Monthly Archives: April 2014

Why the power of saying no to your favorite food may make you fat.

 

I love nature shows. Watching a pack of hungry wolves chase their dinner makes my heart beat faster. Seeing them tear the little rabbit into tasty little morsels makes my stomach growl. Just the thought of chowing down on prized prey stirs my primitive instinct to feed.

 

Watching a swarm of suburbanites at an all-you-can-eat pizza buffet has the same effect. Beyond the crowd’s hotplate etiquette (and impressive waistlines), I see a pack of wolves about to devour the warm flesh of their kill. Freed from social norms or moral values, possessing a portion of pizza flesh becomes the very foundation of their Maslovian pyramid.

 

But the parallels breaks down when it comes to frenzy frequency. A pack of wolves makes a kill about every 4 days, but the pepperoni and sausage special which is the endgame of the other pack makes its way into the buffet rotation every 14 minutes. Waistline, we have a problem.

 

When the rabbit flesh has been devoured by the wolves, the game ends. A wolf’s greedy appetite can only lead to a small deviation from median carnage intake, but in the battle of the pizza buffet, there is no end to the spoils of war. Any warrior willing to invest 45 seconds standing in line can score another carcass of simple carbs and saturated fat. See the problem?

 

I typically lose the desire to fight for another serving somewhere around slice #3, but old habits, herd mentality and a deeply seeded need to get the most of the $5.99 entrance fee propels me easily through slice #11. What if I stopped at the point that I’d no longer fight for another bite?

 

Maybe the battle with the scale is not won by saying no, but by saying enough.

 

The taming of hunger hormones is the latest frontier in weight control. Could the hormones that ebb and flow during the wolf’s feeding frenzy be the same as those at play in the swarm of pizza buf-foodies?

 

Leptin, Ghrelin and Cortisol are three dancers in our body’s hormone hustle that regulate hunger, metabolism and mood. Research and theories abound, but productive guidelines are hard to find. I suspect an answer to making better decisions about what and when to eat is lurking on the ESP to PhD continuum.

 

It’s helpful to keep in mind that if all of human existence were represented by the last 24 hours, only in the last few minutes have we had any choice about when or what to eat. Our hunter gatherer ancestors simply ate food when it was present and stopped when it was gone. A caveman’s trim waistline was not a result of “being present” when eating food, but rather eating when food was present.

 

How can we use the hormone hustle to our advantage?

 

Mind Over Milkshake: How Your Thoughts Fool Your Stomach presents an entertaining experiment which demonstrates how Ghrelin levels are affected not only by the food eaten but also by the food’s perceived value. Ghrelin is affected not just by eating the slice of pizza, but it’s predicted ability to satisfy. Our gut’s trusty Ghrelin meter jumps up and down with joy each time a morsel of our beloved “kill” enters our mind and mouth.

 

Saying no is not the key. Saying enough is the holy grail.

 

Dolly Parton said, “I tried every diet in the book. I tried some that weren’t in the book. I tried eating the book. It tasted better than most of the diets.” Snacking on “feel full” bars (or diet books) gets the same response as when a wolf surfaces with a mouth full of rabbit hair. It may result in a lot of chewing, but it does nothing to satisfy hunger or reduce Ghrelin.

 

The relationship with Ghrelin and metabolism is why saying no to our favorite treats is not helpful in reaching or maintaining a healthy weight. When Ghrelin levels rise and stay there – prize prey is in our mind but not our mouth – our hearty metabolism fades. Each time we deprive ourselves of prized prey, our metabolic rate decreases and we gain weight. But each time we eat more than a healthy portion of prize prey, caloric intake exceeds our healthy metabolic rate and we gain weight.

 

If you think this presents an impossible mission, you’re wrong. It’s like bowling. Most of the battle is won by just staying out of the gutters.

 

Maintaining your desired weight is a matter of avoiding the extremes. Keep your metabolism at a healthy level by regularly (yes, even daily!) saying yes to your prize prey, but keep the caloric intake at a reasonable level by saying enough when you’ve had enough.

 

The next time I’m at a pizza buffet, I’ll remind myself that a wolf can be satisfied by just a few chunks of warm rabbit flesh. For me, the third slice is a charm. A little prize prey goes a long way. It’s so easy, maybe you should give it a try.

If you wouldn’t fight for your next bite, it’s not so tough. Just say enough.

Associated Pressssss

 

This new wonder drug, discovered by Westchester County Neuro-Geek, Dave Norfleet-Vilaro, has been found “radically effective” in treating many of Twitter’s top trending syndromes and disorders. Even if you’ve never heard of any of the diseases cured by the revolutionary drug, over 80% of Westchester residents report, “I must have that one too”, while skimming the list of diseases and symptoms.

 

“Clinical trials” which lead to the discovery of PROFEN (pro-FEEN), conducted by Mr. Norfleet-Vilaro, used the scientific method of casual observation on about seven people for around three weeks.

 

This miracle drug has been “scientifically suspected” to restore energy, reduce pain, boost mood and lessen the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles.

The shocking discovery revealed that when administered properly, the wonder drug was effective in alleviating symptoms in more than five top trending syndromes and disorders which include:

 

• #OlwensDisorder – a neurological disorder which causes a slight to moderate delay in patient’s motion after being in a comfortable position for more than ten minutes.

• #OlniesSyndrome – a seemingly debilitating condition caused by slight to moderate discomfort in the area of and surrounding the patella. (“Clinical studies” show a strong correlation in the onset of Olnie’s Syndrome in patients with Olwen’s Disorder.

• #Olphaartitis – neurologicalish disease which prevents sufferer from doing anything they don’t want to do.

• #Pheimerbichslaptibiaosis – another seemingly debilitating condition caused by slight to moderate discomfort in the area of and surrounding the patella.

• #Pherstwhirldhedakeosis  – slight to moderate crainial discomfort which forces the cancellation of shopping, lunching or “taking care of” errands, pets or kids.

All the above diseases respond well to PROFEN resulting in the cessation of symptoms, temporary remission of the alleged disease/syndrome/condition and absence of the accompanying complaints and excuses.

 

“This guy’s a freakin’ Ponce de Leon”, claims easily impressed neighbor.

The surprisingly easy and inexpensive treatment method is most effective when used preemptively. Fortunately, the onset of the treatable symptoms can be easily predicted. The two most common triggers are “how I tried metabolic expenditure” (HITME) or ”boring entertainment at mealtime event (BEATME) anxiety prognostication disorders.

Having a ready supply of PROFEN is paramount to the success of the treatment plan. A few days before the expected onset of symptoms, prepare a two day supply of the wonder drug by scraping off the first three letters of several ibuprofen tablets. Then the day before onset, take 2 tablets every 6 hours to enjoy a symptom-free life thanks to the anti-inflammatory effects of a twenty year old generic drug and the miracle of the placebo effect.

 

“What we, or at any rate what I, refer to confidently as memory–meaning a moment, a scene, a fact that has been subjected to a fixative and thereby rescued from oblivion–is really a form of storytelling that goes on continually in the mind and often changes with the telling. Too many conflicting emotional interests are involved for life ever to be wholly acceptable, and possibly it is the work of the storyteller to rearrange things so that they conform to this end. In any case, in talking about the past we lie with every breath we draw.”

― William Maxwell, So Long, See You Tomorrow

Since humans developed the ability to tell a story, the first telling of an event was the first changing of the event. The tale morphed, transformed ever so slightly, occasionally with intent to deceive, but usually just a fractional addition or subtraction to make the telling (or the teller) more interesting – more memorable.

With another telling would come another change or two. The teller’s inner fact checker was constantly shoved into the wings by the inner performer. After all, who doesn’t prefer an entertaining story to one that’s handicapped by reality?

So went storytelling for millions of years. Unencumbered by facts beyond immediate  observation, storytellers (or historians as they like to call themselves) could not successfully claim the sky was green today, but it was hard to refute its green-ness some time or place the listener had not been.

The ability to record stories imposed limits on the most creative history makers. A recorded story was frozen, fixed. I suspect many storytellers were not thrilled to have their stories documented, as their habit of leaving out or adding to the story became substantially more difficult. Story-creep lost a little power. Oral revisions are easy when compared to the hammer and chisel skills required to edit a cave drawing.

The ability of storytellers – from drama lovers to power hungry politicians – was dealt another setback by the printing press. The disruptive power of recording and distributing stories must have been a serious threat to those who sculpted history into self-serving shapes. As one version of history became fixed in print, the storyteller could no longer self-edit the story as they told it. As that version of the story was distributed to many, it was also fixed in many minds.

This subjected the story to cross examination and comparison. Imagine the frustration (and accountability!) politicians must have felt when they could no longer make a promise to one neighbor then promise the opposite to another neighbor.

Selective history morphing hit another roadblock with the digital age. Some compare the power of the digital revolution to bring information to the masses to that of the printing press. Both helped inform the masses and are amazing advances in information sharing. Although vastly different in expression and era, both applied the emergency brake to story-creep (conscious or otherwise) in a specular way. Once again, transparency and accountability must be unwelcome guests for those who have made of habit of carving the paths of history in the directions that serve them best.

We are now experiencing another transformation in the recording and dissemination of historical storytelling:

 

crowdsourcing – the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people and especially from the online community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers

 

Thanks to crowdsourcing, a slice of history can now be recorded with text, photos and video; cross examined by masses and communicated to the world quicker than a caveman could choose his chisel. While I think it’s exciting to be a part of this transformation, not everyone is thrilled with the pace of technology.

What my kid can accomplish by tapping a tweet would seem like witchcraftery to my grandparents. And I know at least a few folks who think that emails are nothing but invitations to espionage. If you think technophobic tendencies like opposition to crowdsourcing is new, consider the Catholic Church’s response to the Gutenberg Bible.

(http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/educator/modules/gutenberg/books/legacy/)

As individuals and institutions increasingly utilize crowdsourcing techniques, I expect a healthy rise in accuracy, accountability and productivity. But based on history (or at least the version I’ve told myself) I wouldn’t be surprised by attempts to discredit or slow this transition by those who don’t understand it or fear its results.

I expect a natural divide on the issue based on familiarity and comfort with social media, as without its power, crowdsourcing could be a laborious process to an inferior result.

For those who put their faith in topic specialists and the glacially paced theories of academia, the notion of a peppy, crowdsourced decision by a large group of average people, must seem at least troubling and possibly anarchic.

To those who trust technology, enlisting specialists and consulting the educated elite seems unnecessary or may not be an option considering aggressive timetables and immediate expectations.

Ironically, the battlecry from both sides sounds the same: By giving everyone a voice in the matter, everyone will expect their voice to matter. Indeed.