Things I think – Diet and Nutrition Edition

Initial post: So as not to clutter up the main page, here is a side page for what I am thinking about nutrition and diet at the moment. Stream of consciousness. Runs new to old but did not start when I started getting interested in the topic, so older stuff is less sequential

First though briefly about me and what I eat (or don’t eat). I am diagnosed T2D. I was on a high dose of Metformin and recently also Victoza. I changed my diet on or about January 15, 2019. I now adhere to the following:

  1. No sugars.
  2. No rice, grains or starchy vegetables.
  3. No processed foods.
  4. No seed oils.
  5. Time restricted eating. Most days I follow 20:4 or OMAD. In other words, I eat when I come home from work in the evening. Other that that I don’t eat.
  6. Recently – switching / thinking about switching to lower saturated fats. Less dairy and less red meat.
  7. Alcohol – none since I started this. Not saying I won’t resume but have not.

Here is what this has done for me:

  1. Stopped all T2D meds within three weeks of starting.
  2. At physical just one month in, A1C was down by 0.4 and lipids had improved.
  3. At about two months in stopped BP med. BP remains in normal range.
  4. Down about 18 pounds at the two month mark. Rate has slowed, as expected.

Ok so here is what I think about all this. As noted, new stuff on top [but separate updates at the bottom also] but I added a lot at the two month mark that is in no particular order.

  1. New study from NIH: if you eat processed foods you will eat more compared to eating real foods. Lesson: eat real foods.
  2. I have yet to encounter anyone who really has any interest in changing what they eat. This despite weight and other health problems. This informs me somewhat on why it took me so long to have my “aha moment” about all this.
  3. I recently saw a man talking (not to me) about his poor health interfering with his ability to work. Diabetes he said. I really wanted to say something to him. Diet! What is the right thing to do there? I don’t know.
  4. Fasting is easier than you’d think once you are off the carb addiction. Your body switches to burning fat, and most of us have plenty of that.
  5. Eating whole foods and not buying meds is cheaper than eating processed foods and buying meds, especially with fasting.
  6. Fasting is free.
  7. Why does the government promulgate rules about a “healthy diet” when that diet is unhealthy for someone with T2D given that over half the population has T2D or is in a pre-T2D state? If T2D weren’t blamed on lifestyle then we’d be amazed at the mobilization of resources to combat it.
  8. It is odd to me that there seen to be two main “sides” in the diet wars. There is the Keto/LCHF camp and there are the vegans. Both agree the Standard American Diet is bad. Really they agree on a lot of things as far as what not to eat. They just disagree with what to replace it with.
  9. I routinely see doctors and scientists cherry pick the good studies or the good parts of a particular study to fit their narrative. So unless you have access to the study (sometimes I do) and can understand it (sometimes I do) it is hard to know what to believe.

UPDATE – May 23, 2019

  1. Four months in – have adhered to diet. Decided not to avoid grass fed beef but am recently emphasizing more fatty fish. Had a brief spell where drank alcohol consistently but stopped that after about a week. Did not feel good when did that.
  2. Fasting insulin levels at the 4-month mark are half what they were at the 1-month mark. HOMA-IR score of 2.0.
  3. Basic lipid panel is all good though HDL could be higher.. In normal but not “optimal” range.
  4. Inflammation markers still high so this is a focus.
  5. On a CGM, daily averages of BG range from 101-104 and follow what I understand to be the normal pattern of falling throughout the day. For me the fall recently starts about noon.
  6. Interesting because recent A1C was 6.3. This suggests a recent breakthrough. THat matches up with the next item.
  7. After plateauing for a long time around 216 pounds have started to lose weight again. Today was 214.2.



October 2, 2019 update: After a sustained period of weight loss, I experimented to see if alcohol, specifically spirits, could be reintroduced without major impact. I think the evidence proves the negative. What suckered me in is that my blood sugars did not initially seem to be impacted, though over time they were. However, my weight loss stalled and reversed by about ten pounds. What’s worse, it kept going up even after I stopped alcohol, when I was otherwise adherent to my dietary plan. Then I got some labs and my insulin was far higher than it had been. I was actually pretty proud of how I had reduced it from double-digits down to a HOMA-IR score of 0.7. Well now it was HOMA-IR around 7. But the good news is that my sugars seem to have returned to their prior pattern, and a bit of weight has started to come off again. I expect the insulin levels have decreased.

My two cents: EVERYONE should have their insulin levels tested. Even if your blood sugars are “normal” (and “normal” does not mean good; it means in line with other people), it may be only because your body is producing extra insulin to keep the blood sugars in line. It is a sign of illness that doctors simply do not test for.



Things I think (and little-known facts about me).

Call it my stream of consciousness party platform.  A party of one.  Most recent additions on top.  Hint: Whatever quick assumption you made about me based on a single tweet is probably mistaken.  Also scroll to the end for some little known facts about me.

  1. They say you are not paranoid if people really are out to get you, but I think both can be true.
  2.  Nutrition.
    1. Interesting unintentional personal experiment.  Drinking spirits did not seem to spike my blood sugar, but I think does explain a spike in my insulin levels, which correlates to a weight-loss stall and reversal.  Pleased to say now back going the right direction.
    2. You can find science to support whatever you want to believe, because most of it is belief-driven, poorly conducted junk science in the first place.  Specifically, I refer to the epidemiological studies.
    3. What they do all have in common is that sugars and refined or processed foods are not good for you.  The only question is when you cut those out, what should you replace them with.  On that question, there is little sound science to say that there is one answer right for all.
    4. Moreover, so many factors impact health, and diet is only one of them.  And we all have different genes or disorders and need different things.  For example, I believe that a carbohydrate-restricted diet for someone with insulin resistance is logical and that there is much clinical evidence to support it.
    5. Recent studies on the benefits of WHEN we eat, e.g., fasting, are also interesting.
    6. See further thoughts here: http://www.patrickwaites.com/things-i-think-diet-and-nutrition-edition/
  3. “Two Steps Behind” by Def Leppard is the worst song to ever be a hit.  The lyrics are creepy and the music is inane.
  4. Not a fan of Ocasio-Cortez or her policies but shaking things up is not bad.
  5. All politicians are hypocrites.  Except for Jon Paul Bouche.  And he drives his own party nuts.
    1. Dems flipping on immigration
    2. Repubs flipping on individual mandate
    3. Both sides on federalism, etc etc.
    4. Someone please prove me wrong.
  6. One side being wrong does not make the other right.
  7. Surely there is a way that the majority of people in the middle can come together about what they agree on and marginalize the kooks on both extremes.
  8. There is no reason to have insurance companies involved in routine healthcare.
  9. Billions of dollars that we in the US spend toward “healthcare” each year are not used to deliver healthcare.  That money exits the healthcare finance system as health insurer profits.  I am almost always pro-market, but that is just bad policy.
  10. Our healthcare finance system is broken but MFA is not the answer.
  11. We need robust legal immigration and an end to the idea that illegal immigration is just dandy if it supports your party.
  12. Both parties conspired to create the current immigration dilemma, Dreamers, etc.   Denying a path to citizenship for people we encouraged to be here by word or deed would be a national hypocrisy.
  13. Trump and the media
    1. Trump’s rhetoric regarding the media is not appropriate, but he is often not wrong about it.
    2. The media is right to criticize Trump for attacking it, but too often it gives him a reason to.
    3. Jim Acosta.  Had to include him here because it is always about Jim Acosta.
  14. Congressional districts should drawn by a computer program designed to minimize the average of the perimeter of each district
  15. Suppressing disagreeable speech…
  16. I would be happy to bake your gay wedding cake (if I knew how).  Just don’t tell me I have to.
  17. It is very sad that we have raised a generation so capable of getting PTSD from an election.  I mean that sincerely.
  18. If you make it about us vs. you then don’t expect us not to band together to defeat you.
  19. Healthcare is not a right.  But I firmly believe that as a civilized nation – and one founded on Christian values if that means something to you – we owe it to each other to provide for each other’s basic needs where people cannot do it for themselves, especially access to healthcare.  But that doesn’t mean there is anything wrong with a wealthy person being able to afford different care.
  20. Remove insurance from basic healthcare.  Instead, we pay a doctor/hospital group directly for basic care.  The poor are subsidized for this.   Out of pocket is capped based on income.

Little-known facts about me.

  1. I once fell asleep in the Pentagon.  During this visit, I met the Secretary of Defense and then, after that, went through a metal detector.
  2. I always use the Oxford comma.
  3. I left justify my documents.

The Kavanaugh Confirmation Process – 10 Things I Think I Think

With apologies to Peter King, here are 10 things I think I think about the Kavanaugh confirmation process.   This post is made on the day that he was voted out of committee with the agreement of a brief additional FBI investigation.  So it is likely not to age well.   Just look at it as a snapshot.

  1. It is hard to find much of anyone whose opinions about Dr. Ford’s claims and the resulting process are not easily predicted by their broader political views and their previously-held views about Judge Kavanaugh.
  2. Victims of sexual assault should be taken seriously and treated respectfully.  That said, there is a reason that these claims are so hard to prove.  And that can’t mean a presumption of guilt.  However, those two things are not mutually exclusive.  (That said, I do not claim to know the answer of how best to handle these claims.)
  3. Something happened to Dr. Ford.
  4. The Democrats used Dr. Ford as a political pawn, with her own lawyers keeping her in the dark and acting contrary to her wishes and her interests.
  5. It is hard to argue that the way the Democrats handled this was anything other than an effort to cause maximum delay. [UPDATE: Immediately after posting this I see reports of “Dr. Ford’s lawyer” (see item 4) is arguing against any time limits on the investigation.]
  6. Kavanaugh’s chippiness was not a good look for him but does not really say much about his “judicial temperment” or his fitness for office.   (As a lawyer who has prepared and presented many witnesses during testimony, I can tell you that the pressure of being questioned impacts people in different ways that don’t have any obvious connection to their character.)
  7. There are a few possible scenarios that don’t depend on anyone lying:
    1. Kavanaugh was very drunk, did something along the lines of what Dr. Ford alleges, and simply doesn’t remember it;
    2. Something happened but it was not intended or perceived by Kavanaugh the way that Ford perceived it, and Kavanaugh therefore does not remember it;
    3. Ford was simply mistaken.  That said, I do discount as a significant possibility that Ford was lying.
  8. Another possibility is that Kavanaugh did it, realized he went too far, and then lived an honorable life for the next 35 years, and feels justified and even righteous about lying about it.   [ALTERNATE HISTORY:  What if Kavanaugh had said, “Yes, it happened.  As it was happening I realized it was wrong, and I stopped.  I apologize to Dr. Ford for the pain I caused her.  It has haunted me for 35 years.  In those years I have always tried to do the right thing, and it has helped me to be a better man.    Would that Kavanaugh get confirmed?  UPDATE: It worked for Corey Booker, though he had to face the voters, and they decided.]
  9. I think Jeff Flake did the right thing, though I am open to being proven wrong.
  10. I hope that the FBI investigation will shed light on the following:
  • Is Dr. Ford willing to disclose her therapy notes to the FBI?    What do Dr. they say about the assault?
  • If there is a video of the polygraph and what does it show?
  • What do Kavanaugh’s friends have to say about “Devil’s Triangle?”   The assertion that it is a variant of quarters is pretty absurd.
  • What do Kavanaugh’s close male high school friends, especially Mark Judge, say about his drinking?  (Kavanaugh’s claims that he never had any memory lapses from drinking is not very believable to me.)
  • Why was Ford’s social media scrubbed, and what did it say?
  • Did Mark Judge work at Safeway in the summer of 1982?
  • [Pretty sure there are more.]

Is there really a 1962 Gibson Les Paul Special Double Cutaway?

This is part 2 of my effort to identify a vintage Gibson Les Paul Special Double Cutaway that appears as though it was issued in 1962, when Gibson did not officially sell that model.  In part 1, I described the various distinguishing features of the model as it changed in the years 1959-1961, when it was “officially”  sold, though in the latter part as an “SG Special”.   This post assumes you are familiar with the information from part 1.  I will add that, I think this part can be substantially improved.  I will update it as I have more information.  But for now, here goes:

This is where the fun really begins.   I have seen three examples of guitars that match all of the “late 1959” Les Paul Special specs, including the silkscreened logo, but on which the serial numbers date to 1962.   All three are 544XX, and two are within four digits of each other.  So it would seem that either (1) these guitars are from 1959 with unusual serial numbers, (2) Gibson issued a 1959 model in 1962, or (3) it could have been a warranty replacement.  From my discussions with various vintage guitar experts, any of these seems a possibility.   Gibson was notoriously sloppy with numbering and record keeping.  And it was not prone to waste.  If it had leftover parts, it might very well have assembled and sold them a couple of years later.  But option 3 makes a lot of sense to me.

For starters, there seem to be other examples of Gibson guitars of the era not fitting into a neat box.  For example, this one dates by serial as a 1963, yet has the “early 1959” pickup configuration.   Or this one, which dates by serial as 1961 (though listed for sale as a 1962)  yet has the silkscreened logo and other features of a “late 1959.”

So what are we left with to solve the mystery?  We haven’t yet discussed pot codes.  One of the guitars, according to the owner, had pot codes dating to 1959.  The second did not indicate the pot codes, and the owner, who had sold the guitar, did not recall any pot code information.  The third, the one in my possession, has pot codes dating to 1959.  Even if Gibson were using up old parts, it seems odd that it would have saved pots for several years.  So this would seem to argue for a 1959 conclusion.  (Update: And this one, which also has a 1962 serial, no silkscreened logo, and pots dating to 1959 according to the owner.)

But perhaps the final word is provided by a spec we haven’t discussed – the neck profile.  One expert rightly told me that you could drive yourself crazy trying to make sense of all this, but that the neck profile would tell the tale.  Conventional wisdom says that 50s necks were like baseball bats and 60s necks much thinner.  While true in a general sense, by 1959, when our story really begins, the necks were already getting thinner.  Offhand, though, I think he is probably correct.  The neck on mine looks identical to photos I have seen of a 1962 SG Special.  (Though I am not sure how accurately I can really say that from a photo.)  I do plan to take a more detailed look at the neck profile and will update with what I find.

If you have something to add to this, please email me at [firstname].[lastname]@gmail.com

This table is a work in progress…

Serial
year
Serial # Pot code PU/toggle
location
Silkscreened
logo
Link
1961 22486 N/A Late-1959 Yes  Link
1962 544XX 1959 Late-1959 Yes  Link
1962 54481 N/A Late-1959 Yes  Link
1962 54485 N/A Late-1959 Yes
1962 60648 1959 Late-1959 No  Link
1963 69703 N/A Mid-1959 No  Link

 

Other resources:

  • https://www.premierguitar.com/articles/25669-vintage-vault-1961-gibson-sg-special
  • https://www.vintageguitar.com/3223/the-gibson-les-paul-special/
  • http://www.guitargonauts.info/pick-51.html
  • https://www.bromptons.co/reference/articles/details/gibson-part-4-from-les-paul-to-sg.html
  • http://www.frettedamericana.com/product/1961-gibson-les-paulsg-special
  • http://www.guitardaterproject.org/potcodereader.aspx
  • https://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?202618-A-little-help-with-a-LP-Special-DC&p=2793878#post2793878

Distinguishing features of 1959-1961 Gibson Les Paul Special models

I have decided to split this post into two parts.   The genesis of both posts is my effort to identify a vintage Gibson Les Paul Special Double Cutaway guitar that did not quite seem to fit into a neat box.   Specifically, it has features that would suggest that it has to be a 1959 and other features that suggest it has to be a 1962.  My hope is not only will this aid others with a similar guitar but also that they might share their own information, which I will then add to share with the interwebs.  More on the specifics of my guitar in the next post.  Here lets just set the scene.

This is compiled from various sources, including people from several prominent vintage instrument stores (including Houston’s own Guitarzza), private correspondence with sellers of other similar guitars, and:

  • Gibson Electrics: The Classic Years, by A.R. Duchossoir
  • The Bluebook of Electric Guitars
  • The Gibson Electric Guitar Book, by Walter Carter
  • Gruhn’s Guide to Vintage Guitars, by Walter Carter and George Gruhn

In late 1958, Gibson began to make a double cutaway version of the Les Paul Special.  But very few actually went out the door until 1959.   In fact, the only 1959 Gibson catalog I have seen, which was dated March 1959, did not even include a double cutaway version:Distinguishing features of the new guitar included a silkscreened “Les Paul Special” logo on the pegstock, rounded horns, and the neck pickup located right next to the fretboard separated only by a small insert that was separate from the pickguard.  Also, the pickgard, which appears to be 5-ply with BWBWB is cut at an angle except at the edge between the pickups, where it is squared off.  Here is an example of the “early 1959” configuration:

Early 1959 Gibson Les Paul Special Double Cutaway

Note also the location of the toggle switch.   The first change that appears is relocating of the toggle switch, as there are examples that otherwise have the same configuration, with a relocated toggle switch as the only change.  So this one I will call a “mid-1959” variant:

Mid-1959 GIbson Les Paul Special Double Cutaway

The location of the neck pickup turned out to be problematic.  It required routing into the neck tenon, which weakened the neck joint, leading to a rash of broken necks.  So in mid-1959, Gibson relocated the neck pickup.  The pickguard changed to cover the space between the neck pickup and neck.

Late 1959 Gibson Les Paul Special Double Cutaway

Although I have not seen it, I have read that by as early as November 1959, Gibson issued a price sheet no longer marketing this guitar as a “Les Paul” model.  Rather, this was part of the change to “SG”.  Initially, there was little difference between the late 1959 Les Paul Special and the SG Special.   It had essentially the same “late 1959” features but without the “Les Paul Special” silkscreened logo.

1961 Gibson SG Special

Even Gibson’s own catalogs had trouble keeping up.   The May 1960 edition included an “SG Special” model but featured an image of what appears to be the “early 1959” variant of the Les Paul Special.

With me so far?  So by 1960, we no longer have a “Les Paul Special” but instead an “SG Special” that doesn’t look like an SG.   There was one last variation before Gibson changed over in 1961 to the pointed SG horns that we all know and love (or hate).  I had read that a few guitars in the early ’60s came with the pearloid crown inlay on the pegstock.  Here is one said to be a 1961, though no other information was provided:

1961 Les Paul/SG Special with crown inlay

The photo is attributed to Norman’s Rare Guitars, which at the time of writing,  has one for sale.  They call it a “1960-1961” but the serial number of 5563 would seem to suggest it as a 1961. I would guess that this is the same guitar.  But this one isn’t. And here is another in TV yellow that has a very similar serial number. [UPDATE: And another that appears to have lost its serial number during a refin.]

Then finally there is the 1961 with the pointy SG shape.

1961 Gibson SG Special

There probably are some other distinguishing features that I am overlooking.  Pot codes, of course, can provide insight.  The neck profile differed across the years 1959-1962 and may be informative.  I have also seen it suggested that the angle of the bridge differed, though I have not really checked into that yet.  I will update this as I gather more information about general distinguishing features of these guitars.  So onto the 1959/1962 mystery…

 

 

Other resources:

  • https://www.premierguitar.com/articles/25669-vintage-vault-1961-gibson-sg-special
  • https://www.vintageguitar.com/3223/the-gibson-les-paul-special/
  • http://www.guitargonauts.info/pick-51.html
  • https://www.bromptons.co/reference/articles/details/gibson-part-4-from-les-paul-to-sg.html
  • http://www.frettedamericana.com/product/1961-gibson-les-paulsg-special
  • http://www.guitardaterproject.org/potcodereader.aspx
  • https://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?202618-A-little-help-with-a-LP-Special-DC&p=2793878#post2793878

Fact checking the “20 million insured under Obamacare” claim

Obamacare is not perfect.  It does not provide everyone access to basic healthcare.  It does not control costs.  And it has had negative impacts on some.  Even its most staunch proponents know there is work to be done.  But the debate rages over whether what is needed is an improvement to Obamacare or a “repeal and replace.”   In that context there is a highly disputed statistic; namely that “20 million people have health insurance coverage as a result of Obamacare.”   Many on the right call it an outright lie.  But what is the evidence for either side’s view?  That is a statement of fact rather than opinion, so it should be objectively verifiable.   So as part of my effort to cut through partisan rhetoric to find the reality, I looked.   It is surprisingly difficult to arrive at an objective conclusion, which I suppose is not surprising at all in light of the competing rhetoric.  But my conclusion:  True. Continue reading Fact checking the “20 million insured under Obamacare” claim

The difficult conversation

Healthcare issues have become so politically charged that it can be very hard to have a rational conversation about them, particularly one that converses in ideas rather than hyperbole, anecdotes and party talking points.   As I have become interested in this topic, I have tried to engage a number of people in conversation, both to learn what they think and to learn what I do not know, with relatively little success. Continue reading The difficult conversation

What are you doing, Patrick?

Let’s just put it out there.  I am a bit of an enigma where politics are concerned.  To some people, I am a mirror.   They simply assume I agree with them.   To others I seem to project a reverse image.  For those, my more conservative friends see me as liberal, and my liberal friends see me as conservative.  In truth, I am largely a contrarian with a strong libertarian streak.  I don’t like to be told what to do and, often, will instinctively react as might the loyal opposition.   But I am also basically conservative, which is not a surprise given my Texas roots.  However, I also live in the heart of a large urban center (not being coy, it is commonly known as H-Town) that routinely votes Democrat. Continue reading What are you doing, Patrick?