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 - TylerDurden

Pages: 1 ... 575 576 577 578 579 [580] 581 582 583 584 585 ... 612
14476
The basic problem with fruit is that, in Palaeo times, it was very difficult, in most parts of the world, to get hold of enough of them, as there was no agriculture at the time at all. Having been in genuinely wild areas, I know that much fruit only appears seasonally for a few weeks each time, and one has to compete against other wild animals. I've gone on  mushroom-collecting expeditions in the forests, and the amounts collected weren't comparable to the amounts I would have got via hunting wild animals. So, outside the tropics, minimal-fruit-consumption would have been the norm.

14477
General Discussion / Re: Pemmican: good fat/bad fat
« on: November 04, 2008, 06:04:01 pm »
I would guess that the lubricating benefit of raw fat would likely be reduced by cooking - plus, there are all the extra toxins from cooked-fats, by comparison to cooked-proteins.

14478
General Discussion / Re: Digestion Times For RAF
« on: November 04, 2008, 02:43:03 am »
Nicola, the fact is that as soon as cooked-food-diet-advocates (very grudgingly)  admit that high amounts of cooking generates toxins and makes raw food  less digestible etc.(as more and more do), then it becomes ever more difficult to defend the consumption of lightly-cooked-meats, as it's then merely a question of the degree of harm to raw food via heat.

As regards  your diet, why not change it? Exchange the suet for some other kind of raw fat(marrow, hide-fat, muscle-meat-fat etc.)

14479
Hot Topics / Re: Pemmican
« on: November 04, 2008, 02:28:18 am »
Well, if you believe Loren Cordain et al, stearic acid is supposed to be the only "good" saturated fat.

14480
General Discussion / Re: Pemmican: good fat/bad fat
« on: November 04, 2008, 02:26:58 am »
The whole issue of pemmican is voided by the fact that pemmican is always heated fat. Only unheated fats should be allowed. IMO, even cooked lean protein is way better than cooked fat.

14481
General Discussion / Re: SAD Compatability
« on: November 03, 2008, 05:22:09 pm »
People either eat "high-meat"  or take EM-products before any cooked-meal(some also take additional enzyme-supplements) so as to minimise detox-issues  and/or they deliberately only eat the healthier cooked-foods. So, in my own case, I buy and share  organic christmas puddings at christmas as they don't contain vegetable-oils(nonorganicones give me extreme fatigue) etc.

14482
Hot Topics / Re: Pemmican
« on: November 03, 2008, 05:18:00 pm »
Most people go in for dried beef-jerky which isn't heated above 104 degrees fahrenheit, re travelling. Pemmican, as it's properly heated, should be avoided unless there's no heathy raw fat available.

14483
General Discussion / Re: What are you eating right now?
« on: November 03, 2008, 05:15:34 pm »
I just took my first bite of tongue... bison tongue to be specific.
It's taking all my strength to chew it...
Tongue people, do you find it very hard to chew?

Newbies should probably cut off the tip of the tongue and the stringy underside of the tongue. I've got used to eating the whole tongue(and don't usually chew more than once or twice, just bolt it down as it's small enough).

14484
Welcoming Committee / Re: hey guys, just joined
« on: November 03, 2008, 05:48:16 am »
Zardoz is definitely the weirdest movie ever made. Only worth watching for laughs.

14485
That looks great, Tyler.  Thanks for the idea.

And if you wrap that image link in an image tag, it will show up in your post, without any © issues whatsoever.

Done

14486
Display Your Culinary Creations / Surstromming Recipe(Fermented raw fish)
« on: November 03, 2008, 02:34:08 am »
How To Make Surstromming:-



Step 1:- Buy fresh herring during the traditional months of May and June. You don't want the rotted fish to sit around too long, but you want to be sure there is plenty of time for it to ferment during the traditional surstromming feasting time of late August and early September.
Step 2:-  Brine the herring for a day. Leave the salt concentration a bit on the light side. It should measure about 23 degrees with your salinometer. After all, surstromming was created specifically because the locals didn't have enough salt to preserve fish in the normal way.
Step 3:-  Decapitate and clean the herring. Fish heads and guts aren't part of the classic recipe and would ruin the distinctive taste of surstromming. Leave them out for the local cats, if you wish.
Step 4:-  Put the decapitated, cleaned fish into a barrel, leaving an inch for any gas to escape without causing an explosion. Yes, surstromming has been known to explode or fizz out, even though its defenders swear that this has never happened and is all an urban legend.
Step 5:-  Leave it out in the sun for 24 hours to get that fermentation going. This crucial step jump-starts the process and gets that rot underway. Stir it every 3 hours to achieve an even putrefaction throughout the mixture. Shoo off the neighborhood cats, who will be positively drooling by the end of the 24-hour period.
Step 6:- Reserve about 5 quarts of brine and pour off the rest. Mix the reserved brine back in and add about 5 gallons of 12 degree brine.
Step 7:- Move it indoors to a cool, dark place to let the fermentation continue until mid-August. Surstromming experts recommend that it be kept at a temperature of 63 to 65 degrees F.

