Show Posts

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 [298] 299 300 ... 361
Research / Re: Paleolithic Europeans
« 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.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Fruits and veggies
« 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.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Borderline case!
« on: December 01, 2009, 07:28:21 AM »
so does that mean tomatoes and peppers are not paleo?

They're kind of a borderline case, in my opinion.  They are fruit, so they are evolved to be eaten by animals - likely even specifically monkeys - but they are evolved in the new world - the Americas - and all of human evolution from monkeys through apes to humans happened in the old world.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Borderline case!
« on: November 30, 2009, 07:33:02 AM »
the 'fat burns fat' diet closely resembles paleo, eliminating grain and sugar as a hindrance to the fat burning process, while fat itself stimulates it. from this perspective it is good to eat fat dairy products being high on animal fat, and probably peanuts, oils etc too simply because they are natural products high on fat.

I'd agree that for weight loss purposes, paleo is similar to a low carb - and thus high fat - diet like Atkins.  However, the paleo diet isn't primarily a weight loss diet.  Rather, it's targeted at lifelong health, for which weight control is only one part.  For many foods, the reason they are not paleo is because they may be unhealthy for reasons unrelated to weight gain.

it's interesting though to look at the amount of lectins in the food, ie sugar binding proteins. what do they actually do?

Typically they bind receptor sites on cells in the body, preventing those sites from fulfilling their normal functions.

Food Journals / Re: Cautionary tales #3
« on: November 29, 2009, 08:07:19 PM »
So, you'd think I'd learn, but apparently not.

We had Thanksgiving at my place - my brother came in with his wife and three sons, plus my mother, and of course our own family.  In anticipation of this, I bought a lot of groceries, including some nonpaleo stuff - especially the Green & Black chocolate, which was half price.

Well, after everyone left on Friday, I still had a whole nonpaleo pecan pie left over, plus a big bar of Green & Black 55% chocolate with hazelnuts and currants.  The other 45% is, of course, mostly sugar.

Well, I figured that if I only ate the insides of the pie and not the crust, I'd be skipping the flour and trans fats at least - and the chocolate did have hazelnuts and currants in it, so it wasn't completely nonpaleo!  So I split some with my wife - then over the course of the day yesterday, I ate the rest.  It was probably at least 200g of sugar.

Naturally, I woke up this morning with a sore throat.  Uh oh!  I gulped down some water and a vitamin C pill - fight nonpaleo with nonpaleo, I figure - and I got out of the house to get some sunshine, while staying well hydrated all day.

The sore throat actually went away by noon, but then I had a bad head cold with congestion and a headache all afternoon.

I'm actually feeling a bit better now after staying paleo for the rest of the day and having some bone broth - and I did get hungry in the evening, which doesn't usually happen until I'm recovering.  We'll see what happens tomorrow.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Meal scheduling and weight loss
« on: November 29, 2009, 07:08:54 PM »
I recently read that the maximum protein the body can process at any one meal is 25-30g.  I know many have success with IF so I doubt this is the case but would be interesting to see the study and discuss.

Do you have a link to the source?

I have to admit that I'm extremely skeptical.  There's lots of data out there that indicates that protein - or at least animal protein - is very well absorbed, and I doubt it was all done with lots of small meals.  It's barely possible that protein absorption could be so limited in a small, high carbohydrate meal that passed through the small intestine very rapidly, but on large meals with sufficient fat to keep one satiated for up to a day?  If those numbers were true, people who eat one meal a day would be wasting away because they couldn't absorb even the government recommended minimum amount of protein, and that doesn't seem to be happening.

Miscellaneous / Re: Modern mortality
« on: November 29, 2009, 03:15:10 PM »
Amending my previous response....

What do you think is the cause of 50-60yr olds dying that wasn't there in years past?

Of course, the obvious thing is the food pyramid.

Do people really eat that much more carbohydrate as a result of the food pyramid?

Edit:  answering my own question:

During 1971--2000, a statistically significant increase in average energy intake occurred (Table). For men, average energy intake increased from 2,450 kcals to 2,618 kcals (p<0.01), and for women, from 1,542 kcals to 1,877 kcals (p<0.01). For men, the percentage of kcals from carbohydrate increased between 1971--1974 and 1999--2000, from 42.4% to 49.0% (p<0.01), and for women, from 45.4% to 51.6% (p<0.01) (Table). The percentage of kcals from total fat decreased from 36.9% to 32.8% (p<0.01) for men and from 36.1% to 32.8% (p<0.01) for women. In addition, the percentage of kcals from saturated fat decreased from 13.5% to 10.9% (p<0.01) for men and from 13.0% to 11.0% (p<0.01) for women. A slight decrease was observed in the percentage of kcals from protein, from 16.5% to 15.5% (p<0.01) for men and from 16.9% to 15.1% (p<0.01) for women.

