I love the taste of veggies and pretty much all fruits...that is why I am so big. Once I eat even a little, I am hungry the rest of the day and nearly obsess about food. If I avoid them, I am not hungry and even forget to eat. It is weird, but it is my addiction. I LOVE FOOD! I love to cook, taste and serve it. I just have to avoid certain things (fruits and veggies) or I go into a carb tailspin and binge for months at a time. It is an ugly cycle, but that is how it is for me.

Thanks Steve. I guess my theory is substantiated then

Hiya, dina!

You know, you should post this on Nancy's new thread!

BTW... corn IS a grain!

Oh... and you guys need to cut this out! You're making me HUNGRY! I do miss my fruits and veggies!

Totoro,

Thanks for posting!

I think you are VERY correct in what you are saying in this post! We may eat veggies now, but that does not mean we always did, or that they are necessary... just some of them are really GOOD! * just kidding * ...sorta

BTW... can you believe this is post #500?! What did Bear start?!

Just wanted to jump in here with something I read in (I think) one of the Protein Power books. Totoro mentioned something about eating the "low-hanging" fruit.

The gist of it was that in research into current hunter/gatherer populations, the collection of snails, insects, clams, and other marine life was categorized as the "gatherer" part rather than the "hunter" part, so that this marine life was in fact categorized as vegetable matter.

NOT!

Serrelind,

You are so correct about veggies not being satisfying without butter or cheese or the like... and, of course, they had nothing like this in the past. And the fruit that our ancestors had was not even sweet at all. So, I doubt they would have eaten them at all (except, as you say, during lean times). But, as others have pointed out... during lean times, I think they would have gone for grubs and other insects. Sorry, but I just don't see the reason they would have EVER eaten vegetation... that is for herbivores!

Been down to sealevel yesterday to see the ear doc, so this is a long one-

Right- full cream milk here is 4.8gm / 100 ml. Must have been thinking fortified skim or something.

I don't weigh, measure or worry about the amounts I eat, whether it be protein or fat. I eat fat first if I can, until it feels right, and then lean till I feel satisfied. I don't eat anything like as much as I did in my 20's and 30's.

It is quite normal for ignorant people to claim that any diet other than the high carb, high veg one they learned from mum is 'unhealthy'. I doubt anyone would even consider the right diet unless they personally are having great difficulty with bodyfat. Those who are lucky in the genetic sweepstakes are fixed in what the consider is good nutrition. This has been my experience with literally thousands of people who I have told about my lifestyle over the very lengthy period I have been living it. So, deal with diet at your own space and forget about what happens elsewhere- normal weight people never accept our ways- even many of the obese have a hard time with it.

I like coconut cream, but it varies from brand to brand- the best is >30'% fat, no carbs. This lovely fatty stuff is very sensitive to heat, and turns to oil very quickly- you just can't heat it at all- add it last. I does not work in ice cream- it turns the whole thing to grease (butter?) as it is churned.

I live where the macadamia is native. We buy it in a 10 litre package from the mac oil extracting mob here in Queensland, it lasts us a year at least- cost: ~A$8/litre.

Generally in families where the meat is well-cooked, people do not like meat much, and do not eat very little of it.

I feel I am repeating some things over and over: The muscles do not, and cannot 'burn' glucose OR glycogen. The ONLY fuel the body uses is fat to run the muscle's contractions. Eating carbs interferes with fat metabolism, so keto-adaptation removes this problem- the 'wall'.

The body does do a bit of glucose-making to stabilise glycogen/glucose when needed, just as it will if you are below your native 'fatostat' setting, say you have dropped to around 5%, like a competing body builder- to say at that low fat level requires exact matching of caloric intake to calories burned, coupled with exercise. It is important the the diet supply sufficient protein, of course to spare incorporated protein. In dealing with protein in the muscles etc, one should be aware that the body is constantly breaking down and rebuilding the various protein structures anyway- like a mad mob of tiny housebuilders who dismantle the brick walls and pass the bricks around, rebuilding them as fast as they are taken apart- I have no idea why, but this is how it works. I think this is why you lose muscle mass you gain from exercising, if you don't continue to exercise. The body is very conservative relative to carrying mass, and does not maintain structures like muscle size and strength at levels beyond perceived current 'need'.

I mentioned that I have a paper (somewhere) which pouts to rest the idea that glycogen is used for energy.

I am carb free, I exercise anaerobically by lifting weights. I NEVER get sore muscles the next day- or the day after unless I am forcing a severe weight overload, which causes more severe micro damage to the muscles, and some second-day soreness. So there's the 'practical' proof that glycogen does not deplete with exercise.

Blood triglyceride is an ester, not a sugar. By further oxidation, one-half of a molecule of glucose can be derived from the glycerol moiety, but this tri-hydroxy alcohol represents only a very small percentage of the mass of the triglyceride molecule.

I take three or four ex-large eggs -very soft- with each meal, plus ~60 gm of camembert or brie. It makes the texture of the meat component easier to swallow.

My blood triglyceride level is always at the low end of 'normal'.

People 'eat that stuff' because their family ate them, and they were persistently fed them as babies until they accepted them as food.

I have never said I do not 'like' the usual vegetables people consider food, I learned to eat everything but turnips as a teen (thus my coronary problem). However I gave them away once I learned they are not good food for my body, full stop. I don't even think about them any more. People who wax eloquent about the rapture of eating various veggies are simply showing how very deep running their social conditioning is- to the point it has completely swamped any trace of instinct- instinct is why kids spit out veggies and make a face... People in this category never remain on a strict low to zero carb regime for very long, at least that has been my experience with a large number of 'attemptees'. Their mental state prevents it.

People who eat fibrous things should be aware of the damage this kind of rough, scratchy material does long term to the lining of the small intestine- It irritates it and causes a kind of 'callous' to form, which reduces the ability to extract nourishment from the chyme as it passes through.

Goat, like mutton is tough, kid is not, it is as soft and succulent as lamb...

Meat is not boring to a carnivore, only to a mixed-dieter, to whom all foods are quickly 'boring'.

Carnivores love each and every meal and eat to be nourished, not to be 'entertained'. The low level of gastronomic attraction of vegetables requires a lot of spice and theatre to keep you eating.

No amount of talk or sight of veggies/fruit makes the slightest impact on me- but then, I have had a lot of practice. I have successfully overcome my acculturation, a very unusual thing.

What indeed, did I start, dietary heretic that I am.

Other than as a guide to our lengthy period of evolution under a carnivorous lifestyle, resulting is the loss of tolerance for diet with a high carb/vegetable content, the actual diet of paleolithic people is not really of much value to us in today's modern world. Most of the animals they hunted for food are extinct, and we really do not have any solid data on what they may have consumed but did not bring home.

Hey, Bear,

Welcome back!

What kind do you use that has no carbs? I would love to try it.Talk about living in the right place! Thanks for clearing this up. Can you please direct me to studies that say this... when you find that paper? I want to show others that which they won't believe. I am sure it is correct, since our evolution would have heavily favored this type of metabolism, due to our dietary intake of fat, and lack of carbs. Makes a lot of sense... as most of what you are saying does.This is a very true statement. Our cells are constantly manufacturing proteins.I agree. Thanks to you, I am going to avoid this damage.

Thanks for being here, Bear!

I know it was when I went to cooking school that I learned from my instructor that meat only needed to be cooked to make it more palatable for the people who just could not stand to eat it raw, and that heating the fat portion made it tastier. And I grabbed right on to that idea. People got so grossed out from me eating blue or just rare steaks, but I managed to convert a number of well cooked steak people just by getting them to try it. And topping it with a bit of butter was just the icing on the steak!

I actually had to try raw pork that we were making into sausage, to show that it tasted fine with the spices and fillers and did not require cooking - I will so never forget that, even though I do not remember how it tasted.

I know very few young children who actively like eating meat (except ham and bacon), but I think it is because it is cooked too much, and therefore takes too long to chew. Mostly rare meat is much easier to chew.

My 8 year old will eat medium rare steak but I have to pour off the bloody juice. She eats it with some butter and salt with no problem. And she would trade meat in for pasta anyday. As well as fruit for veggies. She may be a super taster as well.

Just my 2 cents..

Oh, come on, Deano. I can't let this one get by. Lots of wild fruit is sweet. Wild strawberries, blueberries, raspberries are all sweet. Yes, our domestication of most fruits has lead to larger, sweeter fruits, but that doesn't mean the wild varieties are not naturally sweet.

I still think our ancestors were opportunistic eaters with meat giving the greatest bang for the buck, but I doubt everyone hunted, someone had to stay back and take care of the kids who can't go on hunts. While they're sitting back at the home site (permanent or migratory) do you think they wouldn't bother gathering ripe berries right around the site or gathering fruit fallen around trees? There were calories literally ripe for the picking, available with little to no effort and I can't imagine them passing them by.

The facts are, our physiogomy is omnivorous, our teeth and digestive system are between herbivores and carnivores. When most of your energy expenditure is centered around food acquisition, you're not going to pass up free food when it comes your way, whether it be a rotting carcase or ripe fruit. I haven't seen any scientific evidence yet that proves we're supposed to be purely carnivorous, and lots to show that we're omnivorous. All of our closest relatives in the animal kingdom are opportunistic eaters and omnivorous.

Plane
"You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts."

I actually agree, and that is why I said "during lean times". I just doubt there were that many "lean times". When your belly is full of fat, you are not going to be interested in stuff that grows on a bush. You might be interested, but, it would be more like curiosity. Our evolution took us through omnivorous times, yes. I have never argued with that. And, you're right. I don't have the "facts". And, I doubt few do. But, I still think the "greatest bang for the buck" will go a long way toward good health. It's a symbiotic relationship that has produced this condition. And, even if veggies are not bad for us (which they probably are), they aren't necessary. Sorry. Just don't buy it.

Hi Bear
Sorry for coming so late to the thread, but, man I did not know this gem existed (BTW thanks coolwater!). I really need to hang out on the paleo forum! Lotta lively though provoking discussion here.

I tend to agree, but I don't think it's that simple . Although I won't nit pick and will generally agree insulin plays a huge role in premature aging.

This I disagree with; no insulin = death. Always. No matter what you eat. Insulin does a lot of things besides move sugar around the body, and even if it ONLY did that, no insulin still would mean death since our bodies are glucose dependent even if we eat no carbs.

Although it's possible you meant to say no carbs = no insulin hypersecretion, and that I would agree is pretty much true . Unless of course you over eat protein or even fats... both of which are turned into sugar in varying amounts and raise the level, sometimes to hyperglycemic levels. This would require increasingly larger amounts of insulin to bring it down.
Even if they didn't, building muscles, tissues, all anabolic processes are insulin dependent. One characteristic of diabetes is tissue wasting in spite of food ... explicitly because insulin is so high and the body cannot use it well that it can't maintain its tissues.

The body always produces ketones, even if you are eating a high carb diet. Again, perhaps what you meant to say was that we become so adapted to fat-metabolism that we no longer produce as many of them, in excess, as we do early on, because our bodies can more efficiently use fat?

The 12th marks my third year of low carb, high fat eating. Carbs have not been higher than 80g on average (considerably lower than energy need), I have been eating almost 50% fat or more as well. For the earlier portion of those years, carbs were often much lower than that. I can still perceive ketosis, and I can tell when I am deeper in or out based on how I feel emotionally and physically. For example, I had eaten only 30 carbs today and did a lot of activity on not much food... naturally this caused my body to liberate fats and produce ketones more than usual. I felt nauseas and had no appetite.


This is simply untrue. In fact converting dietary fat to adipose is the most metabolically efficient way of making fat, because molecularly it is so similar. This does not mean eating fat makes you fat... of course. All I'm saying is the body can and will turn dietary fat to body fat.

On one hand you seem to say what we like should dictate what we eat - you like meat and don't like veggies. You keep offering evidence of willful kids who won't eat veggies as some kind of evidence that they are bad. You seem to assume everyone shares this view when I know lots and lots of people who can hardly tolerate meat and love veggie food (I'm not talking sugar addiction either). Most kids who won't eat veggies won't eat meat, either.

On the other hand you say we should not eat what we like because that is untrustworthy - for example no "nonfood" which you describe as anything that isn't meat or animal based. In fact there isn't really much in common with what you consider "food" besides the fact it comes from an animal. Dairy is a modern, relatively high processed food. So are store bought muscle meats; I'm sure early humans ate relatively much more visceral and organ meats than they did feedlot strip steaks and other modern foods.

I am getting the impression you think we should eat what you think is best... just because. It's as if you really like the idea of eating animals in spirit and you've kinda made a personal religion about it. There isn't that much facts to support your belief that animal foods are the only natural foods for a person, nor that there is any objective basis for what you are defining as "natural food".

More on the dairy... I notice you eat a lot of dairy and cheese. Are you aware that the human animal is WAY less acclimated to a diet with dairy than it is to a diet with veggies, right? Very few sects of humanity ate dairy, and it is a relatively recent part of our diets. Whereas, most of us ate some kind of vegetative matter and humans have been eating veggies... well forever.


I don't follow your reasoning.
You seem to be assuming that everything we put in our mouths is pointless if not an energy source. I disagree.

I think we can both agree on one main point: Human beings are supposed to run on an animal-food based metabolism, that is to say, animal food is the major substrate for energy. We are not supposed to eat lots if any tubers, fruits, grains, and other sugar foods for sugar. The diseases of prosperity (i.e. carbs) show that.

However it is not logical to take that and then assume it must be true that we are supposed to ONLY consume animal foods.

Do you drink water? Technically water contains no energy and it is a "nonfood". Why drink it? I'll tell you why, because hydration with H20 is essential to keep our bodies doing what they're doing. I look at veggies the same way. Veggies have nutrient factors that animal foods might not, such as roughage and phytochemicals which can be beneficial. Veggies themselves contain no energy, much like water, but they have other properties that are physiologically beneficial.

Just because you have lived this long in relatively good health does not mean it is the lack of veggies that brought you there. Technically one could survive without ever drinking a glass of water. I'm sure it's possible to eat enough melons, or raw meat, or milk... whatever. However, this is hardly evidence that water is "nonfood" or "poison". Nor is it evidence that not drinking water is the reason you are in relatively good health. If you were eating veggies, perhaps you would be better health?

After all there are some very healthy people who live their whole lives eating neither veggies NOR much animal food, by a lucky genetic role (and likely under eating, thus avoiding hyperinsulinemia).

Going to read through this massive thread and try to catch up with it now

Out of curiosity...

Is there a single person on this thread who agrees with the "veggies are bad" hypothesis raised by the bear, who isn't also a veggie hater?

Oh they are so delicious frederick! I feel almost sorry that you can't taste what I taste; the low carb lifestyle would probably be so much more enjoyable for you.

I think my favorite vegetable is cabbage. Cabbage is sweet and peppery, and it has a nice crunch to it. It complements sour or bitter foods very well. I can eat cabbage raw with just mustard.
I love it in creamy coleslaws, too.
I find cabbage also complements deeper sweet tastes - like asian pork with plum, apricot, anise-flavor hoisin sauces. One of my favorite dishes is to stir fry cabbage with sweet pork and ginger and soy sauce. Cabbage really complements all these flavors veeery well. It is way better than cauliflower, which IMO adds very little as a rice substitute other than it's being flavor-neutral and white (and thus easier to tolerate for a lot of people as a starch sub). For me, though cabbage all the way .

Nancy was talking about asparagus, trying to describe it. To me asparagus tastes warm, nutty, almost slightly like avocado, but not mild and summery. The flavor of asparagus begs to be brought out with creams or nuts or other fats. Goes great with another rich heavy food like beef.

Speaking of mild and summery... squashes. Oh man do I love squash! Roasted summer squashes are absolutely delicious, with caramelized onions, and some nice fatty salmon. Heaven. In fact most any roasted sweet vegetable is good since roasting develops the sugars into caramel (example: onions, peppers, and squashes)

Then there are the heartier winter squashes, like pumpkin. Nutmeg, cinnamon, and some kind of creamy dairy = instant comfort be it a warm soup (slightly spicy) or a custard or pie (sweet).

In another thread you inquired about eggplant lasagna; eggplant is slightly sweet and has a kind of smoky flavor to me. The smokiness of eggplant comes out a lot when you roast it. I love roasted eggplant, 'specially baba gahnush (I murdered that spelling)... or as a salad.

Another of my fav veggies is spinach. Anything with cheese tastes better with spinach. Same deal with broccoli.
I like to use broccoli in anything with a lot of sauce because it just sucks it up and then when you bite down it's like WHAM flavor city .

Mushrooms. Cream sauces, onions, cheese (swiss).

Tomatoes are sweet and tangy. Iceberg lettuce is very sweet, cool, crisp. As are cucumbers only they are not sweet.

Man I could go on forever. God I LOVE veggies. Even when I was on a see food diet I always liked them... but LCing taught me to cook and thus now I LOVE them.
I don't know how people low carb hating veggies. That must suck for sure.