"Chew Like A Caveman For Good Teeth"

I like it!:

"The shift from hunter-gatherers to farmers, which started 13,000 years ago, is central to our modern dental problems. As it spread throughout the world our food became softer, so we didn’t need to chew as much.

"This has a direct effect on the development of our jaws, which are now smaller - too small to accommodate all our teeth.

"“Our diets once consisted of everything in raw form - such as seeds, nuts, vegetables, meat and fruit,” explains Professor Jimmy Steele, head of the School of Dental Sciences at Newcastle University. “Now it consists of foods that are often highly processed, pre-packaged, soft and full of sugar.”

"Our food is so soft in relation to what it was that our teeth are actually redundant, says Dr Nigel Carter of the British Dental Health Foundation. “Shocking though it might sound, I’d say that apart from the necessity of teeth for appearance and speech, we probably no longer need them.”

"The arrival of sugar in Britain, at the start of the 19th century, also had a notable effect, adds Dr Carter: “From that point, the state of our teeth plummeted.”..."

There's an idiotic line at the end, however:

"“Some US experts believe orthodontic work, to correct these problems, could be started earlier,” says Professor Steele - as early as four years old.

"Eating tougher meat and coarse grain to build bigger jaws has also been suggested. But that would take centuries to have an effect."

Centuries? The evidence is that it takes only a generation to go from perfect teeth to horrible teeth, as Weston Price (a dentist) discovered. And there's no reason to think that kids raised with proper nutrition won't have perfect teeth. Of course Steele's a professor of "dental science", the very group that's buried the solution for curing tooth decay for 90 years: bad for business, you know.

Ned Kock relates the tale of his daughter, in a post titled "Looking for a good orthodontist? My recommendation is Dr. Meat":

"What if you have a child with crowded teeth as a preteen or teen? Too late? Should you get him or her to use “cute” braces? Our daughter had crowded teeth a few years ago, as a preteen. It overlapped with the period of my transformation, which meant that she started having a lot more natural foods to eat. There were more of those around, some of which require serious chewing, and less industrialized soft foods. Those natural foods included hard-to-chew beef cuts, served multiple times a week.

"We noticed improvement right away, and in a few years the crowding disappeared. Now she has the kind of smile that could land her a job as a toothpaste model"

That's my kind of solution.

Jimmy Moore just interviewed a dentist who's drawn the correct conclusion about all this: all the nonsense that dentists do is unnecessary if you eat a healthy, low-carb diet. To counter Prof. Steele's credentials, Dr. Hujoel's a "research professor of oral health sciences at the University of Washington School of Dentistry".

"Jogging Barefoot Moves From Fad To Accepted Option"

Cool:

"'I have really bad knees,' says Rebecca Ouding.

"'I have an old knee injury that gets aggravated,' says Bud Uyeda.

"'I ran a marathon 20 years ago, and after that my arches collapsed,' says Dave Hafera.

"Not what you typically hear from people enjoying a fun run on a sunny summer Sunday. But there they were in Maryland's Meadowbrook Park at the Naked Foot 5K last weekend, happily joining 450 others despite injuries that usually spell the end of running careers.

"Their secret? After years of frustration trying to cure these ailments, all have switched to running barefoot or in the minimalist shoes that mimic running shoeless...."

And no obligatory ding-bat podiatrist quote.

I don't know that barefoot running's even risen to the level of a fad. Very, very few people actually run barefoot on a regular basis. But lots of people, like me, see old injuries improve or disappear when running barefoot or in minimalist shoes. Strengthening your feet and legs has many benefits.

"Jogging"? <shudder>.

Go Barefoot To Your Local REI Store...

This is great:

"The lady then said that they reached the conclusion that it is not necessary to prohibit barefoot shoppers and that they notified the managers of the stores, telling them to instruct the workers as such. Wow, I still can't believe this...

"The lady said, "We want you back as a customer and you are welcome to shop barefoot"."

That's terrific. Good for REI. (Just got a pair of Vibram FiveFinger SeeYas that I ordered from REI, now I'm glad I did.)

"How To Be An Ultra Pacer"

Read the whole thing, but here's a taste:

"...One of the most selfless acts a human can perform is pacing another person in an ultrarunning event. Mother Teresa never paced, nor did any of the popes. It transcends all mundane humanity and will surely secure you a ticket in heaven (I visualize heaven as an all day BBQ on the 4th of July with the majority in attendance being thin twenty year old women - you get your own heaven)...."

Hilarious. Thanks to Sean.

"An Interview with Endurance Expert Dr. Philip Maffetone"

Very interesting interview covering a lot of topics that should be of interest to ultra runners. Read the whole thing:

"Will: One of your trademarks is the 180 Formula, which is designed to develop the aerobic capacity of endurance athletes. How did you come to develop the 180 Formula?

"Dr. Phil: I started using heart rate monitors in the late 1970s, and all I had as a guide were the old 220 formulas. But training at these heart rates seemed to induce excessive stress after a very short period of time. I tried searching for the scientific rationale for these formulas and realized there were none. So I began evaluating runners on a treadmill using slower paces, attempting to find a less-stressful and more effective training pace. I eventually performed these tests with a gas analyzer (the athlete would breath through a tube so oxygen and carbon dioxide could be measured), which gave me important information on fat- and sugar burning at various heart rates (along with other factors such as VO2 max).

"I began using training heart rates based on the highest fat-burning levels before the shift to more sugar burning took place. These training intensities were much lower than the 220 formulas, much less stressful, and I saw much more rapid improvements. For example, athletes could soon run faster at the same heart rate, and even burn more fat for energy (and not just while running, but at all times). I soon realized a new formula would be very useful as most runners were not able to have an expensive treadmill evaluation, and the 220 formulas were unacceptable. By experimenting with the math (I basically worked the numbers backwards), I was able to get a formula that correlated extremely well with what the treadmill tests were providing. This became the 180 Formula.

"A heart monitor is a simple biofeedback tool (the hardware), and the 180 Formula (the software) is what makes it useful. Biofeedback can help any athlete because it’s a means of more objectively evaluating progress (or lack of it), impending injury and ill health, and other factors. (I’ve used biofeedback in many other ways throughout my career, including developing various biofeedback techniques such as those for muscles and the brain.)...

"...Will: One of the biggest challenges in a 50 or 100 mile race vs. the marathon is the need to consume calories throughout the entire event to sustain energy. This is often difficult because the stomach doesn't always cooperate. What advice can you give to athletes regarding nutritional needs in races lasting up to 24 hours?

"Dr. Phil: my advice is generally the same for any endurance athlete needing to consume calories during a race: find out what works for you. This involves experimenting during training (not racing). I can make some basic suggestions. The first is water – you’ll usually finish the race dehydrated, so drinking small amounts of water throughout the race, and often, is important.

"Carbohydrate liquids can provide both nutrient (carbs) and water. These carbs actually help maintain our fat-burning process. I prefer monosaccharide carb liquids because they don’t require digestion (which uses energy), so there’s no stomach bloating or gas from undigested carbs, and you can absorb the sugar much easier. These liquids include fruit juice (I don’t recommend citrus) diluted with water, and honey diluted with water. Vegetable juices work well too, but I’ve known only a few athletes who used them. (I also like adding sodium chloride to this type of drink.) Solid carbohydrate foods are important too, but use those that are easy to digest. The best are ripe fruits. While they are in a monosaccharide form and don’t need digestion to get the sugar available for energy, they do need to be well chewed.

"I don’t recommend grains (flour products like breads), potatoes and most sports drinks because they contain carbohydrates bound together that must be digested before they can be absorbed. For example, white sugar (sucrose), maltose sugar products (including maple sugar products) and other commonly used carb sources contain two sugars bound together that require digestion. Grains and potatoes are made up of three sugars bound together (called starch) that require even more digestion. Carbohydrate digestion begins in the mouth and most athletes don’t chew sufficiently for this phase of digestion (especially liquids). During a race (and even training) digestion is normally very inefficient, so give your gut something easy to deal with. Creating digestive stress commonly causes intestinal upset – gas, bloating, and even diarrhea. And, you may not get the full load of nutrients from your foods.

"But there’s another issue just as important. The whole idea behind building the aerobic system is to burn more body fat for energy. You’ll also burn more fat during a race, providing a significant amount of your energy needs. This makes the supplemental nutrition part – eating during a race – a lot easier because you won’t need as much. Supplemental carbohydrates are important during and immediately after racing, and very long training sessions, but not before you train and race...."

Half-Marathon PR, Or, How Not To Run A Race

The first half-marathon I ever ran was the Brooklyn Half-Marathon in 2010. (See all my results here.) I'd just put up a decent showing in a 20k a few months prior (also at that link) and was all set to smoke the half.

Well, nearly everything that could go wrong in a race went wrong.

I lost my colleague I was running the race with, and when the race started I was at the absolute tail end of the pack. So I spent most of the early part of the race running hard, as I worked through the 7,000-strong crowd, instead of starting with the 8 mile-per-minute pace group.

I'd also just bought a pair of the then-brand-new Vibram FiveFinger Bikilas, and decided to use the race as the break-in run for these shoes. Rule no. 1 for racing: never wear new shoes; I knew this. Since the interior of the Bikila was supposed to be barefoot-friendly, I ran the race without socks. This worked fine until about mile 6, when the strap anchor point started abrading my foot, and I was actually bleeding. Luckily, I had a pair of injinji crew socks in my pocket, and I spent a good four or five minutes putting those on. Putting new toe shoes on over socks is never easy on a good day, try it when you're watching the race run past...

And finally I bonked at about mile 12 (aka 20k...). 12+ miles was the farthest I'd ever run at that point, and my body reminded me of it. Spots, dizzyness, a tingling scalp and general miserableness joined me on the run. I'd just gone paleo before that race, and was trying not to resort to carbs during the race. At this point I tried some Gatorade, but it did no good. I walked most of the rest of the course.

I had enough juice left to run down the boardwalk to the finish, and then started walking, and limping. The middle of my left foot hurt, in what I subsequently learned was the metatarsal-cuboid joint, a joint I wasn't aware I possessed until that point.

I found my colleague, and we walked the couple of miles to his apartment, where I'd left my car.

Nevertheless, of the five road and trail half-marathons I've run, that 8:53 pace was my personal record, much like my first 5k race was my PR until this Memorial Day.

Happily I've gotten smarter about running races. I learned to always wear socks, to avoid the chafing that can happen during a race. I learned to go out easy, and to keep the pace for the first couple of miles in line with the pace you expect to finish in, leaving some juice for a strong finish, if possible. I've gotten used to running on only coffee and cream prior to the race. Haven't bonked in a while.

So you'd think I would have been all set to put in a stellar effort on this half, right? Being a more experienced runner and just having set a 5k PR?

Sadly, no.

I bought a pair of Vibram FiveFinger SeeYas a few days prior to the race. Unlike my experience with the Bikilas, I took the SeeYas out for a six-mile and then a three-mile run, sockless. That went so well that I decided to run the half in them, also sockless. I ran the race with a friend, who even pointed out that I was foolish not to put the socks I had brought along on prior to starting the race. I persisted.

Inspired by my recent 5k success, and my nutty friend's gung-ho attitude, I went out hard...

And sure enough, after a few miles the right shoe started to bother my foot. I adjusted the strap, and that helped for a bit, but didn't eliminate the problem. Right around the 6-mile mark, I stopped and put a sock on that foot. Around the 8-mile mark, I stopped and put the other sock on, as I could feel a blister forming under my left heel. Note to self: when you can feel it, it's too late. You've already done the damage, you're now in damage-control mode.

The first sock stop left me with an 8:04 average pace to that point. The next stop put me up to an 8:12 average pace. I was happy to make the second stop, because I was running out of juice. Not bonking, but tired legs. I was happy to stop, and when I started running again, the legs were hurting. I was not happy about the fact that I had five more miles to run.

Fairfield vs. Pain to Paine

As you can see from this chart, comparing this race to the Paine to Pain Half last fall (the only other race I have data for) my pace fell off pretty dramatically after the second sock stop at mile 8.

At mile 10 I hit the big hill climb. I walked up part of the hill prior to the big hill, and started walking at the bottom of the big hill. Happily, I saw a fellow run past barefoot. "Hey Adam!" I called out. Barefoot Adam Gentile slowed down, and I started running, and we chatted for a bit. Thanks to Adam I didn't walk the whole big hill, but trotted along, and after he left I checked the average pace again: 8:36. Well, at this point, I realized, all I had to do was keep running at a reasonable pace and I was going to PR. I took a couple of short walk breaks, but managed to run almost all of the rest of the race, and finished in 1:54:10, for a pace of 8:43, compared to 1:56:33, at 8:53 from Brooklyn, and 1:59:25 at 9:06 from last year's Paine to Pain.

And then I started limping. I had developed a huge blister on the heel of my left foot. No, I don't think this was the new shoes, as I got a similar blister on my right foot a few years ago from running up a steep hill in my KSOs, after I'd been wearing them for at least 8 months. That prior blister was a form and calf-strength issue, and I'm sure this one is the same.

So yeah, I finished. But it wasn't exactly a heroic effort: I definitely feel that my poor planning and head-strong ways cheated me out of a better performance. In fact, one would be justified to wonder if I was subconciously trying to sabotage the race, or repeat the Brooklyn experience point-for-point. I can't help but think that if I'd started out at an 8:30 pace, I could have carried that through the whole race. My legs indicate that I gave it my all: my calves, hamstrings, and quads are all really sore. What seems to happen with Maffetone-style training is that as your fitness improves, muscles that were adequately trained find themselves to be inadequate to the new requirements. That's a good thing, just painful in the short term.

From a training perspective, this race was a big improvement over the Paine to Pain Half I ran last fall. While the chart above makes it tough to compare the numbers, pace yesterday was 23 seconds/mile faster (11 seconds/mile faster than my Brooklyn PR), average HR was 178 yesterday vs. 177 in the fall, the temperature was probably 25F higher, and the course was much hillier. So, on average, it was a big improvement. Thank you Dr. Maffetone.

Also, my problem right foot and leg felt pretty good during and after the race, and I had an exciting new ache during the race. Which is usually a sign of improvement.

But I've still got that first 20k looming over me. That was a similar course to this one, also in Fairfield, but my pace in that race was 8:04, and that with severe IT band pain for most of the race in the problem right leg. Of course it was in the 20Fs that day, and as last weekend's Western States demonstrated, a cold day counts for a lot.

There's always next year.

P.S. Due to a request from a scientist friend, I've posted a picture below of the blister on my heel. If you're squeamish, as I am, don't scroll down too far...

P.P.S. Here's Barefoot Gentile's account of the race. 80F at the start and 87F at the finish? I had no idea... BTW, while I had plenty of self-inflicted stupidity to complain about, it's a great race, and I really enjoyed running it. I highly recommend it, and I'm looking forward to next year's race.

I ran three miles yesterday on that blister, wearing my Lunas. I've not done anything to treat it, and it's coming along nicely.

Here's the data from the chart:

	Paine to Pain			Fairfield
Mile	Pace	HR		Pace	HR
1	8:08	170		7:17	174
2	9:23	181		7:24	181
3	8:54	182		7:38	184
4	9:49	178		7:45	185
5	8:35	179		8:45	184
6	9:02	178		9:18	179
7	9:44	178		8:20	184
8	8:54	179		7:49	180
9	9:49	177		8:31	178
10	8:51	176		10:24	173
11	9:21	174		9:10	178
12	9:41	173		9:13	177
13	8:51	179		10:10	170
0.2	?	?		8:43	179



Isn't that lovely?  Doesn't hurt much...

Low-Carb Vs. Low-Fat and Heart Disease

"Lowering fat intake to reduce cardiovascular risk may not be the best advice for most people. Recent studies suggest that reducing carbyhydrate intake is a more effective way to reduce the risk of atherogenic dyslipidemia. For overweight or obese individuals who have trouble losing weight, a moderate reduction in carb intake can confer the same benefit as losing 15 to 20 pounds.

"'When we studied a low-fat diet thinking that would benefit individuals with an atherogenic lipid phenotype, we found something quite different,' said Ronald M. Krauss, MD, Senior Scientist and Director of Atherosclerosis Research at the Children's Hostpital Oakland Research Institute in California. 'A significant portion of healthy individuals who went on a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet instead were converted to the high-risk atherogenic profile. That was quite a surprise.'

I'll bet that was quite a suprise.

Dr. Krauss is, among many other things, "founder and past Chair of the [American Heart Assocation] Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism, and a National Spokesperson for the AHA."

The committee that came up with the "prudent diet" described here:

"After five years on their respective diets, 3.4% of the control (prudent diet) group and 1.3% of the intervention ("Mediterranean") group had died, a 70% reduction in deaths. Cardiovascular deaths were reduced by 76%. Stroke, angina, pulmonary embolism and heart failure were also much lower in the intervention group. A stunning victory for this Mediterranean-inspired diet, and a crushing defeat for the prudent diet!"

I find it prudent to test things before making recommendations, but at least Dr. Krauss has the integrity to correct his mistake.

Back to the American Diabetes Association Diabetes Dispatch:

"His interest in dietary effects on atherogenic dyslipidemia began when he and his research colleagues discovered that, when placed on a high-carbohydrate diet, a quarter of healthy individuals converted from a low-risk atherogenic profile with large LDL particles to a high-risk profile with small LDL particles without a change in LDL cholesterol, but with an increase in the total number of LDL particles."

The cholesterol hypothesis is basically dead. No wonder statins don't work. Lowering LDL cholesterol has no effect on atherogenic risk.

'Even though LDL cholesterol is the main lipid used to guide the evaluation and management of cardiovascular disease risk, atherogenic dyslipidemia is not commonly associated with elevated LDL cholesterol levels...'

H/T Dr. Eenfeldt, another skeptical doc.

(Here's the page from the Dispatch, just in case that link stops working...)