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 - dariorpl

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 41
751
General Discussion / Re: Does anyone eat raw chicken legs?
« on: October 29, 2015, 05:41:50 am »
thanks for the info. I thought frozen chicken may reduce the chance of parasites infection, am I right?

Yes, you are right. Although I'm not aware of any parasites that effectively transfer from chicken to humans. And in any case, I'm not afraid of parasites. Parasites are good, our bodies evolved/were designed to function symbiotically with them. But even if this wasn't the case, and even if there were dangerous parasites in chicken and other meats, I think you give up too much in nutrition by freezing them, to be worth eliminating parasites (and not all parasites are eliminated through freezing)

Regarding parasites, consider this: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-08-24/lifestyle/sns-rt-us-usa-health-parasitesbre87n0uw-20120824_1_rheumatoid-arthritis-pig-whipworm-autoimmune-disease-drugs

752
General Discussion / Re: Does anyone eat raw chicken legs?
« on: October 29, 2015, 05:39:16 am »
My dog loves the bone too, but I don't crush it and I don't eat it myself. How do you crush the bone??

I use my teeth. Whatever is too tough to crush finely with my teeth (mainly the middle parts of the leg, thigh and wing bones), I don't eat. But I suppose you could apply this same rule to use other means to crush it. In any case, the main reason to do this is to get to the marrow inside.

Does anyone else eat bone meal for comment? Just seems like a food that passes through me identifiably does not have nutrition value??

Bone meal is cooked.

753
Primal Diet / Re: AV diet
« on: October 29, 2015, 05:33:35 am »
TylerDurden almost detoxed his TEETH before he gave up on raw dairy.

Where can I read more about this?

754
General Discussion / Re: Does anyone eat raw chicken legs?
« on: October 28, 2015, 02:35:40 pm »
Legs are the best muscle part of the chicken. The skin, cartilage, spongy bone and marrow are also wonderful. But even if you only want the lean muscle, the leg and thigh are by far the best. I only eat chicken breast for health benefits (eating the whole animal is better, as sabertooth says), but I don't enjoy them. They're too bland. The legs and thighs and wings, I could eat all day.

I also don't eat frozen meats.

755
Primal Diet / Re: AV diet
« on: October 28, 2015, 03:37:22 am »
Most of the other recipes include raw dairy in them and often including raw nuts and raw coconut cream and sometimes even raw honey. AV wanted to get as many people into his diet as possible and knew damn well that raw meats were more difficult to get used to than other raw foods. I agree that he did once claim in his books that raw meats were more  useful for rebuilding the body's health than raw eggs but he rarely liked to admit such.

Here's a few quotes that took me 5 minutes to find:

Quote
Prior to the importation of German cooking cauldrons, Eskimos ate their meat raw. The Eskimo-diet was 99% animal products (fish, Caribou, seal, moose, bear, whale, etc.). Eskimos lived free of degenerative diseases. Based on my experiences, eating raw food was the primary factor that enabled them to stay strong, energetic, and happy, and to live without disease under strenuous climatic conditions. (recipe book, p14)

Quote
For some people, eating raw meat is nearly impossible unless it has a familiar flavor. Therefore, most of the recipes I present in this book are to increase peoples’ appetite for raw meat. (recipe book, p26)

Quote
I suggest that we do not drink so much milk that we cancel our appetite for meat and other foods. (recipe book, p36)

Quote
Even though I have hundreds of [meat] sauce-recipes, usually I eat meats plain. When I spice meats, usually it is a time when I am repulsed by or bored with plain meats. If I do not eat meats daily, after a day or two I do not feel or function as well. Sauces help me eat meats at those times. (recipe book, p62)

756
Primal Diet / Re: AV diet
« on: October 27, 2015, 08:30:26 pm »
Wondering if it's worth the effort to get my hands on raw dairy in Canada x.x. I'd really like to gain some healthy fat on my body.

Yes, totally worth it. Once you start having dairy, your diet will seem incomplete without it. It also promotes heavy detoxes and helps to manage them, which is why many people here don't like it. They start having dairy, have a detox and think it's some lactose intolerance or allergy or something, and quit.

757
Primal Diet / Re: AV diet
« on: October 27, 2015, 08:01:21 pm »
From the recipe book, general diet, daily intake: (p39)

Quote

* 1-3 pounds (3-9 cups) of raw meat (red meat, and/or seafood, and/or fowl).
* 8-24 ounces of raw fat (unsalted butter, cream, coconut cream juiced from coconut, meat, eggs, unsalted cheese, coconut, avocado, oils pressed under 96F)
* 8-12 ounces raw milk.
* 4-6 ounces only of raw fruit with equal amounts of raw fat.
* 2-6 cups of raw green vegetable juices.

The recipes and sauces for meat are mainly for making it taste better, not for improved health. He's always said that meat is digested better alone or with another raw fat. In fact the main reason to add another raw fat to meats is so that you don't use up all your meat for energy and have no nutrients leftover for healing and rebuilding. Most people don't like to consume huge amounts of meat alone and AV was sensitive to that, but he never thought of it as a problem, much the opposite in fact, generally the more raw meat you can eat, the better, especially if it's high.

758
Primal Diet / Re: AV diet
« on: October 27, 2015, 01:03:27 pm »
AV promoted a very artificial modern diet which appealed to people who did not want to eat raw meats to any real extent. So raw, dairy, raw veggie-juice, raw coconut cream, raw honey and raw, ground nuts were promoted endlessly as THE main components of the Primal Diet solely because they were easiest, re taste, for former cooked-foodists to try out, and, needless to say, many people suffered thereby from nutritional imbalances etc.

This is completely wrong. The primal diet has always been primarily a meat-based diet; with dairy, eggs, honey, vegetable juices, coconut cream, fruits, nuts and seeds and oils only as supplements to the meat. AV has always said that plenty of people stayed healthy by being entirely carnivorous. The other foods help deal with less than optimal health, by promoting detoxes and by helping to manage the detoxes.

759
In fact if these worms were so prevalent in raw meat, and their infection so pernicious then you would expect everyone of the veterans here to be infested, but this is not the case, so as a group of many people who have eaten raw meat for extended periods, without such issues, we place the burden of proof on anyone who claims that eating raw meat poses a greater risk of parasite infection.

This.

Although I do agree with AV that parasites are always helpful.

And I know you'll disagree, but I'm sure there are people right now working on discovering a simple way to poison people in such a way that the body requires massive parasites on a raw diet, and then they will try to poison us in this way, so that they can say, here, you see? raw meat eaters get all of these horrible parasites. In addition to this, they will probably start manufacturing stories of supposed raw meat eaters who got horrible parasite infections and died or almost died.  This forum is probably already infiltrated by some of these people, so I fully expect those stories to come up here as well.

But the fact will remain that up until this point, what you said has been the case, so even if it changes in the future, they'll still have to explain why it hasn't happened up 'til now. And I'm sure they'll come up with some explanation. They'll say meats today didn't have as many parasites as meats in the future, or whatever.

760
I was not aware of the weston price study you cited. I'll look into it.

I'm not sure what your point is when you say it balances out. Cancer kills people, but you wouldn't say that it's all good that we have a cancer epidemic because after all, it balances birth rates and deaths so that there's less overpopulation (which I don't even believe, but let's just say that that's an issue). If homosexuality is a disease, and it benefits those of the same sex who don't have it, we still shouldn't say homosexuality is good. Of course it may benefit me in my seeking of a female partner that there are males who are struck with a disease that makes them unable to pursue women, because it means there's less competition for me. But it's still not a good thing for a society, and not something we should be encouraging. Also, it may be a benefit for me as a man that there are other men who are gay, but it's a detriment for women, because now they have less options.

761
I don't think Plato won that argument, IOW, social behaviors can be learned, not just inherited. People take their role in society for various reasons, but it doesn't make sense to oversimplify the process and look for genetic evidence only.

Right, so I don't look at genetic evidence. What I was saying is that it can't be genetics. While genetics may play a role of course, they would not be a determining factor. Something else must be causing the epidemic of homosexuality we see in this day and age. In the same way that your genes can determine your likelihood of developing a particular form of cancer, but only in the presence of the toxins that exist in the modern world, and in the lack of proper nutrition necessary to eliminate those toxins adequately.

762
I view homosexuality as a necessary aspect of mammalian evolution, in that it also allows the existence of hyper-male womanisers. In other words, if homosexuals did not exist, neither would alpha-male types who cheat on women all the time.

The problem with this is that if there is such a thing as a homosexual gene, then that gene would not get passed on, or it would not get passed on nearly as much as the other genes. So this doesn't explain that behavior. Unless you're saying that homosexuality is just a pretend game that some men play so that they're trusted to be around with the women, and then can have sex with them when the other men are not around. I could buy into that, and I'm sure some of that definitely exists even to this day. But then we have to redefine the whole thing, and expose homosexuality as the sham it would be.

I'll take the more moderate approach, and assume that when men say they're gay, that they really mean it and believe it themselves, and would never sleep with a woman under any circumstances. From that perspective, I believe homosexuality is a disease. It might be psychological. It might be cultural. It might be caused by pollution, toxic chemicals and vaccines, or lack of proper nutrition. There might be a lot of explanations for it. But at the end of the day, if a lifeform can't reproduce, it's not fully functional. It doesn't mean they can't be good people, but all this dancing around the issue and pretending that homosexuality is the best thing since sliced bread, and actually encouraging people to become homosexuals, is a huge problem in modern western societies. If someone had a disease that made them unable to have children, we wouldn't say they're bad people, but we would recognize that they were unfortunately victims of a disease. Some diseases can be cured, others can be treated. But pretending that there's nothing wrong with them and that their disease is actually a blessing, creates a lot of problems for a society, in my view.

763
Raw Weston Price / Re: Green Pastures FCLO could be sham
« on: August 26, 2015, 08:27:13 pm »
I agree that clay is food.  I haven't eaten it much, but I use it topically for skin.  Is there a good brand? 

AV swore by terramin clay, because it doesn't come from volcanic activity (and so doesn't have many toxic metals), and because it's sun-dried (and so isn't heated to the point where most of it's uses are gone). If I was going to try one, it'd be that one. It's really expensive tho. Especially if you use it copiously for baths as well as eating, as he recommends. In any case, I remain unconvinced. AV says plants eat rock, we don't eat rock, and then says go eat clay. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but I don't know. I do know that herbivores in the wild will eat it to neutralize poisons in the leafy greens and other vegetation they eat. So I'm not opposed to it, and I can see how it could make sense in our toxic environment.

I haven't tried it because it's pretty much impossible to get it where I live, since all imports are basically illegal. I have to find the right guy who will get it for me for bribes, it'd cost like 3 times what it already costs which is really high, and I'm never sure I'll get it. Also I'm worried about them doing all kinds of radioactive scans during shipping to make sure there's no weapons or anything inside. And they may refuse to let it through even with bribes if they don't know what it is and it could be drugs.

Vitamin C does indeed kill viruses.  And yes, the body can fight off viruses.  But what about something like ebola?  And also, what about the fact that most plants and animals can synthesize vitamin c themselves.  Only a few mammals have lost that evolutionary advantage, and we happen to be among them.  So I tend to think that might be one where supplements might come in handy.  Rosehips are really high in vit c, so it's not like commercial pills are the only choice.  Might be important for more carnivorous eaters.  They often say other predators don't need plants, but those other predators also synthesize it themselves, unlike us.

As per AV's views, I don't believe viruses are a problem. They're not alive, and he believed that our body actually creates them at will in order to detoxify something that cannot be detoxified in any other way. And so if vitamin C destroys them, it's impairing a cleansing process of the body and only making us more unhealthy. Also, I don't think vitamin C supplementation has anything to do with the vitamin C in a natural plant food. And there's been studies that show that people who eat more meat require less vitamin C. I would guess that's only more so for those of us who eat meat in it's natural form.

765
Raw Weston Price / Re: Green Pastures FCLO could be sham
« on: August 25, 2015, 07:31:53 pm »
I, as well as several other people here, have has good results with certain supplements, like vitamin D and various mineral supplements like bone meal, Terramin clay, P5P, and others.

Clay is not a supplement, it's a substance found in it's original form and not something minimally present in a natural substance and then extracted through heat and solvents, like the others.

Maybe the beneficial results you attribute to supplements was just the toxicity from them stopping your body from being able to detoxify.

I used to take a lot of vitamin C supplements, and it would all but stop me from having the very lasting colds and flus I was used to. However, those colds and flus were a way for my body to get rid of toxins. So now, after taking it for 7 years, and only having stopped for the last 8 months, I have a lot of catchup to do. I not only have all the toxins that I wasn't able to eliminate through regular colds and flus, but I also have to deal with the toxicity from the vitamin C itself, plus the stuff it came with in it's various forms (talc, sodium bicarbonate, sugar, and several others.

766
Raw Weston Price / Re: Green Pastures FCLO could be sham
« on: August 25, 2015, 12:43:10 am »
Anyone selling actual healthy raw supplements would be instantly put out of business by lawsuits and regulatory compliance type schemes where they just close down their business and confiscate all their products.

767
The pH of stomach acid is in the same range as the pH of lemon juice, so I don't see what you would gain by using lemon juice. Stomach acid is specifically designed to digest raw meat, whereas lemon on meat is a modern culinary invention. Why settle for less than the best, as nature intended?

For people with a weak digestive system, I think it can be beneficial. It predigests the meat and allows bacteria and molds to go to work on it right away. If we all lived as nature intended, it would likely not be necessary. But in this day and age, many people may be too damaged to fully absorb all the nutrients even in fresh raw meat. So whatever can aid in digestion may be a benefit.

But maybe you're right, and it's only detrimental. I know I personally do better when I take the time to marinate it than when I eat it alone. But that might be because when have it marinated, I also add plenty of raw eggs, which I usually don't do if it's not marinated. As the marinated meat absorbs the slimyness of the egg white more easily without becoming sticky and slimy itself. This part is purely a preference, as my problem with raw eggs is the slimyness of the white.

When I mix even a large number of raw eggs with marinated ground beef, it turns the whole concoction into some sort of cereal with milk, it's quite tasty. If I use less eggs, I can barely tell the eggs are there as far as texture, but the taste improves because of the fat in the yolk.

I need the fats from the organic free-range eggs because I can't get grassfed beef, so I need to have only the lean muscle meat, as the fats, organs and bone marrow -which are otherwise the most nutritious parts- contain all the stored toxins. But if I eat lean meats alone with no fats, I think my body has a bit of trouble dealing with all the proteins and with no fats. The same happens when I eat lean wild fish alone. I try to mix it with avocados otherwise (just goes better than with eggs, I think)

I had some raw organic pork ribs recently that were very fatty, and they were delicious and my body loved them without any marination. The same happens when I have raw organic free-range chicken, which is also fatty, particularly because I also have all of the bone marrow along with the skin and meat and I even eat some parts of the bones. But when I tried to have the raw fat from conventional feedlot finished beef, it was disgusting. Mainly due to the texture.

I still have unmarinated raw beef every now and then, when I can't be bothered to grind and marinate it. Usually if I have to eat at someone else's place. I wouldn't say it's a problem. But lately, a while after every meat meal, I feel euphoric and peaceful at the same time. That doesn't happen if I have only lean meats with no fats. And I'm more likely to feel a bit sluggish and annoyed instead, if only for a little while.

768
Yep, that's pretty much what I'd say.  The lemon juice idea is a good one.  May have to implement that

I posted one of my recipes here

http://www.rawpaleodietforum.com/welcoming-commitee/anyone-eats-raw-meat-in-secret-to-their-family/msg130167/#msg130167

769
If you do not want to eat the cooked outside surface, why cook it at all in the first place?

There is this belief that the surface of meat is contaminated by dangerous bacteria, but that the inside is sterile and/or safe. This is the reason why so many people are paranoid about a rare burger, but may think a rare steak is ok. (because in the burger, some of what used to be on the surface is now inside, and will remain uncooked or undercooked with all of the so-called dangerous bacteria)

770
Another thing you can do is use lemon juice to brown it, or brown the outside. It'll predigest the proteins in the same way your stomach acid does. It'll look cooked, but you won't miss out on any of the benefits, and in fact it's even easier to digest since it's predigested and it'll require less production of acid in your stomach.

I often do this for ground beef and fish, and it has the added benefit of making it last longer in the fridge without developing a strong flavor.

771
Oh man you're just killing me. I would love to have access to that quality of meats.

Don't cook it. Just don't. You'll ruin it. I was having blue rare steaks for 2.5 years with no benefits whatsoever, until I started eating them entirely raw.

Eat a little bit at at a time if you feel weird about it. The taste and texture totally grows on you and suddenly it becomes the only thing that makes any sense.

And I personally wouldn't freeze it, either.

772
Health / Re: Bras are not paleo. Tips for modest bra less clothing.
« on: August 22, 2015, 06:31:49 am »
The temperature in the workplace should be set to accomodate the men, not the women. Men have larger bodies and more muscle mass, which produces more heat. Furthermore, men are expected to wear cumbersome business suits and other clothing that are really only ideal for cold conditions in most places, whereas women have much more leeway as far as what type of attire they choose to wear.

The problem is that many women want to be dressed like street prostitutes at work, and then they complain when the temperature is too cold on their exposed cleavage, arms, legs, thighs and feet. And due to their skin tight, super thin yoga pants and other similar types of clothing. They don't wanna put more clothes on, so they expect others to adjust to their preferences.

Because of their body composition, most women should be wearing more clothes than men, not less. But because both men and women put an emphasis on a woman's ability to be attractive to men at the workplace, this otherwise natural tendency is distorted.

Getting back to the topic of the thread, if women wore longer, looser and thicker clothes, bras wouldn't be necessary.

773
Hot Topics / Re: Parasites really are severely underestimated.
« on: August 14, 2015, 08:45:35 pm »
First time eating raw pork. And it was delicious. Hope I don't get trichinosis! ;)

The fat was particularly tasty. Which was a pleasant surprise.

I never was a huge fan of cooked pork.

774
Science / Re: Humans did indeed wipe out megafauna like mammoths
« on: August 14, 2015, 07:48:10 pm »
Well it's still "living in harmony with nature" to hunt one species to extinction so that another can flourish.

But in any case, I'm skeptical of these claims. I think it's much more likely that the end of the ice age was what wiped out the wooly mamoth. Notice how elephants were not hunted to extinction in Africa and Asia.

Have you thought about how ridiculously hard it must have been to hunt an adult wooly mammoth with nothing but primitive spears and rocks? Those things were massive beasts. The slightest touch would kill a human on impact, and driving a spear through such thick fur, skin and muscles in order to get to the organs inside must've been next to impossible. Even if you had modern spears, it would be pretty hard. And with those primitive spears they would've had then, I just don't see it happening all that often. I realize those humans were much healthier, quicker, stronger and resilient than today's humans. But still.

One way I can see to hunt such a massive beast with the tools available at the time, would be to set up a pit-trap and then fool the wooly mammoth into walking over it. But even digging such a massive pit-trap with the tools available at the time must've been quite a feat. Let alone the actually finding a wooly mammoth that just happened to be nearby, and then convincing it to run straight over it somehow.

I suppose another way might be to get it to run around to exhaustion (either being chased around, or making it chase the human hunters, or both), the way the San people of the Kalahari Desert do with some animals there, such as kudus. But elephants are much more resilient over long distances, and I assume wooly mammoths must've been as well. So I'm not sure it would be the mammoth that would get exhausted first. I haven't heard of african tribes hunting elephants or rhinos in this way. And of course, africans are much better long-distance runners than europeans, so there's that as well.

And then another way would be to use poison, if they could find it in the wild. But it would take a tremendous amount of poison to hunt such a large animal. The poison could combine well with the exhaustion hunt.

In order to eat mammoths, more likely than all that, would be to wait for them to die from natural causes, and then find and eat the carcass. High meat :)

775
If I never shaved or cut my hair, I would be forced to live in a cold, wet place like Tierra del Fuego or whatever. I could not stand a hot climate with a beard etc.

I started growing it during the end of the summer here, but it didn't get large until the fall, so I guess I'll have to wait and see if I can make it through the hot summer with a full beard. I'll report on it.

Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 41
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk