The Logic and Vision of Doug Graham

This recent interview of Dr. Graham is a pretty good overview of his perspective on the essentials. He is also a long time professional athletic trainer, and his perspectives on physical activity are also invaluable, but not touched on here.

--"It's the food" --

I am reminded of a funny but slightly sad anecdote. There is an increasing contingent of well known medical doctors that have come to prominence as a virtue of their unusually high rates of success in healing most of the diseases that afflict contemporary developed world humans, which are (briefly) cardiovascular diseases (heart attack, high blood pressure, stroke), diabetes, auto immune disorders, disorders of the digestive tract and other organs of elimination, and strides are even being made in treatment of the most stubborn of these diseases, cancer.

These doctors of high success rates are frequently in attendance at medical science conferences, where doctors and researchers are working hard on figuring out the mechanisms of these modern diseases, but without significant progress. "It's very complicated!" they say, and it's true biology is tremendously complex. Consequently the standard of care for patients with these diseases is lifetime prescriptions for "incurable" diseases.

But these doctors, the ones having outsized success treating these "incurable" conditions, are in these conference rooms (literally and figuratively), raising their hands and saying "it's the food". They may as well have not said anything, no one is listening. But they do keep saying because they have seen it to be so obviously true in their own practices, over and over, ad infinitum.

The bottom line is health is not all that amenable to technological solutions, and via "the unconscious desire for immortality" we have been over complicating all things regarding health. But it's really not all that complicated, nor is it hard to do...if only we knew where to begin.

Doug Graham's perspective has been remarkably helpful to me in learning "what to do" to create health. I can't say I do it perfectly, but it remains my "north star" and I've noticed over and over the closer I hue toward "north" the better I feel, the more energy I have, and the more balanced are my emotions.

the world is CONFUSED about protein

How many times have we heard, "you need to keep your energy up, get some protein." ?  Or we order a salad at a restaurant and the waiter asks "do you want a protein with that?".

The waiter is partially right because leafy greens, the primary stuff of a good salad, have lots of vitamins and minerals, but are low in "available energy". And available energy is the nutrient we need on an immediate basis, every day. We can actually wait for vitamins and minerals, our body stores them, and if our stores are (ideally) not depleted we're good to go. But we need energy with every meal, it's the primary reason we get hungry.

The waiter is wrong because the energy is not coming from protein, it is coming from fat.

Let's back up a bit here. Vitamins and minerals are "micronutrients", so called because the actual quantities we consume are (microscopically) tiny. They do not provide "available energy", they have other longer term functions.

Macronutrients on the other hand do contain "available energy", and we need them every day to have abundant energy.

The formal name for available energy is "calories"...you've heard of those...don't forget there are "good" calories and "bad" calories. Hostess cupcakes have calories, but are also laced with toxins, and devoid of vitamins and minerals. Good calories are whole foods consumed in (or close to) their original state.

The three macronutrients are carbohydrates, fats, and proteins. The confusion about protein is that of the three macronutrients it has the least "available energy", and is used primarily on a longer term basis to build tissues and bones. We do not use protein for available energy under normal circumstances.

The two macronutrients with high levels of available energy are carbs and fats. And let's not forget there is such a thing as "good carbs", all plants are carbohydrates. In fact the use of the word "carbs" to designate junk foods is actually a misuse of the word, a more accurate term for junk foods would be "toxic substances".

Keeping the discussion to whole foods (good calories) the available energy in the restaurant salad comes from fat, not protein. And these are the fats in animal products, which frequently have more calories coming from fat than protein. To oversimplify a bit, the protein is stored for later use, and the fat is used for energy.

It is also not difficult to get more protein than is healthy, and the effects of that on health are not good:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4045293/

There is another source of available energy in typical salads, the vegetable oils used in the dressings. I'm not going to get into that problem here...suffice it to say veg oils are a "junk food" devoid of micronutrient content.

So yes, there is a lot of available energy in junk foods, but these calories, like the hostess cupcakes, are laced with toxins, devoid of micronutrients, and really bad for us. So don't eat that junk:)

Since we are talking about salads let's mention a whole food that has plenty of available energy - fruit. A fruit salad can even be on a bed of greens, which adds a lot of minerals to the vitamin rich fruits, making a nutrient dense meal with plenty of available energy. It can be very simple to prepare, and it really doesn't even need a dressing! (Just be sure the fruits you use are ripe and delicious.)

Vaping? Really?

Bloomberg news published an article on vaping this morning, link below. Long and short of it is a lot of cases of lung damage are showing up in doctors offices. Gee whiz, it takes a looong time for lung damage of that magnitude to show up from cigarette smoking. The implication would be vaping is way more dangerous than smoking.

This is a little bit like the "food - not food" question that is at the root of all the post industrial diseases that are killing way too many of us way too prematurely. How do you know if something is "air - not air"...well that one is pretty straight forward. Clean air is usually pretty easy to detect...although there are plenty of products on the market meant to "freshen" your air. None of it qualifies as (simple, pure, clean) air.

Ever notice how "thick" the exhaled "vape" smoke is? It can't possibly be clean air...which is invisible.

Why is it we don't know what toxins are yet?  There has to be better ways of getting pleasure than beating on ourselves.

According to the article all the (apparently many)
early signs that vaping is dangerous were "missed". OK, if you buy that one I got a bridge you might be interested in:)

Biz as usual. So how do we know if something is "food" or "not food"? Well, food is grown in mineral rich (hopefully) organic soil. Not food comes out of "food science" labs and mixed into real food. Food is very close to the form it was in when picked from the tree or pulled out of the ground. The further it gets from that simple raw organic form it gets the more "not food" it is. It is, BTW, very difficult to get "food" at a restaurant. Unfortunately!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-09-25/vaping-illness-signs-were-missed-or-ignored?srnd=premium

NYT - Our Food is Killing Too Many of Us

Edit - fortunately a good friend sent a PDF of the article, and I'm going to copy it here with a few added comments:

Improving American nutrition would make the biggest impact

on our health care.

By Dariush Mozaffarian and Dan Glickman

Mr. Mozaffarian is dean of the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy. Mr.

Glickman was the secretary of agriculture from 1995 to 2001.

The Democratic debate on health care has to date centered around who should be covered and who should pay the bill. That debate, which has been going on for decades, has no clear answers and cannot be easily resolved because of two fundamental realities: Health care is expensive, and Americans are sick.

Americans benefit from highly trained personnel, remarkable facilities and access to the newest drugs and technologies. Unless we eliminate some of these benefits, our health care will remain costly. We can trim around the edges — for example, with changes in drug pricing, lower administrative costs, reductions in payments to hospitals and providers, and fewer defensive and unnecessary procedures. These actions may slow the rise in health care spending, but costs will keep rising as the population ages and technology advances.

And Americans are sick — much sicker than many realize. More than 100 million adults — almost half the entire adult population — have pre-diabetes or diabetes. Cardiovascular disease afflicts about 122 million people and causes roughly 840,000 deaths each year, or about 2,300 deaths each day. Three in four adults are overweight or obese. More Americans are sick, in other words, than are healthy.

Instead of debating who should pay for all this, no one is asking the far more simple and imperative question: What is making us so sick, and how can we reverse this so we need less health care? The answer is staring us in the face, on average three times a day: our food.

Poor diet is the leading cause of mortality in the United States, causing more than half a million deaths per year. Just 10 dietary factors are estimated to cause nearly 1,000 deaths every day from heart disease, stroke and diabetes alone. These conditions are dizzyingly expensive. Cardiovascular disease costs $351 billion annually in health care spending and lost productivity, while diabetes costs $327 billion annually. The total economic cost of obesity is estimated at $1.72 trillion per year, or 9.3 percent of gross domestic product.

These human and economic costs are leading drivers of ever-rising health care spending, strangled government budgets, diminished competitiveness of American business and reduced military readiness.

Fortunately, advances in nutrition science and policy now provide a road map for addressing this national nutrition crisis. The “Food Is Medicine” solutions are win-win, promoting better well-being, lower health care costs, greater sustainability, reduced disparities among population groups, improved economic competitiveness and greater national security.

Some simple, measurable improvements can be made in several health and related areas. For example, Medicare, Medicaid, private insurers and hospitals should include nutrition in any electronic health record; update medical training, licensing and continuing education guidelines to put an emphasis on nutrition; offer patient prescription programs for healthy produce; and, for the sickest patients, cover home-delivered, medically tailored meals. Just the last action, for example, can save a net $9,000 in health care costs per patient per year.

Taxes on sugary beverages and junk food can be paired with subsidies on protective foods like fruits, nuts, vegetables, beans, plant oils, whole grains, yogurt and fish. Emphasizing protective foods represents an important positive message for the public and food industry that celebrates and rewards good nutrition. Levels of harmful additives like sodium, added sugar and trans fat can be lowered through voluntary industry targets or regulatory safety standards.

Nutrition standards in schools, which have improved the quality of school meals by 41 percent, should be strengthened; the national Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program should be extended beyond elementary schools to middle and high schools; and school garden programs should be expanded. And the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which supports grocery purchases for nearly one in eight Americans, should be leveraged to help improve diet quality and health.

The private sector can also play a key role. Changes in shareholder criteria (e.g., B-Corps, in which a corporation can balance profit versus purpose with high social and environmental standards) and new investor coalitions should financially reward companies for tackling obesity, diabetes and other diet related illness. Public-private partnerships should emphasize research and development on best agricultural and food-processing practices. All work sites should demand healthy food when negotiating with cafeteria vendors and include incentives for healthy eating in their wellness benefits.

Coordinated federal leadership and funding for research is also essential. This could include, for example, a new National Institute of Nutrition at the National Institutes of Health. Without such an effort, it could take many decades to understand and utilize exciting new areas, including related to food processing, the gut microbiome, allergies and autoimmune disorders, cancer, brain health, treatment of battlefield injuries and effects of nonnutritive sweeteners and personalized nutrition.

Government plays a crucial role. The significant impacts of the food system on well-being, health care spending, the economy and the environment — together with mounting public and industry awareness of these issues — have created an opportunity for government leaders to champion real solutions.

Yet with rare exceptions, the current presidential candidates are not being asked about these critical national issues. Every candidate should have a food platform, and every debate should explore these positions. A new emphasis on the problems and promise of nutrition to improve health and lower health care costs is long overdue for the presidential primary debates and should be prominent in the 2020 general election and the next administration.

The article is great, but there is a glaring omission...the primary reason we have such a hard time getting this message out to the public, never mind all the good suggestions in the article. How bout we just start by getting this information out there? Why can't we even do that???

It's called big pharma folks, one of the primary sources and purveyors of the mountains of misinformation on diet and health we, mostly unaware, wade through everyday. And why do they do that? Well first of all this industry is making a bloody fortune that depends on lots of sick people. Second of all, so called Health Care ("disease management" is more accurate) has, according to the article at the link below, become the primary contributor to US GDP. Which is a very big deal with all sorts of political ramification:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/042915/5-industries-driving-us-economy.asp

And why do I say why are we mostly unaware of all this misinformation? Because it comes to us through primary media sources. The New York Times is definitely taking the lead on bucking this trend. Good for them.

The other reason is because we hear so many half-truths that appeal to our pre-existing habits and biases. A good example of this is the so-called Paleo Diet. The range of diets possible under this name is huge. (To be fair the term "Vegan" has the same problem.) The all bacon all the time contingent is not healthy. The rate of heart attack in the paleo movement is reason enough to see this. The rate of digestive/congestive issues is another marker. And there are many others. There is a healthier contingent in the paleo world, these are the folks that consume mostly plants. You can measure this by volume or calories. Let's measure by calories: as "calories consumed" as a percent of total gets closer to the low fat plant based whole food prescription Paleos get healthier. Imagine that.

OK I'm coming off my soapbox now, for the time being at least:) The original blog below:

------------------------------------

Unfortunately for me the New York Times has instituted a hard paywall for online viewers, so unless you are paying the $8/mo subscription fee this link will not let you read the article.

I say unfortunately for "me" because the NYT has been taking a lead recently against the "foods" (toxic substances really) that are killing us prematurely by the millions (leading cause of death by far), and the NYT is a major voice in the US and developed world in general. I like to feature this kind of story in my blog to reinforce the idea that I'm not "off the deep end" over here :)

Oh well, I'm making this a blog anyway just to note the fact increasingly prominent voices are in effect saying "enough is enough" and calling for greater awareness of this clear and present danger to our country and our fellow sisters, cousins, and brothers.

I will however quote the sub heading (which we can see), and provide the link for digital subscribers to the Times.

"Improving American nutrition would make the biggest impact on our health care."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/26/opinion/food-nutrition-health-care.html?searchResultPosition=1

Whole Foods CEO says plant based "meat" is not healthy

Whole Foods CEO on plant-based meat boom: Good for the environment but not for your health
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/21/whole-foods-ceo-john-mackey-plant-based-meat-not-good-for-your-health.html

And a quote from the article: 

--------------------

Mackey says most Americans wouldn’t enjoy eating like he does (he has 15 fruits and vegetables a day) because their taste buds are used to a diet that includes a lot of processed foods.

“So the reason why these plant-based meats have taken the world by storm is that they taste very similar to regular meats, whereas if you get a [healthy] black bean burger with flax seeds and sweet potatoes in it, that’s going to taste great to me,” he says, but not to most people.

Mackey says the good news is that people can retrain their palate to “enjoy pretty much anything” by consistently eating something they typically didn’t like before.

“I love fruits and vegetables,” Mackey says, because he trained his taste buds to love them.

---------------------------

So let's say a person retrains their palate to love fruits and vegetables. They are also going to notice they don't feel the many physical discomforts of eating bad foods (antacids are the best selling over the counter medication). They will notice they can eat fruits and vegetables till they are coming out of their ears and they will still drop to a healthy BMI. They will notice good nutrition + healthy BMI = a lot more energy, and they will want to move their bodies, and they will enjoy it.

How many conclusive studies, for how many years, did it take before the Surgeon General put warning labels on cigarettes? More than 7000 studies over three decades. Governments are short sighted, they prefer industrial sources of revenue to public health.

Now, compare how much revenue was generated by the tobacco industry to how much is being generated by all the industries profiting in some way from all the various diseases directly caused by bad diet. I don't have a stat for that but my guess is at least 20x the revenue, adjusted for inflation, is being generated by bad food in many various ways.

The government will tell us (finally) that tobacco is bad for us. They will tell us that alcohol and drugs are bad for us. But they won't tell us bad food is the bigger problem. Will it take 20x as many studies and 20x as much time for gov to begin telling us a processed food animal based diet is bad for us?

Don't count on government or industry to reverse behaviors that are generating hundreds of billions of dollars annual revenue. Do count on those sources of revenue to be protected by dozens of industries and many thousands of influential individuals. Count on those sources of revenue to be protected by bad science, and count on seeing those conclusions on the front pages of mass media. (Bad science is essentially that which is generated by profit motive, with studies designed to produce a certain result.)

Count on never having heard of the many thousands of good science studies going back decades. If you start looking into it count on being surprised the good science outweighs the bad by multiples of 100.

Don't count on gov to promote truly healthy diets. The change will be a grassroots effort driven by individuals from all walks of life that have begun to see the big picture and want health for themselves and their loved ones.

On a related note, there is an interesting movie coming out soon titled "The Game Changers".

Interview of the director at Sundance this year:

And the web site for the movie:

https://gamechangersmovie.com/