The Ultimate Diet

by D.M. Murdock

Over the years, many diets have been proposed that not only help someone lose weight but also increase health and, possibly, human lifespan. In experiments with animals, diet has consistently had a very pronounced effect on the animal's longevity. It is clear that the consumption of whole foods, as opposed to denatured, refined and processed foods, increases health, well-being and longevity. It is also evident that we must go even further "back to nature" in increasing the amount of organic whole foods we consume. Can someone live a fairly long life consuming little but junkfood? It may be possible, as there are always exceptions to the rule, such as long-lived individuals who smoke and drink, but it is a smarter bet to put your money on organic foods.

Do we really need to live an extremely regimented life with no fun - and no taste?

First of all, organic whole foods tend to taste better than their pesticide-ridden, denatured counterparts. We've come a long way in our return to nature, foodwise. The organic bounty is not only flavorful but abundant again in many parts of the world. It is always advisable to eat as good a diet as is possible. 

However, there is evidence that we need not be strictly regimented in our diets all the time. Individuals such as Jeanne Calment - the oldest documented person, who died at 122 - have not been particularly fussy about their diets. It is evident that attitude towards life counts a great deal towards longevity.

We must thus also consider the ability to experience joy and happiness in life - a priceless commodity in many parts of the world, unfortunately. As is well known, stress plays an important life in the matters of health and longevity. But, whether or not stress is helpful or harmful seems to be up in the air. Experiments have shown that undue stress will shorten the lifespan; yet, it is also attested by scientific data that stress can increase longevity! How are we to deal with this apparent contradiction? One good way would be to not stress too much over stress. In other words, having fun can go a long way.

Protein: How Much is Enough?

The Great Protein Debate seems to have been going on forever, with opinion all over the map. Some claim that we can rarely get enough protein, while others believe that Americans, for example, eat far too much. One thing seems to be clear: strict vegetarians or vegans do not get enough protein. How do we know this assertion to be true? Not to be unkind, but one look at them usually illustrates the picture. In past centuries what we call "veganism" today would have been considered malnutrition. Sagging, wrinkled skin, loss of muscle tone and decaying or lost teeth - these are frequently associated with veganism, as well as with malnutrition. Many compassionate souls would love to be able to subsist off nothing but vegetables, grains, fruits, etc., but we simply cannot - and it is highly debatable whether or not such a diet can increase longevity at all. Proponents of such diets as "Macrobiotics" claim that they do. However, to be truly "macrobiotic," which means "large life," one needs to incorporate one's genetic heritage, which might mean, for example, that a person of Northern European descent craves and needs dairy products and fish. At this time, only one or two cultures are able to maintain a vegan diet without ill effects. Naturally, whether or not a person can be a vegan may be dependent on the individual. Nevertheless, caution is advised in strictly adhering to any diet that appears to be faddish. The standard Macrobiotic diet is generally deficient in protein, calcium and vitamin C, to name a few of the most evident nutrients.

The healthiest sources of animal protein are grass-fed, free-range organic beef; cage-free, organic chicken; wild fish; organic eggs from cage-free chickens; and raw, certified organic dairy products, especially goat milk. It may be difficult to get these products, especially the raw dairy products. Raw cheese is more freely available. It may also be somewhat costly to consume these products, but it is worth it, because producing health now will save a tremendous amount of grief and money down the line.

A rule of thumb when it comes to food: Factor in your genetic heritage, as well as your intuition as to what you are craving. If you are of Northern European descent and you love milk, milk is probably a beneficial food for you. It would be best if you could consume certified, organic raw dairy products, but organic pasteurized is better than not. If you love fish, great! Eat it, but be sure to get wild fish, not farmed, and try to keep the mercury-laden variety down to a minimum. Younger fish possess less mercury. Keep in mind that many species of fish are now endangered. If you love a steak, try to buy organic, free-range, grass-fed beef from humanely treated cows. Ditto with chicken. If you love to munch on potatoes, try to eat organic baked or boiled potatoes, rather than cheap potato chips. And so on.

Raw v. Cooked

In the past century or so another debate erupted as to how exactly food should be prepared and eaten in order to retain the most nutritional value and health improvements. On one side have been those who claim that, in accordance with nature, man should not cook any of his food but prepare it minimally. Raw-food advocates claim that the destruction of food enzymes contributes to the shortening of life. Such "enzyme therapy" is largely based on the work of Dr. Edward Howell. On the other side are the "Levi-Straussians" who aver that man only became man when he began to cook his food. Cooked-food proponents point to parasite infestations as a basic problem with eating raw foods, particularly meats. Other hazards occur with the lack of preparation of certain foods, and anthropologically speaking no culture has eaten an entirely raw diet. The work of the Weston A. Price Foundation appears to promote the most balanced perspective on this matter, with the dietician Sally Fallon presenting perhaps the best overall dietary advice.

