[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? seekliberation --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@... wrote: I've heard and read there are quite a lot of kids under 15 years of age, especially in the US of A, with type 2 diabetes. Some even dead...? IMO, some of the biggest culprits are computers (esp. games), junk food (McDonalds, etc.) and sodas (Coca-Cola, Pepsi), and the heavily processed, high glycemic index food in schools? The cost of that might be nothing short of enormous for the future generations?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@... wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: I've heard and read there are quite a lot of kids under 15 years of age, especially in the US of A, with type 2 diabetes. Some even dead...? IMO, some of the biggest culprits are computers (esp. games), junk food (McDonalds, etc.) and sodas (Coca-Cola, Pepsi), and the heavily processed, high glycemic index food in schools? The cost of that might be nothing short of enormous for the future generations?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
On May 6, 2012, at 7:24 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@... wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. Yep. The increasingly sedentary lifestyle since the 60’s we can probably vouch for ourselves, being raised in the generations that went from kids playing in yards after school and on weekends to cable cartoons after school and Saturday morning cartoons. Scouting around neighborhoods today, you see few children ever outside, despite neighborhoods filled with kids. Of course video games, computers (and computers in cell phones) and the web has just accelerated these inwardly-drawn, self-absorbed dweebs, fed on commercials and TV and their “inner” lives. There’s some speculation that in response to these changes a transitional being may be being born. These are the numerous, many probably as yet unknown, levels of the autistic spectrum child. But no one really knows what it all means. It makes me wonder IF pathologic introversion does cause this in humans, what does compulsive meditative introversion do to meditators children? Vedic Village of the Damned? :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: I've heard and read there are quite a lot of kids under 15 years of age, especially in the US of A, with type 2 diabetes. Some even dead...? IMO, some of the biggest culprits are computers (esp. games), junk food (McDonalds, etc.) and sodas (Coca-Cola, Pepsi), and the heavily processed, high glycemic index food in schools? The cost of that might be nothing short of enormous for the future generations? I keep hearing that this young generation is the first that will have a shorter lifespan than their parents. Organ replacements and incredible medical advances may change that, but I can tell you that few youngsters play outside or ride bikes after school. They go home, have a snack, hopefully do homework, and then text, game, and get on the computer. All fun things and also things that are difficult to stop doing, especially for kids who don't have fully developed frontal lobes to override the desire to just continue with the technology. Schools work to provide aerobic gym classes and all sots of health producing activities in gym class, but the days when we played games outside and raced around for a few hours after school are gone.. For adults, the info about the value of aerobic exercise is strong and getting stronger when it comes to keeping the brain healthy. It promotes the growth of dendrites and helps to replace dead neurons in the hippocampus, which has to do with memory, cognitive skills. It motivated me to do less yoga and more fast walking and going to the gym. Barry, that sounds like really interesting work you do. You get to read about cutting edge research and get paid while making some corrections. Not bad at all.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals... Barry, that sounds like really interesting work you do. You haven't had to read some of the studies I've had to edit. :-) Many of them make the TM science look good. Just sayin'... :-) You get to read about cutting edge research and get paid while making some corrections. Not bad at all. Sometimes. The rat runner studies are excruciating. A few are interesting, but more (for me) in terms of how blind researchers can be to their own biases. The best example I can think of was a study from a large Muslim nation on the impact of malnutrition (including periods of fasting) on pregnancy. Their research concluded without question that depriving a mother of a regular, proper diet even for short periods of time could have devastating effects on the child, and lead to huge risk factors for that child developing serious disease in the future. But given where they lived, the authors felt that they had to throw in a sentence or two saying that fasting during Ramadan was somehow an exception to this, and had no effect on the children of Muslim women. I warned them about including this, but they went ahead. Last I heard, The journal rejected their article because of it. Bottom line is that I just fell into this because others in my household do it for a living and I can help them out during peak periods for them. I do the first pass and they bat cleanup and deal with some of the more scientific issues that I've been unable to resolve. It doesn't take me very long to edit one of these papers, it brings in extra money for the household, and as you say *some* of the studies are interesting. Others, not so much.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: On May 6, 2012, at 7:24 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberation seekliberation@ wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. Yep. The increasingly sedentary lifestyle since the 60's we can probably vouch for ourselves, being raised in the generations that went from kids playing in yards after school and on weekends to cable cartoons after school and Saturday morning cartoons. Scouting around neighborhoods today, you see few children ever outside, despite neighborhoods filled with kids. Of course video games, computers (and computers in cell phones) and the web has just accelerated these inwardly-drawn, self-absorbed dweebs, fed on commercials and TV and their inner lives. I see today's kids are having lots of connections with others, but not face to face. I think they have too many connections and too much input and are stressed greatly by all the different expectations of the different people. Probably better for young people to have just the number of connections and interactions you could have face to face and in real life. These kids are the transition from the old style to the new, and our systems have not grown to be able to handle it - yet. There's some speculation that in response to these changes a transitional being may be being born. These are the numerous, many probably as yet unknown, levels of the autistic spectrum child. Do you mean this in a spiritual way? If so, I doubt that. Altho I do think that our tech culture has allowed techy, introverted people who are mildly on the spectrum to thrive and marry and produce offspring who also are on the spectrum, only more so. So it is being passed down more these days. I bet that within a few decades, science will allow us to bolster and repair that part of the autistic spectrum brain that is different to the point of dysfunction. Vaj: But no one really knows what it all means. It makes me wonder IF pathologic introversion does cause this in humans, what does compulsive meditative introversion do to meditators children? Vedic Village of the Damned? :-) Trying to raise children while having a demanding spiritual practice like TM/TM sidhis must be a challenge, unless you have the funds to hire loads of good help. And even then, the hours spent with eyes closed and not interacting with the kids, having time to hang out I would not call it compulsive meditative introversion - at least not for most Dome going parents. They were caught up in a bad dynamic - trying to be householders with children to raise while really devoting time to making a living and then doing their program (not a householder thing, really). There was a lot of pressure to make doing the program the top priority. For most, I hope that common sense trumped the expectation to do an extended full program twice a day. It did mean having to buck the system and what you thought MMY wanted you to do. Thinking back, there should have been special instructions for parents, special programs to acknowledge the time constraints, an honoring of their efforts to cut meditation short to spend time with the kids. From what I heard and saw, there were some who made a mess of caring for the kids. These days, are there young couples in Fairfield who have kids and go to the Domes? I think of the Domes as filled with mostly older people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb no_reply@ wrote: I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals... Barry, that sounds like really interesting work you do. You haven't had to read some of the studies I've had to edit. :-) Many of them make the TM science look good. Just sayin'... :-) You get to read about cutting edge research and get paid while making some corrections. Not bad at all. Sometimes. The rat runner studies are excruciating. A few are interesting, but more (for me) in terms of how blind researchers can be to their own biases. The best example I can think of was a study from a large Muslim nation on the impact of malnutrition (including periods of fasting) on pregnancy. Their research concluded without question that depriving a mother of a regular, proper diet even for short periods of time could have devastating effects on the child, and lead to huge risk factors for that child developing serious disease in the future. But given where they lived, the authors felt that they had to throw in a sentence or two saying that fasting during Ramadan was somehow an exception to this, and had no effect on the children of Muslim women. I warned them about including this, but they went ahead. Last I heard, The journal rejected their article because of it. Well, I am sure god took care of the nutritional requirements of the fetus if the mother was Muslim and had to fast. And if the child was harmed by Ramadan fasting (doesn't it go on for a month?), then the mother was not devout enough. Bottom line is that I just fell into this because others in my household do it for a living and I can help them out during peak periods for them. I do the first pass and they bat cleanup and deal with some of the more scientific issues that I've been unable to resolve. It doesn't take me very long to edit one of these papers, it brings in extra money for the household, and as you say *some* of the studies are interesting. Others, not so much. Well you get to see the gamut of papers, which is probably discouraging at times.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
On May 6, 2012, at 9:58 AM, Susan wrote: Yep. The increasingly sedentary lifestyle since the 60's we can probably vouch for ourselves, being raised in the generations that went from kids playing in yards after school and on weekends to cable cartoons after school and Saturday morning cartoons. Scouting around neighborhoods today, you see few children ever outside, despite neighborhoods filled with kids. Of course video games, computers (and computers in cell phones) and the web has just accelerated these inwardly-drawn, self-absorbed dweebs, fed on commercials and TV and their inner lives. I see today's kids are having lots of connections with others, but not face to face. I think they have too many connections and too much input and are stressed greatly by all the different expectations of the different people. Probably better for young people to have just the number of connections and interactions you could have face to face and in real life. These kids are the transition from the old style to the new, and our systems have not grown to be able to handle it - yet. Maine has a good number of lower income families, so an interesting piece of this puzzle is that there are still generations here who grow up living and playing and hunting outside simply because their parents don’t have the money to hook them to the web or whatever. But - all Maine 7th graders in Maine get an Apple laptop, have for years. This way you make sure the poorer families don’t become part of a technological underclass. There's some speculation that in response to these changes a transitional being may be being born. These are the numerous, many probably as yet unknown, levels of the autistic spectrum child. Do you mean this in a spiritual way? If so, I doubt that. Altho I do think that our tech culture has allowed techy, introverted people who are mildly on the spectrum to thrive and marry and produce offspring who also are on the spectrum, only more so. So it is being passed down more these days. I bet that within a few decades, science will allow us to bolster and repair that part of the autistic spectrum brain that is different to the point of dysfunction. What I’m saying is if digital introspection is part of a disease process, it’s only natural that this could or would have a ripple effect for future generations. If we pathologically dissociate from the world we live in, we’ll develop nervous systems that are modified accordingly. So this raises the further question: people who spent large parts of their life meditatively cultivating an introspective lifestyle, are there also negative adaptive mechanisms that kick in there? Meditative texts are filled with lists of the side effects of such meditations, what if there’s something to them? Vaj: But no one really knows what it all means. It makes me wonder IF pathologic introversion does cause this in humans, what does compulsive meditative introversion do to meditators children? Vedic Village of the Damned? :-) Trying to raise children while having a demanding spiritual practice like TM/TM sidhis must be a challenge, unless you have the funds to hire loads of good help. And even then, the hours spent with eyes closed and not interacting with the kids, having time to hang out I would not call it compulsive meditative introversion - at least not for most Dome going parents. They were caught up in a bad dynamic - trying to be householders with children to raise while really devoting time to making a living and then doing their program (not a householder thing, really). There was a lot of pressure to make doing the program the top priority. For most, I hope that common sense trumped the expectation to do an extended full program twice a day. It did mean having to buck the system and what you thought MMY wanted you to do. Thinking back, there should have been special instructions for parents, special programs to acknowledge the time constraints, an honoring of their efforts to cut meditation short to spend time with the kids. From what I heard and saw, there were some who made a mess of caring for the kids. These days, are there young couples in Fairfield who have kids and go to the Domes? I think of the Domes as filled with mostly older people. Yeah it seems to be coming a geriatric crowd, supplemented by outsourced Indians.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradhatu@... wrote: On May 6, 2012, at 9:58 AM, Susan wrote: Yep. The increasingly sedentary lifestyle since the 60's we can probably vouch for ourselves, being raised in the generations that went from kids playing in yards after school and on weekends to cable cartoons after school and Saturday morning cartoons. Scouting around neighborhoods today, you see few children ever outside, despite neighborhoods filled with kids. Of course video games, computers (and computers in cell phones) and the web has just accelerated these inwardly-drawn, self-absorbed dweebs, fed on commercials and TV and their inner lives. I see today's kids are having lots of connections with others, but not face to face. I think they have too many connections and too much input and are stressed greatly by all the different expectations of the different people. Probably better for young people to have just the number of connections and interactions you could have face to face and in real life. These kids are the transition from the old style to the new, and our systems have not grown to be able to handle it - yet. Maine has a good number of lower income families, so an interesting piece of this puzzle is that there are still generations here who grow up living and playing and hunting outside simply because their parents don't have the money to hook them to the web or whatever. But - all Maine 7th graders in Maine get an Apple laptop, have for years. This way you make sure the poorer families don't become part of a technological underclass. There's some speculation that in response to these changes a transitional being may be being born. These are the numerous, many probably as yet unknown, levels of the autistic spectrum child. Do you mean this in a spiritual way? If so, I doubt that. Altho I do think that our tech culture has allowed techy, introverted people who are mildly on the spectrum to thrive and marry and produce offspring who also are on the spectrum, only more so. So it is being passed down more these days. I bet that within a few decades, science will allow us to bolster and repair that part of the autistic spectrum brain that is different to the point of dysfunction. What I'm saying is if digital introspection is part of a disease process, it's only natural that this could or would have a ripple effect for future generations. If we pathologically dissociate from the world we live in, we'll develop nervous systems that are modified accordingly. So this raises the further question: people who spent large parts of their life meditatively cultivating an introspective lifestyle, are there also negative adaptive mechanisms that kick in there? Meditative texts are filled with lists of the side effects of such meditations, what if there's something to them? Re digital introspection - I wonder how long it takes for such brain changes to be established to the point they could be passed on to offspring. I would guess it will take a few generations for us to see the full (possibly horrid) impact of this major tech shift. A bunch of people who can't think deeply about anything? Who can't focus for more than a few seconds? Multi tasking is something I find annoying - in colleagues at work it is AWFUL. And I do it too, sometimes, and feel odd as a result. The tech revolution might also have some great effects, too. As to the consequences of spending so many hours with eyes closed? I never thought of that - someone should research that. Twenty minutes twice a day seems at worst benign and at best very beneficial; a full TM program every single day, year after year, who knows? Vaj: But no one really knows what it all means. It makes me wonder IF pathologic introversion does cause this in humans, what does compulsive meditative introversion do to meditators children? Vedic Village of the Damned? :-) Trying to raise children while having a demanding spiritual practice like TM/TM sidhis must be a challenge, unless you have the funds to hire loads of good help. And even then, the hours spent with eyes closed and not interacting with the kids, having time to hang out I would not call it compulsive meditative introversion - at least not for most Dome going parents. They were caught up in a bad dynamic - trying to be householders with children to raise while really devoting time to making a living and then doing their program (not a householder thing, really). There was a lot of pressure to make doing the program the top priority. For most, I hope that common sense trumped the expectation to do an extended full program twice a day. It did mean having to buck the system and what you thought MMY wanted you to do. Thinking back, there should have been special instructions for parents,
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
On 05/06/2012 04:24 AM, turquoiseb wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberationseekliberation@... wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. Sitting for long times has been in the news lately (even MSM) as a contributor to obesity. A few years back there were articles about replacing a computer user's desk with where you stand instead of sit. But then one has to wonder about the health of all those bookkeepers in offices of the 1800s fared sitting all day? It used to be that one couldn't get diabetes unless it ran in the family. That may no longer be true although there may be an actual difference between insulin resistance and full blown diabetes. The former may be much easier to turn around. About a decade ago Johnson Johnson introduced a program with Graham Kerr, the Galloping Gourmet, to encourage people to get the blood glucose monitors and test occasionally. They started selling the OneTrack at $20 and made 25 count strips available since one wouldn't be testing like a diabetic does. I bought one and started tracking my fasting blood glucose levels. These days I use a True2go which is only $10 at drug stores and you can get 25 counts strips for those. BTW, a friend who is a writer did the documentation for one of the pharma companies for a glucose meter and they took him on a tour of the plant. I asked him why the strips were so expensive (TrueTrack had strips that were about half the price of other companies). He said it was a razor razor blade thing and how the companies made money. Up until recently you might be able get a monitor for free if you bought the strips and another doctor friend just had a supply she gave away free. The reason the strips are so expensive is a lot of people's insurance covers them so they can charge what they want. :-(
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
On May 6, 2012, at 10:46 AM, Susan wrote: Re digital introspection - I wonder how long it takes for such brain changes to be established to the point they could be passed on to offspring. I would guess it will take a few generations for us to see the full (possibly horrid) impact of this major tech shift. A bunch of people who can't think deeply about anything? Who can't focus for more than a few seconds? Multi tasking is something I find annoying - in colleagues at work it is AWFUL. And I do it too, sometimes, and feel odd as a result. The tech revolution might also have some great effects, too. That’s part of the weird world of research on the autistic spectrum human: certain autistic types may have peculiar advantages we cannot yet wrap our heads around.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@... wrote: snip Re digital introspection - I wonder how long it takes for such brain changes to be established to the point they could be passed on to offspring. Basically forever, if you're talking about genetic transmission. That would be called inheritance of acquired characteristics, and the notion--popularized by Lamarck in the early 19th century--was ultimately thoroughly discredited. Cultural transmission, of course, is a very different story.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@ wrote: snip Re digital introspection - I wonder how long it takes for such brain changes to be established to the point they could be passed on to offspring. Basically forever, if you're talking about genetic transmission. You're right. However, in a Darwinian sense, those with brains who do well with all this technology will be at an advantage and possibly pass along their genes more often. That would be called inheritance of acquired characteristics, and the notion--popularized by Lamarck in the early 19th century--was ultimately thoroughly discredited. Cultural transmission, of course, is a very different story.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@ wrote: snip Re digital introspection - I wonder how long it takes for such brain changes to be established to the point they could be passed on to offspring. Basically forever, if you're talking about genetic transmission. You're right. However, in a Darwinian sense, those with brains who do well with all this technology will be at an advantage and possibly pass along their genes more often. Yebbut...by the time natural selection would have accomplished this feat, the technology will all be vastly different, and those who had done well with the old technology might have lost their advantage to masters of the newer technologies long since. IOW, natural selection is always going to lag far behind the development of technology, and just when you're ready to pass on your genes, your brain's abilities are likely to have become out of date. ;-) That would be called inheritance of acquired characteristics, and the notion--popularized by Lamarck in the early 19th century--was ultimately thoroughly discredited. Cultural transmission, of course, is a very different story.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Susan wayback71@ wrote: snip Re digital introspection - I wonder how long it takes for such brain changes to be established to the point they could be passed on to offspring. Basically forever, if you're talking about genetic transmission. You're right. However, in a Darwinian sense, those with brains who do well with all this technology will be at an advantage and possibly pass along their genes more often. Yebbut...by the time natural selection would have accomplished this feat, the technology will all be vastly different, and those who had done well with the old technology might have lost their advantage to masters of the newer technologies long since. IOW, natural selection is always going to lag far behind the development of technology, and just when you're ready to pass on your genes, your brain's abilities are likely to have become out of date. ;-) Hmmm. So, we have reached a stage where the environment we react to changes too fast for natural selection to matter, or perhaps even happen (since that environment shifts so often)! Someone needs to write an article about this. That would be called inheritance of acquired characteristics, and the notion--popularized by Lamarck in the early 19th century--was ultimately thoroughly discredited. Cultural transmission, of course, is a very different story.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
On 05/06/2012 06:25 AM, Susan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoisebno_reply@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberationseekliberation@ wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaisterno_reply@ wrote: I've heard and read there are quite a lot of kids under 15 years of age, especially in the US of A, with type 2 diabetes. Some even dead...? IMO, some of the biggest culprits are computers (esp. games), junk food (McDonalds, etc.) and sodas (Coca-Cola, Pepsi), and the heavily processed, high glycemic index food in schools? The cost of that might be nothing short of enormous for the future generations? I keep hearing that this young generation is the first that will have a shorter lifespan than their parents. Organ replacements and incredible medical advances may change that, but I can tell you that few youngsters play outside or ride bikes after school. They go home, have a snack, hopefully do homework, and then text, game, and get on the computer. All fun things and also things that are difficult to stop doing, especially for kids who don't have fully developed frontal lobes to override the desire to just continue with the technology. Schools work to provide aerobic gym classes and all sots of health producing activities in gym class, but the days when we played games outside and raced around for a few hours after school are gone.. For adults, the info about the value of aerobic exercise is strong and getting stronger when it comes to keeping the brain healthy. It promotes the growth of dendrites and helps to replace dead neurons in the hippocampus, which has to do with memory, cognitive skills. It motivated me to do less yoga and more fast walking and going to the gym. Barry, that sounds like really interesting work you do. You get to read about cutting edge research and get paid while making some corrections. Not bad at all. I think that boomers will have shorter lifespans than their older brothers and sisters and parents. Why? Because some of them had to go through a more austere diet during the Great Depression and World War II. Boomers grew up with TV dinners, fast and processed food. In the 1970s a lot of TM folks were suffering hypoglycemia and many solved it by dropping the high carb veggie diets and adding animal protein back into their diet. In the late 70s or early 80s I bought a book by a chiropractor who claimed that meditation was good for some people and for other a daily walk or exercise would be much better. Some folks have natural slow metabolisms and need to speed them up (exercise). Researchers have also discarded the idea that the metabolism remains high for hours after exercise. For some people it will drop back down to pre-exercise levels an hour later. Also a friend back in the 1970s pointed out that a lot of the popular alternative care physicians like Paavo Airola were mainly treating older patients who had arrived in the US as immigrants and treating a much different metabolism than that of the 20 and 30 year olds of the day. HFCS and sweeteners are a problem but also white flour. When I lived in the northwest it was easy to find whole grain bakery goods but here in the Bay Area I swear the bakers hate working with whole grains and the locals love their white bread. They also seem to love highly sweetened Starbucks dessert drinks for a morning break. I'm still waiting for the sedentary person's diet to be published. Someone is going to get rich off of that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@... wrote: On 05/06/2012 06:25 AM, Susan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoisebno_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberationseekliberation@ wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaisterno_reply@ wrote: I've heard and read there are quite a lot of kids under 15 years of age, especially in the US of A, with type 2 diabetes. Some even dead...? IMO, some of the biggest culprits are computers (esp. games), junk food (McDonalds, etc.) and sodas (Coca-Cola, Pepsi), and the heavily processed, high glycemic index food in schools? The cost of that might be nothing short of enormous for the future generations? I keep hearing that this young generation is the first that will have a shorter lifespan than their parents. Organ replacements and incredible medical advances may change that, but I can tell you that few youngsters play outside or ride bikes after school. They go home, have a snack, hopefully do homework, and then text, game, and get on the computer. All fun things and also things that are difficult to stop doing, especially for kids who don't have fully developed frontal lobes to override the desire to just continue with the technology. Schools work to provide aerobic gym classes and all sots of health producing activities in gym class, but the days when we played games outside and raced around for a few hours after school are gone.. For adults, the info about the value of aerobic exercise is strong and getting stronger when it comes to keeping the brain healthy. It promotes the growth of dendrites and helps to replace dead neurons in the hippocampus, which has to do with memory, cognitive skills. It motivated me to do less yoga and more fast walking and going to the gym. Barry, that sounds like really interesting work you do. You get to read about cutting edge research and get paid while making some corrections. Not bad at all. I think that boomers will have shorter lifespans than their older brothers and sisters and parents. Why? Because some of them had to go through a more austere diet during the Great Depression and World War II. Boomers grew up with TV dinners, fast and processed food. In the 1970s a lot of TM folks were suffering hypoglycemia and many solved it by dropping the high carb veggie diets and adding animal protein back into their diet. Yep, I was one of those who did the veg thing and became mildly hypoglycemic (felt just awful). This despite doing the rice/bean combo. I added back the protein by 1975 and felt enormously better. On the plus side for boomers, we have exercised more as adults than our parents did. The next 10 years will give us an idea if we make it into our 70's in decent condition. In the late 70s or early 80s I bought a book by a chiropractor who claimed that meditation was good for some people and for other a daily walk or exercise would be much better. Some folks have natural slow metabolisms and need to speed them up (exercise). Researchers have also discarded the idea that the metabolism remains high for hours after exercise. For some people it will drop back down to pre-exercise levels an hour later. Also a friend back in the 1970s pointed out that a lot of the popular alternative care physicians like Paavo Airola were mainly treating older patients who had arrived in the US as immigrants and treating a much different metabolism than that of the 20 and 30 year olds of the day. HFCS and sweeteners are a problem but also white flour. When I lived in the northwest it was easy to find whole grain bakery goods but here in the Bay Area I swear the bakers hate working with whole grains and the locals love their white bread. They also seem to love highly sweetened Starbucks dessert drinks for a morning break. I'm still waiting for the sedentary person's diet to be published. Someone is going to get rich off of that. This will involve food that looks and tastes like french fries and chocolate cake, but is calorie-free. Or a silicone drink you can take prior to eating those fries and cake, and the food just slips on thru.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Who's to blame?
On 05/06/2012 12:09 PM, Susan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitunoozguru@... wrote: On 05/06/2012 06:25 AM, Susan wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoisebno_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, seekliberationseekliberation@ wrote: I see how mcdonalds and soda can be guilty, but how so with computers/games? I supplement my income by editing medical papers before they are submitted to journals, so I've noticed that in many of them a sedentary lifestyle and sitting for long periods of time are cited as definitive risk factors for diabetes. High-carb and high-sugar diets are probably the more established risk factors, but they seem to be far from the only ones, so Card's speculation may be valid. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaisterno_reply@ wrote: I've heard and read there are quite a lot of kids under 15 years of age, especially in the US of A, with type 2 diabetes. Some even dead...? IMO, some of the biggest culprits are computers (esp. games), junk food (McDonalds, etc.) and sodas (Coca-Cola, Pepsi), and the heavily processed, high glycemic index food in schools? The cost of that might be nothing short of enormous for the future generations? I keep hearing that this young generation is the first that will have a shorter lifespan than their parents. Organ replacements and incredible medical advances may change that, but I can tell you that few youngsters play outside or ride bikes after school. They go home, have a snack, hopefully do homework, and then text, game, and get on the computer. All fun things and also things that are difficult to stop doing, especially for kids who don't have fully developed frontal lobes to override the desire to just continue with the technology. Schools work to provide aerobic gym classes and all sots of health producing activities in gym class, but the days when we played games outside and raced around for a few hours after school are gone.. For adults, the info about the value of aerobic exercise is strong and getting stronger when it comes to keeping the brain healthy. It promotes the growth of dendrites and helps to replace dead neurons in the hippocampus, which has to do with memory, cognitive skills. It motivated me to do less yoga and more fast walking and going to the gym. Barry, that sounds like really interesting work you do. You get to read about cutting edge research and get paid while making some corrections. Not bad at all. I think that boomers will have shorter lifespans than their older brothers and sisters and parents. Why? Because some of them had to go through a more austere diet during the Great Depression and World War II. Boomers grew up with TV dinners, fast and processed food. In the 1970s a lot of TM folks were suffering hypoglycemia and many solved it by dropping the high carb veggie diets and adding animal protein back into their diet. Yep, I was one of those who did the veg thing and became mildly hypoglycemic (felt just awful). This despite doing the rice/bean combo. I added back the protein by 1975 and felt enormously better. A blood sugar crash is terrible. I used to get them quite a bit but hated eating little snacks all day. The solution was to adjust the metabolism so it wouldn't happen. To verify this I had a GTT (Glucose Tolerance Test) back in 1990 and it confirmed by blood sugar curve. The MD said if I didn't lose weight I would be diabetic in 10 years but then again that doesn't run in my family. However my mother did carry me when she had hypoglycemia so I probably don't have the strongest of adrenal glands (got tired at sports quickly). And no my mother did not wind up diabetic either. On the plus side for boomers, we have exercised more as adults than our parents did. The next 10 years will give us an idea if we make it into our 70's in decent condition. In the late 70s or early 80s I bought a book by a chiropractor who claimed that meditation was good for some people and for other a daily walk or exercise would be much better. Some folks have natural slow metabolisms and need to speed them up (exercise). Researchers have also discarded the idea that the metabolism remains high for hours after exercise. For some people it will drop back down to pre-exercise levels an hour later. Also a friend back in the 1970s pointed out that a lot of the popular alternative care physicians like Paavo Airola were mainly treating older patients who had arrived in the US as immigrants and treating a much different metabolism than that of the 20 and 30 year olds of the day. HFCS and sweeteners are a problem but also white flour. When I lived in the northwest it was easy to find whole grain bakery goods but here in the Bay Area I swear the bakers hate working with whole grains and the locals love their white bread. They also seem to love highly
