When I was in 6th grade my class took a big school trip to the nation’s capital. One of the defining moments in my life occurred at some shopping mall right in good ole? D.C. Growing up in Tennessee we had absolutely no sushi. Sushi was just something us yungins had only heard about.
But sho? nuff, right there at that good ole? D.C. shopping mall, square in the middle of the food court, was the first sushi I’d ever seen. My friends hit Mickey D’s, and I, without even thinking twice about it, ordered the weirdest sushi on the menu.
I took my tray back over to the homies, and it was octopus and raw fish nigiri sushi galore. My friends were amazed? and disgusted. Right in front of them I stuffed my face with this odd food, and was like, ?hey y?all, this here sushi’s mighty fine. Yawnt sum?? I’ve never really been the same since. Always a gastronomic pioneer.
Well, I was starting to feel like I was letting you guys down. I mean, here I am reporting my food intake, meal by meal, and I’ve hardly eaten anything that can be considered grotesque, weird, strange, revolting, or barbaric.
Okay, before I get to the climactic conclusion I will say that I’m feeling a little run down and my internet connection blows. Therefore, I am posting this quickly without much discussion this evening. And I really do apologize if I’ve been a little pigheaded lately, but you see, it’s not my fault. It’s just like they say, ?you are what you eat.
That’s right amigos. Last night I stewed up an entire 20-pound pig head. I couldn’t even fit the snout in the pot, but no matter, it made for great video and picture messages on my cell phone.
When I woke up in the morning, she was cooked up all nice and soft, so I plucked those eyes, peeled every bit of good meat off the face, and then transferred the empty skull over to the sink. There I took a small stone tool and crushed that badboy so I could empty out the brains ? and upon close scrutiny for all you guys that think that ?pig’s are smart. They can’t be too smart. That thing was like a walnut.
No matter. I chowed down on some pig face, had me a nice pig tongue, with a side of pig brain in a big stew with all the butter I could get down.
Note on your calendar that this is NOT April 1st.
Breakfast: Pig head broth, 6 ounces leftover duck with 2T duckfat
Lunch: 8 ounces grassfed beef patty cooked in 2T butter, rare, with 2 ounces cheese
Dinner: Pork tongue, ? pork brain, 8 ounces pork face in broth with 3T butter
I would say, ?wish you guys coulda seen this thing, but uhhh, you will. Photos will arrive later this month. Consider it a Christmas gift from me to you.
And for Primus die hards, I will say the bubbling broth was the closest approximation to ?pork soda? that I’ve come across.
I’m very stressed out about what you said that you can get hypothyroidism from low carb diets. Please look at the comment I wrote on Day 12 (I’m Anonymous in case you are wondering). Could you please respond that?
Was your pig organic, from where ?
DId you pot roast or oven roast, any condiments, oil, butter, bacon, wine, maple-syrop?!!!
You can filter and xhill the remaining juice and chill >> the result would be a jelly full of collagen ( broken down by-overheating, but still lubricative enough to penetrate your aging joints…
For the shredded cheeks I would add lime juice and French moutarde with some shavings of pineapples and coconut Fresh picked hawaiian style… A bit of FRUC goes a long way in that culinary new desert of yours….
Bon Apetit, Wolfgang Amadeus 27
P. S. >> what are you announcing — again and again your non-existing ALMAMATTER aka your mothership website ???
Jim, I did post a response over yonder. Basically, there is some concern that diets that fall below 50grams of carbs per day (I’d say more like 15 per meal), can slow down the metabolism. The thyroid controls metabolism. Most cases of hypothyroidism are diagnosed on a subclinical basis – symptoms are coldness, tiredness, loss of sex drive, dry skin, etc. Most cases are not permanent. I’m not talking about severe thyroid damage.
Yes Mozart, unlikely I’ll be fruc-ing my pig head. I simmered overnight in a big pot with a sachet of thyme, peppercorns, and 1/8 cup balsamic vinegar. Oh yeah, and about 2T sea salt Plus I added some beef shanks, which I gobbled for breakfast.
The broth is nice. You should see how gelatinized it is. I could bounce that shiz off the wall.
The pig was fresh and local but not organic. They probably fed it mostly taro root, coconut, and fruit with maybe a touch of important corn – hopefully GMO, my favorite!
And the mothership is a pro-developed website coming out in 1-2 weeks. It’ll be fun. Trying to support my habits with actual income. Imagine that? Getting paid to do work instead of slaving away before and after the day job every day!
I want you to be me guru. I’ll click all the Google ads (https://www.google.com/adsense/) you put on your website and do it daily so you make a lot of money, and can keep helping people like me with their nutrition.
What I like about your style of coaching is that you:
1) experiment a hell of a lot more than many gurus (like the 44 days you were in the wild eating almost only oats! Great read by the way, I hope it was sincere!
2) Consider A LOT of sources:
I like the way you always take into consideration so many sources when discussing one subject of health, and you also take many conditions into consideration, like poor digestion, something which can make the perfect diet not-so perfect for everyone.
3) Compare theoretical or book knowledge with practical, real-life experience: some of the most entertaining and informing articles are the ones where you combine your knowledge from books with that of your own experiments, like when you were in the woods and you ate too little calories and the after-effects – loved that article and how you compared the effects on your body with the effects those subjects in the book experienced.
Think big man.
You could easily be the next AV.
Yes, I want to be the next A.V. He’s got it made because he travels around talking to attractive single moms who are really into health telling them things like, “you know what’s good as a face cream, jizz.” Now that is awesome.
This is a lifelong pursuit for me, and I’m fortunate to have a deep background in the culinary arts and a degree and background as a creative writer. It makes it interesting to follow along as I help to put the logic together.
You will love the book I plan to write on my “Wind River Diet.” I hope to do a big release and get that one in the ol’ Barnes and Noble in hard copy in 2010.
Anyway, I really appreciate your comments. Those are the primary things I strive for in all that I do as it pertains to health… Experiment then research then think then translate then entertain.
I can’t solve everyone’s problems, but I feel like this is a really productive and fulfilling pursuit, and I plan to keep hackin’.
As far as I can determine, the bit about going under 50 grams carb/day slows the metabolism and/or thyroid or pure speculation without any real clinical bases. (The few studies that purport to to show this-indirectly, of course!- are either flawed or biased.)
Michael Eades, MD, of Protein Power fame, appears to agree with me on this. He states that he has never seen a case of hypothyroidism that could be linked to a low carb diet. I suspect the harping about hypothyroidism is just another excuse- among many- that the so called experts use to try to negate the science and virtues of low carb eating.
There is one thing I will agree with however: prolonged calorie restriction will indeed lead to low thyroid output/slowed metabolism. However, I fail to see how this is unique to low carb eating. Most people who genuinely stick to a low carv (or VLC) way of eating find that their ability to eat more fat increases, especially if they are relatively active.
Sorry, not trying to start something; I actually enjoy your blog a lot. I just wanted to add my two cents, so to speak….
Oops, some typos: the first sentence should read: “is pure speculation.”
Two things concern me about the hypothyroidism potential. The first is that Atkins warned that his diet could do this on page 303 of Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution.
Secondly, I know several people who display signs and symtpoms of hypothyroidism after going uber low carb for an extended amount of time. A personal email I received only 2 weeks ago listed the exact symptoms of hypothyroidism after 6 months of low carbin.
This may just be due to its anorectic effect and not being able to eat enough to keep the metabolism from slowing down, just as you suggest. The carbs may not have anything to do with it other than the fact they make eating so little a potential pitfall.
I’m just watching out for it, that’s all. It seems like a potential danger, I know for a fact that people have gotten themselves into real trouble with lulled thyroid and subsequent problems down the line. That much is not up for debate. Why they got themselves into trouble, can it be avoided, etc. are the questions I hope to be better informed to answer after giving this carnage-diet a go.
Great feedback though. I tend to agree, but am far from convinced.
Couple things on the issue of low-carb dieting and thyroid function:
1) We need to distinguish between temporary reductions in thyroid activity and long-term reductions. An immediate reduction during the transition phase (as confirmed by scientific observation) may not matter if things will eventually level off.
2) Even if low-carb diets do not automatically force a reduction in thyroid function, we must distinguish between theory and practice. For instance, it may well be true that, in an very controlled setting, it is possible to set up a low-carb diet that does not result in a long-term reduction in thyroid function. But this is purely academic and meaningless if no one would be able to maintain that sort of diet on a consistent basis in the real world. I suspect that this is closer to the truth of the matter.
