Saturday, September 27, 2008

BioNutriPhysics 101

The newest addition to the LaFever Dictionary Of Contemporary Terms. A dissertation on health, fitness and nutrition, twenty years in the making. This probably would border on thesis material if I had completed my collegiate studies in the nutrition and physiology sectors. But as always, curriculums always moved at a pace slower than that of my learning curve, and not what I was willing to accept. I learned more on the outside than in the classroom. Hence the quote I came across one day: “More students today are often graduated rather than educated”. Probably due to more of a desire for credentials than a love for the work itself. All that time and money for a piece of paper. Then more money for the frame, only to hang it on a wall. The ultimate ego stroke. I felt differently, and began my own research. Traditional literature and internet access. Past meets present. Created my own piece of paper for the wall. Used Olde English text on blank diploma parchment. “Internet University”. There’s a first time for everything. LaFever: on the cutting edge. Same ego stroke, though, I’ll admit.

Even though I was a child in the sixties, Mom & Dad were from the fifties, which meant three full-course meals a day – meat, potatoes and vegetables, the standard staple on the kitchen table back then. All full-fat. Back then, no one knew the difference between simple and complex carbohydrates or saturated and unsaturated fats, let alone the various processes involved with protein synthesis. You ate what was put in front of you. I’m still ashamed of myself for my actions when it came to vegetables. Hated them from the beginning. I was always the last to leave the table. On purpose. So I could throw the veggies behind the cabinet. Imagine the parents’ shock when the cabinet was moved for the first time, discovering all the food behind it, covered with maggots. Not a pretty sight. I didn’t mind the grounding as punishment. They got the point on what I wasn’t going to eat, so don’t put it on the damn plate. I think they realized I was prepared to sit there all night. Denying dessert had no effect. Enough childhood history.

My health and nutrition education started on its own after high school. Out of a desire to maintain a level of health that would keep me strong and prevent your average illnesses from occurring, and shortening the duration if they happened to drop in for a stay. Twenty-five years later of maintaining this regimen, I’m happy to say, I haven’t been to a hospital in fifteen years, and illnesses (flu, common cold) have been few and far between. Sick days from work are taken between one and two years, and never two in a row. And last but certainly not least, at 45 years of age, I rarely get a guess over 35. I’m here to say, the shit works; even if it isn’t maintained daily. In fact, you don’t want to do it daily because it results in either overload or excess. Of course, I’m referring to supplements and training. The nutrition aspect, as it refers to whole food, should be maintained daily. Twice on Saturday and Sunday.

Enough about experience. This is about information. I don’t know how many people exercise compared to the whole population in general, but I would fathom out of those who do exercise, only a small percentage actually take supplements. Then there’s the group that supplement, and don’t exercise at all. Which means they’re making up for the fact they don’t eat right. And that’s for all the wrong reasons. The first thing to remember about supplements is, they’re supplements. They’re meant to supplement. Get it? Along with your whole food intake. That is Rule Number One. Take with meals. Of course, there are exceptions, but only as it relates to strength training and conditioning, where certain supplements are more effective, and thus specifically designed for, intake prior to meals. That’s for an advanced class at a later date. This is Class 101.

Before we get into specifics, such as necessities and luxuries, let’s lay the foundation. It all starts with these three: macronutrients, micronutrients and exercise. The first two are similar terms but different in structure, while intertwined in use and purpose. Macros are carbohydrates, fats and proteins. Micros are vitamins and minerals. All foods are a combination of macros and micros. The ratios are infinite in number. And thirdly, exercise. Split between aerobic and anaerobic. More on that later.

macros

In the beginning, carbohydrates, fats and protein were all we knew when it came to whole foods. Over time, thanks to research, we learned there were many facets of each that were divided between good and bad. We learned what helped us grow, and what made us really grow, if you know what I mean, and that wasn’t a good thing. So let’s break down the sub-components within each category.

carbohydrates

Carbs. Split into two types. Simple. And complex. The purpose is fuel for the body. Both do it, but one is fast-digesting while the other is slow-digesting. Simple carbs are fast and complex carbs are slow. Simple carbs are sugar-based, while complex carbs are fiber-based. The sugar-based simple carbs increase the amount of sugar circulating in the bloodstream, causing the pancreas to release insulin to bring that level down, back into balance. The imbalance caused by continuous simple-carb intake, along with certain hereditary factors, is what results in diabetes. Not a good thing. Fortunately, there is a mineral that combats this process (see micros section). The fiber-based complex carbs are what regulate your movements of food excess not utilized by the body and assist in the exit of toxins not eliminated by the liver (you know, shit).

Even sugar is not without its own subdivisions. Knowing a little more about the various types of sugar could very well change how you consume it. It all begins and ends with the single-molecule sugar, glucose. The first and foremost form of energy, converted into glucogen, the form burned as energy by the muscles. Two of the more common sugars are sucrose, known as table sugar, a double-molecule sugar made up of two glucose molecules, and fructose, another single-molecule sugar found in fruits, a complex carb, which is a paradox in itself. While the fruit in and of itself, is complex in nature, and good for you, fruit juice is not, as it consists mostly fructose, in the form of high fructose corn syrup, an additive that is simple in nature, for preservative reasons, and directly responsible for an ultra-high increase in blood sugar. Not so good for you. So when it comes to fruit, remember this anecdote: eat rather than drink. Of course, there is the ever-present ‘exception-to-the-rule’. But only when strength training is involved. When consuming protein after a workout, it is better to mix your protein with a fruit juice – since the spike in blood sugar levels speeds the uptake of protein to the muscles exponentially. This is a good thing. But only within a couple hours after the workout, while metabolism is high.

Other sugars are dextrose, galactose, lactose and maltos. Most are unfamiliar with the first two, but the third (lactose, the milk sugar) is all too familiar to the millions whose bodies cannot process, or have difficulty processing , dairy products. The African and Latin cultures, in general, are plagued with this dilemma. It is this very reason today you’ll find next to the whole, 2%, 1% and Fat-Free milk, it’s own version, lactose-free milk. This is a good thing. What better way to get your Calcium, other than as a supplement. For the record, it’s the fortification of Vitamin D in milk that converts to calcium in the body. I’ll bet you didn’t know that. Walking outside in daylight for 30 minutes also results in an increase in Vitamin D (from the sun), which, of course, converts to Calcium in the body. I’ll bet you didn’t know that either. Maltose is the sugar found in alcoholic beverages. Another reason for the onset of diabetes – excessive alcohol intake. Not a good thing. Especially for LaFever. Cuz he likes his ‘malt’ liquor.

But worse even, are the sugar substitutes. Aspartame (Equal), saccharin (Nutrasweet), and Splenda, made up of a sugar substitute LaFever doesn’t even know. Not a good thing. Stick to the tried and true – table sugar. Converts better. Or Sugar-In-The-Raw. Niiice.

Fruits and vegetables. These are the complex carbohydrates. And good for you. To a certain degree. Yes, they are fiber. But unfortunately, are broken down even further; into high-glycemic and low-glycemic. Without going into great detail, which you can via the internet, the difference is relative to that of simple sugars. While complex is better for you than simple, high-glycemic complex carbs illicit the same response as simple sugars: an increase in blood sugars and the accompanying insulin to counteract it. Geez, all I want to do is eat my meal. It’s not as bad as you think. Eating other items that are low on the glycemic index brings the overall number down when combined together as a whole meal. Half the fruits are high-GI and half are low-GI. No space here to list. Do your own research. I’m just laying the foundation. Vegetables, on the other hand, are mostly low-GI. This is why they are the most healthy, and the least tasteful. The ultimate paradox. If all else fails, force down a V-8. Don’t forget to watch the sodium levels. It’s a canned beverage. And the sodium is high, for shelf-life purposes. But it sure tastes better than the low-sodium version. LaFever prefers his V-8 in the form of a Bloody Mary. Mmmm.

fats

The devil incarnate. Or so we thought. Now we know so much more. Such as the two, no, make that three, types. Saturated, unsaturated, and trans-fats. Actually, technically, it’s only two. Trans-fats are the bastard, black sheep offspring of saturated fats. (I say three because trans-fats are so bad, they’ve taken on a life of their own.) Unsaturated fats gave birth to those two lovely twins, mono- and poly-unsaturated. Saturated fat is solid at room temperature, while unsaturated is liquid. In the old days, lard (solid at room temperature) was the primary oil used for cooking. As was butter. Even up to as recent as the 1980’s, saturated fats were the primary choice due to longevity on the shelf, not to mention the reason for why food tastes better. I use cheese as an example. While the flavor between regular cheese and low-fat cheese is virtually undistinguishable, not so during the melting process. Regular cheese melts perfectly, with the oil separating and rising to the surface, the center maintaining a soft texture, and the outer rim a crunchy delight. As you can tell, LaFever likes melted cheese, by itself, as a delicacy. The low-fat/fat-free version just sits there, bubbling, until it burns, resembling melting plastic, and never really reaching melted status. An ugly site, it is. And tasteless.

Unsaturated, on the other hand, is liquid at room temperature, and the better oil, obviously. Today, unsaturated fats enjoy a new moniker in the world of health and nutrition: that of ‘dietary fat’. Marketing perfection at its finest. A perfect term to describe a fat that is healthy for you, in that it is directly responsible for the body’s metabolism, and body-fat loss, if consumed in moderation; but most importantly, the uptake and assimilation of fat-soluble vitamins (more on this later under micros). It is the property make-up of these dietary fats that are beneficial. And you’ve heard the terms. Omega-3’s. Most abundant in seafood. Fish-consuming cultures swear by it, and their health and longevity show it. Unfortunately, due to the ever-prevalent toxic presence in our streams, rivers and lakes, the negatives are catching up to the positives.

Just a quick note on seafood: the predominant toxin in our seafood today is mercury. All you have to do is remember the food chain. Everything settles on the bottom. So the most at risk are the bottom feeders – shellfish (crab, lobster, prawns, shrimp). Next is simple: size. The larger the fish, the higher the level of toxins. Obviously. The larger ones eat the smaller ones. The only mystery to LaFever is tuna. Why ‘albacore’ tuna (the more expensive of the two) is higher in possible mercury content than regular tuna is still unknown. Research time. Still, you can’t beat tuna for its protein content. Bodybuilders and weightlifters swear by it. I know I f’n do. (LOL)


Back to fats. Here’s a perfect example of then versus now. I worked in various movie theaters in the 1980’s. The oil used to pop the popcorn was coconut oil, a saturated fat. Chosen for its long storage potential. A metal heating rod had to be inserted into this solid oil in order to melt it into liquid form before the popping process could begin. Adding insult to injury, the butter sprayed on the popcorn had to be heated into liquid form, as well. Initially, it was real butter, but it had been discovered it was cheaper to use palm kernel oil, another saturated fat, and a solid, too. It also had to be heated until liquefied. We certainly ate it by the tub, didn’t we? Without any knowledge whatsoever. Or concern. And for good reason – it tasted just like butter.

Today, after the facts have been uncovered, through extensive research and test trials, all theaters eventually switched to canola oil, an unsaturated fat, to cook the popcorn, as well as the use as a butter topping, or butter flavor (mostly out of shame due to the health discoveries). Add to that, after an uproar by health advocates for truth-in-advertising, theater staff were required to say ‘butter flavor’ rather than ‘butter’. After all, it wasn’t real butter anyway.) Of course, the smaller independent ‘art’ houses saw an opportunity to cater to a niche audience. That audience would be upscale in nature and embraced the idea of having the choice of real butter on their popcorn. For a price, of course. For an additional .25c, you got real butter. Whatever. The popcorn was still popped in canola oil.

Unsaturated fats are split into two. Mono- and poly-unsaturated fats. Not exactly someone thinks about, or takes into consideration, when deciding what to buy when strolling down the supermarket aisle. Besides, most of us are brand specific. When asked, we could tell you what brand we have on our shelf, but would be hard-pressed to name what type of oil it contains, let alone whether it is mono or poly. Helpful hint: it’s all simple really. The majority on the shelves are all unsaturated (vegetable oils). Canola and olive oil are mostly mono-unsaturated, while safflower, sunflower, corn and soybean oil are mostly poly-unsaturated. Peanut and sesame seed oil are half & half. Mono is cheaper, hence the predominant use of it as a cooking oil. Olive oil, which is just as good, if not better, is used more as a topping, as in dressing mixtures. Most likely due to the higher cost, no doubt. Olive oil also has been documented as better at raising your good cholesterol while lowering the bad cholesterol, but only when used long-term. Flaxseed has become popular lately due to its content of all three Omegas: 3, 6 & 9. Note: check the labels for dressings and toppings. Soybean is the most-often used oil because it is the easiest oil to add an additional hydrogen molecule, resulting in the ever-dreadful ‘partially hydrogenated vegetable oil’. You know, ‘transfat’. More on that momentarily.

Cholesterol deserves a mention here, since it is connected to fat intake, but not a fat, mind you, and good food for thought, pun intended. There are two types: good cholesterol, known as HDL (high-density lipoproteins) and bad cholesterol, known as LDL (low-density lipoproteins). Bad fats (saturated) increase bad cholesterol (LDL) and lower good cholesterol (HDL). Good fats (unsaturated) increase good cholesterol (HDL) and lower bad cholesterol (LDL). Good cholesterol is the stuff that circulates in the bloodstream that carries the bad stuff out (toxins), through the liver, the body’s primary toxin processing plant. Bad cholesterol is the stuff that prefers to just hang around, like art – on the walls of your arteries. If left unchecked, the pathway (artery) grows narrower from buildup, until blockage occurs, and flow slows to a halt. I don’t need to tell you what happens next. And that’s just from a dietary standpoint. A sedentary lifestyle (lack of exercise) compounds the problem.

A quick note on eggs as it relates to cholesterol. The ever-omnipotent egg probably gets more press in a back-and-forth nature as it relates to being good for you one day and bad for you the next, second only to coffee. It’s an urban legend, folks. And proven so, thanks to the extensive time and energy on research. It had to happen. The egg has the highest biological value for protein, and is a primary source of protein, responsible for muscle mass building, alongside whey (the top dog), milk (casein), meat and poultry. The egg got flack for its yolk - filled with cholesterol. Egg-whites became the norm, to keep from raising LDL levels. It was assumed the cholesterol in eggs caused an increase in blood-serum cholesterol levels. Au contraire. The cholesterol in the egg, while a saturated fat, yes, and should be consumed in moderation, had no effect on blood serum cholesterol, the stuff circulating in your arteries. The cholesterol in eggs , in excess, contributed to fat storage, not clogging of the arteries. Now, 1-2 eggs per day is acceptable. Thank God. LaFever loves his eggs. (Still a taboo in the bodybuilding world, though. Takes forever for things to change in that industry.) It is not uncommon for the typical bodybuilder to consume a dozen egg-whites in one sitting. Ecchhh. It’s the yoke that gives the egg it’s flavor. As all fat does.

Then there’s the other dairy staple: milk. Calcium is the obvious mineral we are all concerned with, and deservedly so. It is what is most important for building strong bones and teeth. It is because of this association that calcium is used as the important ingredient in milk and other dairy products. Actually, calcium makes up only a small percentage. It is the fortification with vitamin D that adds to it. Look for yourself. All milk products are ‘fortified’’ with vitamin D. Why? Because the dairy industry knows the body converts vitamin D into calcium. Fortifying milk with vitamin D increases the level of the already-present, however minimal, calcium mineral. Which is not a bad thing. This has been done from the beginning. I’m not happy about the manipulative marketing tactics and practices employed, but if it’s good for you, and we all benefit in the process, who is LaFever to complain. Thank God. I love my milk.

By the way, in the interest of research and development, I would like to know what purpose whole milk serves in our diet. If all versions of milk (whole, 2%, 1%, fat-free, even lactose-free) contain the same amount of calcium and the added vitamin D, why the hell would we drink the fat-laden whole milk? I understand for many, fat-free tastes like water, so they consume 1% and 2%, but I’m at a loss as to why some still purchase whole milk. I don’t get it. And probably never will. Personally, LaFever has been ‘fat-free’ for decades. Only tastes like water if you compare it to others. But compared to water, there’s no comparison. More food for thought: fat-free means guilt-free, so you can drink as much as you want. And 1% and 2% tastes like milk. Whole milk tastes like half & half cream, and creamers taste like it’s straight from the cow. Udderly unpleasant.

And lastly, LaFever only cooks with olive oil. Costs a tad more, but for me, it’s worth it. It’s the highest in mono-unsaturated fats. And the best for you if you’re concerned with your cholesterol level. Besides, I need all the help I can get keeping the HDL/LDL balance in check, considering how much I also love cheese and mayonnaise. (In defense of mayo: it’s not as bad as you think; the oil used in processing mayo is soybean oil, an unsaturated fat, and not partially-hydrogenated. The drawback is the second and third items listed next under contents: whole eggs and egg yolks. A double serving of yolks. Yikes!)

The worst fat of all deserves its place in last. Trans-fats. The mere term itself gives the impression of a double-dose of bad news for the bad fat (trans-echh). Nothing good comes from it. In a nutshell, trans-fats are the result of the hydrogenation process, converting a liquid fat (unsaturated) into a solid fat (saturated) by adding a hydrogen molecule. The benefit is an increase in shelf life, something restaurants and manufacturers benefited the most, considering the volume produced and used by these two sectors. One was worse than the other, though. Restaurants had their reasons, buying in volume for storage, to make the food taste better. And it did. We couldn’t tell the difference. But it should have been obvious. There was a reason meals prepared in restaurants always tasted better than meals prepared at home. (Not to mention not having to prepare the meals ourselves – ouch.)

Manufacturers, on the hand, represent the higher proportion of the processing and usage of trans-fat. In everything from spreads, packaged foods, soups (along with abnormally-high amounts of sodium), fast food, frozen food, baked goods, chips & crackers, cookies & candy, and toppings & dips. (Sounds like the standard diet of the majority of us, and the reason for rising obesity rates on a global scale.) All of it, unhealthy. You could tell the difference, too, when cooked or baked with a liquid oil. Just wasn’t the same. But change was in order. In order to survive.
But beware, consumers. Labels are as deceptive as ever. With everyone jumping on the transfat-free band wagon, deception remains. But it’s quite simple: if you’re in the good habit of reading labels. And not just the ‘nutrient/percentage’ part. Most neglect the ‘content’ part. This is where all the additives are listed, as required. Proportions aren’t listed, but is easy to figure out. By law, ingredients are listed in order from most to least. This is why ‘water’ is almost always listed first. Not a bad thing, mind you. What you want to be on the lookout for is the technical term for ‘transfats’. And that term is ‘partially-hydrogenated vegetable oil’. Amazing. The definition of transfat right in front of you. ‘Partially-hydrogenated (added hydrogen molecule) vegetable oil (unsaturated fat). Now it’s saturated. Research has shown that this type of fat is worse than your untouched saturated fat. Translation: margarine is worse than butter. Nooooo. I lived on margarine for several years, thinking it was better than butter. Silly me for not realizing both were solid at room temperature. Old saying: “Nothing is obvious to the uninformed”. True, true. Why margarine is still on the shelf is another mystery. Just . . . say . . . no.

proteins

While carbs are the primary source of energy as fuel for the body’s metabolism, protein is just as vital for the formation, maintenance and increase of the body’s muscular structure. In fact, a protein deficiency has worse ramifications than a carb deficiency. But let’s not let that happen. It’s long been known proteins are the building blocks. Stats: a complete protein is made up of 22 unique and individual amino acids. These are further split into two groups: essential and non-essential. For the most part, knowing which is which is reserved mostly to scientists, bodybuilders and trainers, but you and me, too, if that is your wish. After all, knowledge is power. Non-essential amino acids are produced by the body itself. Essential amino acids (eight in number), on the other hand, are not, requiring intake from outside sources – whole foods and/or supplements.

More importantly, whole foods, which we consume on a daily basis, are made up of various profiles of the protein molecule. But, for reasons more appropriate today as a result of a more active society (sports, bodybuilding, and daily work of a physical nature), protein needs are higher. If whole food intake is inadequate, or more protein is required to keep a deficit from occurring, resulting in muscle being utilized for energy (catabolism), supplements fulfill their purpose. Three-meal days are a thing of the past. Today, it’s all about 5-6 smaller meals. Proportion, baby. To maintain your metabolism throughout the day on only 3 meals, you’d have to eat double the calories to get you to the next meal. Unfortunately, that never works. The body passes the meal from the stomach to the intestines, where it is broken down and used for fuel. The bad part is the body only needs a small percentage for fuel, with the rest being stored as fat. Even if all of it was fat-free. It isn’t just about fat anymore. Research has shown it is all about calories. Even excess protein will be stored as fat if too much of it is consumed. And not enough carbs for fuel while the protein goes to muscle repair results in protein being used for fuel (catabolism). Two hours later, six hours before your next meal, hunger sets in. Talk about a downward spiral. And a wasted effort.

Enter the new order. Six smaller meals spaced throughout the day. A little bit of this. A little bit of that. Naturally, you’ll discover you’re hungry all day. That’s your metabolism staying high because of the multiple feeding times. By the time you get home, your gut is in check, and not sticking out, as result of large meals, and feeling bloated at the same time. It’s difficult, I know. Daytime is occupied by work. Who has time to think about eating, let alone several times a day. And at specific times. It’s all about discipline. And choice. The rest is up to you.

Protein sources are important, but only when the specific goal is an increase in lean body mass (muscle, you dope). Sources include whey (a derivative of the milk/cheese process), dairy (eggs, milk & cheese), red meat, poultry, and seafood. Keep in mind, though, these are general in nature. They break down further into good, better, but also, not-so-good sources of protein.

Numero uno is whey, simply because it is primarily a supplement whose sole purpose is as the highest quality protein available; a result of a process removing the low- to no-fat protein portion from dairy products. What resulted was the highest form of protein, as it relates to the biological value of protein. Two steps back, the BV (biological value) began way back as a way of measuring the protein molecule as a complete unit, comprised of all essential and non-essential amino acids and required by the body for function and repair of the muscular structure. Initially, the egg was the top of the food chain, and given a BV of 100, as a measuring stick. Gotta start somewhere. Enter whey. It was discovered to contain a higher BV. 110 to be exact, when compared to the egg. The important thing to remember here is that whey is strictly a supplement, not a whole food. All other sources fall under whole foods. Whey is documented here simply because it is relevant, and important, if your desire is to be informed, beyond the basics and foundation process. Whey is advanced, and its own sub-categories (isolated, hydrolated, concentrated), are the stuff of future education.

Eggs. Second-highest in the complete protein profile. And first in the whole food sector. Like I mentioned earlier, eggs have gotten a bad rap over the years, and still do in the bodybuilding industry. Read any profile of IFBB (International Federation of Bodybuilders) superstars and you’ll see for yourself the consumption of a dozen egg-whites as a standard part of their diet. In one sitting, no less.

Milk. Also high in protein. Containing the slow-digesting protein known as casein. Perfect for pre-bedtime consumption, to ensure a steady assimilation throughout the night. Then there’s the protein sources from which others are derived. Poultry and red meat. But be warned. Here’s where we need to exercise caution in our choice of cuts.

Red meat. High in protein, and creatine (you’ll have to Google this one – it’s a paper in itself, and good for you, to boot), the greatest scientific discovery to come along in decades. It’s also produced within the body, so it can’t be banned as it is a naturally-occurring nutrient. Red meat is also high in saturated fat, depending on what area of the animal is consumed. It should also be noted, due to recent discoveries, that grass-fed beef is generally more beneficial for you than grain-fed beef. Stick with beef labeled as organic, since they are mostly grass-fed. Protein content is the same but the saturated fat levels are lower. For beef, leaner is better (duh). Basically, you want red, not white. If it’s white throughout (commonly known as marbled), skip it. If it’s red throughout, buy it. If it’s red throughout, with a solid white border, okay. But obviously trim the border. And you’d better.

Poultry. Also known as the white meat. Chicken is king. Turkey comes in second. Always remove the skin. I know it tastes better, but remove it anyway. If you know what’s good for you. If anything, lick the skin. The reason the skin tastes good is because all the seasoning is on the outside. Wings are like ribs. Everyone loves them at a party, but they’re useless. Very little meat, no nutritional value, and a mess to clean up when you’re done. I shouldn’t have to tell you the breasts are the best. And not for the reason you’re thinking (get your mind out of the gutter; there’s only room for one mind here). There are other sources of fowl, but they’re more a delicacy, and will cost you (ostrich, duck, even pigeon).

Seafood. An honorable mention in the big picture scheme of things. Seafood is more noted for it’s high Omega-3 content. Omega-3’s are dietary fats that increase your HDL (remember the good fats), while decreasing the LDL (the bad ones). The one seafood that stands out, especially among bodybuilders, is tuna. And swear by it, they do. I know. I do. Tuna contains the highest amount of protein, proportionately-speaking, than all the others. Your standard can off the shelf has 13 grams of protein. But that can is classified as 2½ servings. Small can. Who eats a half a can? In any case, that can, if eaten completely, provides roughly 32 grams of protein. An obvious staple in the bodybuilder’s diet. Unfortunately, the taste by itself leaves a lot to be desired, and is mostly consumed when mixed with mayo. Secondly, there are two versions: packed in water and packed in oil. Water is better, if you’re watching your fat intake. The oil version isn’t so bad, since it’s an unsaturated oil. All a matter of choice. Add in mayo for flavor, unless you’re watching calories. Salmon is high in protein and Omega-3 dietary fats, as is other shell fish (crab, lobster, prawns & shrimp), but don’t forget what we discussed earlier about toxins. (Is nothing safe anymore?)

Lastly, I know what you’re thinking. Did I mention 6 sources? Or only 5? Well, in all this confusion, I kind of lost track myself. But this source, being the highest in fat, and would stop your heart in a second, you have to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya? Punk? That’s right. The one source left out also contains protein, but not enough to warrant a place in the diet, simply because the level of saturated fat is higher than all the others. The pig. Pork (the so-called other white meat, for no good reason but to sell more, but also the one containing the least amount of saturated fat), bacon and sausage. Nothing more than an indulgence for the palate, counteracting all efforts to maintain a good and beneficial balance of the proper nutrients necessary for the body to function at the optimal level it was designed to. Which is too bad. It’s been documented that pigs possess an intelligence higher than that of the dog. Go figure. Maybe that’s a sign they shouldn’t be eaten. After all, we don’t eat dogs and cats. At least not in this country. A delicacy elsewhere, unfortunately. Bacon’s cool, if cooked right. And I still love my sausage. Cheddar-infused, too. In moderation, of course.

micros

Micronutrients are divided up into two groups, both vital to the body, and having a synergistic effect, as well. Vitamins and Minerals. All interact with each other. Some deplete others if taken alone. Ah, competition. Seems complicated. Not to worry. Whole foods take the worry out of it all. It’s when the diet is inadequate, imbalance occurs, and supplements are added to make up the difference.

vitamins

Further divided into two groups. Fat-soluble and water-soluble. This means they are assimilated via fat and water pathways. This is why you can’t have a completely fat-free diet. That would result in a fat-soluble vitamin deficiency, no matter how much you take. They need the fat in order to be absorbed. Ironically, it is the water-soluble vitamins that are more likely to lead to deficiency, due to their high rate and ease of assimilation and subsequent excretion. You can thank the body for that. It’s 70% water. Everything is. The body. The muscles. The earth. Water is life. You can do without food for a week. But water, a couple days, at most.

So, what exactly do we need and which ones fall into each category? There’s a full list, but for sake of importance, we’ll cover the basics. The vitamins are A, B, C, D, E, F, G. Uh, scratch the F ‘n’ G. Don’t forget K. There’s a reason that cereal is called ‘Special K’. Minerals include calcium, phosphorus, potassium, chromium, selenium, sodium, magnesium, copper, zinc, etc, with several of these classified as ‘electrolytes’, those ever-important minerals lost in the sweating process. Let’s break it down. (For the record, the recommended doses listed are based on the accepted norm based on research and trials. The recommended daily allowance is a government (FDA) recommendation, and conservative in nature, taking into consideration the general public as a whole. Not to mention it hasn’t been updated since the 1950’s. Genetic and cultural differences will obviously have an effect on what is acceptable and necessary. Level of activity also plays a factor. The numbers listed here are more in line with today’s lifestyle.)

A – fat-soluble
The pre-curser to beta-carotene. Actually, it’s beta-carotene you want, in food or as a supplement. The body converts beta-carotene to A. A, in high doses, is toxic. Not possible in food, but as a supplement, don’t even think about it. Purchase beta-carotene. In whatever form. My favorite is marine carotene. It is fat-soluble. The body will use what it needs, convert it to A, and excrete the excess. Supplementation: 5000 to 10,000 IU (international units) should suffice. Once a day will last the day. Even every other day is fine. A very important anti-oxidant (more on that later).

B – water-soluble
B is more than just a vitamin. It is six vitamins in one: B1 (thiamin), B2 (riboflavin), B3 (niacin), B5 (pantothenic acid), B6 (pyridoxine), B12 and Biotin. The more famous of these is niacin, most notably as a flushing agent. I took it once, on an empty stomach. All the blood rushed to the surface of my skin. I was red all over. Didn’t matter. All I could feel was my skin on fire. Lasted a ½ hour. WTF?! Halfway through, someone came up to me and asked if I took niacin on an empty stomach. I’ll never do that again. Obviously, it processed immediately, since it was water-soluble. Supplementation: B-Complex, 25-50 mg (milligrams). B-Complex contains all of the above. No need for individual supplements. And no more than 50 mg, since it is water-soluble, and processed quickly by the body. Any more is a waste.

C – water-soluble
The other major water-soluble, vital vitamin. C is the end-all, be-all, of vitamins. And an anti-oxidant. If you take any other supplement in addition to the always-dependable multi-vitamin, which contains everything you need, take C. 500 mg is adequate, in spite of the RDA of 60 mg found in most multi’s. Talk about outdated. As for the urban legend of mega-doses to prevent sickness, that’s what it is. An urban legend. Listen up. C is just like Echinacea. You take it to recover, not to prevent. There’s a difference. Mega-doses of C are waste of money. Just like B, the body uses what it needs, and excretes the rest. Why do you think they call it rich piss? That bright yellow color you see streaming into the toilet is the excess B and C the body didn’t need. On the other hand, when you’re sick (cold or flu), B and C are the most effective soldiers out there and immediately go to work on the recovery process. 1000-2000 mg are not uncommon in combating your illness. All you have to do is watch the pee. I know. When sick, I up the dosage. Even at 1000 mg, it’s still a pale yellow. Why? The body’s using all of it for the attack on the front lines.

It also works at the onset of illness. More often than not, you wake up sick. If you’re paying attention, you can feel it coming on when you wake up in the middle of the night. Chills. Dry throat. Difficulty swallowing. I pop two 500 mg C capsules immediately. And wake up refreshed. Problem solved. Even though C hasn’t been proven in this realm, I am proof it does. Maybe not for everyone. But what have you got to lose. As for daily, no more than 500 mg. You’ll pee out the rest. Trust me.

Another good reason for at least supplementing with B and C is because of the very fact they are water-soluble. Acting in the same vein are the toxins in our everyday surroundings. Chemicals, exhaust, alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, fluorescent lighting; all lead to depletion of B and C.

D – fat-soluble
Converts to calcium in the body. D in high doses is also toxic. But not calcium. Just like the A/beta-carotene paradox. But be warned. High doses of calcium will result in stones. Small solid, calcified, items of horror, formed in the gall bladder (gallstones), that work their way through the urethra (piss tube) and out the exit. One of the most painful experiences you’ll ever have. Or so I’ve heard. Haven’t experienced it. Yet. Thanks to beer keeping my tubes flowing. D also is absorbed via the sun. 1/2 hour a day is all you need. For all intent and purposes, just drink your milk. Supplementing is not necessary. Unless you’re a female, and pregnant. Osteoporosis is the issue here. And so are the baby’s needs. Definitely.

