This is a guest post from Matt Garland of Healthy Lifestyle Design.
Do you have what it takes to unleash your inner Grok?
Everyone does. It’s inherent in our biology. And yet many don’t, not because of physical obstacles but mental ones. Such barriers manifest as false and misguided perceptions of Primal living’s complexity, difficulty, and restriction. Alas, these devilish traps inhibit many would-be Groks from realizing their full potential.
So, how do you evade these ensnarements and unleash your inner Grok?
You stop worrying about “how” you’ll live Primal and start thinking about “why” you should.
The “why” is essential. If you don’t know why you should adopt Primal living then you never will. How come? Because the “why” gives meaning to what you do. And when you have meaning you have the strength and resolve to succeed.
This simple 1-2-3-4 forumula will guide you to “why” Primal living is right for you. Have fun with it and get ready to unleash your inner Grok!
Who is Grok?
Or, more accurately – what does Grok represent?
He’s no messiah. He’s not a real historical figure. He doesn’t sit on my shoulder at night, whispering post topics into my ear as I sleep.
Grok is simply a starting point for the discussion of human health. His dietary habits, his physical behaviors, his proclivities, his sleep patterns are not technically “his,” because there is no literal him. Grok is just an artifact of our big brains’ propensity to arrange data. We process information by compartmentalizing it, by sticking bits of data together with other bits of data for efficiency’s sake. Mental file cabinets. This makes thinking easier, and it allows higher levels of thought and innovation. The Grok concept is an easy reference point – a figurehead. Everything we know about the course of human evolution, all the fossil records and anthropological literature, is effectively represented by the Grok name. A four letter name that just happens to be easy to remember and easy to type. And you have to admit, it’s a cool visual.
Let’s continue the discussion from last time. Again, I apologize for any meandering. This is a big topic, and I think it helps to leave no stone unturned.
Seasonal eating is currently pretty popular, perhaps even trendy in some circles. You’ve got the locavores, folks who only dine on meat and produce grown and harvested within a certain radius (generally fifty or 100 miles). They don’t necessarily set out to eat by the seasons, but that’s how it works out when you’re only eating local stuff. Others are committed seasonalists (yeah, I may have made that term up), specifically choosing foods that would only be available that time of year. There are even a small number of strict ancestral seasonalists, who only eat those foods which were seasonally available to their ancestors. A lot of Primal dieters fall into this category, and they generally do it for health.
A couple weeks ago in my post about health and vanity a good discussion got started in the comment board about the body composition of our hunter-gatherer ancestors. Was Grok lean and ripped or not? Let’s take a look at what we know.
It’s pretty well established that hunter-gatherers eating their traditional, whole-foods hunter-gatherer diet (whether Inuit, or Masai, or Pacific Islander, or whatever else) display little to no signs of the diseases of civilization. Infection, warfare, pestilence, starvation, and colonial incursion were occasional or even frequent sources of poor health outcomes, but for the most part they were well-nourished and free of degenerative diseases, even the long lived members. These guys weren’t dying for lack of statins or chemotherapy – let’s put it this way.
The Primal Blueprint, as our good readers know, is founded on the principle of evolutionary biology. This certainly applies to our view of what’s appropriate or not in terms of nutrition. In short, what our long time ancestors ate during the course of 2 million+ years, we’re still designed to eat. Even the last 200,000 years of hunting and gathering, from a physiological standpoint, trumps the comparatively short 10,000 or so years since the Agricultural Revolution, when humans commenced widespread farming practices and prepared grains as a significant part of their diet.
An article published in this month’s Science Magazine presents archeological evidence that, according to its author, challenges this accepted timeline. A number of readers have written me about this story. Here’s one letter among the bunch….
Please help me make some sense to this: Stone Age diet included processed grains
I’m a crossfitter in Colorado and most of the gym keeps a Grok diet and are confused about this article. Does this open the door to other minimally processed grains?
© 2013 Mark's Daily Apple | Design By The Blog Studio