apricots in it). Hard boiled eggs is another quick snack.
If I can be of any help, just write. Happy birthing!! Keep us updated.
Love & Peace
Lillian
Bad Modern Birthing Practices
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Marsha in Texas <marsha@CCMS.NET>
Subject: Re: Longevity and Paleo -- childbirth
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 05:08:45 -0800
From: Kenny Brown <pts_racer@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Longevity and Paleo
<snip>
>Interesting idea. Maybe the glucose IV's has
>something to do with causing a greater risk for
>infection following surgery.
In 1971 when our first son was born we wanted it to be a home birth. Complications changed that. I was in the hospital for less than 24 hours and had a drug-free birth. We insisted the baby not be given sugar-water as his first meal outside the womb! The pediatrician on duty [the one we'd spoken w/and who'd agreed to do as we wished was out of town the day Jake was born] went ballistic. He stormed into the recovery room, pointing his finger in my face, YELLing at me that I may have read a book about birthing babies but he was a trained professional and just who did I think I was talking to telling HIM he could not give my son sugar-water!! Whew!
-----Original Message-----
From: Paleolithic Eating Support List
[mailto:PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG] On Behalf Of Mrs Caroline Centa
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 4:02 AM
To: PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG
Subject: Re: pregnant paleo?
I was pregnant after I had been Paleo for 2 years. I was reasonably strict too. I got sent to a dietitian because the midwives said my diet was ridiculous and not sufficient. The Dietitian said it was fine. I had to make sure I was getting enough energy, calcium (100g almonds has twice as much calcium than 100mL of milk... we eat a lot of almonds in the form of almond meal. You can also get calcium from Kale, Brocolli etc) and carbs and fibre (lots of fruit, especially dried fruit was good for that).
I survived (although I did eat a couple of 'naughty' things due to cravings at the time) and the labour was very good (I had been told that being Paleo makes your body handle labour better and even though I haven't done it before I have witnessed 3 births and think I did really well - no drugs or interventions and not as much pain as I anticipated). My baby came out very healthy and alert. He was a good weight (6 pound 14) and was only 3 days early.
We have also been bringing him up on a Paleo diet and he is developing in leaps and bounds.
The Paleo diet is our natural diet. It does well for our bodies and our children. We are designed to eat the diet and be pregnant. I am also pregnant again (9 weeks now) and intend on doing the diet fully this time (not succumbing to the cravings). I am hoping by doing it properly the pain will be even less...
Paleo dieter, Rachel Matesz summed up the common-sense nature of improved pregnancies on a Paleo diet:
>Date: Thurs, 5 Aug 1999 22:24:40 +0200
>From: Rachel Matesz <matesz@earthlink.net
Subject: Paleo-pregnancy
>Re: Have any studies been done on paleo-pregnancies? Women following a
>paleo WOL
>during their pregnancy.
For: Maria Tomashefsky-Dugan and others. Are you serious? We don't need
any studies!!!! We have 2 1/2 million years of evidence that a Paleo diet
can support reproduction. How on earth do you think we got here? The PWOE
and PWOL isn't new. It's not a fad....it's the longest practiced WOL and
WOE on the planet. Every heard of a 2 million year old fad? Whatever we
modern people have been doing, it's a blink of an eye, a few minutes, if
that, in the context of a 24 hour block of time. ….
Easy birth vs Dystocia among animals:
Easy birthing vs. dystocia is even apparent in wild vs. domesticated animals. The ranch hands of the Adams Ranch in Florida said that they leave their grass-fed pregnant cows to handle births on their own out in the fields and there is rarely if ever a problem, whereas grain-fed cattle have much higher risks of complications and tend to require having a farmer or vet at hand during the birth, in case there are problems. Every wild animal birth I have seen on nature shows was amazingly quick and easy, whereas I have seen a grain-fed, barn-cooped cow in tremendous distress from her pregnancy.
-
What do you think of zero carb dieting for conception, pregnancy and birthing?
-
Well, I've made it clear that childbirth was very difficult even in the Palaeolithic era(re women on average dying 5 years younger than men due to complications via pregnancy and childbirth-contrast this with the fact that women live longer than men, nowadays!) but there's no excuse for some of the terrible misinformation re Weston-Price(and the endless testimonials are completely unnecessary (and useless/meaningless) as there are plenty of such equally dodgy positive testimonials re childbirth for every other extreme diet out there).
First off, let's list the grave errors you committed(unknowingly):- One of the biggest frauds that Weston-Price committed was the suggestion, first, that people became criminals as a result of generations of a bad diet; he also made an outrageously false claim that certain genetic diseases such as Down's Syndrome were due to diet(he even made a false claim of cure of that condition by using surgery! LOL!). Down's Syndrome is a defect of the chromosomes incurable by diet, and is one of the many, many reasons why Weston-Price is viewed as an outright fraud by scientists and many others, given such disgraceful claims.
There are other issues:- the modern medical approach to childbirth is to use drugs to force the child out at the doctor's discretion(due to lack of hospital beds) and then there's the bizarre wish by many mothers to endure Caesarian section during childbirth. However, these have bugger all to do with diet, and are simply due to foolish modern medical approaches. Modern women who go for more natural birthing methods have far fewer problems.
There is evidence showing that humans have even worse childbirth-related issues than the Neanderthals and it is acknowledged that even the Neanderthals had childbirth-problems:-
http://www.stonepages.com/news/archives/003278.html
Here's a further rather obvious point made re the difficulty of childbirth in modern humans, including native tribes etc.:- "Humans walk upright, and that means that our pelvis has had to move to run almost parallel to the spine rather than sitting at right angles to it as it does in most mammals. That alone would make birth difficult. But to complicate things further humans evolved high intelligence and large brains. So now we have to try to squeeze Mann infant with an oversized head out through a hole that is undersized" taken from http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006052004505
There are, of course, multiple other points such as why would native tribes need to resort to specific herbs to deal with difficult births if they had it so easy all the time? Similiarly, contrary to your statement, wild animals(while having much easier childbirth than humans due to the vagina being at the back than more to the front) do indeed have difficult births from time to time.
Of course, the biggest con Weston Price perpetrated was the claim that native tribes were all free of birth-defects. Any cursory knowledge of native tribes would show that any infant born with a genetic defect in such tribes would inevitably be left out to die of exposure as the native tribes simply didn't have the resources to take care of such individuals - so that the only people left would be the healthy ones most likely to survive. That's one of the (more minor) reasons why infant mortality was so high in both the Palaeolithic era and up till very recently in historical time.
But my main gripe is the constant reference to Weston-Price. The man's an outright fraud and should not be referenced with such devotion.
-
Childbirth doesn't seem so hard.
The incompetent "birthers" get weeded out.
In 1960 Filipino women had a fertility rate of 7 children per woman.
After that in the 1970s the imperialists arrived and poured billions in birth control propaganda.
-
To TD
You need to reread NAPD. That Down Syndrome kid had palate expansion surgery, WAP admitted that the kid got worse...Hardly a cure!
I think WAP was on to something when he talked criminals showing cranial deformities/lesions. (my own personal observations) People with symmetrical bodies are more likely to be smarter/better sportsman.
Did price claim primitive tribes were free of birth defects, you need to check that one up.
If WAP is an out right fraud then where do we go from here?
-
I agree Andrew. I'm of the belief that Price has provided extremely valuable input. It has also been my own observations that he was onto something linking the skeletal deformations with criminality (I've noticed this particularly through my work over the last 6 yrs with adults with substance misuse issues and prolific persistent offenders).
I, too, believe that diet is a huge factor even in cases such as Downs. Just because a disease or problem is shown to be genetic in origin does not, IMO, mean that it is totally unrelated to parental or ancestral diet. Surely the point was that such deviations from a natural diet begin to appear in all forms of disease and symptoms over multiple generations?! What is the root causation for the chromosome defects?
RE: Easy childbirth, my own recent experiences are quite positive. My partner does not follow a paleodiet but I did have significant input throughout the pregnancy regarding her diet and she eventually gave birth to an extremely healthy baby boy of 7lb 13oz in May of this year. It was her first pregnancy, she was strong and full of energy throughout and it ended in a completely natural birth without ANY pain relief whatsoever - except for hot towels and getting me into a headlock during contractions!! :o My new son is developing very well and shows signs of being physically and mentally advanced already. Throughout her pregnancy (and also now whilst breastfeeding) I ensured my partner ate plenty of grass-fed meats, liver, heart, fish, eggs, bone stock and blue ice cod liver oil. I guess her diet could be considered as WAP-like with an attempted emphasis on RAF (including non-paleo raw butter & cream).
-
Michael, if you don't mind it would be really cool for you to do a journal or semi-journal of your child's development and what you're doing to help it along. It drives me crazy watching parents these days stuffing sugar down their kids throats and then screaming at them and having to bother with them crying or running away every few minutes. I think to myself that if kids behaved this way in the jungle we would not be here today, our ancestors would have all died as children.
-
Childbirth doesn't seem so hard.
The incompetent "birthers" get weeded out.
In 1960 Filipino women had a fertility rate of 7 children per woman.
After that in the 1970s the imperialists arrived and poured billions in birth control propaganda.
Childbirth is very difficult for humans by comparison to other species. And , bear in mind, if the so-called "incompetent birthers" really were weeded out, then evolution would favour those people with much smaller heads in proportion to their body-size given the difficulty of passing through the birth-canal, with the result that the human race would be a lot less intelligent over the millenia.
-
To TD
You need to reread NAPD. That Down Syndrome kid had palate expansion surgery, WAP admitted that the kid got worse...Hardly a cure!
I think WAP was on to something when he talked criminals showing cranial deformities/lesions. (my own personal observations) People with symmetrical bodies are more likely to be smarter/better sportsman.
Did price claim primitive tribes were free of birth defects, you need to check that one up.
If WAP is an out right fraud then where do we go from here?
I don't see WAP as an authority on rawpalaeo. He recommended dairy and grains, stated that cooked food was fine as long as a little raw animal food was also eaten, and other faux pas.
As regards the down's syndrome comment(originally raised by paleophil) here is a paragraph or two making the outrageous WP-based claim that he helped a boy mostly recover from Down's Syndrome:-
"Dr. Price paid particular attention to a sixteen year old boy who had Down's syndrome (or what they termed mongolism) and had been born to an older mother who was sickly at the time of his conception. Down's syndrome often occurs in children of mothers who are over 40 or to mothers experiencing reproductive exhaustion. Dr. Weston Price felt that perhaps the crowding of the pituitary gland caused by constrictive jaw structure, contributed to the underdeveloped sexual organs and mental capacities.
Through surgery Dr. Price widened the boy's maxillary arch, which resulted in improvement of the mongoloid features and a definite increase in mental abilities. The boy wore an appliance in his mouth to keep the bones in place but when it subsequently became dislodged, he reverted and many of his previous abnormal characteristics returned."[/quote]
http://www.ppnf.org/catalog/product_reviews_info.php?products_id=226&reviews_id=12&osCsid=55e273b407e82a7d36c5a2b88ab092c0
Just shocking that WP claimed to help a Down's Syndrome patient supposedly get back mental abilities, solely through surgery. That's what I mean by fraud. Sure the recovery was claimed to be short-term, but to even suggest improvement in mental condition for something as serious(and genetic-based) as Down's Syndrome is fraudulent.
As for the birth- defect comment that is frequently mentioned by the WAPF. Price did make claims re diet supposedly improving the health offuture babies:-
http://www.motherlindas.com/roe.htm
As for the claim re symmetrical bodies, I've only heard of 2 claims which may or may not be scientific:- the first claim is that people with symmetrical bodies are seen as more attractive, and that people with asymmetrical bodies tend to be more likely to be overly emotional. I've honestly never heard of claims re symmetry and sports/IQ(only bodybuilding would actually require symmetry to win re judges ). Interesting claim, anyway.
My main point, though, is that WP and the WAPF are rotten through and through and if we all view WP as some sort of deity then we'll just be viewed with derision by the mainstream. The way I see it, if we can frequently criticise Aajonus for some of his more ludicrous statements(such as that old yarn about coyotes supposedly converting him to a raw food diet), then we should do the same as regards WP's more impossible claims.
-
I, too, believe that diet is a huge factor even in cases such as Downs. Just because a disease or problem is shown to be genetic in origin does not, IMO, mean that it is totally unrelated to parental or ancestral diet. Surely the point was that such deviations from a natural diet begin to appear in all forms of disease and symptoms over multiple generations?! What is the root causation for the chromosome defects?
The point is that the damage to the chromosomes and the really nasty effects derived therefrom cannot be cured simply by diet(or surgery!LOL!). I can accept that minor symptoms can be removed(eg:- some autistic children are said to improve re digestion after cutting out dairy and grains from their diet - and they might even improve very slightly in terms of alertness and concentration or some similiar minor symptom). But it would be extremely misleading to suggest, in the way of Weston-Price, that conditions as severe as autism (or down's syndrome or whatever) could be cured just by diet.
-
It certainly could be that the genetic defect causes the shape of the jaw to be wrong, which then causes then mental problems, or some of them. Did you ever think of that Tyler? So therefore you're both right, surgery cannot cure the Down's Syndrome (the defect in jaw formation) but can cure the symptoms (mental retardation). Just one of the many options that I don't think you've considered before jumping to claims of fraud.
-
Yes, I think using such strong terminology as fraud is a bit strong and Kyle again makes a good point.
To be honest, I never did read NAPD thoroughly and much of it may well be inaccurate or later proven incorrect. But, it does contain much information of great value IMO as does the work of SF and the WAPF. Also, I do think that - in the same manner as AV in some respects - it has proven a valuable tool in engaging people's awareness to what is, essentially, a spectrum of thought encompassing all of these 'diets' - WAP, Primal, Paleo, Raw Paleo etc. That can only be a good thing!
Did WAP claim, as you suggest Tyler, that a person suffering autism or down's could be cured by diet? Autism and other problems such as aspergers are - as far as I'm aware - caused by various factors including pre-natal injury/infection. This could include dietary or toxic factors. Once the damage is done I certainly do not believe it is fully reversible by diet. As I said, I didn't fully read NAPD but I didn't take from it that WAP thought this to be the case either. I took that it could be prevented by diet alone. The surgical intervention is another thing altogether but, I think, not something to be flippantly dismissed as it, too, may hold some value.
Kyle, I empathise with your frustrations regarding many modern parents and what is, effectively, abuse of their children. Ignorance may provide justification for some as does financial hardship and media brainwashing provide a modicum of excuse for others. But a blatant lack of care for the health & welfare of one's own children is rife and I am filled with trepidation for the long-term consequences for our society. I have been working with vulnerable adults in the social work field, as I mentioned, for the last 6 years or so and experience this behaviour repeatedly and predictably. It is not even new. We're now in the 2nd and 3rd generation of this form of parenting and it's consequences are evident for all to see in the form of criminality, social irresponsibility, and bloated welfare & NHS budgets.
Time allowing, I would be happy to add some kind of journal regarding the raising and development of my son if others, too, were to consider it of value? It would probably be useful to me also as I would certainly appreciate the input of many of the wise people on this forum. The time to start weaning is not going to be too far away!!
-
As for the claim re symmetrical bodies, I've only heard of 2 claims which may or may not be scientific:- the first claim is that people with symmetrical bodies are seen as more attractive, and that people with asymmetrical bodies tend to be more likely to be overly emotional. I've honestly never heard of claims re symmetry and sports/IQ(only bodybuilding would actually require symmetry to win re judges ). Interesting claim, anyway.
We don't need scientific studies. Look at the world cup soccer players when the camera pans across before the start of the match, theyre all symetrical and have broad arches and have well developed jaws/cheek bones... Theyr'e aren't too many ugly players.
Cranial deformities are rife among the criminals/down trodden in society. Life is brutal.
High palates are common in people with schizophrenia etc
There are anecdotal reports from more wholistic minded orthodontists/orthopaedicians that gentle palate expansion and balanced craniums has a positive effect on mood and cognition. It makes a whole lotta sense if the nervous system is given space instead of being twisted and contricted between cranial bones, how can you think straight when the cranium doesn't allow enough space for all the nerves and proper oxygen/blood flow.
I second RawKyles request on Michael starting some sort of journal. One thing I find weird is when I see parents forcing babies to eat cooked carby crap...the babies are not hungry and then the kid will throw it up or crap it out moments later. I wonder if the kid would vomit as much and require less nappies if eating raw meat/liver. I think so.
-
[Explanatory note: after I wrote this I realized that I used Down and Down's interchangeably. "Down Syndrome" is the most common term in the US. "Down's Syndrome" is the standard term in the rest of the world. So they are both OK. Marfan and Marfan's are also both commonly used, though a charity I'm familiar with prefers Marfan, so I tend to use that from their influence.]
First off, let's list the grave errors you committed(unknowingly):-
If by error you mean to imply that I'm claiming that diet is the SOLE cause of Down Syndrome, then my words conveyed much more than was intended. I'm sorry it wasn't more clear, but I did write, "Accumulating evidence links," not "the sole cause is." At the time I wrote that I meant that diet had been linked by scientists as a contributor to and/or exacerbator of Down Syndrome. I wrote this stuff years ago and didn't check it for clarity before I posted it. I don't think I even knew at that time that Weston Price had discussed Down's (but thanks for the tip--I zipped through some of his writings years ago and probably missed that). I do not consider dietary factors to be the sole cause of Down Syndrome. Both Down and Marfan Syndromes have heavy genetic components, but there is also tons of information on dietary aspects, including dietary therapies (which are in no way claimed to be anything like cures--I hope I come across loud and clear on that). Sandy Simmon's CTDS website is a great resource that has links to lots of studies on the dietary aspects of Marfan Syndrome, BTW.
One of the biggest frauds that Weston-Price committed was ...
I understand you were badly misled by the advocacy of raw dairy by the writings of WAP and other prominent leaders in the pro-raw-dairy crowd. I was briefly misled by the urgings of that crowd as well, suffered nasty consequences as a result, and I am no fan of theirs, but I'm not sure that it's very constructive to use nearly every mention of anything they touched upon as an opportunity to go on tangents bashing them and I don't want this thread to be highjacked by a WAP debate. Why not start your own thread on that?
I agree that it's not plausible that Down's Syndrome can ever be "cured" or even put into "remission" by diet. I don't know what Price said about it, if I ever read it, and I'm not here to defend everything he ever wrote. I only cite that which I think has some merit and is supported by other science. Besides, I provided plenty more than just Weston Price stuff on childbirth, so if you don't like those bits just ignore them and enjoy the rest, and I don't think there are any WAP references in the Down's Syndrome stuff, but if there are, you can just ignore those too.
... I, too, believe that diet is a huge factor even in cases such as Downs. Just because a disease or problem is shown to be genetic in origin does not, IMO, mean that it is totally unrelated to parental or ancestral diet. Surely the point was that such deviations from a natural diet begin to appear in all forms of disease and symptoms over multiple generations?! What is the root causation for the chromosome defects?
Yes, thanks, Michael. You seem to have understood the general intent of my words. I agree that the evidence is strong for a link between diet and Down's. How huge a factor it is will I hope be revealed by future research and therapies. The potential for some benefit from nutritional therapy is uplifting, but I try not to get too carried away, as some people probably will not respond to nutritional therapy nearly as well as others and we don't know what it can do or how much it can prevent (and I think prevention is the key, of course).
Down's Syndrome is one of my areas of interest. My father got me started on it, as he used to do charity work for children with Down's Syndrome and he made some interesting connections after I told him about the Paleo diet, gluten intolerance and its symptoms, and other nutritional matters. Like Tyler, I was a skeptic at first (though not quite as forceful ;) ). I told him there surely couldn't be any connection between diet or nutrition and a genetic disease like Down's, and surely nutritional therapy would not help in the slightest--but ever the hopeful optimist, he urged me to look into it. You may be interested in what I found:
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 07:26:46 -0400
Reply-To: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Don Wiss <donwiss@BONDCALC.COM>
Subject: Re: Autism and Down
Muriel Hykes <drmom@GEOCITIES.COM> asked::
>>disease. Nutritional therapy has also been shown to have major effects
>>in Down's Syndrome children.
>
> Thank you. Todd or someone had asked me about that and I can't
find the
>source, but I DO remember reading that Down children have exceptional
>likelihood of ear infections and they frequently had milk allergy.
There have been many studies showing that a high proportion of Down's
children have problems with gluten. Two articles with many citations on
this can be found on my Reichelt page at:
http://www.panix.com/~donwiss/reichelt.html
Also here's a third, which I've not yet included at this site. Don.
From: K.L.Reichelt@rh.uio.no (Kalle Reichelt)
Subject: Downs syndrome
Date: 08/19/96 04:39:59 PM EDT
Hi.
I know nothing about the mechanisms causing the Fanconi syndrome. It is
correct that there is s slight increase in the frequency of coeliac disease
in Downs. More important though is the fact that without Downs syndrome
more than 1/3 of the children have extremely high IgA antibodies against
gliadin, gluten, lactoglobulin and casein as well as ovalbumin without
endomysium antibodies being increased.(1,2) There is an inverse
relationship size of the children and level of IgA to gliadin and gluten.
C P Reading in Australia thinks that there is a causal relationship Downs
because of the increase in antibodies found also by him (3).
Ref:
1: Kanavin \ et al (1988) Immunological studies of patients with Down's
syndrome. Acta med Scand. 224: 474-477.
2: Reichelt KL et al (1994) Increased levels of antibodies to food proteins
in Down Syndrome. Acta Paed japon 36: 489-492.
3: Reading CM (1984) Down's syndrome: Is Gluten/Alpha-gliadin
sensitivity/coeliac disease the cause? Int J Biosocial Res 6: 62-65.
All the best Cheers
TINY
K. Reichelt
Pediatric Research Institute
N-0027 Oslo, Norway
Tel: +47 22 86 90 45
Fax: +47 22 86 91 17
E-mail: K.L.Reichelt@rh.uio.no
Downs syndrome and gut permeability
Date: 11 Sept 1995
http://gluten-free.org/reichelt.html#fourteen
Hi.
Many Downs syndrome children have very high levels of IgA and also IgG antibodies to food proteins (1,2) even if most of these do not have endomycium antibodies and a normal gut lining. We have interpreted this as indicating increased gut permeability but in most cases not a coeliac condition. There is an inverse relationship between the size of the children and the level of these antibodies (1). Apparently also Downs syndrome with autism is more frequent than expected (3). I have four children with this combined state so far.
It also is very relevant that Shattock found peptide increases in the urine of such patients (4).
We also find substantial peptide increases in coeliacs (Reichelt et al submitted) and thus confirming data published on increases in hydrolysis released amino acids in the urine of coeliacs. (5)
References:
1: Kanavin \ et al (1988) Immunological studies of patients with Downs syndrome. Acta Med Scand 224: 474-477.
2: Reichelt KL et al (1994) Increased levels of antibodies to food proteins in Down syndrome. Acta paediat Japon. 36: 489-492.
3: Howlin P et al (1995) The recognition of autism in children with Down syndrome - implications for intervention and some speculations about pathology. develop Med and Child neurol. 37: 398-414.
4: Shattock P et al (1990) Role of neuropeptides in autism and their relationships with classical neurotransmitters. Brain Dysfunct 3: 328-346.
5: Klosse JA et al (1971) An automated chromatographic system for the combined analysis of urinary peptides and amino acids. Clin Chim Acta 42: 409-422.
Down. (From: "Collected Net Articles of Kalle Reichelt, M.D.")
Date: 05/08/96 08:52:10 AM
http://gluten-free.org/reichelt.html#twentyfour
Because most of the Down children have IgA and often IgG antibodies way above the upper normal limit but usually without endomycium positive test: this is not coeliac disease but a sign of vastly increased gut permeability to protein uptake.
That intact protein uptake is a reality also normally, is illustrated by botulinum toxin which kills us and a series of papers showing uptake of intact proteins (1,2). Even bioactive enzymes (as is botulinum toxin) is taken up in bioactive form (3-5). This uptake is further confirmed by the secretion of such proteins in mothers milk (6-9). This is why we all have some IgG antibodies to the usual food proteins.
However, it is also clear that the complete Down syndrome is more often found with coeliac disease too (10). (Biopsy and endomycium +).
I think the personally that the MHC genetics only tells us something about increased affinity for certain epitopes increasing the chance of antibody formation (11). Thus the real problem may rather be in epitope presentation from food proteins. this remains to be elucidated of course.
References:
1: Husby S et al (1985) passage of undegraded dietary antigen into the blood of healthy adults. Scand J Immunol 22: 83-92.
2: Paganelli R and Levinsky, RJ (1980) Solid phase radioimmunoassay for detection of circulating food protein antigen in human serum. J Immunol methods 37: 333-340.
3: Schoutsen N and DeJong JN (1984) Xanthine oxidase in rabbit plasma afterapplication of a bovine milk preparation to small intestine. Arch int Physiol et de biochim 92: 379-384.
4: Oster KA et al (1974) Immune response to bovine xanthine oxidase in atherosclerotic patients. Amer lab. 6: 41-47.
5: Gardner MLG and Steffens K-J. (1995) Absorption of orally administered enzymes. Springer Verlag, Berlin.
6: Kilshaw PJ and Cant AJ (1984) The passage of maternal dietary protein into human breast milk. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 75: 8-15.
7: Troncone R et al (1987) Passage of gliadin into human milk. Acta paed Scand 76: 453-456.
8: Axelsson I et al (1986) Bovine betalactoglobulin in human milk. Acta paed Scand 75: 702-707.
9: Stuart CA et al (1984) passage of cow's milk protein in breast milk. Clin Allergy 14: 533-535.
10: Hilhorst MI et al (1993) Down Syndrome and coeliac disease: five new cases with a review of the literature. Eur J pediatr 152: 884-887.
11: Harrison LC (1995) Antigen-specific therapy for autoimmune disease:prospects for prevention of insulin-dependent diabetes. Molecular med 1: 722-727.
"A number of studies have examined the nutritional status of children with Down's syndrome. These children consume lower amounts of calories but are more likely to be obese and to have specific nutrient deficiencies in their diets. 3, 4 Malabsorption is thought to contribute to the health consequences of Down's syndrome, such as cardiovascular disease and Alzheimer's disease, and in a small preliminary study, stool analyses showed that all of four Down's syndrome patients examined had insufficient digestion. 5 Researchers have long suggested that gluten sensitivity may be a cause for malabsorption in many Down's syndrome patients. 6, 7 Many recent studies have established a link between Down's syndrome and celiac disease. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 The immune systems of individuals with celiac disease produce antibodies to gliadin, a protein from wheat gluten and some other grains, and these antibodies damage the intestines resulting in malabsorption and diarrhea. The treatment for celiac disease is complete avoidance of dietary gluten. The prevalence of celiac disease among people with Down's syndrome in these studies ranged between 3.9% and 16.9%, more than 100 times the prevalence in the general population. Antibodies to gliadin have been found to be elevated in many people with Down's syndrome who do not express the severe symptoms of celiac disease. 18, 19, 20, 21 One study found antibodies to proteins from egg and dairy to be elevated in a high percentage of Down's syndrome patients. 22 Patients with Down's syndrome should be evaluated by a doctor for these types of food sensitivities, as well as for celiac disease.
3. Luke A, Sutton M, Schoeller DA, Roizen NJ. Nutrient intake and obesity in prepubescent children with Down syndrome. J Am Diet Assoc 1996;96:1262-7.
4. Chad K, Jobling A, Frail H. Metabolic rate: a factor in developing obesity in children with Down syndrome? Am J Ment Retard 1990;95:228-35.
5. Abalan F, Jouan A, Weerts MT, et al. A study of digestive absorption in four cases of Down's syndrome. Down's syndrome, malnutrition, malabsorption, and Alzheimer's disease. Med Hypotheses 1990;31:35-8.
6. Reading CM. Down's syndrome: nutritional intervention. Nutr Health 1984;3:91-111 [review].
7. Storm W. Prevalence and diagnostic significance of gliadin antibodies in children with Down syndrome. Eur J Pediatr 1990;149:833-4.
8. Zubillaga P, Vitoria JC, Arrieta A, et al. Down's syndrome and celiac disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1993;16:168-71.
9. Castro M, Crino A, Papadatou B, et al. Down's syndrome and celiac disease: the prevalence of high IgA-antigliadin antibodies and HLA-DR and DQ antigens in trisomy 21. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1993;16:265-8.
10. Jansson U, Johansson C. Down syndrome and celiac disease. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1995;21:443-5.
11. George EK, Mearin ML, Bouquet J, et al. High frequency of celiac disease in Down syndrome. J Pediatr 1996;128:555-7.
12. George EK, Mearin ML, Bouquet J, et al. Screening for coeliac disease in Dutch children with associated diseases. Acta Paediatr Suppl 1996;412:52-3.
13. Bonamico M, Rasore-Quartino A, Mariani P, et al. Down syndrome and coeliac disease: usefulness of antigliadin and antiendomysium antibodies. Acta Paediatr 1996;85:1503-5.
14. Gale L, Wimalaratna H, Brotodiharjo A, Duggan JM. Down's syndrome is strongly associated with coeliac disease. Gut 1997;40:492-6.
15. Carlsson A, Axelsson I, Borulf S, et al. Prevalence of IgA-antigliadin antibodies and IgA-antiendomysium antibodies related to celiac disease in children with Down syndrome. Pediatrics 1998;101:272-5.
16. Hansson T, Anneren G, Sjoberg O, et al. Celiac disease in relation to immunologic serum markers, trace elements, and HLA-DR and DQ antigens in Swedish children with Down syndrome. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1999;29:286-92.
17. Pueschel SM, Romano C, Failla P, et al. A prevalence study of celiac disease in persons with Down syndrome residing in the United States of America. Acta Paediatr 1999;88:953-6.
18. Castro M, Crino A, Papadatou B, et al. Down's syndrome and celiac disease: the prevalence of high IgA-antigliadin antibodies and HLA-DR and DQ antigens in trisomy 21. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1993;16:265-8.
19. Lazzari R, Collina A, Arena G, et al. Celiac disease in children with Down's syndrome. Pediatr Med Chir 1994;16:467-70 [in Italian].
20. Bonamico M, Rasore-Quartino A, Mariani P, et al. Down syndrome and coeliac disease: usefulness of antigliadin and antiendomysium antibodies. Acta Paediatr 1996;85:1503-5.
21. Carlsson A, Axelsson I, Borulf S, et al. Prevalence of IgA-antigliadin antibodies and IgA-antiendomysium antibodies related to celiac disease in children with Down syndrome. Pediatrics 1998;101:272-5.
22. Kanavin O, Scott H, Fausa O, et al. Immunological studies of patients with Down's syndrome. Measurements of autoantibodies and serum antibodies to dietary antigens in relation to zinc levels. Acta Med Scand 1988;224:473-7.
[Down's Syndrome, http://12.42.224.225/Library/HealthGuide/cam/topic.asp?hwid=hn-3565005]"
And I just did some more checking, since it's been a while, and found these (it's exciting how much new research has come out since I last checked):
Down's Syndrome and Gluten:
1:
Prospective human leukocyte antigen, endomysium immunoglobulin A antibodies, and transglutaminase antibodies testing for celiac disease in children with Down syndrome.
Wouters J, Weijerman ME, van Furth AM, Schreurs MW, Crusius JB, von Blomberg BM, de Baaij LR, Broers CJ, Gemke RJ.
J Pediatr. 2009 Feb;154(2):239-42. Epub 2008 Sep 25.
PMID: 18822429 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
2:
Celiac disease: what's new about it?
Gasbarrini G, Malandrino N, Giorgio V, Fundarò C, Cammarota G, Merra G, Roccarina D, Gasbarrini A, Capristo E.
Dig Dis. 2008;26(2):121-7. Epub 2008 Apr 21. Review.
PMID: 18431061 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
3:
Tissue transglutaminase antibodies are a useful serological marker for the diagnosis of celiac disease in patients with Down syndrome.
Shamaly H, Hartman C, Pollack S, Hujerat M, Katz R, Gideoni O, Shamir R.
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2007 May;44(5):583-6.
PMID: 17460490 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
4:
Thyroid disorders in Brazilian patients with celiac disease.
da Silva Kotze LM, Nisihara RM, da Rosa Utiyama SR, Piovezan GC, Kotze LR.
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2006 Jan;40(1):33-6.
PMID: 16340631 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
5:
Celiac disease genetics: current concepts and practical applications.
Sollid LM, Lie BA.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Sep;3(9):843-51. Review.
PMID: 16234020 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
6:
Coeliac disease diagnosed at Starship Children's Hospital: 1999-2002.
Westerbeek E, Mouat S, Wesley A, Chin S.
N Z Med J. 2005 Aug 12;118(1220):U1613.
PMID: 16132074 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
7:
Which is the best screening test for celiac disease in Down syndrome children?
Bonamico M.
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2005 Feb;40(2):125-7. No abstract available.
PMID: 15699683 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
8:
[Screening gor celiac disease can be justified in high-risk groups]
Sjöberg K, Carlsson A.
Lakartidningen. 2004 Nov 25;101(48):3912, 3915-6, 3918-9. Review. Swedish.
PMID: 15631226 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
etc., etc., etc.
-
RE: Easy childbirth, my own recent experiences are quite positive. ...
Thanks for the contribution, Michael. I'll add that pregnancy and birthing experience to my files.
What do you think of zero carb dieting for conception, pregnancy and birthing?
It's an excellent question. I think pregnancy and early childhood are critically important times for good Paleo nutrition, but I'm not sure that pure ZC is necessarily the best approach during pregnancy, even though I am a near-ZC carnivore myself, as I seem to recall some reports that some scientists believe that Stone Age peoples gave some special foods to pregnant mothers, and some traditional peoples of today still do that, I think. I think all the success stories I provided were from cooked Paleo diets, but I don't recall any of them being ZC. Raw Paleo might be even better. The ZC forum might have info on ZC pregnancy.
-
It certainly could be that the genetic defect causes the shape of the jaw to be wrong, which then causes then mental problems, or some of them. Did you ever think of that Tyler? So therefore you're both right, surgery cannot cure the Down's Syndrome (the defect in jaw formation) but can cure the symptoms (mental retardation). Just one of the many options that I don't think you've considered before jumping to claims of fraud.
Surgery alone cannot improve mental retardation.There is consistent proof that the mental retardation involved in Down's Syndrome is wholly genetic-based(eg:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5151232.stm
) In short, it's simply ridiculous to claim that mental retardation from birth can be cured solely by surgery(or diet). Now, if someone had an axe hacked slightly into his head, then surgery/removal of the axe would perhaps help matters, but it wouldn't solve a genetic condition.
-
Yes, I think using such strong terminology as fraud is a bit strong
Fraud is a very accurate description. Price was not rigorously scrutinised by scientists and made all sorts of outrageous claims which have subsequently been proven to be not at all presentative of the real life of native tribes.
To be honest, I never did read NAPD thoroughly and much of it may well be inaccurate or later proven incorrect. But, it does contain much information of great value IMO as does the work of SF and the WAPF. Also, I do think that - in the same manner as AV in some respects - it has proven a valuable tool in engaging people's awareness to what is, essentially, a spectrum of thought encompassing all of these 'diets' - WAP, Primal, Paleo, Raw Paleo etc. That can only be a good thing!
I'm not denying that weston-Price had some useful info to draw on. After all, no one person can be 100% correct(or 100% wrong). However, I do find that large numbers of people in the RVAF world wrongly view him, unquestioningly, as some sort of infallible authority. And given his many fraudulent claims(as well as the dead wrong theories like the focal infection theory), he should be viewed with the same skepticism as Aajonus.
Did WAP claim, as you suggest Tyler, that a person suffering autism or down's could be cured by diet? Autism and other problems such as aspergers are - as far as I'm aware - caused by various factors including pre-natal injury/infection. This could include dietary or toxic factors. Once the damage is done I certainly do not believe it is fully reversible by diet. As I said, I didn't fully read NAPD but I didn't take from it that WAP thought this to be the case either. I took that it could be prevented by diet alone.
The trouble is that WP and the WAPF make claims that birth defects in general can be wholly removed (during their lifetime) by turning to the crappy Weston-Price diet. Yet, any basic knowledge of science shows that even wild animals are subject to mutations/birth-defects, so that those WAPF claims must be false -plus it's just not scientifically possible to cure genetic issues that start from birth. As regards autism, that was just an example I gave. The WAPF have made the usual claims re vaccinations link to autism and other nonsense.
The surgical intervention is another thing altogether but, I think, not something to be flippantly dismissed as it, too, may hold some value.
Surgical intervention cannot reverse lifelong retardation as the latter requires some form of neural regeneration etc.Simple as that. I'm shocked that anyone could make such an outrageous claim.
Re journal/kids:- I think it would be most interesting for people to read about your bringing up a baby on some rawish diet. I presume that due to obvious social restrictions, you won't be able to feed your child on a truly healthy fully raw diet(difficult enough to stop young children eating sweets), but it would be interesting for others to read about the challenges faced. After all, most RVAFers come to the diet some time well after the age of 20 or so. So, knowing how to raise someone on as healthy a diet as is manageable , would be of use to many.
Interestingly, a lot of Primal Dieters seem to be raising their children on their raw animal food-based diet. Some even on a 100% raw diet.
-
We don't need scientific studies.
Oh, yes , we do. The alternative is to read only WAPF-inspired conspiracy theories.
Look at the world cup soccer players when the camera pans across before the start of the match, theyre all symetrical and have broad arches and have well developed jaws/cheek bones... Theyr'e aren't too many ugly players.
I've come across quite a number of ugly sportsmen(Lou Ferrigno etc. etc.). And even the more handsome footballers aren't necessarily that good(eg:- David Beckham who has disappointed many).
Cranial deformities are rife among the criminals/down trodden in society. Life is brutal.
Well, when I look at criminals' faces in the newspapers, they seem to have widely different appearances, some are healthy-looking with no obvious defects, others look like a corpse. It's arbitrary to label them all as in poor health from diet.
There are anecdotal reports from more wholistic minded orthodontists/orthopaedicians that gentle palate expansion and balanced craniums has a positive effect on mood and cognition. It makes a whole lotta sense if the nervous system is given space instead of being twisted and contricted between cranial bones, how can you think straight when the cranium doesn't allow enough space for all the nerves and proper oxygen/blood flow.
It's one thing to claim that aligning skeletons etc. improves mood or alertness slightly. It's quite another thing to wrongly claim that surgery can improve mental retardation of a genetic nature.
. One thing I find weird is when I see parents forcing babies to eat cooked carby crap...the babies are not hungry and then the kid will throw it up or crap it out moments later. I wonder if the kid would vomit as much and require less nappies if eating raw meat/liver. I think so.
One of the commonest points made by parents is that when the mother breastfeeds the infant, the baby starts crapping very frequently indeed. It's often pointed out that once the baby goes on to formula milk the baby craps far less frequently(no doubt due to constipation).
[/quote]
-
If by error you mean to imply that I'm claiming that diet is the SOLE cause of Down Syndrome, then my words conveyed much more than was intended.
I have no problem with claims that changing one's diet can improve a genetic condition in slight, indirect ways such as by improving the digestive system of an autistic person by removing grains and dairy. I'm not just happy with periodic claims from WP/WAPF and others that genetic conditions, and the main symptoms thereof such as mental retardation, can be cured wholly through diet or surgery, within that person's lifetime. Now not eating grains during one's lifetime might reduce, say, the chance of schizophrenia in one's children by 1%, for example, but that's about it. Down's Syndrome is a serious genetic problem which occurs mainly due to faulty cell-division and is strongly linked to advanced maternal age, thus indicating that it happens regardless of diet. As for claims re gluten intolerance, I've heard it said that a mental impairment usually also means a physical impairment of some sort(brain development in the womb is far more complex than other parts of the body, so that additional physicial impairment(eg:- leaky gut?) may also be more likely as a result.
Why not start your own thread on that?
I'm eventually planning a highly critical review of Price's NAPD book on the rawpaleodiet.com site.As regards WP/WAPF, I am not solely criticising WP because of the raw-dairy-issue. I am criticising him because he is dead wrong on so many other issues as well. And there is the further question of fraud as WP's accounts are often suspiciously different from other anthropologists. That said, I myself quote Weston-Price on those issues he gets right such as the organ-meats issue etc. *That reminds me, any suggestion that cooked palaeo is supposedly healthy merits inclusion in the hot topics forum. Will change the topic round.*
-
Why can't surgery improve mental retardation?
Lou Ferrigno is a fine specimen of health and symmetry as is David Beckham an amazing elite athlete. Captain of England?
I totally stand by my observations that criminals show a greater amount of of cranial deformaties.
-
Why can't surgery improve mental retardation?
It depends on what you're considering. If you mean would surgery improve the mental performance of someone who's had an axe embedded into his brain as the result of a fight, then sure, very quick removal of the axe would at least slow down further damage and might lessen an injury to IQ. But mental retardation of a permanent nature involves a lack of healthy neurons etc, along with permanent brain-damage etc. that cannot be fixed by surgery alone(or diet). No knife or scalpel has yet been known to regenerate neural tissue by itself.
Lou Ferrigno is a fine specimen of health and symmetry as is David Beckham an amazing elite athlete. Captain of England?
Loe Ferrigno is extremely ugly by anybody's standard and he lost out to Schwarzenegger repeatedly partly because he didn't have really good symmetry. Beckham is just a poser who has disappointed people before in madrid and elsewhere(and the England team - and the last time England won thw world cup in football was in 1966- people have consistently blamed Beckham for the disappointing performances by the English national team as a result).
I totally stand by my observations that criminals show a greater amount of of cranial deformaties.
Well, Weston-Price didn't just single out make the mistake of singling out criminals as solely resulting from a poor diet(along with the error of making flase claims re diet healing birth defects), but he also made a claim that homosexuality could be cured through a good diet. Given the prevalence of homosexuality in wild animals (if only to a low degree) one has to assume that was wrong as well as the other 2.
-
I'm not talking about fixing and curing mental retardation. I'm talking about improving. If a normal sized brain and nervous system is jammed in a poorly developed skull is the brain going to work to it's full capacity?
lou is a fine example of health and symmetry. He just doesnt have femine or neoteny traits that people find so attractive like David Beckham has.
Your comments on David Beckham disappointing people are irrelevent. My point is that symmetrical bodies like his are better for playing elite sport.
-
I'm not talking about fixing and curing mental retardation. I'm talking about improving. If a normal sized brain and nervous system is jammed in a poorly developed skull is the brain going to work to it's full capacity?
You're talking merely about very minor non-genetic-related conditions such as a poorly aligned skeleton or some such. A person with down's syndrome and a poor blood supply to the brain might be improved(to the level of a normal down's syndrome patient) via some alignment of the backbone or whatever, but that's all.
lou is a fine example of health and symmetry. He just doesnt have femine or neoteny traits that people find so attractive like David Beckham has.
I have my doubts as Schwarzenegger talked about several bodybuilders in his biography(ferrigno included) as not having the right symmetry.Plus, symmetry is supposed to be strongly associated with attractiveness, Ferrigno is hardly attractive.
Your comments on David Beckham disappointing people are irrelevent. My point is that symmetrical bodies like his are better for playing elite sport.
No, they're not. if symmetry was directly related to sporting performance, one would expect Beckham to consistently beat others less symmetrical than him.
-
Because Beckham disappointed some fans and team owners, he's not an elite athlete? Please compare him to an uncoordinated person and look at their skeletal features, not to other elite athletes or what his teams were hoping from him. That is an extremely obscure way to conduct this discussion.
Who here can prove that the genetic damage that causes things like Down's Syndrome is not an effect or poor diet, or poor diet over generations? Has anyone considered this? I think Weston Price did, and I don't think he was claiming to be able to cure retards, homosexuals and criminals by feeding them so good food for a bit, but rather than society as a whole would have fewer deviants and more healthy, able bodied and intelligent individuals if it adopted a natural diet, as per his observations of those societies that did.
-
Because Beckham disappointed some fans and team owners, he's not an elite athlete? Please compare him to an uncoordinated person and look at their skeletal features, not to other elite athletes or what his teams were hoping from him. That is an extremely obscure way to conduct this discussion.
Here's an example of a great sportsman who is viewed as pretty ugly by the masses:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/legacygallery/gallery-9744/Ugly-sportsmen.html
There are other examples of contradictions disproving the symmetry theory(not just Ferrigno). 1 obvious one comes to mind:- Shannen Doherty has 1 eye an inch higher than the other, yet managed to get roles in endless TV series due to being viewed as beautiful . So the symmetry/attractiveness link is also dodgy.
Who here can prove that the genetic damage that causes things like Down's Syndrome is not an effect or poor diet, or poor diet over generations? Has anyone considered this? I think Weston Price did, and I don't think he was claiming to be able to cure retards, homosexuals and criminals by feeding them so good food for a bit, but rather than society as a whole would have fewer deviants and more healthy, able bodied and intelligent individuals if it adopted a natural diet, as per his observations of those societies that did.
Weston Price most certainly DID make those claims though re curing retards. He made it clear that such people could improve via diet during their lifetime. That, in itself, is clearly bogus. As regards a better diet helping people over generations re fewer birth-defects that I can accept(certainly a few genetic conditions such as galactosemia, for example, would not have ever been a problem in a society which never consumed dairy for millenia). That said, given that wild animals on natural raw diets routinely have offspring with mutations/damage to DNA due to simple mistakes made during cell-division in the womb etc., it would be wrong to suggest that diet can cure 100% of such birth defects.
The reason why I'm so sceptical re claims re birth-defects is that many dishonest gurus(not just the WAPF and WP) claim to cure all diseases(even AIDS or genetic disorders like autism) solely through diet or some cheap gimmick like avoiding all vaccinations and it gives false hope to parents and amounts to fraud as well as cruelty.
-
The symmetry=attractiveness theory is far from dodgy.
WAP said the Down syndrome kid turned into an adolescent after the surgery to expand the palate, unfortunately WAP said that he turned into a sex pervert because of this and ended up in a institution. Where's the cure?
-
WAP said the Down syndrome kid turned into an adolescent after the surgery to expand the palate, unfortunately WAP said that he turned into a sex pervert because of this and ended up in a institution. Where's the cure?
The point is that WP falsely claimed a temporary cure vis surgery and further claimed that once the surgery didn't take, the so-called beneficial effect effect was removed:-
"The boy wore an appliance in his mouth to keep the bones in place but when it subsequently became dislodged, he reverted and many of his previous abnormal characteristics returned"
At any rate, given the clear references I gave down's syndrome has nothing to do with diet(or surgery!) and is solely due to genetics. Therefore WP must have lied about this claim(or, at best, perhaps he found only slight (non-mental) improvement and then greatly exaggerated his findings.
-
Tyler, nothing is solely due to genetics or diet. Every part of the body requires genes to produce and raw materials (diet) as well. If either the genetics are damaged, or the diet is lacking, problems arise. And what is often looked at as genetic problems could really just be diet deficiency. You don't often hear Vitamin C deficiency described as a genetic disease do you? Well there is only one other animal that cannot produce it's own Vitamin C other than humans, so in that sense the need to take in dietary Vitamin C is as close to a genetic disease as anything else you could think of. It's all semantics and you're getting way to stuck on it.
-
...Weston Price most certainly DID make those claims though re curing retards. ...
Hey guys, do mind keeping such callous terms and off-topics out of my thread? If you want to argue about Weston Price, please create a thread for it. It's getting out of hand. Thanks.
-
Tyler, nothing is solely due to genetics or diet. Every part of the body requires genes to produce and raw materials (diet) as well. If either the genetics are damaged, or the diet is lacking, problems arise. And what is often looked at as genetic problems could really just be diet deficiency. You don't often hear Vitamin C deficiency described as a genetic disease do you? Well there is only one other animal that cannot produce it's own Vitamin C other than humans, so in that sense the need to take in dietary Vitamin C is as close to a genetic disease as anything else you could think of. It's all semantics and you're getting way to stuck on it.
I would agree that diet could indirectly influence genes(re epigenetics), though I think it's clear, from evidence from the animal kingdom, that any claims that diet can cure birth-defects 100% is bogus.
-
Hey guys, do mind keeping such callous terms and off-topics out of my thread? If you want to argue about Weston Price, please create a thread for it. It's getting out of hand. Thanks.
Well, originally that term came from the old IQ tests and was neutral, but I suppose I'll have to use the longwinded politically correct versions instead.As for Weston-Price, most of the arguments re easy childbirth were backed up by references to Weston-Price due to claims re diet, so it was inevitable that WP should be discussed. Still, I'm happy to start another thread as long as WP isn't further referenced.
-
I would agree that diet could indirectly influence genes(re epigenetics), though I think it's clear, from evidence from the animal kingdom, that any claims that diet can cure birth-defects 100% is bogus.
On that I agree with you. The voluminous research on the dietary aspects and therapies for Down and Marfan syndromes is exciting, but we musn't leap ahead of the science to wild conclusions, as people's hopes can be built up TOO high.
One thing I've encountered along these lines is some people who experience amazing improvements with weight, chronic illness, etc. through dietary therapy, but are disappointed or even angry when every single health or physical defect isn't corrected 100%. Expectations can be set too high as well as too low. For myself, the results of dietary therapy have far exceeded my expectations and I have experienced improvements that I thought were impossible, [but I try to be careful not to promise people 100% cures where there isn't strong evidence for this. Still, dietary therapy is the most underutilized, and probably the most effective, of all therapies on the majority of human pathologies. All of us are testament to that].
-
I would agree that diet could indirectly influence genes(re epigenetics), though I think it's clear, from evidence from the animal kingdom, that any claims that diet can cure birth-defects 100% is bogus.
The Vitamin C thing is my prime example of how much diet can effect a lack of genetics. Look it up for yourself, almost every animal can produce Vitamin C. Humans lack one enzyme in a string of 6 or so to take whatever raw materials you start with and end up with Vitamin C. This is obviously very easily fixed by taking in dietary Vitamin C, and therefore this genetic disease, which everyone has, is completely unnoticed until some sailors travel around the world and run out of fresh food on their voyage.
There are probably many enzymes present in some raw foods like meat and organs that would treat certain genetic diseases. Think about it, scientists say cancer is largely genetic. Which means you would imagine that person who has cancer, their ancestors got it as well. But what if they didn't? Cancer was virtually unknown a few hundred years ago. Why? Maybe because people were consuming nutrients, whether it be more enzymes, vitamins or minerals, that might have fixed some of the metabolic pathways that our genetics today cannot make do with on the modern diet. Just like Vitamin C deficiency, many diseases are probably the result of a lack of a certain enzyme to do something, which was traditionally corrected by dietary intake of either that enzyme or a coenzyme that helped it's production, and that today is absent or largely absent from the diet.
My biggest pet peeve in science today is using genetics to explain everything. Genetics is probably the smallest factor in human disease, accounting for in my rough estimation 1% at most.
-
I agree that genetics as regards illnesses like cancer is not too relevant given that there have been multiple reports re bacteria(which are found in raw food in plenty) curing cancer(and the connection made between the levels of heat-created toxins in the human body and the rate of cancer). However, diet is not the sole answer to everything. Wild animals also have birth-defects despite their natural diets(even mental retardation like Down's Syndrome) and even (low rates of) cancer(though that is ascribed to air and water pollution by some people).
-
I agree that genetics as regards illnesses like cancer is not too relevant given that there have been multiple reports re bacteria(which are found in raw food in plenty) curing cancer(and the connection made between the levels of heat-created toxins in the human body and the rate of cancer). However, diet is not the sole answer to everything. Wild animals also have birth-defects despite their natural diets(even mental retardation like Down's Syndrome) and even (low rates of) cancer(though that is ascribed to air and water pollution by some people).
I believe in the concept of genes and the possibility of genetic mutation, but I still think even with most mutations natural living would have made up for it. I can only point to my Vitamin C post as it's clear and easy to understand and I don't feel like coming up with another analogy, but I'm sure that all organisms are rife with "genetic diseases" that only manifest themselves when something in their diet is lacking.
Actually I can easily come up with another example, the "essential" amino acids and "essential" fatty acids are simply ones that we cannot synthesize from raw materials in our bodies. Why isn't that considered a genetic disease? Cause everyone has it? Cause it's addressed by nutrition? Yes, those are the two reasons, but most genetic diseases fit in those conditions. Cancer, everyone has it to some extent, cancerous cells are being created and gobbled up by cellular defenses all the time. Plaque in the arteries? Everyone produces a bit, and it gets cleaned away. But take away proper nutrition from anyone and the incidence of cancer cells will increase as well as plaque production. Let it go on long enough and then all of a sudden you have a magical genetic disease. It's ridiculous.
-
As for Weston-Price, most of the arguments re easy childbirth were backed up by references to Weston-Price due to claims re diet, so it was inevitable that WP should be discussed. Still, I'm happy to start another thread as long as WP isn't further referenced.
Two out of 14 total references, including 6 article or study references, mentioned Weston Price. Last I knew, 2/14 was not considered "most."
The writings or research of these people was also listed, yet you completely ignored them and focused only on Price:
Robert P. Roy, MD, Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of Canada
Ray Audette
LEP Wood, MD, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire in Coventry, UK
William A. Liston, MD, Fellow of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, UK
...along with 8 anecdotal reports, and there was one more anecdotal report provided by Michael, one of our own members. I don't think it was the cooked aspect of any of these diets that provided the benefits (if I thought that, why on earth would I be eating a mostly raw diet, with only occasional light cooking to keep my weight up or for social reasons?). I argue that it was the PALEO aspect. Since when is Paleo not part of RPD? Is this the raw PALEO diet forum or just the raw diet forum?
-
The real problem is re Price is that native tribes did indeed have women die in childbirth(and I've already shown that the much lower life-expectancy of women in the Palaeolithic(compared to men) is widely recognised as being due to a high number of deaths from childbirth:-
http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w/angel-1984/angel-1984-1a.shtml
so the best one can claim is that, indirectly, women in tribal times didn't have Caesarians or drugs so had fewer side-effects and were less likely to be obese(and were a lot fitter) than modern, more sedentary peoples. But diet alone can't cure the 1 problem human women have which is that they have a narrow birth-canal and need to have an infant pass through it with a particularly large-sized head for its overall size, inevitably resulting in issues, here and there.
-
...Now not eating grains during one's lifetime might reduce, say, the chance of schizophrenia in one's children by 1%, for example, but that's about it.
Is that based on a study or your assumption?
Down's Syndrome is a serious genetic problem which occurs mainly due to faulty cell-division and is strongly linked to advanced maternal age, thus indicating that it happens regardless of diet.
As I've stated before, I find such pronouncements based solely on your authority to be unconvincing, especially since you've shown no evidence of having read any of the studies I linked to.
The science shows that celiac disease, a food-triggered disease, is correlated with Down's Syndrome. Here again is one of the relevant studies I listed on this:
[Screening for celiac disease can be justified in high-risk groups]
Sjöberg K, Carlsson A.
Lakartidningen. 2004 Nov 25;101(48):3912, 3915-6, 3918-9. Review. Swedish.
PMID: 15631226 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15631226
It's at least plausible that the epigenetic effects of gluten on a developing zygote or fetus may turn on the genes that produce Down's Syndrome, or something along those lines. Without further study it would be anti-scientific to just rule this out a priori, and to not follow up on such a promising avenue with further research into the cause of the correlation and further exploration and development of promising nutritional therapies (such as "Oral zinc supplementation in Down's syndrome subjects decreased infections and normalized some humoral and cellular immune parameters," http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8193451?dopt=Abstract) would be unconscionable.
Genetic illnesses are not completely divorced from environmental factors. Both genes and environment play a role and are inseparably intertwined from the moment of conception onwards. As Carlin Flora states in "Your Genes, Your Diet" (Psychology Today, http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200410/your-genes-your-diet), "Genes are not necessarily destiny. They are influenced by the chemistry of what we consume."
Sandy Simmons has investigated the role of diet and nutrition in genetic illnesses, including Down Syndrome ("The Role of Diet in Genetic Disorders,"
http://www.ctds.info/genetic_disorders.html):
<<Down Syndrome - Down syndrome, also called trisomy 21, is a complex genetic disease that for years was said to be caused by an extra copy of chromosome 21. A recent landmark study indicated that mothers of children with Down syndrome have an imbalance in folate metabolism that may be explained, in part, by a common genetic variation in an enzyme involved in the folic acid pathway. Further studies are expected to see if maternal folic acid supplementation will reduce the incidence of the disorder. If folic acid does prove to reduce incidences of Down syndrome, then this means the chromosome abnormality found in the disorder is a feature associated with the syndrome, but was not the singular cause.
Interestingly, before "bad" genes started getting the sole blame for most birth defects, medical doctors used to think that "maternal nourishment" was a factor in Down syndrome. Unfortunately somewhere along the line this view fell out of favor.
....
On the mineral front, a number of studies on Down syndrome have linked the syndorme to zinc deficiencies. A 1994 study has shown zinc supplementation had a positive effect on DS patients.>>
One matter where I would differ with Sandy Simmons and Weston Price on treatment of genetic disorders with dietary therapies is I would speak more cautiously in terms of reduction or remission of symptoms, rather than "cure," because some people interpret cure as meaning they are no longer susceptible to the disease and can go right back to eating a SAD again. I also doubt whether all the deleterious changes wrought by genetic diseases can be reversed, even at an early age, though I suppose I cannot rule it out completely either, because dietary/nutritional therapy has not been tried sufficiently to be sure one way or the other, AFAIK.
*That reminds me, any suggestion that cooked palaeo is supposedly healthy merits inclusion in the hot topics forum. Will change the topic round.*
I didn't suggest that cooked Paleo is healthy in an absolute sense, nor even that "cooked" was the healthy aspect of the diets in the success stories and studies. Instead, I offered the science and people's experiences on easy childbirths while on PALEO diets (some may have been raw for all I know, but no one specified that, that I am aware of). Evidence that the Paleo aspect of RPD is beneficial over SAD is not the same as saying that a cooked Paleo diet is optimal.
And BTW, why does the subforum heading say "Discussions of non-RAF/non- raw topics" but not also "non-Paleo topics"?
I agree that the narrow birth canal and large heads of babies are not ideal for childbirth. Since there doesn't appear to be an evolutionary advantage to the narrow birth canal, that would suggest that it may be part of the physical degeneration that has occurred in humans over the millennia, along with shrinking body and brain size, diminishing muscles and thinning bones, narrowing of jaws and crowding of teeth, etc. You attribute most of the degeneration to cooking, and I agree that is likely a major factor, but I also suspect that the change in foods eaten was a major factor, possibly a larger one, especially given that physical degeneration appears to have accelerated more rapidly with the dawn of the Neolithic than it did with the dawn of cooking.
The good news that we can all celebrate, is that the evidence so far from all observed hunter gatherer populations and from all the reports of Paleo dieting people, is that childbirth is generally much easier on a Paleo diet than on a SAD diet. I think you and I agree that it might be even better on a RPD.
-
Is that based on a study or your assumption?
It's based on having read 1,000s of studies most of which claim only a minor, unverified effect of gluten(or dairy) on various conditions like schizophrenia.
One matter where I would differ with Sandy Simmons and Weston Price on treatment of genetic disorders with dietary therapies is I would speak more cautiously in terms of reduction or remission of symptoms, rather than "cure," because some people interpret cure as meaning they are no longer susceptible to the disease and can go right back to eating a SAD again. I also doubt whether all the deleterious changes wrought by genetic diseases can be reversed, even at an early age, though I suppose I cannot rule it out completely either, because dietary/nutritional therapy has not been tried sufficiently to be sure one way or the other, AFAIK.
I think we can at least agree that WAPF/WP--inspired nonsense claims re curing people with serious genetic problems during their lifetime are bogus. There may be a(n as yet unproven) case re influence of epigenetics and gluten /down's syndrome(or not). And, so far, the benefits re diet on people with genetic-related conditions only seem to involve slight improvements in mood or digestion, never wholesale remission of the more serious symptoms(such as mental retardation).
And BTW, why does the subforum heading say "Discussions of non-RAF/non- raw topics" but not also "non-Paleo topics"?
A minor oversight from Craig. I suppose part of the reason is that "rawpalaeo" is a new concept, seemingly more or less invented by Vinny, so that until that term came up, the emphasis was on "raw animal food diets"(besides "palaeo" was previously solely used to reference a "cooked" palaeo diet).Oh, and I think the idea was that non-palaeo topics would be left quarantined within the Primal Diet and Weston-Price forums, mostly.
I agree that the narrow birth canal and large heads of babies are not ideal for childbirth. Since there doesn't appear to be an evolutionary advantage to the narrow birth canal, that would suggest that it may be part of the physical degeneration that has occurred in humans over the millennia, along with shrinking body and brain size, diminishing muscles and thinning bones, narrowing of jaws and crowding of teeth, etc. You attribute most of the degeneration to cooking, and I agree that is likely a major factor, but I also suspect that the change in foods eaten was a major factor, possibly a larger one, especially given that physical degeneration appears to have accelerated more rapidly with the dawn of the Neolithic than it did with the dawn of cooking.
The claim re a narrow birth-canal being due to a poor diet simply doesn't hold up. If women had indeed been evolutionarily selected to have even wider birth-canals they would soon have had trouble walking(and been picked off by predators as a result)!
-
The claim re a narrow birth-canal being due to a poor diet simply doesn't hold up. If women had indeed been evolutionarily selected to have even wider birth-canals they would soon have had trouble walking(and been picked off by predators as a result)!
There are still a few women who are "broad where a broad should be broad", they don't walk alone and predators do not attack groups of other predators.
-
It's based on having read 1,000s of studies most of which claim only a minor, unverified effect of gluten(or dairy) on various conditions like schizophrenia.
