15

votes

[Meta] Are PaleoHackers becoming irritatingly dogmatic?

Answered on September 12, 2014
Created June 01, 2010 at 6:05 AM

Perusing PaleoHacks.com I noticed that a few folks seem hell-bent on enforcing some sort of Paleo Group-Think upon inquiring minds.

For example, David Csonka asks a perfectly reasonable question about the protein content of green beans versus dried beans.

And yet, the answers and comments he gets are fairly aggressive, challenging him on whether or not the question should even be asked.

This, my fellow PaleoHackers, is lame.

So, what is the deal? Are you all becoming Group-Thinkers?

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b

(8989)

on August 15, 2011
at 02:16 AM

...and if I were to blame anything, it would be some of those nice folks who are standing by their Man, SG.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b

(8989)

on August 15, 2011
at 02:10 AM

I do think people have been quicker to pounce lately, and there seemed to be a bunch of dusting-up when this question was originally asked.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 15, 2011
at 12:00 AM

Some of us get grumpy when there are seven or eight "did you see that AHS video?" threads.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on August 14, 2011
at 09:00 PM

this is a consequence of something. I guess you will have to figure out what. Its too bad that paleo now has boundaries.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on August 14, 2011
at 08:58 PM

Dogmatica......dude plus one for that addition. I may have to make that a blog title.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 07:01 PM

Epidemiological data won't cut it for me. We can use it to ask intelligent questions but not much more. However, if your biomarkers of disease are out of whack, manipulating your diet is smart. Cholesterol isn't highly associated with heart disease but I do think high cholesterol can be indicative of a problem with cholesterol clearance. Chris Masterhacks did a great interview with Kresser on heart disease. http://thehealthyskeptic.org/the-healthy-skeptic-podcast-episode-11

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 06:59 PM

Epidemiological data won't cut it for me. We can use it tao ask intelligent question but not much more. However, if your biomarkers of disease are out of whack, manipulating your diet is smart. Cholesterol isn't highly associated with heart disease but I do think high cholesterol can be indicative of a problem with cholesterol clearance. Chris Masterhacks did a great interview with Kresser on heart disease. http://thehealthyskeptic.org/the-healthy-skeptic-podcast-episode-11

Medium avatar

(10611)

on August 14, 2011
at 06:45 PM

Curated I believe in Framingham and population statistics. You'll get no mechanistic explanation beyond that from me because I really don't care. Playing with high level LDL when I was obese was at least in my mind a loaded gun, which I have now unloaded. I love greasy bacon and eggs, but I quit eating them until I got the numbers down.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6

on August 14, 2011
at 06:43 PM

Yes, please don't leave David.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6

on August 14, 2011
at 06:40 PM

Yeah, that's right! You tell 'em. :)

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6

on August 14, 2011
at 06:38 PM

"This is not what we want." Sorry, I don't consider myself part of the editorial "we".

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64

(11488)

on August 14, 2011
at 05:26 PM

You're blaming a noob dust-up on Taubes??? I blame it on the fact that it's difficult to communicate tone of voice throught a print medium such as PH, so some miscues are inevitable.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 05:13 PM

You still didn't say why. What is the mechanism by which this is going to be damaging? Nitrites? http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=183028408420516&comments I don't buy it. What's it going to do?

Medium avatar

(10611)

on August 14, 2011
at 05:05 PM

Where should I start curated? I thought my straw man was good enough, since it's precisely those kinds of people who are attracted to Atkins, though not necessarily to paleo. Someone who is already at 300 total cholesterol, 30 HDL, high % small particle LDL, with diabetes, needs that meal like a hole in the head. But let's go further. I didn't say bacon, eggs or butter with any fine print. What if it contains nitrites? Is not free range? And then there's the issue of whether the pig was fed corn. So many issues for even a strict paleo, much less the common man shopping at Wally's.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 04:13 PM

@thhq only eating scrambled eaggs and bacon is unhealthy but scrambled eggs and bacon aren't. And if you wish to say they are tell us why? Cholesterol? We've known since the 60's that dietary cholesterol does not effect blood serum cholesterol. Sat Fat? http://www.ajcn.org/content/91/3/535.short PUFAs? Maybe that makes them not best.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on August 14, 2011
at 03:52 PM

Eating scrambled eggs and bacon fried in butter every day IS unhealthy. Prescribing that as a diet to an obese person with a familial history of heart problems is at the very least unkind. That kind of diet is also boring, and is a big reason people drop off of Atkins.

16e617676c5ac710e5235e0b773edc0b

(2640)

on August 14, 2011
at 02:50 PM

I'm not trying to take sides here (as a newbie myself) but when you say things like "eating scrambled eggs in butter with bacon everyday is unhealthy" you're going to get people riled up because it's just not supported by science. We don't all have the answers but sometimes it helps to just read for a while to get in the swing of things.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7

(24543)

on April 16, 2011
at 04:30 AM

It would be really cool if a single factor like high serum vitamin D was enough to ensure that such as virus couldn't survive in your body. Also, it would make absolutely no sense and the universe would implode, because that isn't really how biology works. (to my knowledge)

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on April 16, 2011
at 04:01 AM

don't worry, we're not all religious. I had dal this week :P

535633b57c4a4940d1e913e7a12ee791

(1013)

on April 16, 2011
at 02:33 AM

agreed, seems to be a great group of smart people. (blush)

535633b57c4a4940d1e913e7a12ee791

(1013)

on April 16, 2011
at 02:31 AM

Earl, your a hard man.

F82f7d4dafb6d0ffc4c2ee2a85420786

(484)

on June 04, 2010
at 01:17 AM

Yep, good point Ed. Let's chill out a bit.

93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

(10502)

on June 03, 2010
at 12:30 AM

@Aaron Griffin - your wish is my command.

60b0d3e60670f645cca59f67710b4820

(399)

on June 02, 2010
at 06:08 PM

Indeed, this is ridiculous

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on June 02, 2010
at 05:24 PM

Being singled out as rude and aggressive is childish. Please delete my account. You are on a power trip.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on June 02, 2010
at 03:22 PM

Can you provide research backing your claim that kidney beans will kill you and green beans will not? I am curious.

93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

(10502)

on June 02, 2010
at 03:49 AM

I would have hoped so -- but we some trouble-makers *grumble *grumble

8347d512bca9b034d53da40dab8cd21c

(2517)

on June 02, 2010
at 02:30 AM

After giving this conversation some thought, I'd like to add the thought that given the collective intelligence of this group, it does stand to reason that we'd want to have discussions with each other concerning things outside the Paleo realm. I personally find you all pretty interesting, but can see how it would be a bit weird to move to a second board/forum just to discuss other topics with you. I'm not saying we need a second board or not -- just putting it out there as a compliment to you all.

03aeff8d87a3b53a449b5b8e9158da98

(3268)

on June 01, 2010
at 10:33 PM

Ok, thanks for the explanation. At least that is something I can understand. (Although, it's not like I it was my first post! And it does make it hard for anyone to ever mention a commercial product that people might be interested in. But I appreciate the candor.)

93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

(10502)

on June 01, 2010
at 10:18 PM

@David Csonka -- I would ask you not to leave as I value your contributions. And that is what irked me about the responses to your question.

93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

(10502)

on June 01, 2010
at 10:17 PM

I think I am just beginning to understand that Earl Cannonbear answers in satire.

2ac40062935f569c9a86493f7177d2a0

(233)

on June 01, 2010
at 07:58 PM

Well written Ed!

2ac40062935f569c9a86493f7177d2a0

(233)

on June 01, 2010
at 07:54 PM

I saw your post. To me, it came off as if someone was spamming the boards with something they're pushing. It seems such a perception is the fastest way to get down-voted, fairly or not.

65125edd5aafad39b3d5b3a8b4a36bb7

(6092)

on June 01, 2010
at 06:09 PM

"not what we want" "don't see a benefit to having discussions" "don't ask" Is this site for open discussion or propaganda? First of all, eating green beans won't kill anybody. Kidney beans, yes, but not green beans. As long as people ask questions about eating dog food, CrossFit, or getting a tan, then a question about a legitimate food source should not be considered off the table. Not everybody fits into the paradigm of the idealized Cave man. Second, I wouldn't ask these kinds of questions on a vegetarian or vegan site because they are far more dogmatic. Hopefully that does not change.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on June 01, 2010
at 06:08 PM

If are are into just "real food" in general, there are tons of other sites and communities, that I do participate in myself like WAPF. I am not 100% paleo and sometimes I have questions about non-paleo foods- like making idlis, for example. It's just not appropriate to post them here unless I had some sort of paleo context. I think if you had posted the question the way it is now, you wouldn't have gotten a negative reaction.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on June 01, 2010
at 06:02 PM

I've been a big supporter of veg*ns doing evolutionary eating. Don't leave because of the crazies!

