I stopped soaping "all over" about 15 years ago. Now I use an organic olive oil based soap only under my arms; I've tried skipping even that part for months at a time, but it just doesn't work for me -- everywhere else is fine. Otherwise, I find warm water and some gentle washing action to be all I need. No bad side effects, people haven't shunned me due to bad odors, etc. Actually, to the contrary, I've had complements on how I smell ("what are you using?"), and my skin looks and feels fine; not too dry or oily.
[[MORE]]I've also used baking soda as a soap for extended periods. It cleans fine; I just don't particularly care for how it makes my skin feel afterwards.
Almost anything you put on your skin will get absorbed to some degree into your body (that's how nicotine and hormone patches work). Unfortunately, most commercial soaps and cosmetic products are full of artificial chemicals, some of which are known carcinogens. Perfume doesn't come from some beautiful crushed flower; it's an artificially created chemical.
Basically, if you wouldn't eat it, you shouldn't put it on your skin or in your mouth.
FWIW, the same idea holds true for clothes, many of which are coated with toxic formaldehyde sizing to help discourage wrinkles and prevent mildew. Some kids clothes are even worse, being coated with fire retardants. You can minimize potential health issues related to fabric treatments by washing them thoroughly before you first wear them. For kid's clothes, I would was them more than once. Of course, this assumes that you're using a good, non-toxic, perfume-free laundry detergent!
Tuesday, 29 December 2009
Tuesday, 22 December 2009
Proper dental care
After reading an article online about it, I decided to try brushing with soap.
I use an organic olive oil based soap. To my surprise, the taste isn’t unpleasant at all.
Part of the idea behind it is that most toothpastes contain glycerin, which doesn’t easily rinse off completely. While the teeth still have a film of glycerin on them, they don’t remineralize easily. With the film removed, they do.
[[MORE]]Another aspect of using soap is that it has a natural antibiotic character to it, which helps limit plaque.
I’ve tried using a variety of conventional toothpastes over the years, and while they’ve kept gum disease and cavities at bay, I still had some slight persistent inflammation at my gum line, with gum pocket depths that were less than ideal. About two weeks after switching to using bar soap, the inflammation went away—for the first time ever.
I’m a quick plaque/tartar maker, though, and I’ve found that soap alone isn’t quite enough to keep the tartar under control, so I alternate with a baking soda based toothpaste without any additives. The slight coarseness of the baking soda is enough to remove any built-up tartar.
I think that if we ate food that required much more biting, chewing and natural friction over the tooth surfaces, so that plaque and tartar were naturally removed, that we probably wouldn't need to brush -- but that's not a feature of modern diets, even of the Paleo variety. I actually see this easily with my dogs; when they have chew toys, bones, etc, their teeth stay healthy. Without them, the tartar builds up quickly.
To brush with baking soda, I usually pour some dry powder in a small bowl and then scoop it up with a wet toothbrush. It doesn't take that much. When I brush with soap, I just rub a wet brush back and forth against a bar several times, and then let the bar dry out before next use.
Another thing about conventional toothpastes: because they tend to be sweet, they can trigger a release of insulin. One of the goals of Paleo should be to keep your insulin levels low, so they’re incompatible with the diet in that way.
BTW, in case you're not aware, sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), which is in most toothpastes, can cause outbreaks of canker sores. This was explained to me by my dentist years ago after I told him I was having regular outbreaks. Since stopping all toothpastes containing SLS, I haven’t had another sore. Also, the reason they add SLS in the first place is simply to make the toothpaste foam; it doesn’t improve its ability to clean your teeth in any way.
The soap I use is made near where I live here in New Zealand. It's called Clean Earth Soap (the Basic Olive Bar):
http://www.cleanearthsoap.co.nz/collections/soaps
If you can't find anything equivalent locally, they do ship overseas.
It's great for skin, too, not just teeth!
I use an organic olive oil based soap. To my surprise, the taste isn’t unpleasant at all.
Part of the idea behind it is that most toothpastes contain glycerin, which doesn’t easily rinse off completely. While the teeth still have a film of glycerin on them, they don’t remineralize easily. With the film removed, they do.
[[MORE]]Another aspect of using soap is that it has a natural antibiotic character to it, which helps limit plaque.
I’ve tried using a variety of conventional toothpastes over the years, and while they’ve kept gum disease and cavities at bay, I still had some slight persistent inflammation at my gum line, with gum pocket depths that were less than ideal. About two weeks after switching to using bar soap, the inflammation went away—for the first time ever.
I’m a quick plaque/tartar maker, though, and I’ve found that soap alone isn’t quite enough to keep the tartar under control, so I alternate with a baking soda based toothpaste without any additives. The slight coarseness of the baking soda is enough to remove any built-up tartar.
I think that if we ate food that required much more biting, chewing and natural friction over the tooth surfaces, so that plaque and tartar were naturally removed, that we probably wouldn't need to brush -- but that's not a feature of modern diets, even of the Paleo variety. I actually see this easily with my dogs; when they have chew toys, bones, etc, their teeth stay healthy. Without them, the tartar builds up quickly.
To brush with baking soda, I usually pour some dry powder in a small bowl and then scoop it up with a wet toothbrush. It doesn't take that much. When I brush with soap, I just rub a wet brush back and forth against a bar several times, and then let the bar dry out before next use.
Another thing about conventional toothpastes: because they tend to be sweet, they can trigger a release of insulin. One of the goals of Paleo should be to keep your insulin levels low, so they’re incompatible with the diet in that way.
BTW, in case you're not aware, sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS), which is in most toothpastes, can cause outbreaks of canker sores. This was explained to me by my dentist years ago after I told him I was having regular outbreaks. Since stopping all toothpastes containing SLS, I haven’t had another sore. Also, the reason they add SLS in the first place is simply to make the toothpaste foam; it doesn’t improve its ability to clean your teeth in any way.
The soap I use is made near where I live here in New Zealand. It's called Clean Earth Soap (the Basic Olive Bar):
http://www.cleanearthsoap.co.nz/collections/soaps
If you can't find anything equivalent locally, they do ship overseas.
It's great for skin, too, not just teeth!
Wednesday, 16 December 2009
Eating raw beef
I have a close friend who loves raw beef, and had been eating it for several years when he became ill. It turns out he had been infected by not just one, but several different hard-to-diagnose parasites. I don’t know exactly where he got his meat or what precautions he took, but the story still gives me pause.
In addition, there’s good evidence that cooking our food was a key factor in our evolution from Homo habilis into Homo erectus, partly since cooked food requires less digestive effort and results in more complete digestion and energy extraction, which in turn allowed our guts to shrink and our brains to grow. In keeping with the rest of the Paleo diet philosophy, I think that’s a good reason to continue cooking my food, regardless of my personal taste preferences.
There’s a good book that discusses this subject in detail: Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human, by Wrangham.
In addition, there’s good evidence that cooking our food was a key factor in our evolution from Homo habilis into Homo erectus, partly since cooked food requires less digestive effort and results in more complete digestion and energy extraction, which in turn allowed our guts to shrink and our brains to grow. In keeping with the rest of the Paleo diet philosophy, I think that’s a good reason to continue cooking my food, regardless of my personal taste preferences.
There’s a good book that discusses this subject in detail: Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human, by Wrangham.
Sunday, 13 December 2009
Endorphins
I recently heard that eating fat causes the release of endorphins (the body’s natural opiates). It seems to me that this might explain a few things that I’ve observed about myself since switching to Paleo. It could be why my mood has improved: endorphins relieve aches and pains and have a mood-elevating effect. Endorphins are also an appetite suppressant, which could explain why I now only feel the need to eat once a day.
[[MORE]]Since vigorous exercise also releases endorphins, I’m wondering whether some synergy is possible there. Chocolate and caffeine also release endorphins.
I started looking into this because I take low-dose Naltrexone for my arthritis. Naltrexone is an opiate antagonist. In low doses, it blocks the opiate receptor sites for just a few hours, which then causes the body to release more of them in response. The resulting increase in endorphin levels can modulate immune system function, and thereby help a wide range of immune system-related conditions ranging from arthritis to MS to cancer to Chron’s.
Apparently, there is some mounting evidence that an “endorphin deficiency” is prevalent in modern society. Is it possible that low fat intake is responsible? Perhaps low fat intake leads to low endorphins which leads to increasingly common immune system dysfunction? Could it also be part of why people crave chocolate and “can’t live without” their morning caffeine?
[[MORE]]Since vigorous exercise also releases endorphins, I’m wondering whether some synergy is possible there. Chocolate and caffeine also release endorphins.
I started looking into this because I take low-dose Naltrexone for my arthritis. Naltrexone is an opiate antagonist. In low doses, it blocks the opiate receptor sites for just a few hours, which then causes the body to release more of them in response. The resulting increase in endorphin levels can modulate immune system function, and thereby help a wide range of immune system-related conditions ranging from arthritis to MS to cancer to Chron’s.
Apparently, there is some mounting evidence that an “endorphin deficiency” is prevalent in modern society. Is it possible that low fat intake is responsible? Perhaps low fat intake leads to low endorphins which leads to increasingly common immune system dysfunction? Could it also be part of why people crave chocolate and “can’t live without” their morning caffeine?
Saturday, 12 December 2009
How the health care system in New Zealand works
Here's the way the health care system in New Zealand works, in a nutshell:
Emergency care is free; routine doctor's visits to your GP are heavily subsidized (cost is about US$20 per visit); most drugs are heavily subsidized (US$2 to $10 per course); most lab work is free; most in-hospital care is free. That's the so-called "public" system. The problem is that because it's free, the supply is limited, which means rationing. The existence of rationing is readily admitted by everyone. The impact of rationing is long waits. In my area, it can take 3 months to get an MRI scan, or up to 6 months to get in to see the one-and-only neurologist in town.
[[MORE]]To help make the system more palatable -- which also means providing it with badly needed money -- there is a parallel "private" system. Doctors can choose to offer some of their time on a private basis, or not. Most do, but some, like the neurologist I mentioned above, do not. Private fees are still reasonable by US standards: maybe US$45 for a 15-minute visit. There are also private hospitals, since docs aren't allowed to use public facilities for their private patients. Fees there are higher; closer to what they charge in the US. You can buy health insurance that covers private costs. Unlike in the US, pre-existing conditions are never covered by private insurance; there is no "time out" period. Insurance costs are moderate-to-low by US standards, and insurers are also much more picky about who they accept.
So, this all works OK if you only ever see your GP, get a few lab tests and a few prescriptions and maybe go to the emergency room once every few years. But as soon as you have anything complicated happen that requires a specialist or expensive test equipment like an MRI, then your care is rationed. The waiting times for certain surgeries in the public system is notoriously bad: 2 yrs or more in some cases. If you're lucky, and you can afford it or have insurance, then you can get private care. But private care isn't always available, and even when it is, there may still be a waiting list.
Emergency care is free; routine doctor's visits to your GP are heavily subsidized (cost is about US$20 per visit); most drugs are heavily subsidized (US$2 to $10 per course); most lab work is free; most in-hospital care is free. That's the so-called "public" system. The problem is that because it's free, the supply is limited, which means rationing. The existence of rationing is readily admitted by everyone. The impact of rationing is long waits. In my area, it can take 3 months to get an MRI scan, or up to 6 months to get in to see the one-and-only neurologist in town.
[[MORE]]To help make the system more palatable -- which also means providing it with badly needed money -- there is a parallel "private" system. Doctors can choose to offer some of their time on a private basis, or not. Most do, but some, like the neurologist I mentioned above, do not. Private fees are still reasonable by US standards: maybe US$45 for a 15-minute visit. There are also private hospitals, since docs aren't allowed to use public facilities for their private patients. Fees there are higher; closer to what they charge in the US. You can buy health insurance that covers private costs. Unlike in the US, pre-existing conditions are never covered by private insurance; there is no "time out" period. Insurance costs are moderate-to-low by US standards, and insurers are also much more picky about who they accept.
So, this all works OK if you only ever see your GP, get a few lab tests and a few prescriptions and maybe go to the emergency room once every few years. But as soon as you have anything complicated happen that requires a specialist or expensive test equipment like an MRI, then your care is rationed. The waiting times for certain surgeries in the public system is notoriously bad: 2 yrs or more in some cases. If you're lucky, and you can afford it or have insurance, then you can get private care. But private care isn't always available, and even when it is, there may still be a waiting list.
Thursday, 10 December 2009
Rancid fish oil
Fresh fish oil should not taste bitter or fishy. I'm convinced that a large number of fish oil capsules contain rancid oil. I've also found that many people who think they don't like fish actually just don't like fish that isn't fresh. Even store-bought fish often tastes fishy, which is a clear sign that it's not fresh.
Another issue with rancid oil is that it can turn rancid well before it's possible to taste it.
If you take capsules, you might consider storing them in the refrigerator to help maintain freshness. For bulk oil, adding some vitamin E to the bottle can help extend its shelf life.
Even if you don't use it on a regular basis, you might consider buying a bottle of Carlson's cod liver oil, just so you know what fresh, non-rancid oil tastes like. You might also try checking to see how your capsules change in taste over time: chew on a few when you first get them, and then repeat once a week or so. Any change is not good.
The issue with oil rancidity isn't unique to fish oil. I've noticed foods like bulk nuts sold at many grocery stores are also often rancid. Once you identify the taste, you may be surprised at how prevalent it is.
Another issue with rancid oil is that it can turn rancid well before it's possible to taste it.
If you take capsules, you might consider storing them in the refrigerator to help maintain freshness. For bulk oil, adding some vitamin E to the bottle can help extend its shelf life.
Even if you don't use it on a regular basis, you might consider buying a bottle of Carlson's cod liver oil, just so you know what fresh, non-rancid oil tastes like. You might also try checking to see how your capsules change in taste over time: chew on a few when you first get them, and then repeat once a week or so. Any change is not good.
The issue with oil rancidity isn't unique to fish oil. I've noticed foods like bulk nuts sold at many grocery stores are also often rancid. Once you identify the taste, you may be surprised at how prevalent it is.
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
Health-related risk management
As with all health and diet issues, when assessing risk and determining trade-offs, it’s best to look at the whole picture, rather than just one narrow piece. For example, consider the risk of contaminated raw milk. In the event that something bad happens, the resulting conditions should be quickly diagnosable and readily curable with antibiotics. However, the same is not true for the more serious conditions that raw milk may help you avoid, such as heart disease or immune system dysfunction.
[[MORE]]This is similar to the “too much sun” argument and Vitamin D. While it’s true that staying out of the sun will reduce your risk of certain skin cancers, those cancers tend to be among the most treatable and survivable. However, the lower level of Vit D from staying out of the sun also increases your risk of getting the more serious cancers, which are not very curable.
The total cholesterol argument is also similar: you may avoid heart disease with low total cholesterol, but your average lifespan is also likely to be decreased (more death from cancer and other diseases).
[[MORE]]This is similar to the “too much sun” argument and Vitamin D. While it’s true that staying out of the sun will reduce your risk of certain skin cancers, those cancers tend to be among the most treatable and survivable. However, the lower level of Vit D from staying out of the sun also increases your risk of getting the more serious cancers, which are not very curable.
The total cholesterol argument is also similar: you may avoid heart disease with low total cholesterol, but your average lifespan is also likely to be decreased (more death from cancer and other diseases).
Monday, 7 December 2009
Sources of omega-3 supplements
My experience with O-3 oils is that taste follows quality, which follows price. Bad tasting oils are usually rancid (oxidized), which makes them not just useless, but actually damaging. (if you take capsules, it’s not a bad idea to occasionally bite one open to see if the oil tastes bad)
[[MORE]]Cod liver oil (CLO) is a good source of O-3. Unfortunately, one complication is that fish tend to pick up a number of toxins, and those toxins tend to concentrate in their oil -- so the source of the fish used to make the oil is important. I like Carlson's for that reason; they use fish from Norway and also test the oil they use for toxins, which is something I'm not confident that many other suppliers do.
Another issue is the high level of Vit A, which can apparently counteract some of the benefits of Vit D, according to some recent studies.
CLO also contains more than just O-3. A somewhat better source is Krill Oil, although it's not cheap. I've found Jarrow to be a good brand. Both products are available from iherb.com.
Fresh fish oil should not taste bitter or fishy. I'm convinced that a large number of the fish oil capsules contain rancid oil. I've also found that many people who think they don't like fish actually just don't like fish that isn't fresh. Even store-bought fish often tastes fishy, which is a clear sign that it's not fresh.
Another issue with rancid oil is that it can turn rancid well before it's possible to taste it.
If you take capsules, you might consider storing them in the refrigerator to help maintain freshness. For bulk oil, adding some vitamin E to the bottle can help extend its shelf life.
Even if you don't use it on a regular basis, you might consider buying a bottle of Carlson's cod liver oil, just so you know what fresh, non-rancid oil tastes like. You might also try checking to see how your capsules change in taste over time: chew on a few when you first get them, and then repeat once a week or so. Any change is not good.
The issue with oil rancidity isn't unique to fish oil. I've noticed foods like bulk nuts sold at many grocery stores are also often rancid. Once you identify the taste, you may be surprised at how prevalent it is.
[[MORE]]Cod liver oil (CLO) is a good source of O-3. Unfortunately, one complication is that fish tend to pick up a number of toxins, and those toxins tend to concentrate in their oil -- so the source of the fish used to make the oil is important. I like Carlson's for that reason; they use fish from Norway and also test the oil they use for toxins, which is something I'm not confident that many other suppliers do.
Another issue is the high level of Vit A, which can apparently counteract some of the benefits of Vit D, according to some recent studies.
CLO also contains more than just O-3. A somewhat better source is Krill Oil, although it's not cheap. I've found Jarrow to be a good brand. Both products are available from iherb.com.
Fresh fish oil should not taste bitter or fishy. I'm convinced that a large number of the fish oil capsules contain rancid oil. I've also found that many people who think they don't like fish actually just don't like fish that isn't fresh. Even store-bought fish often tastes fishy, which is a clear sign that it's not fresh.
Another issue with rancid oil is that it can turn rancid well before it's possible to taste it.
If you take capsules, you might consider storing them in the refrigerator to help maintain freshness. For bulk oil, adding some vitamin E to the bottle can help extend its shelf life.
Even if you don't use it on a regular basis, you might consider buying a bottle of Carlson's cod liver oil, just so you know what fresh, non-rancid oil tastes like. You might also try checking to see how your capsules change in taste over time: chew on a few when you first get them, and then repeat once a week or so. Any change is not good.
The issue with oil rancidity isn't unique to fish oil. I've noticed foods like bulk nuts sold at many grocery stores are also often rancid. Once you identify the taste, you may be surprised at how prevalent it is.
Friday, 4 December 2009
Losing weight is not just about calorie balance
Many people I talk to about diet are still convinced that weight control is all about calorie balance: calories in vs. calories out. As Gary Taubes convincingly demonstrated in Good Calories, Bad Calories, it's not so simple.
Here's my argument:
[[MORE]]1. If weight is determined entirely by calorie balance, then why are type 1 diabetics unable to gain any weight? They can eat 5000+ calories/day and still be rail-thin. But as soon as you replace their missing insulin, they are suddenly able to put on weight, with no change in diet or activity level. The body does not always hold onto everything you put into it (insulin is the “storage” hormone).
2. In order to survive times of famine, humans developed a feedback loop: the fewer calories you take in, the fewer the body needs; your basal metabolic rate varies depending on food intake. Otherwise, if it didn't, then if you were at a constant weight and cut back your calories, you would eventually waste away to nothing, right? Instead, you reach a new set-point as your metabolic rate adjusts. If you reduce calories enough, people slow down, get tired and fatigued easily, etc., which makes it difficult to exercise, which increases insulin resistance.
3. You can make people or animals fat by boosting their insulin level. Why do you think farmers feed grain to cattle? It's because it boosts their insulin level, which makes them fat. Fat animals weigh more, and are more profitable. Unfortunately, grain makes people fat too, through exactly the same mechanism. (side note: Carbs also make you hungry. Why do you think many restaurant owners give bread or chips away for free?)
4. If caloric input is the primary determinant of weight, then why does obesity tend to increase with decreasing income? The higher the poverty rate, the higher the rate of obesity. (Hint: Which foods provide the least expensive calories?)
Here's my argument:
[[MORE]]1. If weight is determined entirely by calorie balance, then why are type 1 diabetics unable to gain any weight? They can eat 5000+ calories/day and still be rail-thin. But as soon as you replace their missing insulin, they are suddenly able to put on weight, with no change in diet or activity level. The body does not always hold onto everything you put into it (insulin is the “storage” hormone).
2. In order to survive times of famine, humans developed a feedback loop: the fewer calories you take in, the fewer the body needs; your basal metabolic rate varies depending on food intake. Otherwise, if it didn't, then if you were at a constant weight and cut back your calories, you would eventually waste away to nothing, right? Instead, you reach a new set-point as your metabolic rate adjusts. If you reduce calories enough, people slow down, get tired and fatigued easily, etc., which makes it difficult to exercise, which increases insulin resistance.
3. You can make people or animals fat by boosting their insulin level. Why do you think farmers feed grain to cattle? It's because it boosts their insulin level, which makes them fat. Fat animals weigh more, and are more profitable. Unfortunately, grain makes people fat too, through exactly the same mechanism. (side note: Carbs also make you hungry. Why do you think many restaurant owners give bread or chips away for free?)
4. If caloric input is the primary determinant of weight, then why does obesity tend to increase with decreasing income? The higher the poverty rate, the higher the rate of obesity. (Hint: Which foods provide the least expensive calories?)
Thursday, 3 December 2009
Update on my weight loss and BMI
I switched to full Paleo in March 2009. Before that, I had eliminated sugar and refined grains for many years. I started at 234 lbs, and have lost 35 lbs since then—so about a pound a week (BMI went from 31.3 to 26.6, and my waist size has dropped by about 5 inches). My exercise during that time has been relatively light. The main difference for me was eliminating all grains, a few lingering processed snack foods, and nuts. The carb cravings were a little tough the first month, but after that my average hunger level dropped dramatically. Now, it’s easy to go 15 hrs or longer without eating, and I often skip breakfast entirely. I’m in relatively constant mild ketosis. Not enough for acetone breath, but enough that it shows up on the ketostix.
[[MORE]]I didn’t consciously notice it for some time, but my mood has been better, too.
One interesting thing I’ve learned about weight is that there is a difference between optimal from an appearance perspective and optimal from a health or longevity perspective. For the latter, a BMI of 25 to 30 appears to give the best longevity in Western culture, even without a famine.
http://keaen.blogspot.com/2009/06/bmi-and-longevity.html
The “official” categories describe a BMI of 25 to 29.9 as “overweight.” I’m aiming for 25 at the moment. If I wasn’t borderline diabetic, I might be happy at my current weight, but if I can eliminate a little more visceral fat (around the middle), it should help further reduce my insulin resistance.
[[MORE]]I didn’t consciously notice it for some time, but my mood has been better, too.
One interesting thing I’ve learned about weight is that there is a difference between optimal from an appearance perspective and optimal from a health or longevity perspective. For the latter, a BMI of 25 to 30 appears to give the best longevity in Western culture, even without a famine.
http://keaen.blogspot.com/2009/06/bmi-and-longevity.html
The “official” categories describe a BMI of 25 to 29.9 as “overweight.” I’m aiming for 25 at the moment. If I wasn’t borderline diabetic, I might be happy at my current weight, but if I can eliminate a little more visceral fat (around the middle), it should help further reduce my insulin resistance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)