Support the blog and read posts on the PT website.



Kurt Harris MD

An Archevore is someone who eats based on essential principles, and also someone who hungers for essential principles. Take your pick.

Exploring these principles is one of my interests, but not the only one.

So you may find commentary here about other issues in medicine, health, other sciences, or just about anything.

Feed The Archevore

Archevore is written, produced, and directed by me. I am an independent science writer with no outside sponsorship from any private firm, NGO or, Zeus forbid, government agency. Donations are greatly appreciated. 

In addition to buying from the book list, you can also support Archevore by making all of your Amazon purchases for any item through the Amazon Portal below.

Amazon Portal



Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices


« Robb Wolf Podcast | Main | Smoking Candy Cigarettes - revised version on PT »

Archevore Diet Revised

The all vegan version is now up.

Not really.

But I did just spend several hours doing a needed update. I think this is about version 3.0 since the original back-of-the-envelope diet I first put on the web in June 2009. That was a diet I had been using successfully clinically for more than two years.

The emphasis on animal products remains.

The emphasis on real whole foods - kill it or dig it up with a stick - remains and is enhanced.

Macro ratios had already been de-emphasized in v 2.0, but that has now been made even more explicit in the steps, and not just in the coda. 

Things which in my mind were "givens" but had been pointed out to me were not clearly emphasized have been made more explicit, like sleep and eating some offal.

I've deleted references to legumes other than avoiding soy and peanuts, as other legumes seem more and more benign to me.

It remains congruent with, and is perhaps now more so with other whole foods diets that I consider "Paleo 2.0" approaches, like that of Chris Kresser, Paul Jaminet, Chris Masterjohn (he won't force you to eat wheat) and J Stanton, and with more potatoes and less steak, Stephan Guyenet

I've not had a chance to do big blog posts about food reward yet. Those who might have seen some comments of mine elsewhere will see I find merit in the idea, but I don't know its ontological status yet.

Whether reducing food reward is restoring the EM2 or whether it is just a useful fat loss maneuver I am not sure. Either way, I think that is part of how diets like mine and maybe all diets may work, so I have emphasized that a bit more in the rank ordering.

There is also a notable but not strictly scientific bias I have used for this re-write.

It could fairly be called data mining or reverse engineering, but I've tried to write the steps such that most of the weight optimization failures that I know of would have not been following the new steps.

For example, I know of people who failed despite eating very low carb, but I cannot think of many that actually ate only twice a day with no snacks, never ate from a box, avoided restaurants and never ate ANY liquid calories, including milk and cream. So this has resulted in modifications that make my own current diet noncompliant in a few ways (I still add cream to my coffee), but I think these changes make it more universal.

This does seem to work well for many people, but nothing works for everyone.  If it optimizes your weight and health and you are satisfied, you can always break a few rules and see what you can still get away with.

I'll try to do a re-write of "how to lose weight" sometime soon and add more therapeutic tricks for when the whole foods low-NAD idea is not enough.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (47)

Welcome back, Dr. Harris! Now will you please join us in Boston for the Ancestral Health Symposium 2012? We really missed you in LA!

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterThe Lazy Caveman

Very good! I like the use of the word "pastoral" at the very beginning. I've become a Polish Masai!

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered Commentergarymar

Yes!!! Come to AHS 12!!! We did miss you!!

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterDeb

I'm curious about the benefits, if any, for body comp of less frequent (1-2) Vs. more frequent (3-6+) meals when the same foods are consumed. Can you point me to any useful links?

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterThe Evil Placenta Of Doom

Thank goodness, an update!

This is one of the more influential blogs out there for me: it opened my eyes to what the physiology literature in the past two decades has actually been saying. I'm really glad you've updated your ideas page.

What I'd like, though, is any information you have about TOO SKINNY people. People always focus on people who are too fat.

I weigh only about one hundred pounds, and I've stably held that weight for most of my life now, since I was fourteen. I'm entering my thirties now. Same weight.