E – fat-soluble
Along with beta-carotene and C, E also shares the label of anti-oxidant. Anti-oxidants are so-called for their ability to reverse the aging and sickness process. Toxins and illness rob cells of an oxygen molecule, turning them into ‘free-radicals’; so-named for their unscrupulous and ravaging nature of ripping the body’s cellular structure apart. What the anti-oxidants do is replace that missing oxygen molecule to all the damaged cells, making the body a better place to live for all living cells. How divine. E has been in the headlines lately, with its benefits questioned. Not to worry. Just keep taking your multi’s. If you supplement, no more than 400 IU (int’l units). Even better: an E/selenium combo. It’s a vitamin/mineral combo that acts synergistically, and utilized better by the body. It might be confusing after noticing there are different configurations of E, most notably, the presence of DHA, EPA, etc. If so, find one with all of the above. Don’t ask.

K – fat-soluble
K is a luxury. The body produces half of what it needs on its own. K assists in the blood-clotting process. We get all we need from food. And the multi. Forget the supplement. Trust me.

minerals

Calcium, which we’ve covered already, is vital, as we all know. Magnesium, along with phosphorus, potassium, and sodium, which make up the ‘electrolites’, the minerals sweated out of the body during exercise and athletic endeavors. Or sitting in a sauna. Iron, which carries oxygen within the blood, and vital to life. Women need to supplement due to their monthly cycle of the release of blood. Men, on the other hand, should keep Iron in check. Unless you donate blood. Iron isn’t excreted the same way as women, and end up as a surplus in the system, affecting the prostate in the process. Not a good thing. And Zinc, which is responsible for growth and sexual development. Obviously, the reason why oysters are popular as a so-called aphrodisiac due to its high zinc content. Can you say ‘placebo’? Never proven. I hate oysters anyway.

Chromium, specifically chromium picolinate, which regulates the production of insulin in the pancreas. Definitely a good thing. Especially in today’s environment of high simple-carb consumption and out-of-control obesity and diabetes rates. Supplementation: 200 mcg. That’s micrograms. No more. And with meals. Selenium? A mineral that is synergistic with E. No need to supplement. Although it doesn’t hurt to get the E/selenium combo. But alone, nah.

As for supplementation of individual minerals, all are found in proper doses in you daily multi-vitamin. Chromium is probably the only one to take as an additional supplement. Oh, and iron. Women, take the multi ‘w/iron’. Me, the multi, ‘w/o iron’. It’s that simple.

exercise


While macro- and micro-nutrients represent what is necessary and required for body maintenance and development, exercise comes in second, simply because, while important for growth and metabolism purposes, is secondary. On a basic level, we can survive without exercise, as many do, if nutrient intake is satisfactory. You CAN have one without the other. That is, nutrients without exercise; not the other way around. Exercise without nutrients is a double-whammy. Exercise depletes nutrients several times faster than alone without exercise. Don’t even think about it. On a positive note, the benefits of both as part of a program, yields results many times more than each on their own.

Exercise. The practice of exerting physical energy via a variety of means, resulting in a higher rate of metabolism, thus burning a certain number of calories. The sole purpose is to burn more calories than what is taken in (consumption). Simple indeed. Most are familiar with aerobics. And some, with the specifics involved. Aerobics is the proverbial iceberg. Most are only familiar with certain aspects. The obvious parts. Let’s dive down below the surface and uncover the details that will enhance what you already know, and shed light on other aspects that will increase your knowledge on the additional benefits you only thought you knew.

First, the facts. Exercise is split into two forms: aerobic, and anerobic. Aerobic, the more popular of the two, is based on continuous movement for a certain period of time. It was determined early on, that this continuous movement raised the heart-rate, and subsequent metabolism, resulting in a higher rate of calories being burned, but only during the period of exertion. Lifting weights was simply a form of exercise to increase muscle mass. No doubt, this was the reason most of the aerobic classes were occupied by females and the weight areas were mostly male-occupied. My belief is that it was pre-determined. Had to do with testosterone and estrogen. Male vs female. Testosterone related to the male’s muscle mass while estrogen equated to the female’s muscle tone. Men wanted to put on muscle; women wanted to tone muscle. Both knew what could and could not be done, based on their testosterone/estrogen configuration. Men put on muscle easier than women, and women toned up easier than men. Which brings us to the opposite of aerobic, that is, anaerobic.

Here’s the difference. Aerobic, from the Greek translation, means ‘with air’. Conversely, anaerobic, means ‘without air’. It’s all biological. Continuous exercise requires air in the process, and is considered aerobic. Lifting weights, more commonly known as strength training, are movements that are explosive in nature, and not continuous in movement, thus only requiring oxygen in the lifting process. The difference between the two is in the calorie-burning process. Back in the day, if you wanted to lose weight, the only way was to exercise in a continuous fashion, aka aerobics. It worked. To a degree. The problem was, you only burned calories during the aerobics process. Enter weights. It was eventually discovered that, while calories were burned during the aerobic training period, more calories were burned after the strength training had finished. And for an additional 24 hours, to boot. We learned that aerobics burned calories during the session, but discontinued once movement stopped. The benefit was more cardiovascular, than weight-based. Weight training, on the other hand, involved the expansion and contraction of muscle fibers. The subsequent muscle repair process showed an increase in calorie burning, long after the training had ceased. All of a sudden, we realized more calories could be burned by strength training, resulting in fat loss without doing aerobics. Of course, nutrition played a factor. That being the consumption of protein, whole foods and supplementation.

Another factor was that, while aerobics resulted in weight loss overall, anaerobic strength training resulted only in fat loss. Aerobics utilized not only fat, but muscle, as well, to burn calories. Strength training, on the other hand, burned fat only, since the muscle, which had been broken down by the training process, used carbs for muscle fuel. What’s most important is the immediate protein intake required after the workout. If protein is not consumed immediately, the body will use the broken-down muscle as energy for fuel. And this, my friends, is the definition of ‘anabolic’ and ‘catabolic’. ‘Anabolic’ refers to the muscle-building process with a protein surplus, while ‘catabolic’ refers to the muscle-wasting process (breakdown of muscle due to lack of protein for building purposes). Here’s where we dispel all the myths society has embraced, and ignorant they are.

I don’t care what you’ve heard, or how much you’ve heard, or what people say, or what people believe: ‘anabolic’ is a state of being, ‘in process’, if you will, and unrelated to steroids, to a certain degree. Now that you’ve learned the meaning of the term ‘anabolic’, and it’s lesser-known counterpart, ‘catabolic’, steroids become a moot point. The only connection is this: ‘anabolic’ is an adjective, ‘steroid’ is a noun. One is added to accentuate the other. Doesn’t mean one is the same as the other. You don’t even have to look it up. I’ll lay it out for you right here. ‘Anabolic’, and its opposite, ‘catabolic’, are terms that represent the metabolic process of muscle maintenance.

Plain and simple: if the muscle is in the process of rebuilding, with a surplus amount of protein enabling it to do so, it is in an ‘anabolic’ state. If the muscle does not have a sufficient amount of protein to aid in its recovery, it robs other muscles to achieve its objectives. This is called being in a ‘catabolic’ state. If I’m in an ‘anabolic’ phase, it doesn’t mean I’m on steroids. Get it? The only connection to steroids is its desired effect. Bodybuilders take steroids to increase muscle mass. In order to increase muscle mass, the muscle must be in an ‘anabolic’ state. Thus, anabolic steroids. I dare anyone to show me a ‘catabolic steroid’ on the market. If this needs further explanation, you’ll never get it.

lafever’s arsenal

Practice what you preach. The opposite of my Dad’s motto, “do as I say, not as I do”. Hypocritical, as far as I’m concerned. But it works for parents, when dealing with youth. Another testament: “put your money where your mouth is”. LaFever believes when it comes to personal health, there is no room for shortcuts. And now, what you’ve been all waiting for; LaFever’s nutritional five-star menu. Necessities and luxuries. Ammo, for defense against all that would attempt to taint or poison the temple of the self. Armor, to protect that which defines the self. And knowledge, to update and improve the self.

necessities

multi-vitamin – contains all the necessary vitamins and minerals, but in small doses. A staple for everyone, even if you eat right. In society today, even if you do eat right, don’t smoke or drink, there will be some form of deficiency, due to high levels of processing, which, in itself, is responsible for the depletion of foods’ nutritional benefits, not to mention the ever-present external toxic elements. The biggest culprit is the microwave. The keyword here is ‘wave’. Electro-magnetic, to be specific. Nothing destroys the nutritional value of something more than the microwave. If you do anything, get yourself a toaster oven. I did. And rarely use the microwave these days. Note: the microwave should only be used to heat, not cook. Leave the cooking to the stove/oven, for the longer cooking times, and the toaster oven, for the shorter periods, or what the microwave was typically used for.

anti-oxidants – That would be beta-carotene (converting to vitamin A in the body), vitamin C (for defense against the elements and illness, but only in recovery, not in prevention) and E (supporting the body’s cells, numbering in the millions). Also aiding in eliminating the free-radicals in circulation. Cells robbed of an oxygen molecule, and responsible for ravaging other cells, like a vampire on a killing spree. The anti-oxidants are the garlic weapon against such destruction.

b-complex – A collection of vitamins (1, 2, 3, 6, 12 & Biotin) responsible for combating the negative effects of our surroundings, internal and external (alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, chemicals, exhaust, toxins, etc) and keeping the body’s infrastructure intact and in balance, aside the anti-oxidants.

glucosamine/chondroitin – This is a combo that some would consider half-necessity, half-luxury. I disagree. This supplement duo is only used as a necessity. It would be a luxury if you didn’t need it, but if you have no use for it, using it would be a waste. The benefit of these two apply to the joints. Shoulders, elbows, hips, knees, ankles. All the areas that turn and/or rotate, using tendons and ligaments in the process. These body parts are essential for proper movement and degrade naturally over time. And faster for those who engage in any physical activity, which increases the use, resulting in expanded and progressive wear & tear. Nine times out of ten, injuries result in some form of tear to a ligament or tendon, as opposed to a break (bone-related), but just as severe. Some never recover. But for all intent and purposes, the glucosamine/chondroitin combo becomes a necessity for those of us entering midlife, when the breakdown begins due to normal wear and tear. Perfect for minor, slight, aches and pains due to this breakdown. Glucosamine is an amino acid (protein) and chondroitin is a mineral, meaning they act synergistically. Glucoasamine, as a protein, obviously is responsible for the repair of damaged ligaments and tendons. Chondroitin works to build and stabilize existing ligament/tendon structures. One repairs, the other supports and maintains. You can’t beat that. Tag team champions, for sure.

I had an injury once, sustained during a soccer game. I was the goalie and bent my knees inward to block a shot at the net. Twisted the left knee. Stepped out of the game. This happened in the second quarter. By the end of the game, I couldn’t bend my knee. Lasted a week, with extension returning more and more each day. But the pain remained. For two years. It was a tolerated pain. Only happening after sitting for a certain period of time, leading to a painful limp for 5-10 minutes after. I dreaded a CAT Scan that might uncover an ACL or MCL tear (ligaments surrounding the kneecap and the most often injured during sports activity). I started supplementing with this combo. Daily. The research indicated benefits wouldn’t begin for at least two weeks. Shit. I’d put up with is for two years. Two weeks was a walk in the park. Better than the alternative. That would be a visit to the hospital. I figured it wasn’t that bad. Those injuries are nightmares, and usually require surgery immediately. A month later, the constant minor pain experienced by simple walking, and the increased pain after sitting for a period of time, began subsiding. Today, I’m here to say, no more pain. Even after long walking distances and lengthy sitting periods. Self-healed again. I now supplement weekly with this combo to boost and enhance my ligament properties. And hopefully eliminate or, at least, postpone the onset of osteoporosis and arthritis in my later years, even if it doesn’t have anything to do with bone. Could be like Echinacea where prevention doesn’t work, but I’ll take what I can get.

DHEA – (de-hydro-epia-androsterone) – a pro-hormone produced by the body, starting during puberty and declining in production until the age of 40, where it pretty-much stops. Needless to say, while unnecessary at an earlier age, it’s a necessity now. Basically, DHEA, as all pro-hormones do, increases the level of testosterone production in the body. This happens naturally within the body, until around age 40. The body then ceases DHEA, and subsequently, testosterone production. Men’s mid-life menopause. We need this testosterone to maintain, and/or build, lean body mass (muscle). The lack of testosterone production also contributes to a lower metabolism, resulting in an increase in fat storage. Geez, that’s all we need. The benefits of supplementation, in your later years, are numerous. They: increase the production of testosterone, resulting in increased lean body mass (yup, muscle), fat loss, and an increase in immune system function and support. Cool.

Of course, the definition of DHEA as a pro-hormone who’s purpose is to increase testosterone, obviously, and without good reason, connects it somehow, someway, to steroids. For the record, hormones share a similar end result as steroids, but only in its effect on testosterone. HGH, or human growth hormone, is a supplement, and used for the same reason as steroids, but are not steroids, at least not in a scientific, technical sense. But still classified as such, unfortunately. Probably due to the excessive use of such for the same purpose the other is used. Another similarity: the “A” in DHEA (androsterone) is a pro-hormone and a common ingredient in most steroid profiles on the market today. Check any list of steroid configurations and you’ll discover the majority of them start with the prefix “andro”. As for ignorance, or lack of knowledge, for those of you in the dark on this, steroids do not increase muscle. At least, not directly. What they do is increase the muscle recovery process. Exponentially. Enabling you to work out longer, and more frequent. The destructive aspects are just as prevalent. Don’t go there. DHEA is in the clear. And I swear by it. Especially at my age. This, too, I’ll take what I can get.

chromium picolinate – Here’s another one on the fence. Unnecessary during the early years (unless you’re diabetic) but more likely useful in the later years. This mineral is mostly beneficial when blood sugar issues are present, hence the diabetes connection. Chromium is an insulin regulator. Anything that increases your blood sugar level (high-glycemic carbs (refined), sweets, fruit juices, alcohol), results in a release of insulin by the pancreas, to bring those levels back into balance. (We discussed this earlier.) LaFever is not diabetic, thank God. Nonetheless, LaFever does love his beer. In higher concentrations (not volume, mind you) than most others. I’m talking about alcoholic content. Steele Reserve. Malt liquor. 8.1 on the Richter Scale. Booyah, baby. But, at the same time, beer is alcohol, and responsible for an increase in blood sugar. Empty calories, too. To compensate for this, the beer is consumed with meals. Most important, as it lowers the overall Glycemic Index (standard indicator of carbohydrates as it relates to the effect on blood sugar levels). I take chromium picolinate as a defense, to ensure a stable level of blood sugar, and regulating the release of insulin. Other beneficial properties on a minor scale are its effects on metabolism, and the subsequent fat loss associated with it. Way cool.

Pro-biotics – aka super blue/green algae, aka spirulina, the stuff that makes up your intestinal flora (but not fauna, sorry), for the purpose of breaking down the foods we consume, to be absorbed. It’s the so-called good bacteria. That’s a good thing. Yogurt is a good whole food source, considering it’s live cultures contain within.

Water – the most important of all. Available everywhere. But don’t drink too much. It IS possible to over-hydrate. And death has occurred in extreme cases (remember the water drinking contest put on by some radio station where the winner went home nauseated, and died a few hours later?) Don’t forget, we’re 70% water. And that balance needs to be maintained.

luxuries

protein – the building blocks of life. Especially if you lift weights. We all need protein anyway. Lack of protein results in muscle mass being used as energy. And that’s catabolic. Never a good thing. So LaFever always keeps a container of whey protein. Low in carbohydrates, of course. Excess stores as body fat. Easily done at my age. No thanks.

creatine – the greatest scientific discovery in the modern era.. And legal. Probably one of, if not the most, researched supplement in the industry today. Most likely as a result of the explosive benefits of its use. It is produced naturally in the body in small amounts and found in high content in red meat. Can’t ban a natural ingredient found in the body as well as in the foods we eat. Hence, the advent of creatine as a supplement. Basically, what creatine does is draw water into the muscle cell, thereby increasing it in size and strength. It also acts as a form of fuel, shortening the muscle recovery process, enabling the user to train in a shorter amount of time. Gee: isn’t that what steroids are for? Yup. Creatine: the Holy Grail of the bodybuilding industry. Steroids, as a whole, are a thing of the past. And illegal now, too. For good reason.

glutamine – This is one of the 22 amino acids that make up the protein molecule. Why is it supplemented on its own? Two reasons. One: glutamine makes up the highest percentage of the protein molecule. 50%. Glutamine is also responsible for keeping the muscle in an anabolic state, and saving the muscle from being used as fuel/energy for the body. Many use protein supplements and add in additional specific amino acids. Glutamine is the most-often purchased addition to the shelf. Sometimes it comes in second to BCAA’s (branched-chain amino acids). The BCAA’s are leucine, isoleucine and valine, and possess abilities of a higher proportion in its effect on muscular development. (No room here for details. Do your own research. I’m laying a foundation here.) LaFever loves the benefits of glutamine, but forsakes the addition of BCAA’s, since the BCAA’s are represented in the protein powder, in good numbers.

milk thistle – a supplement from neither the vitamin or mineral category. Herbs. A category unto itself. Even more unregulated than the vitamin/mineral category. And controversial, for sure. LaFever’s jury is still out. Although, studies are ongoing. At this moment in time, I’m more inclined to subscribe to the herbs predominant in the Asian community. They live on this shit. The West is still in pre-school, if you ask me. The only other herb I would consume, if I could afford it on a regular basis, is ginseng. Of course, it should be noted there are three types of ginseng: Asian ginseng, American (Panax) ginseng, and Siberian ginseng. Asian and Siberian are better than American. Siberian is the most expensive. Needless to say, considering LaFever’s close proximity to SF’s Chinatown, it’s Asian ginseng, hands down. Other than that, right now, it’s milk thistle. Has nothing to do with milk. Just like a lot of other plants inappropriately named. Milk Thistle is a cleanser, a purifier. Specifically, for the liver. In the Asian community, the liver is classified as the most important organ in the body. LaFever agrees. The liver is responsible for the process and elimination of all toxins in the body. It doesn’t get any more important than that. Especially when you take into consideration, as mentioned earlier, LaFever’s favorite vice, beer. I shouldn’t have to tell you the effect alcohol has on the liver. Massive. Enter Milk Thistle. As a preventative maintenance to support the liver. Plus, there’s good news. The liver is self-generating. You can have half your liver removed, and the liver will grow back to normal size within six months. Kinda like a starfish. And that’s way cool. Where’s my 40…

melatonin – honorable mention. Perceived as a necessity, for the purpose of its use, but is ultimately a luxury, since you shouldn’t be relying on a supplement for something as simple as sleep. With exception, of course, given to the medical condition of insomnia. But then, if it comes to that, prescription medication is usually taken first. Melatonin is classified as a hormone. Produced naturally in the body. It’s what sets and controls the body’s internal clock. Produced by the pineal gland. It became the primary ‘sleep’ supplement after the amino acid ‘tryptophan’ was banned in the US. For no good reason. All due to a tainted batch produced and imported to the US by Japan. WTF?! Ephedra suffered the same fate a few years back. No matter. Melatonin turned out to be better. Resembled the effects of serotonin better than tryptophan. The only drawback, at least for LaFever, was the presence of more-vivid dreams. LaFever already dreams in Technicolor 3-D. This supplement is saved for special occasions. Like when there is a several-night period of less than 3-4 hours sleep per night. Happens on occasion. But I wouldn’t recommend it on a weeknight.

echinacea – an herb with strong medicinal properties. but limitations, too, mind you. Mostly used to combat colds and flu. Works perfectly. Boosts the immune system to attack and destroy the bacteria and viruses plaguing the body during times of illness. But that’s where the benefits end. This herb doesn’t work when used as a supplement on a daily basis, for preventative purposes. Like C, mentioned earlier. Go figure. But that’s what herbs are all about. And we’re still learning how it all works. The reason this and many others are still in the controversial category based on test studies and research, is because of its effect on the human body. Could also be why the Asian community is centuries ahead of the West. They’ve been at it for 4000 years! They’ve been living past 100 for centuries while we’ve been passing at around half that age. Of course, that was during the 1800’s and early 1900’s. Not so today. (Unless you live in the ‘hood. Sorry, but that’s a documented fact. And unfortunate, as well.)

Macronutrients (carbs, fats and protein) are a no-brainer in their necessary effects on our biological and physiological system. The micronutrients (vitamins and minerals) have long been established as necessary for the body to function in the same vein.

Herbs. Obviously, plant-based. And there are a million species of plants on this planet. So much research and information, so little time. The jury is still out on herbs, but we’re making headway. The difference is in how the body reacts to them. It is this reason we all should be cautious in our herbal supplementation. You wouldn’t want to be the first person to have an adverse reaction to something that has no effect at all on everyone else. There’s a first time for everything. Use caution and in moderation, folks. LaFever is happy with his milk thistle, echinacea, and occasional ginseng.

Other supplements have come and gone from the LaFever war chest. All based on research, and test trials. The costs outweighed the benefits, or at least, the alleged benefits. And subsequently discontinued. I’m a realist. I want to see results. Not rhetoric or hearsay. Or marketing. Co-Q enzyme. Pass. Nitric oxide. Pass. Creatine serum (liquid). Pass. Weight loss supplements. Pass. Shark cartilage. Big pass. Don’t believe the hype.

Oops. I almost forgot. Not exactly a supplement. Not even a whole food. Comes from a plant. In bean form. Yup, you guessed it. Coffee. And tea, but LaFever prefers coffee. I’ve heard the arguments. I’ve seen the research. As I mentioned earlier, coffee is probably the most studied substance in the world today. And the studies will continue, so long as the results keep contradicting those from previous studies. Like a goddamn seesaw. Give it a rest. Traditionalists claim tea is better. Because it’s herbal. Uh, the coffee bean comes from a plant. Tea comes from the leaves. That’s the only difference. Tea has enjoyed the classification of being higher in anti-oxidants. True. And for the record, green is reportedly higher than black. LaFever note: the only difference between the two is the production process. So basically, it doesn’t matter. Unless flavor matters. And it usually does. But…it was recently discovered coffee also contains anti-oxidant properties. Definitely good press.

Then there’s the weight-loss formulas on your local store shelves, and the often-accompanied E-C-A stack. That would be ephedra, caffeine and aspirin. The first two to increase heart-rate, thus upping the metabolism, and the third, for blood-thinning purposes, increasing the blood flow alongside the increased heart-rate. No wonder there were problems. Enter the herbal equivalent, as a perceived more-healthy alternative. Same effect. Ma Huang, Guarana and White Willowbark. The same stuff you find in all of your energy drinks today. With added Taurine, an amino acid that elicits the same effect. The herbal equivalent won the war on energy when ephedra was banned due to high-profile deaths that had nothing to with ephedra itself. Sure, ephedra increased the heart-rate and metabolism, but due to lack of information and improper use, the after-effects resulted in biological deficiencies; most notably, dehydration. And we all know how important water is. Ephedra got a bad rap. Moot point now.

One last note on energy drinks. There’s a new breed. 5-hour and 6-hour energy drinks. Not like the others (Red Bull, AMP, Rockstar, etc.). Unnecessary. Next time you’re at the store, look at the ingredients. It’s all vitamins and minerals. That’s what B’s are for. B-Complex. And a good night’s sleep. Which is what everyone is lacking, and the reason for hitting the wall at 3 in the afternoon. It doesn’t have to be this way. All you have to do is modify your behavior. And your attitude. After all, it’s your health.

bottom line

All of your macro- and micro-nutrients can be obtained through whole food consumption. If you are lacking in this area, or participate in athletic sports, or work out at a local gym, supplements may be in order. No, make that necessary. And definitely if you are athletic or work out, but don’t eat right. And you know if you don’t. The lack of energy will tell you so. Exercise. Aerobic and/or anaerobic. For the heart; and the muscle. You can’t lose. Except for the fat. We’ve only scratched the surface. But, like I said, these are the basics, establishing the foundation from which to begin, down the path to perfect health and longevity. There’s so much more. All you have to do is ask.

S.F. Transient Authority

Hmmm. Where to begin. Other than it’s more like ‘Baghdad by the Bay” than it’s ever been, how about an admission of guilt. Yes, San Francisco has a homeless problem. For as long as I can remember. For the record, I’m born and raised San Francisco. I live and work in San Francisco. 25 years in the financial district. I’ve criss-crossed this city hundreds of times, in the form of ‘cruising’. By car, bus and on foot. Sunset to the Marina. Richmond to Potrero Hill. Downtown to Hunter’s Point. SOMA to the Mission. I’ve seen it all.

I’m here to tell you: “what we have here is a failure to communicate”. What we have here is not a homeless problem, at least, not in the capacity it has been made out to be. The problem is ‘transient’. Here are some observations to think about, since the majority of the general public either ‘don’t know or don’t show’.

First and foremost, we need to establish the difference between ‘homeless’ and ‘transient’. All transients are homeless. But not all homeless are transients. Transients are individuals who: prefer living on the street, have no desire to enter the workforce, and have successfully learned how to milk the system so they don’t have to enter the workforce. That very system is to blame for allowing it to happen. The two programs responsible are General Assistance and Welfare. Welfare works to a certain degree because it benefits low-income families. General Assistance, on the other hand, distributes monthly income to those who are homeless, and unemployed, and ineligible for unemployment insurance.

Transients choose to live on the street for various reasons. One is camaraderie. Safety in numbers. This, in itself, is a result of other circumstances. Shelters, for one. There are enough shelters with enough capacity to house every homeless in the City. The reason they are not filled is because of crime, violence, and the lack of support and the subsequent strong-arming by shelter staff. In addition, admission is set during a certain time, and entry-and-exit is not allowed after a certain time. For those living free on the streets, this is a major thorn in their side.

To be fair, a percentage of this transient population have issues regarding mental instabilities that prevent them from leading a normal life. This was a direct result of the release of hundreds, if not, thousands, back in the 80’s by then-Governor, Ronald Reagan. Nonetheless, one has to wonder why most settled in San Francisco, rather than outlying areas of the Bay Area. And where are they now? The people I see on the streets don’t exhibit any of the behaviors associated with mental incapacities. They keep to themselves, carrying on conversations like the rest of us. Every once in awhile, I’ll see an individual talking to himself, or screaming out loud at someone who is, basically, not there. Must have skipped his medication. The rest is drugs and alcohol.

But what about food? Food is free. You’ve got non-profit dining rooms. You’ve got various food retailers who will give around the time of closing, if you’re friendly and cool about it. You’ve got trash receptacles on every corner that contain leftovers from the rest of us. They’re supposed to be locked, but reaching in easily bypasses that obstacle. And that’s the vicious circle.

The real and true homeless are the ones who fill the daily/weekly hotels, the shelters, and either stay with friends who have room, or move back home with parents. For this class, it’s all about pride. I myself have been a victim, not once, but twice. Moved back home with Mom, sleeping in the family room area. No walls. No door. No privacy whatsoever. And daily confrontations with bro, who never moved out. But that’s his problem, not mine. Everything I owned was put in storage. But it was home. Until I found employment, and moved out. And that’s the difference. Homeless are making the effort, utilizing any and all services available. Transients couldn’t care less. Except when it rains. This is probably when the City takes attendance to gauge what the actual homeless population is. When it rains, the shelters fill to capacity. Go figure.

Here’s an example of transience in action. Witnessed firsthand. Over several years. A classic representation of the crisis at hand. The proverbial “for every cockroach you see, there’s a hundred you don’t see”. And proof that it can hit just as close to home as anywhere else. High school buddy. Friends, although estranged at times, for 25 years. Hated authority. Classic product of the environment. Divorced parents. Boarding school. Tardiness and absenteeism on a daily basis. Often quoted “Ends justifies the means”. Obviously, the end for him was the score.

It wasn’t obvious to me how the system was manipulated until the day he came over with a proposition, disguised as an emergency. Unemployed and sleeping on church steps by choice, his semi-monthly General Assistance check was in jeopardy. He needed to show proof that he was actively seeking employment, listing employers with whom he had applied, and contact information. The writing was on the wall.

He asked for the white pages. Then started listing employers at random. I asked how he could substantiate applications with these firms when none existed. He replied that the GA agency never checks, confirms or follows up on it. System failure. Then came the request to act as an employer to justify his application process. System failure. Subsequent to say, he was escorted from the premises and instructed never to return. It was at that point I realized he wasn’t the only one utilizing these tactics to gain benefits at the expense of the City, and ultimately, the taxpayers.

This was the very reason responsible for the “Care Not Cash” program instituted a few years ago. It met with controversy, obviously, but only from special-interest groups who are subsidized by non-profits, and have no real interest in the individuals they are charged with supporting. Sounds like an opinion, allegation or speculation, but it’s been documented. My friend would get his check and rather than use half of it for rent in a weekly hotel, he preferred the steps. Food was free from dining rooms. And his ‘cash’ went to drugs. Never lasted more than a couple days. The rest came from begging.

Homeless? Or transient?! It’s the cockroach conundrum. For every transient you see, there are homeless you don’t see. Consider this: all the homeless you see on the street, ask yourself, what are they doing? Are they preparing their resumes and calling prospective employers? Are they searching the want-ads or online for employment opportunities? Are they going from business-to-business filling out applications? Uh, I don’t think so.

And here’s the kicker: they may just be better off than the majority of us lower to low-middle class working people. I struggle day-to-day just to cover rent, utility bills and food. Many times I’ve had to decide which bill not to pay; which service I can do without for a two-week period. Twice in the last 12 years at my current residence, I’ve had my electricity cut-off. Fortunately, I had extension cords and multi-outlets available. Spread throughout my apartment like a spiderweb. And hooked up to the outlet in the hallway outside my apartment.

Today, Friday, in pouring rain, with traffic backed up, I walked 3 miles from my work to the cable company, to pay my bill, and avoid disconnection the next day. The service had already been interrupted. We do what we gotta do. And the homeless/transients do what they gotta do. But more importantly, don’t be fooled by the City’s claim about homelessness being a problem.

There’s a reason for the term ‘sanctuary’, used in the subtitle. It’s a reference to the tolerance given to the crisis. How many times have you walked by some kid who’s barely out of high school, and wanted to scream out, “Get a fucking job”? You may be surprised to know these youths are the same youths from 20 years ago, living the punk lifestyle. The connection: they come from middle- to upper-middle class families. Rejecting their upbringing and living the hippie/rebel lifestyle. Questioning authority and making their own rules. Outcasts of society. Transients of a different class.

On your way to work, do you see the same individual at the same spot, every morning? Do you contribute to this individual? Do you see others dropping change every day to this individual? Did it ever occur to you that these donations are supplemental income to what he’s already receiving from the City? And if he’s in the same spot everyday, all day, how can he be looking for a job? He isn’t. He doesn’t have to. You’re supporting him. This is his job.

I watched one guy every day, standing on a milk carton, soliciting handouts. Most passed, but many also felt sorry and dropped the change. One day while attending a Giants game, I saw this same individual. He was in the box seats. $100 pair of Nike. Brand name windbreaker and custom designer jeans. Was he asking for change from his neighbors? No. He was eating a hot dog and drinking a beer.

Homeless, or transient? You’ll have to be the judge. I can already tell. If you give to them out of sympathy, and they’re just sitting there, you are contributing to the problem. LaFever says if they aren’t working for it, as in playing an instrument or break- or tap-dancing, look the other way and keep walking. Don’t think you’re disappointing them or making them feel left out. That’s part of the game. I asked my friend what he did to generate sympathy, resulting in pocket change. He gave me the expression he uses. Raised eyebrows and a distant glance resembling the look of “how am I going to make it through the night”. He had his shit down. And so do all the others. Don’t believe the hype.

From A Certain Point Of View

One of my favorite lines from the classic film, “Star Wars”, uttered by the grandmaster himself, Obi-Wan Konobi. Such an influence he had on me with his anecdotes and ‘points-of-view’, like an old Chinese sage, high on a mountaintop. But let’s not get overly other-worldly, hypothetically speaking. Today’s English is so far removed from the old days, it’s a daily challenge to keep up with the latest terms. Most new ones are slang, nicknames created by the youth of today to differentiate from what is used in daily conversation and correspondence. And to keep others from understanding. You know, for the same reason “pig latin” was used so many years ago.

Slang evolves almost immediately, and what one culture calls something, is called something else in another culture. Keeping track of it all is useless and pointless, to a certain degree. “To a certain degree” is the sister term to “From a certain point of view”. A LaFeverism, for sure, as LaFever sees it.

So I thought it would be interesting to match up established terms that mean the same, for all intent and purposes, but somehow, after a little thought, and looking at it “from a certain point of view”, are really different, albeit slightly, and realizing that, yes, there really is a difference, no what the “point of view”.

attorney vs. lawyer

Good one. On the surface, it appears class distinctions are again responsible. Maybe so, but there’s more to it than meets the eye…from a certain point of view, of course. So let’s skim the surface before diving deeper. Pretty cut-&-dry, wouldn’t you say, when comparing the two using class distinctions. ‘Attorney’ obviously used by the upper-class and ‘lawyer’ relegated to middle- to lower class. First things first, you have to remember – it’s not an elitist thing, although some will obviously exhibit its usage in an elitist way. It’s simply based on education. In the old days, upper-class were educated, middle-class to a certain degree, and lower-class, generally speaking, more often not. So upper-class used terms they were taught in school, proper English. And those without education, created alternate terms, more commonly known as slang, but considering the uneducated were in the majority, those terms became part of the English language, and its usage became permanent within a short period of time.

See for yourself. While ‘attorney’ AND ‘lawyer’ can both be found in a dictionary, you won’t find ‘lawyer’ in a phone book. Dictionaries contain everything, for definitive and descriptive purposes, but as it pertains to usage, you can always rely on the ever-faithful phone book to set the record straight. The attorney section fills numerous pages, and rightfully so, as it is the official term for the service they provide. Check under ‘L’ for ‘lawyer’ and what do you find? “See attorney”. That, in and of itself, distinguishes the two as a matter of proper English and slang. At first.

Below the surface reveals meanings beyond that of ‘proper vs. slang’ and upper- vs lower/middle-class usage, although that is still prevalent today. But there is still another level of usage that transcends the class distinction. And that is the personal level.

All lawyers are attorneys, but not all attorneys are lawyers…from a certain point of view. If you need legal counsel, what do you say? “I need a lawyer”, not “an attorney”. So you look for one in the “attorney” section. After the selection is made, this attorney, who you’ve never met before, is now your “lawyer”. Still, the upper-class will always want to speak with their “attorney”. But if you think about it, here’s where it gets tricky. If you have a lawyer on retainer, you’ll still need to call your “lawyer”, who’s already on board, as “lawyers” are to the rest of us, unless you’re rich, in which case, it’s an “attorney”. I would only refer to counsel as a “lawyer”, even if he was already on board, as a retainer. Of course, his profession is “attorney-at-law”.

Helpful hint: No matter whether you’re rich or poor, upper-, middle- or lower-class, always refer to your “lawyer” as your “attorney”. Nothing scares anyone more than hearing “I’ll have to consult my “attorney”. If you say “lawyer”, it means you don’t have one.

carpet vs. rug

This has always been one of my favorites. What exactly is the difference between a carpet and a rug? Depends on who you ask. And where they live, unfortunately. My research has determined this to be a matter of class distinction, which explains why I say unfortunately. Not culturally-based mind you, but more education-related.

‘Rug’, it seems, came after the term, ‘carpet’. Where, I have yet to discover, but at this point, it’s obvious. ‘Rug’, by the very nature of it’s sound, it’s one-syllable utterance, is obviously slang for carpet. The difference had to be established somewhere. LaFever has a theory.

Carpets existed centuries ago. Obviously, the word itself, ‘carpet’, meant something. A floor covering, according to the dictionary. The term looks like a European or Middle Eastern spelling. It could have been pronounced, “carpeigh” for all we know. Very popular in the Middle- and Far-East cultures. Used to cover floorings. Hardwood floors are nice, but back then, hardwood floors were relegated to the upper-class. Concrete and dirt were more common as flooring. These ‘carpets’ were created, not for luxurious reasons at first, but as a matter of practicality. A necessity to keep the temperature up indoors, and for a softer platform. It caught on with the elite, who then incorporated patterns to match their palace décor.

Somewhere along the way, most likely, by visitors from other lands, gave it a nickname. LaFever is on top of it. LaFever guesses it was a European who came up with the term ‘rug’ for the carpet. Not sure when. After all, the famed ‘flying carpet’ was a rug. And here’s why, as it relates to the 20/21st century.

In a nutshell, anything that covers a portion of the floorspace in any given room, is considered a rug. If it covers the whole floorspace, it is considered carpet. Thus, wall-to-wal carpeting is actually a redundancy. If it’s carpeting, it covers the whole floorspace, from wall to wall. When one says they are carpeting the area, they are covering the whole area. Alongside that theory is the one where a rug is thrown down, and lays temporarily for an indefinite period of time. The carpet, on the other hand, is tacked down, to remain permanently.

There are exceptions, though. Today, it has become not just a matter of class distinction, but that of how a person perceives themselves. Example: someone from a bad neighborhood makes a concerted effort to advance, achieving a college degree, and securing a medium- to high-paying job, beating the odds in the process. Congratulations. In his first apartment, you’ll find wall-to-wall carpeting in every room. He’s happy. Vacuuming is easier than sweeping. But when friends come over, what does he say? “Glad you can make it. Don’t spill anything on the rug.” Conversely, you attend a dinner party at local celebrity’s mansion. To upper-class, wall-to-wall is tacky and beneath them. They want their expensive hardwood floors highlighted by imported rugs from the Far East. What do they say? “Glad you can make it. Don’t spill anything on the carpets.”

There you have it. Class distinction in action. But not always between the upper-class and lower- to middle-class. Much of it has to do with how one is perceived. Of course, LaFever believes it sometimes has to do with the rug/carpet itself. I found a ‘rug’ in the neighborhood that was still in good condition. I live in an upper-class neighborhood in a lower-class building. Don’t ask. I’m covered by rent control. Anyway, this rug was used, an I referred to it as a rug. After my cat decided his box was not good enough, he let loose a few times along the border (#1, of course). It stained the rug, and stained the hardwood below it. Embarrassing to say the least. I dumped the carpet after a neighbor moved out and left his rug behind. Cool contemporary pattern, but still a rug, as it was used.
Two years later, a linen store in the neighborhood was closing, and all rugs were %50 off. I grabbed one the same size as my others and replaced the used one. Turns out, this new one was thick and plush, and a pattern designed by Jerry Garcia himself. This was special. Mr. Garcia had become famous for his artwork outside of his music with The Grateful Dead. He did, ties, too, and sold well. Now, I don’t eat over it, and vacuum it regularly. Cat loves it (not the same cat, of course).


I held a small gathering one weekend. Wrestling fans. The same sloppy types you invite over for the Super Bowl or Daytona 500. The first thing I said? “Don’t spill anything on the carpet.”

Ah. This wasn’t about class distinction. It was about old vs. new. You can spill on the rug, but not on the carpet. Now there’s a revelation for you: a carpet becomes a rug when it becomes used. Well, how do you determine at which point it becomes used? If you drop something on it, and it can be picked up, it’s still a carpet. Food or liquid, on the other hand, is the deciding factor. If you can get it up of the carpet, or are able to remove the stain successfully, it’s still a carpet. If it stains, you’ve got yourself a rug.

Helpful hint: I learned this in the dojo. Aikido, to be exact. One of the first things taught – scooting across the canvas mat. Scrapes the toes of all beginners, causing bloodspots on the mat. The sensei handed me hydrogen peroxide and a cloth. I dabbed the cloth and began to rub, at which time he stopped me. He pointed to the blood stain I had just expanded by rubbing. He filled the cap and dropped drops onto the stains and laid the cloth over it. The blood from the mat had risen to the surface with the peroxide and the cloth soaked it up. Stain gone.

rug vs.toupee

Ha! You couldn’t ask for a better segue. Although there’s another one coming up later. Here’s another class-distinction example, with a double-meaning, to boot. “Rug”, in this case, is obviously the slang for a “toupee”, the male version of a wig. The “rug” in this case, and in the previous example in relation to carpet, connotes the same reference as ‘slang’. “Toupee” is the technical definition of the artificial hair replacement, with “rug” being the ‘slang’ nickname. Almost resembles a street term, if you ask me. Although “rug” as a slang for “carpet” doesn’t have the same semblance. Thank God. For some reason, and probably due to the amount of square footage covered, wall-to-wall-carpeted homes and apartments tend to cost more than hardwood-covered dwellings, with “rugs”.

doctor vs. surgeon

Again, one and the same. This pair follows the same pattern as that of attorney/lawyer, and based more in usage in context than as a difference in class distinction, at least not as much as the attorney/lawyer duo. The term “doctor” would be considered more slang in respect to definition. But I’m here to show you the difference. Something wrong? You should see a “doctor”. You don’t hear the suggestion to see a “surgeon”. When you go to the hospital, you’re going to the “doctor’s” office, not the “surgeon’s” office. The “MD” as a suffix to the “doctor’s” name is “Medical Doctor”.

When looking at the root of the word, “surgeons” perform surgery. But so do doctors. So all doctors perform as surgeons, and all surgeons perform as doctors. Enter the attorney/lawyer theory. “Doctor” is personal, while “surgeon” is general. Doctors have patients. Surgeons have patients. So what’s the difference? Easy. If your “doctor” performs surgery on you, he’s still your “doctor”. But if your “doctor” refers you to someone else for a procedure he’s not trained for, or for something of a specialist nature, that someone else is a “surgeon”. “Surgeons” also have patients, and are, of course, referred to as their “doctors”. The exception, “surgeons” who are so specialized in their skills, they only operate on other “doctor’s” patients. They have none of their own. So they are, for the most part, strictly “surgeons”, and do not act as “doctors” in the same vein “doctors” do. I think I’m gonna be sick.

mouse vs. rat

Whoa, the hits just keep coming and coming. The ‘domesticated’ mouse vs. the wild ‘rat’. How did this happen. I mean, think about it. How is it that a mouse always seems to be white, but a rat is always a combo of gray to black? Ever own a pet rat? No. Maybe it’s a term of endearment. If it’s a pet, it’s a mouse, but most likely, white. Yet, for scientific purposes, all those being used as test subjects, are referred to as rats. Even though the majority of them are white. LaFever believes they are mice, domesticated in the lab for scientific purposes. Yet, they are called rats, to remove the emotional attachment we would assume if they were called mice, during the course of experimentation. That’s not fair.

LaFever believes they are not one and the same, but cousins. DNA may be similar, but the differences are obvious. Size is one obvious factor. Personality is another, albeit different, simply based on environmental effects, dictating that difference out of sheer necessity to survive. But considering the DNA being almost an exact duplicate, and out of respect for the species, shouldn’t scientists use actual rats for their experiments? Not breeding the mice, making it easier for them to multiply their test subjects, but actually go out and hunt down the rats that dwell in the city’s underworld?

Sorry. The animal in LaFever escaped for a brief moment. But still, if you had a mouse for a pet, and someone came over, who was not particularly fond of mice, what would be their first response? “A pet rat? Ewwhewww.” Not fair. In all fairness, the mouse and rat, however close in DNA, appearance, and personality, are part of a larger species in general, even if they are considered distant cousins. Rodents. You’d be surprised to learn just how many and which pets fall into this category.

Obviously, mice and rats. Then there’s hamsters and guinea pigs. I’ve even heard rabbits referred to as rodents. Makes sense. As much as I’d like to disagree. But if that’s so, aren’t beavers considered a rodent? They certainly look and act like one. A way distant cousin, if so. And what about the bat? A flying rat as most refer to it. But still a mammal.

Makes you wonder? Does a rat domesticated, become a mouse? If dogs evolved from wolves, over time, shouldn’t the same be said for rats? How did their white hides become? If you set a mouse free, and learns to survive in the wild, does it become a rat? I suppose we’ll never know. RATS.

Funny how these differences-in-terms differ in reference (say that 3 times fast) to humans and animals. With humans, it’s the occupation, while, with animals, it’s the species. Interesting to note: with the human examples, they’re closer to being the same, differing in usage. With animals, on the other hand, the species appear to be the same, but only in appearance, and in some cases, behavior. They are, in fact different. Here are just a few of the examples of species that are visibly the same, but different by DNA.

alligator vs. crocodile

Here’s an example of not wanting to know the difference. After all, if you really wanted to know, wouldn’t you have to get up close and personal? Not yours truly. But there are subtleties. One is geographical, which makes it easy. Alligators and crocodiles are native to different countries, if anything, because of the environment. I’m not a zoologist, but thanks to the Net, and the Discovery and National Geographic channels on cable, ‘you could learn a lot from a dummy’. Whatever differences between the two, however slight, one visible difference should be ever so obvious, with hopefully just enough time to get the hell outta there. And we’ve all heard it before.

The alligator is the bigger and heavier of the two, with a wide, round snout, right up front. The crocodile, on the other hand, is smaller, and more lithe and agile, with a pointed snout. Sorta like the Siamese breed of cat. If it has a triangular head, it is a pure breed. Round, a hybrid mix. Who hasn’t seen “Crocodile Dundee”? Remember the seen where the lady reporter was attacked at the water’s edge, by a crocodile grabbing her water bottle? And did anyone wonder why she didn’t just lean forward and let go of the water bottle? Never mind. The term “crocodile” sounds more ferocious, and also rolled off the tongue better as far as titles go. But in reality, the next time you watch it, take a closer look at the reptile. It’s an alligator. Call it what you will, let’s just say, “I’ll take your word for it”.

dolphin vs. porpoise

Too close to call in my book. But still, genetics differ. Evidently, it’s in the snout, as far as appearances go, akin to that of the alligator/crocodile model. “Bottlenose” is often heard as the difference, with the “dolphin” having the bottlenose, or, elongated snout. The “porpoise” has the shorter, blunt snout. “Porpoise”? What is that? And what “porpoise” does it serve? Rhymes with “tortoise”. And perfect segue to our next example…

turtle vs. tortoise

I know “tortoise” should come first, but, come on. Everyone knows a “turtle”. “Tortoise”? What is that? Sounds like a color. No wait. That’s turquoise. Sorry. The difference for these two is easy. And obvious. A “turtle” is a land-dweller, hence the paws, or claws (claws on a turtle?). The “tortoise” is a sea-faring creature. In place of arms and legs, are huge fins. I’m sure age has something to do with it, but arms/legs vs. fins? I’m sold. While we’re on the subject of turtles (the segues are obvious, aren’t they)…
hare vs. rabbit

This one follows the same criteria as the mouse/rat scenario. One is wild, mostly (hare), while the other is primarily domesticated (rabbit). For the most part. There are wild rabbits out there, but no domesticated hares. Duh. Size is an issue, too. “Hares” are larger in size, strength and speed over their “rabbit” counterparts. Has anyone ever pulled a hare out of a hat?

donkey vs. mule

Even worse. I can’t tell. Still, there is a difference. The “donkey” is commonly referred to as “ass”. Which is why the dictionary also defines the “donkey” as a ‘stupid person’. Technically, the donkey is a pure breed, while the mule is a hybrid, as a result of the pairing of the donkey and horse. Let’s play ‘pin the tail on the mule. Huh??

cougar vs. mountain lion

Much ado about nothing. “Mountain lion” is obviously slang for “cougar” based on visual similarities, and that’s it. For the same reason tigers rule the jungle and “lions” rule the ‘serengeti’, or plains, cougars rule the mountain regions. Ain’t no “lions” found in the mountains. Period. And I don’t want to find out, even though I’m a ‘cat’ sign.


Okay. I’ve made my point. No doubt there are many more. But you can spend only so much time in the animal kingdom before running the risk of being hunted as food. Next up…

film vs. movie

Good one. Back to class distinctions. “Let’s go to the movies.” “How about taking in a film.” Class differences are obvious, but upon further observation, it becomes cause and effect. The class distinctions are a result of the subject itself. “Movies” are, for the most part, commercial in nature, catering to the general public, and released in mass production. “Films”, on the other hand, are produced for a niche audience, and released in independent fashion, at smaller, single-screen arthouses, hence the “elite” nature of its patrons. “Films” also enjoy a stature of old, movies made decades ago, are referred to as “films”. Storylines dealing with a dark side, outside of the norm of that day, are considered “film noir”. Movies considered classic, by critic and/or huge box office success, are relegated to “film” stature. And lest we forget those movies that win Oscars for ‘Best Picture”. “Films”, now, and forevermore. Of course, there are times I’ve seen been film on teeth.

pants vs. trousers

Another variation of the ‘slang vs. technical’ term, with “pants” being the slang. Same thing. A class distinction example. “Trousers” certainly does evoke an ‘upper-class’ version of the clothing item. For me, “trousers” seem to belong to a set, as it were, as in, ‘shirt and trousers’. Whereas, “pants” are sold separately, like batteries. “I need a new pair of pants.” Sound familiar?

jail vs. prison

Uh, I think if you don’t know the difference, you don’t want to know. For those who are familiar with either, or both, there is a difference. To those who don’t, both are used interchangeably. And fools they are, but only to those with firsthand experience. Personally, I’ve been to jail, but not to prison. Jail is an overnight stay. Or thirty days. Sometimes up to a year. But only in County Lockup. State and Federal correctional facilities are referred to as “prisons”. Wouldn’t you agree “prison” has a more ‘hardcore’ ring to it than that of a “jail”? I do. For the record, I’ve been to jail four times. Not to worry. All four were overnight stays. All four times the cases were dropped for insufficient evidence, or no desire to prosecute due to the minor aspect of the charges.

I discovered an interesting anecdote as it was laid upon me in a most enlightening way, most likely at a time when it was most dark, no doubt. When dealing with the justice system, in regards to arrests and convictions, law enforcement handle the arrests while judges handle the convictions. This is why a peace officer’s first question is always, “Have you ever been arrested?”, and a judge’s first question is always, “Have you ever been convicted?”. Why is that?

Personally, I think they are asked for two different reasons. Police ask when they already know the answer, after discovering the truth after they’ve run your name/license. They ask for the same reason parents and your boss ask, and after they already know the truth: to determine if you’re going to tell the truth to all questions thereafter. A judge, on the other hand, asks, well, hell, I don’t know, but I think it’s more a matter of, time. If you’ve been there before, “this won’t take long”. If not, “someone get me a cup of coffee, or a Snickers, we’re not going anywhere for awhile”.
I could be wrong. Then again, I’m not in any hurry to find out. Although if I’m ever in a position to answer the officer’s question if I’ve ever been arrested, I’m saying no. And when he says my record says I have been, “Uh, then why did you ask?” Probably more trouble than it’s worth, but just once.

floppy disk vs. hard disk

And now, last, but certainly not least, my favorite. And a continuing disagreement with IT personnel, the world over. Tunnel vision, obviously. Here’s the scoop: we start with the basics, come in midway, in reference to terms, and backtrack to prove the point. And when it’s over, you, too, will understand, even if it is simply, “from a certain point of view”.

We start with the computer. Assumed as one component, but in reality, three, as all three are interdependent. They are: the CPU, or ‘computer processing unit’, where all information is stored and processed. Next is the monitor, where this is information is viewed. Lastly, the keyboard, the tool used to enter said information into the computer. For all intent and purposes, the monitor and keyboard are simply tools, with no valued importance whatsoever in relation to the information, calculations and computations performed by the CPU, commonly referred to as the ‘hard drive’, or ‘brains’ of the overall unit.

The difference here when referring to floppy vs. hard disks is in its ability and performance regarding storage of information. It starts with ‘internal’ vs. external’. If you save a file to your hard drive, you are saving it to the ‘C’ drive. This is the CPU unit’s internal drive. Then there is the ‘A’ Drive. Why the internal drive was named ‘C’ first and not ‘A’, is beyond me. But, then again, we’re dealing with tech nerds here. So the ‘A’ Drive is considered an external drive, where you save files to a disk that is inserted into the slot on the front of the CPU unit, aka, the hard drive.

Here’s where it gets tricky, but only if you’ve been exposed to this from the beginning, and the reason IT has reluctantly resolved to accept the change. In the beginning, the ‘A’ Drive accepted a disk that was 5” in diameter, and referred to as a “floppy disk”. For good reason. It was constructed of a soft plastic that would bend. You could shake it and it would ‘flop’ back and forth, hence the term, ‘floppy’. Over time, as technology advanced, the ‘floppy’ gave way to a smaller, more sturdy disk made of hard plastic, measuring 3” in diameter.

Because of the size and dexterity difference of the two, IT personnel continued to refer to this disk as a ‘floppy’, since calling it a ‘hard disk’ would create confusion in the marketplace in reference to the ‘hard drive’. Didn’t matter. The ‘floppy’ disk was no more. And the majority of us referred to the new ‘hard disk’ as such, knowing full well the difference between that, and the ‘hard drive’. IT personnel continued to refer to it as a ‘floppy’, no matter how much we pointed out the difference. The ‘hard disk’ goes into to the ‘A’ Drive. The ‘hard drive’ was the ‘C’ Drive. What’s so difficult about that.

pros vs. joes

Psych. This is a reality series on television and has nothing to do with this paper.