Author Topic: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables  (Read 41117 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #75 on: January 24, 2011, 07:57:38 am »
Not according to the Hadza research, where there was apparently some seasonality to at least the berries they favored, whereas the tubers were apparently plentiful year-round, as Hannah pointed out. Did you miss the posts on it? Do you have other research which contradicts it? I'm open to whatever the facts are. So far I'm only seeing opinion coming from you on this.
This was discussed a great while back on the Paleofood list, and it was pointed out that tubers were mostly not useful when raw, whether in terms of antinutrient-levels or general palatability. A generous 1 percent was once suggested as a suitable percentage of tubers which were edible raw, without any issues, as I vaguely recall.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #76 on: January 24, 2011, 09:24:12 am »
This was discussed a great while back on the Paleofood list, and it was pointed out that tubers were mostly not useful when raw, whether in terms of antinutrient-levels or general palatability.
I also pointed out before in this forum that recent scientific research has claimed that tubers that are edible raw were consumed for millions of years, going back to at least the Australopithecines and that chimps still consume raw tubers today (see where I discussed it here http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/general-discussion/raw-complex-carb-options/msg56943/#msg56943 and the original article here "Early Humans Skipped Fruit, Went For Nuts," http://news.discovery.com/human/human-ancestor-diet-nuts.html and see also Paul Jaminet, PhD on tubers at http://www.foodrenegade.com/for-the-love-of-tubers). There doesn't appear to be a lot of research on this, though, so it will be interesting to see whether other scientists confirm or contradict this.

Quote
A generous 1 percent was once suggested as a suitable percentage of tubers which were edible raw, without any issues, as I vaguely recall.
Could you share the study? I haven't come across that one and would like to see it.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline Iguana

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #77 on: January 24, 2011, 04:13:00 pm »
Is that supposed to somehow negate the experience of GS' family that he reported? Are you claiming that your and GCB's children's experience holds for all?

Isn’t my answer below sound? I may be wrong, but I always thought that tooth decay results from a deficiency in minerals and probably also in micronutrients, as is induced by refined food such as white sugar, white flour and polished rice. This seems to be the conclusion of Weston Price, but cooking is probably also a factor.

It’s hard to correlate tooth decay with a specific food, because it’s not a disease happening overnight. It may have been due to previous nutrition or to other foods (What kind of rice was she consuming? Polished or whole rice? What else had she been commonly eating?). Even when we get a flu, we are usually never sure which food caused it and even whether it’s due to a food eaten shortly before or pehaps long ago.

I strongly suspect my own tooth decay (which mostly happen before I was 18) was due to white sugar (sucrose) and white flour, but I think it was rather a combination of both and other diet factors which all together generated appalling deficiencies.

Tooth decay is the result of a long, slowly evolving process. Foods such as dates, sugar cane, honey or sweet fruits can cause toothaches, but only if the dental enamel is already damaged and formerly unnoticed caries are already present.

This was discussed a great while back on the Paleofood list, and it was pointed out that tubers were mostly not useful when raw, whether in terms of antinutrient-levels or general palatability. A generous 1 percent was once suggested as a suitable percentage of tubers which were edible raw, without any issues, as I vaguely recall.

Are these percentile  figured in calories, in weight or in volume? Anyway they are invalid in my view as it t varies largely with time and with each individual. I can eat much more than 1% of sweet potatoes. Yakon is even more palatable and delicious. I even ate some raw manioc (which is considered toxic raw) without any problem. Some atypical people can even eat raw regular potatoes!


Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #78 on: January 24, 2011, 04:48:06 pm »
The point was made that tubers usually need to be processed quite heavily in order to get rid of (some of)the antinutrients in them. So they are often pretty useless even when raw. Some tubers are even dangerous - cassava, a main staple of some Africans' diets contains a cyanide compound which kills if it isn't fully processed. Also, Wrangham focused on tubers re his cooking claims because he realised that they often needed to be cooked in order to be really useful for human consumption.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Iguana

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,049
  • Gender: Male
  • Eating tuna fish
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #79 on: January 24, 2011, 05:04:53 pm »
Yeah, that's the point of view of guys and scientists eating cooked food. They also think that meat is not edible raw or that cooking makes it more tender and digestible! They've never tried to eat neither raw meat nor raw sweet potatoes.

