Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Hot Topics => Topic started by: Joy2012 on March 25, 2012, 03:56:44 pm
-
I personally cannot stomach much cooked animal flesh/fat. I did that a couple times (years ago) and would feel bad as if I had a flu.
On the other hand, it appears that the vast majority of the paleo diet community (including gurus and authors of paleo diet books) eat cooked animal flesh/fat. How come so many people do so well with cooked paleo?
-
The answer is they don't. If you look at the claimed benefits of a cooked-palaeodiet of the gurus, one finds things like a slight reduction in the symptoms of auto-immune diseases reported, an improvement of a few conditions like diabetes, and less weight-gain than on standard, non-palaeo cooked diets. Not too impressive given that rawpalaeodiets provide far bigger health-benefits re decreased aging and many other conditions(after all, studies show significant improvements in age-related conditions when levels of advanced glycation end products(cooking-derived toxins) are reduced in the body.
The simple fact is that cooked-palaeodiets are better/less worse than standard non-palaeo junk food diets. This is because they are less loaded with preservatives/chemicals, and often involve high-quality grassfed meats cooked at much lower temperatures, so, naturally, some people will experience some benefits therefrom, but nowhere near as much as if they had gone rawpalaeo instead.
*Subject should have been moved to the Hot Topics forum", not the General Discussions forum.*
-
if cooked paleo could cure:
- cancer
- psoriasis
- tooth decay
etc.,
Then that would make the job of a healer pretty easy.
Unfortunately, the human body doesn't work that way. The principles of health are quite easy once you take into raw paleo diet and lifestyle concepts.
I find the highest difficulty in healing people is to convince them to eat raw meat, raw fat, raw organs. They want to do everything else... besides that. But those who do raw paleo immediately without fear are rewarded immediately.
-
because, at any rate, it is better than what they were previously eating. i am sure for those who make health attained through diet the pinnacle of their existence or those who are compromised still by diet will continue to search for a healthier or more healing way to nourish themselves
-
The answer is they don't. If you look at the claimed benefits of a cooked-palaeodiet of the gurus, one finds things like a slight reduction in the symptoms of auto-immune diseases reported, an improvement of a few conditions like diabetes, and less weight-gain than on standard, non-palaeo cooked diets. Not too impressive....
If that's the case, then why did the majority vote for cooked Paleo being better than raw vegan here: http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/hot-topics/would-any-raw-vegans-do-better-on-cooked-paleo (http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/hot-topics/would-any-raw-vegans-do-better-on-cooked-paleo)
The vote was actually more favorable to cooked Paleo than I expected, given the usual rhetoric in the forum. It seems that there's a silent majority here that disagrees with you (and doubtless the vast majority of cooked Paleos would disagree with you). If rawness were such a huge factor in the benefits of raw Paleo, and the Paleo factor so small, wouldn't raw vegan fare better than it did?
Many cooked Paleos suscribe to the hypothesis that avoiding or restricting the Neolithic Agents of Disease (NADs)--generally described as wheat/gluten, vegetable/seed oils, and fructose/sugars (sometimes limited to concentrated processed versions, such as soda pop, fruit juices and other processed foods high in added sugars, but frequently also involving limiting of fruit intake)--is the biggest factor in the success of cooked Paleo diets. If that hypothesis is largely on target, then it could explain why so many cooked Paleos report doing very well and would explain why I had dramatic improvements on cooked Paleo myself, and much smaller, though still significant, improvements from rawness.
One good thing about rawness is that it forces one to eliminate many of the most toxic foods. The foods that require cooking do so in part because of their toxic loads and antinutrient effects. Eating a cooked Paleo diet that avoids foods that require cooking, such as NeanderThin, also avoids those same foods. Using forms of cooking that produce far lower levels of heat-related toxins like AGEs, as many cooked Paleos recommend, would make a NeanderThin-type cooked Paleo diet even closer to raw Paleo.
-
If that's the case, then why did the majority vote for cooked Paleo being better than raw vegan here: http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/hot-topics/would-any-raw-vegans-do-better-on-cooked-paleo (http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/hot-topics/would-any-raw-vegans-do-better-on-cooked-paleo/msg87364/#msg87364)
The vote was actually more favorable to cooked Paleo than I expected, given the usual rhetoric in the forum. It seems that there's a silent majority here that disagrees with you. If rawness were such a huge factor in the benefits of raw Paleo, and the Paleo factor so small, wouldn't raw vegan fare better than it did?
That was a deliberately distorted poll of yours. For one thing, polls never accurately reflect a particular community's views as people are lazy and don't vote or for other reasons. Take the polls, years ago on this forum, for finding out who was RZC or raw omnivore - if those polls had been believed, then Rawpalaeos were mostly RZCers at the time. Not true, as it turns out we got more and more rawpalaeos joining this forum from other areas of the Internet/world who were raw omnivores, and the RZC portion is a minority here. Mrs Thatcher also complained about the polls in the UK, as they were often wrong.
The other point was that it was a distorted, biased poll intended to make people give the wrong impression(you often limit/fix poll-options to ensure the results seemingly favour your own beliefs...hmm). For example, it's well-known, scientifically and anecdotally, that a raw vegan diet(possibly not 80-10-10 but who knows?) does provide a lot of health-benefits in the short-term, mainly due to the avoidance of cooked foods. The only catch with a raw vegan diet is that it does not provide all the nutrients that a human body needs so that, in the long run, cooked-palaeo is "less worse" than a raw vegan diet. The sheer load of heat-created toxins on a cooked, palaeolithic diet means that it is very difficult for people to be truly healthy on it, long-term(even if they eat grassfed, and many even eat grainfed meats). Sure, there are gimmicks, such as regular fasting and regular, everyday exercise,which help reduce only one type of heat-derived toxin, but I seriously doubt most cooked-palaeos go in for either or both in a big way. By contrast, those who follow a mostly raw vegan diet but eat only a little raw animal food as well are way healthier than the cooked-palaeodieters, judging from reports.
-
That was a deliberately distorted poll of yours.
Feel free to make your own undistorted version. You're not afraid of what it might show, are you? And for the umpteenth time, unless you can read minds you don't know whether people are doing things "deliberately" or what their motivations are. As I've mentioned before, you are astoundingly bad at mind reading. Much worse than average.
-
Feel free to make your own undistorted version. You're not afraid of what it might show, are you? And for the umpteenth time, unless you can read minds you don't know whether people are doing things "deliberately" or what their motivations are. As I've mentioned before, you are astoundingly bad at mind reading. Much worse than average.
I was dead on target this time, you crook!
Like I said, though, polls never are correct, even if phrased in an honest way. I recall a lot of polls I got started which were unbelievable re results. People are bone-idle on the Net, or have their own reasons for not voting, such as timidity or whatever. Indeed, like with all other internet forums, a large number of people just read here but never post at all, let alone vote. So, polls are never representative(unless you have a system like in Australia where you are forced by law to vote!)
Like I said, though, there is plenty of scientific and anecdotal evidence that raw vegan diets work, at least in the short-term. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that eating mostly raw vegan plus a little raw animal food works way better than a cooked-palaeodiet. And there is plenty of scientific and anecdotal evidence that heat-created toxins in cooked foods are a major problem, not just preservatives/chemicals and other modern extras. Indeed, in past centuries, many people in mediaeval societies were eating diets that excluded modern chemicals, and who went in for raw dairy and fermented grains(or even no grains or dairy in some of those societies), and yet they routinely ended up unhealthy.
-
I was dead on target this time, you crook!
LOL! Crook? That's hilariously over the top and irrelevant even for you.
Like I said, though, polls never are correct, even if phrased in an honest way.
If polls are "never" correct, as you say, then we can always figure out the correct result, which will always be the opposite of what they indicate, right? So if we poll the folks here, asking if they have fared well on raw Paleo, then if the results say yes, according to your logic, we could therefore assume the correct answer is no?
Why are you so confident that the poll is wrong and the cooked Paleos reports of success are apparently lies and the studies finding cooked Paleo to beat the "Mediterranean diet" and so forth are apparently worthless, but your own favorite studies and intuition about what the silent majority thinks are correct (ironically, despite the fact that you who apparently think that rawness far outweighs the Paleo factor are much more vocal and active than the silent ones who voted that raw vegans would do better on cooked Paleo)? How do we know this isn't just cherry picking to support your foregone conclusions?
-
You certainly have a gift for committing false logic, based on your above claims. First of all, an honest poll would inevitably include a lot more options than just 2. Despite your "black-and-white"-type viewpoint, the real world exists in shades of grey as well. So the genuine result would never be the exact opposite of a particular poll result - indeed there may well be some who think that other options are better than either raw vegan or cooked-palaeo. When one factors in other issues such as fatigue/laziness or the fact that most people do not bother voting anyway etc. , it's absurd to claim that any poll is representative. I mean, we even have political polls which show that voters will vote less for certain parties if there is bad weather, and so on...
The problem with your claims is that there are very few cooked-palaeodiet studies around. By contrast, there are a multitude of studies which focus on the harm done by heat-created toxins(several tens of thousands just on advanced glycation end products alone) , so from a democratic viewpoint, the cooked-palaeodiet argument dies a quick death. The "intuition" claim is just childish. I've come across too many reports over the years from Instinctos who did fine even on high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diets but who reported having issues with cooked meats, for example -reports from cooked-palaeos on forums, by contrast, were pretty dismal. As for "being more vocal", that is irrelevant, of course. Whether one is silent or vocal does not change the main result, neither does any poll since it can never be truly representative for the reasons I gave above.
-
I've come across too many reports over the years from Instinctos who did fine even on high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diets but who reported having issues with cooked meats, for example -reports from cooked-palaeos on forums, by contrast, were pretty dismal.
I agree with there being a lot of people who do well on raw diets that include relatively small amounts of animal products. I've seen a lot of this anecdotal data myself. I think that I would have done very well on such a diet if I had never done veganism, but I think eating so little animal foods for several years has forced me to go the other direction.
At this point I'm somewhere in between, but I don't know if I'll ever be able to eat such small amounts of animal products as some people do without sacrificing some mental calm and stability.
I think a lot of the cooked-paleo folks have problems because they are OVER-cooking their food. I imagine if they went in for light steaming instead of the usual cooking methods that they would see a great increase in health.
For that matter, I think being strict about the Brix levels of your plant foods helps too. Also, avoiding farm-raised fish and grainfed beef also make a big difference, IMHO.
-
First of all, an honest poll would inevitably include a lot more options than just 2.
Again, feel free to create one.
I've come across too many reports over the years from Instinctos who did fine even on high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diets but who reported having issues with cooked meats, for example -reports from cooked-palaeos on forums, by contrast, were pretty dismal.
I would be interested to see those examples. If they are as numerous as you seem to suggest, it shouldn't be difficult to produce some. I know that some exist, so I'm open-minded about what the balance of experiences might be--I just suspect that you are overstating the case as usual.
As for "being more vocal", that is irrelevant, of course.
The point was that you seemed to be suggesting that there's a silent majority of people who didn't participate in the poll, which was rather ironic given that the most vocal person of all on the topic is you, someone who believes that the rawness aspect of the RPD is far more important than the Paleo aspect and who insults anyone who dares suggest anything to the contrary. The poll seems to suggest that your rants against anyone who dares speak up and share a different perspective on the topic than yours may have a silencing effect (and, again, feel free to create your own poll, I would be interested to see the results).
-
I agree with there being a lot of people who do well on raw diets that include relatively small amounts of animal products. I've seen a lot of this anecdotal data myself.
I have seen some examples too, including some people who were eating what they thought were relatively healthy conventional diets that included meat and improved by becoming raw vegan, at least in the short term (though I've seen more counter examples--raw or cooked vegans moving to partly or mostly cooked Paleo, vegetarian diets that include eggs or fish or dairy, or LC and improving), and I was surprised that the poll result was as lopsided as it was, especially since it was conducted at a raw Paleo forum that is self-selected for people who think rawness is important enough to frequent a raw Paleo diet forum rather than just a generic Paleo diet forum.
I think a lot of the cooked-paleo folks have problems because they are OVER-cooking their food. I imagine if they went in for light steaming instead of the usual cooking methods that they would see a great increase in health.
For that matter, I think being strict about the Brix levels of your plant foods helps too. Also, avoiding farm-raised fish and grainfed beef also make a big difference, IMHO.
I think you're probably right on all points, though we might have somewhat different guesses on the degrees of importance of each factor. I suspect that a Stephan-Guyenet type near-Paleo diet of traditionally cooked (such as steaming, boiling and crockpot-cooking) whole foods would be more health promoting for most folks than a raw vegan diet, and the poll was just one more small data point lending some support to that guess.
Despite Tyler's accusation, I don't go in for the black-and-white thinking of seeing cooking as either all complete poison or all totally benign (even the poll had a continuum of 5 choices--it wasn't limited to just two discrete options). I tend to see things in shadings, a continuum of bad to good, including cooking. Some cooked Paleo dieters seem to think that if some studies show some forms of cooking to produce low amounts of heat-related toxins or increase calories obtained from certain foods (which is an odd "benefit" to promote in light of the "obesity epidemic") or increase the intake of nutrients from certain foods or otherwise seem relatively OK, and if Wrangham and some others say we may be at least partly adapted to cooking, then any and all forms of cooking are OK, which I doubt even Wrangham would support. In large part it seems like it might be a comforting excuse for eating huge amounts of fried crispy bacon and well-done meats fried in butter or lard, but that's just my amateur speculation based on lots of posts I've read.
I did expect some controversy and backlash from the poll question and my other questions on the topic, and those of others like Joy2012. It's never popular to ask questions that don't jibe 100% with the most purist interpretation of a dietary forum's ideology, but I'm more interested in learning than in promoting an ideology. Over the years I've noticed the same thing that Joy2012 noted in the original thread post and it is an interesting question. If Tyler is right that cooked Paleo offers little or nothing more than slight reduction in symptoms of a few conditions compared to the range of more conventional Western diets that most Westerners eat and that cooked Paleos tend to switch from, then it will likely peter out in relatively short order, as it requires substantial changes that most people seem to prefer not to have to make.
-
There are plenty of polls if you look in the off-topics forum and the philosophy section. They either have too few votes(the political spectrum poll is a case in point) or people don't bother to vote, such as in the Sexual Orientations poll where no one put a vote for "homosexual" in, a rather unlikely prospect when there are 100s/1000s of past and present members.
As for making a new poll, like I said, no poll can possibly be truly representative, so it's a waste of time.
As regards Instinctos, I suggest you actually go onto Instincto forums/websites yourself, like I did years ago and do the relevant research rather than my wasting my time. An obvious example of someone right now doing well on Iots of raw plant foods/low-raw-animal foods, is SkinnyDevil, last I checked.
Like I said, whether someone is vocal or not is irrelevant. For example, I used to feel forced to write vehement condemnations of raw dairy on other RVAF diet forums because the large anti-raw-dairy crowd often were always too timid to post or just couldn't be bothered(despite many of them PMing me about their real views). They were generally frightened off by the fanatical pro-raw-dairy crowd, so I eventually felt forced to put forward the anti-raw-dairy stance on open forum just to warn others in case they encountered the same sort of problems I had. In your case, like that pro-raw-dairy crowd, you are being fanatically pro-cooked-palaeo despite the fact that most in the RVAF diet community find that cooked foods, including cooked-palaeodiets, were less useful or downright harmful by comparison to RVAF diets.
-
The point re palaeolithic diets "petering" out if they don't work is nonsense, of course. There have been a multitude of diets that have remained popular(albeit in cycles) despite not really working at all. The Atkins Diet comes to mind. Even Breatharianism hasn't died out yet. All an SMD eater needs is a diet that is "less worse" than a cooked, junk-food diet, no matter by how little(not difficult to achieve), and people will often stick to it. It takes a bit more imagination to go for more effective diets like rawpalaeo ones.
-
Those examples support what I was talking about--the Atkins diet has petered out quite a bit from its peak and Breatharianism has never exceeded a miniscule following. If Paleo follows those examples then it will eventually fall dramatically in popularity and be eclipsed by other diet trends, just as Paleo has been eclipsing Atkins. Even one of the top promoters of Atkins, Jimmy Moore, went Paleo.
Check out the collapse of interest in Atkins on Google trends:
(http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=atkins+diet&graph=weekly_img&sa=N)
And with the collapse in interest of Atkins went a parrallel collapse in interest in carbs:
"Time-based data related to a search term can be a fascinating look at how trends spark interest in particular topics. For instance, as the Atkins Diet lost popularity, so too did interest in the carbohydrate content of food."
(http://radar.oreilly.com/assets_c/2011/05/Picture%20486-thumb-486x286.png)
http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/google-correlate.html (http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/google-correlate.html)
As for making a new poll, like I said, no poll can possibly be truly representative, so it's a waste of time.
So you're chickening out? It's easier to cast stones than to put constructive effort into something and put one's theories to the test, isn't it? If you're going to criticize my poll then the least you could do would be to create or suggest a better one. If all polls are completely worthless then mine is no worse than any other and it was a waste of time for you to point out alleged defects and motivations behind it ("deliberately distorted", "biased" and so on)--you could have just claimed from the start that all polls are completely worthless instead of suggesting that mine was particularly bad. If instead it's possible to improve upon it, then feel free to do so.
As regards Instinctos, I suggest you actually go onto Instincto forums/websites yourself, like I did years ago and do the relevant research rather than my wasting my time. An obvious example of someone right now doing well on Iots of raw plant foods/low-raw-animal foods, is SkinnyDevil, last I checked.
So are you saying that Skinny Devil "did fine even on high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diets but ... reported having issues with cooked meats"? I know he eats more plant foods than what most raw Paleos report, but I didn't know that he did fine on a high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diet. I guess it would help if you would define what you mean by high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diet.
Probably the best examples to support your case would be ex-cooked-Paleos who switched to raw vegan or partly-cooked vegan and did better on the vegan diet, particularly for longer time periods. To try to help give you a head start, the closest example I can think of off the top of my head is Don Matesz, who switched from LC cooked Paleo to cooked near-vegetarian and improved. It's not quite the same thing, but not far off.
you are being fanatically pro-cooked-palaeo
How on earth do you square the notion of a high-raw dieter being "fanatically pro-cooked-Paleo"?
despite the fact that most in the RVAF diet community find that cooked foods, including cooked-palaeodiets, were less useful or downright harmful by comparison to RVAF diets
Another tiresome straw man. I eat high raw myself, so I'm obviously not arguing that cooked Paleo is better than RVAF diets like my own. The point was never that cooked Paleo is optimal, but that your claims regarding the lack of importance of the Paleo aspect of raw Paleo and your minimization of benefits experienced by people who swtiched from more conventional diets like SAD-type diets to cooked Paleo have been excessive. Joy2012's question was a valid one and can't be so easily dismissed as you tried to do, and clearly Joy isn't "fanatically pro-cooked Paleo."
-
Those examples support what I was talking about--the Atkins diet has petered out quite a bit from its peak and Breatharianism has never exceeded a miniscule following. If Paleo follows those examples then it will eventually fall dramatically in popularity and be eclipsed by other diet trends, just as Paleo has been eclipsing Atkins. Even one of the top promoters of Atkins, Jimmy Moore, went Paleo.
Check out the collapse of interest in Atkins on Google trends:
(http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=atkins+diet&graph=weekly_img&sa=N)
And with the collapse in interest of Atkins went a parrallel collapse in interest in carbs:
As usual, you are conveniently ignoring the fact that all these diets go up and down in cycles over decades - for example Atkins was very popular in the 60s. This does not have anything to do with whether the diet works or not, but on whether a new book is out or not, or maybe an Internet guru appears etc. The Palaeolithic diet also has similiar cyclic activity. As regards Breatharianism, while I have no doubt it is less popular than many other diets, I am pretty sure your claim that its followers are nonexistent is pure bull - I had a dinner with a cousin of mine a while back in which she enthused about the wonders of Breatharianism - she's a new-age follower and eagerly follows every new trend in that field, with an emphasis on the wackiest ones.
So you're chickening out? It's easier to cast stones than to put constructive effort into something and put one's theories to the test, isn't it? If you're going to criticize my poll then the least you could do would be to create or suggest a better one. If all polls are completely worthless then mine is no worse than any other and it was a waste of time for you to point out alleged defects and motivations behind it ("deliberately distorted", "biased" and so on)--you could have just claimed from the start that all polls are completely worthless instead of suggesting that mine was particularly bad. If instead it's possible to improve upon it, then feel free to do so.
What I actually stated was that polls were worthless in terms of providing reliable data. I had further, correctly, stated that your poll was worse than just useless, being actually deceitful. Also, there's no point in my putting forward an honest poll of mine if it's anyway going to be inaccurate like every other poll, anyway.
So are you saying that Skinny Devil "did fine even on high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diets but ... reported having issues with cooked meats"? I know he eats more plant foods than what most raw Paleos report, but I didn't know that he did fine on a high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diet. I guess it would help if you would define what you mean by high-raw vegan/low raw animal food diet.
I mean that Instinctos on c.10% raw animal foods/90% raw plant foods are fine on such a diet. Of course, like cherimoya said, it all depends. Such Instinctos who had been 100% raw vegan for years beforehand would likely not beneft so much, but otherwise as long as the raw animal food component provided enough nutrients to avoid nutritional deficiencies, there would be no problem.
How on earth do you square the notion of a high-raw dieter being "fanatically pro-cooked-Paleo"?
You wre belittling the raw component of the diet, suggesting, wrongly, that it wasn't anywhere near as important as the palaeo component.
The point was never that cooked Paleo is optimal, but that your claims regarding the lack of importance of the Paleo aspect of raw Paleo and your minimization of benefits experienced by people who swtiched from more conventional diets like SAD-type diets to cooked Paleo have been excessive. Joy2012's question was a valid one and can't be so easily dismissed as you tried to do, and clearly Joy isn't "fanatically pro-cooked Paleo."
I did not dismiss the palaeo component as unimportant, you were the one belittling the raw component, I was just defending raw diets. I, after all, am aware of the benefits of avoiding dairy, grains and legumes from one's diet. I merely point out the obvious, that the cooked component of cooked-palaeo is so harmful to health that it negates, to a large extent, the benefits gained from avoiding non-palaeo foods. Besides, if cooked-palaeo were so wonderful, then why is it that switching from pasteurised dairy to raw dairy suddenly makes (some) people healthier? Clearly if cooked-palaeo really were so effective, then even raw dairy should, in all cases, be also harmful to everybody's heath.
-
I think you're probably right on all points, though we might have somewhat different guesses on the degrees of importance of each factor. I suspect that a Stephan-Guyenet type near-Paleo diet of traditionally cooked (such as steaming, boiling and crockpot-cooking) whole foods would be more health promoting for most folks than a raw vegan diet,
My concern with boiling and crockpot cooking is that you're reducing the vitamin B and C content, since they are pretty heat-labile.
Also, in both cases you're missing the good bacteria that live on the surface of meat/fish/plants. Granted, this can be fixed by eating some raw high meat and raw fermented fruits/veggies.
I personally would guess that the ratios work like this:
1. Cooking methods (raw vs. steaming or quick boiling vs. frying/grilling/etc.)-- 25-30%.
2. Brix/quality of plant foods (depends a great deal on how MUCH plant food is eaten regularly. For straight carnivores it doesn't matter, except regarding the Brix/quality of the grass/plants that any ruminants you eat have been eating --also, for people whose diet is mainly wild-caught seafood, it makes relatively little difference)--10-60%
3. wild and/or grassfed (again, depends a lot on how much animal food you eat)--15-60%
4.Use of high meat and fermented foods--15-20%.
If you're eating mostly plant foods, then #3's percentage drops a lot, while #2's percentage rises a lot.
#1 and #4 are fairly invariable, while #2 and #3 depend on how much of a carnivore you are, or aren't.
I don't recommend anyone eat a paleo diet, or any diet at all, long-term, without paying attention to all 4 of those points. In the long run, they all impact your health pretty significantly, for nearly all people.
The percentages are rough, of course, and vary from person to person.
-
Also, I would say that getting a wide variety of foods, and making sure, long-term, that you're getting sufficient minerals (trace and regular) and vitamins (water-soluble and fat-soluble), has importance ranging from 10-50%.
Eating instincto-style, or at least very simply, also has importance of around 10-20%.
These percentages can vary quite a bit over time for an individual person, too, depending on what they are eating. Eating a varied diet versus a near mono-diet can make a BIG difference in the LONG term. Mono-diets can be very deficient, and therefore dangerous, long-term.
-
I feel like I'm making a character for an RPG, all these percentages.
-
I enjoyed reading your informative exchanges of views and banter. The issue is becoming clearer to me.
-
Thanks for your assessment, Cherimoya.
I am pretty sure your claim that its followers are nonexistent is pure bull
I didn't say nonexistent, I said miniscule, and someone once said that the only true breatharians are the dead ones, because no one can actually go without food indefinitely.
I had a dinner with a cousin of mine a while back in which she enthused about the wonders of Breatharianism - she's a new-age follower and eagerly follows every new trend in that field, with an emphasis on the wackiest ones.
How does one "have dinner" with a Breatharian? ;) Did she watch you eat or what?
What I actually stated was that polls were worthless in terms of providing reliable data. I had further, correctly, stated that your poll was worse than just useless, being actually deceitful.
So if my poll was worse than useless, whereas others are better because they're just useless, then it should be possible for you to improve on mine. If you can't improve on it, then that reveals that singling mine out and claiming it was worse was just so much hot air.
You wre belittling the raw component of the diet
No, I was just responding to your belittling of the Paleo component.
I merely point out the obvious, that the cooked component of cooked-palaeo is so harmful to health that it negates, to a large extent, the benefits gained from avoiding non-palaeo foods.
There you go again, belittling the Paleo component, and yet again you're ignoring the gradations of harm from different forms of cooking.
Besides, if cooked-palaeo were so wonderful, then why is it that switching from pasteurised dairy to raw dairy suddenly makes (some) people healthier?
Again, I wasn't arguing that there's no value in rawness, just responding to your going overboard in diminishing the Paleo aspect. Besides, my understanding is that most cooked Paleos don't consume dairy or see it as a modification of Paleo.
And again, if you could cite examples of people who improved dramatically when they switched to raw vegan from cooked Paleo, that would add credence to your claims. Evidence is more convincing than rhetoric and ad hominem.
-
Of course, I don't expect any of this to convince you, TD, so we'll likely have to agree to disagree.
-
Are there any case studies on cooked paleo that may show some evidence as to it being able to heal sickness.
Sure there are cooked paleo gurus like Mark Sisson, but he wasn't really sick. He was a fairly healthy athlete that became burned out from physical stress and eating too much grain and processed carbs. His diet seemed to have helped him regain his health. I still have doubts as to how he will be able to tolerate cooked meat, supplements and vegetable oils as he continues to age.
People who are truly ill may not be able to handle the burden of cooked foods and won't have as dramatic of health benefits as they would on a Raw paleo diet.
Of course we need some real case studies to prove it, one way or another.
-
Are there any case studies on cooked paleo that may show some evidence as to it being able to heal sickness. ...
Of course we need some real case studies to prove it, one way or another.
Are there any case studies on the ability of raw Paleo to heal sickness? No. Do you believe it works nonetheless? Yes! And you don't require a single study to believe that, because you experienced it yourself.
-
Yes, PaloPhil is right.
There are a lot of people that healed themselves with cooked paleo. Go and read on paleoforums, MDA is a great source.
Many also got sick eating 100% raw. Some died. 100% Raw is maybe not the salvation and only solution as many might think.
There is MUCH more into play as only raw/cooked, IMHO.
Inger (still a big fan of raw but lost her dogma long ago.. -X..)
-
Are raw paleo people healing when they use raw dairy?
-
Are there any case studies on the ability of raw Paleo to heal sickness? No. Do you believe it works nonetheless? Yes! And you don't require a single study to believe that, because you experienced it yourself.
I heal people with raw paleo on a regular basis.
But it does not mean that I will resort only to raw paleo tools. I use all the tools available at my disposal. It's just that raw paleo is the most reliable one, the safest tool from my point of view.
Most people go back to their old cooked habits and deteriorate again. It's their life... not mine.
If you fund me for your study, I will be able to heal many many more people.
The cases I have healed do not require "belief".
-
I heal people with raw paleo on a regular basis.
But it does not mean that I will resort only to raw paleo tools. I use all the tools available at my disposal. It's just that raw paleo is the most reliable one, the safest tool from my point of view.
I love that you are so openminded GS. :-* It is a very beautiful character.
And raw foods is a great tool indeed.
Inger
-
Yes, PaloPhil is right.
There are a lot of people that healed themselves with cooked paleo. Go and read on paleoforums, MDA is a great source.
Many also got sick eating 100% raw. Some died. 100% Raw is maybe not the salvation and only solution as many might think.
There is MUCH more into play as only raw/cooked, IMHO.
Inger (still a big fan of raw but lost her dogma long ago.. -X..)
Inger states here that many also got sick from eating 100% raw, and that there is MUCH more into play in terms of raw vs cooked.
I heal people with raw paleo on a regular basis.
But it does not mean that I will resort only to raw paleo tools. I use all the tools available at my disposal. It's just that raw paleo is the most reliable one, the safest tool from my point of view.
Most people go back to their old cooked habits and deteriorate again. It's their life... not mine.
If you fund me for your study, I will be able to heal many many more people.
The cases I have healed do not require "belief".
However this statement from GS suggests that healing is achievable by ALL using a raw paleo diet.
So GS, what is your take on this? It seems in your experience that raw paleo is ALWAYS the way to go and works every time.
Yet others inform of cases where it didn't work.
Why is this, in your opinion?
Are you sure it is in the type of application of the diet?
Thanks.
Phil
-
How does one "have dinner" with a Breatharian? ;) Did she watch you eat or what?
She was seriously considering it, not doing it right then.So if my poll was worse than useless, whereas others are better because they're just useless, then it should be possible for you to improve on mine. If you can't improve on it, then that reveals that singling mine out and claiming it was worse was just so much hot air.
I'm afraid your b*ll is so much hot air. I merely stated, correctly, that your poll was extremely dishonest and that polls, in general, were not an accurate representation of peoples' beliefs. Short of forcing all active members to vote, no poll could be remotely accurate.No, I was just responding to your belittling of the Paleo component.
Just another lie on your part.There you go again, belittling the Paleo component, and yet again you're ignoring the gradations of harm from different forms of cooking.
I wasn't belittling the palaeo component, I simply pointed out, correctly, that cooking removed most of the benefits of avoiding non-palaeo foods. And, as regards "gradation", there is a big leap between raw and cooked, not a small step - cooking destroys enzymes and bacteria and even minor forms of cooking remove some nutrients. And any form of cooking creates some heat-created toxins.Again, I wasn't arguing that there's no value in rawness, just responding to your going overboard in diminishing the Paleo aspect. Besides, my understanding is that most cooked Paleos don't consume dairy or see it as a modification of Paleo.
What a fraud! You can't debunk my point so resort to b*ll. The whole point is that the palaeo concept forbids dairy in all forms, even raw, yet some people benefit from raw dairy but not pasteurised dairy, thus proving that raw is more important than palaeo, to some extent.
And again, if you could cite examples of people who improved dramatically when they switched to raw vegan from cooked Paleo, that would add credence to your claims. Evidence is more convincing than rhetoric and ad hominem.
I am a classic example. I had awful stomach-aches after being cooked-palaeo which crippled me big time. When I went raw vegan, those pains stopped completely.
-
Yes, PaloPhil is right.
There are a lot of people that healed themselves with cooked paleo. Go and read on paleoforums, MDA is a great source.
Thanks Inger. Yes, I've seen countless amazing success stories of people on cooked Paleo in person, in various forums, blogs, podcasts, books, Youtube videos, a Ted Talk, etc., and as you suggested, if someone wants to find them, it's not difficult. I think I even posted somewhere a link to Robb Wolf's online database of success stories, which he reported is only a tiny fraction of them (no way of proving that, of course, but he doesn't strike me as dishonest). I doubt Tyler will be convinced no matter how many examples one might provide, and regardless of how extraordinary they might be. One can always come up with reasons to not take evidence seriously, such as assuming that people are lying or exaggerating or misguided, every study has some sort of limitation or defect that can be used to dismiss it, and so on.
