• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Paleo vs Vegetarian vs Calories

paleo vegan calories caloriecounting

  • Please log in to reply
14 replies to this topic

#1 Plasmod3smata

  • Guest
  • 1 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Iquitos, Peru

Posted 15 January 2014 - 01:49 AM


Any comments and/or oppinions? Ketogenic metabolism burning belly fat? Vegan foods converted into essential bionutrients? Calories not real relevant w low carb?

I will UTFSE later but thought this would be a good intro...

Sent from my iPod

#2 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 15 January 2014 - 06:28 PM

I am not vegan but I eat a lot of low carb vegetables and fruits. I find the paleo diet the easiest to maintain. My experience is that I don't have any trouble maintaining very low body fat, even when eating 2,000 or so calories per day (most times, less than 100 grams of carbs per day).
  • like x 1

#3 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 16 January 2014 - 01:44 AM

I don't understand the question. You could be a vegetarian and be paleo at the same time. Paleo doesn't require meat. It only requires that you don't eat foods that are new to us on an evolutionary timescale.
  • Good Point x 1

#4 Proverb

  • Guest
  • 5 posts
  • 17
  • Location:Norway
  • NO

Posted 17 January 2014 - 03:08 PM

I have to respectfully disagree, niner. You can not be vegetarian and paleo at the same time. I suppose the definition of the "paleo diet" has become increasingly diluted with its popularity, but as far as I know none of the authorities on the subject agrees that vegetarians can be paleo and most of them have explicitly stated this. You need not go further than the first popular book on the subject, The Paleo Diet, to find an explanation.

My experience with diets like vegetarian, vegan, low-carb, paleo, fasting and SAD, is that paleo with some kind of carbohydrate timing is a good point of departure. I would recommend cyclic ketogenic paleo for overweight people as well as for those with low levels of and/or low intensity activities.

#5 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 17 January 2014 - 10:02 PM

I have to respectfully disagree, niner. You can not be vegetarian and paleo at the same time. I suppose the definition of the "paleo diet" has become increasingly diluted with its popularity, but as far as I know none of the authorities on the subject agrees that vegetarians can be paleo and most of them have explicitly stated this. You need not go further than the first popular book on the subject, The Paleo Diet, to find an explanation.


Is that because dairy isn't defined as paleo? There are a lot of people who are well adapted to dairy, so although it's technically "cheating", I think you could slip it in and still call your diet "paleo", providing you were adapted to it, i.e. not lactose intolerant or having allergies to it. A lot of people think that paleo means hyperlipid, but that is not Loren Cordain's view, nor mine. If one chooses to be vegetarian or vegan, it will be harder to construct a healthy diet, but not impossible.

#6 Maecenas

  • Guest
  • 181 posts
  • 46
  • Location:Ukraine

Posted 20 January 2014 - 04:13 PM

I've experimented with many diets in recent years. I tried to be vegetarian and vegan, the last was an awful experience.But the worst was the fruitarian type. I felt hungry all the time. On the other hand, Paleo is a very comfortable diet. I don't know about it's health consequences, but it's easy to follow, it makes you feel satiated, and at the same time you can eat as many vegetables as any vegetarian. Moreover, paleo is the best diet to maintain muscle mass and to stay very fit if you do serious strength training. But I doubt that humans should avoid grains. And if someone claims that paleo is unhealthy because of large amount of meat and protein I think they have no scientific evidence for such statements. I suggest, what makes vegetarian diet healthier is not the avoidance of meat, but more antioxidants, fibre and nutrients it contains.
Nevertheless, in my opinion, the healthiest diet is pescetarianism.

Edited by Maecenas, 20 January 2014 - 04:32 PM.


#7 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 569

Posted 20 January 2014 - 08:34 PM

in my opinion, the healthiest diet is pescetarianism.


What about contamination of seafood with mercury, lead, and other heavy metals in addition to PCB's, DDT, and other pesticides and industrial chemicals and not to mention radiation contamination. And then we have bacteria and biotoxin contamination of shellfish. Virtually all pollution and environmental contaminants drain into waterways and downstream into the seas and oceans where they continue to accumulate in ever greater concentrations. Chemicals, heavy metals, radiation, and sewage. Virtually everything eventually ends up in the seas and oceans.

As healthy as seafood is used to be and in spite of the importance seafood may have played into human evolution, the current and future safety of seafood is questionable at best.

Unfortunately, in today's world, (exclusively) eating large amounts of seafood may not be in our best interest for health. As you have no way of knowing the level of health jeopardizing heavy metal, industrial chemical, or radioactive contamination you may be ingesting with each seafood dinner. And the consumption of each portion of contaminated seafood on a regular (daily) basis will allow ever higher levels of contaminates to accumulate and build in our tissues until our health has been adversely and irreparably harmed as well.

The safest bet, as with everything, is the time tested rule "all things in moderation". Or in other words, it is probably healthier (or at least "more" safe) to cut back on the surf by adding in some turf (the best of both worlds).
  • like x 2

#8 Proverb

  • Guest
  • 5 posts
  • 17
  • Location:Norway
  • NO

Posted 20 January 2014 - 09:17 PM

How is "all things in moderation" a time tested rule as opposed to, say, a diet excluding known allergens like gliadin, lactose etc., like the paleo diet?

#9 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 569

Posted 20 January 2014 - 11:20 PM

a diet excluding known allergens like gliadin, lactose etc


I don't know about you but I surely don't have any allergies to either gluten or lactose. But that doesn't mean it would be healthy to eat white bread by the loaf or pasta by the bowl or chug milk by the gallon. Like I said, it is much safer to consume in moderation and not to over indulge in any particular food group. Your mother should of taught you to eat in moderation and not to over indulge.

People with food allergies are in the minority but like any other health condition, if it doesn't agree with you, then simply avoid the offending staples. This isn't rocket science here.
  • like x 1

#10 Darryl

  • Guest
  • 650 posts
  • 657
  • Location:New Orleans
  • NO

Posted 20 January 2014 - 11:51 PM

The starting point for any discussion of macronutrients in longevity should consider what the longest lived people eat.

Traditional Okinawans have the best claim as the longest lived community, and their diet incorporates a 10% calorie restriction compared to other Japanese, and is 85% carbohydrate, 9% protein, and 6% fat. 4% of their calories come from animal products, primarily fish, and only 2% is saturated fat. As far as I'm concerned, that suggests the starting point for any longevity diet should be a mildly calorie-restricted, and profoundly protein, fat and sugar restricted, near-vegan diet. This makes eminent sense with what we now know of nutrient signalling by insulin, IGF-1 and amino acids, as well as inflammatory signalling by fats.

We can do better than traditional Okinawans, but I doubt there's much to be gained in tweaking their macronutrient intake. The advances we make over this culture will come through hacking biological aging pathways (AMPK, Sirt1, autophagy, telomerase, xenobiotic response, inflammation, superoxide production, epigenetics) in ways that weren't forseen just a few years ago.

Paleo diets are undoubtedly superior to mainstream Western diets in their low glycemic indices and embrace of whole-plant foods, but they're more suited to bodybuilders who want elevated growth signalling, than to those of us who are trying to square our mortality curve as much as possible. As Gems and Partridge ably summarise, growth causes aging.

Willcox, D. Craig, et al. "The Okinawan diet: health implications of a low-calorie, nutrient-dense, antioxidant-rich dietary pattern low in glycemic load." Journal of the American College of Nutrition 28.sup4 (2009): 500S-516S.
Houtkooper, Riekelt H., Robert W. Williams, and Johan Auwerx. "Metabolic networks of longevity." Cell 142.1 (2010): 9-14.
McCarty, Mark F., Jorge Barroso-Aranda, and Francisco Contreras. "The low-methionine content of vegan diets may make methionine restriction feasible as a life extension strategy." Medical hypotheses 72.2 (2009): 125-128.
Gems, David, and Linda Partridge. "Genetics of longevity in model organisms: debates and paradigm shifts." Annual review of physiology 75 (2013): 621-644.
  • like x 3
  • Informative x 2

#11 deadwood

  • Guest
  • 14 posts
  • -16
  • Location:toronto

Posted 12 February 2014 - 06:40 PM

Paleo is a scam

Edited by Shepard, 12 February 2014 - 06:51 PM.

  • dislike x 5
  • Cheerful x 2
  • Ill informed x 2
  • like x 1
  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#12 Saintor

  • Guest
  • 39 posts
  • 24

Posted 22 December 2014 - 12:01 AM

I didn't know that eating animal proteins would have the same effect on insulin as sugar!
 

  • Informative x 1

#13 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 22 December 2014 - 04:19 AM

I didn't know that eating animal proteins would have the same effect on insulin as sugar!

 

 

Claims Dr. Greger, the vegan ideologue who usually distorts the science to make his preselected point.  We'd have to start by noting his definition of "paleo", which is likely to be hyper-meat.   A paleo diet doesn't need a lot of meat, or any, for that matter.


  • unsure x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#14 Darryl

  • Guest
  • 650 posts
  • 657
  • Location:New Orleans
  • NO

Posted 22 December 2014 - 09:30 AM

Case in point:

 

Everyday Vegan Paleo Recipes: Tantalize your Taste Buds with Mouth Watering Recipes, by E Hayes

50 Vegan Paleo Recipes, by Lisa A Miller

Paleo Vegan Kale Recipes: Simple Recipes For the Busy Paleo Vegan Lifestyle, by Lisa A Miller

 

If we take paleo to simply mean minimally processed foods, then just about anything from the produce section of the grocery can qualify. If calorie and methionine restricted, then its also likely consistent with longevity practice.


  • WellResearched x 1
  • Agree x 1

#15 Saintor

  • Guest
  • 39 posts
  • 24

Posted 23 December 2014 - 12:23 AM

The point was elevation of insuline animal proteins vs sugar. Do you have anything to refute his claim. Paleo doesn't have to be all about meat, but in practice this is what happens - too much proteins.

Edited by Saintor, 23 December 2014 - 12:24 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: paleo, vegan, calories, caloriecounting

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users