Revisiting the Changing Paleo Landscape in Real Food Starches, Resistant Starch, and “Nutritional” Ketosis

A few days back I somewhat reluctantly called out Nora Gedgaudas for what, in my judgement, is a resistance to various revelations that have come to pass over the last few years and been widely adopted in the general Paleoish community: Juxtaposition: Dallas & Melissa Hartwig vs. Nora Gedgaudas.

Since I'm very busy with a complex move (I'll be splitting time between three places) I thought I'd just toss up some of my favorite smart comments on that post, comments that deserve to be on the front page for a while. Hope you enjoy them as much as I did. There's an editing touch here & there, but nothing material to the message.


Tuck, you might do well to stop and think for a moment and look at the nutritional profile of wild game that wild carnivores actually eat: Bison, water buffalo, kudu, springbok, giraffes, impala, deer, ducks, fowl, etc., etc. They're all TOO LEAN to support ketosis!


Mind you animals don't eat the fatty parts and walk away. They and their families devour the entire lean and fresh animals—a relatively small amount of glycogen and huge quantities of protein. But, not nearly enough fat, period.

~ Marie

...Mentioning the fact that NK is proven useful for certain diseases addresses its therapeutic effect in special cases up to now, without any accounting of long-term physiological impact.

An extreme example of this issue : Arsenic is also very useful therapeutically. That doesn't make it a desirable for broad, life-long use.

Specific therapeutic effects do not change the fact that long term NK does not have any analogue in nature nor any long history in civilization and has a small patient set of data—data which in fact show adverse effects in many cases (epileptic children studies).

So long term NK is by definition "a modern experiment."

There's nothing wrong with that, btw. Nothing.

It's just that nature or evolution cannot be presented as evidence that long term NK is desirable for anyone. It may be, I surely don't know, but the point is no one does. So, caveat emptor—given which, I'm all for n=1, especially if someone monitors well and shares info.

~ Bret

But when looking for science-based (and not opinion or anecdote-based) baseline

Anecdotes aren't the worst thing in the world. A "science-based approach," while necessary and useful in many ways, still has holes.

Two come to mind primarily:

  1. Most of the time we aim for a clinical study, the gold standard of science. But you can't test everything you need to test in order to establish clinical proof of a dietary/lifestyle tenet. Life is simply too complex. Gary Taubes enumerated this frustrating complexity in Good Calories, Bad Calories when musing about the quandary of trying to design an effective and conclusive clinical study. For instance, if we reduce carbohydrates in a diet, do we increase calories in fat and/or protein? Which one? Or both? If both, then how much of each? And regardless of which we choose, what makes the difference in teh final result? The absolute reduction of carbohydrates? The decrease in carbohydrate relative to the other macronutrients? Or something else that we have not identified? With even one such study being prohibitively expensive, you could not test multiple studies in parallel either. The quagmire is endless.
  2. You can opt instead to use observational science to piece together "markers" of health. But this approach is not flawless, either. Selecting which markers to measure reincorporates the element of bias, which science is supposed to avoid (and as we know from Taubesian research et al, rarely does in practice). How do you decide what to measure? What if some indications contradict others? Are you going to conclude "good" or "bad" based on majority rule? If so, how do you know that certain combinations of these markers don't result in different longevity of life and/or vibrancy of health than others? The danger here is a false sense of security, where you have this enterprise that you implicitly believe lacks bias, but in reality is full of it. Anecdotes, on the other hand, can be much more useful than we often give them credit for. Where experimental studies may give us a decent starting point, individual experiences can help fill in the gaps. Take Tom Naughton's experience illustrated by the following comment, whereas he had previously been highly skeptical of "safe" or resistant starches:

I’ve heard from people who say their energy flagged on a very-low-carb diet, but they felt great when they added 100 grams or so of “safe starches” back into their diets as prescribed in Paul Jaminet’s Perfect Health Diet. I believe them.

Those anecdotes clued him in that there might just be something to this starch thing. Take Richard's recent remarks in a discussion debunking the pursuit of a (fictional) sterile avoidance of bias in human life:


The Synthesis then becomes the new Thesis, and the process repeats ad infinitum; not in circular fashion, but rather, a spiral fashion where each cycle represents more knowledge, better understanding, get's a little closer to the truth. As such, I never have to worry much about someone's bias. Let them be as biased as they like and then synthesize new understanding from competing bias. Someone's comment on a post of mine might be 90% logical fallacy—or just mostly bullshit—but 5%, or 1% decent antithesis from which which a synthesis might emerge and in turn, a new, more complete thesis.

...Or, you can waste endless hours debating who's right and who's wrong; who's biased and who's impartial; who's cognitively dissonant and who's consonant. Or, you could be making progress recognizing that in all likelihood, you're both right, both wrong; both biased; both living in some measure of dissonance and contradiction—in different proportions, contexts and perspectives—and there's a synthesis dying to get out if you could both simply embrace intellectual honesty.


But nothing is settled, ever. I prefer it that way.

And not only is the journey (rather than the end goal) preferable—it is an inevitability of life. We'll never know all the answers. Not even in a thousand years (presuming our descendants are still here).

To corral up all my rambling and return to your original point, I think we have good reason to combine anecdotes with "rigorous science." Be especially careful of that latter concept...you have to bore deep holes of scrutiny and skepticism into every study that comes out before you can trust it as an oracle. Chances are, since it was designed by humans, it will contain the same flaws and biases that plague all of us humans. I'm not saying they're worthless. Just don't let them give you a false sense of security.

~ Duck

Well, he spent $300,000 and 10 years biohacking himself and he still can't tolerate a side of french fries. This suggests that he has some extreme gut issues that even money can't easily solve.

Meanwhile countless others are making more progress with about $100 in probiotics and prebiotics. So, at least he acknowledges that starch is working for many and I think that's certainly better than turning a blind eye to it.

However, Dave couldn't help patting himself on the back as he claimed that the collagen in his bulletproof coffee [see correction on that from Duck] ferments to butyrate at the same rate as RS. I'd love to see a citation for that. I don't think that's true.

I distinctly remember seeing a study about Cheetahs fermenting SCFAs from consuming collagen, skin and other grisly bits when digesting whole animals, but I was the one who uncovered that study a few months ago, and Table 3 clearly shows that hardly any butyrate is fermented from collagen:


And as best as I can tell, that's the only study to look into the SCFAs fermented from animal fibers, and collagen does not appear to be a significant source of butyrate whatsoever.

~ Melissa Hartwig

I always have just the tiniest feeling of dread when I see this many pingbacks to our site from your blog. This one wasn't so bad. Thanks, Richard.


[Laf — Ed]

~ Duck

Nora said: "To quote Bernstein, you can have an amino acid deficiency, you can have an essential fatty acid deficiency, but there is no such thing in any medical textbook on Earth as a carbohydrate deficiency. There is no such thing as a glucose deficiency....per se.

Well, I don't know about you, but nobody in their right mind gets nutritional advice from "medical textbooks." And those same medical textbooks also say some unkind words on dietary saturated fat.


The Joint Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations/World Health Organization Expert Consultation on Human Nutrition stated in 1998:

From: Carbohydrates in human nutrition (Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation, Rome, Italy, 14-18 April 1997). FAO food and nutrition paper 66. World Health Organization. 1998. ISBN 9251041148.

"One of the major developments in our understanding of the importance of carbohydrates for health in the past twenty years has been the discovery of resistant starch."

Nora, Nora, Nora... The evidence for the role of carbohydrates and Resistant Starch in human health isn't just there. It's overwhelming.

~ Duck

From: Bulletproof Executive : Podcast #136

Nora Gedgaudas: There's too much credence being given to the whole "safe starch" idea, that I don't necessarily consider safe at all. You know, nightshades are certainly not what I think of as safe.

Dave: I don't do nightshades. [...]

Nora Gedgaudas: And these are anything but Paleo foods. These are very, very, very new foods to us...

Hard to believe that someone with "expertise" in "Paleo" foods never heard of Tiger Nuts.

While Nora comes off as the Sarah Palin of Paleo in that clip, their conversation highlights the wussification of Paleo.

What Nora and Dave don't seem to realize is that some of the very plant toxins they fear have also been shown to have health benefits. For instance, nightshade toxins have been shown in studies to exhibit the following properties...

  1. Antiallergic, Antipyretic, and Anti-inflammatory effects
  2. Blood sugar-lowering effects
  3. Antibiotic Activities against Pathogenic Bacteria, Viruses, Protozoa, and Fungi
  4. Destruction of Human Cancer Cells

Source: Potato Glycoalkaloids and Metabolites: Roles in the Plant and in the Diet 

For those who are curious, the paper documents all the known harmful effects and beneficial effects of nightshade toxins, and concludes by saying...

"Food and biomedical scientists, including nutritionists, pharmacologists, and microbiologists, are challenged to further define the beneficial effects of the glycoalkaloids against cancer, the immune system, cholesterol, and inflammation, as well as against pathogenic fungi, bacteria, viruses, and protozoa."

Not so black and white, eh? How about so-called toxic saponins?

Nora and Dave are afraid of them too. But, would it surprise you that virtually all indigenous cultures make an effort to consume toxic saponins and tannins? They are nearly always found in bark and bush teas that are consumed by nearly every culture, including the Inuit. Take the Masai for instance. Turns out if you actually take the time to research their eating habits, you find that they eat toxic Acacia nilotica bark extract, with virtually every meat-heavy meal. The bark is rich in saponins and tannins. The saponins are believed to lower cholesterol and heart disease incidence (National Geographic, Oct 1995).

What about the Inuit? Labrador Tea was a major component of their diet. And guess what? It's really freakin' toxic. From: Wikipedia: Labrador Tea

[Labrador tea] has been a favorite beverage among Athabaskan and Inuit people for many years...Labrador tea has narcotic properties. Evidence suggests that excessive consumption of the plant may cause delirium or poisoning. Toxic terpenes of the essential oils cause symptoms of intoxication, such as slow pulse, lowering of blood pressure, lack of coordination, convulsions, paralysis, and death. It is apparently safe as a weak herbal tea, but should not be made too strong.

Oh, and Labrador tea has saponins and tannins too. Definitely not "bulletproof" tea. Are Nora and Dave are oblivious to this, or just willfully ignorant?

At any rate, hormesis from "toxic" plants appears to be a new frontier for health research. Tim shared this very cool article on nutritional toxicology that was published just a few days ago.

Fruits and Vegetables Are Trying to Kill You

Warding off the diseases of aging is certainly a worthwhile pursuit. But evidence has mounted to suggest that antioxidant vitamin supplements, long assumed to improve health, are ineffectual. Fruits and vegetables are indeed healthful but not necessarily because they shield you from oxidative stress. In fact, they may improve health for quite the opposite reason: They stress you.

That stress comes courtesy of trace amounts of naturally occurring pesticides and anti-grazing compounds. You already know these substances as the hot flavors in spices, the mouth-puckering tannins in wines, or the stink of Brussels sprouts. They are the antibacterials, antifungals, and grazing deterrents of the plant world. In the right amount, these slightly noxious substances, which help plants survive, may leave you stronger.

Parallel studies, meanwhile, have undercut decades-old assumptions about the dangers of free radicals. Rather than killing us, these volatile molecules, in the right amount, may improve our health. Our quest to neutralize them with antioxidant supplements may be doing more harm than good.

If one truly makes an effort to research what indigenous cultures ate—and it almost certainly appears that Dave and Nora do not make that kind of effort—one will find that consistent consumption of plant toxins were a major component of their diets.

Given what we are learning about the microbiota, it appears that a healthy gut biome may be required to tolerate these toxins—as these toxins can often be metabolized by our gut bugs. I don't doubt that Nora and Dave have their gut issues and perhaps can't tolerate any plant toxins. I understand that toxins can be hard on the weak, modern gut. But, to profess to the world that all plant toxins are bad just isn't supported by the scientific literature. Nor is it supported by the dietary habits of indigenous cultures. Not by a long shot.

The dose makes the poison. Don't eat tons of plant toxins. But, avoid them at your own peril.


Alright, that should wrap it up for today. It is true that now, my role has shifted from blog writer to blog writer and publisher to a greater and greater extent. I think that makes a far better experience for you readers.

Nobody Is Safe

So I redesigned the blog, substantially.

Yep. you see ads. They are served up randomly by Google and a couple of others I'm testing out. I like them, and I'll tell you why.

  1. They make me money for my efforts
  2. They aren't fake

It's that second point that's most for me. Everybody else does affiliate shit and I won't do any. That's where they have a code for "Paleo Brownies" or some such other "Paleo" junk food (or Low Carb Crap). They get a lot more for a sale than I get for an impression or a pay-4-click, but I'm not trying to demographic you. In fact, most ads served up are responsive to your cookies (har har); i.e., places you've been to and expressed some interest in. The ads you see are different from the ones others see.

I don't give a shit whether the sweet treats you eat are "Paleo" or not. This kinda dealing I will simply not abide. I'd rather see random shit served up by Google and others. I laf at my own ads.

Bigger Issue

I have long wanted to change the old banner that served me so well for so long.

free the animal banner s
Thanks, Justin Owings

Justin Owings was a long time reader from way back prior to 2008 or so when I went to this banner. Similar dumping of religion and politics background. He's a smart man, now husband and father and last I heard, was sill in the employ of Teh Google. He designed it. About a year or so ago I asked him about another round but he doesn't need to get $300 for a banner, anymore. Good. I'd have paid $500, but I knew better than to ask.

Among other things, he started and runs Birthday Shoes. Here's me. And my friend Davis Straub hang gliding in Vibrams.

At times, I obsessed about doing a new banner. Once, I went to A.B. Dada, a cool cat who started and runs 7BuckTees—100% Politically Incorrect T-Shirts. He has designers and was willing to do a freebee for cross promotion. But, I was so muddled that my attempts at putting literally everything into a single banner was so silly, he stopped responding to my emails. Good.

I forgot about it all until a few weeks ago, when I realized that there's simply no way to convey my thinking over the juxtaposition between wild human animals and caged zoo humans in a single banner. So I got to cropping pics.

Right now, there are exactly 39 banner images with many more to follow. It's very digital. The image that serves up with each visit or reload either expresses part of my idea of a wild, natural, healthy human existence...or it expresses a caged, zoo'd, trained, made up, mak-ed-up, fake, phony, learned, over-fed, grain-fed, junk-fed, sugar-fed, drugged, dominated, subservient voting human suffering from Stockholm Syndrome—an Earth epidemic.

I never say which is which. That's part of the fun.

Some are catching on. I initially got confusion. Then, signs that some were getting it. My favorite critique so far was this one:


Enjoy your site, but.. does this look like a blog you are proud of ..really?

Screen Shot 2014 07 19 at 4 39 35 PM
The Banner, or the Ads?

I wondered if it was the banner. The ads, I've explained and if anyone wishes to pay me $2,000 monthly, I'll take them all off. Month-to-month contract.


Absolutely! That biting the throat is one of my 2-3 favorites in the roughly dozen rotating banner images I have.

Thanks for getting outraged, it’s great validation for me. Like I always say, I’m not happy unless you’re not happy. :)

Onward. Eventually, I'll have hundreds of images juxtaposing a wild human existence with a tamed, learned, submissive one.

And everybody gets to choose which they envy the most. 1,000 words per visit.

Over Easy Omelet?

Yep. Indeed.

IMG 2555
Omelet with a warm, runny yolk

Take three eggs, separate the yolk from one, beat the other two plus the white. Make an omelet. When it's ready to fold, gently place your yolk in and just as gently, fold it over.

IMG 2553
Along with a little cheese on hand

So there you go.

Hit & Run: When Will We See The End Of Kings?

Is it just me? I only got this because, owing to flying airplane stuff, I get email alerts from my local peeps.

Hello everyone,

We have VIP movement in the area tomorrow in case you are flying. Please check the TFR's and take caution.

Obama the Choom Master—probably with his Stupid Bitch in tow (that post is from 2007)—will be gracing our presence in their Public/Private B-747 tomorrow evening. Ever asked yourself why, since it's "public property," you couldn't get within 100 yards of the thing—much less get a ride—even after a lifetime of paying your taxes, getting cancer, and it was your dying wish?

The answer, of course, is that it's not "practical"—because then, everyone would want to be King, or minimally, graced by his presence—which is my point. Nobody ought ever be President. Or King. And nothing has changed in hundreds of years, materially. You are still a pawn subject, albeit with more stuff. Are you also a whore, whose mind can simply be bought with stuff and comforts?

Bread and Circuses, animals?

Our Presidents kills numbers of innocent folks around the world, and imprison numbers of domestic citizens over peaceful activities such as to make the Kings of the past blush so envious, they'd probably lock themselves up for 2 days and emerge with a very swollen member.

...So this is the state of The Land of the Free, now? If you intend on doing a Hundred Dollar Burger tomorrow (this is where you fly somewhere for lunch—uh, bikers do it too, only I think they call it the $100 coffee) just know: there's an euphemism afoot. What do I mean by that? Remember when it went from Kentucky Fried Chicken to KFC? Well, VIP means: Very Important Person. Since you are more moral and upstanding than any President or King ever in the history of the planet—since I presume that you live your life in a voluntary, give-&-take dynamic with your fellow human animals the vast majority of the time, eschewing violence and force to get your way—doesn't it seem ironic that you are not a Very Important Person...while those who kill, torture, and imprison the most are so Very Important? ...Plus, you fly your own airplane if you got one...

What does that make you?

Is it that we live in this upside-down world where most people are just subjects, subject to domination by other humans, and that's just the way it is? The VIPs used to be anointed by some things called sovereigntyThe Divine Right of Kings, and whatnot. Since then, there's this new App called Democracy. You get points for voting one way, and having the King do the other. Cool App. It's amazing; because, while it's wholly predictable, 0% of people who play it ever predict correctly. Now: that's one killer, successful App. Best of all, it costs America, currently, about $1 Trillion in added National Debt, such that every person over the age of 18 gets to play it and be wrong every time, challenging them to play it again and again—because it's NOT insane.

...President Barack Obama (and his Stupid Bitch) is scheduled to fly into San Francisco International Airport tomorrow for a short fundraising visit in the South Bay.

Obama is slated to arrive on Air Force One around 9 p.m. ahead of a Wednesday reception and luncheon to raise money for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee at the Los Altos Hills home of Judy and George Marcus.

George Marcus is the founder of the real estate brokerage firm Marcus & Millichap.

Other dignitaries expected at the 10:15 a.m. fundraiser include House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, and DCCC chairman Steve Israel.

According to an event invitation, ticket prices started at $10,000 for lunch and a photo with Obama. A $32,400 ticket includes entrance to a VIP reception, lunch and a photo.

Protesters supporting net neutrality plan to demonstrate outside the presidential visit between 9:30 a.m. and 11 a.m. Wednesday.

The group, organized by MoveOn.org, is urging Obama to support unrestricted, equal access to the Internet.

Organizers have said they are demanding Obama keep his promise to preserve the "open Internet" and publicly state that he supports the Federal Communications Commission treating the Internet as a public utility.

Net neutrality advocates have been rallying against FCC chairman Tom Wheeler's proposal to create a two-tiered system that would allow service providers to offer faster connection speeds for fee-paying content providers and a second, slower speed for others.

Obama will continue onto Los Angeles on an early Wednesday afternoon flight from SFO to end a three-day West Coast fundraising trip.

He will be in Seattle today before flying to the Bay Area.

At my old, getting cantankerous by the day, 53, I am really getting to loath privilege, per se.

I get treated like royalty by friends, family...everywhere I go. Somehow, I get away with writing scathing rebuke as you see in the foregoing while still being treated as I would like to treat most others. Golden Rule.

I'm but one anecdote, but I've been doing this for 22 years and have no intention of letting up.

Have you ever considered that when you read my balderdash and get a visceral rise that makes you uncomfortable—unless you either lash out at me, dismiss me, or whatever—that you simply lack my experience? Do you understand that when I see some of you doing that, I remember what it was like to think like that 20-30 years ago, and I've received judgement ever since, daily?

Do you live your one and only life in fear and trepidation over what others might think or feel? Do you recoil at the fear someone might have the temerity to JUDGE you? I judge people every day, and I'm anxious to take in the judgements of others, for 22 years, and it's nearly daily. In this way, I get to practice the dialectic of Thesis --> Antithesis --> Synthesis. Those who judge and criticize me are ultimately far more valuable than those who applaud me.

After all, if there is a Heaven and Hell, I most assuredly want to go where all the cool cats are going to be. At least I'll get lots of schooling on how I could have been cooler.

...My idea of eternal torture is waking up with an awful hangover every morning. It's quite a lot better, in my view, than waking up and having to don robes, to go sit at the feet of some VIP in worship.

Taking an Accounting of the Folks You Do Business With

 Something is Missing

IMG 0751
The TeeVee

A Sony 42" flat screen LCD HD TV used to be strapped right up there on that articulating arm. We're moving soon, and as such, have been selling stuff via garage sale and craigslist like crazy. No, the Denon Amp and Boston Labs speakers are not for sale. Ever. I love them, and I loath all surroundsound bullshit. I like my music delivered like a concert. In front of me.

...In October of 2005, I paid $2,800 for that missing TV, at Best Buy. It was not the most I ever paid for a flat screen. That would have been a Samsung, heavy as doG, 37" LCDHD for $3,700. Ordered it from Amazon in about 2002 or 3, because shipping was $100 and zero tax. No local retailer could come close—the lowest local guy being $4,700, plus tax, for the exact same thing. Now either can be had for about 500 bucks, new.

...The other day, I figured it was time to re-up for a computer after nearly 3 years—when I went to a top-of-line MacBook Air as a my sole machine. $2,100. It still drives the 27" Apple Cinema Display I'm staring at now.

Twice the speed, twice the RAM and other stuff, and it cost me $1,500, including tax. There's $600 less for twice as good right there. Moreover, according to the local Craigslist market, my old one can fetch about $600, still.

...My brother just had photovoltaics installed on his 3,000 sq. ft., 4-BR, 3-bath house. They're a fraction of what they cost 20 years ago, economically viable, and you can even get them installed with zero out-of-pocket—the savings in electricity makes the payment. His June electric bill was $4.50. The A/C runs all day.

I note that in this same 3-4 years, US inflation has been a total of about 8.5%, but of course, that's compounded annually. 10% is a decent ballpark then, so the MacBook might cost $1,350, instead. Another $150 off but instead, it goes toward monetizing U.S. National Debt.

...Speaking of which, I note that the National Debt has increased about $3 TRILLION in the same 3-year period of time. Public debt is an awesome barometer in noting just how much fucktard parents and fucktard grandparents are liars. They dote on and on about the kids; but they want their "retirement," and by doG, those kids, grandkids, great grandkids...great, great, great, great, great, great grandkids are going to pay for it all, with interest, while they wave their flags, read every single AARP press release that ever came out, and sport "I voted" stickers. Pathetic.

Tom Brokaw was wrong. It's not "The "Greatest Generation." It is—literally—the most entitled feeling generation in the history of planet Earth. I'll take the previous one, that endured the Great Depression, anytime.

That is all.

Juxtaposition: Dallas & Melissa Hartwig vs. Nora Gedgaudas

Way back when, I took a first-impression dislike to Dallas, Melissa and the Whole 9.

They were annoying. Came on the scene quick, rose just as quickly, and they were fucking strict; and those were the reports I was getting in my comments. But I didn't have much time to look into it. "They'll go away." They didn't.

Then one day I looked, looked some more, and I understood. There is a time and place for strict dealing and that's what they deal in. For a time; the idea being, to remove as many confounding variables as possible so you can really see the difference between strict real food and packaged junk in very high resolution, over 30 days. Now, thousands of folks do a Whole30 once or more per year.

As is often my style, I can easily go from hate to love in a heartbeat. The inverse is a lot harder, though. Concerning the former, I still have fond memories of Dallas heaping grinning shit on me for wearing a suit for my AHS12 presentation. I'm typically walking around in cargo shorts barefoot.

New Whole30® Program Rules

White potatoes are now allowed on the Whole30 program [...]

We are always thinking about the Whole30 program—how to make it better, more effective, easier to follow, and more logical in its framework. The discussion of white potatoes began about a year ago amongst our team and valued advisors, and the debate raged hard and long. White potatoes are a whole, real, nutrient-dense food! It doesn’t make logical sense to leave them out while other carb-dense foods like taro, yuca, or sweet potato are allowed. [...]

Eventually, we arrived at a consensus. Potatoes of all varieties are in, but fries and chips are not. [...]

And you now what? Just a light coating of those taters (toss in a wok) with coconut oil, ghee, lard, or red palm oil makes awesome oven fries (450-500 for 10, toss, go another 10). I began blogging about adding potatoes in 2009, while doing Leangains, and found myself leaning out while eating a lot of them. I realized it was not about starch, but processed food.

Let's juxtapose. I hate doing this, because I really adore Nora and her partner on a personal level and they have only ever treated me like a King; but girls: you have to embrace new knowledge and understanding, and the VLC club is running on fumes vis-a-vis Paleo/Primal. Plus, if you get the thousands of comments like I do, you must know that all is not paradise in paradise. I can't count the number of people who've helped themselves by curing their starch deficiency.

Plus, it's just getting to ridiculous proportions with people who ought know better ignoring plain facts and science.

I even have a professor at a well known institution scouring the literature to see if there's a case of obligate carnivores ever having been measured in ketosis—the the Inuit have never, in nearly 100 years of trying (if you bother to read the above links). Nope, not found so far.

But, she has found that even seals aren't in ketosis, and even in a fasted state.

As far as I can see, there have never been any wild animals documented to be in ketosis when not not starving, I've searched literature, libraries... I've asked old colleagues with arcane knowledge. Nada.

I may of course be wrong about this, but dang, if it's been shown in any fed wild animal, it's a rare study....

Heck, some of them avoid ketosis even for prolonged fasting (!) - these seal pups do it by recycling glucose (granted, they probably need to do that due to diving demands, but the result is they can stay out of ketosis during prolonged fasting).


"High levels of Cori cycle activity and EGP may be important components of metabolic adaptations that maintain glucose production while avoiding ketosis during extended fasting or are related to sustained metabolic alterations associated with extended breath-holds in elephant seals."

Sometimes, I just want to answer any ketosis questions with :

"Ketosis is an adaptation for starvation. Short-term fasting is very good, but long-term 'nutritional ketosis' is a modern experiment. Period."

So here's Nora in, to me, a very curious state of being. I'd describe it in three points:

  1. 2008-11 Cocksure
  2. Palpably frustrated to the point of stammering
  3. Doesn't actually have time to look into it (see #1)

You can judge for yourselves. It's at the 38ish minute point in her podcast with Dave Asprey. They talk resistant starch and safe starches for about 10ish minutes.

I reiterate: up to you to judge and this by no means makes Nora a net disvalue, to me. Not by a long stretch. I know it's rather lame to say that I post this to help, but it's really true. I was on fire 2 days go. I slept on it twice, trying to figure out a way to simply motivate the whole community to get past the dogmas that we ALL bought into.

Please end this by scrolling up and refreshing yourself with how it's generally going, Dallas and Melissa being just the most recent examples. Then, if you are so inclined, get word to Nora whatever way you can and plead with her to make sure she really delves into everything.

Please be constructive in any comments.

Apple Cider Pork Chops Sous Vide

Last time I did double-cut, bone in pork chops sous vide it was the Jack Daniel's recipe fron chef James Briscione. This time, this one.

First step is big meat.

IMG 2530
Double cut, bone-in from Niman Ranch

The recipe is pretty easy


For the pork chops:

  • 4 extra thick pork chops
  • 8 thyme sprigs
  • 2 apples, peeled and sliced

For the sauce:

  • 5 tablespoons (75 ml) butter
  • 2 cloves garlic, peeled and minced
  • 1 teaspoon (5 ml) sugar
  • 2/3 cup (150 ml) hard apple cider
  • 1 teaspoon (5 ml) cider vinegar
  • 1 tablespoon (15 ml) whole grain mustard


  1. Preheat SousVide Supreme to desired serving temperature 131F/55C.
  2. Lightly salt and pepper the pork chops and seal each individually in cooking pouches along with 2 thyme sprigs and 1 tbsp butter.
  3. Cook at 131F/55C for 12 hours.
  4. Remove the sous vide pork chops from their pouches, reserving the liquid. Quickly sear the pork chops on both sides in a pan over high heat, or on a grill. While the chops are searing finish the sauce.
  5. Add 1 tablespoon (15 ml) of butter and the apples to a pan over medium-high heat.
  6. Cook the apples until the juices begin to brown and the apples are beginning to soften.
  7. Add the garlic, sugar, apple cider, cider vinegar, mustard and half of the reserved liquid to the apple mixture. Simmer.
  8. Spoon the sauce over the seared chops and serve.
IMG 2532
All dressed up with someplace to go

I didn't have time to go 12 hours, and I've had great luck with 140F, so that's what I did, for 8 hours. The other thing I did was to use all of the juice from the pouches.

With mashed potatoes

It was excellent, and especially because pork goes really well with fruit. Sous vide is just so easy to do and I've yet to not have a good experience. I wrote this on Facebook the afternoon I made this.

Sous Vide Supreme Water Oven. The tradeoff with cooking sous vide is that, unlike some stew or crock slow cook dish, you smell nothing throughout the day. It's sealed in vacuum, submerged in water held to a precise temperature. You can't undercook if you go the minimum time. You can't overcook no matter if you have it 48 hours in (best for a brisket).

I have 4, pound and a half bone-in, double cut pork chops nearing 4 hour soak, 4 to go. I watched them cut it for me. I chose the "tenderloin" end, with the T-Bone-esque lean and tender idea in mind.

The Sous Vide method literally transforms proteins into various textures that can, at times, be like meat pudding you can eat with a spoon. We've done that with chicken. Salmon, too, is amazing.

Or, imagine a rare filet that's still rare because it never got more than a half degree over a rare internal temperature, but over time, proteins broke down into curious textures that are foreign to our pallet, accustomed only to fried, grilled or baked meat?

I still only grill ribeyes. The sous vide method is amazing, but I don't like my ribeyes as I like my filets, sushi, or seared ahi. Or, pork chops. Mike Eades told me when invited up to SF to share an SV lunch with him and Tim Ferriss for the kickoff with Heston Blumenthal, "I set out on this to find the perfect pork chop." Oh, my doG, what a success. I've had many guests that can get almost uncomfortably sexual in their relating of experience over eating a damn pork chop.

The point is, I smell nothing during the cooking.

I like to think all that "stink" is still in the meat.


Looks like the SVS has come down in price from that initial point of about $500 when it was released. Also, there's the Sous Vide Supreme Demi now. Or, for about $80 and a crock pot, you can do the poor man's version: Dorkfood Sous-Vide Temperature Controller (DSV).