Latest posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
28,965
Posts
571,908
Members
29,025
Latest Member
3rdandGoal
What's New?

Im a carnivore dammit

SAD

SAD

TID Board Of Directors
Feb 3, 2011
3,938
2,897
Wrong. They ate grains, starches, and seeds. They even cooked their grains (which is smart due the antinutrients found in grains).

"he researchers also determined from alterations they observed in the starch granules that Neandertals prepared and cooked starch-rich foods to make them taste better and easier to digest." That's from here:

Starch grains found on Neandertal teeth debunks theory that dietary deficiencies caused their extinction*|*Smithsonian Science

A sweet potato and other yams are considered starchy vegetables and are not a product of the agricultural revolution. Roots have been eaten for tens of thousands of years and are a great source of carbohydrates. The same cannot be said for grains. Grains promote inflammation in the body and especially in the digestive system. Here's where one has to define what a study considers a "grain". A "grain" can be used in referencing the size of an object, i.e. "grain of sand" or "grain of salt". In the quote you produced, it says "starchy granules" and this could very well mean sweet potato granules. Below is a link that provides a research article and then goes on to debunk the idea that our paleolithic ancestors ate post-agricultural-revolution grains.
Ancient Carbs? So, Did Cavemen Eat Bread? by Josef Brandenburg | Josef Brandenburg's Fitness Blog

This is wrong, too. Hell, Natives even got famous for their crop planting and their techniques such as the Three Sisters-planting corn, squash, and beans together. Also, how can you forget about Pemmican; it's got berries in it. Acorn bread, Filé powder (like gumbo) made from sassafras trees...some fruit beer made Tiswin..the list goes on. They used a shitload of fruits and veggies, AS WELL AS meat.

Also, frybread didn't even appear until they were on reservations.


I don't know much about Native American agricultural habits, and I'm not going to run off and do some half-assed research to come back and try to sound like I do, but I can say that paleontologists widely agree that the most devastating revolution in history is the agricultural revolution. Pre-agricultural-revolution skeletons had less bone malformations, almost no cavities, thicker and stronger bones, and were generally taller than post-agricultural-revolution skeletons. One will almost always hear the argument "but what about the fact that the life-expectancy for paleo-era humans was so short?", and the simple and honest answer is, environmental hazards and lack of modern medicine. Paleolithic humans that made it past the hunting and gathering ages and to the "elder" age had a life expectancy of almost 70 years old, and that is without any medications or doctors. Common colds could kill infants, childbirth could kill both the child and the young mother, and saber-toothed tigers or falling off of cliffs while hunting could kill the young men, all of which bring the average life-expectancy WAY down. Look at the hunter-gatherer tribes of the modern day, and you will find 70+ year old people with low bodyfat, no diabetes, normal blood-pressure, and very sharp minds. Everyone should buy the book "The Paleo Solution" by Robb Wolf, which brings me to my next point......



Even so, I agree with the premise-eat your meat and fat-remember, cholesterol is the ONLY way to synthesize endogenous testosterone, and saturated fat is a good source. However, this is where we differ bud; I believe grains have their place, just not a big one.

Meat, fat, veggies, fruits, and a tad bit of grains. That's how I feel.


And my next point is, grains don't need to be in the diet at all. Here's the story of my father and his success since I turned him on to the Paleo diet. (Note: I am not completely Paleo due mostly to the time, money, and effort it takes to stay 100% Paleo, however, I have never felt better than the 2 months I WAS 100% Paleo.)

