Suppose you ate a vegetable and there was some sort of trace toxin or anti-nutrient in it. Just imagine having a toxin or anti-nutrient in a vegetable. I know. It’s hard.
But, supposing you could, you could write a blog about that.
You could even write a New York Times piece about that. Oh. Wait. That’s about meat, again. So sorry. Can’t seem to find a current, mainstream article about this-or-that toxin or anti-nutrient in any plant where, if isolated and ingested with abandon causes Bad. Shit. To. Happen.
…I’m giving the benefit of the doubt that Bad. Shit. found in red meat is really Really. Bad. Shit. I actually haven’t read the article. Have you? Silly. Time waster. You see, deconstruction is easy. Or, in the words of Sam Harris the other day, in a post most paid no attention to because It. Wasn’t. About. Diet.
A general point about the mechanics of defamation: It is impossible to effectively defend oneself against unethical critics. If nothing else, the law of entropy is on their side, because it will always be easier to make a mess than to clean it up.
Everything I post is pretty much about everything I post. It’s. All. Connected.
The bottom line is that any and all critiques of basically real food are properly dismissed out of hand for the violation of evolution. I could go on and on, but we’re still locked into the Christianesque notion of Original Sin, whether explicitly or more commonly now, culturally and implicitly.
…the haunting fear that someone, somewhere is having a good time. — H.L. Mencken
Or, people seem to have this unnatural, carnal desire to consume flesh, whilst shunning the ethical purity of vegetables unless accompanied by meat and its juices.
But we see it everywhere, even in Paleo. …An example of an unbridled deconstructionist. She’s actually got a gig to speak at the next conference of the very Society she’s been smearing since its beginning. And not only does she smear the Society itself rather than lift a finger or key-on-board to promote it, she refers to it as “Instestral,” and then deconstructs it further when called on it, with meaningless distinctions.
Further. She has, over the years, attempted to deconstruct and smear an enormous percentage of her fellow invited past and present speakers to the event. She found a “toxin.” There’s an “anti-nutrient,” there. Carole Simpson’s CarbSaneR is just dessert. Eddie, a UK LC diabetic—who helps people—is also lending a hand and making fun of her and her sycophants: Carbsane blog Grashow the Gimp returns to the fold!
Punchline: Evelyn’s AHS13 Presentation in Atlanta is to be about beans. Oh, and in addition to Evelyn regularly sockpuppeting her own comments, Grashow looks to be a neighbor, family member or friend.
What does that mean? Just this. There are basically three ways to go in this deal.
- You’re a lazy ass who always takes the easy route. you only pick nits, criticize, and deconstruct what #2 are doing. The existence of #2 is the only reason you can exist in the first place, much like parasites require hosts. You hide the fact that you are incapable of distinguishing largely good from largely bad. You’re a killer of babies and hate even bathwater that comes from clear running natural springs.
- You have a well developed or practiced sense of blinders. Like a workhorse, you just march and pull forward. You generally ignore critics and march on. This enrages critics (#1), and you just march forward again. Eventually, critics find other more willing targets to validate their lazy efforts, just like any parasite searches out the most abiding host. Sisson & Wolf are prime examples, here.
- In contrast to #1, you don’t just feed off #2 and try to weaken them, you rather look for things to synthesize, highlight, integrate and build upon the value they have already created. The goal, being to promote them further so you have more good to pick from, integrate, build, and help yourself in the process. This is my deal and it’s the way Jimmy Moore operates as well. We do it in vastly different ways. He, with his all-comer podcast, for example, and me with just about whatever strikes my fancy in the moment—but always with a mind to help build on or defend #2 against the parasites of #1.
It’s simple. And guess what? The vast majority of Paleoish peeps are of the #2 mindset, so I never get bent out of shape when they criticize me for going after the parasites. That’s actually a good thing. There are some who love the drama but even there, by and large, it’s like a movie for them where the good guys (#2 & #3) win in the end.
OK, gotta go get the camping gear ready for the year’s first outing, tomorrow.