Originally Posted by toledodba25
Why? Neither Mark Sisson or Barry Cripps appear to agree:
Fun With Fiber: The Real Scoop | Mark's Daily Apple
The Paleo Diet and Fiber Paleo Diet News
"Generally speaking, we would be looking at getting the bulk of our fiber (pun intended), from some low-glycemic fruits, and preferably some green, cruciferous vegetables. Regardless, I don’t believe that obtaining a significant amount of fiber from these sources is realistic, and therefore probably indicates that our Paleolithic ancestors didn’t actually get or NEED a large amount of fiber in their diets."
I would have to agree with VitoVino on this one. Four points...
1. Remember that both Mark and Barry are selling something, so information from them should be taken with grain of salt.
2. Basing a diet on what our Paleolithic ancestors needed or didn't need can be detrimental towards long term health. They may not have needed as much fiber, but they also ate far less saturated fats (and meat in general) then we do.
3. Barry seems to be contradicting himself here: Why I Recently Gave Up Eating Bacon on the Paleo Diet Paleo Diet News
4. The cave men were lucky to live to be 35.....so probably not as concerned about long term health as we should be.
In general I like 90% of what the paleo diet offers...any plan that starts with getting ride of processed carbs is a good thing...and that alone is usually enough for most people to loss significant weight and feel better. But I have never seen any great evidence that avoiding multigrain carbs is detrimental in either the near or long term while there is ample evidence that increased saturated and omega-6 fats can have very negative health effects.
Just my 2cents
Male 45, 5'6"
To date - 32.6 lbs down
Start: 20 Oct 2011: 210.2lb
, body fat =35.3%
Original Goal: 20% body fat - achieved 3/1/12
Last weigh-in: 3-May-2012: 177.6
Last body fat measurement: Oct 15,2012: 14.1%
Goal: Maintain < 20% body fat and < 180lb
Days Maintained : 427