This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Warren Dew
Pages: 1 ... 296 297  299 300 ... 362
« on: December 10, 2009, 12:09:43 PM »
Breakfast: Eggs + Fruit
Lunch: Salad with grilled chicken, onion, apple, romaine lettuce, cucumber, walnuts
Dinner: Same as lunch, or maybe some fish + avocado + fruit, etc.
Throughout the day: more servings of fruit, some nuts, etc...
My guess is the same as the others: not enough animal fat. Grilled chicken is very lean, as is fish unless you are having oily fish with the skin on. The only animal fat you are getting is in the egg yolks, and unless they are omega 3 eggs, they probably don't have a good balance of essential fats anyway.
The result is that you need a lot of fruit to get enough calories, and that can make you feel somewhat bloated. I'm a bit surprised at the constipation, though.
« on: December 10, 2009, 11:57:07 AM »
The oily fish 1-2 times per week recommendation is because some fish are mercury contaminated.
Yes. If you google a bit, you can find lists of what kinds of fish from which sources have how much mercury. The general trends are that smaller fish are better, U.S. west coast fish are better than U.S. east coast fish, and Alaskan fish is better than California fish. Oh, and wild fish are better than farmed.
« on: December 09, 2009, 03:04:53 PM »
Unfortunately, I have a very strong intolerance to egg yolk. I literally get doubling over pain and then throw up if I eat them. Odd, huh? Other things with egg yolk in it just give me stomach pain, like mayo. Can I get the same omega 3:6 ratio by just using egg beaters? I'm not fond of them, but if it's for my health I'll do it.
Unfortunately, the omega 3 fats are in the yolk, so egg beaters won't help. I'd say just use the fatty meat that you can afford for now, and see how it goes. Even grain fed beef has a better omega 3:6 ratio than vegetable oils by most measurements.
The nuts I eat are just plain almonds and walnuts (the only two kinds I like) with nothing added at all. I don't like salt that much at all (I find it tends to give me stomach problems) so I never buy them unless I can get them completely plain.
Good for you! Those are probably the best two kinds of nuts to have.
« on: December 09, 2009, 11:08:41 AM »
Will eating grain fed beef make the diet not work?
The diet should still work with grain fed beef, but you will not get the additional benefits from a good omega 3:6 ratio. I'd recommend at least switching to omega 3 eggs.
So my 2nd question is how much exercise do I need on the Paleo diet in order to lose weight and stay healthy?
You won't need any exercise to lose weight on paleo, provided the meat you eat is sufficiently fatty. I know that last about the fat sounds strange; I'll explain further with the next question.
Exercise will absolutely help your health, though. In your situation, I'd suggest going easy to avoid the fatigue syndrome setting in at first. After a few months, you may find that paleo helps with that too.
I find myself getting hungry just an hour after a large meal of meat and veggies. I then have a snack of a large glass of water and a handful of nuts and either an apple or an orange. I still find myself hungry, though. It even wakes me up at night, always around 2 am. Am I doing something wrong that might be causing this?
The problem is that your meat is too lean. If you don't eat enough fat, the meal will not satisfy you for long enough. Then when you have fruit for a snack, the carbohydrate just makes you hungry again. The general opinion here is that Cordain is mistaken about focusing on lean meat; you should go ahead and have fatty meat, and feel free to eat as much of the fat as you enjoy. You can check out various other threads for more detail on why this is.
Also, if the nuts are roasted or salted, they may be a problem. Most roasted nuts are roasted in peanut oil, which is not paleo. The heavy salting that salted nuts get is not paleo. My recommendation is to get raw nuts still in the shell.
How long should it be before I lose weight eating Paleo and how much should I expect to lose?
You'll probably lose a pound or two a week, plus some additional water weight in the first couple weeks if you are not eating too much fruit. From where you are, it may take a year or three to get down to your ideal weight, which is probably in the range of 140 lb.
Feel free to post here or in the appropriate forums if you have more questions. Some people keep a detailed diet log which can also help in tracking down issues.
« on: December 07, 2009, 02:14:24 PM »
I suspect he's using liberal estimates, but I don't think he has to exaggerate much to make his point.
« on: December 07, 2009, 07:50:38 AM »
I ate marrow for a while, but from what I understand, it is just fat and doesn't contain any calcium.
I think the argument for eating marrow is the same as that for eating organ meats: it's a part of the animal that our paleolithic ancestors regularly ate.
« on: December 04, 2009, 11:45:02 AM »
Interesting. So we're only talking about dietary vitamin D here and not the form created in the skin from sunlight.
The results don't seem conclusive to me on reading this, but it certainly does seem that getting our vitamin D from sunlight would be the safest bet.
« on: December 04, 2009, 11:39:50 AM »
For sure. But it's still big business. The bottom line will always be cut cost and increase income. $!
The business aspects are balanced by the competition, yes.
On the other hand, if we could get insurance to follow the individual rather than be paid for and selected by the employer, health insurance companies might find that a good way to cut costs would be to figure out what healthy eating habits actually are. Getting people off the food pyramid carb addition would be an excellent way to cut costs and benefit the customer at the same time.
Edit: unfortunately, that's not a solution that any of the politicians support.
« on: December 04, 2009, 11:34:36 AM »
I wasn't eating paleo at the time but my bodyfat was really low at that point, maybe 17% or so.
I think 17%, while low by modern norms, would probably have been on the high side for paleolithic women.
« on: December 03, 2009, 09:19:53 AM »
The Mesolithic was quite different from the Paleolithic in terms of what foodstuffs were available. The big game such as mammoth was no longer available, so they had to resort to smalller game and perhaps had to become more reliant on plant matter. So I don't know - should we really not really consider the Mesolithic foods and concentrate only on the Paleolithic? (It's harder though, as there isn't as much fossil evidence!).
I don't think the mesolithic is in and of itself at all a good guide to the paleo diet, given the evolutionary reasoning behind the paleo diet. The time scale for the mesolithic is still only a few tens of thousands of years, so there's still insufficient time to have adapted to foods newly adopted in the mesolithic, just as for the neolithic.
I do agree there's a paucity of direct evidence for our diet during the paleolithic, so we're left guessing about things like whether vegetable and fruit intake was zero or merely low. I do think that mesolithic diets can be used to inform those guesses - just as modern hunter gatherer diets can be - but I think we need to be careful to differentiate between foods which were eaten through both the paleolithic and the mesolithic but only left evidence in the latter, which would be paleo, and foods that were newly adopted in the mesolithic, which would not be.
« on: December 02, 2009, 10:13:52 PM »
There's that one big downfall for a mostly meat diet. High protein and little calcium. :-(
Well, unless you're willing to chew on the bones.
If I can't find tripe, I might have to keep including tahini for the calcium!
My nearest Whole Foods had a lot of tripe yesterday. It's weird, because I've never seen it there before.
« on: December 02, 2009, 02:16:00 PM »
« on: December 02, 2009, 09:20:37 AM »
Would this work?
"Do you think you could make me regular cookies this time, like chocolate chip maybe? My friends won't eat the ethnic ones."
"Oh, but they're for you, not for your friends."
"Oh, mom, I don't eat cookies any more. They give me [stomach pains, diarrhea, whatever]."
Maybe you can even negotiate for some prosciutto or the Eastern European equivalent.
« on: December 01, 2009, 01:40:06 PM »
Mesolithic diets in England included starches!
It's to be noted "mesolithic" means "middle stone age", in contrast to "paleolithic", which means "old stone age", so this isn't evidence for the starchy foods being paleo. In fact, it might be evidence against it - it might be reflecting what foods humans had to resort to after overhunting their main food sources towards the end of the paleolithic.
« on: December 01, 2009, 08:35:12 AM »
The pyramid says to eat 6-11 grains a day. Does anyone else think tha tmaybe we don't eat enough fruits/veggies because people are too busy stuffing their faces with grains?
I certainly think it's a factor. I think that when the average American has a carb craving, he reaches for bread, not fruit.
Pages: 1 ... 296 297  299 300 ... 362