Support NeoGAF

[Piecake]

Well there has been a growing case of diabetes in Asians, and that is related to the consumption of white rice.

We're not saying it's evil or some shit like that, just saying if you want to use the paleo diet, then you have to conform to its guidelines, and rice (along with other grains, dairy, sugars, and legumes) are no go.

You can eat whatever you want and do what you'd like, there's no stopping you.

I thought this thread was just for giving a headsup for people that don't know about this diet and are interested in another form of better nutrition/weight-loss.

Anyway paleo has been around for a long time, it's only recently that it has become popular.

I think that has a lot more to do with sugar and vegetable oils than white rice. I honestly have no idea why you have to conform 100% to a diet either. Do what works for you. If you can eat rice, then go for it.

My opinion on rice is that its neither bad nor good. Its Just sort of there. there are a lot more healthier and nutritious options out there that will also fill you up for a hell of a lot longer than rice.

 

[CornBurrito]

Well there has been a growing case of diabetes in Asians, and that is related to the consumption of white rice.

Source for this claim? And then I assume brown rice is fine, so I can't understand why anyone would suggest cutting that out of their diet.

We're not saying it's evil or some shit like that, just saying if you want to use the paleo diet, then you have to conform to its guidelines, and rice (along with other grains, dairy, sugars, and legumes) are no go.

I thought this thread was just for giving a headsup for people that don't know about this diet and are interested in another form of better nutrition/weight-loss.

No, I'm pretty sure people have claimed that rice is bad for you. I'm only asking for evidence. It shouldn't be hard to pull up a peer reviewed study about rice consumption and effects on health.

If you think that I am posting something that does not belong in this thread and that this thread should be a circle jerk with no questioning of the diet and the claims made by its proponents then I suggest you PM a mod.

 

[OttomanScribe]

Okay... so no problem with people who follow the diet because it works extremely well as long as they don't go on about cavemen nonsense?

Pretty much, yeah. If it works, it will work regardless of whatever padding people want to create around it (usually to sell things). The good thing about science is that outcomes do not necessarily need a mechanism to be understood to be observable. If a diet is effective, it will be effective regardless of the justification for it. If a higher protein, higher fat and lower carb diet is successful, then it will be regardless of whatever people justify it with.

 

[lupinko]

Nope, it is white rice, a random google search brought up many links, but here's three:

http://diabetes.webmd.com/news/20120315/white-rice-linked-to-diabetes-risk

http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/201...-rice-may-increase-your-risk-of-diabetes?lite

http://healthland.time.com/2012/03/16/study-does-eating-white-rice-raise-your-risk-of-diabetes/

Grains are good, I'm not going to do deny that, but I want results and paleo gives me those results while not driving me crazy like other diets, so for the time being, I gotta say no to grains and everything else the caveman says no to.

 

[Dash27]

Then I don't think you understand what I am asking.

I am asking why rice is restricted on a Paleo diet. The reason given seems to be that grains (including rice) have a negative impact on health.

What evidence is there to suggest that RICE has a negative impact on health in general. Not in my one specific case, but IN GENERAL.

And did you do your little experiment by only cutting out rice with no other change in diet? If not you're evidence is fucking laughable. "Hey I changed 500 variables, and am going to think that changing this 1 specific variable had an impact"

Here is what the Primal Blueprint author has to say about rice:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-rice-unhealthy/#axzz2H2cyhzbE

Rice is a grain, yes, but it’s not the same as wheat, barley, oats, or corn. Avoiding grains as a general rule is good for your health, and that goes for rice, but be realistic. A bit of white rice with a restaurant meal is not going to kill you.

Don’t take this as blanket approval for immediate regular rice consumption, however. It’s not black and white. Rice exists on one end of the “grain suitability” continuum. You know how I’ve discussed the dairy continuum? Raw, grass-fed one on end and low-fat, homogenized, ultra-pasteurized on the other. It’s the same for grains. High-gluten wheat on one (very bad) end and rice on the other (don’t lose sleep if you eat it) end. Do I recommend ditching the entire group altogether, just to make things easy and avoid any possible irritants? Sure, but if grain consumption presents itself, or you literally are hamstrung by finances and simply need some calories, you shouldn’t beat yourself up over it just because you ate some white rice.

