I slept until 0845 and weigh 209. BP is 116/69 and
pulse is 59. BG is 5.7. Go figure. I cannot make rhyme
or reason out of what my body does. I drank a bit over a bottle of
red wine last night and ate a lot of nuts instead of supper and my
BP and BG are excellent. Pulse is up in the normal range. A
few days ago when I was better behaved, BP and BG were both much
higher, pulse was much lower and nothing much has changed in my life
to explain the difference.
I am going to dedicate the day to cleaning house.
Inviting guests is always a good incentive. I'll probably run to
town for groceries and incidentals, too, since my plan is to cook
hamburgers if the day remains sunny. The day is predicted to
go to 26 degrees.
Zippy slept well and quietly last night and is
coughing much less today. Desloratadine (Claritin) seems to have
made a big difference. It's cool, now, in the morning, though,
and she coughs more when it is hot, so we'll see.
At 1000, I wondered if the BP reading was an anomaly
and checked again: 111/65. Pulse is 59. Will wonders ever
cease? I ate breakfast of nuts and slow-cooking steel-ground
oats porridge a half-hour ago, so checked BG: 8.6. That is as
high as I want it after a meal, but okay.
I see that alternate day fasting is under
attack. A recent study compared fasting with reduced
calorie diet in
Effect of Alternate-Day Fasting on Weight Loss, Weight
Maintenance, and Cardioprotection Among Metabolically Healthy
Obese Adults A Randomized Clinical Trial. Save this copy if
you are interested because the study is behind a paywall and
this copy may disappear.
"INTERVENTIONS: Participants were
randomized to 1 of 3 groups for 1 year: alternate-day
fasting (25% of energy needs on fast days; 125% of
energy needs on alternating “feast days”), calorie
restriction (75% of energy needs every day), or a
no-intervention control. The trial involved a 6-month
weight-loss phase followed by a 6-month
Is that really fasting? 'Feast days'
were prescribed, and that is contrary to what most of us would
consider a serious fasting regime.
Moreover, the 'fasting' participants not only
were permitted 25% of daily requirements on 'fast days', but they also cheated...
They were eating and did not really fast, yet this charade is
used as an excuse to debunk fasting. It will take a better
'study' than this one to prove anything at all except that once
again, fatally flawed studies are commissioned by vested
interests, then presented in media to uncritical audiences as
'proof' to satisfy an agenda and people fall for it every time.
"Participants in the alternate-day
fasting group ate more than prescribed on fast days, and
less than prescribed on feast days, while those in the
daily calorie restriction group generally met their
prescribed energy goals.
I'll have to read more carefully, but it appears
that the results are, again, averages, and individual responses may
have varied. Also the high dropout rate amounts to
self-selection that confounds the issues. More on this later.
The long and short of it is that everyone is different and also the
participants were selected for being metabolically healthy.
There are many points to consider before concluding much from this
* * *
* * *
On the topic of an agenda masquerading as science,
consider the lack of real science and the blatant excess of
religiosity surrounding the "Climate Change" agenda.
This topic is a hobby horse of mine.
I'm not denying climate is changing. It always
has. What I am finding scary is the lack of intellectual
honesty and the politics surrounding the topic.
The lack of intellectual honesty surrounding
the topic is very discouraging to anyone seeking to openly
examine, understand and discuss the various aspects.
Climate change is real and always has
been. At times, the temperatures rise and at other
times, they fall and the entire weather and climate system
on Earth has always been in flux. Civilizations have
developed and then fallen apart as the climate first
favoured them, then changed in ways that reduced resources.
People get along well when times are good
and resources are increasing, but fall into discord when
things become scarce. Imagine what would happen if we
had one month, let alone a year with no crop. It
hasn't happened recently, but
it has happened in history.
"Evidence suggests that the anomaly
was predominantly a volcanic winter event caused by
the massive 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora in the Dutch
East Indies (the largest eruption in at least 1,300
the extreme weather events of 535–536), perhaps plus
the 1814 eruption of Mayon in the Philippines."
"The Earth had already been in a
centuries-long period of global cooling that started in
the 14th century. Known today as the Little Ice Age, it
had already caused considerable agricultural distress in
Imagine if every year, seasons became
shorter or drier for a decade or two.
How much of the current warming is due to
human activity? Some seem to think they know, but it
should be obvious no one can know. We can guess and those
guesses could actually be right, but the odds of that they are
even in the ballpark are about the same as throwing darts
When All Models Are Wrong: "The beliefs of the public and policymakers about
what should be done on climate (or on the economy, or on many other
less currently resonant issues) are relying on what models are
forecasting about the future, with little if any sensitivity to the
limits on what the models are actually capable of forecasting with
Some spend their lives and careers building
models and promoting the conclusions. These models may be
good at predicting the past after constant tinkering whenever
the do not, and when forgiven for not predicting
unique events like volcanoes and cosmic events, but have proven
lacking for predicting the future. After a span of time,
they are overhauled, then promoted again as predictive.
A common error in modeling is to only vary
one parameter at a time, leaving the others at a central value
assuming the others will remain optimal, when, in fact, it is
possible for all parameters to move at once to extremes and in
the same or opposite directions, resulting in far larger changes
Garbage In, Garbage Our -- GIGO -- is the
rule. Even the best logic performed on weak false
assumptions or bad data will produce garbage.
I have no doubt that the Earth has been warming and
is fairly likely to keep warming, and it seems that the process
feeds on itself, even without any human inputs. Melting Arctic
regions release great amounts of methane -- a far more potent
greenhouse gas than C02 and the darker soils exposed by
melting (vs. reflective ice and snow) absorb more solar heat.
The whole question is very complex, and I have
doubts about human ability to understand it -- or to do much one way or
the other. Excess austerity leads to war and when and where all-out war breaks
out, environmental considerations are completely forgotten, and although
war is a regular and predictable occurrence, that certainty is
* * * *
There were six of us for supper. I barbequed
hamburgers and we ate outside.
Yes, I took a break from my vegetation habits.
I'm not rigid. I also drank wine. Both thiungs I should
quit, but fat chance.
I correct, revise
and augment entries in the previous several days first thing each
day before writing new diary entries.
Read yesterday's post
Next Page >>
A good scientist knows that science is not a
democracy, that scientific truth is not determined
by a show of hands, and that consensus and authority are there to be
challenged, not to be
accepted without question. -- Dr. Frank Schnell, PhD.
All models are wrong but some are useful.
George E. P. Box