Abdominal Fat Is A Phase Folliwing The End Of Calorie Restriction

[mrchibbs]

Strange. Is this for you, or you think In general?

I get most of my carbs from whole fruit nowadays (zero Juice, due to spiking of blood glucose = insulin = belly fat) andd some starches, and have consistently lost fat over last 4 months.

Whole foods over liquids for the win!

Yeah I agree that fruits aren't typically a problem.
Don't see how ripe fruits could cause weight gain.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

Good input. I heard that about NR. I heard aspirin is supposed to be a supplement but somehow pharma was able to successfully turn it into a drug or medicine? Somehow they were able to use a loophole for it and patent it.

What do you think about PQQ, though? I've heard PQQ and CoQ10 benefits can be obtained by vitamin K2, but i've also heard the following regarding the 3. It seems they increase mitochondria through different means so I was wondering if they would be worth combining, or maybe something like PQQ everyday, K2/CoQ10 every other day.

"K2 affects overall signalling, CoQ10 goes to the mitochondria, and PQQ targets cytosolic proteins; it's like three separate work stations for the same assembly line."

Which mineral water are you using now, could you link to it, and where you get it from? Would it be fine to drink a gallon of that a day?

i thought in general, fluoride tends to get stored in the joints, so a low calcium diet would promote fluoride buildup whereas a high calcium diet would help excretion. I can't remember where I got that info from. I vaguely remember reading something about taurine and calcium protecting the body from fluoride.

How much selenium do you think would be good per day, considering the rda used to be 70mcg but strangely enough was lowered to 55mcg this year. Chromium used to be 120mcg, molybdenum 75mcg, copper 2mg, yet this year they were lowered to 35mcg, 45mcg, and 0.9mg.

Selenium promotes t4 to t3 conversion right. I didn't know it also helped to create t4. Zinc is another I heard promotes the t4 to t3 conversion, olive leaf I believe does it via increasing the enzyme that does the conversion. Ashwaganda raises t4 or also increases t4 to t3 conversion, idk how it does that

I remember reading that d3 is involved in something related to prostaglandin, maybe it reduces their formation.
Nice, I remember rays comments on that.
yes they didn't provide evidence showing the fruit itself was anti thyroid but rather certain substances. Here is the website. The info seems interesting. They have quite a few things listed on there which they advise against eating. One of the central points of the author is that vegetable/plant items, due to their self defense mechanisms, usually aren't suitable for consumption.
Do You Have Hypothyroidism? Find Out Which Foods to Avoid

Yes, the rdas themselves I think seem fine as minimums. The upper limits seem to be very accurate, at least if you take that particular nutrient in isolation. For example 40mg zinc, 10mg manganese, 10mg copper, 40mg iron, 400mcg selenium, are the upper limits. Although things like oysters have much more zinc and copper than the upper limit (depending on serving size) yet people don't seem to ever get zinc or copper overdose from them. Which means the minerals themselves in specific ratios, balance each other, or there's something else in food items that prevents you from overdosing on the minerals in the food. If it's the minerals that balance each other then it's possible you could far exceed the upper limit of these minerals as long as you take proportionately more of all the other minerals.

Regarding thyroid, I find a lot of sites which mention a bunch of different minerals being involved in thyroid function. Like some sites even mention vanadium as helping the thyroid, and quite a few mention boron, chromium, molybdenum, manganese, copper, while nearly all of them mention zinc, selenium, and iron. Really makes you wonder if you get a thyroid issue if it's just due to some obscure mineral imbalance.

It's weird that the brita filters state they "leave a healthy amount of fluoride remaining in the water" which makes it seem like they are just saying the amount already in water is a healthy amount, or they filter some fluoride but not all.
Regarding the mineral water in plastic bottles, the plastic only becomes a risk and gives off residues if it heats up while the water is in the bottle right? So if the bottles stayed at reasonably cold or room temperatures, there shouldn't be much, or any plastic residues in the water? I'm unsure if it's safer to use plastic bottled water or filtered tap water. The plastics seem to be very estrogenic, although maybe tap water has some estrogens or other hormones due to not being purified properly.

Aspirin is considered a drug, but fortunately, it hasn't suffered the same fate as a form of vitamin B6 that was admitted as a drug, and now it's banned from being freely sold. I believe you need a prescription for it now.

If that's the mechanism through which vit. K2, PQQ and CoQ10 work, then using all three can have benefits. Or even using more of one could support the chain without needing more of the others.

I'm using a brand of mineral water very common in my country. It's called "Minalba", and it's an alkaline water( ph=8,10). I find it tastes very good, and it seems to hydrate me more than other brands. The fountain is located in São Paulo. It's probably easier to find a good brand near your location, though, since it's probably going to be inconvenient to order water from another country, I would think.
Água Mineral Minalba Sem Gás 510ml - Imigrantes Bebidas

I think the RDAs are lowering the amounts in their recommendations because they're trying to convince the population that such low amounts are enough for health. It's just like the RDA for protein, which states that around 60 grams of protein is enough, when the truth is that, for many, this amount is too low. Ray has mentioned in his newsletter on vitamin E that a researcher was saying that increasing the RDA for vitamin E was a mistake, since there people getting very little of it who were "healthy", but the researcher himself took 200 IU or vitamin E everyday, as well as aspirin. The money that the medical establishment is gaining depends on the un-health of the population, so telling people the right thing to do is the worst thing they can do for their business.

Vitamin D3 lowers gut serotonin a lot, and since 90% of all the serotonin in the body is made in the gut, the anti-inflammatory effect of this vitamin makes sense.

Thanks for linking that site, very interesting. They say that millet contributes to hypothyroidism, and there are studies showing that, but I don't understand how they related this effect to apigenin, since I couldn't find any reference for this statement. The only thing I found that came close to its effects on thyroid was apigenin's inhibition of thyroid tumor cells, which is a good thing.

But in general I agree with the message of that site. Many plants clearly have some very harsh defenses against consumption, and I think most people would do better if they lowered their consumption of leaves, seeds, nuts, beans and grains and started eating more animal foods, honey, and fruits instead.

It's interesting that getting nutrient overdose from food is very hard, if not impossible, which isn't the case with supplements, so that's a good reason to be careful and thoughtful when dosing supps, since getting too much is easy. The ratio of Vit a: Vit d is another example of the importance of ratios instead of absolute amounts.

Yes, I've seen some mentions of these less well-known minerals, but I never really dug deep into them. Maybe I should. This is another argument for eating a lot of good food, and then supplementing, and not the other way around. There may be substances that researchers haven't even discovered yet and that we are unwittingly getting by eating real food.

I saw that claim from the brita filter's site, and the first thing I thought was "what do they mean by healthy?". Seems like a way to avoid the topic. I would guess they think that the goverment knows what are healthy levels of thyroid toxin... I mean fluoride in the water supply and don't filter it at all.

I think both hot and cold temperatures stimulate the release of plastic residues into the water, so keeping them as close as possible to room temperature is what I try to do.

I feel like tap water may contain worse things, such as birth control pill residues, SSRI's, and fluoride, all of which contribute more to hypothyroidism than the plastic bottles, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

Also, this mineral water that I drink has 0,04 mg of fluoride per liter, so even if you were to drink 4 liters of it, your fluoride ingestion wouldn't be very high( 0,16 mg)

 

[BigChad]

Also, this mineral water that I drink has 0,04 mg of fluoride per liter, so even if you were to drink 4 liters of it, your fluoride ingestion wouldn't be very high( 0,16 mg)

What is the fluoride content in tap water usually?
Btw it seems i cant get on the site on wifi i don't get whats going on if they blocked my wifi from the site or what. was down for me all day yesterday and today but fixed now.

Do you think brita filter would get rid of the birth control, ssris, other stuff? It is a charcoal based filter i believe.
What about boiling all your drinking water, storing it room temp or fridge, then filtering before drinking. Would boiling rid the fluoride or other things.

Btw i dont get why ashwaganda , olive leaf and to a lesser extent vitamin mk4, all have similar effects to high iodine doses. They causw some hair loss, throat thyroid inflammation, massive lack of appetite, indigestion bloating. Olive leaf and iodine are both anti bacterial anyway both cause hair loss. cant find much studies or info on this but from trying them out myself i can tell ashwaganda, olive leaf, mk4 worsen things. probably vitamin a too

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

What is the fluoride content in tap water usually?
Btw it seems i cant get on the site on wifi i don't get whats going on if they blocked my wifi from the site or what. was down for me all day yesterday and today but fixed now.

Do you think brita filter would get rid of the birth control, ssris, other stuff? It is a charcoal based filter i believe.
What about boiling all your drinking water, storing it room temp or fridge, then filtering before drinking. Would boiling rid the fluoride or other things.

Btw i dont get why ashwaganda , olive leaf and to a lesser extent vitamin mk4, all have similar effects to high iodine doses. They causw some hair loss, throat thyroid inflammation, massive lack of appetite, indigestion bloating. Olive leaf and iodine are both anti bacterial anyway both cause hair loss. cant find much studies or info on this but from trying them out myself i can tell ashwaganda, olive leaf, mk4 worsen things. probably vitamin a too

In my state, the fluoride content in tap water is 0,7 mg per liter, last time I checked, which is almost 20 times the amount in my current mineral water. You can find the fluoride content of your location's tap water by searching something like "( your location) tap water fluoride".

Maybe it's because it's a site that doesn't appear to you when you search it online, I'm in Brazil, so that's a common site that shows up.
agua minalba

I don't know if it would filter those things. I think I saw a video a while ago saying that the only type of filtration that filters pretty much everything was distillation combined with a very fine filter. I would have to find the video again, I'm not sure if it was exactly this setup that they were using.

I remember searching whether boiling would get rid of fluoride, but it turns out it doesn't. I think this is why distillation would work, the fluoride wouldn't evaporate along with the water steam. Boiling could get rid of bacteria, but I don't know if the estrogens are easily destroyed by heat. The SSRI's may be damaged by heat, but I don't know what they would break into.

Are you taking these substances orally? The gut symptoms are likely from irritation caused either by the main substances in those supplements or by their excipients. The serotonin surge from intestinal inflammation could be causing the other issues. The mk4 can certainly be used on the skin and it will still have good effects. Regarding the ashwaganda and the olive leaf, you could try to dissolve them in some oil( MCT oil, coconut oil, olive oil, etc.) and apply on your skin, but I don't know how systemic the effects will be.

Vitamin A always causes intestinal irritation for me, so when I use it, I put it on my skin dissolved in coconut oil or olive oil.

 

[BigChad]

In my state, the fluoride content in tap water is 0,7 mg per liter, last time I checked, which is almost 20 times the amount in my current mineral water. You can find the fluoride content of your location's tap water by searching something like "( your location) tap water fluoride".

Maybe it's because it's a site that doesn't appear to you when you search it online, I'm in Brazil, so that's a common site that shows up.
agua minalba

I don't know if it would filter those things. I think I saw a video a while ago saying that the only type of filtration that filters pretty much everything was distillation combined with a very fine filter. I would have to find the video again, I'm not sure if it was exactly this setup that they were using.

I remember searching whether boiling would get rid of fluoride, but it turns out it doesn't. I think this is why distillation would work, the fluoride wouldn't evaporate along with the water steam. Boiling could get rid of bacteria, but I don't know if the estrogens are easily destroyed by heat. The SSRI's may be damaged by heat, but I don't know what they would break into.

Are you taking these substances orally? The gut symptoms are likely from irritation caused either by the main substances in those supplements or by their excipients. The serotonin surge from intestinal inflammation could be causing the other issues. The mk4 can certainly be used on the skin and it will still have good effects. Regarding the ashwaganda and the olive leaf, you could try to dissolve them in some oil( MCT oil, coconut oil, olive oil, etc.) and apply on your skin, but I don't know how systemic the effects will be.

Vitamin A always causes intestinal irritation for me, so when I use it, I put it on my skin dissolved in coconut oil or olive oil.

i meant the raypeat forum site wasnt loading on wifi at all before. yes all orally. the thing is a lot of these have no excepients and are just veggie cellulose capsules. the A is in an ADK product with 3000IU retinyl palmitate, 5000IU d3, 1mg K1, 1.5mg mk4, 300mcg mk7

 

[Kelj]

Metformin is awesome

Metformin and B12 Deficiency: A Bigger Problem Than We Thought

If you do take:

"Patients taking metformin should have their vitamin B12 levels assessed regularly to avoid peripheral nerve damage."

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

i meant the raypeat forum site wasnt loading on wifi at all before. yes all orally. the thing is a lot of these have no excepients and are just veggie cellulose capsules. the A is in an ADK product with 3000IU retinyl palmitate, 5000IU d3, 1mg K1, 1.5mg mk4, 300mcg mk7

Did it ever mention anything regarding firewall when you couldn't load the forum? Sometimes I get that, as if I'm not allowed to enter it, very weird.

I think it may be something that contaminated the vitamins during the processing, or maybe they tend to irritate the cells of the digestive track more easily when they are very concentrated.

 

[tygertgr]

I don't think a protruding gut is anything more than caloric excess. Men typically store fat there first, and then only later plump up on the rest of the torso, and then finally the limbs. It's not some pattern specific to "starvation recovery." Anyone who's lean and stuffs their face will get a protruding gut first. As weight is lost it comes off in such a way that the protruding gut is about the last bit of excess fat to burn off: the limbs and upper torso will be quite lean while the protruding gut remains. The very last pocket of fat to lean out is the kidney region on the back.

 

[teds]

The only thing that matters is metabolism. I approach everything from this front now. Calories should be intaken with metabolism in mind, not weight loss, satiety, or any of that silliness. Weight loss will follow metabolism anyway. I came up with a way to describe metabolism with a single number, based upon waking body temp && pulses, since I found it difficult to mentally combine them without a mathematical descriptor. I'm now using this # in my database to optimize my diet.

Essentially:

% Optimal Body temp = Measured waking body temp divided by 98.6 (truncate to 100% if over 98.6)
% Optimal Waking pulse rate = Measured waking pulse rate divided by 85 (truncate to 100% if over 85)

Now you just do math to make sure both values are in the same ballpark. Since body temp does vary a lot more than pulse, I did have to take the exponential of body temp to ensure its range was roughly 70-100% much like pulse was. Finally, I take both these %, multiply them together, and I get my % Metabolic Marker (trademark pending!)

Get % Metabolic Marker to 100%. Profit.

I have indeed found that too much calories does actually cause metabolism to suffer, so one should be cautious just eating everything in sight. The only time I have gotten a 2-day rolling avg of a perfect 100% was with roughly 4,500 calories. Which is still a pretty solidly high intake. And does more or less agree with the premise of the thread.

yo- but is it a chicken or egg situation? do you eat to increase the metabolism or do you change the food and eat the cals for your current ***t metabolism?

 

[rob]

Great thread, some interesting perspectives. I have a lot of time for what @Kelj is saying having struggled with related issues myself, but do understand people’s hesitancy to an ad libitum approach after calorie restriction, especially given some intense fears over PUFA intake.

Having thought about this long and hard, I think a big issue is this...

Whether we like it or not, a lot of us have grown up and are still deeply embedded in societies/communities that, in many ways, are seen as significantly less than ideal on a health front. As such, we can’t get away from the following:

• The powerful associations we’ve built up over decades around foods/drinks we now believe ‘unhealthy’ for whatever reason(s).
• The easy access to and continued societal promotion of such foods.
• The real emotional cravings we might for something – cravings are not all because what we really want is a load of sodium, potassium etc to make up some nutritional deficiency.
• The way in which food/drink we may deem unhealthy is seen as fundamental to social rituals in communities we’re a part of – rituals that bond us and bring us together.
• The highly stressful environments most of us have to deal with on a regular basis in and out of work and the limited ways we have to realistically manage that stress. It would great at work if we could stop the stressful events from ever happening in the first place, but we can’t. Like wise, it would be great if, as soon as we got stressed, we could all get a massage, go for a nice relaxing walk in the sun, meditate for a bit, jump on the exercise machine etc. but sadly that’s not reality either. Hence the reason so many people in the real world use comfort food and drink to relieve stress.
• The limited amount of time and mental resources we have to cook and prepare all the ‘right’ foods as we believe them to be.
• The fact that our health is so much more than nutrition and that, for example, it’s greatly improved by fulfilling our social needs and wants, which feeds back into some of the above points.
• The fact that we can’t always perfectly control things such that ‘good’ foods/drinks will be available to meet our energy demands.
• Etc.

Thus, in the real world, we’re always going to be left with a horribly imperfect trade-off. Always. Why? Because we have two options:

1) Be more nutritionally focused and, depending on what information we choose to believe, dedicate ourselves to getting it ‘right’ e.g. minimising PUFA as much as humanly possible.

From this perspective our environment will always be seen as inherently dangerous/toxic – we’ll always have to be on guard to protect ourselves. We’ll have to continually control any cravings we may have and deal with a mindset that might increasingly view social situations as ‘problematic’ on some level. We'll also have to contend with negative outcomes in spite of all our efforts and, likewise, any conflicting health information that may undermine our views.

2) Be more relaxed and choose to ‘go with the flow’ of the real world more, enjoy things instead of seeing them more as a means to an end, honour our cravings, be content with lower physical expectations – expectations which, to be honest, can often be about more than simply health i.e. low self esteem and, thus, wanting to impress others.

From this perspective our environment will be seen as more playful/fun. However, we’ll have to be content with less control on the food/drink front, we’ll have to learn to quieten any health anxiety we may have because of certain information we’ve found convincing in the past etc., which will be a scary notion for some.

Which side you come down more heavily on depends on what you believe to be more important and what you think will lead to the biggest win. For those who have been significanty restricting calories, possibly because of an eating disorder, I would argue the latter may be more fruitful.

Personally, these days, I'm more heavily weighted on the side of option 2. Like Kelj I have had fabulous results from being less restrictive as I upped the calories. I might consume more PUFAs than others on this forum at times, but I’m really enjoying my food/drink again, I'm infinitely calmer and, according to my health tests, healthier than I’ve been in a long time.

Indeed, we might not like it, but regardless of what we do, we can still get ill. Moreover, some of our best memories and intuitively healthiest times are during carefree moments, when we're just enjoying what the world serves up. Whilst, for many, including myself, a more nutritional focus can too easily conjure negative beliefs about the world, increase amounts of worry etc. In particular, it can too easily end up feeding perfectionist traits when, as I said earlier, real life is an imperfect trade-off – one that will always sorely disappoint the idealistic pursuit.

 

[Ms.Orchid]

Bravo, @rob !! This is beautifully written. I, too, agree. With much thanks to @Kelj , I've upped the calories and have been eating unrestricted. I've already reaped some benefits, especially with regards to anxiety. My health may be slow to improve, but I'm definitely way more relaxed and less stressed--around food and in general.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

Great thread, some interesting perspectives. I have a lot of time for what @Kelj is saying having struggled with related issues myself, but do understand people’s hesitancy to an ad libitum approach after calorie restriction, especially given some intense fears over PUFA intake.

Having thought about this long and hard, I think a big issue is this...

Whether we like it or not, a lot of us have grown up and are still deeply embedded in societies/communities that, in many ways, are seen as significantly less than ideal on a health front. As such, we can’t get away from the following:

• The powerful associations we’ve built up over decades around foods/drinks we now believe ‘unhealthy’ for whatever reason(s).
• The easy access to and continued societal promotion of such foods.
• The real emotional cravings we might for something – cravings are not all because what we really want is a load of sodium, potassium etc to make up some nutritional deficiency.
• The way in which food/drink we may deem unhealthy is seen as fundamental to social rituals in communities we’re a part of – rituals that bond us and bring us together.
• The highly stressful environments most of us have to deal with on a regular basis in and out of work and the limited ways we have to realistically manage that stress. It would great at work if we could stop the stressful events from ever happening in the first place, but we can’t. Like wise, it would be great if, as soon as we got stressed, we could all get a massage, go for a nice relaxing walk in the sun, meditate for a bit, jump on the exercise machine etc. but sadly that’s not reality either. Hence the reason so many people in the real world use comfort food and drink to relieve stress.
• The limited amount of time and mental resources we have to cook and prepare all the ‘right’ foods as we believe them to be.
• The fact that our health is so much more than nutrition and that, for example, it’s greatly improved by fulfilling our social needs and wants, which feeds back into some of the above points.
• The fact that we can’t always perfectly control things such that ‘good’ foods/drinks will be available to meet our energy demands.
• Etc.

Thus, in the real world, we’re always going to be left with a horribly imperfect trade-off. Always. Why? Because we have two options:

1) Be more nutritionally focused and, depending on what information we choose to believe, dedicate ourselves to getting it ‘right’ e.g. minimising PUFA as much as humanly possible.

From this perspective our environment will always be seen as inherently dangerous/toxic – we’ll always have to be on guard to protect ourselves. We’ll have to continually control any cravings we may have and deal with a mindset that might increasingly view social situations as ‘problematic’ on some level. We'll also have to contend with negative outcomes in spite of all our efforts and, likewise, any conflicting health information that may undermine our views.

2) Be more relaxed and choose to ‘go with the flow’ of the real world more, enjoy things instead of seeing them more as a means to an end, honour our cravings, be content with lower physical expectations – expectations which, to be honest, can often be about more than simply health i.e. low self esteem and, thus, wanting to impress others.

From this perspective our environment will be seen as more playful/fun. However, we’ll have to be content with less control on the food/drink front, we’ll have to learn to quieten any health anxiety we may have because of certain information we’ve found convincing in the past etc., which will be a scary notion for some.

Which side you come down more heavily on depends on what you believe to be more important and what you think will lead to the biggest win. For those who have been significanty restricting calories, possibly because of an eating disorder, I would argue the latter may be more fruitful.

Personally, these days, I'm more heavily weighted on the side of option 2. Like Kelj I have had fabulous results from being less restrictive as I upped the calories. I might consume more PUFAs than others on this forum at times, but I’m really enjoying my food/drink again, I'm infinitely calmer and, according to my health tests, healthier than I’ve been in a long time.

Indeed, we might not like it, but regardless of what we do, we can still get ill. Moreover, some of our best memories and intuitively healthiest times are during carefree moments, when we're just enjoying what the world serves up. Whilst, for many, including myself, a more nutritional focus can too easily conjure negative beliefs about the world, increase amounts of worry etc. In particular, it can too easily end up feeding perfectionist traits when, as I said earlier, real life is an imperfect trade-off – one that will always sorely disappoint the idealistic pursuit.

The reason why many people see the modern world as a soil full of land mines is because it's pretty much that.

If you go with the flow, you'll just end up sick. Pretending that there is nothing wrong with PUFA, food intolerances, gluten, iron being added to food, etc. is a great road to end up screwing your metabolism.

The natural environment, although toxic in some parts, is overall much safer, since that's where humans lived and what humans have adapted to, so just like a cat won't eat a lot of leaves, humans won't eat nuts or hard seeds while they're in nature, since, naturally those foods taste bad due to anti-nutrients.

People don't get sick randomly, so no, in a great environment, you will not get ill, or at least, won't get nearly as ill as people living in the modern societies. You seem to be advocating learned helplessness, with maybe a touch of genetic determinism.

If you had a negative outcome after trying something, then figure out why it didn't work out instead of throwing your arms in the air and saying "yup, I give up on being healthy, so it's society that tells me what I should do now".

Whether you like it or not, the modern environment was created perfectly to make people ill. You really don't have to look very far to notice that. This, of course, is hard to accept, but trying to go with the flow is exactly what the government wants you to do, and when you wind up ill, the medical establishment will be happy to take your money, and when you're poor and useless to them, then it will just let you die.

 

[somuch4food]

The reason why many people see the modern world as a soil full of land mines is because it's pretty much that.

If you go with the flow, you'll just end up sick. Pretending that there is nothing wrong with PUFA, food intolerances, gluten, iron being added to food, etc. is a great road to end up screwing your metabolism.

The natural environment, although toxic in some parts, is overall much safer, since that's where humans lived and what humans have adapted to, so just like a cat won't eat a lot of leaves, humans won't eat nuts or hard seeds while they're in nature, since, naturally those foods taste bad due to anti-nutrients.

People don't get sick randomly, so no, in a great environment, you will not get ill, or at least, won't get nearly as ill as people living in the modern societies. You seem to be advocating learned helplessness, with maybe a touch of genetic determinism.

If you had a negative outcome after trying something, then figure out why it didn't work out instead of throwing your arms in the air and saying "yup, I give up on being healthy, so it's society that tells me what I should do now".

Whether you like it or not, the modern environment was created perfectly to make people ill. You really don't have to look very far to notice that. This, of course, is hard to accept, but trying to go with the flow is exactly what the government wants you to do, and when you wind up ill, the medical establishment will be happy to take your money, and when you're poor and useless to them, then it will just let you die.

While you are right that currently the world is less than ideal, @rob's words have many truth to it. A neurotic way of thinking about the world as a mine field will inherently be stressful. We have to choose between the stress of trying to prevent all ills vs the stress of a less ideal lifestyle, but without mental stress.

Since life can't really be controlled no matter how much you try, giving up control when you need to can be as relieving as avoiding all stress from your environment. I have chosen to now default to a more carefree lifestyle and diet, but when I recognized I'm not doing too well, I start to troubleshoot what could be responsible whether from the environment or diet. Doing I slowly learn how my own body reacts through trial and error. With this approach at least, I do not stress anymore about implementing a perfect plan in an unpredictable environment. I just live and learn to adapt to my environment.

 

[Rafael Lao Wai]

While you are right that currently the world is less than ideal, @rob's words have many truth to it. A neurotic way of thinking about the world as a mine field will inherently be stressful. We have to choose between the stress of trying to prevent all ills vs the stress of a less ideal lifestyle, but without mental stress.

Since life can't really be controlled no matter how much you try, giving up control when you need to can be as relieving as avoiding all stress from your environment. I have chosen to now default to a more carefree lifestyle and diet, but when I recognized I'm not doing too well, I start to troubleshoot what could be responsible whether from the environment or diet. Doing I slowly learn how my own body reacts through trial and error. With this approach at least, I do not stress anymore about implementing a perfect plan in an unpredictable environment. I just live and learn to adapt to my environment.

Well, life can be controlled, and nutrition is probably the aspect we have the most control over. Anybody can choose to exit their terrible environment and go live somewhere at least less contaminated, but people are brainwashed to think that they are the problem, instead of suspecting that the government is to blame for the huge amount of sickness and misinformation floating around nowadays. Not to mention that extreme poverty makes travelling to other areas, even within the same country, very difficult.

Stress in the short term is bad, but it's more stressful to live, say, 50 years on a crappy diet than to worry a little about lifestyle choices and get used to doing beneficial things and not harmful ones.

Also, the environment in cities is quite predictable: bad food in supermarkets, stress at work, stress at school, "mysterious" diseases, family drama, lack of freedom, traffic, fluoride and SSRIs in water, EMFs everywhere, negative people contaminating you with their emotions, etc.

You're right when you say that even a "perfect diet", which means different things to different people, though with at least some similarities, won't protect you fully from illness. The rest of your environment matters a lot, which is why even people who eat relatively healthy may still suffer from illness while they still live in a very urban area, and this shows the importance of focusing not only on your diet, but on your environment as well, of which diet can be seen as part of. It doesn't have to be bad, and it's certainly not unpredictable.

Finally, as Lamark stated, there are 2 forces: the adaptive force and the complexifying force. If the environment is rough, then the organism will sacrifice complexity and ingenuity in order to adapt to the bad times, and that way, it will become less coherent. If you adapt to a bad situation or time, you'll degenerate.

 

[rob]

Good debate.

I think it can be very individual as to when it's a good idea to relax a bit more about things – and that doesn't need to mean some extreme – versus focusing on the deep nuances of our nutrition.

Though, more often than not for people in recovery, I do still believe it's generally a good idea to move more in the direction of a relaxed mindset, particularly on a social front. And I say that through personal experience. Eating troubles can be predicated on fear and, fundamentally, we can lose trust in our bodies to manage, to be okay, even if we make one 'mistake' – whatever we define that as.

It also helps put us back in the game/make us more present, not just physically but mentally too. Social isolation might have been a problem and, one, being happy to join in with friends and family and, two, not being tensely locked in our heads because of all the 'what ifs?', is a big step.

We all tend to overly 'nutritionalise' health when, in fact, health has been shown to be determined by a huge range of factors, of which we don't know the precise weightings, including diet and exercise. Indeed, feeling part of community/strong social connection has been evidenced to be a significant factor and something I believe is being undermined by a number of things in today's society.

Furthermore, I maintain there are very real trade-offs between all these factors - in fact I think this would be a very interesting, albeit complex, subject in a public health policy discussion. And, yes, I also maintain we don't always have control in the sense that, if we want to be a well-integrated member of any sort of community, at times we must join in with things that, on the face of it, we would rather not. And, of course, one of the most enduring 'community' activities across the world is the ritual of sharing of food and drink. I think learning to be okay with some of these less-than-ideal, real-world situations is important to our mental health.

 

[YamnayaMommy]

Well, life can be controlled, and nutrition is probably the aspect we have the most control over. Anybody can choose to exit their terrible environment and go live somewhere at least less contaminated, but people are brainwashed to think that they are the problem, instead of suspecting that the government is to blame for the huge amount of sickness and misinformation floating around nowadays. Not to mention that extreme poverty makes travelling to other areas, even within the same country, very difficult.

Stress in the short term is bad, but it's more stressful to live, say, 50 years on a crappy diet than to worry a little about lifestyle choices and get used to doing beneficial things and not harmful ones.

Also, the environment in cities is quite predictable: bad food in supermarkets, stress at work, stress at school, "mysterious" diseases, family drama, lack of freedom, traffic, fluoride and SSRIs in water, EMFs everywhere, negative people contaminating you with their emotions, etc.

You're right when you say that even a "perfect diet", which means different things to different people, though with at least some similarities, won't protect you fully from illness. The rest of your environment matters a lot, which is why even people who eat relatively healthy may still suffer from illness while they still live in a very urban area, and this shows the importance of focusing not only on your diet, but on your environment as well, of which diet can be seen as part of. It doesn't have to be bad, and it's certainly not unpredictable.

Finally, as Lamark stated, there are 2 forces: the adaptive force and the complexifying force. If the environment is rough, then the organism will sacrifice complexity and ingenuity in order to adapt to the bad times, and that way, it will become less coherent. If you adapt to a bad situation or time, you'll degenerate.

If cities are so toxic, why are city dwellers leaner and healthier, on average, than people in suburban and rural areas?

 

[Hildy]

Here is what is often going on with those of us excessively concerned with the "food out there"...this was me, for sure:

Orthorexia Nervosa I: Women Laughing Alone with Salad

"Physician Steven Bratman coined the term orthorexia: “orth”, meaning right or correct and “orexia” meaning appetite. 2

He identified orthorexia in patients as those who pursue “healthy eating” to a point of thinness and ill health. He distinguishes orthorexia nervosa (ON) from anorexia nervosa (AN) by suggesting that an orthorexic is not pursuing thinness but rather a pure, healthy and natural existence."

"In 1997 Dr. Bratman developed an initial 10-question self quiz as a way to determine the presence of orthorexia in a patient:

• Do you spend more than 3 hours a day thinking about your diet?
• Do you plan your meals several days ahead?
• Is the nutritional value of your meal more important than the pleasure of eating it?
• Has the quality of your life decreased as the quality of your diet has increased?
• Have you become stricter with yourself lately?
• Does your self-esteem get a boost from eating healthily?
• Have you given up foods you used to enjoy in order to eat the ‘right’ foods
• Does your diet make it difficult for you to eat out, distancing you from family and friends?
• Do you feel guilty when you stray from your diet?
• Do you feel at peace with yourself and in total control when you eat healthily? 3"

"Here are common symptoms that reflect that quality of life is negatively impacted:

1. You will not eat certain foods under any circumstance despite the fact that you once enjoyed them.
2. You weigh your food when preparing your meals.
3. You look-up and tally (either mentally or with actual food logs) macronutrients in your foods. If the results are not exact, then you cannot shake the feeling that you have done damage to yourself, or that you risk imminent ill health or disease.
4. You equate processed foods, additives, chemical residues, GMO as well as unbalanced micro and macronutrients as dangerous and the cause of disease and ill health (eg. sugars, all processed and packaged foods, sodium, saturated fats).
5. You are vegan or a raw-foodist (these choices do not automatically indicate orthorexia, however they are markers alongside the other signs in this list).
6. You adhere to diets that are suitable for those with existing disease states believing they have disease prevention capabilities (eg. Paleo-diet, low-fat diets, no-dairy diets, low-carb diets, low-protein diets, etc.).
7. You will not go to restaurants if you cannot confirm ingredients, calories and macro and micro nutrient contents of menu items in advance of going there.
8. You tend to avoid having meals at other people’s homes because you have no way to measure and identify all of the ingredients, nutrients and caloric value of the food served.
9. If you do eat anything that you consider unhealthy, you experience anxiety and you compensate by applying any number of behaviors to try to re-balance yourself: fasting, juicing, cleanses, additional exercise (to sweat out the impurities), supplements purported to detoxify, home-remedy enemas, etc.
10. Your mood is dependent on how successful you are at any given point in reaching or failing to reach your nutrient and healthful eating goals."

