Budgeting, and wider thoughts on intermittent fasting.
Having experienced sparse periods of HC+IF confirms a resounding yes. As stressed earlier in Part 3 -the need to accessorise each and every meal - with sauces, condiments, desserts to substantiate - quickly becomes an obsession for flavour. Yet doing no favour - on the wallet.
I've collected enough years of self-metabolic experiment to conclude that hunger management in Keto+IF is more manageable.
Nevertheless, I impose no binary subscription to "nutrition". If ketogenic intervention is not applicable to you, then HC+IF might be worthy to consider. Irrespective ketogenic or non ketogenic. You must find your own combination of principles that fits your contextual needs.
To date, $25 - $28 are my absolute frugal limits. Below sample assumes that (very few) things still yet remains in the pantry, the fridge and the freezer.
As you can see and as previously stressed - $25-$30 per week for indefinite periods - are simply not sustainable. Because of the severely limited carbohydrate refeed opportunities. Worse - condiment privileges are far and few. Hence, these higher spending bracket once every two or three weeks serves an adequately replenishing purpose. Also allowing the weekly dessert whey cheesecakes during Keto/IF days.
Now then, how long do these supplies actually last?
There are other things I'd wish to elaborate. But it is not practical to fit them all into this one singular post.
Besides, I have much more important matters to discuss. Something we rarely hear inbetween realm/s of nutrition and sociology.
Before you ask - no - I am not a Muslim. I am certainly brought up very conservatively. But now uninstitutionalised as one would never expect considering my ethnicity. What I implore is a question that begs to be reconciled amongst ourselves.
That is - "What if" Intermittent Fasting were an "open liberty"? Expected yet not enforced. Encouraged yet unimposed. Would society then be a different place?
I wholeheartedly think so.
Peter Joseph stated way back in 2011's Moving Forward, one reason that keeps our current economics system going - is consumption. There is however one mirror image to this word "consumption" I cannot let go of in my head for however number of years. Somehow - the word "ownership" - remains somewhere or somehow, connected.
This led me to believe that by gaining ownership- one also gains a permit - to consume. "Ownership" today is glamourised quantitatively as amassing enough haven of goods. All for displaying purchasing power. Such pursuit resonates amongst a company's EBITDA graphs. Stocks performance charts. Balance sheets, profits and loss statements. Or that of an entire country's GDP.
But underneath these graphs and charts - represents real biological beings. Succumbing to these feel-good allures of "standards". If "Growth" and "Progress" bear different "standards" to the eyes of a peasant, against that of a politician or a plutocrat.... Who then, do you think has a higher seat, display or fervour of power to dictate how or what growth and progress "means"?
My "answer", be however utopianist it may seem - is that of our own capable and willing - nutritional selves.
All economic systems and means of distributions demand a harmonious "Order". Qualified by quantified validations. After all, Governances and/or Institutions loves putting entire biological citizens as source of blame. For any "lack of progress", "lack of growth", "lack of GDP" or "lack of contributory output" back to the economy. "Growth" or "Economy" for what? New F16 fighter jets in place of cancer research funding?
All economic systems throughout history rely on collectivist ideologies to coerce, guide and display what is binarily right and wrong. Establishments and institutions stems from this very purpose.
What is correct "enough" for them then, should therefore be (in their interpretation) a display of Equality. For all the rest underneath the ladder. Can they truly condense biological chaos into binarily-ordered subservience? I think not.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37N0aFmO19o
Coercively also - "growth" both glamourises and perpetuates hedonism (watch 3:45 onwards). Hedonism necessitates even more desire to gain permission for more consumption. Advertising perpetuates this through an ironic contradiction. The more such a race is instilled upon individuals at accruing these haven of securities - increasingly also becomes susceptible at instilling themselves more in-securities.
"Materialism" - I'd still wager do nonetheless serve as means of a tangibly objective-reward. But their meaningfulness is biologically restrictive to just one (1) pragmatic use and/or context, at a time.
Do you justify the biological needs of multiple Lamborghinis parked in just one garage? For one space? For one driver? At any given time?
Likewise "investing" (a polite derivative for "owning") a dozen homes where one can only sleep in one home, at a time. Or a dozen 50" plasma display screens where you can only watch one at a time. Or ten mobile phones in your drawer all claiming to have the same "smartphone" functionality. Yet your hands can only biologically use them one - at a time.
You may indeed be thrown from all directions as multiple contexts. But only you can address and dissolve yourself in one of them contexts, one (1) at a time. Within this biological state, an authentic self re-evaluation of needs versus wants. I shall elaborate in three points.
Let us examine the concept of "control" throughout history. "Control" assumes ownership / coordination of mass nutritional, physiological and sociological - agencies, authorities and authenticities. All economic paradigms instil "Control". No matter how "Social" or "violent", at least in theory. Communism certainly works in theory. Capitalism works in theory. Hell, even Martial Law works in theory.
Damagingly however, "in theory" also assumes concreteness and finality. Thus expecting infinite, unchanged subscription of the same "correctness".
Can any one of these "economic" systems truly dictate and contain all that of subjective and chaotic variables of "correctness"? Harmoniously? Without conflicts or differences? Across not just one (1) human being, but infinitely - all the next unborn's in billions? I think not.
Everything bears individualised context. "Control" therefore, only in the best of my uneducated imploration - must rightfully be reserved to the individual citizen. The biology of the "self". The question of who dictates and owns the meaning of consumption thus - should not be a democratic question. Nor a democratic decision. It is an individual question, with a capably self-pragmatic decision.
To remind what I wrote in my book- the word "Fasting" - is an interpretive symbiosis of how constructively you interpret - "Time". Agency, authority and authenticity of all "meanings" - should rightfully then be decisively - an Individual decision. As accordingly to his or her's interpretation - of "time".
When you eat food to a full regularity, each and every single meal and day of your lifetime - you are currently enjoying in the secluded haven of security. You are in the realm of "wants". Now, when you are not consuming anything - you are in the realm of "needs". You will not understand much of this. Until you alone experience long enough periods of structural scarcities. Beyond consent.
When you are in the realm of "needs" it is almost guaranteed - you also already are in the state of resilience.
Hence, there is no other way at reconciling this present state of resilience. Intermittent Fasting facilitates synergy between liabilities and biological abilities ~ by self-authentication.
"Eating food" today - has become synonymous to tribal divisions of "either you are with us" or "against ALL of us".
Picture yourself a day of living - where by no "race", or of "believers" or "non believers" aka. "Religion" - are all democratically expected civil criteria. Only you and your own qualitative objective criteria to pursue day to day, is all that matters.
Fasting - is a whollistic, biological state allowing you to do just that. Fulfilling meritocracies without diversions of competing coercions for "correctness". From Lipid Hypothesis to the moral allures of Soylent Green. Or doctors' undying insistence that "morning breakfast is the most important meal of the day". All this is nothing but frivolous pursuit at maintaining Coercions Hierarchy. As if the thought of some sort of "grand prize" imaginable awaiting them, is to me - absurdly hilarious.
It is human nature that laws are meant to be broken. For the benefit of the nutritional self. Intermittent Fasting can and shall - be broken in many ways. By only you, without external coercions.
This Annual food for thoughts for 2018 are as diverse as I could have ever written. Spanning across thoughts on psychology, fitness, physiology and sociology. I've long envisaged to form for my viewers - an in-refutable insight over what it is like to self-nurture under prolonged austerity. So far I have survived, even despite my lingering uncertainties yet to come.
My book and this "Project" are both nearing four years old of lonesome existence. They may yet raise a question amongst curious first time readers. "All this project, this blog, this article - sounds full of institutional resentments. Why should it exists?" Certainly not based on "spiritual" codex. But of physiological, nutritional, molecular whollistical compartmentalisation of "being". All from within. Hence, "This Is™" - what I implore - as the true meaning of Humility.
One way of exerting this lateral re-definition I feel is to add a social-economics layer of discussion. Frugality. Structural limitations. I am not a "saint" nor a messenger claiming I carry some panacea against all the World's Problems. All I offer is simply is a contextual imploration, nutritionally. For amongst the damaged or confused out there - to solemnly reconcile what enough means. Through questioning both their liabilities and their own abilities at establishing self-resilience, privacy, and authenticity. All against today's prevailingly institutionalised, Correctness Hierarchy.
Rain or shine - may Nutritional Humility be your nurturing path. Thank you, 2018.
--