"Eat Like A Predator, Not Like Prey": Paleo In Six Easy Steps, A Motivational Guide

[Alaskan Rover]

Today's reports about red meat are totally misleading. At least they DO note that the culprit is highly PROCESSED red meat...filled with nitrites and a litany of other preservatives and binders.

There are good and bad red meats. Depends upon the leanness....and whether it's filled with BGH and other steroidal hormones.

Go lean and go wild....VENISON....BUFFALO.....local RANGE-FED beef.....lamb....even goat (although I've had goat before ...mountain goat....and I'm no fan of that particularly TOUGH meat....although it DID cook down in a decent stew).

the OTHER white meat: pork.

There are MANY places to acquire venison and range-fed beef and buffalo....seek it out on the internet....or ask around at local butchers for a decent source.

Yes...wholesome, grass/range fed beef and venison is more expensive...but you are getting MUCH healthier meat.

Stay away from processed meats (rare uptake is okay)...and stay the hell away from fast food hamburger....it's filled with hormones and often binders.

In short, if you're smart about it and choose your meat for leanness and natural range-fed goodness....there is NOTHING wrong with red meat.

--

[bryanthebold]

^^
I saw that report on my news feed this morning and nearly gagged. They do admit that red meat eaters in the study were more likely to smoke, eat less veggies, and be lazy fat asses. It blows my mind how a 'study' comes along and the media picks it up and proclaims its good science. I agree with rover above... processed meat and unprocessed is a completely different ball game. On an episode of Jamie Olivers food revolution he derives 'pink meat'... it makes you want to puke.

On a better note, I made my first beef bone broth and made a killer stew. Home made broth blows my mind with its fatty goodness. I found myself drinking it as a snack.

Sent from my Droid2 using TGR Forums

[Dantheman]

On a better note, I made my first beef bone broth and made a killer stew. Home made broth blows my mind with its fatty goodness. I found myself drinking it as a snack.

Proper stock isn't fatty (you should scrape the hardened fat off when it has cooled), the rich fat-like mouth feel comes from all the dissolved gelatin. Homemade stock is nectar of the gods. I make some incredible chicken stock that I cook for upwards of two days. I end up drinking most of it as a beverage. It's actually too strong to make chicken soup with on it's own, I have to cut it 2:1 with canned chicken broth. It's the greatest shit ever for making quick pan sauces.

[Zesty Not Spicy]

But the 2nd paragraph in the article specifically notes a 13% increase in mortality with adding just a single 3 oz serving of UNPROCESSED meat to your daily diet. Obviously there are a ton of other factors and just because it's unprocessed doesn't mean that it's not laden with other shit from a feed lot. But still, kinda damning. That said, I'm gonna go have a bacon burger with a side of extra bacon for dinner tonight!

[Sparky]

You can't dismiss it that easily ardves (unfortunately).

Red meat blamed for 10% of early deaths... Why don't you go figure out the other 90% while I have a steak.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/he...ly-deaths.html

Small quantities of processed meat such as bacon, sausages or salami can increase the likelihood of dying early by a fifth, researchers from Harvard School of Medicine found. Eating steak increases the risk of early death by 12%.

The study found that cutting the amount of red meat in peoples’ diets to 1.5 ounces (42 grams) a day, equivalent to one large steak a week, could prevent almost one in 10 early deaths in men and one in 13 in women.

The scientists said that the government’s current advice that people should eat no more than 2.5 ounces (70 grams) a day, was “generous”.

Dr Frank Hu, co-author of the study, said: “Given the growing evidence that even modest amounts of red meat is associated with increased risk of chronic disease and premature death, 2.5 ounces (70 grams) per day seems generous. The bottom line is that we should make red meat only an occassional rather than regular part of our diet.”

Red meat often contains high amounts of saturated fat, while bacon and salami contain large amounts of salt. Replacing red meat with poultry, fish or vegetables, whole grains and other healthy foods cut the risk of dying by up to one fifth, the study found.

The study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine followed more than 100,000 people for around 28 years asking them periodically about their diet and lifestyle.

It was found that for every serving of red meat - equivalent to 3 ounces (85 grams) - eaten each day there was an 18 per cent increased risk of dying from heart disease and a 10 per cent increased risk of dying from cancer.

For each serving of processed meat, equivalent to two slices of bacon or one hot dog, the risk of dying from heart disease rose by a 21 per cent and from cancer by 16 per cent.

Lead author Dr An Pan from the Department of Nutrition at Harvard, wrote in the journal: “We found that greater consumption of unprocessed and processed red meats is associated with higher mortality risk.

“Compared with red meat, other dietary components, such as fish, poultry, nuts, legumes, low-fat dairy products, and whole grains, were associated with lower risk.

“These results indicate that replacement of red meat with alternative healthy dietary components may lower the mortality risk.”

Scientists added that people who eat a diet high in red meat were also likely to be generally unhealthier because they were more likely to smoke, be overweight and not exercise.

In an accompanying editorial Dr Dean Ornish, of the University of California, San Francisco, said that eating less red meat could also help tackle climate change.

He said: “In addition to their health benefits, the food choices we make each day affect other important areas as well. What is personally sustainable is globally sustainable. What is good for you is good for our planet.”

A landmark study by the World Cancer Research Fund published in 2005 recommended that people should not eat more than 1.1lb (499 grams) of red meat a week, and that children should not be given processed meat like sausages at all.

Dr Rachel Thompson, Deputy Head of Science at the World Cancer Research Fund, said:

“This study strengthens the body of evidence which shows a link between red meat and chronic diseases such as cancer and heart disease. The research itself seems solid and is based on two large scale cohort studies monitored over a long period of time."

Dr Carrie Ruxton, from the Meat Advisory Panel (MAP), a British group of doctors and scientists funded by the industry, cast doubt on the findings and said the conclusions were based on a "theoretical" model"

She said that red meat is a valuable source of iron, zine and vitamin D which is vital for health, especially in pregnant women and infants.

A Department of Health spokesperson said: "Red meat can be part of a balanced diet. But people who eat a lot of red and processed meat should consider cutting down as regularly eating a lot could increase your risk of bowel cancer."

[bryanthebold]

Proper stock isn't fatty (you should scrape the hardened fat off when it has cooled), the rich fat-like mouth feel comes from all the dissolved gelatin. Homemade stock is nectar of the gods. I make some incredible chicken stock that I cook for upwards of two days. I end up drinking most of it as a beverage. It's actually too strong to make chicken soup with on it's own, I have to cut it 2:1 with canned chicken broth. It's the greatest shit ever for making quick pan sauces.

I did scrape the fat off the top at the end, and yes it was incredibly gelatinous! I saved the fat since I figured it was full of tasty marrow from the long bones. When I made the stew I heated up some of the fat and did a light fry with all my veggies, then added aprox 1:1 ratio of bone gelatin and water.

[Ripzalot]

They do admit that red meat eaters in the study were more likely to smoke, eat less veggies, and be lazy fat asses.

no, it doesn't say that.

Men and women with higher intake of red meat were less likely to be physically active and were more likely to be current smokers, to drink alcohol, and to have a higher body mass index (Table 1).

higher intake. not all red meat eaters.


of course the faithful will find whatever they can to dismiss the study out of hand. i'm waiting for a thorough fact-check by spats. certainly he will know better than all these doctors and the JAMA!

[bagtagley]

Proper stock isn't fatty (you should scrape the hardened fat off when it has cooled), the rich fat-like mouth feel comes from all the dissolved gelatin. Homemade stock is nectar of the gods. I make some incredible chicken stock that I cook for upwards of two days. I end up drinking most of it as a beverage. It's actually too strong to make chicken soup with on it's own, I have to cut it 2:1 with canned chicken broth. It's the greatest shit ever for making quick pan sauces.

Stock-off? Winner gets all the stock?

Finally got around to making some quality beef stock. I think my chicken stock days are numbered. Though, I've yet to make anything that touches my old man's fish stock.

[hutash]

Conclusion: eat all things in moderation, (including moderation).

[Dantheman]

Stock-off? Winner gets all the stock?

Finally got around to making some quality beef stock. I think my chicken stock days are numbered. Though, I've yet to make anything that touches my old man's fish stock.

It's on! I need to do some beef, I end up doing chicken because I eat a lot of roast chickens and save the bones, which basically makes it free. Never tried fish stock. A few years back some friends had Liz and I over for a New Years lobster dinner. On the way home I realized I blew a golden opportunity to score a heap of free lobster shells and make lobster stock

[bagtagley]

Yeah, we do at least one roast chicken a week and I make it a point to buy bone-in thighs and breasts. Stock is dead simple and so fucking delicious...no brainer. In the vein of free, I've been saving my vegetable trimmings. It's surprising how quickly you can fill up a bag with onion and carrot ends.

You have a pressure cooker, Dan? My old man is now obsessed with his and has started making stock in it. Less than an hour of cook-time (not including browning time), and he's saying it's just as good. I'm skeptical.

[Dantheman]

Veggie trimmings - Yeah, I've done that too. I also always freeze my stock veggies beforehand, the ice crystals puncture all the cell walls and increase flavor extraction.

Pressure cooker - I have one and I love it for stews, chili, etc.. I have made stock with it and the results are impressive, but the problem is volume. Mine is only 6 quarts, but even a 10-quart (a pretty big pressure cooker) wouldn't make as much as I like. You can only fill a pressure cooker about 2/3 full (you need headspace for proper pressurization), whereas when I make stock I fill a 12-quart pot almost to the brim.

[Lizhnik]

i'm waiting for a thorough fact-check by spats.

His response is on gnolls.org. There is also one on Mark's Daily Apple. I imagine there are many others throughout the paleo-sphere that also don't "dismiss the study out of hand."

[Dantheman]

Teh lulz

[Ripzalot]

His response is on gnolls.org. There is also one on Mark's Daily Apple. I imagine there are many others throughout the paleo-sphere that also don't "dismiss the study out of hand."

i was referring to bryan's misquoting example.

i read spats reponse on gnolls. sounds reasonable. it always amazes me how wrong the experts can be with these studies. i mean, how can you trust anything anymore? paleo 'experts' included.

[Spats]

For those who haven't already seen it, here's my response to the latest "OMG RED MEAT KILLS!1!!!1!" study. They come around every few years, so I decided to explain how these types of studies work. Now, next time a similar nutrition headline comes around, you'll be able to understand what it's really saying -- and what it isn't saying.

"Always Be Skeptical Of Nutrition Headlines"
http://www.gnolls.org/2893/always-be...ally-tells-us/

(tl;dr garbage in, garbage out)

[bryanthebold]

i was referring to bryan's misquoting example.

i read spats reponse on gnolls. sounds reasonable. it always amazes me how wrong the experts can be with these studies. i mean, how can you trust anything anymore? paleo 'experts' included.

Oh I am soo sorry that I must have forgotten that TGR is an academic forum... I will use direct quotes and citations next time. And who's to say I dismissed it outright? I read the whole paper...

I think if you really want to make this idea stand, give me a real controlled study, then we can talk. Until then I will enjoy my grass fed steaks.

Onto the 'real science' for the day... I am reading about endosymbiosis with mitochondria, hydrogensomes, mitosomes, and how the FeS clusters play an integral role in electron transport. http://www.nature.com/scitable/conte...enges-13997647

spats: great overview of epidemiological study methods

[Trackhead]

Teh lulz

And don't forget to include associated BMI (fat assness for the laymen).

That said, I think the Paleo fad is good for it's nutritional awareness, but the idea that eating meat, meat, meat, and more meat is ideal, is silly. Especially when you consider the source of today's meat (GMO corn fed creatures). Now if your meat source is hunted game, or true grass fed/free range creatures, then perhaps a bias towards meat, meat, meat would be more realistic. I doubt our ancestors had meat at every meal. If they did, wow, impressive hunting skills.

[arewolfe]

Nice to hear so many people are making homemade stock. I did beef stock last week and ended up with a pint of tallow, too. Lamb bones in the crock right now.

I saw the "All Red Meat Bad For You, New Study Says" article in the LA Times last week. It's funny, but also really tragic that blatant lies like that are getting attention. As much as we like to think the answers are in the future and that science is going to solve our health epidemic, the reality is that most of the answers we're looking for are in the past. It doesn't matter how many T. Colin Campbells there are in the world or how many more "epidemi-illogical" studies are performed by people that want to condemn animal food.

You can't change the past, and the answers are there: Obesity, cancer, heart disease, and diabetes essentially didn't exist in forager societies. Guess what did exist? Animal foods. In some cases, lots of animal foods, and that goes for every hunter-gather culture ever studied. We know there has never been a vegan culture in history until now, because you can't sustain the human race on a diet that has no B12 in it. Science has allowed us to synthesize B12, but anyone that claims veganism is the natural diet of humans is very confused. Synthetic B12 pills don't exist in forager cultures.

And yes, I know, processed foods didn't exist in forager societies and that's a major part of the problem also.

Not only did all foragers eat animal foods, some ate virtually only animals. Greenland Eskimos and Alaskan Nanamiut got 95-99% of their calories from animal foods. Do we think they suffered from chronic heart attacks, obesity and cancer for hundreds of generations without dying out? That would be completely retarded to believe that. These are diseases that will eventually lead to the human race dying out. I'm not predicting that the human race will soon die out due to our steady diet of processed food -- I'm sure we will figure it out eventually and those who source good food for themselves will continue to reproduce. I'm just saying that it would be impossible to have a culture where everyone gets progressively sicker for hundreds of generations. You can only get progressively sicker for a few generations before your genetic lineage dies out from either infertility (which we're already beginning to see as a problem in this culture) or from general sickliness/lack of immunity, which is also something we're seeing explode right now in our culture among the newest generations: food allergies and susceptibility to getting sick easier.

And another thing, just because there are 7 billion people on the planet (which makes eating lots of meat "unsustainable" and "unrealistic"), it doesn't change the fact that our bodies and brains are designed to thrive off large amounts of animal foods and saturated fat. This is something that vegans like to argue all the time -- that meat (even grass-fed or wild) is unsustainable on a worldwide scale. That's true. But it's also unsustainable to continue the human race on a vegan diet, because it is blatantly unnatural (no vitamin A and no vitamin B12). That's fine with me if you want to pretend to save the planet while you destroy your body, but don't expect health-conscious people to NOT eat the best foods they can get their hands on. Don't expect us to compromise our health just because the planet has 6-billion-too-many people on it.

Edit: 95-95% of their calories form animal foods simply due to how far into north latitude they lived.

[arewolfe]

That said, I think the Paleo fad is good for it's nutritional awareness, but the idea that eating meat, meat, meat, and more meat is ideal, is silly. Especially when you consider the source of today's meat (GMO corn fed creatures).

I agree it would be a bad idea to eat tons of supermarket meat on the regular. But most paleo proponents are aware of the fact that supermarket meat is not worth eating, and they seek out grass-fed and wild as often as possible.

In regards to hunting skills: When you come from a culture where all the men have hunted and gathered their food for hundreds of generations, and you have been raised by these skilled hunters, and you have hunted nearly every day of your life since adolescence, you can imagine how much more skilled you would be than the average civilian of today.

Check out this quote:

"Many have noted the strangely cavalier approach to food among foragers, who have nothing in the freezer. French Jesuit missionary Paul Le Jeune, who spent some six months among the Montagnais in present-day Quebec, was exasperated by the natives' generosity. 'If my host took two, three, or four Beavers,' wrote Le Jeune, 'whether it was day or night, they had a feast for all neighboring Savages. And if those people had captured something, they had one also at the same time; so that, on emerging from one feast, you went to another, and sometimes even to a third or a fourth.' When Le Jeune tried to explain the advantages of saving some of their food, 'They laughed at me. 'Tomorrow' (they said) 'we shall make another feast with what we shall capture' '

Israeli anthropologist Nurit Bird-David explains, 'Just as Westerners' behavior is understandable in relation to their assumption of shortage, so hunter-gatherers' behaviour is understandable in relation to their assumption of affluence."

From the book "Sex At Dawn" by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha. p.174

[Trackhead]

^^^^^Cool quotes. Thanks.

[Trackhead]

Beyond the Paleo/Primal nutrition topics.....We will never achieve ultimate health if we continue not only our shitty nutrition/agricultural practices, but our horrendous lifestyles. Those being, buy more, more, more. Then work sedentary jobs to pay for all the materialistic bullshit in our lives. Then sleep less and stumble around our entire lives stressed out, overworked, under sleeped (is that a word?), and exhausted.

You can do HIT and be a 100% orthorexic freak, but until you take some shit off your life's plate, you're just another hamster running on the wheel.

[Trackhead]

If there are any geeks in the audience, this is an excellent read. It's a dissertation from a plant biologist discussing phytoecdysteroids and their anabolic effects in mammals.

It's 150 pages, and it'll keep you on the edge of your seat for all of it. Well written with incredible research and detail. Good for the creative thinking laymen too.
http://mss3.libraries.rutgers.edu/dl...&authtype=eppn

[Spats]

Trackhead:

Great dissertation! Popeye really was getting something out of that spinach

arewolfe:

People don't realize how strongly we are suited to hunting and gathering, and how unsuited we are to our current sedentary existence. Almost every account of North American Indian hunter-gatherers pretty much talks about what an awesome life they had, their fierce pride in their independence, and the mixture of puzzlement and disdain they had for the hamster-wheel work ethic of the white settlers and their willingness to toil endlessly for Authority.

Finally, sure, feedlot beef is worse than regular beef...but it's still a lot better for you than eating the GMO corn and soybeans yourself. Cattle do a solid job of converting all the incomplete protein and n-6 fats into delicious complete protein and healthy saturated/monounsaturated fats...

...and let's not forget that the n-3/n-6 ratio of grain-fed beef is still better than that of any other meat -- even free-range, pastured pigs. (And it's worlds better than industrial chicken and pork.)

[Dantheman]

Finally, sure, feedlot beef is worse than regular beef...but it's still a lot better for you than eating the GMO corn and soybeans yourself. Cattle do a solid job of converting all the incomplete protein and n-6 fats into delicious complete protein and healthy saturated/monounsaturated fats...

But what about all the toxins/antibiotics/hormones/etc., especially in the fat? I ask because I hear often about how there is all this nasty shit in the fat in feedlot beef, but I have never seen data to back up the claims.