Your canned arguments and inability to reason beyond them is evidence enough of that.

By all means, continue being “primal”*

* Which seems to entail screaming like a child and being utterly unable to analyze evidence in a critical manner.

It is awfully entertaining to see *you* complain about people arguing like children. So far, your participation in this thread has been nothing but a string of insults aimed at me without a word actually aimed at addressing the very limited and narrow argument that I have raised. In fact, I have not seen anyone actually address the very limited argument that I raised.

since you’ve now just discredited yourself….as far as cherry picking goes- I personally haven’t even pointed out anything except for the fact that people were arguing like children. That was my ONLY point. Not sure what I cherry picked.

But since you called me out directly, I thought I’d let you know. I haven’t posted any links and I’ve played little to no rule in the grains drama going on here.

I’m not sure WHAT you’ve been reading… but it obviously hasn’t had anything to do with me. LOL.

I read your links. Or more accurately, I’ve read them all over the years of wading through Paleo apologist crap.

When you can come up with a compelling argument that actually frames your “facts” within a larger model of human nutrition and physiology, I’ll accept it.

As it stands, your reductionist bullshit is the definition of cherry-picking: you pick out the facts you like and summarily dismiss anything that disagrees with your favored conclusion. That’s called intellectual dishonesty.

By all means, post more links and yell more. Creationists do the same thing, for the same reasons, and it works so well for them.

Who needs critical analysis when you can cherry-pick your facts and construct a wall of ignorance? And then you can cap it off with stamping your feet and screaming like a child!

Compelling!

Second, thanks for clarifying GGP; the thing that I feel needs to be clarified, and I hope I’ve tried to make this point, is that what you are doing 90% of the time is going to yield your results. And then you have specific situations:

1. Right after a workout, you are insulin sensitive; you’ve earned carbs. This doesn’t mean some sort of massive binge on pounds of pasta/bread, but if you want it that’s the time to minimize insulin “damage.” I’ve also posted how the GH spike is increased with carbs post workout, if that is important to you.
2. The incredibly lean. You made a note about how I focus on figure and my reason is that many markers improve with leanness. I also made a post in the past about how overfat/obese cannot efficiently deal with their situation. In fact what I wrote was”

Well pity the poor fatty as impaired glucose and fatty acid uptake means that both ASP and insulin are acting in a synergistic manner to send those mixed meal calories on the fast train to fat city. ASP and insulin are elevated during a fast, especially for obese individuals, making fat loss a rather challenging proposition. If you minimize or eliminate one half of the equation, especially the most efficient half, you’re going to make your fat loss endeavors a lot easier.

Such is why I focus on figure, or specifically fat loss to improve health. The paleo community has brought vitamin D/K2 intake to my attention along with the grain intolerance face by many. In my profession, my clients are going to improve all of their health markers by eating closer to paleo and leaning out. If they continue to have issues after those situations are met, then we move on to specifics (such as grain reduction/sprouted substitution, etc.).

One more time: I like the paleo diet. More real food, more hunger blunting fat and protein, improvements in health via proxy. I don’t think it is magic, calories still do count (though if you’re eating such filling food you won’t have to count them until you near really lean, but I suspect most people who paleo aren’t after that).

Great conversation and references, for those who supplied them

I believe the standard arguments against grains are as follows:

Gluten: (obviously this only applies to gluten grains)

Although the percentage of the population with full blow celiacs disease is quite low, I believe a might higher percentage will show signs of GI irritation when given a stool test*. Andectodal evidence links constant low level inflamation to a number of autoimmune diseases. (*I’m not going to dig up this reference at the moment, but I believe you can find it without looking too hard).

Other grains, rice etc:

The issues here are not as clear as with gluten grains, but rice still contains phytic acid, which binds to a number of minerals and prevents the body from absorbing them. Stephan at whole health source has written extensively about this, and the fact that healthy cultures that use grains tend to soak and ferement them extensively which breaks down a significant amount of the antinutrients and lectins.

Personally as an anectodal observation (sample size of 1), I feel and perform better when I avoid wheat containing foods. I’m not nearly so clear on where I stand with non-gluten grains, and I seem to do just fine with moderate amounts of rice. Obviously studying this in humans, and eliminating other variables is very difficult. I’m aware of a study showing good changes in pigs when they were switched from a cereal based diet to a paleo(esque) one.

I’ve also seen a pretty dramatic change in my blood lipids since making dietary changes, but it difficult to say if its the omission of grains, or the addition of much more fruits and vegetables. Again, this is anectdotal and I don’t expect it to win any arguments, or pass any scientific muster, but it has largely convinced me.

Thanks for contributing nothing but insults to the thread!