Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why "primal" and not 19th century?

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

  • #61
    With regards to the OP's question: As a 64 year old I actually knew people who were born in the 19th Century, including quite a few great grandparents, great aunts and uncles etc who were in their 90s and getting around just fine. Apart from my Grandad who had a bike accident and my Dad who died of leukemia I have never had to visit a family member in any hospital, honest.

    However our families were always working class but not poor. I grew up in the UK which was quite socially stratified and your health and diet depended very much on where you lived and where you worked, I expect the same was true in the USA.

    For example I'd expect the people crowded into tenements in lower Manhatten in the 1870s with no bathrooms had far different health outcomes to people in fairly prosperous Mid Western small towns. In the UK the average height of the Lancashire (a poor factory "satanic mills" area) regiment in the first World War was 5 ft in their stockinged feet. When Americans GIs flooded into England during the Second World War people used to marvel at the fact that most of them were six footers at least. However in the South East of England where there was more prosperity people were taller and healthier.

    So it's impossible to define a 19th Century Diet that would be of any practical use. Nonetheless I well remember the sort of diet that the OP is probably harking back to, because I grew up on it after the War - bacon, eggs, black pudding etc for breakfast, a cooked meal of meat and vegetables for Dinner ("dinner" was the meal served in the middle of the day) and a light meal for "Tea" which is now called Dinner in most of the English speaking world. This was often just a couple of pieces of toast, or some cake, or scrambled eggs, but a couple of times a week there would be "high tea" which would be a similar meal to the mid-day "dinner".
    Once a week someone would be sent out to the fish and chip shop for a big serve of cod and chips or haddock and chips, all fried in beef dripping. There wasn't a lot of fruit and vegetables as available today but when you did "snack" it was nearly always an apple or banana or orange.

    What there was NOT: vegetable oils, processed foods other than canned food, frozen desserts, pizza - rice was rarely eaten, and pasta was a strange thing that "Ities" ate.
    No fast foods other than Fish and Chip shops. No Maccas, no takeaway Indian, Chinese, Thai.
    No post mix litre cups of cola. Sodas came in little bottles.

    All school children ate in school canteens and factory workers ate in works canteens, to a proper sit down dinner.

    Then along came the 1960s and it all started to drift away. Oh dear.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by MikeAtTaree View Post
      What there was NOT: vegetable oils, processed foods other than canned food, frozen desserts, pizza - rice was rarely eaten, and pasta was a strange thing that "Ities" ate.
      No fast foods other than Fish and Chip shops. No Maccas, no takeaway Indian, Chinese, Thai.
      No post mix litre cups of cola. Sodas came in little bottles.
      This. Food is too readily available and in too large quantities. When fast food did become easily accessible, burgers were minuscule compared to their size now.
      Last edited by ombat; 03-10-2013, 10:03 PM.
      Is it weird in here, or is it just me?

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by DeeDub View Post
        To a very meaningful extent, wheat and grains are what enabled our current civilization. While it is true they pose problems for some folks, the statement above is ludicrously hyperbolic.
        The civilisation argument is completely irrelevant in a nutritional discussion, the hall mark of civilisation was population, mass carbohydrate feeding was appropriate for that, you only need to live long enough to breed and breed on mass, lots of soldiers, lots of workers, who cares if they die at 50 from a variety of chronic diseases, there's plenty more coming in behind to fill your footsteps. Not much removed from the curreent SAD diet.

        Originally posted by DeeDub View Post
        No, sorry, that's not true.
        Just to repeat outside of trauma injury yes it is, they died of old age with cognitive abilities still intact, they weren't vegetables when they died.

        Originally posted by Zach View Post
        Seriously.
        Even more irrelevant, look before you leap.

        The Gluten story goes well beyond Gluten, Coeliac disease is being termed the tip of the iceberg, that is suggesting that 90% of the problems with Gluten and grains are only just now being recognised, you want to bury your head in a bucket of wheat, go for it, that's your choice, but be warned just because you get a warm fuzzy feeling after downing your pizza doesn't mean it is doing you good.
        Last edited by Omni; 03-11-2013, 01:32 AM.
        "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Omni View Post
          Even more irrelevant, look before you leap.

          The Gluten story goes well beyond Gluten, Coeliac disease is being termed the tip of the iceberg, that is suggesting that 90% of the problems with Gluten and grains are only just now being recognised, you want to bury your head in a bucket of wheat, go for it, that's your choice, but be warned just because you get a warm fuzzy feeling after downing your pizza doesn't mean it is doing you good.
          oh_noes.gif

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Zach View Post
            This is the same argument for every food group that paleo excludes, but you can use that logic on any food group.
            So... that means it's not valid? I'm not seeing the logic there.

            Originally posted by Zach View Post
            The stupidest thing about the gluten witch hunt is that its almost entirely hype. Yes more people are becoming "sensitive" or "intolerant" but reality is that almost all can eat it perfectly fine and have since childhood. The power of suggestion and marketing hype is powerful. And for those who actually have a real condition, maybe it was caused by gluten or maybe it was something else, unsaturated fat for example. Most will never know, they just go with the trendy thing and eliminate gluten while still consuming the unsaturated fat.

            Anyway eat bread, dont eat bread, i dont care. Just know that healthy, long lived people have been eating it for ten thousand years and people will continue to do so and be healthy despite what a few gurus and internet knowitalls will have you believe.
            But that's the point I was trying to make. Along with other foods, wheat is more glutenous and genetically different from bread 100 years ago. And yes, other foods are too. Vegetables don't have nearly as many minerals as they used to either.

            It's not about saying "Demon wheat is the source of all evil in the world!" It's about saying "I can make a better choice, even if it is another food that isn't as good as it used to be."
            Durp.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by RitaRose View Post
              But that's the point I was trying to make. Along with other foods, wheat is more glutenous and genetically different from bread 100 years ago.
              Humans aren't genetically static, either.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Omni View Post
                ...you want to bury your head in a bucket of wheat...
                I don't eat wheat.

                But you just go right on believing whatever it is you need to believe.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by DeeDub View Post
                  Humans aren't genetically static, either.
                  Sweet! I'm counting on that 1/2 a generation adaptation to kick in any minute now!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by DeeDub View Post
                    Humans aren't genetically static, either.
                    And how have you successfully willed yourself or your progeny to evolve lately?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by DeeDub View Post
                      Humans aren't genetically static, either.
                      You're just being an argumentative troll here.

                      Natural selection has been weakened to the point of inconsequence with regards to modern humans. There's no significant genetic change taking place at the species level, despite your misleading attempt to imply that there is.
                      Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

                      Griff's cholesterol primer
                      5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
                      Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
                      TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
                      bloodorchid is always right

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                        My recent ancestors lived into their 90s in great numbers, prehistoric man lived longer than that??
                        I don't know, haven't read any facts or numbers on it. My great-granparents lived to be over 110. Grok's genes (and ours) are programmed to live to 150. Against that 90 is not so great but it really depends on your health. As long as i'm in good health, 150 is OK. Grok had a really high accident rate.
                        "When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power." - Alston Chase

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by JoanieL View Post
                          I actually pretty much agree with the OP and pretty much ask myself, "How did Grandma do this?" rather than, "How did Grok do this?"

                          Factory chickens pretty much became common in the 1950s.
                          Factory pork and beef in the 1970s.
                          1955, Ray Kroc buys McD and in 1958 McD sold its 100 millionth burger (per the McD website).
                          GMO rice, corn, and wheat - the 1980s was the beginning.

                          Anyway, that's my take. So, I'm happy to aim at a 1940s and 50s diet.
                          I agree with Joanie's take. I grew up in Jamaica in the 70s/80s. I remember every now and again, the schools would hand out bulgur, milk powder and other staples. They never actually sent us instructions for the bulgur. I didn't even know it was wheat until recently, so my family never ate that.

                          We ate some organic, pastured meat because that's how a lot of people raised animals then. At different times, we had goats, chickens and a pig. When we bought meat, we couldn't always afford the best part of the animal. So those times when we didn't have our own chickens, we might eat curried chicken backs, or the soup might have chicken feet and a lot of pumpkin to stretch it. It was pretty common to have greens with salted codfish for breakfast. Grains were just an option among many. So a breakfast porridge might be oats or cornmeal, but could also be green bananas. Dinner starches might be rice or wheat flour dumplings. Or they could be breadfruit, potatoes, cassava, sweet potatoes, yams (Jamaican), green bananas again, plantains, dasheens, or coco.

                          I drank my fair share of kool aid. But also carrot or soursop juice. And hot chocolate? Talk about unprocessed. Chances were my parents knew who had dried, roasted, pounded and formed cacao beans into little cylinders that would be grated into the hot water/milk to make a cocoa with particles on the bottom and oil floating on the top.

                          A lot of sweet treats were either seasonal - think Christmas cakes and Easter buns- or minimally processed like coconut drops and tamarind balls; or naturally gluten free or easy to make gf, like sweet potato or cassava pone.

                          Those, not burgers, pizza or mac and cheese, are my comfort foods. So when I struggle with primal, I try to ensure that I do two things: 1) gravitate towards my culture's traditional way of eating and 2) avoid poisonous things.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by DeeDub View Post
                            Humans aren't genetically static, either.
                            Genetics 101: The bearer of the suspect gene in question must die before breeding to ensure the gene is not passed on to subsequent generations.
                            Most of the chronic diseases that we discuss here do not debilitate the individual until middle age, giving plenty of opportunity for breeding.

                            As for your baseless statement, if it had some merit, then there would be no Coeliac disease in the Middle east as this is where wheat has been consumed for the longest time.

                            The prevalence rates of celiac disease in North Africa and the Middle East are now thought to be similar to those of Western countries.
                            Celiac Disease

                            Look at that same as the rest of the world, no tangible evolution to gluten tolerence over 10,000 years of agriculture.
                            "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by magicmerl View Post

                              Natural selection has been weakened to the point of inconsequence with regards to modern humans. There's no significant genetic change taking place at the species level, despite your misleading attempt to imply that there is.
                              This is not technically correct. Evolution is absolutely occurring in humans. And natural selection is going on as well. It occurs way too slowly for any era of humans to be aware of it. Plus, natural selection often occurs in the midst of very large die-off times. For example, there are humans all over the world that are genetically resistant to certain viral infections. You can't see that they are genetically different just looking at them, but if there were a mass die-off from a viral outbreak, these people would survive and have more progeny.
                              Using low lectin/nightshade free primal to control autoimmune arthritis. (And lost 50 lbs along the way )

                              http://www.krispin.com/lectin.html

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by the_walrus0 View Post
                                I've recently been having trouble posting on here asking for advice because, while I usually get some good advice, I also get four or five people arguing that what I'm doing is ridiculous and that they have a better opinion than mine because they read such and such study or they disagree with whomever and that I shouldn't be doing what I'm doing because I should be doing something else.

                                Basically making me feel bad for trying to find a way of eating that can help me to be binge free, binge eating being something I've struggled with for 7+ years. The reason I try so many things, following the way my body feels as a guide, is because obviously what I've been doing hasn't been working in the past. Sometimes the way I feel is more important to me than what the studies say or what this or that book says, or what some other person has found to work for them.

                                I've found another forum where people tend to be much for helpful and, if they have another opinion, it's given very tastefully. I still visit this forum because I do find interesting information and I like hearing what's working for other people.
                                I would love to know what the other forum is so I can join it! Thanks..

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X