1. WHEN YOU HEAR THE CW MANTRA: EVERYTHING IN MODERATION WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT?
2. DOES MOTHER NATURE SETTLE FOR MODERATION?
3. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE DO SETTLE FOR MODERATION IN OUR HEALTH DECISIONS?
4. IF YOUR HEALTHCARE PLAN PRESCRIBES MODERATION ARE YOU OK WITH OK?
5. ANOTHER PATIENT VIDEO SHOWING ‘MODERATION’ IS JUST NOT AS GOOD AS OPTIMAL CAN BE.
Whatever you hold in your mind will tend to occur in your life. If you continue to believe as you have always believed, you will continue to act as you have always acted. If you continue to act as you have always acted, you will continue to get what you have always gotten. If you want different results in your life or your work, all you have to do is change your mind. We do not need an intelligent mind that speaks, but a patient heart that listens. Make your choices and you create your life.
It has been often said that the best lifestyle is the one based upon moderation. Do you really believe that? How do you define moderation? I think each person has their own idea of what moderation really means. I do not agree with this cliche at all. Why? Too many people use moderation as an excuse not to do their best for others. Why? Because it is safe for them to do so. Conventional medical advice often advocates the mantra, “everything in moderation” as its safety net. Even as a kid that cliche bothered me deeply inside.
Should a 350 pound man that eating 4 dozen chocolates at night believe this is “moderately” better than eating 6 dozen a night? Is OK for a drug addict to be pleased when they only take 5 oxycontin instead of the usual dozen? Is it OK for the person with mental illness to only take their medications 5 days a week over 7 days a week? Is it OK for an alcoholic to drink five shots on a Friday night instead of the usual ten?
I think the standards we need to have need to be a lot higher than moderation or just OK. I don’t think an optimal energized life is possible when we settle for small achievements. I realized at an early age that life is not based upon average assumptions of moderation either. As I walked around the Museum of Natural History and saw examples throughout history and biology where moderation just got you mediocre results and often times extinguished things permanently.
Many times people will have a rough day at work and wish that that day would be over. I do not think like that. Each day counts. That point recently was made for me in real life when a member of my OR team decided to take her own life at work. Each day is a valuable day and I value each and every one I have. When someone asks me what is the best experience of my life, my answer is always the same. The best time in my life is the one I am about to have next.
That is precisely how evolution rolls as well. She always plays for the next action, the next challenge that she has to face. She never settles and she does not like moderation much either. The lesson I learned from the rounds I made at the Museum of Natural History is that in life and in biology, it is never too late to revitalize your life if you follow Mother Nature’s lead.
What separates the best from the rest is how they manage the gift of their time. If you settle for moderation you settle mediocre. Too many people live the same year 80 times over, and call it a life.
One of my friends is a medical school professor, and he said it best, “If you accept mediocre, you have no room to complain when the consequences of the decision become apparent.” He told me that those ‘who espouse‘ for things in moderation are often the beneficiaries of this action in some major way. If you are the consumer or patient of this service, accepting something less than ideal. You’re making a trade whether you know it or not. He went on in his ‘history lecture’ for me, to use examples in life and in biology of how life always accepts major challenges and makes sense from the chaos it was dealt. He used evolution as his main example. He said Mother Nature never accepts moderation in its response to life.
Evolution is life’s crucible. No crucible is set to medium low!
She always appears to reach for the ultimate survival mechanism to get to the next generation and to ensure reproductive fitness. He gave examples like how the Mount St. Helens gophers reseeded the entire destroyed face of the volcano in less than three years to sustain new plant life. He used the the examples of the volcanoes on Hawaii that have created numerous lava flows all over the Big Island of Hawaii becoming able to support moss and small vegetation within a few years of cooling. He talked about how how life bounced back from that oil spills and atomic blasts in the Pacific. He also used other ancient examples of how life over came devastation.
The Permian–Triassic event was the most devastating event ever, to life on earth that we know about today. 57% of all families and 83% of all genera (53%) of marine families, (84%) of marine genera, about (96%) of all marine species and an estimated (70%) of land species including insects were wiped free because of a raised CO2 level. The evidence of plants is less clear, but new taxa became dominant after the event because CO2 is the fuel they use to grow. The “Great Dying event” had enormous evolutionary significance.
On land, it ended the primacy of mammal-like reptiles. The recovery of vertebrates took 30 million years, but the vacant niches created the opportunity for archosaurs to become ascendant. In the earth’s seas, the percentage of animals that were sessile dropped from 67% to 50%. Life wobbled…but sustained itself. Life did not choose moderation when faced with total anihilation; it choose ultimate survival based upon the fossil data we have today from China. It navigated the massive increase of CO2 by using plant photosynthesis to take full advantage of the CO2. It did not settle for a low O2 existence. It took the long run and used what the environment dealt out. Moderation lost, yet again.
At some point between 195,000 and 123,000 years ago, the population size of Homo sapiens plummeted, thanks to cold, dry climate conditions that left much of our ancestors’ African homeland uninhabitable. So what did our ancient ancestors do? They went back to the sea to save themselves. Life just finds a way when it is challenged. But it is clear that surviving life forms do not settle for moderation in these decisions. This raises the point what should a modern human consider to survive the modern world? In my view we need to default to the same decision making process. It requires the same decision trees to survive the emergency situations today we face.
When a mountain climber was stuck in a crevice and knew he was going to die if he did not act soon, what did he do? He cut off his own arm and he lived? Moderation or extreme? What was the result? 70,000 years ago there was massive volcanic eruption that changed most of life exposed to its effects. Yet, we are here today as proof that Mother Nature found a way around chaos again. She never chooses safety over survival.
To gain survival requires the first decision be your best. All survival classes teach this principle today. It also appears evolution uses the same plan. Her decisions always lead to survivorship as well. If that was not true life would not be here today. It does appear that decision is fluid and based upon what environment dishes out to her.
About 10,000 years ago, modern man made what many consider was a great decision to move from a Hunter Gatherer lifestyle of life to a modern agricultural one. I told you in my Paleo Summit talk, that I felt this decision was the single greatest error that modern man has made because it created a species of mediocre modern neolithic hominids.
We went in to some detail about how that ripple decision 10,000 years ago is hitting our children health like a Tsunami in today’s modern world due to the affect of a sped up epigenetics. It is why ten year olds are dying of heart attacks and why I recently saw a 9 year old with 80% carotid artery occlusion. This is not supposed to happen according to the books in the medical school library, but they are happening today. Moreover, this is becoming very common. A moderate approach would just say they are outliers, the result, due to their personal bad genetics. This is where modern medicine stands right now today. How many of these cases do we have to see before we begin to ask some more foundational questions?
One of my forum members made this astute statement recently, “That ‘wheat civilization’ got us to the Moon but it cost us humanity in the process. We are like evolutionary terrorists surviving in the grain strangled MAD world” today. I do not think I have heard a better statement regarding modern agricultural practices in the last 40 years of my life.
The paleosphere seems to get that sense intuitively, but still applauds some among us, who choose moderation in their practices, over practices that are best for the survival of their own patients. I think all our decisions should be tied to ultimate survival and optimal health, just as evolution chooses for life, when she is tested. We must be congruent with her message, and not in our neolithic beliefs or practices, dedicated to advocating for ‘everything in moderation’. We might be making a great trade off that we may regret at some point later in our lives. When we do it, we might even know why we don’t know it.
Evolution does not shoot for moderation……it appears to shoot for an “A” when it is possible. If you want to feed your kids cake, do it. But you must realize the consequences of it as well. Some people will tell you that cheats are OK (moderation). They are OK, if you think they are OK. I don’t think this way because evolution taught me to question that belief. After all, we did not have “treats” until recently. We are socialized to believe cheats are OK. This is a modern neolithic thought, I can do without now.
Just because we can eat a banana in winter, does not mean it is without a biologic toll. We must begin to question those who advocate for everything in moderation. Most humans today assume it is a risk free decision, because they don’t feel any worse for it when they do it. This is a decision, you have to make as a modern human today, based upon what we now know about epigenetic signaling and circadian signaling in the brain. You can’t let someone else think for you using CW dogma they learned via a broken system.
I can’t legislate that decision for you, nor, would I want to. I just want you to hear it, so you can think about it now, and decide for yourself. I can show you what I know today to be true. I can tell you what I do, because of what I know today, but you have to decide what works for you presently. When things do go awry, do not ask why they went awry, until you correct for these errors in thinking first. Most humans think these ‘cheats’ are OK in moderation.
We heard this mantra often on the stage in Austin, Tx. Yet, I have seen no proof of that moderation is the standards used anywhere in evolutionary biology. Telomere biology and mitochondrial signaling changed my mind on this 5 years ago. Evolutionary history is pretty clear that moderation is a recipe for disaster. I think our diet directly affects our epigenetic switches faster than any other thing we can do to ourselves today. I think it is paramount to get it right all the time…and not “moderately” correct as some espouse. Maybe we need to consider that the mantra of ‘everything in moderation’ is really a serious danger to us?
Pages: 1 2