Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution Forum banner

1 - 20 of 162 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,768 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anybody research or follow the Paleolithic diet?

If you have no idea what I'm referring to, I'll over-simplify it:

~2 million years ago, our "ancestors" were primitive hunter-gatherers, omnivores

~600,000 years ago, our closest "ancestors" were less primitive, but still hunter-gatherers

~100,000 years ago, we roamed the earth as hunter-gatherers, meaning we killed animals and ate them, we picked things and ate them

~10,000 years ago the first signs of agriculture and grain consumption

~100 years ago heavily processed grain products introduced

The argument for the Paleo diet is that we're consuming a cheap food source that is not meant for our digestive system. Grains are the major culprit with legumes a close second. The list goes on and on about what would be considered good and what would be horrible.

For the Paleo diet, you cut the grain agriculture largely out of the equation and stick to things a hunter-gatherer would eat on a daily basis. Animal meats free of genetic modification, injections and harmful feed. Vegetable greens such as spinach, lettuce, broccoli. Fruits such as apples, assorted berries, etc. Nuts, excluding peanuts and other legumes...

I'm not 100% sold on it but the idea is fundamentally sound to me. I'm considered a health nut by friends and family, but this select group of cross-fit (the means by which this diet is spreading like a wild fire) friends of mine are what I would consider health nuts and they're STRONGLY encouraging me to give it a try.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,768 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
The problem I have with it is price per calorie... It certainly does not bode well with a weight gain routine/diet.

Like I said I'm not 100% convinced but, just as you said, it all sounds great in theory and completely legit. There's no argument I can think of AGAINST it besides it being too expensive (all organics, no grains) and not feasible for certain goals.

Perhaps next year I'll be all about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,290 Posts
Likewise, fartknocker
Haha I've seen him do that to other people a few times. I couldn't help myself.


As far as the diet, it sounds kinda iffy. Is your goal to lose weight or put on muscle? Seems like a high protein diet, which is why I ask.

I also try to buy organic in whatever I can get my hands on, for multiple reasons. Hormones and chemicals being one of the reasons. Have you seen any results of this diet?


Sent from my Autoguide iPhone app
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,273 Posts
I've looked into it. Tbh, I've always kinda followed that mindset. Avoid processed shit and anything that isn't natural. Balance everything else. pretty simple, and it should be fairly universal. Spinning the Grug stuff is an interesting marketing method, but it should be common sense. That said, I'm glad to see a diet that's getting some hype not be just another 'eat less of x and exercise'

example: A Five Guys burger and fries is considered more health than a Lean Cuisine microwavable diet lunch because everything in the burger/fires is natural and fresh, where the frozen lunch is all added preservatives and artificial crap. More energy, less carcinogens.

The problem (sorta...) is that it's a high-energy 'diet'. You gotta burn all that energy, or it'll be stored (fat). It wont work well for people who are naturally skinny and relatively weak, but it's good for people who are naturally active and strong, but tend to be a little over-weight. If your exercising to be lean and fast, it's not for you. If your going for strength and mass, it's pretty solid.

You'll avoid cancer, but will be more prone to heart disease. Fortunately, we can't cure cancer, but we've made some huge progress in dealing with heart issues.

That said, results speak for themself. I love this story... old dude in his mid-50's goes from this:



to this:


To this:


in just over a year, without ever stepping foot in a gym... story here - http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-unconquerable-dave/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,771 Posts
I've looked into it. Tbh, I've always kinda followed that mindset. Avoid processed shit and anything that isn't natural. Balance everything else. pretty simple, and it should be fairly universal. Spinning the Grug stuff is an interesting marketing method, but it should be common sense. That said, I'm glad to see a diet that's getting some hype not be just another 'eat less of x and exercise'

example: A Five Guys burger and fries is considered more health than a Lean Cuisine microwavable diet lunch because everything in the burger/fires is natural and fresh, where the frozen lunch is all added preservatives and artificial crap. More energy, less carcinogens.

The problem (sorta...) is that it's a high-energy 'diet'. You gotta burn all that energy, or it'll be stored (fat). It wont work well for people who are naturally skinny and relatively weak, but it's good for people who are naturally active and strong, but tend to be a little over-weight. If your exercising to be lean and fast, it's not for you. If your going for strength and mass, it's pretty solid.

You'll avoid cancer, but will be more prone to heart disease. Fortunately, we can't cure cancer, but we've made some huge progress in dealing with heart issues.

That said, results speak for themself. I love this story... old dude in his mid-50's goes from this:



to this:


To this:


in just over a year, without ever stepping foot in a gym... story here - http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-unconquerable-dave/
Don't fall for the "that one guy" mentality. I see guys riding bikes all the time with pot bellies. It doesn't mean riding a bike will make you lose weight necessarily.

This one made me laugh! I wish he had done a before and after hanging from the tree...well maybe there wouldn't have been an after, nevermind.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,566 Posts
He probably couldn't even hang from
The tree before. That's why there isn't a shot ;)
As far as bikers with bellies. That's a diet issue. You can be skinny and have no muscle mass. The bikers are obviously not changing their dietary habits along with the riding. Which together would net better results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,273 Posts
lol yea i hear ya. jared from subway its a perfect example =/ its always a 33yr old overweight dude who hires a trainer and gets a gym membership and a dietitian, not a 55yr old morbidly obese guy who just climbs trees shit. eat right and work out a bit and any diet can help anyone lose weight, but everyone has a million excuses. but shit... if santa clause here can turn into grandpa thor, kinda makes it hard to come up with an excuse

nice1 holywood :) dude's got moves
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,378 Posts
It actually does work. A good friend lost 60 lbs in a year following this diet, o exercise at all. Went from fat to skinny. It was amazing really, just expensive and hard to to kept up
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
Explain something to me. Who says that human beings are not supposed to eat grains? Raw grains. Processes grains. Whatever. Who says that grains are inherently bad for human consumption? What are "paleo" advocates claiming the benefit of not consuming grains was to our ancestors? Making a comparison about how things were done tens of thousands of years ago seems pretty pointless to me without an "A=B" argument to go with it.

What do we know about the health of our ancient ancestors? Very little, other than the fact that they lived much shorter lives. Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that there is a correlation between primitive mans diet and his short lifespan... maybe there is, I don't know. I just don't get how anyone can support a diet on the basis that our ancestors (who lived much shorter lives) ate that way. Our ancestors also died of diarrhea and minor infections. Should we stop treating ourselves for those because effective pharmaceuticals didn't show up until 100 years ago?

Not to get too far off topic, but I have friends and family who are avid "crossfitters"... some of them also do the paleo thing. I take what they say with a grain of salt. I just can't get on board with it. Let me get this straight: they pay upwards of $120 each month to have an under-qualified coach (2 days course and $1000 to become a CF instructor) instruct them on how turn weight training and olympic style lifts into a high rep, aerobic exercise.... an exercise that is randomly thrown together earlier that day with no science behind it whatsoever. They do this for 10-30 minutes, or until they vomit/passout, and call it a good workout.

Sorry, but I feel like there are much cheaper, safer, and more effective ways to achieve individual fitness goals. I've had some of these friends work out with me at my gym... we do the same mass building routines I was taught by my trainer. They always tell me at the end "I just don't feel like I did anything. I don't feel like I really got a good workout." So crossfit is basically conditioning them to believe that you haven't gotten a good workout unless you feel like you're on the edge of death?

It all seems like a bunch of bullshit to me. Not to mention, the whole thing feels a bit too much like a cult. Crossfit sells a brand name. They took cross training, added elements that make it unsafe, and slapped a label on it. There is no science, no strength development or periodization. Many of the lifts and other exercises are unsafe and bad for joints. I know 3 people in the last month who had to stop crossfit due to injury.

Yeah, I'm a bit skeptical when these friends come to me with their "Awesome new diet!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,273 Posts
i dont totally buy the 'no grains' argument. i get cutting carbs, but i think the problem isn't so much any type of grain, and more so all the processed crap that's added to any grain-based foods you can buy

after all, beer's made from grains and beer saved the world :)

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,999 Posts
One thing to note about the "Grain" part is gluten and genetically enhanced food.
Most humans feel so much better when they eat gluten free, plus lose weight. Around 1% and growing all the time are those who simply have allergic reactions to eating gluten (Hence the huge gluten free movement).

Now sometime in the 50's we started genetically enhancing wheat and grains so we could have a heartier crop that would withstand frost, drought, and insects. The problem was now we made a food that was much more difficult for us to digest as well. I personally had to remove it from my diet a few years ago because I would feel sick all the time. Now that my stomach has healed I can have it in small doses but not like I used to eat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
Explain something to me. Who says that human beings are not supposed to eat grains? Raw grains. Processes grains. Whatever. Who says that grains are inherently bad for human consumption? What are "paleo" advocates claiming the benefit of not consuming grains was to our ancestors? Making a comparison about how things were done tens of thousands of years ago seems pretty pointless to me without an "A=B" argument to go with it.

What do we know about the health of our ancient ancestors? Very little, other than the fact that they lived much shorter lives. Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that there is a correlation between primitive mans diet and his short lifespan... maybe there is, I don't know. I just don't get how anyone can support a diet on the basis that our ancestors (who lived much shorter lives) ate that way. Our ancestors also died of diarrhea and minor infections. Should we stop treating ourselves for those because effective pharmaceuticals didn't show up until 100 years ago?

Not to get too far off topic, but I have friends and family who are avid "crossfitters"... some of them also do the paleo thing. I take what they say with a grain of salt. I just can't get on board with it. Let me get this straight: they pay upwards of $120 each month to have an under-qualified coach (2 days course and $1000 to become a CF instructor) instruct them on how turn weight training and olympic style lifts into a high rep, aerobic exercise.... an exercise that is randomly thrown together earlier that day with no science behind it whatsoever. They do this for 10-30 minutes, or until they vomit/passout, and call it a good workout.

Sorry, but I feel like there are much cheaper, safer, and more effective ways to achieve individual fitness goals. I've had some of these friends work out with me at my gym... we do the same mass building routines I was taught by my trainer. They always tell me at the end "I just don't feel like I did anything. I don't feel like I really got a good workout." So crossfit is basically conditioning them to believe that you haven't gotten a good workout unless you feel like you're on the edge of death?

It all seems like a bunch of bullshit to me. Not to mention, the whole thing feels a bit too much like a cult. Crossfit sells a brand name. They took cross training, added elements that make it unsafe, and slapped a label on it. There is no science, no strength development or periodization. Many of the lifts and other exercises are unsafe and bad for joints. I know 3 people in the last month who had to stop crossfit due to injury.

Yeah, I'm a bit skeptical when these friends come to me with their "Awesome new diet!"
Pretty sure you guys are confused in equating ancient diet and short life span.

Also we are talking about the diet not crossfit.
Nope. Pretty sure those two lines in bold clear that up. ;)


EDIT Also, this was in the OP:

"I'm considered a health nut by friends and family, but this select group of cross-fit (the means by which this diet is spreading like a wild fire) friends of mine are what I would consider health nuts and they're STRONGLY encouraging me to give it a try."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,566 Posts
Explain something to me. Who says that human beings are not supposed to eat grains? Raw grains. Processes grains. Whatever. Who says that grains are inherently bad for human consumption? What are "paleo" advocates claiming the benefit of not consuming grains was to our ancestors? Making a comparison about how things were done tens of thousands of years ago seems pretty pointless to me without an "A=B" argument to go with it.

Question: What do we know about the health of our ancient ancestors? Very little, other than the fact that they lived much shorter lives. Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming that there is a correlation between primitive mans diet and his short lifespan... maybe there is, I don't know. I just don't get how anyone can support a diet on the basis that our ancestors (who lived much shorter lives) ate that way. Our ancestors also died of diarrhea and minor infections. Should we stop treating ourselves for those because effective pharmaceuticals didn't show up until 100 years ago?
You inferred it twice :) You kinda wishi washy it, but its how you feel and part of your argument in two places :) no need to feel like im attacking. Im only stating that the top 10 reasons for shorter life's has nothing to do with diet. But what probably tops the list is:
-Clean drinking water
-Personal hygiene
Its how the grains and other foods are being modified that Is probably the biggest issue. Pretty much as hollywood stated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
You inferred it twice :) You kinda wishi washy it, but its how you feel and part of your argument in two places :) no need to feel like im attacking. Im only stating that the top 10 reasons for shorter life's has nothing to do with diet. But what probably tops the list is:
-Clean drinking water
-Personal hygiene
Its how the grains and other foods are being modified that Is probably the biggest issue. Pretty much as hollywood stated.
No, I was stating that I have no definitive proof either way. Neither do you. It is highly unlikely that their diet was largely to blame, but neither of us can prove that it didn't play even a small role in their short lifespans. I even mentioned that they died of simple things like minor infections and diarrhea.

I'm simply suggesting that the paleo diet has limited science and faulty logic behind it. By the same logic, we should consume no liquids except for water. Screw MILK! We don't need calcium, do we? Fresh orange juice? Fuck vitamin C! I might die of a strep infection like my ancestors. They didn't need antibiotics, why should I? They also shit in the woods and slept in caves. Should I do that too?

Where is the evidence that says that our ancestors were any healthier for their primitive diet? Where is the evidence that says we'll be better off if we eat like they did?
 
1 - 20 of 162 Posts
Top