proud to present anecdotes!

Ya know ... an awful lot of writers/bloggers, amateur and professional, make a big point of sneering at anecdotes and proclaiming that THEIR point of view is the correct one because they have SCIENCE on their side!!!  There are a few problems with that:

• one can design a study that will "prove" anything one bloody well pleases;
• the proclaimers get all nearsighted when accosted with a study that "proves" the opposite;
• just because it works on genetically-modified mice does not mean it will apply to humans;
• due to genetic and time/damage-wrought variations in humans, we can each react very differently to ANY stimulus.

My thought is that the only evidence at all credible, inspiring me to try something new with THIS body, IS anecdotal.  Reports of clinical success work too.

...Because ideal macronutrient ratios are different between rats and mice, let alone us.

...Because studies often use human subjects who are young, whole, and uncomplicated -- not the middle-aged, menopausal and carbohydrate-intolerant.

...Because the sometimes-arbitrary conditions of laboratory studies don't necessarily match real-world situations.

"Science" can be very good at pinning down mechanisms and processes once they're identified, but until they are, conducting studies can just confuse the poor myopic plodders who do things like feed, exercise and test nocturnal animals during the daytime.

So -- sorry -- claims of scientific evidence are not a clinching argument, but rather a starting point for enquiry into ways and means.  You may feel your study is definitive, but until you can show that it works in real people under normal circumstances, it doesn't actually MEAN diddly-squat.

the scale relents

FINALLY.  Things are back to normal, and i can stop obsessing.  ;-)  This mini-plateau had me concerned -- i admit it!  SO many times i've thought i found "the answer" and had been disappointed....  My belief in what i learned over the last half-year is confirmed.

Ultra-low-carb, moderate protein, high-fat works for me.  "Shaking things up" with nut dishes and dairy OCCASIONALLY can help.  A little red wine doesn't hurt much.  Vegetables get more iffy all the time, and fruit is an indulgence i should trust but rarely.  This morning's weight reading is lower than it's been since i started spending time in New Orleans (has it been four-five years already?) and was seduced by the delectably evil food there; i have less than 10 pounds to go, to get out of the "overweight" category.

For somebody like me, who has always had to WORK to keep my weight within limits acceptable to myself, this is HUGE.  GOK how much time and energy i've poured into this subject since my teens (i was a chubby kid, but it didn't concern me then).  However, this may have been a blessing in disguise; how often do we hear about people who didn't have to think about what they ate, and then in middle-age started to gain and didn't know what to do about it?  At this point, i've tried almost everything, and i have a pretty good idea of what works and what doesn't, and why.

As a matter of fact, it's a very interesting thing to look backward.  I realize NOW that as a teen, i practiced intermittent fasting without having a clue -- i was doing that horrible thing called "skipping breakfast" (i wasn't hungry in the morning), and i frequently did without lunch as well.  The snack i had after school simply filled the glycogen storage i had depleted during the day.  Looks kinda like my eating pattern was like a Kitavan's, doesn't it -- put on fat in the evening, burn it all the next day, rinse, repeat.

In my twenties, i discovered that the CICO hypothesis just didn't calculate out right -- again, not in those terms, but just the concept.  In my thirties, exercise still helped a little, but i had to work a lot harder.  A low-fat diet meant constant dissatisfaction, but i was convinced i needed it for health.  :-(  From there it went downhill.  I ended up at 168#, lacking energy to make an effort to be fit, with early-stage carpel-tunnel problems and damaged plantar fascia, occasional hand-tremors, heart-palpitations and knee pain.

I'm not "perfect" today, but i'm happy to say that all the above problems are a lot better.  Not only the physical ones -- i'm now delighted with my increased confidence in my judgement that what "authorities" said about diet, exercise and health, and which did not fit my experience, was ALL WRONG.  It was no failure of MINE, it was not that i was self-indulgent and lazy.  I was being set up to fail.  We were ALL set up to fail.


It's like in the 1930s films i enjoy so much, when the heroine puts up with the hero's BS till she gets to a breaking point, and then she dumps his sorry ass with a scalding character assessment and change-of-philosophy statement right before the grand finis.  Conventional Wisdom, in your conservative, oppressive, self-aggrandizing way, you've completely failed in your mission.  Your job was to build us up and make us strong, healthy and happy, and your pompous self-interest has achieved NOTHING.  You've been revealed as an insecure private-millionaires'-club, a mutual admiration society of nitwits who don't even know what figures of ridicule you are to everyone who has a functioning brain.  You only maintain your place in society because of the deep pockets you use to bribe the corrupt, mediocre poseurs whom your money also helped to promote to positions of policy-making authority.  Enjoy what time you have left, because TRUE science knows you for the farce you are.  Those of us who KNOW you are now your adversaries, and will fight you every inch of the way till you're universally acknowledged to be the losers you are.

"The End."  ;-)

a good diet will spoil you

It's been almost a week since i ate The Salad of Doom, and my gut flora haven't perfectly recovered yet.  A respected fellow blogger had a carb/protein fest, and it took her brain awhile to get back to normal again, even after reestablishing ketosis.  Some people have one taste of a "trigger food" and they can't stop.

The aged or damaged body doesn't behave the same way as the bodies of the young, fit people who participate in a lot of the dietary trials.  Only a simpleton would expect them to.

We seem to be finding that, although our bodies had managed to function on what they'd been accustomed to, once we put them on a regimen of a more optimal diet, there's no going back.  A diet full of sugar or sugar-resulting foods wreaks its damage SO slowly and progressively that we don't notice it; reintroducing such foods when we have become accustomed to functioning without them produces havoc almost instantly -- like watching a flower wilt via time-lapse photography.

I've come to believe that the phenomenon we call "aging" is actually the result of slow-poisoning -- a carbohydrate-accelerated process of nutrient deficiency and accumulated organ damage.  There's also the diminution of enzyme production; i can't put off writing about that much longer.  In the presence of any imbalance, the body makes an adjustment, which alters another organ's function, which makes another adjustment, ad infinitum.  It's like how carrying a heavy purse on one shoulder all the time makes every muscle group in the body change structure.  The first day you tote that purse around you don't notice it, but after 30 years, you don't stand up straight anymore.

Once we, as adults over 27 (when enzyme use slows), drop our junk-foodstuff-chowing ways and eat what nature intended, the body starts performing better.  It will only go back to these semi-foods kicking and screaming, as i've found out.  Numerous times.

negativity

I have a confession -- there's ONE network television program i do enjoy watching, and that's What Not to Wear.  I see my younger self in some of the "frights" that are featured on the show, and i really rejoice in their ultimate realization of how good they CAN look, when a little insight is able to get them past a few preconceived notions.

Women who are past their "first youth" are frequently poster-children for the whole makeover concept.  Often, those who had their heyday in their school days cling to the look that worked for them back then, and those of us who were (speaking charitably) "cute" strive to find a style that will take us to an improved level, at least.  When we've done our subjective best to look as good as we can, the results can be ... ahem ... not what we intended.  Some are just dated or dowdy, some trampy, and some (who pride themselves on intellect, personality and imagination) go for a quirky look.  In the end, some of these individualists turn up on WNtW.

I believe that it's both a product of society and hard-wired in women to want to look pretty* (and as a corollary, feel loved).  When nature is less than generous, we turn to art to bring it about, but ... doesn't Art go through phases of being less-aesthetically-pleasing from time to time?  (Well, at least i think it does....)  Society then rewards the more attractive and penalizes the less-so, both professionally and in social relationships.  It just reinforces what we suspected all along -- if you're pretty, you win, and if you're not, the universe hates you and you're just SOL.  It's hard not to be sour and negative.

The thing you see, over and over, with these semi-unattractive subjects on WNtW is a persistent, unrelenting negativity.  One "failure" when they try on some item of clothing, and that kind of item CANNOT look good on them.  They see another item of clothing, and it reminds them of something unappealing in their past, and THAT item is tabooed.  Then, one of these items, that fits properly and is chosen mindfully, is tried on and -- miracle of miracles -- is suddenly a success.  Sometimes, a really becoming outfit is brushed aside because the wearer doesn't look the way she wishes she did, in it.  Some of them have a hard time accepting a compliment (and i credit the hosts and aestheticians, that their compliments are believable and not overblown); they've been efficiently brainwashed to not celebrate their best points, only to bemoan their worst ones.

The psychological conditioning we all experience growing up, from family and friends and society at large, is often HORRIBLE.  People who SAY they love us, frequently set us up to fail, and it takes some of us an awfully long time to rise above it ... if we ever do.  We need our successes to encourage us to more effort, and we need to view our failures in a realistic light.  None of us, not the most beautiful, is flawless.  NONE of us.  We DESERVE to be able to think well of ourselves for anything positive in our hearts, minds and bodies, even if it's a gift of nature rather than "earned."  The stupid societal proscription of "vanity" as a manipulative tool to keep people from being braggarts constantly overshoots its aim, resulting in self-defeating diffidence and feelings of worthlessness.  That's BAD.  

DAMN repressive monastic asceticism.  It's "medieval" in the worst possible way.  Keeping people in their place -- i.e., not allowing them to shine -- is a hellish practice, and will reap the karmic reward it so flagrantly deserves.

One of my friends from community-theatre days taught me a lesson that i happily practice as often as possible.  If i THINK something nice about a person, even a stranger's beautiful eyes or clothing, i tell them so.  Maybe they need to hear it.

____________________

*  it's funny -- "ugly" men can be very attractive.  Doesn't seem to work the same for women.

progress report, part 2: eating out is the DEVIL

I can't even wait a day before continuing, because looking back on all i've learned is so exciting and encouraging to me.  Looking back is an excellent Mercury-retrograde activity....  ;-)

Since the beginning of the year, when i've been at home and doing the cooking i haven't failed to lose weight, and when i've been eating out a lot, i haven't failed to gain.  It's that simple.  Because i know what the pitfalls are, i haven't gained MUCH, and i haven't failed to lose it again, but it just goes to show you what happens when other people are in charge of the kitchen.

Other people's condiments are full of industrial-seed oil, sugar, texture- and flavor-enhancers (like carrageenan, guar gum, MSG, etc), preservatives (which may or may not be a problem), artificial colors (which sensitive people find problematic), and so on.  Other people don't properly nixtamalize corn, ferment grains and legumes, soak nuts and seeds -- in other words, they take shortcuts that ruin potentially-nourishing substances.  Other people believe advertising propaganda, and think grain-fiber is a good thing, and that metabolic poisons are "a good part of this balanced diet."  Other people don't realize that anti-meat "information" is frequently from veg*an sources.

Yes, you can eat out.  You can eat out a McDonald's, for heaven's sake, and not ruin your health.  What you CAN'T do is make any assumptions about what you're getting.  The "best" Italian restaurants are known to use artificial "olive oil."  Almost any restaurant steak is going to be seasoned with things you really don't want to consume.  The first thing i look for in an omelette is, whether the egg is homogenous or streaky with white and yolk -- if you have doubts, it's best to order the eggs fried rather than scrambled, because GOK what might be in there.

