The Paul Chek approach is based on the metabolic typing diet. This is based on eating the correct diet for your metabolic type, which is determined by your ancestry and location. For example if you were born in a country like the UK, Finland, Iceland etc, where the ground freezes in the winter, then you will not be suited to a diet high in fruit and veg, because these foods do not grow in the winter. Your energy would have come from high quality animal fats. This is why some people can eat high quality fat and not get fat. This diet would not suit someone from Bardados because they don't have frozen ground in the winter, fruit and veg is available all year and so animal fats and protein is less suitable. http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90469&highlight=metabolic+typing
Simon S raises some good points. The Primal Blueprint takes things a little further. The Primal Blueprint is based on looking at humans as a species, and the nutrition that the species would have eaten for the majority of its evolution and history, and working on the basis that this should be what we are designed to eat. From there scientific studies on diet are analysed to see whether they support this as a beneficial diet for good health or not. http://www.marksdailyapple.com/
Thanks JWT. Paul Chek says that human genes only change 1 10th of 1% every 10,000 years. So our ancestry is very important in understanding our dietry needs. Just because we live in a warm climate does not necessarily translate into us following the native diet for that region. The Primal Blueprint is new to me, sounds very interesting.
I find this interesting. Mostly because since I started eating a strict vegan diet since the New Year (at least fifteen 80g portions of fruit & veg a day, no dairy or meat) I've never felt better. Might do some digging around into Chek's work and play with my diet a bit. Thanks Simon.
I think the conventional wisdom angle was arrived at by not really looking at the whole picture but aspects of this and that, collating bits from here and there and such like. Its not that the research was wrong, just the analysis of the data can be skewed if not taken in context. As for getting large of a McD's well that will be all the carbs :woo: I have lost inches from my waist, energy levels are stable through the day now and i'm building strength better than i ever have. That's with eating 150+ grams of fat a day.
What did you eat beforehand? A lot of people who go vegetarian or vegan find they feel much better purely because the diet they had previously was crap. When they go vegan/veggie they really have to make sure they get a good balance of nutrients in their diet. You also might have had a dairy intolerance and now that you've removed dairy this is why you are feeling much better.
My previous diet was still relatively healthy. You may have a point about the dairy intolerance; before I was drinking upwards of 4 pints of skimmed milk a day, as well as eating other dairy-based products. Never felt sick from it but now I feel "lighter" as well as having more energy and getting ill less often. I make sure I get at least my RDA of protein from soy based foods, and I believe that with eating well over two dozen 80g portions of fruit and veg (mostly green leaf varieties of veg like broccoli, lettuce, cabbage and spinach) as well as taking an a-z multivit supplement I'm confident that I'm getting my full RDA of essential nutrients. I made the switch to veganism because I'd read enough studies to convince me of the link between consuming milk and a high risk of developing terminal prostate cancer, as well feeling sick every time I ate any type of meat.
I find that interesting. I used to consume an average amount of meat/fish with plenty of carbs (bread, rice, spuds, pasta etc), veg and fruit. In fact I'd say the diet I ate was very similar to the mainstream recommended diet. I didn't drink much milk as I found it gave me catarrh, but I had lots of energy highs and lows and would always have cravings for sweets. Despite daily exercise and moderate calorie intake I put on 27kg of weight over 6 years on this diet. Now I'd be the first to say that probably 10 kg of that was muscle, since I'm taking measurements from my last transplant, and I lost muscle bulk leading up to that, but that's still a steady fat gain. Since switching diets I've upped my meat/fish intake slightly, dropped all the complex carbs, and dropped the fruit intake by about 1/3 and kept the veg intake steady. I've also increased the amount of milk I drink and switched to full fat gold top from semi skimmed. The result for me has been less bloating. I eat and feel full, but I still feel I can move. It has had a tremendous effect on my inflamed oesophagus - and I no longer have to worry about reflux. I feel as if I have more energy throughout the day, and I don't have sugar highs and lows. I've lost 10 kg in weight since January from deep fat within my peritoneum with no muscle loss. I had a very nasty back injury recently that I expected to take months to heal - under this new diet it cleared up within a week. I'm monitoring what I'm doing and how I'm feeling, and the bags of pasta and rice are staying in the cupboards. I might have the odd small helping now and again in the future - but now I've seen how well I feel without them I can't see them becoming a diet staple again. Incidentally - what type of soy are you eating? The links below discuss soy from the 'Primal' viewpoint: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/soy-scrutiny/ http://www.marksdailyapple.com/processed-soy-products/ and here's an article on the pros and cons of milk which looks at carcinogenic evidence: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/dairy-intolerance/ and one that looks at milk and insulin: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/dairy-insulin/
Too bad if you're a mutt like me the Paul Chek approach probably wouldn't work. Dieting is a lot like lifting. You can make it simple and get results, or make it incredibly complicated and get results. Pick good healthy foods you like to eat, make a lot of diferent meal plans so you get plenty of variety, and don't eat a bunch of trash. Here are two links that coincide a lot with how I feel healthy eating goes. The first is by a retired Master Gunnery Sergeant from the US Marines who wrote a great book called Corps Strength, geared towards "working man fitness." (He recommends food on here but it's the first part that I'm more geared towards; book is much better and more inclusive). http://www.corpsstrength.com/page1/page1.html The other is from the website Art of Manliness: http://artofmanliness.com/2009/01/01/your-grandpas-diet-plan/
It's not, though the fact that at face value it looks like a healthy diet is your first key. As others have said it looks at what we consider moderate quantities and the reasoning behind it, why we consider complex carbs should be a staple food but that fats and red meat should be kept to a minimum. This great report found by Frodo a while back actually covered a lot of it, for the amount of time these foods have been promoted or demonized we have very little more than links and correlations, especially when the more tightly controlled studies usually demonstrate the opposite. FWIW when I first found the diet I already agreed with a lot of the principles through my own trial and error, at the time I was looking at a low carb approach but felt there wasn't enough emphasis on whole foods and way too much wiggle room for stuff like diet soda or their own brands of processed crap. On top of that the concept appealed to me, rather than finding a diet then establishing why it suited us, looking at what we evolved to eat and then attempting to get as close to that seemed a way better approach at the problem. I have to point out a slight issue I have with Paul Chek on this. Evolution is based on selection pressure and how it affects our chances of breeding. Some things have a higher pressure, like attractiveness or anything that increases survival rate in a hazardous environment. Some things are slower, especially those which affect us in later years. Diet has a lower selection pressure than many things because by the time it starts having a serious affect, usually into the 30s (before processed foods anyway) most humans are well into their 'breeding age' and any advantage from a clean diet is minimal. As a result over the last 10,000 years we will have adapted even slower to dietary changes solely because it won't affect most of our chances to have children. That said he has a good point, our adaptation to modern foods just won't happen as fast as some people think it will.
