Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Paleo diet + cross fit
-
28-01-2008 2:49pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
ApeXaviour wrote: »If you'd like to know more Scotty, I can dig out some good reading, here's a paper from Directions in Psychiatry:
Realigning our 21st century diet and lifestyle with our hunter-gatherer genetic identity
Cheers for that Ape, I'll have a read through it. Don't think I'll start on the carpaccioo just yet, Medium-rare for the time being
0 -
-
-
So long distance persistence hunting in the odd hunter gatherer tribe occurs yes. Was it part of some of our ancestors hunting methods? Almost certainly. But that's one small aspect. If you look at the publications I quoted earlier you'll see the overwhelming majority of exercise was not likely to be repetitive low-intensity, drawn-out, atrophying exercise. It was equally far from bodybuilding in that there was nothing isolationist about it.I'm saying they (and possibly many other "primitive" cultures we are probably all descended from) use a technique called persistence hunting.
(“Brain Size and Hunting Ability in Earliest Man” ,Grover S. Krantz ,Current Anthropology) which appears to me to involve considerable amounts of jogging/long distance running.
You know CrossFit does have the odd "Run 10k" as it's workout of the day, right? Which, by what you've told us, makes it fit closer to the evolutionary model.
Let's look at an even more extreme example of the japanese diet. The people of Okinawa enjoy particularly notable long life expectancy and vibrant health. Their diet consists primarily of fish, tofu and cruciferous vegetables with very little refined carbohydrate. The Mediterraneans also have a high intake of fish Then they've lots and lots of olive oil. This is mostly monounsaturated fat, which the paleo diet advocates intake, mostly through nuts (though avocados and olives are fine too!). This offsets their dietry intake of cholesterol (though the majority of serum cholesterol comes from the liver and is triggered by insulin). The med diet is full of walnuts which protect against oxidative damage. And yes as you mentioned, the omega-3 fatty acids contribute significantly. The reason these diets have shown to be good for life expectancy has absolutely nothing to do with the carbohydrates in them. The paleo diet, as eaten in a modern sense, includes all the good things from both of these diets. It could be seen as a refinement of them.On the issue of diet on life expectancy the two diets that in the modern/early modern world corresponded to a high life expectancy were both relatively high in carbohydrates, the Italian and the Japanese (and yes before you mention I know they have a high intake of omega oils etc).
On what grounds? I think there is too much overlap as to make the difference negligible. If one wants to be healthy in fitness terms, then a favourable body mass index (muscle to fat), and blood lipid profile etc. are what you look for. These are the same things that prevent heart disease, strokes, diabetes etc. basically all the big killers. Intense exercise also lowers insulin levels.I feel it may be important to differentiate between having a “healthy” diet in terms of fitness and in terms of life expectancy.
That was a very long and very pedantic sentence.An example of what I mean is at what point is a person useful in terms of aiding the passing on off their (or their relations genes), say a woman becomes pregnant at 18 and has a child every 2 years, if she stops after 10 children at the age of 36 she will be able to look after the children of her first daughter (now 18) and her following children however by the age of about 54 her first daughter will now stop having children and take on the role of caring for her daughters children at this point the 54 year old could be considered a drain on resources in a society with scarce/patchy food reserves, therefore after this age there is no evolutionary pressure for a long life so the diet that is optimal for her previous to this point may have had negative effects that may only then become apparent however these genes/diet would still be favoured as it gives maximum evolutionary benefit.
I knew someone would make this point. Look at the first paper I quoted. It shows hunter gatherers to be free of signs and symptoms of cardio-vascular disease or future development thereof. Their diet is non-atherogenic, if they die younger it is for other reasons.and the age in western world that Cancer and Heart disease really start kicking in.
I take the point about nomadism, however I would have thought that nomadism/hunting would have increased "occupational hazard" deaths (the writer in the link you posted seems to be of this opinion too). Your analogy of hunter gatherer : agricultural does not fit with urban : rural. I don't see why agricultural populations would live in any more crowded environments than nomadic ones.also a drop in life expectancy may not always be attributed to diet for example disease could have increased due living in close confines for long periods (especially as this was often with their livestock) where as hunter gatherers tend to change camps (or rotate between) often, an example of this would be well urbanites during the industrial revolution life expectancy fell compared to their rural counterparts (due to the disease rife in the vastly overcrowded poorer areas of the cities- If I remember correctly Dublin had one of the lowest life expectancies in the British Isles)
It is interesting. Have you read it? It doesn't appear to support your argument.This website seems to be interesting (I have not checked for sources)
http://www.beyondveg.com/nicholson-w/angel-1984/angel-1984-1a.shtml
In conclusion: CrossFit, while not exactly, quite closely mimics evolutionary fitness (from the information we have available to us, and black box model.)
I think that about sums up everything Ruairi, can we leave this?
Lastly as an aside, the only proven method for longevity is caloric restriction. Google it. CRON (Caloric Restriction with Optimal Nutrition) is often also practised among paleo/zone dieters.
Yes and I accepted that point. But I don't see why it should influence what one does on a personal level. The same could be said if the whole world decided to eat a coconut a day. It doesn't mean people should not eat a coconut a day if they want to, if it's good for them.Khannie wrote:I think that the point was that paleo isn't sustainable. You could not feed the earths current population with a paleo diet as the high meat protein content comes with a high land usage footprint (a high multiple per calorie v's what's required for veg).0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
I get constipation when I go Paleo!!!
There, I said it
To be quite honest, I find this extrapolation about what our "ancestors" ate to be pointless, meaningless and a big ol' waste of time. Times have long changed since then and humankind has spread itself to all corners of the world. With this spread has come evolitionary adaptations. Different races digest milk in different ways. Different races have different natural aerobic capacities. Different races have varying degrees of digestive enzymes, tolerance to carbs, sensitivity to hormones and susceptibility to a variety of diseases based on our genetic lineage.
So why in Jeebus' name would we try and replicate the eating habits of a race of people we essentially know very little about?
Hunterer gatherers may have been big, small, petite, big-boned, tiny waisted, ripped or scrawny as you like, they could even have been all of the above. It's pointless to look at today's races of people to look for something similar because the few tribes that exist that have remained largely uninfluenced by modern-day habits will have both geno- and phenotypes so wildly different to ours that it would be like giving a hyrax the diet of an elephant in the hope that it makes it grow 3 metres tall.
Here's the thing: the Paleo diet advocates "Lean meat, fish, vegetables, nuts, some fruit, little starch and no sugar". That's also known, in modern nutrition and dietetic circles, as common sense. Why try and over-complicate and sexify things by saying it was the diet of ancient man and so it MUST be brilliant :rolleyes:
Frankly I find the whole thing reeks of wannabe machismo with an underlying heavy hand of insecurity. Just eat well (for your own needs) and get on with it ffs. Unconventional. Yeah.0 -
I can't see how this thread was a criticism of CF, it enquired about the apparent incongruency between CF's fitness methodologies and one of the reasons behind following a paleo diet, as seen by the OP. Several assumptions were made in the original post and in the answering, along with several logical fallacies (nature fallacy, post hoc, ergo promptor hoc, etc)Just like how anytime anyone has ANY criticism that is levelled against crossfit some link is found to disprove it.
Surely that's the nature of an inquiry? Someone raises a point/asks a question/puts forward a hypothesis. Evidence is found for/against it. That evidence is evaluated and then the question is refined or answered.
But I suppose we're really getting into inquiry versus debate. Inquiry being genuine curiosity and a desire to discover the truth. Whereas debate is picking a side and vehemently defending it. Of course, these are just my definitions.
hahahaNope, he drew a conclusion, and then hunted down evidence to support that conclusion, then made it sound scientific by putting the word Conclusion at the end, followed by a colon. probably true. You win this round Roper!
Out of curiosity, what were you eating while Paleo? You seem to be the only case I've come across where you had less energy on paleo. Were you cutting for a fight at the time? I was pretty knackered for the first two weeks training for Murphy when I was adjusting to Paleo but after that my energy skyrocketed (Granted, on weekends I was drinking Green Diesel - the anti paleo drink)
What's your diet like now?
Cheers,
Colm0 -
-
Nope, he drew a conclusion, and then hunted down evidence to support that conclusion, then made it sound scientific by putting the word Conclusion at the end, followed by a colon.;)
Conclusion: he liked paleo long before that post.
HAHAHAHA. PMPL.
I think I can speak with a somewhat experienced and impartial view. I've tried paleo, for about 6 months or so. I found it good if you like eating meat, which I do. I needed to lose some weight and while usually I would cut water for it I decided to try dieting down.
I lost weight, mostly fat, and I gained some muscle mass. I was hungry pretty much all of the time which I found irritating. I also found that athletically it impeded my ability to train for long periods. Anyone who has been carb deprived will tell you how crap that can be. Being totally drained 30 mins into a 90 minute session sucks.
But, like I said, I lost some fat, but to be fair I would probably have lost that anyway during the training period and just by watching my diet a bit better. These days I eat moderate carbs, high protein and lots of veg and I'm seeing greater results.
This pretty much exactly matches my experience. I tried paleo (for a much shorter period, only about a month). Loved the meat eating part. Like g'em I found that my (normally very healthy) digestive system complained. I was trying to lose body fat at the time, and did succeed, but I much prefer my current diet, whey, oats and all, and have never felt better.
My own experience is that a bit of cop on goes a long way. I think most people basically know whether or not what they're having for breakfast is crap or otherwise.
edit: I should add that I think the basic idea behind paleo sounds perfectly reasonable to me, I just think that it's a bit extreme. My diet mostly consists of lean meat, veg, little refined carbs (usually post-workout), reasonable amount of complex carbs, fruit, some nuts etc. Seems to work well for what I ask of my body.0 -
Advertisement
-
Damn... that's a lot of hostility.
Apart from a few tangents I'm pretty sure I tried to argue on the point most of the time. I don't agree that you'll find a reference to agree with everything. Sure, published research is far from doctrine and is often controversial in and of itself, but it at least shows I'm not talking through my arse. I really don't know what else you want?ApeXavier has had an answer to everything. And has gone to great effort to pick the posts apart and argue around the point. It's pretty bloody easy to find a reference to support pretty much ANYTHING you want to say online. And to that end, trying to win argument like this is pointless.
I know it's very hard to remove bias from something. So why try? Nobody else will. I'm letting my partiality show, big deal, so are you. I don't know why it should offend you so.
That's not true. Nor did I imply anything like that. RDM expressed doubts as to the apparent lack of consistency with someone practising CF and paleo. I argued the point that there is a consistency. That's it.You'd swear the system has no negatives.
That is I think what the original question/debate boils down to: which is closer. You want to know what's getting away from the original point? This is.This whole thread has turned away from the original question. Everyone seems to be more concerned with replicating pre-historic living patterns now.Nope, he drew a conclusion, and then hunted down evidence to support that conclusion, then made it sound scientific by putting the word Conclusion at the end, followed by a colon.;)
Conclusion: he liked paleo long before that post. heheh
That was really just a tired attempt to end it cos I know RDM_83. I've had these kind of debates with him before. Sometimes he will make ridiculously good observations. Other times he'll also argue to the bitter end, blind in the face of reason, just for the sake of it. I try (not always with success I admit) to be aware when I've lost the good fight. This being a recent example
This is what I do in my ball-park emulation of the zone diet. I find it better for CF.But, like I said, I lost some fat, but to be fair I would probably have lost that anyway during the training period and just by watching my diet a bit better. These days I eat moderate carbs, high protein and lots of veg and I'm seeing greater results.
The opposite occurred with myself, it took me a while to get used to eating so many vegetables. My gut was never happier than when I was on paleo.I get constipation when I go Paleo!!!
Hmm... I must say I disagree with pretty much everything you said there, the bits I snipped out included. It would be pointless to argue it. Comes down to interpretation.To be quite honest, I find this extrapolation about what our "ancestors" ate to be pointless, meaningless and a big ol' waste of time. Times have long changed since then and humankind has spread itself to all corners of the world.
... <snip> ...
habits will have both geno- and phenotypes so wildly different to ours that it would be like giving a hyrax the diet of an elephant in the hope that it makes it grow 3 metres tall.
I'm sorry you see it that way. I don't. I find nothing sexy, complicated or wannabe machismo about it. I'm actually embarrassed to tell most people this is what i do (or more correctly now, did). They don't understand and think you're some nutjob who goes around digging for insects (some paleo heads are this crazy).Here's the thing: the Paleo diet advocates "Lean meat, fish, vegetables, nuts, some fruit, little starch and no sugar". That's also known, in modern nutrition and dietetic circles, as common sense. Why try and over-complicate and sexify things by saying it was the diet of ancient man and so it MUST be brilliant :rolleyes:
Frankly I find the whole thing reeks of wannabe machismo with an underlying heavy hand of insecurity.
The beauty of the paleo diet to me is... IMO human nutritional science is in its absolute infancy. Attempts at good information are often skewed by research bias, government economic interest (e.g. the USDA food pyramid) and then the big moguls: commercial media. Bearing in mind I disagree with you about the impact of genetic variation etc. in the last 10,000 years. Then IMO a paleo style diet covers most of the bases for things we don't know about yet, which I've little doubt are numerous.0
Advertisement