Pondering a 365-Day Challenge for 2021

Are you thinking about doing a 365-day challenge for 2021?

I’m already thinking about doing another one.

I still have 4 weeks left on my 2020 daily blogging challenge, which actually started on December 24, 2019. It feels like an easy coast to the finish line after blogging for 345 days in a row.

Doing something every day for a year can be transformational, even if you stop after that year, because it creates an empowering reference experience. You gain a memory of achievement that you’ll have for the rest of your life.

Knowing that you can do something every day for a year helps you nuke any future excuses about not feeling motivated or capable. It permanently changes your self-image. It will make you ask: If I can do this, what else could I do?

You also get the benefits and results of whatever you achieved with that habit. This year I’ve published hundreds of new articles and some new videos. I also created and published the 65-lesson Stature course and wrote a rough first draft of a new novel (55K words). It’s been a great year creatively as well as a great year income-wise. Timing-wise it was somehow perfect as well.

The daily blogging challenge was always meant to be for just one year, so I’m not going to continue with everyday posting in 2021. I’m looking forward to a year of less frequent blogging in 2021.

The Early Game

This is a good time to start pondering whether you’ll do a 365-day challenge for 2021, especially if you need time to work on the early game of preparation. It can take a while for the mind to warm up to the idea. Sometimes it’s a slow build to get to the point of commitment.

I often feel that these challenges choose me rather than the other way around. I catch myself pondering a crazy idea, and it keeps bouncing around in my mind week after week. First I feel inclined to reject it as too extreme or burdensome. But then it slowly seduces me. The many benefits eventually tempt me to go for it, especially when I consider how such a challenge will still be paying dividends 20+ years later.

You win such challenges before Day 1. If you have any doubt that you’ll successfully complete the full year before Day 1 starts (other than not being able to account for surprise risks like unexpected health problems), you haven’t done the early game well enough.

It is possible to fail at such a challenge, but if you’re still harboring significant self-doubt at the start, then you’ve already lost the challenge in your mind. You win these challenges mentally before you win them physically.

A 365-day challenge is a commitment test. Can you follow through on some specific behavior every day for a year? Knowing that you can commit and follow through on a daily activity for a full year is powerful. It grants you access to bigger and more interesting goals that require consistent investment over a long stretch. It helps you move beyond the limitations of instant gratification.

You can always quit along the way. Maybe the challenge won’t create the benefits you expected, and you may find it wise to reassess your commitment. But even in such cases, you may decide that it’s best to press on and finish. It’s a special achievement to complete the full year without missing a single day, even if it doesn’t go as planned.

It’s predictable that some days you will think about quitting. So you can decide in advance how you’ll handle those days when they occur. How will you get yourself to continue even when you don’t feel like continuing? How will you access the will to keep going?

Some days this year I didn’t feel like blogging. That was no surprise. I could predict in advance that I wouldn’t always motivated to follow through. Surely there will be some difficult days over an entire year. But I also knew that I could still create and publish on those days. I could frame those days as invitations to lean deeper into trust, to listen more closely to inspiration, to train up my self-discipline, to focus on helping people, etc. I have plenty of inner resources to leverage when the going gets tough.

That’s one of the key benefits of a 365-day challenge. It deepens your connection to your best inner resources. It makes you a stronger and more capable human being.

The 2021 Challenge I’m Pondering

For 2021 I’m considering eating raw for the whole year.

I’ve eaten fully raw for as much 6 months in a row before but never a whole year straight. The last time I was really into raw foods as a lifestyle was back in 2008-2009, so it’s been more than a decade.

Since then I’ve done some 30-day raw food challenges now and then, along with various other health-related challenges, including a 17-day and a 40-day water fast and lots of detoxing experiments.

In fact, if not for all the health-related experimentation over so many years, I think this year of daily blogging would have been a lot harder. It’s easier to produce an abundance of creative work when the mind feels calm, clear, and focused. Reducing the toxic load on our bodies pays huge mental dividends.

The benefits of eating raw are stellar, even compared to my baseline of eating fully vegan for almost 24 years (mostly whole foods). So I’m curious what it would be like to experience that for a whole year.

At the very least, I intend to go raw for January. But I’m thinking of a bigger step up to a full year. That seems more intimidating but also more exciting.

I think 2021 would also be a good year to do this. I don’t expect to do much, if any, traveling for the first 6 months of the year. It’s relatively easy for me to eat raw at home, but it’s harder to maintain while traveling (depending on where I go).