I've adopted a no-fructose/no-gluten diet for about two months now, and I haven't observed a change in my weight. Is there anything much I ought to do, other than try to do resistance weight training?

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterHaram al-Jazeri

That's an excellent revision. It's longer, but I think you've answered a lot of common questions with the additions and clarifications.

I see some solid new information, like the soluble/insoluble fiber distinction - and I strongly support your admonition to "go easy on nuts". I see too many people ingesting massive calorie and n-6 bombs by trying to re-create bready snacks and desserts with nut flours, or simply by using nut butters.

Having driven the anti-snacking bus for some time, I'm glad to see you emphasizing it too: there are many reasons to not go through your day in the post-prandial state, with weight loss being only the first.

Glad to have you back! For a while I feared we had lost a key team member.

JS -


Thanks, J. Most of the "new" is not new to the blog or my thinking, just more explicit. I was the original nut-basher : ) Now someone will say you are a fanatic for using the expression "n-6 bomb" as a cultural counter-weight.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJ. Stanton

Welcome back. I've got a question on carbs for weight loss. Your recommendation:
"If you are trying to lose weight, really minimizing fructose and eating 50-70g a day of carbohydrate as starch is recommended. Skipping breakfast or at least no carbs for breakfast can be very helpful."

What is the reason for suggesting no breakfast or no carbs at breakfast?


Decrease meal frequency and decrease carb intake. If you are IR or diabetic, you can decrease your 24 hr AUC for glucose more my eliminating carbs at breakfast than lunch or supper. At breakfast time, you have already been fasting, so if a meal is to be skipped, you are just doing IF by extending the fast.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterSue

Welcome back Kurt! With regard to eliminating caloric beverages, does this include raw milk for healthy people?


I don't think anyone needs to drink milk, raw or otherwise. If you are lactose tolerant and at a tuly healthy weight and not afraid of casein (I'm not really - no change there) drink away....

My thinking now is that ALL caloric beverages, even those with healthy components, encourage overeating and may help raise your body fat setpoint.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterMarty

Do you still recommend the same diet for those with familial hypercholesterolaemia? I've been eating this way, without statins, for 10 years and feel great. Thanks.


Was discussing this with Chris Kresser the other day. If I had FH I would lean more towards the animal/saturated fat route and be wary of anything that causes oxidative damage - maybe favor boiling and gentle cooking methods over grilling - and be especially radical in avoiding oxidizable PUFA.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterOC

I like this revision. Flexible and based on personal experimentation to truly find what works on an individual basis. Thanks again, Dr. Harris. Based on your Archevore 1.0 post, I started adding more carbs back into my diet after several years of VLC paleo. Big difference in energy and endurance.

<i>Make sure you are Vitamin D replete. Get daily midday sun or consider supplementation if you never get outside.</i>

This is great advice...but I'd like to add a warning: if you're someone who is quitting the SAD, and you're still suffering from the effects of having recently eaten a diet heavy in NAD (wheat, n-6 imbalanced vegetable & seed oils, and excessive sugar), your skin's ability to handle direct midday sun exposure is severely hampered. For my entire life, I used to sunburn within 30 minutes of direct sun exposure -- unless I slathered on the sunblock.

Now, I can sunbathe for three hours in the midday sun (11am - 2pm) with no sunblock and not burn (and that's the Hawaii midday sun...much more UVA & UVB exposure than the mainland U.S., thanks to the tropical latitude).

I sunbathe at midday at least 3 times a week now for 1-2 hours at a time. I only started doing this about 4 months ago, when I came to the realization that I was spending a lot of money on D3 supplements (about $20 for 300 capsules), yet I live in a tropical State with year round, direct sunshine. Why am I spending money on that which can be gotten easily for free?

This past summer is the first summer in my entire life in which I did not get a sunburn despite my new sunbathing regimen and all of my outdoor recreational activities and yard work, while completely foregoing any and all sunblock/sunscreen products.

Point is, folks who were recently eating SAD and used to using sun block whenever they go out into the sun, may want to take midday exposure without sunblock slowly to build up tolerance. When I first started sun bathing, I only started at about 15 minutes lying on my back and 15 on my belly. I gradually increased my time as my tan grew deeper until now when I can easily handle 3-4 hours of midday sun without burning.

Anyhow, that's my n=1 experience on sunbathing to boost my D3 levels.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterKeoni Galt

Awesome. Looks more comprehensive, though some might get mixed messages about starch/carbs.

It will be interesting to hear your reasoning for recommending 70g/day of starch for weight loss as opposed to VLC. As a general rule for optimality or just ~ equivalently beneficial when tolerated?

Not sure the audience you have in mind, but a lot of people are not going to know what "pastoral," "putative," and a few other words mean without consulting their dictionary. "Food reward" is confusing definitionally even to the academics who write articles about it journals.

Just fyi, the "eliminate sugar" link was not working as of this comment. Also, you have to talk about leptin signaling if you want to take your evolutionary milieu in scientifically accurate direction. Boat missed.

KGH: "Pastoral" is difficult but I am remiss by not mentioning leptin in the diet plan?
Thanks for the advice.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterCal

Glad to see you back on the grid Dr H! I love the addition of Step 0. Particularly if one considers technology addiction coupled with orthorexia, I think this is a huge issue.

My friend Kamal and I have been in a 30 day Low Reward - diet AND technology - experiment that is coming to a conclusion (round 1 anyway) in a few days. Food Reward pales in comparison to Technology Reward from our experience this month.

Take care,

KGH: Low technology reward ( low technostimulation? ) is hugely important and part of why I have not been blogging much lately. Hard to blog when avoiding computers.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterAravind

thought you might post something as I knew you were going to be on Wolf's podcast. Good to read something here from you again. Cheers.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterben

Doctor Harris, what are you thoughts on consuming milk kefir as part of a diet?

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered Commentercanuck

Hope this means your blogging hiatus is over! Tho the comments you've been sprinkling about the blogosphere have been worth the wait ;). They've prompted me to start work on my next post on food as entertainment (interesting question that ... the folks shocked about your Rice Krispies eating would fall over if they knew about the CCC ;).

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterBeth@Weightmaven

Step 0 -- Excellent!

Despite my total lack of understanding of neurobiology, addictions seem to be all tied together up there, in my personal experience at least. Looking forward to further posts from the Once and Future King.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterKamal

My honest opinion:

It's more comprehensive and really clarifies "Paleo 3.0," but much more dense. Great for those well-versed in nutrition, but may be more intimidating for the friends and family to whom I've occasionally sent the link to your diet guidelines. The original was certainly more "simple to follow" and probably still provided the majority of benefits to average-joe. I guess maybe it depends which market you want to pitch to - maybe you can leave the recruitment of the masses to Mark, and you can provide the next level of refinement.


There is no pleasing everyone.

I am pretty much indifferent to reach or simplicity for its own sake. The "3.0" is just the third revision of the diet, no relation to paleo 2.0 or 3.0 if there is one.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterMichelle

I am trying to get as many ideas as possible to try to help my sister, who, after 12 years of restricting carbs, has high fasting blood sugars. I am copying in a sample of her food log with blood sugar readings. This is so perplexing that we are posting on all the blogs and trying to get help from some of the nationally prominent diabetes experts. She saw Mary Vernon at her clinic in KS, but Mary just put her on this current version of a low-carb diet and is recommending she take more diabetes drugs, which really surprised us. You say that diabetics should not eat starch at all, but I am wondering if she needs to eat some carbs at night to keep her liver from producing glucose (which has to be what is happening since she eats so few carbs?) Or does she need much more fat in her diet? (She hates meat and really hates fatty meat - but that may be her issue?) I talked to her last night, and she reported that yesterdays fasting blood sugar was 250. This all goes against my belief that Type II can be reversed with a low-carb diet, but this certainly isn't the case here.
Day 1
Breakfast - 1 oz almonds, 1 oz cheese (full fat) coffee and heavy cream
Lunch Broccoli, cauliflower (cooked), garden greens (salad) (I always use 1TBS of bacon ranch salad dressing which has 1/2 carb in it), hamburger with no bun
Afternoon blood sugar - 124
Supper - chicken breast (grilled with butter and "butt rub"), spinach salad

Day 2
morning blood sugar 184
Breakfast - bacon and eggs (2 of each), coffee and cream
Lunch - asparagas, turkey mignons (turkey wrapped in bacon), green salad
afternoon blood sugar 160
Supper - Reuben Casserole (corned beef, sauerkraut and swiss cheese)
cooked broccoli and cauliflower

Day 3
morning blood sugar 176
Breakfast - bacon and eggs, coffee, cream
Lunch - chef salad with ham
afternoon blood sugar 141
Supper - cheeseburger - no bun, salad
snack - 1oz almonds, 1 oz cheese


Once you've lost enough beta cells, you need medication including insulin if necessary, to control blood sugar. This is clearly the case here. This is DIABETES. I've seen these type of BG readings improve radically with diet and massive weight loss, but on this diet, she needs drugs as long as she has these readings.

I suggest consulting a competent endocrinologist and getting medication. She has diabetes.

And I never said NO starch for diabetics. Even Bernstein allows some.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterPeggy Holloway

I love the revision, but more I love in the comments you mentioned getting the f*ck away from technology...essentially why i stopped posting on my own blog. I am still stuck at a 8-10 hr a day desk job but outside of work i am a no-computer no-tv no nothing electronic advocate. i NEVER would have realized how attached i was to the internet(and the not good for you blogsphere, IMO) until i said quit it.

to the person who wants to gain weight... i would eat 3 square meals a day, not snacking, and add as much dairy from good sources as possible. it was the breaker for me gaining weight, dairy. also, makes sure your digesting and assimilating your food and not trashing 50% of it b/c your digestion/thyroid sucks.

i tried for about a week with the low spiced meat, potato, veggie thing... i couldn't eat enough to keep my weight where it is wanted and i get lightheaded when i don't sea salt my meat. And the darn potatoes, i never ever in a million years would have thought eating them in adequate amounts makes this switch in my brain that makes all food looks disgusting. i even tested it by getting a reese cup and a snickers bar out and deciding whether i found it would be appetizing...totally repulsed by it. crazy

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterMallory

When you suggest "avoiding oxidizable PUFA" do you include krill oil? Or do you suggest taking it occasionally or never, and just eating fish a couple of times per week?

KGH: I favor n-6 minimization, then fresh fish in that order

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterOC

Interesting changes. I know I'd be interested (and maybe others) in more info regarding the softened stance on "whole meal corn products" and legumes. Thanks for returning.

KGH: Based on dietary anthropology and empirical evidence more than biochemistry or nutritionism.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterNoahR


I've been reading your blog almost from the beginning (and many of the comments you have made on other blogs), and the only surprise for me was the elimination of "caloric drinks" and, more specifically, the fact that you included cream (except in coffee). I understand why you make this recommendation -- it is easy to over consume calories this way. But given that cream used to one of your "diesel fuels", this took me by surprise. Am I correct in assuming that you wouldn't necessarily recommend eliminating cream to someone who doesn't have a weight problem?

Thanks for the update!



I don't have a problem with any whole real food that is not a problem for you.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterLarry Eshelman

I've been drinking about a cup to a cup and a half of pastured heavy whipping cream each day. I love it, but these updates make me think I am doing something wrong. Is this a bad place to get my calories? I generally eat the same things each day:

Breakfast: bacon, eggs, green peas, cheese.
Lunch: grass-fed ground beef and fresh vegetables.
Dinner: 1 cup of cream (liquid).

Is this good or am I going to die? :)

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterAbe

Listened to you this am on the Robb Wolf PC thought it was terrific. I also follow Seth Roberts and would like your thoughts on his flax oil/seed n=1 and it's effects on balance and oral health. Is he exchanging improved balance and oral health for possible future liver damage?


September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterChuck Currie

Hi Kurt,

My brother turned me on to your site after I had been doing weight watchers for a while. I had a kidney transplant because of a disease called Focal Segmental Glomeriul Sclerosis. The prime symptom for this illness is protien in the urine and even after transplant I still spill protein and have had serious relapses. Anyway, since I started this barely any has showed up and whats most promising is that my Albumin level has gone from where it had been right around 3.5 to above 4.5 and at one point 5.3. I couldn't believe it. Currently, it hovers around 4.5. Anyway, I'm wondering if you think my albumin level rose because of my increased animal fat consumption? Also, my hemoglobin has remained stable and I again wonder if that's because of my eating more animal fat. Funny since my original goal was losing weight. Thanks for the great work.



Glad to hear of such great results. I suspect some liver healing with the improved albumin level.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJoe Villa

Are you sure we need to be concerned with WGA (wheat germ agglutinin)? I can't seem to find any solid information on this, but at AHS2011 Dr. Mathieu Lalonde stated that WGA is denatured in baking/cooking, and is therefore a non-issue unless grains are eaten raw.

Of course, there's other proteins that co-occur in grains along with WGA that are of concern, and do not denature in cooking.


I've seen Matt's talk but not read his references on that. I can recall reading other sources in the past that contradict the idea that WGA is reliably destroyed by cooking. But if you are already avoiding gluten and white flour, what would you be eating with WGA, wheat germ? And why be assured by cooking when there is no reason to eat it otherwise?

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterhealthyengineer

Also, you have to talk about leptin signaling if you want to take your evolutionary milieu in scientifically accurate direction. Boat missed.

_KGH: "Pastoral" is difficult but I am remiss by not mentioning leptin in the diet plan?
Thanks for the advice._

I don't think you're remiss for not mentioning leptin... it was a joke, in reference to a recent tour de force.

KGH: Umm....OK

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterCal

Dr. Harris,
Thanks for the update! You really had me on for a second there on the "all vegan version."
I noticed how you indicated skipping breakfast may be beneficial. What are your thoughts in regards to eating a late dinner? Or generally the timing of your other meals?
Thanks a lot,


I think meal number is the issue rather than timing.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterAnn

What are your thoughts on Don Matesz's latest direction change and his talk at the AHS? Along with myself and others in the discussion area of his blog, I have noticed you also commenting on his new approach. Thanks.

KGH: Haven't seen his AHS talk. I think deciding whether the "natural human diet" is carnivorous or essentially vegetarian is a false dichotomy.

September 13, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterEvolutionarily

do you think this diet will be appropiate or benefitial for someone with ulcerative colitis?. Thanks

September 14, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterMaria

Is there a reason you suggest "fresh" liver and not liver in the forms of pate, liverwurst, etc.?

KGH: I have no scientific evidence for it but fresh or frozen seems likely to have better bioavailability and stability of vitamins. I do eat liverwurst often as a matter of convenience, though.

September 14, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterChris Woods

Glad to hear/read your voice again, Dr. Harris. I was wondering if you could elaborate/speculate on how much beef liver per week would provide an adequate amount of vitamins/choline. Or, if you could maybe just share about how much you eat on a weekly basis, it would be appreciated. Thanks!

September 14, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterKim

I am glad to see you posting again and glad to read the changed diet. In terms of high calorie beverages, I recall Stephan Guyenet's comment about the weight gain at college, from beer.

In any event, I managed quite happily on the prior PaNu diet and lost weight just as proposed. Even drinking red wine and beer, just not to frequent excess. I figured human evolution undoubtedly included many generations of consumption of such beverages. For that matter, people may have fermented a lot of "foods" just to get rid of the sugars.

The biggest issues, for me, are to avoid wheat and sugar and PUFA.

