I read your blog occasionally, and after being out of town for awhile, am only just now catching up a bit.

Personally – I *love* politics, and am interested in hearing about all kinds of perspectives, yet, I was thinking that if you were going to write more political comments, then what about narrowing the focus into where ‘food/health/medicine’ intersects? Politics is in everything, and I’d be very interested to hear your take on the recent pet food recall, and the subsequent discovery of possibly melamine-contaminated pork, fish and chicken. That, in conjuction with PIGS (political interest groups) such as the ADA or the AMA or what have you (a.k.a. lobbyists), and the way you’re so good at debunking a lot of the food and health related dogma that seems to be so prevalent – well, this would make your blog even more interesting. I mean, you’re already doing a lot of that kind of thing, and I think it’s a great idea to talk more about the poltics of food and food production. That, and the medicines and so on. It all ties together.

There’s just so much to talk about – and lately, it seems that imported foods are something we should be thinking about in terms of our health and well-being. I always wondered why it was called the “FDA” – not sure I like ‘food’ and ‘drugs’ lumped in together like that.

And what of corn subsidies? Is the USDA a lobbying group or is it something else?

Lotsa stuff – and it’s all very interesting to me.

Anyway, enough about that – just wanted to chime in with the idea that ‘politics is in everything’, including food, medicine, health and well-being – which is your forte.

Sara

Hi Sara–

Thanks for the comment.  I do indeed have an opinion on all the above.  I may get into them in the future, but for now my advice is not to take anything that comes from China.

Maybe your suggestions will allow me to indulge in my political gripes by channeling them in the direction of the food, drug and supplement business.  Now if John Edwards would just go away…

Cheers–

MRE 

You apply so much scrutiny to nutritional studies and literature that your opinions and conclusions can almost be considered facts.

However, your ‘fancy’ posts are merely editorials and I believe what upsets or (in the gaming world) ‘aggros’ these people is that when they come here looking for facts and truths and they see your editorials they assume that you are listing them as ‘facts’ as well.

Of course homegrown fundamentalists being as dangerous as Kurdish fundamentalists openly crushing young women’s heads in the streets, although I’d think it’s hard to argue for, is still a matter of opinion.

A way around this might be to post “Editorial” in your ‘fancy’ posts titles so that people don’t get so riled up about them. They get upset because you say Alec Baldwin is vile, but in another post, you say that gov’t. employees are swine. One is true but the other is opinion.

Nonetheless, people expect the same scrutiny and unbias in ALL your posts because that’s what you uphold to in your nutrition posts. So, they see a post that is opinion-based statement and feel compelled to prove that as such with as much vehemence as you attack the biased drug studies.

With that being said, consider how many people visit your blog and then consider how many people comment. Remember that the ones that are screaming out against your opinion posts are the same type of people that put bumper stickers on their cars.

There are probably just as many, if not more, people that agree with you but don’t comment because they are waiting to hear your response. The non-vocal majority should probably speak up and participate.

Your interests in government and politics is what allows your broad view of medicine, big pharma, etc. The readers here get access to knowledge and a critical review that’s easy to understand by a licensed physician which they would be hard-pressed to find somewhere else. In addition, almost all of their comments and questions are answered in a timely manner. All that’s asked in return is that they don’t begrudge you when you post an opinion piece. It seems so petty and ungrateful when you think about it. Maybe Alec Baldwin should leave them a comment.

Lastly, for those claims that your blog is becoming a ‘political’ blog, it only seems like it as they keep reading the commentaries. If you look at the actual posts, at least every other post is a nutritional post.

So, my advice to you would be just to add the word, ‘Editorial’ above your ‘fancy’ posts.

My advice to the ‘griefers’ (another gamer term) is to just skip those posts as a new nutritional post will be up soon.

But hey, that’s just my opinion.

Hi Scott–

Thanks for the advice.

Cheers– 

Maybe I’ll just add more nutritional posts so that it will seem like there are fewer ‘fancy’ ones.

Cheers–

M 

While I’m not interested in reading political stuff in general, if it is related to govt health and/or drug agencies and/or policies then it is is of interest.

regards

P.S. I recently bought the PPLP book but haven’t had a chance to read it.

Hi Anita–

Welcome to the fold.  Hope you enjoy PPLP.

Cheers–

MRE 

You might consider establishing categories for your posts, i.e. Health&Nutrition, Politics, and/or others. Those reading your blog can then choose which category to read. For some blogs that I access I can set my link to open in a specific category. Just a thought.

Personally, I’ve enjoyed all your posts, but have wondered how long you were going to last….responding to all comments!

Kind Regards,

P.S. No response expected!!

Well, then, I guess you won’t get one.

As an occasional poster and long-time fan I welcome the renewed focus on nutrition. Years ago I had tried Atkins but I was never more successful in my quest for health that when I found PP.

I have laughed myself silly over some of your postings and have often agreed with you political and social commentary but I really love your specialty: nutrition and exposing the folly of the current American diet.

It must be a burden to be talented in so many areas–and you are!

Best to you,
Barb W
Pittsburgh, PA

Hi Barb–

It is a huge burden.  Just ask my wife.

Cheers–

MRE 

I posted on your blog 8-10 months ago while I was pg with my second child (thanks LC!). She’s 6m old and I’m currently 9w pregnant with #3 and hope it sticks. I am currently 40. My OB was surprised as all heck to see me back again so soon and even asked me if I’d seen the local fertility doc. (will they even see you 4m postpartum from a csection?) No fertility docs, just low carbing. I wondered then and still wonder how much of the decline in fertility in the 40ish age group in the current generation is due to insulin resistance. We’ll see if I have a ‘good report’ as my grandmother used to say on Monday. Had a 7w3d baby with a heartbeat last week though so hopefully all is still OK.

As far as kick ass methylation substances go, look at choline. My personal favorite. Check out pubmed publications by ‘Zeisel SH’ on fetal brain development with and w/o choline supplementation. Methylates genes responsible for apoptosis in stem cell lines. Wonder what it would do to beta cell stem cells?…

Take care!

Hi Beth–

I don’t mind responding to comments like yours. It’s the long, political ones that give me trouble, not because I don’t enjoy the debate, but because they require so much time.

The methylfolate supplement you’re looking for is called Metafolin.  The brand we take is sold by Source Naturals, which I bought because it was the one available at my local natural food grocers.  It’s not particularly expensive.  The price tag is gone on the bottle I have, but I recall being kind of surprised at how inexpensive it was compared to what I was expecting.

I, too, love choline (along with betaine) as a good methylating agent.  Thanks for the paper citation.

Cheers–

MRE 

I can assure you that most bureaucrats define ‘free’ a lot differently than do I.

Cheers–