Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => General Discussion => Topic started by: AnopsStudier on August 10, 2014, 04:52:06 am
-
A buddy of mine is convinced that eating wild food that grows naturally around the area you live in is healthier for you. Is this true?
He also talks of local foods being better and being in tune with the season but....
things like kale, and broccoli , and bannanas are not even really real... They are artificially selected foods made better by humans. Is this bad or is this just mumbo jumbo. because I pretty much eat all the organic fruit and vegetables regardless of "artificial selection"
-
You seem to be all over the place with your question. Define wild.
Do you mean to include cultigens that are not sown by human hands? I get unsown watermelon from seeds that have been spat out by the children.
Or non-cultigens?
Or native plants?
-
Sorry
Is wild food better actually healthier for you than organic store bough or farmers market food?
since most food at stores and market has been bread to taste better and is different than wild food
and
Artificial Selection. Kale, Broccoli, Cabbage.... Are all members of the same family which humans artificially selected to become what they are over time...(They are all members of the mustard green family) There are many other foods like this too.. Tons of different varieties of apples, and other fruits that dont exist in the wild, but humans have created. Are these foods healthy to eat?
-
That's a big question. The short answer is that food quality is at least as important as its "wildness". Soil quality is extremely important in determining plant health, for instance. Wild food from very poor soil is not as good as cultivated food from very high quality soil, roughly speaking.
-
Soil quality is MOST important! If the soil does not contain the right minerals, the food grown on that soil will be deficient in nutrients.
Also, before you poo-poo artificial selection, remember that it mimics natural selection, which operates based on climate and other natural factors. Grown side-by-side in rich soil, a wild mustard and a cultigen such as broccoli will uptake the nearly the same nutrients, but the broccoli will also display some traits that have been favored through cultigenesis. You may not be in favor of certain traits, as I am not fond of the trend to select fruits and vegetables for extreme sweetness, but cultigens are not less food-like because of human intervention in the selection process.
-
A buddy of mine is convinced that eating wild food that grows naturally around the area you live in is healthier for you. Is this true?
He also talks of local foods being better and being in tune with the season but....
things like kale, and broccoli , and bannanas are not even really real... They are artificially selected foods made better by humans. Is this bad or is this just mumbo jumbo. because I pretty much eat all the organic fruit and vegetables regardless of "artificial selection"
Well, to me it is clear your friend is right. If you look at the Nature, everything has its seasons, and animals eat what is in season where they live. This is a basic rule.. and it all has their reasons. If yo dig deeper you can find all the answers WHY. I have, after just instinctively getting closer to eat more and more wild and local because it just made me feel better, learned so much about it why that is what we should be doing if we want optimal health. Mind blowing stuff!
This neurosurgeon has helped me a lot to understand it scientifically. It is tough reading, but so worth it
http://jackkruse.com/ (http://jackkruse.com/)
It is not going to be convenient and easy maybe... but no regrets ;).
Just need to add one thing to this, our human brains evolved through seafood.. so you will have to live close to water too - very important. We need DHA for our special human brains.
Hard to get enough DHA from land animals only, if you maybe do not get lots of raw brains to eat.....
-
I prefer to eat raw wild foods whenever possible.
-
This neurosurgeon has helped me a lot to understand it scientifically. It is tough reading, but so worth it
http://jackkruse.com/ (http://jackkruse.com/)
Well, I tried to read a bit of his interminable gibberish here http://jackkruse.com/organization-structural-failure-8-ketosis-appears-fail/ (http://jackkruse.com/organization-structural-failure-8-ketosis-appears-fail/)
Sorry to be frank Inger. We know he’s your guru since you always refer to him, but that’s not science: it’s unreadable verbose and absurd nonsense to anyone who remembers some elementary notions of physics. Somewhere in his pseudoscientific tortuous verbiage, there’s a wise phrase however:
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance. It is the illusion of knowledge.” He should self-apply it!
