You acuse me of cherry picking, when I state explicitly that I am infact cherry picking. I look at isolated tribes who survive for generations on nutrient dense foods with artisan methods of food storage. This wisdom is what I seek a return to, combined with the benefits of modern technology and commerce.
We disagree about calorie restriction, you've presented your evidence, I've presented mine, and we will never agree, so hows about we agree to disagree, because there's not much more I can add. But to summarise, somebody eating a high calorie diet from MacDonalds will tend to put on weight, whilst somebody eating a high calorie diet from the farmers market will tend to loose weight, so long as they do not have too many starchy vegetables and too much grain.
That is my position, take it or leave it. Or you can believe the government.
Actually you ignored two sources showing that regular random historical tribes lived on the brink of starvation. It doesn't matter if they have more vitamins because if you don't have calories, you die. Which is what I'm saying. It ALSO doesn't matter if tyranny causes more starvation because the point is that historically, all tribes and cultures and villages and cities have dealt with STARVATION. It is the single GREATEST way in which our modern diet differs from ANY historical diet.
But yeah you ignored all of this... Barely literate or cognitive dissonance or both?
Sieben, I've set your account to be banned for a month, but the system isn't executing it. Please stop posting. I will delete all further posts from you, and I ask other mods to help me in doing so.
"Am I supposed to believe you even though you don't have a hyperlink to the study?"
Just google diabetes II raw foods. There are plenty of people curing themselves. Just a couple of months ago, there was a doctor here in houston that was curing patients using this. If you can't understand the difference btw junk food vs healthy food, I don't see us getting any further along with debating. You really need a study to tell you raw foods are better for you then junk foods?
You need a study to understand that 100 calories of organic spinach is better than 100 calories of corn syrup?
http://www.diabetes-diet.org.uk/
The best diet for diabetes is a low carb, high fat and high protein diet, yet physicians are telling those with diabetes to eat low fat. Doctors I've worked with have stated that this advice is killing millions worldwide on the false notion that natural animal fats cause heart disease.
limitgov wrote: "... why did they (gov) create the flawed dietary guidelines that promote the flawed idea of eating little to no cholesterol and saturated fats?..."
Aldous Huxley wrote in essay entitled 'Politics of Ecology': "...This is not surprising. Death control, as I have already remarked, is easy, cheap, and can be carried out by a small force of technicians. ..."
We are the soldiers for righteousnessAnd we are not sent here by the politicians you drink with - L. Dube, rip
It is also interesting that the human brain is very dependent on cholesterol and saturated fat.
Studying Dr Price, one sees that isolated, self sufficient communities (which do not require banks for credit or governments for control), that they could be destroyed by simply inserting refined white flour, sugar, and other food products of industry. That this was enough to lay waste to independence, to elicit dependency. Whether or not that was the intention, the affect was to make these once free people dependent on commerce and government.
Sieben, you seem to be missing the point of a lot of the paleo and Taubesian argument, which is precisely that eating certain kinds of neolithic and industrial foods leads to appetite disregulation (which is not explanatorily reducible to the starvation signaling and fat-oxidation-stimulating molecule leptin) which leads to more frequent, lasting, and intense hunger which leads inter alia to caloric excess which exacerbates the situation. This is a modification of chain of causation regarding caloric excess, from primary cause to intermediary, not a claim that caloric intake is completely irrelevant. This is also the reason ad libitum diets under normal living conditions are stressed re: the clinical study lit (eg http://www.dietdoctor.com/weight-loss-time-to-stop-denying-the-science).
Your first reference is based on analysis of 8 sets of Neanderthal teeth from a single burial location. A sample of 8 from a single location doesn't have much external validity for "paleolithic man." There is plenty of loud debate on the quality of life among paleolithic humans vs. neolithic and there is a high level of uncertainty. Hunter-gatherers are susceptible to environmental crises, just like farmers, but farmers are more susceptible to famine than hunter-gatherers to the degree they rely on a large yields from monocultivar crops like rice or corn or wheat. A drought that wipes out your mono crop will less likely wipe out the diverse cultivars of hunter-gatherers. However, grains can be more easily stored for longer periods of time.
The idea that we are evolutionarily adapted to frequent starvation and thus to preferentially eat and store caloric excess as bodyfat is the thrust of the "thrifty gene" hypothesis of obesity. It has problems, e.g.:
In this review I present details of the evidence supporting the famine hypothesis and then show that this idea has five fundamental flaws. In essence, famines area relatively modern phenomenon and occur only about once every 100–150 years. Consequently, most human populations have only experienced at most 100 famine events in their evolutionary history. Famines involve increases in total mortality that only rarely exceed 10% of the population. Moreover, most people in famines die of disease rather than starvation and the age distribution of mortality during famine would not result in differential mortality between lean and obese individuals. A simple genetic model shows that famines provide insufficient selective advantage over an insufficient time period for a thrifty gene to have any penetration in the modern human population
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16784175
There is little doubt that paleolithic humans did not eat as frequently as constantly-snacking Americans, and may have often gone through prolonged periods of fasting with more concentrated feasting (primarily on meat). Most paleo writers do advocate intermittent fasting for bodyfat loss, and that is made easier by ketogenic/paleo diet and that's largely the point.