She Blinded Me With Science

Far for being a Luddite, I do love some of the implications being raised in the previous comment thread about the implications of science qua science.

After all, we already know that many studies are corrupted, and even relate in abstract in a way that the full text doesn't really support (because so many only read abstracts). I'll go out on a limb and contend that human animals have been engaging in science for thousands of years, and perhaps tens of thousands or more. My talk at AHS11 was: Self Experimentation; The Best Science. I meant it. And I still do, bias and confounding variables notwithstanding.

If you're going to test how sitting on your ass and eating Hot Pockets and drinking Coke all day effects you, you're probably going to just eat Hot Pockets and drink Coke. It's only when you exercise your mind to undertake disciplined self experimentation do you try to deal with biases and variables. Because: you have a vested interest. Scientists, for all their fame, have no personal standing in the thing most valuable to you: your life and the lives of those you love. They just have a paycheck. Nope, no bias there. Nada.

My point is that bias will always exist, as will confounders—where you can't tell what's causing what, because too many variables are in play. But, I also presume you care about yourself; and such an audacious presumption, that. I'll go out on another limb: you care more about yourself than do scientists care about you, earning paychecks you didn't sign.

But yea, the work they do is valuable. It's just not all valuable, and it certainly never, ever trumps your own science. I didn't say experience. I said: your own science. If you observe the state of your environment, wonder what results you might get if you change something up, and you reasonablly take stock in that self experiment, you are the scientist as close to home as you will ever find...the one who care about you the most.

Take note: SHE blinded you. So, guys, now you know what all you're up against. :)

Contrast: Squeaking Pips vs Value Producers and Promoters

Warning: This post is vulgarity free. Read at your own risk.

For sure, lots of folks are miffed at me in various ways (see comments). Understandable. See, I have this quirky thing about me where I tend to overlook errors, even lots of errors when, on balance—in my exclusive judgment—the balance sheet is in the black. We have this thing called a paleo, primal, evfit, caveman, ancestral movement where, dang it, and in spite of all of our mess ups, people seem to be getting better, improving in large numbers.

Who's responsible for that, for adding value and promoting it in general? Art De Vany, Loren Cordain, Mark Sisson, Robb Wolf, Gary Taubes, Jimmy Moore, Tom Naughton...and a host of others. But you get the idea. These folks don't all agree with each other on everything. In fact, it's probably a safe bet that any one of them thinks all the others are wrong, even terribly wrong, on some things.

What do they do about that? They continue to produce values, continue to promote; they avoid being a squeaking pip that metastasizes into a cancer. The whole advancing deal, and the people being helped in large numbers are too important to risk turning away because when they heard that a certain guy or gal really had good info, and then when their search dropped them onto certain blogs, they found out how wrong and bad and a promoter of junk science the guy is—and in the context of that blogger being in or on the periphery of the general paleo community—they just went back to their Hot Pockets and liter of soda. Or, they were simply blinded by science.

Should errors be pointed out? Absolutely. But babies don't need tossing out with bathwater. Science, in sociological terms, doesn't come without its downsides and in general, science operates at both glacial pace and speed of light—to move things slowly, or change everything overnight. But mostly, people are concerned, this morning, with what's going to work for them right now.

...So there's a brief intro into promoting even more value producers who are helping people to get on the right track to fat loss and health every day, mixed results included. Fortunately, there's so much value being published and promoted to help people right now, by so many and so frequently, I have neither time to read everything thoroughly, or to blog about them all individually (this is a good, non squeaking-pip thing). However, I have looked at each of these books, wandered here and there in them, and I can honestly recommend them as excellent resources for anyone, even children in one case.

Dr. John Briffa has been kind enough to email a few times about this post or that post I've done, and I'm always surprised and humbled to get noticed by him in that way.

I was even more surprised when a few months back, he emailed me with an advance PDF of his book and that this FTA blog got a mention in the resource section at the end. I loved what he wrote, too.

"Richard writes a good and irreverent blog..."

Later, in email he told me it was better to be irreverent than irrelevant, and I promised to do my best to hold up my end.

Escape the Diet Trap is a template for a the sort of meta-diet-book I'd like to see going forward. A lot of it is about unravelling what has proven not to work: low-fat, exercise, eat less, etc. Oh, and diet, diet, diet. And move more, more, more. Enough, already. Humans don't work that way.

It's sort of a low-carber's intro to a more paleo or primal way of looking at things and includes even breaking through plateaus with fasting and exercise. This is near and dear for me. Lot's of originality and synthesis in this book. has their already not been enough written? Isn't it time to synthesize and show what may be wrong and what may be right?

Unfortunately, the book is still not available in the US via Amazon (a few used copies appear to be available). So, if you can get it via the UK Amazon site, go for it.

So what can I say more about the amazing Stacy and Matthew? I was so enamored with what these two accomplished with not only themselves, but their kids, I decided to do a 2-part interview series. You can see part 1 here, and part 2 here, including my silly commentary on the whole thing.

My delight was to me, palpable, as this was all going down. I don't think I've ever been so enamored with demonstrated life change. The next time you hear it's about the children, think of Matt & Stacy.

I didn't really know at the time that Stacy and Matt had designs of their own to help people, parents and children alike. While I absolutely knew they weren't Squeaking Pips by any means, I didn't really know that they were keeping their awesome talents for being values to so many others a bit closely held.

But low and behold, I got a book in the mail one day and it's simply insane as a way you might be able to outcompete the kids who come to school every day with bags of junk that your kids envy.

...I have it on very good authority from many sources that the way to do this thing is to send your kids to school with leftovers of the real food almost no kid has ever seen. Once your kids are envied for their varied, delectable lunches, you will have hit them at the right social spot, and they'll be paleo zealots. Then, you'll have another issue to deal with, but you're starting from a better point.

Buy enough copies of Eat Like a Dinosaur to have your kids give it away a few to friends, creating even more resentment and envy.  That's the Free the Animal way to go about things politely.

Dean Dwyer isn't funny at all, which is his major problem. And, he seems to attract more women to his increasingly popular blog than men. What's that all about?

To see just how much more funny I can be than Dean; he, in desperate hopes of getting you to conclude the contrary, did a 2-part video interview with me: part 1 and part 2. There was enough footage for 4 parts. I guess he gave up. Good move.

Another good move on his part was to get his butt busy writing a book from his unique perspective. One might call it a book on life & shift change epistemology, only he's not funny, and women seem to love him. And Oprah's off the air.

So where does he go? He continues to strive to be as funny and captivating as possible, only not so much as to ever eclipse me, which would be a tough nut to crack.

You can love Dean as I do, even though he's way less funny. Toss him a bone anyway, and get a copy of Make Shift Happen. Do it for his harem. Buy another or two for your depressed women friends because Oprah's off the air.

Solid, quick work, Dean.

As funny as Dean is not, way hot is Ashley (image Google Ashley Tudor). You ought to buy her book Sweet Potato Power on that premise alone, because way hot girls get certain privileges, ordained by evolution and base survival. And it so sucks for not-so-hot guys. That's why some of us have to be funny, and why things can get so tough for Dean.

It was on the heals of one of my posts about starches that I got wind of Ashley's book. "Someone just wrote a book about sweet potatoes?" "No way." "Really?" "Sweet p-o-t-a-t-o-e-s?" "A whole book?"

Indeed. And I got two copies. One from the publisher and another directly from Ashley with TABS PASTED IN IT. Obviously, she thinks I'm more sciency than hot. ...There was no phone number.

It's easily one of the more smashing and original books in Paleoland. And, it's not only about sweet potatoes. If you want something to really munch down on, try this out. I'll be using it in an upcoming post on what I think is the most important thing about paleo, and it's not anti-nutrients. It's nutrients.

Dallas & Melissa Hartwig.

I have a confession to make. For various reasons having zero to do with anything they have ever done or contemplated, I was not a fan of them...Whole 9, Whole 30, or whatever. I didn't promote them ever, never tried to reach out at AHS11.

My bad.

The truth is, I have no good excuse for why—and the best excuse is only a poor excuse anyway. I guess someone emailed me once, dissed then about how strict they were...I'm busy, and so I let a random email substitute for my own impression and judgment.

Then one day I decided to look into it and it's fitting that they're the last edition to this edition. They are superstars in their passion to create, build, learn, tweak, and, and, and, help people who so need it. Do they know the science? Yes. Does it matter. Sure, but in context. Must one know, understand and cross their chest with the science before they can be helped? I don't think so, and I don't think Dallas or Melissa think so either.

I'm a fan. The book is great, only having skimmed through parts of it. But here's a very thorough review from someone I trust: Stefani Ruper, who will soon have a guest post up here, likely about women's issues.

...Dean: you better put that one on your calendar.

Steve Cooksey Sues the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition in Federal Court: 1st Amendment; Free Speech

While controversy rages in my Paleo circles owing to individual values, choices, assessments, allegiances, bias—and who you'd rather get drunk with—let's take time away from the window breakers (ref: Bastiat) to highlight and celebrate someone who has never done anything but try to help average folks who don't read PubMed or medical journals, and don't really care much whether the science is all in, good or bad.

Their lives are at stake. They care mostly about themselves. And, because they need to.

So while some choose to pinch pimples amongst largely like minded folks, others choose to spend their limited time finding values and helpful information here and there, test it on themselves and—where it pans out, here and there—pass it on.

...I first blogged about my friend Steve Cooksey way back in 2009. More recently, I did what turned into 3 posts about his problems with the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition:

That's the background for those who want to dig deep. Those, however, who insist the science has to be in before they can eat breakfast in the morning, may be disappointed: Steve is a straightforward, smart guy who really, honest to God, helps people. Does it include a little "bad science" here and there, or up-for-grabs science? Maybe. Could be.

America is messy. That was the point.

Y'see, Americans who really get the sprit of the ethic of the thing, kinda grok that everyone lies, everyone effs up, everyone behaves at times in a manner that would not be considered their best. America is about being willing to take the risk in dealing with whomever you want—even if you make a non-optimal choice.

Whatarewe? Idiots? Go ahead. Fool my stupid ass. Teach me a lesson! Let's see how well I do next time. "Idiot" ought to be contextual in time. It usually is, and that's America Underground. The story underneath the story.

...I contend that Steve, even if not perfect always, is a counter to average idiocy, as are many other individuals in myriad ways. However, who is to arbitrate that sort of complexity? Or, is it way too complex when freedom to speak is a value at stake...and then, shouldn't everyone just be left to figure it out for themselves? I'm not a fan of the state—as everyone who who reads me knows—but the 1st amendment is Darwinian in terms of information. And I'm a fan of Darwin; and more importantly, what that means in the long view. And I think: you ought to be too. That's my advice—while still legal to give it.

And so, yes, Steve is suing the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition in Federal Court, backed by a bunch of really bright Constitutional lawyers at the Institute for Justice, led by the well spoken Jeff Rowes. Thanks to Steve, Bob Ewing at The Primal Challenge (and Director of communications at IJ), and of course Jeff, for giving me the opportunity to have the scoop on this story a full day and a couple hours ahead of the official announcement and press conference.

Can the government throw you in jail for offering advice on the Internet about what food people should buy at the grocery store?

That is exactly the claim made by the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition. In December 2011, diabetic blogger Steve Cooksey started a Dear Abby-style advice column on his popular blog ( to answer reader questions. One month later, the State Board informed Steve that he could not give readers advice on diet, whether for free or for compensation, because doing so constituted the unlicensed, and thus criminal, practice of dietetics. The State Board also told Steve that his private emails and telephone calls with readers and friends were illegal, as was his paid life-coaching service. The State Board went through Steve's writings with a red pen, indicating what he may and may not say without a government-issued license.

But the First Amendment does not allow the government to ban people from sharing ordinary advice about diet, or scrub the Internet—from blogs to Facebook to Twitter—of speech the government does not like. North Carolina can no more force Steve to become a licensed dietitian than it could require Dear Abby to become a licensed psychologist.

That is why on May 30, 2012, Steve Cooksey joined the Institute for Justice in filing a major free speech lawsuit against the State Board in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division. This lawsuit seeks to answer one of the most important unresolved questions in First Amendment law: When does the government's power to license occupations trump free speech?

But I'll get to the well spoken Jeff in a minute. In the meantime, this Englishman somehow makes a good narrator for all things caveman.

That's pretty damn clever.

Finally, I got Jeff Rowes on Skype a few days back to get a lead attorney take on this whole case, what it means in the large, and did a bit of devil's advocacy. Take a look.

See also this IJ video on the explosion in occupational licensing in the US.

For Justice. For advancement. For celebrating and lauding values. For rationally accounting for error that everyone's susceptible to. For dumping those who fake notoriety by being squeaking pips.

I Guess James Krieger Wants to Fuck With Me. Let’s Go, James.

My identical comments at his identical postings here (awaiting moderation) and here. I have to draft another post for the morning, 9:30 am EST, and it has to publish precisely to military precision and when you see it, you'll understand why. So, you'll have to read Fuckface Keieger's stupid post yourself, where he tries to impress you with his stock trading prowess by means of overwrought, non-sequitur and just plain stupid analogy. ...Which is no surprise, as he can't even beat himself out of a wet paper sac on the meaning of hypocrisy.

Of course, that moron cunt Evelyn at CarbSane couldn't wait to suck his cock over it (comments).

James is also a master of Latin phrases for logical fallacies.

Laf. If so, it's probably the first time she ever heard of them.

Alright, my comment. Tear it to shreds if you like.

Ha, and yet here I sit, such a fan of "Larry the Liquidator."

But, as Larry explained in that speech at the stockholder's meeting, it was time to cash out. This wasn't breaking windows to "create value," it was redeploying assets to more profitable uses. And if people care to, they can see just how many times I admonished Evelyn to "redeploy" her assets during our exchange, when she dropped 85 comments on my blog in the 2 or 3 Kruse posts I did.

...There's nothing hypocritical about beating up on a bully, taking stuff from a thief, or killing a wanton murderer. Your thinking is laughably muddled here. A better case for hypocrisy and one tougher for me to defend, is that I often rail against various reporters, dietitians, and even researchers whom I often refer to as "grant whores." There, I'm going against CW and institutionalized dogma that has clearly failed; as people keep getting fatter, more diabetic, more unhealthy. The individuals are simply convenient cross-hair targets of opportunity. I don't keep chasing and chasing those individuals.

The problem with the pump & dump analogy is that there are people who signed up for the risks and they're on both sides of the trades. You don't call it right on all your trades, either, James; and sometimes, it was because you got effed for whatever reason by those luckier, smarter, or with better information than you. I traded options full time for about 3 years—credit spreads on the SPX—so I do have a bit of familiarity with the terminology of the square analogy you're trying to force into a round situation. I was totally agnostic as to market direction. At any one time, I'd have as many short spreads as long—they were simply placed at different times, in different contexts.

I'm not arguing against scientific critique. I went after Evelyn, again, because she seems to me to just want to entirely discredit Lustig rather than politely point out whatever errors she thinks he's making while acknowledging a lot of the good he has done like raise awareness—which to me comes down to: drinking a lot of sugar in juices, sodas and energy drinks that don't satiate is very likely to have you eating several hundred calories a day more than you need. Here's an example of a critique I love:



"Part of the issue is about balancing the argument. I think we can learn a lot from someone like Robert Lustig because he has done the knowledge translation piece so well. Whether he's done it intentionally or not, he has brought a lot of attention to his issues. On the other hand, we’ve done -- at least the people with a more balanced view -- a very poor job at trying to communicate that balanced view. Yes, there may be some signals [that fructose has an adverse effect] or, no, there aren't, or it may be conditional on energy. With all the nuances, we’ve done a pretty bad job at communicating it as opposed to the simple message of "Fructose at any level is poison." We're trying to say it depends on the dose, it depends on the energy, and that’s a hard message to communicate. We've been dwelling on harm. We’ve been saying "Well, it doesn’t support harm except where there is excess energy.""

But then there's all this stuff asserting that he even thinks whole fruit is bad when I am quite certain I heard him say on either or both of the Jimmy Moore podcasts he did that fruit is good (because it has fiber, which satiates).

So, to return to the very poorly thought out trading analogy, you might consider that the stock that just got pumped to $120 isn't worth that, and soon people are going to figure that out, so go short. But you probably don't think it's worth zero (and trying to drive it to zero would likely involve securities fraud, not to mention plain unethical) and probably no less than $80.

So, in reality, the analogy you're offering actually supports my contention as concerns Evelyn. Tell me she's not trying to drive the stock of Taubes, Naughton, Moore, and now Lustig to zero. If you short enough shares and a stock does go effectively to zero then well, you get to go live the rest of your days on a tropical island with luscious brown skinned girls serving you drinks with fruit and umbrellas in them. And your conscience is clear.

A stock only goes to zero when it _should_ go to zero and I assume you know why.

I saw you cross posted this and so I'll cross post this comment as well. I saw mention on the other post about Colpo and whole grains. First off, I'm on good terms with Anthony. Secondly, I told him Martin is cool, but he kinda made fun of me for that. Perhaps in time. On the whole grains issue, this is another area where my thinking is evolving. I used to buy into the whole anti-nutrient thing. Could be something there, but I think it pales in comparison to nutrient density. Grains are plain bankrupt nutritionally, which is why they're often "fortified." Simply put, grains (and sugar) crowd out high quality nutrition.

Compare equal caloric portions of bread to either beef liver or salmon:

One day I'm going to actually calculate it out nutrient by nutrient. I think it's safe to say that liver is thousands of % more nutritious and salmon hundreds of %.

Even fruit:

Takes 5 pounds of mixed fruit to equal the nutrition of 4 ounces of liver. So, this is really my focus with Paleo: nutritional density.

To wrap up an egregiously long comment, Evelyn and others like her, who have largely built whatever attention they have on the backs of people like Taubes, Naughton, Moore, Lustig, still haven't figured out that "bad science" is not really what it's all about if you care about people dropping the weight and improving health. Both good and bad science got us into this mess and both good and bad science will get us out. What's important is personality, drive, sensation, conniving, influence, and a whole list of human attributes people pay attention to, in the end.

