Comment author: jkaufman 14 September 2011 06:44:46PM 3 points [-]

This was about a year ago: do you still hold this belief? Has eating like you described worked out?

Comment author: MrShaggy 11 October 2011 02:08:55PM *  1 point [-]

Not just hold the belief but eat that way even more consistently (more butter and less sour cream just because tastes change, but same basic principles). I'm young and didn't have any obvious signs of heart disease personally so can't say it "worked out" for me personally in that literal, narrow sense but I feel better, more mentally clear, etc. (I know that's kinda whatever of evidence, just saying since you asked).

Someone else recently posted their success with butter lowering their measurement of arterial plaque: "the second score was better (lower) than the first score. The woman in charge of the testing center said this was very rare — about 1 time in 100. The usual annual increase is about 20 percent." (http://blog.sethroberts.net/2011/08/04/how-rare-my-heart-scan-improvement/) (Note: I disagree with the poster's reasoning methods in general, just noting his score change.)

There was a recent health symposium that discussed this idea and related ones: http://vimeo.com/ancestralhealthsymposium/videos/page:1/sort:newest.

For those specifically related to heart health, these are most of them: http://vimeo.com/ancestralhealthsymposium/videos/search:heart/sort:newest

Comment author: RomanDavis 17 December 2010 10:58:45PM 2 points [-]

Downvoted. I've seen the evidence, too.

Comment author: MrShaggy 24 December 2010 03:43:52AM 2 points [-]

Downvoted means you agree (on this thread), correct? If so, I've wanted to see a post on rationality and nutrition for a while (on the benefits of high-animal fat diet for health and the rationality lessons behind why so many demonize that and so few know it).

Comment author: JGWeissman 08 October 2010 05:13:28AM 2 points [-]

You have to actually think your degree of belief is rational.

I doubt you are following this rule.

Comment author: MrShaggy 09 October 2010 06:09:36AM *  3 points [-]

I was worried people would think that, but if I posted links to present evidence, I ran the risk of convincing them so they wouldn't vote it up! All I've eaten in the past three weeks is: pork belly, butter, egg yolks (and a few whites), cheese, sour cream (like a tub every three days), ground beef, bacon fat (saved from cooking bacon) and such. Now, that's no proof about the medical claim but I hope it's an indication that I'm not just bullshiting. But for a few links: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19179058 (the K2 in question is virtually found only in animal fats and meats, see http://www.westonaprice.org/abcs-of-nutrition/175-x-factor-is-vitamin-k2.html#fig4)--the pubmed is on prevention of heart disease in humans http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/11/can-vitamin-k2-reverse-arterial.html shows reversal in rat studies from K2 http://trackyourplaque.com/ -- a clinic that uses K2 among other things to reverse heart disease note that I am not trying to construct a rational argument but to convince people that I do hold this belief. I do think a rational argument can be constructed but this is not it.

Comment author: MrShaggy 08 October 2010 05:02:41AM 21 points [-]

Eating lots of bacon fat and sour cream can reverse heart disease. Very confident (>95%).

Comment author: jimmy 13 September 2010 02:37:44AM *  7 points [-]

In short, replace carbohydrates with animal fats.

I still get hungry if I don't eat all day, and it can still have some negative impact, but it's an order of magnitude less of a problem.

It took a little while for my body to adapt to the changes. I didn't actually take notes, and it was sort of a gradual transition for me, so I'm not sure how long everything took. I'd expect a lot of the benefits to come after the first meal, but by a month or so I think most things stabilized and my tastes adjusted to fit my diet better.

If anyone wants to know more details, I'm more than happy to share, but I'm not sure exactly which parts would be interesting. Just PM me and we can chat.

Comment author: MrShaggy 17 September 2010 12:14:33AM 0 points [-]

Just to add to the anecdotal data, I've had the same experience upping animal fat and being able to be productive (mentally and physically) even without eating, and I work a physically demanding job at night, either of which alone can induce fatigue. I eat mostly butter, egg yolks, cream, coconut oil, and fatty cuts of meat like pork belly and fatty ground beef (epsom salts, mineral water and magnesium supplements take care of any muscle soreness).

Comment author: Kevin 16 September 2010 05:03:55AM 1 point [-]

+1 for 5-HTP. I use it as a substitute for melatonin and think it is more broadly useful than melatonin.

Comment author: MrShaggy 16 September 2010 10:33:32PM 1 point [-]

More useful than melatonin for sleeping in particular?

Comment author: Alicorn 10 April 2010 05:29:30AM 0 points [-]

You're the second person to recommend Alexander Technique; if I run into a non-expensive way to try it, I shall.

In response to comment by Alicorn on Ureshiku Naritai
Comment author: MrShaggy 11 September 2010 02:41:52AM 0 points [-]

Not AT but something similar and free online vids is "Intuflow", for example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsMPqP7hxRk

Comment author: MichaelHoward 25 May 2009 12:54:25PM 3 points [-]

you are presented a type of logic puzzle...

It was much easier to solve this one by mapping it to an existing social heuristic. Motivation didn't seem to be a significant factor in this case.

Motivation and using the native architecture where appropriate are both important factors in performance.

Also worth noting: performance does tend to increase with physiological or mental arousal, but only up to a point. When levels of arousal become too high, performance decreases.

Comment author: MrShaggy 25 May 2009 07:35:27PM 2 points [-]

T&C report that mapping the Wason selection task to examples from everyday life doesn't improve performance, only when changed to detecting cheating does it change performance.

Comment author: MichaelBishop 25 May 2009 04:38:45PM 1 point [-]

I'm sure motivation improves performance, but I don't think that is the only thing going on here.

I'm sure that our evolved psychology does make some problems harder/easier than others, despite having identical math behind them. But I'm also sure that our previous experience with problems matters. In your description, C&T don't distinguish between problems we've evolved to think about, and problems that we think about a lot for cultural or idiosyncratic reasons.

Comment author: MrShaggy 25 May 2009 07:25:32PM 0 points [-]

If I understand your last sentence correctly, that was my other main problem with their argument for evolved social contract algorithms or whatever: I didn't see sufficient evidence that the "cheating" stuff was part of our "native" architecture rather than a learned behavior. Hence the suggestion to create tests that vary on things we know to culturally vary.

Comment author: Z_M_Davis 25 May 2009 05:39:16PM *  1 point [-]

"No One Knows What Science Doesn't Know" seems relevant here. I know that there has been a lot of followup literature on the Wason task (e.g. chapter four of David Buller's evopsych critique Adapting Minds devoted a lot of space to an alternative explanation of the Wason task, and Cosmides et al. have responded to critics (PDF), &c., &c.), but if any conclusion was definitively reached, I can't say what it was. Oh, what I would only give for a thousand years of library time---

Comment author: MrShaggy 25 May 2009 07:22:13PM 0 points [-]

Well the EvPsych Primer referenced uses it as their centerpiece for how EvPsych works. I can't say what the rest of the literature says.

View more: Next