OK, that's great that you've read 1000s of studies on gluten or dairy and schizophrenia. Could you provide me with one sample so I can get an idea of what you're referring to, please?
I think we can at least agree that WAPF/WP--inspired nonsense claims re curing people with serious genetic problems during their lifetime are bogus.
Yes, I consider him more of a creative, keen observer and adventurer than a scientist. I always try to cite other references when I cite his work or other people who refer to him. I'm also aware that anecdotes are not hard evidence, but to me they are like clues--valuable in helping figure out what areas future scientific research should investigate.
There may be a(n as yet unproven) case re influence of epigenetics and gluten /down's syndrome(or not). And, so far, the benefits re diet on people with genetic-related conditions only seem to involve slight improvements in mood or digestion, never wholesale remission of the more serious symptoms(such as mental retardation).
I basically agree, though I haven't read all the studies on the subject, so I don't know what all the symptom improvements were, but the ones I did read were relatively minor compared to the overall disease, like you say.
A minor oversight from Craig. I suppose part of the reason is that "rawpalaeo" is a new concept, seemingly more or less invented by Vinny, so that until that term came up, the emphasis was on "raw animal food diets"(besides "palaeo" was previously solely used to reference a "cooked" palaeo diet).Oh, and I think the idea was that non-palaeo topics would be left quarantined within the Primal Diet and Weston-Price forums, mostly.
The claim re a narrow birth-canal being due to a poor diet simply doesn't hold up. If women had indeed been evolutionarily selected to have even wider birth-canals they would soon have had trouble walking(and been picked off by predators as a result)!
I don't understand you here, sorry.
-
There are still a few women who are "broad where a broad should be broad", they don't walk alone and predators do not attack groups of other predators.
Haha, never heard that phrase before.
Could someone explain to me the body type we're talking about here? What about those tennis playing Williams sisters? Their hips seem rather ample, and they are way faster and stronger than a twiggy girl. Maybe not quite as good of a long distance runner as a skinny girl, but in terms of getting away from a lion you're better off being able to sprint or fight than run for miles, you can't out run a cat that way.
-
I believe Tyler is right that today's women, on average, have narrower hips than Paleo women. Women of today with wider hips could be thought of as having a more ancestral-type physique, though this they don't necessarily have older genes, as great variations in physique can occur over relatively short time frames (as compared to evolutionary time scales) and between individuals within modern population groups. The development of narrow hips has puzzled evolutionary biologists for decades, as there doesn't seem to be an evolutionary advantage to it. Ray Audette and others have posited that changes in diet (whether types of foods or increases in cooking or both) may have been a major cause of the narrowing, which would explain why there appears to be no biological/survival advantage to it.
The good news is that even modern women report easier-than-normal pregnancies and childbirths the more ancient-like (for lack of a better term) their diet is. I haven't heard of a single report of difficult childbirth on a RPD or other Paleo-type diet yet (although I'm sure there must be some among the 300,000 or so remaining hunter-gatherers in the world). If anyone has, please let me know. Thanks.
-
The development of narrow hips has puzzled evolutionary biologists for decades, as there doesn't seem to be an evolutionary advantage to it. Ray Audette and others have posited that changes in diet (whether types of foods or increases in cooking or both) may have been a major cause of the narrowing, which would explain why there appears to be no biological/survival advantage to it.
The good news is that even modern women report easier-than-normal pregnancies and childbirths the more ancient-like (for lack of a better term) their diet is. I haven't heard of a single report of difficult childbirth on a RPD or other Paleo-type diet yet (although I'm sure there must be some among the 300,000 or so remaining hunter-gatherers in the world). If anyone has, please let me know. Thanks.
I too think that it is diet or more specifically, the change in hormones that causes the narrow hips.
There are reports that many of these slim women would die in childbirth were it not for surgery, the birth canal is just too narrow.
-
Haha, never heard that phrase before.
It's from an old Broadway musical opera, maybe "Guys and Dames" or something like that.
Could someone explain to me the body type we're talking about here?
It's the once-standard hourglass figure, seen in paintings even in the Egyptian tombs. An American actress named Johannsen comes to mind.
Not good for lightning fast escapes, but that's what the long legs and great heart and lungs of men are made for.
Females never went in harm's way.
-
I believe Tyler is right that today's women, on average, have narrower hips than Paleo women.
I, of course, did NOT say anything of the sort! What I actually stated was that women in Palaeo times could not develop hips wider than a certain point as they need to walk on two legs, and the wide hips of women already force them to be slower than men(that is, the best female runners tend to have much narrower, boyish hips). So, past a very limited point, developing wide hips is an evolutionary DISadvantage, as it would render females unable to run effectively.
The good news is that even modern women report easier-than-normal pregnancies and childbirths the more ancient-like (for lack of a better term) their diet is. I haven't heard of a single report of difficult childbirth on a RPD or other Paleo-type diet yet (although I'm sure there must be some among the 300,000 or so remaining hunter-gatherers in the world). If anyone has, please let me know. Thanks.
The trouble is that palaeoanthropologists do mention that many women died in childbirth during the Palaeolithic,, thus resulting in a lower average lifespan than men by a full 5.4 years,
http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w/angel-1984/angel-1984-1a.shtml
but also there is routine mention of tribes using herbs in order to make childbirth a little easier, indicating frequent issues with childbirth, regardless of diet. Here's a mention of the plant Blue Cohosh being routinely used by Native Americans in order to make childbirth a bit easier and avoid the usual complications:-
http://www.buydominica.com/womenhealth/blue-cohosh.php
As for cases involving difficult childbirth among RPDers, we need more studies but it would be most unlikely to find no evidence of difficult childbirth such as breech-births or whatever.
-
I, of course, did NOT say anything of the sort! What I actually stated was that women in Palaeo times could not develop hips wider than a certain point as they need to walk on two legs, and the wide hips of women already force them to be slower than men(that is, the best female runners tend to have much narrower, boyish hips). So, past a very limited point, developing wide hips is an evolutionary DISadvantage, as it would render females unable to run effectively.
Oh, sorry, misunderstood you.
The trouble is that palaeoanthropologists do mention that many women died in childbirth during the Palaeolithic,, thus resulting in a lower average lifespan than men by a full 5.4 years,
http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w/angel-1984/angel-1984-1a.shtml
Yes, I did understand you the first time on that.
Here's what that article says: "Paleolithic females died younger than males due to the stresses of pregnancy and childbirth while still carrying the burdens of food-collecting and moving camp."
That seems to indicate that some problems were having to walk quite a bit and carry loads that were the reasons for the female--and perhaps some infant--mortality, rather than dystocia.
It also notes that wild animal infant mortality was three times higher than Stone Age human infant mortality. Wild and pasture-fed animals are widely acknowledged to have much easier births than grain-fed animals (I was informed on the general ease of pasture-fed births by the ranchers at Adams ranch in Florida), so dystocia doesn't seem to be the main cause of infant mortality in the wild.
but also there is routine mention of tribes using herbs in order to make childbirth a little easier, indicating frequent issues with childbirth, regardless of diet. Here's a mention of the plant Blue Cohosh being routinely used by Native Americans in order to make childbirth a bit easier and avoid the usual complications:-
http://www.buydominica.com/womenhealth/blue-cohosh.php
Thanks for the reference. I'll check it out.
As for cases involving difficult childbirth among RPDers, we need more studies but it would be most unlikely to find no evidence of difficult childbirth such as breech-births or whatever.
How far back do you think most Stone Agers were RPDers?
-
Here's what that article says: "Paleolithic females died younger than males due to the stresses of pregnancy and childbirth while still carrying the burdens of food-collecting and moving camp."
That seems to indicate that some problems were having to walk quite a bit and carry loads that were the reasons for the female--and perhaps some infant--mortality, rather than dystocia.
First of all, human cultures generally expect the men to carry loads, not the women, for obvious reasons.It's only in very male-dominated cultures that the opposite occurs, and Palaeo times were very egalitarian in their ways, judging from reports. Secondly, "walking quite a bit" doesn't increase mortality(LOL!),it actually makes people fitter and healthier. In short, the deaths from childbirth issue is the only decent explanation for the extreme difference in lifespan between Palaeo men and women - and, remember, women in modern times normally well outlive men, so for them to have a 5-year-shorter lifespan than men in Palaeo times, there has to be a major reason for that, which only deaths from childbirth can be a reason for(unless you're implying some unusually unlikely claim such as that predators mostly killed the women in Palaeo tribes).
It also notes that wild animal infant mortality was three times higher than Stone Age human infant mortality. Wild and pasture-fed animals are widely acknowledged to have much easier births than grain-fed animals (I was informed on the general ease of pasture-fed births by the ranchers at Adams ranch in Florida), so dystocia doesn't seem to be the main cause of infant mortality in the wild.
I'm afraid that even wild animals on natural, raw diets have difficult births.Granted, they have fewer issues than humans(on healthy raw diets) as they have a wide enough birth-canal for their offspring, but they still have birth-defects and common problems re delivery of infants. Plus, they would be bound to have a higher infant mortality than humans as they would be less able than humans to defend their offspring from predators.
That said, the 20-30% infant mortality rate for human infants in the Palaeolithic is extremely high and is easily explained if a large proportion of such derived from female deaths in childbirth/pregnancy.
How far back do you think most Stone Agers were RPDers?
Well, judging from the evidence, it seems as though 250,000 to 300,000 years ago, was the advent of cooking, with everyone being rawpalaeo up to that point.
-
OK, that's great that you've read 1000s of studies on gluten or dairy and schizophrenia. Could you provide me with one sample so I can get an idea of what you're referring to, please?
Here's a sample :-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14661986 (omega 3)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15276666
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16423158
http://www.childrensdisabilities.info/allergies/developmentaldisordersprotein7.html
[/quote]
-
Secondly, "walking quite a bit" doesn't increase mortality(LOL!)...
I've grown a bit weary of your increasing use of ridicule, such as responding to other people's points with "LOL", which I find to be off-putting, rather than persuasive, so I'm taking a break from the back-and-forth for now and I'll focus more on providing information. You're free to continue ridiculing it, of course, but I may not respond directly.
So here's some more info I hope some people find to be a positive contribution:
*** Orgasmic Childbirth ***
The following of the anecdotes I listed before is the report by an MD of a Paleo-dieting patient having an "orgasmic" birth. Below that is a couple of links further confirming the possibility of births that are not only not painful, but orgasmic. The first is the Website of an organization that specializes in assisting mothers to have orgasmic births. They use mostly nondietary techniques that can also help in easing childbirth.
Easier birth...(date: 12/01/03)
Paleo Diet Success Stories
http://www.thepaleodiet.com/success_stories
I had a thought that I suspect occurred to you as well. I had a patient who at 42 had a baby at home 8 yrs after her last one and had been on Paleo for 12 months prior and described it as, ". . . a very different experience, I told my husband about an hour after that baby was born, my gosh honey, I could do that again. Dr Sebring, it may sound strange but pushing that baby out was almost orgasmic."
I don't know about hunter gatherers but I suspect they do not have the degree of difficulty modern women have delivering babies. Your research has been of magnificent importance to the health of our small town.
Lane Sebring M.D.
Wimberly, Texas
Orgasmic Birth
Winner of the Audience Choice Award at the 2008 Motherbaby International Film Festival
http://www.orgasmicbirth.com/
"It is possible to have an ecstatic birth—in fact, that is the best natural high that I know of." --Ina May Gaskin, Certified Professional Midwife and author (she advocates a meatless diet and avoidance of processed "junk food" but recommends B12 supplements for vegetarian mothers and doesn't require her customers to be vegetarians)
Orgasmic Childbirth: The Fun Doesn't End at Conception!
by Laura Shanley
http://www.unassistedchildbirth.com/sensual/orgasmic.html
"I had been told to expect a 'dogging pain,' but was unprepared for the sensation of sexual ecstasy, the voluptuous feeling of penetration...."
-From They Don't Call it a Peak Experience for Nothing, by Ruth Claire(Mothering, Fall 1989)
---***---
*** Gluten and Schizophrenia ***
Here's an article and study link on a case study of a coeliac disease patient who had far more than a "minor" effect on his diagnosed schizophrenia via gluten elimination:
Gluten and schizophrenia SPECT scan
http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2009/06/gluten-and-schizophrenia-spect-scan.html
Schizophrenic symptoms and SPECT abnormalities in a coeliac patient: regression after a gluten-free diet.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9408073
Dietary challenge is the true test of whether gluten elimination helps schizophrenia, not antibody tests, which can provide false negatives and false positives and which do not take into account all the harmful effects of gluten. Ron Hoggan at the PaleoFood forum has lots of info on this and co-authored "Dangerous Grains." I personally know two people who experienced dramatic health improvements from eliminating gluten despite negative antibody tests.
Here is some more schizophrenia research as reported by Loren Cordain in "Cereal Grains: Humanity's Double-Edged Sword":
<<It has been more than 30 years since Dohan first formulated the hypothesis that opioid peptides found in the enzymatic digests of cereal grain gluten are a potentiating factor evoking schizophrenia in susceptible genotypes [327, 328]. In a meta-analysis of the more than 50 articles regarding the role of cereal grains in the etiology of schizophrenia published between 1966 and 1990, Lorenz [329] concluded: 'In populations eating little or no wheat, rye and barley, the prevalence of schizophrenia is quite low and about the same regardless of type of acculturating influence.' In support of this conclusion are multiple clinical studies [330, 332] which have shown that schizophrenic symptoms improved on gluten-free diets and worsened upon reintroduction. Furthermore, the incidence of schizophrenia is about 30 times higher in celiac patients than in the general population [329], and schizophrenics have elevated circulating IgA antibodies to gliadin [333].
There is increasing recognition that in a subset of schizophrenic patients, autoimmune mechanisms are involved in the etiology of the disease [334, 335]. Schizophrenics maintain several immunological abnormalities including increased prevalence of autoimmune disease and antinuclear and other autoantibodies, decreased lymphocyte interleukin-2 (IL-2) production, increased serum IL-2 receptor concentration, increased serum IL-6 concentrations and an association with HLA antigens [334, 335]. Similar to other autoimmune diseases, cereal grains may potentiate their putative autoimmune effects in schizophrenia via molecular mimicry in which self antigens in brain tissue are recognized and destroyed by autoaggressive T lymphocytes because of the structural similarity between brain antigens and foreign dietary antigens. Although this hypothesis may be operative in some schizophrenics, the rapid remission of symptoms by gluten-free diets, observed in clinical trials [330, 332], is suggestive that an acute mechanism may be additionally responsible, since it is unlikely that damaged neuronal cells could regenerate in such a short time frame. In this regard, it has been long recognized that certain gluten peptides derived from wheat have high opioid-like activity that is naloxone reversible [336, 337]. The structural identity of these opioid peptides derived from the enzymatic digest of wheat gluten have recently been characterized and sequenced [338, 340], and there is significant evidence utilizing radiolabelled gliadin isotopes to show that these peptides reach opioid receptors in the brain and peripheral organs [329]. Thus, it is possible that cereal grains may elicit behavioral changes via direct interaction with central nervous system opioid receptors or perhaps via simultaneous immune-mediated reactions against central nervous system antigens.>>
327 Dohan FC: Wheat consumption and hospital admissions for schizophrenia during World War II.
Am J Clin Nutr 1966;18:7.10.
328 Dohan FC: Genetic hypothesis of idiopathic schizophrenia: Its exorphin connection. Schizophr
Bull 1988;14:489.494.
329 Lorenz K: Cereals and schizophrenia. Adv Cereal Sci Technol 1990;10:435.469.
330 Dohan FC, Grasberger JC, Lowell FM, Johnston HT, Arbegast AW: Relapsed schizophrenics:
More rapid improvement on a milk and cereal free diet. Br J Psychiatry 1969;115:595.596.
331 Dohan FC, Grasberger JC: Relapsed schizophrenics: Early discharge from the hospital after cerealfree,
milk free diet. Am J Psychiatry 1973;130:685.688.
332 Singh MM, Kay SR: Wheat gluten as a pathogenic factor in schizophrenia. Science 1976;191:
401.402.
333 Reichelt KL, Landmark J: Specific IgA antibody increases in schizophrenia. Biol Psychiatry 1995;
37:410.413.
334 Ganguli R, Brar JS, Cehngappa KN, Yang ZW, Nimgaonkar VL, Rabin BS: Autoimmunity in
schizophrenia: A review of recent findings. Ann Med 1993;25:489.496.
335 Noy S, Achiron A, Laor N: Schizophrenia and autoimmunity . A possible etiological mechanism?
Neuropsychobiology 1994;30:157.159.
336 Ziadrou C, Streaty RA, Klee WA: Opioid peptides derived from food proteins. J Biol Chem 1979;
254:2446.2449.
337 Huebner FR, Lieberman KW, Rubino RP, Wall JS: Demonstration of high opioid-like activity in
isolated peptides from wheat gluten hydrolysates. Peptides 1984;5:1139.1147.
338 Fukudome S, Yoshikawa M: Opioid peptides derived from wheat gluten: Their isolation and characterization.
FEBS Lett 1992;296:107.111.
339 Fukudome S, Yoshikawa M: A novel peptide derived from wheat gluten. FEBS Lett 1993;316:
17.19.
340 Fukudome S, Jinsmaa Y, Matsukawa T, Sasaki R, Yoshikawa M: Release of opioid peptides, gluten
exorphins by the action of pancreatic elastase. FEBS Lett 1997;412:475.479.
Luckily, physicians like Hadjivassilou, Grunewald, Davies-Jones, Fine, Braly and others are educating their colleagues on the fact that there is more to gluten sensitivity than "celiac disease" and flattened villi--there are other problems, like neurological disease:
<<Gluten sensitivity is best defined as a state of heightened immunological responsiveness in genetically susceptible people.15 This definition does not imply bowel involvement. That gluten sensitivity is regarded as principally a disease of the small bowel is a historical misconception.28 Gluten sensitivity can be primarily and at times exclusively a neurological disease.29 The absence of an enteropathy should not preclude patients from treatment with a gluten-free diet. Early diagnosis and removal of the trigger factor by the introduction of gluten-free diet is a promising therapeutic intervention.>>
--M Hadjivassiliou, R A Grünewald, G A B Davies-Jones, "Gluten sensitivity," Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 2002, http://jnnp.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/72/5/560
-
P.S., I don't mean the last post as a criticism, Tyler, as much as a recognition that I don't tend to respond well to that style of retort. So I'm recognizing my limitations and trying to focus more on providing information rather than responding directly to each counterpoint. I'm going to try to focus more on my strengths, which seem to include seeing things from a slightly different, contrarian angle than most people and sometimes gaining unusual and perhaps interesting insights from this, being good at finding and researching information and summarizing and explaining the findings for other people (albeit in an overly wordy manner :D ). My original intent was more to share and learn than debate, though debating can also at times be helpful in filtering out the weaker areas in my knowledge base and gaining new insights.
-
No probs
-
Here is Jared Diamond's explanation of how the nomadic lifestyle of hunter gatherers (including Paleolithic hunter gatherers) may contribute to higher infant mortality than in sedentary societies:
"A hunter-gatherer mother who is shifting camp can carry only one child, along with her few possessions. She cannot afford to bear her next child until the previous toddler can walk fast enough to keep up with the tribe and not hold it back. In practice, nomadic hunter-gatherers space their children about four years apart by means of lactational amenorrhea, sexual abstinence, infanticide, and abortion. By contrast, sedentary people, unconstrained by problems of carrying young children on treks, can bear and raise as many children as they can feed."
(p. 55 of Guns, Germs and Steel)
-
Here is Jared Diamond's explanation of how the nomadic lifestyle of hunter gatherers (including Paleolithic hunter gatherers) may contribute to higher infant mortality than in sedentary societies:
"A hunter-gatherer mother who is shifting camp can carry only one child, along with her few possessions. She cannot afford to bear her next child until the previous toddler can walk fast enough to keep up with the tribe and not hold it back.
They were social, as we, and had uncles aunts cousins nephews grandparents some of whom would have been capable of carrying a child when necessary. May have also been organized as clans, if so, many hands to make light work.
Mr. Diamond seems to assume that they were as uncaring as animals, and as incompetent as their shrunken modern descendants.
-
If the Paleo dieting mother is not on a high carb diet which can only be delivered by starchy foods, then the baby in the tummy would not grow so massively big that childbirth will be a lot easier.
This is the wisdom given by midwives in our provinces telling pregnant women to cut down on rice and other sweets so the baby doesn't grow too big.
-
Here is Jared Diamond's explanation of how the nomadic lifestyle of hunter gatherers (including Paleolithic hunter gatherers) may contribute to higher infant mortality than in sedentary societies:
"A hunter-gatherer mother who is shifting camp can carry only one child, along with her few possessions. She cannot afford to bear her next child until the previous toddler can walk fast enough to keep up with the tribe and not hold it back. In practice, nomadic hunter-gatherers space their children about four years apart by means of lactational amenorrhea, sexual abstinence, infanticide, and abortion. By contrast, sedentary people, unconstrained by problems of carrying young children on treks, can bear and raise as many children as they can feed."
(p. 55 of Guns, Germs and Steel)
The trouble is that it is a very weak explanation. Palaeo tribes, much like other tribes, were extremely cooperative societies with everyone somehow related to each other etc. So, it is a given that nonfertile females along with teenaged females and older women/grandmothers would have been on hand to look after any surplus offspring.
-
The trouble is that it is a very weak explanation. Palaeo tribes, much like other tribes, were extremely cooperative societies with everyone somehow related to each other etc. So, it is a given that nonfertile females along with teenaged females and older women/grandmothers would have been on hand to look after any surplus offspring.
True, HG societies are definitely more cooperative, and every surplus child wasn't killed (and this probably helps account for some of the gradual population growth before agrarianism--along with improved hunting technologies, some horticulture, etc.). Still, according to every account I've seen, HG societies in both Stone Age times and today do space their children out about twice as much or more than agrarian societies and multiple other sources I've read in the past did say that HGs sometimes use abortion or infanticide when a mother becomes pregnant while still suckling and carrying an infant. This type practice is also apparently practiced by wild animals (for example, a mother wolf may abandon or kill a pup if her litter is too large to feed them all).
I'll leave to William and others the value judgment arguments about whether nature is "wrong" or "sinful" because of this. For now, I'm focusing on exploring this widely-reported phenomenon of reduced dystocia among HG societies and the role that a RPD may play in this.
My hypothesis is that Paleo foods (no grains, dairy, legumes, sweets, etc.) help with this, and also less thoroughly cooked foods. All HG societies appear to eat less agrarian foods and less thoroughly cooked foods (with "low-and-slow" characterizing their cooking methods and with plentiful raw foods featuring in most HG diets, including some raw meats/organs). In other words, reduced rates of dystocia may be a benefit of RPD diets--and BOTH the Paleo AND Raw aspects of the RPD may help. I don't see the success stories of people on cooked PALEO (emphasis on PALEO) diets as canceling out the contribution of raw. Instead, I see both as possibly contributing, and therefore see this thread as supporting the RPD, rather than as a "hot topic."
-
I'll leave to William and others the value judgment arguments about whether nature is "wrong" or "sinful" because of this. For now, I'm focusing on exploring this widely-reported phenomenon of reduced dystocia among HG societies and the role that a RPD may play in this.
It is not nature that I judge, but rather writers.
They persist in imposing their own modern worldview on paleoman, for no reason at all, except their own prejudice, then they come up with crap such as high infant mortality, distocia, ridiculously short lifespan and anything else dredged from their crippled minds in an attempt to show our superiority.
We are told that the paleolithic age lasted much longer than our neolithic, this can only be because they were not stupidly self-destructive, as we are.
WE are poisoned, in mind and body.
-
It is not nature that I judge, but rather writers.
They persist in imposing their own modern worldview on paleoman, for no reason at all, except their own prejudice, then they come up with crap such as high infant mortality, distocia, ridiculously short lifespan and anything else dredged from their crippled minds in an attempt to show our superiority.
I don't know of a single source claiming that rates of dystocia (difficult childbirth) were higher during the Paleolithic than afterward. I also don't know of a single source claiming that rates of dystocia are higher among HGs than modern food eaters. All the sources I've found show the opposite, which was the gist of this thread. If you know of any to the contrary, please share it.
You're right that the lifespan argument was used in the past, but I want to try to avoid getting into the lifespan subject here and focus on childbirth, because the lifespan topic could easily fill another thread and it has already been discussed in other threads.
Infant mortality is not the same thing as dystocia, so it is possible to have high rates of infant mortality (such as from infanticide and accidents) with low rates of dystocia.
-
True, HG societies are definitely more cooperative, and every surplus child wasn't killed (and this probably helps account for some of the gradual population growth before agrarianism--along with improved hunting technologies, some horticulture, etc.). Still, according to every account I've seen, HG societies in both Stone Age times and today do space their children out about twice as much or more than agrarian societies and multiple other sources I've read in the past did say that HGs sometimes use abortion or infanticide when a mother becomes pregnant while still suckling and carrying an infant. This type practice is also apparently practiced by wild animals (for example, a mother wolf may abandon or kill a pup if her litter is too large to feed them all).
There are plenty of other explanations re the lack of Palaeo population growth(except near the tail-end of the Palaeolithic). The obvious one is exposure to feast and famine(a logical consequence of a pre-Neolithic non-settled society). Another point made re Palaeo peoples is that Palaeos had far less in the way of fat-layers while Neolithic peoples had plenty(extra fat helps make a woman more fertile, thus resulting in more offspring and vice-versa). Plus, Neolithic women reached puberty much, much earlier than Palaeo peoples, which meant that Palaeos would inevitably have had fewer children by comparison. Added to the fact that breastfeeding also slows down the chance of conception by a huge amount, means far fewer children born to Palaeo tribes each generation than Neolithic communities.
Another obvious point is that men traditionally guard women from harm in most societies, giving especial attention to protecting women with very young children(plus women have fewer roles involving serious danger re warfare or hunting) so that one would naturally expect female lifespan to be longer than men's UNLESS some major , unavoidable factor, such as deaths from childbirth or extreme predation on human females by predators, acted to lower that figure to a significant extent.
-
There are plenty of other explanations re the lack of Palaeo population growth(except near the tail-end of the Palaeolithic). The obvious one is exposure to feast and famine(a logical consequence of a pre-Neolithic non-settled society). Another point made re Palaeo peoples is that Palaeos had far less in the way of fat-layers while Neolithic peoples had plenty(extra fat helps make a woman more fertile, thus resulting in more offspring and vice-versa). Plus, Neolithic women reached puberty much, much earlier than Palaeo peoples, which meant that Palaeos would inevitably have had fewer children by comparison. Added to the fact that breastfeeding also slows down the chance of conception by a huge amount, means far fewer children born to Palaeo tribes each generation than Neolithic communities.
Yup, Jared Diamond, Richard Leakey and others have cited the breastfeeding factor. However, as I recall, they also say that there was infanticide and other factors that contributed to infant mortality and I don't recall any of them linking infant mortality to any problems in the foods Stone Agers were eating.
...female lifespan to be longer than men's UNLESS some major , unavoidable factor, such as deaths from childbirth or extreme predation on human females by predators, acted to lower that figure to a significant extent.
I think you're making a stretch by extrapolating increased dystocia in Stone Age and hunter gatherer societies based on infant mortality rates. If it's true, then why do all anthropologists and every source I've seen claim that childbirth is easier, not harder, among HGs in the 20th century and today? Do you have a source that found the opposite?
-
One of the reason I suspect that Paleoman had a much longer lifespan than us is the known slow breeding rate of long-lived critters compared to short-lived.
Starving, sickly Neolithic man must breed rapidly or become extinct. We see this happening in our own time.
-
I think you're making a stretch by extrapolating increased dystocia in Stone Age and hunter gatherer societies based on infant mortality rates. If it's true, then why do all anthropologists and every source I've seen claim that childbirth is easier, not harder, among HGs in the 20th century and today? Do you have a source that found the opposite?
The only source I've ever personally come across claiming tribes had easier childbirth due to better diet was Weston Price, and he's hardly reliable. Also, there are obvious flaws in any such claims:- after all, modern medicine now forces women to undergo Caesarians which can easily cause complications(well, often it's the women who insist on them), plus doctors routinely administer drugs in order to speed up a birth and clear hospital beds - other complications include the fact that modern technology is now making it much easier to give birth(albeit with difficulty in certain cases) to infants who would otherwise have died in the womb. These factors have nothing to do with diet, so that it would be misleading to claim that modern women have more difficult childbirths than native tribes mainly due to diet.
I've just done a quick google under "dystocia" and have indeed found some references to dystocia among native tribes(eg:-
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/summary/101/19/1506
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2844324
Evidence re dystocia among animals is also present:-
http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/ilri/x5472b/x5472b0g.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_bound
-
The only source I've ever personally come across claiming tribes had easier childbirth due to better diet was Weston Price, and he's hardly reliable.
I heard it in person from an Amerindian.
-
I've just done a quick google under "dystocia" and have indeed found some references to dystocia among native tribes(eg:-
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/exercisebodybuilding/low-carb-and-zero-carb-exercise/msg17548/?topicseen#new
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/summary/101/19/1506 (1933)
This one mentions "a chapter on dystocia among the savage tribes." Which tribes were they, what year(s) were they observed, did they eat HG diets, and were the rates of dystocia found to be higher than those of moderners?
http://www.jstor.org/pss/2844324 - "Traditionally farmers, the Ganda are a Bantu people...." --http://encyclopedia.farlex.com/Ganda
This source supports the case for RPDs and against farm diets, not the reverse. Did you read this one or just post whatever hits you got?
Evidence re dystocia among animals is also present:-
http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/ilri/x5472b/x5472b0g.htm ("Reproductive traits and disease incidence characteristics of Dorper, Dorper x Masai and Masai ewes raised under semi-arid conditions in Kenya")
Dystocia rate among lamb breeds:
Dorper 10.0% [Dorpers are known to adapt well to feed lot conditions which offers farmers an alternative method to finish lambs in times of drought. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorper_(sheep)]
F1 Dorper x Masai 12.1%
Masai 2.0%
This appears to look at different breeds of pasture-fed animals, with no comparison to grainfed or wild animals. I didn't say there was NO dystocia among wild animals or pasture-fed animals, just probably less among wild animals vs. grainfed, and maybe less also among pasture-fed animals, based on what the people at the Adams Ranch told me. How do the rates of dystocia among these animals compare to wild or grainfed animals? What were they fed? "They were maintained on natural pastures that consisted primarily of Naivasha star-grass. Once a month the animals were supplied with mineral supplements. Water was supplied freely."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_bound
No evidence here of equal or better rates of dystocia among grain-fed, farmed animals
I added a 14th source below that did report lower rates of dystocia among grassfed animals and a couple of counter-sources that did not find that. Counter sources seem to be few and far between.
---------------------------------------------------
Since this and other threads keep getting distracted by focus on WAP, I've deleted the two sources that referenced him and relisted the 15 I have below.
I wrote that there are links to modern foods as vs. diets consisting mainly of Paleo foods--I didn't claim that it was "mainly due to diet" and I didn't say "native tribes"--that's a straw man argument I didn't make. Additional factors do not refute the dietary connection, they merely add to it. The evidence seems to suggest that the closer women move to a RPD (more Paleo, less processed, and probably more raw, given the tendency of people who avoid cooked grains and legumes to eat a higher proportion of raw foods) the more likely they are to have unusually easy pregnancies. This should not be surprising to any of us here who have experienced remarkable improvements from a RPD.
Since the modern foods that most Paleo dieters eliminate (grains, dairy and legumes) are mostly cooked or heat pasteurized or otherwise highly processed, and since many of the foods Paleo dieters eat more of (such as raw fruits and vegetables), are less cooked or otherwise processed, Paleo diets by their nature tend to be more raw than modern diets. So even cooked Paleo diets lend some support to the case for the raw aspect, as well as the Paleo aspect, of RPDs.
----------
NON-WAP SOURCES SUPPORTING LESS DYSTOCIA ON PALEO-TYPE VS STANDARD AMERICAN DIETS:
1) A Darwinian View of Obstructed Labor
Robert P. Roy, MD, FRCSC
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
Address reprint requests to: Robert P. Roy, MD, FRCSC, 4398 Buchanan Street, #1805, Burnaby, BC, V5C 6R7, Canada; E-mail: robertproy@yahoo.ca.
Obstetrics & Gynecology 2003;101:397-401
© 2003 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
http://www.greenjournal.org/cgi/content/abstract/101/2/397
This essay discusses the evolutionary biology of dystocia. From a Darwinian standpoint, the high frequency of dystocia observed today seems evolutionarily untenable. Hunter-gatherers, most notably the Inuit [when eating their traditional diet], appear not to suffer from dystocia. It may be that people from an agriculture-based background are, obstetrically speaking, less well adapted to the good nutrition of a modern affluent diet.
2) Question: Is NeanderThin safe during pregnancy?
Answer (by Ray Audette): "As hunter-gatherers have the easiest births and the lowest incidence of birth defects, it is not only safe but is preferred. But before adopting any changes, you must consult your family physician. The pregnant woman craves added nutrients to nourish and sustain herself and her developing baby. The mother's immune system is also working hard to protect mother and child, so care must be taken to avoid the forbidden foods while satisfying cravings by increasing dietary diversity. In this way the nausea common in pregnancy can be greatly reduced if not eliminated."
3) Obesity, waist-hip ratio and hunter-gatherers
LEP Wood (2006)
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 113 (10), 1110-1116.
doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01070.x
Abstract
Obesity is a rapidly growing global problem. It is not simply the result of eating too much, and not all types of obesity have the same significance. Obesity is in part genetic, and one particularly important genetic type of obesity is the tendency to 'truncal obesity',-that is, a raised waist-to-hip ratio. Such obesity is powerfully associated not only with a tendency to diabetes, but also to cardiovascular disease, ('Syndrome X'). Interestingly, this is the type of obesity seen in every hunter-gatherer (HG) population around the globe. Such people are intolerant of carbohydrate, especially refined carbohydrate, especially in the excessive amounts typically consumed in affluent societies. In such pure HG communities, rates of diabetes can be as high as 50% [and higher], when the 'Western' lifestyle is adopted. Many of us, however, share some of their genes and their carbohydrate intolerance-perhaps as many as 20 or 30% of the world's population. Pregnancy can uncover this characteristic, and obesity and glucose intolerance in pregnancy are rapidly burgeoning problems. Quite contrary to the common nutritional dogma of encouraging regular carbohydrates, it is suggested that pregnant women with a high waist-to-hip ratio should be strongly advised to adhere to a low-glycaemic-index diet. Additionally, many dietary interventions, some of them derived from observation of HG populations, are of proven benefit in reducing the expression of glucose intolerance and may well help in tackling the obesity epidemic.
4) Rising caesarean section rates: can evolution and ecology explain some of the difficulties of modern childbirth?
W A Liston FRCOG
Department of Obstetrics, Simpson Centre for Reproductive Health, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
http://www.jrsm.org/cgi/content/full/96/11/559#REF15
[...] Why is it that modern human childbirth is so frequently associated with difficulty? Only occasionally has anyone attempted to explain this. [...]
With huge increases in population and later industrialization the life of modern woman and man bears little relation to that of the hunter-gatherer. Because biological evolution cannot keep pace, man is a hunter-gatherer living in a 21st century world. Admittedly, where selection pressures have been very strong (e.g. malaria and the haemoglobinopathies) there have been genetic changes, but the species retains much of the physiology of pre-agricultural times. Whereas hunter-gatherers went through tens of thousands of generations there have been only 500 generations of agriculturalists and just a few in the industrial era. Physicians and nutritionists have therefore proposed that certain modern diseases, particularly heart disease and type 2 diabetes, are caused by a maladaption to our current lifestyle. Similar arguments can be applied to reproductive health and obstetric performance.
CHANGES IN HUMAN ECOLOGY
There are four chief ways in which this misfit between biology and lifestyle could affect childbirth-diet, population density, exercise and reproductive behaviour. The diet in palaeolithic times was by most accounts richer in protein and poorer in carbohydrate, with a different pattern of fats.8,9 It was also very varied. In particular the carbohydrate component had little refined starch and sugar with much more fibre. The agriculturalists then moved to a diet with less protein and fat, and more complex carbohydrate. The modern western diet contains a super-abundance of food, especially sugar and fat with less protein than that of early upper palaeolithic man. In poorer parts of the world where protein is scarce, food consists largely of complex carbohydrate, but western tendencies and fast food are spreading to all parts of the globe.8,9 [...]
What is not widely known is that the invention of agriculture and the development of settled living had pronounced affects on physical stature. Study of skeletons points to adverse changes in the teeth11 and a general reduction of height.8,12-14 Angel 15 has charted the patterns over thousands of years. Humans were tall in early upper palaeolithic times and did not become as tall again until the late 20th century in Western Europe and the USA. ....
CONCLUSION
Changes in diet, population density, exercise and reproductive behaviour mean that primigravid women are commonly shorter, older and fatter than is ideal for first childbirth. These adverse factors have been well recorded....
Anecdotal Reports:
5)
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 02:57:58 GMT
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Stacie Tolen <tolen4@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: paleo & pregnancy
Dear Jeremy,
I am a mother of two, and was a vegetarian during each of my pregnancies-Oops. I am sorry to say that due to the effects my diet had on my uterus and sacrum (and yes I can prove this), I endured a C-section with each of my children. I also suffered severe swelling, extreme fatigue, polyhydramnios, sciatica, and many more complications and such during my pregnancies. Though a longtime vegetarian, I craved buffalo meat like mad. Protein is absolutely essential during pregnancy, 80 mg daily. Conditions such as pre-eclampsia and the dreaded toxemia are attributed to protein deficiency. B-12 (available only in animal ingredients: meat, eggs, milk), folate, iron, calcium and vitamin C are others whose deficiency can cause tremendous problems for the pregnant woman, or worse, can damage the baby. Dairy products, especially those containing traces of hormones (BGH) can cause painful menstrual cramps, and possibly worsen pain with contractions. Soy is especially harmful to the fetus, and I have the child with autistic tendencies who proves that. When I eat grains, it causes problems with my joints (some people get arthritis) and if the pelvic and sacral joints are not functioning optimally, the baby will have problems getting through. While this organization does not speak of paleolithic diet, I do recommend that you check out http://www.bradleybirth.org for info. on prenatal nutritional requirements and, if you're interested, natural childbirth. Please do not confuse Bradley with Lamaze, they couldn't be more different and I personally do NOT recommend Lamaze or, worse, something wich claims to be a combination thereof. Your baby's mother should begin paying attention to her diet now if you plan to conceive in the next few months.
Best wishes, Stacie
6)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:57:19 -0500
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Brad Cooley <Bcooley@SOUTHDOWN.COM>
Subject: Re: Healthy Babies
Justin,
My first advice for your pregnant coworkers is to read The Continuum Concept by Jean Liedloff (http://www.continuum-concept.org/) and Our Babies, Ourselves by Meredith Small. These books really don't address nutritional aspects of childcare, but do address other issues that affect health. If they would like breastfeeding information, their local La Leche League (http://www.lalecheleague.org/) should have monthly meetings and individuals that can provide information and other support. LLL has been a great resource for my wife.
My wife gave birth to our first child in April 2000. Before she started incorporating paleo philosophy into her eating habits, she was unable to conceive. Within 3 weeks of going paleo, she was pregnant...maybe just a happy coincidence. During her pregnancy she gained only 25 lbs, gave birth to a 7 lb 10 oz girl, was walking within an hour of the birth, and dropped 35 lbs within a month (from pre-birth weight). I should point out that she didnt always eat paleo foods, but stuck to it pretty well. Certainly, her diet contributed to a relatively low weight gain, a successful natural childbirth, and significant loss of weight after childbirth. Also, IMO, because she eats a lot of meat, her milk production has been very good while breastfeeding. The baby is always well-fed, and sleeps very well at night.
Oddly enough many of the diets recommended for pregnant and lactating women are near-paleo, but with an emphasis on fruits and vegetables. The same can be said for children.
Let me know if you would like more info.
Brad
7)
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 08:28:23 -0600
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 01:22:32 -0500
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Ray Audette <rso456@AIRMAIL.NET>
Subject: Re: the "perils of childbirth" -- question for Ray
From: Jana Eagle >
> I am just wondering if you have some evidence about paleolithic
> childbirths and death statistics or if you are taking the modern-day
> media images of the traumatic operating room childbirth and
> transferring it onto paleolithic times.
I didn't mean to leave this impression. From studies cited by [Vilhjalmur] Stefansson,
hunter-gatherers have far less trauma and labor in childbirth than do
agricultural women. Just removing the hazards of gestational diabetes often
found in modern women ( resulting in very large babies) would improve these
statistics considerably but I suspect much more is involved.
When Gray-Hawk ( seven on May 14th ) was born, it was without doctors or
drugs. We arrived at the mid-wives['] at 3:15 PM and he arrived at 5:20 after
2 hours of mild labor […]. As my prediction, five months earlier, of the easiest birth they had ever seen came true, the midwives bought six copies of my book.
After one year he weaned himself from his mother and would eat almost
nothing but Pemmican for the next year. About the only exceptions were
watered-down fruit juice and pork rinds for teething.
Ray Audette
Author "NeanderThin"
8.
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:07:05 -0600
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Jana Eagle <jana@FIG.ORG>
Subject: toddlers and paleo
Rebecca Fincher <meegok2@HOTMAIL.COM> writes:
> 1. I was reading in the archives a chain titled "pain in childbirth?" that
> interested me because of my experience with PPD (not known to be present in
> tribal cultures or most "traditional" cultures)and because I have had 2
> C-sections (intended to have a natural birth both times). Is Ray Audette's
> wife an isolated example of paleodiet eaters who give birth quickly and w/o
> complications? Anyone else out there? Anyone with experience to the
> contrary? Is there any research on this available?
I can find out more about this, depending on your interest. I do know someone personally who had a very easy, painless birth and was following a paleo diet. I wish I knew of more paleo eaters and their birth experiences. I imagine there are so many circumstances that affect birth that every situation is different...
> 2. I have corresponded some with Stacie Tolen on this subject, but if there
> is anyone out there who has raised a toddler on this diet, I would
> appreciate your input. How do you keep enough calcium in the diet? (Both
> my kids still bf; maybe it's not a concern.) What foods do you prepare that
> your kids like/can eat?
believe it or not, I talked to my two year old and explained that sugar wasn't good for her body, and she doesn't ask for cookies, ice cream, candy like i thought she would. she will ask me if something has sugar in it and if it does she understands that we're not going to eat it. everywhere we go, people are offering her sugar, though. it makes me realize how much candy kids really do eat
we have this little game about food that "grows on trees". if it grows on trees or on a plant, we eat it. so she asks does coconut grow on trees? do kiwis grow on trees? and we talk about all the food that grows on trees.
i prepare almost all our meals at home and always pack snacks to take along on outings. she likes meat a lot, and goes through phases on fruits and vegetables and nuts, where she will really like one thing and eat a lot of it, and then a week later seems "finished" and moves on to something else. the freshest, in season produce seems the most attractive. also she likes jerky.
JAna
9)
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 11:18:49 -0700
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Susan Carmack <scarmack@DOWCO.COM>
Subject: Paleo is in the Bible too!
Hi Kristina and paleopeoples,
....
I have a friend who went completely paleo - no grains - who just had a baby at her house in a tub of water. NO pain. 3 1/2 hours of labour. She is 40 and said it was so easy, she would have 'a million more'. Her husband agreed to one. She has 2 toddlers at home already!! This woman was originally scheduled for a Caesarian … because she almost died last time from heart disease/or an allergic reaction to penicillin.
Is this pain free birth indication that we could be close to going back to the Garden?
> Planting and tilling and harvesting,
> sweating in the fields from dawn to dusk,
> Until you return to that ground yourself, dead and buried;
> you started out as dirt, you'll end up dirt."
The advent of agricultural revolution and the cultivation of grains! This is coincident to Eliots post about the grains for slaves project. We became slaves when Adam and Eve got the boot! Adam and Eve had everything to eat in the Garden, no sweat involved:
(Genesis 2:8-9) . . .. 9 Thus God made to grow out of the ground every tree desirable to one's sight and good for food and also the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.
...but it didn't take long to wreck the Place.
Paleobest,
Susan
10)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:21:11 -0700
Sender: Paleolithic Eating Support List <PALEOFOOD@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU>
From: Mermaid Rose <mermaidxrose@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Paleo pregnancy
To all the mamas-to-be, congratulations, and thanks for bringing healthy babies to the world. Midwife here, doiing home births for 20 years, water births as well... very ancient practices (duh, lol).
I believe paleo is the way of eating that creates healthier pregnancies. Obviously we are here today because of how we ate. There are pregnancy related health conditions that can be avoided by eating this way...ie gestational diabetes and toxemia (both which are treated by upping consumption of protein).
As far as the fish oil...it is the only supplement I recommend to my mamas....I am just not sure if the amount you are taking may be too much...wish I knew the answer. I would not recommend that much myself. Not based on anything other than gut feelings. I wish I could get everyone in my practice to eat the plaeo way....but alas...there are a bunch of vegetarians in the crowd! I love them all!
Remember to eat frequently...helps keep blood glucose even...helps especially with nausea (for which, btw, I also recommend protein). Snacking is a good way of getting all that. Especially nuts. Since you are wanting snacky foods, a nutty trail mix is a good way to take care of the desire of something crunchy and something sweet (put dried apples or apricots in it). Hard boiled eggs is another quick snack.
If I can be of any help, just write. Happy birthing!! Keep us updated.
Love & Peace
Lillian
11)
-----Original Message-----
From: Paleolithic Eating Support List
[mailto:PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG] On Behalf Of Mrs Caroline Centa
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 4:02 AM
To: PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG
Subject: Re: pregnant paleo?
I was pregnant after I had been Paleo for 2 years. I was reasonably strict too. I got sent to a dietitian because the midwives said my diet was ridiculous and not sufficient. The Dietitian said it was fine. I had to make sure I was getting enough energy, calcium (100g almonds has twice as much calcium than 100mL of milk... we eat a lot of almonds in the form of almond meal. You can also get calcium from Kale, Brocolli etc) and carbs and fibre (lots of fruit, especially dried fruit was good for that).
I survived (although I did eat a couple of 'naughty' things due to cravings at the time) and the labour was very good (I had been told that being Paleo makes your body handle labour better and even though I haven't done it before I have witnessed 3 births and think I did really well - no drugs or interventions and not as much pain as I anticipated). My baby came out very healthy and alert. He was a good weight (6 pound 14) and was only 3 days early.
We have also been bringing him up on a Paleo diet and he is developing in leaps and bounds.
The Paleo diet is our natural diet. It does well for our bodies and our children. We are designed to eat the diet and be pregnant. I am also pregnant again (9 weeks now) and intend on doing the diet fully this time (not succumbing to the cravings). I am hoping by doing it properly the pain will be even less...
12) Paleo dieter, Rachel Matesz summed up the common-sense nature of improved pregnancies on a Paleo diet:
>Date: Thurs, 5 Aug 1999 22:24:40 +0200
>From: Rachel Matesz <matesz@earthlink.net
Subject: Paleo-pregnancy
>Re: Have any studies been done on paleo-pregnancies? Women following a
>paleo WOL
>during their pregnancy.
For: Maria Tomashefsky-Dugan and others. Are you serious? We don't need
any studies!!!! We have 2 1/2 million years of evidence that a Paleo diet
can support reproduction. How on earth do you think we got here? The PWOE
and PWOL isn't new. It's not a fad....it's the longest practiced WOL and
WOE on the planet. Every heard of a 2 million year old fad? Whatever we
modern people have been doing, it's a blink of an eye, a few minutes, if
that, in the context of a 24 hour block of time. ….
13) "RE: Easy childbirth, my own recent experiences are quite positive. My partner does not follow a paleodiet but I did have significant input throughout the pregnancy regarding her diet and she eventually gave birth to an extremely healthy baby boy of 7lb 13oz in May of this year. It was her first pregnancy, she was strong and full of energy throughout and it ended in a completely natural birth without ANY pain relief whatsoever - except for hot towels and getting me into a headlock during contractions!! Shocked My new son is developing very well and shows signs of being physically and mentally advanced already. Throughout her pregnancy (and also now whilst breastfeeding) I ensured my partner ate plenty of grass-fed meats, liver, heart, fish, eggs, bone stock and blue ice cod liver oil. I guess her diet could be considered as WAP-like with an attempted emphasis on RAF (including non-paleo raw butter & cream)." --Michael, http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/off-topic/easy-childbirth-on-paleo-diets/msg16745/#msg16745
14) Easy birth vs Dystocia among animals:
Easy birthing vs. dystocia is even apparent in wild vs. domesticated animals. The ranch hands of the Adams Ranch in Florida said that they leave their grass-fed pregnant cows to handle births on their own out in the fields and there is rarely if ever a problem, whereas grain-fed cattle have much higher risks of complications and tend to require having a farmer or vet at hand during the birth, in case there are problems. Every wild animal birth I have seen on nature shows was amazingly quick and easy, whereas I have seen a grain-fed, barn-cooped cow in tremendous distress from her pregnancy.
15) Here is more evidence of less dystocia among animals who are not grain-fed:
"dystocia is unheard of in [grass-fed Certified] Criollos, and 100% calf crops are common." http://www.americancriollobeef.com/Rancher.cfm
16) "I heard [that traditional Native Americans had easier childbirths] in person from an Amerindian." --William http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/hot-topics/easy-childbirth-on-paleo-diets/msg17380/#msg17380
==================
COUNTER-EVIDENCE
I found some, but not much, and it was only regarding cattle:
1) "There was no difference in rate of dystocia for the free-choice hay vs. the high-grain diet group. Calf vigor was equal between both groups."
http://www.angusbeefbulletin.com/ArticlePDF/ABB0904_limitfed.pdf
They did find a higher re-breeding rate among grain-fed cows
2) Incidence rates of both dystocia and combined reproductive disorders were found to be lower (P less than .01) in herds that were fed cottonseed cake as a winter supplement, but higher (P less than .01) in herds that were fed grass hay as a winter supplement. Herds located in the mountains of Colorado had lower (P less than .01) incidence rates of dystocia and reproductive disorders than herds located in the eastern plains.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjas.fass.org%2Fcgi%2Fcontent%2Fabstract%2F68%2F9%2F2642&ei=K7W2SrPXEZHk8Qa7hcCTDw&rct=j&q=Incidence+rates+of+both+dystocia+and+combined+reproductive+disorders+were+found+to+be+lower+&usg=AFQjCNGcjH-3n_xwcSjUHbknqKp8gRg-DQ&sig2=_U9otKzZJa8VGJ0K5hVEEg
===================
Conclusion: based on the weight of the current evidence, dystocia rates appear to be lower among people and animals eating diets that are more biologically appropriate than the SAD/grainfed.
When you combine the above evidence of easier childbirths among women eating diets more RPD-like than the SAD with the Cassidy study that shows that infant mortality was actually lower in a sedentary hunter-gatherer society vs. an agrarian society in the same region in a later period (Cassidy CM. Nutrition and health in agriculturalists and hunter-gatherers: a case study of two prehistoric populations. in Nutritional Anthropology. Eds Jerome NW et al. 1980 Redgrave Publishing Company, Pleasantville, NY pg 117-145, http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/low-carb-diets/nutrition-and-health-in-agriculturalists-and-hunter-gatherers/#more-2877), and Tyler's thread on infanticide during the Paleolithic era (http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/off-topic/infanticide-in-the-palaeolithic/msg11122/#msg11122), it becomes clear that childbirths were probably easier and less likely to result in infant death in hunter gatherer societies vs agrarian societies, whereas infanticide may have been more common among HGs than farmers (and all anthropological sources I've read said the infanticide was usually for band/tribal survival reasons, in the same way that a mother wolf will kill a cub to ensure the survival of the remaining litter, rather than due to murderous impulses).
-
This one mentions "a chapter on dystocia among the savage tribes." Which tribes were they, what year(s) were they observed, did they eat HG diets, and were the rates of dystocia found to be higher than those of moderners?
The article refers clearly to savage tribes, implying a traditional non-agrarian diet- the above article unfortunately, like most serious palaeo articles, doesn't allow full scrutiny without paying and I'm loathe to spend money on something that should be widely available. There was a controversy on New Scientist re this, but it hasn't been solved to my satisfaction, yet.
This source supports the case for RPDs and against farm diets, not the reverse. Did you read this one or just post whatever hits you got?[/quote]
No, I'd read previously another reference which showed that the Ganda ate animal foods like insects, lake fish et al and ironically chose the wrong reference which I didn't check, fully.Precious little data on dystocia in general though random searching of websites shows multiple minor references to indicate that difficult childbirth does indeed exist in native tribes and wild animals. At the least one can't claim universally easy childbirth,merely that childbirth was easiER than modern times, with the factor modern medical practices such as Caesarians confusing the issue further.
This appears to look at different breeds of pasture-fed animals, with no comparison to grainfed or wild animals. I didn't say there was NO dystocia among wild animals or pasture-fed animals, just probably less among wild animals vs. grainfed, and maybe less also among pasture-fed animals, based on what the people at the Adams Ranch told me.
Well, that's fine. My whole thesis was that childbirth is sometimes difficult even for wild animals at times(even they have cases of breech-births etc., with percentages of problems being something between 2% to even as much as 10%(?) depending on the species listed), with a higher rate of difficult births for humans(even on raw diets) than wild animals given the evolutionary disadvantage of a narrow birth-canal having to pass through infants with proportionately much larger heads than wild animal young have.
---------------------------------------------------
Since this and other threads keep getting distracted by focus on WAP, I've deleted the two sources that referenced him and relisted the 15 I have below.
Fine by me.
I wrote that there are links to modern foods as vs. diets consisting mainly of Paleo foods--I didn't claim that it was "mainly due to diet" and I didn't say "native tribes"--that's a straw man argument I didn't make. Additional factors do not refute the dietary connection, they merely add to it. The evidence seems to suggest that the closer women move to a RPD (more Paleo, less processed, and probably more raw, given the tendency of people who avoid cooked grains and legumes to eat a higher proportion of raw foods) the more likely they are to have unusually easy pregnancies. This should not be surprising to any of us here who have experienced remarkable improvements from a RPD.
My only concerns are these:- all these other claims re hunter-gatherers and diet by the other people you cite don't seem to take into account the fact that modern birthing practices vastly increase the number of difficult births(eg:- women going in for Caesarians in order to avoid the hassle of birth, often for no medical reason, use of drugs to speed up birth). Take that factor away(such as experiments of women on modern diets practising traditional birthing methods or water-birth etc.), and with such a huge drop in side-effects, you might well find a much lower rate of dystocia among such women, perhaps not much higher than women on native diets.Granted, people with specific conditions, such as womb cancer or diabetes or whatever are going to have a higher chance of (indirect)complications by implication, which may very well be strongly linked to consumption of modern processed foods, but that's all. One could argue that hunter-gatherer women who did no exercise at all, would also have increased rates of dystocia.
-
My whole thesis was that childbirth is sometimes difficult even for wild animals at times
I have always held that view as well and didn't write anything contrary to that, AFAIK (as a matter of fact, I believe I also stated earlier that there is dystocia among wild animals). I was just reporting evidence that suggests that childbirths are easIER on more biologically appropriate diets, not ALWAYS easY. I hope that clears up any confusion.
-
Dr. Price does mention a book called "Safe Childbirth" by a Kathleen Vaughan in NAPD, chapter 19, page 345. Here is the relevant passage:
"...In addition to the problems growing out of physical injuries through lack of development before birth, which express themselves as facial and other deformities, there is increasing need for concern for physical handicaps entailed in underdevelopment of the hips. The difficulty encountered at childbirth in our modern civilization has been emphasized by Dr. Kathleen Vaughan (16) of London. In her book, "Safe Childbirth," she states that faults of development more than race modify pelvic shape. In the Foreword to her book, Dr. Howard A. Kelly, Professor Emeritus of Gynaecological Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, says:
Dr. Vaughan presents such an array of facts and data that the book must impress every reader. It is of vital importance that her conclusions be considered, for in my opinion our methods of bringing up our girls and the habits of our women with many of the customs of 'civilized' life must be radically readjusted.
This important work should be made available for reference in the school libraries of the United States. Further data from it are presented in Chapter 21...."
Dr. Pottenger also notes in "Pottenger's Cats" that the wide hips and narrow shoulders of women (and the wide shoulders and narrow hips of men) are not nearly as apparent on a poorer diet.
I'm not saying this answers the whole issue, just that it bears investigation.
-
Thanks for the reference, cherimoya. Johns Hopkins has an illustrious history and happens to be my favorite medical school and hospital, though I like the Mayo Clinic quite a bit too.
-
Thanks for the reference, cherimoya. Johns Hopkins has an illustrious history and happens to be my favorite medical school and hospital, though I like the Mayo Clinic quite a bit too.
I've been watching this discussion carefully, wondering when the best time to post this would come. I was sort of hoping someone else would find their own sources, independent of the ones I quoted. Does anyone know of anything else along these lines?
-
About what specifically, wide vs. narrow hips?
-
About what specifically, wide vs. narrow hips?
Yes.
-
Sandy Simmons' website probably has lots of good info on structural deformities linked to diet/nutrition and diseases of civilization. On hips:
Narrow, deformed hips have been observed as being more common in societies with highly processed, nutritionally deficient diets. Sandy notes that narrow or deformed hips are a reported symptom of the following connective-tissue-disorder-related diseases:
> Marfan syndrome (acetabuli malformations)
> Rickets - which involves many nutritional deficiencies
Source:
Connective Tissue Disorders: The Overlaps and Links to Diet
http://www.ctds.info/connective_disorders1.html
She makes other interesting connections too. And before anyone considers criticizing this stuff, please first read as much as you can from Sandy's site, as she links to numerous studies and research papers and she is a very intelligent, reasonable person. There are a some mistakes at her site, yes, but it is the most comprehensive source of info on connective tissue disorders on the Internet, it has proved valuable and motivating in my own health recovery program, and she's a good-hearted person who has helped many, so I'd appreciate it if folks don't speak badly of her even if you disagree with her on some things. As outlandish as some of it may seem, a lot of what she has written has proven true for myself and loved ones, so folks would do wise to do a LOT of reading on connective tissue disorders before dismissing something she has written.
-
It's interesting. I think it's pretty clear that diet must have some influence re increasing/reducing genetic conditions. And then there's the science of epigenetics where diet (or something like smoking) could influence gene-expression. However, given mutations etc., there would have to be a basic percentage of infants born with genetic defects regardless of the mother having had a good diet. What really annoys me is that there's insufficient data on the normal percentage of birth-defects/genetic issues in wildlife.
-
Aajonus reports about an extremely easy childbirth anecdote via raw Primal diet in this video:
Primal Diet Workshop Sampler (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfns42cX8sc#)
-
About what specifically, wide vs. narrow hips?
I've known plenty of women with wide hips and young babies who told me they had a terrible time giving birth, had to get c-sections etc. I had very narrow hips again within three months of giving birth and back under a hundred pounds. I wasn't paleo, but I stayed away from processed foods and ate lots of raw kale & fruit (not together). I gave birth naturally and no medications at all. My mom was always small hipped & fairly paleo, she hated milk since she was a child and rarely ate any grain as I was growing up and considered beans to be a dangerously unhealthy food & also avoided chemicals & overly processed food & only rarely fried food. She had uncomplicated pregnancies only and did not get c-sections. My sisters with wider hips were not so lucky giving birth, took some anesthesia & other supports, said that was barely enough etc. Don't ask me how anesthesia helps one push a baby out, I've never tried it. My having narrow hips did not affect baby's health adversely in the slightest, perhaps the reverse, maybe narrower hipped women make better birth-giving hormone to loosen hips at the right time and bring it back after? What's the BMI for women's health etc?
-
Narrow hips isn't the only source of birthing pain/problems. I suspect that what one's been eating, hormones, inflammation levels, immune system functioning, nutrient levels and/or other factors also play a role.
-
Narrow hips isn't the only source of birthing pain/problems. I suspect that what one's been eating, hormones, inflammation levels, immune system function ..
My autoimmunity was flaring more than ever while pregnant, not to show its head again till maybe seventeen years later. I only had headaches, backaches and acne from it while pregnant, no other health problems when pregnant. Well, I did have sciatica only while pregnant. Perhaps that was because of my small hips.
-
I would be surprised if sciatica were due always and only to small hips. I suspect there's generally more to it than that.
My own cystic acne, one of the diseases of civilization, resolved completely via raw Paleo diet, whereas the most powerful drugs (such as Accutane) were impotent in the longer run. My lower back pain has greatly improved, though not completely resolved.
-
I would be surprised if sciatica were due always and only to small hips... My lower back pain has greatly improved, though not completely resolved.
Try sticking a four inch diameter baby skull in the very narrow hips and tell me, walk around with it, don't take it out 24/7. Add the weight of a sack of amniotic fluid laying on top of that. I did have back pain before that, but not nearly as bad, evil dentist 'ton' of mercury etc.
-
My message may not have come across as I intended, Rawzi. I only said that narrow hips isn't the only source of childbirth pain and problems and sciatica, not at all in any way that there is no pain with any childbirth. You mentioned mercury, which theoretically could be yet another factor, and which agrees with what I was saying that narrow hips doesn't seem to be the only factor. So we seem to be mainly in agreement.
While a man of course cannot experience what a woman goes through and I doubt any man thinks he can, are you saying that one has to bear a child to know that childbirth pain exists? Is it taboo to you for a man to partake in such discussions? If so, I will go silent.
If it's not taboo to discuss, earlier you said, "I gave birth naturally and no medications at all." How painful would you describe the childbirth you experienced and how much more or less so than most American women?