Vicious Cycle: The Pentagon Creates Tech Giants and Then Buys their Services

“These and other examples show that in addition to trying to shape the world in the interests of American elites, the Pentagon’s ulterior motive is to fund hi-tech industry to stimulate new economies. That same hi-technology, which exists in a so-called system of “free enterprise,” not only creates monopolies, it does so with taxpayer money. Spied on and manipulated by the technologies they fund, the public, as consumers, then pay for services provided by those tech giants. Talk about a vicious cycle…”

O Society

by TJ Coles CounterPunch edited by O Society May 22, 2019

The US Department of Defense’s bloated budget, along with CIA venture capital, helped to create tech giants, including Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and PayPal. The government then contracts those companies to help its military and intelligence operations. In doing so, it makes the tech giants even bigger.

In recent years, the traditional banking, energy and industrial Fortune 500companies have been losing ground to tech giants like Apple and Facebook. But the technology on which they rely emerged from the taxpayer-fundedresearch and development of bygone decades. The internet started as ARPANET, an invention of Honeywell-Raytheon working under a Department of Defense (DoD) contract. The same satellites that enable modern internet communications also enable US jets to bomb their enemies, as does the GPSthat enables online retailers to deliver products with pinpoint accuracy. Apple’s touchscreen technology originated as…

View original post 843 more words

Vitamin D3 and Autophagy

Vitamin D3, a fat-soluble vitamin, is one of the most important micronutrients. I won’t describe all of its health benefits. But the effect on the body can be more like a hormone in how powerful it influences numerous physiological processes and systems.

Here is what I’ll emphasize for the moment, as an example of how to think about health in a more complex way. Unless you live near the equator and are near naked outside in the sun for most of the day, you are guaranteed to not be getting enough vitamin D3 through your body’s own production of it. The only other natural source is from animal foods. So, be sure to eat plenty of fatty animal foods from pasture-raised animals, especially organ meats, eggs, and dairy.

Let me throw out the issue of autophagy. Eating protein, as with eating carbs or really anything, shuts down autophagy. And we want some autophagy (i.e., cellular repair and regrowth) as it is essential to health and longevity. Some people blame protein for lack of autophagy, but that is nonsense. It is no more to blame than anything else. Sure, you should fast from protein on occasion. Then again, you should fast from everything on occasion. But fasting won’t give you the benefits of autophagy if you don’t have all that is required to make this possible. Guess which nutrient enhances autophagy? Yep, vitamin D3.

Someone severely restricting their protein consumption is unintentionally also restricting their vitamin D3 intake. They’ll have a harder time getting into full autophagy with all of its benefits. This is even more true for those, in avoiding fatty meats, eat a high-carb/low-fat diet instead. Not only are they not getting healthy amounts of vitamin D3 for they also aren’t regularly in ketosis. And one has to first be in ketosis before one can be in autophagy. On a high-fat ketogenic diet, all that it will take to get autophagy is a relatively shorter fast because the body is already fully primed for it.

It is true that eating protein shuts down autophagy in up-regulating what causes biological growth by way of mTOR and IFG1. That isn’t a bad thing. We want our bodies to grow, just as we also want our bodies to repair. The optimal condition is to cycle back and forth between these two states. Vitamin D3 from fatty animal foods is key for both, as it promotes bone growth and promotes autophagy, among much else. Don’t deny yourself. Enjoy those delicious fats from high quality sources. Feast until satiation and, to balance it out, fast on occasion.

* * *

As a side note, deficiency in vitamin D3 is associated with such things as Alzheimer’s.

It makes me wonder if that is related to the role of vitamin D3 in autophagy. Alzheimer’s is accumulated damage involving (among other factors) insulin resistance and inflammation, both of which would relate to low-carb/high fat diets along with ketosis and autophagy.

But vitamin D3 out of balance can also be a problem, as it works closely with the fat-soluble vitamin A (as beta-carotene). Vitamins A and D3 form a fat-soluble trio with vitamin K2. You can learn more about this from Kate Rheaume-Bleue, although credit must be given to Weston A. Price.

* * *

A Common Diet

“English peasants in Medieval times lived on a combination of meat stews, leafy vegetables and dairy products which scientists say was healthier than modern diets.”
~ Frédéric Leroy

There is an idea that, in the past, the poor were fed on bread while the rich monopolized meat. Whether or not this was true of some societies, it certainly wasn’t true of many. For example, in ancient Egypt, all levels of society seemed to have had the same basic high-carb diet with lots of bread. It consisted of the types and amounts of foods that are recommended in the USDA Food Pyramid. And their health suffered for it. As with people eating the same basic diet today, they had high rates of the diseases of civilization, specifically metabolic syndrome: obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. Also, they had serious tooth decay, something not seen with low-carb hunter-gatherers.

The main difference for ancient Egyptians was maybe the quality of bread. The same thing was true in Medieval Europe. Refined flour was limited to the wealthy. White breads didn’t become commonly available to most Westerners until the 1800s, about the same time that surplus grain harvests allowed for a high-carb diet and for the practice of fattening up cows with grains. Unsurprisingly, grain-fed humans also started become fat during this time with the earliest commentary on obesity coming from numerous writers of the era: Jane Austen, Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin, William Banting, etc.

In the Middle Ages, there were some other class differences in eating patterns. The basic difference is that the feudal serfs ate more salmon and aristocracy more chicken. It is not what a modern person would expect considering salmon is far more healthy, but the logic is that chickens were a rare commodity in that the poor wouldn’t want to regularly eat what produces the eggs they were dependent upon. Besides the bread issue, the Medieval aristocracy were also eating more sugary deserts. Back then, only the rich had access to or could afford sugar. Even fruit would have been rare for peasants.

Feudalism, especially early feudalism, was actually rather healthy for peasants. It’s not that anyone’s diet was exactly low-carb, at least not intentionally, although that would have been more true in the centuries of the early Middle Ages when populations returned to a more rural lifestyle of hunting, trapping and gathering, a time when any peasant had access to what was called the ‘commons’. But that did change over time as laws became more restrictive about land use. Still, in the centuries following the collapse of the Roman Empire, health and longevity drastically improved for most of the population.

The living conditions for the poor only got worse again as society moved toward modernity with the increase of large-scale agriculture and more processed foods. But even into the late Middle Ages, the diet remained relatively healthy since feudal laws protected the rights of commoners in raising their own food and grazing animals. Subsistence farming combined with some wild foods was not a bad way to feed a population, as long as there was enough land to go around.

A similar diet was maintained among most Americans until the 20th century when urbanization became the norm. As late as the Great Depression, much of the population was able to return to a rural lifestyle or otherwise had access to rural areas, as it was feasible with the then much smaller numbers. Joe Bageant describes his childhood in a West Virginia farming community from 1940s-to-1950s as still having been mostly subsistence farming with a barter economy. We’ve only seen the worst health outcomes among the poor since mass urbanization, which for African Americans only happened around the 1960s or 1970s when the majority finally became urbanized, centuries after it happened in Europe. The healthier diet of non-industrialized rural areas was a great equalizer for most of human existence.

The main thing I thought interesting was that diets didn’t always differ much between populations in the same society. The commonalities of a diet in any given era were greater than the differences. We now think of bread and refined flour as being cheap food, but at an earlier time such food would have been far more expensive and generally less available across all of society. As agriculture expanded, natural sources of food such as wild game became scarce and everyone became increasingly dependent on grains, along with legumes and tubers. This was a dramatic change with detrimental outcomes and it contributed to other larger changes going on in society.

The divergences of diets by class seems to primarily be a modern shift, including the access the upper classes now have to a diversity of fruits and vegetables, even out of season and grown in distant places. Perception of grains as poor people food and cattle feed only become a typical view starting in the 1800s, something discussed by Bryan Kozlowski in The Jane Austen Diet. As with the Roman Empire, the poorest of the poor lost access to healthy foods during the enclosure movement and extending into industrialization. It was only then that the modern high-carb diet became prevalent. It was also the first time that inequality had risen to such an extreme level, which forced a wedge into the once commonly held diet.

The early Middle Age communities (more akin to ancient city-states) established a more similar lifestyle between the rich and poor, as they literally lived close together, worshiped together, celebrated Carnival together, even ate together. A lord or knight would have maintained a retinue of advisers, assistants and servants plus a large number of dependents and workers who ate collective meals in the main house or castle. Later on, knights were no longer needed to defend communities and aristocracy became courtesans spending most of their time in the distant royal court. Then the enclosure movement created the landless peasants that would become the working poor. As class divides grew, diets diverged accordingly. We are so entrenched in a high inequality society, we have forgotten that this is severely abnormal compared to most societies throughout history. The result of greater inequality of wealth and power has been a worsening inequality of nutrition and health.

* * *

Reconciling organic residue analysis, faunal, archaeobotanical and historical records: Diet and the medieval peasant at West Cotton, Raunds, Northamptonshire
by J. Dunne, A. Chapman, P. Blinkhorn, R. P. Evershed

  • Medieval peasant diet comprises meat and cabbage stews cooked on open hearths.
  • Dairy products, butter and cheese, known as ‘white meats of the poor’ also eaten.

The medieval peasant diet that was ‘much healthier’ than today’s average eating habits: Staples of meat, leafy vegetables and cheese are found in residue inside 500-year-old pottery
by Joe Pinkstone

They found the surprisingly well-rounded diet of the peasants would have kept them well-fed and adequately nourished.

Dr Julie Dunne at the University of Bristol told MailOnline: ‘The medieval peasant had a healthy diet and wasn’t lacking in anything major!

‘It is certainly much healthier than the diet of processed foods many of us eat today.

‘The meat stews (beef and mutton) with leafy vegetables (cabbage, leek) would have provided protein and fibre and important vitamins and the dairy products (butter and ‘green’ cheeses) would also have provided protein and other important nutrients.

‘These dairy products were sometimes referred to as the “white meats” of the poor, and known to have been one of the mainstays of the medieval peasants diet. […]

Historical documents state that medieval peasants ate meat, fish, dairy products, fruit and vegetables.

But the researchers say that before their study there was little direct evidence to support this.

Another Example of the Replication Crisis

A Waste of 1,000 Research Papers
by Ed Yong

Between them, these 18 genes have been the subject of more than 1,000 research papers, on depression alone. And for what? If the new study is right, these genes have nothing to do with depression. “This should be a real cautionary tale,” Keller adds. “How on Earth could we have spent 20 years and hundreds of millions of dollars studying pure noise?”

“What bothers me isn’t just that people said [the gene] mattered and it didn’t,” wrote the psychiatrist Scott Alexander in a widely shared blog post. “It’s that we built whole imaginary edifices on top of this idea of [it] mattering.” Researchers studied how SLC6A4 affects emotion centers in the brain, how its influence varies in different countries and demographics, and how it interacts with other genes. It’s as if they’d been “describing the life cycle of unicorns, what unicorns eat, all the different subspecies of unicorn, which cuts of unicorn meat are tastiest, and a blow-by-blow account of a wrestling match between unicorns and Bigfoot,” Alexander wrote. […]

“We’re told that science self-corrects, but what the candidate gene literature demonstrates is that it often self-corrects very slowly, and very wastefully, even when the writing has been on the wall for a very long time,” Munafo adds.

Many fields of science, from psychology to cancer biology, have been dealing with similar problems: Entire lines of research may be based on faulty results. The reasons for this so-called “reproducibility crisis” are manifold. Sometimes, researchers futz with their data until they get something interesting, or retrofit their questions to match their answers. Other times, they selectively publish positive results while sweeping negative ones under the rug, creating a false impression of building evidence.

Beyond a few cases of outright misconduct, these practices are rarely done to deceive. They’re an almost inevitable product of an academic world that rewards scientists, above all else, for publishing papers in high-profile journals—journals that prefer flashy studies that make new discoveries over duller ones that check existing work. People are rewarded for being productive rather than being right, for building ever upward instead of checking the foundations. These incentives allow weak studies to be published. And once enough have amassed, they create a collective perception of strength that can be hard to pierce. […]

Similar debates have played out in other fields. When one group of psychologists started trying to reproduce classic results in much larger studies, their peers argued that any failures might simply be due to differences between the new groups of volunteers and the originals. This excuse has eroded with time, but to Border, it feels familiar. “There’s an unwillingness to part with a previous hypothesis,” he says. “It’s hard to wrap your head around the fact that maybe you were on a wild goose chase for years.”

Keller worries that these problems will be used as ammunition to distrust science as a whole. “People ask, ‘Well, if scientists are publishing crap, why should we believe global warming and evolution,’” he says. “But there’s a real difference: Some people were skeptical about candidate genes even back in the 1990s. There was never unanimity or consensus in the way there is for human-made global warming and the theory of evolution.”

(Credit to Nina Teicholz for bringing my attention to this article.)