If you were real scientists, you'd understand that as the meta-science. Yes: good and bad results can be obtained by good and bad science. In the end, the best salesman wins. Thousands of people, including myself, can credit Taubes, et all, with being that one thing that got us on the right track.

And as for Lustig, isn't it so awful that perhaps thousands of people might be questioning the idea of having their kid down a quart or more of fruit juice per day because it's cheap and "healthy," all based on "bad science."

Alright Jamie. Ball's in your court, fuckhead.

First Cryo-Therapy Session. Sub-300 degrees below zero F for 3 minutes

Here's what the thing looks like.

IMG 0944
Torture Chamber

Not really. It's so surprisingly easy to do. and Tore Gustafsson from Sweden says he treats people in their 80s. My initial reaction? Drugs are overrated. I still like my cold water dips of course. This is simply another tool in the toolbox. I'm about 30 minutes out of the chamber and continue to have just an aura of well being that seems to even be increasing. The effect is supposed to last for quite some time, ramping up metabolism, with a calorie burn in the ends of between 600-800 kcal per session.

They are purported to be cumulative, in that it trains your body to run at a higher metabolic rate 24/7, with regular sessions. 2-3 per week for a few weeks, then backing off to once per 7-10 days according to Tore. He's a way cool guy, by the way.

I'm not going to divulge Tore's prices, because I don't want to muck stuff up for any other small businessman out there, or for Tore. Negotiate your own deal.

So, he shot a video of part of the deal.

Alright, find one in your local area if you can. This one is Viking Performance in Los gatos, CA.

...Alright. I have to get ready. My brother arranged for a limo from his place in Sunnyvale up to San Fran, to visit two of world renowned chef Michael Mina's places; first RN74. Then we'll go to Michael Mina—namesake restaurant—where I'm told both Michael Mina and Jeremy Tyler of the Golden State Warriors will be joining us for dinner.

A Quick Note on CT Science & Tweaking: I’m going -300 F

Tomorrow by this time, I'll have gone into the chamber of cold death.

Just talked to the guy at Viking CryoTherapy in Los Gatos, CA. He has a facility within about 5 minutes from me. A commenter hooked me up. We talked a while about my background with things, and he agreed to hook me up with the max.

-300 degrees fahrenheit, somewhere between 2.5 and 3 minutes in the gauntlet. Liquid nitrogen fueled. I'm taking a camera and hope to report back.

...Later, if I survive.

Remember: No woo. No asteroids; just rational science, individual experimentation and results. Even if an asteroid did hit thousands of years ago and shaped human evolution, you're still the fuck on you're own right! Get over it, get fucking used to it, and most particularly, quit listening to fucking gurus.

Additional Secrets of the Universe: Paleoish Corn Dogs

Don't you just love corn dogs?

While "femmes importantes" are now setting their sites on the "sins" of the great Robert Lustig...because, hey, that's what happens when you have no value to add to anyone, pretending instead you offer value by tearing down value...I'm off on a different track, and will continue to do so. It was fun engaging the cunt while it lasted.... Onward.

Right across the street and on the corner opposite the main gate of the Yokosuska Navy Base—on the peninsula quite a bit south of Tokyo—is a shop that does about the best finely ground black peppery chicken or shrimp fried rice I've ever had—that they prepare on the skillet in front of you and its fun to watch how the egg gets integrated; and in fact, though I don't know the recipe, lots of finely ground black pepper has always been essential for good fried rice, for me.

...But when you wander back, drunk & 1am or later, maybe you want a corn dog instead...and they were set up for that, for the totality of the 5 years I had there, in attendance in the latter 80s. They had an window to the street, kinda like convenience stores that're open late now—only for different reasons.

My only problem was that whatever dough recipe they used, it was inferior to what I knew as a kid...that with a solid, unmistakeable outer crunch and thin bread between...and then the mustard. If you put catsup on your corn dog, you're going to Hell. Sorry. I can't save you. You're lost, irredeemably. So, yea, that crunch thing and thin breading was replaced by a decidedly more doughy feeling and soft outer layer, necessitating the prerequisite of being somewhat drunk first. ...Inebriation doesn't only make ugly & fat girls pretty.

I have solved that little dilemma, however, in a Paleoish way. Crunch is paramount.

IMG 0938
First, 3 and only 3 ingredients, and I don't give a fuck about your kitchen sink concoctions

You can grill or otherwise cook your dog, but for ease, I have found that 25 seconds in the nuking machine gets the right balance of warn out of the fridge, little to no fat being wasted by pouring out on the plate.

IMG 0939
You must prepare the tortilla properly. Crunch. Use the gas stove

If you don't have a gas stove, you can do it with en electric directly on the burner. Just turn it almost constantly and keep the setting at medium low. Takes more time and attention, but doable. If you do your tortilla in some sort of oil, microwave it, or whatever fucking stupid thing you might have in mind, well, you ought to got straight to hell, along with the catsup-corndog abusers. I have no use for you in my increasingly small universe.

IMG 0940
A dolup of mustard on the side, just in case

Then, you eat it, of course.

IMG 0941
The tortilla cracks

If the tortilla doesn't crack, it's not crunchy enough and you're lost. Just lost. Comment in, and I'll try my best to save your soul from eternal damnation, in spite of the fact that's what you really deserve.

...But I'm a sucker for redemption.

Fried Egg “Sandwich” Tacos

If you dind't have fried egg sandwiches as a kid, I'm sorry to say that you will probably never, ever be up to the task of understanding all the Secrets of the Universe. It's simply a prerequisite.

...White bread, mayo on both slices spread liberally so as to ooze, an egg fried in butter—yolk broken and flipped—a dash of salt and lots of finely ground black pepper, left to cool down to warm, a slice of cheese is optional and totally appropriate now and then...and then finished off with enough catsup to ooze out along with the mayo.

Back in the Navy, and being always in WestPac and thereabouts for my first 5 years, we ended up in Pusan, Korea often enough, for R&R. Probably about 15 visits for me. What do I remember almost the most? Fried egg sandwiches. $1 each (mid 80s). They used hamburger buns, but there was nothing like coming out of the bar scene at 1 or 2 am, and smelling that cart.

But what to do now? I only eat bread as an infrequent indulgence. Well, some time back Bea and I incorporated quality corn tortillas. I may have blogged about it but I forget. Neither of us has any issue with them and the thing is, now we feel pretty free to go out to mexican because we so like the corn, I don't think either of us has even been tempted to have a flour tortilla in a long while.

But I get quality ones, whether from Trader Joe's or Whole Foods. Often, it's just organic, sprouted corn, filtered water and lime juice. That's it.

So, here's a Fried Egg "Sandwich" Taco.

IMG 0933
Fried in butter, break the yolks and flip
IMG 0934
Let eggs cool to warm as you toast the tortillas directly over the gas flame
IMG 0935
Mayo on the tortilla, egg, black pepper and catsup
IMG 0936

Alright, so no, I don't bother to make my own mayo or catsup, anymore. Tradeoff: it sucks. I use Trader Joe's. Their mayo is "organic" canola, whatever the fuck that means. What it means to me is that a single jar lasts me about 4-6 months. Same with their organic catsup with no HFCS or a 2" long list of unpronounceable ingredients. Your mileage may vary. If it serves your time and interests to make your own, go for it.

But, consider that in making your own to exacting Paleoish standards—I'm sure—might make you worse off, because you might end up eating a whole lot more mayo and catsup (overindulgence because it's doctrinal) than we do, or that you ought to...

This isn't an everyday thing. I just discovered this, and when I do that, It's overindulgence for a week, getting better after two, and a now and then thing after three.

Go with it.

Now just wait. Soon, I might show you the most absolutely delicious corn dogs you've ever tasted. And they beat, hands down, a deep fried one. If you imagine, you can probable get where I'm going.

Can Gay or Effeminate Males be Masculine?

There's an implicit contradiction in the title, on purpose. If you're friends with a good number of gay males, as I have been for a long time, you know they run the gamut from "queens" to very masculine, and everything in-between. Sometimes, they can turn it on and off, just like anybody behaves different ways according to circumstances.

But naturally effeminate males might not be gay at all. See the "weirdness?"

My wife and I count a whole lot of gay/lesbian single people and couples as good and close friends, for a long time. We've attended wedding-esque things, and even a funeral. Some have been together for going on 30 years; some are promiscuous, and some, you'd never have a clue about their "gayness."

It's kinda like...people. Go figure.

Anyway, owing my experience, I was interested in this video from Reason I saw earlier today, Joel Stein. Googling around, it seems he likes to be somewhat ambiguous about where he's really at. Here's an example, which is pretty funny.

Anyway, Joel Stein on his Stupid Quest for Masculinity. There's a level of unabashed honesty from both host Tim Cavanaugh and Joel I really like.

"I went into the book thinking that being a man, in reality, was about being loyal, and being present, and being honest," says Joel Stein, author of the new book, Man Made: A Stupid Quest for Masculinity. "And then I found out that's bullshit. Being a man is about being kneed in the face by [mixed-martial-arts fighter] Randy Couture."

Have at it in comments if you wish.

News: You Read the Blog of a low level narcissist/sociopathic abuser

I'm not sure this book review qualifies, but here it is. Food & Nutrition, purportedly, the "Magazine of the World's Largest Organization of Food and Nutrition Professionals." Evidently, they haven't gotten the memo that they're not only total fucking failures over 40 years or so, but have likely morphed into the Magazine of the World's Largest Organization of Pimps & Whores for Advertiser Dollars."

Reviewed by Melissa Joy Dobbins, MS, RD, LDN, CDE

Claims: The author shares his tips for eating, fasting and exercising “as wild humans did for millennia,” including how to embrace your primal cravings for animal fats and fiber-rich plant sources, stop listening to the “experts” and start tuning into the body’s natural signals. This book claims to help readers lose fat, gain muscle and unleash the energy of the animal inside them. He touts Paleo power in preventing allergies, diabetes and cancer, and states that it may be possible to cure or at least slow your cancer by eating a low-carb, high-fat diet.

Synopsis of the Diet Plan: Nikoley recommends eating “real food” such as meat, organ meats, poultry, fish and shellfish, vegetables (limit potatoes), some fruits (berries and melons primarily), nuts, fats (lard, tallow, butter, ghee, coconut oil, red palm oil, olive oil), whole fat dairy and heavy cream (preferring “raw” milk if available). Foods to avoid include grain-based products, processed foods, certain fruits, potatoes and vegetable/grain/seed oils such as canola, sunflower, safflower and corn. Nikoley is a proponent of “intermittent fasting,” and recommends exercising for one hour per week, but avoiding cardio because it is “catabolic and makes you hungry.”

Nutritional Pros and Cons: Nikoley admits to having no health credentials or training and that his research consists of what he finds on the Internet. He criticizes mainstream science and health “experts,” stating that “not only is mainstream dietary advice wrong, it is maiming and killing those who follow it.”

Bottom Line: This diet would be very difficult for most people to follow, let alone naturally desire. Based more on science fiction than science fact, Nikoley’s recommendations are misguided and reckless, especially his advice to drink raw milk, which is strictly against FDA and CDC recommendations.

Besides the 22 out of 25, 5-star reviews for my Book on Amazon, a commenter on the Facebook Page of Ancestrialize Me pretty much summed it up—and I'll just respectfully, and with a solemn nod in his general direction, leave it to Paul Lussier, as my complete response; and thank you, Paul.

To whom it may concern,

On Page 30 of this month's Food & Nutrition magazine you reviewed Richard Nikoley's book, "Free the Animal". In your review, you claimed, "This diet would be very difficult for most people to follow, let alone naturally desire. Based more on science fiction than science fact, nikoley's recommendations are misguided and reckless..."

Richard's diet is based on eating real, natural, and unprocessed food. Items occurring in a natural, unprocessed state, such as eggs, meat, poultry, seafood, vegetables, fruits and nuts. These are items which our ancestors have eaten for millions of years, and, by the evidence that we exist today, they were fairly successful eating such foods.

Your statement above implies that you do not believe it is possible to thrive by eating real, natural, and unprocessed food, and therefore, by implication, we would be better to consume a diet consisting of unnatural, processed, and man-made food products. Given that we have approximately 2.5 million years of evidence backing up Richard's claims, what evidence does Food & Nutrition have to back up its implied claims to the alternative?

Given that a vegetarian diet, which is also a whole, natural, and unprocessed foods diet, are we to now believe that being a vegetarian or vegan is also unhealthy, misguieded, and reckless ? Why would Richard's diet be considered "misguided and reckless" or "difficult to follow, let alone naturally desire", yet a vegetarian or vegan diet would be considered healthy and simple to adopt? There's really only one difference, and that would be Richard's inclusion of animal-based protiens and fats, to which, biologically, the human body is very naturally and evolutionarily adapted.

Are you really saying that most people would find it difficult to eat bacon and eggs for breakfast, or consume a salad with some tuna, or last night's left-overs for lunch, or have steak, chicken, pot-roast, or roast ham for dinner with a side of carrots, sweet potato, or eggplant? And can you please explain how eating this way is either misguided or reckless? Because I'm at a loss to understand these statements in your review. Most people I know eat as I've described on a fairly regular basis, though, not necessarily at every meal.

Thank you for time, I look forward your response, either privately, or in print.

Paul Lussier

But I have a quibble with Melissa Joy Dobbins [lottsa letters, intended to get you to take her on her authority over yours], though. I prefer "dangerous" to "reckless." Reckless? Please.

Thick skin all around. And I love that, qua base ethic.

Changing gears...

Enough of pussy people, whose great achievement in life is to shout from the rooftops...about how they've been "offended"—claiming victimhood as a badge of horror...uh, honor. Steve Hughes ridicules every single one of you types, so I'll just summon him, via the God of YouTube (pretty much better than any god I was ever indoctrinated with, under fear of eternal torture—and YouTube is tantamount to omniscience to boot).

Now, where might I have seen anything about that, lately? Aww, it's at the address Evie Dearest resides. She doesn't like me calling her Evie. But you have to read comments to get that, and see my response. Don't worry about it. She'll keep the decent traffic spike if she can, and I'm a sucker for redemption anyway. Read her stuff if you like it.

Apparently, she has some weird crawly thing up her important ass for how I didn't exactly come clean about Kruse in precisely the exact right way, and giving him a pass for inconsistencies along the way, over that month I supported him's a super important deal. Apparently, I should have been doing regular colonoscopies, reporting results to you—my trustworthy readers—who can't help but hang on my every word. Either that, or actually get through her entire post—which I simply can't. It's just fucking boring to me, and it's about me....Perhaps you can; perhaps it matters to you, and if so, that's fine.

I'll just sit around and lament the fact that when you come clean on something...that's when you open yourself up the worst. I get it. I have no illusions about "important" people like Evie Dearest.

...Interestingly, the comments don't really go in total to how I somehow botched my mea culpa. What's far more important is that Evie Dearest seems to have a good number of "important" women commenters; they like to hang out there and get their massages—about how it's all the fault of all these guys touting Paleo and LC, but they're wrong this way and that way, and by implication, their average important "importantness" is all those guys' fault.

But again, you'd have to scan through the current 55 comments to get at least a notion of the gist at which I'm getting. I could be wrong. As always, you get to judge for yourself, including me.

But in closing, I have to go all wooo on you. That's the commenter—and I have no idea her background but it's implied she's a medical professional—who tagged me as I report in the title to the post.

Like a true sniveling coward, Nikoley jumps on the Kruse-bashing wagon when his ego no longer sustains electrical jump start thrills by being associated with his (heavily disgraced) name. Kruse has reached such epic levels of public ridicule and unpopularity Nikoley is sustaining narcissistic injury just by being associated with him. This public lambasting of his supposed ex"friend" demonstrates the appalling lack of integrity of Nikoley. The more he attempts to redeem himself, the more he shows what a truly abhorrent individual he is. It's like watching someone struggle in quicksand. Now we know Nikoley is not only a coward, a misogynist, someone with a profound abusive streak, and a liar ("cunt is a term of endearment!") but we also know he has no personal integrity and freely snitches/rats on his buddies for personal gains, a turncoat.

Wow, all you readers better beware. Itsthewooo has the woo. And the shit. Don't you know how to psychoanalyze/deconstruct all in one breath? And she didn't even have to spend thousands on a private eye to get all dirt on me she could; because, I just give it to everyone openly on my blog.

Who's the real fool, here? The stupid sucker?

As an aside, not only was her blog recommended to me in a comment thread a while ago, but I remember her from way back in Stephan's comments at Whole Health Source (I see she's taken to dissing him too, but not for the same reasons, of course). More.

The respectable thing would be to, like Rob Wolf, and pretty much everyone else, would be to slowly distance yourself from this (crazy nut) person. Make it known you do not agree with their endorsements/statements/claims in a tactful way. No one expects one to be chained to a mentally ill pathological liar for life, but the professional/stable/mature thing would be to slowly, quietly, non-dramatically part ways with them.

Yea, that's what she would do, because she's a cunt-head wanker. I'm not. When I'm a fuckhead, I'm a fuckhead, and the only way to quit being a fuckhead is to stop being a fuckhead—NOW. My advice: when you see you're being a fuckhead, stop being a fuckhead, immediately.

In a follow-on comment—and I did offer to have her send me a bill for the free psychoanalysis.

NPD / antisocial traits seem disturbingly common amongst "paleos" as this silly religious cult emphasizes grandiosity, egocentricity, and has a marked emphasis on disregarding modern society. This is appealing to a narcissistic psychopath, as appealing as the atkins diet is to someone who likes hamburgers and bacon.

Nikoley himself shows classic signs of being a low level narcissist / sociopathic abuser, which may be the very thing that lead him to worship other successful narcissistic / sociopathic icons like Jack Kruse or the character in the Baldwin movie he shamelessly admitted to idolizing.

Oh, sorry, I shamefully idolized Baldwin in that clip... but only for those who took it the one way. For those who took it the other, that, that, was indeed shameless.

Alright, to now finally wrap this up, a closing video for narcissist abusers, or even self-abusers alike, everywhere. Lords of Acid, The Most Wonderful Girl, from the 1993 flick, Sliver, with ...OMG, the sexiest Sharon Stone at her bestest.

Eat your hearts out, Evie Dearest and Co. ...You femmes importantes. Turn it up.