(Test) Lyme Meeting

Lyme Meeting

on
September 10

 1:00 to 3:00 p.m.
Location
*Presbyterian Intercommunity Hospital
Room “F” (lower level)
12401 Washington Blvd.
Whittier, CA 90602

*Hospital is located off 605 fwy…exit at Slauson.
For directions phone (562) 698-0811 ole Ma
Enter hospital’s Main Entrance…front desk will direct you to the meeting
~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~

 

~Are you tired of seeing  doctor after doctor only to be told you have Lyme, Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue, Lupus, MS, an Auto-Immune Disease, ADHD, Chemical Sensitivity, a Psychiatric Disorder or other hopeless label?  ~Do you suffer with brain fog, fatigue, impaired cognition or sleep disturbance?  If this sounds like you or someone you know, don’t miss this opportunity to attend a free  presentation & learn how your home may be making you ill.

 

Guest Speaker

Oram Miller, Certified Building Biologist,** will  lecture on EMF HAZARDS IN THE HOME: HOW THEY AFFECT US AND WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT THEM.  These include:  electric & magnetic fields from house wiring, radio frequencies from cell phones, cordless phones, wireless Internet routers (Wi-Fi), Smart Meters & dirty electricity,   Oram will provide simple & affordable strategies you can use to protect yourself from EMF smog.

 

**Building Biology is a term coined during the 1970′s in Germany to describe a movement promoting the use of healthy building principles to improve the health of people who occupy them.  Learn more at www.createhealthyhomes.com
If you have questions or concerns contact;
Earis Corman, Coordinator
Southern California Lyme Support
13904F Rio Hondo Circle
La Mirada, CA 90638
Phone (562) 947-6123
Next Scheduled Meeting:  November 12
“Life is like a sewer, what you get out of it depends on what you put into it.”–Tom Lehrer 

 

disclaimer


San Diego Lyme Support Group Saturday 8/20/11 (email)


Conversation with Eric Gordon, M.D

Conversation with Eric Gordon, M.D. on Transmission and Treatment Issues

PuttingLymeBehindYou

August 16, 2011 at 1:30 am |

Tags: breastfeeding, celiac disease, Diagnosis, disability, gluten intolerance, hormones, IDSA, Lyme Symptoms, neurologic pain, sexual contact, Transmission, treatment, vectors | Categories: Antibiotics, Coinfections, Dr. Eric Gordon, Dr. Neil Nathan, Hormones, Neurologic Lyme, Pain, Post Lyme Syndrome, Therapies, Transmission | URL: http://wp.me/p1AFpr-5C

