Foods Consumed By The Healthiest People, Part 5: The Nicoya Peninsula

[paymanz]

Increasing CREATIVE INTELLIGENCE is one of his main goals, STARCH mainly grains is not as supportive of this ,FRUITS are.

thats interesting, is that from peat? or any other reference?

 

[supernature]

My current diet is mostly all those different kinds of roots and squashes that I mentioned with the addition of fruits, fruit juice, greens, fat free goat milk, fat free goat yogurt, eggs, and the occasional lean beef/bison. The key to making it work is making your own fat free(no oil) sweet/salty condiments to flavor the starch. Just picture a big bowl of steamed/baked/boiled roots and squash as the centerpiece of the meal.

So, do you think little bit of butter wont be beneficial on those tubers, or you are trying to avoid the fats as much as possible in general?

 

[Peata]

I really learn a lot from these studies and the discussions on what people eat. I would like a thread about what our parents eat and grandparents/relatives....their ages and health conditions. I have relatives living until they are 90. My dad retired at 85! He is still going strong, on no medications. It can be confusing watching what people eat and then watching them be more active and healthier than myself in 50's (with a lot of health problems). PS my dad eats good :)

I had a female relative live to almost 100 (maybe four months shy of it). She lived alone, never married, never had kids, was not religious. Worked in one job for decades and retired. Physically active as long as she could be -gardening, house keeping, etc.

She kept up with news, politics through newspaper and TV. Read books. Smart as a tack, dominated at that old game, "Trivial Pursuit". Seemed to be conservative and authoritarian though. She had a dry sense of humor, often seemed to be a negative person, but maybe was just set in ways. She lived through hard times, and I think that made her less prone to worry about the crazy stuff people worry about in modern times. She coasted without much concern. Very strict with money though she had a lot of it saved, what some call a "tightwad" or miserly.

Raised and canned/froze a lot of food from her garden. Ate a lot of the same foods daily. Strong black instant coffee, sweets that she made herself such as pies. She didn't hold back on sugar. Fruits, ice cream, etc. Meat and potatoes.

Was not obese, but not thin at all.

Only medication was Benadryl for allergy, and maybe had some arthritis because she took either aspirin or Tylenol or something. Toward end of life she did have problems with her legs - pain and I think the doctor said it was something to do with her veins and they could operate on them, but she didn't have it done. At the end of her life, she did have to be hospitalized some, but died at home.

 

[Peata]

Had another female relative, again died just shy of 100. Extreme authoritarian, not a warm person, conservative, uber religious. Read Bible, didn't watch much TV. Very active in her church -it was a huge part of her life. Homemaker, physical work, had more than 6 kids, some died young. Lived a primitive life -no running water, used outhouse, handwashed clothes, etc. until later in life. Had few worldly possessions and gave away what little money she had or anything people asked of her.

Practiced calorie restriction, was thin as a rail and I think she took pride in it. No real health problems that I know of until later, when she had some heart issue. I don't think she took many prescriptions or sought medical treatment unless family made her. She believed anything physically wrong was God's will and she didn't want to go against it. However, I think she sometimes took nitroglycerin or something for her heart.

Never saw a gynecologist but once when she was in her 80s and had prolapsed uterus, family made her go to doc.

She loved laxatives.

Died at home.

 

[Tarmander]

Peat's view is that low fat lactose and fruit are better sources of carbohydrate but since you asked me:

Starch comes in three forms:

1. Below ground storage organs: potato, yam, sweet potato, (sweet potatoes are not the same as yams) parsnip, celeriac, burdock, tapioca, sunchoke, jicama, rutabaga, water chestnut, taro, cassava and many others that are available around the world. Some tubers have more simple sugar than starch such as beets and turnips but the starchy ones are the ones that provide sufficient calories.

2. Above ground storage organs, winter squashes: - butternut, acorn, Hubbard, banana, pumpkin, buttercup, turban. Summer squash are usually low in calories which makes sense, summer = fruit, winter = steamed starch to keep warm and be the carbohydrate source when fruit is not there, in the non-tropics.

3. Grains - rice, amaranth, barley, buckwheat, farro, emmer, kamut, millet, muesli, quinoa, rye, sorghums, spelt, teff, triticale and many others, in their non-flour form. White rice is milled, but it's not milled into a flour.

Legumes like beans, lentils, peas, and some others have starch but they also have a high amount of protein so to call them a carbohydrate is a misnomer.

Flour products are not simply "starch." The best are numbers one and two but I don't think grains are "bad." I just think roots and squashes are better. White rice is a superior grain though. It's super brain fuel. This way of eating is very unique and it takes a lot of time and practice to get it down but once you do it's great. It takes a lot of effort in learning how to cook the foods and store them but you get better at it the more you do it. My current diet is mostly all those different kinds of roots and squashes that I mentioned with the addition of fruits, fruit juice, greens, fat free goat milk, fat free goat yogurt, eggs, and the occasional lean beef/bison. The key to making it work is making your own fat free(no oil) sweet/salty condiments to flavor the starch. Just picture a big bowl of steamed/baked/boiled roots and squash as the centerpiece of the meal. Most times for me that is the meal with nothing else. I only have meat bi-weekly and the goat milk every two or three days. The whole problem with people saying that grains are "bad" is that they misunderstand the way people eat them. Do they really think the whole disease epidemic is actually caused by people eating them in non-flour form, in a simple steamed or boiled bowl with no oil or tons of cheese added to them? People don't eat grains like that. Do they really think that all of the people who died from heart disease last year did so because they were going to Whole Foods and stocking up on quinoa and going home and eating a diet of steamed quinoa? When people think of "starch" they think bread, pasta, cookies, cakes, crusty pies, pastries, donuts, muffins, pancakes, waffles, biscuits, noodles, and crackers. There are three problems with calling those foods "starch." Firstly, all of those foods (besides pasta and noodles, which are just flour by themselves) are made with lots of fat, in the form of vegetable oils, margarine, or butter, so to call them just "starch" is a misnomer. People call pizza and ice cream "carbs" when in reality pizza and ice cream have more calories coming from fat than they do carbs. Not only does pizza have plenty of cheese on it, the dough is made with vegetable oil. A cannoli and ice cream have more calories coming from their cream/fat content than from their starch/sugar content. Same with chocolate, it has more fat than sugar. Secondly, besides being baked/cooked with oils, margarine, or butter, those foods are also almost always consumed with added fat as well because no one eats those flour products without any fat. People always add oils and cheese/butter to them. You are considered a weirdo if you eat such foods fat-free. So when one is eating those foods, they have to consider the calories/additives/effects from the fat portion of those foods. So that's why I say eating starch in the way I do is unique and that is why there is clinical research on eating it in that way reverses disease such as the work of Dean Ornish who is not vegan by the way. His diet allows fat free dairy and egg whites. I disagree with him on fish oil but I agree with him on keeping the other fats low. Esselstyn also has data reversing heart disease with eating that way too.

Westside, where do you live where you can find fat free goat milk? I have only been able to find 1% ever, but if you have a source...

 

[Drareg]

thats interesting, is that from peat? or any other reference?

You should quote the entire paragraph I wrote.
If you abduct from his many articles, creativity and metabolism ,glycemia,starch and sugar in context etc.
Is this not a reference?
It's also state clearly in the paragraph ,it's ONE of his MANY goals.

Below is a quote from ,glycemic ,starch and sugar in context. There are many more like this.

"There isn't anything wrong with a high carbohydrate diet, and even a high starch diet isn't necessarily incompatible with good health, but when better foods are available they should be used instead of starches. For example, fruits have many advantages over grains, besides the difference between sugar and starch. Bread and pasta consumption are strongly associated with the occurrence of diabetes, fruit consumption has a strong inverse association".

What do people not get here? Where is this anti-starch camp westsidepufa speaks of ?

 

[Drareg]

Peat's view is that low fat lactose and fruit are better sources of carbohydrate but since you asked me:

Starch comes in three forms:

1. Below ground storage organs: potato, yam, sweet potato, (sweet potatoes are not the same as yams) parsnip, celeriac, burdock, tapioca, sunchoke, jicama, rutabaga, water chestnut, taro, cassava and many others that are available around the world. Some tubers have more simple sugar than starch such as beets and turnips but the starchy ones are the ones that provide sufficient calories.

2. Above ground storage organs, winter squashes: - butternut, acorn, Hubbard, banana, pumpkin, buttercup, turban. Summer squash are usually low in calories which makes sense, summer = fruit, winter = steamed starch to keep warm and be the carbohydrate source when fruit is not there, in the non-tropics.

3. Grains - rice, amaranth, barley, buckwheat, farro, emmer, kamut, millet, muesli, quinoa, rye, sorghums, spelt, teff, triticale and many others, in their non-flour form. White rice is milled, but it's not milled into a flour.

Legumes like beans, lentils, peas, and some others have starch but they also have a high amount of protein so to call them a carbohydrate is a misnomer.

Flour products are not simply "starch." The best are numbers one and two but I don't think grains are "bad." I just think roots and squashes are better. White rice is a superior grain though. It's super brain fuel. This way of eating is very unique and it takes a lot of time and practice to get it down but once you do it's great. It takes a lot of effort in learning how to cook the foods and store them but you get better at it the more you do it. My current diet is mostly all those different kinds of roots and squashes that I mentioned with the addition of fruits, fruit juice, greens, fat free goat milk, fat free goat yogurt, eggs, and the occasional lean beef/bison. The key to making it work is making your own fat free(no oil) sweet/salty condiments to flavor the starch. Just picture a big bowl of steamed/baked/boiled roots and squash as the centerpiece of the meal. Most times for me that is the meal with nothing else. I only have meat bi-weekly and the goat milk every two or three days. The whole problem with people saying that grains are "bad" is that they misunderstand the way people eat them. Do they really think the whole disease epidemic is actually caused by people eating them in non-flour form, in a simple steamed or boiled bowl with no oil or tons of cheese added to them? People don't eat grains like that. Do they really think that all of the people who died from heart disease last year did so because they were going to Whole Foods and stocking up on quinoa and going home and eating a diet of steamed quinoa? When people think of "starch" they think bread, pasta, cookies, cakes, crusty pies, pastries, donuts, muffins, pancakes, waffles, biscuits, noodles, and crackers. There are three problems with calling those foods "starch." Firstly, all of those foods (besides pasta and noodles, which are just flour by themselves) are made with lots of fat, in the form of vegetable oils, margarine, or butter, so to call them just "starch" is a misnomer. People call pizza and ice cream "carbs" when in reality pizza and ice cream have more calories coming from fat than they do carbs. Not only does pizza have plenty of cheese on it, the dough is made with vegetable oil. A cannoli and ice cream have more calories coming from their cream/fat content than from their starch/sugar content. Same with chocolate, it has more fat than sugar. Secondly, besides being baked/cooked with oils, margarine, or butter, those foods are also almost always consumed with added fat as well because no one eats those flour products without any fat. People always add oils and cheese/butter to them. You are considered a weirdo if you eat such foods fat-free. So when one is eating those foods, they have to consider the calories/additives/effects from the fat portion of those foods. So that's why I say eating starch in the way I do is unique and that is why there is clinical research on eating it in that way reverses disease such as the work of Dean Ornish who is not vegan by the way. His diet allows fat free dairy and egg whites. I disagree with him on fish oil but I agree with him on keeping the other fats low. Esselstyn also has data reversing heart disease with eating that way too.

Are squash not considered a fruit?

There is nothing unique about your way of eating starch, people all over the world regularly eat starch in the manner you speak of, many people regularly eat plain boiled potatoes more so than seasoned with fat.
It's mainly Chefs or people into food who use saturated fat like butter,cream,milk in potatoes because it tastes great. The average parent at home is mainly putting up plain enough food,the parents who cook real food that is.

Who believes on the Ray Peat forum that all disease is caused by grains? What people do speak of ?

Traditional pizza dough is not made with veg oil, most of the baked goods you mentioned became popular because they were baked with saturated fats, veg oil and margarine are modern commercial additions, you don't have to eat those brands, many of the top bakeries in France would not dream of using anything other than butter.
Most of what you mention made in the original form and original portion size will protect you from the negative aspect of starch, butyric acid in butter can increase metabolism,cream/milk contains calcium and much more,also butyric acid. I believe butyric acid can allow t3 to enter cells.

You say no one eats flour products without fat yet admit noodles and pasta are regularly consumed,mainly being made of flour and water. They are consumed with tomato sauce regularly ,if any fat goes into tomato sauce it might be a touch of olive oil which has vitamin E. Lots of kids want plain pasta.
Asian noodle recipes have little fat.
These people are not considered weird, one of the most popular dishes in the world is pasta with tomato sauce. You personally consider this weird.

 

[Kasper]

What do people not get here? Where is this anti-starch camp westsidepufa speaks of ?

Well, one thing I don't get, is that people like Ray Peat, Danny Roddy, haidut, etc. are often talking about "starches" as a general term. So including potatoes. But when they are asked about what is unhealthy about them, they often point to studies about "grains" like bread and pasta ...

They say that sugar has a lower GI than "starches". But boiled potatoes have a GI of 49, and orange juice has a GI of 46.

They say that "starches" contains less vitamins and minerals than fruit. But potatoes contains "much" more vitamins and minerals than many fruits, and is very similar to the nutrients in orange juice.

So I sympathise with @Westside PUFAs. Why do people always need to talk so general about starches? Why just not say, grains are probably bad for this and that reason. Or, maybe even better, this study shows that "bread" is probably not a good staple to base your diet on...

I think if you can tolerate potatoes well, they are probably a more healthy staple for carbohydrates than most of the fruits you can find in the supermarket. In theory, the resistant starch could be problematic, but I haven't found any study that shows that the resistant starch in potatoes will have bad effects on your health.

 

[Drareg]

Well, one thing I don't get, is that people like Ray Peat, Danny Roddy, haidut, etc. are often talking about "starches" as a general term. So including potatoes. But when they are asked about what is unhealthy about them, they often point to studies about "grains" like bread and pasta ...

They say that sugar has a lower GI than "starches". But boiled potatoes have a GI of 49, and orange juice has a GI of 46.

They say that "starches" contains less vitamins and minerals than fruit. But potatoes contains "much" more vitamins and minerals than many fruits, and is very similar to the nutrients in orange juice.

So I sympathise with @Westside PUFAs. Why do people always need to talk so general about starches? Why just not say, grains are probably bad for this and that reason. Or, maybe even better, this study shows that "bread" is probably not a good staple to base your diet on...

I think if you can tolerate potatoes well, they are probably a more healthy staple for carbohydrates than most of the fruits you can find in the supermarket. In theory, the resistant starch could be problematic, but I haven't found any study that shows that the resistant starch in potatoes will have bad effects on your health.

Danny Roddy has posted pictures of his potato chips cooked in coconut oil. Ray Peat speaks about eating potatoes, what don't people see here?

They speak that way about starches because of Ray Peats many quotes on it,see the above quote I posted. They are engaged in dialogue and are looking at IDEALS and many other things, Peat is also at times looking at the ideal.

The bigger problem here is westsidepufa creating strawman points that don't exist, you probably sympathise because you are falling for the strawman.

 

[michael94]

CO and potatoes seem to go well together because the starch comes wrapped in an anti-microbrial, antifungal oil and protects against starch feeding endotoxin producing bacteria even in people with below optimal amylase/stomach acid.

 

[Drareg]

CO and potatoes seem to go well together because the starch comes wrapped in an anti-microbrial, antifungal oil and protects against starch feeding endotoxin producing bacteria even in people with below optimal amylase/stomach acid.

Are you implying a humans have taste for this combination because of this? Did you mean coconut oil?

 

[michael94]

Yea coconut oil, the lauric acid specifically is protective.

 

[Drareg]

Yea coconut oil, the lauric acid specifically is protective.

It makes sense,taste is a lense , we do stupid things sometimes we are not entirely stupid.

 

[Kasper]

Sorry to say @Drareg, but I really can't stand the arrogant toxic vibe in your messages ... I feel like you are more interested in kind of "winning" this debate or something, or showing of that you "know it better" than other people ... instead of just having a conversation and sharing different points of views, and trying to understand each other point of view.

In this way, I don't enjoy this discussion at all.

 

[Drareg]

Sorry to say @Drareg, but I really can't stand the arrogant toxic vibe in your messages ... I feel like you are more interested in kind of "winning" this debate or something, or showing of that you "know it better" than other people ... instead of just having a conversation and sharing different points of views, and trying to understand each other point of view.

In this way, I don't enjoy this discussion at all.

Sorry if that's the impression you get. I'm not trying to do that. I write on a mobile device while working.
I made some points to your point in the discussion, you ignore those points ,instead up you claim I am toxic and arrogant based on words on a screen.
why not stick to the discussion and points made?

 

[Kasper]

Sorry if that's the impression you get. I'm not trying to do that. I write on a mobile device while working.

I think I get this impression from the regular use of CAPITALISED words. And questions like: "What do people not get here?"

Danny Roddy has posted pictures of his potato chips cooked in coconut oil. Ray Peat speaks about eating potatoes, what don't people see here?

I do see that. I think they both eat potatoes occasionally, but they both also say that fruits should be preferred above potatoes as a dietary staple. I mean not about eating some potatoes occasionally, I mean eating something like 1 kg or 2kg potatoes a day, for your main source of carbohydrates.

So I can say for myself for sure that potatoes are more healthy for me, than fruits or fruit juices are (at least all the fruits that I tried).For some reason, I get digestive issues and tooth problems when I eat too much fruits or strained fruit juices. I have experimented a lot with that. Maybe, if my health keep improving, and some point, I feel better with fruits than potatoes, I don't know.

So, of course, I should not generalize my N=1 situation, to all of humanity. Probably people like Ray Peat and Danny Roddy also has experimented with using potatoes as a dietary staple, but concluded they felt better with orange juice.

They speak that way about starches because of Ray Peats many quotes on it,see the above quote I posted. They are engaged in dialogue and are looking at IDEALS and many other things, Peat is also at times looking at the ideal.

Well, motivated by my own experiences, and the reasons I posted earlier (or what @Westside PUFAs posted), I do doubt that fruits are more ideal in essence.

 

[ecstatichamster]

@Westside PUFAs do you have any source of recipes or inspiration for your sauces you use on starches?

 

[Drareg]

I think I get this impression from the regular use of CAPITALISED words. And questions like: "What do people not get here?"



I do see that. I think they both eat potatoes occasionally, but they both also say that fruits should be preferred above potatoes as a dietary staple. I mean not about eating some potatoes occasionally, I mean eating something like 1 kg or 2kg potatoes a day, for your main source of carbohydrates.

So I can say for myself for sure that potatoes are more healthy for me, than fruits or fruit juices are (at least all the fruits that I tried).For some reason, I get digestive issues and tooth problems when I eat too much fruits or strained fruit juices. I have experimented a lot with that. Maybe, if my health keep improving, and some point, I feel better with fruits than potatoes, I don't know.

So, of course, I should not generalize my N=1 situation, to all of humanity. Probably people like Ray Peat and Danny Roddy also has experimented with using potatoes as a dietary staple, but concluded they felt better with orange juice.




Well, motivated by my own experiences, and the reasons I posted earlier (or what @Westside PUFAs posted), I do doubt that fruits are more ideal in essence.

Sorry about caps ,I want to emphasise a point, on this device its easier than bold and quicker to use. Where do people get this from ,was an honest question. I'm still curious.
You also used, "people like Danny Roddy and Ray Peat and Haidut",

None of this makes me toxic and arrogant, this is what I am seeing a lot on starch,strawman arguments ,you respond to me like that after I make some points,trying to discredit the points I made.
Creating strawman is not engaging the discussion. I'm not trying to show off or win a debate,you base this on me disagreeing with a point of view.

If you do see they eat potatoes regularly how is this anti-starch ?
If you prefer starch to fruit that's your opinion and your right to excercise it, nobody has the right to misrepresent others opinions calling them anti-starch and not have counter points put forward.
This is not trying to understand another's point of view.

 

[Kasper]

Where do people get this from ,was an honest question. I'm still curious.

Where did you ask that?

None of this makes me toxic and arrogant, this is what I am seeing a lot on starch,strawman arguments ,you respond to me like that after I make some points,trying to discredit the points I made.

I should not have said that it is toxic or arrogant, but I did associate those caps and questions with some kind of aggressive, arrogant, toxic tone. This is just how my associations work, and I thought I should communicate that with you.

If you do see they eat potatoes regularly how is this anti-starch ?

Well, anti-starch is a bit a vague term, but I think Danny Roddy and Haidut done a show about problems with starches, and why starches can cause problems. Ray Peat says similar things. Talking about why sucrose is superior to glucose alone. And all other kind of concerns, some that only apply to grains. If you don't want to call that anti-starch, that is fine with me. Call it starch-concerned or whatever. I'm not really interested in discussing terminology. The point I was trying to make is, that in my opinion, they are too starch-concerned, or that the term starch is used in a too general sense, while actually, grains are meant.

 

[Drareg]

Where did you ask that?



I should not have said that it is toxic or arrogant, but I did associate those caps and questions with some kind of aggressive, arrogant, toxic tone. This is just how my associations work, and I thought I should communicate that with you.



Well, anti-starch is a bit a vague term, but I think Danny Roddy and Haidut done a show about problems with starches, and why starches can cause problems. Ray Peat says similar things. Talking about why sucrose is superior to glucose alone. And all other kind of concerns, some that only apply to grains. If you don't want to call that anti-starch, that is fine with me. Call it starch-concerned or whatever. I'm not really interested in discussing terminology. The point I was trying to make is, that in my opinion, they are too starch-concerned, or that the term starch is used in a too general sense, while actually, grains are meant.

I said ,"what do people not get here ",in a previous post, "what don't people see here ",is similar wording. I put question marks with them.

You felt I was Aggressive,toxic and arrogant, this is not fair or a reasonable reflection on my posts or anybody else's based on caps and the questions asked.
You also ,as I mentioned ,used the term ,"people like Danny Roddy etc", does your own criteria/associations not apply to you?

Anti-starch is not a vague term imo. You claimed we should have a discussion and listen to each other's point of view but then say, you have no interest in discussing terminology.

I don't want to call them anti-starch because they are clearly not,yes they discussed starch not being ideal,many people have quoted Ray Peat articles on here in relation to starch, they don't just mean grains,they mean all things considered starch and have veered in and out of both kinds.
The points I have been trying to make is that your points here but mainly westsidepufas are based on claiming people say/imply things that they have not. Points made on the show are also being taking out of context, Ray Peats articles are they for people to read on starch.
You are saying it's an issue of generalisation, I have to admit here I don't get where you see this generalisation either, westsidepufa is not saying it's a generalisation issue from what I gather.

I personally have not come across any of them speaking about potatoes and then showing research for grains to validate their view on potatoes , you will have to point me to this.

This thread is being ruined by a pitchfork crusade against the anti-starch shadows.