Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Hot Topics => Topic started by: TylerDurden on December 20, 2010, 01:28:29 am
-
Not saying this link is true, but I did notice some initial benefit from RZC which disappeared over time:-
http://180degreehealth.blogspot.com/2010/06/catecholamine-honeymoon.html
I mention the link also because another member referred to a similiar subject in another thread, and am curious as to what people think of it. Given that Matt Stone is, IMO, unquestionably wrong, on some other matters(eg:- his eat-everything-diet) , I am not taking this too seriously, I am just putting it forward for discussion in hot topics.
-
I'm not defending Matt Stone's views or his general behavior, but to be fair, he called his diet the "high-everything-diet (HED)," not the "eat-everything-diet." I read his free pdf and he explained that he didn't literally mean it to be that you could eat absolutely everything in any quantity, though he at times has made casual comments that seemed to give a different impression, but perhaps I read more into them than was intended. He has a new name for his diet now, the "Rehabilitative Rest & Aggressive Re-Feeding (RRARF)" diet. Yeah, I know, quite a mouthful. ;D
Bruce K, apparently a supporter of Matt Stone, might be the one that advocated an "eat-everything-diet" (though I haven't seen him use this literal term), based on this comment of his at Matt's blog, which also happens to mention you:
http://180degreehealth.blogspot.com/2009/03/hamburglars-metabolism.html
Bruce K said...
Oh, and please get in touch with Charles Washington, Aajonus Vonderplanitz, Dr. Joseph Mercola, Sally Fallon, Mary Enig, Geoffrey Purcell, and so on. I'd like to get their input. Anybody who says that people should restrict calories, fat, carbs, starches, sugars, fiber, grains, gluten, lactose, casein, dairy, or any other food. Please get their responses.
MARCH 23, 2009 10:49:00 AM MDT
-
Geoffrey Purcell
Woop woop.
-
I'm not defending Matt Stone's views or his general behavior, but to be fair, he called his diet the "high-everything-diet (HED)," not the "eat-everything-diet." I read his free pdf and he explained that he didn't literally mean it to be that you could eat absolutely everything in any quantity, though he at times has made casual comments that seemed to give a different impression, but perhaps I read more into them than was intended. He has a new name for his diet now, the "Rehabilitative Rest & Aggressive Re-Feeding (RRARF)" diet. Yeah, I know, quite a mouthful.
It is really irrelevant that someone claims he meant to say something else, when he previously stated, at other times, that one should eat plenty of everything. You claimed previously that Taubes had not really meant to say that low-carb diets was always better than exercise re weight-loss. But Taubes did say that in the media. The way I see it, when a guru is performing a double-standard where they make 2 different kinds of statements, with one a complete exaggeration or lie, then one can highlight that.
Anyway, I'm curious as to RZCers' comments re the above link in my 1st post.
-
Anyway, I'm curious as to RZCers' comments re the above link in my 1st post.
I did read it but if you could make a list of the points he made it would be easier to answer them all individually. However, I'll return and read it again myself tomorrow and answer anyway.
Basically though: I recognised a lot of the things he said, but it seemed that he twisted them to sound bad in order to promote his diet. I don't know though, I'll have another look tomorrow and answer more thoroughly I think.
Seems kind of similar to a horoscope... So he says some stuff that's true so you go "oh yeah", and then says it's bad.
-
i don't know who he is, but just looking at that link i can tell that he annoys me :D not for what he says, he could preach my exact current diet and i'd still think he is full of garbage. i think he is seeking a following first, dedicated to health second at best. does anyone really believe he wrote that to help anyone but himself??
all the pros of low carb he mentions i did not experience, nor have i had any kind of 'crash'. i just the same me, only i can digest my food now. what more can i say. oh, i really don't appreciate 'gurus' giving science lessons.
-
If he was right about this theory about how this catecholaine thing causes adrenalin overload and the development of Adrenalin resistance then the Eskimos could not be as healthy as they are considering their cradle to grave low carb diets. There may be something else to it because none of us are following the Eskimo version of a low carb diet, so there may be some truth to his claim based on differing individual circumstance, like negative effects of plant foods, or flat out cheating with sad foods, short of a double blind study or some personal testimonial backed by evidence I will remain skeptical
I was adrenal fatigued before this diet and now I have energy galore and haven't noticed any decline so far. I heard him talking about blood temperature being related to metabolic disorders, which reminded me that since I was a teenager my blood temperature was rarely above 97 degrees, and I think I have always suffered from some metabolic sluggishness, but I can tell you that now my temperature is spot on 98.6 and I don't feel so week and cold in the mornings like I used to. When I was real ill I remember waking up with a temperature of 96.8 and even if I was sick I would rarely spike a fever. I also am more cold hardy and can work outside in fridged weather without getting fatigued by the cold, the last two winters before this diet were terrible and I could hardly tolerate having to do a whole days work.
-
I'll address some of the points he makes re fasting, tomorrow. Haven't time right now.
-
I found that I did indeed get a high from going RZC and then a subsequent drop in energy etc., which could very well have been the result of overtaxing my adrenals. However, Matt Stone's notions don't really fit my own experiences with Intermittent Fasting. First of all, unlike with caloric restriction, I only eat a bit less when IFing than when on 3 meals a day as I eat large amountd during that 1 daily IF meal, and I do not eat less than what my body really needs. Plus, even when I am not IFing, I still find that my levels of concentration/alertness are higher during periods when I have not been eating for some hours. I therefore have my doubts.
-
I still think Matt is all wet until he does his experiments with RAW PALEO DIET.
His zero carb is COOKED.
Anyone close to Matt tell him to do all his diet experiments again, but this time RAW.
That would be more interesting.
-
I vaguely recall that Stone was trying to suggest that things like antigenic foods like grains can be overcome if one constantly eats plenty of that food regularly. Wouldn't work for me as I've tried that route with dairy and it failed.
-
It is really irrelevant that someone claims he meant to say something else, when he previously stated, at other times, that one should eat plenty of everything. ...
Believe him or not, I don't particularly care. His experience doesn't match mine in several important ways anyway. Some time ago I read his story and a couple of his blog posts but was quickly turned off by his advocacy of grains and downplaying of gluten sensitivity, which I consider some of the worst dietary advice one can give, but then he started to get discussed here and at KGH's blog, so I've read a little more of his stuff recently so that I know what people are talking about, and I like testing my views by reading differing viewpoints now and then.
You claimed previously that Taubes had not really meant to say that low-carb diets was always better than exercise re weight-loss.
I don't recall putting it like that, though I don't want to get into a debate over it, and I've asked you before not to try to characterize what I've said or meant as you often get it wrong. You can quote me, but please don't try to characterize my views.
Anyway, I'm curious as to RZCers' comments re the above link in my 1st post.
I'm not currently a RZCer, but I have noticed the increased fat loss, mental acuity, cognition, alertness and energy and lack of yawning on both RZC and RVLC that he reported from his time on cooked ZC. I haven't experienced his trouble getting more than 6 hours of sleep while he was on ZC, and the traditional Inuit are well known for sleeping an average of 14 hours per day during the winter, nor do I think that I'm "Superman." I'm skeptical about his experience applying to most or all people, as his blog seems to suggest.
I am curious about his reports about building muscle by increasing his intake of cooked tubers and other starches. However, I tried that years ago thinking it might do that for me, but it didn't work for me. On the other hand, I was eating plenty of fruits and squashes too, so those might have been confounding variables.
I vaguely recall that Stone was trying to suggest that things like antigenic foods like grains can be overcome if one constantly eats plenty of that food regularly. Wouldn't work for me as I've tried that route with dairy and it failed.
Yeah, it's a bogus idea popular with the food industry and conventional allergy specialists that doesn't have a basis in science. He does add some caveats, however, like he did here:
Corn and corn products (cornmeal, popcorn, corn tortillas) are also fantastic. Brown rice is at the top of the list as well. Amaranth, quinoa, buckwheat, and other “out there” hippie-ish grains are also top choices. Grains like whole wheat, oats, barley, and rye are a little more iffy. Gluten sensitivity, although overblown by a lot of Paleo-oriented nutrition authors and bloggers, is not make-believe. (Matt Stone, Rrarf! An Introduction to 180DegreeHealth)
It's still bogus, unscientific advice that doesn't match my experience, though.
-
Well, it wasn't ever meant seriously, just a silly topic for discussion. There are always anti-raw or anti-palaeo arguments being made online, and, as long as we are aware of them, we can continue to debunk them concisely.
-
OK. One point I should add is one that was well made by Dr. Harris in the past--just because some people can eat fermented sourdough bread without getting ill doesn't mean it provides necessary nutrients they can't get from some other food (and he has challenged the WAPF folks to come up with a single such nutrient) or that it's worth the bother of making homemade fermented sourdough bread or stone-ground whole wheat bread. Those sorts of time-intensive foods of suboptimal quality tend to be used in areas where better quality foods are scarce. If the traditional peoples making and eating those foods had access to plenty of fresh wild meats and fish, berries, raw wild honeycomb/grubcomb, larvae, roots and tubers they would probably choose those foods over sourdough bread.