starches have been more or less a constant throughout human civilization, especially in the last 500 years (since potatoes and other vegetables indigenous to the new world were introduced to europe and then to the rest of the world). no one has eaten a paleolithic diet since, well, paleolithic times. i think you also underestimate the good that plentiful, cheap carbs do for the world. they are not ideal sources of nutrition but they have done more to fight hunger and starvation worldwide than just about anything else; itās the reason people live longer and now die of ādiseases of civilizationā like heart disease, cancer, and diabetes rather than starvation or malnutrition. i remember when a south american bishop was invited as a guest speaker at my undergrad, and told us that he could not explain to his parishoners why people in the united states drank diet cokeāit didnāt have any calories! i think we all need to remember not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, especially those who make extreme claims like āthere is no dietary role for starches.ā
You know what else gives me a chuckle about this discussion? Do we reeeeeeeally know what paleo humans ACTUALLY ate. Sure we may have some fossilized intestinal contentsā¦but I mean do we really, really know? None of us were actually there!
Youāre drawing a false equivalence here. Nobody would deny that people in famine-stricken regions ought to eat what is available. But the United States is not one of those regions. Americans are more likely to suffer from obesity than starvation. That being the case, I think we have the luxury of figuring out what is nutritionally optimal here, and it doesnāt seem to be a diet of 60-70 percent carbs.
Itās a pretty sure bet that they didnāt eat whole wheat bread.
Scientific evidence please?
Go read Gary Taubesās big book, and then come talk to me. Itās full of scientific evidence and itās worth your time.
I have yet to see the argument that eating refined, starchy, processed, grain-based foods is what should be considered ānormalā.
Second that.
Who recommended a diet comprised of 60-70% carbohydrate to you? And WOT but FYI some obese individuals are quite starved, not of energy, but of nutrients.
Again, Frances I am not trying to say what is good or bad. In fact I do not believe you can put the label of good or bad on any food. Cases of extreme excessive water intake can be life threatening. Does this mean I should tell all people to avoid water and only drink juice? Or that their willpower is somehow in question because they prefer to drink water? Obviously this is an extreme analogy but you get the point.
So you can prove 60-70% is no good ok I will give you that. How about 50%? 40%? 30%? Can you prove to me that eating <10% of total calories from carbs is not detrimental? This has been the problem for me. NO ONE knows for sure. Until there is some smoking gun pointing one way or another, making blanket statements one way or another is simply premature. Does this detract from the value some people find by eating 30 grams of carbs or less a day? Never said it did.
I went to this http://www.grainsessential.ca/english/kids/growingwell.html website for a list of essential nutrients found in grains. The first listed was carbs followed by thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin E, iron, magnesium, selenium and zinc.
I then did a search for dietary sources of all but carbs. I wrote them all down, but the list is rather repetitive. It includes meat, fish, eggs, veggies esp green leafy, nuts esp almonds, mushrooms, sunflower seeds, olives, avocados and dairy. Take off the dairy and it sounds pretty paleo to me.
Leave the dairy in and it pretty much describes my diet. Iām a T2 not on insulin so a corrective bolus is not in the cards for me. If I go high I have to just live with the consequences.
Since starches send my sugar sky high and these other foods do not, my meter told me to eliminate starches. After doing this search I feel Iām not depriving myself of anything that can only be gotten from starchy carbs, and it would seem to argue that we evolved to thrive on a diet that does not include starchy carbs, assuming you can derive sufficient energy form non carb sources.
I read an account of a man who walked to the north pole early in the 20th century. He was accompanied by Inuit people and adopted their diet which was 70% fat and contained no carbs. He stated that after his body adopted to his new diet he had plenty of energy to accomplish this arduous task. So it would seem there are other energy sources available. Any one for a serving of seal blubber?
I relate this not to tell everyone they must eat like me, or eat like a cave man. If you can achieve your blood sugar goals eating lots of carbs, go for it, I certainly would if I could. But there does not seem to be any basis for believing that eating starchy carbs is an essential part of the human diet.
Iām not sure that both sides canāt be correct. People are diverse and some people have great success with lower carb approaches and some people have great success with more carbs. I have not read Gary Taubesā book but Iām in the latter category. To have this sort of argument, I think that you would have to define what exactly you are fighting about too and Iām not sure I see either clear definitions of āhealthā āsuccessā or ālow carbā in the discourse, although there are hints. Iām interested in the subject.
I am perhaps the most horrible eater here as I eat all sorts of awful junk food regularly and enjoy quite a bit of processed food since it is much easier to count the carbs if they are printed on the side of the package. I drink about 2 large bottles of V8/ week. I know itās loaded w/ sodium but it has tons of vitamins but they are processed so it probably doesnāt count.
Sixty percent of calories from carbs is the current (bad) ADA recommendation.
Actually, the ADA has outsourced the dietary recommendations. I believe that it was bringing them too much criticism. The American Dietetic Association (ADtA) now develops the dietary guidelines, it is basically all the same people like Marian Franz, so it is just the same stuff all over again. The analysis goes like this, we (the ADtA) canāt figure out this carbohydrate stuff, so letās just use the USDA recommendations. And that is what you get you should eat 45-65% of calories from carbs, just like Archer Daniels Midland suggested.
Well, we have archaeologic evidence and we have other studies that look at things like comparative digestive tracts. But no, we donāt have first hand observations. Work by Loren Cordain laid a lot of the foundation for Paleo. Others such as Robb Wolf have done a lot of work, and despite the extreme case cited here, his efforts are reasonably well founded. Another resource is Dr. Kurt Harris. It is however hard to look at the modern human digestive system and compare it against related primates who have a primary vegetarian diet and not shake your head that there is a huge difference. All these biological comparisons conclude that our ancestors ate a diet that depended primarily on meats, not grains and fruits. And even the most rigid dieticians would agree with Paleo efforts to eat whole foods and things like grass fed meats.
donāt listen to that guy
my friend tried to get me on a raw diet, eating only veggies and fruits.
my sugar was baaaaaaaaad and i fainted a few times
so itās best to do all in moderation.
if someone gives u a diet, make sure itās your doc or a dietitian
Guys I know who this guy is, he is on a site that I have been on, and he had been back and forth on Insulin, he treats himself like a Lab Rat, testing his self on and off. he uses supplement in mass amounts for a period of time then cuts them out and onto something else. I used to read all his Journal writtings and thought no way can he do this if he is Type 1 for real.
I have to admit Frances I was being a bit facetious here. You repeatedly ask for scientific evidence from me but offer none of your own to support your blanket statements. Scientific evidence can be a two edged sword. Great to ask for from others but difficult when you have none to support your own view.
In respect to Taubes I am well aware of his writing and I think he makes very valid points. I do not believe he has it 100% right though either and he himself will state that this is not understood enough and needs to be researched more. Here is an excerpt from his blog:
So hereās the lesson, the moral of this story: before we assume that low-carbohydrate diets are just one tool in the dietary arsenal against overweight and obesity, and before we assume that everyone is different and that some of us lose weight and keep it off because we eat less fat (and more carbohydrates) and some because we cut carbs (and so eat maybe more fat), we should make an effort to understand the concept of controlling variables and look to see which variables are really changing and by how much. Because itās quite possible that the only meaningful way to lose fat is to change the regulation of the fat tissue, and the science of fat metabolism strongly implies that the best way to do that, if not the only meaningful way, is by reducing the amount of carbohydrates consumed and/or improving the quality of those carbs we do consume.
Notice no blanket statement that starches provide no vital role in nutrition or that individuals willpower must be lacking if we choose to consume carbs or even the suggestion that carbs cannot fit into a āhealthyā diet.
Iām not sure that both sides canāt be correct. People are diverse and some people have great success with lower carb approaches and some people have great success with more carbs
Amen Acid- this is all I am trying to point out.
To have this sort of argument, I think that you would have to define what exactly you are fighting about too and Iām not sure I see either clear definitions of āhealthā āsuccessā or ālow carbā in the discourse
I am not trying to say one way is better or appropriate for all. I am simply responding to people who assert there IS one best way for all.
Acid if you can eat junk food and refined carbs and acheive tight control and above all you are happy with what you are doing I say more power to you.
I think too though that it would be useful for us, as a community, to figure out attainable goals rather than spending posts & posts feuding about the # of carbs?