The popular story of how low-carb diets work goes something like this: Reducing your carbohydrate...
Let me introduce myself. My name is Mark Sisson. I’m 63 years young. I live and work in Malibu, California. In a past life I was a professional marathoner and triathlete. Now my life goal is to help 100 million people get healthy. I started this blog in 2006 to empower people to take full responsibility for their own health and enjoyment of life by investigating, discussing, and critically rethinking everything we’ve assumed to be true about health and wellness...Tell Me More
Go back 160,000 years and we all share a common ancestor: The emergence of the first Homo sapiens in East Africa. Since then, humans have spread across every environment imaginable and adapted to those environments. Much remains the same. We all breathe oxygen, require protein, produce insulin, oxidize fatty acids. But extended stays in unique environments have created genetic proclivities in different populations. For example, descendants of people who settled in high-altitude areas like the Himalayas, the Andes, and the Ethiopian highlands tend to show greater resistance to low-oxygen environments, while the Greenland Inuit show unique adaptations to cold environments, including increased activity of heat-stimulating brown fat. And among the island-dwellers of Sardinia, where the landscape constrained the amount of available food, there’s considerable evidence of positive selection for short stature.
What other differences exist, and how can we explore them to inform and improve our own diet and lifestyle choices?
Prior to 1980, how in the world did anyone know how to eat? When you think of all the centuries, the millennia of human existence, how did the species manage to survive bumbling their way through day after day of undirected eating patterns? I’m guessing those of you who know me expected a few irreverent remarks when you read the title of today’s post. Still, I’ll try to keep myself on a short leash today. It’s a legitimate and even, in some regards, culturally (and probably politically) significant question: why were government dietary guidelines ever put in place—and what was the backstory of their uses and modifications over time? Finally, what perspective can it bring to our understanding of embracing a “niche” dietary model like the Primal Blueprint?
Print this out. Bookmark it. Send it to friends who don’t quite get the Primal thing. Consider this a valuable resource for all-things Primal. It’s a nice, alphabetical encapsulation of what it means to lead a Primal lifestyle. It’s not everything, of course. You can always dig deeper into the details, but this summary gives a high-level look at just about everything.
Without further ado, I present The A-to-Z Guide to Leading a Primal Lifestyle.
Avoid chronic cardio. I spent about half my life running (and later, with triathlons, swimming and cycling) myself into the ground. I thought the more miles I could log, the healthier I’d be. That’s the mindset many people have, and it’s absolutely wrong. Running a ten-miler is different than running a ten-miler every day. We have the capacity to go long distances and even outlast wild animals upon which we’re preying. We don’t have the capacity to do that every single day without consequences to our health. Run long distances if you love it, compete if you love competing, but know the cost it incurs.
Some foods and flavors are just made for one another. Bacon and eggs. Strawberries and cream. Basil and tomato. Oil and vinegar. Sweet and sour. The list goes on and on. But what’s behind these classic and nearly universal combinations? Does taste alone drive the decision to, say, add fresh herbs to a charred piece of meat? And if pairings are driven by taste, which sounds reasonably, could it be possible that healthy pairings naturally taste better because we’ve evolved an innate draw towards these powerful combinations? The jury may still be out on that one. Nevertheless, some foods, when taken together, make surprising nutrition sense.
Let’s take a closer look.
For today’s Dear Mark, I’m responding to as many of the questions and concerns relayed in the comment section of last week’s raw milk post. You guys had a lot of them, ranging from whether raw milk can help with eczema and adult asthma, if homogenization is dangerous, why raw milk might taste and smell fishy, to how many people get sick from pasteurized milk. I also respond to reports of raw milk not being a panacea for immune health, and even an active impediment to it.
Lots of ground is covered today, so let’s get right to it.
Here we go:
Is homogenization dangerous?
I don’t drink much, if any, milk. A little cream in my morning coffee, good cheese regularly, some yogurt and kefir on occasion are about the extent of my dairy consumption. But milk? That pure white untouched fluid gushing from swollen udders? No, not really. Not anymore. It’s certainly a nutrient-dense food, don’t get me wrong, and I’m good at breaking down lactose. I just don’t see the need for it in my regular diet.
Ambivalence and lack of personal investment aside, I can’t ignore the bitter debate raging between raw milk advocates and raw milk skeptics. I may not have a personal dog in this fight (for what it’s worth, I seem to tolerate pasteurized milk just fine), and lots of Primal folks reading this are in the same boat, but many of my readers do drink milk — or would like to drink it if a healthier version existed. Raw milk may or may not be that version. Plus, it’s always interesting to wade into the fray to see whose claims are science-based and whose aren’t.