If an employee works just 2 hours a week, they are still technically on the payroll. What if we treated the internal mechanisms that handle food toxins like super part time employees just to keep em around? Dr Ayres says that we shouldn't fear bacteria because diversity can promote a strengthened immunity. Might this apply to poor food choices? What about the 3 horseman? Wheat, Linoleic Acid, and Sugar (primarily fructose).
Every now and then I will eat something on purpose that completely doesn't qualify, like pizza, regular pasta, chips and salsa, or maybe some bread and butter if out at a restaurant, or maybe just order whatever meal I want at a restaurant, regardless of the healthiness factor.
Sounds pretty odd, but usually I feel just fine after doing this, and sometimes even better than when I eat the good stuff. And I know we cannot go off of 'feeling' as the measuring stick. I remember reading a comment by one hacker that asked something like "why yould you want to eat a certain food item every now and then just so that you will not develop an allergy to that particular item due to abstinence". In other words, if you know it's bad for you, then developing an allergy to it shouldn't be a problem. But I am very reluctant with that idea. I would estimate that I am at least 90%, maybe more, so I don't mind a few crazy meals here and there and I think the freedom to be able to eat whatever whenever is a great thing in the context of an otherwise purposefully healthy lifestyle.
Aside from eating/drinking sugary items (which I don't think hold any particular value for the body), is it possible that occasionally eating some of the items that we all know don't qualify could be good overall due to some kind of hormetic bodily response that strengthens immunity? I'm not talking about 'cheating' for psychological sanity. I'm talking about actual physiological reactions to ingesting some foods we normally consider poor choices.