Thursday, April 28, 2011

The Brain That Changes Itself


The Brain That Changes Itself is a book that contains some powerful intersections between neuroscience and the paleo lifestyle. It's by Norman Doidge, M.D., who researches at Columbia, and wrote a fascinating account of the frontiers of brain science. Some truly remarkable stuff.

The book mainly explores neuroplasticity, the idea that the brain can be changed on a neuronal level through environmental changes in stimuli. I wanted to share a couple of quotes from the book that I think my paleo people will enjoy.

In support of novel, dynamic, complex movement:

"That's why learning a new language in old age is so good for improving and maintaining the memory generally. Because it requires intense focus, studying a new language turns on the control system for plasticity and keeps it in good shape for laying down sharp memories of all kinds...Anything that requires highly focused attention will help that system--learning new physical activities that require concentration, solving challenging puzzles, or making a career change that requires that you master new skills and material...The same applies to mobility. Just doing the dances you learned years ago won't help you brain's motor cortex stay in shape. To keep the mind alive requires learning something truly new with intense focus. That is what will allow you to both lay down new memories and have a system that can easily access and preserve the older ones." (pp. 87-88)

In the world of exercise, variation is universally recognized as a good thing, but I bet most people don't truly run with the idea. When I first got into weight training as a young man, variation meant bench press one day, incline bench another day. But there is far more potential for variation in movement, and it just requires a bit of imagination. I like to think of exercise as a skill building endeavor. That way, you get the benefits of focus and learning.

I'd suggest marrying what's fun with what's challenging. So forget zumba, it's too easy, and take up salsa. Skip the weight room now and again, and throw some sand bags around. Even carpentry or gardening fit the bill.

In support of barefooting:

"Finally, they are working on 'gross motor control,' a function that declines as we age, leading to loss of balance, the tendency to fall, and difficulties with mobility. Aside from the failure of vestibular processing, this decline is caused by the decrease in sensory feedback from our feet. According to Merzenich, shoes, worn for decades, limit the sensory feedback from our feet to our brain. If we went barefoot, our brains would receive many different kinds of input as we went over uneven surfaces. Shoes are a relatively flat platform that spreads out the stimuli, and the surfaces we walk on are increasingly artificial and perfectly flat. This leads us to dedifferentiate the maps for the soles of our feet and limit how touch guides our foot control. Then we may start to use canes, walkers, or crutches or rely on other senses to steady ourselves. By resorting to these compensations instead of exercising our failing brain systems, we hasten their decline. " (pp. 90-91)

Especially in regard to aging, these ideas matter greatly. I think the takeaway here is the fundamental connection between motor processing and movement in the physical world and all that it entails (sensation, balance, etc.). Movement is a complicated mechanistic dance between many variables in the brain and body, and you can enhance those mechanisms simply by kicking off your shoes and applying yourself to something new. The results, however, are more universal and even surprising improvements and changes in brain function.


Friday, April 22, 2011

The Detriment of Sentiment



Let's get deep for a moment.

Out of stardust, life sprang, and our planet developed into dynamic, beautiful, interconnected ecologies. From stardust arose consciousness, emotion, the things that make life precious. That blows my mind, and is the underlying framework for why I love animals so.

I spent last weekend touring some of the farm country of Carolina, meeting the farmers who articulated more like scientists, but most notably, meeting the healthy, lovable animals that I had been eating. I met them face to face, and I wallowed in how cute the pigs were piled together comfortably in the dirt, and I saw beauty in the subtle colorations of turkey feathers, and I melted when I pet the soft coat of the baby goats, and I lingered near the chicken coop to hear the young chicks chirp out their song.

In those warm moments, never before had I been so sure that killing and eating animals was the right, just, and responsible thing to do. Because none of those animals would be there if I didn't.

At one farm, they were barbecuing lamb sausage near the pen where the live sheep were held. The irony was deafening, and even uncomfortable, to look out at the cuddly creatures while enjoying a lamb sausage. A child among us was quite vocal about her discomfort, and a couple in our party chose not to partake in the "World's Best Lamb." Understandably so.

We are not immune to sentiment. Killing is a brutal thing no matter the method. But feelings betray us.

We live on a planet where lifeforms must kill and consume other lifeforms in order to survive. This is the dark, beautiful, universal truth of the world. Whether grains from an unsustainable factory farm or animals from a real farm, we must kill and consume other lifeforms.

On the real farm, those animals were born to be eaten. To not eat them is to abort them, and to eat them is to give them the gift of life. It's a mutually beneficial ecological relationship.

I watched those pigs relish rolling in the dirt. They would stick their snout in the feeder and make that cough-sneeze sound and then waddle to the shade and collapse there. I saw the dogs run playfully through the rows of vegetables, yapping at the other animals. The ducklings circled each other in a dark puddle, keeping their brothers and sisters near. Their mother had black speckles evenly spaced throughout her rich brown feathers. The father wore a white necklace and a turquoise sheen glowed from under his black chest. They were family.

Tragic to think they would have never been born at all.



Friday, April 1, 2011

China Study II: Income and Disease


I was one of the lucky few to get an advanced copy of The China Study II: Income and Disease. It hits shelves May 23rd, and I have to admit, the data is compelling.

In this culminating work that pools the same national data as the original The China Study, T. Colin Campbell applies a sophisticated form of meta-analysis to reach some startling conclusions about how our wealth affects our health.

Here's my favorite page, right out of The China Study II. Notice the strong correlation below?




The China Study II: Income and Disease is rife with correlation after correlation like the one above. Since correlation indicates causation, the conclusion is clear: money causes cancer, and is probably responsible for the sweeping array of debilitating diseases of the wealthy, from chlamydia to hairy tongue.

The data has spoken. I urge you to give up your wealth in order to achieve better health. Send your money to poor countries like Ceylon and El Salvador, so they can be the ones with face cancer. It's only fair that they share the burden of wealth with us, for we are all equal children of God.

Happy April fools,
Kev