Read more: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-rice-unhealthy/#ixzz2HCJtXq3V

He delves into the details in the article at the link if you're interested in his reasoning.

 

[Arksy]

Grains are demonstrably fine. Humans have been consuming grains for a very long time and it's not like we would live to 200 if only we cut out bread. A paleolithic diet does work for weight loss and general health, but that's not due to the lack of grain consumption. It's because paleolithic diets are very low in sugar and very high in fibre.

The traditional Japanese diet is very high in carbohydrates but it is a good diet. Like the paleolithic diet it is low sugar, high fibre.

 

[Dash27]

"Fine" is a relative term though. The real goal is improving your health. So grains may be fine in that they are edible and wont kill you. In fact you can live a long full life eating grains. It's a matter of what negatives they also bring. I think it's clear the western diet has some very negative health issues associated with it. Heart disease and diabetes is a big problem in the west. It's worth trying to figure out exactly what is causing that. Grains are at least suspect.

Then there are the smaller issues like digestive problems and weakened autoimmune systems.

I dont think it's a settled question on why we have the health problems we see in the west.

 

[Arksy]

"Fine" is a relative term though. The real goal is improving your health. So grains may be fine in that they are edible and wont kill you. In fact you can live a long full life eating grains. It's a matter of what negatives they also bring. I think it's clear the western diet has some very negative health issues associated with it. Heart disease and diabetes is a big problem in the west. It's worth trying to figure out exactly what is causing that. Grains are at least suspect.

Then there are the smaller issues like digestive problems and weakened autoimmune systems.

I dont think it's a settled question on why we have the health problems we see in the west.

Grains are suspect but they're not the cause. The cause is the vast amounts of sugar we consume and the lack of fibre. Cutting out vast quantities of sugar and an increase in fiber is the thing that correlates the most successful diets. (Atkins, Ornish, Japanese, Mediterranian, Paleo, etcetc) Paleo does work for this reason, so go nuts. Demonising grains can be construed as scientifically shaky at best, and misleading at worst. It certianly won't hurt to rid your diet of most grains.

Edit: I don't think what I've stated is the cause is settled but I believe it to be the most convincing and best supported theory as to the epidemic of metabolic syndrome and obesity. I am quite comfortable espousing this position after doing a fair bit of reading and research.

 

[Moral Panic]

Nope, it is white rice, a random google search brought up many links, but here's three:

http://diabetes.webmd.com/news/20120315/white-rice-linked-to-diabetes-risk

From your own links (all three links are about the same study):

“White rice has long been a part of Asian diets in which diabetes risk was very low,” Dr. David Katz, associate professor of public health at Yale University, told ABC News. “It is white rice plus aspects of modern living — including less physical work — that conspire to elevate the incidence of Type 2 diabetes.”

The study suggested an association, not a cause-and-effect link. Neither doctors nor patients should take "large-scale action" based on the findings; more work is needed to substantiate the idea that white rice increases the chances of getting Type 2 diabetes, according to Bruce Neal, a professor of medicine at the University of Sydney in Australia, who was not involved in the research but who wrote an editorial accompanying the study in the journal.

Some experts, including Connie Diekman, RD, say that the jury is still out on whether white rice really increases diabetes risk. She is the director of university nutrition at Washington University in St. Louis.

“The observational nature of this study limits the ability to state cause and effect, [and] controlled studies are needed to determine if, in fact, white rice increases the risk of type 2 diabetes,” she says in an email.

 

[ClassyPenguin]

"Fine" is a relative term though. The real goal is improving your health. So grains may be fine in that they are edible and wont kill you. In fact you can live a long full life eating grains. It's a matter of what negatives they also bring. I think it's clear the western diet has some very negative health issues associated with it. Heart disease and diabetes is a big problem in the west. It's worth trying to figure out exactly what is causing that. Grains are at least suspect.

Then there are the smaller issues like digestive problems and weakened autoimmune systems.

I dont think it's a settled question on why we have the health problems we see in the west.

