Comments on: What is the “Optimal” Diet for Humans? (Part 2)

By: Anon

Anon — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 07:26:51 +0000

Sounds like you’re a Weston Price fanatic…. Hmmm reccomending Kombucha tea sounds like a good way to tax out the Adrenals. I say that stuff is no good.
Although I’m still not sure about the verdict of raw food and vegan vs. having some Animal protein in the diet, dont follow everything WPF says, they have an agenda too and they are quite vicious about it.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:32:31 +0000

Another excellent post, Denise.
Have you read “Good Calories, Bad Calories” by Gary Taubes? Your points regarding the avoidance of dietary toxins are well taken. I think the availability of refined, concentrated carbohydrates may be the single most significant health threat facing modern humans. The current obesity “epidemic” is cleary related to it and not much else, as are the downstream degenerative diseases associated with insulin resistance.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:42:09 +0000

Nicely done. My one nit is that while we haven’t necessarily adapted to cooking, the opposite isn’t true. I don’t think there’s much actual evidence either way. “Charred meat, for instance, contains compounds called heterocyclic amines (HCAs) known to contribute to cancer in humans” seems like a stretch. Breathing contributes to cancer in humans as well, the question is what is my relative risk from eating charred meat vs. raw?

At any rate, cooking has been around long enough that any significant effect on reproductive fitness should have been seen. That humans continued cooking there food indicates that cooking has somewhere between a negligible effect (positive or negative) to a positive effect large enough to force some selection. And SOMETHING made people keep on cooking (of course something makes people eat bagels and jelly – that doesn’t mean it’s a healthy practice).

Note that this is all in regards to reproductive fitness. If barbecuing your wooly mammoth led to cancer after the reproductive years had passed, then there would be no selection effect.

I’m not looking to get into a debate on raw vs. cooked. I don’t feel like there’s much evidence either way.

By: Neet Ielasi

Neet Ielasi — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 04:07:04 +0000

wholefoods,unprocessed,organic ,fruit and vegetables,sea vegies,nuts and seeds(ground finely so all nutrients possible are absorbed),being well hydrated,herbal teas,fish,eggs and some lean chicken,whole grains,(oats,brown rice,quinoa red and white yes technically a seed~)a good portion of raw food at every meal.THIS is the way of eating,that is allowing my poor little depleted body(from almost 7 years of raw vegan) to heal itself and hopefully fully regenerate.Oh and enjoying some pink himalayan salt,get those minerals in!

Thanks Denise an awesome well thought out article,as always

By: herbiek

herbiek — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 01:46:12 +0000

I think there is a clue in the fact that the hind-gut fermentation process in the primates and the fermentation in the stomaches of the other vegetarian animals yeild a net energy intake of ~80% fat for the animal. Even thought the animal is eating carbohydrate the bacterial fermentation process turns the carbs into fat, so the animals are burning fat as opposed to glucose as an energy source.
Human digestion does this a little bit, too.

Thank you for this excellent blog.

By: hiyaa

hiyaa — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 00:10:46 +0000

http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/carn_herb_comparison.html

By: Evert

Evert — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 13:48:25 +0000

I’ve learned that we tend to have less energy when our insulin levels are high.
To keep our insulin low, it could be helpful to restrict the amount of carbohydrates we eat. While doing that it’s really important make sure to get enough calories to burn as fuel, by increasing the amount of fat we eat.

We also need enough proteins and essential fatty acids as building blocks for the hormones and neurotransmitters like adrenaline and dopamine that make us feel good and energized.

I feel that, for me, eating a high fat, moderate protein, low carbohydrate diet works best to optimize both mental and physical energy.
I do think it’s important to eat something raw regularly.
I start every meal with some raw juicy plants that are low in digestible carbohydrates, like leafy greens, radish or cucumber.
Followed by a complete protein source from the animal kingdom, like wild caught fish or grass fed meat. To make the meal completely satisfying, enough fat or oil is added to meet my calorie requirement.

An example of what I could eat in one day with four meals:
1. Four radishes. Six small eggs with 25 grams of olive oil.
2. Lettuce and dandelion. 250 grams of fish with 50 grams of cultured butter.
3. Cucumber. Four large eggs with 25 grams of olive oil.
4. Endive. 100 grams full fat yogurt with 10 grams shredded coconut and a tablespoon of spirulina. 50 grams of butter.

Preparation:
Egg whites were baked, yolks kept raw and added back after whites were done.
Fish baked so that inside was a bit raw. Sometimes not baked at all but warmed to body temperature.

While I support and practice paleolithic eating and living, I don’t belief in the Darwinian theory of evolution.
While I’m skeptical of the Bible or any religious document, I do belief the different species were created by an intelligence beyond our physical dimensions.

By: Monte Diaz

Monte Diaz — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 08:19:49 +0000

Scientific American did a great article about food, nutrition and evolution a while back that covered the “expensive tissue” issue and a few other things. Here is a link to the article.

http://3dantenna.fileave.com/Scientific_American_Special_Online_Issue-2004-01-11_Diet_And_Health.pdf

By: Drg'svids

Drg'svids — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 03:23:16 +0000

Is kombucha really healthy?

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Sat, 10 Jul 2010 09:00:35 +0000

Hey Denise,

have you ever heard of the expensive tissue hypothesis? It’s a theory that aims to explain (rather convincingly, I think) the differences in brain size between humans and other primates. Specifically how, due to Kleiber’s law, a bigger brain with its higher energy consumption must come at the cost of a reduction in organ mass elsewhere in the body. In our case that meant a smaller gut which in turn required a more nutrient dense diet (i.e. more meat).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20045146/The-Expensive-Tissue-Hypothesis