It seems like there's a big variety of definitions of "junk food" going on in this thread, and it's leading to some miscommunication. I don't know what the author of the article meant by junk food, but to me, junk food is stuff like tortilla chips and queso dip at Mexican restaurants, a bun on my burger, french fries, ice cream, baked goods, pancakes, pizza, chocolate sauce, stuff like that. But I still eat these things within a "primal" framework, even though they're not primal items; everything is as unprocessed and "whole" as possible, there's no HFCS, MSG, or trans fat oils, etc. It would never occur to me to eat something like McDonald's, Taco Bell, stuff made with MSG or Crisco or whatever. But then, I was raised without ever setting foot in a fast food joint. My parents were really strict about it. I never had McDonald's till I was in college. Fast food or the packaged stuff from the inside aisles of the supermarket just does not register as food to me.
So if we're talking "junk food" as in McDonald's, Hot Pockets, Cool Whip, etc., then yeah, I don't think these things are ever acceptable to eat and I would advocate avoiding them 100% of the time. If we're talking occasional additions of wheat, corn, sucrose, and items fried in acceptable oils, then I think it's healthy to stress your system with these cheats.
It should go without saying that if you have specific food intolerances or diseases like Celiac, none of this applies.
Just have to say it...
Mark had a recent piece about a little concept known as "horemetics" which is when small doses of stress (dietary or environmental) might actually have a positive effect on our bodies and overall health. However, the key words here are "small doses."
So yes, eating crappy for a day or two might actually be good for your body by conditioning it to respond to stress better, kick start certain hormones, ect. But the constant stress of a bad diet is going to take its toll over time and wear down your body. We're talking small targeted doses of occasional stress as opposed to the constant, unending stress put upon your body from eating a shitty diet that causes digestive stress and systemic inflammation, ect.
It's all about being reasonable.
[QUOTE=StackingPlates;1069492]Ironic comment posted on a "Paleo diet" message board...[/QUOTE]
Stacking! Where you been....is that all we get from you after such a long absence?
Just like ROS are also signal molecules that actually help with metabolic communication. Simply crazy. Now what is interesting is when you artificially suppress ROS and other things we consider "damaging" with synthetic supplements and the like. Seems reasonable at fist if your simply looking at oxidative stress in a vacuum, but when some of these newer discoveries come to light there's a big "whoops" coming.
It all comes down to we all "think" we are so smart. The body and mind are still light years ahead of our conscious comprehension. All we can do is remove the crap, try to support good function and get the hell out the way ;)
So if you drive a car, is it good to occasionally put sugar in the gas tank?
[QUOTE=Knifegill;1070131]So if you drive a car, is it good to occasionally put sugar in the gas tank?[/QUOTE]
Yes!....just not in Myyyyy gas tank........ ([I]wanders away nonchalantly with bag of sugar....[/I])
I am so tired of comparing one's body to a car. Fueling myself, all that 'premium fuel', 'don't drive on an empty tank' metaphors.
If you had a car that was as individual, unpredictable, temperamental, changeable and defying all logic, any logic, be it CW, Primal or vegan or any other, you would have sent it to a junk yard the second day you owned it. Just after you came to the parking lot, and the keyhole is a different size than your keys, one of the tires was over-inflated by some unknown reason that may or may not have had anything to do with a bit of gravel on the road you've encountered while test driving it 3 weeks before, and the gas tank showed empty though you pumped it full the night before with whatever was advertised as the bestest gas ever at the one of gazillion brands of the gas-stations.
Sorry about this rant.
I definitely get where the author is coming from. I did have issues with high cholesterol and being a bit overweight before primal. However after primal while those issues were gone new ones developed. I am now a fructose malabsorber to a certain extent. My cycles stop when I eat low carb for more than a few weeks and I can't gain weight on primal, so I end up resorting back to grains and sugar so I can ovulate. And yes I have tried starches to gain and get my cycle back. Now maybe I preconditioned my body to not ovulate without grains all those years before primal....but I am 29, so it wasn't that long compared to most. Just my thoughts.
[QUOTE=Goldensparrow;1071433]I definitely get where the author is coming from. I did have issues with high cholesterol and being a bit overweight before primal. However after primal while those issues were gone new ones developed. I am now a fructose malabsorber to a certain extent. My cycles stop when I eat low carb for more than a few weeks and I can't gain weight on primal, so I end up resorting back to grains and sugar so I can ovulate. And yes I have tried starches to gain and get my cycle back. Now maybe I preconditioned my body to not ovulate without grains all those years before primal....but I am 29, so it wasn't that long compared to most. Just my thoughts.[/QUOTE]
Wow, you need grains to ovulate? Sorry... that's unfortunate.
Goldensparrow, just stick to rice for your grain and I think you'd be just fine. Some people are not "easy keepers".