-----------------
Tyler, thanks for that confirmation of your experience. I don't remember clearly what % vegan you were. IIRC, I think you were close to 100% raw, yes? If you recall or come across any other examples of cooked Paleo to raw vegan (or thereabouts) success stories, please let me know.
If anyone else has any examples of cooked Paleo to raw vegan (or thereabouts) success or failure stories, or the reverse (raw vegan or thereabouts to cooked Paleo), whether your own or someone else's, please share them. Thanks. I apologize to anyone who already shared their story in the past. I don't think I kept track of any examples of these sorts from here.
-
I've read the mark wolff testimonials page, and it was exactly as I had stated, all about reducing symptoms of auto-immune diseases, ulcerative colitis(caused by grains, I believe) and the like, not too effective. By contrast, reports from the RVAF diet world are far more impressive, such as a couple being able to have children due to raw-dairy-consumption after many years of infertility, and others even recovering from a genetic condition(eg:- Grave's disease) due to a RVAF diet, many old people finding they look much younger than in their cooked-food-eating days(unsurprising since advanced glycation end products from cooked foods cause wrinkles and damage the skin) etc.
I was raw vegan for 6 months and then Fruitarian for 18 months or so. I was near 100%, in that I only had cooked animal food c.5 times during those periods.
-
I've read the mark wolff testimonials page, and it was exactly as I had stated, all about reducing symptoms of auto-immune diseases, ulcerative colitis(caused by grains, I believe) and the like, not too effective. By contrast, reports from the RVAF diet world are far more impressive, such as a couple being able to have children due to raw-dairy-consumption after many years of infertility, and others even recovering from a genetic condition(eg:- Grave's disease) due to a RVAF diet, many old people finding they look much younger than in their cooked-food-eating days(unsurprising since advanced glycation end products from cooked foods cause wrinkles and damage the skin) etc.
For the truths sake Tyler,
I do have to say that couple getting children after many years trying can happend also without rawfood.
My own brother and his wife tried 7 years to get a child but she got only miscarriage (once). Then all of a sudden - without changing any diet (they eat fairly healthy normal diet and live in Stockholm) she got pregnant! They got a healthy beautiful child and then, after a year she got pregnant again! Now they have their second healthy child! All without any therapies or changes in food. Crazy huh? I could tell you more of these stories, of people in my life that got healthy without rawfood.
My mom (60 yo) cured herself from really bad asthma with constant medication - only with swimming in icewater year round every morning shortly. She eats just normal cooked. She is real healthy and strong. And still lives in the same mold-house as then..! But now, the mold does not bother her! No environmental changes to blame the healing on so to say except of the cold baths.
It hurt my heart to see how the rawfood community shuts down success stories from others, only because they do not fit in their dogma.
And I am NOT telling raw is bad! I think raw is real good!!! It is just not the holy grail many wants it to be.
In addition to this I want to share a comment made from Dr Kruse on his blog, a reader was concerned about the toxicity of the wildcaugt fish that we face today.
Jack Says:
March 27th, 2012 at 7:08 am
@Paul Grace is a rockstar and she is very concerned with heavy metal toxicity…….I think she is right about many fish having issues but her defense is to eliminate fish……..my defense is to make sure my immune system is so good that the toxins never cause me an issue. CT does just that. See when you have a bad thyroid, LR, terrible adrenal gland……..well………you have to eliminate things to stay healthy…….but the tradeoff is that you cant have the most nutrient dense diet that the Ancient Pathway needs to run optimally……..if you at CT and cold……well the fish issue goes away. How do I know this…….i test myself for this very issue every three months………i believe in a quantified self testing platform. I leave nothing to chance. I question everything.
I love how he is thinking about the issue. This is the path I want to follow. Not the path of coming so sensitiv to everything you cannot tolerate one crumb of cooked or poisonous without getting sick.
It is all about immunesystem, adrenal health...
Inger
-
My mom (60 yo) cured herself from really bad asthma with constant medication - only with swimming in icewater year round every morning shortly. She eats just normal cooked. She is real healthy and strong. And still lives in the same mold-house as then..! But now, the mold does not bother her!
Hi Inger,
working in the area of healing, it is amazing the array of different modalities people use to facilitate healing. The possibilities and beliefs are vast and it is truly wonderful to see the spark of light rekindled in individuals concerned.
Your Mum sounds like a hardy, strong spirit: good on her. A lovely story.
Kind wishes, J
-
Where are the COOKED Paleo Diet Testimonials for
- Terminal Cancer?
- Pneumonia?
- TB?
- The gravest cases of Psoriasis?
Cooked paleo diet / rare meat paleo diet can cure EASY CASES... but when the going gets TOUGH, you bet your BALLS on Raw Paleo Diet.
The poor people who fail at using raw paleo diet to heal their diseases DO NOT have a HEALER with them teaching them hands on HOW to use raw paleo diet with their case.
The reason I succeed at healing people with RAW Paleo Diet is because I use tried and tested food sources and recipes and I have a kitchen of maids who are used to preparing raw paleo diet foods.
I am quite SURE of the effectiveness of the food stuffs I am giving the sick and I can adjust the diet on the spot. I'm hands on. I'm not guessing.
Besides, I don't use just diet alone, I use everything else available.
100% COOKED Paleo Diet is CRAP.
Will fully boiled pounded leaves of Kamote Tops leaves be as effective as RAW kamote tops leaves?
-- of course not.
Will fully boiled durian be as effective as RAW Durian?
-- of course not.
Will turbo broiled fully cooked LIVER be as effective as RAW LIVER?
-- of course not.
Will fully cooked Extra Virgin OLIVE oil be as effective as RAW Extra Virgin Olive Oil?
-- of course not.
These pro-cooked paleo diet people are being SILLY! SILLY! SILLY!
To what degree of cooked-ness are you talking about?
100% cooked paleo diet of:
- cooked fruits (well done to be considered 100% cooked paleo diet)
- cooked veggies (well done to be considered 100% cooked paleo diet)
- cooked meats (well done to be considered 100% cooked paleo diet)
Come on!
So the man I helped heal his eyes when he was supposed to go blind... he did raw paleo diet... then proceeded to merely sear the outsides of meats as maintenance... do you count him as a COOKED paleo dieter or a Raw Paleo Dieter?
It is the rawness that is left in the cooked paleo dieters that works.
There is LESS GUESSING with RAW Paleo Diet than with cooked! Because RAW is uniformly RAW.
While COOKED is an iffy, iffy, art experimentation and praying you get the "right" cookness, the right condiments, the right... "mix" of stuff...
Sure there are cooked tools out there for healing, but they are mere tools... not the mainstay diet.
If your closest loved one is dying of terminal cancer and you were the healer and you can do both cooked paleo diet and raw paleo diet, which diet would you bet his / her life on?
-
As for mass acceptability from the SAD paradigm...
COOKED paleo diets will have legions of adherents because it is still cooked.
So cooked paleo diets have the massive numbers of people trying it.
How many DARE to try RAW Paleo Diets? The selected few.
Only when cooked paleo diets fail. And only if they are "adventurous enough".
Most people will drown in CHEMOTHERAPY DRUGS and butcher themselves with SURGERY before they even try eating raw bloody meat and raw animal fat! (It's what my uncle did... RIP.)
My own children will only do cooked meat paleo diet as mainstay.
But when they see the writing on the wall and their current health problem CANNOT be beat by cooked paleo diet... they call on me to give them RAW paleo diet... which as EXPECTED finishes the job. (And then they go back to their cooked paleo diet ways.)
What conditions have my kids gone through that cooked paleo diet cannot do?
- really bad colds and coughs (3 days)
- eczema eating a hand (7 days)
- lots of itches around legs and arms (7 days)
- blood splotches under soles of feet (2 weeks)
- diverticulitis, leaky gut, with externally massive eczema (months... still on going)
- tooth decay pain (3 days)
- tuberculosis / primary complex ( 2 months )
-
I am NOT denying that the cooked,palaeolithic diet can help people improve in small ways. It's just that it is extraordinarily ineffective at dealing with very serious health-problems. In the case of fertility being regained, I was referring to people who were basically completely infertile(virtually no sperm-count etc.) for long periods but who quickly became fertile after consuming raw animal foods. Granted, fertility is not usually reduced to zero on any diet, so someone on a crappy cooked diet could finally become pregnant after many years of trying(incidentally, miscarriages are much more common than thought since embryos often terminate within just a few days of the egg being fertilised, it's just that they don't get noticed) .
It is interesting to see that pregnancy/fertility is hindered by advanced glycation end products, a type of heat-created toxin:-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21233108 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21233108)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168822710004936 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168822710004936)
As for the mention of asthma, that is one of the conditions that cooked-palaeodieters often report is improved on such a diet. But asthma is a minor condition. If cooked-palaeodiets could cure genetic diseases like rawpalaeodiets can, in some cases, I would be more impressed, but no such evidence exists.
As for wildcaught fish, I have already previously debunked the mercury-in-fish claims(see fishscam.com), so I sriously doubt there is any danger from wildcaught fish in any other aspects.
-
Where are the COOKED Paleo Diet Testimonials for
- Terminal Cancer?
- Pneumonia?
- TB?
- The gravest cases of Psoriasis?
Cooked paleo diet / rare meat paleo diet can cure EASY CASES... but when the going gets TOUGH, you bet your BALLS on Raw Paleo Diet.
Next week my dad has the results of a biopsie I think it's cancer. I got my parents converted to cooked paleo with a mix of raw-vegan and weston price last week. I hope it's enough to reduce the cancer. Raw-paleo is not-yet an option. Offcourse they also follow the doctors with there poison/butchering. Don't know if one or both methods will kill off the cancer it's alright with me what ever cures it :-). At least they are eating real food now which is much better than the low-fat healthy crap they ate normally.
-
In MDA-forum there was members that got cured from bad psoriasis with primal food. I could look it up for you but that would take so much time for me to find again I guess..
I have two close cases I know of curing cancer from my relatives. The sister and father of my SIL.
Her father had prostate cancer, and sister ovarian cancer, quite bad. They both fasted, long. About one month. Drinking herbal teas (cooked) and vegetable juices (pasteurized=cooked). They both got healthy, and still are. They had no money for doctors. That is why they tried the natural way. But no rawfood-diet.
There are people cured from cancer out there. I believe in raw, do not misunderstand me! But there are many tools as you say. That is good for us to know as many tools as possible if some are not open for 100% raw, there might be other tools. I like to think that way.
I am NOT trying to say, raw is not the optimal way to enjoy food, and and very good healing tool, as do I think it is! :)
Inger
-
Cooked animal foods are the most cancer-causing, so I'm not surprised at how pasteurised vegetable juices might be "less worse". As regards cancer, wild animals get cancer even on natural raw diets, and people go into remission from cancer all the time for unknown reasons, so recovery from cancer is not an important aspect of testimonials. Recovery from genetic diseases, recovery all the way from a hospital bed etc. are way more of an indication that rawpalaeo diets are better.