So, we have definitely derailed this thread. Shouldn't we split it?

Cheers
François
Cause and effect are distant in time and space in complex systems, while at the same time there’s a tendency to look for causes near the events sought to be explained. Time delays in feedback in systems result in the condition where the long-run response of a system to an action is often different from its short-run response. — Ronald J. Ziegler

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #80 on: January 25, 2011, 08:08:07 am »
Quote
"A generous 1 percent was once suggested as a suitable percentage of tubers which were edible raw, without any issues, as I vaguely recall."

I'd still be interested to see the source of that 1% figure. I checked Paleofood and didn't find anything on it.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #81 on: January 25, 2011, 09:33:18 am »
I'd still be interested to see the source of that 1% figure. I checked Paleofood and didn't find anything on it.
It was mentioned ages ago on that list. I can't remember when it was posted. It could have been merely a hypothetical figure, given as an example.


The basic point is that tubers often need to be specially prepared in order to be edible(ie cooked etc.) And even those which are cooked can lead easily to malnutrition due to being very nutrient-poor in themselves. Tuber-rich diets in Africa have been sometimes mentioned as contributing to malnutrition.


"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #82 on: January 25, 2011, 10:27:58 am »
The basic point is that tubers often need to be specially prepared in order to be edible(ie cooked etc.)
Not those which are edible raw.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline Hanna

  • Shaman
  • *****
  • Posts: 424
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #83 on: January 25, 2011, 04:53:09 pm »
AFAIK a much higher proportion of the starch can be digested if the starchy food has been cooked before.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2011, 06:11:16 pm by Hanna »

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #84 on: January 25, 2011, 05:18:50 pm »
Not those which are edible raw.
Some are edible raw, but still contain antinutrients. Plus, tubers have now been farmed/bred for millenia so are unlikely to be the same as their wild counterparts I would imagine,having lower levels of nutrients in palaeo times .

The point made elsewhere is that diets very rich in tubers, such as found in Africa(60 percent of diet  is cited in some cases), are thought to contribute heavily to malnutrition,so tubers are not ideal.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #85 on: January 26, 2011, 06:09:10 am »
Some are edible raw, but still contain antinutrients.
Yet according to recent research, raw tubers were nonetheless a staple part of the hominin diet going back at least as far as Australopithecines:

Early Humans Skipped Fruit, Went for Nuts
Tooth analysis reveals our human ancestors preferred root vegetables, nuts and insects in their diets.
http://news.discovery.com/human/human-ancestor-diet-nuts.html

Combine this with the observational studies of modern hunter gatherers who never fail to eat tubers as a staple food when they are available and the fact that chimps have been observed digging up tubers and eating them (raw of course) and the case seems rather strong that raw tubers and other underground storage organs were a staple in the hominin diet going back millions of years. There are exceptions, of course, such as the Arctic peoples who did not have access to lots of USOs. It's interesting, however that the Inuit tended to eat caribou stomach contents and cherish the liver of seals and fish. Was this their effective substitute for underground storage organs (albeit at a much smaller intake) and could their love of these foods be due in part to a biological adaptation to the consumption of certain starchy foods (USOs and nuts)?

Quote
Plus, tubers have now been farmed/bred for millenia so are unlikely to be the same as their wild counterparts I would imagine,having lower levels of nutrients in palaeo times .
Sure, but check out Stephan Guyenet's multiple posts on tubers, including on the guy who did an all-potato-diet experiment (I think it was for a month). I think you'll find the information there rather surprising. Stephan predicted the outcome. When a scientific hypothesis enables predictions it is demonstrated to at least be practically useful, if not perfectly theoretically conclusive.

Quote
The point made elsewhere is that diets very rich in tubers, such as found in Africa(60 percent of diet  is cited in some cases), are thought to contribute heavily to malnutrition,so tubers are not ideal.
Show me the evidence, not the "thought," please.

I do think you have a point re: cooked tubers, which I think are a substandard modern substitute for the raw tubers of the past, but the accumulating evidence suggests that raw tubers, roots, corms and bulbs may have played a larger role in ancient diets than Dr. Cordain and Ray Audette originally believed. The recent research and the example of modern hunter gatherers suggests that starchy foods historically provided more calories in ancient diets than fruits. If you have any counter evidence I'd be interested to see it, and it will be interesting to see what future research might reveal on this topic.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 06:18:40 am by PaleoPhil »
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #86 on: January 26, 2011, 07:27:32 am »
Hmm, I once read about a former rock-star, ages ago in a daily telegraph magazine article, who claimed that he nearly died from deficiencies after eating only raw potatoes for a set period (c.1 month?)and nothing else.


As for that study, I wouldn't take it too seriously. After all, there was that series of studies which tried to claim for years that Neanderthals were 90-100 percent carnivores only for subsequent studies to debunk this notion, due to better scientific techniques for examining bones etc. The palaeolithic era is still very poorly understood.

Well, obviously, "Arctic tribes in general" are hardly an "exception", indeed they kind of prove that adaptation to tubers was by no means a given among humanity. Also, the claim re the Inuit eating the stomach-contents(ie fermented plant matter) being considered a substitute for tuber-consumption isn't appropriate as the plant-matter is after all fermented/pre-digested. Besides, I don't think it's been proven that the Inuit HAD to eat raw plant foods, as such.


Also, tubers don't seem too reliable as a dietary staple, given past history, re the Irish potato famine and similiar other crises involving tubers.

http://blogs.alternet.org/wilspencer/2010/02/27/grains-nuts-seeds-and-tubers/

*I seem to have missed that other link re tubers and malnutrition. But there is evidence that even processed cassava can cause the protein-deficiency disease, "kwashiorkor" and even iodine-deficiency :-
http://www.answers.com/topic/cassava

As for cooked tubers, since cooking does greatly increase the availability of starch-content, it produces more calories and the antinutrient levels are heavily reduced. So, while some vegetables can still be eaten raw in moderation, tubers should always be cooked(or preferably avoided altogether in favour of better foods entirely).
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #87 on: January 26, 2011, 08:06:20 am »
Hmm, I once read about a former rock-star, ages ago in a daily telegraph magazine article, who claimed that he nearly died from deficiencies after eating only raw potatoes for a set period (c.1 month?)and nothing else.
I searched for anything on that but couldn't find it. I did find an article from that same periodical on the potato diet guy. He did it for two months:

Washington man completes 60-day potato challenge
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/washington-man-completes-60-day-potato-challenge/story-e6freuyi-1225963611024

That man's experiment doesn't prove anything, but it does raise questions about just how toxic potatoes are if someone can eat little else for 60 days and end up better off by all appearances rather than worse off. Of course, the benefits he experienced could possibly be attributable to replacing worse foods like wheat with the less-"bad"-but-not-necessarily-"good" potatoes, but it is intriguing.

It will be interesting to see what future experiments and research produce. I have seen many cooked Paleo dieters experimenting with cooked tubers lately, with some experiencing negative results and others positive. I think it's somewhat of a fad that Paleos have gotten carried away with at this point, but there could theoretically be a kernel of truth behind it if raw tubers and other raw USOs were consumed in significant quantities by hominins. It is a heck of a coincidence that every HG tribe I've read about that had access to edible tubers was observed eating them as a staple food. It puzzled me that Dr. Cordain didn't address this in The Paleo Diet (or maybe I missed it), though he did later suggest sweet potatoes for athletes in The Paleo Diet for Athletes.

Quote
As for that study, I wouldn't take it too seriously.
I do take my personal experience more seriously than the research. On that note, while cooked tubers do tend to make a heavy lump in my stomach and make me feel logy if I eat too much, and I can't eat even a single daikon root without getting a little stomach upset, raw parsnips don't seem to bother me. It's possible that there's just too little starch to cause any symptoms, especially since I tend to eat less of a raw starch than a cooked one, but it is mildly intriguing.

Plus, I don't have any particular reason to believe your vaguely remembered account on the rock star more than the reports on Australopithecines and the potato diet guy. I'm open minded on the subject. Raw tubers and roots definitely aren't my best food, but I'd like to be able to add a little more variety to my diet, in part to keep my interest and weight up and as a side benefit to calm the concerns of some friends and relatives that I might be restricting my diet too much. Raw USOs might be one such option for me. The preliminary results with raw parsnips are pretty encouraging.

I'm curious about what raw tubers the Australopithecines ate, but so far I haven't seen any article specify any of the tuber species that were consumed.

Quote
The palaeolithic era is still very poorly understood.
Yes, that goes without saying.

Quote
Well, obviously, "Arctic tribes in general" are hardly an "exception", indeed they kind of prove that adaptation to tubers was by no means a given among humanity.
Interesting opinion. If you believe that then do you also believe that omnivory was by no means a given among humanity, since USOs, fruits and nuts were of minor importance in the Arctic and even today the Coastal "Chukchi" reportedly subsist almost completely on walrus and whale during the winter months? I agree that tubers and USOs and plant carbs in general are not a necessity, especially given that liver and eggs contain some animal starch, but that also doesn't necessarily mean that starches couldn't have played a larger role than fruits in the overall average diets of Stone Age and pre-Stone Age hominins, as the above research and observations of modern HGs seems to suggest. Even though the Hadza preferred berries, they ended up getting more of their calories on an overall annual basis from tubers than from berries. So, even though their taste/senses told them to eat berries, what they actually ended up eating more of was tubers.

Another thing to bear in mind is that drying and soaking would have been possible prior to the adoption of cooking.

Quote
Also, the claim re the Inuit eating the stomach-contents(ie fermented plant matter) being considered a substitute for tuber-consumption isn't appropriate as the plant-matter is after all fermented/pre-digested. Besides, I don't think it's been proven that the Inuit HAD to eat raw plant foods, as such.
I don't think they had to either. The scientists who reported the evidence on Australopithecine consumption of USOs didn't claim that they HAD to eat them, just that they did. So that's a digression that I'm not intrigued by.

Quote
Also, tubers don't seem too reliable as a dietary staple, given past history, re the Irish potato famine and similiar other crises involving tubers.
That's a red herring because that was a single domesticated variety that the population had become overreliant on and the famine was triggered by a blight on the potatoes, not from malnutrition from eating the tubers. Have you ever heard of any such widespread blight happening to wild tubers that are edible raw and thus qualify as raw Paleo? The reason such catastrophic blights happen is apparently because 1) the natural antinutrient defenses in domesticated plant foods are reduced to such an extent that they become highly susceptible to infection and overpredation and 2) the over-reliance on a single species of plant further increases the odds of a widespread catastrophic blight.

Plus, the potatoes in Ireland were not the same species as the raw Paleo tubers consumed by Australopithecines in ancient Africa. So that's doubly a red herring.

Quote
*I seem to have missed that other link re tubers and malnutrition. But there is evidence that even processed cassava can cause the protein-deficiency disease, "kwashiorkor" and even iodine-deficiency :-
http://www.answers.com/topic/cassava
Cassava is another tuber that was not one of the raw Paleo tubers consumed by Australopithecines in ancient Africa.

Quote
As for cooked tubers, since cooking does greatly increase the availability of starch-content, it produces more calories and the antinutrient levels are heavily reduced. So, while some vegetables can still be eaten raw in moderation, tubers should always be cooked(or preferably avoided altogether in favour of better foods entirely).
Presumably cooking would not be necessary on the raw Paleo tubers that the Australopithecines ate before cooking was invented.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 08:25:10 am by PaleoPhil »
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #88 on: January 26, 2011, 06:03:52 pm »
I searched for anything on that but couldn't find it. I did find an article from that same periodical on the potato diet guy. He did it for two months:

Washington man completes 60-day potato challenge
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/washington-man-completes-60-day-potato-challenge/story-e6freuyi-1225963611024

That man's experiment doesn't prove anything, but it does raise questions about just how toxic potatoes are if someone can eat little else for 60 days and end up better off by all appearances rather than worse off. Of course, the benefits he experienced could possibly be attributable to replacing worse foods like wheat with the less-"bad"-but-not-necessarily-"good" potatoes, but it is intriguing.

It will be interesting to see what future experiments and research produce. I have seen many cooked Paleo dieters experimenting with cooked tubers lately, with some experiencing negative results and others positive. I think it's somewhat of a fad that Paleos have gotten carried away with at this point, but there could theoretically be a kernel of truth behind it if raw tubers and other raw USOs were consumed in significant quantities by hominins. It is a heck of a coincidence that every HG tribe I've read about that had access to edible tubers was observed eating them as a staple food. It puzzled me that Dr. Cordain didn't address this in The Paleo Diet (or maybe I missed it), though he did later suggest sweet potatoes for athletes in The Paleo Diet for Athletes.
Cordain pointed out that plant foods actually consisted of, at most, 25 percent of calories of HG diets near the equator - so tubers were hardly a staple, even of those tribes that ate them. Plus, I am deeply sceptical of the notion that all non-arctic tribes ate more than minimal amounts of tubers, let alone lots of tubers.

As for that comment re the raw potatoes experiment of the artist, it was mentioned in the Daily Telegraph magazine in an interview of a pop-star, and magazine articles don't seem to get reported online, last I checked. What makes it interesting is that that man's diet consisted of RAW potatoes, whereas the other guy you mention ate cooked potatoes(he mentions the use of cooking-oil). Now, the whole point of my argument was that RAW tubers were not ideal foods, givne their antinutrient-levels. Cooked/processed tubers provide a lot more nutrition than raw tubers but still have their defects, such as heat-created toxins derived from cooking plus lack of bacteria and lack of enzymes.

Quote
I do take my personal experience more seriously than the research. On that note, while cooked tubers do tend to make a heavy lump in my stomach and make me feel logy if I eat too much, and I can't eat even a single daikon root without getting a little stomach upset, raw parsnips don't seem to bother me. It's possible that there's just too little starch to cause any symptoms, especially since I tend to eat less of a raw starch than a cooked one, but it is mildly intriguing.
I think, like with raw vegetables, only a few tubers are worth eating raw, albeit in small amounts, due to concerns about antinutrient-levels.
Quote
Interesting opinion. If you believe that then do you also believe that omnivory was by no means a given among humanity,

No, I am not convinced that all HGs in non-arctic areas ate huge amounts of raw tubers. At best, I think tuber-consumption may have increased after cooking was invented.
Quote
Another thing to bear in mind is that drying and soaking would have been possible prior to the adoption of cooking.
Drying and soaking is not as effective as cooking for removing antinutrients.
Quote
I don't think they had to either. The scientists who reported the evidence on Australopithecine consumption of USOs didn't claim that they HAD to eat them, just that they did. So that's a digression that I'm not intrigued by.
It seems reasonable to assume that tubers were eaten in order to avoid starvation during times of famine, rather than being a preferred food, given taste-issues and lack of nutrients by comparison to other foods.
Quote
That's a red herring because that was a single domesticated variety that the population had become overreliant on and the famine was triggered by a blight on the potatoes, not from malnutrition from eating the tubers. Have you ever heard of any such widespread blight happening to wild tubers that are edible raw and thus qualify as raw Paleo? The reason such catastrophic blights happen is apparently because 1) the natural antinutrient defenses in domesticated plant foods are reduced to such an extent that they become highly susceptible to infection and overpredation and 2) the over-reliance on a single species of plant further increases the odds of a widespread catastrophic blight.

Blight does seem to occur in wild varieties, however they are more resistant usually than domesticated varieties.

