Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Thinking like a caveman, is it even possible?

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

  • #61
    Choco's description of how paleo folks got protein and fat isn't entirely accurate; obtaining these nutrients doesn't always require expending huge amounts of energy at great physical risk. First off there is scavenging, simply wait until the large predators have had their fill and then go in take what you want, small game can be snared (fish too) which takes planning and for thought but not much risk and then of course there are fatty grubs and insects. Personally when I am hungry an apple or potato just doesn't cut it.
    Life is death. We all take turns. It's sacred to eat during our turn and be eaten when our turn is over. RichMahogany.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Urban Forager View Post
      Choco's description of how paleo folks got protein and fat isn't entirely accurate; obtaining these nutrients doesn't always require expending huge amounts of energy at great physical risk. First off there is scavenging, simply wait until the large predators have had their fill and then go in take what you want, small game can be snared (fish too) which takes planning and for thought but not much risk and then of course there are fatty grubs and insects. Personally when I am hungry an apple or potato just doesn't cut it.
      Kinda like this Three Men vs. Fifteen Hungry Lions - Human Planet, Grasslands, Preview - BBC One - YouTube

      Risky yes....energy depleting....not so much. Completely impressive what a big brain does for us though!
      Last edited by Neckhammer; 12-27-2012, 12:01 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        also, unless one lived in utopia, fruit season was (and is) short as i hope you already know from looking around outside

        and tubers can last if they're stored properly. ie, cool dark place away from bugs and vermin

        if not, they're left in the ground, and they won't last either

        this debate is starting to sound like a vegan blog post i once saw, where it was stated as fact that man always had access to fruit so he never had to hunt, so he never ate meat
        beautiful
        yeah you are

        Baby if you time travel back far enough you can avoid that work because the dust won't be there. You're too pretty to be working that hard.
        lol

        Comment


        • #64
          It may be possible to think like our ancestors. In fact, I think it is. But even if it's not, that's besides the point.

          Your mind may be the spitting image of a caveman but the realities of modern day life make it impossible to act like one. For very obvious reasons.

          Just remember... "Primal living in a modern world." Do the best you can with the resources you have. If you can only go halfway, go halfway. It's about doing the best you can for yourself within your means and not getting stressed about the small details...
          "The cling and a clang is the metal in my head when I walk. I hear a sort of, this tinging noise - cling clang. The cling clang. So many things happen while walking. The metal in my head clangs and clings as I walk - freaks my balance out. So the natural thought is just clogged up. Totally clogged up. So we need to unplug these dams, and make the the natural flow... It sort of freaks me out. We need to unplug the dams. You cannot stop the natural flow of thought with a cling and a clang..."

          Comment


          • #65
            Obviously this thread has evolved to include a great deal more than the original topic, but I think others have touched very nicely on that question. The way I see it, our environments and technology of all kinds have been evolving at an extraordinarily rapid pace, much quicker than our bodies have evolved. The idea of the primal blueprint is to mimic our ancestors' ways of life, beyond just eating patterns, because our physiology is not as "advanced" as the world we live in today. I mean, if our bodies were evolved to thrive on them, wouldn't it be great if we could all eat super cheap, convenient Big Macs and granola bars? But that's not the case.

            I'm a psychology student, and the things I've learned about evolutionary psychology have greatly contributed to my embracing the primal lifestyle. Think about stress, for instance: the stress response is a brilliantly effective way for us to deal with emergencies or precarious situations. But our world today generates so many other sources of prolonged stress that would have been absolutely foreign to Grok, and with which our Grok brains and bodies are not evolved to deal efficiently. So we meditate, do yoga, etc., all things Grok wouldn't t have had to force himself to do. We are really an amalgamation of extremely high-order psychological and social functions with very base psychological and physiological mechanisms--it's fascinating to think about, really.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by BklynGirl View Post
              I'm a psychology student, and the things I've learned about evolutionary psychology have greatly contributed to my embracing the primal lifestyle. Think about stress, for instance: the stress response is a brilliantly effective way for us to deal with emergencies or precarious situations. But our world today generates so many other sources of prolonged stress that would have been absolutely foreign to Grok, and with which our Grok brains and bodies are not evolved to deal efficiently. So we meditate, do yoga, etc., all things Grok wouldn't t have had to force himself to do. We are really an amalgamation of extremely high-order psychological and social functions with very base psychological and physiological mechanisms--it's fascinating to think about, really.
              Great post. Its stuff like this that is really interesting to me. And then your post brings another question. Will we be able to evolve enough to keep up with the world we have created or will we cause our own extinction? Im not talking about blowing ourselves up with bombs but if our bodies can adapt to all the stress and toxins that are completely new to our evolution. Obviously no one knows the answer but its cool to think about.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by bloodorchid View Post
                also, unless one lived in utopia, fruit season was (and is) short as i hope you already know from looking around outside

                and tubers can last if they're stored properly. ie, cool dark place away from bugs and vermin

                if not, they're left in the ground, and they won't last either

                this debate is starting to sound like a vegan blog post i once saw, where it was stated as fact that man always had access to fruit so he never had to hunt, so he never ate meat
                I dont understand this post. What do you mean fruit season is short? There are places that have fruits available all year long. Are you taking about where you live?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Zach View Post
                  Great post. Its stuff like this that is really interesting to me. And then your post brings another question. Will we be able to evolve enough to keep up with the world we have created or will we cause our own extinction? Im not talking about blowing ourselves up with bombs but if our bodies can adapt to all the stress and toxins that are completely new to our evolution. Obviously no one knows the answer but its cool to think about.
                  Along the same lines, I think BklynGirl's post points out that your original question could have been much broader. The good thing about all those modern stressors that have a mental base (which then manifest physically) is that we can learn different, healthier responses to them, or just retroactively reduce stress via behaviors, etc. Even stress about restricting foods can be overcome. But anyone already has an advantage in all this if eating well. Shitty food is a modern stressor that you can only overcome by not partaking in (and I think the stress of avoiding said food is more worth taking on than the stress of actually eating it, since the former can be gotten rid of, if it even existed in the first place).

                  My Dad drinks at least a pot of coffee everyday, probably gets most of his calories from alcohol (starts drinking beer around 10 am), and smokes more than anyone I know. He's retired and his new 'thing' now is buying tons of supplements, antioxidants, golf-specific pills even! I don't know wtf he thinks the point is.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                    Aw Derpy, weaksauce 4am argument.

                    Now that a dusty old research paper abstract by a couple of med students on a shelf somewhere at PubMed has been shown to be nonsense and not really even supporting your position, you try to distance it from the Holy man Peat. How loyal of you.

                    Yes, if you stopped eating all sources of sugar, the body would create some using gluconeogenesis. It would create just enough for the body to use, not surplus to feed the cancer cells. A person does not "grow weaker" by not eating sugar.
                    Dude, I work early mornings and switch shifts like today. I'm not up at 4 am because I have problems sleeping like you think I do. Eating tons of sugar and salt helps me sleep by keeping my liver fueled during times stress hormones are at the highest. I actually slept a good 6 hours that night, and I just woke up from an 8 hour sleep right now. It's amazing how much sleep I actually do get all things considering. I have to thank my main man Ray for that.

                    I never said it was nonsense, nor did you refute anything it proposed. You claimed it was useless based on abstract, a lack of credentials, and faulty percentages not adding up(which is just false). You never addressed any of the science behind it. Interpreting that Warburg's hypothesis has been taken out of context all these years, it makes sense.

                    If we're quick to dismiss anything based on a lack of credentials, then we might as well only embrace mainstream ideas. I said it had nothing to do with Ray Peat because it doesn't.

                    You're not understanding. Cancer rapidly multiplies. It's cancerous because they're cells that just don't die off like normal cells do. What you said doesn't even make sense. What is stopping the cancer cells from feeding off the glucose created? You assume the "body" will use up the glucose first? How? Considering protein and carbs both rapidly enter the bloodstream. The cancer cells use much more energy than your normal cells do. Starving it of glucose does not work.

                    If anything, the most prominent attempt at cures take advantage of this fact by preying on the cells weakness to deal it lethal drugs that kill it off.

                    And, yeah, I'd rather take this debate to PM or somewhere else now, since this topic brings up interesting psychological and physiological propositions(that I just read over right now) completely irrelevant to our little side debate here.
                    Last edited by Derpamix; 12-28-2012, 03:53 AM.
                    Make America Great Again

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by sjmc View Post
                      Along the same lines, I think BklynGirl's post points out that your original question could have been much broader. The good thing about all those modern stressors that have a mental base (which then manifest physically) is that we can learn different, healthier responses to them, or just retroactively reduce stress via behaviors, etc. Even stress about restricting foods can be overcome. But anyone already has an advantage in all this if eating well. Shitty food is a modern stressor that you can only overcome by not partaking in (and I think the stress of avoiding said food is more worth taking on than the stress of actually eating it, since the former can be gotten rid of, if it even existed in the first place).

                      My Dad drinks at least a pot of coffee everyday, probably gets most of his calories from alcohol (starts drinking beer around 10 am), and smokes more than anyone I know. He's retired and his new 'thing' now is buying tons of supplements, antioxidants, golf-specific pills even! I don't know wtf he thinks the point is.
                      Thats a good point above and im certainly not saying one should completely ignorant in their food choices, in fact i hate that most of the country and even the world is so ill informed on nutrition in general. There wouldn't be such a problem if people understood the impact of taking in a quarter of their calories from corn products and refined wheat.

                      How is your dads health on his current lifestyle?

                      Originally posted by Derpamix View Post
                      Dude, I work early mornings and switch shifts like today. I'm not up at 4 am because I have problems sleeping like you think I do. Eating tons of sugar and salt helps me sleep by keeping my liver fueled during times stress hormones are at the highest. I actually slept a good 6 hours that night, and I just woke up from an 8 hour sleep right now. It's amazing how much sleep I actually do get all things considering. I have to thank my main man Ray for that.

                      I never said it was nonsense, nor did you refute anything it proposed. You claimed it was useless based on abstract, a lack of credentials, and faulty percentages not adding up(which is just false). You never addressed any of the science behind it. Interpreting that Warburg's hypothesis has been taken out of context all these years, it makes sense.

                      If we're quick to dismiss anything based on a lack of credentials, then we might as well only embrace mainstream ideas. I said it had nothing to do with Ray Peat because it doesn't.

                      You're not understanding. Cancer rapidly multiplies. It's cancerous because they're cells that just don't die off like normal cells do. What you said doesn't even make sense. What is stopping the cancer cells from feeding off the glucose created? You assume the "body" will use up the glucose first? How? Considering protein and carbs both rapidly enter the bloodstream. The cancer cells use much more energy than your normal cells do. Starving it of glucose does not work.

                      If anything, the most prominent attempt at cures take advantage of this fact by preying on the cells weakness to deal it lethal drugs that kill it off.

                      And, yeah, I'd rather take this debate to PM or somewhere else now, since this topic brings up interesting psychological and physiological propositions(that I just read over right now) completely irrelevant to our little side debate here.
                      No biggy, i am interested in the sugar feeding cancer theory as well. Doubt there is any real evidence either way because then we would have a cure for cancer of sorts.

                      I can see good points on both sides, probably eating heavily refined sugars like hfcs would not be a good thing with cancer but im not so sure about sugar in general. For one, like you have been pointing out, sugar has many more roles in the body besides just what nutrients it brings along with it. Getting rid of it entirely seems wrong.

                      But PB if its working for you, go for it. Im interested in how a carnivorous diet works for you.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Zach View Post
                        No biggy, i am interested in the sugar feeding cancer theory as well. Doubt there is any real evidence either way because then we would have a cure for cancer of sorts.
                        Not a cure but definitely treatments aimed at depriving cancer of its primary fuel. There are clinical trials of that sort going on right now in fact. Will be interesting to see the data, but it's looking promising.

                        But, to the subject at hand there are obvious psychosomatic effects of living in the modern world. That is actually the reason why we need to work to reduce stressors where we can. Mental/emotional, physical, and chemical. Trauma or dysfunctional joints are stressful. Bad diet with toxins is stressful. Swing shifts or patterns that don't mach up with our circadian rhythms are stressful. You can deal with these stresses directly by addressing your toxic diet, switching to day shift, or balancing your musculoskeletal system.....or you can take the approach that treats the effect rather than the cause, i.e. take some prescription meds, self medicate with booze or drugs, or yes even pound down some refined sugar.

                        The way I understand it is that we all have a limit to the cumulative amount of stressors we can endure before we become ill, diseased, or start exhibiting symptoms. That doesn't mean you can't handle a bit of stress (even in this instance you can say "the dose makes the poison"). Allostatic load is the concept that chronic stressors reduce our capacity to deal with new stress. So obviously keeping your allostatic load as low as possible is a healthy endeavor.

                        Allostatic load - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          So...what if a caveman lived in a part of the world where fruit was the most abundant food supply?
                          Guess there'd be some fat cavemen running around.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by counterpuncher View Post
                            So...what if a caveman lived in a part of the world where fruit was the most abundant food supply?
                            Guess there'd be some fat cavemen running around.
                            My periods of lowest body weight have always included high levels of fruit consumption. For some people, fruit may be problematic, but I've never had an issue with eating several servings of fruit daily (even through the winter--currently it's mostly bananas, mandarin oranges, and pomegranates, at least one of each per day).

                            I see a huge difference between eating fruit and starchy vegetables and eating refined sugars. It's like the difference between eating avocados and fatty meats and consuming refined vegetable oils. I don't buy the notion that consuming loads of sugar (especially sugary drinks) is good for you, but I also think the fear of fruit is rather overblown.
                            “If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.” --Audre Lorde

                            Owly's Journal

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by counterpuncher View Post
                              So...what if a caveman lived in a part of the world where fruit was the most abundant food supply?
                              Guess there'd be some fat cavemen running around.
                              It would be the opposite. Diet that is comprised almost entirely of sugar would keep someone very lean. Just look at anyone eating 80-10-10.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Neck, good post. I suppose my first question was a little short sided. There are probably both positive and negative effects of "thinking like a caveman". I would say that going out of your way to avoid something or getting sucked into irrational fears would just be adding to your chronic stress load even if the intentions were good. Other things like educating yourself on what is and isnt real food and how your body reacts to certain foods and macros would be a positive.

                                I agree completely that everyones goal should be reducing overall stress load and trying to improve their capacity to handle stress.

                                Also as to the cancer thought, trying to starve the cancer cell of its energy source would also be starving the body of its main energy source. It is an interesting concept though.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X