65125edd5aafad39b3d5b3a8b4a36bb7

(6092)

on June 01, 2010
at 06:00 PM

Everybody seems to worry about the "new paleos" and misleading the "new paleos". Nobody seems to believe that people can think for themselves. Better to prevent the free exchange of questions and information, than to risk somebody forming a unique opinion on a matter? People are asking about eating dog food for goodness sakes, and wondering about the protein ratio of green beans is dangerous to "new paleos"? I thought people would be happy that I was trying so hard to come up with real questions about real food. To say I was surprised at all of the pushback is an understatement.

4145b36f1488224964edac6258b75aff

(7821)

on June 01, 2010
at 03:52 PM

This answer is very obviously satirical. I'm surprised people are taking it seriously.

A727956fa3f943057c4edb08ad9e864e

(4183)

on June 01, 2010
at 02:08 PM

Who the hell is 'we'? Unless you are using the royal 'we' given your title. I get the joke you're trying desperately to make on this an other threads, but newsflash, it's not funny. Here's a novel idea, just don't respond to the questions you find so abhorant, or better yet don't click on them. Yes it's really that simple! Then we'd all be saved your 'jokes' too. Win/win.

4145b36f1488224964edac6258b75aff

(7821)

on June 01, 2010
at 01:35 PM

Heh, I think people are missing the joke here. Upvote since I lol'ed.

  • 93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

    asked by

    (10502)
  • Views
    2.2K
  • Last Activity
    1260D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

19 Answers

17
9e2180e7bfd688eb52d4f0c536172024

(2004)

on June 01, 2010
at 11:02 PM

What we have here is something that should be familiar to anyone who has ever joined a club, attended a church or otherwise participated in any sort of voluntary association. The group is formed; everyone is excited about it. Enthusiasm and dynamism is compelling, and membership grows. Participants have varying levels of commitment to the group or cause; some enjoy the camaraderie or the development opportunity, while others are quite serious about the underlying goals or values of the group. All of this is fine.

Then differences begin to appear among the members, cliques are formed, adversarial situations start to bubble up.

And when, God forbid, someone goes slightly off-piste (or is perceived to do so), ungracious words are said, people get bent out of shape, and invariably someone decides to take his marbles and go home.

This is why we have so many Protestant denominations in this country. Lacking a strong governing authority, this is how we humans behave. Knowing this, I think it???s pretty clear how we should react. You're annoying; I'm annoying. Let???s move on and forget about the stupid sh*t.

14
A4d3b809e6a16032c24a4f3b6f116428

(140)

on June 01, 2010
at 06:59 PM

@David,

And thus begins the voyage to planet Dogmatica. Intolerance, zeal begetting orthodoxy, and the closing of the collective mind. Sorry about your experience. I have only posted a few times but I read daily and enjoyed your comments.

What is so interesting is that there is no consensus, and tremendous variation among the Dr. Harrisses and Mark Sissons of the world to name only a few. Paleo knowledge and nutritional science are evolving as they should. Does anyone believe that this is THE LAST WORD? That we humble practitioners should be so rigid is sad.

@Thor

If so offended, why not ignore them here and get on with your life taking a bit of comfort that you avoided the opportunity to be offensive?

2ac40062935f569c9a86493f7177d2a0

(233)

on June 01, 2010
at 07:58 PM

Well written Ed!

F82f7d4dafb6d0ffc4c2ee2a85420786

(484)

on June 04, 2010
at 01:17 AM

Yep, good point Ed. Let's chill out a bit.

Ed71ab1c75c6a9bd217a599db0a3e117

(25477)

on August 14, 2011
at 08:58 PM

Dogmatica......dude plus one for that addition. I may have to make that a blog title.

12
1340fe0b7e7b01683ea33042092e05d6

on June 01, 2010
at 11:51 AM

Regardless what the membership thinks of the quality of the post by the OP regarding bean protein, I will agree with Patrik and state the the initial answers were completely out of line and not very conducive to a welcoming environment. And I'll also agree with Patrik that it seems to be an overlying tone with a few specific individuals.

The owners/admins of Paleohacks are very good at moderating and adjusting questions as they see fit, and we are not to assume their jobs as we are simply guests at their house.

10
A68f24168bc0de414a038037e287b581

on June 02, 2010
at 02:08 AM

I guess I can call myself "new paleo", as I have been around only for couple of months or so. I read, I think, I research... I am not a baby, I can figure out stuff. If something is posted that does not agree with general consensus about paleo diet, why not comment with short "you realize this isn't paleo, right?" or something similar. why attack? And there are many people who get into healthy eating slowly, in stages, and many times it's still choosing "lesser evil" - like beans instead of bread or so. I personally never liked beans, so I just skipped the thread all together, being only slightly surprised with it being posted.

8
65125edd5aafad39b3d5b3a8b4a36bb7

on June 01, 2010
at 05:52 PM

To be honest, I'm quite certain a good portion of this community still doubts the possibility that somebody could be unable to eat meat or seafood, despite wanting to.

I began those series of questions in the hopes of finding the closest Paleo solution for a friend and colleague of mine, who lives with a good deal of metabolic and dietary restraints, not by choice, but as the result of disease and thyroid complications.

I'm pretty disillusioned with the community at this point, and don't really participate anymore. If any of the questions are "harmful" to newcomers, I'm sure they can be easily deleted. The group-think just reeks of Internet-nazis though. Yes, I just Godwin'd Paleohacks.

Thanks for setting up PaleoHacks Patrik, up until this point, it has been an amazing resource for me, and through others I have learned a great deal. Best of luck to you, and everybody else with your dietary goals.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on June 01, 2010
at 06:02 PM

I've been a big supporter of veg*ns doing evolutionary eating. Don't leave because of the crazies!

93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

(10502)

on June 01, 2010
at 10:18 PM

@David Csonka -- I would ask you not to leave as I value your contributions. And that is what irked me about the responses to your question.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6

on August 14, 2011
at 06:43 PM

Yes, please don't leave David.

7
B3c0950cd33bf7689ca0b98e5f2b6cdc

(588)

on June 01, 2010
at 03:20 PM

Paleo seems to be taking the course of another "Food Religion," Macrobiotics, with dogma, high priests and heretics ....

6
B3c0950cd33bf7689ca0b98e5f2b6cdc

(588)

on June 01, 2010
at 09:37 PM

When the Paleo equivalent of the "Council of Nicea" meets in the future lines will be drawn and heretics will be declared. I'll be laughing my ass off ... Would Jesus Paleo?

6
08ce57b1bbb3bda8e384234389c36d94

on June 01, 2010
at 01:11 PM

We are sick and tired of these candy ass questions about the protein content of peas, smelly sunscreen or cysts on your butt, for heaven's sake!

Look, if you want to follow a Peleo diet and behavior, then eat meat, lots of it, get out in the damn sunshine an take off your shirt, and stop complaining about you petty little aches and pains. Paleolithic humans were too busy recovering from multiple injuries from the hunt and were constantly avoiding sudden violent death to be concerned about a sunburn on their nose or a boo boo on their knee.

Man up! Go hard or go home!

A727956fa3f943057c4edb08ad9e864e

(4183)

on June 01, 2010
at 02:08 PM

Who the hell is 'we'? Unless you are using the royal 'we' given your title. I get the joke you're trying desperately to make on this an other threads, but newsflash, it's not funny. Here's a novel idea, just don't respond to the questions you find so abhorant, or better yet don't click on them. Yes it's really that simple! Then we'd all be saved your 'jokes' too. Win/win.

4145b36f1488224964edac6258b75aff

(7821)

on June 01, 2010
at 01:35 PM

Heh, I think people are missing the joke here. Upvote since I lol'ed.

4145b36f1488224964edac6258b75aff

(7821)

on June 01, 2010
at 03:52 PM

This answer is very obviously satirical. I'm surprised people are taking it seriously.

93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

(10502)

on June 01, 2010
at 10:17 PM

I think I am just beginning to understand that Earl Cannonbear answers in satire.

535633b57c4a4940d1e913e7a12ee791

(1013)

on April 16, 2011
at 02:31 AM

Earl, your a hard man.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6

on August 14, 2011
at 06:40 PM

Yeah, that's right! You tell 'em. :)

6
9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on June 01, 2010
at 01:09 PM

I'm one of the least dogmatic people, but green beans is pushing it and might give the impression to new paleos that green beans are a good source of protein. Perhaps if the question had been asked with more context "Hi, my friend is tied to veganism because of X, but they want to make their diet as evolutionary appropriate as possible using vegan sources. We were thinking about beans and wondering which type would have the best protein ratio."

Because honestly, as the question stands, it does look very out of place on this site. If it were asked the other way we could get into issues of what really is the most "paleo" vegan source of protein. Arguably it's the very unpaleo fermented bean products of Asia, which as least have fewer antinutrients.

But instead I was left with...what do beans have to do with paleo?

With that, I will now edit that question with David's later comment. I hope no one minds :)

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on June 01, 2010
at 06:08 PM

If are are into just "real food" in general, there are tons of other sites and communities, that I do participate in myself like WAPF. I am not 100% paleo and sometimes I have questions about non-paleo foods- like making idlis, for example. It's just not appropriate to post them here unless I had some sort of paleo context. I think if you had posted the question the way it is now, you wouldn't have gotten a negative reaction.

65125edd5aafad39b3d5b3a8b4a36bb7

(6092)

on June 01, 2010
at 06:00 PM

Everybody seems to worry about the "new paleos" and misleading the "new paleos". Nobody seems to believe that people can think for themselves. Better to prevent the free exchange of questions and information, than to risk somebody forming a unique opinion on a matter? People are asking about eating dog food for goodness sakes, and wondering about the protein ratio of green beans is dangerous to "new paleos"? I thought people would be happy that I was trying so hard to come up with real questions about real food. To say I was surprised at all of the pushback is an understatement.

6
8347d512bca9b034d53da40dab8cd21c

on June 01, 2010
at 10:43 AM

I used to run a website for many years concerning the Dave Matthews Band, which had a message board system ("old school" in comparison to this one) that had around 20,000 subscribers, roughly a few thousand of those who were considered "active users."

There came a point when discussions veered way off-course, having very little do to with the band or absolutely nothing at all. We termed it "nDMBc," or non-Dave Matthews Band content. On the one hand, I thought it hurt the solid discussion of things band-related. However, I also saw the value in having it as long as it was kept separate in some manner so that people coming to the site were not confused by the vast array of topics. We wanted to keep it easier for people to find discussions they would want to read or join in on.

We solved the problem first by having folks put a small "nDMBc" at the beginning of their topic of discussion, so a quick scan made it easy to determine what was relevant to those wanting to discuss the band and what wasn't directly on topic. Later, we found it best to create a separate category of discussion with the same name, given that it had grown to some popularity (including discussion on sports, politics, etc.). It actually became a worthwhile section to check out, given that we had some very cool, smart people who had some highly entertaining discussions.

I'm not sure if any of this offers a solution to what's happening here. I guess my point is that we were able to resolve the issue and everything came out positive in the long-term.

8347d512bca9b034d53da40dab8cd21c

(2517)

on June 02, 2010
at 02:30 AM

After giving this conversation some thought, I'd like to add the thought that given the collective intelligence of this group, it does stand to reason that we'd want to have discussions with each other concerning things outside the Paleo realm. I personally find you all pretty interesting, but can see how it would be a bit weird to move to a second board/forum just to discuss other topics with you. I'm not saying we need a second board or not -- just putting it out there as a compliment to you all.

535633b57c4a4940d1e913e7a12ee791

(1013)

on April 16, 2011
at 02:33 AM

agreed, seems to be a great group of smart people. (blush)

4
535633b57c4a4940d1e913e7a12ee791

(1013)

on April 16, 2011
at 02:30 AM

Let's have FUN with this thing and LEARN.

4
03aeff8d87a3b53a449b5b8e9158da98

(3268)

on June 01, 2010
at 05:40 PM

I definitely agree that some people here can be quite aggressive and dogmatic. I recently posted a harmless link to some self-described "paleo" cookies, which included some not-totally-orthodox ingredients. No endorsement; just a link in case anyone was interested. I got slammed with negative comments and down-votes, until I finally asked Patrik to delete the whole thread.

2ac40062935f569c9a86493f7177d2a0

(233)

on June 01, 2010
at 07:54 PM

I saw your post. To me, it came off as if someone was spamming the boards with something they're pushing. It seems such a perception is the fastest way to get down-voted, fairly or not.

03aeff8d87a3b53a449b5b8e9158da98

(3268)

on June 01, 2010
at 10:33 PM

Ok, thanks for the explanation. At least that is something I can understand. (Although, it's not like I it was my first post! And it does make it hard for anyone to ever mention a commercial product that people might be interested in. But I appreciate the candor.)

4
4b97e3bb2ee4a9588783f5d56d687da1

on June 01, 2010
at 11:42 AM

The issue becomes confusing the people who don't understand paleo/primal yet they're on here asking questions trying to learn and see, ohh, green beans are protein.. This is not what we want.

the Non-paleo tag might be helpful... But then again it's like discussing wheat products on a gluten free site and labeling your post w/wheat

I don't see a benefit to having discussions about poisionous food unless it involves the quantity of poison, the validity of poison or the ways to counter said poisons

You don't ask allergic people the nutritional content of their allergy. That's why he got jumped on.This isn't veggiehacks or nutritionhacks.. Anyone want to set one up? I'll happily ignore those posts there

65125edd5aafad39b3d5b3a8b4a36bb7

(6092)

on June 01, 2010
at 06:09 PM

"not what we want" "don't see a benefit to having discussions" "don't ask" Is this site for open discussion or propaganda? First of all, eating green beans won't kill anybody. Kidney beans, yes, but not green beans. As long as people ask questions about eating dog food, CrossFit, or getting a tan, then a question about a legitimate food source should not be considered off the table. Not everybody fits into the paradigm of the idealized Cave man. Second, I wouldn't ask these kinds of questions on a vegetarian or vegan site because they are far more dogmatic. Hopefully that does not change.

77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on June 02, 2010
at 03:22 PM

Can you provide research backing your claim that kidney beans will kill you and green beans will not? I am curious.

95eda9fa0cec952b482e869c34a566b6

on August 14, 2011
at 06:38 PM

"This is not what we want." Sorry, I don't consider myself part of the editorial "we".

4
4e184df9c1ed38f61febc5d6cf031921

(5005)

on June 01, 2010
at 07:02 AM

I also thought the responses to that question rather unhelpful! Never did get an answer....!

3
77877f762c40637911396daa19b53094

(78467)

on August 14, 2011
at 02:10 PM

Haze the newbs! that's what I'm getting... ask a question get attacked. Answer a question. get scolded. I'm just like "well, excuse the hell out of me!" I thought that is what a question/answer forum was for! its not like I'm saying "eat donuts, you all are dumb!" We're all asking and /or answering based on our own knowledge and experiences. If everyone already knows all the answers, and thinks you stupid for asking, then, absolutely! Herd mentality in full force!

Medium avatar

(10611)

on August 14, 2011
at 03:52 PM

Eating scrambled eggs and bacon fried in butter every day IS unhealthy. Prescribing that as a diet to an obese person with a familial history of heart problems is at the very least unkind. That kind of diet is also boring, and is a big reason people drop off of Atkins.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 06:59 PM

Epidemiological data won't cut it for me. We can use it tao ask intelligent question but not much more. However, if your biomarkers of disease are out of whack, manipulating your diet is smart. Cholesterol isn't highly associated with heart disease but I do think high cholesterol can be indicative of a problem with cholesterol clearance. Chris Masterhacks did a great interview with Kresser on heart disease. http://thehealthyskeptic.org/the-healthy-skeptic-podcast-episode-11

Medium avatar

(10611)

on August 14, 2011
at 05:05 PM

Where should I start curated? I thought my straw man was good enough, since it's precisely those kinds of people who are attracted to Atkins, though not necessarily to paleo. Someone who is already at 300 total cholesterol, 30 HDL, high % small particle LDL, with diabetes, needs that meal like a hole in the head. But let's go further. I didn't say bacon, eggs or butter with any fine print. What if it contains nitrites? Is not free range? And then there's the issue of whether the pig was fed corn. So many issues for even a strict paleo, much less the common man shopping at Wally's.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on August 14, 2011
at 06:45 PM

Curated I believe in Framingham and population statistics. You'll get no mechanistic explanation beyond that from me because I really don't care. Playing with high level LDL when I was obese was at least in my mind a loaded gun, which I have now unloaded. I love greasy bacon and eggs, but I quit eating them until I got the numbers down.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 07:01 PM

Epidemiological data won't cut it for me. We can use it to ask intelligent questions but not much more. However, if your biomarkers of disease are out of whack, manipulating your diet is smart. Cholesterol isn't highly associated with heart disease but I do think high cholesterol can be indicative of a problem with cholesterol clearance. Chris Masterhacks did a great interview with Kresser on heart disease. http://thehealthyskeptic.org/the-healthy-skeptic-podcast-episode-11

16e617676c5ac710e5235e0b773edc0b

(2640)

on August 14, 2011
at 02:50 PM

I'm not trying to take sides here (as a newbie myself) but when you say things like "eating scrambled eggs in butter with bacon everyday is unhealthy" you're going to get people riled up because it's just not supported by science. We don't all have the answers but sometimes it helps to just read for a while to get in the swing of things.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 05:13 PM

You still didn't say why. What is the mechanism by which this is going to be damaging? Nitrites? http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=183028408420516&comments I don't buy it. What's it going to do?

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 14, 2011
at 04:13 PM

@thhq only eating scrambled eaggs and bacon is unhealthy but scrambled eggs and bacon aren't. And if you wish to say they are tell us why? Cholesterol? We've known since the 60's that dietary cholesterol does not effect blood serum cholesterol. Sat Fat? http://www.ajcn.org/content/91/3/535.short PUFAs? Maybe that makes them not best.

3
39a1a0bc7855c084ac59df60fdf9c0dd

(1505)

on April 16, 2011
at 03:16 AM

Thank you for this pertinent question. I agree entirely. It is especially galling when people give health comments with dogmatic certainty.

I posted a question a few weeks ago saying I had the flu and asking for advice on what to eat. One answer said, "you wouldnt have gotten the flu if your vitamin D level was at least 70." When another post asked a question about a coworker with eyeball pressure, that same person answered with a certainty only a diety should claim, and said the coworker could "heal herself."

How silly.

21fd060d0796fdb8a4a990441e08eae7

(24543)

on April 16, 2011
at 04:30 AM

It would be really cool if a single factor like high serum vitamin D was enough to ensure that such as virus couldn't survive in your body. Also, it would make absolutely no sense and the universe would implode, because that isn't really how biology works. (to my knowledge)

3
4145b36f1488224964edac6258b75aff

(7821)

on June 01, 2010
at 01:25 PM

Looks like Melissa edited the original question into something perhaps odd for this website but fairly reasonable, so I'm not quite sure what the fuss is about. The answers that still exist actually don't look all that aggressive:

  • Rob Wolfe isn't the paleo authority. Ok, he's not.
  • Google it/something about protein combining. Ok, yeah, googling it would be a good idea given that this is a website for people who by definition avoid beans.
  • How are green beans not paleo?
  • They have lectin! (I would have thought generally inedible raw was the answer, but ok)
  • Answer from melissa that is perfectly reasonable.

So... I guess this is over and done with?

93f44e8673d3ea2294cce085ebc96e13

(10502)

on June 02, 2010
at 03:49 AM

I would have hoped so -- but we some trouble-makers *grumble *grumble

2
7807ddb36f3fa43477d7d3cf7a561980

on April 16, 2011
at 03:43 AM

Honestly, reading the replies to Dave's post was sort of upsetting, especially since he runs one of the 5 or so blogs I read. I don't really know what else to say.

9d43f6873107e17ca4d1a5055aa7a2ad

on April 16, 2011
at 04:01 AM

don't worry, we're not all religious. I had dal this week :P

0
8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b

(8989)

on August 14, 2011
at 04:35 PM

Yes, haze the newb's. But, it does ebb and flow. It's just flowing right now because of the controversy that came out of AHS11.

6426d61a13689f8f651164b10f121d64

(11488)

on August 14, 2011
at 05:26 PM

You're blaming a noob dust-up on Taubes??? I blame it on the fact that it's difficult to communicate tone of voice throught a print medium such as PH, so some miscues are inevitable.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b

(8989)

on August 15, 2011
at 02:10 AM

I do think people have been quicker to pounce lately, and there seemed to be a bunch of dusting-up when this question was originally asked.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on August 15, 2011
at 12:00 AM

Some of us get grumpy when there are seven or eight "did you see that AHS video?" threads.

8949bf87b0e0aefcad10f29975e4fa2b

(8989)

on August 15, 2011
at 02:16 AM

...and if I were to blame anything, it would be some of those nice folks who are standing by their Man, SG.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!