39 replies to this topic

[TheFountain]

A couple years ago Matt Lalonde suggested that if we really want to be on a paleolithic diet we should eat absolutely nothing but meat and vegetables (including root vegetables). 

 

I did this almost every day this week so far and i'm not sure how I feel yet.

 

Does anybody here actually practice this pure and natural style of eating with like no added cocoa or dairy or yogurt or anything? 

 

How's the success on it? 

[TheFountain]

Anybody?

[ForeverBulking]

I tried that for like a week, but I was lacking in calories. How do you get enough calories without adding more carbohydrate or oils/nuts. I am sure the diet works to lose weight though.

[TheFountain]

I tried that for like a week, but I was lacking in calories. How do you get enough calories without adding more carbohydrate or oils/nuts. I am sure the diet works to lose weight though.

And for staying lean, with some long lean muscularity I presume. 

[shadowhawk]

I tried that for like a week, but I was lacking in calories. How do you get enough calories without adding more carbohydrate or oils/nuts. I am sure the diet works to lose weight though.

fats

 

[rwac]

Its really hard to do that while still getting all your vitamins and minerals. Think calcium, copper, selenium, vitamin A, D, E.

 

Have you tried putting your diet into cronometer?

[TheFountain]

Its really hard to do that while still getting all your vitamins and minerals. Think calcium, copper, selenium, vitamin A, D, E.

 

Have you tried putting your diet into cronometer?

I just don't have time to sit and measure all the miniscule variables, put every piece of food on a scale to make sure it matches the cronometer etc. 

 

I just want a simple, longevity diet that is not full of contradictory shit. lol

[rwac]

I just don't have time to sit and measure all the miniscule variables, put every piece of food on a scale to make sure it matches the cronometer etc. 
 
I just want a simple, longevity diet that is not full of contradictory shit. lol

Fast, Easy, and Cheap: Pick any two.

[maxwatt]

Meat and veg.  Good for diabetics.  Or to prevent the disease.  Seeds and nuts were eaten by paleolithic peoples.  Including acorns.  They should be OK.

Sounds like you just want to eliminate rice, bread,  cereals and maybe potatoes for this diet.  How about cheese?  No cheese or dairy.  Sounds like Chinese wok-cooked without the rice.

 

It can be done, with enough greens, a little fruit and berries, and some nuts. 

[TheFountain]

Meat and veg.  Good for diabetics.  Or to prevent the disease.  Seeds and nuts were eaten by paleolithic peoples.  Including acorns.  They should be OK.

Sounds like you just want to eliminate rice, bread,  cereals and maybe potatoes for this diet.  How about cheese?  No cheese or dairy.  Sounds like Chinese wok-cooked without the rice.

 

It can be done, with enough greens, a little fruit and berries, and some nuts. 

 

Well my understanding of Mat Lalonde's suggestion was that it included 'Tubers' and root vegetables (same thing?). So I guess that would include potatoes. 

 

The primary thing would be as natural as natural can be. 

[misterE]

Lack of carbohydrate causes excessive lipolysis and gluconeogenesis, both of which are elevated in diabetics! Meat is not a good fuel for the body; glucose is. 

Edited by misterE, 12 November 2015 - 07:36 PM.

[misterE]

{1} Meat and veg.  Good for diabetics.  Or to prevent the disease.

 

 

 {2} Seeds and nuts were eaten by paleolithic peoples.

 

 

 {3} you just want to eliminate rice, bread,  cereals and maybe potatoes for this diet. 

 

{1} So you are claiming the Atkins diet will reverse diabetes and other diseases?! Atkins is dead, so much for his longevity!

 

{2} Only when they were in season; 2 to 3 months out of the year and in limited quantities.

 

{3} Great advice, eliminate the food that has sustained the human race for the past 100,000 years... Just get a double-bacon hamburger and throw away the buns, what is easier than that?
 

Edited by misterE, 12 November 2015 - 07:50 PM.

[TheFountain]

Lack of carbohydrate causes excessive lipolysis and gluconeogenesis, both of which are elevated in diabetics! Meat is not a good fuel for the body; glucose is. 

One word, potatoes. 

[misterE]

Are you planning on eating a potato-based diet or a meat-based diet with potatoes on the side?

[ForeverBulking]

Are you planning on eating a potato-based diet or a meat-based diet with potatoes on the side?

I'm personally going to start eating a potato based diet with meat, veggies, fruit and occasional olive oil on the side. Going to try eating 3000 calories daily of these foods in the coming month.

[TheFountain]

Are you planning on eating a potato-based diet or a meat-based diet with potatoes on the side?

There is neither a potato or a meat based diet. Why is it an either or proposition? 

 

Like the title said, I am trying nothing but meat and vegetables for like maybe a month or longer to see the effects. 

[misterE]

 

 Why is it an either or proposition? 

 

 

 

 

 

Because high-protein diets promote high cortisol levels, which promotes diabetes, whereas a high-carbohydrate diet promotes high insulin levels, which prevents diabetes.

 

Having a high ratio of starch to meat would be fine, but an even ratio, or a high ratio of meat to starch wouldn't.

 

 

 

 

 

Life Sci. 1987 May 4;40(18):1761-8.

 

Diet-hormone interactions: protein/carbohydrate ratio alters reciprocally the plasma levels of testosterone and cortisol and their respective binding globulins in man.

 

Anderson KE, Rosner W, Khan MS.

 

Abstract

 

The aim of this study was to determine if a change in protein/carbohydrate ratio influences plasma steroid hormone concentrations. There is little information about the effects of specific dietary components on steroid hormone metabolism in humans. Testosterone concentrations in seven normal men were consistently higher after ten days on a high carbohydrate diet (468 +/- 34 ng/dl, mean +/- S.E.) than during a high protein diet (371 +/- 23 ng/dl, p less than 0.05) and were accompanied by parallel changes in sex hormone binding globulin (32.5 +/- 2.8 nmol/l vs. 23.4 +/- 1.6 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.01). By contrast, cortisol concentrations were consistently lower during the high carbohydrate diet than during the high protein diet (7.74 +/- 0.71 micrograms/dl vs. 10.6 +/- 0.4 micrograms/dl respectively, p less than 0.05), and there were parallel changes in corticosteroid binding globulin concentrations (635 +/- 60 nmol/l vs. 754 +/- 31 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.05). The diets were equal in total calories and fat. These consistent and reciprocal changes suggest that the ratio of protein to carbohydrate in the human diet is an important regulatory factor for steroid hormone plasma levels and for liver-derived hormone binding proteins.

 

Edited by misterE, 13 November 2015 - 01:57 PM.

[maxwatt]

You really have to take genetic phenotype into account without making blanket statements.

The plant-based high grain diet (pritikin, no?) may only be suitable for apoE4 genotype.,

ApoE3, the majority of the population, can handle meat in moderation. 

Some genetic types do well with omega-3 (Eskimos and most in North China).

Others, mediterranean types, do not benefit.

The list could go on.

 

But a diet high in refined carbs or high glycemic index carbs - is though to induce diabetes.  Persistently high insulin levels from consumption of excessive carbs can lead to insulin resistance, which leads to type II diabetes.   In many people, not all.  Genetics come into it, and perhaps environmental toxins. 

 

 

 

 

 Why is it an either or proposition? 

 

 

 

 

 

Because high-protein diets promote high cortisol levels, which promotes diabetes, whereas a high-carbohydrate diet promotes high insulin levels, which prevents diabetes.

 

Having a high ratio of starch to meat would be fine, but an even ratio, or a high ratio of meat to starch wouldn't.

 

 

 

 

 

Life Sci. 1987 May 4;40(18):1761-8.

 

Diet-hormone interactions: protein/carbohydrate ratio alters reciprocally the plasma levels of testosterone and cortisol and their respective binding globulins in man.

 

Anderson KE, Rosner W, Khan MS.

 

Abstract

 

The aim of this study was to determine if a change in protein/carbohydrate ratio influences plasma steroid hormone concentrations. There is little information about the effects of specific dietary components on steroid hormone metabolism in humans. Testosterone concentrations in seven normal men were consistently higher after ten days on a high carbohydrate diet (468 +/- 34 ng/dl, mean +/- S.E.) than during a high protein diet (371 +/- 23 ng/dl, p less than 0.05) and were accompanied by parallel changes in sex hormone binding globulin (32.5 +/- 2.8 nmol/l vs. 23.4 +/- 1.6 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.01). By contrast, cortisol concentrations were consistently lower during the high carbohydrate diet than during the high protein diet (7.74 +/- 0.71 micrograms/dl vs. 10.6 +/- 0.4 micrograms/dl respectively, p less than 0.05), and there were parallel changes in corticosteroid binding globulin concentrations (635 +/- 60 nmol/l vs. 754 +/- 31 nmol/l respectively, p less than 0.05). The diets were equal in total calories and fat. These consistent and reciprocal changes suggest that the ratio of protein to carbohydrate in the human diet is an important regulatory factor for steroid hormone plasma levels and for liver-derived hormone binding proteins.

 

 

[ForeverBulking]

I'll take my chances with potatoes. I haven't seen any clear evidence that carbohydrate especially unrefined carbohydrate leads to a progression in insulin resistance. I have no idea why the Randle Cycle is completely ignored by some advocates of high fat diets.

Edited by ForeverBulking, 13 November 2015 - 08:29 PM.

[TheFountain]

I'll take my chances with potatoes. I haven't seen any clear evidence that carbohydrate especially unrefined carbohydrate leads to a progression in insulin resistance. I have no idea why the Randle Cycle is completely ignored by some advocates of high fat diets.

Here's the real question, why not both Meat and potatoes? I mean, what did our ancestors do for centuries on end? They did not have access to a lot of high carb foods till agriculture hit the scene, so in the world of jungle feed, meat, shrubs and berries, how did they do? We're here!

[ForeverBulking]

I'll take my chances with potatoes. I haven't seen any clear evidence that carbohydrate especially unrefined carbohydrate leads to a progression in insulin resistance. I have no idea why the Randle Cycle is completely ignored by some advocates of high fat diets.

Here's the real question, why not both Meat and potatoes? I mean, what did our ancestors do for centuries on end? They did not have access to a lot of high carb foods till agriculture hit the scene, so in the world of jungle feed, meat, shrubs and berries, how did they do? We're here!

That's the basis of my diet, meat and potatoes. Vegetables, fruits, nuts, eggs and olive oil make up the rest. I'm sure our ancestors had better access to under ground carbohydrates than they did big fatty animals. Hunting wasnt easy.

[maxwatt]

 

{1} Meat and veg.  Good for diabetics.  Or to prevent the disease.

 

 

 {2} Seeds and nuts were eaten by paleolithic peoples.

 

 

 {3} you just want to eliminate rice, bread,  cereals and maybe potatoes for this diet. 

 

{1} So you are claiming the Atkins diet will reverse diabetes and other diseases?! Atkins is dead, so much for his longevity!

 

....
 

As I recall Atkins died of a gun-shot wound inflicted by a jealous mistress.  Nothing diet related that I can see.

 

In regards to largely meat-based diets, two words:  French Paradox

 

[misterE]

 

As I recall Atkins died of a gun-shot wound inflicted by a jealous mistress.  Nothing diet related that I can see.

 

 

In regards to largely meat-based diets, two words:  French Paradox

 

 

Atkins, slipped on a curb and hit his head. Many believe he suffered a heart-attack. When he was autopsied he was found to have severe atherosclerosis and lipotoxicity.

 

The French don't eat a high meat diet. They use liberal amounts of dairy-fat (which is benign, yet fattening), avoid omega-6 rich fats and drink lots of red-wine... plus they walk much more. They eat lots of starches, like bread and pasta.

[woleile]

 

 

The plant-based high grain diet (pritikin, no?) may only be suitable for apoE4 genotype.,

ApoE3, the majority of the population, can handle meat in moderation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is it about ApoE4 haplotype that makes plant-based diet suitable?

[maxwatt]

 

 

As I recall Atkins died of a gun-shot wound inflicted by a jealous mistress.  Nothing diet related that I can see.

 

 

In regards to largely meat-based diets, two words:  French Paradox

 

 

Atkins, slipped on a curb and hit his head. Many believe he suffered a heart-attack. When he was autopsied he was found to have severe atherosclerosis and lipotoxicity.

 

The French don't eat a high meat diet. They use liberal amounts of dairy-fat (which is benign, yet fattening), avoid omega-6 rich fats and drink lots of red-wine... plus they walk much more. They eat lots of starches, like bread and pasta.

 

 

My bad:I conflated Atkins with another diet doc.  more on Atkins cause of death: http://www.nytimes.c...live.html?_r=0 

But note "...Dr. Atkins did not have a history of heart attack, nor was he obese. He said that Dr. Atkins weighed 195 pounds the day after he entered the hospital following his fall, and that he gained 63 pounds from fluid retention during the nine days he was in a coma before he died. Dr. Trager said Dr. Atkins did have cardiomyopathy, a heart muscle disease that was probably caused by a virus, not by what he ate."

and that was further disputed.

 

With regard to the French, I gather you have never been to Perigord.  They use goose fat in lieu of butter or olive oil for cooking.  Delicious, and apparently no CHD.
 

Edited by maxwatt, 16 November 2015 - 04:49 PM.

[misterE]

{1} more on Atkins cause of death: .

 

{2} With regard to the French, I gather you have never been to Perigord. 

 

{3} They use goose fat in lieu of butter or olive oil for cooking. 

 

{4} apparently no CHD.
 

 

 

{1} The PCRM published his autopsy which showed he had atherosclerosis. View the medical report here:

http://www.thesmokin...h-report?page=3 It shows he had over a seven year history of "MI" (myocardial infraction), "CHF" (congestive heart failure) and "HTN"  (hypertension).

{2} Never have.

{3} Goose-fat has a saturation-index of 0.13 (the same as lard or human breast-milk). Chicken-fat has a saturation of 0.27 and soybean-oil has a saturation of 1.5, chicken-fat and soybean-oil are two of the major sources of fat in the American diet, so while goose-fat isn't ideal (it has a terrible omega-3/6 ratio) it is much better than chicken or soybean fat.

{4} Sure they have CHD, just not as much as the USA.

Edited by misterE, 16 November 2015 - 07:09 PM.

[TheFountain]

 

 

I'll take my chances with potatoes. I haven't seen any clear evidence that carbohydrate especially unrefined carbohydrate leads to a progression in insulin resistance. I have no idea why the Randle Cycle is completely ignored by some advocates of high fat diets.

Here's the real question, why not both Meat and potatoes? I mean, what did our ancestors do for centuries on end? They did not have access to a lot of high carb foods till agriculture hit the scene, so in the world of jungle feed, meat, shrubs and berries, how did they do? We're here!

That's the basis of my diet, meat and potatoes. Vegetables, fruits, nuts, eggs and olive oil make up the rest. I'm sure our ancestors had better access to under ground carbohydrates than they did big fatty animals. Hunting wasnt easy.

 

But most of the high carb foods we associate with post agricultural diets our paleo ancestors weren't taking the time to cook up because they didn't have the means with which to do so. Plus isotope studies show the inclination was more toward meats and readily accessible vegetables that could be eaten raw, and of course berries.

 

On another note I ate a steak last night, a baked potato and a side of vegetables. Felt pretty much full ever since. I think it takes less food on this type of diet to feel full. Thus increasing metabolic advantage. 

Edited by TheFountain, 16 November 2015 - 08:20 PM.

[misterE]

 

 isotope studies show the inclination was more toward meats and readily accessible vegetables that could be eaten raw, and of course berries.

 

 

The isotope studies also show starch granules, like barley, wheat, rice and amaranth dating back at the very least 100,000 years ago. Hunting for meat took a lot of effort and was very unreliable.

 

 

 

Science. 2009 Dec 18;326(5960):1680-3.

 

Mozambican grass seed consumption during the Middle Stone Age.

 

Mercader J.

 

Abstract

 

The role of starchy plants in early hominin diets and when the culinary processing of starches began have been difficult to track archaeologically. Seed collecting is conventionally perceived to have been an irrelevant activity among the Pleistocene foragers of southern Africa, on the grounds of both technological difficulty in the processing of grains and the belief that roots, fruits, and nuts, not cereals, were the basis for subsistence for the past 100,000 years and further back in time. A large assemblage of starch granules has been retrieved from the surfaces of Middle Stone Age stone tools from Mozambique, showing that early Homo sapiens relied on grass seeds starting at least 105,000 years ago, including those of sorghum grasses.

[aza]

 

Hunting for meat took a lot of effort and was very unreliable.

 

 

This study is interesting. http://rsbl.royalsoc...t/10/1/20130853

Hunter–gatherers have less famine than agriculturalists

"Warm-climate hunter–gatherers actually experience fewer famines than societies with other modes of subsistence."

"Although in good years agriculturalists may reap far more calories per unit of land than hunter–gatherers, hunter–gatherers can and do move in times of drought or flood—something that agricultural populations are limited in doing"

"To the best of our knowledge, only two studies [19,20] have analysed famine and food shortages across different modes of subsistence. Neither of these studies considered habitat quality in their analyses, and neither found differences in the frequency of famine between hunter–gatherers and agriculturalists. However, approximately half of the hunter–gatherer societies in both studies are Arctic or subarctic, whereas very few agriculturalists live in the Arctic or subarctic. Thus, the agricultural versus hunter–gatherer societies in these samples are not comparable in terms of climate and habitat. Our study is the first to report that, controlling for habitat quality, hunter–gatherers have less famine than agriculturalists."

[TheFountain]

To summarize our ancestors were more mobile than we are, even though we have cars and planes and shit. 

 

What that means is they travelled across their lands on foot and that when agriculture arrived, so did colonization and relatively Parochial habitations. So modern humanity has expanded in a sense, but we have also limited ourselves in a sense as well with this agricultural way of living.