Percentages of a varying total aren't very useful, so I plugged the numbers into a spreadsheet:

Category    Total   protein   fat   carb.    other  sat.fat

Men 1971     2450     404     904    1039     103     331
Men 2000     2618     406     859    1283      71     285

  change     +6.9%   +0.4%   -5.0%  +23.5%  -31.3%  -13.7%

Women 1971   1542     261     557     700      25     200
Women 2000   1877     283     616     969       9     206

  change    +21.7%   +8.8%  +10.6%  +38.3%  -62.0%   +3.0%

So yes, the absolute change in carbohydrate consumption has been significant.

All the cases of early mortality I know of are men.  Looking at the men's numbers, it could be associated with carbohydrate consumption, which increased by 23.5%.  It might possibly be associated with reduced "other calories" - probably alcohol - by 31%, but there have always been some teetotalers, and I don't think they died early in my father's generation.  It certainly isn't total fat or saturated fat, which have declined in absolute numbers for men.

It could of course still be something not reflected in these numbers, such as the new medications that have been mentioned.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Hardcore Paleo Winter. Input please.
« on: November 29, 2009, 12:38:46 PM »
The only things I would say are, include some bone broth for calcium and some amino acids that are more common in collagen than in muscle, and get some sunlight.

Miscellaneous / Re: Why are europeans so pale skinned?
« on: November 28, 2009, 01:10:49 PM »
I think they're failing to account for all the data.  For example what else do those alleles affect besides vitamin D?

It's to be noted that there was a major expansion from the middle east into the rest of Europe around 10,000 years ago coinciding with the development with agriculture; the agriculturalists displaced most of the preexisting humans in Europe at that time.  Since those agriculturalists would have needed lighter skin for vitamin D when moving into the Europe from the mideast, and since they contributed the majority of the modern European gene pool, it's to be expected that most modern Europeans would have skin color alleles dating to the time of that expansion.

The preexisting Europeans probably also had light skin, and obviously would have had skin color alleles dating to longer ago - perhaps 30,000 years ago when they displaced the neanderthals - but those alleles would now be rare or nonexistent because of that population's displacement by the later agriculturalists.

Miscellaneous / Re: Modern mortality
« on: November 27, 2009, 08:32:24 PM »
What do you think is the cause of 50-60yr olds dying that wasn't there in years past?

I don't know, and I would like to.  Possibilities that occur to me:

- more sedentary lifestyles - but the people who are dying early don't appear to be particularly sedentary

- more obesity - but see that study on how obesity isn't strongly correlated with early death

- maybe drugs given to control cholesterol are causing problems in some people?  It might be interesting to find out if these people were on statins or such; I don't know in the case I mentioned

Miscellaneous / Re: Modern mortality
« on: November 27, 2009, 08:28:52 PM »
I'd love to see that study if you have a link to it?

It was previously discussed, with links, in this thread:

I may have to modify my reactions to it if it turns out all these early deaths are due to heart attacks after all.

Miscellaneous / Modern mortality
« on: November 27, 2009, 04:05:45 PM »
There was a recent study that indicated that obesity might not have the mortality issues that are generally associated with it - basically anywhere between a BMI of 20 and one of 30 was pretty flat with respect to mortality.  This had me thinking that while the food pyramid diet caused people to get fat, it might possibly flush fats into fat cells quickly, thus not increasing coronary risk all that much.

On the other hand, I've noticed that there seem to be more obituaries from people dying in their late 50s and early 60s than I remember from decades past.  I just learned today that one of my friends died of coronary failure yesterday; he was about 60 and probably had a BMI of about 30.  We'd drifted apart, so it wasn't a personal tragedy for me, but it feels kind of like a warning - I don't remember any of my father's friends dying that early.

Miscellaneous / Re: All the women in my life are gaining weight
« on: November 27, 2009, 03:30:03 PM »
A 5lb increase in the uterus?  Whoa!!

Yeah, you can actually see the effect on the body shape after birth if you look carefully.  It's one of the things that takes longest to go away.

Obviously the uterus needs to get bigger as the baby gets bigger, but I think it also acts as a protein reserve for breast feeding.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Basically Meat-Only?
« on: November 27, 2009, 07:37:17 AM »
I would be somewhat surprised if vitamin D could be stored effectively for months.  It's true that it's fat soluble, so one would expect a half life higher than days, but months seems to me a lot to expect.

I believe vitamin C is water soluble, which means it's flushed from the body in days.  If it's a problem on an all meat diet, it should become a problem within days of starting.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Meat only for 2 days, fruit veg and nuts the rest.
« on: November 27, 2009, 07:33:48 AM »
I ate carb heavy, ie sandwiches, pasta and chips, for a week and my glucose numbers only rose a little, ie from 5.2 to 5.7, which is not much past the standard deviation.

While sandwiches, pasta, and chips are less low carb than a typical paleo diet, they're not necessarily all that carb heavy - especially the sandwiches and chips - when compared to a lot of nonpaleo food.  Chips usually have a lot of fat, as do many sandwiches, and even some pasta.

Pages: 1 ... 296 297 [298] 299 300 ... 361