I have a lot of experience with this diet already, so I’m sure I could do it physically. It really is a different mode of living though, not just diet-wise, so I’m pondering whether I really want to invest in that lifestyle for a year.

What I’m curious about it what it would be like to establish eat raw as my new baseline. I think it would be interesting to establish that as my default way of eating and then to experiment around it to see what effect certain tweaks and changes would have, such as:

  • Including occasional steamed water-rich veggies like zucchini or broccoli
  • Including occasional cooked starches like potatoes, sweet potatoes, or squash
  • Including occasional roasted nuts like pistachios
  • Olive and/or coconut oil vs no oil
  • Different % of calories from fat (10%, 20%, 30%, 40%)
  • Smoothies with added powders vs no powders (maca, carob, acai, maqui berry, etc)
  • Taking detox supplements vs none
  • Cacao vs no cacao
  • Caffeinated tea vs herbal tea vs none
  • Juicing daily vs not juicing (16-32 oz)
  • Including green smoothies vs eating only solid foods
  • Olives vs no olives
  • Avocado vs no avocado
  • Salt vs no salt
  • Fermented foods like tamari or sauerkraut vs no fermented foods
  • Dehydrated foods vs no dehydrated foods

When I try to do these kinds of experiments on a cooked vegan diet, I usually don’t notice any differences. The baseline is too complex and obscures such subtle changes. I have to make much bigger changes to notice a meaningful difference.

So I’m considering this as a self-study experiment. I’d love to learn more about how my body reacts to certain foods. But to do the kind of experimentation I’d really like, I need a more sensitive baseline.

I might also weave in a juice feast along the way for 30, 60, or 90 days. This means having only fresh juice (no food or smoothies) but still consuming plenty of calories. I did a 30-day juice feast in 2008, and it was a rough experience, but I loved the mental and emotional gains after I was done. I felt a bit unprepared for that experience last time, but now I have a better understanding of what it’s really like. It was actually harder than water fasting.

I’m still incubating this idea, so it may change form within the next few weeks. This includes exploring the why for doing it versus not doing it. There are a lot of angles to eating raw, so if I do this as a one-year challenge, I’ll want to give myself some flexibility in how I define it. Since I’ve already eaten raw for an extended period before, I’m less interested in doing this for discipline reasons, and I’m more interested in long-term self-understanding and health benefits. So if I do this one, I’ll want to frame it as a dynamic and adaptive experience. I expect that this kind of experiment could take on a life of its own after a few months.

I do feel like raw foods are calling to me once again though. I’m starting to lose interest in cooked foods, even as I continue to eat them this month. The energy signature of raw foods is feeling more aligned.

If you start feeling tempted by the idea of doing a one-year challenge, let the idea incubate for a while. You don’t have to commit this early. Let it roll around in your mind first. Give it a chance to seduce you. See if you start noticing synchronicities about it. Does it feel like the challenge is choosing you?

Share Button

Covid-19: ‘Do not resuscitate’ decisions complaints up

These orders may have been used inappropriately when care services were under extreme pressure, the care watchdog says.

Share Button

Covid-19 vaccine: First jabs ‘could cut 99% of deaths’ – Jonathan Van-Tam

It is key to deploy the vaccine “as fast” as possible, England’s deputy chief medical officer says.

Share Button

Covid-19: Shoppers return to stores under England’s new tier system

Non-essential shops, gyms and hairdressers can open their doors as a national lockdown ends.

Share Button

Covid-19: Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine judged safe for use in UK

The UK is the first country to approve the Pfizer vaccine – with 800,000 doses due to arrive soon.

Share Button

The tree of cortical cell types describes the diversity of neurons in the brain

The tree of life describes the evolution of life and seeks to define the relationships between species. Likewise, the tree of cell types aims to organize cells in the brain into groups and describe their relationships to each other.

Scientists have long pondered just what the brain’s tree of cell types looks like. Now, an international collaboration led by Dr. Andreas Tolias from Baylor College of Medicine, Dr. Philipp Berens from the University of Tübingen in Germany and Dr. Rickard Sandberg from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, has published an article in Nature that provides one of the most detailed and complete characterizations of the diversity of neural types in the brain so far.

Uncovering the shape of the tree of cortical cell types with Patch-seq

Neuroscientists mostly use three fundamental features to describe neurons: their anatomy, or how they look under a microscope; their physiology, or how they respond when stimulated; and, more recently, the genes they express, which are known as their transcriptome.

For this study, the research team used an experimentally challenging technique that they developed several years ago, called Patch-seq. This technique allowed them to collect a large multimodal database including genetic, anatomical and physiological information from single cells in the mouse motor cortex.

“Gathering all these three fundamental features from the same set of neurons was the key that enabled us to get a much deeper understanding of how neurons in the motor cortex are related to each other and a clearer view of how the tree of cell types looks like,” said co-first author Dr. Federico Scala, postdoctoral associate in Tolias lab at Baylor.

Dr. Dmitry Kobak, also co-first author and a research scientist in Berens lab, described that while the broad genetic families of neurons had distinct anatomical and physiological properties, within each family the neurons exhibited extensive anatomical and physiological diversity. Importantly, all the three basic neuronal characteristics (anatomy, physiology and transcriptome) were correlated, which enabled the team to find interesting links between them.

“Our data supports the view that the tree of cortical cell types may look more like a banana tree with few big leaves rather than an olive tree with many small ones. This view provides a simpler model to describe the diversity of neurons we find in the brain. We believe that this simpler view will lead to a more principled understanding of why we have so many cell types in the brain to begin with and what they are used for,” said Tolias, Brown Foundation Endowed Chair of Neuroscience and director of the Center for Neuroscience and Artificial Intelligence at Baylor.

In this metaphor, neurons follow a hierarchy consisting of distinct, non-overlapping branches at the level of families, the large leaves of the banana tree. Within each family, neurons show continuous changes in their genetic, anatomical and physiological features, and all three features within a family are correlated. In parallel, work published simultaneously in Cell, scientists from the Allen Institute of Brain Science in Seattle obtained very similar results from mouse visual cortex underscoring that this view of cell types may be a general building principle of brain circuits.

Story Source:

Materials provided by Baylor College of Medicine. Original written by Graciela Gutierrez. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Ozone breaks down THC deposited on surfaces from thirdhand cannabis smoke

Second- and thirdhand tobacco smoke have received lots of attention, but much less is known about the compounds deposited on surfaces from cannabis smoke. Now, researchers reporting in ACS’ Environmental Science & Technology have discovered that ozone — a component of outdoor and indoor air — can react with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive component of cannabis, on glass or cotton surfaces to produce new compounds, which they characterized for the first time.

Smoking emits reactive chemicals that remain in the air (so-called secondhand smoke) or deposit onto surfaces, including walls, windows, clothing and upholstery (thirdhand smoke). Unlike the secondhand variety, thirdhand smoke lingers long after a person stops smoking. Nicotine is semi-volatile and reacts with other chemicals on surfaces, producing new compounds that, if volatile, can also become airborne. Because cannabis smoke is chemically distinct from tobacco smoke, Aaron Wylie and Jonathan Abbatt wanted to characterize the compounds formed when THC, by itself or in cannabis smoke, on surfaces reacts with ozone in the air.

The researchers coated glass and cotton cloth, to simulate windows and clothing, with a THC solution. Then, they exposed the surfaces to concentrations of ozone that could exist in indoor air. In their analysis, they found that over time, the amount of THC on glass and cotton decreased, while the quantities of three THC oxidation products increased. In other experiments, the team used a smoking machine to deposit cannabis smoke onto cotton. Upon exposure to ozone, the same three compounds formed at roughly the same rate as observed for the THC-coated cloth. Because of the low volatility of THC and its oxidation products, the compounds are unlikely to be emitted to the air where they could be inhaled in as large amounts as nicotine, the researchers say. They say that somebody could still be exposed to THC and its derivatives, whose health effects are unknown, if they, for example, lick their fingers after touching a surface contaminated by cannabis smoke.

The authors acknowledge funding from the Chemistry of Indoor Environments program at the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

Story Source:

Materials provided by American Chemical Society. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Scientists reverse age-related vision loss, eye damage from glaucoma in mice

Harvard Medical School scientists have successfully restored vision in mice by turning back the clock on aged eye cells in the retina to recapture youthful gene function.

The team’s work, described Dec. 2 in Nature, represents the first demonstration that it may be possible to safely reprogram complex tissues, such as the nerve cells of the eye, to an earlier age.

In addition to resetting the cells’ aging clock, the researchers successfully reversed vision loss in animals with a condition mimicking human glaucoma, a leading cause of blindness around the world.