So, when i was in Texas in Jan/Feb and again in May/June, when i was in San Francisco a week in each the spring and summer, and when i had houseguests for a week in April, i did a LO-O-O-O-O-OT of eating out, and it totally screwed my weight goals.  Most of the time, i tried to eat according to what i know is best for me, but on about a half-dozen occasions (single meals, that is) i completely FEASTED.  The thing i've learned from feasting is, though, to FAST afterward, for a meal or a day.  When i'd get home again each time, especially when my husband was still out-of-town, i'd get right back on my VLC diet and/or the Strong Medicine protocol, and i'd be back to normal within days.  I've gained and lost the same five pounds, four or five times, but i'm about eight pounds down from the first of the year.  Twelve to go.

And rather than thinking it a privation to go back on my "diet," i resume my eating pattern with RELIEF.  I just don't feel good when i'm eating like other people do.  When i eat my 100 grams each of animal protein and fat per day, i don't feel hungry and food-obsessed, and my brain works, and i hurt less, and i'm HAPPY.  I don't like to snack anymore, even though the thought of cocktails and antipasti STILL has allure.  I still enjoy some junkfood, but i know it comes with a price i don't like to pay.

I have a lot of sympathy for people who haven't found the "formula" that works to tame their appetites and control their intake for maximal comfort.  Until i tweaked the Strong Medicine and my supplement list to "fit" me, i did a LOT more thinking about food with longing!*  Now i tell myself, "You're perfectly satisfied, and you feel great on these foods -- you're losing weight with no hunger.  Don't even think about luscious foods you're not allowing yourself RIGHT NOW -- you'll have them later.  Meanwhile, make progress while there are no distractions!"  And i AM!  :-D
________
* I also did a lot more planning, shopping and cooking; a lot more SPENDING of money and time.  I love the change.

progress update time, part 1

More than half a year has flown by, since i started writing here.  Whereas i haven't made much linear PROGRESS in losing weight, the scale hasn't been stuck anywhere ... and i feel i'm significantly wiser about the whole subject.

In January, i began the Personal Paleo Code program, which was an eye-opening experience.  Whether a person wants to lose weight or not -- i firmly believe it's in EVERYBODY'S best interests to go through a strict elimination diet and slowly add back every other ordinarily-eaten food, just to see what causes problems that were never even SUSPECTED before.  I understand the Whole 30 is pretty much the same thing, and there are others out there, too, which offer a description and how to go about it without spoiling the results ... but i really think people who care about their health need to check it out.

I discovered that i have issues with nightshades, which i never suspected before.  Industrial seed oils seem to give me zits, especially when i'm not getting enough zinc.  Milk products (even fermented) seem to contribute to tremors (like any overdose of carbs) -- could high insulin the be the cause?  Cream SOMETIMES contributes to an unhappy gut, but butter, never -- could have something to do with carrageenan in the former....

Wheat doesn't give me overt gut symptoms, but it really brings on the knee pain ...AND hip, and shoulder.  Oats (even soaked) do the same, to a lesser degree.  An occasional (rare!) bowl of porridge will stay in my future, but it's gotta be the unsteamed kind, and it has to be soaked overnight with whey.  I allowed myself so little of the true-sourdough ("salt rising") rye/rice bread, i don't know if it causes much trouble -- further tests are in order.

Home-cooked food (by me) is the highroad to health and weight control.  I've eliminated dozens of products i used to use with confidence because SO many of the things we buy are adulterated -- you have to be careful even buying tuna in "water" because it ISN'T -- it's a soy-laced broth.  "With olive oil" in the commercial world doesn't mean OF olive oil; i make my own mayo and dressings anymore.  The caveat above, "by me" is important -- my husband is sympathetic but not thoroughly aware.  And as for other people?  Absolutely, completely, incomprehensibly BLIND.  Obviously, most people think that if it doesn't kill you SOON, it doesn't have a negative impact on health (face-palm...).  Think CIGARETTES, kids....

I've learned a bit about alcohol, too.  The "cleanest" drink i can have is warm sake; a small amount satisfies and it's easy to stop there.  Even cold (filtered) sake is more ... moreish!  And other things also contribute to a low-grade headache while sake doesn't.  My low-carb cocktails come next, then tepid wine -- which is to say, reds.  White and/or chilled, and the "food reward" thing kicks in -- wonder if the "good doctor" can explain that one?

A very nice lady who went by the screenname "H" made the next big impact on my dietary adventures; she introduced me to "Strong Medicine," Dr. Blake Donaldson's retrospective on how he learned to treat allergy and weight loss, in the early part of the 20th century.  This book, and my subsequent reading, have revolutionized my view of limiting carbs.  H did her good deed, then kinda disappeared like The Shadow.  OOOOhhhh.  ;-)

This, as the title suggests, is going to have to be just the first report, because i realized after i started that the ground i've covered so far this year is going to take longer than i thought.  ;-)  I do hope this isn't just an exercise in self-absorption, but a useful record....

"Son, you're on your own!"

Fred at Philosophy of Weight Management has a column that's very much to the point, today.  Everybody and his dog has something to say about obesity -- where it comes from, what to do about it, and who's at fault.  Few, however, are actually helpful.  Further, there are a great many entities which have a great deal to lose if a "cure" is widely available -- and these entities are frequently the most vociferous about what we should be doing.  (It's obvious how effective their advice is, too....)

How can anyone trust the advice of those who are making a lot of money out of the overweight???  But people do.  [eyes rolling]

We have to make ourselves responsible for our own health, because nobody else really has a stake in it.  If you must have a doctor to help you with some aspect, you should do your homework and see if his/her philosophy jibes with yours.  There ARE low-carb-sympathetic doctors out there, just as there are those who have had weight problems of their own.  Some of them have licked their weight challenges; i can only imagine that they have a little more insight and empathy than the always-lean ones -- but if they succeeded through starving and running marathons at the age of thirty, and you're 55 and female ... who knows?  ;-)

I'm sure i'm preaching to the choir when it comes to those who read here often.  I just hope that any newcomers will be inspired to think about it on my suggestion....

horrible American food and dietary habits!!!

I'm in San Francisco for another visit this week.  It ain't N'Orleans, but we haven't had a bad meal yet. This is part of why i get a little annoyed with sweeping statements about how bad "American" food is, and how it's no wonder so many people are fat, seeing as how we eat fastfood all the time.

HUH?  News to me....

The Americas, in fact, have an awe-inspiring culinary heritage as a result of being the "melting pot of the world."  That statement may sound like a piece of self-important fatuousness, but like most banal truisms it has a basis in fact.  When people came here from all over the globe, they brought their food traditions -- and recipes -- with them.  The magic happened when old-world dishes couldn't be made exactly as they were before, and new-world ingredients were added in an attempt to replace the unobtainable.

Can ANYONE deplore the addition of pumpkins ... tomatoes ... CHOCOLATE to the world's collective cuisine?  I even stand staunchly behind potatoes and maize (if it's properly nixtamalized...).  Stevia.  Turkeys.  Why fixate on Dr. Pemberton's contribution to international culture and forget the rest?  And why conflate greedy businessmen trying to make a fortune off a cheap product, with creative purveyors of outstanding cuisine?

Jokes (and prejudices) aside, there's a wealth of great food here.  If you can't find it, you don't know how to look.  In some of the most out-of-the-way, unlikely places one may find a jewel, and some of the shabbiest dives serve the best food -- i could tell you stories....  Customers flock to our farmers' markets, which are packed with beautiful locally-produced foods of every variety.  Grass-fed beef, pastured pork, poultry and eggs, raw milk (where legal) are eagerly sought by people in-the-know, who impatiently sit on waiting-lists for an opportunity to buy.

Yes, a LOT of people eat McDonald's "food."  Most people don't eat it often, though.  They grab a burger or some doughnuts when they're on the highway or vacationing in a strange place, because they know what they'll be getting, and these places are EVERYWHERE.  Pizza becomes a "treat," when you don't allow yourself to eat it but once a year.  Ditto for Kentucky Fried Chicken.  These are things we picnicked on when we skipped classes and went to the park instead; we sat on the grass and listened to Chicago or Crosby, Stills & Nash on transistor radios, and "made out" in public to the shocked disbelief of our elders....

The only "people" i know who really seem to LIKE fastfoods are children of a certain stage of development, and i suspect it has a lot to do with the rarity of their visits, the fact that they don't get to drink soda with meals at home, the especially-enticing playground equipment, and the collectible toys that come with the "meals."  My grandchildren have the same enthusiasm for McD's that my own kids did; none of them has ever eaten like this regularly, because responsible parents (and there ARE a lot of them here, despite the poor advice they get about childrearing) don't allow it as a generality.  This stuff is designed to entice kids, and SOME kids (far from all) bullyrag their parents into going there SOMETIMES.  Especially when vacationing.

But "bad American food"?  It's out there, but it's pretty easy to avoid, too.  Next time you're in St. Louis, go to Billie's Fine Foods -- it's an old-school diner, and it has one of the best omelettes i've ever tasted, the Supreme.  Highly reminiscent of a supreme pizza, as a matter of fact.  At the Deja Vu in New Orleans, get the Deja Vu omelette (not available during Mardi Gras week, though).  These are not places you'll find in touristy areas -- you actually have to look for them, google-search good restaurants in strange towns and read the reviews.  Of course, if your bus is leaving in 20 minutes and you're ravenous, McDonald's and Cici's Pizza IS right there, and you know what you're getting....

nutritional groupies and espionage agents

"Why can't we all just ... get along?"  [sotto-voce chuckle]

We go through a sine-wave* pattern of argument in the nutritional blogosphere....  You'd think we would have outgrown the ganging-up and spying-out impulses by this time in our lives.  Some writers we agree with, and some we don't.  I don't read the ones that i KNOW can't benefit me, because there are more things worth reading than time in which to read them.  Others may certainly do something different if it amuses them!

Attempts to "reason" with someone who disagrees is ALWAYS in vain.  We all have our reasons for holding the opinions we do, and "truth" is relative to the complexity of experience.  What is applicable to a 20-something male gym-rat (or even a 40-something male gym-rat) is completely irrelevant to this 50-something, hypothyroid, energetically-challenged female body.  What kind of mental process is capable of assuming that it COULD be?  Obviously, only one with a very limited experience of life.

"Vitamin X turned my life around, and statistics show that a majority of people are deficient; therefore, EVERYBODY needs to swallow handfuls of X!"

"Mineral Y is DANGEROUSLY HIGH in a small minority of the population!!!  NOBODY should EVER supplement Y, and EVERYBODY should carefully avoid foods containing this POISONOUS substance!"

Bullshit.

I have my own opinions about what people are better off eating/avoiding, but it doesn't matter.  People WILL follow the diet of their choice despite the "evidence" of its wholesomeness.  People WANT to believe that what they like is good for them ... or at least "not THAT bad."  Time will tell.

There's room for disagreement, but not for outright lies.  There have been LIES published recently (and from time immemorial), and misled groupies of the liars run around defending and promoting and acting like silly teens who think their gurus can do no wrong.  I'm not saying that any of us is exempt from being MISTAKEN, but intellectual honesty is the aim of science, and there's a distinct shortage of that in some theoretically-scientific blogs.

What i write here is subjective -- it's what works for me, and meant as an expression of what MIGHT work for others LIKE ME.  There's no suggestion that these ideas may be universally applicable.  However, i'm not out to build readership by writing provocative articles; if i get playful or go on a rant from time to time, you're perfectly welcome to ... ignore me!  ;-)
___
* i almost wrote "wine-save" -- is that a freudian slip, or what?  ;-)

a mom discovers....

:-)  Anyone else amused by the advertising headlines on websites?  A mom discovers this, a mom likes that, a mom does something-or-other....

Perhaps marketers have decided that the word is magical.  Take an idea that's close to our cultural hearts, dumb it down, make it cuddlier, stick it in some unlikely places, and voila -- $ALE$!!!

I have to confess, "ad execs" have been pushing my buttons (in a negative way) for a looooong time.  When talking about them, you just HAVE to abbreviate their titles, because of course this is what they're all about:  short cuts to fame and glory.  AD-ver-ti-sing....  Way too many syllables.  May confuse people.  I can't even stand comedies about the business -- their "reasoning" just offends my logic circuits.  I really enjoy the film-noir classic "Laura" for many reasons, but when it came out that she was in advertising, my thought was, oh go ahead and kill off your title character, it's not like the world needs more of THOSE.  ;-)

Then, there's the very word "mom"....  "I'm a MAWWWM."  I seem to recall the first time i heard this in a commercial; i stared at the screen in nauseated fascination.  What kind of person defines herself as a mawwwm?  You kinda expect her to continue by saying, "I overindulge my children and micromanage their lives.  I allow them to defy their teachers, be rude to service people, and become bad citizens, because i want to be their FRIEND."

EEEEK!!!  ...Sorry, that just slipped out.

The only thing that competes on the same level with this marketing gambit is the the "one weird trick" technique.  I have to wonder if they have no intention of TRYING to sell their one weird trick, and it's only to generate more traffic to the site in question, and therefore sell more advertising THERE?  Maybe it's one big convoluted ad-selling cycle?  You travel from one site to the next to the next to the next, and back to the first....  Talk about money for nothing!

It just amazes me that this stuff is effective.  I've concluded that the field is for natural-born con artists with an honest streak, like cold-case specialists are the opposite side of the coin from stalking psychopaths.  Raymond Chandler (yes, i DO like that genre...) hit the nail on the head when he described chess, "as elaborate a waste of human intelligence as you can find outside an advertising agency."

happy fathers' day

At least, in the US....  There's a goodly difference between the hooplah one sees on Mothers' Day and that of Fathers' Day here.  I think it may have to do with the different principle being celebrated:  we have a greater affection for the nurturers in our lives than for the authoritarians (although, i'm under the impression that the woman who originally promoted the holiday had no mother, and actually was seeking to show appreciation for her nurturing FATHER).

Then, i suspect that my generation was one in which the STANDARD of fathering took a nosedive.  Among the people i knew well, fathers such as one saw on television simply didn't exist.  No "dads" as in Leave it to Beaver, My Three Sons, Father Knows Best....  They were conspicuous by their lack.  Perhaps it was because THEIR fathers were not family-focused -- they were the children of the roaring twenties, and people had more "important" things on their minds.  Parenting is something people learn from their own (either being like them or being 180-degree different), so what one doesn't learn is really hard to practice.

The pendulum has swung the other direction now, and i see many fathers who are a lot more involved than used to be common.  I applaud them!  (My SIL is one of these....)  When parents work as a team to raise children well, everything flows more smoothly -- of course, when they team up to turn their children into spoiled brats things go commensurately badly, too.  But an "involved" father is definitely a good thing in general.

A little authoritarianism can be a good thing for kids -- they need to learn that their own immature, subjective view of things isn't necessarily an appropriate one.  When we gain some experience and perspective, however, authoritarian behavior becomes impertinent.  X's observations about life are not less valid than Y's, simply because Y belongs to a "club" which exists to agree on a subject and steamroller those who disagree.

This is what we see with organizations like the ADA, AMA, ad infinitum.  They are CLUBS, gangs, whose raison d'etre is to promote their own importance and wealth:  nothing more nor less.  They'll make noises about protecting the populace and promoting appropriate standard of care, but that's nonsense in the face of their actual activities.

I was really tickled by something Gary Taubes said around the time of the last "red meat scare" -- "Every time in the past that these researchers had claimed that an association observed in their observational trials was a causal relationship, and that causal relationship had then been tested in experiment, the experiment had failed to confirm the causal interpretation — i.e., the folks from Harvard got it wrong.  Not most times, but every time.  No exception.  Their batting average circa 2007, at least, was .000."

Sometimes journalists get it right....

theory and practice

The important thing, in so many different areas and on so many different levels is ... what WORKS?

That's what my blog is all about.  Doesn't matter what the researchers (and dilettantes) philosophize -- if theory (actually, hypothesis) doesn't fit what happens in real life, it ain't true.  And i'm not calling genetically-engineered rodents "real life."  For flesh-and-blood humans who want to shed a few pounds, what WORKS?

What kind of alternate universe do some "scientists" inhabit?  My guess is, it's one where there are no actual physical NEEDS -- just ***ideas*** tra la la....

How many times has a certain philosophy "made sense" and yet turned out to be 180-degree WRONG?  [cough **lipid hypothesis** cough...]  "Just logical" reasoning put us in the position we now inhabit:  ELMM!  CICO!

Raspberries.  The shoe doesn't fit.

non-diet complications from my long absence

I had meant to be away from home just ten or eleven days -- turned out to be nineteen.  If i'd known beforehand, i would have done a few things differently.

I left my enzymes at home, because their bottle is friggin' huge.  I figured i wouldn't miss them much, but i did.

My facial scrub stayed behind in the bathroom, too, and it's going to be several days before my skin feels quite right.  Already having a million things to pack, doing without some items which i don't use every day SEEMS to make things easier and more straightforward ... but it also can turn into a handicap in the long run.  I made up for doing without my pumice-stone by getting a professional pedicure -- now, THAT part was a GOOD idea!  ;-)

I took the battery-powered disposable electric toothbrush instead of the "serious" one.  Mistake.  Yesterday i felt like my teeth were REALLY clean for the first time in a month ... especially since i ate a little real sugar, which i almost never do at home.

A lot of the little things we do every day contribute to our happiness and sanity, so when we make-do it can take a toll on well-being.  Would i have been less stressed if i had packed another bag to accommodate the daily-use STUFF i'm enjoying today?  Who knows:  all i'm sure of is, my own bed would never have fit.

searching

As usual, J Stanton inspires....

He observes (among other things) that, though real "news" in the paleo blogosphere is rarer and rarer as time goes by, we still avidly pursue the trickles of information that emerge, searching for ... something.  Of course we do.  Seeking to improve our lives is a basic human drive.

Some lucky people really don't have much to gain by way of health, fitness and well-being, others desperately seek the youth they've lost, and way too many are looking for the properly-functioning body they never had.  Therefore, separate camps have evolved, and thus support systems exist for all conceivable subgroups.  This is highly appropriate -- but it's absolutely absurd that the camps should each consider itself THE One Holy Catholic Church of Radiant Health, and all others HERETICS.

They just need to be honest with themselves about what their specific goals are.  A lot of them aren't, and in some cases apparently can't.  Egos have taken over.  The desire to help others has been subjugated to the desire to lead a cadre of idolaters in some cases; to build careers; to get approbation from the kewl kids in order to bolster fragile self-esteem.  Even some whose scholarship can hardly be doubted damage their potential influence through their overweening arrogance.  Sad ... and self-defeating.

All the groups have their places, because they're serving the needs of some very different people.  The young and "unbroken" human body cannot be the experimental model for the ideal treatment of the older and "challenged" -- how could anyone expect it to be?  Isn't it OBVIOUS that there are no easy universal SOLUTIONS?  Some information is generally useful, and some completely individual, like what supplements will really benefit health.  I'm constantly amazed when people who don't know anything about ME will make absolute pronouncements about what i should and should not take.  How can some people be so presumptuous?

Disagreements are bound to happen, since one man's meat is another man's poison.  I started this blog because i couldn't find one that chronicled the experiences of a woman with problems like enough to mine; if a community of us might FIND EACH OTHER, our individual experiences might compile themselves into a body of knowledge that would be more enlightening than what we'd discover on our own.  What I'M searching for is applicable information.  I don't pretend to have anything to TEACH anyone, but i may be a specimen that allows others to learn.  The young and sound probably won't find much here; that's fine.  Their indifference/disapprobation doesn't hurt my feelings a bit.  I'm unlikely to learn anything from them, either, but they'll get my admiration if they earn it.

There are those who will sneer at all others whom they consider not "scientific" enough, but when their "science" doesn't take into account ALL variations of experience, they don't qualify, either.  If they provide useful information to SOME seekers, well, more power to 'em.  I just hope that the seekers whom they fail realize that there are a lot more ports in the storm.

the glamour of the unknown

I almost wrote a post about the "problem" of advertising influencing children, the availability of proscribed substances to them (AND to adults), and the place of the parents in all this brouhaha....  It's hard to discourage the immature mind from pursuing deleterious substances and behaviors, especially when they may be looked on as something of a rite-of-passage into an autonomous style of existence.  The young long for adulthood, because they see all of these shiny "toys" they aren't allowed to play with (yet), and suppose that attainment will mean happiness ... or at least a less limited life.

We seem to be hard-wired to want to push boundaries, even into the realm of ugliness and degradation.  The bad boy/girl is an attractive image in our culture -- someone who breaks free and goes after what they want, no matter who gets trampled in the rush.  I believe the appeal lies in novelty, escaping routines and seeing enticing possibilities.  In actual experience, after the initial excitement is past, new routines will assert themselves and the limitations will be just as great as before.  It may be "different" but it can also be mighty uncomfortable.

When we grow up, all of the "toys" become less of a joy and more of a responsibility.  Now that we are allowed to stay up as late as we want, eat and drink what we will, buy anything we can afford -- essentially, do whatever we please -- we learn to see the downside, and why limiting our pleasures increases our enjoyment of them.  The grass IS green ... but there's a bunch of dandelions in it, and it needs mowing regularly.  We can shirk the responsibilities that come our way, but there are repercussions ... some of them nasty.

We see the hypnotic effect of this "glamour of the unknown" VERY often in living history.  A huge number of people are enamoured of the past; i'm very curious about how they think their personal lives would really be different, had they been born 100, 200, 500 years before.  DETAILS would be different, but you get up in the morning, do your allotment of work, interact with your family, eat, sleep and wear clothing, don't get everything you want, have experiences you'd rather avoid, and get your heart broken just the same as nowadays.  Without internet.  New reenactors dash out and get fancy clothes and equipment, but the ladies lace their corsets less tightly with every passing year....

This may be the reason why a good fantasy never goes out of style:  being "impossible" to experience, the bloom can never be lost from it.  But it isn't just the fancy trappings that create the appeal of those "far-away places with strange-sounding names" -- is a palm tree better than an oak, a rum cocktail better than a glass of wine, 100-degree heat better than 20-degree chill?  What we really want when we make a cultural escape is to start over, and maybe get it right this time.  We carry our problems with us, though -- inside our heads and hearts.  A different locale, more toys, prettier clothes, A THINNER BODY, etc. is not going to improve things a bit without a mental adjustment as well.

Wanting things we don't have, because an advertiser convinces us to think THINGS will make us happy, is a cycle of frustration.  This includes "things" like vacations, taste experiences, new lovers, almost anything!  Thumb your nose at them, and teach your kids to do the same.

individuality

The more i read, the more it becomes patent that we're all a little different when it comes to what is required for weight loss.  In vain do the theoreticians spin their hypotheses using a very few people (or worse, rodents), when SO MANY sources of "the" problem exist.

Take that infamous "bland calorie" study:  d'ya know how many individuals were involved in it?  FOUR.  F-O-U-R.  All the big conclusions drawn from it were based on the behavior and results of ONE MAN.  How the [expletive deleted] can any halfway intelligent "researcher" look himself honestly in the soul and say "this is indeed significant"....

A blogger whose writings i respect because she's not only been in the trenches herself, but has the persistence to study and the intelligence to interpret, has extremely valuable things to say ... but not every conclusion she draws is applicable to ME, either.  We have lots in common, but she has a different kind of metabolic damage and i have age issues she won't have to tackle for a couple of decades yet.  Our "solution" is not the same.

Another gentleman says he doesn't dare have around his house a particular food which, to me, is the epitome of innocent, self-limiting eating.  One lady would scaarf down, unresistingly, a substance which i allow to spoil in my fridge.  Individuals.

The ways to God fat loss are as many as the breaths of the sons of men.  ;-)

breaking news: bad diet promotes ... bad diet!

I've been having car trouble, far from home.  The good news is, of course, that if i'm going to be STUCK far from home, my daughter's house is the best place to do it.  On the other hand, with the holiday atmosphere going on right now (the school year having ended yesterday and my husband around all week), the calm atmosphere dear to my soul has been non-existent.  I've been eating crunchy things, a horrible temptation i have when frustrated.

There's a new baby elephant in the room.  I guess i have to experience difficulties of the present kind to help keep me humble, because this is something i would NEVER have expected to happen.

My brain isn't working right.  My mood is "off," too.  My body is uncomfortable.  I'm whining....

I KNOW i need to go back to a clean diet and i'll feel much better, but my motivation is in the basement ... or would be, if there WERE a basement here.  It's kinda like in a monster movie, when a character knows s/he is turning into a badguy and doesn't want to do it, but can't stop the process.  I'm sure my regular readers are familiar with the study in which a prison population was randomized and given a vitamin or not:  micronutrients were found to significantly affect behavior.  Is the sneaking "creep" of antinutrients in a restaurant diet (even in GOOD restaurants) stealing away my brain- as well as my will-power?

Kinda looks like it, doesn't it?  D'ya ever see the sad-looking person at the next table with a plateful of pasta or big ol' sandwich that's mostly bread, and you want to say, "For heaven's sake, throw that away and get yourself a STEAK!"  It's not as easy for them as it would be for us; they've been brainwashed by their very diets.  They're zombies.  They're Indiana Jones before Short Round poked him in the belly with the torch.

Ouch.  I'm okay now.  But now i have to exert the self-discipline which gets me back onto the correct path.  I can do it.

doctors i have despised ... and respected

I humbly admit to being a raging bigot ... when it comes to the medical profession!  :-)  As well as the bad taste one gets in one's mouth from what we read of them online (both BY them and ABOUT them), i have plenty of first-hand experience of their arrogance, ineptitude and stupidity.

I'm sure the first quality will be debated by nobody outside the profession.  If you don't belong to their immaculate priesthood, you couldn't POSSIBLY be worthy to discuss the emerging evidence that all we've "known" about nutrition for most of our lives is incorrect -- or any other subject for that matter..  Tell me, is there a class in medical school called Attitude 101?  Or maybe it's just a groupthink thing -- to maintain their position in society they HAVE to be right about everything, all the time.  They couldn't possibly be misled themselves.  What's in the medical books is FACT, scientifically unassailable, and any other doctor who disagrees is a heretic, after whom the AMA and FDA will be coming any day now.  Patients MUST believe in their omniscience.  ...Sounds like the placebo effect to me, that anyone ever benefits from consulting one.

As far as ineptitude and stupidity are concerned, you have to wonder -- these people have GOOD BRAINS!  They couldn't have gotten through all that schooling without them.  Why are they so susceptible to the blandishments of drug reps, then -- where's the skepticism?  When they read about the chicanery practiced by Ancel Keys and the nonsense presented during the McGovern-led hearings, how can they brush it aside without THINKING, the way most of them do?