Climate Catastrophe In Slow Motion

Let me cheer you up. I came across an article on the rise of heat-trapping methane. In the comments section, I noticed someone link to another article about plants absorbing carbon dioxide, although there is a limit to how much plants can store. Here is the kicker. As plants take in carbon dioxide, it acts like a super-fertilizer for many of them. They grow larger, produce more leaves, and foliage becomes greener. “So on average, the poison ivy plant of, say, 1901, can grow up to 50 to 60 percent larger as of 2010 just from the change in CO2 alone, all other things being equal,” explained Dr. Lewis Ziska, a plant physiologist working for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s agricultural research service.

This is seen in the spread of poison ivy, a plant my mother recalls as being relatively uncommon in her childhood, to such a degree that she rarely noticed it. It has since proliferated with climate change and deforestation, a combination that creates the perfect conditions for this invasive species. Poison ivy (and poison oak, along with other vining plants like kudzu) loves both higher heat and higher levels of carbon dioxide. Poison ivy, more than other plants, thrives under these conditions. Also, in response, it produces more of the irritant that gives it its name. Poison ivy toxicity has doubled since 1950, that is to say since my parents’ childhood. This likely explains the phenomenon of why some people who didn’t react to poison ivy as children do so as adults. My mother may have not noticed poison ivy as a childhood not only because it was less widespread but, more importantly, because it was less poisonous to skin contact. Another climate-change-loving plant is giant hogweed (along with its cousin wild parsnip) that can cause third degree burns.

Dandelion and some other invasive species are also fond of mass climatological and ecological disruption (eat more dandelion salads and drink more dandelion wine?). Furthermore, sources of allergens such as pollen from ragweed and certain trees (as oaks and hickories replace pines, spruces, and firs) will become more of a problem and so allergies and asthma might become a more common affliction with increasing costs to society. Mosquitoes, along with deer ticks and red fire ants, have likewise been increasing their territory and population density (the Asian tiger mosquito can carry Dengue Fever and the painful virus Chikungunya, and don’t forget about West Nile virus, not to mention the lesser known Eastern equine encephalitis). The same pattern of spread is seen with bed bugs, kissing bugs, and killer bees. The warmer climate might be assisting the quickened pace of emerald ash borer infestation, and maybe also helping gypsy moths and the southern pine beetle.

I don’t know if it has anything to do with alterations in climate, but this has been one of the greenest springs I can remember. There is a dramatic increase of garlic mustard, one of the most invasive species — it is taking over the town like a 1950s movie about an alien invasion. Many other invasive species are growing like gangbusters across the country — hydrilla, purple loosestrife, Japanese knotweed, oriental bittersweet, milfoil, fanwort, etc — and likely shifting climate is a major factor, not only greater warmth but also changes in precipitation with some areas drier and others moister (ticks love moist and they are precisely moving into areas that have increased rainfall and humidity). The insects killing native species further aids the spread of the invasive plants that quickly take over disturbed ecosystems. And combined with farm runoff, there will be more toxic algae blooms.

The pervasive growth of invasive species and noxious weeds is a nuisance. A friend of mine will no longer walk off trail because of concern for poison ivy, something he never thought about as a child and in fact he didn’t even know how to identify it until adulthood. But it’s more than a mere nuisance. With the spread of pests, there is also the spread of diseases, from Lyme disease to malaria to chagas disease parasite, since over time there are fewer deep freezes to kill off the pests and so they can move further north. There are many other “vector-borne diseases” like schistosomiasis and keep in mind how “thawing permafrost in Polar Regions could allow otherwise dormant age-old viruses to re-emerge.” And don’t think that there is a silver lining to this cloud of doom, as there is “a somewhat paradoxical finding that although carbon dioxide may fertilize plants, many crops show decreased growth (due to changes in rainfall, aggressive weed growth, plant diseases, and other factors), and the nutritional value of the resulting primary production is lowered. Flooded with carbon, crops can become deficient in other elements, resulting in a 10-20 percent decrease in protein levels and anemic iron and zinc concentrations.”

The dramatic superstorms and droughts get most of the attention. They create mass catastrophes and refugee crises, and that in turn causes political instability and contributes to conflicts and wars. But as we head toward existential crisis of the global order and as civilization is threatened by collapse, there will be a worsening that will impact people in small and less obvious ways that make life more difficult and uncomfortable with strains on the social fabric and public health, strains on the food system and economy. A worsening of the conditions and quality of life, this will happen even in the American Heartland that feels so far away from the catastrophes elsewhere in the world. I’ve barely touched upon the diverse challenges and disruptions that will harm humans in numerous other ways. Life will get ever more shitty and this will cause people to act in disturbed and disturbing ways. We are already seeing the increase of terrorism likely with climatological stress and trauma as a contributing factor. Mental health will certainly involve further precipitous declines, with heat waves and societal stress but especially with rising inequality where ecological and societal consequences will be disproportionately found among the poor, not that the rich will be able to forever escape the consequences of the externalized costs they’ve benefited from.

As a society, how long will we be able to ignore the climate crisis, to pretend nothing is going on? Why do we act like ecological collapse and the sixth mass extinction won’t affect us? This is insane and the insanity is going to get far worse. Pests and diseases, noxious weeds and invasive species will be the least of our worries, although I wouldn’t count out the possibility of the first global plague to decimate the human population. We are unprepared for the world we are creating for ourselves or else for our children and grandchildren. Our descendants will curse us for the living hell that will be forced upon them. But on a positive note, if you’re an older adult, you might die peacefully before the shit storm begins. Let the future survivors of the coming collapse deal with the mess later. The joke is on them and humanity is the punchline.

* * *

Here is an example of too little too late. But it’s still better than nothing. At least, it’s an acknowledgment of how bad it’s got. Speaking honestly and accurately is a massive step forward. Still, more than a style guide, what we need is a reality guide or rather a reality slap upside the head.

Why the Guardian is changing the language it uses about the environment
by Damian Carrington

The Guardian has updated its style guide to introduce terms that more accurately describe the environmental crises facing the world.

Instead of “climate change” the preferred terms are “climate emergency, crisis or breakdown” and “global heating” is favoured over “global warming”, although the original terms are not banned. […]

Other terms that have been updated, including the use of “wildlife” rather than “biodiversity”, “fish populations” instead of “fish stocks” and “climate science denier” rather than “climate sceptic”. In September, the BBC accepted it gets coverage of climate change “wrong too often” and told staff: “You do not need a ‘denier’ to balance the debate.”

Earlier in May, Greta Thunberg, the Swedish teenager who has inspired school strikes for climate around the globe, said: “It’s 2019. Can we all now call it what it is: climate breakdown, climate crisis, climate emergency, ecological breakdown, ecological crisis and ecological emergency?”

Calcium: Nutrient Combination and Ratios

Calcium is centrally important, as most people already know. Not only is it necessary for the health of bones but also for the health of the heart, nerve cells, gut microbiome, hormonal system, skin, etc and will affect such things as grip strength and fatigue. As usual, there is a lot of misinformation out there and newer information that has changed our understanding. Let me clear up the issue to the degree I can. The following represents my present understanding, based on the sources I could find.

We can store calcium when we are younger, but lose this ability as we age. On the other hand, it turns out we don’t need as much calcium as previously assumed. And too much calcium can be harmful, even deadly as can happen with hardening of arteries. In fact, the healthiest societies have lower levels of calcium. It’s not so much about the calcium itself for, as always, context matters. Calcium deficiencies typically are caused by a health condition (kidney condition, alcohol abuse, etc), rather than lack of calcium in the diet. Importantly, other nutrients determine how the body absorbs, processes, utilizes, and deposits calcium. Furthermore, nutritional imbalances involving deficiencies and excesses create a cascade of health problems.

Let me explain the interrelationship of micronutrients. There is a whole series of relationships involved in calcium processing. Vitamin B6 is necessary for absorption of magnesium; and magnesium is necessary for absorption of vitamin D3 — zinc, boron, vitamin A, bile salts, and a healthy guy microbiome are all important as well. Of course, cholesterol and sunlight are needed for the body to produce it’s own vitamin D3, which is why deficiencies in these are also problematic. Statins block cholesterol and sunscreen blocks sun; while stress will block vitamin D3 itself whereas exercise will do the opposite. Then vitamin D3 is necessary for absorption of calcium. But it doesn’t end there. Most important of all, vitamin K2 is necessary for regulating where calcium is deposited in the body, ensuring it ends up in bones and teeth rather than in joints, arteries, brain, kidneys, etc.

About on specific issue, the often cited 2-to-1 ratio of calcium and magnesium is actually on the high end indicating the maximum calcium levels you don’t want to exceed as part of your total calcium intake from both diet and supplementation. So, if you’re getting a 2-to-1 ratio in your supplements combined with high levels of calcium from food, such as a diet with plenty of dairy and/or greens, your calcium levels could be causing you harm. Speaking of magnesium deficiency is a relative assessment, as it depends on calcium levels. The body is rarely depleted of magnesium and so, on a superficial level, your body is never deficient in an absolute sense. Yet the higher your calcium levels go the greater your need of magnesium. Nutrients never act alone, such as how vitamin C requirements increase on a high-carb diet.

Here is another example of nutrient interaction. With more salt in your diet, you’ll need more potassium and magnesium to compensate. And potassium deficiency is associated with magnesium deficiency. But that isn’t to say you want to decrease sodium to increase these others, as research indicates higher salt intake is associated with greater health (Dr. James DiNicolantonio, The Salt Fix) — and I’d recommend getting a good source of salt such as Real Salt (although natural forms of salt lack iodine and so make sure to increase iodine-rich foods like seaweed, that being a good option since seaweed is extremely nutrient-dense). As an interesting side note, calcium helps your muscles contract and magnesium helps your muscles relax, which is why muscle cramps (also spasms, twitches, and restlessness) can be a sign of magnesium deficiency. Plus, excess calcium and insufficient magnesium will increase cortisol, the stress hormone, and so can interfere with sleep. There is yet another dual relationship between these two in the clotting and thinning of blood.

Macronutrients play a role as well. Higher protein ensures optimal levels of magnesium and is strongly linked to increased bone mass and density. Fat intake may also play a role with these minerals, but I couldn’t find much discussion about this. Certainly, fat is necessary for the absorption of fat-soluble vitamins. If you’re eating pastured (or grass-fed-and-finished) fatty animal foods, you’ll be getting both the protein and the fat-soluble vitamins (A as beta-carotene, D3, E complex, & K2). Even greater, with cultured, fermented and aged foods (whether from animals or plants), you’ll get higher levels of the much needed vitamin K2. Assuming you can stand the taste and texture of it, fermented soy in the form of natto is the highest known source of K2 as the subtype MK7 which remains in the body longer than other subtypes. By the way, some multiple vitamins contain MK7 (e.g., Garden of Life). Vitamin K2 is massively important. Weston A. Price called it Activator X because it controls so much of what the body does, specifically in relationship to other nutrients, including other fat-soluble vitamins. And all of the fat-soluble vitamins are central in relationship to mineral levels.

Another factor to consider is when nutrients are taken and in combination with what. Some minerals will compete with each other for absorption, but this probably is not an issue if you are getting small amounts throughout the day, such as adding a balanced electrolyte mix (with potassium, magnesium, etc) to your water or other drinks. Calcium and magnesium are two that compete and many advise they should be taken separately, but if you take them in smaller amounts competition is not an issue. Some research indicates calcium has a higher absorption rate in the evening, but magnesium can make you sleepy and so might also be taken in the evening — if taking a supplement, maybe take the former with dinner and the latter before bed or you could take the magnesium in the morning and see how it makes you feel. By the way, too much coffee (6 cups or more a day) will cause the body to excrete calcium and salt, and yet coffee is also a good source of potassium and magnesium. Coffee, as with tea, in moderate amounts is good for your health.

As a last thought, here is what you want to avoid for healthy calcium levels: taken with iron supplements, high levels of insoluble fiber, antacids, excessive caffeine. Also, calcium can alter the effects of medications and, in some cases, should be taken two hours apart. Keep in mind that many plant foods can be problematic because of anti-nutrients that bind minerals or interfere with absorption. This is why traditional people spent so much time preparing plant foods (soaking, sprouting, cooking, fermenting, etc) in order to eliminate these anti-nutrients and hence increase nutrient absorption. It is irrelevant the amount of nutrients in a food if you’re body can’t use them. For example, one of the highest concentrations of calcium is found in spinach, but the bioavailability is extremely low. Other foods, including other leafy greens, are a much better source and with any leafy greens always cook them.

This problem is magnified by the decreased nutrient content of most plant foods these days, as the soil itself has become depleted. Supplementation of many micronutrients is maybe necessary for almost everyone at this point, although great caution should be taken with supplementing calcium.

* * *

Sometimes I write posts about diet and health after doing research for my own purposes or simply for the sake of curiosity about a topic. But in many cases, I have family members in mind, as my own health improvements have gone hand in hand with dietary changes my parents also have made, and my brothers are health-conscious as well although with a vegetarian diet quite different than my own. This particular post was written for my mother.

Just the other day she was diagnosed with osteoporosis. She had osteopenia for decades. Now looking back, she realizes that her bone loss began when she started taking fiber and antacids, both of which block calcium. And all the years of calcium supplementation were probably doing her no good because, even to the degree she was absorbing any of the calcium, it wasn’t balanced with other needed nutrients. I gathered this information in order to help her to figure out how to improve her bone health, as her doctor was only moderately informed and her recent appointment was rushed.

This was researched and written on Mother’s Day. I guess it was my gift to my mother. But I hope it is of value to others as well.

* * *

Without Magnesium, Vitamin D Supplementation May Backfire
by Joseph Mercola

Calcium with Magnesium: Do You Need the Calcium?
from Easy Immune System Health

Expert cites risk of calcium—magnesium imbalance
from Nutritional Magnesium Association

Optimum Calcium Magnesium Ratio: The 2-to-1 Calcium-to-Magnesium Ratio
by A. Rosanoff

Nutritional strategies for skeletal and cardiovascular health: hard bones, softarteries, rather than vice versa
by James H O’Keefe, Nathaniel Bergman, Pedro Carrera-Bastos, Maélan Fontes-Villalba, James J DiNicolantonio, Loren Cordain

Why You Need To Take Vitamin K With Calcium Supplements
by Stacy Facko

For Bone Health, Think Magnesium
from Harvest Market Natural Foods

Calcium Deficiency: Are Supplements the Answer?
by Jillian Levy

Calcium to Magnesium: How the Ratio Affects Your Health
from Juvenon Health Journal

How to Correct Your Calcium-to-Magnesium Ratio
by Sandra Ketcham

Calcium & Magnesium: Finding the Right Ratio for Optimal Health
by Dr. Edward Group

Magnesium, NOT Calcium, Is The Key To Healthy Bones
by Jackie Ritz

Calcium Supplements: Things to Consider before Taking One
by Chris Kresser

How to Get Enough Calcium Without Dairy
by Katie Wells

Is The Paleo Diet Deficient In Calcium?
by Michael Ofer

Paleo & Calcium | Friendly Calcium Rich Foods
by Irena Macri

Mineral Primer – The Weston A. Price Foundation
by Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig

The science of salt and electrolytes (are we consuming enough?)
by Will Little

13 Signs Of Magnesium Deficiency + How To Finally Get Enough
by Dr. Will Cole

Top 10 Magnesium-Rich Foods
by Rachael Link

Vitamin K2, Vitamin D, and Calcium: A Winning Combo
by Joseph Mercola

Vitamin K2: Everything You Need to Know
by Joe Leech

The Ultimate Vitamin K2 Resource
by Chris Masterjohn

Vitamin K2: Are You Consuming Enough?
by Chris Kresser

Promoting Calcium Balance Health On A Paleo Diet (Easier Than You Think)
by Loren Cordain

Calcium: A Team Sports View of Nutrition
by Loren Cordain

How To Keep Your Bones Healthy On A Paleo Diet
by Chris Kresser

Bicameralism and Bilingualism

A paper on multilingualism was posted by Eva Dunkel in the Facebook group for The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind: Consequences of multilingualism for neural architecture by Sayuri Hayakawa and Viorica Marian. It is a great find. The authors look at how multiple languages are processed within the brain and how they can alter brain structure.

This probably also relates to learning of music, art, and math — one might add that learning music later improves the ability to learn math. These are basically other kinds of languages, especially the former in terms of  musical languages (along with whistle and hum languages) that might indicate language having originated in music, not to mention the close relationship music has to dance, movement, and behavior and close relationship of music to group identity. The archaic authorization of command voices in the bicameral mind quite likely came in the form of music and one could imagine the kinds of synchronized collective activities that could have dominated life and work in bicameral societies. There is something powerful about language that we tend to overlook and take for granted. Also, since language is so embedded in culture, monolinguals never see outside of the cultural reality tunnel they exist within. This could bring us to wonder about the role played post-bicameral society by syncretic languages like English. We can’t forget the influence psychedelics might have had on language development and learning at different periods of human existence. And with psychedelics, there is the connection to shamanism with caves as aural spaces and locations of art, possibly the earliest origin of proto-writing.

There is no reason to give mathematics a mere secondary place in our considerations. Numeracy might be important as well in thinking about the bicameral mind specifically and certainly about the human mind in general (Caleb Everett, Numbers and the Making of Us), as numeracy was an advancement or complexification beyond the innumerate tribal societies (e.g., Piraha). Some of the earliest uses of writing was for calculations: accounting, taxation, astrology, etc. Bicameral societies, specifically the early city-states, can seem simplistic in many ways with their lack of complex hierarchies, large centralized governments, standing armies, police forces, or even basic infrastructure such as maintained roads and bridges. Yet they were capable of immense projects that required impressively high levels of planning, organizing, and coordination — as seen with the massive archaic pyramids and other structures built around the world. It’s strange how later empires in the Axial Age and beyond that, though so much larger and extensive with greater wealth and resources, rarely even attempted the seemingly impossible architectural feats of bicameral humans. Complex mathematical systems probably played a major role in the bicameral mind, as seen in how astrological calculations sometimes extended over millennia.

Hayakawa and Marian’s paper could add to the explanation of the breakdown of the bicameral mind. A central focus of their analysis is the increased executive function and neural integration in managing two linguistic inputs — I could see how that would relate to the development of egoic consciousness. It has been proposed that the first to develop Jaynesian consciousness may have been traders who were required to cross cultural boundaries and, of course, who would have been forced to learn multiple languages. As bicameral societies came into regular contact with more diverse linguistic cultures, their bicameral cognitive and social structures would have been increasingly stressed.

Multilingualism goes hand in hand with literacy. Rates of both have increased over the millennia. That would have been a major force in the post-bicameral Axial Age. The immense multiculturalism of societies like the Roman Empire is almost impossible for us to imagine. Hundreds of ethnicities, each with their own language, would co-exist in the same city and sometimes the same neighborhood. On a single street, there could be hundreds of shrines to diverse gods with people praying, people invoking and incantating in their separate languages. These individuals were suddenly forced to deal with complete strangers and learn some basic level of understanding foreign languages and hence foreign understandings.

This was simultaneous with the rise of literacy and its importance to society, only becoming more important over time as the rate of book reading continues to climb (more books are printed in a year these days than were produced in the first several millennia of writing). Still, it was only quite recently that the majority of the population became literate, following from that is the ability of silent reading and its correlate of inner speech. Multilingualism is close behind and catching up. The consciousness revolution is still under way. I’m willing to bet American society will be transformed as we return to multilingualism as the norm, considering that in the first centuries of American history there was immense multilingualism (e.g., German was once one of the most widely spoken languages in North America).

All of this reminds me of linguistic relativity. I’ve pointed out that, though not explicitly stated, Jaynes obviously was referring to linguistic relativity in his own theorizing about language. He talked quite directly about the power language —- and metaphors within language —- had over thought, perception, behavior, and identity (Anke Snoek has some good insights about this in exploring the thought of Giorgio Agamben). This was an idea maybe first expressed by Wilhelm von Humboldt (On Language) in 1836: “Via the latter, qua character of a speech-sound, a pervasive analogy necessarily prevails in the same language; and since a like subjectivity also affects language in the same notion, there resides in every language a characteristic world-view.” And Humboldt even considered the power of learning another language in stating that, “To learn a foreign language should therefore be to acquire a new standpoint in the world-view hitherto possessed, and in fact to a certain extent is so, since every language contains the whole conceptual fabric and mode of presentation of a portion of mankind.”

Multilingualism is multiperspectivism, a core element of the modern mind and modern way of being in the world. Language has the power to transform us. To study language, to learn a new language is to become something different. Each language is not only a separate worldview but locks into place a different sense of self, a persona. This would be true not only for learning different cultural languages but also different professional languages with their respective sets of terminology, as the modern world has diverse areas with their own ways of talking and we modern humans have to deal with this complexity on a regular basis, whether we are talking about tax codes or dietary lingo.

It’s hard to know what that means for humanity’s trajectory across the millennia. But the more we are caught within linguistic worlds and are forced to navigate our way within them the greater the need for a strong egoic individuality to self-initiate action, that is to say the self-authorization of Jaynesian consciousness. We step further back into our own internal space of meta-cognitive metaphor. To know more than one language strengthens an identity separate from any given language. The egoic self retreats behind its walls and looks out from its parapets. Language, rather than being the world we are immersed in, becomes the world we are trapped in (a world that is no longer home and from which we seek to escape, Philip K. Dick’s Black Iron Prison and William S. Burroughs Control). It closes in on us and forces us to become more adaptive to evade the constraints.

The Elite Know What Makes Democracy Work

“Nowhere has democracy ever worked well without a great measure of local self-government.” ~Friedrich A. Hayek

That might have been one of the truest statements ever made by Hayek. Yet he didn’t state this with the assumption that, therefore, we the public should seek nor that the ruling elite like him should allow for “a great measure of local self-government.” Instead, he supported authoritarian regimes such as that of Augusto Pinochet.

He believed that democracy should be sacrificed every single time, even if it required violent oppression and mass death, in order to ensure the dominance of capitalism, that is to say of plutocratic corporatism and cronyism. He understood the precise conditions under which democracy thrives and he feared it.

Freedom must be prevented at all costs, according to his vision, at least freedom of everyone other than the capitalist class in a highly unequal society where the few horde the concentrated wealth. Our present lack of democracy isn’t for a lack of understanding democracy. Those seeking to destroy democracy understand full well what they’re doing.

Think about the next time you hear a self-proclaimed expert, not limited to the political right (Democratic professional politicians are among the worst), warns against too much democratic populism, warns against the mob — advising instead for lesser evilism, paternalistic moderation, centrism of an Overton window shifted far right. They are not defending your freedom but their own power, privilege, and profit.

Those like Hayek hoped to prevent democracy. They envisioned an authoritariasm of totalitarian proportions, such that social control would be absolute. Anyone who questioned or challenged, anyone who dared to speak with an honest and moral voice would be eliminated as untold numbers did under Pinochet. But other elites like John Sherman understood another threat, as he said of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890:

“[P]eople are feeling the power and grasp of these combinations, and are demanding of every State Legislature and of Congress a remedy for this evil, only grown into huge proportions in recent times… You must heed their appeal, or be ready for the socialist, the communist and the nihilist.”

Theodore Roosevelt echoed this thought when he warned that the elite should take heed of the problems the left-wing points to because they are real problems. Otherwise, the masses would turn to those who would do what needed to be done. More than a century on, Nick Hanauer, yet another white male elite of the capitalist class, warned of the pitchforks coming for the plutocrats.

If the elite don’t allow for basic democracy, the left-wingers will gain power. Hayek simply personified why radicalism was necessary, made clear that this is a fight to the death. And the death that the authoritarian elites have in mind is your death and that of your loved ones, your neighbors. This is why we find ourselves with a police state with the largest mass incarceration in history. The Hayekian elite haven’t quite figured out how to implement a Pinochet-style regime, but they’re working on it.

Now if the general public only understood democracy as well as did Hayek. Then we would have a revolution.

(Source: REAL Democracy History Calendar: May 6 – 12)

Boredom in the Mind: Liberals and Reactionaries

“Hobsbawm was obsessed with boredom; his experience of it appears at least twenty-seven times in Evans’s biography. Were it not for Marx, Hobsbawm tells us, in a book of essays, he never would “have developed any special interest in history.” The subject was too dull. The British writer Adam Phillips describes boredom as “that state of suspended anticipation in which things are started and nothing begins.” More than a wish for excitement, boredom contains a longing for narrative, for engagement that warrants attention to the world.

“A different biographer might have found in Hobsbawm’s boredom an opening onto an entire plane of the Communist experience. Marxism sought to render political desire as objective form, to make human intention a causal force in the world. Not since Machiavelli had political people thought so hard about the alignment of action and opportunity, about the disjuncture between public performance and private wish. Hobsbawm’s life and work are a case study in such questions.”

That is another great insight from Corey Robin, as written in his New Yorker piece, Eric Hobsbawm, the Communist Who Explained History. Boredom does seem key. It is one of the things that stood out to me in Robin’s writings about the reactionary mind. Reactionaries dislike, even fear, boredom more than almost anything else. The rhetoric of reactionaries is often to create the passionate excitement of melodrama, such as how Burke describes the treatment of the French queen.

The political left too often forgets the power of storytelling, especially simplistic and unoriginal storytelling, as seen with Trump. Instead, too many on the left fear the populist riling up of the masses. I remember Ralph Nader warning about this in a speech he gave in his 2000 presidential campaign. There is a leftist mistrust of passion and maybe there is good reason for this mistrust, considering it forms the heartbeat of the reactionary mind. Still, without passion, there is no power of persuasion and so all attempts are doomed from the start. The left will have to learn to fight on this turf or simply embrace full resignation and so fall into cynicism.

The thing is that those on the political left seem to have a higher tolerance for boredom, maybe related to their higher tolerance for cognitive dissonance shown in social science research. It requires greater uncertainty and stress to shut down the liberal-minded person (liberal in the psychological sense). I noticed this in myself. I’m not prone to the reactionary maybe because I don’t get bored easily and so don’t need something coming from outside to motivate me.

But it might go beyond mere tolerance in demonstrating an active preference for boredom. There is something about the liberal mind that is prone to complexity, nuance, and ambiguity that can only be grown amidst boredom — that is to say the open-mindedness of curiosity, doubt, and questioning are only possible when one acknowledges ignorance. It’s much more exciting to proclaim truth, instead, and proclaim it with an entertaining story. This is problematic in seeking political victories, if one is afraid of the melodrama of hard fights. Right-wingers might burn themselves out on endless existential crises, whereas left-wingers typically never build up enough fire to lightly toast a marshmallow.

The political left doesn’t require or thrive with a dualistic vision of opposition and battle, in the way does the political right. This is a central strength and weakness for the left. On the side of weakness, this is why it is so hard for the left to offer a genuinely threatening challenge to the right. Most often what happens is the reactionaries simply co-opt the left and the left too easily falls in line. See how many liberals will repeat reactionary rhetoric. Or notice how many on the political left turned full reactionary during times of conflict (e.g., world war era).

Boredom being the comfort zone of liberals is all the more reason they should resist settling down within its confines. There is no where to hide from the quite real drama that is going on in the world. The liberal elite can’t forever maintain their delusion of being a disinterested aristocracy. As Eric Hobsbawm understood and Karl Marx before him, only a leftist vision can offer a narrative that can compete against the reactionary mind

* * *

“Capitalism is boring. Devoting your life to it, as conservatives do, is horrifying if only because it’s so repetitious. It’s like sex.”
~William F. Buckley Jr., in an interview with Corey Robin

Violent Fantasy of Reactionary Intellectuals

The last thing in the world a reactionary wants is to be bored, as happened with the ending of the ideological battles of the Cold War. They need a worthy enemy or else to invent one. Otherwise, there is nothing to react to and so nothing to get excited about, followed by a total loss of meaning and purpose, resulting in dreaded apathy and ennui. This leads reactionaries to become provocative, in the hope of provoking an opponent into a fight. Another strategy is simply to portray the whole world as a battleground, such that everything is interpreted as a potential attack, working oneself or one’s followers into a froth.

The Fantasy of Creative Destruction

To the reactionary mind, sacrifice of self can be as acceptable as sacrifice of others. It’s the fight, the struggle itself that gives meaning — no matter the costs and consequences, no matter how it ends. The greatest sin is boredom, the inevitable result of victory. As Irving Kristol said to Corey Robin, the defeat of the Soviet Union “deprived us of an enemy.” It was the end of history for, without an enervating battle of moral imagination, it was the end of the world.

The Fad of Warning About Fad Diets

Over at the Hurn Publications blog, the author warns against “fad diets”, specifically ketotarian diet, snake diet, and peganism. Let me clear up a few misconceptions. First off, none of these diets are exactly a fad. Various populations have been following diets like these for as long as humans have been around. There are many anthropological and historical examples that can be pointed to.

One-meal-a-day (OMAD) diets like the snake diet were practiced by the Spartans and Romans, but OMAD is common among hunter-gatherers as well. It is the three-meals-a-day-with-multiple-snacks-between diet that is bizarre by the standards of history and evolution. OMAD is one way to dispose the body to ketosis, especially if the diet is at least somewhat low-carb as were most diets in the past. Many populations would be ketogenic for long periods of time, such as during winter when starchy and sugary plant foods were scarce. Mongol warriors under Genghis Khan did extended fasts before military campaigns that would’ve put them into ketosis and then following that typically only ate meat, blood, and milk paste; although they might eat any food available in a city once conquered.

It’s not unusual for hunter-Gatherers like the Piraha to eat all the food they can take in at a time, sometimes until their stomachs are distended, as food can’t easily be stored, and then sometimes not eat for days. This is the standard feast and fast style of eating that was common throughout human evolution and remained far from uncommon around the world until the agricultural surpluses of past century or two. Fasting was a typical and regular practice among Europeans into the Middle Ages. On a related note, most Europeans and Americans didn’t start fattening up their cattle and themselves with grains until the 1800s. By the way, the Piraha’s fasting, intermittent and extended, would have left them in ketosis fairly often. There wasn’t much that would kick them out of ketosis since starchy plant foods are limited in their diet, such as occasional tubers. Ninety percent of their calories come from animal foods, mostly fish.

I might add that nothing equivalent to a baked potato, french fries, or potato chips were a part of the human diet until agriculture. the few wild tubers hunter-gatherers had access to were extremely tough and fibrous, hard to obtain, prepare, and eat (with chewing each bite being a slow process followed by spitting out a big wad of indigestible fiber)— and not nutrient or energy dense for all the work that went into using them in the diet. Most wild plants are extremely fibrous which is why hunter-gatherers got so much fiber in their diet, even when they didn’t eat a lot of plants. Modern plant foods have far less fiber and far more starch and sugar, not to mention nutrient-depleted.

Peganism would be the closest to a fad diet. But it really is rather moderate. It’s mostly about balancing foods for optimal nutrient content and bioavailability while eliminating the foods most often problematic for people. If followed carefully, there is no nutrient one would lack. It fits well within the evolutionary boundaries of human eating. The diet emphasizes food quality including large amounts of nutrient-dense plant foods and does allow moderate amounts of meat, fish, and eggs; but like paleo diet, it restricts foods not eaten for most of human evolution: grains, dairy, and legumes. I should point out that peganism is far from being the only paleo-style diet that heavily emphasizes a plant-based approach. There is Dr. Terry Wahl’s protocol and Dr. Will Cole’s ketotarian diet, both former vegetarians who now recommend ketosis. Like Mark Hyman with his peganism, Wahl’s protocol and ketotarianism allow moderate amounts of animal foods and Wahl’s protocol only recommends ketosis for some people.

Consider that all of these diets fit the profile of what we know of hunter-gatherer and other traditional diets from historical accounts, the anthropological record, and from archaeological evidence. There have even been dietary studies that have measured the macronutrients and micronutrients of hunter-gatherers. We still need to know a lot more, but we are far from merely speculating in ignorance. We do know, for example, that after everywhere agricultural foods were introduced there was a deterioration in height, cranial size, and general health. The vast majority of humans survived and thrived for hundreds of millennia without agricultural foods, without nutritional deficiencies, and without diseases of civilization. Sometimes people point to the high infectious rates of hunter-gatherers, but the infectious rates of agriculturalists was much higher and, besides, many of the infectious diseases harming hunter-gatherers were introduced by agriculturalists (e.g., malaria). Excluding high death rates from infections in childhood, the average lifespan of hunter-gatherers is about the same as a modern Westerner.

Ketosis has always been a normal state and, until quite recently, a state that humans entered into on a regular basis — since constant and unlimited access to carbs was unusual in the past. Ketosis doesn’t trick the body into a pseudo-fasted state. It is its own physiological state, one of the ways of fueling the body, what some argue as being the original preferred fuel in how the body uses it so well. So many diseases are related to glucose and insulin resistance, in a way not seen with ketones and ketosis. Quite the opposite in fact, since ketosis has been used to treat numerous diseases: epileptic seizures, diabetes, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s, autism, ADHD, etc. In particular, a ketogenic diet is one of the best options in the world for blood sugar conditions and one would be insane to not advise cutting out carbohydrates. And there isn’t necessarily a reason to worry about problems with eating disorders, as ketosis is well known to make cravings disappear and improve diverse psychiatric disorders, but it would have to be decided on an individual basis in working with a doctor. Since the Hurn Publications article appears to be written for or promoted by the Cancer Wellness Center, I’m surprised the author didn’t bring up the contentious debate over cancer’s relationship to glucose, specifically in relationship to diet — there are recent books that discuss the science. No matter which side of the debate one falls on, the debate should at least be mentioned.

There is a lot of research out there right now and it is accumulating quickly (including that of Dr. Terry Wahls and Dr. Dale Bredesen, both with books out). It’s been studied for almost a century at this point and it is well understood. I might suggest not worrying about being in ketosis in the scientific sense, unless you have a serious medical condition. The scientific measurement for the amount of ketones to be called ‘ketosis’ is somewhat arbitrary. Even at lower levels of ketones, many of the same benefits are seen. And any significant level of carb restriction will produce more ketones. It doesn’t matter if one occasionally slips out of ketosis. But if one is concerned about this, there are multiple ways of measuring ketones at home.

Even millennia ago, physicians would use ketosis to treat some conditions, although they didn’t have the knowledge of what ketosis was and they were mostly limited to using fasting to induce it. The Chinese observed how the Mongols on their ketogenic diet could ride and fight for days without stopping to eat. That is the power of beta-hydroxybutyrate, the human superfuel. It’s the reason humans were able to cross deserts and oceans with little food or else go without while tracking down, sometimes over days, the next meal. You can’t do that with carbohydrates. Even more awesome is that ketosis creates the conditions for autophagy, which is how your body heals from damage and, by activating stem cells, building new cells, including in the brain. Both ketosis and autophagy reduce inflammation, a major reason for the health benefits, but reversing insulin resistance and bringing diabetes under control is no small feat.

More broadly, low-carb diets are even less of a fad. They’ve been discussed by medical professionals and scientific experts going back to the 1700s and have been well known and widely used since the 1800s. Compare that to fad diets like that of the high-carb/low-fat that has been recommended in the mainstream only for about a half century now. If you are worried about “essential vitamins, minerals, fiber, as well as anti-oxidants and phytochemicals in a healthy diet to support wellness”, then these supposed “fad diets” can be a major part of it. Most people focusing on these kinds of diets tend to be highly informed about potential nutritional deficiencies and about the sources and bioavailability of nutrients. Their obsession with nutrient-density might turn some people away. Peganism explicitly is about nutrient-density as are other forms of the paleo diet, but the ketogenic and snake diets are easily adapted to nutrient-density (e.g., ketotarian). This sector of the diet community is one of the last places one would expect to find malnourishment.

As for the fear-mongering about side effects, there is far less to worry about health-wise on any of these diets than what you are likely to experience from what is recommended in the mainstream. Few people experience side effects and most people experience dramatic improvements, unlike seen on conventional diets. And these dramatic improvements tend to be permanent, not transitory. Ketosis, OMAD, peganism, etc are about changing your dietary lifestyle and fundamentally changing how your body functions. Opposite of what the Hurn Publications article warns, you are less likely to feel “hangry” (hungry and angry) on the snake diet, as you’d be spending most of your time in ketosis. It’s on a diet of constant carbs that people tend to get hangry. These kinds of diets aren’t merely or primarily about losing weight. They can transform the way you feel and even the way your brain operates. There are plenty of people who explain the science behind why this happens, if you’re motivated enough to dig into the details.

The author is right about focusing on nutrient-density, but that is an irrelevant point in terms of criticizing these diets, as I already explained. Even less relevant is the continued focus on calories. If you are eating satisfying and satiating nutrient-dense foods while avoiding carbs that cause cravings, you probably won’t need to worry about calorie counting and portion control. There is a good chance you’ll naturally find yourself only eating the amount of food your body needs. These “fad diets” readjust your taste and hunger. There is nothing simpler and easier than that.

* * *

This post is critical of what I perceived as unfair criticism. But it wasn’t intended to be mean-spirited. As for many people, diets touch upon the personal for food is central to life. And as with others, I’ve used diets in seeking health.

The reason I started following the Hurn Publications blog is because of a piece on the EAT-Lancet that I appreciated. I think I linked to it in my own writing about the topic. That brings me to a concern. We were both critical of EAT-Lancet and so there was some basic agreement. But this latest post of mine is about disagreement.

So what exactly bothered me? One thing is that the attack on fad diets is precisely what turns people toward such things as EAT-Lancet that, in the end, is simply a repackaging of status quo dietary ideology. The advice given in the recent Hurn Publications post fits perfectly in with the EAT-Lancet diet, despite their earlier post rightly discrediting EAT-Lancet.

There is an inconsistency there. But also it puts the two posts at the same blog at cross-purposes. No one can serve two masters. Challenging and defending the status quo are separate positions. Speaking of fad diets is to use the language of the status quo, which is simultaneously misleading since the closest to a fad diet is the status quo.