You’ve heard the old story about cooking a live frog.  Just put him in a pot of lukewarm water and turn on the heat.  The frog will sit there as the water gets warmer, then hotter, until it’s boiling and he’s cooked.

Well, frogs are not that dumb.  They will jump out of a pot of water as it warms up.  At least they will make every effort to jump out and the hotter the water the more frantic they’ll become.  They will not sit still and be boiled alive.  But what about people?

On this topic had an interesting article where Doug Casey talked about “Getting Out of Dodge.”  Doug’s alarmist’s-view-answer is in reference to politics, money, and hiding out.  But that’s not my point in this essay.  I want to explore complacency generally, the dangers of not thinking things through, and the ability for independent thinking about food and health.  So bear with me as I try to make my point by first quoting from the link.

L: Doug, a lot of readers have been asking for guidance on how to know when it’s time to exit center stage and hunker down in some safe place.  Few people want to hide from the world in a cabin in the woods while life goes on in the mainstream, but nobody wants to get caught once the gates clang shut on the police state the US is becoming.  How do you know when it’s time to go?

Doug: Well, the first thing to keep in mind is that it’s better to be a year too early than a minute too late. David Galland recently read “They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45,” by Milton Mayer.  He quoted a passage in his column of last Friday.  It goes a long way in explaining why Americans appear to be such whipped dogs today.  They’re no different from the Germans of recent memory. For those who missed it, let me quote it:

“You see,” my colleague went on, “one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move.  Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse.  You wait for the next and the next.  You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow.  You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ … In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say?  They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re an alarmist.’

“These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end?  On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you.  On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic… the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes.  That’s the difficulty.  If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked…  But of course this isn’t the way it happens.  In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next.  Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C?”

Let’s Not be Shocked

Any conversation that digs too deeply into religion, politics, money, food, social issues, chemistry, history, how to raise a child, and such is almost taboo these days.  People do not mind superficial comments regarding these topics, but if the conversation deals with the fundamentals and progresses to exposing generally accepted thought as being ridiculous or dangerous, that’s different.  Then they’re fighting words for sure.

Naturally, I’m not in any mood to pick a fight nor do I want to start a dialog unless it’s on my blog.  I just want to make a couple of points and allow you to decide if they are relevant.  First a little about today’s politics – always a topic fraught with danger and emotion.  Why is it that Ron Paul is marginalized by both FOX and PBS and all points of light in between?

There’s an interesting comment I read recently about Bill Gross, manager of PIMCO, the world’s largest bond fund.  It said his thinking is slowly leading him to become a gold bug.  It’s based on current events taking place today where the world’s central banks are addressing growing illiquidity with more debt – which may seem to alleviate the illiquidity for the moment but instead makes the entire financial system more illiquid overall.  For him, this thinking is actually nothing new.  What is new, and absolutely stunning, is Gross’ endorsement for president: “I’m a little Ron Paulish.”  It was a comment he made on February 1, 2012.

Amazingly, the manager of PIMCO, the world’s largest bond fund, thinks change is called for.  Keep in mind his fund is invested in bonds that are denominated in paper money.  If the paper money goes poof, he has nothing to manage no matter how prudent he has been.  That’s why Gross sees all other candidates, as well as the current president, as being just more of the same.  Bush/Obama, what difference is there?

If you doubt the validity of my Bush/Obama question look at these three links.

M2 Money Stock
Federal Government Debt
Total Credit Market Debt Owed

While you are looking at these charts please take special note of the Reagan era that lasted from 1981 to 1989.  Tell me, from these charts can you tell which party controlled Congress and their man was President?  Need I mention the numerous wars on foreign soil during the past 60 years and which party initiated or continued to pursue those wars to claim “victory”?

The public and private debts in our country and its money supply have soared onwards and upwards under both recent administrations and all the other modern administrations before theirs.  The central bank (Federal Reserve) has created trillions of dollars out of thin air (most of it since 1995) and neither party has a record for slowing down this monster following the Fed’s creation in 1914.  All candidates say they represent change, but in rhetoric only.  Only one represents change and the establishment is scared to death of him and apparently wants to keep people in the dark as to what he is all about.

How Does This Apply to Food?

People generally are entrenched in the status quo.  They have habits that are part of their cultural makeups.  They do not want to change their habits.  They love their food and make daily decisions with their dollars voting for the foods they want.  Then they blame the results of their actions (sickness and reliance for survival on drugs and operations) on the people (farmers, food processors, restaurants, school lunch programs, and grocery stores) who provide them with what they demand to have.

If these people get sick (they all do in time unless they die early), they think that having a chronic disease is the norm.  Therefore they brag about their ailments like badges of honor.  Many older people speak of their diseases as signs of maturity and proof they have joined the ranks of elder statesmen.  These people are sick beyond measure in more ways then one – but they are the norm not the exception.  To test that statement, just try to tell them that they can probably reverse their chronic diseases by following The Real Diet of Man.  They’ll get mad at you for saying that every time.

The exceptions to the norm are the few people who stand apart from the mob and take measures into their own hands.  They do not spend money on foods that are not part of The Real Diet of Man.  They seek long-term health by strictly monitoring which foods they put in their bodies.  They do not want to go to a doctor for any reason.  In fact, to them, going to a doctor (other than for injuries, bacterial infections, and contagious diseases) represents failure on their part to care for themselves and their loved ones.

Yes, these outliers to the norm recognize the tiny steps toward sickness all others are taking as examples of insanity.  They understand the consequences.  They have informed themselves of the solutions and have initiated the proper steps to take to avoid obvious health problems that plague so many other people.  These outliers have the ability to think independently of the mob.  They are exhibiting wisdom.  Obviously, our customers are the dietary outliers which is why I know I’m singing to the choir here.  So I thank you one and all for being so brave.

Ted Slanker

Monday, March 5, 2012