Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Whole grains in small measures are perfectly paleo.

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

  • Whole grains in small measures are perfectly paleo.

    Heya, I have a question, Our ancestors would have eaten any foods they could have scrounged up and one of them would have been wild grains like rice or whatever was available locally and added it into the mix. I am a paleo skills kinda guy foraging is a hobby so I have to ask why whole grains cooked as oatmeals or as part of a bird stuffing would not be acceptable as part of a paleo diet?

    I add roasted wild rice and Quinoa and sometimes whole Barley or whole oats to my soups and stews and chicken stuffing both as a thickener and for a wonderful flavour. This is paleo and it tastes good. I recognize that many modern grains are not what they were once but still.

    How wrong is this for my diet and my body?
    Primal since April 2012 Male 6' 3" SW 345lbs CW 240lbs GW 220lbs and when I get there I am getting a utlikilt. This one http://www.utilikilts.com/company/pr...ilts/workmans/ actually.

    Join me at www.paleoplanet.net, where all the cavemen hang out.

  • #2
    In my opinion, if you have no intolerances, allergies or symptoms by eating those and you are active and healthy then eat them; I went further and reintroduced pasta every once in a while.

    Comment


    • #3
      They are all perfectly fine, but if you are sensitive to gluten barley could be a problem. However, barley was not genetically modified like wheat was, so if you don't feel bad after consuming it, just enjoy it.

      It is not going be called 'paleo' or 'primal' (though Primal now allows for wild rice and quinoa) but one of the versions of any number of the whole foods approaches.

      Buckwheat and millet are other non-glutenous grains allowed on the whole foods.
      My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
      When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

      Comment


      • #4
        " I have to ask why whole grains cooked as oatmeals or as part of a bird stuffing would not be acceptable as part of a paleo diet?"

        Um, I'd suggest you read Primal Blueprint by Mark Sisson, or The Paleo Solution by Robb Wolf, they will lay forth the entire range of logical fallacies in your reasoning, in great and exhaustive detail. You may have heard of these two guys although your statement seems to indicate that you're not familiar with their work.... At any rate, I'd agree with others that it's not Paleo or Primal to eat grains, but if it works for you, more power to ya! Take care and good luck!

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Warmbear View Post
          I add roasted wild rice and Quinoa and sometimes whole Barley or whole oats to my soups and stews and chicken stuffing both as a thickener and for a wonderful flavour. This is paleo and it tastes good. I recognize that many modern grains are not what they were once but still.
          How is that paleo? If you really want to eat these things, go right ahead, but they're definitely not paleo.

          Comment


          • #6
            No, small amounts of grains are not paleo. Barring a few isolated tribes mashing up some cattails as far back as 20,000 years or so, paleolithic people just didn't eat grains...even in small amounts.

            Comment


            • #7
              I can't imagine a caveman (Grok, ancestral humanoid, whatever) eating grains. If you think about how they grow, it just doesn't seem like they would be milling stuff to make bread, or eating it raw (and I would imagine that no matter how "pure" the grain, it would not be digested well/cause discomfort). So if you want to eat it, go ahead, but as others said, it's not paleo.
              Depression Lies

              Comment


              • #8
                Well, somebody must have eaten some, otherwise how would they end up picking more from what grew up in the vicinity of their camp, fueled up by the stuff that came out on the 'other end' along with the non-digested seeds, then figuring out to cultivate it? Wild grass carried smaller seeds before cultivation, but when it is ripening it is perfectly chewabale and yummy. Have you never chewed on grains in the ripening wheat or barley or rye field? Soaking the harder ones in water is not beyond possibility either. Eventually we figured how to grind ripened grain that was not as given to spoilage as the raw one (based on the experience with dried berries). I bet they ground dried berries into paste before they ground grains.... They also ground bitter acorns into paste and ate it and even eventually braved mutated almonds most of which were outright posionous... why not far less scary grains?
                Last edited by Leida; 08-02-2012, 08:15 AM.
                My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
                When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Leida View Post
                  Have you never chewed on grains in the ripening wheat or barley or rye field?
                  No. Perhaps my feeling this way is largely to do with the environment in which I grew up, which was plenty of gardens and access to fresh eggs, but grains were not a focus until I was older, and by that time, they were all processed (American grocery store bread). I think many of the people around here would probably have had a similar experience. The way you describe it makes sense, but I think that modern grains are not worth the trouble unless obtained as you describe/less troublesome grains are used (there is a kind of wheat that is considered more ancestral available now, but I can't remember what it's called). Perhaps oats would not be so much of an issue.
                  Depression Lies

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    We can quibble about paleo or non paleo until the grass fed cows come home but, Warmbear, IIRC you are trying to shift some pounds? If so, grains are going to slow you down. They displace other more nutrient dense food options and skew your macros toward carbs.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                      We can quibble about paleo or non paleo until the grass fed cows come home but, Warmbear, IIRC you are trying to shift some pounds? If so, grains are going to slow you down. They displace other more nutrient dense food options and skew your macros toward carbs.
                      That.

                      I consider them empty calories. Quinoa is a seed, so that should be primal. But it's still got about 26 gms of carbs in a quarter cup (uncooked). If you're aiming at <100 gms of carbs in a day to aid satiety and weight loss, that's a big chunk of it for not much food and one that could make you feel hungry.
                      "Right is right, even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong, even if everyone is doing it." - St. Augustine

                      B*tch-lite

                      Who says back fat is a bad thing? Maybe on a hairy guy at the beach, but not on a crab.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        On the other hand, if they make you feel more sated, and happy, and your weight loss goes as planned, go for it, and you can find the label to call your diet later. In terms of satiety, I personally find that legumes are a better option than grains.

                        Whole grains as opposite to processed bakery goods are not hunger inducing per se, but nutrient game can make them either good to add or bad to add, and it all can change depending on the level of exertion.
                        My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
                        When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          In Loren Cordain's research he looked at what actual hunter-gatherers ate, those alive today and the archaeological records of those in the past and he found that very few cultures actually ate grains (oats, wheat, barley, rye, corn, rice) in any appreciable quantity. They were usually eaten under duress during times of famine. Also, he demonstrates that they are nutritionally poor for their calories compared to other foods, and that cultures that adopted grains as a major portion of their diet suffered shorter stature, greater infant mortality, tooth decay and shorter lives. I suppose if you've met all your nutritional requirements and simply need more calories, grains are a good way to go. In fact, were I planning to hike another one of the long trails, I would probably use grains as filler in my meals to help me get more calories. But on a day-to-day basis, I can't see any real reason to consume them regularly.
                          Female, 5'3", 50, Max squat: 202.5lbs. Max deadlift: 225 x 3.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Diamond has book sthat are more thorough and exhaustive than Cordaine. Grain is inferior as a food source for a hunter-gatherer, but it was the first junk food humanity discovered - it has the potential to be cheap and super-abundant. Just like it is today. However, there is a difference in grain-dominated diet of a malnourished person, and grain as a part of a varied diet. Anyway, self-experiment away These diets (paleo and primal), despite their catchy titles are not truly copies of paleolithic man food intake, and cannot be. They are an attempt to find the best food source in a modern world to help prosperous people deal with food super-availability to the fortunate few.
                            Last edited by Leida; 08-02-2012, 09:50 AM.
                            My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
                            When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Neither 'small game' nor tubers are more readily available than grain; geographically, likely not being even available. Small game, lol. Try slugs and worms and insects and predator's leavings, that's more likely daily fare than an antelope.... Look, humanity turned to grain for a reason... they needed to eat, not because they thought about screwing up their descendants thousands of years down the road.
                              My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
                              When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X