I’m happy to announce that I’ve started a new podcast. Called “Growing Up Baseball,” the podcast features my son Peter and I discussing the latest happenings in the world of baseball. We were inspired to start this podcast by the fun we had in a recent episode of Swimming Upstream where we reviewed the just-ended MLB season. And since we spend a lot of our time talking about baseball anyway, we figured we’d record it!
If you are a fan of baseball or know someone who is, I encourage you to check it out:
This week I was honored to be on Dr. Taylor Marshall’s YouTube show to discuss the topic “Can a Pope be Deposed?” It’s a relevant topic, and one without easy answers.
Although I grew up north of the Mason-Dixon line, I ate like a Southern boy. My mom was raised in the heart of the South, and her cooking reflected that. Just recalling those meals makes my mouth water even today. I’m old enough that my youth was a time before everyone was health-conscious about the food they ate, but my mom cooks pretty much the same way today. Food is an important part of Southern culture, and its traditions are not easily changed, no matter what the USDA or HHS might say.
But Southern cooking wasn’t my only dietary issue growing up.
My family lived across the street from a convenience store, and those were the
days when you could return a glass soda bottle to the store for a 10-cent
refund. Next to the convenience store were some woods, where my brother and I
would scour the ground for thrown-away bottles. Most days we could find a few.
So we’d collect them, turn them in, and with the money buy a Mountain Dew—the
favorite drink of young boys everywhere. We often consumed four or five 16 oz.
bottles of Mountain Dew a week. My parents had no idea.
With these dietary habits, you might think I was an
overweight kid who had trouble fitting into his prom tux. In fact, the opposite
was true. I ran Cross Country and Track and did weightlifting on the side. As a
5’10” senior in high school I weighed only 135 lbs and had less than 10% body
fat. So to my mind, there was little connection between diet and health.
Creeping into
Unhealthiness
As I entered my 20’s I continued to give little thought to my
diet. After all, I felt great and was still pretty slim. Sure, college put a
few pounds on, but being around 150 lbs isn’t something to worry about. So I
continued to drink lots of Mountain Dew, and didn’t mind swinging by McDonald’s
when I was in a rush.
When I got married and entered the work world, my diet did
improve at home (my wife’s cooking was far superior to my bachelor, Ramen-based
meals), but I still drank lots of soda and ate more fast food than I should
have. I had a desk job, so my physical activity dropped precipitously. However,
I didn’t have any health problems, and while my weight slowly crept up (now
closer to 160 lbs), I wasn’t concerned. I saw no reason to change my lifestyle
choices. A lunchtime stop or two at McDonald’s became part of my weekly
routine.
Then I hit my 30’s. Or perhaps it’s more accurate to say they
hit me. My weight no longer crept up, it galloped. I entered the 170’s with
little resistance and my body had its sights set on 180. I had less energy to
get through the day (which increased my Mountain Dew habit). After a physical
for a life insurance policy I learned that my triglycerides were through the
roof. Before the physical I didn’t even know what a triglyceride was, but I
found that maxing out on them wasn’t a good thing. I realized I would have to
make some changes. The first thing I did was stop the trips to McDonald’s and
switch from Mountain Dew to Coke. Not exactly radical, but it was a step.
However, my weight kept going up and I didn’t feel “right”
most of the time, so I knew I had to take more drastic measures.
Attempt #1: Changing How Much I Ate
Like most people who want to lose weight, my first attempt
involved eating less. Makes sense, right? Just discipline yourself and cut the amount
of food you eat and your weight/health problems will be solved. So I significantly
reduced my calorie intake. This mostly involved eating a very small lunch (perhaps
a handful of peanuts), and a more reasonably-sized breakfast and dinner. I
didn’t change what I ate, just how much. At first, I thought I’d licked the
problem. My weight dropped pretty quickly and I was down to around 160 in a
month or so. Problem solved!
Um, not so much. After the rush of the first month, I found
my energy levels were very low and I was hungry most of the time. What I didn’t
know then, but know now, is that my metabolism had adjusted based on my new
routine. My body was burning fewer calories each day in response to my lower caloric
intake. This left me energy-deficient, my body constantly screaming, “I don’t
like this—go back to your old routine!” Well, I’m not one to argue with my
body, so that’s exactly what I did. My eating routines went back to normal, and
my weight went back to “normal” as well: 180+ lbs.
I soldiered on as before, getting through my late 30’s
without any changes in my eating habits. But you know how I said my 30’s hit
me? Well, my 40’s steamrolled me. My weight went up to the low 190’s. I became
more lethargic, even depressed. I had almost constant “brain fog.” I started
having digestive issues. Eventually I was diagnosed with “reactive
hypoglycemia”—when I ate something sugary I became light-headed and even dizzy
due to my pancreas freaking out.
I knew I had to make some radical changes.
Attempt #2: Changing What I Ate
Since my earlier attempt to cut down on calories ended in
abysmal failure, I decided to take a different tack this time. Instead of
controlling how much I ate, I would control what
I ate. I cut out all sugar (including soda!) and gluten from my diet. At first,
the results were remarkable. I had loads of energy, my brain fog disappeared,
and my stomach settled. I lost over 20 pounds (down to the high 160’s).
Success!
Unfortunately, like my first attempt, this success was
short-lived. After perhaps three months my symptoms returned and my weight
began to creep back toward 180. I was disappointed and a bit frustrated. Why
didn’t this help more? Now to be clear, removing sugar and gluten did help. Since eating either caused
immediate light-headedness, avoiding them eliminated that problem. But my more fundamental
health problems lingered, and I couldn’t get my weight down to a healthier
level.
Eventually I was diagnosed with “pre-diabetes.” Like the name
suggests, this is essentially a step on the way to Type II diabetes. Keeping my
blood sugars in control became a constant battle, and I found I had to eat
every few hours or else risk ravenous hunger and dizziness. So my schedule
became breakfast at 8, snack at 10, lunch at noon, snack at 3, dinner at 6, and
snack at 9. I still felt awful most of the time, but this seemed to keep the food
crashes at bay. I went to multiple doctors, and everything “checked out.” None
of the doctors even broached the topic of diet. I felt that I had hit a dead
end. Then I saw a friend on Facebook post about something called “Intermittent Fasting.”
Attempt #3: Changing When I Ate
First, a quick explanation of what Intermittent Fasting (IF)
is. It simply means not eating for some set amount of time each day. Instead of
“grazing” for six meals a day (as I was doing), you only eat in a certain
window during the day. The most common schedule is called the “16:8 plan,”
which means you don’t eat for 16 hours, then you have an 8-hour eating window
each day. For example, you would eat your last meal of the day at 6 PM, and
then not eat at all until 10 AM the next day. Variations include 18:6 and 20:4
plans, eating only one meal a day (OMAD), and alternate day fasting.
When I first ran across the concept of IF, I dismissed it as
personally untenable. After all, I couldn’t go even a few hours without eating
during the day without significant side effects. As a Catholic, I’m required to
fast on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday each year, and I even exempted myself
from these fasts due to health reasons. So I never considered IF.
But in my friend’s Facebook post, I noticed that someone
mentioned being pre-diabetic and wondering if Intermittent Fasting was doable
for him. My friend said IF was not only doable, but could improve his
condition. This intrigued me, because my biggest issue wasn’t being overweight
(although I was), it was the symptoms that kept dragging me down—low energy,
brain fog, and digestive problems. Perhaps IF could help me with them?
I ended up devouring research on Intermittent Fasting: books,
journal articles, YouTube videos. It seemed like a lot of people had success
with IF for weight loss, but also many found that the very symptoms I had
lessened and even disappeared while on IF.
During my research I noticed that a lot of people doing IF
were also on something called the “Keto Diet.” Essentially,
this is a variation of the Atkins diet, in which one eats a very low quantity
of carbohydrates, moderate amounts of protein, and higher levels of fat. The
Keto diet was intriguing to me because I discovered that carbs spike insulin
much more than protein or fat does. Even after cutting out sugar and gluten I
still consumed a lot of carbs in the form of rice, potatoes, corn, and tree
fruit (and Fritos!). But since I was pre-diabetic, lowering my insulin levels
would be beneficial to me. So along with starting IF, I also went on the Keto
diet.
I stepped into IF gradually, only fasting for 14 hours at a
time. This meant eating dinner at 6 PM, then not eating until 8 AM the next
day. That might not sound too difficult, but for someone who ate every few
hours every day like me, it was a challenge. However, I found that the keto
diet helped me with the fasting window tremendously. After a Keto meal I didn’t
have the “crash” I had often experienced a few hours after eating, when I would
get extremely hungry and weak. Soon my body adapted to my new routine, and I
moved to 16:8, then 18:6, then finally to a 20:4 plan. Each day I now usually
only eat between 2 PM and 6 PM.