The claim that antinutrient levels are heavily reduced by cultivation does not apply, though. it was mentioned, for example, that for various reasons farmers often want to cultivate cassava tubers with higher levels of antinutrients in them - while the reason therefore was not mentioned,I suspect this has to do with the fact that the higher the levels of antinutrients, the more resistant the plants are to insect infestation or parasites. So, useful for those farmers not using lots of expensive pesticides/chemicals.
As for number 2), the same would apply to any palaeo HG tribe which fixated on only one type of plant.
Quote
Plus, the potatoes in Ireland were not the same species as the raw Paleo tubers consumed by Australopithecines in ancient Africa. So that's doubly a red herring.
Irrelevant that they were not the same species as that does not imply full immunity to blight.
Quote
Cassava is another tuber that was not one of the raw Paleo tubers consumed by Australopithecines in ancient Africa.
They could have been consuming other tubers which were just as bad, for all we know, but heavily processed them.

What is revealing is that  HG tribes consuming lots of tubers seemed not to thrive on them. Well, I can think of the Maori, as a classic example, with their fixation on tubers. The problem seems to be the poor levels of protein in tubers, compared to other foods.
Quote
Presumably cooking would not be necessary on the raw Paleo tubers that the Australopithecines ate before cooking was invented.
Good point. Although, like I said, Australopithecines may have resorted to tubers during times of famine, mainly as a last resort. Also, I have a sneaking suspicion that the main reason why cooking was eventually invented was in order to greatly lower the high levels of antinutrients in raw tubers, and some raw vegetables. Indeed, it is quite possible that they only cooked tubers/veg and ate anything else raw, for a while.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Hanna

  • Shaman
  • *****
  • Posts: 424
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #89 on: January 26, 2011, 10:12:00 pm »
Quote
Cordain pointed out that plant foods actually consisted of, at most, 25 percent of calories of HG diets near the equator - so tubers were hardly a staple, even of those tribes that ate them.

This does certainly not apply to the Hadzas (I don´t know about the other HGs):

Quote
Plant foods—roots, berries, and fruit—were also abundant for those who knew where to look and constituted about 80 percent of the Hadza diet.

http://books.google.de/books?id=Ug0oo_l5YbsC&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=Hadzas+diet&source=bl&ots=-HSbD7531f&sig=10TI__6dC24mZL4Y3VmxQO-ANAU&hl=de&ei=QipATfWmIoWcOsvB-c4I&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CFwQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

Quote
During the wet season, the diet is composed mostly of honey, some fruit, tubers, and occasional meat. The contribution of meat to the diet increases in the dry season, when game become concentrated around sources of water. (...) The Hadza ... adjust their diet according to season and circumstance. Depending on local availability, some groups might rely more heavily on tubers, others on berries, others on meat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadza_people#Subsistence


See table 4:
http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP07601616.pdf
See figure 2 and figure 3:
http://www.anthro.fsu.edu/people/faculty/marlowe_pubs/Tubers%20as%20Fallback%20Foods%20and%20Impact%20on%20Hadza%20AJPA.pdf

Quote
Even though the Hadza preferred berries, they ended up getting more of their calories on an overall annual basis from tubers than from berries.

According to your link, they ate more berries.

Offline TylerDurden

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,016
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Raw Paleolithic Diet
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #90 on: January 27, 2011, 02:21:25 am »
This does certainly not apply to the Hadzas (I don´t know about the other HGs):

http://www.anthro.fsu.edu/people/faculty/marlowe_pubs/Tubers%20as%20Fallback%20Foods%20and%20Impact%20on%20Hadza%20AJPA.pdf

  The last link you just gave rather debunks several points made in favour of tubers. To quote from the above text:-

1st page:-

"We showed the Hadza photos of these foods and asked them to rank them in order of preference. Honey was ranked the highest. Tubers, as expected from their low caloric value, were ranked lowest."

and "Tubers fit the definition of fallback foods because they are the most continuously available but least preferred foods. Tubers are more often taken when berries are least available."

and from page 3:-

"For both women (n 5 49) and men (n 5 45) the most preferred food was honey (mean rank 5 4.07) and the least preferred food was tubers (mean rank 5 2.10). Baobab was ranked third by women and men. There were sex differences on the other two foods: women ranked berries second and meat fourth, while men ranked meat second and berries fourth. In addition, though both sexes ranked honey first, men did so significantly more often (Mann–Whitney U 5 753, P 5 0.003, n 5 94). Women ranked berries significantly higher than men did (U 5 679.5, P 5 0.001, n 5 94) (see Fig. 1). It appears that men prefer men’s foods a bit more than women do and women prefer women’s foods a bit more than men do (Berbesque and Marlowe, submitted for publication).

So, in other words, tubers were looked down on by the Hadzas as being the most inferior foods re taste etc., with them only being eaten because they were available all year round, and often primarily eaten only when other better foods were not available. Hardly a sign that tubers are a healthy part of a palaeo diet, more a way to reduce the possibility of starvation.
"During the last campaign I knew what was happening. You know, they mocked me for my foreign policy and they laughed at my monetary policy. No more. No more.
" Ron Paul.

Offline Techydude

  • Shaman
  • *****
  • Posts: 449
  • The barefoot raw paleo nudist intactivist naturale
    • View Profile
    • Genital integrity through regenerative medicine
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #91 on: February 03, 2011, 04:53:41 am »
I firmly believe as humans we use our instincts of what we should eat and listen to our body when eating with what agrees/disagrees with us. Humans adaptability shant be underestimated. If all that's around us is domesticated beef and vegetables and we're doing fine, then I don't see a problem. I'd love to have some wild animals or vegetables but hey if I can't get to em i'll adapt and make do.

Offline KD

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,930
    • View Profile
Re: Non-mutant fruits and vegetables
« Reply #92 on: February 03, 2011, 10:53:41 am »
I firmly believe as humans we use our instincts of what we should eat and listen to our body when eating with what agrees/disagrees with us. Humans adaptability shant be underestimated. If all that's around us is domesticated beef and vegetables and we're doing fine, then I don't see a problem. I'd love to have some wild animals or vegetables but hey if I can't get to em i'll adapt and make do.

To me the whole point of 'diets' is to make sure one eats enough of the healthy foods for their requirements + beyond to help expel modern wastes from the environment and internal build up. Whether one sees it or not, believing otherwise is ultimately to pick and choose what practices are healthy amongst all the known humanoids that have been studied...as multiple conflicting strategies have been shown to keep healthy people relatively healthy. Just because we believe we have the best evidence, its still just one piece of an ongoing discussion on health.

People might be able to accomplish this eating 100% grainfed beef and/or bananas and nothing else. who knows. The issue is that one cannot eat whatever fruits vegetables and meats and assume since they are NOT doing other stuff that their diet is automatically healthy and/or healing. This is the trap. It may be that some people can get by eating any quantity of modern fruits and neglecting certain foods or dietary protocols/ratios etc.. necessary for such healing, but the studies and accounts of most long term raw foodists show this is often not the case and that these diets can create problems that wouldn't exist even on SWD or even the most deficient cooked low fat veg-diets. There are plenty of apparent symptoms on top of outright degenerative failure associated with such things which are easy to see. Often the mindsets themselves are poisonous and destructive, as it sets up a situation where the things possibly required are so out of the periphery of what is believed.

People can be on various cooked and/or neolithic permutations of 'paleo' and traditional diets that avoid such foods or excess can do much better than such philosophies that see eating without specificity to such needs of modern people. Because the foods themselves (mainly fruits) interact poorly in the bloodstream of modern humans, it is irrelevant at that point what foods people ate in the past in comparison to what diets are shown to avoid such problems or correct others more efficiently...or at all. Interestingly enough as pointed out many times, all traditional peoples consume starches and vegetation even when ripe fruits are available. Had these same people been given the option of supermarket fruits, would they eat them?...and then to their detriment? who knows.

If people were truly healthy to begin with, perhaps they could eat whatever modern fruits etc...without running into too many degenerative problems, but most people don't have that luxury. Fundamentally you are right tho, one can't stress about the things one doesn't have, only make the most intelligent decisions on what the body really needs. One doesn't have to dwell on a moment to moment basis, just not have too many concepts of what is harmful or healthful that neglect obvious results.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2011, 12:32:01 pm by KD »

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk