• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
  • Book
  • Amazon
  • Cabo Rental
  • Projects…
    • The Inuit were never in Ketosis
    • The Manifesto
    • Gut Health
    • Elixa Probiotic
    • Resistant Starch
  • Archive

Free The Animal

Ex Navy Officer. Owner of Businesses. Digital Entrepreneur. Expat Living in Thailand. 5,000 Biting Blog Post on Everything since 2003.

You are here: Home / 2012 / Archives for June 2012

Archives for June 2012

Saturday Fun: World Travel; Italy and the Cinque Terre

June 30, 2012 10 Comments

It’s been nearly two years now since we took a trip internationally. Far too long. It’s not in the making this summer—so far, anyway—so I thought I’d review the last trip, July 2010. It’s for myself to relive it a bit, but also for those readers who weren’t around at that time, perhaps to inspire and encourage to get out there and see the world a bit.

The story of how this particular trip came about starts in the summer of 2006, when Beatrice and I headed off for a 3-week tour of Europe by car, no hotel reservations. We touched down in Paris, got the car, stayed the night, then headed south towards Barcelona. From there, we hugged the Med all the way up through Spain, across France, down into Italy, all the way to Pizza. After a couple of days in Firenze (Florence), we headed north, passed through Switzerland and just a bit of Germany, then west back to Paris for the flight home. In all, about 6,000 km. Each afternoon, we’d stop in a place we couldn’t not stop at, I’d drop Beatrice on the waterfront, and she’d go from hotel to hotel until someone could show her a nice room with a view she liked; she’d ring me on the phone, and we’d have a place.

I’ve travelled this way—no reservations—a number of times and it’s my preferred method of vacation/touring travel. So much better when you can see the whole context and decide accordingly. Those wanting to follow along with our Eurotrek 2006, posts begin July 3, 2006 in the archives, and run through July 26.

…

Read More

Filed Under: General

Synthesis: Guyenet, Colpo, Calories Count, Food Quality Matters, Macronutrient Ratios are Qualitative

June 29, 2012 71 Comments

This is actually my favorite sort of post to do; more so, even, than the rants here and there. I find it interesting to get two or more perspectives on some issue or controversy, then synthesize them into what I always hope will be a broader context of understanding and in particular, highly accessible to those less interested in the nitty-gritty of the science.

It’s a dialectic of sorts, but in this case, doesn’t involve any material antithesis. Here, it’s actually two pretty compatible theses: one put forth by Anthony Colpo (quantitative); the other by Dr. Stephan Guyenet (quantitative and qualitative). This is a follow-on to my post of yesterday, JAMA: Effects of Dietary Composition on Energy Expenditure During Weight-Loss Maintenance (access the full text of the study here).

I do find this study highly fascinating. I suppose because it has a number of elements that are ripe for debate, and open debate tends to get more people more closer to more truth. I read the thing from start to finish a couple of times, including all the figures and tables. Something just didn’t add up for me. I quote from the Comment section (emphasis mine):

The results of our study challenge the notion that a calorie is a calorie from a metabolic perspective. During isocaloric feeding following weight loss, REE was 67 kcal/d higher with the very low-carbohydrate diet compared with the low-fat diet. TEE differed by approximately 300 kcal/d between these 2 diets, an effect corresponding with the amount of energy typically expended in 1 hour of moderate-intensity physical activity.

OK, but then there’s this from the Results section (emphasis mine):

Body weight did not differ significantly among the 3 diets.

So I popped off an email to David Ludwig, MD, PhD, one of the researchers. Here’s the relevant part:

I was interested in the study just published yesterday […]

However, I have a glaring question I have been unable to answer after reading the study and looking at the figures and tables:

Where did the 300 calories go LC vs. LF? As I understand it, participants ate isocalorically in crossover fashion, so the only change was the macro ratios. It’s also stated that physical activity did not change. So if they ate the same calories, had the same physical activity, maintained the same weight loss throughout, then how are the 300 daily calories accounted for if not in additional weight loss beyond the initial loss?

Perhaps I could learn more from the eMethods supplement as cited in the article. However, the link to the PDF is broken. If you have that PDF I’d appreciate it, and of course any light you could shed on my question so I can pass it on to my readers and commenters.

Anticipating that the answer might be something like: increased bodily metabolism (higher heart rate, respiration, etc, etc), then my follow on question might be what’s the point, the advantage?

I got back a very quick response.

The point is that 4 weeks isn’t long enough to translate a 300 kcal/d difference into statistically significant weight change, especially when one considers that body weight normally fluctuates by a kilogram or two through the course of a week, based on differences in hydration status, the time of the last bowel movement, etc. We’d need 6 months to reliably see this effect. Nevertheless, there was a slight, and not statistically significant difference in the hypothesized direction, with body weight highest on the low fat diet (data included in the results section).

I’ve informed the journal about the web site problem with the eMethods. Hopefully they will correct that soon.

OK, now here’s the two posts by Guyenet and Colpo.

  • New Study: Is a Calorie a Calorie? (Guyenet)
  • Finally, a Study that Proves a Low-Carb Metabolic Advantage? Yeah, Right… (Colpo)

Hmmm…now comes the hard part, which is where to begin, what to highlight, what to say about it (actually, I worked that latter part all out in the shower this morning). Suffice to say that I like both of these posts for their mutual injection of sanity into what seemed initially to be a lot of attaboys, high-fives, etc., amongst ardent fans of carbohydrate restriction (I count myself a circumspect fan of LC) leading to metabolic advantage (eat as much as you want LC, no problem—I’m not a fan).

Let’s begin with what I’d characterize as a strictly quantitative analysis from Anthony. In the first part of his post, Anthony takes time to review the fact that every single metabolic ward study going back to 1935—every single one—fails to find a statistically significant difference in weight loss amongst different sorts of diet compositions (including LC). In other words, weight loss always comes from caloric restriction. He goes into great detail on every single one of these studies in his book, The Fat Loss Bible. He then goes on to address this particular study; kinda doing so with one arm tied behind his back, because he doesn’t make a lot of fuss about it not being a metabolic ward study, and thus tightly controlled (for my take, the team did appear to use an impressive array of state of art methods and incentives to motivate decent compliance and record data). An excerpt from the post.

Bodyweight was virtually identical during all three isocaloric diet phases which to me, as a rational indvidual whose head has never been embedded in his culo, quickly refutes the famous low-carb claim that greater weight loss will occur on a low-carb diet at a given caloric intake. At the caloric level calculated by the researchers to maintain weight, the low-carb diet did exactly what the other diets did – it maintained weight. It did not magically produce further weight loss while the other diets simply maintained the status quo.

I could by all rights end the discussion there, but the interesting thing about this study is that the lack of difference in weight status during the 3 diets is being roundly ignored by the very same low-carb advocates who are parading this study as proof of a metabolic weight loss advantage.

Instead, they are wanking on and on about an allegedly greater increase in resting energy expenditure and total energy expenditure experienced by the participants during the low-carb phase. This increase in REE and TEE, they are claiming, is proof that low-carb diets produce greater weight loss – even though the low-carb diet didn’t produce any weight loss at all.

Got that?

Let me attempt a different way of conveying the essential point Anthony is making in hopes of getting just one or two more otherwise breathless LC metabolic advantage fans to take a breath.

Here goes, y’ready? …

All 21 participants did lose a significant 13% average body weight over 12 weeks on a calorie restricted diet equal to 60% of daily energy requirements.

Did that escape everyone’s attention, or only the fact that everybody didn’t lose any weight regardless of dietary composition over a separate 12 weeks? And just as the first 12 weeks was designed to lose weight (via caloric/energy imbalance), the second 12 weeks was designed to maintain weight (via caloric/energy balance). Everything went according to plan, so is there really any meaningful news here beyond a curiosity that may merit further investigation?

Let me put it a different way, hopefully getting a few more breathless to take a breath:

Researchers gave 12 people free food, prepared it for them, and promised to pay them $500 if they could stand a 40% caloric deficit for 12 weeks. Additionally, they gave them another 12 weeks of free, prepared food, and promised to pay them another $2,000 if they would eat it and come to the hospital for 9 days of tests.

Again, everything went according to plan.

Another thing Anthony points out is important especially on the basis of what has already happened in the media and some blogs: ‘300 calorie per day metabolic advantage for low carb; step right up and get your metabolic advantage.’

On the TEE graph, 8 of 21 subjects experienced greater declines in TEE on the low-carb diet when compared to the low-GI diet, and four of these folks experienced similar or greater declines in TEE than they did on the low-fat diet.

So you can see that the true story is a little more complicated and somewhat different to the one low-carb shills are trying to portray. Rather than a clear-cut case of reduced drops in REE and TEE during a low-carb diet, the indvidual results are in fact much more haphazard, with some subjects in fact showing markedly greater drops in REE and TEE during the low-carb diet.

Meaning that if you adopt a low-carb diet expecting an increase in metabolism, based on the results of this study, there’s a very strong possibility you’ll be sorely disappointed.

Colpo goes on to address some of the hormonal markers and such, but I’ll set that aside and focus just on the weight loss.

So let’s move on to Stephan Guyenet who, while addressing some of these quantitative weight loss issues, also includes a qualitative angle, and it’s just this sort of thing that makes for a good synthesis. Stephan summarizes the entire dispute in three points.

1. Calories don’t matter at all, only diet composition matters.
2. Calories are the only thing that matters, and diet composition is irrelevant.
3. Calories matter, but diet composition may also play a role.

The first one is an odd position that is not very well populated. The second one has a lot of adherents in the research world, and there’s enough evidence to make a good case for it. It’s represented by the phrase ‘a calorie is a calorie’, i.e. all calories are equally fattening. #1 and #2 are both extreme positions, and as such they get a lot of attention. But the third group, although less vocal, may be closest to the truth.

Sounds like he might be talking about real food, eh? He continues. You can check the post for his references.

Some people have suggested that the type of food we eat, not just the amount, influences energy expenditure, and in particular that this is related to the diet’s carbohydrate content. In people who are not trying to lose weight (4, 5), or who are being overfed (6, 7), the carbohydrate:fat ratio in the diet has little or no detectable impact on energy expenditure, and if anything it favors carbohydrate, but could this be different during fat loss in people who start off overweight? This idea has been called the ‘metabolic advantage’, most notably attributed to the low-carbohydrate diet. The idea here is that you can lose fat eating the same number of calories if carbohydrate is kept low.

I’ve never really weighed in on this because it’s a topic of heated debate, and in any case it’s a fairly academic question. Why is it academic? Because previous weight loss studies have shown that if a metabolic advantage exists at all, it’s quite small, because the effect is undetectable in most studies (8, 9, 10). People who are not associated with the low-carbohydrate community tend to conclude that there’s no metabolic advantage when they review the literature (11), although I haven’t reviewed it closely myself. It’s clear that where fat loss is concerned, calorie intake is much more important than the amount of fat or carbohydrate in the diet. What previous studies have suggested is that low-carbohydrate diets suppress appetite — often resulting in lower calorie intake (12, 13). The reason for this remains a topic of speculation.

So we begin to come full circle with what Anthony said. To put my take on it, Anthony says it’s dumb to believe in any metabolic advantage, while Stephan says it’s pointless, because either it doesn’t exist or is too small to matter.

At which point, I remind you:

All 21 participants did lose a significant 13% average body weight over 12 weeks on a calorie restricted diet equal to 60% of daily energy requirements.

Now enter the qualitative angle. Stephan again.

That being said, I’m actually quite open to the idea that food quality in addition to quantity can influence body fatness, and I would encourage people to think outside the macronutrient box: there are probably many different dietary factors that can have such an effect. Although this idea hasn’t received much support in the human literature so far, there’s quite a bit of evidence for it in the animal literature.

…Like, real food: meat, fish, fowl, vegetables and fruit, like we evolved to eat? Animals? You mean like all those animals in the wild that maintain body compositions exactly as they’re supposed to, when able to eat what they’re supposed to eat? And we’re not even talking about health, yet. Is an animal going to generally fair healthier on a diet provided by nature, or industrial crap in a bag/box?

OK, so if there’s anything that could be termed an antithesis from Guyenet contra Colpo’s thesis in this regard, here it is—but it’s certainly on no such level that all you have to do is eat zero carbs and you’ll lose weight:

Does this support the idea that there is a ‘metabolic advantage’ to low-carbohydrate diets? Well, sort of. It doesn’t change the previous findings that the carbohydrate:fat ratio has little or no impact on energy expenditure during overfeeding, in weight stable people, or during weight loss, but it does suggest that a VLC dietary pattern has a metabolic advantage over a LF diet specifically in the context of weight maintenance after weight loss. It also suggests that a LGI diet has a smaller but still meaningful metabolic advantage in this setting, and that a LF diet are not very effective in this regard. It also opens a whole new can of worms for the research world, investigating the effects of diet quality on energy expenditure.

…It’s that last phrase I’m most interested in: “investigating the effects of diet quality on energy expenditure.” If that were actually to happen, what would that mean for fans of paleo and WAPF, allied most specifically because of their advocacy of real, whole foods from all the available sources (sorry, veg*ns, no soup for you!)?

Here’s an idea: eat real food first. If I can play loose with the term “metabolic advantage,” I’d say that in the end, I think calories count, but that food quality matters. Low to moderate carbohydrate diets—when done right—tend to push out crap food for much better food. Much better food means improved satisfaction, satiation…a greater chance of being in control of appetite, cravings, and so on. Inasmuch as appetite, hunger and satiation are related to metabolism, loosely stated, there’s your metabolic advantage, right there.

If this was recognized above all, perhaps we could get off macronutrient ratios and focus on real, quality food. In so doing—unless you’re just going to eat tubers all day—you’re likely going to be eating a pretty moderate carbohydrate load anyway, and even if that includes potatoes, a pretty low glycemic load (that’s index, with over time thrown in because, y’know, time passes by).

The takeaway: Eat. Real. Food. Move. Around. If you need to lose weight: Eat. Less. Real. Food. Move. Around. More.

[As an endnote, I was already well into this post when I learned that Evelyn at Carb Sane also weighed in. We’ve had our differences, but fair is fair and she raises some of the same questions and issues: A Modest Proposal for Peer Review Research. Check it out.]

Filed Under: General

JAMA: Effects of Dietary Composition on Energy Expenditure During Weight-Loss Maintenance

June 28, 2012 39 Comments

Well I’d intended to get up this morning and write a run of the mill rant about the stupid article accompanying an interview the other day on NPR Morning Edition with my buddy John Durant. Here’s the link to the thing, along with 7 minutes of audio that’s substantially better than the article. There’s now 441 comments. When last I scanned through them, around 360 of them or something, it was about the most idiotic comment thread I’ve ever seen.

OK, so no rant this time.

I got wind of this study this morning via a link to Glenn Reynlds from a friend of mine, then chasing down rabbit holes. This appears to be the full text: Effects of Dietary Composition on Energy Expenditure During Weight-Loss Maintenance. I haven’t scrupulously picked through it but figured why not let everyone who want to go through it just like I will.

Here’s a couple of media reports for those wanting just a summary.

  • USA Today: Low-carb diet burns the most calories in small study
  • The New York Times: Which Diet Works?

And from the Abstract of the actual study:

Objective To examine the effects of 3 diets differing widely in macronutrient composition and glycemic load on energy expenditure following weight loss.

Design, Setting, and Participants A controlled 3-way crossover design involving 21 overweight and obese young adults conducted at Children’s Hospital Boston and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, between June 16, 2006, and June 21, 2010, with recruitment by newspaper advertisements and postings.

Intervention After achieving 10% to 15% weight loss while consuming a run-in diet, participants consumed an isocaloric low-fat diet (60% of energy from carbohydrate, 20% from fat, 20% from protein; high glycemic load), low–glycemic index diet (40% from carbohydrate, 40% from fat, and 20% from protein; moderate glycemic load), and very low-carbohydrate diet (10% from carbohydrate, 60% from fat, and 30% from protein; low glycemic load) in random order, each for 4 weeks.

Main Outcome Measures Primary outcome was resting energy expenditure (REE), with secondary outcomes of total energy expenditure (TEE), hormone levels, and metabolic syndrome components.

[…]

Conclusion Among overweight and obese young adults compared with pre–weight-loss energy expenditure, isocaloric feeding following 10% to 15% weight loss resulted in decreases in REE and TEE that were greatest with the low-fat diet, intermediate with the low–glycemic index diet, and least with the very low-carbohydrate diet.

~~~

Alright, here’s some of my initial, off the cuff thoughts having just skimmed through. I believe I saw somewhere that the participants were eating food prepared for them by the research team; if so, that does add a bit of credibility. Also, if REE and TEE (resting and total energy expenditure) was less with the LF diet compared to the LC diet it seems more plausible to me that the LF, high-carb diet would generally be prone to more cheating, hence more caloric intake, hence an even more curious result if that were the case.

Here’s a blurb from the comments I found interesting:

The results of our study challenge the notion that a calorie is a calorie from a metabolic perspective. During isocaloric feeding following weight loss, REE was 67 kcal/d higher with the very low-carbohydrate diet compared with the low-fat diet. TEE differed by approximately 300 kcal/d between these 2 diets, an effect corresponding with the amount of energy typically expended in 1 hour of moderate-intensity physical activity.

The physiological basis for the differences in REE and TEE remains subject to speculation. Triiodothyronine was lowest with the very low-carbohydrate diet, consistent with previously reported effects of carbohydrate restriction23 ; thus, changes in thyroid hormone concentration cannot account for the higher energy expenditure on this diet. The thermic effect of food (the increase in energy expenditure arising from digestive and metabolic processes) dissipates in the late postprandial period and would not affect REE measured in the fasting state. Because the thermic effect of food tends to be greater for carbohydrate than fat,24 – 25 it would also not explain the lower TEE on the low-fat diet. Although protein has a high thermic effect of food,16 the content of this macronutrient was the same for the low-fat and low–glycemic index diets and contributed only 10% more to total energy intake with the very low-carbohydrate diet compared with the other 2 diets. Furthermore, physical activity as assessed by accelerometry did not change throughout the study. Alternative explanations for the observed differences in REE and TEE may involve intrinsic effects of dietary composition on the availability of metabolic fuels13 – 14 or metabolic efficiency, changes in hormones (other than thyroid) or autonomic tone affecting catabolic or anabolic pathways, and (for TEE) skeletal muscle efficiency as regulated by leptin.26 – 29 Regarding the last possibility, the ratio of energy expenditure to leptin concentration has been proposed as a measure of leptin sensitivity,30 and this ratio varied as expected in our study among the 3 diets (very low carbohydrate>low glycemic index>low fat).

Maybe I’m missing something here, but if the participants were eating isocaloric diets (just the different macro ratios), they were in weight maintenance (no participants gaining or losing), yet the LC participants had total energy expenditure 300 kcal per day greater than the LF participants, and…“Furthermore, physical activity as assessed by accelerometry did not change throughout the study”...then what’s the point?

What am I missing?

OK, perhaps I’ll put up an addendum or another post once I’ve gone through this more, but don’t let that stop any of your science, metabolism or science geeks in comments.

Update: Synthesis: Guyenet, Colpo, Calories Count, Food Quality Matters, Macronutrient Ratios are Qualitative (my extensive follow-up post on the matter)

Filed Under: General

How Do I Love Thee? Let Me Count The Ways: DeadLifts

June 26, 2012 49 Comments

How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.
I love thee to the depth and breadth and height
My soul can reach, when feeling out of sight
For the ends of Being and ideal Grace.
I love thee to the level of everyday’s
Most quiet need, by sun and candle-light.
I love thee freely, as men strive for Right;
I love thee purely, as they turn from Praise.
I love thee with a passion put to use
In my old griefs, and with my childhood’s faith.
I love thee with a love I seemed to lose
With my lost saints, — I love thee with the breath,
Smiles, tears, of all my life! — and, if God choose,
I shall but love thee better after death.

— Elizabeth Barret Browning.

Who amoung you who really cares, can’t relate a good set of deadlifts to all of that?

…It’s a long history but I eventually worked myself up to 325# for 5 reps, back almost a year and a half ago. Here’s a video of 305# for 4. Somewhere along the way, I got an injury—a cervical herniation—that put me down like nothing else, ever. Here’s the this and that of all of that:

  • This is One Big Ass Pain in the Neck!
  • Tension Myositis Syndrome (TMS): Can Your Mind Really Heal Your Back, Neck, Shoulder, Butt, and Leg Pain?

I must mention both Dr. kurt harris and Dr. Doug McGuff. Early on, they both tuned me into Dr. John Sarno. Essentially, if the pain is so intense, chronic and constant, 24×7, for weeks and months…to the point you begin plotting suicide—and how not to make a display or show of it for family members—then perhaps it’s time to look at the mind. Additionally, Kurt (a radiologist) graciously looked at my MRI imaging and confirmed the physical side of things.

Interesting thing is, it worked—and totally without fucking woo bullshit. It’s physiological. For whatever reason you should not care about, your mind decides to fuck with you by restricting oxygen at a cellular/muscular level to isolated places, and it causes oxygen deprivation and excruciating pain, which can persist for years—while a broken femur heals from pain in two weeks (hint hint). The solution? Tell your brain to fuck off. Seriously. Explicitly. In the mirror. You don’t need to “work out your problems.” Tell yourself to fuck off. Mean it. Done. It does take some weeks of such self therapy, so’s that you know you really mean it: in the mirror. Face to same face.

More direct: laugh at the pain and the pain becomes a laughing stock.

All that was a while back. I laid off heavy workouts for a good while, gained fat, bla bla bla. About this time last year I went back to the gym and dived into DLs once again. On the first day I pulled 255 for reps with no problem. I did that a few times in a few weeks. Then, we took a trip to the cabin and in getting ready to turn our vacation home into a vacation rental, I worked for a solid day with my arms above my head cleaning ceilings, light fixtures, etc….and the very next day the same pain was back with a vengeance.

What was the real cause???

It was just as powerful and debilitating as before. I had no idea what was in store and at the time, I was slated for both The 21 Convention in Orlando and AHS at UCLA. I contemplated canceling both. I continued to nurse my woulds, gain fat, and wax miserable. Then, I took note of something. The pain went away, and it did so without me doing much in the way of Sarno-esque, “Fuck you, Richard,” affirmations in the mirror. It was about 2-3 weeks. Gone. I suspect it had something to do with no longer having any fear or trepidation in the matter and I kinda just dismissed the pain much of the time in spite of the intensity.

So, I ended up doing my deals: The 21 Conv and AHS. I didn’t look good at all, but made the best of it and was well received.

Since then, I have been very gun-shy about the whole thing in terms of heavy lifting. I essentially didn’t work out for months. A few months back, I got kettlebells. I really didn’t treat them as formal workouts. Rather, it was 5 minutes here, 5 there, maybe a couple of times per day, or none at all some days. I really like that informality and it will continue. However, whatever it was I did—probably with the 45 pounder—the whole deal came back. But and but: way, way less than before. It was only annoying, and it didn’t really affect sleep and such. Zero suicidal thoughts. It went away in a couple of weeks or so, and it’s been a couple of weeks since I haven’t had a single symptom.

…And so, yesterday was: how-do-I-love-thee-let-me-count-the-ways day. It wasn’t planned. Beatrice and I just decided to head to the swim club around 4:30 and I said to myself: I’m going to fucking do dead lifts.

135# x 10. Kittens could do that, and so did the kitten in me. OK, let’s load 25 per side, for 185# total. Whoa. That’s easy. I took it to 5 reps, rested a bit, did another 5. There’s no wind in the gym, so caution sticks around. After a good rest, I thought that 205# would be doable. So I loaded it up and did 5 more reps; pretty damn easy. I put a cherry on top with 400# on the leg press. Two sets for 10 reps each. Piece of cake. Then I went in the pool, the 13ft side for 40 minutes, legs crossed, treading water, arms only (very easy for me: all my life).

Here’s the thing: all reps were done double overhand grip. This, I owe to Clifton Harski. I had a great steak and salad lunch with him in Los Gatos after AHS last fall…talked about my troubles, my injury, and he immediately nodded his head. He’d seen this before. His advice was something that would likely have not dawned on me ever, because I’m simply not deep into the details of physical training. He said: do only double overhand on deadlifts, and lock your arms “outwards.”

When you think of it, the evolutionary logic makes sense. We’re a system. We evolved in such a way that muscle groups are in concert. Or: our arms can do things our legs can’t; our feet can do things our hands can’t…and all which ways around the mulberry bush.

It seemed like a sensible thing to me, since my forearms and hands, and arms, ultimately, are the endpoint on the bar: to not let the far more massive muscles of my glutes, back and legs injure my far more tender assets—but also far more brainy assets.

It’s a simple concept:

The weakest link in your system is your limit.

In deadlift, that’s your grip. Yea, a reverse grip gets the job done, but it’s interesting to see where all competitors in this deal lift comp failed. Many got into the 400s, some into the 500s, but every single one failed eventually on grip, not on what their butt, back and legs could do.

And so, with an abundance of caution I go forth. I still want to pull a 500# deadlift in my lifetime. I’m 51, and I want to be able to pull 500# when I’m 60, and I’m willing to take it slow and easy. But, when, and if, I do, it will be double overhand.

The way I look at it, my ability to grip is the weakest link, and as such, is what just might keep the rest of my body safe to progress for as long as it takes for my grip to strengthen over time. Moreover, I think that realization has a lot of application in the entire workout and lifting industry.

Don’t shortcut the weak link.

Filed Under: General

Brief Update: The Book, Version 2.0

June 25, 2012 14 Comments

I almost wrote a post last evening just so I could write something for fun. But I was a bit sapped—which continues into today—so I ate a big bowl of my father-in-law’s caldo de res instead. Now, finally, the editors get it back for a couple days before it reverts to me.

What’s Version 2.0? Well, first of all I’m trying to beef it up quite a bit at the level of each chapter—just make it a bit better in my eyes, but still simple and basic for the beginner. A quick summary:

  • Deemphasis of low carbohydrate as necessarily any part of paleo, while acknowledging its usefulness to many for weight loss an certain health issues.
  • Calories count.
  • Potatoes are nutritious.
  • Lots of additional sections in a number of chapters, but one I recall explicitly (my brain is in a fog) is a section on the ethics of eating animals.
  • New Chapter: Cold Water Therapy or “Thermogenesis” (though I’m not sure I care for that term).
  • New Chapter: Moderate Carbs.
  • New Chapter: paleo Kids.
  • New Chapter: Barefooting

Well, that’s about it for now. Should be out around the end of the month.

Filed Under: General

Man Alive! Chapter 5: The Greatest Love of All

June 24, 2012 77 Comments

Here’s the post that kicked it all off. This is chapter 5 of 12, to give interested readers the chance to take on the free ebook chapter by chapter over the weekend, debate it amongst themselves, or even challenge the author who’s keeping tabs.

~~~

From: Man Alive! A survival manual for the human mind.

by Greg Swann

Chapter 5. The greatest love of all.

When the subject of love and sex come up, our friends in the lab coats have a field day. For one thing, gibbons and other critters pair-bond for life, so they’re “just like us.” And for another, when you’re in the thrall of your best-beloved, your brain is all but drowning in pheromones and oxytocin and a mad obsession to rut yourself raw, so you’re no different from a house-cat in heat. Everything they have to say about you omits the inconvenient fact of Fathertongue, which makes their comparisons specious and invalid. However, as a consolation to deluded butterfly collectors everywhere, a genetic Homo sapiens without Fathertongue really is just like a poorly-adapted animal.

But since no mere animal can think in Fathertongue, no members of the animal kingdom bother to study the dating and mating habits of professors and graduate students – a fact that might raise a question in the minds of those assiduous researchers, if they were of a mind to question their contra-factual prejudices. A plausible meta-goal of reductionist science, arguably unknown to the scientists but presumably very well understood by modern philosophers, is to reduce everything to nothing – to trivialize everything in order to trivialize the human mind.

…

Read More

Filed Under: General

World’s Best Multivitamin Dietary Supplement?

June 23, 2012 65 Comments

Uni Liver
Universal’s Uni-Liver

Well here we go, two posts about bovine liver, back-to-back. Ha, well, it’s Saturday, so the rules are substantially loosened. And I make the rules anyway.

But this liver post is different. It’s about liver supplements. Some week back I was actually wondering if there was any such thing as, like y’know, desiccated liver in capsules, or something. But every time I thought of it I was away from an Internet thingy, then always forgot to check when I wasn’t. Then commenter Darin answered the question with the product you see to the left.

Prices vary dramatically. I wanted to get some and try it out right away because I’m so ridiculously impatient, so I ended up paying $40 over at the local Vitamin Shoppe. However, you can get the same jar of 500 tablets from World Class Nutrition.com for $13, currently. Goes to show you the huge markup margins in the supplement industry. In terms of a price per pound of liver comparison, that’s kinda tough to tell since these are desiccated and you’d have to know the water content of fresh or cooked liver. At any rate, 500 tablets is 1,000 grams, so just over two pounds. The bottom line is that no matter how you slice it, this is damn expensive liver when fresh can generally be had for $1-2 per pound.

…OK, wait, this can’t be that hard to figure out. A 2-tablet, 60 grain serving size has 3g protein,  according to the label. It also says serving size (per meal) could be 4-6 tablets. I figure 10 tablets per day is a decent overall level, which is 15g liver protein. So, by adjusting the USDA Nutrition Database to get about 15g of protein in raw liver, it comes out to 73 grams raw, or 2.5 ounces, which seems like a reasonable daily intake to me.

Here’s the nutrition profile. I’m no expert on this by any means but it sure looks like it has some of everything but the kitchen sink in it. For the basic nutrients and RDA percentages, here’s FitDay, which took 2.8 ounces of liver to get to 15g protein.

FitDay for 28 Ounces
FitDay for 2.8 Ounces

Funny. For all the trouble vegans go through to avoid animal products, contending with B12 deficiency…and 10 of these tablets give you over 600% of the RDA.

The other surprise for me was that the liver is grassfed, from Argentina. Here’s the product information.

Uni-Liver is an exceptionally pure, natural product derived exclusively from prized grass-fed Argentinian cattle which have been raised without steroids, hormones, or pesticides. Freed of fat, water and connective tissue, Uni-Liver is quickly flash frozen to -18°C. One of the most nutritious supplements available to all bodybuilders, Uni-Liver is very high in important amino acids and rich in key vitamins and minerals, including heme iron, riboflavin, folic acid and B12. Each 30 grain tablet provides 1950mg of liver (1600mg of protein). Uni-Liver has been a classic staple of hardcore bodybuilders for over 15 years. Certified BSE-free.

“Freed of fat…” Well, I guess fat phobia persists everywhere. Take your pills with a pat of butter, spoon of coconut oil, or natural fat of choice, I suppose. Chase it with a shot of olive oil.

So, just another option for those who want the benefit of a whole food (except for the fat being removed) that happens to be the most nutritious on the planet gram for gram, but just can’t take the taste.

Filed Under: General Tagged With: vitamin d

Focus on Nutrients: Beef Liver Ideas and Alternatives

June 21, 2012 85 Comments

I’m big on beef liver. For one, it makes a lot of evolutionary sense in terms of using as much from a kill as possible. Second, if you learn to like it I think you may find yourself surprised at how regular doses (it is nature’s multi-vitamin) uplift your spirits. Nothing like topping up on all essential vitamins and minerals in a big way. On that score, I’ve blogged this before but those of you new to all this, take note:

  • A mere 4 ounces of beef liver roughly approximates the total nutrition of 5 pounds of fruit
  • Calorie for calorie, beef liver has thousands of times more nutrition than “fortified” bread

I’m so big on the nutritional value of liver that I’ve decided to put together a “Liver Page” on the blog…something I can update from time to time to serve as a one-stop reference. Consider how many health news articles you see about “the tremendous nutrition in x”—usually some vegetable or fruit—when the reality is that liver pretty much knocks everything else out of the water, particularly all vegetables and all fruits. Soon, you’ll be able to pop a link in the comments in order to cure mass ignorance.

The nutritional powerhouse of beef liver is such that it gives me some pause, now, when I see a lot of emphasis on “anti-nutrients.” For instance, if the only way you can manage the texture of liver is to dredge it in flour, I’d rather you dredge it in flour and eat your liver. Bottom line, instead of obsessing over anti-nutrients, how about focus on nutrients?

Heretofore, the only thing I’ve come up with besides the standard liver & onions recipe both I and my wife grew up eating, is beef liver pâté (courtesy of Critical MAS). (And actually, artisanal pâté of all sorts is a great way to get your liver, as is foie gras.) The problem with those products is that they’re expensive by comparison ($1-2 per pound for raw liver) and they don’t really make a meal. So, for the last month or so, I’ve been cooking up a couple of pounds of beef liver per week, in liver & onions fashion. That would get us a fresh meal, maybe a leftover meal sometimes, and my wife’s favorite breakfast has become a few thin slices of cold liver (2 ounces total) wrapped in a warmed up corn tortilla.

The other day I set out to find other ways to do liver and came upon this recipe from allrecipes.com they call Smothered Beef Liver. I decided on this one because of the tomato sauce…figuring that, above all, might induce liver haters to give it a try. Tomato sauce is very good at smoothing flavors out, such that virtually everything tastes like veal parmesan. :) …Anyway, this recipe is simple, quick, and way less messy than liver & onions. I’ll have a different one to try probably next week.

I modified the recipe in a few ways. First, I chopped up 2 slices of bacon, fried it and set the bits aside (added back in with the onions later). Then I added 3 pats of butter to the bacon drippings and just enough olive oil to sauté the onions. On that score, I went beyond just softening them, to slightly browning them. I used gluten free flour for the dredge, and also beef stock instead of water to thin the tomato sauce. Finally, I sprinkled on some dried parsley at the end. Click images for hi-res.

P1020655
Smothered Beef Liver
P1020656
 
P1020658
 

I really liked it quite a lot, ate a big helping. So did Beatrice. In fact, she just got back from picking up her parents from the airport and the three of them had leftovers, and everyone liked it. I tried it cold and really liked it. It’s a winner for a new idea, new alternative.

Does it have that classic liver flavor? Uh, I found it barely detectable, though I happen to like that flavor. Because it’s simmered in the sauce for 10 minutes, it really comes out very tender, without any of the texture issues many complain about.

I think it would go very well with some mashed potatoes. So, give it a try if you dare.

Filed Under: General Tagged With: vitamin d

My Hunter-Gatherer Social Experiment With Facebook

June 19, 2012 37 Comments

I’ve long written on this blog along these lines: we evolved to account for the values and actions of about 30 other individuals. The corollary: at that level, each individual has a real potential to influence the collective action of the entire group, should it be important enough to undertake.

And the general social corollary is that this does not scale to 230 Facebook friends, a half million citizens in your “tight knit” community, 300 million Americans…or, what, 7 billion Earth inhabitants? …Hunter-gatherers might not scoff outright at the idea of voting, per se. But I’m pretty sure they’d scoff at it being secret and anonymous (no personal accountability), but then they’re bound to it.

…I had pretty much come to hate Facebook. Many do anyway, but usually for different reasons than I. That runs the gamut from the envy over Zuckerberg’s smashing billionaire success—to now gloating over the not-so-pretty public stock offering—to the constant hand wringing over privacy issues (that’s the price you pay if you want free), to silly butthurt complaints about how their free service is configured, and the changes they make when they want to make them.

I signed up for Facebook way back when it went from college students only, to public. The strategy and timing of that, the elements involved in it, really ought to make a pretty interesting business book, I’d think. …I signed up, did nothing with it for well over a year, began hearing the buzz, and started using it. It’s a love/hate thing, as I suppose most good relationships are—because at least it’s passion, heads or tales, and not indifference—which really, really sucks.

I don’t think I ever acquired over 100 friends, and since FB is mutual, unlike Google+, that seemed reasonable. I have an FB page for this blog with almost 3,500 “fans,” and a Twitter feed, with almost 5,000 followers. But in spite of stating on my About Page and elsewhere, that my personal FB is only for friends and family I know in realspace, I still get a number of friend requests per week I have to ignore. I used to take the time to send a “sorry” message—directing folks to the FTA Page instead—but I just don’t have the time or desire anymore. Sorry.

…So, let’s get to the thinking part, eh? Does anyone really have 100 friends? I mean, true friends in at least some very important context; that is, people with whom you keep up on all important details and events of their lives, attend every function you can, and they yours; or, perhaps someone with whom you might have some extraordinary, unique affinity that will always be present? How about 230? 450, 500 and on up, as I see on many FB profiles?

Or do you cheap and fake out? Do you accept their friend requests, then hide all their posts—rendering the whole thing a white-scam that diminishes you? What happens when they ask you in a phone conversation, an in-person meeting, an email, or even a personal FB message what you think of their FB contributions, or this post or that post? Or, will that never happen anyway—and, I’ve made my point?

For far too long I’ve put up with stuff on Facebook that was of no interest to me. I won’t bore you with the details. Everyone who’s ever been on it on it knows what I mean. Essentially, we need a concise word for UltraBanal. And, I suppose that would go for me, too, in the eyes of some…which is fine—this is a two-way deal. After all, it comes to a point where, other than some nebulous mutual acquaintance, friend of a friend, a family member or “friend” you wouldn’t otherwise see inside of 20-year spaces—or whatever—it’s just not at all prescient. It’s irrelevant. Which means: it really doesn’t mean much of anything to you. Not…really.

So what do you do? You scroll through…scroll, scroll, scroll…and you’re looking for rare nuggets. Well, how about stop digging for gold and think about what you’re trying to do?

Where do you find them, those nuggets? …How about you do a little data analysis? What if you recorded each time you click “Like,” or you comment, or you post on someone’s wall, etc? See how many people that is, and who they are. As a secondary experiment, record which people click “Like” on yours posts, comment, post on your wall, etc. Compare the two lists. Wanna guess how it might come out in terms of correspondence?

For me, since I already had only about 100 FB friends, I kinda winged it and just began the culling operation. I cut my friends list down to 29. This morning when I got up, I went to Facebook, and I had an epiphany. I kinda loved it. I had a great time, really. Virtually every post was something of interest to me. It was easy to click on the “Like” a few times, drop a few comments—all in the worthwhile endeavor of supporting and celebrating those closest to me,—friends and family. …Real friends, family that are as good as friends—because you choose your friends, not your family.

Anyone else want to give it a shot or, if you’ve stayed away from FB for whatever reason, give it a try under that basis: 30-50 friends, and not a single friend more? See how it goes?

As a final aspect to consider, isn’t it odd that human beings have socially developed such complex ways to place friends and family into hierarchies over millennia? Well, no, it isn’t odd at all. It’s a function or response to how we evolved as social beings to begin with. We simply aren’t adapted to the notion or practicality of keeping up with the waxes and wanes of hundreds of other individuals with separate lives, and you know what? I think that’s perfect.

Why? Because no matter what, there will still only be 24 hours in any given day.

Filed Under: General Tagged With: voting, FB

A Look at Some of The People Being Helped by “Bad and Incomplete Science” Part 2

June 19, 2012 16 Comments

A few more to add to the collection.

~ Mike shares.

I’m 47 years old and have been yo-yoing with my weight since my parents got divorced when I was seven. I had to go to my grandmother’s house after school and being the typical grandma, fed me all the sweets and ice cream and sugar and cinnamon rolls etc. that any young kid would want. So by the time I was 10 I was an obese kid.

When I went to Jr High I played football and wrestled and by the time I was a freshman, I had started to lean out and thought it was all good. I mostly maintained a healthy weight all the way until my Junior year in college.

From there, life took over once again. You can guess the rest, so at the age of 32, Im 5’9″ and 232 lbs. I joined a gym near work, ate a low fat diet, 5 meals a day, got back down to 185 lbs and all was going well. But even at that weight I was still real smooth, but I was happy to be where I was. Then the owner of the gym died of cancer and, the gym closed and I didnt really look into joining anywhere else—so I just gave up and this is the time the real weight gain started.

So fast forward 10 years later. I had been drinking 10-12 beers a day for at least the last 8, eating shit, and my pant size had crept up to the point where I went from size 34 pants, blew past 36, to 38. My wife bought me 2 pairs of jeans for Christmas in 2010 and I couldnt wear them. I had to sneak out and buy 40s because I was embarrased to tell her they wouldn’t fit, so I hid the 38s in the back of my closet. In January of 2011, I dropped myself from our family health plan and started to go to the VA for my health care. At my first appointment I weighed 262 lbs. I was demolished.

I started eating less and by April, I was down to 250, but after that I still kept on drinking the beer.

When my father died on Nov 9, 2011, I realized that I didnt have anything to wear to the memorial, so I took my son and myself to get us suits for the ceremony. I was measured at a 42 waist, a size 50 coat, and a 23 inch neck for the shirt. This was the start of the embarrasement.

After the ceremony we went to a relative’s house for dinner and my nephew—whom I hadn’t seen for about 6 months—came in, and I noticed that he was incredibly smaller than the last time I’d seen him. I asked him what he’d been doing. He told me his Dad put him on a paleo diet. So naturally I sought out my ex brother-in-law, who it turns out is a certified trainer and puts all his clients on some form of paleo diet.

I scoured the internet (must have wasted 80 hours of work time) gathering as much info as possible, and decided to give it a go on Nov 29th.

Your website and Marks Daily Apple have been a great source of information and motivation. So 5 weeks in, I’m down to 227 lbs, have been going back to the gym and using the information on your site about the Leangains approach for a workout, and feeling great. Iwas able to pull the jeans I had hidden from my wife and wear them, and just this weekend, bought 2 pairs of 36 that actually fit.

I know I have a long way to go, but I am enjoying this and no longer crave beer which is the biggest blessing so far.

Well, that was the beginning of January, and as of a couple of weeks ago, I have an update in the form of pictures.

Screen Shot 2012 06 19 at 11 16 09 AM
From 2010 to May, 2012

And how about another?

Screen Shot 2012 06 19 at 11 18 17 AM
From December, 2010 to June, 2012

~ Kim shares:

I’m writing because I have a bit of a success story to share, though I’m still on the journey towards the optimal. As of today, however, I have lost 50 pounds since April of 2010, when I began my path to wellness.

My story actually starts well before that, however. Fuck, let’s just start at the beginning (hope you have a few minutes). I was an athletic kid, played on tons of sports teams, lived in the type of neighborhood where you played outside for hours after school and all day every day in the summers, had two older brothers that enjoyed kicking the shit out of me, etc. Our family ate the very definition of the Standard American Diet, however. Breakfast was plain sugary cereal (didn’t like milk) and OJ. Lunch was a sandwich, sugary yogurt or whatever the school cafeteria was serving up. Dinner was some meat (lots of ham and chicken), a canned vegetable (which I usually fed to the dog) and loads of grains. We had “pizza night” once a week and my mom made casseroles every week as well. Due to my high activity level at time, my poor diet seemingly had little effect on my body composition/health.

A couple of years into high school, I found myself exploring interests other than sports. I joined services organizations and began doing theater. As a result of lessened physical activity, coupled with my continuation of the SAD diet, I started gaining weight. […]

Ever since, I’ve been battling overweight, following the same old “eat less, exercise more” bullshit advice that encumbers the mainstream. For the next 10 or so years, I would bounce anywhere from 160lbs – 200lbs, depending on my situation at the time (stress levels, ability to work out, etc.). At one point, in about 2003, I resorted to using ephedra (Stacker) to loose weight. It worked and I dropped to about 160, maybe a little lower. […]

In 2008, I worked hard to get into shape, because I wanted to begin conceiving a child. I weighed 170lbs when I got pregnant in early 2009. Stupidly, for a good deal of my pregnancy, I followed the same bullshit pregnancy advice and pretty much “gave into cravings” and ate whatever the hell I wanted. At some point in my pregnancy, I watched Food, Inc. and read Nina Plank’s Real Food. This started me on what I now call my “Wellness Adventure.” I started drinking raw milk and eating grassfed meat. I dropped my obstetrician, and started seeing a midwife.

Even with these changes, though, I managed to gain a whopping 70lbs. during my pregnancy. Prior to giving birth to my amazing son in December of 2009, I weighed in at 240lbs. Yikes! Not long after, in April of 2010, I weighed 197 pounds and decided I really needed to do something about my weight. I stumbled onto the Whole Health Source blog, as I was looking more into traditional foods. The first post I read was about Stephen being on jimmy moore‘s Livin’ La Vida Low Carb Show. I listened to that podcast, and down the rabbit hole I went. From there, I found your blog, Robb Wolf’s podcast/blog, Mark Sisson’s blog, among the multitudes.

Just by going “low carb,” I lost 20 pounds by the end of that summer. In addition to the lost weight, my skin had cleared up (I had constant acne), my allergies were nearly gone (we used to say I was always … “leaking”), and I had a ton of energy (not bad for a new mother who wasn’t getting a hell of a lot of sleep). Since I was reading all of these Paleo/Primal blogs, I learned about the dangers of grains and industrial seed oils (never liked legumes, so they were already nixed from the diet – easiest food group to give up EVER). So, I started eating a primal diet (still haven’t been able to kick the cheese habit, though it’s no longer the main source of protein as it had been in my old diet). I stopped eating pretty much all processed food, sugar and all grains. Once my son turned one, and had less nursing needs, I slowly added intermittent fasting into my routine, as well (your Leangains posts were great motivation to give this a go).

As a result, I now have lost 50 total pounds since April, 2010, and I feel amazing. I have boundless energy to play with my toddler son, who loves to wrestle (great workout!). I exercise now because I like the way it feels to move and challenge my body (not because I have to work off that extra slice of pizza). My skin and allergies have improved even more. My mental clarity is better. My lipid profile has vastly improved (lower trigs and higher HDL). I’m happier (less of the monthly mood swings, so the husband is happier too – lol). A primal life is a good life!

