Welcome Angela.

Happy Day 12 Folks, or Day 2 or 7 or 3 or 5. What ever day you're on hope it's going well. What you need? What info do you need to make it work better for you? What support is most useful, what do others do that is most problematic? Use this as a tool to air things out,

Happy Tuesday Folks How R ya?

Gathering Data this week, Glucose is now recovering to 90's 2 hr post meals, fasted is still over 125 but a lot lower than the 190-230 I have been seeing for the last two and half months. I've added 400mg of Berberine per day.

Your Whole30 Daily: Day 26!
Inbox
x
Whole30 Daily daily@whole9life.com via mail11.wdc01.mcdlv.net

4:06 AM (2 hours ago)

to me
Your Whole30 Daily for Thursday, 9 April 2015!


Is this email not displaying correctly?
View it in your browser.
The Whole30 Daily

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
Confirmation Bias
Don’t Believe Everything You Read
N=1: Self-Experimentation
How to Read a Scientific Paper

Welcome to Day 26!

Right now you’re probably feeling mighty healthy. You might even be feeling pretty savvy, too, what with your food-label reading, your product-label reading, and your new awareness of media’s influence on your body image and self-esteem.

But today we’re asking—do you feel health-savvy? Are you equipped with the tools necessary to evaluate the often conflicting and confusing health claims portrayed in the media? Do you know how to evaluate an advertisement, read a news article with a critical eye, or understand an academic paper without your eyes crossing?

Today we want to teach you how to fish… for solid, relevant, evidence-based health information. Get ready, because today is jam-packed with some vital tips and tricks that will help you stay afloat in the media’s sea of data, statistics, and medical claims.

Have a great Day 26!
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

Do you feel befuddled by the conflicting health information you read in the paper, see on the Internet, and hear on your local morning radio show?

Daily drinking in pregnancy 'not safe'VS.A drink a day 'safe' during pregnancy, claim experts

Could eating cake at breakfast help your weight loss?VS.Egg for breakfast: best way to fight flab

Coffee linked with heart failureVS.Drinking coffee may reduce risk of heart failure

These are just a few examples of the real articles about important health topics that we found floating around on reputable online news sources. How is the typical consumer of media supposed to sort out these types of contradictory claims?

Mark Twain once said, “There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.” Whether proven or not, information posited as fact can be incredibly persuasive, particularly statistics that might be used to strengthen a weak theory.

Are we trying to confuse you even more by presenting you with these opposing articles (and that rather discouraging quote from Mark Twain)? Not in the least. We think health information reported by the media can provide you with valuable references and “food for thought” along your path to optimal health. Heck, we’re purveyors of health information in the media, and we love data and statistics. But we don’t believe everything we read… and we try to leave our own biases out of our critical evaluation. Which is sometimes easier said than done.

Our point? Learn to use a critical eye when reviewing material that may end up influencing your health, or the health of the ones you love… and don’t let your own thoughts or feelings influence the way you pick and choose what to believe.
Confirmation Bias

Bias: Any influence (preference, inclination, or a tendency towards a particular point of view) that distorts the results of a research study.

It’s human nature—you tend to look for information that confirms your beliefs, and ignore information that challenges them. This is called “confirmation bias,” and it’s like seeing the world through a filter. And the worst part? Not only will you actively look for evidence and seek out experts that confirm your existing beliefs, but you'll hide from or discredit any information that contradicts your viewpoint. This can cause you to dump money into a failing business, to dump time into a bad relationship, or stick to a “diet” that clearly is not working.

It’s hard to avoid—after all, you want to be right, and you want to continue to be able to justify the things you want to do. So if you love your red wine, you’ll gravitate towards research and articles that report the heart-healthy benefits of resveratrol. If you hate running, you’ll seek out information that demonstrates that regular long-distance endurance training creates unhealthy oxidative stress. If you love your dark chocolate, you’ll probably read more articles by Mark Sisson, who lists dark chocolate as a sensible “Primal” vice, than articles from us, which say, “Candy is candy, people.” Do you see where we’re headed with this?

Confirmation bias is hard to spot, especially in yourself, but here are five ways to help minimize this cognitive distortion.

Remove your ego. At its root, confirmation bias is an ego disease. We hate to be wrong, and we're desperate for others to validate our position. Seek the truth over being right.
Seek disagreement. Foster an environment where it is not only okay to disagree, but encouraged. Ask friends, family members, and co-workers the question, "Why am I wrong?" At meetings, require everyone to play devil's advocate.
Ask better questions. One of the most worthless questions to ask a friend or co-worker is "How do you think I did?" because you'll never get any constructive feedback. A much better question is, "What could I have done differently to make it better?"
Keep information channels open. Constantly seek alternative views and opinions in print, on TV and in person. That might mean visiting websites, reading newspapers and watching shows that you've previously avoided. Remember, seek the truth, not evidence that you're right.
Google better. Don't search what you want to prove, because with over 3 billion web pages, you're bound to find one that agrees with you. Instead, use open-ended searches that aren't biased.

Source: Five Tips to Avoid Confirmation Bias by Robert Pagliarini
Don’t Believe Everything You Read

When you see an article or ad that cites health data and statistics, take the time to read between the lines, and ask some tough questions.

What is the article or ad saying? What do the numbers mean? Stop and evaluate the actual health claim and the wording is being used. Does the claim seem either too definitive (“POM Wonderful pomegranate juice creates a 30% decrease in arterial plaque”) or too vague (“Pom Wonderful juice may improve erectile dysfunction”?) In fact, both of these are actual claims made by the company—and both are being disputed by the FTC.
Who did the research, and who funded it? Make sure you understand what individual, organization, or business is responsible for the study that’s being reported, and if the money behind the research may be influencing the outcomes. For example, this “research” which “demonstrates” that coffee and gluten are cross-reactive was conducted and funded by the company who performs the lab test to determine if you have a cross-reactivity between coffee and gluten. Hmmm… so it’s kind of in their best interest (to generate more lab tests) to conclude in their “study” that there is a relationship between coffee and gluten, huh? (We’re not saying there isn’t a link there… only that we’d like to see better, more impartial research.)
Is this a reliable source, free from bias or hidden motives? Who owns and runs the website, newspaper, magazine, or blog from which you are getting your information? Is it an individual, a branch of the government, a university, a health organization, a business who sells stuff, a credentialed professional? What is their motivation for disseminating the information? (For example, if the title of the website is, “Toxic Fluoride,” do you think you’ll get an unbiased viewpoint?) Do they happen to sell the product that “fixes” the problems they outline in their article? (This article discusses all of the problems with fluoride in the water supply, and sells a filter to fix it.) Are there sources cited or links to additional information, or are bold claims made with no back-up? (This one article, detailing “the truth about mandatory fluoride,” has neither.) If there isn’t much—or any—background information for you to be able to accurately evaluate the source, it’s time to do some more digging, or find another, more reputable, less biased source on the same subject.
Self-experimentation is key. Even if the article is published by a reputable, credible source, isn’t trying to sell you anything, has plenty of references, and is supported by peer-reviewed research, it still may not be the best recommendation for you. This article touting the muscle-promoting benefits of whey protein by Dr. Joseph Mercola passes our sniff test… but if you’ve done the Whole30, reintroduced whey, and experiences gas, bloating, puffiness, or other negative side effects, don’t you have your answer? The next time you read about the next diet trend, exercise protocol, or lifestyle “solution,” think back to your own self-experiments and see if their recommendations fit with your experience.

An “N of 1” (Self Experimentation)

The Whole30 program is basically a way to conduct a little research of your own, with you as the sole participant. (In scientific studies, “n” stands for the sample size, so a self-experiment is often written as “n=1,” or just “N.”)

Take a look again at the basic components of a research study. If you were to write a research article about your experience on the Whole30, what would it look like?

Abstract: I have spent the last ten years of my life trying to lose the same 20 pounds, plagued by allergies, digestion issues, and low energy. The diet and nutrition out there is confusing, and until now, nothing has worked long-term for me. My friend at work started looking and feeling better after completing the Whole30 program, so I decided to try it out for myself. After 30 days of eating healthy, nutritious, real food, I have lost 11 pounds, gone down two pant sizes, no longer need my seasonal allergy medicine, and have more energy than I have in years. The Whole30 has worked for me, and I recommending everyone give it a try.
Introduction: I found the Whole30 program when a friend recommended the book It Starts With Food. There were lots of interesting and inspiring testimonials about the effectiveness of the program in the book and on the Whole9 website. I decided to eat only the foods recommended by the Whole30 program for 30 days to see if I could finally find the health results I have been seeking.
Methods: I (describe yourself here) ate meat, seafood, eggs, vegetables, fruits, and good fats for 30 days. I consumed no sugar (real or artificial), alcohol, grains (even pseudo-cereals), dairy (save clarified butter and ghee), or legumes (including peanuts or soy). I was 100% compliant with the program—no variances. I also did not attempt to recreate junk foods or desserts with “approved” foods, and I did not weigh myself or take measurements during my 30 day program.
Results: I am sleeping a solid eight hours each night and no longer need an alarm clock to wake up. I have high levels of energy throughout the day without experiencing the “mid-day slump.” My clothes fit me better, I’ve visibly lost weight, and my seasonal allergies disappeared. In addition, my cravings for junk food have diminished, and I’m finding it easy to continue this way of eating even after my program.
Discussion: The Whole30 program was an effective way for me to obtain optimal health. The next step in my self-experiment will be to systematically add back in other foods as outlined in the “Reintroduction” section of the program, and evaluate how they affect my health.

Consider writing up your own n=1 case study, after your Whole30 is done! It’s a fun, easy way to share your experience with others.
How to Read a Research Paper

This last section is for those of you ready to go behind the scenes of what the media is reporting, and get your hands on the studies themselves. Academic research articles can be pretty intimidating. They’re often long, cumbersome, and full of language and statistics familiar only to specialists in that particular field of knowledge. However, having some basic article-reading skills can aid you in further evaluating the information you are getting from the media… so it’s time to get your nerd on.

The basic components of a research article are:

Abstract: A summary of the article. For most of us, this is all we need to get the basic gist of the study and conclusions. (And for many studies, it’s all you can get, unless you subscribe to the academic service that published the paper.)
Introduction: Tells you what research has been done in the past and what this researcher hopes to accomplish with his/her current research.
Methods: Details of exactly how those involved conducted the research, including how many people were studied, the demographics of those people, what research was performed and how, what data was collected, and how that data was analyzed.
Results: What they learned after they analyzed the data collected.
Discussion: What the paper’s authors thinks the results mean, and suggestions for further research.

Dallas will often post and “translate” scientific research papers on the Whole9 Facebook page. For example, we posted a link to this study earlier this month:

Effects of chronic stress on penile corpus cavernosum of rats.

Androl. 2012 Jul;33(4):735-9. Epub 2011 Sep 22. De Souza DB, Silva D, Cortez CM, Costa WS, Sampaio FJ.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate structural changes in the penile corpus cavernosum of prepubertal chronically stressed rats. Eight Wistar rats were assigned into the stress group (SG) and were submitted to 2 hours of tube restraint daily, from the fourth to the ninth week of life. Another 7 rats were used as the control group (CG). All animals were weighed weekly. At day 64, animals were sacrificed by anesthetic overdose, blood was collected for testosterone concentration by radioimmunoassay, and penis and adrenal were collected. Adrenal mass index and testosterone serum levels were used to assess the efficacy of the stress stimulus. The surface density of connective tissue and smooth muscle fibers of corpus cavernosum were measured on Masson trichromic-stained slices. Picrosirius red-stained slices were assessed under polarized light for different types of collagen. The Student's t test was applied for mean comparisons, with P < .05 considered significant. Testosterone serum concentrations decreased and adrenal mass index increased, confirming the effectiveness of the stress protocol. Smooth muscle fibers of corpus cavernosum decreased from 14.07% (CG) to 8.98% (SG) (P = .02), and connective tissue increased from 53.66% (CG) to 64.47% (SG) (P = .01). Also, there was a higher level of type I collagen in the SG animals compared with the CG. Stress stimuli induced structural changes in the corpus cavernosum of rats suggestive of penile fibrosis, which may play a role in erection dysfunction.

PMID: 21940985 [PubMed - in process]

Our translation?

“Chronic stress changes the histological structure of the penis, potentially contributing to erectile dysfunction. Stress ruins EVERYTHING.”

Okay, sometimes we like to have a little fun with our scientific research. You can’t fault us for that, can you? So follow along with us on Facebook to learn a little more about the science behind our program, and go here or here if you want more in-depth info on how to read research articles.
How did you do today?