Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Hot Topics => Topic started by: Sully on October 08, 2010, 12:59:33 pm
-
great video, didn't know where this should go exactly, thought hot topics possibly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_fta0-93Ms
-
I grew bananas by cutting off pieces of the root and planting them kind of like you would plant seeds. Yah, I think it would be better to grow them from seeds. I had apples the other day that were so tiny, tart and full of a few big seeds, that I thought they were acerola, if no one told me they were apples.
-
i used to be raw vegan and regularly used to watch his videos. i wonder, if he is on paleo diet now. anyway, great video indeed! lots of truth there. on my paleo land, the main focus of indigenous plants and animals to raise. if we don't think constantly to make money selling meat and fruits that we grow, than to handle this project would be easy. in back home, we do have bananas with huge black seeds on them and they are super delicious. i'm used to eat so much exotic fruits that they all come with seeds. anything without seeds is scary.
-
It is always all about results.
Find the fruit that gives you the healthy results you are looking for.
-
Well, hot topics is really the place. After all, even meats are unnatural, given GM meats and grainfeeding.
-
@raw Yeah he eats meat now.
here he eats raw bison
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cbhkUA5ySQ
-
http://www.travelblog.org/pix/shim.gif
Good stuff all natural. Grow like wildfire so they have never been cultivated. High sugar amount and....even more fiber, take a look at this:
http://scrumptious.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/11/prickly_pear_cactus.jpg
Full of large rock hard seeds.
-
Your title is sort of misleading but thanks for the video. Most enjoyable
-
Looking for pre-historic fruit with BIG SEEDS?
These are exotic fruit from the virgin forests of Palawan.
(http://www.myhealthblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/tabo-fruit-palawan.jpg)
(http://www.myhealthblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/tabo-fruit-palawan-eaten.jpg)
Source http://www.myhealthblog.org/2010/07/23/exotic-fruit-tabo-from-the-virgin-forests-of-palawan-philippines
-
And how about Durian?
Also a pre-historic fruit.
With enormous seeds!
A great number of raw foodists love durian.
It's probably something Durian Rider, Paul Nison, GoodSamaritan, Iguana, and Yon Yonson can agree on.
(http://www.myhealthblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/packed-durian.jpg)
We buy packed durian sometimes for convenience and assurance of ripeness
(http://www.myhealthblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/durian-for-sale.jpg)
This is what Durian Fruits look like
from http://www.myhealthblog.org/2009/09/13/bam-it-is-durian-season-smooth-tasting-yummy-smelling-very-much-filling-durian/
-
in back home, we do have bananas with huge black seeds on them and they are super delicious. i'm used to eat so much exotic fruits that they all come with seeds. anything without seeds is scary.
Where is this "back home" - or how did you manage to get these bananas?
-
Where is this "back home" - or how did you manage to get these bananas?
We have natural bananas in my country.
This is what we natives eat in the Philippines.
The ones we export, are the yucky Cavendish Bananas he is lambasting.
(native people don't eat that, they look too perfect - wierd.)
-
ive heard that durians are an aquired taste?
-
ive heard that durians are an aquired taste?
I think it is genetic.
The first time I smelled durian was when I was 9 years old and I looked for it in the house because it smelled so good.
Tasted it and I was immediately hooked.
All my kids have the same experience and genes.
-
Ive tried to look it up. but you can only get stuff thats been frozen and it is supposed to taste something like cognac with coffee and cream. Which...well that sounds lovely actually, but I have still not even found the frozen stuff.
-
I think it is genetic.
The first time I smelled durian was when I was 9 years old and I looked for it in the house because it smelled so good.
Tasted it and I was immediately hooked.
All my kids have the same experience and genes.
Yeah I wouldn't surprised. It took me a while to appreciate it but in the end I was totally hooked
-
Ive tried to look it up. but you can only get stuff thats been frozen and it is supposed to taste something like cognac with coffee and cream. Which...well that sounds lovely actually, but I have still not even found the frozen stuff.
Yeah, I guess it could be said to taste something like that.
I'd describe it as a creamy custard desert with a tinge of cognac. It is really a spectacular fruit. It is very potent.
-
Can you get the fresh stuff on Greenland? If so, WTH?!
-
Rule of thumb with fruit.
Never get the "variety" that is seedless... that is a freak.
Here are ATIS... full of seeds
http://www.marketmanila.com/archives/atis-sugar-apple
Atis is in season now. The season is very short. Just 1 month of a year.
-
Can you get the fresh stuff on Greenland? If so, WTH?!
Actually I'm Icelandic, but yes, yes you can.
I hunt in greenland quite a bit and they have very western stores with all the western junk along with loads of fruit. They eat mostly sugar and wheat, atleast the people that live in towns do.
It's a very sad evolution, most of them are very fat, depressed and unhealthy. They are kind of lost in the modern world, all the modern bullshit has been pushed upon them and they think that they need it to be happy.
I hope one day they go back to their roots, greenland is one of the most amazing places on earth. I love it.
-
Actually I'm Icelandic
Native Icelanders are not accustomed to a lot of fruits. They've always eaten only a little bit of them. Am I wrong? ;)
-
Native Icelanders are not accustomed to a lot of fruits. They've always eaten only a little bit of them. Am I wrong? ;)
Fruit started here probably 200 years ago and then it was a rarity and people only had it for christmas and only the rich people.
There is no fruit grown here what so ever. My parents and grandparents never touch fruit, my dad for example, just doesn't want it. Never ever eats it even though there's always a lot of fruit available. But yeah there's plenty of imported supermarket fruit.
-
There is no fruit grown here what so ever.
Any berries?
-
Blueberries grow in the wild, they're not grown
-
Where is this "back home" - or how did you manage to get these bananas?
I think she is referring to India.
-
If you can't get wild, get the closest thing to it. I got a mini watermelon at a farmer's market a while ago. Yellow, many seeds, not very sweet tasted more like pure water with a very small hint of sweetness.
Wild grapes are in season now here.
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/DSCN5321-Copy.jpg)
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/100_0675.jpg)
-
If you can't get wild, get the closest thing to it. I got a mini watermelon at a farmer's market a while ago. Yellow, many seeds, not very sweet tasted more like pure water with a very small hint of sweetness.
sully, please, save those seeds and send them to me. :o
-
I think she is referring to India.
yes, I'm from south east Asia. it's part of west bangal /Bangladesh where there is royal bangal tigers live. i believe, my birth place has most exotic fruits which are still from ancient indigenous plants. like red bananas (which Hindus use for worshiping), seeded bananas and other 20 different kinds of bananas you can find. i never tastes bananas as aweful as USA. i see so many exotic fruits in my life (all in my grandma's fruits' garden) unbelievable! i see that it takes couple of generations to mature one fruit trees to have fruits. so, my great grandparents put one fruit tree and we enjoy that tree, but they didn't. back home, also we value the land different way. it's shame to sell a home that you inherit. so, all those indigenous fruits plants come with the home and that's priceless. :)
-
Well, hot topics is really the place. After all, even meats are unnatural, given GM meats and grainfeeding.
I suspect you didn't watch the video. Vitalis' answer was that, yes, (raw, wild) fruits are meant for man, but extreme fruitarianism is not. Vitalis said he eats "pounds and pounds of fruit" and thinks fruits are "fantastic". Why would a video that promotes raw wild fruits as "fantastic" not be considered raw Paleo?
-
Seemed a good video to me.
-
Yeah, just some minor errors in it. As a matter of fact, Vitalis still eats WAY more fruit than I do. So it makes no sense to put this video in hot topics.
-
@raw Yeah he eats meat now.
here he eats raw bison
this guy steals my recipe. that's my invention to fix the breakfast for my husband. i usually eat the meat just the whole piece without put anything on it. but my husband insists me to make it more beautiful. so, from my head i come up to this. i don't encourage to put those salt in the meat. those wild meat has its own natural salt in it. thanks sully for the video. :D
-
Well fruit is certainly digestible by humans and we can extract nutrition from it easily, although even confirmed carnivores such as lions can.
-
Well fruit is certainly digestible by humans and we can extract nutrition from it easily, although even confirmed carnivores such as lions can.
Thats because there aren't all that many digestive adaptations for eating fruit. Fruit bearing trees literally grow fruit to feed you (while also spreading their seeds), fruit is suppose to be easy to digest.
-
He mentions this right in the video...its 'goal' is propagation and no more. the trees are probably indeed intended to feed SOMETHING, but looking just at the basic design of many of these even so called 'prehistoric' fruits, its blatantly clear that minor fauna arn't walking away with much of these large seeds in their digestive tract. It would be interesting as with the instincto experiments to see if accepted near-carnivores would choose smaller berries and similar fruits over ones with larger bearing seeds which also tend to be way sweeter (at least in our period). Even today's fruitarian leaders accept that melons, grapes and other such foods are as inedible in nature as olives and other such things. Even the concord grapes, are a total pain in the ass as far as chewing or swallowing the seeds, although I'm sure its possible some primates spit similar things out.
The other misconception it seems is that just because a fruit has seeds its not been tampered with and is ok?? Sure the seedless varietys are usually worse, but There isn't a remarkable difference in watermelon, grapes etc...I mean they affect my body differently, but they are both just high sugar fungus food in any serious quantity. for me anyway.
-
Even today's fruitarian leaders accept that melons, grapes and other such foods are as inedible in nature as olives and other such things.
That's completely off. Wild grapes are much more edible than raw olives. Have you ever seen bushman eat wild watermelon? You can't compare these wild fruits to olives.
-
hmm, ok, obviously I was exaggerating as none of these foods are 'inedible'. The point is, there have been a few fruitarian promoters that agree that many wild fruits are not sustainable or appealing as food for man, and dont see this as a massive contradiction. I agree with Daniel, and also the title in that fruits are not meant for man at all and certainly not in any design as a dominant food source. This doesn't mean they are wrong to consume, even in modern permutations. But yeah I believe other than nutritional content of wild fruit, or contrarily the amount of mutation or toxicity and elevated sugar in cultivated fruits, they are essentially the same dietarily speaking and in regard to any systemic imbalances a contemporary person might have eating them. Just my opinion.
-
Even the concord grapes, are a total pain in the ass as far as chewing or swallowing the seeds, although I'm sure its possible some primates spit similar things out.
Have you ever had wild concord grapes KD?
They're actually very easy to eat. They are a bit tougher skinned and do have larger seeds but they're still much easier to eat than many other edibles in the wild.
-
Have you ever had wild concord grapes KD?
They're actually very easy to eat. They are a bit tougher skinned and do have larger seeds but they're still much easier to eat than many other edibles in the wild.
As a personal theory, much in the same way that one might eschew green vegetable matter/grasses in light of consuming grass and vegetation grazing animals, its possible that eating fruits in any form in the modern period make up for vitamins once obtained from neglecting the omnivorous animals, such as swine, birds, rodents, lizards, and bugs who all consume sugar from plants in addition to their appropriate prey. Also of course if one is neglecting whole animals parts/organs etc..
It is possible that even if we 'evolved' in tropical locales, that these fruits were not 'designed' for us to eat but for other since long creatures that were our prey.
I have never had wild concord grapes, but I've had quite a few wild tropical fruits and berries, and some fairly wild oranges and bananas. Some are indeed way more delicious then their modern counterparts and others not so much. I know that even as a 100% fruit eater that wild jakfruit was extremely sweet to me like modern candy, despite its larger percentage of fat. Ive never eaten durian off a tree but suspect the same thing. Just logistically, one can see that we are not meant to propagate these plants, but not suggesting like any fallen food is not suitable for our flexible system.
I think what Daniel is saying even as an omnivore is that these foods -even in their optimal state but when we are divorced from natural systems and requirements- should not be a substantial part of the human diet, particularly if one is going to factor in burning fats efficiently. On top of that, yeah it matters also where that fruit comes from but that doesn't trump the former.
What it comes down to tho, with the concord grapes, is that although I find them tasty in small quantities, its a challenge to either spit or chew the seeds. If we are to accept that we would regularly consume half eaten seeds and similar fibrous matter, then we are making a whole differnt set of assumptions on what the natural diet of man is and it becomes more tenuous to rule out seeded grains and grasses and similar things. Again i'm not saying its wrong, as I believe in eating a variety of foods, often times indpendent of whether they are 'meant for us'.
-
You don't have to chew or spit out the seeds.. You just swallow them.. The plant doesn't want you to chew the seeds either. It's not hard to eat wild fruits without damaging the seeds.. And if you don't damage the seeds it doesn't matter if you swallow them or spit them, but mostly it's easier for them to go down your throat.
-
You don't have to chew or spit out the seeds.. You just swallow them.. The plant doesn't want you to chew the seeds either. It's not hard to eat wild fruits without damaging the seeds.. And if you don't damage the seeds it doesn't matter if you swallow them or spit them, but mostly it's easier for them to go down your throat.
Yup, It's fun watching myself poop out watermelon seeds.
-
You don't have to chew or spit out the seeds.. You just swallow them.. The plant doesn't want you to chew the seeds either. It's not hard to eat wild fruits without damaging the seeds.. And if you don't damage the seeds it doesn't matter if you swallow them or spit them, but mostly it's easier for them to go down your throat.
Exactly. The seeds want to end up on the ground, whole, inside a pile of shit so they can sprout.
Most seeds are unpleasant when chewed and Concord Grapes definitely fall into this category. They're a little peppery which can be pleasant with a seed or two but after that it's an instinctive thing to not chew them.
-
uh, I think you guys are arguing something that no one is disputing and missing all the larger points. I ate fruits almost exclusively for 2 years and a large amount for the surrounding years. I tried to eat seeded fruits and I often swallowed the seeds. With concord grapes, berries and similar fruits, its basically impossible not to chew the seeds unless you are plain downing the fruit whole. watermelon is completely different as you hardly even chew it. Either way, you can see how even the most 'paleo' of fruits as opposed to say mango or something are still obviously more suited towards birds and other animals that would spread the seeds. I do believe humans are opportunists and I think our digestive system IS suitable for SOME fruit by nature, but if you were to match animals and humans to corresponding foods/fruits like some childrens workbook exercise, all the fruits would be matched up to other fauna IMO. Perhaps thats not too important in a practical sense but the main point is that seeded fruits don't really make much of a difference other than the reasons I mentioned. They are still likely many steps removed from fruits of the past, even if found unkept.
-
With concord grapes, berries and similar fruits, its basically impossible not to chew the seeds unless you are plain downing the fruit whole. watermelon is completely different as you hardly even chew it.
Those tasty little wild grapes are in season now and I find it easy eating them pretty quickly and spitting out the seeds...it's really not more difficult then ripping through a carcass, just different.
I can maneuver the grape in my mouth with my teeth & tongue to get the juicy part out and separate the seeds, something a wolf or tiger may have trouble doing. When I had rat pets, who are omnivores - they would do similar things like separating the seeds from the grapes, they would use both their little hands and teeth in a similar way. So while fruit is not the only thing meant for man it does feel natural to eat it, well to me anyway, I just think it was much harder to get so much of it in the nature, at least we couldn't have it every day of the year for sure.
Oh and watermelon seeds actually taste nice to me for some reason, I like crunching on them.
I don't chew my berries too much, so when I swallow it I think some of the tiny hard seeds survive and pass through, just not all of them (it's just like sperm, LOL, not all of them make it :P).
I agree the fruits with no seeds are freaky, they also taste weird like just a lot of sweetness but not enough other flavor, I always go for the smaller varieties with more seeds...they are less sweet but often have a way more interesting flavor!
As to humans being more suited for meat, that's probably true but look at it this way...bears are suited for meat, they digest it well...but snakes digest it better, I see my constrictor swallow a rat twice his girth, no need to chew even once, in fact he can't chew, the lump is gone by tomorrow. So just cause we digest something better doesn't mean were not suited to eat the other thing necessarily. And humans can chew a heck of a lot better then a lion, lions can rip better, but we can maneuver our jaws more thats for sure (I can see that even from watching the way my cats eat).
-
I've never seen that Daniel Vitalis guy before but I instantly liked him a lot. I guess I don't follow the "movement" like many other do. I watched a bunch of his videos. Thanks for the post.
As for the topic, no food is "meant" for any organism. All organisms are trying to survive and propagate and it's an all out war for eater and eaten to one up the other constantly. It's partially invisible to our eyes because it's been going on for so long that it's reached a "dynamic equilibrium," like in chemistry when a reaction is finished. The reaction is actually still happening but in a way that the products are changing from one to another at an equal rate. What I'm saying is that no plant is "intended" for any animal to eat, and no animal is "intended" for any predator to catch and eat. The plant eaters and the predators had to fight for their ability to procure and digest their food, and the fight never ends. Birds can break down the enzyme inhibitors in seeds better than humans not because seeds are "meant for" birds to eat, but because they have adapted to them.
I understand terms like "meant for" are usually just short hand phrases but I think it's a bad point to start off a discussion. The real questions I'm concerned with are whether fruits are healthy for me, and the two sources of information I see as informative towards answering that are the history of humans eating them as well as scientific information on what happens in the body when they are eaten. With the evidence of today I think it's pretty obvious that fruits had a relatively small role in human diets pre-agriculture and should therefore have a relatively small role now. I believe this is backed up with the science on insulin and everything else related to a large sugar intake (whether it's "natural" fruit sugar or not).
-
That reminds me of:
Alice Walker, American author, The Color Purple:
"The animals of the world exist for their own reasons. They were not made for humans any more than blacks were made for whites, or women for men."
It's a common vegan adage.
I like Daniel too. Who doesn't? I'm not sure 30BaD has even made fun of him yet. He always seemed healthy/balanced, since I first noticed him. I'm glad to see the new videos posted too.
I've never seen that Daniel Vitalis guy before but I instantly liked him a lot. ... What I'm saying is that no plant is "intended" for any animal to eat, and no animal is "intended" for any predator to catch and eat. The plant eaters and the predators had to fight for their ability to procure and digest their food, and the fight never ends. Birds can break down the enzyme inhibitors in seeds better than humans not because seeds are "meant for" birds to eat, but because they have adapted to them.
I understand terms like "meant for" are usually just short hand phrases but I think it's a bad point to start off a discussion.
-
With concord grapes, berries and similar fruits, its basically impossible not to chew the seeds unless you are plain downing the fruit whole.
It's easy for me(with the wild berries/fruits I've eaten, as well as seeded bought fruits)... You don't close your teeth fully and hard.. you just chew softly and not fully.. It's fruit, it's juice.. you hardly need to chew, and it all just moves down your throat.
I like ... too ... swallow it ... just like sperm, LOL ... :P).
-
very funny miles...I see you're into scrabble! :D
-
Vitalis says "Fruits ARE for man...."
@Tyler, you still haven't answered my question re: why this video was moved to Hot Topics. I suspect you based that on the title, but if you watch the video, you'll see that Daniel Vitalis' answer to the question is yes, that natural fruits are for man, just not excesses of overly hybridized and unnaturally sugary fruits 365 days a year, which fits the biological and paleoanthropological evidence. Here is the heart of the interview:
Is Fruit Meant For Man? w/Daniel Vitalis, episode #547
The Raw Food World show
1:04 "I don't say anything like fruits aren't natural for man. What I'm saying is the fruits that people are eating today are as hybridized from their wild state as chiuauas are from wolves. Understand a chiuaua is a wolf. It shares the genome of all dogs that come from wolves.... In the same way that bananas today are like the chiuaua of fruits. Bananas today contain no seeds, they're sterile mutants. In fact, the modern banana was invented in the 1800s. Previous to the yellow banana was the red and green banana, that were cooking bananas, that weren't eaten raw, and previous to that was the wild banana that is riddled with seeds and barely edible. ....
So the idea is not that fruits aren't natural for man, it's that when we think of fruits, we're thinking of the apples and oranges and pears and all these things that humans have been breeding and breeding and breeding for so many generations now that they scarcely resemble, often, the fruits that they come from. I eat fruits all the time, in fact, just before I came here to do the Longevity Now Conference, I was at home in Maine and it was the peak of the autumn berry season, of the autumn olive, which is an amazing berry ... and I harvested pounds and pounds of that and I'm going to eat that, and that's a wild food. What I know about real fruits is that they're smaller than we think, they're less sugary than we think, they have far more seed material, because the real reason a tree produces fruit is to propagate itself. Feeding us is secondary. Fruits ARE for man, but supermarket fruits are freaky mutations, and it doesn't mean they're not occasionally OK for us, but it hardly makes sense to eat a diet of completely sterile hybrid foods and then go around telling everybody that's the most natural diet for us. That's just crazy. It's actually completely unnatural. So I believe fruits are fantastic, but I like to focus on things like wild berry and autumn berry and the fruits that are the most natural and if I'm going to eat hybrid fruits I try to eat fruits with seeds in them that could actually propagate themselves. Human beings are becoming sterile really quickly."
Mark chimed in by saying that the wild bananas the two of them tried were inundated with seeds and weren't sweet.
Daniel then goes on to praise hunter gatherer / Paleo diets and how his goal is to eat (and perhaps live?) like a hunter gatherer. He also mentions: "The concord grape where I live is fantastic, I like that, as a matter of fact I'm using it now."
I was a practicing 100% raw organic tree ripened juice filled fruit fruivore several times by diet, sometimes lasting several months. It gave me energy. My flexibility was good. My bones started bending and falling in and apart. My teeth started to too. I couldn't stop peeing, and was dead thirsty constantly. I lost all muscle strength. My colon completely stopped, and I had to dig my stool out by hand. Fruit is not good for my bowels, and the more I eat of it, the worse it gets.
Most of your symptoms on a fruitarian diet are pretty commonly reported on fruitarian forums.
I'm not saying that fruits are good for everyone. Definitely not.
All I'm saying is that some amount of fiber (even small amount) is good for us.
Maybe you would do better with the fiber from some wild veggies?
Thanks for correcting your earlier statement, Hannibal, but like Lex, I don't know whether even a small amount of fiber is good or even necessary. I did add some fiber-containing foods back into my diet to see if a small amount of added fiber would help at all with the constipation, while avoiding the worsened mineral deficiencies that plentiful fiber gives me, but I didn't notice any benefits. I kept some of those foods in my WOE anyway, because I didn't notice any negative symptoms from them and I enjoy the taste and texture variety and it also puts my friends and relatives more at ease if I eat something more than meat and fat.
I don't agree with the Fiber Menace guy on everything, but fiber has been more of a menace for me than a benefit (although even he doesn't claim that fruit and veggie fiber is bad). YMMV, of course.
I agree with Daniel, and also the title in that fruits are not meant for man at all...
He didn't say that. He said almost the opposite (see above). People are apparently missing the fact that the video was created by raw vegans Matt Monarch and Angela Stokes Monarch, not some anti-fruit folks and that Vitalis extols wild fruits in the video.
.... I like Daniel too. Who doesn't? I'm not sure 30BaD has even made fun of him yet. ....
Yeah, they generated several different negative speculations about him, such as he might be a plant from the meat industry or a shyster who's only after money. I don't personally know Daniel Vitalis and I don't particularly care what his motivations are, I'm not interested in defending him personally, and I'm skeptical about some things he has said in other videos, but I thought this interview of him was rather good, the best I've seen of him and about as close to our perspective as one can find anywhere on the Internet. I didn't agree 100% with everything, but that's true of nearly every diet video. I do know that the people at 30BAD are quick with excuses and from what I've seen they're frequently wrong about things.
-
The problem is that Vitalis is mentioning an old canard favoured by ZCers like William, that much of modern fruits are overly inbred etc. This is a very biased argument as the same argument can(and should as well) be used for all domesticated meats as they come from animals which have become severely inbred over many millenia of domestication, not even counting the severely negative effects of modern artificial insemination in that regard.
-
The problem is that Vitalis is mentioning an old canard favoured by ZCers like William, that much of modern fruits are overly inbred etc. This is a very biased argument as the same argument can(and should as well) be used for all domesticated meats as they come from animals which have become severely inbred over many millenia of domestication, not even counting the severely negative effects of modern artificial insemination in that regard.
Lovely observation, Geoff.
Seems land animals these days are highly selected for certain qualities. This was so eloquently written in Guns Germs and Steel by Jarred Diamond.
Now ocean creatures are a more wild lot with lots of variety and sometimes more potent nutrition than land animals. I love it at 12noon to 2pm in our wet market when all that ocean bounty pours in every day of the week. It's just awesome.
-
I understand terms like "meant for" are usually just short hand phrases but I think it's a bad point to start off a discussion. The real questions I'm concerned with are whether fruits are healthy for me, and the two sources of information I see as informative towards answering that are the history of humans eating them as well as scientific information on what happens in the body when they are eaten. With the evidence of today I think it's pretty obvious that fruits had a relatively small role in human diets pre-agriculture and should therefore have a relatively small role now. I believe this is backed up with the science on insulin and everything else related to a large sugar intake (whether it's "natural" fruit sugar or not).
This is exactly what I was trying to say, not that fruits are NOT meant for us
---
Yuli, Miles: too much work for me dudes, sorry. my initial reason for bringing it up was in dealing with fruits with mammoth seeds, like mango, duian, jackfruit etc.. that are ALSO incredibly sweet, rather than to engage whether seeds eating/swallowing/spitting is good or bad.
Vitalis says "Fruits ARE for man...."
He didn't say that. He said almost the opposite (see above). People are apparently missing the fact that the video was created by raw vegans Matt Monarch and Angela Stokes Monarch, not some anti-fruit folks and that Vitalis extols wild fruits in the video.
hmm ok. I don't know how once again you manage to misconstrue what I wrote as these are two SEPARATE comments that I agree with him AND that I agree with the title.. I already made the comment that his perspective is coming from an omnivorous viewpoint that does not demonize fruit itself, but that DOES make the point that even wild uncultivated fruits are not MEANT to be a significant part of our diet, and that consuming even these foods from wild sources can only be done by basically artificaly manipulated conditions. I'm of the perspective that even this isn't altogether negative (and even the possiblity that fruits could have other functions in our modern diet), but the points about fruits abundance and other such rationalizations are themselves false.
The problem is that Vitalis is mentioning an old canard favoured by ZCers like William, that much of modern fruits are overly inbred etc. This is a very biased argument as the same argument can(and should as well) be used for all domesticated meats as they come from animals which have become severely inbred over many millenia of domestication, not even counting the severely negative effects of modern artificial insemination in that regard.
Almost all of his information to my knowledge is based on the problems of cultivated foods (including meats AND plants - he has similar videos agains 'vegetables' and cattle) and selecting as much uncultivated and wild food and eating as our ancestors. My impression is that for him this is far more important than raw, carnivory, or any other concept and advocates traditional practices that include cooking, dairy etc... He does not believe in eating meat from cattle and other livestock if it can be avoided. I've yet to be exposed to any other non-vegan 'guru' that is as against domestic farmed plants and animals
-
yeah i remember daniel talking about only eating wild meats in that video where he east raw bison. i didn't really think about it too much at the time, but lately i've been eating mostly/all wild venison and grass fed bison and i get it now. today i had some of my usual grassfed beef brisket. it doesn't even compare. hardly any taste compared to wild meats. hopefully i can keep finding sources of wild meats.
-
+1 on the "wild" meats or farmed animals that are close or identical to their ancient ancestors.
currently i'm doing a rotation & elimination diet instructed by my low-carb paleo-advising naturopathic doctor to finally begin to cure my gut dysfunction and mild rheumatoid arthritis and chronic fatigue. this entails eating red meat, or 1 type of meat only once every 4 days. i've noticed that after 2 days of not eating red meat i get depressed, angry, annoyed and lethargic. the poultry, fish, and eggs just don't do it for me no mater how wild/grass fed/pastured they are!
i am about to mail order flash frozen venison/elk/deer (multiple versions of deer), bison, yak, and ostrich for the variety since i can get lamb and beef locally.
-
Well, being pro-wild foods in general is a good sign, it`s mainly Rawists who seem to hold that view, though.
-
yeah, FWIW I totally agree with you that that argument - particularly from those that support grain-fed meats over food items obviously consumed at least tens of thousands of years ago- is poor. I mean they still might be right in a metabolic sense (hopefully I don't get grilled on terminology here) as far as what is right for them to eat, but there is certainly some hypocrisy there.
-
Well, being pro-wild foods in general is a good sign, it`s mainly Rawists who seem to hold that view, though.
OK, so now that the misconception that he only talks about eating foods that are as close to wild as feasible when it comes to fruits has been put to rest, do you have any other objections to moving this thread out of Hot Topics and putting it one of the raw Paleo sections? I thought it was your opinion that we should try to promote raw Paleo so it will be considered more mainstream? If so, shouldn't we be celebrating a video that's pro raw and pro Paleo and welcoming a new ally instead of putting it into Hot Topics? Granted, I don't know a lot about this Vitalis guy, but I do know he has been becoming increasingly raw Paleo and it seems counterproductive to tag his video as anti-RP without a good reason.
You could change the title to something less misleading avoid further confusion. Perhaps something like "Daniel Vitalis promotes raw Paleo including raw wild fruits"?
-
Well, the hot topics forum is for controversial stuff. I agree with the notion of wild foods being better, but, given that many RVAFers don`t have access to any raw wild game, I don`t think it`s a good idea to denounce all cultivated foods, as such. At least raw, grassfed beef is better than any cooked foods, for example.
-
Well, the hot topics forum is for controversial stuff. I agree with the notion of wild foods being better, but, given that many RVAFers don`t have access to any raw wild game, I don`t think it`s a good idea to denounce all cultivated foods, as such. At least raw, grassfed beef is better than any cooked foods, for example.
He does not denounce raw grassfed beef, he recommends it, because it's closer to wild than feedlot beef. If you watch the video carefully and check out his other videos and writings, you'll see that he isn't saying that everyone should only eat wild foods, because that simply wouldn't be possible for most people. Instead, he's recommending that people try to eat as close to wild as they can. In other words, just like none of us can truly eat Paleo by hunting, butchering and feasting on a wooly mammoth and eating prehistoric berries, so most of us cannot eat only wild foods, but we can try to move closer to eating wild/Paleo.
It looks like Vitalis is the first public figure who advocates raw Paleo, though I don't know all the details of the diet he recommends.
-
Strictly speaking, being authentic rawpalaeo does not require us to eat palaeo-era animals like mammoths. A 100 percent diet of raw wild foods is really only what is required.
-
you'll see that he isn't saying that everyone should only eat wild foods, because that simply wouldn't be possible for most people.
Even if it was possible all the wild fruits would be quickly eaten and there would be a huge scarcity.
The same would be with the wild animals.
-
Strictly speaking, being authentic rawpalaeo does not require us to eat palaeo-era animals like mammoths. A 100 percent diet of raw wild foods is really only what is required.
And who made that up? I would think if you were being 100% strict about it a paleolithic diet would be...a diet consisting of 100% paleolithic food.
-
How about a raw wild diet, consisting of the closest thing you can get to wild foods ;) And eating them in season.
Concord grapes instead of seedless grapes etc, some people don't have time to hunt or gather. Buying domestic foods closest to wild ancestors would be an ideal alternative.
Raw Hunter Gatherer Diet sounds more fitting.
-
Even if it was possible all the wild fruits would be quickly eaten and there would be a huge scarcity.
The same would be with the wild animals.
I agree.
How about a raw wild diet, consisting of the closest thing you can get to wild foods ;) And eating them in season.
Concord grapes instead of seedless grapes etc, some people don't have time to hunt or gather. Buying domestic foods closest to wild ancestors would be an ideal alternative.
Raw Hunter Gatherer Diet sounds more fitting.
I agree, as does Vitalis in this and other videos, though he isn't purely raw Paleo. I'm curious how close to our approach he is at this point. It sounds like he is moving in our direction, though some of his products are clearly not Paleo, and I don't know if they're all considered truly "raw" or not.
Strictly speaking, being authentic rawpalaeo does not require us to eat palaeo-era animals like mammoths. A 100 percent diet of raw wild foods is really only what is required.
By that definition this video qualifies as "authentic" raw Paleo. He advocated raw wild fruits while also stating that it's OK to eat some wild-like fruits and even some more domesticated fruits when not enough wild fruits are available. It also meets the definition of raw Paleo of this forum ("choosing a more historically natural approach to diet, fitness and lifestyle").
-
Even if it was possible all the wild fruits would be quickly eaten and there would be a huge scarcity.
The same would be with the wild animals.
In the tropics if we didn't have civilization that cut down trees, paved roads and made farmland, we'd have too much fruit for people.
Even today during seasons of certain fruits, they'd just rot. Not enough buyers. Not enough consumers. And every month a new fruit is in season.
Same thing with fishing with nets, the people in the fishing village fish way more than they can eat.
-
In the tropics if we didn't have civilization that cut down trees, paved roads and made farmland, we'd have too much fruit for people.
Yeah, I agree.
But here in Poland there's much less wild fruits - primarily bilberries, cranberries, cowberries, a little of raspberries, blackberries. There are also some wild apples and pears but I haven't found them yet. Besides they are only in summer.
Even if there were much more forests there would still be a scarcity.
-
durianrider is clearly watching these forums, as he made a counter video to it , probably after seeing this thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFojZ4agaRM
-
should be noted, vitalis does not label himself any diet, but does eat raw meat. he also promotes alcohol in moderation, dairy if its the right type, and even cooked food.
he made a fascinating video exploring the history of natural drugs and alcohol and how its been used throughout the ages, and for people to dismiss thousands of years of history and uses of alcohol by saying they will never drink it because they are raw paleo, is just a bit silly.
Vitalis used to be a raw vegan, but he also studied the psychology behind raw veganism and studied things like eating disorders and identity and ego, and he realised that raw veganism is also bad for you mentally aswell as physically. Simply labelling yourself to any diet, or having your identity to any diet, or having your identity as someone who avoids certain foods, will only lead to eating disorders and mental illness, most prevalent in raw vegan communities.
-
durianrider is clearly watching these forums, as he made a counter video to it , probably after seeing this thread.
The people in DR's forum tipped him off in the forum about Vitalis' video. DR replied by writing something about he would have some fun with it and he apparently did.
Some background for everyone: The question that Matt Monarch asked Vitalis in the video was inspired by some earlier accusations made by fruitarians against Vitalis after they saw some of his Youtube videos. Matt was giving Daniel the opportunity to refute the accusation, not accusing him of it himself.
should be noted, vitalis does not label himself any diet, but does eat raw meat. he also promotes alcohol in moderation, dairy if its the right type, and even cooked food.
Thanks for the additional info. I knew he was eating colostrum powder, but didn't know he was eating other dairy too. What type of alcoholic beverage(s) does he drink?
I thought in one of his videos he said he was moving more toward Paleo, but I don't remember which one. Have you seen him say that? Of course, his idea of "Paleo" could be very different from ours and he clearly isn't very strict about it if he is. Of course, not being strict is part of his current philosophy. That's OK if your body can take it, but some people have to be strict to avoid negative consequences.
Vitalis used to be a raw vegan, but he also studied the psychology behind raw veganism and studied things like eating disorders and identity and ego, and he realised that raw veganism is also bad for you mentally aswell as physically. Simply labelling yourself to any diet, or having your identity to any diet, or having your identity as someone who avoids certain foods, will only lead to eating disorders and mental illness, most prevalent in raw vegan communities.
That would be true of all human beings who are aware of what they eat, since everyone eats a "diet" of some sort. Maybe he means extreme diets?
-
I agree, even if he is paleo, he does believe people should not be strict about any diet they are on, unless it's obvious things like avoiding white sugar and white flour etc but they come naturally.
I'll find the video, one was hosted on naturalnews.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZJ_wlOYAmM , watch all 6
He didn't say what alcohol in particular he drinks, just said fermented ones that are not pasteurised.
Are you a member of 30bananasday, (should be called 70 bananas a dayy, anyway).
How else would you know they were taking about daniel vitalis on that forum ?
-
durianrider is clearly watching these forums, as he made a counter video to it , probably after seeing this thread.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFojZ4agaRM
You can subscribe to these videos and more likely he's on the mailing list of the raw food world.
Anywho, there's clearly something wrong with DurianRider. Either he's just one of the hugest insecure douchebags I've ever seen, or he's mentally ill.
-
...Bananas don't want to propagate through suckers DR! We just destroyed their ability to reproduce through viable seeds.
-
Are you a member of 30bananasday, (should be called 70 bananas a dayy, anyway).
How else would you know they were taking about daniel vitalis on that forum ?
By just taking a look-see. You don't need to register to check out their forum. Some of the posts are so outrageous they're good for laughs. Some include very sad stories of deteriorating people, with others telling them "It's just detox--eat more sweet raw fruit." It helps me to not eat too much fruit--my addiction--when I see how they've fecked up themselves with the crazy amounts of fruit they eat. DR says he's up to 70 bananas a day nowadays.
-
By just taking a look-see. You don't need to register to check out their forum. Some of the posts are so outrageous they're good for laughs. Some include very sad stories of deteriorating people, with others telling them "It's just detox--eat more sweet raw fruit." It helps me to not eat too much fruit--my addiction--when I see how they've fecked up themselves with the crazy amounts of fruit they eat. DR says he's up to 70 bananas a day nowadays.
I still read up on that forum (although I dont post). Its really funny how I use to make myself believe half of the shet they talk about. On the other hand they also occasionally bring up good points for us paleos to talk about.
-
I still read up on that forum (although I dont post). Its really funny how I use to make myself believe half of the shet they talk about. On the other hand they also occasionally bring up good points for us paleos to talk about.
What are those good points?
-
A couple I found perticularly interesting was ones like how to improve vision using the bates method, how eating to much fruit actually produces AGEs in the blood and others along those lines.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVmoz4Cbupc
more points
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVmoz4Cbupc
more points
I don't agree with everything Vitalis says or does.
However, I agree with him on more points than I do with Harley aka durianrider.
Buying loads of domesticated fruit is the natural diet for humans? Give me a break!
Undomesticated sweet fruits are in nature. They are not available all year round however.
When the hell is durianrider going to interview me. I think he is scared.
-
he blocked my comments for promoting meat/weston price/paleo and discussing weston price
-
I understand the difference between natural fruits and hybrids etc.
i think the real point is, is it sensible to be a fruitarian ? and is it sensible to eat 70 bananas a day ?
he doesnt need to overcomplicate things, all that sugar from the fruit will simply cause many health problems
-
heres my reply to durianrider
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1FQJaZwwUk
-
Nice reply Sully, but in the box you wrote about high-fat raw meat diet. From what you've written/shown you don't eat high-fat. If you did eat high fat you probably wouldn't do well. But then, it depends what one's opinion of 'high-fat' means.
-
High fat is 50% of total calories or more cumming from fat.
I got some ground beef and some meat. Calories from my meal I will eat later will be in the 60-65% range.
Durianrider recommends 80-90% calories from carbs.
Edit: they were raw oysters, i never eat less than 50% of calories from fat. I would feel like I am starving.
You do know that fat should look proportionality smaller than your meat. Fat is denser in calories miles.
Even when I was getting most of my fat from nuts in the beginning I was eating at a minimum 60% calories from fat.
-
Nice reply Sully, but in the box you wrote about high-fat raw meat diet. From what you've written/shown you don't eat high-fat. If you did eat high fat you probably wouldn't do well. But then, it depends what one's opinion of 'high-fat' means.
What have I written or shown that suggest that less than 50% of my calories are coming from fat?
-
i am eating just seom ground beef today miles
its around 85% lean, which brings i to about 65% calories from fat
http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-beef-gound-85-lean-raw_f-Y2lkPTI4NDQ0JmJpZD0xJmZpZD03MDEyNyZlaWQ9NTk5NzkxMDQ1JnBvcz0xJnBhcj0ma2V5PXJhdyBiZWVm.html
It may be more around 82% lean, some where in the area of 65-70% calories of fat ;)
-
Great Vid Sully. I bet DR has already seen it knowing him!
-
Great Vid Sully. I bet DR has already seen it knowing him!
Hah.
Seriously though, I don't understand how he holds onto his way of thinking. I bet he feels he has to now.
I actually would like to chat with him. Have a healthy discussion/debate.
I wonder if he is doing it for the money. People prob have some any problems with his diet he prescribes, he prob makes so much money through online consultations.
We chatted back and fourth in comments on his video Vegan Preacher Boy, he just moves around what I am saying and brings up something else.
It's like he has a mental block. Can't except the truth.
-
yeah, my gut would say don't bother, as you've already answered your own question about it. Theres nothing much to attack but their own mental creations when one is presented with fit, healthy, level headed, well researched (not to mentioned experienced), and sometimes even nice! people like on this forum.
At the same time, all your well documented passions and such are just perfect for hammering on this fact, as even people like Daniel can be pigeonholed for being 'commercial' or promoting cooked foods or drugs or any other embellished thing. So right on man!
-
even people like Daniel can be pigeonholed for being 'commercial' or promoting cooked foods or drugs or any other embellished thing. So right on man!
I guess it's better for him to spend his time bashing someone more known with more things to bash. hah
And thanks! :)
-
Yeah Sully exactly, what you're eating is the right kind of amount. 15% by mass, 60% by calories... This is right. But that's not really high fat.. that's just normal amount fat, right amount of fat, comfortable amount of fat, good amount of fat. People here are hearing 'high-fat' and eating like 60-90% by mass of fat... This is what is high fat. Normal fat must be what you eat... Because it is the normal, right amount. If it was high fat, then it would not be good... High fat, is 300g meat/300g fat. This is high fat, and people here are eating this and feeling like shit, naturally... because that's a high amount of fat. You are eating a normal amount of fat, a suitable amount of fat...
It doesn't make sense to call the right amount of fat 'high'..
-
People here are hearing 'high-fat' and eating like 60-90% by mass of fat... This is what is high fat. Normal fat must be what you eat... Because it is the normal, right amount.
Dude, I don't think anyone here eats that much fat...
That's just ridiculous, and maybe not possible, that's like a pound of fat to 8oz of meat
Durianrider recommends 10-5% fat for calories. So 60-70% fat ratio is def high fat to him.
Some people here have done experiments of 90% fat by calories. But I don't even know of anyone with sticks to as a daily regimen.
-
There are plenty of people who are eating that much, on this forum, Sully... and they all feel like shit.
-
what percentage of mass again? 60-90% :o
who here does that?....
Edit: if their normal, they would throw up after every meal -v after eating that much fat
-
There is an active thread even, right now, where the guy is eating 300g fatty meat + 300g fat per day. He thinks that's normal, he thinks that's 'high fat', because it is. It's high, not a suitable amount, and that's why he feels like shit. But no one apart from me is telling him that >.> Everyone else is telling him he's not adapted or some shit. All the people who complain of low energy are eating like this. That's what most new people think is meant by 'high fat'. When you say high-fat, you mean high-fat relative to people who are eating non-paleo. On a paleo forum, people would expect 15% fat by mass, for example, not to be considered 'high fat'. It's 'high fat' relative to a low-fat raw vegan, but not 'high fat' for paleo..
Yuri was/is eating this crazy amount of fat, and every other person who complains of lethargy eating 'high fat' is eating like this. They think they need this much fat not to have rabbit starvation, because when others say they need high fat, this is the amount they consider high.. so they're stuffing themselves with it, force-feeding..
5% by mass is fine even. You might then get a desire for more fat, and you can have it. Get a fattier cut next time, have a bit of extra fat with it... but 5% would be fine to start with even, until you feel you need more. Maybe they'll settle around the 10%-20% by mass range.
People are starting with 50% by mass, and trying to eat as much fat as they can stuff themselves with, as this is the kind of advice that is being given to them.. And so they feel like shit.
If you are eating fruit, you can handle MORE fat even, than a person eating no plants..
Really Sully, read closer, lots of people here are eating like this..
-
Miles, I don't think you are old enough to be anyone's guardian here.
if you seriously think that all of peoples problems equate to them eating a too large percentage of fat, then it isn't a mystery to me why they are listening to other people. Either way, all you can do is offer your own experience of how your mostly muscle meat diet gives you wondrous health or whatever. The concern as most people know is not rabbit starvation at all as brought up in the other thread but other issues associated with too much protein or too much glucose per their desire.
Sully is right, high fat means high according to usually according to the ADA or similar organizations which would be over 30-40% by calories or higher than what a typical American eats which is already considered to be unhealthy. To the types of people he and Daniel are engaged with argument, 20-30% is considered to be too much fat and therefore 'high'.
50-60% is not a 'just right am mount' this is totally relative, subjective, and dependent on ones goals and lifestyle. Although amongst people engaged in a raw paleo type diet, high fat would be at minimum inclusive of anything that burns fat as primary fuel, and beyond in my definition.
-
Hah.
Seriously though, I don't understand how he holds onto his way of thinking. I bet he feels he has to now.
I actually would like to chat with him. Have a healthy discussion/debate.
I wonder if he is doing it for the money. People prob have some any problems with his diet he prescribes, he prob makes so much money through online consultations.
We chatted back and fourth in comments on his video Vegan Preacher Boy, he just moves around what I am saying and brings up something else.
It's like he has a mental block. Can't except the truth.
He makes a crap load of money through online consultations. I think its $700 a month per person...So even if he has like 20 people hes making $14k. Plus he gets donations. Its no wonder why he can afford 100's of lbs of fruit a week.
-
I guess it's better for him to spend his time bashing someone more known with more things to bash. hah
And thanks! :)
yeah...This is why I've personally stopped having sympathy or desire to 'bring over' those who can't already tell the difference in integrity (not to mention health - but I guess that is my opinion) between the two for instance. I mean particularly on just addressing raw meat eaters honestly, it was claimed that a frail mate recently "are more raw meat than anyone in Australia" yet also said a large portion (>40%?) of calories was also criticized as being honey. Obviously not only does this not make sense mathematically there was some mental lapse in folks like Scott Wheeler (featured on Australia's TODAY show) and wodg (who boots these dudes frequently so should be known), who both eat almost certainly more meat, not to mention are very fit and even do endurance sports.
-
The problem is that Vitalis is mentioning an old canard favoured by ZCers like William, that much of modern fruits are overly inbred etc. This is a very biased argument as the same argument can(and should as well) be used for all domesticated meats as they come from animals which have become severely inbred over many millenia of domestication, not even counting the severely negative effects of modern artificial insemination in that regard.
I don't think these two things are comparable. A modern conventionally farmed apple has over 100 times the sugar content of a wild one, a modern beef steer is not similarly divergent from it's wild counterpart or ancient ancestors. In fact you can look at the fatty acids of grass fed beef and see that they are very similar to the fatty acids of grass fed bison. Much closer than comparing wild fruit to farmed fruit.
-
I don't think these two things are comparable. A modern conventionally farmed apple has over 100 times the sugar content of a wild one, a modern beef steer is not similarly divergent from it's wild counterpart or ancient ancestors. In fact you can look at the fatty acids of grass fed beef and see that they are very similar to the fatty acids of grass fed bison. Much closer than comparing wild fruit to farmed fruit.
That 100x sugar argument is completely wrong. Yes there are certain wild variations of wild apples that have very low sugar content but there are plenty that are sweet, not as sweet as todays apples but still sweet. Same with other wild fruit. Wild raspberries are the sweetest fruit Ive eaten.
-
Yeah Sully exactly, what you're eating is the right kind of amount. 15% by mass, 60% by calories... This is right. But that's not really high fat.. that's just normal amount fat, right amount of fat, comfortable amount of fat, good amount of fat. People here are hearing 'high-fat' and eating like 60-90% by mass of fat... This is what is high fat. Normal fat must be what you eat... Because it is the normal, right amount. If it was high fat, then it would not be good... High fat, is 300g meat/300g fat. This is high fat, and people here are eating this and feeling like shit, naturally... because that's a high amount of fat. You are eating a normal amount of fat, a suitable amount of fat...
It doesn't make sense to call the right amount of fat 'high'..
Who is eating 300g meat/300g fat and what does that translate into in terms of % calories as fat?
-
I agree with Kyle a bit.
wild fruit vs dom. fruit & wild animals vs dom. animals
are different topics and should be looked at individually.
In my opinion, the more wild the better as far as health.
This is how I look at it. Going from best to worse
Pure Wild Animals > Grass Fed Bison, Elk etc. > Highly Breed Grass Fed Beef, Lamb etc. > Organic & "Naturally" Raised Grain Fed > Grain Fed Intensively Raised
Wild Fruits > Close To Wild Ancestors (seeded fruit, concord, dom. rasp etc.) > Far From Wild Ancestors (seedless bananas, oranges, grapes etc.)
In other words, the closer to wild the better. Also, keep in mind, some do well with temperate zone fruits, some do well with tropical fruits, depends on you genetic ancestry. I can get wild grapes, but can't eat as much as i can wild raspberries. Every fruits is different.
Its funny how nature can balance things.
Wild grapes I can't eat much of and there are plenty and have a long season.
Wild black raspberries I can eat more of, but are not as plentiful as wild grapes and have a shorter season.
-
Wild raspberries are the sweetest fruit Ive eaten.
That's bullshit.
Sorry I had to put out there like that. But it's the truth.
I have had plenty of purely wild small undomesticated black/red raspberries, if they are the sweetest fruit you tasted, you must have only tried wild raspberries and wild grapes my friend.
I just can't believe you wrote that.....
-
Who is eating 300g meat/300g fat and what does that translate into in terms of % calories as fat?
Who is eating 300g meat/300g fat and what does that translate into in terms of % calories as fat?
"I've been eating 200g fat + 200g meat"
"I've been trying to consume 300g fat per day"
"I reckon I'll try 300g meat per day"
-Mr BBQ
There are plenty of people who have posted about eating these levels of fat, and complaining about lethargy etc...
50:50 meat:fat by mass..12.5:50 protein:fat by mass, 25:100 protein:fat by mass, 25:200 protein:fat by calories. 200/225*100= 88.9% calories from fat.
85:15 meat:fat by mass...21.25:15 protein:fat by mass, 21.25:30 protein:fat by calories, 7.83:10 protein:fat by calories. 10/17.83*100=56% fat by calories.
-
That's bullshit.
Sorry I had to put out there like that. But it's the truth.
I have had plenty of purely wild small undomesticated black/red raspberries, if they are the sweetest fruit you tasted, you must have only tried wild raspberries and wild grapes my friend.
I just can't believe you wrote that.....
I agree wholeheartedly.
-
Even if wild raspberries are very sweet in comparison to some domesticated fruits, they are so small and hard to find that it's not the same amount of potential sugar consumption. If I went to the grocery store or a modern fruit farm and you went into the bushes or woods and we had a competition to collect the most sugar in fruit form in a day, I would beat you so bad you'd feel it for the rest of your life.
-
Even if wild raspberries are very sweet in comparison to some domesticated fruits,
They aren't, besides lemons, limes, cranberries, yup, can't think of much that isn't sweeter. Only fruits that aren't sweeter than wild raspberries are the ones breed to be tart ;)
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/DSCN5264.jpg)
take a look at this, i compare wild vs dom.
-
The raspberries that grow on my bushes are medium in size, not as small as the wild and not as big as the store-bought ones. Perhaps they are domesticated kind but they have been growing in the yard for over 10 years without us taking care of them or using any fertilizers, they seem very viable to reproduce and keep regenerating by themselves. They are round in shape like the wild black ones instead of elongated.
Also they don't taste that sweet to me at all, well the red ones don't, I have some gold rasperries and those taste just like nectar :)
I stumbled onto raspberry bushes in a park and they were pretty wild, growing in the forest beside the river. However those were large, BUT the individual 'bubbles' were tiny and were lots of them to form the pretty large berries. Also they were red.
I think there are many breeds of berries like raspberries, and that they evolve over-time even if they are wild. Based on where they are growing and the weather etc. I usually only get raspberries from my bushes for a shorter time during late summer/early fall. But it was so hot and humid and sunny in Toronto this summer that I got like four times the yield and the new ones kept popping up every day like crazy. They also turned out much less sweet as well then usually, maybe because they were growing too much. Just a thought on how these things can also affect sweetness of naturally growing fruit.
-
heres my reply to durianrider
Awesome reply, oh and you look way better then that guy durianrider, more in shape and your speech is not weird and disjointed.
This is why "he don't talk about people like you"!
-
That 100x sugar argument is completely wrong. Yes there are certain wild variations of wild apples that have very low sugar content but there are plenty that are sweet, not as sweet as todays apples but still sweet. Same with other wild fruit. Wild raspberries are the sweetest fruit Ive eaten.
That's very true.
There are many wild fruits which are seet, e.g. rasberries.
On the other hand I've got domesticated apples on my orchards, which are sour; but I like them
-
That's bullshit.
Sorry I had to put out there like that. But it's the truth.
I have had plenty of purely wild small undomesticated black/red raspberries, if they are the sweetest fruit you tasted, you must have only tried wild raspberries and wild grapes my friend.
I just can't believe you wrote that.....
Lol maybe it wasnt raspberries that i ate, but it definately looked like them. Whatever berry it was, it tasted like candy to me.
-
Because something is sweet doesn't necessarily mean that's a neolithic unhealthy food.
Acacia honey is very sweet due to its high fructose content - and it's a very natural food, definitely paleo one.
Assuming that man's tastebuds are not superfluous, but nature's way of guiding him to the food he needs, let us examine the notion that the cave man diet satisfied only the bitter, sour or pungent portion of his tasting apparatus, and not the salty or sweet. A number of studies report that honey, far from being a rare delicacy, contributed a substantial portion of the calories in many primitive diets. The Hazda of Tanzania, the Mbuti pygmies of the Congo, the Veddas or Wild Men of Sri Lanka, the Guayaka Indians of Paraguay, the Bushmen of South Africa and the Aborigines of Australia, all put a high value on honey and consumed it in large amounts. East coast American Indians consumed plentiful portions of maple syrup, and used it in the production of pemmican. Wild fruits and berries are incredibly sweet at the peak of ripeness, and can be preserved in various ways for consumption throughout the year. Fermented foods of the Eskimo are described as tasting as sweet as candy. Primitive man did not consume refined sweeteners, as we do, but neither did he neglect his sweet tooth.
http://curezone.com/art/read.asp?ID=126&db=7&C0=774
-
Lol maybe it wasnt raspberries that i ate, but it definately looked like them. Whatever berry it was, it tasted like candy to me.
It could have been a more modern variety that someone tossed out and it established. It could have also possibly been a Mulberry; those are noticeably sweeter but somewhat similar in shape.
-
yeah...This is why I've personally stopped having sympathy or desire to 'bring over' those who can't already tell the difference in integrity (not to mention health - but I guess that is my opinion) between the two for instance. I mean particularly on just addressing raw meat eaters honestly, it was claimed that a frail mate recently "are more raw meat than anyone in Australia" yet also said a large portion (>40%?) of calories was also criticized as being honey. Obviously not only does this not make sense mathematically there was some mental lapse in folks like Scott Wheeler (featured on Australia's TODAY show) and wodg (who boots these dudes frequently so should be known), who both eat almost certainly more meat, not to mention are very fit and even do endurance sports.
My teeth have fallen out and I'm wasting away, I need 4 litres of cane juice every 24 hours to heal me :P
-
There are many wild fruits which are seet, e.g. rasberries.
Did you not notice this post just 3 posts above yours?:
They aren't, besides lemons, limes, cranberries, yup, can't think of much that isn't sweeter. Only fruits that aren't sweeter than wild raspberries are the ones breed to be tart ;)
For what it's worth, my experience matches Sully's re: wild raspberries. All the wild raspberries I've tried (red and black) have been less sweet than domesticated ones and much less sweet than most domesticated fruits. Same goes for wild blueberries. Despite wild blueberries being less sweet than domesticated, I think they are tastier and have a firmer, more pleasant texture.
-
Did you not notice this post just 3 posts above yours?
Yes I did.
That was what Sully said. He has got his experience; I've got mine.
-
I've found wild self hand-picked black-berries much more enjoyable than any berries I've ever bought.
-
I've found wild red and black raspberries and wild blueberries enjoyable, and enjoy wild blueberries much more than domesticated, but just as sweet as domesticated? I haven't found that, though I can imagine if the soil was just right it might be possible in rare cases.
I haven't had wild blackberries in a while, so I can't recall for sure how their sweetness compared to domesticated ones, but I think the wild ones were less sweet.
-
From less sweet to sweetest for wild fruits I find here.
Blackberries and red raspberries do grow wild further away from Milwaukee.
I don't end up getting them often, since they are not in Milwaukee.
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/100_0675.jpg)
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/DSCN5211.jpg)
These are choke cherries (several varieties, I can find a batch close to home, that have a very sweet taste, even sweeter than the black raspberry when fully ripe,
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/DSCN5280.jpg)
This Wild Plum Is RIPE WHEN COMPLETELY RED, Practically Inedible Unless completely red.
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/100_0674.jpg)
Domesticated Fruits That I find Here and May be Mistaken for Wild, From Less sweet to sweetest
Apples and sour cherries are hard to order since there are many varieties of apples and crab apples
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/TartCherry2.jpg)
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/DSCN5287.jpg)
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/BlackMulberry1.jpg)
When gold, these are super sweet, like honey, amazing
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Hunting-Gathering/DSCN4035.jpg)
-
My teeth have fallen out and I'm wasting away, I need 4 litres of cane juice every 24 hours to heal me :P
nurse we are down to 24 hour intervals. This man is massively carb deficient and he is refusing his pureed baby food.
dates, STAT!
-
dates, STAT!
were out of dates! here's 30 mutant bananas! :)
-
were out of dates! here's 30 mutant bananas! :)
I thought we just ordered 50 lbs from The Date People?
oh man, I forgot i went for a jog yesterday morning, needed some serious carbage
just got up from a 30 hour nap
-
?
? ?
Triforce fail.
-
?
? ?
Triforce fail.
Interesting, I can almost see that 5% muscle-fat panacea you recommend really working over your remaining brain cell on this one. I understand you probably don't know much about fruitarians, but I'd rather not ruin my joke by explaining it. Perhaps it isn't so necessary to always let people know you are confused.
-
It is not a panacea. It's just that people need to know that they can start at 5%. It's just so that people know they don't need so much. It doesn't mean someone should eat 5%, or that they shouldn't, it's just that they can... I don't care what people choose to eat, but if someone chooses to eat 50% fat by mass because they think they need to, I am saying that they don't. If you eat like that by choice, because it makes them feel better, or they enjoy the taste of so much fat then great.. I don't care. It's just that people are thinking that this is a minimum.. They are feeling lethargic at this proportion, and thinking the only way is up(with the fat proportion), and of course this does not work, as the high level of that is the problem in the first place.
I know enough about fruitarians. What is there to know?
I am not confused with your joke, I tried to do the 'triforce', but the symbols are not recognised in the forum, hence 'triforce fail'.
Anything else?
-
It is not a panacea. It's just that people need to know that they can start at 5%. It's just so that people know they don't need so much. It doesn't mean someone should eat 5%, or that they shouldn't, it's just that they can... ....and of course this does not work, as the high level of that is the problem in the first place.
I and others disagree. What exactly is your evidence or criteria that people 'can' eat this way or that not eating carbs makes one need less fats? You are judging others, you are scoffing at higher fats while recommending a carnivorous diet 60-70% protein by calorie or higher? hmm ok. The few people you referred to have a variety of complex issues that have little to do with their fat consumption. They might be incorrectly choosing some particular diet ineffectively in an effort to solve these things, and getting no where, and possibly could relax a bit. however, diets restricted to lean domesticated animals is not a short term or certainly not a long term solution which is precisely the reason for these 'minimums'. This actually is a fact, even if ruminant meat has just enough fat to ward off 'rabbit starvation' or whatever, but that is probably for the other thread'.
What is relevant here, to the videos (on both sides) and discussions, is that optimum human functioning (particularly the brain) is through animal sourced fats, not animal proteins or vegetable carbohydrates. This is where the nutrition is (and in other organs etc...), this is where the fuel is, this is where the research leads. Eating too far on either spectrum makes it less easy to use that energy, and far easier to run into all kinds of metabolic stress.
I am not confused with your joke, I tried to do the 'triforce', but the symbols are not recognised in the forum, hence 'triforce fail'.
my misunderstanding then, i'll wise up next time you are constructing triforces mid-discussions. My understanding of 'fail' is/was some kind of generation-retard method of 'diss'.
-
I am not VLC (eat fruits and veggies) but I still get AT LEAST half my calories from fat (usually more then half) ;)
Fat is very calorie dense I don't have to eat much of it, by mass my fat would look so much smaller then the muscle meat, liquids and plant matter...just eat the small amount of fats that come on the sides of my meats, in my ground bison, a piece of fatty raw cheese and 1 tablespoon of flax oil, once in a while I eat some bone marrow or a little cod oil, or a few fatty nuts or fatty salmon.
Compared by volume, you could say I hardly ever eat much fat, but still thats where a big part of my calories are from, if that fat wasn't there I'd be having some big issues. On the other hand I tried forcefully eating more animal fat and felt sluggish and just...not well.
You'll know if you're eating too much fat (sluggish, nauseous etc) or too little fat (tired, hungry, craving too much fruits), everyones requirement is different especially with all the different activity levels and exercises.
I don't care if I am burning sugar or fat or both, sugar from fruits gives me quick energy and burns fast, then after thats done all those precious fats I ate come in handy, then I am burning fat (= I like to use both for energy, but if I had to choose just one, I'd burn FAT, it lasts longer!
I don't know why there are so many arguments about how much fat one should eat, I thought that with the raw animal diet this becomes VERY intuitive/instinctive, who cares about measuring the fat just eat it but don't gorge on it! IF you are Zero-carb THEN you may need a little more then average well thats just obvious no?
-
The fruit I ate in jordan was pretty good quality. The fruit in the picture, the bananas were not as sweet and smaller, the grapes actually had seeds, the red and yellow fruits are fresh dates, they tase best when completely black, and are somewhat bitter when the colors are bright.
Even though it's domesticated, they are generally better versions of domesticated fruits in Jordan. Especially inlocal markets. (my uncle actually works in a fruit market)
(http://i142.photobucket.com/albums/r85/Junts2005/Meals-Diet/DSCN4700.jpg)
Edit: Durianriders dream meal? lol Just kidding
this is a good sticky topic by the way ;)
-
too little fat (tired, hungry, craving too much fruits), everyones requirement is different especially with all the different activity levels and exercises.
You can eat greater amounts of fats and still crave fruits - it's because these carbs are helpful to utilize the fatty acids efficiently.
I don't care if I am burning sugar or fat or both, sugar from fruits gives me quick energy and burns fast, then after thats done all those precious fats I ate come in handy, then I am burning fat (= I like to use both for energy, but if I had to choose just one, I'd burn FAT, it lasts longer!
If you are LC then carbs are needed mainly for your cells without mitochondria (erythrocytes), some part of brain and for high-intensity exercices.
For other functions of your organism you burn fat.
-
I never crave fruits or carbs in general. After I lift weights or do cardio, I am not hungry and just drink water/tea until it is my eating window, where I want meat and eggs.
-
These pics were taken yestarday in my orchard:
(http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/5572/img632511.jpg)
(http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/2707/img632921.jpg)
(http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/3736/img633711.jpg)
I've got 8 crates of these reddish apples in my cellar. They're kinda sour, but IMO tasty.
The green-yellow ones - only several kilograms; they're sweet.
-
Wow,
Is it possible to ship out by air mail these organic apples?
-
That one has been a little bit eaten by some insects -
(http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/7234/img634011.jpg)
Inside -
(http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/7315/img634121.jpg)
Is it possible to ship out by air mail these organic apples?
Sure it is. But what's the cost? ;)
-
That one has been a little bit eaten by some insects -
looks more like the workings of squirrels or birds
-
looks more like the workings of squirrels or birds
Maybe you're right.
There are lots of squirrels and birds in my forest.
But I saw several times that ants were doing that kind of workings in some other fruits.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iah4-oFphnQ
lol,
It feels more like an ambush and attempt to embarass Vitalis, which is a shame.
-
lol,
It feels more like an ambush and attempt to embarass Vitalis, which is a shame.
If it's a shame, then why did you post it?
-
to keep the dicussion /information going
Vitalis can defend himself, he's clever enough.
-
Sure, and he has, but we don't need to soil this forum with DR's anger-ridden crapola, do we? He has vilely insulted all RPDers, which means you too, repeatedly, so I see no need to publish his diatribes here. Besides, he and his followers do that, while pretending to be RPDers or people curious about RPD. As a result, the moderators and other folks here tend to get suspicious when someone keeps posting DR's bile. So far you've acted more like a Weston Price devotee than a fruitarian, but you seem oddly interested in DR. Didn't you already get questioned about that? Last I knew he even said at his site that he still has at least one account here. I think it's probably best just to mostly ignore DR. Enough people report poor results at his forum that there's really no need to refute him.
-
who's durianrider? .............isn't that a fruit?
;)
-
DR made some good points criticizing Daniel Vitalis.
The good point was about Daniel's source of fruits was the supermarket.
In Manila, we do not buy our fruits from the supermarket, because the fruits in the supermarket always suck.
We buy fruits from the wet market from dedicated fruit stands.
DR's diatribe on drinking water and peeing is funny.
So DR admits to peeing 10x a day and getting up several times a night just to pee.
Whooppeeee... he's having fun.
We buy our fruits in the wet market... like so...
Buy organic, local and in season.
-
because the fruits in the supermarket always suck.
Where I am supermarkets often carry organic fruits that are in season in Ontario, as well as the imported fruit....you just have to know what to buy...
I can come out of a supermarket with wild salmon, wild red tuna, raw dulse and organic Ontario fruit that was freshly picked, now we have got some delicious apples
or with a melon from across the world and frozen pizza....theres always a choice
-
What is a wet market? I'm guessing by the photos that it's some kind of open-air market. Whatever it is, I don't think we have it here near the border of Canada. Those fruits would become ice balls in an open-air market during the winter here. LOL I guess you could use them as weapons to hunt an animal with. :D
The main advantage of supermarkets here is low price, but there's a sacrifice in quality. They have some wild fish and local in-season fruits, but for top-quality stuff the healthfood markets (or direct from the farmer) are best (and you get what you pay for, so you pay more--though some foods, like 100% grassfed suet, don't cost much more than the lesser quality alternatives at the supermarkets). Some of my faves at the healthfood markets are 100% grassfed ground beef and suet, pastured ground venison, duck breast, D'Artagnan uncured duck bacon, sashimi-grade wild Hawaiian yellowfin tuna and wild King (chinook) salmon, raw local honey (Champlain Valley Apiaries tastes the best to me of the local raw honeys; no one local sells the really high quality honeycomb yet), free-range fertile eggs, and for less than a couple months out of the year, fresh wild Maine blueberries are in season and available, so they're a special treat, as are sacs of fresh shad roe a couple weeks out of the year. The farmers' markets in the area are still stinky-poo at this point--basically tourist traps.
-
who's durianrider? .............isn't that a fruit?
;)
I did some extensive research on this topic and found an actual picture of one in its wild state.
-
raw local honey (Champlain Valley Apiaries tastes the best to me of the local raw honeys; no one local sells the really high quality honeycomb yet)
Does it come in a steel barrel which you pour out with the nozzle, I just got some local raw honey from my healthfood store, just pigged out on it :P...the taste is great, has a very strong flavor of citrus and some kinda spicy liquor I can't think of a way to describe it, very good, batter then the bottled raw honey I bought...
-
Does it come in a steel barrel which you pour out with the nozzle....
Nah, it comes in glass and plastic containers. Here's an image of their lightly-heated crystallized honey: (http://www.champlainvalleyhoney.com/cart/ProdImages/1%20lb%20crystal%20thumb.jpg) Apparently they don't sell the raw version online. It doesn't meet Aajonus' standards, as they do use a centrifuge instead of hand-packing the honey.
-
It doesn't meet Aajonus' standards, as they do use a centrifuge instead of hand-packing the honey.
...if he thinks its bad to centrifuge honey why does he think its ok to juice veggies...kinda weird
-
I did some extensive research on this topic and found an actual picture of one in its wild state.
A "durianrider" is a fruit native to Australia, but can can be found in Thailand growing on motorcycles.
-Wikipedia
-
...if he thinks its bad to centrifuge honey why does he think its ok to juice veggies...kinda weird
It's not weird.
He is against using centrifugal juicers due to the same reasons why he is against centrifuging honey.
He strongly recommends twin gear juicers.
-
I did not read this whole thread but centrifuging juice is not so good as it mixes the juice with air/oxygen and therefore it oxidizes the nutrients. That's why we bought a twin gear juicer.
-
It is always for maintaing your health.So try to eat only those foods which are good for health.
Regards,
Ali.
-
We had a centrifuge juicer and it worked well. The main issue we had with it was that when it went out of balance, (frequently) it would shake incredibly and frequently to the point where it was hard to turn off. The top would rattle loose and it would get mildly dangerous. I would stay away from them. I can't remember the brand name and I am travelling now so I can't have a look at it.
The way around it was to chop certain things up very small which is a pita and you lose the juice.
The twin gear ones have issues but that concerns cleanup.
Using your teeth and spitting out the pulp would be one solution. ;)