I've been harping on this for a while (see my post above). It started when I tried to defend whey powder and was lambasted by the Eat Real Food Police. The whole foods categorization doesn't work on SADs either.
Originally Posted by longing2bfit
This is a pretty good thread. It seems to bring out all the N=1 exceptions of people who are, for some reason, metabolically outside the Primal/Paleo tent -- all very good information. For my N=1, healthwise I did very well on a nearly pure Primal leptin reset. But after a year I still can't kick the sugar or dairy habit. I'm standing just inside the open flap of the Primal/Paleo tent, working my way further in.
I also think it's pretty funny that we're arguing over whether 80g carb is "low" or 100 g carb is "high." I believe that grams of carbs or % fat is the wrong way to measure. It's enough to say that veg carbs are good, grain carbs are bad, and fruit and potato carbs are okay but restricted. Fat should be measured on a satiety scale; that is, if we can distinguish between real hunger, emotional hunger, and sugar cravings. When I straighten out my macro sources, distinguish my cravings, and adjust for my teeny size, I come very close to Mark's original carb curve and macro proportions.
5'0" female, 44 years old. Started Primal October 31, 2011, at a skinny fat 111.5 lbs. Low weight: 99.5 lb on a fast. Gained back to 115(!) on SAD chocolate, potato chips, and stress. Currently keeping food tracker.
I (try to) follow by-the-book primal as advocated by Mark Sisson, except for whey powder and a bit of cream. I advocate a two-month strict adjustment for newbies. But everybody is different and should tweak Primal to their own needs.