"If you can say “yes” to at least 4 of the items above, then there is cause for concern and above 5, intervention is strongly advised."

"orthorexia nervosa might likely be defined as the combined presence of restrictive eating behaviors alongside excessive focus on health as it relates to food."

"Orthorexia in its application within the restrictive eating behaviors spectrum is a distracting totem meant to protect the patient. It is meant to bolster the patient’s health such that she might somehow avoid the damaging consequences of restrictive eating behaviors."

"the negative impacts on self and others are a very strong marker of the presence of orthorexia. Those who pursue healthy eating habits in response to purely sociocultural pressure will regularly modify their food choices to suit others and lessen social tension."

3. S Bratman, D. Knight, Health Food Junkies: Orthorexia Nervosa—Overcoming the Obsession With Healthful Eating, New York, Broadway Books, 2000.



Focusing on measurements, percentages, the possible benefits of biodynamic food when compared to organic food, or the need to increase or decrease certain supplements based on the latest health articles…all create distraction through ritual—the sense that, if applied correctly and perfectly without flaw, both sickness and perhaps even death are avoidable."

One specific concern:

Food Challenges — The Eating Disorder Institute

"Dietary fats are critical in recovery and shooting for 45% percent of your daily intake coming from fats (saturated equally critical) helps with specific healing requirements."

"During starvation your body uses the myelin on your nerves as fuel to make up the energy deficit created by not eating enough to meet all your biological requirements."

"Not only does this de-myelination affect brain function, but it also impacts motor function, the dependable contraction of the heart muscle, etc. etc. It can mimic the symptoms of multiple sclerosis but it is not MS (I have seen patients misdiagnosed with MS who are on the eating disorder spectrum).

De-myelinated nerves due to restriction will be re-myelinated with adequate re-feeding and dietary fats play a critical role in that process.

Under age 25 there is additional first-time myelination that needs to happen in the frontal lobes of the brain. If you starved between the ages of 16-25 then the natural myelination process in that area of the brain did not happen. And yes it happens at whatever time you are finally able to recover fully.

Dietary fats (saturated and unsaturated) are critical for helping your body to re-myelinate all the nerves.

Beyond recovery, dietary fats are critical for maintaining nerve health and supporting reproductive cycles (particularly in women)"

It really boils down to trusting the body to guide us in food decisions and to heal itself and return to a normal state, including its fat deposition. I know it's scary, but objectively examine the science. These articles I'm quoting are referenced to the studies. There are years of experience embodied here, not just mine. I saw the science before I tried it. I kept reassuring myself by rereading the science and the experiences of others. You can see that some vehemently disagree that this is how things are supposed to work. Look at their point of view as well. Of course, nothing can convince me that the science I objectively examined isn't "real". Where I was hungry, I am now satisfied. Where I was sick, I am now well. Where I was anxious, I am now calm. Where I was storing excess weight, I'm now not. If you can convince yourself to try it again, I can only say persist. It's just living and enjoying life, really.

But don't you kinda have to pay attention to what you are eating, your body temperature, that sort of thing, when eating a more Peaty" way which is completely different than what you used to do? I never understood the importance of calcium like I do now, so focusing on that is what is important to me atm - this makes me more focused on food and the types of food I am eating.
I'm just hoping what I am doing now becomes ingrained in my brain so I don't have to think about getting enough calories. I'm sure a lot of folks desire the same.

 

[Hildy]

Recently Danny Roddy and Georgi talked about this on his youtube series, sometimes a suboptimal waking temperature that won't improve is due to out of whack cortisol levels from impaired circadian cycles. Working on waking up closer to dawn and going to bed when it's dark (i.e. before midnight) can help improve the basal temperature. If you were sleep deprived for years and worked in a windowless window with no beneficial light for a long time that might a lingering problem for you. It was for me, as I spent many years working nightshifts at an hospital and it took me a long time before I realized that I'd picked up bad sleeping habits.

I agree with this. Going to bed at a reasonable hour consistently before midnight- preferably between 10-11 pm. Maybe earlier? really can go a long way towards gaining your health and improving your circadian cycles.

 

[ExCarniv]

I agree with this. Going to bed at a reasonable hour consistently before midnight- preferably between 10-11 pm. Maybe earlier? really can go a long way towards gaining your health and improving your circadian cycles.

I'm feeling way better going to sleep earlier and get at least 7-8h of sleep some days of consistent sleeping and I feel leaner too, so that thing of burning fat during sleep/rest is probably true.