I admire shoo, I wonder how his research would stack up academically. A woman I work with has just written a paper on the pros and cons of a vegan diet for her degree course.

And it all sounds along the lines of what shoo has written. B12, omegas, etc.

I find myself eating less and less since taking algae daily. I also tend to eat more eggs and lean meat than processed or red, I also try not to cook with vegetable fats, in fact I eat very little in the way of processed food. I wouldn't say ive the best diet in the world but in terms of energy I have to say I feel ten years younger. The rust was definitely setting in at 32 now I feel back in my teens. The key thing seems to be nutrients vitamins co-factors etc. Give the body what it needs and it does what its supposed to. Id be interested to hear what shoo has determined to be the correct diet.

What would the difference be between being a researcher as you are now and a doctor?

Well yes and no, I suppose the main emphasis is on being correct. Which you seem to be very aware. I find in the health food business there is a lot of emotional reaponses to people's views on products morw than substantiated facts. Also it seems very hard to find unbiased test results. It's normally done by the company whose shifting the product or the big pharma trying to poo poo a product.

Last edited by Senorservo2.0 (2013-12-26 18:07:03)

Stanshall
First off, congrats on your Avatar. Hang Ten was the preferred surfing shorts brand when I was a teenager because they were the first long shorts (so thighs and legs would not rub on the waked surfboard surface) made out of canvas-like woven nylon (dry fast, tolerate heavy wear).
But really, I don't care how preppy you were, only an American would wear shorts outside the sandy beach. Worn anywhere else shorts were viewed as laughably touristy.
Now Madras shirts, Weejuns loafers, Khakis were another thing. They were viewed as cool not for any specific Ivy League connotation (we hardly knw what Ivy League was), but because of the association with college life in the US in general. In our imagination, we KNEW those guys in the college pictures seen strumming a guitar in the college lawn with a few lovelies in pleated skirts sitting around them were going directly from there to a dorm room to engage in casual, harmless, fun sex with those SAME girls in the picture!
So it seemed logical that the whole "thing"- cowlick hairdo or crewcut, madras shirt, loafers, etc. were instrumental if you wanted to get laid. So THAT part of the prep look was popular because of the particular associations having to do with moral relaxation rather than easten seaboard elite mores.
The OTHER part of the prep look (OCDBS, high waisted straight pants, skinny ties) were considered NOT cool for the simple fact they were our school uniform (Black lightweight wool pants, white OCBDS for underclassmen, powder blue for seniors- to this day i hate powder blue shirts OCDBS- skinny black tie with our golden school lion on it).
Leisure clothing for us was not influenced by what looked cool to other guys, but what looked cool to girls because above alcohol, sports or any other pursuit, sex was prized above all.
As for the prep schools, there were no "rivals". There was the all boys San Ignacio de Loyola and then a San this and Santa that (even a Saint John's for Americans or even Perpetuo Socorro where Benicio del Toro attended) but none other could or does vie with the arrogance and excellence of San Ignacio.
To give you an idea, after school entertainment (from the time classes ended to when the buses left, a period of about 1 hr) consisted mainly of 2 activities. 1) Fights in the lawn behind the church, which could get spectacularly muddy when conditions were right and 2) Impromptu "debates" in the area between the 2 main class buildings where rhetorical skills were honed and prized. Both venues could get you high up on the Darwinian pecking order. As a matter of fact, skills honed in one arena were useful in the other; for example using rhetoric as a means to insult or denigrate an opponent or mobilize the crowd prior to a fight, or alternately using pugilistic skills to "cut the Gordian knot" of a particularly challenging debate.

Chevere

You are so right about some of the ivy prep clothes having negative association with school uniforms... OCBD's, black Weejuns, blazers (worn for School activities and Sunday Mass) - we would never wear any of them on the weekends - they were just things we had to wear.

loafers made a big comeback in the late 80's and boys began wearing their burgundy Sebago's (but always sockless) on the weekends, with rolled up 501's for a 50's look - black penny loafers were a school uniform shoes and not considered cool...

I always wore Wallabies on the weekends and it took me more than a decade after graduation to even think about wearing penny loafers again...

Stan - thanks for the Monochrome Set - what a lovely track