Blog

6

1

And I'm talkin' mostly about things like broccoli/spinach and mushrooms/onions/tomatoes and such. Peter at Hyperlipid seems kinda anti-veg, at least the papers he talks about show no health benefits. Dr. Harris seems to not advocate veggies as important. Mark Sisson, OTOH, can't get enough!

My take is that antioxidants are not really beneficial and that whole acid/base thing seems goofy. Fiber is probably overrated. Which leaves vitamins/minerals/other nutrients. Art Ayers at Cooling Inflammation is a big fan of pectin (apples/tomatoes) for gut health and he also likes vitamin C. Is C important?

How important or not is it to get your "5 a Day"?

flag
1 
Doctor- against Doctor - no need Former Vegetarian with no science background- heavy push, just saying – Stephen-Aegis Sep 14 2010 at 16:25
I'd checkout beyondveg.com, hyperlipid, I'll dig up some specific articles later and edit – Stephen-Aegis Sep 14 2010 at 19:00
Fear of vegetables is probably the daftest aspect of the online paleo community. – Matt Sep 14 2010 at 22:39
1 
Care of all food we eat is why paleo exists at all – Stephen-Aegis Sep 14 2010 at 22:59
Ignoring the science is far more daft than being concerned about what we put in our mouths – Stephen-Aegis Sep 14 2010 at 22:59
show 11 more comments

12 Answers

9

This is a very contentious question.

Most vegetables don't want to be eaten.

Most vegetables have antinutrients/smallpoisons(goitrogen etc)

Cooking neutralizes alot of this, but not all.

I eat only cooked veggies, mostly meat and fat. If you look at the science instead of just opinion of former vegetarians, it becomes clearer

The poisons in the dose... Eat a large variety and you'll likely be fine(plus hormesis) but overeat one vegetable and potentially suffer the consequences of lectins, goitrogens, etc.

------------additional reading--- - beyondveg.com

There's tons more to read, I'll dig up more tonight, some antinutrient specific stuff

  1. http://www.5aday.com/html/consumers/serving.php

  2. http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/5ADAY/Pages/FAQs.aspx

  3. Panagiotakos DB, Pitsavos C, Kokkinos P, et al. Consumption of fruits and vegetables in relation to the risk of developing acute coronary syndromes; the CARDIO2000 case-control study. Nutr J 2003; 2: 2.

  4. 'Three fruit and veg are still healthy'. Daily Mail, 2 September 2003, p 8.

  5. Hung H-C, Joshipura KJ, Jiang R, et al. Fruit and Vegetable Intake and Risk of Major Chronic Disease. J Nat Canc Inst 2004; 96: 1577-1584

  6. Paolo Boffetta, et al. Fruit and Vegetable Intake and Overall Cancer Risk in the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). JNCI 2010, [advance access] doi:10.1093/jnci/djq072

  7. Flint FJ. The factor of infection in heart failure. Br Med J 1954; 2: 1018

  8. How important are respiratory infections as a cause of heart failure? Arteriosclerosis, 7 Sep 1955

  9. Kijak E, Foust G, Steinman R.R. Relationship of Blood Sugar Level and Leukocytic Phagacytosis. South Calif Dent Assn 1964; 32: 349-351

  10. Sanchez A, et al. Role of sugars in human neutrophilic phagocytosis. Am J Clin Nutr 1973; 26: 1180-84.

  11. Ringsdorf WM jr, Cheraskin E and Ramsey RR jr. Sucrose, Neutrophilic Phagocytosis, and Resistance to Disease. Dent Surv 1976; 52: 46-48

  12. Given H D C. A New Angle on Health. John Bale, Sons & Danielsson Ltd. 1935

  13. DaCosta JC, Beardsley E. The resistance of diabetes to bacterial infection. Am J Med Sci 1908; 136: 361.; Richardson R. Measurement of phagocytic activity in diabetes mellitus. Am J Med Sci 1942; 204: 29.; Schauble MK, Baker RD. The inflammatory response in acute alloxan diabetes. AMA Arch Pathol 1957; 64: 563. Bybee JD, Rodgers DE. The phagocytic activity of polymorphonuclear leukocytes obtained from patients with diabetes mellitus. J Lab Clin Med 1964; 64: 1.

  14. Smith-Warner SA, et al. Intake of Fruits and Vegetables and Risk of Breast Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Cohort Studies. JAMA 2001; 285: 769-776.

  15. Patel P, Mendall MA, Carrington D, et al. Association of Helicobacter pylori and Chlamydia pneumoniae infections with coronary heart disease and cardiovascular risk factors. Br Med J 1995; 311: 711-14

  16. Namuzaki K, Chiba S. Chlamydia pneumoniae infection and coronary heart disease. Br Med J 1997; 315: 1538-9.

  17. Svilaas A, Sakhi AK, Andersen LF, et al. Intakes of antioxidants in coffee, wine, and vegetables are correlated with plasma carotenoids in humans. J Nutr 2004; 134: 562-7.

  18. Joshipura KJ, Hu FB, Manson JE, et al. The effect of fruit and vegetable intake on risk for coronary heart disease. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 1106 –14.

  19. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of antioxidant vitamin supplementation in 20 536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 23-33

  20. The HOPE and HOPE-TOO Trial Investigators. Effects of Long-term Vitamin E Supplementation on Cardiovascular Events and Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. 2005; 293: 1338-1347.

  21. Stefansson V. The Fat of the Land. Macmillan, New York, 1957.

link|flag
my answer would read like this one. – MikeD Sep 14 2010 at 17:11
Do you have any links? – Dave S. Sep 14 2010 at 17:21
I was under the assumption that cooked vs raw veggie science was not conclusive, especially between different plant species. – Kamal Sep 14 2010 at 17:35
1 
Links added, more to come later – Stephen-Aegis Sep 15 2010 at 15:02
second-opinions.co.uk/… – Stephen-Aegis Sep 15 2010 at 15:24
show 8 more comments
3

I've noticed that I just feel a hell of a lot better when I load up on the veggies, especially raw veggies. My training doesn't burn me out as much, and I feel more energetic, and just in general more relaxed and comfortable. That's just my bid, though, don't hate on the veggies!

link|flag
1 
LOL - I'll try not to hate on them! Had some (cooked) zuchini & spinach for lunch just now. – Dave S. Sep 14 2010 at 17:08
3

Everywhere you look there is conflicting science and opinion on the human diet. I like to keep an open mind, and thus my beliefs are dynamic and change as the information changes. As of today I think veggies, in moderation, are healthy. Some are better than others, obviously.

link|flag
I'm willing to keep an open mind and go wherever the science leads. I do eat some veggies. I'm currently neutral on any supposed health benefits. I eat them because they are an excellent vehicle for fat *(butter); they are low carb/low calorie and filling; my wife makes me; they might be good for me and I'm hedging that they can't be that bad. – Dave S. Sep 14 2010 at 17:20
6

The science is very misleading, be wary of even paleo experts.

-Antinutrients and toxins may have lots of evidence with regards to short term biomarkers, but very little evidence for long term outcomes.

-Humans have had many years to adapt to their local vegetation, especially when meat was low or just to add some taste.

-Antioxidants may be more important now because of a couple reasons. One is that we have way different, perhaps more stressful lives than paleoliths. Two is that we live longer and accumulate oxidative damage for a longer period. Three is that some foods creep into our diets that could be combatted by eating plants.

-Many paleolithic diets involved more carb intake than many modern paleo folks consume. It's like paleolithic sometimes takes on the definition of "meat diet" for arbitrary reasons rather than "meat centered diet"

link|flag
5 
I think the antioxidant argument is weak. My understanding is that dietary antioxidants don't make it to the mitochondria where they are needed. Which is why the mitochondria manufacture them. Taking glutamine and other antioxidant precursors in support of the manufacture of antioxidants by the mitochondria might make more sense, but I don't know how effective or useful that is either. (Although I do take glutamine). – Dave S. Sep 14 2010 at 17:15
Good point. I can't get this full-text article, but would be interested in its discussion section: Sheu 2006, "Targeting antioxidants to mitochondria: a new therapeutic direction" – Kamal Sep 14 2010 at 17:21
1 
Am I reading right that you think that anti nutrients that have been shown to have immediate effect such as mineral leeching may suddenly replace said minerals? long term affects like goitrogens have been shown, were not talking might happens were talking immediate chemical reactions. Now, Veg are NOT All Bad. We just have to prepare them to minimize the bad. – Stephen-Aegis Sep 15 2010 at 11:18
1 
No, that is absurd. I'm saying that nobody knows the long term link between fruits/veggies having bad stuff and disease. Like polyphenols may be bad in some ways and good in other ways, we tend to eat the veggies that have been bred to have low detriment, nutrients interact with each other, we have a pretty high tolerance for most things, etc. When I see a case study of disease linked to long term consumption of rooibos tea, or a longitudinal study of the harm of eating blueberries, I'll start wondering what's up. Note that I don't eat much veggies, but I'll defend their right to be eaten! – Kamal Sep 15 2010 at 13:22
I'm saying immediate effect we do know, nutrient leeching is bad, impaired thyroid is very bad, taken longer they could only get worse – Stephen-Aegis Sep 15 2010 at 18:04
1

Loads of great replies but I'll just add that I think of it in the most basic terms (as I see it of course): through much, indeed probably most, of our earliest time on this planet we were living through what we would call ice ages. Not much veg around. I take from this that we can do fine without them (as I've been doing for three months). I'm sure we can eat some and do fine too but I do not think they represent anything crucial to our thriving.

link|flag
1 
This is not true. The "Snowball Earth" hypothesis dictates a frozen earth 650 million years ago. Since then, there have been varying patterns of glaciation, but few times with little to no vegetation. During a time with "not much veg" around, the animals that we eat would also not have food, and there would be a huge bottleneck in population growth. From what I understand, the one big human population growth bottleneck was from a supervolcanic explosion a while back. Where did you get your information from? – Kamal Sep 14 2010 at 21:38
Reading Nora Gedgaudus's Primal Mind Primal Body left me with the impression that veg was not a major component of what we evolved eating. Not anti-veg, just that regular veg availability was NOT a part of most of our evolution. – ben61820 Sep 15 2010 at 14:44
Agreed Ben, I'm more inclined to believe meat/tubers. Amalayse/etc reinforces starch consumption – Stephen-Aegis Sep 15 2010 at 15:05
2 
IIRC, bone analysis of paleolithic hominids reveals a 60-65% animal product intake. That's still 35% from plants! I can't say I get anywhere near that much plant matter, even when I hit the nuts hard. Okay, what?! Totally lost my train of thought... Not sure what I meant to say there - perhaps we ate the plants only because we couldn't get as much meat as we wanted to... – Dave S. Sep 15 2010 at 16:16
1

Yes, I agree, the jury is still out on antioxidants and vegetables. Veggies do contain certain nutrients that are lacking in meat. Some argue, if you eat ALL meat and nothing else, then your need for other nutrients is not as great. But few of us eat ALL meat. The very act of eating other things besides meat may increase need for other nutrients. Which may be totally fine as long as you get those other nutrients that you now have increased need for. Some people think there are 'islands of safety' in how to eat. LIke if you eat one thing that has an issue , you are still fine as long you eat another thing that makes up for the weaknesses of the first thing. Such that there are diets that are fine and healthy but perhaps similar but slightly different diets that would cause problems because one or more essential ingredient might be missing. That I think is one very good reason why we always need to be watching ourselves, listening to our bodies, and learning more. Also thrown into the mix for added confusion is the complexity that each individual's islands of safety may be somewhat unique due to genetics and history of their bloodline. Some day, maybe soon, with all the advancement in genetic testing, I think we will develop testing to be able to individualize our diets, but beware because I am sure big pharma will try to couple that with tons of 'preventative' pill popping recommendations as well.

link|flag
3

I must say that I am so confused sometimes from the variety of (sometimes) contradicting data, that I kind of gave up and decided to simply eat whatever I feel like ;-) I hope my body is healthy enough to give me hints if it needs something extra... Sometimes I eat more veggies (almost only cooked), sometimes hardly any - like now.

link|flag
1

I like how Dr Harris, PaNu, refers to vegetables. "Plants and plant compounds are not essential or magic". Actually when you think about it, most veggies are quite tasteless without lots of butter and or salt to flavour them. I only very occasionally eat them when I feel like something different but it's only a bit of cabbage or some leek or mushrooms or a brussel sprout or two. So while I don't think they're essential I don't there is any harm in eating some now and again, just avoid the potatoes, corn and keep the starchy stuff to a minimum.

link|flag
2 
I primarily view broccoli and spinach as vehicles for butter! – Dave S. Sep 15 2010 at 16:10
I love vegetables - brussels sprouts, asparagus, turnip, beetroot, cabbage, radish, artichoke - tasteless? I don't think so! – andrew Sep 15 2010 at 18:47
1 
Hmm, can't really agree there. Sprouts, cabbage artichoke has virtually no taste, beetroot is all vinegar or earthy dirt taste if raw and turnip, well you and keep that all to yourself. Yuck! I just don't see the point in gathering all these thing and preparing them in various ways to make them edible when you can just have a big juicy steak. Good thing we're all different. ;) – Alan Sep 17 2010 at 2:39
5

When there tends to be conflicting data on a subject, I personally use common sense and logic to determine my course of action. For the vast majority of human history, humans have lived and eaten veggies (Arctic cultures have limited exposure, I know, and they may just show that veggies aren't necessary but that's not the topic at hand). This isn't a recent phenomenon like agriculture, we're talking eons. Something tells me natural selection would have weeded that habit out (like it sadly might be doing with agriculture/grain consumption).

From a health standpoint, some veggies do not want to be eaten and contain anti-nutrients. Others offer their fruit as a tasty vehicle for spreading seeds. Deer comes by and eats a tomato, poops it out a mile away and there you've got a new tomato plant growing away from it's host. So it's hard to make a sweeping generalization about plants because different edible parts serve different purposes. A zucchini contains seeds and spinach leaves do not, they serve different purposes so they need to be taken as a case by case basis.

From a modern paleo standpoint, organic grassfed meat is friggin expensive. Veggies, especially this time of the year, are super cheap. We aren't talking about widespread negative effects like excessive carb and polyunsaturated fat intake, we're quibbling about details and individual nutrients in certain veggies. From my wallet's standpoint, I'm willing to tolerate that trade-off if I can get some otherwise nutritious and tasty food into my diet.

Doing a little research on how to best prepare each veggie takes some work but could settle some upset minds. Spinach's iron is best absorbed when it's cooked. Broccoli has its peak nutrition when its steamed. Do a little research and act accordingly. I personally eat a few salads a weeks and eat cooked veggies a few times a week as well. Mix it up, add in and swap out veggies. Eat them with meats and fats. Eating a well balanced diet is pretty sound advice, just avoid the food pyramid if you're curious which foods to include in that balance.

link|flag
There's an old thread about best ways to prep veggies... Tomatoes area fruit, so are zucchini.. Not good examples of veggies that want to be eaten. – Stephen-Aegis Sep 15 2010 at 14:30
Good point, I tend to include both veggies and fruits together and personally don't care for the difference. Some people do, I'm just not one of them. That thread would be a great place to start researching how to prepare them. – Joe Sep 15 2010 at 15:59
For most it's simply, cook them. :) – Stephen-Aegis Sep 16 2010 at 9:37
Some need to be peeled like potatoes – Stephen-Aegis Sep 16 2010 at 9:38
1

Cows eat grass (at least the grass-fed ones). Grass does not want to be eaten. But still cows eat it, and it seems important for their health, as we all know.

So how do cows stay healthy? Well, natural selection gave them the tools to digest the grass. And for that, cows (and of course, their wild ancestors) had to have enough evolutionary time and selective pressures.

So, are humans adapted to eat veggies? I don't know, but it would depend on how long we have been eating them.

Some research suggests that this could be true, since a lot of the 'good' things in veggies (the anti-occidants and other micronutrients) are actually bad things, but by the way of hormesis our bodies turn it into someting good. And I think that hormesis also suggests that it is an evolutionary adaptation.

Now this is just some speculation, but this could be supported by science. Anybody?

link|flag
Cows have huge guts to ferment process and excrete the bad... Have you seen how much even healthy cows poop? – Stephen-Aegis Sep 15 2010 at 18:05
@stephen-aegis: I certainly didn't mean to suggest that we are vegeterians, because that we are certainly not! Just meant to say that what is poison to one, is food to the other, and that evolution by natural selection is the process that takes care of this. So although vegetables do chemical and biological warfare, we could have chemical and biological detox mechanisms. And in some ways, we certainly have those. – Pieter D Sep 15 2010 at 19:18
Better cows than me :) They have a much nicer complex stomach and colon to ferment the stuff. – Bread-Eating Beelzebub Sep 15 2010 at 19:33
I sort of remember that we can digest some vegetables better than cows can. So I'd much rather cows eat grass and we eat cows, but that doesn't apply to cows eating (asparagus? mustard greens?). – Kamal Sep 15 2010 at 21:25
2 
In a way grass does "want" to be eaten. Grasses have co-evolved with grazing animals, neither could survive as well without the other. – Matt Sep 16 2010 at 0:42
show 2 more comments
1

Don't forget the butyrate. Vegetables are made into fats in ourgut. Butter + veggies = (to some extent) butter +butter. Just like starchy carbs become palmitic acid, but our poor livers are stressed in the process.

link|flag
Wait, what? I'd like to read more on this... – Stephen-Aegis Sep 16 2010 at 2:11
I can't find anything anywhere even suggesting this. Either I've completely failed at google or it's outta some very obscure source – Stephen-Aegis Sep 16 2010 at 9:44
Try this on the first point: wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2009/12/… On the second: Not much sugar or starch in converted into fat when eating a normal mixed diet. – Matt Sep 16 2010 at 10:07
I've seen that Article, I took that fiber fermentation produces very very negligible amounts in humans. – Stephen-Aegis Sep 17 2010 at 0:01
0

My sources are Whole Health Source and The Perfect Diet - fructans feed the bacteria who make butyrate.

link|flag

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.