Dr. Gordon spent some time in conversation to cover some of the remaining patient questions from the conference with Dr. Burrascano. The following is a transcript from that conversation. The second part of the talk will be posted later this week. Initial questions: Can Lyme or co-infections be transmitted thru sex or kissing? Please address whether Lyme is an STD? Can it be transmitted from an adult to young children during normal care giving? What do you think about the possibility of sexual transmission or other TBD? DR. GORDON: Can Lyme disease be transmitted through sex or kissing? The answer is through sex, probably; through kissing is much harder. I don’t believe anybody has found Lyme bugs in saliva. Usually you don’t get it from saliva. You might be able get it because there is a cut, there is a little bleeding…. INTERVIEWER: An opening to the bloodstream. DR. GORDON: ….gums that bleed or something. INTERVIEWER: Eric, have you heard anything in any of the conferences about what it takes to actually be able to transmit the infection. For example, with sexual transmission, men’s sperm actually suppress women’s immune system so they can impregnate the egg. So they think that’s why, or it’s part of why, it might be easier to transmit Lyme disease from males to females, but is there anything else that you’ve heard in terms of what it takes to transmit the bacteria, like if it got on your arm could it crawl through the skin….? DR. GORDON: No, I wouldn’t believe so. I mean, most bugs don’t do that very effectively. It takes usually a broken area…. The skin has to be broken. If you had an open cut or an open sore, that would be theoretically possible. But so far, there is no evidence to show that it happens in reality. INTERVIEWER: Yes. DR. GORDON: These are just guesses. I mean, yes, I’m sure it can happen, but if you look at something like Hepatitis C and AIDS, they are good examples. Hepatitis C is definitely contagious and transmissible through sexual contact, but it still happens to be relatively difficult to do so, and does not happen often. INTERVIEWER: Yes. Well that’s what I keep trying to say to people when they say, “Well I can get Lyme from mosquitoes,” or “I can get it this way.” Ticks have a very unique transmission process, that suppresses the immune system enough to allow the bacteria a chance to be established. DR. GORDON: Yes. Lyme, you probably cannot get from mosquitoes. You can probably get Ehrlichia and any of the Rickettsial things from mosquito bites. And Bartonella may be transmitted through other vectors, but Lyme, I don’t know if it is possible, I don’t think so. INTERVIEWER: They haven’t been able to prove it yet in transmission studies, so, you know, it seems like when they ask, “Can it be transmitted from an adult to a young child in your daily care taking?” Again, it seems unlikely except…. DR. GORDON: With Lyme it would be very, very unlikely. INTERVIEWER: Except, you know that there is a possibility with breastfeeding. Borrelia has been found in breast milk. DR. GORDON: Yes, again, could be, but unlikely, because the mother should have some immune globulins going at the same time. So if the breastfeeding is passing the infection, it is also passing protection from the infection. Other than that, you just have to say, what people don’t understand, is that this disease has not been studied. And people are making these statements based on evidence that could have other interpretations. Like, we know in utero transmission has happened, but we really only have maybe one or two documented cases. Everything else is a guess. So I have always been uncomfortable about this whole thing. I think you just have to say that it is possible, yes, but likelihood is very low, yes; just like yes, it is possible to win the lottery. INTERVIEWER: Right, right. But I think the thing that people are asking you, Eric, is do they need to do anything different? Do they need to be concerned in their sexual relationships? Do they need to be concerned when taking care of their children? That’s of course the bottom line about these questions. DR. GORDON: The bottom line is that we don’t know, and I think there’s probably a better chance that you can do more harm to your child by worrying about it than by doing it. INTERVIEWER: Well, there you go. DR. GORDON: And as far as relationship, it is the same thing. If you’re in a committed relationship, it’s not something I would worry about. If you are really worried then, get yourself tested! Because you have to remind people that most people who get Lyme can be treated relatively easily. They’re not all going to be chronically infected. The IDSA is not all wrong. INTERVIEWER: So talk a little bit more about that, Eric… DR. GORDON: Back to my statement—my basic statement to the world is that the reason we’re in this terrible political battle is because the IDSA (Infectious Disease Society of America) people really do see folks respond to short-term antibiotics, and get well, and they don’t go on to get recurrent illness. I forget…. The rate in Connecticut is like, what, 10% or 15% of the people have had Lyme disease? INTERVIEWER: Yes, something like that. DR. GORDON: It’s some huge number, and they are not all having chronic joint pain and brain fog and difficulty functioning. INTERVIEWER: Right. Ten percent of their population is not disabled. DR. GORDON: Exactly! This is a