GCB:Eating meat regularly is harmful to health

[Hanna]

Burger says he changed his opinion about (raw) meat.
He made his claims both orally and in writing.
Source in German: 
Interview with GCB via Skype (word for word): http://www.abenteuer-rohkost.net/threads/884-Guy-Claude-Burger-rät-vom-Fleisch-essen-ab/page2
His central messages are now:
Eating meat becomes harmful to health in the long run (after decades). Therefore, meat shouldn’t be eaten regularly. It is only a surrogate for insects. Meat of wild animals is ok, if eaten perhaps once a month (more often, for example, in case of pregnancy).

Iguana! Why didn`t you tell us anything about that?

[Iguana]

Hanna, do you hold me responsible to report on this forum about GCB’s conversations in German which I know nothing about? 

The only thing I know about it is that he eats now (since about a year) a lot of bee brood and found out it suits him much better than meat. He’s been thinking and telling for decades that insects are missing in our diet. I even started a topic about this, in which you can directly read what he wrote.
Direct link to his relevant post

I also wrote about insects:

Yes, variety is very important, exactly as Jessica and Tyler say. Otherwise, after some months you'll probably get bored of eating always the same food. Not only other mammals meats, but also poultry, eggs, shellfish, fish... and insects if possible... anything except of course neolithic and modern foods!

No, unfortunately. I'm disgusted by maggots and I admire Sabertooth who can eat them with pleasure. A friend of mine also told me he has eaten meat with maggots and he said it's tasty...

But I could once catch a grasshopper and I ate it. Also, once in the desert in California, I was a bit hungry and I tasted an ant. It was too small to feel its taste, so I caught some more and put them all together in my mouth; it was not good, quite acidic.     Bee brood is tasty but difficult to find. 

I think if we were hungry sometimes, we would try much more to eat various insects. Our ancestors certainly ate quite a lot of them.  Bruno Comby launched a research long ago in view to find out which insects are palatable and himself was regularly eating insects. GCB also thinks insects are missing in our food range.

When he was staying in my house about 4 years ago, we were eating meat regularly, about once or twice a week, alternating with fish, shellfish, crabs and eggs.  One of his daughters is a MD, and 100% raw paleo / instincto ever since childhood. She eats a lot of meat; when I brought her some along with eggs, she had a big fridge already full of meat and it was difficult to find space in it for the meat I brought her. Most of the long term instinctos that I know eat a lot of meat too. As I reported, almost all of us didn’t believe GCB when he attributed the death of Nicole to her large and regular beef consumption. But he seems really convinced about that. I think she was somehow on VLC.

[van]

He may be right,,, maybe,, but then, as I posted before,  I witnessed many times at Montrame Instinctos eating large portions of meat,, and that is my current idea as to what is really harmful,, overeating protein meal after meal, or even just eating one large protein meal per day.   As my understanding is that the body can only utilize so much protein for repair and maintenance, the rest being somewhat toxic and stimulating an insulin reaction.   And, i understand that it may not be an instinctive practice to limit one's self to small, three to four ounce portions of meat throughout the day, as opposed to eating a pound at one sitting.  But think about it for a second..  If insects were a primary food source,  wouldn't early hunter gatherer/insect eating peoples have eaten them when they found them,,, Thus eating them throughout the day as do all other mammals who eat insects?   Something to think about,   I think.       Insects also have the most complete fat, protein, mineral balance...  unless one was able to eat the whole cow.   Tribes who eat (cooked) game birds do eat the whole carcass...

[Iguana]

Maybe when they found no meat of big animals, then they ate insects the whole day. But since we like to eat meat in rather large amounts, why wouldn’t our ancestors do the same whenever they had the opportunity?

Whatever the case, I just took out of my fridge a appetizingly smelling  large chunk of a donkey leg and I’m probably going to eat some for my dinner since I have no insects in my fridge… plus, they are few, small and far apart in my surrounding… and anyway I’m not especially fond of insects!   

