“The values of the culture in which we live are often in conflict with the wellbeing of the individual.”
<At the risk of sounding cliché (and losing an audience), I will keep (most) of my thoughts to myself. A rarity, I realize>.
Not a day goes by that I am not nutritionally questioned, in a more often than not desperate plea for help. And while the questioning is welcomed, if not substantially wanted, I sometimes find myself wondering if I’m administering sound, healthful advice. I’m not stating this as an attempt to scare you, or free you of reading my articles. If anything, I’m hoping to gain more of your interest than ever before.
While I’ve poured my heart, (soul) and brain into “research” on overall, functional health (in the rawest sense of the word), the nutrition portion of the story has taught me a rather valuable lesson. Although this lesson lingers on the wild side, or rather, the side of subconscious un-acceptance, I feel a profound urge to share this lesson with you. (Over and over again.)
My studies over the past several years espouse very specific views on health, however, the message that emanates above the specificity of it all is as follows: It appears more than necessary to challenge the status quo, and think for yourself, basing views regarding nutrition on what remains experimentally true rather than what is theoretically appealing. I have found it ideal to administer a goal of preaching anti-authoritarian logic, i.e. original thought, or rather, an attempt to calculate matters of health without the burden of dogma or doctrine. Trust your body’s innate intelligence over that of a rigid ideology. The industry (read: agricultural/medical/pharmaceutical/governmental), based off of such experimental health, looks to have unsubstantiated hypotheses rooted in profit and wealth, thus, a welcomed counterbalance to the mainstream’s regards of diet and nutrition would serve as a beneficial solution to the majority of the population (America)’s needs.
Contrary, no matter the popular vote, a one-size-fits-all diet does not exist. So even turning what I preach into doctrine or religion would not benefit your health entirely (even though I’m definitely always right about everything). Similarly, one could conclude that the usual “Ten Things To Eat To Live Forever” lists represent strategic foolishness (but appealing in theory). Rather, honoring the intelligence of your physiology by relying on your own biofeedback would produce empowering results.
However, that’s not to say that there isn’t a basic, logistic background of nutrition that proves rationally true under all circumstances, for instance: Sugar (real sugar) is therapeutic. Polyunsaturated fats (canola oil, vegetable oils of the like, seeds, nuts, leafy greens) elicit an estrogenic response and should be mostly avoided. Saturated fats (coconut oil, butter, animal protein) provide functional digestion and hormonal balance. Carbohydrates (tropical fruits, fruit juices, root vegetables) should be consumed as an optimal energy source. Coffee contains magnesium and is amazingly awesome.
Howbeit, continuing the role of devil’s advocate, while the above list is true and backed by radically independent, original ideas, as well as accommodated by straightforward, accurate science (source: Ray Peat, Lita Lee, Constance Martin, Josh Rubin, Paul Chek, Judith Walker DeLany), every one of us is substantially and physiologically different, at all times, and on different days; meaning what, where, how, how much, and in what ratios I eat may represent suicidal health for you. Which would, again, leave one to rely on basic biofeedback and the innate intelligence of our own person. (If you’re craving a burger, eat a freaking burger.) While leaving legroom for flexibility and adjustment.
Seeing as we live in a world that is dominated by corporate interests, let us not mistake the conceptual world for reality. Or our health will forever deteriorate. So it appears.
(And if all else fails, just relax. And eat.)