April Carnivore Contest, Homemade Mayo, and Vegetable Oil 411

Well the March Kitchen Clean Contest at the Bus is over - I managed half the month totally clean, with slip-ups either being artificial sweeteners, dark chocolate or - once or twice - rice.

On to bigger and better!

This contest is the best one yet, in my opinion. According to Dean, pack leader over on the Bus, the April Carnivore Contest serves the following purpose:

...to help people find out what they can and can't give up in their pursuit of a more natural and healthy diet, based on what we evolved on. If you can go all the way with this thing, you're lucky. It's not really about that, though. I mean it can be, if that's your thing. But, it's really more about focusing on something harder, so we'll get our minds off what we're "giving up" in our diet, and instead see what we're "adding to" our natural diet. I can begin to really appreciate how just a cup of coffee can be seen as a treat, and how I don't need to eat ice cream or pie for that mental fix. When I am focused on keeping veggies out of my diet, I'm not thinking about donuts. Haven't thought about those in months. If "slipping up" is eating some almonds or drinking some cream or eating a tomato, then we're doing pretty damn good, now aren't we?!

Agreed! Whether you think that vegetation is harmful, unnecessary or vital, these contests really help keep you focused on adding natural, good whole foods to your diet. Plus - they're fun!

The rules will be following for the month of April are:

All foods should be as natural, fresh, and whole as possible. Animal fat should be kept high, 60-80% of calories, and carbs should be kept as low as possible. The cleaner one eats and the closer they get to an exclusive raw animal diet, the more points they can rack up. The goal is not to be perfect, but to see how close you can get to our ancestor's diet.

Allowed
* any part of any animal (including processed meat)
* eggs
* VLC dairy
* VLC vegetation (includes nuts)
* olive/nut oil
* VLC condiments, seasoning, salt, AS
* VLC beverages

To get any points you MUST eat only what's Allowed and remain under 20g carbs.

If you had something not allowed or went over 20g carbs you are out for the day, you get zero points.

Add up your points each day. You can get up to 5 points per day.

One point for each, for having:
- only allowed items + under 20g carbs
- no alcohol + no AS
- no vegetation + no oil
- no processed meat + no dairy (butter is not counted as dairy)
- some raw animal part / raw egg

So, for instance, if you had no vegetation and no oil during the day, you would get ONE point for abstaining from those items... or if you had no alcohol and no AS, you would get ONE point for not having those things... or if you had no dairy and no processed meat that day, there's another ONE point.

You can get up to FIVE points per day.

For me, I'll be avoiding cheese. I've developed eczema under my nose, and I suspect it's cheese-related. I will include heavy cream for now. Coconut milk falls under vegetation/oil, and will be counted as such.

I am aiming for 100 points total out of a possible 150.

So does no-cheese leave me out of the Oopsie club? Nope! I've made mayo, and will be experimenting with mayo-oopsies throughout the month. Making mayo is so, so easy - just oil and egg, and whatever seasonings you care to add. I followed Ray Audette's recipe in Neanderthin:

1 whole egg
1/2 t dry mustard
1/4 sea salt
1/4t pepper
1 1/2 T lemon juice
1 cup light olive oil (I subbed walnut oil, bc I didn't have any olive, and didn't need the whole cup)

Put everything but the oil in a blender and whizz. Take the plastic stopper out, and slowly drizzle oil in. That's it! Simple and fast. One minute, you've got liquidy, oily crud whirling about; then, all of a sudden, it transforms into thick, white mayo before your very eyes. Now that I've done it, I don't know why I'd ever buy mayo again. Tastes much better than store-bought, and you can control what's in it. Homemade mayo lasts about a week in the fridge - store-bought can sit in there for ages, even though it's made with oils (usually canola or soybean) that are not known for their stability or long shelf life. Something to think about.

Even so, nut oils (like other polyunsaturated oils or PUFAs) are too high in omega 6 linoleic acid compared to omega 3, and are best used sparingly. Too much omega 6 can interfere with the production of important prostaglandins (hormone-like substances that contribute to functions such as the dilation and constriction of blood vessels, control of blood pressure, and modulation of inflammation) and result in blood clots, inflammation, high blood pressure, GI tract irritation, depressed immune function, sterility, cell proliferation (an increase in the number of cells through cell division and growth) and weight gain. When omega 3 linoleic acid is in balance with omega 6, prostaglandin production is balanced as well.

Unfortunately, most commercial vegetable oils are way out of whack. Traditionally, PUFA consumption came from the small amounts in nuts, seeds, green veggies, fish, olive oil and animal fats (nope, animal fat is not 100% saturated), as well as legumes and grains if eaten. The vast majority of fatty acids in the diet were saturated and monounsaturated, and came from animal sources (lard, tallow, then butter etc), tropical oils (coconut, palm) and olive oil. These fats began a slow decline in the early decades of the 1900's (as heart disease started singing "I'm Coming Out" and strutting around in glittery dresses), with the invention of glorious plastic foods like margarine, but we didn't start chugging massive quantities of PUFAs until the 1950's.

By 1950, heart disease had taken the lead role in "Cause Of Death" and was (literally) killing audiences nation-wide. Margarine and vegetable oils had by then practically replaced natural fats like butter and lard. The connection should have been obvious. It was obvious. Instead, we got the lipid hypothesis, kicked off by a study on rabbits eating cholesterol (scroll up to the first paragraph). By the 1990's, consumption of vegetable oils had jumped from less than 2g per day to 30g, per person. Butter had plummeted to about 5g per day, and use of lard and tallow had dropped by two-thirds. We all know what happened to heart disease rates - they kept pace, despite the claims that foods made from soybean, canola, corn and safflower oils, among others, were "heart healthy" and animal fats were suitable only for the four horsemen of the apocalypse, who don't have to worry about clogged arteries, the lucky bastards.

Of course then we learned about the dangers of trans fats, found in partially hydrogenated vegetable oils, and now we can buy trans fat free margarine and other veggie oil containing processed foods. Problem solved? Nope. In addition to the whole prostaglandin issue, studies have shown numerous problems resulting from PUFA consumption. A 1994 study published in The Lancet showed that almost three quarters of the fat in artery clogs is...wait for it...polyunsaturated. For more depth than I can go into here, I highly recommend reading everything Mary Enig has ever written on the subject of fats, starting here and here.

So yes, I intend to make my own mayo but I will focus on keeping animal fats in the lead role. We evolved eating them. We thrived eating them. We wouldn't be here, loving our hearts with Becel margarine, if it weren't for animal fats. Seems pretty simple to me. A high (animal) fat diet has made me feel better than I've ever felt, and these contests at the Bus serve as constant reminders of that. Even knowing what I know, sometimes I need all the reminders I can get!

A Hug for Jane Brody

I am sending NY Times writer Jane Brody a virtual hug. Why? Because I am practicing compassion, and Buddha says that we should extend compassion towards people even when they're total blockhead fluffernutters who are so entrenched in their own nincompoopy dogma that they can't see their hand in front of their cockamamie face. I'm paraphrasing. (I'm also practicing not swearing as much).

No clue who I'm talking about? Let me sum up. Jane Brody is a health writer for the NY Times and on Tuesday she published a doodyful piece about her "uphill battle" with - horrors! - cholesterol. She got a total reading of 222 (readings of over 200 are flagged). Now, everything was within range except her LDL, the so-called "bad" cholesterol, which was slightly high. For an explanation of why none of this really matters, I'll refer you to those smarter than I: Dr. Mike Eades, THINCS and Anthony Colpo. Please read them. For now though, we'll stick with Sweet Jane's train of thought.

Okay, so she gets a slightly elevated reading. Her doc is like, whatever. No biggie. Sweet Jane, however, knows better. She writes for the frickerfrackin NY Times, after all. So she launches her very own war against cholesterol, which naturally involves her lowering dietary fat intake by removing cheese from her diet (she cuts the cheese...tee hee), even though "I eat a healthful diet and I exercise every day for 60 to 90 minutes and run up and down scores of steps." She also started taking plant stenols, which are supposed to help lower cholesterol.

Three months later she goes for another checkup and guess what? Her cholesterol has RISEN. So naturally she lowers fat further, since it worked so well the last time. Her words: "Now it was time to further limit red meat (though I never ate it often and always lean), stick to low-fat ice cream, eat even more fish, increase my fiber intake and add fish oils to my growing list of supplements." Pretty dagnabbin' smart, no? (Am I starting to sound like Annie Wilkes from Misery? Where's my sledgehammer...)

Another checkup, and her levels are EVEN HIGHER. So she decides to start taking statins.

Let's take a moment here, shall we, and recap. Chicky-poo has followed a fat-conscious diet for most of her 65 years. Her cholesterol starts going up. She cuts fat. Cholesterol goes up. She cuts more fat. Cholesterol goes up. She goes on meds.

Sweet Jane - wake the fudge up.

First, statins. Read this, and then do your own research. And then email it to Jane Brody, because she obviously doesn't read anything but her own copy. According to many sources, but here quoting from Dr. Mike Eades, "the preponderance of properly done studies have shown that statins confer no health benefits to women of any age and that women over the age of 65 (she is 65) who have high cholesterol live longer than those who have normal to low cholesterol. And she missed the studies that show that both men and women over the age of 65 who take statins have an increased incidence of cancer."

Second, cholesterol. Read the links I posted earlier for in depth info. Basically, cholesterol has NEVER BEEN PROVEN to have a causative effect on heart disease. The link just ain't there, kids. It's a bunch of cockadoodie.

Third, and my biggie: diet. Low carb diets have been proven to lower triglycerides, and saturated fat makes HDL (the "good" cholesterol) go UP. Sweet Jane has quite helpfully demonstrated for us all how lowering dietary fat does not improve lab values - it, in fact, worsens them. She makes recommendations that even Buddha would bop her one for: eat leaner meats, trim the fat, eat more beans and soy, more whole grains, and "Start by switching to low-fat and nonfat dairy products, like skim milk and, if you can stand it, fat-free cheese. Substitute sorbet, sherbet or fruit ices for ice cream, or choose ice milk or ice cream with half the fat." In other words, stand at your kitchen counter and shovel spoonfuls of sugar down your throat. Helps the statins go down.

She also lets us know what to avoid: organ meats, egg yolks, fat. Okay, pastries and such too, gotta give her something.

Basically, her advice (and the methods she herself is following) is based on outdated research that has never been proven. The reason the low-fat craptasticisms stem from the lipid hypothesis is because IT'S A HYPOTHESIS. And it hasn't been proven. In fact, it has been disproven several times over. Buddha is wagging his finger and making clucking sounds with his tongue.

This is what worries me about dogma of any kind. Adherents to a particular dogma often refuse to listen to, examine or acknowledge conflicting viewpoints and/or evidence. It is staring Sweet Jane in the face, for land's sakes, and it doesn't even make a ripple because it isn't within her comfy dietary dogma. And thing is...it could really hurt her. She could get very sick. And she doesn't have to. I know I'm ragging on her here, but I'm lippy by nature. Really, it saddens me to see someone headed down a dangerous road especially when all the information they need to choose a healthier path is readily available to them. She is a health writer. She has access.

I rag on vegans too, but quite honestly I have the same concerns. So many vegans eat the way they do because of deeply held beliefs, beliefs rooted in emotion, and as a result are unlikely to connect any health problems with their diet. Not everyone will develop problems, but many do - I believe the average time span is 12 years of veganism before health problems become apparent. Because their WOE (way of eating) is something they hold quite dear to them, it becomes difficult to abandon. Maybe it's arrogant of me, but I feel...well, compassion. I was a staunch vegetarian. I made a huge deal of it. It wasn't easy for me to realize that, in my case at least, my dietary beliefs had done me more harm than good. So I get it - but jeezum crow, people, I made the paradigm shift and am healthier and happier for it. Your principles don't matter a whit on your death bed.

So, Sweet Jane, I am sending you and your heart a great big ol' (((hug))) in hopes that you'll come to your senses and realize that being right means nothing compared to being healthy and alive to annoy us with your column for another 20-30 years.

And fuck these unswears. Ahhhh, that's better!!