Free the Animal

Mastery and Control of Your Life

Reader and commenter Tin Tin sent me the following and it's really special. It aired on Australia's 60-Minutes program. Backyard Revolution.

Of course, as with virtually everything you see, there's the continual emphasis on eating plants and demonization of fat. But look beyond that. This is more about real food, and even more -- if you pay close attention -- this is about taking responsibility for your food and ultimately, mastery and control of your own life.

The video is about 12 minutes long, the first half of which is about backyard gardening, primarily. The second half is better, featuring Link Walker -- who lives off the land along with his family -- and professor Kerin O'Dea. It's slightly funny that so much of the piece is about fruits and vegetables ("Low in Fat!!! Yea"), yet watch what Link and his family are up to: getting meat, and lots of it.

Here's a notable quote from O'Dea, who took Australian Aborigines suffering from the typical laundry list of modern diseases into the bush to live off the land for seven weeks:

We lived off the land for seven weeks and in that time, all of the metabolic abnormalities of diabetes and all of the risk factors for heart disease that I could measure just plummeted. People changed, those Aboriginal people changed completely when they went back to the bush. They were in charge of their lives. And they had this sense that we talk about now of mastery and control over their lives and we know that when people have a sense of mastery and control, they're healthier.

Now, see? Don't discount mastery of your life as a huge part of your overall improvement in well-being on the paleo/primal path. This is why I avoid politics and all involvement in it like the plague, and why I consider it just as toxic to well-being as grains and processed frankenfood.

Why waste time with anything that exists primarily to divorce you from mastery and control of your own life? I can't think of anything more unhealthy.

Modern Day Weston Price?

Well, perhaps not exactly, but let's see if we can't find something to cheer about. But first, in review:

In 1939, he published Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, a book that details a series of ethnographic nutritional studies performed by Price across diverse cultures.

Some of the cultures studied include the inhabitants of the Lötschental in Switzerland, the inhabitants of the Isles of Lewis and Harris in the Outer Hebrides of Scotland, the Eskimos of Alaska and Canada, the Native Americans, among the inhabitants of New Caledonia, Fiji, Samoa, the Marquesas Islands, Tahiti, Rarotonga, Nukuʻalofa, Hawaii, the Masai, Kikuyu, Wakamba and Jalou tribes of Kenya, the Muhima of Uganda, the Baitu and Watusi of Rwanda, the Pygmies, and Wanande in the Congo, the Terrakeka, Dinka and Neurs of Sudan, the Aborigines of Australia, the inhabitants of the Torres Strait, the Māori of New Zealand, the Tauhuanocans, Quechua, "Andes Indians", "Sierra Indians" and "Jungle Indians" of Peru.

In his studies he found that plagues of modern civilization (headaches, general muscle fatigue, dental caries (cavities), impacted molars, tooth crowding, allergies, heart disease, asthma, and degenerative diseases such as tuberculosis and cancer) were not present in those cultures sustained by indigenous diets. However, within a single generation these same cultures experienced all the above listed ailments with the inclusion of Western foods in their diet: refined sugars, refined flours, canned goods, etc.

The book is available online.

Now comes San Francisco physician, Daphne Miller, and a book called The Jungle Effect. Given the title of this blog, that's certainly a book title that I could get behind.

So, just from the cover, I can kinda get an idea of which way this book slants. I'm sure Michael "eat mostly plants" Pollan would approve.

At any rate, thanks to a friend down the hall (thanks, Marcus) I did listen to a radio interview and I think she does get a lot of fundamentals right. Obviously, number one and the thing I can even agree with whole food vegetarians and vegans about: dump the flour, sugar, vegetable oils and all the myriad products derived therefrom, and you'll be way better off. And, in fact, in spite of all the cheering around here over natural fats and the meats they go so well together with, it must be emphasized that the very most critical aspect of all of this is getting the processed frankenfood crap out of your life.

You'll be glad you did, and you may even end up embracing a Paleo-like, high-fat diet, as I do.

Now, this is not a book review. Dave Dixon at Spark of Reason has done a more than adequate job of that.

However, I did listen to the complete 55-minute interview on KQED, public radio. That was quite interesting in that she clearly understands that it's not just natives eating native food, but what happens to some of the natives who venture to the modern world. They get the same sets of diseases, and when they return, they no longer look anything like their brothers and sisters -- no bout a result of many added pounds, as well as the fat-face inflammation that I used to suffer from and so many Americans still do (for more information, consult the "Dean Ornish chubby-face diet"). She also seems to know about disease association issues with vitamin D, and says that virtually 100% of the patients she sees in San Francisco are deficient.

But the real funny thing, one that gives me a different perspective than I had after reading Dave's book review, is her manner of almost apologizing over the issue of fat. In one segment of the interview, she acknowledges healthful cultures that get a lot of fat from heavy cream. She offers it up both apologetically and also as a kind of paradox. In another segment, she admits that the Okinawans totally converted her to being a pork lover and now she even cooks with "modest" amounts of lard. (You know, the Okinawans who live so long because of the white rice and fish they eat.) Anyway, note to the doc: you know about the Inuit "paradox," I gather. How about the Massai, who get about 35% of calories from saturated fat? And most of all, how about the Tokelauans, who get a whopping 50% of their calories, not just from total fat (60%+), but from saturated fat. I trust, good doctor, that you don't need a lesson in hypothesis (diet-heat-cholesterol) falsification.

Anyway, lest I dwell too much on the negative, I am generally positive about Dr. Miller's work, Dan Buettner's Blue Zones work, and heck, even Michael "eat mostly plants" Pollan.

Let's get over processed and "convenient," packaged, flour and sugar laden anti-food, and then we can quibble about how much fat, how much meat, how little vegetable, etc. And, even though I avoid all grains and legumes (as well as dairy), as I want optimal nutrition (and grains and legumes can't hold a candle to meat, fat, veggies, fruits and nuts, when these replace grains and legumes in the diet), there is certainly benefit to handling some of the nastier lectins in grains and legumes through soaking, sprouting, and/or fermenting -- all methods used by various wise cultures over centuries.

Vitamin K2, Menatetrenone (MK-4)

Since my last but fairly recent vitamin K2 post, Stephan has posted on K2 from the perspective of cardiovascular disease.

Take a good look at it, as well the references he cites. Did you read his other posts on K2, as I suggested? If not, maybe now is the time. I previously wrote:

You really owe it to yourself to look into this. Think of it this way: 60 years ago they were curing cavities in teeth by getting them to re-calcify using this exact thing. Now, think of what happens with a vitamin D deficiency; rickets, right? rubbery bones. Calcium. Other mineral salts. What you will find is that these vitamins, in combination, essentially cause your minerals to go everyplace they should, and no place they shouldn't (such as the walls of your arteries).

Now here's some of the research Stephan dug up.

• Tissue-specific utilization of menaquinone-4 results in the prevention of arterial calcification in warfarin-treated rats. (link)

• Dietary intake of menaquinone is associated with a reduced risk of coronary heart disease: the Rotterdam Study. (link)

• High dietary menaquinone intake is associated with reduced coronary calcification. (link)

• Matrix Gla-protein: the calcification inhibitor in need of vitamin K. (link)

Coincidentally, Loren Cordain's free newsletter was about the K vitamins this week and here's an excerpt.

There are two different forms of vitamin K: Vitamin K1, or phylloquinone, is found in green plants such as green, leafy vegetables. Vitamin K2, more properly designated: menaquinones (MK), is bacterially synthesized forms of Vitamin K (especially anaerobic bacteria that is present in the lower bowel).

The main function of Vitamin K is to carboxylate or activate a class of proteins called Gla-proteins. Phylloquinone [K1] preferably carboxylates or activates clotting factors in the liver, and menaquinones [K2] preferably carboxylate or activate other Gla-proteins such as matrix-Gla protein (which prevents calcification of soft tissues such as arteries) and osteocalcin (which is responsible for depositing calcium in the bones where it belongs).

So, how do we get it? Well, the best place is in food. Cordian's suggestion:

Liver and to a lesser extent meat also contain MKs and, as Dr. Cordain has explained on the website, organ meats were favoured parts of the animal so presumably this was one way our hunter-gatherer ancestors would have gotten their MKs. And, let's not forget menaquinones from gut bacteria. Unfortunately, today that may not be as reliable a source for some since we now live in a world with the generalized use of antibiotics, which may destroy gut flora.

Therefore, it could be useful to include organic organ meats (such as liver) in your diet, to maintain a healthy gut bacteria flora by supplementing with a broad spectrum probiotic supplement when an antibiotic is needed, to eat enough soluble fibre found in vegetables and certain fruits (such as apples) and prebiotic containing vegetables (such as onions and garlic).

Easy for me, as I love liver. Here's also a list from the excellent Chris Masterjohn article I previously linked. As you can see, various organ meats and eggs seem to be highest, but the general message is clear: eat lots of meats. Makes sense, huh?

As far as supplemental sources, I think it's a good idea, and also for omega-3 fats and vitamin D3. I'll post about the importance of the omega-3 fats later, but essentially my regime on non-fasting days is 3g of salmon oil (3 gel caps), 2g of cod liver oil (2 gel caps), 1g of butter oil (2 caps) from Green Pastures (for the K2, MK-4). I also try to get a few hours of skin exposed sunlight per week during the spring & summer, and then I supplement 4,000 IU of D3 daily from October to April. There's a few other K2 (MK-4) sources: Thorne, Carlson, and here's a D3/K2 (MK-4) combo from Nature's Plus.

Other than that, I take no other supplements, no multi-vitamin or anything. Just food.

And what of my experience? Well, the K2 is the only one I definitely "feel." Marked difference in softness of skin overnight, and my wife has since noticed her skin improve as well. Within a few days, all plaque deposits on my teeth dissolved and have not returned. This has been a big issue, as I had gum disease and two surgeries about seven years ago. Since getting off grains (probably the gluten) my gum disease has reversed completely according to the dentist. And now, my teeth are virtually always smooth. I rarely feel the need to brush them.

The following excerpt suggests why.

Weston Price was primary interested in Activator X because of its ability to control dental caries. By studying the remains of human skeletons from past eras, he estimated that there had been more dental caries in the preceding hundred years than there had been in any previous thousand-year period and suggested that Activator X was a key substance that people of the past obtained but that modern nutrition did not adequately provide. Price used the combination of high-vitamin cod liver oil and high-Activator X butter oil as the cornerstone of his protocol for reversing dental caries. This protocol not only stopped the progression of tooth decay, but completely reversed it without the need for oral surgery by causing the dentin to grow and remineralize, sealing what were once active caries with a glassy finish. One 14-year-old girl completely healed 42 open cavities in 24 teeth by taking capsules of the high-vitamin cod liver oil and Activator X concentrate three times a day for seven months.

Activator X also influences the composition of saliva. Price found that if he collected the saliva of individuals immune to dental caries and shook it with powdered bone or tooth meal, phosphorus would move from the saliva to the powder; by contrast, if he conducted the same procedure with the saliva of individuals susceptible to dental caries, the phosphorus would move in the opposite direction from the powder to the saliva. Administration of the Activator X concentrate to his patients consistently changed the chemical behavior of their saliva from phosphorus-accepting to phosphorus-donating. The Activator X concentrate also reduced the bacterial count of their saliva. In a group of six patients, administration of the concentrate reduced the Lactobacillus acidophilus count from 323,000 to 15,000. In one individual, the combination of cod liver oil and Activator X concentrate reduced the L. acidophilus count from 680,000 to 0.

As a final note, you can round out your calcification management by checking out the Track Your Plaque program, along with Dr Davis' Heart Scan Blog.

What Causes Heart Disease?

In a mental exercise I posted yesterday, I asked readers to speculate as to the order of most likely cause of heart disease and death from myocardial infarction.

The facts are that death by MI was unheard of in 1910 (about 100 years ago), had risen to 3,000 deaths per year by 1930, and to 500,000 by 1960. Then I provided eight food group categories, A - H, and indicated how much each had changed over the last 100 years, but without telling you which group was which. So here we go:

• A; sugar and sweeteners: 100% increase
• B; eggs, fruit (excl. citrus), vegetables, whole grain: Moderate decrease
• C; lowfat milk: 100% increase 
• D; whole (full fat) milk: 50% decrease
• E; butter, lard, tallow: 70% decrease (30 lbs. per person per year to under 10)
• F; vegetable oils (incl. hydrogenated): 437% increase (11 lbs. pppy to 59) 
• G; poultry: 280% increase (18 lbs. pppy to 70)
• H; beef; 46% increase (54 lbs. pppy to 79) 

So, if one were to simply line it up by the numbers, the order would be like this:

1. Massive increase in vegetable oil consumption.
2. Huge increase in poultry consumption. 
3. Large increase in sugar and sweeteners.
4. Large increase in low fat milk consumption. 
5. Large decrease in animal fat consumption (butter, lard, tallow).
6. Moderate decrease in whole, full fat milk consumption.
7. Moderate increase in beef consumption.
8. Moderate decrease in eggs, fruit, vegetables and whole grains. 

