bowel movements

[Satya]

where do you draw the line?
on what grounds?

The line I would draw is: I would go only as far back as Acheulean tool users from the Lower Palaeolithic.  The grounds are: These are the peoples who can first be typified as hunter-gatherers.  They had social order and also created art.  Anything less is really not human, is it?  Can we breed with nonhumans?  If not, then why even look at these extra human species diets? 

Trace back to the roots of our species, but to go back to plants is foolish, as Kyle rightly pointed out.  We can't eat grass like cows, so looking even at mammals is futile.

[TylerDurden]

Maybe eating things we weren't "designed" to eat (as long as it's in the whole foods group) isn't such a devastating thing after all

Well, if the giant panda has to limit its energy expenditure because it's on the wrong diet, that can't be good. Same goes for sloths and koalas who also have to limit their energy expenditure.

[Raw Kyle]

"... your mode of reasoning..."

what do you mean? what is supposed to be my so-called mode of thinking in this thread?

i was asking a question for my own enlightenment & that of other readers

Your mode of reasoning as in looking at all organisms on the planet equally as informative for our ideal diet. You didn't say look at them equally, but you also didn't say look at some more than others. It seems to me that you have to pick just a few to look at, you have to limit yourself. If you look at everything you essentially are looking at nothing. The old "you're special, just like everyone else" kind of thing.

[rafonly]

"Your mode of reasoning as in looking at all organisms on the planet equally as informative for our ideal diet. You didn't say look at them equally, but you also didn't say look at some more than others"

for the sake of a sense of responsibility on this forum, i tend to think it would help if you, kyle, would provide a quote from at least 1 post in which i write any, if not all, of the statements you are putting in my mouth

thanks & be well

[Raw Kyle]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution

In the book "Evolving Health" author Boaz shows how closely we are linked the the life forms we co-evolved with. We are still using much of the same cellular metabolism that evolved 2 billion years ago. Many of our molecular, cellular, and system breakdowns are diet related to specific periods in our evolution. During my embryonic development in my mother's womb I had a tail and gills. We all did.

I'm not really interested in playing this game and even less interested in continuing with the evolving tone going on here, but this is the post that led me to believe you were considering all of organismal evolution for dietary advice.

For me I don't consider any comparative analysis between animals and diets to be the best information but rather comparative analysis between the same animals eating different diets. As in, when you have a population of the same animals (and this is easy with humans because they have many different diets) with different diets, which ones are the healthiest. Also, who's to say that horses or chimps or crabs might not be healthier if fed a different diet than the one they are naturally inclined to? Like the thing about panda bears in another thread, yes they eat bamboo but retain the digestive system of a carnivore, does that mean bamboo is more healthy for them? I would say it's more likely that they were being out competed for meat and were forced into a different niche, just like the lemurs that had to eat the rough parts of the bamboo with arsenic in them. They can tolerate it, but I believe they would probably be healthier without it, just like panda bears would probably have more energy and live longer on a diet of meat. They are just not able to get it because their abilities don't jive with that ecological niche as compared to stronger and faster predators. Humans on the other hand can fit into any niche they want because of technology, we can choose to eat a 100% carnivorous, 0% carnivorous, 100% fungal whatever diet we want.

[rafonly]

"The line I would draw is: I would go only as far back as Acheulean tool users from the Lower Palaeolithic.  The grounds are: These are the peoples who can first be typified as hunter-gatherers.  They had social order and also created art.  Anything less is really not human, is it?  Can we breed with nonhumans?  If not, then why even look at these extra human species diets?"

good point: it makes a lot of sense

a separate, albeit perhaps related, issue would be the sources or long term (evolutionary?) triggers of the current human cravings for all types of sugars -- including (sweet) fruits

[rafonly]

incidentally, kyle, the quote you just provided was authored by donrad
please take a look at my own forum name anytime you feel like it

end of story

[Raw Kyle]

Oh that's funny, I was originally having the conversation with donrad and didn't notice the name change half way through. Sorry for the mix up. I'm not into the internet arguing anymore though so if you want to "end the story" or "get me" then go for it, you got me. I've wasted more energy fighting people on the internet than in real life, and I haven't even had the internet my whole life!

[donrad]

If you are reading this you are a work of art beyond comprehension. You are a survivor against all odds. You have a continuous chain of life that goes back 4 billion years. Your existence is  marvelous. No words that I can write can do justice to your beauty.

How far back should we look?

4 billion years. It seems impossible but we must keep trying.

Cosmic evolution.

Thank you all

[Raw Kyle]

I would agree that to study the evolution of life on earth you would want to go back all the way to the beginning. I just can't see how that would be very fruitful for human diet research, except in a theoretical way with an evolutionary perspective that would speak to things eating other things and co-evolving with them. It just doesn't seem to me to inform much about what I should be eating right now in my own life, it seems a rather grander concept. When I look at the grand scheme of life on earth over the time lengths needed, what I'm eating right now seems pretty uninteresting and pointless. It's only when I start thinking about human history, about how humans survived before much technology, about early attempts at "food preparation" (stuff like jerky and pemmican, plants for medicine or even condiments, etc) that I start to relate these grand evolutionary and historical ideas to my current life and how I fit into it all.

[Satya]

I would agree that to study the evolution of life on earth you would want to go back all the way to the beginning. I just can't see how that would be very fruitful for human diet research, except in a theoretical way with an evolutionary perspective that would speak to things eating other things and co-evolving with them. It just doesn't seem to me to inform much about what I should be eating right now in my own life, it seems a rather grander concept.

But Kyle, you are missing the point.  Cosmic evolution, don't you know.  We are, after all, the stuff of stars ultimately, so why stop at 4 billion years when looking at evolution (Donrad's backstop)?  Why should we even eat when we could be fusing hydrogen into the higher elements and be creators in our own right, just as some stars that yield planetary systems are?

[rafonly]

so far my only participation in this thread, content-wise, has been merely to ask a question
luckily, this question met w/ a, for me at least, most interesting answer

come to think of it, yes, of course: the boundaries of a trophic niche will, naturally, tend to overlap the inter-species lines -- whether animal species are defined by inter-breeding, as many biologists define them, or otherwise

in their natural environment, gorillas & chimps have different foodstyles

this leads to a chicken & egg type of issue, namely what came 1st: the species -- incl. its gene expression at a specific bifurcation or phase transition in the species evolution -- or the geographic & climatic environment?
also, what defines a sub-species (such as gorilla vs chimp)? what is the role of the eating pattern in sub-species differentiation?

when it comes to humans, are ethnic/racial differences analogous to sub-species divisions (w/ minimal or no inter-breeding in the pre-columbian past)?
did each have its naturally specific foodstyle in the pre-columbian planet?

moreover, are upper paleolithic hypothetical homo sub-species - defined on a genetic, anatomic, physiological, or environmental basis -- the forerunners of pre-columbian ethnic groups?

[rafonly]

in my last paragraph above i meant to say simply "paleolithic"
afaik this period starts w/ the lower paleolithic, which includes:
~ acheulean, homo erectus or homo ergaster in africa, west asia, europe
~ non-acheulean in east asia, java

[Satya]

this leads to a chicken & egg type of issue, namely what came 1st: the species -- incl. its gene expression at a specific bifurcation or phase transition in the species evolution -- or the geographic & climatic environment?
also, what defines a sub-species (such as gorilla vs chimp)? what is the role of the eating pattern in sub-species differentiation?

when it comes to humans, are ethnic/racial differences analogous to sub-species divisions (w/ minimal or no inter-breeding in the pre-columbian past)?
did each have its naturally specific foodstyle in the pre-columbian planet?

moreover, are upper paleolithic hypothetical homo sub-species - defined on a genetic, anatomic, physiological, or environmental basis -- the forerunners of pre-columbian ethnic groups?

These are very good questions.  I am not very well-versed in the life sciences in general, but I would venture to say that the environment came first, the adaptation to it later.  On the definition of sub-species, I am afraid ignorance rules presently, but I will go out on a limb and suggest that there may indeed be problems with ethnic blending concerning the optimal health of someone for a given locale.

If someone, for instance, has the light pigment adaptation for polar cold, but also is quite tall with a small frame as is true for warmer climes, where and how should they live?  And isn't it interesting that foods of the north contain lots of vitamin D (cold marine life) as the sun is not such a source in polar regions?

For another instance concerning adaptation and then natural selection, I am of northern ancestry.  I have the traits for cold adaptation: short, thick bones, stocky build.  I would imagine that I would be best suited for a diet very low in plant foods, as this climate of cold (and paleo times were colder than today) dictates such a life.  That said, the Inuit (according to WA Price) did preserve sorrel in seal oil and dried cranberries (but there wasn't much of that I am sure). 

Who knows what other traits and gene expressions get messed up if I eat a more plant-based diet?  I am allergic to nightshades.  I am gluten intolerant and don't do well with dairy.  I have no known issues with any paleolithic animal food.

[feral]

In conclusion:

If you go carnivore, you will probably digest more thoroughly, crap less, and crap infrequently.  If you do develop issues with constipation it is most likely a result of too little fat in your diet.  Given a 'desperate' situation regarding constipation, berries tend to work wonders.  If eating zero carb is more important to you than 100% raf, then you could try something like a rotisserie chicken, although you'll probably have a tough time finding one that isn't injected with corn syrup or MSG.  Also, if you eat much dried meat you might develop constipation if you don't drink enough fluids to compensate for the loss of water from the meat.

[Nicola]

After looking at a few of this guys videos I came across this one about the bowel and poo...he mentions fiber - yet people on a paleo diet or people eating meat and fat (van eating the fat first and then the meat) do not have much or any fiber! Do you people ever think and wonder about not "moving" much (or having loose stools and all of the other episodes) and that the waist gets recycled - toxins going threw the system again and again?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86q19t8ciQE

Nicola

[goodsamaritan]

It is fruit and fat that makes me move.

I disagree with fiber.

see http://www.fibermenace.com/

[Raw Kyle]

It is fruit and fat that makes me move

Doesn't fruit have a lot of fiber in it?

[Hannibal]

Doesn't fruit have a lot of fiber in it?

Yes it does
raspberries for example - they've got over 6 grams of fiber in 100 g; other berries are likewise rich in this element

[goodsamaritan]

Doesn't fruit have a lot of fiber in it?

Depends on the fruit.
As a rule of thumb it is a lot less than vegetables.
And the fruit fiber is usually soluble.
There is a distinction between SOLUBLE and INSOLUBLE fiber.

The insoluble fiber is very bad with the excess being recommended by western mds.  That is what the website fiber menace explains http://www.fibermenace.com

Fruit and raw fatty meat are the easiest and most "completely" digested foods. 

A lot of our poop should come from old blood we have discarded as waste.  Found this out as experimented during my 14 day orange juice fast with the guidance of my teacher Barefoot Herbalist MH.  No solid food, just DILUTED juice and you keep on pooping if you use a herbal colon cleanser or a warm water enema.

MH taught me to temporarily use his herbs to train and restore my colon function.  I just trained for 2 months.  After that, no need.  Just my raw omnivore diet with fatty hydrating fruit in the morning and my fatty raw animal food lunch and dinner... and I get daily effortless colon function.

Also learned from another guy the optimal position for pooping. 

[tear11]

I have not gone or had the urge to go for over three weeks. My appetite is the best I can remember and I have no discomfort but being severly undwerweight and having a history of chronic constipaion would anyone suggest helping things out with some herbs just to see? Or should I just not worry about it. I when was on regular and raw vegan i had severe discomfort and problems with constipation  and bowel desease.

Thanks....

[goodsamaritan]

I have not gone or had the urge to go for over three weeks. My appetite is the best I can remember and I have no discomfort but being severly undwerweight and having a history of chronic constipaion would anyone suggest helping things out with some herbs just to see? Or should I just not worry about it. I when was on regular and raw vegan i had severe discomfort and problems with constipation  and bowel desease.

Thanks....

3 weeeeekkkkkssss???? This is insane!

Maybe you mean 3 days?

My policy in the house with my kids is that 1 day no poop is red alert... 2 days is a national emergency!

[invisible]

If I'm eating zero carb and not eating excess calories I may only go once a week. If I am eating zero carb but eating alot I will go more often. I had a carb and junk food gorge last weekend and was going 15 times over 2 day period with horrible diarrhea, burning and even blood....

I actually feel that the less you go the better as long as when you do go it is easy, clean, firm and with little dour.

Feces is made of undigested food and bacteria in the colon...the less the better.

[wodgina]

How does you bowel heal if your crapping all the time?

In no part of my rational can I think how coffee enemas could be anything but damaging or even dangerous. 

[goodsamaritan]

In no part of my rational can I think how coffee enemas could be anything but damaging or even dangerous. 

I agree with you.  Coffee enemas can be damaging and dangerous.  Coffee enemas are not used for bowel movement issues.  Coffee enemas are used to detoxify a cirrhotic liver / toxic liver when liver flushes are not enough.  Coffee enema is a tool to help heal the extremely sick as an emergency measure.

The 14 day diluted orange juice fast I did that helped heal my bowels had me crapping just once per day (or you use a warm WATER enema).  My teacher said that a fast should be stopped when you miss to crap for 1 day because your body begins to reabsorb toxins instead of crapping them out.

I believe that my fasting that long dissolved the rest of the stones in my liver and  helped strengthen my digestive system which now allows me to consume quite a good amount of meat.