disease that does disable people and do terrible things, but it takes a combination of events, and a combination of genetics, and other infections before this will lay you low, and that’s why it has been so difficult to convince so many doctors that chronic Lyme does exist. Because the IDSA looks at their regular patient population, and then they have somebody who thinks they have chronic Lyme come in. They have people come to them who have diagnosed themselves on the internet, because they read about what Lyme symptoms are, and the problem with that is if you read the symptoms, they fit multiple diseases. So yes, this is a clinical diagnosis, but it is a clinical diagnosis where you have to listen to lots of people to make it. When patients have the symptoms, and read a lot about Lyme, they don’t always know the difference between the achiness that might come from something else, and the level of disability that Lyme can bring, unless they have seen a lot of patients. So sometimes the IDSA doctors can be right when they tell a patient they don’t have Lyme disease, or that it is not the cause of their symptoms. Another big part is that the IDSA usually doesn’t pay any attention to the kind of symptoms that those of us who treat Lyme recognize as more Lyme-specific symptoms. So they miss some of the people who do have Lyme. INTERVIEWER: Okay. DR. GORDON: So, a lot of what are really neuropathic pain symptoms, like the deep burning pain that moves around, the joint pains, like one day your shoulder hurts; the next day your knee hurts…. Those are the things that they tend to just ignore. INTERVIEWER: Or they think it’s something psychological. DR. GORDON: Exactly, when you have symptoms that move around they think you’re kind of crazy, so that just adds to their impression that what they’re dealing with is a psychologically over-stimulated population who has some minor illness that a little therapy would help. INTERVIEWER: Exactly. Are there some other symptoms that you feel like you look at carefully that they disregard? DR. GORDON: Well, it would be…. The type of pains, I guess: It’s burning pains, the sense of muscle fasciculations, a sense of what they call not fasciculation but formication – the sense that ants are crawling on your skin. That’s a common Lyme symptom, but not common in regular medical practice. People in medicine think it’s a psychological problem. Also, sharp, stabbing pain that once they work you up, they don’t find anything really wrong on the regular tests, that also goes into the realm of probably psychological. INTERVIEWER: Right, because they can’t find a physiological cause. DR. GORDON: Right, right. So if you’re an average Lyme patient who does not have a swollen joint, but merely achy joints, okay, and painful, tender muscles, has brain fog and has lots of muscle fasciculations and the joint pain moves around, has headaches and sleep disturbance, they go to an infectious disease doctor, that doesn’t add up to any infectious disease they recognize. The symptoms have been there for a year or two and their tests show you are normal. Those guys, they see this person who they think is no big deal, and then they get that same kind of patient show up who has been on IV antibiotics for two years, and isn’t getting better, and they just go, “Oh my God, this is malpractice! This is terrible medicine. So they rightfully decide that the doctors who treat chronic Lyme disease are really just enablers, and dangerous enablers. Because that’s what they see. And on top of that, all they need to see is one patient once a month, or once every 6 months who comes in with these kind of symptoms, and had been diagnosed with Lyme disease, and it turns out that they actually have sleep apnea. INTERVIEWER: Right, something that was missed. DR. GORDON: Right. And they think, oh, let’s treat the sleep apnea, and the body pain gets a lot better, and the doctor ignores the parts that don’t get better, and they think, “Oh my God, well it was just sloppy diagnosis.” Or the patient sees somebody like Richie Shoemaker, who notices that they’ve got mold toxicity, and so therefore all their Babesia symptoms are meaningless, because they can both look the same as far as symptoms. Not all doctors think about whether you might have both, and need to be treated for both. INTERVIEWER: So, Eric, what other kinds of things do you see? This is another thing that I feel like people with Lyme, they have this tendency to think everything they have is Lyme. They are always asking, “Do Lyme patients have this? Is this because of Lyme?” And it’s so possible to have multiple issues going on. DR. GORDON: Well, what I think we have to say is that the other good example is celiac disease, but you don’t have to have celiac disease in the classic sense. You could just have milder forms of gluten intolerance or GI inflammation. INTERVIEWER: Yes, yes. And do you find that in people with Lyme that because of the inflammation levels that they are more likely to have that? DR. GORDON: Absolutely. Any inflammatory process makes the others easier. Because if you’re stuck in inflammation, your body’s ability to modulate inflammation goes down because if it didn’t you would not be stuck there. Usually the ongoing inflammatory response is no longer effectively killing the bug, okay? It’s no longer self regulating. INTERVIEWER: So what besides celiac or gluten