Nora Gedgaudas ketogenic diet dogma DEBUNKED

Nora – the ‘Sarah Palin’ of Paleo

Nora likes to mention that a particular food isn’t ‘Paleo’. But really, what foods that we eat today, was around in Paleo times? Most of the veggies, fruits, and even grass fed meats are the result of ancient and modern day cultivation and farming practices. Broccoli wasn’t around, pre agriculture (at least in its current ‘edible’ state).And everyone considers eggs to be Paleo. I doubt our HG ancestors had access to a bird that laid 300 eggs year! I’m starting to cringe at the words ‘Paleo diet’. Kind of like when Yuppie assholes started using the word ‘core’ for abdominals!!

no case of obligate carnivores ever having been measured in ketosis—the the Inuit have never, in nearly 100 years of trying (if you bother to read the above links

There’s also the poor, misunderstood hibernating bear…which despite all it’s fat is Not in ketosis when hibernating :
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6998737  or a comprehensive review pdf (on bears) here :
http://www.bearbiology.com/fileadmin/tpl/Downloads/URSUS/Vol_10/Hellgren_Vol_10.pdf

The seal pups and the bears are not the norm for the response of wild animals to prolonged fasts, but they are examples showing that some animals manage to avoid ketosis even in extreme conditions.

This is in addition to the fact that apparently all wild animals, including carnivores, are not in ketosis in the fed state.

It’s known that when proteins are fermented in the gut then H2S is emmited as a side effect.
http://www.prohealth.com/library/showarticle.cfm?libid=14757
And then show that H2S was the cause of biggest mass extinctions out there – look for Peter Ward’s work.
http://archive.wired.com/science/planetearth/news/2008/03/peter_ward_qa?currentPage=all

“This allows a type of bacteria to take over that creates hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Animal life cannot live in water that has a lot of hydrogen sulfide in it. When you have concentrations of greater than 80 ppm of hydrogen sulfide, or you get up to 200 ppm, which is easily done, you’ll kill every animal [in the ocean]. Eventually so much hydrogen sulfide leaks into the atmosphere that it kills animals and plants. […] Every mass extinction except the dinosaur extinction seems to have been caused by this.”

Christoph Dollischallenged Nora once about the sweetness of fruit, when she wrote:“Consider that modern day fruit is NOT bred for its nutrient content so much as for its sweetness. Modern cultivated fruit is much larger and far more filled with sugar than its wild counterparts. Wild fruit is far more tart, in general, than sweet ….”  “With respect, It isn’t true that modern fruits are significantly sweeter than wild fruits.“Blackberries, salmon berries, thimble berries? (Going by my local environment.) “Yes, they’re SMALLER — but less sweet than, say, an apple? “Not true.“ Here are 2 studies that show the opposite:”
http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2010/03/paleo-basics-how-much-sugar-in-wild.html

to which Nora replied: “You are, of course, correct. …”

Nora on her July 2012 appearance on Jimmy Moore’s Ask the Low Carb Experts show: The program ordinarily involves the guest expert providing detailed answers to specific listener questions that only a well versed student of the relevant topic would be expected to answer. On this episode, however, the same diversity of questions was met with one response, hardly even reworded from question to question: “Humans don’t need any starch. Therefore, no starch is ‘safe’ for us, and we ought not to consume it. Eat fat instead.”

Seriously. Really robust, well thought out, well written questions. Same god damn reply every single time. It was surreal. Jimmy, by the way, was “yep”ing and “right”ing along

The Joint Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization Expert Consultation on Human Nutrition stated in 1998:

From: Carbohydrates in human nutrition (Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation, Rome, Italy, 14-18 April 1997). FAO food and nutrition paper 66. World Health Organization. 1998. ISBN 9251041148.

“One of the major developments in our understanding of the importance of carbohydrates for health in the past twenty years has been the discovery of resistant starch.”

Nora, Nora, Nora… The evidence for the role of carbohydrates and Resistant Starch in human health isn’t just there. It’s overwhelming.

Nora argues that “there is no such thing as a glucose deficiency” and therefore it is not essential.

There is no glucose deficiency because the body will do everything in its power to make it if you don’t eat it. That’s sound “essential” to me.

She’s a business person dressed like a scientist and has staked her professional reputation and financial well being in this position. The result: she refuses to follow the science for fear that she’ll lose whatever credibility she has.

She may not even realize it, but she is so heavily invested in these ideas psychologically, that she is actively resisting any contradictory evidence. She appears to have romanced herself into believing that she is the first person to write a book and/or blog that will not later turn out, in hindsight, to contain erroneous information. That reflects true arrogance, because the underlying assumption is that she knows all the answers. “None of the tenets in my book will ever be refuted. THIS is absolute truth, bitches.”

What Nora and Dave don’t seem to realize is that some of the very plant toxins they fear have also been shown to have health benefits. For instance, nightshade toxins have been shown in studies to exhibit the following properties…

Antiallergic, Antipyretic, and Anti-inflammatory effects.
Blood sugar-lowering effects.
Antibiotic Activities against Pathogenic Bacteria, Viruses, Protozoa, and Fungi.
Destruction of Human Cancer Cells
Source: Potato Glycoalkaloids and Metabolites: Roles in the Plant and in the Diet

For those who are curious, the paper documents all the known harmful effects and beneficial effects of nightshade toxins, and concludes by saying…

From: Potato Glycoalkaloids and Metabolites: Roles in the Plant and in the Diet

“Food and biomedical scientists, including nutritionists, pharmacologists, and micro- biologists, are challenged to further define the beneficial effects of the glycoalkaloids against cancer, the immune system, cholesterol, and inflammation, as well as against pathogenic fungi, bacteria, viruses, and protozoa.”

Not so black and white, eh?

How about so-called toxic saponins? Nora and Dave are afraid of them too. But, would it surprise you that virtually all indigenous cultures make an effort to consume toxic saponins and tannins? They are nearly always found in bark and bush teas that are consumed by nearly every culture, including the Inuit. Take the Masai for instance. Turns out if you actually take the time to research their eating habits, you find that they eat toxic Acacia nilotica bark extract, with virtually every meat-heavy meal. The bark is rich in saponins and tannins. The saponins are believed to lower cholesterol and heart disease incidence (National Geographic, Oct 1995).

What about the Inuit? Labrador Tea was a major component of their diet. And guess what? It’s really freakin’ toxic.

From: Wikipedia: Labrador Tea

[Labrador tea] has been a favorite beverage among Athabaskan and Inuit people for many years…Labrador tea has narcotic properties. Evidence suggests that excessive consumption of the plant may cause delirium or poisoning. Toxic terpenes of the essential oils cause symptoms of intoxication, such as slow pulse, lowering of blood pressure, lack of coordination, convulsions, paralysis, and death. It is apparently safe as a weak herbal tea, but should not be made too strong.

Oh, and Labrador tea has saponins and tannins too. Definitely not “bulletproof” tea. Are Nora and Dave are oblivious to this, or just willfully ignorant?

At any rate, hormesis from “toxic” plants appears to be a new frontier for health research. Tim shared this very cool article on nutritional toxicology that was published just a few days ago.

Fruits and Vegetables Are Trying to Kill You

From: Fruits and Vegetables Are Trying to Kill You

Warding off the diseases of aging is certainly a worthwhile pursuit. But evidence has mounted to suggest that antioxidant vitamin supplements, long assumed to improve health, are ineffectual. Fruits and vegetables are indeed healthful but not necessarily because they shield you from oxidative stress. In fact, they may improve health for quite the opposite reason: They stress you.

That stress comes courtesy of trace amounts of naturally occurring pesticides and anti-grazing compounds. You already know these substances as the hot flavors in spices, the mouth-puckering tannins in wines, or the stink of Brussels sprouts. They are the antibacterials, antifungals, and grazing deterrents of the plant world. In the right amount, these slightly noxious substances, which help plants survive, may leave you stronger.

Parallel studies, meanwhile, have undercut decades-old assumptions about the dangers of free radicals. Rather than killing us, these volatile molecules, in the right amount, may improve our health. Our quest to neutralize them with antioxidant supplements may be doing more harm than good.

If one truly makes an effort to research what indigenous cultures ate — and it almost certainly appears that Dave and Nora do not make that kind of effort — one will find that consistent consumption of plant toxins were a major component of their diets.

Given what we are learning about the microbiota, it appears that a healthy gut biome may be required to tolerate these toxins — as these toxins can often be metabolized by our gut bugs. I don’t doubt that Nora and Dave have their gut issues and perhaps can’t tolerate any plant toxins. I understand that toxins can be hard on the weak, modern gut. But, to profess to the world that all plant toxins are bad just isn’t supported by the scientific literature. Nor is it supported by the dietary habits of indigenous cultures. Not by a long shot.

The dose makes the poison. Don’t eat tons of plant toxins. But, avoid them at your own peril.

Finally: doesn’t Nora look kind of bloated and over weight? And kind of haggard and worn out.

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s