-
Where are the COOKED Paleo Diet Testimonials for
- Terminal Cancer?
- Pneumonia?
- TB?
- The gravest cases of Psoriasis?
Cooked paleo diet / rare meat paleo diet can cure EASY CASES... but when the going gets TOUGH, you bet your BALLS on Raw Paleo Diet.
The poor people who fail at using raw paleo diet to heal their diseases DO NOT have a HEALER with them teaching them hands on HOW to use raw paleo diet with their case.
The reason I succeed at healing people with RAW Paleo Diet is because I use tried and tested food sources and recipes and I have a kitchen of maids who are used to preparing raw paleo diet foods.
I am quite SURE of the effectiveness of the food stuffs I am giving the sick and I can adjust the diet on the spot. I'm hands on. I'm not guessing.
Besides, I don't use just diet alone, I use everything else available.
100% COOKED Paleo Diet is CRAP.
Will fully boiled pounded leaves of Kamote Tops leaves be as effective as RAW kamote tops leaves?
-- of course not.
Will fully boiled durian be as effective as RAW Durian?
-- of course not.
Will turbo broiled fully cooked LIVER be as effective as RAW LIVER?
-- of course not.
Will fully cooked Extra Virgin OLIVE oil be as effective as RAW Extra Virgin Olive Oil?
-- of course not.
These pro-cooked paleo diet people are being SILLY! SILLY! SILLY!
To what degree of cooked-ness are you talking about?
100% cooked paleo diet of:
- cooked fruits (well done to be considered 100% cooked paleo diet)
- cooked veggies (well done to be considered 100% cooked paleo diet)
- cooked meats (well done to be considered 100% cooked paleo diet)
Come on!
So the man I helped heal his eyes when he was supposed to go blind... he did raw paleo diet... then proceeded to merely sear the outsides of meats as maintenance... do you count him as a COOKED paleo dieter or a Raw Paleo Dieter?
It is the rawness that is left in the cooked paleo dieters that works.
There is LESS GUESSING with RAW Paleo Diet than with cooked! Because RAW is uniformly RAW.
While COOKED is an iffy, iffy, art experimentation and praying you get the "right" cookness, the right condiments, the right... "mix" of stuff...
Sure there are cooked tools out there for healing, but they are mere tools... not the mainstay diet.
If your closest loved one is dying of terminal cancer and you were the healer and you can do both cooked paleo diet and raw paleo diet, which diet would you bet his / her life on?
Is it this straight-forward though?
GS have any of the individuals you have treated with raw paleo diet noted to you that they don't get the same 'energetic lift' or 'boost' from raw meat as they do from cooked.
Would be interesting to hear if any have, but on persistence with the diet have found success.
For example, initially on eating raw liver I felt an obvious lift as some nutrient deficiency was amended. However, this lift diminishes on regular eating of raw liver, I assume because the nutrient deficiency is mostly corrected.
When comparing frequent eating of raw liver to cooked liver, the cooked liver seems to provide more of a lift. This could be a short-term VS long-term argument here though.
I just wondered if any of the individuals you have healed have mentioned this to you.
It is clearly what the Chinese describe as Yin and Yang, and really confuses an issue that would seem at first glance quite straight-forward as you describe.
Has anyone else on the forum, who still occasionally eats cooked meat, noticed what I describe? Or does anyone who eats raw meat with cooked vegetables notice a difference when eating the cooked VS raw in terms of an energetic boost?
-
No, virtually all of us report detox-like symptoms after eating any cooked foods. I, for example, feel a type of hangover-like effect afterwards, a definite downer, whereas after eating raw foods I feel great.
-
I cant get past the awful taste of cooked meat to even try and go back to cooked paleo foods.
-
Is it this straight-forward though?
GS have any of the individuals you have treated with raw paleo diet noted to you that they don't get the same 'energetic lift' or 'boost' from raw meat as they do from cooked.
Would be interesting to hear if any have, but on persistence with the diet have found success.
For example, initially on eating raw liver I felt an obvious lift as some nutrient deficiency was amended. However, this lift diminishes on regular eating of raw liver, I assume because the nutrient deficiency is mostly corrected.
When comparing frequent eating of raw liver to cooked liver, the cooked liver seems to provide more of a lift. This could be a short-term VS long-term argument here though.
I just wondered if any of the individuals you have healed have mentioned this to you.
It is clearly what the Chinese describe as Yin and Yang, and really confuses an issue that would seem at first glance quite straight-forward as you describe.
Has anyone else on the forum, who still occasionally eats cooked meat, noticed what I describe? Or does anyone who eats raw meat with cooked vegetables notice a difference when eating the cooked VS raw in terms of an energetic boost?
Energy boost. People get used to the "level up" they feel. Like when I had my 3rd liver flush in the old days, even without raw paleo diet, the liver flush I used was RAW FAT extra virgin olive oil.
Your example of continuously eating raw liver and expecting more energy boosts is illogical. How much boosting can one experience really? When does the body top up?
Cooked liver gives a lift? How cooked was it? There lies so many many possible permutations of what COOKED is. Your definition of cooked may be different from your neighbor's definition of COOKED LIVER. Pan seared, Grill seared, Boiled in soup, Stir Fried, Microwaved, Oven Baked... etc. etc... and with What Condiments? People cannot agree on what exactly "cooked" is. Or how much cooked things should be: seared, rare, medium rare, medium, medium well, well done?
My now dead uncle couldn't stand raw liver. So he cooked the liver. He turbo broiled the liver I brought to a burnt crisp. Would you have had your energy boost with that kind of cooked liver?
I don't get an energy boost with cooked meat. It's nowadays just a social thing. The only cooked meats I noticed that are not as toxic to me are some fatty roast pig (lechon), but it will depend on how much better roasted or the quality of the pig or cooking method... hit and miss.
Cooked vegetables... the only one I could remember lately is steamed broccoli. I don't remember being thrilled with it. It was a social thing too.
-
Energy boost. People get used to the "level up" they feel. Like when I had my 3rd liver flush in the old days, even without raw paleo diet, the liver flush I used was RAW FAT extra virgin olive oil.
Your example of continuously eating raw liver and expecting more energy boosts is illogical. How much boosting can one experience really? When does the body top up?
Cooked liver gives a lift? How cooked was it? There lies so many many possible permutations of what COOKED is. Your definition of cooked may be different from your neighbor's definition of COOKED LIVER. Pan seared, Grill seared, Boiled in soup, Stir Fried, Microwaved, Oven Baked... etc. etc... and with What Condiments? People cannot agree on what exactly "cooked" is. Or how much cooked things should be: seared, rare, medium rare, medium, medium well, well done?
My now dead uncle couldn't stand raw liver. So he cooked the liver. He turbo broiled the liver I brought to a burnt crisp. Would you have had your energy boost with that kind of cooked liver?
I don't get an energy boost with cooked meat. It's nowadays just a social thing. The only cooked meats I noticed that are not as toxic to me are some fatty roast pig (lechon), but it will depend on how much better roasted or the quality of the pig or cooking method... hit and miss.
Cooked vegetables... the only one I could remember lately is steamed broccoli. I don't remember being thrilled with it. It was a social thing too.
Having tasted raw liver, cooked liver is just not as good by a long distance. It kind of tastes wrong.
Heavily cooked liver is a definite no-go. But I have found that lightly cooking the liver, maybe 50% cooked to 50% raw provides a boost that 100% raw does not give. The more I sway towards the raw side, the less boost I get, and the more I veer towards cooked, the more boost I get.
Admittedly, partially cooked does not taste as good, but it feels as though I benefit more from the 'cookedness', which does not make any logical sense!
Tyler mentioned a 'fake feel-good' factor from cooked food. Perhaps this is what I notice. Or maybe it is the Yin-Yang thing?
I just was interested if any of the individuals who you have healed have ever mentioned anything like this to you and had to work through this, or if anyone else on the forum has any experiences similar to this?
-
I often don't feel bad after eating cooked food, as long as I don't eat too much. That's about all I can say for sure.
-
Having tasted raw liver, cooked liver is just not as good by a long distance. It kind of tastes wrong.
Heavily cooked liver is a definite no-go. But I have found that lightly cooking the liver, maybe 50% cooked to 50% raw provides a boost that 100% raw does not give. The more I sway towards the raw side, the less boost I get, and the more I veer towards cooked, the more boost I get.
Admittedly, partially cooked does not taste as good, but it feels as though I benefit more from the 'cookedness', which does not make any logical sense!
Tyler mentioned a 'fake feel-good' factor from cooked food. Perhaps this is what I notice. Or maybe it is the Yin-Yang thing?
I just was interested if any of the individuals who you have healed have ever mentioned anything like this to you and had to work through this, or if anyone else on the forum has any experiences similar to this?
I noticed this kind of thing during adjustment phase from cooked to raw.
Something that gets the digestive juices going. The psychological angle maybe. Or physiological adjustment.
But I think after 2 or 3 years this kind of cooked stimulation has disappeared from me.
The trick to healing sick patients with raw paleo is to make recipes and arrangements that will trick their senses into seeing the raw paleo dish as appetizing. Something like how the Japanese chefs do their thing.
I've got a few tricks up my sleeve like raw beef barbecue, high fat fish ceviche, and sushi rolls, smell of soup, smell of grilled, alternate cooked and raw bites, and maybe a few dips here and there.... add that to Inger's beautiful presentations and ta daahh... the sick SAD people can eat raw happily.
And yes, the sick need company and socialization, eating raw paleo with nice presentation with the healer and other people eating raw and loving it. Mimic.
-
I've got a few tricks up my sleeve like raw beef barbecue, high fat fish ceviche, and sushi rolls, smell of soup, smell of grilled, alternate cooked and raw bites, and maybe a few dips here and there.... add that to Inger's beautiful presentations and ta daahh... the sick SAD people can eat raw happily.
And yes, the sick need company and socialization, eating raw paleo with nice presentation with the healer and other people eating raw and loving it. Mimic.
I loved this. I've noticed that, yes, I can just rip into a steak or chew on some suet, and it satisfies my hunger, or I can chop up some liver, toss it in a bowl, and eat it with my fingers. There's nothing inherently wrong with this.
But when I take my pretty ceramic knife and pay attention to the cuts, arrange them attractively, complement them with something simple like thinly sliced red onions for my liver, etc. eat with my husband or friends (even if they're not remotely sold on eating raw meat), and focus on the whole experience of it, I feel even better. More nourished. More at peace. Slicing the meat ahead of the meal has become one of my favorite parts of it, thinking about what I'm about to eat, how good I feel afterward. It's like a mini-meditation.
Along with the physical healing comes mental healing, too, healing of attitudes towards food and the body. I just loved the mental picture you painted about how you work with those who come to you and help to encourage them to eat the food. I wish I could accomplish this with my parents, but they are so thoroughly entrenched in fear that they'll get sick from it that they won't hear it at all, even though both of them suffer from a wide variety of ailments.
-
I enjoyed reading your informative exchanges of views and banter. The issue is becoming clearer to me.
It's good that someone is deriving benefit from it. If nothing else it produced one of the most hilariously ironical quotes in the history of this forum ("I had a dinner with a cousin of mine a while back in which she enthused about the wonders of Breatharianism...." ;D ).
She was seriously considering it, not doing it right then. I'm afraid your b*ll is so much hot air.
I cringe at the thought of what twisted logic you might try to use to explain how someone who was considering possibly trying breatharianism refutes my estimate of its miniscule following.
I am NOT trying to say, raw is not the optimal way to enjoy food, and and very good healing tool, as do I think it is! :)
Yes, same for me and I understood that, Inger, and I hope others will give you the benefit of the doubt on this, as you have fabulously established your raw bonafides. I greatly value the honest sharing of unpopular yet interesting and often educational information that folks like you and Joy have provided and the grasp of subtlety and complexity you have displayed, and I appreciate your willingness to risk the backlash that often follows such honesty.
Luckily for me, I don't normally seem to get the bad symptoms that Tyler reports from eating any cooked foods (detox-like symptoms, hangover-like effects, reports of vomiting, etc.) that are edible raw, nor very much symptoms from certain cooked foods that are not edible raw (as long as I don't eat too much), and I hope that won't eventually happen to me the longer I eat high raw, as it would make life more difficult socially, convenience-wise and so forth. I do find that rawness further optimizes my health, and is cheaper, faster, better for the environment, etc.
It looks like Justin has had some amazing success while including cooked potatoes in his diet (see http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/before-and-after-photos/2-year-weight-gain-on-being-on-raw-paleo-(90-95)/msg88306/#msg88306 (http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/before-and-after-photos/2-year-weight-gain-on-being-on-raw-paleo-(90-95)/msg88306/#msg88306)). Congrats to Justin. Yet another example confirming Joy's initial post in this thread. The last I tried eating cooked tubers regularly I didn't fare well, but they are currently all the rage in cooked Paleo circles where they call cooked tubers and white rice "safe starches." Such foods apparently currently aren't "safe" for me and some other folks, but I've noticed there is a wide variation in how individuals respond to various foods and my philosophy is to each their own, rather than to criticize anyone who eats any cooked food regularly. I'm not big on dogmatism.
Recovery from genetic diseases, recovery all the way from a hospital bed etc. are way more of an indication that rawpalaeo diets are better.
Do we have a sticky for dramatic raw Paleo success stories like that? Seems like it would be useful and convenient to point people to for evidence and motivation, especially newbies and undecided folks, and so it would make sense to put it in a public section.
I've read the mark wolff testimonials page, and it was exactly as I had stated, all about reducing symptoms of auto-immune diseases, ulcerative colitis(caused by grains, I believe) and the like, not too effective. By contrast, reports from the RVAF diet world are far more impressive, such as a couple being able to have children due to raw-dairy-consumption after many years of infertility, and others even recovering from a genetic condition(eg:- Grave's disease)....
There are cooked Paleo testimonials and reports re: Grave's disease that you obviously didn't try very hard to find, including at Robb Wolf's site. If I provide them, I suspect you'll find some excuse to dismiss them like it seems you've done with nearly anything else that doesn't fit your cherished beliefs. Inger and Joy seem more open to whatever the evidence reveals, so if they're interested, I'll share them.
-
Sorry, it was the robb wolff site I meant. I checked the titles of the testimonials on all 10 pages of it, and, sure enough, it had b*ll about curing or reducing some symptoms of auto-immune diseases like rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis, IBS, dermatitis and similiar issues. Not too impressive. No mention of Grave's that I could see or any genetic disease mentioned in the titles.
-
The Robb Wolf site does have a couple of reports on Grave's disease in other parts of his website than the testimonial database, but I won't bother anyone with them unless someone is truly interested and open to the possibility. There's no point in sharing those or others with someone whose posts suggest he has already made up his mind on the subject. As the old saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water..." and "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."
-
In other words, you just made it up to counter my point re genetic diseases.
-
Another thing that debunks the cooked argument is that animals raised on raw diets are reported to be way healthier than those which eat cooked, but "natural" diets involving cooked meats. I'm also pretty sure that most raw-feeding pet-owners only give their animals raw, grainfed meats, not grassfed meat, so that's another point in favour of the pro-raw argument.
-
Hi Phil
I'm interested in Rob Wolf's stuff. It is really good. I found them first, then I saw Peg the paleo parent feeding her child raw hamburger and THEN I found raw paleo. I may never have gotten hear if they didn't exist. The diet is very similar I found it fairly easy to transition. I think it would have been much harder mentally to have gone from SAD to RAVF.
-
Another thing that debunks the cooked argument is that animals raised on raw diets are reported to be way healthier than those which eat cooked, but "natural" diets involving cooked meats. I'm also pretty sure that most raw-feeding pet-owners only give their animals raw, grainfed meats, not grassfed meat, so that's another point in favour of the pro-raw argument.
I think rawness is more important when it comes to fatty meats than many other foods, and I think that's something we agree on, so rawness might be especially important to an animal that is biologically adapted to a mostly meat diet, such as cats and dogs. Plus, by feeding them raw it eliminates the biologically inappropriate foods from their diet like grains and other foods that require heating and processing. Thus, raw diets also contain a substantial component of Paleo that many rawists overlook when they attribute most or all of their healing to rawness rather than Paleo (biologically appropriate foods). There's also so much overlap that it's difficult to completely separate the two, and thus the arguments will likely be endless, but I've seen firsthand some remarkable success stories from cooked Paleo and read about countless others.
Hi Phil
I'm interested in Rob Wolf's stuff. It is really good. I found them first, then I saw Peg the paleo parent feeding her child raw hamburger and THEN I found raw paleo. I may never have gotten hear if they didn't exist. The diet is very similar I found it fairly easy to transition. I think it would have been much harder mentally to have gone from SAD to RAVF.
Yeah, a lot of people are put off by the idea of raw Paleo. Cooked Paleo is less offputting to most people I've encountered, and from there they can bridge to less damaging forms of cooking, then introduce some raw animal foods and then maybe finally try fully or high raw Paleo some day. I have gradually seen more of the cooked Paleos considering these things and I think we will see more of them try out these steps over time.
So are you interested in seeing the reports re: Grave's disease from Wolf's site, Adora?
-
There is a small category of people who've over the years fed their animals mostly on cooked meats discarded by humans or specially cooked for the animals. These did not feed their animals on processed pet-food-cans. The point being that they were more or less palaeo(OK , no grassfed meats or much in the way of organ-meats) but one would expect that method to have become far more popular if cooked-palaeo was all that important.
-
More gluten-free and Paleo-type heated pet foods, such as INNOVA EVO (INNOVA Evo brand (http://www.naturapet.com/brands/evo), http://www.innovapet.com/faqs# (http://www.innovapet.com/faqs#)), are actually growing in popularity.
Besides, no one has argued that raw Paleo isn't better than cooked Paleo, only that people have achieved amazing improvements on cooked Paleo. We don't have to bash cooked Paleo as near useless to promote raw Paleo. They are putting to use many of the principles we do and have taken a big step toward our own approach and away from the SAD. We don't have to focus on the empty part of the glass, we can congratulate cooked Paleo folks on the full part of the glass and encourage them to fill it up further, following some of their principles to their logical conclusions.
I found your scorched earth policy to be a bit of a turnoff for me for raw Paleo, whereas Lex's reasonable and pleasant writings were encouraging, as were Ray Audette's hints about rawness and the implications that eating only foods that are edible raw implied. I know it wasn't your intent to turn off potential rawists, but it unfortunately seemed to be an unintentional byproduct. For example, when you went on about how little benefit cooked Paleo provides, I knew that didn't match well with my experience, so it undercut your credibility and I helped put off my own raw experiment, which was unfortunate because the experiment was successful and it has become a WOE for me.
-
The trouble is that while you acknowledge cooked-palaeo as useful, you refuse to acknowledge raw vegan as being useful too. Granted, raw vegan diets have a problem re nutritional deficiencies eventually, but cooked-palaeodiets also have huge problems for many people as regards heat-created toxins. I'm a case in point. While cooked-palaeodiets were deadly to me(if I'd continued with cooked-palaeo I would have been dead by 35 for sure, given the pain etc. involved in eating cooked animal foods etc.), I could have continued with raw vegan diets for years afterwards. My problem with raw vegan diets wasn't due to nutritional deficiency, it was solely that my health-improvements were rather minor with me having vast hunger-pangs all the time.
More to the point, if we are talking about transitional diets that allow people to regain health as best as possible without going too much in for rawpalaeo(which most people are hysterical about due to media hype), then a diet which is 90% raw vegan and 10% raw or cooked animal food(say raw eggs and raw dairy which are easier for people to get used to of all RAF foods) is way better than a 90% cooked-palaeodiet with 10% in the form of raw or cooked plant foods.
The link you cited showed "page not found" as a result when I clicked on it. None too promising.
Anyway, the whole thesis of rawpaleoforum has always been that people coming to this diet are more likely to previously come from the raw vegan/fruitarian field or the cooked, palaeolithic diet field than any other area. Those who can come up with a sudden, immediate switch from SAD/SMD diets to raw, palaeolithic diets have my respect, as I would never have had the guts to do that so quickly.
-
Thanks for letting me know about my broken link. I fixed it.
The trouble is that while you acknowledge cooked-palaeo as useful, you refuse to acknowledge raw vegan as being useful too.
Raw vegan may be better than SAD, but it's too early to tell, as it's a new experiment that has no precedent in human or primate history. Even mountain gorillas eat some insects and carion. Even the raw vegan Paul Nisson conceded this point. Over the longer term, it seems that including some animal foods, such as with Denise Minger's plant-oriented partly cooked Paleo diet, is essential. Whereas some traditional peoples have been eating cooked Paleo and similar diets their entire lives for at least a couple hundred thousand years, by your own admission in posts on cooking in human history.
cooked-palaeodiets also have huge problems for many people as regards heat-created toxins. I'm a case in point.
You could be right, it's just that my sense is that the majority of folks from the overall raw animal food and Paleo dieting community don't agree with you or go quite as far as you do in bashing Paleo and emphasizing the essentiality and vastly greater importance for all of raw, and the poll here appears to jibe with my sense.
-
Graves dx results sound interesting. There are type 1 diabetic results that show improvement too. No, reversal of long standing type 1's that I've seen yet, but I haven't been following his site close.
-
OK, Adora, I'll start with sharing a story I know about personally. A good friend of my sister's who's a former (cooked foods) vegetarian with Grave's disease improved dramatically just by cutting out gluten and cutting back on grains after my sister told her about (cooked) Paleo (I had told my sister about it and she and her children had experienced dramatic benefits herself). The Grave's symptoms and lab numbers improved so much that her physician had to greatly reduce her thyroid medication. Unfortunately, that friend refused to eat meat or go Paleo, much less raw Paleo, else she might have experienced even better results.
