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 - paleophil

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8
61
Introductions / Re: Hi Everyone, were a family new to Paleo.
« on: October 16, 2012, 08:27:33 PM »
The cheese suggestions are more clearly nonpaleo than the "paleo" breads and cakes, though.
They may not be optimal suggestions, but then she was talking about pizza, banana bread and cakes, so the context was not exactly optimal foods. "Paleo" breads, cakes, pizzas and pancakes made with almonds, sunflower seeds, flax seeds and such seem to do me a bit more harm than raw Zamarano sheep's cheese, so if those breads and cakes are more Paleo, then Paleo apparently does me harm, which would mean that something like a Primal blueprint diet is superior to Paleo for me, right? Except that my definition of Paleo includes Primal blueprint.

My preferred definition for Paleo is along the lines of what Boyd Eaton wrote back in the 80's--the foods that I am biologically adapted to eating--with a touch of Ray Audette's definition from the 90's--the foods that could be acquired and consumed with nothing but a sharp stick (which basically means wild foods that could be eaten raw if one wished to, with minimal processing, and which I choose to treat more as a suggested direction than an absolute dogma).

Milk, honey, honeydew and saps are some of the rare substances in nature that are specifically designed to be foods, so they presumably would require less adaptation than plants, nuts and seeds, which contain chemical defenses, and there are reports that some hunter gatherers save small amounts of milk of lactating animals they've killed and ferment it--I'm guessing in a bag made from the skin or other part of the animal. Given the tendency of some tribal peoples to eat nearly everything but the hoofs, skull and large bones, it sounds plausible.

Almonds are surprisingly high in phytic acid--especially almond flour (see http://chriskresser.com/another-reason-you-shouldnt-go-nuts-on-nuts)--and were reportedly toxic and inedible without extensive processing during the Paleolithic era. See also http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/p-nu/201104/smoking-candy-cigarettes and http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/archevore/201103/dietary-manifesto-paleo-20?page=3, if you haven't read them already (warning: Dr. Harris' "honeybadger" style can take some getting used to and he makes more assumptions and draws more conclusions than I would, but I like the general gyst of his points).

To me, the notion that almond cake with chocolate chip frosting is more Paleo than pastured, cultured butter or raw sheep's cheese doesn't make sense. I'm not saying that butter or cheese should necessarily be considered fully Paleo or optimal for most people (for me the jury's still out), but if we're going to call cake Paleo, then maybe butter and cheese should also qualify. I'll occasionally have a bit of my sister's "Paleo" cake to be nice, and as always, YMMV, but I'm more inclined toward Dr. Harris' opinion, which may be a paraphrase of Delfuego at the Zeroing In On Health forum:

"Fly your freak-flag high.

Say no to the cake."

62
Diet and nutrition / Re: The concept of moderation annoys me
« on: October 15, 2012, 05:54:15 PM »
I agree, palebluedots, "everything in moderation" is one of the great lies of food corporations and the government they've bought,  and one of the most destructive. They don't want you eliminating a single food from your shopping list, so they follow one of the old maxims of propaganda--keep repeating a lie until people say "It must be true--people wouldn't keep saying it if it wasn't." I've never seen a single person who has used this maxim produce one iota of evidence to support it. It has always been presented like it were a revelation from heaven, needing no evidence whatsoever.

The corollary to this nonsense is that if you eliminate a single food from your diet, then you're a fanatic. It doesn't seem to matter if the so-called "food" you've eliminated is actually toxic and wasn't consumed for 99.9% of human history.