The achievement represents the first successful attempt to reverse glaucoma-induced vision loss, rather than merely stem its progression, the team said. If replicated through further studies, the approach could pave the way for therapies to promote tissue repair across various organs and reverse aging and age-related diseases in humans.

“Our study demonstrates that it’s possible to safely reverse the age of complex tissues such as the retina and restore its youthful biological function,” said senior author David Sinclair, professor of genetics in the Blavatnik Institute at Harvard Medical School, co-director of the Paul F. Glenn Center for Biology of Aging Research at HMS and an expert on aging.

Sinclair and colleagues caution that the findings remain to be replicated in further studies, including in different animal models, before any human experiments. Nonetheless, they add, the results offer a proof of concept and a pathway to designing treatments for a range of age-related human diseases.

“If affirmed through further studies, these findings could be transformative for the care of age-related vision diseases like glaucoma and to the fields of biology and medical therapeutics for disease at large,” Sinclair said.

For their work, the team used an adeno-associated virus (AAV) as a vehicle to deliver into the retinas of mice three youth-restoring genes — Oct4, Sox2 and Klf4 — that are normally switched on during embryonic development. The three genes, together with a fourth one, which was not used in this work, are collectively known as Yamanaka factors.

The treatment had multiple beneficial effects on the eye. First, it promoted nerve regeneration following optic-nerve injury in mice with damaged optic nerves. Second, it reversed vision loss in animals with a condition mimicking human glaucoma. And third, it reversed vision loss in aging animals without glaucoma.

The team’s approach is based on a new theory about why we age. Most cells in the body contain the same DNA molecules but have widely diverse functions. To achieve this degree of specialization, these cells must read only genes specific to their type. This regulatory function is the purview of the epigenome, a system of turning genes on and off in specific patterns without altering the basic underlying DNA sequence of the gene.

This theory postulates that changes to the epigenome over time cause cells to read the wrong genes and malfunction — giving rise to diseases of aging. One of the most important changes to the epigenome is DNA methylation, a process by which methyl groups are tacked onto DNA. Patterns of DNA methylation are laid down during embryonic development to produce the various cell types. Over time, youthful patterns of DNA methylation are lost, and genes inside cells that should be switched on get turned off and vice versa, resulting in impaired cellular function. Some of these DNA methylation changes are predictable and have been used to determine the biologic age of a cell or tissue.

Yet, whether DNA methylation drives age-related changes inside cells has remained unclear. In the current study, the researchers hypothesized that if DNA methylation does, indeed, control aging, then erasing some of its footprints might reverse the age of cells inside living organisms and restore them to their earlier, more youthful state.

Past work had achieved this feat in cells grown in laboratory dishes but fell short of demonstrating the effect in living organisms.

The new findings demonstrate that the approach could be used in animals as well.

Overcoming an important hurdle

Lead study author, Yuancheng Lu, research fellow in genetics at HMS and a former doctoral student in Sinclair’s lab, developed a gene therapy that could safely reverse the age of cells in a living animal.

Lu’s work builds on the Nobel Prize winning discovery of Shinya Yamanaka, who identified the four transcription factors, Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, c-Myc, that could erase epigenetics markers on cells and return these cells to their primitive embryonic state from which they can develop into any other type of cell.

Subsequent studies, however, showed two important setbacks. First, when used in adult mice, the four Yamanaka factors could also induce tumor growth, rendering the approach unsafe. Second, the factors could reset the cellular state to the most primitive cell state, thus completely erasing a cell’s identity.

Lu and colleagues circumvented these hurdles by slightly modifying the approach. They dropped the gene c-Myc and delivered only the remaining three Yamanaka genes, Oct4, Sox2 and Klf4. The modified approach successfully reversed cellular aging without fueling tumor growth or losing their identity.

Gene therapy applied to optic nerve regeneration

In the current study, the researchers targeted cells in the central nervous system because it is the first part of body affected by aging. After birth, the ability of the central nervous system to regenerate declines rapidly.

To test whether the regenerative capacity of young animals could be imparted to adult mice, the researchers delivered the modified three-gene combination via an AAV into retinal ganglion cells of adult mice with optic nerve injury.

For the work, Lu and Sinclair partnered with Zhigang He, HMS professor of neurology and of ophthalmology at Boston Children’s Hospital, who studies optic nerve and spinal cord neuro-regeneration.

The treatment resulted in a two-fold increase in the number of surviving retinal ganglion cells after the injury and a five-fold increase in nerve regrowth.

“At the beginning of this project, many of our colleagues said our approach would fail or would be too dangerous to ever be used,” said Lu. “Our results suggest this method is safe and could potentially revolutionize the treatment of the eye and many other organs affected by aging.”

Reversal of glaucoma and age-related vision loss

Following the encouraging findings in mice with optic nerve injuries, the team partnered with colleagues at Schepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear Bruce Ksander, HMS associate professor of ophthalmology, and Meredith Gregory-Ksander, HMS assistant professor of ophthalmology. They planned two sets of experiments: one to test whether the three-gene cocktail could restore vision loss due to glaucoma and another to see whether the approach could reverse vision loss stemming from normal aging.

In a mouse model of glaucoma, the treatment led to increased nerve cell electrical activity and a notable increase in visual acuity, as measured by the animals’ ability to see moving vertical lines on a screen. Remarkably, it did so after the glaucoma-induced vision loss had already occurred.

“Regaining visual function after the injury occurred has rarely been demonstrated by scientists,” Ksander said. “This new approach, which successfully reverses multiple causes of vision loss in mice without the need for a retinal transplant, represents a new treatment modality in regenerative medicine.”

The treatment worked similarly well in elderly, 12-month-old mice with diminishing vision due to normal aging. Following treatment of the elderly mice, the gene expression patterns and electrical signals of the optic nerve cells were similar to young mice, and vision was restored. When the researchers analyzed molecular changes in treated cells, they found reversed patterns of DNA methylation — an observation suggesting that DNA methylation is not a mere marker or a bystander in the aging process, but rather an active agent driving it.

“What this tells us is the clock doesn’t just represent time — it is time,” said Sinclair. “If you wind the hands of the clock back, time also goes backward.”

The researchers said that if their findings are confirmed in further animal work, they could initiate clinical trials within two years to test the efficacy of the approach in people with glaucoma. Thus far, the findings are encouraging, researchers said. In the current study, a one-year, whole-body treatment of mice with the three-gene approach showed no negative side effects.

Share Button

Your Exploration Baseline

When you explore something new, you’re exploring relative to a previous baseline.

When you explore a new diet, your baseline is your previous way of eating.

When you explore a new travel-rich lifestyle, your baseline is your previous stay-at-home lifestyle.

When you explore a new relationship and you weren’t in a relationship right before, your baseline is being single.

Your default baseline is your normal, usual, routine, or expected experience in that particular area of life. Your baseline is your status quo.

But does that have to be your baseline?

If exploration is relative to your baseline, what would happen if you changed your baseline first?

Moving Your Baseline

We can compare the year 2020 to the previous baseline of 2019. That comparison will surely make the COVID situation stand out. We could also compare 2020 to the baseline of 2015, and that may serve to further highlight the political differences. And if we used 1943 as our baseline, the year 2020 might seem like a relatively quiet and peaceful year.

It makes sense to interpret change relative to what came immediately before, but in the context of personal growth, you have the ability to change what comes before your explorations. You have the ability to redefine and establish new baselines.

You can use your current circumstances as your point of reference for further exploration. But you also have the power to establish very different baselines and to use those as your jumping-off points for further exploration. As it turns out, this can be immensely valuable.

For instance, if you want to travel throughout another country for an extended period, you could first establish a temporary “home base” in that country, such as by renting an apartment in one city there. Then you could use that base for further explorations, such as by taking excursions and trips to other parts of the country, always returning back to your new base each time. You base lets you live like a local for a while, giving you a different point of reference when exploring, so you aren’t in perpetual tourist mode.

Practical Explorations

Sometimes it’s easier, more useful, or more meaningful to explore from a different baseline instead of your usual default.

Here are some examples to get your mind churning on some possibilities:

Suppose you want to find your ideal wake-up time. You could start experimenting from your current baseline. Or you could become an early riser first, such as by getting up at 5am consistently. Make that your new baseline. See how that feels for a month or two. Then explore with different wake-up times to see how they perturb your results.

If your usual wake-up time is 9am, and you experiment with earlier wake-up times like 5am, 5:30am, or 6am, you may not notice much difference between them. But if you first establish 5am as your new baseline, you’re very likely to notice how different it feels in your body to get up at 5:30 or 6am. You’ll also have a new perspective on how it feels to stay up late.

