Count me in on this Wai Diet thing...

[goodsamaritan]

Ok, how about moving up Instincto?

So Wai Diet is below Instincto?

[TylerDurden]

Ok, how about moving up Instincto?

So Wai Diet is below Instincto?

Fine.

[PaleoPhil]

Ok, how about moving up Instincto?

So Wai Diet is below Instincto?

Heh, I didn't realize that the diets were ranked. I was thinking more along the lines of a separate Wai section of its own below the Raw Paleo Diet to Suit You section, which would actually make it more prominent and separate it from Paleo, but Tyler doesn't want to do that, so thanks for trying to find a compromise.

[TylerDurden]

Heh, I didn't realize that the diets were ranked. I was thinking more along the lines of a separate Wai section of its own below the Raw Paleo Diet to Suit You section, which would actually make it more prominent and separate it from Paleo, but Tyler doesn't want to do that, so thanks for trying to find a compromise.

In a way, that would make the wai diet seem more important than it is, if it had its own category.

[KD]

well at least its now admitted that this isn't a 'nitpicking issue' at all and just reveals that there is a hierarchy involved where no matter how many modern, processed, or neolithic foods are in a diet, or how healthy that diet even is, it is considered more 'paleo' than any diet that includes dairy foods.

Without redefining that this is a diet created by a single person:

If the 'munch' foods included in wai were dairy and not grain foods (these can now be seen as not equally un-paleo with grains being acceptable as long as they are not a huge part of the diet)

Or

If the acceptable amount of any or all of the intake of refined sugar, olive oil and fruit juice were replaced with dairy foods or refined juiced vegetables it would not have an 'elevated' status amongst 'non-paleo' diets.

So the message actually is that a paleo diet is not 'what it excludes' but merely any diet that excludes dairy foods and can theoretically be any combination of other foods. It matters not at all that the diet is not a diet that completes ones nutrition or general health needs as long as it excludes dairy foods and includes some animal foods.

[TylerDurden]

You're missing the point once more. The wai diet is "less worse " as it advocates only some grains and some sugar  while the primal diet and weston-price diet advocate huge amounts of raw dairy, and lots of grains in the case of the WP diet, and the primal diet advocates huge amounts of raw veggie juice as well.

[KD]

the point is that one doesn't need to compare it to other diets to see that any non biased group of people witnessing this conversation would see that it doesn't fit the category of a paleo diet and is basically being praised for its exclusion of raw dairy rather than its merits as an ancestral diet or a diet people can practice healthfully.

other diets have no place in this but these other diets do actually have more evidence of creating long term health than wai diets which have been basically admitted to being a 'transition' diet filled with modern and neolithic foods and actually less grounded in traditional diets of our ancestors no matter which foods they exclude.

If you seriously want to now shift and stand behind it being 'less amounts' than 'what it excludes' then surely back up your stance by creating yet a new category that includes similar small amounts of dairy and other processing comparable to wai as a paleo category or admit that this is 100% an issue of your perspective on raw dairy vs any neolithic or modern food as being 'most problematic' by your judgement alone.

Or just move the non paleo diet in with 'Other non-paleo approaches"

[PaleoPhil]

In a way, that would make the wai diet seem more important than it is, if it had its own category.

Correct, which I mentioned in the post above yours and which is why the misunderstanding that I was trying to persecute the Wai diet was rather ironic.

Alternatively, another way to organize it would be to move it to the "Other Raw-Animal-Food Diets" section, putting it at the top to show that it is closer to raw Paleo than the other diets there. It wouldn't seem to be necessary to rename that section to something like "Other Related Diets" since the Wai Diet does include animal foods. However, you apparently don't like this idea, so that's a nonstarter.

So the message actually is that a paleo diet is not 'what it excludes' but merely any diet that excludes dairy foods and can theoretically be any combination of other foods. It matters not at all that the diet is not a diet that completes ones nutrition or general health needs as long as it excludes dairy foods and includes some animal foods.

the point is that one doesn't need to compare it to other diets to see that any non biased group of people witnessing this conversation would see that it doesn't fit the category of a paleo diet and is basically being praised for its exclusion raw dairy rather than its merits as an ancestral diet or a diet people can practice healthfully.
....

Yes, it has become clear that Tyler's pet peeves are diets that include significant dairy or extensive cooking. Per his posts, it seems that as long as an individual's diet doesn't include either of those it can be terribly unhealthy for him/her and bear little resemblance to the diet of any Stone Age or hunter-gatherer people and be quite contrary to what biological adaptation, metabolic science and individual genetics and epigenetics indicate and still be considered basically raw Paleo. As KD explained, one can fashion an unbalanced diet with Paleo foods if one focuses just on individual foods and not the holistic picture.

Tyler summarized well this sort of misguided reductionist distortion of the concept of "Paleo" with this quip: "The relevance is that if any palaeo peoples could have eaten raw sugar cane in their areas, then your whole argument is dead in the water." This is a classic case of missing the forest for the trees by equating the theory of Paleolithic nutrition with re-enactment of certain potential details of theoretical Stone Agers somewhere in the world and then stretching the details as necessary to fit the agenda. This subject is so fundamental and such a common pitfall that it deserves its own thread some day, but I don't want to delve into it right now, as it's likely that Tyler will contradict everything I say on it and make little or no effort to understand what I'm trying to say.

[p0wer]

or a diet people can practice healthfully.

Are you saying the wai diet is not healthy? Can you please elaborate exactly why? You get all the nutrients you need with the least amount of antinutrients, I don't see how is this not healthy. Just please don't start again on the sugar

[TylerDurden]

Interesting, neither of you have remotely successfully debunked my previous points re the Wai Diet being "less worse/more rawpalaeo" than the primal diet or the weston-price diet. I had pointed out that the vast amounts of raw dairy and raw veggie juice in the primal diet, and the vast amounts of cooked foods and raw dairy in the weston-price diet meant that they were not remotely as rawpalaeo as the wai diet was.

[KD]

we 'debunked' that that was an issue at all in deciding if it if wai was actually a paleo diet. we 'rebunked' the notion that this is entirely based on your biases and attempts to refine things for your own purposes and theories. that you cannot even stick to a single definition to say what is paleo or not. nor have you responded to my point about a diet heavy in ruminant meats and fats thats omnivorous and contains equal or less calories in dairy than wai in sugar and grain being an acceptable paleo diet.

which is more raw paleo a spaceship or a 747?  I'm thinking the 747 is slick and dynamic and otherworldly enough to be disqualified but the spaceship..its in outer space. which one should we pick?

[TylerDurden]

we 'debunked' that that was an issue at all in deciding if it if wai was actually a paleo diet. we 'rebunked' the notion that this is entirely based on your biases and attempts to refine things for your own purposes and theories. that you cannot even stick to a single definition to say what is paleo or not. nor have you responded to my point about a diet heavy in ruminant meats and fats thats omnivorous and contains equal or less calories in dairy than wai in sugar and grain being an acceptable paleo diet.

which is more raw paleo a spaceship or a 747?  I'm thinking the 747 is slick and dynamic and otherworldly enough to be disqualified but the space..its in outer space. which one should we pick?

Well, that's totally false. First of all, it is not based on my own biases, as Craig was involved in setting up the forum in that way, I made no decisions in that regard, it was all craig's idea, I merely stated which diets should have their own forums, not where they should be placed. Plus, GS and the other guy he cited view the Wai Diet as being "rawpalaeo", so clearly it's just you and Paleophil who are biased, nothing more.

