Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Paleo-Diet: Not the Way to a Healthy Future?? NPR blog

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

  • #31
    Our current state of mass-production-agriculture-distribution in order to stave off mass starvation is not sustainable, that's what is not sustainable. Distributing grain products to people living in slumdog conditions with no running water and no jobs and no birth control - is that sustainability?

    It's a fucking aberration, it's mind-boggling in its inhumanity, that's what it is. Is that what we want to sustain? It's all going to come tumbling down at some point.

    Mother nature will throw her usual curve balls of droughts or mini ice ages or disease and we're going to have to face the mass starvations no matter how hard we work at keeping this population house of cards stacked up through unnatural means.
    Positively Radical — Pigeonholes are for Pigeons!

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Uncephalized View Post
      And for the record, I advocate a slow reduction over several centuries, accomplished my having fewer children. I am not in favor of any measure that involves killing any already-living people, or sterilizing anybody, or anything that otherwise harms people. I don't know how to best accomplish that, but it needs to happen. But just doing the math, if we could accomplish a worldwide replacement rate of 1.6 children per couple reaching reproductive age, we would be below 1 billion people in about 500 years. That's not impossible.
      That sounds remarkably sensible to me.
      Last edited by honeypig; 10-27-2011, 12:19 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        The question is whether we'll even survive 500 years. Based on the Fate of the World simulation game, we'll hit peak oil within 100 years after which the world's economy will go into the shitters and then mass unrest and wars and death will follow.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by HillsideGina View Post

          It's a fucking aberration, it's mind-boggling in its inhumanity, that's what it is. Is that what we want to sustain? It's all going to come tumbling down at some point.

          Mother nature will throw her usual curve balls of droughts or mini ice ages or disease and we're going to have to face the mass starvations no matter how hard we work at keeping this population house of cards stacked up through unnatural means.
          "Mom's gonna fix it all soon. Mom's comin' round to put it back the way it ought to be. Learn to swim." -- Ænema, TooL
          "Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food." -- Hippocrates

          Comment


          • #35
            Overpopulation is a myth:

            Women Against Malthus » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

            Comment


            • #36
              I think we have pretty much demolished Ms. King's arguments, so thank you for all the great debate and discussion!

              But now I'm thoroughly depressed from all the doomsday talk.

              I tend to think that we are doomed as a species and the planet with us, but if I fully believed it I would either (1) follow (or lead) the lemmings to the nearest cliff or (2) drive a huge vehicle, drink like a fish and eat sugary desserts every day.

              Instead, I have never contemplated ending it all, never owned a vehicle larger than a Corolla, never consumed excessive quantities of liquor and try to eat in what I have recently learned is the healthiest way I can. And I don't think that eating mostly veggies (our pyramid's base), and then meat and fish, and then (heaven forbid) the fat that everyone else is trying to avoid is any less sustainable than any other form of eating. Plenty of vegetarians are eating grains and legumes raised in unsustainable monoculture conditions, just as I am eating meat that comes from unsustainable feedlots.

              Life goes on. We try to make the right choices -- in lifestyle, friends and political candidates. And there is not much we can do about population policies in India, China or anywhere else on the planet, other than contributing to the NGO of your choice that advances the policies you think would work. My best to all of you clear-sighted, well-intentioned people.

              Comment


              • #37
                This is a reply I wrote to a post of that article on Facebook earlier today (bold text are the quotes I referenced from the article)

                ‎[...] Lean meat and veggies take center stage, but the emphasis may vary in details such as how much seafood to eat. [...]

                *Partly because the paleo movement realizes that there was a great variety in the exact composition of diets around the world. Groups that lived near the ocean would naturally eat more fish, while those that lived in the arctic would eat relatively few plants, etc. Also a large part of the diet is aimed at experimentation to discover exactly what works best for each individual*

                [...]in addition to food, paleo-faddists think hard about exercise and lifestyle choices.[...]

