Candida and Me

Okay, so candida. Kind of an icky topic. I won't go into a lot of depth here, because you can google it. Basically, it's an overgrowth of the natural yeast that we all have in our guts. Supposedly, I have it. I didn't make this up--it was tested by my doctor and a lab, via. . . how to put this delicately: that stuff that comes out of your gut, your poop.

That's quite enough of that. What I really wanted to write about was the ensuing month of special diet I have had to consume, along with a smorgasbord of supplements, to try to heal my gut. I'm 3/4 of the way done with my four weeks of treatment. I can't wait for it to be over. But I have learned a few things about myself through the process.

Let me just say that I was given the option to approach this now or later. The wonderful staff at my new doctor's office are well aware that this is a difficult regimen to undergo, and they said I should only do it if I could stick to it. So I decided to go ahead, and I decided to pursue it with conviction and concentration. (I have actually been treated for this in the past by other practitioners, but I didn't approach it with the degree of effort I have this time. And I have much more support and information from my practitioner this time.)

Sometimes, I find it useful to prove to myself I can do something hard. A couple of years ago, it was backpacking in Yosemite. Birthing a 10 lb 10 oz baby was enough of a challenge nearly 18 years ago that I didn't need to prove anything for a very long time. This seemed like a good opportunity to prove to myself that I could focus on food as merely food and not entertainment. That I could live without my favorite vices.

The regimen I have been following is kind of scary. I am not allowed to eat any of the following: dairy, sugar or other sweeteners except for stevia, alcohol, grains of any kind, starchy vegetables, anything fermented or made with vinegar, or fruit except an occasional few berries in a protein smoothie. If you know me, you know that I love dairy AND bread AND fruit. So I knew this would be an extreme challenge. Basically, I can eat meat, beans, eggs, non-starchy vegetables (of course, all my favorite vegetables are of the starchy variety), nuts and seeds, and healthy fats.

Being the rebel and the self-directed person I am, I did a little of my own research and discovered that there are many variations in what is considered allowable on the candida diet. For example, raw honey is allowed by some. And as I have developed a distinct hatred for stevia, I decided a teeny bit of raw honey would be okay. I also have developed a gag reflex when drinking a protein smoothie, so I decided berries were acceptable if eaten with other types of protein, like meat.

My doctor had already okayed one cup of coffee per day, but no sugar. I started by using stevia, but I really don't like its flavor, and I had already been reducing my intake of sugar, so I now drink my coffee with no sweetener. Just cream. (I was allowed that tiny bit of dairy in my coffee, since they viewed that as better than opting for fake creamers.) So one thing I learned is that coffee really is not bad without sweetener. Who knew?

Here are a few other things I've learned:

Attitude is everything. I'm 51, and I should know this by now. But I kind of need a kick in the pants every once in a while. I went into this process with a positive attitude that it would be a chance to explore new foods, try out some other options I'd been wanting to try out anyway, and see if it really was possible to live without anything made out of wheat or any other grain (including oats) for a month--I thought missing grains would be the hardest part. The attitude has helped immensely. Duh. Hey, I gave up alcohol for three pregnancies. I gave up cheese while nursing Peter because it seemed to make him miserable. I can do almost anything for just one month.

Not to sound all new-agy and stuff, I have become more mindful about eating. Of course, that was sort of a by-product. I've had to think about literally every single thing. Mustard and ketchup? No, those have vinegar. What to have for breakfast when almost all of my prior breakfast choices have been grain-based? Eggs. Love eggs. Have not yet grown to despise eggs. But every morning? Today I drank the dang protein smoothie just for a change of pace. But I've discovered the wonders of almond flour and coconut flour and how you can make edible pancakes and muffins and even substitute hamburger buns out of them. On this diet, it is impossible to step into the kitchen and grab a snack without thinking, so yeah, mindfulness. Maybe more mindfulness than I would like. How delightful it will be to go grab some fruit for a snack without having to come up with something involving meat or veggies (not that I have anything against those food groups in particular).

Tastes I really, really like. I have become a big fan of the multiple uses of lemon juice. (I can have that where vinegar might be the norm, say in salad dressing and stuff.) I love lemon flavor. And it can be used in almost any kind of dish to add zing. Also avocados.  I've always loved the smooth and creamy texture of avocados. This month, I have been putting avocados on and in everything. Guacamole is my new love. I loved it before, but now I'm planning on eating is as often as possible. Coconut everything: flour, oil, butter, milk.

Perfection is impossible. Already knew this, but a nice reminder is useful. There have been one two occasions where I did use mustard or fruit or something more than I was supposed to. I have been allowed to have a very small amount of extremely dark chocolate, which I may have eaten slightly more than the allotted amount. But hey, I'm a writer, and writers can't write without chocolate.

On the other hand, I am made of stronger stuff than I anticipated. I never, ever thought I could survive without some sort of grains. I could go without wheat, if that's all it was. But rice? Oats? Yes, I can live without those as well. It's been a nice surprise that I am able to do this thing that I thought would be next to impossible. I have walked past tables of sugary treats without blinking, or even feeling tempted. I have eaten out with my family and not even cared that they were eating my favorite things, while I was stuck with more chicken and green salad. (Okay, I might have cared a bit. I have done my fair share of whining and complaining.)

It hasn't been all joy and wonder. Not at all. It has been a pain in the butt, to be honest. For starters, I'm not the kind of person who likes a regimented lifestyle. I was told I had to eat three meals and two snacks and they had to be 2-3 hours apart and at certain prescribed times. That has not happened. I knew it wouldn't. I eat when I'm hungry, and I'm still asleep at 7:00 a.m. so I'm not going to be eating breakfast between 7-9. I figured that was optional. I have tried to make sure I have some food every few hours, and I call that good.

And while I really do love a wide array of vegetables, not being able to eat fruit is practically killing me, especially at this time of the year, when all the fruit is ready to eat. That's why I've always been glad that the food pyramid or plate or whatever has combined fruits and vegetables into one category. Thank goodness I am allowed a few measly berries a day. I think fruit might be the first thing I eat when I'm done.

I really haven't missed dairy all that much, as I typically don't consume tons of dairy products anyway. But I was just falling in love with raw milk, so I will be glad to have that back. And cheese--like on sandwiches and pizza, and with bread and wine.

I don't really miss sugar that much, but I was already cutting way back on that and using low glycemic choices for sweeteners. So that will be something I can carry forward. I'm sure I will eat sugar--I must have some ice cream soon--but I think I can pick only the truly special treats that really mean something and leave most of the rest of the sugary stuff in the past.

I hope this kills the candida. Because if not, I might have to do it again, and I would not enjoy that at all. However, I wasn't having many of the symptoms of candida to begin with, and I don't feel any better or worse after the first 3 weeks. I have had some headaches and been very tired, but isn't different than before. I don't feel less brain foggy. I don't have more energy. My digestion doesn't seem any different. So aside from being grouchy whenever I pass Fanci Freez, I don't really feel different at all.

Therefore, when my month is up--coincidentally on the exact date of my 30th wedding anniversary--I will not feel at all guilty about enjoying myself with some wine, cheese and bread, and strawberries with whipped cream. No meat or vegetables in sight. I have proven to myself that I could do it, and it has definitely been interesting. But it's not the way I want eating to be for the long term. So if at the end of this the doctor tells me I can never eat grains again, I might be okay. But is she tells me no fruit, there might some extreme negotiations to work out. And lots of screaming.

My two most important take-aways are things I was trying to work on anyway: eliminating or significantly reducing my sugar intake and eating less or no processed food. I have done both of those things, and I think they are definitely habits I can continue.

It's been a journey, with some illuminating new insights. But  mostly I can't wait to be done.

How a Rational, Educated, non-celebrity Chose Not to Vaccinate

There’s been a lot of vitriol aimed at the “anti-vaxxers” lately, blaming non-vaccinators for recent outbreaks of measles, whooping cough, and whatever else rears its head. Some people have written posts calling parents who choose not to vaccinate “ignorant” and “selfish.”

Well, I am here to defend these parents, and I am not afraid to state right up front that I am one. It’s been nearly 25 years since I made this decision for my babies, but I think time gives me a substantial level of objectivity, since I’m no longer personally insulted by the hatred, nor am I afraid that people will think I’m some sort of bad mother—my children have all turned out to be very healthy, intelligent, and worthy human beings who have yet to spread anything worse than a cold.

I realize that people don’t like their long-held beliefs challenged, and this certainly applies to vaccinations. It is far easier to simply yell louder that vaccines are essential than it is to actually do the research. But look at all the ways the medical community has changed its mind about tests and treatments it once considered perfectly safe. Overuse of antiobiotics led to the rise of super bacteria that are resistant to the available antibiotics. Another example: for decades now, they’ve been telling women they must have mammograms. Now, science is starting to realize that this strategy has resulted in many women being treated unnecessarily, as well as other women feeling reassured when fast-growing cancers that would kill them in a few months were not detected by a mammogram.

I did not make the choice not to vaccinate my children lightly, by any means. I did not simply decry it as a government conspiracy or a medical waste of time. I initially thought like a lot of you, that vaccines were the way to go, so I wasn’t on board right away. A couple of acquaintances suggested I check out the information on both sides of the issue—a strategy that has served me well throughout parenthood.

So I researched. I read dozens of books. I looked at questions that had been asked about vaccines that the medical community did not have answers to. If I had found satisfactory answers to my questions, I might have chosen to vaccinate. But I did not. The research on long-term side effects of vaccines just did not exist. The research on short-term effects was not very convincing, either.

I probably read more about vaccines—both pro and con—than the average pediatrician/MD. I know that the medical practitioner is often influenced by several factors, such as the pharma reps who visit their offices regularly, not to mention the reluctance to buck the system. I read books by several physicians who had bucked the system, and they were basically shunned by the medical community, even though they had been previously well-respected.

At this point, if you’re reading this, I urge you to read extensively on both sides of the issue, and please avoid rash judgments on the intelligence and parental responsibility of the person who chooses not to vaccinate. If you want to have a respectful discussion of the actual science (or non-science, as the case may be), I welcome that, but unless you have read extensively on both sides of the issue, it can’t be a true discussion.

I made the decision not to vaccinate because the evidence in favor of it did not seem complete enough to me. One common reason given to me in favor of vaccines was the obvious “fact” that many diseases had been eradicated because of immunizations. Nothing proves this, however. In most of Europe, there was never a mandated immunization program as there was in the U.S., and they experienced the same decline in diseases at the same time. What I learned was that the incidence of most contagious diseases ebbs and flows. So, simply the correlation of mass immunizations in the U.S. and the decrease in diseases does not prove causality. I could just as easily correlate vaccinations with increases in childhood obesity, auto immune diseases, cancers, ADHD, depression, etc. (I believe this type of correlation is what makes some people claim that immunizations cause autism. I don’t buy that. I know non-vaccinated children with autism.) If vaccines truly worked the way we are told they do, then no one would feel threatened by my unvaccinated family, because supposedly you are immune to the disease and therefore cannot get it. In addition, if the disease can be carried by people who aren’t immune, then it can be carried by both the unvaccinated and the vaccinated, since obviously there are some who have been vaccinated who are not fully immune.

In addition, I learned that there are numerous ways to increase the strength and effectiveness of an immune system. An MD won’t tell you about these, because big pharma doesn’t knock on their doors once a week promoting it. (I realize my bias is showing.) Many of these methods are hundreds of years old and easily achieved.

The first and easiest way to promote a baby’s immune system is by breastfeeding. I will not go into much depth here, because there is a ton of information to back this up. In fact, the evidence supporting a myriad of breastfeeding’s benefits is overwhelming. Even the medical community (which, incidentally, was not always so pro-breastfeeding) now recommends breastfeeding as the best form of infant nutrition. Among all the many benefits is the mother’s antibodies are passed to the baby through her milk, which is the perfect way to help the baby fight diseases specific to the environment where the mother lives.

Giving mass doses of vaccines at the vulnerable age of infancy can put more stress on the immature immune system. Which is why some parents take a middle road approach of delaying vaccines until the baby is older, and then spacing out the vaccines instead of administering them all at once. There is some reason to believe this might be a good compromise. This way, if there is a reaction, it is clear which vaccine was at fault. People often cite the bad side effects of the diseases in question. I have seen first-hand equally devastating effects after vaccines.

But most of the information I read indicated it was best to avoid all vaccines until children were much older.

Some other ways to promote the health of the immune system are things you read about a lot these days. Herbs and vitamins are useful. Less processed food, low sugar intake, and the like help. Good gut bacteria (which is supported by breastfeeding).

Also low intake of antibiotics. My children rarely received antibiotics. And they really didn’t need to—because they had really strong immune systems that had been allowed to develop at a natural pace through breastfeeding, healthy food, and by fighting off diseases with a supported immune system. Interestingly, it was once considered a no-brainer to just pump kids with antibiotics “just in case,” and we now realize that this causes resistance to antibiotics as the formation of super-bacteria. What will a couple of decades teach us about the long-term problems with vaccines?

Let me address just a couple of diseases specifically. Let’s talk whooping cough, as this is one of the illnesses that always gets the pro-vaxxers up in arms. The fact of the matter is that whooping cough vaccine is one of the least effective vaccines given to kids, so the fact that lots of incidents crop up should come as no surprise, and should not be blamed on the kids who aren’t vaccinated.

Right now, it seems measles is a big issue in New York City and more recently in LA. According to what I’ve seen in news reports, many of those who are getting sick have been vaccinated. Again, if the vaccine worked, they wouldn’t be getting sick.

I am not entirely against vaccines. When people are older and the vaccine serves a specific need, then I see some good reasons to administer them. Foreign travel, for example. Our bodies are not used to the viruses, bacteria, and illnesses of unfamiliar parts of the world, so an older teen or adult being vaccinated prior to travel seems prudent. Exposure is perhaps another reason. If you work in a hospital, which is rampant with all kinds of nasty stuff, it might be wise to be vaccinated. But this is when our immune systems are much more developed and able to handle a big influx of vaccines.

For some people, the risks of living are scary, and that includes the risk of childhood diseases. A generation ago, before vaccinations were the norm, these same childhood diseases were the norm, and nobody thought twice about the possibility of getting measles, for example. In fact, you were the strange one if you hadn’t had the disease. A couple of things I learned through my research were that these illnesses are normal childhood illnesses that are less dangerous in young children than they are in older children or adults. I can attest to this from personal experience. I never had chicken pox as a child, so I got it at age 30 when my children had it. I was extremely sick, dangerously so. My children were hardly even uncomfortable. The other thing to note is that having a disease like measles confers lifelong immunity, a much better risk avoidance technique than an unsure roll of the dice with vaccines. Because people frequently forget to have boosters, there are more incidents of these illnesses in young adults, which can have even worse side effects than having the illness as a kid.

I do not judge those who choose to vaccinate. There are reasons in favor of it, and I know that every parent makes the best choices we can at any given time. But as I said before, I have read more on both sides of the issue than probably most parents, doctors, and the general populace. I made my decision based on information and rational thought. So please refrain from calling me ignorant or selfish. I made the best choice for my children—not selfish, just what any parent would do. 

My Pretend Ideal School

What follows is my attempt at thinking about a way to "do" school in America without all the annoying assanine problems we have right now. I was so hopeful that the nice-sounding mission of Common Core was going to be awesome, but its implementation has proven to be far less than promised. And the College Board--don't even get me started. So how would I--a highly educated mother of three very motivated students--structure the school system?

First, we need to think about the point of education. I have a bias about this, so let's get it out there right up front. I believe education is supposed to produce an educated population, one that can think critically and analytically, one that can discern mumbo jumbo on Fox from actual news, one that understands other cultures and governments, one that has a broad range of culture literacy. I don't think education is there to prepare people for jobs or whatever. A well-educated populace will be prepared for all kinds of things, jobs included.

My ideal school would be a free (no-tuition), private school, not subject to the rules of idiots who run the state department of education but who have never ever worked in the school system. I shall for the time being--since this is just a hypothetical school--invoke the debater's method of fiat for funding. In other words, for the sake of argument, we'll assume there will be funding for this idea. (I mean, why get bogged down in reality?)

Admission to the school will be based primarily on the student's willingness to abide by the standards of the school--such as no bullying, respect for self and others, self-motivation, etc. Under no circumstances will socio-economic status be a deterrent to admission, nor any other factors such as race, parental involvement, etc. In fact, the goal will be to provide the most diverse population possible and to have an atmosphere that welcomes and respects all people from any race, religion, gender identification, neighborhood, nationality, and any other factors that are commonly used to exclude.

The curriculum at this school will be written by the teachers, not a corporation. For now, let's pretend it's K-12, although some of my ideas might be best only as you get into the high school years. Every student will take Latin from the very beginning. Until they leave. Yes, it's a dead language, but the skills learned by studying Latin serve the mind well in conquering a whole host of other things, such as our own language, logic, etc. Every student will also take another foreign language. It doesn't have to be the same one from k-12, but each language should be studied for a minimum of three years to achieve some basic level of fluency.

The rest of the coursework will be very rigorous--really. Not the way Common Core promised to be rigorous. Students will be expected, say through the course of high school, to study the history of the world, not just western civilization, but also Asian history, African history, and South American history. Same with literature. In fact, ideally, all courses would be aligned so that students are studying the period of history and literature and science together. Writing well shall be emphasized across all subjects.

The emphasis of this school will be on classic education: language, history, math, literature, science, art and music. There will not be vocational programs. All courses will be the same for every student, based on the idea that all students are equally capable of mastering all subjects. Some may need more time, and the structure of the school will allow for that. Students who are able to progress more quickly may do so, and thus take higher level courses. There will be daily time for physical activity, whether you want to call it recess, PE, or whatever. It will focus on activities that might be life-long joys, whether team sports, or solitary running, hiking, skiing, etc. I think religion class aimed at learning the basic tenants of all world religions (probably incorporated into history and literature) would be good. Not as evangelism, but as learning to understand the rest of humanity.

There will be NO standardized tests of any kind, and teachers will be encouraged to write tests that really test a student's mastery. No multiple-choice, but a combination of short answer, essay, and analysis. Nobody will learn to write 5-paragraph essays. They will learn to write cogent, thoughtful essays of a length necessary to state and support the thesis.

Grades will not be given. For the purpose of transcripts, grades will be recorded, but will not be released except for specific requests. The theory of this is that students will be putting forth their best efforts at all times, aiming for mastery of their subject, rather than trying to figure out what to put for an answer that will give them the best grade. Homework will be assigned solely for the purpose of practicing and repeating necessary skills, but not for a grade. Students will understand that doing homework will help them master the material faster.

Multi-age classes and subjects will be encouraged, as will collaboration between teachers to teach lessons that are coordinated with other subjects. Students reaching the necessary level of subject mastery may move on to the next level, whether it takes one quarter or three quarters to make that next level. I like a trimester system, because it allows for more intensive exposure to more subjects.

Teachers will be in charge of the school. There will be no administration making top-down decisions. (There will be administrative assistants doing the necessary tasks like attendance, record keeping, scheduling etc. Just not someone making decisions about the classroom.) Teachers will be like owners or shareholders of the school. All teachers will be hired based on creativity in teaching, years of experience, and knowledge of subjects. One would not have to be state certified to teach in this school, but would have to demonstrate a high level of skill in teaching and knowledge of the subject. At least one teaching assistant will be in each classroom. These will be hired from a pool of new college graduates and/or new to teaching professionals. All teachers will be expected to mentor the teaching assistants. All teachers will be expected to work in a highly collaborative capacity with fellow teachers, even co-teaching whenever possible and practical. Teaching assistants may move into teacher positions when they have received a certain level. I don't know what that would be. Maybe five years of assisting/being mentored before being eligible to be a full teacher.

To accommodate the additional time needed for assessment and administrative tasks asked of these teachers, one day a week will be given to teachers for collaboration, inservice education, and admin. That day will be one in which students will focus on individual studying, writing, presenting, under the supervision of the teaching assistants. Teaching assistants will also receive one day per week for in-depth learning experiences with mentor teachers.

The school day will start later than most schools now. Maybe 9:00 a.m. It will end later as a result. Probably around 4:00 or even 5:00. The school year will start in September, with three months in session and one-month breaks as follows: Sep/Oct/Nov will be first trimester. December: break. Jan/Feb/March is second trimester. April is break. May/June/July is third trimester. August is break. This kind of schedule avoids summer breaks that get way too long for most students I know who are highly motivated. It also allows plenty of time for extended family vacations. Students at the high school level may be encouraged to use their breaks for internships, self study, or even work. Those who plan to take SATs or ACTs or other tests (not required by the school) might use that time for study aimed at those tests. Perhaps, if parents were interested, special classes could be offered during breaks--to meet their childcare needs, mostly. Things kind of like summer or spring break day camps do now.

In this school, all teachers and other personnel will be paid a highly competitive salary. (Fiat on the funding, remember?) A professional level salary. For each year a teaching assistant stays, their salary will increase until they are eligible to be a full teacher. Full teacher pay will reward teachers for longevity, creativity, extra learning opportunities, and so forth. Maybe there will be some sort of master teacher levels that will allow for further pay increases. The idea being that teaching is one of the most important professions and should be paid accordingly, and in a professional manner.

I realize there are probably many practical and realistic issues with some of these ideas. This is just me, thinking of what sounds good. I welcome input and further discussion of these ideas and more. Because I'm really sick of the way it's been done for the last ten years. And I live in the best school district in the state. And I've been pretty happy with the education my kids received. But that has been a factor almost exclusively of having really fantastic teachers who teach for love and having really motivated, smart kids. All students should have teachers like the ones my kids have been fortunate enough to have had. And I think we need to put education back in the teachers' court. Train teachers through mentoring and expect high levels of work from our students.

How Did I Get Here?

Disclaimer: this post contains boring analysis of my health conditions and what they mean to me. And the journey I've been on. May not be interesting to anybody. Read at your own risk.

It's hard to know where to start. I think I'll start with the turning point that occurred about 13 or 14 years ago. Most of my life before that did not involve the intensity of health problems that came after. (I did have an abundance of health issues before that, which I'm sure all contributed to the turning point, but I can't recount my entire life story here.)

So in the winter of that year (around 2000 or maybe it was 1999--possibly even earlier or later), I had a very bad case of the flu. Probably the worst flu I've ever had. I remember it well. I was flat on my back for about 12 days. I lost about 20 pounds because I didn't really eat or drink anything. I became dehydrated like I never have before. I was really sick. It took a few weeks to feel normal again.

By that time, I developed what seemed to be a bladder infection, but turned out to be a kidney stone (probably induced by being severely dehydrated), although we didn't get that diagnosis for a couple of months. The stone was lodged in my ureter and was not moving and being passed. It took several different diagnostic tests of varying levels of humiliation before the urologist finally found where the bloody little thing was. Then I got to have a  procedure called lithotripsy, in which you are put under and sound waves are aimed at the blockage to break it into pieces so it will move. After that, you still get to pass the stone like usual. So I got to be sick with the stupid thing for three months, and as a bonus, I still got to pass the stone in the end. So fun.

To sum up--basically sick and miserable for about four months. This led to several things, some of which I didn't understand or realize for a very long time. The most outward and obvious one was that I sank further into the chronic depressive state that required medication. I'd been teetering on the edge of that cliff for decades, managing to function, but not necessarily well. (That's an entire book of analysis all on its own. It took at least a year to get stable.) Also, my body physically responded to this extended period of illness by interpreting it as an emergency of top priority, leading to my adrenals and thyroid becoming drained and failing to do their job, try as they might. You've probably heard of adrenal exhaustion. That.

Thus began an ordeal of doctor visits to see what could be done. Because I am more of an alternative medicine kind of gal, that's the route I took. I saw a homeopathic doctor for a while. She tried several remedies that didn't seem to be doing the trick. In hindsight, I realize two things. First, I didn't take my conditions seriously enough, resulting in not taking the remedies as thoroughly as possible. Second, I and the doc were too impatient for results to appear, so we moved on probably too soon to other options.

Frustrated with no progress there, I found an osteopath who treated thyroid condition known as Wilson's Thyroid Syndrome. This is a fun time that involves taking your temp three times a day at precise times and eating at precise times. If you know me, you know precise timing is not my thing. I struggled to adhere to the treatment, but it was causing more stress that probably taxed my poor adrenals even further. I ended up taking thyroid meds. I am not sure they ever really did me any good. Maybe they did. I can't tell. I took them for years.

For years, I underwent blood analysis and a barrage of supplements and yeast cleanses and foot detoxing and bioidentical hormone therapy.

On top of all that, the illnesses, shutdown of my adrenals, and antidepressants caused me to gain about 100 pounds. Which didn't do much for my personal self-esteem and well-being. Even when I weighed 110 pounds in college, I thought I was fat. So this wasn't helping my body image at all.

Then they decided to treat my cholesterol, which is extremely high. I took statins for years, which did help the cholesterol, but then I read that they had some causal links to diabetes, which puts you at higher risk for heart disease, which is the whole reason to reduce your cholesterol in the first place. I don't take those meds anymore.

One doc decided I needed more D3. On and on. I tried everything they made me do. I even tried to lose the weight. I managed to lose about 30 pounds, then plateaued and never got any further with that endeavor. (Later, through some intense reading, I learned that people with adrenal exhaustion create more exhaustion when trying to lose weight, because the body interprets the weight loss as a crisis and jumps in to stop it. Thus making it nearly impossible to lose weight.)

Which brings me approximately to 2013. The antidepressants I had been taking for about ten years and which had kept me stable and functional that whole time began to "poop out," as they say in the psychiatric world. At the same time, I began consulting with my chiropractor on some of these issues--like cholesterol, blood sugar, adrenal fatigue, thyroid, and digestive absorption. I started reading a whole bunch of books and articles about the lies of the medical "research" over the past several decades and the wrongness of much of the advice that is commonly  handed out by doctors.

Let me preface what I am about to say with another disclaimer. I have always been on the "other" side of much of what the medical establishment touts as the best thing. I never vaccinated my children because I did a lot of reading about vaccines--from all points of view--and decided they couldn't answer all my questions satisfactorily. I had two babies at home, despite the common looks of horror that many people gave me, thinking I was putting myself and the babies in grave danger. I don't do antibiotics and never allowed them to be given to my children. You get the picture. So I, more than the average person, am already halfway there when someone tells me the medical establishment has been lying to me. (As with cholesterol lowering meds, for example.)

Throughout this intense period of reading, which I continue to do a lot still, I made some discoveries that have impacted the way I look at my health and how I should approach it. I'm not saying these strategies are the ones everyone should use, but they are where I have come down on certain thoughts about health. I'm going to list them in no particular order.

1. I have realized that you can consume all the supplements you want, but if they're not being absorbed because you have digestive concerns, then they're doing you no good.

2. Healing the digestive system is a long process requiring a lot of patience.

3. Cholesterol is not the enemy. We need it for our bodies and brains to function. Focusing too much on that number is not that useful.

4. Saturated fat is not the enemy. Hydrogenated and trans fats--abundant in processed foods--are the enemy.

5. Carbs are not the enemy. Refined sugar and processed foods are.

6. Adrenal exhaustion requires a unique approach that most practitioners really don't understand. It involves sleeping a lot, eating really really good foods, and not over-exercising (which the body interprets as a stressor and thus creates more exhaustion).

7. My own personal timetable is very slow. I think of it as glacial. One healer said it's like a mountain. In other words, I may be at this for a very long time before I am at the state of wellness I'd like to achieve.

There are many other insights and details of how I look at things at this point. But my story in ongoing. Last summer I began experiencing frequent headaches of random duration. Headaches that worried me quite a bit. At first I thought it was from my new antidepressants. Then I thought it might be from eye strain. Or not getting enough water. Or too much sugar. After months of keeping a headache journal along with a food diary and an assessment of possible triggers, I still have no concrete answers as to what is causing these headaches or what I can do to prevent them. I am beginning to think they are caused by the random and strange fluctuations of hormones as I go through menopause.

Here's what I HAVE learned, though. The headaches came so that I would pay attention. So that I would search out the best health I can. And that has been a useful journey, which I continue on and will for the rest of my life. It starts with me, with paying attention to my body, its responses, and its intuitive knowing.

Now, I am sure that if any of my friends and family read this, you will undoubtedly want to share with me the miracles you have found for yourselves. Whether it's eating raw food, gluten free, paleo, vegetarian, or whatever. Please don't. I'm aware of the benefits of all those strategies, and I am actually following many of them in my own stew of strategies.

Where I have come down at this point is that I should be eating high quality foods, unprocessed foods, lots of water, plenty of good fats like butter/meat/coconut oil/etc, plenty of high quality protein, and as little sugar as I can. And I know that because change comes to me at a glacial pace, I can't be in a hurry. Therefore, I am tending to avoid looking at numbers like weight, cholesterol levels, and such. I will look at those numbers some, when it seems right. But I am looking inward more for the understanding I need. I am reading a ton of information, so if you have a good source and want to share it, feel free. Mostly I have learned that one thing that might be healthy for one person might not be healthy for me. I have learned that my weight has been a physical response to perceived crises, and that it may never go back to normal. Or after glacial years of taking the best possible care, my body might decide it is safe to let go of the weight. I can't afford to focus on the number right now.

It's a journey I've been on for all my life. I am realizing now that each step has taught me something of value. It's very hard to focus on how to get well when there are so many systems that are in need of healing: the digestion, the adrenals, the thyroid, the liver, the brain, the blood, etc. I find myself at this point open to what I can learn and do in order to restore and renew what I am able to. So, no specific answers and lots of questions, but an openness to seeing things differently. Not a bad place to be.

Why a Tattoo?

Today I got my first tattoo. I've been planning this tattoo for years, so it wasn't like I just woke up one day and said, I'm doing this. And I didn't want to carve something into my skin for life that wasn't hugely meaningful to me. I didn't want just a butterfly or something.

So if you're interested, here is the story of my tattoo. First, the question why? I know my hubby wonders why anyone would volunteer to undergo pain and expense. He'd probably rather buy camping gear. The easy answer is it's a means of self expression, a way to visibly display something about myself. For me it goes deeper than that.

I was thinking about what it means to me and why I would go through with it all week as I anticipated the pain. I don't like pain. I have a high tolerance for it, but I don't like it. Here's what I realized. For me, this a a rite of passage of sorts. It's solely about me. All the other rites of passage I've had have been mostly me in connection with others. Which is a good thing. My wedding, the births of my children, graduations. All of those things have importance, permanence, and meaning in my life. Big time.

But over the past years as I have approached 50 (a milestone I reached last year and about which you can read at length elsewhere on my blog), I have thought more about myself as, well, My Self. The self I am when it's not about how I'm connected to others. Not that I don't like being connected to others, mind you, but I've never NOT been connected to others, so it was kind of strange to think about. Perhaps this is a normal developmental process for women "of a certain age." I mean, my children are almost all grown and I have more and more of my life that is my own. I'm fast approaching menopause (with welcome arms I might add). They don't call it the change of life for nothing. I have read that for women, this is a time where we come into our power, ourselves, our true selves. No longer are we living for others, but we can live for ourselves. Follow our dreams. Lots of women have whole new lives from this point forward. I don't anticipate a whole new life on the outside, but it does feel sometimes like there's a primal, earth moving, tectonic motion going on inside my spirit.

It's like a quote my friend Gregory posted recently from Victor Hugo. I'll paraphrase in case I don't get it just right: Forty is the old age of youth; 50 is the youth of old age. That is exactly how 50 feels to me. I'm not young anymore. Kind of a relief, to tell you the truth. I feel like I'm the young one of my generation. I am technically a Baby Boomer, but like that last one born. So I do feel like a youth of older folk. So what a perfect time to get a tattoo, huh? Isn't that the kind of things people do in their crazy youth? But I'm in my crazy second youth. I don't care what people think of me. (Something that was definitely not true of me in my youth.) I am not afraid of messing things up or having to live the rest of my life with artwork on my body. I have a bit of extra money to spend on myself. And I am getting to really, truly, know the me that is My Self.

So about the tattoo. It has three pieces, all of which have great meaning to me and stand alone, but together make up the essence of myself.

First there is an owl in flight. The owl is my spirit animal. You might not believe in that kind of thing. No problem. But I do. I have loved owls since I was a child. They are mysterious, powerful, supposedly wise, silent and yet not silent. They are magnificent, elegant. Cute even. I love owls of all kinds and types. Live and painted, sculpted, or otherwise depicted. On one of the lowest days of my life (years and years ago), David tried to cheer me up. He took me to a creek in the Black Hills, where we splashed and played like kids. He took me somewhere with mountains, water, and peace. On the way home that night, a huge owl greeted me on the road. It was in flight, just above the trees, truly magnificent. It was as if it was telling me everything would be all right. Maybe like an angel or a spirit. Or just an owl. Also, the owl symbolizes for the purposes of my tattoo, my love of nature. Nature is to me the visible evidence of God. Even God itself. In nature is when I am with God. The spirit in which I live and move and have my being.

Second, there are three shooting stars. Basically, these represent my children. They are the best things I have to offer the world. I have raised them, and now they are ready, or almost ready, to shoot off into the world to bring their own version of themselves to fruition. They are my shining stars. Also, last year on my 50th birthday at May Lake in Yosemite, we watched shooting stars. I saw three. I think the number three is the most mystical number there is. Plus, Yosemite on my 50th birthday was just one of the best times in the world.

Finally, there is a Celtic symbol, with three spirals all coming together as one. I could probably go on ad nauseum about the magical number of three. There are religious connotations like Father/Son/Holy Spirit. There are earth based patterns like earth/wind/fire, mountains/water/trees (my own personal recipe for enlightenment and peace), breath of life/air/spirit, mother/father/child, sun/moon/stars. Dozens of others. Probably ones I haven't even thought of yet. In yoga, when we say three Ohms at the end of a session, I have heard it explained this way: the distinct sounds you say when you say "Ohm" represent birth/life/death. You are speaking everything in that breath. I've also heard someone else describe it as the sound of the earth itself. As an earth person, I connect with that very deeply.

So that is what the symbols mean to me. Someone once said they thought it was stupid to have a tattoo that was so obtuse you had to explain the symbolism to everyone. Oh well. What's important to me is that I know the symbolism and the importance. After all, it's on my body. I don't care what anyone else thinks. (See above.)

I couldn't be happier with the results. The sketch the artist did for me was great, but the actual tattoo is about ten times more awesome. Yeah it hurt. I don't know if I'll ever get another. Only if I come up with a design that holds as much meaning for me as this one.

Our Story (from one point of view): Part One

Once upon a time, a little girl moved from the Big Apple out to the fresh air and mountains of South Dakota’s Black Hills. On her first day of school in Hot Springs, second grade, she noticed a boy across the room. She didn’t know his name, but he had very, very blond hair and a little scar on his temple from where he had scratched at his chicken pox. She had never had chicken pox. (More on that later.)

After that, they weren’t in the same homeroom very often, and she didn’t pay much attention to him. Their families went to the same church, and they were in youth group together in middle school.  She had a crush on his best friend at one point. They were both in band, both played flute. She was first chair. He wasn’t very good. Until he got put on bass drum in the marching band. He had rhythm, that’s for sure.

In high school, they both joined debate. Both still in band. Both in theater. (In Hot Springs you didn’t specialize. There just weren’t enough students. Everyone was a generalist.) During sophomore year, he started paying attention to her. Talking to her more than just the general ways classmates do. He finally asked her out over Christmas break. It was a dance with the local band Ivory playing. (Clap if you remember them. Yeah, two of you. That’s what I thought.) He drove his grandma’s car, and she got friends to buy beer for her. The ride home was not a pretty sight.

Still, he asked her out again. (In those days, you asked a girl out. You dated. You actually went on dates to do things.) Until they were pretty much a thing. She was 15. They went to lots of movies and lots of dances. More beer was involved. (That’s pretty much what you had in Hot Springs.)

They went to debate camp the next summer, and that’s where they started to fall in love. And that’s when they also realized they’d be excellent debate partners. During  junior and senior years, they won many, many debate tournaments, theater contests, band festivals, etc. They spent an awful lot of time together. Her parents worried. But he was a nice boy.

Oh, things happened. They got into some troubles. Those aren’t important. What’s important is that they loved each other. Then they graduated. She was valedictorian. He was a national merit scholar. They went to separate colleges. She was miserable. She had a car accident. She sprained her ankle multiple times. She hated being apart from him. So she transferred and life was back on track. They spent their college years at Carleton. He ran cross country and acted in theater. She played flute and wrote plays. Neither of them did debate.

They graduated. She was cum laude. He got distinction in his major. Then they got married. That was June 20, 1984. Twenty-nine years ago. That’s not the end of the story, but that’s how the story began. 

Not an A Student

The end of the school year always comes with those assemblies where students get all kinds of awards. I remember when my kids were in elementary school, there were awards for perfect attendance. I always wondered how in the world that student was never sick, never had a dentist appointment, never had to take a day off to travel to see family for a holiday or special event. Was it really such an accomplishment?

I am not writing about our weird society that rewards kids for showing up and trying. Although that is a worthy topic of discussion, it’s not what I’m about today.

I’m here to talk about all the kids who don’t earn an award. Does that mean they are somehow less worthy of our acknowledgements?  I don’t think so. And I’m not here to laud the wonderful strength of students who, say, graduate despite all the odds against them, whatever they might be. I’m here to write about the ordinary kids who are usually not on anyone’s radar.

So, okay, I’m going to use my own son, Peter, as an example. Of course, I think Peter is extraordinary, but you don’t know him, so you probably don’t share my bias. There are a lot of qualities Peter has that make him awesome, but the ones I want to talk about today involve his attitudes toward school, learning, and matters of the mind.

As just a general example, Peter’s attitude about grades is approximately the opposite of most students I know. His belief is this: if he knows the subject matter, feels he has a reasonably good grasp and mastery of it, then he has no need to prove that to his teachers or his peers by jumping through what he sees as unnecessary hoops in order to get a good grade. To some, this might look like laziness. He doesn’t see any point in studying until 3:00 a.m. in order to get an A. He figures if he goes to class, pays attention, does his homework, and understands what he has learned, studying isn’t going to get him that much further. He knows what he knows. The end result of this attitude is that he doesn’t feel the need to do mindless extra credit work, doesn’t feel the need to do test corrections, doesn’t feel excessively compelled to turn in every last scrap of paper called homework.

Some parents would probably freak out over this. I mean, he doesn’t get straight A’s. Even though I’m pretty certain he could if he ramped up his effort the tiniest bit. He is wholly unmotivated by gold stars and letters on a transcript. But this doesn’t mean he is unmotivated. His motivation is internal, not external. I personally think this is a good thing. You know those job announcements that constantly want applicants who are self-motivated? Creative? Able to work without supervision? That’s Peter.

Sometimes Peter’s attitudes are at odds with his peers, which can tend to make him seem antisocial. For example, often in school, other students seem to be primarily interested in spending class time chatting, laughing, and generally not doing their work. (These are often, ironically, the same students who freak out if they don’t get a good grade and who stay up until 3:00 a.m. studying for a test.) Peter gets annoyed by these kids. He has said repeatedly that he wants to learn. He is there to learn. His motivation is not for the grade, but for the knowledge. One girl in his English class, for example, spent her class time applying fingernail polish. When Peter commented about this on a facebook post, she got upset because she felt he was calling her stupid. I think he just meant that he wanted to focus on class and the fumes from her nail polish made that difficult.

Then there’s English class. Peter is definitely a science geek, but he also has pretty good language and literature knowledge. When his class read Taming of the Shrew, he was the only one who had ever seen it produced. He was the only one who knew what the basic plot was. He was, from what I have heard, one of the few who was not completely freaked out by Elizabethan English. One of his English papers this year had to do with symbolism found in the piece of literature they were reading at the time.  Assignments like this frustrate the hell out of this kid. He doesn’t like to look at literature as “what is the author trying to say?” He would rather ask “what impact does this literature have on me?” (As an author and an English major, I wholeheartedly support this approach.) So in this particular paper, Peter quoted John Green, one of his favorite authors, who says when the author says the curtains are blue, he just means they are blue. He’s not trying to symbolize sadness or something. In short, Peter’s paper pretty much ignored the assigned task, but engaged in the literary work in a very real way, and for that he received 100%. Because he showed the teacher that he was actually thinking, and not just regurgitating what he thought she wanted to hear, he made a statement. The teacher could have easily given him a different grade because he didn’t really complete the assignment, but I give her credit for acknowledging that he had actually been more engaged in the assignment than anyone else in class.

Because of experiences like that, Peter has enjoyed his English class more than he expected to, despite the nail polish girl and the kids who wanted to watch videos rather than do work. While there are a lot of things I did not appreciate about this particular teacher, I think she did see that he was actually thinking about what they covered in class in a way that other kids weren’t.

Peter understands that if he wanted to, he could get straight A’s. And he knows that colleges will be looking at his GPA. And I’ve talked to him about how useful scholarships are for college. He may decide in the next school year that those rewards are worth jumping through a few more hoops than he might like. If not, he understands that certain doors may not open for him. Which is kind of sad for those on the other sides of the doors. I mean, if I were a college admissions officer of an elite science oriented school, I think I might be interested in a student who outfits his own personal chemistry lab at home for the summer, because he loves chemistry that much. I might want to encourage a student who thinks curiosity is the most important quality, because it leads to trying things in different ways until one gets the desired results.  I might find it interesting that this kid is learning a fictional language from a computer game, even creating clay tablets on which to write this language, not because he has to, but because he is fascinated by it. I might even want to invest scholarship money in someone who is so curious about life that he’d rather just learn than get a certain grade.

It reminds me of the joke my husband’s law school buddies used to tell, which bears a shocking truth. The A students became law professors—which doesn’t pay all that well. The B students became judges—again, not extremely high paying. And the C students became the litigators earning the big bucks. Now this is not to say that money is the end all. That is the last thing I’m about. However, it does pose an interesting idea. Being a C student doesn’t mean you won’t succeed. Book learning is not everything. (And yes, it feels somewhat blasphemous for me to say that, as the intellectual book geek that I am.) The practical ability to solve real-world issues is perhaps the greater good. And often, those people aren’t the ones earning all the top awards at end-of-year assemblies. They’re the ones quietly doing chemistry in their bedrooms over the summer.