Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - a87.pal

Pages: [1] 2 3
General Discussion / Re: Old New York Gangsters knew about raw meat
« on: March 10, 2013, 12:25:15 pm »
 the most pragmatic way to determine the correct reading of a sentence is to look at the sources. lists four sources, interestingly none of them contain the quote "It soothes dog and men." In fact, here is what each says:

A Dictionary of Slang, Jargon, and Cant.
"(thieves), pieces of raw meat."

A Dictionary of Slang and Colloquial English.
"Uncooked meat."

Vocabulum: Or, the Rogue’s Lexicon.
"Raw meat."

A Dictionary of the Underworld
" 'Pieces of raw meat' (B. & L.); c.: from ca. 1870. Perhaps ex idea of meat poultice for a black eye. (Alexander McQueen.) "

Unless you find the source that backs up "It soothes dog and men.", then it appears this argument has no basis. From the sources the site actually lists, the black eye poultice interpretation seems best supported.

General Discussion / more evidence
« on: March 04, 2013, 03:40:34 am »

more support that fats when raw are healthy and when cooked become dangerous.

General Discussion / Re: what qualifies as raw
« on: February 28, 2013, 05:08:21 am »
This thread was meant to determine if food introduced to very low heat <60C would lead to dietary problems.

The issues with tallow and cooking in general was pretty thoroughly discussed here:

Exercise / Bodybuilding / accelerating ketoadaption
« on: February 27, 2013, 05:39:23 am »

Health / Re: Does freezing destroy the milk fat?
« on: February 27, 2013, 05:28:21 am »
As far as I am aware, freezing does not make fats harmful to eat. (Plenty of people here freeze large pieces of meat[protein and fat] for later consumption without issues. Of coarse, fresh is usually preferred for taste reasons)

As for the grainy consistency, I dont know a lot about this: but I imagine that after freezing, the milk "separated." Milk is an emulsion of fat and water. That is why it is opaque instead of transparent. When you freeze it, different parts become solid at different temps and the emulsion "separates." Then when you bring it back up to temperature, the fat and water remain separated and grainy. To reform some of the emulsion, you could mix/shake/blenderize it. It should regain some of its normal consistency.

General Discussion / Re: what qualifies as raw
« on: February 26, 2013, 10:16:32 pm »
Ive read some of GCB's work, but, as I remember, his key point is that  aside from creating toxins, cooking also perverts our instincts, obscuring our decisions about what and how much to eat.

Its interesting to consider that slightly cooking could be equally as dangerous as fully cooking, just through a different mechanism. Based on the excerpts quoted and Tyler's concerns about enzymes, I'm curious if this is more of an issue with plant matter than with animal matter.

(I'd be surprised if there were significant amounts of proteases and lipases in animal tissue though I suppose it is possible.)

I guess what I really need to do is look into the temperatures when the reactions for PAHs/HCAs/AGEs/NSAs begin.

General Discussion / Re: what qualifies as raw
« on: February 26, 2013, 10:17:13 am »
I understand that getting active enzymes has benefits, but I was unaware that denatured proteins/enzymes were detrimental to health. I thought it was only the other compounds like PAH's and HCA's that were problematic, and that these required higher temperatures before they started to generate.

I monitored my last batch of jerky and noticed temperatures around 55C. I could obviously change things to keep temperatures below 40C, but I like my current set up and want to get a better idea if I am actually setting myself up for certain problems.

General Discussion / Re: what qualifies as raw
« on: February 26, 2013, 08:06:20 am »
This makes sense as most mammals thermoregulate between 24C to 40C. So I guess ~40C would be the limit for truly raw.

You mentioned that up to 60C (you can sous-vide a steak) is still not considered cooked, but certain molecules become noxious. Any guidelines here, like the upper limit before proteins and fats start generating noxious substances -- for use when drying?

General Discussion / Re: How NOT To Lose Weight?
« on: February 26, 2013, 04:57:43 am »
Just some thoughts from my own experience.

When I first started raw paleo (after SAD and 6 months vegan) I ate a lot of fat and still lost weight. Particularly I was eating about 1 lb of meat and 1/3-1/2 lb of fat (which is about 2000+ calories). I was also underweight at the time (118lbs | 5'8'' | male | 23) so I was expecting easy gains.

Everyone is different when they start eating this way. And I would not recommend plowing forward with your "ideal" diet if you continue losing weight. Initial loses from most dietary changes are due to decreased sodium intake, resulting in water loss, and less food going undigested and sitting in your gut (also drawing in water). After this period, you should be very critical of weight loss. It suggests you are not digesting/utilizing the calories you are eating. 

I would be open minded and keep everything as an option (even carbs, and even less accepted in this community--cooked starches). Your goal, if you are like most people here, should be to go low carb and fully raw, but getting keto-adapted is different for everyone. Exercise seems to help speed up the process in most cases.

The studies I have read on this suggest it takes at least a few months after adopting a ketogentic diet for the body to adapt and performance to reach peak levels agains. These studies were done on athletes (very small samples, like < 20 people) and used cooked diets. I also remember reading posts on the zero carb part of this forum about how it only took 1 or 2 weeks for some people.

General Discussion / Re: Types of bone marrow
« on: February 26, 2013, 04:22:06 am »
I bought something like 30 lbs of beef marrow and 30 lbs of bison marrow from slankers a while back. (I was testing the plausibility of getting all my fat from marrow)

What I found was that about 20% of what they sent me was the translucent yellow-orange "buttery" type, the remainder was the white type. Both are good, but the "buttery" type is the best tasting fat I have experienced so far.

There is one website online I found that  claims the softer marrow comes from the lower leg. But I have never seen any other verification of this. Slankers didn't seem to know what I was even talking about or care to check.

When I was scooping the marrow out, I noticed that each bone was different. Some had all soft marrow. Others had the soft marrow only near the joint. And some had the soft marrow in the center.

I imagine it depends on the animal, its diet, etc. Did notice that slanker's cows seemed to have more of the soft marrow than their bison. But the cow bones were bigger (radius).

General Discussion / what qualifies as raw
« on: February 26, 2013, 03:58:43 am »
Hi guys,

I got thinking about how I personally consider things like jerky and "cold pressed" (under 120F) coconut oil raw. But really they are not.

Obviously there are physical transformations that occur at higher temperatures (and durations). Can someone summarize where the 120F number comes from (if I even got it right)? Additionally, are there any significant changes at lower temperatures?

General Discussion / Re: High meat can make you smarter
« on: June 08, 2011, 12:21:22 am »
do you think eating dirt (similar to how people supplement with clay) would be an alternative (possibly more convenient) to high meat?

Hot Topics / legalization of raw dairy
« on: May 16, 2011, 10:05:59 pm »

despite myself being intolerant of cow's milk, I find this one step in the right direction. Plus the guy is running for president. Sounds like he is of the paleo mindset.

Hot Topics / Re: panu blog: ketosis
« on: February 09, 2011, 10:45:12 am »
my current opinion about his experience is that there is a difference between ketosis, and ketosis with one meal a day/IF.

for example, (this is all pure speculation) if glycogen regeneration is determined by blood concentration of glucose, then while doing ketosis with 3 meals a day perhaps most of the glycogen gets regenerated but there is still a bottleneck that only higher blood glucose levels will overcome. One way to achieve this increase in glucose is to eat a 400 cal carb meal like he did. However, another method would be to eat all the protein-fat meals in one huge meal. Again this is pure speculation. Either way, it suggests that if you cannot digest huge meals of meat and fat then perhaps you should add a few carbs until digestion improves.

Hot Topics / panu blog: ketosis
« on: February 08, 2011, 03:59:28 am »
I am sure some of you have read this already, but what are your opinions about his theory on ketosis:

General Discussion / bovine serum allergy
« on: February 07, 2011, 03:17:32 am »
After about a year going raw paleo, trying everything from primal to zero-carb without really any progress, I recently found out that the staple food I was eating was causing the problem: beef. Or more specifically, beef/bison blood.

While I have enjoyed many benefits from the diet, in terms better digestion and ketone metabolism, these were far over powered by a constant fatigue, which would only be relieved when I occasionally switched to eating lamb or cooked-paleo. It were these occasions that helped me decide to get the allergy tests done and conduct my own elimination diet experiments.  I now know fairly certainly that I am allergic to beef.

In light of this revelation, the path moving forward seems clear, but I know I can probably learn something more from the community. If any of you have advice and/or possible alternative explanations, please let me know.

Currently, I plan to remove raw beef from my diet for at least several months to a year. At that point, perhaps my allergic response will have faded and my stomach acid improved to eliminate more of the bovine serum proteins.

It's just going to mean a bigger hit to my bank account.

Hot Topics / Re: tallow v. butter
« on: January 11, 2011, 06:17:28 am »
  First of all cooked-palaeodieters actually have a variety of other problems which are just as bad or worse as grains/legumes/seeds. On the varied cooked-palaeodiet forums I've been on, legumes/seeds are foods that people actually have fewer  problems with, specifically. The non-palaeo foods cooked-palaeodieters have the most  problems with appear to be grains, dairy, (and, to a lesser extent, carbs in general, as opposed to just seeds/legumes in particular).

As for heat-created toxins like PAHs, scientists are now largely convinced that carcinogens do indeed get past the digestive tract, given that PAHs have been directly linked to stomach- and colon-cancer etc.:-

I'm a bit confused. Do you not consider the stomach and colon part of GI and digestive system? These are places that are in direct contact with the carcinogens before they enters the blood stream, so isn't there still a barrier before they get to the internal organs (heart, liver, kidney, brain, etc.)?

The reason why I mentioned grain/legumes/seeds is not because people necessarily have problems with them intrinsically, but rather because they promote gut permeability which would make it easier for carcinogens to enter the blood stream from the GI and digestive system.

In any case, I realized that the last time I experimented with beef back fat was in the very beginning of my raw paleo journey (when I couldn't digest it all) and that it may be worth revising. However, for some reason, I think that since suet is closer to the organs it should be more nutritional, though I doubt that is the case.

Hot Topics / Re: tallow v. butter
« on: January 11, 2011, 03:10:05 am »
I think everyone in this forum has the gut impression that cooking foods will lead to extra carcinogens.

What I'm not convinced of, though, Tyler, is that (A) these carcinogens get past the GI/digestive system when grains/legumes/seeds are removed from the diet, because that is where most cooked paleo dieters get problems. Further, I am also not convinced that (B) humans cannot handle a light load of these carcinogens in the gut (which is lined with/protected by bacteria might I remind you).

presumably given another 50 years once all the current cooked paleo dieters grow old (A) can be studied and proven one way or another. However, it will be along time before we can even design experiments to study (B).

knowing that it will be a long time before this is resolved, I have a very specific question: Given what we know about their chemical makeup how would you compare raw grass fed butter against melted (140-180 F/60-80 C for 30 min) grass fed suet [as I consume this more often than tallow, which I only use for pemmican].

I imagine your response is going to vary on a person's dairy tolerance, so bear the following in mind for my case: after eating butter a few more times this last week I got really sick of the taste and didn't want to eat anymore, like a really strong "stop signal." In earlier experiments I ate butter and sour cream for 2 months without any of these reactions. However, when I had tried to drink raw milk (~1 quart a day) in the past, I never really acclimated to it, even after 1.5 months, still getting gas and electrolyte imbalance symptoms.

Hot Topics / Re: tallow v. butter
« on: January 08, 2011, 05:37:38 am »
We do a lot of indian cooking and we have come to realize that Quality of spices matters!

Of course we have not done any quantitative analysis in our kitchen, i am not sure if the researchers are aware of that.

Crappy spices dont work medicinally at all, my wife uses spices as medcine, she can easily tell them apart.

fresh, organic spices may be good for very specific medicinal purposes due to other chemicals in them.

these chemicals probably have very little antioxidant properties though. As far as ORAC capacity goes, I have only seen that dried always has a significant amount more per gram (water weight). However, in the future we will probably find out this is a flawed metric.

In any case, if you look at the composition of the spice mix, you see the two most potent antioxidants, cinnamon and oregano make up about 30% of the 11.3 g mix. I bet they could have just used a 4 gram mix of only oregano and gotten the same result. This is much more reasonable and closer to what I ask my parents to add to my cooked food when I'm at home.

Hot Topics / Re: tallow v. butter
« on: January 08, 2011, 05:04:57 am »
If you look in this article: at table 1 where they show the composition of the cooked burgers:

you see they added 11.25 g of spices (composed of per 250 g raw burger (a bit over 1/2 a pound).

This achieved a 71% decrease in the malondialdehyde content.

11.25 g of spices is a lot for me, but it may not be that much for you.

Hot Topics / Re: tallow v. butter
« on: January 08, 2011, 04:47:20 am »
Tyler, I hate that this thread has emerged into an attack on your evidence and explanations, because we (the attackers) are not supplying as much evidence as you are to back up our claims.

I wanted to use this post to summarize a few points from each side of the argument, but I quickly realized that I couldn't even verbalize what you were arguing.

Are you arguing that: cooking of any type will ALWAYS speed up the "aging"/"deterioration" process (i.e. rate of cancer, heart disease, neurological and muscle disorders)?

In either case, please specify in your next post to prevent this conversation from becoming pointless. Are there particular types of cooking that are safer than others? which are the worst? when might it be beneficial? Have all these deterioration processes been documented (I am only aware of digestive and GI track cancer from cooked paleo diet)?

And just to be specific, I am arguing that lightly cooking fats high in waxy esters and sat fat, with moderate mono fat, and very low poly fat (in the presence of antioxidants) will cause negligible toxins (though still a few, which the body can easily handle through fasting and high fat diets). And also that the beta oxidation metabolic pathway (promoted in ketosis) is prepared to handle the oxidized fats (not the PAHs) from cooking.

Your first article about PAHs only mentions plant oils, which are unstable even at low temperatures (probably, why plants are also high in antioxidants). I mean flax seed oil has been known to spontaneously catch on fire: Just because we as humans combine fats from plants and animals into one category does not mean they behave the same way.

I "think" others here are arguing that lightly cooking (searing, steaming, boiling/poaching, slow cooking) meat in the presence of spices/antioxidants and eating with fiber/salad [a paleo-diet] will not speed up the deterioration process (except perhaps GI and digestive cancers, which were probably because of those people did not do cooked paleo with enough fiber and spices, or just not enough excersize/water) (note that in the long run i think fiber is bad, but can be useful to heal a cancerous gut by promoting certain regulatory microorganisms)

Again, this whole spices thing is my own CRAZY idea. Never really proven.

But I have seen a few studies confirming it, and a lot of human accounts. The spices cannot deal with PAHs once they have been formed. But they can lower the rate of oxidation, which in turn lowers the rate of PAH creation (I think?). Also, all the studies indicate that you really have to pour on the spices to see considerable effect, which could lead to buildup of other plant nasties. However, turmeric and ginger are one of the few spices with almost no reported symptoms (i think?), compared to things like pepper, curry, or other seed/leaf based spices.

Hot Topics / Re: tallow v. butter
« on: January 06, 2011, 06:40:57 am »
Again, I'm not so well versed in all this biochem. But I am becoming more convinced by your argument Tyler, though I think i still need more evidence.

I don't have access to the science direct article, and the abstract only mentions plant oils, but I'll take your word for it until my friend sends me a copy of the article. This is, however, your most convincing piece of evidence (though I would like to see if it delineates between wet v. dry heat and low v. high temps: as these do make a significant difference in the reactions that are even possible, not just rates).

The wikipedia entry is unverifiable. If you look at the reference for the quote you mention, it doesn't even mention fats.

and I don't see how the ncbi article is relevant: they examine two groups, one eating cooked beef with low fat and one with high fat. Both groups have high HCA's in their food, yet the high fat group ends up with less cancer. This article, again, doesn't delineate between cooking fat alone and cooking fat with protein.

Also just out of curiosity (because I dont really eat cooked starches) could you point me to some info on how low cooked or wet heated starches produce these compounds? I was always under the impression that lightly processing most vegetables increased their nutritional value. I'm guessing it has something to do with the small amounts of fat and protein they also contain?

Hot Topics / Re: tallow v. butter
« on: January 06, 2011, 04:30:07 am »
Tyler, just for clarification, are the "major heat created toxins" from cooked meats also all formed during the heating of fats?

I was always under the impression that cooking fat and protein together produced nasty carcinogenic compounds, but I don't think I've ever come across things that show "low heating"(without burning/smoking) and "wet heating" of fats alone or starches alone produce these carcinogens (and if they do, it is at a much lower rate).

Also (as you pointed out) the study I cited does not show spices counteract the major cooked meat toxins, but it does lend evidence to spices counteracting oxidized fats.

Not to be repetitive, but, again, I do believe raw is best. This thread is supposed to be more about comparing the risks of cooking grass fed animal fats (not cooking meat, though I am aware there are bits of meat even in suet) v. the risks of raw butter.

The reason I think making this comparison is useful is because I have noticed many people on the boards have difficulty digesting raw suet and accessing very fatty fresh grass fed meat cuts. The alternatives as I have mentioned before are raw marrow (best), raw grass fed boar/fowl fat, tallow and raw butter. ( I should also add egg yolks to the list, which I previously forgot about) Given availability and storage issues with marrow and pork/fowl fat, this leaves tallow and raw butter (and now also raw egg yolks).

General Discussion / glucose experiments
« on: January 06, 2011, 03:28:10 am »
I have been tracking my glucose along with symptoms ever since going zero carb and now low carb (<25 g) and am curious to see if any of these correlations match up with other people.

1) when my blood glucose is above 95 mcg I get insomnia.
2) blood glucose drops <5 mcg points an hour after a meal
3) blood glucose of 85 mcg "feels" optimum (no headaches, 55 - 70 bpm/low fatigue rate, low muscle fatigue)

Pages: [1] 2 3
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk