Oh brother.... If anything engages my gag reflex more than what i wrote about the other day, it's solicitations and races to help FIND CURES for what ails us. It's not the concept of actually curing illness -- if only!!! Alas, no. What they want is to look like they're TRYING to do something constructive.
What they're actually trying to do is fund drug research in order to market something new -- it doesn't even have to be something effective! Most pharmaceuticals have a piss-poor track record for alleviating suffering, especially in the psychiatric world from what i hear. And "they" want to put statins in the water supply....
A dear friend was very recently diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and his prognosis is bad. This has prompted me to revisit a few sites that discuss cancer from a professional and informed point of view, and ... what can i say? The state of the union in the treatment of this sad illness is a bloody JOKE. Same-ol'-same-ol' poisoning of the patient in hopes that they'll kill the renegade cells before they kill the host -- nothing more! In other parts of the world they're "softening up" the cancer's defenses with enzymes before administering the poison, to give a little advantage to the victim but we don't want to do that here! We want to pretend that American medicine is evidence-driven and state-of-the-art, and our propaganda machines have convinced the poor suckers that it is SO.
For chrisesake, if _I_ can find reasonable evidence that at very least a non-omega-6-based ketogenic diet, and the use of serrapeptase SUPPORT conventional treatment in a safe and cheap way, there's no f'ing excuse for the resistance that both get in the medical industry. Doctors, alas, support each other in faith and confidence: they give each other the secret handshake and assume the other guy knows what he's talking about. They rarely suspect each other of ulterior motives or stubbornness or IGNORANCE of actual data -- more's the pity.
So "survivors" are turned into shills supporting the systems that let them down in the first place. I pity them as enthusiastic suckers, while scorning them as deluded and indoctrinated, and so addicted to sugar that they aren't even willing to give up their fix to help their bodies heal. They've been poisoned, and poisoned, and poisoned again; assaulted with knives and ray-beams, and they go on to praise their assailants and dig up money for them to continue doing it to others.
There are damn few "cures" in this world, mostly "treatments." The treatments some doctors and researchers like best are the ones that keep the victims coming back for more till their resources run out, they're discarded by the system that didn't care about them from the beginning, and they die in misery. People with respect for this appalling industry wonder why i despise it so much; why, those annual cancer screenings they've been brainwashed into taking every year or so throughout their adulthood "saved their lives"!!! Pardon my skepticism -- i don't necessarily believe that to be true. I strongly suspect that these screenings are designed to scare the patient into undertaking procedures which are more harmful than helpful in an awful lot of cases.
The world of nutritional information about which i've become so passionate has taught me about far more than food and supplements. It's taught me that the people who SHOULD be looking out for the health and well-being of their "flocks" are more interested in their incomes and reputations than THE REASON THEY THEORETICALLY WENT INTO THE FIELD (to help people) or THE OATH THEY TOOK UPON BEGINNING PRACTICE (to first do no harm). Their outdated ideas and bad advice are killing people, and they don't give a shit. Hell, if they were ONLY killing i'd be less censorious of them -- they're causing needless pain and suffering, and they just don't give a damn. They could be ameliorating the lot of miserable people everywhere, and it's not that they can't, but a shocking proportion of them WON'T.
Showing posts with label Conventional Wisdom BS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conventional Wisdom BS. Show all posts
Friday, August 30, 2013
Sunday, August 11, 2013
histamine reading continues....
While eating a lot of the wrong things myself, i continue to read about theoretically controlling histamine.... :-) Today's brunch was a really yummy platter of preserved meats (sausage, confit, headcheese, bresaola, ...), goat brie, pickled vegetables and a couple glasses of champagne, and i paid the price -- feeling miserably bloated sitting on the sunny side of the car, and having to soap my ring off when i got home.
I have no doubt that some of my allergy problems are in fact histamine-intolerance issues. When i first read about the subject a couple of years ago, it rang a bell (set off an alarm clock actually), but something distracted me and i'm only just getting back to it. This time i'll make every effort to stick with it a little better.
