[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/ck/ - Food & Cooking

View post   
File: 761 KB, 2579x1934, fail-and-win-89-7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5091465 No.5091465[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

What does /ck/ think of paleo dieters and their pseudoscience?

>> No.5091468

somewhat flawed but probably less flawed than whatever you're pushing

>> No.5091495

Why do you believe paleo dieting is pseudoscience?

>> No.5091506

>>5091495
The whole thing is based around an anecdote.
>cavemen just ate meat and berries and shit
>that must mean its the perfect diet

And most of the people doing this are just eating whatever they want except bread and candy.

>> No.5091514

>>5091506
>And most of the people doing this are just eating whatever they want except bread and candy.
That's probably not a bad thing.

>> No.5091517

>>5091506

I believe it's more about avoiding foods that we have only recently begun eating and may not have the capacity to properly digest.

Compared to your typical North American diet, it's a huge step up, though.

>> No.5091524

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_diet#Reception

It's based on the assumption that humans were ever perfectly adapted to their environment, which is false. We've always been barely clinging to life.

>> No.5091529

>>5091506
No, it's based around producing ketones.

>> No.5091537

>>5091514

>eating bread and candy are somehow no better than whole foods

>pseudoscience

>> No.5091543

>>5091529
You're confusing paleo with keto. Paleo is for boring people who want something to make them special snowflakes and an excuse to eat more meat candy. Keto is for quick and easy weight loss (and is also believed to be better for some with epilepsy). It works, but can be hard on the kidneys. A ketogenic diet can be vegan if stuff like plant protein isolate is used.

>> No.5091545

>I can't read

>> No.5091546

>>5091537
Uh, that's too many implied implications and double negatives for my brain to process in the morning.

>> No.5091648

Nutritionally, meat & vegetables *are* better than grains.
Don't see what the issue is.

>> No.5091672

>>5091465
Why is the pasta shaped like dicks?

>> No.5091675

>>5091648
but this is wrong, whole grain is chocked full of awesome nuetrients that are great for you.

>> No.5091686

>>5091672
Watsda muddah wif you, hey! Gotta no respect? Itsa shape da history not a sexy pasta

>> No.5091698

>>5091672
Shut up its not a sexy pasta. I'll show you a sexy pasta.

>> No.5091700

>>5091465

you're begging the question a bit here but yeah, it's pseudoscience, and anyone who restricts their diet on the basis of pseudoscience is a grade-f moron. see also: raw foodism, atkins, gluten-free diets for non-celiacs, master cleanse

if you want to eat more meat, just eat more meat, don't make up some bullshit to justify it.

>> No.5091705

Paleo is often rated really low relative to other diets, often because of how difficult it is to follow, and how much weight you actually lose.

Tru fax, look that shit up. I'm too drunk to find links at the moment.

>> No.5091728

Calling anything a paleo diet is retarded. Paleolithic peoples ate a variety of different foods, usually just whatever they could get their hands on. Some of it included wild grains, acorns, or other high-carb shit. That stuff tastes terrible though, so for the most part it was meat, seafood, and whatever wild plants/fruit could be gathered.
The agricultural revolution made us able to live longer and settle down so we could make better tech and do great things. Not to mention, it doesn't matter how paleo you think you're eating, because almost all our food is domesticated.
Sure if you have most of your diet as grains, it'll be bad for you. But it shouldn't do much harm as a small side or for one meal. Don't forget to add a protein with a carb or sugar, though.
Wheats and grains are bad for your teeth, though. Be careful with that stuff.

>> No.5091767
File: 35 KB, 400x400, abbaPic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5091767

>>5091537
well thats just the issue. what is good about it is it cuts the nonsense. Atkins has the same thing going.

they arnt losing weight because paleo is the ultimate diet, they are losing weight because no more potato chips and Mt Dew.

any diet that included provisions against donuts, Doritos, and french fries would work just as well.

they also get bonus negative points for having vegan like in your face bullshit. this dumb bitch i know is a paleo koolaid drinker despite cheating on her "lifestyle" at least 3 times a week, plus drinking booze. she still needed to bring a horrible "paleo pumpkin pie" to thanksgiving so she could make a big deal about her "lifestyle"

just fucking stop it

>> No.5091768

>>5091728
also this. tons of early humans lived on carb heavy diets.

>muh tarrow
>muh yams

>> No.5091774

has anyone actually met some who is on a paleodiet? this is one of those things I hear about often on the Internet but never irl and im beginning to think its some kind of shared hallucination

>> No.5091780

>>5091767
Pumpkin/squash did not exist outside North America, and modern pumpkins do not survive more than a couple seasons without human intervention.

>> No.5091811

>>5091728
I like you

>> No.5091824

If you were asked to 'sell' healthy eating, how would you brand it?

Paleo is how I would have presented it.

>> No.5091856

In evolutionary terms we don't need to live a long life, just long enough to ensure the continuation of our lineage.

>> No.5091917

i've read the use of diet is to avoid modern sicknesses like diabetes and stuff.

that said, most paleo-supporters don't consider that early humans had to move their asses to survive while modern humans sit on their ass all day while they consume food, which is reason for diabetes and obesity in the first place.

also early humans didn't life very long, or long enough to have the chance to develope a fat ass or diabetes

>> No.5091930

>>5091917
>early humans didn't life very long
Many did, it's just that they were more likely to get killed by a predator or even their prey, or sustain an injury or infection. But many did live to 60+

>> No.5091979

>that must mean its the perfect diet

It is the best though

>> No.5091993

>>5091930
>But many did live to 60+
maybe some, but not the majority

>> No.5092005

>>5091465
I think it is better than the vegan pseudoscience diet.

>> No.5092033

A lot like Atkins, it's an effective diet that has a stupid brand on it. Cutting down carbs/refined sugar and upping protein and plant-based carbs is almost always better for you. Just because the premise is dumb doesn't mean the diet isn't effective or healthy.

>> No.5092039

>>5091993
Many did. I forgot to mention the biggest contributor to low life expectancy actually - infant mortality.

>> No.5092139
File: 109 KB, 580x488, r_primatives.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5092139

I have no problem with people on the paleo diet, or primal for that matter. I think it is a step in the right direction and most of the recipes are delicious and relatively healthy.

I prefer a more well rounded lifestyle that can include, legumes and fermented or raw dairy (or at the very least non homogenized milk). I love including fermented foods and cultured foods like lacto-fermented vegetables or traditional probiotic beverages like water kefir..

From my understanding, grains are certainly something not to miss out on, as long as they have been prepared properly. Soaking,sprouting,and fermenting grains makes them easier to digest and the nutrients in the grains will be more easily absorbed.

I don't know why people assume that the paleo diet is a low carb diet no carb diet. It includes them, they are just not found in the form of grains, legumes and processed foods. Plenty of "paleo friendly" foods are carbohydrates in the form of root vegetables, fruit, squashes, etc...

I know some of the foods available to us today are not what were available to paleolithic people, but I think that was just a name you could attach to the diet to make it more understandable in one word. If it had a more clinical name then soccer mom's on pinterest wouldn't find it so attractive. The caveman thing is silly.

Most Paleo people I know avail themselves to a 80/20 formula of paleo/conventional food. Giving a small percentage to a eating a nonpaleo food item allows the dieter to not feel so deprived I suppose.

>> No.5092165

The diet is based on the idea of what we think ancient man's diet might have been like from the hazy archaeological evidence we have that's always changing. Paleo ignores science that shows how the food it promotes can be harmful, and more frustratingly ignores the proven health benefits of many of the foods it restricts.

The fact that every large, healthy population of people in history have thrived on foods like barley, beans, lentils, chickpeas, oats, wheat, potatoes, corn, rice, etc as the centerpiece of their diets really sets the paleo people up to have to explain why these foods are bad, but instead their reasoning is just "I didn't see sweet potatoes on The Flintstones, Fred just ate brontosaurus ribs"

>> No.5092180

>>5092033

>A lot like Atkins, it's an effective diet that has a stupid brand on it

But Atkins is a horrible, unsustainable diet

>upping protein and plant-based carbs is almost always better for you

Excess protein wrecks your kidneys and increase IGF-1 levels, which promotes tumor and cancer growth more than anything else in our bodies can. All carbs are plant-based, dismissing fruit and grains because your diet has you in ketosis at all times is ridiculous

>> No.5092184

>>5091700
I don't want to eat more meat. I want fatties to eat more meat so they too can be healthy.

>> No.5092186

>>5091774
I known 2 very hot girls who do paleo. Unfortunately one is married and the other lives in a state over.

>> No.5092193

>>5092165
>food it promotes can be harmful
>ignores the proven health benefits
I think your nutritional information is 20 years out of date.
>>5092180
There are studies of people eating atkins for decades. It is quite sustainable.

>> No.5092196
File: 19 KB, 500x449, so moe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5092196

>>5091517
All foods we eat we have only recently started eating
Have you seen wild cabbage? The thing that spinach, lettuce, kale, and literally hundreds of other things are made from?

>> No.5092207

>>5092196

You're wrong about spinach, but the other stuff is all cabbage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brassica_oleracea

>> No.5092215

>>5092193

Nowhere in science does it now say that bacon is a health food and lentils are dietary poison. The most consistently long-lived people in the world are from Okinawa where their staple food is the sweet potato.

>> No.5092235

Same way I view anyone who refuses to put any work into their weight loss.

>> No.5092238

>>5092215
>Nowhere in science does it now say that bacon is a health food and lentils are dietary poison.

Where did someone say this was the case? Please point it out.

>> No.5092255

>>5092238

Right here

>>5092193

>>food it promotes can be harmful
>>ignores the proven health benefits
>I think your nutritional information is 20 years out of date.

What else could you possibly interpret that as?

>> No.5092341

>>5092255
>What else could you possibly interpret that as?

Well I would interpret it as exactly what it says instead of narrowing it down to a ridiculous exaggeration. I appreciate your commitment to your argument, but it's stupid.

>> No.5092391

>>5091517
>I believe it's more about avoiding foods that we have only recently begun eating

Then cows are out. The type of beef we get, angus cow, doesn't exist in the wild. Neither does the chicken we eat. Turkey? Can't have that. Literally almost everything we eat nowadays has been touched by selective breeding or science.

>> No.5092393

>>5092341

>a ridiculous exaggeration

How exactly?

Paleo allows bacon, paleo disallows lentils. There's no exaggerating going on, especially when the parameters were "SOME foods it promotes can be harmful" and "MANY foods have proven health benefits." Bacon is harmful, lentils and sweet potatoes have proven health benefits. These sentiments have never been reversed in the scientific literature. Be a man and admit you messed up.

>> No.5092399

>>5092393
>bacon is harmful

No it isn't. It can be perfectly fine if that is where you choose to get a lot of your fat from. No food is unhealthy in a vacuum, it's all relative

>> No.5092406

>>5092399

Yeah, fuck science

>> No.5092409

>>5092391
It's not geometrically possible for contemporary turkeys to mate.

>> No.5092412

>>5092406
>the world is black and white

Yeah!

>> No.5092414

>>5091767
What did this pie end up being? Mashed pumpkin and honey baked in a stone bowl until firm?

>> No.5092418

>>5092393
>There's no exaggerating going on


Well anon, carbs aren't all bad b-

>HAH, WELL I GUESS YOU THINK WE SHOULD JUST BE EATING A POUND OF REFINED SUGAR EVERY DAY, HUH? FUCKING MORON

This is how you sound.

>> No.5092426

>>5092255
They used to suggest giving cocain to babies too. yesterdays proven benefit means shit when it has been proven wrong.

>> No.5092428

>>5092393
Bacon is very good for you. it provides quality fat

>> No.5092435

>>5092393
All foods it promotes CAN be harmful. All foods it restricts CAN be harmful.

Fucking A go drink too much water and die.

>> No.5092445

>>5092418

Okay, explain how you came to that conclusion.

The foods I talked about are clearly endorsed by or shunned by the paleo diet. The fact that you know bacon is bad for you and find it misleading that I'm using it to attack paleo just proves my point more, because paleo openly says that bacon is a quality food that need not be avoided. There's no smoke and mirrors going on, you're basically just agreeing with what I'm saying while trying not to agree with me.

>> No.5092468
File: 52 KB, 536x400, bill cosby laughing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5092468

this bacon guy is fucking hilarious

>> No.5092514

>>5092445
>>5092428
>>5092406
>>5092393

Your biggest problem here is that bacon is "bad for you" which can mean very different things to different people. Some people can't consume animal fat for some reason, while others do just fine with it. If you're saying that bacon is universally bad for an average, healthy person, though, I'd have to ask you to prove that, and I'm pretty sure you can't.

>> No.5092518

Lets get this thread back on track and start talking about penis pasta.

>> No.5092519

>>5092514

You mean those people who get "meat sweats"?

>> No.5092523

>>5092519

I mean people who can't handle high-fat foods, whether they have gallbladder issues or whatever else can cause that.

>> No.5092531

>>5092518
I would pick out all the orange ones because I make my boyfriend wear orange condoms. :3<3

>> No.5092535

>>5092523

>people who can't handle high-fat foods

that would be everyone

>> No.5092536

>>5092535

Nice try bacon guy. Still waiting for you to respond to this:

>>5092514

>> No.5092539

>>5092518
What's the cheapest penis pasta available? I'd eat only penis pasta if it didn't cost so much.

>> No.5092541

>>5092535
So nobody can eat avocado's? Or nuts?

>> No.5092549

>>5092514

> If you're saying that bacon is universally bad for an average, healthy person, though, I'd have to ask you to prove that, and I'm pretty sure you can't.

This is as unfounded as saying refined sugar isn't bad for you, and you wouldn't be able to "prove" that either. Just as I could show you how bacon increases the risk of many types of cancer and heart disease, you could just say "well the people who get those diseases are just genetically predisposed or something, my grandpa lived to be 200 and he ate nothing but bacon all his life, and he was breastfed with pure bacon grease." And you could tell me all the things refined sugar is linked to, and I'd even be able to show you how sugar is beneficial as it's actually been found to increase insulin sensitivity in studies rather than decrease it. The vast majority of scientific work demonstrates that neither of these foods are good though, and your approach of "nothing is bad, fuck every kind of information we've gathered as a species" is a cowardly way to cling onto all the food you like and pretend it's not affecting you badly

>> No.5092555

>>5092549
>I'm too much of a pussy to back up the claims I make

haha

>> No.5092609

>>5092549

You must be the worst conversation partner in the world. You literally assign beliefs to people despite them having never advocated said beliefs. If you're a troll, you're a good one. If not, you're just a depressingly shitty person to talk to.

>> No.5092677

>>5092549
Individual studies don't mean shit. Almost everything has a second study with opposite results.

The problem is that most nutrition studies use surveys. Which by themselves are inaccurate. But made more so when asked to remember food intake over a period of weeks or months. Many people have trouble remembering what they had for breakfast let alone breakfast on November 17th.

The other problem is researchers are biased. Often I will see a low fat diet compared to a low carb diet. The low fat diet has under 40g of fat. The low carb diet under 150g of carbs.

When people like atkins suggest under 30g during the initial acclimation period, they do so for a reason. Yet plenty of people use it as false proof.

Another example of bias is these "bacon is bad for you studies" most of them find that people who intake 6000 calories a day are more likely to be obese, have diabetes, have cancers, etc etc. And then because the subjects all ate at least 1 serving of bacon within a 6 month period, bacon gets linked to everything. Because the researchers were looking for a bacon link. Completely ignoring that 100% of participants also had some sort of water intake, most likely daily.

If you want to look at the science of nutrition, you need to look at science. We know exactly how the body metabolises various nutrients. We know exactly what it does with them, We know the effects of too many of various nutrients, as well as the effects of too few. And with this knowledge comes the responsibility to admit our earlier mistakes.

>> No.5092692

>>5092677

What about basic nutritionally knowledge like saturated fat raises LDL cholesterol, dietary cholesterol enhances oxidation of the LDL that leads to arterial plaque build-up, and the nitrosamines produced in bacon are known carcinogens?

>> No.5092761

It can't be as good as chrononutrition.

>> No.5092777

>>5092692
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2123482/

no link between saturated fat and total ldl cholesterol levels

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072886/

arterial plaque build-up is due to damage to the endothelium. Fats do not damage endothelium.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22488423

cholesterol repairs endothelium damage. the issue is that small ldl can get stuck in the damage and cause buildup

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/67/5/828.short

saturated fat promotes large ldl formation

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/78/3/370.long

vegetable fats promote small ldl formation

I cannot speak to nitrosamines, I do not know enough. But I can say that the amount of nitrates in meat is miniscule compared to many vegetables. My understanding is nitrates are an important part of a healthy diet.

>> No.5092779

Bottom line is that any diet high in vegetable fiber and low in sugar is likely to be a better choice than the typical Western diet.

>> No.5092783

>>5092777
But that's not what my community college teacher taught us.

>> No.5092788

>>5092777

Nitrates are usually used when packaging it. Often in the form of celery (as they can just pump the celery full of nitrates and say it's natural).

>> No.5092836
File: 72 KB, 600x450, 1265679164257.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5092836

>>5092777

>Br Med J. 1963 March 2

Guy says the other guy's nutritional information is 20 years out of date, then posts studies from 50 years ago.

>> No.5092842

>>5092777

>fats do not damage endothelium

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9036757

>> No.5092848

>>5092788
The danger of nitrates is that if cured meat gets burned, it can become carcinogenic. Other negative health claims are generally bullshit.

>> No.5092854

>>5092777

>But I can say that the amount of nitrates in meat is miniscule compared to many vegetables. My understanding is nitrates are an important part of a healthy diet.

Nitrates are found abundantly in vegetables and they're certainly good for you. Nitrates in meat form carcinogenic nitrosamines though, which are not good for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7zTJ5LnO1E

>> No.5092858

>>5092848

You don't need to cook cured meat for nitrosamines to form, I think you're thinking of heterocyclic amines which form in any cooked meat, and not just burned meat

>> No.5093420

>>5091506
>not eating proccessed sugar and garbage
>"stupid diet is stupid"

K, bud.

>> No.5094275

>>5093420
>can't have potatoes because hurrr durrr cavemen didn't eat them
enjoy your no potassium

>> No.5094284
File: 61 KB, 580x923, az11.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5094284

>>5091824
promise sick gainz

>> No.5094385

>>5094284
ded

>> No.5094411

>>5094284
Everything promises sick gains brah. Palaeo has the upper edge in that it supports bro science and tickles the fancy of the neanderthal, strong man image which gym rats cream over.

>> No.5094424
File: 308 KB, 445x658, rockabilly_girl[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5094424

Do you guys drink milk?

I haven't had it for like 2 years but I'm thinking of starting to drink it daily

my gains have stalled so if I can find no solid reason not to do it, I might as well try it out

>> No.5094428

>>5091774
Yes.

I do know someone who is. He is my best friend. It's kind of embarrassing.

>> No.5094436

I wish there a database where I could punch in diet characteristics and get a list of approved foods.

For instance, if I wanted to eat a vegan diet that had a low-glycemic index and a low-insulin index that had paleo, atkins, and keto characteristics.

I wonder what the hell that diet would like. Probably nuts and seeds.

>> No.5094503

>>5094436

Brb, stealing your idea for app and website development

>> No.5094522

>>5094436
>>5094503
Spoiler: It already exists.

lrn2google

>> No.5094560

>>5094522

What's it called, smart guy?

>> No.5094563

>>5094560
I think he's either confused or bullshitting.

Whatever the case, it's not a bad idea.

>> No.5094640

>>5094436
>>5094503

It wouldn't even be that hard. The nutrients in foods are already very well documented, so you just need to make a database of it, create a list of rules that can be added (vegetarian, kosher, paleo, etc), with some slider bars for stuff like protein and the like (showing percentages). Then it just returns you a list of all the foods you can have in there with various searching and sorting mechanisms. Hell, you could even add a function for ingredient substitutions.

>> No.5094664

>>5094640
Sounds promising, better get onto it.