“Youth is not a time of life – it is a state of mind. It is not a matter of red cheeks, red lips and supple knees. It is a temper of the will; a quality of the imagination; a vigor of the emotions; it is a freshness of the deep springs of life. Youth means a temperamental predominance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over a life of ease. This often exists in a man of fifty, more than in a boy of twenty. Nobody grows old by merely living a number of years; people grow old by deserting their ideals.”

- Samuel Ullman

wipeboard wisdom

A little bit of ECU Track and Field throws coach David Price’s wipeboard wisdom; deconstructing the hammer throw.

Well, well, well…how could I not workout after listening to this Super Human Radio exchange between host Carl Lanore and guest Randy Roach, author of Muscle, Smoke and Mirrors.  This is a fantastic episode of SHR, and if you’ve never given the show a chance because you think it might be just a bunch of meathead, bodybuilding blather, give this episode a shot.  I promise it will change your mind.  Plenty of intelligent, edgy discussion on healthcare reform, vaccination controversy, corrupt politicians and companies, nutrition, diseased citizenry — I could go on and on, but you get the idea.  This episode will get you jacked for a workout better than downing a double red-eye (known as a black-eye in some parts) while jammin’ to my boys Rage Against the Machine. A little old school RATM here, just to set the tone–

Nicely done, boys.  And remember, now — if you don’t turn on politics, politics will turn on you.

Anyway, after an hour’s long drive home from work, listening to Carl and Randy ranting it up all the while, I was good and spun; the ol’ Friday evening kick-back was not an option at this point.  I immediately jumped out of my work-a-day garb and into some workout attire, saddled-up the ol’ fixie and headed out.  I hit about 45-minutes worth of sprint intervals around G-Vegas and the ECU campus, finally winding up out at the track and field throws practice area (aka, the playground).  From there I performed the following:

• Pull-up bar (straight bar) muscle-ups x 4
• Elevated feet ring flyes x 10
• 45 lb. plate toss* x 10

4 rounds, with very little in the way of a breather between rounds.

*For a demonstration of the plate toss, check out the athlete in this Jay Shroeder, Evo Sport clip, at 24 seconds in:

Now in my version, I used a heavier plate (a 45, in this case), and I also added a glute/hamstring kick (akin to what you’d get out of a kettlebell swing, or maybe a power snatch movement) to propel the plate as high as possible, while still maintaining “control” of the plate; i.e.,  I was able to catch the plate cleanly, at chest level, with hands just above the 9 and 3 position, and with the plate face remaining verticle to the ground (i.e., flat to me).  Believe me, snagging 45 lbs from a free-fall a few feet over your head x 10 reps will toast your shoulders and arms.  It’s good stuff.

Next up here on TTP, I’ll be ranting about the unholy beast that is the bill HR 2749, set to enter Senate debate shortly.  Want to maintain access to raw milk, grass-fed, free-range meat, organic produce, supplements and the like?  Well, it’s time to get your opposition on.  Well talk about it next up.  Until then, here’s a preview of this insidious bill, from The Proud Political Junkie’s Gazette, one of my favorite political/activist blogs.

In health,

Keith

“The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

—Margaret Thatcher

I’ve had a little bit of time now to mull over the moral outrage directed at John Mackey (and, by association, Whole Foods), over Mackey’s recent Wall Street Journal Op Ed piece.   From what I can tell, the nexus of the piss-storm from the left has come about from the following two statements:

“…Many promoters of health-care reform believe that people have an intrinsic ethical right to health care—to equal access to doctors, medicines and hospitals. While all of us empathize with those who are sick, how can we say that all people have more of an intrinsic right to health care than they have to food or shelter?”

and

“…Unfortunately many of our health-care problems are self-inflicted: two-thirds of Americans are now overweight and one-third are obese. Most of the diseases that kill us and account for about 70% of all health-care spending—heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes and obesity—are mostly preventable through proper diet, exercise, not smoking, minimal alcohol consumption and other healthy lifestyle choices.”

And I can’t say that I necessarily disagree with Mr. Mackey on these points, or with the whole of his Op Ed piece, for that matter. I think most of us here can pretty much full-on agree with the second statement.  How much could be saved in the health care system as a whole, if we were able to eradicate metabolic syndrome alone?  And this “syndrome”, in the vast majority of instances, is totally, totally, preventable.  Remove metabolic syndrome from the table, and I dare say that this debate would not even be happening.  The general public, however, has not yet been forced to face the fact that they are a huge (dare I say the largest?) part of the health care problem — not government, not business — but the masses who choose not to take serious interest in the maintenance of their own health.

As to Mackey’s first statement, well…I’m an odd political mix, and I hold true to no particular political party or ideology; that said, I am for what works in any given situation, regardless of the origin of that idea’s ideology.  I do, however, find myself siding mostly with the libertarian point of view on most issues.  Not always, though — health care being one example.  Putting a man on the moon, the interstate highway system, the creation of the National Parks system — these would have never come to fruition without significant government involvement.  It is my opinion that health care reform is the same kind of animal.  There is no perfect answer, of course, but I feel that a good first step starting point — a platform from which to proceed further — would be something akin to the Swiss/Dutch system.

This does not mean, however, that I believe the government to be competent (or uncorrupted) enough to handle such an undertaking.  Far from it.  Unfortunately, the health care issue comes tethered with vast amounts of money, and, with that, a phenomenal amount of greed and power mongering.  If anyone believes that at the highest levels of government and corporate America, if this discussion is centered around anything other than profit and potential profits, you’ve already ingested you’re fair share of “blue pills”.  Go now, turn on a Three’s Company rerun, and rest peacefully until your number’s up.

*Seriously, that’s my last red pill/blue pill analogy for quite some time.  I think I’ve sufficiently worn that one thin.*

My personal gut feeling about how healthcare reform will shape up is summed-up beautifully here, in a post by Hunter, at the Daily Kos.  In a nutshell, you’ll get mandatory universal coverage — coverage supplied by private insurers, and something similar to the previously-mentioned Swiss/Dutch system.  Insurers will make up for the have-to-cover, “pre-existing condition” groups and/or expensive customers with the positive of adding additional millions of paying customers to the bottom line.  Both the left and the right will, after sufficient “spinning”, claim ideological “victory”, politicians will mostly be re=elected in their districts, and the system will continue to eat itself alive because the underlying problems of corporate greed, political power-mongering, and an inattention to basic personal health (diet/fitness) remain.  The Swiss/Dutch system works, not because it is a clever mix of government and open-market interaction, but because the Swiss and Dutch are culturally of a different mindset.  No system can be created that will not ultimately implode under the weight of a diseased citizenry.  In the US, attitudes must change.  Priorities must be re-arranged.  I know I’m speaking to the choir here when I say this, but if you want true healthcare reform, you must first reform that person in the mirror.  Everything else, then, will take care of itself.

Tonight’s speech will be interesting…and telling.

In health,

Keith

“Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.”

- Thomas Edison

I’m not even sure where to begin with this; speechless, you might say — and when it comes to diet and fitness, that’s not at all like me.  The one thing that I can say, though, is that one can easily see how we as a nation ended up in the health care morass we find ourselves in now.  Now I wouldn’t necessarily call myself a conspiracy theorist per se, but damn, if the general public is gullible enough to be taken in by the utter bullshit spewed by the folks behind the Smart Choices food labeling campaign, well… I guess I’m the fool for not taking in some of that action, too.  Problem is, I can’t seem to muzzle my conscience.  The Smart Choices crowd, however, seems to have no problem at all with that little inconvenience.

Anyway, how’s this for a few selected pearls of “wisdom”?

“Eileen T. Kennedy, president of the Smart Choices board and the dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University, said the program’s criteria were based on government dietary guidelines and widely accepted nutritional standards.”

Emphasis mine.  Apparently, having a long list of credentials following one’s name does not inoculate against pure F*ing stupidity.  Or selling-out, for that matter.

“You’re rushing around, you’re trying to think about healthy eating for your kids and you have a choice between a doughnut and a cereal,” Dr. Kennedy said, evoking a hypothetical parent in the supermarket. “So Froot Loops is a better choice.”

How about a nice cup of arsenic, kiddos, or maybe a duce-duce slug to the temple?  Hell, CAFO animals are treated more humanely.   Donuts.  Froot Loops.  Health care debate.  Now I’m feeling suicidal.  If you haven’t already, check out Richard’s post for more on the subject of rampant, abject stupidity.

“Froot Loops is an excellent source of many essential vitamins and minerals and it is also a good source of fiber with only 12 grams of sugar,” said Celeste A. Clark, senior vice president of global nutrition for Kellogg’s, which makes Froot Loops. “You cannot judge the nutritional merits of a food product based on one ingredient.”

And just who is this Celeste A. Clark dumb-ass, you ask?

“Dr. Clark, who is a member of the Smart Choices board, said that the program’s standard for sugar in cereals was consistent with federal dietary guidelines that say that “small amounts of sugar” added to nutrient-dense foods like breakfast cereals can make them taste better. That, in theory, will encourage people to eat more of them, which would increase the nutrients in their diet.”

Ahh, I get it now. Nice move, doc.; now, how does it feel to be wealthy and soulless?  Explain to me again the difference between this and the business model for a successful drug cartel?

And finally this.  “Finally”, not because that’s all the stupidity and wanton greed exposed in this article, but because it’s all that I can stomach in one day:

“Ten companies have signed up for the Smart Choices program so far, including Kellogg’s, Kraft Foods, ConAgra Foods, Unilever, General Mills, PepsiCo and Tyson Foods. Companies that participate pay up to $100,000 a year to the program, with the fee based on total sales of its products that bear the seal.”

I bet they have. Now, take a wild guess as to what kind of political power these companies wield via intense lobbying efforts.  What kind of incestuous interests do these companies have in the pharmaceutical and insurance business?  Things to ask yourself.  You say you want health care “reform”?  I say you’re seriously fucked; pardon the French.  Comparisons to the military-industrial complex, anyone?

More on this later.

In health,

Keith

“Character – the willingness to accept responsibility for one’s own life – is the source from which self-respect springs.”

– Joan Didion

courtesy of roadsidepictures

Groucho is dubious here, and you should be too

A buddy of mine brought this video to my attention recently (thanks, Caleb!), and it really is a “must see” — or a “must hear”, as I chose to listen to the podcast version (making my work commute pay dividends).  Wow, in the same way that watching the Zeitgeist films will stir-up your hatred for “the gub’mint man”, Sugar, The Bitter Truth will make you want to go out and string-up a few “big food” executive types.  No kidding, pick a rainy weekend to kick back and watch all of these offerings back-to-back and you’ll want to jump off the grid and join up with a militia.

The tag line for the “Sugar” lecture is as follows:

Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics, Division of Endocrinology explores the damage caused by sugary foods.

But really, it’s so much more than that.  Dr. Lustig does a fantastic job of explaining why (and how) sugar is so destructive to the body, and why High-Fructose Corn Syrup is just out and out poison.  Anyone who is still in the dark about exactly how carbohydrate in general (sugar and HFCS specifically) botches-up the blood chemistry and ramps-up the body’s fat storage mechanisms, needs to pay close attention.  And get ready to be schooled — though, in a very entertaining way.

And be prepared  as well, to consider the out-and-out lunacy of a nation attempting to formulate some manner of health care reform, while at the same time promoting, through taxation (or lack thereof) and subsidy, the very substance that is at the heart of (pardon the pun) the physical ailment side of the whole equation.  Get people healthy to begin with, and the unwieldy health care debate then becomes something much more manageable.

In health,

Keith

“Life is tough, but it’s tougher when you’re stupid.”

John Wayne

Brent Pottenger (aka, Epistemocrat) served-up a great post last week about the illusion of the best-fix for the nation’s healthcare woes (writ large) being a purely individual, free-market enterprise.  Now I am as free-market as any social-liberal, financial -conservative Libertarian out there; and initially, my position here may seem at odds both with what I am politically, and with what I am implying by this post’s title; it’s not, though.  Let me explain.  Better yet, let me expound just a bit on what Brent has already so thoroughly opined.

Now, if it’s one thing I utterly despise about politics in general (and this coming from a PoliSci major well versed in the art of debate), and of this particular issue specifically, it’s that neither the right nor the left political centers of gravity will “cave” and tell you the truth. And the truth is that the only real and lasting fix for this issue is a mix of both personal and social responsibility.  Yes, you are most certainly accountable for your own health and your own heath choices.  And yes, too — if we are to be a vibrant and progressive society, we are responsible (at least to some extent) to each other for those catastrophic illnesses/accidents that are (depending on your take) acts of God, or luck of the draw.

Of course, some ideas are best left to the ether-world realm of theory and debate, as the real world tends to make so much confetti of of such clean, neatly-packaged thought.  And the same applies here.  What to make, for example, of diabetes?  Is it a preventable disease?  In my opinion, yes.  So should we, as a society, absorb the resultant costs of someone’s poor dietary choices?  What about the 80 year old who now requires a knee replacement due to the cumulative trauma of a youth spent training for and playing rugby?  What if the diabetic was not the stereotypical obese, averse-to-exercise, slovenly individual, but a former endurance athlete?  What then?

I guess the truth of the matter is that, just as in many of the most important issues in life, there is no “right” answer, and we’re likely, as a nation, to tilt too far one way or the other.  Personally, I try not to worry about those things I can’t affect.  What I can affect, though, is the state of my own health.  I’m of the notion that it’s not only a personal and societal responsibility, but a spiritual responsibility to take care of my health to the best of my ability and knowledge.  And part of this responsibility is to never become stagnent — either physically or mentally.  Times change and science progresses, and it’s imperative that each of us continually measure the “new” against a counter-balance of healthy skepticism in order to discern the good and useful from the dead-ends.

TTP is an extention of my “healthy skepticism”, and I hope we can all learn a little about taking care of our health through the continuing give-and-take on these pages.

In health,

Keith

“Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of habit.”

- Somerset Maugham

The following letter will go out Monday to my United States Congressional Representative, G.K. Butterfield.  Suggested edits are always welcome.  And feel free to plagiarize any or all of this letter to send to your own representative.  As I’ve commented on before (here), the proposed provisions of the NAIS, along with House Resolutions 875 and 759, must be stopped if we are to continue to enjoy the Paleo benefits of locally-grown foodstuffs.  The bottom line is that I know best of all how to properly fuel my body; the last thing I need is a government agency dictating what I can or cannot ingest.  Lets just say that government doesn’t necessarily have a good track record over the last 60 years or so in promoting nutritional health, and leave it at that.

Here’s the letter.  Again, any and all editing suggestions are welcome.

Dear Congressman Butterfield:

I am writing, as both a proponent and as a consumer of locally farmed and ranched food options, to ask that you vehemently oppose the United States Department of Agriculture’s proposed regulations under the National Animal Identification System (NAIS).

At first glance, the provisions of NAIS provide for a technologically advanced level of food-borne illness security, whereby farmers tag every head of livestock and poultry in the country, and with the USDA then provided access to the electronic tracking of said livestock and poultry. In the event of a disease outbreak, applicable government agencies would then require notification within 48 hours of (1) which specific animals were involved, (2) where these animals are currently located, and (3) other animals that may have been exposed (due to proximity to the “diseased” animal). In this way, any future livestock/poultry related disease outbreak could be identified, tracked, and sequestered. Reality, though, paints a much different picture.

Under the USDA’s proposed NAIS regulations, the following would be required:

1. Premises Registration: Every person who owns or manages locations where livestock and poultry are handled would be required to register in a government database, or a government-accessible, private database. This includes people who own even one horse, chicken, goat, sheep, cow, pig, deer, or elk.

2. Animal Identification: Every animal would be assigned a unique 15-digit number by the government when said animal is moved from its herd of origin and/or commingled with other animals. Each animal would be required to bear permanent identification in the form of radio frequency identification (RFI) tags or microchips, rather than the less expensive, traditional forms of physical tagging. While the USDA claims that poultry and swine will get “group numbers,” most small farmers and companion-animal owners do not keep animals in ways that would allow exemption from these provisions.

3. Animal Tracking: Owners would be required to report, within 24 hours, every instance of an animal’s being tagged or having lost a tag, every death, slaughter or missing animal, and any and every “commingling” event, including public and private sales, shows, and exhibitions.

Please note that the verbiage and structure of the proposed NAIS regulations allow for large-scale, industrial animal processing operations, due to the nature and organization of these operations, to side-step the single animal identification provision by providing a “group identification number” in lieu of a single-animal identification. Also note that it is the very conditions in which animals are bred and raised in such large-scale, close-confine, industrial operations that not only promote, but propagate the spread of the very diseases that NAIS regulations are ostensibly aimed at preventing. In addition, any proposed animal tracking system is rendered useless in tracking and/or preventing post-slaughter diseases (such as salmonella, for instance), in that (1) said tracking devices are discarded at the time of slaughter (i.e., do not follow the carcass through processing), and (2) the spread of post-slaughter disease is a function of poor slaughter house hygiene and food handling practices – concerns the USDA is supposedly already monitoring.

In short, the proposed provisions of NAIS represent an unprecedented expansion of government bureaucracy into citizens’ private lives, and infringes on property and privacy rights. The program will impose onerous monetary and logistical burdens on small-scale livestock owners, driving many of these family-run operations out of business. Cost estimates for implementation of NAIS range into the hundreds of millions of dollars; a cost burden that will have to be shouldered collectively by the livestock owners themselves, either out-of-pocket or via taxpayer subsidy. And for all this added cost and government intrusion and oversight, the provisions of the NAIS will provide little in the way of animal health, food safety or consumer protection.

I urge you, Congressman Butterfield, to lead Congress in putting a stop to the USDA’s continuing attempts at pushing for implementation of the NAIS, and I ask that you call for Congressional hearings into this issue. Small poultry flocks, livestock herds, and family farms in general are not the source of food born disease, as the animals thereon are not raised in overcrowded conditions, fed substandard feed, or living in their own filth. This explanation is exactly, though, the case with animals raised in industrial, close-confine, animal operations; the same operations exempt from the most onerous and cost-heavy of the proposed NAIS provisions.

Thomas Jefferson championed the small, independent farmer as the backbone of a strong and healthy America. I urge you not to allow these proposed onerous regulations to further dismantle the America that Jefferson envisioned. He who controls the food, Congressman Butterfield, controls the populace. Control of the food supply should rightly remain with the people and with the small, independent farmer and rancher, and not be placed squarely in the hands of government entity or profit-hungry, agri-business.

I look forward, Congressman Butterfield, to your written response.

Please do your part to actively engage your representatives, either via snail-mail, email, or phone.  Let your voice be heard.

In health,

Keith