The initial results, much like my previous two attempts, were
amazing. In fact, they were even better than those attempts. Within three
months my weight dropped to around 150 lbs (for the first time in over 25
years). My fasted glucose levels went under 100 mg/DL, which means I’m no
longer pre-diabetic. Most importantly, my issues with low energy, brain fog,
and stomach problems all completely disappeared.
Sustaining Success
As I mentioned, my first attempt to change my eating habits,
which was essentially a severe calorie-restriction plan, was not sustainable.
After a month or so, my metabolism had adjusted and I couldn’t stay on the
reduced calorie plan. However, Intermittent Fasting, at least in the four
months I’ve been doing it, has been completely sustainable. In fact, I’m
surprised at how easy it is. After my dinner I feel fully satisfied, and I
don’t start getting hungry again until around noon or 1:00 the next day—about
an hour or two before I eat. And my hunger isn’t ravenous, it’s just a reminder
that I should eat soon. Keeping to an IF schedule—whether it be 20:4 or 18:6 or
16:8—isn’t a pie-in-the-sky ideal. It can be as simple as skipping breakfast
and not eating after dinner.
My second attempt to change my eating habits, while partially
successful, didn’t bring lasting change because it wasn’t radical enough.
Although it cut out sugar and gluten, it didn’t cut out carbohydrates, which I
believe were a big culprit in my health issues. More importantly, it didn’t
address my eating schedule. I was constantly spiking my insulin by eating every
few hours. My body had no opportunity to rest; I was running on the sugars
found in the foods I ate, instead of burning fat.
I’m convinced Intermittent Fasting, as well as the Keto diet,
is a major piece of the puzzle to solving my various health issues. By
controlling when I eat, along with
what I eat, my body is able to take time each day to rest and recover. Instead
of having to deal with digesting food (with its corresponding insulin spikes)
almost 24/7, my body can spend time each day rejuvenating and healing itself,
which gives me more energy and makes me feel better.
2018 is wrapping up, and before it goes, I thought I’d look back at the top podcasts I did this year. I recorded a total of 41 podcasts in the year, which is a little less than the once/week average I was going for. I try to cover a variety of topics, from Catholicism to cryptocurrency to politics to self-improvement. Here were my most popular episodes from this past year:
I was a little surprised this made the Top 10, as it’s basically me detailing what I think is most likely to cause The End of the World As We Know It. But I guess I have an audience of pessimists.
Every Easter we hear reports of how many people entered the Catholic Church. Unfortunately, that number is steadily (and quickly) decreasing. I look at why in this episode.
I recorded this episode before the McCarrick scandal blew up. Even then lots of Catholics were upset at the Church, and I wanted to tell them that it’s okay to be upset.
On the 45th anniversary of Roe v Wade, I looked at what I thought was the best way to end the horrific practice of legalized abortion. Hint: It’s not what you might think.
I was happy this made the Top 10, as it didn’t involve me complaining about anything or criticizing anyone. I just look at what we can do to practice a holy Lent.
The three most popular episodes shouldn’t be surprising given what’s been happening in the Catholic Church this year. They all relate to the scandals that have surfaced, and how the heirarchy—including the pope—have fostered them.
The McCarrick Scandal unleashed a fury among lay Catholics not seen since the Protestant Reformation. I discussed what the laity should do in the wake of such corruption in the highest levels of the Church.
I haven’t been hesitant to express my displeasure at the pontificate of Pope Francis. But here I wanted to look at what exactly makes a pontificate “bad”. Based on its ranking, this is obviously something others wanted to know as well.
Thanks for listening this year, and I look forward to many more episodes in 2019! If you have any ideas for podcast topics, feel free to shoot me an email.
After a few years’ hiatus, and a very static website, I have returned to writing regularly for my website. At least I hope so. At the same time, I’ve decided to revamp the site and give it a different feel. In my old “Divine Life” site I wrote almost exclusively on Catholic topics, but “Swimming Upstream” will be more eclectic in its tastes. I plan to write on just about anything that interests me, whether it be Catholicism, economics, technology, sports, politics…you name it. Hopefully it will be of some interest to the reader, but at least it will be interesting to me!
I have no idea how often I will post articles, but hopefully it will be at least a few times a week. We’ll see.
I found this video completely mesmerizing – it is a compilation of all home runs hit this year by the Toronto Blue Jays, set to the tune (and in sync with) Johnny Cash’s “God’s Gonna Cut You Down,” which is one of my favorite songs. I’ve been unable to stop watching it.
