User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 7:46:40 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You need to send me these recipes!!! 
Many came from here. Bonus - most of the meals are quick and easy if you have some tools like a food processor. Start with that cookbook. It's easier and better than his other efforts IMO. Mark's Daily Apple also has a bunch of recipes on the site for free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 7:48:13 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Many came from here. Bonus - most of the meals are quick and easy if you have some tools like a food processor. Start with that cookbook. It's easier and better than his other efforts IMO. Mark's Daily Apple also has a bunch of recipes on the site for free. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You need to send me these recipes!!!
Many came from here. Bonus - most of the meals are quick and easy if you have some tools like a food processor. Start with that cookbook. It's easier and better than his other efforts IMO. Mark's Daily Apple also has a bunch of recipes on the site for free. Marketing!  You must work for paleo headquarters!!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 7:49:45 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Marketing! You must work for paleo headquarters!!! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You need to send me these recipes!!!
Many came from here. Bonus - most of the meals are quick and easy if you have some tools like a food processor. Start with that cookbook. It's easier and better than his other efforts IMO. Mark's Daily Apple also has a bunch of recipes on the site for free. Marketing! You must work for paleo headquarters!!! $30 at Amazon and Discover Card is doing 5% cash back on Amazon purchases through the end of the year. I quit working for the headquarters because they wouldn't give me free toe shoes |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 7:57:21 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More veggies solves this. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
7 pages and still waiting for someone to post what the negative heath consequences are for omitting grains and processed food from one's diet Harder to poop. . More veggies solves this. Yeah. But I'm trying to give them something to hate on. Being wrong as often as the antis are, they need a self esteem boost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 8:10:45 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So, calorie-dense foods had a positive impact on humanity at a time when starvation was a real threat and humanity adapted to become more adept at digesting starches. Today, is lack of caloric intake a bigger threat to the average American's health than obesity and its consequences? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: FFS At least read the article before you make a spurious attack. It was reported in the Quarterly Review of Biology, and attributed to such in the article. There are numerous scientific articles indicating the likely inclusion of various foodstuffs by primitive hunter gatherers. That being said, most sources had not been bred up as our modern fruits and starch tubers have been. This raises an interesting point, on which I agree with the "you can't recreate the caveman diet" crowd, as misguided as the argument may be. Many of the fruits and vegetables that we have now didn't exist, and I have to seriously wonder what plants our ancestors could have actually eaten. The apple was originally more like a crabapple, and not terribly pleasant to eat. Broccoli, cauliflower, kale, cabbage, and turnips were all bred from the wild mustard plant. I have to wonder if the same could even be said for tubers- that they originally carried a rare but (by comparison to modern crops) paltry amount of starch until bred into modern yams and potatoes. A brief Google search says "at least in some instances". Yep. By volume, and in concert with higher ratios of insoluble fiber and other indigestible carbohydrate, glycemic load overall would have been reduced. But humans ate whatever they can get their hands on, including starchy tubers. Ripe fruits contain little starch, and although smaller, still would have been consumed in quantity. Look at how fruits, wild berries etch are sought by all animals. The question has become why are humans unique amongst primates in genetic changes allowing digestion of starch more efficiently. Research that suggests multiple copies of amylase genes, which is what you see in populations consuming starches, since there a survival benefit, existed well before modern humans. So at some level, starches had an impact regardless of the nascent form the starch plants exhibited, for a time well before intentional cultivation. Other Primates have much fewer copies, as they eat primarily ripe fruit, containing relatively little starch. So this seems to draw a difference between our ancestors. So, calorie-dense foods had a positive impact on humanity at a time when starvation was a real threat and humanity adapted to become more adept at digesting starches. Today, is lack of caloric intake a bigger threat to the average American's health than obesity and its consequences? A better question to ask is why get invested in defending a "diet" based on a demonstrably false food palette concept. One that never existed, nor could it be replicated today as examples are no longer extant. If a particular diet works for an individual, great, eat it. But lets not claim a particular diets efficacy is based on human adaption, when what evidence exists is to the contrary. The issue with total caloric intake has less to do with carbs in the diet than it does portion size and types of carbs. Humans have been eating caloric dense foods for a long time, yet obesity has only become endemic recently. For the most part because Americans do less and eat more. 50 years ago most American diets wouldnt be considered particularly healthy today, and certainly wouldnt be considered "paleo", but obesity wasnt rampant. No need to reinvent the wheel. Regardless, any attempt to eat more naturally and with better balance should be encouraged. Not sure what your question is suppose to ferret out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 8:14:33 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A better question to ask is why get invested in defending a "diet" based on a demonstrably false food palette concept. One that never existed, nor could it be replicated today as examples are no longer extant. If a particular diet works for an individual, great, eat it. But lets not claim a particular diets efficacy is based on human adaption, when what evidence exists is to the contrary. The issue with total caloric intake has less to do with carbs in the diet than it does portion size and types of carbs. Humans have been eating caloric dense foods for a long time, yet obesity has only become endemic recently. For the most part because Americans do less and eat more. 50 years ago most American diets wouldnt be considered particularly healthy today, and certainly wouldnt be considered "paleo", but obesity wasnt rampant. No need to reinvent the wheel. Regardless, any attempt to eat more naturally and with better balance should be encouraged. Not sure what your question is suppose to ferret out. Because the diet name is silly, like has been said 100 times. It's still an excellent diet despite that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 8:15:13 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One might very well argue that certain adaptations have become anachronistic and harmful, like say for example salivary amylase. Letting more starches through undigested and not raising glycemic impact by causing mucosal absorption of maltose would be a beneficial trait for modern humans. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Yep. By volume, and in concert with higher ratios of insoluble fiber and other indigestible carbohydrate, glycemic load overall would have been reduced. But humans ate whatever they can get their hands on, including starchy tubers. Ripe fruits contain little starch, and although smaller, still would have been consumed in quantity. Look at how fruits, wild berries etch are sought by all animals. The question has become why are humans unique amongst primates in genetic changes allowing digestion of starch more efficiently. Research that suggests multiple copies of amylase genes, which is what you see in populations consuming starches, since there a survival benefit, existed well before modern humans. So at some level, starches had an impact regardless of the nascent form the starch plants exhibited, for a time well before intentional cultivation. Other Primates have much fewer copies, as they eat primarily ripe fruit, containing relatively little starch. So this seems to draw a difference between our ancestors. So, calorie-dense foods had a positive impact on humanity at a time when starvation was a real threat and humanity adapted to become more adept at digesting starches. Today, is lack of caloric intake a bigger threat to the average American's health than obesity and its consequences? One might very well argue that certain adaptations have become anachronistic and harmful, like say for example salivary amylase. Letting more starches through undigested and not raising glycemic impact by causing mucosal absorption of maltose would be a beneficial trait for modern humans. Theres evidence that having a low number of copies of AMY1 appears to correlate with increased incidence of obesity. So not sure this is correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 8:30:14 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Theres evidence that having a low number of copies of AMY1 appears to correlate with increased incidence of obesity. So not sure this is correct. http://www.medicaldaily.com/causes-obesity-find-true-genetic-culprit-you-need-rule-out-irrelevant-genes-339300 Edited to trim and to add- To remove any physiological uncertainty, I'll amend that to a more general "starches passing through partially undigested or unutilized would in many cases be a good thing". |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 9:00:03 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A better question to ask is why get invested in defending a "diet" based on a demonstrably false food palette concept. One that never existed, nor could it be replicated today as examples are no longer extant. If a particular diet works for an individual, great, eat it. But lets not claim a particular diets efficacy is based on human adaption, when what evidence exists is to the contrary. Or invested in describing said diet as trendy. I never claimed any diets effectiveness was based on human adaptation. However, if there is a secret caveman forum, you're probably on its enemies list now
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 9:31:09 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or invested in describing said diet as trendy. I never claimed any diets effectiveness was based on human adaptation. However, if there is a secret caveman forum, you're probably on its enemies list now Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
A better question to ask is why get invested in defending a "diet" based on a demonstrably false food palette concept. One that never existed, nor could it be replicated today as examples are no longer extant. If a particular diet works for an individual, great, eat it. But lets not claim a particular diets efficacy is based on human adaption, when what evidence exists is to the contrary. Or invested in describing said diet as trendy. I never claimed any diets effectiveness was based on human adaptation. However, if there is a secret caveman forum, you're probably on its enemies list now Would the wood club icon be visible or invisible? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 9:43:28 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Would the wood club icon be visible or invisible? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
A better question to ask is why get invested in defending a "diet" based on a demonstrably false food palette concept. One that never existed, nor could it be replicated today as examples are no longer extant. If a particular diet works for an individual, great, eat it. But lets not claim a particular diets efficacy is based on human adaption, when what evidence exists is to the contrary. Or invested in describing said diet as trendy. I never claimed any diets effectiveness was based on human adaptation. However, if there is a secret caveman forum, you're probably on its enemies list now Would the wood club icon be visible or invisible? It's in near infra red which only cavemen and Basques can see |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 10:20:10 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's in near infra red which only cavemen and Basques can see Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
A better question to ask is why get invested in defending a "diet" based on a demonstrably false food palette concept. One that never existed, nor could it be replicated today as examples are no longer extant. If a particular diet works for an individual, great, eat it. But lets not claim a particular diets efficacy is based on human adaption, when what evidence exists is to the contrary. Or invested in describing said diet as trendy. I never claimed any diets effectiveness was based on human adaptation. However, if there is a secret caveman forum, you're probably on its enemies list now Would the wood club icon be visible or invisible? It's in near infra red which only cavemen and Basques can see So...You're saying that eating paleo makes you see in IR? I'll have some more rutabaga. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 10:53:06 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...You're saying that eating paleo makes you see in IR? I'll have some more rutabaga. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's in near infra red which only cavemen and Basques can see So...You're saying that eating paleo makes you see in IR? I'll have some more rutabaga. Think of all the money you could save not having to buy night vision! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 10:55:19 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Think of all the money you could save not having to buy night vision! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's in near infra red which only cavemen and Basques can see So...You're saying that eating paleo makes you see in IR? I'll have some more rutabaga. Think of all the money you could save not having to buy night vision! More money to buy cook books!!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 10:59:13 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
More money to buy cook books!!!! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's in near infra red which only cavemen and Basques can see So...You're saying that eating paleo makes you see in IR? I'll have some more rutabaga. Think of all the money you could save not having to buy night vision! More money to buy cook books!!!! As long as one of them isn't To Serve Man... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 11:09:47 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Think of all the money you could save not having to buy night vision! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's in near infra red which only cavemen and Basques can see So...You're saying that eating paleo makes you see in IR? I'll have some more rutabaga. Think of all the money you could save not having to buy night vision! And I'd never have to log onto marksdailyapple ever again. I'm free and I'm the top predator at night without the heavy ass helmet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 8:37:37 AM EDT
[#17]
Why does paleo even exist?
Because someone visited a nursing home and said HOLY SHIT WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO TO NOT END UP HERE! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 8:44:13 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...You're saying that eating paleo makes you see in IR? I'll have some more rutabaga. I'm basically a Terminator now |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 9:04:27 AM EDT
[#19]
I've lost 25 pounds so far doing Paleo and walking for about an hour every day on the treadmill. I have asthma and cant really "bust ass" - hardcore train during the summer due to the heat & allergens in the air.
It hasn't been too hard for me. I need to lose another 20 pounds to get to my target weight. Hey, whatever works , right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 9:21:09 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why does paleo even exist? Because someone visited a nursing home and said HOLY SHIT WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO TO NOT END UP HERE! Paleo prevents aging? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 10:27:19 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've lost 25 pounds so far doing Paleo and walking for about an hour every day on the treadmill. I have asthma and cant really "bust ass" - hardcore train during the summer due to the heat & allergens in the air. It hasn't been too hard for me. I need to lose another 20 pounds to get to my target weight. Hey, whatever works , right? are crawfish paleo?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 1:03:19 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
are crawfish paleo? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've lost 25 pounds so far doing Paleo and walking for about an hour every day on the treadmill. I have asthma and cant really "bust ass" - hardcore train during the summer due to the heat & allergens in the air. It hasn't been too hard for me. I need to lose another 20 pounds to get to my target weight. Hey, whatever works , right? are crawfish paleo? Yuuuuuuuuuuuuup. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
