Meet Mark

Let me introduce myself. My name is Mark Sisson. I’m 63 years young. I live and work in Malibu, California. In a past life I was a professional marathoner and triathlete. Now my life goal is to help 100 million people get healthy. I started this blog in 2006 to empower people to take full responsibility for their own health and enjoyment of life by investigating, discussing, and critically rethinking everything we’ve assumed to be true about health and wellness...

Tell Me More
Stay Connected
March 11 2018

Weekend Link Love — Edition 494

By Mark Sisson
30 Comments

weekend_linklove in-lineResearch of the Week

Seniors who train improve their immune systems.

Dietary cholesterol helps repair damaged brains.

Everyone knows a love song when they hear it.

Sleep disruptions may predict Alzheimer’s.

New Primal Blueprint Podcasts

Episode 225: Michelle and Keith Norris: Host Elle Russ chats with the founders of Paleo f(x).

Each week, select Mark’s Daily Apple blog posts are prepared as Primal Blueprint Podcasts. Need to catch up on reading, but don’t have the time? Prefer to listen to articles while on the go? Check out the new blog post podcasts below, and subscribe to the Primal Blueprint Podcast here so you never miss an episode.

Interesting Blog Posts

What we pass on isn’t always genetic.

Altitude sickness is no joke. Also: choose your porters wisely.

Media, Schmedia

The 2-month Internet vacation that wasn’t.

Captive orangutans get more curious.

23andMe can now tell you about your breast cancer risk.

Everything Else

Buy 2-for-1 organic kale, meet your soulmate.

The authors of one of the most lauded medical textbooks failed to disclose a huge conflict of interest: millions of dollars from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries.

This is nonsense.

Silicon Valley’s slipping. The latest hotness isn’t diapered indoor chickens. It’s potty-training them with elimination communication.

I love this kind of thing.

Macron’s urging the French to drink more wine.

Cannabis-infused epsom salts receive a positive review.

Things I’m Up to and Interested In

Questions I have to ask: If keto is such an effective way to improve metabolic health and reduce bodyweight in preparation for bariatric surgery, why not just stick to keto and skip surgery?

Concept I’d never really considered: The technology that most distinguishes us from other species—clothing—is the one whose origins we know the least about.

Petition you should consider signing: “Stop the Harassment of Tim Noakes”

Announcement I’m pleased to, well, announce: We’ve got some new dressings and marinades, including vegan ranch (yes).

Now this is disappointing: Neurogenesis may not exist in humans.

Recipe Corner

Time Capsule

One year ago (Mar 11 – Mar 17)

Comment of the Week

Nice job Joe. I would say you are actually 175 lbs. You have at least 5 lbs of beard there.

Peter Bidowski, your comment reminds me of a topic I need to tackle: Does beard count as lean mass?

Subscribe to the Newsletter

If you'd like to add an avatar to all of your comments click here!

30 thoughts on “Weekend Link Love — Edition 494”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. I am quite flattered to be the comment of the week and anxiously awaiting the beard as lean muscle mass post.

  2. Tim Noakes should have a statue in his honor. The hill to climb is still steep, but we will get there Hell or High Water.

  3. “If keto is such an effective way to improve metabolic health and reduce bodyweight in preparation for bariatric surgery, why not just stick to keto and skip surgery?” => Not sustainable ? 😉

    “Stop the Harassment of Tim Noakes” => He first has to stop giving bulls*** advices relying on anecdotes…

        1. Recommended by who? American dietetic association? You mean the ones still recommending 50 grams of carbs or more per meal to diabetics? And constant grazing?

          No thanks. There is a ton of evidence/research that supports ketosis long and short term.

          1. The evidence for long term is scarce, and even keto advocates don’t recommend it over the long term. Even Mark himself. Do your homework.

          2. No, Mark says there is no absolute “need” for most people to do it long term. There are plenty of benefits to long term ketosis. Brain function and health, appropriate body mass, in-tune hunger hormone levels, easy burning of a clean fuel source, less free radical production.

            Please enlighten me with the many keto advocates who have huge piles of evidence of negative effects over long term. Oh wait…. they don’t exist.

            Ketosis is one of the strongest tools we have for health and longevity. Don’t put down the process based on your limited knowledge.

      1. How long is too long? Been doing it 5+ years now. Still not dead.

    1. I’m a big fan, Mark but I have to say, I think you’re off the mark on this one. Studies show that surgery is the only successful way to long term (2+ year) weight loss for the morbidly obese. You can put them on a keto diet and be very successful, but the body will try to send you back to your original weight or set point (homeostasis). That’s why most people cannot sustain weight loss over a long period (2+ years) of time. Do I think that keto can raise the statistics? Sure but for every person here that says they lost 100+ pounds and kept it off over 2 years, there are exponentially more people who have done this only to regain (and likely more).

      1. Homeostasis for any normal human is not morbidly obese. Or even overweight.
        That’s completely false. Metabolic setpoint is the genetic setpoint for a HEALTHY human being. It varies but does not include obese.

        I would wager every single person who gained back the weight did so due to a faulty diet. (Or medication- but this is an entirely different issue).

        There is no possible way to put on 100 pounds in ketosis unless your are literally force feeding extra liquid calories into your body through a tube. And even then you would throw up before anything else.

        So feasibly…. Impossible. I welcome you to try gaining even 20 pounds in ketosis. Good luck.

      2. Lisa – I doubt the issue with the weight re-gain is the diet. Having know a few people that have had the surgery, all it comes down to is a stop-gap measure until they figure out WHY they are overeating. If they don’t do that, surgery or not, the weight comes back on. There’s no set point for your body to carry excessive fat unless you are metabolically damaged (insulin resistant) and your body can’t read the signals correctly. Surgery of any kind should almost always be the last attempt to fix rather than the first (obviously some things surgery cannot wait).

  4. “This is nonsense…” Of course it is. It ranks right up there with the chemtrail “conspiracy.” You can find all sorts of BS online without half trying. The secret is to first know a little about whatever you’re researching, and then keep your common sense on high alert.

    The story on altitude sickness is worth a read. Some people have trouble with it and others don’t. You don’t have to go all the way to Nepal to experience it, but for sure that would be a fascinating trip.

  5. Great links as always Mark!

    Just wondering if you could do a segment on women & keto. If there are any differences that might make it less advisable for younger women in particular, such as how it might affect fertility etc.

    I find the health advantages of keto really interesting, but I have found that I don’t seem to do well with a high fat diet. I’m a young thin, active female & I tend to thrive on a lot of primal carbs.

    1. I would also love an article on this. Simply because, anecdotally, ketosis seems to be harder on women.

      Would love to hear Mark’s thoughts.

  6. “Questions I have to ask: If keto is such an effective way to improve metabolic health and reduce bodyweight in preparation for bariatric surgery, why not just stick to keto and skip surgery?”

    Because there is no money for the medical community in that. If you diet first, it makes the surgery easier (not cheaper) but they still get their money. If you never have the surgery, they don’t get paid.

  7. Thank you for the Tim Noakes petition.

    It’s unbelievable. What he’s been through. I hope many more people sign.

  8. I understand that clothing has its place — say crawling through nettles or ice climbing — but it’s largely a huge distraction and annoyance. It’s unsurprising that we’ve come to find another big problem had climate change at its root.

  9. The ‘This is nonsense post’? It’s not nonsense. It’s advocating a healthy psychological mindset towards foods rather than an obsessive preoccupation with every bite we put in our mouths – down to the micro level of what it contains. That’s not living. That’s treating life as if it’s a science experiment to solve. No thanks.

    1. I was surprised at the declaration of that article as nonsense, too. I would bet that completely cutting out all sugars–including dairy and fruit–would hurt more than help the vast majority of people. The psychological aspect is huge, especially for women. Consuming a low amount of sugar incidentally to existing in contemporary society > militant obsession with 0 g sugars.

  10. Great new dressings, Mark. Please consider Russian dressing for your next new item!

    1. MDA would probably get hacked with false news if he tried making Russian dressing…and I hope you know I’m just kidding.

  11. In reference to the link that you considered “nonsense,” I’d like to know what I’m missing in it? Other than her final takeaway paragraph, which I thought sounded a little on the new-agey, self-enabling side, I didn’t see too much that didn’t read as reasonable. As a matter of fact, I thought that the over arching theme of what she was trying to get across actually mirrors much of what you assert regarding overall health and wellness and the resistance toward over analysis of any particular eating regimen. Ultimately, what is best is what works best, am’I right? I didn’t see her advocating a fast food embrace or any kind of DOD incorporation (Dessert of the Day). I’m just intrigued by the summary dismissal of the article,I suppose.

    1. The topic of the article. “You don’t need to quit sugar to improve health” is misleading.

      All fine and dandy until you realize all the evidence and research that points to high sugar products’ connection to many maladies. Hypertension, heart disease, insulin resistance, weight gain.

      It’s like telling a cocaine addict, “It’s okay. You don’t have to quit cocaine to be healthy. Everything in moderation.”. It sounds like a joke. But it’s not far off the mark for many people. Sugar is EXTREMELY addictive in these products.

      Telling the public that “sugar is okay” is plain inhumane. You’re telling people that it’s okay, in moderation, knowing full well the negative effects. And knowing that most people cannot do “moderation” with the addicitve qualities.

      Also, a note on fruit. You absolutely CAN overdo fruit. It’s just as lipogenic as other high fructose products. You can easily overwhelm the liver. Only fiber stops us. To see the detrimental effects, you only need to look at any long term Fruitarians. Teeth and jaw issues. Lean mass loss. Muscle loss. Hair loss. Weight gain.

      It may be a well-meaning article. But it’s a dangerous one. Full on incorrect info.

      1. Still don’t see much of a problem with the article. Fact is, you absolutely CAN improve health without giving up sugar and also, there is a distinction that you would be wise to draw between sugar consumption and what you, yourself referred toward as “high sugar consumption.” Notice that the author didn’t use the modifier, “optimal” when she mentioned health, only the “improvement.” She even asserted as much at one point in the article. The point that she was trying to make is that it is possible to get healthier while not feeling as though you are depriving yourself.

        I think that your “inhumane” tag is a little on the heavy side. I mean, it’s probably due to the fact that she happens to believe what she is espousing and not because she’s in the pocket of the sugar lobby or “Big Dessert.” It’s not like she didn’t make a decent argument for herself. She clearly cited micronutrients and other ancillary nutritional considerations. Again, I didn’t see where she advocated over doing anything and did, in fact, speak of the consumption of fruit in moderate levels.

        Disagree that it’s a dangerous article and disagree that it contains “full on incorrect info.” We all understand the dangers of immoderate sugar consumption and the author is no different, but I don’t think the consistent use of hyperbole is a fair way to represent what the author was trying to get across.

  12. It may be true that neurogenesis doesn’t happen in adult humans, or perhaps the adult humans they looked at were working long hours, stressed, sedentary and eating a high carb, low fat diet as is the norm these days.