Jack the Quack is Back with Smack! But a Calorie is Still a Calorie

Jack who?  Why Dr. Jack Kruse, Neurosurgeon!  (or is he still practicing?) of course.  There's more to say about some of the other fall outs from AHS12, but one that is unrelated to the sociopolitical drama in the community is the apparent re-emergence of Jack Kruse on the paleo web scene.  It began during AHS12 itself via Twitter.  Following Krusegate, having achieved all of his goals of his actions, with the possible exception of that pesky momentary rebuke, Jack retreated to his website and raked in the admission to the webinar on Factor X and various membership and consult fees (all exorbitant, some moreso than others) .

Perhaps the fruits of his recruiting labors on PaleoHacks and Mark's Daily Apple had faded, or perhaps he just missed the limelight.  Having suffered no public rebuke from the organizers of AHS, and absent any official word from Jimmy my-stateroom-was-5-doors-down-from-the-action Moore about what really happened on the cruise ship that got Jack out of his promised free reveal of Factor X and his face on national TV (nobody that was anybody ever challenged his accounts) ... why not?  He's got a new brand of Epi-Paleo and a whole deck of martyr cards to play to rouse his followers and entice new ones. 

His science, however, is as bad as it's ever been.  Which is what I have discussed here many times (and no, I won't apologize for my writing style):
I called him a quack back in my first post addressing him in the wake of his stoking of Taubes' asshat moment at AHS11.  I'd heard of him, read a bit, but mostly dismissed him as nobody really seemed to be taking this guy seriously.  And then all of a sudden he was THE.HOT.THING.IN.PALEO -- delivering keynote speeches, encore podcasts, and invited to speak at AHS12.  

Jack Kruse is embarrassing to the community for more than his behavior.  He exposed just how utterly incapable those in position of power and influence in the community are when it comes to being able to vet their own.  Seems the lot of them are a bunch of Dean Dwyers , and back in April I addressed how Jack got away with baffling with bullshit, BWBS.  
Ah Jack Kruse. I must admit I am a huge fan of this man. But let me give you some perspective because he is a polarizing figure. Just to clarify, anyone who is looking to shake up any old establishment is going to be considered polarizing so I don't say that as an insult to the man.
He is a damn smart dude. And he knows he is a damn smart dude. And he knows he knows more than almost everyone he is talking to. And that's the rub. That is what throws people off. They get caught up in their own insecurities and in my opinion feel inferior around him. So instead of trying to understand seek to undermine him instead.
Luckily for me I have no such insecurities around him because the man knows stuff and thinks on a level that makes my head hurt. So I see a MASSIVE opportunity to learn a lot from him. As he said to me one night while we were chatting, "Dude I'm a neurosurgeon." While I must admit I never thought I would see "dude" and "neurosurgeon" in the same sentence, he is right. He is a freaking neurosurgeon. He runs in a world I will never run in and as such, he has insights that I will never discover on my own.
Could it be that all of the movers and shakers in the community were also blinded by the "Dude I'm a  neurosurgeon" pick up line?  Why wasn't Jack at the pick-up-artist brofrence when they needed him!!  Apparently so, because apparently it took the AHS folks long enough to decide to disinvite him from speaking that he backed out on his own when made aware of the impending leaked rebuke.  Ummm ... if his writings were not enough to disqualify him from an invitation to speak in the first place, the events he described at TEDx Nashville were a no-brainer reason.  And after the LC Cruise debacle?  Hello????  And buh bye Jack.  But no.  And so we're witnessing a resurgence of Leptin Man from his arctic epi-paleo cesspool.

So in comments on my latest chemistry post, Melissa reports:
Hilarious, today in the International Paleo Movement Group, our friend Dr. Kruse posted
"One molecule of glucose has only six carbons. Glucose can make 28-30 ATP. One molecule of an 18 carbon stearic acid, a FFA, has three times as many carbons as glucose but makes five times the amount of ATP (147 ATP) while only having two times the caloric density of glucose. This shows you precisely why a calorie is not a calorie and why CICO makes little sense."
Oooooh ... sounds awfully convincing!  Fat v. Carb -- 3:1 ratio of carbon atoms, 5:1 ATP ratio (using stearic acid) but just over 2:1 calorie ratio.  Let's take these one at a time.  

First, the number of carbon atoms is only relevant when we're talking putting molecules through the same metabolic pathway.    For example, comparing fatty acids, you get more ATP/calories out of the 18C stearic acid than you get out of the 12C lauric acid.  But -- and this is important -- you get different amounts of energy per carbon atom based on the original molecule and the metabolic pathway used to "extract" the energy from it.  Here is a comparison of the energy yield from glucose (6C) through the glycolysis→TCA→ETC pathway vs. a 6C (e.g. caproic acid, the shortest MCT) fatty acid, where they calculate 5ATP/C for glucose, 7ATP/C for the 6C fatty acid.  So ... the first ratio of ATP/C is irrelevant

Secondly, let's compare the more common chain length of 16C -- palmitate -- and keep in mind, always, that calories per gram are both estimates and averages.  Dietary fat comes in the form of predominantly triglycerides - 3 fatty acids + glycerol.  A palmitic acid triglyceride has a molecular weight of 3(256)+92 = 860 g/mol while glucose has a molecular weight of 180 g/mol.    A palmitate-TAG produces 407 ATP/mol, while (varies) the maximum theoretical ATP production from glucose is 38 ATP/mol.  WOW!  10X the ATP but only a little more than 2X the calories per gram.  Jack's onto something here for sure.  ALL of those biochemistry textbooks in all the world have been wrong and misleading us for over a century.  Not so fast.

The calculation I'm about to go through is basic chemistry for science major stuff that someone arguing as Jack is should be well-versed in.  I'm going to convert ATP from ATP per mol (6.02 x 10^23 molecules) to ATP per gram.
Glucose:  [38 ATP/mol] / [180 g/mol] = 0.211 ATP/g
Palmitate-TAG:  [407 ATP/mol] / [860 g/mol] = 0.473 ATP/g
So gram per gram, the fat:carb ATP ratio = 0.473 / 0.211 = 2.24

How does that compare to calories?  Well, gram for gram fat:carb = 9/4 = 2.25

Gram for gram, you get approximately 2¼ times the ATP from fat vs. carb.  Gram for gram, you get approximately 2¼ times the calories from fat vs. carb. 

I rest my case -- Gram for gram, offering you at least 2¼ times less BS from my brain vs. Jack Kruse's brain.


Unknown said…

He says

"Since the human colon is anaerobic when we feed these bacteria a diet high in simple carbohydrates they extract the oxygen and and leave us with bowel gas and lower levels of FIAF. This actually allows us then to store fat that we can use later on for our own needs. This fat is loaded with long chain fatty acids, but to gain the energy in its bonds we have to have oxygen to access it. The bacteria don’t have that luxury, so they are inept at using the fat they created!"

"So when the human host turns around and eats a fat laden ketogenic diet it creates a huge hormetic issue for our gut flora. They can not access the energy in these fats because there is no molecular oxygen present and the human host is not hungry at all because the presence of the fat in the gut is signaled to the brain via the vagus nerve. This is the perfect storm for the human and really bad news for the gut bacteria. This is why one has to question the validity of any safe starch theory in my view. The molecular biology of the gut just does not support it."

"It makes complete sense to me because I understand how circadian mismatches can kill us. (Channel Steve Jobs, Walter Payton, Gilda Radner, Joe Piscopo)"

Alert - Joe Piscopo is alive!!

"I believe this is when Mr. Jackson’s altered pathologic gut flora caught up to his brain and destroyed it over the last 25 years of his life. As result of this mismatch, he found he could not sleep at all, and it he had to rely on powerful anesthetic drugs to put him down…….so powerful they killed him. Was it irresponsible medicine that killed him? Sure that played a role, but the question no seems to asks what was the pre existing state that got Mr. Jackson to that point? How did he get to a point where he needed a drug like Diprivan and Ketamine to sleep? I think this blog opens that rabbit hole for you to think about now. Think about his life, the stressors, his family dynamic, the vitiligo, the veganism, the bizarre behavior and his strange choices from childhood to adulthood. Where they a pop star’s eccentric coincidences or modern epigenetics of a bad gut flora being simplified to slowly destroy his brain and his ability to sleep?"

My question is - WTF is he talking about??

Evelyn, what do you make of this:


Just here to stir the pot!
Unknown said…
What really matters is the alphabetic order of the macronutrients. Oxygen is essential, it begins with "o," near the end of the alphabet. And you can't survive very long without water, which starts with a "w" which is near the end of the alphabet.

Carbs on the other hand begins with "c" which is close to the beginning of the alphabet, so you can live without carbs at all. Fat is an "f" meaning it is more important than carbs but not as important as oxygen and water. Protein is a "p" making it even MORE important than oxygen though not as important as water, make sure you get your protein.

So as you plan your diet pay attention to where the food name falls in the alphabet, zucchini is essential but carrots are not. Steak is essential, liver not so much.
oboereedgal said…
Oh!! So that must be why these people are obsessed with grass fed butter. "b" for butter would be at the beginning of the alphabet making it less important than carbs but "g" for grass fed butter would make it even more important than fat. It all makes sense now.

(Ha! LOL!)
Victor Venema said…
I do not see any link between Jack Kruse and Marks Daily Apple. A Google search for: Jack Kruse -forum site:.marksdailyapple.com did not return any results. This accusation of Mark Sission needs a foundation.

I guess Jack Kruse will again claim that his account was hacked. While I agree that just eat less is bad advice, his argument why CICO is wrong is simply absurd. I really hope I will never need brain surgery.
oboereedgal said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…

Victor Venema said…
I made a search on the site marksdailyapple.com, that other people use both names in one post does not show that Mark supports Kruse. Thus on Google I have added


Then I noticed I got mainly results from the forum at MDA, which does not show that Mark supports Kruse. Thus I wanted to remove results from the forum and added -forum to the search. I now see that this is too strong, as any page one MDA has a link to forum, thus contains this word and was excluded.

On the page Charles Grashow mentions above, Mark get a question on Thermogenesis and Kruse and his answer is: "If you’re really interested in cold water therapy, I’d look to Ray Cronise, the NASA scientist who helped Tim Ferriss on the cold water immersion section in the Four Hour Body book. He’s far more measured in his claims and recommendations."

Does not sound like a recommendation to me.

However, I probably misread Evelyne. The sentence: "Perhaps the fruits of his recruiting labors on PaleoHacks and Mark's Daily Apple had faded, or perhaps he just missed the limelight." could also mean that Kruse was active in the MDA forum, not that Mark endorsed him. Sorry.
Lesley Scott said…
wait...Joe Piscopo is alive??!!
CarbSane said…
Victor, A year ago Jack's bigggest claims to fame were (a) podcast with Jimmy, and (b) MEGA thread on MDA forum. Now the thread on Mark's site was not an explicit endorsement, but it was a MEGA thread. That, and Mark was in negotiations with Kruse to publish Jack's book. Kurt Harris was authorized by Mark himself to publicly confirm (here on this blog) that the book deal as nixed after first draft.

Jack used Mark. Mark is a smart businessman and figured that not letting things slide in the least confrontational way possible was best for business. Looks like it turned out well for Mark.
KD said…
I think somebody said it about Newt Gingrich, but it applies to Kruse in spades. He's a dumb person's idea of what a smart person sounds like. How anybody could read even a randomly selected paragraph from that guy and decide that he's somebody to take seriously is beyond me. I wonder how many of his fans have actually gone through an entire post.

Though my problem may be that my ancient pathway hasn't been cold exposed enough to correct my leptin signaling due to my never having adjusted my hormal environment to account for factor X... I try to keep an open mind
Victor Venema said…
Who did not do a podcast with Jimmy?


Mark will even publish books by people who eat a lot of fruit. Definitely in the insidious weight gain region.

And here's the original study:


Basically it means the "energy out" part of the equation is the same for both Westerners and skinny, ripped hunter gatherers. We're simply eating too much.
CarbSane said…
Sigh ... I'm not sure where you're going here Victor. Here's the timeline of Kruse's meteoric rise, though I don't know when exactly the megathread was started. But Kruse started posting about his leptin reset and didn't even have a website or blog yet. The MDA forum is very popular and that thread went viral. So Jimmy has Kruse on his podcast gaining him a wider audience. There was enough right there for a person with biology degree to spot the quackery. But Jack was allowed to continue posting at MDA and/or the megathread was allowed to prosper. At some point Mark bears some responsibility for Jack's "cred", certainly at the point of a book deal. If/when Denise starts spouting quackery then one can draw any similarity -- I'm not seeing it. Having any dealings with Jack was a hiccup in Mark's otherwise flawless PR/marketing. He's a genius in that realm. At least he recognized the nonsense and nixed the book deal.

I was pointing out the fact that Jack gathered his following by posting at MDA and PH. He's now back on PH with a huge points rating so newbies will have no clue what went down in May. Perhaps his membership is flagging so he's back for a second dip.

Charles' link is to the after-the-fact luke-warm "oh nevermind" by Mark. I was very disappointed in that given my knowledge of non-public information.

BTW -- You can see from the title of my podcast just what Jimmy is all about. Taunter? I explained (once he finally got around to asking me questions about my purported reason for being on the podcast) how Gary Taubes misrepresented what references in GCBC really said. That podcast was not to promote me or my contrarian ideas -- it was to set me up for the predictable shout down by his readers (I still have the comments he's turned off) and for Gary to smear me in his supposed response to critics where he addressed not a single point made regarding his book and theories. I'm just glad it backfired on them so beautifully.
CarbSane said…
Never finished my timeline. Perhaps another day.
CarbSane said…
ancient pathway ... chuckle :D
CarbSane said…
Wait a minute!!! (Too much sun yesterday perhaps) I misread your quote of what I wrote. It is NOT a point of contention or in dispute that Jack recruited followers on Mark's site and PaleoHacks. NONE. Everyone is entitled to their opinions as to the culpabilities of Mark and Patrik (PH owner) for allowing it to happen, go on as long as it did, and/or for their ultimate response. Speaking for myself, I'm profoundly disappointed in both.
Victor Venema said…
Exactly It is not a point of contention that Jack recruited followers on MDA. I only first thought that you had written, that Mark supported Kruse. Personally, I would say that the host of a forum is not responsible for the validity of its content. You can expect from a host of a forum to remove posts which are illegal or hateful, but not much more.

I am also "not sure where" I am "going here", but it provoked some interesting information. PaleoDrama has not written a complete history of all the drama yet.
CarbSane said…
I don't know if his site still boasts it, but Jack used MDA to advertise his site -- he mentioned it in interviews, etc. Yeah, Mark is not responsible for all content on a forum. Agreed. But this was a special case involving a megathread and promotion. He tries to run an open forum that even allows (to his credit) criticism of Mark himself. The book deal was at least rumored (confirmed at least somewhat by reliable sources) for quite some time as well, which does imply some tacit endorsement.

I'm surprised, more than anything, that Mark let the Kruse thing go on as long as he did ... though I suspect he let it continue once there was a book deal in the works because he stood to gain. There's nothing wrong with that, but with that decision he took on some responsibility for the fiasco that unfolded.

I have bits and pieces of Krusegate in my draft bin. I may put together what transpired from my viewpoint so people have a complete picture of just exactly what went down.
Victor Venema said…
Just listened to the Taubes taunting podcast during in a nice walk in the setting sun. Poor Jimmy did not manage to put up a counter defense. ;-)

Evelyn, I was wondering, however, did you ever try paleo? If you need a definition: Paleo in the sense of no processed foods, no grains or legumes, no refined vegetable oils, no dairy, eating the entire animal (especially offal and sea food), get sun regularly, walk a lot (especially in nature), a little weight training, sprint sometimes, manage stress and if needed trying to fix to cause of any remaining health issues. (You can test afterward which steps were not necessary for you personally.)

What you describe in the podcast are low-caloric, Atkins and low-carb diets. Cookie diet, cottage cheese, Freedom fries, noodle soup, Chinese fried noodles. Or is the complaining on this blog about the paleo diet only because you equate paleo with low carb?
CarbSane said…
Oh jeez ... the effen cookie diet. I was recalling something I did in my 20's because Jimmy had to drag that Twinkie diet into the podcast. Realize this was supposed to be about Taubes' theories and my criticisms and not me. Yet Jimmy decided to spend half the time on me, and even brought his weight loss into it. You can probably hear me gritting my teeth at that time thinking STFU, I don't care about your weight loss I spent several hours prepping the notes in front of me with page cites and quotes on important stuff. Freedom fries, noodle soup and chinese fried noodles? For the latter I think you meant rice, and I don't recall the other two. That podcast was taped almost 2 years ago now so I don't remember all.

I'm sorry you seem to think I'm complaining about paleo. So NOW it's defined, eh?? I actually got dragged into this paleosphere by Jimmy Moore. I dispel mostly LC myths and dogma. But along the way it seems that paleo is indeed whatever anyone defines it at the time. When I lost my weight, my diet was more paleo/primal than half the people who claim to be.

I have no dairy sensitivities, so I see no reason to give up dairy when I lost most of my weight eating low fat cottage cheese. Same goes for grains, which I didn't eat a lot of, but the occasional low carb wrap never bothered me. I hadn't eaten a legume in like 3 years (well except the occasional peanuts) until last year when I began adding some to my soups. If you like offal, have at it. I was a lean person before ED w/o eating a lot of animal protein let alone offal, so I would sooner try going raw vegan than this version of paleo.

I spent almost 2 years trying to tweak things and eating very little processed food if at all. So it's a little offensive whenever folks suggest I just haven't tried and adopted the austere measures you are suggesting to achieve nirvana. As if that will magically fix my remaining defects. Right?

Jimmy had no defense when we got to the science, because there was none. But do check out how I was confooooosed and whatnot as Gary addressed his critics, but not their criticisms in his WWGF book promotion podcast.

I'm not anti paleo, but I'm anti-dogma, anti-pseudoscience and anti-profiteering off of gimmickry. Paleo has managed to incorporate all of those so ....
Victor Venema said…
I had to give some sort of definition to get an answer. Otherwise, I would just have gotten a request for a definition. Jimmy Moore is probably not the best introduction to paleo.

I had no noticeable dairy sensitivities, but since changing my yoghurt for eggs for breakfast, my weight started to drop, so these two things need not be related. (Could also be the eggs.)

I did not want to be offensive, was just curious what the word paleo means on this blog. It was also interesting to hear that I probably eat more carbs on "paleo" as the janitor of the Carb-Sane Asylum.

Personally, I do not see any austerity, but love the food I eat. It is only a bit cumbersome when I am not cooking myself. Up to now, it was "magical fix" for me, but I guess that is not guaranteed, but a wonder of the self-healing capabilities of the body.

Keep on debunking. That is important for long term progress. I learned a lot from hearing the podcast.
CarbSane said…
Are you married or live with other connected peeps (e.g. anyone but a roommate with whom sharing food would not be obligatory)?
Victor Venema said…
So your hubbie is to blame?
CarbSane said…
You didn't answer my question. I'm not blaming anyone. We've discussed this here before. All extremely restrictive lifestyles are easier to maintain when everyone in the home follows them -- but that's presuming a person WANTS to follow such a restrictive regime themselves. Paleo as you defined it is very restrictive and you wrote: "Personally, I do not see any austerity, but love the food I eat." So I'm asking if you live with someone or someones who would not agree with that statement. You're a step ahead of many if you truly believe what you said. You'll have an easier time of it even if you live with those who don't, but you'll be ten steps ahead if they do too.

Come to think of it, this explains why restrictive lifestyles become so cultish and cliqueish -- putting down the practices of non-followers, trying to convert people to eating like you, coming up with evermore inventive gimmicks and rationales for why their way of eating is the only true, and right, and best and pure way .... But (and I think Robb Wolf addressed this once, but I'm not sure so nobody bite my head off please if he didn't) pure paleo is like the Amish trying to recruit from Beverly Hills High. But if we allow autos and electricity for cooking it will be easier to recruit converts for the rest. But the cars and electricity are pretty big concessions and you dilute the message/premise of the culture/lifestyle.
Unknown said…
I never will understand the objections to legumes. Sure they make you fart but only if you eat too many.

The anti-nutrient argument makes no sense unless you are suffering from some kind of nutritional deficiency.
CarbSane said…
Especially since many of the same so-called anti-nutrients are in nuts and seeds that are acceptable.
Victor Venema said…
I think we do not understand yet why the paleo diet works and why some people better stay away from some foods. Thus the new series as MDA on "is it primal?" estranges me, here Marc gives his blessing for some processed foods as long as they do not contain much of certain chemicals/anti-nutrients.

Restrictive? No grains and no legumes is the entire restriction. I guess there are people with more restrictions due to allergies. In many recipes you can make 2 versions and add gains or legumes at the end if your partner insists. You can replace refined oils by butter. Everyone who has time for blogging about diet should have time to cook a meal from fresh ingredients.
Unknown said…
I personally don't give a crap whether or not MDA blesses a food as primal or not

What’s for Dinner? Researchers Seek Our Ancestors’ Answers

"After comparing emerging evidence from ancient humans and diverse modern cultures, the researchers concluded that many factors—including genes, sex, ancestry, and fetal and childhood conditions— influence how we digest foods and store fat. Physiological stress in mothers can leave lingering imprints on descendants for generations. So although it’s true that humans evolved to eat a diet relatively high in protein and low in carbohydrates and fat, there’s no single Paleolithic prescription for better health. “It is the internal environment inside yourself that is key—how genes are expressed and how you started off in life,” says paleoanthropologist Peter Ungar of the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville."


"Fallacy #1: We have tried the food guide pyramid style eating yet we are just getting fatter, thus the food guide pyramid is incorrect.

To put it simply: the old way isn't working, we have to find something new... which is when you become a vegan, zero carbers, cave-man etc

This is a causality issue. You first must examine how many people are actually following the recommendations and from those recommendations what percentage of people are actually showing improvements or worse results in lipid panels, oral blood glucose tolerance tests, blood pressure readings etc.

If you look at the top of the US Food Guide pyramid it says keep extra oils, fats and sweets to a minimum. Last time I checked the most recent data, these changes did not happen in the american diet...rather the opposite. Overall caloric intake increased from added fats and sugars along with refined grain products; where as meat, vegetable fruit, and dairy consumption remained relatively stable from 1970 to 2006

If you take a closer look at the food guide pyramid, Vegetable oil and HFCS were not in the bottom rows of the food guide pyramid and yet those are the two things that people consume the most in excess.....

This is where we run into problems, when we base our logic on incorrect/incomplete/misleading premises. When we misrepresent the data or even the structure of the food pyramid, it can thus lead us to false conclusions. This is why it is important to research the subject matter in as much depth as possible because without proper background knowledge of the subject matter or even an understanding of critical thinking skills it becomes extremely easy to become susceptible to persuasive rhetoric and diet movements with religious fervor."

SO - I believe that we really HAVE NO IDEA WHAT A PALEO DIET IS - is it just another fad diet that a lot of people are making money off of??

Unknown said…
I can understand the restriction on grains because it is easy to eat a lot of grain products but I can't imagine someone becoming obese or diabetic because they eat too many beans. Seems totally arbitrary to me.
Victor Venema said…
Dear Charles, then we agree on blessings, vegetable oil and HFCS. That's a beginning. I believe, there is no relation between what you believe and the quote above. Keep on sending your money to Kraft, Unilever and Monsanto, if such arguments make you happier.

Dear Unknown, as with all paleo ideas, I would say just test the difference and observe what you body says. Personally, I seem to have no problems with fresh beans (except for bloat when eating a lot). I did not try dried or canned beans again, as I do not miss them.
Unknown said…
@Victor - I and my wife eat NO PROCESSED CRAP so we contribute no money whatsoever to companies like Kraft or Monsanto, etc.

I eat what some might call a Paleo/Primal diet - raw ground beef, raw eggs, coconut milk, sweet potatoes, some beans, sauerkraut, fruit. My only non-paleo processed item is the whey protein powder I put in my post work-out smoothie (workout is done fasted - usually after a 14-17 hour fast).

My question now is since life expectancy at the turn of the 20th century in the USA was appx 46 years how much of the so-called diseases of western civilization is caused by the increased life span and how much is caused by the SAD?
CarbSane said…
Everyone who has time for blogging about diet should have time to cook a meal from fresh ingredients.

Wow ... just wow. {takes off minimalist footwear and shuffles off to the kitchen} Please do let me know when your Time Management Manual for the Modern Paleo Woman book hits the shelves.

For the record, too much take-out, convenience and junk foods certainly contributed to both my husband and my weight gains in marriage. Cutting those largely out has improved both of our lives and waistlines. We have different jobs/work schedules and that has changed considerably throughout our marriage as well.

Meal times together are part of our precious couple time. I will not take direction from you or anyone on how I'm supposed to cook for my "insistent" husband. For one thing, we generally cook together as well, but yes, because of our current work schedules, I do more of the cooking for us both. I did once post on how we managed to do the LC thing for me because it's pretty easy to prepare a separate starchy side dish for him. You're suggesting I make two soups, stews, entrees entirely. My bean soups taste as good as they do because after initial soaking and such, I slow cook the beans in bone broth and pureed mir a pois with herbs/spices -- this is the base of deep flavor -- the meat (usually left over pork butt or chicken) is added at the end.

BTW, you changed the rules again. Started with no dairy and seafood/offal as part of your paleo definition, now it's just no grains/legumes. What came through in your original question is "have you tried the Full Monty". No. I do not ever wish to try it because even if it worked for weight loss, it would not be sustainable. I guess I'm just weak and subservient or something. Sheesh. Actually I choose my strategies based on what has worked for me in the past and what I can sustain. I've done various eliminations just not all at once.

By the way, butter is not paleo, nor is ghee -- the infant food of other mammals was not a paleolithic human food.

Now ... I answered your questions, but you didn't answer mine. If you live by yourself and you cook for yourself it is easier than if you add even one other person to that mix. Ours is a partnership and I can no more expect my husband to accept some faddish arbitrary restrictions 24/7/365 than he should expect me to change if he decides to go vegan (luckily I don't have to worry about that any time soon). So ... will you answer my question?
Craig said…
Argue on about Paleo, what it means, and what it does. But it may become a moot point. If the following story is correct, no one (except the very rich and the very well armed) will be eating paleo in the future:


"Leading water scientists have issued one of the sternest warnings yet about global food supplies, saying that the world's population may have to switch almost completely to a vegetarian diet over the next 40 years to avoid catastrophic shortages.

Humans derive about 20% of their protein from animal-based products now, but this may need to drop to just 5% to feed the extra 2 billion people expected to be alive by 2050, according to research by some of the world's leading water scientists."
Unknown said…
Fortunately I only have 25 years or so left to live
Victor Venema said…
@Charles, that sounds like a good healthy diet. Makes we wonder what the controversy is for. You can also analyse the percentage of chronically ill people in an age group. I do not have a link for you, but I have seen results that show that chronic deceases also increase in such age groups. Asthma and autism are also likely on the rise (an important difficulty in all these numbers is whether the chance of detecting is has stayed the same) and are seen mainly in you people. Also adolescent obesity is on the rise.

My main motivation is not to reduce the chance of chronic deceases in future. My motivation is feeling better now. No more chronic hunger, my asthma is gone, teeth are cleaner, better skin. At least for my asthma the main problems were probably not diet related.
Unknown said…
The controversy comes when self-anointed "experts" - like Jimmy Moore, Jack Kruse, etc. try to tell all people that they have "found" the only way to eat and that EVERYONE else in wrong. People should read and decide for themselves what to eat/not eat.
Victor Venema said…
@Evelyn, I wrote you already yesterday by PM that I would like to keep a certain amount of privacy as I write under my real name. I see no reason not to discus this in general, without getting personal. There are many couples with different diets, the classical one would be that she is vegetarian and he is not. I did not want to criticise the way you life your life, just suggest that two diets is often a solvable problem.

I know butter is not paleo, neither is a stove, frying pan or recipe app. The idea is to test which parts of modern life are detrimental. Apparently, not too many people noticed an improvement when using a frying pan, some actually have problems with butter, as far as I know no one seems to have problems with gee, but feel free to use lard for a more realistic re-enactment.

Sounds like a great soup. Maybe I should try eating some beans again. :-)
Victor Venema said…
Charles, then I am in with you on this controversy. There is no one perfect diet for everyone. It would be great if they would leave the internet and more prudent voices would take their place.
Victor Venema said…
Paleo does not have to be meat heavy. Eating the whole animal and not just the muscles would help a lot and we could stop converting food into gasoline.
Unknown said…
Like this post

I'd imagine in-vitro meat will be available long before then.
Unknown said…




Anonymous said…
It's a reductio ad absurdum of his own ideas. We need to control the gut flora to control the brain to control the gut flora. Psychology is just a series of rationalizations about what the flora want us to do.

I'm reading this blog post now because the flora are telling me to. Now they know about the internet, they're unstoppable!
CarbSane said…
Love it David! Don't recognize your avatar as having commented here before, so welcome!
CarbSane said…
Same for beef oboe! "b" before "c", but grass-fed! Or ... you can make butter more important than protein by calling it "pastured"!!
No takers on this? I know it's a bit off-topic, but not so much when you consider what Kruse, Dickoley, Art De Vany, every single Cross-Fitter and even Stephan claim when it comes to bodyfat.

If this study proves that exercise doesn't matter, where does that leave us?
Victor Venema said…
Anonymous said…
GG- be careful what conclusions you draw out of two studies. They seem well done to me, but you aren't correct about the conclusion. Saying after two studies that anything is "proved" is a bit premature.

Beyond that it never would prove that "exercise doesn't matter". Exercise will always matter, cardiovascular fitness is important no matter what your body weight. In-fact being obese and fit carries less risk than being normal weight and unfit.

Exercise might not matter for body weight, (that's the conclusion of the study) and the only ramification is- eat less to lose weight. My n=1 seems to suggest that this seems impossible, but who knows. Over the last 6 months I've shed a bunch of body fat, lost pounds, I am exercising more and I'm pretty sure actually taking more calories than at the higher body weight, but who knows I wasn't using tagged water to measure my intake. Other athletes like Micheal Phelps who have low body fat, normal body weight and eat 8k calories a day would suggest otherwise also. There's no way that you could get elite athletes that take 6-10k calories to fit into the kcal/kg formulas they come up with that study. I personally weigh 160 and I'm eating around 3000 cal. I think even I'm (average 1 hour intense exercise per day) well above those numbers.
CarbSane said…
@Gunther: I'm a bit behind as I'm working on an update for the Kickass post. Colby Vorland has discussed this over at nutsci.com. I have the following general theory: HG's were not cultures of abundance, therefore basal metabolic rates and even work efficiencies are established in that context. Many Western EE's are high because we're bigger and less efficient.

This may be another reason why such isolated cultures fare worse when exposed to excesses. They are dialed low.
Diana said…
I saw this myself and was flabbergasted. I would love to see Evelyn's analysis of this. My 'dummy' take on this is that the more energy you expend, the more the body finds ways to conserve. Perhaps the Hadza are not just great movers, they are champion resters. They're bodies are more efficient at doing both.

GG: my ability to read these things sucks. I am going to download it and read it carefully but did you get how many calories the Hadza eat?
Diana, I had the same problem with the study: no mention of average daily caloric intake anywhere. Why was that so hard for them to include?

But if the Hadza's TEE is 1877 kcals/day for women and 2649 kcals/day for men and they are lean and weight stable, you can assume they are eating just about the same amount of calories per day, no?

For fat Westerners, you can assume the calorie intakes will be all over the place depending on socio-economic status, region, culture, etc., since "Westerners" are not an isolated population group with a definable diet like the Hadza.
Lesley Scott said…
@GG "If this study proves that exercise doesn't matter, where does that leave us?"

I thought that one study done at McMaster on the impact of exercise on the stem cells in bone-marrow cavities was interesting. The mice that were sedentary had the cavities of their bone marrow fill with fat, which then impeded their bodies' ability to make new blood - which creates conditions like anemia and subpar clotting of wounds. In the rodents that were exercised, it was the act of exercise, apparently, which dictated that the bone-marrow cavity stem cells create new blood instead of fat. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110901112531.htm
Diana said…
@GG, "But if the Hadza's TEE is 1877 kcals/day for women and 2649 kcals/day for men and they are lean and weight stable, you can assume they are eating just about the same amount of calories per day, no? "

Told you I was a dummy! But I still think they should have included it. Also something about what they eat and when. I'm not terribly familiar with this one hg group, y'know? But I'll read up on them. The women sure are skinny.

In any case, the study intrigues me although I'm not convinced. I have always thought that 'move more' was useless unless you take care of the 'eat less' part, and I know too many people who don't exercise much at all, and are normal weight, to discount this out of hand. Also, the anthropologists who conducted the study appear to be honest and not fringe-y at all.

I wonder if the Hadza ever go through periods of semi-starvation?
Anonymous said…
Great beat ! ӏ wоuld likе to
appгеntісe while уou аmend your ѕіte, how can i subsсribe for а
blog webѕite? Тhe account hеlped me
a aсcеptаble ԁeal. ӏ had been tіny bit acquaіnted of this yοur
brоаdcaѕt offerеԁ bгight clear concept

Аlso vіѕit my wеb-site; Payday Loans
Anonymous said…
I visited many web sites eхcept the auԁіo feature for audio sοngs present at this web site is gеnuinelу mаrѵelοus.

Also viѕit mу site Same Day Payday Loans