FitChick Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 This diet has been around for a while but this man's story might inspire some men to get off the couch and throw away that bag of chips. 2
EasyHeart Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 I first discovered the Paleo diet about 8 years ago when I was diagnosed with celiac disease. A lot of celiacs eat this way because it is naturally gluten-free. But you have to be careful because there are people out there who take it waaaaay too seriously. I remember a viciously nasty fight on an internet message board about "The Tuber Controversy". 3
ooglesnboogles Posted January 27, 2013 Posted January 27, 2013 Apparently my dad was on a similar diet before he married my mom almost 30 years ago. He wanted to slim down a little more. It was a structured thing, he was just eating essentially what that diet suggests, without having heard of it. Worked for him. Interesting article, though the 'after' picture looks like he's still wearing the shirt he wore before he lost the weight =P 1
Author FitChick Posted January 27, 2013 Author Posted January 27, 2013 Interesting article, though the 'after' picture looks like he's still wearing the shirt he wore before he lost the weight =P Is there a TV show similar to the old Queer Eye for the Straight Guy?
Author FitChick Posted January 27, 2013 Author Posted January 27, 2013 But you have to be careful because there are people out there who take it waaaaay too seriously. I remember a viciously nasty fight on an internet message board about "The Tuber Controversy". I was surprised that potatoes were on the list of forbidden foods. I thought body builders ate sweet potatoes. As long as they aren't friend or covered in cheese and sour cream, I don't see the problem. Top them with salsa and they are delicious and low calorie. 1
tman666 Posted January 28, 2013 Posted January 28, 2013 I think a "paleo" based diet tends to help people out due to the following factors: 1) Lowered caloric density of "paleo-approved" foods 2) Increased vegetable/leafy green intake 3) High level of restriction of processed foods My theory is that a lot of people see success on paleo diets because the above factors are going to lead to increased health and better body composition in most people regardless of their supposed genetic ancestry. So while the "science" used to back up paleo dieting seems shaky, in practice, I think it can be a very positive change for the typical westerner eating a western diet (high salt, high processed foods, too many calories, too many simple carbs, low amount of veggies, etc.). In other news: potatoes are great. 1
M30USA Posted January 28, 2013 Posted January 28, 2013 If a food didn't exist before the Industrial Age, don't eat it. 2
Author FitChick Posted January 28, 2013 Author Posted January 28, 2013 If a food didn't exist before the Industrial Age, don't eat it. What? No tangelos?! 1
EasyHeart Posted January 28, 2013 Posted January 28, 2013 NO! Otherwise you're NOT PALEO!!! That's how it starts. First it's a tangelo and then the next thing you know, you'll be eating a tuber. 3
neveragain34 Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 I love paleo! Feel so much better since I started and have a newfound love for cooking since you have to be creative with meals at times to avoid boredom. I bought a book at Costco called Practical Paleo and I love it! Not only does it contain easy recipes, but it also discusses the science behind it. Nomnompaleo.com also has some good recipes. Just made some kale chips for the first time...super easy and delicious! 1
ptp Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 I don't understand a couple of things about the Paleo Diet. 1) Why are all grains considered bad? Mankind has been eating grains for 1000s of years without significant adverse affects. 2) Why do people automatically assume that because the cavemen did it one way that way is the right way? For example cavewomen didn't have neonatal vitamins, should we stop giving women those? Also cavemen cooked their food over an open flame which would be considered grilling or smoking. Those aren't the most healthy ways too cook meat but since the cavemen did it we should also do it? 2
Emilia Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Must admit I'm naturally sceptical to base my diet on a lifestyle that sustained 45 as the average life expectancy. 4
AlexDP Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 I don't understand a couple of things about the Paleo Diet. 1) Why are all grains considered bad? Mankind has been eating grains for 1000s of years without significant adverse affects. Historians actually use tooth decay to date skeletons. Grain has a marked effect on teeth. Also note that you couldn't eat it if you didn't process it. That is sort of an indication in itself that is not that suitable for human consumption. 1
AlexDP Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Must admit I'm naturally sceptical to base my diet on a lifestyle that sustained 45 as the average life expectancy. If we didn't change our diet, but did everything else the same as they did, we wouldn't live beyond 45 either. I think that is pretty much a given. Also, 45 is quite generous. I think 25 is more likely.
Forever Learning Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Well I cleaned up my diet recently, I guess I'm doing the caveman thing, avoiding sugars, processed foods, wheat, gluten and dairy, and I feel much better, the biggest difference was less aching in the morning in my arthritic hands and back. Awesome stuff, thank you Fit Chick.
Author FitChick Posted February 5, 2013 Author Posted February 5, 2013 Historians actually use tooth decay to date skeletons. Grain has a marked effect on teeth. Also note that you couldn't eat it if you didn't process it. That is sort of an indication in itself that is not that suitable for human consumption. That makes no sense. Cooking meat is "processing" it by your definition. No different than boiling millet in water.
ptp Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Historians actually use tooth decay to date skeletons. Grain has a marked effect on teeth. Also note that you couldn't eat it if you didn't process it. That is sort of an indication in itself that is not that suitable for human consumption. I don't think that is entirely true. Unless I am mistaken, corn either on the cob or in a can isn't processed, neither are oats nor brown rice. So there are grains that can be consumed without processing. Also, I don't know if lentils are considered grains, but they have been a staple in many societies for thousands of years and they are consumed largely unprocessed.
fortyninethousand322 Posted February 5, 2013 Posted February 5, 2013 Some people can handle grains pretty easily. Some people can't. The trick is figuring out which category you find yourself in. Personally, I like the caveman diet.
AlexDP Posted February 7, 2013 Posted February 7, 2013 That makes no sense. Cooking meat is "processing" it by your definition. No different than boiling millet in water. We don't have to cook it. More than a few people have claimed it would be healthier if we didn't. If you think we need to process meat to eat it, I have one word for you: carpaccio.
Recommended Posts