Lex's Journal

[RawZi]

I spend very little time preparing my meals.  Once every 2 weeks I thaw enough ground meat and pet food to last 2 weeks or so and once mixed I repackage into single servings (one serving per day) in very cheap ZipLoc sandwich bags.  This whole process takes about 1 hour.  I then refreeze and pull out one package each day to thaw for my afternoon meal.  When it’s time to eat I add in extra fat depending on how I feel that day.  ...  It all depends on what I’m doing, and how much fat I’m craving.  If I’m working in the garden taking out overgrown plants with a pick and shovel, I’ll want far more fat than if I spend the day lying on the couch reading a book.  My daily meal prep takes about 10 min and then I spend about 20 min. eating.

Counting my initial prep time, daily prep time, and the time to eat the meals, I spend maybe a maximum of 35 - 40 min a day fussing with food.

    It sounds pretty quick and nutritious.  I'm tempted to follow suit.

[PaleoPhil]

Lex, I watched the Taubes lecture Youtube video again and noticed that at 1:13:55 he admitted that Edgar Gordon was "a little bit wrong today, but, trivially" about the quote he listed in his presentation:

"It may be stated categorically that the storage of fat, and therefore the production and maintenance of obesity, cannot take place unless glucose is being metabolized. Since glucose cannot be used by most tissues without the presence of insulin, it also may be stated categorically that obesity is impossible in the absence of adequate tissue concentrations of insulin.... Thus an abundant supply of carbohydrate food exerts a powerful influence in directing the stream of glucose metabolism into lipogenesis, whereas a relatively low carbohydrate intake tends to minimize the storage of fat."

So it looks like Gary's position basically hasn't changed, he has mainly explained a bit more about how Gordan was wrong. On the other hand, at 1:19:20 he said "Insulin levels in obese women are [solely] determined by the carbohydrate content of the diet, not total calories", inserting "solely" between "are" and "determined" in this quote of Kipnis, so he appears to have slightly contradicted himself here by using "solely". I think that this and other seemingly contradictory statements he has made have contributed to the confusion and controversy. I hope that some day in the future he tries to better clarify what he meant then and now and I wish him luck in it.

[Hanna]

Hi Lex,

But what about the hunters and gatherers in Africa? In Africa they have (and had) only lean meat at their disposal. If we take for granted that homo sapiens came from Africa and that our genetics has not changed much since then, we should (also) be adapted to a nutrition that does not provide much animal fat.

I found this about the bushmen´s diet: http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-3f.shtml#san%20bushmen
Obviously they eat many nuts (mongono nuts).

A distinguishing characteristic of the diet of the !Kung is the superabundance of the mongongo nut, which is a very high-fat food (at 80% fat), and which constitutes over 1/3 of their diet.

In the savannah, where our ancestors evolved, nuts can be found. Bushmen eat a high-fat diet, but get most of their calories from plants.

[Hannibal]

But what about the hunters and gatherers in Africa? In Africa they have (and had) only lean meat at their disposal.

That's not true.
There are also fatty animals in Africa - hippopotamus, elephant, rhinoceros, cape buffalo, etc.

[Hanna]

What´s your source, Hannibal? Why should these animals be fatty? AFAIK only animals living in a cold climate have a thick layer of fat.

[Hanna]

And doesn´t the existence of "rabbit starvation" show that we are NOT adapted to an all-meat diet? True carnivores won´t suffer from rabbit starvation when they eat only lean meat.

[Hannibal]

What´s your source, Hannibal? Why should these animals be fat?

They are fatty, or at least most of them.
Look at them, read about them.

AFAIK only animals living in a cold climate have a thick layer of fat.

No, that's not true.
It depends on the animal - caribou from North Canada is much more leaner than hippo from Central Africa.
On the same grazing there are goats which are very lean and sheep that are fatty, regardless of the climate.

[Hanna]

It depends on the animal - caribou from North Canada is much more leaner than hippo from Central Africa.

Hippos have much meat but not much fat!
Here is a German text about hippos showing this:

"Jedenfalls ist der Eiweißanteil (Muskelfleisch) gegenüber dem Fettanteil höher als bei anderen Säugetieren."

