Step One: eat like a grown adult.
End of steps. Fast. When fasting doesn’t cut it, drink water. When you need more, have greens. After greens, have seeds, meats, and oils. If you are as active as a child or want to grow as fast as a child, then feel free to have grains, starches, and sugars. If you aren’t as active as a child or don’t want to grow bigger, then don’t have grains, starches, and sugars. Fruits and nuts are dicey. Even for seeds, be cautious. If you can eat them like an adult, then go for it. If you lose control like a child, then don’t.
0 Comments
I’m always bewildered by people waving the banner of “a calorie is a calorie is a calorie” or “a protein is a protein” or “a carb is a carb”. If a calorie is only a calorie, drink gasoline and bleach, please. Both are chock-full of calories.
From the day chemists discovered proteins in the 1830s, no scientist has ever believed the simpleton meme that “a protein is a protein.” The difference in a single fold of a protein is the difference between nerve health and Mad Cow Disease. This isn’t hyperbole. Really. One fold. Same protein. Food sensitivities and the role of food in inflammatory diseases and human health, therefore, isn’t controversial. The extent for any one is up for debate. The existence is not. The same exact peanut protein, for example, might aid some people in tissue repair (although this is contended in research, with statistical evidence that peanut protein actually results in musculoskeletal mass LOSS) while it will kill someone else right on the spot. Anyone who proclaims anything we termed “food” as inherently or always safe is ignoring the entire pursuit of chemistry, biology, and all of biochemistry. That group of chemicals doesn’t know or care that someone once called it “food.” Your body doesn’t know or care either. That designation is a human invention. And chemistry doesn’t care whether someone with a suffix believes anything. I absolutely love when the hand-waving ramps up. “Well, ONLY people with Celiac have to worry about gluten”, someone interjects. Ah yes. I see that logic and science are hard for people. So far, we have proven HOW one group of people with one type of genetic variant negatively responds to the gliadin, one of the constituents of gluten which no human can fully digest. I tolerate it. Many people tolerate it. Individual tolerance doesn’t tell us anything about universal safety or benefit. There are degrees of tolerance. The naysayers are confusing degrees of tolerance with the demarcation of benefit. Something which is tolerated doesn’t of necessity become beneficial. Likewise, you can drink some gasoline and bleach. The dose makes the poison. Small enough dosing is tolerated. Different people can tolerate different dosing. This doesn’t equate to benefit. Tolerance isn’t benefit. You may tolerate the experience of repeatedly scraping open a wound on your arm. That open wound isn’t beneficial. It’s tolerated. It may lead to fatal infection In an immune-compromised person, a physically exhausted person, an over-stressed person. The tolerated WOUND itself doesn’t ever magically become good any more than a set of tolerated chemicals become beneficial food. Unsurprisingly, therefore, fasting shows great benefits. Every week another set of studies gets released on defined benefits of food avoidance. The University of California had an interesting one this year: https://som.uci.edu/…/fasting-can-improve-overall-health.asp Every traditional culture developed a seasonal or yearly fast. Research continues to explore the immunological benefits of simply not eating. Every single time someone hazards to question food’s role in any disease, we of course find an affirmative answer. This doesn’t mean the food was inherently bad any more than food isn’t inherently good. It doesn’t mean that food created the disease. There is no good or bad food. Remember, we invented the idea that something be named “food.” There is productive and unproductive or counterproductive. If you are willing to conduct science and ask the question, you may find something questionable. But to neglect the question and the science altogether is circular: It’s a food; therefore safe. Why is it food? Because it’s safe. What do you mean by “safe?” It’s a food. That type of thinking is just going around in a circle. It isn’t analyzing or explaining anything. There is a distinct set of genetic expression changes with any and all food or lack thereof. Spend five minutes on PubMed with search lines of “food” and “genetic expression” or “epigenetics”. The debate over variant protein impact was over in the 1800s. The debate about whether food affects us was over before it began. That isn’t the argument. There is no argument. Let us conduct science and do MORE exploration of HOW this works. Let us not get bogged down in a shouting match of false dichotomies: X is good; X is bad. No no no. Try this instead: how might different physiology be altered by X? THAT is the question. But for the persisting naysayers, as they keep hearkening to the Dark Ages when being inquisitive was illegal: Go ahead and show us that a protein is simply a protein or a calorie is only a calorie. The snake venom and prions and gasoline and bleach are waiting. Up until 1985 or so, a lot of "experts" thought that pumping piles of corticosteroids into a bulged disc or inflamed knee was helpful. Then modern science continued to make discoveries for the past 35 years. Unfortunately, the American Medical Association didn't get clued in until recently: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2626573
But the oddity is that the mechanism of steroid injections was always understood. We knew that they turn off the growth factor cascades which repair tissue. That IS their mechanism. A brief run-through on PubMed, and you'll discover that studies already defined the degenerative role of steroids as far back as the 1960s and 1970s: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5808578 So, why did it take over 50 years for the general populace to become aware of a fully-understood and detrimental procedure? It's a great question without a solid answer, because most people still don't know this. I've even run into clinicians who don't know this, still believing that pro-inflammatory procedures are quackery, and that the archaic steroidal injections are the way, the truth, and the life. Perhaps it has something to do with our immediate-gratification culture. People like to "feel" better in the short-term even when it's obviously destructive in the long-term. Either way, if you encounter people whose beliefs of steroid injections hearken to the 1950s, try to spread the news. It may be a shocker, but we have been continuing to conduct science for the past 80 years. Time to update. There are genuine limitations on how much time or effort someone can spend on food and exercise. Strength is the only thing that will ever scale, because you will never have more time in your life than today. As someone becomes stronger, she can spend less time on both with improved benefit.
Consider the 90 minute workout of someone who walks the lake versus the 35 minute workout of someone who deadlifts 400lbs for 10 reps, sprints, overhead presses 200lbs, etc. The strong person can accomplish more with less. Consider the 2 hour workout of someone who curls 5lb dumbbells versus the 20 minute leg circuit for someone who squats hundreds of pounds dozens of times for multiple sets. The strong person isn’t a slave to schedule. Consider 8 hours of yard work versus 15 minutes of max effort sprinting repeats. However you want to compare and contrast, you are always going to find that strength gets more calories burned, preferentially signals the metabolism, is more efficient and sustainable, and obtains more rest time. People will defeat themselves with weigh-ins. But the only important question is, “did you work steps to get stronger?” Heck, if you did, that might result in a scale uptick, WHICH WOULD BE A GOOD THING. The way most people interact with fitness is an overt effort to get weaker. They eat to get weaker. They train to get weaker. Everything is an emphasis on depletion. So even when the scale is down, they’re actually in a far worse position. Meanwhile, people who can show me they deadlift substantially more than 18 months ago are always leaner. Always. Even the strong man competitors or the super heavyweight powerlifters who purposely carry extra body fat don’t have an average of MORE than they did when they lifted lighter weights. Strength is primary to good living. If you skip it, I can predict 100% where your fitness will be in 6-12 months. The more I think about the widespread fear of heavy lifting, the more I’m convinced it was a plot to keep people weak and fat. Obviously, from this video and the many many examples of tiny but very strong lifters, picking up heavy weight ALONE won’t wantonly pack on size or turn you into something other than a more athletic version of yourself.
“But I just want to lose weight,” you pipe back. And? There isn’t an elite cyclist, runner, yogi or Pilates instructor on earth with better body comp than this powerlifter. She’s got a more shredded upper body than every cardio queen you’ve ever known, but without wasting thousands of hours on repetitive foot pounding (video here: https://www.instagram.com/p/ByU44A6jqhU/). When you get stronger, you can produce more force. More force equals more work capacity. More work capacity equals getting leaner without ONE extra minute of activity. It’s simple: get the food on point; and stop training to be weaker. THIS is different. This is someone who was already an intermediate/advanced athlete whose strength has exploded, and whose body comp has improved for the first time ever without a performance dip. She came a long way before me. But the elusive alchemy of being lighter AND better only just arrived. And we’re in our first two months.