On the way home from the restaurant, though, we stopped by the neighborhood health-food store and i picked up a bottle of holy-basil tincture and at home i took a dropperful -- felt better pretty quickly. Gonna use it for a little while in place of benedryl and see how it works in the long term.
Well, back to the reading ... but just have to gripe a bit about the people who write on the subject! OBVIOUSLY know diddly-squat about the subject of nutrition because they seem scared to death they're going to give themselves a case of malnutrition by omitting "whole food groups" -- where have we heard THAT before? ;-) ...Unless of course they're talking about giving up MEAT* -- that IS a mistake!
______
* and the proclamation against "red meat" is based on the factoid that "Red Meats are hardest on us as they are usually from animals who had antibiotics injected or were force fed etc." also that they're supposedly very high in omega-6s -- i guess these people don't know about grassfed....
I have no doubt that some of my allergy problems are in fact histamine-intolerance issues. When i first read about the subject a couple of years ago, it rang a bell (set off an alarm clock actually), but something distracted me and i'm only just getting back to it. This time i'll make every effort to stick with it a little better.
On the way home from the restaurant, though, we stopped by the neighborhood health-food store and i picked up a bottle of holy-basil tincture and at home i took a dropperful -- felt better pretty quickly. Gonna use it for a little while in place of benedryl and see how it works in the long term.
Well, back to the reading ... but just have to gripe a bit about the people who write on the subject! OBVIOUSLY know diddly-squat about the subject of nutrition because they seem scared to death they're going to give themselves a case of malnutrition by omitting "whole food groups" -- where have we heard THAT before? ;-) ...Unless of course they're talking about giving up MEAT* -- that IS a mistake!
______
* and the proclamation against "red meat" is based on the factoid that "Red Meats are hardest on us as they are usually from animals who had antibiotics injected or were force fed etc." also that they're supposedly very high in omega-6s -- i guess these people don't know about grassfed....
Saturday, June 29, 2013
physiological/dietary hint
"If a woman is fat, fair and forty, and has borne some children, she is the type most likely to be full of gallstones," reminisced Dr. Donaldson of "Strong Medicine" after a long and successful career. I believe this fact contains hints about perennial truths of modern life as well as compelling dietary advice.
If you want to keep your figure, having children is one of the worst things you can do to your body. Between Nature (flooding you with hormones and robbing your body of nutrients) and Conventional Wisdom ("chow down! you're eating for two!"), it's a rare individual who comes out the other side without laying down body fat which is progressively more difficult to get rid of after each pregnancy.
Middle age, through the niggardliness of enzyme secretion and even MORE bad hormonal signals, piles on the pounds all by itself. Women who had remained effortlessly normal-weight up to perimenopause finally get an idea of what some of us have dealt with all our lives, when with no change of diet or habit their body composition goes straight to hell.
As for those of us who were willing and able to fight fat-growth, well, we have tended to spend decades in calorie-counting and non-fat consumption, losing some pounds and gaining some back, over and over till our metabolisms are thoroughly confused about whether it can afford to let us burn body-fat or not. And we know what causes gallstones -- yes, all those low-fat-eating years when bile sat in storage in underused gallbladders.
This brings us to the "fair" portion of the introductory sentence -- women whose forebears have spent thousands of years in northern climes, where their ancestrally-dark skin, hair and eyes have been bleached by countless generations of seeking to absorb optimal quantities of sunlight. Women who are, genetically, separated by millennia from large amounts of plant foods in the diet, until agriculture finally reached the "frozen north" (which was significantly later than in places like the "Fertile Crescent"). Women who have no business eating a year-round load of concentrated carbohydrates of ANY kind, let alone the garbage that passes for food these days.
RIGHT BEFORE OUR EYES we have seen what happens to this kind of people when "novel modern foodstuffs" are introduced to a gene-stock not accustomed to a high-carb diet -- Cleave wrote about it, Stefansson wrote about it, countless missionaries wrote about it.... People in North America and Pacific islands and other places that were not invaded till comparatively recently, who took to the addictive and easy-to-prepare carbs of "civilization" and twenty years later WHAM -- unprecedented diseases completely destroy their well-being!
"Fair" women should not eat industrial and agricultural foods on a regular basis. To put that in LESS archaic and exclusionary terms, women, even more than men, should eschew the neolithic agents of disease, ESPECIALLY women whose ancestors have most recently adopted an agricultural lifestyle. We have fewer hormonal buffers to protect our bodies from the damage that these things wreak. Our bodies have built-in protections for survival of ourselves and our children, but they are no match for the sheer destructiveness of modern life.
If we could find an objective and unbiased jury before whom we could present our evidence, i believe they'd come to the same conclusion i have: products of agriculture as well as the kind of society that agriculture (including pastoralism) has empowered, are SINGULARLY bad for the health and welfare of women. We've been encouraged to breed excessively while undermining our ability to do so in a healthy fashion. We've lost our individual dignity, autonomy and sense of sorority because of the "need" to compete for high-quality mates (i.e., capability of passing the best genes to the next generation). We've been indoctrinated to believe that the very things which are "killing" us are in fact good -- like paternalistic religion, libertarianism, nationalism ... and wholesomewholegrains, antioxidantfruitsandvegetables, hearthealthyvegetableoils and the low-fat diets which undeniably give us gallstones.
If you want to keep your figure, having children is one of the worst things you can do to your body. Between Nature (flooding you with hormones and robbing your body of nutrients) and Conventional Wisdom ("chow down! you're eating for two!"), it's a rare individual who comes out the other side without laying down body fat which is progressively more difficult to get rid of after each pregnancy.
Middle age, through the niggardliness of enzyme secretion and even MORE bad hormonal signals, piles on the pounds all by itself. Women who had remained effortlessly normal-weight up to perimenopause finally get an idea of what some of us have dealt with all our lives, when with no change of diet or habit their body composition goes straight to hell.
As for those of us who were willing and able to fight fat-growth, well, we have tended to spend decades in calorie-counting and non-fat consumption, losing some pounds and gaining some back, over and over till our metabolisms are thoroughly confused about whether it can afford to let us burn body-fat or not. And we know what causes gallstones -- yes, all those low-fat-eating years when bile sat in storage in underused gallbladders.
This brings us to the "fair" portion of the introductory sentence -- women whose forebears have spent thousands of years in northern climes, where their ancestrally-dark skin, hair and eyes have been bleached by countless generations of seeking to absorb optimal quantities of sunlight. Women who are, genetically, separated by millennia from large amounts of plant foods in the diet, until agriculture finally reached the "frozen north" (which was significantly later than in places like the "Fertile Crescent"). Women who have no business eating a year-round load of concentrated carbohydrates of ANY kind, let alone the garbage that passes for food these days.
RIGHT BEFORE OUR EYES we have seen what happens to this kind of people when "novel modern foodstuffs" are introduced to a gene-stock not accustomed to a high-carb diet -- Cleave wrote about it, Stefansson wrote about it, countless missionaries wrote about it.... People in North America and Pacific islands and other places that were not invaded till comparatively recently, who took to the addictive and easy-to-prepare carbs of "civilization" and twenty years later WHAM -- unprecedented diseases completely destroy their well-being!
"Fair" women should not eat industrial and agricultural foods on a regular basis. To put that in LESS archaic and exclusionary terms, women, even more than men, should eschew the neolithic agents of disease, ESPECIALLY women whose ancestors have most recently adopted an agricultural lifestyle. We have fewer hormonal buffers to protect our bodies from the damage that these things wreak. Our bodies have built-in protections for survival of ourselves and our children, but they are no match for the sheer destructiveness of modern life.
If we could find an objective and unbiased jury before whom we could present our evidence, i believe they'd come to the same conclusion i have: products of agriculture as well as the kind of society that agriculture (including pastoralism) has empowered, are SINGULARLY bad for the health and welfare of women. We've been encouraged to breed excessively while undermining our ability to do so in a healthy fashion. We've lost our individual dignity, autonomy and sense of sorority because of the "need" to compete for high-quality mates (i.e., capability of passing the best genes to the next generation). We've been indoctrinated to believe that the very things which are "killing" us are in fact good -- like paternalistic religion, libertarianism, nationalism ... and wholesomewholegrains, antioxidantfruitsandvegetables, hearthealthyvegetableoils and the low-fat diets which undeniably give us gallstones.
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Bro decides to "help" again....
A lot of blogs written by women on the subject of food, fitness and weight loss are personal stories of success and/or frustration. A lot of us have been thoroughly let down by conventional wisdom of the medical industry or dietary/fitness "authorities" -- we bust our asses to do things "right" with appalling results, till there comes a point that we either give up or go renegade and start creating our own sets of guidelines.
We now share so that we can give encouragement to others like us. After all, we wish WE had learned from the experiences of other women in the same hormonal situations, especially before the day of the internet when such info was a lot harder to find. We pour out our findings and discoveries, spending time and emotional energy on our blogs and THEN:
Joe Bro decides to step outside his weightlifting, carbstuffing, testosterone-boosting circle to tell us we're WRRRROOOONNNNGGGG. Just check out his favorite bro-palace, run by some muscle-headed self-informed guru -- he'll straighten us out!
Are these guys the reincarnations of Galileo's opponents? You'd think so, since THEIR paradigm is the center of their universe, and only THEIR experience could possibly be valid. And they feel it their absolute DUTY to pop into certain forums -- like the bright pink one that inspired this rant -- and man-splain what's REEELY TROOO.
May all the gods bless the MAJORITY of the guys who visit me, and Wooo and Sid and EB and ... etc! They manage to express their opinions -- even contrary opinions -- without coming across as self-important and dictatorial. On the most sensitive subjects, they SOMEHOW manage to disagree with some of our views and yet not be perceived as a bunch of tactless ... (use your descriptor of choice).
So NO: we're NOT going to read your entire archives, Joe. Nor are we interested in reading your bro-guru's stuff. We've heard this tripe over and over for the last forty years and we KNOW how unlikely it is to be of any practical value to us. So please try really hard to repress your superior patriarchal attitudes on OUR sites, huh? You can be as big a dick as you like on your own.
We now share so that we can give encouragement to others like us. After all, we wish WE had learned from the experiences of other women in the same hormonal situations, especially before the day of the internet when such info was a lot harder to find. We pour out our findings and discoveries, spending time and emotional energy on our blogs and THEN:
Joe Bro decides to step outside his weightlifting, carbstuffing, testosterone-boosting circle to tell us we're WRRRROOOONNNNGGGG. Just check out his favorite bro-palace, run by some muscle-headed self-informed guru -- he'll straighten us out!
Are these guys the reincarnations of Galileo's opponents? You'd think so, since THEIR paradigm is the center of their universe, and only THEIR experience could possibly be valid. And they feel it their absolute DUTY to pop into certain forums -- like the bright pink one that inspired this rant -- and man-splain what's REEELY TROOO.
May all the gods bless the MAJORITY of the guys who visit me, and Wooo and Sid and EB and ... etc! They manage to express their opinions -- even contrary opinions -- without coming across as self-important and dictatorial. On the most sensitive subjects, they SOMEHOW manage to disagree with some of our views and yet not be perceived as a bunch of tactless ... (use your descriptor of choice).
So NO: we're NOT going to read your entire archives, Joe. Nor are we interested in reading your bro-guru's stuff. We've heard this tripe over and over for the last forty years and we KNOW how unlikely it is to be of any practical value to us. So please try really hard to repress your superior patriarchal attitudes on OUR sites, huh? You can be as big a dick as you like on your own.
Wednesday, March 13, 2013
repeat a lie often enough
Once bullshit finds favor with those media writers and producers who HAVE TO FILL columns or airtime EVERY SINGLE TEDIOUS DAY, you end up with avalanches of bullshit which eventually clog drainoff and drown the actual story....
Over and OVER and O-O-O-V-E-R-R-R, we hear the same old stories about meat and fat being bad for you and fruitsandvegetables and healthywholegrains being good. One wants to run screaming into the night. Yet another of Mark's columns is devoted to reassuring a reader who is being bombarded by enemies and relations with the untruth. Yet another of Tom's articles is devoted to trying to unclog the bullshit-drain.
Those of us who have improved our health through clean eating, whether it be paleo or low-carb or a mixture of the two, would LOVE to help the struggling people we see all around us! We hate to see loved ones who are in pain or taking medications that don't help and come with their own burden of unwellness, KNOWING that a few MINOR INCONVENIENCES (ie not living on wheat and sugar) might make them feel immeasurably better. In the glow of our satisfaction we try to "share the good news" only to be refuted by the CW and advanced nutritional wisdom as learned through television commercials.
And out comes another spewage of BS that reinforces Kellogg's position!!! ... Yeah, right. Ya know, in "celebration" of this Mercury Retrograde, i'm inclined to say "LET 'EM EAT CAKE" ... or pasta, or whole-grain subway sandwiches or whatever the hell they want. Let 'em cut calories till they're miserable and sick and fatter than ever. Let 'em convince themselves that my diet is gonna kill me, no matter how much better (than they) i look and feel. I've put the information out there, and if they choose to ignore it then i'll say (with Reverend Johnson) "son, you're on your own."
So as each "new study" comes out with the same old bullshit, i'm just going to smile cattily and order another Proud Mary burger (two 8-oz-before-cooking patties with cheese and bacon), hold the bun, with a glass of the house cabernet. That plus coffee is enough food to hold me for a whole day. Let my MIL eat nothing but sugar for breakfast. Let Dr. Joe Blow scarf down pie at midnight, and say that his obesity is due to his newly-discovered hypothyroidism. Let others say "everything in moderation" but it must be bad genes that cause cancer. New version of tough-love: it goes along with my long-ago-adopted anti-nagging policy -- i'll tell you once, and remind you once, but beyond that it's not MY problem.
The current MR will be over in about four more days, which pleases me immensely -- my internet connection improves when Mercury is direct. I can't hope that the misinformation will go away ... but i also won't accept responsibility for helping to muck out the drains.
Over and OVER and O-O-O-V-E-R-R-R, we hear the same old stories about meat and fat being bad for you and fruitsandvegetables and healthywholegrains being good. One wants to run screaming into the night. Yet another of Mark's columns is devoted to reassuring a reader who is being bombarded by enemies and relations with the untruth. Yet another of Tom's articles is devoted to trying to unclog the bullshit-drain.
Those of us who have improved our health through clean eating, whether it be paleo or low-carb or a mixture of the two, would LOVE to help the struggling people we see all around us! We hate to see loved ones who are in pain or taking medications that don't help and come with their own burden of unwellness, KNOWING that a few MINOR INCONVENIENCES (ie not living on wheat and sugar) might make them feel immeasurably better. In the glow of our satisfaction we try to "share the good news" only to be refuted by the CW and advanced nutritional wisdom as learned through television commercials.
And out comes another spewage of BS that reinforces Kellogg's position!!! ... Yeah, right. Ya know, in "celebration" of this Mercury Retrograde, i'm inclined to say "LET 'EM EAT CAKE" ... or pasta, or whole-grain subway sandwiches or whatever the hell they want. Let 'em cut calories till they're miserable and sick and fatter than ever. Let 'em convince themselves that my diet is gonna kill me, no matter how much better (than they) i look and feel. I've put the information out there, and if they choose to ignore it then i'll say (with Reverend Johnson) "son, you're on your own."
So as each "new study" comes out with the same old bullshit, i'm just going to smile cattily and order another Proud Mary burger (two 8-oz-before-cooking patties with cheese and bacon), hold the bun, with a glass of the house cabernet. That plus coffee is enough food to hold me for a whole day. Let my MIL eat nothing but sugar for breakfast. Let Dr. Joe Blow scarf down pie at midnight, and say that his obesity is due to his newly-discovered hypothyroidism. Let others say "everything in moderation" but it must be bad genes that cause cancer. New version of tough-love: it goes along with my long-ago-adopted anti-nagging policy -- i'll tell you once, and remind you once, but beyond that it's not MY problem.
The current MR will be over in about four more days, which pleases me immensely -- my internet connection improves when Mercury is direct. I can't hope that the misinformation will go away ... but i also won't accept responsibility for helping to muck out the drains.
Thursday, February 21, 2013
pointing fingers at the wrong villains
How synchronicitous! I just read the year-old WAPF article on salt which ties in very neatly to my recent ponderings on the subject.
We're accustomed to seeing high-carb rodent diets being described as "high-fat" and all their ill effects being blamed on the lard in them -- as though that were good old-fashioned pig-fat from pastured swine instead of the high-PUFA, partially-hydrogenated garbage the passes for lard today. But i'm not sure the bloated PMSing women out there (of which i was one) might have any clue that it's NOT the salt that came on their pizza or fries that is making them miserable....
Ya know what else causes water retention? Sugar (and other carbs, especially lactose and fructose if you're intolerant). Insulin. Cortisol. Allergies. MSG. Alcohol. And probably a whole lot of other things, too. But of course i keep coming back to the fact that "TABLE" SALT takes the rap.
As i pointed out before, i love salt and use it liberally at home. I NEED salt for the sake of my digestion. I find it hard to believe that i'm getting significantly more NaCl in restaurants. When CW slams something that i KNOW is beneficial for me, it makes me mad that others like me (but less headstrong) might believe the idiots and forgo something that would make their health better. And since the "logical" way CW deals with failure of a public policy is to make the original recommendations stronger, we get stupid reactions like denying school-children the use of salt-shakers....
The WAPF article makes it clear that although in a small population, severe salt restriction may lower BP by single digits, all-cause mortality in the general population seems to rise. Why is it, with salt and dietary fats, tiny fragments of demographics getting bad results get extrapolated to the rest of us, and now that we have large-and-growing bad effects of grains and other carbs, the cautions against them DON'T happen? If it were only the case of lobbying, i'd think the egg, dairy and meat-producers would band together and stand as strong as the wheat/corn/soy group does, but it doesn't seem to work that way.
We're accustomed to seeing high-carb rodent diets being described as "high-fat" and all their ill effects being blamed on the lard in them -- as though that were good old-fashioned pig-fat from pastured swine instead of the high-PUFA, partially-hydrogenated garbage the passes for lard today. But i'm not sure the bloated PMSing women out there (of which i was one) might have any clue that it's NOT the salt that came on their pizza or fries that is making them miserable....
Ya know what else causes water retention? Sugar (and other carbs, especially lactose and fructose if you're intolerant). Insulin. Cortisol. Allergies. MSG. Alcohol. And probably a whole lot of other things, too. But of course i keep coming back to the fact that "TABLE" SALT takes the rap.
As i pointed out before, i love salt and use it liberally at home. I NEED salt for the sake of my digestion. I find it hard to believe that i'm getting significantly more NaCl in restaurants. When CW slams something that i KNOW is beneficial for me, it makes me mad that others like me (but less headstrong) might believe the idiots and forgo something that would make their health better. And since the "logical" way CW deals with failure of a public policy is to make the original recommendations stronger, we get stupid reactions like denying school-children the use of salt-shakers....
The WAPF article makes it clear that although in a small population, severe salt restriction may lower BP by single digits, all-cause mortality in the general population seems to rise. Why is it, with salt and dietary fats, tiny fragments of demographics getting bad results get extrapolated to the rest of us, and now that we have large-and-growing bad effects of grains and other carbs, the cautions against them DON'T happen? If it were only the case of lobbying, i'd think the egg, dairy and meat-producers would band together and stand as strong as the wheat/corn/soy group does, but it doesn't seem to work that way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)