In the West, we eat a lot of starchy(fries, potato chips etc ) foods and white flour products, which are caloric dense but not nutritious. That's why cutting back on carbs works as weight loss, especially for Americans. These diets replace those foods with more variety and nutrient rich food (for example, instead of a bagel in the morning, you eat a Greek yogurt with fruit). Whole grains and oats are not the same a white flour, which by the refining process strips a lot of nutrients out and because our portions are huge, you end up consuming a lot more than you would normally do (of a substance that is calorie heavy but not nutrient heavy) resulting in weight gain, obesity, diabetes and heart disease. Same thing with white rice. Even in cultures with heavy what consumption, it's not all they eat but it forms a small foundation of a meal.

 

[Tesseract]

i b eaten like thus me hole life and i turned fine. good tips though for uninitiated.

 

[hoos30]

Like any human endeavor (fitness, diets, console warz) you have your overzealous enthusiasts pushing the boundaries. Just use your common sense.

I've been doing a modified version of Paleo for four weeks now, with good results. Feeling great and lost 15 pounds so far. But I do eat cheese and consume other dairy. And I still work out 3 to 4 times per week.

The caveman shit is a hook, but it is also a useful and simple filter. Simplicity is the key to any diet, er, lifestyle change. I miss my bread and potatoes, but I don't miss soda, fast food and other processed junk.

 

[GatorBait]

I'd expect a diet based in science to have people agree on something as basic as rice.

I think you are working off a faulty assumption in that the diet is "based in science." I think that is too strong a term. It is a diet that is supported by studies and theory, which is about as much as you can say for the food pyramid and any other diet. Until we get a long-term scientific study that directly tests the hypotheses behind all the different diets, we are going to have to continue to make best with correlation and second-hand observations.

However, I do think you are right to question the "science" behind it. The "creators" of these paleo/primal diets seem to have restricted a few foods for somewhat arbitrary reasons so that the diet furthers the caveman narrative. I'm not much for dogmatic thinking, so I try to take a look at the foundation of the diets and what goals they are trying to achieve.

The most common sense answer I can give you on why it would be a good idea for most people to moderate rice is that it there are better, more nutritious sources of carbohydrates. There is a gentleman named Mark Sisson who has created an off-shoot of the paleo diet called the "primal diet." He seems to understand that there are a lot of foods that fall into the gray area where they can't necessarily be categorized as good or bad, and even if they don't fall into the caveman narrative, it isn't bad to eat them in moderation in an otherwise healthy diet. See what he has to say about rice here:

Not many nutrients, pretty high in starchy carbs – eating white rice and nothing but will lead to nutritional deficiencies fast, but not because white rice is leeching nutrients from you. It’s simply a matter of displacement. White rice replaces other, more nutritious foods, and in some cases, it acts as a vehicle for negative foods, like rancid oils and sugar.

[...]

There is nuance to all things. Though categorization is a valuable, essential data management tool, one that helped propel us to the top of the food chain (grouping bits of data together into categories allows us to handle more mental “stuff” at once), we run the risk of forgetting that these groups are made up of individual, non-homogenous bits. There is danger in missing the trees for the forest. Rice is a grain, yes, but it’s not the same as wheat, barley, oats, or corn. Avoiding grains as a general rule is good for your health, and that goes for rice, but be realistic. A bit of white rice with a restaurant meal is not going to kill you.

Don’t take this as blanket approval for immediate regular rice consumption, however. It’s not black and white. Rice exists on one end of the “grain suitability” continuum. You know how I’ve discussed the dairy continuum? Raw, grass-fed one on end and low-fat, homogenized, ultra-pasteurized on the other. It’s the same for grains. High-gluten wheat on one (very bad) end and rice on the other (don’t lose sleep if you eat it) end. Do I recommend ditching the entire group altogether, just to make things easy and avoid any possible irritants? Sure, but if grain consumption presents itself, or you literally are hamstrung by finances and simply need some calories, you shouldn’t beat yourself up over it just because you ate some white rice.

Rice can even be a vehicle for the good stuff – for butter, ghee, coconut. It can also be a vehicle for the bad stuff – for vegetable oils, for sugar. In fact, it’s the essential neutrality of rice that makes it what it is. The problem with rice in most people’s diets is twofold: it serves as a vehicle for processed fat and sugar; and overweight, insulin-resistant folks with damaged metabolisms can’t handle the glucose load.

Rice fried in rancid corn oil? Avoid.
Rice fried in homemade ghee? Not so bad, necessarily.
Rice if you’re trying to lose weight? Avoid.
Rice if you’re lean and active? Not so bad, necessarily.

 

[mr. puppy]

Like any human endeavor (fitness, diets, console warz) you have your overzealous enthusiasts pushing the boundaries. Just use your common sense.

I've been doing a modified version of Paleo for four weeks now, with good results. Feeling great and lost 15 pounds so far. But I do eat cheese and consume other dairy. And I still work out 3 to 4 times per week.

The caveman shit is a hook, but it is also a useful and simple filter. Simplicity is the key to any diet, er, lifestyle change. I miss my bread and potatoes, but I don't miss soda, fast food and other processed junk.

how did you modify it?

 

[shira]

LOL impossible claims. Just another fad diet.

 

[FoxSpirit]

Just a question: if this diet is so fantastic, why hasn't every pro athlete under the sun switched?
I mean, madness!! Imagine the landslide when they do and find out they had an easy 15% increase in fitness right under their nose the whole time. Such sad fools ;-)

 

[Arksy]

LOL impossible claims. Just another fad diet.

Some of those are bullshit (Sleeping patterns, clear skin, more efficient workouts). Others are easily verifiable but just boil down to the fact that it's low sugar and low carb.

 

[dralla]

None of them have been bullshit for me, I've experienced all of them. Except allergies, never had any to begin with.

 

[hoos30]

how did you modify it?

I avoid wheat and most other grains, sugar/high-fructose corn syrup and industrial seed oils.

I do eat dairy and a few other things that aren't exactly Paleo kosher (i.e. popcorn)

Author Chris Kresser says that we shouldn't be "Food Fascists" and should think more about a "Paleo Template" than a "Paleo Diet", meaning no diet is one size fits all. There's also the 80/20 or 85/15 rules to consider.

 

[kaizoku]

Some of those are bullshit (Sleeping patterns, clear skin, more efficient workouts). Others are easily verifiable but just boil down to the fact that it's low sugar and low carb.

This is it in a nutshell, low carb is great for a diet, it works and you lose weight, is it easy and is it for you? Only you know, but I would definitely recommend it as an option for people looking to lose some weight. Do the Atkins/insert name for abit, lose weight, then wean off. Personally diets are too hard for me, I'm too unorganised.

Low sugar I think is more a lifestyle change (which is what paleo and others aim to be, not diets but a new way of approaching your meals). Our life is way too full of easy access and hidden sugars and its killing us.

If I go through life aware of this and consciously try to eat less sugar then I feel better for it, that's all there is to it and that's my take on the paleo/low carb diet. I actually bought some product from exantediet.com and used the bars/shakes as meal replacements whenever I couldn't be bothered cooking or shopping or even just wanted to save money. Some days I only use the products, other days I eat 3 low carb meals. It's free form, flexible and convenient and is my own take on these diets. I don't worry so much about the occasional potato kicking me out of ketosis and screwing me up for ages.

I did this in November and went from the fattest I've been in 4/5 years to the slimmest. I then went on a mad binge in December because in January I was going to do this on a much longer term. I put on some weight but didn't get back to previous levels, I feel and look a lot better and I still feel the benefits of only doing it for a month.

Back on it now.

 

[FryHole]

Just a question: if this diet is so fantastic, why hasn't every pro athlete under the sun switched?
I mean, madness!! Imagine the landslide when they do and find out they had an easy 15% increase in fitness right under their nose the whole time. Such sad fools ;-)

Well, off the top of my head:

1) mockery/suspicion of the latest 'fad' diet could put them off
2) athletes can be superstitious and stick with what they know/are unwilling to change what seems to be working anyway
3) many have won the genetic lottery anyway and would be fit, thin and high performance on damn near any diet
4) they're operating so near peak performance they don't notice any real gains.


Please note I don't actually buy some of the more fabulous claims for the diet, just listing reasons why we might not see a flood of athletes extolling the virtues of paleo.

Edit:
5) it can be tough to switch to the low carb version of the diet, an adaptation period is often necessary.
6) they're already on it but don't call it paleo - chicken and veg is often cited as the sort of thing athletes eat to stay trim

 

[Arksy]

None of them have been bullshit for me, I've experienced all of them. Except allergies, never had any to begin with.

It could be placebo, or due to the fact that you've lost weight. Unless I see some science linking a plaeolithic diet to improvements in sleep and clearer skin I'm going to sceptical.

 

[entremet]

It could be placebo, or due to the fact that you've lost weight. Unless I see some science linking a plaeolithic diet to improvements in sleep and clearer skin I'm going to sceptical.

Clearer skin can simply be a result of avoiding dairy, which causes breakouts in some people. I don't see clear skin as big deal in terms of the diet being one that is sold by snake oil salesman. Eating whole foods and getting clearer skin isn't some big deal you're making it out to be.

And for all you proposing studies into these diets, it is being done, but dietary studies are incredibly expensive and take time.

Moreover, n=1 experimentation, although hardly scientific can provide some insight. Is avoiding wheat, vegetable oils, and sugar that hard to do?

 

[Arksy]

Clearer skin can simply be a result of avoiding dairy, which causes breakouts in some people. I don't see clear skin as big deal in terms of the diet being one that is sold by snake oil salesman. Eating whole foods and getting clearer skin isn't some big deal you're making it out to be.

It's not a big deal. Not by a long shot. Improvements in sleeping patterns however, are a very big deal. I would love to see some hard evidence of this.

The paleo diet is great. I went on it for a few weeks while I discovered more about nutrition and it did two things for me that I'll be forever grateful for, introducing me to alternatives that are a bit arcane and obscure (cauliflower pizza, almond meal pancakes and a host of other things), and reinvigorating my love of cooking real foods. I'm absolutely addicted to steaks, salads and other paleo staples now.

But that doesn't mean we should lose sight of the actual problem. It's not grains (glucose), it's sugar and sugar alternatives. (HFCS, high fructose content foods, etc).

 

[FryHole]

But that doesn't mean we should lose sight of the actual problem. It's not grains (glucose), it's sugar and sugar alternatives. (HFCS, Sucrose, high fructose content foods, etc).

It's the proteins in the grains that are considered the problem, I think. There's quite a bit of literature on (non-coeliac) problems due to gluten, WGA, etc.

 

[dralla]

You don't think what you eat can effect your skin? Lots of paleo foods are great for your skin..salmon, avocado, tomatoes, sweet potatoes, carrots, brazil nuts, dark chocolate, berries..The severe insulin spikes from refined carbs, sugar, and grains are not good for skin. Neither are the massive amounts of rancid Omega-6 from veggie oils. Dairy is something that gives people skin problems too, so if you're removing dairy that'll help too.

And improved sleep has been one of the most noticeable changes, I'm assuming it's directly related to the improved blood sugar and more consistent energy levels, no more highs and lows. Weight loss is also most definitely a factor.

 

[terribletwo]

Is there a list of meats and veggies that would have been available to cavemen that eventually became central Europeans? I'd like to try this, but I don't think it would be "paleo" to eat veggies and fruits that they didn't evolve eating (like avocado). Or other foods for that matter.

 

[entremet]

I think when you look at the diet from a weight loss perspective, it is limiting. But when you look at it, the majority foods you are eating are highly nutritious--meat, poultry, eggs, fish, veggies, are way more nutrient dense than bread, crackers, etc.

Yes grains are important in feeding the developed world, but don't have much of a choice sadly. However, the stuff isn't the most nutritious stuff at least compared to whole foods.

I don't see how its controversial that you're getting more nutrient dense foods that you'll see improvement to skin, teeth, hair, etc. This isn't rocket science. You're eating much more nutrient dense foods on this diet.

Is there a list of meats and veggies that would have been available to cavemen that eventually became central Europeans? I'd like to try this, but I don't think it would be "paleo" to eat veggies and fruits that they didn't evolve eating (like avocado). Or other foods for that matter.

Like others said, this is only a template. You can't actually relive the Paleolithic era.

Fish, shellfish, game, beef, lamb, poultry.

Also, the paleos can sometimes get to crazy about it, I'd admit. For example, coconut oil is used a lot of paleo diets, but we didn't have access to coconut oil in the Paleolithic era.

 

[dralla]

Is there a list of meats and veggies that would have been available to cavemen that eventually became central Europeans? I'd like to try this, but I don't think it would be "paleo" to eat veggies and fruits that they didn't evolve eating (like avocado). Or other foods for that matter.

I think you're taking it too literal. Just eat the avocados dude

 

[Arksy]

Is there a list of meats and veggies that would have been available to cavemen that eventually became central Europeans? I'd like to try this, but I don't think it would be "paleo" to eat veggies and fruits that they didn't evolve eating (like avocado). Or other foods for that matter.

Yeah, add mammoth, sabre-tooth tiger and various megafauna which are now extinct to the list of meats. To vegetables also add prehistoric berries and vegetables which have also evolved due to cultivation and farming, which are no longer available as they were in Palaeolithic times.

The fact of the matter is the world has changed, going in with that sort of mindset isn't going to really serve you very well. You don't need to be that strict with the diet.

 

[cryptic]

I followed this diet for a few years before my bodyfat became extremely low and it became a bit of a challenge. I was also getting nowhere in the gym.

I'm now following a ray peat style diet as I think Paleo combined with an active lifestyle may have made me hypothyroid at 22.

 

[Not a Jellyfish]

You had me until I read the "Alcohol" in the avoid list.

 

[entremet]

You had me until I read the "Alcohol" in the avoid list.

80/20, my friend. You gotta life live too.

 

[Arksy]

You had me until I read the "Alcohol" in the avoid list.

The fact that alcohol is toxic and disastrous for your health isn't really controversial. Just don't go overboard.

Also not all alcohol is created equal. Beer is one of the worst. Wine is one of the best.

 

[triplestation]

you guys should try eating the meat and veg raw instead of using our mad future fire devices.

 

[despire]

you guys should try eating the meat and veg raw instead of using our mad future fire devices.

Humans have widely used fire to cook food for at least 125 000 years and before that.

 

[Not a Jellyfish]

The fact that alcohol is toxic and disastrous for your health isn't really controversial. Just don't go overboard.

Also not all alcohol is created equal. Beer is one of the worst. Wine is one of the best.

I will probably look into least damaging liquor, love beer and not a real wine fan.

 

[Dash27]

Updated the OP with this on grains, hopefully it's coherent. It's not very cut and dry:

WHY cant I eat grains on this diet? What's wrong with whole grains? I thought that was healthy.

There is no simple, satisfying answer to this.

People seem to agree if you have celiac disease, gluten is really bad for you. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/celiac-disease/DS00319

Then you get into a grey area of "gluten intolerant". Is that real? Is it bullshit? Some first world syndrome? Are you intolerant? You have to decide that for yourself it seems like.

WebMD article: Only people with celiac need worry about it.
http://www.webmd.com/digestive-disorders/celiac-disease/features/gluten-intolerance-against-grain

WSJ article: Celiac researcher says gluten intolerance exists:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704893604576200393522456636.html

If "they're bad for you" is not acceptable on the face of it (and it shouldnt be), there are a lot of people who are happy to break it down for you. I've read through the pro and cons and at the end of the day I keep coming back to "Try it for 30 days and see what happens". Again, even the people arguing gluten and grains are fine for the majority of people admit that those with celliac disease. They also argue there is not a lot of evidence backing the no grain gluten free thing (some say no evidence). So far as I can tell there may not be much hard evidence but there is some, and it seems to be getting traction.

Basically the Paleo arguments come down to:

- Grains are calorically dense but do not contain much in the way of nutrition. e.g. compare 100g of wheat bread to a cup of broccoli.
- Grains contain a lot of carbohydrate in a small package, this equates to a insulin spike when consumed
- Grains contain a high concentration of lectins (gluten is a lectin but there are many others). Many lectins are harmless, some may even be beneficial but some can be bad for your health. Lectins found in grains, in high concentrations are thought to be harmful to the stomach lining and thus cause inflammation, autoimmune issues and insulin resistance.

All of the above come from these articles:

http://whole9life.com/2010/03/the-grain-manifesto/

http://life.dailyburn.com/diet-and-nutrition/paleo-sounds-great-but-why-no-grains/

And for balance here is an article arguing against all of this:

http://www.outlawfitnesshq.com/why-grains-and-gluten-arent-bad-for-you

 

[Skilotonn]

I was doing basically this for a year last year, but I realized that I wanted to bulk up more though so I changed it up for the last two months.

 

[Mononofu]

Some of those are bullshit (Sleeping patterns, clear skin, more efficient workouts). Others are easily verifiable but just boil down to the fact that it's low sugar and low carb.

It does effect sleep.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_wave#section_8

Diets very low in carbohydrates, such as a ketogenic diet, have been shown to increase the amount of delta activity and slow wave sleep in healthy individuals.[36]

 

[Deleted member 17706]

LOL impossible claims. Just another fad diet.

Can't comment on "more efficient workouts" but the rest of those ring true for me.

Keep on LOLing, though!

 

[JB1981]

I sort of arrived at this diet through a process of elimination. Grains like oats, barley, wheat etc contribute to intestinal inflammation for me. A Paleo-esque diet makes me feel much better.

 

[Dre]

Here is what the Primal Blueprint author has to say about rice:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/is-rice-unhealthy/#axzz2H2cyhzbE



He delves into the details in the article at the link if you're interested in his reasoning.

You forgot the most important article, the one where he delves into the "Asian Paradox".

How Do Asians Eat So Much Rice and Not Gain Weight? | Mark's Daily Apple

Basically it's fine for Asians to eat rice because they are healthier than the Western population and have a healthy metabolism.

 

[blackflag]

It does effect sleep.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_wave#section_8

paleo is far from keto, not necessarily but it usually is.

 

[harSon]

I don't understand these diets. You can enjoy every kind of food if you do it all in moderation.

That's not true at all. Not all bodies are the same. My body for example doesn't respond well to artificial sugars or Carbohydrates at all. My weight loss pretty much stopped entirely if I incorporated them into my diet moderately.

 

[brianjones]

That's not true at all. Not all bodies are the same. My body for example doesn't respond well to artificial sugars or Carbohydrates at all. My weight loss pretty much stopped entirely if I incorporated them into my diet moderately.

what kind of carbs were you eating?

 

[harSon]

what kind of carbs were you eating?

Steel Cut Oats, Quinoa, white/brown/wild rice, whole grain breads, fruits (mostly berries), sweet potatoes, legumes like Kidney beans.

 

[IceCold]

You forgot the most important article, the one where he delves into the "Asian Paradox".

How Do Asians Eat So Much Rice and Not Gain Weight? | Mark's Daily Apple

Basically it's fine for Asians to eat rice because they are healthier than the Western population and have a healthy metabolism.

This is actually a pretty good article. I think that if you goal is to lose a ton of weight or to reach a low bf% then cut most carbs, including rice of course. Otherwise just eat it moderately if you want. It's not like eating potatoes, rice, or even fresh bread (not white bread loafs) moderately is going to kill you but you aren't losing all that much by ditching them either. So why not just ditch them and replace them with nutritional denser foods? I think that's the point of a lot of these diets. Aim for quality, not quantity.

It's like my parents. They eat a lot of bread. Sure they are Southern Europeans, and there's a cultural aspect to it. But I also know it's because as kids they were poor and eating bread was a cheap way of filling their stomachs. Old habits die hard.

 

[Arksy]

You forgot the most important article, the one where he delves into the "Asian Paradox".

How Do Asians Eat So Much Rice and Not Gain Weight? | Mark's Daily Apple

Basically it's fine for Asians to eat rice because they are healthier than the Western population and have a healthy metabolism.

Yes. They had a healthier metabolism and are healthier because added sugar and the removal of fibre is only a recent phenomenon. The same thing applies to Western diets. People in the west haven't been obese since time immemorial. In the 1700s Europeans were eating half their daily calories just from bread yet there was no problem with weight or heart disease or metabolic syndrome. Mark Sission doesn't have an Asian paradox to deal with he has an entire world paradox to refute, and he can't.

 

[Mononofu]

paleo is far from keto, not necessarily but it usually is.

Both diets endorse low carbs do they not? The little difference are not important to me.