PUT THIS MUFFIN DOWN

Have you heard about Michael Mosley, the British GP who introduced the concept of intermittent diet in England? I just found this talk by Dr. Mosley: How to stay healthy: Michael Mosley, All About Women 2016.

The talk is entertaining, informative, and hilarious. It has very useful and updated information on healthy food habits (I do not want to use the word "diet", as it has a negative connotation).

Actionable
Learn and stay healthy and free!

 


 

Interested in healthy eating habits?

If you are, visit this blog.

"Divide and conquer" - does it work in cancer care

Fotogeniss -

Philip-ii-of-macedon

"Divide and conquer" may have worked for Philip II of Macedon; however, is it an effective strategy in understanding cancer development and providing cancer care?    

Have you seen the talk by Dr. Gary Fettke, "Nutrition and Cancer - Time to Rethink"? The talk leads to the conclusion that cancer is a disease of our metabolism. The chromosomal changes, including any gene mutations, seem to be bystanders in the unfolding madness of cancer development.

However, recent research indicates that all cancer cell changes (mutations and metabolic changes), the immediate environment of the cancer cells (influenced by external environmental and internal factors), and the metabolism at the organism level are interconnected, and contribute to the neoplastic growth.

It is not any single element, it is rather the congregation of factors that allows for the abnormality of cancer to emerge, persist, and eventually kill.

We should be mindful of the perils of reductionism in science and cancer prevention/treatment, and try to adopt a holistic view on cancer. Here are the precise definitions of the two approaches:

Reductionism,
the practice of analyzing and describing a complex phenomenon in terms of simpler, more fundamental phenomena...

versus...

Holism,
the theory that parts of a whole are in intimate interconnection, such that they cannot exist independently of the whole, or cannot be understood without reference to the whole...

For more examples on misleading reductionism see here.



ACTIONABLES:
Yes, we should be aware of not only what we eat but how we eat it.

Yes, we should stop drinking to death, and I am not even referring to drinking alcohol.

Yes, we should learn how to cook for ourselves, since the food industry is force-feeding us with loads of sugar.

Yes, you should educate yourself, and not rely on your doctors and mainstream media to do so.

Yes, all of us should be aware that it is easier to deal with a just-born, immature troublemaker than a fully established, mature enemy; in other words, cancer prevention is more effective than cancer treatment.

Yes, we should try to integrate mainstream and alternative approaches to cancer care.

And yes, for all of you cancer researchers and enthusiasts: analyzing a phenomenon by breaking it down to its elements/building blocks and addressing only a single element is not going to bring a success. Cancer prevention and treatment need to address all aspects of the cancer development.

Metformin, Diabetes, and Colorectal Cancer

The drug metformin, used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, has shown some efficacy in being protective against colorectal cancer, and a paper discusses possible mechanisms of action, including inhibition of mTOR signaling, as well as reduction of inflammation and oxidative stress. This is perhaps not surprising, given the known link between type 2 diabetes and colorectal cancer. As always, lifestyle changes that reduce the risk of development of type 2 diabetes, including a healthy diet and exercise, may also play a preventive role against colorectal and other types of cancer.

High fiber carrot muffins

In addition to high fiber content, these muffins have no sugar added. For 24 muffins you will need:

2 containers of unsweetened apple sauce (4 oz each cup)
2 ripe bananas (mashed)
3 cups of grated carrots
4 eggs
1 cup water
4 cups whole wheat flour
2 tsp baking powder
1 tsp baking soda 
1 tsp cinnamon (optional)
pinch of salt
2 cups of chopped walnuts
Preheat oven to 400ºF. Spray two pans of 12 muffin cups each. In a big bowl, beat eggs by hand or with an electric mixer, add the apple sauce and the mashed bananas. Add water and grated carrots, mix well. Mix all dry ingredients separately, add them to the egg-carrot mixture, and stir. Fold in the walnuts. Divide the dough between the 24 muffin cups and bake for 20 minutes to a color or until an inserted knife comes out clean.

If you are still not used to "no-sugar-added" food items, add a bit of raisins to the dough before baking.

How research funding focuses on your real needs

British_sailors_boarding_an_Algerine_pirate_ship.jpg

When you read or hear what people in the U.S. are dying from, what is it? Is it diabetes, cardiovascular disease or cancer?  

Every publication on the topic, including this on Wikipedia, will confirm that these are the most frequent "culprits". 

In fact, all of these are consequences of the real causes of death.

Here are the REAL major causes of death in the U.S. (in parentheses are the numbers of deaths):

tobacco (400,000)
diet/activity patterns (300,000)
alcohol (100,000)
microbial agents (90,000)
toxic agents (60,000)
firearms (35,000)
sexual behavior (30,000)
motor vehicles (25,000)
illicit use of drugs (20,000)
etc.

These causes were summarized long time ago, in 1993, by McGinnis and Foege in their JAMA publication, Actual causes of death in the United States.

It is logical that when you want to alleviate a problem, you address the causes, not the consequences. And yet, do our research funding agencies address the real causes of death or their consequences? Does our health care system do that? Do we continue to treat the symptoms or address the real "roots of evil"?

Here is how one major agency (DOD) that funds research in 2016:

I admit that some of the health problems/conditions listed in this website need more research and deserve funding. However, 1/4 of the listed problems are consequences of lifestyle choices. 

It is also interesting that today the army cannot recruit enough young men with a normal weight, yet none of the research focus of DOD is on lifestyle interventions and solutions to the rising BMI of the nation (and the army recruits). 

Make no mistake, the other major funding agencies do not differ in their focus: they all myopically stare at the consequences, rather than tackling the real causes. 

Can we influence the decisions on how donations and taxpayers' money are being used? Probably.  But first we all need to realize what in fact really KILLS US: our lifestyle. 

Reasons Or Excuses?

Reasons or excuses - it's a bit of both.

The link is to an article citing 20 reasons why losing weight is allegedly more difficult now then ever before. While some of these reasons may be just excusing laziness and lack of discipline, there is some truth to many of them. One common thread is the increasing acceptance of obesity, and accommodation of it in society. Therefore, the fact that so many people around us are overweight/obese "normalizes" the condition, so that physiques that decades ago would be clearly recognized as abnormally overweight are now the "new normal." Also, as indicated in the article, clothes sizes are being adjusted so that larger waistlines are being redesignated as smaller sizes, again accommodating and normalizing unhealthy weight gain.

The ever-changing dietary guidelines are cited, and there is some truth to that. On the one hand, science is all about keeping an open mind and changing paradigms when presented with new evidence, so we perhaps should not be too surprised when guidelines change (although in some cases, the radical changes and complete "U-turns" are indeed disconcerting). One thing that may make these changes more palatable is for any guidelines to be presented somewhat less rigidly, less definitively. To tell people one day that it is absolutely true that "eating X,Y,Z" is unhealthy for you, and then to tell these people five years later the exact opposite, with equal certitude, is going to confuse and discourage them. I understand that some people may say that "hedging bets" about conclusions will make dietary guidelines and health suggestions less powerful and will weaken their ability to alter peoples' behavior. That may be true, but the constant changes in "this is definitely true" probably does more damage. Also, explaining to people why the changes were made would help, and also explaining how and why some evidence is stronger than others may help as well. To just radically change guidelines without explanation or discussion is going to, as I said before, confuse and discourage.

Sugar: your death sentence

Run away from sugar: it is your death sentence.
Read the food labels and learn to recognize the 56 names for sugar since approximately 80% of the 600,000 U.S. food items contain some kind of added sugar.

How to build a portfolio after age of 36

At my advanced age, I am desperately trying to create a retirement portfolio that can carry me over bad times. 

Considering that I started to work late (at 32, after obtaining my PhD degree), and was not eligible to participate in the measly University retirement plan until age of 36, building retirement funds has required perseverance and mindfulness (instead of frugality).  This period is mostly limited to the past four years, when we, as a family, finally found ourselves free of debt and mortgage-free. 

These four years have been a mad rush/frantic attempt to compensate at least in a minuscule way for all the lost decades of low stipends or fellowships. The pitiful financial situation has been compounded by the fact that both, my husband and I, are PhDs (OK, I know it is hilarious, but do not laugh too much).

Obviously, by starting to invest late in life, we do not have too much time for capital growth.  Also, we cannot observe the traditional financial advice. For example, I am not sure whether to keep up with the advice on asset allocation that the years till retirement (i.e., the years of investing) should determine the equities:bonds ratio in the portfolio. 

Currently, my best paid years and my increased ability to invest suddenly coincide with a time that I consider "close to retirement" for many reasons (in addition to our age, continuous employment is never guaranteed).  So, according to the commonly dispensed wisdom, at this time my asset allocation should include a healthy portion of bonds. 

If I oblige to this wisdom, I would entirely skip the aggressive stage of building a portfolio (i.e., the time when one invests 100% in stocks). The question is, considering the specifics of my retirement investment saga, should I consider bonds or not? Obviously, my return will go down by investing a percent of the funds in bonds, but would not a cushion of 20-30% bonds in the portfolio improve the situation in any financial downturn in the future?

Plagued by thoughts of my profound financial ignorance, I have been trying to read more on who weathered the largest stock market crashes and how. In this process I found a summary of the 10 biggest market crashes in the U.S.: Stock Market Crashes of 1930, 1937, 1906, 1929, 1919, 1901, 1973, 1939, 1916, 2000.

The largest crash was between 1930 and 1932, and during this time the stock market loss exceeded 86%. The estimate was that to recover $10,000 invested prior to this crash would have taken 22 years.  

On the other hand, according to this webpage, if one had continued investing $1,000/year in the stock market even after the Great Depression, the recovery time would have been 7 years.

I am aware that everyone in retirement should maintain enough cash to cover approximately three years of a stock market downturn (i.e., leave the stock and investments to heal), but how about having enough savings to cover seven years, plus additional funds to invest each year? This seems onerous to impossible to achieve.  

There are already too many bugaboos in our lives, and a life without hope is not worth living. Therefore, I hope that the current built-in U.S. financial mechanisms would prevent a prolonged downfall of the stock market in the future.  

I also hope that by doing my best now (i.e., by investing as much as I can, and by building healthy lifestyle habits), no matter what happens in the future, I would be able to look back without regrets.

Actionable
Keep reading J Collins and his stock series and maintain your health. In short, fight for your freedom.

When do you live?

Below are the requirements for the position of Assistant Professor in Biology in the University X (U.S.A.). This is one of the many similar job announcements for Ph.D.-level graduates. As I read these job descriptions, my heart cringes and my question is, when do Ph.D.s live? Remember that unlike other advanced degree-graduates, Ph.D.s start their careers late in life (in the U.S., at least after 5-6 years of academics) and at low, low salaries/fellowships.

Teach three courses (9 credits) each semester that fulfill the requirements for the Biology and Science degrees using traditional, hybrid and online delivery methods. Courses include but are not limited to at least one upper level course in plants or fungi, one upper level course in genetics, and introductory level courses in these areas.

Teaching assignments may require teaching day, evening and/or Saturday classes as needed.

Publish in refereed journals.

Participate in professional organizations and in course, curriculum, and program development. 

Advise students and provide career guidance.

Participate in campus, University, and community service activities. 
 
It seems like 24/7 job. I am yet to read a job description that states "the candidate should demonstrate a successful ability to balance life and work"?