Nonviolent Eating: Relax Your Eating for Better Health

TL/DR;

• I used the Dexcom Stelo "Continuous Glucose Monitor" or CGM.
• I confirmed the same lessons from previous experiment. My Experiment Results
• Foods high with grains or processed sugars cause blood glucose levels to rise
• Walking after eating helped to bring levels into acceptable ranges
• Stress can cause levels to rise more (even with identical foods).
• New insight:
• Nonviolent eating (I made this term up), or mindful eating in a relaxed, non-rushed manner can help reduce blood glucose spikes

Six years ago I did an experiment with taking periodic blood glucose  measurements after eating. It took hundreds of finger pricks.

Luckily, Dexcom now has a non-prescription, over-the-counter, continuous blood glucose monitor which provides readings every 5 minutes. I won't review all of the data because it basically confirmed what I discovered with my previous experiment.

Tuxedo Cake

The first surprise was on Memorial Day (May 26, 2025). We had my daughter and her family over. It was a relaxing, enjoyable day with swimming and ping-pong. At 12:45 PM, we had hamburgers, watermelon, etc. Then at 2:52 PM, we broke out the Tuxedo Cake from Costco. I ate a slice, then another, and then had a few more smaller pieces. I thought to myself, "This is really going to spike my blood sugar!"

Costco Tuxedo Cake

I went back to playing ping-pong with my grandson and then checked my levels later in the Stelo app. The green circle in the image marks the time when I ate the cake. My blood sugar never spiked (highest was 118 mg/dL an hour later). I figured it was being active (playing ping-pong) that kept it low. 

Blood Glucose After Eating Tuxedo Cake

Oatmeal

These next measurements were for times I ate oatmeal for breakfast. The only thing I add is raisins, roasted almonds, and sea salt. The captions describe the differences for three days.

Instant Oatmeal

Whole Oats, Walk after

Relaxed Eating (Whole Oats, no walk)

The second measurement I went on a walk just as it was spiking, bringing down my levels. The last measurement (June 5, 2025), I decided to actually take a break to focus on eating. I put on music from a relaxing playlist and I didn't do any work. 

I only discovered this relaxed eating the last few days that I had left on the sensor, but I applied the approach at every meal with noticeable reductions in blood glucose levels.

Nonviolent Eating

The way I think of it is as a hunter-gatherer out on the savanna. You're picking nuts and berries and eating as you go. You are very alert to any dangers, so you throw the food quickly in your mouth and munch it down quickly. You're telling your body "hey, I may need this to run away from a lion, so convert it to ready energy." This is "violent" eating, because you are in fear of violence while eating.

You bring some of the food back to your dwelling and the hunters just got back with a kill. You all sit, relaxed in the safety of your group and eat a relaxing meal. This is "nonviolent" eating, since you are not in fear of violence while eating. 

The goal is to create a mindful situation for your eating, where you aren't binging or rushing. You calm your mind and focus only on eating. You aren't thinking ahead to the next task or problem.

Stuck in Traffic: A Chance Encounter in the Second Dimension of Time

Yesterday I drove an hour away to my cousin's funeral. This post is about my drive home and its connection to my previous post on the Four Dimensions of Time.

The second dimension relates to the cumulative time spent with each person, object, or action on our main journey through the first dimension of time. The more time we spend, the deeper our relationship can become, the more adept we can be at a skill, and so on.

There were two accidents on my way home, which turned a one-hour drive into a three-hour drive. Luckily, I was in my new EV, which can be a very relaxing experience if you aren't in a rush to get somewhere. I had plenty of content on my phone to listen to. At first, I felt myself get angry at the people passing on the shoulder or sneaking into the merging lane to get ahead. But I reminded myself that I didn't need to hurry. 

At the first accident, I happened to glance over at a young woman sitting on the ground, leaning against the white cement barrier. She was being attended to by an emergency medical technician (EMT). I only saw her for a second or two. In the second dimension of time, she is insignificant.

Later that night, as I lay pondering the day, I thought about how much of an inconvenience the accident had been for her. For me, it made me slow down. For her, whatever she had planned for the day was interrupted. She may have a lasting impact from any injuries she might have sustained.

We never know how a brief encounter with a stranger may impact them. Not that we have any responsibility to make an impact. We play a bigger role in life than we can ever realize.

Putting the Patient before the Politics

 Imagine you have a loved one who has been diagnosed with cancer. The doctor's prognosis gives a 50/50 chance of survival from treatment. The thought of losing this person to cancer is most troubling. The doctor devises a treatment plan, and your loved one starts treatment. This is an uncertain time, so you provide as much support as you can.

Then you discover that the doctor has politics you vehemently disagree with. Unfortunately, you are too far along with the treatment plan to change doctors. Still, their politics! How can someone so smart be so dumb about politics? How can they have these opinions? Of course, the doctor doesn't share his politics during medical visits.

But the thought of this person succeeding drives you crazy. Wouldn't this just embolden them in their stupid political beliefs? You find yourself secretly hoping they will fail—that will teach them!

You take advantage of every misstep or setback during treatment. "You're not so smart after all, are you, Doctor?" you say with a snarky tone. Your dying loved one looks at you incredulously. "He needs to realize that he's not perfect! You know, he's not as smart as he thinks."   

Of course, this scenario is as ridiculous as this comedy sketch from College Humor.

If the video doesn't work for you, the scene shows scientists explaining to a general about an asteroid coming towards Earth for an extinction-level event. They are proposing launching missiles to stop it, when the general says, "Just Let The World Die."

But there is a sick patient. The United States.

Government Accountability Office reports $200 to $500 billion in fraud annually. That's from criminals in Russia, China, and elsewhere stealing from the U.S.

There's an ongoing obesity epidemic in the U.S.

The people in charge have only recently brought these problems, or "cancers," to our national attention and are trying to do something about them. But it seems the response is political. If we care about these problems, we should all rally together to address them.

The Missing Middle: Our Political Blind Spot

 I try to keep an open mind and critically examine information. When I hear arguments from the Right or Left, I find elements of truth in both. But reconciling the contradictions between them can be difficult. Then I was analyzing some data at work (unrelated) and came up with a way to piece both sides together. I call it "The Missing Middle."

In my experience, data can be overwhelming for many people, so to make this post accessible to more people, I'm going to keep it as simple and relevant as possible.

We are all familiar with the Bell Curve, which helps teachers assign grades in class. The problem with using it in education is that it identifies one side as good and the other side as bad. The general "Normal Distribution" curve used in science and medicine recognizes the middle as "normal" or acceptable, and the "tails" on either side as unacceptable. For example, blood pressure that's too high or too low is cause for concern.

I purposely created this example with "red" and "blue" to represent the Right and Left viewpoints, where I think most political discussions occur today. Just like blood pressure, it makes sense to raise alarms when either party drifts too far from the middle.

The problem is when either side treats every action of the opposing side as alarming. If a person is criticized for everything they do, they will stop listening to criticism.

The following are some current examples.

Immigration

Recently, the Right has made immigration an issue with threats to deport millions of immigrants. They criticize the previous administration for allowing millions to cross our borders and overwhelm our country. Over 260 alleged gang members were deported. Among those was a man who was mistakenly identified as a gang member. Critics argued that these deportees deserved "due process" - a fair hearing before removal. 

The Missing Middle

Of the 260 people, about 10-20 were convicted violent criminals (e.g. rape, murder). The government had been attempting to deport these people, but the cases were caught up in court. What's missing is a working immigration policy and more efficiency in providing "due process."

Government Excess

The Right has been attempting to rein in government excess, while the left points to critical programs that may be cut. I've heard the argument against D.O.G.E. that many government agencies already exist to do this work (Government Accountability Office (GAO), Office of Inspector General (OIG), Congressional Budget Office (CBO), etc.). 

The Missing Middle

While the current government auditing arms have already identified many areas for improvement, they aren't empowered to take action, and those empowered aren't required to listen to their counsel. It would be better if both sides figured out a way to leverage this missing middle.

Climate Change

The Left has been sounding the alarms for the consequences of climate change and trying to enact policies to reverse the increase in greenhouse gases. The Right mostly denies this and prioritizes human prosperity over planet health.

The Missing Middle

While humans have caused an increase in greenhouse gases, which has heated the planet, the planet has been warming up since the Little Ice Age (1300 to 1850 AD). So even if we could revert to conditions before the Industrial Age, the glaciers would still melt, and the seas would still rise. While some habitats are stressed by the changes, others thrive from increased CO2 and warmer temperatures.

More than 200 million people rely on the fresh water from the Indus River, which is glacier runoff. Scientists project a significant decrease in water by 2050. Without anthropogenic climate change, this devastation would only have been delayed.

The Right needs to acknowledge the coming changes and Left could be less alarmist. We should all work together to adapt to any unavoidable changes to our world and do our best to prevent what we can.

Conclusion

Focusing on the extremes of the normal distribution leads to polarization and unproductive discourse. It also distracts from much of the good that exists in the middle. We need to keep pointing out when either side strays too far, but we need to do it in the spirit of working together for the general good of the country. 

A Journey Through Four Dimensions of Time

This post is a journey through time to illustrate how one might self-reflect on the passage of time. We've all experienced "time dilation", where time seems to pass faster or slower than usual, but the following story illustrates extra dimensions of time.

Sequential Time - The First Dimension

I recently went hiking with my friend Jonathan and his son Isaac. They met me at my house and I offered to drive to the trailhead in my new car. Upon arrival, I led the way, having done the hike many times. I suggested we take a slight detour on a more scenic route. The 6-mile loop and 1,122 feet elevation gain led us across a winding dirt and rock trail. At a saddle point between two peaks, the view opened up to the valley below, rolling hills, and cities in the distance. We rested a few minutes for photos and to catch our breath. At the peak, we had a 360-degree breathtaking view. I ate mixed nuts while Jonathan and Isaac ate from their prepared lunches: a sandwich, dried fruit, and other snacks. We returned to my car and drove home. We had a nice time visiting on every leg of the journey.

Cumulative Time - The Second Dimension

In the sequential flow of time, we can circle back and spend more time with people, at places, or doing things. This is the second dimension of time: how much time we accumulate with a thing. 

I've known Jonathan for about five years, and we've spent about 100 hours together. We've had many conversations and experiences together.

Isaac recently finished school, and one of the purposes of this hike was to discuss career opportunities. I only met Isaac once before, and our conversation was brief.

I've made this hike 20 or 30 times before, while this was their first time. I was familiar with each section.

I was pleased to find the hike easy this time. My recent physical activity seems to have helped my conditioning.

Lesson:

Pay attention to the cumulative time you spend, and ensure that you spend enough time on what matters most to you.

Sub-Experience - The Third Dimension

Some complicated processes and activities are below our awareness and are only peripherally observed.

As we walked, our muscles demanded more energy, so our metabolism kicked in, and heart and breathing rates increased and intensified. As this happened, our bodies grew new capillaries, strengthened muscle fibers, and improved neuroplasticity.

Some of the dust we kicked up we breathed in with our nasal system filtering most of it. 

The plants at the side of the trail were invisibly extracting nutrients from the ground and using the sun for photosynthesis.

Our families and friends were back home living their lives. Strangers were going about their lives.

Lesson:

Be aware of how much happens outside of your awareness. Use subtle clues (like increased heart rate or faster breathing) to inform you.

Super-Experience - The Fourth Dimension

Some complicated processes and activities move so slowly that we don't observe any change.

This week, a 5.2-magnitude earthquake occurred nearby, giving us all a nice jolt for about 10-20 seconds. It caused an estimated 1 to 2 cm of displacement (0.4 to 0.8 inches). The mountain we hiked formed millions of years ago from volcanic and similar tectonic activity. All that we observed on our hike was a screenshot with giant boulders, rock outcroppings, and bedrock in dry streambeds. At the top of the peak, we looked out over rolling hills. I've always wished I could see a time-lapse video of the formation of mountains.

Lesson:

It's no surprise that many people consider spending time in nature a spiritual experience. We should recognize with awe the super-experiences around us: the sun, moon, stars, oceans, lakes, rivers, and mountains.

 

The Sweet Spot: Where Left and Right Can Rally Together

TL/DR

• A tennis racket has a "sweet spot," the best place to hit the ball.
• The racket also has a "dead zone" that results in poorly hit balls.
• Different types of governments are identified as either in the "sweet spot" or "dead zone". 
• Both U.S. parties are in the "sweet spot".
• Like a married couple who must work together for the greater good.
• Trump may be creeping away to the "dead zone", but we still have many institutions to check his power (not the main point of this post, but worth acknowledging).

The Metaphor

If you have ever played racquet sports (or Pickleball), you should be familiar with "the sweet spot": the area in the center of the hitting surface that results in a harmonious, controlled, powerful hit of the ball. 

You should also be familiar with the "Dead Zone," or area outside the sweet spot, which results in a jarring vibration and the ball going off into undesirable places.

Government Sweet Spot

What would be the sweet spot for governments?

• Human rights and dignity
• Freedom of speech and association
• Free and fair elections
• Checks and balances on power
• Opportunity to provide for oneself (the "pursuit of happiness").

Many forms of governments provide this today:

• Liberal Democracy (Canada, Germany, New Zealand, Sweden, Japan)
• Parliamentary Democracy (UK, Norway, Netherlands, India, Australia)
• Presidential Democracy (U.S., South Korea)
• Constitutional Monarchy (Denmark, Spain, Belgium, Thailand)
• Federal Republic (U.S., Switzerland, Germany, Mexico)
• Social Democracy (Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark)

You can find criticisms of these countries, but the people living there generally live well. 

Government Dead Zone

In the Dead Zone, there are no checks and balances; no meaningful elections; suppressed media and civil society; persecution of minorities and dissenters; and laws serve power, not justice.

Example forms of government:

• Totalitarianism
• The state seeks to control every aspect of public and private life
• Examples: North Korea
• Authoritarianism
• Power is held by a single ruler or a small elite, not constitutionally responsible to the public.
• Examples: Russia, Saudi Arabia, China
• Military Dictatorships
• The military controls the government, often through a coup.
• Examples: Myanmar, Egypt
• Theocracies
• Religious leaders or laws dominate governance
• Examples: Iran, Afghanistan
• Fascism
• Uses fear, force, and blind loyalty.
• Examples: Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Franco's Spain

Democrats and Republicans

What about the Left and Right in the United States? Both are constrained by our Constitution, which includes the Bill of Rights and checks and balances between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. Both support freedom. Both support free and fair elections.

Neither party is putting us at risk of becoming North Korea, Russia, Iran, or Nazi Germany. It may "feel" like there is a threat of bad things happening, but people have been warning about the dire consequences of the current government for decades. Yet somehow, the U.S. has remained in the sweet spot.

How can you tell if a country is in the sweet spot? More people try to get into it than try to leave it.

I appreciate anyone willing to enter public service. It's a hard job—a really hard job...a nearly impossible job. And we humans aren't as clever as we'd like to think we are. We constantly make mistakes. We build ridiculous weapons - and then we use them. We invade and intervene when we shouldn't. We don't do things when we should.

I think of Democrats and Republicans like a married couple. One spouse decides to discipline the kids a certain way. The other spouse thinks, "Oh, okay, we're doing it that way? I'm onboard." Then they figure out how to make it work. What a married couple should never do is:

• Criticize their partner for the exact same behavior that they do.
• Undermine anything their partner is trying to do in the spirit of helping the family.
• Scare the children with exaggerated criticism about their partner.
• Behave recklessly (out of control spending or other behavior).

What happens when partners don't work together? 

Trump

To be more intellectually honest, I had to add this section. I researched how Trump may or may not be fascist. Here are the findings:

✅ Fascist-Like Traits Seen in Trumpism:

• Cult of personality – Loyalty to the leader above party, law, or institutions.

• Attacks on democratic institutions – Undermining trust in elections, courts, and the press (there are examples of him both complying and not complying with court decisions)

• Use of propaganda – Repetition of false claims as political tools (e.g. the "stolen election")

• Scapegoating minorities and immigrants – A hallmark of fascist movements

• Violent or authoritarian rhetoric – Praising dictators, calling for retribution against opponents

• Incitement or tolerance of political violence – Most notably, the events of January 6

---

❌ Why Some Say It's Not Technically Fascism:

• No one-party state – The U.S. still has competitive elections and multiple parties  (e.g. Senator Cory Booker wasn't thrown in jail for his record 24-hour filibuster. Try that in any of the Dead Zone countries). 

• Independent institutions remain – Courts, press, and some law enforcement have pushed back.

• No centralized control of the economy or media

• Fascism is a fully realized system, not just a style of politics

An Honest Look At Tariffs

Let's try examining tariffs in an attempt to decouple the idea from the current political polarization. I'll use a similar approach to examining minimum wage in my post Intellectual Vision.

Tariffs are a tax on goods or services from another country. A tariff schedule includes a detailed list of products along with tariff rates (% of value and/or a specific amount) and country of origin. 

Raising Tariffs

If a country raises tariffs, the importer (not exporter) pays the fees. The importer can pay the fees out of profits or pass the costs onto customers. The customers may just agree to pay the extra costs or may decided not to buy the product. If they don't buy the product, they may be able to find another equivalent alternative. If they can find another alternative, it will most likely cost more than or not be the ideal fit of the import. If the alternative product is produced domestically, then these businesses can benefit from the additional demand and potentially increase production. Since this demand is essentially incentivized by the tariffs, the business is not experiencing competituve pressure to innovate or cut costs, potentially resulting in higher costs than necessary.

If the customers can't find an equivalent alternative, they will have to find a product that doesn't meet the same needs or may have to make due without the product. 

The fees paid by the importer are collected by the government. These fees can be used by the government for productive manipulation of the economy, for example, by lowering taxes on consumers, offsetting the increased costs. These fees can also be used for non-productive applications, such as paying for excess government spending or special programs. In this case, the customer of the tariffed product ends up subsidizing the government program.

With complicated global supply chains, raising tariffs can end up hurting domestic producers that rely on foreign goods to make their products. Raising tariffs can have hidden costs such as creating an extra burden on businesses to adapt to changing rules.

Lowering Tariffs

After WWII, the U.S. lowered tariffs to promote global trade and economic recovery to help with post-war reconstruction.

If tariffs are lowered, a greater variety and quality of products can be found by consumers. Prices typically drop and global competition forces all suppliers to become more efficient. Foreign products may harm domestic suppliers if they can compete with cheaper foreign imports (due to cheaper labor or less regulation). Some domestic producers may benefit if they can by cheaper foreign parts for their products. If companies become dependent on foreign parts, this could result in supply chain disruptions, for example during a pandemic or war. If a domestic product is considered nationally strategic (e.g. defense, semiconductors), then lowering tariffs can put the national interests at risk.

With lower tariffs, a foreign government may reciprocate with lower tariffs. If they do, this may open new foreign markets for domestic producers. 

An example of this is NAFTA (The North American Free Trade Agreement), where lower tariffs between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada resulted in generally lower prices on imports from the other countries, however many small Mexican corn farmers were put out of business as they couldn't compete with the large U.S. subsidized corn farms.

These last two examples bring up the issue of unfair trade practices, where a government can subsidize a product, then flood a foreign market with cheaper goods to destroy local industries. This can result in foreign monopolies taking over. This is the reasoning for high tariffs on many Chinese products.

Foreign governments may instead keep their tariffs high, creating an unfair trade balance. 

Additional Thoughts

Intellectual Humility - I am not an expert on the intracies of tariffs.

Intellectual Curiousity - I am curious enough to investigate the nuances of tariffs.

Intellectual Honesty - I am open to the truth about tariffs, even when it makes me uncomfortable.

Intellectual Access - I recommend going to objective sources of information and avoid politically motivated sources.

Intellectual Prudence - I have attempted to critically evaluate the pros and cons of tariffs and avoid sensationalism (though I may have oversimplified this whole idea of tariffs with this post).

Intellectual Tolerance - I haven't taken political or nation sides, recognizing the consequences on all parties.

Avoid Persuasion, Seek Understanding - I have tried to create a shared pool of understanding and not persuade you to take one position or the other.

Promote Empathy and Compassion - I recognize that their are winners in losers in the current system and in currently proposed changes, whether or not either are optimal. 

Reference:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tariffs_in_the_United_States