Eating is a Hedonistic Terminal Desire

The desire to eat is a hedonistic terminal desire, and a biological imperative driven desire. Few people have the will power to fast for extended periods, and shallow cuts take more will power than deep cuts. By shallow and deep cuts I mean shallow of perhaps 200 calories/day, while deep of perhaps 1000 calories/day. I am not sure how much more will power than cutting is required for fasting, but I expect it is considerable or considerable distraction is undertaken at the same time. I have never been able to fast long, except when I had to drink that stuff for a colonoscope, which the medical profession almost killed me with.

Programs like OA can help for a distraction and may help considerably for some but it does not help other forms of the overeating problems. It is not a single cause. It does seem to help with the maladaptive moral behavior issues, and the relationship based issues, perhaps even stress, which are the issues that are really addressed by the steps. For those of us who know that there is no god, and at best god is a concept that lends itself well to acceptance of a problem, and acceptance of the inability to deal with the problem, and thereby stopping struggling, when the problem is the struggling, it does help on the maturing out of the issue. See Stranton Peele for the full description of this problem. These programs do not help where there is a real physical drive to overeat, and the only solution is going against our nature and our desires on a ongoing basis. We need to accept that the problem is real and physical, and learn to not succumb to that miserable desire.

In reticent time, it has become increasingly difficult to resist the desire and the nouns are disappearing. I never was good at spelling, but I can no longer write much without google to look up words. I expect this is all connected with the onset of dementia, although I have not been diagnosed.

Hedonistic terminal desire, according to William B. Irvine, Desire, are the strongest desires, as these have direct rewards. In addition, all these type of appetite desires feed directly into the "serial" side of our brain, so some of us also struggle to change once we start down that path, because "neurons that fire together wire together", for what ever that is worth. This is the hallmark of addiction.

In most addictions, the desire reduces with abstinence from the substance. With food this is not happen for many, and practical long term, and salad with horrible of just tolerable dressing just does not cut it for long. It is one way to reduce consumption if there is nothing else available. Salads with just tolerable dressing is one way that I have used for weight loss.

The medical and addiction world has nothing to offer food addicts other than "faith in god" bullshit, and some counseling from the "believers". All local AAA meetings and Smart meetings are a bunch of sugar sucking, sugar pushing, alternative to alcohol cravings pushers, and that is not useful to a food addict. The books from Smart do not address the physical desire issue, as abstinence from food is not possible, and its explanation is not really correct, but the suggested plan is the only approach they have.

Meditation has an effect on many things but the effect on physical driven desires are minimal and do not last beyond the end of meditative state. So once we have sufficient food and philological information, what is the solution. Gut bacteria seem OK. This problem started by the time I was 6 years old, and it has never left.  

So that leaves me where I are today, desiring to eat without end, and gaining. So what is the solution? Is there one? Does it even matter? 

Learning to Live Hungry

4:00 AM, and I wake up hungry. Perhaps it is time to learn more about this condition of unsatisfaction. So I spend a bunch more time searching the net. Nothing new there. Hunger is a "motivational state" that is supposed to send us in search of food. It does, and works as it should. Nothing new there.

Hunger is caused by insulin, ghrelin, leptin, Peptide YY, digestion speed, and a bunch of the usual suspects. Some say it is a psychological problem, and I am sure that is a component. There is the usual statements about... eating to just satisfy hunger... but that feeling never goes away for some of us.

I have looked at this as diet, life style choice, an addiction, a psychological issue, a maladaptive behavior, a lack of food knowledge problem, an environmental problem, a social issue, a familiar problem, a cultural problem, a philosophical problem --- and while these all help, they are not the complete solution. I have spent a fair bit of money and time chasing possible solution or getting suckered by dream merchants. I have explored OA, FAA, WW, TOPS, FA, AAA, SMART, JC, as well as the various other eating schemes, paleo, low carb, zero carb, fasting. It all come to eat less that I burn, I lose weight, and am hungry. Some helped some. Some less hungry, some more. No shit Sureluck.