14487
General Discussion / Re: Saturated Fats Article by Fallon
« on: November 03, 2008, 02:25:10 am »
You should avoid all vegetable-oils, not just olive-oil. Even coconut-oil and palm-oil/palm-kernel-oil, rich in saturated fats, should be avoided. Vegetable oils are simply not a natural part of the human diet, and consuming such concentrated oils/fats is a really bad idea, healthwise.

Coconut oil, apparently, contains antinutrients, which explains why I got stomach-aches when I tried the stuff, and olive-oil just goes quickly through my body unabsorbed, producing diarrrhea, in effect.

As for the whole issue of saturated fats/polyunsaturated fats, you don't really have to worry about it, as long as you're eating a natural diet, you're getting SFAs and PUFAs in the right proportions.

14488
General Discussion / Re: Digestion Times For RAF
« on: November 02, 2008, 09:33:29 pm »

As for the Goldberg study on AGE formulation I contend that, like the other studies mentioned thus far, it does not actually tell us anything about meat that is cooked only to bleau or to rare.  To start, it does not give us a true control by not telling us how many AGE's are in raw beef.  It may be similar to the raw breast milk, but there is no law saying that it needs to be. 

The report I cited is the most comprehensive report on AGEs-content in foods, and they did actually heat the foods, themselves(they state, for example, that the increase in AGEs was directly tied to the increase in temperature, and that heat-increase was the most relevant factor behind AGE-formation).

 While that particular excerpt from the report didn't include a dozen other tables showing AGE-content, the limited data on that 1st table does make it perfectly clear that raw foods, consistently, have negligible AGE-values(0.05/0.13/0.01 etc.) while even just boiling beef etc. vastly increases the amounts of AGEs - so it's not realistic to claim that there would be little difference between raw and boiled-beef, in terms of AGE-content.

Quote
Just as there is no enzyme damage at 38C but there is at 40C it remains possible, based on the data presented so far, that there is no significant AGE formation or reduction in digestibility in food heated to (to pull hypothetical numbers out of a hat) 58C but that they do show up at 60C and start increasing rapidly after that.

While it is possible, it is extremely unlikely as the food already is being damaged at 40 degrees, in terms of enzymes, so one would expect other kinds of damage to appear at the same time as well, albeit in much smaller amounts than if cooked at 120 degrees, say.

Quote
The data on the fats I find a little more confusing.  Did they actually cook them at all, or are they just measuring them as purchased from the supermarket?  If the latter then the butter numbers probably tell us something quite interesting about pasteurization.  I'm also curious about the olive oil.  I wonder what type they used.  If they did not heat them at all then I would expect there to certainly be a difference between cold-pressed extra virgin and the heat extracted, second press Pure olive oil garbage.  If they did not heat the fats in any way themselves and they did use good quality fats (both assumptions that we can't confirm from this paper) then it actually tells us nothing about AV's claim that the best food raw is the worst cooked.   The AGE's might be endogenous to the fats themselves.

It's clear from the fact that they are comparing different types of heat-treatment and the fact that they repeatedly report heating a number of foods, during the experiment, that they did cook all the foods. It is true that AGEs are formed in tiny microscopic amounts in food(and even in the human body), but every study, so far, has pointed out that the biggest,  source of AGEs, by far, is from heated foods. I have yet to come across 1 single mention of a raw, unprocessed food with high amounts of AGEs in it.

Quote
I don't understand what you mean when you say that destroying phytonutrients by cooking plant matter is deemed good by zero-carbers.  Since zero-carbers don't consume plant matter why would they have an opinion on whether or not cooking it is a good thing?  As for whether the creation of toxins is worse than the destruction of anti-nutrients I think that this would be dependent upon both the quantity of the substances created and destroyed and the relative effects that these substances have on the body.  Without knowing the levels of the various substances and their effects I don't think that we can say with certainty which method of ingestion is ultimately better.

Well, I meant low-carbers as well.And even some so-called zero-carbers occasionally eat some plant-food on certain unavoidable social occasions.As far as comparing the creation of toxins such as AGEs and the removal of antinutrients, I would say it's pretty clear that the creation of toxins would be much worse. After all, toxins such as AGEs are known to be a major cause behind diabetes- and age-related diseases, whereas all that antinutrients do is block the absorption/uptake of the nutrients in the food in question as well as any other foods eaten at the same time. Granted, if one were eating some very nutritionally-deficient diet(such as the tuber-rich diets in some parts of Africa), then antinutrients would be a more serious issue, but not on a standard Western diet.