Translation: The proportion of protein (muscel meat) compared with the proportion of fat is higher than in other mammals.
http://www.world-of-animals.de/Tierlexikon/Tierart_Flusspferde.html

[Hannibal]

Hippos have much meat but not much fat!

Read this - http://www.whozoo.org/Intro98/herrick/sethherr.htm

[Hanna]

  Important is the PROPORTION of fat, compared with the PROPORTION of protein. The proportion of fat is low in hippos, according to the link I posted.

[Hannibal]

Important is the PROPORTION of fat, compared with the PROPORTION of protein. The proportion of fat is low in hippos, according to the link I posted.

Ok, I understand.
But it isn't compulsory to eat all the protein, is it?
You can give it to dogs.

[lex_rooker]

Lex, what are you including in your assumption that 40-50% calories as fat might be fine in the way of rough proportions of proteins and/or carbs (recognizing that you aren't claiming one specific ideal ratio)?

I’m including exactly what was in the statement I made, no more, no less.

As for Taubes lecture, it is a lecture and doesn’t impact my life in any way.  People are allowed to believe and say what they wish.  This is true for Taubes, for me, and for you as well.  This doesn’t mean that any of our beliefs are correct.  You are free to test the correctness of any statement made by any person just as I tested my understanding of Taubes’ original statement and found it wanting.  I have no need to pursue the subject any further.

But what about the hunters and gatherers in Africa? In Africa they have (and had) only lean meat at their disposal. If we take for granted that homo sapiens came from Africa and that our genetics has not changed much since then, we should (also) be adapted to a nutrition that does not provide much animal fat.

You may take anything you wish for granted.  That is up to you.  There is no doubt that we are able accommodate a wide range of fat content in our food.  Animal fat varies by the season and our dietary needs must be met by the average low levels or our species would have died out long ago. 

In the savannah, where our ancestors evolved, nuts can be found. Bushmen eat a high-fat diet, but get most of their calories from plants.

If you wish to eat nuts then eat nuts, and if you wish to get most of your calories from plants then by all means do so.  It is your life and you get to do whatever you wish.  Have a ball.

And doesn´t the existence of "rabbit starvation" show that we are NOT adapted to an all-meat diet? True carnivores won´t suffer from rabbit starvation when they eat only lean meat.

It is clear that you have no idea what you are talking and about.  Those of us that have carnivores as pets (dogs and cats come to mind), know that if we feed our animals too lean a diet they will become ill just as humans do. 

Your choice to believe that only animals living in cold weather have significant fat also shows that you have very little grasp of reality.  Look around you.  Humans are animals and some of the most obese cultures live in tropical climates.  Other animal species are equally as variable as related to fat and climate.

Important is the PROPORTION of fat, compared with the PROPORTION of protein.

Please tell us what is important about it.  As far as I know, as long as our minimum need for dietary fat is being met, the actual proportion of fat to lean is immaterial.  Do you have a peer reviewed study that indicates otherwise?

I know of no instance of protein poisoning from eating the meat of any large grass eating game from any continent.  However, if you choose to believe this to be a problem, then by all means stop eating the meat of all those African animals that you feel are too lean.  As for me, I’m very fortunate in that I order my meat from Slankers in Texas.  They have wisely chosen to zealously defend their customer’s health by not offering excessively lean meat from African animals.

I feel this whole discussion of how lean animals are (or aren’t) is rather pointless.  Humans, just as all other animals, can accept a rather wide range of maco nutrient ratios within their normal food source. These ratios vary significantly, from animal to animal, and season to season.  If we couldn’t accommodate these variations then we would have died out as a species long ago.

Lex

[PaleoPhil]

I have no need to pursue the subject any further.

That's fine, thanks again for your time.

[lex_rooker]

That's fine, thanks again for your time.

Please don't go away mad Phil.  It's just that I have no control over what others do or say.  In the case of Taubes, I've tested the theory in question and found to my own satisfaction that his theory (as I understood it) was incorrect.  If he chooses to continue championing it, that's up to him.  Any time spent agonizing over it is nonproductive and takes away time and energy that I can put to better use in other areas of my life.  Stuff like this can become an energy sink that feeds on itself to the point of becoming all consuming if you let it.

Eating properly is important to me for practical, not philosophical or academic reasons.  I want to eat well so that I have the health and energy to do the things I want to do.  I have little interest in debating aspects of diet and lifestyle that have no impact on making my life better. I could care less about how fat is metabolized at the cellular level, but I do care if eating a fat based diet improves my health in a measurable way so that I can more actively pursue my other interests.

Yes, I do tests and experiments, but they are based on testing the practical implementation of promising theories or ideas into my day-to-day life to see if the expected improvement or goal can be realized.  For me to be interested in it, the results must be measurable.   I have little interest in debating theories that can’t be tested or have little or no practical value in daily life.  Knowing if I will gain weight if I over eat on a fat based diet is useful to me and I can measure it.  Trying to figure out how my body metabolizes fat at the cellular level does not improve my daily life, nor do I have a way to monitor or measure the process, so for me, debating an issue like this is totally unproductive.

The same goes for debating the relative leanness of animals on the African Savannah (or elsewhere for that matter).  It is a total waste of time.  We know that if we don’t get enough fat that we will become ill.  We also know that to cure the illness we must either increase our fat intake or add carbs to our diet.  Spending time trying to determine the precise level of fat intake required to avoid protein poisoning is not very useful since in the real world we have no way to measure fat content without some rather sophisticated technology which is usually not available under the conditions where rabbit starvation would likely occur.  Also, the symptoms are easy to recognize and easy to cure – which from a practical day-to-day living standpoint is all I need to know.

My journal is about how I live my life, the decisions I’ve made, how and why I made them, and the practical results I’ve achieved – both good and bad.  I offer my experiences in an effort to help others avoid the mistakes I’ve made or leverage some good result I’ve achieved without having to reinvent the wheel.

Lex

[PaleoPhil]

Please don't go away mad Phil.

I wasn't mad and I understood your reasons the first time. I'm a simple man. I generally mean by my words the simplest and most benign possible meaning. I meant literally what I wrote. I know you want to focus on practical stuff and don't want your journal to get too far off track, so I try to honor that.

[Alan]

Lex,

do you have any inclination to voluntarily eat less food, to try to lose the 10 lbs that you re-gained up as your body became EXTREMELY efficient at handling a high-fat diet?

I am currently trying to cut back on the amount of protein I ingest, because I did experience the same phenomenon.

I have zero experience with the Slacker's products.   But my experience with my butcher's "fat" trimmings is, they contain a very high (compared to what a non-veterinary-anatomist might have naively expected) content of connective tissue. Which is protein.

Anyone who thinks that they can receive a pure-fat product from any working butcher without having paid for a VERY LARGE AMOUNT of tedious hand-labor, doesn't have both feet on the ground.

[lex_rooker]

do you have any inclination to voluntarily eat less food, to try to lose the 10 lbs that you re-gained up as your body became EXTREMELY efficient at handling a high-fat diet?

I’ve done this several times.  It is not difficult, (at least for me), as my relatively high fat intake is very satisfying, even when I reduce the fat content of my meals to reduce calories.

For me it is the overall calorie content of the meals that drives my weight up, not the protein content.  In my case, this is controlled by the amount of fat I add at each meal.  I’m eating 2,500 calories per day.  If I drop that down to 1,800 I’ll lose the 10 lbs in a few weeks.

I have zero experience with the Slacker's products.   But my experience with my butcher's "fat" trimmings is, they contain a very high (compared to what a non-veterinary-anatomist might have naively expected) content of connective tissue. Which is protein.

Slankers products are probably the same as your butcher – especially if you order ‘fat trimmings’ or ‘beef fat’.  Since trimmings come from around the muscles and between the skin and body, there is a lot of connective tissue associated with it.  I order Suet which is fat from the internal cavity that cushions the kidneys and other organs.  This fat tends to come in large chunks with relatively little connective tissue as compared to trimmings.  When rendered, trimmings can yield as low as 60% pure fat and sometimes even less, the rest being connective tissue and water.  I’ve had Suet yield as high as 85% fat.  Since I render over 100 lbs of fat at a time, my numbers are fairly accurate.

Anyone who thinks that they can receive a pure-fat product from any working butcher without having paid for a VERY LARGE AMOUNT of tedious hand-labor, doesn't have both feet on the ground.

As I stated above I use mostly suet as there is more fat and less connective tissue, but when I eat the fat raw (rather than rendering it) I actually like the connective tissue.  It gives me something to chew on.  Connective tissue in cooked meat used to make me gag.  Not so with raw.  Over the last few years I’ve come to prefer some connective tissue in my meat and that is another advantage of adding the pet food to my mix. In addition to it’s organ meat content, it has more connective tissue in it than plain ground muscle meat. It gives my teeth and jaw some work to do.

Lex

[Alan]

What I had been getting was gigantic packages of the very stuff (all his trimmings) you describe.  My attempts to convince the butcher to charge me 300%-400% more in order to get the selection I wanted were turned down several times.

I'm not yet retired and I live in a military Quarters.  The totality of the situation has convinced me to stop buying the beef trimmings and to substitute clarified butter.

For the past few weeks, I've been eating approximately 1 lb of el-cheapo (raw) ground beef, heavily slathered with clarified butter; once per day in the evening.

I get mine from a Mexican bodega here in San Diego.  I imagine it's the same stuff that is sold in Walmart as 73-27.   What bothers me is that I'm starting to think that there actually is not that amount of fat in there. I think they are counting anything that started as a beef trimming, as "fat".   The connective tissue is as white as fat; without a jeweler's loupe I don't think I could tell the difference between the two....  and so far, I haven't worked up the motivation to do THAT.

I apologize to the community for such character weakness.....

[lex_rooker]

I get mine from a Mexican bodega here in San Diego.

Alan,
San Diego is not all that far from where I live.  Maybe 2 - 2 1/2 hours.  Come on up and I'll give you several chunks of suet and if you'd like some rendered fat (I consider it a better choice than clarified butter), I have a couple of hundered pounds so could probably spare a couple of months worth for you without a problem.

Infinitenexus and his lovely wife were just here last Saturday and I think they found the trip worth while.  He is in the military as well and drove down for the day from Fort Ord. We spent the day talking, eating jerky, and making pemmican.

Lex

[Hanna]

Quote from: Hanna on Yesterday at 02:07:06 AM
And doesn´t the existence of "rabbit starvation" show that we are NOT adapted to an all-meat diet? True carnivores won´t suffer from rabbit starvation when they eat only lean meat.

It is clear that you have no idea what you are talking and about.  Those of us that have carnivores as pets (dogs and cats come to mind), know that if we feed our animals too lean a diet they will become ill just as humans do.

I referred to wild carnivores eating other wild animals in nature. Lions, for example, certainly eat lean meat in nature, but don´t starve because of that.

Your choice to believe that only animals living in cold weather have significant fat also shows that you have very little grasp of reality.  Look around you.  Humans are animals and some of the most obese cultures live in tropical climates.  Other animal species are equally as variable as related to fat and climate.

I referred to WILD animals, because hunters usually hunt native wild animals and not cows. These "obese cultures" in the tropics certainly eat neolithic food. Do you know any hunter-gatherer culture that is obese?

Quote from: Hanna on Yesterday at 06:12:06 AM
Important is the PROPORTION of fat, compared with the PROPORTION of protein.

Please tell us what is important about it.  As far as I know, as long as our minimum need for dietary fat is being met, the actual proportion of fat to lean is immaterial.

You wrote:

"...still feel that we should eat a wide variety of animal parts rather in the proportions that they exist in the animal."

If you eat in this way, you won´t meet your minimum need of fat when eating/hunting lean animals. Wild animals are usually lean, except some animals living in a cold climate.

[Alan]

what modern hunter-gatherers do, and what their health situation is, is irrelevant, as their societies don't accurately reflect life in the paleolithic with its quasi-infinite resources of fat herbivore animals. 

Agriculturalists have pushed these modern hg's  into exceptionally marginalized circumstances.

[Alan]

Lex, thank you for the gracious and generous offer.   Guys who live in housing on a base can accept such offers.  I live in a ship's stateroom; my mini-bar type refrigerator can't even  hold a gallon container of milk.

For the next few years,  my sustenance philosophy will be heavily dependent upon Dr KGH's  "panu" teaching that 90% of the required effort is satisified by NOT eating items known to be slow-acting poisons.

I do eat my beef raw, for practical/logistical reasons.  It does work for me and I don't plan to change that.

Having noted that,  I don't yet feel convinced that cooking is harmful.... what is your reading of the evidences?

[Hannibal]

I referred to wild carnivores eating other wild animals in nature. Lions, for example, certainly eat lean meat in nature, but don´t starve because of that.  

Lions are the cats and cats...

The cat also needs proportionally more protein in its diet compared to other mammals - one reason is that certain liver enzymes that break down proteins are always functional (they are turned "on" and "off" in other animals) and so cats use some energy from protein just to fuel this process. Other mammals use most of their protein for growth and body maintenance. While an adult dog's protein requirement will drop to about one third of its requirements as a growing puppy, the kitten only needs about one-and-a-half times the protein of an adult cat because the adult level is still relatively high.
(...)
All animals have a metabolic requirement for glucose. Carnivores, such as the cat, convert glucogenic amino acids and glycerol to glucose for the maintenance of blood glucose, and therefore, have no established dietary requirement for carbohydrates.
Because cats have adapted to diets high in protein and low in carbohydrate, continuous activity of amino acid catabolic enzymes provides a continuous source of carbon skeletons for glucose or energy production and nitrogen for synthesis of dispensable amino acids and other nitrogenous compounds. This continuous metabolic state causes the cat to catabolize a substantial amount of protein after each meal, regardless of its protein content.
(...)
In the cat's liver, gluconeogenic amino acids in the diet are deaminated and converted to glucose for the maintenance of blood glucose levels. The cat has evolved to maintain normal blood glucose levels and health on a carbohydrate-free diet, a capacity inherited from her desert-dwelling ancestors. This ability is related to its different pattern of gluconeogenesis. In most animals, maximal gluconeogenesis for the maintenance of blood glucose levels occurs during the postabsorptive state, when dietary soluble carbohydrate is no longer available. However, carnivorous species, such as the cat, are similar to ruminant species in that they maintain a constant state of gluconeogenesis - the immediate use of gluconeogenic amino acids for the maintenance of blood glucose levels (these mechanisms are turned "on" and "off" in other animals).

http://maxshouse.com/feline_nutrition.htm

[lex_rooker]

Lex, thank you for the gracious and generous offer.   Guys who live in housing on a base can accept such offers.  I live in a ship's stateroom; my mini-bar type refrigerator can't even  hold a gallon container of milk.

I’m somewhat familiar with conditions on a ship.  My son just retired after 20 years in the Navy.  This is why I offered some rendered fat.  No refrigeration is required, and it doesn’t take much space.  If you would like 15 or 20 lbs you are welcome to come on up and pick it up.  15 lbs takes up the space of a cube that is 9”x9”x9”.

Having noted that,  I don't yet feel convinced that cooking is harmful.... what is your reading of the evidences?

I generally think that raw is better, and choose that when available.  But I live in the modern world and therefore take advantage of the convenience of things like occasionally eating in restaurants, or choosing to render my fat to make storage more convenient.  For me it is a matter of scale.  Many eat a steady diet of Big Mac’s, French fries, soft drinks, pizza, candy bars, cakes, and cookies, and I for one consider cooked meat and rendered fat to be health foods by comparison. 

Lex

 

[Nicole_German]

Hey Lex,
I just wanted to express my thanks to you for all the tipps you were giving me when I first started out the ZC adventure. But what I want to thank you most for is the post a couple pages before where you expressed why you don't wprry about any scientific things that do nothing for you in everyday life! This reminded me why I actually love ZC so much now: I have never felt better in my life, stable enrgy throughout the day, calm and focused mind, sound sleep. During the past couple months I was trying to reintroduce veggies and especially greens becuase I did get concerned about calcium etc. and all teh people telling me that I need the stufffor the vitamins. Yet wheneve I ate veggies my nose woud clogg uo and my tummy bloat and the pains were not nice.
So basically I wanted to thank you for expressing your thought and opinions in that journal! Thanks for reminding me that when I feel really good all the time (like on ZC) then I should probably simply go on doing what I do and stop obsessing over details...
Nicole