I agree with you, but I struggle with my weight myself. I don't think "personal results" should be used to adjudicate an argument.

A really good heuristic to determine what is and is not true about health is to ask: "What were the conditions during which our finely tuned biological mechanisms adapted? Whatever those conditions were, our bodies attuned themselves to those conditions, so reproducing those conditions maximizes the match with how our bodies are tuned." It might be that there is a magic new thing better for us in some way than our historic environment, but if you don't know what to believe, bet against such ideas.

Based on that, fasting cant be bad.

Based on the fact that surviving relgions all have fasting as part of them, again, probably the non-fasters died off.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I think the idea that outlying poorly understood factors should characterize the machine the human body is, and justify certain personal results is in the large majority of cases justification to continue behaviors that perpetuate the condition. I have a rubric that will with no doubt help you mitigate the struggle with your weight if you wish, offered for no personal gain whatsoever. I have no problem with people who have an alternate living style, but I think it should be acknowledged as a choice, not a biological destiny. It is truly amazing how little energy it takes to maintain the sedentary human form, and how many foods translate to blood glucose directly. Let’s just admit that eating is amazing! At any given time I am 20 to 40 pounds over my optimal weight due to choices I make and enjoy thoroughly. I have no guilt about these choices, and can change my selection at any time.

Very sympathetic to evolutionary arguments.

But in this case it's non-sensical.

Humans evolved with all kinds of intestinal worms and fungal parasites, should we then infect ourselves with worms to be healthy? No.

What you have to remember is that although evolution can (sometimes after millions of years) turn a formerly toxic substance into a benign one (or even a beneficial one, see oxygen). It is not omnipotent. A lot of the environment we evolved with is just harmful and evolution has not had enough time to make it not so.

Well, regarding parasites, there is a strong argument that the emergence of allergic reactions has something to do with the symbiotic relationships we have historically fostered with parasites. Evolution is defined by the spaces of unrealized resources between and among toxic monoliths.

Worms tho

You can believe that living naturally is good without going to thw extremes of irradiating yourself with natural uranium, starving yourself, then infecting yourself with worms.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills over here

I’m just saying that our associations with the natural world are storied and complex. It’s a lifetime of study to comprehend even the fundamentals. Benefits are unrelentingly balanced by compromise. Radiation, toxic chemicals and the cancer patient?

You don't need a lifetime of study, read my most recent reply to mike with a reasonable metric for sorting good nature from bad nature

Actually parasitic worms help cure autoimmune diseases. That is well established now. Our immune systems were attuned to them, without them we get out of calibration and start attacking the self.

But your point is in general correct. Look carefully at my prior argument, esp the sentence starting with "It might be".

You're missing the point.

I didn't call your previous argument non-sensical because you didn't leave room for exceptions but because you lumped everything in our evolutionary past into the probably good category whereas I would argue that it's very obvious which things were good and which weren't.

If you want an evolutionary argument it's better to think about pur evolved preferences.

For example, we evolved the preference to be repulsed by rot and excrament. This would not be possible had we not been exposed to these things for our entire evolutionary history. Yet your argument would say that rotting things are good because they've always been part pf my environment where I would tell you that, quite obviously, they are not.

The same can be said for worms or starvation.

Well, we can agree to disagree. Just as bitter indicates poison, the revulsion to what is unwholesome is the product of the preferences of those who survived to procreate.

I didn't say rotting things were good (let's put aside the question of fermented foods for a bit). Our ancestors were repulsed by things, that indicates strongly that they are bad.

But I think you are missing my point. I am saying that we are all dumb as rocks. We barely evolved any intelligence at all, and far too often we think we know things and we act on that supposed knowledge to our detriment. And so when someone says "It's very obvious which things were good and which weren't" my point is that it absolutely is not obvious:

* It was obvious that the sun caused skin cancer and we should lather up. It was not obvious that the sun's vitamin D production cut heart disease risk so far that sunscreen wearing caused more deaths.

* It was obvious that saturated fat caused heart disease, and so margarine would be healthier. It was not obvious that trans fats cause huge problems to human bodies that did not evolve to handle huge loads of trans fats.

* It was obvious that intestinal worms were bad (duh!) until we learned that our bodies expect them. I have personal experience on this one.

Nothing is obvious. We live in a hyper-complex system.

And so we have to trust that we evolved to work against a certain kind of environment and we should mimic that environment as much as possible to avoid risk, because any sort of changes to that environment are very likely to be in the bad direction (some could be good, but always bet the other way) even if they seem obviously in the good direction.

I am constantly amazed at how fine tuned life is towards it's environment, and how even small changes in the environment cause species extinctions. And yet us humans are tweaking our own environment in massive ways, and then suprised that we develop allergies, autoimmune diseases, metabolic syndrome. The causes are obvious. The solutions are hard to put into practice, but we know what they are. Tribal people don't have diabetes, autoimmune diseases, metabolic syndrome, allergies, etc.

Saying "fasting also comes with innumerable desteuctive [sic] effects the worst of which is an increase in cortisol" presumes we know far more than we actually know about fasting, about cortisol, about why your body is producing it, etc. I can point you to many studies showing how fasting is very healthy, despite the alleged spike in cortisol, but that's not the argument I'm trying to make here. The argument I'm trying to make is that humanity is a lot dumber than we pretend to be, to the extent that simple heuristics like "do what your ancestors did" do better than trusting the current science does.

It turns out our ancetors didn't have fruit all year round... we probably shoudn't either. It turns out they sometimes went days without eating, because they couldn't find any more food. Turns out that is good for us too. Our ancestors almost all ate meat - we should too. Our ancestors didn't use fluoride in their water or toothpaste - we shouldn't either. Fluoride hardens teeth with calcium, why shoudln't it then also harden arteries with calcium? that seems obvious to me but it is the opposite of what we are told. Flouride occurs naturally in some water supplies, but if your ancestors didn't come from there, you aren't attuned to it. Our ancestors didn't live indoors. Our ancestors sat around fires at night. Our ancestors squatted, they didn't sit in chairs. Lots of things to mimic that, if you try it, you will find you start to feel a lot healthier.

Evolutionary biology and game theory -- it is an entire way of thinking. It changes everything.

This is totally incoherent, you should have some warm milk with honey or something else pleasant and easy to digest, you'll feel better.

I don't use a spell checker so sorry for the typos I guess. Though, I suspect you understood me perfectly, just wanted to brag about something or lash out.

Just because our ancestors starved, often didn't get enough sleep, fought violently and did all kinds other bad things, it does not mean they'll "turn out" to be good.

Our evolved preferences are a simple heuristic for the parts of our environment that are good for us and the parts that are bad. We prefer to have food often, to sleep a lot, to feel safe and not engage in violence. Even though very few of our ancestors had these things, they are obviously good.

Preference emerged out of necessity, and the consequences of these preferences would not have manifested until after the age of procreation. What we are talking about here is wellness into echelons of age never before seen in human populations. It is a new frontier, and we’re all just making educated guesses about what might serve us best.

just a heuristic Jac

but you should take note that if most of your ideas about health lead you to things that healthy humans don't naturally prefer, then you're probably on the wrong track

exceptions are to be expected obviously

Ditto. I guess we will see. I’m pretty old already though, so far, so good.

Evolved preferences are a good guide too. But sometimes we can see where the preference wasn't attainable, so the actual environment might give better clues.

I'm going to go have some warm milk and honey now. I was astounded to find out what percentage of our paleolithic diet came from honey (15-30% or more)

💯

On second thought, I should have a snack too and feel better.

Sorry for the hostility dawg, you're on the right track as far as I'm concerned and closer to the truth than most.

gn

I have the feeling that there is lot of truth in what you say.. it resonates.

I think your assumptions start with a fallacy:

Didn’t get enough sleep? Who said it?

Fought violently? Again… who said it?

All kind of other bad things? Which exactly?

You start assuming the we are evolved and the people in the past were savages.. which again is just a false statement, or at least really hard to tell

mmmm i answered on the wrong post … it was mean for the answer to this sorry!

nostr:npub1fl7pr0azlpgk469u034lsgn46dvwguz9g339p03dpetp9cs5pq5qxzeknp you were saying something along similar lines.

I agree, the common logic or “obvious answers” are all wrong. Engineered that way.

Take that “obvious logic” and reverse it - you are more likely to have the actual answer.

What about the gut parasites? Is their absence related to a modern illness? Genuinely curious.

There is definitely some strong evidence suggesting ties between the way gut parasites change the function of our immune system and autoimmune disorders. Autoimmune responses are responsible for a vast array of debilitating conditions ranging from allergic reactions to IBS to Crohn’s disease, even the cytokine storms that are often the cause of death in viral infections. Cultures who have parasites as part of their environment typically are aware of plant remedies that control the parasite loads as well, as uncontrolled parasite load can result in health consequences including mortality. Like so many other things, balance and management are key concepts. Several people affected with debilitating and life threatening allergies have documented their recovery through intentional infection with hookworm parasites. An interesting rabbit warren for sure.

Intentional hookworm infection sounds interesting 🤔

Besides the research finding a coorelation between a lack of gut parasites and autoimmune dysfunction, and finding that gut parasites lead to a reduction in autoimmune dysfunction, I have a personal story. Ever since I was 7 or 8 years old I used to get excruciatingly painful IBS (I'll leave the gross details out for now). When I was 42 I moved onto a farm. The IBS resolved, not completely, but got much better. This is not science, it might be completely unrelated, but I have been drinking rain water collected from the roof that is not entirely clean, has leaf litter, is collected into a water tank. Instead of getting sick from "non-potable" water, I got well. I actually went for about 8 years without getting sick at all (except for minor sniffles).

I’m not surprised at this. I have always worked in the dirt one way or another, had pets and farm animals, my kids played in the dirt as children and we’re all healthy as can be and have been for our whole lives. The tonsils, that reside in the back of your throat where the nasal passages and mouth cavity meet are full of mast cells. Everything you breathe or eat is sampled by your immune system there, and preparations are made at that point just in case one organism or another reaches pathogenic proportions later on. Without constant exposure and preparation your body gets blindsided when exposure does occur. I see the tonsils as explicitly non-vestigial. #touchgrass