Toxins pt 2: Can they play a positive role in emotional health?

This is a complex topic. Let's begin with the obvious: human cultures have used measured doses of toxins for various purposes since the beginning of human cultures. Various purposes range from benign mood enhancement at social gatherings to horrific chemical weapons of mass destruction, and everything in between.

I'm not going to approach the more destructive uses of toxins here, except to note we humans have an intractable innate capacity for destruction / self-destruction that Freud called the death instinct (instincts are intractable).

That unsettling innate capacity noted, I'm going to hue closely to the title topic. This is not a blog on psychology, but emotional health is certainly within the purview. Can toxic substances have a positive effect on emotional health?

We are innately attracted to certain substances because they temporarily induce euphoria, and "pleasure seeking" is one leg of the "motivational triad" that controls behavior to a predictably greater extent than conscious thought. The other two legs are "avoid pain" and "conserve energy", together they can be called the basic set of survival instincts present in all creatures. (See the book "The Pleasure Trap").

The motivational triad works quite well for creatures in the original primordial setting, as there are no circumstances occurring outside the innate "instinct envelope", in other words there are no technologically concentrated substances. There is honey (and bee stings), but no white sugar, cocoa leaves, but no cocaine. Modern humans have the innate instinct set of "primordial conditions", but live in a self-made wilderness of concentrated substances.

So how might a chemically induced pleasurable (euphoric) episode benefit emotional health? It's like a mini holiday that does not require the effort and expense of actual travel. Changes in routine and perspective can "reset" emotional condition in very positive ways. 

The important question: is it possible to gain a net benefit to health? The answer would be yes if biologically destructive impact is outweighed by gains to emotional well being. Obviously we cannot go too far down the biologically destructive path before the net effect to health is a loss. Also obviously, there is no practical way of actually measuring net gain/loss in this situation, so it comes down to personal intuition, or "listening to your body".

The notion of "intelligently measured dose" (all things in moderation) comes to play here, and as you might imagine different folks have very different interpretations as to what that is. And it becomes very easy to rationalize on this point, which is essentially one description of addiction.

So there is a layer of complexity to ignore (path to addictive behavior) or contend with (balance and moderation).

And many will argue since our bodies have a baseline toxic load to contend with (generated by continuous ongoing metabolic "house cleaning"), and since we cannot control (or even identify) all the toxins coming into our bodies from various sources, we should put known toxins into our bodies (most typically in the form of rich foods and alcohol), very moderately, if at all.

Toxins: What Are They Exactly?

Does the answer to the question posed by the title seem self-evident? Perhaps it is: materials that when consumed alter biochemistry quickly and substantially. By substantial I mean "quite noticeable": one will feel ill, one will feel "high".

There is a reason these substances are frequently called intoxicants. Intoxicant consumption can feel good, it can be addictive.

But it's also complicated by the notion of "dose". Too much of anything will kill you...I've heard it said, don't know if it's true, drinking enough water will kill you. I kind of doubt you could breathe enough air to kill you, but hyperventilation does have an intoxicating effect.

Perhaps the simplest definition of toxin is anything that is not (real) food. This one is quite relevant, as toxic "food like" substances have created epidemics in the so called metabolic syndrome diseases: heart disease (stroke and high blood pressure in this category), cancer, diabetes, and the many and varied autoimmune disorders.

I realize the above is a contentious point, as we generally have not been exposed to the idea that the reductionist paradigm used in medicine is mostly counterproductive when it comes to the very desirable goal of reaching and maintaining the state of optimal health. Reductionism in medicine: "separate problems, each with specific and different treatments".

The alternative view to reductionism is simply that the body is a wholistic self-regulating biomechanical, chemical, emotional entity repaired most rapidly and effectively from the general state of disrepair most of us find ourselves in simply by removing toxins from our daily lives. In the most basic terms that means simply "stop putting them in your mouth".

Yes Virginia, it really is that easy on a logistic level...which is not to say it's that easy on an emotional level. But this knowledge is an excellent place from which to engage the emotional level, as it helps immeasurably knowing that terra firma actually does exist, and it's basic and simple. It is more than conceptual, it is bio-mechanical, and easily repeatable ad infinitum.

This health "terra firma" can also be metaphorically referred to as "True North", which is also, not coincidentally, the name of the well known health clinic in Santa Rosa, CA.

(Recommended reading on the general role of toxins in our lives: "The Pleasure Trap", written by two of the principles of The True North Health Center.)

Terra firma, finally found, feels good, safe, and solid. Most of us are unaware it even exists in reality. For those folks it can feel amazing.

Those brave souls who step outside the reductionist box to repair their health by discontinuing the ingestion of toxins tend to no longer "need" (or even want) the medications, supplements, and intoxicant substances that "make us high" or give us comfort...at the expense of our good health.

On the Crux of a Tipping Point

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

We are still in the latter stages of "violently opposed", with smatterings of the early stages of "accepted as being self-evident".

But the "violently opposed" camp is entrenched and heavily fortified, sitting as it is on one of the more profitable situations in history. Let me give a few examples: cardiology, oncology, pharmacology, processed food, fast food. And another example; the mechanism to funnel middle class wealth directly into the coffers of big pharma and all they've bought and paid for on capitol hill: Medicare.

I'm recently on Medicare. Any interface I've had usually revolves around a central question: what meds do you take? When I say none, the assumption seems to be I misheard the question, and it is repeated. Then I feel compelled to be more clear: I am not taking any medications whatsoever.

Here is a Ted Talk by a common citizen who discovered the truth more or less by accident, as many of us do.

Nutrition: What is it?

An important question, surrounded with a lot of conflicting answers, and a lot of confusion. Why is that?

Elucidation is at hand in the form of a talk given by the person many consider to be one of the most important nutrition research scientists of this (and perhaps any) age, T. Colin Campbell, the American biochemist who specializes in the effect of nutrition on long-term health, in a career spanning six decades of activity.

If you're already familiar with Dr. Campbell's work this presentation is perhaps the best synopsis of his views I'm personally aware of, and I can't recommend it highly enough to you.

Prepare to be surprised, and enjoy.

Admit it, you want to be here :)

 

As Groovy As Sex

OK that was shameless clickbait:)

I was having some trouble finding a title for this post that would convey my feeling of its importance without sounding cumbersome, so I gave up and went with the above.

Thanks to the continuing efforts of Dr. Michael Greger and his team at Nutritionfacts.org, we see here in a single presentation a comprehensive compendium of research showing the outsized benefits of a Whole Foods Plant Based diet. It is significant in that it dispels uncertainty as it presents the facts.

How can we be sure these are indeed facts? And if they are, why aren't we hearing more about them? Dr. Gregor handles both questions masterfully, so be sure to watch to the end. Prepare to be surprised along the way, and enjoy.

OK perhaps not as groovy as sex, but...

A Slightly Different Perspective on Cancer Screening

I'm being just a wee bit subversive using the word slightly in the title of this blog; the word "radically" in its place would be more accurate.

Are you curious? If so then you may find this presentation by Dr. John McDougall quite interesting. In it he shows why decreasing probability for developing detectable cancer in the first place is so desirable an idea and practice.

File this under an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure:

And then, after watching, if you presented this information to your medical doctor (if you could get their attention long enough in the first place...an unlikely scenario) the response you'd probably get would be along the lines of harrumphing and sputtering. One thing they would not be able to produce is science countering the science presented here.

Information like this can be very unsettling. We do not want to know the man behind the curtain is no wizard after all. The truth is the responsibility for your health cannot be handed over to others, and you are, in fact, almost solely responsible for it yourself.

Information is power. The purpose of misinformation is to persuade one to give control of one's destiny over to others, in this case, for profit, at the expense of your health.

And how big a cost is that exactly?