Secondly, just like working out, part of the reason for the diet is to look good when you go out, and what's the point if you cannot eat at restaurants? I just try to minimize the damage. Still no wheat and avoid the PUFA and sugar. My favorite laugh is people who cancel social engagements so they can do their daily work out or, in this case, because they cannot eat the food. Just eat the burger, and not the bun.

On a serious note, I think the issues of set-point and food reward are misguided. The Paleo approach and the Archevore diet get the same result without tasteless food from a tube. Why? Because grains are emergency rations for an omnivore, and not meant to be the major source of calories. And sugar to excess and PUFA were never prevalent in the evolving human diet. As far as i can rationalize all this, it seems that when people eat too much of grain calories the body copes for a while, and then it comes to a point where it begins to fail. Something is telling the body that meat and proper fat are in short supply, and that the body had better prepare for poor hunting conditions. That means fat storage and serious travel to a new hunting location.

But after years of excessive grains and too much fat storage, the whole system begins to fail.

Thanks for your posts and for your pithy comments and pointed opinions.



Thanks Richard.

"The Paleo approach and the Archevore diet get the same result without tasteless food from a tube."

I honestly think you are not fairly characterizing the concept. The extreme maneuver of food in a tube informs us how the principle works, but it says nothing like "everyone must eat tasteless food". I think you are confusing palatability with reward. Palatability is only one component, and I hypothesize the maxima for most engineered food are on a revers u-shape curve. I do not think it is linear. That is, I think some high reward food is actually less palatable than some low reward food. Claiming that all food must be tasteless is to misunderstand the concept, IMO.

I am open to the idea that FR is one component of how whole foods diets work. Whether FR is one more NAD or just a dietary trick I don't know.

I also do not think the set-point notion is at all misguided. I do not think it is possible to maintain the same weight over many years without counting or weighing without a setpoint or adipostat.

September 14, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterRichard

Hi Kurt,
I read your post on fats, and the new diet 3.0, and have a question. You mention that seed and nut oils are to be avoided because of the high PUFAs and n-6s. Yesterday I bought a bottle of expeller pressed sunflower oil. A seed oil, so apparently bad. But fat breakdown, according to the label, mono = 12.5, sat = 1.5, poly=0.5, which would seem to suggest a good distribution of fats. So, is this seed oil bad? or is the label perhaps wrong? or is it that expeller-pressing the oil produce a more favorable mix of FAs than would an industrial, chemical-based extraction? Obviously not an oil that our ancesters would have had access to, but maybe not so bad?

KGH: Maybe more pointless than bad. What do you plan to do with this bottle of artificially extracted seed oil?
It can't have a higher smoke point than more saturated fat predominant fats like coconut and it would not have the flavor or polyphenols in olive oil.
I am guessing this would be marketed as "good" because is is predominantly monos and less sat fat, but there is no reason to avoid sat fat, and I would rather cook with sat fat as it is less oxidizable.

September 15, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterChris

Hi Dr. H-

I can't say enough about how helpful your website has been! I am wondering about your new recommendation to consume offal (or new emphasis on it). I have been diagnosed with fatty liver disease, though I'm generally healthy and lean. I eat a lot of egg yolks (pastured) for choline in trying to fix my liver. Is there anything about choline from offal that's different from that found in eggs? In other words, can I just get away with the eggs and skip the liver etc.? Being told you have fatty liver and to not worry about it it's normal etc. was extremely disconcerting, by the way.

Thank you for your consideration and time.


B12 and other B vitamins, copper, folate, vit C, etc are all in liver more than eggs. A nutritious hedge against micronutrient deficiency. Not really new thinking, just neglected to emphasize.

September 15, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJessica

Hi Dr. Harris,
thank you for all this great info and the revised diet.
I just have a question concerning those who have had their gallbladders removed . . . are there any special considerations or concerns about long term effects to be aware of (ie. colon cancer)??
thank you!


Your ability to emulsify and therefore digest a bolus of fat is decreased (but not eliminated) with no gall bladder to concentrate bile. The fat you eat should therefore be divided between meals. If you find you still have malabsorption of fats, you might benefit from reducing fat and adding starch as your fuel source.

September 16, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterkellie

Hi Dr. Harris:
Just to make sure I'm clear:
The reason to avoid wheat is becasue of the glutin proteins and phytates it contains.
The reason to avoid peanut butter is because of the lectins.
And, in avoiding carbs at breakfast, how strict do you mean? Absolutely no carbs (ie eggs and/or meat and coffee only), or are a hand full of blue berries with cream still "no carbish" enough?

September 17, 2011 | Unregistered Commenteroc

I was just reading your post on hormesis and plant toxins. Why would wheat (1 slice of bread once or twice per week) or an ocassional teaspoon of peanut butter not also cause hormesis. Is it absolutely determined that these substances are unhealthy, or is this also theoretical? I ask because my mom eats pretty healthy, but it's still difficult for her to give up her toast in the morning.

September 17, 2011 | Unregistered Commenteroc

What happened to your passion for consuming large amounts of Diesel 1?!?!?


Whole cream (Diesel #1) had to be reduced in favor of russets, american yams, white rice and bananas.

Multifuel stove. Animal fats or starches.

September 17, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJordan

I'm so glad to see you posting again!
I send links to your site to all my friends and relatives who ask me about my new way of life. You have the very best informational blog and you really get to the meat of the matter. Your posts have been so helpful to me and I'm just really excited to see new posts!

September 20, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterMaryBeth C.

Great revision, great blog and content in general.

I was wondering if you do interviews. Our nutritional approach is very similar. My niche is fitness athletes/physique enhancement. The majority in this field use extreme approaches that compromise overall health along with normal metabolic and hormonal functioning. Or they are overloaded with BS fitness industry marketing fluff from the mags.

My goal is to use evolutionary theory, science, and practical experience to teach people a healthy approach to fat loss and physique enhancement, and our demographic could use access to an expert like YOU!!!!

If not, that's cool. There are more noble things to worry about than helping meatheads and fitness diva's, but just thought I'd ask. Regardless, thanks for the great content.

September 20, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterNate Miyaki

Nice work Kurt, I enjoy your ruminated revisions! Keep it real.

September 21, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterMike McMillan

So I wonder where "corn syrup" (little to no fructose) fits into the picture now...

KGH: Corn syrup is a liquid caloric industrial food product, whether high fructose or not. If you are eating whole foods, whether animal or vegetable, you're not getting any calories from these non-food liquid sources.

September 21, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterNoahR

AFAIK, in regards to fructose content, there are differences between corn syrup, which is mostly glucose with some maltose, and HFCS, which is corn syrup that has undergone further processing (enzymatic) to convert some of the glucose to fructose.

KGH: You are correct.

September 21, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterAgainstthegrain

Thanks so much for your constant work and revisions!

When it comes to burning fat, does the body care if you eat starches and animal fats in the same meal? Or is there a physiological "switch" that optimizes fat store reduction with higher animal fat intake?

And do you still see protein intake as over-emphasized by most paleo/whole foods?

September 21, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterJarick

You mentioned olive oil in your response to Chris, which was a bit of a relief - I've been making a lot of mayonnaise lately with a mixture of pastured egg yolks and salted anchovies, plus lemon juice and whatever probiotics are lying around (beet kvass, pickle juice, kimchi juice, pineapple vinegar...) It's become quite a staple, and when you said "avoid temperate plant oils" I wasn't sure if that included olive. I do mix in some bone marrow or pastured lard when I have it, but I find that the mayonnaise "breaks" or gets lumpy if it isn't predominantly olive oil.

What do you think of using this mayonnaise as a primary fat supplement? I'm trying to reduce my protein intake as my gut seems to prefer it when I have less.

September 22, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterCapmikee

Just showing some love. Glad to have you back, Kurt.

September 22, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterZach
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.