Something's going on
I've only been on MDA for less than a year, but I'm noticing a huge difference between the conversations going on on the forum now, and the ones that circulated back in 2011 or 2010 (and even as recently as 2012). It seems like there's a lot more liberalism towards starches and fruit, and carbs in general.
Is it because the science has changed? Or are people just realizing they can lose/maintain just fine, even while eating starch and fruit every day? Just curious what everyone thinks.
the changes i've noticed in my time are carb centric dieting, fat centric dieting & lots and lots of cursing
It was bound to happen. The rigid carb curve was never a good idea. Arbitrary numbers of any kind are not a good idea in a broad topic like diet. That goes for the Jaminets' pound of starch a day and beyond. What if someone does better on more or less? I think the downfall of the Paleo diet is prescribing fixed numbers and percentages. That just creates confusion and disagreements, and possibly encourages going down wrong, dangerous avenues.
I think minimum numbers are ok in general for basic nutrition, but setting ceilings is bound to cause problems and resistance.
I think the real value in Primal and Paleo is ditching the processed foods that make us sick.
I think *some* people have issues that a whole foods diet does not address, hence the tweaks. I think *some* people like being food martyrs and maybe have some eating disorders going on. I think *some* people are super into science. I think a lot of people get very confused about how other people define low carb. Low carb to me is ketosis. Low carb to some people is under 100 grams of carbs. High carb to some people is 100 grams of carbs and to others, 400 grams if carbs. One man's "evil sugar binge" is a handful of blueberries and another man's is the haagen daz binge.
Mostly every thing is very vague; people are probably disagreeing while they say the same thing.
It seems to me there are fewer True Believers insisting on a One Truth Path.
Makes for a less...exciting...board. But also a more informative one.
Lots of "disagreeing while saying the same thing." But your question is big and the answer isn't simple.
Is Primal low carb? Is 150g/day low carb? Compared to SAD, hell yeah. Compared to what's actually eaten by people who eat all whole foods with no ingredient lists that don't come in a box? It's kinda high unless you base every meal on rice and potatoes.
Is VLC for everyone? I don't read Mark's books that way. Is it for me? Yeah, when I want to have beach abs or make weight for a competition. But I'm one of the people who feel and perform great in ketosis. Lots of people don't.
Are the Kitavans a black swan to the carbohydrate hypothesis of obesity? Yup. So are the Okinawans and several others. Does that mean that there aren't good reasons to eat VLC? Nope. I feel great eating that way. Some people have diseases that, for one reason or another, respond well to eating that way. Epilepsy is a definite. T2D is pretty firmly in that camp too. Obesity? I think so. Even if carbohydrates don't cause insulin resistance, (as shown by the above mentioned groups, among others), restricting them has a pretty solid reputation for helping to correct it. At least that's what the evidence I've seen tends to suggest.
But I think the cause is just that as these concepts grow, there are trends that emerge and new thinkers who put their spin on things and we all come from different backgrounds and different places and have different frameworks to mesh the data into.
I think that for a lot of people 2-3 years ago, being paleo meant being VLC (very low carb). Gary Taubes et al were regarded as being credible. Now, even if people agree with the conclusions he is reaching, his proposed mechanisms have been largely discredited.
Now the [URL="http://perfecthealthdiet.com/category/food/safe-starches/"]safe starches[/URL] ship has sailed into port, with reasonably inarguable scientific credentials, so some of the former proponents of VLC have quietly changed flags.
Of course, there's lots more bio-hacks than just cutting out wheat and sugar that come and go on the forums. There's iodine, intermittent fasting, cold thermogenesis, potato-diets etc etc as well. Some people (trolls really) are even advocating Peatisms like sugar.
I was in the VLC camp but I've drifted to what Mark talks about in terms of "safe" carbs in the context of overall health and activity levels. One of the big insights that caused me to question Taubes conclusion was that many proteins are as insulinogenic as many carbs. That, plus the traditional societies mentioned above that achieved great health and leanness on a diet rich in starchy carbs. I do well when I eat VLC or LC but if I put some starch around my work outs I can achieve greater intensity which has its benefits
[QUOTE=magnolia1973;1118840]I think the real value in Primal and Paleo is ditching the processed foods that make us sick.
I also think they offer a great alternative to the idea that in order to be healthy or have green politics, you have to be vegan or vegetarian.
[QUOTE=PrimalStudent;1118782]It seems like there's a lot more liberalism towards starches and fruit, and carbs in general.[/QUOTE]
Not me, I'm a purist.
No 80/20 rule here, 100%. :cool: