CrossFit Discussion Board  

Go Back   CrossFit Discussion Board > CrossFit Forum > Nutrition
CrossFit Home Forum Site Rules CrossFit FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Nutrition Diet, supplements, weightloss, health & longevity

Thread Tools
Old 04-22-2007, 10:20 AM   #21
Jibreel Freeland
Member Jibreel Freeland is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 548
"I don't think veg provide enough energy (calories) to keep hunters alive during unsuccesfull hunts. Why do you believe hunters where sustained by vegetables? I think they where probably sustained by preserved meat. "

They were probably sustained by many things, vegetables included. The best book I have ever read on primitive diets in Northern climes is this one: d_bxgy_b_text_b/002-7080012-3774407

(W/S link)

It goes in to great detail about the plants eaten by natives of British Columbia.

"Can you give me an example of a fruit that would be more digestible after cooking?"

Technically I believe all fruit would be more easily digested after cooking, with a higher glycemic index and thus more efficient energetic delivery requiring less energy to digest. The vitamin content however would be diminished since C and other vitamins are susceptible to heat degradation.

"Keep in mind that we are not just trying to survive, we are striving for the best nutrition."

And your diet is "the best nutrition"?

In my opinion Price proved that humans can survive , and thrive, on a variety of diets, some containing neolithic era foods such as dairy and grains, all containing cooked foods. There are some commonalities between them all but hardly enough to claim any one eating style as the "best" diet nutritionally. That, would be dogmatic.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2007, 11:10 AM   #22
Daniel Miller
Member Daniel Miller is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: St Louis  MO
Posts: 124
Well said Larry.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2007, 01:19 PM   #23
Garrett Smith
Member Garrett Smith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tucson  AZ
Posts: 2,264
Humans can live and thrive on a proper mixture of animal foods alone, or with a mixture of animals and veggies. Black box says so.

If you refuse to eat veggies because you don't like them, feel free.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2007, 02:30 PM   #24
Kemal Eren
Member Kemal Eren is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ann Arbor  MI
Posts: 62
One thing I don't get also are antinutients or basically toxins. Plants don't want to be eaten they want you to eat their fruits. Nature has natural pesticides in the plant part of the plant but the fruits don't contain these because it is in the plants evolutionary (or if you believe in creation where createded) strategy.

The link you provided gives a long list of animals who eat vegetables.

"Just take a look at animals consuming plants only, like cattle, elephants, horses, koala bears, hippo’s, gorilla’s etc.;"

Are you trying to claim that plants are "designed" so that humans can't eat them? Most of those plants existed before humans existed. And if you think about it, the plants now exist in great abundance because humans do eat them.

So that whole evolutionary argument for not eating plants leaves a lot to be desired.

Just a quick clarification about evolution.

Plants, like any other form of life, are "designed" to pass on their genes. Those that get eaten have failed, so yes, a plant benefits from being "designed" to avoid being eaten. However, herbivores and omnivores benefit from eating plants, as they are the primary source of energy in any ecosystem. So it's a kind of arms race. Plants are "designed" not be be eaten, but humans are "designed" to eat them anyways.

Of course, some plants are better at preventing herbivory than others, and humans are better at consuming some plants than others.

(one caveat: any anthropomorphic language that I use, such as plants "wanting" something or being "designed" for something is, of course, only a convenient shortcut for scientific processes. For instance, natural selection, not an inherent desire to avoid being eaten, is responsible for plants' defenses.).

I know wikipedia isn't always the best resource, but there's some good information about these types of biological ideas.
(links are family/work safe)
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2007, 08:41 PM   #25
Nikki Young
Member Nikki Young is offline
Nikki Young's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Canberra  ACT
Posts: 458
I was about to reply with my 2cents worth.. but then i read Larry's post, and decided not too.. just read his again cause it's pretty much the short version of what i was going to say.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2007, 12:18 AM   #26
John de la Garza
Member John de la Garza is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Garden Grove  ca
Posts: 212
Anti cancer applies if you are at risk. Chemo is anti cancer, it is toxic but I dont' want it if I don't have cancer. If you don't ingest carcinogens I don't think you need to concen the phyto nutrietns (which are usually toxic, too) to prevent cancer.

I guess, I'm saying don't medicate bit rather prevent. I doubt you will see it this way (I mean plants as medication) but please consider this (to me it makes sense).


Cooking damages nutrients in fruits. Fruits are ultra digestable the way they are. If you'd like I can give you some sources to read (let me know if you are interested in some more info)

Yes we can survive on cooked meat, but why cook it? It creates toxins and damages proteins. If I in places where I could get no fruits, I'd move. If I had to stay there, I'd consider fat my fuel.

by the way, yes I do believe raw animals products and fruits (with fats mixed to avoid insulin spikes) to be the best nutrition with the least amount of toxins

just to clarify I'm not trying to put anyone down, but can you give me a nutrient that can't be found in my diet? (raw fruits, nuts, and animal stuff)? Keep in mind I dont' feel the need for anti cancer properties of veggies, because I'm not eating foods that foster cancer in the first place.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2007, 01:16 AM   #27
Tom C Lopez
Member Tom C Lopez is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: bristol  south west
Posts: 68
the world we live in today is pretty carcinogenic...

im assuming from your access to the internet that you dont live out in the wilderness, you are more than likley breathing fumes from cars and coming into contact with lots of plastics in the air, water etc...
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2007, 01:29 AM   #28
John de la Garza
Member John de la Garza is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Garden Grove  ca
Posts: 212
you got a point there, Tom (unfortunately we do live in polution)

by the way, if anyone would like to read a bit more on why I believe what I do check this out:

I also forgot to ask in my last post (to the person who said cooking fruits makes them more digestable), can you give me an example of a fruit that is made more digestable by cooking it? If I found a food that needed to be cooked to be made more digestable, I personally would exclude it from my diet unless it had nutrients I just couldn't get anywhere else. I have yet to find a case like this.

I know I am in the minority here and just wanted to say thanks to you all for not getting in fight mode. I really appreciate a good debate where new ideas can be presented.

In my expierience with bring up this topic in 'vegan raw food' boards, I usually become the target of personal attacks and no learning takes place or even presentation of new ideas.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2007, 08:51 AM   #29
Jibreel Freeland
Member Jibreel Freeland is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 548

I am not saying that fruits are not highly digestible in their current form, however I am saying that all fruits would technically be more digestible after being cooked. I am defining digestibility by insulin spike. Also, I have absolutely no research to back this up so this is just conjecture.

Remember that during the paleolithic fruits did not resemble their current form. Prior to domestication fruit baring plants were tough, fiberous, and sour, not to mention smaller.

Veggies too were quite different during this time.

"by the way, yes I do believe raw animals products and fruits (with fats mixed to avoid insulin spikes) to be the best nutrition"

Typical raw foodist dogmatism. To think that you can find the best diet for everyone on earth is illogical. There are factors that come into play such as climate and demographics that make eating the same diet worldwide problematic.

I'd be willing to wager that you won't live much longer than a typical mountain Swiss who eats cheese, fresh rye bread, raw milk, and cooked meat. People who eat like this have an incredibly low rate of cancer, heart disease, and diabetes.

"Yes we can survive on cooked meat, but why cook it?"

Good question. Why would every single HG group known to us cook their meat, many as far as I know also eating certain parts raw directly following the kill? There must be a reason. Very good question.

  Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2007, 02:03 PM   #30
John de la Garza
Member John de la Garza is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Garden Grove  ca
Posts: 212
You say
"Typical raw foodist dogmatism. "

I believe you saying vegetables are healthy is dogma...

I can assure you in my case this isn't dogma, I don't simply believe this but have seen many studies. This isn't simply dogma. You shouldn't through accusations around like. You don't know me or why I believe what I do. I am not trying to win an argument, but rather find what best suits my needs from a purly biochemical point of view.

I speak for my self. I dont' live in the northern regions. I have fruit available to me. I am talking about modern foods, not Paleolithic.

Cooking meat produces toxins and makes proteins harder to digest:

Cooking food is always a chemical experiment; all kinds of new substances originate.
Many of these new substances are heterocyclic amines (HCA).
Many of these HCA are directly or indirectly physically addictive. (1)
Due to the heat these HCA originate from the interaction between protein and carbohydrates and / or creatine (in red meat) or nitrate (in vegetables).
Some examples :

tryptophan + form- / acet-aldehyde = 1-methyl-1,2,3,4-tetrahydro-beta-carboline (pro-mutagenic) (2)
tryptophan + glycolaldehyde = 1-hydroxymethyl-tetrahydro-beta-carboline (3)
serotonine + formaldehyde = 6-hydroxy-tetrahydro-beta-carboline (5)
serotonine + acetaldehyde = 6-hydroxy-1-methyl-tetrahydro-beta-carboline (6)
tyramine + nitrite = 3-diazotyramine(4-(2-aminoethyl))-6-diazo-2,4-cyclohexadienone (carcin.)(7)
salt + nitrite + protein / sugar = 2-chloro-4-methylthiobutanoate (mutagenic) (8)
glutamate + sugars = 2-amino-6-methyldipyrido-(1,2-a:3',2'-d)imidazole (carcinogenic) (9)
glutamate + sugars = 2-aminodipyrido-(1,2-a:3',2'-d)imidazole (carcinogenic) (9)

When aldehydes react upon cyclic amino acids or -amines (like tryptophan, tryptamine, serotonine, phenylalanine, tyrosine, dopamine, tyramine, aniline), mostly beta-carbolines and isoquinolines originate. When creatinine (from meat) is involved, mostly imidazoquinolines and imidaziquinoxalines originate. (10)

(Glutamate and tryptophan are amino acids, tyramine and serotonine are amines, and aldehydes are sugars)

see this for more:
I don't see your logic comparing me to a bread and cheese eater, but I dont' really think you are searching for the best way but rather trying to show I am wrong. This isn't really a good way to go about this.

  Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fruit better than veggies James Falkner Nutrition 16 10-04-2006 09:33 PM
The Zone and Veggies Jason Arsenault Nutrition 6 09-23-2006 09:55 AM
Getting enough veggies/greens David Stegman Nutrition 25 06-07-2006 03:08 PM
NO fruits and veggies? Travis Mulroy Nutrition 14 12-30-2004 05:36 PM
Question about veggies... Scott Parker Nutrition 7 01-18-2004 05:49 AM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:26 PM.

CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.