Robb Wolf's "The Paleo Solution" is Now Available.

We are all indeed fortunate to now have access to The Paleo Solution. It is the written version of the outstanding advice which GB Forum moderator Robb Wolf has provided to my own athletes for years. Robb's expertise has been a truly invaluable asset in the development of my high-level competitive athletes. From the US Jr National Champion all the way down to my State Championship level competitors; all have benefited immensely from Robb's concise, easy to follow nutritional advice.

My only complaint is that I wish the book would have been available years ago when I was still competing!

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

I'm going to go order it now!

This will be my first book on nutrition; I can't wait until it arrives.

I've had it on pre-order for over a month, really looking forward to reading and applying it!

Me too! It is in my wish list from prerelease!. It´s coming in my next amazon batch

I've pre-ordered it nearly 1 month ago, unfortunately it won't be available in Europe until October... Can't wait

Hackysack said:

I've pre-ordered it nearly 1 month ago, unfortunately it won't be available in Europe until October... Can't wait

Strange i got notification yesterday that the book had been released.

I pre-ordered through www.bookdepository.com and really recommend them, they have free shipping anywhere in Europe and good prices, i got this title for 25% off pre-order making it a no brainer.

I've ordered it from Amazon, yesterday i got the eMail that i would receive it between October 2nd and October 10th... I didn't know about bookdepository.com, thank you for the tip

Alan Aragon did a critique of Robb's interview with t-nation in his latest publication. I thought he raised some good points but also committed straw men fallacies in a couple others.

Interesting, so Allen and Alex and your other gymnasts follow some of the advice to different degrees? Good to hear.

trianglechoke7 said:

Alan Aragon did a critique of Robb's interview with t-nation in his latest publication. I thought he raised some good points but also committed straw men fallacies in a couple others.

That's interesting! I greatly respect both of them, would you mind to write a bit more about his critique?

thanks!

I am ovo lacto vegeterian, but I will order the book because I want to be informed. I read about Paleo diet but also forums on the internet, and on the first view some statements especially about grains ( I mean oats, brown rice) need to be seriously checked, because the contra arguments are very strong, but I will check the book and analized.

There is one thing for sure, and that the meat industry love Paleo diet very much.

Lekman said:

There is one thing for sure, and that the meat industry love Paleo diet very much.

Actually not so much, as it is very much in favor of organic, grass fed, free range meat the thought of which the industry hates.

Mr Brady wrote

Actually not so much, as it is very much in favor of organic, grass fed, free range meat the thought of which the industry hates.

Dont depreciate their skills to camouflage and to sell new `green` product, unless someone have indenpendent source, or have wild goats in the backyards :wink:

Lekman said:

Mr Brady wrote

Actually not so much, as it is very much in favor of organic, grass fed, free range meat the thought of which the industry hates.

Dont depreciate their skills to camouflage and sell new `green` product, unless someone have indenpendent source, or have wild goats in the backyards :wink:

Good point! You always have to look at the source, if its from Safeway, it probably isn't.

ChenZhen said:

trianglechoke7 said:

Alan Aragon did a critique of Robb's interview with t-nation in his latest publication. I thought he raised some good points but also committed straw men fallacies in a couple others.

That's interesting! I greatly respect both of them, would you mind to write a bit more about his critique?

thanks!

A couple points but there is more:

(1) He quotes Robb as saying that a multitude of diseases can be cured by eliminating inflammation. Aragon argues that we don't know yet if inflammation causes the various diseases or the other way around. He further states that there are many causes of diseases.

(2) He cites studies showing that grains improve symptoms of intestinal issues, ergo, how can grains be bad for the gut if they improve the symptoms of people with gut problems?

(3) Aragon claims that Robb's advocacy of creatine contradicts himself because caveman didn't have creatine supplements. This is weak point by Aragon showing that he doesn't entirely understand Wolf's position.

Trianglechoke,

Would you be willing to post the references Alan uses for the grain argument? It seems to me the argument against grains based on phytates, wheat germ agglutinin, gluten, and aflatoxin is quite strong. I would like to see Alan's argument to these points.

There is no doubt that Refined Grains are not good for humans, and thats the industry product of the humans. but claims that natural grains like oats, quinoa, brown rice are not good now and cause diseases, doesnt make sense to me, like the hole world eating only nuts and brown rice and now there is a time to hunt and eat some meat for change. But the situation is different, In every possible place that I go in the world, in most cases people eat only meat and refined grains and lots of it. But now someone told you there is one micronutrients in all grains that (maybe) is not good for you, but what about meat ? Do you seriously think that every possible nutritient in meat are good for you ? Think twice. Sorry if I sounds a little bit ironical, but there is no one single truth and only one theory.

Add to the stew individual tolerances and life cycle.

On an anecdotal level, i was a vegetarian for 15 years, and at first thrived, then i lost energy etc, and went back to meat and feel great again.

I was just looking at Jon Hinds story, and its the opposite, meat was giving him joint problems (a common argument for going vegetarian) he went vegan and feels great. I saw him at the seminar, and he's clearly a vital healthy man.

It may be in another 15 years i'll be back on veg and him meat, who knows..?

I think we need some cycling in our overall diet as well, that most likely one lifelong approach doesn't exist. Just a thought. Right now i'm all ears for what Robb has to say.

Clearly science is so far off with this that research knowledge is only part of the story. The final test has to be 'does it work for me' if it does than be happy, and let others be happy with what works for them. If it doesn't then the work begins looking for a solution. It took me about a 16 months once i realized i needed to make some changes to find the combo of diet and supplements i'm happy with and can afford to maintain.

I'm really grateful to the information i found on this site as it was key to finding what worked for me, right now.

Lekman said:

There is no doubt that Refined Grains are not good for humans, and thats the industry product of the humans. but claims that natural grains like oats, quinoa, brown rice are not good now and cause diseases, doesnt make sense to me, like the hole world eating only nuts and brown rice and now there is a time to hunt and eat some meat for change. But the situation is different, In every possible place that I go in the world, in most cases people eat only meat and refined grains and lots of it. But now someone told you there is one micronutrients in all grains that (maybe) is not good for you, but what about meat ? Do you seriously think that every possible nutritient in meat are good for you ? Think twice. Sorry if I sounds a little bit ironical, but there is no one single truth and only one theory.

"Natural grains" still contain phytates, lectins, and aflatoxin. This is not "one micronutrient." Firstly, these are not nutrients, and secondly, it's more than one. Grains also lower cholesterol. Given that they have one good aspect and three bad ones it seems to me the bad outweighs the good. Obviously not everything about meat is good, nature is not benign, but unless you can show me a solid argument that meat is more bad than good, that argument doesn't mean anything to me. There seems to be a number of benefits to high quality protein that outweighs the risks of haem iron and heat induced carcinogens (both of these problems can incidentally be corrected by proper cooking and eating leafy greens with your meat, therefore reducing meat risk down to nearly zero). I think twice about everything I eat, which is why I'm always looking for more info from both sides so that I can make a well informed judgement. Given that eating is something you do everyday for your whole life I feel it is crucial to evaluate the risks and benefits of all foods consumed on a daily basis to be sure the benefits outweight the risks. Thank you though for being concerned that maybe I only thought it through once and that I must be under the impression there is only one truth. I assure this is not the case.

I would love a comparison between this and the other books on the topic,

The Primal Blueprint by Mark Sisson

and

The Paleo Diet for Athletes by L. Cordain.

Jay Guindon wrote:

"Natural grains" still contain phytates, lectins, and aflatoxin. This is not "one micronutrient." Firstly, these are not nutrients, and secondly, it's more than one. Grains also lower cholesterol. Given that they have one good aspect and three bad ones it seems to me the bad outweighs the good. Obviously not everything about meat is good, nature is not benign, but unless you can show me a solid argument that meat is more bad than good, that argument doesn't mean anything to me. There seems to be a number of benefits to high quality protein that outweighs the risks of haem iron and heat induced carcinogens (both of these problems can incidentally be corrected by proper cooking and eating leafy greens with your meat, therefore reducing meat risk down to nearly zero). I think twice about everything I eat, which is why I'm always looking for more info from both sides so that I can make a well informed judgement. Given that eating is something you do everyday for your whole life I feel it is crucial to evaluate the risks and benefits of all foods consumed on a daily basis to be sure the benefits outweight the risks. Thank you though for being concerned that maybe I only thought it through once and that I must be under the impression there is only one truth. I assure this is not the case.

My english is not so good, so maybe the word nutritient is not proper for what I want to say. For the rest, you did not read carefully some parts of the text. For healthy aspect dont look too much in `natural` grains, because people who eat them especially in the west are rare, and also if we eat them, Its very important to do it in proper small measure.Structurally speaking, we are 60% water so its crucial to eat more vegetables, fruits etc that contain more water, so there is too much lights on the wrong aspect of the healthy problems. But let forget all theories, and just look at as people in the mirror, and inside them. Why the god create our physics like this if he want as to be like wild predators. We are not so strong despite our size and the most people will run away if the home cat attack them. From outside,there is no any, and I mean any sign of body part of wild predators on humans bodies, and just look at our jaws and little power of them. Inside, your gastric acid is 10 times weaker compare to any wild predator who eat meat and thats not all. Why is that ? We are all looking for answers.

There is one thing, be aware of industry food products of any kind.

There is little dispute that humans are omnivores, eating both meat and vegetation. Human digestive systems are not the same as a true carnivore, like my cat, and not like a pure herbivore. Humans, despite not having strong natural weapons or physical capabilities, are nevertheless excellent hunters because of their ability to build and use technology, to communicate and act as a group, and to pass on and maintain information between generations.

Humans can obviously survive on grains, but there is growing evidence of a price that must be paid. For most people, the health consequences will be small in the short run, but could have real impact as the years progress.

I think almost everyone agrees that each person's digestion is somewhat particular and dynamic. Still, I am looking forward to learning more about how the whole system works.

[by the way, I am not associated with Mr. Wolf, the author. I just chose the forum name of Wolf with one Ear because Dork with no Thyroid didn't sound good. More accurate, though.]

I'm not sure that because we're 60% water we then must eat fruits and vegetables because they're mostly water. We can also just drink water. As far as the god made our physiology thing, I'm not going to get into a debate about religion but humans are well equipped to digest meat. Meat is also the only way humans could get B12 during our entire evolution, which is a required nutrient in our diet. We didn't have supplements until recently and we didn't consume dairy after we stopped breastfeeding. The very fact we require a nutrient that is only found in meat (and dairy, but we didn't consume dairy past early childhood and it was human milk, not animal milk) means we had to eat meat during our evolution. Many anthropologists and evolutionary biologists also believe it was our consumption of meat that lead to our divergence from chimpanzees. Learning to cook with fire and meat consumption are often argued, pretty successfully, as the very catalysts that made us the humans we are today. To say we have a physiology that is not well equipped to utilize meat is, I believe, erroneous. Anyways, I think this is maybe a subject we are going to have to agree to disagree on, so I won't be commenting on this specific issue anymore.

Jay Guindon said:

Trianglechoke,

Would you be willing to post the references Alan uses for the grain argument? It seems to me the argument against grains based on phytates, wheat germ agglutinin, gluten, and aflatoxin is quite strong. I would like to see Alan's argument to these points.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article ... ool=pubmed

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/pdf/10 ... 0802005894 (PDF)