Surely it must be simpler than that!

Before moving on to the next element, I wanted to write a bit more about the path I’m on here.

The principles behind the processes

When I said, “Surely it must be simpler than that,” I mean that I’m on the lookout for the principles which underlie the many different processes, for the very foundations of life and health. Because if we can understand the fundamental principles, we’re better able to work and play with the processes by which those principles are enacted.

     I find it frustrating in the extreme that so many of the “healing modalities” used in complementary and alternative medicine – aka holistic medicine, integrative medicine, ONE medicine, and whatever term comes next in the procession – have so very many moving parts. The number of acupuncture points, for example, or the number of homeopathic remedies and medicinal herbs, not to mention their component phytochemicals. Even the number of healing modalities or philosophies is astounding. The same complexity is true in conventional medical science as well. Molecular biology is where it’s at, and the cast of characters is mindboggling.

     Surely it must be simpler than that? Yes. It is.

     Life (and therefore health) just cannot be that complicated. Not at its core. Otherwise it would have expired long since, having ground to a halt at a single tricky step and collapsed under the enormous weight of its own complexity.

     Life is characterised by diversity, yes. It is also incredibly intricate as we follow it down from planetary systems to planets to species to populations to individuals to organs to cells to subcellular organelles to molecules to atoms to subatomic particles to ...  An infinite number and variety of moving parts! And yet, at its core life is a very simple process, and one that is inherently self-regulating and self-perpetuating.

     There’s very little we need do in order to sustain life. By the same token, there’s very little we can do to sustain life when life itself has decided otherwise, and very little point in trying.

     In other words, we have less control than we like to think. The good news, though, is that we need control life less than we seem to think. That is very good news, because it frees us to actually get on with living our lives and enjoying them, worrying less about managing our lives and the lives of those we love.


That's all for now. More soon,


-Dr. Chris King-
Nature's Apprentice
www.animavet.com

Eat when you’re hungry, drink when you’re thirsty, stop when you’re full.

Hello, world.
     It's been awhile since I've posted here. The past several months have been really rough, to say the least, but all the turmoil has made me get really clear on what I think and what I want to be doing with myself.
     For years now, I've had a recurring thought whenever I'd hear or read something about health: Surely it must be simpler than that. Whether it be acupuncture or astrophysics, herbal lore or phytopharmacology, we've managed to make it so darn complicated that it takes a lifetime to thoroughly learn just one of these philosophies.
     And in the process, we get so caught up in all the details - many of which are fascinating, to be sure - that we fail to see the simple truth that, at its core, life takes care of itself. Despite all its intricate moving parts, life is fundamentally a very simple process. Mysterious, yes; but simple, too. Good health likewise is fundamentally very simple.
     That's because bodies - all bodies - are inherently designed to be self maintaining, self regulating, and self repairing, over a lifetime. And then they stop. Simple as that. Animals and plants don't know that, in the way we customarily think of knowing something. They just do it. Spontaneously. And simply. They just go about the business of living with a simplicity and directness that humbles - and at times humiliates - this exalted human mind.
     The funny thing about this realisation is that it renders me redundant! except in my own life and that of my dog (whose feeding and other basic care is my responsibility). It really is quite ironic, if not actually humorous, given how I've been trying to make my living (as a veterinarian).
     Redundant - unless my role changes from "healthcare provider" (what an absurd term!) to teacher or coach. LIFE coach, in the fullest sense of the term. Another thing that has slowly dawned on me is how many of us have lost the ability to take good basic care of ourselves. We rely so much on others to tell us how to live and what to do to restore our health when - inevitably! - it fails that in one sense we're more helpless now than when we were babies. Have you noticed, for example, that there are now classes, books, and DVDs on how to breathe properly? On how to breathe! Good god, we've forgotten how to breathe!! That's a sad commentary on modern "life."
     So, if you will permit me to shift gears a little, it will be my great delight to share with you what I'm learning about life, from life. The theme is SIMPLICITY.


Eat when you’re hungry, drink when you’re thirsty, stop when you’re full.


This course in simplicity is going to take the form of a series of simple phrases. Things you could fit on a bumper sticker or a t-shirt. The point, after all, is simplicity.
     This first one is fundamentally about listening to your body. The body has some very sophisticated mechanisms for regulating its intake of food and water. But the "sophisticated" human mind thinks it knows better or that it doesn't need to pay attention to such primitive and pesky things. We've even made the mental over-rides of our body's signals part of our common language.
     "Lunchtime," for example. There is no such thing in all of nature. There's sunrise, there's sunset, and somewhere in between there's the middle of the day; but there is no fixed time of day when a meal should be eaten. Personally, I'm seldom hungry at lunchtime. That's because I'm seldom hungry at breakfast-time, so I seldom eat breakfast until mid- to late-morning. In fact, I'm happy with just two meals a day. That's all my body wants, so as often as I possibly can, that's how I eat: when I'm hungry, and until I'm not hungry anymore.
     We've become accustomed to feeding our animals the same way we eat - at set times of the day - when they would be healthiest and happiest if we would give them as much freedom as possible in choosing when and how much to eat and drink. Although, there is a trap to be avoided here, and that's the influence of boredom and stress on eating and drinking habits. The quality and quantity of the diet is important, too, as I'll discuss in later posts. Obesity is a very serious health problem in domestic animals, just as it is in domestic humans.
     But please don't let the challenges stop you from trying. Please give some thought to how you might move a little closer to nature's way of feeding her own in your particular circumstances. And then move a little closer still. This issue is an ongoing challenge for me, and I continue to tinker with it. It's easy enough for me to eat when I'm hungry, but I'm also responsible for feeding a dog. Here are my thoughts on feeding domestic dogs on a more natural "timetable" (knowing there's no such thing).
     By nature, dogs are rather opportunistic feeders. They eat their fill when food is available, even what you or I might call overeating if the food supply has been spotty. When food is scarce, they either hunt or scavenge, eating whatever they can find until their hunger is satisfied.
     What I do with that basic physiological and psychological template for Ms. Lilly is still a work in progress. The variety and opportunity components are easy enough, as I've been making a point of feeding her lots of different things, including leftovers from my dinner. (I may also share part of my meal with her if it's something she likes. Inexplicably, salads remain a "no sale" :-).
     The timing element remains a challenge, though. For now, I address the "eat when you're hungry" by paying attention to her. For example, when she comes up to me and politely asks for my attention while I'm down the rabbit hole of the computer screen, I'm getting better at noticing, asking her what she wants, and hearing that she's hungry and wants to eat. It's her choice, not mine. Because she's tuned in to her body, while I was on the computer, not even tuned in to my own :-)
     Another way I'm trying to address it is to feed her a large enough meal that I'm replicating what happens when a wild dog eats its fill at a fresh carcass or other food source. The dog is then satisfied for several hours. Dogs seem to prefer to be meal-feeders, not grazers, and their digestive systems would appear to be set up for meal feeding, although they certainly may "graze" or forage for food if a single meal doesn't satisfy. So, generally I feed Ms. Lilly a satisfying meal at least once a day (usually of an evening, as I've discussed before). Although on weekends especially, we may both "graze" our way lightly through the day. Short fasts from time to time are a natural thing.
     I also don't begrudge her the occasional "found object" when we're out on walks. Discarded hamburger buns, french fries, and DQ shakes may not be good for the body, but they sure are good for the soul. Dog manna! I'm almost as happy for her as she is when she scores such a find :-) Because scavenging for food is a natural thing for dogs.


     "Drink when you're thirsty" is easy enough with our animals. I just wanted to share some human-specific thoughts on this subject, as I've been both vexed and amused at the admonition by "health experts" for us to 'drink at least eight 8-oz glasses of water a day.' The advice continues that we should drink even when we're not thirsty, because by the time we register thirst, we're already dehydrated.
     Well, duh! The point of replenishing one's body fluids by drinking is to correct de-hydration; in other words, to re-hydrate. Drinking when you're not thirsty is the same as eating when you're not hungry: you'll end up taking in more than your body needs, which is not healthy. In fact, hyperhydration (excessive fluid intake) can be every bit as problematic as dehydration.
     There is nothing wrong with being mildly and transiently dehydrated. It's a normal physiological state, one that is corrected simply by drinking some water. It is neither necessary nor healthy to try to pre-empt dehydration by drinking in advance of one's need. Our bodies don't work that way; we can't store water in our humps! What happens instead is that we pee out the excess water within minutes of overhydrating - along with electrolytes, vitamins, and other small water-soluble molecules our bodies need to function well.

     I once tried drinking the requisite 64 oz. of water per day. I spent the day going to the bathroom every 30 minutes, peeing like a racehorse. Now, that may not cause any serious health problems if it's for just one day. But over time, such a practice may interfere with the body's ability to regulate its own water balance. Healthy kidneys use a concentration gradient of electrolytes (sodium and potassium, in particular) across their tubules to concentrate the urine and thus regulate the body's water balance. With excessive drinking comes excessive urine production, which weakens that concentration gradient, so over time the kidney becomes less able to concentrate the urine. It's a condition called renal medullary washout, and it can be a serious problem if it's not corrected.

    Here's another fun fact about this obsessive water drinking from veterinary medicine: In animals, there is a condition of confinement (boredom and/or stress) called psychogenic polydipsia. Decoded, that means excessive water drinking - i.e. water intake beyond one's physiological needs - caused by a mental/emotional disorder. The animal drinks excessively (and therefore pees excessively), not because there is anything wrong with the kidneys or with the central regulation of thirst, but because of a psychological disorder.
     In my view, humans who drink when they are not thirsty and continue to drink beyond the point of satiety are exhibiting the primary symptom of psychogenic polydipsia.
     (Have you cottoned yet to the fact that I'm an iconoclast? ...  :-)

     Homeostasis is not a static state; it is a dynamic process, a continual see-sawing around a theoretical stillpoint. It is not the stillpoint itself, but rather the process of maintaining balance in the face of change. To never be dehydrated is to never be alive.

     Why must we pathologise everything our bodies do?

     If we were to simply listen to our bodies, we would eat when we're hungry, drink when we're thirsty, and stop when we've had enough. Let's figure out some simple ways that allow the animals in our care to do the same. Please share any simple strategies you come up with to address this principle, and I'll pass them on to everyone else.

     That's it for now. Until next time,


-Dr. Chris King-
Nature's Apprentice
www.animavet.com