63
Introductions / Re: Hi Everyone, were a family new to Paleo.
« on: October 15, 2012, 05:28:27 PM »
The best thing is to not eat breads and cakes of any sort, regardless of what they're made of (see http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/p-nu/201104/smoking-candy-cigarettes) -- our ancestors didn't (unless you count the pounded acorn mashes and fermented gruels of the early Neolithic) and I don't fare well on that so-called "Paleo" junk. I was never big on bread or cakes myself (I'm more of a pie man, and I never understood why people don't ask for pies instead of cakes at birthdays--frosting always tasted like synthetic glop to me, and the cake part like dry sawdust, though the cake-makers got better at it over time, those divils ;-) ) but if for some reason you refuse to go for what's actually better in every way, ;-) then another alternative is to use coconut flour.

Paleo has enough of a following now, that I'm hoping that Paleo folks will stop apologizing for what works for them, stop trying to make "Paleo" versions of bogus SAD recipes, and start embracing traditional foods as more sensible, tasty and health-and-happiness-producing (shouldn't that be the goal?), with new foods like puffy breads and cakes as the oddities--not holding my breath, though.

You gotta love one of the popular refrains of the SAD-defenders who torment Paleo parents, though: "How can you deprive your child of cake/candy/ice cream/pizza/etc.?" You never hear anyone say, "How can you deprive your child of broccoli," or grassfed meat, or anything healthy. It's only the toxic junk that people get upset about. How bizarre is that?

Maybe instead of going right to the Paleo breads and cakes, perhaps first try some yummy healthier options like lovely combinations of fruits and fats, such as avocado plus raw honey, wild Maine blueberries plus sheep's yogurt, raw Zamorano cheese plus quince paste? These are gourmet foods beloved as delicacies in most other nations of the world other than the Cheese-Whiz and Wonder Bread loving good 'ol USA (heaven help us). ;) Sure, these foods are expensive, but so is almond flour, so it's in the same general ballpark.

I also suspect that if we taught our children the importance of traditional foods and culture, that they would actually mostly listen to us--especially after the initial difficult transition period, if we would be patient. Granted, I don't have children of my own, but I've noticed that my two nephews who went mostly-Paleo were rather receptive to it, especially when they saw how much they benefited from it. Unfortunately, their father wanted to continue eating lots of ice cream, pasteurized cheese and sandwiches, so he fought Paleo and encouraged them to become less Paleo, despite the improvements he witnessed in them.

64
Introductions / Re: Hello and academic question
« on: October 15, 2012, 05:17:44 PM »
Believe it or not, the reasearch suggests that the Maasai have NOT fully adapted to consuming lactose (see "Lactose malabsorption among Masai children of East Africa," http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/581925). Instead, the key to their dairy-consumption success appears to be fermenting the milk to reduce the lactose and promote the bacteria that digest it. Surely we cannot just assume that the Maasai or anyone else "must" have genetically adapted to a food just because they tolerate it well when there are other more plausible explanations, like fermentation. It would be a mistake to assume that the Maasai "must" have adapted to milk just because they seem to fare well with it as a staple, and then to extrapolate that further into assuming that it "must" be OK for me to drink skimmed low-fat, high-heat pasteurized milk from CAFO cows fed corn, soy, molasses and chicken shit that's been sitting around in trucks and on shelves for days or weeks. Industrial milk is not the same thing that the Maasai consume. To assume that the results will be the same would be an exercise in evidenceless faith, which of course is happily promoted by agribusiness corporations.

Beware, for very few promoters of milk who cite the Maasai bother to mention what sort of dairy products the Maasai actually traditionally consumed. I try to be cautious and skeptical with reports from anyone other than the Maasai themselves and the people who have directly observed them, when it comes to what they traditionally ate. From what I have read, like most ancient, traditional pastoral peoples (such as the Celts, ancestors to many Western Europeans), the Maasai traditionally fermented most of their milk (reportedly called Kule naoto by the Maasai; http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/t0251e/T0251E07.htm) and often mixed blood in it, and never pasteurized it. Plus, the Zebu cattle that the Maasai currently use as their main dairy source were only introduced to African centuries ago. Before that, there were apparently goats and before that presumably the water buffalo or no milk sources at all. How many Westerners do you know who drink raw fermented goat's milk or Zebu cow's milk mixed with blood, much less water buffalo milk? Surely less than 1% of Americans. We cannot assume that the Maasai example applies to Americans drinking pasteurized, or even unfermented raw, cows' milk.