Anyway, as I said at the beginning of this email, I still feel I have a way to go. I weigh 147 as of this morning. My ideal weight for my height is probably closer to 130. I’m positive I’m going to get there (I constantly tell people how amazing it is to know you are on the right path and to have no concern that you aren’t going to meet your goals). […] I’m happy to share my story with you, and am so appreciative of what you do.

~ Dan loses a huge amount of weight on a low carb approach.

The sudden death of my wife of 37 years prompted a lifestyle change that has led to a weight loss of 143 pounds in the last 20 months. After researching diet and nutrition. I’ve adopted a low carb/Paleo lifestyle.

I tell my story on my blog at: http://danmoffett.blogspot.com/

Screen Shot 2012 06 19 at 10 16 42 AM
340 & 52″ Waist to 183

~ Here’s Lauren with a “facelift” transformation.

I enjoy your blog and have seen you mention several times the idea that a person’s face changes when they switch to paleo. I don’t really call myself paleo as I read and admire MDA, your blog, and archevore equally. Regardless I eat the diet that you all basically promote and my face is quite different now. The first two photos were taken directly following the birth of my first baby. Two and a half years later, I had another baby. The two after photos were taken following the second child. The difference is quite strong, I think. I won’t bore you with a big long story, the photos speak for themselves. I will say that I was a vegetarian for 13 years and that celiac runs in my family. I did one pregnancy as a vegetarian and one as a carnivore.

Screen Shot 2012 06 19 at 10 32 58 AM
Facelift

~ Jim gets motivated.

My name is Jim, and I just wanted to drop you a quick note to say how much I enjoy your blog. I think I first stumbled upon it the day I also found Mark’s Daily Apple…someone on that forum had linked to a post of yours I believe. For quite some time I had been looking for both the method and the motivation for losing some of my extra weight. I was an all-American thrower in college, but had lost control in the past few years and at my heaviest was 335lbs. On a 6′ 7″ frame it’s not the worst, but I remember how I felt physically at that point, and I hated it, but couldn’t seem to do anything about it. In the couple of years after that I was able to get down to about 310, but no further.

Anyhow, Mark’s Daily Apple helped show me the method I was looking for, but it was your “New Year’s Resolutions Are Bullshit” post that really gave me the motivation to get after it. Specifically, the picture with the caption “Fuck you”. That day, I remember looking in the mirror and saying “Fuck you!” to what I saw – since that time (October 1, 2011), I’ve lost almost 30lbs and am exercising much more effectively. In addition, I’m taking more of a “follow your instinct” approach to almost everything. In short, my whole attitude has changed, and it really feels like I’ve figured a lot of things out.

Wow, all of these people figuring out all of this on their own, with “Bad and Incomplete Science.” But there’s nuthin’ to see here. It’s all anecdotal. Just more bad science.

Filed Under: General

  • Go to page 1
  • Go to page 2
  • Go to page 3
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Search FreeTheAnimal

Social Follow

Facebook3k
Facebook
fb-share-icon
Twitter6k
Visit Us
Follow Me
Tweet
Instagram358
Pinterest118k
Pinterest
fb-share-icon
YouTube798
YouTube
Follow by Email8k
RSS780

Post Notification Options

About FreeTheAnimal

I'm Richard Nikoley. Free The Animal began in 2003 and as of 2020, has 5,000 posts and 120,000 comments from readers. I blog what I wish...from lifestyle to philosophy, politics, social antagonism, adventure travel, nomad living, location and time independent—"while you sleep"— income, and food. I intended to travel the world "homeless" but the Covid-19 panic-demic squashed that. I've become an American expat living in rural Thailand where I've built a home. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. [Read more...]

CLICK HERE to shop Amazon. Costs you nothing.

Shop Amazon

My own on-the-scene expat photos, stories, podcasts, and video adventures, currently from exotic Thailand

Become a Patron

Gastrointestinal Health

Elixa Probiotic is a British biotech manufacturer in Oxford, UK. U.S. Demand is now so high they've established distribution centers in Illinois, Nevada, and New Jersey.

Still, sell-outs happen regularly, so order now to avoid a waiting list.

Elixa Probiotic

My Book

Free The Animal Book

Recent Posts

My Thoughts About The 2020 Fraudulent Election

Since a picture is worth a thousand words, let's call it 500 words of thoughts about the election circus spectacle and 500 words about considering ...

Read More

A COVID Cult and Clown Car Roundup

Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist ...

Read More

You Can’t Recount Your Way Out of This

It's a hot mess inside of a shitstorm From about 1990 until midterms, 2018, I was a non-voter, even though I generally supported libertarian and ...

Read More

November 3rd

Less than a week out and looking forward to forgetting about it for another 4 years. 320+, and the popular vote. Bank on it. That is all. ...

Read More

Please Wear Your Mask to Help The Spread of Covid-19

Finally some good news. Turns out, via CDC, that habitual mask wearers are the ones spreading the virus around the most. That's fantastic since ...

Read More

Popular Posts

Coronavirus #3: Denise Minger is Thorough But Misses the Boats92 Total Shares
My 8 Weeks in Thailand #188 Total Shares
Covid-19 Is Impeachment 3.0; BLM Riots, 4.0; Re-Lockdown, 5.083 Total Shares
My Musings on the Coronavirus (Covid-19)73 Total Shares
Coronavirus #2: The Dumb and the Dumber58 Total Shares
Have You Forgotten? Richard Lothar Nikoley Doesn’t Give An Eff What You “Think”56 Total Shares
I Met A Dry Fasting Nut39 Total Shares
CovidScam Unravels. Backlash Grows and Intensifies.35 Total Shares
Coronavirus #1: The Innocent and the Guilty30 Total Shares
Everything I Thought I Lost28 Total Shares

Last 10 Comments

  • Richard Nikoley on My Thoughts About The 2020 Fraudulent Election
  • Richard Nikoley on My Thoughts About The 2020 Fraudulent Election
  • EatLessMoveMoore on My Thoughts About The 2020 Fraudulent Election
  • Big on My Thoughts About The 2020 Fraudulent Election
  • Richard Nikoley on You Can’t Recount Your Way Out of This
  • Anonymous on You Can’t Recount Your Way Out of This
  • Chung Ho-Lee on A COVID Cult and Clown Car Roundup
  • Kris on Perfect Salmon and Asparagus in an Air Fryer
  • Richard Nikoley on Coronavirus #3: Denise Minger is Thorough But Misses the Boats
  • John on Coronavirus #3: Denise Minger is Thorough But Misses the Boats

© 2021 All Rights Reserved · Free The Animal Return to top