Of course, this is missing junk and highly processed foods.

Now, I agree with the commenter on the previous post. This does not establish causality. And yet, how many decades has it been now that the "health" establishment has been telling you, as though it was certain, that meat and saturated fat are the causes of heart disease? If they even mention junk food, pastries, and all manner of stuff loaded with flour and sugar, it's not those: It's the fat.

It's absurd.

So here's the article with associated references from whence I culled this little exercise. That's Sally Fallon and Mary Enig: It's the Beef. This is an excellent source for all manner of mythbusting with regard to meat and other animal products. Here's another good one.

There was another question posed on my original post speculating that perhaps there weren't heart attacks in 1910 because people didn't live long enough to have them. Average longevity was way lower. The firs thing to note about that is infant and child mortality is what brings the averages way down. There are still people living to 80, 90, 100 and beyond -- plenty of them -- and they weren't dying of heart attacks. Stephan had a good post last July concerning this exact issue, vis-a-vis the Inuit.

A Mental Exercise

I was going to try to design a poll, but let's just get on with it. Do your own personal poll; discipline yourself to create an actual list of probable causality, in oder of most likely to least likely. If you think the causation is likely multiple factors, then place two or more categories next to each other, like 1, 2, 3. In other words: in order of priority, of likely cause.

The most certain vector for approximating the level of heart disease is a data point relatively easy to obtain: death from myocardial infarction ("heart attack"). It's well established that heart attacks are typically caused in first-order by heart disease (generally used to describe a number of related conditions). Naturally, everyone is thusly focussed on second-order causes: what causes heart disease?

Let's take in some statistical data. Myocardial infarction was almost non-existent in 1910 (heart attacks were unheard of). By 1930, deaths from MI had escalated to 3,000 per year. That would constitute a thousands of percentage increase, approaching infinite, the lower the actual number of deaths in 1910. It began to taper off in terms of percentage increase, so that by 1960, there were 500,000 deaths from MI per year. That's very important to understand, as health authorities proclaim that their low-fat diet prescriptions are lowering the rate of death from heart disease.

Now, here's the changes in consumption of various food groupings from 1910 to some point in the recent past, like a few years ago.

• Food category A: 100% increase
• Food category B: Moderate decline 
• Food category C: 100% increase
• Food category D: 50% decrease 
• Food category E: 70% decrease 
• Food category F: 437% increase 
• Food category G: 280% increase 
• Food category H: 46% increase 

  Now, in what order would you assign most likely cause, A - H? I'll give you the actual food groups in a post tomorrow, as well as references.

Is The Tide Turning?

I like to think that other than accounting for long tails (lottery-style luck) that, for most, where you get in life is somewhat related to (less than 'directly proportional to' or 'a function of') how well you see coming trends and modify your life in ways that capture the tide. This could be as basic as an employee of a buggy-whip manufacturer finding a job with a steering wheel manufacturer (when he'd have been in high demand, i.e., early) to a master-level electrical engineer inventing the next [..?]. The point is twofold; first, that lots of people see changes coming enough that they make a wide range of changes in their lives with a consequent variety (meaning: distribution) of upheaval; and second that, a very few pin the tail on the donkey, and change our lives forever.

This is the rational 100% of the Animal at work and, it's what differentiates us from the others (in some function; there are other differentiations). This is why we must -- now more than ever -- respect our Animal evolution. The Age of Obesity isn't a fad -- not as I see it -- but a direct consequence of our ability to increasingly control our environment, the aspect of which I'll focus on is the food we eat and, when and how much of it we eat.

As for me? Well, you see the direction of this blog, so you know where my bet is placed.

If it were just two things, I'd have blogged them each. But since I have three things for you, I'll do it in one post, and you can chase down a few of the particulars. First up was an entry by Doc Eades the other day, linking to this video. Well, I don't know if I share Doc Eades' utter enthusiasm, but, then again, I'm not running the stubborn-arrogant-ignorance gauntlet 24/7, established exclusively by those fallaciously entrusted to know better.

Medscape is a subscription service available only to physicians and is as mainstream as it gets. The lead article in this weeks issue is not really an article, but a video lecture. One Dr. Sandra Fryhofer lectures the mainstream docs subscribing to Medscape on what the above study shows. She points out the weaknesses of the low-fat diet and is positively enthusiastic about the low-carb diet.