So perhaps it is time to just give up and learn to live with hunger. How the f does one do that? The choice is learn or die an early death of obesity. It is that simple. I have battled this problem since I was 6 years old, and the amount of time I have been near normal weight could be counted in weeks, and have deep cycled 100 pounds 6 or 8 time. The last time it was 68 kg, and I have gained back 24 kg over the last 4 years, and that was on low carb, Paleoish, virtually no grains, etc.

I have outlive my doctor, and the new one has a bigger problem with weight than I have. Old Tim told me years ago, when I was suffering from back pain that as it had been a problem for years, that I should just learn to live with it. Years later, I took up archery and the pain went away. Explain that if you can. Perhaps it is time to do the same with this diet problem.

So how does one learn to live hungry? Well, since hunger is a natural motivation state, one will need more motivation or constraint to not eat than to eat. The desire for food, sex, are physical and at the gene/animal level according to some. Some people have too much sex drive or one of those perversions of sex that have become accepted by society as being not normal but real. Why not a food overdrive? Just because we do not want it, what difference does that make. Not all gays want to be gay. Or is this just one more excuse? I doubt it. It feels real.

I find recipes and food pictures stimulate appetite so those will be quashed, ejected, suppressed when possible.  

But what do I know anyway?   

Learn to live hungry

Learn to live hungry is the answer provide by the medical establishment.

http://diabeticmediterraneandiet.com/2016/03/12/nearly-half-of-adults-in-california-have-prediabetes/

There may be a few that can learn to eat low carb, and become satisfied on less food that they burn hence become normal sized. There are those to who meter their food and become able to live like that. Good for them, keep it up. Most of suffer at losing, and maintaining, and therefore not able to do it long term. Why? It is the food pushing environment we live in. We cannot get away.

The appetite is tied into the serial part of our brain and does not respond directly to logic. We get hungry, we want to eat, and once we start, we are unable to stop, unless we run out of food. So what does science offer? Eat less, move more. But that is not the problem, it is in the doing of that. We all know that if we were able to eat less and move more, we would not have the problem. Those who are able do not have the problem. The remainder of us, the other half have a problem which the thin refuse to accept or does not exist for them, and can offer no help for the problem, other that criticism, condemnation and belittling.

We are a dipole population. At least what the data tells us, for those of us who only look at the data (engineering). We are not homogeneous in this, the weight/obesity data tells us this; we are two groups of something like Chi-squared with quite a bit of freedom, one group is of the 1-Chi-squared, and combined we look something like normal distribution. But that is not what the minds that govern us seem to think. They are fixated on a single population, some eat too much and move to little.

Obesity is a mental problem, not a motivational problem. It is not yet understood enough to remove the problem, but some of us are making progress. We have been fed bullshit all our lives, and when we realize this and start cleaning out our minds, we start to make progress.

The establishment is becoming irrelevant to many, and will soon be irrelevant to all,  so establishment f-off, with your condemnation, until you understand the problem and can offer real help.

Honesty, truth, compassion, peace, but what do I know?

A bridge to far, a step to short.

http://www.weightymatters.ca/2016/03/canadas-senate-set-to-tackle-food.html

and the senate is going to do something.... Good luck... 

"Banning food and beverage advertisements to children (where food advertisements have been proven to increase kids' eating)"

For those of us with low impulse control, and/or high susceptibility to suggestion, aka easy to influence with advertising, it would be a substantial benefit to us for the government to ban all food/sugar advertising. One advertisement can whet an appetite, regardless. I am not likely to buy there products, but am am likely to go look at what is available in the fridge, cupboards, etc. It is suggestion that leads to food thoughts, looking, urges, temptation, desires, thoughts, and eating/snacking/overeating and down the road to obesity.

Those who are busy, not easily influenced, not watching TV etc, are not exposed to the advertisement, are not effected. Muting helps but it is not enough. A total ban on food advertising could have a big impact, but that would need to be tested first. A total advertising ban for a period of time with surveys before and after a year would be the best way to test it. Only survey people who are overweight and watch TV a lot, for we are the canaries in the obesity mine.

The government does not have the balls to take on the food industry, so that can never happen, however the CRTC may help. We now have TV on demand which has much less commercials and could have no food commercials, but not all the programs. If our Canadian Senate takes it on, they would be worthwhile.

Improving access to nutritious food in Canada's northern communities ----   For any of you that have spent time in the northern small communities, it will be obvious that low carb frozen is the way to go. But then the north requires cooking lessons, and an understanding of low carb cuisine, along with the whole non-low carb world.  I never eat as well as I have since studying low carb, and living low carb, but that also takes a different set of cooking skills. 

Ensuring that the revision of Canada's Food Guide excludes the direct involvement of food industry representatives---- 
Really. Do you think the Canadian Senate has the balls to do that? The crying will be loud.


If the senate was that influential, we would not be questioning the value of the senate. Good luck.

And now how can I maintain respect with honesty, truth, non-violence, moderate compassion, and moderation in self control.... But what do I know? 

Complete Apathy

I just do not care today.

It is difficult to argue, as to present an philosophical argument with people who believe they are right for no other reason because they believe it, and thinking make it so. The only way to deal with such is through apathy.

This was part of a discussion of the right to die, to trim the final miserable end of life, when it will be just days we are talking about. Our lives, if we are free, is something that we should have absolute control over, and do, as long as we are physically able. The government may say we do not, but are we free or not? Certainly the medical profession should not have the right to make one suffer, as they create revenue for themselves by the suffering and hanging on of the elderly and infirm, where there is no hope of reasonable recovery and there is no quality of life, and little awareness of life either. We would not permit animals to suffer like that.  

Marcus Aurelius procrastinated in a writing assignment in his studies with Fronto - to arguing both the pro and contra for a position in the same assignment. That is equivalent to making a cost benefit analysis, both ways. One way misery, the other peace. One way some period of pain, suffering, hardly aware of life if even aware of life. The other way no more. It is shorting the suffering only, for by that point, life and the pleasures of life are done.

Sacredness of life is only sacred if there is a god. Logic says that if something exists, we should be able to find evidence. If there is no evidence, that the science says it does not exist, or its effects are small or is not.  Therefore, the hypothesis that there is a god can only lie toward the truth by the amount of not being able to prove it wrong, not enough to base a life on; therefore, the religious waste time on only a hypothesis, but we permit that with apathy. Oh well.

When we go at a problem, we can change our self, the situation (good luck with that), or we can just stop caring and let the shit fall where it does (apathy). It is a common choice.  

Respect, truth, non-violence, moderate compassion, and moderation in self control.... But what do I know? 

Priorities

Priorities need to be adjusted from time to time and we need to list our priorities from time to time. Religions like Christianity and Islam have the religion itself as there first priority. That is just wrong, the religion should serve the people, not the other way. Stoicism has rationality as the first priority, at least that is the individual, following our true nature, and living a virtuous life; that is all fine and good but it puts wisdom top on the virtuous. One needs to become older to develop wisdom, hence it is suitable to age into stoicism. Buddhist put truth, peace and loving kindness or compassion as there top three. Confucianism places respect for others as their top priority, respect for family, up and down generation, for the society, governance, and like as the top. That covers a great deal of territory in one shot, and that is something that is lacking in North America in general.

Respect must flow both ways, and must be seen by both to flow both ways. When our political types get arrogant, there is no room for respect. Respect is not just speech patterns, but also more actions that any phrasing. When a Beaumont, Alberta, RCMP approaches a car in a routine traffic stop with his hand on his gun, it does not show respect, trust, but likely fear on the part of the RCMP, especially with a senior.

Lack of respect for traffic law show up in many places; consider those plastic reflective plates over license plates, psychopath screens. They say that the driver/owner intends on speeding and not taking responsibility for there actions. Of course, street design on new rebuilt roadway that impedes traffic flow also lack of respect for the traffic on the part of the Town Council, the dinosaurs, as they have become to be known. Respect must flow both ways for it to work for much.

The whole Canadian Government, from the Senate down would need to be cleaned up if respect was to become a cultural norm. Would respect for one's self make a big difference toward our self treatment? I think it might reduce many of our societies problems, and perhaps reduce our dependence on the processed food. If we respected ourselves more, we would not eat it and perhaps recognize those merchants of not respecting we humans as people, and perhaps this disrespect of them, and our own self respect could provide that last push away from the bad foods. It is respect flowing both ways, that has allowed the Chinese to flourish under Communism. 

Respect must flow both ways, once again. I do not respect religion, for these are based on logically impossible events thousand or more of years ago, that we are supposed to care, and live that way. There patrons pass the gullibility test on regular basis. Grab onto something and give your head a good shake. Look around at the Catholic Church and there frequent pedophilia and alcohol abuse problem among priests. They need to get there house in order first, but they are a property rich, cash flow poor organization.  New Earth types defy science and logic.

Today my priority must be self respect, to not dip into the insulin overshot foods, not to allow psychological cravings to start or let myself into a situation where lack of impulse control can start a slide.

Oh well, respect, truth, peace, compassion should be the first virtues in the priority. The Cardinal Virtues will just need to weight for now.

   

Most Religion is Fraud

And the truth shall set us free. Schopenhauer figured that we have two biological drives: food and sex, aka reproduction, perhaps at times a bit of desire for companionship, but after those are satisfied, there is boredom, unless we pick a purpose for our life and go just do it. Does that need a god? Not in the least.

Half of our existence, our biological drives, our genetic roots, is about food. So if we are short of success in reproduction or beyond our best by date, are we driven to the area where we can have success in, that being the consumption of food?

What does religions have to say about all this. It is sin. We were born to do wrong. What a negative point of view! It is moral failure. It is greed. It is lack of self control. We now know that it is mostly chemical and biological driven in an environment that does not force us to do labor as it once did. We are biologically doomed, and those who survive will be the ones with genes that are better suited to this abundant environment. Religions may distract the unthinking and short lived from reality, but they do not fix the basic problem. We reproduce to fast to maintain stable populations. Religion is the original dream merchants. We now have more information.

Our present bleeding heart political system will not lay down the hard facts on any of these issues. Over population, dangerous foods, mostly created by processing and preservatives, but taste wonderful, are being heavily marketed to a gullible population. How gullible? Look at the hold of religion, the original gullible test. So what do we need to do to create a truthful, and honest environment where those of us with food and eating issues can flourish?

First, we must provide ourselves with a new purpose, to define and build such an environment. A year around stable and suitable local food source/system must be defined. Here in Northern Alberta, it can be done, at least on a small scale (I grew up that way), but it is not economic, considering that a can get a jar of pickles from India for the same price as a resealable jar here. That is the problem, economy of shipping from cheap labor countries.

We would need a physical community of like minded people. There is not that. Being a free thinker, clear reasoning atheist, makes that much more difficult, for the religious all shun the atheist free thinkers. This country may claim to be Christian, but they run from the atheists. The next revolution will be a religious cleaning of the belief system of the population. It will not be political, but truth and reason from first principles of science to a new culture. A supply of good food will only be one of the issues.

It will be interesting times in the future for sure, just as it has been throughout my working life. I grew up working some with horses, dirt roads, root cellars, no electricity, back country ways. The Gerstetner was a high tec machine as was the fax, both come and gone. The computer and internet have become a essential tools, complete with antivirus and anti-add software, encryption up the was-zoo, and the like. Free cloud storage for the non-valuable stuff, and off line off premises back up for all valuable stuff. I wonder if this whole era will be lost to history as the technology changes and everything becomes obsolete.    

What do I know?  Perhaps a new religion based on truth, peace, and compassion, but not any bullshit.

Impulse Control and Meditation

In resent years, I have come to recognize that my overeating problem is a group of problems, and that low impulse control, temptations, are part of the overall problem. Impulse control is one of those separate issues.   

Impulse Control for overeating issue can help when the issue is impulse and temptations are available. It is easier to remove myself from the temptation situation, but that is not always practical. Does meditation help? The answer is yes, at least when the low impulse control is active, and while the meditation practice is active.  So it is not yet clear if it is the meditation or displacement that is effective, that is to say that meditation can be a form of displacement.

Displacement is simply the act of going or doing something where we take our bodies to a location of activity or to a place where food is not an issue. It is difficult be be interested in food in a barn, sewer plant, dump, dusty field, root patch, rock patch, or anywhere we busy and want to be. Work is a great place for some, hell for others.

Meditation practice can be conducted in a environment where one is not being attached by conversation, TV, Radio, or other intrusive conditions, and attention can be diverted from the surroundings for an extended period of time. Nothing special is required, but quiet really helps, as does comfortable body position. The physical position is not critical for short term meditation, but if you intend to sit for times where hours would be the appropriate way to measure time, some of the elements of position becomes important.

Meditation is a state of mind, regardless of how we get there. It is a form of concentrated directed contemplation, or just contemplation. The ease that various people can drop into this is variable; some have difficulty, and for others it is near automatic. The depth varies and changes over time. After a bit we start to see thought objects and the gaps between thought objects, feel sound, and learn to look where thought objects come from. We may even learn to deselect thought objects and put them in other places. I do not have the vocabulary to describe some of these effects. It is not of the physical world, but seems very real and is in the realm of concepts and concept objects, X files sort of stuff, but short of fancies. It needs to be experienced, not intellectualized. It is a state of mind.  

So what does this all have to do with overcoming food issues. The solution may be to go meditate on it. But what do I know?

The process

I have struggled with cravings all my life, and various people have given me bits of guidance, which never helped. One day I realized that there is one more problem, and I will call that psychological cravings. 
A search of the web shows lots of chat about this problem, more or less, assuming it is the same problem but little on overcoming this issue. There is a lot of advise that does not work for me, so does this mean I have a different problem or the advise does not work.
Then I went exploring the cause of cravings, and well the Buddhist have a fix, but it takes some mind work. So will that work?
Short term, it does have an effect.

We cannot treat something that we do not understand.

So I put together bit of a table about this whole overeating/addiction issue and realized that if there are psychological/mental driven cravings, these too are separate and need to be address.

But what do I know?

Causal groups of overeating	Development	Recovery
Social / family overfeeding /Sugar overload	1	1
Physical Cravings, Insulin resistance induced cellular hunger	2	2
Emotional / Psychological distress	3	3
Development / Learning of Maladaptive Eating Behaviors	4	4
Psychological Cravings	5	5
Belief System / Philosophy	6	4
Environmental	7	6
Chemical Dependence	8	2
Food Knowledge / Exercise correction/ learning proper eating habits 301/		1
Emotional Coping Methods		3
Philosophical correction		4
Recovery from Psychological Cravings		5 or 1

Sugar Addiction

We have all heard that sugar lights up the brain just like cocaine. Or should that be alcohol?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz9Cp8L0jA8

Is it dopamine that drive overeating?

So how does one not eat any carbohydrates to test addiction to carbohydrates theory?

Childhood Obesity

In the last while there has been a great deal of yap about childhood obesity. Yes, sugar, wheat, starches, junk food are part of the problem. I was an obese child, without junk food but an oversupply of good food. And there is also a psychological problem, I was not adapting to the insane environment I was being raised in.

http://www.drsharma.ca/is-childhood-obesity-driven-by-genetic-differences-in-appetite
http://www.webmd.com/children/news/20160211/varied-diets-may-not-curb-childhood-obesity-study-suggests

I expect it is the same today. It is or will become the child's responsibility to adapt to it's environment. If he/she/it does not adapt, obesity may occur as a side effect of one of the releases. High insulin, high blood glucose level cause relaxation and eases sleep, and result in obesity. Once the habit is established... it becomes part of there characteristics... now what?

Correction of childhood obesity, during childhood would save a lifetime of struggle, but then what would I know? I just lived through the problem. There is not enough recognition that some people are just not skilled at raising children. Oh well, those children that survive become the next generation of parents, and the cycle continues, until someone recognizes the problem and applies the fix.

But then what do I know?  

Just because one is behind a pay wall:

Kids given more food diversity might be heavier, researchers find

WebMD News from HealthDay

By Kathleen Doheny

HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, Feb. 11, 2016 (HealthDay News) -- Eating a greater variety of healthy foods may reduce the odds of being overweight in adults. But, a surprising new study suggests that a greater diversity of foods might not have the same effect in very young, poorer children, and may even increase their risk of becoming overweight.

"We found that among low-income, preschool-age children in the U.S., dietary variety and diversity were not associated with [overall] body mass index," said study author Dr. Julie Lumeng. She is an associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Michigan Medical School and School of Public Health in Ann Arbor.

However, from year-to-year, the researchers found that greater overall food variety, healthy food variety and dietary diversity were linked to greater annual increases in body mass index (BMI) in the youngsters studied.

BMI is a rough estimate of a person's body fat based on weight and height measurements. In children, age and gender also play a role in BMI calculations. In general, the higher the BMI, the more fat someone has, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The researchers said the annual changes in BMI in the children studied were small, but were "notable" because they were unexpected. Lumeng and her team had thought that a greater variety of foods, particularly healthy foods, would lead to improvements in BMI scores.

Because the findings were so counterintuitive, the researchers said it's too soon to make any dietary guideline changes based on the results. And the study was only designed to show an association between food variety and BMI, not cause-and-effect.

Lumeng and her colleagues decided to look at the effect of dietary diversity in young children because of the prevalence of obesity in children and a lack of research on the topic. Nearly 23 percent of U.S. preschoolers are overweight or obese, and that figure rises to 30 percent in low-income families, the study authors said.

The researchers evaluated 340 preschoolers, who were all 4 years old when the study began. They were also enrolled in Head Start, a federally funded program for low-income children.

The researchers weighed children and their primary caregivers. They also asked the caregivers to complete a dietary survey to get an idea of the variety and diversity of the youngsters' diets. Variety is defined as the number of foods eaten from a predetermined list over a given time period. Diversity includes not only variety but their relative distribution in the diet, and how well people stick with recommended dietary patterns, the researchers said.

The study authors were able to get follow-up information on 264 children from the original group two years later.

The study is published in the March issue of the journal Pediatrics.

Dr. Susan Baker, professor of pediatrics at the University at Buffalo, reviewed the findings and wrote an editorial to accompany the study. She was also surprised by the study's outcome.

Although she can't explain why greater variety and diversity in the youngsters' diets didn't lead to improved BMIs, Baker did note that the study has some limitations, as many studies do.

"The major limitation was the use of self-reported food intake data," she said. Experts know that overweight people under-report what they've eaten and underweight over-report, she said.

Until more research is in, Lumeng said, "It's still important to focus on ensuring that your child has a diverse range of foods in their diet. However, if you are concerned as a parent about obesity or preventing obesity, increasing dietary variety and diversity may not be the most important thing to be doing."

More important, in Lumeng's view, is to think about limiting portion sizes, reducing time spent in front of the television and other screens, and avoiding sugar-sweetened beverages.

The research may actually be good news for fretful parents of picky eaters, she said. While she's not encouraging picky eating, of course, Lumeng said parents often worry about it. "When you look at the literature, kids who eat a smaller variety [of foods] tend to be thinner, picky eaters," she said.

Totes watevs

Humor plus a bit of information makes the message go down better.

Examples:
 http://carefactorcritical.blogspot.ca/2016/02/the-race-to-bottom.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymxAg4XWnxc

Irreverence

Bless me father for I have sinned, it has been two weeks since my last post... 
I could not resist, I just started reading AC Grayling, The Good Book... along with a secular Buddhist book....

Anyways, the first thing I realized that Buddhism teaches patience in a big way, but never bothers to state that. Secondly, with the habit of reflecting AM and PM... where have we heard that before? Buddhism, as practiced by Buddha was primarily a well organized philosophy, his followers converted it into a religion.

Buddhism teaches truth is a virtue, but never bothers to define that word, or what that really means. Casting about for a definition, like I was casting to hook a swamp shark, I fine little as a clear definition.  In accordance with fact or reality... ok.

So I set about to find a heavy duty definition of truth. Well we can eliminate anything that can be demonstrated to be untrue, or that doubt can be raised. That eliminated a great deal. Secondly, we must believe that it is true. We must be able to justify the truth, belief is not enough. It must be believed by others to be true....untrue. What others believe may be in fact untrue, just traditional or folk wisdom, but it may also be true.  So to recap, not demonstrably untrue, believed true, justifiable.  

So it is not about truth exactly, but what they believe to be true mostly. So a belief in any specific god is untrue, as there are many specific gods, which makes a true god demonstrable untrue to some. 

So what does this all have to do with not eating. We all need something to keep our minds and bodies busy. Expanding our minds is part of a full and flourishing life.  This same argument can be made against any diet that speaks of optimum diet. Without summing over a lifetime, there is no way of figuring an optimum, so these are false claims. There can therefore be no best. There are areas where people did tend to live longer, but some of that is in genes, and some is in memes. 

There is no doubt that I feel better on a Paleoish diet, without grains and sugars, but I am unable to say it is "better" for everyone. I also know I feel hunger at a "no weight gain, weight maintenance" level of intake. That is a problem for me, long term.

But what do I know?

 

 

 

Lifestyle

We all live lifestyles. If we have a problem, food, smoke, drugs, gambling, etc, it is easy to say it is is lifestyle choice. It is. But that statement is of no value in changing the impact of the problem. We have no choice with respect to the problem, we are just unable to make that change, and likely we and you do not know why.

We all know the solution to obesity is to quit overeating. That is obvious. It is the doing that is not easy. We have been trained to eat, have a compulsion to eat, a natural over-driven desire to eat. We are not normal people. We need to identify and change what ever the things are that are driving us to eat. There is the problem.

All those who say stop eating, change your lifestyle, are just missing the problem and a ignorant of the real problem. Many people are driven by high (excess) insulin to eat, but not all. Excess cortisol also causes the same problem. Excess adrenalin similar issue. Some have physical issues, psychological issues, philosophical issues, environmental issues, social issues, or the like. So what do we need to change?

The only solution is to examine one issue at a time until we find what fixes the problem, and then make the lifestyle change. Without knowing what the problem is, each lifestyle change only adds more failure to the problem.

The first step in our recovery may be to accept who we are and our limitations, not try to change ourselves to something we are not. We may need to stop listening to others and become a hermit. Now there is a life style change.

But what do I know? 

Exobese

Sharma post reminded me of a story..
http://www.drsharma.ca/if-oprah-cant-why-do-you-think-you-can 

why do they with great unanimity recommend vices to us?

The devil was chatting to a alcoholic. You can go to heaven today, or you can party tonight and go to heaven tomorrow. The alcoholic, of course, partied. The next day, the devil gave the alcoholic the same choice again....

So the diet should start now, not tomorrow. It should be only a maximum of three meals each day. To do more creates a devil made me do it attitude. Society says it is OK to eat more often, and what has that done for us? The obesity epidemic.

It is crucial that we have a urgency to do it, and a eager want to do it.  Combine that with low impulse control, and the devil made me do it, and the problem is worse.

Then there is that feeling of deprivation that some people report at not being to eat chocolate or some other item. That means that they never made the decision to give up chocolate or some other item. It is this unclear decision that causes deprivation feeling. To be successful on any diet one must make a decision to give up, for ever, some foods like chocolate, sugar, grains, dairy products. If one does not, the weight will come back.

It is like eating wonderful tasting dose dependent poisons. You get away eating small portions of the poison, and even occasional more, but you never feel good. But you like the taste, and the way it goes down, the early effect, but not the long term effects... Food addiction is real.

So go have a donut and start your diet tomorrow is bull, start your diet now, and good luck.

But that is not what the government diet wise program says. Oh well, what do I know?

Self Evaluation... to understand the cause of overeating.

The purpose of self evaluation is to understand the causes of overeating with the idea of removing the causes. As I have said before, there about six groups of causes; food knowledge, physical drives, environment, social drives, maladaptive eating behaviors, and food addictions. Five of the six can only be addressed by doing something that is not natural for us to do, that is not eat when the craving, desire, natural urge arises. We need to do this consistently long term. It is no wonder that most of us fail long term.

The first we need to give up are the foods that cause a craving for more, those that digest into opioid peptides, and drive food addiction. Dairy products and grains are the first to need to go. Food addiction is real for some of us.

Now we find that habit does not have a cause, we do it because we were trained to do it. We simply need to retrain ourselves or of that habit, if our problem is habit.

   

What is Canada's most pressing problem?

There are many possibilities. Over-population, The economy, religious differences, ethnically based problems (native v. population), unemployment, poor education, poor truth testing of the young, the disconnect between the governments and the people after election, ... terrorism... the list continues.

I think that it is none of the above, but rather the approach of unsustainable government spending producing a collapse of public support for social spending, big infrastructure, and the like high flying spending.

South of Edmonton there is a new 250 million interchange for a road that does not yet have much traffic on it. What was needed was three overpasses, and a some on and off ramps, perhaps 50 million, not as nice but functional for as much traffic. The new overpass is really nice, and in 20 or 30 years may have considerable traffic, but it is far more than will be needed given the oil price.

We see the City of Edmonton executive ignoring an engineering study and then directing the engineers to change the location of LRT (light rail transit), which creates a automobile nightmare in a portion of Edmonton.

I was forced to go into down town one day, and caught the LRT. On the way back, the signaling was working incorrectly, so I caught the wrong train back. I was treated to a 40 minute tour of the City. I had not realized how many tent encampments there were in Edmonton. Oh well. There was a story in the news the other day that 63% are one paycheck away from the streets. Lest we forget the 105000 homeless where 2800 are vets, and 4.5% of the population, natives, that want new houses.

We have now a federal government that wants to fix all the problems by spending. New water treatment for all the native communities, and then they will need sewer treatment, roads, housing, etc where there is no work save that which the government provides. There are no trade people on the reserves, all the trades work must come from outside. All construction requires 24/7 security, as does the equipment. There are no hotels, so camps must be set up for construction personnel. Everything must come in and then go back out. The cost doubles at least. Then there is truth and reconciliation recommendations.

The provincial government wants to shut down cheap coal power in favor of twice as expensive natural gas. It is good for the economy Notley says. It is not good for the home owner, any businesses except the electricity business. They are guaranteed profits. Oil Sands are being encouraged; these produce more Co2 per gig-joule that coal, but oh well.

All this leads me to think that one of the problem which will bring down our civilization is likely to be over taxation ... reckless spending of government, but what do I know?