I think I’m starting to see (chuckle) the first signs of my eyesight deteriorating due to age. I’m 35 and have always had perfect vision, but I’m starting to experience delays in focusing on things that are close to me. Not a difficulty in doing so after the delay–but a delay none the less.

And so it begins…

/sigh/

These things are dangerous. They slay people. Especially those with bad cardio health, which is sad since those are the types most prone to using them. Something’s odd about the whole arrangement.

I’d like to see some stats on how many people these things kill per year. And on messed-upness scale of 1-10 I’d say dying of a heart attack while exercising to improve one’s health is about a 13. An unlucky 13.

An interesting piece on the Japanese health care system.

[ Japanese Health Care ]

There’s talk going around again about the different sugar substitutes. Aspartame, Stevia — are they safe? Which does the most damage? Do they cause cancer?

I have a simple solution.

If someone hacks together an artificial chemical that’s designed to give people something for nothing, don’t eat it. It will probably do bad things to you.

When you spill a coke on the sidewalk ants are on it immediately. When you spill a diet coke on the sidewalk the ants walk around it. That should tell you something.

So, in other words, just about every substance in the world that is sweet is high in calories, but we’re going to be audacious enough to create something in a lab that breaks this rule, and then we’re going to eat it? That’s not so bright.

I’m not one of those people who puts nature on a pedestal of perfection. I’m aware that evolution transmits flaws. But we’re nowhere near the point in our understanding of biology or physiology to be able to mimic natural substances such as sugar. Or, at least not without consequences.

It’s foolish to believe that we can, and greed and gluttony are the only reasons one would even subscribe to the idea. In other words, one has to say, “I don’t care what that is because,

1. I don’t want to work out in order to offset the sugar I eat.
2. I don’t want to get fat.
3. I still want to consume sugar all day.

So these are cheater chemicals designed for lazy people who don’t understand enough about science to realize that they’re likely dangerous.

The Simple Approach

So my answer is simple, and it includes more than just sugar substitutes — eat the natural version of foods. Get the least amount of additives and preservatives possible. Organic if possible, but overall as natural as you can find it. Real sugar. Real butter. Etc.

If it has more sugar in it, or more natural fat, so be it. Eat less of it and/or get more exercise.

I’m overweight myself but I like to take responsibility for my actions. I’m fat because I eat too much and don’t exercise enough. That’s it. Fin. I’m going to eat the foods that I’m supposed to be eating, i.e. the regular and non-hacked versions, and if I can’t do so and stay fit then it’s because I’m not doing it right.

I don’t want crutches created for weak people who can’t control themselves — especially when the crutches themselves are pretty damn suspect.:

[ Why French Women Don't Get Fat ]

There’s a very popular show on Showtime right now called Dexter. The show is both interesting and at the same time quite disturbing.

The main character a man who works in a crime unit (kind of like CSI). That seems basic enough except he’s also a serial killer. He’s literally a very disturbed individual who is compelled to kill other people (and who enjoys doing so immensely).

The twist (and the only thing that makes the show acceptable) is the fact that he is a “moral” serial killer, i.e. he only goes after people that he judges to be horrible people — child molesters, rapists, murderers, etc..

What I find troubling about the show is its popularity. I think it points to a quiet and perverted rage that exists just below the surface of American society. I believe this show is allowing its viewers to explore their own homicidal feelings in a safe environment. That environment consists of two things:

1. It’s just a T.V. show, right? This isn’t hurting anyone.
2. Besides, even if I am enjoying watching him kill human beings, they’re bad people.

Right, sure. You’re still empathizing with a person who takes pleasure in killing people. This is a very tangible step towards our cultural acceptance of Schwarzenegger’s “The Running Man” where the public relishes in the hunting and murdering of criminals.

The creators of this show have quite simply found a way tap into and harness this unhealthy anger in a socially acceptable way. Ultimately not much direct harm will come from people enjoying the show. The problem is that it bumped us down a few rungs on the decency ladder. And I’m not so much worried about what rung we landed on this time, but rather what rung we’re we’ll be on after a few more drops.:

There’s been a ton of debate over the years about whether or not aspartame causes cancer. Based on the evidence out there I’ve always thought it likely true. Well, the evidence continues to get more and more compelling as additional, larger studies are done.

A 2005 study was published by the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP). This study was significantly larger than previous ones. So what did they find?

“Our study has shown that aspartame is a multipotential carcinogenic compound whose carcinogenic effects are also evident at a daily dose of 20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight (mg/kg), notably less than the current acceptable daily intake for humans,” the authors write.

From a Medical News Today summary:

Researchers administered aspartame to Sprague-Dawley rats by adding it to a standard diet. They began studying the rats at 8 weeks of age and continued until the spontaneous death of each rat. Treatment groups received feed that contained concentrations of aspartame at dosages simulating human daily intakes of 5,000, 2,500, 500, 100, 20, and 4 mg/kg body weight. Groups consisted of 100 males and 100 females at each of the three highest dosages and 150 males and 150 females at all lower dosages and controls.

The experiment ended after the death of the last animal at 159 weeks. At spontaneous death, each animal underwent examination for microscopic changes in all organs and tissues, a process different from the aspartame studies conducted 30 years ago and one that was designed to allow aspartame to fully express any carcinogenic potential.

The treated animals showed extensive evidence of malignant cancers including lymphomas, leukemias, and tumors at multiple organ sites in both males and females. The authors speculate the increase in lymphomas and leukemias may be related to one of the metabolites in aspartame, namely methanol, which is metabolized in both rats and humans to formaldehyde. Both methanol and formaldehyde have shown links to lymphomas and leukemias in other long-term experiments by the same authors.

In other words, the argument has always been, “Well if you give someone four times their body weight in just about anything it’ll probably cause cancer.” But that’s just it: all indications point to aspartame causing cancer at or below the amounts approved for human consumption by the FDA.

Seriously. Consider not consuming this poison anymore.:

[ Update: This link points to another study that refutes the Italian study. That study was extremely large and the results are discussed on the National Cancer Institute's web page, which gives it a lot of weight in my book. But I still remain unconvinced.

The common argument of "humans are different than animals" simply doesn't hold water for me, especially when the opposing evidence did not come from actually administering the aspartame in a lab environment like the Italian study did. Anyway, I sure as hell won't be drinking the stuff, and I'll continue to recommend that my friends and family don't as well. ]

www.escrimaconcepts.com

After nearly 15 years of following MMA I’m finally getting physically involved.

I’ve found a Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu school in town that looks really decent. I’ve always wanted to learn the basics of this incredible martial art and the health benefits are compelling as well.

Overall it should be very positive. I’m looking forward to it and will surely have much to say about it as I progress.

I’ve been saying this for years based on anecdotal evidence, but now it’s for real.

This spring, neuroscientists at Columbia University in New York City published a study in which a group of men and women, ranging in age from 21 to 45, began working out for one hour four times a week. After 12 weeks, the test subjects, predictably, became more fit. Their VO2 max, the standard measure of how much oxygen a person takes in while exercising, rose significantly. But something else happened as a result of all those workouts: blood flowed at a much higher volume to a part of the brain responsible for neurogenesis. Functional M.R.I.’s showed that a portion of each person’s hippocampus received almost twice the blood volume as it did before. Scientists suspect that the blood pumping into that part of the brain was helping to produce fresh neurons.