Here's something new I'l be doing. Throughout the course of any given day, I see lots of stuff I'd like to call attention to, and some, I do — via Facebook, Twitter, and my shared Google items. However, making them available via blog posts is problematic because I end up with dozens of links, have to choose between them and procrastinate, and then end up doing something else.
What I'll do is simply keep a compose window open and toss them in when they come up. When I get six or more, I'll publish and begin a new one. I'll sometimes offer brief commentary.
~ Is the gluten in wheat like morphine? Dr. Davis thinks so.
~ Hey, the mainstream gets it right on vitamin D. Advising 2,000 to 3,000 IU per day is a pretty big step for keepers of the conventional wisdom for the unconfused consumption of the masses.
~ Can intermittent fasting (IF) regenerate brain matter and stimulate production of neurons from stem cells? Reboot your brain.
~ "…much of the evolutionary process in cancer could be arrested at the outset by maintaining vitamin D adequacy. According to Garland, other scientists have found that the cells adhere to one another in tissue with adequate vitamin D, acting as mature epithelial cells. Without enough vitamin D, they may lose this stickiness along with their identity as differentiated cells, and revert to a stem cell-like state."
~ So, were the "experts" and "authorities" fucking idiots all along, or not? I vote yes. Why? Principles, man. The notion that animal fat would be bad for an omnivorous human being — given our evolutionary history and the anthropological record — should have called for an enormously high bar to be set for impugning its marvelous healthfulness (not to mention the franken-poisons that replaced it). It wasn't. Unbridled reductionism won out, the the detriment and victimization of the Bohemian masses of sheeple. In Slate; Lard: After decades of trying, its moment is finally here.
~ Oh, well, three of six links on vitamin D. I suppose that serves to underscore its importance. Here's a report of a study suggesting that high levels of vitamin D might help keep the brain healthy as people age. "The study authors found that high circulating vitamin D levels were associated with high scores on memory and information-processing tests, while low vitamin D levels were associated with poor scores. The findings appear online in advance of publication in the print issue of the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry."