|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 3:52 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
[
If we split it into four food groups (animal, plant, grains, dairy) it's clear the majority of homo sapiens do best on the animal/plant foods under which they evolved. There is huge variation within that spectrum however -- for example H/G tribes at the poles ate 99% meat, while some at the equator ate 70% plant. Within meat some subsisted on red meat, some on fish, within plant some on coconuts and some on tubers. Yet they all thrived. There are endless "Paleo diets". So yes, different things work within that wide spectrum of animal/plant foods for which we are adapted.
|
First of all let's refute this implication that hunter-gatherer societies had better health than we did. Because that should still hold true today and it doesn't.
Let's look at a modern hunter-gatherer tribe
| Quote: |
| Closely examining one group of modern hunter–gatherers—the Hiwi—reveals how much variation exists within the diet of a single small foraging society and deflates the notion that hunter–gatherers have impeccable health. Such examination also makes obvious the immense gap between a genuine community of foragers and Paleo dieters living in modern cities, selectively shopping at farmers' markets and making sure the dressing on their house salad is gluten, sugar and dairy free. |
| Quote: |
Hill and Hurtado calculated that foods hunted and collected in the wild account for 95 percent of the Hiwi's total caloric intake; the remaining 5 percent comes from store-bought goods as well as from fruits and squash gathered from the Hiwi's small fields. They rely more on purchased goods during the peak of the dry season.
The Hiwi are not particularly healthy. Compared to the Ache, a hunter–gatherer tribe in Paraguay, the Hiwi are shorter, thinner, more lethargic and less well nourished. Hiwi men and women of all ages constantly complain of hunger. Many Hiwi are heavily infected with parasitic hookworms, which burrow into the small intestine and feed on blood. And only 50 percent of Hiwi children survive beyond the age of 15. |
Here's what anthropologist William Leonard of Northwestern University says
| Quote: |
| Too often modern health problems are portrayed as the result of eating 'bad' foods that are departures from the natural human diet…This is a fundamentally flawed approach to assessing human nutritional needs," Leonard wrote. "Our species was not designed to subsist on a single, optimal diet. What is remarkable about human beings is the extraordinary variety of what we eat. We have been able to thrive in almost every ecosystem on the Earth, consuming diets ranging from almost all animal foods among populations of the Arctic to primarily tubers and cereal grains among populations in the high Andes.” |
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-paleo-diet-half-baked-how-hunter-gatherer-really-eat
(bolding mine)
Last edited by TheUrbanMyth on Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You'll have to send that in a different format...my firewalls are blocking it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here are some more hunter-gatherer tribes
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.kr/2011/06/food-reward-dominant-factor-in-obesity.html
Of the five surveyed..three of them eat an almost exclusively or heavily based plant diet.
| Quote: |
| The !Kung diet is predominantly composed of plant foods |
...although they do eat meat.
| Quote: |
| They are generally very lean |
| Quote: |
| The food habits of most traditional Polynesian and certain Melanesian islands centered around starchy staple foods including taro, breadfruit, yams and sweet potatoes (today, additional starchy foods have been introduced, including cassava). Other important foods included coconut, fish and shellfish, taro leaves and a few fruits (today, they have many more fruits that were introduced). They had sugar cane, but it was chewed plain as a snack, in moderate quantity. Pork was a rare treat for most people. |
And again on average they were lean
| Quote: |
| In the New Guinea highland village of Tukisenta in the 1980s, people ate virtually nothing but sweet potatoes (90+ percent of calories), with small contributions from vegetables, pork and insects. They drank water and they did not have alcohol. They were characteristically lean, with female fat mass peaking during reproductive years and declining thereafter. Male fat mass remained low and constant throughout life. They were physically fit, showed no sign of malnutrition and had an extraordinarily good glucose tolerance. |
(bolding mine) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The food habits of most traditional Polynesian and certain Melanesian islands centered around starchy staple foods including taro, breadfruit, yams and sweet potatoes (today, additional starchy foods have been introduced, including cassava). Other important foods included coconut, fish and shellfish, taro leaves and a few fruits (today, they have many more fruits that were introduced). They had sugar cane, but it was chewed plain as a snack, in moderate quantity. Pork was a rare treat for most people |
Most Paleo advocates identify wheat as the main enemy, and refined and processed carbohydrates. Sweet potatoes, and especially cocunuts, fish, and shellfish are highly recommended. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Paleo diet is actually quite flexible:
| Quote: |
In the early days, following Loren Cordain’s book, The Paleo Diet: Lose Weight and Get Healthy by Eating the Food You Were Designed to Eat, the Paleo diet was considered to be moderate in carbohydrate and low in saturated fat (though monounsaturated fat wasn’t restricted).
Then, as low-carb diets rose in popularity and many low-carbers switched over to Paleo, it seemed that the lines between low-carb and Paleo began to blur. For these folks, the Paleo diet is high in fat – especially saturated fat – and low in carbohydrates, with a moderate amount of protein.
More recently, some authors/bloggers have advocated a diet based roughly on Paleo principles but that also may include dairy products and even certain grains like white rice and buckwheat, depending on individual tolerance. Still others have suggested that a high carb, lower fat diet – provided the carbs come from starchy vegetables and not grains – may be optimal.
So what is a Paleo diet? Is it low-carb? Low-fat? Does it include dairy? Grains? |
http://chriskresser.com/beyond-paleo-moving-from-a-paleo-diet-to-a-paleo-template |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isitts
Joined: 25 Dec 2008
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Auslegung wrote: |
| I'm thinking that homo erectus ate when food was available… |
Right. And they probably also ate what was available. So it sounds pretty funny to say you’re on a “hunter gatherer diet” and then give a long list of foods you can’t/won’t eat. Or, “I’ll just hold out until what I want is available.”
If you want to be on a hunter gatherer diet, then maybe you should live off the grid somewhere and actually hunt and gather and see what you come up with. Squirrel meat and tree bark maybe?
If you’re coming to Korea, there’ll be plenty of rice and kimchi available. Happy hunting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neilio
Joined: 12 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ghostrider wrote: |
| Have you ever read The China Study? Decades of research reveal a strong link between eating meat and disease. Those who eat a lot of animal products are much more likely to die of cancer, heart disease, and diabetes. Those who eat a plant based/vegan diet are the healthiest and live the longest. It's the most comprehensive study of nutrition ever done. Bill Clinton highly recommended the book and lost a lot of weight by following its advice. |
china study has been torn apart ten fold. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neilio
Joined: 12 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
Perhaps it's jus the nature of Daves that has made me feel like this discussion long ago lost its productivity in this thread (?)
I don't follow this diet, at least not o my knowledge, and feel my health is better than the average 40 year old's. I believe there's lots of genetic diversity in responses to various foods - what works for me, may not work for you. I've seen it when guys try to diet down for shows… there is not "one size fits all".
So let me ask either side here - do you believe that there's lots of room for individuality here? That what works for you, may not work for me? (or, at least not exactly the same way) |
Short answer yes and no.
Long answer:
First let's throw a couple things out there..
1) All foods have good and bad stuff in them. Let's use the term nutrient density. We could probably put everything on a spectrum like this:
SUPER NUTRITIOUS & NO ANTI NUTRIENTS <--------------------------------------> HIGH ANTI NUTRIENTS & LOW NUTRITION
Every food can be put on this. Now what valid reasons can one use to choose foods on the right side? 1) in jail 2) child (physically or mentally) 3) ignorant 4) brainwashed
3 and 4 are valid up to a certain point.
It's important that we go beyond marketing and govt recommended RDA's to make this decision. This would lead to another question: What's the optimal amount of nutrients for the human body, and does this differ from person to person. I'd say we have a pretty good idea of optimal, and it's based on looking at the diet's of healthy populations. There is definitely variability on what becomes optimal from person to person, and that's for each of us to tinker with once we establish a solid baseline of health.
When you talk about individual differences, and the 'what works for me' idea, i'd need to know a bit more information. I'd really dig into the question : Why do you make a certain food choice that you feel works? Is it convenience, immediate gratification, ..etc.
Here's a common example "I eat cereal because it's convenient, tastes good, i feel good after, and I don't really feel bad afterwards."
I think it's important whenever you eat something to ask the question "What is this doing for my body? Is it (on a physiological level) helping? Hurting? Or neutral." We should always be asking this question when we eat anything.
If we consider another few spectrum's:
Tastes great <----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->Tastes bad
favorable health consequences <------------------------------------------------------------------------->poor health consequences
Promotes me reaching my potential <----------------------------------------------------------> Takes away from me reaching my potential
Increases my quality of life <----------------------------------------------------------------------------->Decreases my quality of life
These are all things that I use to make and justify a decision. Depending on how you weigh and value each of these will guide your decision making.
Do i eat this pizza? Well it tastes great, i'm hungry as f, it's convenient, and i know my health will suffer but it increases my quality of life enough to make it worth it. EAT
(next day) Do i eat this pizza again? Well it still tastes good, my health will suffer even more, and i know ill gain body fat so my quality of life will decrease. DONT EAT
The most important thing is that we are educated and honest with ourselves as to the effect of foods we eat.
So for flexibility in the Paleo diet. There are a bunch of foods (Meat, fish, poultry, foul, fruit, veg, nuts, seeds) that have been determined to have high nutrient density with no anti-nutrients. Whatever food you want to use to get your nutrients is fine, but why not choose ones that are the most dense and are the least problematic, and are most likely to allow you to reach your potential? "Well i prefer the taste of......" Which is fine, but as long as it's acknowledged that you may be sacrificing your health for taste.
A smart way to go about it:
TRY EVERYTHING. Try eating vegan for a month, try paleo, try a food pyramid. Try different things and really become aware of how you look/feel/perform when doing so. This is critical as there are so many things out there (foods, substances, care products) that can be putting a low level stressor on us that we never realized is there until we change things and it goes away.
What i'd recommend is trying a paleo diet for a month, make it as strict as you can at first, as we feel this will allow you to establish a baseline of health, "giving your body the nutrients it needs, ridding itself of toxins, reducing inflammation from problematic foods." After the month make your own assessment of how you look/feel/perform. Now at least you know what you 'should feel like'.... based on ancestral measures.
From there comes the fun part. Now is your opportunity to be your own experiment. And to see if something truly does work for you. If you think eating lots apples works for you, keep your diet the same and add in apples, assess how you feel, take them out and see how you feel. It becomes very easy in a systematic way to reveal what foods are messing with us, but only once we establish that baseline.
What often ends up happening is people establish the baseline, feel great, throw some stuff back in, some works some doesn't, and they feel so empowered and liberated that they want to spread the word (sometimes in an annoying way).
In summary.
Yes there's room for individuality.
First, establish a baseline of health.
Introduce new foods, assess, remove, assess.
Once you know what your body is possible of feeling like, making nutritional decisions is much easier.
Now you can see what ultimately works for YOU. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
I really like how you broke that down, neilio. That's very much how I view food as well - although probably not as researched as you.
Is there a cheat sheet that lists these "super nutritious and no anti-nutrient" foods? I'm curious how they match up with my current diet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Here are some more hunter-gatherer tribes |
Like Cap said, discussing this on Dave's goes nowhere. 
The study of H/G tribes is useful because it can be seen as a proxy for Paleolithic tribes, it is our best window into how they lived. Instead of cherry picking this tribe or that (as you have done), we can study ALL the tribes at once.
If you look at the qualitative data from the Ethnographic Atlas there were 230 tribes documented living a H/G lifestyle (that's a lot of data points!). The mean is 66-75% dependence on animal foods, the rest plants. Fish is a huge part of their diet. The histograms give us more detailed info; that a good many were 86-100% meat, yet zero were vegetarian.
The topic of if they were healthier is an old topic. Their lack of cavities and chronic disease is well documented. As is their decline in health when sugar and bread were introduced. Lifespan is a poor proxy for health because it involves shelter, modern medicine, etc.
See pg3 charts. I downloaded the database and checked his math...
http://m.ajcn.nutrition.org/content/71/3/682.full.pdf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Here are some more hunter-gatherer tribes |
Like Cap said, discussing this on Dave's goes nowhere.
The study of H/G tribes is useful because it can be seen as a proxy for Paleolithic tribes, it is our best window into how they lived. Instead of cherry picking this tribe or that (as you have done), we can study ALL the tribes at once.
If you look at the qualitative data from the Ethnographic Atlas there were 230 tribes documented living a H/G lifestyle (that's a lot of data points!). The mean is 66-75% dependence on animal foods, the rest plants. Fish is a huge part of their diet. The histograms give us more detailed info; that a good many were 86-100% meat, yet zero were vegetarian. |
Thanks for the link.
If you look at the qualitative data from the Ethnographic Atlas you can see the words "estimate" and "projected" occurring regularly...meaning that at best many of these figures are nothing more than guesswork...educated guesswork to be sure but guesswork nonetheless.
The link itself makes this very clear.
| Quote: |
Ethnographic data are qualitative in nature and
as such lack the precision of quantitative data; |
Also I did some checking on the authors of the article...surprise surprise..they are all long term advocates of the paleo diet. Nothing like writing an article with a certain conclusion already in mind. Perhaps that is why they used qualitative data instead of the quantitative data.
Let's look at some quantitative data posted by the SAME authors of the article that you posted.
| Quote: |
| A compilation of the few available quantitative dietary studies in hunter-gatherers showed a plant-animal subsistence ratio of 41:59 (6), which is similar to the aggregate value (45:55) we reported in our article. |
As we can see the available quantitative data ratios (41:59 or 45:55) differ quite a bit from the qualitative data where you have 66-75% meat which would be a 2 or 3 to 1 ratio.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/72/6/1589.full
However thanks for the link...it is at least a scholarly work...but there's just too many maybes, estimations and projections (IMHO) to regard it as THE authoritative work on the subject...especially given the divergence between the actual quantitative data and the qualitative data.
Oh and I didn't cherry pick any tribes...the article that I used picked them and was simply describing a few of the more well known ones. I don't think anyone reading that article thought that it was intended to be an exhaustive study of hunter-gatherer tribes or the final word on the subject.
I simply showed that some H/G tribes despite having a high or extremely high reliance on plant food nevertheless demonstrate a high level of overall health.
And oh by the way I am not vegan or vegetarian (to answer a previous question of yours) I eat meat regularly and in large quantities. But I do so because it tastes good not because of "science".
But yes I agree discussing this on Dave's goes nowhere. Plus it's Friday and I have other things to do. So in conclusion...have a good weekend! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neilio
Joined: 12 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Some research for yal to have on hand to give to anyone that says "show me the research to back up the paleo diet"
1. Frassetto LA, Schloetter M, Mietus-Synder M, Morris RC, Jr., Sebastian A: Metabolic and physiologic improvements from consuming a paleolithic, hunter-gatherer type diet. Eur J Clin Nutr 2009.
2. Jönsson T, Granfeldt Y, Ahrén B, Branell UC, Pålsson G, Hansson A, Söderström M, Lindeberg S. Beneficial effects of a Paleolithic diet on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes: a randomized cross-over pilot study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2009;8:35
3. Jonsson T, Ahren B, Pacini G, Sundler F, Wierup N, Steen S, Sjoberg T, Ugander M, Frostegard J, Goransson Lindeberg S: A Paleolithic diet confers higher insulin sensitivity, lower C-reactive protein and lower blood pressure than a cereal-based diet in domestic pigs. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2006, 3:39.
4. Jonsson T, Granfeldt Y, Erlanson-Albertsson C, Ahren B, Lindeberg S. A Paleolithic diet is more satiating per calorie than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischemic heart disease. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2010 Nov 30;7(1):85
5. Lindeberg S, Jonsson T, Granfeldt Y, Borgstrand E, Soffman J, Sjostrom K, Ahren B: A Palaeolithic diet improves glucose tolerance more than a Mediterranean-like diet in individuals with ischaemic heart disease. Diabetologia 2007, 50(9):1795-1807.
6. O’Dea K: Marked improvement in carbohydrate and lipid metabolism in diabetic Australian aborigines after temporary reversion to traditional lifestyle. Diabetes 1984, 33(6):596-603.
7. Osterdahl M, Kocturk T, Koochek A, Wandell PE: Effects of a short-term intervention with a paleolithic diet in healthy volunteers. Eur J Clin Nutr 2008, 62(5):682-685.
8. Ryberg M, Sandberg S, Mellberg C, Stegle O, Lindahl B, Larsson C, Hauksson J, Olsson T. A Palaeolithic-type diet causes strong tissue-specific effects on ectopic fat deposition in obese postmenopausal women. J Intern Med. 2013 Jul;274(1):67-76 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chaz47
Joined: 11 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have a few questions, one of which is slightly off-topic so please be kind.
1.) I am not getting enough calories in a day. How do you go about getting enough calories down on the paleo diet?
2.) How paleo is a McD's double-quarterpounder (just the burger) in a pinch?
3.) I've been doing kettlebell style exercises with jugs of stuff (water/sand) for the past few months. Now I've moved up to a 13 liter jug of water but it seems to be too wide. I keep getting twinges in the ligaments of my knees that freak me out and lead to weeks of rest. Any suggestions for cheap kettlebell alternatives? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neilio
Joined: 12 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chaz47 wrote: |
I have a few questions, one of which is slightly off-topic so please be kind.
1.) I am not getting enough calories in a day. How do you go about getting enough calories down on the paleo diet?
2.) How paleo is a McD's double-quarterpounder (just the burger) in a pinch?
3.) I've been doing kettlebell style exercises with jugs of stuff (water/sand) for the past few months. Now I've moved up to a 13 liter jug of water but it seems to be too wide. I keep getting twinges in the ligaments of my knees that freak me out and lead to weeks of rest. Any suggestions for cheap kettlebell alternatives? |
1. How many calories you aiming for? Eat more bacon, butter, coconut oil, nuts.
2. McD's serves frankenfood. Not paleo.
3. http://www.movnat.com/#sthash.HuLHSCG3.dpbs
Kettlebells are safe. It's probably your form that's the problem. Reduce the weight and focus on PERFECT TECHNIQUE. Post videos to websites and get feedback.
-Bucket with handle, bag of rice? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
