Paleo/Primal/Ancestral/Low-Carb Dietary Lifestyles

Weregrognard · Oct 6, 2012

Libramarian said:
As it happens I have just finished 30 days of low-carb dieting. I'm doing the p90X exercise plan, and the nutritional guide for the first 30 days is high-protein, low-carb. It's the first time I've done this type of diet before. I have to say I haven't noticed much of a difference, in terms of energy or general well-beingness. I do feel good, and I've lost about 5 pounds and gained a bit of muscle. But I'm looking forward to upping the carbs in the next phase. I want a bowl of slow-cooked, steel-cut oats for breakfast (yum).

As far as the "Paleo" diet goes -- I think of these diets as narratives. They're stories that some people need to get jazzed enough to make a major change in their lifestyle. The Paleo diet has the whole uber-masculine thing where you pretend to be a caveman. I find that pretty cheesy, so I'm not into it, but if it's what turns you on enough to stop eating junk food and eat more plants, then rock on.

Of course if someone is gluten or lactose-intolerant, then I'm sure they'll feel much better with the paleo diet, or any diet where they eat less grains and dairy. But as far as I can tell I handle grains and dairy fine.

Indeed. The problem here is that the message is getting lost because of the need to simplify by labeling. On one hand, "Paleo" as a buzz-word gets public attention, on the other, any legitimate scientific research behind it (that just happens to run counter to mainstream thought) gets dismissed as a "fad", or pseudo-science.

When co-workers noticed I was losing weight, they eventually asked what my "secret" was. At first, I tell them about eating "real" food over processed stuff, and they nod. When prodded for more details, I talk about my avoidance of (processed) grains and sugar. That's when I start to get the weird looks. Finally, the need to simplify means the word "Paleo" or something like it escapes my mouth, and that's when I get the typical: "oh, it's that caveman thing".

P90X is good (I'm a "graduate" myself), and the exercises are "legit" (as opposed to gimmicky gadgets), but I've since realized that I can get the same results with a shorter work-out, fewer times a week, and that works better for me.

Umbran · Oct 6, 2012

Androlphas said:
On one hand, "Paleo" as a buzz-word gets public attention, on the other, any legitimate scientific research behind it (that just happens to run counter to mainstream thought) gets dismissed as a "fad", or pseudo-science.

If you do an end-run around peer review, and go to profit making mass-market dieting books to publicize your material, then yes, I'm going to dismiss you as a profit-hunting fad or pseudo-science.

Peer review is not fast, but in the long run it works. If you're not using it, I'm giving you the hairy eyeball.

Dannyalcatraz · Oct 6, 2012

What page of the MM are hairy eyeballs on again?

Anyway, the point of peer review in dietary science isn't just to see if a diet helps you lose weight- because, in all honesty, most do- but to ascertain WHY you are losing weight and if it is safe. As in, are there any unexpected short or long-term deleterious effects to one's health.

It also helps determine if a given diet will tend to produce short term benefits only- leading to yo-yo weight effects- or if it is legitimately a long-term lifestyle diet that you can be on for years with no health concerns.

Libramarian · Oct 8, 2012

Androlphas said:
Indeed. The problem here is that the message is getting lost because of the need to simplify by labeling. On one hand, "Paleo" as a buzz-word gets public attention, on the other, any legitimate scientific research behind it (that just happens to run counter to mainstream thought) gets dismissed as a "fad", or pseudo-science.

When co-workers noticed I was losing weight, they eventually asked what my "secret" was. At first, I tell them about eating "real" food over processed stuff, and they nod. When prodded for more details, I talk about my avoidance of (processed) grains and sugar. That's when I start to get the weird looks. Finally, the need to simplify means the word "Paleo" or something like it escapes my mouth, and that's when I get the typical: "oh, it's that caveman thing".

P90X is good (I'm a "graduate" myself), and the exercises are "legit" (as opposed to gimmicky gadgets), but I've since realized that I can get the same results with a shorter work-out, fewer times a week, and that works better for me.

I don't mean to be dismissive by saying it has the caveman angle -- I really do think a "theme" to go along with a diet can be a useful motivator. Diets are psychological tools, they're not just bodies of scientific knowledge.

P90x is the first time I have worked out to a video, and I'm actually liking that a lot. Allows me to zone out a bit and not have to keep track of time. What I'm not liking about it is the old school movements that are known to be pretty risky and hard on you, like upright rows for the shoulders and all the leg raises and straight leg sit-ups. I know enough to work around them but I wish they played it safer with the exercise selection. I wouldn't be surprised if it has a significant injury rate.

Someone · Oct 9, 2012

Morrus said:
Calories in - calories out. It's just basic mathematics and the laws of thermodynamics. All the rest is just fluff to sell you books.

I thought the same, until I noticed that all my friends wer fat when they lived with their family, got leaner when they lived alone, and got fat again when they married.

So what makes you fat are women, not that calories

.