[Toolip]

So I've been interested in the idea of TF for a long time but I have just recently started reading more about it. I know that there are some different variations of TF so maybe my concerns aren't relevant to all of them.

I've read some of the information on the WAP website and I am reading NT.

First of all, I'm a little leery of their statistical interpretations (well, I'm always leery of the way people interpret statistics) especially for things like the rates of heart disease and cancer.

It also seems to me like taking all these traditional food diets and pooling them all together, may not be anything like eating any one of the TF diets that was studied.

I worry that maybe there is a huge piece that we are missing. Maybe these people were in better health because of something entirely different. Or maybe this kind of diet was only appropriate when people spent all their time out in the sun, or didn't wash their hair... (Just something different about the way these cultures lived)

I know that eating this way is not supposed to be a "fad diet" but in some ways it seems like that to me. It doesn't really seem that it has stood the test of time because, from my understanding, no historical culture really ate like this.

Maybe I have some serious misconceptions, so pleas correct me. I'm sure that others of you have thought about these things too, so what has convinced you that this is a healthy way to live?

Today is discount day at my coop and I'm ready to go buy my vat of coconut oil

:

 

[Peek-a-boo]

I'm sure other much more knowledable folks will come along and contribute here. I've seen this concern raised and addressed in this forum before.

I do think that WAPF doesn't adaquetly account for the level of activity in traditional cultures compared to ours nor for possible spiritual components to health and longevity.

I think I've read the comment around here that it would be unlikely for cod liver, coconut oil, and dairy all three to occur naturally in a traditional diet. So, yes, picking and choosing from among lots of traditional diets seems questionalb eot me.

I guess I've taken a moderate approach partly because of a reluctant husband and a tight grocery budget, but partly because I don't want to get sucked into something extreme. I think it matters too what it is you're replacing. I guess I'm really more whole foods than TF. I figure if I'm eliminating the processed crap, that's a good start. Any whole food I replace it with is a step in the right direction. Then I try to prepare those whole foods using traditional methods as much as possible. And from there I try to choose things that my family enjoys and that seem to sit well with our particular bodies. I'm sure that leaves us well short of the ideal diet that many folks around here are striving for and achieving, but I feel at peace about it.

Oh, and I agree with you about the statistical interpretation stuff in NT. As I was reading her criticism of medical theories about fat, cholesterol, etc based on flawed studies, and then two lines later siting another study (often that seemed too narrow /limite) to support her point of view I was feeling pretty skeptical.

As an aside, I do use and enjoy coconut oil as we are dairy intolerant.
If we weren't, I probably wouldn't mess with it b/c it definitely don't think it's traditional to my ango-saxon genetic make up, lol.

 

[Sasha_girl]

I am in no way a purist but here are my .02:

I'm skeptical, in general, of 'modern' life. I don't think that a person needs a new car every three or four years, that each person in a family needs 1000 square feet of living space, or that we need a pill or powder for every affliction (and I've got a child who takes medication daily for a condition so I'm not anti-medicine, just anti-unneccesary medicine).

Here's my take on traditional foods--I strive to feed my family minimally processed foods. When I'm at the grocery store and I see soy cheese I think, what on earth is in that cheese?! Instead I make our cheese out of raw milk, rennet, a culture, and salt. I grow our vegetables because I don't want chemicals added from everything to the seed to the plant to a wax coating the vegetable itself. I buy grass-fed beef because, well, I have no idea what is in the beef at the grocery store and we're a family who likes to eat meat.

Those things seem to me to be no-brainers. And maybe that just makes me a whole foods proponent, rather than a traditional foods one, but I'm also someone who works hard on a homestead (and we've got a cushy life with running water and electricity, lightyears away from my homesteading forefathers) and understands firsthand that I could not function eating a diet full of processed foods. I couldn't eat 'diet' or 'lowfat' thises or thats and have the energy or stamina to keep up with my responsibilities. Instead I drink my coffee (again, I'm no purist) with lots of heavy cream and slather butter (the real stuff, made from cream and salt) on, well, just about anything. Okay, I'm kind of exaggerating on that but I'm not about denying myself flavors.

