64 replies to this topic

[#1hit]

Lately I've been researching the benefits of grass fed meat over grain fed (so many), and my digging led me to this site :

http://www.bulletproofexec.com/

At first I was very skeptical and turned off by the crazy claims that are written on the top of the page, but as I sunk my teeth into it this guy seems pretty legit. Basically the site is done by Dave Asprey, a silicon valley dude who spent 10 years and over 250,000$ of his own cash to experiment with biohacking, and the results of his experimentation are that he lost a ton of weight, increased his IQ (he was already a nootropic user before his "quest", using modafinil very liberally) and just basically became a better person.

I've been trying to align my diet with the bulletproof diet he describes succintly in a couple of charts, and I also tried his recipe for "bulletproof coffee", and it is incredible. The coffee doesn't even feel like your drinking a cup of coffee, I mean zero side effects, but I felt more alert and even all day. Idk why it works but it gave him a little more credibility in my eyes.

Has anyone on this forums heard about him, followed his suggestions, etc? It seems to me that someone in our niche topic of nootropics / longevity would have heard of him.

[Mind]

Heard of him. Did know that he follows a modified paleo diet. His diet looks pretty decent for health and he obviously, anecdotally, reports he feels great.

I never heard of the bullet proof coffee, but I do put butter in my coffee from time to time. I thought I was weird. Now I feel like a genius, lol.

Does anyone know where to get whey protein concentrate (WPC) from raw milk (as reccomended by Bulletproof and Mercola)? The Obama adminstration and FDA are on the warpath to make sure no one ever touches, eats, drinks, or consumes raw dairy products, so I was surprised that WPC from raw milk is available.

[The Immortalist]

Does anyone know where to get whey protein concentrate (WPC) from raw milk?

What would be the advantage over "normal" whey protein concentrate?

[bacopa]

what about the claims of the anti raw milk people that raw milk brings contaminants too, like blood, feces, other pathogens, bacteria that could be bad? I have no f'ing clue, but what is the argument that something that comes from an animal that is not pasturized etc. is safe?

[X_Danny_X]

Raw milk is pasteurize to a very small degree to get rid of few enzymes that can be harmful. From that though, raw milk is the best milk to buy. Assuming you are buying from a legit farmers market.

I do my best to buy Oragnic milk, meat, eggs, etc but man they are much more expensive. The price adds up. If you cannot buy organic meat, then buy lean meat from the regular supermarket.

Grass fed animals are the best way to go. It is better than grains, grains are not good for you or any animal really. The government during the late 60s and early 70s talked about eating grains which cause more health problems.

However, animals that are just fed only grains are still healthier than buying meat from your local supermarket since in America they inject pigs, cows, and even chicken with steroids, antibiotics, etc.

People even today still think that cholesterol and saturated fat is bad for you, which in reality are healthy fo your and that both were a main food source for humans since back during the stone age.

Edited by X_Danny_X, 09 December 2011 - 02:03 AM.

[JChief]

Heard of him. Did know that he follows a modified paleo diet. His diet looks pretty decent for health and he obviously, anecdotally, reports he feels great.

I never heard of the bullet proof coffee, but I do put butter in my coffee from time to time. I thought I was weird. Now I feel like a genius, lol.

Does anyone know where to get whey protein concentrate (WPC) from raw milk (as reccomended by Bulletproof and Mercola)? The Obama adminstration and FDA are on the warpath to make sure no one ever touches, eats, drinks, or consumes raw dairy products, so I was surprised that WPC from raw milk is available.

While raw milk certainly has its benefits I'm not sure if the whey protein needs to be derived from raw milk as long as the amino acid profile is legit.

http://www.realmilk.com/ - check local sources and ask around for the time being. I have not been able to find a source. If Mercola, and that huge store of his, does not offer it then I'd guess it'd be hard to find if you didn't live in California or something.

A quality whey protein powder I trust is Perque Whey Guard. Perque, in general, can usually be counted on to provide the highest quality form of every vitamin you could think of. Raymond Francis, the founder of The Project to End Disease, also a biochemist, re-sells a lot of their products at markup. If you are going to settle on a single powder and you cannot locate a raw-milk derived variety then I'd consider that as an alternative. You can trust what's on the label and the BCAA profile is superb.

[JChief]

Lately I've been researching the benefits of grass fed meat over grain fed (so many), and my digging led me to this site :

http://www.bulletproofexec.com/

At first I was very skeptical and turned off by the crazy claims that are written on the top of the page, but as I sunk my teeth into it this guy seems pretty legit. Basically the site is done by Dave Asprey, a silicon valley dude who spent 10 years and over 250,000$ of his own cash to experiment with biohacking, and the results of his experimentation are that he lost a ton of weight, increased his IQ (he was already a nootropic user before his "quest", using modafinil very liberally) and just basically became a better person.

I've been trying to align my diet with the bulletproof diet he describes succintly in a couple of charts, and I also tried his recipe for "bulletproof coffee", and it is incredible. The coffee doesn't even feel like your drinking a cup of coffee, I mean zero side effects, but I felt more alert and even all day. Idk why it works but it gave him a little more credibility in my eyes.

Has anyone on this forums heard about him, followed his suggestions, etc? It seems to me that someone in our niche topic of nootropics / longevity would have heard of him.

Thanks for sharing. This guy seems similar to me (Dual n-back. Paleo-esque diet etc) I just lack the funds and dedication. I'll get there... (jk) I am always leery of for-profit advice. But you gotta make a living somehow right? Riiiiighhhttt....

Edited by JChief, 09 December 2011 - 09:40 AM.

[#1hit]

what about the claims of the anti raw milk people that raw milk brings contaminants too, like blood, feces, other pathogens, bacteria that could be bad? I have no f'ing clue, but what is the argument that something that comes from an animal that is not pasturized etc. is safe?

I'm not too well-versed in this controversial arguement, I just drink the raw milk lol, but here is what I've gathered from some research. First of all, there wouldn't really be an increase in blood, feces, or other physical contaminants compared to pasteurized milk because raw milk only means that it wasn't pasteurized, so its not like heating it would destroy these contaminants. Also, feedlot cows are often exposed to higher levels of feces because they are standing all day in the same spot that they defecate in, whereas cows used to make raw milk are almost always raised on small farms that let the cows roam on a pasture.

As for the bacteria content, this is where things get a little more interesting. There are many dangerous bacteria that can get into milk, such as e-coli, some forms of staph, etc, and this poses a big risk. By heating the milk, almost every dangerous bacteria is killed, and for a commercial operation this is essential to ensuring that the millions of gallons of milk sold across the country are safe to consume. Unfortunately, a consequence of destroying all the bad bacteria is that the good bacteria, as well as almost all of the nutrients in the milk, are destroyed as well.

From what I've read, the deciding factor in whether pasteurization is necessary lies in how the cows are raised and what they are fed. Basically, if a cow is pastured and fed an all-grass / hay diet, which is their natural diet, they are very healthy and have dramatically lowered incidences of bacteria. The reason that pastuerization, as well as antibiotics, are required in industrial feedlots is because grains , soy, etc are not naturally digestable to a cow, and besides introducing all kinds of toxins and bacteria to the cow, just simply make for an extremely unhealthy cow that needs antibiotics to stay alive, and then to ensure that the bacteria the cow had acquired / was too sick to fight off doesn't end up in the milk, the milk is pasteurized before being distributed.

Soooo if your going to consume raw milk, the best way to ensure that its safe to ingest is to verify that it was produced from cows on a grain free, hay/grass diet.

[Mind]

Everyone loves to hyper-analyze here at Imminst, so I thought I would throw this out: for being so well "researched" I am surprised that bluberries are so low on the list of good things to eat on the bullet-proof diet. The data behind blueberries is rock solid.They are also very low carb. I am perplexed why he rates blueberries lower than most other berries.

[#1hit]

Everyone loves to hyper-analyze here at Imminst, so I thought I would throw this out: for being so well "researched" I am surprised that bluberries are so low on the list of good things to eat on the bullet-proof diet. The data behind blueberries is rock solid.They are also very low carb. I am perplexed why he rates blueberries lower than most other berries.

