Cold Thermogenesis 10: Is Good The Enemy of Great?
Reader Summary
- When you hear the CW Mantra, everything in moderation, what do you think about?
- Does mother nature settle for moderation?
- What happens when we do settle for moderation in our health decisions?
- If your healthcare plan prescribes moderation, are you okay with okay?
- Another patient video showing ‘moderation’ is just not as good as optimal can be.
Whatever you hold in your mind will tend to occur in your life. If you continue to believe as you have always believed, you will continue to act as you have always acted. If you continue to act as you have always acted, you will continue to get what you have always gotten. If you want different results in your life or your work, all you have to do is change your mind. We do not need an intelligent mind that speaks, but a patient heart that listens. Make your choices and you create your life.
It has been often said that the best lifestyle is the one based upon moderation. Do you really believe that? How do you define moderation? I think each person has their own idea of what moderation really means. I do not agree with this cliche at all. Why? Too many people use moderation as an excuse not to do their best for others. Why? Because it is safe for them to do so. Conventional medical advice often advocates the mantra, “everything in moderation” as its safety net. Even as a kid that cliche bothered me deeply inside.
Should a 350 pound man that eats 4 dozen chocolates at night believe this is “moderately” better than eating 6 dozen a night? Is it OK for a drug addict to be pleased when they only take 5 oxycontin instead of the usual dozen? Is it OK for the person with mental illness to only take their medications 5 days a week over 7 days a week? Is it OK for an alcoholic to drink five shots on a Friday night instead of the usual ten?
I think the standards we need to have need to be a lot higher than moderation or just OK. I don’t think an optimal energized life is possible when we settle for small achievements. I realized at an early age that life is not based upon average assumptions of moderation either. As I walked around the Museum of Natural History and saw examples throughout history and biology where moderation just got you mediocre results, and often, times extinguished things permanently.
Many times people will have a rough day at work and wish that that day would be over. I do not think like that. Each day counts. That point recently was made for me in real life when a member of my team decided to take her own life at work. Each day is a valuable day and I value each and every one I have. When someone asks me what is the best experience of my life, my answer is always the same. The best time in my life is the one I am about to have next.
That is precisely how evolution rolls as well. She always plays for the next action, the next challenge that she has to face. She never settles and she does not like moderation much either. The lesson I learned from the rounds I made at the Museum of Natural History is that in life and in biology, it is never too late to revitalize your life if you follow Mother Nature’s lead.
What separates the best from the rest is how they manage the gift of their time. If you settle for moderation, you’re settling for a mediocre life. Too many people live the same year 80 times over, and call it a life.
One of my friends is a medical school professor, and he said it best, “If you accept mediocre, you have no room to complain when the consequences of the decision become apparent.” He told me that those ‘who espouse‘ for things in moderation are often the beneficiaries of this action in some major way. If you are the consumer or patient of this service, accepting something less than ideal. You’re making a trade whether you know it or not. He went on in his ‘history lecture’ for me, to use examples in life and in biology of how life always accepts major challenges and makes sense from the chaos it was dealt. He used evolution as his main example. He said Mother Nature never accepts moderation in her response to life’s challenges, so why should you?
Evolution is life’s crucible. No crucible is set to medium low!
She always appears to reach for the ultimate survival mechanism to get to the next generation and to ensure reproductive fitness. He gave examples like how the Mount St. Helen’s gophers reseeded the entire destroyed face of the volcano in less than three years to sustain new plant life. He used the the examples of the volcanoes on Hawaii that have created numerous lava flows all over the Big Island of Hawaii becoming able to support moss and small vegetation within a few years of cooling. He talked about how how life bounced back from that oil spills and atomic blasts in the Pacific. He also used other ancient examples of how life over came devastation.
The Permian–Triassic event was the most devastating event ever, to life on earth that we know about today. 57{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6} of all families and 83{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6} of all genera (53{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6}) of marine families, (84{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6}) of marine genera, about (96{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6}) of all marine species and an estimated (70{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6}) of land species including insects were wiped free because of a raised CO2 level. The evidence of plants is less clear, but new taxa became dominant after the event because CO2 is the fuel they use to grow. The “Great Dying event” had enormous evolutionary significance.
On land, it ended the primacy of mammal-like reptiles. The recovery of vertebrates took 30 million years, but the vacant niches created the opportunity for archosaurs to become ascendant. In the earth’s seas, the percentage of animals that were sessile dropped from 67{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6} to 50{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6}. Life wobbled…but sustained itself. Life did not choose moderation when faced with total annihilation; it choose ultimate survival based upon the fossil data we have today from China. It navigated the massive increase of CO2 by using plant photosynthesis to take full advantage of the CO2. It did not settle for a low O2 existence. It took the long run and used what the environment dealt out. Moderation lost, yet again.
At some point between 195,000 and 123,000 years ago, the population size of Homo sapiens plummeted, thanks to cold, dry climate conditions that left much of our ancestors’ African homeland uninhabitable. So what did our ancient ancestors do? They went back to the sea to save themselves. Life just finds a way when it is challenged. But it is clear that surviving life forms do not settle for moderation in these decisions. This raises the point what should a modern human consider to survive the modern world? In my view we need to default to the same decision making process. It requires the same decision trees to survive the emergency situations today we face.
When a mountain climber was stuck in a crevice and knew he was going to die if he did not act soon, what did he do? He cut off his own arm and he lived? Moderation or extreme? What was the result? 70,000 years ago there was massive volcanic eruption that changed most of life exposed to its effects. Yet, we are here today as proof that Mother Nature found a way around chaos again. She never chooses safety over survival.
To gain survival requires the first decision be your best. All survival classes teach this principle today. It also appears evolution uses the same plan. Her decisions always lead to survivor-ship as well. If that was not true life would not be here today. It does appear that decision is fluid and based upon what environment dishes out to her.
About 10,000 years ago, modern man made what many consider was a great decision to move from a Hunter Gatherer lifestyle of life to a modern agricultural one. I told you in my Paleo Summit talk, that I felt this decision was the single greatest error that modern man has made because it created a species of mediocre modern neolithic hominids.
We went in to some detail about how that ripple decision 10,000 years ago is hitting our children health like a Tsunami in today’s modern world due to the affect of a sped up epigenetics. It is why ten year olds are dying of heart attacks and why I recently saw a 9 year old with 80{a7b724a0454d92c70890dedf5ec22a026af4df067c7b55aa6009b4d34d5da3c6} carotid artery occlusion. This is not supposed to happen according to the books in the medical school library, but they are happening today. Moreover, this is becoming very common. A moderate approach would just say they are outliers, the result, due to their personal bad genetics. This is where modern medicine stands right now today. How many of these cases do we have to see before we begin to ask some more foundational questions?
One of my forum members made this astute statement recently, “That ‘wheat civilization’ got us to the Moon, but it cost us humanity in the process. We are like evolutionary terrorists surviving in the grain strangled MAD world” today. I do not think I have heard a better statement regarding modern agricultural practices in the last 40 years of my life.
The paleosphere seems to get that sense intuitively, but still applauds some among us, who choose moderation in their practices, over practices that are best for the survival of their own patients. I think all our decisions should be tied to ultimate survival and optimal health, just as evolution chooses for life, when she is tested. We must be congruent with her message, and not in our neolithic beliefs or practices, dedicated to advocating for ‘everything in moderation’. We might be making a great trade off that we may regret at some point later in our lives. When we do it, we might even know why we don’t know it.
Evolution does not shoot for moderation. It appears to shoot for an “A” when it is possible. If you want to feed your kids cake, do it. But you must realize the consequences of it as well. Some people will tell you that cheats are OK (moderation). They are OK, if you think they are OK. I don’t think this way because evolution taught me to question that belief. After all, we did not have “treats” until recently. We are socialized to believe cheats are OK. This is a modern neolithic thought, I can do without now.
Just because we can eat a banana in winter, does not mean it is without a biologic toll. We must begin to question those who advocate for everything in moderation. Most humans today assume it is a risk free decision, because they don’t feel any worse for it when they do it. This is a decision, you have to make as a modern human today, based upon what we now know about epigenetic signaling and circadian signaling in the brain. You can’t let someone else think for you using CW dogma they learned via a broken system.
I can’t legislate that decision for you, nor, would I want to. I just want you to hear it, so you can think about it now, and decide for yourself. I can show you what I know today to be true. I can tell you what I do, because of what I know today, but you have to decide what works for you presently. When things do go awry, do not ask why they went awry, until you correct for these errors in thinking first. Most humans think these ‘cheats’ are OK in moderation.
We heard this mantra often on the stage in Austin, TX. Yet, I have seen no proof of that moderation is the standards used anywhere in evolutionary biology. Telomere biology and mitochondrial signaling changed my mind on this 5 years ago. Evolutionary history is pretty clear that moderation is a recipe for disaster. I think our diet directly affects our epigenetic switches faster than any other thing we can do to ourselves today. I think it is paramount to get it right all the time…and not “moderately” correct as some espouse. Maybe we need to consider that the mantra of ‘everything in moderation’ is really a serious danger to us?
Why extreme is the currency of biology
The irony of modern society is that we are now the best informed society that has ever walked this planet, but yet we also carry greatest risk of dying from our own ignorance. At its core, I think ‘moderation’ eventually leads to extinction in biology. At Paleo FX a friend added this truth to that statement, “And the mantra of this neolithic ignorance is “Everything in Moderation” attitude of the modern healthcare Rx to treat.” I think when you hear the word “moderation” from a politician, a lawyer, an engineer, an architect, or a modern physician they might have just uttered the most dangerous thing to your existence and to your health.
They just told you that it is better for you to settle for the safety of middle ground, because they are likely to benefit in some way. ‘Covering your ass’ (CYA) is pretty popular these days in medicine, and in all businesses today. But this being good for business practice for today, does not imply it is good for our optimal health, longer term. On this blog, I strive to use an evolutionary lens to look at life and health.
When I hear a physician call for ‘moderation’ in the paleosphere it smacks of incongruity to me. When we decide to ‘go Paleo’, is it not an anti-moderation position today? Paleo is far from mainstream and it is looked at as extreme by the masses. Paleo is an outlier today. Nothing about this lifestyle is about moderation when you think about it, and yet, we all embrace it. I think the decision to become paleo personally, must spill into our professional life as well, if we are to make a real difference. We can’t settle for less in anything we do in my opinion. It may not be comfortable at first to do this, but leadership is all about getting comfortable with the uncomfortable.
Movements often begin and go against the grain before an inflection point is reached that facilitates real change. Choosing a paleolithic template give modern man the best chance at health in our modern world. So, why would we then want to advocate for moderation then? This is a very serious question for this community.
Paleo is an aggressive lifestyle, compared to modern SAD lifestyle that garners mediocre results. The lifestyle allows us to obtain, and maintain, personal healthcare dominance in this sea of mediocrity. Paleo strives for “excess health” in control. It is mandated by evolutionary biology. So tell me, why do some still advocate moderation? I think we need to ask physicians who advocate for paleo to embrace their ‘discomfort’ for sake of their own comfort?
Modern healthcare and physicians try to be all things to all people, and the result winds up being nothing to anyone. That is where the road to moderation leads today, in my view. I believe we need to stand up for something. I believe we need to play ferociously for our patients, to get them to world class, or don’t play at all. Evolution is a brutal teacher, and not one who uses moderation to guide her. We need to advocate for aggressiveness in control.
I think modern humans need to realize that mediocre is at the core of ‘moderate approach’ or as a Rx for health. After all, if moderation was good why did the Saber tooth tiger and Megaladon go away? They were both apex predators that enjoyed a position of strength for a long time, before the environment changed, and made their ‘common’ middle ground existence untenable.
Adaptation does not use moderation. Epigenetic modifications requires quick aggressive adaptation for survival. Moderation failed to lead to ultimate survival for either species. In fact, I can’t find any example where moderation is good for survival. It certainly did not appear in these personal decisions in I, caveman
.
The decisions made in Robb Wolf’s life, those few days seemed awfully important, as we all watched it unfold on TV.
If she took a “moderate approach” to her food predicament, it would have lead to her death too. Evolution tells life to extend to its limits when faced with survival. Her survival instinct was to move and swim to look for the things to further her longevity. She could always have another cub, if she could just extend her own life. We also recently saw this in a modern human. In Argentina, a child thought to be still born due to a premature birth was pronounced dead by five modern physicians, recently.
Read again what the doctor said in this article. Dr. Greenburg said, “Presumably, the whole physiology is tough to understand. There is nothing about description of the baby’s existence that can explain survival, based on current understanding of cellular physiology.”
Then this: Another commenter Coriolana Magna – disagreed.
“It’s not a miracle at all – it is science and the doctors’ incredible incompetence,” Magna wrote. “She’s a lucky child [that] she wasn’t buried alive by these so-called ‘healers!’”
Moderation or Extreme? Life seems to find a way when we get out of the way with a “moderation response.”
Her body was put into a freezer without any food. All humans are born into the world in ketosis, thankfully. Infants are better able to handle cold environments because they are born with a lot of brown fat to stabilize their temperatures with thermogenesis by burning their fat stores. They are not born with muscles loaded with glucose to do what adults can do and shiver.
Do you ever wonder why Mother Nature does this by design in infants?
Ironically, putting the infant in the freezer likely saved this child’s life. This is counter-intuitive to us today, but yet, the correct choice made by evolution. Her mother coming back to want to see the child was the real serendipity in this case in my view. They found the child alive after 10 hours, and no worse for wear either. That should have made the doctors and scientists think how could this biologically happen? Instead, they focus on suspending the doctors and fixing the breakdowns that allowed this to happen in the first place.
They chose to see the common and not the uncommon in the situation, while life just finds a way to survive. Everyone seemed to miss the part where Mother Nature reached into her bag of “extremes” and preserved a human life in ketosis and the cold, yet again. That ability was built into her by Mother Nature, and is in each one of us. This is laid at in CT -6. Evolution does not settle for moderation, ever! Most life on this planet lives at at extremes because evolution shoots for optimal, when life is at stake. It appears to me that modern healthcare, however, does settle for moderation because it is the short term safe choice. Safe does not yield optimal in evolutionary biology.
In my view, if it was not good enough for Mother Nature, why is good for you now? Why is eating a banana in the dead of winter OK for you today when Mother Nature says it should not happen? Is it because you feel ‘OK’ doing it? Does that ‘OK feeling’ make it the correct choice, in evolutionary biology? A vote for moderation says, sure it won’t hurt you, or will it?
Consider that when you hear doctors talk to you from this point forward in person, on the internet, or in a video presentation or from their blog. Really look at what they are asking you to do and make a deal for, when they tell you, ‘everything in moderation’ is best for you. I completely reject the notion of moderation, as the most dangerous thing we can accept in medicine. Why is that? Take a look at this clinical example from my clinic.
Another example of rejecting “moderation” using CT in my practice
Why should we question settling for moderation in modern medicine? What if I told you I could take a 4 cm tumor out of the infra-clavicular brachial plexus of a women’s armpit without any pain meds? Just so the ladies can clue the gentlemen in to the pain involved, tell them how it feels when you nick or cut your armpit when you are shaving your armpit.
Now think about having an incision made in your armpit to remove a 4 centimeter tumor, off a major nerve, that controls your biceps muscle? Got the picture now in your mind? What if I told you I could ice an armpit for 3 weeks pre operatively to allow me to remove this tumor without any local anesthesia or post operative pain medication, with the exception of extra strength tylenol, would you believe me? A moderation approach to medicine would call that notion moronic or idiotic today. After all, it is not in any textbook in the best medical schools, or the Ivory Towers of medicine, is it? And, because it is not in there, we should call it nonsense, right? Well, take a look at this image.
A patient with an armpit incision is one of the more painful incisions we make in humans. Any general surgeon or plastic surgeon can back me up in this statement of surgical fact. When it is localized on a major nerve of the brachial plexus it can be a very painful procedure for the patient. Generally, I would have to keep these patients on narcotics every four hours for 4-6 weeks. Here I did not need any pain medications at all.
I believed in Cold Thermogenesis before January 9, 2012. It told me that we might be capable to accomplish some even more amazing things for humanity, if we learn how to harness it. January 9th’s bio-hack proved me correct in my own assessment of how this works on pain. Here is another example of a believer in the CT who benefited from my bio hack. No, you wont find that answer in your biochemistry text in Ivory Tower’s library, but it occurred right here. Why is that? Maybe you are not aware of just how much you really don’t know?
Life has a habit of making us forget why we became physicians. We fall into a routine. We take things for granted. We stop taking risks because it is not safe for our lives. We forgot why we became healers. It was to help people. We stop aiming for the stars, for them because some in society says it may not be ‘safe enough’. We stop speaking the truth. We play small with the gifts of our life, that may actually help our patients lives. They deserve better than mediocre or a plan for moderation. Ordinary people can do extraordinary things by recalling who they truly are and living that way. That is what being paleo is to me.
It is an all in proposition and not one born on the middle of the road position. If this sensibility is different than yours than I suggest you just stop reading this blog and mock me as the paleo elitists have. I am standing up to be counted. I like embracing the discomfort of my position.. I do things my way, and I do them this way because I think I can do better for my patients today than I did in the last 15 years. Moreover, I am going to show you there is a better way to do things, than “moderation” calls for today. To me, this is very congruent to the paleo lifestyle and goes against the grain of what is espoused in those Ivory Towers. Ivy Towers ‘educate out’ the good ideas from our minds. Do not believe it?
Watch this video:
Cultivate your brilliant ideas and limit your bad education…
Never let someone who gave up on their dreams talk you out of going after your own. Sometimes in life a time comes when it’s time to rethink everything. That time is upon humanity today in my view.
I reject moderation in medicine now. I want optimal for me, and all of my patients now. I leave ‘moderate choices’ for those in the Ivory Towers. Leadership requires us to act fearlessly. Choose very wisely, people, because what you choose might just save or end your life early. Understand what the ‘Rx for moderation’ brings you over time. There are big decisions for us all ahead when it comes to optimal health.
If you want to live “80 ordinary years” relying on an “everything in moderation” approach, eat that banana on Dec 31, in the dead of winter, and don’t worry about it at all. Everything in moderation ‘might have‘ you well covered based upon the ‘old books’ in the Ivory Towers, after all, no?
Click here to read more Cold Thermogenesis
Your Shopping List for this Post
Additional Resources
