Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: If one wanted to go "nut free" that should eliminate seeds right? page 2

  1. #11
    Zach's Avatar
    Zach is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamie Madrox View Post
    Do hemp and chia seeds contain the same stuff as nuts and other seeds people consided toxic?
    Yes. Some stuff definitely shouldnt be for human consumption but someone will spin it into a health food anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    I think it's a matter of cost /benefit analysis.

    All nuts, seed, grains, veggies, *all vegetation* has some anti-nutrients. It's just a matter of picking the ones that give you the most nutritional bang for the buck. Grains are clearly not worth the tradeoff.

    You can pry my macadamia nuts from my cold dead hands.
    Agreed.

    Some cultures see almonds almost as divine food. Same with rice and beans, these are essential foods for 3/4 of the world.

  2. #12
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    Yes. Some stuff definitely shouldnt be for human consumption but someone will spin it into a health food anyway.
    Right like when some genius figured out that bran which was only used for animal fodder could be spun into heart healthy cereals.

    Some cultures see almonds almost as divine food. Same with rice and beans, these are essential foods for 3/4 of the world.
    Rice and beans are "essential" only because they are a cheap source of calories. That does not make them optimal human food.

    As far as the O3/O6 tradeoff plus the anti nutrient factor, mac nuts are the best (Mark did an article all about nuts.) Almonds, IIRC, were a close second.

  3. #13
    Zach's Avatar
    Zach is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    Rice and beans are "essential" only because they are a cheap source of calories. That does not make them optimal human food.
    You should go to Mexico and South America and tell them that. Then head over to Asia and the Middle East. Then maybe come up here and tell the local Native Americans.

    There is so much more to food then the sum of its nutrients.

  4. #14
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    You should go to Mexico and South America and tell them that. Then head over to Asia and the Middle East. Then maybe come up here and tell the local Native Americans.

    There is so much more to food then the sum of its nutrients.
    I've lived in Latin America and visited Asia. Just because poor people are getting enough calories to survive and reproduce on a food, does not make it optimal human food. Your genes don't care what happens to you after you reproduce and get the young ones up and running. Optimal nutrition has to be about more than that if one is going to live past ones reproductive years and live it well.

  5. #15
    Zach's Avatar
    Zach is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    I've lived in Latin America and visited Asia. Just because poor people are getting enough calories to survive and reproduce on a food, does not make it optimal human food. Your genes don't care what happens to you after you reproduce and get the young ones up and running. Optimal nutrition has to be about more than that if one is going to live past ones reproductive years and live it well.
    Not just the poor people eat these staples. Did you ever think the the macronutrient carbohydrate has something to do with these peoples health and longevity?

  6. #16
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    Not just the poor people eat these staples. Did you ever think the the macronutrient carbohydrate has something to do with these peoples health and longevity?
    Whose health and longevity are you talking about specifically? I mean there are many traditional societies that eat 30% or less carbs and have terrific health. Seems to me that the evidence points to lower carb for longevity. But, you might be able to make a case for macro agnosticism. Nothing is exactly settled, but I don't believe anyone can actually provide a legitimate argument that high carb is necessary for health and longevity.
    Last edited by Neckhammer; 12-21-2012 at 06:49 PM.

  7. #17
    Zach's Avatar
    Zach is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Whose health and longevity are you talking about specifically? I mean there are many traditional societies that eat 30% or less carbs and have terrific health. Seems to me that the evidence points to lower carb for longevity. But, you might be able to make a case for macro agnosticism. Nothing is exactly settled, but I don't believe anyone can actually provide a legitimate argument that high carb is necessary for health and longevity.
    First, 30% of calories is not lower carb. Even at 1800 cals, that is 150g carbs. Second, which cultures eat less then that? Besides the Inuits of course.

    Pretty much the entire world eats 30-50% calories from carbs including the longest lived and healthiest peoples in the world. Almost all eat grains as part of a daily diet.

  8. #18
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    Pretty much the entire world eats 30-50% calories from carbs including the longest lived and healthiest peoples in the world. Almost all eat grains as part of a daily diet.
    Of course pretty much the entire world is now suffering from high and increasing rates of obesity, diabetes, and cancers too. There's quite the correlation there.

    Most HG societies ate less than 30% carbs and these are the groups that have no indication of all these chronic diseases that are now on the rise. Here is a link:

    Whole Health Source: Composition of the Hunter-Gatherer Diet

    "Many groups were almost totally carnivorous, with 46 getting over 85% of their calories from hunted foods. However, not a single group out of 229 was vegetarian or vegan. No group got less than 15% of their calories from hunted foods, and only 2 of 229 groups ate 76-85% of their calories from gathered foods (don't forget, "gathered foods" also includes small animals)."

