Flexible Good Food Eating

Just a dump of photos of the sorts of things I've been eating mostly, lately. Nope: not particularly Paleo, not particularly low carb, not particularly high carb, not particularly high fat, not particularly low fat. Etc. It's not particularly anything at all.

Rather, at different times, places and circumstances, it's one or more of all of those because it's simply...omnivorous.

I will add that achieving the dietary flexibility to have highly satiating starches lately has virtually eliminated all desire or practice of going out and getting some crap sandwich or burger—or even Taco Bell.

IMG 2149
Chicken & Shrimp Pancit Bihon with Rice Noodles
IMG 2152
Leftover Pancit with Bacon Bits, Orange, Fresh Cabbage & Siracha
IMG 2242
Turkey & Swiss on Lightly Toasted Udi's Gluten Free White
IMG 2248
Classic Beefsteak Tomato & Mayo on Toasted Udi's Gluten Free White
IMG 2254
Leftover Corned Beef & Cabbage with Mustard & Horseradish Sauce on Udi's Gluten Free White
IMG 2258
Grilled Ribeye & Mashed Potatoes with Butter, and Salad Vinaigrette
IMG 2265
Sunny Up Eggs over Baked, Cooled & Wok Fried Potatoes in Juka's Red Palm Oil & Leaf Lard Refried Beans
IMG 2269
Over Easy Eggs, German Fried Potatoes and Medium Rare Fresh Ground Beef Patty at Gunther's
IMG 2273
Mom's Take on Classic Potato Salad with Hardboiled Eggs
IMG 2277
Thai Massaman Beef Curry, made on the fly with Russet Potatoes and TJ's pre-cooked Roast Beef
IMG 2279
Patty Melt with Swiss on Udi's Gluten Free White
IMG 2284
Deviled Eggs topped with Dungeness Crab at Dry Creek Grill
IMG 2283
Peruvian Seared Filet Mignon, Sautéed Onions, Peppers & Tomato in a Roasted Garlic & Chile Sauce. Served with Fried Fingerling Potato, Tacu Tacu, and Salsa Criolla at Ciano's Modern Latin Flavors
IMG 2281
Crispy Plantain and Taro Root Chips with Black Bean Hummus at Ciano's Modern Latin Flavors
IMG 2286
Organic Rotisserie Chicken Fettuccine with Leeks, King Trumpet Mushrooms, English Peas, Smoked Tomatoes, Applewood Smoked Bacon, and Shaved Parmesan at Dry Creek Grill

I saved that pasta dish for last because not only was it my last meal (last evening), but I wanted to relay how it went. Since doing all the stuff with Resistant Starch and the Soil-Based Probiotics, I've done a few experiments both in terms of blood glucose (reported here) and heartburn tolerance, since others have reported such improvements over time. A couple of weeks back, I had some pizza & beer, sure to give me heartburn. Nothing. This was test number two, a pasta dish, probably the worst in terms of getting heartburn. In addition, I had half of that deviled egg app and one Perfect Manhattan, stirred, not shaken.

I waited for the inevitable nuclear heartburn to arrive (especially in combo with hard liquor), but it never did. Does that mean I intend to go out and have pasta regularly? Nope, no need. Because, since things are flexible enough now, I can simply have gluten free pasta which I've found to be pretty damn good, and I can have a few sandwiches every week, also on gluten free. The bottom line? Since adding this degree of flexibility, I am far, far less likely to go anywhere and eat something cheap and crappy.

THE Weirdest thing just happened

I was in the car, listening to the local NPR affiliate as I always do—when not classic rock, or Top-40 Hits.

It was a forum with a host and several local professionals; least, that's what they call themselves—professionals. They really like to use the word a lot to describe themselves. I was told these professionals constitute a $10 billion industry, so good for them, I'm guessing. They were talking what seemed to me to be really weird shit about some deadline that happens April 15th, and they use this 3-letter word to categorize it. My mind flashed to a 5-letter word that might better described what I was hearing, but then I realized that I'm just a citizen, and they're just talking about some sorts of obligations us citizens have. Apparently, that important obligation is that you have to do a bunch of accounting of your affairs that involve any sort of net financial benefit to you, file papers before this certain date (April 15, any given year), or serious shit comes down on you. I couldn't immediately discern whether this was a right, obligation, or privilege of citizenship—or whether it was just best left ambiguous.

Eventually, as I listened, I took it to mean that you're supposed to have trepidation, fear, loathing and above all, submissive obedience to a stranger you were taught was your authority. I was just guessing, though, so just me. But it also seemed to me—on the weirdest level of all—that lots of people actually love all this complexity, accounting, filling out of paperwork...feeling really good about licking a stamp—even driving miles to drop it it a mailbox before The DEADline—right before they turn into pumpkins. Does it mean that if you don't, you're actually dead? I wondered. Or, is it meant to just scare you? I wondered that, too.

In a flash of silly thought, it seemed tantamount to being told to go kneel, do Hail Mary's, and then feel AWESOME! And likewise, I'm not dead! So, is it the exersise that saved me?

I want to know.

For a second, I wondered why I wasn't really feeling it; perhaps, it's because I have a really hard time feeling a sense of guilt when I haven't used force against anyone. But then again, I'm a miscreant of the worst sort.

So I immediately dismissed it as a totally dumb thought (it happens). See, I recalled how, in the 1960s and 70s, tens of millions were persuaded to pay to cover their beautiful hardwood floors with wall-to-wall carpeting, some shaggy. Then, they did away with perfectly functional white appliances in order to pay for ones colored in avocado and harvest gold. ...And the entire nation might now suffer compromised vision owing to the wallpaper that covered perfectly functional white walls. Oh, yea, and wasn't there those very dark, dark, dark cabinets? I think they were touted as Spanish style, or something.

It was all so confusing and complex, and especially in the retrospective; those clever home remodelers paying for those services, being very happy with themselves. They even had friends over to show it all off, so that everyone could share in the mutual joy and comfort of everyone being exactly like everyone else.

On the other hand: forms, boxes, numbers—some numbers being so powerful as to confer security of a social dimension—and thousands of pages of rules (I suspected that the complexity was so that some people could do better—maybe those who can afford "professionals"—than others).

Spending time in perplexed, deep analysis, I think I get it, somewhat. It appears to all be entangled in some earthling concept of services. Oh, I get it—I thought—at first, thinking I had made some bit of sense of it—I know about that! I pay for a lot of services, from the various merchants I deal with daily, to the bills I pay monthly...because the trade seems mostly worth it and I seem to have more and more options. Moreover, Division of Labor is pretty cool, too. Imagine if you had to go bag groceries for 10 hours every week to trade for your family's food—much less cultivate and harvest crops, or raise and slaughter pigs, cows, chicken and fish, between attending to your Alaskan salmon tanks, with seawater piped in from Alaska.

But it was only a wistful euphoria, by which I was captured, blissfully shuttled away into fantasies of absolute security at the expense of others. What services, really? Is it a "service" to me to face deadlines and file paperwork? How is that a service? Or, but is it a service and I was simply confused over who was being served? I'm trying my best, and I think I figured it out. It's apparently a service centered around something they call "internal revenue." When I thought about it, I immediately dismissed the "revenue" part. Duh. Follow the money. It's that "internal" part I found interesting.

I immediately thought of Guido and Vinny, well known in the hood-lore-metaphor. They too provide internal revenue services. But to whom? Yea, I know, they protect all those mom & pops from getting their places broken into, firebombed at 1am, all that. It's why we love to watch movies about them.

Their service to the public is noteworthy and you will do well to file your annual papers with them, not to mention hire a professional (friend of the family) to help you. What's really cool about Guido and Vinny, though, is they really go to lengths to serve. They come to your door so  that it's so easy for you to purchase their services.

They are very competitive service providers. You do not have to drive. You do not have to lick a stamp.

I'm just waiting for the online version, where you can file electronically: TurboGV.com.

How Barack Obama Becomes The Greatest President In US History Without Killing 750,000 Americans

That figure was news to me. I've been winging it with ~650k American "Civil" War dead (don't you just love that oxymoron?) for two decades of writings when I bring it up. Perhaps that's what it takes to be the greatest president, in The Land of the Free. Kill lots of people that lots of other people don't like. Simple equation. Little history lesson. Letter from President Abraham Lincoln to Horace Greely, editor of the New York Tribune, 1862.

As to the policy I "seem to be pursuing" as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free. [emphasis added]

Spoken like a master pragmatist.

Shorter Lincoln: 'Don't you fuckin' get it, man? I'm a politician and as such, seek power over the lives of other people and the more, the better. We euphemistically call it a union; and the constitution and statutes it has enacted; I have sworn to uphold. and I will do so, no matter how many lives it costs.'

The "Civil War" was about secession of the southern states, tied to slavery economically, via unmechanized agriculture; but not about ending slavery in any sort of Enlightenment, moral ideal. Abolition of slavery had a long history, since The Enlightenment, and the first nation to enact laws abolishing slavery was Spain (Leyes Nuevas), in 1542, more than 300 years before the US "Civil War" to "end slavery in the 'free' world." (The only thing that surpasses American hubris is American ignorance, to a degree that might make North Korea blush, some days.)