To me, eating a diet more reminescent of Farmer Boy than The Devil Wears Prada just makes sense. Perhaps it wouldn't make sense if I lived in Manhattan but living here it just makes sense.

I think that our collective health failures stem from chemicals. Chemicals on our lawns, chemicals in our vaccines (which we need more of every day), chemicals in our drinking water, but especially chemicals on our *foods*. When I sit and think about the list of ingredients in Ordinary American Family's dinner it makes my head spin. Without a degree in nutrition it just makes sense to me that a dinner of grass-fed steak, homegrown potatoes with real butter and sour cream, some roasted veggies, a glass of raw milk or water, it just makes sense that it would be sustainable.

Just seeing the difference in our cow's milk compared to storebought (my kids call it 'plastic milk'), seeing the difference between a storebought egg yolk and one from pastured hens, it's enough for me. And perhaps I'm missing the point on traditional foods and focusing on the wrong things but, for me, it means soaking grains, fermenting veggies, drinking raw dairy and culturing dairy, and eating grass-fed meat. Those things, even without a common culture to tie them, make sense to me if for no other reason that so many cultures, uncommon in other ways, relied on the same methods. Perhaps they were healthier because they paired hard work with nutrition. They were hunters and gatherers, farmers and trappers, and didn't spend their days sitting at a desk or on a factory line. They certainly did not live the lives of leisure that we, as a society, do. Perhaps a soft lifestyle makes for poor health. Those are questions that can't really be answered because we, as a society, are not willing to go back to a more basic lifestyle.

But even if one isn't willing to go back to outhouses and hauling drinking water from a creek, I think that traditional foods are a step--perhaps a big one--in maintaining a healthy lifestyle.

Anyway, my baby erased my message twice and I kept getting interrupted, so hopefully this makes sense.

:

 

[BedHead]

Yeah, I'm a little skeptical about some of the WAPF theories too. Like Peek-a-boo, I'm more whole foods than anything else. I am convinced that grass finished meat is better, but as for coconut oil and cod liver oil - I haven't invested in those yet. Nor do I get raw milk - for one thing it's illegal here. I would like to use it for kefir, yogurt, cheese and butter making, but I doubt we'll ever use it for drinking. I'm also having trouble getting past the 'saturated fat is ok' assertion - probably more to do with the fact I've been indoctrinated for so long than anything else. I'm not going out of my way to ingest saturated fat, but I'm not avoiding it like the plague like I was for so long.

 

[Teenytoona]

I guess I would say that I'm skeptical of how some folks have presented it and the lack of attention to other factors, such as physical activity, as Peek-a-boo said. I also get a certain vibe from Sally Fallon's writing, especially, that feels more propaganda-ish than fact. Not saying that she's making everything up, but I do feel like she's pushing extra hard to make some of her lines connect.

Really I agree that its unlikely that clo, co and dairy would all be available to any one culture. But, since I/we've been immersed in SAD most of our lives, I'm going to take advantage of clo/co for now, for me it's a temporary sort of recovery thing. I figure its currently in my budget to do so and that I'm on the track to recovering from all that crap.

Ideally I plan to migrate into a much like Sasha's type of diet once I "feel right." It makes sense to me. While I don't homestead (it's only a dream at the moment), it's something that I'd like to do. And as long as my lifestyle/budget allows I'm transitioning into buying less from grocery stores and more from local farmers.

The things I'm convinced of are that processed flours, sugars, fats and mostly convenience foods/drink are a major bane of health and that moving away from them can only help.

Does anyone know how WAPF originated? Was there some trigger occurance in the health/medical world? Sally Fallon started it, right?

 

[Toolip]

Well crap! I thought you were all going to come on and convince me that I was wrong!!

I can say for sure that I am a believer in "whole foods." That seems like a no brainier.

:

I do think that the coconut oil is a big sticking point for me. I just don't know. I read through the thread about losing weight with VCO and now I am even more uneasy. First of all, it seems like losing weight with no effort is not "traditionally" good for your health. I always thought that we had fat reserves for a reason... historically anyway. I'm also unsure about the idea of "revving up" metabolism. I don't think that there's really evidence that it is good for your health, other than strictly weight loss...

I guess that was a bit of a tangent but it just doesn't seem likely that traditional people woke up and had a tablespoon of VCO before they ate breakfast

But maybe they did, like I said, I'm new to all this!

I'm interested to hear more

 

[Toolip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teenytoona But, since I/we've been immersed in SAD most of our lives, I'm going to take advantage of clo/co for now, for me it's a temporary sort of recovery thing. I figure its currently in my budget to do so and that I'm on the track to recovering from all that crap.

Oh, also... what does "SAD" stand for in terms of diet?

 

[Peek-a-boo]

One recommendation I've read here (that I've yet to do myself) is to actually read WAP's book. That it will give you a much clearer picture of TF than Sally Fallon's interpretation of it.

 

[Peek-a-boo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toolip Oh, also... what does "SAD" stand for in terms of diet?

SAD = standard american diet

 

[Toolip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peek-a-boo One recommendation I've read here (that I've yet to do myself) is to actually read WAP's book. That it will give you a much clearer picture of TF than Sally Fallon's interpretation of it.

Yes, I heard that too. I started but it was midnight and I couldn't keep my eyes open

I am very curious to read more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peek-a-boo SAD = standard american diet

Thanks

 

[phroggies]

I guess I'd want to separate NT and WAPF from the notion of eating traditional foods, first of all. I have a great deal of confidence in TF, and less so in NT and WAPF, for some of the reasons you mentioned. I would also agree that factors other than food affect health--in addition to the physical activity you mentioned, there are a host of other fascinating factors, such as the effect of artificial light and the modern sleep cycle (there have been some neat threads on this topic on this forum), lack of time spent outdoors, and even social factors, such as the fact that we rarely eat together in the way traditional cultures do. Yet another example--I have a friend who has recently done some interesting research on the way that simply wearing modern shoes has affected our bodies, for example.

But, but, but: My understanding for the reason that many people emphasize diet is that in almost all cases in which indigenous people have maintained their foodways even while moving to modern locations/lifestyles, they have retained their health. And conversely, when they maintain their traditional lifestyle in all other respects but start eating the modern Western diet, their health deteriorates. I think Michael Pollan talks about that in his most recent book (blanking on the title), but I've come across the idea elsewhere. One example I dimly recall entailed a group of modernized Inuits (I think) who went back to eating traditional foods and experienced a reversal of diabetes, heart disease, etc. very, very quickly. So there's a lot of evidence that traditional food is the most important part of a traditional lifestyle.

 

[Toolip]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phroggies I think Michael Pollan talks about that in his most recent book (blanking on the title), but I've come across the idea elsewhere. One example I dimly recall entailed a group of modernized Inuits (I think) who went back to eating traditional foods and experienced a reversal of diabetes, heart disease, etc. very, very quickly. So there's a lot of evidence that traditional food is the most important part of a traditional lifestyle.

In Defense of Food?

Thank you for all your comments, just the kind of things I want to hear

 

[sisteeesmama]

I agree a lot with the questions the OP brought up.
I guess where I branch off is deciding that the modern western ideas we have been presented with could be any better. Or that it would be extreme to move to far away from modern habits. (That is just paraphrasing what it seemed like some had said. Please don't burn me

)

I feel like TF is just one facet of a multi-faceted life. I think the OP was right about other things being different, too, in traditional cultures besides just food. I think that they were much less inundated with chemicals, toxins etc. and we have a lot to compensate for on that end. To me that is another reason why it is so important for me to find the best food sources for my family.

I agree that it might not make much sense to combine a bunch of different cultural dietary staples to make one ultimate diet so much as find the culture that you most identify with as far as your heritage and go with that. To me it makes much more sense to eat what people ate in Hungary if your ancestorship is hungarian than to eat a traditional african diet for example.

To me it's like creating a a healthy happy baby that grows into a healthy well adjusted adult, you need an egg, a sperm, a womb, but then you need love, guidance, and a whole host of experiences and so on.
With TF I think the food is important, muy important, but then I think a healthy lifestyle like you mentioned getting lots of sunlight, working or walking outside, playing outside even, meaningful interactions, rituals, holidays, clean water, love, relationships with young and old and animals as well and the list goes on I'm sure.

I think TF is a meaningful part, a crucial part of a much larger puzzle.

 

[CrunchyChristianMama]

We're also more Whole/Organic foods than TF. I just love this forum because it's the closest to how we eat as I have found.

Here's my viewpoint. If I were to live where I live without all the modern convenience foods, what would I eat? It comes down to seasonal, local produce, grass-fed beef, free-range chickens, eggs, and butter from local farmers, soaked grains, etc. We're such a mix of ancestry that there is no way I could eat the traditional diet from one country and say that was best for us. So, while I add cod liver oil to my diet to supplement, for the most part I stick to what makes sense for where I live.

Along with this though, is my husband who says we can only eat this way if pizza is traditional to our area.

So I make homemade crust and use organic toppings and such. We have a few things in our diets that aren't totally local or natural, but we do what we can.

 

[columbusmomma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toolip In Defense of Food? Thank you for all your comments, just the kind of things I want to hear

I'm reading this now and love it!
We are some TF but always try to eat whole foods,as much local and organic as possible.

 

[punkrockmomma]

I know I have had the same thoughts about all the different cultures who's food is discussed in NT, and how the combination of recipes from different cultures isn't a true Traditional diet, but I feel that NT has taken the best of these traditional diets and has set forth some good guidelines on a how to eat in healthier way then the SAD, and it's gotten me personally to look at what my family eats more closely. I do feel saturated fats that come from good sources (like grass fed beef, butter from pastured cows, whole raw milk, and animal fats from animals raised on their natural diet) have gotten a bad rap in this country, and not eating enough animal fat isn't good for us either. Humans have big brains and our brain need fat, especially growing brains like my toddlers. I guess I'm like a lot of people in this forum in that we eat more whole foods then anything. We are about half TF. We drink raw milk, I make kombucha and my own milk kefir, I also make my own stocks. We also take clo and butter oil, but that's because I get depressed in the winter and taking a food based supplement just makes more sense to me then taking a synthetic vitamin supplement. We do some other TF things as well.

The places where I fall short are in the area's of grains. I'm a professionally trained pastry chef, and I just can't make what I want to make with soaked home ground flour. Even though I understand why people who eat TF don't eat white flour, it's just something I don't want to eliminate from my diet yet. We do eat some convenience food but that that's mostly because I don't have a lot of self control for certain things, and because I have a toddler who is picky. I guess what it comes down to for me is that TF and whole foods make sense, and you do the best you can. And if your weary about certain things like coconut oil, do some more research. And to be totally honest TF confirms for me that certain things I love like lots of butter and cooking with coconut oil are actually good for you, so I'm more then happy to go along with it.

:

 

[hummingmom]

You might also check out the Price-Pottenger Nutrition Foundation. They've been around much longer than WAPF, and in fact were founded shortly after Weston A. Price died in the late 1940's. (They were originally called the Weston A. Price Memorial Foundation.) They tend to take a broader view of Dr. Price's work, as can be seen by their list of Similarities of Traditional Diets.

Here are some aspects that are on the PPNF list, but not on WAPF's list:

- the foods of healthy traditional societies were grown on naturally mineral-rich soil (which isn't necessarily the case with all organically grown and pasture-raised foods; soil mineral contents differ greatly from place to place, due in large part to geographic factors)

- the people had clean air, sunlight, and vigorous physical exercise

- even natural sweets were only used sparingly, at special feasts, rituals or celebrations

- there were periods of fasting, under-eating, or abstinence from certain foods (whether voluntary or dictated by seasonal patterns)

- there was daily consumption of some high-quality raw protein, e.g. raw meat, dairy, eggs, nuts, or sprouted seeds; without raw protein, we risk not getting our full complement of amino acids

- all cultures breast-fed their children

In addition, compared to WAPF, PPNF puts somewhat less emphasis on fermented foods, bone broths, and animal protein, and much less emphasis on fat. Most notably, they don't promote the consumption of lots of fat as an important thing in itself. High-quality fats are mentioned only as sources of fat-soluble vitamins. (This is also true of Dr. Price's work, IIRC).

PPNF also does a valuable service in sharing the findings of other great nutritionists of the early- to mid-20th century. Some of them were known for their excellent clinical research, others for their extensive study and synthesis of the medical and scientific literature. It's fascinating to learn more about their work, and see how it fits together consistently with the anthropological approach used by Dr. Price.

When it comes down to brass tacks, though, the reality is that WAPF, NT and Sally Fallon have had much more success than PPNF in getting the concept of "healthy traditional diets" into the public awareness. Even their harshest critics will readily acknowledge this. I'm a big fan of PPNF, but they tend to seem more like a library or museum, whereas WAPF is like a traveling road show that can't fail to get people's attention.

Is the WAPF approach often reductionistic, strident, and overly focused on certain controversial issues? Do they sometimes present the benefits of "traditional foods" in a way that seems like a license to self-indulge on coconut cream pie and bacon-wrapped steak, while ignoring the subtler or more challenging aspects of proper nutrition? Many of us would say "yes." But I'm not sure to what degree we can fault them for that. Sad to say, maybe that's what it takes to get noticed in our society.

 

[Arwyn]

I am really not a fan of WAPF in general, and I haven't read fallon's NT, and our diet is only about 70% in line with my "ideal", but: I really like the idea of tradiional foods. My favorite way of characterizing it is trying to get "nutritionally dense" foods, as much as possible. I love this, and wholeheartedly embrace it. Because if we're talking about the nutritional density of food, then there aren't foods that are "good" and foods that are
"bad", foods that are on some stupid checklist or off it; rather, we can evaluate each food for itself, and pick among the available options. So, white bread? Not evil, it has carbohydrates and a little protein and maybe fat. But part-whole wheat bread is denser in nutrients, with more fat and protein and fat soluable nutrients. All whole wheat bread is denser still. Soaked flour bread may be even more nutitionally accessible. Soaked and sprouted whole grain more so. Etc...

All foods have nutrition (that's why they're food); some foods also have damaging substances (naturally occurring arsnic, for instance, or pesticide residues, orartificial additives), which may or may not counter the benefit of the nutrients in the food; some foods can be prepared in ways that make the nutrients more accessible to us, or add nutrients or beneficials not already present (fermented foods). Inasmuchas traditional foods is about being aware of the nutritional density of our food, and seekin to maximize that density, I'm all for it.

 

[Jimibell]

yes, it is often the "extremist" who get things done when it comes to social change.
The extreme view also appeals to some people (like me). I like to go full-on. But now that I've been reading and cooking a lot more I have been doing what pp mentioned. Starting with what we enjoy eating within a particular framework. We are pretty strict about not eating processed foods or refined sugars but we really want to enjoy our foods so we go with what we like. I am constantly tweaking things and trying out new things so it's a great learning experience.

But when it comes down to it, nobody has all the answers. And I have a feeling that if you gradually move in the direction of a whole foods or traditional foods diet you will see great improvements in your health and you will feel good. This will lead to more improvements in your diet and better health. But it's a process and it's a personal process so you have to go with what feels good and perhaps be courageous and experiment, you never know what you'll find.

 

[BedHead]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arwyn All foods have nutrition (that's why they're food)...... Inasmuchas traditional foods is about being aware of the nutritional density of our food, and seekin to maximize that density, I'm all for it.

That last part is SO true!

I just finished reading In Defense of Food (loved it) and his term 'food-like substances' really stuck in my brain, so with respect to foods having nutrition I agree, but some define food differently than others I guess!