The problem is that there is no one diet will not work for all. So th e hunter-gatherer will work only for a certain group of people. Ayuveda, Chinese medicine and western nutritional concepts such as Metabolic Typing address the different diets and who should use which.
One thing I learned years ago from the metabolic typing people was that much of the popular alternative diet recommendations of the 1960s and 70s were for one particular group of individuals: those who tended to have high blood pressure, high cholesterol and tend to get diabetes. To this day even conventional medicine and even TM targets this group which is the majority. There is a smaller group that can have low blood pressure, low cholesterol and may only occasionally suffer from hypoglycemia but not diabetes. And then you have people who are neither but suffer occasional imbalances. For those doctors may over treat. Meditation is generally for calming down someone who is high strung. For those low strung it may just put them to sleep. In fact one chiropractor back in the late 1970s suggested in his book that the latter might do better going for a walk or jogging than meditating. BTW, there are mantras that will stimulate. By the way the majority may only be that way because they eat too many foods that are stimulating and do so because they like the stimulation. I know people who went on a doctor recommended diet and dropped it when they had trouble doing their work and impaired their judgment. On 07/26/2013 12:03 PM, Xenophaneros Anartaxius wrote: > Diet is a really interesting subject. I am partly confident something > like a balanced diet arose in indigenous populations and is reflected in > their medical traditions. However these were developed largely before > the plentiful quantity of food in developed nations became available, > especially refined carbohydrate rich foods, like wheat flour. Those > foods that release high amounts of glucose in the system probably should > be avoided. Rice cakes, for example, are about the worst you could eat > using this criterion. Ice cream, because it is cold and because the > sugar is locked up with protein and fat takes more time to diffuse in > the system. Peanuts are very low glycemic, but can cause some very > dangerous allergic reactions in some people (they do not bother me for > example, but I have seen people react instantaneously to peanuts). Foods > with long chain sugars like bread tend to break down very quickly into > glucose. As Alex mentioned, cake can be particularly nettlesome. > > > Physicians in the West tend not to be well trained in diet and > nutrition. In the USA, the obesity epidemic seems to coincide with the > FDA recommending eating larger quantities of cereals and grains, which > are quickly converted to glucose. The old USDA Pyramid: > > [USDA food pyramid] > > The food industry took issue with the original food pyramid because it > established food hierarchies, while many nutritionists complained that > it encouraged people to eat too many grains. > > A hunter-gatherer food pyramid looks more like this (Zone diet) - and > minus the cheese, vegetable oils, and other more recent contributions to > the diet: > > [hunter-gatherer diet food pyramid (Zone diet)] > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote: >> My advice is to know as much about the biochemistry of how the body >> works. Then you will probably be doing better than many physicians > who >> struggle with the course in medical school. Apparently biochemistry > is >> the music theory of medicine which performance majors struggled with. >> >> I generally limit much intake of any sweets because a doctor told me >> over twenty years ago due to my glucose tolerance test I might develop >> diabetes. Didn't happen mainly because I limit intake of sweets. I >> also learned how to regulate my metabolism both through ayurveda and >> metaobolic typing. And as another physician who is diabetic told me >> "since diabetes doesn't run in your family it is unlikely you will get > it." >> Someone here once asked why they craved sweets after a meal. Someone >> responded because in ayurveda sweets are cooling (pitta reducing). >> Indians solve this problem with fennel or anise usually in the form of >> saunf, those little dishes of it you find near the door when you leave >> an Indian restaurant. The fennel or anise cools, relaxes the stomach >> and improves digestion. Even if it has little colored candies mixed >> with it there's not enough sugar there to mess the blood sugar up. >> >> There is a lot of evidence that the introduction of high fructose corn >> syrup into foods as a cheap sweeter has given rise to the increase in >> obesity. It should be banned from products. It's complicated because >> I'm sure marketing at "big fooda" companies is telling the CEO that >> people are starting to look at labels and avoiding their products >> because product X has done away with HFCS. The CEO says "but we still >> have two years on the contract for HFCS we bought." So nothing gets >> done right way. >> >> Groceries around the country have found a profitable side product: > Coke >> and Pepsi from Mexico which does not have HFCS in it. >> >> Artificial sweetners are not thought to be good because they try to > fool >> body which says "dammit I asked for sweets to do some chemistry and > you >> give me this phony shit." And it just messes the metabolism more > often >> resulting in weight gain. >> >> The more you know about nutrition the better off you'll be but be >> advised that western medicine is very fragmented and doesn't often > even >> have a good overview of the situation. >> >> On 07/26/2013 05:53 AM, Alex Stanley wrote: >>> My advice: listen to your body. I can eat an entire pint of ice > cream and my blood sugar will be fine. But, a large piece of cake or the > big bowl of white rice that is sometimes served with a sashimi platter > can put me to sleep. The way I see it, sugar is up front and honest > about what it is, and typically, it is a mix of glucose and fructose, > which limits the impact on blood sugar. But, starch is this relatively > tasteless caloric filler that goes into the body and explodes into a > massive rush of glucose. >>> Which is not to say that one should go out and eat entire pints of > ice cream. I'm just pointing out than an unreasonably large serving of a > sugary food can actually have less immediate negative impact on the body > than a reasonable serving of starch. >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long sharelong60@ wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Xeno, thanks for this. Well there will always be some 96 year > old woman who "smoked every day of her life and wasn't bothered by the > harmful effects of cigarettes." Yay for her, you go girl! But I'm gonna > go with the statistics on this one, thank you! And with the stats on > sugar. >>>> >>>> >>>> OTOH, maybe Woody Allen got it right in Sleeper: >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yCeFmn_e2c >>>> >>>> >>>> What sugar MIGHT be doing to your brain: >>>> > http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/09/02/fructose-a\ > ffects-brain-health.aspx >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: Xenophaneros Anartaxius anartaxius@ >>>> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com >>>> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 3:44 PM >>>> Subject: [FairfieldLife] Is Sugar Really Toxic? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> http://tinyurl.com/pm24aqn >>>> >>>> [ > http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/2013/07/15/is-sugar-reall\ > y-toxic-sifting-through-the-evidence/ ] >>>> >>>> Â >>>> >>> >
