During the last week of November, I stumbled upon both an old and a new diet, though I did not know it at the time. I only found out about it during the last week of December, and thus it took me about a month to discover it.
Let me warn you that it is a painful diet. In comparison, the ketogenic (keto) diet has been shown to be the optimal diet for excellent health with regular fitness, the part that I do not adhere to because my brain is working awake 20/24 every day and thus I already get too much exercise. It seems that my brain also exercises for my body. They have an arrangement. I only have to eat well for them, and I do, and I never cheat. It seems that I do not need to cheat because my brain and my body will not let me. They also understand what is at stake. I also have a neurotic back which does not lend itself to much fitness.
The old/new diet I discovered involves love. Not regular harmless love, but passionate intense love exemplified by my love for my muse. Not an imaginary muse but a real woman with wit, words, and all other womanly parts. Love for such a woman strains both the brain and the heart with all the seemingly extra blood flowing incessantly through them and especially the heart, also affecting the rest of the chest including the lungs. Luckily, for the lungs there is peppermint extract which clears it in less than five minutes. For the heart, cannabis can help but only for a short time. The heart is the part where most of the pain is felt.
Amorous and passionate love can take its toll on the body and on some of the will in the brain. The body is constantly in a state of euphoria and some functions lose out. Eating, for example, since one eats less and even forgets to eat. It may seem harmful, but on the contrary, one loses weight and eats less which is always beneficial for general health, that is as long as one eats correctly à la keto. In most other diets, this lack of food is quickly unsustainable and replaced by harmful junk food and many other toxic carbs.
Extreme love has always been an easy diet since it starts by itself. You do not have to initiate it. It just hits you like a blue Moon. Take the case of M. I am his freaking narrator. He loves his muse so much that this new diet has placed itself on top of his usual keto one, creating an even healthier environment since good food is still consumed but in even lesser quantities. M could live on coffee, keto bars, and important supplements and still maintain a good health as long as his diet reverts to normal at some point in the near future. A body on keto can manage such a diet for at least a month and perhaps up to three.
The love diet is real, but again, one cannot just adopt it. One has to fall deeply in love. M did and he will not look back. He could not even imagine a life without his muse any longer. Even as far as she is, she affects him immensely and he is head over heels in love with her as mentioned in most if not all previous stories and poems about his muse. And his falling weight is one way to prove it, namely that love works in mysterious ways.
About the Creator
Patrick M. Ohana
A medical writer who reads and writes fiction and some nonfiction, although the latter may appear at times like the former. Most of my pieces (over 2,200) are or will be available on Shakespeare's Shoes.
Keep reading
More stories from Patrick M. Ohana and writers in Longevity and other communities.
The Truth About Cheese
Did you say cheese? I could have titled the story “The Truth About Dairy: Don’t say anything” but dairy is a loaded word, so I clinched a compromise and cheesed it, and you, of course, and even set out to frustrate and exasperate by cheesing you off. Those hunks of cheese in the picture are only there to illustrate what can happen to a joint, not the one that is smoked but the one that becomes crooked, deformed, grotesque, inflamed, misshapen, painful, unsightly. You may get the picture now. Every joint is attacked, but the pictures are almost exclusively focused on the fingers; all of them, even the thumbs. However, like most diseases, not everyone can discern this outcome. Yet osteoarthritis, the most common form of arthritis, affects millions of people worldwide.
By Patrick M. Ohana5 years ago in Longevity
Day 4 of Quitting
If this is how sobriety feels, maybe it’s better to go through life a little buzzed… this, along with other hits like, I want to kill myself, I wish I was dead, and I’m going to throw myself off a bridge have been the only thoughts on rotation these past few days. I promise myself that if, in a month, I still feel like this (‘this’ meaning despondent, full of rage, and simultaneously numb) I can go back to smoking. Until mid-February though? Nicotine is off the table.
By sleepy drafts8 days ago in Longevity
The Return of the Aircraft Carrier Truman Is Being Seen as a Snub to the Navy in the War of the Future
The return of the U.S. aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman to active deployment has sparked debate far beyond naval circles. While some see it as a show of enduring American naval power, others interpret the move as a symbolic snub—particularly in the context of how modern warfare is rapidly evolving. In an era dominated by drones, cyber warfare, hypersonic missiles, and artificial intelligence, the decision to once again lean heavily on a traditional aircraft carrier has raised uncomfortable questions about whether the Navy is preparing for the wars of tomorrow or clinging to the strategies of yesterday. A Floating Symbol of 20th-Century Power For decades, aircraft carriers have been the ultimate symbol of U.S. military dominance. These massive floating airbases project power thousands of miles from American shores and allow the U.S. to strike almost anywhere in the world. The Truman, like other Nimitz-class carriers, represents this legacy—housing nearly 5,000 sailors, dozens of fighter jets, and unmatched logistical capability. However, critics argue that what once made carriers indispensable now makes them vulnerable. Their sheer size, cost, and visibility turn them into high-value targets in a battlefield increasingly defined by precision strikes and long-range weapons. The “War of the Future” Looks Very Different Modern conflict is no longer limited to sea, land, and air. Cyber attacks can cripple infrastructure without a single shot fired. Drones can swarm targets at a fraction of the cost of traditional aircraft. Hypersonic missiles can reach targets faster than current defenses can respond. In this context, sending a massive carrier strike group into contested waters can appear less like a strategic necessity and more like a risky gamble. Critics argue that the return of the Truman reflects an outdated mindset—one that prioritizes visible force projection over adaptability and technological evolution. A Snub to Naval Innovation? Many analysts and serving officers believe the Navy’s future lies in distributed lethality—smaller, more agile platforms networked together, harder to detect and cheaper to replace. Unmanned surface vessels, autonomous submarines, and land-based missile systems are increasingly viewed as the backbone of next-generation naval warfare. Against this backdrop, recommitting to a traditional carrier is seen by some as sidelining innovation. It sends a message that, despite years of discussion about transformation, the Navy still defaults to familiar tools when tensions rise. This perception has led to frustration among those advocating for faster modernization. They argue that resources devoted to maintaining and protecting carriers like the Truman could instead accelerate investment in emerging technologies that are more relevant to future conflicts. The Strategic Signal to Allies and Rivals Supporters of the decision counter that the Truman’s return is not about nostalgia—it’s about deterrence. Aircraft carriers remain powerful political tools. Their presence reassures allies, signals commitment, and demonstrates readiness in a way few other assets can. Yet even here, the message is mixed. To technologically advanced rivals, the deployment may signal predictability rather than strength. Adversaries have spent years developing strategies specifically designed to neutralize carriers, including anti-ship ballistic missiles and advanced surveillance systems. Cost Versus Capability The financial reality cannot be ignored. A single carrier strike group costs billions of dollars to build, maintain, and operate. In contrast, drone fleets and missile systems can be produced and deployed at a much lower cost, often with greater strategic flexibility. Critics argue that continuing to rely on carriers drains resources from areas where the Navy needs to grow most urgently. In a future conflict defined by speed, dispersion, and digital dominance, the cost-benefit equation of aircraft carriers looks increasingly questionable. Why the Carrier Still Matters—For Now Despite the criticism, aircraft carriers are not obsolete—yet. They remain unmatched in their ability to sustain prolonged air operations without relying on foreign bases. In regions where access is limited or politically sensitive, carriers still provide options no other platform can. The real issue, many experts say, is not the existence of carriers like the Truman, but over-reliance on them. Using them as one component of a broader, more flexible strategy may still make sense. Treating them as the centerpiece of future war planning may not. A Turning Point for Naval Strategy The return of the USS Harry S. Truman highlights a deeper tension within modern military thinking. It represents a crossroads between tradition and transformation, between proven power and emerging threats. Whether history views this moment as a wise assertion of strength or a missed opportunity for innovation will depend on what comes next. If the Navy pairs legacy platforms with bold technological change, the carrier’s return may be justified. If not, it risks becoming a powerful symbol—not of dominance, but of reluctance to adapt in a rapidly changing world.
By Fiazahmedbrohi 3 days ago in Longevity
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.