Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Daily Low-Carb Support > Paleolithic & Neanderthin
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Tue, Nov-06-07, 21:28
girlgerms's Avatar
girlgerms girlgerms is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 628
 
Plan: uncommon sense
Stats: 173.0/135.5/145.5 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 136%
Default Paleo in a nutshell

I'm trying to sort out the essential principles of the paleo diet. Like, what's the difference betweeen paleo and neanderthin? Why don't people recommend dairy? And just the stuff you are 'allowed' to eat and at what level of processing. I'm sorry if this sounds hopelessly ignorant, but I've just read a huge thread in this forum and I'm a bit confused. Also, I'm not into evolutionism, which I see as just another religion, so do any of you come at this diet from another angle?
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Tue, Nov-06-07, 22:00
Daryl's Avatar
Daryl Daryl is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 7,427
 
Plan: ZC
Stats: 260/222/170 Male 5-10
BF:Huh?
Progress: 42%
Location: Texas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by girlgerms
I'm trying to sort out the essential principles of the paleo diet. Like, what's the difference betweeen paleo and neanderthin? Why don't people recommend dairy? And just the stuff you are 'allowed' to eat and at what level of processing. I'm sorry if this sounds hopelessly ignorant, but I've just read a huge thread in this forum and I'm a bit confused. Also, I'm not into evolutionism, which I see as just another religion, so do any of you come at this diet from another angle?


I don't think many here would agree about evolutionism being a "religion", but as a reason to eat in a Paleo way. We ate paleo for centuries, and did not suffer heart disease, diabetes, and cancer as we do now, hence paleo should give us the best shot at vibrant health.

Here's some links discussing the differences between NeanderThin and Cordain's Paleo diets:

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=171913

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=184700
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Tue, Nov-06-07, 22:45
kallyn's Avatar
kallyn kallyn is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,998
 
Plan: life without bread
Stats: 150/130/130 Female 5 feet 7 inches
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Pennsylvania
Default

The basic principle of paleo is to eat only the foods that were available to humans before the invention of agriculture, which eliminates grains, legumes, dairy, sugar, and processed foods. Browsing through the links at http://www.paleodiet.com should give you a good overview.

"Paleo" is a broad term used to lump all these similar types of diets together. Neanderthin is one version of paleo, and it takes its name from the book Neanderthin by Ray Audette. The other big book is The Paleodiet by Loren Cordain.

I'm not sure what other angle to come at this other than evolution. Do you mean you don't "believe in" evolution? I guess if you want to think of it in religious terms you could think of it as eating god-made food instead of man-made food.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 00:58
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,866
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Well, you might but I suppose one could argue that grains and milk are god-made, but they're clearly not paleo.

I can't quite see how to explain this diet to someone who believes that the earth is only a few thousand years old that they need to eat foods that have been eaten by humans for more than 10,000 years.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 01:09
LessLiz's Avatar
LessLiz LessLiz is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 6,938
 
Plan: who knows
Stats: 337/204/180 Female 67 inches
BF:100% pure
Progress: 85%
Location: Pacific NW
Default

I have a question and it doesn't have anything to do with the difference between science and religion.

I've read that paleo excludes root crops. Is this true? I'm curious about this -- in my region the Nez Perce have eaten camas bulbs as long as their history remembers. These were never farmed -- even today the Nez Perce refuse to plant and grow camas. Camas are naturally distributed here in grasslands in abundance. What would be the basis for thinking that paleo man would not have taken advantage of an edible, naturally occurring abundance?

Frankly, I lurk a lot in the paleo forum. When my list of purchased books that I need to read gets a bit shorter I'll probably pick up Neanderthin.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 03:50
perfectfit's Avatar
perfectfit perfectfit is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,613
 
Plan: I eat all of the eggs. :)
Stats: 600/400/160 Female 5'3"
BF:
Progress: 45%
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LessLiz
I have a question and it doesn't have anything to do with the difference between science and religion.

I've read that paleo excludes root crops. Is this true? I'm curious about this -- in my region the Nez Perce have eaten camas bulbs as long as their history remembers. These were never farmed -- even today the Nez Perce refuse to plant and grow camas. Camas are naturally distributed here in grasslands in abundance. What would be the basis for thinking that paleo man would not have taken advantage of an edible, naturally occurring abundance?


I didn't know what camas were so I went looking......



n late September 1805, after nearly starving in the Bitterroots, the Corps of Discovery was introduced to the two staple foods of the northwest: fish and roots. All of the men immediately became seriously ill, possibly from overeating on empty stomachs. They found the root foods difficult to digest and preferred the bison they had feasted on while crossing the Great Plains, but it would be nearly a year until their return to what Lewis longingly called "the fat plains.


That meal of fish and roots was offered at Weippe Prairie by a group of Nez Perce Indians in the midst of their annual harvest for camas bulbs, a calorie-rich food they collected and stored for winter. Each fall Nez Perce families traveled to the large camas meadows near present-day Weippe, Moscow or Grangeville where the onion-shaped bulbs grew thickly. Women used digging tools and were able to harvest over 50 pounds a day. In a few days, enough could be gathered for a winter’s food supply. Women held rights to family camas patches, carried out the harvesting and baking, and gained the right to use surplus bulbs for trading.


At Weippe that September, Clark wrote about the abundance of camas bulbs he saw: "emence quantity of the quawmash or Pas-shi-co root gathered & in piles about the plains." And the journals estimate that there were more than 4,500 Nez Perce. How could such large harvests of camas be sustained?


Early accounts of Native American subsistence apply terms like “hunter/gatherer.” But today ethnobotonists and anthropologists describe the cultivation and storage of important food plants as complex systems capable of sustaining dependable annual supplies for large populations. The Nez Perce system for camas is a good example.


Camas harvesting requires planning because the bulbs reach maximum size and highest food value, and are best for storage, only at a specific time--after the flowers have withered. Trips to distant meadows required careful timing to meet this condition.


Intimate knowledge of detailed plant features is another element of the Nez Perce system. In the case of camas, this is especially critical, because “death camas,” a relative of edible camas, sometimes occurs in the same habitat. The two are easy to tell apart by flower color--edible camas is blue, the other creamy white.1 But since harvest occurs after flowering is over, this color cue would not be present. Perhaps trips were scheduled to the meadows during flowering to dig out the toxic species; or perhaps gatherers were able to differentiate the plants by their bulbs.


Camas bulbs were cooked to improve taste and food value. A carbohydrate in camas called inulin is difficult to digest, but after cooking for up to two days in a carefully tended pit oven, the inulin converts to fructose, which is more easily digested and tastes sweet.


Baked camas can be eaten right away. For long-term storage, though, the cooked bulbs were sun-dried, mashed, shaped into a flat loaf, and baked again.


To remain productive, camas meadows need to be open and sunny, free of encroaching tree growth. Fire was used as a tool to accomplish this. Camas bulbs themselves were tended, too. During harvest the bulbs were sorted by size: large ones were collected but smaller bulbs or bulblets were put back into the newly worked-up soil for next year.


Today’s growers of daffodils or tulips are familiar with the process of dividing and replanting bulbs. But while daffodils are grown as pretty flowers to brighten spirits, camas meadows were tended by Nez Perce women to provide sustenance for families during long rainy winters along the Clearwater River. A different relationship is implied, involving both the practice of ceremonies to mark and give thanks for this important food, and strict protocols about when to harvest and how much to take.


The descriptions of native American practices in Lewis and Clark’s journals are famous for their details and new information. But as travelers on a schedule they may have missed important elements of the Nez Perce system for producing annual crops of big camas bulbs. And, because camas cultivation was carried out "in the wild" with neither row crops nor fences, it wouldn’t have matched the explorers' mental image of domestic food production. This was a system planned and carried out by women, whose horticultural skills were not investigated by Lewis and Clark.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 08:39
ProteusOne's Avatar
ProteusOne ProteusOne is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,320
 
Plan: Paleo/Low Cal
Stats: 000/000/200 Male 5 ft 10 in
BF:
Progress: 0%
Location: NC, USA
Default

I don't avoid roots, except for white potatoes and other ones that are not easily digested raw. I just don't eat them every day or with every meal, as their concentration of starches can be addictive.

Now, I'm not saying I go around eating raw tubers. I don't. I eat cooked sweet potatoes, blue potatoes, etc. But part of the Paleo diet that I try to abide by is that if you can't eat it raw or without processing, then don't eat it. In fact, I think that's the most fundamental aspect of this diet.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 09:58
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,866
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

No, I don't think paleo necessarily avoids root crops unless you're trying to lose weight, they tend to be very starchy. Probably potatos are not very paleo, but I'd think yams are. The New Guineans HG's also ate a root crop.

Paleo diets vary a bit and of course the way everyone implements them varies.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 14:21
Kskline Kskline is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 117
 
Plan: Paleo
Stats: 282.8/244.2/120 Female 5 feet 5 inches
BF:
Progress: 24%
Location: Idaho
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ProteusOne
I don't avoid roots, except for white potatoes and other ones that are not easily digested raw. I just don't eat them every day or with every meal, as their concentration of starches can be addictive.

Now, I'm not saying I go around eating raw tubers. I don't. I eat cooked sweet potatoes, blue potatoes, etc. But part of the Paleo diet that I try to abide by is that if you can't eat it raw or without processing, then don't eat it. In fact, I think that's the most fundamental aspect of this diet.


I have heard of some people eating raw sweet potatoe and really liking them.

Kim
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 14:58
Heidihi Heidihi is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 410
 
Plan: urban hunter gatherer :)
Stats: 20/12/00 Female 62 inches
BF:
Progress: 40%
Location: state of disarray
Default

I love raw sweet potato and beets have been known to put them in salads that way..some roots are not edible raw like cassava or the real yams ..and I dont think you can eat taro raw either ...
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 15:24
ProteusOne's Avatar
ProteusOne ProteusOne is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,320
 
Plan: Paleo/Low Cal
Stats: 000/000/200 Male 5 ft 10 in
BF:
Progress: 0%
Location: NC, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heidihi
I love raw sweet potato and beets have been known to put them in salads that way..some roots are not edible raw like cassava or the real yams ..and I dont think you can eat taro raw either ...

That's the point, you can eat sweet potatoes raw. Something I wouldn't try with a russet.
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 15:51
Demokat's Avatar
Demokat Demokat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,301
 
Plan: Paleo/Organic Fat Flush
Stats: 193/176/145 Female 5'4.5"
BF:42/31/24
Progress: 35%
Location: Boston
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by girlgerms
I'm trying to sort out the essential principles of the paleo diet. Like, what's the difference betweeen paleo and neanderthin? Why don't people recommend dairy? And just the stuff you are 'allowed' to eat and at what level of processing. I'm sorry if this sounds hopelessly ignorant, but I've just read a huge thread in this forum and I'm a bit confused.


I have been moving toward the Paleo diet, because I feel better when I eat this way. I think Paleo is an umbrella term for eating foods in their natural forms, whether raw or cooked with fire. Think of our ancestors hunting game, foraging for wild berries and vegetables that grew in the ground or on trees. That is the very basic interpretation of the Paleo diet. As civilization evolved and people settled down and began farming, 'processed' food came about, such as grinding the seeds and plants into flours. Of course, as villages grew into towns and cities, feeding large populations became difficult, and the expansion of agriculture helped solve this problem. With these advances came diseases of civilization like diabetes, heart disease, gum disease, etc. Paleo looks back to the way we evolved to eat, before we were saddled with 'diseases of civilization'.

I still have a hard time giving up dairy and chocolate. I have cut back and hope to eventually eliminate them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by girlgerms
Also, I'm not into evolutionism, which I see as just another religion, so do any of you come at this diet from another angle?


No, it's not a religion. It's science. Fossils weren't put in the ground by evil scientists trying to trick the faithful. They are part of our history as human beings, and not some conspiracy to prove or disprove God.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 19:09
girlgerms's Avatar
girlgerms girlgerms is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 628
 
Plan: uncommon sense
Stats: 173.0/135.5/145.5 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 136%
Default

LOL but fossils don't prove evolution. But that's beside the point, and by saying evolution is a religion I meant that it is faith based: you know - it comes down to either believing in eternal God or eternal matter. That's really interesting about the root crops, though, when the world's most 'prehistoric' people, the Australian Aborigines (I live in W.A) eat all sorts of stuff they dig up out of the ground in the bush. They even dig up bardies (witchetty grubs) and either eat them raw or cook them. Actually, they don't look too bad: nice and plump! Thanks for those links, BTW, I'll check them out and see what the thing about dairy is.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 19:24
ProteusOne's Avatar
ProteusOne ProteusOne is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,320
 
Plan: Paleo/Low Cal
Stats: 000/000/200 Male 5 ft 10 in
BF:
Progress: 0%
Location: NC, USA
Default

I don't have faith or hope in evolution, I just trust in it. And yes, if I were out in the wild, I'd dig wild tubers, and eat 'em, but wouldn't count on them looking or tasting like our Idaho baking potatoes...

And if I had the time I'd even cook the wild potato, but if'n I was real hungry, I'd eat it raw.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Wed, Nov-07-07, 20:04
Demokat's Avatar
Demokat Demokat is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,301
 
Plan: Paleo/Organic Fat Flush
Stats: 193/176/145 Female 5'4.5"
BF:42/31/24
Progress: 35%
Location: Boston
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by girlgerms
LOL but fossils don't prove evolution.


Yeah but they prove that the world a hell of a lot older than 6,000 years old.

Quote:
Originally Posted by girlgerms
But that's beside the point, and by saying evolution is a religion I meant that it is faith based: you know - it comes down to either believing in eternal God or eternal matter.


Believing in God and and accepting science are not mutually exclusive.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:35.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.