Mark Sisson's Blog, page 218

Are Cell Phones and EMFs Really Harming Your Health?

I’ve covered GMOs (twice), organic food, and pesticides. Today, I’m tackling another hot button issue: the dangers (or lack thereof) of modern electronics, specifically mobile devices and the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs).

Obviously, the way we use electronics has impacted our lives in both positive and negative ways. Positives include greater dissemination of knowledge, democratization of communication, economic growth, and increased opportunities for people in far-flung locales and otherwise oppressive situations to learn about and impact the world. Without modern electronics, I wouldn’t be able to do what I do and you wouldn’t be able to read this. That’s fairly unassailable.

But from brain cancer to bone loss to sperm mutation to behavioral problems, EMFs (a byproduct of many electronic devices) have been blamed for many health problems. What does the evidence say? And if there are real issues, what can we do to mitigate them? How far should we go?

If you’re already pretty versed in Primal living, you’re probably already familiar with the non-EMF related costs to staying too plugged in:

Too much reliance on digital life, not enough on real life.

Lack of close physical contact. Why meet up for coffee when you can just follow a person on Facebook?

Excessive use of cell phones compromises our posture. The dreaded “text neck.”

Blue light emitted by electronic screens interferes with melatonin secretion at night and disrupts circadian rhythm.

Those drawbacks have more to do with us—how and when we use and rely on technology. It may be hard to disengage from social media and reclaim “real” life, or remind yourself to fix your posture when texting, but nothing physically prevents us. It can be done, and just about everyone agrees that these are real issues with our use of technology.

But what about the physiological ramifications of regular exposure to electronic and magnetic fields emitted by the electronic devices in our lives?

Cell phones and brain cancer

A large new study on brain cancer and cell phones in Australians just released. Researchers examined three decades’ worth of data, looking for correlations between cell phone use and the rate of brain cancer. They didn’t find any. Among men but not women, cell phones were associated with a tiny but insignificant increase in brain cancer. The most notable increase, found in adults aged 70-84, began in 1982—before cell phones even existed.

An even more recent study (PDF) on cell phones and brain cancer with different results has also come out. This one was in rats, but it was a big one with a lot of government money behind it. According to the study’s authors, exposing rats to the type of radio waves typically emitted by mobile phones caused “low incidences” of two kinds of tumors. Low, but not zero. Critics and proponents of the “cell phones cause cancer” idea have both championed it as supportive of their cause.

A few things about the study make me question its relevance.

The rat pups were introduced to cell phone radiation in utero. I question the relevance to humans. While pregnant mothers are using smartphones, they’re usually not bathing their unborn in high-powered cell phone radiation.
Despite the uptick in cancers, the rats exposed to cell phone radiation actually tended to live about 8% longer than the control rats exposed to none. Could this be a hormetic, adaptive response to radiation? In previous studies, GSM-modulated cell phone radiation has been shown to increase a rat’s resistance to stronger forms of radiation.
It’s not the full study. The authors released “partial findings” after getting some notable results. It was still peer reviewed, but full analysis of the data isn’t expected until 2017.
These were Sprague-Dawley rats, a lab breed known for high tumor rates (PDF). There’s a reason scientists like using Sprague-Dawley rats—it all but ensures you’ll have some tumors to study. Humans don’t develop tumors with anywhere near the same frequency, so the risk isn’t the same for us.
They received full body exposure. They were immersed in the stuff. On humans, exposure is more localized.

All in all, I’m not too worried about brain cancer and cell phones. On the scale of things that kill you, brain cancer is a rare one. Primary brain cancer which starts in the brain and is presumably caused by cell phones is far more rare than metastasized brain cancer which starts elsewhere and spreads to the brain. Except when it isn’t, of course—but that’s true for everything.

Brain cancer isn’t the only thing people worry about. There are other concerns.

Cell phones and bone density

A couple studies have found that keeping your smartphone in your pocket on one side may modestly accelerate hip bone loss on that side.

Compared to people without mobile phones, mobile phone users had lower bone mineral content and bone density in the right trochanter (part of the femur that attaches to the hip).

Another study gathered 150 mobile phone-using men and separated them according to which pocket held their phones. Group 1 wore them on the right side, Group 2 on the left. They looked at bone quality at the right hip, using Group 2 as a non-exposure control.  On average, subjects wore their phones on the hip for 14.7 hours a day. Those with exposure showed signs of slightly degraded bone quality, albeit not as severe as osteoporotic patients.

Cell phones and fertility

Men can vouch for this: our boys are sensitive. They need careful handling, almost coddling. A lot can go wrong down there. So when you ask me to place a consistent source of EMF directly adjacent to them, I wonder if that’s a good idea.

For years, famous strength coach Charles Poliquin has insisted his athletes keep their cell phones out of their pockets to maintain optimal testosterone levels. Tim Ferriss ran an n=1 self-experiment on the effects of carrying a cell phone in his pocket, finding that it definitely degraded his sperm count and quality. Researchers have wondered if the cell phone is modern man’s nemesis (PDF). Studies have found links between time spent carrying a cell phone in your pocket and erectile dysfunction, morphological changes to sperm, and reductions in sperm counts. If you ejaculate then blast the semen with cell phone radiation, oxidative stress levels go up in individual sperm. The truth is that there isn’t a lot of solid research one way or the other. But what we have indicates a real effect.

Cell phones and kids

Kids have thinner everything. Their skulls are softer and thinner. If we’re talking infants and 1-2 year olds, they’re practically made of cartilage (that’s why they don’t break when you drop them). The less hard boney tissue a watt of EMF faces, the deeper it’ll go. Some researchers are invoking the precautionary principle, urging parents to hold off on giving mobile phones to their kids until further research can be done. Other researchers are suggesting that kids’ skulls absorb more cell phone radiation than adults’ skulls.

Mobile phones are consistently linked to worse sleep in kids, causing some folks to wonder if EMF was responsible. One recent study examined this question, determining that while mobile phone usage is strongly linked to sleep problems, it’s probably not the EMF doing it. Residential exposure to EMF had no impact on sleep disturbance; only using a mobile phone in the home did, probably due to excessive light and the fact that it’s pretty hard to sleep when you’re glued to a crappy iPhone game.

Links between cell phone use and ADHD have also been proposed, but I think reverse causality is equally likely. Is little Finn’s iPad shooting radiation into his brain and giving him ADHD, or are Finn’s exhausted parents giving him the iPad to keep him quiet? The researchers report that kids who stopped using cell phones midway through the study had improvements in their symptoms, which at first glance suggests causality. But maybe they stopped using the phones because their symptoms improved and their parents no longer had to resort to the phone. As this was an observational study, not an intervention, we can’t say.

What about unborn kids? Again, observational studies suggest a connection between cell phone exposure in both the prenatal and postnatal period and behavioral problems. But those are observational. They can’t make any causality claims or account for all confounding variables. Moms who are glued to the cell phone may have other characteristics that predispose their kids to behavioral problems.

The effects of all this EMF, if they’re real, are relatively minor on the grand scale of things. Keeping your phone in your pocket might gradually weaken the bone there, but not nearly as much as failing to lift heavy things, walk a lot, get your vitamin D, eat calcium-rich foods, and lead an overall healthy, nutrient-dense lifestyle. While an iPhone beaming directly into your genitals probably isn’t ideal for your sexual health, eating a bad diet, being sedentary, carrying lots of extra weight, avoiding the sun and fresh air in general, and flubbing dozens of other factors is worse.

I suspect there’s something going on. I just don’t think it’s worth stressing about. You can, however, make a few easy changes to mitigate any damage. I’ve bolded what I deem the most significant/least intrusive:

Check the amount of radiation your phone emits. Get one with a low rating if you’re worried.

Put your phone on airplane mode when it’s in your pocket or up against your body. Turn it back on to check it periodically. Unless there’s an emergency, you’ll be fine and won’t miss out on much. Even better, this keeps you from obsessively checking your phone every minute.

Turn off additional transmissions when not in use (bluetooth, wifi, etc).

Don’t leave your phone next to your head, or up against your body when you sleep. Don’t keep it under your pillow. Use airplane mode at night, too.

Pregnant women, keep the phone away from your belly.

Use earbuds, headsets, or the speaker to talk.

Use different sides of the head when talking on the cell phone. Spread the love.

Take breaks. Go camping. Get out into the wild. There are only a few places remaining where we can avoid EMF, and they all happen to be lovely and worth visiting on their own merits.

Limit or avoid screen time for kids. In this day and age, eliminating it is probably more trouble than it’s worth. Just be sure to balance out any screen time with a disproportionate amount of outside, screen-free time. Aim for a 5-1 ratio of real ancestral play to modern tech.

There are also cases and gadgets that claim to reduce radiation absorption, but they all seem to have mixed reviews and the supporting science isn’t very strong. It gets really complicated and expensive really quickly.

I wouldn’t worry too much about all this. These devices are here to stay. They’re fairly integral for doing business and maintaining communication, and used properly they can enhance our engagement with the world. But with just a few quick modifications to how you use electronic devices, you can get the majority of the benefit and reduce any potential health effects.

What do you think, folks? Was I too easy on mobile devices? Too hard? I’m sure I’ll get flack from both sides for this one, but I’m okay with that.

Thanks for reading, everyone.

What Is the Experience of Awe and Why Does it Matter?

I camp mostly for the stargazing. Everything else is important, of course. The campfire, the smoky bacon, the muddy coffee. Trees, fresh air, endless trails. All great. But what I look forward to most of all is slipping out of my tent on a dark, moonless night, finding a clearing in the trees, looking up at the sky, and realizing that light from a star that shot out a hundred thousand years ago is only just now hitting my retina.

That’s awe.

Awe is what John Muir felt when he came up over that ridge to see the Merced Valley laid out below on his first High Sierra excursion, or inched out along a narrow granite ledge behind Yosemite Falls to watch thousands of gallons tumble past his face every second.

Awe is what Oppenheimer conveyed in his response to seeing the first atom bomb—his creation—tested: “I remembered the line from the Hindu Scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. ‘Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.'”

Awe is what the first humans to reach Australia likely felt when they stumbled upon a fantastical world of 1000 pound flightless birds, 20 foot lizards, and 10 foot kangaroos.

Awe is what astronauts invariably report feeling upon seeing Earth from orbit.

We’ve all felt something similar. Describing the types of experiences that induce awe isn’t hard. What’s hard is describing the feeling itself. It’s almost beyond words.

Researchers Jonathan Haidt and Dacher Keltner have proposed a description, what they call the “prototype of awe” (PDF): perceived vastness and induced accommodation. But what does this mean?

Perceived vastness: For a stimulus to provoke awe, it must be vast, larger than life, and certainly larger than you. This can be true in a physical (Grand Canyon, skyscraper, monster wave) or metaphorical (piece of music, religious text, rousing speech, opening crawl of Star Wars) sense.

Induced accommodation: Because an awe stimulus is bigger than you and transcends your normal frame of reference, you must shift your worldview to accommodate the experience. Folks who report feeling awe use words like “earth-shattering” or “changed how I saw” or “I’d never realized” are coming to terms with induced accommodation. If you don’t come to terms with the new reality, it’s terrifying, so you’re compelled to integrate it.

My dogs probably love hiking more than I do, but they don’t stop at lookouts to take in the scenery. They don’t feel awe. Why do we? What’s all this about?

There are several possibilities as to why awe arose.

Haidt and Keitner suggest awe developed in humans to enable hierarchies. If low-status people were “in awe of” higher-status people, the latter could become leaders and maintain social cohesion. Faced with immense power (“vastness”), the lower-status people would need the capacity to accept lower status (“induced accommodation”) without causing strife.

According to another hypothesis, awe arose because it allowed humans to process and accommodate novel information and experiences. Organisms that can handle and integrate major disruptions to their world view are more likely to survive and adapt.

Or it could just be a necessary byproduct of higher cognition. Awe is part of being a big-brained talking ape.

Whatever the reason for its evolution, experiencing awe has several interesting effects on how we think, feel, and even heal.

Awe turns our attention outward, not inward

Astronauts looking at Earth from orbit frequently report a sense of kinship with their home planet. They truly want to protect it from environmental degradation, not just buy a Prius and make sure the recycling bin’s full every Sunday. Human foibles are rendered inconsequential (“we shouldn’t be killing and fighting”; “you’re small compared to everything else”) in the face of such vastness. A series of studies found that awe makes the self “smaller.”

Awe promotes generosity

In a recent UC Berkeley study, subjects standing in a grove of eucalyptus trees who experienced awe increased their prosocial behavior—they were more willing to give—and reduced their sense of entitlement.

Awe stretches time

Studies find that people exposed to awe-inducing stimuli feel less pressed for time (PDF). They grow more willing to donate time (but not money) to help others. Time scarcity, perceived or real, is a serious condition in the modern world that increases stress, limits our ability to focus on the present moment, and increases unhealthy behaviors (there’s no time to cook or go to the gym!). It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy where we spend so much energy fretting over the scarcity of time that we run out of time to do anything. Anything that reduces time scarcity will improve your quality of life. In my experience, the biggest moments of awe stop time altogether.

Awe improves your ability to parse arguments

In a 2010 study, researchers examined the effects of different mood states on a subject’s ability to discern good arguments from bad ones. Compared to amusement, anticipatory enthusiasm, and attachment love, awe reduced persuasion by weak arguments.

Time and time again, awe appears to reduce our sense of self, increase our connection to the world and its inhabitants, and expand time perception, if only for a few moments.

The coolest thing about this research is that it doesn’t take much to elicit awe. To study awe’s effect in people, the researchers aren’t taking their subjects to the Grand Canyon to take in the view, or big wave surfing, or scuba diving, or anything amazing. That’s too expensive. They’re showing them commercials for LCD TVs that feature waterfalls and astronauts, or having them stand in grove of eucalyptus trees on the Berkeley campus. And they’re still getting these results. Imagine the real thing.

You look into your infant child’s eyes, opening for the first time. The kid is defenseless, physically tiny, not at all imposing, and certainly not vast. But he does inspire awe. He’s the 50/50 genetic manifestation of you and your partner. And boy do you have to shift your reality to accommodate this new human.

Awe isn’t necessarily positive. Watching those jets crash into the Twin Towers certainly inspired awe, but also terror. You knew that everything was going to be different, that you were looking at history unfolding itself before you.

Awe doesn’t require trekking out to a national park. Small moments can work, too. They’re all around us. You just have to pay attention. In a future post, I’ll get specific with tips, tricks, and examples.

Let me know down below how often you experience awe.

Prefer listening to reading? Get an audio recording of this blog post, and subscribe to the Primal Blueprint Podcast on iTunes for instant access to all past, present and future episodes here.

Save

What is the Experience of Awe and Why Does it Matter?

I camp mostly for the stargazing. Everything else is important, of course. The campfire, the smoky bacon, the muddy coffee. Trees, fresh air, endless trails. All great. But what I look forward to most of all is slipping out of my tent on a dark, moonless night, finding a clearing in the trees, looking up at the sky, and realizing that light from a star that shot out a hundred thousand years ago is only just now hitting my retina.

That’s awe.

Awe is what John Muir felt when he came up over that ridge to see the Merced Valley laid out below on his first High Sierra excursion, or inched out along a narrow granite ledge behind Yosemite Falls to watch thousands of gallons tumble past his face every second.

Awe is what Oppenheimer conveyed in his response to seeing the first atom bomb—his creation—tested: “I remembered the line from the Hindu Scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. ‘Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds.'”

Awe is what the first humans to reach Australia likely felt when they stumbled upon a fantastical world of 1000 pound flightless birds, 20 foot lizards, and 10 foot kangaroos.

Awe is what astronauts invariably report feeling upon seeing Earth from orbit.

We’ve all felt something similar. Describing the types of experiences that induce awe isn’t hard. What’s hard is describing the feeling itself. It’s almost beyond words.

Researchers Jonathan Haidt and Dacher Keltner have proposed a description, what they call the “prototype of awe” (PDF): perceived vastness and induced accommodation. But what does this mean?

Perceived vastness: For a stimulus to provoke awe, it must be vast, larger than life, and certainly larger than you. This can be true in a physical (Grand Canyon, skyscraper, monster wave) or metaphorical (piece of music, religious text, rousing speech, opening crawl of Star Wars) sense.

Induced accommodation: Because an awe stimulus is bigger than you and transcends your normal frame of reference, you must shift your worldview to accommodate the experience. Folks who report feeling awe use words like “earth-shattering” or “changed how I saw” or “I’d never realized” are coming to terms with induced accommodation. If you don’t come to terms with the new reality, it’s terrifying, so you’re compelled to integrate it.

My dogs probably love hiking more than I do, but they don’t stop at lookouts to take in the scenery. They don’t feel awe. Why do we? What’s all this about?

There are several possibilities as to why awe arose.

Haidt and Keitner suggest awe developed in humans to enable hierarchies. If low-status people were “in awe of” higher-status people, the latter could become leaders and maintain social cohesion. Faced with immense power (“vastness”), the lower-status people would need the capacity to accept lower status (“induced accommodation”) without causing strife.

According to another hypothesis, awe arose because it allowed humans to process and accommodate novel information and experiences. Organisms that can handle and integrate major disruptions to their world view are more likely to survive and adapt.

Or it could just be a necessary byproduct of higher cognition. Awe is part of being a big-brained talking ape.

Whatever the reason for its evolution, experiencing awe has several interesting effects on how we think, feel, and even heal.

Awe turns our attention outward, not inward

Astronauts looking at Earth from orbit frequently report a sense of kinship with their home planet. They truly want to protect it from environmental degradation, not just buy a Prius and make sure the recycling bin’s full every Sunday. Human foibles are rendered inconsequential (“we shouldn’t be killing and fighting”; “you’re small compared to everything else”) in the face of such vastness. A series of studies found that awe makes the self “smaller.”

Awe promotes generosity

In a recent UC Berkeley study, subjects standing in a grove of eucalyptus trees who experienced awe increased their prosocial behavior—they were more willing to give—and reduced their sense of entitlement.

Awe stretches time

Studies find that people exposed to awe-inducing stimuli feel less pressed for time (PDF). They grow more willing to donate time (but not money) to help others. Time scarcity, perceived or real, is a serious condition in the modern world that increases stress, limits our ability to focus on the present moment, and increases unhealthy behaviors (there’s no time to cook or go to the gym!). It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy where we spend so much energy fretting over the scarcity of time that we run out of time to do anything. Anything that reduces time scarcity will improve your quality of life. In my experience, the biggest moments of awe stop time altogether.

Awe improves your ability to parse arguments

In a 2010 study, researchers examined the effects of different mood states on a subject’s ability to discern good arguments from bad ones. Compared to amusement, anticipatory enthusiasm, and attachment love, awe reduced persuasion by weak arguments.

Time and time again, awe appears to reduce our sense of self, increase our connection to the world and its inhabitants, and expand time perception, if only for a few moments.

The coolest thing about this research is that it doesn’t take much to elicit awe. To study awe’s effect in people, the researchers aren’t taking their subjects to the Grand Canyon to take in the view, or big wave surfing, or scuba diving, or anything amazing. That’s too expensive. They’re showing them commercials for LCD TVs that feature waterfalls and astronauts, or having them stand in grove of eucalyptus trees on the Berkeley campus. And they’re still getting these results. Imagine the real thing.

You look into your infant child’s eyes, opening for the first time. The kid is defenseless, physically tiny, not at all imposing, and certainly not vast. But he does inspire awe. He’s the 50/50 genetic manifestation of you and your partner. And boy do you have to shift your reality to accommodate this new human.

Awe isn’t necessarily positive. Watching those jets crash into the Twin Towers certainly inspired awe, but also terror. You knew that everything was going to be different, that you were looking at history unfolding itself before you.

Awe doesn’t require trekking out to a national park. Small moments can work, too. They’re all around us. You just have to pay attention. In a future post, I’ll get specific with tips, tricks, and examples.

Let me know down below how often you experience awe.

Like This Blog Post? Subscribe to the Mark's Daily Apple Newsletter and Get 10 eBooks and More Delivered to Your Inbox for FREE

Dear Mark: Primal Sun Protection and Stigmasterol Stability

For today’s edition of Dear Mark, I’m answering two questions. First up concerns the effect going Primal has on your skin’s resistance to sun damage. While there isn’t any specific research examining ancestral eating and sun damage, several lines of evidence suggest a protective effect. Second, what’s the deal with stigmasterol, AKA Wulzen anti-stiffness factor? The WAPF says butter and cheese and milk are the best place to get it, but that pasteurization destroys it. Is this really true? And how does fermentation affect stigmasterol?

Let’s go:

When I was younger, I burned in the sun quickly. Now that I’m older and paleo, I can stay shirtless in the sun for at least an hour at high noon without a tan or sunscreen in spring without burning. I’m very watchful because of history, but I never come close to burning. Is there any evidence the paleo diet provides protection from the sun?

There’s some decent evidence that going Primal helps protect your skin from the sun. RCTs showing added protection on a Primal way of eating don’t exist, but we have good evidence that doing the things typically characterized as “Primal” helps.

Eating colorful, polyphenol-rich plants: Whether it’s the lycopene in tomatoes (especially cooked ones), the proanthocyanidines in red wine, the flavanols in dark chocolate, or  pretty much any colorful, polyphenol-rich spice, fruit, or vegetable, each is shown to help protect us from the kind of free radical damage in UV rays.

Eating saturated fat and monounsaturated fat: Compared to PUFA, both SFA and MUFA (via a photoprotective metabolite of oleic acid) confer protection against skin cancer in animal models.

Eating dietary cholesterol-rich foods: In what must have blown lipid hypothesis-embedded researchers’ minds, a study from the late 70s found that the more dietary cholesterol a mouse ate, the longer it took for UV-induced skin cancer to develop (PDF). This makes sense; cholesterol in the skin reacts with UVB to form vitamin D, thus acting as a “buffer” against sun damage. If you’re eating eggs with any regularity, you’re probably improving your skin’s resistance to UV.

Eating salmon and shrimp: The pink color indicates the presence of astaxanthin, a photoprotective “keto-carotenoid” that krill-consuming marine animals carry in their flesh. You can also go straight to the source and eat krill oil.

Eating adequate omega-3s:  One study out of Australia—land of skin cancer—found that adults with the highest serum concentrations of DHA and EPA had the least “cutaneous p53 expression.” When your skin is in danger of damage from the sun, p53 expression is upregulated to protect it. The fact that p53 expression was low suggests that the skin wasn’t in danger; the omega-3s were protecting the skin and reducing the “perceived” (and real) danger. Acute intakes of EPA reduce the inflammatory skin response to UV radiation.

Drinking coffee and/or tea: Both the caffeine content and the phytochemicals present in tea and coffee have shown protective effects against sun damage.

Also note that it’s not just about what you eat. It’s about how you sleep, too. Our skin’s resistance to UV damage follows a circadian rhythm. We seem best adapted to sun exposure during the morning/early afternoon. It’s also quite probable that a bad night’s sleep, or several, will open you up to increased sun damage, since our ability to repair UV-derived damage depends on a well-functioning circadian rhythm.

Any of that stuff sound familiar? I’ll bet it does.

Mark,

Amylase and Wulzen anti-stiffness factor (stigmasterol), normally found in raw milk, butter, and cream, are reportedly destroyed by pasteurization. Do either of them survive the fermentation process to any extent in the making of raw milk cheese?

Thanks,

Carl

Stigmasterol is a plant sterol, a compound similar to cholesterol with benefits for joint health. It’s also called the Wulzen anti-stiffness factor after Rosalind Wulzen, who discovered a mysterious component in butter oil that restored the health (particularly of connective tissue) of ailing animals (PDF). Though it’s the most famous source of stigmasterol, dairy isn’t the only place to get it. The only reason it’s present in grass-fed dairy is because the animals obtain it from the vegetation they eat.  It’s also found in neem (a medicinal herb used in India), blackstrap molasses, and sunflower fat, just to name a few.

I’m not even sure stigmasterol is destroyed by pasteurization. The Weston A. Price folks have always claimed it does, but I haven’t seen any real references. One recent study subjected sunflower oil-bound stigmasterol to 180 °C for up to 3 hours. By the end, some but not all of the stigmasterol had been destroyed. Pasteurization subjects milk to 71.1 °C for just 15 seconds, far gentler than what the sunflower oil stigmasterol was subjected to. You could argue that oil-bound stigmasterol is uniquely resilient, but dairy-bound stigmasterol is fat-bound, too. I don’t see why it’d be any different.

Fermentation? A survey of various goat and sheep dairy products, including fluid milk, fermented cheeses, cream, and butter found that stigmasterol was present in nearly every product studied (PDF). It’s safe to assume your fermented raw cheese will have some stigmasterol remaining.

Overall, what I found suggests that stigmasterol probably isn’t destroyed by pasteurization, let alone fermentation. Even if it is, there are plenty of other places to get stigmasterol. I’ve spoken highly of blackstrap molasses in the past, so go for that.

Don’t get me wrong: I still prefer raw dairy, provided it’s safe, grass-fed, and from a quality source. But I’m not sure stigmasterol is a reason to focus on it.

Like This Blog Post? Subscribe to the Mark's Daily Apple Newsletter and Get 10 eBooks and More Delivered to Your Inbox for FREE

Weekend Link Love – Edition 405

Well, looks like we swept Paleo Magazine’s Best of 2015 contest. Thanks to everyone who cast their vote! We took home awards for the following:

Best Blog (Health): Mark’s Daily Apple

Best Blog (Fitness): Mark’s Daily Apple

Best New Packaged Product: PRIMAL KITCHEN™ Mayo

Health Hero of the Year: Mark Sisson

Best New Idea: Primal Kitchen Restaurants

Abel James teamed up with Quarterly to put a paleo/Primal-friendly Summer Survival pack together, complete with PRIMAL KITCHEN™ Dark Chocolate Almond bars. Check it out.

Research of the Week

Thicker shakes increase “perceived fullness” over thinner shakes.

Mouth guards make you stronger, faster, and overall better.

30 minutes of blue light exposure improves reaction times, even after the light’s removed.

Creatine reduces optimal rest time for lifters.

Female nurses who drink a lot of coffee have longer telomeres.

In 60+ year olds, those with higher LDL cholesterol live longer.

Air pollution linked to mental illness in kids.

Antibiotics may disrupt the establishment of healthy gut bacteria in breastfeeding infants.

Dietary fiber seems to protect the gut from outside excursions.

New Primal Blueprint Podcasts

Episode 53: Mark Sisson and Brad Kearns — Podcast host and friend Brad Kearns stopped by my house in Malibu to catch up on all our recent happenings. If you didn’t attend Paleo f(x), I talk about my keynote address based on Primal Endurance principles and share my take on where I think the primal/paleo movement is headed. We talk stress, wine, cooling mattresses, and more. If you’d like, you can catch a video of our discussion here.

Each week, select Mark’s Daily Apple blog posts are prepared as Primal Blueprint Podcasts. Need to catch up on reading, but don’t have the time? Prefer to listen to articles while on the go? Check out the new blog post podcasts below, and subscribe to the Primal Blueprint Podcast here so you never miss an episode.

Why You Should Reconsider the “Workout” Mentality
How Quickly Can You Lose Weight?
Zen and the Art of Calisthenics
Finish Line: The 2015 Primal Blueprint 21-Day Challenge

Interesting Blog Posts

Whether you’re a coach or a client, we can all learn something from this.

Should insomnia patients spend less time in bed?

Why 5Ks are better than marathons.

He looks way better (and happier/healthier/fitter) now.

Why the claims that seed oils are safe and healthy don’t hold up to scrutiny.

Media, Schmedia

Africa’s getting fatter.

I’m into cultured butter, but this is a little ridiculous.

90 year-old British woman credits her health and longevity to cutting carbs.

Everything Else

I’ve incorporated some of these concepts into my training and have seen big dividends. If you’re not performing 500 pound sled drags on the stationary bike with a resistance band around your Adam’s apple, what are you even doing?

The AspireAssist is a thin tube running from your stomach to an external port that removes food before you can digest it. This isn’t a premise from a dystopian sci-fi short story. It’s what the FDA just approved.

How frogs get down.

Timing is everything.

The All Blacks are cutting sugar.

For most Americans, the Milky Way is just a mediocre candy bar.

Is banning plastic bags really better for the environment?

The changing attitude toward fitness is a positive one, I think.

Breakfast’s reputation as the most important meal of the day might originate not from scientific research but a misreading of Kafka’s The Metamorphosis.

Recipe Corner

How about a bone broth brunch? From Bare Bones Broth comes this recipe for bone broth biscuits and gravy.
This strawberry tomatillo chicken fajita salad is real good.

Time Capsule

One year ago (Jun 22 – Jun 28)

7 Ways to Use Stoic Philosophy to Improve Your Health and Happiness – Contained within are Seneca’s training regimen, Marcus Aurelius’ diet plan, and Epictetus’ opinion on kipping pullups.
The Pitfalls and Limitations of Self-Experimentation – There are limits, and you should be aware of them.

Comment of the Week

The salad guide is wrong. Avocados should be in every salad.

– I agree with this, Diane.

Crepinettes

Crepinette is a lovely and fancy-sounding word for ground meat wrapped in caul fat.

Essentially, it’s fresh sausage that you can make at home without the time-consuming struggle of stuffing ground meat into casings.

Caul fat is a lacey, fatty membrane that lines the stomach cavity of pigs (and cows and sheep, although you’ll mostly just see pork caul fat sold). The thin, edible netting looks delicate, but it’s quite sturdy and easy to work with. In this recipe, caul fat is used to wrap sausage patties, but it can also be used to wrap meatballs, meatloaf, and roasts. Caul fat holds meat together, gives it shape, and bastes the meat with fat as it cooks, keeping it moist. It’s sort of like wrapping something in very, very thin bacon that becomes invisible when cooked.

Servings: 15 to 20 sausages

Time in the Kitchen: 1 hour



Ingredients:

2 pounds ground pork (or other ground meat) (900g)
4 garlic cloves, finely chopped
2 green onions, thinly sliced
2 tablespoons finely chopped cilantro or parsley (30 ml)
2 teaspoons cumin (10 ml)
1/2 teaspoon ground cinnamon (2.5 ml)
2 teaspoons kosher salt (10 ml)
1/2 teaspoon red pepper flakes or black pepper (2.5 ml)
1 sheet caul fat (6 to 8 ounces)

Instructions:

Recipe Tip: Often, caul fat has to be special ordered from a butcher, so plan ahead. Although some specialty and well-stocked butcher shops keep it in stock.

In a large mixing bowl, use your hands to thoroughly but gently mix the ground meat with the garlic, onions, fresh herb, cumin, cinnamon, salt and red pepper flakes.

Gently form the meat into 15 to 20 golf ball-sized balls, then flatten the balls into small patties 1/2-to-3/4-inch thick (12.7 mm to 19 mm).

Spread the caul fat out on a clean surface. Use scissors or a knife to cut the caul fat into 2 or 3-inch squares (50 mm to 76 mm). Wrap each meat patty in a square of caul fat by placing the patty in the middle of the caul square and stretching and pressing the caul fat around the meat until it’s snug and smooth.

(The wrapped, uncooked crepinettes can be made a day or two in advance and refrigerated, if needed. They can also be frozen for several months.)

Preheat the oven to 375 °F/190 °C.

In a heavy skillet over medium-high heat, heat a tablespoon of oil or lard. Cook the crepinettes in batches, so they aren’t too crowded in the pan. Cook 6 minutes per side, until each side is nicely browned. Finish the crepinettes in the oven, until the internal temperature is 160 °F/71 °C.

How I Rediscovered My Health and Love of Real Food

It’s Friday, everyone! And that means another Primal Blueprint Real Life Story from a Mark’s Daily Apple reader. If you have your own success story and would like to share it with me and the Mark’s Daily Apple community please contact me here. I’ll continue to publish these each Friday as long as they keep coming in. Thank you for reading!

Growing up in Trinidad and Tobago, I had a relatively active childhood. I wasn’t a fat child, but I didn’t have much muscle tone either. I got up to 6’ 2” and my friends referred to me jokingly as T3 (i.e. thin, tall and terrible). I never took to the same sports as my classmates, but basketball during the week and body-boarding on weekends kept me occupied. My weekday diet consisted of three to four sandwiches, two to three times per day, with margarine and something else—the something else usually being some type of meat that came out of a tin or a pack. Sometimes I would get home-cooked lunch which would typically be pasta/rice with some sort of chicken. At 16 this changed, I cut back on physical activities so that I could dedicate more time to studying, and then cut back some more for the same reason when I was in college later on. The term “going for a sweat” evolved from meaning “going to play basketball” to “going to sit and play video games.” At first this seemed a heretical redefinition, but I slowly grew into it. Most of my spare time was now spent behind a computer, either working or playing video games. There wasn’t any change to my diet, I still ate lots of sandwiches.

After college I married my college sweetheart and four years later she gave me a daughter. People joked that of the two of us, I gained the most weight during our pregnancy.

Traffic in Trinidad is colossal once you work in the city, so getting to work takes anywhere between one to two hours and getting back home is the same, or worse, so I spent anywhere between two to four hours in traffic daily. Between family, work and traffic, there wasn’t any time to do much else, so the weight kept piling on. Fast forward 12 years and I’m up from what I thought was my set weight for life was at 185 lbs, to weighing in at around 255-260lbs.

I work in IT so when people asked me what I did for a living, I told them that I sat at a desk all day long waiting to be either diagnosed with diabetes or to experience my first myocardial infarction. In mid-2012, I picked up martial arts and on my first day, I remember laying on the ground after the first 15 minutes, waiting for air to return to my burning lungs. Most others in class were just getting warmed up. Even so, I enjoyed it and continued, eventually being able to last about an hour. After a year I felt a lot more skillful but I think I lost just 5-10 lbs.

A couple incidents that kept getting airplay in my head, which also helped me start this journey:

1) My dad is a Type-1 Diabetic and used to chase my sister and I around the house with his insulin needle while laughing like Count Dracula when we were kids. This gave me an intrinsic fear of needles and, a healthy fear of eating sweets, so I didn’t have a snacking problem growing up.

2) A friend of mine once told me that I could exercise as much as I liked, but would never see body changes until I changed my diet.

One day I was visiting my mentor/adopted godfather’s house; and as I was standing on the balcony, he came outside to ask what’s up. My head was down as I had my usual sinus issues and was recovering from having sneezed more than a dozen times because of whatever was in the air, when I noticed his feet. This guy is at least 20 years older than I am and here I was, wondering at how his feet were so smooth, almost like a baby’s. My feet, on the other hand, were ashy and grey with cracks and webs, reminiscent of a well-mottled terrazzo floor. How could he have better looking feet than me? I knew that he used to run 10 kilometers nearly everyday, so I knew he definitely wasn’t pampering them. He saw me looking and when I asked him about it, he exclaimed in his usual accusing voice—the one he uses when imparting life-impacting knowledge as he frequently did, that I “needed a lifestyle change.” He then directed me to MDA. At the time, the front page prominently displayed a very delicious looking pot of pork.

I read an article or two then closed it off and didn’t bother myself further that day. However, the picture of the pot of pork was etched into my mind’s eye and I would go back and look for it. I would try to wrap my mind around how it could possibly be health food. After-all, this was pork(!) and it was caramelized(!) in its own heart stopping(!), saturated fat(!). How could that possibly be healthy? Every time I went back to watch the picture of the pork, I would also read an article or two. I read about grains, insulin, fats, carbs, protein, cholesterol and everything else in between. I waded through the Definitive Guides. Like most others, Fridays were my favorite days. I wished there were more Fridays in the week! Eventually, things started coming together and making sense to me.

I decided that I would both join the gym and adopt the Primal Lifestyle, however, I was about to go to Canada for a month where I would stay by various relatives and in-laws and attend my cousin’s wedding. So instead, I made a plan to start when I returned. This way I wouldn’t have to refuse all the nice food that I knew would be on offer from both relatives and in-laws. In the meantime, I read MDA at a faster rate, attempting to consume as much knowledge as possible. This included the articles on supplementation, which led me to buy a bunch of stuff I thought I needed. However, this is Trinidad and prices are prohibitive so I got most of it off of Amazon. In the end, I think the only things I really needed were fish oil, protein powder for the days I couldn’t get enough meat and the occasional multi-vitamin to ensure that I wasn’t missing any micro-nutrients. Some of the other stuff was unnecessary or in the case of the wheat germ, deleterious.

On September 1st, 2013, I began my lifestyle change. The hardest part was figuring out with what to replace bread and wheat in all its forms. I planned to eat more eggs instead of eggs with bread, more meat instead of rice or pasta with meat, etc. By the first week, I started getting cravings for fried potato wedges at exactly 9 AM everyday. Potato wedges weren’t even something I would normally eat, so this was strange. I ignored the cravings and kept boiled eggs on my person for when the cravings assaulted me. I justified not caving by telling myself I couldn’t possibly be hungry, not after eating eight eggs. By the end of the second week I got a sore throat, which developed into slight cold accompanied by light headedness.

My wife remained skeptical about my new diet and proclaimed that I was starving myself and would probably die within a couple weeks if I didn’t recant and eat some bread. She also informed me that if I got sick she would refuse to take me to the hospital. This didn’t matter much to me since going to the hospital in Trinidad and Tobago was equivalent to a death sentence anyway. By the end of the third week, this illness passed and I felt quite comfortable again. I later read that this was what was commonly known as the “carb flu.” All the “bad” gut bacteria were dying because I was starving them, the exotoxins produced by their death induced a spike in systemic inflammation, the spike in systemic inflammation though acute, revealed itself in the form of the sore-throat and a cold. Once you know why this is happening you can laugh sadistically and persevere.

The weight started coming off at somewhere between two to three pounds per week. I didn’t track this properly, since I didn’t expect it to be this drastic. I didn’t own a scale and either way, my spiritual leader and bush doctor convinced me not to watch the scale.

It’s not like I switched to Primal overnight, this was a learning process, something that more closely resembled an Orwellian Wedge. As I learned which foods were good and which were bad, I added or subtracted them from my diet accordingly. Soon enough, boiled eggs weren’t the only things I could eat for breakfast and when I did eat eggs, I started doing fancier things with them.

I love lamb and we get relatively good stuff from New Zealand. Since I wasn’t confident enough to eat the fat, I saved it in case I became confident enough later on. I ended up with a large bag of lamb fat saved up in the freezer after a couple weeks. Since I needed space for more meat in the freezer, I figured out how to render tallow. Good home rendered tallow made from two weeks worth of saved up lamb fat. YUmmMM!!

I used this tallow to fry up my vegetables. Gone was the blandness of vegetables, they were now lamb-fat infused. In fact, all food started tasting fantastic again. Over time, food was bland and boring and just used to fill a hole, now that I was Primal, I could distinguish individual tastes again. Garlic, peppercorns, ginger, rosemary, even salt makes food come alive. This is not something that I was even aware that I was missing until I rediscovered it.

Instead of crawling painfully out of bed in the morning, I now leap out like a non-leotard wearing Spiderman would.

Food isn’t cheap anymore, in fact it’s rather expensive but I’d rather eat properly than brave going to a doctor in Trinidad. As mentioned earlier, this is the equivalent of death. My mentor saw me in the market a couple months into this life-style change and pointed his gnarly finger at me, stuttering as he claimed that I owed him money for the advice which he passed on to me. I didn’t let him finish that sentence and told him that he in fact owed me money since none of my clothes fit anymore. He didn’t explain ahead of time that I’d need to get an entire new wardrobe if I changed my lifestyle. At work, one of my colleagues at work instantly saw straight through my reasons for eating Primally. He knew that it was because I was greedy and wanted to find a way to eat more food. He wasn’t entirely wrong.

After a year being Primal, at the behest of work colleagues and family, I went for a full panel of blood tests. My fear of needles kept me from ever doing a baseline, so I don’t know where I started but when the tests came back my cholesterol levels were what was regarded as “protective.”

Every Divali, we visit one of my wife’s friends, who treats us to some very nice Indian food. This food includes paratha roti, so I intend to eat flour at least once per year, regardless of how much I imagine the toilet will complain for my misdeeds for the 24 hours after the act. I’m still learning, I don’t think that will ever stop. I don’t think that I could have paid for better information than what was derived from this website and I would like to thank Mark and his staff for all the hard work that goes into it. Grok on!

Like This Blog Post? Subscribe to the Mark's Daily Apple Newsletter and Get 10 eBooks and More Delivered to Your Inbox for FREE

How Defining Moderation Can Help You Reach Your Health Goals

We’ve heard it a million times: “Eat a well-balanced diet with everything in moderation.” After all these decades of clear failure, it’s a hazy cliché still delivered by physicians, dietitians and nutritional “experts” with earnest assurance. The same goes for exercise and stress. Moderate amounts of stress are okay, moderate cardiovascular work is good, etc. We accept the concept of moderation so readily, I think, because it sounds so rational and simple. If we follow common sense, moderation suggests, we’ll be fine. But if it were that easy, most people would be healthy—and statistics on the rising rates of obesity and chronic illness tell us otherwise. So what’s the problem?

Something critical is missing in the picture. Unfortunately, the moderation mantra—as we tend to invoke it—is too often a comforting abstraction we use to delude ourselves and to justify engaging in the same sabotaging behaviors again and again. After all, moderation as a blurry standard conveniently doesn’t exactly ask us to change anything specific or question what we’ve come to accept as normal lifestyle patterns. It’s limited by our own subjective interpretation. So to that old mantra, I’d like to make an additional recommendation.

What if we could take the low-pressured positivity of this concept and reframe it within specific, personalized, meaningful bounds?

In short, what would it mean for our health goals if we truly took moderation in hand and clarified it for our own individual use?

Because the fact is, I see a genuine opportunity here. As those who have been around MDA for a while know, I’m not a stickler for minute detail. I don’t promote counting calories or weighing food. There’s no need to run daily arithmetic around Primal “points.” Likewise, your daily exercise needn’t be measured obsessively to get and stay in good physical shape. The Primal Blueprint, after all, is about principles—the basic, straightforward, physiological principles that have governed ancestral diet, movement and lifestyle for hundreds of thousands of years. When we align our lives with those principles, the beauty is we don’t need to bother much at all with the math. It makes good primal health easy.

The Problem of Perception

But the concept of moderation as most people commonly think of it suggests something totally different. Moderation is almost always put in context of “all things in moderation.” As in, anything goes as long as you don’t eat or do too much of it—except research doesn’t support the idea that this leads to actual health gains. In fact, the opposite appears to be true for weight and metabolic health.

Add to this question the complete and utter fuzziness of what constitutes “too much.” How much is too much cardio? How much is too much sugar? How much is too much stress? What about too much sleep?

The problem is, we’re not particularly good at defining moderate amounts for ourselves without the haze of self-justification getting in the mix. Case in point: a recent study published by the University of Georgia. In one part of the overall study, subjects were asked to define how many chocolate chip cookies constituted an appropriate amount (how many people “should” eat), how many constituted a “moderate” serving, and how many constituted an “indulgent” serving. The average responses were a little over two for the appropriate amount, just over three for the moderate amount, and just under six for the indulgent amount. In other words, people tend to situate “moderation” between “ought” and “indulgence.” Researchers observed the same trend when they repeated the experiment with candies.

But in the most telling of all results, participants were asked to both describe their consumption of specific unhealthy food choices (e.g. pizza, ice cream, etc.) and their definition of a moderate serving for these foods. Not at all surprisingly, the more people ate of a certain food, the more generously they defined a moderate serving for it. I don’t think it’s far-fetched to believe the same can be said for self-justifying our other lifestyle factors.

For example, just how does a cardio junkie hope to define moderation for his/her aerobic activity? How could an avid Cross-Fitter settle into a moderate HIIT routine? Can a couch potato come up with a meaningful sense of appropriate and moderate physical activity? And in terms of dietary transition, how can someone who’s used to drinking a liter of soda per day conceive of a moderate sugar intake? Someone who eats fast food every day—how does he/she find a moderate standard for SAD foods? What about the vegan adopting a “moderate” amount of meat and animal products? And that workaholic? How will that person come to a reasonable, moderate balance for work and play? Or how about the person who’s spent decades avoiding sun exposure at all costs. What’s going to feel “moderate” to him/her?

Where do all of these scenarios and their difficulties leave us with the moderation question? Is it a hopeless enterprise, or can we learn to bring more objectivity to bear? If so, how?

Moderation as a Process

For one, I think we need to embrace the idea of growing into moderation. This means accepting that it’s a process to learn to live “in the middle” when for too long we’ve lingered along the edges in one degree or another. Moderation, if we ever hope to intuit it as a broad standard in our lives, seems a whole lot easier coming from an internalized compass (if not temperament) of moderation. Perhaps the Stoics had it right.

But how does this happen? A good initial question deals with motivation.

What pulls us to the edges and keeps us in our less moderate behaviors? What’s behind our obsession with work, with chocolate, with muscle mass, with soda? What are we hiding from, substituting for, and asking of our lives? We may not have an instant answer here, but I’m guessing most if not all of us will have some inkling. Start there.

Next, get clear on how the body works as a system. The mentality as well as physiology of moderation is rooted in understanding and appreciating the holistic mechanisms at work. Take a real look at the Primal Blueprint for this very principle—one of inclusive, intersecting logic. We’re seeking to bring balance to all systems. If we’re living off cortisol and caffeine all day, it doesn’t bode well for our hormonal homeostasis. Exercising a lot but justifying eating the conventional carb intake will eventually take us toward any number of ailments, including insulin resistance.

Take a moment to apply that idea of physiological balance to your life as a vision toward self-attunement, keeping in mind where you’re off the Primal grid. The beauty of the Primal Blueprint is that it focuses on balancing a number of essential inputs. We often go through a period of transition if we’re coming out of unhealthy metabolic states that spur everything from fatigue to sleep issues; cravings to brain fog. But once we’re over the hump, we’ll be working with reliable physical feedback. The basic guidelines for making this shift are there—a blueprint for physiological balance as determined by ancestral patterns. “What Would Grok Do?” in that way becomes a resourceful question in imagining moderation.

Now it’s time for the rubber to meet the road.

Instead of languishing in vagueness, start setting a new “working” standard, understanding that moderation will be a process of experimentation and refinement.

You’ll be training yourself toward moderate eating/exercising/living week by week.

I’m not one for excessive recording, but it can be a great tool for awareness—the raw numbers that demonstrate the crucial difference between perception and practice. Use a notebook or app to record your day’s activity/diet/sleep patterns/stress perceptions—whatever you’re trying to rein in. At the end of each day, take a look. Where exactly is the 80/20 Principle falling apart in your day? How much time did you really spend lifting or performing heavy cardio today? How does it compare to the Primal Blueprint recommendations?

When Moderation Isn’t the Answer

Finally, I think it’s well worth coming back to the question of elimination. A rational adult knows better than to believe that every option under the sun needs to be at the table for life to be worth living. We maturely eschew certain things because we accept they aren’t good for us—for us as individuals.

Some people can have a brownie at the family picnic and be done at one. For other people, it just doesn’t work that way. They’re better leaving it out altogether. Learn to accept that some things resist moderation for you. They’re a set-up every time. Gluten allergies, sugar addiction, adrenal fatigue or other health propensities (e.g. aggressive cancers that run in your family) call us to ditch moderation for the sake of well-being.

In the interest of your own health and satisfaction, learn to reject the fixation on deprivation—the assumption that if we don’t have the freedom to indulge in everything at the buffet table or to run ourselves ragged because we’re obsessed with FOMO (fear of missing out), we’re being held back from life. A smart approach to moderation knows what to leave out of the picture entirely.

Ultimately, the question of appropriate and effective moderation may boil down to a lifelong commitment to reading the body’s feedback. At what points do we realize we’ve extended ourselves beyond the range of tolerable impact? The further along we are in the journey, the more attuned we’ll be to these shifts in mood, sleep, energy and performance.

Thanks for reading today, everyone. I’d love to hear how you’ve honed your way to moderation in Primal living. Have a great end to the week.

Like This Blog Post? Subscribe to the Mark's Daily Apple Newsletter and Get 10 eBooks and More Delivered to Your Inbox for FREE

Top 8 Changes Coming to Nutrition Labels

After years of committees, debates, panels, “consensus-building” retreats, and literature reviews, the FDA has finalized the new nutrition label guidelines. Packaged food companies have two years to incorporate the new labels. At that point, anything in a package that humans eat must have labels that reflect these changes. You’re probably skeptical. I was. The FDA doesn’t have the strongest track record. But before we condemn the new labels sight unseen, let’s take a look at what’s actually changing and what the implications are.

1. Added sugars

“Carbohydrates” will now contain a subsection for “Added Sugars,” which includes all sugars that do not naturally occur in the food.

Adding “Added Sugars” is a great move. Natural sugars are different than added sugars because they come packaged with the nutritional elements that mitigate their damage. A blueberry contains glucose and fructose, yes, but also anthocyanins, fiber, and other micronutrients. It used to be that you’d have to guess where the sugar was coming from in a packaged food. You’d have to see where an added sugar source lay on the ingredients list and estimate its degree of contribution to the total. With the new label, you get actual numbers, no guessing.

2. Revised serving sizes

Serving sizes will reflect what people typically consume in a sitting.

Using realistic serving sizes is a no-brainer and I welcome it. Nobody drinks just half a bottle of Coke or scoops a neat half cup of salted caramel ice cream from the pint. The labels should reflect how people actually eat.

3. Added micronutrients

The food’s vitamin D and potassium contents are required to be displayed.

I also like the inclusion of vitamin D and potassium. They’re both important nutrients that most people are deficient in. Of course I’d like to have seen magnesium added or, heck, all the relevant micronutrients like manganese, zinc, chromium, choline, vitamin K2 (especially iodine, about which I can never seem to get accurate data), but this is better than nothing.

4. Removed micronutrients

Vitamin C and vitamin A are no longer required to be displayed.

If label space was a premium and it came down to potassium and vitamin D versus vitamin C and vitamin A, I’m happy the former pair won out. Otherwise, I would have included both. Vitamin C and vitamin A are important vitamins that people assume they’re eating enough of.

5. Actual quantities of micronutrients listed

Instead of only listing the vitamin or mineral content of a food as a percentage of the daily value, the new labels will also list the absolute amounts of those nutrients in milligrams or micrograms.

Getting absolute amounts of the micronutrients is huge. Not everyone eats the 2000 calorie diet the daily values are based on, reducing the utility of the “percent of daily value,” but “400 milligrams of potassium” applies to everyone equally.

6. Daily values updated

The daily values for fiber, sodium, and vitamin D have been updated to reflect new scientific consensus. Whereas 4 grams of fiber used to comprise 16% of your DV, it’s now 14%. Sodium DV was previously based on a 2400 mg daily limit; now it’s 2300 mg.

“Scientific consensus” can be iffy, but some of these changes appear for the better. Sodium limits have been tightened (unfortunate, given the mixed evidence for salt restriction), fiber recommendations increased (good, given what we know about the microbiome), and vitamin D recommendations increased (good, because most people could use more).

7. Increased prominence of “Calories” and “Servings Per Container”

“Calories per serving” is front and center, with a larger font and more bolding. “Servings Per Container” has a similarly elevated emphasis.

Calories are probably overemphasized. Everyone “knows” how important calories are for weight loss; further accentuation on the label may lead folks to ignore everything but them when making choices. That said, using realistic serving sizes does increase the utility of “calories per serving.”

Servings per container deserves the extra emphasis. It’s the reference point from which everything else on the label proceeds.

8. “Calories from fat” removed

The new label no longer lists the amount of calories derived from fat.

YES. Since fat is more calorically dense than other macronutrients and most people assume calories are the most important aspect of a food’s healthfulness, using calories to represent fat’s contribution paints fat as the bad guy. Eliminating the “calories from fat” encourages consumers to evaluate the food on its merits.

You know what? I’m really impressed. These are actually positive changes. But what would I add, had I supreme power?

ORAC

Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity; the antioxidant activity of a food. Higher is generally “better” and indicates the presence of polyphenols.

Added micronutrients

I’d include magnesium, manganese, iodine, chromium, choline, betaine, all the B-vitamins, vitamin K2, all the good stuff we talk about.

Added clarity

I’d specify which forms of vitamin A (beta-carotene, retinol, etc), omega-3 (ALA, DHA, EPA, etc), fiber (soluble, insoluble, fermentable, etc). I’d distinguish between synthetic and natural forms of the nutrients.

Sugar represented by “teaspoons”

In addition to using grams, using teaspoons would provide a strong visual for consumers.

But that’s in a perfect world. Being a producer of foods that require a label myself, I know how onerous and expensive it can be to expand the standard label to include more information.

Maybe in 10-15 years, we’ll have “living labels” with touch screens and augmented reality capabilities. Touch “Minerals” or “Vitamins” and the full breakdown pops up. Touch “Where I’m From” and get a video showing the production process. That will be very cool.

Hardened Primal veterans won’t see their lives or behavior change much directly from the new labels, but you’re not the main audience. What I foresee happening is the general population realizing they’ve been eating terribly (“How much sugar is in this low-fat yogurt?”). We’re already trending in that direction; these label changes indicate the broader shift. When people realize that, no, a third of a bottle of Coke isn’t the true serving size and yes, they have been regularly consuming 65 grams of added sugar when they pop the 20 ounce Coke at lunch, they’ll realize that the way most people eat is insane and maybe that guy in the office who eats his steak and greens lunch out in the sun and takes frequent walking breaks and lobbied to get standing workstations for everyone isn’t so crazy after all.

All in all, I don’t see any big drawbacks here. It’s mostly a positive shift.

Scoff all you want. Realize that you folks who know the magnesium content of each spinach varietal by heart, can rattle off the specific non-curcumin phytonutrients present in turmeric, and are able to place a single droplet of liquid on your tongue and divine its sugar content by weight with perfect accuracy are in the minority. Most people can use the information provided on the new labels. Most people will see their food choices improve.

That’s a good thing.

What do you think, folks? Are you for or against the new label changes?

Thanks for reading.

Street Workout: Bodyweight Calisthenics for Primal Strength

The following guest post from Al Kavadlo & Danny Kavadlo is adapted from their book STREET WORKOUT and is published with permission from Dragon Door Publications. Enjoy!

In the beginning, we crawled. We hunted. We climbed. We played. We did a lot of things. Early man used his arms, legs and entire body every time he pulled himself up a tree to pick fruit or hoisted up a mammoth carcass for the weekly feast. He didn’t isolate body parts when he fought to survive. He didn’t jump or sprint because it was “leg day.” He did it because a saber-toothed tiger was gonna rip him apart if he didn’t.

Fast forward a few millennia and we find mankind erecting the Egyptian Sphinx, Stonehenge and the Great Wall of China. It takes a great deal of raw, physical strength to move mountain-sized boulders, but we had it. There was no isolation there, friends, just the full body working together in harmony. Trust me, these architects were not at the gym doing three sets of ten hammer curls.

The Acropolis. The Great Buddha of Kamakura. The Brooklyn Bridge. Our ancestors didn’t use any modern gym equipment to get in shape for masterfully designing and building these incredible structures. In fact, they built these amazing structures because they understood (from an architectural perspective) that leverage, one of the key principles of progressive bodyweight training, could help create something incredible, whether it’s a majestic pyramid or a sculpted human body.

Training the body without the use of external resistance equipment is known as calisthenics. It has been around since the dawn of humanity. Calisthenics, or bodyweight training, is the oldest and noblest form of exercise.

Pressing, pulling and squatting are hard-wired into our DNA. Way before the invention of the modern gym, using only our bodies for resistance was not just the best way to train…it was the only way. It’s no wonder so many of us get excited, inspired and motivated by this phenomenon! In fact, the modern gym (sometimes called “globo-gym”), with all its fancy, bi-angular lat pull-down machines, shiny cable crossovers and digitized, fake bicycles is a recent invention of the 20th century. Calisthenics is timeless.

That’s not to say that gyms did not previously exist. They did, but not in the modern sense. The very first gyms (or “gymnasia”) of ancient Greece consisted of exclusively bodyweight exercise. The minimalist equipment used, for example, were parallel bars, climbing ropes and running paths. In fact the word “calisthenics” has its roots in Greek and translates approximately to “beautiful strength.” It’s interesting to note that these gyms also taught wisdom, philosophy and linguistics.

In the era in which we grew up, the aforementioned globo-gyms had become the standard. Thank goodness that in the 1980’s New York of our youth, we were too young and too broke to visit them. I guess we were lucky in that when we were kids, minimalism wasn’t a trend; it was our only choice. Our fitness journey started out with push-up and pull-up contests. In fact, the only equipment we owned at the start of our odyssey was a doorframe pull-up bar. Man, we loved that thing!

For many years we’ve observed numerous big box fitness chains opening up all over the place. We even worked at a few of them. (Hey, hey, hey—everybody’s gotta make a living somehow.) But now on a global scale, it appears that fitness culture is returning to its roots. It’s nice to see. The Primal community is a big part of this resurgence, as is a subculture that has simply become known as Street Workout.

We’re born with an urge to be outside. We’re animals, not built to sit under florescent lights in a climate controlled, windowless room. It’s bad enough that so many good people have to do this at their jobs. Let’s not do it during our workouts.

Street Workout taps into so many elements you simply can’t find in the contemporary big box gym. These include the elegant minimalism of bodyweight training, the splendor of the great outdoors and the empowerment of owning a body that’s truly self-made. Not to mention the badass feats of strength associated with extreme calisthenics.

The improvisational element of Street Workout is equally appealing. When you use what the world has provided around you, rather than what you’ve been told to use by the corporate equipment manufacturers, you awaken a creative, even artistic, part of your mind. Whereas commercial gym members use multiple thousand-pound machines to train one muscle at a time, we can look at a pole, fence or street sign and come up with a dozen full-body exercises on the spot. We can even do entire workouts with nothing but the floor beneath our feet.

On a cultural level, Street Workout is revolutionary. The great anthropological equalizer if you will. Our community comes from different backgrounds and origins, assorted borders and parts of the world. We are united for a common cause: a love of fitness, form and function, a passion for self-improvement and a need to inspire others. Young and old, male and female, black and white, gay and straight: we are all represented.

But sociology aside, Street Workout is also the great equalizer of body types. Because calisthenics focuses on your pound-for-pound strength, the big guys and little guys have the same relative resistance: themselves. Allow us to elaborate; a muscular guy who’s 6’ 2” and weighs 250 lbs. will naturally have a higher bench press than an equally muscled individual of 5’6” and 150 lbs. Assuming the same body composition, it’s simply a matter

of physics. The heavier guy can lift more external weight. But if you put them both in a push-up contest, it’s an even playing field. Street Workout is an equal opportunity employer. If your body mass is going up and your reps in push-ups are going down, are you really getting stronger?

By utilizing basic principles of progression such as the manipulation of leverage, adding or removing points of contact and/or increasing the range of motion, you can continue to build new levels of strength without ever having to pick up a weight.

Some people will argue that the pull-up, for example, can only be progressed by adding weight to the body. Though that is one approach, there are many other methods to progress the pull-up. Here are three way ways to increase your pulling power without adding weight or using any equipment beyond the bar itself.

Archer Pull-up

This is an advanced variation that involves keeping one arm straight while relying primarily on the opposite side to do the bulk of the pulling. Begin like you’re performing a very wide pull-up, but bend only one of your arms as you pull your chin over the bar. This means your torso will shift toward that side while the opposite arm stays straight. You’ll need to reach your legs slightly to the side to counterbalance. The hand of your straight arm may need to open and roll over the bar at the top of the range of motion, depending on your wrist mobility.

If you are unable to perform a full archer pull-up, you can allow your secondary arm to bend slightly in order to make the exercise less difficult. Once you get to the top, you can extend the arm fully and attempt a negative archer pull-up. In time, you shouldn’t have to bend the secondary arm at all.

Muscle-up

The mighty muscle-up begins like a pull-up, but continues until your entire torso goes up and over the bar. Grip the bar slightly narrower than you would for a pull-up, then lean back and pull the bar down your body as low as possible. At the top of your pull, reach your chest over the bar and extend your arms.

It’s helpful to think about leaning away from the bar during the pulling phase before pitching forward at the top. This creates a movement pattern that’s more of an “S” shape than a straight line, allowing you to better maneuver your body around the bar.

One Arm Pull-up

The one arm pull-up is the ultimate in pound-for-pound pulling prowess. It is said that only 1 in 100,000 people will ever perform this exercise, but any able-bodied person who is willing to put in the time and effort can achieve a one arm pull-up in this lifetime.

Due to the lopsided nature of using just one arm to pull yourself, some trunk rotation may be unavoidable when working on the one arm pull-up. Your body will naturally twist as you go up. In the beginning, you should use this to your advantage, and practice turning in toward the bar as you pull. This will cause your grip to rotate from an overhand to an underhand position as you ascend.

Before you begin working toward a one-arm pull-up, make sure you spend plenty of time getting comfortable with the two arm variety. Focus on getting to the point where you can perform at least 15 clean overhand pull-ups in one set without using momentum. Ideally, you should do closer to 20. This is the foundation for your one arm pull-up. Getting comfortable with archer pull-ups is also very helpful before embarking on the quest for the one arm pull-up.

These examples are just the tip of the iceberg. You can train every muscle in your entire body without relying on external resistance, and every movement pattern in the Street Workout continuum can be progressed or regressed to suit any fitness level. The possibilities of what you can do with just your own bodyweight and your environment are greater than you might have imagined.

If you would like to know more, pick up a copy of our new ebook, Street Workout.




Like This Blog Post? Subscribe to the Mark's Daily Apple Newsletter and Get 10 eBooks and More Delivered to Your Inbox for FREE