I want to be clear: I don’t like rapid transformation stories. Every single coach on Earth who has been training more than 6 months has hundreds. They’re a dime a dozen, especially with beginner clients. Mostly the stories are gratuitous marketing for unskilled newbie trainers who haven’t yet mastered the craft of long term lifestyle with clients, on top of being misleading for the lay populace (because the same testimonials tend to regain and be worse off 2 years later). This isn’t one of those. This is about seeing in the blind spots. This is a hard, hard worker who had already worked out at CrossFit boxes and with competent coaches. With very minor, but targeted and precise program alterations we could REDUCE her effort and INCREASE her outcomes. If you feel a hole inside of you, “eat less” likely won’t work as a sustainable program. If you feel the weight of life, “exercise more” likely won’t work as a sustainable program. The emotional component is the keystone. Unsurprisingly, when we are more fulfilled we eat fewer kilocalories naturally. I know this firsthand. My most productive weeks ever, I have a hard time fitting in ENOUGH food, not just because of busyness, but because I don’t yearn to fill a void. Likewise, when we look forward to days, physical effort is natural. It isn’t an additional burden. Clients who face this truth do amazing things. They START with an evaluation of how to enjoy the rest of their lives, especially their work environments, and from this positive emotional state they flourish. Those who neglect to change the overall flow of life and mindset, they continue to artificially bolt-on exercise and nutrition in an arduous way. Sometimes through sheer power of grit people will still make headway without revising the workspace and headspace. But mostly they won’t. It’s so obvious yet so overlooked. Our emotional state can categorize the exact same healthy behaviors as stress-relief or as overwhelm. This is why calories in versus calories out isn’t an explanation. It’s a description. Sure. But it isn’t explanatory in the least. How will you eat less and move more when you already feel starved and overworked? “How” is explanatory. Calories are descriptive. And the “how” is all about emotion. I’ve noticed a trend that as people tend to worsen in their fitness programs, they increasingly talk about escapes. They increasingly focus on the next weekend, the next night out, the next vacation, the next escape. They are suffering all week, only to escape for a few moments here and there. Think about this. Rather than change the mind or the life, people just look to escape their mind or life. I don’t think it’s reasonable or kind to put more stress on that person. Rather, I think they need to figure out how to hate the week less, so that healthy behaviors can be a natural outgrowth. Conversely, people who are passionate and excited about the week tend to flourish in their fitness programs. They don’t talk much about escape, because there isn’t anything to escape. Diet and exercise aren’t impositions for that mindset. When struggling, therefore, take an inventory on general gratitude for how good your life actually is. It sounds odd to people. But this has actually been a profound homework assignment for some of my coaching clients. Daily written gratitudes can do more to lose weight than you can imagine. The lightness that ensues can make activity and healthy eating incredibly easy. Loving most days of your life isn’t about a hard week versus an easy week. It’s about perspective. It’s about emotional management. Or, you could just keep implementing momentary escapes. Don’t underestimate the role of emotion. Entry Site For Needle into Joint Capsule:
The stem cell/PRP aftermath is interesting. I can now bend the knee into almost 90 degree flexion despite the tightness, although I still can’t fully extend or flex quad hard. This is one of four entry sites, this one I believe being the intracapsular one. A sharp metal point rocking around inside the knee was a little disconcerting. What I find fascinating is that there were Luddites who once believed that injecting cortisone into a knee or spine was a good idea. I find it more fascinating that some cave-dwellers still believe it's a good idea. Meanwhile, those of us who've actually studied HOW the body heals moved in the opposite direction: invoking pain with purposeful pro-inflammation in order to grow or regrow tissue (ie - healing). I don’t want to jump to conclusions; and we have to factor in that the knee is currently swollen. But the rotational instability from before procedure already appears less. I won’t be pushing the knee hard for a little while, at which point we can see more definitively. But I can cycle, walk, do stairs, and pickup my kids, etc., even the day after procedure. Pain is still high, which I take as a good indicator of growth. I plan on a very modest leg routine by Tuesday or Wednesday, staying in frontal plane, with maybe one transverse exercise like banded shuffle or side plank clamshell. Stay tuned. There is a “tactic” which results in trying. And there is a strategy which results in results. The difference: sense of obligation.
I was watching an interview with a powerlifter who was describing his mindset primer. His brother died when they were very young. And every time the powerlifter approaches an exercise he thinks, “if this lift could bring back my brother, would I even consider the option of quitting?” He creates in his mind an obligation to pick up 800lbs for 8 reps or whatever the insane effort is. Then, he does it. The pain of consequences must be so high in your mind that there is no option to not follow-through on your word. And, in fact, this is not just imaginary. There are real consequences of suffering by refusing to invest in personal wellness. But, we avoid sense of obligation. Especially in the land of the free, there's almost something un-American-feeling about having obligations. Getting rid of the sense of obligation extends into detrimental life decisions where we tend to create a fictional abstraction about the dire consequences of counterproductive health decisions: “So and so did everything RIGHT, and still had a heart attack/stroke/cancer/Alzheimer’s/etc.” “So and so did everything WRONG, and still never had ANY health problems.” Of course, these are very non-specific, question-begging, and statistical outliers even if true. But we cling to them in order to avoid obligatory behaviors. If the way I live doesn't affect my health, then I can just do whatever I like and never confront myself about healthy decisions or food addiction. So I'll find whatever evidence I can to pretend that the way I live has no impact on my health, whether it be genetics or these fictions about people who smoke every day and live to 100 years old while someone else exercises and eats intentionally but died of a heart attack at 37 years old. Our societal rebellion against sense of obligation ironically enslaves us. Look at the contentment in hard-working people who live charitably with a sense of duty to their fellow man. Look at the persistent malcontent of people living outrageously comfortable lives. Repeatedly, long term studies on health show benefit to parents versus non-parents, pet-owners versus non-pet-owners, married people versus non-married people, people with a history of volunteering versus those who never volunteer. Why? Because there is more purpose in obligation than the momentary contentment people get from wanton independence. There is something about sense of obligation which speaks to the human spirit. The more people avoid obligation, the more their mental health deteriorates. I don’t know what it takes for each individual. But search how you will obligate yourself toward growth. If you aren’t growing, you are withering. I've seen people boast about their inability to mature and grow, describing themselves as a fixed personality type. Despite such assessments like the Myers-Briggs being totally dismantled as pseudoscience, people will cling to one of these designations for a lifetime. How sad. If it were a valid test and you always tested the same way, it would mean you quite literally have gained zero additional life skills and continue to think in the same manner as the first time you tested. That's not good. With regard to risk, a risk-free life sounds good. So people work toward it, attempting to reduce the sense of obligation. But with each reduction in palpable consequence is another reduction in intrinsic reward. For health, for life, for purpose, for happiness, for goal-setting, for growth, don't seek to reduce demands. Don't avoid responsibilities. Don't escape sense of duty. Rather, obligate. I can remember my grandmother beginning to opt out of more demanding hikes and beach visits as she approached her 90s. I now know 20-somethings and 30-somethings (in fact, I’ve even seen peers of my 7-year-old son) who have to do the same. Low physical fitness and capacity doesn’t NET you a decrease in effort. It NETS you an increase in effort to do basic living, such that you keep living less and a smaller and smaller existence with increasing restrictions.
I have experimented with a variety of fasting methods for the past 28 years, all of which take less time and decision making budget than standard American eating or dieting. I used to skip school lunches and pocket the money. I used to visit amusement parks and simply drink water all day. Last Spring and Summer I experimented with an exercise program which took up no more than 27 minutes per week. The idea that being healthy and fit takes more time, effort, and money is demonstrably untrue. Active self-sabotage or “apathetic” go-with-the-flow takes far more energy, both on the front end (quantifiable daily practices) and the backend (palpable health consequences). The “effort” people reference is a delusion. The effort to be healthy and fit is provably same or less. What they mean is “unfamiliar.” I can and I do regularly walk people through how to spend less time and money on productive foods than unproductive foods. Precision Nutrition was circulating an infographic to this effect a few months ago. That’s the simple transactional analysis. When we get into ripple effect, it’s not even close. The time, money, and energy people spend on recreation which worsens them is 10 times greater than what people who improve health prospects spend. The fitness industry as a global whole commands billions of dollars. That’s true. About 81 billion at last check. That’s everything combined. Meanwhile, the number one fast food chain? 125 billion by itself. Tobacco company revenue in 2018? 125 billion. The electronic gaming market? 137 billion. Pharma? TRILLIONS. Some estimates even place the porn industry at 97 billion, dwarfing the measly 81 billion of fitness industry revenue. Cybercrime and Dark Web? TENS OR HUNDREDS OF TRILLIONS. It’s pretty plain to see that we don’t have an effort problem. We are putting in plenty of effort. We have a familiarity and belief problem. We believe that we aren’t putting lots of effort into worsening. It’s become so familiar to collaborate with deterioration that we don’t even acknowledge the hard work we put into getting worse. Improvement might be a few minute commitment a few days per week. Worsening is a 24 hour a day job. The effort at change, therefore, must be placed on calling out your false narratives and delusions. People will tell me they “couldn’t” make a healthy choice at a work event or party. There were no proteins, no veggies, and no water? I’m not totally shocked. But remember: you could just NOT EAT. At times I feel like I’m talking to a serial rapist who insists he “has to” do what he does, because there’s no other option. Umm. No. There’s always another and preferable option to NOT BE DESTRUCTIVE. It may be unfamiliar. But it takes LESS effort to do good. It takes less effort to withhold oneself from sabotage. It takes less effort to be healthy and fit once we let go of our made-up stories. We can start by putting less effort into maintaining our delusion that it takes more effort. |
Elev8 Wellness
|