BTW, I find sheep's cheese to be VASTLY superior to cow or goat cheese--and the Greeks know this and wisely export mostly goat cheese/yogurt to ignorant Americans, while keeping the sheep cheese/yogurt mostly for themselves. If you must consume dairy products, do try sheep's dairy, and if you must consume milk, then find out how well you tolerate raw fermented vs. pasteurized. If you don't try the various forms, you'll never know the full truth.

65
Introductions / Re: Hello and academic question
« on: October 15, 2012, 04:39:09 AM »
Specifically, there seems ample evidence that paleolithic diets were varied (as one would expect) in accordance with where an individual lived.
Yes, and I haven't seen any prominent advocate of Paleolithic diets deny that. Even with the variation, every single one of them that evidence has been found for included meats in their diet.

Quote
In addition there is fossil evidence of many nutritional deficiencies amongst pre-agricultural humans.
Some, but if it were universal, then H. sapiens would not have survived. The evidence shows that deficiencies increased dramatically with agriculture.

Quote
If genetic testing existed to identify the ideal diet for you (i.e. members of the Masaii tribe in Africa have a genetic adaptation for cholestrol homeostasis and are evolved to eat meat/milk)
Humans and the ancestors of humans have been eating insects, vertebrates, mammals, eggs, etc. going back many millions of years so no adaptation to meat was necessary by the Masaii.

Quote
I know the Masaii are pastoralist and does this suggest post-paleolithic evolution that relates directly to diet?
Some, yes. How much, we don't know for sure. We do know that there hasn't been time to adapt to industrial foods.

Quote
I'm  not really going to change what I eat on the basis of this, but it makes sense to me that not everyone will be thin eating tons of meat and maybe some people, depending where they are from, are evolved to eat differently.
Most people reading this forum are descended from northern and western Europeans, who have a history of some of the heaviest meat eating, so your point would argue for substantial meat eating by most of us.

66
Exercises / Re: Crossfit Vs Bodybuilding
« on: October 14, 2012, 10:29:14 AM »
Cool, thanks for the input.

67
Is restricting calories the solution, or a temporary mask of underlying problems? As Angelo Coppola of LatestInPaleo.com says, "humans are not broken by default" and in their natural, healthy state do not tend toward overweight and obesity.

In traditional societies it takes great effort to become overweight. Take the example of the "Bodi fat men" (http://www.worldphoto.org/images/image/89473/?FromImageGalleryID=5867) who spend months consuming as much milk mixed with blood as they can while lying and sitting all day in order to become fat, and quickly become thin again after the ordeal is over.

Take a theoretical case of someone who has been eating nothing but normally healthy traditional foods for many months or years and is still overweight and not losing body fat--could that suggest that there are metabolic, body-fat-setpoint or other underlying problems that should be investigated and addressed? I lost 40 lbs of mostly belly fat and moobs by first cutting out soda pop and reducing the amount of food on my plate (such as buying medium-sized sub sandwiches instead of large ones) and then going Paleo, without calorie counting, but if I hadn't and was looking to lean out further, I would personally be more interested in trying to reset my bodyfat setpoint with a Shangri-La approach (http://sethroberts.net/science/, http://boards.sethroberts.net/) than artificially counting and restricting calories. For one thing, Shangri-La would be a lot simpler and easier (which is why it's called Shangri-La).

68
Diet and nutrition / Re: Why isnt raw honey paleo?
« on: October 14, 2012, 09:31:00 AM »
The great question is, is something healthy not whether or not it's paleo. Is some raw honey healthy? Depends but I do it every now and then and don't worry about it much.  ;)
Yup, for those who are trying to optimize their health, the key question is "Is this healthy for me personally," not "Does this fit someone's litmus test of what is 'Paleo'?" Paleolithic nutrition is a template/blueprint that gives us clues. It's a starting point, not a single final answer for everyone on everything.

