Hasta La Gadget!

How can you get a roomful of health experts agitated? Walk around and casually mention “I think the Paleo diet is the best” or “veganism is the answer to the world’s health and environmental concerns” and see what happens. Few topics other than the current presidential campaign can create the same buzz in a short time. Everyone has an opinion, just read the new headline, or has a new diet trend. Since 1985 and the introduction of the Paleolithic Diet by Dr. Boyd Eaton, this primal eating pattern has grown to be the darling of many journalists, athletes and health advocates. Generally the Paleo diet recommends that one consume lean meats, produce, fish, nuts and seeds and ample “healthy fats” while avoiding processed foods, dairy, sugars, grains, and legumes. The appeal of the Paleo diet is puzzling as it is one of the least scientifically supported eating patterns for health and ranks near the bottom of diets for heart health by an often quoted health source. Indeed, Dr. Eaton recently spoke on the subject and headlines for recommending plant based nutrition over the Paleo diet due to pressing environmental concerns from relying on animal food production.

This week the Paleo diet was given extraordinary headlines with claims that it could “save you from a heart attack” and “dramatically cut blockages in your arteries.”. So can we celebrate the end of heart disease with a bison limb in hand? I believe that is premature. Indeed, the research sparking celebration was presented at a meeting and has not been published in any form. It appears that researches in Houston fed 8 healthy volunteers a Western diet rich in processed foods, saturated fats and sugars for 8 weeks and then substituted a Paleo diet devoid of processed foods for 8 weeks. The measurement was a marker of immune response called IL-10, one that has no routine role in cardiac assessment or care.

Compared to the standard Amercian diet (SAD), the cleaner Paleo diet increased the marker IL-10 by 35% in 8 weeks, suggesting lower levels of inflammation. One of the researchers commented that “The study’s findings add to the possibility that short-term dietary changes from a traditional Western pattern of eating to foods promoted in the Paleo diet may improve health– or, at the very least, the diet does not have negative health implications.”

Wow. It is long way from a headline claiming that you can save yourself form a heart attack to the reality that the diet may simply not be harmful. Yet the apparent lust to eat meat and relate it to our primal heritage, despite overwhelming science on the risks of such dietary patterns to the environment and human health , creates competition for headlines for research that is small, unpublished, and without consideration of actual cardiac or environmental health measures. This stands in contrast to plant based dietary patterns which not only have been shown to reverse atherosclerotic plaques in humans and lower cardiac event rates, but are also approved by Medicare for reimbursement with dozens of centers across the United States.

So while the buzz words Paleo and vegan might agitate a room of nutrition experts into a heated discussion, at least for now, there is little to say to support the Paleo diet and heart health. Almost everything is better than the SAD. Indeed, recent words of caution about the Paleo diet as a treatment for diabetes have just been contributed to the medical literature for the same reasons. Paleo diets cannot be claimed as a means of saving heart attacks or unblocking arteries. That is obvious media spin seeking headlines for sales. What we have to do is to make plant based nutrition, the dietary pattern with enormous data for prevention and reversal of heart disease and diabetes, sexy like the Paleo diet. Any ideas? Rename it the SED (sexual enhancing diet)?

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Donald Trump paid a $2,500 IRS fine this year for making a $25,000 gift from his charity to support the re-election of Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi three years ago, David Fahrenthold of The Washington Post reports.

In September 2013, three days before Trump made his donation to a political action committee supporting Bondi, the Orlando Sentinel reported that her office was considering joining the state of New York in a lawsuit against Trump University, which sold real estate seminars and was not, as the name suggested, an accredited academic institution. Ultimately, Bondi did not join New York’s case.

As a nonprofit, Trump’s charity cannot make political gifts. The Post reported earlier this year that the Trump Foundation listed the gift as going to a Kansas group with a similar name in IRS filings. That, Fahrenthold points out, meant that “the prohibited gift was, in effect, replaced with an innocent-sounding but nonexistent donation.”

Trump also donated $35,000 to support former Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott’s campaign for governor in 2013. As attorney general, Abbott decided in 2010 not to pursue a false advertising case against Trump U.

Jeffrey McConney, senior vice president at the Trump Organization, told the Post this week that the inaccurate record of a donation to the Kansas group “was just an honest mistake… It wasn’t done intentionally to hide a political donation, it was just an error.”

Trump said he donated to support Bondi’s re-election because she “is a fabulous representative of the people — Florida is lucky to have her.” Bondi has endorsed Trump for president and spoke at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland this summer.

Internal company documents show that Trump University employees were instructed to emotionally manipulate people into buying classes. According to court testimony, Trump U. employees pressured customers to max out their credit cards. Trump’s lawyers and campaign have denied the allegations.

McConney did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this story.

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Like what you see below? Sign up here for HuffPost Hill and receive it in your inbox every evening!

“Oh, there’s softening,” Donald Trump said of his immigration position, though he shouldn’t be embarrassed, as it happens to lots of guys’ policy platforms. Republicans are baffled by Trump’s immigration speech, and it takes A LOT to baffle Republicans ― these are the people who nominated Donald Trump. And Senate Democrats want to to clean house ahead of a possible Hillary Clinton administration, passing a long-term budget and taking all the dirty clothes and dishes and stuffing them in the bedroom where guests won’t see them. This is HUFFPOST HILL for Thursday, September 1st, 2016:

HISPANIC STAFFERS RESIGNING TRUMP CAMPAIGN AFTER IMMIGRATION SPEECH – Not all the taco bowls in all the world… Elise Foley: “Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is quickly losing some of his Hispanic advisers and supporters after a hardline anti-undocumented immigrant speech on Wednesday. Jacob Monty, an immigration lawyer based in Houston, withdrew his support, and at least two other members of Trump’s National Hispanic Advisory Council have followed suit. Monty said Trump’s speech made him question whether the businessman even wants to win…Ramiro Pena, a Texas pastor and another member of the board, emailed campaign and Republican officials after the speech to say he thought it had killed Trump’s election chances, Politico reported. ‘I will pray over the next couple of days but it is difficult to [imagine] how I can continue to associate with the Trump campaign,’ he wrote, according to Politico. “I owe my national audience an explanation.’” [HuffPost]

TRUMP STILL MAKING NO SENSE ON IMMIGRATION – Attempts to make him seem presidential are about as successful as making Bernie Lomax dance. Elise Foley: “Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump offered the most detailed account yet of his immigration policy on Wednesday night. That didn’t stop him from trying to muddy the waters on Thursday about his positions. Appearing on the Laura Ingraham radio show Thursday morning, he went back to using the kind of language that caused speculation that he was open to legal status for undocumented immigrants. ‘Where’s the softening?’ Ingraham asked him, ‘Oh, there’s softening,’ he said, reiterating that he would carry out his policies ‘in a very humane way’ and deport gang members, drug dealers and criminals first, ‘We’ve got a lot of people in this country that you can’t have, and those people we’ll get out,’ Trump said. ‘And then we’re going to make a decision at a later date once everything is stabilized. I think you’re going to see there’s really quite a bit of softening.’” [HuffPost]

GOP PERPLEXED BY TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION SPEECH – McKay Coppins: “Trump’s much-hyped speech in Phoenix came after two roller-coaster weeks in which the nominee flailed and flip-flopped on the immigration issue, and suggested he was “softening” his stance. This brief flirtation with moderation led many to speculate that Trump was courting Hispanic voters — a theory that was buoyed by the candidate’s last-minute meeting with the Mexican president Wednesday. But interviews with a wide range of Republicans — from unabashed Trump supporters to #NeverTrump bitter-enders — suggested few in the party are still clinging to that hope. Ari Fleischer, the former White House press secretary and a reluctant Trump supporter, praised the nominee’s visit to Mexico, which he said made Trump ‘appear more presidential’ and could help win over ‘college-educated voters, a group with whom he’s greatly underperforming.’ But as for courting Latinos, Fleischer said, ‘I’m afraid it’s too late. He likely has already made too many Hispanics think he doesn’t want them in the country. They’re not listening to his next sentence. He’s already lost too much support that his words now won’t make any meaningful difference.’” [BuzzFeed]

Like HuffPost Hill? Then pre-order Eliot’s book, The Beltway Bible: A Totally Serious A-Z Guide To Our No-Good, Corrupt, Incompetent, Terrible, Depressing, and Sometimes Hilarious Government

TRUMP’S FLORIDA OPERATION STILL FLEDGLING – Jennifer Jacobs and Kevin Cirilli: “How many of the 24 field offices that Team Trump said in early August they’d open this month in Florida are now up and running? None yet, according to Republican officials in the state. The Republican presidential nominee has one of his campaign’s weakest ground games in his most crucial swing state, several political insiders and donors told Bloomberg Politics. Now, some Republicans are worried it’s getting too late to recover, with vote-by-mail ballots going out starting in late September and Democrats pledging a big push in early voting. Karen Giorno, a senior Trump adviser who oversees Florida operations, said the promised 24 offices are coming. ‘We are going to be opening them shortly. The leases are being signed,’ she said.” [Bloomberg]

CLINTON USED TAXPAYER DOLLARS FOR CLINTON FOUNDATION – “Including servers” might win this year’s award for journalistic side eye. Ken Vogel: “Bill Clinton’s staff used a decades-old federal government program, originally created to keep former presidents out of the poorhouse, to subsidize his family’s foundation and an associated business, and to support his wife’s private email server, a POLITICO investigation has found. Taxpayer cash was used to buy IT equipment — including servers — housed at the Clinton Foundation, and also to supplement the pay and benefits of several aides now at the center of the email and cash-for-access scandals dogging Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. This investigation, which is based on records obtained from the General Services Administration through the Freedom of Information Act, does not reveal anything illegal. But it does offer fresh evidence of how the Clintons blurred the line between their nonprofit foundation, Hillary Clinton’s State Department, and the business dealings of Bill Clinton and the couple’s aides.” [Politico]

SENATE DEMS WANT TO CLEAR LEGISLATIVE TO-DO LIST– Alexander Bolton: “Senate Democrats on Thursday ruled out the possibility that they would agree to a long-term spending measure, saying they will not let talks spill over into the new president’s term. ‘Everyone should be alerted today that we’re not going to be doing a long-term CR,’ Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) told reporters on a conference call, referring to a continuing resolution to fund government beyond the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. ‘We’re not doing anything into next year and every Republican should be aware of that right now,’ said Reid, who is retiring at the end of the Congress. Reid’s comments reflect Democratic confidence that Hillary Clinton will be elected president. Clinton is leading Republican Donald Trump in polls, and Democrats want to give her a clean start as president so that she does not have to negotiate funding for the federal government in her first 100 days in office.” [The Hill]

GRASSLEY REITERATES OPPOSITION TO GARLAND HEARING – Sam Levine: “During a question-and-answer session at the Sioux City Rotary Club on Monday, Grassley said he was personally opposed to having hearings if Clinton won the election, but added that he wouldn’t get in the way if a majority of senators disagreed with him. The comment marked a shift for Grassley, who said unequivocally in May that the next president should fill the Supreme Court seat left empty by Justice Antonin Scalia and refused to have a hearing for President Barack Obama’s nominee. On Wednesday, Grassley ― who is seeking re-election ― said he had been misunderstood. ‘Everybody who heard me say that I said got the wrong opinion. People ask me to speculate, maybe I shouldn’t be speculating, and that’s all it was,’ he told reporters in Dubuque, Iowa. ‘My position is exactly the same as it was when I wrote the letter signed by 10 other members of the judiciary committee to other senators that it’s advised by the principle of the 30-year understanding, that if you have a vacancy in the last year, the people are going to have a voice,’ he continued. ‘So my position is, it’s going to be decided by whoever is elected president.’” [HuffPost]

THIS IS NO WAY TO TREAT A SUPERVOL – Grandma deserves better than this. Jeremy Fugleberg: “Online volunteers seeking to help Donald Trump by making phone calls might be signing up for more than they bargained for. To sign up on Trump’s website, potential volunteers must agree to a 2,271-word non-disclosure agreement in which they also promise they won’t compete against or say anything bad about Trump, his company, his family members or products – now and forever. The agreement is a required part of the sign-up process for Trump Red Dialer, an online call system that connects volunteers for the Republican presidential candidate with potential voters. Earlier this year, volunteers for Trump in New York had to sign non-disclosure agreements in person before making phone calls at Trump Tower. But the website requirement is the first indication that online volunteers must also sign the form, even if they’ll never meet a Trump family member, attend a Trump rally, meet a campaign staffer in person or step inside a Trump campaign office.” [Cincinnati Enquirer]

HOUSE REPUBLICANS TO INVESTIGATE CLIMATE INVESTIGATORS – But who will investigate the investigation investigators? Who, we ask you?!? Kate Sheppard: “House Science Committee Chair Lamar Smith (R-Texas) wants to exert congressional authority over state attorneys general who are trying to investigate ExxonMobil’s climate record. The committee announced plans to hold an oversight hearing on Sept. 14 to ‘examine Congress’ investigative authority as it relates to the committee’s oversight of the impact of investigations undertaken by the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts at the behest of several environmental organizations.’ The hearing will feature three conservative legal scholars,according to The Hill. The hearing title, ‘Affirming Congress’ Constitutional Oversight Responsibilities: Subpoena Authority and Recourse for Failure to Comply with Lawfully Issued Subpoenas,’ is a mouthful. But it basically seeks to lend credence to the committee’s efforts to investigate the state attorneys general who are investigating ExxonMobil.” [HuffPost] BECAUSE YOU’VE READ THIS FAR – Here’s a bunny on vacation.

THE HOTTEST OF TAKES – “From our respective positions of rabbi-counselor and former Playboy model and actress, we have often warned about pornography’s corrosive effects on a man’s soul and on his ability to function as husband and, by extension, as father. This is a public hazard of unprecedented seriousness given how freely available, anonymously accessible and easily disseminated pornography is nowadays.” [WSJ]

COMFORT FOOD

– The driver of this postal truck works a lot harder than you.

– Every Britney Spears song, ranked.

– Expensive thing goes boom.

TWITTERAMA

@nickconfessore: If anyone can get away with not lining out which independent expenditures are going in which states, it’s God.

@fansince09:

Bike cop: freeze scumbag

Me: nah, you’re wearing shorts.

@pattymo: If Penn State really wants to honor Joe Paterno’s memory they should not tell anyone about the ceremony, then admit to it in several decades

Got something to add? Send tips/quotes/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to Eliot Nelson (eliot@huffingtonpost.com) or Arthur Delaney (arthur@huffingtonpost.com).

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

A Boston sports anchor tried to be a good sport earlier this week when he was holding an alligator.

WBZ-TV’s Steve Burton was taping an interview with reptile expert Michael Ralbovsky that is scheduled to air on Sunday.

Part of the segment required Burton to hold a small alligator. He was game, until he almost became game.

The gator became skittish and started trying to get away when it saw a crocodile also on stage, CBS Boston reported. If that’s the case, it’s unclear why the experts had them both out on stage together. Ralbovksy did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Huffingtin Post

It’s tough to tell who was more freaked out ― the alligator or Burton. 

Burton didn’t mince words when he posted a short clip on Twitter:

Burton managed to hold on to the gator until Ralbovsky could take over, but he couldn’t wait to say “see you later.”

“That thing was so strong. I wasn’t fine!” Burton told CBS Boston.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

The year was 2004, and I was a newly transitioned trans woman, integrating my identity with the world and working out all the needed nuances and social cues. As I built a new life, one of the first things I wanted to do was join a church — particularly one that had a good music ministry. I thought of one near me, where the music program would be especially appealing. I also knew the place was conservative and my gender transition might give them trouble, but I naively figured that with some “don’t ask don’t tell,” I would be fine.

Little did I know I was in for one of my life’s most exhilarating times — only to be followed two years later by a soul-crushing disaster (read on). As painful as this whiplash was, it taught me a lot — enough so that it was almost worth what I had to go through. I want to share the lessons I’ve learned. I could simply list those and stop, but at the risk of writing a longer piece, I’ll finish my story first. Besides the context it provides, its positive side motivates me to try new things; maybe it will for others as well. And, of course, it’s all completely true, unbelievable as it seems even to me at times.

So I went to the music director and offered my services as a pianist. To my surprise, he responded by saying that the choir needed members, so could I sing there? I felt trepidation — and also supreme excitement. Me, singing in a choir? I had never done that before, and “singing” for me had never been more than croaking out a few primitive grunts. But every so often, I’m up for a challenge, and this was one of those times. At my first practice, we stood by a piano and tested my voice — which, conveniently enough, fell right in alto range. With that, eagerly I went to join the other women in the choir’s alto section. I sang, cautiously, the first Sunday, and then with increasing confidence for the Sundays after that. I was excited by my new ability. In the succeeding weeks, I hired a vocal coach and worked further at it. Our choir did weekly services, and concerts for special events. This was a big privilege — and lots of fun. The music was wonderful — ranging from spirituals to classical to modern.

Hiding one’s identity gets old after a while, and so after a year — at which point I was getting compliments from my music director and others — I thought perhaps I could share my gender history with a minister who I felt I could trust. Big mistake — but I didn’t know that until it was too late. My minister reacted with disbelief at the news, as if I had claimed I was an alien emerging from a spaceship. What are you doing here, his eyes seemed to flash at me. It was clear that he was struggling with how to react. I was a valued choir member, but my trans history didn’t fit his world view. We continued talking to each other for months, but it was never the same. I could feel the tension. Probably at that point, I should have taken the hint and moved on. But I had felt generally accepted by then, and I hated to give up the music ministry.

One fateful day, my cell phone buzzed ominously, and the call came. It was my “friend” the minister: Get out, and do not come back next Sunday in the choir. Your presence at the church is causing a lot of trouble. You can’t be serious — I love my choir and have been here more than two years. Yes, I am serious, step aside NOW. But we have a classical music performance three days from now, and they need alto voices, and I’ve worked hard to get ready. I don’t care, step aside, I’ll tell the music director that you won’t be there. We’re doing this to ensure the purity of the church. Wait, this seems wrong, what about my side of things? Silence.

And with that, my choir career screeched to a halt. Though I felt awful, I resolved to be more careful in the future. I gingerly probed the wreckage with a few questions. I learned that the minister had shared my trans history with senior leadership, and in response they ordered him to expel me. So in fairness, it wasn’t entirely his fault. But that didn’t stop me from feeling misery. Maybe this was needless — it was just a choir, after all, and it should have been easy to just take it as another hit from life and move on. But what bothered me — a new and naïve trans woman — was that an organization that was supposed to do good could instead boldly inflict hurt.

So as I recall all this — years later — what have I learned? Quite a lot.

Ultimately, churches are not primarily religious or spiritual organizations. They are businesses and will do whatever it takes to survive as such. Churches, like any business, do focus on the bottom line. Many will probably adhere to their stated religious principles when convenient, but in a conflict between that and the bottom line, the latter may win discouragingly often. In my case, the church had preached compassion from the pulpit countless times, but they probably worried that if my trans status became widely known, congregational donors — especially conservative ones — would object, and withhold money. Hence my choir expulsion.

Churches often do not process information or reason logically. This is especially true regarding trans issues. Some of it is ignorance and some is outright hostility. Humaneness is tossed aside, and irrational thought and outdated beliefs are clung to like security blankets. Regarding “the purity of the church” that motivated my minister’s action, are they investigating the personal lives of all the other choir members too? They’re not? So how then can they guarantee so-called “purity” without a full-scale witch hunt? It’s totally illogical, but sadly, it’s common behavior.

Radical religious conservatism is very bad. Really. If you wouldn’t mix toxins with your favorite drink, then don’t mix a trans or gay identity with the kind of radicalism that I faced. The result will be about as predictable — and as devastating. The exterior of radicalism can seem pleasant, but the interior is corrosive. Like a snarling angry beast, it can’t be reasoned with, befriended or tamed. It must be avoided entirely — or countered with legal, humane activism through the right channels — as many are already doing.

Churches often neglect their responsibility to help others in need and make the world a kinder place. I am not a biblical scholar, and my purpose here is not to argue theology anyway — though many churches do seem to ignore the historical and language translation contexts for the biblical verses that they use to demean gay and trans people. Instead, I argue on purely a humanistic basis. It seems to me that churches need to use their considerable power and influence to help those who are different or hurting in some way, and to leave the world a better place than they found it. They benefit from considerable largesse — tax exemptions, donations, and so on — and owe something back in return. Of course many churches do a lot of good. But mine could have taken the same effort needed to shake me from my choir seat, and used it instead to help someone in need. Isn’t that a better use of time and resources?

The friends we make in churches will often not stick with us or support us if something goes wrong. Only one church friend reached out to me to find out what happened and to offer support. My other “friends” vanished like snowballs in July. My choir director turned his back on me too. I felt truly alone. I think the reason stems from the posturing, superficiality, and “towing the line” needed to adhere to a church of this nature. This does not lend itself easily to the deep friendships where people really care for each other.

My story has a sort of happy ending — I found other choirs eventually, and had many happy opportunities to sing again, in more receptive environments. But in a way, the damage was done. It is hard to recover the depth of trust and goodwill that I once had. Trans individuals often have the same desire for a spiritual life as other people, and there certainly are accepting churches out there, some of which would originally have been a better choice for me. But sadly, I must still advise heeding the lessons I learned, and generally being cautious with religious organizations. Otherwise, the Choir Without Compassion that I experienced might earn itself an encore performance.

—

This post is part of HuffPost’s Journey Beyond the Binary blog series, an editorial effort to bring diverse trans and gender non-conforming voices to the HuffPost Blog during and after Pride month. As the LGBTQIA community celebrates great strides forward this June, it’s important to acknowledge the struggles still pertinent to trans and gender variant members of the community. Please email any pitches to beyondbinary@huffingtonpost.com

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.