How can a fat, unhealthy doctor confront his patients and proclaim, "do what i say, because i know what i'm talking about"?  First, trying to take care of HIMSELF and finding his own advice doesn't work, HOW on god's earth can he not doubt the validity of his beliefs?  A certain doctor, whom i know only socially, is the poster-child for the point of view i'm describing -- his diet is appalling.  I honestly like the man but ... DAMN.

There are plenty of "professionally revolting" doctors out there, too.  From the GP i'd seen only once, who tried to make a house-call uninvited after i had returned from a hospital stay, to my "favorite," the ritzy Houston endocrinologist who declared that it didn't matter how bad i felt, because my blood-test numbers were good....  I don't know how these dickweeds can live with themselves.

On the other hand, there are some who deserve all the blessings the gods can give them -- some have MY blessings already!  The men who "fixed" my mother's knees and eyes were paragons of their art.  The two doctors i had, who themselves suffered from thyroid problems, who taught me a great deal i had never heard before (and i was no spring chicken when i consulted them) -- one of whom, additionally, educated me on allergens -- these were worth their weight in gold.  The female doctor, actually was worth her weight in something more like platinum (the skinny thing)....  It was a dark day for me when she left her Texas practice.

One or two friends, being aware of my predilection, voice surprise that there are blogs that i read and endorse which are written by [gasp] DOCTORS!  :-)  Doctors, of course, are like plumbers and hair-stylists, in that there are great ones as well as the piss-poor.  It's just that there's a limit to how much damage a crummy plumber can do.

There are those who will say we have to cut doctors some slack, because after all, they're only human.  My reply is, they can't have it both ways.  They can't insist on maintaining their monopoly when their track record in so godawful.  The excellence of trauma-care cannot cancel out their abyssmal record in the advancement of wellness.  Until the physician learns to heal him/herself, my trust and confidence will be firmly withheld.

addition to my supplement list

As a result of some discussions of inositol on Wooo's blog, i've decided to add it to my collection of daily supplements.  DAMN, that collection is getting extensive!  :-)  I don't take every single one of them every single day, but ... damn.

Inositol is not classified as a "vitamin" because we CAN make it for ourselves.  Danger signal for me:  i so obviously DON'T manufacture and absorb things like "normal" people, whenever i find out something like this -- especially if the word "thyroid" is in the description or pathway -- i have to learn more, and possibly try it for myself.

Information on the 'net about how to use it and what it interacts with, is a lot sketchier than with some of my other supplements -- the latter are carefully grouped so as to give me the most nutritional bang for my buck.  Tyrosine allies with copper (on the days i take it) early in the morning, and magnesium is scrupulously placed in the bedtime group.  But inositol?  Save for some psychiatric drugs (which are not in my repertory -- i take no prescribed pharmaceuticals), i can't find much about it competing or abetting....

On one site, i DID find a suggestion about it being lacking in hypothyroids, and on another was a hint that it might be excessively excreted in those whose carbohydrate tolerance is iffy.  The latter conclusion with me has been one of comparatively-recent realization; i've known for years that low-carb is best for me, but just how poor my tolerance is, is an ongoing revelation.  However, i've grown quite proud of how my health has improved as a result of my diet and supplement choices, because of the care i take to bolster the specific nutritional needs of my struggling thyroid gland AND conversion-of-T4-to-T3 (with my liver especially in mind).  Only my energy levels need improvement at this point.

So i encourage my readers with experience of inositol use to chime in and tell me what WebMD and the others don't (won't?)!  I tell ya, i learn more from you all and the other bloggers listed here, than i ever have from "official" health sources....

time for a little more "woo"

I'm occasionally troubled by the attitudes of "friends" on Facebook.  Some get very wrapped up in one or another group ideology, and seem to lose their humaneness.  Others seem to feel privileged to rebuke complete strangers for being too sensitive about some very loaded subjects.  There are those who can't be happy, and must always have something to complain about, however small.  Then there's the ... never mind, you get the point.

Is it the anonymity of the internet which encourages people to express themselves in ways they wouldn't dream of, face to face?  Is this the "real person" behind the facade they present to the everyday world?  Are some displacing rage they actually feel in a different direction, toward targets unable to effectually give them the response they might otherwise expect?  Or is it self-hate to which they are reacting, trying to justify their choices, to themselves, by making virtues of either vices or plain necessity?

In whatever case, i pray for something which i really have no hope of seeing -- that they would all take a quiet hour and examine their hearts. 

A young man i know complains of his bad karma.  It's no wonder -- bad karma it truly is, and all of his own creation.  Whether religiously-inclined or not, most of the people i know believe in some kind of repercussion from their behavior, be it heaven/hell, the self-approbation/condemnation of a rational humanist, good results in the Judgement Hall of Osiris -- whatever.  Myself, i believe in both lifetime and afterlife rewards. 

I believe that emanating hatred earns you hatred, and hostility, hostility.  You know, the old "as you sow, so shall you reap" thing.  A little understanding and compassion toward others goes a long way.  "Judge not, lest ye be judged," and "forgive us commensurately with how we forgive others"....

Conversely to what disheartens me on some social websites and forums, i also see much good ... and more is possible.  Goodwill is just as contagious as nastiness.  As long as i'm in a quoting mood, there's this one:  "Smile!  it'll make everyone wonder what you're up to" -- remember that?  :-)  Smiling is contagious.  I even read once that the physical act has a mental response, in increased cheerfulness, and it seems to bear out in practice.

Do YOURSELF a favor, and cultivate cheerfulness and compassion -- it pays more than you might expect.