All Categories - #whatwouldBillysay?

Milk Powder Bake

27/7/2017

From around 1999-2004 milk was a major part of my diet, some might say that my increased consumption (I'd always been a fan) was a factor in my incredibly high metabolism during that period (for those that are unaware, you may wish to seek out my articles and podcasts discussing my 6000 kcal intake). For those that are fans of the work of rebellious scientist and philosopher Dr Ray Peat, the milk consumption coupled with my jelly sweet consumption, love of coffee and general carbaholic status gives good evidence of the effects of a so called "peatatarian" diet.

Whilst I had an awareness of Ray via my studies of Broda Barnes, I had yet to fully immerse myself in the Fan Girling whirlwind that encircles Ray...although he is totally unaware of his celebrity status. What happened next was a few years of hell that eventually brought me full circle and ensconced me in Ray's work. A place that not only felt comfortable and reassuring, but a place that reaffirmed how close I'd been way back when. It showed me that my time in the whacky paleo/metabolic typing/CHEK world was damaging but the ultimate experiment/lesson.

And so it came to pass that I once again began consuming milk (I gave it up during faileo as I couldn't get raw pasture raised). And with it I returned to my milk powder bake. As ever it was a Ray statement about milk powder pancakes that sparked the memory, so I adapted my recipe to use his ideas, but baked it my old way rather than frying in a pan.

Enjoy

Ingredients

1 cup of milk powder (I use Organic Skimmed)
1/3 cup of Milk (I use Organic Skimmed)
2-3 tablespoons of sugar
1 egg

Directions

Mix all the ingredients in a bowl to a smooth consistency. Pour into a dish that is suitable for the over (I use the glass lid from a casserole dish)
Bake in the oven at 180-200 degrees C for around 15-20 mins, or until golden brown. Around 10 minutes slice a cross to allow the inner part to cook.

Serve with Greek yogurt, cream or Ice Cream

April 16th, 2017

16/4/2017

Why did I turn down a PhD position at my local university? I met with the two professors in “charge”, and it became apparent that they were not really in charge. In fact one of them worked for the people who were really pulling the strings, global diet business who were allowing access to a data set collected from their member base. In theory I was free to utilise this data as I wished, so I drew up a proposal and it hit brick wall after brick wall. My research intentions were not particularly controversial. After finding issues with funding test equipment (despite the fact I already own it) they eventually simply stopped replying and began ignoring me.
The main bone of contention was that they wished me to modify my research in order that it became focused on behaviorism. To put it plainly, they wanted me to conduct some research that would assist dieters adherence to dieting, something that is particularly useful in an industry founded on guided starvation. I have never been a fan of either starvation or behaviourism, in fact the words of John B. Watson haunted me from the moment I started in this industry.

“Give me a baby and I can make any kind of man.” - John B. Watson, the founder of Behaviorism. (1)

Watson’s belief was that an organisms behavior is predictable, and therefore controllable. He investigated this at John Hopkins University in 1920 when he experimented on babies ranging from three months to a year old. During numerous experiments he would show the infants lit candles to assess their reaction to fire, and bring in animals in to see if they were frightened by them.
One subject became synonymous with Watsons work, known as Little Albert, he initially found delight in touching a rabbit. However, when Watson elicited loud noises behind the infants head (using a steel rod and a claw hammer) whenever he touched the rabbit, his reaction naturally switched from delight to terror. It then became apparent that even the mere sight of the rabbit would leave the child in a state of fear, even without any loud noise. Watson reached a rather radical conclusion that has defined political, industrial and social engineering in the 20th century. His belief was that fear is the driving force within society.

Ivan Pavlov a man most people are aware of, begun his work on the “conditioned reflex” in dogs, realising that a dog would salivate when it began to associate a stimulus such as a ringing bell with food. While most are aware of this research, maybe even finding it mildly amusing during our school days, not many of us are aware that we are as conditioned as Pavlov’s dog.

We are all bought, sold, conned, shared and used everyday to make other people money. We are owned yet we believe, mainly because that is what we are told, that we live in a free society. We are continually told that we can escape our obesity by signing up to the latest fad diet that is usually nothing more than a repackaged version of the previous semi starvation fad. When these products come to market it is critical that they utilise various behavioural strategies to alter your behaviour and make you adhere. You may think Joe Wicks (star of Mean in 15) is the latest lifestyle guru, in reality he is well versed in behaviour modification. Shaming your fat self on instagrim with the hashtag #fitfam is just a way of trying to modify your behaviour and stop your “weak willpower” taking hold when your hunger kicks in.

Behaviourism relies upon the principles of operant conditioning, the principles of which have more recently become known as behaviour modification. Whilst it is a fascinating area of study that allows us to analyse behaviours and their effects upon both health and wellness, it is also frequently utilised as a scheme to shape the behaviours of other, often without their fully conscious awareness.

Behaviourism relies upon the notion that behaviour rather than the physiological and thought processes driving these behaviours are more important. Thus the use of various kinds of techniques to modify behaviours trains you and makes you compliant. Take the diet industry, the philosophy of dieting is deceptively simple. It works upon the notion that we are mechanistic flesh and blood machines. That we require fuel, that if we are over fuelled we simply need to be restricted and put to work for a specific cause, namely burn some calories, yet this never seems to work as planned. As is well documented, humans struggle to achieve this goal of semi starvation (eat less - move more) due to a thing we call “weak willpower”, and the obesity epidemic rages on.

My area of study is that weak willpower does not exist, that compensatory health behaviours are just that, a compensation for a physiological action. Hold your breath and you will hyperventilate for a while when you restart breathing. The same goes for dieting, it drives a physiological compensation, namely you “overeat” because you have been starved. Naturally in response to our gluttony, guilt will rise and you're likely to feel compelled to restrict or starve oneself again….and so the struggle continues.

Luckily for those of us that are weak willed, behaviourism considers that we can be repaired, redesigned or conditioned with new and superior behaviours. It helps to think back to the breathing example to consider how ludicrous this is, if you're struggling to limit your breathing, behaviourism would seek to adapt your behaviours to help you achieve your goals. This may take the form of an app for your iPhone that reminds you to hold your breath, a breath watchers club where you receive the support of your leader and the rest of the group, maybe receiving a sticker or similar when you achieve specify breath hold targets. Maybe you’d sign up to instagrim and hashtag shame yourself when you over breathed #o2syn or patted yourself on the back #turningblue

This and only this (unless they just don’t like me, which is plausible) seems to be the reason for my academic knock backs. If this was educational tinder they are continually swiping left once they see my research interests. Do I want work on developing strategies to create dietary adherence? Do I want to compel people to perform like monkeys at the circus because I helped develop an app for a global diet cult? If I wanted money and to climb the corporate career ladder then maybe, if I want to maintain integrity and fulfil my legacy then nope. Do I want to starve people and teach them to ignore physiological signals indicating that energy is needed? No, what we need is a scientific explanation that is understandable within the general population, yet not one that ignores the complex needs of the human organism.

Whilst human behaviour has long been intriguing, the era of capitalist industrialisation at the turn of the 19th century (2) was when we really began to consider that we could control living organisms (in particular humans) in the same way they that we control machines. Admittedly industrialisation brought many advantages, but the disadvantages were equal if not greater, where there is a light side there is usually a dark side in the deal.

Watson was indeed an interesting character and his influence on social science and the boom in advertising is significant, and on the face of it seemingly innocent and beneficial to society. However, his real manifesto for behaviourism, and the belief that human beings can be shaped in any way that a scientist desired is showed for what it is in his writings at the end of his life

"I sometimes think I regret that I could not have a group of infant farms where I could have brought up 30 pure-blooded Negroes on one, 30 pure blooded Anglo-Saxons on another, and 30 Chinese on a third all under similar conditions.” (3)

Behaviourism is the mechanism of control, you dictate to people what their behaviours should be. This may be glossed over as giving the individual control, for instance some diet groups sell the premise that you can regain control your life and be happy if only you limit your syns and attend group penance. Yet the entire task of starving oneself is broken down into specific aspects of the whole task rather than allowing a skilled person to decide how the entire task should be done, so theirs a very much control involved. Good foods and syns are labelled, and you are told how many times may syn. Poor behaviours are identified and weak willpower is treated by attempts to modify behaviours.

To the degree that this is involved your control is lost, and any skills/knowledge are no longer needed. Granted many diet club members become diet club leaders, but any attributable skills are simply the ability to repeat parrot like what the capitalist management dictate. And this removal of power makes dieters less likely to be rebellious, less likely to join or form a movement that operates against the system.

From a business perspective this is great idea, and mainstream science also believes it is good idea for dieters because the problem, “obesity” has been viewed from a reductionist stance. That it is purely a mechanistic problem, that fat people just need reprogramming. Henry Ford stated that he was too smart to have these kind of rational principles imposed upon him, but that he needed to impose those principles on the workers because they wouldn't know what to do if he didn’t. (4)

You may think the diet industry is not like Ford and his desire to increase productivity and profit, but business is business and a diet company really isn’t that interested in your goal, more ensuring you remain a client and supportive customer. Rationalism is embodied by Fordism, McDonaldisation, and Dietism. The principe is that those at the top want to impose on the bottom, but something they don't want to upset is profit. As Ford and Ronald McDonald wanted mindless workers working in a robot like fashion, so do WeightWatchers, they are reliant on members that put faith in the principles that are imposed on them by the industry and all that profiteer from it.

Stay tuned for part two.

References:

1. Watson, J., B. (1930). Behaviorism (revised edition). University of Chicago Press.
2. Burnham, P. (2003). Capitalism, the Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
3. Watson, J. B. (1936). John Broadus Watson. In C. Murchison (Ed), A history of psychology in autobiography (Vol. 3, pp. 271–281). New York: Russell & Russell.
4. Ford, H., and Crowther, S. (1922). My life and work. Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday, Page & Co.

Infant sleep/feeding patterns and stress response

6/3/2017

A large part of my research focuses on child development and the adaptions that occur to ensure our safety, in particular that our metabolism is in-tune with our environment and adjusts accordingly to availability of food. It is well established that there is an intrinsic hormonal connection between mother and baby. (1, 2) Cortisol is a hormone that many people are now acutely aware of, the rise in low carbohydrate sugar phobic clean eaters, and the desire to punish oneself with CrossFit style workouts has happened alongside a rise in private cortisol testing, usually via saliva samples. Much is known about cortisol’s functions in adults, as expected in this type of situation we secrete adrenalin in order to supply glucose from the liver to breakdown fatty tissues. If or when these stores are depleted, (and many people currently exhibit inadequate stores of glucose to cope with stressors) cortisol is produced in order to catabolise amino acids to provide energy. (3)
We currently have Harry, an almost two year old who much to Jen’s dismay is still waking regularly in the night to feed. Much of my research stemmed from the birth of our daughter Daisy, and this is the point where my book changed from being a rebuke of dieting, to a full book on the physiology of human metabolism throughout lifespan.
In an attempt to pacify Jen’s upset at seeing other babies sleeping through the night from an early age I turned to my research. And from a metabolic point of view we have a neonate that has previously had 24 hour 7 day a week access to the maternal glucose pool. Upon birth they suddenly have to ask for energy, and over the next period of their life a cry will elicit various reactions from the immediate caregivers, such as checking the nappy, assessing if they are tired, maybe checking their temperature, but of greatest priority are they hungry? So we have to adapt from freely taking energy on demand, to requesting it. This happens regularly due to limited stores of energy, the high demand for glucose (in the womb growth restriction occurs if glucose supply to the brain risks becoming limited, during the early months this may still occur due to limited needs for physical development when the brain must grow and develop prior to learning to crawl, walk, talk etc), and an exceedingly high metabolic rate. (4) So, whilst the lack of ability to sleep through the night may prove frustrating for parents it does provide slower adaption of metabolic rate.

Also, during the night it is critical that your child awakens to feed, they're light sleepers initially due to the need to awaken if they're in danger. Humans are particularly vulnerable and dependent due to limitations in brain size (25% of adult brain volume). This gives rise to the high probability from an evolutionary perspective that infants slept near mothers to be nurtured which brings into question sleep training due to potential psychological damage and raised cortisol levels even when crying has subsided. (5, 6, 7, 8, 9)

And this led to my initial theory that their was a link between cortisol in mother and child. I had initially suspected that this was linked with breast feeding versus non-breast feeding and evidence does suggest this to be the case. (10) And that breast feeding leads to greater resilience to stress, leading to the assumption that small incidences of stress (cortisol) coupled with recovery (feeding, comfort etc) helps the infant develop to deal with the stress of adaption to the external environment. From the perspective of my own research this suggest that the little and often feeding pattern also allows from metabolic adaption to life outside the womb over a longer timescale. (4)
Yet I was interested in the phenomenon that sees my wife awaken prior to Harry (and Daisy when she still breast fed), and this led me to consider cortisol awakening response (CAR). Something my wife probably thinks I made up as I tend to have an answer for everything.

It is well established that the cortisol response we see in adult is not present at birth, but how it is established has been a grey area. and then right when I was seeing this phenomenon occurring with Daisy, a study appeared that showed that infants cortisol levels stay stable upon awakening and then decrease for half an hour afterward. Further to that cortisol levels remained constant following naps. Yet the research team did find a mother-infant cortisol psychological link that confirmed the correlation between mother and infant cortisol levels.

One of the research team stated that,
"In infancy, cortisol responses may be less dependent on hard-wired biological rhythms and more influenced by the HPA axis activity of the baby's immediate caregivers.” (9)
This opens up some fascinating possibilities into our ability to deal with stress in later life, is breast-feeding, the process of feeding regularly, and indeed being at hand to respond to distress (initiating and deactivating the cortisol response) part of a biological process to help us survive in the world? Research suggest that adults that received inconsistent care or mistreatment as a child have high levels of awakening cortisol and dampened response, which does seem to suggest that this bond between mother and child provided a critical role in childhood development. (11, 12)

References

Lothian, J, A, PhD. (2005). The Birth of a Breastfeeding Baby and Mother. J Perinat Educ. 14(1): 42–45.
Leuner, B., Glasper, E, R., and Gould, E. (2010). Parenting and plasticity. Trends Neurosci. 33(10): 465–473.
Goodwin, M, L, Ph.D. (2010). Blood Glucose Regulation during Prolonged, Submaximal, Continuous Exercise: A Guide for Clinicians. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 4(3): 694–705.
Craig, B. (2017). Consistent Eating, the metabolic adaption of humans in response to energy restriction. (unpublished)
Lee T. Gettler, L, T., and McKenna, J, J. (2011). Evolutionary Perspectives on Mother–Infant Sleep Proximity and Breastfeeding in a Laboratory Setting. Am J Phys Anthropol. 144(3): 454–462.
Bremner, J.D., (1998). The Effects of Stress on Memory and the Hippocampus Throughout the Life Cycle: Implication for Childhood Development and Aging. Developmental Psychology. Fall 10 (4): 871-85.
Bugental, Daphne Blunt; Martorell, Gabriela A.; Barraza, Veronica (2003). “The hormonal costs of subtle forms of infant maltreatment.” Hormones and Behavior, Vol 43(1), Jan 2003, 237-244.
Lyons et all. (2000). Stress-Level Cortisol Treatment Impairs Inhibitory Control of Behavior in Monkeys.” J. Neuroscience. October 15. 20 (20):7816–7821.
Cao, Y., Rao, S, D., Phillips, T, M., Umbach, D, M., Bernbaum, J, C., Archer, J, I., and Rogan, W, J. (2009). Are Breastfed Infants more Resilient?-Feeding Method and Cortisol in Infants. J Pediatr. 154(3): 452–454.
McEwen, B. S. (2003). Early life influences on life-long patterns of behavior and health. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 9(3), 149–154.Bright ,M, A., Granger, D, A., and Frick, J, E. (2012). Do infants show a cortisol awakening response? Dev Psychobiol. 54(7):736-43.
Carpenter, L, L. Tyrka, A, R., Ross, N, S., Khoury, L., Anderson, G, M., and Price, L, H. (2009). Effect of Childhood Emotional Abuse and Age on Cortisol Responsivity in Adulthood Biol Psychiatry. 66(1): 69–75.
Doom, J, R., Cicchetti, D., and Rogosch, F, A.(2014). Longitudinal Patterns of Cortisol Regulation Differ in Maltreated and Nonmaltreated Children. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 53(11): 1206–1215.

Change of Payment Service and Removal of Members area

5/1/2017

Over the Christmas period I suffered at the hands of a PayPal reverse transaction, I've had the odd occurence of being scammed in the past. From my agreement at Virgin Active to be repaid for a training course if I remained working at the company for a year (they blamed a change of finance team), through to a someone promising to pay me for some lab tests that I'd paid on their behalf.

I've long ago accepted that people will try and take advantage and as with life you have to take the rough with the smooth, but I always hoped I had the support of the company I used to accept payments, PayPal. Sadly it didn't work out that way, and over Chrismas I suffered a loss due to someone reversing subscrition payments. I'm not in this work to become a millionare, I value my time and my research more than profit as most will tell you. If it was about the money I'd work at GloboGym, sell a preprinted diet sheet, or work in the NHS.

The idea behind the subscription service was to allow users to access myself at a reduced rate for brief interactions by email (giving you priority in my email box), and to give you access to the members section which was password protected. My blog has 300+ free posts but the members area was targeted towards the needs of those subscribed. It also contained my database of 6000+ research articles catorgorised into differing health issues that made it easy to search for relevent material. It is also the only area I made video and audio content avaiable (TV and radio shows I've been part of, plus my own recordings) as I'm not too keen on this type of media and prefered it kept away from open viewing. The members area started from what was initially a "school" area, in which I trained numerous individual who worked in a variety of health releated jobs. Three years ago I opened it up to subscribers well aware that people would make copies and share my work. Yet I didn't expect to be quite this exposed.

PayPal state their terms to be;

11.10 What are examples of items/transactions/cases that are not eligible for PayPal seller protection?

Intangible items, licenses for digital content, and services.
Items that you deliver (or are picked up) in person (except for items for which you received payment through the PayPal Location Based Payments Functionality).
Transactions made through Zong, Website Payment Pro (PayPal Direct Payment and Virtual Terminal).
Claims, Chargebacks and Reversals for Significantly Not as Described; and/ or claims filed directly with eBay.
PayPal Business Payments.

So despite having spent a few days over Christmas attempting to protect my work, I have no option other than to suck it up and wait for PayPal to unblock my account. I've always viewed my independent research as an artistic outlet, so to have someone potentially use it, copy it, distribute it, then be able to gain a refund doesn't feel great.

As of today my site will run via stripe rather than PayPal which hopefully won't cause you any difficulties. I have also shut down the members area, stopped taking subcriptions and refunded those that were current members. My plan is to gradually transfer some of the work to Patreon, but as I'm sure you will appreciate this will mean reformatting and editing content to make it suitable.

Thank you to all my supporters, I'm sorry to make these changes but hopefully Patreon will work out and I'll get more time to dedicate to my research/book. As ever, I'm available for consults via my store.

Weight Watcher or Money Waster?

20/12/2016

The Christmas binge season is creeping up on us, and as ever it will be quickly followed the annual tradition of starving oneself as a penance for your syns (I know it's sins, I just borrowed a slumming world term). Metabolism is the basis of both my work and research, and it never ceases to amaze me how misunderstood the topic is.

I thought we’d look over an old article from the Daily Mirror. Not exactly PubMed but it is where most people will go for “expert opinion” once New Years Eve is in their hazy past. The article by Tanith Carey was titled “How many calories do you REALLY need to eat every day? We put six women to the test.” (1) In the article they want you to consider why some women can eat anything and not gain weight, whilst others gain weight just by looking at a piece of cake. Now that simply isn’t true, everyone has the potential to gain weight, our ability to survive thus far is most likely due to our ability to down-regulate our metabolism and store energy in order to survive periods of famine. (2, 3)

The article goes on to mention the dreaded NHS guidelines that the average female needs 2,000 calories a day. The problem is how we define average female.
Scientifically we know that we are individuals, and to use the term “average” is beyond useless, indeed, to follow some dictated policy shows an utter disregard for your individuality. With the scientific tools we have at our disposal we no longer need to conform ourselves to the system, we can define our own systems.

The article does touch on the number of calories “we can eat” varying from woman to woman. They then went onto measure oxygen inhalation and carbon dioxide exhalation to enable the calculation of resting metabolism in six “individuals. Dr Naufahu stated “As we get older, our metabolism tends to slow down, so unless we keep up our muscle mass with exercise, those extra calories get stored as fat, which is why so many middle-aged women battle with their weight.” Personally it leaves me astonished that no mention is made of food sustaining the metabolism, I've completed enough study over the years to conclude that you'll struggle to maintain or increase muscle mass without adequote food. As you'll see, metabolism seems to suffer most at the hands of the lieflong dieter.

One of those tested was a personal drainer called Jo who was 53 at time of publication, and needed 1,600 calories despite eating 1,942. Her various admissions;

“For most of my life I’ve yo-yo dieted.….In my teens, I lost the weight through dangerous crash dieting. But then I married and gained more pounds with each of my pregnancies until I went up to 15st….”

“I started exercising and eating no more than 1,200 calories a day. It took 22 months for me to lose five stone….”

“Now I’m happy with my body and keep my figure trim with exercise and eating healthily during the week – fruit, protein and salad but indulging at the weekends. I am particularly partial to red wine…..”

“The weight still comes off much more slowly than it used to in my younger days.”

This really sums up the metabolic adaption created by dieting or making incorrect assumptions about what your body needs in terms of its energy requirements.

Further into the article Dr Naufahu’s makes a childish error when she states that "To lose a pound of fat, you need a calorie deficit of 3,500-kcals each week.” She then states that Miss Average needs to cut down by 400 to 500 kcals a day. Yet the belief that a 3,500-kcal deficit will result in one pound of weight loss (about 0.45 kg) is misguided if not corrupt. It continues to be cited in “over 35 000 weight loss educational websites” plus copious amounts of academic textbooks, scientific articles and so called experts in diet and nutrition. (4) Even the British Dietetics Association pushes the totally unreferenced 3500-kcal rule. (5) Even if it was factual it fails to account for the metabolic adaption caused by dieting. To put it simply, the greater the degree of energy restriction to encounter, the more efficient you become as energy output is slowed to protect you. (6)

Then we meet Nicola who is 54 and eats 1,800 calories despite her RMR being 1,497, interestingly she claims to .

“eat more than half what I used to in my 30s and find it harder and harder to keep it off, especially since I turned 50."

“I had a hysterectomy at 42 and have been on HRT ever since. I think that keeps me heavier because it makes me suffer water retention."

“It’s very frustrating because I don’t eat a lot. I start the day with an omelette and have lots of fish and salads – with the odd cereal bar thrown in as a treat.”

So we can see the daily recommendation based on the “average woman” are pretty much worthless, and that random dieting seems to have often detrimental effects on the Resting Metabolic Rate (RMR). The next stage up from this guesswork would be predictive equations such as Mifflin-St Jeor, (7) which I used during my MSc dissertation due to the costs involved in utilising more accurate methods across a large study group.

Their can be no doubting that predictive formula provides a greater degree of individual understanding when developing and evaluating a nutrition plan, yet predictive equations may effect longterm outcome due errors in accuracy.(8, 9) Oshima et al, (10) concluded that indirect calorimetry was an important tool for nutritional therapy of patients, so it would seem logical to conclude that those looking to lose weight (often for health reasons) should utilise the best possible tools available to enable both long term success and evade future health problems.

That studies such as Fothergill et al, (11) describe poor weight-loss maintenance at 6 year follow up, coupled with RMR suppression, indicates the importance of knowing individual RMR in order to maintain health and longevity whilst attempting to attain weight-loss goals. (12) Whilst costs may seem prohibitive it must be noted that during a study funded by Weight-Watchers, 5 year weight-loss maintenance was reported as 16.2 percent. Whilst this seems to make it plausible it must be considered that by the studies own admission the participants were made up of only the most successful members, and is no indication of actual success rates amongst all all members. It is also worth pointing out that the study was looking at “success” measured in terms of members who managed to maintain 5 percent of their weight-loss over 1, 2 and 5 year periods. Ask yourself would you really be happy being one of the 16.2 percent in an elite group that after 5 years had managed to maintain only 5 percent of your weight-loss? Thought not.

So, at the cheapest rate for online access you’d be paying £122.68 for a year, right through to £325 a year to attend group meeting.(13) Cheap enough to risk it for those unaware of their chance of “success” and a great business model for repeat customers tricked into thinking their outcome was due to poor willpower.

So how would I tackle the issue of weight loss?

Firstly you need to know your own energy requirements, not those of Miss Average.

Option 1. Select a formula, work out your RMR and add on your activity to give you a better estimation of your needs.

Option 2. Book in for an RMR test and gain a more accurate picture of your needs.

After completing option 2 I would then suggest (or I do it for you if you visit me) that you complete option 1 to see how your actual RMR compares against what standardised formula suggests you need.

Next you need to consider the fact that after most RMR tests are completed the individual is then subjected to the 3,500 calorie deficit rule. We already know this isn’t backed up by evidence, and cannot work long-term due to metabolic adaption. So my suggestion would be to eat the amount your body needs and begin to restore your youthful metabolism. If you are supplying the correct amount of energy you will benefit from not needing extreme willpower, and over time you’ll see the RMR begin to raise as the metabolism adapts in response to the consistent supply of energy.

Any questions, leave a comment.

References:

1. Carey, T. (2013). How many calories do you REALLY need to eat every day? We put six women to the test.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/health/how-many-calories-you-really-2161639 published 14 Aug 2013 and updated 27 Jun 2016

2. Galgani, J., & Ravussin, E. (2008). Energy metabolism, fuel selection and body weight regulation. International Journal of Obesity (2005), 32(Suppl 7), S109–S119. http://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2008.246

3. Mattes, R, D., Pierce, C, B., and Friedman, M, I. (1988). Daily caloric intake of normal-weight adults: response to changes in dietary energy density of a luncheon meal. Am J Clin Nutr, 48(2):214-9.

4. Thomas, D, M., Martin, C, K,. Lettieri, S., Bredlau, C., Kaiser, K., Church, T., Bouchard, C., and Heymsfield, S, B. (2013). Can a weight loss of one pound a week be achieved with a 3500-kcal deficit? Commentary on a commonly accepted rule. International Journal of Obesity (2013) 37, 1611–1613; doi:10.1038/ijo.2013.51; published online 30 April 2013.

5. BDA Food Facts Sheet https://www.bda.uk.com/foodfacts/Want2LoseWeight.pdf accessed 20th December 2016.

6. Luke, A., and Schoeller, D, D. (1992). Basal metabolic rate, fat-free mass, and body cell mass during energy restriction Metabolism - Clinical and Experimental , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , 450 - 4566.
7. Mifflin, M, D., St-Jeor, S, T., Hill, L, A., Scott, B, J., Daugherty, S, A., and Koh, Y, O. (2005). A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990 Feb;51(2):241-7.

8. Frankenfield D., Roth-Yousey, L., & Compher C. Comparison of predictive equations for resting metabolic rate in healthy nonobese and obese adults: a systematic review. J Am Diet Assoc. 2005 May;105(5):775-89.

9. Aliasgharzadeh, S., Mahdavi, R., Asghari Jafarabadi, M., & Namazi, N. Comparison of Indirect Calorimetry and Predictive Equations in Estimating Resting Metabolic Rate in Underweight Females. Iran J Public Health, Vol. 44, No.6, Jun 2015, pp.822-829

10. Oshima, T., Berger, M, M., De Waele, E., Guttormsen, A, B., Heidegger, C, P., Hiesmayr, M., Singer, P., Wernerman, J., & Pichard, C. (2016). Indirect calorimetry in nutritional therapy. A position paper by the ICALIC study group. Clin Nutr. 2016 Jun 22. pii: S0261-5614(16)30142-X. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2016.06.010. [Epub ahead of print]

11. Fothergill, E., Guo, J., Howard, L., Kerns, J. C., Knuth, N. D., Brychta, R., Chen, K. Y., Skarulis, M. C., Walter, M., Walter, P. J. and Hall, K. D. (2016), Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after “The Biggest Loser” competition. Obesity, 24: 1612–1619. doi:10.1002/oby.21538

12. Rizzo, M, R., Mari, D., Barbieri, M., Ragno, E., Grella, R., Provenzano, R., Villa, I., Esposito, K., Giugliano, D., & Paolisso, G. (2005). Resting Metabolic Rate and Respiratory Quotient in Human Longevity. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 2005 90:1, 409-413

13. Weight Watchers Pricing structure. Accessed 20th December 2016 https://www.weightwatchers.com/uk/weight-loss-plans?

Social Conformity

13/10/2016

From an early age I was acutely aware that life appears to be about social conformity, that we change in response to either physical or imagined pressure to meet the expectations of the group, we yield to the perceived social norms (1). It always seemed odd (and still does) that we agree to do things we'd rather not to in order that we fit in with the perceived desires of the majority (how can we be sure the majority aren't all agreeing for the same reason), so that we can fit in and be liked by the group. In effect we take our role in society in order to claim our identity and make sure other like us.

Three differing types of conformity seem to occur:

Compliance, Internalisation, and Ingratiational

Compliance occurs when our behaviour adapts in order to gain approval and/or avoid disapproval by conforming. (2) For example you may take part in bullying behaviour, or sing at a karaoke night to conform with the group, despite not actually agreeing with it. This can happen at all levels, from agreeing to those drinks you'd rather not have, trying smoking when you really didn't want to. Right through to agreeing to bombing another country when you really don't think we should (I think with most politicians they are most likely careerists that internalise or identify as discussed below).

With internalisation we genuinely accept the group norms because of reward. Kelman (2) states that this is high level conformity due to the group beliefs becoming part of the individual’s own beliefs, therefore the behaviour tends to become permanent. Sherif (3) found that people conform to the group norms when they are unsure, as such this tends to occur when we view the group to have authority over us. We yield to the super knowledge, as an example I see numerous clients that comply with their Doctor despite being either unsure or unhappy with the advice. We might conform to government policy on health and nutrition because the authority said that saturated fat was dangerous and polyunsaturated was healthy. We may not have the knowledge to challenge authority, and under the belief that we are rewarded with health we genuinely accept the belief.

Identification happens when we want to establish a relationship with a person or a role within a group, (2) as displayed in the Zimbardo Prison Study in which those involved in the experiment as prison guards complied to the perception of the role. Do we comply in our role as the fat, sick and stressed once we assign ourself that identity? Take genetics, if we are fed the theory that we are genetically predisposed to a condition do we accept or even manifest it to maintain our identity. I see a lot of this on Facebook within health groups set up to supposedly support others, typically it becomes a battle to fit in and be the best/worst case.

So why do we conform? As I discussed earlier I was acutely aware of social conformity from an early age, in fact I began to suspect that extroverted and introverted personalities were often simply differing degrees of conformity. Whilst I'm typically classed as an introvert I often felt it was simply the fact that I'm more than happy to say no. My desire to be myself and do what I want tends to create the appearance of an introvert, in reality I know my own mind and won't agree to conform, not even to authority if I can prove them wrong.

Deutsch and Gerrard (4) discussed Normative and Informational conformity. Normative being the desire to fit in with group for fear of rejection despite privately disagreeing with the group. Taking drugs or getting drunk when you'd rather not out of fear that you'll be ostracised from the group is a good example, and one that most people can relate to. Informational conformity is when we lack the knowledge and look to the group or authority, usually we then adopt this behaviour as our new norm. This often seen in the health industry, from dieters following diet gurus, happy to accept preprinted diet plans, spending cash on yet more editions of the blobby coaches mean in 15 books. Right through to our acceptance of government and scientific/industry policy without question. The promise of reward (skinny/health) in response to submitting to the group ideology has us conforming with something purely based on trust. Two of my friends are soon to release a long awaited documentary that I backed via kickstarted called "On the Back of a Tiger".(5) The film looks at the work of a group of renegade non conformist scientists and considers the conformation for industry rewards that is rife in the scientific community, this will also be the topic for my next blog.

So what makes some of us fail to conform to the social pressure?
What makes a freethinker think for themselves?
Are we taught conform?
Does public policy on food and drugs help with conformity? Are we drugged droids?
Is freethinking a risk to the authority/ruling class?

All these will be covered in up and coming posts, but please feel free to comment below and add your voice to guide future posts.

As you may of noticed some of my post have started going via Patreon, the main reason for this is due to my desire to remain independent and not conform. Some of you may know that the previous year has seen a battle with three Universities who have all been keen to explore my research. Yet at the final hurdle I have time and time again failed to secure PhD funding when I refused to alter my proposal to conform. Two academics privately praised my intention but stated that the institution receives funding from industry that opposes my ideas.

I will not climb on the back of the tiger simply to gain acceptance and would rather go it alone. Patreon isn't expensive and my ultimate plan is that rather than purchasing a small online consult with me (currently £8 a day, £30 a week) you will use Patreon at a much cheaper price and the questions will be answered (maintaining your anonymity) in a group post which enables you all to see the Q&A's.

All the monies generated from this method will go towards furthering my research, and it is my intention that the research will be transmitted live so that you can make suggestions, ask questions and generally get involved.

References;

1. Crutchfield, R. (1955). Conformity and Character. American Psychologist, 10, 191-198.

2. Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51–60.

3. Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in perception. Archives of Psychology, 27(187) .

4. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The journal of abnormal and social psychology, 51(3), 629.

5. The Production Journal for: On the Back of a Tiger. Perceive Think Act http://perceivethinkact.com

Masa Harina Pancakes

6/10/2016

Corn is pretty popular as a food but what makes Masa Harina different? Traditionally eaten by Mexican Indians after being nixtamalized (boiled with an alkaline chemical that changes both its physical and chemical structure.[1] As Dr. Ray Peat reported;

"In 1979 some of my students in Mexico wanted a project to do in the lab. Since several traditional foods are made with corn that has been boiled in alkali, I thought it would be valuable to see whether this treatment reduced the ability of the starch grains to be persorbed. For breakfast one day, they ate only atole, tamales, and tortillas, all made from the alkali treated corn. None of the students could find any starch grains after centrifuging their blood and urine. That led me to substitute those foods whenever possible for other starches."[2]

References:

Cerqueira MT, Fry MM, Connor WE. The food and nutrient intakes of the Tarahumara Indians of Mexico. Am J Clin Nutr. 1979 Apr;32(4):905-15. PMID: 433816.
http://raypeat.com/articles/nutrition/carrageenan.shtml

Ingredients

75g Masa Harina
¼ tsp salt
2 eggs
200ml whole milk
75ml water
50g refined coconut butter (you can use normal butter)
50-100g of sugar depending on how sweet you'd like them.

Makes around 6-8 pancakes

Perfect with squeezed orange juice and either maple syrup or sugar sprinkled on top. A personal favourite is strained Greek yogurt or ice cream with stewed apple.

Place the masa harina, sugar and salt into a mixing bowl, making a well in which you break the the eggs into. Scramble the mix and then add both the milk and water.
Mix till you have a smooth batter.
Use 2 tbsp of butter in the batter and continue to mix.
Heat a frying pan over medium to high heat. Drizzle a little melted butter in the pan before adding 2 tbsp batter. Circle it round so that the batter spreads evenly.
Cook till golden brown underneath before flipping and cooking the other side.
Repeat as desired or store the batter in the fridge for use another day.
Add your toppings and enjoy.

Be patient

16/9/2016

Doctors have patients I have...people, friends, I don't know what else to call them? They're just people that ask for help, maybe because they read my blog, saw something I posted on Facebook or somebody suggested they chat to me. From my very beginnings in they health industry I hated the word patient. At one point I had a desire to become a Doctor, with one or two caveats, I neither wanted patients nor did I want to dish out pills in an authoritative manner without the "patient" being involved in the diagnostic process. Hence I didn't get past the Med School interview and I'm not a Doctor.

My love of diagnostic processes, a desire to collate data prior to making an informed decision, and the above all that I present my findings to the individual, explain the differential diagnostic process and allow them to draw their own conclusions. It is important that I do not diagnose, partly because I'm not allowed to as I've not ticked the right boxes and attained the correct title, but more importantly because nobody should be a greater authority then the person themselves.I meet two types of people in my work, the anti-authoritarians and the patients. The patients typically struggle with my methods, they want me to be the authority, I want them to fix themselves (with some guidance). They want a diet sheet, I want them to learn, to understand, to take ownership, to realise that things change. And that unless they take the wheel, they may veer wildly off course without even realising it.

authority NOUN

The power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.
‘he had absolute authority over his subordinates’
‘a rebellion against those in authority’

As a nation we are incredibly impatient in so many aspects of our lives, from instantly downloading books and expecting next day delivery (and impending same day drone drops if the media can be believed), through to ready meals that ping out the microwave. Yet when it comes to our health we are prepared to patiently wait for care, so stoic in our acceptance of our illness the we patiently accept whatever our Doctor tells us without question. Admittedly aren't patient with the long wait to see a doctor, venture in any waiting room and you'll hear disgruntled snorts, tuts, sighs, and a fair bit of moaning about the inability to book an appointment. Yet when it comes down to actually sitting face to face with the doctor we become the patient, submissive and compliant. Suddenly we accept whatever we are told and trudge back for test after test, repeat prescription after repeat prescription, popping pill after pill usually with a distinct lack of progress, and more often than not a refusal to discuss anything you may bring up. If the Doctor gives the condition a name, we love it and take ownership like a new baby, often telling our friends and family about it. Often when given a named condition we'll be referred to a specialist in that specific named condition, at which point we are able to claim ownership of "my rheumatologist" or whatever specialist it is. We treat them like Gods and frequently sign our bodies away for medical experimentation without a second thought.

From an early age I always had a problem with authority, it wasn't that I grew up a screaming anarchist hell bent on fighting the power, I just never saw why somebody, indeed anybody could hold a position of authority over me. Surely we should be able to challenge any person and their views, beliefs and actions. Our early days in school are all about discipline, conformity, disempowerment, fitting in and ultimately becoming dependent upon the system. You tick the boxes, they give you the credentials that you need to progress in the system and so forth. Once this compliance with authority is established it can extend to all areas of your life, an overwhelming desire to comply, to do as your told. The Doctor knows best, and you mustn't challenge their authority. Compliance and a willingness to submit to the statins, diabetes drugs, the endless painkillers, antidepressants and the ever growing cocktail of pharmaceutical concoctions that numb our very existence. And despite all this we never ask why? What does it do? Will it help?

Next time you visit your Doctor, do your research, ask some questions. Typically they hate it, they may lash out and ridicule your attempt to engage in your health. Stand your ground, ask questions, get explanations that you can understand. It's your body and nobody has a right to take ownership of what happens with it, especially in a 7 minute consulatation.

It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment. - SH

References:
(1) http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/patient

(2) https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/authority

Addicted to the Poison

4/8/2016

I got the poison.
I got the remedy.
I got the pulsating rhythmical remedy.
I got the poison.
I got the remedy.
I got the pulsating rhythmical remedy.
I got the poison.
I got the remedy.
I got the pulsating rhythmical remedy.
I got the poison.
I got the remedy.
I got the poison. I got the poison. I got the poison.
Yeah... Yeah... Yeah...
Yeah... (Boom...) Yeah... (Bah...

We turn up our noses and sneer at those dastardly low-life drug addicts that blight our society. They've got the poison and we think we know the remedy...abstinence, therapy or better still, a criminal record. Yet our streets are lined with Starbucks and Pubs, they're legal and we love it. So why when the worlds most popular drugs are street legal, do we hold such disregard for those seemingly "addicted" to less socially acceptable (depending on the circles you move in) drugs such as heroin or meth?

Are we better addicts? Do we deserve to live a better life? To be loved despite our self-medication? Their can be no doubt that suffering is a part of life, and our ability to adapt to this is what shapes us. Yet their can also be little doubt that "addiction" is a form of suffering, and that If we attach the tag "addict" because you have a beer or bottle of wine every night, does that increase the belief that you need the substance and that you're suffering an infliction? Addiction may not even exist, it may just be a biological response to some sort of suffering, a way to numb the pain, be it physical or emotional. Bang your knee and you'll self-medicate by rubbing it better. Starve yourself of food or a particular macronutrient under the guidance of any number of foodie/nutritionalists and you're likely to self-medicate with any number of "treats" when it all gets too much. You may label this an addiction, a cheat day, call it flexible dieting or even ignore it and promise to get back on the wagon tomorrow.

In the 1970's Dr. Bruce Alexander ran his now famous Rat Park experiments, tracking white laboratory rats housed in cages in close proximity to one another, separated by the steel sides, only engaging in contact when lab staff brought food, water etc, basically solitary confinement. At other times they suffered prolonged starvation and were confined to skinner boxes which allowed for punishments and rewards (limited feeding and electric shocks etc). Inside the skinner boxes the rats reward themselves with pellets by pushing a lever on the side of the box. The metal allowed for administration of electric shocks in order to punish rather than reward. Eventually they considered addiction, and the rats were allowed to inject drugs by pressing the lever, a process that involving being tethered, cathetered (to allow the drug to enter the bloodstream). The results showed that the rats continued to use the lever to self administer heroin, morphine, amphetamine, etc. Thus it came to pass that drugs were labelled addictive to rats and naturally to humans as well. And so began the War on Drugs, and with it, harsh retribution for anyone caught with anything not allowed by the authoritarian state.

Alexander however realised that rats are highly social, and that solitary confinement may drive them crazy which may increase the desire to self-medicate. He also realised that while isolated they had no real options, they couldn't escape the cage and pushing the lever if for no other reason than to stem the boredom seemed inevitable. Along with colleagues he undertook studies to compare the drug usage of rats in a fairly normal environment versus those in isolation. To do this he built a park environment filled with things to climb on, hide in, other rats (of both sexes) and adequate nutrition. Pretty much every experiment they ran showed that the isolated rats consumed more drugs no matter what variables they ran.

Despite the findings being replicated by other researchers it was largely ignored, and continues to be to this day. Addiction is an irresistible disease, something we're all susceptible to, something is claimed to have genetic risk factors. Is it too profitable to turn our backs on expensive long-term drug treatments and therapy, when it may be more useful to consider the socio-economic environment? Why do human become "addicted"? Do things make us feel caged or isolated?

Alexander went further, sadly he couldn't conduct Human Park studies due to ethical reasons, but he was to look back at historical data. Such as when our ancestors colonised various native tribes in Western Canada during the 18th and 19th century. The natives were broken, both economically and culturally, losing their homes and being forced to abandon their language. History shows us that alcoholism became rife, which was explained by the settlers as genetic vulnerability. In effect the natives were the rats, isolated, forced into a new culture and basically caged in an environment that they didn't wish to be in.

What causes your "addictions"? Do you need that wine to numb the pain of working in a job you detest? Is that drug addict that you look down on really just numbing the social and economic pain of being isolated in an environment that basically leaves them with no obvious way out. Are your food issues caused by the likes of Joe Wicks, Davina McCall, Weight Watchers or any other diet club or guru caging you in an environment that leaves you undernourished? Is Jamie Oliver freaking you out about sugar, causing you to create a cage in you restrain yourself from consuming an important fuel?

Are your addictions due to a cage that you have created for yourself? Or even one you have let someone create for you? It's time to escape your cages...

Choose Life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family. Choose a fucking big television, choose washing machines, cars, compact disc players and electrical tin openers. Choose good health, low cholesterol, and dental insurance. Choose fixed interest mortage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose your friends. Choose leisurewear and matching luggage. Choose a three-piece suite on hire purchase in a range of fucking fabrics. Choose DIY and wondering who the fuck you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting on that couch watching mind-numbing, spirit-crushing game shows, stuffing fucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the end of it all, pishing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than an embarrassment to the selfish, fucked up brats you spawned to replace yourself.
Choose your future.
Choose life. - John Hodge

Reference:

Alexander, B. (2010). The Globalization of Addiction: A study in poverty of the spirit. Oxford Univ. Press.

Cancer: Thousands surviving in UK decades after diagnosis

1/8/2016

The news that "more than 170,000 people in the UK who were diagnosed with cancer up to 40 years ago are still alive", is a positive step forward suggests Macmillan Cancer.[1] Apparently "people are twice as likely to survive for at least a decade after being diagnosed than they were at the start of the 1970s". This it is suggested is due to better treatments and diagnoses. The report [2] Cancer Then and Now, suggests that long-term issues are a major factor in 'survival' and I would suggest that these long-term issues may become a factor in the future.

I've previously written about the "war on cancer" [3] and the statement from Macmillan just doesn't sit well with me;

"People are now twice as likely to survive at least 10 years after being diagnosed with cancer than they were at the start of the 1970s"

For a start, the statement is referenced with the Quaresma, Coleman, and Rachet's (2015) study, in which the assessment of progress in cancer control was based upon an observational study. In "patients diagnosed in 1971-72, the index of net survival was 50% at 1 year after diagnosis. 40 years later, the same value of 50% was predicted at 10 years after diagnosis."

"Predicted 10-year net survival adjusted for age and sex for patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2011 ranged from 1·1% for pancreatic cancer to 98·2% for testicular cancer."

"Net survival for the oldest patients (75-99 years) was persistently lower than for the youngest (15-44 years), even after adjustment for the much higher mortality from causes other than cancer in elderly people."

"The very wide differences in survival for different cancers, and the persistent age gap in survival, suggest the need for renewed efforts to improve cancer outcomes."
FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

Further into the report, they "estimate that at least 170,000 people are living with cancer who were diagnosed in the 1970s and 1980s."
Despite all these estimates, the death rates among adults seem to be steadily rising other than when you jiggle the figures and use age restandardisation, a point Ray brought up previously in his article on Breast Cancer. [5]

"Government officials, editors of the big medical journals, professors and broadcasters, have been able to get away with this huge statistical fraud. I suspect that they will soon feel encouraged to simply make up the data that they want, because eventually “age standardization” isn’t going to work to hide the actual increases in mortality. Since people with cancer usually die of something else, such as a stroke or heart failure, it will be no trick at all to make cancer mortality decline to be replaced by other causes of death. The precedent for such fabulizing of data exists in the FDA’s approval of AZT, and other less notorious drugs." - RP

Whilst I'd like to bring the news that the headline is full of bright prospects, it is seemingly a propaganda piece aimed at keeping us focused on fighting the war on cancer. To keep morale high and convince us that we are succeeding. As I've stated previously, unless mainstream science admits some huge failings, the war will continue.

References

1. Cancer: Thousands surviving in UK decades after diagnosis http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-36925974

2. Macmillian Cancer Then and Now report http://www.macmillan.org.uk/documents/campaigns/cancer-then-now-report-final-online.pdf

3. Craig, B. War on Cancer http://www.billycraig.co.uk/blog/war-on-cancer

4. Quaresma M, Coleman MP, Rachet B. (2015). 40-year trends in an index of survival for all cancers combined and survival adjusted for age and sex for each cancer in England and Wales, 1971-2011: a population-based study. Lancet. 2015 Mar 28;385(9974):1206-18. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61396-9. Epub 2014 Dec 3 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25479696

5. Peat, R. Breast Cancer http://raypeat.com/articles/aging/breastcancer.shtml

Offering nutritional consultation, dietary and health analysis, CHEK practitioner, exercise coach, personal trainer, and neuromuscular therapy services worldwide via online consultation but based in the East Midlands, Derby, Nottingham, Burton areas. Cover all areas including Willington, Repton, Findern, Milton, Duffield, Allestree, Darley Abbey, Littleover, Mackworth, Quarndon, Mickleover, Alvaston, Chellaston, Chaddesden and the surrounding areas. I have clients that travel from all over the UK and Europe so please get in touch to discuss how I can help you.