If even small amounts of raw fermented honey harmed me significantly, then I wouldn't eat it, regardless of whether it's "Paleo" or not. The fact that it's been in the human and pre-human diet for millions of years and is one of the favorite foods of all hunter-gatherers and primitive tribes who have access to it gave me clues that it was worth trying, and seeking the best of the best. It didn't guarantee that it was going to be beneficial for me, but it did help me keep an open mind and not just accept that Internet claims that honey is not "Paleo" and is super-unhealthy because it's "sugary" or was only eaten rarely and therefore can't be healthy in any more than minute quantities, or not at all, and such. I even filled out an online Paleo diet questionnaire once that said my diet isn't Paleo at all because it contains some honey.  ::) I seem to handle raw fermented honey better than the "safe starches" like sweet potatoes that have become all the rage in some "Paleo" circles. So some foods that are currently widely considered "Paleo" appear to harm me more than some that are not. Interestingly, I have noticed a recent shift back towards considering honey and fruits more Paleo again, after there was quite a bit of demonization of them by some in the LC wing (and I'm saying this as someone who's relatively LC myself, not antagonistically).

The fact that honey is seasonal and that in some years the availability can be poor and that the nutrient content is narrow, especially when the bee larvae are not eaten with it, and that some people are metabolically deranged, does suggest that there are limits as to how much of raw honey one should eat, which will likely vary by individual.

69
Exercises / Re: Crossfit Vs Bodybuilding
« on: October 14, 2012, 09:12:21 AM »
I'm talking about generic Crossfitters, not YouTube sensations I have been to 8 gyms in my area and have not seen more than 2 people that look "ripped". I think you missed the point of this topic. I'm simply looking from advice from people who have done it and actually know what they are talking about.
Are there a lot of people doing "generic" anything that look ripped (and I'm not talking about the genetic freaks and steroid users)? If so, please share with us what they're doing. What are the 8 gyms that you didn't see more than 2 ripped people at and what are the ripped gyms that you're comparing them to?

Coincidentally, I was looking for advice and info on Crossfit too after I saw someone get ripped on it, so we share the same purpose, and it was in so doing that I came across your thread. Sorry about my undiplomatic response. What I found here was the opposite of what I expected and I was thrown for a loop by it. I'm glad that it inspired you to explain what you meant and provide some info. I'd be interested in more explanation, if you don't mind, and reports about how Crossfit works out for you, now that you're trying it.

You're the first person I've seen focus on alleged unripped appearance of Crossfitters since I came across it on the Internet years ago and saw/heard it discussed by Robb Wolf, the Crossfit forum, and various other forums, blogs and podcasts. Ironically, there's even a Crossfit gym called "Crossfit Ripped" (http://www.crossfitripped.com/). ;D Perhaps what you mean is that the Crossfit focus isn't only on getting super-ripped and building muscle bulk, like a gym that focuses on little or nothing besides free weights, but more all-round fitness? The reports I've seen on Crossfit have tended to be more along the lines of what JonBhoy and PaleoDavid reported, and it fits with not only the Crossfit Games videos, but also the other videos that show the Crossfit gym members doing routines. The main criticisms I've heard are the sorts of things that Cave Man Wayne and PaleoDavid mentioned - that the routines are extreme, the risk of injury is high, the Crossfitters are mostly already ripped before they start it and thus that it is not for beginners. That does make some sense to me, because I rarely see anyone in the Crossfit gym videos who looks terribly out of shape, such as very obese, like what one would see at an ordinary gym with weight machines, aerobics, pool, etc. There seems to be some self-selection going on.

My interest in Crossfit increased when my nephew did Crossfit for a short time, before he got a job in a different area and switched to a closer gym, and he quickly got much more ripped and stronger than he's ever been, but he did start out stronger and more muscled than me. There isn't room in my budget for a gym membership right now, but it did pique my interest and I'm thinking I might try it in the future. However, the concerns about injury risk that Cave Man Wayne, Robb Wolf and others have expressed do give me pause. Input from Crossfitters on this would be welcome. I'm thinking that by the time I try it in the future they may have worked some of those kinks out, maybe they already have? I'm guessing also that not all Crossfit gyms are alike and some may do a better job of helping those who aren't already ripped.

70
Exercises / Re: Crossfit Vs Bodybuilding
« on: October 03, 2012, 08:31:10 PM »
"The main downside is I don't usually see "ripped" people doing Crossfit"

Is this a joke? I don't do Crossfit myself, but just search on Crossfit Games on Youtube if you want to see some amazingly ripped and strong people, including plenty of Crossfit women who stronger and more ripped than most men.

71
Diet and nutrition / Re: Why isnt raw honey paleo?
« on: September 23, 2012, 03:19:07 PM »
Word is getting around about the "Paleo" nature of wild honey:

The Sweetness of Human Evolution by Heather Pringle
http://tiny.cc/t8z3kw

Paul Jaminet shared a video on "the Hadza and their honey seeking":
http://perfecthealthdiet.com/2012/09/exercise-is-less-better-than-more/

72
Diet and nutrition / Re: Why isnt raw honey paleo?
« on: September 21, 2012, 03:22:54 PM »
First, to summarize and recap: raw wild honey IS Paleo--the evidence suggests that it's super-Paleo. Now for the detail (and there is endless more info than this):

Honey is paleo as long as you get stung by angry bees and run for your life after collecting it. If you do that then:
 
- You will think very carefully before wanting honey again (probably several months before you forget the stings).
Only if you're a sensitive or unfortunately misguided moderner. Luckily, we don't have to gather honey ourselves any more anyway, as you can buy good quality raw honey in healthfood stores and via the Internet or phone nowadays.

Like Tete, the hunter-gatherer in the video, my grandfather wasn't bothered in the slightest by bee stings. One day my father noticed that a bee was stinging my grandfather in the hand and told him. My father watched with amazement as my grandfather continued to do the work he was doing and didn't even bother to swat the bee away, instead saying something about them not being a bother. He was born and raised in rural Ireland and never understood why modern Americans were so fussy about the stings of bees and other insects. Of course, he wasn't highly allergic, like more and more moderners have become to so many things.

A friend of my father's even intentionally collects bees to sting himself with, because the bee venom is therapeutic for his arthritis. The stings bothered him at first, but not after a little while of doing it. I have seen news reports about many people doing this.

Quote
In the end you will figure out it´s not worth the effort other than occasionally.
You're not convincing me, based on my experience with both bee stings and high quality honeys and my research, nor will you ever convince the honey-eating traditional peoples of the world of that. Did you look at the video of Tete risking his life to get the liquid gold of the forest? If you watch it you'll see that he is not bothered in the slightest by the bees' stings. If honey wasn't worth any effort, why on earth would he and his fellow tribesmen risk their lives climbing enormous trees, with some of his friends having fallen to their deaths in the process, to get it? Honey is one of the most highly valued of all Paleo foods by hunter gatherer and primitive peoples (in addition to the Aka people of Tete, there are the Ache, Efe, Hadza, Hadzabe, Masai, Sheko/Shenko [aka the Honeymen] and other honey-loving traditional peoples), with at least some, like the Hadza, ranking it first--the best of all Paleo foods (http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/EP07601616.pdf). They invariably regard it as a staple, healthy food, gorged upon by the largely adult males who gather it, rather than a sweetener, dessert or treat. Mind you, most or all HG's and many traditional eat bee grubs (larvae) too, unlike squeamish moderners, which adds healthy fat and protein to the mix.

It also helps understanding to be aware that most domesticated honey doesn't come close to the quality of raw wild forest honeycomb/grubcomb. You can't understand the value of wild honey, or even the better domesticated raw honeys, based on supermarket honey (such as Sue Bee honey, which to me, forgive me, is substandard).

This image makes a mockery of the notion that anything more than a smidgeon of honey now and then is not "Paleo":
Quote

Caption: "Kattunayakan honey harvesters can tell from the ground whether a hive 60-80 feet up in the air has honey or not and whether it is worth the effort to climb there. Children as young as eight go along not just as spectators but to actively participate. By the time they are 12 they are full members of the team. Photo by: Tarsh and Tariq Thekaekara."

"Do the bees not sting you? Now everyone laughs. ‘Of course they do! They’ve worked so hard for months to make that honey for their children, poor things. If someone attacked our house wouldn’t we be angry? The first time you get stung you can get fever. After that – just a little pain. But what’s that compared to what we get in return from them?’ ....

We have lived with the bees since the days when our ancestors walked these forests, when time began."

Source: Honey is life, New Internationalist Magazine, http://www.newint.org/features/2009/09/01/tribal-peoples/
If "Paleo" is to have any value and not be a religious dogma, it can't be about making up rules about things based on preconceived notions instead of keeping an open mind and investigating. Over the years I've noticed that this is one of the biggest problems in the Paleo community.

Consuming small amounts of high quality raw fermented honey on a fairly regular, intermittent basis has lowered my fasting and random blood glucose levels and eliminated most of my dandruff. These were unexpected benefits, but I've learned that they are not unheard of:

Quote
"When consumed regularly over several weeks or months, honey will lower blood
sugar and HbA1c levels. ... Research studies using humans have shown that honey consumption will result in lower blood sugar levels by as much 60 to 100 mg/dl at 60 and 90 minutes following ingestion of a comparable amount of sucrose.  Therefore it is not surprising that the HbA1c levels will be lower by as much as 2 to 4%." ~Dr. Ron Fessenden, MD, MPH

Experimental evidence suggests that consumption of honey compared to other sweeteners may improve blood sugar control and insulin sensitivity.” ~Dr. David Baer, USDA Human Nutrition Research Center
Source: Honey for diabetes? Yes!, by Dr. Ron Fessenden, MD, MPH, http://www.worldclassemprise.com/custom.aspx?id=21

Dr. William Budd's Sugar and Honey Px for Diabetes Worked:
"Budd's prescription included 8 ounces of white sugar and 4 ounces of honey every day, and again, instead of increasing the amount of glucose in the urine, the amount decreased quickly as the patient began eating almost as much sugar as was being lost initially, and then as the loss of sugar in the urine decreased, the patient gained weight and recovered his strength." ~Ray Peat, Glucose and sucrose for diabetes, http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/glucose-sucrose-diabetes.shtml

Gastroprotective effects of honey and glucose-fructose-sucrose-maltose mixture against ethanol-, indomethacin-, and acidified aspirin-induced lesions in the rat.
Gharzouli K, Amira S, Gharzouli A, Khennouf S.
Exp Toxicol Pathol. 2002 Nov;54(3):217-21.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12484559
"These results suggest that sugar rich solutions (GFSM and honey) may prevent gastric damage by a mechanism involving the release of some protective agents."

And there are countless other studies and research articles about the beneficial health effects of various honeys.

Raw fermented honey and nectar have played a fascinating role in human and primate history, going back all the way to the first primate and beyond (http://www.livescience.com/7540-tree-shrew-sober-drinking-day.html).

A word of caution, though. Many moderners have damaged metabolisms that may not enable them to handle the huge quantities of honey that hunter-gatherers can eat in season without noticeable problems. I was very cautious, at first, about my introduction of honey into my LC Paleo diet, and I tested many different brands and varieties to find the one I tolerate best (Really Raw fermented honey). And, as always, YMMV.

73
Diet and nutrition / Re: Why isnt raw honey paleo?
« on: September 15, 2012, 05:18:54 PM »
However it'd only be available infrequently ie/ a few times each year.
Based on what? Granted, honey is a relatively scarce food, but it's widely regarded as very valuable among traditional peoples and I would think it would be more like a few months a year during good honey years (The ecological basis of hunter-gatherer subsistence in African Rain Forests: The Mbuti of Eastern Zaire, http://www.bonoboincongo.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Human-Ecology_The-ecological-basis-of-hunter-gatherer-subsistence_1986.pdf) than a few times, given the lengths this Aka man goes to get honey and the incomprehensible skill, experience and courage he displays:

Facing angry bees 40 metres high and unattached for honey - Human Planet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3W_iMve4xvg&feature=player_embedded
> "Deep in the Congo forests, Tete defies death by scaling a giant ... 40 metre tree, balances on a precarious branch and endures being stung by an angry swarm of bees to reach the most sought after of jungle foods -- honey."
> "Tete is fully aware how dangerous honey gathering is, but the Bayaca believe it's bravery that makes the man, and sugar is so scarce in these forests that honey is the best nutrition that Tete can provide for his family."

And given that the Hadza hunter gatherers rank honeycomb/grubcomb as their favorite food: Sex Differences in Food Preferences of Hadza Hunter-Gatherers, 2009, http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP07601616.pdf

And given that during the Upper Paleolithic there were probably more trees and honey bees in Africa and Eurasia than today, and that honey consumption by our ancestors stretches back millions of years, back beyond the evolution of homo, to our-prehuman ancestors going back all the way to the very first primates and beyond.

Honey and royal jelly (along with nectar, the honeydew of honeypot ants, aphids, and some scale insects, milk, fruit/berry flesh, and plant food bodies) is also expressly produced to be a food, not filled with toxins to discourage consumption, like seeds and other more toxic parts of plants. If you include all the plant and animal species the produce honeys, saps, nectars, and honeydews, the season for sugary liquid foods is extended beyond just the honey season of the two common domesticated species of the European common honey bee (Apis mellifera) and the eastern honey bee (Apis cerana).

The earliest primates are believed to have been similar to today's tree shrews, which are particularly fond of fermented nectar (http://www.livescience.com/7540-tree-shrew-sober-drinking-day.html). Not far off from raw fermented honey (http://www.westonaprice.org/food-features/fermented-honey, http://www.reallyrawhoney.com/category_s/44.htm) and mead (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mead#History).

74
Food Journals / Re: Im not losing weight! Help!
« on: March 21, 2012, 03:50:32 PM »
Ive got a bit of constipation- just wondering how i could solve it without fruit? Do i need more fat or vegetables? Im already having about 1 1.2 - 2 litres of water a day
It depends on the individual. Why not experiment and track the results in a health journal? And also consider other factors like sleep, nondietary stressors, etc.

If you're feeling foods digesting, that tells me that you're not digesting them very well, based on my experience. Thoroughly cooked foods sit like a lump in my stomach and cause mild bloating (the "I've got to loosen my belt" after eating phenomenon). I discovered with experimentation that when I use very little, gentle cooking or eat raw, I don't feel food in my stomach at all, regardless of how much I eat (except maybe if I eat lots of highly fibrous raw veggies like cauliflower and broccoli).

75
Miscellaneous / Re: Paleo + PCOS
« on: March 20, 2012, 06:12:10 PM »
I just don't want to restrict myself too much here it might not be sustainable for a lifetime.
If you start with why you might not be able to do something, you're starting off at a disadvantage. Why not start with trying to find ways to do the right things? If you can't do raw Paleo, for example, what about considering trying to take advantage of the basic principles by focusing your diet on foods that are edible raw (a la NeanderThin) and using traditional low/slow/moist or brief forms of cooking that damage nutrients less and generate fewer toxins? Is that a doable option to try?

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 8