Kidney Stress

[invisible]

try eating more fruits and vegetables and lessen meats, that is what i am experimenting/doing myself and the dark-eye circles seem to have faded a bit. If milk isnt a problem for you then drink more milk and lessen meat.

If you do not think the raw paleo diet is healthy then that's your choice, but stop recommending people go to neolithic diets around here.

[pc701]

i never said it aint healthy, i just said add more fruits and vegetables which is paleolithic. people get kidney stones such as yuri and lex rooker that develope on low carb because its too much protein i think.

[van]

my thoughts are that it's not the amount of protein eaten in one day, but how it is ingested.  If you read Rosedale, he has very strong opinions, beliefs, etc, on eating more protein in one meal than the body can use for maintenance and repair.  Any excess is harmful in the long run. That our energy should come primarily from fat, as opposed to excess protein being converted into glucose.  Not sure about this last sentence/glucose? In speaking with him, he came out and said that the Bear's cancer was a resultant of eating huge meat meals, and that more (cancers) would follow.  Thus he believes in spreading your protein out into at least two meals per day.  I have heard the arguments going both ways, and am sorry I can't remember the specifics regarding Rosedale's finer points to do with excesses.  Bit if choosing a one meal a day plan, one might like to look closely as to the reasons, for example;  convenience, ideas about paleo this or that, and possibly that by eating an excess in one meal leaves one not hungry enough to eat two meals a day.  Bottom line, is it working for you in the long run.   Rosedale is mostly about longevity, and says something unique;  nature or whatever didn't design us to live forever, just long enough to pass along our skills and parenting to the next generation.  His quest is looking deeper into what causes aging, and his main pointers are insulin and leptin, amongst other markers.  My impressions from having spoken with him for over three hours is that his ego is smaller than most.  Most refreshing.

[Paleo Donk]

my thoughts are that it's not the amount of protein eaten in one day, but how it is ingested.  If you read Rosedale, he has very strong opinions, beliefs, etc, on eating more protein in one meal than the body can use for maintenance and repair.  Any excess is harmful in the long run. That our energy should come primarily from fat, as opposed to excess protein being converted into glucose.  Not sure about this last sentence/glucose? In speaking with him, he came out and said that the Bear's cancer was a resultant of eating huge meat meals, and that more (cancers) would follow.  Thus he believes in spreading your protein out into at least two meals per day.

This is really interesting. Lex's blood glucose readings dropped to "normal" levels since he recently dropped protein levels. The bear's bg according to him have always been at 100.  At the same time the bear was pretty adamant that we didn't need much protein at all even if we were strength training. If a lot of excess protein is converted to glucose then I wonder if it would simply be better to eat vegetation to lessen the stress on the body. I'll probably give a low protein diet a go at some point.

[Hannibal]

i never said it aint healthy, i just said add more fruits and vegetables which is paleolithic. people get kidney stones such as yuri and lex rooker that develope on low carb because its too much protein i think.

ZC was responsible for that, not protein per se.
It's not dangerous to eat more protein, but if you are on ZC it could be very unhealthy.
If you eat healthy fruits, some vegs, honey that's not the issue. In general of course, because there are some individuals that could be more prone to kidney problems.

[carnivore]

ZC was responsible for that, not protein per se.
It's not dangerous to eat more protein, but if you are on ZC it could be very unhealthy.
If you eat healthy fruits, some vegs, honey that's not the issue. In general of course, because there are some individuals that could be more prone to kidney problems.

Why excess protein on a ZC is unhealthy and not dangerous on an omnivore diet ?

[TylerDurden]

Why excess protein on a ZC is unhealthy and not dangerous on an omnivore diet ?

  He's talking about rabbit-starvation, where too much protein and not enough fats can lead to those symptoms. There was a scandal involving liquid protein diets some decades back in which people died from excess protein. Rabbit-starvation is, of course, not an issue with a raw-omnivorous diet as carbs or fats can remove the condition.

[carnivore]

  He's talking about rabbit-starvation, where too much protein and not enough fats can lead to those symptoms. There was a scandal involving liquid protein diets some decades back in which people died from excess protein. Rabbit-starvation is, of course, not an issue with a raw-omnivorous diet as carbs or fats can remove the condition.

Protein in excess is detrimental, with or without carbs!

[TylerDurden]

Protein in excess is detrimental, with or without carbs!

Not so sure re this.  I mean isn't it rather difficult to overdose on protein on a raw or even cooked-palaeodiet? I mean if one was eating a highly processed liquid protein diet, it might be an issue, but on a rawpalaeodiet, one wouldn't have the usual hunger-pangs that one gets on processed food diets, so it would be very difficult to overdose on protein. Certainly, I do find some of the anti-protein people to be overly obsessive re limits; I mean 100g of protein as a maximum  upper limit per day is ridiculous.

[Hannibal]

Protein in excess is detrimental, with or without carbs!

But without carbs you've got to eat more protein. On low-carb omnivorous diet you don't need to eat so much protein. It's simple.

