Photos of recipes from the new book Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Photos of recipes from the cookbook Tender Grassfed Meat
When it Comes to Food, “One Size Fits All†Fits Nobody
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo credit: Jeffrey Beall
The recent confiscation of a four-year-old’s homemade lunch, which resulted in her being given chicken nuggets instead, has outraged people all over the United States. Many comments on the Internet have made it clear that this is not an isolated incident, but that many similar actions have occurred, not only in preschools, but in elementary schools as well.
The Federal government is attempting to dictate what constitutes a healthy meal, and what every child should eat. While the intent might be good, the execution is a disaster, as flawed standards are dictated, and these standards are required for every child, regardless of their individual needs. The basic human right of parents to select food for their children is completely ignored.
The inevitable result is that the children are much worse off, because their needs as individuals are ignored.
Federal Standards Ignore Quality and Individuality
The federal government has decided that all children in preschools, even home preschools, will have a lunch that consists of the following:
- One serving of meat or meat substitute;
- One serving of low-fat or nonfat milk;
- One serving of grain;
- Two servings of fruit and/or vegetables;
- Each serving size is set at three ounces.
No mention is made in the standards as to the quality of the food. The government standards treat all food as being of equal quality, and demand the same lunch for every child. The truth is that every kind of food varies greatly in quality, from heritage organic foods raised on small sustainable farms (the best), to factory foods raised on huge factory farms that are lacking in many vital nutrients, and are full of pesticides and other chemicals, often containing GMOs and soy protein isolate (the worst).
The government programs often mandate that the cheapest source of the required foods be selected, which guarantees that the worst quality food is selected for government-financed food programs. Yet the government insists that each lunch must contain the required servings, and ignores the issue of quality.
Lunch Inspections Lead to Worse Nutrition, Not Better
The incident that sparked so much outrage deserves a close look. A four-year-old preschool student brought a lunch prepared for her by her family. The lunch included a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, a bag of potato chips, and some apple juice. Her lunch was INSPECTED, by some kind of official. This resulted in the child being told that the lunch her family packed was not good enough. She was told to put the home lunch away and to get a cafeteria lunch. The only portion of the cafeteria lunch that the child actually ate was three chicken nuggets. The nuggets, since they had to be the cheapest available, almost certainly were made from slaughterhouse scraps treated with ammonia, the infamous pink slime. Soy protein isolate was almost certainly added to this mix, along with artificial flavor enhancers and who knows what else.
Does anyone seriously contend that this child got a better lunch than the one her family packed for her?
By trying to force the child to eat the one-size-fits-all government lunch, the government deprived her of a good lunch and caused her to have the equivalent of no lunch at all.
In fact, government interference resulted in her having a truly inadequate lunch, rather than the much more nutritious lunch packed for her by her family, consisting of foods that her family knew she would eat.
The incident was later blamed on “teacher error,†by a school district administrator. Yet even this administrator said the child should have been given a container of milk. This must have been the cheapest possible low-fat or non-fat factory milk. What if the child was allergic to milk, as so many children are? What if her parents did not want her to drink that type of milk? What if milk gave her indigestion? What if they wanted her to drink only high-quality organic milk? What if they did not want her to drink milk at all? What if they knew the child would not drink milk, but would eat the cheese they put in her sandwich?
The point is, the government does not know any of these details, and does not appear to care. To them, one-size-fits-all, every child gets a carton of factory milk, whether they or their parents want it, or not. Whether it is good for the child, or not. That is exactly why the government should not be making food choices for children, why parents know best, and why one size fits NOBODY, when it comes to food.
Here is a link to a great post by my friend, Kimberly Hartke: Keep America Safe for Brown Bags!
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Before Weight Loss Surgery — Try Grassfed Fat
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Pastured butter—this is what people used to eat to lose weight.
The FDA recently claimed that some advertisers of “Lap Band†weight loss surgeries were not properly disclosing the many dangers of the procedure.
It is a total mystery to me why anyone would accept the risks of surgery if they had any alternative. Why anybody would accept mutilation, internal scarring, and the insertion of a foreign device into their bodies. To have this done for the purpose of losing weight is incomprehensible to me.
But it is supposed to be so hard to lose weight, and to keep the weight off. And weight loss surgeries like gastric bypasses and the “Lap Band†are supposed to make it easy.
But there is a much safer and ultimately easier way that will work for most people. A way that was in common use before World War II, from a time when obesity was very rare. A way that is simple and effective. This is the “secret†that was commonly used in the early twentieth century, with great success—eat a low-carb, high-fat diet.
Weight Loss Before
Before animal fat was demonized by the completely discredited “lipid hypothesis,†there was no massive diet industry. There were no surgeries for weight loss. There was very little obesity. If somebody wanted to lose weight, the common medical response was to prescribe a low-carb, high-fat diet. This was so effective in achieving weight loss that obesity was not a problem. And people did not suffer from malnourishment with such a diet, as grassfed animal fat is one of the most nutrient-dense substances on Earth.
The food at that time was also different. There was much less processed food. Meat was always grassfed and grass-finished. While there was far too much sugar in the diets of many people, going on a low-carb, high-fat diet would remove the sugar-heavy foods and the carbohydrate-rich foods. People who went on the low-carb, high-fat diet would usually eat large amounts of pastured animal fats such as butter, lard, beef tallow, and fatty meats, from animals that were grassfed and pastured. The fat of grassfed animals is rich in CLA, a nutrient that actually reduces body fat. It was not hard for most people to stay on such a diet, because the animal fats are so satisfying.
Weighing too much was simply not a problem for most people, and when it was a problem, there was an easy solution that worked for almost everybody.
And there was no market for a huge diet industry.
The Change
Obesity started to become a huge problem after World War II. The fear of cholesterol was created, and eating fat was identified with consuming cholesterol. Animals in the U.S. were finished in feedlots, a practice that resulted in the animal losing almost all the CLA in its meat and fat. Doctors stopped prescribing the low-carb, high-fat diets that had been so effective in the past, because of the fear of animal fat. People ate more and more high-carbohydrate, processed foods, more sugar, and more food additives. At the same time, they greatly reduced their consumption of animal fats and greatly increased their consumption of vegetable oils that could only be made with modern technology.
The result? Americans became fatter, and fatter, and fatter. The diet industry was born.
Weight Loss Now
You would think that something would have been learned about the fact that high-carbohydrate, low-fat diets make people fat, after decades of experience. And you would be right. Unfortunately, one of the things that was learned is that such a diet would make huge numbers of people fat, and that a fortune could be made by keeping them fat and giving them weight loss programs that would provide only temporary relief. Thus, we have a multi-billion-dollar diet industry, a segment of the medical industry that “treats†obesity, and millions of suffering people who are exploited by these industries.
Millions of people starve themselves, and exercise themselves into exhaustion as they follow these programs and get advice from medical professionals, in a desperate attempt to lose weight. Most people who lose weight, after much effort, suffering, and expense, gain it back, and the whole horrible cycle starts again.
This has led to the creation of “weight loss†surgical procedures, which promise an easy way to keep weight off. Two of the most popular are gastric bypasses and “Lap Bands.â€
A gastric bypass actually involves stapling the stomach, and rerouting the food digestion so the small intestine is avoided. Normally, all food passes through the small intestine, which is crucial to digestion. This make it impossible for the body to function properly in digesting food, which leads to weight loss.
A “Lap Band†involves the surgical, interior attachment of an inflatable belt around the stomach. The belt constricts the size of the stomach, so it cannot expand to hold more food to digest. This makes it impossible for the stomach to function properly in digesting food, which also leads to weight loss.
Both of these procedures have many risks and a high chance of serious side effects, which often lead to more surgeries to try to correct the problems that arise.
The Solution
My own personal experience has convinced me that the best way to deal with almost any body issue is to strengthen the natural functions of the body, by eating a nourishing traditional diet, full of foods rich in pastured animal fat. Surgeries that interfere with and disable the natural functions of the body are something that I would never agree to.
If weight is the issue, the low-carb, high-fat diet is tried and true. It is important to eat only real food and grassfed meats when you are on such a diet, as those were the foods available when the diet was common and obesity was rare.
I am not giving medical advice, just writing about how things were done and about my own experience. If you have a medical issue, you should consult a medical professional, preferably one who treats each patient as an individual and is open to new ideas.
There are many such diets, with the Atkins diet being the most famous. The book “Eat Fat, Lose Fat†by Sally Fallon Morell, describes an effective high-fat diet, using a Weston A. Price perspective. My friend Jimmy Moore is devoted to providing information on low-carb, high-fat diets, and there is a ton of useful information on his website, Livin’ La Vida Low-Carb Blog. Jimmy will also answer questions about the subject by email.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday, and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Aging in Reverse with Real Food—Then and Now
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
photo  credit: 4johnny5  The redwood tree gets stronger and more beautiful with age.
My wife gave me a wonderful gift for Christmas. A DVD showing photos of our son when he was a baby and a small child. He looked great, and it was amazing to see how tiny he used to be. But there was someone else in some of the photos. Someone who did not look great. Someone who looked sick and strained, even at the happy times when these photos were taken. That someone used to be me.
These photos were taken from twelve to seventeen years ago. The man in those photos looks so much older, weaker, and sicker than I look today. The difference is so remarkable that I think it is worth describing. It is a living testimony of the difference that switching to real food can make.
The Skin—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos has pale, pasty skin, quite blotchy, with a very unhealthy pallor. I remember that it was often itchy and irritated, with small growths that would come and go.
Now. My skin is smooth, supple, and a healthy color. It is hardly ever itchy and never irritated. The growths are gone.
The Mouth and Breathing—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos always had his mouth wide open, and often appeared to be gasping for breath. I remember that I was on many medications for asthma and the constant respiratory infections I was afflicted with. I saw doctors frequently and occasionally had to be rushed to the emergency room when I got an asthma attack that the medication could not control. I remember that I could never get enough air, and could only breathe through my mouth. Often breathing and gasping for air would end with a nasty, painful hacking cough.
Now. My mouth is shut unless I am talking, or eating, or laughing. I breathe easily through my nose at all times. I hardly ever notice my breathing, which is effortless. I do not cough, or gasp, or choke. I am on no medications (over-the-counter or otherwise), and have not seen a doctor for at least nine years.
The Hair—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos had dull, damp, thin, coarse hair that looked like it was about to fall out. I remember that I was losing hair, with ever growing bald spots.
Now. My hair is lighter in color, with a fair mixture of gray. But it is very thick, and gleams. It is soft and full-bodied. It never falls out. In fact, the bald spots seem to be shrinking a bit.
The Eyes—Then and Now
Then. The man in the pictures often had a look of pain in his eyes, even at the happy times when those pictures were taken. I remember that I was almost always in pain, with all kinds of discomforts, aches, and soreness—all over my body.
Now. My eyes are calm and serene. Many people tell me I have “kind eyes.†I usually feel good, with no pain or discomfort of any kind. When there is an occasional bump or ache, it goes away very quickly.
Posture—Then and Now
Then. The man in the photos is always slumped, whether sitting or standing. I remember that it seemed hard to hold my head up, to sit or stand straight, as I was so tired all the time. It was so hard just to get out of bed in the morning.
Now. I sit and stand straight naturally, without even thinking about it. I am full of energy most of the day and much of the night. I am eager for the day, which is always full of good things. I leap out of bed without effort.
What Did I Do Differently?
I switched completely to real food, in particular, grassfed meat, and stopped eating processed and factory foods. I followed the dietary guidelines of the Weston A. Price Foundation, modifying them a bit to eat only meats that are grassfed and grass-finished. It took years, but all my many illnesses healed, and I have had no need for drugs or doctors.
This is what real food can do.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, and Real Food Wednesday blog carnivals.
CLA—Another Great Reason to Eat Grassfed Meat, the Fatter the Better
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
This picanha (New York tip) roast has a great fat cap, full of CLA.
Where do you find the nutrients our bodies need in these days of industrial agriculture? We are given nutritional advice by the powers that be which is motivated by profit only. Food is not what it used to be. Hybrid varieties are developed for shelf life, not nutrition. Meat animals are fed unnatural feeds (as well as growth hormones and antibiotics) to make them fatten faster and to increase profits. Factory food has made it hard to get essential nutrients. Soils depleted and contaminated by pesticides and artificial fertilizers compound the problem.
My solution is to eat the pure foods of our ancestors, unmodified, raised and cooked in traditional ways. Eating this way has brought me back to good health and greatly increased my enjoyment of food, because real food tastes so much better. Many other people have found the same solution. Every now and them, research comes through that supports the real food way of eating, and science confirms what instinct and feeling good has already told us—real food is good for us, and gives our bodies what is needed to support the natural functions that keep us healthy and strong.
However, many people have turned to using nutritional supplements as a solution. These supplements vary widely in their content and purity. Let me put it this way. What if a substance was developed that would give the following benefits?
- Increases the metabolic rate
- Increases muscle mass while reducing fat
- Decreases abdominal fat
- Strengthens the immune system
- Reduces the risk of cancer
- Reduces the risk of heart disease
- Reduces the risk of diabetes
- Reduces the risk of hyperthyroidism
- Normalizes thyroid function
Would you want to take a supplement that contained this very beneficial substance?
Well, you do not have to. Various studies have shown that all of the benefits listed above come from eating food containing Conjugated Linoleic Acid, more commonly known as CLA.
The very best source of CLA is grassfed meat and fat, which are rich in this wonderful nutrient. CLA is a very useful nutrient that is used by the natural functions of our bodies to create all of the benefits listed above.
CLA is found in its most digestible form in the fat and marbling of grassfed animals. This is yet another reason to eat the fat on and in grassfed meat, and to get well-marbled grassfed meat, rather than the leaner grassfed meat.
The CLA from grassfed animals is not the same as CLA from plant sources, or in supplement pills based on plant sources. CLA is much more abundant in the meat of grassfed and grass-finished animals than in feedlot meat. Almost all meat animals are started on grass, but are finished in a feedlot, eating foods that are not natural for their species, such as processed grains, GMO-corn and GMO-soy, and a host of other things that were never part of the natural diet of any herbivore, often including such substances as chicken manure, cement dust, restaurant plate waste, and even plastic balls. Studies have shown that grassfed meat contains three to five times more CLA than factory meat. The fattier the grassfed meat, the more CLA it contains. (Source What Is CLA?)
Not only does grassfed meat and fat contain 300% — 500% the CLA of feedlot meat, the grassfed meat also contains many substances that promote the absorption of the CLA. It is not known whether factory meat contains these substances, or in what amount. It has been shown that feedlots can cause the amount of nutrients in the meat to greatly decline. For example, the amount of omega-3 fatty acids in meat almost vanishes by a typical stay in the feedlot. (Source Health Benefits of Grass-Fed Products)
While CLA can also be found in dairy products from grassfed and grass-finished cows, I believe that grassfed meat and fat are the richest source, and the easiest to absorb.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Why Grassfed Meat Is Better
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue
Grassfed Butter Steak, Tender Grassfed Barbecue, page 76
One of the questions I get asked most often is this—“What is different about grassfed beef?â€
Many people seem to think the only difference is that grassfed beef is “always tough,†and that grassfed beef lacks the “great flavor†that is supposed to come from “corn feeding.†I have found that properly cooked grassfed meat is very tender, has much more flavor, and a much better texture than conventional beef.
There are many important differences between grassfed and conventional meat. The very composition and content of the meat is very different.
Because of the vast difference in the qualities of the meat, grassfed meat is best when cooked differently than conventional, “corn-fed†meat.
How Grassfed Meat Is Different
Grassfed Meat Is an Ancient Food
Grassfed meat, coming from herbivorous animals eating their natural diet of grass and meadow plants, is one of the oldest foods of mankind, maybe the oldest. This means that the human body has adapted over uncounted thousands of years to digest and process this meat. Our bodies know the composition of grassfed meat, and how to absorb nutrients from it, and expect to find all those nutrients there when they digest the meat. Conventional meat has a totally different nutritional profile, and had not been eaten by humans until the twentieth century. Grassfed meat, fat, and bones are perhaps the most primal of foods.
Grassfed Meat Has Superior Nutritional Value
Grassfed meat has the proper balance of omega-3 fatty acids to omega-6 fatty acids, containing far more omega-3s than conventional meat. Grassfed meat is also rich with CLA, a valuable nutrient that has many benefits. Conventional meat has a much higher ratio of omega-6 fatty acids, one that does not occur in naturally-fed meat. Conventional feedlot beef has far less CLA and omega-3 fatty acids than grassfed meat. Grassfed meat is also richer than conventional meat in many other nutrients.
Grassfed Meat Has Far Less Water and Should Be Cooked Differently
Grassfed meat is denser than conventional beef, and shrinks far less in cooking. Conventional meat is often quite watery, and that water cooks away when the meat is cooked, resulting in much more shrinkage. The need to deal with the water has led to the development of modern meat-cooking techniques, which will ruin grassfed meat. Because grassfed meat has far less water, it is best when cooked differently than conventional beef.
Grassfed Beef Tastes Much Better
Properly cooked grassfed meat is not tough, but tender, and has much better flavor than conventional meat. I can no longer stand the taste and texture of conventional meat, because grassfed meat tastes so much better. Grassfed meat from different breeds and producers taste different, in many wonderful ways, providing a wonderful variety of deep, rich flavors. The best comparison is with the many varieties of fine wine, which have many different tastes. Conventional beef always tastes the same—blah.
Grassfed Meat Cooks Faster and Easier
Grassfed meat cooks much faster than conventional meat, and is much easier to cook. This statement may surprise some people, but grassfed meat has so much flavor that it needs far less in the way of spices and sauces to be absolutely delicious. When you know the right techniques for cooking grassfed meat, it is very easy to cook. Tender Grassfed Meat: Traditional Ways to Cook Healthy Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue: Traditional, Primal and Paleo are both full of easy ways to cook delicious grassfed meat.
There are many other differences, but these are the major ones. Tender Grassfed Meat and Tender Grassfed Barbecue both cover the subject in detail, pointing out the many differences in the composition and cooking qualities of grassfed and conventional meats.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Fat Tuesday, Real Food Wednesday and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Eating the Whole Wild Fish
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat
photo credit: phoosh
Why does a blog devoted to grassfed meat mention fish? I eat fish too. I consider some seafood to be important for a balanced diet.
But more importantly, the quality of most fish sold in the U.S. has become just as compromised as the quality of feedlot beef.
Today I had an absolutely fantastic whole wild fish for lunch, which inspired me.
Farmed Fish are Not the Same as Wild Fish
When I was a child, just about all fish were wild, eating their natural food, which was usually a smaller kind of fish. Fish were often very fresh, often caught near the place where they were sold, and packed with all kinds of nutrients that they received from their natural diet. Fish were also very cheap, except for a few very expensive varieties.
In some areas (especially Asia), freshwater fish were farmed in tranquil ponds, ponds that were full of the natural food of such fish.
Times sure have changed. Most fish sold in U.S. stores have been farmed and frozen. The fish at fish farms are fed a variety of substances, but the feed often contains substantial amounts of GMO soy, something that was never fed to fish before. Much fish feed consists of various kinds of fishmeal, which consists of the bodies of smaller fish that have gone through industrial processing to be turned into meal. Other substances are also used, which are not part of the natural diet of fish.
I have not seen any studies, but wild fish eating their natural diet tastes much better to me than any farmed fish. When food is natural, truly natural, the way it tastes is a message to you from your body as to whether you should keep eating it. I believe this to be a good indication of how nutritious the food is. Obviously, the use of chemicals and flavor enhancers can confuse this taste system, which is yet another good reason to eat only food that is free of chemicals and unprocessed. Good food is also satisfying, meaning you do not have to eat huge amounts of it to be satiated and full. I have found farmed fish to be watery and tasteless. Farmed fish never satisfied me.
The oceans, lakes, and rivers have become seriously polluted, and some of the pollutants find their way into the fat and flesh of some fish. Mercury especially is a concern.
Even the wild fish you buy may have been frozen twice, if it is cut into fillets. That is because these fish are frozen when they are caught, then shipped to China where they are defrosted, cut into fillets, and refrozen, then shipped back to the U.S. to be sold in the markets. They are often defrosted a second time and put on the counter.
Fish has also become very expensive, farmed or wild.
Most people only see fish in the form of boneless, skinless fish fillets. This was not the way our ancestors ate fish. Wild fish were caught, and often cooked the same day, whole, with all their nutrients. Large fish were often cut into thin strips, and dried or fermented to provide food that could be stored. Some medium-size fish were preserved by smoking and salting, as were pieces of larger fish. Some fish were cut up and preserved by salting. Salt cod became a staple food all over Europe.
How I Find Healthy Wild Fish
It took a while, but I finally found a way to get wild fish that satisfies me.
The best way to get fish is to catch your own, preferably from waters that are only lightly polluted, and process them yourself. This is beyond the circumstances of many of us.
What I do is buy small or medium-sized whole fish, and cook the whole thing in one piece. Best to leave the head on for flavor, but you do not have to. I will later use the bones and head for fish broth, a wonderful elixir that is said to cure anything. There is an excellent recipe for fish broth in Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon Morell.
I try to buy fish from the less polluted waters such as Alaskan waters.
The small size of the fish means that it has not absorbed much mercury.
The fact that it is whole means it has not been filleted in China, with the necessary defrosting and refreezing.
The fact that it is wild means that it was eating its natural diet when caught, and should be rich in nutrients.
I will also buy fillets if they appear to have been frozen only once, and have not gone the China route. A few wonderful markets process whole fish and cut them into fillets themselves, rather than subcontracting the job to China.
I will even buy flash-frozen fish fillets, as flash freezing of a quickly frozen fish preserves freshness (though it can never compare with a truly fresh fish), if I am convinced that it was only frozen once.
Just like grassfed meat is vastly superior to the industrial variety in taste and nutrition—whole wild fish are far superior to the farmed variety.
This post is part of Monday Mania, Real Food Wednesday and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Related Post
Smelt Soup for Natural Iodine
A Real Paleo Diet — Grassfed Meat, Fat, and Organ Meats
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat
photo credit: tuchodi
The idea behind the Paleo diet makes a great deal of sense. For tens of thousands of years, humans have been eating the foods available during the Paleolithic period. Our bodies have adapted to use these foods and easily digest and process them. Our bodies know how to use the nutrients in these foods, and how to dispose of the waste in these foods.
But what is the Paleo diet? What did Paleolithic peoples really eat?
The Paleo diet is generally agreed to consist of foods that were only available during the Paleolithic period, before agriculture and the keeping of domestic animal herds had been developed. All grains, dairy products, all modern processed foods and oils are excluded. Wild meat, fish, roots, shellfish, berries, fruits, eggs, some tree nuts, vegetables, and edible fungi such as mushrooms are included.
Some say that the Paleo diet should be meat-heavy. with an emphasis on lean meats. Others say it can be mostly fruits and vegetables. Some say it should be high-fat, and others say it should be low-fat. But what did the Paleolithic peoples really eat?
A true Paleolithic diet was discovered and recorded by Dr. Weston A. Price, the great food researcher. In 1933, Dr. Price visited a native people living in the far north of Canada, far from the sea. These people were eating the same diet their ancestors had, consisting only of foods that were readily available during the Paleolithic period.
These people had no agriculture, and no herds. They were so far north that they were deprived of all fruits and vegetables for most of the year. They were far from the sea, and the rivers were so frozen that there were no fish. In fact, they ate very little other than the wild animals they hunted, often moose.
They ate not only the meat of the animals, but the organs, and the fat, especially the fat. Meat was always eaten with fat. They also ate bone marrow, chewed on the bones, and used the bones in cooking. The animals they ate were mainly herbivores, grass-eaters, so they were eating grassfed meat and fat, and the organs of grassfed animals. And just about nothing else.
Dr. Price found that these people were in excellent health, strong, happy, and vital. Though the temperature would often be seventy below zero during the long, cold winters, these people had learned how to keep warm and well-fed. The women would give birth quickly and easily, to healthy children who were free of birth defects. They had no dentists, and no cavities. Despite the extreme cold, nobody had arthritis. They did not have heart disease or cancer. They did not have diabetes or any of the chronic diseases so common in the modern world.
Dr. Price wanted to know why they did not get scurvy, a disease caused by the lack of Vitamin C that causes teeth to fall out, and eventually results in death. Dr. Price learned that they got the Vitamin C they needed by eating the adrenal glands and second stomachs of the animals they hunted. Scientific research later confirmed that the adrenal glands of grassfed animals were the richest known source of Vitamin C, containing far more than any fruit or vegetable. These native people knew what part of the animal to eat, so they could get the nutrition they needed. In fact, they got all their vitamins and minerals from the fat, organs and bones of the animals they hunted.
These people were so free from crime that nobody locked their doors, and nothing was ever stolen.
After Dr. Price left these people, he traveled south, and studied the native peoples he met on the way. Many of these people had adopted modern food like jam, sugar, syrup, and bread. The native peoples eating modern foods were riddled with disease, many suffering from crippling arthritis. Tuberculosis, cancer, and tooth decay were very common.
Dr. Price’s research described a true Paleolithic diet, and the wonderful health of the people who followed it.
While this is not the only Paleolithic diet, it shows how beneficial a true Paleolithic diet can be.
This post is part of Monday Mania and Real Food Wednesday blog carnivals.
Diabetes Study Proves Nothing about Grassfed Meat
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat
photo credit: Alan Vernon. Bison grazing in Yellowstone National Park.
Once again, we are hit with yet another study claiming that red meat increases our chances of getting a horrible disease—Type 2 diabetes. It joins a host of other studies claiming that eating red meat increases the chances of just about every chronic disease you can think of. In fact, since humanity ate mainly red meat and saturated animal fat for most of its existence, we must be extinct, since all those diseases would have wiped us out long ago, when we got almost all our calories from meat and fat. All of these studies still have one thing in common. They totally fail to distinguish between the factory meat that did not exist until the twentieth century; and grassfed and wild meat, which has been the basic food of humanity for most of its existence. Since all the studies claiming that meat is unhealthy are based on people eating factory meat, these studies are totally meaningless when it comes to grassfed meat.
Grassfed Meat Is Different
There are many differences between the composition of grassfed meat, and factory meat.
Grassfed Meat Has:
- A perfect balance of omega-3 fatty acids to omega-6 fatty acids;
- Considerably more CLA (conjugated linoleic acid);
- The benefits of having the animals eat the food they were evolved to eat, which is natural for them;
- A natural balance of nutrients, which our bodies have evolved to use over hundreds of thousands of years, if not more.
Factory Meat Has:
- A gross imbalance of omega-6 fatty acids to omega-3 fatty acids, which does not occur in nature;
- Far less CLA;
- The detriments of having the animals eat a totally unnatural diet in the feedlot, including GMO soy, GMO corn, animal by-products, restaurant waste, and many other things that were never the natural food of grass-eating animals;
- An unnatural balance of substances in the meat, often including growth hormones, antibiotics, chemical residues, and others.
The very composition of the two kinds of meat is so different that consumption of factory meat is very different than eating grassfed meat.
The Study Fails to Prove that Eating Red Meat Increases the Risk of Diabetes
As I once wrote before, it is crucial to study the study before you blindly believe the conclusions drawn from the data. I have carefully looked at the latest study, and my own opinion is that it has no proof that any kind of unprocessed meat increases the risk of diabetes.
Why did I reach this conclusion?
The study concluded that eating red meat was associated with an increase in Type 2 diabetes, and seemed to recommend that people stop eating red meat on a regular basis.
But the data was inconclusive, with even the scientists who conducted the study admitting that it was hard to pinpoint the actual dietary factors that caused an increase in Type 2 diabetes risk.
The study was limited to roughly 60,000 doctors and nurses, and consisted mainly of reviewing food questionnaires sent in by the participants over a multi-year period.
The study did find a correlation in increased Type 2 diabetes risk by those who ate the most red meat. The increase for those who ate unprocessed meat was approximately one-third the risk increase of those who ate processed meat. But the data also showed the following:
- Those who ate more meat also consumed more sugary soft drinks;
- Those who ate more meat also ate considerably more calories, which almost certainly included a lot of refined high-carbohydrate foods;
- Those who ate more meat drank more alcohol.
Many studies and other research have shown that increased consumption of sugar (from the soft drinks), alcohol, and refined high-carb foods is directly related to causing Type 2 diabetes.
The people who ate more sugar, more alcohol, and more refined carbohydrates had a higher incidence of diabetes, which is exactly what you would expect, regardless of their meat consumption. Since we know that sugar, refined carbohydrates, and alcohol can cause Type 2 diabetes, the amount of meat eaten proves nothing.
But what about the result that eating processed meat had a much higher risk factor than eating unprocessed meat?
The answer is simple. Almost all factory-processed meats contain substantial amounts of added sugar, whether in the form of sucrose, fructose, dextrose, or just sugar. In addition, almost all factory-processed meats contain substantial amounts of industrial salt, which often has sugar added to it. In other words, the people who consume more of these processed meats are consuming more sugar. In other words, the sugar added to the processed meat would increase the risk of Type 2 diabetes, all by itself.
It is totally unknown whether the consumption of meat has any relevance at all to the risk of Type 2 diabetes, because you cannot separate it from the consumption of sugar and refined carbohydrates in this study. It is impossible to know whether the increase was caused just by the higher intake of sugar, alcohol, and refined carbohydrates; or by the combination of this with more red meat; or by red meat alone.
Although I believe the researchers to be sincere, their conclusion that red meat causes an increase in the risk of Type 2 diabetes is not supported by the data in their study, in my opinion. It is also clear from reviewing the remarks of the researchers in various articles that they already believed that eating red meat is unhealthy.
I will point out that this study, like all the others, failed to distinguish between eating grassfed meat and factory meat.
But there is an earlier study that addressed the affect of eating wild and grassfed meat on chronic disease. Dr. Weston A. Price spent ten years traveling around the world to study the diets of traditional peoples. Most of the peoples he studied ate plenty of wild game, and/or grassfed meat and fat. As long as these people ate their traditional diet, they had none of the chronic diseases common to the modern world. They had no cancer. They had no heart disease. And they had no Type 2 diabetes.
It is reasonable to conclude that if eating red meat caused Type 2 diabetes, the peoples studied by Dr. Price would have a diabetes epidemic, because they ate so much wild and grassfed red meat. But since they had no diabetes at all, it is equally reasonable to conclude that eating wild or grassfed red meat did not increase the risk of Type 2 diabetes. I will also point out that these people did not eat sugar or refined carbohydrates, and their diet was considerably lower in carbohydrates than modern diets. Of course many other factors were involved, but you cannot deny the fact that they ate large amounts of wild and grassfed red meat, and they did not get diabetes.
As a personal observation, I know many people, including myself, who eat red grassfed meat on a regular basis. I eat it almost every day, sometimes several times a day. I love it. It makes me feel good and gives me strength. None of those people, including me, have any symptoms of Type 2 diabetes. Not a scientific study, just real life observation.
Finally, I do not eat factory meat. It tastes like blah, and makes me feel stuffed rather than great. I love grassfed meat!
This post is part of Monday Mania, Real Food Wednesday and Fight Back Friday blog carnivals.
Traditional Drink Cools and Restores Nutrients
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat
Cool, refreshing, nutritious traditional drink Ayran.
The United States is suffering from a widespread heat wave. The heat causes people to lose electrolytes, water, and minerals through sweating. Traditional peoples also suffered from hot weather. But they developed their own ways of cooling down. One of the oldest and easiest is a drink called Ayran, which also has other names.
Ayran was probably developed in Turkey, but it is widely used in the Middle East and the Balkans. While there are only two to four ingredients, the details and proportions differ, and there are many different versions.
Ayran includes old-fashioned, full-fat unflavored yogurt, and water. Salt is often added, sometimes mint leaves. The yogurt is full of nutrients that replenish a sweating body. The fat in the yogurt also provides energy. The salt not only replenishes lost salts, but minerals. The drink is very cooling and refreshing, and really helps deal with the heat. Ayran has no sweeteners and no chemicals, being a very pure drink.
It is best to use organic or the equivalent full-fat plain yogurt, which is what was used traditionally. Unrefined sea salt is ideal for this recipe, as it contains many minerals.
It is quite common for the drink to separate in the refrigerator. If this happens, a brisk stirring with a long fork will solve the problem.
Here is the version I like best:
Makes one quart. (You can double the recipe if you wish.)
INGREDIENTS
1 pound full-fat unflavored yogurt, preferably organic or the equivalent
2 cups cold filtered water
½ teaspoon unrefined sea salt
- Combine all ingredients in a blender or mixer. Blend for 1 minute.
- Chill in the refrigerator for at least 1 hour.
- If the mixture has separated, stir briskly until it recombines, which should happen very quickly.
Serve and enjoy this cooling drink.
This post is part of Weekend Gourmet, Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday and Monday Mania blog carnivals.
Finally! Modern Study Proves the Benefits of Grassfed Meat
By Stanley A. Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat
Eating this delicious grassfed steak will increase the omega-3s in your bloodstream. Much tastier than fish oil!
I have been convinced for a long time that eating grassfed meat is much healthier than eating feedlot factory meat. Our ancestors ate grassfed meat, and thrived on it. The healthy peoples studied by Dr. Weston A. Price ate grassfed and wild meat, and thrived on it. Many studies have shown that grassfed and grass-finished meats have much higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids, a perfect balance of omega-3 fatty acids to omega-6 fatty acids, and a much higher level of CLA.
But the factory meat industry has been able to produce other studies claiming that the difference in omega-3 fatty acid content between grass-finished and feedlot meat is minimal. It has also been claimed that any difference is meaningless, since the omega-3 fatty acids are supposedly destroyed when cooked.
Yet there has been no study on the issue of whether people actually get more omega-3 fatty acids when eating grassfed and grass-finished meat instead of feedlot meat. Until now.
An Irish study, reported in the British Journal of Nutrition has shown that people who eat grassfed meat have significantly higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids in their blood when compared to people eating feedlot meat.
The study was of healthy people. All the meat eaten by one group was grassfed and grass-finished. All the meat eaten by the other group was feedlot meat. I assume the meat was cooked, as the abstract of the study would have mentioned if the meat was raw. After four weeks, the blood of the two groups was tested.
The blood of the group that ate grassfed meat showed significant increases in omega-3 fatty acid levels. It fact, the increase was so dramatic that it was comparable to the omega-3 levels of people taking fish oil capsules. The omega-3 levels in the blood of the group eating feedlot meat were much lower than the grassfed group.
This is very important, because the Standard American Diet (SAD) is totally unbalanced in favor of omega-6 fatty acids. Most Americans have a large imbalance of omega-6 fatty acids.
An excess of omega-6 fatty acids has been associated with a substantially increased risk of cancer, heart disease, obesity, rapid aging, and many other problems. Many doctors advise their patients to take fish oil capsules to help with the imbalance, as a proper balance can help reduce the risk of all these illnesses.
I would much rather enjoy the wonderful taste and tenderness of grassfed meat, as a delicious way to increase the omega-3s in my blood.
In other words, I will continue to eat grassfed meat as a way to support the natural functioning of my heart and body. I will also continue to eat grassfed meat because it tastes so much better.
Now we finally have a well-conducted scientific study that confirms the lessons of history, tradition, and common sense—grassfed and grass-finished meat is much better than feedlot meat.
This post is part of Real Food Wednesday, Fight Back Friday and Monday Mania blog carnivals.
« Previous Page — Next Page »