On another register I found a nicely smelling unidentified mushroom (could not identify it since I don’t know anything about mushrooms) in my garden and I carefully ate it, keeping a small piece in my mouth for about 10 seconds before swallowing it. As its taste was very good, I ate the whole, still carefully. I think mushrooms should be part of our diet too. This one was delicious.     

[Iguana]

Now that I dutifully tried to better understand that Skype talk through the help of Google translate, it appears to me that the title of this topic does not accurately fits to what GCB said. Wouldn't it be more truthful to change it for something like “GCB: Eating meat too often is harmful to health”, Hanna? As German is your mother tongue, you would certainly know better than me.

[van]

Maybe when they found no meat of big animals, then they ate insects the whole day. But since we like to eat meat in rather large amounts, why wouldn’t our ancestors do the same whenever they had the opportunity?

Whatever the case, I just took out of my fridge a appetizingly smelling  large chunk of a donkey leg and I’m probably going to eat some for my dinner since I have no insects in my fridge… plus, they are few, small and far apart in my surrounding… and anyway I’m not especially fond of insects!   

On another register I found a nicely smelling unidentified mushroom (could not identify it since I don’t know anything about mushrooms) in my garden and I carefully ate it, keeping a small piece in my mouth for about 10 seconds before swallowing it. As its taste was very good, I ate the whole, still carefully. I think mushrooms should be part of our diet too. This one was delicious.     

   I hope that this bit of redundancy doesn't annoy,,  early man created by nature or god or whatever had little desire for creating an individual that would live to 100 (but only to live long enough to procreate and pass along survival skills) .   But would program their diet to gorge on anything because there would never be a way of knowing when the next meal would come along.   Thus,, to gorge would be fine for them, and questionable for us should we be interested in living very long.      And, again, experimentation can be a way to see for one's self especially over time, as to whether one feels better with gorging or eating smaller more frequent meals of protein.   

  And back to the insects...  I still suggest they ate them as they found them, one by one,, and that could take many hours of hunting as opposed to ripping into a two ton wooly mammoth.

[PaleoPhil]

It's interesting that Instinctos, Paleos and LCers have been learning the same thing--that too much muscle meats with too little prebiotic foods causes problems in the longer run.

[goodsamaritan]

In my short experience healing myself and healing other people... instinctive eating still rules whether you eat A LOT OF MEAT or less meat.

I ate a lot of meat on Year 2 and 3 maybe because I needed lots of it.  And years 4-6 is a great decline.

I have healed people on short runs with lots of raw meat as well.

So it really depends.  I think children and pregnant women will need more meat and more frequent.  Depends on your level of activity as well.  And the combination of foods you eat.

[van]

I agree, over time excess protein will have it's effects. But here,   I am specifically speaking of how much protein one eats at one sitting,, be it meat or whatever protein.    There very well may be other nutrients in meat besides the proteins that the body craves or needs, and hence the 'need' to eat large amounts... but after a while, or as the body's needs are met for those particular nutrients;   that is what I am speaking of.      Also in the beginning for those beginning to eat raw/raw meat and proteins, there are so many different healing and cleansing phenomenas going on it would be very difficult to sort them all out especially with no real experience or reference point.  GCB's wife would often say to me that most people think that raw fruit and veg. are the body cleansers, but really raw proteins are much more aggressive...

[Iguana]

Van:

   I hope that this bit of redundancy doesn't annoy,,  early man created by nature or god or whatever had little desire for creating an individual that would live to 100 (but only to live long enough to procreate and pass along survival skills) .

It seems you didn’t see my answer to this point of yours:

…
 We don’t know: animals don’t seem to have either but nevertheless most of them live much longer than “just long enough to procreate and pass along hunting and survival skills” as you say below.
…
Many of them certainly lived longer and better lives than most of us, “knowledgeable and informed” civilized people.
…

  But would program their diet to gorge on anything because there would never be a way of knowing when the next meal would come along.   Thus,, to gorge would be fine for them, and questionable for us should we be interested in living very long.      And, again, experimentation can be a way to see for one's self especially over time, as to whether one feels better with gorging or eating smaller more frequent meals of protein.

This might be a good idea, but it has to be validated by long term experiments with several individuals.

Our long experience as instinctos tends to show that on the contrary we are better off with a large intake (which may be during several consecutive days at one meal per day) of  meat once in way, followed by a period without mammals’ meat in which we will eat fish, shellfish, eggs, birds or durians (or insects!) instead. This seems to be more like what would have happened in nature in the distant past.

At least, it’s more what we instinctively tend to do and what we are usually constrained to by the vagaries of our food supply. 

  And back to the insects...  I still suggest they ate them as they found them, one by one,, and that could take many hours of hunting as opposed to ripping into a two ton wooly mammoth.

Yes, I have already agreed with you on that point.

GS:
 

In my short experience healing myself and healing other people... instinctive eating still rules whether you eat A LOT OF MEAT or less meat.

I ate a lot of meat on Year 2 and 3 maybe because I needed lots of it.  And years 4-6 is a great decline.

I have healed people on short runs with lots of raw meat as well.

So it really depends.  I think children and pregnant women will need more meat and more frequent.  Depends on your level of activity as well.  And the combination of foods you eat.

Exactly. That’s what has been constantly observed within the instincto experience. 

[van]

As mentioned,  I don't really care what early man did, or ate, or even how he had sex or treated his women, or his instincts.  For I don't believe they were to serve him living a long life,, but to stay alive for the moment and procreate.      And, whether it be fish or meat or eggs,  I agree variety is good.  I am simply speaking as to how much protein the body can utilize for repair and maintenance at any on meal, with the rest being converted to glucose at the expense of certain toxic byproducts.   And because Instinctos eat this way and seemingly do fine, is similar to saying early man seemed to do ok with this way of eating.  Doesn't mean much to me.  Obviously you're doing ok,,  you don't have any serious illnesses that you've mentioned.  But we all age for various reasons.  I am simply stating here that eating excess protein in any one meal ages you, as does eating sugar to the extent that it raises your insulin levels.  One may not be aware of it in the moment, but there's enough evidence that leads me to experiment, and leads me to report my findings.  This may not be true for anyone else.   But to simply rely on what early man did, or what other instinctos do, whether it's GCB or not,  seems to me to be limiting.     
  I heard a quote the other day on the radio while driving,,  real change happens mostly when we move out of comfort zone.   Food can be a real comfort zone for many.

[Iguana]

As mentioned,  I don't really care what early man did, or ate, or even how he had sex or treated his women, or his instincts.  For I don't believe they were to serve him living a long life,, but to stay alive for the moment and procreate.

The ones who behaved in the way most favorable for survival had the best chances to get the longest life. Their behavior was in a large part transmitted to their offspring, both by the genes and by training. We descend from those ones, obviously the ones who survived best. Our instincts are inherited from them and have been fine tuned by natural selection to give us the longest lifespan possible in the wild.

But to simply rely on what early man did, or what other instinctos do, whether it's GCB or not,  seems to me to be limiting.

The point is not to rely on what others do or did. It’s to rely one one’s instinct to know what and how much to eat. How can you know otherwise “how much protein the body can utilize for repair and maintenance at any one meal” without any excess that would be “converted to glucose at the expense of certain toxic byproducts”, as you wrote?

  I heard a quote the other day on the radio while driving,,  real change happens mostly when we move out of comfort zone.   Food can be a real comfort zone for many.

Yes, sure. For example when you just have to order as much bones and fat as you want from Slankers or Northern Bison or when you can buy bananas in bulk. That’s why I said the solution would be to hunt and gather our own food in the wilderness. The problems are on one hand that very few of us are willing to do this, and on the other hand that not much wildlife remains intact.   

[van]

what I meant by offering the quote was that to experiment with a new way of eating puts one immediately out of their comfort zone.   Exactly where I went when I experimented with switching from sugar and protein to fat as a fuel source.  It wasn't easy mentally.  I included that for you.
    I don't agree what so ever about what you write regarding instinct preserving us for old age.   There is no evidence of that.  But plenty on how to survive long enough to procreate and pass along survival and communal skills.  As in don't eat that mushroom, smell that meat before eating, eat all you can right now because you don't know where the next meal will come from...   Fine line, yes, but it lies at the heart of what you and I are discussing.    I'm sure I can't change your mind that instinct isn't the one bible for optimal health.   But others here may discover that there's benefit from combining instinct with current science.   

[micelte]

Not really sure whether GCB's new claims are questioning some of the fundamental principles of instincto-nutrition (doesn't meat often taste good to the point that we tend to overeat it? - I mean, even for wild one!) - I guess he would have to answer that himself...

But what I am starting to be convinced of, through my own experience, and which seems to be an evolution of anopsology, is that as humans, who are fundamentally more evolved than animals, the mental state in which we are at the time we eat is influencing *more* what the body absorbs and uses, than the food itself.

At this stage, I am still agreeing with most of the instincto principles, but I am nearly sure that humans have the potential to somehow control their instinct, that is, sometimes: benefit from a food that does not taste great, or, create some damage from a food that tastes delicious.

Mind over matter... Stuff that animals can't do but that we can.

[Projectile Vomit]

...humans, who are fundamentally more evolved than animals...

You lost me there. Must be an instincto thing...

[Iguana]

No, it seems to be a Micelte thing! 

Van, I don't see any answer to my question in your last post.

[van]

Sorry I forgot it,,   through blood work, from only what i've read,,  rise in insulin levels from conversion of protein to glucose, an increase in protein conversion by products, of which I can't remember, but if you're interested, truly, I will go back to dig it out.   Also from my or one's own experience.  How much protein does one need to maintain muscle integrity vs. overload,  same thing applies to maintaining testosterone levels...  have to go, someone's at the door. later...

[Iguana]

Sorry I forgot it,,   through blood work, from only what i've read,,  rise in insulin levels from conversion of protein to glucose, an increase in protein conversion by products, of which I can't remember, but if you're interested, truly, I will go back to dig it out.   Also from my or one's own experience.  How much protein does one need to maintain muscle integrity vs. overload,  same thing applies to maintaining testosterone levels...  have to go, someone's at the door. later...

No, thanks, you don’t have to dig it out: I’m not interested in this kind of medical investigations and interpretations.

I don't agree what so ever about what you write regarding instinct preserving us for old age.   There is no evidence of that. But plenty on how to survive long enough to procreate and pass along survival and communal skills.

Sorry but what you say makes no sense and is proven wrong by a lot of well known facts. Disobey to your instinct telling you to drink when thirsty or not to jump down from a cliff (just 2 examples) and you won’t live long. Just searching 30 seconds by Google, I found this :
“In this study, I conduct a literature survey of studies of 42 mammal species from eight orders, showing that post-reproductive lifespan appears to be widespread among mammals.”

As in don't eat that mushroom, smell that meat before eating, eat all you can right now because you don't know where the next meal will come from...   Fine line, yes, but it lies at the heart of what you and I are discussing.    I'm sure I can't change your mind that instinct isn't the one bible for optimal health.   But others here may discover that there's benefit from combining instinct with current science.

I never thought nor said that instinct is “the one bible for optimal health”. Current science is very useful; it tells us that pesticides, cooking, wheat and dairy are noxious, for example. The instinctive nutrition theory and practice has been developed by using the scientific method.

Micelte, sorry I can’t follow you. 

[van]

See this is what I am speaking about,,  when you suggest that I am discrediting any value of instinct  by siting how one would die without following the instinct of drinking water.   That sort of argument gets us nowhere.  I never indicated to throw out instinct altogether.      Let's take a look at one facet of instinct.   That of eating sugar.  It's there.  We all love sugar,, something sweet, whether it's cake or a mango.  Instinctos would say if the desire is there, if you drool with the smell and it tastes good, eat it, all you want till it no longer tastes good.  And I'm sure we both can agree that with cooked food, as with the cake,  that same impulse is there to eat it, and we both agree that the stop is missing since it's full of processed materials that the instinct can no longer identify as necessary raw food molecules.....   But the real question  I think needs to be asked is,   Why the taste for sweet in the first place?    Now, my guess is you will automatically take us back to where you believe we developed a 'natural' taste for sweet food; original man living near the equator where sweet sugary foods abounded.  That's your choice of what to believe, as to why they still are an ideal part of your mainstay, and make up a majority of your calorie consumption on a day to day basis.    The other choice, which to me makes more sense considering where my ancestry has developed in the last thousands of years ( who knows just how many thousands), is that my body's genetic inscriptions have developed eating according to the seasons, not just one long summery sugar laden one.   So if you're willing to follow along,, that would mean sugar would appear at most for a couple of months a year.  And my then impulse to eat those berries, those tart wild apples or cherries etc. would have naturally appeared in part for my benefit to put on several pounds of fat to help me endure the winter,, not unlike other animals who do the same, like the bear, or wolf, or coyote or even the horse or cow who inhales as much as sweet green grass as they can before winter..    And in doing so the small amount of insult of damage caused by rising insulin levels from eating sugar for that short period of time would be completely offset by the restorative period for the rest of the year where sugar was not available and I was 'forced' to eat fat and protein for sustenance and fuel, thus reducing my insulin sensitivity.     Now extend that availability time where sugar is 'naturally' offered and that's where I believe the problem arises in as far as following an instinct that was created for a different purpose.    And yes I have read where some days you'll eat figs to you don't want to eat another one, and then the next meal it's lamb or seafood.  And how you don't have sources of fat readily available as we do 'here'. 
   It's your choice to avoid all literature relating to the effects of long term spikes or  increases of insulin.  I did the same and was completely resistant to anyone or anything  that would suggest that sugar is sugar in any form,, that fruit is not some elite sort of sweet outside the realm of sugar.    That way of narrow thinking is what I meant by the inference to instinctive nutrition being your bible.  I hope that clears up what I was intending to convey. 

[Iguana]

See this is what I am speaking about,,  when you suggest that I am discrediting any value of instinct  by siting how one would die without following the instinct of drinking water.

I was responding to these words of yours:

I don't agree what so ever about what you write regarding instinct preserving us for old age.   There is no evidence of that.

I quoted this study which shows you’re wrong on this point: Female post-reproductive lifespan: a general mammalian trait.

The other choice, which to me makes more sense considering where my ancestry has developed in the last thousands of years ( who knows just how many thousands), is that my body's genetic inscriptions have developed eating according to the seasons, not just one long summery sugar laden one.

Then you would likely be adapted to wheat and cooked food as well since your ancestors had them as a staple for the last thousands of years. You would also be genetically very different of people born in the tropics such as GS. This is clearly not the case: we all share the same DNA at 99.9% and most of the 0.1% of variability “does not affect a person's characteristics”.

http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/resources/whats_a_genome/Chp4_1.shtml The majority of variations are found outside of genes, in the "extra" or "junk" DNA that does not affect a person's characteristics. Mutations in these parts of the genome are never harmful, so variations can accumulate without causing any problems. Genes, by contrast, tend to be stable because mutations that occur in genes are often harmful to an individual, and thus less likely to be passed on.

[Iguana]

Not really sure whether GCB's new claims are questioning some of the fundamental principles of instincto-nutrition (doesn't meat often taste good to the point that we tend to overeat it? - I mean, even for wild one!) - I guess he would have to answer that himself...

Yes, on this point and since (according to the conversation posted by Hanna) he now thinks we would instinctively tend to eat too much meats of wild animals too,  I agree there’s something at odds with his stance that our instinct adequately adjusts our intake of various raw unprocessed wild foods.

I don’t know the answer, but I guess he might exaggerate  on both sides. Or perhaps the question of availability matters: it’s not so easy to get the meat of large mammals. It became commonplace only after our ancestors had developed hunting weapons and strategies plus cutting tools, which may be too recent in our evolution for a perfect adaptation.     

[van]

I was responding to these words of yours: I quoted this study which shows you’re wrong on this point: Female post-reproductive lifespan: a general mammalian trait.Then you would likely be adapted to wheat and cooked food as well since your ancestors had them as a staple for the last thousands of years. You would also be genetically very different of people born in the tropics such as GS. This is clearly not the case: we all share the same DNA at 99.9% and most of the 0.1% of variability “does not affect a person's characteristics”.

not my usual style,  but I am going to respond with the typically U.S. slogan,,  'whatever'.       

[Hanna]

Yes, on this point and since (according to the conversation posted by Hanna) he now thinks we would instinctively tend to eat too much meats of wild animals too,  I agree there’s something at odds with his stance that our instinct adequately adjusts our intake of various raw unprocessed wild foods.

I don’t know the answer,

His answer to a similar question of mine is that insects, that is a whole protein class, are missing in our diet. According to gcb, this disturbs the work of our nutritional instinct and the overall balance of our diet.

Well, I have no opinion on this since I have never intentionally eaten any insect. For me it’s reassuring to know that nothing is written in stone, not even GCB’s teachings, Iguana , so we can’t help but use our own brain.

[Iguana]

 

His answer to a similar question of mine is that insects, that is a whole protein class, are missing in our diet. According to gcb, this disturbs the work of our nutritional instinct and the overall balance of our diet.

Thank you to let us know that, I didn’t know about this hypothesis. He could be right or he could be wrong, but at least it’s another possibility than those I expressed in my last post. Unfortunately it’s difficult to test because bee brood is hard to get and other insects are not so appetizing for most of us, poor civilized people.

Well, I have no opinion on this since I have never intentionally eaten any insect. For me it’s reassuring to know that nothing is written in stone, not even GCB’s teachings, Iguana , so we can’t help but use our own brain.

I suppose you never followed a GCB entire seminar (except perhaps a one weekend crash course) because there’s actually something written in stone in what he used to teach: “question everything, don’t believe anybody and anything, myself included — of course. Please, question how and why at every step, relentlessly put every thing into question, always”.

He insisted so much on the fact that scientific theories are only approximate and provisional models of the reality, models which will have to be modified, completed or even discarded in the future when more understanding, info and knowledge will be available, that he went on that topic during the full morning of the first seminar day.

It’s by this way of questioning all previous ideas and theories about nutrition and starting all over from scratch (the methodical doubt of Descartes) that 50 years ago he, his wife and his friend JDD (later joined by other people) came to test the idea of eating everything raw, unprocessed, un-spiced and unmixed. Then, by this experiment, they discovered that the consumption of wheat and dairy induced troubles in themselves and in the numerous animals they used as guinea pigs. Next they discovered that they were attracted by the smell of fish and meat and that a raw vegan diet was not sustainable in the long run.

That’s how the raw paleo diet was born, decades before others such as Eaton, Cordain, or Vonderplanitz came partially to similar conclusions.

I have been myself constantly questioning GCB’s theories, hypothesis and ways of practicing, but I failed to find any significant flaw — as several MDs and experts. There are a few points I rather disagree with him, but it’s not on the dietary issue. Plenty of people, who have more or less understood his theories and practiced their kind of instincto nutrition for a while, think they know better and have put up divergent personal ideas and theories. A few of them even regularly contribute to this forum! Their ideas and practices seem to work fine for them, at least during some years, but experiments done by a single individual don’t prove much. Moreover, their ideas and theories don’t withstand a rational, thorough analysis.

Therefore, I find your words and smiley “not even GCB’s teachings, Iguana ,” completely out of place, aggressive and offensive. I’m used to use my own brain, thanks, you don’t have to remain me. You’ve always been aggressive with me and this is something I dislike in your behavior. I’m a sensitive guy and it hurts.

Otherwise I appreciate your contributions and I thank you for them, you bring interesting points. Please stay with us but be gentle!   

[Hanna]

Sorry, Iguana, no offense meant. Or at least I meant myself more than I meant you or others  . By „use our own brain“ I simply meant that we have to experiment and make observations ourselves, that is, for example, eat insects and observe the effects this has on us.