Goddess Living

Lies The TV Tells Us: Cholesterol, Fat, and Animal Protein

I like documentaries. I find them interesting, and often as informative as reading a book. I also appreciate them as a form of entertainment, and am always willing to view them as critically as any other thing I might read or listen to. That being said, two fascinating documentaries to watch back to back are "Super Size Me" and "Fat Head." One is a very well known documentary on the evils of fast food, and the other is an in-depth response to many of the claims of that documentary, as well as underlying superstitions that people hold in regards to nutrition.

I say "superstitions" because that's what they are--mass held beliefs unsupported (and, in fact, often disproved) by any scientific study. One of those is very well debunked in "Fat Head," where the documenter goes into great detail about cholesterol, as well as "good" and "bad" fat/cholesterol, as well as it's relationship with heart disease and health.

Most of what's in there is very well supported by true scientific fact, including the MOST IMPORTANT fact of all: high cholesterol in women is HEALTHY. In fact, low cholesterol in women leads to earlier deaths, and often very poor mental health. This is something my mom has known for years, particularly because she's had many different odd health problems that have caused her to do a lot of research into the commonly held beliefs about women's health.

My only true concern with the documentary's claims about fat and saturated fat, is that the way to get this fat is through the consumption of animal protein, which is "healthy" for us. This is where I unfortunately part ways with the documentary, as other in-depth studies that are notably unsupported by the government because they disprove nearly everything that the government supports (high grains, dairy products, and meat). Plant protein is much better for human kind, and that there are plenty of available fats in nuts that do a body very good.

One of the core arguments for "Fat Head" AND "Super Size Me" is the claim that we need to return to our "roots" as humans. That in our recent times, we've changed our diets radically from what we used to eat, and this is what is causing much of our problems. This is, at the basic level, extremely true.

We now eat a lot of chemicals, through pesticides, and even more importantly through genetically modified foods. We now eat mass produced food farmed using artificial fertilizers. We now have a diet that focuses on the regular consumption of easily accessible meat. We use dairy products of all sorts as a regular addition to nearly every single meal we eat. We now bake, cook, and fry a vast majority of our foods. We consume an incredible amount of artificially processed and created sugars in almost every type of food we consume.

What both of these documentaries ignore, however, is that animal proteins did not use to be a massively huge part of our diets as humans. In fact, when "Fat Head" claims that when we ate a high saturated fat diet of animal proteins that we were taller and more muscular, they're neglecting to mention that this was one of our early ancestors who were bred into EXTINCTION by the homo sapiens. Not a particularly compelling argument to be like them.

Human beings are omnivores only in the sense that we have developed an ability to consume animal proteins and meat out of a strong desire to survive. We are not developed in any way to eat meat daily, or even weekly. It was meant to be used as a last ditch effort to eat, and something that we could eat IF WE HAD NEED. We are not equipped with ANYTHING meant to take down another animal, and even the old argument of our teeth is bogus. We're meant to eat plants, fruits, nuts, roots, and other such things. We're not even meant to cook most of our food--other animals don't cook their food! This is something we learned to do that has, in fact, reduced the amount of nutrition we receive from our foods.

So, while most of the information present is good, and very helpful in debunking major lies that the TV and government tell us, it can be misleading. Drinking another animal's breast milk isn't a good source of anything meant for us. Eating another animal on a regular basis in not an appropriate diet. Eating food that we cook (or HAVE to cook in order to eat) are being consumed in a way that was not intended. Our bodies are not equipped with flame throwers--our stomachs were not created to only accept food that has been cooked.

Saying that we figured these things out with our brains, and that they are therefore "meant" to be is a faulty logic of epic proportions. In fact, even some of our biggest advancements of society through our brains (our "medicine" for example) are all things we developed to counter act the problems we created through our "development" of our diet and exercise beliefs. For example, rather than inventing an incredible system of dental care and oral hygiene...we could just stop eating an incredibly high diet of sugar, corn syrup, and carbohydrates from grains. But, unfortunately, we are too smart for that.

"Detox": What It Really Means, Part 1

People talk about "detoxing" all the time. They say they're going on a "detox diet" or that they're "detoxing from the week." Sometimes, all this really means is that they're going to unwind from a stressful week. Other times, it means they're going to adjust their diet (no Arby's or Chipotle! or so on).

However, a lot of people ignore the toxins that we ingest through so many other forms--particularly those through our skin. Women especially put an incredible amount of toxins on their bodies, on a daily basis, which seep into our systems and hang out in our fat cells (which we already have naturally more of as well).

In general, the vast majority of the chemistry-minded production of body products are essentially toxic. Since items such as makeup are not regulated by the FDA (who already is far too lax on some very important issues, and overly strict on others, in my opinion), most of the most toxic substances we put on are done so without any accessible knowledge on our part.

However, today I'm going to address the issue of deodorant/antiperspirant.

There is a huge difference between a deodorant (which seeks to address ODOR, hence the name) and an antiperspirant (which seeks to prevent the natural occurrence of sweating). Deodorant can be sometimes toxic, but antiperspirant always is. It contains a specific substance that prevents sweating in people, which is already an extremely bizarre idea. Sweating is one of the number one ways our bodies release toxins and help cool our system down (speaking of detoxing!), so preventing that is a little ridiculous. But, the substance itself is aluminum, which has been proven to be extremely toxic, particularly in high doses.

Most people would like to say that the amount you put onto your armpit is hardly enough to qualify for neurotoxicity levels. Besides ignoring that fact that substances like aluminum are notflushed out of our systems immediately and do build up in our bodies (so that the "small amount" turns into something much larger over time), they're also ignoring how many other times we encounter aluminum. Aluminum is also used to coat our cooking pans, helping to create that "non-stick" feature we've become so attached to. Over time, the surface gets scratched, both visibly and only visible-under-a-mircoscope, releasing aluminum flakes into our food. Additionally, aluminum can also be present in an astringent or toner for one's face, as well as added to certain waters for helping to make things like clothing or carpeting waterproof (which is then released in small doses onto us). The more present aluminum is in your life, the more you build your levels up to seriously toxic levels.

So, when you can, reduce that. "Detox." Take aluminum out of your life. There ARE alternatives to the standard deodorant/antiperspirent out there, and it's important to check these things out, for your own safety and health. Personally, I've now been going two months without using a standard deodorant or anti-perspirent. I use a combination of tea tree oil (a natural antiseptic that helps fight the bacteria that forms under the arms that creates most of the smell) and essential oils (to give me a smell other than my natural odor), as well as another roll on form that consists mostly of water and oils that function in the same way, all of which is naturally found in plants, rather than created in a lab.

The imporant thing is to NOT hinder your sweating in any way. We've been cultured to think that body functions are evil/dirty/bad/wrong, and this just makes it more difficult for our body, since it doesn't know that it's expected to suddenly alter itself on the newest whim of society. We need to sweat! And sweating doesn't always mean "bad" smells, especially with deodorant. Preventing that just doesn't always mean covering our pores with chemicals.

Move away from alumnium! Avoid products that carry ANY type of aluminum compound that you put directly on your skin. I have done so, and trust me, the transition is easier than you think.

I also use stainless steel pans, and glass and wooden bowls for food prep (ceramic or stoneware for eating). But, that's another story...

Good luck out there!

Getting Off The Meat, One Step At A Time

We've heard the old standbys several times already about red meat vs poultry vs fish. Red meat is sin; poultry is okay; fish is best. But, the thing that this supposes is that meat, in terms of animal protein, is inherently good for us.

Is it?

A lot of the recent efforts behind the pushes towards veganism and vegetarianism have been to not only say that eating less meat is better for you, but that eating any meat at all is not good for you. This has been an attempt to show that the non-meat eating ways isn't just about saving the chickens and the cows, or making a political statement, but about eating better.

I, personally, once again fall on the fence of this. On one hand, I've seen some information that's made some very convincing arguments against the consumption of meat, even underscoring that our "omnivore" status has been greatly exaggerated over the years. On the other, I won't deny the tastiness of meat. I want to enjoy my life, as well as live for as long as possible. So, there needs to be a balance.

The most important change of our lifestyle has come from a movement away from thinking of ourselves as Meat Eaters Who Can Also Eat Vegetables, but as Plant Eaters Who Can Also If Necessary Eat Some Meat Too. One of the best ways to do this is to change the fundamental construction of the meal. American culture has the focus on the meat, with vegetables and grains serving as sides.

My suggestion is to simply move that around. Have instead a meal where you put vegetables as the "meat"¹ and use the meat as a side dish. I won't get into grains here and now, so let's say that if you have them, you should keep them as a side dish. That's pretty good. Even better is cutting out the meat altogether, and replacing it with something like cashews/almonds/sunflower seeds/etc. Stay away from beans as an option, even though you've been taught that they are a good source of protein--they have other factors that make them very difficult to digest for a human, which is why they are frequently a source of gas.

Give it a try. It's a good way to get started on making meat no longer a focal point of all your meals, and helping to teach your brain to eat meat in smaller portions.

----

FOOTNOTES:

1. Some great ways to help with the visualization of this shift is to get a vegetable that is big. Sometimes a bunch of small vegetables just doesn't do it for your eyes. I've found things like rounds of American eggplants, or wide slices of squash, or thick slices of grilled zucchini, help to visually make you feel like you have something big on your plate. You can serve this on top of a bed of smaller vegetables, or even some greens like spinach or green leaf. Try to get the presentation of the vegetables as close to what you'd expect with a good cut of meat at a restaurant, without spending too much time on it. Remember, you're trying to trick your mind into thinking that meals revolve around VEGETABLES and not meat. It'll take some time.

Lies The TV Tells Us: Milk

This post has been a long time coming, mostly because this is my “baby.” This is The Issue which I will fight for hours on, until I have finally driven my point home so hard that no one can refute it. It bothers me more than any other nutritional lie ever made by man:

“Human beings need to drink cow’s milk.”

Maybe, maybe, I could work with it as a problem of “human beings can drink cow’s milk.” But, no, it is not the assertion that we are capable of consuming it, but that we should drink, no, need to drink it. This is the lie that the TV tells us. Who has not encountered the “Got Milk?” advertising campaign in their lifetime? Make no mistake, it is as much of an advertising campaign as Sprite’s “Quench your thirst” is.

My favorite fallacy is that it’s needed for calcium. When I ask people, “If you were low on calcium, what should you do?” They all respond: “Drink milk.”

Let’s look at some facts, shall we?

Several sources list the amount of calcium in a single cup of milk as being approximately 300mg¹, so let’s take that as the “absolute” in calcium that a cup of milk has to offer. Let’s not forget that other substances can have just that same amount of calcium added to it (like orange juice and soy milk), because let’s pretend for a moment that we don’t agree with drinking processed juice, and don’t agree with ingesting too much soy.

So, milk is the best, is it?

Except that 1oz of sesame seeds is around the same amount of a cup of milk. That is, it comes in at 277mg of calcium, or rounded up, 300mg. Now, sesame seeds have other things that may affect whether or not one wants to replace milk with them. For around an ounce of seeds, they come in near around the same amount of calories as a cup of milk (158), and they do have 12 grams of (good) fat. This essentially comes to a point of coming with the same vices and virtues of this cup of milk. Sesame seeds have other benefits as well, but it may be that even being able to knock out the entire need for calcium per day without a single dairy product won’t be enough. (Even in the form of things like Tahini, in addition to sprinkled sesame seeds.) Note: These figures are for whole toasted sesame seeds, and do not necessarily apply to untoasted sesame seeds, or black sesame seeds/white sesame seeds. These are just general figures, meant to illustrate a point.²

There are other leafy green vegetable options for calcium intake, though perhaps not quite as so obviously comparable with milk. (Raw) Kale comes in at around 33 calories and 91mg of calcium for every 1 cup (67 grams) (kale has many, many good features, but it not necessarily the most tasty of vegetables). A cup of (raw) broccoli (91 grams) is around 31 calories and 43 mg of calcium. A cup of (raw) cabbage (89 grams) is 22 calories, with 36 mg of calcium.³

What I seek to prove by throwing out some of these numbers is that calcium is in more than just milk. And unlike milk, which is a drink, these are food products. You can have a meal with broccoli and cabbage as part of vegetable dishes, with an ounce of sesame seeds, and feel full, without the “need” of including a glass of milk. Milk, and milk products, are not necessary to get sufficient amounts of calcium on a daily basis.

This brings me to my less number-driven point of contention: why does a grown human being “need” to drink another animal’s breast milk?

If I said to another human being that at 23-years-old, I drank three glasses of fortified human breast milk, I would get looks ranging from deep disgust to sincere concern. No one would think to say, “Well, I guess that makes more sense than drinking the breast milk of a cow!” The fact is, it is strange to drink breast milk past a certain age. It is even more strange to drink the breast of milk of another animal, one with which we share very few things in common. It is not as if we drink the breast milk of chimpanzees, who share at the least a good deal of our DNA. No, we drink the milk meant to bring up a baby cow, and we tell ourselves that it’s for our own good.

There is no way that this can make sense. There is no argument that can undo this basic principal of wrongness. We are not cows--we have never been cows, and never will be cows. To even drink milk requires many steps of processing, especially adding in things like calcium, Vitamin A, Vitamin D, and so on.

But, this is once again the beauty of advertising. If you inundate the populace for a long enough period of time, back it with enough money, you can convince people of anything. You can convince them that grown human beings need breast milk from a bovine. You can convince them that this is the best--maybe even only--way to get calcium.

Even the fact that we milk cows is something bizarre. We keep them in a permanent state of lactation, to the point where it becomes painful to them if they are not milked. When we hear that “cows have to be milked or it’s painful” we accept this as fact, without ever considering, what did cows do before humans began milking them? We didn’t always do this. In fact, in some parts of the world, this did not become a part of the culture until Western influences infiltrated.

By now, most people are familiar with the term “lactose intolerance.” Once again, the beauty of advertising. Because truly, it is not that some people are lactose “intolerant;” it is that some people have become lactose tolerant. They have learned to adjust, over the thousands of years they’ve subjected themselves to milk, to the consumption of milk. It doesn’t mean that milk is good for them, just that it isn’t as painful to consume it, as it is for others.

Ultimately, many of the claims of milk are not unlike the claims of other food products with a government based advertising system in place. Is drinking milk better than not consuming any food, in terms of delivering calcium? Yes. But, when a regular meal with good, leafy vegetables does the trick, why add in all the other aspects of milk and dairy? Is drinking milk helpful for certain conditions, like sleep deprivation? Perhaps, from a control of doing nothing at all. But, can you find other ways that don’t involve milk that are, in fact, better? Absolutely.⁴

Being “better” does not always mean “best.” And when it comes to milk, cow milk, a lot of the facts get trapped in misleading jargon.

The bottom line is this folks: milk isn’t necessary. Milk isn’t even good for you. Milk is not the way to get the calcium you need.

Milk may make some things taste good, and it makes delicious things like cheese, and butter. And I will be the first to say, even if it’ll make you live until you’re over 120 if you never touch another dairy product again, there’s something to be said about not taking all the fun out of eating. However, it should be noted that these things should be limited. Even if you’ve already constricted things like butter and cheese, aware of the high fat/calorie content of these, you should still think further. Milk, yogurt, frozen yogurt, ice cream, and so forth, are all things that should be put on the “use with caution” list. If possible, eliminate them altogether. Should you go through a period of time when these things aren’t necessary to your enjoyment of food, try to avoid them as absolutely as possible. Even if you eventually incorporate an amount later, use as sparingly as you can.

Do not be mislead by the lies the TV tells you. It’s trying to sell you something, not look out for your bodily needs. Always keep this in mind, even when it’s telling you that something is “good for you.”⁶

Additional Reading:

1. Excerpt on milk and milk related products in relationship to the body; contains information on what calcium is good for, and why Americans require more calcium than other nationalities: http://www.freedomyou.com/nutrition_book/milk%20and%20cookies.htm

2. More information on what milk is, why it isn’t the same across the board (species differences, milk vs. human milk), and further information on the actual business of standard milk (versus organic, local milk): http://www.notmilk.com/kradjian.html

3. Another author breaking down the myths of milk in a systematic way: http://www.ultrawellness.com/blog/why-you-should-avoid-milk

There are others, but these area few I think that offer up a pretty focused argument. Others that are more comprehensive attacks are usually on more than just milk (including grains, legumes, and meat), and this is a topic I wish to focus on especially. You may notice that most of these dissenters are what are known as “fringe” scientists, that is, they fall into the minority opinion. I hope that no one is so naïve as to believe that money does not influence greatly scientific studies, or language, or advertisement. There isn’t a lot of money backing sesame seeds, for instance, so there won’t be a long running series of commercials saying “Got sesame seeds?” complete with dozens of studies about how sesame seeds can save you from cancer, osteoporosis, cavities, insomnia, etc, etc.

SOURCES:

[1] http://www.nichd.nih.gov/milk/prob/milk_cal.cfm

 

http://www.fitsugar.com/How-Much-Calcium-182622

http://www.calciuminfo.com/about/foodsources.aspx

[2] http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/nut-and-seed-products/3071/2

[3] http://nutritiondata.self.com/

[4] http://www.gotmilk.com/#/benefits/sleep/info/ [Note the use of language here, meant to lead you into believing that if you drink milk, you will sleep better. The reality is that these studies are based on very skewed results, and don’t examine this affect in relationship to other natural sleep aids such as melatonin, valerian root, or chamomile. This also did not address magnesium’s relationship to sleep, which is found in abundance again in dark leafy green vegetables (such as kale) and seeds (like sesame seeds). These would provide the exact same functions of milk on two levels, which is, of course, why they were not compared with milk in these studies.]

[5] http://www.gotmilk.com/#/benefits/teeth/info/ [Again note language and misleading information. Please, for your own benefit, look into this. You have the internet at your disposal, utilize it. Milk does not help prevent cavities.]

Laundry: Washing Clothes

Laundry is one of those household chores that bothers me, more than others. I just hate the futile nature of it, as much as I do dishes. It simply feels like there is no end to it, no matter how often you run the machines. In fact, if you live a certain way, trying to keep everything clean, with enough people in the house, you can run a load every single day.

However, the necessity of laundry is something that should be addressed. Here in the United States, with our feelings about "hygiene" and throw-away culture, we create a lot more laundry than we need to. It doesn't have to be this way--there is another way of doing things that cuts down on the amount of laundry each person produces, and with that, water, soap, and electricity.

Yes, I am talking about re-wearing clothes that have already been worn. Often when I bring this issue up, people give me a look of disgust, as if I've suggested that they wear clothing that they've dipped into the sewer. However, the reality remains that very often we simply don't do enough in our clothes to really get them dirty, except perhaps with shedding of some skin cells and sweat. Sometimes, depending on the day, we may not even have worn our clothes for more than few hours, where we did little.

Now, I'm not suggesting that each person wears the same outfit day after day after day, until it gets dirty/smelly. I understand that issues of fashion, appearance, weather are not to be made little of, even in the face of conservation. There's no reason it should.

Rather than undressing and putting everything automatically into the hamper/basket/etc, there should be some consideration. Is this dirty? Is this smelly? Does this need to be washed? Some things, like underwear, will probably always be something that are washed after one use. However, I do know from an informal poll from those I know, that not everyone puts their jeans into the basket after one use. There's no need--jeans just don't get the same wear and tear and dirt accumulation as t-shirts seem to, especially with sweat. Even then, shirts are not always dirty from one use. With things like deodorants and anti-perspirants, sweat isn't always even an issue.

All that has to be done, is hang these things that are not dirty back up in the closet, or refold them into the drawer, or such. This will not only help make the clothes last longer, but also help the environment in a small, but overall significant way. Even if you do nothing else to help reduce the amount of laundry you make, or reconsider how often things like bath towels need to be washed (to consider: you wipe the water off a freshly washed human body; yes, it should be cleaned from the accumulation of dead skin cells and water, but it may only be "as needed" rather than on a set schedule of every week, every two weeks, etc), just hanging up a few clothes will be a step in the right direction.

This isn't anything radical, not on a global scale. In other countries in the world, including Spain and China, this is an everyday fact of life. "You only wore that turtle neck for a few hours during a nice Autumn day, where you didn't do any exercise beyond walking at an ordinary pace? Why should you wash it? Just hang it back up, to wear again."

You don't have to wait until it smells bad--but even just using each article of clothing twice cuts your laundry in half. For those of us who care about using fresh water, electricity, and cleaning products, this is just one more way to make a difference on a regular basis.

Smoothie, Dip, and Environmentalism

Today is a good day. It's started off well, primarily because I started it with a great smoothie. We've advanced from just a big quantity of fruit with either greens or nuts. I've utilised more and more of my own ideas from concepts I got from Raw Foods books.

This morning's smoothie was a great Winter smoothie. For those of you in colder places, even colder than here, is sometimes a challenge. All you want is something hot. For that, in my own case, I drink a cup of tea or hot lemon+honey water. But, if it's not enough, don't force yourself to be uncomfortable. Still, there are those who still have warm weather even in the winter, and I think sometimes a smoothie would actually taste very nice for the added fact that it's chilled.

By now, I'm sure some people are starting to crave the neat pastries that get put out around now. They're all pretty much using the same flavors: cinnamon, nutmeg, clove, vanilla, etc. One of the ways to get yourself in that mood, without eating those things, is to add the ingredients to something you CAN eat. For example:

"Eggnog" Smoothie:
2 cups (vanilla) almond milk
1 cup frozen mango
1 cup frozen strawberries
1/2 tsp of vanilla extract
A good shake of nutmeg (maybe 1/4 tsp to 1/2 tsp)
(Add in water if you're having trouble with the smoothie not processing, or if you don't have enough for at least two servings)

This created a smooth, relatively thin drink with a distinctive vanilla and nutmeg taste. It makes it taste surprisingly like a fruity eggnog. I've mentioned it before--I'm not going to tell you something tastes like another thing if it doesn't really. This really does remind me strongly of eggnog. It has a really neat color; it's a sort of orange sorbet look. I wish I had a working camera so I could snap a shot of it, but alas, that will be some other time.

Additionally today, for lunch, there's another go at our "Ranch" dip made of cashews, olive oil, lemon juice, miso, water, dry mustard, onion granules, basil and tarragon. I may be missing an ingredient or two, but since I'm not really giving the recipe so much as a list of what it is in general, it should be fine.

To round out this entry is a brief commentary on Toyota's latest attempt at establishing a better image for itself (particular after the recall fiasco): "Toyota Ideas For Good." From their website:

Big ideas are bigger than cars. Toyota has proved this time and time again by sharing our big inventions with the world outside of cars. Everybody has a few good ideas, and Toyota wants to help make some of them a reality. So we’re sharing some of our most innovative technologies with you in the hope that you’ll share your good ideas to improve the world.

One winner in each of the five technology categories could have their idea become a reality. Winners will be determined by a formula based on input from our panel of gurus and the general public. The winners will get their pick of a new 2011 Prius, 2011 Venza or 2011 Highlander Hybrid. See the Official Rules. Together we can do some real good and make a difference we couldn’t have made alone.

1) Pick from one of five technologies
2) Share your creative way to use them to improve our lives beyond cars
3) Check out and support other submissions

 

Boyfriend went in and read many of them, and his reaction was rather extreme. Apparently, some are really, really awful. I'm not sure (as I was only interested enough to go through about 12 or so, and the ideas were often shoved in alongside things like "SAVE TEH KITTENS!!!!" or "PPL LYKE DON'T HAVE CLEAN WATER!!!!" that made me go, uh...you have a limited amount of space to write this idea, and you're shoving in propaganda instead of a better plan for how these things could be adapted for these circumstances? Seriously? Do you know anything about technology or are you just guessing?) if it was the ideas being engineering/structurally unsound, or if he was as annoyed at the presentation of many of the ideas as I was.

He submitted three ideas himself, one for three different technologies. One that takes a small solar array and applies it to the concept used in southern humid states to have continual circulating air on a slow moving fan belt. A second that suggests using the new "touch tracer" to be applied to firefighters, military, or other professions where voice communication is often not practical. And a third that suggests applying what Toyota has learned about the foot to footwear. If you're interested, you can check it out. Simply go to Toyota's website, and look for "IDEAS FOR GOOD" and follow the rabbit hole.

Coffee Houses and Humanity: Night Out In The City Of Portland

There is a certain image that I think many people have when someone says the words "coffee house." I don't feel that on a whole this is the same image that comes to mind with the words "coffee shop" or "coffee bar." I think that by now Starbucks has become the dominant image evoked by things like "coffee shop" or just "coffee." But, there is still a certain nostalgia associated with "coffee house" that I feel hasn't been accessible to Starbucks.

A coffee house just seems like a place that must be independent, or locally owned, and it must have tables and a menu, and a few unusual drinks that don't just involve different versions of blended sugar. It also needs to be a place where you can gather in a reasonable number and enjoy a mellow atmosphere where the majority of the people come in to stay for some time, not rush in for their caffeine addiction fix and then rush back out again in with their paper and plastic cups.

Last night Boyfriend and I set out for a Coffee House. We wanted a place that was not Starbucks, that hopefully would serve us drinks in porcelain cups (rather than paper), and that we could comfortably sit in for some undetermined amount of time.

It took quite some time. We went into the city armed with a list, and we did not have much success locating the places we were supposed to have encountered. But, in the end, what this did was encourage us to get out of the car and get on foot. Driving in a city is madness, and deciding where to park is far more important. We also have learned to adapt to the concept that walking several blocks, often for hours at a time, is a natural state of being.

We parked on 2nd and Morrison in an underground garage that charges $5 for the entire night (up to 6am). I was in favor of this rather than some of the $4 for the evening places that are exposed to street traffic. Not that my 1998 Acura 2.3CL really poses an exciting target, but I prefer not to take a chance when it's the difference of a dollar. This was a garage that closed its doors for those who did not have a code to get into it past an hour, and had a watchman. So, we left the burdensome car there, and went out on foot.

We started this journey at around 7pm. We did not even come to a destination until 9pm. I want to make this clear from the beginning because this is the difference between living in a suburb and living near or in a city. You just can't look at the idea of walking for two hours around several blocks to find something as an impossible task. And yes, we were walking that entire time. Sometimes we would be standing for the few seconds waiting for the Walk Sign, and even less frequently to stop and read a menu to see if we wanted to stop and eat food at a particular place, but in general, that was spent going around a rather ordinary sized radius of streets in search of an open coffee house.

This lead us to several interesting things. First was finding the legendary Voodoo Donuts, a most unusual donut shop, where we purchased a Voodoo man donut. It's a delicious chocolate iced donut, in the vague shape of a voodoo doll, with a pretzel stabbed through its painted on heart, with a sweet raspberry jam filling. This gave us some extra energy, to continue our search for a coffee place. We did locate two of the three Stumptown, a local chain of coffee shops, places, and while we purchased an 80z coffee for me and a 16oz tea for Boyfriend there, we did not stay. While I pointed out and greatly appreciated the use of stirring spoons, rather than straws or wooden stirrers, I was dismayed at the amount of paper cup waste that seems to be a large part of every Starbucks influenced coffee shop.

I will skip the details of the walking and searching, except to say that we did encounter a man using plastic tubs and the street lamp nearby, and I got to explain "busking" to Boyfriend. I was a little surprised that he hadn't ever encountered the word before, but I suppose if you aren't aware of those who earn their money with street performances in either fiction or reality, the word doesn't come into your vocabulary.

We eventually ended up in the same area we frequently go to when we go into the city, and we were going down a street that we had gone on when a friend of mine had visited us. We had seen a chocolate/coffee place that in my research had been given very good reviews, and walked toward where it was likely to have been. It's called Sweet Masterpieces, and that title can be slightly misleading. Yes, they have a rather impressive selection of delicious chocolate and dessert based foods, but they have a breakfast, lunch, and dinner menu as well.

Our hope, in going in, was that it would be a place we could stay for awhile. When we inquired for their closing time, the server informed us that it was midnight, so we were welcome to stay as long as we'd really like (that would have been three hours, a rather long time to remain in a place these days). We immediately ordered some food and a drink for me. I got an eggplant sandwich, while Boyfriend got an "Aztec Chicken Panini" that seemed very delicious. I was happy with my slightly more bland eggplant/basil creation, as I ordered a Mayan Hot Chocolate, which was flavored primarily by espresso, orange, and chili powder. It had a very pleasantly rich texture, with a taste of orange chocolate, and a spicy finish.

Later, Boyfriend also ordered a peanut butter meringue, which was surprisingly good according to him (meringues really aren't large enough to share, and I was enjoying the end results of my drink by then). I have never been impressed with meringues, but he seemed well pleased by it.

Though we had brought a card game to play, we ended up being far more interested in talking than playing a hand of Squarrels.

Most of our conversation related to a webcomic we are both very fond of, Girl Genius, that is a self-described "gaslamp fantasy" (as opposed to steampunk). We were discussing certain aspects of the comic that led into two significant conversations:

1. Mistresses and Minions (or Leaders and Followers)--My conclusion of examining certain values in both American and Japanese society is that sometimes we put too much value on only one of the two possible choices of being a Leader or Follower. I also feel that in our American society, the roll of the "minion" is vastly underrated and generally misunderstood. I feel that by putting increasing pressure on all people to display what are called "leadership qualities" we impose an increasing amount of psychological discomfort on those who are simply not meant to be leaders.

One of things that we feel has been overlooked by our social values is that "minions" (followers) are not necessarily weak people. I feel that this is how our society attempts to explain the existence of followers: they are merely weak people who are failing to display their leadership abilities. Not everyone is made to be a leader, or even has the capacity for it. Leading necessitates being able to gather a group of disorganized people and motivate them toward a chosen goal, or to create solutions to problems on the fly and convince others to carrying these orders out. There are some people who are simply always going to be better at comprehending an order and coming up with a way to follow through on it.

This is not to say that all people who are natural followers are mindless drones. I brought in the example of Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game" in which Ender proves his military prowess by allowing his immediate underlings a certain amount of manoeuvrability and autonomy by presenting each with an end goal, and leaving the execution of the goal to the discretion of each "squad leader." That Ender is their leader is not questioned--they follow his orders, but they in turn give orders to those who give orders and so on. There are levels of minionhood, but it all comes back to the fact that there are those who are meant to lead people, and those who are meant to feel more comfortable with a goal to follow through on.

The psychological discomfort can come from both extremes: in Japan where following and willingness to follow orders is placed on a social pedestal of aspiration, it can be very difficult to accept a compulsion to forge ones own plans and goals. Being a leader in a social situation where leadership is not something that should be sought after, or even something that can be earned through ability alone, can cause someone who is meant to be a "Mistress" into the role of a "minion" and just as a "minion" cannot be a good "mistress" so cannot a "Mistress" be a good "Minion."

2. Vertical Expansion In Place of Horizontal--This is a concept I have been toying with in a vaguely science fiction sort of way, as an alternative radical solution to our ecological situation. I realize that it would be almost impossible to implement during the next 60 or so years, which is the estimated length of time I have left to live, so it's not something that could ever be achieved while I was around to see it. But, I still think that it should be put out there as a solution to be considered.

It's a simple enough concept in generalities. The idea is to stop the sprawl of humanity outwards and focus entirely on going upwards: that is, to build more houses/shops/buildings in general up rather than out. I suggest putting humanity into a relatively small space, as in the manner of a city, and create a world that uses the aerial space rather than land space for habitation and storage of goods and services.

This would be, in fact, not to deal with an ever increasing amount of humanity, but to reclaim a much greater portion of the planet for what we call nature. I would propose a forced removal of humanity from large portions of the planet, to be put into these "human reservations" called "cities" and to have the homes and habitats of humanity destroyed to make way for nature. There would be an emphasis on making room for more ways on sustainable resources, such as the example of forests and trees. Rather than continually cutting down a large forest, lumber would be harvested on a rotation of anywhere from 20 to 30 years. As you can imagine, this would require a large amount of the world to be dedicated to the growth of forest and trees. Hence the necessity of moving humanity out of the space.

Additionally, both food and farming with sustainable practice would require more space so as to avoid the creation of genetic engineering to remake food using potentially lifethreatening practices (such as using a virus in order to introduce a new string of genetic code to "perfect" a tomato). This would also redefine the amount of space allocated for animals, should a sizeable portion of humanity still desire a significant portion of their food to be animal meat.

Ultimately, the goal would be to give back a great deal of the space we have stolen from other creatures on the planet, and to recreate our concept of what we are entitled to as human beings. But, the most crucial point, the sticking point as you might say, is that this cannot be enacted with 8+ billion people. It simply isn't possible. But, this leads back to the theory that I, and many environmental scientists, ascribe to, which is that we are already past the point of being even capable numerically of sustainability. There are simply too much of us on the planet, in sheer numbers, to create a system to function on a level of sustaining this amount. Even if there was no additional growth from now onwards, we couldn't manage.

Simply speaking, something as radical as this vertical over horizontal expansion, would essentially require the human race to be halved, at least. 4 billion might still be too many, and the number might need to be only 2 to 3 billion, or even less if certain practices will not be given up (like private use cars for vast majority of citizen, plastic storage, styrofoam usage, paper wrappings for food in many establishments, etc). But, it is an alternative to consider, if we could bear to accept that humanity may not be the most important aspect of the planet.

--

Those were our two driving conversations. Around 11:45pm, we wrapped it up, and left the coffee house. We walked the few blocks back to the car, and talked about trivial things for the ten minutes it takes to drive back to our apartment home. All in all, it was a great evening. It seems strange to think about how radically our concept of living could change, and how much it needs to change, while perpetuating the way we are living just by doing ordinary, daily practices.

But just as I feel that we will NOT come up with a viable way of truly recycling until our trash becomes our most common resource, we will NOT change our way of living until we stare our End in the face and come to grips with the fact that we are going to self-destruct in a meaningful way. Right now, it's too far away. It's not OUR problem. Only a few people have truly begun to panic. When that number is the majority, this is when we will see real change. It may not be in time to save humanity, but I think that we are the only ones who will mourn that fact.

Smoothies And Portion Control

It's been two months, as we end November, since I started to include more Raw Food in my diet. It's also been now seven months since I began to make daily bento for both Boyfriend and myself.

I've been doing a lot of talking about weight with my friends lately. I suppose it's just the natural course of things in America, with this time of year being the absolute worst food consumption days combined with the most pressure and despair. The end of the year is coming, and with it, my own personal goal of reaching 120lbs again.

Anyone who has known me for any real length of time where I was at some point or another under pressure or stress knows that I maintain that I will gain weight during this time, even if I'm not eating much at all. My body just doesn't process the food properly, and I think it misinterprets the mental stress as physical distress. In any case, I put on the pounds weekly.

I've never been under as much pressure as I have put on myself these past few months studying for the JLPT 3, a level that is almost beyond my reach if only because of how far behind I am in reading and writing. I take the test this Sunday, and I can tell you right now that the thought of it makes me get dizzy. This is stress and panic at its worst.

I'm not gaining weight. For the first time in my entire life, I'm not gaining weight. I'm not exactly losing weight either, but I'm not gaining. It's the holidays and I'm stressed out to the max, and I'm not putting on weight.

There are two combined explanations for this "miracle" of mine: smoothies and portion control. With the increase in time I've spent doing other things, I've been completely unable to do more than the minimum with Raw Food. I did get an exciting new book, and that's given me some great new ideas for changing things, but I just haven't been able to do much at all. All I've been able to keep doing is the smoothies in the morning, and of course, the bentos for lunch. Dinner has been made on the fly, with about 95% of it cooked, if not 100%.

The latest in smoothies for me is trying out these nut+fruit smoothies. These recipes came from the new book, though I haven't actually done any one of the recipes exactly. I used the fruit I had and of course didn't add in the things I didn't have. This morning was a fantastic smoothie, and very filling. I like these better because of the smooth and creamy texture that gives a nice fulfilling feeling. Todays was my own creation:

2 cups raw organic Almond Milk
1 tbsp carob powder
1 mango
2 cups of sliced frozen organic peaches

That's it. I blended it very well, in stages so as not to overheat it, and it came out very rich and thick, like a milkshake. The carob powder makes it look like chocolate, and kind of smell like chocolate, but it doesn't taste like chocolate. This is okay--the taste of the carob powder is, at least to us, a pleasant taste. But, as I've mentioned before, I don't follow that believe that I should be telling you that it's a substitute for chocolate that tastes just like it. It doesn't. This doesn't mean it doesn't taste GOOD. But, if you're expecting "chocolate" and you get "not chocolate" your brain can say, "Then this is bad/gross/etc." Don't go into it thinking that it'll be exactly the same. Almond milk plus carob powder is not going to be like milk plus cacao powder. Period, end of story. It doesn't mean that you won't like the almond milk and carob powder just as much if not better though. Personally, I don't like chocolate flavored things because I feel it comes out tasting more like chalk dust than chocolate truffles. So, I'm happy with the carob powder. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

The second part of this "miracle" diet is that I provide a bento. For those who have never heard of bento, I suggest typing it into a search engine and checking out the results. In Japanese culture, it's as well known as the phrase "brown bag" or "lunch box" or such, and it means pretty much that. It's a type of packed food (often lunch) wherein food is packed closely together into a container. That's all there is to it. Some people go out of their way to make it ornate, or pretty, like http://www.mybentolicious.com/ but others focus on the more practical bento, like the kind that I usually make, such as from the http://justbento.com/handbook/lists archives.

The most significant point of the bentos is that it controls your portion. In our world, where portions are exceedingly large, this is even more important in many ways that what you eat. Just getting yourself to eat about 600ml of food for lunch and finding this to be a satisfying portion is a challenge at first. When I first started bento in the summer, 14lbs ago, I was basically hungry after every single bento. I wanted more food, even if I'd had filling food, because my stomach was used to much larger portions.

People talk about "shrinking their stomach" or even the very dramatic surgery of "stapling" the stomach to physically reduce the size of food they consume. You can think of bentos as a way of "stapling" your stomach in a non-invasive surgery way. There comes a point when it doesn't matter that you're eating healthier food. In fact, even in Raw Foods you can go wrong by eating too much of the wrong things, or too many high calorie foods that aren't filling enough. "Too much of a good thing" goes very far in both healthy and Raw Food philosophy.

You shouldn't be hungry all of the time. Most people who have gone on a diet like that know that eventually you get tired of being hungry all the time and gorge yourself on food. But, sometimes, if you keep eating until you feel full, you just can't lose weight. Sometimes, you can't even maintain weight. Doing something like packing a lunch, or packing a dinner, or even packing a breakfast--even if you never leave the home--makes it a lot easier to start making sure you're eating a reasonable amount of food. You also pay a lot more attention to what kind of variety of food you're getting in something like a bento. The focus of bento is on small portions with regards to color, texture, and nutrition.

Also, different people have different needs. I, who spend a lot more of my time on the computer or at a table working on something, just don't need as much food for lunch as someone who is doing a lot more activity. For me, a 550ml to 650ml container is enough. For Boyfriend, who is bigger and a male, he eats anywhere from 800ml to 900ml. With bentos, if you pack it in the exact ratio of carbs to vegetables to protein, you get around the same amount of calories per ml in the container. Sometimes we hit around that, other times it's less, and sometimes it's more. It's a rough estimate, but it's not just calories that concern me, but how much food goes in.

These days, I am full after every bento, and after every smoothie. I know I'm in a good place when I just can't finish something like a Carl's Jr "combo meal" or a 2-item combo from Panda Express because it's just too much food.

These are the two guiding principles of my "miracle" diet that is making it so I don't gain weight, and so I can get closer and closer to my goals. Like all the best "diets" this isn't a "diet" like what you go on to get in shape for a wedding and then go off; this is a lifestyle, a way of living that has nothing to do with stopping and starting things. This is how I live.

The Inevitable Thanksgiving Post

I'm American. That means, among many other things, that I have to live with Thanksgiving coming around every year at the end of November. I say "live with" rather than "celebrate" because of my own personal beliefs at the twisted nature of a holiday that celebrates a successfull racial genocide.

This is a great example of the Lies The TV Tells Us, only not in food, but in a sense of our history as a people. We're taught to accept this "holiday" as a celebration of family, football, and food. It's based in the root that Christopher Columbus "discovered" America, and that we came to live here by the blessing of God.

That is not what happened. Most people who have had an education that was even remotely honest learned of the horrific atrocities the European invaders (yes, invaders) committed against the native population that had been living there for centuries before even the Vikings came to the continent. In fact, they had been there long enough for different cultures to emerge, come into power, and eventually fall, just like the powers in Europe and Asia.

And the invaders who would later form the country America slaughtered them because it is easier to kill everyone than negotiate fairly for a peaceful co-occupation. We condemn racial genocides left and right, but our own we celebrate. We say it's a day to be thankful. Yes, we should give thanks. Give thanks that our technology was superior. Give thanks that we had developed unique diseases to infect others with, and the stomachs to deliberately inflict those diseases on others. Give thanks that we were brutal enough, cruel enough, to kill hundreds of buffalo so that we could starve out Native Americans. Give thanks that we would lie as a country, giving false promises, and renege on those deals as soon as we wished it. Give thanks that our desire for more land was stronger than our sense of humanity and compassion.

There are those who would say that I'm ruining the "spirit of the holiday." I say that these people are the ones the government are most proud of, because they believe the lie so strongly that they could actually find insult in someone reminding them what this holiday is truly about. I'm not taking offense at something that isn't there. I'm not twisting a sacred holiday into something else. I am trying to show you how something can be twisted for a purpose.

We celebrate this with eating copious amounts of food--the surest sign of opulence and arrogance--in a country that is already the most well off of all others. Can you be proud of a country that doesn't acknowledge its history? If there was a holiday in Germany that celebrated the Holocaust, but called it "Thanksgiving" and said that it wasn't about the fact that they elimanted many Jews from their society, thereby making more room for more "pure" Germans, it was about TURKEY and CRANBERRIES, would you buy it? Would you accept it if there was a holiday about the racial genocides in Darfur? Would you accept the mythology that Hilter "discovered" Germany?

Read your history. There are plenty of things to be proud about in the history of this country (Child Labor Laws comes to mind quite quickly), and in the history of humanity (medicine, care for women in childbirth, and so on). But, ignoring the atrocities, or perverting them into something else like a celebration of a lie, is not something you should be proud of, not in any circumstance.

So, today we will be eating a meal. It will not be a feast, but it will commemorate this day. It will be in mourning for what was done to create a country we reside in, that our ancestors immigrated to. We are not direct decendants of those who did those acts, and in fact, in my own history there are ancestors who faced similar atrocities, but we are decendants of the way this country raises its children. We will mourn the losses of the peoples who were killed, and their deaths covered up with a false celebration. We will mourn the lies we tell our children.

Raw Smoothies, Raw Dips, Raw Books, And...Fast Food?

I've noticed that within a lot of these Raw Food Recipe Books (calling them "cookbooks" seems somehow like an oxymoron), the author talks about how after eating raw foods for long enough, they completely stopped craving or wanting the Evil Foods. Often, the author has experienced a disease or health problem that set them on the path of Raw Foods, though this is not always the case. Some began as vegetarians and transistioned from there to vegans to raw food vegans.

But, one thing is consistent: they maintain that eating a raw food diet makes it easier to quit ingesting Evil Food.

Well, that's not true in this particular case at least. If anything, it's like being on a rollercoaster with extreme climbs and extreme drops. It seems that more we introduce raw foods into our diet, the more we want Evil Food. The cravings for things that are bad for us, that make us feel uncomfortable usually immediately after, are stronger than any aversion created by horrible sensations after consumption.

Why? All the other books would lead you to believe that once you start going raw, there's no turning back. But, not only have I decided to take a stand in the middle between raw and cooked, but I'm also not doing it for any compulsion reason. I have no health problem; I have never been a vegetarian; I don't need to lose more than 5lbs. So, the drive behind going raw comes only from an acknowledgment that raw food has more nutrients and more benefits than cooked. It arises from a realization that the TV and the government have been lying to me for my entire life about what I should and should not put into my body. Why have a cow's breast milk when I could have sesame seeds--an excellent source of natural calcium?

But, without the driving need to convert to raw foods, it becomes more of an exercise in will power. I have to compel myself to put in the extra effort to make raw foods. They're not complicated, and believe me, given some of the insanely time consuming recipes out there for the cooked foods, raw foods just can't really compete. Most of the time, it's you, vegetables, and a blender. Bzzzzzzzz. Ta-da--food's ready.

The effort it takes to have the ingredients, and the prep-work, and the careful planning is what begins to take it's toll. Trying to have both cooked and raw food is like juggling. And eventually, I start feeling more and more like I don't want to put the effort or time in, for either. So, I think of what I can get right now; I think of what kind of "fast" food I can get.

I think part of it is the mind game. You feel you're eating healthy, so you assume that must mean you are depriving yourself. And, no matter what the raw food gurus will say about the deliciousness of fresh fruit and veggies, the fact is that we've been conditioned to value the taste of fat, oil, and sugar. Getting away from that is more than a simple process of just eating more and more vegetables and fruits and telling yourself that it's yummy--especially if you keep the option of cooked food on the proverbial table.

The bottom line comes down to being able to control yourself. Sometimes, you won't be able to. In fact, sometimes, you probably shouldn't. It's been my personal experience that sometimes it's better to let yourself hit rock bottom and climb out of the hole, rather than use up all your energy fighting the fall, only to land near the bottom, and have no energy left to climb back up. So, I've let it happen. I've let the fast food--the Panda Express, the Burgerville, the Siam Village, the Taco Bell, etc--come. I was dumb about it mind you--still counted my calories, and watched what I ate, and when it was possible to order a veggie burger in place of beef I took it, but I didn't avoid the fries. I didn't avoid the taco shells, or the tortillas.

Now, here we are, getting to the end of November, and I've craved myself out. I don't need any more. I didn't gain any weight, and I didn't lose all of my health benefits--no acne, no dull hair, no fatigue. Because I've still be keeping the other things coming--still drinking the smoothies, still eating the dips and pates filled with vegetables, still eating less meat and more vegetables at dinner times.

But, I've reached a balance again. I can keep up with the raw foods again, paired with my regular diet (which still has no milk or butter, and very rarely any cheese), and keep on. I know that I might end up once again with the problem of the cravings, and I'll have to decide again if I'm going to indulge it and let it run its course or try and fight it.

The one thing that is certain though is that I won't lie about it. I won't tell you that I'm magically cured of all desire for a hamburger and French fries; pizza with creamy white sauce, feta cheese, and roasted red peppers; Kobari beef, Mandarin chicken, and steamed vegetables. Because I'm not. And I don't expect that everyone who gets into raw foods will be either.

How To Get Started: Dips and Dressings

I've been able to get increasingly into the inclusion of fresh vegetables into my diet: sliced carrots, zucchini, celery, and such. But, there's very little point in having fresh veggies if you need to have some sort of high fructose corn syrup dip to make it feel more like a meal.

So, one of the things that has made it easier to eat those things like fresh vegetables are those dips and pates. I'm going to be the first to tell you--they do not taste the same as the things that inspired them. I've heard people into Raw Foods go on and on about how they couldn't taste the difference. Maybe their memories aren't as good, or their desire to like the Raw Foods is stronger than their taste memory. I can easily taste the difference. The "cheese" dip doesn't taste like cheese dip; the "ranch" isn't Ranch.

But, they are close. The texture is a little different as well, but you can get that sort of experience just between different brands, so I won't address it. The taste, on the other hand, I think is important.

Sometimes, I've found that I like the taste of the raw dip better than the so-called original. It'll happen, especially if you're willing to be honest about your feelings when eating the raw dip. Our latest one is a "ranch" made of cashews, olive oil, lemon juice, miso, dates, garlic, water, onion granules, dry mustard, pepper, and basil. It can't taste exactly like ranch, but when I presented it to Boyfriend, without telling him what it was, with celery and carrots for dipping, he knew that it was Ranch. The color is correct, so it's a lot easier to fool yourself visually that it is Ranch dressing. I used a little more water than recommended in order to get the consistency more what I feel that a dressing/dip has. The taste was similar enough that our brains intepreted the taste from our tongues as "Ranch dressing."

Once I'd revealed not only what it was, but what went into it, Boyfriend reported that if he focused on it he could taste some of those elements (but not all--the olive oil and cashew flavors weren't strong enough to come through). I could do the same, but it's an interesting psychological trip, since it's not clear if you can really taste those things, or if now that you're looking to find those flavors, your brain is telling you that it can taste it even if you can't.

I think that nonetheless it is important to recognize that you can't get the same taste with entirely different ingredients. Once you acknowledge that, the next step is to understand that it's okay if it's not entirely the same. The flavors of dips change from brand to brand, and recipes differ from chef to chef. My version of steamed eggplant in a spicy chili paste sauce isn't going to be the same as someone who approached the recipe from a Thai perspective (since mine is Korean).

To understand that this is okay is what is most important. If you still can't let go of your nacho cheese sauce, then don't. I see no reason why you can't have both. Converting to Raw Foods shouldn't be an all or nothing journey. Yesterday, I used the "ranch" on our salads for lunches (with a side of rice), but last week I used store-bought Caesar dressing (mind you, it's Lite and has about seven ingredients rather than 20).

We'll continue to eat more raw foods, but we're not going to let go of all the other foods we enjoy. It may seem like a half-hearted conversion, but really, it's just about trying to find balance between the things that we've been enjoying eating for so long and an entirely new set of rules of food. Because I don't believe in the lies the TV has told me any longer: I don't believe that grains are good for you, or that another animal's breast milk is necessary to my survival, or that I need to have such and such servings of meat or fats and oils in order to get through my day.

But, I'm still eating cheese at least once a week, and have a sprouted whole grain bread in the fridge. I still have meat at least once a day (either in the form of tuna, egg, chicken, or pork--we haven't been able to find affordable grass fed cow meat so we're off cow entirely).

The things that have been changing are eliminating milk in the fridge. I have non-dairy creamer for my coffee, but almond milk is the new milk for tea. I'll be giving coconut milk a try next month. Meat is not the center of every meal; it's a side dish, and sometimes absent.

I'll still be making eggnog though, come December. That's how this is going.

Falling Off The Wagon

I don't know how many times I can say it before it becomes old, but the basic tenet of my philosophy is that I'm not going to go completely raw. I'm not even going to go mostly raw, at least not any time soon. And for the past two weeks, I've been eating less raw food than before.

The reason is that it just hasn't been fitting into my schedule. I haven't been able to get up the energy and enthusiasm to make something. I haven't been interested in making cooked food either.

But, there are certain things I have not changed, and not given up: morning green and fruit smoothies. This is the one thing that even when I'm really not doing anything else, it's what I keep on the eating schedule.

Today, I finally returned to my proposed schedule. Lunch was raw veggies and a raw pate/dip, with a side of short grain rice (prepared Japanese style, which involves rinsing and soaking the rice prior to cooking). Breakfast was an apple, orange, raspberry, romaine smoothie. Tonight, I'm going to make some more smoothies that involve mangos and bananas. I have noticed that smoothies that don't include something substantial like a mango (or papaya or banana) are not as filling. It makes it hard to go through the day without snacking.

So, a reminder to myself and to all others trying to get into Raw Foods--you don't need to go 100% raw on even the second month. You don't even have to stay super healthy. You can eat a Chicken burger on sprouted grains bread with tomato, lettuce, ketchup, and mayo with a side of beans and Mexican rice (like we did last night). You can have curry vegetables with udon noodles (like we did the night before). You can have tuna with chopped celery, short grain white rice, steamed broccoli, stir fried carrots and water chestnuts, and raisins (like we did for lunch the other day). And, yes, you can even have Basil chicken with phad noodles, medium grain rice, and a side of fries (like we'll be having this evening at our local Viet Thai bistro we try to visit once a month).

But, tomorrow we'll be having our standard morning smoothie. Lunch will involve a raw pate and dipping vegetables. It'll also involve meat, and rice. And that's okay.