Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If today's (typical) bread diet is so bad, why are we living longer?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • If today's (typical) bread diet is so bad, why are we living longer?

    Hi all.

    I am a long time Primal eater (14 years). I no longer need to take blood pressure medication (after taking it for 12 years). The list of benefits for me go on and on. Not to mention it just makes sense...!

    But I can never answer this question when I'm asked (by friends/colleagues to whom I am preaching...):

    With modern food-related (insulin-related) diseases being so much more prevalent than previous decades and centuries, why does our average age continue to increase each generation?

    Why did Grok live less long?

    -Derek

  • #2
    Medicine

    Comment


    • #3
      lol

      also wanted to add that grok lived to a ripe old age and most likely died in his sleep after a day of normal life instead of a year in a death bed.

      Comment


      • #4
        Well, I would guess that the absence of saber toothed tigers, woolly mammoths, tetanus, polio, measles, tuberculosis, neonatal deaths reduced, increased shelter, antibiotics, treatment for cancers, heart disease medications, lower childbirth mortality all have just a teeny impact on the average age of death.

        Just because we are living longer does not mean we are living healthier. In addition, the generation of adults who are reaching the age of seniority had diets that were pre-low fat craze in their formative years. This generation has a lower anticipated lifespan than the one before it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Check out Marks post from yesterday. Compression of Morbidity: Vitality to the End | Mark's Daily Apple

          Comment


          • #6
            And it is not increasing any longer. Life expectancy is decreasing now.

            Medicine

            Why did grok live less long? It's in the book and the blog but to summarize
            Medicine
            - infant mortality was huge until just a few generations ago. Grok lived as long....if he didnt die young.
            -accidents. Go chase down a buffalo who is being stalked by a lion everyday and see how long you live. Oh, and you arent allowed to go to the doctor if you get a broken bone with a gaping flesh wound in the process. No antibotics.

            If you take away all the Groks who's lifespan was 'artificially' shortened by lack of medical care and the dangers of primal living there is no reason to believe that grok wouldnt have lived well into his later years.
            MTA: because it is rare I dont have more to say

            "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - my daughter Age 7

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Unicorn View Post
              Just because we are living longer does not mean we are living healthier. In addition, the generation of adults who are reaching the age of seniority had diets that were pre-low fat craze in their formative years. This generation has a lower anticipated lifespan than the one before it.
              This. I have been thinking about this a lot recently, and think it is a crucial point. Even though the current seniors probably ate plenty of grains, I believe that perhaps their consumption of traditional foods and dietary fat may had a sort of protective impact (not to mention a much lower consumption of processed foods).
              Everything in moderation, including moderation.

              Comment


              • #8
                Yep. Accidents and infectious disease claimed a lot of people. You typically see spikes of deaths from illness in children and from accidents, infected wounds and childbirth in younger adults. People who made it through that, though, had a very good chance of living to a vital old age without the signs of decline that we see in our elderly population.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thank you all for the replies (so quickly!!)

                  I had considered qualifying my question a little more but decided to just put it up there and see what discussions ensued.

                  For instance, things like getting taken out by a predator, disease, infant death, etc. were, to me, a given. Better meds now, obviously. And the whole discussion of quality of life versus quantity -- of course.

                  I think the question was directed more toward those who managed to escape the predator's jaws their whole life, and managed to avoid disease etc. I was under the impression that even those folks still lived fewer years than we now do.

                  Following these posts however, I may have been wrong in that assumption. From some of what I'm reading, those primal ancestors (who escaped the perils of my last paragraph) actually lived as long as we now do.

                  Is there evidence of that?

                  -Derek

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Derek, how did you discover Primal 14 years ago? I assume it was called something else then.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Well, the first chapter in Mark's book has a lot of info on this. Check it out at a library ^-^ The endnote on the age expectancy of primal man (94 btw) mentions Dr. Jared Diamond's studies, and he has over 100 papers on the subject. You could look up some of his stuff.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        To aktres: Yes, what I meant was I discovered eating this way. I found Drs. Eades' first book, Protein Power.
                        Last edited by derekg1959; 03-31-2011, 12:48 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thanks greatdanelover. Very helpful. I will.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I am no scientist but I also believe that the prevalence of animal fats in the SAD prior to the rise of King Corn in the latter half of the 20th century ameliorated the effects of grain in the diet. In many ways the entire food supply chain was different not to mention how much more physical labor was done.
                            Wheat is the new tobacco. Spread the word.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              We're not living longer.
                              Just dying slower.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X