I've been getting on well with raw butternut squash actually. That's somewhat starchy. I've eaten up to 1 kg a day.
Actually I've just looked at the nutrition data and it doesn't make sense. It says 12g carb per 100g. 2g sugar, 2g fiber but ~ symbol for starch.
So I guess it's 8g per 100g. Anyone know what's going on with that?
alot of it is water. By the time you finish eating the thing you've made 'negative calorie soup' in your stomach. Heh. Although I'm biased like above and think raw starches are probably only of value as some kind of mineral supplement.
Yah he seems pretty bent on getting some starches in me. Im wondering if their are any raw sources? I guess I could always sprout some quinoa or something. Also forthehunt and KD what is your cal intake look like? It seems even fruitarian can gain some muscle if they eat 6000+ cals a day so Im sure raw paleos could do it in like 4000.
low by comparison then I guess. maybe ~2600-3500
What fruitarians are building
size on 6000 cals a day? Its certainly possible to build muscle on vegan diets, but raw fruits present an obstacle in a number of ways I think. Certainly cooked vegans can get large and even defined muscles, probably less than on other cooked diets, but nonetheless, the secret has something to do with the carbs and some might argue some stored bulk toxins in the cooked foods. I can see how some people can manipulate the same thing with just raw fruits if they are massively overdosing on calories, but even then its gong to be rare because most people arn't digesting much of that shit.
For me, it could very well be true in the future that once my body is totally healthy I will be able to put on weight even easier doing my same program. Its already happening to some degree and I think i'm now at my heaviest weight (while raw) in 5 years. Or I could try to force feed raw food now, at the same time, its never going to compare to whatever Christian Bale does or whatever.
but anyway, as a simple answer..you can gain muscle MASS on a variety of approaches, but likely not limited to meat and including perhaps fruit. I know someone doing just raw vegetarian (dairy, honey) that is very muscular and actually has a normal human size otherwise, but that seems fairly rare. Of note I guess is most carnivorous animals are fairly lean, although none of them look 'skinny' to my knowledge like the bulk of humans who restrict their diets to raw plants and/or meats. Just cooking the same foods (or likely a wider mix of paleo foods) obviously seems to make a difference when looking at alot of the cooked paleo/cf people. Although this likely carries other consequences that most raw foodists would like to avoid.
To me, it seems unfortunate in this as with other raw camps that most people would rather fuss how raw or how healthy their diet is on paper rather than actually bring down the results where it matters. After being on a variety of unhealthy 'health' programs that likely were not going to give me any more longevity then the average bird, it made more sense to me that I would only do things that made my life worth living in the present. As a young unmaried person, this included having a build that is at least presentable in society as 'healthy' as being fairly important, and being less fussy in social situations if need be. The point being in regard to starch, is that although we can't comment on traditional peoples in a WAP style to say that 'this' will correct all our health issues, at the same time if we can use any of these tools to our advantage, and are otherwise in a good state of health, it makes alot of sense to do so, rather than holding on to mere ideas of what is healthy without the results we really want.
Topic: Not all dieticians are as anti-paleo as I previously believed (Read 16587 times)