Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 105

Thread: Criticisms of Primal/Paleo Lifestyle? page 10

  1. #91
    Ghshl's Avatar
    Ghshl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    518
    Quote Originally Posted by AureliaWaterman View Post
    drink beer and eat plenty of red meat you would be rewarded with high blood pressure and cholestrol problems
    I eat a primal diet, but I still drink beer. My cholesterol is stellar, and my blood pressure is in the lower end of the healthy range.
    I think I'm just going to keep it up ;-)

    Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

  2. #92
    Erik W's Avatar
    Erik W is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by tfarny View Post
    "Wow, so, how did you lose weight? I'm getting married and I HAVE to lose weight!"
    "Well mainly I just cut out sugar and starch."
    "Oh, I could never do that!"

    Yesterday conversation. I think "I'm addicted" is the most common Paleo objection.
    That conversation made me laugh. To think someone who asked for advice would actually react that way to the advice.

  3. #93
    Erik W's Avatar
    Erik W is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by SkullCandyxox View Post
    Even if we do not know entirely what a paleolithic diet contained and even if it varied for many humans globally, there is enough research and evidence to show that after the introduction of agriculture (grains and lots of beans D: ) and society, we deffinately became weaker and had stunted growth.
    Not to mention, we went from living with the land to living against it which is in my opinion the worst mistake made ever.
    I believe modern society and way of life will eventually collapse because it is in no way sustainable.
    Plowing a field isn't living against the land. Mother Nature's "balance" wasn't upset; the only people who seek to preserve balance in nature are humans. Not the animals and plants who have exterminated competing animals and plants for millennia.

    Agriculture was necessary for people to have more food, instead of living at starvation levels. Society could grow and we could develop science and technology. I understand that for some who have listened to their teachers in school that is an Evil Western Thing. Not for me. It is good that we can reach for the stars, and bring Life forward to unlock the secrets of the universe and overcome any obstacles in the future. We have only just begun.

    So there is a difference in a goal-oriented morality and a nihilistic morality here. If you see no goals for Life, nothing to accomplish except existing until the planet dies at some point, then I can see how plowing a field can be considered evil, because you evicted the field mice who have as much Right to live as you - and who cares then that we will never reach above the mud level.

    I will never accept arguments against grains based on that flower-power outlook on life. I will, however, note the scientific evidence that cutting out grains from your diet is healthier for your body. It wouldn't have been possible for us to survive that way in Medieval times, but it is now. Maybe not for the whole world at once, but for me. So that's why I do it.
    Last edited by Erik W; 05-14-2013 at 12:40 PM.

  4. #94
    rcooke22's Avatar
    rcooke22 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Telford, England
    Posts
    4
    Funny enough when I tell people they often have a more bizarre reaction of "oh yeah I've heard/read that's a really good way to loose weight" They then usually follow that up with

    But....

    1. I have a thyroid problem
    2. I don't eat fish so I would really struggle
    3. My Doctor ( insert a whole host of rubbish)
    4. Atkins leads to Heart Attacks (who mentioned Atkins???)
    5. With my job its really hard...... canteens/colleagues etc
    6. Life is to short - I mean if I can't have a cream cake now and again

    As others have mentioned what is really frightening is just how easily people believe information if it comes from what on face value is a recognised institution.

    The amount of times that I have explained to people that sugar is more often than not the replacement for fat in low fat products and then see their face glaze at the idea that their low fat yoghurt is not helping them loose weight.

    The really strange part is the fact that these people are often in such admiration/jealous/wondering about how I keep so trim and lost so much weight and yet when you present them the solution they almost instantly decide it wouldn't work for them or real off a host of excuses.

    Humans are very odd

  5. #95
    Timbobaggins's Avatar
    Timbobaggins is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Erik W View Post
    Plowing a field isn't living against the land. Mother Nature's "balance" wasn't upset; the only people who seek to preserve balance in nature are humans. Not the animals and plants who have exterminated competing animals and plants for millennia.

    Agriculture was necessary for people to have more food, instead of living at starvation levels. Society could grow and we could develop science and technology. I understand that for some who have listened to their teachers in school that is an Evil Western Thing. Not for me. It is good that we can reach for the stars, and bring Life forward to unlock the secrets of the universe and overcome any obstacles in the future. We have only just begun.

    So there is a difference in a goal-oriented morality and a nihilistic morality here. If you see no goals for Life, nothing to accomplish except existing until the planet dies at some point, then I can see how plowing a field can be considered evil, because you evicted the field mice who have as much Right to live as you - and who cares then that we will never reach above the mud level.

    I will never accept arguments against grains based on that flower-power outlook on life. I will, however, note the scientific evidence that cutting out grains from your diet is healthier for your body. It wouldn't have been possible for us to survive that way in Medieval times, but it is now. Maybe not for the whole world at once, but for me. So that's why I do it.
    Could not agree more, I'm new to this lifestyle but it is already reaping it's benefits for me so I can certainly see why it should be made a sustainable and prominent part of ones life. This does not mean however I have anything against grains other than that they have negative correlation with ones health when consumed in large quantities, I can understand and appreciate that if it weren't for grains we likely would not have evolved to become the society we are today.

    Although I would have to partially agree that lately we have been more living against the land rather than with it, the first farmers and farmers in the past perhaps lived with the land, although it is impossible to say that now as vegetation and fruit is constantly planted in depleted soils artificially rejuvenated and to poor standards with fertilisers and other crop related stuff (I'm no farmer as you can probably tell).

  6. #96
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,425
    Quote Originally Posted by Erik W View Post
    Agriculture was necessary for people to have more food, instead of living at starvation levels.
    You are assuming that hunger-gatherers subsist at starvation levels, while a switch to agriculture means improved nutrition. Archaeological study would suggest the opposite: the change was accompanied by increased malnutrition.

    Society could grow and we could develop science and technology.
    The change to increased calories from grains made it possible for these lesser-nourished people to increase their rate of population growth. But more than that, it gave farmers an incentive to have large families, because the kids were built-in farm hands. Result: a population explosion lasting 10,000-20,000 years. which "science and technology" have been trailing behind in an effort to cope with population-driven changes.

    There is no evolutionary ladder for cultures, or for organisms for that matter. Change is just change.

  7. #97
    primal_alex's Avatar
    primal_alex is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Geneva (Switzerland)
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by rcooke22 View Post
    The really strange part is the fact that these people are often in such admiration/jealous/wondering about how I keep so trim and lost so much weight and yet when you present them the solution they almost instantly decide it wouldn't work for them or real off a host of excuses.

    Humans are very odd
    I get this a lot from colleagues.

    Other criticisms include:

    - one must eat a little bit of everything in moderation (ok, I'll add some grass-fed crickets :P )
    - I am exaggerated, almost fanatic, I should cheat more often, it's not going to kill me if I do it once in a while (what they intend is: once per day)
    - the skin on my stomach has the thickness of the skin on the back of one's hand (I never understood how this can be used as a form of criticism, it looks like a compliment to me)
    - 18 eggs per week are too many, I won't have problems now but I'll do in 20 years (the only way to check who is right is to wait 20 years, I'll be there, and you?...)
    - the ozone layer is gonna disappear, and that's because of livestock (fine, who is coming to Africa with me to kill all those methane f@rting elephants?)
    - Leonardo da Vinci was a genius and was vegetarian (no, he wasn't: he wrote cookbooks with meat recipes and he even invented the automatic roaster machine to slowly turn the meat onto the fire)

  8. #98
    patski's Avatar
    patski is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Suburbs of Toronto
    Posts
    1,239
    The critics aren't always wrong. Eating high-fat can make a person malnourished, unless they consume offal and bone broth on a regular basis.
    A Post-Primal PrimalPat

    Do not allow yourself to become wrapped up in a food 'lifestyle'. That is ego, and you are not that.

  9. #99
    Z0oom's Avatar
    Z0oom is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    86
    Usually people tell me that they saw something on Dr. Oz and he said it, so it must be true.

    Oh and the everything in moderation, I like that one a lot.

  10. #100
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,081
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by patski View Post
    The critics aren't always wrong. Eating high-fat can make a person malnourished, unless they consume offal and bone broth on a regular basis.
    Well thats quite a silly statement, especially when the polar opposite is just as true of an assumption.....


    Eating low fat can make a person malnourished, unless they consume offal and bone broth on a regular basis.

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •