From: I William Wiser (will@wiserlife.com)
Date: Thu Apr 24 2003 - 14:35:42 MDT
I'm not sure where nuts and starchy root vegetables (carrots,
yams, potatoes) fit in. Are those in or out Paleodiet wise?
Insects and organ meats are not a big part of the western
diet anything else that might be good for us from a Paleodiet
perspective?
I don't hear anyone shouting against vegetables and I don't
hear anyone shouting for saturated fat. Not a lot of people
arguing for added sugar or highly processed foods. So, it's
whole grains, legumes, and low-fat dairy verses higher levels
of lean meats, fish and fruits. Both sides like fruit it's just a
matter of how many calories. Both sides like lean meats and
fish at least in moderation.
Assume a 2000 calorie diet. Start with the agreeable parts
of the food Pyramid (looked at from a "whats the best way to
eat," not a "what can I get away with" perspective), all the
vegetables you can eat, 3 or 4 ounces of fish many days a
week, all the fruits you can afford calorie wise, some nuts
and oils, 3 or 4 ounces of lean meat, occasional eggs.
So the controversial part is about 1000 calories, 500 in
whole grains, 200 in legumes and 300 in dairy (or other
high calcium source). Paleodiet would say get rid of
all (or most) of that junk and eat more lean meats, fish
and fruit instead (maybe insects, organ meats, bones,
eggs and root vegetables also). Am I getting this right?
There are two questions I see here. Which diet has more
and better balanced nutrients? That is easy enough to
type into a diet analysis program. Which diet has the
most of the most harmful substances? Something I would
like to see added to diet analysis programs. In both cases
the best we may be able to do is assume the beneficial and
harmful substances we know about are representative
enough to get the right answer.
Which diet taste better and which makes people feel better
sounds like a do it yourself exercise. Grains, legumes, and
dairy are cheaper. I know grains, legumes and dairy do
okay verses the RDA even at CR levels (be odd if the
recommended diet did not supply the recommended
nutrients). So which is more nutrient dense?
The Paleodiet has more protein. The Pyramid has more
carbohydrates and more fiber. The Pyramid has more
calcium but when it comes to individual nutrients (and
toxins) we can look at a lot of arguments about optimum
levels, balance between nutrients etc. I suppose this sort
of analysis is all an advocate of any diet theory can hope
for. I'll get back with you when I get to typing the food
into a diet analysis program (any recommendations for
a good one, mine is old?)
I can see an argument that if no obvious advantages or
disadvantages can be found the Paleodiet is the more
conservative approach. Probably not as convincing as
the it's yummy and not know to be harmful argument.
Both of these diets sound healthier than the way most
people eat (except maybe the eggs and organ meats part).
And they both sound healthier than the Atkins diet. ;-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 24 2003 - 14:45:44 MDT