Theory to Practice

“Cynicism is the intellectual cripple’s substitute for intelligence. It is the dishonest businessman’s sub writer, for self-respect.”

- Russell Lynes

I wonder by what age he'd clocked his 10,000th hour of practice --

Malcolm Gladwell, in his very interesting book, Outliers (if you haven’t yet read it, I highly recommend you do), posits the notion that the combination of inherent talent, timing (luck of circumstance), and persistent skills training are the three crucial components to “superstardom” in any endeavor, beit intellectual, physical, or a combination thereof.  Copious in its absence — for athletic prowess, at least (power/Oly lifting not withstanding) — was strength and conditioning training.  And for good reason.

I’ve discussed the mental mindfield of causation/correlation a few times prior (here and here, for instance), but it was brought to the forefront again recently for me in the form of a Facebook message I recieved from a good friend of mine.   My buddy has been wading into the Paleo waters over the last 4 months or so, shedding some significant weight and 4 inches (an inch per month!) off his waistline in the process; and this while being a slapshot — at best — paleo practitioner.  In any event, my friend has shed enough weight to not only get back into pusuing his passion — golf — but to try his hand at some form of strength and conditioning as well.  The strength and conditioning, he says, will go along way toward improving his golf game.  And to some extent, he’s correct; but not to the degree, or even the form, for that matter, that’s held in his mind’s eye.

Weight training for a golfer, even more so than for a baseball player, is tricky business.  Performed correctly, and within the correct dose/response window, and if performed as an adjunct to maintaining skills, I believe, of course, that it can be a boon to one’s game.

Lest you think I’ve slipped off the deep end here, let me assure you that I still believe in the athletic enhancement benefits of a properly designed and executed strength and conditioning program.  I believe in the heath benefits, and the whole host of other positives derived from “physical culture”, writ large.  All that I am saying is — well, let me show you what I wrote to my buddy, in response to the purported, “Tiger’s workout plan” that he sent me:

“One thing I would say about what you sent is to make sure that you don’t fall into the “false correlation” trap. That is to say, correlation does not imply causation. Tiger is not Tiger because of his workout, but because of inherent talent, natural athleticism and focused practice. He may be a slightly better golfer b/c of his workout regimen; there is always the chance however (though I doubt it in this case), that he’s actually being hindered b/c of his workout regimen. That said, if I were you, and an improved golf game were my goal, I’d focus first and foremost on gaining strength in the basic moves (deadlift, overhead press, squat), then moving on to improving explosive power. I’d also work up to doing short sprint intervals. Note that whatever workout you choose to follow, you MUST continue to practice your golf game, as the fine motor skills must keep pace w/ your added strength and power.”

And don’t get me wrong — to emulate the actions, techniques and attitudes of the best and the brightest of any given endeavor is a wothwhile and, I believe, even a healthy and highly intelligent thing to do.  To gain the most from this practice, though, we must take into consideration both our inherant weaknesses and the “emulatee’s” inherant gifts, and adjust, in both our mirroring of these actions and our expectations, accordingly.

Gone to Texas

I’ll be out of pocket for a few day while Meesus TTP and I travel down to Hunt, Texas for a family reunion.  Though, due to Brittani’s absence, it will be bittersweet get-together, we are looking forward to seeing friends and family, lazing about in the Gaudalupe, and raisin’ a little hell out at Crider’s (the site of much of my misspent youth).  If you happen to be out that way — maybe checking out the Stonehenge replica, or the dinosaur tracks, or the indian pictographs, stop by and say hey — or beter yet, meet us out at Crider’s for a great Friday and Saturday night.

Following that trip, we’ll head out to Georgia to tie up some remaining loose ends from B’s passing.  I don’t know how much posting I’ll get in between now and until after the 4th — posting or not, though, my mind is always reeling with thought, and I’m sure I’ll return chock-full of  posting ideas.  One thing I know I want to address is the old axom of , “lift on your heels, play on your toes”.  I’ve got some ideas about that, and I’ll address them when I get back.

By the way, Congratulations to the University of Texas baseball team for such a fine run this year.  Close, so very close guys.  And, though it pains me to say it a special congratulations to the boys out at LSU.  Fine job, guys.

In health,

Keith

I hate to be such a damn cynic, but could we not see this one coming from a mile away?

“After searching NHANES between the years 1999 and 2004 for participants that fit the JUPITER profile, then extrapolating that to the general population, Michos and Blumenthal estimate that about 6.5 million older adults with low cholesterol and high CRP might benefit from statins. If they expanded their search criteria to the cholesterol level cutoff of 160 mg/dl that doctors often use when deciding to prescribe statins, the researchers increased this statin-benefiting group’s size to 10 million.”

Excerpted from a Johns Hopkins medical study, as reported in the blog, Lab Spaces.

I wrote a while back about the infamous JUPITER study; check out this post for my commentary on the subject, and some good links pertaining  to the study as well.

And oddly enough, no mention was made in the Johns Hopkins paper of the efficacy of Paleo-like diets in the reversal of metabolic syndromes.  Imagine that.

And from the TTP Wha-Huh?? Diet and Fitness Files, we have this:

I swear I am not making this up.  This morning, in the gym, I saw the following scene: On the seated leg curl machine was a girl — I say “girl”, I suppose she was in her late twenties/early thirties — very cute in the face, though, unfortunately, about 75 to 100 pounds overweight.  Fair enough, though, she’s in the gym at 6:30 AM — which I applaud! — however, she’s on the leg curl machine, slowly leg-curling away, while eating a figgin’ honey bun! I swear to you — I could not make this up.  Somewhere in the back of this poor girl’s mind was a small voice from her distant (or maybe not so distant) past, saying you’ve got to eat breakfast, it’s the most important meal of the day. And I’m sure she figured, well, I’ll just kill both the working out and breakfast “birds” with a single stone.  My initial thought was, I’m being punk’d.  Then I remembered that I’m not important enough to be punk’d.  Then, I began to feel very, very secure in my pharmaceutical validation career.

Where would you even begin to correct this mindset?

In Health,

Keith

Weighing 230 pounds, she had tried every possible way to restrict her caloric intake — including diets, diet pills and bariatric surgery — without long-term success.

“I’ve tried them all and [the weight’s] not coming off,” she said. “I really believe it’s got something to do with the brain.”

~ From The ABC News special, A Frontier of Medicine: Brain Surgery for Weight Loss

Wow, I’m speechless. Just friggin’ flabbergasted.

The story cited above, as thoroughly and expertly covered by Sandy Szwarc, over at Junkfood Science, really makes my blood boil. Now, it’s one thing to get a fabulously good guffaw over mainstream obesity research’s continuous outpouring of misguided, asshat “studies”, offerings that are totally skewed from the get-go by the researchers’ insistence upon adhering to the dimwitted notion of treating the body as a simple, closed-system, thermodynamic entity; a notion, by the way, that has been both empirically, and via correctly run studies (there are a few!), thoroughly refuted. However, this isn’t about mainstream’s ass-backwards studies, or laughable, tunnel-visioned interpretation — this is about real lives; real human beings.

The mainstream obesity research community ought to be very ashamed that their reluctance to at least recognize a sensible, Paleo-like lifestyle as a viable option for the obese has had a hand in allowing such quackery to thrive.

In Health,

Keith

“Obstinacy is the result of the will forcing itself into the place of the intellect.” ~ Arthur Schopenhauer

Here’s a quick and interesting LA Times article on the subject of Charles Darwin, evolution, and the so-called phenomenon of “speedy” or “swift” evolution.

Detractors of the Paleo lifestyle are wont to fly the flag of speedy/swift evolution as evidence of the supposed incongruence of the Paleo way vis-à-vis modern man’s interaction within his present-day environment. I’ve never really understood this straw-man argument; it is a bit of a non-sequitur, as one can prescribe whole-heartedly with speedy/swift evolution theory and still be fully on-board, intellectually, with the Paleo lifestyle premise. One in no way disproves, or disavows, the other. Lactose tolerance/intolerance is just one of many examples of accelerated evolution. My argument here would be that if you are lactose tolerant, and if your blood-work supports the consumption of raw dairy, then – assuming no immune system impact or inflammatory issues (arguments to which I’m as of yet undecided) – I’d say raw dairy could fit well within your personal realm of Paleo-ness. Few things in life are merely black and white, and the Paleo lifestyle does not exist in a vacuum; it is merely a platform thesis supported by positive blood-work, superior bodily composition, and general “feel good” results. To hold firm to the notion, though, that man, in some distant vision of the future, will have become endowed with the ability to efficiently digest and utilize grains, and that this is an argument in support of man’s consumption of grains now, is to entirely misinterpret the evolutionary concept – speedy, swift, or any form or fashion thereof. It’s a dreadfully wrong argumentative application of the right theorem. What is optimal for our bodies now ought to be foremost on the collective mind.  As I’ve said before, take one on the chin for “Team Human” in this regard if you wish.  Do your part, if you will, to push forward the evolution of mankind.  I’m quite content, thank you, to be the selfish, feeling-good prick putting a drag on the whole evolutionary march forward.  So be it, to each his own, live and let die, etc.  But I digress…