    The evidence is obviously lost to the ages. Now that most of these tribes are extinct or have had their traditional cultures destroyed there is little left to study now a days. It's rather sad. But, we do have some inclination as to what they didn't eat...grains, legumes, or seed oils. They did eat meat, nuts, seeds, berries, fruit, and tubers with some vegetables. The groups that had access got more energy from starch and fruit, but there are many that did not.

    Your remark about grain is interesting. Surely you have seen the data damning wheat in grain eating societies...basically in comparison to rice usually. So rice is obviously less toxic than wheat right? So there are levels to which grains are better or worse when your picking your poison...that has been addressed numerous times.

    Then there is this for the agriculturist vs hunter gatherer societies http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/l...ter-gatherers/
    Last edited by Neckhammer; 12-21-2012 at 07:49 PM.

  9. #19
    Zach's Avatar
    Zach is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,869
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Of course pretty much the entire world is now suffering from high and increasing rates of obesity, diabetes, and cancers too. There's quite the correlation there.

    Most HG societies ate less than 30% carbs and these are the groups that have no indication of all these chronic diseases that are now on the rise. Here is a link:

    Whole Health Source: Composition of the Hunter-Gatherer Diet

    "Many groups were almost totally carnivorous, with 46 getting over 85% of their calories from hunted foods. However, not a single group out of 229 was vegetarian or vegan. No group got less than 15% of their calories from hunted foods, and only 2 of 229 groups ate 76-85% of their calories from gathered foods (don't forget, "gathered foods" also includes small animals)."

    The evidence is obviously lost to the ages. Now that most of these tribes are extinct or have had their traditional cultures destroyed there is little left to study now a days. It's rather sad. But, we do have some inclination as to what they didn't eat...grains, legumes, or seed oils. They did eat meat, nuts, seeds, berries, fruit, and tubers with some vegetables. The groups that had access got more energy from starch and fruit, but there are many that did not.

    Your remark about grain is interesting. Surely you have seen the data damning wheat in grain eating societies...basically in comparison to rice usually. So rice is obviously less toxic than wheat right? So there are levels to which grains are better or worse when your picking your poison...that has been addressed numerous times.
    If ever there was a time to say "correlation does not equal causation" that would be it. Pretty much the entire world only started getting high rates of obesity, diabetes and cancers in the last 100 years and mostly in the last 50. There is no doubt that this is from a multitude of things but processed foods, chemicals and a sedentary lifestyle are chief among them. There is no way on earth you can blame carbohydrates or on these things.

    Also i was not talking about small hunter gatherer tribes or our distant ancestors. Im talking about the billions of people around the world who have been eating grains and beans for centuries and are still much healthier then their modernized counterparts. This doesnt mean im specifically talking about wheat either. There are many types of grains. All im saying is that you can google a list of all the longest lived cultures, google their diets and every single one eats a form of grains.

    Btw grains can be traced back up to 100,000 years, legumes 150,000+ years. Grains were the cause of our civilization boom. There is way too much evidence showing that grains are healthy to ignore. They may have toxins just like all plant material but they also sustain life in ways animal products cant.
    Last edited by Zach; 12-21-2012 at 08:01 PM.

  10. #20
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,086
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by Zach View Post
    If ever there was a time to say "correlation does not equal causation" that would be it. Pretty much the entire world only started getting high rates of obesity, diabetes and cancers in the last 100 years and mostly in the last 50. There is no doubt that this is from a multitude of things but processed foods, chemicals and a sedentary lifestyle are chief among them. There is no way on earth you can blame carbohydrates on these things.

    Also i was not talking about small hunter gatherer tribes or our distant ancestors. Im talking about the billions of people around the world who have been eating grains and beans for centuries and are still much healthier then their modernized counterparts. This doesnt mean im specifically talking about wheat either. There are many types of grains. All im saying is that you can google a list of all the longest lived cultures, google their diets and every single one eats a form of grains.

    Btw grains can be traced back up to 100,000 years, legumes 150,000+ years. Grains were the cause of our civilization boom. There is way too much evidence showing that grains a healthy to ignore. They may have toxins just like all plant material but they also sustain life in ways animal products cant.
    Listen, you asked for "a culture"...I gave you 46 (at least). I quite plainly stated you can't make an argument that high carb/grains are necessary because there is ample evidence to the contrary. The article by Eades compares an agricultural society and HG society at the same location....edge HG without grains. I don't disagree that the past hundred years have been worse. Thats why if you are going to eat substandard fair like grains and legumes you should look into WAPF and learn how to prepare them "traditionally" to best mitigate their damage.
    Last edited by Neckhammer; 12-21-2012 at 08:19 PM.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 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
  •