                *That is in fact one of the coolest things that sets the paleo movement apart from most 'diets'. It leads people to look at their entire lifestyle and be more proactive across the board.*

                Some of them, in fact, take a paleo-lifestyle to startling lengths. [...]interviews disciples who run through the undergrowth and eat wild boar in explicit emulation of their Paleolithic forebears.

                *Because it is always a good idea to base your opinions on the fringe outliers of any movement right?!*

                [...] I worried aloud about the consequences of urging even more carnivory than we've already got. [...] But the paleo-movement seems to doom (even if unintentionally) more animals to life and death in factory farms. [...]

                *Again though, you find different levels of commitment between people. Some will only consume grass-fed and humanely raised meats. Again the direction towards conscious food choices raises awareness about health and sustainability of meat choices. *

                [...] A greater percentage of grain crops would also be diverted to rich countries' animals and away from poor countries' people. [...]

                *Except for the growing push for grass fed animals!*

                [...] Many nutrition scientists give the paleo-diet a thumbs-down. They worry about its dearth of carbohydrates, its cost, its impracticality, and the fact that its boasts for good health are medically unproven.[...]

                *Unfortunately there is a significant lack of proven dietary science in regards to the paleo way of eating but the exact same can be said of the nutrition guidelines promoted by our government. If you actually read the studies you find that many of the things we have been taught
                (such as that high cholesterol causes heart disease when in fact it is only a correlation rather than a causation AND the fact that so far no studies have linked dietary cholesterol to heart disease causation NOR have they shown that lowering blood cholesterol with medications improves heart health. I could go on about TYPES of cholesterol and their greater roles but I won't!)
                you will find that there is lack of scientific proof across the board. But at least the paleo diet focus' on REAL foods. No chemical crud junk food in this diet!*

                [...] hunter-gatherer groups adapted to local environments that were regionally and seasonally variable [...]

                *And to be truly in tune with your food (and to promote sustainability through reduction in food shipping!) you would eat seasonally. Asparagus should be enjoyed in the spring. In the middle of the winter it must travel halfway around the globe to get to your dinner plate. Not so cool.*

                [...]Second, genes were not in control. [...]

                *and yet what are we if not the product of our genetics?*

                So my closing thought is this. When I eat paleo I eat MORE vegetables than I do when I'm eating non-paleo, I eat 100% less junk food when eating paleo, By being introduced to paleo I have become MUCH more aware of nutrition in general, how my body reacts to specific foods, gained a level of caring about where my meat comes from (and lead to me raising my own beef this year), And has spread to other areas of my life such as encouraging me to drive less and walk or ride my bike more and even to quit using plastic tupperware and ziplock bags (I'm about 90% there on that). So I eat better, feel better, think more, exercise better and try to be more mindful of my impact on the planet. I say Go Paleo!

                Comment


                • #38
                  GREAT rebuttal, Noctiluca! I invite you to post it on the NPR blog comments. There have been some good comments there, but none so precise and succinct as yours!

                  In fact, for all those who have contributed such insightful remarks, maybe letting Ms. King and her NPR readers know your thoughts will mitigate the damage her blog may otherwise cause.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I wish I was given the task of populating an entire continent....

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I live in Australia where according to the propaganda (I say that tongue in cheek) the butcher gave me the other day, 50% of our land mass is devoted to raising cattle and sheep. It is definitely sustainable here but we only have 22 million people, a very small percentage of the words population compared to the sheer size of the country.

                      More info here Australian Farm and Beef Industry | Red Meat Green Facts
                      Became Primal August 2011

                      SW - 84kg / 185lb
                      CW - 60kg / 132lb
                      GW - 60kg / 132lb

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by HillsideGina View Post
                        Our current state of mass-production-agriculture-distribution in order to stave off mass starvation is not sustainable, that's what is not sustainable. Distributing grain products to people living in slumdog conditions with no running water and no jobs and no birth control - is that sustainability?

                        It's a fucking aberration, it's mind-boggling in its inhumanity, that's what it is. Is that what we want to sustain? It's all going to come tumbling down at some point.

                        Mother nature will throw her usual curve balls of droughts or mini ice ages or disease and we're going to have to face the mass starvations no matter how hard we work at keeping this population house of cards stacked up through unnatural means.
                        Out of everybody in this thread, you hit the nail on the head.

                        Also, it should be clear that the USA is not DIRECTLY contributing to overpopulation as much as other countries. America grows only about 0.4% a year by birth/death (not counting immigration). For comparison, India grows at 1.4% per year. This means that after 10 years, India will have increased the world population by 172 million people while the USA increased it by only 12.5 million. Or, in more understandable terms, over 10 years India will add 13 people to the world for every person the USA does.

                        However, the USA is doing so much more harm by enabling starving countries to continuing reproducing while that reproduction continues to depress their efforts to become sustainable.

                        PS: I used India because of it's large population and moderate birth rate. Places like Ethiopia have significantly lower populations, but significantly higher birth rates.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          It's not fair to claim that paleo is unsustainable, since it's been artificially squeezed out of the market by grain & soy subsidies, propaganda & media manipulation (the Kellogg craze), and a whole lot of cultural inertia.

                          And even if it does turn out that a high-meat diet is unsustainable, humans who aren't metabolically deranged can easily live on as much as 60-70% carbohydrate. Sweet potatoes yield 2-4x more calories per acre than grains, with a higher micronutrient, fiber, and complete protein content to boot. The need for cheap carbohydrates can still mesh with paleo, and does not necessitate grains.

                          The population problem can be easily, peacefully solved by people simply being more thoughtful and conscious about having kids. The people who are pushing out more children than they can care for are doing so just because that's what's expected of them, or they haven't been educated on contraception use. Pretty much any where you find human populations booming out of control, you'll also find a culture where antiquated family models and cultural mores are held in high esteem.

                          From looking at trends in western europe, population slowdown results from cultural liberalization and a decrease in the popularity of organized religion. If that continues, human population should correct itself as more cultures continue to mature and secularize.
                          Last edited by Chaohinon; 10-27-2011, 05:19 PM.
                          “The whole concept of a macronutrient, like that of a calorie, is determining our language game in such a way that the conversation is not making sense." - Dr. Kurt Harris

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            This all reminds me, I remember hearing eating paleo makes women ultra-fertile. Uh oh.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              The USA is doing its very best to shorten our lifespans. Isn't that honorable enough? This obesity 'epidemic' is just the fruition of one very satisfactory population control measure. Obesity helps to make us less prone to reproduction and die very early. But it's not the only plan in the mill! Among others: Condoms, female dominance (men no longer have reproductive rights, and women have largely been convinced they need to kill their fetuses for various reasons), high Omega-6 in the convenient foods TV tells people to eat (helps to harden arteries and eventually make boners impossible), ideas that food HAS to taste like sex or it's not worth eating (avoidance of nutrition), overall lazy life-long indulgence in absurd conveniences, and the list goes on. These tools have all been implemented under the guise of something to be applauded. Media convinces some group that it needs to demand its rights, it demands them like cattle, and those in power give them what they were waiting to distribute the whole time. Piece by piece, the deceptive puzzle has been assembled until the old ways cannot be seen at large. And we die en masse of what should be obviously preventable BS, but which has been disguised as something people deserve, that they fought for. Ask a fifty-something about cheeseburgers and pills. They will smile like you just reminded them Jesus loves them. And then proceed to die.
                              Crohn's, doing SCD

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I, like all those sustainable gurus out there, am not lining up to volunteer to "reduce the surplus" population.

                                I will chose to go Primal whenever possible. I do still believe in free will.
                                Life is an ongoing Experiment of One, so here's to science!

                                My Primal Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread37576.html

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X