14489
Welcoming Committee / Re: Hello Everyone
« on: November 02, 2008, 08:32:24 pm »
Welcome to the forum!

14490
Health / Re: Post-Surgery and Scars
« on: November 02, 2008, 08:16:34 pm »
Trouble is that Aajonus' remedies for things like scar-tissue tend to involve large amounts of dairy, cream etc.

If you have trouble swallowing, I suppose it would make sense to use Vitamixes/blenders of various kinds so as to mince the meats properly.

Prerawpalaeodiet, I had one mild scar on my left arm (from a vaccination I think), which was sensitive enough so that I couldn't sleep on my left-side. It only disappeared once I turned to a raw, palaeolithic diet and cut raw dairy out of my diet. My rate of wound-healing (re cutting myself shaving or whatever) also sped up after I went rawpalaeo.

14491
General Discussion / Re: Digestion Times For RAF
« on: November 01, 2008, 07:22:58 pm »
I think that this is analogous to Wrangham.  We can accept the data of the python study without having to accept any of Wrangham's far-fetched conclusions.  It would be a career-killer for Stephen Secor, who has studied and published more about the digestion of pythons than anyone else, to publish research that could be so easily falsifiable by anyone else who is willing to do the experiment.  I do not claim that Wrangham set the conditions and that some junior scientist did the work.  As reported by Science and Health journalist Rachael Gorman, http://www.rachaelgorman.com/article_full.php?article_stamp=1202161241, Wrangham sought out Secor because he already had experience studying the evolutionary design of the digestive system.  Yes, the research found what Wrangham wanted it to find and he uses it to prop up his theories, but I don't think that that indicates the data to be erroneous any more than I think that the data actually supports his theory.  As I've said before, I find it very hard to believe that the snake data in isolation tells us anything meaningful about the human digestive tract.  I also don't think that this study tells us anything about the quality of the nutrition that the snake is absorbing.  It just tells us that the snake can absorb cooked food more quickly and with less energy than it can raw food.

Even if Wrangham wasn't remotely responsible for that python experiment(highly unlikely as stealing others' credit would be damaging), there is also the point that 1 lone study, such as this, is never accepted as likely by scientists unless there are at least a large number of other studies confirming the same result. This is partly because there are so many scientists like Wrangham, who start off with what seems like a nice theory, and then try to set up an experiment where they manipulate the facts to fit the theory, rather than what should happen which is to work out some facts and build a theory from them. The studies on the deleterious effects of heat on food may not be 100% comprehensive on all aspects, as food-science is such a new field, but the amount of data re the harm done to food by heat comes from so many different scientific papers on AGEs, HCAs etc. etc. that it can no longer be dismissed.

As regards the whole issue of AGEs in less-heated foods, claiming that they're only in small amounts is irrelevant as the amounts are still way, way above the microscopic amounts of AGEs in raw foods. Plus, there are also other toxins such as heterocyclic amines, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and nitrosamines. So, over a lifetime, it's inevitable that these build up over time, especially given the known tendency for the human body to store (and form) AGEs in itself. Here's a standard table showing 22 KUs of AGEs for boiled beef, yet only 0.05 KUs of AGEs for raw mother's milk:-

http://www.newcastleyoga.com.au/links/Food%20AGEs%20text.pdf


As you can see from the table, even boiling foods increases AGEs considerably by comparison to raw foods, so that boiling or lightly-cooking foods may be less worse than frying or baking foods, but it certainly still does harm, judging from this and other studies.

 *One important point:- fats are especially affected by heat, in terms of producing AGEs,  so this confirms Aajonus' point that the best food raw is the worst food cooked*
]

 Since the studies show that  amounts of AGEs and other toxins rise inexorably , on a linear level, as temperatures get ever higher, it becomes more and more difficult to argue that there is no change in the digestibility of foods once the content of foods starts getting changed(ie enzymes getting destroyed at 40 degrees celsius).

As for the issue of phytonutrients, it doesn't really matter whether cooking destroys the phytonutrients(deemed bad by SAD-dieters, and good by zero-carbers) as the process of cooking itself creates further toxins, thus negating any supposed benefits re removing antinutrients.





14492
General Discussion / Re: raw vegetarians/vegans - allies or enemies?
« on: November 01, 2008, 06:17:07 pm »
I see your point. But, while we are hardly going to convince the animal-rightists in the raw vegan movement, those who just turn to raw veganism for health reasons can be persuaded. And, while raw vegans do spout all sorts of rubbish about the dangers of meats, they find it more difficult to argue that nutritional deficiencies don't develop on their diets.

14493
Journals / Re: Squall's Journal
« on: November 01, 2008, 06:01:28 pm »
But what about fat consumption? Reduce it, increase it, keep it steady? I have no problem dealing with panicky feelings from eating fat. I've experienced enough to know that they are self-limiting. I just don't want to do anything that could possibly worsen any pre-existing condition.

Not sure, to be honest. At the nd of the day, all one can do is experiment to find what works for one as an individual. I personally find very large amounts of  fat not necessary(but only harmful if on zero-carb).

14494
Off Topic / Re: Celebrity Rawists
« on: November 01, 2008, 05:55:13 pm »
Demi Moore and Natalie Portman
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/the-raw-meat-diet-do-you-have-the-stomach-for-the-latest-celebrity-food-fad-493908.html

They're actually doing only raw vegan diets - the above article was a little misleading. Funnily enough, I've heard that Natalie Portman has given up veganism quite some time ago, as has Demi Moore , quite recently.

14495
Journals / Re: Yuri recovery
« on: November 01, 2008, 02:03:39 am »
Well, given that intolerance to cold is a classic symptom of hypothyroidism, it's best to use the  thyroid capsules you've received. Failing that, all I can suggest is a visit to a doctor.

14496
Welcoming Committee / Re: hey guys, just joined
« on: October 31, 2008, 09:56:00 pm »
Doesn't matter, either way. Aajonus recommends against freshwater fish, due to pollution, but if you get them from an unpolluted area, there's no issue.

Buy nonfrozen fish/shellfish, when possible.

I find whole fish very messy and with large fish, can usually only get the muscle-meat/fillet, anyway - so I often eat the raw seafood whole, if it's small like sardines/anchovies or prawns(minus the scales), but only eat fillet for larger things like swordfish.

14497
Welcoming Committee / Re: hey guys, just joined
« on: October 31, 2008, 09:07:26 pm »
Welcome!

Don't bother with sushi-grade fish, it's way too expensive, just go in for normal cuts, like all RPDers do, sooner or later. It's perfectly OK.

Read the child-boards on the top in the General Discussions Forum, as they give  a lot of information.

Re organs:- Easy ones to get used to= tongue, marrow(newbies generally prefer cutting off the stringy parts of the tongue but more experienced RAFers eat the whole tongue once they're used to it all). Liver's usually the most difficult organ to get used to, but there are plenty of people who love raw liver from the get go, and hate marrow or whatever. Everyone has unique tastes.

What I eat as a long-term RAFer(just a quick review, foods listed are eaten raw,  organic/grassfed/wildcaught or free-range/grassfed etc.):-

wild hare carcasses-plus organs/ leg of lamb/mutton plus lamb organs, venison organs, goose-/quail-/duck-/chicken-eggs, sea-urchin-eggs, swordfish, giant tiger prawns, lobster, crab,mussels, kingfish, shark, beef organs, free-range turkey breast-fillets(whole goose and whole turkey at Christmas), wild boar muscle-meats/organs, horse-muscle-meat, heather honeycomb, samphire, blueberries, cherries, raspberries, wild mallard duck and organs, limpets, goat muscle-meat.

Organs would usually include tongue, liver, kidney, heart, plus, in some of the above cases, brains(rarely), suet and marrow. Some items are only eaten by me  rarely or seasonally(eg:- eggs or sea-urchin-eggs)

14498
General Discussion / Re: raw vegetarians/vegans - allies or enemies?
« on: October 31, 2008, 08:49:37 pm »
Thanks, I'll post this on the rawpaleodiet yahoo group, once I've checked it through.

14499
 My understanding is that "lard" is heated fat, in other words, it's definitely not a RAF-diet food. Cooked fats are to be avoided even more so than cooked lean protein or cooked carbs. If you do want raw pig fat as opposed to cooked, get it from pastured pigs as most pigs, nowadays, are force-fed on 100% grain-diets which is not a good idea.

14500
Off Topic / Celebrity Rawists
« on: October 31, 2008, 08:34:08 pm »
There was a topic on celebrities doing RAF diets. It occurred to me to do a thread on real-life and fictional people eating raw animal foods.


In real-life:- Mel Gibson and Uma Thurman.

In Fiction:- Boss Hogg from the Dukes of Hazzard TV series. He's shown to eat raw liver, which is an old US dish. The idea in the show is to emphasise his villainy by showing him as a raw-meat-eater.

Pages: 1 ... 575 576 577 578 579 [580] 581 582 583 584 585 ... 612
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk