Gluten cannot be digested by human stomach

Disclaimer: I am no doctor. This is not dietary advice. This is not a treatment schedule.

    Modern foods are made to appease and fool the human processing system. So, instead of using a tried and tested eating habits which has trickled down over humanities existence, the food shelves of these days are a far cry from the shelves of the yester years. The human digestive system is being fooled as the brain is being fooled. It is what the facebooks and googles are doing for the brain. Give more of what it wants. Every human brain is unique. 

     There will be preferences. But, then for the overall development of the human being there should be variety. Instead, these companies feed on the nature's most important rule, the rule of least resistance. Feed the least resistance path. So, what do you gain. Well, you get the attention of the brain. If you get the attention of the brain, you have the individual hook, line and sinker. The foods are going the same way. It is well understood that opioids are addicting more people than the addiction which the governments across the world are worried of. Just because opioids come in nice packages, with good printing and excellent colors, dont mean that they are doing any good. But designing food to do the same as these is criminal. Food is quintessential part of the life of a living being.

    It was shocking for me to know that we are not growing wheat as we used to in the good old days. ie, we have tampered with the "natural" variety of wheat which our previous generations have eaten. Instead we have edited out and added information in genome sequence which will yield wheat having more of the properties multinational business houses want. Not what humans want. It is very difficult to fathom the profit making prospects of these big businesses, or for that matter smaller businesses. By harming the health of the consumer, when profits are made, then it is a vicious cycle. The thing is these decisions are not made by one single business.

    The treatment business and the problem origination businesses are hand in hand. The treatment business can always come out against the food producing businesses highlighting the issues with such vociferous volume that the businesses will have to rethink their strategies. Alas, that is not happening. Both are running their own businesses. Both know they are feeding of each other and both in turn feed of the individuals. The most shocking truth about wheat is the gluten. The wheat originally grown by our past generations did not have this element in large quantities as of now. The genetic blue print of wheat is changed and edited by multinationals to include more gluten in the produce, in turn making "soft" "chewy" bread. Why did they do so? Why didnt the consumers worry about questioning this practice. Well, one answer is in the farmer producing it. He is now not worried about the storage of it. The multinationals have found huge markets for all his produce. They are resistant to insects. They can be stored for a longer time. 

    So, if there are any issues arising out of this gene editing, the treatment industry will take care of it and will survive. This methodology of doing business is the same as how cancer cells do business. These cells dont produce energy the "correct" and "efficient" way. They do it the wrong way. They suck in lot of inputs and produce very little amount of energy. This makes them sick in turn. As an extension many will die. But these dead cells stay there. They disrupt already wrongly made up blood cells. There it is you have the perfect example of a tumor. So, what does the present medical profession do about it? Well, they dont know. They keep trying all sorts of modern gimmickry. They try to go the way, the genetically modified food is produced. They think that they can start manipulating the cancer cells to start working like healthy cells by trying to edit the genetic material of cells which make up the cancer cells.

But, the human genome is not a joke. People dont know the repercussion of editing one portion of the gene and replacing it with a different chemical formula. The same applies to gene editing of wheat. Gene editing might have given us wheat which has more gluten. But, we dont know how this is going to affect in the "synergistic" point of view of the entire gene. Now, getting back to gluten, it is clear that the human stomach cannot digest gluten. So, it is passed on to the intestines. There starts the complications. If the complications are so clear, why should we continue eating it. I dont see any reason whatsoever. This should be a prime reason to reduce this protein. Let the chapatis crumble. Let the bread be a little hard. Let the bread by a different color than white. 

 

     The gluten free group is a bigger fad. They take up the same wheat produced with the maximum possible gluten in them and chemically try to remove the gluten in it. Now, nobody is telling exactly what all nutrients get removed by carrying out this process of removal of gluten. Like we exactly dont  know the total effects of editing the wheat gene to produce more gluton, we exactly dont know what this de-glutenising process results in. So, suit yourself

    What is this obsession of human beings with white. The obsession is that white is associated with purity. With this, you can pass the most impure substance on earth, until it is white. Why are we not eating food as we were eating just 20 - 30 years ago. It is not late. The human race has to make a decision. All farmers dont farm with good intentions in their mind. Majority of the farmers have gotten used to just putting the seeds and seeing them grow. They just want the yield. It is like earth is a machine. No, sir, it is not. So, how do we make the farmers understand this. Well, start supporting farmers who are doing the right thing. Farmers are very susceptible to success stories. Make a success story of one farmer with ethical practices, you will see that others will follow.

    I for one dont think that stopping eating wheat, is going to do any major issues with the human body. Consult your dietician and spell out your wish and definitely there will be a positive answer. What about ones who cannot afford a dietician. What about people who cannot afford anything other than wheat. This is a very tricky situation. The problem here is the person cannot afford the treatment for the issues in his food. He will consume what he can afford, not what is healthier for him. So, whom do you turn in these situations. God, or the government which does the job of God on its behalf. Ensure that the food is produced in the most traditional manner. Ensure that research happens to store food in its most pristine form instead of converting it to some non-nonsensical chemical formula. It is not that the human should be modified to eat this modified food. Ensure that the food is at its pristine level. Forget about making it look pleasing. Whoever wants to have such food, can create a demand and many producers will answer. Let us keep the poor people away from this since they dont have options. As for people with options, it is left to them to choose what is better for them.

Buffers, Windows and tabs in vim/neovim

There are three concepts when it comes to viewing/editing files in vim.

Buffer:

When you open a file in vim the contents are loaded to RAM. This portion of the ram which has the contents of the file is the buffer. Now, this loading happens behind the scenes. It is no good if the file contents are in the buffer. We have to view it. That is what visual editors like vim are for. There are ways and means of editing files without having the contents of the file displayed on the screen. For that you can combine the power of ed and then the later front ends like grep and sed. So, now we are still at a stage where vim has loaded the file into memory and named that block of memory with a name taken from the file name itself. This buffer name can be used in moving around buffers when we have multiple buffers.

When you create an empty buffer, vim allocates a certain amount of the RAM for the buffer. If you write this content to a file then the contents are saved. If you delete the buffer without saving it then all your content created in this buffer is out in the ether.

For playing with buffers vim provides commands starting with :buffer. It follows the object, action on the object philosophy of the other vim commands.

When you shift from one buffer to another using the buffer next command or similar, vim prompts you to save the present buffer to file. This can be overridden with settings in the vim config file.

Window:

This is the area where the contents of the buffer is displayed to the user. After loading the file into the buffer, vim then reads the contents of the buffer and displays it on the screen for the user's viewing pleasure. A full screen of content, which was a big deal in the good old days. To display the file vim creates a window. The file contents are displayed within this window. Okay, you have been editing a single file for many days. Now, you want to refer another file. So you now go ahead and open it up with :e file2

You are in for a shocker, the screen is now showing only the contents of file2. As we have already clarified, a window is the place where vim displays the contents of the file. In the present case we have only one window. So, when you requested vim to open a second file, vim agreed and showed the contents on the solitary windows. To show that vim had to clear the screen and load up the buffer which was the contents read in from file2.

The situation here is we are having one window and two buffers, as such vim can display only one buffer while the other is still loaded and available with vim read to be displayed when asked for. You can ask to bring the buffer contents of file1 to the fore by using appropriate :buffer command. But, instead a more elegant way of viewing both files side by side would be to create another window. This will reduce the screen estate available for each windows. if you open two windows then both share 50% of the screen and so forth.

Ctrl-W v    opens a new window and splits the screen into half vertically. Now you can open file1 in the left window and file2 in the right window. Now there are two buffers and two windows displaying the respective buffer. What if I open the same file in both the windows, well all your editing activities in one window will reflect in the second window also. try it. Because you are editing the same buffer.

To end the discussion about windows, when you close a window, the buffer is not offloaded from memory. It is still there within vim. You have to delete the buffer using the respective command to instruct vim to offload the buffer from memory.

Tab:

Tabs are the masters of vim windows. Every tab has access to the full screen. Withing tabs you create windows as explained above. In the above example there was only one tab which is started by default. Every tab can have multiple windows. When you close a tab you close all the windows in that tab. tabs are good when you want all your files to use the complete screen of your monitor. Whenever a new tab is created it is started with exactly one window. If you want to view file1 and file2 using the full screen estate of your monitor and move between them then, the :tab command is the way to go. The disadvantage is that you cant see the file side by side.

When you close a tab, all the windows within that tab are closed. But all the buffers you were viewing in that tab within their respective windows are still in memory. You have to delete the buffers to remove them from memory.

 Of course, when you quit vim, all the buffers are closed and any changes which you have done to the buffers, will be queried for saving.

In summary, we see that there is no one single strategy which works for and individual. And for every individual, the strategy depends on the task/s at hand. So, dont be very harsh on your preferences. You will be losing out on the most important aspect of vim, ie, "situational editing"