Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone

Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Daily Low-Carb Support > Paleolithic & Neanderthin
User Name
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey

Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   ^
Old Sun, Aug-23-15, 11:07
Merpig's Avatar
Merpig Merpig is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,163
Plan: IF/Fung IDM/Potato Hack?
Stats: 375/272.6/175 Female 66 inches
Progress: 51%
Location: NE Florida

Originally Posted by teaser
I've seen vegans claim that meat is totally unpalatable unless you do stuff to it... for me that describes soy, not meat. Except with soy, I still don't like it, even after the food scientists have had their way with it.
Well I actually have to agree with the vegans there. Meat is totally unpalatable to me without cooking. It took me years to even be able to eat a "medium" steak, and I cannot touch hamburger if it has even the least trace of visible pink.

In HS I can remember visiting a friend whose mom was making hamburgers, mixing the meat in a large bowl with spices, and my friend would reach into the bowl and grab hunks of the raw meat to eat. I nearly ran into the bathroom to barf! It was the same friend who taught me to like yogurt however so I'm grateful for that.

OTOH this friend's mom also made homemade bread weekly and we would hang around the kitchen and grab a loaf fresh from the oven, tear it apart, and eat it warm, slathered with butter.

Interestingly this friend's mom was a real "make everything from scratch" sort of cook, unlike my own mom. However while my friend was slender her mom, dad, sister and brother were all seriously obese, quite amazing as you so rarely saw such heavy people back in the 60's.

But maybe the home cooking was protective in some way, as my "TV dinners" sort of mom passed away from Alzheimer's complications 11 years ago and my friend's mom, still seriously obese, is still alive, well and has all her marbles at age 90.

Anyway though I agree with the vegans about meat I could never *be* a vegan, and I try not to touch soy either, though do like an occasional splash of tamari sauce in stirfries.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #17   ^
Old Sun, Aug-23-15, 11:12
MickiSue MickiSue is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,006
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 189/148.6/145 Female 5' 5"
Progress: 92%
Location: Twin Cities, MN

While the danger of parasites in raw meat may be overstated, it's still a greater possibility with wild meats. And, of course, that's all our ancestors had to eat.

It would seem that cooking, which killed the parasites, would have been a survival advantage.
Reply With Quote
  #18   ^
Old Sun, Aug-23-15, 11:24
Nicekitty's Avatar
Nicekitty Nicekitty is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 464
Plan: Banting
Stats: 150/132/132 Female 5'7"
Progress: 100%
Location: PNW

I've looked into the nutritional qualities of raw meat and cooked meat, while investigating a raw diet for my dog, and found there is not much difference. But cooking completely changes the proteins of meat as you might expect, to the point that they are much more likely to cause allergic/intolerance problems in a dog. Obviously humans have adapted well to cooked proteins. Cooking also destroys some compounds that are very beneficial to animals, such as enzymes, taurine, glucosamine and chondroitin. Taurine in particular has proven to be an absolutely essential nutrient for cats--deficiency can cause heart defects, blindness and other problems. I suspect there are other nutrients that we haven't even discovered yet, that will prove to be very beneficial, in raw meat.

I find it difficult to believe that humans started cooking just because it tastes better. Animals develop very strong taste preferences and dietary beliefs based on how they are raised. For instance some of my chickens will eat white cheese but not orange cheese, others eat both, based on the exposure to cheese they had as chicks. Cooking must provide some strong evolutionary advantage. I tend to think that cooking as a method of preserving meat allowed humans to consume their larger kills over a longer period of time, such as a wooly mammoth. My dog prefers cooked meat (especially organ meat) over raw meat, but I suspect that is due to the diet he was raised on as a puppy (kibble).

Last edited by Nicekitty : Sun, Aug-23-15 at 11:31.
Reply With Quote
  #19   ^
Old Sun, Aug-23-15, 13:17
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 12,833
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario

I find it difficult to believe that humans started cooking just because it tastes better.

On the preference front--in animal studies, there's a tendency where a flavour/food cue that's paired with a greater calorie payoff, whether fat or carbohydrate, for a greater preference to develop.

1, Weintraub GS, Wrangham RW.
Author information
Processing food extensively by thermal and nonthermal techniques is a unique and universal human practice. Food processing increases palatability and edibility and has been argued to increase energy gain. Although energy gain is a well-known effect from cooking starch-rich foods, the idea that cooking meat increases energy gain has never been tested. Moreover, the relative energetic advantages of cooking and nonthermal processing have not been assessed, whether for meat or starch-rich foods. Here, we describe a system for characterizing the energetic effects of cooking and nonthermal food processing. Using mice as a model, we show that cooking substantially increases the energy gained from meat, leading to elevations in body mass that are not attributable to differences in food intake or activity levels. The positive energetic effects of cooking were found to be superior to the effects of pounding in both meat and starch-rich tubers, a conclusion further supported by food preferences in fasted animals. Our results indicate significant contributions from cooking to both modern and ancestral human energy budgets. They also illuminate a weakness in current food labeling practices, which systematically overestimate the caloric potential of poorly processed foods.

These mice were fed very lean meat--lean enough that they lost weight whether the meat was cooked or raw. Whether the mice were newly introduced to raw vs. cooked meat, or were more experienced, they preferred the cooked over the raw. It would be interesting to have animals eat the raw for an extended period before introducing the cooked, and see what that did to preference. But I don't think it's that strange to suppose that it wouldn't take long for a preference for cooked foods to develop. Take a people who eat a whole, relatively unprocessed diet, such as the Kitivans. How long would it take for them to develop a preference for pizza and cheeseburgers? I would guess not very long.
Reply With Quote
  #20   ^
Old Sun, Aug-23-15, 13:53
Robin120's Avatar
Robin120 Robin120 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 4,026
Plan: low carb
Stats: 171/125/145 Female 5'9
Progress: 177%
Location: DC

another HUGE fan of sashimi/ ceviche/ shrimp cocktail- everything else cooked.
While i agree that the risks of salmonella and parasites are overstated, i feel no need to risk it!
Reply With Quote
  #21   ^
Old Mon, Aug-24-15, 02:43
paleochris paleochris is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 40
Plan: raw fatty meat
Stats: 166/151.2/155 Male 180
Progress: 135%

The raw meat diet is complete only if you ad organs, egg yolks, suet and bone marrow, if you only eat meat (cooked or raw) is not complete, organs and yolks for vitamins and minerals like A, D, E, zinc and folic acid and suet or marrow for good source of fat.
raw lumps/brain for bit.C.
Reply With Quote
  #22   ^
Old Mon, Aug-24-15, 09:38
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Posts: 45,269
Plan: Paleo 99.5%
Stats: 210/170/160 Female 67.5"
Progress: 80%
Location: San Diego, CA

Eating meat raw doesn't mean you're some kind of paleo rockstar. Especially since our paleo ancestors actually did cook. Eating cooked organ meat is pretty much just as good. Of course, eating vegetables along with it, cooked or raw, just fills out your nutrient profile.
Reply With Quote
  #23   ^
Old Tue, Aug-25-15, 07:13
Lulumae's Avatar
Lulumae Lulumae is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,055
Plan: Atkins, sort of
Stats: 184/157.1/140 Female 5'6
Progress: 61%

People here in Europe, especially France, eat beef very rare or even raw as tartare (ground with egg and herbs, maybe ketchup and usually some cognac mixed in I believe). I don't eat tartare but many people here in Switzerland do. It's a standard in restaurants. I'm not sure why I don't eat it. I could, if I really had to, I think, but I don't really fancy it.
You can often get fish tartar (salmon or tuna) too, without any egg or alcohol, I guess, just oil and lemon juice. That I eat.
Carpaccio of beef, tuna, swordfish or shrimp is a great delicacy. It's served with oil and lemon juice. I eat all of those. I don't do them at home though, as i am concerned about freshness.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:26.

Copyright © 2000-2018 Active Low-Carber Forums @
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.