Getting up at 5am consistently is my baseline. If I do any further sleep experiments, that’s my starting point. If I get up at 6am one morning, I’m sleeping in late because 5am is normal. If I experiment with doing anything “first thing in the morning,” it means I’ll be doing it before the sun comes up.

Suppose you want to improve your diet. You could experiment from your current diet, but that may not be nearly as useful as establishing a healthier baseline first. If your current diet is so-so, and you add in some healthier foods or subtract some unhealthy ones, you may not notice much difference. Add some celery and blueberries, and it may not even matter.

But suppose you establish your baseline to be a vegan, whole foods diet – no animal products and no processed foods. Then you experiment around that, such as by adding back some of the items you were having before, one at a time to see how each one affects you. See how some crackers affect you. See how your body responds to caffeine. See how some cheese affects you (if you even find it appealing anymore). This will give you much more clarity about which foods are helping you and which are hurting you.

The cleaner, simpler, and purer your dietary baseline is, the easier it is to discern how different foods affect you and whether those affects are positive or negative.

I went wheat-free for many weeks and then had some wheat pasta this week. I noticed the difference in my body shortly afterwards, experiencing minor cold-like symptoms, mild congestion, and some brain fog for a few hours. I also felt extra calm and peaceful shortly after I ate it. If I eat wheat regularly, I don’t usually notice any reactions, but if I experiment against a wheat-free baseline, I can see how it affects me more easily.

What’s your baseline for cleanliness and order in your home? If you live in a cluttered environment, you may not even notice the results of some modest organization improvements. But if your baseline is to keep your place neat and tidy by default, then some minor tweaks may have noticeable affects.

Declutter Your Baseline

One nice improvement you can make is to declutter your baseline. You’ll often learn more by simplifying and cleaning up your baseline first, and then see what happens when you add complexity.

If, however, you start with a complex situation and shift from one form of complexity to another, or from complexity to relative simplicity, it’s hard to identify clear and crisp lessons. You won’t be able to tell which specific changes are having the biggest impact. You won’t know where the key leverage points are.

It’s hard to tell what’s dragging you down or holding you back when your entire baseline is filled with issues that could be contributing to those affects. It could take a long time to isolate and identify problems when you have a dozen overlapping problems interacting with each other. But if you could first establish a relatively problem-free baseline, then you could selectively add back some complexity and immediately see when you cross back into problem space.

Upgrade Your Baseline

Another empowering way to use baselines is leverage them to elevate your routine experience, so you’re always returning to a pretty good default situation.

How happy are you with your current baselines in these areas?

  • Relationship situation
  • Social life
  • Diet
  • Exercise habits
  • Cleanliness
  • Productivity
  • Workspace
  • Income generation
  • Hobbies
  • Entertainment
  • Hygiene
  • Reading and education
  • Living situation
  • Travel
  • Creative expression

Raising your baseline takes time, but it’s a worthwhile investment. While it’s wonderful to have peak experiences now and then, you’ll spend a lot of your life living at your default baseline. So even if it takes a huge amount of effort to raise that baseline, it’s well worth it.

When I think back about some of the best decisions I’ve ever made, they often involved changes to my baseline in some area of life. They involved significant lifestyle adjustments, and some took years to reach, but they continue to provide ample rewards.

It’s especially wise to raise your baselines to the point where your everyday experience includes appreciation. A good question to ask yourself is: Do I appreciate my baseline in this area of life?

For instance, my income generation baseline is that I make money from fun, creative, inspiring, growth-oriented projects that improve people’s lives. Many years ago my old baseline included stress, scarcity thinking, acts of desperation, and focusing way too much on money instead of happiness, flow, caring, and trust. Notice that my current baseline is simpler and cleaner than the old one, especially without the clutter of stress, worry, and desperation – so much wasted energy. Note that trust, caring, and fun are much simpler – they do take more courage to implement, but they do not require more complexity.

Consider how much we complicate our lives just to avoid the simplicity of courage. What if courage was your baseline?

If you don’t like your baseline that much, why are you still there? Maybe it’s time to stop framing it as your current default. Be willing to drop a baseline that isn’t serving you well. A good baseline is a jumping-off point for further exploration, but it’s also a decent place to hang out between experiments.

Share Button

Nottingham hospitals maternity services ‘inadequate’

Inspectors find a number of problems, including staffing, poor leadership and management.

Share Button