Monday, January 26, 2015


Does a feeling of anxiety cover the feeling of satiation? Satiation is a soft signal, so does the feeling of anxiety drown out the signal? We also know there is a cortisol ghrelin link which should drive hunger.

So what is the cause? Could there be a belief that is the cause of anxiety? I was raised with unattainable by me expectations placed on me by my parents. The goal post kept changing, always out of range. This created anxiety, which I took over keeping on myself. Trained in anxiety. Abandon the belief that I should strive for anything, and the anxiety should go away.

Sunday, January 18, 2015

No Fat Added

Just  mountain goat near Jasper, roadside at Goat Point. That is a federal goat, about 1000 year for harvesting him.

There is no consensus on added fat in the LCHF community, or on the amount of food required. They refuse to use calories as a measure of food quantity. So those of us with high appetites gain weight at "eat to satiety". What is a person to do?

Ignore the advise is one possible choices. Or perhaps follow Zoe Harcombe, never mix carbohydrates and fats. Or perhaps just no added fat (naf). It needs to be tested.

Now that I have been out for ribs and a potato with butter, I think the plan is only workable at home. Since I am not a real diabetic yet, i have more wiggle room. I am thinking eggs and something for breakfast, a veg lunch (naf), perhaps a second veg late afternoon (naf), and a normal meat dish and greens (naf) in the evening. The (naf) has two effects, it greatly reduces palatability and calories. Dry vegetable are quiet good at killing hunger, as long as there is nothing else available.


Saturday, January 17, 2015

Uncovering hidden meaning

Warning! DIY psychology. Thanks Val.

Windy Point, above Bighorn Dam, West of Rocky Mountain house, looking northeast downwind. No purpose, no hidden meaning, just a nice day last Sept 2014.

For the last 40 years I have been taking pictures. What am I going to do with them? Back in the day, anyone came over, I had captive audience for a slide show. Some stayed away because I would "make them watch slides". How rude of me. Not no more. We have a friend who puts a "slide show on his TV". We all watch. Ken likes to Photoshop everything. You don't like that wire,... gone, that sign, ... gone, that haze, not bright enough, no detail in the shadows, color is off, ... all fixed.  Oh well. Some people like slide shows, other do not, so what? As a kid, they were often good local entertainment at my grandparents house. But we were visually starved for entertainment, no TV, no movies, not much for radio. National Geographic was a big hit also for a "foreign publication".  Now we are drowning in stimulation. Too much, just too much. Not enough mental stimulation though.

But back to the subject. As I have alluded, this eating problem has many different faces. It is as much psychological as physical, philosophical, chemical, environmental or emotional. The psychologist do not know how to fix it either. Everybody is pointing fingers at something else. We have done everything right, it must be the client. He is non-compliment. And yet we look at all those obese people who have made an effort to learn to eat right and are unable to keep the weight off. There is something wrong somewhere.

We have found wheat and dairy product to be appetite stimulus. Everything that tastes good is an appetite stimulus, a hyper-palatable food, even steaks. It become a necessity for some of us to live hungry. There is no other choice, hungry, craving, desiring, -not satisfied - whatever. With all those negatives the Losada ratio is shot for sure. (Discredited, yes, the data does not support 5 significant figures, but the concept is about right.) Anything not 3 positives to one negative is just too negative. But what is the fix? Boring food, OK. But everything I cook tastes good. Life is a bitch. The other choice is to eat and grow fat again. There is a procedure that chemical cauterizes the blood supply to the ghrelin producing region of the stomach. But would that work?

It should not be necessary to mutilate the body to live at a normal size. This just does not seem right. Perhaps I will try steamed vegetables rather than microwaved.  


Tuesday, January 13, 2015

The problem with blogs

Moose seem to like kale stocks. They have come back a half dozen or so times. The picture has nothing to do with the topic, just the back yard.

The problem with blogs is they require a bit of time. They are just great for us opinionated and retired peoples who have issues with written English. It is difficult to follow all those damn rules of grammar,  spelling and correct word usage. For a change, a phonetic blog perhaps should be employed, where everything was as it sounds, not as it should be according to the English majors.

But then, even for the opinionated, we may have days of no opinions. Now what? Nobody cares, nobody listens, we just talk on. One more empty opinion in the mass volume of emptiness and noise that is the internet. There is good information, and bad information, and the sorting is the problem. If we know a bit, we can sort by what we agree with and what we do not, but that is confirmation, not sorting.

Obesity has much more to do with appetite, appetite stimulation by foods, food addiction, food addiction like issues but for some, maladaptive eating behaviors, emotional eating are the major force, while the opposite is true for others. Some of us have both, and something that looks like a ongoing physical drive to eat, a naturally high appetite. Science does not seem to offer any solutions nor even any good studies into this area. So what is next for this blog?

Now here's one for the books: Wiki - how to gain weight is essentially the same as the typical weight loss recommendations.  

This blog has served as a place to comment on all sorts of food issues, a place to keep notes, opinions, and links. It may likely continue, but to what end? or does it need a purpose beyond a space for what ever is rattling around my brain when I get the urge? I just do not know. Enough.  

Monday, January 12, 2015

Overeating Cure vs Remission

So Overeating is the same, I need to seek remission, not a cure. Is remission from over stimulated appetite actually possible? Remission from hunger is satiety, and low carb makes that possible. Is the excess ghrelin, if that is the actual problem, caused by physical or some though process? How would one tell the difference?

Sunday, January 4, 2015

Question by Allan Farber

This is not medical advise, only opinion. Take with salt. The question was asked with no other way to contact:

"I just started studying a related problem. I need to know the extent of fat"reuse". The body is continuously breaking down cells and replacing them. Are the cell fragments broken down and reused? or are they broken down and excreted? or both."

The body has only three was to get rid of anything it absorbed. The largest by far is to burn it for energy, biological energy or directly to heat. The body can pass small amounts through urine, but if you are passing sugar, fat, or protein in anything belong trace amounts, you have another problem. Third, small amounts of toxins can be excreted through the bile duct back to "outside the body" into the intestine. That is the three choices.

To get fat as FFA (free fatty acids)  out of fat cells, insulin must be low, Triglycerides break into FFA and FFA diffuse out of the fat cells into blood system. Glycerides goes off as glycerides, glycogen and glucose and returned to the liver and kidneys for further reduction to glucose. The only way the body can get rid of fat, essentially, is to burn it.  Good Calories, Bad Calories has a description of this.

Now the cell walls are broken down and reused or replaced one protein at a time. What is it reused for? Proteins and peptides can be reused if undamaged peptides or the liver can make glycogen out of them through gluconeogenesis. It must be a highly effective process, for once again, if we pass much glucose, fat or protein, we have a problem of some kind.  Effective, not efficient, as energy is required for this process.

The body can use intakes three major ways, as energy, directly as heat, or process to storage. Tiny amounts, weight wise, are separated and used directly as they are (proteins, peptides, vitamins, minerals). The division of calories in fat, protein, and carbohydrates is different for each. Fat is slightly higher in energy and heat, protein is higher in heat, likely due to reuse and gluconeogenesis, and carbohydrate is higher in storage.

The philosophy for weight loss should be something like, reduce carbohydrate to some low level, 0 to 100 gm/day depending on your basil insulin production, no more protein than you need to satisfy ghrelin and protein requirements, and adjust the fat by weight of fat loss. The problem is all those other factors that prevent us from doing that. Eating is largely non rational, while the philosophy is totally rational. Other factors are food addiction, and addiction like behaviors, emotional maladaptive behaviors, temptations (low impulse control), environment (living at a smorgasbord), physical issues, desires, cravings, habits, likes and dislikes in foods, societal pressures, willful overeating, lack of concern about weight (no desire to change), etc.

Note that a calorie is a unit of heat, not bio-available energy. The conversion is not consistent from one person to the next, nor for one food to the next. But then, what do I know?