I was baffled by that ranking of blueberries too, especially because they are the go-to fruit for brain health. What I got from devouring his blog the last two days is that the key elements of his bulletproof diet are

1. As much healthy fat (animal, coconut, nuts, etc) as possible
2. Minimal toxicity (mycotoxins and other molds)
3. As little sugar as possible
4. As an added thing, generally everything should be organic, raw, grass fed, etc

For almost everything in the red zone, they fail on one or more of these rules. In the case of blueberries, I believe they are consigned to the right hand side of the spectrum whereas blackberries, strawberries, and raspberries make the "good for you" list because blueberries have a higher amount of sugar (15 grams sugar / 123 grams berries compared to 7 / 123 for blackberries and 5/123 for raspberries).

I'm not saying blueberries are bad, I still eat them, but i'm pretty sure that's what dave asprey's rationale for ranking blueberries poorly is.

[JChief]

Everyone loves to hyper-analyze here at Imminst, so I thought I would throw this out: for being so well "researched" I am surprised that bluberries are so low on the list of good things to eat on the bullet-proof diet. The data behind blueberries is rock solid.They are also very low carb. I am perplexed why he rates blueberries lower than most other berries.

Totally agree here. Absolutely nothing wrong with fresh organic blueberries in the diet!

[JChief]

Everyone loves to hyper-analyze here at Imminst, so I thought I would throw this out: for being so well "researched" I am surprised that bluberries are so low on the list of good things to eat on the bullet-proof diet. The data behind blueberries is rock solid.They are also very low carb. I am perplexed why he rates blueberries lower than most other berries.

I was baffled by that ranking of blueberries too, especially because they are the go-to fruit for brain health. What I got from devouring his blog the last two days is that the key elements of his bulletproof diet are

1. As much healthy fat (animal, coconut, nuts, etc) as possible
2. Minimal toxicity (mycotoxins and other molds)
3. As little sugar as possible
4. As an added thing, generally everything should be organic, raw, grass fed, etc

For almost everything in the red zone, they fail on one or more of these rules. In the case of blueberries, I believe they are consigned to the right hand side of the spectrum whereas blackberries, strawberries, and raspberries make the "good for you" list because blueberries have a higher amount of sugar (15 grams sugar / 123 grams berries compared to 7 / 123 for blackberries and 5/123 for raspberries).

I'm not saying blueberries are bad, I still eat them, but i'm pretty sure that's what dave asprey's rationale for ranking blueberries poorly is.

I like what he's doing and he seems to at least embrace the benefits of raw fruits and vegetables as primary source of carbs. Leafy greens cannot be stressed enough. Romaine lettuce, for instance, reads out like a multivitamin label lol. Fresh juices and "green smoothies" are great ways to incorporate a healthy amount of greens in the diet as well as an awesome fiber source!

Also, I wanted to pass on this chef who knows very well that good healthy fats are your friend as well as cultured foods! Her name is Chef Teton . Highly recommend.

[Xhenaro]

Hello. I have been visiting around the Bulletproof Execute site, which I'd think you know. I would like to know your overall opinions of his techniques, specially of the diet, which is a modified version of the Paleo. It promises a lot... can it be true? Could it be a possible long-term diet to have?

http://www.bulletpro...lletproof-diet/

[niner]

It looks pretty good. I didn't see any ridiculous claims; the claims I saw seem like a reasonable outcome from a good diet, particularly compared to the Standard American Diet. I like the presentation he has where different foods are ranked within their category on a continuum from "eat" to "don't eat". I would change the orderings of a few things, but I think he has it mostly right.

[JChief]

I saw this the other day. First off I think a lot of us eat too much meat. And of that meat it's usually low quality. And the amount of protein we need is much lower than is commonly believed. No doubt if you were to follow this diet in comparison to the SAD diet you would improve your health and lose weight. I think primarily plant-based proteins are the most ideal and meat should be oily fish/lean meat topping out at no more than 10% of your overall calories if you wanted to nitpick for longevity reasons.

[Xhenaro]

In any case, they talk about that diet as an improved version of Paleo, but what is the difference with a "normal" paleo diet? Would you be able to identify why those changes are made? Because I see no source/studies backing up the info he gives.

[JChief]

I'll guess that it's because he encourages more raw, whole foods. And that all of your carbs should be primarily vegetables. Naturally, he considers this an upgrade to a high-cooked Paleo diet. He considers it an "upgrade" because it's paleo philosophy + "latest scientific research."

Edited by JChief, 11 December 2011 - 11:42 PM.

[Xhenaro]

I'll guess that it's because he encourages more raw, whole foods. And that all of your carbs should be primarily vegetables. Naturally, he considers this an upgrade to a high-cooked Paleo diet. He considers it an "upgrade" because it's paleo philosophy + "latest scientific research."

What I don't get is where the "latest scientific research" is and how does it cotribute to change (in what) the paleo classical diet. And, overall, why that "latest scientific research" supports a paleo diet (which I didn't know of until I visited the site yesterday).

[JChief]

I'll guess that it's because he encourages more raw, whole foods. And that all of your carbs should be primarily vegetables. Naturally, he considers this an upgrade to a high-cooked Paleo diet. He considers it an "upgrade" because it's paleo philosophy + "latest scientific research."

What I don't get is where the "latest scientific research" is and how does it cotribute to change (in what) the paleo classical diet. And, overall, why that "latest scientific research" supports a paleo diet (which I didn't know of until I visited the site yesterday).

Here is more on the diet. "many advocates of the Paleolithic diet consider high percentage of animal flesh to be one of the key features of the diet." Paleo pleases meat eaters and is part of the appeal. Paleo normally excludes grains, legumes, dairy products, salt, refined sugar, and processed oils. That guys version includes dairy and makes some exceptions.

Personally I think given the fact you want to choose organic grass-fed and high quality meats you would find it to become very expensive.

Edited by JChief, 12 December 2011 - 12:32 AM.

[Shepard]

I've always gotten a bad vibe from Asprey. I came across the site shortly after it was launched, and I've never really become comfortable with the presentation. The butter in coffee tastes pretty good, though.

[Mind]

Everyone loves to hyper-analyze here at Imminst, so I thought I would throw this out: for being so well "researched" I am surprised that bluberries are so low on the list of good things to eat on the bullet-proof diet. The data behind blueberries is rock solid.They are also very low carb. I am perplexed why he rates blueberries lower than most other berries.

I was baffled by that ranking of blueberries too, especially because they are the go-to fruit for brain health. What I got from devouring his blog the last two days is that the key elements of his bulletproof diet are

1. As much healthy fat (animal, coconut, nuts, etc) as possible
2. Minimal toxicity (mycotoxins and other molds)
3. As little sugar as possible
4. As an added thing, generally everything should be organic, raw, grass fed, etc

For almost everything in the red zone, they fail on one or more of these rules. In the case of blueberries, I believe they are consigned to the right hand side of the spectrum whereas blackberries, strawberries, and raspberries make the "good for you" list because blueberries have a higher amount of sugar (15 grams sugar / 123 grams berries compared to 7 / 123 for blackberries and 5/123 for raspberries).

I'm not saying blueberries are bad, I still eat them, but i'm pretty sure that's what dave asprey's rationale for ranking blueberries poorly is.

Well darn. I am stooopid. Someone here at Imminst posted a few years ago that blueberries had less carbs than blackberries, and I took it as fact. Should have double checked. Still, blueberries are good for health and I won't shy away too much.

[DukeNukem]

The diet looks quite good, but I'd move nuts (except macadamia nuts) further up the graph in the avoid direction. Occasionally okay, but definitely not everyday.

[Ron]

I've always gotten a bad vibe from Asprey. I came across the site shortly after it was launched, and I've never really become comfortable with the presentation. The butter in coffee tastes pretty good, though.

Glad I'm not the only one. Too much braggadocio and too little science. I put him in the same category with that sleazy Ferriss guy.

[niner]

for being so well "researched" I am surprised that bluberries are so low on the list of good things to eat on the bullet-proof diet.

In the case of blueberries, I believe they are consigned to the right hand side of the spectrum whereas blackberries, strawberries, and raspberries make the "good for you" list because blueberries have a higher amount of sugar (15 grams sugar / 123 grams berries compared to 7 / 123 for blackberries and 5/123 for raspberries).

I'm not saying blueberries are bad, I still eat them, but i'm pretty sure that's what dave asprey's rationale for ranking blueberries poorly is.

Well darn. I am stooopid. Someone here at Imminst posted a few years ago that blueberries had less carbs than blackberries, and I took it as fact. Should have double checked. Still, blueberries are good for health and I won't shy away too much.

NutritionData.com has several listings for blueberries; plain old raw blueberries are 10g sugar/100g, while Wild Alaskan blueberries are 6.5g sugar/100g. My half cup of frozen wild blueberries that I have on oatmeal is 6 grams of sugar, last time I looked. I'm willing to consume 6 grams of heinous toxin (cue creepy music) in order to get the good phytochemicals, plus I like the taste. I think Dave's ratings need to be taken with a grain of salt.

[canz]

In the past two weeks I've cut out grains, breads and starches and I've felt great since then. I've also lost 8lbs (and I'm not an obese person). Where I'm at right now I really don't have too much of a variety for food, but I eat lean meats (for the most part) eggs, and as much spinach, celery, olives, cucumbers and carrots that I can possibly stand within a day. I also try to eat some almonds and pistachios for fat intake every now and then, but I take 3g of fish oil and 3g of virgin coconut oil daily. I've cut down on my fruit intake to zero for now, and I have a cheat day (Saturday) where I eat anything I want (except grains and breads).

I'm still trying to figure out the balance of this diet. I am not the type to veer towards the "atkins" or the "paleo" or even the suggested slow carb diet in Tim Ferriss' book the 4 hour body. I have been collecting facts from each food group, advantages, disadvantages and when the right time of day would be to eat certain things and I'm going from there. I've just started taking a solid interest in my food intake, and am soaking up as much knowledge as I can. Like someone has said, everyone is different so there is no such thing as a cookie cutter regimen for eating. However, I think generally we all know what foods are good for us and what aren't. For me, the key is when to eat these foods and how much of them is too much. From what I've researched, you can't eat too many green vegetables or meat, and the more healthy fats the better. Fruit on the other hand should be eaten in moderation and at certain times of the day, and grains should be avoided for the most part.

Like I said, I'm still learning and applying to my daily food intake, but so far I'm having great results. The key for me as well is that I'm not starving, and I am ALMOST over the carb/sugar craving which is huge for me. I have a major sweet tooth and carbs and sugar were my friend (the enemy, lol). I still get the cravings, but allowing myself a cheat day keeps me straight. If you all have any other sources like bullet proof that you've learned more about diet and it's effects that would be beneficial.

Edited by canz, 14 December 2011 - 06:09 AM.

[DukeNukem]

Canz, this is the diet I'm most aligned with:

http://www.archevore.com/get-started/

Although I don't eat more than 20-30 grams of starchy (high-glucose) carbs daily (typically sweet potato), because I want to reduce glycation potential and keep insulin levels low (insulin might be pro-aging). I eat a lot of low-glucose (high-water-volume) vegetables, like leafy greens.

[Shepard]

Glad I'm not the only one. Too much braggadocio and too little science. I put him in the same category with that sleazy Ferriss guy.

I don't know what you're talking about. I totally have a body that reflects the work I put in four hours a week. Four hours at In-N-Out is truly effective for building mass.

[Mind]

mmmm, In-N-Out. My favorite burger place!

Why avoid nuts so much? Too much N-6?

Edited by Mind, 14 December 2011 - 09:13 PM.

[JLL]

Adding 20 points with duel-n-back? Looks like he didn't read the follow-up studies. Probably lots of good tips on his site but I would take them with a grain of salt.

[Shepard]

Why avoid nuts so much? Too much N-6?

The w-6 or imbalanced ratio is normally the answer given for avoiding nuts.