Ancestral eating removed mental fog, fatigue, and confusion for me. Those weren't my primary health concerns, but there is a significant difference in my mental performance when I completely eliminate field-agricultural foods and processes from my diet. I have a somewhat dangerous job that requires maximum alertness and the ability to make quick and correct decisions for prolonged periods of time, kinda like an air-traffic controller, which I am not. I have fun at work when I'm completely alert.

I, too, do not say I'm on a paleo diet, since that has come to mean "coconut-flour bread" and "chia-seed pudding" in popular usage. Paleolithic people didn't have recipes, food-processors, refrigerators, etc.

Thanks Eve, very interesting. I didn't know about J. I. Rodale and it seems GCB doesn't know about him or any previous findings about wheat's harmfulness neither. There was no Internet and information about previous researches were not so easily found in the 60's when he unexpectedly observed these effects of wheat on animals. On top of those you mentioned, comes schizophrenia. 

In the late 19th century, there was a surge of so-called new-age thinking about many subjects as many branches of "science" distinguished themselves from "religion." Mind and body were explained by science, and we saw the rise of everything from mesmerism to homeopathy, and there were many branches of science that dealt with nutrition. There was a flourishing interest in nutrition, spurred by discoveries in anatomical science (x-rays, cadaver studies). Even the casualty-ridden US Civil War gave rise to battlefield doctors who poked around in the ruptured bodies of severely wounded soldiers.

That was the era of the Cereal Kings - men like John Harvey Kellogg and Charles Post - who promoted their cereals as cure-alls for ailments. (Good book also made into a movie: The Road to Wellville gives a hilarious portrayal of a Kellogg-like sanitarium). The premise was that murdered  animal flesh was bad for the body and mind, and gentler effects could be had from living on grains. Even wild animals like the tiger were raised in captivity on cereal, supposedly proving that vegetarian eating made ferocious animals docile. (In fact, the animal's docility was due to its meat-deprived, weakened constitution.) This was also the time when Indian ascetics ventured into the west, bringing their karmic blessings to vegetarianism.

Then, as now, great healing could be achieved by a change of diet from indulgent to moderate. You could go "for the cure" and get results if you were formerly nibbling on pastries all day long. Even shredded wheat cereal will heal something if you have been eating your wheat in breads and cakes.

I guess there's nothing new under the sun.

If you google "wheat aggression" there are about 2,500,000 hits. I've been reading studies about the indigestibility of wheat and the damage done throughout the body, including the brain, by the large, undigested molecules that rip through the colon wall since the 1960s. Nothing new here, just more articles saying the same thing that J. I. Rodale had been saying since the 1920s: "Don't Eat Wheat!" (He wrote a series of articles by that name.)

My practical sense is if the animal has some venom or poison

Venom and poison are not the same thing. Venom has nothing to do with eating, unless it is also a poison.

Ha ha!

I wasn't trying to be funny. I even apologized because my suggestion was so simple. For all I know, the OP already wrote to the uploaders, couldn't find the original uploaders, or never got an answer. After all, for all the increased access to information that the internet gives us, there has been a simultaneous increase in the sophistication and the complexity of unearthing the information.

Venom-eaters have been around for a long time. It would be nice to know more about it.

YS, if you google images for "liver damage in cattle," you'll see images of all the liver problems, usually on agricultural university websites. I think the images used to teach at the universities are way better than any pic we can take.

In addition to what RF explained about damage at the micro level in both the fridge and the freezer, there is freezing damage at the cellular level, too. It's hard to compare subtle freezer damage to the opposite, heat damage, because the changes in heating are quite pronounced, while freezing damage is subtle. I mean, if you look at the lump of it, frozen = hard and thawed = soft, no biggie.... 

To visualize freezer damage, think about putting living larvae into a freezer... they die; thaw them... they don't revive. The loss of life-process is due to the damage in the freezer. The majority of this kind of damage comes from membranes rupturing as water expands to ice. Even already-dead tissues get damaged by rupturing membranes. That accounts for the wateriness of thawed food.

It's hard to quantify the implications when it comes to eating previously-frozen food. Let's not turn this discussion into Stefansson and the Inuit. What will we do with our vast freezers if frozen food is no good?

eveheart:

re 1), some people can be tricked into thinking they're having raw milk when they're not

re 2), like AV said, raw milk never spoils, it just becomes a variety of yoghurts and cheeses. Now pasteurized milk, that's another matter. I agree that getting fresh unsour milk from the farm to the city requires quick distribution, but if refrigerated, raw milk should stay unsour for 3 or 4 days if not more.

Dario, what you said is true, but it has nothing to do with the dairy industry.

re re 1): "Some people" don't even know what pasteurization and homogenization are, and they don't care as long as the milk is cold. If they ever drank milk that was just gotten out of the cow, they would gag.

Plus, you are not the deliverer of people who don't care if they drink raw milk or not and don't mind being tricked. If we are talking about most people, they don't care...

re re 2): ... and when they do start caring, they will keep asking their market corporation to stock raw milk until raw milk supply meets the demand.

I see quicker, cooler milk stabilization as an improvement over high-heat pasteurization. I don't drink milk (AV told me not to), so I don't care about raw-milk availability.

As regards your mention of "Parliament", this issue has nothing really to do with big government but to do with local councils/local government. Council leaders in the UK routinely have annual  salaries that can be 5 times or more than the annual salary the Prime Minister gets. Of course,  Prime Minister, MPs etc., after leaving office,  get vast amounts more money via gaining directorships etc. from companies they  corruptly favoured while in office, so this is not as corrupt as it sounds. It is merely that  council leaders/councillors etc.  by contrast make most of their corrupt money while still in office.

Please accept my apology and interpret my comments as they best apply to your country. Heck, I can't even figure out the politics here in my own neighborhood, and my cynicism prevents me from understanding how these layers of government are nothing more than a convenient way to point the finger of responsibility at someone else.

Hmm, fair enough. Somehow, though, I doubt that worms eat plastic or metal and the like.....

Those should be recycled, anyway, and don't attract flies and rodents.

What's really scary is that agribusiness has developed cultivars of ripening fruits that will not ripen on the tree, but only ripen with exogenous applications of ethylene gas. "They" know that gas-ripened fruit doesn't contain the same biochemical components as tree-ripened fruit - agri-science studies this type of thing - yet the convenience-to-industry wins over food wholesomeness.

Ethylene gas, itself, is produced when a fruit is injured. (Picking before ripening is an injury!) When injured, the fruit "sacrifices" its quality and rushes into producing a viable seed. As CK points out, gas-ripening does not provide the fruit with nutrients required for a slow and leisurely natural ripening. Instead, the fallen fruit uses what nutrition it has within the fruit itself to reach maturity -  kinda like inducing labor, delivering a 6-month fetus, raising it in an incubator, and then smiling and saying that the kid developed just fine outside the womb, just so the mother doesn't have to risk stretch marks.

You got me wondering, HB...

There is no way for someone else to tell you if you are staying in ketosis, and you have asked about this a few times, so I'm wondering if you are testing your urine (or blood) to see if you are in ketosis. You can measure this with reagent strips, sold as Ketostix or generic equivalents.

Forgive me if I've come to the wrong assumption, but testing for urine ketones (cheap and easy, but you only get an average ketone level since your last pee) or blood ketones (more expensive but more accurate, I've never done this because I don't need that much accuracy) lets you correlate your carb intake to your level of ketosis.

I don't test all the time, but if I get to wondering, I use a fresh reagent strip and see what's going on. If you read about ketosis, this is what they mean about "being in the purple zone." The strip color goes from off-white to various shades of pink and purple when you have ketones in your urine.

MAGGOTS!

(Oops, I mean: HOUSEFLY LARVAE!)

Because I live in an vast city (3rd largest city in California) that relies on trucking to supply it's food, I've been wondering about survival food. What would I eat if the trucks stopped rolling? What could I store that would exempt me from having all my sealed barrels of emergency rations stolen by strong-armed bandits?

First, I thought about sheep, goats, and chickens, but those animals are not food-for-tomorrow, and I really don't think I can raise happy livestock on my 400 square foot backyard (the size of a 2-car garage). Even black soldier fly larvae (bsfl) take three weeks to reach their tummy-filling size.

I set up a bsfl "farm" anyway. With the native bsf population, I got some bsfl growing in the bin, but I realized that this is too slow a process for emergency food. However, as luck would have it, houseflies found my bin and provided me with fistfuls of larvae in a day or three. For days, I eyed those wigglies with disgust, but as I contemplated the ease of attracting flies (and their rapid reproduction), my mouth started watering.

I know I'm not the first on this forum to eat fly larvae. Some members report eating chunks of maggot-infested meat with great relish. That enjoyment level may be in my future, but for now, I'm settling for eating them frozen. The freezing kills them, and that makes all the difference to dissipate my yuck factor.

The first two frozen larvae made me feel queasy. I reasoned that this queasiness was all in my head - such a tiny amount of anything wouldn't make me feel sick to my stomach - so I ate some more. From their frozen state, I dusted off some of the clinging compost dirt. The bite was a creamy POP! that I found enjoyable. The taste is negligible.

I'll keep my bsfl bin going, fwiw, and I'm adding red wigglers in a regular compost bin. (My city sells discount compost bins and offers free classes on composting with red wigglers.) But my main experiment is going to be with fly maggots. I'm going to quantify my experiments to find out how much "production" I need to feed a family. I will "fly-proof" my composting with screens so I don't get such a strong maggot smell all over the yard and grow my maggots in jars. I think a tray of about a dozen 1-quart mason jars with a little bait in each jar will do it. My goal: sustain a family on a "ranch" the size of a garage. Maggots and flaxseed sprouts should do the trick. I'll post pics one of these days.