The issue of "what is palaeo" is more complicated than you like to pretend. For example, on previous occasions you were on the war-path trying to denounce the Instincto Diet as not being truly "palaeo". Anyway, Craig seems to have shoved it into the "palaeo" section since he, like most others, viewed the Wai Diet as being primarily raw seafood and raw fruits, and because it was far more "rawpalaeo" than the primal diet or the weston-price diet. Putting the Wai Diet into its own category would be foolish as that would make it seem more important than it is.

As for the other point re creating another category for a diet with small amounts of dairy etc. to balance the Wai Diet, so far there isn't one, so it would be stupid to create a category for a diet that doesn't officially exist.

[KD]

Are you saying the wai diet is not healthy? Can you please elaborate exactly why? You get all the nutrients you need with the least amount of antinutrients, I don't see how is this not healthy. Just please don't start again on the sugar

well in fairness what I said was that based on what some people were including as a diet that it clearly doesn't factor in that a large part of the diet could be composed of refined and processed foods that are considered by and large to be unhealthy by the plaeo perspective and still be elevated over other diets as being 'more paleo' even when people actually ate far similarly to those other diets.

If you want my actual opinion I would say just your brief comment is typical per this conversation in its misrepresentation of what a healthy diet truly is. A healthy diet is something that is in line with what our ancestral makeup is ("what we are designed to eat" which of course is largely disputed) as well as something that is SHOWN to create best results in avoiding disease and repairing various issues/detoxing old residues and what have you. (also I guess disputed). Based on the information available I would indeed say that wai does not qualify as either.

Taking the belief that we are on some level ruminant animal eaters it would be nonsensical to say that a a diet which entirely excluded such things fulfills all our nutritional and health requirements. In addition based on the belief that even including ruminant meat exclusive of things like organ meat and bone marrow is also an incomplete diet then just seafoods and eggs as an animal food source would be even more inadequate in fulfilling these needs for quality fat and protein as well as many micro-nutrients.

On top of that this whole idea of seeing a small amount of animal food as replacing missing nutrients in plants foods is just a false concept. Just as the amino acids in plants are not comparable to animal proteins, the proteins in eggs and seafood just do not fulfill all the requirements for protein in the body from repairing old cells to basic functioning. You can't say oh my raw vegan diet is just missing selenium and b-12 and fill that gap with a brazil nut and an egg yolk with token seafood and call that a natural diet. People criticize the food pyramids and such and say that these things are exaggerated when they actually underestimate what types of things we need and in what quantities. its really just a miracle that people can get very little true nutrition, and tons of poor nutrition/chemicals and do ok in some respects for a select period of time. In that respect of course people can show they can eat no animal foods and survive but overall its inaccurate to say it fulfills all the nutrition needs in micro or macronutrients. Fats like avocado or even oils may be OK but they dont substitute animal fats and saying that some oil and avocado is ok does not mean eating avocados and oil (and sugar) daily is a healthy or natural thing to do. To assume there is no problems with such or drinking juice because these are 'heath foods' is incorrect even if one can prove these are actually health forming foods.

What it comes down to is things like fruit juice, olive oil, sugar and yes - diets high in fruit can easily be traced to health issues so these are larger markers for an unhealthy diet than foods that contain 'anti-nutrients'  or diets composed of sugar (carbs) that lack ruminant fats. The other flip side is this idea of avoiding 'anti-nutrtients' being somehow a validation that it is healthy. Firstly its a complete falsity that anti-nutrients have anything to do with 'anti-health' directly. anti-nutrients are just things that prevent nutrition from being absorbed from the plant itself. So this is something that unfortunately has seeped into this sites philosophy and has no presence in past hygine literature or Instincto or primal theory or any other raw information going back decades and probably began with RRM himself and was useful in explaining why people get the shits form veg juices or something or why fruit is tasty. The fact that cooking basically destroys most anit-nutrients yet creates other volatile compounds is reason to discount this terminology as being any marker where it lacking from a food having meaning anything in regards to whether it is health forming.

I could certainly go on about why I don't think such a diet actually heals the body or why I think people will inevitably shift even to a more inclusive cooked diet but for now hopefully that sum things up..at least from a 'paleo' perspective.

[KD]

Well, that's totally false. First of all, it is not based on my own biases, as Craig was involved in setting up the forum in that way, I made no decisions in that regard, it was all craig's idea, I merely stated which diets should have their own forums, not where they should be placed. Plus, GS and the other guy he cited view the Wai Diet as being "rawpalaeo", so clearly it's just you and Paleophil who are biased, nothing more.

The issue of "what is palaeo" is more complicated than you like to pretend. For example, on previous occasions you were on the war-path trying to denounce the Instincto Diet as not being truly "palaeo". Anyway, Craig seems to have shoved it into the "palaeo" section since he, like most others, viewed the Wai Diet as being primarily raw seafood and raw fruits, and because it was far more "rawpalaeo" than the primal diet or the weston-price diet. Putting the Wai Diet into its own category would be foolish as that would make it seem more important than it is.

As for the other point re creating another category for a diet with small amounts of dairy etc. to balance the Wai Diet, so far there isn't one, so it would be stupid to create a category for a diet that doesn't officially exist.

I think my complaints regarding instincto were mostly how its principles don't override other solutions for health and also that it wouldn't necessarily create the best health for a modern person or even likely that it would create a condition similar to how people ate in nature. Also various issues regarding things like the habits of animals which just arn't true in my understanding. So even if the theories I personally believe are artificial and perhaps a similar problem regarding importance but its clear that it fits at least the Cordain-type definition of excluding all neolithic foods and processing whereas wai does not..not in the least.

It really has nothing to do with my bias as to me Its just obvious that anyone on say a cooked paleo diet for instance would see Weston Price as closer to their ideals than the wai diet, of oil, sugar fruit juice and some grain and lacking meat and that wai diet is fairly embarrassing to be included as a paleolithic diet and has indeed been pointed out on other blogs and things. As for the dairy thing I would disagree it make no sense to create a diet as opposed to 'paleoizing' someone elses diet that is not paleo. There is also certainly way more people doing such a diet than the wai diet on this forum (maybe 20+ active people), but probably very little support for needing to qualify such a thing as a paleo diet. It makes much more sense to just have only paleo diets listed in the paleo section I would think.

[goodsamaritan]

If you want my actual opinion I would say just your brief comment is typical per this conversation in its misrepresentation of what a healthy diet truly is. A healthy diet is something that is in line with what our ancestral makeup is ("what we are designed to eat" which of course is largely disputed) as well as something that is SHOWN to create best results in avoiding disease and repairing various issues/detoxing old residues and what have you. (also I guess disputed). Based on the information available I would indeed say that wai does not qualify as either.

This accusation is BOGUS.

Wait Diet is my diet of choice when curing Filipinos because it is DEAD EASY for Filipinos to adopt temporarily.

It is the very first intro diet to Raw Paleo Diet for the people I heal.

Filipinos have abundant fruits so that part is solved.

Filipinos have easy access to good eggs.

Filipinos have easy access to abundant fresh ocean FISH / sea food.

As I said before KD, your experience in your area and your preferences are not what others experience.

WAI DIET WORKS.
WAI DIET WORKS.
WAI DIET WORKS.
WAI DIET WORKS.
WAI DIET WORKS.

You want more?

WAI DIET WORKS.

-------

Your only hang up against Wai Diet is their recent refined sugar idiocy which can easily be solved with raw wild honey.

I agree re the sugar idiocy of some of them is idiotic.

[goodsamaritan]

Sample recommendation I do for healing say someone with kidney problems:

- coconuts: meat and juice
- fruit in season
- raw egg yolks
- raw fish, raw shrimp "kinilaw" ( with kalamansi / lemon added )
- raw oysters
- tuna / blue marlin sashimi

Well HELLO... WAI DIET here.

7 days their kidney problems go away.

They can go back to their idiotic old cooked diet.  And this works.

(You cannot tell a Filipino to eat raw beef or raw goat or raw lamb... it's way out of his mental paradigm!)

---------

To repeat: WAI DIET WORKS.

Just because some wai diet practitioners are idiots in their implementation does not condemn the entire dietary concept.  Hell, there are raw paleo dieters who claim they are raw paleo dieters but suck at implementation.

[TylerDurden]

That's another thing, like GS said, the Wai Diet is sort of a useful intro to raw, palaeolithic diets as many people have an absolute horror of raw meats from land animals.

[p0wer]

I know this is a paleo forum, so don't kill me if any of my comments go against the raw paleo diet (and I'm not very familiar with it actually).

A healthy diet is something that is in line with what our ancestral makeup is ("what we are designed to eat" which of course is largely disputed) .

So our ancestors simply knew [better then we know now] what we are designed to eat, i.e. what's a healthy diet? I think we're much smarter now; we can take something like that ancestral makeup into account, but we can surely do better than our ancestors.

as well as something that is SHOWN to create best results in avoiding disease and repairing various issues/detoxing old residues and what have you (also I guess disputed).

I don't quite get the "repairing various issues/detoxing old residues" part. Your everyday diet should definitely not be some sort of a medicine.  It should provide you with the nutrition you need and it should not create new problems/diseases in your body.

Taking the belief that we are on some level ruminant animal eaters it would be nonsensical to say that a a diet which entirely excluded such things fulfills all our nutritional and health requirements. In addition based on the belief that even including ruminant meat exclusive of things like organ meat and bone marrow is also an incomplete diet then just seafoods and eggs as an animal food source would be even more inadequate in fulfilling these needs for quality fat and protein as well as many micro-nutrients.

As far as I know the wai diet doesn't exclude them, but promotes fish and egg yolks as a more convenient alternative.

Your only hang up against Wai Diet is their recent refined sugar idiocy which can easily be solved with raw wild honey.

Honey is definitely not the kind of sugar I'd want to eat. Check http://www.rawfoodexplained.com/sugars-and-other-sweeteners/why-honey-is-a-harmful-food.html for a quick overview, otherwise you can find quite a few papers on the internet.

[goodsamaritan]

I'll assume Power is a long time Wai Dieter?

Awesome, we need more of you here.

[PaleoPhil]

Quote from: KD on Today at 12:23:13 am
A healthy diet is something that is in line with what our ancestral makeup is ("what we are designed to eat" which of course is largely disputed) .

So our ancestors simply knew [better then we know now] what we are designed to eat, i.e. what's a healthy diet? I think we're much smarter now;

That wasn't KD's point. By ancestral makeup he indicated that he means "what we are designed to eat"--in other words, our biology today, not what some Stone Age ancestor "knew" in the past, which it's impossible to know today.

If we do have any longtime Wai dieters, I hope they'll contribute. Up till now it's only defenders have been folks who aren't even claiming to be doing Wai currently.

[TylerDurden]

If we do have any longtime Wai dieters, I hope they'll contribute. Up till now it's only defenders have been folks who aren't even claiming to be doing Wai currently.

But there are those claiming to have done the Wai Diet ages before.

[KD]

This accusation is BOGUS.

Wait Diet is my diet of choice when curing Filipinos because it is DEAD EASY for Filipinos to adopt temporarily.
Your only hang up against Wai Diet is their recent refined sugar idiocy which can easily be solved with raw wild honey.

I agree re the sugar idiocy of some of them is idiotic.

don't you also see many other equally non paleo solutions like cleanses, zappers, and even vegetable juices and The Primal Diet as possible 'cures' for contemporary people? That part we seem to share actually but the question is are these things 'raw paleo'? and the answer is no.

There are two different but parallel discussions here. The issue is - is it is repeatably being seen as a incomplete diet so that cannot be a plaeo diet even if it excludes the very intrinsic aspects outlined by its main practitioners. These of  which being refined foods, sugars, neolithic foods and arbitrary application of some paleo foods but not other foods generally seen as completing a paleo diet. I don't have to object that in the short term a fruitarian diet or sprout diet might have 'excellent' benefits that are short term and transitional. are these paleo diets? no.

as you can see, you are already in a dispute over whether honey (a inarguable paleo food at least in terms of its paleolithic existence) in comparison to modern heated table sugar in terms of which is beneficial on a RAW paleo diet. I may have my 'preferences' based on my experiences and experiences just observing all manner of raw and cooked diets/leaders in comparison to one another to know that many of the 'hierarchies' people try to place do not match up with the health being delivered by such theories. Saying a cooked Primal Blueprint diet is more 'paleo' I do not believe is some stretch of the imagination for most people. That said all of the above discounts even the idea that even being healthy as a transition to qualify as a 'paleo' diet. Furthermore what is attributed as a 'success story' on this and other forums obviously completely displaced from reality as with many other cases where just being on a diet for a certain time tautologically proves the diet is good. I have plenty of friends passed their 10 year anniversary of being cooked vegans that outshine many people I have met in the last 6 years or so doing raw. Doesn't make their diet health forming per se or paleo.

[p0wer]

I'm doing it currently and I'm very happy with it. Not a long-time wai dieter though, it's been only 3-4 months so far.
I'm not consuming any processed sugar btw, nor the fruit juice + olive oil combination as I don't really need any extra energy. What I'm able to get daily from fruits, eggs and fish (and a few nuts from time to time) satisfies my needs perfectly fine.
The strongest point of the diet in my opinion is the very scientifically supported theory behind it. And of course the bonus of eliminating acne, in case you're susceptible to acne.

[p0wer]

That wasn't KD's point. By ancestral makeup he indicated that he means "what we are designed to eat"--in other words, our biology today, not what some Stone Age ancestor "knew" in the past, which it's impossible to know today.

So today we're not biologically suitable to eat fruits, egg yolks and fish (the staple foods of the wai diet)?

[KD]

So today we're not biologically suitable to eat fruits, egg yolks and fish (the staple foods of the wai diet)?

let me ask you a different question. At what point does a diet that includes these 'biologically appropriate' foods become unbalanced or out of bounds of the wai diet...or even becomes less healthy then a standard diet or cooked paleo diet? Is it if it consisted of 2 oz of fruit, 30 egg yolks and 1 small piece of fish, if  it was 90 % of calories from fruit 5 % from fish and 5 % from egg yolks or if was almost entirely fish with minimal egg yolk or fruit? Is it at all possible that these diets are entirely different and have a different effect on the body even though they all lack the same things? Add in the more notorious things which are part of wai and this exacerbates what is good or bad in terms of diet.

The point is that it lacks certain things that are usually seen as crucial to health, crucial to being paleo (which is really the main discussion), and contains an ignorance to how even 'healthy' foods can create problems and imbalances that totally deficient crap diets even do not. Since there is 'science' that tries to back a vegan or fruit diet I can see how adding fish or eggs yolks seems to 'balance' that but theres multiple of reasons which I hardly scratched in terms of how such things can affect the health of a modern person negatively.

If a friend told me they were including alot more raw fruit, egg yolk and raw fish in their diet, I would be fairly happy. to inject my personal bias this would all go out the window if it was 90% fruit, contained massive amounts of refined sugar, olive oil and juiced fruits. If we were just talking about problems of deficiency it would be the last of which above being the least offensive and merely lacking quality animal fats and other micronutrients of a paleo diet and only being a long term concern. It likely being able to create a fair amount of health in the short term despite lacking other foods which would be good to add at any point. All egg yolk with small fish prtein/fruit being also a likely effective cleanse. But biases aside, either way the main issue is that no one really is suggesting wai is a proper paleo diet by definition..not that it is impossible to be healthy doing any number of things.