No, "palaeo" is defined by what is not "palaeo", rather than what is palaeo(ie " no grains, no dairy etc;") - so wai is indeed "palaeo".
I mentioned sugar. Isn't sugar "not Paleo"?
I had no idea Wai recommended sugar?
Shouldn't you examine the Wai diet before you conclude that it is "Paleo"?
Where does Wai say this?
At the link I provided sugar is listed as an optional food. Granted, it's optional, but to say anything positive about refined sucrose is pretty far from a Paleo perspective. What next, Wonder Bread is optional? I read one Wai dieter claim that Wai himself eats sugar and Kurite seems to be confirming (correct me if I'm wrong) that sugar is regarded as OK in the Wai diet.
Tyler, what do you think of these quotes from Wai? -
"'Empty calories'
One of the most prominent accusations heard, is that of sugar being 'just empty calories'. This refers to the fact that table sugar has been stripped of anything else than just the basic molecules glucose and fructose. Although table sugar is (almost) devoid of any micronutrients, it is still a macronutrient, a useful source of energy. If daily requirements of micronutrients are met, there is therefore no objection to the use of sucrose in order to meet daily macronutrient requirements.
Types of sugar
Different types of table sugar exist, but we recommend the use of white refined sugar, because most of the impurities (possible sources of toxic substances) have been removed.
Conclusion
Sugar is just a form of energy, and can be used without problem as long as the complete diet meets macro- and micronutrient requirements.
(Source: http://www.waiworld.com/waidiet/twd-sugar.html)"
"Table sugar is an excellent source of extra energy, as long as it isn’t taken at the expense of necessary vitamins and minerals. As a guideline: maximally 50% of the total energy intake." (http://www.waiworld.com/waidiet/thewaidiet.pdf)As for the issue of what Wai recommends, I simply meant that it didn't include raw meats like almost all other palaeo themed diets, and many RVAFers find it more difficult to have a RVAF which excludes raw meats , with just raw seafood as an alternative.
I know, and my question was how is the discouraging of meat intake considered Paleo? Encouraging sugar and discouraging meats would be about as anti-Paleo as one could get if they weren't modified with the "optional" label.
Also, Wai ranks the "protein quality" of foods based solely on the ratio of cystine plus methionine to total protein content, which results in his ranking Brazil nuts and
rolled oats well above beef, chicken and pork (
http://www.13.waisays.com/protein.htm). He also writes, "Even consuming (the right-) fruits only, you will absorb all protein you need." Is this "Paleo" in your view?
From this line of thinking of Wai's, there develops quotes from his followers like this one: "Brazil nuts have better protein quality than any animal food...."
http://www.waiworld.com/waitalk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1293. Aren't nuts generally regarded as a second-rate food in this forum? Another result is that the animal food section of the Wai forum is dominated by discussion of egg yolks and fish
http://www.waiworld.com/waitalk/phpBB3/viewforum.php?f=11&sid=67a4fd2f7a2718ea053fdc53182137e9 rather than meats, so Wai's followers apparently take his recommendations and warnings seriously.
The Wai diet is clearly another raw alternative diet, but is it really "Paleo" by your definition?
Is anyone here following a Wai diet?