[carnivore]

But without carbs you've got to eat more protein. On low-carb omnivorous diet you don't need to eat so much protein. It's simple.

It is why any extreme diet where one macronutrient is eliminated (like ZC, frutarian, ...) are very dangerous!
We need a balance of protein/fat/carbs.

[Hannibal]

It is why any extreme diet where one macronutrient is eliminated (like ZC, frutarian, ...) are very dangerous!
We need a balance of protein/fat/carbs.

That's very true. Protein, fat and carbs are equally important - that's the biochemical fact.

[pc701]

I came to the conclusion that it's not too much protein that stresses the kidneys but undigested protein. So if one has dark circles and edema like I had, it's likely your not digesting the proteins well enough.
http://www.luckinlove.com/kidney.htm

[MrBBQ]

I've been self-experimenting these last couple of weeks and I'd agree with carnivore/Hannibal that ratio seems to be everything.

I can say this because instead of relying on fruits for my carbohydrates, I've been eating cooked (boiled/steamed) starches in quite large quantities, PLUS along with more carbs, I've been increasing my meat+fat content to a much greater extent than before, which has been less problematic for me than meat+fat+fruit.

I've also been adding lightly cooked vegetables for variety, to make more "square" meals. Typically, I warm my meat and fat in a bain marie/porringer, which I find much more preferable to just room-temp or cold meat.

With just the addition of cooked starches, my metabolism and mood seems to be very much more favourable (bowel movements are also really regular as opposed to constipation), plus my body just likes/tolerates more meat+fat, which is the ultimate objective - to be able to eat optimal amounts of meat+fat with horrible. Also, I'm consuming an added serving of organ meats (usually dehydrated as a snack food), which I'm readily tolerating.

Apparently, because of being able to eat more meat+fat on account of eating more dense carbs that don't erode my tooth enamel (like fruits), body composition is improving with more subcutaneous adipose tissue laid down, plus my eyes have more shine and hair has stopped falling so much.

My conclusion is that if we've developed large salivary amylase production, surely the human metabolism is systemically geared to a reasonable starch intake. Thankfully, starches are allowing me to eat more meat+fat without problematic consequences.

[Paleo Donk]

Glad to hear that your experimenting with starches is going well. The one big difference between starches and fruit that I've noticed is that I always had something within me telling to stop eating them fairly soon, but never really with fruit. There are obviously a number of reasons for this. Starches are more calorie dense, don't taste as good, might be poisoning my body, etc.. but it could be because of the high fructose content in modern fruits make them so addictive and unable for my body to know when its had enough.

Aren't roots and tubers a staple for many, past and present, hunter gatherer tribes? Much more so than fruits, especially in the African savannas? I know I've read some theories that I don't believe that state we turned to these calorie dense tubers to get enough fuel for our large brains. Also, are modern tubers closer in therm of nutrient content to paleolithic tubers as compared to fruit?  I think wild tubers do have quite a bit of anti-nutrients that require cooking to eliminate and is stated as one of the reasons why we turned to cooking in the first place.

hmmm..just found this - http://www.springerlink.com/content/q30v451728120085/

Apparently cooking does not deactivate glycoalkaloids that are harmful (even death is possible) if consumed in high-enough quantities.

[pc701]

Man I am confused, maybe it is all about ratio.

[MrBBQ]

Haha, the confused state is the best state - it means the mind is still open to the possibility of infinite reality...The human organism in the environment of Earth, the solar system, the milky way etc.

Anti-nutrients are a bugger and like you rightly say, it makes over-consumption less possible (so the animal moves on). I look to cooked starches as a raft across the river, but when I'm across the river, I'll discard the raft and river - in my wisdom. Maybe the domesticated breeds are less defensive in their anti-nutrient profile. Domestication sucks, but let's face it, we're a domesticated breed ourselves - I still think that life is miraculous, even if it is a little tainted by modernism.

The primitives gradually knew what they could procure and prepare from their landbase to sustain optimal health all the way through life (including pre-natal/post-natal) and they weren't restricted by dogma - it became self-evident what was nourishing/anti-nourishing. If I just eat RAF, my hair falls out and I can't eat enough to maintain a healthy weight without unbalancing organ function etc.

Isn't it stupid to sustain something that is unsustainable, hence the saying "the fool that persists in his folly will become wise"? I can say that I will be learning still on my deathbed, in whatever form that manifests...

Large amounts of fruit is NOT tooth-healing, full stop (I don't care what anyone says!), and because my kidneys can't take RZC, I have to find other strategies to make this sustainable. Quite frankly, rinsing my teeth with various substrates (bone meal, green clay, sodium bicarb etc.) after fruit definitely does not stop the rot.

I appreciate that submission on kidney stress pc701, which I found useful and I have been thinking about making some raw pemmican with ground juniper berries and maybe drinking some kidney-herb/root tea to see if that makes a difference. The article is totally undermined by the assertion that soy beans are anything fit for humans - stupid considering that it talks about phytate-related nutritional deficiencies in the same article.

Nature will temper us in its way, so I bow in silence waiting to be instructed...

I would like to be eating "guts and grease" as this WAPF article documents: http://www.westonaprice.org/Guts-and-Grease-The-Diet-of-Native-Americans.html (what a warrior face on that Navajo - awesome!)

[MrBBQ]

Another thing that we're all abundantly aware of around here is heat-mediated oxidation products (either minimal or maximal), particularly the so-called maillard products depending on carb/amino content.

I've been adding rooibos tea and other anti-oxidant spices to the cooking water of the starchy stuff as a potential means to minimise oxidation products - I wonder how much difference this would make, but I know that traditional India people add curry/betel leaves while clarifying butter into ghee, which I reckon must minimise oxidation of all components including chole-sterol (the native North Americindians weren't scared of oxysterols nor much else!).

On the matter of proteins, I think it was Ray Peat that said that the aminos in collagen/gelatin(the cooked form) are anti-inflammatory compared to the dominant aminos in muscle meats - hence the recommendation to eat of the whole creature (also out of reverence for life like the native North Americans). Maybe it's beneficial to include either bone meal (minerals in a powdered collagen matrix) or bone broth (probably less optimal, but still with the minerals and anti-inflammatory proteins as a hydrophylic colloid).

Sometimes, when things don't work quite as other people assert/experience, it shows the true value of dogma i.e. worthless. Maybe that's why "rendered" fat works for William, yet "cooked" fats don't serve Tyler...I myself like to keep my fats raw, but it's what works in nature, whether that be a camp in the depths of a jungle or an urban settlement in the 21st century.

[Paleo Donk]

If I just eat RAF, my hair falls out and I can't eat enough to maintain a healthy weight without unbalancing organ function etc.

Isn't it stupid to sustain something that is unsustainable, hence the saying "the fool that persists in his folly will become wise"? I can say that I will be learning still on my deathbed, in whatever form that manifests...

Large amounts of fruit is NOT tooth-healing, full stop (I don't care what anyone says!), and because my kidneys can't take RZC, I have to find other strategies to make this sustainable.

I find that I can never make statements as strong as these, in that one thing definitely causes another, especially if I have not eaten a certain way for a very long time. I guess I'm always in amazement how sensitive most people here are to the different inputs.

Some people have miraculous results on pemmican so I definitely think you should give it a shot if raw isn't working. I have noticed a bit of pattern forming that those that can handle pemmican don't do as well on raw (william, delfuego, danny, charles) and those that do well on raw don't handle pemmican as well (tyler, djr, and lots others here).

[KD]

I've been self-experimenting these last couple of weeks and I'd agree with carnivore/Hannibal that ratio seems to be everything.

I can say this because instead of relying on fruits for my carbohydrates, I've been eating cooked (boiled/steamed) starches in quite large quantities, PLUS along with more carbs, I've been increasing my meat+fat content to a much greater extent than before, which has been less problematic for me than meat+fat+fruit.

I've also been adding lightly cooked vegetables for variety, to make more "square" meals. Typically, I warm my meat and fat in a bain marie/porringer, which I find much more preferable to just room-temp or cold meat.

square. so you are eating your raw (warmed) meat/fat WITH cooked starches and veggies?? what do you mean by starches yams or traditional potato? or grains? OR how long do you wait before eating raw meat again? doesn't starch take many hours to digest?

[MrBBQ]

Yeah man, square as square can be.

Starch (amylose) begins its digestion in the mouth (courtesy of salivary amylase for breaking dietary starches/glycogens), hence it's rapido! Judging by my earlier glucose blast testing, the (simpler sugars from the) polysaccharides were in my bloodstream almost within minutes - very quick...

I haven't found yams yet, but I want to find some - otherwise, potatoes, butternut squash, carrots, turnip/swede and others. I tolerated grains for most of my young life, so I'm not particularly fearful of gliadin/gluten, although if I did consume grains, I'd be sprouting and fermenting them a la sourdough process or complementary soaking with high-phytase grains/seeds (e.g. soaking pasteurised pure oats with buckwheat or some similar combination).

There's a lot of myth about food combining and you're not telling me that nature doesn't complex polysaccharides with various amino acids...Hmmm...

Wait? As the Zen master said, eat when hungry, sleep when tired...This is the essence of Zen, hehe...

@Paleo Donk: Good suggestion (and thanks for your useful post before). I'm with tyler on keeping my fats raw, which are not at all problematic for me. I will always consume raw where it makes sense to me, and of course, biochemistry is often finding elegant and biologically active substances that are inactivated by heat. One example is "stigmasterol" (Wulzen anti-stiffness factor) in raw butter, which is inactivated by heat - that's useful for preventing degenerative conditions.

I'm loathe to cook anything I eat, especially starches, but like I've said, this is a means to an end. One to contribute to my tooth healing (no organic acids from too much fruit) and two to correct my low basal metabolic rate (which is improving greatly already - I've just found a source for fresh thyroid as well).