We went to a dinner party last night (thanks Tim & Sarah!), and Joanne & I won the party. Not saying much in that the other invitees have young children. But I digress. Something that came up in conversation was pack-rattedness--something I've linked to in the sidebar. So it was a battle to see who had the worse case. I don't think there was a clear winner, but I think I had the most "why the hell do you have that?!" award. I, up until today, had kept every issue of The Shadow (high school newspaper). All four years and 33 issues. But the shame of my "victory" got me to spend the day clearing out our storage room. And it went well--the stuff that's in the room (as opposed to a closet) is more stuff to get rid off, though I'm not inclined to give it away (Joanne's wedding dress, my various "collectibles", and so on). Other big step was conceding that I don't need to keep the packaging boxes of various items we've purchased (the plasma, DVD player, lamp, etc.)...
Other downsizing--I've returned to listing some DVDs and CDs at half.com or Amazon, and I've made *3* sales to institutions---Black Orpheus to a ritzy resort in New Jersey, seasons 1-4 of the West Wing to the New York Public Library, and an out-of-print edition of Notorious: Criterion Collection to... ASU's Film Studies department. Odd.
If you were/are interested in the Planet Earth documentary series, Amazon resellers have pushed the price under $30. (normally sells for over $50).
Switching topics, I came across an old article from NYT about the myth of low fat is good health, centered heavily around the Atkins diet. The same author, Gary Taubes, has a book coming out next month entitled Good Calories, Bad Calories, which expands greatly on the article. One excerpt from the article:
The gist of the glycemic-index idea is that the longer it takes the carbohydrates to be digested, the lesser the impact on blood sugar and insulin and the healthier the food. Those foods with the highest rating on the glycemic index are some simple sugars, starches and anything made from flour. Green vegetables, beans and whole grains cause a much slower rise in blood sugar because they have fiber, a nondigestible carbohydrate, which slows down digestion and lowers the glycemic index. Protein and fat serve the same purpose, which implies that eating fat can be beneficial, a notion that is still unacceptable. And the glycemic-index concept implies that a primary cause of Syndrome X, heart disease, Type 2 diabetes and obesity is the long-term damage caused by the repeated surges of insulin that come from eating starches and refined carbohydrates. This suggests a kind of unified field theory for these chronic diseases, but not one that coexists easily with the low-fat doctrine.And I never did return to finish off that Big Brother in China post. Maybe some day...
2 comments:
The problem with the "low glycemic index idea" is that it's like a lot of ideas. Sounds promising and logical, but is not backed up by peer reviewed research. I believe I've seen at least one study that says the GI value doesn't really matter to a statisically signficant amount. I'd love to see a well thought out synopsis of the current state of the research.
Sells a lot of books though.
Taubes' book, I think, will have a lot of current research, albeit research that supports his contrarian view. Amazon has it listed at 640 pages.
And I believe high GI is sometimes good--post weight training, for example. The high GI gives the body a source to burn rather than metabolizing muscle. Or that's my understanding from some random body building webpage.
Post a Comment