Well of course I was BSing because people are totally hypocritical on this stuff. A few people want scientific evidence, but they want only the scientific evidence that backs up the claims they already believe. Most others - as you can readily see even on this forum of generally smarter raw foodists - can't wait to embrace anything that is not mainstream as the new holy grail and the fix to all their problems because yeah..they had already so carefully followed science to a T. Then dismissing how perhaps it might be better to maintain first the common sense stuff like having to have a functioning metabolism and hormones as a pre-requisite to health before thinking just 'removing stuff' heals you.
I think I know what you mean, KD. There is quite a range of attitudes, from dismissing anything different than what one is already doing or what the mainstream advocates, to quickly embracing a new fad without researching it first to see whether there appears to be any real merit to it, and dismissing any info that contradicts it.
Also, sometimes removing stuff turns out to be just the thing that heals someone, rather than necessarily some guru's notions about what heals metabolisms. FWIW, That has tended to be the case for me, even though I was quite reluctant to give up foods like grains and dairy, which probably contributed to years of needless suffering, because I gave too much credence to mainstream science and medicine's dismissal of approaches that remove or limit foods.
Like many here report, I've tried quite a range of recommendations over the years and came to raw Paleo somewhat reluctantly, after trying nearly everything else, though I think I was helped by the fact that I have much less fear of germs and gross things in general than the average American. Still, I was pleasantly surprised with the benefits of raw Paleo that I experienced, which go far beyond health benefits.
In general, it seems that no two scientists or gurus or dieters agree on everything, so I tend to go with whatever works for me, and I take into account warnings about potential long-term side effects of any dietary approach and watch for the reported early symptoms, as well as other people's reported experiences, scientific research, and all credible information. I neither embrace nor reject anything without cause, at least not intentionally.
Other than that, just perusing the thread, most of the relevant points to this seem mentioned already. Pretty sure Peat is against grains ....
Generally yes, though according to the reports I shared above, he does allow for
some consumption of certain grains, presumably depending on one's tolerance of them. Even most prominent raw, Paleo, and Primal advocates like Paul Sisson, Kevin Gianni, Minger, Cordain, Sisson, Wolff, Kresser, Jaminet, etc., etc. tend to say that it's OK to eat a certain amount of off-plan foods.
Just a different wacky way to look at things.
Thanks for sharing your interesting perspective.
Still makes more sense to me to be aware of which things actually work to get the best results, rather than present how things should work in either a scientific or 'natural' model, and therefore take options off the table....
Right, and which things actually work
for each individual, as everyone is not the same.
if people present optimal approaches they should have better than average turnouts holistically, not just temporarily fix one or two ailments.
Right. After some early dramatic success with cooked Paleo, feeling much better than I had felt in many years, I was briefly tempted to shout to the world about it but quickly came to my senses, luckily.