The root cause of slavery was agriculture. Logic flow:

  1. Agriculture creates many calories, relatively easily available and cheap vs. hunting and gathering.
  2. Relatively easy and cheap calories equals a boon to fecundity and survival of young.
  3. More people.
  4. Requiring more agriculture.
  5. Exponential growth.
  6. Eventually, people are no longer self sufficient.
  7. Vacuum.
  8. Protection racket, euphemistically called Politics.
  9. Non-industrail; so, let subjects starve, or arbitrarily create classes of slaves based on differences and natural antagonism?
  10. Slavery wins out. Gotta protect the political power of having the most influence over the most people.

It's not morality or conscience that ended slavery. They just hitched a ride and have been milking it ever since. What ended slavery was the Industrial Revolution that got started in about 1760 and was in full swing...guess...20-40 years before our most civilized war. OK, so maybe Spain and a few others were acting on conscience in their Abolition. Don't know, for sure.

America largely and officially, was not. It was not! America has no seat at the table over freeing slaves because it was morally abominable to hold slaves. And yet, Americans are like North Koreans on this point of history, and it has fucking irritated me for 2 decades.

I have plenty of hubris over a lot of things, but the American fantasy and hubris over being the shining light in terms of human slavery makes me blush.

...OK, shifting gears and connecting dots, suppose we forget all that and focus on the existing American enslavement of blacks and Latinos? They call it the War on Drugs. I call it the War on American Citizens, but it's really just another "Civil War" that morally depraved Americans just seem to sadistically love—the most sadistic being the most religious; completely not ironic, if you understand their lust for people they don't like being tortured in hell eternally. Let's get started.

According to Sen. Robert Byrd, cosponsor of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, the reason to attach five- and ten-year mandatory sentences to drug trafficking was to punish “the kingpins—the masterminds who are really running these operations”, and the mid-level dealers.

But, the logic of law enforcement is to always go with the least risk, least cost, and just plain easiest—all while showing off their fashion clothing. This is why if you're paying attention, they are praying on peaceful citizens daily and shooting the family dog—probably a combination  of wanting something low-risk to do, combined with a pussy complex...but I'm just guessing.

Federal Judge Mark W. Bennett:

How Mandatory Minimums Forced Me to Send More Than 1,000 Nonviolent Drug Offenders to Federal Prison

Growing up in blue collar Circle Pines, Minnesota, in the 1950s, raised by parents from the “Greatest Generation,” I dreamed only of becoming a civil rights lawyer. My passion for justice was hard-wired into my DNA. Never could I have imagined that by the end of my 50s, after nineteen years as one of 678 federal district court judges in the nation, I would have sent 1,092 of my fellow citizens to federal prison for mandatory minimum sentences ranging from sixty months to life without the possibility of release. The majority of these women, men and young adults are nonviolent drug addicts. Methamphetamine is their drug of choice. Crack cocaine is a distant second. Drug kingpins? Oh yes, I’ve sentenced them, too. But I can count them on one hand. While I’m extremely proud of my father’s service in World War II, I am greatly conflicted about my role in the “war on drugs.”

I'd ask why his government retirement is more important than those lives and his conscience, but it's not the point. It's going to happen anyway. I get that, so I'll give him a pass so long as he maintains a voice of conscience. And it has a certain power: "why are you torturing my conscience like this, for the sake of your politics and irrational fears?"

So, You da Judge. Keep at it, sir.

Keeping with Da Judge, Let's take a look at the facts, just in terms of federal law and conviction, keeping in mind that in total, the Land of the Free incarcerates more citizens per capita than any other nation on earth.

Crack defendants are almost always poor African-Americans. Meth defendants are generally lower-income whites. More than 80 percent of the 4,546 meth defendants sentenced in federal courts in 2010 received a mandatory minimum sentence. These small-time addicts are apprehended not through high-tech wiretaps or sophisticated undercover stings but by common traffic stops for things like nonfunctioning taillights. Or they’re caught in a search of the logs at a local Walmart to see who is buying unusually large amounts of nonprescription cold medicine. They are the low-hanging fruit of the drug war. Other than their crippling meth addiction, they are very much like the folks I grew up with. Virtually all are charged with federal drug trafficking conspiracies—which sounds ominous but is based on something as simple as two people agreeing to purchase pseudoephedrine and cook it into meth. They don’t even have to succeed.

I'd suggest considering a different view. That America is morally depraved and its people—you, voters—directly culpable. I know. you don't care. God & Country, Law & Order. Damnation, Hell, and eternal torture. Turn your Bibles to Chapter X. It all reads the same.

I'll limit this to Federal incarceration and it goes to the post title as to why, which I'll get to shortly. Drug offenders in the Fed system:

  • As of 2013, 99,426 were serving time for drug offenses, about 10% associated with violence. Call it 90K non violent. Interestingly, for all 50 states, "only" 55k are in for possession, while 167K are associated with violence. Since state law typically deals with the adjudication of violent acts, this makes sense. On the other hand, how much of the violence is associated with the presence of laws that make no rational sense to people? "Where there are laws, there will be crime." - Solzhenitsyn
  • As of 2013, 985,000 people were on probation for federal drug offenses.
  • As of 2013, 280,000 people were on parole for federal drug offenses.
  • As of 2013, approximately 500,000 people are in federal and state prison over drug offenses, violent and non-violent combined.

Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution grants unilateral executive power to the president to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." 

So, all that to get to this. President Barack "Choom Master" Obama gets to be the greatest president in our history by the stroke of a pen during his last few days in office. See, he's pretty famous for pleading his duty to "uphold the law" when admonished by common citizen surfs in town-hall publicity stunts, who harangue him for not holding up the Black end of things.

OK, so just enforce the law to convict them, then pardon them all. By my rough calculation, he could free 1,355,000 slaves in prison, on probation, or parole with a single signature—a hugely disproportionate population-based percentage of them black and Hispanic.

Would that fucking rock the world, or what? It would literally gut the whole Drug War and get poor, peaceful folk back to their families—or remove dark specters of federal conviction hanging over their heads—for good. As a bonus, as Presidents love to apologize for the past sins of the nation they execute power over, how about a public apology for the American Disgrace, since Nixon started it? Barack: just say that you were inhaling, when Clinton was in office. That outta do it.

How many state governors would then find the "political will" (one of the funniest fraud-concepts ever) to follow suit and open their prison doors to non-violent offenders and release parolees and those on probation?

It would be so awesome. That's why it would and will never happen. It's complicated, but it turns on the secret handshake between those who hold office, and those who proudly wear lapel stickers every 2-4 years.

Barack Obama is a politician and the Democrat party is far more important than all those lives. So is the Republican party.

Now, voters, go out and wave your party flags, you proud people, you.

One Thousand Words

IMG 0977
 

I miss your Divinity terribly, sir.

Ok, 1,006 words.

I’ll Be Hosting the Famous Livin’ La Vida Low Carb Show

April 28, 2014.

Tim Steele and Dr. BG "Grace" are my unconfirmed but planned guests and they are going to get a grilling about this whole resistant starch deal.

My role, in respect of my benefactor, will be to play it military pro and straight, for his audience.

April 28.

Update: No, folks, it wasn't and is not an April Fools. More accurately, given all the emails, tweets and FB comments by those who were sure it was, it's an April Fools, April Fools joke. How clever is that? A serendipitous deal so outlandish and unexpected, that people aren't going to be fooled. But they are after all.

So, I have now raised the bar and set the standard for all future best April Fools jokes: when people are convinced they're not fooled; but that's what makes them fooled, after all. It's complicated.

To Reiterate, Just In Case You Missed It: No Elevated Ketone Levels in the Inuit

Sorry Low Carb dieters: the Inuit just aren't that into you

Since this post the other day and subsequent exchanging of some emails and comments here & there with those I'd generally consider advocates of very low carb dieting—to include those advocating near perpetual states of ketosis—I've been met with surprise bordering on disbelief that indeed no, the Inuit are no more a "ketogenic society" than anyone else across the planet Earth.

And if not, then there is literally not a shred of any basis that chronic ketosis is a healthy state to be in (and so sorry, but I'm just guessing it's not "nutritional," either).

Let's dive into the three old papers cited in that other post: 1928, 1936, and 1972, all with identical findings.

STUDIES ON THE METABOLISM OF ESKIMOS. Peter Heinbecker. Departments of Biological Chemistry and Physiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis. July 9, 1928.

The main objects of the experiments were to learn whether detectable ketosis exists among Eskimos under natural dietary conditions; the extent to which ketosis develops in fasting and the rate at which it disappears on glucose ingestion; the “carbohydrate tolerance” as indicated by blood sugar curves; and to determine the respiratory metabolism during and after a ketosis-producing fast. [...]

It may be said at once that the Eskimo on his usual dietary shows no ketosis and has high tolerance to ingested glucose. [...]

Eskimos show a remarkable power to oxidize fats completely, as evidenced by the small amount of acetone bodies excreted in the urine in fasting.

[emphasis added; note also that "acetone bodies" and/or acetoacetic acid are what are commonly referred to today as "ketone bodies."]

The paper explains why they're not in ketosis. Two reasons.

  1. Very high protein intake (av. 280 grams/day; fat only 135 grams)
  2. Low carbohydrate, but not very low carbohydrate ("54 gm. of carbohydrate of which the bulk is derived from the glycogen of the meat eaten.")

Accordingly, with super sufficient protein to make glucose from dietary protein, combined with the meat carbs (liver and muscle glycogen) they get from eating raw, fresh kills, they maintain good glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity.

Screen Shot 2014 03 31 at 8 27 24 AM
Normal glucose tolerance with adults receiving about 120 grams 12 hrs after last meal

In order to produce deep ketosis, which the paper explains they were very resistant to, they fasted the subjects for 82 hours. Guess what happened to their glucose tolerance? Shot to hell would be an understatement! This should be a sobering picture for anyone experimenting with prolonged ketosis (starvation).

Screen Shot 2014 03 31 at 8 28 16 AM
280-300, and over 220 for three hours after the same 120 gram dose of glucose

Wow, they must be DEB3ATEEZ! No, they were put into starvation, and in order to spare essential glucose for the brain, the metabolism no longer gave a runny shit about cellular sensitivity to insulin. Yea, really healthy and "nutritional," that chronic ketosis thing.

Now, tell me again how "there's no such thing as an essential carbohydrate."

Now I understand exactly what happened when months ago, thinking 'hmm, maybe there's something to this,' I began eating 4-6 oz. portions of protein rather than 8, 12, 16 or more. Upped the fat, stayed lowish carb, and then when I did have a carby meal, glucose tolerance was shot to hell and I'd see 160-180, even 194 once. I also now understand perfectly why upping my carbs to 100-200 of starch daily restored my tolerance to normal human.

Moving on.

A STUDY OF THE BLOOD LIPOIDS AND BLOOD PROTEIN IN CANADIAN EASTERN ARCTIC ESKIMOS. Arthur Curtis Corcoran and Israel Mordecai Rabinowitch. Department of Metabolism, The Montreal General Hospital, Montreal. December 13, 1936.

Both lived at Dundas Harbour, on Devon Island (lat. 74deg 35'), and had had practically no carbohydrate food other than the glycogen of animals for about 10 months before the tests. In each case, the test was commenced in the fasting state and the concentrations of the different plasma lipoids were determined before and again 1, 2 and 3 hours after administration of the oil. [...]

Also suggestive of an unusual mechanism for the utilization of fat is the absence of ketosis in these natives, whereas the urines of both of Tolstoi's subjects contained acetone. The explanation of this absence of ketosis is not entirely clear. As shown previously [Rabinowitch & Smith, 1936], though the small amount of carbohydrates in the diets may be more than balanced by the potential sugar production from the large amount of protein to keep the ratio of fatty acid to glucose below the generally accepted level of ketogenesis, the respiratory quotient data suggest another mechanism also. That the Eskimo possesses a very active fat metabolism is suggested from some of the data. [emphasis added]

I can hear the VLC/Keto "nutritionists" now: "SEE, LC MAKES UZ A FATZ BUR3RZ!" Yea, but they're not in ["nutritional"] ketosis. They're eating their meat fresh and raw, lots and lots of it (high protein), getting glycogen from it, and it's also plenty enough to ensure robust gluconeogenesis from dietary intake.

They are not putting themselves into a "nutritional" state of starvation by restricting protein along with carbohydrate, in order to consume more micronutrient bankrupt fat, without even resistant, fermentable fibers to ensure vitamin-synthesis by gut microbes—just to ensure keto-hocus-pocus long term. The Inuit are not doing anything like it, have never done anything like it, and would avoid it like the plague if they had ever even conceived of such a harebrained idea.

A final note on this one, because some are surely going to purposely misread the study so they can lie. First of all, as the paper makes clear, this was a study about blood lipids and the differences between different populations, i.e., those eating a "civilized diet," vs. those further north eating predominately their natural diet, except for at most 2 months of the year (remember that number).

In order to determine the efects, if any, of the dietary habits of these natives, the data, as stated, were divided into two groups, namely, (a) those obtained in Hudson Bay and Strait amongst natives who live, to an appreciable extent, upon mixed diets, and (b) those obtained in Baffin and Devon Islands amongst natives whose diets, except for about 2 months in the year, consist of the natural foods of their environment (seal, whale, narwhal, walrus, etc.). A summary of this division of the data is recorded in Table III in which are also recorded, for comparative purposes, the average values found with the same technique amongst civilized peoples. It will be noted that the average concentrations of total lipoids, neutral fat, total fatty acids and phospholipins and the average ratio of phospholipins to total cholesterol were higher amongst the meat-eaters than amongst those whose diets, in addition to meats, consisted also of appreciable quantities of carbohydrates (flour etc.). [emphasis added]

Now, recall what I quoted above:

Both lived at Dundas Harbour, on Devon Island (lat. 740deg 35'), and had had practically no carbohydrate food other than the glycogen of animals for about 10 months before the tests. [...]

...the absence of ketosis in these natives. [emphasis added; plus, 10 + 2 = 12]

...Just so you can keep your liars straight.

ALASKAN ARCTIC ESKIMO: RESPONSES TO A CUSTOMARY HIGH FAT DIET. Kang-Jey Ho, M.D., Ph.D., Belma Mikkelson, B.S., Lena A. Lewis, Ph.D., Sheldon A. Feldman, M.D., and C. Bruce Taylor, M.D. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. August 25, 1972.

Grain products and simple carbohydrates are virtually absent from the diet, as they must be imported from a great distance at considerable cost.

The marine mammals and the herds of caribou, upon which the Eskimos depend, tend to be migratory, and famines occur occasionally, especially during the long dark winters (5, 6). In the summertime, their diet is usually plethoric. In general, they have no fixed time for meals and eat as they please, but they usually do have one good meal toward the end of each day. Much of their food is eaten uncooked, partly from preference and especially from necessity, because fuel is scarce. [...]

Average total daily caloric intake was approximately 3,000 kcal per person, ranging from 2,300 to 4,500 kcal. Approximately 50% of the calories were derived from fat and 30 to 35% from protein [260 grams on average]. Carbohydrate accounted for only 15 to 20% of their calories, largely in the form of glycogen from the meat they consumed. Grain products were scarce and although sucrose was not unknown, the average adult ingested less than 3 g/day, primarily for sweetening tea or coffee.

Are you noticing a pattern here in the composition of diet in all three studies, and that the the VLC, Ketogenic and Zero Carb folks have it conveniently wrong? How many times have you heard over the years that "Atkins is not a high protein diet, it's a high fat diet?" Well, Atkins may indeed be high fat, low to moderate protein, but it certainly doesn't have the Inuit as a healthful population as an example, to justify such tomfoolery—as its proponents seem to do endlessly; nor does it have any other population I'm aware of, either. Moreover, much of that protein was fresh and raw, thus providing significant glycogen (carbohydrate) from meat, another aspect that in no way supports a VLC, Ketogenic, or ZC diet. The entire very low carb phenomenon is in part a charade when it uses these Inuit and other populations to justify doing something so unnatural, so unprecedented!

And sorry, but in all cases in all three studies, protein is 250 grams and upward, on average. Ever tried to ingest that much protein without drinking it? Well, I have: 280g on workout days and 230g on rest days, while doing LeanGains for months. It's high protein. Trust me. I hated that part the most, especially when it had to be combined with lower fat on the workout days, in order to accommodate far higher carbohydrate and stay within total caloric bounds because for Martin Berkhan, it's count calories or go home. So this is another thing Atkins and other VLCers get wrong if in any way thinking they are modeling some natural, proven healthy diet by claiming it's not and should not be very high protein. It's not even close. And by the way, Atkins isn't even a ketogenic diet beyond induction and as I recall, one was supposed to find the level of carbohydrate that would keep him out of ketosis. So, this whole "nutritional ketosis" (an enormous contradiction in terms, incidentally) thing is even a vast departure from Atkins, all the while Atkins is likely too low in protein for many practitioners. What a mess.

Well, no need to delay further, you already know the punchline.

Each Eskimo's serum was tested for the presence of ketone bodies by the strip paper technique (18), which is sensitive to concentrations of 1 mg/ 100 ml or greater and all serums were negative. This does not preclude an increase in ketone body production during this time; usually these substances do not attain noxious concentrations until after fasting periods longer than 50 hr. [emphasis added]

So there you have it. Three studies separated by 44 years, from the West of Alaska to the Hudson Bay, all on Inuit with just about the same high protein dietary ratios, all on their natural diets, and not a single subject in ketosis, ever; and it was more difficult to get them into ketosis than for normal subjects, requiring them to be starved for more than two days straight.

So, what are the lies of commission and omission by advocates of very low carb, ketogenic and zero carb diets we've exposed so far, over the last few weeks?

  1. The poster child Inuit do indeed get carbohydrate, above 50g per day on average, from "meat sugar" (liver and muscle glycogen that's only available in appreciable amounts when fresh and raw). See more here.
  2. The poster child Inuit do indeed get fiber, from meat (glycans in the raw blood, raw meat, raw grisly bits and raw connective tissues that resist enzymatic digestion and the gut microbes take over). See more here. Here too.
  3. The poster child Inuit are never in ketosis unless in a severely fasted state.
  4. The poster child Inuit indeed eat as high protein as possible, in oder to have adequate glucose available, both from the aforementioned glycogen, as well as in sufficient quantity for gluconeogenesis without wasting lean tissue.

In other words, I can't think of a single thing I can recall from VLCers, Ketosis fans, or Zero-Carb zealots about the Inuit that's true and accurate—at least in the context of what their diet actually is and how their metabolism responds to it.

Do you believe this is all an innocent mistake? After all, even the oldest paper, from 1928, seemed to take it as an matter of course that carbs from meat (glycogen) was obvious and well known, and all three papers mention that matter-of-factly.

Accordingly, I think you've been conveniently lied to by some people. Why, would be up to you to form an opinion.

So, what are my closing thoughts, suggestions? It's simple. In order to do LC healthfully, based upon the lowest carbohydrate intake of any population we know about, you:

  1. Get that protein high, and unless I'm not mistaken, this has always been Dr. Mike "Protein Power" Eades' take on LC. Good for him.
  2. Unless you're a hunter out eating your kills fresh and raw, including the offal, then you need to get at least 50g of carbohydrate daily. I'd suggest safe starches (rice, potatoes, traditionally prepared legumes).
  3. Get over the notion that fat is particularly healthful or nutritious. 50% of calories ought to be about the upper limit.
  4. Scroll up and look at the 2nd chart again and get over the notion that a state of prolonged ketosis (starvation) is in any way healthful and does anything but mess up your glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity royally. Inuit have excellent glucose tolerance when eating their natural diet. You don't, if you're keeping yourself in ketosis.
  5. Get over the notion that when in ketosis, eat a piece of birthday cake, and see your BG spike to 200 that "you can't tolerate any carbohydrate." No, you're just confirming a bias based on bullshit information. You've fucked up your tolerance and insulin sensitivity by following shitty, wrong advice. Your fault. Your metabolism is probably fine if you follow the above steps. Expect to have high readings for a few days until you adjust. Toss your meter for a while, so you don't freak yourself out.
  6. Exercise ketosis intermittently. It's called a fast. 1-2 days, once every while. Likely healthful in terms of hormesis and autophagy.
  7. Get resistant fermentable fibers like resistant starch in your diet so that your gut bugs have the substrates by which to synthesize vitamin nutrients. And in order to ensure that you're not feeding empty cages, such as after lifelong occasional rounds of carpet bombing antibiotics, or years of VLC dieting that has starved some of them to extinction, get on some rounds of soil-based probiotics.
  8. Stop being such idiots about all of this.

Alright then. Does that about cover it?

Gut Microbiome and Resistant Starch Roundup

First a bit of The Book update. Tim, Dr. BG and I have completed the first draft and 95% of the content that's going to be in it, is in it. Also, longtime frequent commenter (about 950 comments, going back to 2010) Dr. Gabriela Kadar, DDS contributed a chapter on non-gut microbes (mouth, skin, vajayjay, etc.). Comes in at around 450 pages, but I'm sure that will get trimmed as I go through the 1st editing run, now about 20% through. The references are the the thousands and much of the research published in 2013 and even 2014, is in it.

There's lots of title ideas, but one thing for sure is that it will be for the widest possible audience. Not a "Paleo Book," even remotely. Not a diet book either. It's a book about the other 90% of us, the part ignored to our own detriment for so long. Anyway, this was the title and tagline I had in my mind when I woke up this morning.

Mind Your Gut, Heal Your Body and Mind — The burgeoning new science in the care and feeding of the 100 trillion

So, any suggestions, critiques, input in the comments appreciated. Brevity, please. I also posted this to Facebook, so wherever you prefer to provide input.

~ "Steven Leigh (Univ of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) explores the nature of the primate microbiome with the goal of understanding the impacts of microbiomes on human evolution. His results point to important contributions of microbial ecosystems to the evolution of human diet. He also sees implications for human brain evolution through energy and micronutrients that are produced by microbial taxa. Series: 'CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny'"

~ Dr. Art Ayers of Cooling Inflammation has been busy at work with a series of four very nice posts:

Congratulations on 200 valuable posts, Dr. Art! He probably saw he was at 196 and just had to go get busy.

~ Dr. Norm Robillard of Digestive Health Institute has up a new post about resistant starch:

Resistant Starch – Friend, Foe or Lover ?

Since my first article on resistant starch (RS), raw unmodified potato starch, or RUMPS as I like to call it, continues to light up the blogosphere. Like a lot of people, I was caught off guard by the overwhelmingly positive light RUMPS has been cast in. Some people have truly fallen in love with this molecule, or rather two molecules (amylose and amylopectin) all tangled up together. Even Tom Naughton and Mark Sisson have fallen and Jimmy Moore wants to get some. The explosive interest in this topic can be traced to the extraordinary efforts of two flies in the nutritional ointment, Tim Steel, AKA Tatertot and Richard Nikoley of FreeTheAnimal.com.

The reported benefits of RUMPS include the enticing claims of better sleep and vivid dreams. Those alone make me want to buy some tonight and give it a try, but there’s more: improved gut function, curing SIBO (Say what?) preferentially feeding healthy gut bacteria, preventing cancer with more butyrate, immune stimulation, toxin/carcinogen degradation, blood sugar/insulin control, improved cholesterol, triglycerides and even weight-loss. [...]

After all, RUMPS is a form of resistant starch, which I have recommended limiting for SIBO. For more info on this counterintuitive idea, you can visit Dr. BG, AKA Grace, at Animal Pharm and Dr. Art Ayres at Cooling Inflammation. You can also see my mini-debate with Tim in the comments section on Dr. Mike Eades’ blog on heartburn. [...]

Tim and Richard contacted me recently to discuss some of the experiences people were reporting after supplementing with RUMPS. At that time, we agreed to share all information, both positive and negative about RUMPS and digestive health issues going forward. Realizing that our real goal was to help people and that science will figure this out eventually anyway, we agreed to do our best to speed things up hopefully benefiting all involved. In other words:

“Instead of making science conform to our beliefs, let’s find out what’s real and update our understanding”

~ Dr. Bill Lagakos of Calories Proper seems to have been interested in my 2-Part "Duck Dodgers" series: Disrupting Paleo: Inuit and Masai Ate Carbs and Prebiotics (Part 1 and Part 2).

Animal fibre

Fruits and veggies, fermented or otherwise, aren’t the only source of prebiotics in your diet. Eat a whole sardine and some of the ligaments, tendons, bones, and cartilage will surely escape digestion to reach the distal intestine where they will be fermented by the resident microbes.

Salmon skin and the collagen in its flesh, the tendons that hold rib meat to the bone, and maybe even some of the ligaments between chicken bones. All of these are potential prebiotics or “animal fibres.” And it may explain why fermented sausages are such good vessels for probiotics.

~ Mark Sisson of Mark's Daily Apple has had enough, and pushes his substantial blogging weight around by penning a Definitive Guide. I think it means that Mark thinks that resistant starch is definitively here to stay.

The Definitive Guide to Resistant Starch

Mark manages to be the elephant in the room, while also maintaining high levels of respect throughout the Paleo and Primal community in spite of the fact that he dares to actually make money doing this! Here's why:

I’ll admit now, with regret, that I didn’t look as deeply into the matter as I might have. I didn’t dismiss resistant starch, but I did downplay its importance, characterizing it as “just another type of prebiotic” – important but not necessary so long as you were eating other fermentable fibers. While technically true, we’re fast learning that resistant starch may be a special type of prebiotic with a special place in the human diet.

See how easy that was? It happens.

Update: Oops, missed something worthy.

~ The Microbiome Discovery Project.

ME/CFS: a devastating neuro-immune disease as disabling as multiple sclerosis, affecting one million Americans and 17 million people worldwide.

The study: a cutting-edge hunt for the causes of ME/CFS in the gut “microbiome” – the bacteria, viruses and fungi in the digestive system – led by “the world’s most celebrated virus hunter”, Dr W. Ian Lipkin at the world’s largest and most advanced center for microbe discovery and diagnosis at Columbia University in New York.

The payoff: a world-class study with the potential to swiftly lead to treatments using drugs, probiotics or exclusion diets.

Our challenge: to raise $1.27 million (£760,000; €910,000) to fund the project and do it fast! The scientists are ready to go and can complete and publish the study within 12 months. The sooner we fund it, the sooner it starts.

Go check it out and watch the brief video by Dr. W. Ian Lipkin. And pitch in if you can.