Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
The Impact of Our Subconscious Thoughts On Our Health
GaleHawkins
Posts: 8,159 Member
blog.mindvalleyacademy.com/alternative-healing/scientist-show-subconscious-thoughts-can-cause-specific-molecular-changes-genes
Science Now Says That Your Subconscious Thoughts And Beliefs Can Actually Cause Molecular Changes In Your Genes
The research behind this article.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4039194/pdf/nihms542085.pdf
Science Now Says That Your Subconscious Thoughts And Beliefs Can Actually Cause Molecular Changes In Your Genes
The research behind this article.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4039194/pdf/nihms542085.pdf
0
Replies
-
... Energy Healer?0
-
The Woobecon. You've crossed it.0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »The Woobecon. You've crossed it.
Is that anything like the Wobenzym systemic enzyme product.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »The Woobecon. You've crossed it.
Is that anything like the Wobenzym systemic enzyme product.
Yes. Insofar as they are both utter nonsense with no basis in science.
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »The Woobecon. You've crossed it.
Is that anything like the Wobenzym systemic enzyme product.
Yes. Insofar as they are both utter nonsense with no basis in science.
So you do not see epigenetics/genetics as science? Do you think humans are programmed and hope, love and charity can have not positive impact on yourself and others?0 -
The linked article has absolutely nothing to do with epigenetics.0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »The Woobecon. You've crossed it.
So much crystal power I swear I heard "My life for Aiur", and "you must construct additional pylons".0 -
It wouldn't be the first science based study that gives some weight to the human though process and ways to help change it being believed to have physical impacts.
I'm sure those that mock it have studies that show this not to be the case?0 -
robertw486 wrote: »It wouldn't be the first science based study that gives some weight to the human though process and ways to help change it being believed to have physical impacts.
I'm sure those that mock it have studies that show this not to be the case?
This^^^^^
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »The Woobecon. You've crossed it.
So much crystal power I swear I heard "My life for Aiur", and "you must construct additional pylons".
There is no Dana. Only Zuul0 -
0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »The Woobecon. You've crossed it.
So much crystal power I swear I heard "My life for Aiur", and "you must construct additional pylons".
As to the OP, the research article essentially saw that meditation decreases stress. The reduction in stress has effects on expression levels of different markers including cortisol. It's been known for years, they're more showing the mechanism.
I don't think the article says what you think it says.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »blog.mindvalleyacademy.com/alternative-healing/scientist-show-subconscious-thoughts-can-cause-specific-molecular-changes-genes
Science Now Says That Your Subconscious Thoughts And Beliefs Can Actually Cause Molecular Changes In Your Genes
The research behind this article.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4039194/pdf/nihms542085.pdf
The original researchers' use of the term epigentics for this kind of research is considered a contested form of it. Yes, they the researchers do have some evidence of altering the rate of gene expression in certain cells pending meditation activity - say it that way is not controversial. The preferred, uncontested version of epigenetics involves actual heredity - as these researchers are not deterimining if mediators have children with less inflammatory stress, using epigenetics to describe it is not the cleanest term to use.
I will say that in rodents, there are studies that show a male's increased stress profile can be inherited epigenetically down to the grandchild level. Basically, stress a female rodent out by forcing him to go into well lit areas to obtain food, give him a little less stressed time with a female rodent, eventually a grandchild generation appears, and even though they may not be stress, nor their mother or grandmother stressed, these rodents have hyper stress responses like grandpa. I don't think anyone's tried teaching them to meditate yet though. Maybe they'll sit in seiza for hours if offered a little bit of coconut oil coffee?0 -
robertw486 wrote: »It wouldn't be the first science based study that gives some weight to the human though process and ways to help change it being believed to have physical impacts.
I'm sure those that mock it have studies that show this not to be the case?
The thing being mocked is not the study on which this is tenuously based, but the wacky article designed to get gullible fools to click on--and purchase--the conveniently linked "Unlimited Abundance" program for the new low, low price of NOT $1099, but the new discounted price of JUST!!! $297, or--for those who are particularly cash strapped--two low payments of $159 each. With this exciting, low-priced program, you will be able to overcome Abundance Blockers and awaken, among other things, your "money intuition" which will then allow you to rake in the cash!!!! The many satisfied testimonials demonstrate that the program works. /sarc, obviously.
Rather than studies, I think a more appropriate response is a litany of articles telling the sad story of financial predation and plundering of the undiscerning elderly and others who are not able to smell out a scam. Sickening.0 -
telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12205847/Mental-illness-mostly-caused-by-life-events-not-genetics-argue-psychologists.html
This article is of interest to me because indirectly it opens the door to better appreciate the possible interplay of genetics and environment through epigenetics.
We understand that obesity can have a genetic relationship in some cases.
We read only 5% of cancer has a direct traceable link to a genetic cause.
As the article in my take makes a case research $$$ spent on finding the genetic cause of mental illness or cancer may be kind of like pissing into wind expression. Short term one feels better doing it but long term results may be a sticky and smelly mess.
There is no disagreement that financially stable people are less obese and live longer.
The most exciting aspect in my view of this article is we are NOT victims of our genes. It does appear that our environment can and does have a lot of influence on how our genes express themselves because they are under the control of our minds more than we realized.
As most of us into research and/or reading research the concept of Placebo and Nocebo effects always puzzled me. Finally the study of Epigenetics seems to be shedding some light on how both effects are mentally controlled.
@ronjsteele1 and @robertw486 the following article may be of interest called: Placebo Vs. Nocebo Effect: When your mind makes you sick by James Hubbard, M.D., M.P.H.
familydoctormag.com/blog/2008/09/placebo-vs-nocebo-effect-when-your-mind-makes-you-sick/
0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12205847/Mental-illness-mostly-caused-by-life-events-not-genetics-argue-psychologists.html
This article is of interest to me because indirectly it opens the door to better appreciate the possible interplay of genetics and environment through epigenetics.
We understand that obesity can have a genetic relationship in some cases.
We read only 5% of cancer has a direct traceable link to a genetic cause.
As the article in my take makes a case research $$$ spent on finding the genetic cause of mental illness or cancer may be kind of like pissing into wind expression. Short term one feels better doing it but long term results may be a sticky and smelly mess.
There is no disagreement that financially stable people are less obese and live longer.
The most exciting aspect in my view of this article is we are NOT victims of our genes. It does appear that our environment can and does have a lot of influence on how our genes express themselves because they are under the control of our minds more than we realized.
As most of us into research and/or reading research the concept of Placebo and Nocebo effects always puzzled me. Finally the study of Epigenetics seems to be shedding some light on how both effects are mentally controlled.
@ronjsteele1 and @robertw486 the following article may be of interest called: Placebo Vs. Nocebo Effect: When your mind makes you sick by James Hubbard, M.D., M.P.H.
familydoctormag.com/blog/2008/09/placebo-vs-nocebo-effect-when-your-mind-makes-you-sick/
Really not how epigenetics works. There are definitely genes that influence the rate of depression, cancer, and a host of other issues. The environment will set the results within those genetic limitations. However, for anything to be heritable, even epigenetically, it must first be genetic. You cannot inherit epigenetic genes turned on for genes you don't have. Saying you can't have genes for depression because it is epigenetics is like saying you can't inherit green eyes, your ancestors or now you could just have tried being green eyer and you'd have them instead of those common brown eyes. Not at all how it works.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »blog.mindvalleyacademy.com/alternative-healing/scientist-show-subconscious-thoughts-can-cause-specific-molecular-changes-genes
Science Now Says That Your Subconscious Thoughts And Beliefs Can Actually Cause Molecular Changes In Your Genes
The research behind this article.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4039194/pdf/nihms542085.pdf
The original researchers' use of the term epigentics for this kind of research is considered a contested form of it. Yes, they the researchers do have some evidence of altering the rate of gene expression in certain cells pending meditation activity - say it that way is not controversial. The preferred, uncontested version of epigenetics involves actual heredity - as these researchers are not deterimining if mediators have children with less inflammatory stress, using epigenetics to describe it is not the cleanest term to use.
I will say that in rodents, there are studies that show a male's increased stress profile can be inherited epigenetically down to the grandchild level. Basically, stress a female rodent out by forcing him to go into well lit areas to obtain food, give him a little less stressed time with a female rodent, eventually a grandchild generation appears, and even though they may not be stress, nor their mother or grandmother stressed, these rodents have hyper stress responses like grandpa. I don't think anyone's tried teaching them to meditate yet though. Maybe they'll sit in seiza for hours if offered a little bit of coconut oil coffee?
Honestly, that debate is pretty much over in most medical research fields, judging by the frequent use of the term to refer to pretty much any genome modification that alters transcription. Heritability is not required anymore.
There may be some specific fields that are more precise with their usage.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12205847/Mental-illness-mostly-caused-by-life-events-not-genetics-argue-psychologists.html
This article is of interest to me because indirectly it opens the door to better appreciate the possible interplay of genetics and environment through epigenetics.
We understand that obesity can have a genetic relationship in some cases.
We read only 5% of cancer has a direct traceable link to a genetic cause.
As the article in my take makes a case research $$$ spent on finding the genetic cause of mental illness or cancer may be kind of like pissing into wind expression. Short term one feels better doing it but long term results may be a sticky and smelly mess.
There is no disagreement that financially stable people are less obese and live longer.
The most exciting aspect in my view of this article is we are NOT victims of our genes. It does appear that our environment can and does have a lot of influence on how our genes express themselves because they are under the control of our minds more than we realized.
As most of us into research and/or reading research the concept of Placebo and Nocebo effects always puzzled me. Finally the study of Epigenetics seems to be shedding some light on how both effects are mentally controlled.
@ronjsteele1 and @robertw486 the following article may be of interest called: Placebo Vs. Nocebo Effect: When your mind makes you sick by James Hubbard, M.D., M.P.H.
familydoctormag.com/blog/2008/09/placebo-vs-nocebo-effect-when-your-mind-makes-you-sick/
But that doesn't mean what you're implying it means.
That means that only 5% of cancer cases have inherited known mutations in genes that result in genome instability. The instability causes the genome to more easily accumulate other mutations that result in cancer.
That percentage doesn't indicate how many inherited mutations resulting in genome instability, but aren't known to as of yet. If you think we are anywhere close to characterizing and fully functionally annotating the human genome, and the cumulative effects of SNPs, you're mistaken. We've found mutations that are clearly deleterious that occur in genes required for certain pathways to function. The low-hanging fruit.
We've not characterized combinations of SNPs that together are deleterious, but on their own are not. We've not characterized SNPs that slightly change the function of a gene but don't cause a significant phenotype unless found in combination with other similarly mutated genes in the pathway. We've not characterized diseases where the cause can be mutations in any one of multiple genes - possibly from different pathways. Etc, ad nauseum. These things have been characterized in microbes, because you have the power to do those kinds of analyses. In humans, we don't.
ETA: Sorry for the long delay, emergency at work. Should add of course there are epigenetic causes as well.0 -
I don't characterize it as the subconscious, however it is factually true that the mind is not separate from the body, and that our emotions affect the health of our entire bodies, through the hypothalamus, for example. The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, aka "stress response," has a particularly profound effect on mental and physical health.0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »The Woobecon. You've crossed it.
So much crystal power I swear I heard "My life for Aiur", and "you must construct additional pylons".
There is no Dana. Only Zuul
I am the keymaster.....are you the gatekeeper?0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12205847/Mental-illness-mostly-caused-by-life-events-not-genetics-argue-psychologists.html
This article is of interest to me because indirectly it opens the door to better appreciate the possible interplay of genetics and environment through epigenetics.
We understand that obesity can have a genetic relationship in some cases.
We read only 5% of cancer has a direct traceable link to a genetic cause.
As the article in my take makes a case research $$$ spent on finding the genetic cause of mental illness or cancer may be kind of like pissing into wind expression. Short term one feels better doing it but long term results may be a sticky and smelly mess.
There is no disagreement that financially stable people are less obese and live longer.
The most exciting aspect in my view of this article is we are NOT victims of our genes. It does appear that our environment can and does have a lot of influence on how our genes express themselves because they are under the control of our minds more than we realized.
As most of us into research and/or reading research the concept of Placebo and Nocebo effects always puzzled me. Finally the study of Epigenetics seems to be shedding some light on how both effects are mentally controlled.
@ronjsteele1 and @robertw486 the following article may be of interest called: Placebo Vs. Nocebo Effect: When your mind makes you sick by James Hubbard, M.D., M.P.H.
familydoctormag.com/blog/2008/09/placebo-vs-nocebo-effect-when-your-mind-makes-you-sick/
But that doesn't mean what you're implying it means.
That means that only 5% of cancer cases have inherited known mutations in genes that result in genome instability. The instability causes the genome to more easily accumulate other mutations that result in cancer.
That percentage doesn't indicate how many inherited mutations resulting in genome instability, but aren't known to as of yet. If you think we are anywhere close to characterizing and fully functionally annotating the human genome, and the cumulative effects of SNPs, you're mistaken. We've found mutations that are clearly deleterious that occur in genes required for certain pathways to function. The low-hanging fruit.
We've not characterized combinations of SNPs that together are deleterious, but on their own are not. We've not characterized SNPs that slightly change the function of a gene but don't cause a significant phenotype unless found in combination with other similarly mutated genes in the pathway. We've not characterized diseases where the cause can be mutations in any one of multiple genes - possibly from different pathways. Etc, ad nauseum. These things have been characterized in microbes, because you have the power to do those kinds of analyses. In humans, we don't.
ETA: Sorry for the long delay, emergency at work. Should add of course there are epigenetic causes as well.
Thanks, I should have added the word 'risks' so it reads: We read only 5% of cancer 'risks' have a direct traceable link to a genetic cause.
Part 2.b in my mind relates to epigenetics as I understand it today. Clearly it is a term that means different things to different researchers today.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epi-
As with any software coding every additional branch may expediential increase possible end results. As we learn more about the programming of DNA and the impact of the epigenetic bridges the better. The bridges do not seem to be hard coded so the unknowns from the environmental influences will never be fully knowable I expect.
The point of discussion for the article about mental illness seems to be where to spend research $$$. We know that is a huge mental connection (not mental illness per se) involving obesity. When it comes to the children it seems many are in an environment that leads to obesity long before they gain any understanding of diet.
A teenager with messed up hormonal signaling and prediabetic or worse would require a lot of reprogramming learn how to eat for the best long term health.
At the age of 65 even with my educational background I am just grasping obesity is NOT a calorie issue as much as not eating the correct macro at least in my case. My 18 year old kids do not eat well today because I did not eat correctly in front of them. Thankfully my wife did a good job diet wise so they got to be grown without ever being overweight.
In short our health knowledge base continues to expand exponentially so how do we get that info to the masses?
I see nearly ZERO interest in eating for better health setting in the local fast food or local greasy spoon local places of eating. The people coming to MFP are not the norm for sure.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12205847/Mental-illness-mostly-caused-by-life-events-not-genetics-argue-psychologists.html
This article is of interest to me because indirectly it opens the door to better appreciate the possible interplay of genetics and environment through epigenetics.
We understand that obesity can have a genetic relationship in some cases.
We read only 5% of cancer has a direct traceable link to a genetic cause.
As the article in my take makes a case research $$$ spent on finding the genetic cause of mental illness or cancer may be kind of like pissing into wind expression. Short term one feels better doing it but long term results may be a sticky and smelly mess.
There is no disagreement that financially stable people are less obese and live longer.
The most exciting aspect in my view of this article is we are NOT victims of our genes. It does appear that our environment can and does have a lot of influence on how our genes express themselves because they are under the control of our minds more than we realized.
As most of us into research and/or reading research the concept of Placebo and Nocebo effects always puzzled me. Finally the study of Epigenetics seems to be shedding some light on how both effects are mentally controlled.
@ronjsteele1 and @robertw486 the following article may be of interest called: Placebo Vs. Nocebo Effect: When your mind makes you sick by James Hubbard, M.D., M.P.H.
familydoctormag.com/blog/2008/09/placebo-vs-nocebo-effect-when-your-mind-makes-you-sick/
But that doesn't mean what you're implying it means.
That means that only 5% of cancer cases have inherited known mutations in genes that result in genome instability. The instability causes the genome to more easily accumulate other mutations that result in cancer.
That percentage doesn't indicate how many inherited mutations resulting in genome instability, but aren't known to as of yet. If you think we are anywhere close to characterizing and fully functionally annotating the human genome, and the cumulative effects of SNPs, you're mistaken. We've found mutations that are clearly deleterious that occur in genes required for certain pathways to function. The low-hanging fruit.
We've not characterized combinations of SNPs that together are deleterious, but on their own are not. We've not characterized SNPs that slightly change the function of a gene but don't cause a significant phenotype unless found in combination with other similarly mutated genes in the pathway. We've not characterized diseases where the cause can be mutations in any one of multiple genes - possibly from different pathways. Etc, ad nauseum. These things have been characterized in microbes, because you have the power to do those kinds of analyses. In humans, we don't.
ETA: Sorry for the long delay, emergency at work. Should add of course there are epigenetic causes as well.
Thanks, I should have added the word 'risks' so it reads: We read only 5% of cancer 'risks' have a direct traceable link to a genetic cause.
Part 2.b in my mind relates to epigenetics as I understand it today. Clearly it is a term that means different things to different researchers today.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epi-
As with any software coding every additional branch may expediential increase possible end results. As we learn more about the programming of DNA and the impact of the epigenetic bridges the better. The bridges do not seem to be hard coded so the unknowns from the environmental influences will never be fully knowable I expect.
The point of discussion for the article about mental illness seems to be where to spend research $$$. We know that is a huge mental connection (not mental illness per se) involving obesity. When it comes to the children it seems many are in an environment that leads to obesity long before they gain any understanding of diet.
A teenager with messed up hormonal signaling and prediabetic or worse would require a lot of reprogramming learn how to eat for the best long term health.
At the age of 65 even with my educational background I am just grasping obesity is NOT a calorie issue as much as not eating the correct macro at least in my case. My 18 year old kids do not eat well today because I did not eat correctly in front of them. Thankfully my wife did a good job diet wise so they got to be grown without ever being overweight.
In short our health knowledge base continues to expand exponentially so how do we get that info to the masses?
I see nearly ZERO interest in eating for better health setting in the local fast food or local greasy spoon local places of eating. The people coming to MFP are not the norm for sure.
That wasn't the point I was making - my point is that the 5% is likely drastically understated. It's what is known today, only. And we don't know hardly anything.
Ask any genomics analyst whose job is analyzing the effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). If they are honest, they will tell you how seldom they can make a prediction of effect with any confidence. And of those predictions, how few will actually be accurate, presuming they are one of the lucky ones that has access to the resources necessary to do the wet lab verification.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »I see nearly ZERO interest in eating for better health setting in the local fast food or local greasy spoon local places of eating. The people coming to MFP are not the norm for sure.
I know! It's like how people totally shun my venison recipes at the local PETA meetings.
If you genuinely want to corner people to talk about healthy eating in your community (even if you and I don't see eye to eye on what healthy eating is), maybe start a meet-up, rather than expecting to find people really focused on it hanging out at a fast food joint or greasy spoon. Not that people interested in healthy eating might not also visit such places on occasion, but I wouldn't expect it to be the main clientele or for people to be interested in discussing it in that setting, especially if they are made to feel defensive or (as with many getting FF) in a hurry.
Lots of people in my community seem to be interested in healthy eating. They are all over the green market, for example, and the raw vegan place (again, though, they and I might not see 100% eye to eye on what it is) and even the WF (not that everyone there is).0 -
My area is really into redneck eating for the most part. Rabbit food is a put down remark. Right now I can not think of a health conscious place to eat but being a college town there must be a few out of the way places. We have them from time to time but they typically close after a few years. After several posts about Wendy's I am going to check them out tonight for LCHF for the first because the kids like to eat there from time to time. McDonalds real eggs cooked in real butter works of my WOE. In the mean time I need to work on programming my subconscious thoughts.
0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »My area is really into redneck eating for the most part. Rabbit food is a put down remark. Right now I can not think of a health conscious place to eat but being a college town there must be a few out of the way places. We have them from time to time but they typically close after a few years. After several posts about Wendy's I am going to check them out tonight for LCHF for the first because the kids like to eat there from time to time. McDonalds real eggs cooked in real butter works of my WOE. In the mean time I need to work on programming my subconscious thoughts.
Back in the day, it used to be the redneck standard to raise your own vegetables, aka, rabbit food, and then cook them WITH the rabbit in a nice fricassee. It was also a tradition in the spring to go out and gather spring greens or spring tonic--nettles for soups and nettle tea, "poke sallet," dandelions, ramps, morels, watercress, all kinds of wild edibles that are now trendy to forage for. Then of course through the summer and fall there are all kinds of greens, notably collards and mustard, cooked with some ham hock and fat back. If you want to program your subconscious thoughts, there is nothing like getting one's butt into the woods to hunt for greens or critters, or getting one's hands into the soil to grow a garden. My 6-year-old's "chore" yesterday was helping mama start seeds by filling a plastic box with bags of soil mix, and working water into it with a shovel, just because I knew he would spend an hour playing with it and get nice and dirty.
I see you are in Kentucky--do you have any traditional barbeque or soul food restaurants in the area, or at least a Cracker Barrel? When we travel in the South, we generally will stop to eat at Cracker Barrels because we can get sauteed trout, turnip greens, fried okra, sweet potato, green beans, pinto beans, pretty good (if not frou-frou) salads, pot roast, pork tenderloin, grilled chicken breast, broccoli--all kinds of tasty vegetables, particularly on the "wholesome fixin's" menu with the calories listed. I kind of had to force myself to eat the greens at first but now I love them.
Or at your local greasy spoon--maybe they would put on menu some of the more traditional (and healthy) foods with a little encouragement. Replace the SAD with the TAD--Traditional American Diet. You probably have a wealth of people in your community in their 80s and 90s that remember "hard times" and how to better live off the land. They would be great people to interview and record before their knowledge dies with them.0 -
telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12206669/Long-term-vegetarian-diet-changes-human-DNA-raising-risk-of-cancer-and-heart-disease.html
Diet and DNA mentioned together in this article but not subconscious. The use of grains and oil from grains has been considered by some in the field to increase cancer for years. As in all research one has to look for the 'agenda' because biases is almost always going to impact studies.0 -
jmbmilholland wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »My area is really into redneck eating for the most part. Rabbit food is a put down remark. Right now I can not think of a health conscious place to eat but being a college town there must be a few out of the way places. We have them from time to time but they typically close after a few years. After several posts about Wendy's I am going to check them out tonight for LCHF for the first because the kids like to eat there from time to time. McDonalds real eggs cooked in real butter works of my WOE. In the mean time I need to work on programming my subconscious thoughts.
Back in the day, it used to be the redneck standard to raise your own vegetables, aka, rabbit food, and then cook them WITH the rabbit in a nice fricassee. It was also a tradition in the spring to go out and gather spring greens or spring tonic--nettles for soups and nettle tea, "poke sallet," dandelions, ramps, morels, watercress, all kinds of wild edibles that are now trendy to forage for. Then of course through the summer and fall there are all kinds of greens, notably collards and mustard, cooked with some ham hock and fat back. If you want to program your subconscious thoughts, there is nothing like getting one's butt into the woods to hunt for greens or critters, or getting one's hands into the soil to grow a garden. My 6-year-old's "chore" yesterday was helping mama start seeds by filling a plastic box with bags of soil mix, and working water into it with a shovel, just because I knew he would spend an hour playing with it and get nice and dirty.
I see you are in Kentucky--do you have any traditional barbeque or soul food restaurants in the area, or at least a Cracker Barrel? When we travel in the South, we generally will stop to eat at Cracker Barrels because we can get sauteed trout, turnip greens, fried okra, sweet potato, green beans, pinto beans, pretty good (if not frou-frou) salads, pot roast, pork tenderloin, grilled chicken breast, broccoli--all kinds of tasty vegetables, particularly on the "wholesome fixin's" menu with the calories listed. I kind of had to force myself to eat the greens at first but now I love them.
Or at your local greasy spoon--maybe they would put on menu some of the more traditional (and healthy) foods with a little encouragement. Replace the SAD with the TAD--Traditional American Diet. You probably have a wealth of people in your community in their 80s and 90s that remember "hard times" and how to better live off the land. They would be great people to interview and record before their knowledge dies with them.
Good points. I remember Mom picking 'poke salad' as my ears understood back then in the spring. Yes we grew our meats and vegetables. While we have Cracker Barrels the greasy spoons do serve the items daily that taste better than at Cracker Barrels. I think that generation of home taught cooks is about passed however.
Since the 50's lard and butter have been replaced with oils from grains which seems to put us at great health risks per some research. The people who died at 55 ate basically the same foods as those who died at 95 so I guess genes and general state of mental thoughts were the main differences that impacted life spans perhaps.
I know people who repeatedly state they know they are going to die from cancer, heart disease, etc like their parents and grandparents did. Research above tend to show that kind of self talk is self fulfilling more often than not. We know so little and understand even less about the interactions of mind and food on life spans it seems.0 -
jmbmilholland wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »My area is really into redneck eating for the most part. Rabbit food is a put down remark. Right now I can not think of a health conscious place to eat but being a college town there must be a few out of the way places. We have them from time to time but they typically close after a few years. After several posts about Wendy's I am going to check them out tonight for LCHF for the first because the kids like to eat there from time to time. McDonalds real eggs cooked in real butter works of my WOE. In the mean time I need to work on programming my subconscious thoughts.
Back in the day, it used to be the redneck standard to raise your own vegetables, aka, rabbit food, and then cook them WITH the rabbit in a nice fricassee. It was also a tradition in the spring to go out and gather spring greens or spring tonic--nettles for soups and nettle tea, "poke sallet," dandelions, ramps, morels, watercress, all kinds of wild edibles that are now trendy to forage for. Then of course through the summer and fall there are all kinds of greens, notably collards and mustard, cooked with some ham hock and fat back. If you want to program your subconscious thoughts, there is nothing like getting one's butt into the woods to hunt for greens or critters, or getting one's hands into the soil to grow a garden. My 6-year-old's "chore" yesterday was helping mama start seeds by filling a plastic box with bags of soil mix, and working water into it with a shovel, just because I knew he would spend an hour playing with it and get nice and dirty.
I see you are in Kentucky--do you have any traditional barbeque or soul food restaurants in the area, or at least a Cracker Barrel? When we travel in the South, we generally will stop to eat at Cracker Barrels because we can get sauteed trout, turnip greens, fried okra, sweet potato, green beans, pinto beans, pretty good (if not frou-frou) salads, pot roast, pork tenderloin, grilled chicken breast, broccoli--all kinds of tasty vegetables, particularly on the "wholesome fixin's" menu with the calories listed. I kind of had to force myself to eat the greens at first but now I love them.
Or at your local greasy spoon--maybe they would put on menu some of the more traditional (and healthy) foods with a little encouragement. Replace the SAD with the TAD--Traditional American Diet. You probably have a wealth of people in your community in their 80s and 90s that remember "hard times" and how to better live off the land. They would be great people to interview and record before their knowledge dies with them.
As part of the New Deal there was a lot of work done recording the traditional American diet in various areas. I have a book about it -- quite interesting. (I wish my memory was better; I'll have to dig it out.)0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Since the 50's lard and butter have been replaced with oils from grains which seems to put us at great health risks per some research.
Hmm. Most restaurants I go to (other than the olive oil ones) seem to use butter, butter, and more butter. I think it's still a restaurant staple.
I also know lots of people (northerners, though, most people I know are northerners, although a college friend is in Lexington and I have some other good friends in TX and AL) who are all into making pie with lard. I'm still a butter person for baked goods, but I've thought about trying it (or did when I used to bake -- side effect of weight loss is I barely ever do anymore, and since I'm out of practice it seems like more work).0 -
Locally the skills seem to retiring and passing away. I noticed in a local greasy spoon the pies in the pie case had come off of a truck instead of the kitchen like in the past. The greens and other vegetables come in gallon cans so nothing is home grown anymore. Now that I am physically doing better on LCHF I have thought about a garden. My wife and I grew up with stay at home moms so canning and food storage is known in our house.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions