Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Difference between Paleo and Primal

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

  • #16
    1



    OTB I think we are all capable of deciding for ourselves what to eat. Today, the question "What should we ideally eat?" *can* be answered *objectively*, it's not a matter of opinion. While It's our choice to decide how much to diverge from the ideal, that doesn't mean we shouldn't call a spade a spade.

    “Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.” -Oscar Wilde
    "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." -George Bernard Shaw
    "The trouble with jogging is that the ice falls out of your glass." -Martin Mull

    Comment


    • #17
      1



      I question how much of the Paleo religion is objective. It's mostly best guesses and some bone and cartilege analysis, AFAIK. I could be wrong.


      Diet selections are subject to a "diminishing returns" syndrome. Outside of the junk food industry, I don't think that there are many people who would say sodas, lot of fries, or Twinkies are good for you. But when you get over to the "All solana are bad for you," well, there may be evidence but it is sketchy and/or bad science in many cases. Or, someone says so, so it must be true. Again, AFIK. Or a given person or a few people have an intolerance, so everyone should avoid Substance X.


      When we get into the "fringe" areas, there also may be good reasons to eat some foods. Lypocene, best found in watermelon, grapfruit, and tomatoes, may be worth it to your body.


      And it's quite possible that a super high muscle meat diet will get you in the end with some other illness caused by it, and not eating the heart, brains, and blood. We just don't know, there are SO many variables in diet.


      You are right, we are capable. I was just reading a lot of evangelism into your posts. Maybe I misread.

      Comment


      • #18
        1



        We can objectively say that new foods are not paleo. The argument that a deviation from what we evolved to eat will probably tamper with your health is, I believe, perfectly rational.


        Calling Paleo a religion and supporting the consumption of new or artificial foods by saying that they might not necessarily harm you makes me think that you might be looking more for emotional comfort and less for an objective dietary north. But then, I also think we are all entitled to that.


        Selective skepticism can be very appealing, but can also mislead people.


        Amen

        “Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.” -Oscar Wilde
        "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." -George Bernard Shaw
        "The trouble with jogging is that the ice falls out of your glass." -Martin Mull

        Comment


        • #19
          1



          I'm just happy to be getting healthy and being able to eat well. One question, what is SAD? :-(

          Comment


          • #20
            1



            SAD = Standard American Diet :-(

            The "Seven Deadly Sins"

            • Grains (wheat/rice/oats etc) . . . . . • Dairy (milk/yogurt/butter/cheese etc) . . . . .• Nightshades (peppers/tomato/eggplant etc)
            • Tubers (potato/arrowroot etc) . . . • Modernly palatable (cashews/olives etc) . . . • Refined foods (salt/sugars etc )
            • Legumes (soy/beans/peas etc)

            Comment


            • #21
              1



              Interesting that everyone seems so fast to defend themselves or their eating habits.

              When it comes down to it, eating is a personal choice. It is also greatly influenced by each person's ability to digest and healthily use a food. Some of us are fortunate enough to be able to have dairy, and others not. Some people can eat nightshades with no problems. There are many foods that would fall under a personal choice umbrella, then. Obviously we developed at least some genes to handle those foods, or we wouldn't be able to eat them at all. Just like the lucky few who seem healthy eating a steady diet of grains, it can happen. Read what other people have to say, see if it could apply to you, make your choice about what to do with the info, and then move on.

              If you claim to be paleo, you follow those rules. If you claim PB, you follow the PB rules. Or you can claim to be "influenced by" one or the other, and make your own rules. There are some things that have been reliably proven to be true for many, if not all, of us - but as for the rest make your choice. Describe how it works, and then don't get upset if someone doesn't agree with you. That's just silly. We are all here to help each other get healthier, not argue about who is right or wrong.


              Tarlach - I am pleased to hear that your family's health has improved with changes to your diet. I agree it works - I am also migraine free without nearly the alterations you have had to make. I am just happy to hear about people relieved of suffering no matter how it happens.


              OnTheBayou - good luck finding your path, too. I am right there with you in agreeing that I take what I get from all this and I will feel my way into what will work. I have been using these rules for a very short time, and hopefully we both have success on them.


              Good luck to all of you.

              "The rose petal floats on water. The kingfisher flashes above the pond. Life and beauty swirl in the midst of death."

              -al'Lan Mandragoran
              "The Eye of the World" by Robert Jordan

              Visit my blog: http://www.antihousewife.com/

              Comment


              • #22
                1



                Good post, Lady. That's pretty much what I'm trying to say.


                If paleo man did not eat squashes as we know them because they were inconveniently being eaten only by animals in the New World while Grok was in the old, does that make them bad? I don't think so.


                OTOH, watermelons have been growing wild in Africa for who know how long. They are probably paleo in the timeline, but should we be eating them, at least in any quantity? Probably not. (I sneaked a very tiny piece when I was serving up for my Dad.)

                Comment


                • #23
                  1



                  Not that I really eat curcubits anyway, but just for general info...


                  Watermelon has a much higher and better spread of nutrients and amino acids than something like an apple.


                  For the same weight, watermelon has less sugar than apple, about 10x more Vitamin A, more vitamin C, more essential fatty acids and more magnesium, potassium, zinc and selenium.

                  The "Seven Deadly Sins"

                  • Grains (wheat/rice/oats etc) . . . . . • Dairy (milk/yogurt/butter/cheese etc) . . . . .• Nightshades (peppers/tomato/eggplant etc)
                  • Tubers (potato/arrowroot etc) . . . • Modernly palatable (cashews/olives etc) . . . • Refined foods (salt/sugars etc )
                  • Legumes (soy/beans/peas etc)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    1



                    On the subject of watermelon: seedless watermelons suck and I am dead set against them. Does anyone know where I can sign a petition to have them abolished?


                    Reading the "no salt" comments brought to mind a concern about iodine. Depending on where you live (midwest) the soil can be very low in iodine and can be lacking in the local produce.

                    It's grandma, but you can call me sir.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      1



                      We seem to be getting good at permanently messing up food (like watermelon). Apparently wild bananas used to be full of large seeds and are nothing like what we get now.


                      It makes it very hard to eat what Grok ate, when foods aren't even the same as they were a year ago


                      Seafood is a good source of iodine and I think that it is usually inland populations (that do not have access to seafood) that suffer from iodine deficiency.

                      The "Seven Deadly Sins"

                      • Grains (wheat/rice/oats etc) . . . . . • Dairy (milk/yogurt/butter/cheese etc) . . . . .• Nightshades (peppers/tomato/eggplant etc)
                      • Tubers (potato/arrowroot etc) . . . • Modernly palatable (cashews/olives etc) . . . • Refined foods (salt/sugars etc )
                      • Legumes (soy/beans/peas etc)

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        1



                        And why do seedless watermelons suck?


                        I think they are a blessing. They were developed by natural selection, so it's not like the seeds were blasted with cosmic rays or anything.


                        Let's pick our battles carefully, not wantonly.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          1



                          OTB, why isn't watermelon PB? I've been having them fr the last 2 days. If it has anything to do with Glycemic Load, then watermelon is good - although it's GI is high, it's GL is low. If it's non-Primal, please let me know why.


                          Oh, if you think seedless watermelons are bad, check out these LOL:


                          http://images.google.com/images?q=square%20watermelons&sourceid=ie7&rls=com .microsoft:en-US&oe=utf8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi


                          And some varieties of bananas in India still have seeds in them, really small ones, almost undiscernible in some cases.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            1



                            This has all been very interesting, all I know from experience is some foods don’t agree with me so I have now eliminated them and as I am now listening to what my body needs it tells me that I function better on just nuts, eggs, meat, vegetables and fats and the rest I can do without.


                            OTB seedless watermelons do suck – what is the use of eating watermelon if there are no pips to spit out!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              1



                              seedless watermelons suck because they taste bad and are no fun at all. I have not enjoyed one yet.

                              It's grandma, but you can call me sir.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                1



                                OK, I get the fun part. But if you aren't out of doors, that's a negative.


                                Seedless don't taste any different that seeded; they mostly have unformed seeds in them anyway. The variation in taste, flavor, sweetness between any two or more melons can be huge and is not the result of being seeded or seedless. I've had seedless that were every bit the equal in flavor of seeded. And just like the seeded ones, some are better than others.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X