Next up concerns someone highly regarded in this generally described "leanness community:" Craig Ballantine. I got his book, and it's good stuff. One of the things my trainer told me at the outset was that I'd eventually get used to anything, but to achieve better results I should change up my workouts. That's what we do. That's what Turbulence Training is essentially about. Don't do the same thing all the time. Change it up a lot, big, and do it fairly often.

By virtue of buying his book, I have the pleasure -- I assure you -- of receiving his almost daily emails to "upgrade" to this and that (at additional cost). That's fine, and I can quit receiving those emails whenever I want, but, this one caught my eye.

But first, you see, I had read the book and, though the exercise material was right on, the diet and nutrition advice sucked. There was not enough emphasis on skipping processed food, along with too much emphasis on small, numerous meals, and never -- NEVER -- skipping breakfast. Total BS; but, I approach this mainly from diet and, he, from exercise. I saw the thing in context. So to the email...

Then I read the book. The research he covers showed me just how brainwashed I had become by the supplement company ads (even though I was smart enough to not buy their supplements, I was still convinced that all fat loss dieting had to be borderline obsessive-compulsive).

Brad's ESE is one of the best nutrition books I've ever read, and I went through it in just one evening, because not only was I fascinated by the science, but also by the dieting myths Brad destroyed.

In fact, Brad created this "anti-diet" program for people that are sick and tired of trying to measure out and eat 6 small meals per day. If you are frustrated and overwhelmed by trying to follow that "bodybuilder nutrition lifestyle", then Eat-Stop-Eat is for you.

I mentioned Brad's ESE back at the end of last year, after I'd done a couple of fasts on my own; and Brad's book reinforced everything I had learned, while giving me a few new ideas to test on myself. Now, Craig is obviously reselling Brad's book and, so, is obviously (should be) getting something for that. My judgement is that Craig has being straight up. He probably has hundreds of "gurus" hitting him up for the sort of partnership he's developed with Brad. He has to make his choices, like anyone else, and judging from his book and background, I'm betting he's best served by going with what he's personally verified to work and have some value.

I think his endorsement is yet another affirmation that ancient fasting is, once again, cutting edge. I told you so.

Finally, Matt at RashyNullPlanet emailed about fat. Not just any fat. Jennifer McLagan's fat. It was linked in lifehacker, who linked to the book, and to the article in Salon. The book cover itself is, I think, astoundingly beautiful. It's a perfect melding of the technology that makes this possible and the Animal we can individually set free.

I have the book in my hands. Of what could I tell you, first hand? Oh, lots, but I'd have my particulars. The very first sentence of the intro, perhaps? "I love fat."

There's this:

From the beginning of human history until the middle of the last century the word fat had positive connotations.

That's why both "modern Ignorance" and "primitive wisdom" play a role as categorizations in this post.

But I think what I like most is the dedication page: "For all the Jack Sprats out there----you're wrong!"

Jack Sprat could eat no fat

His wife could eat no lean.

And so between the two of them,

They licked the platter clean!

Here's another article in Canadian news I came across while bouncing about for this post.

A College Education in Evolutionary Fitness in 8 Minutes

Do you have eight minutes to spare, to acquire every essential you need in the quest to Free the Animal? Thanks to commenter Ricado in a recent hunting post for providing it. I disagree with him on the ethics issue. Provided animals are dealt with in a humane and rational fashion, and the purpose is consumption as food, it passes ethical muster for me. However, there are differing levels of respect for me. Bow hunters get more than rifle hunters. But no one compares to these guys. This is the Gold Standard of hunting.

See how many principals you can take from this. The essential one is that this is why you walk the Earth, today. At some point, our primitive ancestors noted that consuming high-energy density animal flesh was a far better strategy for survival, allowing for lots of languid free time and rest. Herbivores spend all their days foraging. Observe gorillas a bit. A dead end, evolutionarily. They simply have no time to do anything but munch on pounds and pounds of fibrous vegetable matter. No time at all to get themselves in the sorts of jams that natural selection feeds on.

Of particular note: grasp how our three primary adaptive advantages are exploited. First is the efficiency of bi-pedal over quadra-pedal locomotion. Next, we sweat onto bare skin. We carry a tremendous radiator, like a car. Finally, we have means of carrying along supplemental coolant.

Note also: only one guy goes off on the final long chase. So, while some level of endurance is certainly called for, this suggests that perhaps H-Gs engaged in division-of-labor specialization. I still don't think it's justification for spending much time on the treadmill.

What I'd have liked to see is the after kill activities. I'd speculate that the successful hunter began to dress the animal while the others caught up. Then they would have to section it and haul it back to camp, potentially hours of additional strenuous activity after the kill.

For this reason, I always work out hungry, at least 12 hours, usually more. After the workout (the hunt), I go at least two hours, sometimes six before eating.

"Loving Lard"

New readers, of which there are quite a few: that's exactly right. By the time you finish reading this, I hope to have those of you who just know that lard is bad for you questioning that assumption. Keep it in mind, as it's instrumental and essential in deprogramming decades of such purely rendered error.

Here goes. First, a reader email.

Did you read the article in the San Francisco Chronicle today? It's in the Food section and it's called "Loving Lard." It extols the virtues of lard. You've been blogging about lovely lard long before the newspapers caught on to its benefits.

When I was young, I had the pleasure of spending the summers with my Granddaddy and Grandmother in Winton, CA. They grew all their produce on their quarter acre of land, bought their meat and dairy at local farms, and canned their own food. Once a week, my Grandmother would get a tub of freshly rendered lard from the local farmer. Every day, she would melt some so that my Granddaddy could drizzle it over just about everything he ate. He lived to 99 years of age and was healthy and fit up to his last day. In addition to working out in his large garden, he could do push ups and other forms of exercise that men half his age had trouble doing.

My Grandmother, too, lived well into her nineties. She could never understand all the crazy diets that limited meats and fats. When I was in my twenties, I tried in vain to convince her that science had "proved" her way of eating was bad for humans. I can still remember how she would shake her head sorrowfully at me and smile as she and my Granddaddy enjoyed every bite of their real food.

Ah, what a good lesson I managed to miss back then.

My immediate response is that this was essential blogging material, and that it would, of course, be categorized in "primitive wisdom." We have given over authority for one of the most fundamental aspects of our lives to highly interested others -- only our health is not their remotest interest. The difference between me and those who seek more regulations and government standards stacked higher and higher is that you really can't escape your own responsibility in this matter.

But, OK, it's just an anecdote, right? I had three grandparents of four who smoked, for instance, all lived into their 80s and none died from anything that could be directly tied to their smoking. So, clear thinking is always in order.

Then again, animal fat is something we've been eating for millennia upon millennia. Oh, here's the article our reader references. It's short, and you'll want to go have a look.

Cooks seeking flavor, farmers advocating a return to more sustainable ways of raising animals and science's shifting thinking on dietary health are all helping to rehabilitate its name. Consumers can once again buy tubs of fresh lard at farmers' markets, and celebrated Bay Area restaurateurs have put rendered pork fat back to work in the kitchen.

And the reader is right. I have blogged about lard going back. So has Stephan. First was this revelation (but read the whole post):

Pigs are the only commonly eaten land animals that store vitamin D in their fat. This only happens if they are exposed to the sun, however. Lard from pasture-raised pigs is the second-richest food source of vitamin D by weight, after cod liver oil. I say by weight because if we look at a typical serving, lard has as much vitamin D as high-vitamin cod liver oil. One tablespoon supplies approximately 100% of the recommended daily allowance (RDA). Compare that to a glass of vitamin D-fortified milk at around 30%. Lard and cod liver oil are the only two foods that can provide 100% of the RDA for vitamin D in one serving. In case you're not up to speed, vitamin D is critical for overall health and development, most Americans are deficient, and it's rare in food.

Hmm. Assumptions beginning to get rough around the edges, yet? Well, it's a Real Food, too. And long studied for their super longevity, the Okinawans seem to know.

Dig in. My doggies love it, too. They each get a teaspoon every morning mixed in their food, and man have they suddenly become enthusiastic.

Keeping it Real: Food

You'll read here often, and other places: nutrition is 80% of your overall health. The rest is accounted for by activities such as work, exercise, and play.

I'm going to be doing some bits of review over the next few days, as there's quite a few new subscribers. I'm also reorganizing the general "fitness" category from the old blog into more specific categories on this one, such as diet related, exercise, cooking (food porn), and so on.

I was all prepped to give a brief primer on what foods to eat and by coincidence was reading Scott over at Modern Forager, where he drew attention to a post of his from a few months back that really explains it perfectly. There's also a Part II. Even though I'm predominantly "low carb," as it goes well with my inner carnivore, I do eat vegetables, very often have fruit for breakfast and desert, and I even eat starchy potatoes now and then. What I very nearly never eat is stuff that is not real food. I also avoid grains, most particularly wheat, because we simply didn't evolve to eat it. Refined sugar? Same thing. In both cases, it's the concentration that's the chief problem. Ancients could never have gathered sufficient grass seed to mill into flour for the various grain-based products we have in abundance. If you look, you can surely find the disastrous results for primitive peoples formerly on their natural diets and, subsequently introduced to white flour and sugar. I'll be covering that a lot over time.

But even though I'm low carb, you rarely see me linking to any of those low-carb / Atkins guys. I wish them well, but so many of them are falling into a trap. How? Because they have lost sight of the really good probability that the reason Atkins can work is that it focusses on real foods, contains very sufficient amounts of protein to preserve and promote lean mass even in caloric deficit (I hate that term; we metabolize food, we don't "burn" calories), and provides sufficient essential fatty acids with the necessary fat-soluble vitamins to ensure the proper distribution of minerals like calcium (think: bones and teeth, not atherosclerotic lesions).

Back to Scott Kustes.

We can argue about low carb, low fat, The Zone, Ornish, Atkins, and Weight Watchers until we’re blue in the face. But civilizations have thrived on diets of varying macronutrient proportions throughout history. The Inuit ate a diet of almost no carbs and mostly fat with no ill effects. The Masai drank cow blood and milk and ate meat like it was going out of style. As the nutritionists gasp, I’ll mention that the Masai achieved prime health too. The diet on the island of Okinawa is heavily weighted towards vegetables and rice with some fish and little meat, high in carbs, low in fat. Again, very good health; Okinawans have excellent longevity.

For more on the amazing Inuit, see here. They don't get cancer, either. Also, one might consider the Kitavans. Excellent health, but on a high carbohydrate diet. But: they eat real food. And once again, my favorite neurobiologist (everyone should have one), Stephan, has a great series on the Kitavans.

Cardiovascular Risk Factors on Kitava, Part I: Weight and Blood Pressure
Cardiovascular Risk Factors on Kitava, Part II: Blood Lipids
Cardiovascular Risk Factors on Kitava, Part III: Insulin
Cardiovascular Risk Factors on Kitava, Part IV: Leptin
Kitava: Wrapping it Up

Need more convincing? Well, there's the Kuna.

Back to Scott, again.

So it’s not so much about the macronutrients, as long as you’re getting enough protein and fat to allow the body to function properly. It’s about the types of food being consumed. Dr. Weston Price noted that traditional civilizations thrived until they were introduced to processed grains and sugars, at which point, health declined markedly. We all know someone that follows a low-fat diet or low-carb diet by eating every processed product in the store that excludes their chosen macronutrient (”Angel Food Cake is a fat-free food!”). They rarely make the progress they’d like to. Why? Because before you can worry about macronutrients, you need to focus on food. You don’t eat nutrients. You eat food.

Speaking of Dr. Weston A. Price, DDS, his amazing work, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, is perhaps the most shocking and eye-opening book I may have ever read (still reading, actually). Long story short is that he was appalled at the tooth decay of Western Civilization and set out on a 10-year quest around the world to find and document people who had no evidence of tooth decay. He found lots. This was in the 1920s and 30s. You guessed it: all relatively primitive peoples on traditional diets that included no white flour, sugar, canned or packaged goods. Soon, I'll post how he discovered how to get cavities in teeth to re-calcify  (in one documented case, 42 of them in the mouth of one girl). Hint: fat-soluble vitamins A, D, and a "secret" one I'll reveal later, in another post. Clue: none of them are to be found in any vegetable sources whatsoever; it's meat, baby, and especially organ meats. If your mom made you eat liver from ruminators and forced cod-liver oil down your throat, she was a wise woman. Of course, these results were verified and his work published in medical journals 60 years ago. I would never even mention it, otherwise.

I recently came across the following quotes from Dr. Loren Cordain's free newsletter (Paleo Diet, in the Acknowledgments section to the right).

George Catlin, the famous chronicler of American Indians, circa 1832-39, glowingly used these words to describe the Crow tribe: "They are really a handsome and well-formed set of men as can be seen in any part of the world. There is a sort of ease and grace added to their dignity of manners, which give them the air of gentlemen at once. I observed the other day, that most of them were over six feet high . . ." "It is but to paint a vast country of green field, where the men are all red - where meat is the staff of life . . . ." .

Cabeza de Vaca, the Spanish Explorer, saw native Florida Indians in 1527 and called them, "wonderfully well built, spare, very strong and very swift. Similar observations of the indigenous inhabitants of Florida were made in 1564 by the French explorer Rene Laudonniere, who noted that, "The agility of the women is so great that they can swim over great rivers, bearing their children upon one of their arms. They climb up, also, very nimbly upon the highest trees in the country. . . . even the most ancient women of the country dance with the others". In his account of California Indians in 1869, Begert notes, "the Californians are seldom sick. They are in general strong, hardy, and much healthier than the many thousands who live daily in abundance and on the choicest fare that the skill of Parisian cooks can prepare".

Captain Cook who visited New Zealand in 1772 was particularly impressed by the good health of the native Maori, "It cannot be thought strange that these people enjoy perfect and uninterrupted health. In all our visits to their towns, where young and old, men and women, crowded about us, prompted by the same curiosity that carried us to look at them, we never saw a single person who appeared to have any bodily complaint, nor among the numbers that we have seen naked did we perceive the slightest eruption upon the skin, or any marks that an eruption had been left behind . . . . A further proof that human nature is here untainted with disease is the great number of old men that we saw. . . . appeared to be very ancient , yet none of them were decrepit; and though not equal to the young in muscular strength, were not a whit behind them in cheerfulness and vivacity."

For a good 15 years, I've actively eschewed the idea that primitive peoples have anything to teach us. I was dead wrong. The clear facts clearly demonstrate otherwise. That doesn't mean I want to live in the primitive manner they lived. What I want to do is benefit from their wisdom in a modern context.

Health Links

Here's a few things I cam across over the course of the week that you might find some interest in.

Ketogenic Diets and Physical Performance. This is a very interesting review by Stephen Phinney where he takes a look back at essentially forgotten studies of indigenous people who lived quite dandily on animal fat and protein, with a notable absence of diabetes, obesity, heart disease and cancer, though the focus of the paper is on physical performance.

During the time that this consensus view of the necessity of carbohydrate for vigorous exercise was forming, the last pure hunting cultures among the peoples of North America finally lost out in competition with expanding European cultural influences. Between 1850 and 1930, the routine consumption of carbohydrates spread north from the U.S. Plains States through central Canada, where the indigenous peoples had heretofore made at most seasonal use of this nutrient class. However the last of these groups to practice their traditional diet, the Inuit people of the Canadian and Alaskan Arctic regions, were luckily observed by modern scientists before their traditional dietary practices were substantially altered. The reports of these early scientists imply that the Inuit people were physically unhampered despite consuming a diet that was essentially free of identifiable carbohydrate.

Fast Way to Better Health. This is by Michael R. Eades, author of Protein Power, and a blogger too.

When researchers restrict the caloric intake of a group of lab animals to about 30 to 40 percent of that of their ad libitum (all they want to eat) fed counterparts, they find that the calorically restricted animals live 30 percent or so longer, don't develop cancers, diabetes, heart disease, or obesity. These calorically restricted (CR) animals have low blood sugar levels, low insulin levels, good insulin sensitivity, low blood pressure and are, in general, much healthier than the ad lib fed animals.

...

Caloric restriction is a terrific way to lose weight and get healthy; problem is, it's not much fun. When rats live out their little ratty lives calorically restricted in their cages they seem to show signs of depression and irritability. Primates do for sure. If primates don't get enough cholesterol, they can actually become violent. But, if you're willing to put up with a little irritability, hostility and depression, it might be worth cutting your calories by 30 percent for the rest of your long, healthy miserable life.

Doesn't sound so cheery?  You're not ready to sign up yet?

Well, there is a better way.

Here's a good lesson in Occam's Razor. First this blog entry, again by Michael Eades, and this Men's Health article, The Cure for Diabetes (five pages, well worth it). See if you can put it all together.

Finally, here's a little bit on mental health: Zeitgeist - The Movie.

"They must find it difficult, those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority."

"The mass of people who are Bible-taught never get free from the erroneous impressions stamped on their minds in their infancy, so that their manhood or womanhood can have no intellectual fulfillment, and millions of them only attain mentally to a sort of second childhood."  -- Gerald Massey