Do you think we over analyze things? page

[Bostonbully]

The whole premis of eating primal is to eat like our ancestors ate. At the same time we are I guess gifted with the ability to jump online and look up any and every nutritional fact. The carb content, the protein, the Omega 6's and 3's, and that is all well and good. It is all good information that we should take into account but it bothers me when I hear someone say something like "Oh I don't eat that because the Omega ratios are off a bit" or something along those lines. Grok didn't have all the info we have and since we are all here I am assuming he did just fine. I guess my thing is assuming it is primal eat the damn food. Live life and stop looking so close at everything.

[Stabby]

The paleo axiom is an a priori method used to create working hypothesis'. We take what we know about evolution and about paleo anthropology and make inferences about human nutrition using premises from the knowledge we have in those fields. Mark and the generally scientifically minded people realize this, and that is why we think that "what Grok did" or what we think he did is insufficient to form a conclusion about what we ought to do for optimal health. The a priori hypothesis must always defer to the empirical evidence and that is where modern nutritional science comes in. There are things that Grok did that we can improve upon and there are things that he never did that we should do. Grok is a starting point, not an end.

For those of us striving to be as healthy as we possibly can with the greatest vitality and longevity as is possible, looking at things closely is the only reasonable conclusion. It gives us knowledge and whether or not we decide to act upon it is another issue all together. For some it is primarily a point of interest.

"Oh I don't eat that because the Omega ratios are off a bit"

Maybe that person doesn't want more eicosanoid activity than they have to. Today I ate two tablespoons of hemp seeds and two tablespoons of olive oil, and hefty amount of bratwurst. Was that particularly healthy? No, but the point is that I know it isn't and all knowledge is invaluable in the hands of one who can handle it.

edit: To put in another way, we should always strive to know what -is- the case, but knowing that doesn't necessitate an -ought- in itself. An ought can only be derived from an is with a qualifier about a person's values. If I value the hemp seeds right now more than I value the absence of superfluous eicosanoids, I ought to eat the hemp seeds. If I would rather go without the hemp seeds than have the inflammation, I ought not to eat the hemp seeds. Neither is more right than the other, it's all contingent upon individual values. There are few values that I hold as immutable and one of them happens to be that I ought to know what is the case about reality, and so I'm going to look really closely.

[Helen in Oz]

I try to find a happy balance - edumacate myself about the science involved, internalize it then eat instinctively.

The problem is that we are SO saturated by conventional wisdom, and our food supply system is so artificial, that unless you're living in some idyllic jungle somewhere, it's far too easy to get it wrong.

At the moment I'm eating fairly randomly anything remotely within the guidelines; next month when I have more time (and can finally afford to buy the book), I'm going to track my nutrition and balance things a bit.

I think a lot of us enjoy tracking down the science a bit too - it's sort of a hobby, as health and fitness often is.

[ikaika]

Bostonbully-- I totally agree. So much over analyzing sucks the joy out of eating and the play out of life!

The problem is that we are SO saturated by conventional wisdom, and our food supply system is so artificial, that unless you're living in some idyllic jungle somewhere, it's far too easy to get it wrong.

At the same time, I (sadly) acknowledge that the above is true.

So yeah, I learn what I can and then do what I want
(tracking crap is a large part of learning, for me)

-写

[primalclubber]

Given the crap loads of CW we have to overcome, I think it's ok to over analyze to a point. There's a lot of information we need to sort through. Ultimately we still need to find a balance, or else it becomes another miserable "prescription" to survival, rather than a meaningful lifestyle. It's the lazy ones that expect others to do the thinking for them that annoy me here.

[Bostonbully]

I agree the more knowledge the better. As primalclubber said it all comes down to balance. I guess if someone wants to be 100% clean then thats great. It is just a little over bearing to me. I eat primal foods. Did I know that hemp seed gave you superfluous eicosanoids, nope. I had to google what eicosanoids are. I will eat primal to the best of my ability but I'm not going to look up how every food I put in my mouth interacts with my body. That just isn't me, but I guess if someone else wants to then more power to them.

[tooround]

Sometimes I think so but ... I put an awful lot of effort into calorie counting too.

One of the things I like best about PB is that there is such a wide range of "effective compliance". A body can indeed get to be slimmer and healthier by simply cleaning up their food. Just because the information is there ... to go above and beyond ... does not mean that we have to use it. But some folks love that stuff and/or aspire to elite fitness.

Also, if I ever become discontent with the progress I've made ... I know there's a weath of inofrmation out there to help me get better results.
Oh and yes, we feel the need to justify our "weird" activites vs CW. Everybody does it. WW, South Beach, Dr Chemicals Weight Loss Clinics ...

My take is this ... we must find what works for us with the least amount of heartache. One of my most favourite definitions of obsessive behaviour is about it's "detrimental" effect on the rest of your life. It contravenes a couple of the Primal Laws to fuss and stew and sit at the computer thinking ... which I used to do in effort to get my macros just right. But that makes some people happy.

[Diana Renata]

I over analyze everything...

[Anand Srivastava]

How do you know that a food is Primal or not?
Is it possible that paleolithic guys were preparing it in a different way, because it is more nutritious that way?
Or is it possible they avoided something in a season but ate it in another?
We don't know much about the primal foods.

The Primal concept is just a guide.

We then use our scientific knowledge to decide whether it makes sense or not.
Everybody comes up with different ideas about foods. Eg I and a few others think that potatoes are primal, while several people think that they are not primal. It depends on everybody's research.

There is no ultimate truth here. So the need to analyze.
I am not sure when we cross the border and are overanalyzing.

[ikaika]

I had to google what eicosanoids are.

I just did and I'm still lost