Paleo? For or against?

youtube!

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Well I hope you're not taking in 10g of fish oil, because that's how much you'd need and that would start to become counter-productive.

BTW if anyone is curious:

http://cronometer.com/download/

is what website we're referring to. I prefer the standalone download myself.

Man oh man am I having fun with this website!:p So much better than My fitness pal which I find jumbled and confusing, Cronmeter rocks! Thanx so much for the heads up!:pac:;)

Tar.Aldarion

cronometer is cool, although needs even more foods! Although as I eat a lot of home cooked meals it's rather difficult. I ate too much iron today
It doesn't differentiate in vitamins does it? such as cyanocobalamin, hydroxocobalamin and methylcobalamin, D2 vs D3 etc?


Thoughts on:
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2813%2960598-X/abstract

--Kaiser--

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Thoughts on:
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2813%2960598-X/abstract

Here are some comments
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.ie/2013/03/atherosclerosis-in-ancient-mummies.html

http://huntgatherlove.com/content/atherosclerosis-human-condition

El_Dangeroso

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

cronometer is cool, although needs even more foods! Although as I eat a lot of home cooked meals it's rather difficult. I ate too much iron today
It doesn't differentiate in vitamins does it? such as cyanocobalamin, hydroxocobalamin and methylcobalamin, D2 vs D3 etc?

No, it doesn't, neither K1 and K2 nor Beta-carotene and retinol are differentiated either.

To be fair I don't think the USDA database has these, and that's where most of this info comes from.

I figure if your eating food as opposed to taking supplements, the form probably isn't as important. Except maybe with people who can't convert beta-carotene to retinol efficiently (a lot of celtic people lack this ability).

FYI, copper is very good to balance a high iron intake, also giving blood!

Tar.Aldarion

Suppose it's not essential, it's more of a general thing that can show you gaps.
Yeah I will have to give blood anyway, don't really need too much iron with Hemochromatosis!

Brion

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Well I hope you're not taking in 10g of fish oil, because that's how much you'd need and that would start to become counter-productive.

BTW if anyone is curious:

http://cronometer.com/download/

is what website we're referring to. I prefer the standalone download myself.

Trawling through some paleo-related posts and saw this. Pretty nifty program I must say. Sorry for the size of the images below (tried to resize them here but doesn't seem to make a difference). That was a day's intake recently, anything I should be on the lookout for?

Cale

Just wondering if anyone would have any insight as to how paleo would fair in years to come?

I mean, would it be advisable if you're in your 60's say to be eating that much fat?

I guess you'd have to taper it down to fall in line with your lifestyle at that age...

Just a thought..

j@utis

there's a guy in this video who could answer your question http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCye_4oaUHM&feature=youtube_gdata_player
does he look like 72?

Cale

j@utis wrote: »

there's a guy in this video who could answer your question http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCye_4oaUHM&feature=youtube_gdata_player
does he look like 72?

Impressive.

Tar.Aldarion

j@utis wrote: »

there's a guy in this video who could answer your question http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCye_4oaUHM&feature=youtube_gdata_player
does he look like 72?

I doubt it has much to do with it, does this vegan look 72?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6qi3gfIJRA

El_Dangeroso

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I doubt it has much to do with it, does this vegan look 72?

Aren't they both health conscious people with good genes who don't smoke, exercise regularly and avoid junk food? That could be it

In any case I don't think you have to be strict paleo OR strict vegan to look like that when you are old. Vegans die younger than vegetarians, and we don't have the long term data on paleo.

I'm gonna go out there and say that genes probably determines 70% of your longevity, the rest being made up with avoiding junk-food, keeping a decent lean muscle mass into old age, not smoking or drinking to excess, getting good sleep and having a wide, supportive social structure around you (in fact this last point may be even more important than diet based upon current data :eek:).

j@utis

she says she's been vegan for a year and a half ...

Tar.Aldarion

Yeah that is my point really, a sample of one says to me, "it's possible to live on the diet" whereas longevity and appearance is much more based on nature than nurture with nurture obviously helping along the way. With that being a case of don't treat your body like crap, rather than striving for the utmost in optimal diets. i'd like to read about that social aspect.

j@utis wrote: »

she says she's been vegan for a year and a half ...

Woah, looks like it worked really fast!

El_Dangeroso

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

Yeah that is my point really, a sample of one says to me, "it's possible to live on the diet" whereas longevity and appearance is much more based on nature than nurture with nurture obviously helping along the way. With that being a case of don't treat your body like crap, rather than striving for the utmost in optimal diets. i'd like to read about that social aspect.

There is a tonne of research on social connection and health, here's a nice study that was highlighted recently in TIME:

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2006938,00.html

It's also one thing all the 'blue zones' have in common too.

spiralbound

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Vegans die younger than vegetarians

Do you have a source for that?

El_Dangeroso

Here you go: http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/14/4/963.full

I don't know if you have access to the full text:

Being a vegan was associated with a higher mortality risk (1.59; 95% CI, 0.98-2.59) than being a lacto-ovo vegetarian (1.08; 95% CI, 0.86-1.34), when compared with nonvegetarians with moderate meat/fish consumption, accounting for all other variables

spiralbound

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Here you go: http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/14/4/963.full

I don't know if you have access to the full text:

Cheers. There were only 60 vegans, and 23 deaths, though, I'm not sure you can make a strong statement based on that.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

I was paelo for over a year. It defiantly works well for weight loss. But as others have said energy levels for me were pretty low. I did find however that my training and weight loss plateaued on this diet. On research I found others that found the same.

Its also extremely expensive diet, and just as vulnerable to portion size as any diet.

Weight loss on a pealo diet has a lot to do with water retention. Carbohydrates suck a lot of water into cells as a transport mechanism, I find I can gain and loose 3kg in a 24hour period on a high carb day.

Anyway I dont think its a way of life really, its a diet. Short to medium term.

El_Dangeroso

spiralbound wrote: »

Cheers. There were only 60 vegans, and 23 deaths, though, I'm not sure you can make a strong statement based on that.

It was statistically significant for what it's worth, i.e, there is less than 5% probability the result was due to chance.

But since veganism is a very recent phenomenon we will have to wait for more data to confirm the finding.

spiralbound

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

It was statistically significant for what it's worth, i.e, there is less than 5% probability the result was due to chance.

But since veganism is a very recent phenomenon we will have to wait for more data to confirm the finding.

Yes, it was statistically significant, but they had a very small sample size, in one country, of people who had been vegan since the 70s (I'm sure there is more information on vegan nutrition available now than there was then). This is not enough evidence to say 'Vegans die younger than vegetarians' - the vegans in this study had a higher mortality risk than the vegetarians.

El_Dangeroso

spiralbound wrote: »

Yes, it was statistically significant, but they had a very small sample size, in one country, of people who had been vegan since the 70s (I'm sure there is more information on vegan nutrition available now than there was then). This is not enough evidence to say 'Vegans die younger than vegetarians' - the vegans in this study had a higher mortality risk than the vegetarians.

The sample size was big enough to determine the difference was not at random.

As I said it needs more data, but I personally wouldn't risk my health in the meantime waiting for it.

BTW there is a plausible mechanism of why that would be the case, even mild B12 deficiency elevates homocysteine which is a potent predictor of mortality.

If I were vegan I would supplement B12, algal DHA, zinc and maybe taurine and carnitine if I were prone to depressive episodes.

spiralbound

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

The sample size was big enough to determine the difference was not at random.

As I said it needs more data, but I personally wouldn't risk my health in the meantime waiting for it.

BTW there is a plausible mechanism of why that would be the case, even mild B12 deficiency elevates homocysteine which is a potent predictor of mortality.

If I were vegan I would supplement B12, algal DHA, zinc and maybe taurine and carnitine if I were prone to depressive episodes.

Yep, they could also have been deficient in vitamin D. I am vegan (as you may have surmised!) and supplement with B12 (in a multivitamin which also has zinc), D, calcium and algal DHA, as is currently recommended.

Anyway, that's probably enough derailing of the paleo thread.

wolfpawnat

My partner is paleo with dairy added accidentally. He never even heard of paleo, he just altered his diet to be healthy and then all this info on paleo came out and he just so happened to be eating it anyway. It is easy to shop for him and it just so happens it has made the house a lot healthier in general as all I do is add grains for me and my son to the same dinner as my partner is having.

Katgurl

Heaven Clean Surf wrote: »

I was paelo for over a year. It defiantly works well for weight loss. But as others have said energy levels for me were pretty low. I did find however that my training and weight loss plateaued on this diet. On research I found others that found the same.

Its also extremely expensive diet, and just as vulnerable to portion size as any diet.

Weight loss on a pealo diet has a lot to do with water retention. Carbohydrates suck a lot of water into cells as a transport mechanism, I find I can gain and loose 3kg in a 24hour period on a high carb day.

Anyway I dont think its a way of life really, its a diet. Short to medium term.

Interesting. So how is your current diet different? And what are the changes now to results (weight, fitness, financial)?

--Kaiser--

Heaven Clean Surf wrote: »

Anyway I dont think its a way of life really, its a diet.

Funny, I see it the exact opposite. And what you eat every day is a diet as well

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Katgurl wrote: »

Interesting. So how is your current diet different? And what are the changes now to results (weight, fitness, financial)?

I still eat a lot of protein and it make up the majority of my macros, however I eat some rice, some bread, some cheese, some dairy and normal food. I try to eat like a normal person when I am out, but limit carbs during the week. Have a takeaway if I feel like it, and some alcohol.

I train a lot better with carbs onboard, I sleep better, think better and recover faster, hell I even do cardio (nail me to a cross). My weight is around the same, although as I said it varies 2-3kg from day to day. My BF is down a good bit, I look less deflated and more solid. More importantly for me I feel strong and fit rather than looking and feeling tired

My theory is that as you reduce BF and increase muscle mass, you need more energy to sustain the muscle. If you stay at the same calories and add muscle you actually slipping in deficiency more and more. Your energy will suffer. Adding some carbs makes up for that. A well known body builder in Ireland once told me not to be carbaphobic, eat loads of carbs just earn them.

Paleo is an extreme diet ( I know diet refers to anything you consume, but in this context I mean restrictive diet). Like so many things, without moderation it is not sustainable, unless you the type that like posting pictures of steak, broccoli and 6 cashews on Facebook with the tag "YUM YUM", and kipping your chins.

At the end of the day, I was always a big meat eater, portion control is more important for me. If you body was not meant to eat it, you would not have the capacity to digest it. I am not saying that crisps an rounds of toast are good for you but moderation is.

El_Dangeroso

This is not aimed at you fitzgeme in particular, but I hate hate hate the term moderation. It's a word that can be used to justify anything 'All things in moderation, including crack, heroin and transfats!'. /rant

I do think that low carb has co-opted paleo in a big way so they have practically become synonymous. I got into paleo initially 'cos I was low carb, ironically paleo got me eating carbs again via fruit and potato.

I wouldn't call paleo restrictive with regards to variety of foods, most people eat 3-4 things as their staple, wheat, potato, chicken and vegetable oil comprise most of the irish diet. Paleo made me consider eating way more variety of foods, for example nose to tail eating.

But it is restrictive in terms of finding stuff to eat outside of your own home then absolutely. Also tasty things that can be cooked quickly, basically a LOT of planning is required.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Indeed, low carb and paelo are not the same, but most people associate paelo with low carb, your point is well taken.

Moderation, always less than you think.

j@utis

Heaven Clean Surf wrote: »

Its also extremely expensive diet, and just as vulnerable to portion size as any diet.
<...>
Anyway I dont think its a way of life really, its a diet. Short to medium term.

Extremely expensive? really? What were you buying? eggs, meat and veg? I don't find it expensive at all and it's very quick and easy to shop for. When I go shopping for groceries on my own and by "paleo" foods I spend x-amount of money. When me and my partner go together (he's not paleo) we spend at least 20eur more and we don't get more food that could make us dinner. he basically fills the trolley with treats like ice-cream, rice cakes, granola bars, humus, fancy sliced prepacked hams (50g/pack), juices, smoothies, yogurts etc and eats these in between the main meals = waste of money and ever expanding waistline.

I would strongly disagree with you on the second point. Paleo is more of a lifestyle that concentrates on health benefits in the long term rather than quick weight loss like most of the diets do. Weight loss is only secondary but always welcome "side effect" of this diet.

El_Dangeroso

Heaven Clean Surf wrote: »

Moderation, always less than you think.

Ha! I want this on a bumper sticker