My own perception is that VLCD (i.e., eating between 50 and 100 grams of carbs per day) are an overreaction to the sugar-laden society we’ve become. The fact that there are millions of thin Asians, Europeans, Indians, Africans, etc. who eat relatively high-carb diets proves that a reduction in carbs is not the be-all-end-all of ideal body comp. or health.
Again, it seems to me that the low-carb movement is a backlash to the low-fat movement. I would like to see someone (looking at you, Matt) get fat on a diet of whole-grain sourdough breads and the like with plenty of fat and meat in your diet.
If you want to see fat people that eat sourdough bread with lots of fat and meat, go the a Weston A Price Foundation conference. I’m not saying their health is terrible, but clearly there are many that have impaired lipolysis while eating a high fat diet, and are packing it away. Those aren’t unhealthy foods by any stretch of the imagination, but there may be better strategies for dealing with their underlying health disorders.
Your take on low-carb and hypothyroidism is right on, but there are of course plenty of historical examples of societies eating VLCD’s, so we know that a healthy person, in theory, should be able to thrive assuming they do’nt have an underlying health disorder that would stand in between them and success.
Just yesterday I popped open a book on paleopathology and read about the Chochorros of peru. Their diet: 89% seafood, 5% land meat, 6% plants, and I don’t think those plants were even starches.
It was noted that they had perfect teeth with no tooth decay. Surprise, surprise.
My comment re: sourdough bread was to focus on the starch, not the fat. In other words, I doubt seriously that America’s obesity problem is due to excessive consumption of whole grains and similar carb sources.
It just astounds me that we’ve essentially taken a look at the 64 oz. Cokes, candy, Doritos, etc. and said, “Ya know what we need to do? Restrict all carbs to less than 100 grams per day.”
Uh, what?! Isn’t there a middle ground here, between one soda-sucking extreme and near total carb deprivation on the other?
And, for the record, I am not denying that there were societies that existed on VLCD. But the fact that we can refer to them by name kind of proves my point: that this sort of practice was the notable exception rather than the general rule.
Every time this issue gets debated, it always goes something like this: “Oh yeah? What about the Eskimos and Masai (and now, Chochorros)?” It’s like me telling you that veganism is the ideal diet for an NFL football player and when you ask for examples, I go, “Well, how about Tony Gonzales and Ricky Williams.”
I guess the point I’m making is that it seems like traditional people who ate a very carb-restricted diet (and I lump the Masai in here even though their milk consumption may preclude it) did so either because consuming plants was (1) a cultural taboo or (2) impossible. I have no idea what the hell was the matter with the Chochorros.
One last point: We must admit that the diet you’re eating right now would be extraordinarily difficult to sustain in the wild. I mean, just how good of a hunter would you need to be (and how plentiful the game) in order to sustain this diet? We are arguing over the consequences on thyroid function assuming a virtually unlimited supply of rich, fatty meats. What happens when that supply runs low (or at least is lower than what you are able to eat in modern America)? You wanna talk about hypothyroidism . . .
And maybe that’s the answer? Perhaps VLCD are a rarity because they could only be sustained by cultures that had reliable access to tons of animal flesh. This might strengthen the argument for biochemical individuality (i.e., carb vs. meat types).
WHO IS A V
AV = Aajonus Vonderplanitz. He promotes eating an all-raw diet, of meat, butter, eggs, fish, milk, cheeses made at below 105F, green juices, and unheated honey.
Ben, great comment, particularly the Tony Gonzalez analogy.
One argument I have is that overcoming addictions to 64 ounce cokes is much harder on a high-carb diet, than one that is lower. Otherwise that point is flawless, and I think anyone who cuts out sugar will lose weight, no matter what their diet consists of otherwise. In my personal experience, I’ve never seen an overweight person not lose weight on a zero sugar diet — even on a steady diet of quesadillas.
I brought up the Chochorros because I just opened up a Paleopathology book and that was the one and only example I read about. The authors did say something like, “typical of diets like this, there was complete absence of tooth decay,” implying they were not just one drop in a small bucket.
Really high-carb diets didn’t become the norm until the last several thousand years and the dawn of agriculture, which allowed staples like potatoes, taro root, grains, and more to become a part of virtually every meal. Contrary to the paleo belief, these foods didn’t lead to poor health when combined suitably with animal foods.
And I guess the final thing I’ll add is that most people assume that life was really tough for our ancestors. I’m not so sure about that. We were masters of our environment back then, capable of hunting things into extinction even with primitive tools. I think it was an all-you-can-eat buffet out there, which is why it took us so damn long to develop agriculture. Like Jared Diamond (Guns, Germs, and Steel) argues, agriculture didn’t make sense for most cultures, like the plains Indians. Why eat squash and beans when you’ve got unlimited access to fatty buffalo hump? There’s no evolutionary push to do that. That’s like a lion hunting chipmunks.
All interesting points, Matt. I think we mostly agree (probably because you taught me most of what I spit back at you!).
When you say “zero-sugar diet” I assume you are talking about refined sugar or are you lumping natural sugars in there as well (e.g., fruit, honey, milk)? I suspect that the refining process does something critical other than ditching the micro-nutrients, but that’s more gut than intellect talking.
We may have to agree to disagree about the ability of our ancestors to hunt meat. Everything I’ve ever read/seen has suggested that early man was a pretty shitty hunter and, aside from the rare fortuitous kill, basically got meat by scavenging from the carcasses of other animals’ kills. No doubt early man was far more in tune with his environment than we are, but he wasn’t hunting modern cow and lamb, either.
Things obviously would have gotten better with the domestication of dogs, advances in weaponry, etc. But there would have been other issues as well: Preserving the meat would have been quite hard, and thus I suspect that regular meat consumption would have required regular, successful hunts.
Ironically, we associate agriculture with an increase in the consumption of plants, but I think agriculture and the domestication of animals facilitated our consumption of meat just as much if not more than plants. With domestication, any fat, lazy slob can have himself a nice cut of meat several times a day.
Indeed, was this not how the Masai–one of the most extreme examples of protein consumption–got their meat?
For the record, I am not trying to be a party pooper. I am just trying to play devil’s advocate with all of this. I personally feel like our society may have gone a bit overboard with carb phobia, and am starting to believe that any diet of unadulterated foods–whether consisting of whole grains and raw dairy like Weston A. Price thought ideal, or an all-meat diet like Matt’s experiment–can work.
Which diet you choose will probably depend largely on digestive capacity and tastes.
Sugar is poorly correlated with obesity. I’ve seen lots of obese people who drink diet soft drinks and lots of lean people who drink large bottles of regular soda. Many controlled studies also have failed to link sugar to obesity. I’m talking of eating dry sugar by itself or sugar with protein, NOT sugar with PUFA oils, which does seem to be fattening. I’ve seen all kinds of studies saying that sugar leads to “reduced feed efficiency” when fed to animals by itself or with coconut oil or protein. But when you feed animals sugar and PUFA oils, they get fat. Here’s one study, among many, that show this.
“In the absence of fat, sucrose produced a decreased FE [Feed Efficiency] in both strains. Animals fed a low-fat, high-sucrose (LH) diet were actually leaner than animals fed a high-complex-carbohydrate diet. Fat was also found to be the critical stimulus for hyper-glycemia and hyper-insulinemia in B/6J mice. In the absence of fat, sucrose had no effect on plasma glucose or insulin.”
Here’s an article by Ray Peat about how PUFAs and other toxins cause diabetes. I suspect that if everyone ate a tropical diet, low in PUFAs, diabetes would fade into obscurity. The combination of high carbs and high-PUFAs (e.g. french fries, doughnuts, and potato chips) causes the rapid degeneration seen today.
The sumo are among the most obese people in the world and they eat a high-starch, low-sugar diet. Many cancer diets forbid starch entirely, but allow raw fruit and carrot/beet juices, unheated/comb honey, and raw milk products. Gerson and Norman Walker are examples of this, I think, as are many others. (Most anti-cancer diets condemn starches, so there might be some truth that starches promote cancer or at least do not cure/prevent it, esp if you live in today’s polluted world.)
A diet high in sugar won’t necesssarily cause obesity if it’s also low in PUFAs, including animal fats like pork fat and chicken fat that are relatively high in PUFAs. Sugar by itself, or with coconut oil, would probably make you lean. It’s only when it’s eaten with fat (esp PUFA oil) that sugar is fattening. On a very low PUFA diet high in coconut oil, it’s extremely unlikely that refined sugars, let alone natural ones, would cause fat gain. PUFAs slow down the metabolism so weight gain is more likely. Protein and coconut oil eaten with sucrose wouldn’t have the same effect as protein and soy oil eaten with sucrose.
I also agree with what you’ve said that non-caloric sweeteners (esp artificial, but also sugar alcohol and stevia) will cause more hunger and cravings than the ordinary sucrose. HFCS is also far more damaging than cane/beet sugar.
IDK, Bruce. I think that absolute statements like this are hard to square with what we know about traditional diets around the globe. The Japanese, for example, rely largely on the very things you think are the devil–starch and polyunsaturated fats in fish–but seem to be doing just fine.
Also, how do you define a “tropical diet”? Obviously this would include coconut oil, but what else?
The Japanese eat a low-fat diet and they also have problems like strokes from the excess omega-3s. Most Japanese eat a low calorie diet, and are short and thin. As they adopt Western diets – fast food and junk food – they grow taller and fatter, and get the same diseases that Americans and Europeans have. Traditional Japanese foods are bland and/or lean. If they ate more flavorful food and more of it, they would lose much of their advantage.
By tropical diet, I mean very low PUFAs, not necessarily tropical food. The only oils I use are coconut, macadamia, and things like that. Maybe cocoa butter or red palm oil. For food, lean white fish (like cod), shellfish, fruit, red meats, beef, lamb, butter, cheese, milk, honey, maybe tubers, potatoes, sweet potatoes, pearl tapioca, arrowroot, organic white sushi rice (unenriched), etc.
PUFAs are highly perishable, not just in a tropical area, but in our warm bodies. So, I feel the ideal diet would be based on foods suitably low in PUFAs and limit foods high PUFAs (like most nuts, seeds, whole grains, soybeans, fatty fish, mayo and salad dressing from a store, chicken and turkey fat, most vegetable oils). If you live in the tropics, like Matt does, pork fat might be OK in small doses, but judging by his nausea from pork belly, I would limit all pork. Duck and goose are better than chicken and turkey, but they still have more PUFAs than beef or lamb.
There is infinite flexibility for mixing foods together. You could have something like cod with potato and butter, or beef with coconut oil and white rice, or milk with honey. The question is not what the traditional groups ate, but what is best in today's world. PUFAs wil make you far more vulnerable to pollution and poisons than saturated fats (like coconut oil or butter or beef fat). The propaganda that saturated fat is bad comes from studies which fail to isolate SFAs from PUFAs. A lot of studies define lard as "saturated fat", even though it's less saturated & higher in PUFAs than tallow, butter, or coconut oil. Some studies feed a mix of beef tallow and safflower oil, and call that a high saturated fat diet. This is why we have the propaganda against SFAs, because people don't eat just saturated fat, they eat lots of PUFAs too. That's the worst possible diet, and will cause higher cancer rates. Saturated fats are safe, unless you eat PUFAs with them or have a lot of PUFAs in your body (which is the same bad situation).
Here's a review that shows very clearly what causes cancer. "Rats fed diets containing mixtures of 3% sunflower seed oil and 17% of either tallow or coconut oil developed twice as many tumors as those fed 3% sunflower seed oil or 20% of either saturated fat alone. Tumor yields in the rats fed these mixed-fat diets were comparable to those in rats fed a 20% lard diet, which provided about the same amount of linoleic acid." Their conclusion was that "a certain amount of polyunsaturated fat, as well as a high level of dietary fat, is required to promote [breast cancer]."
But instead we mostly hear the absolute LIE that "saturated fat causes cancer." "Saturated fats" that are high in PUFAs like lard and chicken fat might indeed cause cancer, but "saturated fats" that are low in PUFAs (like beef tallow and coconut oil) don't. So, it is probably not good to eat high-PUFA and high-fat, but one or the other might be OK.
Here’s a good quote by Ray Peat to give some perspective in the arguments about what foods make people fat.
“I saw people lose weight stably when they had the habit of eating large amounts of tortilla chips fried in coconut oil, but those chips disappeared when their producers were pressured into switching to other oils, in spite of the short shelf life that resulted in the need to add large amounts of preservatives. Oreo cookies, Ritz crackers, potato chip producers, and movie theater popcorn makers have experienced similar pressures.”
Back when junk food and fast foods were made with coconut oil, obesity was rare. In cultures that eat coconut oil as the main fat, the people are lean. Thailand, for example, ate this way traditionally. When high-PUFA oils are introduced, all of the sudden, carbohydrates become the most fattening thing possible. It’s not the carbs, it’s the fats that are eaten with them. For ex: I doubt anybody will get fat on banana chips made with sugar and coconut oil, no PUFAs added. On the other hand, just go to any grocery, and you’ll see fat people eating corn chips and potato chips made with soybean oil, corn oil, cottonseed oil, sunflower oil, peanut oil, canola oil, and other junk.
These oils make you fat, whereas coconut oil causes weight loss, even if you eat lots of sugars and/or starches. I agree with Ben that the low-carb movement is a backlash against low-fat and that there would probably be more benefit to a diet that simply eliminated PUFA oils, trans fats, and refined carbs (esp HFCS). But we have to define junk food carefully. I think potato chips fried in corn oil are much worse than potato chips fried with coconut oil. Pork rinds are somewhere in between. I think doughnuts fried in PUFA oils are much worse than banana chips or coconut based macaroons.
I do agree completely that a combination of factors all put together is the worst case scenario, or as Barry Sears calls The Perfect Nutritional Storm. Refined sugars eaten alone, have a lot of trouble causing weight gain, although they still do their damage.
Refined sugar with starch is even worse. It’s as if the higher the glycemic load of the overall meal, the more fat-triggering the sugar becomes.
Combine sugar and starch and lots of fats together, especially PUFA’s as you state is the worst possible scenario. It’s no secret that a diet rich in starch, refined sugar, and vegetable oil combined with plenty of animal protein is the most fattening diet in the world. Any observer could see that plainly.
The two most guilty victims, because they are the only ones to have significantly increased since obesity became more common are refined sugar (particularly fructose as in HFCS and crystalline fructose) and vegetable oils. Therefore, those are almost always the first two components of any diet that should be excluded, along with artificial sweeteners.
And I must admit Bruce, since following this all meat diet, pork, duck, and chicken are very unappealing. The only things I’m compelled to eat are fish, shellfish, red meat, and eggs.
Oh, and Ben, when I said no-sugar diet, I meant zero sugar of any kind, similar to many “candida-cleansing” diets.
It’s the mix of high-fat (esp PUFAs) and high-carb (esp HFCS) that causes rampant obesity. Herman Taller showed that you can lose weight eating 1300 Calories of safflower oil, corn oil, and margarine a day – if you eliminated carbs from your diet totally. Who would want to eat that way is another question. But try to get fat by eating just fruit and raw juices with no added fat. Try to get fat eating dry potatoes. Without fat or water, you couldn’t eat much sugar. Mix in soybean oil and flour, you’ve got a doughnut.
People are fat, because they eat a high everything diet. High fat and high PUFA, high sugar and high fructose, high carb, high starch, high protein, high alcohol, etc. But coconut oil would counter this trend somewhat. When movie pop-corn was made with coconut oil, you never saw an obese person eating it. When fries were made with beef tallow, obesity was rare. Now those foods are made with cheap oil high in PUFAs and/or trans fat. Obesity soared as PUFAs replaced saturated fats like beef, butter, and coocnut oil.
Very interesting information. It sounds like you believe that one can be healthy and fit by minimizing polyunsaturated fats (PUFA) and refined sugar, and emphasizing coconut oil as protection. Two further questions:
1) I assume that goat/sheep dairy would be preferable over cow dairy since those have greater numbers of short- and medium-chain triglycerides and, unlike cow’s milk, less long-chain triglycerides and unsaturated fatty acids?
2) I followed the link to Raymond Peat’s site. One thing I find somewhat ironic is that he believes that vitamin E is a great supplement, yet most vitamin E comes from sources of polyunsaturated fats (e.g., wheat germ, soybean).
The only other good source of vitamin E I can think of that is not composed of lots of PUFA’s is palm fruit oil, which is mostly mono-unsaturates. For what it’s worth, this oil is ubiquitous in tropical climates like Southeast Asia. (Indeed, a company called Carotech from Thailand has started to sell a palm-fruit based vitamin E supplement with the proper ratios of tocopherols and tocotrienols called Tocomin (TM).)
Anyway, it just struck me as a little contradictory to emphasize vitamin E, yet based PUFA’s. (And yes, I am aware of the argument that reducing consumption of PUFA reduces the need for vitamin E.)
I forgot one other thing: The diet you mentioned is noticeably devoid of vegetables (esp. green veggies). I personally believe the benefits of veggies are oversold, but am sympathetic to the idea that green veggies are beneficial for chlorophyll and magnesium. Your thoughts?
Some do better with goat or sheep dairy, due to the difference in protein. The A2 milk is often tolerated better. Some cow breeds do produce A2 milk, like Guernsey cows. Milk has small amounts of MCTs and SCTs. It’s mostly long chain SFAs and/or MUFAs. Butter fat has ~4% PUFAs, so that is fine IMO. Beef is 2-3% PUFAs. Lamb is under 8% usually. Pork and fowl is more, so I eat those fats less.
The amount of Vitamin E in food tends to be proportional to the amount of PUFA it contains. Ray Peat doesn’t suggest using wheat germ or soybeans, or the oils that are derived from them. I don’t think the Vitamin E supplements have any PUFA oils in them. Most supplements are dangerous. He mentions Vitamin E as a safe one, but only in small amounts. Red palm oil does have lots of Vitamin E and several forms of it, provided it’s unrefined.
Some vegetables are high in oxalic acid, phytic acid, goitrogens and other toxins that can weaken you. Ray feels that root vegetables, tubers, fruit, and honey are safer. Cucumbers, zucchini, and so forth might be OK. They’re technically fruits. Here are some articles that question the benefits of vegetables.
I don’t agree with the diet promoted by this website (mainly fruit and raw nuts with small portions of raw fish and egg yolks), but she is right about the fact that vegetables contain toxins. (Fruits and nuts do, too.) I’ve seen people who argue that it’s good to eat these plant toxins, because they strengthen us like taking small doses of poison. (Hormesis or Homeopathy.) It’s debatable. You can eat green vegetables if you want, but I would avoid bitter ones. (Spinach makes my teeth feel gritty like sand, because of the oxalic acid probably.)
Also, I would cook vegetables thoroughly (steaming or boiling until soft).
Dr. Walter Voegtlin wrote in “The Stone Age Diet” that all fruits and vegetables should be cooked. Voegtlin was a gastro- enterologist who advocated eating mostly paleo except for butter, cheese, yogurt, sour cream, uncreamed cottage cheese, or other fermented dairy products.
I have a few other questions for you. How would you prefer I direct them to your attention? I feel that communicating through Matt’s blog may be a bit unwieldy. Please advise.
Go to my list and send a message to “list owner” at the bottom. Join if you want. Or search the messages to see if a topic is discussed.
Good day !.
You re, I guess , perhaps very interested to know how one can make real money .
There is no initial capital needed You may begin to receive yields with as small sum of money as 20-100 dollars.
AimTrust is what you thought of all the time
The firm represents an offshore structure with advanced asset management technologies in production and delivery of pipes for oil and gas.
It is based in Panama with structures around the world.
Do you want to become a happy investor?
That`s your choice That`s what you really need!
I feel good, I began to take up real money with the help of this company,
and I invite you to do the same. If it gets down to select a proper companion who uses your funds in a right way – that`s AimTrust!.
I make 2G daily, and my first deposit was 1 grand only!
It`s easy to start , just click this link http://legurytedo.freehostyou.com/ogawiv.html
and go! Let`s take our chance together to become rich
If my dick is aimed at your face, you can trust that whatever comes out of it will not miss.
Matt, you can probably eliminate the few spam messages this blog gets by enabling "Show word verification for comments" in Settings -> Comments near the bottom. It is enabled on Peter's blog and Stephan's (I think) and I've never seen spam. I've also got it enabled for my blog. Thanks.
Thanks Bruce. I know. I have so much fun humiliating SPAM sources though, especially on old posts that don't get read much anymore like this one. Thanks for watching my back though.
Your blog has been getting a lot of spam recently, however. I doubt most of your readers care about seeing you humiliate spammers. I think it's best to block the spammers with word verification. Then we can have more energy for discussion. Let the spammers rot. Thanks, Bruce