Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
Off Topic / Re: Give us a laugh !
« Last post by TylerDurden on Today at 05:24:16 am »

It pleases me that there are people out there who are even more extreme than me as regards ingesting things!!!
Journals / Re: Lex's Journal
« Last post by Eric on Today at 04:46:18 am »
I've long since given up on the idea that there's a perfect diet, either in general or for anyone in particular. The human body is very adaptable, and any individual person could probably live well on multiple different diets. Finding a diet that renders us free of disease is a useless ideal, in my opinion. This isn't to dismiss the value of eating clean, whole food, obviously. Just that it's important not to view diet as a perpetual work-in-progress rather than to turn it into a dogmatic ideology.

I honor Derek's pursuit of a better relationship with the landscape one inhabits. That's a huge driving force behind my dietary choices too. The healthy diet that one piece of land can provide might (and most likely will) be very different from the one another can, though.

Here in Vermont, for instance, there are a lot of farmers growing grass to feed cattle. But is the northeast really the place for cattle? Cattle are grazers, and prior to the introduction of domestic sheep and later cattle with the Europeans there were no large grazing animals here. None! Perhaps a wood bison wandered into the state once in a blue moon, but they were never here frequently enough for the resident indigenous peoples to even create a word for them. Given this reality, I don't think cattle have a place here. They're only here now because farmers force the landscape to be something they can inhabit, force the land to be pasture when it wants to become savannah or forest. What did live here? Browsers, like caribou, elk, deer and moose, all of which do very well in forests and savannahs. A grazer is very different, ecologically, from a browser.

Perhaps what Derek means by "beyond grass fed" is to rekindle an awareness of the ecological appropriateness of food animals?
Off Topic / Re: Royal couple eat some raw shellfish
« Last post by TylerDurden on Today at 04:36:19 am »
In France, most people eat raw shellfish!
I am glad to hear it. France is one of the few European countries with at least some interest in raw foods.  My mention of the royal couple is because many people are easily led by the more prominent in society. For example, any outfit worn by  a young female Royal, such as Princess Diana in her heyday, causes millions of women to buy the same sort of clothes from the relevant shop. Then there was the ridiculous, nauseating  public hysteria over Princess Diana's death! Even the Daily Telegraph, normally a relatively sober, respectable newspaper,  devoted all or most of its pages for several days to the incident, all because women are  fed this propaganda about princesses as little girls.
Journals / Re: Lex's Journal
« Last post by sabertooth on Today at 03:28:47 am »
The perspective I am attempting to cultivate takes into consideration many of the points you have made, and Ive shared many of the same realizations, but there is something more difficult to explain I am attempting to communicate, which takes a little stretch of the imagination to follow. Its the spirit of the maxim "In every deliberation, we must consider the impact on the seventh generation." Though I see the irony in how even this insight could not protect the Natives from progress....and I personally fall short of doing this in some way just about every day.

I agree following gurus and eating what is deemed a pure diet by "nutritional science" hacks, then experiencing that they all failed to provide the ideal results, can make one question the rational of seeking such ideals or truths in a world of confusion, but this does not mean that there isn't an ideal to strive for, or a truth to stand for. The human mind is just not capable of taking in all the factors involved as it works out ways to decouple itself from nature, and so the results of even the "wisest" of lifestyle choices can be easily fouled up by the invisible variables which constitute the unknown and unknowable. 

I am in no way a fundamentalist who believes that there is only one singular ideal, because I know what is optimal in one environment is detrimental in another. What is heaven in one persons mind would be hell to another.... Still it seems there must be a larger unifying force that connects us to the life and the health of our earth? When I look out over land that a few generations ago was wild ecosystems and see the pinned up animals, in between fields of round up soy and corn that seem to go on forever, in a wasteland were no other life is permitted to trespass....I get a feeling of if our living world is undergoing a forced mechanized metamorphosis....which alas may be part of the inevitability of fate.
This is where larger perspectives are needed for greater understanding of our all too human dilemma. On the one side I agree, it does seem fruitless to struggle against the tides of a changing world out of clinging to ones ideals, but on the other-side it also seems like a waste of human potential to allow our progeny to be degraded and desecrated to lower forms without a struggle....the ideal in my mind would be to live a life thats balanced somewhere between the extremes.

Regardless of what happens life will find a way, but what kind our future will be inherited, and is there anyway we can alter it with our personal life choices?

There is this notion that perhaps it is not my purpose to stop progress. Life is a quantum force riding a wave of mutilation, and it will in some shape or form flow on regardless...but perhaps there is a purpose to be found in playing the role as an intermediary between the natural world and the mechanical civilization. We must hold back the machines from certain areas of a biological critical nature( such as food production, and in our own environmental spaces) long enough for our technical civilization to mature and begin to integrate technological advances in more balanced ways and with less destructive effects on the biological matrix. 

Journals / Re: Lex's Journal
« Last post by ys on Today at 01:29:44 am »
How is your prostate after that procedure you went through?
Journals / Re: Lex's Journal
« Last post by lex_rooker on Today at 12:39:12 am »
TylerD! so good to see you're still around and as cogent as ever. Thanks for stopping by.

I agree that our food animals should eat as close as possible to their natural diets.  Commercial Chicken Chow is far removed from what wild chickens eat.  I find it humorous that the state of California has decreed that no eggs may be sold from caged chickens.  However, chickens in large open pens eating Chicken Chow is somehow more humane and better for us.

Such is the hubris and ignorance of our leaders,

Journals / Re: Lex's Journal
« Last post by lex_rooker on Today at 12:27:47 am »
Sabertooth.  Thanks for the detailed reply.  What you say makes a lot of sense. Get ready for it...  here is comes.... OK Now comes the "BUT"...

When I was younger (late teens through my thirty's) I was hung up on "perfection".  I was convinced that if I just ate the right foods, did the correct exercises, drank the purest water, that I'd live in robust health forever. I had the diet gurus telling me so.  Then I got older and things started going wrong, even though I was surely doing everything right.  How could this be?

The initial flaw in my thinking was that I knew what was right.  Clearly I didn't. At least if doing what was right meant that I'd live in robust health forever - or at least a very long time.

My next issue was how could people do so well on such a varied playing field. Eating all the wrong foods, sitting on the couch watching TV, and drinking beer, and sodas.  Many of these people were living as long or longer and in as good health as those of us that were doing everything right.  I'm still scratching my head over this one.

In your examples of allowing our food animals to eat their natural diet in unfettered circumstances is a wonderful ideal, but what does it gain us.  The Inuit certainly ate free range animals and their average lifespan was into their 80's - very much the same as the soda and beer swilling couch potatoes I described above.

The Garden of Eden you describe doesn't exist anywhere on this earth.  Every bio-habitat or region has it's own strengths and weaknesses.  All the wonderful herbs may be present but the soil may be missing one or more key nutrients.  The soil may also be contaminated by such substances as lead, arsenic, or some other bad thing that will be taken up by the animal either directly through consuming bits of dirt or through the plants they eat.

The wonder of it all is that despite everything being less than perfect, we seem to do rather well.  It is the fact that perfection is not required that makes animal and plant life so amazing.

The opposite side of the coin is also interesting.  Even if everything is perfect, assuming we even know what perfect is, we will live our same life span - say into our 80's or 90's.  Maybe in slightly better health assuming all the natural destructive elements all around us in our food and environment (the sun?)don't do us in, but none the less our lives are finite. 

So for me it comes down to a matter of degree.  It makes sense to me to eat as close to the diet we evolved on, food that eats as close as possible to the diet it evolved on, but as you get closer to perfection - assuming we know what perfection is - there are diminishing returns.  I think the oldest (validated) recorded living human is 120 years and 4 months.  There are people all over the planet, eating a wide variety of diets, and yet none have exceeded this age.  Many people today, again on varied (and some might think terrible) diets live into their early 100's.

So, let's say you find a way to meet your idea of a Utopian food source.  What do you expect to gain? Will it be worth the time and effort expended?  At 65, I'm faced with my mortality.  I have less time to go than I've already lived. If my genetic history has any bearing then maybe only 20 years or so.  No male member of my family has lived beyond 85, and most died in their 70's. Very sobering.  The question I have to ask myself is do I want to spend the next 20 years totally focused on trying to find or live some idea of perfection in an effort to gain an additional 5 years of life?  I've answered that for myself with a resounding NO!

For me it is quality of life. Right now.  Today.   I'm committed to doing practical things within my modern environment that will give me the best quality of life possible for whatever the remaining duration is.  I'm fine with dying tomorrow (or this afternoon) from a massive heart attack or stroke, because yesterday (or so far today) I'm doing everything I want to do. 

This implies that what I don't want to spend my remaining time doing is obsessing over my diet.  I eat my food (which I've chosen with the best information I have available, and from what is readily available in modern commerce), and then I spend the rest of my time on family and other interests.

Your choices are surely different from mine.  That's OK.  The only thing I'd ask you to consider is, if you are able look back in 30-40 years at what you've spent your life doing, will you find it time well spent?  Will the commitment be worth the reward?

So each of us must decide for ourselves,

Off Topic / Re: Royal couple eat some raw shellfish
« Last post by Iguana on Yesterday at 11:11:49 pm »
In France, most people eat raw shellfish!
Off Topic / Re: Look younger and benefit more from exercise via ice baths
« Last post by TylerDurden on Yesterday at 08:16:27 pm »
I have been currently doing  cold baths for the last  week or so. Amazing in effect and makes me more "palaeo", I guess.  In Vienna, apparently, the water from the tap  comes out at a temperature of  8-10 degrees Celsius as it comes straight from the mountains without being warmed by the sun. So, I won't need to add any ice-packs to my baths. I spend the time reading as the idea is to be in the cold bath for at least an hour a day, overall.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10