See:
http://carbsanity.blogspot.pt/2012/03/quantum-bullshit.html (http://carbsanity.blogspot.pt/2012/03/quantum-bullshit.html)
http://carbsanity.blogspot.pt/2012/04/you-pcs-vs-jack-kruse-md-dds.html (http://carbsanity.blogspot.pt/2012/04/you-pcs-vs-jack-kruse-md-dds.html)
http://paleodrama.tumblr.com/post/29966942598/kruse-lies (http://paleodrama.tumblr.com/post/29966942598/kruse-lies)
http://paleohacks.com/questions/129489/paleo-guru-credibility-jack-kruse-suspended-by-neu.html (http://paleohacks.com/questions/129489/paleo-guru-credibility-jack-kruse-suspended-by-neu.html)
That said, I agree it's better to eat wild foods, their taste is stronger and better as long as they suit our needs. We tend to eat too much cultivated fruits and livestock meat.
-
That said, I agree it's better to eat wild foods, their taste is stronger and better as long as they suit our needs. We tend to eat too much cultivated fruits and livestock meat.
hahahaha...... Francois you cannot stop trying to turn Jack down, no? ;) It just do not work with me...lol
If you was to read all the bullshit on the net and believe it, i feel sorry for you. Bullying never suited me and i run away from anything that smells like it - sorry ;)
Often when we go against the stream there will be many haters.
as you see, in the end we still agree...... ;D
-
Inger. Are you actually eating wild? WIld foods would be food native to where you live. So food that grows in the wild by you may not actually be "wild". It may be a random tree or bush planted there buy man 100's or thousand of years ago... WId would mean food that is actually native to the region you are from...You would have to alot of research to eat "wild"... and then it still might not be right because of your ancestry.. If a person is European living in South America eating local foods... how would the jive with your body?
-
I never believe what I read, Inger, I always doubt. I first tried to read that page from your guru Jack Kruse and found out what I wrote about it. Then I searched if others had the same view, to be reassured that there are some sensible people on this planet... The pages I linked show that I'm not alone, fortunately! :)
-
Inger. Are you actually eating wild? WIld foods would be food native to where you live. So food that grows in the wild by you may not actually be "wild". It may be a random tree or bush planted there buy man 100's or thousand of years ago... WId would mean food that is actually native to the region you are from...You would have to alot of research to eat "wild"... and then it still might not be right because of your ancestry.. If a person is European living in South America eating local foods... how would the jive with your body?
The most important thing to do is to eat the stuff seasonal to where you live. No matter if you are not native to there. Because it has to do with the sun. Where is lots of sun and carbs grow naturally, we can eat them, because our body needs sunshine to process carbs without them hurting us (this will not work if you live around the equator and a unnatural life with lots of non native EMF)
Just go to the Nature, she will give you the answers. Merciless. ;)
My main staple food these days are wild oysters picked by myself along the shore.. and wild caught herring and mackerel.. and wild herbs and berries from my surroundings.
I am not 100% wild tho, I do eat some grassfed heart and fat too and sometimes local organic veggies like cucumber, and I even eat raw Nuts, i prefer Hazelnuts - they grow here too, wild.
But my main food sources are wild. And i could practically live very well from them only if I just was a hunter, because I crave saturated fat too at times and that is why I always have grassfed beef fat in my fridge, I just eat it plain like a pastry..yum But I eat it only occasionally.
-
I never believe what I read, Inger, I always doubt. I first tried to read that page from your guru Jack Kruse and found out what I wrote about it. Then I searched if others had the same view, to be reassured that there are some sensible people on this planet... The pages I linked show that I'm not alone, fortunately! :)
Great Francois.... I do not care if I am alone tho, not at all..... lol
i have read those bully links of yours long ago my friend and they are trash IMHO ;)
if you do not stop calling Jack my guru I will come down faster than fast and I do not know what I will do to you :o
you might regret it, or NOT (depends on the figs....)
;)
-
Come while there are still figs, then! :) If you're late it'll be cherimoyas, arbutus, etc...
-
Things like cucumbers and bananas which are too of my favorite foods are not even natural in the wild.. Wild cucumbers and wild banana plants are damn near inedible. So it confuses me when it comes to eating foods that aren't made through Artificial Selection. So I continue to wonder if artificial selection was bad or it is beneficial.
-
This has been extensively discussed and addressed several times before, for example here: http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/instinctoanopsology/explain-instincto-diet-fully-2/msg41628/#msg41628 (http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/instinctoanopsology/explain-instincto-diet-fully-2/msg41628/#msg41628)
-
Whether domesticated plant foods are better than wild ones depends on your reasons for eating. If your singular goal is to consume the most nutrient dense, medicinally active foods possible, then you should eat the roots, stems, leaves and fruit of wild plants. If, on the other hand, your singular goal is to satisfy your sweet tooth, then domesticated plant foods - particularly cultivated fruits - will suit you better. I'm admittedly setting up something of a false dichotomy here; we can eat for nourishment sometimes and eat for sweet tastes at other times, using a mix of wild and cultivated plants.
In general, plants have been bred to remove their bitterness and increase their sweetness. The compounds that make plants bitter often have either nutritional or medicinal value, so removing the bitterness diminishes the value of eating plants. Lettuce is a prime example; the wild ancestor of today's cultivated lettuces is prickly lettuce, a wild plant with a quite bitter taste that most people find unpalatable but is, in fact, both nutritious and very medicinal. Through decades of breeding, we've turned prickly lettuce into iceberg and other lettuces, which are mild of flavor, are largely devoid of nutrition and have zero medicinal value. They're basically crunchy water.
In my personal experience, fruits that have been bred for sweetness cause me to eat too much, leading to blood sugar issues, tooth enamel damage and sometimes reinforcing a sugar or carb addiction more generally. I don't have this problem when eating wild fruits, like wild blueberries or strawberries, because these fruits have plenty of plant secondary compounds that trigger the 'enough' sensation and prevent me from eating more than a hand full.
-
Wild ocean food is usually better... choose fresh.
In fact, when I buy our aquatic animal food I make it a point to avoid farmed fish like milk fish, tilapia, dory, cat fish.
-----------
For land animals, animals I've compared are:
- wild boar vs organic fed farm raised boar vs commercially grown pig... wild boar is best
- freely roaming wherever they want provincial chickens vs caged... freely roaming chicken best... same with the eggs
-
Generally wild is radically superior however especially ocean food which I believe is probably the healthiest food there is. However land food grown using natural principals would be superior as the wild we experience in the modern world is far away from a true wild, most of the soil and herb base is destroyed throughout much of the planet.
-
i like how this forum has individuals that think different and gives different advice. It is makes it all very colorful and not a black and white matter.
Because life is by far not black and white :)
I think we go along pretty nicely despite our differences :)
-
I still will never understand... isnt EVERYTHING hybrid or modified??? Lemons are a cross between a citron and a an orange so are they not good?... Melons have all been bread to enhance taste... everything is so confusing
-
Everything cultivated is hybrid, some cultivated plants have also been genetically modified. Wild plants are the result of long-term evolutionary processes, so developed to fill niches rather than to satisfy our sweet tooths.
-
so lemons , cantaloupe, celery, is all hybrid? etc..
-
Yes, lemons, cantaloupe, celery have all been selectively bred for many decades to create the commercial varieties you buy in a store. They barely resemble their wild counterparts, if at all. Commercial varieties have been bred so far that most cannot survive a growing season without help from humans. They would die from inadequate water, fertilizer or other nutrient, or they would be devoured by insect pests that their wild counterparts could resist.
-
ahahah so after some research.. Berries are pretty much the same they have always been!
Then is it unhealthy to be eating watermelon and celery and all these hybridized, artificially bred foods?
-
No.
-
...Berries are pretty much the same they have always been...
No, they are not! Commercially available berries - like strawberries, raspberries and blueberries - are more similar to their wild counterparts than are other cultivated fruits, but they are NOT the same. Their sugar contents are higher, they are generally larger, their plant secondary compound contents are lower. Commercial blueberry orchards usually need to spray pesticides lest their crop be decimated by all manner of insect pests, whereas when you wander into a wild blueberry field no pesticides are needed because the berries and the plants more generally can successfully resist most pests because their secondary compound contents are much higher.
-
Berries are definitely not the same as try have ever been. There is a huge variety of berries available in the wild that bear little to no resemblance to common berries found in stores today. The differences can be something as basic as size, take he extremely minesculenwild strawberry vs Driscoll brand strawberries that can be up to 50 times larger, and mostly full if water and sugar and lacking nutrient density. Same goes for cultivated blueberries vs wild which have much higher pectin content. Berries like sumac which are tart and fuzzy, unlike anything we use today. Rose hips and wild currants, again having high pectin and vitamin c and low sugar contents compared to what we consider berries today. Driscoll brand, which is large commercial producer, works to breed raspberries and black berries that are able to be mechanically picked, harvesting them before proper ripeness has been attained certainly makes me think that they would not have as healthy and nutrient dense profile as berries left to fully sun ripen. Wild plums, while not a Berrie, are another good example, they grow in abundance on he north american continent, are rarely harvested, are sweet and delicious and full of pectin and honestly rely on bears, coyotes and humans to spread because the pits are too large for smaller animals to pass in their feces. They are extremely small compared to the poults and plums of today and even so were cultivated by natives. The fact we have on demand water in agricultural centers changes the duration of seasons and allows he process of food cultivation to speed up dramatically, food is constantly changing.
Wild foods, especially greens hat become food for wild life. Tend to have different and much more sturdy root structure and the variety alone helps the plants pull up different nutrients from the soil and increases the diversity of nutrients that wild life receives. Also being able to grow in various types of soils that contain different mineral content is very important.
Eric covered this but Anti nutrient content in wild plants is also much different. Those bitter, sour, pungent tastes have been bred out of leaves, stems and roots, which enables us to eat more plant materials. Whether this is good or bad depends on your constitution by for some this can cause a lot of irritation.
Whether they are healthier or not depends on how the foods thrive in heir wild environment and then on how they fit into your lifestyle and diet.
-
so how the H E double hockey sticks do I eat wild foods.... that are actually the same wild foods they were before man changed them
-
You gather them from wild places when they're in season.
-
So nobody believes that humans could have possibly created even better foods than exist in the wild? such as the modern sweet potato and kale?
-
I'm open to the idea that humans can create better foods than exist in the wild if we put our mind to it, but I've seen no evidence that we've done that so far. We've generally bred foods to tempt our palates or increase their shelf life and ease of shipping, and since we've done this by removing their nutrition and medicine and increasing their sugar content the result is, from a health perspective, inferior foods.
-
I love how you think Eric.
-
Sure we could have, but I think that time passed long ago and is speeding away at a forever increasing pace. Humans may have existed in the wild when they were cocreating these cultivars and that is why things like plums didn't mind to become sweeter but remain hearty and able to grow without artificial irrigation or soil amendments, they appreciated our bodies and the bodies of those attracted to similar tastes (bears, coyotes) to distribute them so that they could flourish. And this a natural relationship were all beings benefit to an extent that nature remains in balance.
there is always a balance in nature and if we want to produce the most sweet and juicy plums or berries possible, we do that at the risk of the plant becoming dependent on us providing extra water, select climate and soil nutrients for it to do so. This means the plant is no longer able to simply grow without an excess of human assistance and will only be able to flourish were those needs are met, outside of the natural system. humans generally do no establish anything close to the soil and nutrient biodiversity that the natural process can provide, which includes so many inputs and TIME.
I think it's best to always study nature and wild things because we forget that we once and still do have a role and place in he system and it's our knowledge or lack of that drives how we interact and appreciate nature.