What 4000kcal Of Fruit Looks Like

[ste199]

Is that normal flour, wheat doesn't bother you?

Yes wheat doesn't bother me.i also eat pasta and pizza sometimes,anyway gluten almost daily.On my digestive system is harsher 1 Orange than 100g pasta

 

[Jennifer]

I believe that, Such. I attract a lot of wild turkey and deer to my yard because I toss the fruit rinds out into the woods behind my house. They love it!

 

[Westside PUFAs]

No way that fruit (or starch) is the humans optimal food. There is no presidence for it. We came out of the trees for a reason and it wasn't to dig for roots. Flesh. Probably shellfish actually since we would have evolved around warm coastal waters when possible. It would make sense since we need an abundance of minerals normally found in the sea.

But I digress, fruit is diarrhea food. That's is purpose, to get the seeds out faster. Ever seen bear scat?

Protein toxicity is something that hunter-gatherers struggle with on a daily basis as protein cannot be the primary source of fuel for humans because of the nitrogen byproducts generated when converting protein into fuel. Salivary amylase is present after weaning years, indicating our starch nature. Eat only shellfish for days and see what happens. Unlike bears, we have thumbs to remove seeds. The human body has 10 specific enzymes specifically evolutionary adapted to break down glucose as well as an additional 8 specific enzymes to convert glucose to ATP in the Citric Acid Cycle. Our craving for sweet as well as our tongue receptors indicate our fruit and cooked starch nature.

Also, see this study @haidut posted. Funny how he didn't use the dirty word "starch" in the title, even though starch was the key in the study: Carbs (not meat) were crucial factor for developing big brains

I understand the vegan angle WestsidePufa...but if you are eating vegan and not eating nuts/seeds + mushrooms that is a mistake imo. Cashews, macademia, pine nuts are examples of nutrient dense food with a good fat profile.

A fruit and cooked starch angle ≠ “vegan.”

It's a base for daily calories/nutrients/fiber.

 

[lindsay]

The different variety of foods people mentioned eating in this thread is a good reminder that there is no blanket diet for everyone. We all eat/tolerate different things. And I think our diets/cravings change as we get the nutrients we need and when our bodies require other nutrients. For almost two years, I have been eating a lot of cheese, eggs & high fat dairy. It helped me rebuild after surgery and kept me strong and provided good protein. Now I'm feeling like I need to take a break on dairy and get more beef protein and veggies/fruit (it's also summer, so I naturally want to lower my fat content). The only consistent things in my diet year round are oranges, OJ and coffee because I love them and always crave them. The rest I allow to change when my cravings dictate it.

I think we should all just pay attention to our intuition more and eat what we crave. Last time I checked, nobody ever got to mealtime and said, "Gee, I think I could really go for a bottle of Canola Oil today!"

 

[Such_Saturation]

Well... neither did they want a jar of coconut oil or a piece of dough lol.

 

[tyw]

First, let's not complect evolutionary precedence from what a particular person should do today. If you want good health today, you've got to be hardcore about things -- do what works today.

----

On the topic of evolutionary precedence, the most generic principle expoused by Peat and the people he was inspired by (eg: Vernandsky) is basically that more Complexity requires more Energy.

Regardless of whether you believe "DHA was necessary", "Shellfish was necessary", "Magic Mushrooms were necessary", ..... or any other theory of how the human brain came to be ...... absolute quantity of energy (ie: Glucose) is still one of the primary factors. Without enough energy to supply this need, a big brain could not form.

Regarding the source of carbs, evolutionary speaking, fruit would have likely been too nutrient poor, fat (which is definitely energy dense) would not provide the right kind of nutrition, and thus we are only left with starchy tubers to provide the say 150-200g of glucose a day you need to allow brain development.

Now, just because starchy tubers were was "the most convenient" in the past, is no indicator of what is best for meeting energy requirements. The primary metric is meeting energy requirements in the least harmful way possible. What particular foods help a person do this will depend on the person.

----

As for what people should do today, I'll use the example of a question that someone asked me in a private conversation:

Qns: Is long-term Ketosis dangerous?​

To which I answered:

The effects of long term ketosis in healthy populations in general are basically unknown. All the data we have are basically either:

(a) of sick people (eg: children suffering from epilepsy who are put on a truly ketogenic diet for a long time),
(b) of very informed individual who happened to gravitate towards a ketogenic diet via some unknown mechanism.

Most of these individuals aren't truly in long-term keto -- I do not consider 1 - 3 years as sufficient time to see long term effects. There are exceptions of course, eg: ItsTheWooo is clearly leptin deficient (a rare genetic disorder), and has been on a keto diet for at least 10 years (and I think it's closer to 15 years).

Generically, ketosis isn't an ideal state -- you are missing out on many benefits of keeping the "fed state", like higher insulin, more nutrient delivery, more robust immune function, more robust Anti-oxidant function (Glutathione is massively boosted by insulin), etc, etc .....

To be clear, "not ideal", does not mean "not practically possible". I want to judge individual cases. In a case like ItsTheWooo, chronic Ketosis produces the least harm of any option, and thus it is her recommended path. In myself, 1 year of ketosis just provided less resilience and less energy.

The same goes for the whole "carbs vs fat" conversation as a whole. Yes, mechanically speaking, fat oxidation provides less benefit than carbohydrate oxidation. However:

(a) What are the relative downsides to a particular person, of carb vs fat metabolism. We can't just discuss benefits .... if metabolising a large amount of carbohydrates is not possible for whatever reason, then fat metabolism is "currently safer"

(b) Does the extra benefit matter? Extra marginal energy from carbohydrate is impactful in a cancerous state. It is not as impactful in an already healthy person. Does it even matter in practical consequence, that you reap additional benefit from metabolising more carbohydrates?​

I personally think that glucose metabolism is the "best" out there. The downsides of the metabolism of fatty acids has been discussed many times, and the I have talked about the downsides of excess fructose consumption many many times (eg: I think fructose in caloric excess is uniquely capable of putting additional stress on the liver to turnover fatty acids).

Glucose is "best" in my book due to the many benefits that Peat et. al. have talked about, and also due to all the regulatory mechanisms (with fructose can bypass) to prevent accumulation of excess harmful byproducts or other effects.

Again, just because "glucose is best", does not mean that a particular person needs this extra marginal benefit to be healthy, or is even capable of exploiting this extra benefit (for whatever reasons you can think of).

----

In that sense, I'm personally much more concerned with Avoiding Harm, than I am with reaping additional benefits.


....

 

[BastiFuntasty]

The different variety of foods people mentioned eating in this thread is a good reminder that there is no blanket diet for everyone. We all eat/tolerate different things. And I think our diets/cravings change as we get the nutrients we need and when our bodies require other nutrients. For almost two years, I have been eating a lot of cheese, eggs & high fat dairy. It helped me rebuild after surgery and kept me strong and provided good protein. Now I'm feeling like I need to take a break on dairy and get more beef protein and veggies/fruit (it's also summer, so I naturally want to lower my fat content). The only consistent things in my diet year round are oranges, OJ and coffee because I love them and always crave them. The rest I allow to change when my cravings dictate it.

I think we should all just pay attention to our intuition more and eat what we crave. Last time I checked, nobody ever got to mealtime and said, "Gee, I think I could really go for a bottle of Canola Oil today!"

+1

Same thing here, in my early stages of peating I was like 2-3 gallons of milk daily, until it suddenly gave me more and more nausea. Now I am free of dairy products and the nausea is gone. There must have been something in dairy which overloaded my system and my body wanted to show me that.

What I cannot fully agree with is to trust every single crave we get. I don't know but if I would eat what I crave, I'd end up eating fries with mayonnaise or pizza or burgers or chocolate and would of course use sodium glutamate on a daily routine

Our brain is so easily to be fooled, often it just has the affinity for good taste.So my advice would be to still trust our cravings, but with enough care and selfawareness.

 

[BastiFuntasty]

....

Isn't it more likely that it's actually fruit which has the best output and balance of nutrients and energy ? Fruits are so easily digestible for persons who are used to it. You get so much out of them without much effort. Weirdly they seem to even provide enough protein to build up mountains of muscle, search for fruitarianism bodybuilding.

Furthermore isn't it actually fructose which fits so perfectly into our metabolism, so that we don't end up with blood sugar crashes? A healthy liver which is not overloaded with fats can very very easily handle enormous amounts of fructose. Of course this only works while pretty low on fat.

BTW I like your opinion on rather Avoiding Harm than additional benefits. That's one of our modern illnesses , most people want to be better in everything than others,be it in muscle mass, knowledge or health, which disrupts our society.

Just my 2 naughty thoughts

 

[keith]

The different variety of foods people mentioned eating in this thread is a good reminder that there is no blanket diet for everyone. We all eat/tolerate different things. And I think our diets/cravings change as we get the nutrients we need and when our bodies require other nutrients. For almost two years, I have been eating a lot of cheese, eggs & high fat dairy. It helped me rebuild after surgery and kept me strong and provided good protein. Now I'm feeling like I need to take a break on dairy and get more beef protein and veggies/fruit (it's also summer, so I naturally want to lower my fat content). The only consistent things in my diet year round are oranges, OJ and coffee because I love them and always crave them. The rest I allow to change when my cravings dictate it.

I think we should all just pay attention to our intuition more and eat what we crave. Last time I checked, nobody ever got to mealtime and said, "Gee, I think I could really go for a bottle of Canola Oil today!"

I find the more Peatish I eat the more I crave those types of foods, although mixing it up keeps it interesting, and just because something isn't an "ideal" food doesn't mean it can't be healthy in the certain amounts.

 

[keith]

Our brain is so easily to be fooled, often it just has the affinity for good taste.So my advice would be to still trust our cravings, but with enough care and selfawareness.

Good caveat. I like mayo too . You can make it without PUFA, but it is a fair amount of effort, not easy to make in small quantities, and doesn't last long.

 

[tyw]

Isn't it more likely that it's actually fruit which has the best output and balance of nutrients and energy ? Fruits are so easily digestible for persons who are used to it. You get so much out of them without much effort. Weirdly they seem to even provide enough protein to build up mountains of muscle, search for fruitarianism bodybuilding.

Furthermore isn't it actually fructose which fits so perfectly into our metabolism, so that we don't end up with blood sugar crashes? A healthy liver which is not overloaded with fats can very very easily handle enormous amounts of fructose. Of course this only works while pretty low on fat.

BTW I like your opinion on rather Avoiding Harm than additional benefits. That's one of our modern illnesses , most people want to be better in everything than others,be it in muscle mass, knowledge or health, which disrupts our society.
Just my 2 naughty thoughts

Well, the fruit comments were made specifically in the context of evolving a large brain. The metric here is referring purely to energy, not micro-nutritients and what not, which is likely a secondary factor in driving brain evolution.

If we're considering wild native fruits, there is some good evidence put forth by Denise Minger that fruit of the past is comparable in energetic density to the fruit of today -- Wild and Ancient Fruit: Is it Really Small, Bitter, and Low in Sugar?

Is fruit consumption sufficient to provide for the required glucose requirements of the brain? The researchers of the originally referred to study contend that the mix of glucose and fructose, along with the relative high abundance of starch-containing foods vs fruits, likely indicate that the starches were the primary energetic driver -- http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/682587

----

What does "fit with our metabolism" mean? Statements need to be specific.

Under what circumstances do "blood sugar crashes" happen? And why is fructose uniquely beneficial compared to other macro nutrients.

I can cite benefits and drawbacks of fructose. Fructose doesn't raise insulin nearly as much as glucose -- insulin is a feedback mechanism for energetic overload, and which is also required for many processes (like thyroid hormone utilisation).

Fructose is very poor at replenishing muscle glycogen -- just look at all the studies regarding carbohydrate re-feeding, fructose is very poor at re-establishing muscle glycogen due to the high hepatic load, and inability to be transported by GLUT4.

And while I don't put too much weight in this Rat study, here is one talking about how fructose can suppress GLUT4 vs a glucose feeding scenario, making it harder for muscles to uptake glucose in the post exercise condition -- Suppression of the GLUT4 adaptive response to exercise in fructose-fed rats

That study should actually be read as "fructose + PUFA", since we're talking about a standard chow diet. But still, glucose + PUFA still preferentially allowed muscles to uptake more carbohydrate.

More realistically, a 2:1 glucose to fructose re-feeding scenario seems to be equivalent to a pure glucose re-feeding scenario -- Postexercise muscle glycogen synthesis with combined glucose and fructose ingestion. - PubMed - NCBI . Note however, that pure sugar is a 1:1 glucose to fructose ratio.​

Then, regarding a statement like: "A healthy liver which is not overloaded with fats can very very easily handle enormous amounts of fructose. Of course this only works while pretty low on fat"

Firstly, the inevitable rise in triglycerides when eating Fructose is something that needs to be explained. I have stated before that I view this as Fructose causing the liver to release stored fat, and not because of De-novo Lipogenesis from Fructose -- Natalie Zimmerman: "The Woefully Misguided War On Carbohydrates"

This doesn't say anything for how well a "healthy liver" can handle fat, and doesn't have anything to do with the fat content of the diet in the short run.

eg: If as a Male, a person is at 15% body fat, even if they eat a zero fat diet that is high in fructose, this high liver triglyceride phenomena is still going to occur.

How this fructose is handled in the liver and other tissues is a big big question mark .

Thoroughly complex and impossible to determine in real time. eg: Randle effect favours fatty acid suppression in the face of high carbohydrate concentration in the liver -- what happens to the released fatty acids floating around in the liver after fructose consumption? Are they going to be PUFAs that "do bad things"? Are they going to be SFAs that are benign? We don't know, since we have no idea where these triglycerides are being released from, and in what quantities they are released (which also depends on the quantity of fructose). And do this triglycerides result in greater systemic free fatty acid levels? No clue.

There is good evidence for a U-shaped dose-relationship regarding fructose, with some fructose enhancing metabolism, and more not necessarily becoming harmful. As for the mechanisms of harm, so much is centered around this fuzzy concept called "liver health", which no one knows how to determine, and which is therefore impossible to practically quantify in real time.

Sidenote: I have opined that the 10-15% carbohydrate as fructose rule is probably where the most benefits lie. Search my previous posts for details.​

Glucose is "safer" in the sense that:

- The ability to both monitor and regulate glucose flux is greater, both from the perspective of the body (superoxide and insulin signalling to regulate glucose input) and humans (blood glucose monitors)

- The storage and mobilisation capacity is much larger (eg: muscles with 400g glycogen that is more directly stored via Glucose). The "margin of error" for glucose consumption is therefore greater.


This is not saying that "people should eat glucose", that is a determination for people to make themselves based on principles and experimentation. But similarly, to say that fructose is uniquely good is also not accurate.

....

 

[lindsay]

What I cannot fully agree with is to trust every single crave we get. I don't know but if I would eat what I crave, I'd end up eating fries with mayonnaise or pizza or burgers or chocolate and would of course use sodium glutamate on a daily routine

Our brain is so easily to be fooled, often it just has the affinity for good taste.So my advice would be to still trust our cravings, but with enough care and selfawareness.

I guess I should say that, the beauty of not having a gallbladder is that a lot of these foods repulse me. Especially fried foods & mayonnaise (I have been afraid of mayonnaise since a Magyver episode I watched in childhood) - I used to have episodes waking in the middle of the night vomiting because of eating fried foods (before discovering RP). Pizza I can tolerate occasionally, but don't crave it, burgers I eat without the bun and drink OJ with, and chocolate is really a perfect food and one which everyone should eat when they crave (that is my opinion).

My guilty pleasure is gummy candy and jelly beans :) And I never feel guilty when eating them. We are surrounded by crap in the modern world - chocolate and gummy candy are the least of our problems! If I was fat, I might feel differently, but I am active and fairly lean and will eat what I crave if my body wants it, and be happy. End of story.

 

[michael94]

50% of the fat in pine nuts is omega-6. They should call 'em cancer nuts! bah dum dum...

Store bought OJ is still better than the majority of the food most people eat. Ripe fruit is better though IMO.

@BastiFuntasty has the right idea (<-- thats milk in those bottles...)

I'm a little out of it. I took too much cypro, leave me alone!!

Okay, okay, I admit it, I only post on this forum to use the emoticons!!

lol

Well I'm referring to how they process the OJ, it's just so fake. And yes I think the chemical structure of the water is important even Peat has said this.

btw the pine nut fat is not problematic, it actually anti-cancer and anti-pathogen. Not all omega-6 behaves like linoleic acid.

 

[redred]

LOL This looks like my diet. Yesterday was two twenty pound watermelons, two cantaloupe, two pounds of mangoes and two pounds of figs. The melon has been really good this season so I can't help myself. One would think I spend all day in the bathroom eating this way, but this diet is the only one that gives me great digestion. Nature calls a perfect 3 times a day. On dairy and starch, nature takes a holiday.

You ate 20kg of watermelon and 2 cantalope, 1 kg of mango and 1 kg of figs?

 

[redred]

+1

Same thing here, in my early stages of peating I was like 2-3 gallons of milk daily, until it suddenly gave me more and more nausea. Now I am free of dairy products and the nausea is gone. There must have been something in dairy which overloaded my system and my body wanted to show me that.

What I cannot fully agree with is to trust every single crave we get. I don't know but if I would eat what I crave, I'd end up eating fries with mayonnaise or pizza or burgers or chocolate and would of course use sodium glutamate on a daily routine

Our brain is so easily to be fooled, often it just has the affinity for good taste.So my advice would be to still trust our cravings, but with enough care and selfawareness.

12 liter milk daily?

 

[BastiFuntasty]

12 liter milk daily?

I wanted to say liter not gallon.

Lol I shiit brix when I read what I've created there. "I was like 12 liters of milk daily and after a while I noticed oncoming nausea"

 

[Jennifer]

You ate 20kg of watermelon and 2 cantalope, 1 kg of mango and 1 kg of figs?

No, roughly 11kgs of watermelon. The watermelons were 20 pounds each, which includes the rinds. The rinds were roughly 7 - 8 pounds per melon so there was about 14 - 16 pounds of refuse.

 

[Jennifer]

I wanted to say liter not gallon.

Lol I shiit brix when I read what I've created there. "I was like 12 liters of milk daily and after a while I noticed oncoming nausea"

Hehe! You drink 12 liters of milk and I eat 20 kilos of watermelon, rinds included. We'd be unstoppable in an eating contest.

 

[Jennifer]

My guilty pleasure is gummy candy and jelly beans :) And I never feel guilty when eating them. We are surrounded by crap in the modern world - chocolate and gummy candy are the least of our problems!

You make Willy Wonka proud!

My not so guilty pleasure as a child was Razzles. Do you remember those? They're candy and gum, all in one. I loved them! My shampoo smells like them and so I often find myself wanting to lick it. You think this requires therapy? LOL

 

[Such_Saturation]

No, roughly 11kgs of watermelon. The watermelons were 20 pounds each, which includes the rinds. The rinds were roughly 7 - 8 pounds per melon so there was about 14 - 16 pounds of refuse.

Damn that is a lot of water!