Here are the Graves' disease testimonials from Robb Wolf's cooked Paleo site:
Robb Wolf December 24, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Jim-
Graves is an autoimmune issue. We have seen remarkable improvements in a variety of folks with autoimmunity by adopting paleo. I [can] think of 3 [folks] we have worked with who have seen remarkable improvements with Graves. You never know till you try, but [your friend] has the potential of actually putting the problem into remission. Worst case scenario: she is “just” healthier, but still managing Graves. http://robbwolf.com/2009/12/21/the-paleolithic-solution-episode-7/ (http://robbwolf.com/2009/12/21/the-paleolithic-solution-episode-7/)
A friend of Eva La Rue of CSI: Miami
"Eva also mentions a friend with Graves’ disease (an autoimmune disease that leads to an overactive thyroid) that lost 25 pounds in five weeks, and more importantly, was able to stop taking her medication."
Also, Eva's mother went Paleo and she lost 20 pounds, "her hair grew back, her sight got better and she went off all her heart medications for the first time in 10 years...."
(http://robbwolf.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/EVA.jpg (http://robbwolf.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/EVA.jpg))
Kristy January 27, 2011 at 2:38 pm
http://robbwolf.com/2011/01/26/chris-kresser-visits-the-paleo-solution/ (http://robbwolf.com/2011/01/26/chris-kresser-visits-the-paleo-solution/)
Hi. I was diagnosed in 2000 with Hyperthyriodism, Graves Disease, goiter, and no pituitary function. I underwent radioactive iodine therapy which left me 50 lbs heavier, approximately 3 % of a functioning thyroid, and Hypothyroidism. I take Levothyroxin daily. I have a very hard time loosing weight. I began the Paleo way of eating about 2 weeks ago. I feel better than I have felt in YEARS! however, I am not seeing much weight loss via scale or inches. I also know that eating certain foods can have an adverse affect on my hormone level and replacent therapy. Is the Paleo diet the most effective for me and will I ever see the kind of weight-loss others are seeing???
Tyler will no doubt dismiss these examples, but that shouldn't surprise anyone, as he has clearly already made up his mind, and anyone can easily think up reasons for dismissing testimonials if they don't like the message they convey. So these examples aren't for him, but for you and anyone else interested.
These examples are not meant to imply that cooked Paleo is just as good as or better than raw Paleo, only that the Paleo/ancestral aspect of raw Paleo appears to be very important and can provide some rather dramatic benefits over the diets that most people in the USA and Europe are on (generally, standard American/Western diets SWD). I would encourage folks to resist the temptation to just dismiss or belittle the Paleo aspect. Not everyone will go straight to raw Paleo from SWD. Some will get here via cooked Paleo, such as myself, so we shouldn't treat it like it's a horrible, complete enemy. Plus, if we keep belittling Paleo, we might lead people into other less optimal raw diets or discourage people from trying raw Paleo.
Of course, there is overlap between raw and Paleo and various degrees and types of cooking, so it's difficult to determine what benefits are due to which aspect, which is another reason it may not be wise to dismiss one aspect or the other.
-
More gluten-free and Paleo-type heated pet foods, such as INNOVA EVO (INNOVA Evo brand (http://www.naturapet.com/brands/evo), http://www.innovapet.com/faqs# (http://www.innovapet.com/faqs#)), are actually growing in popularity.
Besides, no one has argued that raw Paleo isn't better than cooked Paleo, only that people have achieved amazing improvements on cooked Paleo. We don't have to bash cooked Paleo as near useless to promote raw Paleo. They are putting to use many of the principles we do and have taken a big step toward our own approach and away from the SAD. We don't have to focus on the empty part of the glass, we can congratulate cooked Paleo folks on the full part of the glass and encourage them to fill it up further, following some of their principles to their logical conclusions.
I found your scorched earth policy to be a bit of a turnoff for me for raw Paleo, whereas Lex's reasonable and pleasant writings were encouraging, as were Ray Audette's hints about rawness and the implications that eating only foods that are edible raw implied. I know it wasn't your intent to turn off potential rawists, but it unfortunately seemed to be an unintentional byproduct. For example, when you went on about how little benefit cooked Paleo provides, I knew that didn't match well with my experience, so it undercut your credibility and I helped put off my own raw experiment, which was unfortunate because the experiment was successful and it has become a WOE for me.
Hi Phil and Tyler,
I think we all can agree, that IF every person could have access to the best healer, the best chef, the best resources, and not have any yucky inhibitions..
Raw Paleo Diets will always win out.
Where Cooked Paleo diets is a transition thing or for those who cannot get over the hump of yucky attitudes to raw meats.
Where temporary Raw Veganism may be used for detox.
It all works out in the hands of skilled healers and skilled healers will use whatever works at what point in time. I'm probably speaking for myself and my friend Vander.
Yes, there are times when rawish / cookish paleo diet will already give benefits and healing.
Yes, there are times when absolutely raw paleo diet is needed.
I think Tyler is speaking from his experience that he gets tummy aches from cooked meat. Yes, I get that too if I eat too much cooked meat. Even my own children know and have experienced raw paleo is just the thing that does the job when cooked paleo cannot.
I think if sick people had access to perfect information... or as much information and experience as we have... we can draw them a map of how these various diets work... us being experienced poly-dieters.... so with the map they know where things can lead to.
Maybe we can start drawing our EXPERIENCED mental maps on how these diets work out.
-
Hi Phil and Tyler,
I think we all can agree, that IF every person could have access to the best healer, the best chef, the best resources, and not have any yucky inhibitions..
Raw Paleo Diets will always win out.
I would generally think so. I know it has worked best for me. I don't see sharing testimonials of some success from cooked Paleo as undercutting raw Paleo, I see it as supporting the Paleo aspect, and possibly even the raw aspect in some cases (removing cooked grains and legumes from the diet and replacing them with raw salads increases the rawness, for example), of raw Paleo. Seeing the glass half full instead of half empty. Plus, more importantly, cooked Paleo supports some of the fundamental concepts behind raw Paleo which in some cases lead people to raw Paleo (including me, partly).
-
I see that I made a grievous error in mentioning Grave's disease. After all, it is only partially hereditary(and not in a DNA sense, I suspect, but more due to the health of the parents due to nutrition) - plus it is an auto-immune disease which I have already stated is the one thing that cooked-palaeo is good at.
Raw vegan diets also cure auto-immune diseases related to the thyroid, so PP is dead wrong in belittling raw vegan diets:-
http://www.raw-foods-diet-center.com/weight-loss-autoimmune-thyroid-disease-high-cholesterol-arthritis.html (http://www.raw-foods-diet-center.com/weight-loss-autoimmune-thyroid-disease-high-cholesterol-arthritis.html)
Basically, both cooked-palaeo and raw vegan diets are purely transitional diets which will help resolve some health-problems(usually in the short-term) but which will never be anywhere near as effective as raw, palaeolithic diets. They both have inherent problems. Cooked-palaeodiets often include grainfed meats(only some palaeo interpretations involve grassfed meats and ban grainfed meats), plus there is the issue of lack of enzymes, lack of bacteria and all those heat-created toxins derived from cooking; and the one problem with raw vegan diets is that they don't supply all the nutrients a human body needs so that all initial health benefits will eventually be negated by nutritional deficiencies at some stage in the future.
Incidentally GS, I didn't just get "tummy-aches" from eating any kind of cooked animal foods, pre-rpd diet. These were extremely painful sensations that felt like I had a dagger ripping through my stomach and intestines. I also got very painful, chronic constipation and rectal bleeding from eating any cooked animal food, plus massive weight-gain, plus a few other issues I can't recall right now. By contrast, my raw vegan experience was much better, I was slimmer, had no stomach- pains at all nor any constipation etc. Granted, the lack of "complete foods" meant I didn't solve my other health-problems, but it worked way better for me than cooked-palaeo did.
I should add that I did the best possible raw vegan diet in my opinion, including lots of raw juices(mostly fruits), a very large part of my diet at the time included raw sprouts, and I made a real effort to eat raw avocadoes and the like to get enough raw fat.Hmm, I even carried on eating sprouts while I was a Fruitarian, though I didn't eat any veg(avocadoes are technically fruits I believe?).
-
I see that I made a grievous error in mentioning Grave's disease. After all, it is only partially hereditary...
LOL, HAHAHAHAHA! PARTIALLY hereditary! Thanks for that one, TD. I knew you'd find a way to dismiss, but it wasn't quite what I expected, and even more hilarious than usual. I was expecting a less subtle, complete dismissal. Maybe you'd make a good politician. ;)
Raw vegan diets also cure auto-immune diseases related to the thyroid, so PP is dead wrong in belittling raw vegan diets:-
Raw vegan diets can indeed provide great improvements in the short run for some folk. It's in the longer run that they especially run into problems, or so it seems. I don't have any problem with plant-heavy diets if it works for someone. If someone wants to do that, I recommend the blog of the goddess of Paleo/ancestral, Denise Minger, praised be her name.
Basically, both cooked-palaeo and raw vegan diets are purely transitional diets which will help resolve some health-problems(usually in the short-term) but which will never be anywhere near as effective as raw, palaeolithic diets. ....
Hmmm, well this is boring. We both agree on this.
Incidentally GS, I didn't just get "tummy-aches" from eating any kind of cooked animal foods, pre-rpd diet. These were extremely painful sensations that felt like I had a dagger ripping through my stomach and intestines. I also got very painful, chronic constipation and rectal bleeding from eating any cooked animal food, plus massive weight-gain, plus a few other issues I can't recall right now.
Yeah, and he also mentioned vomiting when he eats cooked foods, the poor man! Have a heart, GS! ;-)
By contrast, my raw vegan experience was much better, I was slimmer, had no stomach- pains at all nor any constipation etc. Granted, the lack of "complete foods" meant I didn't solve my other health-problems, but it worked way better for me than cooked-palaeo did.
Yes, I think we all know your history by now. The point is, it doesn't necessarily apply to all, so please don't assume it applies to all, or even most.
I made a real effort to eat raw avocadoes and the like to get enough raw fat.Hmm, I even carried on eating sprouts while I was a Fruitarian, though I didn't eat any veg(avocadoes are technically fruits I believe?).
It's "botanically a large berry that contains a single seed" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avocado (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avocado) (search engines are your friend ;) ).
-
LOL, HAHAHAHAHA! PARTIALLY hereditary! Thanks for that one, TD. I knew you'd find a way to dismiss, but it wasn't quite what I expected, and even more hilarious than usual. I was expecting a less subtle, complete dismissal. Maybe you'd make a good politician. ;)
You are being a bit clueless, here. It has been noted on various online sources that Grave's disease has a "powerful" hereditary component, or just that it is "often" a hereditary component, so, clearly, one doesn't always get it via heredity, and there are other ways to contract it:-
http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/hormonal_and_metabolic_disorders/thyroid_gland_disorders/hyperthyroidism.html (http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/hormonal_and_metabolic_disorders/thyroid_gland_disorders/hyperthyroidism.html)
Plus, like I said, I suspect that the thyroiditis has nothing to do with inheritance via DNA. More than likely, it has to do with the parents being unhealthy due to poor nutrition and the embryo suffering therefrom in the womb etc. In other words, once a person's diet went rawpalaeo, any subsequent children would be highly unlikely to contract Grave's disease.
Raw vegan diets can indeed provide great improvements in the short run for some folk. It's in the longer run that they especially run into problems, or so it seems. I don't have any problem with plant-heavy diets if it works for someone. If someone wants to do that, I recommend the blog of the goddess of Paleo/ancestral, Denise Minger, praised be her name.
Cooked-palaeo also has long-term negative effects. The load of heat-created toxins involved means that increased aging is the result, along with all sorts of age-related health-problems. The point is that raw vegan diets plus a tiny proportion of raw animal foods, enough to provide all the necessary nutrients a human body needs is way, way better than a cooked-palaeodiet.
Yeah, and he also mentioned vomiting when he eats cooked foods, the poor man! Have a heart, GS! ;-)
That only happened after some years on the rawpalaeodiet. It only happens if I eat lots of cooked foods at one time. I can usually tolerate small amounts without vomiting, unless the food is very highly processed.
Yes, I think we all know your history by now. The point is, it doesn't necessarily apply to all, so please don't assume it applies to all, or even most.
Ah, but it does indeed apply to most. Granted, a few carb-sensitive types like Lex may find the experience a disaster(though didn't he only quit after many years of raw veganism?) but most people find some benefit from raw veganism at the start up to perhaps as much as the first couple of years, it's only in the long-term that issues start appearing, due solely to nutritional deficiency, not anything else.
Hmm, I suppose I can't really call myself a "Fruitarian" as I did indeed eat a lot of sprouts. At one point, sprouts formed 80-100% of my food-intake.
-
You are being a bit clueless, here. It has been noted on various online sources that Grave's disease has a "powerful" hereditary component...
This completely misses my point. First you called it a hereditary disease that cooked Paleo hadn't helped with and only raw Paleo could and said that Robb Wolf had no testimonials. Then when links were supplied, you start changing your tune about its nature, making it seem like less of an achievement to improve it. No doubt you'll make excuses for this too. It was predictable that the excuses began, but their actual delivery was still humorous. No matter what evidence is provided, you'll find excuses for it.
Of course it's partially hereditary, but that isn't the language you used when you were talking about how cooked Paleo couldn't help with any of the hereditary diseases. Instead, you were giving the impression that improving Grave's Disease would be very impressive indeed.
-
I conceded the point that Grave's Disease was nowhere near as hereditary as I had thought. I wasn't making excuses, just rechecking my data and finding out that I was wrong re my past statement, nothing more, and that I should not have selected any auto-immune condition. So, obviously, we need to look at actual genetic-inherited diseases for more impressive results. It wouldn't surprise me if cooked-palaeo had zero effect on such and that rawpalaeo lessened some of the symptoms. Like I said, though, Grave's disease, being an auto-immune disease, just proves my earlier that cooked-palaeo is only good at improving auto-immune diseases, nothing much more, really. By contrast, raw foods are able to improve many other kinds of health-problems.
-
I conceded the point that Grave's Disease was nowhere near as hereditary as I had thought. I wasn't making excuses, just rechecking my data and finding out that I was wrong re my past statement, nothing more....
OK, I'll take your word on that.
So, obviously, we need to look at actual genetic-inherited diseases for more impressive results. It wouldn't surprise me if cooked-palaeo had zero effect on such and that rawpalaeo lessened some of the symptoms.
Feel free to pick a disease and provide your examples of raw Paleo success. I'm interested in impressive success stories from any therapeutic approach, especially raw Paleo, and it will provide more examples for me to share with friends, relatives and the interested.
-
Feel free to pick a disease and provide your examples of raw Paleo success. I'm interested in impressive success stories from any therapeutic approach, especially raw Paleo, and it will provide more examples for me to share with friends, relatives and the interested.
Create a new thread for this.
I will gladly contribute.
-
I think it should be a sticky, but I can't create a sticky in the main forum. Can you or Tyler do it. It could be called Raw Paleo Success Stories, so it could also include reports from celebrities and other folks that we read about.
-
I think it should be a sticky, but I can't create a sticky in the main forum. Can you or Tyler do it. It could be called Raw Paleo Success Stories, so it could also include reports from celebrities and other folks that we read about.
Go create the thread and I'll make it sticky.
-
I personally cannot stomach much cooked animal flesh/fat. I did that a couple times (years ago) and would feel bad as if I had a flu.
On the other hand, it appears that the vast majority of the paleo diet community (including gurus and authors of paleo diet books) eat cooked animal flesh/fat. How come so many people do so well with cooked paleo?
Simple, they've eliminated junk-food.
Even a 'cooked' Paleo diet consisting of Meat and Vegetables is leaps and bounds healthier than the modern diet of fast, processed, sugar-heavy garbage.
-
Simple, they've eliminated junk-food.
That does appear to be a major factor. It's what Nassim Taleb terms via negativa (removing harmful factors from one's diet or lifestyle).
Here are some results from the Paleo Survey 2012 (http://naturallyengineered.com/blog/2012-paleo-community-survey-results-released (http://naturallyengineered.com/blog/2012-paleo-community-survey-results-released)) relevant to this thread:
Do you have any medical conditions which have not been improved by a Paleo diet?
Choices Percentage Count
Total 4688
Unanswered 615
no 48.49% 2273
not applicable 31.98% 1499
yes 0.49% 23
Has your overall health changed while on the paleo diet?
Improved: 88.3%
No change: 11.4%
Worse: 0.3%
-
Robb Wolf reported two successful remissions of Huntington's Disease, which is regarded as an incurable genetic disorder, with a standard (cooked) gluten free paleo diet.
"Huntington's Disease: a devastating, hereditary, degenerative brain disorder for which there is, at present, no cure and only one FDA-approved treatment (Xenazine) for a symptom of HD."
What is Huntington's Disease (HD)?
http://www.hdsa.org/about/our-mission/what-is-hd.html (http://www.hdsa.org/about/our-mission/what-is-hd.html)
Robb Wolf September 20, 2011 at 12:43 pm
http://robbwolf.com/2011/09/13/the-paleo-solution-episode-97/ (http://robbwolf.com/2011/09/13/the-paleo-solution-episode-97/)
"Scott-
We had 2 examples of folks with early on-set, aggressive HD [Huntington's Disease] see remission with a standard gluten free paleo diet. I do not think ketosis is necessary, we suspect gluten cross reactivity/transglutaminase issues are at play here. We have a clear direction to go with clinical trials…and no way to fund it. Yet. the autoimmune protocol in the book or downloads section is all these folks need to get going. 30 days will determine if it works or not."
-
Cooked meat is poison in my body.
I stopped eating meat for over a year because I would get constipated everytime I did. Then a year later, about a couple months ago, I had a piece of cooked pork; it invoked a serious immune system response, the piece of cooked pork did not stay and digest in my stomach, the meat got dumped in my intestines right away like my body did not want the cooked meat in my body, then bloating, stinking gas, nauseous headache and a painful feeling in my heart followed.
It took me a couple months to get the courage to try meat again; especially raw meat. I did tonight. Raw ground beef from France. Its digesting wonderfully!
I'm very glad. I have a lot to learn about raw paleo now.
-
Hi Phil and Tyler,
I think we all can agree, that IF every person could have access to the best healer, the best chef, the best resources, and not have any yucky inhibitions..
Raw Paleo Diets will always win out.
Where Cooked Paleo diets is a transition thing or for those who cannot get over the hump of yucky attitudes to raw meats.
Where temporary Raw Veganism may be used for detox.
It all works out in the hands of skilled healers and skilled healers will use whatever works at what point in time. I'm probably speaking for myself and my friend Vander.
Yes, there are times when rawish / cookish paleo diet will already give benefits and healing.
Yes, there are times when absolutely raw paleo diet is needed.
I think Tyler is speaking from his experience that he gets tummy aches from cooked meat. Yes, I get that too if I eat too much cooked meat. Even my own children know and have experienced raw paleo is just the thing that does the job when cooked paleo cannot.
I think if sick people had access to perfect information... or as much information and experience as we have... we can draw them a map of how these various diets work... us being experienced poly-dieters.... so with the map they know where things can lead to.
Maybe we can start drawing our EXPERIENCED mental maps on how these diets work out.
Rawsamaritan, i would like to ask why raw paleo cured your eczema, but cooked paleo did not? What is the scientific reasoning behind it?
Has anyone on this forum (or are there reports) of people treating acne and Seborrheic dermatitis with cooked paleo? I know people have treated acne with cooked paleo (insulin responses, gluten sensitivity)
-
I think rawness is more important when it comes to fatty meats than many other foods, and I think that's something we agree on, so rawness might be especially important to an animal that is biologically adapted to a mostly meat diet, such as cats and dogs. Plus, by feeding them raw it eliminates the biologically inappropriate foods from their diet like grains and other foods that require heating and processing. Thus, raw diets also contain a substantial component of Paleo that many rawists overlook when they attribute most or all of their healing to rawness rather than Paleo (biologically appropriate foods). There's also so much overlap that it's difficult to completely separate the two, and thus the arguments will likely be endless, but I've seen firsthand some remarkable success stories from cooked Paleo and read about countless others.
Yeah, a lot of people are put off by the idea of raw Paleo. Cooked Paleo is less offputting to most people I've encountered, and from there they can bridge to less damaging forms of cooking, then introduce some raw animal foods and then maybe finally try fully or high raw Paleo some day. I have gradually seen more of the cooked Paleos considering these things and I think we will see more of them try out these steps over time.
So are you interested in seeing the reports re: Grave's disease from Wolf's site, Adora?
is grilling a safe form of cooking?
-
No, grilling is one of the worst forms of cooking. Boiling in water is the "least worse" type of cooking.
-
is grilling a safe form of cooking?
When our household grills we use a smoke less grill, it's a hot plate really with "fins".
-
No, grilling is one of the worst forms of cooking. Boiling in water is the "least worse" type of cooking.
I'd say steaming is even less of a problem. It still kills good bacteria, but I don't think it reduces any nutrients. Light steaming probably doesn't even create AGEs or other heat-created toxins.
-
I eat lightly cooked wildcaught fish occasionally. I cook it in just a little water and just enough to get cooked, like one or two minutes. I add salt, curcumin and black pepper.
I never recognised anything bad after eating this. I usually do it with saithe because it taste not good raw and is prefrozen but wildcaught and very cheap. When ready I add a big spoon of raw coconut oil on the top. Yummy.
I use 400 gram for me alone and that makes me so nicely satiated about 5 hours or longer.
This agrees with my body so much better than any rawfood-gourmet-creations with lots of nuts and seeds and fruits.. or vegetables..
Inger