Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 105

Thread: I wish Mark (or someone else) writes a response to this... page 4

  1. #31
    Omni's Avatar
    Omni is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    968
    Shop Now
    The phytic acid article, still cherry picking, nothing definitive there, regarding betaine easily available through a wide variety of other foods so still no points for wheat.

    The interesting point with regards to the phytic acid article is the early mention of the indigestability of gluten and the proliferation of a specific bacteria with regards to high gluten consumption, and this was passed off as a beneficial adaptation.
    Anyone who knows anything about microbiota, knows that any significant changes observed, come with 100's of changes not yet observed or understood, the proliferation of this bacteria may well be a significant contributer to the upsurge in chronic disease rates, so a very poor and superficial assessment IMO.
    "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

  2. #32
    Dirlot's Avatar
    Dirlot is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Edmonton Canada
    Posts
    2,424
    Quote Originally Posted by jakejoh10 View Post
    So what did you find in her rebuttal paper that is false?



    Studies? Also, those that eat higher portions of grains often tend to have a horrible diet overall. Saying that grains are the factor causing all of the issues is overly simplistic, and ignoring context of the overall diet.
    She was paid by the grain council. Everything was cherry picked and simplistic analysis. If you can't see that nothing I say will convince you.

    No studies basic USDA and UN info....it is all there and I am sure you are aware. As I am sure you are aware India one of the highest grain consumers also has the highest rate of diabetes

    Hmmm so the highest grains (most 3ed world counties) have the most "horrible diet overall" Why do you think that is? Could it an over reliance on grains???? Head Desk
    Last edited by Dirlot; 06-23-2013 at 10:41 PM.
    Eating primal is not a diet, it is a way of life.
    PS
    Don't forget to play!

  3. #33
    Knifegill's Avatar
    Knifegill is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    6,884
    A true carnivore eats very few vegetables, and those are largely predigested in the gut of prey (easily substituted with fermented vegetables if desired). Complete nutrition (and then some!) is easily found in a vegetable-free diet. Eating entire animals, seafood, eggs and a few berries and other fruits completely covers all RDA and usually vastly overshoots them at 3000 calories a day. So a virtually phytate-free diet is easily attainable. And I do find it interesting that the fewer phytates a food has, the more nutritious it tends to be. Coincidence?


    Turquoisepassion:
    Knifegill is christened to be high carb now!
    notontherug:
    the buttstuff...never interested.
    He gives me Lamprey Kisses in the midnight sea
    Flubby tubby gums latching onto me
    For all that I've done wrong, I mastodon something right...

    My pony picture thread http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread82786.html

  4. #34
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirlot View Post
    Everything was cherry picked and simplistic analysis. If you can't see that nothing I say will convince you.
    Wasn't offering this as a definitive piece, just another side of the argument.

    Hmmm so the highest grains (most 3ed world counties) have the most "horrible diet overall" Why do you think that is? Could it an over reliance on grains???? Head Desk
    Maybe I should have been more clear. Of course, if you're over-consuming grains due to a lack of other sources of nutrients, your diet is going to be poor. The diet is poor because it's deficient in nutrients, and it's over-reliant on grains; not because grains themselves are inherently bad.

    Is it fair to draw the conclusion that grains are unhealthy because third world countries over-consume grains and they have high disease rates? No.

    Is the situation of third world countries relevant to this discussion? No.
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

  5. #35
    Misabi's Avatar
    Misabi is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,683
    Quote Originally Posted by jakejoh10 View Post
    Interesting that you think investing in blood work is so crazy. Don't really have much in response to this, other than if you're concerned about gluten to the extent that you think you might be "gluten intolerant", I absolutely think it's worth paying for.
    I may be misunderstanding your point, but why spend good money on testing for it when you can simply eliminate it to find out?