What about fat?

One overlooked aspect of diet is the role of fats in producing health, rather than causing disease. Without a doubt improperly processed fats, such as transfatty acids and hydrogenated oils, have a deleterious effect on health. Other fatty acids are very necessary. The list of healthful fats and fatty acids is long and includes conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), which has been traced to the reduction of body fat and the production of lean body mass. CLA is present in unprocessed animal fats, such as butter and grass-fed beef. Other healthful fats include olive oil and cod liver oil. Flaxseed also possesses well-known healthful qualities. The value of canola oil is questionable.

It is also becoming better understood that a low-fat diet does not prevent disease, unless the fats in question are the denatured trans fats or hydrogenated oils. Raw butter and organic coconut oil have been demonstrated to be very healthy foods that contribute to health and, therefore, longevity. As concerns the use of animal fat in the diet, the Weston A. Price Foundation states:

Dr. Price's research demonstrated that humans achieve perfect physical form and perfect health generation after generation only when they consume nutrient-dense whole foods and the vital fat-soluble activators found exclusively in animal fats.1

According to the president of the Weston Price Foundation, Sally Fallon, the composition of fat found in clogged arteries is only 26% saturated, such that it is not saturated fat to blame for such disease. "The rest," Fallon states, "is unsaturated, of which more than half is polyunsaturated."2 Concerning saturated fat, Fallon further says:

Saturated fatty acids actually play many important roles in the body chemistry—they enhance the immune system, are necessary for healthy bones, provide energy and structural integrity to the cells, protect the liver and enhance the body’s use of essential fatty acids. Stearic acid, found in beef fat and butter, has cholesterol-lowering properties and is a preferred food for the heart. As saturated fats are stable, they do not become rancid easily, do not call upon the body’s reserves of antioxidants, do not initiate cancer, do not irritate the artery walls.

The human brain is composed of saturated fat, such that the growing brains of children are in need of such fats for optimal health. The idea that children over the age of two should be given skim milks and avoid other animal fats is simply erroneous. Children on such low-fat diets fail to thrive. For optimal health, the fats in question would be from free-range, grass-fed animals, thus maintaining their natural fats profile.

As concerns vegan diets, "Paleodiet" expert Dr. Loren Cordain remarks:

Numerous studies of vegan vegetarian mothers show that DHA is reduced in both the tissues of mother and newborn infant and that reduced plasma concentrations of DHA is associated with both behavioral, cognitive, and visual problems in the developing child/infant when the child/infant is deprived of preformed DHA. Hence DHA is indeed necessary during ontogenesis.3

DHA or docosahexaenoic acid is an omega-3 fatty acid found abundantly in fish oils, and ontogenesis is the "origin and development of an individual organism from embryo to adult." In other words, DHA is necessary for the proper development of the human being.

Moreover, the idea that saturated animal fats are harmful is proved erroneous by traditional cultures. Concerning this concept, Sally Fallon states:

Another myth about primitive diets, and one that is harder to dispel, is that they were low in fat, particularly saturated animal fat. Loren Cordain, PhD, probably the most well known proponent of a return to Paleolithic food habits, recommends a diet consisting of "lean meat, occasional organ meats and wild fruits and vegetables." While this prescription may be politically correct, it does not jibe with descriptions of Paleolithic eating habits, either in cold or hot climates. 

Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who spent many years living with the Eskimos and Indians of Northern Canada, reports that wild male ruminants like elk and caribou carry a large slab of back fat, weighing as much as 40 to 50 pounds. The Indians and Eskimo hunted older male animals preferentially because they wanted this backslab fat, as well as the highly saturated fat found around the kidneys. Other groups used blubber from sea mammals like seal and walrus....

Obtaining adequate fat in the diet was a greater challenge for the Australian Aborigine, living in a very different climate. They were close observers of nature and knew just when certain animals were at their fattest. For example, kangaroos were fat when the fern leaf wattle was in flower; possums when the apple tree was in bloom. Other signs indicated when the carpet snake, kangaroo rat, mussels, oysters, turtles and eels were fat and at their best. Except in times of drought or famine, the Aborigine rejected kangaroos that were too lean--they were not worth carrying back to camp. During periods of abundance "animals were slaughtered ruthlessly, and only the best and fattest parts of the killed game were eaten." Favorite foods were fat from the intestines of marsupials and from emus. Highly saturated kidney fat from the possum was often eaten raw. The dugong, a large seagoing mammal, was another source of fat available to natives on the coasts.

Other sources of fat included eggs--from both birds and reptiles--and a great variety of insects. Chief among them was the witchety grub, or moth larva, found in rotting trunks of trees. These succulent treats--often over six inches long--were eaten both raw and cooked. Fat content of the dried grub is as high as 67%. The green tree ant was another source of valuable fat, with a fat-to-protein ration of about 12 to one. Another important seasonal food in some parts of the country was the begong moth. The moths were knocked off rock walls on which they gathered in large numbers, or smoked out of caves or crevices. They were roasted on the spot or ground up for future use. Moth abdomens are the size of a small peanut and are rich in fat.

Modern investigators find it hard to accept the fact that groups exhibiting superb physical development and perfect health ate liberally of the very dietary component that modern nutritionists have demonized: Saturated animal fat. Yet, even a cursory look at disease trends exonerates traditional fats like butter, lard and tallow. As these fats have been replaced by commercial vegetable oils in the western diet, cancer and heart disease have soared. Dietary saturated fats actually play many important roles in the human biochemistry: Saturated fatty acids constitute at least 50% of the cell membranes, giving them necessary stiffness and integrity; they play a vital role in the health of our bones; they lower Lp(a), a substance in the blood that indicates proneness to heart disease; they protect the liver from alcohol ingestion; they enhance the immune system; they are needed for the proper utilization of essential fatty acids; they are the preferred food for the heart; and they have important antimicrobial properties, protecting us against harmful microorganisms in the digestive tract.

Even more important, animal fats are carriers for vital fat-soluble vitamins A and D, needed for a host of processes, from prevention of birth defects to health of the immune system, to proper development of the bones and teeth. In fact, Price was convinced that these "fat-soluble activators" were key to the beautiful facial development and freedom from dental caries that characterized the people he studied.4

But what about getting too much fat and becoming too fat? Doesn't it shorten your life? There is evidence from laboratory experiments on animals that being slightly underweight creates an increase in longevity. However, concerning this calorie restriction (CRON), which has been shown to extend life in lab rats, one of the leading authorities on aging, S. Jay Olshansky at the Center on Aging, reminds us that this experiment has not been reproduced in humans, so CRON is not proved to work in people. Anecdotal evidence regarding long-lived cultures seems to indicate that calorie restriction is a longevity factor, since many of them, such as the Hunzas or Okinawans, tend to be thin. This thinness, however, may also be attributable to regular physical activity that is part of their lifestyle. Logically, their thinness would still qualify as "calorie restriction," although not necessarily deliberate. We may say with some safety that being obese will likely shorten your life.

Are grains healthy?

Some longevity and health advocates assert that anything which affects the blood sugar, such as potatoes and pasta, increases insulin-resistance, thus shortening life, and therefore should be avoided. Other health experts claim that animal products should be avoided and large amounts of pasta, grains and potatoes should be eaten. Clearly, the field is rife with contradictory and confusing opinions.

The question as to whether or not grains - specifically the eight "major cereal grains," i.e., barley, corn, millet, oats, rye, sorghum and wheat - are beneficial to human health is complicated, because the evidence is that grains are not "natural" to the Paleohuman diet prior to the development of agriculture. The well-known diet expert Loren Cordain, PhD, a professor in the Department of Health and Exercise Science at Colorado State University, has done extensive research into the "Paleodiet" eaten by human ancestors thousands of years ago and has concluded that some 70% of our diet today comes from foods not eaten by these Stone Age peoples. Says Dr. Cordain:

The foods that humanity originally evolved to eat and those we now eat in modern civilization are in many cass significantly different--yet our basic underlying genetic inheritance remains basically the same as it was before, and has evolved only very slightly since then. Thus, many of the foods we now eat are discordant with our genetic inheritance.9

Anthropological studies at this point show that even wild grains were not widely consumed, as even where available they were extremely time-consuming to harvest and prepare. Other foods within the modern diet that were not widely consumed during the Stone Age include dairy and sugar, as well as, of course, all processed and denatured products, which are at the root of much illness today.

The current scientific timeline for the domestication and cultivation of grains is as follows (per Dr. Cordain):

• 10,000 Before Present (BP), barley and wheat in the Middle East
• 7,000 BP, rice in China, India and southest Asia
• 7,000 BP, corn in Central and South America
• 5,000-6,000 BP, millet in Africa
• 5,000-6,000 BP, sorghum in East Africa
• 5,000 BP, rye in southwest Asia
• 3,000 BP, oats in Europe

Grinding stones in the Middle East that date to some 15,000 years ago provide an interesting clue to the processing of wild grains, although not providing conclusive evidence that grain had been domesticated there by that time. Nevertheless, based on finds at a 23,000-year-old submerged site in Israel called "Ohalo II," a study published in Nature in 2004 by Weiss, et al. concludes:

Our data indicate that routine processing of a selected group of wild cereals, combined with effective methods of cooking ground seeds, were practiced at least 12,000 years before their domestication in southwest Asia.6

Concerning this development, an article in the Harvard Gazette remarks:

At Ohalo II, grass seeds were the principal plant food, augmented by a wide variety of other wild foods, including acorns, almonds, pistachios, olives, raspberries, figs, and grapes.7

Grown in healthy soil, grains provide many nutrients, especially B vitamins, as well as microminerals and others, some of which are likely not yet discovered. As concerns the quantity of B vitamins in grains versus that found in other foods, Dr. Cordain states:

Compared to fruits and veggies, cereal grains are B-vitamin lightweights. An average 1,000 serving of mixed vegetables contain 19 times more folate, five times more vitamin B6, six times more vitamin B2 and two times more vitamin B1 than a comparable serving of eight mixed whole grains. On a calorie-by-calorie basis, the niacin content of lean meat and seafood is four times greater than that found in whole grains.8

Also, grains also contain large amounts of "anti-nutrients," such as phytates, which bind with vitamins and minerals, and can create deficiencies in biotin, calcium, iron, magnesium and zinc. Other antinutrients include "protease inhibitors, alkylorescorcinols, alpha-amylase inhibitors, molecular-mimicking proteins, etc."9 Legumes, especially uncooked, have many possess many of the same antinutrients or mineral-binding effects. The human digestive system is at this point not well equipped to digest grains and legumes. According to Dr. Cordain, excessive grain consumption is known to produce the following illnesses and syndromes:

• biotin deficiency
• bone problems
• celiac disease
• fingernail brittleness and ridges
• growth failure or dwarfism
• hypogonadism
• iron-deficiency anemia
• osteomalacia
• rickets
• zinc deficiency
• vitamin D deficiency

Primates in general do not consume grains: "Except for some species of baboons," reports Dr. Cordain, "no primate consumes gramineae (grass) seeds as part of their regular, natural diet." When all the science is considered, it is probably best to focus on consuming fruits, vegetables, animal proteins and fats, while eating grains and beans in moderation.

Answers to these quandaries regarding the consumption of grain were provided by the studies of Dr. Weston A. Price, as related by the current president of his foundation, Sally Fallon:

What researchers often overlook is the fact that seed foods--grains, legumes and nuts--are prepared with great care in traditional societies, by sprouting, roasting, soaking, fermenting and sour leavening. These processes neutralize substances in whole grains and other seed foods that block mineral absorption, inhibit protein digestion and irritate the lining of the digestive tract. Such processes also increase nutrient content and render seed foods more digestible. For example, in India, rice and lentils are fermented for at least two days before they are prepared as idli and dosas; in Africa the natives soak coarsely ground corn overnight before adding it to soups and stews and they ferment corn or millet for several days to produce a sour porridge called ogi; a similar dish made from oats was traditional among the Welsh; in some Oriental and Latin American countries rice receives a long fermentation before it is prepared; Ethiopians make their distinctive injera bread by fermenting a grain called teff for several days; Mexican corn bread cakes, called pozol, are fermented for several days and for as long as two weeks in banana leaves; Cherokee bread was similar, but wrapped in corn husks; before the introduction of commercial brewers yeast, Europeans made slow-rise breads from fermented starters; in America the pioneers were famous for their sourdough breads, pancakes and biscuits; and throughout Europe grains were soaked overnight, and for as long as several days, in water or sour milk before they were cooked and served as porridge or gruel. Grains carefully prepared in this manner confer far more nutritional value than modern quick rise breads, granolas, rice bran concoctions, extruded breakfast cereals and, of course, denuded white flour products.10

The "paleodiet" thesis is premised on the currently accepted "evolutionary timeline" that human beings only began using agriculture some 10,000 years ago. The thesis also assumes that all human cultures were at the same point of development during the preceding hundreds of thousands of years, as well as that homo sapiens in his current "modern" form arose only 35,000 to 40,000 years ago. As illustrated by the Ohalo II find, there is evidence that in some parts of the world now inundated cultures thrived at a higher level of civilization and possessed some type of agriculture. It seems impossible to believe that human beings with the same brain capacity as we possess today never thought about growing their own food, domesticating animals, etc. And, again, it is clear that during the past 10,000 years various cultures have been a different point of development. If then, why not earlier? The tremendous cataclysms globally during the end of the Pleistocene destroyed much evidence of human culture and possible civilization prior to that period, some 10,000 years ago. 

Maintaining an entirely "paleodiet" is not practical, as we humans for the most part are not today hunter-gatherers. Obviously, when discussing such a diet for optimum health, we are addressing a modified plan. In addition, as with the raw versus cooked, it may be argued that humans weren't really humans until they developed agriculture and the cultivation of grains. It is likely not a coincidence that, by the orthodox evolutionary paradigm, human beings developed agriculture and then true civilization. If the foods grown and consumed via agriculture themselves are not healthy, then at least their cultivation has afforded humanity the opportunity to do something other than hunting and gathering - to wit, developing civilization.

Do we need a lot of supplements?

The answer to the question of whether or not we must jam hordes of pills down our throats on a daily basis is no, unless, of course, there is a diagnosed nutrient deficiency. It is not necessary to spend our hard-earned money on oodles of supplements. Rotating a few can increase health and longevity significantly, such that we may be able to benefit from the extraordinary breakthroughs in supplementation that have occurred over the past few decades, without driving ourselves to bankruptcy. Today, our supplements go well beyond the inorganic, undigestable and useless multi-vitamins of the past, which frequently find their way unused - i.e., whole - into the sewage system. Today we have what are essentially whole foodstuffs, rather than isolated nutrients. The isolated nutrients are still produced, but we know well that for nutrition to be effective it must be utilized synergistically with other nutrients. As an example of when supplementation is probably a good idea, it is strongly advised that for optimal health we consume not rock salt but, rather, unrefined sea salt. Although there is some iodine in such sea salt, many people, even those who use refined iodized rock salt, could improve their health with iodine supplementation. Another example is the supplementation of vitamins A and D found in cod liver oil, which is highly recommended throughout life.

Diversity - The Ultimate Diet

When it comes to diet, one rule of thumb is: "One size does not fit all." One of the oldest living persons, according to Dr. David Williams, was an African-American man who ate little other than sardines for most of his life. One look at the diet diversity among traditional peoples further proves this point (per Sally Fallon, as related by Dr. Weston Price):

The diets of the healthy "primitives" Price studied were all very different: In the Swiss village where Price began his investigations, the inhabitants lived on rich dairy products--unpasteurized milk, butter, cream and cheese--dense rye bread, meat occasionally, bone broth soups and the few vegetables they could cultivate during the short summer months. The children's teeth were covered in green slime but Price found only about one percent decay. The children went barefoot in frigid streams during weather that forced Dr. Price and his wife to wear heavy wool coats; nevertheless childhood illnesses were virtually nonexistent and there had never been a single case of TB in the village. Hearty Gallic fishermen living off the coast of Scotland consumed no dairy products. Fish formed the mainstay of the diet, along with oats made into porridge and oatcakes. Fishheads stuffed with oats and chopped fish liver was a traditional dish, and one considered very important for growing children. The Eskimo diet, composed largely of fish, fish roe and marine animals, including seal oil and blubber, allowed Eskimo mothers to produce one sturdy baby after another without suffering any health problems or tooth decay. Well-muscled hunter-gatherers in Canada, the Everglades, the Amazon, Australia and Africa consumed game animals, particularly the parts that civilized folk tend to avoid--organ meats, blood, marrow and glands, particularly the adrenal glands--and a variety of grains, tubers, vegetables and fruits that were available. African cattle-keeping tribes like the Masai consumed no plant foods at all--just meat, blood and milk. Southsea islanders and the Maori of New Zealand ate seafood of every sort--fish, shark, octopus, shellfish, sea worms--along with pork meat and fat, and a variety of plant foods including coconut, manioc and fruit. Whenever these isolated peoples could obtain sea foods they did so--even Indian tribes living high in the Andes. Insects were another common food, in all regions except the Arctic. The foods that allow people of every race and every climate to be healthy are whole natural foods--meat with its fat, organ meats, whole milk products, fish, insects, whole grains, tubers, vegetables and fruit--not newfangled concoctions made with white sugar, refined flour and rancid and chemically altered vegetable oils.

In this bewldering but splendid confusion, it helps to keep in mind that the longest-lived people, such as Jeanne Calment, did not adhere to a strict diet but attributed her longevity to enjoyment of life.