My dad has full-blown type II diabetes and was on Metformin along with a host of other medications including statins and ACE inhibitors. Back in January, he was 260lbs and felt like shit most of the time. I convinced him to buy and read "The Paleo Solution", and after he did, he agreed that it made sense and would give it a try. Fast forward to June of this year, he was 218lbs, had dropped the Metformin as well as the statins and ACE inhibitors, and his blood sugar (which he monitored religiously) held steady at 110-120 throughout the day. To this day, his doctors are amazed and impressed that he could control his diabetes, cholesterol, and blood pressure, with just dietary changes. He even eats 4 or 5 servings of fruit a day and his blood sugar remains stable. He feels great, has regular and painless bowel movements, has steadied his weight at 214-216 (he's a big guy) with probably 11-12%bf, and his skin/eyes/hair look great. He is living proof that grains are NOT needed and are in fact a major contributor to our modern health issues. None of this is exaggerated or sensationalized, it is the true story of my father. Now if I could just convince him to see a TRT doctor......
 
Ogre717

Ogre717

TID Official Lab Rat
Jul 22, 2011
1,678
714
I love when SAD gets a hardon for a thread. Im a card carrying member of PETA......


People Eating Tasty Animals.
 
bybon

bybon

VIP Member
Sep 15, 2011
508
100
A sweet potato and other yams are considered starchy vegetables and are not a product of the agricultural revolution. Roots have been eaten for tens of thousands of years and are a great source of carbohydrates. The same cannot be said for grains. Grains promote inflammation in the body and especially in the digestive system. Here's where one has to define what a study considers a "grain". A "grain" can be used in referencing the size of an object, i.e. "grain of sand" or "grain of salt". In the quote you produced, it says "starchy granules" and this could very well mean sweet potato granules. Below is a link that provides a research article and then goes on to debunk the idea that our paleolithic ancestors ate post-agricultural-revolution grains.
Ancient Carbs? So, Did Cavemen Eat Bread? by Josef Brandenburg | Josef Brandenburg's Fitness Blog

Josef Brandenburg did not read the study fully. He is correct that the terminology "grains" is used as a object reference and not the synonym for caryopsis. With that said, the study says that the grains found at Bilancino II could belong to Poaceae (true grasses), and the grains looked to belong to Brachypodium (a genus of the Poaceae family), which is a genus of bunch grasses. Cattail was found, but it was concluded to be mainly pollen (usually added to the flour).

Again in Bilancino, grains were found that represented Sparganium (bur reed). Now I have to give you some plant information to show the importance. Sparganium and its relatives as well as true grasses are in the Poales order, but in different Families (true grasses with caryopsis are found in Poaceae); Sparganium are found in Typhaceae.

Sparganiums have fruit called achenes. Grasses have fruit called caryopsis (aka grain). The difference? The only difference is in grains the pericarp (ovary wall) is fused to the thin seed coat. Once ground and cooked, I can't see a presense of pericarp making a noticeable nutritional difference. The Sparganium and Brachypodium were used together (smarter, that way they got more flour).

Yes, roots, rhizomes, and tubers were found. Seeing that neanderthals did not have domesticated plants, they only got caryopsis, achenes, etc IF they came across some wild, and you bet that they did eat them when they had the chance(and make 'em into flour).

And my next point is, grains don't need to be in the diet at all.
Of course not. Yet, on a personal level, I want to be able to enjoy grains every now and then, and I know sporadic grain ingestion is not going to cause health problems.

Neanderthals ate caryopsis, achenes, rhizomes, etc and only at a sporadic frequency due to lack of domestication.
 

ajdos

Friends Remembered
Sep 8, 2010
2,282
401
Ok wow, great history on hunting gathering, slash and burn, and the advent of the agricultural revolution and the health of paleolithic mans colon.
 
MightyMouse719

MightyMouse719

National Champion & VIP Member
Jul 8, 2011
1,045
103
Vegetarian - Indian word for bad hunter.
If you have not seen Food, Inc., I recommend it. I agree that if food can be poison, it can also be the cure.
 
SAD

SAD

TID Board Of Directors
Feb 3, 2011
3,938
2,897
Josef Brandenburg did not read the study fully. He is correct that the terminology "grains" is used as a object reference and not the synonym for caryopsis. With that said, the study says that the grains found at Bilancino II could belong to Poaceae (true grasses), and the grains looked to belong to Brachypodium (a genus of the Poaceae family), which is a genus of bunch grasses. Cattail was found, but it was concluded to be mainly pollen (usually added to the flour).

Again in Bilancino, grains were found that represented Sparganium (bur reed). Now I have to give you some plant information to show the importance. Sparganium and its relatives as well as true grasses are in the Poales order, but in different Families (true grasses with caryopsis are found in Poaceae); Sparganium are found in Typhaceae.

Sparganiums have fruit called achenes. Grasses have fruit called caryopsis (aka grain). The difference? The only difference is in grains the pericarp (ovary wall) is fused to the thin seed coat. Once ground and cooked, I can't see a presense of pericarp making a noticeable nutritional difference. The Sparganium and Brachypodium were used together (smarter, that way they got more flour).

Yes, roots, rhizomes, and tubers were found. Seeing that neanderthals did not have domesticated plants, they only got caryopsis, achenes, etc IF they came across some wild, and you bet that they did eat them when they had the chance(and make 'em into flour).


Of course not. Yet, on a personal level, I want to be able to enjoy grains every now and then, and I know sporadic grain ingestion is not going to cause health problems.

Neanderthals ate caryopsis, achenes, rhizomes, etc and only at a sporadic frequency due to lack of domestication.



Good info here, thanks bybon. That being said, "could be" doesn't mean "is/was". And what it all comes down to is that it is a personal choice. Listen to your body, and if grains give you indigestion/cramps/the shits, then stay away from them. If you are having health issues, try the Paleo diet and see if you can curb them to some extent, and if you look like Phil Heath with the vital signs of a decathlete and perfect bloodwork and you eat nothing but bread and pasta, then keep on keeping on.
 
bybon

bybon

VIP Member
Sep 15, 2011
508
100
Good info here, thanks bybon. That being said, "could be" doesn't mean "is/was". And what it all comes down to is that it is a personal choice. Listen to your body, and if grains give you indigestion/cramps/the shits, then stay away from them. If you are having health issues, try the Paleo diet and see if you can curb them to some extent, and if you look like Phil Heath with the vital signs of a decathlete and perfect bloodwork and you eat nothing but bread and pasta, then keep on keeping on.

Agreed. Man, I give it to you; made me read shit for at least an hour.
 
SAD

SAD

TID Board Of Directors
Feb 3, 2011
3,938
2,897
Agreed. Man, I give it to you; made me read shit for at least an hour.


Spend a few hours reading The Paleo Solution, you will not be disappointed. This goes for everyone. If you know me at all, you know I don't push hardly anything, but I have no qualms whatsoever pushing this book.
 
NutNut

NutNut

MuscleHead
Jul 25, 2011
865
172
The basic idea is this: hunter/gatherers were opportunistic. They ate mainly meat because a large animal can feed many people and compared to berries etc. are calorie dense (in simple terms made them not so damn hungry). If they ran across edible grains I'm sure they consumed them too it just wouldn't be the mainstay of the diet. The study about grains in teeth does not prove that grains were eaten as a regular part of the diet only that they were consumed soon before death, plane crash victims have eaten human remains to stay alive, imagine if future scientists found some of them dead and formed conclusions based on that. Grains surly were not avoided for health reasons the only reason not to eat them would be lack of abundance so the argument that we shouldn't eat grains because they weren't abundant to our caveman ancestors....well neither were many types of leafy greens or the variety of meats we have now...or chickens eggs. The argument needs to be stronger than "well they didn't do it". Also who says all of our ancestors had the same diets? Wouldn't we have to be closed minded to assume neo's in different geographical areas ate the same items? From North Africa to Germany would probably result in a different dietary intake.

Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic people seem to be where grain based diets seem to come more into play, less hunting big game and more small game and prepared grains.
 
AXEMURDERER

AXEMURDERER

MuscleHead
Jan 5, 2011
342
60
As someone that has had red meat TAKEN from them... enjoy it. Black, blue and bleeding.
 
Who is viewing this thread?

There are currently 0 members watching this topic

Top