So, in following with this previous line of evolutionary thought, here is some intelligent conversation on Darwin, evolution, and the interplay of evolution and religion. The link will take you to a WGN 720, Milt Rosenberg podcast – one of the best podcasts/interview mediums out there, in my humble opinion. In this particular episode, Milt hosts guests Jerry Coyne (author of Why Evolution is True) and Robert Richards, both of the University of Chicago.

One thing I’ve never fully understood is the whole religion/evolution argument. Actually, I guess I do understand it, I just don’t get it. In my view, religious dogma no more allows for evolution, than does scientific “dogma” allow for spirituality. It’s almost the case of the atheists being as dogmatic as the evangelicals. My spirituality openly embraces both “God” and science – and that includes full-octane evolution. I don’t see why that’s a problem, for either side to stomach. But then again, I can embrace the CrossFit methodology, “one set to failure” and the “Vince Gironda” systems all as legitimate and results-inducing training protocols. The only problem with this “inclusive” way of thinking is that it can be awfully lonely sometimes, without a dogmatic “home” in which to reside.

In Health,

Keith

Some of you may have already come across this article, either from Art’s Evolutionary Fitness site, or straight from the New York Times.

I think the article’s author (Marlene Zuk) may have misinterpreted the precepts and/or goals of a Paleo/EFit lifestyle. Most adherents of this lifestyle realize (at least, I hope they do) that our mirroring of a Paleo diet is not undertaken in a mindless vacuum devoid of any thoughtful manipulation of “modern” variables. “Paleo” is a benchmark, yes; a launching pad. However, we adherents test out hypothesis against an array of hard measurables (in the way of blood tests, physical performance, lack of disease, etc.). And by all perceivable measures, our “way” has thus far been proven superior. Will a better method/lifestyle come along? Hey, I’m open to all ideas and will consider all possibilities — I wear no blinders, and I’m married to no single philosophy — but any “upgrade” had better be able to produce superior results to what we have achieved with the Paleo way. Build a better mousetrap, prove it to be such with sound science, and I’m in.

And then there’s this amusing blog post from shapely prose – a blog which, by the way, carries the following purpose line: urban, liberal, feminist, latte-drinking, overeducated, intellectual, unapologetically p.c. american patriots. I’ll forgo casting judgment as far as that is concerned, in lieu of a quick musing on the particular post in question.

My first thought is, that all concerned here need to define both the “rapid” — as in “rapid evolution” – as well as to what the specific degree of “evolution” is here, that we’re talking about. Those of the Paleo mindset readily acknowledge the “rapid” evolution, under the sharp dietary pressures precipitated by such things as the transition to agriculture, the cultivation of livestock and the widespread disappearance of certain species of fauna. Remember, however, that there are always biological trade-offs for every evolutionary advance. For instance, the ability by some to effectively digest the lactose found in dairy products does not come free of consequence. The immune system must still mount a defense to the novel (to our genome, at least) proteins found in dairy. This is just one example. There is a huge difference, in my opinion, between an organism’s mere surviving and that same organism’s thriving.

And I whole-heartedly subscribe to the notion that evolution does not stand still. It marches onward, in fact, in spits and starts – and, yes, at times it races ahead. It is wise, though, I believe, to consider what these terms are relative to. Racing ahead, leaps-and-bounds, leap-frogging – relative to what? 50, 000 years of human evolution has produced something like a .2% change in the human genome. Just keep that in mind when cruising the grocery store aisles.

So yes, the ladies are correct — evolution marches on. And I suppose that it is within the realm of consideration that in 50, say, or 100 thousand years, the human species will have evolved to the point of thriving on grains and HFCS, and that the human body will have morphed proportionally to the point of resembling a queen ant. That’s all fine and well, and far be it from me to stand in the way of those who choose to “take a needle for Team Human” in the advance of that evolutionary inevitability. And call me a selfish prick if you will, but I, for one, opt out of that noble pursuit. Just gimme a steak, some berries and leaves, and let me be with my selfish, caveman self.

In Health,

Keith

“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

~ Albert Einstein

I can’t think of a more appropriate quote after having seen Oprah’s recent video clip,  New Year, New Plan.  I have to say that I find it extremely difficult to believe that such a driven, intelligent and incredibly powerful woman can be duped by such out-and-out ludicrous diet and fitness advice — and publicly so, no less — and not once but twice!  I’ve already commented on Oprah’s dismal diet and fitness advice in this post, so I won’t tread that well-worn path again.   We all know  full well how this sorry tale of her’s will progress and ultimately crash-and-burn.  If you haven’t yet, checkout Richard’s post over at Free the Animal, as he pretty much says all that need be said on this subject.  Check out the comments, too as they’re spot-on and insightful as well.  I guess all that I can add to this sorry state of affairs is this: Oprah, dahling, if you really want to put an end to your public diet and fitness misery and humiliation, drop Bob Greene like a hot potato (pun intended) and call me.  Otherwise, sorry to say, but the next stop for you and Brain-Trust Bob’s “new you”, unfortunately, is going to be over on failblog.  And I truly hate that for you.  For Brain-Trust Bob, well, not so much.  My feeling is this: if you dispense with asinine diet and fitness advice, you deserve you just comeuppance.  Fail!

Just one more thing, really, and I’m done with this subject for good.  I think the world of you, Oprah, but really, my heart pumps piss to hear about your 14-hour -long day.  I do that grind, too — and so do a lot of others — so you’re certainly not alone.  And I cook my own food, as well as shop for it — 95 % of the time if I eat, it was either made by me, or I had a big, heavy hand in it.  And yeah, that includes washing dishes when the meal is done.  I don’t have a personal chef or a maid to look after my every need, and I sure as hell don’t have a personal assistant to schedule my workouts, meals, and “just me” time.  No, I do all of that my self — and quite well, thank you — all the while maintaining a single-digit body fat ratio, and — if I do say so myself — a fairly decent physique for a guy of 44.  I guess this is a round-about way of saying that you have no excuses, Oprah.  None.  We’re all busy people just trying to be fit in an environment that is everything but.  But if you were to ever ask my advice on the subject (yeah, right) I’d simply refer you to this post’s opening quote, as well as suggest that you, in the future, surround yourself with better counsel.

And speaking of “chef-less” meals prepared after a long workday (post PM workout as well — subject of tomorrow’s post), Meesus TTP and I whipped-out tonight’s dinner in about 15 minutes.  The menu?  Broiled sirloin, steamed cauliflower and avocado.  15 minutes!  There’s nothing to the sirloin: tenderize, season (rub in brisket rub, fresh cracked pepper, and olive oil), top with butter and place on a buttered and pre-heated, cast-iron flat, as close as possible under the broiler (high setting).  Go about two minutes (depending on the cut’s thickness) each side for a rare/medium rare outcome.  It’s the best “fast food” you’ll ever taste.  London Broil is just fabulous done in this way as well.

Good Paleo Eatin'. And Fast, Too!

In health,

Keith

“In the spider-web of facts, many a truth is strangled.”

~ Paul Eldridge

Thank God (go ahead, pick one.  No, really, it’s OK) for Podcasts.  I spend 10+ hours a week commuting to and from work, and I do believe that I’d go absolutely snake-shit if I didn’t have a solid library of downloads to rely on to get me through.

What I’ve provided here are some links that might be of interest, pertaining to the recent publication of the JUPITER study in the New England Journal of Medicine.  In true TTP fashion, I attempted, best I could, to listen to (and read, as well) all sides of the debate with an open mind.  Here is some of the stuff I sifted through in order to come to my current stance on this subject.

The following insightful interviews are courtesy of The People’s Pharmacy:

Extended Interview with Nortin Hadler

Extended Interview with Nortin Hadler, MD, Professor of Medicine, Microbiology and Immunology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is attending rheumatologist at UNC Hospitals.

Extended Interview with Paul Ridker

Extended Interview with Paul Ridker, MD, Professor of Medicine at the Harvard Medical School and Director of the Center for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention at the Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, MA. He led the JUPITER trial of Crestor against CRP.

Extended Interview with Stephen Sinatra

Extended Interview with Stephen Sinatra, MD, FACC, cardiologist at the New England Heart Center in Manchester, CT.

This is a good trio of interviews, because you’ll hear the pro, the con and the “sensible center” of  the Crestor (statin)/CRP (C-reactive protein) debate, related to their (purported) relationship to heart attack and stroke.

Additionally, Richard, at Free the Animal,  posted about the JUPITER study here.  Also included in this post is some good-to-know information about about my one of my favorite foods — eggs.  And eggs vis-a-vis the cholesterol issue.  Which leads us back again, full circle, to the whole JUPITER study debate.  If you’ve got the time and want to delve deeper into this debate, a good place to start is here, courtesy of Junkfood Science.

So what are we to make of all of this?  And more specifically, what can we control?

After listening to/reading all sides in this debate, it seems obvious to me that, practically speaking, what we need to control — and what is perfectly within our power to control — is inflammation. And for the most part, that troublesome inflammation within our bodies is brought on by poor lifestyle choices.  I won’t waste time mentioning the obvious culprits here (smoking, excessive drinking, chronically elevated stress levels, sleep deprivation, etc.) — I mean, c’mon, right?  But aside from eliminating those sources of inflammation, the next obvious source is diet related.  Cut the bad carbs, cut the grains.  Eat the way of the hunter-gatherer.  Really, the answer to preventing these “diseases of inflammation” is just so astonishingly simple.  I would add, too, that this also lends credence to Art DeVany’s notion (and one that I have adopted) of avoiding  a chronic inflammatory response as a result of poorly selected exercise regimens.   The long, drawn-out, punishing sessions are futile — both as related to performance and health.  Hit it hard, hit it infrequently, and go home and rest.

In Health,

Keith   

“It’s what you learn after you know it all that counts.”

~Harry S. Truman

I thought I’d post this link to an interesting lecture, by Dr Loren Cordain, on the Paleo Diet and Multiple Sclerosis, brought to us by Dr.  Dan at At Darwin’s Table. The lecture, in its entirety, will cost  about an hour of your time — but if you don’t have that kind of time to spare , just watch the first 10mins as this gives a really good introduction to the Paleo Diet in general.

In a broader sense, this lecture will open your eyes to the plethora of diseases inflicted upon our genotype by the consumption of a substandard diet.  The focus here is Multiple Sclerosis — a disease I hadn’t really given much thought to as being largely diet-driven; Dr. Cordain, however, delivers a good bit of evidence to the contrary, and it’s highly interesting stuff.  Now, the good doctor and I don’t see eye-to-eye on everything diet-related — the consumption of saturated animal fats, for instance — (he, for the most part, being against it), but this is a minor contention, as otherwise I believe that he and his brand of Paleo are spot-on.

In other news, I plan on writing a “day in the life” post for Saturday — kind of a “highlight chronicle” of a typical (or, not so typical, as it wound-up being a  “working ” Saturday) — but nonetheless, it may provide  some insight for those curious about how I juggle eating, exercise and my work schedule.  Now, I’m chronicling Saturday’s highlights, however, it may be a few days before I post.  My work schedule has been a tad demanding as of late.  Hopefully it will be worth the wait  though, as I’ll include the recipe for the awesome pressure-cooker roast Meesus TTP made last night.  Yummmm, yum!

In Health,

Keith

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.

Abraham Lincoln

coba

I’ve lost some respect, as of late, for strength and conditioning coaches Mike Boyle and Charles Poliquin; especially so for Poliquin, and I’ll explain why in just a moment.  But first you might be wondering, just what in the bloody hell is this all about?

At this controversy’s root is the problem, from a strength and conditioning “guru’s” point of view, of there being far too little trophy game available for the relatively high number of active hunters.  That is to say, supply-and-demand and market forces are generating heated competition within the S & C community — with the resultant snarky remarks and back-biting — among folks attempting to rise to the top of the guru heap.  And who just happens to be at the top of the heap right now?  Crossfit, that’s who.  And in my opinion, deservedly so.

Note: I consider myself as objective as reasonably possible in this matter (kinda like being a Libertarian in the midst of the Republican/Democrat throw-down), however, my workout style is skewed heavily toward the Crossfit camp.  And although I don’t consider myself part of the “Crossfit nation”, I do draw extensively from their ideas, then tailor those ideas to fit my own, specialized needs.  Namely, I emphasize more of the sprint/explosive elements of Crossfit and de-emphasize the endurance elements.

So why is it that Boyle and Poliquin can’t give Crossfit its due?  Because, quite simply, in doing so, they’d have to concede a certain portion of market share — and, therefore, potential clients — and the resultant, dirty, sexy money that comes with those clients.  What’s my take on this?  Simple.  Number one, you’ve got to know where you want to be in the future, i.e., know your goal.  Number two, objectively assess your current status.  Now, from that great, universal grab-bag of ideas and knowledge, assemble your own, personal, transport system.   That system might be a Poliquin, Boyle or Crossfit-leaning system — or it may lean toward any of a dizzying number of systems.  The thing is that most all systems will work for their intended target audience.  The trick is to discern, through the fog of (intentional or unintentional) misinformation and false claims, what is right for you and your goals.

Now, ironically — and in the same article in which Poliquin dismisses Crossfit, he paraphrases one of my favorite sayings: Adopt what is useful and reject what is not.  But just how do you “know” if something is useful or not, if you refuse to lend it proper study?  This is a mind-set that I’ve never quite understood.  And it’s certainly not limited to the S & C community, either; this mid-set is prevalent in any field you choose to study.

If you have the want to, check out this podcast of Crossfit’s rebuttal of Mike Boyle’s dismissal of the Crossfit system.  It’s actually a good discussion, and not what you might think something like this would sink to — namely, a Jerry Springer-like idiot-fest.  There’s some good, high-quality information put out in this discussion.

And to be honest here, I’ve never borrowed much from Mike Boyle’s bag of tricks — I haven’t found all that much in his training philosophy that I agree with — so it was relatively easy for me to dismiss his Crossfit rant.  Not so with Charles Poliquin.  I’ve borrowed heavily from his training philosophy and I consider him — and consider him still — as being one of the most knowledgeable, effective and preeminent S&C coaches in the business.  My take on this, though, is that Poliquin has succumbed to “guru envy” in this matter.  What he won’t admit is that his pool of potential clients is small  due to specialization.  His focus is on (and should be, because he’s proven his worth here) training upper-level athletes.  He’s trying to expand that potential client pool by saying, effectively, that if it’s right for the highly-developed athlete, it is therefore, by extension, the correct prescription for the athletic-leaning, general public.  This is where I disagree with Poliquin — and where, too, I’m disappointed in his failure to, at a minimum, address this notion.

For Poliquin not to concede the efficiency and effectiveness of the Crossfit program in developing better physically-prepared policemen, firemen and armed-forces personnel (or anyone with at least some modicum of beginning fitness, for that matter) is to be either blindered by personal ambition, wilfully ignorant, or unknowledgeable of the physiological sciences.  I think everyone familiar with Charles Poliquin would say that the last two options are non-sequiturs, which leaves us with the first option — that of the ugly beast of personal ambition.  And for an otherwise respected man in his chosen field to allow personal ambition to trump the dissemination of truth, my friends, is highly, highly disappointing to me.

In Health,

Keith

The wise person questions the wisdom of others because they question their own; the foolish one, because it is different from their own. – Leo Stein

Vinod Sohanlal 

A fantastic job and a stellar bit of insight from Methuselah, of Live Now, Pay Later in writing this article for Fitness Spotlight.

The continued and diligent search for the “optimal and doable” is what TTP is all about.  And I whole-heartedly agree with Methuselah’s premise — that what was “paleo” and “evolutionary” might be a shade removed from what is actually optimal for the genotype.  We have to be constantly vigilant for new information and questioning of what we now “know” to be true, open-minded and not necessarily wedded to any one notion just because it gives us a feeling of solidity beneath our feet.

I truly believe that the Paleo lifestyle is the North Star by which to navigate the ocean of heath and fitness.  Individual routes may vary, one might take raft or luxury liner, but the general destination remains the same.   Always be open, though, to adjusting  your tack, dependant upon what environment you encounter. 

In Health,

Keith