    Incidentally, on the subject of being able to handle eating grains just fine, I think the number of people who can is less than you (they) believe. For example, neither my parents or I would ever have thought that we had issues caused be eating gluten, certainly the medical community never related any of our health issues to gluten. I could easily Polish of a whole least of white bread without issue, but if I ate the slightest amount of garlic or cooked onion and I'd experience major digestive distress. My dad had the similar but more advanced symptoms and had suffered from them for decades,to the point where basically the only "foods" which didn't result in issues was mushrooms on toast.

    Thanks to sites like mda I tried removing gluten only to find that my issues (e.g. lifelong issues with gut pain, constipation, bloating, diarrhea, cramps, etc. ) within days.

    Likewise with my dad, the same symptoms as mine in addition to acne (from his teens to his 50's), again they vanished within a couple of weeks of dropping the gluten. He was back to being able to eat food that previously would have caused him distress, such as broccoli, cabbage, etc.

    My mum's insomnia and restless leg syndrome drastically improved also within va couple of weeks.

    Forgive my rambling, my point is that until weknew bettermy family were "fine" eating wheat, either other food caused us problems or we had unexplained issues which didn't seem to be good related.

    We were also seemingly fit and healthy (apart from the symptoms mentioned above), my dad and I both keen athletes throughout our lives.

    How many other "fit, healthy and active" people are actually suffering a variety of issues that they either don't notice because that's just how they've always felt that way or from issues that they just don't realise are due to gluten?
    If you're interested in my (very) occasional updates on how I'm working out and what I'm eating click here.

    Quote Originally Posted by tfarny View Post
    If you are new to the PB - please ignore ALL of this stuff, until you've read the book, or at least http://www.marksdailyapple.com/primal-blueprint-101/ and this (personal fave): http://www.archevore.com/get-started/

  6. #36
    MarieD's Avatar
    MarieD is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by jakejoh10 View Post
    Okay, call them whatever you wish. Again, there are healthy people who eat large amounts of grains. It's the full context of the diet that matters.
    Inflammation is insidious - often with no symptoms until illness strikes.

  7. #37
    EatMoveSleep's Avatar
    EatMoveSleep is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Misabi View Post

    How many other "fit, healthy and active" people are actually suffering a variety of issues that they either don't notice because that's just how they've always felt that way or from issues that they just don't realise are due to gluten?
    good point - my situation was the same - though I too was fit and healthy ( with some issues)

    Doctor had drugs but no mention of grains or other food.

    I never suspected grains as the cause and they're said to be healthy.

    I stumbled on this crazy no-grain idea (no real help from medical doctors or dieticians - the experts), eventually I tried dropping grains after another health issue.

    After 10 days the issues went away - along with many other small ailments I carried for more than half a lifetime - again no one mentioned grains to me as a bad thing.

    I now don't consider grains a food group.

  8. #38
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,606
    Quote Originally Posted by ahuderot View Post
    Hi all!
    My primal life is about a few weeks old, and I believe primal living have improved my life extensively. Though, I'm relatively new to this web site.
    I'm reading several anti-primal or anti-paleo ideas from several sources over the internet. The latest one I read is in the following link:
    Dissecting the Myth: Why Grains and Gluten Aren't Bad for You | Outlaw Fitness
    The author is a grain-lover, and so he does not like the primal strategy offered by the Primal Blueprint. In the article, he quotes Mark and writes his responses to each point in some of Mark's articles on this site.
    I wish Mark could write a response to that, and so enlighten the unknowledgeable ignorant such as I.
    Alternatively, if any of you could do that (or point me to some direction), I would totally appreciate it.
    Thank you for your consideration.
    OK, I did not read the link - but I can answer your question without reading the link.

    1.) Let's assume gluten is not bad for you.
    2.) Let's assume grains contain no phytate at all and eating grains didn't block nutrient absorption by binding to minerals like zinc, calcium and magnesium, making your body unable to absorb them.
    3.) Let's assume grains don't contain any other lectin activity (WGA in wheat - which probably worse than gluten, avenin in oats, zein in corn, etc.)
    4.) Let's assume most of the grain we eat today is actually grain and not some GMO-monocrop.

    Let's assume all the toxic effects of grains we hear in paleo communities don't exist. Let's assume they are completely benign.

    They are still empty calories.

    There is little measurable nutrition in grains. Compare any grain to steak, eggs, cheese, any fruit or vegetable, milk, fish...they're not even close. Even if they are harmless from a toxin standpoint, they provide little nutrition and little satiety. At their absolute best, they are very fattening and promote nutrient deficiencies due to the high calorie load, low levels of nutrients and low satiety. At their absolute worst, they are toxic and will cause disease overtime from a mix of toxin load and vitamin deficiencies.

    At your absolute best, you're overweight and malnourished. At your absolute worst, you're dead from some autoimmune condition. So, why eat them?
    Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 06-24-2013 at 06:15 AM.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  9. #39
    oxide's Avatar
    oxide is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    MD/VA/DC
    Posts
    1,249
    Quote Originally Posted by jakejoh10 View Post
    Is it fair to draw the conclusion that grains are unhealthy because third world countries over-consume grains and they have high disease rates? No.
    Is the situation of third world countries relevant to this discussion? No.
    WHY is third world "irrelevant?" Are non-Americans somehow not the same humans as Americans, that third worlders are taken down by grain and their American betters are somehow immune?

    And anyway, you don't need to go to the third world to see bad diets and grain-based obesity. Just go to the poor section of any American city where Little Debbie rules the day. Or go to any rural area where homemade (i.e. "unprocessed") pancakes and muffins, or corn grits, are seen as the staff of life. Or, go to any upscale zumba class where women eat heart healthy Special K and exercise and yet still can't seem to get rid of those extra 18 pounds. Grains, and wheat especially, are inherently bad for a variety of reasons for many people, maybe not all, but enough.

    I reject the "in moderation" argument. William Davis, among others, see modern wheat as a mildly addictive drug. Wheat in moderation is like cigarettes are heroin in moderation -- there IS no moderation.
    5'0" female, 43 years old. Started Primal October 31, 2011, at a skinny fat 111.5 lbs. Low weight: 99.5 lb on a fast. Current weight: skinny-fat 106.5 lbs because of sugar cheating.

    MY PRIMAL: I (try to) follow by-the-book primal as advocated by Mark Sisson, except for whey powder and a bit of cream. I aim for 80-90 g carb/day and advocate a two-month strict adjustment for newbies. But everybody is different and other need to tweak Primal to their own needs.

  10. #40
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by oxide View Post
    WHY is third world "irrelevant?" Are non-Americans somehow not the same humans as Americans, that third worlders are taken down by grain and their American betters are somehow immune?
    It becomes irrelevant when you compare third world countries, who are deficient in nutrients simply due to poverty and lack of availability, to a group of people who's problem is choosing what to eat and what not to eat, with a choice. And then saying that grains are to blame for the poor health of a population is ignoring the myriad of other factors that play in.

    And anyway, you don't need to go to the third world to see bad diets and grain-based obesity. Just go to the poor section of any American city where Little Debbie rules the day. Or go to any rural area where homemade (i.e. "unprocessed") pancakes and muffins, or corn grits, are seen as the staff of life. Or, go to any upscale zumba class where women eat heart healthy Special K and exercise and yet still can't seem to get rid of those extra 18 pounds. Grains, and wheat especially, are inherently bad for a variety of reasons for many people, maybe not all, but enough.
    To your first point, the problem is the entire context of the diet. Overeating is a serious problem among these populations, and of course, the excess consumption of refined grains does nothing but make it worse. In your Zumba class example, I'm not convinced that grains would be the underlying problem in that situation. Just my opinion.

    I reject the "in moderation" argument. William Davis, among others, see modern wheat as a mildly addictive drug. Wheat in moderation is like cigarettes are heroin in moderation -- there IS no moderation.
    I think that's a bit of a hyperbole.

    I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. There are those who do not agree with the notion that wheat is the devil as well (Alan Aragon and Lyle McDonald come to mind). I think it's important to look at both sides of the argument. At this point, I'm not for or against the consumption of grains, I'm just trying to look at the situation from an un-biased perspective.
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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
  •