I’m generally with Woz on the “Down on Republicans and Democrats” theme, but Sanders is going in the exact wrong direction: we don’t need more of the Leviathan State, but less of it. Although Sanders claims to agree with Rand Paul regarding the dismantling of NSA surveillance operations, I doubt someone who thinks the State is the answer to our problems would be very strong on protecting citizens or private companies (like Apple) from encroachments from the government.
The latest Center for Medical Progress video exposing Planned Parenthood is out, and, like the previous ones, shows just how evil PP truly is. This one includes discussion of a live baby that “just fell out.”
Yet it seems that the campaign against Planned Parenthood has lost its steam. No longer is it on the forefront of news, becoming “old news” already. This reminds me of the famous Stalin quote, “A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.” To that I would add, “One PP video is shocking; dozens of videos are boring.” At least to the eyes of this world.
If you follow baseball at all, you will sometimes hear the phrase “little league home run.” This is to denote someone who circles the bases due to a combination of errors and miscues by the fielders. It is not really a home run, just instead something like a single and a 3-base error. My son, who plays Little League, always gets offended by this because he has never seen such a “home run” in his own league – the defense is usually pretty good.
But after watching the Little World Series this year, I have to think we need to change that definition. There were a lot of (over-the-fence) homers this year. A lot. And many of the dingers were massive – at least 40-50 feet beyond the 225 foot fence. For those not familiar with the abilities of the average 12-13 year old, this is incredible. In my son’s league, the fences were at 200 ft, and we had only an average of less than 1 homer per game, and we had some good kids in that league. Yet these kids are hitting it 250ft+ with regularity. And if you watch closely, many of their swings don’t even look that great – oftentimes it looks like they are all arms and hands in their swings, with no power from their legs.
I’m not accusing anyone of cheating, and some of these kids were HUGE, but I wonder if the expensive bats have gotten so advanced that homers are becoming too commonplace. In 2006, Williamsport moved the fences back because of all the homers; I wonder if they will have to do it again. Personally, I’d prefer they become restrictive on the bats used instead of changing field dimensions. Until then, dingers away!
Our culture is filled with the phenomenon of “in name only’s.” For example, RINOs – Republicans in Name Only, and CINOs – Catholics in Name Only.
These are people who proudly claim a label – Republican, Catholic – but go against some of the fundamental principles of that label. It is apparent that for decades the pro-life movement has been plagued with PLINOs – Pro-Lifers in Name Only – and they are rearing their ugly heads again:
I’ve been involved with pro-life work for over 20 years now, and in that time I have witnessed a lot of beautiful pro-life rhetoric coming from politicians. However, what I have not witnessed is any significant action to stop, or even slow down, the onslaught of legalized abortion in this country. Today we have a situation in which Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the country, is caught red-handed – and on video! – perpetrating some of the most vile evils imaginable, and yet the “pro-life” GOP can’t even muster the strength to deny them funding. Not shut them down and lock them away (which would be true justice), but just simply stop sending them our money.
This is why I simply do not care how great a politician’s pro-life rhetoric is. I have heard it all before. What I care about is: will Politician X actually spend political capital to confront legalized abortion? Are they willing to risk their political careers to stop this evil? If you look at the previous GOP presidential candidates of the last 25 years: H.W., Dole, W, McCain, and Romney – the answer is pretty clear.
Looking at the current crop of GOP candidates, the chances are not much more promising. I would guess that Paul, Cruz, Jindal, Santorum, Huckabee, and perhaps Perry would spend at least a little political capital to defund Planned Parenthood. But I can’t be too sure – fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice (or 100 times), shame on me. Others, such as Carson, Fiorina, Rubio and Walker, might support defunding, but I won’t hold my breath.
That is why I don’t take pro-life rhetoric in consideration when evaluating candidates. Yes, Marco Rubio sounded great at the first GOP debate, but does anyone sincerely think he really will spend political capital to push a pro-life agenda?
This is why my main consideration in picking a candidate is their attitude towards the Leviathan State. Why do I say this? Because as we have seen clearly, the Leviathan State NEVER defunds anything, it only adds new initiatives and programs. If a candidate is comfortable with Big Government (in their actions, not just words!), then he or she will probably do little to stop legalized abortion.
Unfortunately, all the GOP candidates in some form or another are comfortable with an expansive Federal Government. Sure, some, such as Paul and Cruz, are closer than others to recognizing the inherent problems of Big Government, but that is like saying Philadelphia is closer than New York to Los Angeles. Both cities are a long drive away. Hopefully the GOP will nominate someone who at least has an inkling that the first step to a strong country is a weaker Federal Government, which will be good for all of us, including the unborn.
Of course, I was attacked for comparing Martin Luther King’s fight for civil rights with those who oppose same-sex marriage, but my point was broader: there is such a thing as an “unjust law”, and just about everyone recognizes this. In fact, progressives haven’t always been so gung-ho for the “rule of law:”
@jwilcox79 Was it okay when Mayor Gavin Newsom issued same-sex marriage licenses in defiance of Calif law in 2004? Why didn’t he go to jail?
So what makes a law “unjust”? How do we determine this? I think MLK, basing himself on St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, and the Christian tradition, says it very well in his “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” (emphasis added):
There are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”
Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.
“Not rooted in eternal law and natural law” – that is the key to determining if a human law is just or unjust. In the case of segregation, the laws in this country were unjust because they went against the dignity of the human person, considering one race of people inferior to others. In the case of same-sex marriage, the laws in this country are unjust because they go against the dignity of marriage as it has been understood throughout human history: a union of a man and a woman. Thus, Kim Davis is acting squarely in the tradition of MLK by refusing to issue marriage licenses to those who simply cannot, by natural law, contract a marriage.
There are a lot of staggering numbers associated with her reign, but I personally think one of the most staggering is how many coins her image has adorned. By one count, over 30 countries either currently or at one time had her image on the obverse of their circulation coins (and this doesn’t include the many countries which have had commemorative coins issued with her image). Over 63 years, the number of coins produced with her image must total in the billions.
Thou art higher than all cedars,
whereon the Life of the world hung, whereon Christ openly triumphed, and His death trampled down death for ever.
(Laudes antiphon)
Source: Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-16/obamas-recovery-just-9-charts). For the brave of heart, click image to see the full damage.
I’ll admit that I’m not a big fan of supposed “private revelations,” such as Marian apparitions. I’m skeptical of any supernatural origin for them, and I suspect some are simply frauds perpetrated on innocent and naive believers. I basically accept Guadalupe, Lourdes, and Fatima and ignore the rest.
One theme, however, that you see in many of these apparitions is a prediction that one day there will be a “Sign” for all to see that will be unmistakable and from God. To me this does not seem very consistent with how God works – He usually does not do anything that cannot be interpreted by non-believers as something other than what it is. He requires faith from those that follow Him.
Yet with the release of the Planned Parenthood videos exposing their callous barbarity, my wife mentioned to me that she thinks these videos are like an unmistakable “Sign” for all to see. We can quibble about whether Carly Fiorina properly described one part of a video, but this is straining a gnat and swallowing a camel. Anyone who has seen the videos know that they show a callous disregard for human life – which is why Planned Parenthood is desperate for no one to see them. These videos demand a decision: will our country continue to deny the humanity of the unborn child, or will we finally – finally! – see that the unborn child in our midst is deserving of every legal protection?
I’ve been interested in Bitcoin for a few years now, but unlike the media obsession with Bitcoin as a speculative investment, I have been fascinated by the technology and economics behind Bitcoin. As a payment network, Bitcoin is a technological marvel, allowing secure transfer of value without a trusted third-party. As a currency, Bitcoin upends the conventional wisdom of how modern currencies are supposed to work – it isn’t government-controlled, and it has a limited supply.
However, I’ve found that most people are only vaguely aware of Bitcoin, and the little they know consists of half-truths and propaganda (either for or against). So I decided to write this short, easy-to-read book in order to answer the most common questions I’ve heard regarding the cryptocurrency.
The table of contents gives a general layout of the topics I cover:
Bitcoin Basics
Bitcoin as a Payment Network
Bitcoin as Currency
Ownership of Bitcoin Network
Technological Advantages of Bitcoin
Economic Advantages of Bitcoin
Using Bitcoin
Cost of Using Bitcoin
Bitcoin Mining
Anonymity of Using Bitcoin
Security of Bitcoin
Value of Bitcoin
Objections to Bitcoin
The Future of Bitcoin
I think this book will help explain Bitcoin to the laymen, so if you are interested in Bitcoin, or know someone else who is, buy this book!
Today I did my first Periscope video, and I discussed why I wrote Bitcoin Basics: 101 Questions and Answers. I get a little excited when I talk about the potential for Bitcoin in the economic sphere. Hope you enjoy it!