intolerance, or sleep apnea, what other kinds of things do you see most often are missed? DR. GORDON: Oh, the chronic biotoxin issues Dr. Shoemaker talks about. Insulin resistance, which increases the inflammation in the body. Shoemaker’s Actos treatment helps a lot of people by lowering the constant inflammation from insulin and leptin resistance. If you also put them on a high protein, low glycemic diet, their inflammation might go down also. Because insulin is very pro-inflammatory, and so if you have insulin resistance and you eat, but you’re sick and you’re tired and the only thing that lets you get through the day is a little bit of ice cream now and then, or just peanut butter and jelly, or whatever high carb snack works for you, and if you have the genetics, which a lot of people do, or just start to gain a little weight without the genetics, you begin to have higher and higher levels of insulin being released all the time, and that drives inflammation. That turns on a lot of the inflammatory cascades. It also will suppress your adrenals. This goes back to the whole naturopathic concept….and why a lot of naturopaths have been late to the game of treating Lyme is because they, in their training, they think that if they fix the gut and balance the hormones and supplement the hormones, help resuscitate the adrenals and the hypothalamus and pituitary gland, get that functioning better, get the ovaries and testicles working better, restore basic nutrition and deal with some of the allergic foods, you’re going to get people well. And you will help them. But if their main trigger is a Lyme or Bartonella or Babesia or Chlamydia or Mycoplasma infection, you’re not going to get them well. You might improve them, but if they’re really sick you don’t even do much for them—until you begin to remove the bug. And you don’t have to necessarily cure the infection. Suppression of the infection and allowing the immune system’s self regulatory pathways to function again, will then keep the bug in a dormant state. Similar to having a chronic herpes virus which stays dormant as long as the immune system is healthy. And the problem is that the Lyme world has been so focused on killing the bug, and that does work with some people. But what I would love to know with some of the Lyme doctors is, they talk about the number of patients that they treated and claim are well. I wonder what was their dropout rate, though? One of the problems with the use of long tern antibiotics by many physicians is that they may be seeing their successes and forgetting about those people who had to drop out because they couldn’t tolerate the long term antibiotics. This doesn’y invalidate long term antibiotic therapy, it just means that we have to remember to tailor the therapy to the patients. …and I think again we need a common denominator to use, because to be fair to the doctors who only use antibiotics, you know, they help a lot of people by just keeping them on antibiotics forever, but they don’t stop to go back and go, okay, what else do people need? Maybe the infection has been knocked down but the patients are still sick and look the same. INTERVIEWER: It’s unfortunate because some don’t tend to look very much in sort of the more conventional issues other than Lyme. DR. GORDON: Right. You know, what makes this difficult and I think we have to emphasize is why this is so individual because, I have one patient who sticks in my mind. She was somebody who saw a doctor for like 5 years, and he did a good job, he really did; she was a very, very sick young lady. She came to see me—I was lucky. I had just started supervising one of his patients, okay, and she had some severe headaches and was so sick and had been on tons of Rocephin for a year and all kinds of antibiotics, you know, and she has been on a ton of Mepron. And it hadn’t helped. She still had positive Babesia tests. So I put her on IV clindamycin? But not in the way Dr. Jemsek uses. Rather, I put her on it daily for one month. I was only going to do it for a month, but she improved so much she stayed on it for a few months, and then we did vancomycin. She eventually lost about a hundred pounds that she had gained and is now symptom free. INTERVIEWER: Oh my gosh! DR. GORDON: And she’s now back to functioning normally. I mean she really got well after being totally disabled and on high doses of narcotics for six years. INTERVIEWER: Wow! DR. GORDON: I mean, she’s young. She’s only in her mid 30s, but she got well. This is somebody who when you found the right antibiotic and the right antibiotic combinations, it worked. We have to remember is that we don’t want to say never do that, but we need some parameters while we’re treating to make sure that the thyroid and the adrenals are being looked at, sort of like checking, sort of like cooking, like, “Is it done?” INTERVIEWER: Yes. And what else does it need now? DR. GORDON: Yes. ………. This interview will continue later this week. Dr. Eric Gordon is the founder of Gordon Medical Associates. What Dr. Gordon emphasizes is listening to his patients. “I believe my patients. Their description of what is going on in their body is the most accurate way we have to assess what is going on with them. I interpret the information they present, and blend it with laboratory results and imaging and other tests to determine a protocol that is customized to their condition.”

SAN DIEGO LYME SUPPORT GROUP MEETING – Saturday, August 20, 2011

SAN DIEGO LYME SUPPORT GROUP MEETING

Saturday, August 20, 2011
From Noon until 2pm

Guest Speaker Dr. Tobin Watkinson
www.tobininstitute.com

Dr. Watkinson has asked me to send you the link below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNtyr2-BN_c

This is is YouTube video on Lyme.
He will discuss prevention, education and treatment…

Meeting will be held at the

Scripps Ranch Library
10301 Scripps Lake Drive, San Diego, CA 92131-1258

Overcome Bias by Outsourcing Your Decisions – Psychology Today (repeat)


Why Our Monkey Brains Are Prone to Procrastination – Part 2

Why Our Monkey Brains Are Prone to Procrastination (No, It’s Not Just Laziness or Lack Of Willpower) By David McRaney, AlterNet Posted on July 4, 2011, Printed on July 18, 2011 http://www.alternet.org/story/151514/why_our_monkey_brains_are_prone_to_procrastination_%28no%2C_it%27s_not_just_laziness_or_lack_of_willpower%29

This story is cross-posted from You Are Not So Smart.

The Misconception: You procrastinate because you are lazy and can’t manage your time well.

The Truth: Procrastination is fueled by weakness in the face of impulse and a failure to think about thinking.

Netflix reveals something about your own behavior you should have noticed by now, something which keeps getting between you and the things you want to accomplish.

If you have Netflix, especially if you stream it to your TV, you tend to gradually accumulate a cache of hundreds of films you think you’ll watch one day. This is a bigger deal than you think.

Take a look at your queue. Why are there so damn many documentaries and dramatic epics collecting virtual dust in there? By now you could draw the cover art to “Dead Man Walking” from memory. Why do you keep passing over it?

Psychologists actually know the answer to this question, to why you keep adding movies you will never watch to your growing collection of future rentals, and its the same reason you believe you will eventually do what’s best for yourself in all the other parts of your life, but rarely do.

A study conducted in 1999 by Read, Loewenstein and Kalyanaraman had people pick three movies out of a selection of 24. Some were lowbrow like “Sleepless in Seattle” or “Mrs. Doubtfire.” Some were highbrow like “Schindler’s List” or “The Piano.” In other words, it was a choice between movies which promised to be fun and forgettable or would be memorable but require more effort to absorb.

After picking, the subjects had to watch one movie right away. They then had to watch another in two days and a third two days after that.

Most people picked Schindler’s List as one of their three. They knew it was a great movie because all their friends said it was. All the reviews were glowing, and it earned dozens of the highest awards. Most didn’t, however, choose to watch it on the first day.

Instead, people tended to pick lowbrow movies on the first day. Only 44 percent went for the heavier stuff first. The majority tended to pick comedies like “The Mask” or action flicks like “Speed” when they knew they had to watch it forthwith.

Planning ahead, people picked highbrow movies 63 percent of the time for their second movie and 71 percent of the time for their third.

When they ran the experiment again but told subjects they had to watch all three selections back-to-back, “Schindler’s List” was 13 times less likely to be chosen at all.

The researchers had a hunch people would go for the junk food first, but plan healthy meals in the future.

Many studies over the years have shown you tend to have time-inconsistent preferences. When asked if you would rather have fruit or cake one week from now, you will usually say fruit. A week later when the slice of German chocolate and the apple are offered, you are statistically more likely to go for the cake.

This is why your Netflix queue is full of great films you keep passing over for “Family Guy.” With Netflix, the choice of what to watch right now and what to watch later is like candy bars versus carrot sticks. When you are planning ahead, your better angels point to the nourishing choices, but in the moment you go for what tastes good.

As behavioral economist Katherine Milkman has pointed out, this is why grocery stores put candy right next to the checkout.

This is sometimes called present bias – being unable to grasp what you want will change over time, and what you want now isn’t the same thing you will want later. Present bias explains why you buy lettuce and bananas only to throw them out later when you forget to eat them. This is why when you are a kid you wonder why adults don’t own more toys.

Present bias is why you’ve made the same resolution for the tenth year in a row, but this time you mean it. You are going to lose weight and forge a six-pack of abs so ripped you could deflect arrows.

You weigh yourself. You buy a workout DVD. You order a set of weights.

One day you have the choice between running around the block or watching a movie, and you choose the movie. Another day you are out with friends and can choose a cheeseburger or a salad. You choose the cheeseburger.

The slips become more frequent, but you keep saying you’ll get around to it. You’ll start again on Monday, which becomes a week from Monday. Your will succumbs to a death by a thousand cuts. By the time winter comes it looks like you already know what your resolution will be the next year.

Procrastination manifests itself within every aspect of your life.

You wait until the last minute to buy Christmas presents. You put off seeing the dentist, or getting that thing checked out by the doctor, or filing your taxes. You forget to register to vote. You need to get an oil change. There is a pile of dishes getting higher in the kitchen. Shouldn’t you wash clothes now so you don’t have to waste a Sunday cleaning every thing you own?

Perhaps the stakes are higher than choosing to play Angry Birds instead of doing sit-ups. You might have a deadline for a grant proposal, or a dissertation, or a book.

You’ll get around to it. You’ll start tomorrow. You’ll take the time to learn a foreign language, to learn how to play an instrument. There’s a growing list of books you will read one day.

Before you do though, maybe you should check your email. You should head over to Facebook too, just to get it out of the way. A cup of coffee would probably get you going, it won’t take long to go grab one. Maybe just a few episodes of that show you like.

You keep promising yourself this will be the year you do all these things. You know your life would improve if you would just buckle down and put forth the effort.

You can try to fight it back. You can buy a daily planner and a to-do list application for your phone. You can write yourself notes and fill out schedules. You can become a productivity junkie surrounded by instruments to make life more efficient, but these tools alone will not help, because the problem isn’t you are a bad manager of your time – you are a bad tactician in the war inside your brain.

Procrastination is such a pervasive element of the human experience there are over 600 books for sale promising to snap you out of your bad habits, and this year alone 120 new books on the topic were published. Obviously this is a problem everyone admits to, so why is it so hard to defeat?

To explain, consider the power of marshmallows.

Walter Mischel conducted experiments at Stanford University throughout the late 1960s and early 1970s in which he and his researchers offered a bargain to children.

The kids sat at a table in front of a bell and some treats. They could pick a pretzel, a cookie or a giant marshmallow. They told the little boys and girls they could either eat the treat right away or wait a few minutes. If they waited, they would double their payoff and get two treats. If they couldn’t wait, they had to ring the bell after which the researcher would end the experiment.

Some made no attempt at self-control and just ate right away. Others stared intensely at the object of their desire until they gave in to temptation. Many writhed in agony, twisting their hands and feet while looking away. Some made silly noises.

In the end, a third couldn’t resist.

What started as an experiment about delayed gratification has now, decades later, yielded a far more interesting set of revelations about metacognition – thinking about thinking.

Mischel has followed the lives of all his subjects through high-school, college and into adulthood where they accumulated children, mortgages and jobs.

The revelation from this research is kids who were able to overcome their desire for short-term reward in favor of a better outcome later weren’t smarter than the other kids, nor were they less gluttonous. They just had a better grasp of how to trick themselves into doing what was best for them.

They watched the wall instead of looking at the food. They tapped their feet instead of smelling the confection. The wait was torture for all, but some knew it was going to be impossible to just sit there and stare at the delicious, gigantic marshmallow without giving in.

The younger the child, the worse they were at metacognition. Any parent can tell you little kids aren’t the best at self-control. Among the older age groups some were better at devising schemes for avoiding their own weak wills, and years later seem to have been able to use that power to squeeze more out of life.

“Once Mischel began analyzing the results, he noticed that low delayers, the children who rang the bell quickly, seemed more likely to have behavioral problems, both in school and at home. They got lower S.A.T. scores. They struggled in stressful situations, often had trouble paying attention, and found it difficult to maintain friendships. The child who could wait fifteen minutes had an S.A.T. score that was, on average, two hundred and ten points higher than that of the kid who could wait only thirty seconds.”

- Jonah Lehrer from his piece in the New Yorker, “Don’t”

Thinking about thinking, this is the key. In the struggle between should versus want, some people have figured out something crucial – want never goes away.

Procrastination is all about choosing want over should because you don’t have a plan for those times when you can expect to be tempted.

You are really bad at predicting your future mental states. In addition, you are terrible at choosing between now or later. Later is murky place where anything could go wrong.

If I were to offer you $50 now or $100 in a year, which would you take? Clearly, you’ll take the $50 now. After all, who knows what could happen in a year, right?

Ok, so what if I instead offered you $50 in five years or $100 in six years? Nothing has changed other than adding a delay, but now it feels just as natural to wait for the $100. After all, you already have to wait a long time.

A being of pure logic would think, “more is more,” and pick the higher amount every time, but you aren’t a being of pure logic. Faced with two possible rewards, you are more likely to take the one which you can enjoy now over one you will enjoy later – even if the later reward is far greater.

In the moment, rearranging the folders on your computer seems a lot more rewarding than some task due in a month which might cost you your job or your diploma, so you wait until the night before.

If you considered which would be more valuable in a month – continuing to get your paycheck or having an immaculate desktop – you would pick the greater reward.

The tendency to get more rational when you are forced to wait is called hyperbolic discounting because your dismissal of the better payoff later diminishes over time and makes a nice slope on a graph.

Evolutionarily it makes sense to always go for the sure bet now; your ancestors didn’t have to think about retirement or heart disease. Your brain evolved in a world where you probably wouldn’t live to meet your grandchildren. The stupid monkey part of your brain wants to gobble up candy bars and go deeply into debt. Old you, if there even is one, can deal with those things.

Hyperbolic discounting makes later an easy place to throw all the things don’t want to deal with, but you also over-commit to future plans for the same reason. You run out of time to get things done because you think in the future, that mysterious fantastical realm of possibilities, you’ll have more free time than you do now.

“The future is always ideal: The fridge is stocked, the weather clear, the train runs on schedule and meetings end on time. Today, well, stuff happens.”

- Hara Estroff Marano in Psychology Today

One of the best ways to see how bad you are at coping with procrastination is to notice how you deal with deadlines.

Let’s imagine you are in a class where you must complete three research papers in three weeks, and the instructor is willing to allow you to set your own due dates.

You can choose to turn in your papers once a week, or two on the first week and one on the second. You can turn them all in on the last day, or you can spread them out. You could even choose to turn in all three at the end of the first week and be done. It’s up to you, but once you pick you have to stick with your choice. If you miss your deadlines, you get a big fat zero.

How would you pick?

The most rational choice would be the last day for every paper. It gives you plenty of time to work hard on all three and turn in the best possible work. This seems like a wise choice, but you are not so smart.

The same choice was offered to a selection of students in a 2002 study conducted by Klaus Wertenbroch and Dan Ariely.

They set up three classes, and each had three weeks to finish three papers. Class A had to turn in all three papers on the last day of class, Class B had to pick three different deadlines and stick to them, and Class C had to turn in one paper a week.

Which class had the better grades?

Class C, the one with three specific deadlines, did the best. Class B, which had to pick deadlines ahead of time but had complete freedom, did the second best, and the group whose only deadline was the last day, Class A, did the worst.

Students who could pick any three deadlines tended to spread them out at about one week apart on their own. They knew they would procrastinate, so they set up zones in which they would be forced to perform. Still, overly optimistic outliers who either waited until the last minute or chose unrealistic goals pulled down the overall class grade.

Students with no guidelines at all tended to put off their work until the last week for all three papers.

The ones who had no choice and were forced to spread out their procrastination did the best because the outliers were eliminated. Those people who weren’t honest with themselves about their own tendencies to put off their work or who were too confident didn’t have a chance to fool themselves.

Interestingly, these results suggest that although almost everyone has problems with procrastination, those who recognize and admit their weakness are in a better position to utilize available tools for precommitment and by doing so, help themselves overcome it.

- Dan Ariely, from his book “Predictably Irrational”

If you fail to believe you will procrastinate or become idealistic about how awesome you are at working hard and managing your time you never develop a strategy for outmaneuvering your own weakness.

Procrastination is an impulse; it’s buying candy at the checkout. Procrastination is also hyperbolic discounting, taking the sure thing in the present over the caliginous prospect some day far away.

You must be adept at thinking about thinking to defeat yourself at procrastination. You must realize there is the you who sits there now reading this, and there is a you sometime in the future who will be influenced by a different set of ideas and desires, a you in a different setting where an alternate palette of brain functions will be available for painting reality.

The now you may see the costs and rewards at stake when it comes time to choose studying for the test instead of going to the club, eating the salad instead of the cupcake, writing the article instead of playing the video game.

The trick is to accept the now you will not be the person facing those choices, it will be the future you – a person who can’t be trusted. Future-you will give in, and then you’ll go back to being now-you and feel weak and ashamed. Now-you must trick future-you into doing what is right for both parties.

This is why food plans like Nutrisystem work for many people. Now-you commits to spending a lot of money on a giant box of food which future-you will have to deal with. People who get this concept use programs like Freedom, which disables Internet access on a computer for up to eight hours, a tool allowing now-you to make it impossible for future-you to sabotage your work.

Capable psychonauts who think about thinking, about states of mind, about set and setting, can get things done not because they have more will power, more drive, but because they know productivity is a game of cat and mouse versus a childish primal human predilection for pleasure and novelty which can never be excised from the soul. Your effort is better spent outsmarting yourself than making empty promises through plugging dates into a calendar or setting deadlines for push ups.

Check out a copy of the book “You Are Not So Smart.”

(c) 2011 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved. View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/151514/

Overcome Bias by Outsourcing Your Decisions – Psychology Today