Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 89

Thread: why mark? page 2

  1. #11
    mikezentz's Avatar
    mikezentz is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Honolulu
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by palebluedots View Post
    Something rubs me the wrong way about how that was said. I suspect it's not that people with health problems are gullible and will "latch on" to whatever's out there, but rather that they are more inclined to try experiments to see what makes them feel better. As you admittedly have no health problems, you may not understand the awfulness of not being well on a day-to-day basis. For myself, after years of staunchly believing what the science does officially say got me absolutely nowhere, so it was time for a change. It's still approached in a completely reasonable manner, and it's not at all that I've just latched onto the next fad. :-/
    Well said. I also have no health problems and am not overweight. I started this lifestyle because of the results I saw in other people. If anyone decided to try Primal because nothing else worked for them I'm proud of them, for continuing to try and not just surrendering.

  2. #12
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by palebluedots View Post
    Something rubs me the wrong way about how that was said. I suspect it's not that people with health problems are gullible and will "latch on" to whatever's out there, but rather that they are more inclined to try experiments to see what makes them feel better. As you admittedly have no health problems, you may not understand the awfulness of not being well on a day-to-day basis. For myself, after years of staunchly believing what the science does officially say got me absolutely nowhere, so it was time for a change. It's still approached in a completely reasonable manner, and it's not at all that I've just latched onto the next fad. :-/
    I am sorry that using the world "latch to" conveyed a diminutive connotation but that's not what I intended to say. I wish for everybody to be healthy.

  3. #13
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    I recommend you search threads where people post their bloodwork. Internal evidence is a lot more telling.
    What's Grok's bloodwork? Or maybe at least Mark's? Do you know?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    As for the grains being a different species, do not forget about GMO grain. The grain from back then had a lot less proteins than the grains do now, due to selection and genetic modification. You cannot compare the changes in cows to the changes in grain, as cows have not really been tampered with genetically beyond animal husbandry.
    Are you saying that every grain cultivated right now is GMO? Are you saying that the African Buffalo is the same as the current domesticated cow?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    Secondly, grains back then were shown to go through extensive preparation to remove the most harmful effects of it.
    You can do exactly the same thing right now. But I thought paleo advocates claim that people didn't consume grains back then so why would they go through extensive preparation?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    Yes, you can be healthy without all muscles pronounced, though looking good named should always be a goal.
    It is very subjective what is good looking

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    You will not find much peer reviewed research, if any at all, because this way of eating is so completely OUT THERE in terms of what is known as conventional wisdom. People cannot fathom not having bread or pasta. It also does not pay to promote this diet, because in current farming form, this way of eating would be unsustainable without major agricultural reform.
    You seem to have your perception of agriculture based on your own culture. As far as I know there are plenty of agrarian societies on the planet of earth that have their diet that hasn't changed for centuries. By the way, that's majority of the people on the planet. You are in a minority.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    CW helps promote a silk populace, which means money can be made. Many people who eat CW and then change to paleo, mention how a fog lifts from their mind, as if wool was removed from the eyes. A populace dependent upon muted grains/lab foods is a submissive populace. [/B]
    I already talked about industrialized food.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    We emphasize here that you need to do what works for you, but the rule you must always follow is "Eat real foods." There are paleo vegetarians and vegans. It is a difficult path, however, especially for vegans. I am not quite sure how paleo vegans get their protein intakes, especially if they are against soy (which we all should be, male or female). If they consume enough coconut, avocado, and safe starches, it is completely sustainable and the body will be decently happy.
    That is very different from a vegetarian relying on processed foods. Compare the two if possible.
    Thank you for this, proving that people don't have to follow paleo lifestyle in order to eat real food.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    I would look at the pictures people post while on their different diets. Look closely at them. Notice the skin coloration & sheen, the bone structure, their teeth, the hair thickness, and the muscle tone. Ask yourself, and be honest, if you think certain people look healthy/attractive to you, without even considering their dietary choices. It will be hard to find someone who eats vegetarian who looks like someone on strict paleo; you are what you eat. That is not to say that they are not both equally healthy, but trust your first reaction to pictures.
    That's in a subjective territory and that subjectivity varies from culture to culture.
    Last edited by KathyH; 06-25-2012 at 08:13 PM.

  4. #14
    ciep's Avatar
    ciep is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Barneveld, NY
    Posts
    533
    Why Mark/Primal?

    First of all, because the evolutionary perspective is the only perspective from which we can truly make sense of the life sciences (including subtopics like health, nutrition, etc). That is to say, everything in all of the life sciences can be explained by the theory of evolution by natural selection (theoretically of course, in actuality there are many things we don't have explanations for, but it is accepted that explanations do exist that make sense with within the framework of evolution). That said, the paleo/primal movement really represents the first time that nutrition science has been thoroughly examined, explained, argued, etc from the evolutionary perspective. This, in my mind, gives paleo/primal considerable weight.

    Secondly, because the science, research, and arguments are sound. I won't say that I've been 100% convinced on every point Mark has ever made, or that there isn't at least a little conjecture and occasional guess-work within the primal paradigm, but for the most part on points of contention I've noticed that primal usually has the better/more convincing science to backup its arguments. Honestly, it's pretty difficult playing devil's advocate against primal, whereas the majority of opposing viewpoints tend to get shaky under scrutiny.

    Finally (and I understand that this probably means very little), this way of eating just makes very good intuitive sense to me. I can't necessarily explain why, but eating food in as close to its natural state as possible just seems like "the right way", at least to me.
    Last edited by ciep; 06-25-2012 at 08:30 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    981
    I don't think it's a case of being right or wrong, I'm sure there's way more shades of grey than people tend to acknowledge. It's up to you to experiment and find what you feel best on, that's whats most important to me. When it comes to longevity it's really hard to say that one diet is best. You have countries like Japan that live long healthy lives on fish, rice and veges and countries like Iceland and some of the mediterranean areas that also have a long life expectancy and low disease rates yet consume a diet high in meat and dairy.

  6. #16
    TCates190's Avatar
    TCates190 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SoFlo
    Posts
    124
    I chose to be Primal by using sheer common sense. I read what Mark had to say and it clicked, I immediately felt better and began looking better after just a week (glowing skin, complexion etc.) I just know from my own experiences what works and what doesn't work for my body. I feel that there is no better lab rat than myself.

  7. #17
    DashFire's Avatar
    DashFire is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    256
    Quote Originally Posted by Knifegill View Post
    You want to start with common sense. What do wild humans eat?... Animals and plants. So what should you feed your human? The same... Always start with common sense.
    Absolutely agree with this. As soon as I read the OP, my first thought was Occam's Razor - "a principle urging one to select from among competing hypotheses the one which makes the fewest assumptions and offers the simplest explanation of the effect." For me, Paleo/Primal wins hands down on that.

    Plus when I'm standing in the grocery store, the simplest options, and the ones which I have to make the fewest assumptions about their goodness for me, are whole, unrefined, single ingredient foods -- plants, animals, nuts, etc.
    My Primal Journal - Food, pics, the occasional rant, so...the usual.

    I love cooking. It's sexy science that you stuff in your face. - carlh

  8. #18
    Dirlot's Avatar
    Dirlot is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Edmonton Canada
    Posts
    2,545
    There is no research showing primal is bad. That is the sad thing, so many people say it is bad or say grains are good but there is not a stitch of research showing that.
    Eating primal is not a diet, it is a way of life.
    PS
    Don't forget to play!

  9. #19
    BONZ's Avatar
    BONZ is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    ME/Southwest Asia
    Posts
    145
    So you're a skeptic, huh? Welcome to the club.

    To the OP's question, I'm sorry to say there is no answer to that. In your life you'll only ever know what's optimal for you, and you'll only know that through personal experimentation. If you ever find yourself in a social setting (like this internet forum perhaps) with such a strict dogma that personal experimentation is not incouraged, I'd suggest moving along. I don't however think that would be an accurate description of the crowd gathered here, although I do admit every group has it's outliers.

    While this won't be an answer, it does make for an interesting exercise.....

    Imagine that most of what you "know" about nutrition came from studies funded by Agri-business. Whole grains lower bad cholesterol for example. Well, lets also imagine what you know about blood cholesterol came from studies funded by Pharma-business. LDL-c numbers are an indicator of CVD or heart attack risk and HDL numbers should be higher for example. These are "truths" in the medical industry today, and no run of the mill doctor will stray from the book in diagnosing and perscribing for you. They won't risk a lawsuit, and the "book of truths" protects them. Dogma.

    Now lets imagine there's a backlash to this. Pioneers of "paleo" theory take it in the extreme opposite direction. No grain is acceptable, carbohyrates in all forms are poison, that's why you make ketones, etc.

    Like most things in life, I imagine the closest thing to truth lies somewhere in the middle, getting drowned out by the outliers having a shout down at one another.
    Went Primal: 20 DEC 2011
    Starting: 6'1" 220 lbs
    Starting Energy: "bleh...."
    Current: 183 lbs @ 8.33% BF (Jackson/Pollock 4 caliper method)
    Current Energy: "WOOHOO!" See my journal HERE.

    "Paleo? Try it, but be wary of the cult mentality that comes with it. Paleovangelists are everywhere and a bit scary."

  10. #20
    KathyH's Avatar
    KathyH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    252
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    No I do not. I said look at the bloodwork posted by current members of this forum.
    The bloodwork is all over the place, what kind of sane conclusion am I supposed to draw from that?


    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    Most of the wheat produced in America is GMO. Corn and Soy are close behind.
    Is paleo lifestyle only practiced in the United States? If so, then no wonder your perspective is limited to that culture alone. And when you say America are you referring to geographical location or political?
    These arguments and debates where there are such large swooping generalizations and are based on such limited cultures without broader global context are prove to me that I can't take any of this "evidence" seriously.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    The African Buffalo is a lot different than a domesticated cow, but both of them evolved naturally and through husbandry. Do not mince my words.
    Are you serious? African Buffalo has been domesticated? I would like to know where exactly the African Buffalo has been domesticated. Please don't quote Zoos.



    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    People generally did not make agriculture a staple until 10,000 BC.
    What is this supposed to mean? Generally? SO did they or did they not? How do you know that 25,000BC there was no domestication of any kind practiced? Can you find evidence against it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    When it was eaten, it was prepared because it made tasty things. Remember, most grains only have themselves as their only defense. Something that kills a rat that eatss it probably just would make a very large mammal or human sick, but not kill it.
    Again, it's your assumption based on what?


    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    Look at their health, how many of them are truly healthy? How many of them show no signs of diseases? How many of them have widsom teeth?
    Does such data exist for global population? If so point me to it. Please give me examples of societies/cultures to prove your point.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sihana View Post
    You have not even mentioned what your culture is, you are dodging the issue, and it sounds like you have already made up your mind about the issue, and are just here looking to attack our ways. Most of us here eat meat, and plenty of veggies and fruits. We know by our OWN EXPERIENCES, that we react badly to certain things. Regular corn makes me sick/foggy, sprouted corn does not. Cow dairy makes me break out, goat dairy does not. Wheat makes my skin turn ashy, my brain foggy, and makes my periods harder. Soy makes me have two periods a month, no joke.
    Please show the relevance of my culture to this conversation.
    You are dodging the issue as much as I am, obviously you have made up your mind. Sorry that inquisitive mind questioning things means attacking to you. I think I am debating and you think I am attacking.
    I also eat meat and plenty of veggies and fruits, how am I different from you then? I also know by my OWN EXPERIENCE, so is your anecdotal experience better than mine or is it just different?

    So back to original question "Why Mark?" Still no idea. Inconclusive evidence, too many broad generalizations for me.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •