Hey guys, guess what?
The US economy is sucking for those of us in the bottom 80% right now. It's causing a lot of concern, angst- oh, and a lot of joblessness. While Congress, The President, Wall Street and the Corporate interests are making out dandy, thanks- we're not.
So here's a few notes, from someone who hasn't had a job in long enough that he's self-employed.
One thing you might want to look at is whether you want a job, or you want income.
Think on that one for a moment, and realize that the two aren't inseparable.
There's a lot of advantages to jobs as such- health benefits, retirement plans, managers directing and controlling your work. I can see flat out stating that it's gotta be a job you want- That's cool, but the rest of this post is aimed at someone who wants income in the meantime. Or someone who doesn't care about the job aspect as much as the income aspect.
Why am I writing this? Because, I honestly think it's up to us to build the economy, or at least keep some levels of it functioning- underneath, orthogonal to, and in spite of DC and Wall Street. I'm not going to get into any details, but my view is expressed here:
http://koyoteconditioning.blogspot.com/2011/07/politics-of-working.html
Okay, back to work. Income. Income means producing wealth- whether it's trade, production, reselling- doesn't matter. In some way, you need to add something to the mix, then collect some cash for it. (Or barter, but that's all up to you.)
The absolute basic rules are pretty simple. The first one is Do Stuff. Very simply, you need to move around, and make changes in your local universe. Weaving baskets out of pine needle bundles may sound silly, but it sure beats couch potato lard.
It really doesn't matter, at most levels, what it is you are doing all the time, as long as you are Doing Stuff. If you want a job coding remotely for a company, that's great- your Doing Stuff should probably include lots of software in the OSS and PDA fields. But sharpening all your friends' axes and whittling a chain necklace are cool, too.
Do. Stuff.
Second rule: Finish something every day. Some projects take an hour, some take a month, but you need to make sure that every single day you have something you can point to and say "Complete!"
This is crucial stuff. Without going way deep into psychology, if you do this you'll build up some momentum, horsepower, and your time management skills will soar (trust me)
Third rule: eliminate all "can't", "not allowed to", "don't have the materials", and "need to buy this first" talk.
As I said before, pine needle baskets are cool if that's where you are at. With what's around you, you can do something. Do it. "all the jobs are near this rail line I live far away from." "The landlord won't let me run a forge on a balcony." "I need a CNC mill before I can make this model to sell."
Balls. Do Stuff. No can't, just Do Stuff.
Okay, here's the magic part- as long as you follow these three rules (intelligently- starting a $25,000 homebuilt airplane while on unemployment is not intelligent), good stuff will happen to you. Money will come in, however slowly, people will give you stuff, trade you stuff, come over and share experience. Stuff Happens when you Do Stuff.
You can target this, you can focus on an area, build a career, aim for a job in a specific industry, whatever you want. Just don't break the three simple rules.
Let's say you are following the rules. What's next? Well, don't expect $2,500 a month off of etsy selling pine needle coasters that you learned how to make a week ago.
This one is really hard for people. You can't master anything that's going to make you a lot of money and generate life quality in a day, a week, or a month. You may get no more than 10% over your materials cost for stuff at first. A set of pine needle coasters (6) might sell for $10. And that's going to take you half a day of work to do. Sucks, huh?
Well, here's the thing- every hour you spend, attentively, doing stuff, is an investment in skill and ability.
I have met a model maker- guy makes little plastic models. He sells them for over $250 each. (A couple a week.) Believe me, he's not slapping together a Revell kit and spraypainting it! He's got years into this, he's developed skill, an artistic style (even accurate modelling has it), and a customer base.
Making chainmail jewelry? great. It's not magic, but it's sellable if you choose materials right. But you have to produce detail oriented work (smooth closures, even rings), and you have to put enough time in to have something to sell. 5 days for a $20 bracelet ain't it. 5 days should net you a sleeveless shirt. 10 days should net you a full knee length hauberk and coif. Work means WORK.
Don't expect that anything you do is perfectly unique- no cottage industry is completely new (okay, very damned few) and you do have to deal with the fact that there's someone out there been doing it longer. that's okay.
There's a saying in the knife world that anything you develop in your custom shop has been done before sometime in history. You may put a twist into it, or be using a new steel, but it's almost certainly been done. That's fine by me, I'm selling my knives as my knives. I don't need to try and force people to believe I invented knifemaking.
Fortunately, you don't have to saturate a market, nor even necessarily compete with anyone else. There's lots of room. Whatever you are doing, you can do it well and generate some life out of it.
I have to append a pretty important note to the second rule. Extending this rule is crucial.
I'm not talking solely about refusing to "I can't" on whatever you are doing. This needs to be extended to life.
A lot of people, I find, have an excuse for everything. It's as if there's a programmed avoidance technique in operation where if anything new, active, or solution oriented is proposed, the first thing to do is find a reason why it can't be done.
This is absolutely critical. ERASE this attitude, response, and habit from yourself.
You may find you have to stop accepting it from others. Spending 5 hours of your Doing Stuff time listening to someone else chant "I can't" in all the various forms will not help you. And they are just as likely to put that onto you- "You can't."
I'm not saying you have to divorce yourself from these people, but some tactic will need to be employed to protect yourself from ... well, not Doing Stuff.
Friday, July 22, 2011
Monday, July 18, 2011
Politics of working
This is a side note, a reference for another post.
For purposes of working with how I am treating the subject of working and income, consider thbese views.....or don't! This isn't crucial, but points out some difficulties.
First, the government of the US isn't here to get anyone a job, nor to ensure employment. Not even to fix the economy. The federal government is primarily to prevent "bad actions" in the economy.
What this means is that, left unchecked, "capitalism" will end up taken over by monopolistic and protectionist machines. Adam Smith saw this one, as did many of our Founding Fathers. In fact, if you look at corporate law in our first couple decades as a nation, you see a very different picture.
See:
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/history_corporations_us.html
and (bit leftist for me, but read it)
http://prorev.com/corpsandus.htm
Secondly, large corporations in general are not here to benefit you. Further than that, their power structures are set up to control wealth and power over and of others. The independent businessman, cottage industry, and entrepreneur are threats.
So don't be looking at corporate loyalty, benefits, or anything else to save you.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
defining a diet and therapies.
Yknow, I need to put the disclaimer up for this post.
I'm not a doctor, I'm not a doctor, I'm not a doctor. This particular post has no goal of advocating a specific diet. This post is intended to explain some issues with alternative diets such as VLC, LC, and PN (Paleo Nutrition) with some references to individual desires to use them as a therapy.
Generally a question will come along such as:
"How will a gluten free diet help my child with ADHD?"
"How will a paleo diet help with my mild Asperger's?"
"What do I do about a specific diet for autism (classical -actual- autism, not Asperger's, nor PDD-NOS, Rett's, nor CDD) ?"
"How about my metabolism, or thyroid conditon?"
The list of questions is endless in minor variations. The primary problem is in defining what, exactly, is meant by the "X diet" - and the search for the all important extensive studies.
I'm going to be blunt. While there are several specific studies of certain aspects of various diets, and research supporting some of the theories, there is not and probably won't be (anytime soon), an extensive, 500 person 3 year study of whatever you think you mean by "X diet."
There *are* enough studies, from the classic WW2 famine study onward, to support various forms of the low carbohydrate, paleolithic foods influenced diet in general.
But what is this diet? What are the relevant factors?
Let's take a basic example, of a person using a paleo diet as a springboard for a gluten-free lifestyle because there's some evidence/suspicion that the gluten is making a condition (suspected celiac, ADHD, minor non specific IBS) worse.
After 3 months, this diet which went so WELL at first, is having issues and behavior or health is going down.
Well, eating local produce, it turns out that this three months has gotten you into the middle of apple season where you live, and your apple intake has quintupled, or septupled. The fructose load has skyrocketed!
Perhaps it's something else, where the carbohydrate level has tripled. Or the lactose or casein levels.
Some of this stuff can even effect your eggs to the point where you end up with different reactions to commercial eggs at different times of year.
And you can't tell why- it could be the vitamin D! NO ONE knows, though there are some theories with merit. No one knows because it's chaotic, and the math for network systems hasn't been applied to all the studies. I'm not sure it can be without much more in depth multivariable studies.
What you can do is look at the basic thrusts and tracks of many of the low carb, autism, and paelo family of diets.
1: No gluten. This gets into- no grains. And thus no grain enzymes, no gluten, no storage molds, no rancidity, no conversions of starches into other sugars (such as happens through cooking or malting)
2: Controlled levels of carbohydrates in a generally raw or unprocessed, balanced, inclusive food. Meaning you get carbohydrates from a carrot, a raspberry, or some other source where the carbohydrate is part of a whole food.
3: low and controlled levels of glucose and fructose. Fructose especially is dangerous as it bypasses some of the control mechanisms in the body that other carbohydrate types like glucose and proteins have to go through. (go to the paNu blog and search fructose, and read what the Doctor has to say)
4: extremely limited or no dairy- losing the lactose and casein that can also cause problems, individually or systemically, with several types of disorder.
5: exercise. at a minimum, some 15 minute sweat inducing power interval type of workout (like 100 kettlebell swings and some situps) that increases the overall metabolic rate.
You need all 5. You can't - just can't- isolate to gluten, or fructose, or bean enzymes, or lactose. The reason is we don't know which specific control items in which combinations are damaging.
It's far better to focus on a broader sense of the map than to narrow to one specific item- replacing gluten with 6 apples a day. replacing all dairy with high processed fakery. (fakery is bad. Fakery is processing, processing is bad. minimize it)
There's nothing unhealthy about leaving the high sugars, grains, beans, and dairy products behind. No one can prove that- if you eat the right foods- axing these will harm you. Every argument relies on "if you don't eat enough plant fiber in salad greens, if you eat too much of X fat, if if if- iuf something, you will be less healthy"
All you have to do- all you have to do- is not "if" yourself.
I'm not a doctor, I'm not a doctor, I'm not a doctor. This particular post has no goal of advocating a specific diet. This post is intended to explain some issues with alternative diets such as VLC, LC, and PN (Paleo Nutrition) with some references to individual desires to use them as a therapy.
Generally a question will come along such as:
"How will a gluten free diet help my child with ADHD?"
"How will a paleo diet help with my mild Asperger's?"
"What do I do about a specific diet for autism (classical -actual- autism, not Asperger's, nor PDD-NOS, Rett's, nor CDD) ?"
"How about my metabolism, or thyroid conditon?"
The list of questions is endless in minor variations. The primary problem is in defining what, exactly, is meant by the "X diet" - and the search for the all important extensive studies.
I'm going to be blunt. While there are several specific studies of certain aspects of various diets, and research supporting some of the theories, there is not and probably won't be (anytime soon), an extensive, 500 person 3 year study of whatever you think you mean by "X diet."
There *are* enough studies, from the classic WW2 famine study onward, to support various forms of the low carbohydrate, paleolithic foods influenced diet in general.
But what is this diet? What are the relevant factors?
Let's take a basic example, of a person using a paleo diet as a springboard for a gluten-free lifestyle because there's some evidence/suspicion that the gluten is making a condition (suspected celiac, ADHD, minor non specific IBS) worse.
After 3 months, this diet which went so WELL at first, is having issues and behavior or health is going down.
Well, eating local produce, it turns out that this three months has gotten you into the middle of apple season where you live, and your apple intake has quintupled, or septupled. The fructose load has skyrocketed!
Perhaps it's something else, where the carbohydrate level has tripled. Or the lactose or casein levels.
Some of this stuff can even effect your eggs to the point where you end up with different reactions to commercial eggs at different times of year.
And you can't tell why- it could be the vitamin D! NO ONE knows, though there are some theories with merit. No one knows because it's chaotic, and the math for network systems hasn't been applied to all the studies. I'm not sure it can be without much more in depth multivariable studies.
What you can do is look at the basic thrusts and tracks of many of the low carb, autism, and paelo family of diets.
1: No gluten. This gets into- no grains. And thus no grain enzymes, no gluten, no storage molds, no rancidity, no conversions of starches into other sugars (such as happens through cooking or malting)
2: Controlled levels of carbohydrates in a generally raw or unprocessed, balanced, inclusive food. Meaning you get carbohydrates from a carrot, a raspberry, or some other source where the carbohydrate is part of a whole food.
3: low and controlled levels of glucose and fructose. Fructose especially is dangerous as it bypasses some of the control mechanisms in the body that other carbohydrate types like glucose and proteins have to go through. (go to the paNu blog and search fructose, and read what the Doctor has to say)
4: extremely limited or no dairy- losing the lactose and casein that can also cause problems, individually or systemically, with several types of disorder.
5: exercise. at a minimum, some 15 minute sweat inducing power interval type of workout (like 100 kettlebell swings and some situps) that increases the overall metabolic rate.
You need all 5. You can't - just can't- isolate to gluten, or fructose, or bean enzymes, or lactose. The reason is we don't know which specific control items in which combinations are damaging.
It's far better to focus on a broader sense of the map than to narrow to one specific item- replacing gluten with 6 apples a day. replacing all dairy with high processed fakery. (fakery is bad. Fakery is processing, processing is bad. minimize it)
There's nothing unhealthy about leaving the high sugars, grains, beans, and dairy products behind. No one can prove that- if you eat the right foods- axing these will harm you. Every argument relies on "if you don't eat enough plant fiber in salad greens, if you eat too much of X fat, if if if- iuf something, you will be less healthy"
All you have to do- all you have to do- is not "if" yourself.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
that diet report thing.
The paleo blogs blew up this week about the US News report on best diets:
http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets
As amusing as the user stacking on the "did this work for you" is, I need to write just a little bit more on the topic.
USnews states: "Experts took issue with the Paleo diet on every measure. Regardless of what a dieter's goal is—weight loss, heart health, or finding a diet that's easy to follow—most experts concluded he or she is better off looking elsewhere."
Well, let's take a quick look. A fair amount of analysis has been done on the methodology and suspected .... industry bias... of this report. So I'm just going
to hit a few high points:
http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/paleo-diet
How's the paleo diet for your heart?
USnews: "While some studies have linked Paleo diets with reducing blood pressure, bad “LDL” cholesterol, and triglycerides (a fatty substance that can raise heart disease risk), they have been few, small, and short. And all that fat would worry most experts."
Okay. Let's parse this. The studies there ARE show the paleo diet can be linked to lowering blood pressure, ldl cholesterol, and triglycerides.
So the experts worry that it's unsafe because it's got too much fat.
Logic?
USnews on health risks:
"By shunning dairy and grains, you’re at risk of missing out on a lot of nutrients. Also, if you’re not careful about making lean meat choices, you’ll quickly ratchet up your risk for heart problems."
Which nutrients exactly? If you look into the vegan diet (same review) and poke around a bit, you find piles and piles of sources for replacements or improvements on every nutrient class. Leaving out the beans, soymilk, and tofu that form the basis of the vegan Way, we have complete animal sources of protein, vitamin D, and other nutrients.
Lean meat choices? See the first point. "all that fat" has been proven in the existing studies to NOT be a problem.
In the section "analyzing" how well the Paleo diet conforms to accepted guidelines, note the first thing is the fat:
"Fat. At about 39 percent of daily calories from fat, a sample Paleo menu exceeds the government’s 35 percent cap by a bit."
All this scare about fat, over 4%? 4%!?!?.
Okay, note that the report couldn't find a way to come down on salt. Paleo wins on balancing the sodium intake.
Fiber- well, veggies. fiber. Got it.
The potassium intake on the paleo diet is high enough to actually be used as a reason for the paleo diet to work. Not the only reason, but it's tops on many nutrients like potassium without supplements.
USnews on Vitamin B12:
"Vitamin B-12. Adults should shoot for 2.4 micrograms of this nutrient, which is critical for proper cell metabolism. You’ll have no trouble meeting the recommendation—fish and meat are B-12 powerhouses."
USnews on Vitamin D:
"Vitamin D. You’ll get very little or none, so you’ll either have to supplement (the non-caveman way) or just make sure you spend enough time in the sun to get the 15 micrograms recommended. Some experts suggest five to 30 minutes of sun between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m., twice a week and without sunscreen, to meet the recommendation, according to the National Institutes of Health."
Supplementing vitamin D the caveman way is pretty easy. Lard. The non hydrogenated, natural kind. (from pigs that see sunlight.) We're talking tablespoons per week here- the ONLY thing that beats it in vitamin D is cod liver oil.
Though, for a paleo man or woman, a couple hours of sunlight a week isn't at all difficult. Because paleo is more than a diet and involves getting outside and moving mass in space (exercise)
And last, on the nutrient list- calcium
USnews:
"Calcium. It’s essential not only to build and maintain bones but to make blood vessels and muscles function properly. Many Americans don’t get enough. Women and anyone older than 50 should try especially hard to meet the government’s recommendation of 1,000 to 1,300 mg. Because you’re not allowed dairy or fortified cereals, you’ll likely only get about 700 mg. from a Paleo menu."
Balls. That's it, just balls.
First, the 1300mg is based on the lower bioavailability of calcium from milk sources. You get something like one and a half to double the amount of bioavailable calcium from non dairy sources. Which means 700mg might not be low, even if it's true.
It's not.
Calcium is available in a wide range of natural sources, once you exclude dairy and those ever-so-healthy "fortified" cereal chem lab experiments. Sardines, salmon, trout- not exotic fish, but inexpensive sources. Kale, spinach, collards- essentially every dark green leafy vegetable will have some significant calcium source.
Not. A. Problem.
Diabetes is often a big issue with dieters these days. I'll leave it to you- look at one of the top rated diets- DASH, and read (carefully) the diabetes section (read more link int he page).
Then read the paleo section.
While the facts are nearly identical, the wording, tone, and phrasing are rather heavily slanted.
For a final comment, I'd like to point out the USnews sees a major issue with the paleo diet in that it requires you to shop in the produce section, and at the meat counter.
you know, where the food is....fresh?
http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/best-overall-diets
As amusing as the user stacking on the "did this work for you" is, I need to write just a little bit more on the topic.
USnews states: "Experts took issue with the Paleo diet on every measure. Regardless of what a dieter's goal is—weight loss, heart health, or finding a diet that's easy to follow—most experts concluded he or she is better off looking elsewhere."
Well, let's take a quick look. A fair amount of analysis has been done on the methodology and suspected .... industry bias... of this report. So I'm just going
to hit a few high points:
http://health.usnews.com/best-diet/paleo-diet
How's the paleo diet for your heart?
USnews: "While some studies have linked Paleo diets with reducing blood pressure, bad “LDL” cholesterol, and triglycerides (a fatty substance that can raise heart disease risk), they have been few, small, and short. And all that fat would worry most experts."
Okay. Let's parse this. The studies there ARE show the paleo diet can be linked to lowering blood pressure, ldl cholesterol, and triglycerides.
So the experts worry that it's unsafe because it's got too much fat.
Logic?
USnews on health risks:
"By shunning dairy and grains, you’re at risk of missing out on a lot of nutrients. Also, if you’re not careful about making lean meat choices, you’ll quickly ratchet up your risk for heart problems."
Which nutrients exactly? If you look into the vegan diet (same review) and poke around a bit, you find piles and piles of sources for replacements or improvements on every nutrient class. Leaving out the beans, soymilk, and tofu that form the basis of the vegan Way, we have complete animal sources of protein, vitamin D, and other nutrients.
Lean meat choices? See the first point. "all that fat" has been proven in the existing studies to NOT be a problem.
In the section "analyzing" how well the Paleo diet conforms to accepted guidelines, note the first thing is the fat:
"Fat. At about 39 percent of daily calories from fat, a sample Paleo menu exceeds the government’s 35 percent cap by a bit."
All this scare about fat, over 4%? 4%!?!?.
Okay, note that the report couldn't find a way to come down on salt. Paleo wins on balancing the sodium intake.
Fiber- well, veggies. fiber. Got it.
The potassium intake on the paleo diet is high enough to actually be used as a reason for the paleo diet to work. Not the only reason, but it's tops on many nutrients like potassium without supplements.
USnews on Vitamin B12:
"Vitamin B-12. Adults should shoot for 2.4 micrograms of this nutrient, which is critical for proper cell metabolism. You’ll have no trouble meeting the recommendation—fish and meat are B-12 powerhouses."
USnews on Vitamin D:
"Vitamin D. You’ll get very little or none, so you’ll either have to supplement (the non-caveman way) or just make sure you spend enough time in the sun to get the 15 micrograms recommended. Some experts suggest five to 30 minutes of sun between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m., twice a week and without sunscreen, to meet the recommendation, according to the National Institutes of Health."
Supplementing vitamin D the caveman way is pretty easy. Lard. The non hydrogenated, natural kind. (from pigs that see sunlight.) We're talking tablespoons per week here- the ONLY thing that beats it in vitamin D is cod liver oil.
Though, for a paleo man or woman, a couple hours of sunlight a week isn't at all difficult. Because paleo is more than a diet and involves getting outside and moving mass in space (exercise)
And last, on the nutrient list- calcium
USnews:
"Calcium. It’s essential not only to build and maintain bones but to make blood vessels and muscles function properly. Many Americans don’t get enough. Women and anyone older than 50 should try especially hard to meet the government’s recommendation of 1,000 to 1,300 mg. Because you’re not allowed dairy or fortified cereals, you’ll likely only get about 700 mg. from a Paleo menu."
Balls. That's it, just balls.
First, the 1300mg is based on the lower bioavailability of calcium from milk sources. You get something like one and a half to double the amount of bioavailable calcium from non dairy sources. Which means 700mg might not be low, even if it's true.
It's not.
Calcium is available in a wide range of natural sources, once you exclude dairy and those ever-so-healthy "fortified" cereal chem lab experiments. Sardines, salmon, trout- not exotic fish, but inexpensive sources. Kale, spinach, collards- essentially every dark green leafy vegetable will have some significant calcium source.
Not. A. Problem.
Diabetes is often a big issue with dieters these days. I'll leave it to you- look at one of the top rated diets- DASH, and read (carefully) the diabetes section (read more link int he page).
Then read the paleo section.
While the facts are nearly identical, the wording, tone, and phrasing are rather heavily slanted.
For a final comment, I'd like to point out the USnews sees a major issue with the paleo diet in that it requires you to shop in the produce section, and at the meat counter.
you know, where the food is....fresh?
Friday, February 4, 2011
Real food, fake food, and the natural paleo
Real Paleo, what is it?
How I define real and fake foods.
This is a fuzzy area in parts. If you check my wife's blog for the homestead at Lemurs in the Homestead , you can see that she can get pretty creative with paleo ingredients. I wouldn't classify zucchini mint chocolate chip ice cream as anything but fake. Her coffee smoothies utilizing it are (except for the coffee) raw, whole, and complete. Can't fault that. Naturally, the most excellent and amazingly low carb Mock Split Pea Soup made with zucchini instead of peas is totally fine. And it's FINE, too!
More on this in a moment, first we need to look at what makes a food fake:
Processing versus conversion.
Processing is a fundamental change in the nature or purpose of a food. Processing in the commercial sense generally means mechanical, chemical, and heat changes to the food itself- along with additives.
When you take something that should be healthy- like pork fat (lard) and you hydrogenate it for shelf life, you destroy many of the benefits of the natural product.
Some processing is done by most of us- from grilling to canning to making jerky. But the difference in this realm of "fake paleo" is when processing is used for two purposes:
1: To convince someone they are eating something that wouldn't be considered paleo in any other context (cookies, crackers, the godsawful mess that is an atkins shake, etc)
2: To eliminate the whole and fresh aspects of the paleo diet. (healthy food has to be food, if your diet is 80% prepackaged and premade, it's just NOT going to work.)
Conversion, by contrast, is when a food is changed into a different food by a natural- most often living- process. Yogurt is an example, as is sauerkraut, kimchee, or real soy sauce. Or many types of cheese.
I have found that many converted food that would generally not be acceptable become so with conversion. In many to most cases, the specific issues a archevore or paleovore would have with a given food source become moot as the food is converted. (lactose, for example.) Many converted foods are living foods, as well.
Back to fake and real.
I've seen several reports of paleo not working for a specific individual- and atkins as well. In most of these cases where I've talked to people, there is a preponderance of fakery. If you eat 15 servings of "paleo cake" or "grok cookies" every week, things aren't going to go well.
It's best to keep it real, keep it simple as you grow into your lifestyle, and minimize the incidence of fakery.
How I define real and fake foods.
This is a fuzzy area in parts. If you check my wife's blog for the homestead at Lemurs in the Homestead , you can see that she can get pretty creative with paleo ingredients. I wouldn't classify zucchini mint chocolate chip ice cream as anything but fake. Her coffee smoothies utilizing it are (except for the coffee) raw, whole, and complete. Can't fault that. Naturally, the most excellent and amazingly low carb Mock Split Pea Soup made with zucchini instead of peas is totally fine. And it's FINE, too!
More on this in a moment, first we need to look at what makes a food fake:
Processing versus conversion.
Processing is a fundamental change in the nature or purpose of a food. Processing in the commercial sense generally means mechanical, chemical, and heat changes to the food itself- along with additives.
When you take something that should be healthy- like pork fat (lard) and you hydrogenate it for shelf life, you destroy many of the benefits of the natural product.
Some processing is done by most of us- from grilling to canning to making jerky. But the difference in this realm of "fake paleo" is when processing is used for two purposes:
1: To convince someone they are eating something that wouldn't be considered paleo in any other context (cookies, crackers, the godsawful mess that is an atkins shake, etc)
2: To eliminate the whole and fresh aspects of the paleo diet. (healthy food has to be food, if your diet is 80% prepackaged and premade, it's just NOT going to work.)
Conversion, by contrast, is when a food is changed into a different food by a natural- most often living- process. Yogurt is an example, as is sauerkraut, kimchee, or real soy sauce. Or many types of cheese.
I have found that many converted food that would generally not be acceptable become so with conversion. In many to most cases, the specific issues a archevore or paleovore would have with a given food source become moot as the food is converted. (lactose, for example.) Many converted foods are living foods, as well.
Back to fake and real.
I've seen several reports of paleo not working for a specific individual- and atkins as well. In most of these cases where I've talked to people, there is a preponderance of fakery. If you eat 15 servings of "paleo cake" or "grok cookies" every week, things aren't going to go well.
It's best to keep it real, keep it simple as you grow into your lifestyle, and minimize the incidence of fakery.
Grok got fat, now what?
Ah, an actual weight loss post. Finally!
A few cautions before we go in. This is a "ketosis" or "induction" style weight loss program. Ketoacidosis isn't ketosis isn't ketonuria. Go look it up, know what's what! If Dr. Atkins had done that to begin with, a lot of arguments about the dangers of ketosis that were made by people thinking about ketoacidosis would have never come up.
I am not a doctor, nor a nutritionist, nor a guru. This is what I am doing, and solutions to sticking points that I have used and will be using.
Dr. Atkins forms the basis for the very first levels. In his 1973 book, the original "Diet Revolution", he lays out a very workable first phase system for weight loss.
It's not that the current book is...bad. But the original book tends to follow a more "natural" or even "paleo" approach (except for the creams and cheeses) with less fakery. Fakery is bad.
Okay, look. Any of the paleo/very low carb/atkins type approaches are going to work. All you need is to get into ketosis for a few weeks, adjust the habits of eating, not cheat.
Also, while I've tried the fast and feast type of thing- it really does work better if you eat 3 or 4 meals a day. It just does. No idea why.
If you really want to blast the weight off, get a good power interval before each eat. Not food without a sweat right before. Simple!
I topped out at 248 after my wife's last pregnancy, with the move and the diet issues, and I'm looking at 195 now- 5 months of dieting and off and on exercise. Getting down to 215 or so was easy- ketosis. I got stuck, and the two things that seem to have gotten me past it are:
- eating lunch instead of just breakfast and dinner.
- EVERY DAY exercise.
I'm doing 100 kettlebell swings every morning, with various add ons. pushups, pullups, hot potatoes, snatches. Just anything- no real plan, except I always do some kettlebell presses.
I'm not even close to there yet- still 39" at the beer belly, but my neck has popped from 16 to 18 inches, body fat is calculating down at 21%. Another 6% to go and I'll be in "good" shape.
LC and paleo may be the key, but the lock is exercise.
Our ancestors didn't exercise 3 times a week for an hour, either. Makes games of it, change it up constantly, but make sure it's hard and you do it- a couple times a day.
A few cautions before we go in. This is a "ketosis" or "induction" style weight loss program. Ketoacidosis isn't ketosis isn't ketonuria. Go look it up, know what's what! If Dr. Atkins had done that to begin with, a lot of arguments about the dangers of ketosis that were made by people thinking about ketoacidosis would have never come up.
I am not a doctor, nor a nutritionist, nor a guru. This is what I am doing, and solutions to sticking points that I have used and will be using.
Dr. Atkins forms the basis for the very first levels. In his 1973 book, the original "Diet Revolution", he lays out a very workable first phase system for weight loss.
It's not that the current book is...bad. But the original book tends to follow a more "natural" or even "paleo" approach (except for the creams and cheeses) with less fakery. Fakery is bad.
Okay, look. Any of the paleo/very low carb/atkins type approaches are going to work. All you need is to get into ketosis for a few weeks, adjust the habits of eating, not cheat.
Also, while I've tried the fast and feast type of thing- it really does work better if you eat 3 or 4 meals a day. It just does. No idea why.
If you really want to blast the weight off, get a good power interval before each eat. Not food without a sweat right before. Simple!
I topped out at 248 after my wife's last pregnancy, with the move and the diet issues, and I'm looking at 195 now- 5 months of dieting and off and on exercise. Getting down to 215 or so was easy- ketosis. I got stuck, and the two things that seem to have gotten me past it are:
- eating lunch instead of just breakfast and dinner.
- EVERY DAY exercise.
I'm doing 100 kettlebell swings every morning, with various add ons. pushups, pullups, hot potatoes, snatches. Just anything- no real plan, except I always do some kettlebell presses.
I'm not even close to there yet- still 39" at the beer belly, but my neck has popped from 16 to 18 inches, body fat is calculating down at 21%. Another 6% to go and I'll be in "good" shape.
LC and paleo may be the key, but the lock is exercise.
Our ancestors didn't exercise 3 times a week for an hour, either. Makes games of it, change it up constantly, but make sure it's hard and you do it- a couple times a day.
Paleo isn't a weight loss regimen - part three
Mass in Space. I want to get my Muppet on and say it dramatically- MASSSSSSS IN SPAAAAAACE.
Specifically, moving mass in space - or exercise.
In a paleo-lifestyle, exercise is often a key component, but it's divorced from paleo-nutrition. There are exception, like the previously referenced 12 steps of Dr. Harris. Even there, though, it remains a very short statement.
To say that going paleo doesn't work as a weight loss system because it lacks exercise is untrue. Exercise is crucial, and often recognized by the paleo-life crowd. What the paleo lifestyle most often lacks in this regard is a progression or evolution of exercise from "couch potato" to "Grok."
Everything I write here applies to the guy who needs to drop 15 pounds and bump the energy levels nearly as much as it does to the girl who needs to shed 40 pounds, the guy looking at 50, 80, even 100 or more pounds of weight loss. But for illustrative purposes, I'm going to stick with the "middle major" area of needing to drop 40-90 pounds by the BMI index.
Being overweight like this has effects. You can't move the same way you can when lean. You will be moving an automatic extra 40-90 pounds of weight with each squat, each swing, each pushup, each dreaded attempt at a pull up.
Your heart is also feeding a lot more blood to a lot more flesh. And your lungs, more oxygen. There's a fair amount of taxation involved here.
In short, you need a workout plan that you can do, that won't put you in the doctor's office, and that can grow with your rapidly expanding capabilities (and they will expand rapidly!)
I'm not using this short post to get into any exercise programs, just to talk about what we need.
For research, I'm going to leave you with two words: kettlebells and bodyweight.
I'd highly recommend picking up a decent kettlebell book like Enter The Kettlebell, and my bodyweight book of choice for this stage is Convict Conditioning.
What's going to be key here is that you need a solid regimen that
* ignores the high science of specific training,
*boosts fat burning and overall metabolic function,
*and that you can push yourself further with as you succeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
