Brief Update: The Book, Version 2.0

I almost wrote a post last evening just so I could write something for fun. But I was a bit sapped—which continues into today—so I ate a big bowl of my father-in-law's caldo de res instead. Now, finally, the editors get it back for a couple days before it reverts to me.

What's Version 2.0? Well, first of all I'm trying to beef it up quite a bit at the level of each chapter—just make it a bit better in my eyes, but still simple and basic for the beginner. A quick summary:

  • Deemphasis of low carbohydrate as necessarily any part of Paleo, while acknowledging its usefulness to many for weight loss an certain health issues.
  • Calories count.
  • Potatoes are nutritious.
  • Lots of additional sections in a number of chapters, but one I recall explicitly (my brain is in a fog) is a section on the ethics of eating animals.
  • New Chapter: Cold Water Therapy or "Thermogenesis" (though I'm not sure I care for that term).
  • New Chapter: Moderate Carbs.
  • New Chapter: Paleo Kids.
  • New Chapter: Barefooting

Well, that's about it for now. Should be out around the end of the month.

Comments

  1. Loved the original. Would love to see some updated info on IF for women. I’m reading a lot more about it being maybe not as effective or such a good idea for females. Not sure if that is just for women trying to conceive or women in general. Still trying to sort it all out.

    • In the word of thy Paleo gods – very last testiment 12:13 – “Try it and see if it works for you” n=(1-1+1)

    • I’m with you, Sue. Different hormones, different optimal body fat, different muscle building, different bone density, different life milestones, different needs, different passions from men. Lots the same, of course, and the fundamental paradigm applies equally, but in the palaeosphere generally, it’s been framed from a male perspective, often from the perspective of 42 year old overweight males.

      Otherwise, I’d like to see the pros and cons of contentious debates: low carb/not low carb, dairy/no dairy, supermarket meat/grass-fed meat, nutritious potatoes, calories count/a calorie is not a calorie, not just one side of each debate. Also for the classic exercises (deadlift, squats, bench press, pushups, chins) you might give a benchmark people can aim for. I think this is important for people who have not exercised for a few years – or ever. They feel their “perceived effort” is high, but they generally have no idea of where they stand against the palaeolithic norm! They can’t expect to see benefits from exercise unless they reach a certain intensity, however tough it may feel on the way there. I would not go for the absolute weight lifted, but just the ratio of weight lifted to bodyweight. For example, Art DeVany suggested that deadlifts of twice body weight are worth aiming for. Clearly this is heavier that the point at which a real benefit is achieved. Chin-up and pushup goals can be unweighted to keep it simple.

      Best of luck with this project, Richard.

    • Imo to the extent IF is a problem for women it is probably because you have to consume a whole day’s worth of calories during a pretty brief window, and women for one reason or another are more reluctant than men to eat their faces off.

      If you are eating no processed foods or grains, and only eating during a 4 or 6 hour window, you really have to go at it like a starved wolf to make sure you get enough calories. Eating 8 ounces of meat and some veggies isn’t going to get the job done, you are going to run constant caloric deficits and eventually you will crash and burn.

      Though there of course are plenty of exceptions, in general women don’t think in terms of pounds of meat and starch. And veggies are pretty useless in this scenario, all they will do is keep you underfed.

  2. Sounds awesome, Richard.

  3. Hi Richard – Looking forward to the release.

    Is it finally common knowledge in Paleo land that natural carbs like fruit and potatoes are extremely healthy yet? The sooner the better so we can call it, say… “The natural organic real food diet”. but this isn’t as catchy and lacks the marketing potential as “caveman” I guess. I’m curious how this all plays out in the future. I am kind of partial to the “grain-free organic omnivorgian ancestral fruitarian starch diet”

  4. Richard, before you venture too deep into GuyenetLand with your second edition, better acquaint yourself with Peter’s past several posts, where Stephan is being completely deconstructed. (Don’t skip the comments.)

    Here is the latest one:

    http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2012/06/almost-done-with-insulin-infusions.html

    • I will look. Thank you, and I love Petro to death. He essentially saved my dog, via email.

      I want to be fair. I don’t want to say that everyone should eat low carb or that everyone who’s fat is food reward. My shtick is individualism and you’re on you’re own. Believe it or not, that’s what the book is going to say. Nope, there’s no formula and hence every diet book you’ve ever purchased and read is in some ways bullshit when it prescribes and proscribes for you individually.

      You need all the info, about what seems to be effective for various individuals. But then you’re still on your own.

      Thanks, man. I’ll have a look.

  5. Yeah, you’ll have to decide how many chips you want to put on a given school of thought. But I thought you might like a heads-up that some of the stuff that’s being represented as fact is anything but.

    And I definitely agree that everyone’s different, but biochemistry is biochemistry. And it’s fiendishly complicated. And I think there are only three or four people in the Paleo world who truly understand it.

    (And I think there’re a lot more people who only pretend to understand it–or don’t concede or recognize where facts end and opinion begins–and some of them have PhDs and MDs after their names.)

    Interestingly, in my opinion, the few people who really seem to understand biochemistry tend to be the quietest and least argumentative on the scene. (They also seem to be among the least likely to be found on a podium.)

    Anyway, Peter doesn’t seem to be the type to pick fights. Nor is he trying to build a name. I think he’s just a guy who truly, madly, deeply loves science.

    And I get the impression that he got to the point where he could no longer stand the torrent of bullshit being served up as scientific fact.

    There are several posts (and they’re not easy reads) but they’re all fascinating.

  6. Tim Gwaltney says:

Trackbacks

  1. [...] previously blogged about this revamp for a 2nd Edition and I'd expected it to be finished around the first of this month. Then I dug in. There was so much [...]